Mini 873 Plainview Game Over

[foilist13]

@Gammagooey - I'm willing to back off Cruelty for now, and yes I'll try and be civil, but he and Archaebob have been less than that towards me this game, and it's starting to get under my skin.

[Papa Zito]

Cruelty (4) Papa Zito, AlmasterGM, Gammagoey, foilist13

All of you, 'splain please. I'm not seeing the case here.

Suggest you go back and read then, since several people have posted why they want cruelty dead.

Sanjay, why aren't you voting?

[archaebob]

I'm pretty sure foilist isn't mafia. When he came under attack his first offense was on Muffin. If he's scum, why would he try to get the pressure off himself by putting it his own godfather, when attacking a random townie would do the same thing without risking a godfather lynch if people listen to you.

WIFOM.

I pointed out that cruelty and peanut never spoke to each other yesterday. If they're both scum trying not to draw attention to each other, bussing at this point where everyone suspects both of them would be pretty much suicide. Neither of them wants the other lynched today. Hmmm.

Heads I win tail you lose. This is unfalsifiable, and ignores, as cruelty rightly pointed out, that he has not talked about many players in this thread. It also ignores the fact that peanutman has said just as little about AGM and foilist, except when directly pressured.

Going back to Almaster- I still think that if he's a townie his play yesterday was absolutely terrible, but there's the tiniest chance that he's just what he said he was: a terrible, terrible doctor.

His play today has been much better though, and I really don't think he would bus right now, so if cruelty comes up scum there are people I'd rather lynch before him.

Side note: SpyreX was one of the only people still willing to vote him after his claim. WIFOM and all that, but it's still something to think about.

You lost me with the bolded. Que?

Also, yeah, WIFOM and all that, meaning it's

not

something to still think about.

Peanutman's defense at the beginning of the day seemed a little scummy to me (trying to put suspicion on people because they're voting for him, not stating his own suspicions until some of the heat is off) and claiming that he had a big part in lynching Socio when he didn't even vote for him is glory hogging at best, and scum trying to get town cred at worst.

So vote peanutman. This is WAY more compelling than anything I've seen for cruelty.

Cruelty didn't contribute much at all yesterday, didn't mention Muffin/Socio until very late in the game, and similar to peanutman is pushing on archae who I think just made a townie mistake (reasoning was a few posts back if you want it). In addition, he's still stating that foilist is scummy even though Socio's flip makes him just about as confirmed as a village idiot as he can get. He also has inconsistancies in his reasoning for being irritated at AGM and changing from not wanting to lynch AGM yesterday to wanting him lynched now.

Quote me the inconsistencies in cruelty's reasoning, and explain why his flip flop over AGM is any different from Mordy's over AGM, Sanjay's over foilist, and mine over AGM.

I will vote for any of these three dudes. However, if cruelty is scum

I think AGM looks a hell of a lot better given my bussing is suicide theory

, making peanutman the last maf in my eyes (doesn't work the other way around:if peanut is scum, either Al or cruelty could be the last maf).

I'm thinking cruelty gives us the most info from the lynch and has a high chance of lynching ze scum.

Vote:cruelty

The bolded is a very bad theory.

I still don't see the logic behind the italicized.

[archaebob]

@Gammagooey - I'm willing to back off Cruelty for now, and yes I'll try and be civil, but he and Archaebob have been less than that towards me this game, and it's starting to get under my skin.

Have a cookie. (PS: you started it)

Back off from cruelty meaning what?

[foilist13]

@Archaebob - Back off here having the meaning of not tunneling, and generally leaving him alone. I've said what I wanted to about him, now I'm going to go look at other players.

[MordyS]

@archaebob:

I would love to lynch AlmasterGM, but I'm satisfied lynching his scumbuddy and then lynching him. For the record, tho, I'd happily lynch either.

re your peanutman question:

And you can't deny that I was key early on in getting the Godfather lynched. I'm not saying I should be obv-town because of it, but it seems useless to build a case against me based on that.

Also, something I noticed while reading Peanutman in iso:

And I say this because you seem to be completely ignoring Bob's different playstyle since the Muffin BW. What do you make of this? Also, you say that he screwed up? How so? How would town-Bob have screwed up in Day 1? I can see how scumBob screwed up, but enlighten me on the town-Bob scenario.

There's defending Bob, and then there's playing for him. And you are slowly creeping into the later.

So essentially he asked me to explain why I didn't think archaebob was scum, and when I did, he accused me of playing for him. So, peanutman, another question you can answer when you deign to answer why you didn't vote for Muffin yesterday: Why would you ask me to explain someone's behavior and then accuse me of playing for him after I answer your question? Was it entrapment? Did you forget you asked the question? Are you just willing to say anything to discredit the case against you?

[cruelty]

My response to your earlier post included a small bit:That AGM would be absolutely mafia in my eyes, and if you flip town we also have suspicions from a confirmed townie on multiple players, notably on archae and peanut.

I already addressed both points earlier and I don't think they're compelling at all.

1: As far as I'm aware

everyone is already suspicious of AGM

. Is it really worth two lives (mine + [inevitable] nk) to find that out?

2: I said it in response to someone (foilist? Don't remember who, don't think it matters) but I'd be highly concerned if you took my suspicions and ran with them purely because I flipped town. That's terrible logic and as such makes this point void.

I really think you have to do better than that. You'll get my suspicions and extra scumpoints on AGM? C'mon.

several people have posted why they want cruelty dead.

You have you and GG, plus a couple guys with what really amount to nothing more than retaliatory votes (I'll stop just short of shouting OMGUS because I acknowledge there is a valid half-case against me). GG I don't think has been particularly compelling with his quest for information and AGM/foilist are tunneled. This leaves you.

[Papa Zito]

Lawl, kay fine. That leaves me.

Has your opinion on archaebob changed now that he's posting?

[Gammagooey]

Archae, responses to you are in order from your comments in your earlier posts.

I'm aware that mafia can in fact use reverse psychology to try and confuse townies. However, if you look through the posts and reasonings provided to us, you can get some damn good clues on whether people would do so at a given time or not. When foilist was being attacked, it was two real-life days into the game and been called out for doing scummy things very early. I don't see someone who hasn't been thinking enough about his posting to vote for the wrong person AND make a case on the said wrong person suddenly gaining a burst of clarity and start manipulating the situation in his favor for later.

I made a list of when peanutman mentioned everyone as well when cruelty asked me about the same thing. If you missed that too, please read what everyone has said in the past few pages instead of just asking for things people have already gone through.

AGM has played better today in that his suspicions of cruelty at least seem reasonable and he hasn't gone off and made cases like yesterday's which in my opinion were mostly rediculous.

You're using WIFOM enough that I think I need to say this. You seem to be using WIFOM in a way different way than I do. I generally think of it as "keep in mind that the mafia could always be using reverse psychology". You seem to think of it as in "This information has the possibility of being reverse psychology. We should ignore talking about it completely." Just because something COULD be reverse psychology, does not mean it is likely or that the information is out of bounds. I refuse to throw out information that we can discuss further and determine whether the mafia actually chose to use reverse psychology in a particular instance or not.

The main inconsistency is here:

I wasn't enthusiastic about the lynch, no. It didn't thrill me with joy because honestly I didn't think Muffin was scummier than foilist/AGM on day 1. I could see the logic behind the case, but it seemed less than ironclad.

Huh, guess I wasn't around for the end of the day.

AGM's last 4 posts have contained 1 inane sentence and 3 unexplained votes, he's been scummy all day and HE gets to hammer? Sigh.

Why would you be irritated at someone else getting to hammer instead of you if you weren't enthusiastic about the lynch in the first place?

The secondary one wasn't really an inconsistency as much as a lack of explanation, and he explained that he thought foilist was scummier at the time and no longer thinks that, so I dropped it.

If AGM is mafia and his partner gets lynched, I am 99% sure the mafia will not be able to win given AGM's previous behavior. Bussing for other mafia would also be crazy risky given it would leave them at 1 mafia to 7 townies.

Any of the three main suspects mentioned in my 901 would give IMO a high chance of lynching scum, and cruelty's flip would reflect heavily on the other two's alignments. In order of preference right now it is cruelty>Almaster>peanutman.

In response to cruelty's

2: I said it in response to someone (foilist? Don't remember who, don't think it matters) but I'd be highly concerned if you took my suspicions and ran with them purely because I flipped town. That's terrible logic and as such makes this point void.

I think you're referring to me, but having your suspicious does not mean blindly acting on them. However, it DOES mean that those suspicions are reasonable for a townie to have, and should be discussed accordingly.

[AlmasterGM]

WIFOM.

WIFOM fallacy.

Heads I win tail you lose. This is unfalsifiable, and ignores, as cruelty rightly pointed out,

that he has not talked about many players in this thread.

It also ignores the fact that peanutman has said just as little about AGM and foilist, except when directly pressured.

Bolded part is scummy on cruelty's part.

So vote peanutman. This is WAY more compelling than anything I've seen for cruelty.

Why are you so interested in getting votes off cruelty?

If I flip town, what information do you get?

You keep pushing this dumb "information" issue. This doesn't even matter - we should be lynching SCUM, not people who we think we'll get lots of information from. You're scummy, and are lynchable. The end.

cruelty, why don't you suspect/want me lynched anymore?

Because he likes shifting his advocacy all the time so you can't pin him down on anything later.

All of you, 'splain please. I'm not seeing the case here.

LOL, are you serious?

Also, what happened to wanting AGM lynched?

Once again, he likes shifting his advocacy all the time so you can't pin him down on anything later.

1) I don't have an obsession with "political capital". Whatever "power" I might have had in the town yesterday was due simply to several players deciding they thought I was town after I linked foilist's meta in this thread. This was not something I could have planned for.

The fact that you even know what this means and are on the debate team makes me think you are quite knowledgeable about it and are actively using it. Mmmmm…Politics DA.


1) What archebob thinks we should do today. E.g., I want offense, not abstract responses to posts or promises.

2) Why the hell is cruelty voting Peanutman? All we have is

his is my biggest issue; peanut's lynch will give us information both ways

Seriously? We are lynching based on "information?"

Happy with my cruelty vote.

[Benmage]

Vote Count:
Cruelty (4) Papa Zito, AlmasterGM, Gammagoey, foilist13
archaebob (2) peanutman, PharieM
peanutman (2) cruelty, MordyS


Not Voting (2) Archaebob, Sanjay

[Sanjay]

@ everyone -

Given what we now know about Muffin's alignment, does anyone have a new perspective on the Muffin vs. Chinaman dialogue near the beginning of Day 1?

At the time, I thought it was town on town. We know now that it wasn't that. However, I'm still getting the vibe that they had the same alignment...

archaebob, I'm curious:

What are the features that a town vs town dialogue shares with a scum vs scum dialogue? I really can't think of any. What is this "same alignment" vibe you are talking about?

@ Sanjay -

I'd love to know what you think about cruelty. Love as in

love

.

As far as cruelty goes, he's seeming a lot more townish today. I don't know what was with all the unnecessary attitude yesterday, but I'm not enthusiastic about a cruelty lynch.

I know sometimes it is hard to understand love, but why do you ask?

[cruelty]

If I flip town, what information do you get?

You keep pushing this dumb "information" issue. This doesn't even matter - we should be lynching SCUM, not people who we think we'll get lots of information from.

You're scummy, and are lynchable

. The end.

Bolded = lol.

I'll see your argument and raise you a reflection. You (amongst others) have been consistently more scummy than me, and the case against me is based more on things I haven't done than anything concrete that I have. The information thing is a byproduct of this, and I don't think it's valid.

cruelty, why don't you suspect/want me lynched anymore?

Because he likes shifting his advocacy all the time so you can't pin him down on anything later.

Also, what happened to wanting AGM lynched?

Once again, he likes shifting his advocacy all the time so you can't pin him down on anything later.

Yawn. Been over this, but my votes have been consistent and backed up by reasoning. Yours (again, amongst others) have not.

The problem with you and foilist is that your absolute conviction in my guilt is as much a product of your own scumminess (and therefore the heat that has been directed your way by virtually everyone in the game at some point or another) as it is mine. The presence of both of you on my wagon is a fairly blatant attempt to push the 'easy' lynch and ensure your survival. This is opportunistic.

I also note that you have also been horribly tunneled on me today. In fact, looking through your iso, the absolute entirety of your "scumhunting" has been 99% directed at me. Even your questions re: archaebob have mostly been regarding me.

I mean, I can't be the only person noticing this. The two scummiest players from yesterday (in terms of towns attitude towards both of them throughout the entirety of the day) are both 100% tunneled on me, the easy lynch for the day as pushed by the current player with the most town cred (big Papa Zito). I am pretty damn sure there's scum here.


Speaking of Papa.

I'm willing to eat one of SpyreX's hats if foilist13 isn't town based off of this. There's no reason scum would shift a wagon from Scum Role X onto a Godfather.

Still think this?

Has your opinion on archaebob changed now that he's posting?

Not really. I'm still wary of him and I don't think his big explanation post about town cred, political capital, ego etc really means much (obviously we don't know him personally so...). I also think that he's slowly recapturing the limelight so I guess we'll see what happens there. For now though, I don't think he's a reasonable lynch.

@GG, been over that "inconsistency". Can't explain it any better than I already have.

Bussing for other mafia would also be crazy risky given it would leave them at 1 mafia to 7 townies.

This confuses me. You have your top 3, and I'm voting for one and sparring with the other. Do you think that I'm scum and bussing/being bussed?

[archaebob]

@ Sanjay - why did you unvote foilist at the last second yesterday?

and ur right, the two have nothing in common. that's not my point. that whole conversation just seems...planted. I never really felt very comfortable with their dialouge, and now that I'm looking at it again, it's bothering me even more. It just seems so convenient...the two of them went after eachother over basically nothing, giving them the appearance that they were doing something productive, while they were actually just tunneling eachother. Muffin was called out for this, and ultimately got lynched. I still don't think that was a smart move, given what we knew at the time, but it happened, and he flipped godfather. What I'm curious about is why Chinaman slipped away. And then I remembered. He got replaced.

There's nothing concrete here atm, I just want people to read over that exchange again, and decide if it all pinges their gut, now that we know Muffin's alignment.

[Papa Zito]

(big Papa Zito)

*flex*

I'm willing to eat one of SpyreX's hats if foilist13 isn't town based off of this. There's no reason scum would shift a wagon from Scum Role X onto a Godfather.

Still think this?

I'm less sure, given our earlier conversation on the matter. (If you are scum like I think then well done hurting his credibility)

I also think that he's slowly recapturing the limelight so I guess we'll see what happens there. For now though, I don't think he's a reasonable lynch.

What does reasonable mean?

Also who is your prime suspect now then?

@Sanjay - You missed my question. Why aren't you voting?

[Sanjay]

Not sure who to vote for yet.

I have too many town reads.

[Sanjay]

@ Sanjay - why did you unvote foilist at the last second yesterday?

and ur right, the two have nothing in common. that's not my point. that whole conversation just seems...planted. I never really felt very comfortable with their dialouge, and now that I'm looking at it again, it's bothering me even more. It just seems so convenient...the two of them went after eachother over basically nothing, giving them the appearance that they were doing something productive, while they were actually just tunneling eachother. Muffin was called out for this, and ultimately got lynched. I still don't think that was a smart move, given what we knew at the time, but it happened, and he flipped godfather. What I'm curious about is why Chinaman slipped away. And then I remembered. He got replaced.

There's nothing concrete here atm, I just want people to read over that exchange again, and decide if it all pinges their gut, now that we know Muffin's alignment.

The whole conversation seemed planted so you thought it was town on town?

You are breaking my heart, archaebob.

[Sanjay]

Also, I thought my reasons for unvoting foilist were pretty clear when I did it. I wasn't feeling the lynch.

I'm a little surprised that you seem just as suspicious of me today as compared to yesterday. Did nothing that happened yesterday give you a clue I might be town? True I didn't unvote foilist13 with a deliberate goal of lynching Muffin, but couldn't I have very easily put my vote somewhere else if I wanted to avoid a Muffin lynch?

It's not as much mental gymnastics as having a scum read on Papa Zito, but how do you think the events of yesterday are compatible with me being scum?

Also, Muffin got lynched because Sociopath didn't post. Not because of the Chinaman Muffin conversation. I think PhaerieM was the only one on the wagon because of a strong scum read.

[cruelty]

I also think that he's slowly recapturing the limelight so I guess we'll see what happens there. For now though, I don't think he's a reasonable lynch.

What does reasonable mean?

Also who is your prime suspect now then?

I don't think he's a reasonable lynch because I can see his posts coming from town. I think he's a lot less scummier than some other players in the game and I'd be hesitant about (but probably not against) lynching him on what really amounts for me to be a gut wariness.

My prime suspect. Don't really have one. AGM is easily the scummiest (followed closely by my boy foilist) but I'm not 100% sure that he's scum or just special.

[MordyS]

Oh no, cruelty. (Say it ain't soooo...) Why are you voting with me if AGM is your #1 target?

[archaebob]

The whole conversation seemed planted so you thought it was town on town?

No, I didn't think it was planted when I first read it. My first feeling was that it was town on town. Since it has been proven to me that it wasn't town on town, I've had to update my theory.

There are two options left:

Scum vs. Town -

When I read the exchange thinking that it's scum-Muffin vs. town-Chinaman all along, it really doesn't work for me. And this is because Muffin being scum requires him to be aware of all the roles,

including the fact that Chinaman is town

. I fail to see what Muffin would have to gain from tunneling a town player who nobody else was even looking at seriously, especially given the existence by that point of other much more plausible lynch candidates. Why would he waste his time getting himself so strongly associated with Chinaman, a town player, at the expense of an early spot on either a mislynch or a bus wagon? I can see how poor play could possibly be involved, but I

know

that Muffin is an intelligent player, and this explanation is not particularly satisfying.

Scum vs. Scum -

This option, however, makes perfect sense. The two scum have a go at each other, over NOTHING. There are serious payoffs to this. 1) They seem like they are doing something, when they aren't. 2) One of them getting lynched is pretty implausible, over all. 3) If one of them DOES get lynched, town points go to the other player.

It's mega-distancing, and SEEMS like town vs. town. What better way is there for two scum to slip under the radar?

Which, btw, they pretty much did. I'd bet pretty heavy money that had Muffin not been replaced by a total non-poster, he would have survived till at least today.

Unfortunately, due to a fluke, Muffin wound up flipping prematurely. And now, I'm having a very difficult time seeing his interactions with Chinaman as scum vs. town.

Also, I thought my reasons for unvoting foilist were pretty clear when I did it. I wasn't feeling the lynch.

This isn't a reason. One moment, you've decided that foilist's usage of your name means that he must be scum who knows your alignment. You make a big show of changing your mind, and turning on him. Yet, at L-1, you suddenly unvote. Why?

I'm a little surprised that you seem just as suspicious of me today as compared to yesterday. Did nothing that happened yesterday give you a clue I might be town?

Everything period is a clue that you

might

be town. However, the fact that you think your actions yesterday have somehow

confirmed

you as town is a clue that you

might

actually be scum.

True I didn't unvote foilist13 with a deliberate goal of lynching Muffin, but couldn't I have very easily put my vote somewhere else if I wanted to avoid a Muffin lynch?

It's not as much mental gymnastics as having a scum read on Papa Zito, but how do you think the events of yesterday are compatible with me being scum?

For me to decide that you being early on that wagon confirms you as town, I have to be able to say that I can't see a plausible scum motivation for doing what you did.

Truth is, though, I can. I can see you being faced with a choice between bussing Sociopath and Foilist, and choosing Sociopath. You were VERY late on the foilist wagon, so the bus wouldn't do much for you. In fact, you knew at that point that if foil flipped scum, I'd be all over your ass. With

Sociopath

, however you had an opportunity to be one of the first on the wagon, Mr. Golden Bat Boy, or whatever. What better way to get long term town creds than to contribute early to a wagon on the fucking

Godfather

! Seriously. In addition to all that, Sociopath probably looked like he was going to be a pretty useless scum partner, so why not pick him to bus over foil?

And it's not like you could have gone back to AGM after making such a big show of changing your mind.

[archaebob]

Suggest you go back and read then, since several people have posted why they want cruelty dead.

I

did

read, Pops. Please, show me where you posted why you want cruelty dead.

The only explanation I see anywhere in your iso is

this

:

Case 1: foilist13 vs. Muffin (125) - bad case
Case 2: peanutman vs. archaebob (139) - Would only agree on a couple points if we were later in the game
Case 3: AlmasterGM vs. archaebob (221) - Agree on a few points but they're aren't damning. Some weird repeats of Peanut's case.
Case 4: AlmasterGM vs. MordyS (also 221) - Horrible. All theory and wrong at that. lulz

Case 5: Muffin vs. cruelty (289) - PbPA, I agree with all points here.

Case 6: cruelty vs. archaebob (290) - Playstyle nonsense.
Sanjay's 327 isn't a case but it was lulz so I thought I'd say so here.
Case 7: SpyreX vs. AlmasterGM (351) - I agree with a couple of points here. Good case.
Case 8: archaebob vs. Peanutman (370) - This case is pretty much predicated on Foilist13 being scum.
Case 9: PhaerieM vs. Muffin (464) - Some good points here.

I assume you have interest in giving us a better reason than that. Especially in light of...recent events.

[archaebob]

@ PharieM -

Where did you go? I'm getting a little anxious.

And help me out...why do you think i'm scum?

[cruelty]

Oh no, cruelty. (Say it ain't soooo...) Why are you voting with me if AGM is your #1 target?

Two reasons. First, given my current (lack of) town cred it's implausible that I can push through a lynch on a claimed doc. Second, I am confident that if I'm lynched and flip town, he's next. Peanut's lynch has the double benefit of clearing me and also incriminating AGM (additionally, if people consider me town, then I believe I will get the support to lynch him), and it's reasonable to believe he's (peanut) scum. I don't think he's hugely scummy in terms of what he's

said

, but I'm currently thinking his actions diverge a little from his words.

Therefore, AGM will die tomorrow once my alignment is confirmed. Lynching him today isn't necessary.

[foilist13]

I had planned on posting today, but I have an ungodly amount of work to do before tomorrow, so I'll post either late tonight or tomorrow afternoon. Consider me V/LA till then.