Mini 486: GAME OVER!

[Albert B. Rampage]

Vote count

Elias - 1 (Setael)
Hermit - 1 (Nelly)
Gorckat - 1 (ckd)
CKD - 1 (Shanba)

7 alive, 4 to lynch!

[curiouskarmadog]

Thanks for finally posting some content, even if you are barking up the wrong tree.

I guess I am a little confused at what your case is against me (in reference to SPAG). Please dumb it down for me a bit.

I guess one of your problems is my rating system and timing. Day 2, I put Gorckat 7/hermit 7/and spag 8….I could have simply said that Gorckat, hermit, and spag was my top three, but wanted to convey that I thought SPAG was a little scummier than the others. IF the situation would have been different I would have voted SPAG/yag then. However, he was at –2 with talks (by gorckat) to get to –1. I had a feeling that if I voted for yag, he would have been hammered immediately. I wanted conversation to continue a little more, mainly I wanted to see how people reacted to my suspicions. If you go back and read (when I posted my player break down) the Yag wagon was really rolling, I didn’t want to have a quit lynch Day 2. Did you?

He seems to think an awful lot of people are scum. He lists both Elias and Gorckat as 8s (a rating I disagree with fundamentally) and Nelly as 6. Basically, that's anyone who's really been under any pressure this game. It's also a neat list of who might be lynched.

Why do you fundamentally have a problem with gorckat and Elias being at an 8? Your next two sentences are incorrect.. Please show me where gorckat has been under more pressure than hermit (who I ranked a 5 today). Seems to me, even day 3, Hermit is under more pressure. As a matter of fact, I seem to be the only one actively pushing for a gorckat lynch.

On a side note, I meant Yagami/Spag's partner. That much should have been obvious, given that the front post says we only have three scum and two are dead.

IMO, this is either here nor there, but your post was confusing and I wasn’t the only one it confused.

I still reckon Elias is town, and am firmly opposed to his lynch today. I need to finish my analyses, as I'm not really sure who might be his partner. Will re-read his posts.

And yet Hermit hasn't changed on his scumlist, and elias has suddenly gained on him. This post could also very well be a last ditch attempt to get something out of his partner's lynch by linking a couple of players to him.

I think maybe you might be skimming over posts, Hermit HAS changed on my scum list 7 to a 5. I find elias’s play Day 2/3 suspicious that is why his rating increased.

So again, why am I a good lynch today?

[TheHermit]

Before I continue with my analysis, what do you all think of Jordan being the mafia's choice for a NK? Considering how quiet he's been, I'm a little confused about this decision. Why did the mafia consider Jordan the most dangerous person to them?

[gorckat]

Skimming new posts and this jumped out at me:

That being said, I support and will vote Elias or Gorckat (I think our last scum is in that pair)

Really? Is there any other reason to lynch someone (being scum)?

[curiouskarmadog]

Skimming new posts and this jumped out at me:

That being said, I support and will vote Elias or Gorckat (I think our last scum is in that pair)

Really? Is there any other reason to lynch someone (being scum)?

you are right, I must be guilty of being redundant…why did you feel it important to point this out?

[gorckat]

Seemed like you were telling yourself by telling us. SPAG/Yag's being scum did make me go back to the whole PM issue, but I let it go again since you hammered Yag, didn't you?

@Hermit: Maybe he hit on something that was close to home? I haven't gone back to his posts just yet. I was focusing on the dead scum and remaining living players in my reading yesterday.

[curiouskarmadog]

Seemed like you were telling yourself by telling us. SPAG/Yag's being scum did make me go back to the whole PM issue, but I let it go again since you hammered Yag, didn't you?

interesting that is all you got to comment on out of that big long post..

why didnt you vote for Spag?

if you feel like there is a case to be made against me..make it, dont wait until you get a feel for where the town will be going.

[gorckat]

Skimming new posts...

I'm at work. I'm checking in to games as I can. Reading is easy. Commenting on a single, little, weird, thing is easy. Breaking out an in depth analysis of analysis ain't so easy.

Without looking back to Yag's lynch and its timing, one thing I was waiting for was a cue that some of the connections I'd made on people's affiliations was correct, though early day 3, I think I may have been wrong on who was with whom.

And if I feel there is a case to be made, I will make it. I have to go back over Shanba's ideas and re-read you (again).

Right now, Elias is still my number one suspect. Actual (unstated on Day 3, obv) case aside, it seems to me he'd be a big distraction the next two potential days. I don't see us clearing him to the point that we are ever comfortable going in another direction.

[curiouskarmadog]

Right now, Elias is still my number one suspect. Actual (unstated on Day 3, obv) case aside, it seems to me he'd be a big distraction the next two potential days. I don't see us clearing him to the point that we are ever comfortable going in another direction.

why even add this last part? What are you saying? Seems to me, that you are indicating we get rid of elias because he might be scummy, but even if he isnt, he will distract us the next two days while we look for scum. First of all, I think I would like to lynch scum today thanks...second, I am not in the business of jumping on a bandwagon because someone is distracting...clearly I am not distracted that much, I am suspicious of Elias, but not distracted. Some people would say I was distracting...someone might argue hermit was...will you use the same arguement tomorrow as well?

[gorckat]

why even add this last part? What are you saying? Seems to me, that you are indicating we get rid of elias because he might be scummy, but even if he isnt, he will distract us the next two days while we look for scum.

Yes, that's what I said:

1) He seems like scum
2) If he's not, he still seems like it
3) If we're wrong lynching him, we have still improved our position

First of all, I think I would like to lynch scum today thanks...

Yes- you've said who you'd like to lynch (because the scum are among them)

second, I am not in the business of jumping on a bandwagon because someone is distracting...

Never said it should be the sole reason- its supplemental to an actual case (that I'll post later when I, you know, have time to gather posts and ideas)

clearly I am not distracted that much, I am suspicious of Elias, but not distracted. Some people would say I was distracting...someone might argue hermit was...will you use the same arguement tomorrow as well?

I didn't say he'd be distracting now, but the next two days when things tighten up. This goes a little against the grain of my 'hardly near LYLO' point with Elias earlier: As we get closer to the end, we must be more certain of our lynches since each one is potentially more damaging.

Looking forward (assume you lynch me, since that's where your vote- everyone can assume their own target for this 'exercise'), is there anyone you'd be more certain of Day 4 than Elias? Day 5, when its 2 on 1?

I don't think the game is hopeless tomorrow (which is how I read Elias trying to spin his 'near LYLO' comments), but it will be harder if people that have been highly suspected are still around.

Its the inverse of scum offing the most townie people. They kill those most confirmed (in the absence of power roles) to make it harder for the town. In general, we should lynch the scummiest to make it harder for them to put others in a bad light.

Elias should be lynched if he is the scummiest, not

just

because he has been suspected in the past.

[TheHermit]

I'm in the middle of my Elias read right now. Lots of posts to go through. A LOT.

I'm really trying not to let his rampant swearing influence my decision, but his temper is making me want to vote him just so I don't have to hear it anymore. He is apparently thinking that people will listen to him if he says the "f" word enough times, and if that isn't an appeal to emotion then I don't know what is. He's been warned once about this already; if he continues verbally abusing other players, I am going to ask the mod to kill/replace him.

[Elias_the_thief]

Youre funny hermit. What exactly is it about the word fuck that makes you guys pissed off? What if I said F*ck? Does it really make a difference? Screw? They all mean the same thing. They are nothing more than a tool to add emphasis to certain sentences. I get ignored a lot of the time. I've learned that using the f bomb gets a response, and valuable reaction out of people. I mean, the choice of certain words as offensive is totally ridiculous. Am I attacking your race/nationality? no. Am I calling you insulting names? no. Im just adding a certain adjective for emphasis. Calm the hell down about it, its how I play.

In addition, I simply cannot believe that you would consider voting me or asking for a modkill based on this. Are you just openly saying that admitting youre antitown at this point?

Response to Set coming up.

[TheHermit]

There's a very large difference between saying "fuck" and telling someone to "shut the fuck up".

[TheHermit]

Also, this?

In addition, I simply cannot believe that you would consider voting me or asking for a modkill based on this. Are you just openly saying that admitting youre antitown at this point?

If you are disrupting the game or offending other players, that is completely different from "just playing the game". There's a line, Elias. I'm asking you not to cross it. How is this anti-town?

[Elias_the_thief]

So you say you missed that post, but you continue to downplay the case on him.

What frickin case?! Even after I've asked for clarification twice, ALL you have produced is that hammer. Do you honestly comtinue to claim that one bad hammer is a case? Ive seen countless townies do the same thing and lead to a bad lynch the next day. I'm not saying this is a town tell. But it certainly isnt a scum tell worthy of a lynch, or being called a "case". So in response to my downplaying, I really think i'm just describing this case as it is.

Basically you're implying that had you seen that post, it would not have changed your opinion and you still would've thought SPAG was Town.

No im not. Dont put words in my mouth. Had I sen the post, I wouldve been more suspicious of SPAG. However, what I am saying, it that the post would not have been enough to convince me to lynch him.

If you're that bad at scum hunting, why should anyone listen to your arguments about Hermit?

This is a real bad comment on several levels. Firstly, its an ad hominem logical fallacy (attacking the person to avoid the argument). Even the least experienced people can have good ideas. Secondly, its a low blow. I mean come on. I havent attacked your ability at this game. Please dont attack mine. Finally, my record as town doesnt really have much to do with my scumhunting abilities. I just usually appear scummy in my games, and get mislynched. Thats why I've gotten much better at defending myself. I had to.

You refuse to admit, even now that SPAG came up scum, that we had a good case on him.

I wouldnt say I refuse to admit. Id say I refuse to agree with you. Using the word "admit" implies that I'm wrong, qhich quite frankly I dont think i am. As I said yesterday, I think we got lucky on the SPAG lynch. There was not good evidence in my opinion, we just picked right.

I don't believe that you were ignorant of the SPAG case. I believe you tried to downplay it just like you're doing now.

Good for you. I

was

ignorant of it, and I dont think I'm downplaying it so much as showing how weak it was.

Yes, that's my opinion. I know it drives you crazy when we state our opinions, but a lot of the "evidence" we have in this game is our personal reaction to what others say and how they react.

My problem isnt with your opinion. Its that you present your own opinion as evidence (and as fact).

And EVERY *** DAY I get out of it by pointing out that all your arguments are BS.

I disagree. This is what you want people to believe, but what actually seems to happen is every day you get out of it by providing a well-constructed defense. This does not mean you are Town, or that you have proved that the arguments brought against you are BS. All it means is you are good at defending yourself, whether you are scum or Town.

Keep on believing that. But theres only so long that a good defense can stop good arguments. Since I've survived this long, I had thought maybe you could realize the previous arguments were crap.

In fact, remember those posts that I listed that you asked me to quote? They were other people's suspicions of you that I found convincing, and that you never adequately refuted.

Thats because I asked for clarification on them and you never gave it. Dont try to pin this on me, its not my fault I couldnt address these.

Furthermore, Oman APPROVED of my "plan" to vig pulse and then to lynch Para (the latter of which he may well have thought avoidable). The other important detail to this plan, which I have not revealed until now, is the person who was NOT mentioned: You, Elias.

We know that Oman was scum. We can see Oman trying to protect you. At that point, Oman was NOT under threat. Hence, he had no reason to assume his role would be revealed.

I showed in a preivous post how this is pure wifom. You never addressed that. Please show me how using this as evidence isnt wifom.

By jumping on Hermit, i would have done nothing. There would essentially be no pressure on him, and if you [Nelly] turned up scum and I had in the heat of your wagon voted for him instead, it would have appeared that I was simply distracting from your wagon purposefully.

Sorry if I'm requoting the exact same thing from earlier (I think its just an excerpt of the earlier quote- its been on the clipboard awhile before I finally sat down to break it down)

If Nelly came up scum and you were seen voting Hermit, you'd be looked at as distracting the Nelly wagon. That's what I saw as being afraid of distancing, although distracting is the word you used.

The basic point I tried to make is the same- if you are acting in a manner you believe pro-town, why are you afraid of being called anti-town? By saying a townie should avoid scum tells, you imply they should the do so even if they are convinced that the wrong wagon is being pushed, if making their vote is a scum tell (a distraction).

My opinion of what is protown does not always coincide with others, to begin with. As youve seen, my opinions very often clash with the opinions of others. And also, with my town record, and the reasons behind me having the bad record (constant suspicion as town) can you understand why I might be concerned with not acting in a way that might be portrayed as antitown?

Oman voted a random vote in the beginning for OJ (Paradox) then changed it to Ninja and then once again changed it back to OJ (Pardox)... He placed a 4th vote on Paradox and then jumped at your suggestion that we lynch Paradox and VIG Pulse... So now with us knowing that Oman was Scum it wouldnt make sense for him to be so careless with Paradoxombie if they were scum buddies... So I have to believe that both Paradoxombie and Pulse are both Townie. At this point the list of people who voted for me are...

Gorckat
Oman
Paradoxombie
Elias
Nelly632

Lets see... Nelly632 is Town... Oman is dead and proven Scum... So odds are we might be able to find a scum bag on my bandwagon...

Paradoxombie was voted and never defended by Oman and since Oman is scum we assume Paradoxombie is NOT...

Gorckat & Elias...

Gorckat jumps on me before a wagon even exsist and has legitament comments and questions...

Elias votes for me after I have TWO saying he is placing pressure on me and avoiding being looked at as scum...,

I dont understand what the point is. more votes = more pressure.

My biggest problem with Elias(and I'll admit it's not huge) is that he made such a big deal about the possibility of Volkan being scum and I believe he was first to do it followed by Hermit.
1) You may be giving ideas to scum. Hermit basically laid out the entire plan for the scum when I see no need to, atm. Especially in a game with several fairly new players, it's possible scum would completely miss the opporunity presented in not NKing Volkan.
2) You make it more obvious to scum that we aren't sure that volkan is town. Although volkan IS slightly leading the town, there's no reason to point out the possibility of scumminess unless he survives tonight. Even if scum thought of not NKing Volkan, if we made it look as though the entire town trusts completely that he is town, then he might as well be confirmed; he is also a very proficient scumhunter, imo. Basically, by showing that we don't trust him or at least make it look so, it tells the scum that such a tactic is more likely to suceed.
3) Scum might also fear that even if they let volkan live, the town will ignore the possibility that he is scum, so they put the idea out there now.

In conclusion the most protown and intelligent action would've been to silently consider the possibility of Volkan being scum to yourself, and only bring it up if Volkan or anyone else actually tried to utilize Volkans semi-confirmed townie status to get a lynch on someone else or if Volkan did somthing fairly suspicious. While ckd DID call Volkan confirmed townie, he didn't use it for any purpose such as to get a lynch or protect Volkan, therefore I see it as unreasonable to point out his still-possible-scum status because it benefits scum overall for the reason above.

Town more likely to be careful about what they “give away” to scum. If Elias is scum, he has no need to worry about

Your defense to this was particularly unconvincing, when in the next post you deflected attention and pushed all blame onto Hermit, while attacking Para for FOSing you.

I was not the first to bring up the thing he accuses me of bringing up. Hermit did it just as much and para totally ignored him. This case is obviously biased towards attacking me. Anyways, I still think it is a mistake I made, but I mean, I wanted to keep looking at everyone as opportunities for scum at that time. The next para post is basically the same thing.

I'm sure there is a reason you have a perfect scum record. Clearly when you are scum, you don't tend to make obvious mistakes or many scumtells and it's hard to find obvious cases where we can be sure you bussed or buddied up. The best we would have to go on is sloppy play by your scum buddies (such as Oman's list). You are going to be able to refute anything we say, but you would be able to do so just as well if not better if you were mafia.

What? This isnt true as all. My alignment doesnt affect what things happen to my game, and it doesnt really change my ability to defend myself. The only difference Ive noticed in my play between factions is that I make less mistakes as scum, my play is more calculated. As youve seen, I've made mistakes (the things I said about vollkan, not seeing the SPAG case) and my play has been a bit sloppy. If youre going to meta me, I'll tell you right now I'd be playing a lot tighter were I scum.

If anyone here is going to be able to win this game as scum when the odds are clearly against them, it's probably Elias. Whether he is scum or Town, he'll have a convincing defense to anything brought against him.

So you want to lynch me because of this? Or is this an attempt to simply get around the fact that I'm defeating all the points you bring against me.

By the way; This is a game

that id like to win

. If swearing is the only way that you guys are gonna listen to what I have to say and not make a mistake by lynching me, then ***, im gonna swear, and I dont care whether you like it or not.

IN MY OPINION (take it or leave it but it's what I think) this statement just sounds like someone afraid to ruin his perfect scum record.

Then you are completely biased against me. This post has nothing to do with the game. It is defending a meta issue, that swearing is a viable strategy. Also, my record isnt ACTUALLY perfect. its 6-1-1(mod abandonment).

[Elias_the_thief]

Also, this?

In addition, I simply cannot believe that you would consider voting me or asking for a modkill based on this. Are you just openly saying that admitting youre antitown at this point?

If you are disrupting the game or offending other players, that is completely different from "just playing the game". There's a line, Elias. I'm asking you not to cross it. How is this anti-town?

Youre not asking me not to cross a line. You are threatening me with a modkill if I do not do as you say. There is a large difference. This is anti town because you do not know my alignment and you threatening to kill me could (and will) hurt the town. Also, what in hell is the difference between asking someone to "shut up" and "shut the fuck up"? What do those two little words mean? and if the answer is you have a problem with "shut up", then I will simply stop arguing the point with you because that would be borderline idiocy.

[TheHermit]

Let's look at Elias today!

17: Asks why oj has shifted his vote.

oj did actually unvote before putting on his first vote, so I could understand the confusion.

25: Reiterates his question.

29: Asks DFN why bandwagons are bad.

44: Explains why bandwagons are good on Day 1; they create discussion and create links between players, which makes it easier to find scum. Posits that only requiring 6 to lynch is a town handicap.

48: Notes that LyLo will come a day earlier (this assumption is corrected by a mod edit), and that there is less margin for putting pressure on others.

49: Votes to pressure kerplunk into speaking.

52: Asks the mod to prod kerplunk.

63: Believes oj is scum

(after just one post!)

, and notes that DFN isn't so great under pressure but could go either way.

69: Notes that he may have worded his previous post a bit strongly, and merely meant that oj was his top suspect because of his quick vote and lack of comment.

113: Thanks Para for replacing, then adds that he's suspicious because he saw oj as scummy.

120: Argues with the mod about his decision to ban contentless posts.

122: Feels the mod praising Para's skill is a town handicap. Claims his post attacking Para's former player was deleted.

132: Claims that he's leaving behind evidence for later when he declares Para as scummy. Feels that both Nelly and Hermit are "playing weirdly" and votes Nelly.

142: Says that he would like Nelly to remove his self-vote. Explains that he will use his suspicions in later cases.

149: Even though Nelly is at -1, he refuses to remove his vote because he feels Nelly will remove his vote in due time if he's actually pro-town, and also because a town wouldn't hammer and scum would be stupid to. Feels that keeping his vote will sustain pressure.

201: Responds to Para's claim that oj did nothing scummy by saying he will keep his suspicion of oj in mind when deciding on Para.

Note that he doesn't actually answer the question Para asks him.

Expresses disbelief that he's being looked at as scummy.

206: Finally gets around to answering the question; says that oj wagoned with no content, and this makes him scummy even while admitting that oj randomly votes in all of his games.

IMHO, this is BS reasoning.

208: Claims that the burden of proof is on para that oj didn't randomly vote, then asks again why he is being suspected.

For future reference, the burden of proof is always on the person who makes the claim. Elias said that oj's vote shows that oj is scum, he must provide the evidence to say so.

211: Explains that vote pressure is more effective when concentrated rather than split. Feels that if Nelly came up as scum later and he had voted for Hermit, it would make it look like he was distracting from the Nelly wagon to protect a scumbuddy.

216: Notes that vollkan is not cleared as town, and that this could be a gambit to clear a scum-aligned vig as pro-town. Claims to have not read Nelly's content until just now and finally removes his vote.

He has posted four times since Nelly provided his content in post 155, yet noticed just now.

Pulls out his 6-1 win record as scum, and asks why he would make a silly mistake like that if he were scum? Explains that his post 149 is NOT a backtrack.

He's right, it's not.

220: Says he brought up his record to prove that he is not stupid scum. Points out that "distancing" and "distracting" aren't the same things. Defends the avoidance of common scumtells as good town play. Again brings up the possibility that vollkan is scum.

223: Clarifies that he does not think vollkan should be lynched, but that the possibility of him being scum should be kept in mind.

228: Clarirfies that in 220 he was responding to Nelly's point that he was going for a quicklynch. Asks ckd where his vote is and, if it's on him, to explain why.

230: Calls vollkan "either an idiot or scum". Claims to have refuted all points against him and that there is no evidence against him. Points out that for him and Para to be distancing instead of debating, they'd have to both be scum.

232: Explains that hopping on a bandwagon and hoping for a quicklynch is not a strategy he uses as scum.

He ignores that vollkan also pointed out that his justification for the vote, "pressure", is very convenient.

Feels that Oman's list is the only decent evidence against him, but it's not a good idea to lynch just based on that. Asks again for proof that Para is scum.

235: Doesn't understand why there should be at least one more scum on Nelly's wagon. Again misunderstands vollkan; vollkan says outright that he doesn't think he was going for a quicklynch but rather just quietly letting his vote stack with others, but Elias acts like a quicklynch is the only way his vote could be scummy.

238: Argues there can be more than one reason to vote someone. Claims that Oman's list will screw town if he didn't put another scum there. Claims he had three reasons for voting Nelly, and all of them have to be proven false to call him scummy.

243: Repeats his defense from 238. Insists there is a huge difference between voting for pressure and advocating a lynch, and that Hermit was guilty of the latter.

So, he's basically saying that he should have voted Hermit... but didn't? Also, he's stating his opinion as fact.

He also asks us to take as fact his explanation that he just wanted to pressure Nelly.

Still that "opinion as fact" he hates so much... I guess he only hates it unless it supports him.

Says that it would be bad if people noticed a vote on me in the late game.

Why?

244: Attacks gorckat for parroting vollkan's accusations. Asks vollkan why his reasons for voting Nelly are scummy.

246: Admits that he has no defense against Oman's list.

250: States his opinion of Hermit's vote on oj as fact. Claims that vollkan makes a contradiction by saying there was already suspicion on Hermit. Explains that a post on Hermit would have stood out.

This is a bad thing?

251: With two votes on him and six to lynch, he requests that someone warns before hammering him so that he can make a final defense.

259: His first instance of abusive language. Continues to state his opinion as fact regarding Hermit's oj vote. Finally acknowledges vollkan's point that there are other results in a vote besides "bandwagon" and "quicklynch", then promptly ignores it. Reiterates his defensive points.

Linky.

261: Defends his use of swearing and abusive language, basically saying he'll do anything to be seen as town.

263: Says he's still pissed off at other players. Wishes mod a Happy Birthday.

265: Explains that he's been too busy defending himself to look for scum.

To provide context, every post from 201 to here was made within 24 hours, most of them being very long.

Claims that he does not believe Hermit's backtrack and that Oman and vollkan made up the list as a scum gambit.

272: Asks why it is bad for a pro-town player to avoid looking scummy.

After this game I agree with him.

Gives his town record as 1-4. Considers his anger justified. Asks gorckat why he voted him after reading his latest defense.

274: Says that he'll get right on digging for scum.

284: Elias posts his opinions on all players. He thinks of vollkan as town even though he just claimed the vigging was an orchestrated scum play, and SPAG as town.

286: Thanks vollkan for taking a look at the people voting Elias based on his arguments. Wants to hear his thoughts on his latest defense.

287: Wants a clarification from gorckat. Also wants Nelly to explain his vote.

292: Says that town will listen to vollkan. States his suspicion of Hermit. Claims that his vote for Nelly and Hermit's vote for oj are completely different.

They were, however, similar enough for both vollkan and me to make a connection.

Details the pros and cons of bandwagons, and makes the judgment that the good outweighs the bad.

298: Repeats that noncontribution was one of the factors that made him vote for Nelly over Hermit. Admits his suspicion of Hermit is based on opinion.

301: Described Nelly's "weird" play as suddenly voting himself for no reason and then claiming with only three votes on him.

303: Defends against Para's accusation of making a big deal about the possibility of vollkan being scum. Takes a single one of the three times he's made this claim and wonders if that's really such a "big deal". Thinks Para and Hermit are scumpartners.

304: Posts his opinions on other players. Of note, he calls pulse "scum" although he admits he doesn't have enough info to go on. Puts an FOS on Para, ckd, Pulse, and gorc while voting Hermit.

309: Explains that he sees a sudden shift in playstyles as a scumtell.

310: Claims that Oman might have known he was about to get vigged, and made a list that would hurt the town.

WIFOM. Especially since Oman blundered right into the trap without dropping a hint that he suspected something.

Claims that he doesn't think vollkan is scum anymore. Says that the town's time would be better spent looking elsewhere.

311: Rather sarcastically calls Nelly the best pro-town player he's ever seen.

313: Repeats that he thinks Oman knew he was about to get vigged.

315: Says his change of opinion of vollkan was due to the three page conversation, and not suddenly between 272 and 284. States his opinion that Para went looking for dirt on him as fact.

Lots of other points made, so click the link to see it in all its glory.

318: Calls Para's FOS on Hermit a backtrack.

320: Stands by his opinion that Nelly's behavior was a scumtell. Dismisses all argument by saying it doesn't matter what different people see as a scumtell.

322: Attacks Hermit's stated reasons for voting Elias.

327: Continues to attack Hermit.

337: Says his interpretation of Hermit's oj vote reveals a backtrack. Admits that he doesn't care for vollkan's interrogation style.

334: Admits that Hermit is not making contradictions, but they are suspicious in other ways.

346: Thinks vollkan has created enough evidence for a lynch, but still doesn't like his methods. Hopes for Nelly to post soon.

352: Claims vollkan pulled a "contradiction" out of thin air while he was questioning him. Notes that Para has begun to lurk. Wants to know why he's more likely scum than Hermit.

370: Points out three "backtracks" by Hermit.

1) is actually just a clarification of intent, 1a) is total garbage, 2) I can easily explain in a separate post assuming you still want to hear it, and 3) isn't a backtrack.

373: Admits backtrack 1a is a misread.

Points for noticing it before it had to be pointed out. Negative points to Nelly, who called it a "great post" regardless.

375: Asks Hermit if his self-vote means he's giving up.

381: Maintains that his previous points are backtracks.

394: Says that he's been suspicious of Hermit far longer than vollkan. Feels that vollkan's suspicions of him are not well-founded. Is mad at Para for lurking.

404: Debates minor points with Jordan. Is very emphatic when he says that no one should hammer Hermit before he says something.

411: Requests a deadline extension.

414: Expresses his displeasure about how a deadline should not have been placed, and that there have several rules that he feels "handicaps" town.

416: On rereading, thinks Para looks VERY scummy. Unvotes Hermit while he looks for more info.

Here's where my Scum!Elias model starts to break down. There's no reason for him to unvote; Hermit is still the popular lynch, barring a few stubborn hangers-on, and it would have been easy to say, "We're running out of time, lynch Hermit today and get Para tomorrow", but he does not. Instead, he takes a serious look at para, following up on the suspicion that he's had for several days. I like this post. Very town. That Para later came up town is unfortunate, but I appreciate that he ditched the "popular" vote to follow up on his own suspicions.

418: Berates himself for not noticing Para's comment earlier.

420: Explains that he unvoted to mull things over.

422: States that para's Nelly vote appeared to be a random quicklynch. Taken in this light, it appears very scummy. Repeats that para has never posted a case.

425: Explains that random lynches nearly always hit town, and thus are a very bad idea.

427: Doesn't think para using "you" instead of "we" is a strong tell.

434: Again objects to Para's claim that he called sticking to his guns scummy; rather, he is pointing out that calling replacement "unethical" is questionable.

440: Thinks para is scum because he advocated too strongly and too quickly for a lynch.

441: Asks for a votecount.

470: Votes Para to put both Hermit and Para at 3.

472: Not game related.

492: Objects to Hermit's suspicions. Calls Jordan's view of ckd PMing SPAG as WIFOM.

497: Thinks Hermit's play could be newbish and para being first on Oman's list a towntell, but still feels their scum signals are pretty large. Requests a deadline extension.

499: Is pleased to hear of a deadline extension.

505: Is content with a Para lynch.

509-10: Requests a votecount.

549: Defends his avoidance of scumtells. Thinks vollkan being NKed makes him look bad.

565: Clarifies that it's his interactions with vollkan that makes a vollkan NK look badly on him. Feels that everyone posting on his views about how he might be making them as scum is "getting on his nerves".

566: Says he is looking primarily at ckd and Hermit in his reread. Wants Hermit to restate why he is suspicious of him.

571-5: Says he never wanted to vote Hermit based on just his oj vote.

304 ringing any bells? Not much more than that in his justification.

Other than that tiny point, defends himself well. Clearly starting to lose his temper again. Starts attacking "statement of opinion as fact".

Another series of massive posts. I'll link them because there's a lot to digest and subtle word choice may be lost in the reviewing.

579: Asks ckd why he was going to vote for him on Day 1 if he didn't think he was scum.

580: Claims that an accusation against a party opposed to the NK always happens, so he wanted to get the argument out of the way.

583: Quotes where vollkan admitted that his interrogation of Elias comes down to Elias voting on something vollkan didn't think was a scumtell. Promises to post his thoughts on Hermit tomorrow.

586: Promises to take a better look at ckd if Hermit comes up as scum. Calls the Hermit wagon "better", but didn't need much convincing to switch sides.

I wonder what he thinks of ckd now that he knows both of us can't be scum?

595: Defends his opinions on other players made on Day 1, insisting that there was more to his consideration than post numbers and post length.

605: Explains that two posts were made because he forgot some players the first time.

606: No game content.

626: Strongly disagrees with Yagami's interpretation of Hermit as town.

633: Asks for a PbP on Hermit and gorc by Yagami, but would like to hear his thoughts on Setael and Shanba first.

647: No game content.

659: Still says he'd rather lynch Hermit than SPAG.

665: Explains that it is unfair to ask him to explain why he is not voting Yagami when he thinks he has a much better case against Hermit. Asks why its weird that he doesn't think Yagami is scum.

687:

Ho boy. I'm going to get to this one later, because I'm still so steamed about his blatant disrespect for other players that I don't think I can look at it objectively right now.

VERDICT (thus far): Looking at isolated points, Elias looks bad. There are parts of his playstyle that I don't agree with. However, taking a longer view of his play shows that he has solid suspicions for his votes and a great defense. If there's any scum that could come back and win this, it's Elias. But I'm saying that because he's convinced me that he's

possibly town

. My view of 687 might change this, but I don't feel right making a judgment call like that until I've cleared my head.

Those small points do nag at me though. When you're calm, I'd like to ask you a few questions:

First: Since you knew that oj voted randomly, why did you think his single vote was scummy?

Second: You mentioned that a vote on me would "stand out" when people were picking through the game. Why did you say this?

Third: Now that you know both ckd and I cannot both be scum, what do you think of his strong push for para in the closing of Day 1? More to the point, given the choice between me and ckd, who do you think is more likely to be scum?

And a question for everyone else: Oman's list. What are your thoughts on it? Is Elias right in calling it WIFOM? Do you think Oman poisoned the results because he knew he was about to get vigged? Or do you think vollkan's assessment of the situation, that his play can only be explained by attempting to protect Elias, makes more sense?

[TheHermit]

Also, what in hell is the difference between asking someone to "shut up" and "shut the fuck up"?

First, that's not the comparison I made. Second, one carries a lot more invective than the other. I don't think taking out your aggression on other players contributes to a good game environment. THAT is my primary grievance with your behavior. It has nothing to do with whether you or I are scum.

[Setael]

416: On rereading, thinks Para looks VERY scummy. Unvotes Hermit while he looks for more info. Here's where my Scum!Elias model starts to break down. There's no reason for him to unvote; Hermit is still the popular lynch, barring a few stubborn hangers-on, and it would have been easy to say, "We're running out of time, lynch Hermit today and get Para tomorrow", but he does not. Instead, he takes a serious look at para, following up on the suspicion that he's had for several days. I like this post. Very town. That Para later came up town is unfortunate, but I appreciate that he ditched the "popular" vote to follow up on his own suspicions.

Interesting. This makes it sound as though Hermit was completely at the forefront and Elias out of nowhere decided to unvote and "follow up on his own suspicions" of Para. Possibly Hermit is making this assumption because he is only reading Elias' posts rather than all the surrounding posts in context. Possibly he has other motivations for interpreting this post the way he did. Let's look at the posts leading to Elias' decision to unvote Hermit and look into Para.

I feel like Para is scum and should be the lynch of the day.

CKD: I agree about Paras lurking. I totally forgot about him.

I can't say that I necessarily think your case is particularly extensive, but I maintain my suspicion from Para earlier (I kind of got sidetracked by Elias and then Hermit).

Vote: Paradoxombie

Post 391 vollkan votes Elias the Thief

I would rather lynch Para, for lies upon mis truths...but if the time comes I will vote Elias...I am not sold on Hermit and if everything remains constant will not vote for him Day 1.

I really don't like Hermit's actions, but I behaved almost exactly like that myself in my first game and I was a vanilla.

Para's stuff with the dragged out and misappropriated quotes has added to my suspicion of him. He didn't just explain himself like Elias, he had to strike out.

Post 398 Para votes The Hermit

Post 401 Jordan FOS's Para a couple times and presents several reasons he thinks Para is scummy, ends up voting The Hermit

looks like Hermit will hang today....I would perfer it to be Para..but Hermit's play is just bad.

Para actually has lied and used quote out of context to form a case and deflect suspicion from himself. He is our scum...he gets his vote in and just disappears?

TOWN this is our scum....

Posts 407-410 back and forth between Para and CKD

I do not need to play any type of card...your [Para's] scummy nature is "forcing my hand".

It didn't really happen the way Hermit portrayed it. Not long before Elias unvoted Hermit and started looking at Para, both vollkan and CKD stated that they would prefer an Elias lynch over a Hermit lynch. CKD flat out said he would not vote Hermit Day 1. Vollkan and CKD both said they would prefer a Para lynch over a Hermit lynch. At this point in the game vollkan, CKD and Elias were arguably the three most active players. When you take that into account, Elias' switch from Hermit to Para looks more like pure and simple self-preservation than anything really Townish.

This statement by Hermit made me wonder about his motivation. If I'm wrong about Elias and Hermit is the last remaining scum, I can see Hermit being motivated to make a post like this one. First of all, it makes him look Town to spend the time to analyze individual players. Second, he takes the player who most thinks he's scum and points out something he thinks makes him look Town. The fact that it's taken out of context and doesn't seem accurate at all makes me think that rather than really thinking this is a reason for us to stop suspecting Elias, it's something Hermit has contrived to get us to see him (Hermit) as Town. This way, if we lynch Elias and he comes up Town, Hermit comes off looking pretty good.

Whoever is scum at this point has to survive through a couple more days of discussion. They're going to be very conscious of the things happening today affecting who gets lynched tomorrow. This Hermit post seems to contain that kind of forsight and planning that the last remaining scum would need in order to win this game. Not sure what to think about it - maybe I'm totally off. I'd like to hear from both Hermit and Elias about it.

[TheHermit]

I guess we have different interpretations of the context. I saw myself as needing only a few more votes to get a lynch, picking up two votes in a short time and with only a little bit to go until deadline. Although yes, I was focusing overmuch on Elias. I missed vollkan's voting patterns, though I was well aware of ckd's pining on Para. I just thought he was alone in this.

I find it flattering that you think I'm capable of such foresight. Although I haven't totally written off Elias yet; I just think it's more likely that he's town than scum. If he answers the few questions I have to my satisfaction, I don't think I'll have any more suspicion against him.

While we're on the subject, Elias has made the claim that the only bit of evidence you have that he is scum is Oman's list, which he denounces as WIFOM. While I'd say it does look like Oman is trying to protect him, who's to say he didn't simply list three townies randomly? Remember, in order for the Scum!Hermit strategy you outlined to work, Elias has to get lynched today. But on what evidence is this going to happen?

Finally, I'd say that Nelly is more convinced I'm scum than Elias is. Nelly opened up Day 2 and 3 by voting me immediately, only changing on day 2 when it was obvious someone else was going to get lynched. I'm going to take a look at Nelly next.

[Elias_the_thief]

What is it that gives it invection then? Youve simply dragged me around in a circle: what is it that makes this word any more invective then words such as "screw", "f**k", or "frick"? They all mean the same thing. There is absolutely no reason that saying "frick" should be acceptable, and "fuck" should not. I do not use these words to hurt. I use them as tools to add emphasis to points. To fully utilize a language you must be able to comprehend and put to use any words that you wish to, not put them through some imaginary filter of what is socially acceptable.

Anyways, this is a meta debate for another time. I cant get to the points brought up in Hermits last post right now, or what set said about it. Tomorrow.

[curiouskarmadog]

Finally, I'd say that Nelly is more convinced I'm scum than Elias is. Nelly opened up Day 2 and 3 by voting me immediately, only changing on day 2 when it was obvious someone else was going to get lynched. I'm going to take a look at Nelly next.

actually if it is all the same to you, do me next.

[curiouskarmadog]

What is it that gives it invection then? Youve simply dragged me around in a circle: what is it that makes this word any more invective then words such as "screw", "f**k", or "frick"? They all mean the same thing. There is absolutely no reason that saying "frick" should be acceptable, and "fuck" should not. I do not use these words to hurt. I use them as tools to add emphasis to points. To fully utilize a language you must be able to comprehend and put to use any words that you wish to, not put them through some imaginary filter of what is socially acceptable.

Anyways, this is a meta debate for another time. I cant get to the points brought up in Hermits last post right now, or what set said about it. Tomorrow.

seriously conversation is stale...want to get back to actual game content?

[Elias_the_thief]

I said tomorrow...you call this conversation stale? wierd. I think we are having good conversation with the meta debate on the side. Also, what do you call that post? You could have easily posted content then added that on the side...why didnt you?

[curiouskarmadog]

I said tomorrow...you call this conversation stale? wierd. I think we are having good conversation with the meta debate on the side. Also, what do you call that post? You could have easily posted content then added that on the side...why didnt you?

the conversation about the usage of "fuck" was stale., ..how do you know there was no implied content in that post? You are smart Elias, do I really need to spell it out for you?