Newbie 694 (over)

[CarnCarn]

I'm here, reading, etc. Will post thoughts when I'm done.
Please post any questions you had for RealityFan and I'll try to answer them.

[CarnCarn]

First,

Unvote

My thoughts as I read though (pardon the stream of consciousness style):

Random Vote: Xtoxm

for his cool avatar.

r we allowed to speak before the game starts? if so where r u guys from?

<==Look left

I agree that the disussion about RV is unlikely to be very productive, but I felt the need to get my point across.

I think the RV discussion was useful, it's an important concept to learn about as a new player. Personally, I think it is just a way to break the ice and get discussion going, and usually doesn't lead to any terribly useful information later in the game or anything.

At anyone who isn't an IC; Is self-voting pro-town? Or is it the opposite?

It is always anti-town. Always. Either you are scum trying to confuse the town with your voting, scum self-hammering to stop discussion in an inevitable lynch, or town who has given up on the game. All of these are terrible for town. I would vote you, normally, but the context of your self-vote is different, since it seems like you were trying to make a point about Mafia in general.

Exactly. If they're town, they're not being helpful anyway. So if you have no really good reason to lynch a non-lurker, you'd best lynch lurkers.

It is usually difficult to tell who is actively lurking and who is just inactive for real life reasons, etc. For example, RealityFan was quite inactive, but you didn't lynch him, for which I'm thankful (since I got to replace in).

About policy lynching, I think it depends what that policy is, lynch all liars is a bad policy, lynch all lurkers may be a good policy

I have to disagree with you and ClockworkRuse. I think lynch all liars is a generally good policy. The idea to discourage anti-town behavior early in the game by avoid the chaos caused by mass lying. However, in later stages, when mass-claiming, etc., the policy should be relaxed or discarded.

And anyway, the only town power role who should really try to remain hidden is the doctor, and he could play active townie just as well, it should be really easy for him, because he has no knowledge the town does not have

This is really a strange thing to say. What do you mean by "hidden"? Your suggesting this is in itself suspicious since it sounds like you are trying to influence the doctor's playstyle.

FoS: Elennaro

Lets say there i'm a watcher, ok?
Now, I know u targeted the guy that died last night, ok?
So I claim cop and say that I have a guilty on u, and ask u to claim.
if u claim miller, then I'll know your scum because miller doesn't target, if u say I can't be cop because ur not scum(ur vig or cop or something), then I'll know u may be telling the truth.

now, after that happens, if u claim miller, and I claim watcher and tell everyone that I just wanted to check if u r scum or vig.

after that happens, a guy with a Lync all Liars policy would lynch me next day(this day lynch the scum) just because I lied...

get it?

This really doesn't seem like the best way to go about it. You are essentially asking for a claim from someone and you are fake-claiming yourself. If the person you

tracked

(not watched, since watchers only know if someone was targeted, not who they targeted) is town, you are outing a PR. If they are scum and lie about their role, and you backtrack with your own role claim, we get into a back and forth about who is lying, and end up nowhere.

Power's only want to give up their role if absolutley necesary to prevent their lynch, with the expection of a cop with a guilty, who would claim it right away.

Why should the cop with a guilty claim it right away? Obviously, if there is only one scum left, I can see it as the way to go. Also, how do we know if it is not a scum-gambiting to get the real cop to step up? Or to get a mislynch?

Yea...we can discuss all day...people will claim whatever...and we still won't lynch anyone...but just for the sake of speeding up the game...I'll unvote...lol

Unvote: Xtoxm

I understand you are used to faster paced games, but, trust me, we will eventually lynch someone today. No lynch is not a good idea D1 (it rarely is a good idea), mostly because lynch is our only method to take out mafia, and if we don't use it, we'll never catch mafia. Discussion for D1 is enough to come to a decent lynch target, and, even if we mislynch, we gain information based on who voted for the mislynch and others' voting patterns. We can use this info for the next day, even at the cost of 1 townie (in the worst case scenario).

I still have my random vote "on" because I have not yet wanted to chancge my vote to anyone else. As soon as we start discussing things relevant to the game to you just expect me to vote somebody else. It is not going to happen.

Do you plan on contributing at all? We need everyone's thoughts if we're going to come to a good decision. It's not useful to town if you're just going to sit on the sideline and watch for something to develop on someone else. In fact, that is a very scummy move.

FoS: militant

Yes, thanks[, militant, for unvoting me]!

You're happy with that? What happened to wanting to know why he was so reluctant to unvote? You just seem relieved to have 1 less vote on you, and don't care so much about why the person voted/unvoted you. That's a bit suspicious. Not as suspicious as the above, but:

IGMEOY: GIEFF

Actually, I do not think it is scummy enough to be a reason for putting a guy at L-2

I think putting someone at L-2 here is not so dangerous, since it is a relatively small game, and 2 quick votes to lynch from scum would be quite suspicious anyway.

I'm very much liking GIEFF's scumhunting in post 196, many brownie points are his/her's.

unIGMEOY: GIEFF

Please let me know if I have mis-characterized your reasoning. As this wagon is close to lynching, I would like to get EVERYONE's thoughts on the above 4 reasons. I will start:

1 - Active lurking. I disagree with this; could hambargaz or Xtoxm please explain further? Militant was just responding to Clockwork's request for discussion, as far as I can tell.
2 - Random vote left on too long. I agree with this.
3 - Appeasement. I agree. At first I thought the "opinion" referenced was militant's opinion about why he voted for me, but I now see that it refers to militant's opinion about not removing random votes until a better target presents itself. However, I feel that appeasement with regards to policy (i.e. metagame) is less scummy than appeasement with regards to the reasons behind a lynch (which is what I thought was initially meant by the appeasement charge). Do you agree with this, Clockwork and uri?
4 - Withholding scummy evidence. I disagree. I believe militant is referring to his accusation that hambargaz was himself lurking when he accused militant of active-lurking. Your quote of militant in post 193 was referring to hambargaz' accusations that militant was reading his posts with bias.

I agree mostly with 1. He was laying low for a while before being voted and then he only came out to defend himself. He never tells us who he finds suspicious, except to say that hambargarz is scummy for voting him because hambaragarz is also lurking.
I would like more thoughts from militant and infamousace2 on who they find suspicious now.

CarnCarn replaces RealityFan. Thanks CarnCarn!

You're welcome! It's been a pretty interesting read through.

Also, @Xtoxm: what are your current thoughts on militant (for whom you are voting)? Any others that you find suspicious?

Unvote: Xtoxm

(removing my random vote from above)

As for a vote, I'm going to

Vote: Elennaro

because I want an answer from him about what he mean by the doctor staying hidden. I really don't want anyone to be trying, or thinking they can try, to manipulate how a PR plays and contributes to the game.

Sorry to everyone for the ridiculously long post, but I had to make up for everything RealityFan didn't post

[CarnCarn]

I've seen StrangeCoug use it as a pro-town move, but otherwise I mostly agree with you.

I went back and took a quick look at that game (Meerkat Manor, right?), and his argument, as well that of as a few others, is that it is a null-tell in the RV stage, only intended to generate discussion (much like your self-vote), but generally not a good move. Others argued that it is a outright scum-tell. I don't think it is a scum-tell but but do think it's generally not very useful, and sometimes downright distracting (which is why I think it is anti-town play, intentional or not).

[CarnCarn]

OK, I'm going to

Unvote:Elennaro

after his response. I just didn't want anyone, especially a possible doc, to misinterpret his previous comments.

Right now, I have to say I'm a bit lost about who is scum. I want to see _over9000 (replacment for militant) make some responses to outstanding questions.

Will try to post more thoughts in this game tomorrow or Tuesday; schoolwork is getting more intense towards end of the term.

[CarnCarn]

But I still had one page to read and didn't know how many votes you had on you. Now that i've read all the way through, however, I see that you aren't near a lynch and am ready to

vote: ClockworkRuse

That is a tenuous at best reason for not voting originally. Your post was one of the first on page 10. Even if your read only the first 8 pages, that should have been enough to know that CR was not in any danger of being lynched ATM, as I don't believe he had any votes (other than maybe random votes) EVER in the first 8 pages. Sure, anything is possible, there could be 4 votes popping up on the last page and your vote could have lynched, but, really I don't find your excuse to be believable.
Now, what is your real reason? And what is your power level?

Vote: _over9000

(j/k on that last question)

[CarnCarn]

Let me ask you this...
IF i were scum, why would I change my reason now?

Pressure from others to take a stance and vote.

I already gave my reason for not immediately voting. I then voted after that conditional was met. Now, what effect on the game did delaying my vote have, exactly?

What condition? That he wasn't close to being lynched? Like I said, that is a very tenuous reason at best considering everything through the first 8 pages.
It's not so much that you delayed a vote, as the excuse you gave for not voting. You sound very interested in your "image" and don't want to be taken as being too aggressive yet. Like you might be waiting for the right opportunity to cast your vote.

[CarnCarn]

Mod: Can we request a prod on infamousace2?

It's been over 10 days since his last post and we could use his input.

MOD EDIT:

done

[CarnCarn]

bumping this

infamousace2, over9000, and urielzyx seem to need replacement since they haven't posted in a long while, after being prodded. Willing to wait until the end of the Thanksgiving break, though, before actually pushing for replacements.

[CarnCarn]

I will be V/LA 12/3-12/4

[CarnCarn]

GIEFF, I still think a defense from _over9000's replacement will be useful as it will provide more discussion and let us make a more informed lynch. More discussion = more chances for scum to slip up. I'm a bit worried now that you and hambargarz seem eager for his lynch ASAP (granted though that this game has mega-stalled).
11 days is plenty of time for his replacement to respond to issues and for us to get more information. Day 1 really is the most useful day for gathering info, IMO, and it sucks to have a deadline because activity has been so low.

And I agree that we need input from Westbrook on his suspicions and he needs to vote someone, too.

[CarnCarn]

Dipstick, it's a good idea to say why you think someone is scummy so that that person can make a reasonable response to your accusation. Just saying "you're scummy" doesn't add much and is difficult to respond to.

[CarnCarn]

What does MotR mean?

"Middle of the Road," probably.

I do see what you mean about catching people with longer posts, but once again, it depends on the player.

I don't like that as a scum-tell/town-tell at all. Scum will try to do whatever to blend in with the town. If that means making longer posts, then they'll do that. Some people won't, though, because that is just their play style, but that doesn't make them scum since they'll make concise posts as town, too.

[CarnCarn]

Yeah, I'm still here. I've been keeping up with the Dipstick/Westbrook comments, and I honestly haven't seen anything that makes me want to change my vote.

And regarding CarnCarn's question, CR summed up my position accurately; the longer the posts, the more chances there are to slip up. This holds especially true for players like Westbrook and Dipstick who recently joined the game; their predecessors may have posted a fair amount, but that it does us little good in questioning them about what other people said, so I want to see as much from them as possible so they can "catch up" with the rest of us.

I disagree with this full-heartedly. Longer posts do not in any way decrease the chances of that poster being scum.

Mod: Can we have a deadline extension/retraction because two players (ClockworkRuse and SilverPhoenix) are V/LA before the deadline? Thanks.

MOD EDIT: V/LA is part of the game. It's been about a month and a half since the game started, so no extension.

[CarnCarn]

uh, lol. "Trust me?" I hope you can give a better answer when you sober up a bit.

I do think the hammer was rash considering the short span of time between the claim and the hammer vote. CR, an IC, is saying that he doesn't like that (presumably it is scummy). Xtoxm, while I think I agree a vanilla claim means less of a possible downside to lynching someone, is a hammer that soon after the claim a right play as town?

[CarnCarn]

You posted 40 times over 3 days in other parts of the site. That's over 4,000 minutes, and you expect me to believe that you coming back

7 minutes

after L-1 to hammer was just a coincidence?

This is not true, by the way.

[CarnCarn]

Can you give me any downsides to a long day?

I have an answer for this, but I'll let xtoxm go first.

[CarnCarn]

And CarnCarn, go ahead and give your reasons now. I'll answer them after you've made your point.

They're basically the same. I think players (town especially) tend to become less motivated if a day wears on unnecessarily (after someone has become a pretty apparent lynch for the day).

[CarnCarn]

Are you asking me to defend Xtoxm's behaviour with examples? I don't think townies should defend anyone but themselves. I'll leave it to Xtoxm to defend himself against the points put against him. All I'm saying is my opinion. My interpretations of Xtoxm's posts is that they are concise but contain decisive action. I hate when people post pages and pages of content with lots of wishy washy positions and thought processes. It makes rereading harder and in turn is anti town.

Well, you defended him by saying he acted with conviction, and thus it was protown. You both seem really confident that you are both town, which is somewhat strange at this point, I guess. If you're going to defend xtoxm's posts as protown, you're going to have to explain why if people ask you.

I've been rereading, gathering thoughts on various people and I've noticed something about CR. CR has jumped on suspicious behaviour the whole thread but steered well clear of discussions regarding infamouseace2's anti-town behaviour. I've recently noticed a similar vibe in his behaviour to Westbrooke.

What exactly are you implying here?

[CarnCarn]

Hey all, back from V/LA and catching up on the stuff that's been posted recently (a lot).

Right now, I'm trying to figure out why xtoxm is avoiding the NK question after he originally brought it up (which I think is a WIFOM anyway). I can't think of a pro-town reason for him to 1) bring up the issue, then 2) completely ignore it after 8+ times of being asked the question.
I don't think it's helpful to talk about NK's on D2, since scum can manipulate the discussion very easily, but CR seems to have a legitimate reason to push xtoxm to talk about it here, IMO.

I also think GIEFF is tunnelling a lot on hambargarz in recent posts and several of his points seem like reaches by aggressive scum, although ham is on my suspicious list at the moment, but well below xtoxm. I will try to give specific examples from recent posts, but I am currently in a bind for time, so expect this to come later at some point.

[CarnCarn]

^^^Are you ever planning on answering the question that GIEFF and CR have been asking you for a while now?

But i'm not scum. You probably are. I'm probably going to be lynched today.

With a defense like this, I would agree with your conclusion. Looking forward to your post tomorrow, though.

[CarnCarn]

If one (or both?) of the ICs are scum, this is going to be a classic example of why lynching based on NKs is a terrible strategy early on. I'd prefer to disregard discussion of the NK at the moment. In fact, notice that the ICs haven't said anything about experience related to the NK.

GIEFF, I'll get to your question shortly.

[CarnCarn]

If Xtoxm ever does provide his reasoning, it will only be AFTER he said he found something scummy about CR, was asked eight times about it, and then voted CR, still without explaining his reasoning. To me, this situation seems similar to the situation with militant.

Militant said he found something scummy that you did, but when pressed, couldn't name it. Xtoxm has said the nightkill suits CR (obviously due to something he saw in Day 1), but when pressed, cannot name it.

IMO, the two situations are not that similar at all. Xtoxm's comment about the NK could be interpreted as protown reaction-fishing on his part, and there is nothing to suggest that he would have "read the thread with a bias," since his explanation has very little to do with content from this game.
What makes this a reach is that you are taking the two cases to be similar (perhaps intentionally) to make ham look suspicious/buddying for not expressing his suspicion on Xtoxm.

I said it because I am implying that the reason you did NOT regret your vote is that your vote was for someone not on your team. I noticed that you chose to attack me instead of answering the question, so I will ask it again; why don't you regret your vote? @ everyone else who voted for militant/_over/dipstick; do you regret your votes?

This is not a useful scumhunting question at all, IMO, because, no matter which way someone answers, it will only be a null-tell. Town can say "Yes, I regret it" or "No, I don't regret it because it was the best lynch we had and would give us the most info, etc."; scum can say "Oh, of course I regret it" or "No, etc." Regardless of how they answer, you can't really get any useful info.
I'm not sure if I answered this question or not, but if I haven't, I will just say that I don't regret voting for the lynch yesterday, because militant/_over9000/Dipstick was by far the scummiest lynch candidate. To regret this would to regret playing this game correctly, and I certainly don't do that.
What makes this question a reach is that you imply something that isn't there simply because the other person's (ham's) answer is different from yours.

You assumed that I didn't know if militant was town, which means you assumed by extension that I am town, right? Why?

From the way I read that, I would say ham assumed you would claim a town perspective, and that that post by itself is not an indication that he "knows you are town." He assumed you were town because, well, if he assumed you were scum, you would know militant was town and the whole argument would be moot.

---

Also, if hambargaz is on your suspicion list but "well below" Xtoxm, that implies you have at least 3 or 4 people on your suspicion list. Could you present some analysis or evidence to show why you feel that one (or more) of the people on your list between ham and Xtoxm is (are) suspicious?

Nope, I should just clarify that ham is a distant second at this point. I did not mean that there were others in between.

[CarnCarn]

Looking at it, CarnCarn hasn't made a vote since _over9000. I find that pretty interesting and it is noted.

Neither have W_O_U or hambargarz. Why do you think I should be voting now? Do you think I should be voting now? What about the other two?

[CarnCarn]

Yeah, I voted _over9000 when he started acting scummy about withholding his vote, saying he wasn't sure what the vote count on CR was after reading all but one page, etc. His story was really inconsistent.
I also said Dipstick hadn't done anything to change my mind about it and so I was keeping my vote on him.

[CarnCarn]

I was reminding him about when and why I voted (and then even confirmed my vote), since he said I wasn't on that wagon. Basically, I just elaborated on what you said.

[CarnCarn]

Do you think it's odd that Clockwork focused on you instead of on Westbrook? If so, why did you choose to focus on explaining your reasoning rather than on why Clockwork didn't focus on Westbrook, especially after having been accused of having a blind spot for Westbrook earlier on Day 2?

He originally said he found it odd that I haven't voted today, but I responded to that by saying that others (hambargarz, W_O_U) haven't done so either. Then he "clarified" with this:

What I meant more about that is that during the lynch yesterday you weren't on the wagon, which I'm taking note of. I'm not really sure if I find it scummy or not. I have to go back and look at the rest of the vote history and see if there is anything else I find interesting.

Again, the same applies to Westbrook, but, frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if CR didn't notice/forgot since he was clearly wrong about me not voting for the lynch yesterday anyway.

You elaborated on a detail that was not at all relevant to the point I was trying to make, which was about Clockwork, not about you.

I just elaborated on

where and when

I voted yesterday and confirmed that vote, because CR said that

I

wasn't on the lynch wagon. True though that it wasn't really what you were talking about towards the end of your post, which was questions for CR.

[CarnCarn]

I have haven't I? *goes back and checks* Yes I have in post 500. Similarly, W_O_U has an excuse as he is V/LA for the holiday period

Oh, I'm sorry. I completely missed your vote. Well, my questions still stand for CR. I have a good reason for asking the questions.

[CarnCarn]

Was CarnCarn v/la around this time too?

For a little while, yes. After that, I've been here and just observing the quote wars and waiting for Xtoxm to answer the questions outstanding. I see he's done this, so I think it's time to reread the last few pages or so and refresh myself on the context of everything. However, I'm going to be V/LA until Wednesday, so this won't happen too soon.

[CarnCarn]

I'm suspicious of Xtoxm for a number of reasons. The delay to answer questions is only one part. Here are the other ones:

1. Quick hammer before people had a chance to react to the Dipstick claim.

2. Blatant buddying/defending of hambargarz (Note: this is suspicious regardless of whether ham is scum or town).

3. Deflecting suspicion onto the other IC by suggesting the NK "suits him," without offering any semblence of an explanation until it was dragged out of him tooth and nail (this one could be tunneling on my part, though).

4. Major lurking while active in other games.

5. Calling CR scum for voting him (looks like OMGUS, more attempts to deflect suspicion onto anyone other than him).

And I'm sure I'm missing some other things, too.

[CarnCarn]

CC raises suspicioun with his "Major lurking" accusation on me, which is nothing but a blatant lie.

I believe there were long stretches in this game where you did not post while you posted in others. True or False? Is that lurking or not?

And why do you think W_O_U is

trying

to lurk?

[CarnCarn]

Yeah, I actually didn't notice W_O_U was up to L-1 until I saw the latest votecount.

Regarding my point 4, it's something I just assumed was correct from what GIEFF and CR had said. Not original content from me, just borrowing their points (which, if true, is a very strong one). I'm not sure now what to think about Xtoxm lurking, but I think the other points are valid anyway. I haven't been paying as much attention to West (largely because he's been invisible for a while now). I'm going to go back and look at his posts again and what people are saying about them.

L-1 is generally claim-time, but I want to see if this wagon is worthy. First impression says it seems to have built quite lazily.

[CarnCarn]

Why would you just accept what others say as true? Are you so sure that neither CR or I is scum?

Normally I don't. This (xtoxm's posting/lack of posting) sounded like something that could be proven/disproven by checking Xtoxm's post history. I didn't think either of you would be blatantly lying about something that could be verified like that. I should have checked myself, it appears (but, you were both right, to a certain extent anyway).

I've noticed you have been saying and doing things with blatant disregard to how scummy they look. This has lead me to believe you are actually town.

Too Townie :badlogic:

[CarnCarn]

Which, unlike it's counterpart, is a valid argument.

No, it isn't. It's advocating ignoring multiple scumtells which is not valid at all. Too Scummy is no more valid than Too Townie.

Mod: Can we get a votecount?

[CarnCarn]

No, there's a town motive behind it.

What is the town motive for lynching someone pre-claim?

[CarnCarn]

Ack, I haven't been keep up with this game as much as I've wanted to. Lots of new posts (and quite lengthy at that) that I'll have to wade through.

Welcome to the game magicrabbit.

A quick skim shows Xtoxm hasn't answered my question in 601. Still waiting for that:

No, there's a town motive behind it.

What is the town motive for lynching someone pre-claim?

[CarnCarn]

Gosh, still trying to journey through these wall-o-texts on the last page. I'm afraid I won't be able to get anything analytical up until Sunday, though.

[CarnCarn]

Sorry, RL just hasn't allowed me to keep up with the gobs of "content" being posted in this game. On skimming, I can say that hambargarz's suspicions are rubbish and misrepping in a big way. I am not just regurgitating others' ideas as he accused. Only point 4 was something I took at the word of others; the others were my own thoughts, although others then used those.

I apologize for the decline in posting but the large posts have delayed me from catching up.

Also, he uses my non-voting of Xtoxm to making me look scummy. CR had already made that accusation earlier, in almost the same situation in the game (oh the irony of accusing

me

of borrowing ideas...). Now, I'll respond with the same answer I gave CR: Do you (hambargarz) think I

should

vote Xtoxm now? Why should I vote him now?
Notice the key word: now. And notice also that I have repeatedly said that I haven't been able to catch up with the game. For that matter, do you think I should have been voting Xtoxm at the point when CR asked that same question?

FoS: hambargarz

I think it's much more possible now that he's scum trying to deflect attention from a scumbuddy in danger of being lynched (either magicrabbit or Xtoxm). I know this comes off as OMGUSy but it's really not because his accusations aren't worth the bits of server data they're stored in.

[CarnCarn]

oh goody, more postage to read through. with deadline close, i'm going to commit to addressing everything this evening.

[CarnCarn]

Yeh it is scummy, why are you unwilling to vote someone you are apparantly so supicious of?

Vote CC

He's barely given an opinion on anyone, and only recently started to sheep onto my "easy" wagon.

Both false. First, when CR asked the question, it was very early in the day and voting you would have put you at L-1, very close to lynch with outstanding questions/discussion possibly foregone by a speedy lynch. As for why I didn't vote later, I've already said this: I haven't had the time to keep up with the loads of lengthy posting to feel confident enough to vote (I would be throwing out a vote with the possibility of missing important information). So, how is my not voting here scummy?
And I'm definately not "only recently" suspicious of you. I've had you as my most suspicious the whole day (for reasons I've given already), but I haven't voted you for reasons above.

and I noticed a lot of his discussion has been theory based rather than trying-to-make-progress based if you get me. His more recent play and particularly how he's been attacking me looks scummy though.

This is a learning game, so theory is expected to be discussed. Discussing theory is important if you want people to understand why you think certain things are scummy and why they're not. My discussions of theory are relevant and (hopefully) helped others understand where I'm coming from when I'm looking at players' actions. Don't get why that's scummy.

It's still regurgitating if you aren't adding new content. I've only found one point you made all game that hadn't been made by others, in post 252.


I agree with ham's points, and the fact that you reacted so emotionally, trying to discredit ham instead of address his points, is scummy. Looking at your posts in isolation, you have provided zero scumhunting.

Please respond to ham's points rationally, without the ad hominem

GIEFF, seriously? I've haven't attacked ham ad hominem at all and I've addressed ALL of his points in my post. If there is something specific I haven't addressed, let me know. Also, I'm wondering what you define as "new content"; I'm pretty sure all of my posts earlier today gave "original content" (not so much in later posts, which have just been to say I'm catching up). Only 1 thing all game? Wow, I can't say much about that except it's flat out wrong. I'd spend another hour cataloging original content, but I want to know if I'm just misunderstanding what you're saying.

The rest of it is mostly simple 1 liners, several on the 31st re-explaining why he voted, goes basically off-site for a week (last post 12/31, 1 post 1/4 for saying he's watching quote wars and will still be v/la) then a post 1/7 with his first reasons for thinking xtoxm is scum. These reasons are rather short in my eyes, especially looking back at them. If these were such solid reasons, why wasn't there more info to back up your case? CC then goes on to explain away #4 (the xtoxm lurking) for a couple posts, still mostly little blurbs. Talks about the too townie/scummy argument, asks for a votecount, and asks what's the motive for a lynch pre-claim. Recently (since 1/14), complains about not being able to keep up, and continues to say he's just skimming.

Basically, you're accusing me of not writing longer posts here. All I will say is that quality is much more important than quantity. Longer posts don't make anyone more protown to me (and I've already had this discussion earlier in the thread).

After nearly 3 and a half weeks, you've been "active" by posting, but nothing that important, makes me extremely suspicious. Also, the skimming that you're doing seems like a scum-tell to me, as scum could kinda skate by on skimming and picking out stuff to attack/defend at random, while townies would go through every post to try to find evidence against everyone.

I only skim when I don't have time to do a complete read. If I find something that stands out, I address it. And I think I only said I skimmed once, when I found something particularly glaring, so I don't know what you're talking about with continuing to skim.

Even in a v/la status, you could slowly read posts and get the full picture and eventually keep up when you come back rather than not getting a read on the game at all but "staying active". There's been plenty of opportunities to actually go out and find scum in the period that I've went over, but it seems you lack the motivation to do that as well.

The whole point of v/la is that I'm not at the computer... (so I can't read stuff/don't have the time to read stuff)

Heck, I believe I've typed more in this post alone than CC has in the past 3 weeks. Unacceptable behavior for a pro-town (which I doubt you are) and expected behavior from a scum.

Wonder if you still think this is a valid accusation.

The self-vote was the start of a bandwagon which got a townie lynched. What point do you feel was made by this self-vote that made up for its other anti-town aspects, and prevented you from voting CR, as you "normally" would have done?

I have no idea what the first line is trying to say. The point the self-vote was trying to make was to discuss whether self-voting is anti-town and why it would be so. CR didn't just random vote himself - he voted and asked everyone to comment on it in general (a demonstration/theory discussion). It's not scummy.

Elenarro was not influencing the night decision, he was giving advice in a newbie game about how a doctor should remain under the radar, which I think is very pro-town. I realize this is another original point you have made, though, so add it to the one I mentioned above.

You only know this in retrospect because he is now dead. And I never said anything about night decision, I said playstyle (active/inactive, aggressive/passive), and I felt he was subtly trying to push a doc into a playstyle that would help him (as scum) figure out who they were. That's why I FoS'd.

Elenarro then explained himself, and you unvoted. You said the only reason you voted Elennaro in the first place was to make sure the doc didn't listen to him. But isn't doing so influencing the doc's playstyle just as much as Elenarro did, if not more? You weren't voting Elennaro because you thought he was scum, you were voting him to send a message to the doc.

My position was to let the doc just play whatever style they choose, instead of us the town (or a single player) influence how they play. I guess you're right though, if I influenced a doc to play to his own style. I found elennaro's comments the most suspicious at that point, so I voted him (it made him most likely to be scum).

I'm trying to find the reason behind you're FOS. It seems that you are FOSing me because "it's much more possible now that I'm deflecting attention from a scumbuddy (MR or Xtoxm)". Could you state what it is that has made his possibility "more possible". It appears that it's only because I posted some points against you.

On a side now, does this mean you suspect MR as scum?
Also, saying that I'm deflecting attention from MR doesn't work, because I have been one of the main players stating suspicions of MR.

No, I think the interactions between you and Xtoxm indicate reciprocal buddying (possible scum behavior). When I said that, both Xtoxm and magicrabbit had 2 votes at the time. I did not imply that you were scum with MR; you being scum with Xtoxm makes much more sense. I don't think MR is scum; I haven't been suspicious of him today because I haven't found his actions or anyone's cases to suggest he is scum. He was apparently at L-1 before his wagon stalled, but I didn't hammer because I don't think he's scum. With stalled wagons, it's typically the case that either the potential lynch is scum and scumbuddy is hesitant to hammer, or scum is already on the wagon and townies disagree with the lynch. I believe this is likely to be the latter case, and that wagoners are where we'll find the scum (but this assumes MR is town, which is what I'm leaning).

To answer CarnCarn's question, ie. "Why should he vote him now". My answer is to make your position clear. Not committing is scum behaviour because it looks like you want a back door to easily change your mind when it suits you.

I'm pretty sure I've made it clear Xtoxm has been most suspicious to me. If I ended up voting someone else, I think it would be a big surprise to everyone. Basically, my not voting doesn't mean I'm making things more flexible at all (it's not like you can't unvote, anyway).

Stating that it looks OMGUS doesn't lower it's "OMGUSness" it only shows that you were conscious of it before (being careful of how your posts look to people is another minor scum tell).

It's not OMGUS because I explained why your accusations are pretty outrageous and contrary to what I've done in the game overall (though more accurate in recent days, I admit, as far as activity goes). I felt it was a big reach case that was trying to deflect the attention from someone I think is scum and puts it on a townie.

I can see how you can maybe attempt to accuse hambargarz of defending Xtoxm, but seeing them defending me is a little absurd I think.

Never said that (the latter). I thought it was fairly obvious who I was referring to, but I guess not.

Unvote: Xtoxm for now since derailing a lynch on me seems protown.

You realize people have been trying to lynch you this whole day and it hasn't worked, right? It's not a surprise at all to see scum abandon your lynch for another.

Claim while your at it, thanks.

Why? I have 2 votes on me and you want a claim?

[CarnCarn]

You're not misunderstanding. I looked at all your posts in isolation, and found two in which you bring up new points about related to who you think is scum, and why.

There is more to providing content and helping town than just that. As an example, take my disagreement with you about your case on hambargarz earlier today. I provided reasons why it was not sound and why I felt you were reaching/tunneling with some of your points. No, I wasn't saying who I thought was scum, but I was helping guide the discussion in the direction I felt was better for town.

Yes. We are at deadline, your appearances are sparse at best, and I want to lynch you.

I don't anticipate going anywhere before deadline. As for the latter, I can say the same for you. What exactly are your reasons to lynch me? ham's case which I've just explained why it's wrong?
It's pretty amazing actually that you don't seem to mind lynching anyone who isn't you or ham.

[CarnCarn]

Not true.

Yes, it's true. You've accused just about everyone of being scum. CR was obvious scum to you early today. Then it was MR/W_O_U. Then me/GIEFF scumpair. That's everyone except ham and Amished (who you haven't said much about today - or really all game).

You are quite obvious scum.

You are quite obviously wrong (and you know it).

[CarnCarn]

You are saying that my "scumbuddy" is either magic rabbit or Xtoxm, you are implying magicrabbit is a possible scum buddy, Now you say you don't suspect MR?

Yeah, that was a mistake - I didn't think through about MR when I posted (confused my read on him as he was a recent replacement).

I agree, but I didn't see much "quality" in what was posted. "Quality" being decisive action, strong positions and info or insights for scumhunting.

Meh, I guess we have different opinions on this, then. Strong opinions are not worth that much to me because townies

shouldn't

act like they know everything already. I hate it when townies attack each other because they become so convinced the other must be scum. Leads to easy pickings for the scum.
Also, scumhunting is pretty multi-faceted and you can do it in a lot of ways. The best ways are subtly, of course, without letting on to scum that your questioning is all that important to you. That way you're going to get much more honest responses and reactions from someone who is scum. I'm not sure I'm willing to say much more about it (my scumhunting today) at this point, though.

[CarnCarn]

I have not called anyone else obvious scum.

Technically true, but while you were voting CR:

Lol. whatever scum. That's BS. I didn't post anywhere for like 3 days, jsut boxing day.

Lynch the scum.

Basically, implied that he's obvious scum (to you).

And you've chosen to defend again this one technicality because you have no defense for your thrashing about to lynch/accuse almost anyone today.
After ham's "case" on me, your very next post and first response was:

Yeh, i'd happily lynch him today.

That strong of a reaction from one post by ham (the first real indication of suspicion on me today), with very weak reasoning, and you're already happy to lynch me?

[CarnCarn]

Lol. I'd been suspicious of you long before then. That was just an agreement statement.

The only other posts before ham's where you expressed ANY suspicion of me were your isoposts 73 and 78, and you never even said why so
And you weren't "agreeing" with ham because he never said he wanted to lynch me - he just FoS'd.

[CarnCarn]

I think the points are valid (especially ham's),

Can you tell me which ones are valid? I don't think any of them are, except the ones about recent activity level.

[CarnCarn]

Gieff you know i'm not good with that kind of thing.

Can you at least restate your case, especially in light of my responses to them?
The only reasons I managed to pick up during my reading was that I'm scummy because I haven't voted you (which is counter intuitive anyway) and that I've talked a lot about theory. I've responded to both of those points in my wall-o-text on the last page (I know, you don't like reading those - neither do I - but it was necessary to address things; I kept my answers to each point as concise as I could).
If there's anything else, I'd like to know what it is so I can at least make some response.

[CarnCarn]

With what I believe to be some major towntells coming from Rabbit (who I believe i've been tunneling on),

It would help if you actually said what those are - without that, to me it looks like scum jumping from a stalled lynch attempt of a townie.

[CarnCarn]

In my experience, this HAS been a scumtell.

In a Newbie game? Really? Surely all the ICs must be scum then...

[CarnCarn]

I believe a death-pleadge of the sorts Rabbit made on L-1 one is unlikely to be coming from scum, and his reaction to how unvoted him him is very townly.

this?

Just when I come up town, remember who pushed for this, and wanted to lynch me before even getting discussion going on anyone else playing the game.

So, the town would focus on who pushed the lynch (i.e., you and ham). A town-tell or scum scared to lynch a townie who left behind a lot of info/analysis?
And he's certainly right about the second point he bring up, too. You never even answered why there would be a town motive to wanting to lynch someone pre-claim.

Yes. and don't pretend you don't understand what I mean, i've already explained.

I'm afraid I don't; you tend to make broad/vague generalizations:

And yes - Theory discussion. CC has much of it early on, and little of much anything else.

Like what? All I can respond to something like this is "no I didn't"

[CarnCarn]

This is a misrepresentation of Xtoxm's point, and it looks intentional. Theory discussion is NOT scummy, but theory discussion alone at the expense of scumhunting discussion IS scummy. This point was very clear to me (see bold):

Well, that's true, but the accusation doesn't hold water because this

is

a learning game, and my theory discussion certainly wasn't at the expense of scumhunting. Point me to something where I discuss theory in a way that is not relevant to finding out whether someone may or may not be scum.

[CarnCarn]

This is consistent with Xtoxm's earlier behaviour so I'm not sure if it's his playstyle or if there's a scum agenda to speed a mis-lynch (although this latter is a bit blatant and attention grabbing to be an attractive scum play).

It worked for him D1 and there's an increasing chance it will work again today.

[CarnCarn]

This is a misrepresentation of Xtoxm's point, and it looks intentional. Theory discussion is NOT scummy, but theory discussion alone at the expense of scumhunting discussion IS scummy. This point was very clear to me (see bold):

Well, that's true, but the accusation doesn't hold water because this

is

a learning game, and my theory discussion certainly wasn't at the expense of scumhunting. Point me to something where I discuss theory in a way that is not relevant to finding out whether someone may or may not be scum.

The point now isn't whether Xtoxm's point is true (which I believe it is, and have said so more than once).

The point now is why you misconstrued Xtoxm's point by ignoring the part I quoted in bold above. And also why you ignored my accusation that you ignored it, and instead focused on whether or the point is valid.

These posts are not long, nor are their logic difficult to follow.

Well, I feel angry when someone misreps blatantly about my play. I strongly disagree that I did "little of anything else" except discuss theory (and certainly not without relevance to find scum). I've already said that before he accused me of it, and even gave an example. To answer you more directly, it was partly intentional because I don't think his own accusation was genuine.

[CarnCarn]

^^^Of course he would.

This apparently is beyond the point of remedy, so I'll claim and let you do what you will.

I am the cop. I'm either dead tonight or roleblocked for the rest of the game. But, I will leave you with one thing: I investigated Westbrook_Owns_U, now magicrabbit, (yesterday's other lynch candidate) last night and received an innocent result.

Sorry for the crappy play - I've obviously done something wrong since everyone suspects me, but I don't think I would have played any differently in retrospect.

Xtoxm's impatience for the hammer on Westbrook_Owns_U/MR (and now me) is I think a major cause for concern, and one he's not answered upon repeated questioning. I'll make this position official:

Vote: Xtoxm

[CarnCarn]

Because you are useless to the town now, CC, what do you think about us lynching you to verify your claim?

Bad plan. Here's what would happen:
If there is no doc, MR dies.
If there is a doc (and scum would know because they would have an RB), they just kill someone else with a good chance that they kill the doc (2 scum + not MR, 6 alive = 1/3 chance the NK kills the doc). Admittedly, the doc could then switch to protect someone else, but then so could the scum switch back to killing MR, and so forth (circular thinking).
Anyway, if we lynch scum today, we have a 25% chance of lynching RB, in which case my power would be useful again. (Odds of having RB = 1/2, odds of lynching RB given scum = 1/2; Odds of both = 1/4)

[CarnCarn]

FoS: hambargarz I think it's much more possible now that he's scum trying to deflect attention from a scumbuddy in danger of being lynched (either magicrabbit or Xtoxm).

Why would you say something like this if you had an innocent on him?

Why did you make no attempt to crumb your result, or even mention WOU/MR or suggest you thought he was town up until very recently?

That's not how a cop with an innocent result acts...

Also, why, if you are cop, were you happy not to claim to save MR from being lynched, when he spent a period at L-1? Or even try to put you argument in against his lynch? Why did you sit back and let it happen?

The doubt that has crept into me is repidly disappearing as I reread CC. His play does not fit with what he has claimed at all.

Yes, I would like to hear these answers, CC, and quickly. Only two days left.

Alright.

Why would you say something like this if you had an innocent on him?

You are saying that my "scumbuddy" is either magic rabbit or Xtoxm, you are implying magicrabbit is a possible scum buddy, Now you say you don't suspect MR?

Yeah, that was a mistake - I didn't think through about MR when I posted (confused my read on him as he was a recent replacement).

Why did you make no attempt to crumb your result, or even mention WOU/MR or suggest you thought he was town up until very recently?

That's not how a cop with an innocent result acts...

First, I don't breadcrumb with codes. I find that pointless because, if I used them, I would use them in every game, regardless of whether I am town or scum. Second, and you may disagree with this, but as cop I prefer to keep suspicion on my innocent (and myself, if possible) so we'll have a better shot of surviving to endgame. Not too much. I didn't go out of my way to make W_O_U suspicious because he was already under a lot of fire (which makes sense given he was a lynch contender yesterday). If he didn't have any heat on him, I would have acted to provide some. That way, scum won't consider me a threat, either. Which brings me to your next question:

Also, why, if you are cop, were you happy not to claim to save MR from being lynched, when he spent a period at L-1? Or even try to put you argument in against his lynch? Why did you sit back and let it happen?

Well, I don't think claiming is the correct play at all there because I am likely to find scum on his wagon with my investigation even if he actually gets lynched (I would have investigated you, or maybe ham). Or, I would have a confirmed innocent at LyLo (unless roleblocked/dead, but those probabilities, while real, are small, I felt).
As far as not arguing goes, that was probably not the best strategy, but I wasn't sure exactly how to defend him. The biggest points of the case against him were that he was not active and I would have found it strange to see someone defend another player by excusing their lurking. Just doesn't fit in and could tip the scum off about me. This is really the only thing I remember mentioning about West early today:

Yeah, I actually didn't notice W_O_U was up to L-1 until I saw the latest votecount.

...I haven't been paying as much attention to West (largely because he's been invisible for a while now). I'm going to go back and look at his posts again and what people are saying about them.

L-1 is generally claim-time, but I want to see if this wagon is worthy. First impression says it seems to have built quite lazily.

When I noticed the situation, I didn't want W_O_U to claim, but what reason could I really give since he was at L-1? All I could say without attracting too much suspicion is that I thought the wagon didn't merit a claim. Then, my activity went down as RL kicked in and I didn't get a chance to follow up on what I wanted to do in this post.

[CarnCarn]

CC hasn't posted in this game in 10 days (although almost half of that was night phase). He is active elsewhere on the site. I'd think a legitimate cop would be more eager to inform us of his results.

yo, I'll get to this later tonight. My activity has pretty much died site-wide.

[CarnCarn]

Alright well, just got out of lab and things have been really hectic last week or 2. Don't expect any change to that soon.

So, everyone wants a result. Me, too. I didn't get one. I investigated fuzzylightning and got no result. I simply got a note back saying that I had no result.

In any case, this is possible LyLo (not sure if a mislynch here results in automatic endgaming or not). I know there must be a doc in this game because there is no way for me to not get a result without a Mafia RB being in the game. And since there is a Mafia RB in the game, there must also be a doc.

I'm thinking massclaim, and then we'll have two confirmed innocents (well, technically only confirmed from my viewpoint, I guess; it really depends on how willing rest of town is to believe that I am cop). Your thoughts? This is probably LyLo, so holding back the info now isn't helping the town anymore. There are a few things for the town to think about here if a doc claims/doesn't claim:
- If a doc claims, either I and the doc are both innocent, or both lying scum. Analyze whether you think I and whoever the doc is are a likely scum pairing and come to a conclusion about whether we're both scum or both innocent.
- If a doc doesn't claim, then I'm lying scum (there can't be only a cop and a Mafia RB). Lynch me.
- A doc claims, but I'm lying about being RB'd. Well, this is the toughest situation and honestly there is nothing more that I could do to prove anything. I know, of course, that this scenario is wrong, but anyone who isn't me won't be able to rule it out as a possibility.

As for the dialogue between GIEFF and Amished on the last page, I'm not sure at all how GIEFF came to the conclusion that Amished "knows" anything about GIEFF from the post he quoted. He did say "Xtoxm is town" before Xtoxm was lynched, which is strange. And:

magicrabbit, I wish you hadn't changed your vote. I'd like to think I would have voted for CR, but I probably still would have ended up voting Xtoxm. I would have appreciated the extra day to think about it as I asked for, though.

This is also a bit strange. Why would you like to think you would have voted CR?

As for lynching Xtoxm, I was going to post this before he got lynched, but the thread was locked very quickly after the hammer:
I fully believed that Xtoxm was the best lynch at the time yesterday, because his fishing to lynch people pre-claim was just absurd coming from town. I asked him repeatedly to explain what protown motivation there would be for it and he NEVER explained. He was the correct lynch on a percentage play because I consider that a pretty huge scum-tell.

Anyway, back to the present.

I would also wonder why CC posted, yet did not state his result, it takes a very small amount of time to do that and would help our discussion alot.

I don't know if posting "No result" would really have the same effect and I honestly had a lot more to say about it than time would permit.

[CarnCarn]

I look like town. Scum likes to kill those who look like town. I was not targeted by scum. Assuming it was optimal play for scum to kill me (I don't necessarily agree, but Amished does), there are two possible explanations.

Speculating about why you were NOT killed will likely drive us in loops. You're either scum yourself or you're town and not killed for a bunch of other reasons.

Does this logic still apply?

I didn't write what you're referring to. I think it was ham, but not sure.

Going back to my thoughts on Amished and CR as a logical conclusion for being a scum pair. I've been looking back at their actions between each other. Amished could have easily have joined the wagons on either Xtoxm and CC on the previous day, he instead at the last minute attacked CR and almost got him lynched. It's either extreme bussing or one or both of them is town.

This would mean one or both of my 2 lesser suspected players are likely to be scum. I'm willing to believe CC for the time being which means my scum pair at the moment is GIEFF and CR. I agree a mass claim will be good, and may help me decide the validity of CC's claims.

These paragraphs don't follow logically. Amished/fuzzylightning and GIEFF/fuzzylightning are both his scum pair at the moment, which is odd. Clarify, please.

So I guess the doc is either fuzzy or Amished?

I can under ruling yourself out, but what has ham said to rule out him being the doc?

[CarnCarn]

I'm still around (not dead). Been busy with RL, etc. Limited time to really do much reading, but I think I got the main points that need to be addressed:

Amished's doc claim sounds genuine (I believe it). Especially with no counter, and me being RB'd. That's basically another innocent as far as I know, which is good because we are in LyLo.

Right now, I'm thinking hambargarz/fuzzylightning scum team, with outside possibility of GIEFF/fuzzylightning scum team.

I'm surprised GIEFF has decided to so boldly throw out a vote in LyLo, without really saying why he thinks fuzzy is definately scum (as I have done with my scenarios above). Maybe a wild scum gambit bussing his buddy?

In any case, I'm fine with a fuzzylightning lynch because I'm pretty sure he's gotta be scum for this game to make sense:

Vote: fuzzylightning

[CarnCarn]

Unvote: fuzzylightning

Actually, I just realized that fuzzylightning has not posted yet, so it's possible that Amished is lying about doc claim. What I saw as lack of counterclaim in my quick read could just be fuzzylightning-doc's absence. I would also encourage GIEFF to unvote until fuzzylightning (or replacement) posts, as there is no rush here.

[CarnCarn]

CC, I trust Amished's claim, ... That leaves ham and FL.

This is definately what I'm leaning towards, too. If fuzzylightning

does

claim doc... well, we see what happens then (I have a few ideas, but I don't want to really discuss them until fuzzylightning claims).

[CarnCarn]

If CC is the real cop, then Amished is the real doc.

Not necessarily; waiting on fuzzylightning.

[CarnCarn]

Would the "cop" like to say anything?

Yes:

Vote: fuzzylightning

There is a counter argument however that Amished/CC could be a scum pair. With no roleblocker and they are gambling on the chances that there is no doc or cop (way too risky, and therefore unlikely in my opinion)

That's not even a possible setup. My money is on you being fuzzylightning's partner.

[CarnCarn]

CC, what makes you believe Amished over FL?

He makes an especially good point:

What I find most odd is that hypothetically if FL was the doc, he would "know" that I'm lying about it, and therefore "know" I'm scum. Yet, with that supposed knowledge, he didn't vote me as a real doctor would.

And:

So you assumed CC was really the cop. Why?

To answer GIEFF's question:

I believed his claim because I honestly think that he is the cop, in any game, every player does things that don't necessarily make sense, but that doesn't mean that every player is scum. I believed his claim, and if his claim is to be believed, then there has to be a roleblocker in this game.

I'm scum and I forgot I'm not supposed to know CC is cop.

CC, if you think Amished is the real cop, then lynching ham is the better play here, as he is more likely to be the roleblocker. If we lynch the roleblocker (and if you are the real cop), then we win.

Hmm, it's speculative. I have to trust that you're definately not FL's partner. FL is the obvious lynch - why should I take the risk? And the only way your plan works is if you can trust me as cop (right?), but then:

So you assumed CC was really the cop. Why?

[CarnCarn]

On the chance that I die tonight, I'd just like to point out that this looks very staged to me, setting up fuzzylightning to claim doc:

This of course will all change if FL comes out with a counter doc claim, but I think this is very unlikely.

I'm about to vote CC actually.
But have to wait for FL on the off chance he will counter claim.

Unless FL throws things with a counterclaim or someone points out a flaw in my logic, my vote will probably go to CC

Damn, I knew FL would come in and mess things up with a doc claim.

Wow, just notice the first and last quotes, and how ham's tone towards a counterclaim shifts from top to bottom.

[CarnCarn]

I don't understand how lynching the RB today will make a real difference. The only purpose it serves is to free up the investigation tonight, which, if we lynch ham-RB, means I investigate one of fuzzylightning/Amished. But, I'm pretty sure fuzzylightning is scum now anyway.

We win only win after lynching both scum, and if we lynch ham and he's not the RB, then we either lose (if he's town and GIEFF is scum with fuzzylightning) or we come into LyLo again with the decision to be made between Amished and fuzzylightning. Either way, decisions have to be made, and I don't really see why ham should be the lynch over fuzzylightning today. Maybe you could explain it further. In which case, I'll

Unvote: fuzzylightning

so he's not lynched before I understand what your plan is.

[CarnCarn]

OK, there's a bunch of things that could be going on here, and a bunch of things that could happen at night depending on which scum we get (assuming we lynch scum, of course).

If we get the RB, then it's a win for us, as far as I'm concerned. If we don't, well, I don't want to say what could happen because it'll put ideas in the RB's head.

As for what's happening right now, I still think FL is very, very likely to be scum. I would hammer him, but I'm still considering the lynch-RB argument. Pardon me as I think aloud here:

fuzzylightning is like 95% scum in my eyes (read back to last page for why). He counterclaimed doc, and I've claimed cop, so this means, no matter what, that

Amished and fuzzylightning are mutually exclusive as scum

(correct me if I'm wrong). Given that, Amished is 95% town, in my view.
That leaves the other scum between GIEFF and hambargarz, and I have a much less confident read on either of these two. GIEFF makes a good argument about how lynching the RB will give town the victory tomorrow, and he believes hambargarz is RB because RB wouldn't counterclaim doc, as he is more valuable to the scum team than the goon. This argument makes sense if there is a real choice between which of the two scum should counterclaim, but don't I believe this premise holds here. As for the second point, fuzzylightning/ClockworkRuse was definately under more heat than anyone else, so it made more sense for him to counter instead of his buddy.

So, I think fuzzylightning is quite likely scum, that and that there is a good chance he is the RB anyway.

Vote: fuzzylightning

So, questions to ponder over the night (hopefully there is a night, but I've got to believe there will be): Was hambargarz bussing? Is GIEFF stalling scum? Was GIEFF trying to shift the lynch from his buddy to hambargarz-town? Was hambargarz telling scumbuddy FL to counterclaim doc?

^^Hopefully these questions will be relevant.

/thinking aloud

See you tomorrow or in post-game.

[CarnCarn]

Yes! I choose correct. Hopefully again tomorrow, or hopefully (even better) FL is RB.

[CarnCarn]

*facepalm* chose, that is

[CarnCarn]

GIEFF, how did the killing and RBing go last night?

same question for you hambargarz.

[CarnCarn]

It went fantastic. I killed Amished in his sleep and I feel fine. No qualms whatsoever. I am a complete sociopath.

I drugged your coffee too,

so you couldn't investigate anybody. That's just the kind of guy I am. Ruthless.

Noted. I didn't have any coffee last night. Or in the last 10 years.

[CarnCarn]

http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 47#1504047

Why haven't you posted in this game for a few days even though you're posting in others?

LOL - Well, I haven't had the time to post anything meaningful. Other game was in twilight and lots of discussion going on, so my posting was focused on that. Also, I replaced into 2 other long games and I've been spending spare time reading up on them.

There haven't been many posts in this game since I last posted (only 3 in fact). As you say, hambargarz avoided even answering the question I posed, and you gave a very tounge-in-cheek answer, to which I gave a semi-serious response. Apart from that, I haven't seen anything that needed my immediate attention.

My plan is to get my notes from yesterday together and read early interactions between each of you and ClockworkRuse (Day 1 and Day 2). Will post my comments when I get a chance to do this (hopefully tomorrow - only have small bits of spare time today).

And that's why I hate having to answer that question

[CarnCarn]

I'm surprised you characterize those uber-long posts as "only" 3 posts. You don't have any thoughts on them, one way or the other?

Those weren't the ones I was referring to (I said since I last posted). As for the long posts, I read them very quickly and I didn't find anything that I needed to address immediately (like I said I'm going to work on a readback, and I'm sure I'll comment on those when I get to them).

[CarnCarn]

Deeply sorry I haven't been able to get that post I mentioned, and a personal emergency has come up, making me unavailable to post until Wednesday. Apologies again.

[CarnCarn]

ok, i've set a couple hours aside this evening, so I'll get to this then.

[CarnCarn]

ugh, sorry guys, I've been quite sick over the past week and mafia hasn't been at the top of my priority list.

I believe I mentioned I would get around to my analysis of each of your interactions with fuzzylightning/ClockworkRuse, but I haven't been able to do it. I apologize again for this.

First off, I'll respond to GIEFF's post above:

Or were you fine with a FL lynch because you knew that it was a great opportunity to look townie, setting up ME as the scumpartner by wondering if it was a wild scum gambit?

I pretty much deduced he would have to be scum from my view because I knew there was a doc (as I was RB'd) and Amished was the only doc claim. I hadn't realized that fuzzy didn't claim yet when I voted him. I unvoted when I realized that. But I've already explained this.

Why do you think I'm "setting you up" as the scumpartner? I just found it odd that you threw out a vote for someone in LyLo without giving much reasoning behind it, which is a scummy thing to do.

ham is right; you were the first to bring up the possibility of FL-as-doc. And you encouraged me to unvote scum.

OK... but don't you agree that it was protown? The only reason I trusted Amished claim (at the time I voted) was that he was the only person who claimed doc, and I thought everyone had already claimed. I realized the mistake soon after I voted and decided we needed to hear from fuzzylightning. His response was scummy (as I pointed out yesterday) and that's why I didn't believe the claim. But only after he actually claimed.
Are you saying you'd rather have me vote/lynch a player without giving them a chance to claim? That's not something I will follow.
Anyway, if you're saying I'm so eager to buss my partner, then why would I suddenly shift gears 15 minutes later, when nothing has changed game-wise (no new posts in that time)? That's not WIFOM - there's just no reason to do it.

Another post by you wishing FL would claim doc.

Huh? Where are you getting that impression from?

Actually, looking at this quote, it's clear you don't just want FL to claim. You expect him to claim. You say you won't discuss it until FL claims.

Oops.

Why would a town-aligned player EXPECT FL to counterclaim?

I did expect him to claim because we were massclaiming and he hadn't claimed. I didn't expect him to counterclaim. Nice try twisting my words, though.

Another post by you trying to set somebody up as FL's partner.

I'm not setting anyone up - it's what I think, and I still think so. I believe that was hambargarz I was referring to.

As for the other post I am promising, I will get to that this evening -

I promise

.

Lots more to come,

CarnCarn

[CarnCarn]

Particularly the vote on 953. Which was removed after about 15 minutes. His excuse for removing was "realising" FL could be claiming. This would theoretically mean he was thinking about it and still reading after he had posted. Which is fishy considering how busy he always seems to be.

You're right I was still reading after I posted because I suddenly realized that I didn't remember FL ever claiming, and that that destroyed my basis for trusting Amished's doc claim. As the only doc claim, I figured he was confirmed, but then I realized that not everyone had claimed yet.

As for your other comment, in general, my "busyness" comes in waves - very busy at times and not busy at all at others.

[CarnCarn]

As for the other post I am promising, I will get to that this evening -

I promise.

Ah, heh, well, promises are made to broken
I still only have pockets of time, but in the interest of keeping things moving, here goes:

OK, I'm going to start with my impressions of hambargarz. This may take multiple posts to complete.

First off, the things I've found scummy from his posts (this will be followed by any townie things I pick up, in later postage):

Why he's likely to be scum:

First off, hambargarz tag teamed with ClockworkRuse to get the wagon rolling on militant and pushed it hard from the beginning. I had forgotten most of the early stuff from Day 1, but it is pretty remarkable how deceptively ham and CR appear to be working together. This particular post stands out as an example:

Unvoting to make someone happy?

Backpedaling like that is a bit scummy looking.

Because there was no reason for it in the first place? I fail to see how that is scummy - you guys attacking him actually looks scummier in my eyes.

This strikes me as very scummy. He's defending GIEFF which implies a scum buddy relationship. But moreso he is saying guy's attacking him look scummy, why do they look scummy? is it simply on the basis that they are attacking militant? why is militant the innocent one in your eyes considering his scummy behaviour?

FOS: GIEFF

This is regarding militant's unvote and why it was scummy, which was an argument that both hambargarz and CR supported from the start. With the perspective of CR as scum, this tag-team operation becomes much more apparent. Then, he throws out an attack on GIEFF for spotting the scumminess of his and CR's attacks, which is just OMGUS.

Next, hambargarz's FoS of CR for self-voting looks like clumsy attempt at bussing:

self voting, to me at least, is generally an anti-town play.
There are some instances where it is good though (ie. gambiting).
At this point in the game, I see you're self vote as neither one or the other because it doesn't escalate much.

In my last game 2 people self voted. The context was much more significant than here however. (Though the behaviour was seen as anti-town rather than scummy).

Asking stuff like this strikes me as a bit scummy. You want the town's position on your behaviour? That only helps you if you're scum in my opinion.

FOS: ClockworkRuse

He admits that, from his past games, self voting wasn't scummy, but he manages to FoS CR for asking the town's position on self voting. After he gives his own opinion on it. If ham were really concerned about that information only helping scum, then why would he have given it? Could it be because *gasp* he's scum himself? hmm...

Next, part of a larger post that became a springboard for attacks on militant:

I am going to re read tomorrow, I am particularly interested in hambargarz.

Why are you interested in me particularly when you haven't found anything? Are you rereading with a particular preset bias to me? Why would I be more "interesting" than any other person here?

The only answers to these questions I can think of is OMGUS. Which is also a bit scummy

At the time, I thought ham made an interesting observation, but I wasn't reading closely enough, and obviously not with the knowledge of the dead players' alignments. To me, this appears to be ham's attempt to ward off a case on himself by portraying himself as an unjust victim of future attack. It really looks like ham is trying to keep suspicion off of him at all costs - he is discouraging militant (and, indirectly, other players) from going back and reading his posts again.

OK, that's really all I have time for this morning, and that's only up to ham's isopost15. I don't like breaking up posts like this, but it seems it's for the best. Hope to keep a flow of these posts coming. I may alternate between posting about you and hambargarz - I'll see what will make this easier to finish.

[CarnCarn]

Vote: hambargarz

if this game is still going on

I feel really bad for the lapses on my part guys, but I think this was going to end up with GIEFF and hambargarz voting each other anyway (which is what happened).

I'm very sorry for the long delays - as I said I've been sick but also on the road a lot without access to MS.

[CarnCarn]

Post-game thoughts:

Cop-claim: I was pretty sure I was going to be the lynch at that point, so I decided to at least out the cop if there was one in the setup (ClockworkRuse/fuzzylightning and I were both goons, so only a doc or cop was possible). If there wasn't a cop, then I had a chance of living if I could be convincing enough. I think this is one of the weaknesses of towns in general - reluctance to lynch some claimed PRs. I wasn't really sure where the case on me was going (saying I hadn't contributed much except theory), but it was pretty accurate and something I just sort of fell into. It was a good case by ham.

I don't know if I had to bus fuzzylightning D3, but it was probably the most straightforward play to win today. If I defended fuzzylightning and everyone else wanted to lynch him (and did lynch him), then I'd be in a lot of hot water the next day. Sorry for that, fuzzylightning

I'm going to be taking a break from mafiascum until RL things calm down (maybe a month or two). I feel really bad for the gaps Day 3, but I think you've developed some good thinking skills in this game, but your emotions may have gotten the best of you when you were reluctant to lynch a claimed cop Day 2.

Thoughts/feedback?

[CarnCarn]

i probably would have ended up voting ham anyway, but I'm pissed off at how you got away with contributing so little for so long.

Yeah, this game was pretty poor play from me, with the possible exception of using MR as an innocent in my cop claim. Other than that, I really should have been lynched.

This will be the last game I play with CarnCarn. This is pretty ridiculous.

Hopefully you guys will all still stick around mafiascum and maybe I'll see you in another game in the future, though I can understand your mistrust of me.

[CarnCarn]

Regarding scum nighttalking: there wasn't a whole lot of talking.

For N1, ClockworkRuse and I chose to NK insanepenguin because he seemed the least active participant and we felt it was only fair to the more invested players (obviously, GIEFF would have been a better NK...)

For N2, fuzzylightning and I had trouble with conflicting V/LA, but magicrabbit was the obvious NK, given what I had claimed. The "fairness principle" above didn't really apply b/c everyone was pretty equally active and invested, I felt.

For N3, it was just me, and Amished was the obvious kill, given that he was confirmed town with fuzzy being lying scum (and if my own RB claim were to be believed then there HAD to be a doc in this game).

[CarnCarn]

btw, at 46 pages, this is an epic Newbie game.