Open 19 - Nightless (Over?) before 430

[Guardian]

I don't like the Guardian wagon. At all.

I'm not particularly fond of Tony's leap onto the wagon, and if Guardian is lynched and comes up scum, I'm not sure who I'd consider going after tomorrow. But I feel like there's a good case here.

For the record -- who are you going to push if you mislynch me and I come up town? That's more relevant a question.

I am aware of the irony that one of the reasons I'm going after Guardian (him using bussing when I don't believe a townie would use it), is similar in style to what Guardian was attacking Elias for (him feeling that Elias had knowledge that a townie wouldn't have).

Yeah, its not irony, its hypocrisy.

But I really feel like Guardian is looking for something to do now that he's been forced out of the position of constantly attacking IH.

I realized that me posting every post about IH would not be effective. WTF "forced out". I could still be doing that, and apparently wouldn't have attracted as many votes. Instead, I decided to open my mind and prod various players -- and now isntead of me attacking IH as scummy, you find me attacking more than one person as scummy. WTF double standard!?

He attacked Elias for what I think is a poor reason, he attacked Setael for what I believe is a poor reason, with the second being a fairly sudden shift in his behavior with respect to that role (and he's never really justified his reasons for believing the Omanus/Setael role to be protown previously, other than to say that he doesn't see the arguments that other people have brought up).

I didn't go out and say "Elias == scum. Setael == scum. But I wanted them to explain their actions. It is so freaking ridiculous how you are painting that as scummy and at the same time saying my prolonged attack was scummy.

Guardian's been caught doing several of the same things he accuses of being a scum tell in others

Such as? Not all scum tells are 100% indicators of someone being scum, I have made some slips and done scummy things. That doesn't make me scum unless stuff builds up.

Guardian's response to his wagon is to start being defensive and start OMGUSing, which is at best not helpful.

I always respond this way to getting wagoned as town for bogus reasons. Seriously, Elias's case is extremely lacking, you are attacking me for being open minded and changing my style, and Tony is attacking me for... ah, because I'm an easy target.

All of you are attacking me about this "busing" seriously wtf. I used the word busing because I think Thok is scum and would be trying to wagon someone as scum. It wasn't an intential use no matter how much you play it up as such.

Seriously, IH Tony or Thok needs to die, with Elias as a close runner up.

[Guardian]

Elias, your post is too long and daunting atm, ill try and respond to it at some point.

I've decided that I want to temporarily

unvote

, only because I want to hear what few people have to say about recent events who haven't posted yet. (IH, Setael, and Skruffs: in particular

Mod, please prod Skruffs

).

I'm also going to take the time to look at a few games where Guardian was protown and under pressure. (And if Guardian is town, I want him to also take a look at a few of those games, to see whether or not this OMGUS style is useful in either catching scum attacking him or in preventing him from being lynched.)

24 Mafia and The New C9 are both good examples of this. I don't know for sure in The New C9 as it is ongoing, but in both games it did really hurt me in terms of me getting lynched... But in 24, I caught all the scum, in the new C9, I feel I caught some of them at least, but no confirmation of this. Also, Skruff's AM Mafia I OMGUSed Panzer (he was scum) and got mislynched.... It isn't as simple as OMGUS -- when people attack me for BS reasons at or near LYLO, I see this and point it out.

That said, I want to point out how his response to the wagon on him have been unhelpful and also misleading; if Guardian is town, he needs to actually take time to think about his responses before posting them.

Time is something I don't really have right now..

I don't like the Guardian wagon. At all.

I'm not particularly fond of Tony's leap onto the wagon, and if Guardian is lynched and comes up scum, I'm not sure who I'd consider going after tomorrow. But I feel like there's a good case here.

For the record -- who are you going to push if you mislynch me and I come up town? That's more relevant a question.

First of all "if you lynch me, I'll come up a townie" type comments are not helpful.

I wanted an answer to my question, which you kind of provided... So, how was that not helpful? When you get a better answer, please let me know.

I am aware of the irony that one of the reasons I'm going after Guardian (him using bussing when I don't believe a townie would use it), is similar in style to what Guardian was attacking Elias for (him feeling that Elias had knowledge that a townie wouldn't have).

Yeah, its not irony, its hypocrisy.

Whatever. It's only hypocrisy if I claimed to believe that was a scum tell in others, and then exhibitted that scum tell myself and claimed it wasn't a scum tell in myself. Which does describe some fo your recent behavior. But feel free to toss words around in an attempt to inflame.

Like "whatever" isn't meant to inflame. You were being hypocritical, I pointed it out, and all you did was disregard me as fanning the flames. I am annoyed at your attacking me, but fanning the flames was definitely not the main purpose of that.

I've also explained why I feel the situation where Elias made that statement made it less likely to come from a scum

True. I disagree, but you did state your reasons.

But I really feel like Guardian is looking for something to do now that he's been forced out of the position of constantly attacking IH.

I realized that me posting every post about IH would not be effective. WTF "forced out". I could still be doing that, and apparently wouldn't have attracted as many votes. Instead, I decided to open my mind and prod various players -- and now isntead of me attacking IH as scummy, you find me attacking more than one person as scummy. WTF double standard!?

If you are town, I'd prefer that you actually be trying to focus on lots of people, and not just whoever seems to be saying stuff at the time. The people you are prodding seem to be either the people who are attacking you or the people that everybody is prodding.

. I am prodding most people, the only ones that I am not actively prodding atm are IH Skruffs and VitaminR. I am trying to see the game from the other perspective, those three were my initial scum group, and being objective, they are being the least scummy

right now

. IH and VItaminR have very scumm pasts, but everyone was saying that it was completely not helpful for me to rehash my arguments on them again and again, so I am moving on and looking at new targets. This is completely true.

He attacked Elias for what I think is a poor reason, he attacked Setael for what I believe is a poor reason, with the second being a fairly sudden shift in his behavior with respect to that role (and he's never really justified his reasons for believing the Omanus/Setael role to be protown previously, other than to say that he doesn't see the arguments that other people have brought up).

I didn't go out and say "Elias == scum. Setael == scum. But I wanted them to explain their actions. It is so freaking ridiculous how you are painting that as scummy and at the same time saying my prolonged attack was scummy.

I'll sort of give you that on Setael, (although you did use an FOS when it wasn't necessary, and you did try to explain on several occasions why it was a scum tell when I pushed you on it). But for Elias? You said on multiple times that you thought he was likely to be scum, and it seemed like you were more interested in attacking him then asking him to explain himself.

He explained himself in a way that was completely unsatisfactory to me. I really still don't like that exchange from his POV.

Setael, I got to respond, her response made sense, and that was that....?

Guardian's response to his wagon is to start being defensive and start OMGUSing, which is at best not helpful.

I always respond this way to getting wagoned as town for bogus reasons. Seriously, Elias's case is extremely lacking, you are attacking me for being open minded and changing my style, and Tony is attacking me for... ah, because I'm an easy target.

Actually, I'm attacking you for using crappy arguments and throwing out FOS's when I feel they aren't warranted, and for mostly only attacking people who everybody is attacking or who are attacking you.

I'm basically attacking everyone who I see as being scummy recently. If that mostly includes those wagoning me for bad reasons, then why is that a bad thing?

All of you are attacking me about this "busing" seriously wtf. I used the word busing because I think Thok is scum and would be trying to wagon someone as scum. It wasn't an intential use no matter how much you play it up as such.

Curious. If I'm scum, then why did I jump off my Setael/Omanus case (that I had been pushing all day) to start going after you? I want you to answer this, and I want you to actually try to think about your answer before posting it (and feel free to call me a scummy McScum if you think I'm trying to bias this question one way or another, but honestly I'm not).

I'll try and address this when I have legitimate time to think about it. It does require some thought.

Also, can you give any single other instance where you have misused bussing in this way?

If I recall correctly, I misued a term in 24 mafia near the end that helped to (almost) get me mislynched... I definitely have made "slips" as town before.

Seriously, IH Tony or Thok needs to die, with Elias as a close runner up.

So wait, just a few posts ago you claimed that you saw IH as town for the first time in forever, but now you want to go back after you.

After him*. I said I agree with his suspects IF HE IS TOWN. That =/= saying IH is town.

And you had FOS's on Setael and Elias (with Elias's comment about Oman/Setael making it likely to you that he was scum), but now Setael's completely ignored and Elias is only fourth?

You Tony and IH are scummier than Elias, and Setael adequately responded to my prod.

[Guardian]

Thok, you are curious who to go after if Guardian turned up scum. The answer, of course, would be you - or else the whole point of voting him for saying 'you bussed him' (the implication that you and him are both scum) - is null and void. Do you follow?

The whole term 'bus' comes from 'throwing under a bus', which in most mafia terms was originally (as far as I am aware) used to represent someone who will betray/backstab/exploit one player for their own gain. IT's typically used to describe one mafia voting another mafia player to appear town to everyone else.

If Guardian was scum,

he could be lying

about me trying to bus him in order to set up the above argument.

OMG, it was just a slip I used the wrong word.

But I do at least agree with Skruffs that I really don't like how Thok keeps bringing this up and bringing this up....

[Guardian]

OMG, it was just a slip I used the wrong word.

OMG, why should I believe you?

Maybe because freudian slips are a very poor scum tell, and if it *was* a freudian slip it would mean I am scum with you, and you know that's not true.

But I do at least agree with Skruffs that I really don't like how Thok keeps bringing this up and bringing this up....

Curious, I'm not sure your comment is a correct interpretation is what Skruffs is saying at all.

I'm also curious about how much you believe I should have pushed this at all, since you claim I'm pushing this too much. Should I have completely ignored your use of the word bus? Should I have not explained why I wanted to look at your use of the word bus? Should I have not explained why the argument works even if I'm town? Or am I just not allowed to attack you at all if I see you drop what I think is a scum tell?

You should have dropped it around the second... or third... or fourth time I told you it was just an accident.

....

[Guardian]

I just realized something.

Playstyle-wise, I really need to stop overreacting to being wagoned or voted for bad reasons. I just hate when it happens and flip .

I'm lynch -2, and it isn't like I'm going to be quicklynched, especially if I'm right that there are one or two scum already on my wagon.

Calm, cool, collected Guardian from here on out... theoretically, lol.

[Guardian]

OMG, why should I believe you?

Maybe because freudian slips are a very poor scum tell, and if it *was* a freudian slip it would mean I am scum with you, and you know that's not true.

And, gee I've explained how it could work as not a Freudian slip, but a delibarate inclusion to try and create a fake connection between us that could be noticed if I got you lynched and you came up scum.

....It was a slip. Nothing deliberate.

The point is that if you were lynched as scum, other people could come along, see "Look Guardian said Thok was bussing him" and use that to try to lynch me.

You said you don't like these comments.... But in terms of "if I come up scum" you have nothing to worry about. But, if I do get lynched and come up town, I'd be more than happy that people take my suspicion of you (and Tony, and IH) and run with it.

Heck, it could even work as a Freudian slip from my point of view if we assume that you are scum with somebody else who's currently trying to push you, and you were thinking about them bussing you rather than about me bussing you and messed up names.

IE, Elias? You really think I could be scum with Elias at this point? That doesn't seem consistent with what you've said previously.

You should have dropped it around the second... or third... or fourth time I told you it was just an accident.

You were already complaining about me pushing the issue too much in post 1398, which was the first time you specifically said "Oh, I used the wrong word."

You're right about this. I just thought mentioning it at all was ill conceived, I just used a wrong word. [/overreacting]

[Guardian]

OMG, it was just a slip I used the wrong word.

OMG, why should I believe you?

Maybe because freudian slips are a very poor scum tell,

Yet you claim that I'm moving up on your scumlist for what you claim to be a slip. Odd, seeing as saying "bus" is a whole lot more blatant then what I did. Now, I'll agree with you that a slip like that isnt a great tell, but theres no way in hell you can be pushing me for a "slip" when you wont allow people to use it against you. The fact that its a good tell against me, yet bad against you, deserves an FOS.

Yours was a conscious decision to call Oman def town. Mine was a use of an incorrect term.

They are categorically different things.

Also, you still have to respond to my latest points in our debate. Just a reminder.

Yeah...

[Guardian]

What? How in hell do you know whether it was a consious decision or not?

For one thing -- because afterwards you claimed it was a conscious decision -- that you "thought" he was town.

I was going more on the risk rather than the certainty anyhow.

When did you bring this up previously?

Anyways, youre claiming that what I did is a scumtell because I slipped up and supposedly let loose that I knew he was town.

Yeah, you showed having too much information.

How is your slip up to use a term that wold only be right if you were scum any different?

Because they are two similar terms. Both are about wagoning someone. To me it describes the wagoner more than the wagonee, and I probably used it more because I thought Thok was scummy than anything else. My using that term in no way implies that I have additional info.


You saying that Oman being modkilled = bad for town does imply additional info -- and you've never defended why you were so sure Oman was town.

[Guardian]

To Guardian:

Even so, the tone and content of his post are perfectly consistent with scum trying to gain brownie points. He doesn't anger town by pointing the blame at us, he just complains to the mod about how modkilling a townie is bad.

Um, no. You're missing the point. HypoEliasScum wouldn't have to respond to the modkill threat at all. If you believe that he's got some mastermind plan to gain townie brownie points and that he can develop this plan in seven minutes, then you also would believe that he'd take an extra couple of minutes and doublecheck his posts for things like "does it look like I have too much information"?

This is right on the money. First you claim that my post is a contrived attempt to appear town by going against a modkill. However, at the same time, I call Oman obvtown? If I were making a post to appear protown, do you think I would let something that major slip?

You know Oman is town. You know that complaining about townie modkille = looks townlike. You make the post in 7 minutes or less. Final answer: yes.

[slight wifom] I hate to bring records into it, but im 6 and 1 as scum. Im not that stupid. [/slight wifom][/b]

Hm. The one thing this makes me think -- if you are in fact town, what is your town win record? I remember it being something like the reverse. That doesn't do much to make me think you are a good citizen to keep around, or that your case on me is apt to be particularly sensical.

You seem very convinced of it, but I don't think it is that great a case.

This looks like a BS argument to justify why your questions are more important than Elias's questions. And it ignores the fact that Elias was

doing both things at once

.

Exactly. In the beginning of the post, I respond to your arguments about my supposed contrived yet mistake ridden post, and at the end I mention in one sentence that you are not responding to my points at all. In my next post, I again respond to your points about the Oman thing for the first three sentences of the post, and then at the end accuse you of avoiding my points (in one sentence). Then you pull this crap about how im using my case to avoid your points. Hey, guess what? If I posted my points, then you post on a different subject afterwards, then your the one who is attempting to change the subject of discussion with points unaddressed, not me. Further, You made two posts in which you focused only on the Oman thing, both of my posts addressed both issues.

You were trying to make me address your case instead of adressing the Oman issues. I couldn't do that in the time alotted. I've explained this.

And then, CRASH, the site is dead for weeks. I am deeply saddened by the loss, since this was probably the most telling part of the Occult wagon, when it was just starting. Anyways, after NAR is replaced, the suspicion on John/Occult are beginning to pick up again. Here, BM is the very first to suggest the pairing of John and Occult. He then proceeds to vote Occult, on VERY faulty reasoning.

FOS: BM (Guardian).

Faulty reasoning is a BM scum tell?

Pay more attention to the part where he is the first to mention the possible pairing of Occult and John. Later he agrees with himself, and it seems to me as if he was the route of this idea.

I see this, and it was quite bad. I say again: since when is faulty reasoning a BM scum tell?

Mainly because this all the times that bad reasoning come into play, they support Occult getting lynched, which leads me to believe that this faulty reasoning is not genuine, but is in fact a contrived attempt to shift attention to Occult.

BM being on the Occult lynch looks suspicious, I submit to that. But honestly, holding me responsible for BM's logic doesn't make much sense from a meta-perspective. He uses bad logic to attack townies and scum alike.

He is questioned for his reasoning, he evades the question. He eventually states that he is voting Occult because of the possible pairing with John, yet he is not voting John. He at this point has posted more evidence against John, yet is voting Occult on the sole basis of a possible link to John.

FOS: BM (Guardian).

Yeah that wasn't great play on BMs part. You are ignoring how blagho voted John, I notice.

I'm confused. How does Blahgos vote relate to BM? I mean, he replaced him, but the guy made two posts, one with the vote, one requesting replacement. I'm guessing it couldve been a random vote, he couldve been joining a buddy in bussing, or he couldve been distancing. I believe Blahgos vote is a null tell.

I think blagho, with John being scum, looks very much like a townie who didn't really care and wanted a wagon. If you think it was scum distancing... well I can't really argue with that, I can just tell you that it is wrong and that I disagree.

I didnt say that I thought it was distancing. I said that it couldve been any one of the three things I mentioned, making it a null tell, because Blahgo never posted anything game relevant again. Way to COMPLETELY misinterpret my argument.

Not at all -- if this could be one of three things, why couldn't BM's attacking Occult be as town. I have proffered no evidence as to why this should be viewed as town attacking scum.

But you have equally and similarly provided no evidence as to why BM attacking Occult was scum attacking town -- in the previous quote you say it is only suspicious because Occult showed up town.

So, you are in fact being quite selective here -- you are attacking one of my predecessors solely because he wagoned town, and said that was a scum tell.

Then inverse happened when my predecessor wagoned scum, but instead of saying that is a town tell, as would logically follow in the inverse situation, you dismissed that as a null tell.

Soon afterwards, Occult uses attacks BM, because he has seen BM often more aggressive as town, and he feels BM is sitting back this game. John (known scum) comes to his defense, saying that aggressiveness is not a scum tell (completely ignoring the fact that the attack is based on specifically BMs tactics).

FOS: BM (Guardian)

(for sitting back this game, and since Johnscum defends him).

So Johnscum buddying with BM is a scum tell for BM?

First of all, do not mischaracterize this. Although it could be buddying up, it could just as easily be defending a scumbuddy, which is what I see it as.

And I see it as buddying up. You've done nothing to at all convince me or anyone else that it was more likely to be defending than buddying, and it wasn't defending. Saying blagho's vote was a null tell and that John was more likely to be defending is something of a double standard.

Not at all. You see, Blahgos vote was his first post from him. With no other text, there is no way to tell what it is (I think it was probably a random vote at this point). John's post comes well into the game, defending a player already taking heat. Now why would a scum go out of their way to buddy up to someone already taking heat? I can see a mafioso calling someone town to buddy up (*cough* you calling me town all game *cough*), but trying to defend someone already under pressure from meta logic? That is VERY unlikely to be buddying up. Further, I think of Johns play as noob scum. Buddying up is usually a play made by experienced scum, not noobs, from my experience. Defending buddies is a common mistake from newb scum. Therefore, it is much more likely this is defending, not buddying up.

Second of all, I'm using this one fos to represent both the metagaming, which I agree with, and the defense from John.

Hmm? I am slightly confused.

Youre confused easily then. I simply said that this fos is a combination of me being suspicions because I agree with the metagaming, and of the suspicions I have from John defending him. And you were only attacking half of it. I was basically saying my fos will stand on this point, even were you to prove to me that Johns defense of BM wasnt scummy (very doubtful).

Some time goes by. Guardian replaces BM. He calls YB very suspicious, and places a vote. Sometime later he unvotes and votes someone else (IH i think). Guardian makes another post calling YB scummy. Yet, when deadline rolls around, guess who is not on YB, for all his talk? Guardian. Interesting.

FOS: Guardian.

It is completely clear that YB was my #2 suspect, and that IH was far and above my #1 suspect. I've responded to this many times. Voting YB at the end of day would have meant nothing -- YB was going to be lynched, and I would have rather had IH lynched. I saw no reason to move my vote.

There is also no reason not to move your vote. Your move to not vote simply shows to me that you were reluctant to lynch him. Why would you not vote if you thought he was scum?

I wanted IH lynched. I didn't want to support a YB lynch over an IH lynch. Moving my vote or not moving it had no effect on the outcome, why are you pressing this so much?

Because I find it scummy. And I dont believe a protown player would play the way you did in this situation. This: "I didn't want to support a YB lynch over an IH lynch.", in light of the evidence at time, and knowing Johns alignment as we do now, is very suspect.

It was obvious that IH wasnt going to be lynched that day.

/disagree. Well, maybe at the end it was.

Contradict yourself much?

But YB possibly could have been wrong, and I didn't want to support it.

Points like this hurt your case, not help it. IH could easily have been wrong as well, we had about equal evidence for lynching either of them, really. Yet "YB could be wrong", and an IH lynch is A-Ok.

Next day, Guardian doesnt do too much til the end. He had been calling Romanus suspicious and Aimee town all day. Yet when deadline rolls around, instead of voting Romanus (which would have prevented the Aimee lynch) he stays on IH.

FOS: Guardian.

Voting Romanus *wouldn't* have prevented an Aimee lynch, first off. Second off, I was like 65% sure on Romanus, 70% sure on Aimee-town, and 90% sure on IH. Why should I be expected to change my vote when everyone else is placing meaningless votes at day's end? Like some votes on mustafa, for instance?

It wouldve helped towards preventing it. Basically, I dont like the passive attitude you took towards the Aimee lynch near the end of the day.

OK, that's more supportable -- but I wanted IH lynched -- and with 2 votes needed only, he *was* a viable candidate. *Anyone* was a viable candidate, and I saw no reason to change my vote.

Even though at the time everyone was disagreeing with your cases on him. But alright.

On page 43, IH attacks him for not moving to Romanus and letting Aimee get lynched (1051). However, IH makes a typo in the post. Guardian exposes the typo and avoids the question. (1053). However, IH never brings up the point again, despite Guardians obvious evasion.

FOS: Guardian, mFOS: IH.

I wanted clarification -- I agree with the fosing IH, but I really wasn't sure what IH meant -- did he expect me to switch to Romanus, or to mustafa, or what? I don't like at all how you attack me for trying to get clarification on this typo.

I think it was pretty obvious what he meant, otherwise, why would I have known what he was saying?

Because you assumed what he meant instead of having him explain it himself? IH-Elias connection?

Huh? Since when were scum allowed to privately daytalk? In order for me to have any better understanding of his point then anyone else as scum, we would have to be daytalking. Also, who were you expressing suspicions on at the time, yet notably not voting? Romanus, thats who. It was fairly obvious what he meant.

Guardian votes MoS on BS reasons. Later, he votes Tony on BS reasons. (Not saying that it was a bad vote, saying that his PROVIDED reasons were bad).

FOS: Guardian.

Also, sometime during this day, he attacks Skruffs for something that NAR did, which he has no evidence of happening besides other peoples reports

I have already responded to all of this. MoS was really scummy and wasn't contributing and needed to be voted. If Oman doesn't get replaced, I feel that the same standard should probably apply. I don't think my reasons for voting Tony were BS. Also, as I've said many times, I was shadowing this game, and when I saw it needed replacement I jumped in. I hardly remember them now, but I had read NAR's votehopping and badlogic.

MoS wasnt really scummy. Adel was scummy, hopping into the game voting random immediately without reasoning, but MoS really wasnt, he hadnt finished reading.

mustafa was scummy. MoS wasn't doing anything. Game was dying. Lynch MoS.

As I see it, you basically just said "I had an easy lynch, and an excuse. Lynch MoS".

I disagree on your reasons for tony. And about NAR, if you can hardly remember it, why in hell are you attacking someone about it?

I remembered it then, and I have my recollections of it and yours in writing.

Do you remember what post 27 was? If not, then why attack people for it?

Answer: because you can go back and read it. We don't have a direct history of NAR's actions, but we do have a fairly reliable indirect history if it -- your analysis included. Or were you misrepresenting NAR's actions?

I was representing NARs actions correctly, yes. But do you know whether I was or not? No. You trusted them no apparent reason. And I believe it was because by blindly believing me, you had a better chance of getting someone lynched, which I see as a fairly antitown action.

He has also votehopped the whole game, despite his posts, which have attacked IH all game.

Quoted For Lying. WTF Elias -- you attack me two or three times in this post for NOT switching my vote off of IH, and now accuse me of votehopping? WTF?

Don't you see? Thats what makes your votehopping so suspicious. There were two particular instances, near deadline, where you decided to stick your vote on someone when you were suspicious of others.

Notably IH over YB and Romanus? YB and IH I thought were scum together, and moving my vote did not matter at all. Romanus we don't know his alignment, all though from your posts 7 back I'm really beginning to guess it is town.

You didnt votehop nearly as much as I thought, though I still think youchange your vote too much for my likeing (almost always arbitrarily, and almost always back to IH after a while).

Besides those two instances, you've been hopping around like crazy (and always landing back at IH).

That's not really true. IH has been my main focus.

It is true. Youve voted for pretty much anyone that anyone has showed the least bit suspicion for, though you havent hopped as much as I thought.

And for all his talk about IH, the only good point he has, as far as I can tell, is IH's voting record.

FOS: Guardian.

IH is flippant and scummy every single post, and blatantly ignores arguments and tries to contrive arguments on others. His voting record is only a part of what I find him scummy for.

As far as I can tell he's responded to every one of your points. From what I've seen, youre the one that ignored one of his points.

The point where you assumed what he meant but he never clarified? That one? Why are you defending him on that and attacking me?

Also, you count all his responses as "responding to every one of my points"? He has typed text after quoting almost all of my points, as I've said, he hasn't really

responded

to them in many instances.

Stop being ridiculous. You cant just say, "I dont like what he said" and claim he never responded. If you dont like the response, deal, but dont try to make it out as if he didnt say anything.
Also, Im hardly defending him. I'm pointing out a fault in your arguments, in order to further my case against you. The fact that your faulty point happens to be against IH has nothing to do with it.

If you feel otherwise, provide me with some quotes.

I've done this before... I am too busy to re-read IH right now, but if me doing this will be relevant, I can do it at some later time.

And we agree that the only point of his I've ignored is the one where he never made clear what his point was?

Ah. Too busy. alright then. Also, IH claims that he did clarify what he meant in a later post.

I think that there is A LOT of good evidence for a Guardian lynch. Therefore, I will

vote: Guardian

.

Wow Elias. I have a question for you. Most of "your arguments" were brought up by others and responded to by me numerous times in the game.Why is it that only now you find me scummy for them, and you didn't find me scummy for them at earlier times when they came up?

Mainly, this stems from the fact that I dropped off the radar around oh...page 29ish? And from that point on I've been saying things like "I need to reread", Ill reread tomorrow" and such, and not really paying attention to the thread. I finally got a round to it, and this is what I found. Also, there at least 2 or 3 points in there I never saw brought against you.

Ah -- so you didn't find me suspicious because you've been lurking all game without any relevant opinions, and just now you are re-entering? .

Um, yes. I have been lurking most of the game, from a combination of lack or effort, RL getting in the way, and your giant feuds with IH. Roll your eyes all you want, Im thinking youre just unhappy that there is another participating protown player in the mix.

[Guardian]

To Guardian:

Even so, the tone and content of his post are perfectly consistent with scum trying to gain brownie points. He doesn't anger town by pointing the blame at us, he just complains to the mod about how modkilling a townie is bad.

Um, no. You're missing the point. HypoEliasScum wouldn't have to respond to the modkill threat at all. If you believe that he's got some mastermind plan to gain townie brownie points and that he can develop this plan in seven minutes, then you also would believe that he'd take an extra couple of minutes and doublecheck his posts for things like "does it look like I have too much information"?

This is right on the money. First you claim that my post is a contrived attempt to appear town by going against a modkill. However, at the same time, I call Oman obvtown? If I were making a post to appear protown, do you think I would let something that major slip?

You know Oman is town. You know that complaining about townie modkille = looks townlike. You make the post in 7 minutes or less. Final answer: yes.

[slight wifom] I hate to bring records into it, but im 6 and 1 as scum. Im not that stupid. [/slight wifom][/b]

Hm. The one thing this makes me think -- if you are in fact town, what is your town win record? I remember it being something like the reverse. That doesn't do much to make me think you are a good citizen to keep around, or that your case on me is apt to be particularly sensical.

You seem very convinced of it, but I don't think it is that great a case.

This looks like a BS argument to justify why your questions are more important than Elias's questions. And it ignores the fact that Elias was

doing both things at once

.

Exactly. In the beginning of the post, I respond to your arguments about my supposed contrived yet mistake ridden post, and at the end I mention in one sentence that you are not responding to my points at all. In my next post, I again respond to your points about the Oman thing for the first three sentences of the post, and then at the end accuse you of avoiding my points (in one sentence). Then you pull this crap about how im using my case to avoid your points. Hey, guess what? If I posted my points, then you post on a different subject afterwards, then your the one who is attempting to change the subject of discussion with points unaddressed, not me. Further, You made two posts in which you focused only on the Oman thing, both of my posts addressed both issues.

You were trying to make me address your case instead of adressing the Oman issues. I couldn't do that in the time alotted. I've explained this.

And then, CRASH, the site is dead for weeks. I am deeply saddened by the loss, since this was probably the most telling part of the Occult wagon, when it was just starting. Anyways, after NAR is replaced, the suspicion on John/Occult are beginning to pick up again. Here, BM is the very first to suggest the pairing of John and Occult. He then proceeds to vote Occult, on VERY faulty reasoning.

FOS: BM (Guardian).

Faulty reasoning is a BM scum tell?

Pay more attention to the part where he is the first to mention the possible pairing of Occult and John. Later he agrees with himself, and it seems to me as if he was the route of this idea.

I see this, and it was quite bad. I say again: since when is faulty reasoning a BM scum tell?

Mainly because this all the times that bad reasoning come into play, they support Occult getting lynched, which leads me to believe that this faulty reasoning is not genuine, but is in fact a contrived attempt to shift attention to Occult.

BM being on the Occult lynch looks suspicious, I submit to that. But honestly, holding me responsible for BM's logic doesn't make much sense from a meta-perspective. He uses bad logic to attack townies and scum alike.

He is questioned for his reasoning, he evades the question. He eventually states that he is voting Occult because of the possible pairing with John, yet he is not voting John. He at this point has posted more evidence against John, yet is voting Occult on the sole basis of a possible link to John.

FOS: BM (Guardian).

Yeah that wasn't great play on BMs part. You are ignoring how blagho voted John, I notice.

I'm confused. How does Blahgos vote relate to BM? I mean, he replaced him, but the guy made two posts, one with the vote, one requesting replacement. I'm guessing it couldve been a random vote, he couldve been joining a buddy in bussing, or he couldve been distancing. I believe Blahgos vote is a null tell.

I think blagho, with John being scum, looks very much like a townie who didn't really care and wanted a wagon. If you think it was scum distancing... well I can't really argue with that, I can just tell you that it is wrong and that I disagree.

I didnt say that I thought it was distancing. I said that it couldve been any one of the three things I mentioned, making it a null tell, because Blahgo never posted anything game relevant again. Way to COMPLETELY misinterpret my argument.

Not at all -- if this could be one of three things, why couldn't BM's attacking Occult be as town. I have proffered no evidence as to why this should be viewed as town attacking scum.

But you have equally and similarly provided no evidence as to why BM attacking Occult was scum attacking town -- in the previous quote you say it is only suspicious because Occult showed up town.

So, you are in fact being quite selective here -- you are attacking one of my predecessors solely because he wagoned town, and said that was a scum tell.

Then inverse happened when my predecessor wagoned scum, but instead of saying that is a town tell, as would logically follow in the inverse situation, you dismissed that as a null tell.

Soon afterwards, Occult uses attacks BM, because he has seen BM often more aggressive as town, and he feels BM is sitting back this game. John (known scum) comes to his defense, saying that aggressiveness is not a scum tell (completely ignoring the fact that the attack is based on specifically BMs tactics).

FOS: BM (Guardian)

(for sitting back this game, and since Johnscum defends him).

So Johnscum buddying with BM is a scum tell for BM?

First of all, do not mischaracterize this. Although it could be buddying up, it could just as easily be defending a scumbuddy, which is what I see it as.

And I see it as buddying up. You've done nothing to at all convince me or anyone else that it was more likely to be defending than buddying, and it wasn't defending. Saying blagho's vote was a null tell and that John was more likely to be defending is something of a double standard.

Not at all. You see, Blahgos vote was his first post from him. With no other text, there is no way to tell what it is (I think it was probably a random vote at this point).

In your POV, blagho's logic was no worse than BM's, and you say it was probably random (not scum motivated). Yet you say that it ending up on town has no significance?

John's post comes well into the game, defending a player already taking heat. Now why would a scum go out of their way to buddy up to someone already taking heat?

To look townlike?

I can see a mafioso calling someone town to buddy up (*cough* you calling me town all game *cough*), but trying to defend someone already under pressure from meta logic? That is VERY unlikely to be buddying up.

First off, nice assuming that you're town .

Secondly, dude -- if it makes no sense for scum to go out of their way to someone already taking heat, why would I, as scum, defend Aimee? Your logic isn't internally consistent, you are applying double standards all over the place to try and wind up with me-scum.

If you aren't applying a double standard here -- then it was VERY unlikely for my actions with Aimee to be scum motivated?

Further, I think of Johns play as noob scum. Buddying up is usually a play made by experienced scum, not noobs, from my experience.

Not to me, but OK.

Defending buddies is a common mistake from newb scum. Therefore, it is much more likely this is defending, not buddying up.

I think you underestimate John's play, and if he were here he'd probably be quite happy you are interpreting it in this way.

Second of all, I'm using this one fos to represent both the metagaming, which I agree with, and the defense from John.

Hmm? I am slightly confused.

I simply said that this fos is a combination of me being suspicions because I agree with the metagaming, and of the suspicions I have from John defending him. And you were only attacking half of it. I was basically saying my fos will stand on this point, even were you to prove to me that Johns defense of BM wasnt scummy (very doubtful).

Agree with what metagaming? And your suspicions will stand even if I prove to me that your argument for me-scum isn't valid!? Now I'm

really

confused.

Some time goes by. Guardian replaces BM. He calls YB very suspicious, and places a vote. Sometime later he unvotes and votes someone else (IH i think). Guardian makes another post calling YB scummy. Yet, when deadline rolls around, guess who is not on YB, for all his talk? Guardian. Interesting.

FOS: Guardian.

It is completely clear that YB was my #2 suspect, and that IH was far and above my #1 suspect. I've responded to this many times. Voting YB at the end of day would have meant nothing -- YB was going to be lynched, and I would have rather had IH lynched. I saw no reason to move my vote.

There is also no reason not to move your vote. Your move to not vote simply shows to me that you were reluctant to lynch him. Why would you not vote if you thought he was scum?

I wanted IH lynched. I didn't want to support a YB lynch over an IH lynch. Moving my vote or not moving it had no effect on the outcome, why are you pressing this so much?

Because I find it scummy. And I dont believe a protown player would play the way you did in this situation.

Those two sentences have no logic in them at all.

I could attack you making post 1444 and when you ask "WTF why are your pressing this?" I could respond "Because I find it scummy. And I dont believe a protown player would play the way you did in this situation."

This: "I didn't want to support a YB lynch over an IH lynch.", in light of the evidence at time, and knowing Johns alignment as we do now, is very suspect.

Again, I can't respond here, you don't explain WHY at all.

It was obvious that IH wasnt going to be lynched that day.

/disagree. Well, maybe at the end it was.

Contradict yourself much?

Like 90% of the day IH was possible. And moving my vote would at the end have accomplished ending the day sooner, at the most. I still supported IH more, and saw no reason to jump ship.

But YB possibly could have been wrong, and I didn't want to support it.

Points like this hurt your case, not help it. IH could easily have been wrong as well, we had about equal evidence for lynching either of them, really. Yet "YB could be wrong", and an IH lynch is A-Ok.

I sitll think IH lynch is not going to be wrong. Like, IH-wrong = 1/15. YB wrong there = 1/3.

Next day, Guardian doesnt do too much til the end. He had been calling Romanus suspicious and Aimee town all day. Yet when deadline rolls around, instead of voting Romanus (which would have prevented the Aimee lynch) he stays on IH.

FOS: Guardian.

Voting Romanus *wouldn't* have prevented an Aimee lynch, first off. Second off, I was like 65% sure on Romanus, 70% sure on Aimee-town, and 90% sure on IH. Why should I be expected to change my vote when everyone else is placing meaningless votes at day's end? Like some votes on mustafa, for instance?

It wouldve helped towards preventing it. Basically, I dont like the passive attitude you took towards the Aimee lynch near the end of the day.

OK, that's more supportable -- but I wanted IH lynched -- and with 2 votes needed only, he *was* a viable candidate. *Anyone* was a viable candidate, and I saw no reason to change my vote.

Even though at the time everyone was disagreeing with your cases on him. But alright.

I'm not going to stop finding someone suspicious because others don't.

You are basically attacking me for

not

being opportunistic.

On page 43, IH attacks him for not moving to Romanus and letting Aimee get lynched (1051). However, IH makes a typo in the post. Guardian exposes the typo and avoids the question. (1053). However, IH never brings up the point again, despite Guardians obvious evasion.

FOS: Guardian, mFOS: IH.

I wanted clarification -- I agree with the fosing IH, but I really wasn't sure what IH meant -- did he expect me to switch to Romanus, or to mustafa, or what? I don't like at all how you attack me for trying to get clarification on this typo.

I think it was pretty obvious what he meant, otherwise, why would I have known what he was saying?

Because you assumed what he meant instead of having him explain it himself? IH-Elias connection?

Huh? Since when were scum allowed to privately daytalk? In order for me to have any better understanding of his point then anyone else as scum, we would have to be daytalking.

Not at all. He could have been trying to communicate with you through his post, hoping you'd read it as him telling you to do something.

Are scum allowed to day talk? I think this came up and athey aren't right? Why are you bringing daytalking up, it wasn't implied here.

Also, who were you expressing suspicions on at the time, yet notably not voting? Romanus, thats who. It was fairly obvious what he meant.

I'm not sure it was obvious it couldn't have been interpreted in another way. How is Romanus related to this argument, you seem to be diverting attention.

Guardian votes MoS on BS reasons. Later, he votes Tony on BS reasons. (Not saying that it was a bad vote, saying that his PROVIDED reasons were bad).

FOS: Guardian.

Also, sometime during this day, he attacks Skruffs for something that NAR did, which he has no evidence of happening besides other peoples reports

I have already responded to all of this. MoS was really scummy and wasn't contributing and needed to be voted. If Oman doesn't get replaced, I feel that the same standard should probably apply. I don't think my reasons for voting Tony were BS. Also, as I've said many times, I was shadowing this game, and when I saw it needed replacement I jumped in. I hardly remember them now, but I had read NAR's votehopping and badlogic.

MoS wasnt really scummy. Adel was scummy, hopping into the game voting random immediately without reasoning, but MoS really wasnt, he hadnt finished reading.

mustafa was scummy. MoS wasn't doing anything. Game was dying. Lynch MoS.

As I see it, you basically just said "I had an easy lynch, and an excuse. Lynch MoS".

...

You think me on IH all game = easy excuses? You think me defending Aimee when no one else was = easy excuses? You think me trying to come up with an alternative way to win = easy excuses?

All I see is double standard after double standard. You call me opportunistic in one sentence and too mule headed the next -- which one is scummy? Or, might neither be scummy, and both result out of different situations being responded to in different ways? (*hint: yes*)

I disagree on your reasons for tony. And about NAR, if you can hardly remember it, why in hell are you attacking someone about it?

I remembered it then, and I have my recollections of it and yours in writing.

Do you remember what post 27 was? If not, then why attack people for it?

Answer: because you can go back and read it. We don't have a direct history of NAR's actions, but we do have a fairly reliable indirect history if it -- your analysis included. Or were you misrepresenting NAR's actions?

I was representing NARs actions correctly, yes. But do you know whether I was or not? No. You trusted them no apparent reason.

Other than my reading the game at the time and remembering his actions corresponding to how you and others represented them....

And I believe it was because by blindly believing me, you had a better chance of getting someone lynched, which I see as a fairly antitown action.

More double standards. Here I am taking the easy way out, earlier I am too stubborn with Aimee and IH.

The back and forth "too opportunistic. not opportunistic enough. too opportunistic. not opportunistic enough." really makes your argument fall flat.

He has also votehopped the whole game, despite his posts, which have attacked IH all game.

Quoted For Lying. WTF Elias -- you attack me two or three times in this post for NOT switching my vote off of IH, and now accuse me of votehopping? WTF?

Don't you see? Thats what makes your votehopping so suspicious. There were two particular instances, near deadline, where you decided to stick your vote on someone when you were suspicious of others.

Notably IH over YB and Romanus? YB and IH I thought were scum together, and moving my vote did not matter at all. Romanus we don't know his alignment, all though from your posts 7 back I'm really beginning to guess it is town.

You didnt votehop nearly as much as I thought, though I still think youchange your vote too much for my likeing (almost always arbitrarily, and almost always back to IH after a while).

ROFL! "You don't votehop as much as I thought... but you're still BAD." Wow this is so contrived I can't even believe it. Seriously, wow.

And always ending up on IH -- Like when I lynched MoS? Oh but wait, you attack me for THAT too.

Your argument has no consistency.

And for all his talk about IH, the only good point he has, as far as I can tell, is IH's voting record.

FOS: Guardian.

IH is flippant and scummy every single post, and blatantly ignores arguments and tries to contrive arguments on others. His voting record is only a part of what I find him scummy for.

As far as I can tell he's responded to every one of your points. From what I've seen, youre the one that ignored one of his points.

The point where you assumed what he meant but he never clarified? That one? Why are you defending him on that and attacking me?

Also, you count all his responses as "responding to every one of my points"? He has typed text after quoting almost all of my points, as I've said, he hasn't really

responded

to them in many instances.

Stop being ridiculous. You cant just say, "I dont like what he said" and claim he never responded. If you dont like the response, deal, but dont try to make it out as if he didnt say anything.

His responses are highly inadequate a great deal of the time. Like that phraseology better?

Also, Im hardly defending him. I'm pointing out a fault in your arguments, in order to further my case against you.

Hey! Guess what!? Pointing out flaws in a case on someone = defending them.

The fact that your faulty point happens to be against IH has nothing to do with it.

In mafia, it has everything to do with it. By pointing out flaws in a case on IH, you are, pretty much by definition, defending IH.

If you feel otherwise, provide me with some quotes.

I've done this before... I am too busy to re-read IH right now, but if me doing this will be relevant, I can do it at some later time.

And we agree that the only point of his I've ignored is the one where he never made clear what his point was?

Ah. Too busy. alright then. Also, IH claims that he did clarify what he meant in a later post.

IH also claims that I responded when he clarified .

I think that there is A LOT of good evidence for a Guardian lynch. Therefore, I will

vote: Guardian

.

Wow Elias. I have a question for you. Most of "your arguments" were brought up by others and responded to by me numerous times in the game.Why is it that only now you find me scummy for them, and you didn't find me scummy for them at earlier times when they came up?

Mainly, this stems from the fact that I dropped off the radar around oh...page 29ish? And from that point on I've been saying things like "I need to reread", Ill reread tomorrow" and such, and not really paying attention to the thread. I finally got a round to it, and this is what I found. Also, there at least 2 or 3 points in there I never saw brought against you.

Ah -- so you didn't find me suspicious because you've been lurking all game without any relevant opinions, and just now you are re-entering? .

Um, yes. I have been lurking most of the game, from a combination of lack or effort, RL getting in the way, and your giant feuds with IH. Roll your eyes all you want, Im thinking youre just unhappy that there is another participating protown player in the mix.

I'm unhappy your case is BS, and that furthermore it is a case on me that is BS, and furthermore that it doesn't seem to follow fluidly at all from your reactions at the time.

I'd love to see you re-address the above -- I don't see how your case on me is anything but throwing as many arguments as possible (no caring if they contradict each other) to try and find me scummy.



GAH mafiascum I hit preview and half of this somehow submitted. So here it all is again.

...

[Guardian]

Wow, I read your first few responses. I literally have 0 desire to continue going back and forth with you.

You arguments are mostly misinterpretations/misunderstandings of my arguments if not completely bull-shittery.


Like calling my meta on you ad-hom. You brought in the meta, not me. But you don't like it when the meta is applied fully, eh, only the good parts.

Yeah feel free to respond to my post, but I am done quoting your wall of badlogic and responding it for now, at the least. I have many better things to be doing.

[Guardian]

I have many better things to be doing.

I never commented on the IH/Guardian back and forth because, unless you checked the thread 3 times a day, there was no way you could stay up to date. The same is now happening with Elias and Guardian.

I really agree. It's getting to just be a serious of "U" "NO U" "NO NO U" or something. I'm sure some of my responses seem that way too, and, if Elias wants to get the last word in that's great, but I'm not really interested in going on and on and on.


And I'm back at college right now. I really should be out, or doing work, or seeing what the other people living with me are doing, not sitting here playing mafia.

.

Mod: Please set a deadline.

It appears the mod has....?


Tony, why confirm vote? What have I done to merit such an honor ?

[Guardian]

Thok, I'd like to pick your brain a bit. Full detailed explanations aren't as neccesary but:

1) What do you think about Setael right now? You don't like how I've been very neutral towards her role, and have attacked "her" previously -- what do you think now?
2) Also, what do you think about Elias? Again, you don't like how I attacked him, but what do you think about his recent responses? Do you still think his complaint about modkill came from a town perspective?

It might be more helpful for me if you answered these from the perspective that you are assuming I am town -- because you have expressed you don't like my reasoning on them, and it isn't useful to me to hear what you think about them tacitly assuming I am scum. Feel free to answer either way, or both ways.

---

Tony -- who is your #2 suspect after me, and why? Even if they are way behind me, I'd like to hear who they are and why.

---

IH Vitr and Skruffs I'd like to hear from more generally, what their current suspicions are, what they think in the end, etc. Thok's question to VitaminR makes sense.

---

I would also like to hear what Elias has to say about Setael's question, I hadn't liked that too but didn't nearly articulate it as clearly as she did.

[Guardian]

I said that the point is only viable under the assumption that he was town. I never said that I made the consious assumption that he was town when making the post. "Um, yeah,this point is under the assumption that Oman is town." means that the only way my points make sense is if he is town.

Wait -- what are you saying here. You made an

un

conscious assumption that he was town? Or that your points don't make sense? Or something else? O.O

And Guardian, oddly enough, I agree with you about the back and forth. But you know, you're just going to refute them somehow, then I will, and at no point will one of us say "oh shit. I'm wrong". I'm not going to remove my vote, and youre not going to admit any error, so laying down our oens on the issue is actually a good idea.

This is sort of what happened with me and IH, except that I was in your shoes. Then I figured, eh, I think he is scum, but there are at least two other players besides him who are scum , so there is no reason to be 100% singleminded, just present the case and leave it out there, and if others see the light return to it.

And yeah, there is definitely no way I'm going to say "you're right Elias, I'm scum" because I'm not, and you really aren't going to convince me of that .

Equally, it is very hard for people (me included) to say "oh, my case is wrong, oops", and even though it is, I doubt you are going to say that. The thing I don't like about this is that I think your case has a suspicious inconsistency or two, and I'd like you to address at least how those are not inconsistencies.

Though there are certain points i'd like to continue discussing (which I'll bring up in the next couple days).

OK, that's fair. We should definitely be more targeted in our debate, it makes it more readable and relevant.

One thing I would definitely like you to address if we are to continue in a limited fashion -- how is what John did with BM (me) different from what I did with Aimee such that it makes no sense for John-scum to be doing it with me-town, but that it makes sense for me-scum to be doing it with Aimee-town.

The scenarios are almost identical, but one you have not addressed and one you say is surely John protecting me-scum.

[Guardian]

I said that the point is only viable under the assumption that he was town. I never said that I made the consious assumption that he was town when making the post. "Um, yeah,this point is under the assumption that Oman is town." means that the only way my points make sense is if he is town.

Wait -- what are you saying here. You made an

un

conscious assumption that he was town? Or that your points don't make sense? Or something else? O.O

I'm saying that when I looked back on my post, the only way my points were viable and sensical was to assume Oman was town. I didnt think this when I made the post, the comment was purely retrospect.

So when you made the post, what

did

you think/assume about Oman's alignment?

[Guardian]

IH, Tony, Elias, or Thok need to be lynched.

That is my order of preference. I would not support a wagon on Skruffs, VitaminR, or Setael at this point.

• IH for his anti-town behavior all game. These reasons
  are convincing
  , but I've summarized them many many times to go into detail here. Actions on wagons and contrived responses are recurring themes.
  
• Tony for his non-helpfulness, lack of reasoning, and recent actions (the hammer, for instance -- look at his explanation for it).
  Attacked me for being "too townlike" this was then later forgotten. I find that similar to Elias's reasoning, though potentially less bad.
  
• Elias lurked all game, and then came in with an ill-founded attack on me that seems inconsistent and ill conceived. I cannot see his complaining about the mod kill coming from town perspective.
  
• Thok has been strongly sure about a lot of players this game, including in defending them, and I haven't necessarily liked his reasons or understood why he had such a firm read on all these players. Thok would be my least ideal lynch at this point.

Of all the cases, I think that against Elias recently is the most obvious -- not the most strong, but the most obvious.

No one has joined me in voting either of my top two suspects; if someone were to go for the third, I think I would participate, especially as we are about a week out from deadline and me getting deadline mislynched in this game after all I've put into it and read from it would be ridiculously stupid.

I've responded to the cases on me, and they are bad. Period.

[Guardian]

Skruffs OMGUS'd Setael.

Setael OMGUS'd Skruffs.

I like Setael's case better, though.

---

I still am most interested in my top three, I think. An Elias lynch continues to look favorable as many have taken strong stands on him, and more people are convinced of him than Tony, or IH, sadly. IH and Tony are my preferences, but as it seems very realistic that I could be deadline lynched with TWO or THREE votes on me (AKA, the number of scum left), I would gladly support a wagon on any of my top three candidates.....

Whoever the other four of you are, we need to make up our minds. A deadline lynch is so suboptimal at this point in the game.

[Guardian]

I actually don't like the two quick votes, just because while Thok and Setael had mentioned Tony as somewhat suspicious, the vote seems to have come in a rather sudden change of heart in willingness to move him to the forefront.

That being said, I'm not going to let my company on the wagon sway me, as Tony

is

my second choice of all the players.

Tony's offering to leave his suspects makes me happy, I find it as a good sign when players do that -- but it doesn't nearly offset his otherwise scummy play. Again, his flat out refusal to answer mine and other's questions the whole game makes me think that this promise may be something of a farce.

Tony, if you were ever going to respond to my and other's points and convince me that you're not suspicious, now would be the time to do so.



I was about to post something like "more votes to Tony plz", but at this stage I think we're just fine .



One thing I ask, especially if VitaminR is about to vote -- I'd like to have IH, Skruffs, and Elias weigh in on Tony before he is lynched, as they largely haven't today.

[Guardian]

Wow, I really hate IH's post right there.

He builds a huge case on me, and then votes Tony.

WTF is with that? It feels like he is setting up two mislynches, so much so that I will

unvote

at least temporarily.


He claims to feel a lot worse about me, but instead of voting me and bringing the wagons to 3-3, he votes Tony because "he wants the day to end".

Wow

vote: IH

.

Seriously, enough is enough, he needs to be lynched. I

guess

I still support a Tony lynch but

seriously

!? How does voting Tony follow from IH's most recent post?

Answer: it doesn't.

IH is scum.

[Guardian]

I also notice that you take him off of lynch minus one to vote for me, like you have with every other wagon.

Like I did with MoS? .

IH is scum. I am sick and tired of games where I find scum and somehow lose anyway, look at just this instance: his last post implies he should be voting for me, not Tony.

But the wagon on Tony was larger, and he placed a -1 vote with VitaminR "intending to vote".

Please, please let's lynch IH today. I don't want to go into a lylo situation with IH alive, and I am now starting to fear that that will happen if Tony is lynched.

[Guardian]

Vitr and Skruffs both have expressed suspicion of IH all game, and then ended up voting someone else.

Setael, why don't you find IH suspicious?

Tony? Elias?


I like the Tony wagon more than the me and Setael wagon, but seriously IH's entry and then statement "Way to ignore things" really is so bad. He makes a huge post about all my faults... and then votes Tony. Sure, he says he likes Tony more -- but WHY?

It seems like misdirection -- build a case on Guardian, lynch Tony.


VitaminR -- also -- I thought you were "just about ready" to vote for Tony? I'm happy you aren't now, but what changed your mind? Also, you were going to vote IH, if not Tony. Why change from that?

[Guardian]

The not voting IH and level of apathy/notposting currently in this game are inexcusable.

I'm going to speed re-read on Tony and Setael tonight and pick one, if no one moves to IH.

IH is infinitely preferable right now. Seriously, more votes to IH please. IH scum needs to be lynched today.

[Guardian]

IH, I've responded to that... I didn't re-quote it, but I've definitely addressed the subject.

Is there anything specifically more you want from me on the subject of you building a huge case on me then voting Tony?

---

Setael, I would vote IH for that among a myriad of other reasons. I think VitaminR is actually not bluffing, and that we could get an IH lynch today...

[Guardian]

I didn't have time to read. .


I hate, hate, hate the manner in which IH voted Tony.

Setael's positioning on Tony I also dislike, and I haven't much liked her entry to the game.

unvote: IH vote: Setael

.

I would rather IH be lynched, and I'd thought I was sure on Tony second, but I just don't like the wagon. I will not be disappointed if Tony is lynched, but I think Setael is better.


Regardless of the alignment of either Setael or Tony, I think IH is the play for tomorrow. IH makes sense with Tony scum, and makes even more sense with Tony town, and I don't see much correlation between Setael's alignment and IH's.

IH needed to be lynched like 4 days ago.

[Guardian]

IH, I think the most likely case would be you trying to set up two mislynches, with something of an "Oh damn, why didn't I vote Guardian" schtick.

I am interested in seeing where Tony and Setael's votes end up as deadline approaches.

[Guardian]

unvote vote: IH

.

We need VitaminR's vote and one more to get an IH lynch.

[Guardian]

Well, it appears that finally the players in this game have to choose between IH and me. Setael mayybe is an option, and I'd definitely vote her to save me, but really, I want IH (or me) to be the play today.

For all of you who are undecided: I'm town.


Elias's vote/case is merit-less, but I doubt that he and I are going to see eye to eye on this.

Tony I don't really get why is voting me, I wonder if you might consider voting IH? I'm not scum, IH deserves your vote.

Thok's vote will also be telling, he initially thought we were both town, then me scum because he was "busing" me, then undecided again.

If VitaminR votes for me over IH, you'll know who to lynch tomorrow and the next day.

Skruffs, seriously, you're going to lynch IH over me? That is similarly, though to a lesser extent, incompatible with your stance all game.

I think that's it...

make the right decision guys.


I'll be really annoyed if I get lynched because Skruffs and VitaminR don't sign in.

If they don't post and I'm lynched, please hold them accountable for it. I echo frustration with deadlines... Since I got to 3 first, 4 votes are now needed to lynch someone other than me. Make it happen people, IH literally just switched his vote to save his own skin.

[Guardian]

unvote vote Setael

IH would have been 100x better. And still IS 100x better.

FOS: VitaminR

. If you didn't happen to check in that is really unfortunate.... but it makes me think you are full of it.

[Guardian]

Thok, is there a reason YOU didn't take the chance she gave you and voted yourself???

You have an opportunity to take a stand, why not do so, and THEN ask why she didn't?

Don't want to be guilty for a mislynch?

FOS: Thok

I too don't get why Setael wouldn't vote though. My vote remains on her, obviously.

[Guardian]

Me too -- he ALSO had an opportunity to make a deciding vote, and

didn't

.

Thok (if scum) would much rather Setael voted and he didn't have a hand in deciding who was lynched.

His question was legitimate, but his action in NOT voting was NOT legitimate.

[Guardian]

Confirm Vote:Guardian

YOU ALSO HAD A CHANCE TO MAKE A DECIDING VOTE. AROUND 5 POSTS SINCE SETAEL UNVOTED ME

AND I DID MAKE THAT DECIDING VOTE SO STOP PRETENDING LIKE YOU ARE READING THE THREAD WHEN YOU REALLY AREN'T AND TRYING TO USE THAT TO BUILD A CASE ON ME THX, YOU ARE SCUM, IF SETAEL IS YOUR BUDDY WE'RE REALLY LUCKY.

[Guardian]

Yes!

VitaminR, I am happy Setael was scum -- if she showed up town, I'd be thinking you were scum with IH now -- but as it is, your not changing votes is at most a null tell, and your voting IH today makes me happy.

I also don't like Thok's play end of day, he said was confused by the wagon moving, and also seemed to be trying to get Setael to vote me too hard.

IH
Thok
Elias
Tony
Skruffs

makes some sense to me, though I would probably switch Skruffs and Elias. I don't see Romanus reacting how he did to my plan to lynch to 4 if one of you was his scum buddy. However, independent of Romanus being scum, I definitely agree that Elias has been more suspicious than Skruffs as a whole.

vote: IH

.

[Guardian]

just for the record...

I voted Setael when Tony was the lynch leader.

later I was, but I voted her before that, too. I only unvoted because I thought IH lynch was possible.

[Guardian]

Hey, Guardian. If you are town, why didn't Setael vote for you when you were both at three votes and no other lynch options seemed likely?

Why didn't Setael vote for me? Newbie scum mistake? She didn't want to look scummy by voting me just because it was convenient? How am I supposed to know?

My best guess is that it seemed like she was trying to get

you

to vote for me, and instead you voted her. Like I said, you seemed rather apologetic, and unlike you contend, the interactions between you and Setael do not at all definitively strike me as authentic.

Also she

did

vote for me in the end.



Skruffs, my list of scum is almost the inverse of yours. I think IH, Thok, and Tony, in that order, are most likely to contain the 2 scum, with you and Elias close behind Tony. VitaminR doesn't make sense to me as scum right now.

I guess this will lead to some interesting debate. I agree that "we" are in a good position right now, though.

[Guardian]

My wiki has three.

Theoville is the most "real" of the games, and the only game I've ever been lynched in as scum. Ironically my only win on mafiascum.



Skruffs -- maybe because Setael was 'scum' and that was her 'role'? Why are you parsing my words like this? Do you think my choice of 'newbie scum' is any reliable indicator of anything, other than me reading her lynch scene?

Well, I think Thok's more tied to Setael than me or IH. And you certainly aren't going to convince me that I'm linked to her .

Thok -- Maybe she didn't want to look bad for voting me? Thok, why am I supposed to know the answers to these questions? She was scum -- do

you

know her motivations?

[Guardian]

OK, I may look linked to Setael, but I know that I'm not, and Skruffs is like trying to convince me that I am.

[Guardian]

And even re: me looking linked to Setael... I did help get her lynched, and if she hadn't voted IH, she was my final target yesterday.

And if you think it is unreasonable for me to target IH over my other target... come on.

[Guardian]

Wtf Skruffs, that's not true at all.

I could ask equally convoluted questions to Thok that he couldn't answer, about the same freaking actions.

eg: Thok, why did Setael wait for you to vote, and only after seeing your vote, then vote?

Finger of Strong Disapproval: Skruffs

for saying I am "busted" for not being able to answer leading and inconclusive rhetorical questions.

[Guardian]

If you want me to answer with a handful of possible different scenarios, I can probably go back and do that.

You seemed to want me to come up with definitive answers as to why such and such was true, which I obviously don't know. Any answer, as all three -- four -- of yours were, are complete speculation.

Is this what you want -- you want me to blindly speculate as to what possibly might have been Setael's motivations?

[Guardian]

I need to re-read this game but I lack the time.

Unless somehow I magically am able to re-read, I am very content with my IH vote and Thok suspicion.


Romanus/Oman/Setael had a lot of interplay with everyone that merits reading, I just am too busy now to do it .

I'll try and respond to Thok in more depth when I get a moment, basically I really don't like his request as I've largely

already

done what he says he wants me to do -- I came up with several plausible things Setael could have been thinking, and he is trying to paint that I can't as a scum tell when I have already......

I feel great that 2 scum are among IH, Thok, Tony, Skruffs.

I highly doubt that Elias or VitaminR is scum. I don't see how we lose this.

[Guardian]

Wtf Skruffs, that's not true at all.

I could ask equally convoluted questions to Thok that he couldn't answer, about the same freaking actions.

eg: Thok, why did Setael wait for you to vote, and only after seeing your vote, then vote?

Finger of Strong Disapproval: Skruffs

for saying I am "busted" for not being able to answer leading and inconclusive rhetorical questions.

Skruffs, I somehow convince myself that you are unlikely scum, and then you agree with bad cases like this one.

I wrote a note to myself, using notes -- it was something like "Skruffs wants me to think that he isn't scum -- BUT THEN WHY DOES HE KEEP ACTING SO SCUMMY and USING BAD LOGIC!?

...


@Thok. Look at my reasoning. None of my reasoning is bad. You can't just assume I'm scum because of a bad voting record; I may have been wrong on some people, but I was wrong for good reasons.

And seriously, my voting record

isn't that bad

.

I absolutely cannot

tolerate

how you and especially IH talk about my voting record and are like "man, and he didn't even support the John lynch".

Lies! He was almost as scummy as IH, and I obviously, obviously supported his lynch. And -- what do you know -- Setael was my second choice to IH -- and I

was

on her lynch wagon.

In effect, I've supported two scum lynches, and been on ONE townie mislynch, two counting BM's actions.


You're like "omg, bad voting record". That isn't even true.

dayvig: IH, Thok

. At

least

one scum dead. Seriously.





VitaminR -- how does Elias being scum jive with Romanusus's reaction to my lynch to 4 proposal?

[Guardian]

@Thok. Look at my reasoning. None of my reasoning is bad. You can't just assume I'm scum because of a bad voting record; I may have been wrong on some people, but I was wrong for good reasons.

You didn't have reasoning for not voting Romanus. You repeatedly said things like "I think he's a confused townie", or "I don't see Thok's argument".

Exactly -- I didn't have reasoning FOR voting Romanus. I didn't see a good case -- voting him wouldn't have made sense. The most I've had this game until yesterday was scummy vibes that very well might have been tainted with OMGUS over his constant pursuit of me -- surely you aren't saying I

should

have voted him for those reasons?

I voted for Setael because her actions since replacing in seemed scum motivated, and because it looked very much like her or Tony, and I preferred her.

Your vote for Adel was simultaenous with you arguing that her bad logic wasn't a scum tell.

It was also simultaneous with me arguing that her complete lack of response AND her predecessors actions WERE full of scum tells.

Much of my suspicion of mustafa came from your (imo seemingly good) advice to look for who supported Occult over John. Mustafa was obviously one of those characters, and he also had a few other black marks on his record.

I've already criticized your arguments for going after IH.

I feel very strongly about these, you disagree; I'm OK with agreeing to disagree with you here, especially since there is a not insignificant chance that you two are scum together.

And seriously, my voting record

isn't that bad

.

I absolutely cannot

tolerate

how you and especially IH talk about my voting record and are like "man, and he didn't even support the John lynch".

I've never brought up the John lynch. I have brought up the rest of your voting record, which arguably is bad.

My bad about the John lynch -- IH *has* brought that up repeatedly -- I thought you agreed with it.

My voting record, I *guess* is arguably bad -- but not counting day one, I've lynched one townie and one scum. Certainly others have done equally bad or worse .

Lies! He was almost as scummy as IH, and I obviously, obviously supported his lynch. And -- what do you know -- Setael was my second choice to IH -- and I

was

on her lynch wagon.

Huh? Setael only became your "second choice" at the end of the day; as late as post 1494, you mostly prefered a Tony lynch to Setael. As I've explained the late day vote on Setael is mostly worthless in assessing your alignment. (Your first vote on Setael was worth something, but you immediately unvoted her when she jumped off of Tony).

This is a fair analysis -- all I will say is that I unvoted her because she voted IH -- IH is and was my first target, and with her and VitaminR seemingly available to support an IH lynch, I thought it could finally happen...

And if you voting Setael is protown credit for you, then why isn't it protown credit for me, especially since I actually had a choice of who I could vote at the deadline and I was the major pusher on Romanus/Oman before Setael arrived?

Reasons, and timing. Like you said, my late vote of her really doesn't mean much, she was the viable alternative to me at that point.

However, your late vote for her was your only vote for her, correct? And even then, when you had a chance to vote her or me and make a decision, you didn't, and instead gave her an opportunity to cast the deciding vote. As I expressed then, your hesitation to make a decision is something that I did not like at ALL. When you did vote her, you seemed almost apologetic about it, which makes me think you were busing.

In effect, I've supported two scum lynches, and been on ONE townie mislynch, two counting BM's actions.

You're like "omg, bad voting record". That isn't even true.

You only supported a Setael/Oman/Romanus lynch on the third try. The first two times you didn't push that lynch, a townie died.

Like I said -- the first two times I didn't push the lynch, I didn't have a good reason TO push the lynch, and I had good reasons to push IH and secondarily others.

I'll ask again, as I do want an explicit answer:

Do you think I should have voted Romanus earlier, when I didn't believe there was a legitimate case on him? If not, why should I be held accountable for not voting him?

If IH turns out to be scum (highly likely), should I be held accountable for voting IH instead of Romanus?

[Guardian]

Do you think I should have voted Romanus earlier, when I didn't believe there was a legitimate case on him? If not, why should I be held accountable for not voting him?

If I felt that you had legitimate reasons to believe there wasn't a good case on Romanus, I would agree that you had reson not to vote him.

Wait -- Thok -- burden of proof! I don't have to have legitimate reasons to

not

vote someone. According to that, I'd have to have legitimate reasons why you are town to not be voting you -- which is obviously paradoxical.

All I need to

not

be voting someone is to have a better reason to vote someone else. I had a better reason to be voting IH than Romanus, just as I have a better reason to be voting IH than you.

My point is that I don't believe that you've ever made a convincing argument that there wasn't a good case on Romanus. Much of my argument against Romanus was based off of how he reacted to the John/Occult wagons. You basically ignored this/claimed not to understand the argument, even when I explained it in detail.

The above being said... I DID have a legitimate reason not to vote Romanus. I re-read day one and did detailed analysis, and in my opinion he did not actively steer the whole John/Occult issue and was legitimately scum hunting and seemed like a confused townie -- and I've said as much.

Then, you continued to keep bringing up how he did, and I responded many times with "I don't see it".


So, not only are you using a whacked out, unfair, illegitimate assignment of burden of proof by saying that I have to have good reasons to NOT be voting someone (when in reality one only needs a reason to BE voting someone), I did in face HAVE those good reasons for not voting Romanus.

If IH turns out to be scum (highly likely), should I be held accountable for voting IH instead of Romanus?

If IH is scum (which I feel you are way too certain about)

I feel that 4 players are way too uncertain about IH's scum-ness. He's scum. He needs to die. If he isn't scum -- wait, that start of a sentence is a non-sequitor. He's scum.

I believe you are more likely to be town. But it would to some extent be irrelevant to whether or not you voted him over Romanus.

Yeah.

Your feelings on IH have little to do with your choice to vote MOS/Adel. It might sort of explain your vote for IH rather than Romanus when Aimee was lynched.

Agreed... me finding mustafa and MoS and Adel scummy for good reasons is why I voted MoS/Adel.

And like I said, me finding IH more scummy than Romanus explains why I voted IH over Romanus...

On reread, I do see that you expressed a lot of suspicion of mustafa on day 4.

Yeah.


Do you stand by this?:
Each player has the burden of demonstrating good reasons why he was NOT voting for any other player at any time in the game.

If you do not fully stand by it, please qualify it to the extent you do stand by it, and explain how that qualification applies to me not voting Romanus.

[Guardian]

Do you stand by this?:
Each player has the burden of demonstrating good reasons why he was NOT voting for any other player at any time in the game.

If you do not fully stand by it, please qualify it to the extent you do stand by it, and explain how that qualification applies to me not voting Romanus.

I think it's clear I don't believe the full statement you've given. For example, I'm not asking you why you aren't currently voting Skruffs.

OK, good, thought so.

I do think a player has a burden to explain why he wasn't voting for a possible scum lynch if that players vote helped prevent the scum getting lynch (this is where you IH vote during Adel/Romanus and you MOS vote during MOS/Oman falls).

Woah -- so you basically believe this?:

If a player votes someone else when someone who later turns up scum is also up for lynch, that player has the burden of explaining why he WASN'T voting for that scum post mortem?

Thok, before I respond, in your opinion, did I have the responsibility of explaining why I wasn't voting Romanus at the time, before we knew his alignment, or only after, when we now do know his alignment?

I think that if a player disagrees with an argument against another player, he has a burden to explain why he disagrees with the arguments, and to try to refute the arguments/explain why those arguements shouldn't apply if he feels they are bad arguments (this is where I feel your arguments for not lynching Romanus applies; it feels to me as if you sort of tossed my arguments to the side and never really considered them.)

That's fair, to an extent. Whether or not players should have the impetus to do this, I *did* do this -- I re-read day one, and didn't see Romanus wagon shifting. I thought he was a townie trying to figure thing out.

So I did explain why I didn't like your argument .

Serious Question: If we lynched IH today and he came up town, would you vote for yourself tomorrow? If not, who would you go after?

If we lynch IH today and he came up town, after PMing Simenon to make sure that it was accurate, and expressing some pretty extreme disbelief....

I would probably look harder at Tony and Skruffs, and still consider you Thok. Your defense of IH would not be defending a buddy, but there are still points against you I don't like. IH's suspicion of Tony would be marked as genuine, and Skruffs would be there still, but peripherally.

If IH came up town, I would probably vote Thok or Tony, I would strongly suspect they were both scum, and at LEAST one.

VitR: What do you think of Setael moving off Tony and putting herself in danger to get a wagon going on IH?

I'd like to respond to this after VitR does. Good question, btw.

Elias: Name your top three suspects, with reasons.

Heh, also a very good question .

[Guardian]

Thok, if you want me to respond, please re-quotify that so it is less confusing .

Skruffs makes sense; this disturbs me, especially with IH last .

[Guardian]

Things to research - Did anyone claim to reread day one and NOT point out that Romanus deflected the wagon from John? Aimee and Mustafa were both partially implicated in further lynches. Who claimed to have read?

Skruffs, I read and did a detailed analysis of day one and I didn't think Romanus was a major player. Maybe I missed that he was, but that was what I thought.

I forget which post/page number at this point, but look through my posts for the two really, really long ones to see why I didn't think Romanus was that fishy.

[Guardian]

Wait, was it aimee vs romanus day three when guardian was voting IH at deadline?


Omg!
Fos: guardian

no -- fos: IH.

[Guardian]

No, it just felt like caving, like I pointed out elsewhere in the post. Posting just to satisfy someone, while essentially keeping his stance.

I don't have the effort or desire to respond to your post in detail. But seriously -- I've "caved" in this game, and that's a point against me?

This game, you've attacked me constantly for BOTH not changing my opinion on you -- AND for changing my opinion too much.

BS attacks like this make it even LESS likely I am going to CONSIDER changing my opinion on you. If I did, I'd probably be caving .

[Guardian]

<snip>
Woah -- so you basically believe this?:

If a player votes someone else when someone who later turns up scum is also up for lynch, that player has the burden of explaining why he WASN'T voting for that scum post mortem?

You act as if this is an utterly ridiculous request.

It depends. It depends on your answer to the below. I want to see if you are being reasonable or not.

Thok, before I respond, in your opinion, did I have the responsibility of explaining why I wasn't voting Romanus at the time, before we knew his alignment, or only after, when we now do know his alignment?

Certainly you should be able to explain it after you know his alignment. It's possible you should also be able to explain why you weren't defending a person you believe to be a townie alternative is lynched.

Can you clarify here? I get that you are saying I should be able to explain it after -- should I be able to explain it during? The grammar of your sentence makes it confusing to me, and you aren't taking a definitive stance with the word 'possible'.

Should I have had to explain why Romanus was town while I decided not to vote him? What burden of proof are you implying that I (should have) had?

Practical question: supposing I am town, how should I go about determining whether your vote of IH during Aimee/Romanus (I mistakenly did Adel/Romanus above, sorry about that) and your vote during MOS/Oman arise from you mistakenly thinking Romanus/Oman is town as opposed to a delibarate attempt to keep Romanus/Oman from being lynched?

Read my posts and reasoning, and see if they are BS or if they are internally consistent and reasonable thinking. I didn't see your case on Romanus from my analysis of his day one play. I've explained that in detail once or twice, and obviously from my POV my distrust of the case made sense.

That's fair, to an extent. Whether or not players should have the impetus to do this, I *did* do this -- I re-read day one, and didn't see Romanus wagon shifting. I thought he was a townie trying to figure thing out.

I need to reread Romanus to see if this was a reasonable view to take of him. However, there were definitely massive sudden jumps that he made that weren't consistent from post to post.

Hindsight is 20/20. He definitely changed his opinions on things, but I didn't read that as scummy -- I read it as him changing his mind .

[Guardian]

@Thok -- I reluctantly argued for Aimee's township and imo made a strong and valid argument.

My decision not to try and lynch Romanus, who I also thought was much more likely town than IH, doesn't mean I didn't try and defend Aimee.

And honestly, maybe I messed up. I've admitted this many times -- it wasn't an "obvious" decision. But I had about 15 minutes on vacation to think about it, and I figured that if I was wrong and Aimee was scum, last minuted deadline lynching Romanus, who I thought was not at all surely scum, would have basically ruined the game.

I'm going to bold this:

people don't seem to give me any credit that I admit it was a close decision, nor do they give me credit that I didn't know Aimee's alignment; I thought she was town, but lynching a townie and having her lynched tomorrow because no one else thought she was town doesn't help anything

.


Thok, I'm still not liking how you want me to explain now, but do not take the firm position that I shouldn't have had to explain then. If I didn't have to explain then, it almost seems like you are asking me to make things up after the fact, I really don't like this .


In terms of he said she said on Romanus, if there is something I wrote you disagree with, bring it up and I can try and respond to it. You at least seem to be trying to be reasonable, unlike IH. I'm done trying to convince IH. He's so obviously scum, and also isn't even pretending to try and grasp back and forth.

Maybe I'm being like that with him too, but he definitely is, and forget that, I am done trying to "win him over".



Thok, my finding you scummy isn't cruxed around you chaning your mind. That analogy isn't fair.

I understand the points behind his wagon

You agree with them?

as well as him attacking me all game

Wait -- me attacking you is a good reason to attack me?

as well as his flawed style re: voting accurately

Explain this. I don't agree at all that I haven't been voting "accurately".

I am not going to hammer him, yet, though.

YET? WTF? Explain.

No, it just felt like caving, like I pointed out elsewhere in the post. Posting just to satisfy someone, while essentially keeping his stance.

I don't have the effort or desire to respond to your post in detail. But seriously -- I've "caved" in this game, and that's a point against me?

This game, you've attacked me constantly for BOTH not changing my opinion on you -- AND for changing my opinion too much.

BS attacks like this make it even LESS likely I am going to CONSIDER changing my opinion on you. If I did, I'd probably be caving .

I'd love to have y'all see if IH can respond to this. Answer: he can't.


@IH's fake dialogue with me and Skruffs... All i can say is wtf.


VitaminR, thank you for being a voice of reason in the game .


For the record, in terms of levels of reasonableness in this game:
Me
VitaminR
|small gap|
Thok
|gap|
Elias
|big gap|
Skruffs
Tony
|grand canyon|
IH

This isn't necessarily scummyness, but the people near the top at least are trying to seem reasonable.

Skruffs is like more towards the middle of town-ness... but in terms of making sense, I really don't get him.

[Guardian]

VitaminR, you're right but... it is kind of amazing how you are so sure when many are so suspicious of me .

(I'm starting to suspect that the other one falls under something like a "Thok and Guardian have very distinct play styles, that don't match up well with each other".)

I think I might agree with this... I disagree that my attack on you is OMGUS, I haven't ever liked how you sound so sure of... everything.


Skruffs, how am I crazy? Also, do you have any response to my post 1662 where I quote you a lot?


If anyone else wants me to respond to something from IH, let me know... He's scum and really I don't feel like going back and forth with him, it isn't like he's going to agree with me.

fos: Tony & Thok connection

if IH is somehow town. I really don't like how Tony was trying to imply a me-Thok connection with his last post...

[Guardian]

Also, VitaminR kind of stole my thunder on the IH-Setael thing. That was pretty much exactly how I interpreted it.

Oh, and I agree with Thok that VitaminR and I aren't scum together .

[Guardian]

(I'm starting to suspect that the other one falls under something like a "Thok and Guardian have very distinct play styles, that don't match up well with each other".)

I think I might agree with this... I disagree that my attack on you is OMGUS, I haven't ever liked how you sound so sure of... everything.

You basically never expressed suspicion of me until I started attacking you yesterday.

I beg to differ; as soon as you replaced in, I was like "woah, your suspicions are really really off", and you seem like you are really sure about them.

So pardon me if I see a significant amount of OMGUS. The "Thok sounds confident " seems like a bit of a cover to attack me, especially since if you analyze my voting record, you'll see I haven't been confident about stuff.

That's true. I am willing to concede that there is probably some OMGUS, just that it isn't central. I can't help that I get defensive as town. I mean I'm trying to help it but, .

fos: Tony & Thok connection

if IH is somehow town. I really don't like how Tony was trying to imply a me-Thok connection with his last post...

I got more of a "Tony is trying to push the Guardian wagon without getting his hands dirty by voting" vibe.

That is also a possible interpretation. I definitely don't like the comment by him.

Obviously, that's filtered partially by the fact that I know his role

fos: Tony + Thok again...

but Tony also tried to push a you-IH connection earlier today.

How do you read this?

My problem with the IH-Setael connection interpretation of her play is that it ignores the Tony wagon that was the leading wagon at the time. It's unclear to me why Setael scum wouldn't try to save herself by putting more pressure on Tony, as opposed to do the convoluted maneuver to IH you suggested.

As VitaminR explained, it makes for a pretty dirty link to him if IH comes up scum.

Tony being fellow scum suggests a solution to this. (Of course it may be that Setael likes complicated maneuvers, which would also explain her behavior with respect to you and me at the end of the day.)

Yeah. I agree with this bit, both parts are plausible.

Guardian-looking over Oman's early posts I noticed he had a fairly chatty tone with you (specifically he called you his top suspect initially, but also asked you not to sweat that comment). Is there anything from the previous games with the two of you that would explain why he would act that way?

I didn't notice that at the time/remember it, but assuming that that did happen, we've chatted quite a bit on scumchat//played together//and I announced that a replacement was needed in scumchat (with Simenon's express permisson) and Oman responded...

So though I don't really remember a chatty tone, that might help explain it .

[Guardian]

Or you are scum and would love to hammer me like you hammered Adel....

[Guardian]

that's complete BS, if I have an "ONLY goal in the game" other than lynching scum, it is to get IH lynched...

fos: Tony

again...

[Guardian]

You agree that my

only

goal in this game has been to survive?

That's obviously incorrect....

[Guardian]

I like this one better:

[Guardian]

To implicate VitaminR for not "doing as he promised" if IH ever was lynched. It would really look like VitaminR was defending IH.

Secondarily, it is possible the scum were Setael, Tony, IH, such that Setael moving to IH was a null choice, and if IH were lynched it would make both Setael and Tony look good.

[Guardian]

How would it make Tony look good?

The lynch shifted away from him to scum?

What happened to Thok?

My

secondary

scenario isn't necessarily true, just plausible.

Do you think that Setael would have thought that far ahead since she pressed a pretty much omgus case on Thok?

Why not?

Do you seriously think that her case on Thok was bussing?

Yeah, why not?

In fact, what is so different about Setael pressing her case on Thok as you pressing your case on me?

Other than me being town, and my case not being OMGUS, and you being scum?

Well... I'm not reading anything into Setael's case on Thok. It isn't a one way or the other tell on Thok for me. What are you getting at here?


...damn it, I just responded to IH. His questions made sense though .

[Guardian]

Thok, before you re-read, maybe like print out my d1 analysis so u can see that im being reasonable.. other than that, good luck with it.

[Guardian]

With reasons... I spent like 4-6 hours analysing day one from an objective standpoint, and IH looks very much like scum with what we know now.

[Guardian]

I agree with 1729, though imo more evidence on IH really isn't necessary at this point.

I want to hear what Thok thinks after his re-read, he is making sense from a partial re-read perspective, but I'd like to hear what he has to say after a full one.

1725 and 1733 make sense to me by Skruffs, for once. If IH somehow isn't scum, it will definitely cause me to rethink things, and Skruffs being willing to compromise is encouraging, I think.

I don't like 1732 by Tony -- I want him to take a definitive stance on someone, and to explain how everyone has done something scummy today.

[Guardian]

compromise isn't necessarily pro-town. It is encouraging because maybe this game will finally get moving.

[Guardian]

He is making more sense, and his compromising in this scenario,

I think

is in genuine interest to try and get the game moving.
And if you're lynched and come up scum, and Skruffs helps, I'll definitely think better of Skruffs.

Other than recently, I think I've made clear that Skruffs is middle of the road for me -- I think Vitr and Elias are more likely to be town than him, but Thok Tony and you are more likely to be scum.

[Guardian]

Romanus scum finding it fitting to pursue me the whole game for my lynch to four plan.

I don't think elias or Vitr scum makes sense with that.

[Guardian]

If you go back and read -- I included him thinking if there was scum in the foursome then he would probably be the one scum of the foursome. I was pretty sure Romanus and Elias were town. I was wrong.

I was wrong about Romanus. Why does the foursome thing look badly on me? He attacked the living crap out of me for it.


Also, are your other questions directed at me, or IH, or what? If they are at me I'm happy to try and give answers, I'm just not sure which question goes where.

[Guardian]

I was wrong about Romanus. I don't know if I was wrong about elias.

I was wrong about both Romanus and Elias being town...

[Guardian]

I explained why I included VitaminR here, when I first introduced the plan.

And thanks... can we lynch IH yet ?

[Guardian]

Elias, my wiki has all four games I've ever been scum in, iirc. TBH, I think theoville is probably the best example.

Texas Justice is an OK example but it was very, very short.

[Guardian]

The Setael thing makes me think VitaminR is town, not scum. Could you logically explain why you think it makes VitaminR scum?

[Guardian]

I said those three and two more or something. I obviously wanted IH lynched. I don't remember what I said exactly.

But seriously, vote IH.

[Guardian]

I'm actually considering this (voting IH).

Good! Were you not "actually considering" it before?

But I want to look over a bunch of stuff.

Such as? Did you ever get to do your full re-read? Did my analysis of day one not make sense?

[Guardian]

If by 'it', he means 'voting IH', then I agree...

If anyone wants specific input from me let me know, but right now I'm really in the mindset of hoping people see the case on IH, and proceeding as planned if he is scum, and possibly re-reading in depth and re-evaluating if somehow he isn't.

[Guardian]

You could use the vote distillery thing (check mafia discussion) if you want to quickly track her vote.

Or, you could just vote IH .

[Guardian]

Well, I wanted to answer Skruffs's question, but more I wanted him to vote IH .

I only posted because I had a good answer to his question . Like I said, I have said most all I have to say, I am just really hoping two people see the light and vote IH.

[Guardian]

Thok, it seems no matter what I do it is lose-lose.

If I post summaries and try and interact with IH, people say that is a distraction and it has already been said. Also, tbh, I've done this so many times I lack the effort.

However, if I don't do anything, people think I'm not doing enough.

I don't

want

to do anything right now other than get IH lynched. I think I've found one of TWO remaining scum. If I am right about this, I don't want to try and figure out for certain which of the other remaining players is his partner and try and lynch them, ignoring IH. If I am wrong about this, I want to find that out, and really reexamine my arguments/thoughts about the game.

I

do

have an agenda -- get IH lynched before anyone else gets lynched. I'd have thought that was explicit/obvious by now.

[Guardian]

How about your thoughts on people assuming I was scum, and assuming I was town.

I've made this really clear, but for the sake of... whatever.

IH = scum
Me = town
Elias = very likely town
Vitr = prob town
Skruffs = less town
Tony = even less
Thok = even more less


But if IH is scum and we lynch him today, no way in hell we lose. No way. I am town, and I'm pretty sure that both Elias and Vitr are town. So it is kind of pointless for me to discuss in depth scenario if IH is scum -- we have only one scum left then.


OTOH

IH = town
Me = town
Elias = very likely town
Vitr = prob town, but dubious IH interactions.
Thok = scummy, but good IH interactions
Skruffs = less townlike than the above
Tony = very likely scum

But I am confident IH is scum. So it is equally meaningless to discuss this; I don't think it will come up.

[Guardian]

all games: possible v/la or only posting during the day due to computer issues...

lynch IH plx.

[Guardian]

Thok, I don't recall ever thinking your reasons for thinking that IH is town are legitimate.

I thought my reasons for thinking Romanus was town // not worthy of being #1 suspect were legitimate.

That's the difference for me.

IH needs more votes. I'm not at all interested in seeing a last minute non-IH wagon form .

[Guardian]

Yeah wait, it would only be hypocritical if the scenario is the same -- if IH is scum. How would any townie *know* this?

If IH turns up scum, Thok is highly likely his partner.

[Guardian]

Skruffs, that's retarded. Why would I push IH all freaking game if I were his partner?

But whatever, if IH is scum and then you lynch me, it will still be very hard for town to lose.

[Guardian]

Yeah wait, it would only be hypocritical if the scenario is the same -- if IH is scum. How would any townie *know* this?

If IH turns up scum, Thok is highly likely his partner.

X

The situation is similar enough already. Guardian has

already

attacked me based on the assumption that IH is scum and that I've been defending him for reasons he doesn't understand.

(Also Skruffs, so far in this game, you've claimed that I've made arguments that only make sense if I'm scum with Guardian, that I've made arguments that only make sense if I'm scum with IH, and you've also claimed that I'm scum with VitR. At some point, I'm not going to be scum because it requires me to be partners with too many living people. Guardian has also claimed that I'm likely to be scum both with Tony and with IH.)

I'll also point out that this was also much of Setael's reasoning for attacking me when she first replaced in yesterday was that I was defending IH and that she didn't like my reasoning. So I feel skeptical about that sort of argument actually being a protown argument.

X

Your post didn't include a vote for IH.

[Guardian]

..................

...................................................................................................


WTF. Wow, fuck me. I owe this game a re-read, I guess, as much as I don't want to do so.

Wow..... That's just...

wow

.....

[Guardian]

I re-read today and

vote: Tony

.

His play today has been uninspiring, and last few days he has gone for all the easy lynches, including his unexplained hammer.

I think Tony--Thok are most likely the last two, though my confidence is shaken after being wrong about IH...

Tony trying to draw me-Thok ties and Tony and Thok independently being the most scummy make me think this.

If I have time to re-read all 74 pages, then I'll do so. But I am going off of reading the ~10 page today because I had time for it and at least that's something.

[Guardian]

That's not entirely correct......

Day 4, Tony hammered Adel. That was obviously an easy lynch.
Day 5, Tony was on me, when I missed being lynched by 1 vote.

So um, yeah, he's been going after easy lynches the past few days not including today....

[Guardian]

I said, yesterday, multiple times, that Guardian's 'scum list' from DAY TWO was the exact same as nwo even through three or four people have been lynched in the meanwhile.

X

My scum list now is
Tony
Thok
Skruffs

My scum list from DAY TWO was
IH
John
VitaminR
Skruffs

Those are not even CLOSE to being the same.

You are either not paying attention or blatantly misrepresenting me.

Thok, I re-read day 6. And I had good reasons for being suspicious of Tony, and of you. If I found something different that made mroe sense I'd pursue that, but I'm not going to abandon reason and randomly pick someone different just because they are different. Especially considering that I find it highly likely Elias and VitaminR are town.

[Guardian]

Elias, Thok basically explained it in the post above. Maybe I am massively overevaluating this, but that really makes me think you and VitaminR are town.

[Guardian]

I'd like to hear your current case for suspecting me, and if you are town, I think actually presenting that case will give you a better feel for it. I will point out that you've now been shown to be wrong about your case on IH and you thoughts about Romanus, (and note I was right about both of those when I replaced in) and that from what I can tell, your case on me is similar in style in that it focuses mainly on playstyle.

Repeating my request for Guardian.

Honestly, it is more of process of elimination for me, and habitual thought. Maybe I should really re-evaluate my suspicion of you.

I may be incorrect in this, but really I think the most plausible explanation of Romanus's behavior is me-Vitr-Elias town.

Tony has been extremely suspicious, so he is my number one.

It is then you or Skruffs.

My past thoughts on you were that you were way too sure of your thoughts and defended people I thought were scum, and attacked those I thought were town, and then your deadline actions with Setael.

But considering how wrong I was on IH, maybe part of this is not valid.

So then I would have you below Skruffs. Skruffs has been kind of suspicious; he keeps bitching at me that I should find him town, and has done some inconsistent and/or OMGUSy stuff.

I could see VitaminR possibly as scum. His deadline actions are what throw me off. I still think he is more likely town than you though.

Elias has been the one person I was pretty sure was town all game. He is definitely less suspicious than you. A lot of this is due to his lurking, but really, I think he is likely town.

I do think my vote for Tony is very well founded though, considering his voting record and lack of contribution.

So yeah, Thok, maybe putting you second is misfounded. Skruffs and VitaminR have both done things that might warrant putting them above you. Really, I don't have time to re-read the whole game, so putting together coherent thoughts is hard. But these are my kind of opinions right now. I'd have to re-read and reconsider to see if I think you are scum or not, but I concede that there may be reason to find others more suspicious than you.

[Guardian]

I think/thought VitaminR was town because it overwhelmingly makes the most sense to me that Romanus attacked me because me-Elias-VitaminR are town.

Many are bringing this interpretation into doubt; if it is in fact faulty, I would be less sure of VitaminR's town-ness.

[Guardian]

He attacked me for suggesting bringing me him you vitr to the final 4.

If one of you two were scum, why would he attack the plan -- it would make more sense for him to support it.

[Guardian]

Like I said, others are attempting to dissuade me of this. If so, I might be more receptive to cases against VitaminR...

Thok made me rethink my suspicion of him, I am beginning to wonder if I am completely off base.

Still, Tony HAS been suspicious, no? He is still my top suspect.

[Guardian]

Who is your top suspect then? VitaminR? Why do you think that he is scum?

[Guardian]

I thought about the game a bit, and I've realized that my positive evaluation of VitaminR also had to do with his willingness to go with me on getting IH lynched.... That doesn't make as much sense as it did when I was sure IH was scum..

. I'm a bit lost in this game right now.

btw, I'm really sorry, IH, if you're reading this .

[Guardian]

Guardian, you aren't sorry. If you had any intentions of apologizing for IH as town, you would have considered him to be town.

This is also categorically not true. I'm sorry

because

I didn't consider him to be town. WTF.

I realize you have some life issues... but I do too man, and I'd appreciate if you tried to deal with yours outside the game rather than bringing them to this game .

I think there is good reason to find Tony suspicious, and it seems that many aren't seriously considering him. .

Skruffs has been all over the board, and VitaminR I'm very unsure about right now.

Thok, skimming back, has been freakishly right about things. I'm still unsure about him, but after thinking it over and reading what I could, I am less so.

Elias basically lurked through the game, and has gone 360 degrees on me and doesn't seem to be taking firm stands on others.. I am not very interested in lynching him today though. If I had to pick one person I was most sure was town it would be him, but after IH... seriously I'm confused .

[Guardian]

Skruffs:

Purporting to "know" that I am not sorry for my actions is ridiculous, as I am, in fact, sorry....

[Guardian]

So Skruffs, you are saying the only reason Setael would vote Tony over me is that I'm scum and he's town? I'd think you'd consider her actions more than that.

Also, can you sum up in one post, or refer to where you did so, your argument for VitaminR scum? I can see how he possibly isn't cleared, but what in your opinion makes him scum?

[Guardian]

I'm voting for Tony. Too many people are willing to be suspicious of VitaminR to make me think he has a good chance of being scum with anyone.

Only Thok is not actively mentioning him as a suspect. Thok-VitaminR? .

Skruffs, I am coming to realize, can be hugely unreasonable in a variety of scenarios... Alas.

I pushed for IH's lynch cuz I thought he was scum. I mean, damn, how was he NOT scum? .

I'm still thinking Tony Skruffs VitaminR Thok Elias.

[Guardian]

I'm voting for Tony. Too many people are willing to be suspicious of VitaminR to make me think he has a good chance of being scum with anyone.

Only Thok is not actively mentioning him as a suspect. Thok-VitaminR?

Huh? I'm pretty sure I've expressed suspicions of VitR recently (I'm probably the person who's been pressing the VitR supporting Romanus idea the most).

d'oh.

I'm actually leaning towards VitR-Tony at the moment (partially because of my suspicious, and partially process of elimination-I don't really see Skruffs or Elias as scum, and VitR-Tony feels better than either VitR-Guardian or Tony-Guardian),

That could make sense. I find Tony-Skruffs more likely... Why can't you see Skruffs as scum?

I'm also curious where you think Tony has expressed suspicions of VitR.

Tony -- this was probably directed at me, not at you.

Thok, I just messed up -- I was pretty sure that most people had expressed suspicion of VitaminR, and one hadn't -- so is it the case that you have and Tony has not? If so, yeah, I just got you two switched re: your VitaminR interaction.

[Guardian]

My reasoning behind Skruffs suspicion are that multiple times in the game Skruffs has purported logic that has made me want to bang my head against the wall. He has me thinking he's townlike, and then he goes and says some crazy anti-town/unbelievable stuff, and I get suspicious of him again. If my life depended upon it, I could definitely find a couple of instances of this -- but it doesn't, and I'm really not un-busy enough to completely re-read this game.

I anticipate being able to re-read this game once more in any reasonable foreseeable future, and I'd love to do that after we catch another scum. I feel everyone is having that trouble -- I hate to, but I agree with Tony -- we're at a point in the game where we just need to make decisions -- there is SO much freaking content -- piling more on has diminishing marginal utility.

[Guardian]

Also, can you sum up in one post, or refer to where you did so, your argument for VitaminR scum? I can see how he possibly isn't cleared, but what in your opinion makes him scum?

SKRUFFS?

[Guardian]

I think you're scum because you quote one of the first posts I made in this game when I

obviously

changed my mind later. This is one of those instances I described where I am like, "WTF how could Skruffs make that post as town??"

[Guardian]

Skruffs, tbh, I don't even know anymore. I'm not free enough to read the thread, and (obviously) everyone keeps aruging how they aren't scummy and someone else should be.

I think you and Tony are both scummier, but almost everyone seems so sure about VitaminR. I could see a Tony-VitaminR pairing, maybe.

Skruffs, what are you going to say if he turns up town? You've been pushing him almost like I've been pushing IH .

[Guardian]

Skruffs has been single mindedly pushing VitaminR for 3/4 days with sureness that he is scum. Certainly there is some level of parallel.

[Guardian]

unvote vote VitaminR

[Guardian]

I voted VitaminR to get reactions. I must say, I'm not really liking ANY of them, except Tony's.

Elias, and especially Skruffs, instead of being happy, just asked me why. Considering Skruffs's vehemence in wanting VitaminR lynched, I'm quite perplexed by that reaction.

Thok immediately launched a counter attack on Tony, and I wonder both why he didn't support me in that earlier, and why do it right after my VitaminR vote.

VitaminR completely ignored me vote, and due to V/LA has made only one post since then, addressing Skruffs.

Tony has continue his attack on Thok/me, and while his attack has its own problems, with him most of all out of all the players does that seem like a natural reaction to the vote.


My plan was to move this vote back to Tony, and while I'll definitely consider that... I'll keep my vote on VitaminR for now. Skruffs and Thok's actions following my vote both just sit poorly with me.

[Guardian]

Short answer, I actually felt I gained a lot of info from your switch to VitR, which basically confirmed to me that you and VitR aren't scum together.

But my initial vote of Tony says nothing about me-Tony? I see both a double standard in this, and I don't see how my switch would prove anything.

I'm curious how you think VitaminR should have responded to your vote.

Some incredulity? Asking me why I voted him? Frustration? Acknowledging its existence? He seemed entirely nonplussed, and that bothered me.

[Guardian]

I'm vehement, but I'm not 100% sure. I posted a big response, and you said nothing, just voted VitaminR. This was right after you got a bunch of slack for being vehement about IH.

SO yeah, with no explanation about what 'changed your mind' - and just this post later on, saying you didn't even really mean it, I think you can understand my suspicion.

Suspicion, sure. But the entirety of your reaction was 'Why?'

I really didn't like that, I thought you'd react at least in some positive manner.

[Guardian]

Short answer, I actually felt I gained a lot of info from your switch to VitR, which basically confirmed to me that you and VitR aren't scum together.

But my initial vote of Tony says nothing about me-Tony? I see both a double standard in this, and I don't see how my switch would prove anything.

Given that the style of your vote on VitR (no reasoning, sort of out of nowhere) is completely different from your style of your vote on TonyMoonshine (lots of arguments), I don't see why I can't interpret them differently.

So you think a no reason vote is more likely to indicate lack of pairing than a reasoned pursual? Mmmk..

Of your votes, your VitaminR vote most resembles you 4th vote on MOS/Adel. That sets up warning flags in my head.

How so?

Also, your attack on Skruffs/Elias is a double standard given that you're attacking me for doing the same thing (making a vote that appears to be a sudden change).

Quite the opposite. If they had attacked me, at least that would be something. All they did was absently ask 'why?'.

I'm curious how you think VitaminR should have responded to your vote.

Some incredulity? Asking me why I voted him? Frustration? Acknowledging its existence? He seemed entirely nonplussed, and that bothered me.

I claim that you could equally well attack him if he had made any of those responses.

I disagree.

If he acknowledged my vote and at least asked why I was voting him, even minimistically as Skruffs and Elias did, I would be less suspicious. But he completely ignored my vote, and I find that odd.

[Guardian]

Huh. Why are you surprised by the reactions from me and Skruffs? I think if a person just accepts your vote happily, then it is not a good sign. I always like to know why someone voted the way they did.

I agree with the later sentiment -- but don't you think it is more natural to react in some way, in addition to wanting to know why?

The way you voted, with no explanation, seemed more like an attempt to join a town wagon, especially coupled with your surprise at the questions.

Why not say this earlier, instead of just asking 'why?'. I find it odd that both you and Skruffs are only analyzing my vote when I press the issue and ask you to.

But I don't really think you're scum, meta wise.

Well, that's good at least.

Right now, your vote trail is too confusing to follow.

Hm?

[Guardian]

We have a deadline in four days, set right for Thanksgiving (thank you very much mod). People who have not yet voted today need to vote now, since we are likely going to have half the people unable to post at the deadline.

Myself included, most likely .

I'm did some rereads of Elias/Skruffs to get a feel for them (and to make sure that I don't mess up by assuming that somebody is obvtown when they are actually scum).

I've started with Elias. Something that struck me was the Elias/Romanus argument on page 27. Elias's 665 in particular looks quite protown to me (note that it started a Romanus wagon). I also noted Tony's response to this in post 675/679 which was to call this a distraction and start pushing back on Aimee. (Looking over my comments, I've noted the wagon on Romanus on page 28 and VitR.)

There's also the whole reaction to the threat of the Oman modkill.

I'll also note that VitaminR spent a significant amount of time calling Elias protown, then sort of out of the blue in 691 he said he would be interested in an Elias lynch. I also don't think VitR has ever explained why he's found Elias suspicious (except possibly as a process of elimination thing). There's sort of some comment where he finds Elias's attacks on Romanus insincere, but I don't really see that (and it's a much weaker attack now that we know Romanus is scum).

Could you explicitly state what conclusions you draw from these analyses?

I looked over some of Skruffs comments and tried to match them to comments I read in C&H. For the most part they agreed in tone. I should probably hunt for a mini in which Skruffs was scum to compare them.

Again, concreteness?

Bah, all of this has me leaning towards VitR/Tony as the last two scum. Except that makes some of the day 5 voting weird.

This seems very vague to me. I can see how it might follow from the above, but I and others can't follow your reasoning if you don't explain it -- could you try and be more explicit as to why your analysis leads you to this conclusion?

And if this is your conclusion, does that change your thoughts on who should be lynched today?

[Guardian]

I'm here. I can see where you are coming from Thok, actually -- if you are town. I'm not convinced of that though, especially with this switch to Tony.

Tony has been scummy but I don't want to switch back. Everyone's recent actions make me think VitaminR is better. This is probably the last time I'll have to post/think about it so... hope we lynch scum! And happy thanksgiving!

[Guardian]

Wow, that was lucky. I'm really not into VitaminR scum now.

vote: Skruffs

.

If Skruffs isn't the last scum, I'm hella surprised.

[Guardian]

Elias, who's scum?

You? No.
Me? No.
Thok? I highly doubt it after yesterday.
VitaminR? Possibly, but unlikely after yesterday.
Skruffs? Yeah.

[Guardian]

I've thought you were town all game, and I think I'm right.
Thok changed the lynch from a VitaminR lynch to a Tony-scum lynch. Also Tony was really 'suspicious' of Thok.
VitaminR was pushed by Skruffs (and Tony to a lesser extent), as an alternative to Tony scum lynch.


I don't really think we need more than process of eilimination.

But, Skruffs I haven't liked all game. He acts town, then not, then town, then not, and has bad logic and good, and his inconsistency and confusingness make me think he is a good candidate.

[Guardian]

Meh, I was voting Tony too, and have pushed him as a top suspect for a while. But VitaminR and everyone else's reactions to my vote made me think VitaminR was better.

VitaminR still

could

be the other scum. I tend to see Skruffs as much more likely though, because of how the wagons and discussion went.

I agree that Elias sharing his thoughts would be good.

[Guardian]

Prodded...

Still waiting for Elias.

The only thing in the ten some posts since my last I see that was directed at me is Skruff's question.

I don't really understand the prior two sentences of his post, but I think any lynch would have been easy yesterday for Tony + partner, with two being the lynching total. VitaminR not being lynched, then, is somewhat of a mark against him .

Who knows with Tony, though.

[Guardian]

I'm not likely to be mislynched after Tony came up scum

Mislynches future for ahead planning

you

aren't?

Also, I find interesting how you reward Elias for not posting.

In addition, I am not impressed by your reasons for voting me. Scum voted oddly and tried to make connections with me; I am suspicious of many at this juncture; and you find that to be a problem?

[Guardian]

Thok, you've already established that,

if

we both are town, I really don't buy your way of thinking. So why do you expect me to respond to a case under those premises? I am suddenly supposed to be willing to play under your terms when you present a case against me?

Also -- you wanted "town me" to stick to VitaminR, the alternative to a scum wagon, because of the great success I have had in this game with sticking to my top suspect? Nice one.



Elias, lol, your suspicion of me in this game is like a sine curve.

I'm going to

unvote: Skruffs

at this point. With five people left, I'm happy to not be voting someone who isn't starting up rumblings for a me-mislynch.

[Guardian]

Thok, you've already established that,

if

we both are town, I really don't buy your way of thinking. So why do you expect me to respond to a case under those premises? I am suddenly supposed to be willing to play under your terms when you present a case against me?

So, you're trying to sidestep my argument by saying "we can't talk, so I won't try"? At the very least you could put down counter arguments about why you are town/why somebody else is scum.

Woah, woah, woah, that's

bullshit

. Earlier, when I disagreed with your arguments on someone else, you said the exact same type of thing.

you've shown that if you are town, then you don't understand the type of arguments I make

Now when I say it, you call me a sidestepper? Being hypocritical is NOT pro town!

Also -- you wanted "town me" to stick to VitaminR, the alternative to a scum wagon, because of the great success I have had in this game with sticking to my top suspect? Nice one.

"Expected", not "wanted". The distinction is fairly key. I'm arguing that your change in voting isn't consistent with what has been claimed to be your town meta.

So changing my play... to a play that you would have wanted... makes me scum?

My observation has been reinforced by the sort of potshots you've now thrown at Elias/VitR (and to a lesser extent me) whil voting for a fourth person.

Potshots?

vote: Thok

I am suspicious of everyone. Because they_could_be_scum. Your recent tact and assumption that "oh now I am a bad lynch" makes me think you could have been busing Tony yesterday, and now your plan is to just act like such a perfect townie that you win this.

Also, as I've said, to me, your arguments make precious little sense, in terms of actual scum hunting -- and they are directed at me. OMGUS -- oh my god, you're scum.

[Guardian]

Thok, respond to the first point of my post, instead of selectively quoting the parts that are easy to respond to, and then I'll respond to yours.

Until then, I will accept your tacit admission of hypocrisy, and assume you are scum.

[Guardian]

Sorry for neglecting this game. I'm very busy in life right now. All my posts elsewhere have been quippy few sentence things or things not requiring thought.

I don't want to slip up responding to Thok and then have him call me scum for it, so I will try to respond when I get time.

My current feeling in this game remains something like

Thok 8
Skruffs 5
VitaminR 4
Elias 2

[Guardian]

Two more finals, starting next week/this weekend I should be able to make a decent post, provided I don't go to grandparents, in which case I wouldn't have internet for a few weeks...

[Guardian]

Well, I don't plan on voting VitaminR soon, and I don't think Thok is either with his thinking I am scum, so I need more convincing as to why my reasons for doubting a VitaminR lynch are ill-founded.

*He was competing lynch candidate to Tony yesterday.
*He was in my final 4 Romanus attacked, I keep being unsure how much to give credence to this, but it very well could mean VitaminR and Elias are town also.
*Thok being a more appealing alternative.

If you have time and think you can respond to any of those concerns, go for it. I will hopefully have time this weekend. If I don't get time then, I'm not sure when I will .

[Guardian]

Skruffs: I'm confused by your post, or at least it seems you went in a full circle. I'll try to not do what I wasn't doing that would make me scum but I'm not? ?

Elias: It is -2? Not -1?

Thok: How is Elias possibly being unsure about the something of whatever an indication of anything? I'm confused on your read there.

VitaminR: I'd like to hear from you.

[Guardian]

Vote: VitaminR

Why? I'm a lot busier than I anticipated, I wanted him dead yesterday, and him being scum makes sense.

I think this vote has a not insignificant chance of ending the game, and that would be really great for me at this point.

Simenon?

[Guardian]

Woah -- quick vote in lylo Thok??

Damn @ VitaminR not being last scum.
Well, I guess I will *try* and make time to respond to everything now. I pretty much don't have any. Relatives etc.

I was really hoping that would end the game.

Assuming no hammer, I guess it is me or Thok. Hint: not me.

[Guardian]

I am leaving town tomorrow for about a week. I have every hope of making a big post today. If I don't get to, w/e, I feel pretty good about Thok at this point. I feel that even if Thok gets you guys to lynch me first, he will be a great play tomorrow and turn up scum.

More later (hopefully).

vote: Thok

[Guardian]

Checking mafiascum because I need backup mods for my two games while I'm gone -- there is no way I'm going to be able to wholly respond to THok's recent points against me...

Going out now for some of the day, and leaving tomorrow -- I'll be lucky to respond to his week old stuff.

That being said, the game is 84 pages long. I've left plenty of stuff throughout those pages for you to read, go ahead and read them.

I really don't have the time or effort for this game anymore, and I'm not about to ask Simenon to find a replacement for the longest Mini Open ever.

I don't want to re-read the game, I don't have time nor want to respond to Thok, I just would like to see this game end. If that means I get lynched, OK . <- And if that means Thok and the other two of you think I am "defeatist" or whatever, that is OK too.

I'm sick of arguing for this game, I've been wrong so many times and argued so much, and I know I'm not going to "out-argue"

Thok

ThokThok.

Everyone, read the game and see who you think is most scummy, and vote. For me, it's Thok |||| Skruffs | Elias, so I'll keep my vote on Thok.

If I don't manage to make myself post, Merry Christmas everyone.

[Guardian]

Yeah I'm sorry about that. Just, being so wrong in this game, and it going on so long, and vanilla townie replacing in (my least favorite role), and plus to that I hate arguing about me being lynched because I always think its so obvious I'm town and that what I think is right, just all are demotivators.

I'm in three games right now and haven't joined new forming games for a long while and didn't replace except for one game for a few months, maybe I am getting sick of mafia.

Sorry that comes here. I'm not scum, and winning this would be cool, and I don't want to let whichever two of you are townies down, after 9 months, but my head just isn't in it right now.

If you think I should ask for replacement I am OK with that.

[Guardian]

I just want to add a PS: Usually when I feel I am off in a game, I stop leading and try to follow, and really consider what others are saying. Elias and Skruffs were making sense, and I hoped it maybe would make the game end. So, I went with VitaminR.

Now, the only person trying to lead is Thok. And he wants me lycnhed. SO that also is hard to deal with for me; I feel like I really don't have a good hold of this game, but following Thok isn't going to do any good. So I'm stuck :\.[/spoiler]

[Guardian]

Got back in town, it appears that there are two days left?

I'll try and respond... but honestly, I feel a lot like Elias. This game ending would be great; and I don't have lots of motivation/effort for it. At this point, it doesn't seem at all likely I'll convince Thok or he'll convince me, Skruffs and Elias just need to make up their minds -- I'm kind of saddened they haven't said anything while I was gone. There are 80 pages or whatever of game to read and comment on -- and vote, before deadline.

[Guardian]

Sigh...

Skruffs, vote 4 Thok .

Or Elias, I'd switch . I don't KNOW he's town..



If I do end up getting lynched, good luck tomorrow dudes. (Hint: Thok).

Again, I'll try and post something, but may not happen.

[Guardian]

The post where I voted him...

viewtopic.php?p=857529#857529

[Guardian]

You have a few good points, but compared to the case on you or skruffs is better. Needless to say, I'll put more consideration into a lynch tomorrow if you come up town, but I dont think that Thok is the last scum.

Guardian doesn't have any good points; moreover

Complete hyperbole, if I ever saw it.

if you read the next 5 posts after his vote, I responded to everything he said.

Do you want a prize? Responding to things doesn't mean your side holds the greater weight.

Similarly, not responding doesn't mean that your side doesn't. Company tonight, busy tomorrow, busy Saturday, leaving Sunday.

Sorry I don't have more to help convince you Skruffs, you'll have to work out I'm town on your own, if you're not scum just acting.

[Guardian]

Hi, I've mulled this over.

Thok is annoying, and scummy, and wrong...

Elias doesn't care, and has scripted play... But I had town reads all game :\.

Skruffs is unsure and seems genuinely concerned, but that could be that he is afraid of being lynched tomorrow.

I am most confident in Thok being scum, with Skruffs and Elias are near to each other as seconds. Elias I'd thought town all game.. Eh, still think that pretty much.



Town has only won once with me lynched. And that game I was scum. I'm not here, and I'm not at all confident in you guys working this out tomorrow if I'm lynched.

Elias, there is a great third option, Thok. From my POV Thok is a much better play tomorrow than Skruffs, if I do end up lynched. I think you should consider him. Skruffs, you are the most open minded, good luck and figure it out.

Thok, sorry if you are town, but you are wrong about me here. If you are to be lynched, definitely continue as you are doing and leave us your thoughts (including, for me, who would be scum if not me ). You are a good player, I know that from all over. Just I think you are scum here.

[Guardian]

Back from vacation. Pleased at extension. Maybe I'm going to reread this game..! But not tonight .

[Guardian]

This is going to come in drips. I figure I might as well start by responding to this.

@Guardian

1. If you think "annoying" is a scum tell for me, you should take a look at Board Games or Mafia versus Werewolves.

I'll look.. if true, that's annoying...

2. The lack of arguments from you is getting repetitive, especially when you've been asked to provide arguments.

:shrug: I play a lot by intuition anyways... cases are scummy, and usually lead me wrong. If I go with what I think first, works better. I can try and explain that through words, but sometimes it doesn't amount to a 'case'.

Repeatedly claiming I'm scummy doesn't make it true, just like repeatedly claiming IH was scummy didn't make that true either.

*zing*. Me being wrong in the past or using flawed argument style doesn't make you town, either.

Forget about whether or not it makes you look scummy or even how the lack of arguments suggests that you are probably wrong about me if you are protown; if you can't make an argument, nobody will ever listen to you.[/mafia advice for the day]

I never really understood this/figured out how to incorporate it into my play. People should figure out that I am right or wrong, why do I need to waste lots of time and make arguments?

3. At this point you seem to be leaning mostly on your intuition. Given that your intuition has been mostly wrong the entire game, now isn't the time to started leaning on it.

I'm hoping that'll come around.

(And frankly, this is part of why I'm suspicious of you; if you are town, given what I've seen in other games you've played, isn't your intuition not supposed to suck this much?)

Usually. I've only been dead on for 1/3 scum, and that disappoints me. Hopefully this will come around .

4. This is a minor point, but stop repeating the lie that you never were suspicious of Elias, or at least include the caveat "I always had a protown read of Elias, except for that time I spent attacking him because of his reaction to the threatened Oman modkill". I also find it hard to see how Elias could be seen to be playing of of a script, or even why that should be considered a scum tell (remember, that was Tony's primary attack on IH.)

. I was suspicious of him for what, 2-3 pages in a 90 page game? Maybe I'll add an asterisk from now on, if it matters to you...

5. I agree that Skruffs seems more interested in hunting for scum than Elias.

Oh do you?

Skruffs has a much better voting record than Elias especially when you take into account the timing of votes (Skruffs pushed the john lynch when it looked like it might disappear, and Skruffs pushed on Setael fairly early on in her lynch).

How convenient buddying if Elias is lynched today.

Most of my reason for thinking Elias is protown solely has to do with his interaction with known scum (his fight with Romanus, his reaction to the Oman modkill, and Setael's suspicions of him) and to some extent the lack of a VitR vote when VitR and Tony were the potentially deadline lynchees and his suggestion that me/Guardian were cleared yesterday when we obviously weren't.

I think you underestimate Elias's scum play. He told me once (and I think his sig has) that he has lost, maybe 1 game as scum? I wouldn't put it past him at all, and your easy acceptance of that as a town tell bugs me.

6. The buttering up to me in your last paragraph is pointless.

Buttering up to you? lol. I want you dead . But, with the most information you have in the game, I'd like for you to not be 100% focused on explaining why I am scum and Elias and Skruffs are town, because if you are town and are lynched, that doesn't give me much of anything to go on for tomorrow, and drawing from players who were dead for days is bad since they had much less information.

Moreover, given your current line of play it seems extremely unlikely to me that I'll be lynched today, because as things are going, you are undermining any reason for a wagon on me by yourself.

I really don't understand this at all. Maybe it has to do with the "not making cases" thing? I think you should be lynched, I've said so, I've sketched why, and asked for help. Why does that make it

unlikely

for you to be lynched? Elias and Skruffs voting for other people possibly makes it unlikely for you to be lynched, but what am I doing??

(Note, I realize that point 6 probably increases the chance I'll be lynched today by some amount, as it makes me appear haughty and overconfident and such foolishness might encourage a stupid gut reaction that causes somebody to vote me.

Cool .

I don't really care.)

And saying that you don't care, which you think increases your chance of being lynched, helps the town, how (if you are town)?

I realize I too have some apathy towards this game, but Elias's all out not caring about the result is suspicious of him, for me. It is an easy reason to not post. But I feel for him, because if he is town then he feels a lot like me, I guess I can just try not to act on it so much, and ask him to, too, if he's town.

[Guardian]

I don't even *want* to respond to all of that...

:\

I'm never going to keep up with this dialogue, all I hope is to read the last 10-15 pages or so, make sure my vote is right, and hope for the best.

[Guardian]

I just requested replacement/death in every mafiascum endeavour I'm in, besides this one.

I won't bail here, after the months and months, but yeah don't expect much more than Elias is giving/I've been giving.

My heart isn't in these games anymore.


Thok: Really, @cases: I definitely heartily question the assumption that cases

are

useful and helpful in determining whether you are right/wrong about something.

I don't need people to listen to me, I need people to make the right decisions.

And I was dead on about John.

It is not incredibly likely that I'll respond to your longer post.

[Guardian]

That was unexpected.

Thok, why does (I presume) me being town in Ork mafia correlate to me being town here? You think my play is that similar?

Not moving my vote at the moment. I'm interested in what Elias and Skruffs think of Thok's change of heart.

[Guardian]

Elias, I can hammer you right now, you are still voting me (the only one not voting you), and think that Thok's vote is "just some attempt to get you to post"?

His vote doesn't change your game view in the slightest?

[Guardian]

His vote doesn't change your game view in the slightest?

No. I'll tell you right now that hammering me is an idiotic move if you would like to win this game, as I am town.

You are voting me despite being at lynch -1. So voting you, and presumably lynching town would be idiotic? It seems that you're not sure whether you're supposed to be thinking I am scum or town.

I dont understand why Thok is voting me, and frankly I dont really care too much as I dont have the will to defend myself from anything he might bring against me.

I feel for you there.

On second thought, maybe you guys should lynch me.

diescumdie

I know that I survive today I'll be an extremely popular lynch choice tomorrow if we hit town today. As that would lose the game, maybe it would be better to get me out of the way now.

makes sense... diescumdie... makes sense... .

Though I still believe that Thok is town, and lynching the remaining other two over the next two days would win us the game. thok is voting me dispite the fact the that I essentially offer him the game if he's scum, so this reaffirms my belief that hes town.

That actually makes a lot of sense. Hmm.

I don't think anyone besides you is going to be lynched today, Thok and Skruffs are set on it. You are set on not Thok today, and I am pretty set on not Skruffs today.

I have some misgivings about this, but hey, maybe it ends the game . If not, here's to hoping we get it right tomorrow.

Vote: Elias

[Guardian]

damn.

I too, am disappointed I changed my vote. I'd be much happier with Thok dead and Elias alive.

Hm. I think the chances of a town win if Thok is town are about 1%, since he's pretty dead set on voting me. Elias made a good point about why he'd be town tho, so I too hold off voting, for now.

Skruffs seemed trying to manouver away from me being lynched, since he thought me first, then him. That is the main point I have there, and it is disconcerting.

I'm gonna think about this. I'd love if whichever of you is scum voted me, I hate being the one to decide, that always goes poorly :\.

[Guardian]

I've been thinking about this game, as I want a town win and also want to be done with it, and I have a conundrum.

I think Elias's point about Thok makes a lot, lot, lot of sense, and I can see Thok's POV, to an extent. Really, if Thok just voted me, as would have been very plausible, and I got lynched, Elias would have given Thok the game. The thing is, Skruffs wasn't going to go along, BUT Skruffs wanted to lynch Elias, not Thok, so at worst, for Thok-skum, it would be counflip between Guardlynch (ideal) or Eliaslynch (ok).

Also, I can see how Thok might think I'm playing badly, and his metagaming does make sense, again, to an extent.

The problem is, if Thok is town, I don't think he will lynch Skruffs today. The way he phrased his last post, his mind is made up.


Skruffs, OTOH, was very concerned with himself being lynched tomorrow yesterday. He was in my original list of 4 as scum, and I like to think my intuition is better than 1/4. I wish the pages from pre-crash were still here, I'd read them, I can hardly remember what I found so incriminating about them, but I felt strongly about it at the time. I may read Skruff's game summary from when he replaced in very carefully.

He seemed very concerned with himself not being lynched yesterday, and I'm interested if he goes along with Thok's plea, let's just lynch Guardian.


So, I right now feel like 35% that Thok is scum, but 10% that if he's town he'll make the right choice and lynch Skruffs between me and Skruffs. Utility of .60 * .1 = .065.

I feel like 65% that Skruffs is scum, but 50% that if he's town he'll make the right choice and lynch Thok between me and Thok. Utility of .35 * .5 = .175.

So, if I continue feeling that way, it makes the most sense to Thok, since it is more likely that voting him would be more likely to result in a town win. BUT, I find it more likely that Skruffs is scum, so this is really counterintuitive to me to vote Thok. At this point, if I had to vote, it would be for Skruffs. I think.

In any case, I'm going to try and re-read some critical passages (Skruffs right after replacing, Thok too, his predecessors limted contributions, and recent arguments).

I'd like to hear what Skruffs has to say at this point, after pioneering the Elias lynch.

[Guardian]

Guardian why are you doing this analysis now, when you could have done it yesterday before hammering Elias?

Elias's argument for me being town applied as soon as he said it yesterday. You could have taken the time then to think about what that meant then and tried to do analysis when an extra person was alive.

Reasons are twofold:

First and foremost, I, like Elias, wanted this game over. I was/am pretty disillusioned with this website, and cut ties to all endeavours on it except this game and one other. At that point, I thought there was a, while not terribly high, not insignificant chance that Elias was the last scum, and a chance ending the game, while not a sure shot, was lucrative.

Also, this analysis didn't matter yesterday, in that it says nothing about Elias's alignment. It seemed Elias was inevitably the day's lynch, and I figured let's get on with it. You alluded to being pretty set on Elias, as was Skruffs.

I was willing at that point to consider you, and though I hadn't gotten my mind around considering Skruffs, because he had not hammered me yesterday, that possibility was there.

Elias himself, however, was not going to move his vote anywhere besides me, the one person not voting him. It seemed to me that with those circumstances, and Elias lynch was inevitable and the best course of action.

Why did I make the analysis now? Being involved in only two games instead of like 7, including moding and mish-mash, as of as recently as a week or so ago, makes it a lot more fun, and less of a "job" to play.

Too, doing the analysis and trying for a win is owed to everyone who put effort in the game, AND getting it over with asap makes the game end sooner, which again, while not as neccesary as it seemed a few days ago, is still a fairly high priority for me, especially with the fall semester of school forthcoming in a week or so.

Mod

, can we have a prod on Skruffs?

Yeah.

[Guardian]

Why did I make the analysis now? Being involved in only two games instead of like 7, including moding and mish-mash, as of as recently as a week or so ago, makes it a lot more fun, and less of a "job" to play.

Too, doing the analysis and trying for a win is owed to everyone who put effort in the game, AND getting it over with asap makes the game end sooner, which again, while not as neccesary as it seemed a few days ago, is still a fairly high priority for me, especially with the fall semester of school forthcoming in a week or so.

You hammered Elias on January 6th, after you had already dropped all of the games on your schedule that were causing you stress.

Literally, you can check my posting history, today did I realize that maybe it was specific games and the heaviness of my involvement that was annoying me, and not mafia in and of itself.

And you spent a good portion of yesterday arguing that cases were irrelevant.

In my analysis, show me where I made a case.

Just like I said yesterday, that is my line of thinking turned into words. I definitely wouldn't call any of it a case, as such, it is just me explaining how I feel about the game right now and what my thoughts are about the best course of action.

[Guardian]

The argument for me being town is a case.You would categorize it as such?

I think of cases as detailed posts explaining all the pros and cons of a player, looking at every detail possible, and arriving at a concrete definitive conclusion. My few sentences about you have little if any of those characteristics.

Also, I believe I've allowed you to use a subtle rhetorical technique, of chaning the argument by making me assume your premise: That I abhor cases, think they are useless, and that it would be contradictory for me to make one.

To set the record straight and reiterate what I actually said, and do think: I don't think cases are completely useless, I just put less faith in them than most people do.

If you want to call my description of my thoughts about you a case, that's fine.

[Guardian]

To add to my first point:

In addition, cases are typically used to convince others of something. I'm not trying to convince anyone that you're town.

[Guardian]

vote: Skruffs

Why?
*I think he's more likely to be scum.
*His entire last post is trying to rip any waning hesitancy Thok might have that I could possibly be town.
*I re-read Thok and his predecessors, and his actions are not obviously anti-town, and in many instances pro-town. His self pointed out StD town-tell makes sense, especially.
*I re-read my thoughts near the beginning, and I wanted Skruff's blood.
*Also, Skruffs yesterday was very peripheral and focused on not dying, trying to maneuver the lynch such that he wouldn't kick the bucket today.
*Skruffs play right after replacing was crazy, and while I am not going to do any detailed analysis, after reading/skimming his summary post, I can definitely see how it could be scum faking an analysis.
*I'll be damned if my intuitions right after replacing are only 1/4, with IH, VitaminR, AND Skruffs being town.
*Skruffs seems about as likely to lynch me as Thok, and if you both want to lynch me, I at least want to vote first and try to get this right.

Why not?
*Maybe I should have re-read more, and considered more, etc.
*I think Thok's recent dialog with me is BS, in that even if he is town he isn't seriously considering lynching Skruffs -- but maybe not.
*I'd have a better chance of not giving the game to the scum if I let someone else vote first, but scum probably want to wait too.
*I felt so sure about Thok yesterday... but re-reading a lot of that was OMGUS, and didn't make that much sense .

Anyways, that's my final answer.

I'd like Thok to post, and for me to see if I'm an idiot or if I'm right. I'll be kicking myself if my change in opinion from Thok is definitely scum to more likely town than Skruffs is incorrect -- but I believe it is not.

[Guardian]

Cool .

Me neither .

Any more question or things you need, ask, and I may provide them. We're halfway there.

[Guardian]

Still not scum. I'll be thinking about this for a while. I want to see you two discuss/argue things among yourself.

I'm not very good at this stage of the game (see Open 29, among others). I tried there, and I suspect I will encounter a similar difficulty here, in that I find it hard to take any of Skruffs's points seriously now that I know he is scum.

I'll try and do better -- starting tomorrow. Going to watch a movie tonight .

[Guardian]

Well, Guardian, I was actually hoping to do this, the last day, with a bit more civility, talk things through before everyone starts voting.

Why is that more civil? And why does a game being "civil", in your definition, matter in the slightest?

Apparently that really bothers you, because you immediately moved into 'votevotevote' mode.

See above.

When did you decide that Thok was town over me?

When did I make my final decision? When I read all the stuff yesterday, using most of one of my last days of vacation to do so.

Or did you always know he was town?

NO U.

When did you reread thok and his predecessors?

See above.

I *never* really thought Thok was scum, but you were absolutely sure of it yesterday. Why the switch around?

Read my posts.

Was it when you realized I was not going to hammer Thok if you voted him?

I'm not going to bother answering leading rhetorical questions that do nothing to further your argument and consist solely of rhetoric.

You have wanted my blood on and off the entire game, and I've always asked you why, and every single time, you forget why you thought I was scum, back off, go to IH. Every single time. It's laughable.

I've addressed this over the course of the game. You acted scummy, I got suspicious of you. You beg on hands and knees "but Guaaardian, I am town, obv. how can you possibly find me scummy? You are town, so don't mess this up."

I should go back and quote the time(s) where you in quotes said "but you are town", Thok, you are also perfectly capable of finding them. And you say I'm the one with extra knowledge ;P.

Now?

Now I've read the game and made my final decision, and no amount of begging is going to change mine, try begging to Thok.

Is focusing on not dying scum?

Not imo. Read my sig. I inherently don't trust towns to get the job done when I'm lynched, for good reason.

That's been your modus operandi teh entire game.

It's been part of it, sure. The other parts have been trying to get my suspects lynched.

I, not knowing if Thok was the last scum, wanted to lynch Elias yesterday over you. Why? Because elias said openly that he wanted to lynch you, then me. That gives Thok scum the win. Do I think Thok is scum? no. Does that make me very wary, of someone who doesn't care abotu the game, wants it to end, isn't scum hunting, is directing lycnhes? Yes, that seemed very easily to be scum faking bored town.

I don't see how any of this is relevant to me being scum. I see you rationalizing your trying not to get lynched today yesterday, which makes sense, but it makes sense from the perspective of you being town. Thok is not privileged to any such information, and I know that assertion to be false.

What was crazy abuot replacing in after NAR? You refuse to explain, so what am I able to defend against? Or does this go back to the stuff that NAR said that I can't defend against, because it's gone?

Anything that I didn't cover at that point in the game, I'm not going to cover now. I think I brought up a few specific points back then, I don't care to rehash those arguments, if you want to dig them up and respond to them that is your perogative.

"*I'll be damned if my intuitions right after replacing are only 1/4, with IH, VitaminR, AND Skruffs being town. " <- What intuition? Are you saying that your feeling on IH and VitaminR were hunches? because you didn't say it was intuition at the time.

I decide who is scum through intuition and then try and explain my reasons for it. I play in an intuitive way. Is that a problem?

Thank you, though, for helping to clear up any misgivings I had about Thok. I was worried about lynching you yesterday because I didn't want to give Thok the game if he was scum, or Elias the game if he was lazy scum (though that's not the case). He's, if scum, at least extraordinarily sadistic scum.

I'd say you're welcome but I know this is all a load of whooey.

I really think you screwed up in voting rather than talking.

I don't see how that's possible, I made the best possible play here by voting you.

I get the impression that thok-scum WOULD probably lead things along, if he felt he was safe, which he is in this situation, but... oh well.

I addressed all of Guardian's points in my last post, so I will do a little exposition of my own.

If there's something in here I need to respond to, let me know.

NAR contacted me about the game shortly after the site came back up. I forget when this was. I have more contact with NAR than most others, I actually think he is a pretty decent guy, you jsut have to remember he is young, asian, and very exciteable.

He's kind of like an untrained samurai

.

lol!

I replaced in, and there was an issue going around where VitaminR had caught a scum tell on John about John asking about nightkills.

True.

That was a negligible null tell, I think, usually, but it turned out to be a good one in this case - (Which actually led me to be mroe suspicious of VitaminR later on, BECAUSE it was such a good catch on such a little slip). I forget exactly who was on and who was off of the John wagon, but I remember that it came up that Occult and John knew each other out of the game, and Occult wound up 'defending' John slightly. Somehow the wagon wound up sliding onto Occult instead of John. I remember *noticing* this a few days before the deadline lynch, and pointed it out that it was more likely to be John than Occult. However, the wagons didn't shift, and Occult was lynched as town.

Sure.

Anyways: This is what I wuold have seen if I had ever bothered to reread the entire game after I started in:

you've REALLY lost me now. My argument for voting Occult, was mainly that i felt him and John were scumbuddies. the fact that Occult WASNT scum, implies that the original voting logic was flawed, and thus John probably isnt scum-UNLESS he is much cleverer than he looks, and has succeeded in attaching himself to a townie, which i find unlikely.
BM

BM - John's a master of distancing? You said not once, but twice, that you were voting Occult because you saw Occult and John as a scum pair. You didn't vote John. Now you say John probably isn't scum.

???

Yeah, given the way BM plays, I find that comment more than reasonable.

There we go. "Occult was town, so John should be too." Which was exactly what I was sayign scum might try to do if Occult had turned up town and John was scum, both of which were true.

Let me get this: You made a prediction and BM did what you predicted, so thta makes him scum? That's laughable.

I predict scum will quote parts of this post and respond to it. So if you do that Skruffs, that makes you scum. Bull shit.

Either you're earnest about the game, or you could care less. If you can't even bother to keep up the fake-piety for more than an hour, why even start in the first place?

I watched a movie for a few hours with friends. That equates to not caring about the game? You're really stretching here.

And if you can't take my points seriously, why is it so hard for you to respond to them?

Because I know they're all just made up, and I feel like responding to every single one in a sarcastic, dismissive fashion. That's never worked in the past, though :\.

Instead you side step that and go directly to "Yeah just vote him". So do you want to talk or not? No? Fine.

That's cool with me, if it's cool with Thok. I don't particularly want to talk anymore, I want Thok to vote you. If we must talk, I'll play along for a bit.

Don't say otherwise, then. If Thok is the last scum, you were incredibly reckless to cast a vote "because you think he is scum" at lylo.

It's apparent that Thok isn't the last scum (I trust that he's not being sadistic), and my reasons for voting you went way beyond, "because I think you aer scum", even from the limited outline I gave in the post I voted you.

You forced me to counter vote you. If thok WAS Scum, I could no longer look at him as a potential scum, because he would just be able to hammer me if I voiced any suspicion of him.

Yup, and I'm happy with that.

You panicked, because you saw that I was discussing possibly voting you, and decided to make the first move and hope Thok followed along.

Not at all; I read the game, took into account how you were just as unlikely to vote Thok as he voting you, and decided that I'd go with my thoughts as to who was scum, and put them into action by voting. Panicking had nothing to do with it. I figured I better get the vote out before scum OR town votes me first, if I was right, which I am, I think it puts Thok in a better position to move correctly from here than if I just waited around and you, SKruffs, voted me first, or worse if he voted me and you instantly won.

Well, my intentions were not to vote you, t least not without more discussion. You did a really good job of responding to all accusations/questions/prods when there were a lot more people in the game. Now you couldn't care less, you just haphazardly vote. Fien. That's your choice.

Few of these assertions are true. First, in your post before I voted you, you made it abundantly clear that you were very likely to vote me over Thok. I didn't haphazardly vote... and I could care a lot less, I could have not taken the time to respond. Whatever I do

is

my choice, but your straw manning the hell out of me.

Thok: It's up to you I guess. I would love to not have to go to sleep wondering how it ends, though.

Wait, so after spending a couple of posts chastizing me for "voting haphazardly", you want Thok, all of a sudden, who had been leaning to vote me, to make his decision in one night???

As long as Thok doesn't need me to be really active in a week (when I'll be back at school), he can take as long making his decision as he likes, as far as I'm concerned. Just make the right one.

[Guardian]

Guardian, how many people who you thought were town did you let die by voting someone else (who was invariably also town)

A couple. Relevance?

How many times did you say you priority in this game was to keep yourself alive?

I've said it was

a

priority a couple of times. Relevance?

When did it become a scum tell?

Since it seemed like it was your

only

priority.

Did you remember all the times you've used that as excuse for scummy actions before you tried to use it against me?

Yeah. Do you think using it as an excuse was valid, or not?

You say you reread thok to figure out he was town, but you were entirely sure he was scum up until the point I indicated that I was more in agreement with his case than yours.

That's not at all true.

Lies, again

. My second post of the day, before you posted any of that, indicated I thought you were odds on to be the last scum.

Like thok asked, why didn't you reread thok yesterday?

Apathy.

And since you were entirely sure he was scum yesterday, why did you hammer elias?

I've already addressed this, as I've asked you to do before, please read my posts.

Elias was going to go after me after you were lynced: you knew that. If you thought I was scum yesterday, why did you try to lynch my most vocal opponent?

Because I didn't think you were scum yesterday.

Answer: your priority was to lynch two people before getting lynched yourself. That's why you will vote anyone for any reason.

Answer: because he was going to be lynched yesterday and might have been scum, so I figured I might as well get on with it. As I've already addressed.

Please

read my posts.

And that's why you waited until after you hammered elias to try and make me look suspicious for posting a case against him.

When have I said your case on him was suspicious? Your

admitted

motivation for posting the case on him is what's suspicious.

Because if you defended elias before hand, you would have a harder time explaining haMmering him later.

I've defended elias all game -- until after Thok voted him and I started having interactions with him, and I decided it was time to hammer. I'm confused what you're going at here.

I hate cliffhangers, and I hate being. In lylo standoffs.

Why?

I like how you are trying to say I'm forcing thok to make a decision, when you forced both of us to make a decision

What the hell are you on about? You are trying to force Thok to make a QUICK decision. Thok can have whatever time he needs, within reason, as far as I'm concerned -- you were begging him to end the game last night!

by speed votng me in lylo. It makes sense, of course, why you would vote first, and post the reasoning later.

Two points: I posted the summary of my reasoning in the post where I voted, so you're off. Secondly, I didn't go into more detail, because if I was wrong that would be a complete waste of effort. You talk like I made some great scumtell when I voted you, that is simply untrue.



Thok, I hope you can see that Skruffs is grasping at straws at this point. He didn't bother to quote and respond to any of my counterpoints, because most of his initial arguments were quite week. He's decided to go on the offensive and respond minimally, making as many negative points as he can. More points doesn't = good ones.


I'd like to make two points at this juncture:

First, in elaboration: Skruffs, you never responded to the bit about how you predicted what BM would do, and that him doing it is a scumtell. You predicted that he would drop a case on John, since he relied on the John-Occult connection, and Occult was town. We deserve to know if you are aware of three things:

a)How many other players, who have now turned up town, did the exact same thing, since they also believed in an Occult-John connection.
b)That I called for John's (2nd only after IH's, to be fair) lynch in one of if not the first post I made during the game.
c)Blagho's first vote of the game, I believe, was John.

I want you to let us know if you were aware of these things. They all contribute to making your case bogus.

Second, Skruffs, I want you to consider this quote:

Having to be convinced to go along with someone in voting has been proven (to me) to be a scum tactic.

Guardian, you aren't scum

. So don't do that.
Not that you are doing it, because you posted reasons as to why you disagree, which is townish.

You accuse me of chaning drastically on Elias and Thok. So Skruffs, we deserve to know:

Aside from me voting you and proving Thok to be town, and your needing to lynch someone other than yourself today, what has changed that now you think I am surely scum instead of being sure that "you aren't scum", and on top of that giving me advice as if from townie to townie. What's changed Skruffs?

[Guardian]

Going back to school tomorrow, limited access..

[Guardian]

At Guardian, you keep bringing up that you were "right about John". Why should I consider that a plus for you, when Skruffs was, IMHO, more important in terms of actually getting john/YB lynched?

Consider it a plus for me and for Skruffs, then. Where do I keep bringing this up as a major point in my favor?

I'm really town. I realize that's one of few points in my favor at the moment, but also the only one that matters .

Also, you spent a lot of time defending your voting IH at deadlines and ignoring other things, on the theory that you found him to be your top suspect. Yet when you found me to be your top suspect, you chose to hammer VitR/Elias rather than continue to vote me. I'd like to hear your explanation for the difference in these behaviors.

Well, with VitaminR, he hadn't posted on site for well over a week, and we had 3 lynches to spare, I was dead-on to him yesterday at that point, and I thought people were making some sense that Tony showing up scum shouldn't have changed that, so I thought what the heck, and that voting him might end the game.

The next day, Elias made it pretty clear that he was unwilling to switch his vote, meaning that the *only* possible lynch that day was Elias. Again, two lynches to try, and ending the game was an incredibly lucrative prospect.

So, the reasons were specific to the two people who got lynched (VitaminR who I had thought suspicious and went AWOL, Elias who was the only viable lynch option) and that combined with my desire to end the game made me act and hammer those two.

If that is unclear or you want me to attempt more detail let me know.

[Guardian]

I'd like to make two points at this juncture:

First, in elaboration: Skruffs, you never responded to the bit about how you predicted what BM would do, and that him doing it is a scumtell. You predicted that he would drop a case on John, since he relied on the John-Occult connection, and Occult was town. We deserve to know if you are aware of three things:

a)How many other players, who have now turned up town, did the exact same thing, since they also believed in an Occult-John connection.
b)That I called for John's (2nd only after IH's, to be fair) lynch in one of if not the first post I made during the game.
c)Blagho's first vote of the game, I believe, was John.

Hmm.
A) How many players turned up town that did the exact same thing? I don't know, BM - I never got around to rereading the game, like I should have, to find out. I do not remember if that lead was ever actually used. I remember saying it should be, but after John's lynch I was satisfied enough with myself not to go too crazy in investigating other players, until Oman/Setael's slip up regarding the double-standard regarding mea nd VitaminR. I can see now that the slip up may have been genuine, in order to get a mislynch on VitaminR, but that was the second time in the game I was very active. I never really thought that Aimee was a good lynch, I didn't really condone the lynch on IH all that much (Although for some reason he really hated me when I said that I would consider it), the Adel lynch was bizarre, mustafa's also, I think he got scape goated. So no - Were there a lot of town players who tried to avoid lynching John because Occult came up town? I don't remember there being Any.

So what you're saying, in response to my question, is that you have no idea.

B. You also said in your first post that you had been reading along with the game, and you were up until you replaced, sure that Battle Mage was scum. What is your point?

I've never tried to use BM's play as a defense. I will however, try and use my own play as a defense -- and you saying that my role ignored John is largely negated by my calling for his blood.

C. Distancing? It was Blahgo's only post, I think. If it was random, then it was random. If it was distancing, it was distancing. HE never endorsed himself or anything else - so why would you bring this up? IS this the "grasping at straws' I heard you talking about?

So you think it is completely insignificant he put a known scum to three in his first post?

I want you to let us know if you were aware of these things. They all contribute to making your case bogus.

I don't see how. Can you explain why?

a) IF known townies did the same thing you are calling a scum tell, it is pretty bullshit. b) If I went after John, it is pretty irrelevant that the person I'm replacing didn't. c) And if blagho went after John, you're just making this up.

Second, Skruffs, I want you to consider this quote:

Having to be convinced to go along with someone in voting has been proven (to me) to be a scum tactic.

Guardian, you aren't scum

. So don't do that.
Not that you are doing it, because you posted reasons as to why you disagree, which is townish.

You accuse me of chaning drastically on Elias and Thok. So Skruffs, we deserve to know:

Aside from me voting you and proving Thok to be town, and your needing to lynch someone other than yourself today, what has changed that now you think I am surely scum instead of being sure that "you aren't scum", and on top of that giving me advice as if from townie to townie. What's changed Skruffs?

Well, actually, you deciding to vote me spontaneously and irresponsibly proved to me you weren't town.

ROFL. I neither acted spontaneously nor irresponsibly. My quick, well thought out, vote might just give Thok the chance to make the right decision and pull victory from the jaws of defeat here for the town. It is ludicrous to call my vote either of those things.

IF, as you say, I am the one who "NEEDS" to lynch someone other than myself, then why are you the one who 's quickhammered, not once, but TWICE since yuor failed attempt?

Read my posts, please. I've explained this numerous times.

If you are so worried about me 'needing' to lynch someone, why are you using "My intuition can't be wrong 100% of the time" as the first underlying 'basis' of your case on me?

lol, the ordering isn't relevant. I find it highly amusing you're trying to turn that into a relevant point.

I do not think that changign yoru mind about someone, AS FACTS ARISE, is not scummy at all. In fact, if YOU had been willing to change your mind, during the first five or six days of the game, (Which wouldn't have helped you, of course, being scum), you probably could have helped town a lot, instead of being a hinderance to the investigations of town.

Changing your mind eh? I'll come back to this.

You seem to resent me not whole heartedly endorsign you, even after you quick-voted me at LYLO, on a *hunch*. Am I really supposed to say "Hmm, Guardian has been acting Desperate, lately, but it's a LOT more likely to be Thok who's scum!"?

o.O I resent you not endorsing me? wtf? I know you're scum, I don't care what you say you think. I find it very scummy how you keep talking how Thok could maybe be scum, as if to try and get me to unvote or some shit.

Is that what you are asking?No. I believe that you intended to go after Thok, originally, if you had made it to final three. But, when you saw that Thok is 'flexible', in regards to who he thinks is scum, you decided it would be a LOT more easy to convince him to vote me, then it would be to get ME to vote HIM, considering I bucked the trend and didn't hammer you yesterday, when I Could have, for a while.[/quote]ROFL. Thok, more flexible? Read

his

posts please. One of his lasts posts before I voted you was him asking you how you could possibly think that I wasn't scum. Me voting THok because he was flexible? Wow.

You didn't question Thok's vote onto Elias, did you? Even though he had previously been voting you, and you were 100% sure he was scum, you had no problem 'changing your mind' about Elias, and hammering him, before I even had time to check in and unvote him. Now, to go back to THOk, would be stupid - so you have to go to me.

First, I did question his vote, I thought his sudden metagaming was suspicious. And I've explained why I hammered Elias. Read my posts.

So you really buried yourself, Guardian. IF, for some reason, you are town, you have handed Thok-scum the game. And for that, I can only shake my head. If you are, as I am 95% sure, the last remaining scum, you still screwed up, because unfortunately, everything you are throwing at me does not stick, when I look at who's throwing it. You are telling me that changing my opinion on someone is scummy. When you've been using NOT changing your opinion as a tool to avoid scum hunting half the game, and rapidly changing your opinion, sometimes on people you've said rpeviously that you were town, for the second half. No. I'm sorry.

*********************************

Skruffs, the thing is, your changing your opinion on me was completely and totally because Thok was gearing up to lynch me.

Skruff's stance all game:

BM's resonated with mine, and I think that means he did an honest reread

If you weren't BM's replacement, i'd be more suspicious of you.

I'm only thinking you are town because of BATTLE MAGE'S play.

I've been defending Guardian most of hte game because I agreed with BM's PBPA

Contrast Skruff's play all game with this:

I think I can meta BattleMage (Guardian's replacement) enough to be pretty comfortable with lynching him.

Thok, you can only conclude that

Skruffs started warming to the idea of lynching me because you were

-- and that his change in stance is unfettered bullshit. His reason for the change? He hadn't completely read the game. If he hadn't completely read the game, why base his entire stance towards me on something he hadn't read? Why? Because he is lying.

He needed a reason to change his opinion towards me to get a lynch of me with you, Thok, and made up a complete and baldfaced lie to do so

.

My play I'm sure has a lot of faults. I get what you are saying about the difference in me hammering Vit and Elias, and not moving from IH earlier in the game -- but my views and reasons are internally consistent, and I had good reasons for what I did, which I explained.

Skruff's view is NOT internally consistent -- he is just lying to try and get your support. I hope you can see that.

[Guardian]

well done, thok.

ffs thank god this game is over.

i hated this game in so many ways, not the least of which was Tony, who planned to place the lynching vote a few days ago, not being able to do so since he was coin flipped off out of the game at like 8 in the morning :\. sorry simenon, I know this game sucked to mod and I feel for you there, but I have to complain about that one :\.


after playing scum in nightless, it really made me think about deadline rules, because they area really favored towards town. every scum besides me that got lynched was a deadline lynch. almost all the townies were "real" lynches.

I find it hard to believe I made it to endgame, having to hammer two people I obviously supported as town.

again, thank god this game is over.

[Guardian]

Also, I have to say that besides Tony, I hated my scum partners with a passion. Romanus, if you're out there, wtf?? We missed so many easy lynches because you felt like you needed to bus me. Gaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah. OVER.

[Guardian]

Yeah, town was quite good. I'm really proud I got to lylo and Thok had to even think for a day or two .

[Guardian]

Thanks guys.

Yeah, Thok, you were great -- when you replaced in, I remember thinking (and possibly PMing Simenon) that I now projected a loss, not a win. With that role not only not being lynch bait but also being filled by your able shoes... . Near the end of the game I really upped my efforts of trying to invent random cases to get you lynched because I didn't think that if you survived the game it would end in a scum win.

Later in the game, I made quite a few slips that were obviously written from a scum perspective -- I don't remember which posts though. If someone were to go through with a fine tooth comb, I'm sure they'd be there -- but who would want to? o.O

IH, I'm so sorry, lol.

BTW: My frustration with the site and mafia and whatnot were not faked -- just convenient. I might leave mafiascum for a bit now, that this game is over.