Open 19 - Nightless (Over?) before 430

[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.

[Simenon]

Vote Count

VitaminR (1)- Skruffs
Skruffs (1)- Guardian

[Skruffs]

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

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????

[Thok]

Elias, could you make a list of your suspicions with reasons? I'd also like to hear an explanation for your lack of voting yesterday.

busy now.

Still waiting.

[Simenon]

Simenon is disappointed but is not motivated enough tonight to look and see who needs prods.

Anybody need proding?

[Thok]

Elias in particular needs prodding, but just prod everybody but me for good measure.

[Elias_the_thief]

I'm here, but I'm at a debate tournament in princeton from tomorrow til sunday.

[Skruffs]

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

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.

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!

Hmm.
Thok trying to lynch you instead of Setael makes you more likely town;
You repeatedly said Tony was scummy, int he same way you had said abo IH, though - however you actually started it off with a reason.

Did you think VitaminR was 'the easy lynch' yesterday, Guardian?

[Thok]

Thok trying to lynch you instead of Setael makes you more likely town;

You do realize this argument only makes sense if I'm scum, in which case Guardian couldn't be scum because there's only one scum left. It's essentially a circular argument. It also ignores the possibility that I went after Guardian as scum because I thought he was scum.

Skruffs, have you thought about the fact that Setael spent a lot of time attacking TonyScum? She followed me when I voted for Tony rather than trying to push a lynch on either you or her (right after you and Setael started going after each other), and consistently listed Tony in her likely scum groups (although she often claimed that she expected one of me/Tony as likely scum possibilities).

I'm worried that you haven't reconsidered how Setael would interact with her partners, given that we now have extra information.

[Simenon]

Prodding VitaminR, Guardian

Deadline- December 17th

[VitaminR]

Thok, perhaps I'm sensitive. Perhaps it's frustration at not having the time to get a good enough feel for this game to articulate what I mean properly.

I can see this as a scum response too.

Um...why?

It was really wishy-washy.

NAR vote is too easy.

"XXX vote is too easy" is a RETARDED scumtell. For a person to decide a vote to be easy to begin with, they have to be scum. So basically you're saying I'm scum because I'm scum.

Don't entirely follow your logic there. If a vote looks too readily cast to me, that can be scummy.

Except that no one ever adequately explained the "connection"?

Not entirely sure what you're getting at here, but the Occult-John connection was definitely there. Occult came out defending John pretty heavily and I seem to remember John said some flip-floppy stuff regarding Occult.

I had the same stance...so why not bring that up?

Dunno. I would guess that you didn't come out with it as strongly as Romanus did. I didn't particularly notice it, anyway.

Yes, granted I was busy (aka, having 2 days access a week), and also that it's my playstyle to be passive much of the game? The only time I really get much into it is in my own defense.

Fair enough, but I don't see how it is supposed to make me feel better about you.

Wow, I like how I went from mostly towny to scummy based on one post which was too passive, and based on a vague claim that that's a scum interaction. Nice. Even while at the same time, you admit that I was busy.

Addressed this.

What suspicions did I have of Aimee, pray tell? I thought she was townie the whole time, based on the fact that there was no real case against her. Oh, by the way, she came up town.

Hmm, yeah, you're right. I must have misread that.

He probably left a comment about me because we had been arguing the whole game up to that point, and wanted to post an official stance. I find it even more interesting that he places you as definate townie. I don't have anywhere to go with my Romanus case, he's dead.

Obviously, I meant in the ensuing pages.

Exactly, I doubt he wouldnt put two scumbuddies. I like how you include the last part, so even though this should really be a point in my favor, you try to turn it so at least it won't be remembered that way.

I wouldn't have brought it up if I intended to make you look bad. It is a point in your favour.

OK Elias, I asked you to do it for the following reason:

I thought we had a group of four likely town like players who all trusted each other's townness, minus me trusting Vitr. If I were willing to let slide for a moment that I don't trust Vitr, and I was right about my impression of having four town like players who thought the other three were town like, then we would have an interesting alternate strategy/side strategy for winning.

As long as the four players kept seeming townlike, and we still trusted each other, we could just keep lynching people not in our group, and would eventually get all the scum. Even if we got all the scum except one (Vitr? ), there would be four of us left with two chances to get that scum lynched.

Doubt Guardian is scum.

Why.

It's too stupid a plan.

So, I'm going to say that my attentions will be on mustafa, AImee, Elias, VitR, and IH, (or their replacees), in that order. Not all of them are scum but i'm sure one or two of them are.

more later!

Too wildly inaccurate to come from scum.

Um...what? This doesnt even make sense.

I expect scum to include at least one or two token scum players. At least 4 are town.

I'm really inclined to see Elias as scum at this point. His behaviour today is another example. Skruffs and Guardian come blasting out of the gates, with reasoned, consistent (pretty much) votes. Elias just seems to be standing by, prodding at Guardian, but with no real indication that he has an idea of who is scum.

wtf? You think Guardian came out with strong reasoning?

I didn't say that. I just get the feeling that, no matter whether or not you agree with it, Guardian at least has a consistent view of this game in his head. I'm missing that from you.

[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.

[Elias_the_thief]

Thok, perhaps I'm sensitive. Perhaps it's frustration at not having the time to get a good enough feel for this game to articulate what I mean properly.

I can see this as a scum response too.

Um...why?

It was really wishy-washy.

How? Explain.

NAR vote is too easy.

"XXX vote is too easy" is a RETARDED scumtell. For a person to decide a vote to be easy to begin with, they have to be scum. So basically you're saying I'm scum because I'm scum.

Don't entirely follow your logic there. If a vote looks too readily cast to me, that can be scummy.

You didnt say it was too readily cast, you said it was too easy. There's a difference. Besides, how was my vote easy?

Except that no one ever adequately explained the "connection"?

Not entirely sure what you're getting at here, but the Occult-John connection was definitely there. Occult came out defending John pretty heavily and I seem to remember John said some flip-floppy stuff regarding Occult.

The connection was there...is that why you cant come up with any actual evidence? I like how you say that you seem to remember, but where is the actual evidence?

I had the same stance...so why not bring that up?

Dunno. I would guess that you didn't come out with it as strongly as Romanus did. I didn't particularly notice it, anyway.

Bullshit. There's no way you didnt notice it, unless it was intentionally.

Yes, granted I was busy (aka, having 2 days access a week), and also that it's my playstyle to be passive much of the game? The only time I really get much into it is in my own defense.

Fair enough, but I don't see how it is supposed to make me feel better about you.

Because it's my playstyle. Aka, I do it as town and scum. Aka, its a null tell.

Wow, I like how I went from mostly towny to scummy based on one post which was too passive, and based on a vague claim that that's a scum interaction. Nice. Even while at the same time, you admit that I was busy.

Addressed this.

He probably left a comment about me because we had been arguing the whole game up to that point, and wanted to post an official stance. I find it even more interesting that he places you as definate townie. I don't have anywhere to go with my Romanus case, he's dead.

Obviously, I meant in the ensuing pages.

I would have posted more extensively and then voted him. What else do you do with a case, if no one rebutts it effectively?

OK Elias, I asked you to do it for the following reason:

I thought we had a group of four likely town like players who all trusted each other's townness, minus me trusting Vitr. If I were willing to let slide for a moment that I don't trust Vitr, and I was right about my impression of having four town like players who thought the other three were town like, then we would have an interesting alternate strategy/side strategy for winning.

As long as the four players kept seeming townlike, and we still trusted each other, we could just keep lynching people not in our group, and would eventually get all the scum. Even if we got all the scum except one (Vitr? ), there would be four of us left with two chances to get that scum lynched.

Doubt Guardian is scum.

Why.

It's too stupid a plan.

So basically youre saying its wifom.

So, I'm going to say that my attentions will be on mustafa, AImee, Elias, VitR, and IH, (or their replacees), in that order. Not all of them are scum but i'm sure one or two of them are.

more later!

Too wildly inaccurate to come from scum.

Um...what? This doesnt even make sense.

I expect scum to include at least one or two token scum players. At least 4 are town.

So it's based on what you expect people to do. So again, youre saying its wifom.

I'm really inclined to see Elias as scum at this point. His behaviour today is another example. Skruffs and Guardian come blasting out of the gates, with reasoned, consistent (pretty much) votes. Elias just seems to be standing by, prodding at Guardian, but with no real indication that he has an idea of who is scum.

wtf? You think Guardian came out with strong reasoning?

I didn't say that. I just get the feeling that, no matter whether or not you agree with it, Guardian at least has a consistent view of this game in his head. I'm missing that from you.

You didnt say that? What does "Skruffs and Guardian come blasting out of the gates, with reasoned, consistent (pretty much) votes" mean? And also, how in hell does guardian have a consistent game view? He changes his stance on me about once every two posts! How exactly have I been inconsistent? You are scum. That is my view.

[Skruffs]

Thok - I will be honest that I have not recomped my analysis of hte game since Tony was lynched, not like I did after Setael and John were lynched. I *really* need to do that, because the day five lynch of Setael, I think, was frenetic enough that the remaining scum *probably* outed themselves in choosing between the wagons.

[Thok]

I'm getting tired of waiting for Elias to actually say who he is suspicious of. I guess there's a suspicion of VitR in his above post, but it feels like he's reacting to attacks on him more then actually doing stuff. On the flipside, I do think his interaction with Romanus/Setael/Tony suggests he's protown.

@Elias-if I had to make a case against you, it would be based on the observation that you haven't been voting much, and you haven't been on any of the scum lynches. I'd argue the choice of who has the worst voting record is a toss up between you and Guardian.
------------------

[quote="Guardian"]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. [quote]

If you or Skruffs were scum, that would just require Tony to be strange with his vote. With respect to this discussion, it's worth noting that you were trying to push me into moving from Tony to VitR near the end of yesterday.

In addition, the same argument could be made with respect to the Satael/Guardian lynch decision on day 5.

It's possible that there was enough confusion about what would happen at the deadline that Tony (and possibly scum partner, if it's not one of Guardian/Skruffs) didn't realize what would happen at deadline and didn't realize the urgency for switching votes. It's also possible that scum didn't realize what time the deadline would be on Thanksgiving (and so the lynch happened before a Tony vote change could happen), or that Tony's just a massive lurker.

Your post feels like a way to weakly toss some suspicion of VitR to use if a VitR wagon comes up later, especially when matched up with your "VitaminR was a distraction for scum comments" earlier.
---------------

Feh,

vote Guardian

. I still think the day 5 voting actions (Guardian abandoning the Tony wagon at lynch-1 and Setael weird refusal to vote Guardian) are scum signs.

I also felt Tony was trying to tie me to Guardian yesterday, which feels like a strange play for scum to do if both of us are town. (Read Tony's comments: he repeatedly tried to blame me for the lack of Guardian lynch throughout the game.)

I also feel like the last remaining scum (assuming it's not me) desperately needs to simultaneously get pressure on multiple people today, as they need to get 3 mislynches, and I'm not likely to be mislynched after Tony came up scum. All of (Skruffs, VitR, Elias) have been focused on one player at a time [although Elias has switched the one player], while Guardian has made side comments about implying suspicion of Elias/VitR while keeping his vote on Skruffs.

[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?

[Thok]

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

Mislynches future for ahead planning

you

aren't?

Huh? I'm pointing out that there's reason for the rest of town to believe I'm protown, and that the last remaining scum wouldn't think I'm a good lynch.

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

Not really. I'm rewarding Elias for attacking Romanus on multiple occasions in the game, not for his current lack of 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?

If you aren't "impressed with them" then why aren't you actually refuting them, or explaining why scum acted in that way?

Scum voted in ways that make less sense if you are town (Setael's lack of vote on you when scum would be expected to save your neck), and you've voted in ways that make more sense if you are scum (jumping off the Tony-lynch at -1 and voting IH rather than Romanus and Adel rather than Oman at deadlines, possibly abandoning Tony yesterday to go after VitR and criticizing me for going on you.)

TonyScum tried to connect me with you while trying to "get you lynched" (even though he never voted you), even though that wouldn't have helped him at all if you were town. (The vast majority of Tony's arguments against me were "Thok helped keep Guardian alive by flipflopping on Guardian.")

I would have expected town you to keep sticking onto VitaminR, since frankly nothing has actually changed between yesterday and today about that wagon and because you sticking to that bandwagon is consistent with your claimed metaed town play. There's also the observation that a you/Tony scum team had a potentially winning line yesterday of "Get VitR lynched, then have Skruffs vote Thok and get me mislynched also". (Elias/Tony also have this line of play also, and it would have been easier for Elias to implement, IMHO.)

[Elias_the_thief]

Well, basically scum will be found based on connection from this point on. Vit and guardian both have links, i just need to review them both to see who has stronger ones. That's what I'll be basing my vote off of. As of right now, I dont have a strong enough understanding of eithers extent to vote.

[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.

[Thok]

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.

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. 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.

[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.

[Thok]

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

You've repeatedly said "I think VitaminR could be the last scum" today but haven't voted him. You've also complained about Elias not posting his thoughts when I said that made him look suspicious. You've now also voted me.

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.

Just saying "Thok's arguments don't make sense" doesn't make it true. There are also multiple reasons from my voting record to believe I'm not scum.

First Guardian, you gave me multiple oppurtunities yesterday to jump from Tony to VitaminR at the deadline. Moreover, I fairly obviously could have just voted VitaminR yesterday without ever mentioning Tony. That would have put me in superior position then what actually happened.

Second, similarly on day 5, I probably could have pushed a Skruffs lynch when the Skruffs-Setael argument happened. Given that you already had announced that you would vote IH at lynch or lose, in the hypothetical case that I am the last mafia, I already knew that getting Skruffs lynched in that situation would be a nearly guaranteed mafia win (at that point, a VitR or Elias wagon coul accomplish the same purpose but was harder to do.)

You'll notice that at that point I pushed a bandwagon on Tony, rather than pursuing a likely winning line of play.

Third on day 5, at deadline I chose to lynch Setael rather than you, and I could have reasonably made the opposite choice given my posting. That would put us in stronger position, especially since we could have followed up a you town lynch with an IH lynch that would have won.

That's at least three times where I chose to go after scum rather than try to lynch a person who would be town if I am scum, at times where going after the townie would be much more helpful, at least one of which would likely have been a winning play and possibly two. If you really think I'm scum after all that.

[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.

[Thok]

Rolls eyes are Guardian. Here's the relevant stuff.

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.

I'm not attacking you here for pointing out that we don't agree on arguments, I'm attacking you for

not trying

. Should I take your unwillingness to reply to my arguments as "tacit acceptance that they are correct"? If you are town, I don't see why you'd just refuse to argue with me and make a blanket statement of the form "I don't need to respond to Thok because I don't understand him."

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!

If you read 1958, I pointed out that I don't think you understand my arguments. And then I went and made several paragraphs worth of comments describe my thoughts and interpretations

anyways

. Because I felt that going through the effort of describing my thoughts would be useful; even if they didn't convince you, they could help the other players in the game to see my point of view.

Your claim of me being hypocritical works only if you completely misinterpret what I'm saying.

And now I've responded to your entire post.

Incidentally, I love how your main reason for voting me and unvoting Skruffs is that I'm attacking you and Skruffs isn't. (Sure, you've thrown in a comment about how you think my arguments make sense. But apparently your case for voting Skruffs was so flimsy that him not finding you suspicious makes it go away.)

[Thok]

Random extra thought for Guardian: Supposing for the moment I was the last scum trying to keep out of the limelight as you claimed, why would I go after you today? You've demonstrated a consistent willingness to respond to my attacks on you with OMGUS attacks and votes, while I could put pressure on other players at much less of a risk. Given that every other player today has been attacked by somebody (you voting Skruffs, Skruffs voting VitR, and VitR's partial reread finding Elias as scum so far) I could easily have voted other people with much less of a risk to myself.