Mini 521 (SMSM, Ended)

[Adele]

...
whoa

this is goin' be

gooood

.

metagame strategy? you mean, like, townies falling on their swords in a minigame to ensure that a highly-suspected minigame townie probable metagame scum is up for the cordocet? That seems like something we can better do a bit later than now... you know, once we know who we want to meta-lynch

[Adele]

The trick is to figure out what tactics the scum might want to use - and punish these tactics (BOCWATT).

after all, if the minigames were nor tactically relevant, a mod as wise and fantastic as mith (/crawl, yet true) wouldn't have bothered including them.

[Adele]

"But Of Course, Wifom Applies To This"

[Adele]

Hi. This is Sim. Any suggestions to whatever way makes it easier for us to communicate which one of us is speaking?

/confirm

What, there's two of you talking through the same mouth?

This is a mini. 12-man. If there are two of you behind a single alt, whatever; keep it to yourself. That's your problem, not mine; and if the two of you can't play consistently as the same character, then you shouldn't be playing the same character anyway.

[Adele]

For those against joint accounts, you're going to hate us. This is JordanA24 and Aimee, who agreed to replace together because of time constraints.

From now, our posts will have a clear "(Aimee)" for example at the starts of our posts, so that you know who is speaking.

(Anyway this is Aimee here.)

Random vote:

vote: Pooky

. He's too cuddly!

If you're doubleheaded, that's cool and all - just don't expect me to care which head's speaking, because I'm going to treat you as a unit.

Also: please get an avatar! I'd be really,

really

grateful.

kabenon, Waterboywaldo (how should I shorten that name? Suggestions?) wasn't calling you singleminded, but hypocritical. I think his point was "at least I contributed my opinions, before you did by the way".

Max is annoying me. Haven't decided if I distrust him yet. I do want to know why he saw fit to share the "role that didn't happen" information with the town.

We should aim to have someone at Claim Or Die by Wednesday, I think.

/agree. It also seems to me that there is

less

at stake in this game than a normal mini; all will do is limit our Main Game lynch options, which for the first lynch, won't necessarily be all that hot anyway.

Hmm. An idea occurs, a precipitate to a mass roleclaim down the line; if everyone stated now whether their role is the same as first time around. May be useful for catching folk in lies down the line... may be unutterably stupid. Thoughts?

[Adele]

I am not voting at random; I believe Max to be acting suspicious. Also, the deadline isn't THAT short. It's pretty much a whole week. We have plenty of time to kill him.

This doesn't read to me as "yeah let's definately kill max today, yeah?"

Waterboywaldo (I am going to have to insist you provide us with a nickname there; you could be waterboy, waldo, WBW... pick) seems flippant but not particularly scummy to me.

[Adele]

fos: kabenon

[Adele]

Well, you know, when you vote your suspicions are right there for everyone to see, and that might bite you in the ass later when you contradict yourself out of convenience.

I'd prefer to wait and see a safe wagon to jump on.

[Adele]

Not hugely; I have a much bigger problem with dice-tag votes and self-votes. Plus, like I said, I think the stakes are much lower here than typically. However, if it really bugs you, I'll:

vote: Max

since he really should have answered your question (and mine)

[Adele]

lol

[Adele]

For people who do not understand semi-random votes heres a small explanation, Firstly you use a reason that is not true for example claiming that they told you they were scum.

It was a random vote,

Definition of Random:

A process where the outcome is not decided by normal decisions and is instead, for example, by the roll of a dice. See Chance

But why share that info anyway? When it might somehow damage the town, discretion being the better part of valour and all?

and: for those of you who don't realise it, when you preface a joke with "oh guys here's a joke:", it's just a teeny bit

less funny

. To the point of being obnoxious. That's why waterboywaldo didn't say in the post when he was kidding around that he was just kidding around. Which makes this especially ironic:

Adele is confusing me.

when you vote your suspicions are right there for everyone to see, and that might bite you in the ass later when you contradict yourself out of convenience.

I don't have a problem with her FOSing somebody instead of voting them, but this is a weak argument. She's worried that her suspicions are there for everyone to see? That's what happens when you FOS somebody too. Heck, just stating your suspicions allows people to see them. This is a poor explanation for her lack of vote.

[Adele]

Everyone, do you think Adele's "let's all say whether we have the same role" suggestion was scummy?

...

this

one?

Hmm. An idea occurs, a precipitate to a mass roleclaim down the line; if everyone stated now whether their role is the same as first time around. May be useful for catching folk in lies down the line... may be unutterably stupid. Thoughts?

That one? Where I state it's an IDEA, that it might be

unutterably stupid

and ask someone smarter than I to say if it is?

Yes. You are right. We must stamp out this dangerous trend towards

discussion

.

FOS: Fiasco[/i] for, I think, misrepresenting me.

[Adele]

but what do you use to determine who is scummy and who isn't?

Evidence, questions, contradictions, behavior not townielike.

Sure, but we're mostly going to be playing subgames. Behaviour within a subgame may be a horrible indicator of scummyness in the metagame. Pooky raises a good point IMHO.

[Adele]

If only one thing is clear, it's that this subgame requires a more confrontational style. I know this post is unlike me, but I think it's necessary to be a bit shoutier. For the record, I am

not

going to turn into Fritzler

__

Boo hoo. "Suggestion" is not that different from "idea". I didn't even say it was scummy, just asked other people. Fact is that you proposed something that would have outed most vanillas in the game even if it didn't seem that way at first. If one or two people followed it because they couldn't see the harm, that would still have been damaging.

yeah, if I'd not made a point of saying it might be unutterably dumb, and asked specifically for thoughts.

When Adele asked for comments on her idea, Fiasco said,

'Everyone, do you think Adele's "let's all say whether we have the same role" suggestion was scummy?'

. (BTW, points against Adele here for attempting to benefit from the mod's mistake. While this isn't necessarily scummy, it is, in my opinion, poor sportsmanship). More importantly, I noticed that Fiasco doesn't give his opinion on the idea, but asks everyone else first. It would have been less suspicious if he had said

"Does anybody ELSE think Adele's suggestion was scummy?"

, but it seems that he was leading everybody else into it and waiting for anybody else to start gunning for Adele.

YAUS. Asking everybody else if something's scummy so, if anyone (like Joe-average) says "maybe, yeah", you can later say "Um, I think I agree with Joe-average that Adele was scummy" = scummy.

So could all the non-me, non-magical, non-kabe people please weigh in on whether we're going to play this subgame at all? If yes, may I suggest threatening Max?

unvote, vote Max

"Look at me, I'm the only one who cares about the game, look how many posts I've entered (bickering off-topic), follow me in bandwagoning this guy cause what else are you gonna do?"

I'll do this.

Vote: Fiasco

[Adele]

Thorned Rose: So you think a scum would come out and throw that many accusations around that quickly?

False dichotomy. How about a scum *might*?

[Adele]

deadline incoming

That is pretty damn ironic coming from you.

I will greatly enjoy watching certain people make asses out of themselves by lynching me.

God, yes, how embarrassing: an info-free short-deadline day-1 lynch that doesn't have a perfect justification behind it. Boy will

my

face be red if Fiasco's innocent!

[Adele]

I'm not lynching Fiasco because I think he is subgameScum, I'm lynching Fiasco because I think he is MetaGameScum.

So, if he comes up town, will you push for the town to throw the game so you can eliminate him?

I'm just playing the game right now. That kind of clever stuff is, for me, for the second half of games (I'm speaking here of the metagame) when the town has enough information to make some kind of sense of it.

[Adele]

If only one thing is clear, it's that this subgame requires a more confrontational style. I know this post is unlike me, but I think it's necessary to be a bit shoutier.

I don't understand why you said this. I think what's necessary (at least

now

) is exactly the opposite -- let's make a point of de-escalating the sarcasm and discussing constructively.

Because it's a paced game and sometimes the reflective style that I gerenrally prefer takes too long.

"Look at me, I'm the only one who cares about the game, look how many posts I've entered (bickering off-topic), follow me in bandwagoning this guy cause what else are you gonna do?"

I'll do this.

Vote: Fiasco

This comes across to me as malice caused by me having annoyed you somehow, which you then didn't separate 100% from your judgment of my alignment. At the time, there was disagreement over whether to play the subgame at all; this seemed to me like the most important issue at that moment, some people were ignoring it, and I wanted to hear their opinion. The subtext you put in quotes isn't really there, in my opinion, and if there wouldn't be that scummy.

That's the subtext that I saw there, and I still think it was there. You may not like the tone (regarding the o/t mention, most of your more recent votes had not been about the subgame), but it was not malicious. Perhaps a little sarcastic, maybe even rude - and if so, I am sorry - but this is not a knee-jerk out of annoyance.

You yourself agreed that we should have threatened someone with lynch by Wednesday. I thought Max was suspicious because the earlier comment about me causing the reroll could point to him having discussed the roleblocker issue as scum, and he has refused (and continues to refuse) to give us any other explanation for the comment.

I agreed we should have someone at Claim Or Die by Wednesday; however one or two players can't manufacture that between themselves so it was a statement of an ideal - and I certainly don't think it's worth pushing the wrong person to that point just to fit that schedule.

Then you voted me, without explaining why the couple of "things that scum might do" in my posts outweighed the evidence against other people.

I found you scummiest and posted why. You want me to explain exactly

why

I find you scummier than Max? I don't have hours to spend each day on this game, you know; the short deadlines limit how much I can post.

God, yes, how embarrassing: an info-free short-deadline day-1 lynch that doesn't have a perfect justification behind it. Boy will my face be red if Fiasco's innocent!

I would say "a weak attempt at justification", but we can disagree on that. I don't think "short-deadline" should be an excuse; to my mind, the point of a speed game is that you play faster, not that you go on (much) less information. On "info-free": if we'd planned ahead more, we might have had more info from claims, might have used the standard push people to claim strategy, etc.

[/quote]by playing faster, you

do

have less info to go on; there's less time for revelations, discussions, analysis. 2 people on the other side of a clock can only back-and-forth 7 times in a week. That's just the nature of it. My point here was simple: that your suggestion that we should be embarrased for this course of action is unfair, and assumes too much. It's D1, for heavens' sake. There's a big bundle of limiting factors forcing the play to be near-random. You've been somewhat scummy, which happens to be (IMO) the best we've got. Suck it up: you'll only die in the subgame (assuming you even get lynched).

[Adele]

The only reason for people not playing properly is because they are sad and aren't trying to win... Hence fiasco must be a jester

This is a jesterless setup.

...isn't it?

[Adele]

Wait, maybe this will work.

Max! Yes, you! What made you think I caused the reroll?

I DID NOT IT WAS A RANDOM VOTE

que?

Post 1:

Vote: Fiasco

It's his fault the set-up had to be randomized again. I was scum last time, And I had a chance of winning

meh

12 players. Chances of it being no-one's fault also. And Max guessed correctly? I strongly suspect lyingness, so

unvote, vote max

[Adele]

av pls

[Adele]

<3

[Adele]

Doesn't everyone know how in games people give random votes for reasons such as "I was in a game with him", "He nightkilled me in game 1", "He's obv scum he made the first post". I don't see how mine is any different. If someone disagrees with what I

know

what I said and what I meant by it you deserve to be lynched for it

But you claimed such-and-such that we don't know how you could've known and it turned out to be true.

And, we deserve to be lynched for not trusting that your backtracking is honest? We're applying professional skepticism here, max. It's now about what

you

know; we can only act on what

we

know.

[Adele]

Ugh.

Unvote, Vote: Fiasco

> no lynch

claim tomorrow pls max.

[Adele]

claim pls max.

[Adele]

Deadline at 10PM so about 9 and a half hours, Personally I prefer the sound of a no-lynch than a lynch on me, but I prefer a lynch on Fiasco to a no-lynch. And If I (need to/ am forced to) claim I will, just I don't think it'd be wise

We didn't have time to force a claim off him yesterday due to the deadline. I relucantly unvoted him to hammer Fiasco.

i want a claim.

[Adele]

Should

we concede as town? I

so

don't get all this - is it based entirely on you, Pooky, wanting to metalynch Fiasco? If so, then I for one do need convincing.

[Adele]

vote: Adele

Any kind of reason for that?

[Adele]

wtf, Waldo?

[Adele]

Got anything to say about the fact you're probs gonna die, Sam?

[Adele]

What's your role?

Actually, are you subscum or subtown?
-->I don't even know if that's a question that we

want

answered, but we're approaching deadline, I don't want another NL and so there's really no time for me to submit the worth of the question itself to town scrutiny.

[Adele]

ehhh...

bugger

Vote: Sammich

Sorry

[Adele]

'cause it was a crap lynch.

[Adele]

unvoting won't unlynch you. I didn't want a nolynch; that's why I lynched you. What do you mean "screw the deadline"? Yeah, I didn't want to go to night without killing anyone

for the second time in a row

I think your post's lost in translation. I don't get it.

[Adele]

Dude, I'm in the UK. I lack web access at home, and I'm out of the office this week. I'm in a cybercafe, and I'm not gonna be here again for

24

hours.

I had to make a call (shrug). Crap lynch > No lynch.

[Adele]

Vanilly.

[Adele]

Dangit Adele, didn't we lynch you yesterday? You are such scum.

No, actually, I hammered a townie yesterday.

Also, not scum. See my claim.

[Adele]

Yeah, I didn't really have a reason for it. I just wanted to post to prove I hadn't forget about this game. Didn't notice we were in sub-LYLO phase.

unvote

I just don't understand this game variant. Can somebody explain to me how these subgames will help us find metamafia?

Yeah, um, and me too.

[Adele]

Pook:
1) I'm not convinced of Fiasco/Sarcastro's scumhood, so the plan does not, as of yet, particularly appeal.
2) Secret messages in code? Would that be against the rules? We're clearly not obligated to play-to-win in the subs, so the rules are different here.

[Adele]

Sure I'll say stuff. The only real problem is

what

to say.

In most games, whether or not I know who the scum are, I know who I'm trying to find. Here, there's a debate between hunting subscum and metascum, and it seems to me that

both

sides of the debate are correct: hunting subscum

is

potentially counterproductive, hunting metascum

is

impossible (at this stage, anyway). I feel like I'm in my first game on a site without a wiki or ICs, and the mod's conveniently forgotten to tell me what my WC is.

Pooky maintains that Fiasco and/or Sarcastro is subscum, that they should be metalynched, and that the subtown should therefore take a dive. I fail to see, though, where Pooky has attained popular town opinion or conclusively demonstrated that they're metascum, so I'm concerned that latching on to the first person to propose a plan is a bad approach to all this.

Ultimately, I don't get the setup. I get how scum might be able to use the subgames to their ends. I therefore kinda get how town can use the subgame results for information. But I

don't

think that this subgame can be affected for the metatown's benefit, and attempts to do so will only serve to confuse things later in the metagame when we try to analyse stuff.

Wow, stream-of-conciousness posting's actually helped me clarify my position! Thanks, Simenon!

So, here's where I'm at. It's the first subgame. Subscum should play to subwin. Subtown should play to subwin. Pooky is wrong. No-lynches are bad.

Now that I've figured

that

out , I'll be able to go back over stuff and come back with a suspicions list.

One note though: as long as a number of players are thinking past the end of the subgame, the subgame will be shoddily played. We need near-universal commitment to what's in front of us, or else this section of the game will wind up just being a swamp, pointless and ultimately beneficial to metascum.

[Adele]

Okay. I want a lynch to go through today, and I'm not happy with Pooky's contribution ("I think these people are metascum so you should all follow me in throwing the subgame, and if you don't understand my point you should definately follow my ideas because you can't refute them, rather than playing like makes sense to you at least at first").

vote: Pooky

for so angrily discouraging subgame play.

[Adele]

It's difficult to care when you don't understand the consequences...

[Adele]

[quote=""kabenon"]Although... Adele is experienced enough... she should have known that if she put the third vote then a scum would hammer to win the game... so why would she do that? I think Adele could be scum as well... protecting one or more of her metascum partners that were subscum... if the town were to lose, we metatownies have a harder chance of hitting metascum, because we have more to choose from... so I think Adele is going to be on top of my list. [/quote]Sorry, what

should

I have done?
Let us no-lynch our way to a scum win, or give the town a chance by lynching a reasonable candidate?

@Adele you can criticize me for me upset that you guys didn't understand me, but you guys never told me that you didn't understand what I was saying, you just basically decided to ignore me.

Interesting. I don't see it that way. I don't think it was yet the time to be thinking the way you were, and I see your actions throughout the subgame as derailment. Engaging you in discussion would have only furthered this.
The only question on my mind is, were you deliberately derailing the game, and were you doing so for scummy reasons?

How are we supposed to find metascum in this setup?

Never thought I'd <3 DGB . No clue, but I think it'll emerge over time. Pooky's trying to force it, which I think'll just mean that we're as clueless at the end as we are now.

That seems like something we can better do a bit later than now... you know, once we know who we want to meta-lynch

after all, if the minigames were nor tactically relevant, a mod as wise and fantastic as mith (/crawl, yet true) wouldn't have bothered including them.

I have difficulties reconciling this with the floundering that followed.

I have no doubt that the minigames

will be

useful. I just don't think that usefullness could've been aplied during the first. Yeah, I floundered - I was confused. I believed the games were there for a reason, and couldn't figure out how to use them.

[Adele]

Really? Do you think it's reasonable to expect the situation to change dramatically in a couple of days?

I didn't. I thought the game would end one of two ways, and supported the way that I preferred.

[Adele]

A couple of days in a Day that lasts about a week is a significant amount of time, relatively speaking.

Wow.
Um, I disagree. The gamestate seemed

very

static and immoveable to me, and bandwagons have generally been slow and exclusive. Factor in that I (and clearly several others) can't be at the PC 24/7 haranguing people, and the result is deadlines that've been pinching the town. We were time-short, so I went action-heavy. I made a call. The wrong one. But I don't see that things would've ended more happily if I'd done differently.

[Adele]

I've submitted my picks.

[Adele]

Adele put me on ignore.

?

What do you mean? Do you feel I ignored you? What? Where?

I'd be happy to answer any questions you have.

[Adele]

I'm pretty sure Adele and Fiasco are metascum for obvious reasons.

Well, I was all for Adele.

That's unexpected. My participation hasn't been glowing - I recognise that - and I disagreed with some people about the most sensible course of action to take, especially about whether the first game should be manipulated for a particular result or played out for later information. But I don't think I harmed the metatown with my actions, or that my approach was absurd or unjustified.

I'll spend some time this weekend trawling for accusations against me and answering them.

[Adele]

Adele put me on ignore.

?

What do you mean? Do you feel I ignored you? What? Where?

I'd be happy to answer any questions you have.

Why did you think there was a purpose to the subgames before the subgame started and then later change your mind?

No, I still believe there is a purpose to the subgames. I was confused as to what the best purpose was for a while, and came to the belief that, at least for the first game, the real use it provided was retrospective, not immediately actionable. Hope that helps.

To clarify, do people want me dead entirely because of the above? Which part are you objecting to? The opinion I came to, or the fact that I acted on it rather than allow the game to drift into pointlessness?

Oh noes. I'm being lynched in the subgame for which I've already forgotten my role.

lolqft.

[Adele]

No, I still believe there is a purpose to the subgames. I was confused as to what the best purpose was for a while, and came to the belief that, at least for the first game, the real use it provided was retrospective, not immediately actionable. Hope that helps.

It still doesn't explain why you seemed completely lost. And that doesn't shound characteristic of a player like yourself.

But the biggest reason I'm voting you for is this:

5>4>3>6>2>7>9>8>1 #Adele

1. Because for a while I was. It wasn't until I was called upon to articulate my thoughts that I realised what I thought.

When I was a teenager, I heard the "no chemical means of changing one element to another" rule, and thought photosynthesis an exception. It wasn't until I articulated it to someone and said the words "Carbon Dioxide" that I twigged, duh, CO₂ not an element. They didn't even need to say it. I figured it out because I said something.
It's kinda like that. Sweet of you to say I don't seem the type to get confused - in fact, I'm often the one to tentatively suggest plans that I can't figure out if they're good or bad. I'd be dire in a dethy. I'm just very upfront about the opinions I

have

formed, and I'm very good at the formal end of logic.

2. What's that? My vote list? You don't like who I voted for? Which bit?
(I was gonna cut and paste from my notes who I voted for the record, but I got the grey screen of death).

[Adele]

Got it now: PookyTheMagicalBear, Max, kabenon007, ryan, Fiasco, Sammich, Xdaamno, Sarcastro, Adele

As there could be a blocker, role hinting here seems to me like an especially bad idea.

nah, it's just I read it, didn't much care (subroles aren't all that important in the scheme of things) and proceeded to cram my brain with Consolidated Statements of Change in Equity. Fun fun.

[Adele]

Got it now: PookyTheMagicalBear, Max, kabenon007, ryan, Fiasco, Sammich, Xdaamno, Sarcastro, Adele

Yeah, I disagree on every count with this list. I'm serious, nobody seems to be in the right spot here. Why put Fiasco at number 5? Did you seriously think Sammich was the 6th person in terms of scumminess on your list?

Basically, I cannot believe anybody thought Pooky was the most scummish person, and kabs and ryan look very town to me. And I'm even more surprised you wouldn't compromise and say "well, pooky's scum, but if he's not, he could be right with his theory." You had no exposure to sarc; the only info to go on him was Pooky's theory.

I thought Pooky was scum in large part

because

of his theory. I still don't think it was the right play. It doesn't make sense.

As to the list... no. It's not a result of hours of agonising over who I thought was fifth or sixth scummiest. I put the people I suspected most at the top, I put me at the end and I filled the middle in as best I could. I understand you might not believe that I can have opinions on large numbers of people at once, so in support of this claim: I don't play normals. I can't keep up with them. I've got strong areas and weak areas, but I'm not gonna produce as solid opinions on 8 people as I am on 3. I'm a focuser, not a multi-tasker. I'm sorry if that disappoints you, but it's a skill thing not an alignment thing (99th percentile maths and logic, 9th percentile short-term memory).

Pooks, max and kab I stand by.

[Adele]

Pooks, max and kab I stand by.

Well congratulations, your top two candidates are dead, and they were both town, so forgive me if I don't trust your reasoning, especially cuz I know I'm town.

I mean that given the information I had at the time it seemed the best choice.

Obviously

, I'm not the only one who felt that way, since otherwise they'd not have died, yet I seem to be very heavily targeted right now. Que sera sera I s'pose, but I don't know if I'm going to have a chance to adequately defend myself, and certain people, faced with a choice of lynches, have taken steps to make my lynch (and my lynch only) near inevitable. I'm not a fan of no lynch either, but Fiasco was nearly as lynchable as me prior to ryan's vote. I'll need to reread to see who's jumping on the wagon at safe/easy times, but obv won't have a chance to share my viewpoint until the mini's over.

<<insert mandatory cop claim here>>

[Adele]

Yes, I did say "nearly as lynchable" - in that scenario, he and I would have 3 votes each.

[Adele]

How on

earth

has Mike's move

increased

the likelihood of a no lynch???

how this looks to me:
ryan = wants me dead, pretends wants nolynch.

If I survive til morning, I'll be looking

closely

at you, ryan.

Oh yeah, I probably ought also to

vote: fiasco

since I don't want a nolynch (the irony is not lost on me ) and I'd obviously prefer, if there is a lynch, that it not be me.

[Adele]

I'm not pretending one thing. Mike's move takes another person off the potential voting cycle.

OK. to start with, I don't know what that means. Please explain.

[Adele]

How on

earth

has Mike's move

increased

the likelihood of a no lynch???

how this looks to me:
ryan = wants me dead, pretends wants nolynch.

Sorry, should've been

ryan = wants me dead, pretends wants no nolynch

[Adele]

I get that you're claiming to have "avoiding nolynch" as your priority - I just realised my error and EBWOP'd on the last page - but I don't understand this sentence:

Mike's move takes another person off the potential voting cycle.

[Adele]

??? how is him voting for fiasco worse than him not voting at all?

[Adele]

Oh good lord, nevermind Adele, you're back to your typical twist things around and make everyone else look like they are scum.

Yes, of course. Nothing scummier than not understanding what someone's saying. My bad. [/sarcasm]

For the record, it seemed to me that ryan was frustrated by mike's appearance and vote-placing, judging this to be a negative action, rather than neutral, because it increases the chance of a no-lynch.
I can't see how Mike voting fiasco increases the chances of a no-lynch over mike not voting anyone, so I don't get what ryan's complaint is unless his fear of a nolynch is a red herring and his true priority is to get me lynched, as he now seems to be claiming.

[Adele]

I do find you scummy and it looks like you're playing the same way you did when we were both scum in an earlier game. (Will you be coming up with your numbers now on the probabilities of voting or not voting and blah blah blah)

What game are you even

talking

about? When have we been co-scum?

[Adele]

I do find you scummy and it looks like you're playing the same way you did when we were both scum in an earlier game. (Will you be coming up with your numbers now on the probabilities of voting or not voting and blah blah blah)

What game are you even

talking

about? When have we been co-scum?

Ryan, whether I made an error in a my search, or you're confusing me with Adel, I can't recall being co-scum with you. If it's an important part of your wanting me dead then it seems well worth settling, so could you provide a link? Many thanks

[Adele]

In which case, her playing style is rather different than mine, so I think you've been chasing me over a false tell.

no hard feelings?

[Adele]

vote adele

Still just for omgus?

[Adele]

oh,

my bad

. You've actually expressed views on me...

twice

. I was working offa this one:

Vote Adele

.

A vindictive vendetta

, on the verge of vanquishing villains, with vigilance and valiance... and valium.

(italics added).

However, to be fair, you did present this half-baked theorum earlier:

Although... Adele is experienced enough... she should have known that if she put the third vote then a scum would hammer to win the game... so why would she do that? I think Adele could be scum as well... protecting one or more of her metascum partners that were subscum... if the town were to lose, we metatownies have a harder chance of hitting metascum, because we have more to choose from... so I think Adele is going to be on top of my list.

Question 1) Isn't it entirely plausible that I was sincere in believing that the first subgame should be treated as an information collecting time - and, in fact, didn't I make my case for this

prior

to the events referred to above?
Question 2) How would I, subgame town, have even

known

who was in the subscum?
Question 3) Doesn't this theory assume that SomeStrangeSimenon or WaterboyWaldo is co-meta-scum with me, since it'd have to be one of the subscum and DGB's dead and innocent? - Seems to me that that's an assumption worth remembering for posterity.
3a) why did it fall to me to point out the above association, kab?

(although to be fair, 3a's a bit mean; there's no reason that it couldn't have legitimately slipped his mind. In fact, this was a very bitchy and sarcastic post. Group hug?)

[Adele]

Answer 1 seems like a fallacy to me, similar to the odds of a single die rolling a six being 50-50 (either it is or it isn't), when really it's 1 in 6.

Well, tell me how else it could be interpretted other than plausible or not?

Good catch, MBF! I was thinking in terms of "he's acting like he's got something solid on me, but it's just a theory"; I wouldn't even have noticed that kab's opting to treat the two options as equal (which I don't think they are, especially considering the reasoning preceded the action) without justification and now, when asked for justification, he's suddenly flailing.

If he'd said that he, personally, thought the probabilities were equal, I'd let it go, but claiming that it's a dichotomy and

therfore

equal chances?

FOS Kab

[Adele]

Ryan, you seem to just be going with the flow, voting for whomever is in the spotlight.

vote: Ryan

Fair enough

You agree?

[Adele]

Mod, request deadline extention

due to the fact that Something Awesome made ONE post a month ago and has since disappeared from the face of the earth. I also request that his replacement have more than ONE post total on the site. -_-

I have good information that Adele is not subscum. Please switch to someone, whoever it is.

Are the the cop? Just come out and say it if you are because we'll have a doctor that can protect you anonymosly.

I'd like an answer to this question before the end of the day, personally. If not, I could be wrested into a simenon wagon.

[Adele]

Mod, request deadline extention

Second

[Adele]

Since we're 6 hours from deadline, and I'm going home soon, and I don't like no lynches,

Vote: Mikeburnfire

.

If the day's still up tomorrow, I'll unvote.

Simenon, I'd definately like that answer please.

[Adele]

Yet I still think you were barking up the wrong tree, since this whole thing started based on my opinion of the most viable play for the first subgame - which was sincere.

Metascum, Subcop. Don't know how folk missed the fact I was cop, since

I claimed it

:

...I'll need to reread to see who's jumping on the wagon at safe/easy times, but obv won't have a chance to share my viewpoint until the mini's over.

<<insert mandatory cop claim here>>

This, btw, was why I put the major brakes on with ryan this morning; I went from "you're manipulating to make me look scummy and I wanna know why!" to "I think you may have made an error; no hard feelings".