Mini 659: The Neighborhood- Game over on Day 6

[Ythill]

I obviously don't have enough information to tell if user is town or scum at this point, but I will say that if you are telling the truth, you've made a poor choice.

Claiming miller unbidden verifies the existance of a cop and narrows the search for him. It also creates a good meta strategy for scum if it becomes the norm. So, like, shame on you or something.

[Ythill]

I'm not exactly inclined to believe iamausername's claim at the moment since it appears to be lacking a certain flavor.

QFT.

So, the cop really does have a reason to look into you....

Are you really trying to direct a cop investigation? Why?

Here's my input... though I'm not wanting to get into a huge theory discussion, I believe that the miller claim is not a pro-town move. However, I understand that some people think that it does help the town. These people are certainly wrong, but being wrong does not make them scummy.

Since this claim has already happened and there's not much we can do about it at this point except make the most of it...

User claimed miller which means he is (a) a miller telling the truth (b) a mobster lying or (c) another option that I'm not going to explain for now. It's safe to say that one of the first two is most likley true, and the secret third option doesn't make any differnece in the points below. The important thing to see here is that, no matter what, user's alignment will be seen as "guilty" to a sane cop. So...

(1) User should be treated as if a cop got a night-zero guilty result on him. He should be scrutinized very carefully as long as he's alive.

(2) As long as he's alive, user is an excellent way for cops to test their sanity. A result of "guilty" on him means that you are sane or paranoid (which is easy to figure out) while an innocent result would mean you are naive or insane (which is almost as easy to figure out). Of course, if your sanity is guarenteed (or you figure it out some other way) then this point can be ignored.

[Ythill]

He's cast aspersions on iamausername, but has cleverly manoeuvred so that people find it hard to challenge those aspersions, by announcing that he doesn't want to get into a theory debate.

All I said was that I don't want to get into a "huge theory discussion," which is different from not wanting to discuss it at all. I simply stated my beliefs, so that y'all know where I stand. I also have stated that others who believe differently are welcome to their opinions.

If we are going to try to change one another's mind about this, we should do so in MD because we only have three weeks to lynch correctly.

Is your attack sincere, Ythill?

I wouldn't call it an attack. In both of my posts I have explicitly stated that I don't think user is scum per se. The closest I come to an attack is where I say that we should treat user as if we have a N-0 guilty result on him, a statement that I stand by.

If you'd like to argue that point (concicely), I think it would be relevant.

[Ythill]

Isn't that the same thing?

[Ythill]

To clarify:

I defined treating him as cop-investigated as: scrutinize him closely as long as he's alive. Tony, how is your angle different?

[Ythill]

Did my first readthrough...

In user's favor is the way he minimized the theory argument and redirected people to the MD thread. I'd expect most miller-claiming-scum to smokescreen with theory in a game that has auto deadlines.

@bionic: Elias made a good point about the flavor you missed, why didn’t you address it?

@wolf: If I thought it was pro-town to discuss option (c) I would have done so. Why are you nudging me to reveal more information?

@fhq: You were unsure if wolf had missed a point or was fishing. Has #50 helped to solidify your opinion?

@Rash: You mentioned that you wanted to look at a couple of other players, but you never said who or why. Who? Why?

@Tony: Your vote on Darox seemed to be too serious too soon. You’ve ignored him since then. Why?

[Ythill]

What was there to address?

I don't know that there was anything to specifically address but reading the tone of a concession might have been helpful, so I wanted to ask you about it. Your answer was adequate, thanks.

Perhaps a vote will loosen his stiff lips.

Not going to happen.

If it's not pro town, why bring it up at all?

Two reasons. (1) It is a valid option that I (and probably others) have considered. Leaving it out entirely would have been a false dichotomy. (2) To tempt and then analyze other players' curiosity. Yours, for example, struck me as a little scummy because of your earlier fishing. Rash's I'm not sure about yet.

[Ythill]

If a miller dies, we have an easy lynch with you.

Do people agree with this sentiment?

A dead miller would certainly be solid evidence against user. FTR: I have played minis with multiple cops and docs but I think multiple millers would be generally unbalanced.

Tommy, after you have your answers (or sooner if you feel it's appropriate) I'd like to know what you hoped to learn by asking this question.

[Ythill]

Huh. I always thought QFT meant Quite Fucking True. That's what I mean when I say it.

Tony posted my least favorite answer (to the questions I asked) and he's done a couple of vaguely scummy things, but I don't find him overly suspicious.

Lowell is a little too emotional and doesn't seem altogether sane, but that's just Lowell. I've mislynched him before and he was acting just like this. Not saying he's town, but eveything he's done so far has been null for him.

The wolf wagon is intriguing. She's role-fished, which is definately a scumtell, and bionic had a couple of other good points. Add to them the fact that wolf calls position changing a scumtell in #96 while she's doing it herself, as well as arguing that an FoS is not "pushing the wagon". I don't think the "ticked off" argument is anything but sematics but her EBWOP might have been Freudian. It's certainly worth seeing where the wagon goes.

So my first vote goes to

##vote crywolf20084

.

@wolf: If quickly changing stances is a known scumtell, why would you do it as town?

[Ythill]

Don't have much time this morning but I can answer some stuff...

@Rash: Thank you for dropping (c) until later. I will offer full disclosure when it is no longer harmful to the town.

Mind telling me which part of 96 you think she calls a change of stance a scumtell?

In looking it up, I have realized that "calls" is maybe a bit too much. She certainly eludes to it, suggesting (IMO) that she thinks it is. Which means the same thing in the context of my accusation. Anyway, here's the quote...

I perticually don't like this post, and you were also quick to defend Tony in post 90 as well, but in post 68 (sorry none of these are linked) you told Tony to shut the hell up. Why the change in heart?

[Ythill]

...by-and-large I agree that one of wolf/Lowell is scum.

Furthermore, I think only one of the pair is scum...

I don't like this line of thinking. Though I agree that it's unlikely both are scum, you've failed to consider that they could both be town. And if they are, what I've quoted above would be a smooth move from the real mafia.

Nothing to hang you over, but certainly worth noting.

I'm still more comfortable with wolf than Lowell but I'd rather have more than two choices before we lynch.

[Ythill]

Just because I didn't mention it, it doesn't mean that I didn't consider it.

Fair enough, but I cannot read minds. The problem I had with the statement was the ambivalence combined with the surety that one (and only one) is scum.

It's empty as a townie sentiment (because honest surety should flow from evidence and evidence is inevitably linked to one alignment, not two possibilities). To further explain, if somone believes that only one of a pair is scum without attaching that belief to an individual, then he obviously believes that it is possible for either person to be town. The surety that one is scum belies this.

However, from the standpoint of you as scum, adherence to this belief sets up two mislynches in a row. Do you understand what I found suspicious about your play there?

As for other people to look at, what do you feel makes the reasons for voting crywolf stronger than the reasons for voting Lowell?

If you are asking about my reasons, I already explained this in #108.

If you are asking my opinion about others' reasons, I must admit that I have not yet read them closely enough to give a definitive answer, but I'll glance back now and give some impressions in my next post.

[Ythill]

As promised...

Those voting for Lowell

:
Tony: I don’t like the way he agrees with user about wolf’s actions, but somehow translates that to a point against Lowell. His vote is pure OMGUS. Later (in #92) he backs this up with a post that is such a defense-attack combo that it’s hard to tell what he’s getting at. I think this is the scummiest vote on Lowell.

Tommy: I think his vote is solid, though my experience with Lowell is that the tells mentioned by Tommy are unreliable. No suspicion of Tommy here, I just don’t agree with him.

Darox: Like all of his vote changes, the reasons for this one are vague. I don’t like baseless assertions, but there are scummier votes on this wagon.

Rash: I already talked about how I didn’t like the eeny-meeny approach to this vote, but I can follow the reasoning and it seems to me like Rash is honestly trying to determine Lowell’s alignment in later posts.

wolf: Pure OMGUS, and confirmed as comfortable @ L-2. A vague statement about aggression is her only other reasoning. This vote is a close second for scummiest on the wagon.

Elias (who has unvoted): This vote came with a solid case that was the strongest of several stated suspicions. It was accompanied by reasonable follow-up and removed when appropriate. No problems with this vote at all.

Those voting for wolf

:
user: The reasoning is a little empty, considering wolf’s play, but it makes sense. He’s followed it up with a little bit of nitpicking. This vote is not a town-tell but it seems honest enough to me.

bionic: I particularly like his initial pressure vote because it was based on a trend that was concerning to me as well. He made some valid points in his follow-up case. I like the way user keeps an eye on the big picture and my read on him is starting to lean town, which is based on things separate from his vote but generally helps me to view that vote as more valid.

Ythill: Obvtown. All of his votes are jedi-ninja cool.

Lowell (who has unvoted): This vote is a Lowell-tell. I don't like it, or agree with it. If I'd not played with Lowell before, I'd even find it suspicious. But I have played with Lowell before. Those who haven't should seriously take the time to meta him.

Discuss.

[Ythill]

I don't disagree with you here, Tony. But with all Lowell has done, I find it unsettling that your main problem with his play was limited to his attack against you. Hence my "pure OMGUS" comment.

Will you address the way you used user's statement about wolf's actions to lead into your complaints about Lowell's attack?

[Ythill]

Did you place a vote on one of the wagons? I was going from vote counts and memory, neither of which showed you voting for Lowell or wolf. Am I mistaken?

[Ythill]

@Darox: I'm not here to improve Lowell's play. I'm here to win this game by hanging scum.

I dont think i was translating his points to my vote on lowell. I was rather cooveying that i was in the camp of thinking that one of them are scum, and I was thinking Lowell was the best bet.

Okay, I hear ya. I reread and now see that I misread one "she" as being a "he" in your post, which threw me off.

[Ythill]

Hi Oman. Your reputation preceeds you. I look forward to reading your opinions.

[Ythill]

PRetty much a suble cop direct. But it looks well intentioned.

Well intentioned how?

Ythill wins townie brownies...

Thanks and all, but I'd rather have you nominate me for a special title.

1. Conspiracy? Really?
2. Policy lynch on page 8. I knew you were a rash player but... wow.
3. I agree that the information potential is good.
4. How is having a cop unusual?
5. Nice sentiment, but it's a lot scarier from someone who isn't already voting for him.

[Ythill]

Expect a response to Ythill's analysis then...

I don't know what there is for you to respond to but... okay.

neutral as in you have no read on him, or neutral as in 3rd party alignment?

When I read Darox's response I thought, if I was scum I would ask Darox what he meant by neutral. Don't know that this says anything about bionic's alignment, but the thought came up so I figured I'd mention it.

Your comment makes no sense to me. Is somebody who is 'neutral' to you right now the scummiest person you can find? Does that mean everybody else is coming across as clear town to you?

I endorse this product and/or service.

[Ythill]

What would you ask if you were town and didn't know what they meant?

I thought it was obvious, from the context, that he meant MotR. I also thought asking which he meant would be a good way for scum to appear helpful. I don't think this means you are mafia (it's too assumptive to be a reliable tell), but I mentioned it because it seemed relevant.

I’m not sure I like you self analysis on why you are voting me, it might be helpful to list your reasons again just to make sure they are consistent.

It wasn't meant to be analysis. It was meant to be a witty remark posted in place of self-analysis because it's pretty presumptuous for me to analyze my own play.

How will repeating the reasons for my vote prove their consistancy? They haven't changed.

neutral as in you have no read on him, or neutral as in 3rd party alignment?

When I read Darox's response I thought, if I was scum I would ask Darox what he meant by neutral. Don't know that this says anything about bionic's alignment, but the thought came up so I figured I'd mention it.

Your comment makes no sense to me. Is somebody who is 'neutral' to you right now the scummiest person you can find? Does that mean everybody else is coming across as clear town to you?

I endorse this product and/or service.

You're essentially saying "this line of questioning is scummy", and then also saying "I agree with this line of questioning" here. What's up with that, Ythill?

You are falsely lumping the questions. My interest was piqued by your first question which I found (mildly) suspicious due to my own thoughts about the “neutral” statement. However, I found the other two points valid: that a “neutral” player seems to be Darox’s best guess for who is scum and therefore, if he is town, his overall suspicions must be unreasonably weak. Which suggests that he isn’t town.

[Ythill]

Just checking in to tell y'all I'm on my usual Monday-Tuesday routine, not much time for internet.

I may post tomorrow but probably not. Definately will be back by Wednesday evening.

[Ythill]

@ Tommy: I thought you meant you were going to address what I said

about you

. Now I understand.

The gist is that crywolf may be scummy to fall for Lowell's bait, but that Lowell is scummier for setting it in the first place.

That's if you believe it was bait. I agree with what Lowell said about Tony. His post was all over the map. Was that enough for Lowell to place a vote? On page 2? Absolutely.

Do you still believe Tony's is a scummy vote, though?

Less so, but yes.

Re: wolf and the n00b card... it’s a possibility that’s been bouncing around in my brain, which is why I haven’t pushed her too hard yet.

Compare Lowell: (1) his focus shifts when he feels the wind changing, but (2) it's always possible to say what he's trying to pull.

That’s pretty ridiculous, Tommy. (1) You cannot possibly know what Lowell is “feeling.” (2) Is the above “bait” an example of this? I fear you are projecting.

He's more coherent than crywolf, and therefore more suspicious.

So a player who plays the VI well is more likely to be scum? I don’t agree with that. In fact, I’d say it makes it more likely to be a null-tell, since a coherent VI is more likely to play similarly regardless of alignment.

Hey, I'm actually not bionic.

Yeah... ooops. You sorta look bionic.

On other topics…

I totally agree with the questions posed to Darox and I don’t like how his replies have gone. He’s dodged the basic gist of the accusation: voting a player whom you find neutral yet disruptive is not pro-town play, and it suggests overall suspicions that are too weak for a townie to hold honestly. It sounds like scum leaving room, later, to escape culpability for a lynch or to reverse positions if the wagon goes sour. Saying “misrep” and getting frustrated does not change these things.

Furthermore, when asked to defend his vote, Darox tried in vain and eventually detracted it quietly. And there have been a few other minor points.

##unvote; vote: Darox

I am intrigued by Rash’s latest questions. I think this discussion between he and user will provide a good deal of information.

I’m curious where Oman’s gotten off to. Still wondering how he saw wolf’s fishing as well-intentioned.

[Ythill]

##unvote; vote: Darox

Bad move.

Really?

We're a week from deadline. I've got a little doubt about my choice for the lynch, and the rest of the town isn't putting any stake in the case I've brought against her. Instead, they are intent on lynching the VI. And there's three scummy votes on his wagon.

Then a few people post honest-sounding suspicions of one of those scummy voters and I agree with them. And Darox responds in a way that embroils him further. So I change wagons in the hopes that we can lynch scum rather than the VI.

Having said that, I've now gotten the chance to read #265 and I'm seriously considering a jump back to wolf. Waiting to see her response to bionic.

[Ythill]

@Darox: I've already posted a decent summary of the case against you...

I totally agree with the questions posed to Darox and I don’t like how his replies have gone. He’s dodged the basic gist of the accusation: voting a player whom you find neutral yet disruptive is not pro-town play, and it suggests overall suspicions that are too weak for a townie to hold honestly. It sounds like scum leaving room, later, to escape culpability for a lynch or to reverse positions if the wagon goes sour. Saying “misrep” and getting frustrated does not change these things.

Furthermore, when asked to defend his vote, Darox tried in vain and eventually detracted it quietly. And there have been a few other minor points.

I can go into the minor points if you'd like, but I'd be satisfied, for now, if you addressed what's explicit above.

Also, your meta suggests that you are normally more forthright and direct with your defenses. What's different in this game?

Still waiting on wolf...

[Ythill]

On another topic...

I understand Fhq's point about Lowell. Even though I think hanging him would be a 3 in 4 chance of a mislynch at this point, I'd still hammer him at deadline to avoid no lynch. For information if nothing else.

However, it sounds to me like Fhq is

pushing

that lynch while saying it is a last resort, which is suspicious.

IME, the best way to deal with the VI is with town power (investigate or vig) before LYLO.

[Ythill]

Your above quote only holds weight if you think I was voting to achieve a lynch.

I don't buy the pressure-only defense. It's too easy for scum to fall back on. Pressure votes lynch people as easily as non-pressure votes, and you kept yours on into lynching territory. Nor did you accompany it with questions.

Nor does the pressure defense address your lack of more realistic suspicions.

I have pointed out that all you had against my vote was that 'leaving someone you don't find 100% scummy at L-1 is a moral and social injustice'.

Absolute strawman. There's nothing moral or social about it. What it means is that you were willing to let a quick hammer fall onto someone you were explicitly reading @ MotR. Which demonstrates that you don't mind hanging a townie. Which suggests that you are not town-aligned.

[Ythill]

Would you say 'Its the fault of those damn people who didn't unvote when he reached L-1', or would you start seriously questioning why someone dropped an untimely hammer?

I'd probably do both, depending on the circumstances. You and I both know that town can quick hammer. IME, they do it more often than scum.

So here we have you saying that lynching an unknown is okay, because you can follow it up with suspicion on another unknown. Nice defense.

But really, the point of this is moot because Tony or whomever unvoted him before I had the chance to even contemplate not unvoting him.

This

did

seem like a good defense, so I looked it up. Tony unvoted in #190. You were the person who posted #189, without unvoting.

And where the hell is wolf...

[Ythill]

I had some stuff for Darox, but user covered it. I'm still comfortable with my vote, but also still awaiting wolf's return. I'm sure that one of them will have my vote at deadline.

@Tommy: It's interesting to me that you have healthy suspicion for both Darox and wolf but still say that Lowell is worse. How do you justify those thoughts when both Darox and wolf have dropped scumtells while pushing Lowell toward the noose?

IMO, their actions are currently the best evidence of Lowell's alignment, and that evidence suggests that he is not scum.

[Ythill]

@Darox: First you said you didn't have the "chance to even contemplate". Then you said you "did briefly consider it," regardless of the fact that the hour and a half between your post and Tony's unvote wasn't exactly brief. Now you say you'd "decided to not unvote Lowell," but might have changed your mind.

My problem with this is the fact that the original argument was: you decided to leave your vote on someone you read as MotR @ L-1. Now you've admitted it, which is not scummy in itself. But why the circumlocution? If you have nothing to hide, why cite a false timing issue in the first place?

Its not a justification for lynching Lowell, its a justification to not be afraid of night (i.e. afraid of lynching).

It doesn't make sense to me that, in a game with auto-deadlines, you'd have this motivation. I smell a rat.

You don't believe Lowell could be scum?

I never said that. I don't know if he's scum or town, but I know he's playing VI. Which means he's the pawn. There's even some mild evidence for his townieness, but I don't think it's enough to clear him entirely.

Avoiding the wagon?

Absolutely. I've already said that I don't want to lynch Lowell. Why would I not be avoiding the wagon?

Guys, with deadline this close (within the week I think) we all need to get on one target, and I'm saying NOT DAROX!

Perhaps you'd care to defend him then?

He

certainly isn't convincing me.

[Ythill]

I am starting to think Lowell is the right play today. Even if we lynch somebody else, I feel as though the game will be stuck in Lowell mode and we will end up right back where we are tomorrow.

This is the best argument I've heard yet for a Lowell lynch. Still hoping we can hang one of the more suspicious characters before deadline though.

Also, if he is alive when night comes, a cop (if we have one) would likely investigate him.

Why is this a bad thing?

Wolf's response isn't sterling. Mainly, I don't like the waffling between #312 (where she diminishes the case on Lowell) and #314 (where she pushes it again), although this could be a function of tense. Otherwise, she's answered the questions adequately enough.

My vote's staying on Darox for now.

[Ythill]

I just woke up, haven't even finished my coffee yet.

The NK is odd. Scum must have known user was the miller, so why kill him? Of course, maybe they wanted to distract us with that very question.

As of now, I'm still pretty suspicious of wolf and Darox, especially since some of the scummier moments of each were related to the Lowell mislynch. Before I place a vote, however, I'm going to look back at that wagon. If I remember correctly, Oman's policy vote and Tony's early attack were also suspect.

[Ythill]

I know, but I'm pretty sure that at least one did. The wagon is just good place to start, and I'm not just talking about the votes. I'm going to look at the dynamics in general: arguments for and against the wagon, the timing of certain actions when compared to suspicion on others, etc.

The benefit of Lowell's death is that we have lots of info, as previously stated.

Also, I promised to disclose "option (c)" as soon as it was no longer dangerous to the town. In case you don't remember, the topic was user's possible roles, with (a) and (b) being scum and miller. He also could have been a cop, using the claim to hide his role and keep himself from being NKed. Unlikely, but possible. Maybe scum figured that out, explaining their NK choice?

Anyway... not sure when I'll have time to do the wagon analysis. Maybe not until Wednesday (Monday and Tuesday are LA days for me), but I'll let y'all know when it's done.

[Ythill]

@bionic: Yeah, I brought up NK discussion, so what? I found it odd. I also think it's nice that so many people weighed in on the topic. Lots of ammo for Rash's quote miners.

@Oman: That was pretty creepy. Why are you buddying to me?

Anyway... I managed to find some time.

For reference, my initial impression of the votes on Lowell was posted in #165. Most of it still applies. I did amend the read on Tony’s vote after the connection between the quote about wolf and his own case against Lowell was explained to me. I had misunderstood that argument but now see the logic behind it.

It was also brought to my attention that I’d missed Fhq’s pressure vote. I’ve now reread it. It

seemed

like it was honest pressure as it was placed appropriately and removed once Lowell started posting again. Though the

placement

was fine, I don’t really like the way Fhq pushed suspicion on Lowell while removing the vote as well as other stuff he did afterwards. More on this below…

On the Wagon

Rash:

Still seems legit to me. There was that one little problem with his vote, but it has been buried under a mountain of townie play.

Oman:

Gives five reasons for voting Lowell. They are: information, policy, information, information, and claim or die. Then he spends the rest of the day pushing for a Lowell lynch. OMG! Like I said before, I know that Oman is a rash player, but this seems like too much.

@Oman: Explain yourself. I'll have more specific questions for you once you have.

Tony:

I still feel like his initial vote was a little suspect. The unvote @ L-1 + revote @ L-2 was null. However, what I find most suspicious afterwards was the way Tony stopped looking at other people. His posts after that vote were all defense or side-comment until the end-of-day IGMEO Oman. This while serious discussion about the Lowell lynch was taking place.

@Tony: Why did you stop hunting?

wolf:

I still think the initial vote was scummy. The meta-based unvote seemed transparent, but the “hammer” vote (actually L-1) struck me as preemptively defensive, which is usually not a good sign. And she “hammered” for his refusal to answer questions though he’d already done that before she unvoted. So why the change in stance?

@wolf: Which games of Lowell’s did you read? Did you by chance read mini539?

Tommy:

I still don’t have any problems with Tommy’s treatment of Lowell. Some of his other actions are questionable, but none of it is of major concern.

Fhq:

Voted for pressure, unvoted

while pushing suspicion

after Lowell answered. He continues to talk about how Lowell is a bad player, slipping in scummy qualifications, while defending wolf, who is his other suspect at the time. He votes Darox because of a miscount? Then back to Lowell, then Darox again, as the conversation shifts. There are some questionable contradictions in his arguments. In the end, Lowell gets the vote for deadline and bad play.

@Fhq: Please explicitly share your read on wolf.

Darox:

I think this drama has been in the forefront of the game long enough that I don’t need to rehash it. Combining his most recent unvote with the hammer demonstrates that the unvote itself was likely for show. I still rank Darox high in my suspicions but yesterday’s info has produced multiple leads and I don’t know that he’s the scummiest of the bunch.

On the Sidelines

bionic:

He was against a Lowell lynch for the same reason I was (meta and the suspicious acts of wagoneers). He allowed himself to be talked into an info lynch, which looks kind of slimy, but his unvote was the most appropriate of anyone’s. I don’t find his actions noteworthy.

Elias:

His vote and unvote reasoning were solid, but he muddied it later (which bionic called him on), and again when explaining why he wants to look at Darox tomorrow. He was one of the earlier supporters of an info lynch. He prompts user to give a solid stance on Lowell as the day is winding down. He contradicts himself again when saying he hasn’t looked much at the Darox case.

Conclusions

This post probably sounds pretty paranoid. I just wanted to look at all the angles.

I feel like Rash, Tommy, and bionic get a townie pass for the day, unless something comes up. Oman’s playing like a freak but that’s a part of his reputation; Tony had passive tunnel-vision and some OMGUS, but that’s about all; Darox still has to answer for his convenient voting patterns but there are bigger fish to fry. These three are not my primary concerns.

Elias could be, by process of elimination, the scum on the sidelines and his play is far from clean. In hindsight, Fhq’s D1 actions were worthy of a vote and, read in isolation, he’s the scummiest on the wagon. However…

Wolf’s alignment is suggested not only by her own actions, but by others’actions as well. We have the early Lowell wagon started by people who found wolf scummy. We have several players defending wolf and downplaying her actions at moments when she might have been the clear alternative to Lowell. We have several suspicious players who seemed to find she and Lowell both scummy but him the better lynch. Combined with her own play, I see this evidence as pointing to a clear conclusion, but I’ll await answers to my questions before placing my vote.

[Ythill]

Yeah, I almost asked about that. Then I read Elias, and your change no longer seemed questionable.

[Ythill]

How do you know whether I'm "looking at other people"? I'm just not the instigator type..

I don't like slippery arguments. Are you denying the charge or not?

You "found" Lowell and he was a good enough lynch. There's not much else.

[Ythill]

No, Tony, that's not what I said. You found an early target and then you gave up the hunt. You didn't just refrain from arguing. You refrained from everything that wasn't defense or side-comments until almost the end of the day, when Oman got your OMGUS.

I assert that you did this. I believe it's obvious. If you want to deny it, we can discuss the specifics. If not, I want you to answer my question. "Why?"

@wolf: You didn't answer me at all. I want to know if you read the game in which I helped mislynch Lowell D1. If you didn't, I want you to tell me why you didn't.

@Darox: Eight things wrong. I've already said I'll place a vote once my questions are answered.

@Oman: So you felt he'd be a smokescreen. How do you explain that at least two people were answering to valid cases yesterday if Lowell is so bad for scumhunting? And why choose him over one of them?

[Ythill]

Well... that didn't work.

@wolf: Why those games?

[Ythill]

@Tony: By side comments, I meant things like "This guy is funny, he can't be scum," and, "Well he doesn't seem to be willing to respond to lots of things, but we're in no rush to lynch, lots of daylight left..." FTR: the only thing I found suspicious about these statements was that they were "active lurking" as you said.

Anyway, I feel your answer is adequate for now though, if your claim is that you were scumhunting passively (aka reading for evidence), I'd like to hear some of your suspicions now.

So... I feel like my questions have been answered thoroughly enough for me to place my vote. It's a close race between fhq and wolf, and both were implicated heavily by their play regarding Lowell. However, I've found that secondary actions are often more reliable than personally commited tells (less WIFOM) so I'm going to

##vote: crywolf20084

and post a very rare

FoS: fhq

.

[Ythill]

Why would you guys pressure vote someone who's already answering questions? And then not ask any of your own?

Do you really have that much faith in Darox?

[Ythill]

(Incidentally, Ythill, why did you call him out for his slippery answers the first time but not the second time?)

Um... I did. I said, "No, Tony, that's not what I said," then repeated my charge, then added, "If you want to deny it, we can discuss the specifics. If not, I want you to answer my question."

I

really

don't like the way you said there were "reasons" for your vote and then later posted an extremely weak case based on things that happened after it. I don't believe your soft claim.

Explain your vote or earn mine.

[Ythill]

Explain your vote or earn mine.

##unvote; vote: Darox

[Ythill]

Can somebody remind me how Crywolf has managed to slip completely out of the picture here?

Sure, Darox soft-claimed and directed the town to vote for Tony and, for some unknown reason, people have believed him. Personally, based solely on yesterday's info, I think wolf is the play. However, we've got plenty of time for that and Darox needs to answer for what he's done.

[Ythill]

Then give the reasons for your vote.

[Ythill]

NOTE: IF YOU THINK SOMEONE IS SOFT CLAIMING, DON'T POINT IT OUT. All it does is point the mafia to them. The point of soft claiming is to keep it SECRET AND SUBTLE.

Thanks coach. Except that I have a good reason to believe he was lying. Capiche?

As the person who asked some of the questions, I think Tony (eventually) answered me. Darox has not. The former was being mildly evasive and now is simply annoyed with the nitpicking. The latter is the one who is stonewalling. Let's make this very simple...

Darox, name the "reasons" for your vote on Tony. "He's scum," is not enough. Tell us WHY you think he's scum. If you cannot, then we have uncovered your soft-claim gambit and backing out of it now does not clear you.

[Ythill]

Sorry folks. I spent way too much time on another game. Will be back by Wednesday to address current topics.

[Ythill]

Quick post before work.

@Rash: Stonewalling reasons for a vote is very different than refusing to state something that could hurt the town.

Thanks for (finally) answering, Darox. I don't agree that your case is strong or obvious, but I can believe that you think so. I will be watching you, in the meanwhile...

##unvote, vote: crywolf

.

[Ythill]

Sorry everyone. I've been busier than expected. Should have time for a real post tomorrow.

[Ythill]

Is there anything new to warrent this vote on myself?

Nothing specific. I was simply returning to you after Darox responded, since there was no need to pressure him further. I have seen some suspicious behavior from you recently, but I haven't had much time to consider it. I think I'll be doing a PbPA on you when I have a little more time to post.

For being hypocritical about another player's withholding of information when he did it yesterday.

Can you explain why scum would be more likley than town to be "hypocritical" in this way? I think you're grasping at straws.

Different context (wifom on user's role, vote reasons), but the idea is generally the same.

Sure, and hemlock is generally the same as ginseng, but try telling that to Socrates.

[Ythill]

Crywolf PbPA

(post numbers are in isolation)

00 – Random vote on Lowell.
01 – Discusses user’s claim, leads the cop.

First scum-tell on her. She seems more worried about the cops investigation than user’s claim.

02 – Agreement with Lowell’s attack, FoS on Tony for talking, asks about option c.

The first case where wolf explains her opinions by agreeing with others. She does this a lot. There are very few original opinions from her.

03 – What the hell does Lowell mean?
04 – Cites Tony’s post as satisfactory and reason to look at Lowell.

More basing her opinion on others’.

05 – Wants to know more about option c.

Scum are not curious about roles, they tend to have more curiosity about other things.

06 – Attacks Tommy for changing stance (shut-up to defense) on Tony; semantics about “pushing;” asks Fhq a question; announces claim-suspicion on user, making the statement, “I shouldn’t be completely trusted just yet.”

This last bit could be a slip, though there are context-appropriate reasons it could be a simple error. Considering later clarifications, I now think the potential slip was the only (possibly) suspicious thing about this post.

07 – EBWOP to say, “

he

shouldn’t be trusted.”

Catches her own slip, probably a null tell.

08 – Will get “ticked off” if bionic doesn’t explain his vote.
09 – Justifies getting ticked off.

I agree with wolf here.

10 – Thanks bionic for explaining his vote but only responds to one point.

I wonder why she would ask for clarification and then refrain from answering some points. Seems like she didn’t have good answers prepared.

11 – States that she was mistaken about what QFT meant, openly OMGUS votes Lowell.

At this point, this is a null-tell. However, it becomes important later.

12 – EBWOP of a typo.
13 - Content with OMGUS, cites Lowell’s ruthlessness.

Now we have her admitting the OMGUS but still being comfortable with it, which is very strange. She seems to be saying we should hang Lowell because she doesn’t like him, irrespective of his alignment, which she makes no attempt to determine. First smoking gun.

14 – Check in.
15 – Check in.
16 – Long post. Thinks fast Lowell wagon is okay because hers was fast; agrees with me about Rash; pot vs. kettle about Lowell; cites his vindictiveness and lack of cooperation; admits that the problem is Lowell’s style and unvotes; vaguely suspicious of Tony again.

Remember that clearing Tony was her reason for looking back at Lowell. The inverse doesn’t make sense so the return to suspicion on Tony is odd. Here she clears Lowell for his playstyle. She says she did a meta read on him which, due to later posts, seems untrue. Hence me trying to trap her later.

17 – Sarcastic reply to Darox.
18 – Agrees with both bionic and Rash, which is odd because they are disagreeing with each other. Thinks arguing is the best way to hunt scum.

Strange, because she hasn’t done any arguing and, earlier, thought Lowell’s ruthlessness was reason to vote him.

19 - Hurried Lowell hammer that is not actually a hammer; cites that he is “blatantly” doing what she accused and cleared him of earlier.

This is the second (and worst) smoking gun. Wolf doesn’t claim that Lowell has done anything different. She only claims that he is doing the same stuff “blatantly.” She doesn’t say more blatantly. IMO, he was doing it blatantly before and, if she really did that meta read she’d know, he does it blatantly as a matter of course.

20 – Cites miscount; says Darox will be a better D2 lynch, leaving Lowell as the D1 lynch.

The pre-planning tell was already pointed out. I agree.

21 – Expands Lowell case to include his ambivalence of opinion which does not agree with his stubborn voting; thinks Lowell’s analysis is outside his normal playstyle and therefore suspicious; denies herself the n00b card, saying, “if I can’t just hold in one scummy thought;” says she likes next-day game plans (because scum may kill her suspects?); slippery defense vs. Oman.

Thos post is where I started to suspect that wolf didn’t read Lowell because, contrary to what she says, posting a detailed analysis shortly before his death is a part of his standard playstyle. The “scummy thought” line seems like another slip because she cites wanting to hold in those thoughts (aka keep them secret) even though a townie shouldn’t be having them in the first place. Though I didn’t cite the minor instances earlier, wolf does the slippery defense thing a few times. It’s not a smoking gun, but does suggest manipulation and therefore dishonesty.

22 – EBWOP to say she has nothing else to add.
23 – Offers to clarify the waffling I pointed out.

Never does.

24 – Questions Oman for clarification.
25 – NK is strange; preempts suspicion of Darox, Tony, and Tommy.

Why these three? This will come in handy later. My bet is that, if wolf is scum, at least one is a buddy.

26 – Asks questions about Darox’s post with a serious misread of his meaning.
27 - Clears up the last post.
28 – Continues from the last post, wonders why I suggested something far fetched.

Misrep of what I said, because I stated that it wasn’t likely (which is far from suggesting it to be true) but a lot of time has passed so we can probably let this slide.

29 – Doesn’t like Darox’s vote because it lacks reasoning.
30 – Agrees with Fhq vs. Lowell; claims to be “gathering a list” on her three suspects; drops slanted suspicion on Darox in the form of warning Oman about him.

There’s that mysterious list. Why don’t we ever see it?

31 – Side-steps my trap, cites the games from her meta of Lowell.
32 – EBWOP due to bad links.
33 – Check in.
34 – Brings up the Tommy-defending-Tony case after bionic does; again cites her mysterious list.

Again with the agreement that seems required before wolf can state a serious opinion. She refers to the list as if it exists but I still doubt that it does.

35 – Elaborates on the Tommy-defending-Tony case, claims to have been “saving it” without reason; votes Tommy.

This is pretty bad. Two of the three times that wolf mentioned her list, she was claiming to be working on it which suggests that she intends to share it when she is done. Now she cites it for the first time and claims that she’s been keeping this information close to her chest for (1) a long time and (2) no reason. This begs a ton of questions. Why would she promise a future list if she already had some of it? Why would she have claimed to have had it for a extensive amount of time when not long ago she was still working on it? Why would she keep it quiet when she was so intent on gaining others’ tacit information (option c) and decrying other players for not sharing reasoning (Darox and Tony)? None of this makes sense from a wolf-as-town perspective.

36 – EBWOP to fix the quote tags.
37 – Misrepresents the case on Tony, diminishing it in scope to claim that all cases are based on a single point: his lack of 3E.
38 – You too, Darox (though in his case it is more accurate).

The case on Tony is a little more elaborate than that, why is she simplifying it? Is it a move to protect Tony? To protect Darox? This is another bit that will be useful later.

39 – Makes an argument to hang Tommy or Tony; she claims that Tony should hang because he can’t defend himself, and that Tommy should hang because Tony has already said everything Tommy will say. What?

None of this makes any logical sense at all. It looks to me like wolf, a relatively new player, does not understand the ramifications of buddying behavior but is trying to blather her way to a conclusion without sounding scummy. Fail.

40 – Adds me to the anti-Tony after I have withdrawn.

Could be an honest mistake. I’ll let it lie for now.

41 – Thinks defending is only scummy if it’s done more frequently.

Not true at all. Not really scummy to be wrong though.

42 – Not sure if I’m interpreting this correctly, but I think she’s arguing that because many players suspected Lowell, somehow it is not coincidence that two scummy players have attacked Tony.

I’d like this post explained or clarified before I base a read on my own interpretation, which is really just a guess. The post is very vague.

43 – She’s not assuming both Tommy and Tony are scum.

Then what was the deal with her #39 (iso)? It’s either one or the other.

44 – Wants to know if I have a new case.
45 – Compares Tony to Darox, finding Darox more informative.

This is 100% poppycock. Is she reading the same game I am? Note that, if wolf is scum, this either identifies the buddy in her top three suspects or she is a much better player than she’s letting on.

46 – Complains about low posting rate.

Conclusions

This is just what wolf has done as an individual. When I spoke of her earlier, I also mentioned a few things that others had done that implicated her. Together, these two types of information make her the obvious choice for today’s lynch.

In retrospect, I believe that her own actions are enough to hang her on. Particularly damning are the smoking guns I pointed out, the rarity of original opinions from her, and her mysterious list which probably doesn’t even exist. I am, of course, willing to entertain defenses but, from where I’m at right now, I doubt wolf will manage to clear herself.

Note that I am not advocating an immediate lynch. We have lots more info to gather. However, expect me to be pressuring her from here on out and, unless she somehow manages to clear herself IMO, expect me to be voting her when the day ends.

[Ythill]

Just checking in. I see that nobody has commented on my PbPA... unless Oman's drunk double post counts.

[Ythill]

@Rash: After wolf responds, I'd like you to share your outside-the-game explanations for the points I touched on in my conclusion (2 smoking guns and wolf's list).

Meanwhile... why is "outright plagiarism" scummier than standard aping? What I find suspicious about her copy-cat play is that she bases her stances on the existence of outside support rather than evidence or her own opinions about what is scummy play. I don't think the tell requires robot-like posting.

Tommy - why did you feel the need to answer for Tony there?

Aha! So I'm not the only one that has noticed that. There has been several instences where you, Tommy have been either quick to defend, or quick to answer for Tony, and it hasn't been just recent. I have been keeping track of that for quiet some time now.

In this instance, wolf claims to have been tracking a behavior for some time but didn't say anything about it until someone else brought it up. In this case she may have been waiting for town support or, more likely, felt the need to pretend fore-knowledge when bionic brought up a possible link between two of her stated suspects.

Only if no one manages to

make themselves look scummier

and a deadline threatens, but I find this unlikely.

I find this phrasing interesting. Town are looking out for people who are actually acting scummy. Scum are looking out for townies who are making themselves look scummy.

I highly agree with this.

...and then, in the same post...

iamausername argues that lynching someone for anti-town behavior is not what we should be doing. Instead we should be lynching scum. I want to know what iamausername thinks the difference is in these two categories of lynch reasons.

I saw that too, but when I saw you posted it i didn't feel like quoteing it myself.

I do want to know what the difference. Yes sometimes town does give off scum vibes, but are those not the vibes you should follow to make sure that, ehem, you get the scum????

Here we have wolf citing agreement with two sides of an argument. On the surface, this suggests that she is waiting to lean whichever way the argument goes. However, having looked at a couple of points that suggest a relationship between she and Darox, this

could

be her way of discrediting his attacker while appearing to side with him. Either way, it is telling.

Note that in the last quote wolf again claims to have seen something previously but has refrained from talking about it.

@wolf:

Why

didn't you bring up Tommy's defenses of Tony or the chink in user's argument when you noticed them?

[Ythill]

That's an odd request from someone who just moved his vote from a frontrunner to an unknown. Two of your four suspects are being voted by others, why not focus on one of them?

[Ythill]

My whole thing about Darox's responce was that it was delayed for so long, I just don't know if I could put any faith behind it.

Says the girl who still hasn't responded to a single point of my case. It's not going away just because you ignore it.

[Ythill]

@wolf: Your waffling will not save you. Why is it that Rash understands how to respond to my case but you apparently do not?

What am I supposed to say? Basically everything you said was rhetorical.

I'm not giving you a script. Yes, my questions were rhetorical. My post, however, was not all rhetoric. I made valid points and I would expect a townie to try and refute them.

My list was over Tommy.

Then how come you said, in #426, "I'm gathering a list right now about three people: Darox, Tommy, and Tony?" Seriously wolf, did this list ever exist?

I had started to notice Tommy's behavior right as it started and I wasn't sure when was a good time. I knew I didn't wanna do it in day one, but when Bionic noticed it too I felt it was time to point out the many other times it has happened.

I will again point out your contradiction. You pushed me to reveal option (c); you called out other players for not sharing information; you seem to have demonstrated an understanding of the idea that town-players should be forthright and transparent in their play. However, you now claim that you made a

conscious decision

to keep information private. What was your reasoning for doing so? How could posting that information D1 have hurt the town?

-We have a deadline, no reason to rush, since "we can get more info"

That's a little unfair, I wasn't fear-mongering about the deadline.

-Pressure her!

This is fine, except that when linked to the last phrase in context, it suggests an untrue contradiction. I was not callng for others to pressure her, I was announcing my own intent to do so. IME, applying pressure makes scum more likley to slip up and townies more likley to post a timely, compelling defense.

You cited wolf's list as a smoking gun, so they are the same here.

Did I? The two smoking guns I remember were (1) wolf saying she's comfortable with her OMGUS vote on Lowell and (2) wolf re-voting Lowell for the same tells she'd cleared him for with her meta read. These are the two I was refering to in my conclusion.

How do the actions of

other

players with unknown alignment have a bearing on whether crywolf is scum?

I'll just point you to the last paragraph of #407 where I explained this in a little more detail. If you have further questions I will answer them.

Another question: The way you phrased "outside support rather than evidence" suggests to me that the support itself is not evidence in your opinion. What are you saying about the "outside support?"

I wasn't really taking any stance on the content of the outside support (which would require a point-by-point breakdown to be fair). Let me expand on my point. When a player cites another's points, she is either agreeing with their evidence or forming her stance based on popular opinion. When a player is scumhunting honestly, I usually see a mixture of agreement and original opinions. You, for example, have cited agreement with several people but you have also made your own unique points (example: your case against me).

When a player fails to make original or contentious points, but seems more focused on agreement with others, I believe it suggests heavily that they are more worried about popular opinion than evidence. Wolf's play has been a textbook example of this. Do you understand me now?

I don't have time to make all of my points, and I tend to try to use my better ones. Lesser things may go noticed but not commented on. I suppose something similar here. Your argument is not necessarily wrong, but it has no basis to assume scumminess, or exclude the above.

Your counter-point could have been valid at the time of my argument, but wolf didn't cite time constraints in her explanation (see above). Furthermore,

possible

townie motivation for an action is just as assumptive as

possible

scummy motivation. The difference here is that the sheer number of serious tells suggests that scummy motivation is more likley.

[Ythill]

I will do it in three different parts 1-8 8-16 16-24

This is my viewpoint after reading pages 1-12.

LAL!

Welcome. Your analysis is a little hard to read without a second window open for reference, but I agree with a lot of what you said. No major holes in it, though not much correlation either. Looking forward to the final product.

Deadline in two days, wolf @ L-2, and two people reading her as scummy. She should probably claim.

[Ythill]

I find it odd that we'd have both a bus driver and a doc. Not out of the question, just out of the ordinary. Then again, why would scum claim doc if they already got the protective role lynched?

I thought the best place to start would be a peek into wolf's D1 treatment of Rash, but a look over it shows nothing contradictory.

During the skim, I found this breadcrumb, "I'm sorry if I've been a little busy with medical issues that will put me outta commission for a month." So, either wolf is a doc or she's been planning this claim for awhile. Or, I suppose, she's undergoing some strangely coincidental, non-debilative, month-long medical condition. If scum-wolf was planning the claim all along, we should be aware that her whole team was probably planning it, but I suppose that will not help us until her card's been flipped.

I must raise an eyebrow at M4y. I thought bionic's attacks against him were solid. Now he's pushing belief in the doc claim and calling for a counter. This certainly aids the hypothetical wolf-scum in acheiving her ends.

I think that wolf's flavor sounds too bland. And bionic might be on to something. My role PM doesn't mention other places.

How many of you were born and raised in the Neighborhood?

I'm comfortable with my vote for now, but do not intend to let wolf be lynched until we've looked at this from all the angles.

[Ythill]

Quick note.... Bus Driver was the Flavor, Lowell was actually a townie.

Yeah. Brain-fart.

Make your crucial points more clear.

Um... read better?

I think my willingness to answer questions is good enough, you don't need to critique my writing.

How did players (who found wolf to be somewhat scummy) that joined the Lowell wagon make wolf look scummier?
How does wolf (while having her actions downplayed) having been an alternative to Lowell make wolf look scummier?
How did "suspicious" players choosing to lynch Lowell over wolf make wolf look scummier?

All of these actions have the possibility of ulterior motives from anyone who knew Lowell was town and wolf is scum. We know that a few players did know wolf's alignment and Lowell's in those instances. Therefore it seems supsicious to me that so many individuals treated her that way. Some were certainly mistaken townies. Some were most likely coniving scum.

It's hard to tell who was who without a card flip, but the general suggestion seems to be that wolf is scum.

Your "sheer number" of "scum" tells suggests your criteria isn't strong enough.

You want certain proof that just isn't possible in the game of mafia. When someone makes a few moves that seem scummy, I'm a lot more willing to buy the explanations. When they have a convenient townie reasoning for 100 different things that seem like scum behavior to me? Those excuses start to wear thin.

Not that wolf has raised such excuses. You're the only one defending her.

How many of you were born and raised in the Neighborhood?

Of course... Someone's rolefishing...

Whatever. If bionic is right that all townies are from the Neighborhood, then my question puts the scum in a tough spot. If they tell the truth, they risk being easily identified after we lynch one of them. If they lie, wolf is suddenly obvscum. It's a win-win for town...

if

bionic is right.

I think it's a great question. And I wonder why you avoided it rather than answering it.

[Ythill]

And the fact that user, a non-vanilla townie, was from the town kind of flies in the face of Rash's accusation that I was role fishing.

So c'mon everybody, answer my question. Is your role from the Neighborhood or not?

[Ythill]

I take it that since you're not taking the opportunity to scumhunt where you "know" suspicious players are, you're not interested in finding the scum.

I am hunting where I see the

most

suspicious player. Doubting my accuracy is no good reason to vote me.

There's a simpler explanation: Many of the people who voted Lowell yesterday thought he was scummier than crywolf.

So let me get this straight. I am scummy for thinking that wolf is scum even though I've stated a reasonable case against her. Yet everyone is forgiven for mislynching Lowell because they thought he was scummier even though some of their cases were extremely empty? You make no sense, Rash.

There are plenty of reasons I think wolf is the play, but I see that you have cherrypicked a couple and now say that they invalidate the whole case. What's your motive?

The justification you have provided is insufficient.

So don't vote wolf. Obviously, all of the people attacking cannot be not scum, so some must have been convinced either by my arguments or her own actions. Sufficiency is a matter of function.

Meanwhile, you use the actions of "suspicious" players to justify your vote. Who is suspicious? Why is that person suspicious? Why is that person not suspicious enough to vote on?

Go back and read for yourself. A lot if the "actions of others" I cited were pointed out by me and others as they happened. I'll be more specific when I am attacking them. Like I said, I'm voting who I find

most

suspicious.

Benefit of the doubt is enough to discount the validity of most of your scumtells.

Benefit of the doubt only stretches so far. That's what I was saying.

If wolf is scum, the other scum (should they exist) will not out themselves to save her.

Precicely why this plan will work to confirm or deny her role.

If wolf is town, the scum pretending to be from the Neighborhood may get her mislynched.

It would be a pretty serious coincidence if wolf was the only townie from outside the Neighborhood. And bionic has now made

two

reasonable arguments for townies being locals. I think that it's a reasonable risk.

Everyone would have to provide some justification-a little flavor, to actually make a good case that s/he was from "the Neighborhood."

Absolutely false. With simple yes/no answers, we have all the info we need. I would hope that people would not give more info.

The town only benefits if wolf is scum, and loses a power role if wolf is lynched as doc.

That's a big if. This method has a reasonable chance of clearing her if she is the doc. Of course you could just keep stalling and making silly arguments so that it does no good at all.

This is scummy. For suggesting it, you are likely to be scum.

That's one (flawed) explanation. Where's that benefit of the doubt you claim to love so much?

[Ythill]

@Rash: Seriously dude, what's with the smokescreen? You don't seem scummy to me, and I thought your initial questions about my case on wolf were fair enough, but is this argument really helping the town one day from deadline?

You think wolf is telling the truth? Fine, don't vote for her. You think I'm scummy for trying to figure out whether she's being honest or not? Fine, keep your vote on me. But this round-and-round is getting us nowhere. I'm going to step back now. If we're both alive tomorrow and you want to pick this up again, I'm game.

I will answer one of your points, because I believe you've honestly misread me.

I'm trying to wait at least one night before I decide to lynch a claimed power role. What are you and bionic up to?

Your tacit suggestion is that I'm trying to lynch a claimed power role. Note that 99% of my attacks against wolf came pre-claim. Note that it was me who asked her to claim while we still had time. Note that, after her claim, in #638, I posted my thoughts about the claim which were pretty reasonable, and I sought more information.

I would have unvoted, except there was/is no need (she's out of the danger zone), and I wasn't sure, at the time, where else to put my vote. The only alternative from my own scumlist was Darox, and M4y's attack on him made me hesitate.

Now, for the last two days, I've been arguing about how a case against the claimed-doc is valid instead of looking for the best alternative lynch. Why? Because I've been defending against your attacks on that case. So if I'm endangering the claimed-doc then so are you.

On other topics... Tony doesn't seem like the best lynch to me. My alternative choices are M4y, Fhq, and Darox. Since Darox seems to be an option at this point, I'll

unvote; vote Darox

but I'll be checking in later and will be more than willing to jump to one of the other two I mentioned.

[Ythill]

What, you don't like funny people?

[Ythill]

Deadline at midnight EST (GMT-5).

I have to leave for work in a few minutes. Will be back here at about 14:30 MST (GMT-7) and will access for the rest of the day. I will switch my vote to avoid no lynch if needed, but I still think Darox is a better lynch than Tony.

[Ythill]

Alright Darox. Here's where I stand now...

D1 Tony was a little suspicious but you were my top lynch choice. I gave reasons for this.

At the start of today you were both implicated in my initial analysis (#407). Him because of one minor point and one major one, you because of the D1 drama and your actions at the end of D1.

Tony's answer to my major point wasn't stunning, but it seemed honest. You jumped on Tony and we had to pry the reasons out of you. When you finally stated them, they didn't seem very compelling. So, from my PoV, I see a more suspicious player pushing an unconvincing case on a less suspicious one.

Also, there's the fact that I still see wolf as uber suspicious. It's not very reliable without confirmation of her alignment, but the evidence seemed to point to you as one of her buddies. And she attacked Tony.

But I'll keep an open mind. You have a few hours. Convince me to vote Tony over you.

Now I really do have to leave for work...

[Ythill]

Sigh. That makes me feel better. [/sarcasm]

@Darox: Not even going to try?

I'm home from work now and will be checking this game periodically until the day ends.

[Ythill]

Mod: I'm voting for Darox, not wolf.

[Ythill]

The likely result of people answering the question is that crywolf is singled out again, and demonized some more. If this exercise serves a purpose, IT IS TO LYNCH A CLAIMED POWER ROLE.

If everyone else is from the Neighborhood, it singles her out because it suggests heavily that she is lying about her flavor. If this excercise serves a purpose, it is to lynch a fake-claiming mafioso. Putting things in big letters does not make them true.

How can you

know

that she is likely to be singled out and still believe she is telling the truth?

I'm simply baffled at how many people missed Darox's focus on Tony "defending the scumkill" in his questioning of Tony.

How do you know they missed it? I, for one, found it to be a reach. Lots of us were talking about the NK, stating some reasons why it could have been the choice isn't defending it.

[Ythill]

Dodged the question.

That's what I thought at first too, then he reiterated.

Darox is referring to the lack of votes. Tony throws suspicion on Darox for no good reason.

No good reason from your PoV maybe. It sounds to me like Tony didn't understand what he was talking about, and was pressuring him for more info.

Darox was asked to explain his vote on Lowell by Tommy in post 443.

Which doesn't invalidate anything you quoted by Tony.

[Ythill]

Still not buying the case on Tony, especially after the late day hung jury. But I'll reread him more carefully today.

Rash is obv-town. Process of elimination suggests that wolf is full of shit unless we have a 9:2:1 setup.

@wolf: Whom did you "protect" and why?

[Ythill]

Cross-posted.

@bionic: It says Darox was vanilla, so I assume it's not the same.

I'll consider the mass claim suggestion and post my opinion after work. If we do it, I want people to also post whether or not they're from the Neighborhood, damn it.

[Ythill]

Yeah, I'm game for the massclaim. There are many benefits for us, fewer for the scum.

I was considering the suggestion that we do flavor-only first, to test wolf's claim before fully outing our power, but I don't know that it is wise with a two week deadline.

[Ythill]

Since it looks like we're going ahead with this, I'll share some private information not related to my role.

Tommy/peg's role "neighbor" was actually stated to me as "nosy neighbor." His power was that he could select a player N1 and send that player a note via the mod. Starting D2, he and that player were allowed to converse at night. I know this because Tommy selected me. The only info shared by Peg was that he found Tony to be obv-scum. I do not agree with his read but I figure he'd want me to share it.

Don't know how this info can help us, but I don't see how it can harm us at this point either.

Waiting on the popcorn... wolf is supposed to start it, yes? Remember to say whether or not your role PM mentions places other than the Neighborhood.

[Ythill]

...just reread Tommy's note. The only information he shared was: now that he knew he was wrong about Lowell, he was convinced that Darox was scum. Totally irrelevant but hey... full disclosure.

[Ythill]

Probably somewhat scummier...

Rash, seriously, what's your deal with me? All of your reasons for suspecting me are based on very assumptive tells. Now, I do see those same types of assumptive tells in your D2 case against Tony so I know it's part of your persona, but at least there's enough of them against him that I can see how your perception was colored.

I'm pretty sure you're town, so I'm not trying to say you're being disingenuous, but I think you need to take a second look at your suspicions.

And where the hell is wolf? Stalling the popcorn is seriously anti-town considering the deadline.

[Ythill]

How are they assumptive?

You certainly have. I've explained my reasoning in each case except this last one. I didn't actually use the word "assumptive" because it's obvious that a tell is assumptive when both town and scum motivations exist for an action and you stick to the scummier possibility.

Let's take, for instance, my call for a partial-flavor claim yesterday. I think it was a damn good idea. I still think it's a good idea and will certainly consider the info after our popcorn. You think it was likely to bring us to a false conclusion while providing too much info to the scum. Our disagreement is a difference in our views of theory and strategy.

However, you started out by immediately assuming that I see the game the same way you do and therefore I must be scum seeking the scum-advantages you believe exist in such a play. You did this even though a number of people seemed to see things my way and nobody explicitly agreed with your view.

You know, maybe you're right about the play itself. I don't think so. But, no matter who is right, the disagreement says nothing about my alignment. It only seems to because of your own assumptions.

Does that answer your question or do I need to touch on more examples?

Does this make Ythill more town or scum in anyones eyes?

Probably somewhat scummier, it's a relation among PEG (dead pro-town), Ythill, and a lynch target yesterday. It's more of a knee-jerk reaction than something I credit.

I had the same reaction.

I guess I will have to address this directly.

I can't seem scummier due to Tommy selecting me as his mason buddy, because that was his choice. If anything, it demonstrates that he probably thought I was town. I can't seem scummier from what Tommy and Peg said to me, because those were their thoughts. It's pro-town to share all information that will not hurt the town, so me sharing what I know can't be scummy.

Rash even said I was suspicious for playing something close to my chest earlier. So I am scummy for keeping secrets and scummy for not keeping secrets?

You have no reason to believe that I lied about being Tommy's choice, because nobody else has claimed that he picked them. You have no reason to believe that I am lying about what they said. I mean, look back at their actions: it's pretty obvious that I was sharing their actual opinions.

So what about this says anything about my alignment? Nothing.

Hell, the only reason I even brought up the info is because I thought a deeper understanding of the setup might assist y'all in separating the truth from the bullshit once the claims are out.

[Ythill]

EBWOP: Messed up the first quote. My opening line would make more sense if I'd have quoted all of #742, which I meant to.

[Ythill]

..when both sets of motivations exist, you must provide explanation for why one set is more likely than the other...

I must provide no such thing. It is not a defendant's place to argue liklihood. I can only explain what I have actually done and why I have done it. As persecutor, it is your place to convince others that your theories are more plausible than my explanations.

But when I say that your suspicions are assumptive, I am not speaking only of your arguments, but also of the perceptions they are based on.

Our disagreement is over the premise with which you called for the partial flavor claim yesterday. It is flawed because it's metagaming the mod.

It is more an exercise in human nature and statistics than metagaming. We have a few possible scenarios. The least likely, I believe, is that we have stumbled upon and voted to claim the one player who is from out of town, who just happens to be the doc. Was the claim plan 100% sure-fire? No. But the lilihood of getting a unanimous "I'm from town" and still mislynching the doc was small enough to be worth the risk.

"dead" and "lynch target."

I don't see how these words explain your reaction. A dead townie said to me that the guy he was voting for was his prefered target. I didn't make him suspect Tony, I didn't make him tell me, I didn't make it up. I don't even agree with him. How does any of this reflect on my alignment?

What's obvious to you is not necessarily so obvious to others

Which is why I suggested rereading. We know Peg was town and we all can see who he voted at the end of the day, so I think it's pretty obvious that he suspected Tony. Like I said, my main reason for bringing this whole subject up was to give the info about Peg's role. Sharing what I'd learned at night was simply full disclosure.

The above imagined arguments against you were neither stated nor implied by me.

I never intended to suggest that they were. What I meant to do was to answer the two-player "knee-jerk" with a broad argument since no specific accusation was made. I wasn't going to address it at all until it was QFTed.

[Ythill]

Ugh. The game is grinding to a halt.

Just posting to let y'all know I've been checking in regularly. Not going to continue the argument with Rash until our popcorn is finished.

[Ythill]

...or better yet crywolf? If you are a tracker, you were probably the best shot at getting any sort of definitive answer about her (though we would have to trust you and your results). You track her and if she didn't visit Rash, you would know she was lying.

I think I know the answer to this but I'll let Tony speak for himself.

C'mon Oman, pick somebody.

[Ythill]

This is the slowest popcorn ever. Orville Redenbacker would not be pleased.

[Ythill]

Postman. I can tell if you're late on your bills, but that's all. Vanilla Townie.

CLAIMS
crywolf: big city doc
m4yhem: florist/vig
Rashiminos: crossing guard / vanilla
TonyMontana: Ice Cream Man / tracker
Oman: Librarian / watcher
bionicchop2: Game Shop Owner / vanilla
fhqwhgads: Newspaper Editor / vanilla
Ythill: Postman / vanilla

LOL @ the mod for putting in a miller but no cop. Seems slightly vanilla-heavy to me. And why is wolf the only one without a secondary job title?

[Ythill]

Who did you target last night?

Watcher-tracker-doctor-vig-neighbor does make sense, but wolf's flavor still does not compute.

[Ythill]

I find Ythill's continued push on crywolf's claim intriguing...

How so? She was my PE#1 before the claim, it sounded suspicious when she made it, and her flavor sticks out like a sore thumb. Plus she survived last night.

Why are you protective of her?

[Ythill]

If he wasn't the doc, i'd be happy to go after crywolf today. I'm also willing to sign off Ythill as town for now, on the condition that crywolf is scum...

This sounds like you are sure that wolf is scum, but still don't want to hang her. Am I missing something here?

My statement on you continuing your argument on crywolf isn't so much as why it is her, but rather on you still insisting on the 'townies grew up in town' argument. I don't really feel comfortable lynching on that analysis.

You speak as if that's the only reason but, in my latest reply to you #789, I said, "She was my PE#1 before the claim, it sounded suspicious when she made it, and her flavor sticks out like a sore thumb. Plus she survived last night."

The "sore thumb" statement referred not only to the not-from-here bit, but also to the fact that she is the only role without a second job title (ex. miller didn't work at the mill, he was a piano teacher, etc) and that her flavor sounded a little too bland.

Anyway, I suppose we should start working on a wagon or three. I'm still most suspicious of wolf and so will park my vote on her. However, I do see that a few of you are making the hang-vanilla-only argument and I agree that there's most likley at least one scum among the vanillas, so I'll take some time to look them over tonight and let you know what I think.

vote: crywolf20084

[Ythill]

Sorry guys, I don't have as much time as I thought I would tonight. I started rereading the 'nillas but didn't get very far. More time tomorrow I hope.

Don't get your panties in a bunch about wolf, she's not in any danger yet.

[Ythill]

Rereading the 'nilla's looking for scum is somewhat maddening. There are a few very minor things that could implicate both Rash and bionic, but they both seem overwhelmingly townie. Of the two, bionic seems to have the dirtier hands, but not because of anything extremely damning. His flavor stands from the other 'nilla's a bit, etc.

Meanwhile, Fhq, who looked very scummy to me at the dawn of D2, has started to mix up his play. His D2 & 3 stances seem to follow the flow of evidence. He spent a good amount of energy attacking wolf; he did cheerlead my case a little and it struck me (at the time) as distancing but my reread shows his attacks on her to have come early and without prompting. His late day swap to Darox raised my hackles, sounding pre-planned, but for the most part he didn't set off the scumdar.

I still think there's scum among the 'nilla's, but it's dangerous scum. My first reaction is to suspect fhq, but I'm having trouble seeing he and wolf being scum together and I'm pretty sure she is. Like I said, maddening.

Here's a little something I found...

I am trying to lynch who I think is scum instead of blindly believing a claim. If we mislynch today, then tomorrow is mislynch and lose without something unforeseen happening (assumes standard of 3 scum). I feel if she isn't lynched when we have a mislynch available as a safeguard, then she won't be lynched tomorrow either. This gives 2 free days to my top suspect for using the most common fake claim in the game.

These sound like the words of a player who is (1) convinced that wolf is scum and (2) annoyed that, if she's allowed to live into N2 and survives, her buddies will have an easy time keeping her from the gallows on D3. Fine. But now he's arguing pretty vehemently about why the setup demands that she not be killed at LYLO. Makes me wonder why.

One way to interpret bionic's post is as a preemptive lead in to today's arguments. Kind of like saying,

okay... since you guys talked me out of it today, I'll let wolf slide, but if we don't lynch her today we can't tomorrow.

There were a couple of us that clung to the wolf wagon for awhile after she claimed. I was there because I was (and am) convinced that the girl is mafia. Still convinced enough to at least talk about lynching her to win instead of relying on vig/SK guesswork. Was bionic that convinced? If so, why the turnaround? If not, why was he on there so long?

I'd like bionic to weigh in on this topic.

[Ythill]

You're arguing that we should pursue the lesser of two evils: the least chance of defeat in the event of a mislynch. Maybe, instead, we should pursue the greatest chance of an accurate lynch. Or at least not rule it out.

Seriously, what's different today? You know that we have a second killer who

might

be protown and

might

hit scum? You are claiming to have so much self doubt, all of a sudden, that you would rather trust a lone killer of unknown alignment and heretofore unfavorable results than trust your own suspicions with the assistance of four others.

And you aren't just stating it, you are arguing it somewhat desperately, even though I'm the only one who has even suggested a wolf lynch.

It's not a bad position in itself, but it suggests that your stubborn stance yesterday was a ruse.

[Ythill]

I explained the difference between the two days. Yesterday we were in the position to lynch wrong and be here the next day to fix the issue. Today we are not in that position.

All of which you knew would be the case yesterday, if wolf didn't die. You were the one who predicted it. Yet your stance then was different than it is now. So, again, what's changed?

We also did that fun little mass claim at the beginning of the day which gives ample opportunities to prove / disprove power roles.

All of which implicates her even more. Two protective roles. The sore-thumb flavor. If anything, you should be

more

suspicious after the mass claim.

I am not so stubborn to tunnel in on wolf and not think about other players.

It's not this supposed thinking about other players that makes me suspicious, it's you going from a PE#1 read on wolf to arguing that she would be the worst lynch, all without good reason.

I would have had no issue changing off her yesterday if any of the other players I thought were scum had wagons on them. I don't immediately jump off my top suspect onto a wagon of a player I think is town just because they claimed a role.

You didn't just stay on the wagon. You continued to defend her lynch. Those are different things. Your actions telegraphed certainty. You admited to that certainty in #829. Now you tell us that your vote was only there because you didn't have a better target? Which is it? Why did your story change?

Nobody is even discussing lynching her besides you. If she had a legitimate wagon on her, then I would be more inclined to consider it, but I am certainly not going to push for it today knowing the risks of being wrong are far higher than they were.

Strawman. I am not accusing you of refusing to vote wolf. I am accusing you of switching from

we must lynch wolf-scum right now, in spite of her claim

to

wolf-town is the only one who can save us

without any new evidence. In fact, with

contrary

evidence.

I didn't think this point was entirely incriminating, because I saw some potential excuses for your actions. However, you didn't touch on those excuses and what you have said doesn't add up.

[Ythill]

Please explain the goal of your line of questioning right now. If you are accusing me of being scum, then vote me and press on.

My goal is to determine your alignment. I am not convinced that you are scum, but this point doesn't sit right with my vision of town-bionic. So I questioned you about it and now, as your arguments get even more slippery, I'm wondering if I've stumbled across a bad guy.

Does this make crywolf more or less likely to be scum?

Neither. This is about you.

Does it make me more or less likely to be scum?

More likely. Your view changed drastically with no corraborating evidence, which tells me that either your original stance or this one are not honest. A 'nilla townie has no reason to be dishonest.

If you think it makes me scum, there are 2 scenarios - cry as my partner or cry as town. If you think cry would be my partner, then I would have had to be driving the longest bus ride ever as I have been on her from day 1.

Or you could have been in on the fake-claim plan, pushing her wagon until her claim was "forced" out, knowing that the town wouldn't hang her. And maybe catching a counterclaim in the process.

If you think wolf is town and I am scum, then explain the advantage for scum to try and keep the doctor alive when they can simply win the game by getting her lynched?

Town sentiment, as you predicted yesterday, is to let wolf's claim ride for another day. So the benefit to your actions here would be to take a firm stance on the let-wolf-live side of the fence in case we do hang her or, at least, to not stand out.

But all of this conjecture is beside the point. Neither of your WIFOM scenarios explains why your PoV changed so drastically.

The absolute only reason I have changed my opinion on how to proceed is the NEW information that there is a vigilante.

Which I addressed in #830. Your response was to claim that the entire dynamic had changed, citing yesterday's available mislynch. When I decried that excuse, you went back to the vig. If you have nothing to hide, why is your story changing?

You also are missing the obvious point about the doc. Not sure if it is intentional or not. The idea is to keep the vigilante alive so he can shoot. It is pretty simple, so I don't see why it has been repeatedly missed. The percentage chance of the doc saving to give us another day is much lower than the percentage of a vigilante killing scum. The idea is that scum cannot kill the vigilante.

And you are missing my point, intentionally or otherwise. Your stance today

hinges

on wolf being the doc. Your stance yesterday stubbornly insisted that she was scum. This is a huge shift in opinion, without good reason. What is the reason?

I do understand the doc-protects-vig plan. I do understand the wolf-is-obv-scum read. I do not understand them together.

[Ythill]

What are you saying?

[Ythill]

@Rash: I don't know that putting all our eggs in the vig basket is good for town. I do like the idea of tracking the doc if we let her live, but the watcher should probably watch the tracker because if wolf is scum she'll target him and if wolf is doc, scum may still target him to leave us in this same position tomorrow.

Really though, I don't think it's a good idea for us to have an explicit plan. No matter how we do it, the scum will know who they can get away with killing. I think that it's fine to suggest various plans and their likely outcomes but the watcher, at least, should choose his target independently.

[Ythill]

If it was "very flavoured" maybe you should share it. I wouldn't recommend quoting, but you could paraphrase for us. There might be clues.

Where did bionic go?

[Ythill]

I hope we get the deadline extension but, in case we don't, we'd better get to it.

I spent some time considering the 'nilla lynch. I'm certainly not self-voting, and I still think Rash is the towniest of the remaining three, so it all comes down to whether I believe bionic's recent inexplicible behavior and the existing wagon problem outweigh fhq's D1 play.

For now, I'm going to say that they don't. There was D2 talk about a wolf-fhq connection. Her jump on and off of him may have been distancing.

unvote; vote: fhqwhgads

[Ythill]

m4yhem failed to mention that we were 1 shot vig

Well, that blows our failsafe right out of the water.

Sorry I've been so quiet lately. There hasn't been a lot to comment on. I've been checking in regularly though. Interested to see what Elias has to say once he catches up.

[Ythill]

Hi DR.

Since I have tons to catch up could someone please give some input in advance why a no lynch is being considered?

I believe it's because we are @ MYLO with an even number of players, but I'm not really sure. I'm not one of the supporters.

I'm ambivalent. On the one hand, waiting until tomorrow will give us more info than we have today, although there is no way to verify the truth of whatever is gained tonight. I think best-case scenario for a no lynch is that we could

probably

confirm wolf's alignment one way or the other.

On the other hand, our likely 5:3 ratio leaves a little room for townie error, whereas 4:3 does not. But it's a pointless argument: if we do not agree on a lynch by deadline, there will be no lynch automatically. Which brings me to my next question...

For the record, I don't believe a 'no-lynch' is a good idea.

Then why are you not voting?

I still think that wolf is the best lynch, except that a handful of people have said they're not willing to hang her today. Might have changed their minds now though, since the vig revealed he was one-shot. If we hang a claimed 'nilla, my front-runner is Fhq.

Unvote; vote crywolf20084.

[Ythill]

Percentage wise, it also give us a higher chance of catching scum. Today 3/8 leaves it at 37.5% scum and each town player has 3/7 chance of choosing correctly (42%). By tomorrow, we will have dropped a suspect and be at 3/7 with each town looking at 3/6.

Like I said, I'm ambivalent, but this line of reasoning is flawed. As far as I can tell, the scum NK is an obvious choice. Trying to play WIFOM with hypothetical-doc-wolf or disbelieving the one-shot claim could change that choice but, even considering that, the scum will certainly choose to kill one of three people, none of whom I'm even considering for the lynch.

Are they likely to kill any of the top suspects? No. Are they likely to kill anyone who has been suspected at all? Maybe Tony. Either way, the scenario I see unfolding for tomorrow is that we will have the same number of suspects. However, we will have one less townie vote, meaning that all townies will have to agree on a lynch to make it happen. Today we can have one townie disagree and still have a chance of lynching scum.

On top of that, there is a chance we get claimed night results which conflict with each other. This would let us focus on a smaller group of players to try and get a correct lynch.

I agree that this

could

happen. It

could

happen if we lynch correctly today though, so I don't see how it's an argument for no lynch. Another thing that could happen is that we could get non-conflicting, false results from a fake-claiming mafioso, costing us the game.

But, like I said, we're wasting time and attention arguing the finer points of this subject. We will either agree on a lynch by deadline or no lynch will happen. There's really no need to vote no lynch unless you disagree with the deadline extension.

[Ythill]

I've got new evidence that narrows the pool considerably, but I'm waiting until DR catches up a bit before I post it... you'll see why.

@ bionic: Wasn't trying to load the question. Plain truth: a vote for no lynch is a vote for ending the day now, nothing more. Also, I wasn't suggesting you should vote a player you don't want to hang. Just saying that your current vote is a little silly.

[Ythill]

I've got new evidence that narrows the pool considerably, but I'm waiting until DR catches up a bit before I post it... you'll see why.

What if DR fails to post before deadline?

He doesn't need to post. Just needs a reasonable amount of time to catch up.

[Ythill]

...well then we are in the same situation we are in today with minimal information gained. The fact remains

we will not be worse off

...

Depending on whether certain roles are fake, there is certainly potential for us to be worse off. Imagine a situation where both DR and Tony are scum, or where both Tony and wolf are. I don't know if these are likely but they're certainly possible. Also, there's the vote-ratio change which is almost guarenteed. So, no, being no worse off is not a given.

However, I agree with Elias. I can see where people could prefer a no lynch and I don't think it's scummy per se.

[Ythill]

...where my vote is on Ythill, I think is pretty good.

If by "good" you mean based on a crap-logic process of elimination and baseless opinions, then I'd have to agree.

Question: if you really are a protective role, why were you not suspicious of Oman's claim? A doc and watcher together is improbable.

[Ythill]

Okay, I've waited long enough for DR. I believe it's safe to assume that he knew we were @ MYLO and saw the vote count. Here's the evidence I mentioned...

Note how long I was @ L-3 and that everyone posted while I was. Assuming three scum, that means that at least one of the following people is mafia: myself, Rash, or wolf. Include DR in that pool if you do not believe he had time to realize the relevent details, but I think he did.

From my point of view, this is more good evidence against wolf because I know my alignment and I don't suspect Rash very much at all. C'mon people... this is like pulling teeth.

Let's hang wolf-scum.

[Ythill]

Not taking advantage of L-3 isnt really that daming. ...3 isnt really that easy to accomplish and isnt as strong a tell in my opinion.

We're not talking about accomplishing, we're talking about attempting. Would two townies voting a townie for that many days be ignored entirely by scum when it could give them the win? I guess maybe, but it doesn't sound likely to me.

@ wolf & Tony: What's with the ancedotes, you two? I've only seen a tracker without a watcher. So what? It means nothing.

[Ythill]

I simply said this was nonsense.

Fair enough. I wasn't sure that was what you meant.

Btw, Ythill, I think your argument has merit, but calling it 'evidence' is a stretch.

The difference between evidence and an argument with merit is entirely semantic. Call it whatever you want.

[Ythill]

Well then be certain to remember it if I die.

[Ythill]

Main Entry: 1ev·i·dence
Pronunciation: \ˈe-və-dən(t)s, -və-ˌden(t)s\
Function: noun
Date: 14th century
1 a:

an outward sign : indication

b: something that furnishes proof : testimony ; specifically :

something legally submitted to a tribunal to ascertain the truth of a matter

ev·i·dence (v-dns)
n.
1.

A thing or things helpful in forming a conclusion or judgment

: The broken window was evidence that a burglary had taken place.

Scientists weigh the evidence for and against a hypothesis.

2.

Something indicative; an outward sign: evidence of grief on a mourner's face.

3. Law The documentary or

oral statements and the material objects admissible as testimony in a court of law.

Don't argue semantics with me, you'll lose. I know what I meant.

[Ythill]

Well, yeah, I got that and I'm sorry to have incidentally mislead you, but it was semantic, not intentional.

Like I said, we can call it whatever you want.

[Ythill]

##Unvote: TonyMontana
##Vote: crywolf20084

Finally...

I'll take three more of the same. We've got 47 hours.

[Ythill]

I wouldn't be voting her if I thought she was going to turn up town. On the off chance that happens, I'll suppose I'll deal with it then.

Why the preemptive argument?

[Ythill]

This game's gotten a case of deadline explosion.

I'm noting how frantic bionic's getting about wolf being at L-1. The point about DR's crappy vote is semi-valid, but I can imagine that I, too, would vote for a player I'd found suspicious and who was the only realistic alternative to no lynch, if I'd replaced in as town with his timing. I don't think his actions prove he's town, but they certainly don't prove that wolf is.

A lot of bionic's arguments that he claims

strengthen

his "tingle" rely on the assumption that the "tingle" is accurate. There are plenty of reasonable scenarios that make sense with her as scum. Ruling out distancing, at this point, is naive. Also, arguing a no-lynch here is pro-scum if wolf is scum.

My vote's staying put.

[Ythill]

The lack of hammer suggests to me that most of the people off of crywolf are town, or they are scum with crywolf.

So you find it true that either you don't know her alignment or she is scum.

If I can't get a DR lynch, I don't think I want any lynch.

Chances are, only one of them is scum. Wolf seems like that one to me. Look at her votes. Look at the way she's been on the cusp of people's suspicions but has managed to live. If she was town, wouldn't there have been scum pushing her earlier?

Hammer her, Elias. You're the only one who will.

I'd rather force it than vote for it though...

Why?

[Ythill]

If you think Wolf is scum, why dont you write a case...

I have.

Why have me vote for it when its now less than an hour away?

This isn't about me.

You

said you'd rather wait than vote. If you're claiming a preference, you must have a reason. What is it?

Why are you really pressing for a hammer?

Simple. You're the best lynch and I'd rather hang you now than let you and your buddies get another unanswered kill while we wait for unreliable information.

[Ythill]

Could you point to the part where he noted even being mildly suspicious of Crywolf?

I thought I could but, looking back, it seems you're right. I must've confused something Elias said as attributed to DR when they replaced in at the same time. Let me see if I can find it...

[Ythill]

Yeah... #912. For some reason I attributed the last paragraph, in my memory, to DR.

I don't believe that mistake makes your point more valid, but it does mean my counterpoint scenario is pure specualtion. More valid against DR, IMO, is the claim problem you pointed out. But I do see townie reasons for a watcher to keep vanilla results quiet.

This is confounding. Obviously one of DR/wolf is scum. Maybe both.

It looks like it won't make any difference today anyway...

[Ythill]

How bout answering the full question, chief?

I did.

My first case was posted here though I used reference numbers instead of quotes. Since then I've pointed out lots of evidence, such as the doctor-doctor anomoly. There's no reason to quote if people already know what I'm talking about.

[Ythill]

If you vote DR I will vote DR as well instead of no lynch.

Okay. If only just to see what happens.

I'm in and out, watching my son, so keep a close eye for the quicklynch.

unvote; vote: Dead Rikimaru

Warning: I will hammer wolf if that option arises, so don't put her @ L-1 unless you want her dead.

[Ythill]

Cross-posted...

Vote: Dead Rikimaru

for failure to answer any of my pleads for a summary of his thoughts, and for not disclosing who his watcher targets were.

I feel good about this already... not.

[Ythill]

Feel as you may, I can do as I like, and what happens when DR turns up scum?? Will you loose a little bit of your attitude on me?

That's a loaded question. It's not been "attitude".

DR scum would be a point in favor of wolf-town, but it wouldn't clear you completely.

[Ythill]

My reason is that it made no sense, seeing as how we were gonna get a no lynch with or without my vote.

"Rather" implies that you have an actual preference. Saying "it made no sense" is a cop out. If it made no sense at all, why would you bother making the statement to begin with. Here's my problem with what you said.

1 hr and 20 minutes to go.. Ya guys just may get your No lynch. I'd rather force it than vote for it though..

An hour and twenty is not enough time to get another lynch. However, it is enough time for you to be hammered, and Elias was in the wings saying he might vote for you. So wolf-town, in the name of avoiding the mislynch, should have been voting no-lynch. However, wolf-scum with scum on her wagon should have been hedging her bets by avoiding the no-lynch.

My theory is that you felt guilty about your ulterior motives and felt the need to justify your refusal to go no-lynch. However, when asked for details, you had nothing.

Seriously Elias... there's still time. Let's hang wolf.

[Ythill]

Meh... just looked back. Elias voted no-lynch one minute before wolf posted, so she may have seen it before she made that post.

[Ythill]

Hey, Ythill...we're over the deadline by an hour and 9 minutes if I read it right.

Oh, right. It was eastern time, wasn't it? I wonder if votes after deadline count.

[Ythill]

Better than a mislynch? Absolutely.

Better than a wolf lynch? Grumble-grumble.

I'm going to

unvote; vote crywolf20084

and go to bed.

[Ythill]

What's with the rhymes?

I don't know that I'm prepared to believe anything our power-roles say, but I agree that they should spill their beans.

I refrained from taling about it too much yesterday, but Tony-town was the obv-choice for NK. The move protects wolf is she is scum and keeps the heat on her if she is town. Question is, if she's town, why didn't she protect him?

We're @ LYLO with a two week deadline. I want to see

everyone

active.

[Ythill]

Bionic is reading my mind. I was trying to be patient and wait for both claimed protectors to post.

Why would wolf not protect Tony? More importantly, why would competent scum in this spot NK Tony if they knew wolf was a doc? Only two answers: wolf is scum or there is a mafia RB.

I've seen evidence of the former but none of the latter.

[Ythill]

I didn't mean to infer anything about

your

level of patience.

Glad you don't get to mock me though.

[Ythill]

Still no DR, huh?

After the late-game yesterday and the deductions we've made about wolf today, I'd like to know people's theories on whether this setup would be balanced if both of them were lying scum.

I guess I don't have much more to say at this point.

[Ythill]

@ DR: There is no pro-town reason to stall before giving your results from last night, but there is a very strong pro-scum reason. Post them immediately and explain why you didn't in your last post.

[Ythill]

I have to agree. Things look pretty bleak at the moment.

The only way this game looks bleak for town is if I've been wrong about wolf, which is unlikely. Today's events make bionic's #3 option seem the most likley.

Bionic, the question of wolf's competence is a valid counterpoint to the scummminess of

wolf's

supposed choice last night. It does not, however, explain the mafia's choice.

I'm running out of patience.

[Ythill]

Im just unsure of who to vote for, crywolf or DR.

I feel your pain.

Wolf has been on my scumdar since D1. Her claim flavor doesn't fit. Her targets don't make sense. Her vote follows the flow rather than the evidence. Last night's NK confirms her as scum in the absence of a mafia RB. And the fact that she was under suspicion for so long without dying means that the information gained from her card-flip will be very useful.

Oman was questionable but that's his playstyle. DR, on the other hand, has been "catching up" for almost two weeks. He's refused to answer questions, made a very suspicious vote and, today, has refrained from sharing his night info. This is the most damning bit of all because I cannot see any way that his silence helps the town, but there is an obvious strategic advantage if he is scum.

I think it's clear, due to their similar roles, that at least one of these two is scum. I'm quickly coming around to the belief that they both are.

Taking a step back, I still think that wolf is the best lynch today. However, DR (even scum-DR) needs to share his night results before we move forward. I no longer believe he will do this without some pressure.

vote: Dead Rikimaru

DR, if you are town, I have just handed you over to the mafia. Post your night results immediately.

[Ythill]

Meh. We have to do

something

at this point. Waiting around for DR-scum to milk the clock is likely to cost us the game anyway. I will simply not abide by him returning at the last minute with game-relevant results to confuse us.

[Ythill]

Does anyone who thinks DR is scum have some ideas for who his scumpartners are and why?

This question raises my hackles a little bit. Would you mind explaining why you asked?

I don't mind answering...

I try to avoid looking too deeply at the buddy evidence before a card has been flipped because basing one assumption on another is bad news. Rather, I look for scummy individual behavior and just see if there are major points against both being scum. In this regard, wolf is still obv; the only thing that makes me hesitate (about DR, not wolf), is the fact that they have claimed similar roles and the inclusion of

one

of those roles seems natural.

As for the third candidate, my first choice at this point would still be fhq but there are a couple of posts by Oman that seem to belie this notion. Using only the Oman/DR info, bionic looks like the most likely, because he gets a similar hands-off tretament from Oman (similar to wolf) but it really could be anyone, Oman is a good enough player to mix it up without being obvious.

Post #800 is interesting. In it, Oman addresses the which-nilla-is-scum question, basing his theories on a potenetial wolf-scum cardflip. He declares that I am town, and therefore finds that the most suspicious are fhq and Rash. Meanwhile he very subtly pushes a town read on bionic without mentioning it.

But, again, a lot of this is useless unless DR is confirmed scum.

[Ythill]

unvote

Don't want to be on a wagon with that girl, at least not until I'm ready to hang someone.

Mod: please prod Dead Rikimaru

[Ythill]

@ bionic: What's up with the cheerleading?

Also, he has been prodded and has responded...

More than 72 hours have passed since that response.

Scum didn't try to pile on and end the day, so either scum isn't paying attention, DR is scum, or scum is already on the wagon (i.e. Ythill). This makes the following statement

DR, if you are town, I have just handed you over to the mafia.

somewhat WIFOMy in my eyes.

You're wagging the dog here. The least likely of three scenarios that were revealed

after

I made a statement says nothing about my motives for making that statement. On top of that, your false conclusion is that my statement was WIFOM, which suggests that it was meant to be evidence but it was not. It was a threat.

I feel a bit uneasy that both Ythill and bionic are running the show at the moment in terms of determining who is scummy without being appropriately questioned about their motives.

And here you're casting suspicion without cause. You are uneasy that we are actively playing this game? Or you are uneasy that others are not? The latter cannot be blamed on either of us. And I'm noting that you are one of the folks who is not appropriately questioning us about our motives.

Fhq's post reeks of someone who is trying to look busy.

[Ythill]

Thanks for the quick answer.

I don't know that it was scummy per se, but it's been a little creepy the way you agreed with my vote in #1075 and then lauded the unvote in #1085. Felt like buddying. But your explanation of the latter also makes sense.

I agree with your lynch subjects but want to add that we should try to get DR replaced today and just hang wolf. I've had nothing but bad luck with lynching absentees and I think it's best to force DR (or his replacement) to name his night target(s) before we hang him... more info for future deliberations.

[Ythill]

I am not lynching anybody without night results from DR or a replacement.

If DR is scum, you are telling him how to win the game.

I honestly think if a replacement is called for, I would vote to abandon the game.

I understand your ire, but fully disagree with your stated course. I've put a lot of time into trying to pull this game out of the toilet. Now, finally, it looks like it might turn around. I'm not going to let a lurker dissuade me.

[Ythill]

How?

I'd rather not spell it out. If it's not obvious to you, it may not be to him. I'll explain when it's no longer relevant.

Bottom line is: we need to lynch today no matter what he does.

[Ythill]

Either way, the scenario I see unfolding for tomorrow is that we will have the same number of suspects. However, we will have one less townie vote, meaning that all townies will have to agree on a lynch to make it happen.

I warned of your "mathematical approach" yesterday, citing it as evidence against the wisdom of a no lynch. Now you raise it to defend the idea that we should not lynch again, at LYLO, if a suspicious player lurks?

If DR is town, his absence is unintentional (which usually means unavoidable), and we need to replace to win. If he is scum, his absence could still be unintentional, or he could be forcing the vote to wolf, or counting on one lame townie for the no lynch, or waiting until the last minute to come in and tell us something ground-breaking in an attempt to force the no-lynch, or just being lazy because he thinks they have the game in the bag. Maybe he doesn't want to explain why he's not voting for his obv-scum buddy at LYLO. There's a lot of potential motives.

His actions-as-scum are not indicitive of wolf's alignment. Other factors are.

[Ythill]

Where did you get this retarded idea? Where did I say I would nl at lylo?

I am not lynching anybody without night results from DR or a replacement.

Your second explanation for what this statement means doesn't make sense to me. While you're banging your face into that wall, read the writing on it. Maybe I was wrong and you misspoke yourself, but I'm certainly not jumping to ridiculous conclusions.

And Ythill: I know you want me lynched and all, but I cannot believe someone who is pretty damn sure one person is scum, DR, would jump off just because his next suspect, me, gave a little bit more pressure under my terms.

You think you're my

second

suspect? That's very, very funny.

[Ythill]

EBWOP:

Your second explanation...

"Your

belated

explanation..." is a more accurate way of saying it.

[Ythill]

Fine. Other suspect. It really doesn't matter either way because DR is really looking good.

It does matter, pertaining to what you said. Yes, DR looks quite scummy but, if only one of you two is scum, I pick you. There is little reason for you to bus at this point, so I'm not staying on any wagons with you.

You're wagging the dog here. The least likely of three scenarios that were revealed after I made a statement says nothing about my motives for making that statement. On top of that, your false conclusion is that my statement was WIFOM, which suggests that it was meant to be evidence but it was not. It was a threat.

Could you rephrase this please.

Sure. Although, since you say you are dropping it, I'm not going to bother going through all of it unless you have specific questions. I'll just address the misconceptions apparent in what you said just now.

I thought it was WIFOM because you were wording the argument in the way that assumes you are town.

It wasn't an argument. I was threatening DR, not trying to prove his alignment. Yes, I might have made that same statement if I was scum but saying something is WIFOMy is one way of saying that it is illogical or untrue, which would make sense if I had been making an argument but does not make sense in response to a threat.

If you (and bionic) are town, my questions towards your allignment should pose no threat at all.

Again, the threat I mentioned was me pressuring DR, not you threatening me.

Does this clear things up for you? If not, please ask specific questions about what you don't understand.

[Ythill]

EBWOP: LOL. I shouldn't post before coffee!

The first quote in my last post was said by wolf, not me.

[Ythill]

Does anyone who thinks DR is scum have some ideas for who his scumpartners are and why?

This question raises my hackles a little bit. Would you mind explaining why you asked?

Surely you have players in mind that you'd be comfortable voting with and others you want to DIAF. Having put some thought into this might help be more sure about your vote.

I answered your question, but you have not answered mine. I'm asking why you want to know people's theories on potential DR-scum connections, not why I should have already considered it.

I've got the feeling my life means one of two things: wrong about suspects, or prime lynchee...

Yet nobody has pushed you and here you are pursuing your same suspects. What changed your mind about this? What does your "life mean" now?

Oh wait, this is obvious. Ythill unvoted in LYLO.

Ythill removed a pressure vote when wolf-scum followed him onto the wagon. What difference does LYLO make in this scenario? Explain how I would benefit from my action as scum.

Here are some questions for you. Do you believe there is a mafia RB? If so, why? If not, can you explain how it is that Tony died?

I'm seriously questioning my town read on you. For days now you have been ignoring and pooh-poohing evidence against obv-wolf while pushing suspicion on me (her primary attacker) and DR (her counterclaim). I've been chalking this up to tunnel-vision but, as the evidence mounts, I am starting to wonder.

[Ythill]

@wolf: All I meant by "follow" was that you voted him after I did.

[Ythill]

@wolf: All I meant by "follow" was that you voted him after I did.

Yeah I got that.

If you understood what I meant, then why did you twist my words to make it sound like I meant something different?

Now that Ythill has a vote, we have the same situation as with DR. Scum hasn't piled on, so either he is scum, or scum voted for him (assuming all scum are active).

It's the exact same situation. Meaning that DR as scum would account for the lack of a quicklynch on me.

Further, if Rash is town, the scum don't have to lynch me to win this game. He's announced stubbornly that I am his vote for the day, which (if he's serious) guarantees that we will either have a mislynch or a no lynch.

[Ythill]

@wolf: All I meant by "follow" was that you voted him after I did.

Yeah I got that.

If you understood what I meant, then why did you twist my words to make it sound like I meant something different?

Because you're twisting mine, or my actions rather.

I hate this circular argument shit. Did you or did you not vote for DR after I did? You did? Good. That's all I said. Notice any twisting?

I never even mentioned your reasoning or your motivations. That detail was your own projection. I explained this to you in #1111 and you claimed that you understood what I had meant in #1113. So the question remains...

If you understood that I only meant you had voted after me chronologically, then why did you act as if you thought I was talking about your reasoning?

Your answer... to punish me for something I didn't actually do? It doesn't make sense. Even if I had been twisting your actions, how would it help the town for you to pretend to misunderstand me and attack me for something I'd never intended to say?

vote: crywolf20084

Stop arguing in circles. Answer the question.

[Ythill]

Wolf, answer my question.

[Ythill]

3 posts and still nothing about last night...

Nothing direct, but we can now assume that he either didn't watch Elias or didn't see wolf target Elias, because of this...

Next: My vote on crywolf

@wolf: Thank you for answering. I'll consider your answer later today, when I have more time. Going to leave my vote on my top suspect for now.

[Ythill]

After ten days a lot has been said behind my back and I'm high on everyone's scumdar.
I need to clarify all that was past first so players will give proper weight to my findings.

Two reasons that this is complete bullshit...

(1) This may be (borderline) acceptable for explaining why you are not posting results now, but does not explain why you didn't post them in #1063.

(2) Posting your results will in no way affect the time we have remaining. While it may be true that we will give no weight to your results if we suspect you, posting them will not make us suspect you more or less, and you still have the same amount of time to clear yourself before deadline. Delaying your results, meanwhile, only has the effect of increasing our suspicions, which is counterproductive to your stated goal.

Like I said before, there is absoluetly no pro-town reason to withhold information here. However, there is a viable scum strategy that accounts for your behavior.

Wolf on your wagon may be a WIFOM game or, god forbid, I could be wrong about her, but I am quickly warming to a DR lynch. Post your results within 24 hours or die.

[Ythill]

...I am quickly warming to a DR lynch. Post your results within 24 hours or die.

More than 24 hours has passed.

unvote; vote: Dead Rikimaru

[Ythill]

can we NOT force a lynch 3 days before deadline?

Vote with me or don't. I'm not forcing anything. The only way we'll get a quicklynch is if DR is town, and that's pretty damned unlikley. Although I would recommend that we don't place another vote until someone is ready to hammer.

HE HAS CONNECTION PROBLEMS. He has legitimate connection problems and is serving as a mod in one game and a back up mod in mine.

I'm not voting him for connection problems. He

has

posted. Any of his posts could have contained the results of his investigations. He chose not to post it. Waiting until the last minute to post that info only serves the purposes of scum. He gave an excuse for why he made this choice and it was bs. Ergo, DR is scum.

LYLO is not the time for pressure votes...

Matter of opinion. I think there's no time a pressure vote is more effective. I was online and checking regularly for safety's sake, and unvoted the moment someone scummy jumped aboard.

Tony's death is a matter of two things: Scum chose to kill him, crywolf chose to protect elias (with bionic as a runner-up choice and Tony way back in 3rd or worse).

Tony was the only person who could prove or disprove wolf. He was the

obvious

NK target. Might as well have been a confirmed cop. You're asking us to swallow that not only did wolf not protect him, but the mafia somehow knew wolf would not protect him? It is unfathomable.

I even set a little WIFOM trap out there, naming Tony as a likely kill. They

both

ignored it?

Ythill's latest vote change only increases my confidence.

So I am scummy for initially pressure voting DR. And for unvoting him when there was a sign of foul play. And for revoting him when he revealed his own alignment. I'm damned, in your opinion, no matter what I do. You've been making assumptive attacks on me for days, ever since I figured out wolf's alignment. I can't believe you expect to be taken seriously.

I'll also echo the sentiment that "personal DR-needs-to-post deadlines" as a reason to vote DR is utterly absurd. Lurkiness =/= scumminess.

I

never

claimed that lurkiness equated to scumminess. I've said that withholding info in this spot is scummy. That posting excuses and waiting until the last minute (or never) to give information cannot serve the purposes of town, but only serves the purposes of scum.

As for the "deadline," I wanted to vote for DR as soon as I read his post. The 24-hours was leeway.

Wolf has been the obv-lynch since D1. DR has been obv since he replaced in. The

only

question in my mind is whether it is reasonable that they are scum together, but I've gotten over that. I'm just grateful that one is voting the other so that we can hang DR in spite of Rash's "blindness."

You lament the fact that DR is the only one we'll be able to lynch as if you aren't the cause of that predicament. I'd

love

to hang wolf but, though he's claimed he would, DR isn't voting her. And neither are you. Maybe you're scum and it doesn't matter who you're voting for, but if you are town and voting for me, the only way we can win this game is if we act quickly enough to utilize wolf's distancing to our advantage.

[Ythill]

Tony was not the only unknown capable of proving wolf night 3.

Sure, if DR is a watcher

and

wolf is a doctor, he

could

have guessed her target, watched that target, and cleared her. That's pretty far fetched. Tony was the only role capable of automatically busting her as scum or clearing her as town. Stating the ridiculous is no way to gain ground in an argument.

I even set a little WIFOM trap out there, naming Tony as a likely kill. They both ignored it?

You admit trying to encourage people to WIFOM so you can trap them?

Like twisting words, huh? I set the WIFOM trap to entice the mafia into killing someone else unless wolf was one of them. Same thing bionic did when he backed her into a corner about Tony's alignment. The outcome heavily suggests that wolf is scum.

Ythill's latest vote change only increases my confidence.

So I am scummy for initially pressure voting DR.

Never said that.

You claimed it was anti-town while voting me. Close enough.

I'll also echo the sentiment that "personal DR-needs-to-post deadlines" as a reason to vote DR is utterly absurd.

Lurkiness =/= scumminess.

I never claimed that lurkiness equated to scumminess.

That statement was made generally.

Bullshit. Read the part I bolded. Who else made that move?

I've said that withholding info in this spot is scummy. That posting excuses and waiting until the last minute (or never) to give information cannot serve the purposes of town, but only serves the purposes of scum.

Withholding information doesn't help fakeclaimed scum either.

BS again. We're at LYLO. All the scum need to do is sew enough confusion to force no lynch at deadline. An easy task from a claimed watcher.

wolf's "distancing" has limited applicability here.

I know, which is why I was hesitant when she first voted for DR. But I can't account for poor judgment on her part. All I can do is call the evidence as I see it, and I no longer believe in a world where one of them is town.

Now, please explain how I have caused this predicament.

It should be obvious. Oh, wait... that's how you answer questions...

Your lamenting the situation is your representation of townieness. So, assuming that you are town, your stubborn vote on me means that we have to catch scum distancing to win.

A clear majority finds both DR and wolf scummy. The only hold-up has been people waiting for DR's info.

Even if I was scum

, your insistance would be unlikely to lead to my lynch. But, if you are town, your vote is needed to hang scum... unless they are being very ballsy, like wolf is doing with DR.

[Ythill]

Hmm, 3 other "power roles" is not too hard to guess from... Perhaps you're trying to distinguish who was better suited to finding out wolf's alignment? As of night 3, DR's and Tony's claims were both viable in that regard.

A guess between three is as accurate as a guarentee of getting info by selecting a single target? Listen to what you're saying. A truthful DR unveiling the truth of wolf's claim might have been viable, but a truthful Tony was guarenteed to succeed. And the mafia knew, yesterday, who among them was telling the truth.

Either wolf is scum or she is a doc. If she is a doc, the scum are using her as the next mislynch and Tony clearing her destroys all of the work they have done. If she is scum, Tony catching her is was the town's best chance of securing the win. DR

may

have revealed her alignment. Tony

would

have. The scum

needed

him to die.

Maybe wolf-doc could have missed this detail (though I find it unlikley) but I seriously doubt that an entire scum team (one that's managed to reach LYLO in spite of two no lynches) would have. Nor do I believe they would have risked a no kill unless they had a good reason to believe that it wouldn't happen. Ergo: mafia RB or wolf-scum.

So are there no reasons for Tony to be killed except those where wolf is scum?

Obviously no (see above). Noting how you edited my word-twisting accusation out of the quote, and how you are continuing to twist my words. Bionic pressured wolf into agreeing that Tony had demonstrated that he was town. I vaguely discussed likley NKs, naming only Tony. The idea was to make it clear that Tony was a very good protect for wolf, and to make sure tha mafia saw this information.

The "trap" part is simple. If wolf is the doc, the mafia are pretty likley to let her be cleared rather than risk the no-kill. In fact, if I was scum and we were still in that unthinkable wolf-as-doc world, I would have killed wolf, realizing that she had outlived her usefulness. What would you have done?

What DR does can't force what the 4 townies do unless DR is a townie.

So if we are ready to hang wolf and then DR comes in two hours before deadline to say that he saw her target Elias, that wouldn't force a no lynch? Or if you manage to get everyone convinced to hang me and then DR comes in just before deadline to say that he saw you kill Tony, that won't create enough division to force no lynch?

Maybe "force" is too strong a word but remember, we are not talking about the effects of DR's delay. The discussion is about his

intentions

.

Exposing the game to two possible wagons by your indecisiveness, poor judgement or scummy?

Neither. I am simply confidant in my reads.

Your second sentence is flawed. It assumes we know you're town, which is an illegitimate assumption.

It doesn't assume anything. I'm not talking about perceptions, I'm talking about facts. If you are town, we cannot acheive a scum-lynch while you are voting me. Whether or not you choose to believe that is up to you.

The majority has been wrong often enough...

Wrong or right, a majority is

required

to lynch and we

need

to lynch to win. Playing renegade here is futile. It's much better for town if you find the scummiest of the popular lynches and argue it over the one you find most likley to be a mislynch. I, for one, think it doesn't matter much which we hang.

Ythill has been making the argument that my vote on him loses the game since townies are needed to hang scum. He has also been arguing as if we knew he was town.

Did you forget about the part where I explain how your renegade vote and stated refusal to change votes is detrimental to town interests even if I am scum?

In that case I could argue that the scum could win merely by wagoning him.

We've been through this. Scum

can

win the game by quicklynching me, but they don't

have to

. Think of the risks. Two jump on and scare you into unvoting, or Elias is lying and the town has a 2:1 kill ratio with all three scum revealed. These risks are mitigated by the fact that

your vote

hands them the no lynch and therefore the win. All they

have to

do is nothing.

[Ythill]

That's nice and all, but this is what you said previously:

Tony was the only person who could prove or disprove wolf.

This statement is patently false for the reasons I gave in a previous post. You've backpedaled from there.

I didn't backpedal. I just neglected to insert the word "automatically" into my original sentence. As in, Tony was the only person who could

automatically

prove or disprove wolf. In context, my point was clear. The DR-was-just-as-good-a-target was your strawman, and now you are arguing in circles.

You've managed to convince yourself that wolf is scum, but you're voting DR instead?

They're both obv-scum. I've said that 2361231239512312365 times.

Your case on crywolf at this point seems to hinge on crywolf meeting your minimum expected standards for doc play...

If by "case" you mean

new points introduced today

then I'll concede. I've been bringing evidence against wolf for days and it adds up to a hell of a lot more than that.

Trying to WIFOM trap the mafia is the same as encouraging people (in this case the mafia and yourself) to WIFOM.

Why is it bad to add extra protection to an important role by convincing the mafia to WIFOM and therefore not kill him? Why is it bad to set up a situation that helps to prove that my PE#1 is scum, when applied to the most likely scenario that leaves her alignment otherwise unrevealed?

You are in denial about things you have said yourself.

Lies. I stated simply that something was a WIFOM trap, you twisted that to suggest I was encouraging the

town

to WIFOM. I explained how what I meant was different than what you said, and you twisted my words, trying to suggest that I said wolf-as-scum was the only reason anyone would target Tony. I knew exactly what I meant all along. You are the one trying to paint it in a scummy light.

What I read here is a description about leading the doc. How shall I distinguish this from leading the doc?

Well, it would help your theory if we had a doc.

Seriously though, I am scum for trying to lead the doc to my own NK choice? You're making less and less sense. Yes, I was leading the doc. No, it doesn't mean I am scum. Considering the kill identity, it suggests that I am town.

For you, your alignment is a fact. For most of us, it is a perception.

Facts are facts are facts. If you believe chickens are mammals, it doesn't give them nipples. If I am arguing that chickens lay eggs, and I cite that they are not mammals without first proving it, you are correct that the entire chicken-nipple camp can call out BS, but some of us see reality, in spite of your manipulations.

Those who agree that DR and wolf are obv-scum, those who see you trying to lynch me instead, because I had the audacity to switch my vote between the two obv-scum roles, will realize whether or not this chicken has nipples, and will therefore follow the arguments I laid out.

You act as if I am trying to assert my townieness in order to put forth the conclusion that I am town. I have done no such thing. I've asserted it in two arguments... (1) To refute the

scum could bandwagon Ythill-town for victory

argument which, incidentally, hypothetically assumes that

both you and I are town

on its own. And (2) to refute the

woe is us because we are forced to lynch DR

appeal you made, which is applicable whether I am scum or town.

What DR does can't force what the 4 townies do unless DR is a townie.

So if we are ready to hang wolf and then DR comes in two hours before deadline to say that he saw her target Elias, that wouldn't force a no lynch?

Your noose has been made...

Or if you manage to get everyone convinced to hang me and then DR comes in just before deadline to say that he saw you kill Tony, that won't create enough division to force no lynch?

I can't stop people from unvoting, but there is a difference in trusting me as opposed to trusting DR as far as votes have gone.

Cute. But you're straying from the subject. Do you see the possible scummy

intentions

in delaying this info? Do you see matching townie intentions?

A little too confident for one who does not want to talk about scumpartners.

Like I said before, I answered your question. I added that I don't like to

base conclusions

on unconfirmed alignments. Meta me and you will find this true across the board. I also questioned your motives for asking, because I saw potential scum motives for that question. But I did answer you. Calling me "one who does not want to talk about" it is a fabrication.

How about it? DR, crywolf, and who?

I already told you that it is not clear. Obviously it is either you, Fhq, or bionic. Right now, I'm leaning towards you, which may be partially OMGUS. And actually, not to disappoint fhq, but in realizing that DR is scum I have trouble swallowing fhq as the third buddy.

Popularity and quality are not equivalent, although hopefully the latter leads to the former.

Popularity and viability

are

equivalent with a 4:3 ratio.

Your indifference to lynching crywolf or DR seems out of place.

Ambivalence is a better word, but anyway... I don't see how it's out of place. It started when I realized they were both scum. And it's not total ambivalence. Deep down, I'd rather hang wolf, but there is that nagging possibility that you could be town, which means we have to hang DR. In case you don't believe me, watch what I do if either you or DR vote wolf.

Did you forget about the part where I explain how your renegade vote and stated refusal to change votes is detrimental to town interests even if I am scum?

I don't recall it, so I must have forgotten, please remind me.

Jesus man, really? You quoted it! Grumble. It's the last paragraph of #1151.

Honestly, I'm flattered you like arguing from the "Ythill and Rash are both town" perspective, but it would be silly for the rest of the town to be as confident as you seem to be about someone else being town.

This is too much. The Rash-town arguments were responses to

your own points

where

you

inferred your townieness. I was endulging your own hypotheticals to refute you. I listed the arguments in the chicken-nipples bit above, so I'm not going to type them again.

I am certainly

not

convinced you are town.

[Ythill]

@fhq: I'll respond to your arguments directly if you come up with something original. Until then, just read my responses to Rash, since you're just aping him anyway.

[Ythill]

LOL. More circles. I'll get to Rash's nonsense later today, if I have the time. I've only got a few minutes now and wanted to address fhq...

My apologies for the tone of my last post to you. I was arguing with Rash and a little worked up. I didn't mean the "aping" thing as an accusation though I can se that you took it that way. I was only saying that I'd already answered your concerns above. Sorry for the bombast.

Here's a question for you. You've been accusing Rash of twisting your words and setting up strawmen. Yet you are somewhat vague on what you believe Rash's alignment to be. So I ask you directly: If you believe Rash IS twisting your words and setting up stawmen arguments, do you think he is scum?

Didn't mean to be vague, it's just that I'm not entirely sure. Considering the options and Rash's escalation, I feel confidant saying that he is the most likely third scum, but not without adding that I could be wrong. I am sometimes guilty of OMGUS and I'd like to keep that in mind, just in case.

Hanging obv-scum today will give us lots of time to reread with the confirmed alignments in mind and make a more reasonable determination about Rash.

If not, what use would town have for 'setting you up'?

This question suggests that the set-up is proven to be conscious, and I don't believe it has been proven such. Rash is actually a lot like me. If he's town, he's got tunnel vision and his ego will not let him back down from a fight he thinks he can win. Which is ironic.

[Ythill]

As I was about to post this, I noticed DR's post. I wrote this post before reading his, but will adress his shortly.

@ everyone:

The following post is entirely for wolf’s entertainment [/sarcasm].

Seriously though, unless the

deadline is extended (please, please, please?)

, this will be my last long post before deadline. As you know, I am often V/LA on Mondays and Tuesdays. So it looks like Rash will have the last word.

Decide carefully whether or not to believe him. Obviously, no solid evidence (such as a confirmed cop result) exists as regards anyone. And the game is hanging in the balance. Even if Rash’s shenanigans has you questioning my alignment, consider whether you think I am the

best lynch for today

.

Consider also the weight of his evidence. Rash has posted a lot of words and argued a lot of details but his entire thesis boils down to a couple of tells. He says that my attacks on wolf have been less than logical. He says that my voting today has been irresponsible. I hold that neither of these things are true but

even if they were

, they can be attributed to a townie.

Compare his case to those against wolf and DR. Look at the way other people have brought unique suspicions against them, but how Rash has been the chief proponent of a Ythill-lynch in spite of what you thought on your own. Be aware that he is manipulating you, whether to serve his ego or his alignment.

I still assert that wolf is the best lynch, with DR a close second. Reread my posts to see why I think this, and decide what you believe.

Though I will not be able to make a long post like this one, I will be able to occasionally check in before deadline. I will gladly hang DR or wolf. I will not hang anyone else.

@ Rash:

It wasn't in your original sentence. The context was not clear. It's a backpedal.

Fail. It wasn't clear

to you

in context. You could have asked me to clarify instead of guessing what I meant. Clarifying after the fact is not

backpedaling

, I have not changed my intended meaning, you were just wrong about it.

I never said anything about DR being a target. That's misrepresentation. Your original argument was "who could prove wolf's alignment," and DR was a valid answer to that in addition to Tony, contingent on them not being lying scum (in hindsight Tony was not).

*Headdesk* My original argument was that Tony was the obvious NK choice b/c he was the only one who could [automatically] clear or condemn wolf. You argued that other people could have cleared him. If you were not arguing my conclusion, then why even bother?

Your unvote after crywolf voted for DR contradicts the assertion that DR is obv-scum.

You're straying even further from reality. I didn't say DR was obv until

after

his last post. Until then, I was still harboring a little doubt, as was evident in my unvote (and expressed explicitly around that time).

A lot of your "evidence" is speculation about the setup and involves divining wolf's alignment from the actions of others and forces links that aren't necessarily true. This means your case is craplogic.

Do we have a confirmed cop with a guilty result? No. Do we have other solid facts comparable to that? No. We have nothing except a lot of evidence that

suggests

people's alignments. In some cases, it has added up deeply enough to form conclusions.

Your argument here makes me laugh becasue my case on wolf is

a lot

more extensive and

a lot

less assumptive than yours on me. In the name of brevity, let's just look at today's evidence...

Wolf is a claimed doc who did not die, did not protect the crucial role for "clearing" her, and who's pressence did not sway the mafia from killing him even though two people all but suggested that she protect him.

I am a claimed townie who has engaged in "irresponsible" voting against two people I see as scum. Hell, even if my voting was irresponsible, it doesn't mean I'm scum.

You act as if this trap could not be used to frame crywolf instead, and that's where the problem is.

Rash, OMG, think about what you are saying. This statement is absolutely ridiculous. If I was using that trap to frame wolf, it means that I am scum and she is the doc. If I am scum, what would be the gain in leading a real doc to protect someone and then killing that person? Was I trying to have my NK blocked?

It makes absolutely no sense.

Note that I said people. This means that mafia are included, and it's not just the town.

Conceded. I misread your tone in the heat of things. Sorry.

You set a trap where the mafia (who are people) WIFOMS when they kill (from your day 4 argument perspective) and you WIFOM about the kill when you wake up in the morning.

Very generally, yes, though the WIFOM today is pretty mild. I cannot fathom that mafia would target Tony after that trap without knowing the kill was safe.

I set the WIFOM trap to entice the mafia into killing someone else unless wolf was one of them. Same thing bionic did when he backed her into a corner about Tony's alignment. The outcome heavily suggests that wolf is scum.

Am I twisting words?

(No.)

(Yes.) You have been suggesting that this was the case: "wolf is scum because Tony was killed."

Quote fixed. Look back at what you said: "So are there no reasons for Tony to be killed except those where wolf is scum?"

I explicitly said that there were

reasons

for Tony to be the kill whether wolf was scum or town. Tony's alignment was nearly confirmed by his actions late yesterday, so I had no reason to believe he wasn't the ideal kill.

Now go back and read what I said: "to entice the mafia into killing someone else unless wolf was one of them." Which means that, if wolf is scum, the mafia may very well still kill Tony but,

if she is not

they are unlikley to. Which is the only thing I've said (and meant) all along, despite the meaning you attributed.

You've since concluded from the NK (in addition to all of that other craplogic, spare me) that wolf is scum, so she is not doc. This is not an applicable explanation for a prior day 3 event. Your reason for the "idea" came before that statement, not afterwards. Let's hear it.

I don't understand the question. I'll try reiterating but, if I don't answer you, please rephrase the question...

Yesterday I was pretty convinced that wolf was scum, but made an effort to ensure that she was either cleared or condemned today. I set up a situation whereby Tony would be likely to survive (thus revealing her alignment) or where it would be (more) obvious by his death that she was scum. Today I interpreted that information. I don't see the conflict there.

Considering the kill identity, it suggests that I am town.

Explain this.

Already have (above) but I'll say it again. Saying that I (as scum) would lead wolf (as doc) to protect a player and then choose to kill that player is absurd. If the gambit was successful, I would only have managed to block my own kill.

You're still too confident.

That's funny from an equally confidant guy who is operating on less evidence

and

leading against the consensus.

Popularity and quality are not equivalent, although hopefully the latter leads to the former.

Popularity and viability are equivalent with a 4:3 ratio.

As popular and viable as a Lowell vote, I'm sure.

Do you even know what viability means?

First off, I was never on board with the Lowell lynch, so your cheap shot is entirely pointless. Second, viability has nothing to do with a D1 lynch. Third, the statement is that viability=popularity (trasnlation: an unpopular lynch is less likley to actually happen at this ratio). That's what I was saying all along, and then you tried to assert "quality" into the argument, and then I simplified the argument without your additive "quality" so as to better communicate it, and then you try to use some

viability + popularity = something else

argument in its place? Huh?

Back to the original statement... in a situation where the number of town equals the number needed for a lynch, the viability of a lynch is equal to it's popularity. We've argued this so far into the ground that I don't even remember what the point of this statement was. LOL. But that's the statement, stop trying to cahnge it in order to disprove it.

Saying that "a majority" is dead set on lynching DR does not equate to a representation of my townieness.

Oh contraire, my slippery friend. You said, "The way things have been going, it doesn't seem like we're going to have anyone but DR lynched today..." The context and tone of this

infers

(which was what I said) that the matter is both out of your hands and against your better judgment. Which is a point of view that can be associated with town but not scum.

Now, maybe you meant something else. And I wasn't trying to say that you were scummy for saying what I quoted right there. I was just saying that it was invalidated by your own actions (as hypothetical town). You (as town) have the power to alter the opinions of others. You, as one of the 'nillas, are one of the important swing votes. It is certainly within your power to try to argue wolf (the other popular lynch) over DR. So you acting like the matter is out of your hands ("The way things are going") is not valid.

Just because you deem the consensus (remember that scum can consent too) to be against me, it doesn't mean my actions are worthless.

It depends on how you are using

worthless

here. And on your alignment. Even then, worthless is probably a strong word to describe your renegade-ness, but it certainly isn't the wisest course of action. Unless, of course, you are utterly convinced that both wolf and DR are town, which seems inconceivable to me.

[Ythill]

Wow... okay. Noting that this is a version of the come-in-at-the-last-minute-and-give-game-changing-evidence ploy I was expecting.

Unvote

for the moment because, either way, Fhq is going to vote for DR and I don't want him @ L-3 until we are ready to hammer.

I do not believe there is a RB. There has been no evidence of it at all. And I'm pretty sure DR is scum anyway. Interested to hear what others have to say about this...

[Ythill]

No need to apologize, fhq.

Wow, setting up tomorrow's lynch as well. Nice one. But if your plan works, there won't be a lynch tomorrow.

I am not sure this makes sense. What purpose does scum have to set up 2 lynches? He has set up a situation of you vs. him. If he is scum, he either gets you lynched today on a lie and wins, or he is lynched and nobody will care who he suspected.

It (fhq's theory) doesn't make sense, but the move from DR-scum does. I've been calling him obv-scum and he needs to discredit me or we will hang him.

I

can't wait

to hear Rash's opinion.

[Ythill]

I mean in addition to that.

[Ythill]

IF he is telling the truth though, it would mean cry is possible (almost certainly) town and that would mean fhq, rash and ythill are all scum (or 3/4 vanillas).

I've been thinking about this. Fact is, it's true no matter which 'nilla point of view you look at it from (except fhq's of course). What I mean is, since I know I'm town, the scum would have to be Rash, bionic, and fhq. Etcetera.

So... and please let me know if you see another option because a false dilemma is not my intent... we have a situation where either DR is lying or 3/4 living vanila towines are scum. Which means only 3 'nillas total in the whole game, unless you count the pointless miller as 'nilla, which still only leaves four. It seems like a low number to me, even with a scum RB.

4 people felt strongly about lynching - you, DR, rash and Ythill.

I understand that you are generalizing, but I'm not comfortable being included in that

strongly

class. I was pretty clear that I was ambivalent, though I thought lynching was marginally better (and I explained why).

[Ythill]

the above argument may be somewhat WIFOMy

Very

WIFOMy, actually. And it misses two important factors, one of which you elluded to at the end...

I'm betting he's going to be quiet until deadline.

I doubt anyone will take this bet because DR has shown himself to be uncooperative

and

he has internet access issues. Hell, he even mentioned the fact that he may not post again before the old deadline. The perception, at least, is that questions to DR are not going to do much good. If anyone is on the fence, they are better off getting information from you.

Second factor... of the four people (excluding you) who have posted since DR's revelation, only one has asked any questions at all. Elias and I both seem to be leaning towards DR-scum (mine is much more than a lean). Wolf has been playing her cards close to her chest. Only bionic is asking questions, so I guess the most logical thing to do is ask...

@ bionic: Why are you questioning fhq but not DR?

Here's my stance in a nutshell. Before the revelation, I was ready to lynch wolf or DR. My main argument against DR was that he had no honest pro-town reason for delaying his results (which, contrary to Rash's BS, is not the same as him posting infrequently) but that there was a viable scum strategy in delaying them: a last minute post that would either clear wolf or condemn a townie, intended to secure the mislynch or force the no lynch. Almost magically, DR has posted a revelation that clears wolf

and

condemns another player. DR has even managed to strengthen my belief that he and fhq are not likley to be scum together.

From my perspective, not much has changed. What has changed? Wolf is no longer a

viable

lynch (boo). I am even less

viable

as a lynch (yay). And wolf is no longer voting for DR (surprise, surprise). Now that we have new info and a deadline extension, I do intend to do a reread (probably tomorrow), but I can't imagine that I will come back from it believing that

both

DR and wolf are town.

@ bionic: I'm still thinking about that 3/4 'nillas as scum point and I have two more questions for you. You said that the revelation

almost

certainly clears wolf. Would you explain how you see it not clearing her? Also, assuming you as town, the theory identifies the scum as myself, fhq, and Rash. How likley do you think it is that Rash and I are scum together?

[Ythill]

Well, it's one day until deadline...

Isn't the deadline @ midnight? That means we have two days.

Bionic, please unvote, at least until tomorrow evening so I have a chance to reread fhq and post an argument.

[Ythill]

I am pretty sure you and Rash are his partners, so I don't think I am going to accomodate you on this one.

Even if Rash and I were scum, unvoting for a few hours doesn't help us.

Give me this much... if wolf or Rash put fhq @ L-1 before I post this evening, consider unvoting before the other one posts. Seriously, I'll be starting my reread in about 9 hours. Is it really too much to ask?

[Ythill]

@ bionic: Your vote is being WIFOM-cemented in place. Did you reread the suspects?

@ wolf: I thought you were convinced that DR was scum. Are you really anxious to believe what he says?

Oman/DR vs. Fhq

User’s Claim

: Oman doesn’t take a stance, though he does attack Tommy and Lowell (both town) for taking stances; he also defends wolf’s fishing. Fhq doesn’t take a stance either, he questions Darox-town’s opinion and attacks wolf for fishing. I think fhq gets the townie brownies here, though I might have caught a minor slip in his #41...

Personally, I think it was a good move (if a bit unconventional)

from your side.

@ fhq: Read the phrase I bolded and tell me what you meant by that.

The Lowell Mislynch

Oman parks a policy vote on Lowell, bringing him to L-1. He then continues to push the lynch even though he admits twice that Lowell is hard to read and later calls wolf scum. Fhq briefly pressures Lowell early on, and returns to vote him twice, intermittently attacking Darox-town (with votes) and wolf (without votes). Both are on the wagon at the end and, on this reread, both are looking pretty dirty to me. Oman ignored evidence to push the policy lynch; fhq jumped back and forth between two townies; both took it easy on scummy wolf.

Lowell (7): Rashiminos, Oman,

TonyMontana

, crywolf,

Tommy

, fhqwhgads,

Darox

Day Two Opening

: Oman plays lightly, posting mostly single sentences; he manages to call several different players town with little or no reasoning, including one who he says has scum-traits (wolf). This is blatant buddying. He parks a vote on Tony-town and then pooh-poohs all other cases. Fhq flounders around a lot without really saying much. Eventually he votes for Darox-town, seemingly because nothing major has happened since D1. Oman gets the scum-points here for the buddying.

The D2 No-lynch

: I don’t think anyone has been arguing that the D2 no-lynch was a good thing, so I’m treating actions that lead to it as scummy. Neither Oman nor Fhq was very active at the end of D2. However, Fhq compromised to put wolf very close to lynch, only jumping off after her claim, whereas Oman stubbornly sat on a two-man townie wagon which, by proxy, became the alternative to Darox when wolf claimed. It is true that Oman did not jump wagons to hammer Darox-town, but it’s also true that he’d pigeon-holed himself into a townie-stance on Darox, meaning that dropping the hammer would have brought him tons of flak the next day. I will not engage in WIFOM but, rather, ignore this double-edged sword. Oman squeaks into the lead on scum points for his stubbornness near deadline.

Darox (5): M4yhem,

TonyMontana

, crywolf, fhqwhgads, Ythill
TonyMontana (5):

Darox

, Oman, Rashiminos,

pickemgenius

, bionic

The Mass-claim

: Both supported popcorn. Oman’s flavor is a little odd (how does a librarian know who was at which house), and he delayed his uneventful results. I see no problems with Fhq’s claim. Also, there is a huge difference in their play after the popcorn. Oman just meanders along, stating that he’d like a ‘nilla lynch but not much else. Meanwhile, Fhq seems to have his curiosity whetted by all of the new information. He quickly agrees with the ‘nilla-lynch plan though he has not claimed a power role. Then he goes on to do some of the most active scumhunting of his game. This all adds up to minor scum-points for Oman and serious townie-brownies for Fhq.

The Second No-lynch

: The wisdom of this no-lynch is in contention, so I will not be considering scummy those actions that caused it. DR replaces in and is lurker-extraordinaire; his MYLO vote on wolf without finishing his reread belies a town alignment. Fhq continues his hunting for a bit, then argues theory about the no-lynch, then argues semantics with me, it strikes me as an inspired townie running out of steam. He hops on and off of bionic twice but is willing to compromise on wolf at the end. This section hands another fat scum-point to DR.

Today

: DR seems more worried about himself than he does about the town. He delays his night-results until just before deadline and then posts game-changing information, just as I guessed he would as scum. Fhq spends a lot of time analyzing the vote possibilities. He attacks bionic and myself but generally seems as if he has given up on the game. Obviously, I’m giving DR another fat scum-point for his gambit.

Conclusion

: Yes, fhq did some scummy things from time to time. In some spots, his treatment of wolf was soft-handed enough to make me wonder. If we hit scum today, I will not entirely rule out an inventive move on DR’s part (fingering one buddy while clearing another, thereby playing for the endgame), but I still doubt that both are scum together. Comparing them, however, Oman/DR is still the obvious choice for today.

Vote: Dead Rikimaru

[Ythill]

Ythill - answer this:

What advantage does DR-scum have for framing fhq over framing crywolf (who in my eyes would have been an almost sure-fire lynch if DR was scum and decided to frame her)

Wolf is scum.

[Ythill]

So your argument is both DR and wolf are scum and we had a town of one-shot vig, tracker, miller and neighbor? Just checking.

Sure. Why not?

Ythill has just said the only reason DR-scum would have to frame fhq instead of you is if you are scum.

I never said "only". I am not omniscient. Perhaps there is another reason I didn't think of. But it doesn't matter. I'll eat my hat if wolf is town.

Also remember that I could have hammered you yesterday and ended the game (if you think I am scum trying to mislead you).

That's what WIFOM said. Besides, if you were scum, why would you be trying to mislead your buddy?

[Ythill]

No, actually. That last bit was a joke (see smiley).

I find it entirely possible that you could be wrong.

[Ythill]

Bionic, look at post #1219. Please answer the "Sure. Why not?"

It wasn't rhetorical.

[Ythill]

Yeah, and I feel like we should have a cop with a miller. This mod is tricky.

The

why not

is important because you're hinging an awful lot on set-up speculation... and basing that speculation on beliefs that you have not expounded upon.

[Ythill]

Sure, the answer is quite simple, it's a mistranslation, or rather, a direct translation from a common Afrikaans (my first language) saying.

The saying goes something like: "Dit was 'n slegte skuif van jou kant af." Which quite literally means "It was a bad move from your side."

Wasn't expecting

that

answer. You write English very well for a second language.

Anyway... here's how it seems like this is going to play out. Wolf will put fhq @ L-1. Elias will put DR @ L-1. Then Rash will get to choose the lynch. I don't like that outcome one bit.

Bionic, doesn't it bother you that our only confirmed non-mafia also suspects DR over fhq?

[Ythill]

I am not sure why you are trying to persuade me.

DR is scum. Wolf is scum. Rash is quite possibly scum and wouldn't listen to me anyway. You're the best shot, even if it's a long shot.

Besides, arguments are arguments. Maybe Rash isn't scum and he'll read what I've written and do the right thing.

[Ythill]

Just thought of something. Bionic, if you're town and you're now sure that Rash is scum, why are you

not

trying to persuade Elias? It would seem that, from your point of view, him voting fhq is the only way town can win.

[Ythill]

Yeah, and I feel like we should have a cop with a miller. This mod is tricky.

The

why not

is important because you're hinging an awful lot on set-up speculation...

and basing that speculation on beliefs that you have not expounded upon.

Someone is covering his rear...

No. I just wanted him to explain why he figured that set-up was unlikley. He hadn't really explained it.

I'm just glad you didn't live up to my expectations, Rash.

[Ythill]

I guess I don't really have much to say at this point.

Assuming we're right about DR, there will be a tomorrow. If I am not alive to see that tomorrow, please hang wolf. Thanks.

And goodnight.

[Ythill]

I still think crywolf is the play, but I'll try to keep an open mind during rereads. I think our best course of action is to use our time wisely. No rushing. I'll be rereading DR soon, maybe more than once. I'd like it if everyone did the same.

If you want to assume crywolf and myself are partners in crime, explain why we did not win by lynching fhq yesterday.

As you said later, the same thing could be said of myself and wolf, but I think the assertion of innocence here is premature and WIFOMy. Cold feet is enough of an explanation to shed reasonable doubt.

If I understand the Mafia Spy role correctly...

This is going to be problematic. We have a mod that includes a miller without a cop, so we shouldn't assume convention. Now we have a role that, according to the wiki, has a few common variations.

I believe the worst thing we can do in this spot is to assume anything about the spy, except that his alignment was scum. Problem is, knowing about the role would really help us put the pieces of this game together. I'd love to hear any and all

evidence

of how the role worked, and will share whatever I find.

So I guess the first question I'll ask today is this: Who did crywolf protect, and why was this person chosen over Elias?

Bionic. I didn't want to see him gone seeing as how he's been the most helpful in finding the damned scum, even though he wasn't on DR's kill.

Wolf, you've made quite a statement there. How did you come to the conclusion that bionic was the "most helpful" in finding scum?

Oman's first post upon replacement leads me to be fairly sure he was unknown to the mafia.

I looked at the post. Not sure if I agree or not, depending on what you meant. Were you suggesting that they didn't know at first, or at all?

Oh, I just had an Idea: Mafia, I'm on your team now, feel free to PM me your names and we can all be friends. I swear. Maybe I'll PM you a place to meet and I'll come alone and not with the whole town ready to lynch you.

This suggests heavily that, from Oman's point of view, his buddies didn't

start

with knowledge of his identity. However, I can't see the scum missing this so, if they suspected a spy in the set-up, they probably knew it was Oman after that post. His message also suggests that he was recruitable.

DR didn't know who mafia was.

How did you come to this conclusion? The wiki states that a "spy" (as it differs from "traitor") doesn't know the mafia's identities, but a common variant for both makes the role recruitable. Besides, I don't trust that gorkat stuck to the spy/traitor naming conventions.

[Ythill]

I'm sure the guarantee of an instant win (which assumed the scum knew DR was scum when the argument was made, I have since realized that this is not necessariily true) would have overcome "cold feet."

The "guarentee of an instant win" also assumes that the spy counted toward victory, that the scum knew he counted, and that the scum knew Elias was not lying about being one-shot.

Your accusation of WIFOM here and the cold feet provides for reasonable doubt are somewhat shocking considering the sort of cases you have put forth.

Great. First I am wrong for assuming my own alignment as town, now I am wrong for bringing it up when you do the same. Fact is, we do not know what the scum knew. We do not know what they were thinking.

What we know is... Elias was town, which probably put our end of day wagoneers @ 3:3, which means that someone was scum voting for scum. One possible explanation is that both fhq and DR are scum but I don't know that it's very likley in the situation they were in. Another explanation is that the team didn't know who their spy was, but with the doughnut-sized-breadcrumb and the fhq vs. DR day-ender (which proves that at least one of them was scum), I don't believe this is likely either. It's all very mysterious, and I don't know that we'll be able to figure out exactly what happened, but we can probably figure out who DR's buddies were by rereading him.

A quick skim shows that he buddied to myself, bionic, Darox, and wolf; and to a lesser extent to Rash, user, and Elias. His main targets were confirmed town (Lowell and Tony), but he made smaller attacks against a good number of people. When Oman buddied to wolf, it was differently worded. Whereas he simply called others "town," he usually refered to wolf as scummy-seeming but excusably so.

The above suggests that wolf is scum. I believe Rash, as the only unknown among the minor-buddies, is cleared a little by his inclusion, but I wouldn't say he's off the hook entirely.

DR didin't do much. He voted wolf, but also defended her the next day. He FoSed me for OMGUS and volunteered fhq as the alternative lynch. The common thread in these three things is that they all strike at the power base of a wolf wagon (defends wolf, attacks her biggest detractor, provides a compelling alternate theory that puts himself in the noose instead of her if it goes sour). The simple fact that he derailed wolf as a candidate makes me believe that she is a scum power role.

I think my next step will be to reread wolf and double check for connections, but I've already spent too much time on this game today...

[Ythill]

Checking in. I haven't had time to reread wolf yet, but still intend to.

I see no reason to hurry, so I'm not voting yet, but it would take a lot to convince me to vote for anyone other than wolf.

[Ythill]

Okay... I've finally finished rereading wolf, mostly in isolation but some in-context when my memory was hazy about the exact situation. I've got two pages of notes but I'm condensing it here. All post numbers below refer to in-isolation, and I'd suggest reading with an isolated-wolf window open in the background, for reference.

Wolf makes scum-slips in #s 6, 21, 74, 94, 95, 97,

147

,

148

,

149

, and 154. The italicized three come quickly as she tries to recover from #147.

A lie (the list) is apparent in reading post #s 25, 30, 34, 35, and 52.

Two pithy posts, #s 19 and 147, seem contrived. These were wolf's "hammer" of Lowell and her temporary switch from DR to fhq (vote declared but not placed).

She posts poor defenses and/or dodges questions in #s 16, 49, 55, 101, 111, 112, and 128.

She asks if DR turning up scum will clear her (#116).

Wolf jumps back and forth between people most of the time but in two cases she does a vote-unvote succession on the same player. The first is Lowell (D1), the second is DR (D4). The question of whether wolf would distance by voting DR D4 might be answered by #145, wherein she unvotes DR and leans fhq as soon as the DR-fhq dilemma has been established.

Five of the eight people wolf made direct attacks against have been confirmed town, one was DR, the other two are still alive.

Wolf flip-flops opinions without corraborating evidence six times; cheerleads others' suspicions six times (3 on confirmed town, 1 on DR); and fence-sits four times (3 regarding DR). Remember, we've already pointed out other tells that I'm not repeating here (bland doc-doc flavor, direct-the-cop, NK-WIFOM-trap, etc), and she's been alive as a claimed doc for 3 nights.

In reading the wolf-Oman links, I have come to believe that wolf did not know he was the spy on D1, suspected he might be on D2, realized he was N2, made that realization too obvious early on D3, tried to distance at the end of D3, deepened the distancing early on D4, and hammered him when his lynch seemed inevitable.

Feel free to discuss anything above. I will be voting for wolf when we're ready to end the day.

[Ythill]

@ Rash: I don't have a lot of points of contention with #1293, but there are a few...

re Spy counts as Mafia: You are basing this on personal knowledge we don't know the scum shared. The wiki is unclear and we don't know what the PMs said. I assume you are correct, but I do not know that the scum assumed the same thing.

re Premise vs. Conclusion: Fair enough, but your train of thought is still WIFOM. I'm going to let it pass for now though.

re Knowing what the scum are thinking: This is my main point of contention with your post. Every quote you gave was me using

common knowledge

to deduce what the scum were thinking. If you read the thesis you were disproving however, you will see that it had two parts (1)

"...we do not know what the scum knew."

and (I should have said therefore) (2) "We do not know what they were thinking."

Re No Relevant numbers from DR reread: Sorry, it was a skim and I didn't take detailed notes. I could go reread again if you want to argue the specific points but, since you don't disagree, I'd rather not take the time.

@ bionic: All I have to say about #1295 is QFT.

Please correct me if I am wrong. It sounds like bionic is ready to move on. Rash's vote indicates that he is ready. I have finished my rereading and am personally ready to go to night unless anyone has anything to say about #1292. Fhq, please state explicitly whether you are ready to move on.

[Ythill]

The wiki is clear. Traitors and their variations (Mafia spy for instance) are "pro-mafia."

Right. Which means he wins when the mafia wins. Meaning that he will

not

be counted toward the town total. But it is vague on whether he is counted toward the scum total. Example: 3 townies + 3 scum =/= 3 townies + 2 scum + spy for the win.

It really depends on the wording of the scum role PM... whether it is "majority" or "equal numbers" that the scum must attain to win.

How is saying the mafia would choose to win given the clear chance WIFOM?

Because apparently they didn't "choose to win".

It's not common knowledge, but I don't think you're going to accept that this game.

Either Tony was scum or he was a tracker = knowledge common to the players of this game.

Either wolf is scum or a doc = knoweldge common to the players of this game.

Anyway, all of this is superfluous to today's business. Since everyone is ready...

vote: crywolf 20084

[Ythill]

"Tony was the obv-NK" =/= common knowledge

Well... duh. I know.

However "Tony was the obv-NK" = an extrapolation on "Tony is the only one who can [automatically] clear or condemn wolf" which is the logical result of "Tony is scum or the tracker", which was common knowledge.

That's all I meant. Considering your stance, I don't see why you're nitpicking me. Do you consider me incompetent?

[Ythill]

Somebody give me a reason why crywolf would not have voted for fhq and instead voted and hammered on DR.

An interesting topic.

Wolf was attacking DR before he claimed his last minute night results, but that "revelation" caused her to compose a fabricated lean towards fhq. Then Rash-town, who was supposedly going to vote for fhq, came in and voted for DR. After which wolf hammered almost immediately. This suggests one of two scenarios...

(1) Wolf-DR-fhq as scum. Wolf had an obvious preference for a fhq bus, because it had the secondary effect of clearing her. But one thing she didn't want was for scum to be lynched without her on the wagon. Since Elias was leaning towards a DR hammer, she jumped the gun to cover her ass.

(2) Wolf-DR-bionic as scum. With two of her buddies already on fhq, wolf just needed one townie to join them before she hammered. Rash was expected to be that townie but he changed his mind at the last minute. Since Elias was leaning towards the DR hammer, wolf made a snap decision that it was better to bus and hope for the win later than it was to be stubborn and thereby reveal herself as scum.

The second of these two scenarios seems a little more plausible, b/c I doubt DR would try that three-scum gambit @ LYLO. It's possible though, and I'd rather not win or lose this game based on WIFOM.

Yesterday's reread also seemed to indicate bionic as the last buddy. Particularly telling are #1005 and #1008 by wolf, when compared to the vote count; also, the early-game interactions between fhq and Oman, which suggested that they were not scum together. However, that reread was performed without knowing Rash's alignment and so I think another read is in order before I vote.

Of course I'm also interested in hearing what the two of you have to say.

[Ythill]

I do find it a little hard to believe you consider me more likely to be crywolf's partner considering the amount of focus I have put on her for most of the game. Yes, I did have changes of opinion in the later stages of the game.

That's just it. I'll have to reread to verify, but I remember your stance on wolf as being: attack her when she's under fire but change your mind before the end of each day. Which seems like buddy behavior to me.

...we need to look at what a spy does to game dynamic.

QFT.

If both mafia die (excluding scum), the game ends since the spy has no killing ability.

Where do you get this conclusion? Wouldn't it be possible for a spy to win through lynching if the scum win condition was "equal numbers"?

FHQ also played a low-key game and rarely expressed any strong opinions of anybody.

This was true in the early game, but he opened his game up later on. It may have been because the spotlight was elsewhere, but I'm not sure how much I want to speculate on this before rereading. I should have time to go over things this weekend or early next week, then I'll have a lot more info to work with.

I'm curious as to why fhq hasn't posted yet.

[Ythill]

In case it's not obvious from my silence, I'm going to concentrate on this game until fhq is back from LA. Another of my games is very active right now, so I've got something to keep me busy, and I think a two-man endgame could lead to bad things if bionic is scum.

[Ythill]

LOL. You guys think I'm town.

vote: bionic

[Ythill]

[Ythill]

Back for a victory dance.

Rash, I hope to see you in another game some day. You have keen vision and getting out of your spotlight is like escaping a jaw-trap. I thought I was going to have to chew my leg off.

Even though it's clear in the mafia-chat, I'll explain that D4 debacle. I was checking in constantly, waiting for wolf to vote fhq so that I could hammer. I'd been rallying so hard against DR that it was too risky for me to be the third vote on fhq. If bionic checked in before wolf, it might have cost us the game.

Then, on D5, when I was arguing with Rash, I realized that it had the ring of defending the mafia's actions. I thought for sure that Rash or bionic would catch that. It all ended well though. Still undefeated as scum. Woot!

Wolf, your performance was truly astonishing. I don't know how you lived as long as you did, but I've got to tip my hat to you. That "annoying fly" strategy worked

very

well. I think you've been my most useful buddy ever.

Gorkat, I intend to nominate you for most enjoyable game (even though I'm in the running for it and you're sure to beat me) because this game was a nail-biter from page 1 until the final vote. The GF + miller with no cop was brilliant and the balance seemed just about perfect. Best game I've played so far!

[Ythill]

I think the standard pro-nolynch argument goes something like: we have a greater chance to hit scum the next day.

I recall reading a game that came to 4-players and had a similar issue. The convention was to nolynch. However, Glork argued against it. IIRC, his remarks were something to the effect of:

"You have to convince two townies as opposed to one to be wrong on another townie, which is more difficult for the mafia to do."

That was the argument I made here. I'm glad it wasn't effective.

When I play as scum, I try to forget my alignment whenever I can. And I am careful to tell the truth unless it is absolutely crucial that I lie. I was very entertained by the D3 debate where I was telling all of you who my buddies were and some of you were arguing against me.

And, FTR, we had picked out Oman as the spy on D1, which was confirmed by his N1 note. Also, remember that discussion on why mafia would NK the miller? The truth was never suggested... with a spy and a GF, we thought killing user was the only surefire way of

not

killing the cop. Little did we know...

[Ythill]

Maybe asking others why they still feel their vote is better placed on someone else than on the person you are debating with?

It can be a valuable tool. I often invite others to enjoin when I'm town. For example, in another (finished) game we had a claimed doc who I at first suspected but then started to second-guess myself. He was angry and not making much sense, so I invited others to defend him. Their arguments changed my mind about his alignment.

In my first game as scum, one player who ironically thought I was town asked me if I thought my extra-helpful playstyle (PbPAs, long debates, and "thinking out-loud") would get me into trouble as scum. I find that the opposite is true. A lot of players skim through long posts or zone out while reading them, only paying close attention to the conclusions. I find that people often believe my conclusions are sincere because it seems like I have a lot of thought behind them.

Rash caught a lot of my crap-logic filler, but most people don't.

The other side of this is that I've had some good fortune convincing townies to vote with me when I'm town, and I've seen veteran players do the same thing (vollkan, Adel, and MoS are good exapmles). So I don't think that concise always means better. Both styles can be done wrong (compare TSQ to Lowell) but both can be done right as well.

[Ythill]

Get me a special title?