Open 260 - Tit For Tat - Game Over

[vollkan]

Reading time.

For the unaware, I use a numerical points system to rank my suspicions. Each player starts at a score of 50 (on a 0 - 100 scale). Scumminess pushes it up. Towniness lowers it. It is uncommon for people to ever actually go below 50. So that I don't have to repeat this ad nauseum later, a score of 50 at the end of the proces does not mean "no opinion"; it means "neutral". Absent extrinsic factors (eg. claims, deadlines, etc.), I will always vote the highest scored player.

For the aware and unaware alike, I recently decided (and this is reflected across my ongoing games) to double-scale my points. Basically, I've become more skeptical about scumtells over time (and I'm extremely skeptical about almost any 'towntell'), which has meant that my scores have increasingly tended never to get above 65. As a result, I'm scaling points up, on the basis that it more accurately reflects seriousness.

For reference, something which would have previously gotten 2 or 3 now gets a 5. And a serious scumtell (eg. contradictions) now gets a 10.

40: @Don: provide meta evidence for the view you express here. Failing that,

Don+5

. The reasoning here is all over the place. First, the unsubstantiated assertion that scum try harder to look jokey in RVS. Second, Don points out, without taking it anywhere, that lew's vote was his "second" (*gasp*). And third, that the joke didn't work because consig had confirmed (so what? it's not like it was a serious vote, so why does an invalid premise matter. Finally, there's a reflexive use of the "It's RVS, lighten up" defence at the end, where he asks the rhetorical question "is it a "super serious not gonna ever change my vote no matter what happens" vote? i'll let you figure that one out." - this sort of thing is a mild scumtell because, rather than defending the validity of his argument, it rests on basically downplaying its significance.
73:

Smash+5

Recognsies that Consig seems confused, but then says, with absolutely no explanation, that it seems unlikely that he genuinely didn't realise Andrew was not in the game. This implies that Smash thinks it more likely that Consig faked the view that a player was in the game, and then felt it necessary to justify his fake vote.
85: Really dislike this.

lew+6

. I just finished a game with lewarcher (I was mafia, he was SK), which he won. He is a very clever player. In this post, he accepts, on the one hand, that Consig's mistake looks like a mistake but then proceeds to put him at L-3 and only jack up the pressure. While lew is correct insofar as the mistake does not prove consig is town, I find it beyond belief that lewarcher wouldn't realise that consig, whatever his alignment, is genuinely a newb/VI and, accordingly, the worst possible place to direct pressure.
87:

implosion+5

He shows patterned vapidness...and that's scummy?
88: Gonzo's 88 is win.
91: Ugh..werewolf's vote here is dreadful.
92; More win from Gonzo.
93: More badposting from lew. 1) is bad both because it fails to distinguish between wagons on decent players and wagons on VIs and because it spins the purpose of said wagons as being reactions, when any objective reader would see that that the Consig wagon was substantially a auspicion wagon and not simply a pressure one. 3)'s second point is correct, but it's irrelevant to the first, which is incorrect - especially in relation to low-hanging fruit like Consig.

lew+5

Will continue from start of p.5

[vollkan]

post 85: it is my opinion that a scumnoob makes mistakes just like a townnoob, therefore it is no bad strategy to put votes on a scumnoob; moreover, consig is in his 4th game, I am in my 8th or 9th, he was not such a noob after all. I thought that consig was an unexperienced scum player and acted accordingly, until I decided that gonzooo looked scummier to me. Then other cases became more urgent, there was the crazy zhero claim and the werewolf lynch, and meanwhile purple has joined, and I started getting towntells from her. Therefore I may have been wrong about consig, and being wrong about consig means I should reconsider my case on gonzooo and possibly dismiss it, at least for the moment.

This doesn't really address my point. You say "scumnoob makes mistakes just like a townoob", but that's exactly what I meant: both are liable to slip up, so putting one under serious pressure hardly makes sense.

Am I misunderstanding you?

(Also, whether a player is a noob or not is not simply a question of how many games they have been in. Some players learn how to play much much faster than others)

post 93: having a suspicion and expecting a reaction by the bw-target are no mutually exclusive strategies. They are mutually exclusive iff the player is about to get lynched, L-3 is not the case.

Yes, but this ignores two points:
1) As I said, the wagon on Consig was not simply a pressure wagon;
2) Pressure on a newbie easily leads to them crumbling and being lynched from a L-3 base point

(why are you mentioning that other game? Do you want town to get paranoid about me?)

I don't want people to get paranoid, but I think it is important that people read you with an accurate understanding of your calibre of play. It was also directly on point to what I was saying, because part of my reason for suspecting you is that your play with respect to consig is at odds with what I'd expect from somebody of your ability.

Continuing read

111:

Smash+8

. The vote here is terribad. First, it begins with "looking back over" without any explanation as to what changed his mind. Second, he drums up Consig's play to being scum trying to avoid suspicion, and entirely ignores dealing with the prospect that Consig is simply a daft newbie.
132:

Lew+6

The three points against gonzo here are all crap. First, as Gonzo says in 137, really just seems to be spinning the fact that Gonzo knows how to separate VI from scum. Second, is really making a mountain of a molehill - some people very clearly were voting consig because of the Andrew thing; I can't see why the fact that gonzo didn't say "But lew is being a good boy and not doing so" makes him scum; the point is that the wagon was a steaming pile. Third is just ridiculous - there is absolutely no contradiction in thinking that people should be pushing harder but also suspecting people who push for terrible reasons.
167: Admiral makes a good find here about lew mudslinging

lew+3

201:

Mallow+6

Mallow's vote here is terrible. A L-3 claim is not scummily premature, let alone to justify a vote when this is the first time that Mallow has even mentioned werewolf. I don't think town would reasonably change tact so suddenly.
226:

Smash+10

. Contradiction. He smears the zhero wagon by saying he thinks it is scum-drive (either bussing or opportunistic). He then proceeds to agree with the reasoning and announces his intention to vote zhero "in a day or two". In short, the wagon is really scummy, but he's going to join it.
294: I arrive. Sky erupts with songbirds.

Player	Score
don_johnson	55
Purple Orange	50
Gonzoooo	50
lewarcher82	70
mallowgeno	56
ThAdmiral	50
smashbro_of_the_SSS	73
implosion	55

Accordingly,

Vote:Smash

[vollkan]

In part. You seem to be unable (unwilling?) to start from the assumption that I was convinced that consig was scum. I attacked him because I thought he was scum and because I thought he was likely to slip and make it evident.

This was your voting post for Consig:

I completely disagree. In fact, Consigliere only posted noise and did little more than apologise in all his posts. He states he is new, he states he does not know how to handle nvs, and so on... the mistake discussed here is just a little mistake, not at all scummy, but it does not show he is town, and the rest of his activity is disturbing me.

In fact, I will put him at L-3 by unvoting; vote: Consigliere.

I can't see how any of the matters you listed could justify you being 'convinced' he was scum. Every single one of those is equally consistent with him being a VI. It begs belief to think that you of all people wouldn't be able to realise that such a player is a bad place to apply 'pressure'

My vote on consig was both a pressure and a fosing vote. The BW never got so far to make me worry about what it meant to other players on it. You keep starting from the assumption that I was voting a town. It may have been the case, but I was convinced that my target was scum.

Quote me please where I have assumed consig is town.

What I have opposed is the ridiculous notion that Consig was so obviously scum that it was appropriate to try and trap him using a method that was liable to make him vulnerable due to his newbness - because he wasn't obvious scum (if he was, why the need for pressure?)

Weird. Most of your comments are dedicated to me being scummy, but then I am only the second scummiest in the table, and you vote with the block...

What's weird about it? Especially since I use a numerical system, it should be damn obvious why smash's score is higher.

First off, welcome to the game. I can see that you have learned how to pull numbers out of the air and use them to come up with bigger numbers. Bravo.

You're not the first to take this attitude.

Think about it this way: Most players don't even rank their suspects, and those that do will just have a list of Town: X, Y Z; Scum: A, B, C. It doesn't tell you anything about how much they relatively suspect people, or why.

Everybody gives relative rankings to scumtells - I just try and make it more explicit with numbers.

as for your points. in post #111, I said I thought Consig was town, yes. Just because i didn't type that I considered the idea that he might be newb town doesn't mean i didn't consider it. I just thought that Consig was scum, rather than town. how is this a crime? as for the lack of any reason, i thought that saying that i had reread covered it. I look at the thread, Consig's actions, and the other cases against him. and i agreed.

So up until that point, you had no problem with consig's play - but then, for reason, something struck you as scummy?

for the Zhero wagon, I still stand by that the wagon came on too fast, and to me it seemed like there was a scum bussing or scum jumping on a new, popular wagon to look good. Just because the wagon happened too fast for my taste though, did not mean that i disagreed with it. I thought Zhero was scummy, and so i agreed with the wagon then. Call it contradiction, but i can both think that a wagon was scummy for being much too quick, and still agreeing with the case against Zhero.

This doens't make sense. You accuse it of being too fast, but you yourself stated that you were going to join it.

[vollkan]

@vollkan(1): you are totally misquoting me. The sentence you quote is not referred to all consig's posts, but only to a specific event, namely his vote on a non-existing player. As I already said several times, I always refused to consider that event anything more than a nulltelling mistake. His way of playing casual, his apparent active lurking, his way of posting filler, on the other hand, were mild scumtells, and they were the reasons why I voted him.

I'm not suggesting you did treat it as anything other than a mistake. As I said, though, " It begs belief to think that you of all people wouldn't be able to realise that such a player is a bad place to apply 'pressure'" What was so scummy about the rest of his play that meant you could overcome that necessary caution?

@vollkan(3): your scumpoints are a very ill-defined system that you can easily manipulate (and you did it in our last game, in which you were scum, for instance). Since you use them in all your games, I will not consider them a sign of impartiality.

Did I say that they make me impartial?

@volkan - how does your point system compensate for non-contribution? I'm rather curious why dj is so low on your list when he seems to be coasting pretty hard throughout this game. I felt like he was scumhunting in the early game, but has since gone into hibernation mode. What are your thoughts on him other than "55"?

I get this question surprisingly often.

Short answer: it doesn't.

Long answer: the points measure behavioural scumtells, not the probability that a player is scum. While there's obviously meant to be a correlation between the two, my point is that the system doesn't take account of things like claims. In short, just as any other player subordinates their reads to certain information and circumstances, I do likewise with my points. With that in mind, my theoretical approach for dealing with lurking is that it increases the relatively uncertainty surrounding a player and so can override

low

scores elsewhere. I wasn't aware that dj had been coasting (I think this is a consequence of reading in catch-up mode - I don't get the real-time experience of "Hey, X hasn't posted in a while?".

I just reskimmed DJ's ISO, and I don't see any noticeable change in activity. He has one enormous post early on, but apart from that his play has never really been content-heavy. @DJ: Is this normal for you?

--- until that point, no, i did not think Consig scummy. When i went back over the thread and saw what others had pointed out, I started to believe that Consig was scum. It's a crime to change my mind?

It is fairly serious circumstantial evidence when there is no clear reason for the change (you still haven't given one) and the change has a patent scum motivation.

--- I saw it scummy for it to build up as fast as it did, probably with scum trying to look more townlike. I agreed with the reasoning behind, but I usually am suspicious when something happens to fast. leads to "mistaking how many votes there were" and early lynches.

You aren't addressing my argument.

If you had simply said "I agree with the reasoning, but this wagon is too fast" that would have been fine.

But you didn't. You not only agreed with the reasoning, but you also announced your own intention to join the wagon "in a day or two".

[vollkan]

Well, I don't mean that so much as, 'hey I'm showing up regularly, but mostly only to bandwagon and argue with lew about whether the vig made the right shot choice last night'. Like I said, I feel like don is in cruise control right now and doesn't want to rock the boat too much, so he's arguing over trivial points with lew instead of trying to find the scum.

Ah, in that case I see your point. As somebody who has fallen prey to the same behaviour in the past (cruise control due to boredom), that's why I asked DJ for meta in my previous post. He's not a newb, so if boredom is something he has a tendency towards, there should be precedent.

Vote Count

smashbro_of_the_SSS (3) - don_johnson, ThAdmiral, vollkan
don_johnson (2) - Gonzoooo, smashbro_of_the_SSS
Purple Orange (1) - implosion

Not Voting (3) - Purple Orange, mallowgeno, lewarcher82

With 9 alive it is 5 to lynch. The deadline is set for the end of December 8th, PST.

For posterity (e.g. people reading this at a later date who are confused): VP Baltar = Gonzoooo.

[vollkan]

@vollkan: I categorically refuse to accept that backtracking is necessarily a scumtell. It is not. I change my mind a lot of times in every game. For instance, I have been FoSing gonzooo, and now I am not FoSing him anymore, as a consequence of my change of mind about consig/purple (cuz purple looks pro-town to me). Does this contribute making me scummy?

No, because what you did wasn't backtracking.

You have changed your view about purple based on evidence and that has altered your view of things. That is not only understandable; it's exactly what people should be doing.

That's completely different from where a player changes position for no apparent reason, especially where there is a clear scum motivation for that shift.

i think i'm moving implosion up the scumlist. i didn't catch it the first time around, but he initially questioned my vote on lew saying he "could see where i was coming from" but that he thought it may not be that big a deal. then his consig case was based entirely on the idea that:

Where the heck I'm coming from is that the mafia has a specific incentive to look like something that they are 100% not. If posts contain specific attempts at blending in that do not contain useful information, it's scummy.

which is basically identical to my reasoning for the initial lew vote. just because consig posted a little later in the thread, does not exclude him from being able to be extended the same "repreive" that he gives lew. he says lew's post "may be just a bunch of smilies". but he never gives consig that benefit of the doubt.

just reading a few iso. full thread reread later. but in any case. lew and implosion both seem to be looking worse as this day drags on. smash could still fit as the third scum, but reading him he could just be apathetic town. not enough evidence to take him off the lynch list yet, but certainly an

unvote

for now.

vote: implosion

until further notice.

tl;dr OMGUS. Nicely done.

1) What do you mean by OMGUS?
2) Why is it scummy?

[vollkan]

volkan: what i mean is, do you think its something more than coincidence that both the players i have accused today have moved their votes to me in response?

Depends on what you mean.

People do, understandably, focus more on cases made against them personally; it's just silly to pretend otherwise. The real issue is whether their attacks on you are in some respect defective, as suggestive that they aren't at least trying to approach you genuinely.

have you read either of their cases against me?

I skimmed, but I wasn't going to rebut their cases for you. I'll look at them in Interrogator detail now, since you say there is a problem.

Rundown of Imp's case

dj 311: calling someone lazy then saying you don't feel the need to do much. INTERESTING. Also shenanigans about the whole "move on" thing, which is still really weird.

What does "INTERESTING" mean here? Are you accusing him of hypocrisy, or not?

And what shenanigans about "move on"?

dj 317: o_o.

?_?

Purple 352: a blatant accusation of rolefishing directed at lewarcher (at least that's the most notable thing IMO). Something like this needed to come from someone at some point. I really think one of lew/dj is likely scum, because I doubt a conversation like what transpired would happen between 2 mafia, but it just seems like pointless rolefishing on one of their parts and a need to continue the conversation for the other. Not much else of lew makes me suspicious, so I'm inclined to look at don for scum.

How does this point to DJ-scum?

dj 354: essentially, he's saying he has no meta. Hrm.

Actually, he said:

Not sure how to answer the meta questions. I don't believe I hav a reliable meta. My style and amount of contribution depend on many variable factors both in game and rl. I hav already stated my suspects and who I'm willing to lynch atm. I have not reread the thread yet. When i do I'll let you know if anything has changed.x

The way you present it makes it sound like he is trying to avoid people attacking him based on his meta, when the actual argument he mounts is entirely reasonable.

dj 359: honestly, not much notable here. He refutes Smash's case. I still think don is scummy however, mostly because of what I already brought up in my last posts and also because of the possible rolefishing incident.

You mean the previosu points covered?

dj 363: thing is, Consig never did anything. lew did.

So...?

I fail to see how this case is voteworthy, let alone L-1 worthy.

Imp+8

and

@Lew

what, in a nutshell, is your anti-DJ case?

@ThAdmiral and volkan - what are your thoughts on the dj wagon?

I've only given him 5 points, which indicates my level of suspicion.

I also dislike Imp's reasoning. Is there any specific aspect you think I have missed?

Ok. I assumed that saying I would be joining the wagon meant that I agreed with the rationale. I said that the wagon was going too fast, which is why I didn't vote right away.

I know that. I can read.

My point is is and has been since the first time I raised this issue that there is an obvious inconsistency in saying that you are ready to vote (minus an artificial time buffer of a few days), but also smearing the other wagoners for joining too quickly.

By voting for a competing wagon, you allowed yourself to avoid putting a vote on the werewolf(town) wagon, and therefore the scrutiny that comes the say after. I'm sayign that your move to mallow was just so that when werewolf (the more likely lynch) would probably flip, you would have hands clean and a suspect for the next day already.

If DJ-town genuinely suspected Mallow over Werewolf should he have voted Werewolf anyway?

It is my opinion that one (good) explanation for this is that smash IS in fact scum. I have no idea if DJ is town or bussing scum. He seems to react with violence to everyone voting him, but given his record I would have to assume that, as scum, he would know better than this.

To my shock, I actually agree with most of your 399. The above is the only point that bothers me. Why do you think we can expect a higher standard of play from scum-DJ than town-DJ? I'm among the first to say that OMGUS is not scummy, but you actually seem to be arguing it is a towntell.

226 is pretty bad. But I do see how you could have been saying, "I agree with the reasons, but I think the wagon has moved suspiciously fast just the same," and just communicated it really badly. (Ala Zhero's FAIL communication of his thinking in the "smell a bus" post). I'm willing to consider your responses to the questions about 226 as genuine clarification, not rationalization. Other people gotta make their own calls. I think 226 has been pushed about as far as it can be pushed, though.
[/qupte]

I think you are being too generous here.

I can understand how somebody could both think that a wagon was reasonable but also that it was moving too quickly.

But Smash didn't do that. He indicated that he would join the wagon in a few days time. I can't see in any sense why that has any game relevance; it is, as I indicated above, entirely artificial.

[vollkan]

i mean, as it stands, the two most oppurtunistic votes made today(smash and implo on dj) seem to be drawing very little scrutiny. in the meantime, i am being scrutinized for attempting to create a voting block of players i had town reads on at the time.

This is AtE. Also, I don't think you can consider smash's vote on you all that opportunistic considering I was the only one on the wagon.

Gonzo+4

, removal contingent on response.

How do you figure that the above is AtE? Ignoring the question of whether or not Smash's vote was opportunistic, he's pointing out a valid inconsistency.


I'll come back around. Have you played with dj prior to this game? If you already answered this, I apologize.

I'll come back around. Have you played with dj prior to this game? If you already answered this, I apologize.

I was about to answer in the negative, but then I googled. It turns out that we were in a game together way back in 2008. I was town Doctor and was lynched D1. He was mafia and won.

I can't remember anything about him from that game, though.

In unrelated matters, why are you not pressuring lewarcher at all? He was quite high in your points system yesterday and I see nary a word or two in his direction today. Nor are you trying to get him lynched. What gives?

I wasn't in the game yesterday

Anyway, from my initial read, Smash was my #1 and I have already debated at some length the points I had against lew with him.

My smearing of the other wagoners was the fact that, with even a few days left, there was no hesitation by them. It was relevant that I would wait, because we had time till deadline, and I wanted to see other people's reactions to the events. If every person voted for Zhero as soon as they saw the Zhero vote, there would have been no chance to discuss whether or not it was a good choice.

My only issue with that is that it begs me to ask what you thought needed to be discussed that you also didn't think would stop you putting a vote down in a few days.

That's the thing. I don't see Dj town. He had been telling me to present a good case on Mallow all day, and didn't seem to believe in it. But once the Werewolf wagon gained votes, he suddenly thinks that it would be good to have two wagons, and goes onto none other than Mallow. He had been vocal about his other reads, but didn't seem to be sold on Mallow. Once someone else joined the Mallow wagon, he joined it too, rather than Werewolf. That's the point. I didn't think that DJ suspected Mallow over Werewolf.

This makes sense to me.

[vollkan]

@vollkan, what is my score currently? (and I liked you better before the scores. I think you were better then.)

56.

Also for meta purposes, I'd be really interested to know what negative difference do you think the score system makes?

How do you figure that the above is AtE? Ignoring the question of whether or not Smash's vote was opportunistic, he's pointing out a valid inconsistency.

inconsistency in what? the entire town? Everyone can read smash's and implo's votes for themselves and adjudge whether it was opportunistic or not for themselves. DJ pointing it out and essentially stating 'not fair that people are criticizing me and not them' is very much appealing to emotion. If and when the town wants to judge smash and implo's votes, they will...and without dj stamping his feet about it. Seems like a weak attempt to redirect attention away from him.

If you assume that Smash's and implo's votes are opportunistic, then it's a reasonable argument that a player who sees DJ as more suspicious than such votes (because of DJ's proposal) has a strange conception of what is scummy (ie. it is inconsistent because it is attacking DJ for something which seems far less objectively serious)

that's fine. i think we agree that smash may be VI. the vote is still oppurtunistic. instead of coming up with an original case, he dropped omgus with a "shit case"(your words). how is that not "oppurtunistic"? meh, this may be getting into the range of a semantics argument. i may not have described it correctly, or may have incorrectly lumped it into a comparison with implo's vote. either way, his vote on me is bad. the case was bad. we agree on that.

DJ+4

Inappropriately calling something "opportunistic" is a weak scumtell and not a matter of semantics. It's scummy because it suggests that you are trying to make suspicion on the person outstrip the evidence. It's weak because it can conceivably be a mistaken product of getting emotional (especially where it concerns a vote on yourself)

only thing is that it really only makes sense if i am scum with mallow. and even then, what is my scum motivation? the scum motivation is there(avoid townie wagon, ecpress suspicion of known scum to buy townie points), but at that point in time the mallow lynch was a real possibility, and my vote made it more so. thats a risky bus on day 1. scum could have just laid a vote on wolf, or someone else for that matter. i evened out the wagons which created more discussion and(had mallow not dissappeared) could possibly have given us much more insight into both players alignments/connections etc. i don't see how the mallow vote can be perceived as overtly scummy. if mallow were to flip scum, then maybe in retrospect it would draw scrutiny, but even then, its not a good move for scumdj. and you certainly can't accuse dj of avoiding the townwolf wagon.

I think this misses the core point of Smash's post:

That's the thing. I don't see Dj town. He had been telling me to present a good case on Mallow all day, and didn't seem to believe in it.

But once the Werewolf wagon gained votes, he suddenly thinks that it would be good to have two wagons, and goes onto none other than Mallow. He had been vocal about his other reads, but didn't seem to be sold on Mallow.

Once someone else joined the Mallow wagon, he joined it too, rather than Werewolf. That's the point. I didn't think that DJ suspected Mallow over Werewolf.

To begin with, it's strange to want a second wagon for the sake of having a second wagon.

The part bolded above suggests that you didn't genuinely see Mallow as the most suspicious at the point you voted him.

That said, you're right that as far as busses go, it would be pretty terrible. Joining a scum wagon for a weak reason is scummy in and of itself.

i have been plenty patient. implying otherwise is more of your sideways ad hom. not one person has yet answered this:

lew was saying "vig has no brains." dj was saying "vig shot was legit". which of those two statements do you think has more potential to draw out a vigilante?

i'll make it easy:

a) lew's statement
b) dj's statement
c) they are both equally guilty of role fishing
d) rolefishing? just looked like a conversation to me.

i'd like everyone to answer this. a general consensus is needed.

d). I can't see how either of them would draw out a vig.

VOTE: vollkan because he is scum.

For real?

[vollkan]

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 6#p2621836

This was the catchup post by Thad, and it is decent. While at the start of the game people were waiting for DJ to think up something for them and then did nothing with it, Thad sees it immediately, and then points out key points in the Lew case. The fact that he can do this so spot on makes me think that he's actually looking for points (in stead of trying to make a save entrance into the game)

If we compare this to the entrance of PO: http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 4#p2623504

First he's attacking wolf. While I'm not really happy with the reasonings used, it is scumhunting. The same goes for the attack on mallow (me). It consists of one point and is further based on the fact that Mallow was a lurker. Fine. Not very scummy, but definately a save place to put your vote down. After that Lew gets buddied. He was "completely legitimate". PO is taking. Oh, PO is going to like me too (I'm not English either!). And then the "thank you" to gonzo who thought consig was town. Another attempt at buddying.

This is completely opposite to Thad, who actually scumhunted. PO played it save, and I don't like it (esspecially seen that consig was scummy too).

I don't entirely agree.

First, and I really don't think this is just a consequence of me not believing in 99% of towntells, there's nothing in Thad's post that can't reasonably come from scum. You say he's contributing rather than "playing it safe" - but there's nothing "safe" about a lax opening post. It really just depends on whether a person plays scum by being passive or by being more aggressive and active.

As for PO: The biggest problem I see here, and I'm going to

PO+7

, points contingent on respnose, is that the reasoning on werewolf, while not good, is much better than the reasoning on mallow which, as you say, is largely a lurker case. I don't think making a lurker case is scummy in and of itself (I hate lurker wagoning, but it's a fairly common fail).

People I might be convinced to lynch as a compromise:
vollkan

Because?

[vollkan]

Oh there are six alive, not five. Maybe we shouldn't claim then. NL without claiming is another option. If we go that route, we shouldn't really talk at all today. I can see the pros of both, but it kind of depends on who is who.

It's effectively MYLO, so No Lynch is probably the optimal course of action.

Vote: No Lynch

Also,
@Thad: Why do you not want No Lynch?
@Gonzoo: What pros do you see in lynching?

[vollkan]

Don't have time to make a long post - but

Claim: Vanilla

[vollkan]

[quote="Don"]
tbh, most likely scum on the wagon is volkan. his smash vote is text book bus. drop it on early in the day and let it ride. [/quote[

This just isn't true. I followed up on my suspicion of him in multiple posts. The fact that I was the first on the wagon is not a bussing tell - in fact, I'd imagine that if I had joined the wagon late, you'd then simply be arguing that I was bussing by having a last-ditch attempt.

Please, explain to me exactly what it is that you think my subsequent posts lacked.

I'll also point out that I believe you may inadvertently be attacking my playstyle. To elaborate, in a lot of my games, no matter what my alignment, I get accused of not scumhunting. The following is a kind of compilation meta defence on this that I made in another of my recent town games, which may be helpful to you: viewtopic.php?p=2473767#p2473767

See also my most recently finished town game, where I was just lynched a few days ago (game is still ongoing) where I got comments such