Mini 701 - That's a Wrap! (Game Over)

[TDC]

confirm!

[TDC]

Hi guys,

vote: springlullaby

I doubt another self-vote will be sparking more discussion than Mayor vollkan's. (On the other hand, I just responded..)

I don't see an early self-vote as indicative of alignment and quite frankly, I have no idea why this seems to be such an issue.

ecto, mrfixij: Would things be any different for you if vollkan had dice-voted instead?

[TDC]

@TDC: I'd have preferred a dice vote, even if it had landed on himself. It shows that it is indeed random as opposed to deliberate and inflammatory. Again though, that's based on my idea of a vote, which it seems that Voll and I have agreed to disagree on.

A dice vote carries the same amount of information than a self-vote (zero), but is less likely* to spur discussion.
What exactly is good about a truly random vote?

*I have seen people being voted for dice-voting, but most of the time it just gets ignored.

[TDC]

Vollkan: How would a game look like where everyone was you? How would the first case develop if nobody started pushing weak cases to see where they'll go?
I can certainly envision 12 vollkans arguing about theory, but how would you ever move away from it?
I agree that it's in the best interest of the town to only follow good cases, but they don't just drop from the sky, do they?

---

Why is Springlullaby following Spyrex (she says Ecto is scummy), but votes Vollkan?

What, can people only be suspicious of one person at a time?

vote Springlullaby

for bandwagoning (although she didn't vote Ecto). The closest I can get to a non-random vote.

You're voting her for bandwagoning despite her not voting for the bandwagonee?

---
mrfixij:

What about Spyrex's input? Was he overly sucking up to Vollkan in his post 75?

What do you think about this?

[TDC]

The post I reacted on. I thought this a weak post, because:
a. What is the purpose of this vote? She doesn't seem to be serious to attack Vollkan, and pressuring isn't going to work here.

How did you conclude that she wasn't serious (for page three standards) about it?

b. She keeps the options open to choose Ecto, the other side of the discussion. Yet, why is Ecto scummy? She only follows Spyrex. Did you really think I would vote for someone just because that person had two suspects?

But if she has two suspects, what's wrong about voting one and commenting about the other?

[TDC]

Ecto: Do you think he's scummy for that pbpa summary?
I mean it doesn't support his vote reason (you pushing crap logic) at all, and I think if he was going to fudge a pbpa then it would've made sense to fudge it in a way that supports his vote?

---

orangepengiun: I guess you'll not come around quoting him a bit. Where is the craplogic?

---

I think this whole discussion to be weird. It is mostly about theory (the self vote, what is "gut") and there are only a few people actively posting. Personally, as noob, I'm quite scared by the huge posts, but what I get from them, doesn't seem to be worth the effort, as it doesn't tell me a lot about the game itself. From that, people suddenly find scum. That is why I vote.

I don't know.. do long exchanges like this ever

not

lead to the participants voting for each other?

---

I fear I really need to meta some of you to take something out of this..

[TDC]

I don't particularly favour any however I've got a leaning against Ectomancer, especially in light of how orangepenguin and SpyreX represent the progression of his argument.

So I'm going to

Vote: Ectomancer

which puts him at L-2. I wouldn't suggest anyone else votes for him without providing (very) strong justification at this point.

Where has orangepenguin "represented the progression of Ecto's argument", and why does it make you vote Ecto?
Kind of funny how you advise people not to put another vote on him without "(very) strong justification", when your own justification is poor.

How high do you rate the chances of Ecto being scum?


-------

orangepengiun: I guess you'll not come around quoting him a bit. Where is the craplogic?

Are you going to address this?


------

It's not scummy because, for one, it makes no attempt to, as you say, "fudge" and even more so because he has admitted it is a load of crap. However, it doesn't do much for the likelihood that he has just latched on to me and/or spyrex and briefly skimmed Ecto's posts to summarise the skeleton of each. That's why he needs to explain himself in full.

Well if it's a load of crap, why bring it up in the first place?

I assume that last post of your's landed in the wrong thread.

[TDC]

Also, originally, I posted orangepenguin's summary in post 136 as a reason for voting for Ectomancer. Please explain what was wrong with it and why it was not worthy of citing as a reason for voting Ectomancer.

Because it doesn't contain any reason for voting Ecto. orangepenguin has said as much himself. (And as you see, he's asked to provide better reasoning, too).

[TDC]

I'll

vote: orangepenguin

You have

still

not presented your case on Ecto. Are you planning to just ignore my question until the day's over, or what?

And now you say that ortolan's wagon is wrong,

because

"Ecto has shown scumminess", but you'll still not tell us where that happened.

[TDC]

I'll

vote: orangepenguin

You have

still

not presented your case on Ecto. Are you planning to just ignore my question until the day's over, or what?

And now you say that ortolan's wagon is wrong,

because

"Ecto has shown scumminess", but you'll still not tell us where that happened.

First off, I never said I was going to present a case. I was sarcastically responding to ecto's sarcastic response to my vote. vollkan and Spyrex have posted cases already. I agree with what they both said, hence the vote. I don't know what a third case would do, hence my comment, and instead, I posted a pbps (summary, not analysis).

It would already help if you pointed out, by quotes or in your own words, what it is that you like about vollkan's and Spyrex' cases.

I don't recall your question. I'm sorry. Please quote it, and I'll answer it for you.

It was: "Where is Ecto's crap logic?"

If you don't like their cases, then fine, disagree with it, but I do like their cases and I do agree with their thoughts. Maybe it's not in the best form to follow what others have presented, but isn't that the real point of cases? To sway the voters. I guess I was just swayed.

If it's just "their case" and not "also your case", then you're denying accountability.
You don't need your very own case, but if you jump on a wagon, more reasoning than "I agree with this case" helps understanding your vote.

---

ortolan: What's your read on orangepenguin?

[TDC]

unvote.

That changes quite a lot.

[TDC]

They've claimed masons one page ago.

How did you guys miss that?

I know for a fact that ortolan's wagon is wrong, which I am not going to elaborate on at this point

Translation: I'm mason with ortolan.

ortolan: What's your read on orangepenguin?

Translation: Is that correct, ortolan?

100% town

Translation: Yes.

I find it very unlikely that they are gambling scum.

[TDC]

They've claimed masons one page ago.

How did you guys miss that?

I know for a fact that ortolan's wagon is wrong, which I am not going to elaborate on at this point

Translation: I'm mason with ortolan.

ortolan: What's your read on orangepenguin?

Translation: Is that correct, ortolan?

100% town

Translation: Yes.

I find it very unlikely that they are gambling scum.

I meant this question.
Vollkan: Have you noticed this dialogue at the time it happened?
If yes: Why did you keep pushing ortolan? (Don't tell me you did that because you wanted to educate him or something, you clearly let him fall like a hot potato when they claimed

again

.)
If no: Why did you not wonder about my unvote?

Same question to Ectomancer (though he wasn't on his wagon and did not as much to push ortolan).

[TDC]

First off, just a clarification to my last post, where I realise I didn't explain the continuance of my vote (which wasn't what you explicitly asked, but I figure it probably was implied). Basically, I have an objection to "insinuation claiming". OP's "I know for a fact that ortolan's wagon is wrong, which I am not going to elaborate on at this point" is a vague assertion. It could mean "I am mason", it could mean "I am a cop with an innocent", or it could just mean "I have a really strong opinion". Same goes for the other posts. They suggested the possibility to me, but I wasn't going to drop off just because of something so vague (unlike the explicit claim which prompted my unvote)

Yeah, when I wrote "dropped like a hot potato" I meant your unvote. (Which, as you'll admit changes the tone of your questioning of him a lot).

If you don't like implicit claims, why did you not just ask them about it, but instead pretended nothing happened? Policy?

As for it possibly being something other than a mason claim - They both claimed to be 100% sure. Unless you consider two cops investigating each other a viable possibility.

[TDC]

Would you rather he typed a multi-paragraph response and took his time unvoting while a scum or foolish town player said "Nope, don't buy the claim" and lynched ort? I think that a hasty unvote was a towny move.

You are misunderstanding me. I had asked vollkan why he didn't unvote when I unvoted (a page or so earlier than when he actually did).

[TDC]

SpyreX: I don't understand why you see this "self vote contradiction" as central point of your case.
Would you think that the statement "WRITING IN CAPS LOCK IS SCUMMY!" is a contradiction of similar magnitude?

Why do scum get tangled up in contradictions? I think it's because they want to appear pro-town and say the "right things" but ultimately might do the opposite to further their goals.
Does her self vote do anything to further scum goals? What do you think did she want to achieve with the self vote?

--

mrfixij:
What parts of SpyreX' case do you agree with? Everything but the point you mentioned?
What where your reasons for voting her before SpyreX posted his case?
You only cited her being on the ortolan wagon (together with your previous vote, Spyrex, and vollkan) as reason.
What about her vote was worse than the other two?

---

vollkan: What do you think about mrfixij's vote? It seems to conflict with how you have said votes have to be justified, yet you didn't mention it at all.

[TDC]

Ecto: Is myk's "turnaround" scummy regardless of sl's alignment?

--

The fact that it is partially backed up on meta also really bothers me.

Why?

--

mykonian: I found mrfixij's timing of his vote suspect, too. He did however afterwards present his own case (which was somewhat different from Spyrex', and disagreed with it on quite some points). So, in that sense, he did not rely on Spyrex' case (which is also evident by the fact he voted before Spyrex actually presented his case. For all mrfixij knew Spyrex could've come back and said "Just wanted to see who'd jump on it" and then scum-mrfixij-who-has-no-own-case would've been screwed..)

[TDC]

At this point I want however TDC and mana-ku to express who they are suspicious of and Ectomancer to comment on the case against me.

If only I knew, but I'll try anyway.

vollkan I have a bad feeling about, but I can't quantify where I actually got it, and the case on him is not particularly enforcing it. Still don't like how he kept his vote on the claimed mason for policy reasons instead of just asking them about it.

I agree with myk's sentiment that the sl-case is not as good as some make it out to be (Spyrex in particular is unreasonably sure of her alignment and that this game is "in the bag"). I still don't see the point in the self-vote "contradiction". Her vollkan case, however, is reaching at times (misplaced post, the vollkan-ecto connection, ..) and rather vague. It doesn't make me want to vote vollkan despite my bad feeling about him.

Still think the timing's off about fixij's sl vote, but as I already said, that he relativated that with his case.

--

It could be argued either way. If SL is town, I would say that the case would not be as strong unless you argue that Myk's initial vote was weak and now he is defending hard in order to be vindicated if SL should turn up town. (Of course for Myk, it would be when SL turns up town)

A better question I think TDC, would be if that turnaround is a 'natural' or 'contrived'. That's probably an opinion based question.

Let's say it this way, SL's alignment is not dependent upon Myk's, but if SL were to turn up scum, I would expect that Myk is also scum.

Reads more natural than contrived to me, I wouldn't look his way if sl turns up town.
I think it's quite understandable that he was (and as far as I can tell still is) somewhat suspicious of her, but thinks the case is blown out of proportion (or even scum-fueled?).

[TDC]

Uh...my policy reason was the reason I didn't ask. I thought it was premature for a claim, and claims should only occur explicitly.

The end result is the same: You kept your vote on him and it was caused by policy.

Let's say you are working for the police and someone on the streets mumbles something that somewhat indicates he needs your help.
You have a policy of not helping him, until he explicitly asks you for help.

I say you haven't helped him for a policy reason.
You say you haven't asked whether he needed help of a policy reason.

How is that any different?

[TDC]

Yeah, and all I'm saying is that I don't get why that also means there is no good reason to ask for clarification in such cases instead of just ignoring them.

[TDC]

Sorry, this game sort of fell off the truck for me.

My hat is really empty..

Anyway.
Ectomancer: Quite a while ago you tried to vote myk, but it failed because you didn't unvote, so the mod still has you voting SpyreX. I didn't notice until now, but one would think that at least you would notice your vote was on the wrong person?

mykonian: You recently unvoted mrfixij and then revoted him (a page or so later). What changed in between?

Other than that, vollkan and SpyreX like the same wagons (Ecto->orto->(Ecto->)sl)

Also, the only wagon that ever reached 4 votes had our two claimed masons on it.

If anyone else cares (and can maybe make some sense of it), here the full(?) list of votes cast:

orangepenguin(1): +SpyreX
Ectomancer(1): +orangepenguin
orangepenguin(2): SpyreX,+Juls
vollkan(1): +mrfixij
vollkan(2): mrfixij,+vollkan
springlullaby(1): +ortolan
vollkan(1): mrfixij,-vollkan
mrfixij(1): +vollkan
springlullaby(1): +springlullaby
mrfixij(0): -vollkan
vollkan(2): mrfixij,+vollkan
springlullaby(0): -springlullaby
vollkan(3): mrfixij,vollkan,+springlullaby
Ectomancer(0): -orangepenguin
springlullaby(2): ortolan,+mykonian
SpyreX(1): +Ectomancer
vollkan(2): mrfixij,springlullaby,-vollkan
Ectomancer(1): +vollkan
vollkan(1): springlullaby,-mrfixij
SpyreX(2): Ectomancer,+mrfixij
orangepenguin(0): -SpyreX
Ectomancer(2): vollkan, +SpyreX
springlullaby(1): ortolan,-mykonian
SpyreX(3): Ectomancer,mrfixij,+mykonian
Ectomancer(3): vollkan,SpyreX,+orangepenguin
springlullaby(0): -ortolan
Ectomancer(4): vollkan,SpyreX,orangepenguin,+ortolan
vollkan(0): -springlullaby
ortolan(1): +springlullaby
Ectomancer(3): vollkan,SpyreX,orangepenguin,-ortolan
Ectomancer(2): vollkan,orangepenguin,-SpyreX
ortolan(2): springlullaby,+SpyreX
Ectomancer(1): orangepenguin,-vollkan
ortolan(3): springlullaby,SpyreX,+vollkan
orangepenguin(1): +TDC
SpyreX(2): Ectomancer,mrfixij,-mykonian
orangepenguin(0): -TDC
ortolan(2): springlullaby,vollkan,-SpyreX
ortolan(1): springlullaby,-vollkan
ortolan(0): -springlullaby
Ectomancer(2): orangepenguin,+SpyreX
vollkan(1): +ortolan
vollkan(2): ortolan,+springlullaby
Ectomancer(1): orangepenguin,-SpyreX
springlullaby(1): +SpyreX
SpyreX(1): Ectomancer,-mrfixij
springlullaby(2): SpyreX,+mrfixij
springlullaby(3): SpyreX,mrfixij,+vollkan
Ectomancer(0): -orangepenguin
mrfixij(1): +mykonian
mrfixij(0): -mykonian
mrfixij(1): +mykonian

[TDC]

I do not get the point of TDC's last post at all and the undecided-ness is starting to grate on my nerves.

What's there not to get? I thought looking at who voted who and when might be of help. Turned out it didn't help that much, but now that I had done it, why should I keep it for myself?
If by undecided-ness you mean not joining either your or vollkan's side - there's not necessarily a decision to make there. I find it quite possible that both of you are town. You two approach the game from entirely different directions, and that's what the discussion between you two has mostly been about. I still fail to see how either of you arrived at the conclusion that the other is likely scum. Ortolan's discussion with vollkan went much along the same routes.

--

I've been suspicious of him for quite some time, but vote:TDC. Reasons later.

Interesting.

--

ortolan: Well, there's one thing you can still tell us: Can you only talk at night, or all the time?

[TDC]

Just two hypothesis:

a you are town, tried to trap scum in a slightly weak trap, and you cought a mason. Bad luck.

b you are scum. You tried to open your possibilities in case there came more votes on mrfix, and you expressed your direction. On the moment you get attacked for that by a confirmed person, you say: "hehe, it was a trap".

Vollkan said he wanted to show that orto was tunneling on him and not that he wanted to find scum with his trap.

[TDC]

There was a little snipe in this mess that stands out. What was it and why!

And.. what was it? I have no idea.

--

TDC:

P 73 seems like he’s just not paying attention

Not paying attention to

what

? I had asked a question and commented on the answer I received.

P 96 a few questions, but no real contribution.

The question to vollkan was mostly meta, yes. The complaint about myk's weak sl vote was a valid one, and I'd say a "contribution". The question towards mrfixij about SpyreX's post was motivated by mrfixij and whether he thought SpyreX was sucking up to vollkan was motivated by mrfixij's 76, in which he adopted vollkan's "sliding scale of scuminess".

Why did you, of all my posts, choose to point out this one?

P 478
[quote="TDC]
ortolan: Well, there's one thing you can still tell us: Can you only talk at night, or all the time?

What good does this do? kind of scummy to try and find out more about someones role.[/quote]
What bad does this do? Why is it scummy?

EXCEPT for my comment on his spam. why would that be?

post 59 was basically spam. i find spam inherently scummy.

In light of spam being such a scummy and important issue for you, what do you think of Ecto's 494? Surely that gives him away as obv-scum...

--

Still waiting for orangepenguin to tell us why he's voting me.

[TDC]

strike one "was motivated by mrfixij"

[TDC]

Refreshing to see that this game can produce train wrecks without vollkan's participation, too.

don_johnson: Have you actually read through the whole thread now?
If SpyreX was dodging questions and is scummy because of that.. what are you doing right now?

SpyreX: I think we can all see that don_johnson has not answered all of your questions. Why do you think he's lying when he's saying he has answered them

to the best of his knowledge?

Are you voting him for not answering your questions or for saying he has, when he hasn't?

mykonian: Which particular questions to don_johnson do

you

want answered?
What happened between "SpyreX, your OMGUS is not helpful" and you voting don_johnson, too, to change your mind?

[TDC]

vote OrangePenguin

Their claim needs to be tested and confirmed. I'm not going to fall for a VI scheme.

"Hey, if we get into trouble, let's claim mason so town wont lynch us and then play scummy so that "scum" wont kill us. Haha!"

At the very least, Jim Carrey and Jeff Daniels need to be neutered. Take out the inactive one.

Uh.. what? Why do we need to test this today?

Here's what happens if we just don't test it at all:

Let's assume they are town, we have two scum and lynch randomly among everyone but the masons:
Day 1: 25% of hitting scum (which immediately confirms the masons)
Failing that (and assuming that the masons are not nightkilled), we get
Day 2: 2 Masons, 6 Others, two of which scum. 33% of hitting scum there
That gives us a probabitly of 0.25+0.75*0.33=50% of confirming them by random lynching amongst the others if they are town before we reach LyLo.
Failing that we enter Day 3 with: 2 Masons, 4 others, two of which are scum.
If they are scum, we lynch town twice and enter Day 3 with our 2 scum masons and 4 townies.

By then we should have a much better idea about the 4 remaining non-masons to judge whether the masons are to trust or not.

Conclusion: Even if they are not nightkilled, we still have a 50% chance of confirming them within 2 days if they're really town.

Your plan is to lynch one of them right now, which if they're town results in Day 2 starting with either 1 confirmed mason, 7 others (2 of which are scum) or just 8 players (2 of which are scum).
If they're scum, we obviously win right away. (Though last time I checked it doesn't matter at all whether we win Day 2 or Day 4, we might as well "win right away" after keeping them alive for 2 days).

Where then, is the advantage in finding out today?

[TDC]

@TDC - Think of it as a protest vote. Kind of like putting the Libertarian Party on the ballot. You know you aren't going to win, but you do it anyhow.

Their claim needs to be tested and confirmed. I'm not going to fall for a VI scheme.

Doesn't read like a protest vote for me at all. Sounds like you genuinely want him lynched.
What would've happened had anybody jumped on?

Now that I've stirred you, mind taking the lead here?

Asking me to "take the lead" when you yourself have a vote going that you admit will never lead to a lynch is funny. Is that what you consider "taking the lead"?

Let's hear the direction you think we should be taking.

I think dj should finish his re-read. I don't know why answering to current things and re-reading are impossible for him to combine, but it just leads to him bringing up things that we've already heard. This whole orto/dj vs vollkan thing is leading nowhere, everytime I open this thread there are a couple new walls of text which just re-iterate things that were already said multiple times.
When dj has done that, I'd like to read this:

I will wait till johnson catch up before posting one summary of why I think Vollkan is scum. Then everybody here is going to have to explain point by point why they are not voting Vollkan.

because I still don't get how either of her, orto or dj have come to conclusion that vollkan must be scum.

--

mykonian: What is mrfixij hiding from? I don't remember him being under pressure or something.

[TDC]

@TDC - Think of it as a protest vote. Kind of like putting the Libertarian Party on the ballot. You know you aren't going to win, but you do it anyhow.

Their claim needs to be tested and confirmed. I'm not going to fall for a VI scheme.

Doesn't read like a protest vote for me at all. Sounds like you genuinely want him lynched.

I want the Libertarian candidate to win too, but we know he wont.

I figured you didn't because you didn't address my objection to electing him at all.

What would've happened had anybody jumped on?

That's the 64 dollar question isn't it? Encourage more to join?

Now that I've stirred you, mind taking the lead here?

Asking me to "take the lead" when you yourself have a vote going that you admit will never lead to a lynch is funny. Is that what you consider "taking the lead"?

Of all the players, in my view I consider yourself and the recipient of my current vote to have been sideline players for much of the game. Your derogatory statement about my direction ignores the easily demonstrable times when I have attempted to lead the discussion.

These were made under the above assumption. I see you consider a protest vote a real vote nonetheless, while for me it carries a notion of inherent uselessness. For me, a protest voter (in elections) votes someone the establishments considers "unvotable" for the sake of expressing discontent with said establishment (because not voting at all long ceased to express that).
But as I said, if you're voting him for real, I'd like you to address what we could possibly gain by lynching him today (other than potentially winning

faster

).

[TDC]

When do you think would be a good time to test them if not today? Assuming they really are Masons, do you really think we also have an investigative role to confirm them? Probably not is my guess.
So does any of this mean scum has to NK the masons? Not until after the first LYLO. They get to try to get the masons tested, or get the townie killed for a win. Failing that, even should one of them get lynched, they kill a mason and go into the final day only needing to convince the remaining mason that the other guy is scum in the final LYLO.

I'd prefer to win today, or confirm the remaining one and let scum decide when they will either NK him or have to go into the final day with him as judge.

I have not assumed the existence of a (investigative or other) power role at all. What I have said is that if they are town, there's a reasonable chance (50%) that we confirm before we

have

to decide whether we believe them

simply by lynching scum

.

I really do not see how you being vanilla makes you believe this must be mountanious. Your claim is entirely premature.

--

Let's say it's D4. We have the two claimed masons and some people who are moderately suspicious. I am very skeptical that, at that late stage in the game, anybody (and I include myself in this) would be prepared to hazard a claimed mason lynch over somebody suspicious. That was what I was trying to get at when I said:

Hmm. Scum aren't going to kill either of them. In my view, absent claim, they'd both be lynchworthy (Orto more so than OP). Basically, the only reason they are both alive is because of their claim, and that's the way things will remain into the foreseeable future, absent vigging or something.

At every stage of this game, the "claimed mason" status is really going to be a problem. Let me be clear that I do not support a lynch today and nor am I trying to set up a D2 lynch or anything like that. What I am saying, though, is that the situation is very problematic - I suspect both Orto and OP enough that I would normally want them lynched BUT FOR their claim, and because their claim would be a very risky gambit, I am inclined to believe it. And that's the basic dilemma for me: I hate the idea of having to trust this claim, given the atrocious play of both Orto and OP, but I also cannot think of any normal circumstances under which I would be prepared to lynch them.

That is why I expressed support for a N1 vigging. It would eliminate all doubt, and save the trouble of having to risk a lynch.

Again, here's what's different day 3: If they are town, we might actually have lynched scum day 1 or day 2. Doing that confirms them without killing them.
If we haven't then yes, the situation is both problematic and similar to today's. It's not worse than today's though.

How do you feel about Ecto claiming vanilla?

Unless there is a SK, mafia tend to come in threes.

Are you serious? A three player scum team in a ten player game?

[TDC]

okay what?

[TDC]

I'm not willing to hammer you.
From what I can tell, neither SpyreX nor Ecto want to do that either.
So, I guess the ball is in orto's court on whether you should claim or not.

--

Ecto: When do you plan to reveal your gambit? I have trouble understanding what it was supposed to achieve.

[TDC]

Not much time.
How would vollkan coming up town imply SpyreX must be town, too?

You've said you found scum through voting patterns. Who is that? vollkan? Why did you ever unvote him then?

[TDC]

..

Ectomancer: Your request for vollkan's claim comes pretty much out of nowhere, I can't remember when you last voiced suspicion of him. Why could only his claim move the game along and not, say, dj's claim? What made you push for

vollkan's

claim specifically?

mykonian: It's one thing to keep your vote on a claimed doc because you don't buy the claim. But actually moving your vote to him, because he claimed doc?
You preferred dj, but now that vollkan claimed doc, you think he's more likely scum than dj?

[TDC]

Ecto: Do you agree with dj that if vollkan were to come up town, SpyreX is more or less confirmed, too?
I can understand the possibility of them being a scum pair, what I don't get is how it is supposed to work the other way around.

--

We'll have a lot fun in this game if there is no doctor...

Look at that claim yourself, is it that strong? What do I see, what you can't?

What do you mean "is it that strong"? It doesn't need to be "that strong". It's a freaking doc claim.
What you are saying is that

because

he breadcrumbed, it's impossible for the claim to be true. How does that even make sense?

--

To those on the myk wagon: What do scum gain by lynching a doc as opposed to lynching someone else (assuming that someone else is not one of them) and then nightkilling the doc? Put any other role in that spot and it makes more sense (because that role might be doc protected at night), but with the doc himself (how many gmaes have two of them? Not many), the only "risk" I can think of is a watcher. But that's kind of a moot point when

everybody

can see how you're pushing for the doc's lynch at day.
So I don't really understand what the myk-scum rationale for pushing the vollkan-doc lynch would be, it would be so much easier to move on the dj wagon and just wait for the night to kill vollkan..
For myk to be scum, I would think either dj needs to be his partner (who was the leading wagon before vollkan was forced to claim), or vollkan himself (this, at least would explain how he knows the claim to be false and would give him big "Told you"-townie-points if he vollkan is lynched and comes up scum.)
That or he isn't aware that doctors usually can't self-protect.

[TDC]

Neither will reveal the alignment of the other.

I find myself looking for a town buddy as scum often enough. In this case, Spyrex would be the instigator of the relationship. Vollkan flipping town wouldn't comment on Spyrex's likely alignment though. Also, he could just happen to agree with Vollkan.

Well.. what would a vollkan lynch tell you then?
You said:

He has a peculiar relationship going with Spyrex. That alone makes his alignment of particular interest.

So I assumed a vollkan lynch would tell you something about SpyreX, but now you say it wouldn't?

--

Moreover, go back to where Myk voted me. Orto had attacked my claim. To Scum-Myk, that would reasonably look like an opening to vote me and have the protection of a claimed mason's endorsement.

Well, him thinking he might just get away with it, that's a good point.

--

I was thinking he might want to get vollk lynched then nk the other claimed power role (not the masons).

I wasn't aware of mrifixij's soft claim. With this, I can see how scum would want to lynch vollkan, if they think he'd protect mrfixij.

TDC, who do you suspect the most, it seems to me virtually all your posts are defending various people but you don't attack at all.

I absolutely agree that there's no town rationale for voting the claimed doc at this point. I was just pointing out that it seemed to be irrational from a scum perspective as well. (Little reward, much risk.) With there being a claimed mystery power role, that changes quite a bit.
Wouldn't oppose a lynch of him.
I think he's on L-2 and orangepenguin just said he's the best lynch but is still voting dj (?).
Claim time, I'd say.

I do not share the vollkan suspicion (still waiting for sl's case on him).
I'm wary of Ecto for he ultimately caused the vollkan claim for "moving the game along" and for his undisclosed-mason-vote-gambit.
dj has engulfed himself in a ball of fire and a few people happily pour more gasoline over his head. Lynching him is probably both inevitable and informative, but I'm not convinced he's scum.

--

He is doing it cleverly, and you buy it all, but I won't.

Buying the claim and not wanting to lynch him Day 1 are two very different things.

[TDC]

Because if you're wrong, you've lynched a doctor.

[TDC]

First off, on the off chance that they're both scum and the real doc is still out there: Claim now.

Also, masons are pretty much confrimed now.

myk:

Spyrex, you also seem to know that [mrfixij] soft-claimed. I a searching for it, but I can't find it. Could you tell me what or where he did it?

I missed the softclaim.

Now, I can understand missing it (I did so, too). But as evident by the second quote you were aware of it at some point.
Explain.

--

Ecto: Where you aware of mrfixij's soft claim when you made that "this is probably mountainous"-post?

[TDC]

"That alone" refers to the entire paragraph. It means I shouldn't need to provide any reasons more than those.

My bad, I thought it only related to the third point.
Either way, you've not answered the question: What would a vollkan lynch have told you (the other two points seem to say that they'd gain us information about other people, too)?
Other than this new development of it telling us a lot about mykonian, of course.

[TDC]

i may ask for permission to put this in my sig at a later date.

You're welcome.

On breadcrumbing: If you can breadcrumb in a way that can only be seen in hindsight, then I don't see any problem with doing it, even if you're a doc.

--

mykonian:

3.) This little tidbit:

We'll have a lot fun in this game if there is no doctor...

Look at that claim yourself, is it that strong? What do I see, what you can't?

Anything to say about this?
If you're the doctor, why would you even play with the thought that there might not actually be a doctor?

[TDC]

Also, masons are pretty much confrimed now.

Why? Just cause of the two doc claims? Doesn't that just prove it's not mountainous?

It's really unlikely that we have two doctors. So one of them must be scum.
You two are claimed masons and hence are either both town or both scum together.
So for you to be scum there would need to be three scum in total, which in a 10 player game is very unlikely. A 3 player mafia team I would rule out. If whoever of the two "docs" is scum turns out to be a SK that would leave a small chance of you being the mafia, but I doubt there actually is an SK in this.
Hence, you're "pretty much confirmed".

[TDC]

On breadcrumbing: If you can breadcrumb in a way that can only be seen in hindsight, then I don't see any problem with doing it, even if you're a doc.

Yes but isn't useful as evidence that he is not fakeclaiming, because it came at a time when he would have had equal motivation for putting it in as a fakeclaim as he would have for putting it in as a real claim.

It's not useful as evidence that he

is

fake claiming either.

[TDC]

Too much simulposting going on.

I thought I reacted on ecto there. Ecto saw no other way of lynching vollkan, then with a counterclaim. That was not exactly what I wanted. I tried to push a lynch of vollkan through without having to counterclaim.

Ecto would accept every claim witout a counterclaim, seen from that post. That is too easy. I shouldn't always work like that. I had the small chance of moving ecto's vote this way, and I have token that chance.

How does "We'll have a lot fun in this game if there is no doctor... " serve to sway Ecto towards voting vollkan?
I can't fathom how this kind of statement could form in the head of a doctor that has just seen scum claim his role.

[TDC]

I would actually expect there to be 3 scum in such a power-role heavy setup. I read some setup thread where they said 2 scum is normal in a 7-9 player game, and 3 scum is normal in a 10-12 player game or somesuch.

If you are scum, then the setup is not power-role heavy at all, for all we know so far.

[TDC]

I would actually expect there to be 3 scum in such a power-role heavy setup. I read some setup thread where they said 2 scum is normal in a 7-9 player game, and 3 scum is normal in a 10-12 player game or somesuch.

If you are scum, then the setup is not power-role heavy at all, for all we know so far.

That argument is self-contradictory. If we are scum, then the town is not power-role heavy. But you already said if the town is not power-role heavy then we are likely to only have 2 scum, which is impossible if we are both scum along with the two claimed doctors.

.. You said that the town was power-role heavy and because of that you'd think there would be three scum. If that is true, then that still doesn't mean you can be this scum, because if you were the town would not be power-heavy in the first place.
I personally don't think three scum is likely either way. However, even

if

power-heaviness makes three scum more likely, you can not be among those three.

It stretches credulity to breaking point to suppose that you aren't smart enough to figure out that an immediate counterclaim of me, under the circumstances which I was in (ie. being under suspicion), would result in my immediate lynch.

I agree with this. I for one would've believed an immediate counterclaim.

[TDC]

vollkan: Your suspicions do not seem to take into account that the second scum would need to be mykonian's partner.
Is there anything you have noticed about connections between anyone and mykonian?

[TDC]

I'm more surprised that of the two masons op is dead, and not ortolan.

Anyway, Doc

and

Jailkeeper is hard to swallow.

I reckon I have a *really*, *really* good idea about what you could do tonight. How about you jail me, and protect me

That way the confirmed townie gets saved, and if they kill you instead then we know you're townie too. I'm really liking this plan, what do you think?

I like this plan, too.

[TDC]

What I meant was "This setup having both a Doc (vollkan) and a JK (mrfixij) is hard to swallow". I am aware what a JK does.

[TDC]

however, town is definitelyu overpowered in the protection department.

Why do you know that mrfixij is town?

[TDC]

however, town is definitelyu overpowered in the protection department.

Why do you know that mrfixij is town?

i don't. i just don't agree with the current suspicion. he has claimed. should i not give him the benefit of the doubt?

It's more that your "benefit of the doubt" reads (paraphrased) "he's definitely town, but let me speculate about how weird the setup might be to accommodate him".
It's all the benefit and little of the doubt.

[TDC]

I thought we were waiting for mrfixij.

[TDC]

Zero stand on what?
Myk is obviously scum, not much else to do today.
Love your "I'm good with lynching mykonian".. as if there ever was any sort of alternative.

I assume mrfixij not objecting implies consent with our plan for his jailkeeping, so

vote: mykonian

.

Not sure whether we need one more?

[TDC]

Mind explaining why ortolan is dead, mrfixij?

[TDC]

Uh, a vig might not have tried to shoot N1, so in that case, mrfixij could still be scum.

[TDC]

Yeah, mrfixij, if town SHOULD have protected the confirmed mason, too..

[TDC]

Furthermore, another thing is wrong with your SK scenario.
If mrfixij is town and prevented myk from killing someone, then a) the SK killed orangepenguin and didn't try to kill myk or b) the SK tried to kill myk and myk's partner killed op.
a) would make sense in so far as it would explain why it was orangepenguin who died and not ortolan.. the SK would probably have thought the mafia would kill ortolan, so the next best target was going to be op?

[TDC]

EBWOP: Obviously in b) mrfixij would've protected myk rather than prevented him from killing.

[TDC]

and today is NOT lylo

It sure is lylo if there is a SK.
Lynch a townie and night starts with two town, one mafia, SK. The only chance for town to win then is a) cross kill b) one kill failing + one of the scum killing the other c) both kills failing. One townie dying that night and the game is over (well, there might be a day with both scum and one townie, but that just let's the townie choose who shall kill them..).

[TDC]

Well, I can not see how this game could've started with just 6 townies..

[TDC]

Okay, first of: Why would a JK be blockable? As in, why would a Roleblocker's block have precedence of being resolved voer the JK's jail? I would expect them to be resolved at the same time..
mrfixij: Did you receive mod confirmation of being blocked?
Why do you think that SpyreX is only lying about the block and not all together?

I'm not sure what dj wants to hear from me.

SpyreX: Why investigate Ecto?
When did you confirm with the Mod that not receiving a result was not caused by Ecto being dead?

More later.

[TDC]

I'm not a vig either.

[TDC]

Sure, but I'd like spring to go first on that part. I guess you agree with that sentiment.

[TDC]

Also, please include

what

you were getting confirmation on.

[TDC]

Well, she isn't posting anywhere else either.

[TDC]

Interesting.

I'm vanilla.

This is very relevant in light of the fact that I think Spyrex is part of the 2 man mafia, gambitting to the finish line. He is either telling the truth about TDC or TDC is his scumbuddy.

How does the latter make sense? If he's in the two-man group, then mykonian is his buddy.

That is unless you think a one-man scum group (in that case, mykonian) would not be called "Serial Killer". But even if that was the case, why would myk bother drawing out the Doc if he didn't have a partner who could benefit from it?

A few questions for our three claimed power roles:

SpyreX: I forgot this earlier, why investigate me of all people N1? Myk was obvscum, but I remember you being pretty suspicious of both spring and dj.

springlullaby: What do you think about SpyreX claim? Quite risky to claim Cop that early, especially considering that Cop's are not all that uncommon?
Why are you so sure that there would not be two investigative roles, especially considering that your claimed investigative role is not that investigative anyway? The only thing it does is confirm something we already know (by nobody claiming Vig): There is an SK. The only chance for you ever to catch scum with it was if someone claimed Vig.
As for his breadcrumb. Well, he certainly could claim guilty on me, because he didn't attack me yesterday at all. I don't see any other use for it, or what are you thinking of?

mrfixij: In light of there now definitely being an SK:

But regardless, I am the town jailkeeper. I serve as a roleblocker and a doctor at the same time. I jailed mykonian last night.

The only reason I can think that I am alive is that he tried to kill me, and we have another killing role that fired, be it vig or SK. I don't see any reason for a vig to kill a claimed mason, so I'm guessing we have an SK on the loose.

Underlining mine.

So, why did you dismiss the - at the time - quite possible explanation of mykonian's partner killing orangepenguin and just not bothering about your mystery claim?
This reeks of "Well, we didn't kill orangepenguin, so there MUST be an SK."
The only thing that bugs me about this theory is that it would require the myk-mrfixij scum team to pull a no-kill gambit to confirm mrfixij's upcoming jailkeeper claim. (I could see mrfixij as roleblocker, and maybe he even actually targetted myk for added bonus in case of a tracker/watcher. I can see him as scum roleblocker, because he never seems to have considered that his role is not just a blocker but also a doc).

Either way, I find ortolan dying despite mrfixij allegedly jailkeeping him very unconvincing.
Does anybody really think a jailkeeper can be blocked by a roleblocker?

--

I will need to think about spring's claim (it is quite the unorthodox role for a mini normal, and it's not particularly useful either).

[TDC]

EBWOP: He certainly

couldn't

claim a guilty on me.

[TDC]

Wait a minute, you're claiming that both kills are from

mafia

and not just

scum

?

I can still not see how there would be a one person mafia, so my best guess would be two two player groups? But then - myk was just revealed as mafia, not as "XY mafia" or whatever. Also.. four scum in total.. that can't possibly be balanced, can it?

I remember someone suggesting that maybe, just maybe the mafia had two kills, was it SpyreX? That becomes an interesting tidbit now.

[TDC]

Sorry for the n-post, but looking into the first post, myk is mentioned as "Mafia Goon (Anti-Town)" which at least to me is sort of suggesting that there is another "Anti-Town" faction whose member(s) would not be revealed as Mafia, thouth, too, as Anti-Town. I see that we're entering the realm of outguessing the mod there.

--

spring: I've read your post again, and am getting more confused by it when the first time around when I thought it had the "both kills by scum" meaning..

This means 2 mafia of 2 and 1 each. This means town has a chance to win only if we lynch the 2 man mafia.

Am I reading this right that you're speaking of member numbers

left

, as in you think there are two groups of two? How could that possibly be balanced?
2 Mafia + 2 Mafia + 2 Masons + 2 Vanilla (Ecto, I) + 1 Doc + 1 of (SpyreX-Cop, mrfixij-JK, you-forensic whatever, dj-vanilla)..
It just doesn't add up.

[TDC]

Haha, I just noticed all this thinking was worthless, here's why.

Out of Thread - Exhibit A:

Oop! Looks like my game is gathering up players quickly, so here's some specs (

shamelessly

based on TDC's):

• Closed, 9 players
  
• Standard roles (Reference)
  
• Day 1 start
  
• No Cults
  
• Deadlines for each Day every three weeks, extension is possible if you beg
  
• Confirmation by PM, prods go out after three days of a player's inactivity and answer them In-Thread

(Note: He was subsequently corrected by MeMe hat his game actually has 10 players)

Now, let's go to that wiki page:

Mafia

* Goon
* Godfather

[edit] Town

* Townie
* Cop
* Doctor
* Mason

[edit] Third-party

* Serial Killer

Do you notice something? Neither Jailkeeper nor forensic whatever are in there.

Kind of the anit-climax, but the remaining scums are mrfixij and springlullaby.

vote: springlullaby

[TDC]

EBWOP: I only quoted the "Basic" section since that is what I think Rage referred to and it includes all other roles we know of so far (even the SK).
The JK and forensic-bla do not appear in the advanced section either.

[TDC]

EBWOP2: Well, we need at least one scum roleblocker to have blocked Spyrex, so I assume he's using advanced roles, too, but as I said, the two claimed roles don't exist in there either.
That, or SpyreX is yet another scum, but I doubt that.

[TDC]

No, no you're wrong.

springlullaby is the SK.

But thanks for the Scum RB claim

[TDC]

By the way, if there were two two player scum teams, then we'd need to lynch YOU and not one of them.

[TDC]

Ah, you're right.

Not that it matters, cause springlullaby is the SK.

[TDC]

And I don't find 2 Mafia + 1 SK + 1 Doc + 1 Cop + 2 Masons + 3 Vanilla that unbalanced.

[TDC]

Have you read what I've posted about Rage's list of possible roles? You should

[TDC]

Out of curiousity mrfixij: How do you intend to win this game at this point?
I'm not blaming you for trying, but I don't see how it's possible.
You'd need to let spring alive (because if she goes down you're the next lynch tomorrow and it's game over) and hope that she doesn't kill you through the night (but obviously, she would)..

[TDC]

You are still assuming that spring is town and talking the truth about there being two mafia groups, when in fact she's proven scum (and within all reasonable thought SK at that).

[TDC]

How would a townie go about submitting a night kill? I've tried that often, but it never worked

[TDC]

And you sure are the blocker, but I can see how lying about that is about the only thing you can still lie about

[TDC]

We're pushing for her lynch, because she's claimed a role that, as per the Mod's post announcing this game in the Queue, can't actually exist in this game.

They are both 100% confirmed scum.

However, if you are scum AND spring AND DJ are a different scum group, well, we've lost any way I cut it.

In this EXTEREMELY unlikely case we lynch spring and look what the scum do (not killing the other scum would be EXTREMELY stupid, so they'd within all likelihood crosskill)

[TDC]

I'm fine with lynching mrfixij first, too. Good point with him maybe being able to block AND kill in the same night, which would of course prevent the crosskill..

unvote, vote mrfixij

.

[TDC]

Or rather, he definitely can block AND kill in the same night, cause he's blocked SpyreX and killed orto..

[TDC]

[TDC]

Sorry for the profanity, if I appear smug right now, it's because I am..

The thing is, if you knew Myk was blocked and it wasn't you why would you claim to have done it? That was just asking for a counter claim which would've ended your game right there.

[TDC]

Possible, too. But why would he not kill her night 2?

[TDC]

Hm, okay, because he only learned night 2 that there was anohter killing faction.
Makes sense.

[TDC]

Anyway, doesn't matter at all.

I hope this night will be a bit shorter ;p

[TDC]

You're already dead, mrfixij.

I do wonder how this would've went if spring had claimed vanilla. A dj, I, her endgame doesn't look unwinnable..

[TDC]

vote: springlullaby

.

dj: If anything regarding springlullaby's confirmed SK-ness is unclear to you, just ask.

[TDC]

If you were telling the truth, then both dj and I were the second mafia team and this day would never have started.

[TDC]

Again, dj, by knowing he's town, knows that you're lying about there still being two mafia left.

[TDC]

Well, I don't see you self-hammering either

[TDC]

lol.

Certainly didn't see

that

coming.

I am officially eating my own words here.

Sorry SpyreX, but I figure this would've gone the same way had you been in my position...

And I really don't see how this was supposed to be balanced, to be honest. We've had only one mislynch (day one), you can hardly expect the town to play much better than that.

Rage: Out of curiosity: What was the 10th player you forgot about in the signup thread? Did this have 2 mafia 1 SK initially, or did it have one townie less?

[TDC]

mrfixij: Look at the link again, Roleblocker is in there. Jailkeeper isn't.

[TDC]

On a side note, the day one lynch wagon on vollkan was all four scum + the masons.

[TDC]

As for suggestions for Rage:

- I personally do think different groups of mafia should be revealed as such, the revealing of "Mafia (Anti-Town)" was specifically misleading.
- I think you should've posted this "only roles from this wiki page can be in the game" somewhere in this thread, too. That probably would've prevented two scum from claiming impossible roles.

[TDC]

Vanilla definitely was the right claim for you. spring should've claimed the same. That would've at least left the possibility of me lynching you and not her (though I doubt I would have no-lynched under any circumstance). Maybe her claiming mafia right when the day started could've swayed me, too.. but I doubt it.

[TDC]

- I personally do think different groups of mafia should be revealed as such, the revealing of "Mafia (Anti-Town)" was specifically misleading.

I'm not sure how I could handle that. Should I have named them differently, and revealed that upon their deaths?

I think that is the usual solution. Like "Sicilian Mafia (Anti-Town)" and "Calabrian Mafia (Anti-Town)" or whatever.
Even then we would've needed luck, but at least we would've had an idea.

[TDC]

Your case on me is I think what made Ectomancer and TDC pussy out of voting me.

Yeah, this is probably true. Didn't think of him as scummy for pushing the case, but I didn't think it was as convincing as he thought either (especially this whole self-vote-contradiction thing..).

[TDC]

by the way.. Ecto.. what WAS that gambit supposed to achieve? I still don't get it