Mini 733- Congratulations! You are... Mafia (Game Over)

[dahill1]

EBWOP: err.. below should be above

[elvis_knits]

I think Darox is the play today. His participation has been pathetic. The fact that he has promised things and not come through really makes me suspicious. Combined with the bandwagon vote on KMD with no explanation, he remains my choice.

what are your thoughts on him now that he's completed the review?

I don't like his review. It's only of half the people in the game. I don't like that at all. When you pick only certain people to review, that makes me suspicious... like he's shaping his answers. Why choose the people he did? Why leave out the people he did? It's not like his review was only people he found scummy. He said I was scummy, buddied up to hascow and lucifer, says a whole lot of nothing about caf, dahill, and glork. I don't agree with him about hascow, and feel he was sucking up. And the only person he accused of being scummy was me, and that's basically OMGUS.

I still support his lynch.

Those are the first six people listed on the front page.

That's why I picked the people I did, and that's why I left out the people I did. Because I was only half done.

Okay... I see the thing about the list from the first page. But explain the rest. You are buddying to hascow and OMGUSing me, and your assessments of the rest tell me nothing.

[Mirth]

Final Deadline: Monday, Feb 23, 2009, 11:59 PM EST

Votecount

darox - 87329572 -[imaginality, elvis, des]
elvis - potato - [Plum, Isacc]
Kmd - 3587297529830918353 - [Dahill]
des - 1 - [sly]
Isaac - 208420 - [kmd]
PJ - 1837593 - [Glork]

Not Voting - 3 - [Caf, cow, Darox]

Cups of Lemonade Bought: 2

[/quote]

[Isacc]

Caf, who has bought lemonade from you so far? I forgot.

Also, yeah, Darox's big "analysis" still really bugs me. I don't know why people think it's content worthy of removing votes. In fact, I think I'll

Unvote

and

Vote: Darox

.

A few unanswered questions bother me, namely; Glork, why did you find Kmd and EK obvtown? I still don't understand where you had that reasoning at all.

Slysly: Your words were "if darox flips town" you'd have a new list of scum candidates. And what if Darox doesn't flip town? Why did you choose to make your most recent decisions based on him flipping town, rather than scum?

[Plum]

Sorry for any neglect you've all felt. I think, for my sake as well as everyone else's, I'll do a recap post with analysis throughout, to better get back in touch with the game.

The Darox wagon's peak came right around just after my last post in this game (i.e. it stalled at Darox's long post and fell apart as a let's-avoid-a-No-lynch wagon soon afterward due to deadline extension; thanks, Mod). Right now I'm inclined to analyze a few players in the context of how they affected or responded to the Darox wagon: EK, Des, and maybe Glork or Imaginality - I'll see if anything interesting comes up as I reread in depth.

Going back to the beginning of the wagon for EK, then. EK's votes, from the beginning of the game: Random vote on Glork, early vote on CC for lack of scumhunting. Cow replaced CC. EK weakly disagrees with Cow's case on Isacc in the same post in which she unvotes him and votes Sly, but I notice that that was the day she triple posted. What were you on, again, EK? Ah, nyquil. It was after a few posts with questions and jabs at Sly, so fine on that count. On the other hand, interestingly, immediately before this she notes Darox as scummy for 'his unexplained pile-on vote on kmd'. Not totally - as the case progressed Darox expressed sentiments that Kmd was being more self-contradictory than a compulsive liar, from which one may deduce that he saw the 'Kmd's responses are becoming scummy and contradictory' side of the debate . . . But I digress; apologies. To the matter at hand - the next unvote and vote were both regarding Sly, etc.

I have to look through the thread and see where I want to put my vote now. I'm thinking darox or maybe cow. Darox for that weird bandwagon vote on kmd with no reasons explained. cow because he went on Isaac's witch hunt against des.

As above, I don't think her case on Darox at the ime was that strong, but whatever. More interesting, as I believe others have pointed out (myself included?) was he comment on Cow. In this case I don't believe any silence on Cow's part could be rightfully interpreted as actually going along with Isacc's stupid plan. Which is the argument EK makes in support of her statement.

Since you had voted des (although, I don't think you were voting him at the time) because of the english/german question, and Isacc's plan had to do with that issue, it's not easy to tell your feelings on the subject. I thought you might support isaac, because you brought up that exact same issue against des.

And why are you worried about "following" or appearing to follow?

I dropped the issue at its inception, partly because at face value the accusation was so ridiculous and EK had said, if I recall, that she'd been in need of a reread. However, following up, she did not acknowledge that the accusation was inane but attempted to justify it with weak points. Cow's lack of comment on Isacc's plan was in no way ambiguous enough, much less as scummy as the original accusation's tone would imply, to justify considering a vote. Basically, saying that Cow 'went on Isacc's witch hunt against des' is a lie, implying that he did something scummy he did not do is itself scummy, and the weak justifications don't help.

Oh yes, I was supposed to be analyzing EK's votes in the context of how the Darox wagon formed and grew. Back to that. She was considering putting her vote on Darox after the failed lynch (she did participate in Des' second lynch attempt) because of 'that weird bandwagon vote on kmd with no reasons explained'. Weak but arguably fair case there, as I stated above. However EK's next vote is on Cow. Let me break out a quote:

If we can't lynch sly, I'll go for cow since I sensed something scummy with the Isaac plan/des stuff. I really didn't like when cow said he didn't say how he hated Isaac's plan because he "didn't want to look like a follower." Being overly worried that your actions might look scummy is usually a sign of being scum.

Not quite related to the original crap argument, and better, than it, too.The quote from Cow isn't verbatim, and arguably Cow's statement could be read such that he meant all he would add to the conversation by saying he didn't like the plan would be him looking like a follower, which would be detrimental to him and add nothing to the conversation, and thus be a nulltell. However I'm pretty confident that EK's approach here isn't itself a scumtell.

Back to the votes

HEAVENS THIS IS GOING TO BE A BIG WALL OF TEXT

now.

Next post after the Cow vote is a Darox vote stating that she hasn't seen him do much in the game besides the bandwagon vote on Kmd, which implies lack of contributions, which from memory I find myself agreeing with. Second vote on the wagon, shortly after Imaginality's vote.

EK's Darox vote itself doesn't look conclusively scummy itself, I conclude. The stronger scumtells I've picked up along the path, however, are still relevant, at least in my mind. I'd wondered whether my vote on EK needed reconsidering - on reread, however, I think EK's a pretty good pick for scum right now.

Des' place on the Darox wagon: Interestingly enough, Des also has an earlier vote on Darox after the first failed lynch. Des notes Darox's 'opportunistic' vote on Kmd early and also notes Darox's overall lack of contribution as reason for his vote and ends his long post by saying that 'I think Darox needs to die'. Bit strong for that amount of proof, but I'll deal. In a subsequent post Des says that ' I think the only good wagons today are on Darox or imaginality'. Interesting. Next comes the second attempt at the Sly lynch. Between that and Des' revote on Darox there are two posts; one continues to push the attempt on Sly and one is discussion with Glork (which I hope to cover later in this post).

THIS ALWAYS HAPPENS WHEN I PROCRASTINATE.

With Des' revote on Darox comes a strange accusation towards Imaginality which seems to imply that Des is quite sure that Imaginality is Mafia, either bussing Darox or jumping on an easy mislynch. Which I believe is the 'blatant false dilemma' to which Glork was referring. The revote is the third vote on the Darox wagon in a very short period of time. It was, however, preceded by an extended expressed desire to lynch Darox, so I'd be hesitant to slap the label "opportunistic" on it and call it a day.

The next vote on the Darox wagon is Sly. Aaaaannd to be honest by now we're really coming up to deadline, and it'll be harder and harder to judge motivations and scumminess based in subsequent wagoning. So maybe I'll get back to EK and Des. I'm kinda pressed for time here.

Des' response to Glork's accusations regarding Des' false dilemma are interesting. He doesn't actually respond to the false dilemma accusation itself as far as I can tell (though does elaborate on Darox case vs. Imaginality gut for all of us). The only actual defense I can see here is 'I could have done it for reactions and that would be legit, you know'. Which is iffy, in my humble opinion.

The Darox reread - the part he's been able to post thus far. Does it make him less scummy? Yes and no, unfortunately. He's at least breaking out of the 'little contributions made' mold, which is good. Does turning over a new leaf make a towntell? Not really. Decent scumhunting, if that's what this turns out to be, would, however.

Odd thing I notice in his analysis of Caf is that his semi?-defense for an accusation that he voted Sly with little case to back him up is that 'One would think placing a vote is a pretty good way of saying "Yep, I think this guy is scummy"'.

In the analysis of EK, I find that Darox says

Strangely, the biggest complaint to this is raised by Plum who manages to miss the mark completely, attacking EK for changing the subject after Sly explained why he used the phrasing he did. This completely falls through though, because Sly explained it before EK ever called it a scum slip. Isacc also tries to push this "changed the subject" angle. It's very bizarre and really, out of all the people involved in the argument over the Scumslip thing, EK comes out looking the best despite not really showing anything of substance against Sly.

Interesting, and something I plan to address later. Simply do not have the time right now, and other things are pressing in this already over-long post.

Des continues to push for the Darox lynch afterwards, citing, of all things, a quote of his in which he attacks Glork for 'giving Darox lip service' on his lack of contributions. Huh? Did I miss something here?

I think Darox is the play today. His participation has been pathetic. The fact that he has promised things and not come through really makes me suspicious. Combined with the bandwagon vote on KMD with no explanation, he remains my choice.

what are your thoughts on him now that he's completed the review?

I don't like his review. It's only of half the people in the game. I don't like that at all. When you pick only certain people to review, that makes me suspicious... like he's shaping his answers. Why choose the people he did? Why leave out the people he did? It's not like his review was only people he found scummy. He said I was scummy, buddied up to hascow and lucifer, says a whole lot of nothing about caf, dahill, and glork. I don't agree with him about hascow, and feel he was sucking up. And the only person he accused of being scummy was me, and that's basically OMGUS.

I still support his lynch.

As I believe others have noted, weird. First, I believe Lucifer etc. references Darox himself, EK, just for clarity's sake. Second, he warned us that he was only half done with the post he was making, and, yes, he wrote about the first six players on the list as they appear on page one.

More than one person comments on Darox buddying up to Cow. Honestly, I can't focus on that or any motivations behind it right now. I didn't see it as being strong enough to be really disconcerting/a scumtell, but I may need to reread it.

On Des, Glork, and controversy:

On Glork, I'd like to see a claim. If he can't vote for any player in this game, he's useless to the town besides through scum-hunting, but he's hardly been doing any of that.

What this means is that with Glork alive, we'd be in lylo one day early.

So, Glork, if you can't vote for anyone, I think you should claim right now and explain to us why we should be keeping yo alive.

Yes: no. This is a clear request for a claim right now. Request is clearly not warranted and in my opinion scummy. As has been said by myself and others, asking for a premature claim isn't the way to go here. Ensuring that Glork isn't a LYLO liability is, but we're not near LYLO yet.

"Wait and see" was what I said. I didn't vote you, I didn't say, "let's lynch Glork". I said you, as a voteless player, are a policy lynch one day before lylo. I asked for a claim because that was all I could see that would change that. All of this was easier for me to say because you didn't look very town either. I wanted the idea out there now, so it wouldn't be a scramble later in the game.

Liezh. Ven joo firzht mentioned it, joo said joo had to think on vot ze alleged restrikzhon said. Zen joo came out vith joor "Glork should claim or else we should leench him" idea.

So far, no one, including yourself, has provided a compelling argument against my suggestion, which is on purely theoretical grounds, and I have asked for feedback on it. Most of the responses seem to be based on preferences as opposed to real probabilities.

Ze policy itself is only part of ze issue here. Joo demanded a klaim

immediately

becoz joo said zat vizout one, zere vas no reason joo shood "be keeping [me] alive." Vot I kant onderstand is vy joo vood vont a klaim D1 for ONLY ze reason zat we may lose a day if I kannot vote in endgame.

First of all, zis is a DIREKT KONDRADIKZHON to vot joo jost claimed, zat joo vanted to "vait and see" how my role and gameplay vood play out. Before I ever had ze chance to respond, joo vere saying I shood klaim or die.

How in ze Motherland does "klaim or ve have no reazhon to keep you alive" translate "letzh vait and see vot happens over ze korse of ze game before decidink if Glork izh aktually ze scomzh"?

So, basically, your argument here has always been that I'm blindly pushing for your lynch without considering context, which isn't true at all.

So, Glork, if you can't vote for anyone, I think you should claim right now and explain to us why we should be keeping yo alive.

Joo tell me vezher joo vere "considerink knotekst" or giving me a "klaim or die" ultimatum, based on vot joo originially said. Don't joo dare try to change vot joo pushed. Joo vere blatantly fishing for a claim, else joo didnt vant me alive. Joo didnt say "perhaps Glork vill be investigated and vill bekome konfirmed town" (vich vood obviouzhly negate ze desire for a policy leench). Joo never said "perhaps Glork vill have anozer ability vich vill become evident vithout him having to klaim on D1 for no reason at all." Joo never said "perhaps Glork's lack of vote is temporary, and he vill be able to vote later." Tho joo never outright DENIED zese possibilitizh,

joo implied zat me klaiming is preferrable to exploring ze dynamics of my role vithin the context of ze game.

And ZAT is vot botherzh me so moch about joor play. I vood NEVER expekt joo to take soch an onreazhonable approach as town, and zat is vy I think joo are ze scomzh.

Hopefully zis post hazh artikulated my pozition moch more.

It certainly looks like a contradiction to me. While still suspicious of EK, I'll feel free to

Vote: Destructor

.

tl;dr coming soon!

[SlySly]

Why did you choose to make your most recent decisions based on him flipping town, rather than scum?

The play of a few has given me a hunch that Darox is town and they are scum.

I would also suggest that no one buy the lemonade. It sounds like a way to join a cult to me. If it were not for my role, there is no way I would have bought some.

[destructor]

"Wait and see" was what I said. I didn't vote you, I didn't say, "let's lynch Glork". I said you, as a voteless player, are a policy lynch one day before lylo. I asked for a claim because that was all I could see that would change that. All of this was easier for me to say because you didn't look very town either. I wanted the idea out there now, so it wouldn't be a scramble later in the game.

Liezh. Ven joo firzht mentioned it, joo said joo had to think on vot ze alleged restrikzhon said. Zen joo came out vith joor "Glork should claim or else we should leench him" idea.

What I said:

On Glork, I'd like to see a claim. If he can't vote for any player in this game, he's useless to the town besides through scum-hunting, but he's hardly been doing any of that.

I find it unlikely that he's scum faking a vote restriction, but, unlike Sly suggested in 526, I don't see why that mean he couldn't be scum who actually HAS a vote restriction. Whatever the case, he's a serious liability to the town because that's one vote we KNOW will never land on scum.

What this means is that with Glork alive, we'd be in lylo one day early.

So, Glork, if you can't vote for anyone, I think you should claim right now and explain to us why we should be keeping yo alive.

I say:
1. Voteless Glork is useless to town besides scum-hunting, but he's not doing any anyway.
2. Glork is not only useless, but a liability to the town because he can never vote for scum. (Elaboration coming.)
3. Glork should explain to us why we should be keeping him alive in light of 1 and 2. 1 and 2 are enough to lynch him given his lack of hunting, hence a claim I ask for.

I put the ball in your court. I didn't vote you or suggest that anyone else should. Where's the lie, Glork? And more importantly, why are you pushing bullshit?

Ze policy itself is only part of ze issue here. Joo demanded a klaim immediately becoz joo said zat vizout one, zere vas no reason joo shood "be keeping [me] alive." Vot I kant onderstand is vy joo vood vont a klaim D1 for ONLY ze reason zat we may lose a day if I kannot vote in endgame.

First of all, zis is a DIREKT KONDRADIKZHON to vot joo jost claimed, zat joo vanted to "vait and see" how my role and gameplay vood play out. Before I ever had ze chance to respond, joo vere saying I shood klaim or die. How in ze Motherland does "klaim or ve have no reazhon to keep you alive" translate "letzh vait and see vot happens over ze korse of ze game before decidink if Glork izh aktually ze scomzh"?

What

you

said:

Zis is true, bot she obviouzhly doezhn't believe zat it is unekvivikolly right to leench voteless playerzh, vich is vot you are soggezhting. Vot EK said and vot joo vont to do are kompletely, 100% different. "Vait and zee" is ze right vay to approach it. Leenching people in ze manner joo soggezht is jost terrible.

First,

you

said that I wanted to lynch you immediately. It is to

this

that I said I was "waiting and seeing".

If I was suggesting that you should be lynched immediately for being voteless, I'd have voted you and pushed for your lynch on that alone. What I did was "wait and see" what you had to say. Have I voted you yet? How can you possibly perceive me as saying "it's unequivocably right to lynch voteless players"? You can't, so now your beef has become "des asked for a claim too early."

Joo tell me vezher joo vere "considerink knotekst" or giving me a "klaim or die" ultimatum, based on vot joo originially said. Don't joo dare try to change vot joo pushed. Joo vere blatantly fishing for a claim, else joo didnt vant me alive.

I wasn't fishing. I was

demanding

a claim. Fishing is insidios and sneaky. Townies don't fish, scum do.

Joo didnt say "perhaps Glork vill be investigated and vill bekome konfirmed town" (vich vood obviouzhly negate ze desire for a policy leench).

No it wouldn't.

Joo never said "perhaps Glork vill have anozer ability vich vill become evident vithout him having to klaim on D1 for no reason at all."

Sure, I thought about it. But your play didn't look town. I expect you to scum hunt because you're experienced and know why townies should be. You weren't scum hunting. You appeared more likely to be scum. I don't have issues about making scum claim. lol

So, yeah, you could have been town. You might have given me a good reason not to ask for your claim. I've read what you've been saying. I've kept a dialogue up. Read on...

Joo never said "perhaps Glork's lack of vote is temporary, and he vill be able to vote later."

This was the possibility I was thinking of in particular. A claim would have covered this.

Tho joo never outright DENIED zese possibilitizh, joo implied zat me klaiming is preferrable to exploring ze dynamics of my role vithin the context of ze game.

I SAID IN THE FIRST POST I MADE ON THE TOPIC THAT YOU WEREN'T SCUM HUNTING.
I would expect you to be. In fact, as a townie without a vote wouldn't you want to be making cases even more? Your backseat attitude didn't seem like something Glork-town would do at all.

And ZAT is vot botherzh me so moch about joor play. I vood NEVER expekt joo to take soch an onreazhonable approach as town, and zat is vy I think joo are ze scomzh.

I think I was pretty reasonable. I mean, you still haven't claimed and I'm still discussing this instead of going, "zomg glork didnt claim lynch him!"

So, you still don't look like town, so I would personally be happy to see you claim today. You are resilient, so I realise that isn't going to happen unless the rest of the town asks for it too. We would be making a mistake not to get a claim out of you tomorrow if we don't lynch scum today.

Here is why (and me trying maths again):

With x scum alive, where there are 2x+1 living, the town NEEDS x+1 votes

on scum

to have ANY chance of winning. (This is not hyperbole. It is fact based on what we know of this game's mechanics.)

If Glork is scum and alive in any situation as described above, the town could be okay -> Glork is probably scum (or else the game would probably be over)
If Glork is town, the town will only have x votes and so will not be able to lynch scum. That is, the town

will

lose.

So, unless something we know about the game's mechanics changes, Glork needs to die a day before LYLO at the latest or the TOWN WILL LOSE.

It doesn't matter if Glork's not lynched today. I had an anti-town feeling of Glork and wanted to explore it, so I started posting about it. If Glork's scum, it'd be fine to lynch him for something other than policy.

Funnily enough, Glork, as town, should be more than happy to be lynched at the appropriate time because of this.

(Something for anyone who's voting me to think about: If I were scum, wouldn't I want to keep a voteless player alive?)

[destructor]

Why did you choose to make your most recent decisions based on him flipping town, rather than scum?

The play of a few has given me a hunch that Darox is town and they are scum.

I would also suggest that no one buy the lemonade. It sounds like a way to join a cult to me. If it were not for my role, there is no way I would have bought some.

Re: lemonade.

I think caf's town because he didn't make some shit up about what would happen if we had lemonade. I think scum would be tempted to lie about it. Caf has been frankly telling us that something happens but he can't tell us.

Towntell on Sly is that he bought lemonade at all. Glork said scum were more likely to buy it because they'd have more reason to believe Sly is town, and so won't harm people. On the other hand, scum would not go near the stuff if they knew that buying some

helped a pro-town player

.

[Glork]

I say:
1. Voteless Glork is useless to town besides scum-hunting, but he's not doing any anyway.
2. Glork is not only useless, but a liability to the town because he can never vote for scum. (Elaboration coming.)
3. Glork should explain to us why we should be keeping him alive in light of 1 and 2. 1 and 2 are enough to lynch him given his lack of hunting, hence a claim I ask for.

Expand on ze #3. Joo and I both know zat is vhere ze issue liezh.
1) Joo ask for a klaim vithout anybody ozer zan joo putting even an ounce of prezhure on me. I maintain zat a protownzh player vood not do this. It vood make more sense for joo to have VOTED for me at ze time as a vay of putting prezhure on me to kontribute, instead of demanding a klaim outright.
2) The phraze "vy ve shood be keepink joo alive" botherzh me very much. Zis does not imply "ve shood leench joo one day before LyLo." Zis impliezh "ve shood leench joo immediately."

I put the ball in your court. I didn't vote you or suggest that anyone else should.[/b] Where's the lie, Glork? And more importantly, why are you pushing bullshit?

As I said, joo implied zat having me klaim vos better zan putting appropriate pressure zat a normal protownzh player vood do.

First,

you

said that I wanted to lynch you immediately. It is to

this

that I said I was "waiting and seeing".

Ya. I said it first, becoz of

ze exakt vords joo wrote

:

explain to us why we should be keeping yo alive.

As I have said MULTIPLE TIMES, zis implies zat joo vonted me leenched immediately. Else, joo vood be "keeping me alive."

Vot

exactly

did joo mean ven joo said "explain to us vy ve shood be keeping joo alive"?

If I was suggesting that you should be lynched immediately for being voteless, I'd have voted you and pushed for your lynch on that alone. What I did was "wait and see" what you had to say. Have I voted you yet? How can you possibly perceive me as saying "it's unequivocably right to lynch voteless players"? You can't, so now your beef has become "des asked for a claim too early."

I'm not entirely sure vy joo didn't vote me outright, because honestly, it's vot I vood have done if I vere in joor shoezh. Like I've said many timezh, joor klaimed stance on zis matter makes no logikal sense to me votsoever. I don't onderstand vy joo vood have demanded a klaim zere. I don't onderstand vy joo vood not vont to keep me alive (aka, not leench me)

[quote=""Dezh"]Sure, I thought about it. But your play didn't look town. I expect you to scum hunt because you're experienced and know why townies should be. You weren't scum hunting. You appeared more likely to be scum. I don't have issues about making scum claim. lol[/quote]Do joo honestly think zat I, regardless of alignment, vood have klaimed jost becoz joo asked for it?

Joo never said "perhaps Glork's lack of vote is temporary, and he vill be able to vote later."

This was the possibility I was thinking of in particular. A claim would have covered this.

1) Joo never addressed any of ze ozer possibilitiezh.
2) A klaim is only von vay of covering zis, and it is easily ze VORST vay to cover it.

Tho joo never outright DENIED zese possibilitizh, joo implied zat me klaiming is preferrable to exploring ze dynamics of my role vithin the context of ze game.

I SAID IN THE FIRST POST I MADE ON THE TOPIC THAT YOU WEREN'T SCUM HUNTING.
I would expect you to be. In fact, as a townie without a vote wouldn't you want to be making cases even more? Your backseat attitude didn't seem like something Glork-town would do at all.

I meant in ze knotext of ze ozer roles in ze game. Ve KNOW zat zere are many different mechanics at vork, and different postink restrikzhons. Yet joo seemed to ignore ze fakt zat zis is a VERY unuzhual game in favor of asking for a D1 klaim on a player vith no pressure on zem votsoever. Vy is zis?

I think I was pretty reasonable. I mean, you still haven't claimed and I'm still discussing this instead of going, "zomg glork didnt claim lynch him!"

Well duh joor not saying zat now. Joo'd have to be a komplete moron to kontinue vith zat line of utter krap after I pointed out how HORRIBLE AN IDEA IT VOS TO BEGIN VITH.

Here is why (and me trying maths again):

With x scum alive, where there are 2x+1 living, the town NEEDS x+1 votes

on scum

to have ANY chance of winning. (This is not hyperbole. It is fact based on what we know of this game's mechanics.)

If Glork is scum and alive in any situation as described above, the town could be okay -> Glork is probably scum (or else the game would probably be over)
If Glork is town, the town will only have x votes and so will not be able to lynch scum. That is, the town

will

lose.

So, unless something we know about the game's mechanics changes, Glork needs to die a day before LYLO at the latest or the TOWN WILL LOSE.

Zis is teknikally korrekt, bot it assumezh exactly von scomzhkill per night and no ozer aktions. Zere is an awful lot zat kan happen betveen now and "day before LyLo," and as I've said

multiple

times, I find it very diffikolt to believe zat joo jost ignored ze nature of zis game, as I indikated above.

Funnily enough, Glork, as town, should be more than happy to be lynched at the appropriate time because of this.

Wrong. If zis vere a vanilla game except for my lack of vote, zen yes. I vood agree. But no. Joo koodn't be more wrong.

(Something for anyone who's voting me to think about: If I were scum, wouldn't I want to keep a voteless player alive?)

Only if joo thought zat I vos truly useless. I don't think joo ever believed zat.

[elvis_knits]

Didn't we hit deadline?

No. Y'all were whiney and I gave you an extension

I don't like destructor hammering away at Glork over being voteless. I've already said how we don't know if Glork has other abilities that we might want/need around. Also, he may get his vote back at some point -- I've seen roles like that. I remember I think it was llama in Family guy mini who was random joat and if he unradnomized himself he would lose his night ability but gain his vote back. So there's no reason to auto-lynch Glork at this point.

[elvis_knits]

Why did you choose to make your most recent decisions based on him flipping town, rather than scum?

The play of a few has given me a hunch that Darox is town and they are scum.

I would also suggest that no one buy the lemonade. It sounds like a way to join a cult to me. If it were not for my role, there is no way I would have bought some.

Re: lemonade.

I think caf's town because he didn't make some shit up about what would happen if we had lemonade. I think scum would be tempted to lie about it. Caf has been frankly telling us that something happens but he can't tell us.

I don't think caf has been especially scummy either, but your logic here makes no sense. If caf is scum and makes something up about what the lemonade does, it could be easy to catch him in later. If he lies, we'll probably lynch him. So the fact that he didn't lie doesn't make him town.

Towntell on Sly is that he bought lemonade at all. Glork said scum were more likely to buy it because they'd have more reason to believe Sly is town, and so won't harm people. On the other hand, scum would not go near the stuff if they knew that buying some

helped a pro-town player

.

Another logic fail. Sly says he's hard to kill, so that's probably the bigger reason he took lemonade and he's not afraid of what the lemonade will do.

[Mirth]

Imaginality has been prodded. If anyone else is in need of proddings, let me know.

[Kmd4390]

Des, just ran a hypothetical situation through my head, and you are right about Glork. Lynching Glork before LYLO brings a normal LYLO. Keeping him alive in the same hypothetical game ends the game.

EK has a good point though. Glork may not be voteless for the whole game. Glork, do you know if you can get a vote later on?

Plum, would you mind presenting your case on Des in bulleted points so it's easier to read? Des, could you post a defense to the bulleted points when Plum posts them for the same reason?

Isacc, were you still planning on doing that PBPA on Darox?

[Isacc]

@KMD: I had wanted to, but I was busy before and now my computer is broken for awhile, so I haven't had the time to. I will try to do it now, and maybe have it up in a little while.

[Plum]

Plum, would you mind presenting your case on Des in bulleted points so it's easier to read?

Sure. To be honest, that's sort of where I started running out of steam. I should have something clear up by tonight.

[Isacc]

Alright, I am skipping the first 6 pages for this PBPA because they were mostly random and/or role-related. If anyone feels I have left out important details, you may correct me.

Darox PBPA:

Starting at page 7 though...

150-151: Role stuff, and votes Glork for having two votes (although both were on not-real people). The fact that both of glork's "votes" were irrelevant makes it seem kinda like he didn't think much about this.

177 & 179: Clarifies that his vote for Glork was based on having two votes, and then another role related "who would win" (abbreviated to WWW from now on, for ease).

183: Asks who Ross Perot is and another WWW.
185: Votes Ross Perot, and another WWW.
210: Calls KMD contradictory (through a WWW), and asks why Kmd cared about looking like a bandwagon.
212: Asks why Kmd would make a disclaimer on page 1.
249: WWW (between a lion and tiger, wtf?) and votes Kmd.
260: Modified WWW.
Nothing page 12
312: Doesn't understand why Glork thinks scum would buy Lemonade, asks for clarification. Another WWW.
329: buys hard cider. (Ignoring the debate between me and Hascow at this point, and also ignoring Destructor coming in and posting in english.)
Nothing page 15
384: Posts only "What" in reference to a Sly post saying not reading the whole game is scummy.
394: WWW, aliens vs sasquatch. Hasn't commented on Sly's claim.
406: Explains why Sly's role can be confirmed by lynch-attempt to Dahill. Another WWW.
409: Another WWW. Sly had just asked Darox why he was ignoring questions, and Darox now asks "What questions?" Sly doesn't clarify any time soon, that I can see.
423-424: Translates Zazi's posts, and another WWW.
437-438: Asks me why Destructor should stop posting in German, and another WWW.
446: Reminds me that I'll need more support if I want to follow through with my plan agaisnt Dest. Note that he doesn't actually say my plan is bad for wanting to kill Destructor. He makes no comments against it at all. And then another WWW.

463: Tells me Destructor would never have accepted my plan (again, still no explicit comments for or against it). Also, asks Sly why his role claim seems to be changing (which I never really thought it was). Another WWW.

477: Claims he's answered all questions directed at him. Accuses Sly for making a foreign language post after attacking people for it (even though it was obviously a joke). Then he says he doesn't like the way Sly pushed for a Destructor lynch, and provides quotes that apparently in his mind prove his point. Explains that Sly isn't defending himself against points, instead repeating himself. Also says Sly is guilty of what he's accusing Destructor of being (whatever that is, Idk). Ah, ic...apparently he's calling SlySly a liar. Then another WWW and puts Sly at L-1.

481: Explains to Sly why he didn't translate everyone's posts. Then another WWW.
519: Darox is confused as to why I say he isn't contributing. However, after doing this PBPA I feel completely confident I was right. He claims I am ignoring the parts of the posts that aren't WWW, however as we can see through this analysis, the vast majority of his posts didn't really say anything at this point.

Nothing page 22.
557: Asks Sly to explain an accusation about ignoring flavor, and accuses Sly of OMGUS. Then tells Caf that he's not the only one who isn't posting much content, and then another WWW.

Nothing page 24.
615: Again says my plan would never have been accepted, still avoiding saying whether or not it was suspicious, just that it wouldn't work. Also, another WWW.
Nothing page 26 and 27.
685: Says he's been busy. Will return soon.
708: He's still busy. Promises his overview.
724: Says he's still working on overview. Asks for votecount.
738: The promised overview...er...half of overview appears. Says Caf is townish except for accusing Hascow. Says Hascow rocks and has always been right. Says Dahill is alright. Is confused by EK, noting a few good points and also a few times Hascow "trashed" EK. Says Glork is Ok. Says he'll post the other half later. I see serious Hascow buddying. I think if Darox went up against a 40 year old virgin in a fight over Hascow's sexy parts, Darox would win =O.

773: Clarifies he was going in order of the front page list.
And that was his last post.


So, I can see only two accusations made (correct me if I am wrong...that's a lot of posts to analyze). He attacks Kmd with Dahill earlier. Then he attacks Slysly later. He also humps Hascow like a dog in heat.

What is most interesting is that he's ignored so much. He ignored Me v Hascow, Me v Destructor, Destructor v Slysly, Destructor v Glork (were there others? I forget). But he has, as you can see, made no comment on many of the major arguments of the game so far.

After this review, I'd say I like my vote on Darox.

[Isacc]

EBWOP: Ignore the url links. Apparently me calling his "Who would win?" things WWW's has caused a few oddly placed urls lol.

[imaginality]

Got prodded, apologises. I vas waited to rrread the rrrrest of Darrrrrox's overrrrrrrrview but zhat ztill haz not yet to arrive...

As for ozzer stuff lately, Isacc's post yust above helps confirm my zense of Darox vas deliberrrately tryingk to zkate through day while prrovided little in ze vay of analyziz orr vote rrecord. Still very happy with my vote on him, think he good lynch for today.

I take Glork's side about destrrructor, who zeems to haf been fish/prezzure Glork to roleclaim and prezzing too hard (at this stage) on Glork for current inability to vote. Azide from hoping to get claim, destrructor may alzo haf been hoping if ozzer vagons fizzle out ve vould fall back on a 'lynch Glork he iss useless' lynch as deadline apprroaches.

Not sure about points against elvis, haf to re-read her posts again. At moment prrefer Darox lynch, also ok with destructor lynch. Feeling better about Isacc due to rrezent posts, now I tending to think hisss earrrlier aggrrreszzsion may been ankry townie razzer zan prezzured scum.

[caf19]

Caf, who has bought lemonade from you so far? I forgot.

Sly and Des have bought it.

I would also suggest that no one buy the lemonade. It sounds like a way to join a cult to me. If it were not for my role, there is no way I would have bought some.

You really think that? I need at least three people to buy lemonade each day. A cult recruiting three people a day in a 12-person game is somewhat unlikely, no?

I don't see why we need to plan whether or not to policy lynch Glork on a later day right now - especially in a game such as this one, where we can't meaningfully speculate on how many town or scum will be left later on. setting up lynches for later days is generally a bad idea anyway. Right now, as his missing vote is hardly crucial D1, it seems natural simply to lynch him if he's scum, and not if he's town. (Ain't that groundbreaking logic? )

[Isacc]

I'm feeling lucky/daring. And it deff doesn't sound like a cult.

Maybe it's the meds talking, but I think I'll

Buy: Lemonade

. I've had town reads from you so far, so I think letting you live another day is a good plan. Hopefully I won't regret this once I'm off my meds.

[imaginality]

Ma-ia hii
Ma-ia huu
Ma-ia hoo
Ma-ia haha

[destructor]

I say:
1. Voteless Glork is useless to town besides scum-hunting, but he's not doing any anyway.
2. Glork is not only useless, but a liability to the town because he can never vote for scum. (Elaboration coming.)
3. Glork should explain to us why we should be keeping him alive in light of 1 and 2. 1 and 2 are enough to lynch him given his lack of hunting, hence a claim I ask for.

Expand on ze #3. Joo and I both know zat is vhere ze issue liezh.
1) Joo ask for a klaim vithout anybody ozer zan joo putting even an ounce of prezhure on me. I maintain zat a protownzh player vood not do this. It vood make more sense for joo to have VOTED for me at ze time as a vay of putting prezhure on me to kontribute, instead of demanding a klaim outright.
2) The phraze "vy ve shood be keepink joo alive" botherzh me very much. Zis does not imply "ve shood leench joo one day before LyLo." Zis impliezh "ve shood leench joo immediately."

Why are you ignoring the obvious? If I wanted to lynch you today, if that was what my intention was from the beginning, why didn't I vote you?

It follows that my intention was never specifically to lynch you today.

There is no manual of pro-town play that says the only way to pressure a player is to vote for them. That isn't invariably what a pro-town player

should

do at all and it's ridiculous that

you

are suggesting this.

I thought you were more likely scum when I asked for the claim, which was an agitation.

Vot

exactly

did joo mean ven joo said "explain to us vy ve shood be keeping joo alive"?

As in, if you're not going to scum-hunt and you're going to be a liability to the town, why should we think you're town as opposed to scum, because if you're scum, we're going to want to lynch you.

I'm not entirely sure vy joo didn't vote me outright, because honestly, it's vot I vood have done if I vere in joor shoezh. Like I've said many timezh, joor klaimed stance on zis matter makes no logikal sense to me votsoever. I don't onderstand vy joo vood have demanded a klaim zere. I don't onderstand vy joo vood not vont to keep me alive (aka, not leench me)

Because

maybe

you just had a slow start and would pick it up. Instead, you OMGUS'd me, brushing off my

theoretical arguement

, which you agree now is true, as irrational and came up with two disparate reads of Plum and Darox. You continuously made arguments that were out of context or to the neglect of something else I'd already said. None of this has made me feel any better about you.

Do joo honestly think zat I, regardless of alignment, vood have klaimed jost becoz joo asked for it?

I didn't think it was likely. But if you are scum, I was pretty interested in seeing how they might approach the topic. I'm pretty sure I asked people for feedback on it at least once afterward.

Joo never said "perhaps Glork's lack of vote is temporary, and he vill be able to vote later."

This was the possibility I was thinking of in particular. A claim would have covered this.

1) Joo never addressed any of ze ozer possibilitiezh.
2) A klaim is only von vay of covering zis, and it is easily ze VORST vay to cover it.

I meant in ze knotext of ze ozer roles in ze game. Ve KNOW zat zere are many different mechanics at vork, and different postink restrikzhons. Yet joo seemed to ignore ze fakt zat zis is a VERY unuzhual game in favor of asking for a D1 klaim on a player vith no pressure on zem votsoever. Vy is zis?

Dunno, few reasons I can think of off the top of my head.
1. You looked more like scum than town.
2. Pressure/Reactions.
3. Your lack of vote had the potential to screw the town over. No one was discussing it's implications and I thought it was important to bring it up.
4. I don't think powerroles are the be all and end all of any game. If they are, the game's way too swingy.
5. This is a bastard mod game. Powerroles probably have limited utility. I give them even less value.

There's also a factor of me knowing you could probably come up with a fake-claim as scum (Dantes in Fresno), so getting you as scum to claim earlier would be more effective.

It's reasonable, given my read of you so far, that I should be sceptical of you telling us that somehow you being alive at endgame doesn't inevitably leads to a town loss. It's even more reasonable, barring something comming up that strongly suggests that you are town, for the town to be wary of this. I have been getting the feeling, by how much you initially opposed my suggestion, that you have been very concerned about

staying alive

, which is, at least, not a town-tell.

I think I was pretty reasonable. I mean, you still haven't claimed and I'm still discussing this instead of going, "zomg glork didnt claim lynch him!"

Well duh joor not saying zat now. Joo'd have to be a komplete moron to kontinue vith zat line of utter krap after I pointed out how HORRIBLE AN IDEA IT VOS TO BEGIN VITH.

Yeah, but I never actually said "if glork doesnt claim we should lynch him" in the first place. Neither did I mean it.

Zis is teknikally korrekt, bot it assumezh exactly von scomzhkill per night and no ozer aktions. Zere is an awful lot zat kan happen betveen now and "day before LyLo," and as I've said

multiple

times, I find it very diffikolt to believe zat joo jost ignored ze nature of zis game, as I indikated above.

The "awful lot that can happen" is

pure speculation

. I am not putting stock in what "could" happen.

Anything

could happen. I'm playing based on what we know here and now.

Funnily enough, Glork, as town, should be more than happy to be lynched at the appropriate time because of this.

Wrong. If zis vere a vanilla game except for my lack of vote, zen yes. I vood agree. But no. Joo koodn't be more wrong.

Without elaboration, all you're giving us is your word. That obviously doesn't count for much. It would be bad play to take it any other way.

(Something for anyone who's voting me to think about: If I were scum, wouldn't I want to keep a voteless player alive?)

Only if joo thought zat I vos truly useless. I don't think joo ever believed zat.

Seriously, there's no WIFOM here, if I was scum who really wanted you dead, I'd nightkill you. It'd be SO much easier that what's going on right now.

[destructor]

Right now, as his missing vote is hardly crucial D1, it seems natural simply to lynch him if he's scum, and not if he's town. (Ain't that groundbreaking logic?

Winner!
Which is why I've made arguements against Glork

that have nothing to do with his lack of vote!

I think it's significant that Glork makes pretty minor responses to these and instead makes the bulk of his posting about my theoretical argument, which he has now admitted is correct (ignoring what "could happen").

I take Glork's side about destrrructor, who zeems to haf been fish/prezzure Glork to roleclaim and prezzing too hard (at this stage) on Glork for current inability to vote. Azide from hoping to get claim, destrructor may alzo haf been hoping if ozzer vagons fizzle out ve vould fall back on a 'lynch Glork he iss useless' lynch as deadline apprroaches.

Not sure about points against elvis, haf to re-read her posts again. At moment prrefer Darox lynch, also ok with destructor lynch. Feeling better about Isacc due to rrezent posts, now I tending to think hisss earrrlier aggrrreszzsion may been ankry townie razzer zan prezzured scum.

Look at that, no issues with Glork's read of Darox. Instead, his take is that the only reason anyone has suggested that Glork should be lynched is that he has no vote. And jumps on board the destructor wagon too. And all of this just after going into pro-lurker mode!

I don't think caf has been especially scummy either, but your logic here makes no sense. If caf is scum and makes something up about what the lemonade does, it could be easy to catch him in later. If he lies, we'll probably lynch him. So the fact that he didn't lie doesn't make him town.

Pretty sure he could have come up with something innocuous, like something that happened to

him

that would be difficult to confirm. As scum, he'd have had plenty of time to prepare is approach before asking anyone to buy lemonade at all. More important to me is that he's been really frank about it AND has been playing pretty protown.

Another logic fail. Sly says he's hard to kill, so that's probably the bigger reason he took lemonade and he's not afraid of what the lemonade will do.

It's irrelevant that Sly thought it wouldn't hurt him. As scum, he would have

known

that he'd be helping a player of another alignment. Why would scum do that?


Plum, if you can summarise your case, I'll try to respond, although maybe I've covered some of it in responding to Glork already.

[destructor]

CAT VS KITTEN!!!

SAMURAI!!!

Samurai waren mächtige Krieger. Ninja's waren hinterhältig, aber.

[Glork]

]Why are you ignoring the obvious? If I wanted to lynch you today, if that was what my intention was from the beginning, why didn't I vote you?

It follows that my intention was never specifically to lynch you today.

Ah. So joor sayink joo never had ANY intention to leench me even zo joo think I am scomzh based on my play and joo think I am a detriment vithout a vote?

1+1=5, apparently.

I thought you were more likely scum when I asked for the claim, which was an agitation.

Okay, seriously. If askink for ze klaim vos in agitation, vy voodn't joo have said zat at ze very beginning, ven I first said "joo dont vont me to klaim and I'm not goink to"? Sayink it vos in frostration vell after ze fakt makes joo look very insincere.

Because

maybe

you just had a slow start and would pick it up. Instead, you OMGUS'd me, brushing off my

theoretical arguement

, which you agree now is true, as irrational and came up with two disparate reads of Plum and Darox. You continuously made arguments that were out of context or to the neglect of something else I'd already said. None of this has made me feel any better about you.

I do

NOT

agree zat it joor theoretikal argument is true. I agree zat it is true IF AND ONLY IF joo make COMPLETELY TERRIBLE ASSOMPTIONS about ze nature of ze game vich NO REASONABLE PROTOWNZH PLAYER SHOOD MAKE.

Do joo honestly think zat I, regardless of alignment, vood have klaimed jost becoz joo asked for it?

I didn't think it was likely. But if you are scum, I was pretty interested in seeing how they might approach the topic. I'm pretty sure I asked people for feedback on it at least once afterward.

Joo never said "perhaps Glork's lack of vote is temporary, and he vill be able to vote later."

This was the possibility I was thinking of in particular. A claim would have covered this.

1) Joo never addressed any of ze ozer possibilitiezh.
2) A klaim is only von vay of covering zis, and it is easily ze VORST vay to cover it.

I have been getting the feeling, by how much you initially opposed my suggestion, that you have been very concerned about

staying alive

, which is, at least, not a town-tell.

Zis "feelink" is kompletely wrong. From ze start, I have been attacking joo becoz joor play looks like ze scomzh. Ze klosest I kame to being "knocerned about staying alive" is becoz I said I vood disagree vith ze plan baed on vot I know about my role and zis game (even though I vood agree vith it if ze game were essentially vanilla).

Au contraire, I haff been kontnet to argue vith joo all day becoz I am seriously 99% certain zat joo are ze scomzh, and seeing joo leenched today makes my job so much easier.

Yeah, but I never actually said "if glork doesnt claim we should lynch him" in the first place. Neither did I mean it.

Bot joo said "klaim and explain vy ve shood keep you alive." I'm sure joo can see vere I interpreted it as such.

The "awful lot that can happen" is

pure speculation

. I am not putting stock in what "could" happen.

Anything

could happen. I'm playing based on what we know here and now.

Without elaboration, all you're giving us is your word. That obviously doesn't count for much. It would be bad play to take it any other way.

Askink for and gettink a klaim vood have been "takink my word." Vot's joor point?