Newbie 1052 - Endgame

[theplague42]

The white highlight behind the bolded text is off putting aesthetically for me.

I completely agree. Second game here, got mislynched D3 in my first one.

Vote: Ty

cause he's the only experienced guy w/o a vote. And cause his username is an actual game

FoS: Mute

because he didn't RVS in his first post and placed the second vote on me afterward. I would vote for you but I don't want to be yelled at for OMGUS. Happpened to me in my first game.

[theplague42]

Edit: meant "either of his first posts."

[theplague42]

1. You're correct, he did. It was farther into the line so I must have missed it. Also, his lack of an unvote made me think that he hadn't voted yet.
2+3. I've read some games where people have been attacked harshly for "being defensive" in the RVS. And my FoS was pointing out something suspicious, not a die-hard scumtell. I am not going to cause myself to get attacked this early without a solid reason for voting.

[theplague42]

Theplague42

1) You appeared scummy in Day 1 of your previous game. How do you intend to fix this?

Vote: Ty cause he's the only experienced guy w/o a vote. And cause his username is an actual game

2) Is there any reason in particular you didn’t mention the IC Nachomamma8 who hasn’t posted yet?

2+3. I've read some games where people have been attacked harshly for "being defensive" in the RVS. And my FoS was pointing out something suspicious, not a die-hard scumtell. I am not going to cause myself to get attacked this early without a solid reason for voting.

3) Why do you care about being attacked early on?

1. In my last game, I learned that I shouldn't make excuses and keep digging a bigger hole for myself. The IC had said that I was weak at first but played "immensely townie" toward the end. Apparently I have an issue with the beginning of games...
2. He already had a vote on him, so I ignored it. Also, I meant "name" instead of "game." I'm also having issues with editing this game.
3. Because I was put at L-1 by a newb-scum last game barely a week into D1. At the time, I thought all the players who had been voting for me were scum except for that person. I figured the other scum hadn't voted yet, and I freaked out about getting lynched that early. I'd rather have that not happen again.

..oh ****. Sorry, I had forgotten to unvote.

Mute, it's perfectly fine to not Unvote before placing another vote. Both mods and players prefer it, but it's not necessary. Otherwise it leads to the situation I'm in right now. It's not your fault, but mine as I made an assumption I shouldn't have.

theplague42 (or TP42 if you don't mind):

I feel like you said nothing new at all while talking more. I think you would be a good politician.

Yeah, but I would have an unthinkable flaw. Feeling the need to actually do work TP42 is fine if you prefer it. I would prefer Plague if it doesn't matter to you, but you can use TP42 if you like it better.

2+3. I've read some games where people have been attacked harshly for "being defensive" in the RVS.

So? Do you think the people attacking for it are wrong in their assumption? RVS is pretty much the joke stage to start the discussion, so acting defensively while everyone else is still joking means 'I don't want to be in spotlight' to me, and that's the mafia's way of thinking.

And my FoS was pointing out something suspicious, not a die-hard scumtell.

It's still something suspicious for you. Do you feel your vote is better placed on someone who didn't post at the time of you voting (so just a random vote), rather than on someone who you think started acting suspicious?

I am not going to cause myself to get attacked this early without a solid reason for voting.

You won't get a solid reason in or right after RVS. Unless someone start's drilling, we can pat our backs to the end of the days without anything conclusive.

Makes sense. Looks like I was wrong. Chalk it up as newbie reasoning.

By the way, now when I think of this, what's exactly suspicious in Mute's post? Now we know you were wrong on the first part, and the second part? Why exactly putting the second vote on someone is suspicious? Bandwagon's are one of the best ways to get us out of RVS (at least as far as I can see after reading a few games), and they are usually not giving any clue about someone's alignment.

Because he randomly switched his vote during RVS. I just don't understand why someone would make a joking vote, then immediately switch to me when someone places a vote on me. And isn't the second vote on a bandwagon generally scum, especially if it doesn't have strong reasoning behind it? I remember that from the wiki.

Now I'm going to seem hypocritical, but I'm conceding to Angry Scientist's logic. I was wrong, and I'm fixing it. My second reason is going with the bandwagon idea. Three votes doesn't seem like a risky plan right now, as a quickhammer is unlikely. I don't think his table is suspicious in terms of helping scum. I think it leads to tunneling and ignoring players whose town-count is high. For example, in my last game, we pretty much all followed the IC's reasoning and tells. He was only suspected two or three times (one of which was deadly accurate in him being RB) and all suspicions.were dismissed as paranoia. Turns out he was scum RB. His "Nacho was scum, so now he can't be" logic is also off, a gambler's fallacy argument. I'm pretty sure that 99.9% of mods use random.org to decide on roles.

Unvote

Vote: Mute

[theplague42]

Still more editing problems: should be "were

not

scum" instead of "were scum"

[theplague42]

Everyone

I briefly spoke about lurking in the above part of my post however I should inform you all that I policy lynch lurkers. If you don’t have a reason for not posting for extended periods of time I will ruthlessly advocate for your lynch faster than you can say I-didn’t-realize-lurking-is-anti-town-play.

I'll support you on this, judging by my last game. Out of two lurkers in our game, one (townie) got mislynched on D4 and lost the game because he had been pretty quiet the few days before. The other lurker ended up being scum. That slot was replaced three times and had extremely scummy behavior, but we mistakenly let it slide because of the replacements.

Workdawg

…I didn't want to paint a target on myself for OMGUS or otherwise.

You and theplague42 have both said this, and I am here to say that that statement is irrelevant. If you are truly a townie you should not be concerned with how you appear or being killed, remember you can still win if you are dead. You should focus on your win condition of eliminating the mafia by scumhunting, no matter if it seems like OMGUS or what have you. Trying to stay quiet so you don’t get killed only hurts the town, because you are either 1) a scum that is trying to avoid detection or 2) a town player that is providing less information for the rest of the town to work with. Both are bad, so don’t be shy and speak your mind (Post #29 is exactly what I’m talking about).

But what if we are almost mislynched? In my last game (as I said earlier), I was almost mislynched pretty early. Afterward I started to watch what I said and I wasn't really attacked until the scum-IC used me as a best-worse-case-scenario lynch (instead of asking for a doc counterclaim).

[theplague42]

Unvote

Vote: Workdawg

To use a cliche, EPIC FAIL. I'm 99.9% sure that you're only the fourth vote on Ty. I command-F'd and scrolled through since the last votecount. My vote was on Ty, plus four more put on afterwards. Unfortunately for you, I'm pretty sure that I unvoted and voted for Mute. The only other thing was Mute's FoS on Ty in post 34.

Damn, I thought I got away from people who obviously can't count in this game.

@Nachomamma8
Why is your response to the pseudo-hammer so calm? If it had been a real hammer, this would probably have set the record for the shortest D1 ever.

Preview edit: Angry, you and me are completely correct.

[theplague42]

Missed this first time around.
[quote="Workdawg"]

@Mute from Preview

As far as throwing down the hammer... I guess I'm a little bit anxious since it's my first game. As you can tell, I'm pretty active online and the idea of waiting 2 weeks to learn any concrete information as craziness to me.

If I set myself up as a target for Day2, then I guess we'll see what happen

[/qupte]
This is the single scummiest thing I have seen in this game so far. You're obviously baiting and challenging us to vote for you, as if we would be afraid and back down. Wagon wagon wagon time!

[theplague42]

Ok completely ignore my last post. I put p instead of o in the end quote. I am seriously having issues with editing this game. I'm actually going to use preview this time. Let's try this again...

Missed this first time around.

@Mute from Preview

As far as throwing down the hammer... I guess I'm a little bit anxious since it's my first game. As you can tell, I'm pretty active online and the idea of waiting 2 weeks to learn any concrete information as craziness to me.

If I set myself up as a target for Day2, then I guess we'll see what happen

This is the single scummiest thing I have seen in this game so far. You're obviously baiting and challenging us to vote for you, as if we would be afraid and back down. Wagon wagon wagon time!

[theplague42]

Posting from mobile so this could take awhile.
@Mute
My "can't count" is referring to how some hammerers will claim they miscounted the number of votes. I've seen it alot with newbies, scum or not. I just think that it's too early to have been an honest mistake, especially since there was a vote count not too long ago.

@Workdawg
"Flip" refers to a person's role being revealed when they die. Comes from the MeatWorld tradition of playing cards used to symbolize roles, and a players card was physically flipped to reveal the role.

Wolfdawg's "newness" is piquing my interest. He claims this is his first game, but he has read alot. He seems familiar enough with terminology and hammering, yet has no idea what "flip" means? It's a null tell to me, but it's still interesting.

Preview edit: I see the question has already been answered by Mute.
Another preview edit: I feel the same wayabout ninjas.

[theplague42]

@Workdawg
It is indeed in the glossary page. Maybe you're confusing it with the abbreviations page. And your lack of an unvote isn't bad per se, just ironic. Perfect example of why they're used.

I would disagree with your view of Ty. He is deinitely acting more as a teacher than a player right now, but that's half of his job. He's using general logic and techniques to crticize and/or support specific arguments/statements (right words?) in this game. There really isn't

that much

stuff to attack people with examples from just this game.

Preview edit: nice to know I'm not the only one with acute fail-at-editing syndrome

[theplague42]

I guess TP42 is my new official abbreviation? Sweet! Much more BA than just "plague" IMO

[theplague42]

@theplague
Do you think he might be lying about how new he is? What's the scum motivation for that, do you think?

I'm not sure that he is lying directly. He's just reading selective information in the wiki, somehow completely missing the (arguably) most important part of the game. People who tend to do this do it everywhere, including in-game arguments. I don't particularly think that it's a scumtell, as it's not any type of duplicity or misinformation. If anything, it could be considered a slight towntell, as this is an example where he has no reason to lie.

Nacho, why are you refusing to reveal your top two suspects? Isn't that just denying information to the town?

[theplague42]

@Workdawg

More suspicious behavior. Why would they NK you? The only way I could see that happening is 1. you did actually hammer, and 2. Ty was scum. Unless you were ultra-early bussing your partner. If a player gets enough suspicion, he's probably going to be left alive as a scapegoat. Or left alive to create WIFOM confusion.

Nacho

I feel like he's really playing his IC role more than the game. He's definitely tossing out good thoughts and make people question eachother. He's also defended himself well against Ty. No one else has really questioned him though.

I would rather have an IC play more teacher than player than the other way around. Why would anyone believe he is scum if he is tossing out good thoughts, asking questions, and defending himself well? Isn't that what town is supposed to do?

And why is nacho voting ty suspicious? It was still RVS, so any and every possible scumtell is worthy of suspicion, considering there isn't much else to go on. How can you accuse Ty of tunneling on Nacho? In post 77, you comment on every player in the game, excluding yourself of course. Yet you only post real evidence/quotes for the argument against me and Nacho. The difference is that you are agreeing (?) with me. I'm not sure what word to use, but your conclusion is that my response was not scummy. Your attack on Nacho was by far the longest out of any of them. Then you throw out the possibility of Ty/Nacho scumteam. The point that I agree with on that is the "suspicion, but no vote" on Ty's part towards Nacho. The unvote by Nacho isn't suspicious at all by itself. He already gave a perfectly good reason for it, avoiding "crazed newbies" such as yourself. However, I will again point out the lack of emotion on Nacho's part. The "if it were a normal game" logic seems silly. There are ways to express your anger without scaring people off. But I think this points to Nacho as scum, while not really saying anything about Ty. Hopefully this is clear, as I'm just going by order that I remember.

@Neuky

I think aggression is more of a towntell than a scumtell in a newbie games. SEs and ICs are supposed to play at their best, as that would teach us newbies more than if they intentionally played badly, which would probably be very difficult to do anyways.

Aside from that, I agree with the newb-scum possibility (bad word, but I can't think of the one I want to use; starts with a "c"...) and the dawg/stels team idea. He makes a lukewarm comment about Stel's encouragement, which pales in comparison to the amount of advice Ty has given (his towniness/scuminess is irrelevant for this). The fact that you took the time to post out the wagon is really pro-town and just plain helpful IMO.

Preview edit: Yet another disturbing lack of emotion. AFAIK newb-town are more likely to freak out, while newb-scum are more likely to just sit there. Also, as I was reading over my post (finally previewing to avoid errors:)), I had a thought about the tunneling on Nacho. By this point, Workdawg seems to have more suspicion on Nacho than Ty, judging by his summary post above. Then why keep your vote on Ty instead of Nacho?

@All

I would like to know everyone's view on Dawg's reponse to the pseudo-quicklynch. And can we get one or two more votes on him to see what happens? Just to be clear, if anyone quicklynches "accidentally," you will be next on my personal, gold- and platinum-plated chopping block.

[theplague42]

Am I supposed to keep my crazy thoughts to myself and then start yelling I KNEW IT when it happens, or throw them out there and let people shoot holes in them? You've said you agree with parts of it (at least the scumminess of some of Nacho's actions), so obviously I'm not completely off my rocker.

Throw them out there. Any "holes" are probably actual flaws. Townies rip apart false arguments because 1. They want to follow more substantial arguments, and 2. Because scum's arguments are usually weaker than towns (usually is the key word). If your suspicions turn out to be true, tells us all you want. Otherwise not a single person would believe that you had actually thought of it before.

Also, your silly thought about why you would be NK'd is ridiculous. Why would

scum

NK a prime person for the next mislynch they are trying to achieve?

Preview edit: Wow. Just wow. Mute just shot more holes in Worldawg's argument than he could have with a minigun. Also, thanks mute for posting he's at L-2. Avoids any more "mistakes."

[theplague42]

Actually, I just realized I'm an idiot. Mute, do you realize that points 4 and 5 are

my

words? This does throw bad light on the rest of the argument, but number 7 is pure gold. I will point out the possibility of Mute bussing his partner. I think it's extremely unlikely, but it's a thought. Barring the two screwed up points, the whole process seems too good to be a scum bus.

[theplague42]

Back-to-back triple posts. My "I'm an idiot" comment refers to me not realizing that those two points were my words, not Workdawgs. Just to avoid ambiguities.

[theplague42]

In retrospect, 4 is the same thing as 6. Except that it's the right person's quote. 5 is completely wrong though. And I would argue that point 7 is the " single greatest scum-tell, slip, and exposure" that

anyone

[i/]

has made. It directly points to him having more information than everyone else. I imagine that it's the most basic and powerful scumtell in the game, and the basis for all the rest. Isn't that the reason that Mafia was created in the first place? "An uninformed majority against an informed minority?"

[theplague42]

Damn. This is indeed a newbie game, isn't it? Therefore, roles are shown. Gah!!

Unvote

Vote: Mute

More being swayed by others' logic...

Preview edit: I suppose you mean confirmation stage, not night?

[theplague42]

This is my second game, and I remembered the rules for 98% of stuff. I forgot that role PMs were shown, not roles just being posted.

@workdawg
Whose alt are you?

[theplague42]

I voted him earlier, then switched to you b/c of some suspicions. I voted back to him because of the mistaken reads.

If you're not an alt, then you must have ungodly amounts of time online. It seems like you've read the entire wiki plus multiple full-length games. What job allows that much time online?

Preview edit: Mute, I think "rules" applies to all of Drench's starting posts. The roles are available to everyone in this and other open-type games, so it's info known to everyone. If you feel the need, put out a request to the possible cop to investigate him. The cop may or may not listen, but it's better than accusing him of being scum when most of your argument fell through the floorboards.

[theplague42]

Mute's last post smells of badly executed bussing to me.

[theplague42]

Wall of post incoming. I'm not going to write a summary for the whole thing as I think that it's all important. Any summary would misrepresent what I'm trying to say. Or it could just be a symptom of my bloated ego.

@TP42: I'm a software developer and we are currently in QA. I've already got my next release scheduled and documents written, right now I don't really have much work to do aside from supporting QA in their efforts. So I sit on my computer and surf the internet

Sounds like a pretty awesome job to have right now.

I mean, seriously? I'm bussing my partner (which according to the glossary mean's that I'm trying to distance myself from him so that if he flips scum, people don't think I am scum because I'm his buddy) by actually trying to lynch him? As I mentioned before, I've made a pretty bad mistake in this game, but holy cow scum lynching scum would be something even more epic

I do think this would be rare to happen in a game with only two scum. With three scum, the risk isn't as great. In this setup, the chance that someone would see through the bussing is just too risky. The risk of bus-lynching one of only two scum (especially on the first day) outweights any WIFOM (see below) benefits. In later days, however, since the town is usually closer to find scum anyways, bussing seems like it would be much more possible.

WIFOM explanation: We would think that scum wouldn't lynch scum, as its too risky when there are only two of them. But then again, the scum would know this, so would happily lynch their partner. But we know that they may be thinking that, so we would think they were bussing. Etc etc.

@TP42 I looked back at your vote for Mute and it was WAY early, it seems like your reasoning back them was that you didn't like the table, is that still the reason

My vote for him was mainly because my OMGUS argument (avoiding it, that is) was torn down by Angry Scientist. So now I'm just going back to him after you crushed my hopes and dreams of you being scum.

I'm torn about the table. It all depends on how its being used.I don't think that it hurts the town to have your scum/town reads posted regularly. Otherwise information is just denied to each other. I don't particularly like, however, his method of only posting either before he dies or when someone asks for that. As a townie, I would post it as much as possible. Scum are not actually looking for tells, correct? They only do that as cover. Therefore, a scum-player could randomly throw in some numbers without any real reasoning and say "these are my suspects." I agree with this:
[quote+"Nachomamma8"]@plague: Yes, it is. But I didn't really have any sort of solid suspicions on anyone at the time, and it's always better to withold giving out your suspects than make some up. Right now though, my top two suspects are Neuky and Ty[/quote] in that only scum have to make up suspects. The non-regular and non-explanation method of posting the table is inherently beneficial to a scum-player who wants to appear to be scumhunting.

Argument against this: "But scum-players still scumhunt and genuinely try to lynch scummy players!" Yes, they do. For two reasons: 1. because scummy players are easier to mislynch (especially without drawing suspicion), and 2. they are blending in with the town. The genuine scumhunting is only genuine because townie's scumhunting is genuine.

tl,dr: The table is fine, but I don't like how Mute claims he will be using it. Without regular explanations, it seems like it would be an excellent way to throw suspicion on someone without real reasons.

Preview edit: Mute, I think "rules" applies to all of Drench's starting posts. The roles are available to everyone in this and other open-type games, so it's info known to everyone. If you feel the need, put out a request to the possible cop to investigate him. The cop may or may not listen, but it's better than accusing him of being scum when most of your argument fell through the floorboards.

Of the possible set-ups in this game, only half have a chance to have a cop. It'd be a safe bet to ask that, but I won't. If someone is a PR the

last

thing they need to do is draw attention to themselves.
And if I were to do that, that'd be scummy of me.
How? How would I get the info from the cop if I asked for them if they were here to investigate dawg? (to digress, what's to even say if there is a cop this game, they'd listen to me and not their gut on whom to check? :eyebrow:) If I say that I'd like to hear the cop's results, that's role-fishing, a scum move. If I ask a cop to investigate dawg, that's scummy as well for trying to draw out the cop and put them in danger.
Rule of thumb from my first game here as doc: power roles are the greatest asset to a town. In one of the available F11 set-ups, the town has NO PR's whatsoever.

There is no town-motivation to want to seek a PR this early on in the game. I know you meant good from it by mentioning it, but it's not a good move.

The PR-less setup's odds are only 1:3. Chances are that there's a town PR out there, maybe two. Yes, the cop would probably ignore you. I already said that. And I would say that 50% is a good enough chance to throw out a request.
As to your rolefishing claim, let me present a situation. Cop investigates someone N1. That someone gets a guilty verdict. Now we know that there are no sanity issues or GFs in this setup, yes? So that someone would definitely be scum. The cop claims and presents his guilty verdict. There is no counterclaim. That person gets lynched, and the cop gets either NK'd or RB'd.
If its an NK, then the trade is 3 townies for 1 scum, leaving a 4:1 split. The chances of a successful (even random) lynch of the remaining scum is pretty high. Once it gets down to 2:1, there is a 66.6% chance of a successful lynch, much higher than if the cop would try to push the lynch w/o claiming, especially if that person looked townie otherwise. I wish I could have those odds in Vegas.
If there's a both a cop and an RB, then there's also a doc, right? So now the scum would probably RB the cop, as the doc may protect him, making an RB useless. Therefore, their RB is tied up on the cop until they either NK him or they find the doc. This situation isn't quite as good for the town, but it's still better than the back-to-back mislynches that would probably happen if the cop tried to push the lynch himself.

@all

Can someone quickly explain how to do the math for those probabilities? I can never figure it out when the events are in sequence like that, even though they're independent as all townies are considered the same in this.

If you truly wish to see where you fall onto my list so bad:
During my tunnel on you, I rated you a 90, and you were above everyone by a good margin.
Now? 79. Remember that I am not going to post it regularly, nor even give any warning as to when people go up or down it. The points are given by gut feeling, and corrected by evidence used in the game. My gut alone would give you an 84, just in case you're curious.

Mute is now throwing out numbers willy-nilly. His 55 on Nacho has already proven to be false. And I think that 90 is way too high to be considered "normal" this early in the game. I really haven't seen too much from Workdawg that I consider super scummy. Combine that with his golden defense to Mute's 7 points, and I'm inclined to rate Workdawg as a null-tell right now. Also, look at Mute's last number. Apparently, his gut can do math, as he rates Workdawg an 84

by gut alone.

Not a nice, round number like 80, 85, or 90. His gut can pinpoint numbers to the single digits! Maybe he's impersonating Mark Harmon.

Wrong, I tell whomever asks what purpose it serves, and have done nothing but. So far, only you and neuky have been the most vocal against it, and nearly everyone else feels it's either insignificant or a null-tell.

snip

Why do I keep using it as my defense? Town-players will dismiss a needless table which is majorly opinion-driven as needless fluff and rely on solid evidence; scum players will use whatever arguments they can to push to get the town lynched.
"Maybe you can outline for me what exactly your grid has done so far that is pro-town."
Maybe you can outline for me what exactly the table has done that is anti-town so far? That'd help.

Opinion-driven claim: Do tell, what

else

is there to scumhunt besides opinions? It's not like we can put someone's posts in a mass spectrometer and say, "Yep, that post has 17% town and 83% scum! Lynch him!" Any and all "solid evidence" is

always

going to be based on one person's opinion. When anyone says "solid reason," they almost always mean something that they

think

is inherently scummy. The difference between your "opinions" in the table and most other's "opinions" is that your "opinions" have nothing to back them up. The only way you can do that is to be proactive and post it regularly, with detailed explanations for each and every point you add or deduct. Waiting for people to ask is lurky.

Whatever arguments claim: Yes, they will. No, they won't. They will indeed use any and every argument to lynch town, but any superfluous arguments that lack in depth will be considered scummy. If scum help to lynch someone scummy, are they directly hurting the town? Yes and no. They are definitely blending in, but they create a best-worse-case-scenario. Your job is to find out who is either attacking too vehemently without good reason (bussing) or who is blatantly defending a scummy person (helping out their scumbuddy).

Snappy response to a perfectly reasonable question: Someone's defensive! For pro-town vs. anti-town, I do believe in absolutes. Pro-town gives more content to read, more arguments to discuss, more people to lynch! Anything that either detracts from that or doesn't add anything while saying something is inherently anti-town. It's not necessarily scummy, but it doesn't help the town regardless.

Mute, you seem to be regarding scum's thinking as different than townie's thinking. They are trying for separate goals, but both are doing the same thing (for different reasons obviously). Both want to construct fat, well though-out, and persuasive arguments on why someone is scummy and should be lynched. The town is doing it to find scum, and the scum is doing it to appear town.

@Nachomamma8

On that note, I liked the Mute-Workdawg-Plague argument. That is, until WD voted Mute >.>
TP42 is town, though.

I'm a little confused. Which side of the argument do you like?

[theplague42]

Wow that took a while. Lots of information to try and get my head around. Dawg and Ty seem to head the list of suspects to you all at the moment on first read but i mainly skimmed as i am getting my son ready for school. Personally at the moment being a newbie i have no clue who could be town or skum among you. I will re-read and give some thoughts on where i am at later today.

lol shows how wrong and new i am, it is Mute and workdawg in currently the most spectulative topspots at the moment. I am leaning towards workdawg at the moment on the grounds that some of the posts he made implied that he could be mafia. I will read again his posts and may change my mind and wont set my vote yet but i will be looking......

Good to have you with us. Actually, you weren't too far off. Ty had the most suspicion earlier, but all four people unvoted him after the "accidental" pseudo-quickhammer. Also, you can use

FoS: playername

(stands for Finger of Suspicion) to point out anything particularly scummy, just underneath enough suspicion for a vote. If you either vote or FoS, please quote the specific post (or at least put the post number if the post is obscenely long) and give a reason for your suspicion.

[theplague42]

@asano234
Just for future reference, it's probably a bad idea to use the word "buddy" when applying to someone in a favorable way. Generally, scum team partners are referred to as scum

buddies

. "Buddy" itself also has scummy connotations to it, specifically certain scum tactics. You can search the wiki for more details on that. For those, you can say someone is "buddying" if they are trying to gain someone's favor for no apparent reason. It won't be used against you now, but I could see some overzealous scumhunters attacking that in later games. They wouldn't realize that you didn't know what using "buddy" implied. Sorry if I seem like I'm jumping on this, but I don't like people being scared away for frivolous reasons.

[theplague42]

@Workdawg
It's a magical button called "preview" I discovered it after my own horrendous editing this game!

Anyways, I will (again) second your question as to why Mute gave you the numbers he did, as I don't think you are scummy enough to deserve them.

@Mute
The whole reason for having a table is so that you

won't

fluctuate your views on a whim. The table is supposed to show the cumulative view of a person instead of piecemeal accusations on individual posts. If the numbers fluctuate on a whim, then the table is pretty much useless.

[theplague42]

So, I'm scum because you gave me a number... isn't it supposed to work the other way around? You find enough evidence against someone that the number climbs high enough that you call them scum. I guess I'll have to wait and see what the evidence is.

Best argument I've seen against the table so far. The initial sentence is fuzzy, but the second half is great. Workdawg, it seems like your first sentence isn't really coinciding with the second part. I would say this is more an issue of writing your summary before your details, rather than inconsistency. Anyways, I would say that Mute's reasoning is more "you give me a huge number, which implies I'm scum, which means I deserve a high number." (I'm saying this from workdawg's POV) Mute's using circular logic to try to prove his point.

[theplague42]

Ok in the first part of this post, I looked at Mute (my biggest suspect) ISO, so I may be backtracking a lot.

That said i am sure that this table is useful to you and maybe it has been sucessful in the past but it just feels too unscientific for my liking and a bit random to say the least. Out of curiousity i would be interested where i fall on the table being a newbie and therefore an unknown quantity.

Actually, according to Mute, this is his first time using it.

This is in all honesty an experiment on my part on using a number-based system to keep track of scum suspicions.

I do not expect it to be perfect and the amounts will fluctuate with my whim. I will not rely on it alone to lynch anyone I feel is scum, merely as a way to keep track and augment my arguments and such. If at all you'd like to see where you fall at any time, just ask.

As I'm looking back, the bolded part seems suspicious. He seems to be defending the table before any comments were made about it. Earlier in the same post:

Everyone starts out at 60, because it is a nice enough a number to prove my point in that

I have as much reason to think of everyone as scum as much as they are town.

This is to, for me, keep track of how everyone acts, and the scores are rather arbitrary.

Now look at his previous post:

I'm going to play with the mindset of "

scum with medium probability until highly suspected/proven town.

"

Bolded hypocrisy.

Mute:

About your table... Sure, it's nice to keep the track of everyone, but what's the reason of revealing that table to us? If you'll be posting the entire table regularly, you're pretty much giving your neutral and town reads all the time, and that helps scum pick their targets at night.

The point of the table was more to get a concrete view of my stance out there. To say "oh yeah, I'm gonna play as everyone is more likely scum than town and gameplay will prove innocence" is nice and all, but it can easily be twisted by scum to be used for whatever bussing/WIFOM reasons against me later on.

Mute seems to be very concerned about how the scum will specifically target him. If the scum were to actually consistently attack him for bad reasons, wouldn't they get lynched? As I've argued before, good scum will use logical arguments to get someone lynched. If the table gets attacked, then it's probably for good reason.

>If I post just the person's standing on the table, without saying anything else, I feel I don't have to explain myself. If I am questioned why X is #, I'll respond, as will I do if I present a case to justify X's # on it.
Hopefully we can move past this concern about the table. It does nothing but bog down on scum-hunting.

Providing arbitrary numbers without justification bogs down scumhunting, too. Numbers only work if you add/subtract points based on every single post of a person, not just things that catch your eye.

If he flips scum, I anticipate dying tonight.

More commenting on what scum will do to him. Also, he seemed very confident that Workdawg will be lynched.

End of Mute ISO.

@Neuky

I think what Mute means is that we (Mute, TP42 and I) have been doing most of the posting in here. Of course, he's just quoting himself a lot... <.<

Likes to hear himself talk, I guess. He should run for public office

Actually Neuky, I only want a prob for Naben. Everyone else in that list is just a "what's on your mind?" thing.
Figured by only bolding the request and naben's name, and using semi-colons instead of commas, it'd not confuse anyone. =x

Nah, it definitely looks like you want prods on all three. Naben I can understand, but Ty's walls make up for his less frequent posting and Neuky's posting is perfectly fine. Also, why not request one for Nacho? He hasn't posted in two days (omg! two days! its horrifying!), which is longer than either Neuky or Ty.

@asano234
Don't be too careful about what you say, though. Only scum have to do that. Townies really shouldn't have to monitor what they say, but using loaded words can be considered an attempt at WIFOM.

@ThePlague: I stopped at your post on Page 5, Post # 120. Trying to find the PR's early? No. Don't do that at this point in the game. You can certainly try and appeal to them by stating that you want them investigated, if they are there, but that's about it. Even if they do have results, I think they would show those results in a manner that wouldn't reveal them to be a PR, unless of course cornered or if he can't show his reason why he wants them dead in any other way. It's still a bad idea to out the cop or any PR. You said that the RB becomes useless? Why? Is it because the cop isn't dead yet (assuming there is a doctor, but then again, there might not be)? RB blocks the known cop, cop can't investigate anyone, making him just a VT, that's not useless to scum IMO. Of course if we even have any PR's.

Alright, I won't. I do agree that the cop would only out himself if he didn't think that he could get the scum lynched any other way. As to your logic, there's one flaw. If there's a cop and no doc, then there isn't an RB. Also, if there is cop/doc/RB, then it ties up the RB by forcing him to block the cop. It doesn't make the RB useless, but its a best-worst-case-scenario in that they have half the attempts to take out the doc (by either NK or RB). My argument is definitely flawed in that way, but I still think that using any means to get to a 4:1 ratio is worth it.

[theplague42]

EBWOP:

@ Mod: vote count s'il vous plait?

If my math's right, both Dawg and I are at L-2, as it stands with Ty's and Stel's latest votes.

You FoS'd Stels because he didn't announce that his vote put Workdawg at L-2. Why exactly is that scummy? There isn't much difference between L-2 and L-3, so should people be forced to announce at L-3? Following that logic, L-3 and L-4 aren't that different of situations, either. So should we announce that we're putting the

second

vote on someone? No, we shouldn't. It's one of those things where if you try to use it as a scumtell, there's nowhere to draw the line that says "beneath this is not a scumtell." Not announcing L-1 is definitely suspicious, but even that isn't a cut-and-dry scumtell. Anything below that, YMMD. Following this, why didn't you say anything about Ty putting Workdawg at L-2 w/o saying anythings? I don't agree that he should have to, but your views are inconsistent. Basically, what I'm getting from this is that people should announce that they are putting

you

within a half lightyear of a lynch, but anyone else is fair game? Seems like you're awfully nervous about getting even remotely close to a lynch.

[theplague42]

You probably shouldn't have even said that much. I'm not entirely sure what counts as "discussing ongoing games," so we'll have to wait for Drench for a ruling.

[theplague42]

Mini-wall ahead. I didn't think it would be a wall, but it certainly seems longer than an average post. Edit: make that a huge wall after adding the asano section.

Mute

Plague: does a decent job of scum-hunting and providing towards the town. But one thing got me; being swayed by logic so easily and casting a vote by it? Null-read alone, but will future posts prove whether he's scum or not? Unsure; I bring it up for posterity. Town-vibes though.

This post made me laugh and head-desk simultaneously. "Being swayed by logic so easily and casting a vote by it?" First of all, that is a completely ridiculous claim. Logic is the hand behind the weapon of a lynch. What you're saying by this accusation is that scum players make logical arguments and town players make illogical arguments. That is utterly ridiculous. Townies use logic to find scum. Anyone that disagrees with the fundamental part of that statement is completely wrong, IMO.

Secondly, do my ears deceive me? I seem to remember something rather similar in the beginning of the game....

snip

VOTE: theplague42

This guy is the plague. The mafia plagues this town. Which means, he's the mafia. QED.

Ah, gotcha. Lemme guess an experiment went wrong and you were angry over the failure? =P
Also your logic is flawless.

Vote: theplague42

By this, I am in no way agreeing that using logic is a scumtell. I already explained that above. I'm instead pointing out that Mute is using a double standard when looking at scumtells. Anything he does is townie, while the same things are scummy if committed by other people. Considering that he called Angry Scientist's logic "flawless," wouldn't it make sense that I was swayed by him as well? Apparently flawless logic only applies to voting other people... Unless he's talking about my switch back to Mute from Workdawg, following Workdawg's logic. In that case, I'm guessing that Mute just doesn't want to admit that he (as well as I) was completely embarrassed by that. I was blinded by Mute's bad logic, which he certainly didn't seem to mind at the time, as I was an extra vote on his supposed suspect.

Also, no time like the present:

Players	Percent
theplague42	54
Neuky	49
Workdawg	79
Angry Scientist Asano	50 54
Naben Veridis	????????
Stels	66
Ty	67
Nachomamma8	65

snip

Justifications for the numbers:

lots of meaningless words that is in no way a good enough justification for me

I am confident that every single one of these numbers was made up on the spot. If you look at the game as a whole, every single number agrees with what I see as the general consensus. According to Mute, we're supposed to believe that "vibes" and his "gut" can pinpoint a person's scum-number exactly. Real justification would explain point-by-point what is scummy and what is not.

Pseudo-logical guesswork follows: To use a bit of psychology, look at the last three numbers. 66, 65, and 67. Three consecutive numbers, albeit not in order. It certainly seems like these three were typed in randomly, trying to express similar views on all three. I know that I can't be sure, but its definitely supports the fact that he didn't really give good justification for his point assignments.

a vague vote without announcement

is just a "what the hell guy?" moment

Why? Because he voted for a player that he thought was scummy? I love how you don't even comment that it was an L-1 vote, which you were so suspicious about earlier. I do agree that he should have announced, but I'm willing to concede that to a newbie mistake. No offense, asano, but I've seen a lot of newbie-replacements claim to have "read the thread" and other stuff which they didn't do. I'm not saying you lied, but your interpretation of "reading the thread" is different from our interpretation of "reading the thread."

I don't know why there's such a massive space between my first line and the table proper.
"what happened to you only posting it at the start of days?"
I'm posting it now 'cause I feel like it. (That I'm at L-1 is irrelevant. Yup, entirely irrelevant and plays into this decision in no way at all. )

Yeah right. Its completely relevant. I see no other reason why you would post it now. Also, why did you never claim? The general rule is to claim at L-1, but you seemed to avoid it at all costs. You even admitted that you realized you were at L-1. You had several other posts before asano unvoted you. Why avoid claiming?

asano

I did say something about/to you above, but I don't want to recopy it.

Unvote Mute

Well that created somewhat of a stir. I have decided to take my vote off again for now but may reinstate it.

Voting w/o announcement of L-1, then unvoting, then a possible reinstatement is even scummier behavior than the original vote.

To answer the question that i had not justified it and could not be bothered. I had said i would justify my decision later. I would love it if i could spend more time on the net but having a family and children and a full time job does require my time. This morning i wanted to post why i had been absent and could not go into details about my reasons as i have to get my son ready for school, take him to school and get ready for work.

HoS: asano.

for the unvote and the missing of key arguments about announcing, unvoting (unvoting follows in this paragraph), and for bad justification (below). Why did you take your vote off? I see no reason why you should have. If you think Mute is scum, vote him. Look at the game earlier when Angry Scientist thought that it was scummy that I didn't vote Mute because I didn't want to appear to be OMGUS'ing. Unvoting because people say something is definitely scummy behavior. I would vote on this normally, but I'll give you another newbie-break. My generosity is running out, though.

My reasons for my vote were as follows:

1. The table. It has by far become the most time consuming issue in this game and is distracting all of you from scumhunting, debating whether or not the system is useful for many posts has almost become a central theme of this game and as a result i feel that time between here and the deadline is being wasted and a mislynch is likely and who does that help. For that reason and maybe you will think i am crazy but i think it is possibly a scummy distraction technique. Dazzy them with whats over here and they wont look at the real picture.
2. I am completely new to this game aside from watching a work colleague play his first game from the sidelines. With the table being the central theme i have absolutely no clue about any of you if i am completely honest about it so decided i would jumped on the Mute bandwagon to see if that caused a stir which it has. Mute is right that it was a what the hell moment. The post from stels gave an interesting demonstration of where she is at and Mutes last post gave an indication where he is at.

This is suspicious. Earlier you said that the table was not your only justification. Now, in #2, you claim that it was newbieness on your part. That is not a justification for a vote. That is an explanation for why you voted w/o announcing, etc. It only works for explanation after the vote, not while making it. Therefore, the table is really your only justification. I would agree that the whole argument is a scum distraction if I didn't think that Mute was scum! If I thought that Mute was town, then I would go for Workdawg. I think a Mute-Workdawg team is unlikely. Either that or ultra-serious bussing.

I do feel in my gut that there is some scummy behaviour by Mute and will likely return to vote for him again unless something changes my mind but until there is good evidence i wont jump on again as i did not realise through my inexperience that my vote put him in L1 position until the vote count came up. My thoughts as a newbie are pretty vague and i apologise for that but my feeling at the moment is that Workdawg and Mute are my candidates for the skumteam at work here at the moment.

Sorry if I seem callous, but this is the second time this has happened so far. You just can't claim inexperience for unknowingly putting him at L-1. It doesn't require much experience to count up votes and check the numbers. If you aren't sure, then ask for a votecount first. But don't vote and then claim a miscount/newbieness/"I didn't realize." This has already been discussed after Workdawg's attempted hammer. If you "miscount" again, I will eternally push for your lynch.

@all

We really need more activity! The majority of the posting is being done by about half the players, and its getting rather repetitive. We need other opinions!

@mod

This may be premature, but can we get a mass-prod sent out? I don't want to overstep my bounds on this, but I feel that not enough is being posted by players as a whole. No-one really deserves to be prodded individually now that Naben has been replaced, but several players' activity is rather low.

Preview edit: Good to have you, veridis. Would you mind if I asked you to get an avatar? It's easier to keep track of who says what. Sorry, but a reduction in walls just doesn't work in a game like this. Both Mute, Ty, Stels, and I seem to make walls pretty regularly.

[theplague42]

Edit: nevermind veridis, I saw that you just added an avatar. Thanks anyways!

[theplague42]

Double-edit: My numbers-theory psychology argument also applies to Neuky-Workdawg and asano-me. 49 and 79, 54 and 54. There are just way too many similarities between these numbers to be true values for the scumminess of each player. Also, why is it ??????? for naben/veridis? 60 is supposed to be the value for an absolute null-tell. Could it be another sign that the table was made up on the spot? If he really kept a saved table elsewhere, or truly copied it and change the numbers to reflect his genuine tells, wouldn't it follow the 60's that were in there the first time he posted the table?

[theplague42]

@the plague 42 You have been pretty harsh on me the whole time i have been a replacement or a stern teacher. Essentially i accepted that maybe i acted a little hastily and retracted that error. If my explanation for voting without explanation was not good enough for you i am sorry but that is life. I intended to explain my reasons and did so and if they are not acceptable to you again such is life. They are my reasons and if that makes me appear skum or town so be it the reasons stay the same. At the end of the day this is a learning game for me and will be trying to pick up on things as quick as possible but if i make the odd mistake...guess what i am human.

Your vote has remained on me since the start so i could have gone for the i am gonna vote for you right back ploy but i am not a child and also more importantly dont think you are skum so i wont.

Please give me a little slack.

I'm sorry if I'm seeming harsh. That's just my way of typing. I tend to use sarcasm and the like a lot; it's just my style. I'm about to say something else in the next paragraph, and I'm just telling you that I'll try to be as non-condescending as possible about it.

Look at the bolded part. You claim that my vote has been on you since the start. It's not. Check the last votecount if you don't believe me. I will not vote you for fear of causing you to go ballistic and quit this site forever, but I do want to point that out as a major mistake.

Last thing: It's scum, not skum. End of teaching to you on my part. Sorry for any harshness.

[theplague42]

@Stels
Why are you unvoting Mute? You were also unvoted Ty after the pseudo-hammer. Both times you claimed you wanted to be careful. What's the reasoning behind this? I can understand unvoting Ty, but Mute was at L-2 when you unvoted. What's your reasoning behind this? I don't agree that he should be lynched immediately, but why aren't you keeping your vote on suspects? This back-forth wish-wash pressuring is suspicious.

[theplague42]

@asano
Once again, sorry for seeming harsh, but you still didn't say anything about you being incorrect in stating that I was voting for you.

Also, you're a FIDE master? That's very impressive. What's your rating? Is it ELO or something else?

[theplague42]

Workdawg

In the future, just make sure you know what the votecount is before you vote. I've made that mistake already. I would also highly suggest laying out all your reasoning behind any vote you make up front so that everyone knows why you vote. It's much less suspicious that way.

As I remember it, your reason for trying to hammer Ty was to move the game along, not a miscount.

Asano

All i was asking is that you cut me a little slack and remember that i am a newbie. I am sure most of you have many games under your belts and have worked on your ideas and fine tuned how you go about it but i have never played a game quite like this before.[/b]Actually, only three of us do. Probably two or three of the other six have completed one game, with the other three being complete newbies.

[theplague42]

Hmmm forgot quote tabs on bottom.

Asano

All i was asking is that you cut me a little slack and remember that i am a newbie. I am sure most of you have many games under your belts and have worked on your ideas and fine tuned how you go about it but i have never played a game quite like this before.

Actually, only three of us do. Probably two or three of the other six have completed one game, with the other three being complete newbies. If you're actually town, you're worrying way too much about getting lynched and not worrying enough about finding scum. I would suggest going through the game, picking two top suspects, and finding specific things that they have said that are suspicious. By specific things I mean you should quote exactly what they say in quote tabs, not just saying "he did this, this and this." Do you know how to do manual quote tabs? I can show you how if you want.

[theplague42]

Ok there are too many walls for me to quote everything. I'll do my best to pick out a couple things that irk me.

asano

there has been 4 official vote counts thus far (i am sure you will be quick to point out if i am wrong) of those i have recieved a vote from you on 3 occasions

I'm quite confused by this. Can you specifically tell me the numbers of the posts where I supposedly voted for you?

Ty

Every time I scroll down, your wall just regenerates. My eyes were watering by the time I finished it. I can't find a single flaw in your argument against Workdawg. However, I do disagree about the table as a nulltell. The table is a nulltell in itself, yes. But the way in which Mute is using it seems very much like an easy cover-up for any inconsistencies/wild accusations that Mute may do. He just posts the table with some random numbers that support his views, and says "well, look at my points. he's obviously scum."

Workdawg

I have to admit, it certainly seems like you've got a strong case against me. You've obviously got quite a bit of experience hunting scum and analyzing posts. At this point, I'm not sure what I can even say to you that will convince you I'm town.

I will straight up say it, I am a townie. Any actions that you think are scum-tells are simply my ignorance at how this game is properly played. I feel like I made one major mistake and have been unable to adequately defend myself from the inquisition that's been imposed on me as a result.

Why are you claiming so early? You are nowhere close to L-1, even with my soon-to-be vote. And yes, there isn't much way to defend against an attempted hammer two meatworld-days into a game-day, much less Day 1

Once again, time really played no role in my vote against you other than that I was simply anxious to do something good for the team. The evidence against you I felt was strong enough.

Considering both of the other experienced players also placed a vote against you for their own reasons, I don't see how it's unreasonable to assume that a newb town see's some things he doesn't like and then jumps on the band wagon as well; especially considering that the two experienced players are already on board.

I do not believe you for a second on this. You specifically stated that time was the main reason for voting Ty. You later frantically defended that by saying that you couldn't stand waiting two more weeks for the day to be over. Later, you switch track by saying that you have other "evidence" for voting Ty. Yet you never once give a concrete example (parroting Ty a little here) of why you voted him.

Before you voted, you said that you thought Mute was scummy. Yet you tried to hammer Ty two days into the day. Therefore:

Unvote

Vote: Workdawg

If we end up lynching him and he flips scum, I'm beginning to change my mind and to think that Mute could be his partner. The sheer amount of time that they are putting in to constantly attack one another is mindboggling. That, combined with the immediate back-down after veridis pointed it out, could indicate bussing/distancing.

Although if Workdawg is town, then I still think Mute could be scum, but my suspicion would be greater than if Workdawg is scum. Now that I say this, I'm not exactly sure why I want Workdawg lynched before Mute. But I do, if just to eliminate all chance of another "miscount" and pseudo-hammer. Lynch all Liars! Yes, by that statement I mean that I believe that Workdawg lied.

Mute

Walls are only helpful to scum if they don't contain any real information. Ty's walls are progressing from SE-voice to player-voice as the game goes on, which seems completely consistent with the amount of in-game content to work with.

veridis

I do agree that the wagon got spooked, but I'm not sure if it deserves to be reinstated. I think that both Mute and Workdawg are both scummier than Ty. If I see townieness in their play later, I would be willing to investigate Ty more fully.

Neuky

I too am surprised by Nacho's lack of content. From the games I've read and my one played game, ICs universally seem to be the most aggressive posters. Its strange that he A. hasn't really provided much content recently, and B. seemed to have absolutely no emotion when dealing with the attempted hammer. He said that he didn't want to scare newbies away, but there are ways to express disbelief and anger without being scary. Although, QTF for the final comment you quoted. After re-reading Workdawg's reaction, I can see where that tell comes out.

Hopefully I can get a couple ISOs in over the weekend. With that huge storm coming up the east coast, I foresee lots of time inside in the near future.

[theplague42]

asano

there has been 4 official vote counts thus far (i am sure you will be quick to point out if i am wrong) of those i have recieved a vote from you on 3 occasions

I'm quite confused by this. Can you specifically tell me the numbers of the posts where I supposedly voted for you?

Well if you recall i have replaced angry scientist and you voted for me in: Post 30,72,115 and 146. The last 2 counts 168 and 199 you did not vote probably becuase you thought i would go insane and quit. Dont worry yourself about it.

I hope that helps your confusion.

Ohhhhhhh I see what is causing the confusion. I think you are reading the votecount backwards. The list of people on the left are the people being voted. The number tells how many votes are on that person, and the people placing the votes on that person are on the left. Example:

John - 2 - Bill, Alex
Bill - 1 - John
Alex -

In this example, Bill and Alex are voting for John. John is receiving two votes. John's vote is placed on Bill. Alex has nobody voting for her. What had happened in this game was that Angry Scientist had voted for me in RVS. Therefore, it could be mistaken that I was voting for him. Hope this helps.

[theplague42]

Logical Fallacy #1: False Dilemma. You clearly state that either I’m a townie not voting you making me look like scum, or if I do vote you I am scum. If you want to call it “advice” as a euphemism, go ahead, but it’s still presenting me with a false dilemma.

Looks like I have to pull the quote out again. I said:

You've failed to explain in your post why not answering your questions has any scum intent behind it. You also failed to answer my question. Instead, you posted a case on me which is concluded with a question: why shouldn't you lynch me? Well, if you're town you don't feel confident enough to put a vote with that case, so you'll only end up making yourself look like scum. But if you ARE scum, then go ahead. I'd love to see you try to lynch me.

...which is a direct response to your question "why shouldn't I lynch you"? I answered that if you were town, you shouldn't try to lynch me since you clearly weren't confident enough in your case to even put a vote on me, and thus your attempt would be weak. I also hinted that if you were scum and you tried to lynch me, you'd look scummy and get yourself lynched. No where in that post did I provide you with an ultimatum. I did not post ANY absolutes whatsoever. There isn't even a command in there; I'm just answering your question. So, instead of linking me to a wiki I've already read, try explaining why you're seeing a false dilemma.

Nacho, did you realize that the second quote above says "by Ty" when you said that it was you? Did you mean to say "by Nachomamma8?" Just want to make sure I understand it correctly.

[theplague42]

Actually, this format is quite nice for taking out specific quotes

tl,dr: The table is fine, but I don't like how Mute claims he will be using it. Without regular explanations, it seems like it would be an excellent way to throw suspicion on someone without real reasons.

Well, the easiest way to prevent this would be asking Mute the reasons behind his numbers rather than just asking for numbers themselves, no?

I've done this several times, haven't I? I've repeatedly asked for concrete examples as justification for his numbers, telling how many points were added/subtracted for each post/comment. He has failed to do so. His "gut" can't possibly give him concrete numbers. The whole point of using a table is to add and subtract points by judging individual posts. It gives a better overall view of a person than looking at their arguments as a whole. Changing numbers at your whim using "vibes," I consider a cover-up. Did my number-psychology bit make any sense? Or was it me just overthinking it?

[quote="Nachomamma8]

I'm a little confused. Which side of the argument do you like?

I like the argument in general, as in, I was getting a town read from everybody participating in it.[/quote]
Gotcha.

@asano234
Just for future reference, it's probably a bad idea to use the word "buddy" when applying to someone in a favorable way. Generally, scum team partners are referred to as scumbuddies. "Buddy" itself also has scummy connotations to it, specifically certain scum tactics. You can search the wiki for more details on that. For those, you can say someone is "buddying" if they are trying to gain someone's favor for no apparent reason. It won't be used against you now, but I could see some overzealous scumhunters attacking that in later games. They wouldn't realize that you didn't know what using "buddy" implied. Sorry if I seem like I'm jumping on this, but I don't like people being scared away for frivolous reasons.

Have you seen someone get lynched or almost get lynched based on that?

No, I have not. But I do think that it could lead to accusations of WIFOM, which is an often-used reason for lynching.

I have as much reason to think of everyone as scum as much as they are town.

I'm going to play with the mindset of "scum with medium probability until highly suspected/proven town."

TP42, how do these two sentences contradict?

Maybe I interpreted the first sentence wrong. To me, it seems as if the first sentence claims that Mute will look at everyone as neutral at first. This is also supported by his beginning numbers for people in the table. But in the second sentence (and at least one other time), he says that he will view everyone as scum until proven town.

Maybe the first sentence was a response to someone saying that their view was "town until proven scum." Mute may have been saying that people had just as much reason to be viewed as scum than town. Is my point coming across clearly? I can try to explain it more if not in another, longer post. It's one of those things where it's difficult to explain while speaking, much less typing. Basically, I think that he was saying that he would view neutral. But I may misinterpreted the wording; the wording really meant "I think that people have as much reason to be viewed as scum than town."

You probably shouldn't have even said that much. I'm not entirely sure what counts as "discussing ongoing games," so we'll have to wait for Drench for a ruling.

"Discussing ongoing games" means that you aren't allowed to talk about what's going on in other games. That means that you can't say "Well, Workdawg just quickhammered town in a game that I'm playing in and he ended up flipping town, so I don't really think that he's scum this game." You can say things like "I'm not lurking, I haven't posted in any of my games!" or something like that, but you can never ever ever reference a specific game. If you're unsure with anything like that, PM Drench. Otherwise, he may be forced to modkill you and no mod likes that.

I'll do that from now on, thanks.

If we end up lynching him and he flips scum, I'm beginning to change my mind and to think that Mute could be his partner. The sheer amount of time that they are putting in to constantly attack one another is mindboggling. That, combined with the immediate back-down after veridis pointed it out, could indicate bussing/distancing.

Why is it that you believe scum would put more energy into calling one another scum than town calling someone they think is scum scum?

Because the town can never be sure whether someone is scum or not, cops and such excepted. I don't think that scum are more likely to call someone scum than town, per se. My points is that the incessant tunneling by both Workdawg and Mute, when combined with their other scumminess, could point to newb-scums trying to appear as scum-hunting savants if/when one of them is lynched.

Nacho, did you realize that the second quote above says "by Ty" when you said that it was you? Did you mean to say "by Nachomamma8?" Just want to make sure I understand it correctly.

Yeah, that's supposed to say my name, not Ty's. At least I know you're reading

I try

[theplague42]

Dammit guys, stop writing so much!

I have some modding to do in a mish-mash game, and then I'll see if I can muddle through without wasting the rest of my day.

[theplague42]

Aaaggghhhh so many words! I seriously can't get much out of any of these walls. Workdawg's last string of posts is an exception, as its his general views on people with general reasons as a summary of all of his earlier walls. The earlier walls are just so detaily and overlap so much, quoting specific things from several pages ago. Waaay too confusing for me to understand everything clearly. I'm inclinded to agree with Neuky about Workdawg's posting. Even being at L-1, he continues to name his top suspects and give reads on everyone so as to be useful even if he was lynched. That is what town is supposed to do, I believe. Therefore,

Unvote

I'll hold off on voting back to Mute for now. I can't seem to really make up my mind about any specific person, and I don't want to pull another quick-change vote like earlier. With Workdawg's late-coming usefulness, I'm thinking Mute as a last-minute lynch if we run out of time. Almost two weeks to go, but there doesn't seem to be one specific ultra-scummy suspect, at least to me. Mute is still the most likely in my view, but that's probably just because two or three players haven't really been that active. On that note, I will be pre-emptive in saying that a no-lynch is a bad idea, just for anyone who may suggest it. I actually just thought of the possibility and how it may help, but then I realized that, with nine players currently alive, it would put us in an even-player game which is always much worse for the town, as LyLo comes one day earlier. That's the main reason I would lynch Mute if it comes down to the deadline.

To CINCLANTFLT (aka Mute):
This is an official announcement that Workdawg is now at L-2. End of transmission.

[theplague42]

sorry double post.

After doing a google search, a few links came up with regards to the US Fleet and how it ties into the Navy. I am impressed/terrified you know that I'm going into the Navy plague, as I don't recall ever mentioning that on this site. Even more odd is that I'm not even going to be an officer, but an enlisted sailor when I go in for basic.

relevant link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Sta ... es_Command

Actually, I had no idea. I've been reading Tom Clancy lately and he often uses abbreviations for all the people, especially in Red Storm Rising. I'm planning to go to the Naval Academy if I can get in... Weird!

Back to the game.

@Neuky
Thanks for the correction. I was thinking of the two unvotes, not the total votes

Not much else new, as I can't see anything conceptually wrong with Mute's argument. Although it does seem rather out of character compared to his other posts.

Preview edit: I'm not entirely sure that "Appeal to Majority" is in the wiki. Sounds like it should be, though.

[theplague42]

They all are. If you search the wiki for "appeal" there are four articles that come up. And from any of them, you can hit the 'Logical Fallacies' category and see them all there as well.

I've been proven wrong (yet again). I had searched "appeal to majority" and got nothing. Maybe I spelled it wrong without noticing. Thanks for the correction (yet again).

[theplague42]

Oh, and the Pacific. Excellent book so far! Still haven't seen the HBO miniseries yet, though.

End of Navy digression.

[theplague42]

That's the main reason I would lynch Mute if it comes down to the deadline.

I like how you don't have any confidence in that we won't find out anything new or someone scummier in the 1 week and 4 days that we have left. Setting up a premature lynch for Mute is also a bit scummy. We should deal with the deadline when we're actually close to the deadline and haven't lynched yet.

Alright. I just don't see anyone making any huge blunders that would take attention from the Mute/Workdawg soap opera, which has pretty much been the entire game after the Ty-lynch fiasco.

[theplague42]

veridis
Not much to go on so far, only 4 posts. I like his initial analysis of "the top three wagons" so far (and not just because he pegged me as newb instead of scum, lol). However, I don't like his excuse for posting the top three wagons instead of his top suspects (from ISO #3). He says the three wagons include 2 of his top 3. He says he doesn't want to tip off his number 2 (implying that his #1 and #3 or either myself, Mute or Ty and that #2 is someone else). My issue with this is that I don't really seem the harm in "tipping off" your suspects. As we've discussed before, information is power to town and it can only help town to tell us who he thinks is scum. If nothing else, maybe it applies a little bit of pressure to that person.

I have given you information, I've told you I'm looking at someone else. I could easily have made my 3 reads on the 3 wagons and pretended that they were the only people I was looking at. But I think I've spotted a small inconsistency in someones play and I let you guys know that. Were I to point it out now it would be a fairly weak argument. I'm hoping that it grows so I can make a proper case with it.
You don't arrest a guy for a broken tail-light if you think he might lead you to his hideout.

Nice analogy. It's definitely a different approach to how most people scumhunt, but I like what I hear so far.

-Veridis: Null. You have to understand me, 4 posts, but he piqued my interest here. He took a curious position here, went after Ty who we have forgotten about with an sort of logical POV. Have to see more for a definite read.

As you say people just forgot Ty, they didn't retract their earlier positions, they didn't acknowledge some good arguments for why Ty was town, they just forgot. I think many of the initial criticisms of Ty still stand and the wagon was spooked by the failhammer and the thread has been distracted by the dawg/Mute bickering since.

I definitely agree with the first and last points. Personally, the "initial criticisms" argument is a little wobbly for me. It seemed like one of the main arguments against Ty earlier was that he wasn't being specific enough in his posts. That has seemed to turn around, especially with his last wall. The other main criticism that I see was his general abrasiveness, specifically toward Nacho and Mute. I think that this abrasiveness is more arrogant-townie than arrogant-scum, but I don't think that its a true towntell. Also, Ty seems to be tunneling on Workdawg, just like Mute. Possible Ty/Mute team? A possibility as I'm looking at the last couple pages, ignoring the first few pages.

That aside, I'm getting tired of the Mute/Workdawg argument, as we aren't really getting anywhere. We need some new views, opinions, arguments, everything!

Vote: Ty

[theplague42]

@Stels - you did say earlier that when you give advice its generally for everyone - can you explain how this post is in the interests of town?

@Stels: I haven't lied yet, and I don't intend to start now. Certainly not to claim to scum for no reason.

With this, you can't claim a PR anymore, if there are any. Just saying.

I had thought this was suspicious, but I don't think that Stels would communicate so blatantly. Of course, that is subject to WIFOM, and I'm not even going to trying to outguess anyone. Although the "just saying" definitely seems like he's trying very hard to make it appear as SE-talk to a newbie.

[theplague42]

@Stels - you did say earlier that when you give advice its generally for everyone - can you explain how this post is in the interests of town?

@Stels: I haven't lied yet, and I don't intend to start now. Certainly not to claim to scum for no reason.

With this, you can't claim a PR anymore, if there are any. Just saying.

That post in specific wasn't advice, it was a sort of warning. I'm not fond of liars, but if Dawg claims a PR when he is about to be lynched if he will be, then I won't be so daring to believe his claim since he already claimed VT. Depends on the situation though.

Workdawg has obviously read a lot of games and articles. I'm sure that he's read about "Lynch All Liars" sometime or another. Your warning (yes, I'm calling it a warning) is unnecessary if Workdawg is as knowledgable as I believe him to be. I'll say again, the "just saying" comment really irks me. Calling it "warning" instead of "advice" also makes me suspicious. The words are pretty much synonymous in this usage, so it seems like you're trying to get away from accusations of being scumbuddies without changing the intent of what you say. Both "warning" and "advice" convey a meaning of telling someone what they shouldn't do. It's completely unnecessary in this case.

@Asano234: 16/23 Posts are all fluff.
No input for 12 pages. Jumps onto the Mute wagon for little reason, except that his reasons for voting was: 1) & 2) [To cause a reaction]. Jumps off the wagon when Mute puts a

FoS

onto Asano. Personally, I don't see the reaction that was made by Mute that made you jump off someone you had no read on whatsoever. Care to elaborate?

For right now, I think its just newbie-jumpiness and inexperience dealing with reactions to votes. If it was an experienced player, then I would be really suspicious.

[theplague42]

Alright, so. Ty's exit-post looks very towny to me. I would imagine (for the most part) that scum would be more inclined to stay in the game as everyone gets to play as scum less often than town. His continued analysis and information-giving is also towny, as scum would definitely want to go out quietly. I'll go ahead and

Unvote

Vote: Stels

as my number two suspect now. Mute has finally dropped the war with Workdawg and that had been the main issue I had with him. I'm starting to believe that Stels is scum, but I'm not sure about his buddy. The Stels/Workdawg situation is definitely suspicious because of the advice-giving and the fact that Stels said that the Workdawg/Mute argument was probably town on town. Although Nacho said this as well, Stels could be implying that Workdawg is town without strongly stating it. Asano still seems like misguided newbie, but IGMEOY. As for veridis, I have no idea what is going on there. I will say that I had a crazy thought about that over the weekend. What if Naben's super-late confirming was gaining time to talk with his buddy? Naben disappeared afterward, and my last game (yes, more single game meta-ing) had a scum-slot with a total of three players in it. My choices for teams are:

Stels/Workdawg
veridis/somebody else

If Stels is town, I would consider that clearing Workdawg. If he is scum, then I would be suspicious of Workdawg.
If veridis is town, then I don't know what the hell is going on with that. If veridis is scum, then I would have to gauge reactions and the like and do some review-work.
Mute's calming-down-ness has definitely pushed him back towards null tell for me. Townie with some definite tunneling issues. But apparently he can see reason, so I'm happy with that.

[theplague42]

Workdawg has obviously read a lot of games and articles. I'm sure that he's read about "Lynch All Liars" sometime or another. Your warning (yes, I'm calling it a warning) is unnecessary if Workdawg is as knowledgable as I believe him to be. I'll say again, the "just saying" comment really irks me. Calling it "warning" instead of "advice" also makes me suspicious. The words are pretty much synonymous in this usage, so it seems like you're trying to get away from accusations of being scumbuddies without changing the intent of what you say. Both "warning" and "advice" convey a meaning of telling someone what they shouldn't do. It's completely unnecessary in this case.

Oh god, now my word choice is being insulted. Yes, I am aware that technically warning = advice, but they are used in different situations. Advice is more friendly IMO than warning. Shall I provide an example? OK! Here we go!
You were walking down the street when you see a strange door. On the door it says:

[ADVICE]
Do Not Enter.

Would you still enter this door as opposed to:

[WARNING!]
DO NOT ENTER.

I'm not arguing about which one has more force. Yes, warning has more force, but that's not my point. I'm saying that you switched words to appear that my case was null, without actually changing what you were saying. Changing the "force" of a word doesn't change its meaning. The "advice" or whatever you want to call it is suspicious by itself, but I wouldn't vote on it alone. The clincher for me is the "Just saying" part. With those two words, that goes from "SE advice" to "SE communicating under the guise of advice."

And if you really want to argue about the force of "advice" vs "warning," your insistence that "warning" carries more force is also suspicious. In fact, I would argue that what you said is a "warning" under the guise of "advice." That is, it was a warning to your buddy about what to claim if he goes to L-1 again while appearing to give advice to an innocent newbie.

@Asano234: 16/23 Posts are all fluff.
No input for 12 pages. Jumps onto the Mute wagon for little reason, except that his reasons for voting was: 1) & 2) [To cause a reaction]. Jumps off the wagon when Mute puts a

FoS

onto Asano. Personally, I don't see the reaction that was made by Mute that made you jump off someone you had no read on whatsoever. Care to elaborate?

For right now, I think its just newbie-jumpiness and inexperience dealing with reactions to votes. If it was an experienced player, then I would be really suspicious.

Even the content that he provides can technically be called fluff... I mean, I'm not insulting anyone, I'm just stating that it bothers me.

I never said that it wasn't fluff. Most of his posts are indeed fluff. I've been guilty of this myself before. I just didn't really feel the need to say "I completely, utterly, and irrevocably agree with Stels." But I'm commenting on his quick vote and unvote, not on his contributions or lack thereof. The "jumpiness" is aimed at his voting, not his posts. If anything, his posts show a

lack

of reaction to what other people have said.

@Stels:

Workdawg has obviously read a lot of games and articles. I'm sure that he's read about "Lynch All Liars" sometime or another. Your warning (yes, I'm calling it a warning) is unnecessary if Workdawg is as knowledgable as I believe him to be. I'll say again, the "just saying" comment really irks me. Calling it "warning" instead of "advice" also makes me suspicious. The words are pretty much synonymous in this usage, so it seems like you're trying to get away from accusations of being scumbuddies without changing the intent of what you say. Both "warning" and "advice" convey a meaning of telling someone what they shouldn't do. It's completely unnecessary in this case.

Plague's said it. I've got a serious feeling of you and him buddying up. With each of your posts towards Dawg I gather that assumption, hence why I said that.

So what do you want me to do about it? Want me to stop talking to Workdawg? Should I just go and isolate myself in the corner so no one can buddy-up to me anymore? Want me to stop giving advice? Fine! We got an IC and another SE here to do that in my place. Is that really helpful? Figure it out for yourselves.

Someone's defensive! Usually it takes a lot more than what we've said to make something go off like that.

As for veridis, I have no idea what is going on there. I will say that I had a crazy thought about that over the weekend. What if Naben's super-late confirming was gaining time to talk with his buddy?

Do you know how absurd this whole statement is? Think about it. He was late confirming because he was talking to his scum-buddy? Really now? Let me break it down for you:
1) Scum can talk only during the confirmation stage + Night.
2) Naben did not confirm until the middle of page 4.
3) Naben can't talk to his scum-buddy because he hasn't confirmed yet.
4) Since he hasn't confirmed yet, he doesn't know what role he has been given.
5) Even if he did know his role, why would he not confirm when the game started?
6) Related to #5. If it's to dodge suspicion, how come you bring this question up? Meaning there is no point into confirming this late.
7) Scum-chat is maintained by the Mod, the mod would know when the scum are talking to each other, since he opens and closes the scum-chat, meaning that Naben would already be confirmed at the start of Day 1.

Hey, I did say it was a crazy thought. It was something I thought about and decided to post. I don't really have any conviction behind it. To #6, I was thinking of what may have caused Naben's weird confirmation stuff after reading Ty's post, and that popped out as a reason that could be attributed to the game, as opposed to just busyness or loss of interest, which I can't put any conviction behind either.

I'll admit that I didn't remember that he did confirm so late. My theory would make sense if he had confirmed right after confirmation ended. But since he didn't, it's probably just busyness/forgetfulness/lack of interest-ness on his part.

I will say that you seem awfully anxious to put down one of my hair-brained theories. Rather than just point out flaws, you feel the need to break down the entire situation like I'm some kind of an idiot (I'm only an idiot

sometimes

) and explain it word for word. Reason for that?

[theplague42]

@Stels and Workdawg
Workdawg's last post impressed me, I will say. Although he does receive more advice than others, he definitely shows other places where Stels has offered advice, including me.

Now that I've sorted out my thoughts a little, the real issue I have with the "advice" is not that it's advice. It's that Stels warned you that you couldn't claim a PR. Now if you were town, then you wouldn't have to lie. Only scum lie. All my other accusations, meaning my suspicion on word usage and such, can be truthfully explained to be wrong. But the core of it is that only scum would need to be warned not to lie. Seeing how Workdawg has shown immense familiarity with the wiki, I can't believe that he wouldn't have heard of "Lynch All Liars." So that can't be used as an excuse to tell him that he couldn't lie.

@Mute

Plague earlier on I commented on Naben, and how it was a few days after the game started that he had confirmed, and had not posted and was forced to be replaced.

That really does make a good case for that slot to be lynched. Personally I would like to lynch that slot, but as it stands it's semi-vacant since veridis is being replaced. Why'd I like to see that slot lynched? There's been no content added to the game from that slot and the original player had confirmed and not posted at all, even if the confirm was waaaaaaaaaaaaay too late.

To expand on that, yes, I'd count that as a push for a "Lynch All Lurkers" lynch.

Yeah, but I wouldn't consider a double-replacing slot to be strategically "lurking." I will say that I've seen a game where one of the scum-slots was replaced twice, and it wasn't that long of a game. But I don't think that multiple replacements is directly scummy. If the players acted scummy, then yes I would push for a lynch. But there have been less than 6(?) posts by that slot. Not much to go on. Let's take a look at the replacement first.

@Everyone
Pray to Drench that he'll grant a deadline extension with this replacement epidemic.

[theplague42]

@Dawg:

I have to ask, what was the idea that caused you to get off my wagon like someone lit it on fire? There was certainly quite a bit of posting going on between your previous post and the one above, but you were 100% convinced that I was scum before, and you haven’t yet said what it was that changed your mind.

Right now, I say that to progress the game, it'd be better to lynch the single most detrimental player, the one who did nothing, and the replacement that was forced to enter and provided little as well. That slot is doing nothing this game, and if it's a scum-slot then more the better reason to add to lynch it.

EDIT::
@Plague:
6 posts by the replacement. Of them he managed to vote for Ty and give vague arguments/reasons for his cases.

That's a really, really big

if

. It's super-scummy that you're pushing for a slot that isn't really doing anything and is a complete null-tell simply because nothing has been posted!

FoS: Mute

[theplague42]

Problem is he's being replaced without any warning. Same with Nacho. At least Ty came in and gave both his reason and an extra farewell of his final reads.

I'm willing to wait for a replacement for that slot but they'd better get a good read of the thread and give some usable speculations.

Nacho isn't being replaced IIRC. He's just been prodded. Drench had accidentally put "replaced" instead of "prodded" but he fixed it.

@theplague42: It's getting a bit irritating that you're nit-picking my choice of vocab. Ok, let me tell it to you this way. Think about what I'm about to say to you for a second. Ok, here we go: How does my warning of Workdawg benefit me or him in any way? He claimed he was VT. I warned him that that claim was final since he basically claimed the same thing twice. Assuming you think we are partners, which we are not, how does me saying that he can't claim anything else but VT help him in the future? Suppose he claimed doctor right out of the blue or as he is about to be lynched to save his ass, would I believe him? No, I wouldn't (depending on the scenario). Would you believe him even after his "scum-partner" warned him not to do so?
Another thing, you do know that I posted that after reading ALL of the posts that came before that specific post of mine, meaning I told him he can't claim anything else other than VT without arousing suspicion from me, when he was not going to die? Why would anyone give advice to their scum partners in-thread when their partner isn't going to die and they have the Night phase to talk about what to do, how they should do it, when, etc. Gawd!
Dude, I'm not defensive, I'm confused in what you want me to do. It's like I confined in a straight-jacket and if I say something, you treat it as crazy talk and criticize me with "OH HE BUDDY!" or "OH HE USE SE COVER". I'm not trying to use my status as SE in order to cover my ass, I'm an SE and a player. 1 hand I give advice, the other hand I play to my winning objective.
I don't mean to make you seem like an idiot, but I just have this urge to do so since those last posts of yours irritate me to the bone. The nit-picking pisses me off.

I don't want to start another fight like Mute/Workdawg. I'm sorry if I'm angering you. I tend to nit-pick. It's my nature. Also, I have read games where scum-ICs semi-use their role as town leader to direct the game. The choice of words isn't my main point though, so I'll gladly drop that as a peace offering. I won't let off on my main point, sorry.

Main point broken down:
1. You told Workdawg that he can't claim PR since he already claimed VT.
2. Town shouldn't lie, and Workdawg knows that. He also knows about "Lynch All Liars."
3. Therefore, you shouldn't have to give that advice, even as SE. I just don't see it as the kind of general pro-town advice that is usually given.
4. If you are town, how does giving that advice benefit you? The only thing it does is reminds a scum-player that he can no longer claim PR. How does this is any way benefit town?
5. That kind of advice, in any situation, will

never

benefit town. I can't think of a single situation where town would benefit from being reminded they can't claim PR. If they are a PR, then they shouldn't lie in the first place. If they are a townie, then why would they lie and claim a PR? Especially considering that's a pretty advanced and rare tactic. If they are scum, then they know what claims they can safely make and those that they cannot.

[theplague42]

@Nacho

@Stels - you did say earlier that when you give advice its generally for everyone - can you explain how this post is in the interests of town?

@Stels: I haven't lied yet, and I don't intend to start now. Certainly not to claim to scum for no reason.

With this, you can't claim a PR anymore, if there are any. Just saying.

I had thought this was suspicious, but I don't think that Stels would communicate so blatantly. Of course, that is subject to WIFOM, and I'm not even going to trying to outguess anyone. Although the "just saying" definitely seems like he's trying very hard to make it appear as SE-talk to a newbie.

Why?

I'm going to answer with a question. Why is it necessary to put in the phrase "Just saying"? To me, it seems like a pre-emptive defense against any accusations. Just putting the advice there seems unnecessary (I explained this earlier), so why add yet another unnecessary phrase to that? Lots of "unnecessariness" going on. What is your view on it? Is it necessary (perceived or not) or unnecessary?

PS. I just realized that Neuky had already asked the question about how that advice can be pro-town.

For right now, I think its just newbie-jumpiness and inexperience dealing with reactions to votes. If it was an experienced player, then I would be really suspicious.

In games like this, people are usually recommended to defend themselves and not others, unless the attack is absolutely terrible or scum-motivated. Do you feel Stels's attack was either? If so, why? If not, why did you respond?

I'm confused. This comment was in reaction to asano's vote and subsequent unvote. What attack of Stel's? I'm not aware of any that were related to the vote/unvote. Obviously I think Stels is scum, so the argument would obviously be scum-motivated, but I just don't know what argument you're talking about. It could just be a very reasonable and logical argument from a player who happens to be scum.

Alright, so. Ty's exit-post looks very towny to me. I would imagine (for the most part) that scum would be more inclined to stay in the game as everyone gets to play as scum less often than town. His continued analysis and information-giving is also towny, as scum would definitely want to go out quietly.

These are the types of assumptions that get you burned.

Alright I can accept that. It's definitely a can of WIFOM. But what do you mean by "burned?" Is it scummy or is it just a weak scumhunting try?

What if Naben's super-late confirming was gaining time to talk with his buddy? Naben disappeared afterward, and my last game (yes, more single game meta-ing) had a scum-slot with a total of three players in it.

This theory shouldn't have made it past the RVS. Even if it's true, it's not a big enough point to push a lynch on.

It's just a crazy theory that I thought of. I agree with Workdawg that crazy theories should be published. They might just be right, although this one is definitely completely wrong.

If Stels is town, I would consider that clearing Workdawg. If he is scum, then I would be suspicious of Workdawg.

Why?

Because my main suspicion on Workdawg is Stel's comments. I strongly believe Stels to be scum, and Workdawg is guilty by association. If Stels is actually town, then my suspicions on Workdawg aren't as numerous anymore.

Mute's calming-down-ness has definitely pushed him back towards null tell for me. Townie with some definite tunneling issues. But apparently he can see reason, so I'm happy with that.

Mute backed down immediately after Workdawg did. Does this make him townie for finally backing down, or scum for unvoting at the same time his main aggressor did?

I think that its townie to do that. The argument sputtered out instead of Mute going "Okay, I'm done, unvote!" If it was quick like that, I would have been suspicious. But it seems to me that they agreed to end the wall-war as it wasn't really going anywhere. Plus, that last little spat of arguing doesn't look like scum trying to get a mislynch.

So Nacho - why do you think it would be pro town to have a player, any player at L-1 with the chance of 2 newbies coming into the game, when we still have 5 days before deadline?

It would be a clear, decisive action. I'm not overly worried over accidental hammers on Stels because I think that he's scum. And think of it- the only really interesting discussion that's taken place in this game thus far has resulted from Workdawg's "accidental" hammer, so it's not like having a complete and total newbie waltz in here and hammer would be a complete waste.

Parroting an earlier question (Stels IIRC, rather ironic), I assume that you don't think anything will come up in the last few days until the deadline? I agree that getting the game moving is a good idea, even with 5 days left, but I'm just wondering about the reasoning behind that.

[theplague42]

P.S. It just occurred to me that, while you were surprisingly calm about Dawgs fail-hammer, it strikes me as odd about this aggression you've shown to me about my refusal to put Stels at L-1, I don't know what to make of that as I'm too tired, and too closely involved in the situation - I'd welcome others' comments though..

Hmmm that's interesting. I had completely forgotten about Nacho's unusual reaction to Workdawg attempting to hammer. I'm not sure about what it says about the Stels-Nacho-Dawg relationship, but it's an interesting contradiction. Maybe "contradiction" isn't the right word, but I think it makes my point.

Not much else to say really. I will comment that Neuky seems to be doing a good job of honestly defending himself. His admitted reluctance to even put Stels at L-1 is also townie to me.

[theplague42]

@Nacho

I'm going to answer with a question.

That, my friend, is what we call a copout.
Insert 25 cents and try again, please.

Basically, the advice is unnecessary. Workdawg knows that town doesn't lie. So Stels shouldn't need to give that advice to him. The "Just saying" is a pre-emptive defense against anyone who might say that Stels was giving advice. If anyone accused Stels of giving advice, then Stels could say "Well, I did say that I was just giving advice!"

@Asano234: 16/23 Posts are all fluff.
No input for 12 pages. Jumps onto the Mute wagon for little reason, except that his reasons for voting was: 1) & 2) [To cause a reaction]. Jumps off the wagon when Mute puts a

FoS

onto Asano. Personally, I don't see the reaction that was made by Mute that made you jump off someone you had no read on whatsoever. Care to elaborate? @Mute:

Stels: recently has caught my attention.

Care to elaborate this from a bit back? With this, I leave for the night.

I'm confused. This comment was in reaction to asano's vote and subsequent unvote. What attack of Stel's? I'm not aware of any that were related to the vote/unvote. Obviously I think Stels is scum, so the argument would obviously be scum-motivated, but I just don't know what argument you're talking about. It could just be a very reasonable and logical argument from a player who happens to be scum.

This one.

I do believe this was scum-motivated. Although it was an honest point against an experienced player, it's a rather weak argument against a newbie. Many newbie players have trouble judging what is suspicious or not, and tend to post fluff. Would you agree with this from your personal experiences? Anyways, I think that it's an attempt to direct attention away from Stels, as is the vote against Neuky.

@Mute

*sigh*

Okay, first point: You did misread something.. I said why I was dropping my vote, as I was tired of our back and forths that led nowhere and decided it was better to go after a slot that's provided nothing this game.

So you're implying that you no longer think Dawg is scum?

Did you ever say "Workdawg is 100% scum"? No.
Did you deny you thought I was 100% scum when I brought it up? No.
Is non-denial an acknowledgement? Also no... but it is something. I could go through your previous posts and point out a couple of times where you seem absolutely convinced I am scum, and not denying it when I bring it up says a lot, I think.

I would argue that there were certain points where Mute did indeed say that you were 100% scum. His post where he said "Workdawg, you are scum" after his 7 or so points were refuted seems pretty definite in him thinking you scum.

I already posed this question before, a bit differently (post 323), and your response was (post 324):
You still think I'm scum, but want to lynch a lurker

for fun

.

A copout answer if I've ever seen one, so now... to be direct:

Can you elaborate on one of these:

A) Why you are unsure I am scum now?
OR
B) What motivation a town player has to lynch a lurker instead of someone whom you are sure is scum?

Now, the above may look like a False Dilema, but I would be more than happy to entertain an option C if you can come up with one. I can't, so I am presenting only those options.

I second this question. And it's really not a False Dilemma IMO. Basically it boils down to: If Mute thinks Workdawg is scum, why does he want to lynch a lurker instead? Mute wanting to lynch a lurker implies that he no longer thinks Dawg is absolutely scum, or even a likely scum. Lynching even a more-than-even scum is probably more useful than lynching a lurker, except if the lurker has seemed irrefutably scummy in his few posts.

[theplague42]

Nacho was cop? He hadn't looked like one to me. I guess it was the usual meta of killing the town-IC.

Vote: Workdawg

Self-explanatory.

FoS: Mute

Appears to be bad bussing, but advice trumps bussing IMO.

[theplague42]

I'm just going to go everything so far in order, so it may be disjointed. Also, I may ask questions that have already been answered.
Edit: Ended up being a wall of epic proportions. Sorry for that.

Can you sum up your case, TP? I am guessing it boils down to these ideas:

1) Stels giving "advice" to Dawg
2) Stels saying Dawg/Mute was town-on-town

In regard to 2, it seems like this could be a bid to protect Mute just as well
In regard to 1, Stels was being suspicious (trying to paint Dawg into a box based on something he didn't say), but I don't get why he'd tell another scum to claim VT, you'd think he'd want the opposite

I have good vibes from Dawg and I am feeling much more like a

VOTE: Mute

Pretty much. Based on stuff up to Mute lynching Stels, Workdawg was much more likely to be scum than Mute, IMO. But Mute lynching Stels like that and Stels being scummy is incredibly scummy. In retrospect, I feel equal about the two of them. I'll decide by the time I finish reading all the new stuff.

And so it begins, I suppose.

It does indeed.

Could you at least do me the service of providing a reason, or specific case, that I could attempt to refute? I've already shown that Stels had provided other people with advice too. Voting for me based on the play of someone else who flips scum is a pretty weak argument if you ask me. Especially when the idea of the team was proposed so early that it would be extremely easy for that scum player to buddy up to me to draw attention away from his partner. I guess I understand why Nacho said not to deal in scumteams...

Requesting stuff to refute? Little suspicious to me.

Tl;dr: I think Mute is probably scum and he bussed Stels to try and get suspicion on me for the Stels/Workdawg scumteam idea that’s been floating about.

The first half is a good theory. I don't particularly understand the part about suspicion. How did bussing Stels throw suspicion on you?

I do like the rest of your argument against Mute. I'm not going to comment specifically on anything, but you definitely made good points, specifically about Mute's earlier lack of suspicion on Stels and his inconsistency when dealing with lurkers.

The MS Word thing was definitely the reason why it did that. Use NotePad (Microsoft) or TextEdit (Mac) instead, as the beginning and ending quotation marks are the same. That should work.

@Mute, I'd like details as to why and when you had suspicions of Stel... "That I'm not afraid to hammer" is not a good justification for doing so and it is in fact a scummy one as it suggests that you hammered for our benefit, to prove something about yourself

Good reasoning. It (Mute's hammer) looks very much like weak bussing.

Zeroth:

@Mod: How'd that prod work out, will veridis be here or are you going to look for someone else (again)?

Firstly: I am withholding my vote. Dawg, you're not my top suspect any longer.

In that case, who is?

Secondly: Nacho you idiot. This is why I say that; why did you make yourself a target? =_= *sigh* Well, at least with your death finding the last scum will be easy. But..

@Stels:
Nothing fun happens until Day 3 . But I'm likely to be killed early in this game, so I might as well make the best out of the time I have, right?

Just lynch the last scum after I'm gone, okay?

I can guess he assumed he was going to die? Iuno. I'll make sure the last scum is found though.

How did he make himself a target? I see no reason why he would be pegged as cop. IMO, he was killed because of the usual meta of killing the IC first. That comment was most likely directed at his status as IC, not cop.

Thirdly: @Sundy- Go read Stels' first few posts. Read the posts of his where he mentions Nacho. I can't describe it but they felt out of place for me, especially the first post of his where "he was happy to see him." Combined later on with he says how townie Nacho can be, but this really stood out. Why? At the end, the "hope you're not scum" and "would like to sweep scum with you;" these were trying too hard. They were weaker cases and I didn't mention them, as most of my focus was towards Dawg.

I don't really see how this points to Stels being scum. If anything, it looks more like scumbuddy talk to me.

Fourth: Nacho was the cop, meaning that either the last mafia is a godfather, or a goon, and town may or may not have a doctor still in hiding. I will assume the 2 goon-1 cop-6 town setup from today on with my case making. I don't wanna have a case built up on relying on a doctor if there isn't one.

There is no godfather in newbie games. The only possible scum PR is roleblocker. It would also be beneficial to know that the other scumplayer knows the setup, depending on whether they are a goon or RB.

Fifth: I believe Ty to be town, Neuky may be town, and I know I am town. This is all I will reveal at the moment until I can organize my thoughts better.

I agree. Except that you're looking really scummy to me by now.

Lastly: You may not like my defense for lynching Stels. That's cool if you don't. I wanted to hammer because, if I were to put them into L-1 people might start to re-think their votes. This is the frustration I had with Dawg. While it still amazes me everyone's accepted that it was a "newbie mistake" of his to nearly lynch Ty, it is only so because of him repeating it over and over, and everyone just accepting it as true. Psychology has a term for this, where if an individual repeats something over and over, the group will eventually accept it to be true. I did not and I will not fall for it, and I still call it a scum-slip, but Nacho's posts are why he was killed and I intend to find out why.

Ummm, you never gave an actual psychology term. And this is a game where constant repetition is actually suspicious, IMO. No, I don't like your reason for lynching Stels. It looks like rushed bussing to me. Please do tell where Nacho was pegged as cop. Right now, I have no reason to believe that he was killed for being anything other than the IC.

Now if I may do a little psychology myself, I think this points to the other scum player as a newbie. That is, not Ty. Assuming that the scum didn't know Nacho was cop, who would be most dangerous later in the day? The IC, as Nacho even admitted himself. By that logic, Workdawg and Mute seem like the most likely suspects. Veridis hasn't been around enough to send in a kill and Neuky seems town to me.

Ok - 5 people voted to lynch Stels, but add me as well, as Mute beat me to it.

That's six out of 9 players. Stels voted for me, and veridis had gone awol. That leaves Dawg not voting for him.

You're leaving out the fact that Mute may have been bussing.

Now consider Stels' posts that we considered to be coaching.
There's only two things he could have been up to.
He was either coaching his scum buddy, or casting suspicions on a townie - but if he had done that to me, I'd have been very suspicious of him. So how could Dawg not see the scumminess of Stels' behaviour if everyone else could? The whole of day 1 - neither Stels nor Dawg got strongly on to each other - despite the two of them doing the scummiest things. Just plain odd.

That's a good point, but I don't have enough confidence in Dawg's scumhunting ability to make that a strong argument. (Sorry Dawg, but I'm just being Simon Cowell-honest )

As for Mute: The hammer was a real surprise, as I was going to ask Stels for a claim first.

It panned out OK of course.

Now, I know the Scum-Mute may have done that on purpose, but then, I would have thought he would have considered me asking Stels to claim first (wouldn't most of you?), and then he would have known that there was a decent chance that Stels claiming a PR may have bought them an extra day as a scum pair, at the cost of (most likely) a town-Dawg lynch. If there's something wrong with my logic, let me know. Here's one for Ty/sundy - surely most scum hammering scum events occur after a claim (probably a VT one at that no?)

It almost panned out

too

OK. Makes me very suspicious. I will say that your logic is a little too WIFOM for my taste. I do think that Mute may have quick-bussed his partner to stop suspicion where it was at. That is, he was getting nervous and wanted to make sure none of that suspicion moved over to him.

[quote="Workdawg}According to your list above, Neuky, Ty and you are town (3/9), Stels and Nacho are out (5/9), and I'm not your top suspect (6/9).
That leaves Sundy, veridis, and TP42.
TP42 has been acknowledged by others as pretty much the most town player in here so far, and I agree.
Sundy has come on pretty strong to me and appears town. He got the correct read on Stels, but then he picks a less likely second suspect in Mute? Everyone else was saying that I would look super scummy if Stels flipped scum. It seems like if Sundy was coming in to the game in that situation as scum, it would be SUPER easy to jump on that band wagon and get Stels lynched and then me mislynched D2.
veridis is AWOL again, so who knows. Again, just picking on a lurker for an easy lynch target.[/quote]
Workdawg, I may be falling in love with you. (no homo!) Now that you say this, killing Nacho instead of me (if I'm really considered the most towny) may have been a weak attempt at WIFOM. Sundy's unfortunate that he hasn't really been around that long, and so would make an easy target. You would be scummy if Stels flipped scum because of the advice thing. But your recent spat of posts makes the original advice look like just SE-talk. Veridis would indeed be an easy lynch. It's funny that Mute flipped on his view of lurkers.

Mute implying that either Sundy or veridis is his suspect is really scummy. Veridis is just a simple lurker IMO, and Sundy hasn't been around enough to get a good read. I will say that the immediate jump on the bandwagon seems funny, but wagons happen for a reason. It could be that he just thought Stels was indeed the scummiest. In that case, Mute completely fell for it.

As for your considerations in the middle. I think you are presenting a false dilema here. You present the following:
1. Stels is coaching his scum buddy.
2. Stels is casting suspicion on a town player.

I would propose 3. Stels was simply playing the SE role. Of course, this is just going to sound like I'm trying to hide behind that defense, but it's the truth. Like I said above, I never saw a GOOD reason to consider Stels scum posted.

Something like this is hard to figure out. In retrospect, it will seem obvious what it was. I agree that it was a false dilemma, but your third choice is also a false dilemma. It could definitely be 1 under the guise of 3. But I don't particularly think 2 could be combined with 3.

Maybe he was also pissed at you guys for getting on his wagon with weak reasons, who knows. Obviously I didn't read him correctly.

Maybe he was pissed that we were right

No Sundy I hammered because I

didn't

want another "oh let's hear their excuse and find a new target" debate. That would've been needless. Instead of giving scum the opportunity to weasel away I took the initiative to lay the final vote.

You mean you took away any more info we may have gotten. There was no way we were going to switch votes away from Stels. I know I wasn't.

No Sundy I hammered because I

didn't

want another "oh let's hear their excuse and find a new target" debate. That would've been needless. Instead of giving scum the opportunity to weasel away I took the initiative to lay the final vote.

Ah I see what you mean. You DIDN'T want people to rethink their votes. My interpretation was off.

Lol exactly! He wanted to make sure that his buddy was lynched and he was the innocent, brave townie who hammered at the risk of facing our wrath afterward.

Remember when I first started, "everyone's scum to my eyes and posts prove otherwise?" This is not contradictory, my saying that.

No, it wasn't. But that certainly seems like a gentle way from pushing yourself away from scum, viewing everyone else as scum.

What I'm doing now is weighing in on who would benefit most from him dead. People he's targeted, people that've targeted him, so on and so forth. Scum does not kill without reason.

So Nacho being the IC isn't reason enough? It certainly seems like it to me.

"Friendly banter," or needless fluff by scum to appear as town as possible to a friend?
After your failed attempt at prematurely ending the day, yeah, people would expect a solid reason..but coming from you I don't take that as seriously as if from others.
Also, even if it was a weak case, I was right with everyone else that voted, that Stels was scum.

Friendly banter is often used to buddy up with someone. That's

exactly

what makes me suspicious. You didn't really say much about Stels other than defending him. You really had no reason to hammer Stels unless you knew that he was scum.

Lastly, according to the wiki... F11 setups with a cop are either 6 town, 1 cop, 2 goons or 5 town, 1 cop, 1 doc, 1 goon and 1 mafia RB. So either we are left with a goon and 6 town, or a doc, an RB and 5 town.

Good eye, missed that in preview. The comma after godfather should be a semi-colon, and godfather should be RB.

Good, I see that the RB-GF thing has already been cleared up.

Suspect list:
1. Mute- hammering without a real reason plus the possibility of bussing
2. Sundy- jumps on wagon after replacing in
3. Workdawg- still the advice thing, but last few posts are very towny

Unvote

Vote: Mute

[theplague42]

Wow yeah... disjointed seems like an understatement almost.

Requesting stuff to refute? Little suspicious to me.

I don't think it's unreasonable to ask for you to present your case. As far as I can remember, the last thing you said about me was something like "if Stels is scum, I think workdawg is scum too" and vice versa. That's a pretty weak case. If you have real reasons, why wouldn't you want to share them?

Truthfully, that was all I had on you. And the only thing in the game except for previous suspicions of Mute. I didn't think your play was directly ultra scummy. The relationship between you and Stels was suspicious.

The first half is a good theory. I don't particularly understand the part about suspicion. How did bussing Stels throw suspicion on you?

You're the one who said if Stels flipped scum, I would look more scummy... so you tell me. Assuming Mute is scum, he would have known that Stels would flip scum, and that you and others would look at me as extra scummy because of the flip.

Yes, Stels being scum puts suspicion on you. But when Mute busses Stels like he did, then all suspicion goes back to him. It just isn't worth the suspicion it puts on you. I still believe it's bussing, but not for that reason.

Thanks for fixing the quotes. I didn't see it in preview.

And here is the second part of the quote fail:

As for your considerations in the middle. I think you are presenting a false dilema here. You present the following:
1. Stels is coaching his scum buddy.
2. Stels is casting suspicion on a town player.

I would propose 3. Stels was simply playing the SE role. Of course, this is just going to sound like I'm trying to hide behind that defense, but it's the truth. Like I said above, I never saw a GOOD reason to consider Stels scum posted.

Something like this is hard to figure out. In retrospect, it will seem obvious what it was. I agree that it was a false dilemma, but your third choice is also a false dilemma. It could definitely be 1 under the guise of 3. But I don't particularly think 2 could be combined with 3.

I think 3 is a completely separate choice. I think when 1 was proposed originally by Neuky, he intended for it to be implied that Stels was trying to "hide the coaching" under SE talk. I know that he wasn't trying to scum-coach me, so unless it was some weird attempt to communicate with whoever else is scum, then it was just straight up SE talk.[/quote]
Actually, that's not a bad idea. Stels may indeed have been communicating to someone. I don't have time now, but tomorrow I'll look back and see if anyone else "claimed" townie sometime. Not a true claim, but just saying "I'm a townie" in a post. It's an interesting possibility for sure, and we have plenty of time.

Also, forgot to say, but I think that puts Mute at L-1 since it's three to lynch. Solid, concrete, true claim time.

[theplague42]

Agghhh another quote fail! Eh, it's readable.

Btw is my distinction between "official" claim and "in post" claim clear? I can try to explain more if not.

[theplague42]

Lol exactly! He wanted to make sure that his buddy was lynched and he was the innocent, brave townie who hammered at the risk of facing our wrath afterward.

You'll be surprised by how sharp Occams Razor is.

Sorry, not in this game. Simple gets scum lynched. Complicated is what scum likes.

Secondly: Nacho you idiot. This is why I say that; why did you make yourself a target? =_= *sigh* Well, at least with your death finding the last scum will be easy.

and

I'll make sure the last scum is found though.

@ Mute - I'd like you to elaborate on these statements if possible - especially the "easy" bit?

These two quotes look like Mute is trying to portray himself as the savior of the town. He just

knew

that Stels was scum, and is confident in his ability to find the other.

Well, it isn't as easy as I had first thought, but I'll see how well I can elaborate what I meant.
Disregard that he was the IC this game; he's done enough posting to merit him being a target N1. He's questioned nigh on everyone in the game, and given nothing solid to go on, e.g. "This person is scum because [X, Y, Z]," except only in passing. I've a great deal of talent when it comes to picking up on reads of people, i.e. whether or not I like what I see. So far (real life and game-wise), it's proven pretty damn successful. Believe me or not, I've got the hammer of Stels this game and my first game here as a doc (link in sig) that should speak enough as evidence to that end.

Yeah, lying isn't usually as easy as you think it is.

Your argument on why Nacho was lynched seems very logical, surprisingly. Of course, there's always the possibility that you NK'd him because of those reasons. Why are you being so arrogant about your scumhunting ability? All I've heard since you hammered Stels was "Oh, I'm just good at scumhunting" even thought you lost your last game as town. Your unfounded self-confidence is through the roof and is really starting to annoy me. I don't like people who have huge egos.

HoS: Plague:

you put me into L-1, and ~2 hours later announce I am at L-1.
But hey, you asked me to claim so- I am a Vanilla townie.

So why won't you vote me? If I remember correctly, there has already been a discussion about fear of OMGUS earlier in the game. Angry Scientist said that I shouldn't be afraid of OMGUS'ing someone in RVS. Now, you're afraid to do it on your "top" suspect. Personally, I think it's an attempt to continue your WIFOM suspicion on me without being accused of lacking evidence. You have no evidence other than "he's so town, he's scum" and my posts look "waxy." What does that mean anyways? Too perfect?

[theplague42]

Zeroth:

@Mod: How'd that prod work out, will veridis be here or are you going to look for someone else (again)?

Firstly: I am withholding my vote. Dawg, you're not my top suspect any longer.

In that case, who is?

You are.
Since I know it'll come eventually, pre-empting questions here:
"Why aren't you voting for plague if he's your top suspect?"
1- Because if I'm going to vote it won't be for something that can be played off as OMGUS. I want my votes to matter.
2- I'd like to hear more and see how things progress. If I feel the need to later on I'll make my vote.

1. Already presented my case against this.
2. So you want to pursue me as a suspect without putting any pressure on me? What's up with that?

RE: plague - An aside first: Stels was scum and Nacho was cop, which leaves Ty as the last of the SE/IC players here. Deductive reasoning I'm using is that it's unlikely that scum will both be more experienced players, so with the experienced down it leaves the regular players to check. Using that I cleared Ty of suspicion for myself entirely. Neuky and plague are both arguably the strongest towns players here, but I only listed Neuky as I've felt he was the strongest. The way plague's posted this game felt too waxy for me for him to be town.

Once again, you're following the Gamblers Fallacy. First with Nacho, now with Ty.

One person being scum has no effect on the probability of someone else being scum.

Stop using bad logic to try to justify yourself. It ain't working.

RE: Sundy - (s)he was on the right trail with Stels, and I don't deny I've done scummy things according to others, but I am not about to change how I am playing this game because of that. Sundy feels town to me, as they've brought information to the table and have cross-checked the existing info as well.

3)

If I am posed a question by Sundy, I'll answer it. Don't see why you had to include yourself into that equation but okay.
The difference? I made sure of the vote count. My vote for Stels was because I had enough reason to vote for him. You voted and attempted to hammer Ty simply because you were eager to advance the game and thought he was already at L-1 incorrectly. That's the difference between our two "hammer" votes.
And I ignore your questions which are either ambiguous, or have no real way of being answered, or I have already answered. Mainly because it seems no matter what answers I give you, you're hardly ever satisfied with them.

You're having the opposite problem of Workdawg. You refuse to say anything unless specifically asked, and Workdawg is avidly looking to questions to answer.

There is

no

difference between you and Workdawg when it comes to hammering. Both of you truly wanted to lynch the person you voted for. The difference is that you checked the votecount first, probably because you knew what had happened to Workdawg. You wanted to make sure that Stels was lynched and he flipped as scum. This points even more to you bussing Stels.

Here we go again, an L-1 with veridis still nowhere to be seen.. When veridis did post, he seemed pretty town to me, and I wouldn't mind hearing what he has to say, so what's the rush? Mute seems pretty unpanicked about L-1 too. This is interesting, as Stels reaction was awful, and I remember Dawg's reaction persuaded me to drop my vote at the time.

So what do you think that signifies? Is it an honest reaction, or avoiding a reaction like Stels?

unvote

I'm not entirely satisfied by Mute's answers and he's still my #1 suspect, but there are a few players who haven't even checked in today and this wagon built up REALLY fast IMO, no need for trigger happiness.

@Ty, Veridiwhatsit: your thoughts on all this?

I can see where you would want more input, but I don't have much faith in Ty and veridis being around often enough to do that.

An aside first: Stels was scum and Nacho was cop, which leaves Ty as the last of the SE/IC players here. Deductive reasoning I'm using is that it's unlikely that scum will both be more experienced players, so with the experienced down it leaves the regular players to check. Using that I cleared Ty of suspicion for myself entirely.

A note here: I am actually a SE player as well.

Also your logic on Ty does not work. The probability of one player being scum is uncorrelated with the probability of another player being scum (except for there being 2 out of 9 overall), so the Stels flip has no relationship with Ty in terms of experience level.

Already pointed out, so ignore when I said it above.

I second every one of Workdawg's questions as he ninja'ed me on a couple. I hadn't thought of the one about lurkers and whether he had any other reasons for hammering Stels.

[theplague42]

Self-voting?

[theplague42]

Doesn't make any sense to me.

[theplague42]

Unvote

Yay driving.
Errands are done, but I'm going out drinking with some friends tonight, some broohaha about a party or some such, iuno. I was invited so why not.

Vote was a test, yielded no results sadly, but speculations came to mind whilst I was out

A "test?" Putting yourself at L-1 is a "test?" Pray tell what you expected to gain from that.

[theplague42]

Sorry been busy today. I wrote out a post earlier and clicked submit, but it never showed up in the thread, even though it said "your post has been submitted." I'll post it again tomorrow, as it's 11:50 here.

[theplague42]

Damn it, I knew hitting backspace I'd forget to include something when I rewrote it all...

There is one other thing I find a little bit suspicious about TP42. He IMMEDIATELY writes off Nacho's NK as scum targetting him for being IC. When I was rereading the thread, I noticed that Nacho had taken quite the interest in TP42 right at the end of D1. By my count, during that period Nacho quoted 24 comments various people made , and 11 of them were TP42's posts. Not all of them are questions, and not all of them seemed to indicate any kind of scum hunting. Just an interesting though that if TP42 is scum, he would seem to have a reason to off Nacho. playing it off as "IC killing" is convenient, though I think that's probably all it was.

FWIW, Nacho seemed to be a lot more suspicious of Neuky at the end of D1 than anyone else. To follow the same pattern as TP42 from above, 8/24 statements he made were to Neuky, and he seemed to be a bit more agressive with them.

That's because Neuky and I were posting the most before Nacho made that one long post. There was simply just more to quote from Neuky and me than anyone else.

Just noticed something. As I was looking back to where Workdawg was talking about, I saw Stels' vote on Neuky. Didn't have much strength behind it, especially since Stels flipped scum. Could the vote on Neuky been possible distancing? It didn't have any purpose other than that.

[theplague42]

As for the NK, that's because the town-IC is killed 90% of the time, unless there's a newbie or SE that is much better at scumhunting. There wasn't any one person who fit that description, so I believe wholeheartedly that Naxho was killed because he was the IC. If you can show me anywhere where he strongly shows cop or catches any powerful tells on people, I may revise my theory.

Did Nacho even end up voting for Stels?

[theplague42]

Just noticed the new "activity overview" button under the page numbers on bottom right. Really, really cool! I especially like how you can select and send PMs for prods right from there.

Anyways, I had actually sent myself a text message about Ty's question of Stels a couple days ago when I randomly thought of it. Apparently I also forgot about the message until I saw that Sundy posted it.

My stance is changing on Sundy. This last post showed very good logic and ability at picking up tells. I still think that Mute should be the next lynch. I really do believe that the hammer was Mute trying to bus his buddy before any claims or anything from coming around. Also, if you look at Mute's earlier play it could be that he was nervous that he would make a mistake and get wagoned.

[theplague42]

Also, I agree that the funny confirming times is suspicious. Considering Stels was one of the three, it could be that they went from talking in confirmation to confirming once they decided on their plan and such. I think I've seen a game where this happened before, but I can't remember which one.

[theplague42]

Meh. I don't think that "jealous" means anything. The sentence as a whole is funny, but I'm not sure whether it means that there's an RB or not.

As for Workdawg's analysis, you're just doing

too

much work lol. Try putting more tl,dr sections in your posts. Maybe then lazy people will pay more attention!

Alright I think it's time for a little bargaining. Can we lynch Mute before Ty? He's much scummier IMO and there's a much greater chance that he was Stels' partner. If Mute ends up flipping town, then I'll push for a Ty lynch. If both of them turn up town, lynch me if you want since I'll have orchestrated back-to-back town lynches.

[theplague42]

Hmmm I think Workdawg has swung to the other end of the spectrum. Very, very quick-hammer to really, really slow-hammer.

[theplague42]

Sooo...... anyone got anything new to point out? I got nothing.

[theplague42]

Unvote

Vote: Mute

Ha! More pressure.

Yes, this was my attempt at humor. Laugh please.

Not much else new going on until Mute shows up again with what will hopefully be a good, long post.

[theplague42]

Um, it's completely visible IMO. I didn't pick a size too small that it couldn't be easily seen or read, but I wanted it for humorous effect. Don't be so nit-picky. But I'll asked Drench out of respect for the rules.

@Drench
Is the small text above okay? I didn't think it was that small to elicit any concern. Feel free to change it if it is too small.

Lol: "it if it is."

[theplague42]

Plague please make that micro-text readable. It's up to the moderator's discretion but rule 7 comes into mind.
And yes I hope it will be substantial as well. I'll be doing a page-by-page analysis instead of an individual review of players.. which is to say I'll be reviewing everyone from page to page.

By the way, What of you formerly famous list? is it up to date? Care to share some ratings on your top suspects?

Especially since a good part of D1 was spent debating the merits of the table (or lack thereof). I think he only posted it once after the initial demonstration.

[theplague42]

Still nothing new until Mute and Concerned fulfill their promises. I'm more interested in what Concerned has to say, coming in as a replacement at this point in the game. It'll be nice to get some fresh views on stuff.

[theplague42]

@Concerned

Can you elaborate more on why you think Sundy may be scum? Is it just process of elimination or something more?

Preview edit: Workdawg, that doesn't make much sense to me. IMO, Concerned is completely saying that Ty "did a very good job" as town. The only way it could mean otherwise would be if it was at the end of the game and we knew Ty was scum OR Concerned was either scum/cop and knew Ty was scum. Since Stels was scum, nobody who is still alive knows who the scum is except for the scum.

[theplague42]

Concerned, I really hate to ask this but could you possibly close off quote tags and such? Reading the different colored fonts and stuff hurts my eyes. Now I know what Mute feels like Sorry again for that.

Preview edit: Pretty much. I think that we may be expecting too much from him.

[theplague42]

I certainly hope I'm not falling into a trap... I was mainly asking because you hadn't given a big post on him like you did for a couple others. The post is fine too, so no need to repeat it. Highlighting definitely helps. I think it's mostly the blue-on-tan that's most discontenting.

[theplague42]

Mute do you have a Mac or PC?

[theplague42]

Meh Never mind then, I've got a Mac.

[theplague42]

ZOMG, we should lynch TP42 for using a mac!

OMGUS!

FoS: Workdawg

!!!!!!!!

[theplague42]

I can think of at least two reasons:
1. Calling someone scum so early in the game, will actually have the opposite effect on most people's mind. The first thing one would say is "Come on, how can he be scum, we are just beginning the game! there is no way we can find scum so early", thus subtly implying that he is innocent at that point.
2. An extremely early distancing gambit. After all, even if Stels flips as scum later on you could just say: "Wow! did you see that? I just got a lucky shot at him during RVS but I was right!!!". Earning super-scum-hunter townie points.

#1 is a valid point, as I can see where that could work in some situations.

However, #2 would not work. If Ty really acted like he had known that Stels was scum, it would be a too-good-to-be-true situation. He'd get lynched faster than you can say it, too. If Ty played it off as pure guesswork, then it's a null-tell at best, not town.

[theplague42]

@Drench
Can we possibly have a mass prod go out to those not V/LA?

[theplague42]

Still feel who hasn't contributed much either?

[theplague42]

Really? That may well be in the rules, but I've never followed it IMO. The only (*knocks on wood*) time I've been mislynched, I spilled my guts out on who I thought was suspicious or not.

[theplague42]

Edit: Why the hell did I put IMO? Makes no sense in that context.... "personally" would be a better choice.

[theplague42]

Bah humbug.

[theplague42]

Gah. Thought we had that after D1 scum lynch....

Props to Sundy for his LyLo play. I think I would've votes Ty too

[theplague42]

@theplague42: you got lucky that time! I just didn't have enough time to say anything + laziness got the best of me.

Mmmk

[theplague42]

I think we should play another game sometime with these same people. This was a great game, and I'd love to play with you guys again. I'm thinking next marathon day, as I'm way back in the mini normal queue. Thoughts?

[theplague42]

@Ty
Do you think I was acting aggressively as a doc? I was hoping to use WIFOM to get others targeted as PRs, but I guess it didn't work out. Then again, if I wasn't aggressive then I'd possibly get lynched or at least forced to claim. Any suggestions?

[theplague42]

Actually, let me get it now: http://www.quicktopic.com/45/H/5ENqBpArHHDP

Quick read