Mini 554 - Mafia in Vollville - Over!!

[Incognito]

Good posting by Jitsu.

======================================================

Votecount #35

Oman - 2 (Incognito, Adel)

ChaosOmega - 1 (Erg0)

Not voting - 6 (Matt_S, ChaosOmega, Xylthixlm, Patrick, Jitsu, Oman)

With 9 alive, it's 5 to lynch.
Deadline for D2: Friday April 5, 11:30AM GMT+10
================================================

[Jitsu]

So...you think CO and I are mutually exclusive scum now?

P.S. For the record, I do think that you and CO are mutually exclusive (unlike the opie/Matt_S arguments brought up earlier in the day).

Why do you think they are mutually exclusive?

[Incognito]

So...you think CO and I are mutually exclusive scum now?

P.S. For the record, I do think that you and CO are mutually exclusive (unlike the opie/Matt_S arguments brought up earlier in the day).

Why do you think they are mutually exclusive?

Because in my opinion, Oman being scum isn't dependent on ChaosOmega being lynched and turning up scum. It seems like in Day 1 people were linking opie with Matt_S suggesting that if opie turns up scum then Matt_S would also likely or even definitely be scum. People (except for Patrick who did suggest that he could see Matt_S being scum independent of opie's alignment) couldn't read Matt_S as scummy on his own; the case against Matt_S was completely dependent on opie's alignment.

[Jitsu]

Because in my opinion, Oman being scum isn't dependent on ChaosOmega being lynched and turning up scum.

I'm confused.

Mutually exclusive means, "if one of them is scum, the other one cannot be". It would be equivalent to say "they cannot both be scum". However, that doesn't really sound like what you are saying here. Is that correct?

[Incognito]

Mutually exclusive means, "if one of them is scum, the other one cannot be". It would be equivalent to say "they cannot both be scum". However, that doesn't really sound like what you are saying here. Is that correct?

Oh right. I thought mutually exclusive meant something else. Nevermind what I said in Post 873.

[Erg0]

I stand by what I've said. The FoS is valid. You simplified my case down to what you all ready knew to be true: that CO is not scum. You wrote your post based off of that assumption.

Repeating yourself doesn't make your argument more valid.

Why

do you think that my post was written based on that assumption?

[Erg0]

Also, I thought on day 1 that Matt_S was slightly more likely to be scum if opie wasn't. His actions since have made me reconsider that position, though they came after I voiced this thought so I can't be sure it wasn't just a reaction on his part.

[Adel]

I don't see any reason at all that Oman would "slip away". His alignment isn't really linked to CO's at all.

A lynch revealing CO to be scum would make it harder for Oman to "slip away" which does link Oman's alignment to CO's.

Now do you see it?

[Xylthixlm]

Adel, why would a lynch revealing CO to be scum make it harder for Oman to "slip away"?

[Erg0]

I don't see any reason at all that Oman would "slip away". His alignment isn't really linked to CO's at all.

A lynch revealing CO to be scum would make it harder for Oman to "slip away" which does link Oman's alignment to CO's.

Now do you see it?

Are you stating that as a fact, or are you saying that's what I'm saying?

[Matt_S]

Matt_S: An enigma. Early on D1, he seemed desparate to have something to say and made some really bad FoSes with horrible reasoning. I don't like his simplistic view of the game, which seems to be roughly categorizing people due to simple factors like how nice or aggressive they are. He looks like a newbie to me, either way. He's done a number of scummy things, but every once in a while, he surprises me with something that comments that sound seasoned and relatively well-reasoned. In spite of the inconsistency of his play, he had chances to jump on bad wagons or rush to conclusions against townies, and he did not. I can't tell if he is a scum playing it cool, or just a somewhat confused townie. Opinion: Neutral.

I'd rather make bad FoSes than bad votes any day. And the only FoS that I'd take back was my one on opie, since I should have reread it before that. As for my simple view of the game, I just don't see things the way Adel does, how she can seemingly know what everyone is thinking with their posts. Like her FoS on Erg0. I didn't see anything odd about his post, but Adel did. All I had to go on Day 1 was deciding who seemed to be helping the town, and some of the people made arguments against became aggressive rather than answering my suspicions. I also witnessed other people getting aggressive rather than answering suspicions.

And speaking of Adel, I can't see the slipping away thing happening. I don't think ChaosOmega being scum will change many thoughts on Oman.

[Patrick]

I don't mind admitting that the last page or so has really confused me.

I don't think that Oman's scumminess is dependant on CO's alignment, and I too don't understand how he might slip away if we lynch CO first, regardless of what CO is. I think some of Xlythixlm's scumminess is reliant on ChaosOmega turning up as mafia.

[Jitsu]

I never really did much care for cases like "we need to lynch X so Y doesn't slip away". There's really no substance to it and it makes it very hard to logically debate it. To me, it's too easy of a way for scum to get someone lynched without saying why. I think if you are going to lynch somebody or choose to lynch someone over somebody else, you should back that up with good reasoning.

I know there's cases where you don't want to give scum additional information so they can change their behavior, and that's fine. But isn't it true that by saying that Oman could slip away if CO is lynched first, it's probably true that Oman

has already been alerted

to change his behavior?

I don't have any idea whether or not Adel really does have solid reasoning to suspect Oman may slip away. What I do know is that I've seen Adel do things like this before as town, so I have to consider this a null tell also.

[Xylthixlm]

The question is not whether someone does something as both town and scum. The question is whether someone does something

equally often

as town and scum.

Barring evidence that Adel does, in fact, do the same number of stupid gambits in every game regardless of alignment, I think I'm entirely justified in taking stupid gambits as scumtells.

[Adel]

I don't see any reason at all that Oman would "slip away". His alignment isn't really linked to CO's at all.

A lynch revealing CO to be scum would make it harder for Oman to "slip away" which does link Oman's alignment to CO's.

Now do you see it?

Are you stating that as a fact, or are you saying that's what I'm saying?

i'm saying that is the fact that your post ignored.

[Oman]

Barring evidence that Adel does, in fact, do the same number of stupid gambits in every game regardless of alignment, I think I'm entirely justified in taking stupid gambits as scumtells.

Actually for Adel they're towntells, but I might not have read the games where she gambits that way as scum.

[Erg0]

My statement was open, it didn't specify either scenario. The assumption that I made was related to the point you were making, not to CO's alignment - i.e. I thought it was so unlikely that Oman would slip away if CO were scum that you must therefore be talking about the other scenario. Either way, I find the entire idea preposterous. There is no reason not to lynch the person most likely to be scum, especially with the possibility that we have an SK (though cop would be an unusual fakeclaim for an SK to make).

[Adel]

There is no reason not to lynch the person most likely to be scum, especially with the possibility that we have an SK (though

Sane

cop would be an unusual fakeclaim for an SK to make).

I fixed it for you.

[Xylthixlm]

Barring evidence that Adel does, in fact, do the same number of stupid gambits in every game regardless of alignment, I think I'm entirely justified in taking stupid gambits as scumtells.

Actually for Adel they're towntells, but I might not have read the games where she gambits that way as scum.

So Adel lies more often as town? Very interesting, if true.

[Erg0]

There is no reason not to lynch the person most likely to be scum, especially with the possibility that we have an SK (though

Sane

cop would be an unusual fakeclaim for an SK to make).

I fixed it for you.

Non-sane cop is a very weak claim, I can't see an SK taking that as their first option.

[Adel]

well, after a watcher and a tracker both die after you claim cop to escape a lynch...

[Incognito]

Non-sane cop is a very weak claim, I can't see an SK taking that as their first option.

Eh? What are you people talking about? I was under the impression that a cop wouldn't know his/her own sanity until after an investigation took place. Role PMs don't indicate your sanity most of the time, do they?

[Oman]

He said guardian was guilty = non-sane

[Incognito]

I know that. ASDFGHJKL;

My point is ChaosOmega claimed yesterday (Day 1). Erg0 seems to be implying that ChaosOmega would have known even when he claimed yesterday whether or not he was sane or insane. I'm of the same opinion as Adel; his non-sane cop claim was more a result of circumstance, i.e. we learned on Day 2 that we had both a Tracker and a Watcher so to think that we also had a Sane Cop would be unbelievable so he fakes a guilty result on Guardian to make his cop claim more believable.

[Oman]

No, I read it differently. I thought erg0 was saying that Chaos made the decision this morning to be non-sane.