Open 236 - Pamplona Mafia (C9++) Game Over

[The Fonz]

Vote: Ythan

[The Fonz]

I don't know how useful setup speculation is going to be day 1.

vote: Beefster

Meh, anything the town can work out is helpful.

unvote, vote netlava

I can't think of any protown benefit of answering that particular question. I can think of a problem (as Al pointed out). This suggests Netlava didn't really think about it very much, and just went for go with the flow approach.

[The Fonz]

@Fonz: Help me out here, what question to or about Netlava are you voting him over? The N0 Vig question?

Yes.

Blatantly anti-town? That seems like a mischaracterization. I was about to answer the question, but then decided to see if there were any objections first.

Well, pro or antitown is an opinion, so can't really be a mischaracterisation. But I think what is problematic about your post is that the problem with that question is apparent with about a microsecond's thought, so the fact that you didn't have a problem with it indicates you didn't really think about it, which is at best unhelpful.

[The Fonz]

UNVOTE: drmyshottyizsik

Who's scummier than Doctor M?

[The Fonz]

So it's basically a 'random voting is over' unvote? GRRRRRRRRRRRR I HATE THOSE! If enough has happened to mean leaving a random vote on is inappropriate, something has happened worth voting. Jump to it.

[The Fonz]

Unvote, vote: drmyshottyizsik

Yeah, I don't believe that one can make assessments on my playstyle that quickly. If you really like meta so much, you would have learned about the search feature by now.

I think you are definitely coming across as someone antitown in this game thus far, but I can also see why he thinks that might be playstyle. The search feature is kinda tricky in terms of specific games, and no use whatsoever in terms of finding games of particular alignments. Just give the man what he wants, unless you've got something to hide?

[The Fonz]

Ythan, please answer the question on everyone's lips, which is to explain why you suggested asking everyone if they liked vigging N0 in the first place. What were you trying to achieve?

[The Fonz]

Ythan, please answer the question on everyone's lips, which is to explain why you suggested asking everyone if they liked vigging N0 in the first place. What were you trying to achieve?

I have answered this. I was speculating on my own about the nature of the setup. It was unwise for me to ask that question but it did not occur to me at the time.

'I was speculating' is not an answer to that question. What did you think the benefits for town were of this kind of speculation? What were you hoping to achieve?

[The Fonz]

Ythan, I'm getting pissed off with you not answering my question and then saying you've already answered it. I've read you in ISO, and I don't see an answer. I get that you were speculating about the setup. I want to know WHY. This is what I do. I try to look for some semblance of a thought process intended to help the town. If I can't find one, I assume scum. I'm already suspicious enough of the fact you didn't see a problem with the question that is really, really, obvious.

Now, assume that no-one had a problem with your question. Three people say they are devoted disciples of that enemy of good theory, Pie_Is_Good, and will vig N0. The other eight have half a brain, and say they won't. What do you expect to conclude from this? And even more importantly, how did you think that would help you or others find scum, which of course is what town play is all about?

Same question if eight people are Piediots and three are sane.

[The Fonz]

Reading Ythan is kinda hard since... y'know, people don't normally admit that there is absolutely no protown reason for their actions.

[The Fonz]

Meh, I was going to use my vote to issue a call to arms for lurkerhunting here, but the worst lurker is the guy i'm already voting, and probably the worst active lurker is V/LA. So, yeah, join me on Netlava.

[The Fonz]

Meh, I was going to use my vote to issue a call to arms for lurkerhunting here, but the worst lurker is the guy i'm already voting, and probably the worst active lurker is V/LA. So, yeah, join me on Netlava.

How am I active lurking?

I wasn't referring to you.

[The Fonz]

Furthermore, I reread and did an ISO, and I'm not at all liking how overly defensive he was about Alduskkel's RANDOM vote.

1) You kinda contradicted yourself there, saying it was Ythan who was too lazy to go back and quote himself. That implies that the answers were there, and therefore Ythan was in the right.

2) Overly defensive is a scum argument. Also, to my mind, he wasn't defensive, he was attacking- trying to place pressure on a minor point to get the game going. This to my mind is slightly townish, as it reads as trying to create an argument to get the game going. I've also attacked players in the past for seemingly being unable to keep their story straight about their reasons for their random votes.

There's also the kind of amusing contradiction between you attacking Ythan for refusing to defend himself and attacking him for being too defensive.

Unvote, vote: Beefster

At Netlava: Zajnet is the worst active lurker.

[The Fonz]

At Netlava: Zajnet is the worst active lurker.

Umm, do you know what active lurking is? I've been straight up lurking because I've been out of town. Active lurking would be if I was posted on a regular basis, but with no content. Anyways, expect more later today.

Funnily enough, having played on the site for three years, I have come across active lurking, but nonetheless, I do find your condescending douchiness refreshing. [/sarcasm]

You've been

V/LA

because you've been out of town. You know when I said 'The worst active lurker is V/LA?' That. I wasn't holding that against you, in fact, it's the reason I didn't vote you then (it's pointless trying to pressure someone who isn't there). What I am holding against you is your lack of content up to that point, and your attempt to pass your fence-sitting off as 'just my playstyle.' THAT is active lurking.

At Netlava: Zajnet is the worst active lurker.

Active lurking means that a person is trying to appear active without posting anything of substance and a definite cause for suspicion. I'm curious why you said Zajnet was active lurking without placing any suspicion on him.

What the hell gives you the impression that I had no suspicion of him?

PROX!!!!!!!! HI!

What do you think of what's been happening since you last posted? I really don't like how you take the time to post but don't even comment on stuff. That's called active lurking, Fonz, in case the explanations didn't clarify enough.
.

You're an asshat. That means I don't like you very much.

Not knowing what active lurking means isn't a scum tell, but I think some of the other things Fonz has been saying could be. For example, his case on Beefster seems very contrived.

Funny, I found Beefster's case contrived. That's why I, y'know, voted him.

[The Fonz]

Prox, are you a Mastin alt?

[The Fonz]

More the way he's made a massive wall of text, a lot of which seems to be irrelevant or trivial.

Bingo, and also the sentence or two of quote, sentence of response, another quote structure. Prox, bear in mind people HATE Mastin, and some are willing to policy lynch him just for being him because of the negative impact posts like that have on the game (although at least so far you have not shown the worst part of Mastin's game, that is, his tendency to repeat himself in slightly different wording). It would be helpful if your posts were more concise and kept to that info which is strictly relevant, for all our sakes.

(Odds on someone interpreting this as coaching? Short).

[The Fonz]

Why do you insist that Al make up a reason for his random vote? What is going through your head?

Knowing how players in this game would act as a vigilante, a role whose actions are immediately apparent if successful, would aid in my speculation. I was trying to narrow it down but in this complicated setup that really won't be fruitful for some time.

THERE IT IS! THE REASON YTHAN ROLEFISHED. HE ACTUALLY DID ANSWER THE QUESTION!

He didn't explain the purpose of his speculation, which is what I wanted to know. He said 'I would know how players act, which would help my speculation' which simply begs the question.

Also, wouldn't it have been easier to just go ahead and quote the post you knew you already made or at least restate what you had already said rather "I've already said this"?

Standing on principle, which is something I've done loads of times, like when I refuse to answer a question because I believe it is stupid, even if I know full well the questioner is going to keep pressing me and find me scummy for it.

Oh, and I really don't think he backtracked. He said 'I want to work out how people would act as vigs, this would help my setup speculation.' I then basically asked 'Why were you speculating about the setup in the first place?' and his answer was essentially 'Oh, no reason.' That's retarded, but it's not a contradiction. It basically asks us to assume that Ythan had a curiosity about the setup entirely unrelated to his win condition (he wanted to know as much about the setup just because) and either didn't care about or didn't realise the impact it would have on his win condition. I find that implausible, but I find a lot about Ythan implausible. People are strange sometimes.

[The Fonz]

I thought it was obvious that he wanted to narrow down who might and might not be vigilante so he could find out the VVVVV's or whatever. Or did I misinterpret?

We know there are an even number of V's, and so we know there is a vig in the game. People giving away hints as to whether they are the vig or not does not help ascertain whether it's vv or vvvv.

But could you, ah, wait to respond to the parts of my post directed at specific people until they respond to them?

Not if I think the answer is utterly obvious to any third party paying attention.

[The Fonz]

Or to put it another way, I reserve the right to attack the question for being stupid, pointless or badly thought ought, whether or not it has yet been answered.

[The Fonz]

Bloody hell, I'd forgotten Dry Fit was in this game. Think we have a new 'worst lurker.'

[The Fonz]

(Odds on someone interpreting this as coaching? Short).

Why are you preemptively deflecting suspicions?

Because as I was writing I thought "I bet some idiot is going to take this as coaching and we're going to have a tedious back-and-forth.'

Hey Zajnet, how's that long post going?

[The Fonz]

OK so. Care to address my rebuttal of your attack re: 'Active lurking?'

[The Fonz]

If a large percent of respondents would hold fire on N0 as vigs, or vice versa, it would be indicative of whether there was a vig in a game with only one kill N0.

But Ythan, we KNEW there was a vig (or two) in the game before you made that post. Did you not read the first two posts of the game? The sole consequence of your question would be to narrow down who it is.

[The Fonz]

Did you miss the first two posts of the game, or disagree with them, or what? I find it utterly incredible someone engaged in setup speculation wouldn't see the flip on the N0 death, and try to see from that what they could work out about the setup.

[The Fonz]

I saw a dead one-shot. I am fairly certain that this leaves uncertain whether there is a vigilante or there are two.

Yes, there is, but this contradicts what you said about 'whether or not there is a vigilante in the game.'

It would be indicative of whether there was

a

vig in a game with only one kill N0.

Emphasis mine. So there's a 'can't get his story straight' angle on this, which to me is more of an angle than the actual rolefish, because I think if you were scum and realised the implication of the question, you'd know people would be unwilling to answer it and therefore you'd draw a ton of suspicion for little gain.

It would be indicative of whether there was

a

vig in a game with only one kill N0.

Incidentally, for those genuinely interested in setup speculation, the chances of something which occurs at a one in ten chance occurring 4 times in seven is very slim indeed, so it's a fairly safe working assumption that we are dealing with VV.

Incidentally, @Prox: Al has already answered that question. He states that he closed his eyes, pointed at the player list, and went 'eeny meenie miney mo' which to me seems eminently plausible and not evidence that he lied at all.

[The Fonz]

It's just not a 'mistake' that I can easily see someone who is being open and honest making. 'I was speculating, there was no reason' to 'I was speculating in order to work out if there was a vig' (until it is pointed out that this makes no sense) to 'I was speculating to see if there was ONE vig or TWO' is a pretty big drift. I mean, if the last was what you were doing, why wouldn't you say so six pages ago, and this whole thing would smell a whole lot less?

Yes, I believe that Al telling the truth is by far the likeliest explanation.

[The Fonz]

I have absolutely no idea what you're referring to in the previous post, or why 'it' being posted after the 'incident' is remotely relevant.

Ythan, you are trying to blame others for the fact that you did something that has basically no protown justification, then contradicted yourself in attempting to explain it away. OF COURSE WE'RE GOING TO FIND SOMETHING LIKE THAT SUSPICIOUS.

[The Fonz]

For the umpteenth time; okay, vote me. Then get on with it. We're on page eleven. I'm not going to elaborate my defense because there is nothing to elaborate. I can either wait for you to stop caring or

make something up.

I'll do the former. .

For the umpteenth time; I'd got to the situation when I thought you were just being an asshole. Then you contradicted yourself. I will not be bullied, harangued, or pressured into dropping this just because you say so. I'm pursuing this PRECISELY because I'm far from sure you're scum. I'm trying to figure out why you'd be acting this way as town, but you apparently are trying to be as obstructionist as possible with regard to this aim.

[The Fonz]

Or, in other words, I think you've done precisely the bolded.

[The Fonz]

I'm not acting like a victim. I don't understand why you are, or are making out like this is somehow an illegitimate line of investigation.

[The Fonz]

I'm not saying 'Nope you're lying.' My instinct is that you're telling the truth. The thing is, every scummy thing you do, you just go 'It was a mistake' and then act like no further discussion is permissible.

[The Fonz]

Also, Al's statements do contradict. Its relatively hard to do eeny-meeny-miney-mo with your eyes closed for starters.

No, it isn't.

@Ythan: Why did you state that you wished to find out whether there was

a

vig, which you knew already there was? Did you merely word what you meant incautiously, had you forgotten, or what? What caused this 'mistake?'

Why did you answer 'There was no reason' to the question of what you were attempting to achieve by speculating, then later change your answer to 'I was trying to work out if there was a vig?' And subsequently whether there was one or two.

[The Fonz]

No, when I said 'What were you trying to achieve?' 'Trying to work out the number of vigs' would have been a straight, and vaguely satisfactory answer. Instead, you obfuscated.

You

didn't notice

yourself making a statement about your intentions that apparently wasn't correct?

[The Fonz]

Are YOU seriously this dense? I'm trying to work out what the actual 'mistake' was. Did you MEAN to write 'how many' rather than 'if there is a?' Did you temporarily forget that you knew full well there was a vig, and therefore at that moment you thought what you were accurately representing your intentions? And people can realise something was a mistake in retrospect. Bloody hell.

I mean, when you were asking whether people minded answering if they would vig N0, did you forget that you were asking the question, or did you not realise the implication? I think it's the latter. There is more than one type of mistake. Jesus Christ.

[The Fonz]

I'm sure I did but I don't keep track of or take notes on the writing process behind everyone one of my posts so I can waste time answering these sorts of questions later. I also don't see how you missed my previous sentiment and think that realizing a mistake

after

the fact somehow gives you an edge on remembering what you were thinking in the past.

Well, normally when I make a mistake, then I notice it or pointed out, I can remember what I meant to say, and have a reaction like 'oh crap I wrote the wrong thing there' or 'oh crap I forgot about X-' whether I had meant what I had said but forgotten something important, or if I'd simply made a typo. If someone points out a supposed flaw in my logic, I can remember whether I didn't consider the objection at all, or considered it and dismissed it at the time, etc.

And no, I wasn't asking what people would do as vigs when I asked if they'd like to answer. You can say a is b until you're blue in the face but it won't go anywhere an I'm not going to help you pound a square peg into a round hole.

And I didn't say you were. But presumably, if no one had a problem, you'd have asked, yes?

[The Fonz]

@Fonz: In other games I've seen you try to get the town to agree to certain things when the game starts. Why didn't you do that here?

Other game

s

? Really? I tried to get folks to agree not to do antitown stuff in one game I can recall. It didn't work out that well.

[The Fonz]

What the hell gives you the impression that I had no suspicion of him?

There was no indication of suspicion, when normally I'd expect an active lurking accusation to be a somewhat strong accusation.

Erm, of course there was suspicion. To start with, to state that X is the worst active lurker in the game is an expression of suspicion in itself: it

goes without saying

. Plus, y'know, the whole me indicating I would have voted him had he not been V/LA thing (when I talked about how I wanted to use my vote to encourage lurkerhunting, but couldn't because I was already voting the worst lurker and the worst active lurker was out of town).

Speaking of lurkers and active lurkers, how about someone who doesn't post much, and when he does says nothing memorable?

Unvote, Vote: Dry Fit

[The Fonz]

Speaking of lurkers and active lurkers, how about someone who doesn't post much, and when he does says nothing memorable?

Unvote, Vote: Dry Fit

Okay. Do you think I'm scum though?

Jesus Christ, what is it with some people? Yes, when I point out something scummy about someone and vote them for it, it tends to mean I think they're scum.

Specifically, I see a lack of the townie motivation to figure shit out from you.

[The Fonz]

I'm somewhat surprised at people's assessment of Drmyshottyizsik claim being a poor one for scum. Yes, it might be 50% there's no D's at all. But think about it. If he claims backup, there's a 50% chance that there's no doc, but that won't get found out until massclaim, which probably happens at LyLo- ie, delays his lynch at least a couple of days if believed. Secondly, there's much less risk of a counter than with a doc or cop claim, because the probability of a backup doc in the setup is pretty low (but no SO low as to render the claim unbelievable). Thirdly, he doesn't have to fabricate night action results. As far as I can see, it's a BRILLIANT scumclaim.

I still find Dry-Fit incredibly scummy, but Zajnet conveniently hopping off the fence in order to declare willingness to hammer everyone else's suspect really sticks in my craw.

[The Fonz]

Three of any one letter other than T, I think, is so unlikely that a counterclaim ought to come if anyone claimed doc or cop, especially since we know there's two Vs. In which case, the chance of a nurse counterclaim is only ever so slightly higher, and the fact that you don't have to deal with the 'Why wasn't X nightkilled?' factor helps as well. I just think it's what I'd do if i were run up day one as scum in this setup.

[The Fonz]

Netlava is right. If someone says 'X appears to be scumhunting' that means 'It looks to me like X is [actually] scumhunting.' Not 'X is either scumhunting, or trying to look like he is.'

My problem with Dry-Fit is less saying little, which can be explained by RL issues, as with what he says (or rather, doesn't) whne he does post. I don't see scumhunting. I mean, he apparently took some fairly serious effort to meta me (having claimed to have seen me do something in multiple games- to my recollection, I've never played with him) then came up with one minor and incorrect point and dropped it immediately it was challenged. The rest just seems to be him trying to discourage anyone from attacking him.

That said, Zajnet was every bit as bad in this regard, and also has:

a) Misrepresenting me by claiming that him being V/LA- not posting- had ANYTHING to do with why I suspected him

b) His opportunistic and hypocritical jump on Dry-Fit when it looked like the latter was going down

c) The contradiction between his earlier fencesitting and point b). Sure seems like he made his mind up quick when someone got put in killing range, doesn't it?

I'd probably rather vote for Zaj than Dry-Fit right now, but I'll only do it if someone's willing to go with me- there's no sense in forming a one-man wagon at this stage.

[The Fonz]

Unvote, vote beefster

We just have to try to get any lynch off now, so better break tie. beefster, claim.

[The Fonz]

Because i've seen this happen before, and with two wagons at l-2, it turns into a giant game of chicken, with people on both wagons hoping someone on the other blinks first, and you end up with a nolynch. At 4 hours or so to deadline, it's time to act to get SOMEONE lynched. Btw can some1 put a post in the vla thread 4 me? My computer died, am posting from phone. may be a day or 2 before back online properly.

[The Fonz]

Hmmmm, so today will be the day when everyone has the same top two suspects, will it?

I need to go back and look at the Ythan wagon. I felt at the time that his assholish behaviour might act as a honey trap for opportunistic scum.

[The Fonz]

The way he questioned my motives D1 suggests not me, though it's Ythan, so who the hell knows.

Looking at his wagon, Dry-Fit's a dead but somehow town opportunist lurker, and yabbaguy comes across as the one player who really believed Ythan was ACTUALLY scummy.

The way Prox latched onto Ythan's REALLY BAD argument against Al is interesting. I'm feeling really uninspired here though, like I can't begin to tell if it's a scummy attack, distancing, or just stupidity. Damnit, I'm getting mafia burnout. I need to take three months off after my ongoings finish, I think.

[The Fonz]

Oh yeah, and the other person on the wagon was drmyshotty, who we've established is either a bigtime VI or scum.

[The Fonz]

Massclaim is a terrible idea. In what would be mylo, but with vig, the most important thing is keeping the vig hidden.

[The Fonz]

Well, Zajnet, consider that you returned from V/LA at mylo-vig, and proceeded to talk about the setup instead of anything to do with who we lynch. Like I said before, active lurking. Or the fact that you're unwilling to stick your neck out early on, but perfectly happy to hammer or put people at L-1 once other people have set someone up.

[The Fonz]

^
|

Stalling.

The fact of the matter is, the case is based primarily on what you haven't done, not what you have, so it's not going to be very long. That doesn't make it invalid. I mean, by that logic, you could never really lynch lurkers.

[The Fonz]

I thought of asking for a doc claim myself, but if no-one else does, a scumbuddy of drmy can claim doctor, and probably won't get lynched for it, and we're at mylo so that could be game over. Plus, on the off chance the scummiest player i've ever seen does flip town, having a hidden doctor around for the possibility of a save is useful: if the scum know who the doc is, they just target

him

.

I think plan as originally submitted is good. Only one T is an outlier possibility.

unvote, vote drmyshottyizsik

@ZAj: funnily enough, Netlava does look really scummy. The problem is, at least half the game, you included, falls into two or more of the three boxes marked 'Opportunistic,' 'Lurky,' and 'Little original content.' So yeah, he's scummy, so are you, so's doctormy. So were beefster and dry-fit.

[The Fonz]

Well, the flips tell me quite a lot.

Firstly, I'm pretty sure ekiM is town. If Zajnet were scum, then they were almost certainly partners, but it made no sense for scum-ekiM to stick his neck out like that to swing the lynch from one town player to another (would have raised the chances of him being town).

Netlava looks bad for being the last living of that no original content/opportunistic/lurky group. Prox is all over the place. And I've got a bad feeling about yg, but I can't quite place it.

[The Fonz]

When I wrote 'increased his chances of being town' I meant 'vigged.'

A townie lynch doesn't end the game if there's a successful save. I don't see any need to out a doctor who might not get run up.

[The Fonz]

You know, looking back over the game, it's really hard to see why a scumgroup NOT including Netlava would kill Zajnet. I suppose there's the 'He's very scummy so unlikely to be protected' factor. I don't see any vig tells.

[The Fonz]

You were his top suspect, he looked scummy and therefore was eminently mislynchable. One has to assume the scum were killing on the premise of 'Who of us is the most likely to be vigged, who's the most likely to do it, and who can we manipulate if one of us does die and it goes to another day?' For an ekiM/Prox/Aldusskel team, yabbaguy seems a more reasonable choice (assuming that I'm being kept alive either because I've been wrong, or because of doc fear). The same team but with yabba in place of prox probably kills prox or even you before Zajnet. Yabba/Prox I could maybe see.

_______________________________________
yabba actually really looks scummy for his 'Oh my, that nasty ekiM misled me!' thing. Especially since all ekiM's actions did was move the wagon from an unclaimed undercontributing scummy-looking townie to a weak-roleclaimed undercontributing self-contradicting scummy looking townie. There's no real strong reason to believe that's in scum's interests. Scum-ekiM would have known that drmy wasn't the vig or doc, but that Zajnet might have been.

Also, he is misrepresenting my play in MeF. I did not in any way, shape or form 'hyper tunnel' on StrangerCoug vs Quoi. I asked people to comment on it because it was the beginning of the game, and it was the first thing of genuine relevance I saw. And almost importantly, I did this

because that is my MO as town,

to try to get people commenting on relevant issues ASAP.

In this game, I was questioning Ythan because he appeared to be being evasive, and was really pissing me off. Note that I wasn't one of his initial attackers, and indeed never voted him. A straight answer would have got me off his case fairly early, since, as I made clear repeatedly, I didn't really see a particular scum motive for doing what he was doing, and stubbornness when it's bringing you suspicion is protown. I was trying to see if he would say anything that would confirm my town impression. I wasn't tunnelling on him. Again, not a lot was going on, due to lurking. I then went after lurkers.

The interesting thing is, I can see yabba connections to both Netlava and Prox. Prox, because yabba keeps him second on his suspect list, behind Zajnet, for quite a long time, and today, lo and behold, he's third behind me and ekiM. So yabba keeps Prox in the position where he midly cricitises him, but doesn't vote him.

OTOH, we have the 'Why is Netlava and not Ythan getting all the heat' thing in reaction to me, and others, voting him over him not seeing the flaw in Ythan's logic, and the fact that he COMPLETELY IGNORES Netlava in his first post today.

[The Fonz]

EBWOP to finish the top bit: Maaaybe yg/prox kill Zajnet, because Netlava's probably not that much harder to lynch than you are, but then, I'd have thought they'd have gone for ekiM. Although ekiM's whole push on Drmy possibly makes less sense if

he's

the doctor (and therefore knows there is one) so maybe that's a possibility.

[The Fonz]

I could see scum motives for you switching. Having confirmed Town shrinks the unlynchable pool, and the problem is that you didn't even dwell on shotty's scumminess when you brought up the probability point.

Well, for one, 80% chance of scum is ridiculously high. I would lynch on that alone every time, let alone when the player's also played like shotty did. Your criticism of it after the fact just looks like scum going for the mislynch.

Secondly, scum didn't need to throw shotty in the 'lynchable' pool, he was already there. As I said, I saw his claim as being perfect for scum in that scenario- weakest PR that won't get you lynched is always a good scum claim. In fact, possibly the only objection I could think of is that shotty is too dumb to come up with that. I particularly didn't like the way you tried to use that as an excuse to try to out the doc. Plus, they only needed one mislynch, if the vig didn't kill right. Zajnet was clearly in line for that.

One question- even if you don't buy the above, don't you think that it would serve scum ekiM to wait for Zajnet to be forced to claim? I always think, if someone puts their neck on the line to effect a large change in the game, and it doesn't obviously benefit scum, it's protown.

And you wildly botched the numbers, ekiM. We have 2 D inputs, which was 12% likely. It's 6:1 against DDD, which certainly isn't slim (shotty flipping Town was 5:1, IIRC)

Six to one is extremely slim.

yabba, you have a point on no chance if we mislynch: therefore, I withdraw my opposition to mc. I suppose, at least, it either clears a player, or commits a specific scum to the doc claim (whereas if we don't, either one can claim doc if facing lynch).

I could live with popcorn.

[The Fonz]

Guys, my home net is down atm, so i can read but replying at length is v tricky. Netlava, your point that 'scum are more likely to defend' just isn't true, especially at lylo- town should be willing to state who they think is scum and who town, and why. The fact that, as you yourself noted, yg's attempt to come up with an exp for why it makes sense for ekim as scum relies on ekim having a specific role, having targeted zajnet that specific night, then an unlikely town role existing, then that town role hitting precisely the scum rb. If you have to come up with that litany of individually improbable events to explain why he as scum would do that, but the town exp is very simple, then i'm going with the town exp. @ yg, yes, of course i know that if ekim is scum, he knew drmy was town. The words 'informed minority' ring a bell?

[The Fonz]

Without trying to start a pointless squabble here, yes, that's what I'm trying to tell you. I'm trying to say that ekiM's usage of statistics is scummy because the fact of the matter is that his supposed gamble was wrong, and you have to factor into the issue whether or not he was scum-motivated to do so.

Right, and that is PRECISELY my point. Working out odds like that is something town are more likely to do than scum imho, and shifting from a player that could have been vig or doc to one that definitely isn't just isn't worth the effort for scum. Overnight, I thought that Zajnet was probably scum and ekim had done that to save him, but it makes a lot less sense with Zaj-town. Again, when someone sticks their neck out in such a way, but it ends up benefiting town (keeping Zaj hidden) I find it much more likely town-motivated.

You would have been aware at the time of the possibility that ekim was scum and knew full well that drmy wasn't, at the time. To bring it up now, again, it looks like you are scapegoating ekim for the mislynch- it looks like you are scum trying to mislynch him. By attacking ekim, you are distancing yourself from your own role in the lynch.

And the 'one hole' in your theory is the size of a planet. There is absolutely no way a scumgroup knowing Zaj was vig wouldn't have blocked him, and your conspiracy theory to get around this relies on piling one unlikely thing on top of another. If scum know who the vig is, they don't even WANT to kill him- they want to kill someone who might be doc, because the one person the doc can't protect is himself. Frankly, when someone comes up with a theory so intricate and relying on so many things to go exactly as you supposed, it always makes me wonder if that person has insider knowledge. I want to wait until after mc to elaborate on this.

Also, I'd like you to read day one of the just completed Newbie 986, if you believe that me trying to get people to comment on other people's arguments in early game, or me tunnelling, is a scumtell.

@ NL: Your claim that you wouldn't have killed Zaj because he was mislynch bait just underlines my point. That is true for

everyone,

but someone still killed him. Therefore scum must have had some reason to believe, even though he was mislynch bait, that he was a threat to them. The best explanation I can see for that is that you are part of the scumteam, and wanted him gone because he suspected you. I've played too many games to discount the possibility that scum will just kill whoever suspects them and then cry WIFOM when it's pointed out. The second most likely explanation is that other players may have accidentally dropped hints that they weren't the doc.

I want Yabba or Netlava first, but I am happy to popcorn from there.

[The Fonz]

ekiM, night actions?

[The Fonz]

VT. So 2/3 of prox, nl, yg. I'm most confident on netlava. While i was waiting on prox, i re-read Netlava in mini love as town. Not at all lurky or opportunistic-looking there.

[The Fonz]

Prox, you are either legitimately the stupidest player ever to play mafia, or you're faking VIness, or you didn't think it through for more than a second. If netlava, yourself and ekim are all town, who do the TWO scum HAVE to be?

[The Fonz]

Why did you write that you'd attack 'Not netlava?'

[The Fonz]

Thing is yg, floundering scum and flailing newbie VI look a lot alike, and if he's scum, then i can't believe he wouldn't have been coached just a little or given a talking point or two. Instead, he's got worse as the game wore on- see his comments on Ythan v al which at least show effort. Need to meta.

[The Fonz]

Seriously, Prox, what do you expect? You've made next to no effort in this game. If you're town, that makes you my team-mate. You've not put a fraction of the effort into this game that I have, and so if you're town, the rest of the town has every right to label with every uncomplimentary mafia epithet under the season. In any game or sport, it sucks to have a team-mate who isn't willing to do the minimum necessary to hand his side a chance to win, and yes, it does piss people off. I've seen you posting in GD and the goddamn TITLE FAIRY while we were waiting for you to claim in the MC. That's just disrespectful. This is a mafia site, and your first priority when online should be ensuring you are UTD with your games (how many have you got, btw?)

The best I suppose that could be said for you is that you haven't gone and fake-counterclaimed a town power role or something else equally game-destroying. This game has had far too many town players doing jack shit to try to help their side, and I'm absolutely sick to the back teeth of it. Any reservations I may have had about taking a pretty long break from mafia after this game have been utterly demolished by your play. I've just had enough of the kinda bs which is all too common, if even your 'participation' in this game is an extreme example. Heck, you're not even playing badly. You're not playing AT ALL.

And I still don't know why you wrote 'Not-Netlava' when you apparently meant 'Netlava,' but it's probably moot, at least it's the beginnings of a stance. You can understand my utter disbelief there though, surely?

Basically, though, Prox, it's like this. With newbies who try to pull the 'Oh my gosh, I'm so out of my depth, I don't even know where to begin so I'm going to do nothing,' line, it always ends one of two ways. One, the newbie continues playing the newbie card to avoid contributing and gets lynched. Two, the newbie actually relents and gives some thoughts and feelings, and might or might not get lynched. Your call. Replacement is the coward's way out.

Also, could you explain the difference between D1 and now? I mean, you were willing to attack al over his random vote. Now you're not willing to make a case on anyone with three day's worth of posts and seven flips at your disposal?

[The Fonz]

Oh, and: @yg: Prox is at least as easy a target for you as Netlava is for him.

[The Fonz]

Why can't Prox be scum? VIs can be scum too, and if you recall, I have consistently found him scummy (and no, it's not bussing). Why are you instantly coming to the conclusion that he's town?

I don't know whether this is deliberate twisting of what I've said, or you've just misunderstood on a quite catastrophic level. I have never suggested for a moment that I believe Prox to be town. How could I: he's not done one single protown thing all game that I can recall. If he doesn't make at least the vaguest semblance of an effort, I'm quite comfortable with lynching him on the 'guy it would be most embarrassing to lose to' principle. The point I've been making throughout is

that I just cannot tell if he is scum or simply one of the worst players in the history of the site.

You are putting far too much faith in someone who *has* done scummy things, like swinging the pressure between multiple people far too quickly. I am not pushing a VI mislynch. Prox is scum.

You are baselessly calling my attack baseless.

Now this last I find hard to see as anything other than a direct lie. I have never called your attack baseless, it's a perfectly fine case to make. Prox is scummy. It's just also a case that yabbaguy, Netlava's partner, could make with ease to run up an idiot townie who's incapable of defending himself, in order to win the game for scum. It's a hell of a lot easier than trying to run me up. It's also (this is not quite as likely as the town or NL-partner explanations, but I've done it plenty in the past) that Prox is your partner, and you've decided to bus him in order to get town to rule out the yabba-prox pairing, especially after being called out for scumbuddy-seconding him. Prox is scummy, but so are you, and Netlava may well be more scummy than either, given that I've found evidence of him playing a million miles better than this as town. I think there's a very high possibility that he's acting lurky/no original content/opportunistic deliberately because half the town were doing it so he could get away with it.

yabba, if you're the other townie, right now you're not helping by strawmanning 'I think he's scummy, but so are others and I'm not yet convinced he is scum' as 'I'm convinced his town' and 'That's an easy case for you to make as scum' as 'that's not a valid case to make as town.' I'm not saying you're doing it deliberately, but what you're attributing to me isn't close to the positions I'm actually taking.

Would you care to take a look at the Netlava meta I mentioned and see if you agree or differ?

Also, ekiM, some confirmed-town analysis would be super-awesome.

[The Fonz]

Because shotty was being scummy, and

I needed to know if he was scum or not

. Plus, I was leaning towards him as my last suspect.

Why would you even think of lynching for info at mylo?

[The Fonz]

It would be super-awesome if Prox would answer the questions asked of him.

[The Fonz]

Nuh-unh.

[The Fonz]

Yeah, yg didn't phrase that very well, but I think he definitely thinks that vote makes you hugely scummier.

Personally, I know one of those three votes (yg on nl, prox on nl, yg on prox) is a bus, and i'm thoroughly confused as to which it is.

[The Fonz]

Fluffing? Pah. Try genuinely no idea who's scum since you're all so scummy. Though, you know, thanks for clarifying.

And my most likely thought atm is that you pulled away the vote because you couldn't afford to confirm the non-existence of a Fonz/Prox pair. Placing the first vote on Lava makes little sense given what you'd said prior to that. My guess? You placed the first vote on NL in the hope that ekiM or I would follow it after a while, and Prox could hammer. Prox fucked it up by following immediately, which would have left the 'Prox is scum or both scum are on Prox' argument indisputable. The way you've played today as if deliberately to make it as hard as possible to tell which is your buddy is pretty concrete, imho.

Call the bluff on Prox and possibly hand the very scummy Netlava the chance to hammer? Heck, why not. Like I said before, principle of 'guy most embarrassing to lose to.'

Vote: Prox

100% calling yabba as partner.

[The Fonz]

Ed: THe 'NL is scum or both scum are on NL' argument, named the wrong player. Oh well.

dieyabbascumdie

[The Fonz]

Fluffing? Pah. Try genuinely no idea who's scum since you're all so scummy. Though, you know, thanks for clarifying.

I don't understand this. It's loaded with all sorts of spite and I have no idea what this is even trying to say.

What I'm trying to say is your behaviour there made you obvscum.

And hang on- I'm saying that Prox COULDN'T have bussed Netlava with that. If you're Town with me, then your thought at this moment should be to take that theory into account.

This is just posturing, because you knew as well as I did that

My precise point is that your

How can you possibly be saying that I would "call Prox a bluffer as scum" and yet "hand scummy Netlava the chance to hammer". The two don't stack!

Because, and this was and is really obvious, that's not what I'm saying. I was calling YOU the player who was bluffing, not Prox. I wasn't suggesting that Prox' vote for Netlava was bussing- I was suggesting that your reaction to it was fake, because, y'know, it was.

The weird thing is that you probably realize that; by voting Prox, you're agreeing with me on this. There's no way Netlava could be scum if this theory checks out.

Correct: the clue was when I 100% called you and Prox as the scumteam. My point about being afraid to give Netlava the chance to hammer was that there is always the outside chance there's even more layers of WIFOM to the scum's play than you thought, and Netlava on his own has looked really quite scummy all game. The thing is, the interactions didn't look like that. Still, given that as town, I constantly second-guess myself, it was enough to worry about, if not enough to actually change my assessment.

________________________________________________

Specifically: the yabbaguy vote for Netlava, coming when it did, was the clincher. Like I said, all game yg has been saying that he suspects Prox, then when the chips are down voting for someone else. Prox ballsed it up by following his partner too quickly. yg knew then that I would show up, not hammer, and then we'd be left with Fonz-NL ruled out, and the huge obvious question of 'Why is yabbaguy voting with his supposed top suspect?'

There's other stuff, like the pushing to out the doc and the utterly absurd ekiM case, but the above is the crux of the matter. Netlava, look how he creeps from 'Prox is scum' to 'Prox is scum, but I can't help but take into account the following scummy things of netlava' to vote Netlava. And it might well have come off, too, had Prox not ballsed it up, because you sure had ekiM convinced you were scum.

[The Fonz]

@ yg: You have one post to let me know whether you're even going to try to convince me it's Netlava.

[The Fonz]

Fine by me.

Vote: yabbaguy

[The Fonz]

My bloody endgame record strikes again. Oh well, with yabba tunnelling me, guess whatever i did didn't matter.

[The Fonz]

And I, for my part, had NL as scum candidate no1 until the vote/unvote affair. I thought the Netlava vote was a) hasty, and b) completely inconsistent with the fact that you'd been ragging on Prox all day whilst mentioning Netlava only in passing and ignoring my request to meta, and then the immediate unvote: well, I felt like I was being blatantly and hamfistedly set up. I didn't think, if you were town, given that Prox had criticised (well, in a manner of speaking, he didn't actually make any arguments) Netlava and only Netlava all day, that you as town would have been surprised that Prox followed you. Combine that with what I saw as constant strawmanning, well...

In fact, when Prox threatened to replace out, that did kinda make me think him town for a bit, because replacing out as scum in LyLo because you're being suspected is SUCH a colossal douche move, like the sort of thing that gets you permanently blacklisted in my book, that I didn't want to believe Prox was really threatening that.

THe 'fluffing' comment was kinda like a red rag to a bull, because I was trying really damn hard to figure shit out, but like I said, you were all so scummy. Another bit was that I couldn't really fathom the notion that town could have been put in such a hole by such a terrible scumteam, so there must have been someone (ie yabba) manipulating shit.

Also, WTF WTF WTF didn't Ythan claim with a guilty?

[The Fonz]

I do find it funny how Kyle's first thought for 'what would be a good fakeclaim?' was backup doc.