Open 391 - Theft on Cookie Island - Town Wins

[Sando]

Hi guys, I've read up on the thread, but I'm just confirming with Quaroth about the Shotty situation, but seems clear enough now that I've seen his post in game, so I'll post my thoughts in the next few hours unless mod asks me not to.

[Sando]

Alrighty, I'm going to assume mod's post here and in PTs can be taken at face value and I've swapped for Shotty.

Here's my reads:

AcRv

- there's some strange attitudes to RVS, and I fairly strongly disagree with the assertion that town enjoy prolonging RVS as much as scum, given town have a strong motive to get out of it reasonably quickly. The self-vote, the unvote and revote in post 106 says to me that he's a bit excited by it. In post 130 he ignores the non-RVS discussion happening and just continues on with the RVS, scumpoints for that, and interesting to note later for partner implications.

Post 134 he claims he's not voting seriously, yet also not trying to prolong RVS, bit of a contradiction, then in post 138 he basically claims "see I was trying to get us out of RVS the whole time", this whole thing seems quite disingenuous. The whole thing in 148 and others that you can't attack him for something without attacking others is fairly scummy, it's an attempt to deflect attention onto others without answering his accusers. 253 basically says that getting out of RVS quickly is pro-town, yet prolonged RVS himself.

Overall my read on AcRv is scummy.

Amrun

- Ultimately I think FuDuzn's read on Amrun is a good one, there was plenty of contrived posts, AtE's, as FuDuzn pointed out, no real need to repeat. He's wrong to say that there's no reason to undermine town reads, given it can and potentially was used to head off a wagon. Given this and that it's about him, I'm giving Amrun scum points for post 159 as well as the fakeness etc.

I really don't like 164, it assumes that his opinion is the only valid one, and that scum is going to see him say that and 'fall' straight into it? Then the statement that his vote is no longer RVS seems like he's hiding it a bit.

Overall, very slight scumminess on Amrun, most of my scumread on him is based on his initial horrible posts bemoaning the reset and his insistence on town-reads being respected for no real reason.

FuDuzn

- Saw his post 128 and thought it was one of the best posts of the thread, been scummy since then. Took the breakdown of Amrun's post too far, quoting for the sake of it by the end. Post 141 he starts scrambling back on his initial accusations, ones I think were fair, basically letting Amrun off the hook, but doesn't back that up with an unvote. I think the hasty retreat is fairly scummy.

As Amrun points out, 277 is pretty much entirely AtE, very scummy post. Basically after his initial good post, FuDuzn backs off when attacked, gets very defensive, appeals to emotion and by 286 has basically stopped scumhunting at all.

FuDuzn is my pick for scummiest by a reasonable margin, but at L-2 I'm not going to put him at L-1 with 2 lurkers and >2 weeks left to deadline.

Hiraki

- Has some very strong opinions which are presented as facts, regarding faking and RVS, neither of which I agree with. 218 from Hiraki is a really bad post, he strawmans and misrepresetns FuDuzn, focussing purely on the fakeness aspect and not the reasoning behind the actual accusation. Then uses the logical fallacy that because Om used the words "I don't like" and this isn't technically good scumhunting, his entire argument is invalid, which is patently not true, fairly high scumpoints for this.

Post 264 again posting opinion as fact, and showing a strong tendancy to try to lead town and and over-reaction to a vote here too.. I like where Hiraki's vote is even if I disagree with his initial assessment, and I don't think scum would try to lead this hard on a town FuDuzn. Reasonably strong town-read.

Chrimi

- Much like AcRv, post 132 ignores the above arguments that are non-RVS. Deflects attacks with petulance in 199. Obsessed with reaction testing, which strikes me as newbie, and just not really contributing to the conversation. Happy with a newbie town read at the moment, I don't think scum would join a game with the gameplan of 'reaction test and attack anyone attacking me'.

Thomith

- 133 is a false ambiguity, what FuDuzn is voting for is very obvious, regardless of whether you agree or not. Makes an incorrect claim that scum can believe anything they say in 171, then tries to backtrack in 173 when called on it. 281 is not 100% convinced the person is scummy... well you don't vote someone you don't think for sure is at least scummy, you're only not 100% convinced they're scum. Just not reading clearly, or a little too eager to distance themselves from a mislynch? Not sure on Thomith, neutral read.

Om of the Nom

- Good call on AcRv in 131 and provokes a reactionary vote a few posts later. But putting someone to L-2 with a 'not wanting to step on toes' justification with so much material... the timing of this is really off. Overall fairly neutral, leaning slightly scummy.

I don't have much read on the others, although Heilo's 146 looks like a partner relationship in there, which ManiacalLemon correctly calls. Interesting dynamic, but not one I can judge yet. 221 and 222 from projectmatt look a lot bigger than they actually are, and meta a player on your first post a few pages in, really?

AcRv has pushed against the wagon by attacking the person pushing it, Hiraki, combined with the whole unable to make up their mind about RVS, gives me my best vote option at the moment.

Vote: AcRv

[Sando]

Can you say where I said that town like prolonging RVS? I don't recall saying that... it might be you misinterpreting something.

Yeah you didn't, my point on you is that said scum want to prolong RVS, yet also did that. My disagreement with the assertion that town want to prolong it is directed at comments made by Hiraki. Someone else attacked you for this, Hiraki defended by saying town do it too, I disagree and think you deserve scumpoints for it - no scumpoints for you from this.

The self-vote, the unvote and revote in post 106 says to me that he's a bit excited by it.

It's called messing around...

The point is that you're excited by it, and this seems to be driving some of your actions, rather than that it itself (excitement) is scummy. It could explain some things from you, but I think it goes too far later to be pure exuberance - no scumpoints for you from this.

253 basically says that getting out of RVS quickly is pro-town, yet prolonged RVS himself.

I didn't want to get in the way of the to-and-fro, so I tried to get more talk happening. And had Ommy attack me for fluff posting but not Chrimi.

Chrimi also didn't say this though:

Well, if it were fake then she would have been stalling out RVS... which kinda is pro-scum.

By your own words you posted fluff beyond RVS, and you also think stalling out RVS is pro-scum. The point is not just that you extended RVS, which although I gave you scumpoints for isn't a massive deal, it's that you yourself say it is a scummy action. In RVS you generate discussion with random voting (hint is in the name) and silly comments. In the main scumhunting phase, you generate discussion with serious comments about peoples scumworthiness. Given that you yourself said the vote was not serious, and that your non-serious vote was intended to generate discussion, it's very obvious that it belongs in RVS.

I've deleted the rest from my response as this is the crux of my argument, my other point being that you attacked the main person driving the FuDuzn wagon in what looks like a derail attempt.

[Sando]

Wow, this post reeks of scumminess. He isn't even paying attention to what I write. It makes me feel like he's just ctrl+f'ing "vote" through every page.
I had a reason for putting him at L-2, all you had wasn't a good reason. L-2 this early isn't bad either, are you worried that your buddy is going to die?
And my reason was right there in my post, learn to fucking read.

The issue is not just why you voted for them, you've explained this. The issue is why you put someone at L-2, what were you hoping to achieve? You waited for a votecount, one where the mod announced a replacement (ie a spot is about to get active) and prods two more, then say "that's fine" and put him at L-2. You obvious knew what you were putting him at, and presumably wanted to achieve something with it, what was it? Did you simply want to lynch him then and there?

[Sando]

First of all, I wrote that instead of Thomith.
Secondly, I waited for a votecount because I didn't want him at L-1 yet, and I wasn't sure what he was at.

Correct, was you, and my post was directed at you, I messed up my quoting, sorry.

So the only vote you feel the need to avoid is L-1 (and obviously hammer)?

What's better about L-2 than L-1 that you wanted to get from your vote? You've accused your accuser of being 'scared that their buddy will be lynched' yet don't want to put the person at L-1?

[Sando]

Yet you accuse and vote Thomith of being scared that their buddy is going to die. You've tacitly admitted that L-2 is a significant threat of lynch and that Thomith's reaction to it is scummy-buddying to the person, yet now claim you don't want people lynched?

L-2 this early isn't bad either, are you worried that your buddy is going to die?

If you think he's legitimately worried that his buddy will die, why would you then claim that you don't want people lynched this early?

[Sando]

Oh my God, no.

I had to argue with this to my newbies in my last IC game.

L-2 isn't fucking anything. It doesn't mean anything and it never, ever will. STOP IT.

The point isn't that L-2 is some crazy scary moment, but that Om thinks that someone is scared that their buddy is going to die. He can't accuse someone of being scared of L-2 while simultaneously arguing that he thinks the L-2 means nothing.

[Sando]

So you're entire reason for thinking I'm scummy is because I've been throwing a vote around. Can you tell me why scum would throw their vote around at this point any more than a town member would?

I'm saying that throwing your vote around randomly at that point in the game was "prolonging RVS", which it obviously is. Now, here are your

words

on prolonging RVS:

Well, if it were fake then she would have been

stalling out RVS... which kinda is pro-scum

.

(bolding mine)
So you prolonged RVS, and you think that's scummy.

So I'm not allowed to attack people if they're leading a case? Okay scum, if you want to make sure you can't be attacked just lead a case on someone.

As explained elsewhere, not all tells are always tells, you judge it on the situation and in this case I think it looks scummy. But yes, when you attack the leader of a wagon for something other than leading the wagon (ie you think their arguments are false), you need to be much more sure of yourself than otherwise. Getting bogged down and not progressing arguments is anti-town, and derailing a wagon by attacking the leader bogs town down. You have to weigh the level of their scumminess with not letting town getting bogged down.

In this instance your case was weak and did not warrant an attack on him in the position he was in, hence scumpoints.

[Sando]

I want FuDuzn dead first though

Setting up future lynches? Really?

GNR I keep forgetting you are playing, and I don't like that. Plus leaving me open as a scumread without a vote really irks me.

Why is noone pointing out that GNR had and still has his vote on Om?

Defending yourself by saying it's a 'wikitell', that was pretty amusingly scummy.

[Sando]

throwing your vote around isn't a scumtell, nor is it RVS if you have slight game related reasons at the time of throwing it around, which unless i forget ac did.

It's not a specific scumtell, but it is RVS when the only reason given is to 'generate discussion', especially when non-RVS discussion has already been made, and you ignore that. RVS is about throwing your vote around for reactions/discussion in a non-serious way. Given that he reacted with laughter to the suggestion that his vote was serious, what else would you call it but a non-serious vote?!

[Sando]

Because that's what they are. Of course you don't know what you're doing, because you're doing it by accident.

Where did this come from? You've spent the last page attacking him for this, now you declare that he's doing it by accident, and by extension not scummy for it?

[Sando]

Because that's what they are. Of course you don't know what you're doing, because you're doing it by accident.

Where did this come from? You've spent the last page attacking him for this, now you declare that he's doing it by accident, and by extension not scummy for it?

Uh. Where did I say it wasn't scummy.

Aren't you saying that he's misrepresenting the situation by accident? Misrep on purpose is scummy, but by accident isn't. Hence by accident being not-scummy.

[Sando]

Sando, if misrepping is generally a scumtell, why would scum do it on purpose?

Because if you're good at it, you can get the person lynched or at least diffuse their arguments. Scumtells are typically scumtells because they're good for scum, if they think they can get away with it, why wouldn't they do something pro-scum?

[Sando]

Now he is voting Chrimi for being "defensive" (using that tell is a scumtell) and for posting while on V/LA (am I also scum for being semi-V/LA right now and posting?). Apparently AvRv and Chrimi also arent scum together but im not sure what has changed... his reads just seem to match common suspects.

This bit isn't really true, he specifically voted Chrimi for being defensive about lynching while VLA, not just for being defensive, as per:

He doesnt post much , then got defensive about a lynch while he was V/LA

Other than that the case makes sense.

RD makes the good point, OOTN has claimed, there's no point continuing on him today, if he's scum it'll come out in the wash later in the game.

I initially read the 'slip' accusation on Heilo and thought it was a stretch, but with Heilo's response, I'm less sure, and think his attitudes to the number of scum and cop are fairly scummy:

But i would like to imagine it to be 3 scum. that way i have room for error, and if their is a cop , we will find out d2 and i can go from their.

This seems reasonable enough, except that Heilo was basically scumhunting on the basis of a scumteam working together, so getting the number of scum wrong would significantly effect his reads. Also the 'room for error' presumably means lylo/mylo, yet he also assumes that a cop would out themselves day 2, which would negate the need for 'room for error'.

Mod: I will be VLA from tomorrow about this time for 4 days (maybe 5)

, I have a funeral that I need to attend well outside of civilisation. If you'd like to replace me that's fair enough, sorry about it, but there's nothing I can do.

I agree with the majority of RDs case except as noted, and I was really expecting a 'FU that's not what I meant' in response to the slip allegation, and instead we got a fairly slippery and poorly thought out justification.

Unvote
Vote: Heilograph

I believe this is L-2 with the self-vote.

[Sando]

Sorry I haven't had a chance to read today's activities yet, but no, I am not a JK. I will post my other thoughts in a few hours, sorry for not being around, I am officially back from VLA and should have no issues from now on.

[Sando]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but something that is helping me at the moment is the knowledge that there are guaranteed to be two scum who aren't Om. Either he's a JK and there's just 2 scum, or he's scum and there's 2 other scum.

I'm a little unconvinced by the benefit we gain from hypocop. A cop presumably wouldn't have investigated Om, knowing that if he's scum he's going to die later in the game anyway, and if he did what does the cop say in the hypo without actually claiming? And a cop with a guilty on someone else would now basically have two guilties (the actual one and Om) and should claim. So basically we're potentially giving scum info on a cop if he exists (they can eliminate any VTs that pretend to have targeted scum), for the sake of a N1 not guilty?

Is it worth the risk to a cop that might exist to get a guaranteed N1 innocent?

[Sando]

Oh shit, my bad there too, I read it as either 2 JK or a JK and cop, oops.

[Sando]

No you sillies, everyone does a hypo cop so the real cop stays safe.

Any VT that says they investigated a scum and got townie is identifying themselves to scum (and only scum) as a VT and reducing the potential number of possibilities for them to cop-hunt.

[Sando]

If I am cop, I investigated AcRv and got innocent.

Om, you are not confirmed, but we can treat you as such given that when the presence of a cop is worked out, we will know for sure if you're a JK or scum.

[Sando]

RD you just pushed a hard wagon on me with 'lurking' and an 'obvious' link with OOTN...

I'll give you lurking today, but yesterday? I was fairly obvious in terms of who I detailed as scummy and why. I also stated that with plenty of time (2 weeks) to deadline and 2 lurkers that putting someone at L-1 with my first post might not be the greatest idea.

Given you're attacking me specifically for NOT putting someone at L-1, why have you just removed your vote?

[Sando]

I also stated that with plenty of time (2 weeks) to deadline and 2 lurkers that putting someone at L-1 with my first post might not be the greatest idea.

could you re-word this as i don't understand your point here.

My first post was a little bit into day 1 and was basically a big rundown post. In it, I said I found AcRv scummy along with FuDuzn, but that FuDuzn was more scummy to me. FuDuzn was at that point at L-2, and I thought that putting someone at L-1 was a poor idea out of the blue (I hadn't posted before that) when we had more than 2 weeks left till deadline, and 2 lurkers at the time.

I'm more convinced of FuDuzn after the events of day 1. After some initial good scumhunting he cops some flak and scrambles back on the defensive and never really comes back into the game. The only reason we stopped on FuDuzn was that another wagon popped up, and he conveniently went under the radar after that. He's stopped all pretence at actually scumhunting by now, and he showed at the start of the game that he's perfectly capable of it, at least until he gets unwanted attention.

Vote: FuDuzn

[Sando]

Sando, I have been extremely inactive in all my games, so voting me for that reason is dumb

I didn't vote you for inactivity, I voted you/found you scummy due to the drastic change in your style from when you first started, which was aggressive with good points, to your current style which is to just chime in with fairly pointless reads with nothing to back them up.

So I have RD attacking me for having a suspicion of FuDuzn yet not pushing hard enough, and I have FuDuzn saying I'm opportunistically jumping on his wagon... Yeah this is also the second day in a row that we've had a wagon on FuDuzn that subsequently gets ignored when another wagon gets pushed.

RD, of course he could have been lynched... I was worried about a quickhammer from the lurkers or others if I put him at L-1 with my very first post, so yes I'm well aware he could have been lynched. I pushed AcRv, I didn't like some of his responses, then I thought OOTN with his play was scummy, then I had to VLA.

Also, and most importantly, I'm accusing FuDuzn of going from active scumhunting to flying under the radar when attacked, he flew under the radar around the time of my flurry with AcRv and I didn't really notice him shortly after that and OOTN, that's what flying under the radar is. Just because I fell for it at the end of D1 along with the rest of you doesn't make it less scummy.

[Sando]

Rainbow - two questions:

1 - Why do you insist that OOTN is 50/50 (true) and yet keep trying to force us to assume he's scum for link-reads? It's a coinflip, yet you attack the idea of working on the basis he's town and promote the idea of working on the basis he's scum, seems contradictory.

Plenty of others don't have much reads, PM, Riggs, FuD has one on me that is following you then accusing me of opportunistically bandwagoning (we'll deal with the irony of this later). Now I'm perfectly happy for you to go after one of them (us) and basically ignore the rest, so I'm not asking that. My question is:

2 - Why me of the people without strong reads day2?

[Sando]

1 - Why do you insist that OOTN is 50/50 (true) and yet keep trying to force us to assume he's scum for link-reads? It's a coinflip, yet you attack the idea of working on the basis he's town and promote the idea of working on the basis he's scum, seems contradictory.

There are a handful of players that make little to no sense with him being scum as a partner, so they are not going to be lynched today because if he IS scum, they can be pseudo-confirmed tomorrow. I would rather lynch somepony who make some sense with him though, because if he is scum we already are putting pressure in the right area and lynching scummy player regardless.

By doing this you are basically reducing the pool of lynch targets fairly dramatically based on what is a 50/50. If he's not scum, we drastically increase our chances of mislynching by your reasoning, thus given it is a coinflip, it is poor reasoning. This poor reasoning puts town in a very bad position based on a guess, and given that scum are NOT guessing the setup, someone trying to influence the town on a 50/50 like this seems quite scummy.

[Sando]

so you are saying RD is scum manipulating us then sando? Rainbow always seems to come up with little plans like these in the town games i have played with her/watched her play in, don't know if she does it as scum but i don't think it is a scumtell here.

Plans are fine, the problem I feel is that she's trying to influence our actions on what is, in her own words, a 50/50 that is driven by alignment known to one side. Scum know if OOTN is JK or not, town do not, we are leaving ourselves incredibly open to manipulation if we start working on links to OOTN as scum or town. Only scum would want to influence feelings on this, town would naturally look at a 50/50 and correctly draw the conclusion that they shouldn't make any conclusions based on it.

[Sando]

so you are saying RD is scum, if so why no vote/ actual FOS?

It's a single action in an otherwise townie-game from her. The other thing I find scummy from from her is that yet again FuDuzn is in trouble and having a wagon pushed on someone else to distract attention, and this time it's RD. In this case due to only me knowing I'm town, and it being predicated on FuDuzn being scum, I don't think it warrants scumpoints and I can't expect it from others, but should be looked at later in the game.

I throw out 'scummy' pretty freely (see my first post and RD's reaction to that actually), in this case I qualified it with 'quite' which from me is a fairly large one, but short of 'very'. With that being the only real scumtell I'm seeing from her in a largely townie game, I don't think it appropriate to push on her. It does need to be highlighted though, and it's terrible reasoning from her and needs to stop.

[Sando]

I understand why you think it is terrible reasoning, but really we have little else to go off of.

My point is that it is worse than nothing to go off. It is actively bad for town to pursue that line of attack.

Has anyone actually articulated how I'm linked to scum-OOTN? Or are we all just swallowing the line of 'we have to assume scum because assuming town is bad, oh and by the way Sando is linked to him'?

[Sando]

because of the way om interacted with you/ lack of interaction imo it would make sense you were partners if om is scum, also i don't see how nothing to go off is worse than using a 50/50

No I meant something specific. Turns out that because of the interaction that X did or did not have with Y, they are linked... yeah no, not going to fly.

My point is town are stuck with a 50/50, scum know 100% if Om is scum or not, and can manipulate the conversation accordingly. Town can only only lose, we cannot get better than 50%, and scum can manipulate us to get a worse result. This is the definition of a bad idea.

[Sando]

No, I got your point, it doesn't change the facts, and it is a horrible idea to assume that OOTN is scum at this point, which is essentially what you're advocating. It forces us into a much smaller lynch pool (that you've somehow decided arbitrarily) today, then based on OOTNs flip tomorrow sets up the lynch of the person/people excluded from the pool today. You're essentially guaranteeing at least one mislynch.

If we follow your plan we lynch a scum-linked person today, then if that's wrong a scum-cleared person tomorrow. If your reads are correct, then you've just guaranteed a mislynch, and that's assuming your town. If you're scum this could easily be manipulated into a double mislynch.

Using a coinflip to clear/implicate someone today is a horrible idea, and plays straight into scum hands.

[Sando]

om/sando to me just feel like they are ignoring each other, which i find weird, however it could just be bad observation from my part.

No you're right, I've even specifically stated that I'm ignoring Om I believe, or at least his alignment. I didn't yesterday, today I am, given we're going to be basically told his alignment tomorrow.

[Sando]

How am I guarenteeing a mislynch?

The paragraph following what you quoted:

If we follow your plan we lynch a scum-linked person today, then if that's wrong a scum-cleared person tomorrow. If your reads are correct, then you've just guaranteed a mislynch, and that's assuming your town. If you're scum this could easily be manipulated into a double mislynch.

Today - scum-linked
Tomorrow - town-linked

If you're correct in your link reads, one of those is guaranteed to be wrong. And that assumes you're even town and not manipulating the whole process.

[Sando]

I know you are not afraid to bus, but i still find it weird how you and sando seem to be purposely keeping out of each others way.

This is completely untrue of my interaction with Om, he was one of the people I looked at yesterday, I pressured and pushed him on several issues, just iso me and you'll see. I didn't vote him given it would have been overkill and potential quicklynch, and we got a 'result' ie a claim without it, so I feel my judgement there was sound. Since the claim, and given that the claim will almost definitely be shown to be true or false within a few days (from when we started this day 1) I've since been quite active in taking a neutral tone towards Om because of that, and I stand by that, as evidenced by my assertions towards RD.

AcRv, I'm leaning town on Om, but at the moment I'm trying very hard to divorce myself from thinking either way, and avoid making any reads based on it, because it is anti town to assume one way or the other. I'm being accused of ignoring a person that I'm actually advocating ignoring, it's a bit strange. I'm happy to listen to his opinions, but at the moment he doesn't compute in my thinking of town/scum, because that just clutters what we're trying to achieve.

[Sando]

i find it weird that you have said you are just ignoring him, as i dont see how that helps us.

Seriously? The entire page of conversation I've had with you and RD is about this and all you can say is 'weird'?

It doesn't help us to ignore him, it hurts us NOT to ignore him.

[Sando]

What's more bothersome about these reads then anything is the wiggle room he's giving himself. I mean, I do it a lot too but it doesn't make a lot of sense as a train of thought to support FuzDurn logic and say that it makes sense and the person he's pushing on is likely scum while also going "But hey wait, FuzDurn might be scum as well".

What? You quoted me saying that I found Amrun (the target of FuDuzn logic) very slightly scummy, and now you're saying that I thought that the person FuDuzn was pushing was 'likely scum'?

Also, are you claiming that scum never make logical accusations?

[Sando]

Ok so I reread FD trying to see what everypony else sees and all I found was another somewhat reliable town tell that I originally missed from him. He is either scum who has been told exactly the types of tells that I look for, is amazingly lucky scum, or is town. Im going to say he is town and I am right about everything regarding him at this point. If I have to drag this wagon off him I sure am going to make a valliant effort to.

Again? How many times are we going to have the wagon pulled off FuDuzn, again without a reason?

[Sando]

it's getting us nowhere

No shit sherlock.

He also asked you, the person voting Thomith, in that same post, what the case was on thomith, basically asking for someone to put the discussion back on course. You declined to give reasoning, and FuD conveniently jumps onto another wagon when he's under pressure.

Iso read on Thomith is giving me very little scumminess, and a lot of good reasoning for his actions, so what am I missing guys?

[Sando]

RD has made the obvious point, it would be stupid beyond belief to bus their partner into convincing people she's cop, given she'd be countered by the real cop or Om coming up scum. Om's point of RD 'knowing' about setup is pretty true though.

RDs insistence that it's easy to find the cop is odd given she's spent most of the day trying to convince us to lynch on the basis of Om being scum, which would mean no cop.

However I'm trying to wrap my head around how scum would do RDs actions, it kinda works as a gambit with Om scum, but Om ruled that out when he accused RD. Whilst I don't like what RD has been doing today, I cannot fathom any scenario where scum would want to do this.

[Sando]

Yeah thought about this today, I cannot come up with any situation where RD would benefit as scum pulling what she did today. I'm pretty happy with RD being confirmed town, at least for now, I might revisit in a day or two but for now I'm going to treat as confirmed town. Om's response basically confirms him as JK, there's no way he'd do that as scum against a town claim from RD, or as scum against a scum claim from RD, neither make any sense.

What we can take from this little exercise is the responses to RD, I think scum would react to the initial flurry with a 'wtf is going on' and small amounts of action and refusal to commit to what is obviously a plan from RD of some sort. This relies completely on RD being town, but I honestly think FuD fits this template perfectly. He completely ignores the whole basically claiming cop from RD, and instead 'innocently' asks why RD has changed her mind on him. Then responds with confusion and annoyance towards RD after Om blows the plan out of water, and basically tries to ignore the whole thing.

Honestly, I'm not sure how as town you could possibly want to hide your head in the sand over the giant storm that RD and Om managed to brew up. FuD's response of 'plan or no plan' to effectively dismiss a page and a half of amazing content is burying his head in the sand. I'm happy with FuD at the moment. I can see GNR, but I'm happier with FuD, and what GNR flips isn't really my main focus for RDs alignment anyway.

Speaking of, Chrimi, we know RD is not the cop, GNR flipping scum would only confirm RD as well-played-town or gambitting-scum, nothing more. RD is cleared in my eyes for completely different reasons.

[Sando]

This freaking annoys me about FuD, again, but today is going nowhere and we need a lynch, and one pushed by what I think is confirmed townie is a good one.

UNVOTE
VOTE: Guy_Named_Riggs

[Sando]

Potato
Should I claim who I blocked last night?

Don't see why, it's a slight deterrent to a fake-claim of cop if we don't know, as you may have blocked scum who fake-claim a result, giving us a free lynch.

[Sando]

Tend to disagree with the cop not claiming, but not sure. To my mind:
A cop with 2 alive town-flips should claim, this makes 4 guaranteed confirmed and RD as a very likely confirmed leaving a very small lynch pool (great)
A cop with scum-flips should claim
A cop with 1 alive innocent, I'm on the fence, but definitely not if it's their N1 result as that's been put out there
A cop with no alive innocents should not claim

Is any of my reasoning there faulty?

Basically I don't think the cop is needed to clear OOTN, I'm pretty happy with the idea that we have one, and they can claim tomorrow.

[Sando]

Cop, acrv and fud are town. On phone, will post more later.

[Sando]

I gotta admit, I was extremely confused yesterday!! I had no idea what was going on, first I thought RD was cop-hunting, then she claims she's found the cop, but then says it's not me...

[Sando]

Sorry, did Thomith just counter-claim me?

I'm not in any way fakeclaiming, I AM THE COP.

You'll note day1 I thought AcRv was scum and ignored him day2. You wanted to know why I went back to FuD day2, I lost my main focus as a target overnight due to investigate.

Thomith is now 100% scum.

/vote Thomith

RD wtf? Your reaction to a counter-claim is to believe one and give town points to the other person?! I can understand believing the wrong person, people make mistakes, but not thinking that the one who you think fake-claimed is at least probable scum, what? You think I fakeclaimed, as town, and gave two of my biggest targets town-points?

I'm being turned back to scumread on RD due to this, but I can't fathom how this is a gambit. I can't see how scum would plan a move like this, and it would be a planned thing, if they are scum together there's no way this happened organically. I'm racking my brain trying to come up with a good scenario in this for RD scum due to the ease she's been pulled to Thomith (and thinks I'm town fakeclaiming?!?!) but I cannot, I'm still on my 'no way would scum do this' even though I don't like the actual play.

What happens if OOTN blocks the cop and then dies himself? Does the cop get a result? If so, that's the obvious move, they either kill OOTN and give the cop a result, or they can't kill either cop of JK.

[Sando]

Alright, this is silly, we kill Thomith today, AcRv and FuD, you are clear as town, it is bad play to leave Thomith alive.

Even if I die tonight you are left with 3 confirmed townies tomorrow out of 6, vote as a block and we win.

I'm done being led, Thomith said he wasn't the cop when I claimed, then magically took it back? No.

Thomith should 100% die today, there is literally no town-motivation for him to have fake-claimed after I claimed.

[Sando]

You basically had a guilty on me for fake-claiming... nice try but no, you're scum.

I've stated who is innocent, and I hypo'd to say AcRv on D2. N1 I investigated AcRv and N2 I investigated FuD.

[Sando]

I had a inno on an obv town because i was stupid and went to cautious so i was going to wait until i got a better report.

So you thought a scum getting away with a fakeclaim today was a good idea? Nope.

[Sando]

why not? if i am useless i saw no point in claiming so decided to just let it slide for a day to claim tommurrow.

You're not useless as a cop in that position, I would be scum fake-claiming you, as good as a scum result.

There is no motivation for vanilla townie to act as I did, to not only claim cop (to misdirect scum?) but to claim two innocents as well? I was obviously either scum or cop, if you were cop you would have known I was scum, not 'let it slide'...

[Sando]

Yes, up until that point on Day 2 I thought Om was scum, I wasn't going to immediately jump up and down about having 'caught' scum in that way with my first real post of the day, I wasn't sure of my options and I stayed quiet...

for half an hour

while I looked at things and realised I'd gotten things wrong. I 'knew' which option I thought it was when I said:

Either he's a JK and there's just 2 scum, or he's scum and there's 2 other scum.

I was not being genuine when I said that, it was something I wanted to point out to town without outing myself as cop, I knew Om was scum at that point, realised I'd misread the roles after that.

I'm not particularly forthright with claims until forced to be, I didn't do it today with my first post even though I had 2 innocent alives and thought I should, I was open to suggestions from others on whether I should claim, hence my first post.

[Sando]

BTW, the 'oh shit' was because I was very close to claiming to get Om killed, hence I was pretty relieved that I realised my mistake before posting.

[Sando]

so sando, you say you knew om was scum but still just didn't really try that hard to get them lynched?
If you genuinely red the setup wrong, wouldn't you have at least tried a little as cop to get them lynched, you barely tried at all.

Correct, in my one real post (after my hi I'm back from VLA post) of the day before I realised what was up with the roles, I did not push extremely hard on the person I 'knew' was scum who I also knew would be outed as scum sooner or later.

I didn't barely try, I didn't try at all in that post, I was weighing whether to out myself as a cop to get him lynched right there and hadn't made up my mind.

[Sando]

I'm not seeing the guaranteed win here from no lynch. I will die overnight, you'll be left with 3 confirmed town, 1 confirmed scum, and 3 unconfirmed containing 1 scum. You lynch Thomith, 1 dies overnight, you're left with 2 confirmed, 3 unconfirmed containing 1 scum. Doesn't seem like an auto-win to me.

[Sando]

Tomorrow Thomith and another scum will be alive if we no lynch, if we mislynch tomorrow then two scum alive who can submit a kill, why do you think Om's block will achieve anything?

I'm dead, you lynch Chrimi, how are you going to stop scum killing Om overnight? That only works if Chrimi is scum.

[Sando]

Why is it a foregone conclusion? You've just outlined how doing that almost guarantees a scum-loss, and yet it's a foregone conclusion that OOTN dies tonight?

I've pointed out how we're in no way guaranteed a win if they kill me as a cop, so why would they not? Yes it guarantees Thomith dead, but it hides his partner a lot more.

From my point of view killing Thomith is 100% the right choice. It leaves 3 unconfirmed and 4 confirmed going into night. OOTN states his block target tonight amongst those 3, I investigate 1 other. If anyone dies, OOTNs target is cleared.
If OOTN dies his target is cleared and I give you the last scum either through guilty or the last person in the unconfirmed being scum through process of elimination.
If I die, you have two unconfirmed and OOTN is basically a cop at this point, he states who he's blocking, if he dies it's the other person, if he doesn't you lynch that person. Scum might fake it out by not submitting, but that would only buy a day, they need to NK to win.
If no one dies, you have an innocent from me and a probably scum from OOTNs target, lynch for the win.

So, if everyone can agree that Thomith's claim is obviously fake, I'm handing you the game.

[Sando]

RDs plan doesn't work, she's got some holes to fill in it. I'm prepared to listen to her fill those holes, but unless she does, it will in no way guarantee us the game. If I can convince town I'm the cop I win them the game today, right now. With no viable alternative to that given the holes in the other plan, obviously I'm going to push for it.

[Sando]

Ok yep, my bad, me dying guarantees town win.

So at some point town have to make a decision between me and Thomith, correct? I can't find a reason when town can safely mislynch one of us, so if scum never kills me, what changes by this plan? If we mislynch today and tomorrow we draw, and I can't see a way to guarantee a correct lynch in those times (mathematically).

Simply, town have to make a decision, this can't be won through setup manipulation. If we lynch Chrimi today I WILL have a result tomorrow, as I only have RD and PM to choose from.

The way I see it, town have to make a decision either today or tomorrow whether they want to trust me as cop. I'm handing them a win today if they believe me, I will state who the scum team is tomorrow 100%. They can choose to go with me today, or tomorrow.

[Sando]

RD, at some point town have to believe my claim or disbelieve my claim and if they choose to believe me either day I give them the win.

At least if town get it wrong and lynch the wrong claimed-cop today there's potential for recovery. That is NOT true tomorrow.

OOTN can you please confirm who you will block tonight amongst Chrimi/PM/RD if we lynch Thomith and he flips scum?

[Sando]

Actually looking at it, literally the only thing that this plan accomplishes is the removal of the buffer for a mislynch of the cop. I'm asking you to believe me today and I'll give you the win. If you disbelieve me today and lynch me, well at least Thomith is dead tomorrow and you've still got a chance. Mislynch me tomorrow after a town mislynch today, and it's a draw at best.

At some point town have to decide to believe me, that should 100% be today, at least if you're wrong you've still got a chance of a win.

[Sando]

Ok, so here's my scenario, very likely to happen:
Chrimi flips town, OOTN dies overnight.
I claim a guilty or psuedo-guilty on say PM.
Thomith claims an innocent on Fud (I think that was your suggested target for him).

What now?

You have 6 alive, you cannot mislynch again, you now have to lynch one of the cops. Which one do you choose?

You keep saying 'caught by the cop' tomorrow, how will town know which claimed cop is telling the truth tomorrow as opposed to today?

[Sando]

By the way, and town that agrees with me should NOT vote Thomith until OOTN has stated who he will block overnight within Chrimi/PM/RD. He only needs to do that in the event of a Thomith scum-flip, he can block whoever he wants if I'm lying or Thomith isn't lynched today.

OOTN needs to state his target though within those 3, please do no pre-empt this with a lynch on Thomith.

[Sando]

If Chrimi dies today and isn't scum, I know that you or PM are scum. At that point it doesn't matter who I investigate, I will get a result either through guilty or process of elimination.

So tomorrow we have (I'm assuming Chrimi is town because if scum we win):
PM
FuD
RD
Sando
Thomith
AcRv

If Thomith claims an innocent on FuD we have a confirmed townie, and I will tell everyone whether RD is scum or not. Assuming she's not, best case is we have 2 cleared, RD and FuD. We no lynch, one of the confirmed dies overnight. Now we're left with 5 alive, 1 cleared (Thomith will claim a guilty by default, same as I will tomorrow), and you cannot mislynch.

You cannot get around the fact that town have to at some point, choose between the cop claims. It is better they do that today than tomorrow.

[Sando]

Unvote

Until OOTN states who between PM/Chrimi/RD he will block tonight in the event that 1) Thomith is lynched and 2) he flips scum.

[Sando]

Om we actually need you to guarantee who you will block in the event of a Thomith scum-flip. As long as it's in the list of RD/Chrimi/PM is fine, but we need to know who you're blocking in that list.

That means that if anyone dies, we can 100% clear the person you blocked.
If no-one dies either your target is scum or we're being faked out, but I'll have a result clearing someone at minimum, so we can safely lynch your target anyway.
If I die, then your target is cleared and you're left with 2 unconfirmed in 6 tomorrow - lynch one block the other for a guaranteed win.

All of that relies on Thomith being scum today, but I'm only asking that you guarantee who you'll block tonight in that event, do what you want if I'm lying and get Thomith lynched.

For your block to be of worth, we need you to state who you're blocking, so that if/when you die, we can clear the person that you were blocking.

[Sando]

Thank you, you block Chrimi, I will investigate RD (not that it matters between him and PM).

VOTE: Thomith

Town - just so everyone is aware of the plan (proviso that Thomith is scum and I'm not a lying faker) which works on the fact that Om will be able to block the NK by blocking the last scum.

• - If Om dies tonight Chrimi is town, I am confirmed cop, and I will tell you who the last scum is between PM and RD.
  - If I die tonight, Chrimi is town, you lynch either RD or PM, Om will block the un-lynched of those two (assuming you don't hit scum), scum can no longer submit a kill due to being blocked.
  - If no-one dies tonight, then unless I have a guilty, either PM or Chrimi are guilty, lynch one, block the other.
  - If anyone other than Om/me dies, Chrimi is cleared and I can clear/guilty RD, giving us a guilty on either RD or PM.

That covers all the overnight bases I believe. Yes this relies on Thomith being scum, but as I've shown, at some point you will have to either believe me/thomith or disbelieve me/thomith. Today is your best option for making that decision.

[Sando]

Sand you are saying if i flip scum, if you were the cop you would KNOW i would flip scum which annoys me that nobody else sees this.
UNVOTE:
VOTE: Sando

You mean the bit in 1057 where I said you were definitely scum was too ambiguous for you?

Thomith is now 100% scum.

You're the person who thought that claiming VT after a 'scum' claimed cop was a good idea, and you accuse me of 'not being sure'?

I'm addressing legitimate town concerns regarding whether I'm cop or scum, simply stating 'well I am the cop and Thomith is scum' would not help town.

I am telling Om to do something when you flip scum, his obvious reaction is 'well what if he doesn't flip scum', so I'm attempting to address that question with 'obviously ignore my lying scum instructions'. Town also have the question of 'well what if Sando is scum', and I'm telling them that it is better to deal with it today than tomorrow. To do that, I need to pose 'if' questions.

[Sando]

You didn't seem to care earlier, what changed?

Care about what?

[Sando]

You were acting like i was town, now not so much.

I've addressed it, I stated categorically that you're scum, in stark contrast to your claim where you claimed VT after my cop claim then changed your mind after some prodding from RD, then didn't actually vote me despite the fact that I 'fake-claimed'.

I've had my vote on you ever since, except to remove it while waiting for Om to confirm his actions tonight.

Town don't need to hear me endlessly droning on about you being scum, they know that one of us is, now they need to decide which one is telling the truth, and how to go about maximising the opportunity and minimising risks.

So I don't really need to tell town that you're scum, they're pretty well aware that I know you're scum.

[Sando]

Because I see a forced win

You keep using that phrase, I do not think it means what you think it means.

Please paint me a picture of how you've forced a win, every time you say 'forced' win what you actually mean is that there's still possibilities for scum pairings that are in no way discovered.

I've made it very clear for town how they have to choose between the cops, today is the best time to do that.

Chrimi, if you're town and right about Thomith (I think you're town and know you're right about Thomith), you know that the last scum is one of PM and RD... and you're going along with the no-lynch? It's a bad idea, scum MUST avoid Thomith lynch at all cost as they instantly lose if he's lynched.

I'm happy with Chrimi as town now, there's no way he's so suicidal to push on Thomith as his partner. Town can/should treat him as not scum with Thomith as opposed to definite town.

[Sando]

We have to mislynches here, and I want as much information as possible about the unknowns before we start risking expending them.

I assume you mean 'two'?

How do we have two?

Assuming we lynch every day:
Today we are 8, mislynch and NK make it 2 scum alive in 6. Mislynch and NK would make it 2 scum in 4 and impossible to win (is this actually a scum-win?)

Assuming we no-lynch today:
Tomorrow we are 7, Mislynch and NK make it 2 scum alive in 5, another mislynch is obvious loss to town.

So remind me again how we have two mislynches? Are you seriously building your no-lynch plan based on having two mislynches?! We cannot get it wrong more than once or we lose.

[Sando]

Pretty confident PM is the last scum.

Chrimi-scum is ensuring instant loss if he gets his way and lynches his partner Thomith
RD-scum is ensuring instant loss if she gets her way and I investigate here (lynch me after I claim Thomith/RD to confirm me as cop, lynch Thomith and RD)
I've eliminated everyone else as a scum other than PM and know Thomith is scum

[Sando]

50/50? If I'm scum and we lynch cop-Thomith today, in 2 days time then 4 people will be alive, AcRv, FuD, Chrimi, PM, and one will be scum. That's not an instant loss.

If you can't work out why, you're not thinking this through hard enough and should not be blindly following plans...

Everyone - assuming I find RD innocent what will you do tomorrow if Thomith claims innocent on FuD?
Everyone - assuming I find RD innocent what will you do tomorrow if Thomith claims guilty on FuD?

[Sando]

Oh well a plan that you can't explain because it isn't a forced win if scum react a certain way sounds like a great forced win plan...

[Sando]

What post of mine are you talking about? I didn't ignore it, you're showing that we can mislynch once in both circumstances, I stated that myself.

[Sando]

So anyone guilties we lynch the cop with the result. Both claim guilty we lynch either cop, doesn't matter.

So innocents from both is the only viable scum-option from either of us. Town still don't know who between Chrimi/PM/AcRv is scum, and town don't know between Sando/Thomith, and there's no way to get that information through investigations.

[Sando]

So anyone guilties we lynch the cop with the result. Both claim guilty we lynch either cop, doesn't matter.

So innocents from both is the only viable scum-option from either of us.

Town still don't know who between Chrimi/PM/AcRv is scum

, and town don't know between Sando/Thomith, and there's no way to get that information through investigations.

... I thought you said I was innocent

You don't know that I'm cop, so town can't clear you.

[Sando]

Look at the diagram Sando! I'm the quarter, remember? The quarter and the $8.99 figurine are both town.

This one?

Actually its simple enough to just say if Thomith claims a guilty

We lynch the Taco Bell Hot Sauce. If its scum, we can lynch the Bobblehead and Reciept at will since we have the time to since we lose on the second, not first mislynch. If the Hot Sauce is town the candy and nail clippers die back to back since Rainbowdash (The Rainbow Dash figure) and AcRv (The quarter) are town either way.

The hint is in the first sentence... RD is addressing what happens if Thomith claims guilty, I agreed with her. Thomith would claim guilty on FD, either he's cop and it's Sando/FD pairing, or he's scum and it's Thomith + PM/Chrimi. You are 100% confirmed town IF Thomith claims a guilty.

[Sando]

Well, if he has an inno I'm not 100% confirmed admitedly, but Rainbowdash has explained the town read multiple times to which you never objected the logic of.

Why would I reject the logic of it? I know you're town!

So now we're going from a game-breaking auto-win plan to one where you've got Chrimi/PM and Sando/Thomith to pick between, and AcRv presumed innocent due to some town-tells... All because you can't bring yourself to realise that Thomiths claim is laughably bogus.

Unless RD is scum, I can 100% guarantee that Thomith will find FuD innocent, so:
AcRv - unconfirmed
FuD - Town
RD - Town
Chrimi - unconfirmed
PM - unconfirmed
Thomith - unconfirmed
Sando - unconfirmed

Hey cool we've got no way to guarantee a win at this point.

Under the plan that happens tomorrow, we lynch one of Chrimi/PM, it doesn't matter which, me and Thomith investigate the other one. Both of us will claim either a guilty on the person or innocent=AcRv-scum, so we have a result. At that point you have to decide which of the cops is scum.

That is the only none-auto-loss option for scum, so unless FuD or RD are scum or we hit scum in Chrimi/PM it WILL happen, and you WILL have to pick between me and Thomith at Lylo.

Why not just do that now when you're not at lylo?

[Sando]

RD - do you agree that unless you or FuD are scum and therefore someone claims a guilty (or stupid scum claim a guilty), we are guaranteed to end up in this situation tomorrow?

AcRv - unconfirmed
FuD - Town
RD - Town
Chrimi - unconfirmed
PM - unconfirmed
Thomith - unconfirmed
Sando - unconfirmed

Who do you lynch?

[Sando]

That worst case scenario will happen tomorrow... surely you can see that as cop-Sando, I KNOW Thomith will give an innocent no matter who he investigates, and you're insanely close to confirmed to me.

Your two 1v1s are predicated on the read that AcRv is town, while I agree with him being town, why are you advocating a complex plan that involves eliminating someone due to a town-read (as opposed to guaranteed things like investigations), all to avoid making a decision on the cops,

that you will have to make anyway

??!?!?!

It makes no sense. One of those 1v1s that you're so blasé about is between me and Thomith, yet apparently tomorrow or the day after it'll be easier to make?

But I'm kinda done arguing against this plan, it's like beating my head against a wall. I know AcRv is town, leaving RD as my investigate tonight, as long as you pick right between Thomith and me town win.

[Sando]

I'm investigating you RD, there's no way I'm not doing that tonight. PM is the most likely, I've outlined why previously, but essentially you and chrimi have both tried really hard to commit scum-suicide today. PM just just jumps on the thomith thing once I pointed that out.

Thomith will give an innocent, may as well make him clear fud while you're at it.

Does ootn know how to break the game if I die tonight? It's auto win for town, but a little complicated.

[Sando]

After the game I'd like someone to tell me how claiming cop before the fake-claim is either 'countering' or 'mafia 101'. Thomith breadcrumbing, then not countering me when I claim and in fact claiming VT, then countering my claim at RDs behest, is NOT an example of me counter-claiming someone...

Just FYI, you just did exactly what scum MUST do in your position, attempt to get me out of investigating you tonight. Hence, no, I'm investigating you.

Postgame will be interesting, yes

[Sando]

That wouldn't have worked, there's no plan you can put without FuD/RD investigate tonight that I wouldn't be screaming blue murder about. I'm only reasonably passive about the no-lynch because the status-quo of me vs Thomith is kept, and you and FuD are 100% cleared. Having put yourself in this position, the only way out if you're scum at the moment is to avoid me investigating you.

I claimed first, how am I 'countering'?

As for OOTN, if you're scum I'm dying overnight, that's a given. Hence he needs to know how to break the game in the event that I die, without your coaching.

[Sando]

Unvote
Vote: No Lynch

[Sando]

In case it's not obvious, RD is correct about the forced win if I die, and how to do it. There's other ways, but that works.

[Sando]

Got an innocent on RD.

Vote: Thomith

Scum-team from my POV (ie I know this because I'm cop) is Thomith/PM. Chrimi/PM is the last possibility, and Chrimi pushed very hard on Thomith yesterday, which would be suicide as Chrimi-scum.

[Sando]

Rofl, thomith, you think I might be faking an innocent on the person you said was innocent? Nice slip.

[Sando]

You mean fd that you investigated last night? Lol

[Sando]

RD was 100% right, no lynch was the correct option. That didn't make it the best option, so I figured I'd have a crack at getting an easy win for town. My problem was that RD basically forced scum to pull the only trick they had (bus their partner in suicide position), then basically fell for it. I watched the quick hammer happen and was just sitting there praying it happened. Ballsy move there PM, I know you basically had to do it, but wow, nearly pulled that one off. Whether you'd have won the game I dunno, but props for the ballsy move.

I was massively confused day 2, I had no idea what anyone was talking about with the cop came. Then Day 3 comes and I claim, and I'm told by RD that I'm not actually the cop... whaaaaat? Oddest claims and reactions I've seen.