Mini 1121: Nexusville Mafia.

[Nameless]

Confirm.

Look ma, no slashies!

[Nameless]

Agreed, DarthYoshi is definitely setting us up to be hammered in our sleep.

(Sliding Scale of Serious: minimal)

But to answer anyway: GMT+8, RQS, the alternative is less interesting, and half a dozen or so games here but I haven't played for a while.

[Nameless]

No shit. IIoA, as they call it?

Unvote, Vote: ICEninja

That was ... far too quick and aggressive a re-vote. Also, I'm not familiar with 'IIoA'. Define please?

[Nameless]

vote: implosion

for making silly declarations and drawing inane connections on page one.

Not sure if serious.

[Nameless]

Like Nameless, I'm having a hard time telling if your vote was serious or not. It sure looks serious when you read it.

That's twice now you've made a (comparatively) lengthy post that amounts to no more than a verbose form of 'I agree'. I'm gonna keep an eye on that.

Vote:Weapon

for being jumpy, defensive, using IIoA as a scumtell on page

1

, and because it's still RVS.

Obvious self-contradiction is obvious. (Justifying your own vote / saying it's still random.)

[Nameless]

This is directly generally: People need to stop using the early game as an excuse to handwave away dubious statements as jokes. If you're joking, it's trivial to make this 100% clear (see: #17) and not doing so needlessly risks wasting time. I'm not saying every/anyone doing this is scummy, but it is poor play and likely going to help the scum.

Nameless--what exactly is bothering you about Ninja's posts [...]

There is no need for you to be jumping in and defending another player at this point. Not liking this.

[Nameless]

There is no need for you to be jumping in and defending another player at this point. Not liking this.

You can not like it as much as you want, but when you're pointing fingers in lieu of answering what was a fairly simple question that gets asked all the time ("What exactly bothers you about the guy's posts?"), you're the one who ends up looking scummy, not me.

I stated in #37 what I was generally keeping an eye on, and I don't think it warrants more attention yet - particularly when ICEninja hasn't even posted since. For the sake of comparison, your choice to defend him I can pinpoint as specifically scummy and your nonresponse ("You can not like it as much as you want") more so.

(SSS: moderate)

[Nameless]

All I asked was what exactly about it is bothering you—as in, for instance, was there anything in particular that caught your attention? Or is it just that you are wary in general of people who write lengthy posts, or is it because it’s Ninja who is making lengthier posts? Asking for clarification and explanation doesn’t constitute defending—you just jumping in and shouting out that I’m defending Ninja doesn’t make it so.

Three responses to this:
* The exact thing that was bothering me was that two of ICEninja's posts appeared on my initial read to add nothing more than verbose agreement with what had already been stated. That would be scummy if it continued, so I decided to keep an eye on it just in case. I stated this quite clearly in my original post, so I'm not sure where you're getting your ambiguity from. In any case, ICEninja's responses since have been reasonable so I no longer consider it an issue.
* You are correct, asking for clarification does not constitute defending. However, in #43 you not only asked for clarification but also, without prompting, offered an explanation for ICEninja's behavior. (In part: "But when you don't have a lot to go on in just page 2, sometimes you have to zero in on the little things".) This

is

defending.
* Gah, my choice of quote selection really sucked in #52. >_>

Alright, time for some general impressions.

WeaponsofMassConstruction - There is far, far too much noise over a stupid opening trap. I'm inclined to think he's town, but the significance is being exaggerated either way. If his wagon goes any further without better justification I'll be calling scum shenanigans and anaylysing further.

Mongoose / q21 / _over900 / neil1113 - All need to start making real contributions, but it's too early to call any of them scum for it. (Give it 5-7 days, is my general estimate.) #64 is amateurish, but no more scum than town IMHO. That all of Neko's current suspects are among these opening lurkers (#85) reeks of scum searching for easy targets. Neko has been around these forums long enough that he should know better.

Implosion - His "semi-legitimate" vote on mongoose was a load of crap, his list of suspects without justification is a classic filler post, having a complete list of (non)suspects at all this early on seems unlikely, and changing his stance on me the moment he's challenged by ICEninja is kind of dubious.

mb53 - Read #72. Then read #80 or #91. The hypocrisy is pretty obvious, but he's made enough individual posts that it could just be his style, IDK.

(inb4OMGUS)

LAST MINUTE EDIT: Will consider neil's posts a bit later.

[Nameless]

I have now considered Neil's posts.

VOTE: neil1113

That's an attempt to literally laugh off attention, refusing to answer questions, suggesting that asking questions doesn't help the town, patronizing your accuser as a defence, discarding two players' lists as "absolutely ignorant" without reasoning, attacking a player for asking questions (WAT) and finished off with a too-townie fallacy. Did I miss anything?

[Nameless]

To address #2, I wasn’t explaining away Ninja’s behavior; I made an observation that what I saw was something not uncommon

Let's not get technical. You offered words in another player's defense without prompting.

Implosion - His "semi-legitimate" vote on mongoose was a load of crap, his list of suspects without justification is a classic filler post, having a complete list of (non)suspects at all this early on seems unlikely, and changing his stance on me the moment he's challenged by ICEninja is kind of dubious.

I don't see how that's in any way a filler post. If you want me to, I could elaborate on the reads, but it's early game so a lot of it is based on gut. I don't see how my "semi-legitimate" vote was a load of crap, either. It ended the RVS pretty effectively.

It's a filler post because it has the appearance of scumhunting and deep consideration, but you haven't actually observed, argued or justified anything. You could have determined the order by dice for all we know. And calling your vote on mongoose even semi-legitimate is an epic reach (accidentally missing a player's name at the start of a game = distancing scum OMG). 'Ending RVS' isn't a meaningful justification since any scum could use it to handwave an early-game error and D1 is generally a gradual increase in seriousness rather than a simple on/off switch anyway.

[Nameless]

I promise that I will have much more content tomorrow.

Unvote, vote _over9000

more comments on recent posts when I have time.

Nice.

(SSS: a little)

[Nameless]

SSS?

Sliding Scale of Serious. I used it first in #17.

(On a general level, not directed at Mb53 in particular) I agree with the amount of pressure being put on _over9000, and will definitely consider joining the wagon if he doesn't come through with his promise to post content soon. In my experience, lurking + promising content without delivering = scum.

In my experience, setting yourself up to jump on a wagon for a reason that hasn't occurred yet = scum.

I would also like to hear from both ICE and Silavor, since both are offering conflicting stories on Neil's meta--ICE in 117 is saying Neil showed this kind of disinterest as scum, Silavor in 105 is saying it was that Neil complained about playing VT. Which games are you guys referring to?

So neil1113 is frequently an 'inconsiderate' player. Attempting to dig up dirt in games we aren't playing about people who aren't playing sounds like an attempt to waste townie time.

Everyone vote Nameless.

... huh?

[Nameless]

In my experience, showing an open mind to the possibility of new evidence if it presents itself = town

In my experience, there's no reason for a townie to go around stating all the townie things that townie is as a townie going to do if they townie present themselves. Townie.

...

= scum.

For the record though, I'm now suspecting DarthYoshi only an average amount; most of his responses are reasonable or else I could imagine a townie making, even if I disagree with them.

More likely scum candidates would seem to be Implosion (see: #94, #113) and mb53; the later makes a lot of posts with little content, often requires prompting to explain anything, changes his first vote very quickly, exaggerates 1/10th of D1 as "all game" and dittos a scumlist without prompting only to allegedly forget why two real days later.

q21 is a dodgy third. Some of his early points are just 'I agree' and the entirety of his last few days scumhunting amounts to jumping up and yelling 'AH HA!' at a careless mistake ... while simultaneously making a careless mistake himself. (Yes I know they're not the same, but it still kind of weakens your argument.)

Also, _over9000 and mongoose need to contribute or get out, but I can't actually read them yet due to lurking.

UNVOTE: KingTwelveSixteen and- Wait. None of my suspects have wagons. >_> brb gonna flip a coin

[Nameless]

VOTE: mb53

[Nameless]

Actually, after a quick individual read of both, I'd slightly prefer to lynch implosion. It's unlikely - but possible - that mb53 did genuinely post his scumlist on a whim and forget why; at which point his 'I can't go back in time' post becomes a reasonable, if melodramatic, response. But I can't imagine any purpose for implosion to eg. still post questions to an already replaced player other than showing off how much of a detailed, scumhunting town's townie he is. (see: #110 aka "Woo questions that will never be answered.")

That said, I believe it would be more helpful to bandwagon mb53 now, on the basis that he - unlike implosion - has generally needed more prompting to get explanations from.

[Nameless]

Regarding the coinflip: No, I didn't expect a wagon to form from a coinflip. My last vote was outdated, I had two equal suspects, I was lazy and I didn't expect it would make any difference to the next 24 hours. But mostly? It made me giggle. When ICEninja posed the dilemna I figured I'd better give a serious answer, though. AND NOW YOU KNOW.

Some of [q21's] early points are just 'I agree' and the entirety of his last few days scumhunting amounts to jumping up and yelling 'AH HA!' at a careless mistake

Point is, the percentage isn't important, the fact that a lot of day 1 scum lynches are based on scumslips which makes is a perfectly valid move to stand up and shout "AH HA!" when I see one.

That is exactly not my point. Don't strawman; I'm calling you scummy for

only

doing that and making a lot of posts without any scumhunting of your own. (BTW, I never actually attacked DarthYoshi's question. I attacked the paragraph of defence he followed it with.)

I get a really bad feeling right now from the _over9000 wagon.

scum:
mongoose
nameless
over9000

^ Here implosion distances himself from a wagon that he helped to push.

I'd rather withhold any lasting read on him until he posts content

As for _Over9000, His ISO 2 seems overly cautious and his ISO 3 seems overly unnecessary. mb's explained him.

^ Here implosion ignores his previous read and backtracks his own specific analysis, for the purpose of excusing himself from taking a stance.

I'd bet there's at least one scum on his wagon right now

I agree, he looks scummy right now, and the votes on him are justified

^ Here implosion implicitly contradicts himself; ie. if the votes are justified, there's no reason to assume any given voter is scum.

He isn't as much of an easy target, but he is to an extent.

^ Here implosion gives his stance on a major bandwagon (WoMC) ... as a meaningless, wishy-washy statement.

Or rather, I feel like if I were scum, I would push very hard on him because he appears unlikely to defend himself well. For the same reason, if I were scum and _over9000 is scum, I'd make sure to be on his wagon in case it goes through so that it becomes a bus.

^ Here implosion very heavily WIFOMs to convince the town his actions are not scummy.

UNVOTE: mb53
VOTE: implosion

I'll call it. Implosion is scum.

[Nameless]

Sorry, the point about my early posts just being 'I agree' posts was false and I didn't see a reason to respond to that point

Awesome. So can I get a free ticket to ignore any accusations against me, since I know they're false too?

As to the 'attacking the question' argument, I've already admitted that my choice of quote culling (hence the [...]) was crappy - but if you read the full paragraph I was responding to, it's pretty obvious which parts I was attacking. I'll provide them in bold below.

Nameless--what exactly is bothering you about Ninja's posts (I presume you're talking about the ones directed at WoMC and Neko)? Reading them,

I'm at least seeing scumhunting happening...anal-rententive and/or obsessive-compulsive scumhunting

, maybe a little (WARNING FOR THE SUPER SERIOUS POLICE: THAT WAS HUMOR, OMGBBQLOLZ).

But when you don't have a lot to go on in just page 2, sometimes you have to zero in on the little things

--I don't see anything wrong with that per se.

Now then, back to implosion. My last post wasn't intended as a full case against him; I only responded to his last two posts and didn't make much effort to draw the points together. I don't feel I misrepresented him, however. Implosion

did

push _over9000 for specific reasons, and

has

backed off now that the bandwagon is rolling. This was even pointed out before me, I just presented the examples to make it clearer. His assuredness that scum are on the wagon (of THREE, I might emphasise, with over twice that to lynch) of a player he considers scummy

is

stretching.

And to state the obvious here: if town-implosion considered _over9000 scummy and the bandwagon justified (which, #164, he claims to), there'd be no reason for him to object to lynching _over9000 anyway. Unless he planned on letting scum get away because they bussed each other? I don't think so.

Implosion's mind-reading of the scum and entire justification for this is WIFOM aka circular reasoning. The easiest way to demonstrate is to pick an example and make the counter-arguments.

Implosion's argument (if _over9000 is town)

: Mafia will wagon, because they can get away with the mislynch.

Counter-argument

: But the town knows that and would be watching for the Mafia to go for easy targets, so the Mafia would target someone else.

Counter-counter-argument

: Ah ha! The Mafia can use this assumption in their defence and target the easy mislynch anyway!

Counter-counter-counter-argument

: Except wait, the town know that Mafia will be considering their reaction, so the Mafia would still have to target someone subtle.

Counter-counter-counter-counter-argument

: Which is exactly what the Mafia want the town to be overthinking while they go for the easy target.

Counter-counter-counter-counter-counter-argument

: And this why the town cannot target the lynch in front of them!
Etc.

[Nameless]

Sorry, the point about my early posts just being 'I agree' posts was false and I didn't see a reason to respond to that point

Awesome. So can I get a free ticket to ignore any accusations against me, since I know they're false too?

If they are factually inaccurate rather than just interpretively inaccurate, go ahead.

This is probably going off on a tangent, but that sounds incredibly counter-intuitive. If an accusation is based on a subjective interpretation, there isn't much you can do to defend against it other than more clearly state what you meant and hope the other players believe you. But if an accusation is based on an objective fact, it should be trivial to unarguably disprove that by displaying the evidence - and not doing so would make you look more guilty than not bothering to argue an interpretation.

Here are some hard-boiled FACTS for you:
- Your first post was RQS / RVS.
- Your second post voting WoMC for not buying his trap, and found my reaction to DarthYoshi defensive and scummy. Both these points were already made by neko2086 (#47) and DarthYoshi (#53).
- Your third post stated you disliked mongoose voting someone other than his suspect. This point was already made by Zdenek (#65).
- Your fourth post accused neil of asking for a free ride and being afraid of appearing to be posting because his name was mentioned, FoSed implosion and mb53 for posting scumlists, and called me out for answering a question. The exact points against neil were new, although over half a dozen similar points were already made between neko (#88) and I (#95). The point against implosion / mb53 was already made between neko (#85) and neil (#86). And the point against myself was already made by mb53 (#83).
- For the remaining 2 days and 21 hours between your fourth post and my accusation, all you posted was silavor's slip and the correction to your vote

Some of his early points are just 'I agree' and the entirety of his last few days scumhunting amounts to jumping up and yelling 'AH HA!' at a careless mistake ... while simultaneously making a careless mistake himself. (Yes I know they're not the same, but it still kind of weakens your argument.)

It's not exactly a fatal accusation, but I dare you to bold which part of it was false.

I never once objected to lynching _over9000.

Alright, I'll give you that. But since you didn't directly agree with it either, but were suddenly kicking up a lot of fuss and throwing suspicion onto the wagon, it WAS a fair assumption.

Second of all, WIFOM is something that should be ignored in favor of Occam's razor

In the context of Mafia I really,

really

disagree with this, but I'm going to let somebody else write that essay.

[Nameless]

The specific defense that implosion gave I believe was, "Your quotes are out of context. Also, misrep." At the time of me voting I had not, in fact, looked back at where the quotes were. (actually I still havn't, I should go do that soon.)

So let me get this straight: You'll vote for a player without bothering to check the accusations against them are real, and you'll believe a player's defence without bothering to check their arguments are real. BTW in post #60, q21 set your house on fire.

4. What scum reasoning

would

implosion have for doing what he has did if over is town? 'Cause I can't think of any.

You're not thinking very hard. Implosion could pretty obviously be setting up the town's next (mis)lynch as somebody early onto _over9000's wagon,

regardless

of _over9000's alignment.

[Nameless]

WeaponsofMassConstruction's wall of text focuses FAR too much on scumteams for D1. As town, this a crapshoot and actually damaging when you then start ignoring individual tells. As scum, this is a possible method to set up future mislynches and protect scumbuddies. Combine this with a LOT of short, unjustified declarations and we have ourselves a really bad post. KingTwelveSixteen already pointed out some specifics, so I'll be looking out for explanations in WoMC's next reply to tell whether the wall was scummy or just rushed.

Re. WoMC's question: Your trap was a good page 1 post, but it makes for a weaksauce page 8 argument. The logic is flawed because there was little else for town or scum to add. Move on.

Re. KTS's question: Implosion could be setting up a mislynch NOW so that it has greater credibility later, plus nets him townie points for slowing what he can convince others is a bad wagon.

q21's last attack on KTS is

awful

. Asking a hypothetical question does not mean you assume it to be the case. And accusing KTS of making relationship-based arguments right after WoMC's wall of fail screams of tunneling. KTS's reaction post is quite frankly justified, and q21's following refusal to justify the argument himself is utterly unconvincing. After this + ignoring my #185 I'm ranking q21 equal first on my scumlist.

Oh, and I just want to add that implosion's justification for attacking only _over9000's wagon is actually really good. Of course it's just as valid for a scum player as a town one - ie. if those on WoMC's wagon have more possible reasons for joining, then it's harder for scum to set them up as opportunistic - but still.

[Nameless]

why is Implosion’s reason really good if it is also as valid for scum as for town?

It was clever and I hadn't thought of it. More of a personal compliment than game argument. (You know, compared to mongoose's enthusiasm ...)

P.S. One new post in nearly 24 hours makes me sad.

[Nameless]

I'm not sure how to respond to Saint's posts. The thing is, I actually agree with most of his reads and content. But after looking closer, I don't like the way he's presented them. A couple of times he pads his posts out with meaningless promises or his belief in the town. The way he buddies up with people who agree with him is obviously excessive, and makes me wonder if he's not just borrowing ideas from and appealing to the more active players in order to appear town himself. I rather suspect the hostile reaction to my vote of neil (+ what DarthYoshi said in #238 re. his Mongoose read) is only for the sake of defending his own replacee's inactivity - which shouldn't be necessary if Saint plays well. And no, I don't know where the heck his neko = SK read came from either.

KingTwelveSixteen: I'm not going to lie, the possibility of Saint being an SK (or at least in a second scum team) did cross my mind. But 'He made a joke!' is not a valid enough argument for this. >_>

Mongoose needs to be replaced.

[Nameless]

Empking: Feel free to explain any of those reads sometime.

Saint: #257 is a semantics argument. Liking you slightly less again.

mb53: Hang on. Prior to now, you said implosion's defence was decent. But this time you didn't even give him a chance to respond before deciding you'd changed your read. ICEninja's post before yours didn't actually make any new arguments either; I brought up the discrepancy between implosion's initial scummy / currently neutral reads, the lack of justification for his 'scum on wagon' stance and whatever else pages ago. Maybe my posts weren't convincing enough, but that "pretty huge" contradiction wasn't new. The bandwagon on implosion - and your sudden change of heart - was.

[Nameless]

Are semantics arguments generally scummier than other arguments, or something?

Semantics arguments are generally

meaningless

. You might as well lynch somebody for disliking the overuse of commas or their IRL accent.

in his #179, mb says something similar to "why does such and such make me scum?" the fact that he has to ask why seems and reads more like "what did I do wrong for you to have caught me?" than anything else.

It isn't unreasonable for a player to ask why somebody else finds them scum. If the accusation hasn't been properly explained then they're not going to be able to explain why it is wrong and prevent their own mislynch.
/not actually semantics this time.

All my reads are due to gut. And the only one I'm overly confident in is Nameless (who is no doubt about it bona fide scum) and q21.

Hello active lurking.

[Nameless]

Got nothing exciting to add today that hasn't already been said, so ...

I'm replacing out.

*headdesk*

[Nameless]

Saint, I swear to God I would lynch you right now if you had a wagon. If you don't see how your catchup was scummy then you have apparently not read pretty much everything anyone has had to say about you since you replaced in.

[Nameless]

Saint (4): mb53, neko2086, KingTwelveSixteen, Zdenek
implosion (3): Darth Yoshi, nameless, ICEninja

Wow, okay, so obviously I need to pay more attention before posting. >_>

UNVOTE: implosion
VOTE: Saint

For the record, I'd also be okay with lynching

q21

Setael or WoMC.

Empking, I don't think you get to mock somebody for not knowing some piece of voting theory (#301) when you continue to withhold explanations for your reads / votes and claim that this can't be a scum tell (#310).

[Nameless]

Setael: This exchange (which q21 ignored in further posts) and my second last paragraph here are primarily why I'm guessing your slot is scum.

[Nameless]

THIS IS THE TOWN:

@Saint: A few things. First, why is neko SK? Isn't that a huge leap of logic and/or speculation? Second, why do you find my list and/or anything else scummy? I'm not sure if that's iioa, but it's something like that... giving reads and not explaining them. Also, mb "explained _over9000" in his ISO 4. It didn't "sell" me, it's just that _over9000's scumminess had already been explained in a previous post.

Whats with the sudden jokeyness? Perhaps it is you who is the serial killer! Since you seem so convinced there is one and once you mention your read for the SK your posting style changes to be much more jokey.

I do share in the other players’ questions of your read on serial killer neko—Implosion’s note that it is a huge jump in logic, and KTS’s as to why you are so convinced that there is an SK in the setup.

I’m also curious about your read on Mongoose—you say in #224 that he lurks as scum, but you also say in your very next post that you played with Mongoose and this wasn’t his scum play—but Mongoose has spent a lot of time lurking or just not being around (including, I would consider, the present moment, with him having checked in some time ago, but w/ still no content). This looks odd.

Wow, buddy much?

Again... Buddy much? And on a post I thought was complete crap too. Nice.

I'm not sure how to respond to Saint's posts. The thing is, I actually agree with most of his reads and content. But after looking closer, I don't like the way he's presented them. A couple of times he pads his posts out with meaningless promises or his belief in the town. The way he buddies up with people who agree with him is obviously excessive, and makes me wonder if he's not just borrowing ideas from and appealing to the more active players in order to appear town himself. I rather suspect the hostile reaction to my vote of neil (+ what DarthYoshi said in #238 re. his Mongoose read) is only for the sake of defending his own replacee's inactivity - which shouldn't be necessary if Saint plays well. And no, I don't know where the heck his neko = SK read came from either.

Saint, what causes you to believe that he is more likely to be an SK than scum with the information we have?

I see where Nameless is coming from with his analysis of Saint's tone, and will pay close attention to any further buddying that he does.

The rest of his posts thus far--I do not at all like how easily he claims mongoose and zdenek to be town. Call me scum for being "nervous" if you want, but blindly following others means you likely know something we don't.

Saint's newest post- how exactly is that a slip? I meant "what"-- over made a completely pointless request for q21 to explain his typo, and I couldn't (and still can't) imagine what he could possibly have been going after.

Seems a bit to eager to accuse anyone of anything. He also seems to just...ignore any scummyness his predeccesor had. Like, not ignore the suspicions, just flat out trying to explain away the stuff as if it was nothing at all, even when nobody is calling him specifically out on it.
Oh, just rereading and Saint asks Neko what his (saint's) read on Neko is about. How could anyone know whats up with someone elses read like that? Unless they can read minds or something...

Reeks of having too much information and of buddying.

An SK read, before there are multiple kills? This seems like a scummy attempt to distract the town from scum hunting or to seem pro-active and townie by looking for all sorts of anti-town characters.

Saint-- I really don't see anything suspicious with mb's asking why such and such makes him scummy. This is a completely legitimate question to ask. Possibly the most important one--people need to back up their claims of what is scummy. Also, I hate to be the fluff police (I really don't mind it when it's marginal), but does 264 merit its own post? That whole sequence of posts really doesn't amount to much. In general, the cases you are trying to build are attempting to be novel but are based on really inconsequential details (or no details at all), as though you're trying to appear to be helpful.

This is terrible. You just essentially said "I feel like you are all just pushing the scummiest looking player", and had an undertone that it is scummy to do so.

This doesn't even make sense. He is voting you because you "know" he's scum with implosion?

If you don't see how your catchup was scummy then you have apparently not read pretty much everything anyone has had to say about you since you replaced in.

Your play is getting more attention, and I can definitely see why. I'm prepared for some impulsive posting from you based on my previous experience with you, but posts like these are bad, bad, bad.

THIS IS SAINT:

Why are there still votes on me?

[Nameless]

Implosion: Why not so many people? There are gonna be 3-4 scum players in the game, so being willing to lynch any of my top 3-4 suspects seems normal. Listing them explicitly is helpful in case a wagon falls apart close to the deadline and the town needs to quickly decide a new one.

340 is epic. Just epic. Not necessarily evidence against Saint, but epic.

Aww, look at the cute little scumbuddies, aren't they adorable? (BTW, don't think I'm not noticing you either, Setael.)

DarthYoshi: I kept my vote on implosion in #297 because I was more than happy to lynch either of them. Due to the several replacements, number of posts since the last vote count and my own carelessness in making that quick comment, I mistakenly thought implosion had the larger wagon.

[Nameless]

My discussion with King has given me a 100% scum read on him.

I don't believe this for two seconds. You were basically trolling him; there is no other way to put it. Even assuming you believe your game theory, you know fully well that the majority of players don't. Attempting to argue it in the middle of an ongoing game - where you have already been accused of not providing specific analysis - is never going to increase your townie standing. And when you start acting sarcastically towards the first player to disagree with you ... It's clear you were choosing to get a rise out of King.

I can think of several possible reason for this but nothing of them are good. You could be scum, using this as a distraction to avoid answering harder questions or draw attention away from a wagon on a scumbuddy, maybe waiting to jump on the first player who snaps and makes a mistake. You could be arrogant IRL, in which case stop and think a little further ahead before you post next time. For all I know you could just be an actual troll who needs to play to their win condition or gtfo.

But you could not be both town and stupid enough to believe that you're playing optimally for your situation in

this

game.

Setael: I honestly haven't been paying THAT much attention to your posts, since I'd rather see implosion or Saint lynched D1. In general, I'm not buying your accusations but they don't jump out as scummy either. The comment about noticing you referred to the fact that you as well as implosion were keen to defend Saint. You know, despite the WALL OF EVIDENCE that Saint still refuses to EVEN ACKNOWLEDGE THE EXISTENCE OF.

DarthYoshi: I wouldn't have been reluctant to cast an early or initial vote on Saint, it just would have been inefficient since I'd need to unvote from the larger wagon on another scum? Not really sure how to further explain this.

Empking:
* What I meant in regards to Saint was that I agreed (mostly) with who he stated to be scum/town, but I found his buddying, fluff, unprovoked defense of lurkers etc. scummy. These are entirely different things.
* Making one or two lazy posts out of ~30 regular contributions does not a lurker make. Typing a scumlist and the word "gut" after 250 posts and then sitting back with a smug look on your face

does

.
* Imma use a quote for this one:

People have faulty memories. Also not a scum tell.

* What is misleading about my TOWN / SAINT post? Those are all direct quotes referring to Saint, exactly zero of which Saint had acknowledged.
* Given the context, I disagree; implosion's shenanigans with _over9000's wagon are well documented, and that he continues to hedge around Saint's wagon - despite his initial protests of 'not enough to read!' now being null - is significant. I could have elaborated instead of joked, but DarthYoshi already asked him the obvious question in #346.

[Nameless]

Saint doesn't read as particularly scummy to me. After considering it a bit more, Saint's play doesn't really give me vibes that are necessarily scummy. Kind of strange, but I don't think scummy. So I'd lean town on that slot at this point.

You know what I notice about this answer? It doesn't comment on or even acknowledge (hey that sounds familiar) a single aspect of the case against Saint.

Doesn't really count as evidence though.

Okay, so if a whole wall of over half a dozen players all pointing out scummy aspects of Saint's play and asking questions that - again - Saint refuses to acknowledge (*inhale*) does

not

count as evidence, what actually does? Or would you like to go through the list and defend against each point individually?

Or I guess you could just go ahead and wave your hands some more, if you feel like that's helping.

[Nameless]

Empking, I actually read those exchanges between you two as well. That's an outright lie.

UNVOTE: Saint
VOTE: Empking

[Nameless]

... My eyes hurt.

I've made a case on why Nameless is scum.

This is rather an exaggeration. You explicitly said you were only commenting on my recent posts rather than making a full case, and you didn't explain / justify any of your points even before I refuted them.

Why should they? Can you give a scum reason for claiming mason?

Because your claim is meaningless if otherwise, if not scummy in itself since you should be able to back it up. And to avoid being lynched with a roleclaim that can't be disproved during the night, obv.

Arguing using non-game related drivel about how Empking might be IRL, is a pointless waste of time.

The game-related point of that spiel was the very next sentence you didn't quote. And that Empking might just have an arrogant attitude was literally the only reason I could imagine him acting as he is as town - a reason that by now I feel we can safely rule out.

BTW it's nice that you were careful to include a 'no relationship tells, lol' disclaimer at the start of your post, but your defence of Empking at the end of it is still noted.

[Nameless]

All my points were explained

"Z but also not Z" - Dol I need to explain it.
This postsd are consecutive on his ISO. Yeah.
We all know how this is scummy.
This is scum trying to mislead.
Weak argumenty is

weak

scummy.

and none were refuted.

* What I meant in regards to Saint was that I agreed (mostly) with who he stated to be scum/town, but I found his buddying, fluff, unprovoked defense of lurkers etc. scummy. These are entirely different things.
* Making one or two lazy posts out of ~30 regular contributions does not a lurker make. Typing a scumlist and the word "gut" after 250 posts and then sitting back with a smug look on your face

does

.
* Imma use a quote for this one:

People have faulty memories. Also not a scum tell.

* What is misleading about my TOWN / SAINT post? Those are all direct quotes referring to Saint, exactly zero of which Saint had acknowledged.
* Given the context, I disagree; implosion's shenanigans with _over9000's wagon are well documented, and that he continues to hedge around Saint's wagon - despite his initial protests of 'not enough to read!' now being null - is significant. I could have elaborated instead of joked, but DarthYoshi already asked him the obvious question in #346.

[Nameless]

Empking, I was assuming your last questions were rhetorical, but yes. You claimed mason, now I want you to back it up. Either you can't, in which case there's no reason not to believe you are scum and lynch you. Or you do but your 'buddy' ignores you, in which case there's actually MORE reason to believe you are scum and lynch you. Or you can, in which case quite frankly I still won't believe you and we'll have one less scum to find after you flip.

Oh, and as many lynches as you can get away with, I presume.

[Nameless]

His play just seems... careful. My first read through I put him as town. It actually makes sense that scum would read very townie-seeming before any flips, since they'll be trying the hardest and have the most inside information.

Too townie fallacy. Also hilarious, since most of the accusations against me are for the few posts where I obviously joked around or posted too quickly.

(I'm also nervous that there is no one trying to get Emp out of a lynch which wouldn't happen if he were scum.)

Zdenek is. You are. And scum can bus, so that assumption would be false anyway.

The more I think about the unlikelihood of Emp's claim getting him out of a lynch, the less I think it's a fake claim.

WIFOM. Also, what happened to an unverified mason claim being "completely invalid"?

[Nameless]

KingTwelveSixteen: Empking is arrogantly ignoring your accusations, blatantly misrepresenting you, acting as if patronisingly obvious questions and ignorant theory were a valid defence, and general being obvscum.

We get it.

STOP TYPING.

Please. ;_;

If you both claim, we have 2 confirmed townies

No. If Empking's buddy claims, we have 2 confirmed players of the same unknown alignment.

Neko: I'd swap my vote back onto implosion or Saint if it came to it, but I'd rather lynch Empking first because he's not only painfully scummy but also the most disruptive to the town.

Empking: Players have already provided a motive for scum in your position, and answered most of your other bad questions-instead-of-defences too. Desperately posting in large text is only drawing attention to this fact and that you continue lying.

[Nameless]

This'll be my last post before the (current) deadline. I'm leaving my vote on Empking. Not gonna try quote and respond to any of his new posts; I'd just be pointing out different instances of the exact same scumminess anyway. Saint needs to answer to his accusations before we lynch him, implosion is at least trying to defend himself and scumhunt, and nobody else I feel sure enough of to push at this point. Empking being alive for another day is more likely to distract from scumhunting and let certain players get away with lurking rather than help the town.

mb53 is obviously one such player, but Zdenek comes to mind as coasting a lot too. There's been so MANY lurkers / flakers in this game it's gonna be hard to figure out who is actually scummy without some serious poking, though. This should happen during D2.

If Empking flips scum, Setael needs to be analysed. Don't forget q21's dodgy play in that slot either.

I'm getting bad vibes from Neko's last post. He accusation that mb53 jumped onto Empking without giving reasons is HIGHLY hypocritical: Neko has previously said very little about mb53, but has attacked mongoose/Empking several times - yet now claims at the last moment to dislike the lynch? Watch this.

Final note. KTS -> WoMC connection noted, by attacking him only when he's AWOL and pre-excusing his replacement for not answering. Could be honest, but something to keep in mind depending on how the next few days go.

[Nameless]

Empking is still lying to attack other players.

Neko is still contradicting himself by excusing his own vote, but saying that mb's under close to the same circumstances was a "pretty damn good" reason to vote, with a justification ('oh nobody else said anything about him either') that actually makes it

worse

since it means Neko could also have been letting mb fly under the radar until it was convenient to attack.

Saint is still refusing to acknowledge the case on him, still making increasingly crappy posts.

Setael is still making bogus attacks against me for some reason.

@nameless - your post was so scummy. Are you still not going to post anymore today even though the deadline is extended? Parking on the wagon of a claimed mason and ignoring everythig else that's going on is not at all pro town.

Are you seriously suggesting that it is scummy to go, what, 18 hours (11 at the time of your attack!) without posting? I cannot be plugged into mafiascum 24/7. Taking my vote off the major wagon at that point would have been scummy (ie. deliberately risking a no lynch), not leaving it on. And I wasn't ignoring everything else - my last post was pretty clearly a summation one, touching on several other players generally and commenting specifically on two recent posts from KTS and Neko.

Blech, I am over D1.

[Nameless]

Setael: 'Refusing to participate' and 'ignoring everything' are

funny

scummy ways to rephrase 'have IRL stuff to do'.

i can only play the way i know how to as a townie, which is to stay out of the spotlight until you need to defend yourself

Wall of accusations. Right there. Plus much more since, all unacknowledged. There was even a wagon on you for it a while back. You are clearly not playing that way.

I'd love to scumhunt, but I am shifting how I am trying to play townie - I'm trying to play properly - which is why I'm saying go ahead and lynch me.

... this is just wrong. If you trying to play townie properly, you would be scumhunting. Allowing yourself to be lynched is bad play for any

(normal)

role. Saying you are shifting your play is an obvious non-defense for excusing unusual scummy behavior. Spending several posts angsting about your play is exactly what you wouldn't do if you were trying to play well, especially since you claim limited IRL time.

UNVOTE: Empking
VOTE: Saint

[Nameless]

BREVITY TIME.

How exactly has Implosion redeemed himself?

He hasn't.

He parks his vote on a claimed mason

FFS, #526.

you want to to give him a chance to talk his way out of it?

If town -> avoid mislynch.
If scum -> he'll stumble.

He defends Implosion

Not intentional; explaining preference.

Pro-town fluff

Suggestion / warning.

shouldn't he think that Set should be analyzed anyway?

I do. But moreso.

He attacks Neko for being hypocritical because he changed his mind about the Empking lynch

Attacked vote, not unvote.

Empking being alive for another day is more likely to distract from scumhunting and let certain players get away with lurking rather than help the town.

Setael: 'Refusing to participate' and 'ignoring everything' are funny scummy ways to rephrase 'have IRL stuff to do'.

6 hours != lurking, obv.

[Nameless]

Let's see. Mb53's wagon sprung up out of nowhere the moment there was a chance to avoid Empking's lynch. (Compare, _over9000/Saint being justifiably attacked several times before now.) The accusations against mb53 are valid, but limited to a few obviously lackluster posts. (Compare, Saint's complete lack of sensible contributions in the last week, unfulfilled promises of a dedicated catchup post, and ignorance of any accusations against him ...) Identifiably scummy players like implosion are jumping on mb53 without much explanation. (Compare, the entire wall of accusations and plenty more since predating Saint's wagon.)

I'll call it: Saint is scum, mb53 is town, and the scumteam are pushing the heck out of his wagon to prevent themselves from losing a member.

[Nameless]

LOL, Setael.

That

didn't take long.

But seriously: Ad Hominem, confidence isn't scummy when you can back up your arguments, and if you actually believed what you just said then would have shifted your vote off mb53. (Maybe onto Saint? I don't know, since you've never really commented on anything except his wagon - and that for ill-defined reasons.)

[Nameless]

So as I was saying, VOTE: Saint and let's maybe not let the scum derail us this time.

More convincing post tomorrow when I'm not sleepy. Just for now: Saint is fishing for power roles to NK plus his sudden agreement with InflatablePie is kinda suss (but WIFOMy, yeah) or at least lazy. The statement we "need something to work with" is false and an attempt to handwave away his bad play D1 (wall of unacknowledged accusations etc). And Setael's attack on me for 'knowing' mb53 was town is still BS, the scum maneuvering was pretty obvious and I explained how I reached my assumption.

[Nameless]

Empking: Reasons?

Zdenek: FINE. PATRONISING VERBOSITY TIME, THEN. There is a fundamental difference between not being able to - or even just not feeling like - playing for 6 hours and the same for 48. Practically speaking, people have work and sleep and whatever that prevents them from playing at certain times of the day. This is reasonable. However it is also reasonable that, having signed up and agreed to regularly participate in the game, a player can find SOME time to post at SOME point during most given days. Not posting for 6 hours means you probably

couldn't

. Regularly not posting for 48 or only making short, non-contributing posts usually means you've

chosen

to, at which point it's fair to question ingame motives. This is why attacking me for 509 is not valid, but attacking other players for lurking might be.

And #526 was where I pointed this and a bit more out to Setael, who had already made the exact same accusation.

[Nameless]

Saint remains a good lynch for these reasons:

* Upon replacing in, Saint very quickly and very obviously buddied up to several of the more townie players, then wondered out loud why they would vote him when he considers them town. Yet he later attacked mb53 for buddying.
* Saint's catch-up included significant hostility towards players who voted based on lurking - a heavyhanded attempt to dissuade players from bringing up his replacee.
* During his catch-up, Saint contradicted himself over mongoose's meta while shifting his predesecor's vote off mongoose.
* Saint accused Neko of being an SK with very little reasoning, then claimed to change his mind later without answering any questions from multiple players regarding the accusation.
* Saint's accusations in general have been very stretched, including accusing Neko of a scumslip for weak semantics and attacking mb53 for asking another player to explain themselves.
* Saint's only posts close to a defense are vague accusations that other players are pushing the easiest wagon or ignoring the meat of the argument, without any clarification.
* Saint ongoingly refuses to acknowledge virtually every accusation and question directed at him.
* Saint several times during the end of D1 promised another catch-up and serious scumhunting attempt, but never followed through.
* Saint claimed to be playing by staying out of the spotlight until needing to defend himself, but didn't defend himself when wagoned and even cried 'go ahead and lynch me' rather than do so. When called on this, he handwaved that he was shifting his playstyle and acted as if being suicidal was good townie play.
* Saint began D2 by fishing for power roles, and pretending that all of D1 was nothing to work with.

[Nameless]

KTS, why do you keep defending me?

[Nameless]

Wow, Setael. You kinda wimped on that bussing attempt pretty quickly, huh?

Seriously though, 'oh, 4-5 townies couldn't possibly be wrong!' ... is wrong, and a terrible excuse for shifting your vote. Especially since you misrepresented the case against Saint (there was much more too it) and defended his D1 play

in the same post

, and then immediately leaping back OFF the bandwagon to attack ICEninja who you claim has always been your #1 scum read despite having clearly been pushing for my lynch with no real mention of ICE during the last week of D1 or your opening D2 post.

If this sounds at all familiar, remember Setael started mb53's wagon in a similar manner; suddenly swearing mb53 was really his scummiest player despite not mentioning him for a while.

[Nameless]

Finally, Saint reacts!

You have sheeped, bandwagonned, and even reading this post makes me realize how stretched out you are this game.

Give examples, give examples and explain why they are scummy, and explain why that post was scummy. Respectively.

guy loves to bandwagon, doesn't he? He also has been really wishy washy on who he wants to lynch (anyone other than him)

No reasoning given here either.

How could you want me lynched if implosion is scum? I would lynch his ass so fast.

Saint, you express this kind of sentiment quite often and seem very determined that the scum haven't been and won't bus each other. Any particular reason?

Your list of answers to my list of reasons to lynch you is a little unreadable. Several of your paragraphs don't directly match up to any of the reasons, you miss at least one reason entirely (the 2nd), and I'm not even sure what your "Joke." line is supposed to be responding to. Please make them clearer next time. Meanwhile,

I don't see how I buddied anyone.

Does it make sense to you, then, that IceNinja is my best town read?

DarthYoshi's post at the top of 5, #101 I believe, is nearly perfect. Wonderful post, sir. Very glad that you are on my team this game, again, considering our last game together was a flawless win. Lets keep up the good work.

I completely agree with [Zdenek]. It is nice to see the town suspecting the same people I am suspecting.

Q.E.D.

I did not contradict myself. Show me this.

I also like your pressure of mongoose. Guy seriously lurks as scum!

Also, I've seen mongoose as scum in a mountainous game (modded by sotty7), and this was NOT his scum play.

DarthYoshi pointed this out ages ago.

MY accusations have been stretched? you are a wolf in sheep's clothing!

So instead of eg. defending or explaining the accusations I quote, you choose to attack me ... and

still

without any examples or reasoning.

I'm totally ignoring your case on me here. YOU'RE SO RIGHT. I'm not even defending myself.

Sarcasm isn't a defense, and this remains literally the first post you have started to do so. This despite saying you WOULD come out of the spotlight if you needed to defend yourself (and being wagoned during D1).

Yeah, I only say "I'm staying out of the spotlight" when I am a townie.

This isn't going to convince anyone. The frequency with which you needlessly reiterate you are townie in lieu of explaining your actions is scummy in itself.

[Nameless]

Empking: Reasons?

[Nameless]

Since Saint is Furclow, I will not vote him unless someone can point out something scummy that he's done that has clear scum motivation.

Challenge accepted.

Saint buddies with townie players upon replacing in -> Scum gains the appearence of having good reads without having to do anything more than parrot, plus scum puts suspicion on the most effective town players if he is lynched.
Saint refuses to acknowledge case against him during D1 -> Scum avoids being lynched for questions he can't answer.
Saint acts as if scum never bus -> Scum conceals the bussing he is doing or is being done to him.

And so on.

Seriously though, 'oh, 4-5 townies couldn't possibly be wrong!' ... is wrong, and a terrible excuse for shifting your vote.

Agreed. Good thing I saw the error of my ways, eh? It seemed reasonable at the time.

Excusing excuses with even worse excuses is awesome. (Regarding your case on ICEninja, I find it fairly weak. Partially due to your situation, mostly because you're exaggerating particular sentiments in his posts and avoiding the rest of the context.)

What I mean is that Emp is not a very pro-town player right now, regardless of his alignment. Regardless of him being scum, mason, or even VT, he's hurt the town and has done very little to help.

Please provide examples.

Please, please let the scumteam be Saint / Setael / Empking. It would be almost perfect.

swiftstrike's iso #5 is pretty convincing as a slip

vote: zdenek

sad that I was "buddying" this guy, nameless

Using a crappy 'scumslip' as an excuse to quickly vote one of the players who earlier buddied up to doesn't change anything you've already done, and only demonstrates how desperate you're becoming. But I'm glad you "liked" my post, rather than say, actually give any of the requested reasoning.

[Nameless]

Why are you placing so much value on scumteam speculation? At this point, honestly, it seems like the majority of your case on me...

I can't speak for ICEninja here, but a key point in MY case against you was that your interactions with _over9000 / Saint and their wagon were scummy regardless of Saint's alignment; there were evident scum motives either way, and your actions were unusual for a town player, explained or not. It's not just "scumteam speculation" that players find you scummy.

Funny joke question there.

How is it a joke question to ask a player to explain their vote on me?

So Saint, you apparently seem to know the setup... how?

You also seem to have knowledge of the setup.

This is a closed setup. Scum aren't going to know any more about the town power roles than town are, so why are you acting as if this is a scumtell?

Nameless/ICE reads of Saint's post: this does actually make Saint look very scummy. And yet, I don't know. Part of it might be that I think ICE is scum, which would make Saint likely town.

This is exactly as much of scumteam speculation as you're accusing ICEninja of doing, you know.

Otherwise reasonable posting from Implosion; he gets to stay out of my idea scumteam for the moment, pending responses.

[Nameless]

EBWOP: Ideal scumteam. That could have sounded less dodgy. >_>

[Nameless]

#664, if i was on a scumteam with empking, why the fuck did I push a case on him at the start of today...?

It's almost like bussing is a thing that exists and can happen! Also, I can't help but notice how you quick you are to attack that hypothosis (made in response to Setael jumping in for Emp) in comparison to how slow you've generally been to answer questions posed directly at you. Plus how you suddenly go from 'liking' my posts (and unvoting me) back to accusing me of tunneling and general insults.

Implosion: If you only consider Saint slightly scummy, which players do you rank between Saint and ICEninja in terms of individual scumminess?

SETAEL TO THE RESCUE. And away!

[Nameless]

[OOG]So I'm getting rather abruptly kicked out my current residence, and don't actually have anywhere else to move into right now. I'll try and get internet set up ASAP when I find somewhere and I might have time for a serious post later today depending on how things go, but

if I suddenly drop out for a few days ... that's why.

[/OOG]

Quick thoughts:

* Given his 'wait and see' attitude, I suspect ICEninja hadn't investigated Empking. Empking's buddy should claim.
* Given that mb53 and Saint were town, I have no friggin' clue what was happening with D1's lynch. Somebody figure that out.
* I still stand by my

reasoning

for lynching Saint. With this kind of a mess, look at the players who've been voting without much effort.
* Setael still makes sense as scum though, if her discrediting and wagoning of ICEninja came after twigging he could be cop.

Not gonna vote in case I'm V/LA for a while.

[Nameless]

The way I figure ICEninja is this: He wouldn't risk wasting an investigation on Empking in case the scum decided to just NK him that night. Even if he had investigated Empking, he should have left SOME clue to the result rather than suggesting that we wait until D3 specifically. And I seriously, seriously doubt ICEninja would have investigated implosion - he already believed implosion was scum so it would have been redundant, and ICEninja was the only townie with good enough play that I trust him not to have made that mistake. Regardless, ICEninja

didn't

leave any clear hints so trying to lynch (or not) someone based exclusively on ICEninja's posts would be a crapshoot.

Setael is now my top suspect. Her obvious defence of Saint even while using poor excuses to join his wagon makes sense if she knew he'd flip town, and her sudden swap to ICEninja being D2's lynch makes even more sense since it came right after ICEninja's cop theorising. She also started mb53's the moment a D1 deadline extension became all-but inevitable, with little prior mention of him. Both her and q21 have made some pretty terrible and opportunistic accusations as well eg. q21's 'scumslip' against silavor or Setael's 'parking on a wagon' against me. (ISO me for details on those, and a few others.)

VOTE: Setael

[Nameless]

I just checked; Empking shouldn't have a mason buddy via simple process of elimination: None of the dead players flipped mason. Swiftstrike has outright stated he isn't Empking's buddy. Setael said several times D1 that Empking'd buddy needed to claim, without doing so. I'm sure we all remember KTS's back and forth gunning for Empking earlier in the game. I am not Empking's buddy.

That leaves Implosion, Zdenek, DarthYoshi and Neko as plausible candidates. Except that every single one of those players expressed explicit suspicion of mongoose (whom Empking replaced) early in the game. 23, 140, 71 and 161 are examples for each.

Therefore, somebody is lying. It's probably Empking. If not, and I say this on the basis that their recent interactions would have made it pretty obvious anyway and the town can't really afford to screw up another lynch by not knowing if this is actually the case or not, hello Zdenek.

Setael: The first thing ICEninja says D2 is that "things haven't changed", and he pretty obviously includes the possibility that he's wrong about implosion. That doesn't spell a guilty result. And yet here you are, suddenly pushing for implosion's lynch with all your might the moment an opportunity arises despite not having made any attacks against him previously. DOES THIS SOUND FAMILIAR AT ALL GUYS.

[Nameless]

Hey. We've mislynched twice and D2 already ended suddenly, the town can't AFFORD to lynch anybody straight away without some better consideration of all players first. No hammering yet, please.

Setael: For a mason to actively cast suspicion on the only other player they know to be town would be almost as bad play as self-lynching, as well as making any future claim highly suspect. The only reason I'm not voting Empking right now is that his play has been so unhelpful thus far that I could actually see him encouraging this as town somehow.

DarthYoshi: That was overdefensive. My post was clearly an attack on Empking's claim, with some provocation towards Zdenek to clear up the only off-chance Empking is actually townie. Also, "Setael's and your" cases containing significant new material is BS. Setael hasn't done anything except literally quote ICEninja, while your points were either taken directly from Swiftstrike or had already been answered by implosion in #667.

Implosion: I think your VCA makes too many assumptions to be reliable (your alignment notwithstanding), but it does make me think I should ISO neko later. Mostly because I could kind of see Setael / neko both suddenly starting mb53's wagon to point to in their defence later when Saint was lynched, but then enough townies actually followed them. That's really just guesswork though, so eh.

It IS interesting that DarthYoshi's only been on major wagons around deadline. Any response to that, Darth?

[Nameless]

Implosion, what exactly are you hoping to achieve by posting #753?

Setael, good point, let's continue to argue theory in Empking's defence while avoiding real comment on implosion's VCA.

Zdenek, are you Empking's buddy, yes or no. This scum are already going to know or figure this out regardless of how theoretically you talk, but town needs to know this NOW so we can get the most benefit and make a better judgment. Your theoretical support (ie. based on lylo theory and that you haven't voted) for lynching Empking is flawed for this reason - if Empking was lynched and town, the scum could NK his buddy and leave no confirmeds in probable lylo. If you are mason you should claim here to maximise the town benefit and avoiding heading into lylo as you suggest.

As I said, process of elimination leaves you as the only likely mason buddy to Empking's slot (your opinion of mongoose was vague and you only once called his actions scummy when pressed by ICEninja). It follows then that you should know Empking's alignment from your own role - if you aren't mason, Empking almost certainly is scum and you should also claim here. The only situation in which it would be optimal for you not to claim, would be if you were scum; in which case it still follows that Empking is lying and scum with you.

The problem with this argument is the possibility of Empking's mason playing very poorly. However, I'm not inclined to believe any of the other remaining choices would ruin their validity by outright claiming they weren't or would needlessly and without any provocation gang up with other townies on their buddy in the opening game. (Setael's theory I doubt for its 'all or nothing' reasoning and that I believe she is scum with alternate motivations.) Unless another player can point out where I'm wrong, I'll act on this after Zdenek's next post.

Swiftstrike, you PLACED that L-1 vote. If you're worried, why did you make it?

[Nameless]

Implosion: I was calling my Setael / neko theory guesswork, not your VCA. You claiming that everything in Mafia is guesswork (and now WIFOM as well, apparently) is blatantly false, and sounds a lot like encouraging wild theories and lynches rather than the (mostly) sensible case built up on you. Saint may have actually been a suicidal townie, but your arguments were more intelligent than this before you were wagoned.

DarthYoshi: I'm poking at your attacks rather than intentionally defending implosion. I actually did think implosion was town for a while - end of D2 his posting was good, while ICEninja's attacks felt old and weak - but I'm leaning back towards scum again given some of his more recent posting. If so, his quick wagon I'm thinking is the other scum bussing hard to gain credibility back after pushing several mislynches.

That you were on a wagon at deadline isn't the problem - it's that you may have been avoiding wagons the rest of the time that looks suspicious. Implosion's vote was hardly a

slip

, he did give the (I feel reasonable) justification of "flawed reasoning is flawed reasoning". And yes, there is a strong case to be made that Empking is scum (that's why he was forced to claim, after all), but I'll leave that until after I've seen Zdenek's response.

Setael: No, that was a valid point, no opportunistically shrugging it off for you. Continuing to argue generic theory in lieu of responding to a significant post from the player you're trying to lynch is a good for appearing more active and analytical than you really are, but little else. The difference between your post and neko's was that neko pointed out a way in which the VCA was slightly helpful (summary of vote counts) but also why the analysis was flawed (number of scum on any given wagon unreliable), while your post could have been losslessly compressed to the emoticon .

Oh fine, here: VTs get townie reads on other town players all the time without being 'so obviously' masons or getting NKed for it. In most cases (and this being a closed setup with no reason to suspect it would end up otherwise), it is practical and safer for masons to simply focus their attention elsewhere; in the early game, it's not expected or even reasonable for a player to have conclusive reads on every other player. And now you know ... the rest of the story.

[Nameless]

Right then!

UNVOTE: Setael
VOTE: Empking

Here's a recap:

* Empking enters the game after nearly 250 posts and refuses to provide any more analysis than the word "gut".
* Empking starts hypocritically attacking KTS, primarily for not scumhunting and IIoA.
* Empking votes me without explanation.
* Empking argues with KTS for quite some time, using poor game theory to disregard accusations against him without addressing them or explaining himself. He also many times responds to attacks with personal insults. Examples: in 332 he claims not explaining your votes is a town tell and in 357 he says that implosion is wrong because he is poor at the game.
* Empking hypocritically attacks KTS for continuing the argument, while excusing himself for cementing a read he'd claimed to be certain of before the back and forth even started. KTS fairly points this out as well as a number of other accusations Empking had been ignoring entirely. Empking replies ... by rolling his eyes.
* Empking finally makes a case against me, comprising of little more than empty sentiments. I defend myself or ask for further explanation for each point, but Empking only claims that his points were explained and none were refuted. 412 has this lie fully quoted.
* Empking lies about KTS, starting with 385.
* Empking lies about his role. More on this later.
* Empking lies about scum having no reason to claim mason, even after several are given.
(Honestly the rest of Empking's D1 is just more of the same insults, bad logic and general unexplained nonsense, so let's skip to D2.)
* Empking supports a Saint lynch despite leaning town on him.
(That's it. In the week that D2 lasts, that's all Empking does after the pressure is off of him. No scumhunting. No meaningful contributions. Not even "gut". He just lurks then votes Saint.)
* Empking jumps on the implosion wagon. His only explanation is taken straight from another player and in his own words "not conclusive".

To elaborate on Empking's fakeclaim: First of all, it was clearly prompted by the wagon on him at the time. That he didn't bother to defend himself after claiming should indicate it was an excuse to avoid addressing his case more than a serious attempt to avoid being lynched - he even argues several times that he's likely to be lynched if he isn't NKed, which directly contradicts his claimed plan of drawing the NK. That he couldn't provide breadcrumbs also indicates that he hadn't planned anything. And mason would be a poor choice from drawing the NK anyway; scum wouldn't want to NK him until they'd figured out his nonexistent partner.

[Nameless]

KingTwelveSixteen: I notice that you haven't said much since D1 either. Other than Empking, who are your top suspects?

implosion: Your VCA was impressive, but contained a lot of assumptions you haven't explained. Why did you think there was one scum between Empking and Setael at the 7th VC? Why are you convinced that every wagon town must have mafia on it? Why don't you feel this is much information to be gained from Saint's wagon before he self-lynched?

Setael: You've ignored this twice now, and it's a particularly notable question since you've yet to provide any arguments against implosion that don't amount to piggybacking ICEninja. In 754 you discussed generic game theory instead of responding to a significant post from the player you were trying to lynch. Why?

Empking: What post towards Darth Yoshi were you talking about in 771?

Swiftstrike: What was it that Zdenek said that caused you concern about lynching implosion? Also, what are your reads on Setael, neko and myself? You haven't really mentioned us yet.

Zdenek: You've said there's a reasonable case against Setael and implosion, as well as being fine with lynching Empking. Do you think these players are likely to be the scumteam, or do you still suspect me / others?

Can't think of any meaningful questions towards DarthYoshi or neko2086 right now.

[Nameless]

I'm finding it hard to use the interactions between players to try to judge who could be on the same scum team because of the play of mb and Saint: both of them were so likely to be lynched days one and two that it would have been fairly safe for scum to attack one another without the fear of one of the partners being lynched.

Hang on. Mb53 was "so likely" to be lynched? Mb never had more than a single vote until the last three days of D1, and the player who started the wagon did so without any prior mention of him. You didn't think he was worth a vote. It sounds like you're trying to disregard the lynch wagons here, which makes me think you're interested in protecting someone who was on them ...

[Nameless]

Yeah, I'm getting the feeling we're just going to stall here. Somebody hammer, please.