Mini Normal 1187: Game Over

[xvart]

Hello everyone. I'll try and get this read through this afternoon and post tonight. I might do it in a couple different sittings. Happy hunting.

[xvart]

I'm halfway through page nine right now but I see a archaebob/hiphop scum team as a possibility so far. I wish that archaebob wagon would have gone through when it was building momentum.

[xvart]

Up to page 18 now. Not sure if I'll get this done tonight but I'm going to try and power through. In the meantime...

VOTE: archaebob

[xvart]

xvart, I can't prevent you from pursuing this ill-advised course of action, but if you do so, it is imperative that you post other reads as well. I don't know a damn thing about your player slot right now.

Wow. Thanks for the pro-town tip. This isn't my first replacement rodeo.

[xvart]

Almost to the end of day one but I thought I would wet everyone's whistle with this nugget:

In any case, I don't really support lynching a claimed tracker D1, especially not one who makes a point of posting fairly often.

You don't support lynching a claimed tracker D1 but you do support lynching a claimed mason who can be confirmed?

[xvart]

Done with D1. This post is juicy:

gonna assume mafias kill got blocked, and a vig of some sort killed DH.

How did the mafia kill get blocked with the town roleblocker dead? Do you think it would be balanced to have a RBer and a doctor in the same game? Two PRs that can stop mafia kills? And what town vig in their right mind would kill a claimed mason? This is classic scum misdirection and confusion tactics based on inside information.

Taking a break now.

[xvart]

Yes; something is wrong here, mainly your lack of response to my inquiry about you wanting to lynch an alignment confirmable role as opposed to not wanting to lynch a role that alignment cannot be confirmed.

[xvart]

Down, boy. This isn't worth your time, and it definitely isn't worth mine.

Do you deny that scum have motivation to lynch a role that can be alignment confirmed?

[xvart]

Okay. I'll have a full response tonight with an explanation for the archaebob questioning but I am reluctantly moving archaebob down on my scum list. I see the Barry Allen case and I see hiplop being scum with him as well. I still have about 4 pages I think and I see something about a neighborizor... the claims in this game...

I promise a full monty of post will be up tonight. It's going to take me a while to type it all up once I finish.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: hiplop

[xvart]

I'm forced to agree with archaebob here. It doesn't make sense how there could be that many power roles.

You say this knowing you are not only a neighborizer but a

mason

neighborizer? Scum neighborizer isn't unlikely.

VOTE: foilist13

I am all caught up. Whoever said it was right. Those last four pages were a doozy. Full comments coming after work. It is possible that foilist was setting up Ace to be the fall guy if he ever got busted and lynched since it is unlikely that mass claim would come before they could kill off the person that could counter claim the plan. But we can worry about that tomorrow. hiplop is still scum.

[xvart]

Yes do not hammer until after I post.

[xvart]

Introduction

:

For reference, when I replace into games I read the thread and make notes of scumtells, behavior that might be scum motivated, inconsistencies between behavior and actions, mismatched votes, and links between players. One thing you'll notice is I have a real problem with the way the game was played D1 with all these pressure wagons being more important than voting scummy behavior. Had I been in the game D1 there would have been some serious arguments going on.

Giitah

:

Post 80

-

Hiplop, you plan on defending yourself yet or are we going to have to finish this up before we move on to you?

I don't like the precognition of "finish[ing] this up" and "mov[ing] on to [hiplop]". The part I don't like is the underlying assumption or allusion that hiplop is scummy because he hasn't defended himself while sitting on a pressure wagon. And then the follow up post about "exactly; you haven't done anything."

Post 345

- This is a very strange post. Explain how killing any of us would be helpful or any different than killing you??

Post 422

- lol @ foilist not having enough content considering he just replaced in and had some some decent posting; but there was not scummy insinuation or undertone. Also this:

Decisively town so far. He's done some good work so far but he also shot down the Jily case, which looks pretty bad on him. I think it was simply a mark of bad judgement rather than scumminess.

How does shooting down the Jily case make him look bad?

Post 496

- I know that Giitah has softly suspected Pine but it seem to be more on the coat tails of others, so when he says "Pine is really scummy in my books" it seems a little forced or overstated, especially considered he was omitted on his player by player analysis. Someone that scummy would warrant a summary especially since she has no stated concise case anywhere but rather some random lucid thoughts.

Post 500

- This is just a terrible post.

Post 505

-

I think Jilynne's rather used to pressure; I've read through some of her games, actually, and she doesn't normally react too strongly to wagons. I would say it's a null tell, actually.

Big issue with this post. Why are you just now saying this? Wouldn't this have been important to say days ago?

Post 721

- This is a solid town post. This is intentional scumhunting, looking for possible scum in a narrower pool. Unless Giitah is scum

with

this can only come from town.

Barry Allen

:

Post 335

- If your vote is "free up now" and you are not satisfied with hiplop why are you not voting hiplop?

Post 664

- I don't like the whole ramp up "I've waited as long as I can to reveal this information."

Post 673

-

I hate this coming down to a vote between role claims. But, given the choice I'm choosing Tracker over a blocker claim that could be town or scum.

This is worded incredibly strangely. As town, wouldn't he be voting for the person he knows is town and not because of his role?

Post 688

- Similar to hiphop, Barry is employing the classic scum tactic of misdirection. Given the kill flavor of being shot means vig or serial killer? Mafia don't typically use guns in mini normals? Plus the countless other roles that could have visited including cop, JoAT, etc (but many people weren't thinking outside the doctor box).

Post 720

- Diminishes his own play, acknowledged a bad move on his part.

Post 747

- Barry sensationalizes the night kills saying "we've already lost too many roles" when we've actually only lost one.

Post 786

- the whole argument for removing votes to not out more PRs is crazy. If you think someone is scum you want to wagon them and get them claim and lynch them, unless you know they are town and might be a PR. Being cautious about who you wagon to not out PRs is terrible because:

1. You are scum and don't have a legitimate case;
   
2. You are scum and don't want to wagon another town person and look scummy; or,
   
3. You are scum and don't want to be the driving force of another mislynch.

Barry

- why did you choose to track Foilist last night?

Heliman

:

Post 89

- Irregardless of the cult/survivor thought process, how does creating typos prevent someone from dying at night? The typos thing is such a petty and ridiculous thing on which to latch.

Post 171

-

I'm pretty sure what archebob is doing right now is trawling for a reaction tell. I'm personally going to leave him be on it for now, but if he never follows up on what he was looking for or was looking for somthing really stupid then it will be a+ + scumread to me and I will push to lynch.

What is the point of exposing a reaction fishing plot? Doesn't that undermine everything? Also, why are you answering for archaebob when being questioned by nintendoaddict? This looks like someone wanted to show how observant. Also, the "I'm going to watch archaebob to see if he follows up" also seems to undermine the intent.

Did he follow up adequately in your opinion?

Post 242

-

A policy lynch? really? Archaebob, why doesn't this argument apply to Jil, who hasn't contributed to scum hunting enough? Better yet, why doesn't this apply to Hiplop, who has been sheeping and reasonless voting since we started?

I felt this was spot on due to my opinion on the D1 lurker hunt fest.

Post 753

- the 2:11 ratio is wrong, but I understand that he has other site experience.

Heliman

- can you provide links for games like this from your other site?

Foilist

:

Post 432

-

Choose 3 people as scum. We know there should at least be that many, so any fewer scum candidates is unreasonable. Go.

If you know there are at least three scum and are demanding three scum reads from others, why have you not provided three scum reads? Especially since you said in your first content post that several people stuck out to you but you never really followed up on this.

Post 555

- I thought the exact same thing about archaebob's post.

Post 815

- Claims friendly neighbor. Not mason friendly neighbor which he actually claims he is.

Going back in chronology based on the mason claim:

Post 488

-

RE: Outing Masons: You have two choices. Either you keep it a secret who it is, and maybe plant a breadcrumb that your partner knows about which they can then reference later when they claim, or you can out them. If you out them, you will either get lynched anyway, in which case your partner will probably be killed and that will be the end of the masons, or you defer the lynch and the scum have to decide and either paint both of you as scum or to spend their time killing you off instead of other PR's and having no hope of lynching you during the day.

It's up to you.

This doesn't sound like a mason partner to me. Especially when after the day breaks and you have claimed to be mason to archaebob in the QT you all the sudden start saying "mason(s)". When speaking cryptically about the situation a mason partner wouldn't leave it up to the other one to decide. He would say definitively "I think it is bad play for the mason to claim" or the "the mason should claim" while speaking from an outside perspective.

To be continued...

[xvart]

wtf on the hammer. I still have to type up archaebob but I'll post everything else I have so far just in case it closes.

[xvart]

Ace5993

:

Post 150

- I don't like this post because Ace says he doesn't like Pine at all then votes content lacking Barry (which he explains that posting without content is always scummy) but he doesn't stick his vote around there much longer and removes his vote in his next post (during which time Barry only posts once - see below).

Post 176

- Ace says in this post that Barry's one reply (mentioned above) is terrible, which presumably would increase his case on Barry Allen and justify his vote staying. However, Ace now comments on how "almost every post since page 4 has been directly related to archaebob's comments or questions. He isn't trying to generate discussion, he's trying to control it and lead the town to a mislynch D1." The problem with this is, if his comment about archaebob controlling the conversation is true (which I believe it was) and has been true since page four he could have easily made this comment in his last post. This post and the one previously are mixed up in terms of motivation and intent with each vote and the reasons behind them.

Post 338

- The long ISO post against Pine followed by a vote on DH with a one liner case. Especially strange since he hasn't said two words about DH prior to this post. The intent of his ISO post is obvious in the suspicion of Pine. There should have been a vote attached here if he believed it.

Post 658

-

1+2 - Revealing different reasons in different posts is scummy. It's kind of like the old spreading out a role claim over several posts thing. It seems like you're coming up with reasons for your actions, rather than acting on your thoughts.

If this is scummy why didn't you comment on it when archaebob did it? Why is it only scummy in this instance?

nintendoaddict1

:

Post 350

- You call Barry opportunistic for drawing attention to someone not post or someone not here. What about archaebob and his countless pushes on people not posting? Isn't that opportunistic for similar reasons?

Post 391

- This is a huge misrep.

Post 701

- NES's self quotes do not align with the original question posed by ace saying NES had not indicated that Pine might be scum. NES's quoted examples include meta example of a scum member claiming town RBer and then called the claim sketchy. Knowing Pine's flip could indicate that his original posts were planting a seed of doubt behind the claim without committing to a solid stand.

Post 827

- Lynch order incorrect, suggesting that if Foilist is scum that NES might be his partner, trying to get ace lynched first. If NES is scum I doubt ace is because scum, at this game state, wouldn't be quite so obvious in putting both partners on a platter; plus, if they are all three scum together NES would want to lynch Foilist first since his PR is spent with the neighborizor role being used up and ace might still be another scum PR.

hiplop

:

Post 114

- Tells DH to settle down and that nobody took that vote seriously but him. What vote is hiplop talking about? His own? Was it not a serious vote? Did you include yourself in the set of all people that did not take the vote seriously? It seemed serious especially when you upgraded it and suggested a wagon form on DH.

Post 142

- Unvotes because DH is "smartening up". Does this override the suspicious behavior of DH "worshipping archaebob"?

Post 181

- Why is giitah scum? Nothing you have said up until this point has indicated as such. If you are so certain that giitah is scum then why are you voting for something you are simply willing to "go with"? The only thing that happened with giitah between this post and your vote on archaebob is that she also voted archaebob?

Post 198

- How were archaebob's reactions townie? I always have problems with posts like this because it is a super easy way to bail a wagon.

Post 213

- I think this post is a scummy response to something that was obviously a misunderstanding in intention. The fact that hiplop said in post 198 that archaebob's reactions seemed townie and then a short time later said "archaebob is town" it should be obvious that the absolute was in the context of likely town and not definitive town. This seems like scum getting caught for some stupid error and had to over explain the explanation to justify it.

Post 425

-

Graiie, explain where DH has ever been pro-town. Now. He hasnt done anything useful all game. Make sure to include evidence.

Are we now lynching people who have done nothing town? You ask for evidence that he has done anything town when you yourself are unable to provide evidence that he is scum ("Also, theres something just wrong with his posts, they come across very scummy, cant really explain it"). Do you always call out people who want to policy lynch on D1? Can you show me some examples or explain how this case is different?

Post 426

- asks for a scum/town list. From a personal point of view, I despise town lists and feel they are more beneficial to scum than town (especially early game). It is strange that he wants a complete ordered list, too, from only one person. Feels like fluff posting to appear to be advocating contributions.

Post 447

-

alright,ill explain it to you. Look at the clear connection between scumhunter and demonhybrid. They're distantly defending eachother, and scumhunter is using some LOL defense about a policy lynch. Giitah, he hasnt handled pressure well at ALL, he continues to tunnel Jil, with no real case; all hes saying is that shes a lurker, and we all know that. Hes clinging to one person so that he doesnt have to squirm around as scum. Also, his blatant overexaggerations/practically worshipping Bob in earlygame is incresibly scummy.

When pressured for his case on DH and shown that he hasn't stated it (despite him saying he had) he says that it is because he and scumhunter have been actively defending each other? Do you typically think scum pairs defend each other so openly on D1?

Post 478

- "That claim is awful" regarding DH's mason claim. Why is it awful? Have you played in a game with mason's before?

Post 683

- Scum obviously misdirecting. No vig in their right mind would vig a claimed mason on D1 and the whole doctor thing is absurd since town already has a confirmed roleblocker (two town roles that can block kills?).

Post 731

- This could be a forced bus with hiplop thinking he found something original that nobody else had seen or it could just be hiplop running a mislynch. Either way, this post has scum motivation all over it. It's especially strange since he was voting Barry Allen at the end of D1 and the start of D2 so how could he "just now realize that BA was the scum"? This is such a scummy contradiction. Also, I would like links to sensor being a common fakeclaim offsite. I've never seen a sensor in all the games I've read here and I doubt it would be a common role off site and common enough that people would use it as a viable fake claim.

Post 768

-

There’s no way we have THAT many power roles,

and it sounds to me like Barry is covering Bob’s ass

. Mafia would have tried to kill bob no matter what, he’s too strong of a player/

pretty much everyone agrees that he is town

. Much more dangerous than a Mason.

That's why i thought a vig killed DH

, because of how strong Bob is.

But since the Mafia killed DH,

that makes it seem like Bob is mafia

.

I highly doubt we have a killing role on our side, plus all of the others. The tracker result, even if Barry is town: DOESN'T PROVE ANYTHING, it just means that someone visited bob, That guy could have been the mafia godfather, easily....

The contradictions in this post astound me. First,

hiplop is speaking out of both sides of his mouth on archaebob's alignment

. Second of all,

the vig comment is especially strange since hiplop was convinced (or at least wanted us to be convinced) that there was a vig in his D2 opening post

. Plus the night action WIFOM is so obvious that nothing should have been considered absolutely definitive.

Post 833

- Again, voting ace instead of Foilist. Foilist should be the obvious first lynch since he is the one being called a liar by both parties he is claimed to be connected with.

Post 863

- subtle scummy implication on someone posting elsewhere on the site.

[xvart]

This "analysis" from you is also a classic scumtactic. You are directing our attention away from my noting who was visited during N1 in that post. You are instead trying to create connections that don't exist between players, hoping that one or both would look scummy.

How am I misdirecting anything? I am not disputing your claim of being a tracker and your result being authentic by any means. I don't see where I suggested as much. I am, however, wondering what sort of flavor you expected to come from a mafia kill. At this point in the game, what flavor would you have said "yep, that was definitely the scum kill."

Your point being....what?

Nothing really, just something to note. As I said, I go through and look for scum motivations and while this isn't a tried and true scumtell it always peaks my interest when people say things like "oh yeah I realize I misplayed that" or "I know what I did was scummy." Scum have more motivation to call themselves out for their own behavior.

This is where you are wrong. We lost our blocker on D1 through lynch and we lost a mason by night kill N1. That's two roles we lost, not one.

You are correct. A total error on my part. I withdraw any implication that you are scum based on that comment. What does this say about my alignment?

This is another scumtactic. You disagree with me, so you list several scenarios that all assume I'm scum. The last scenario is just what I stated it was. We had lost two roles already (not one as you mistakenly noted above), and I did not want to risk more fail. On D2 we do have time to continue hunting elsewhere, and if we later choose to not believe the claim and go after Nintendo we certainly have time. In fact, not going to that very quick lynch has given us a LOT of valuable discussion and information, so in retrospect I still believe I did the right thing.

The point that I was making and the point that still remains that you were backing off of scum read because you were afraid of outting more PRs, and under those circumstances I suggested the bullets that followed.

I've already stated how I looked at my short list for tracking. How I picked foilist out of that group? It wasn't just that foilist dropped the hammer, it was that there was a post FoSing foilist before the thread was locked. Since there was an FoS on foilist, the maf might let a town foilist live in order to try to BW him early on D2, and of course a scum foilist was sure to live and might actually visit someone. When foilist DID visit and bob lived through the night, I thought at first that I had found the doc, so I only released the name of the person he visited (bob). The later neighbor/mason claim obviously blew that doc theory out the window.

I was, in fact, asking for why you specifically picked Foilist above the others on your shortlist.

I'll read the rest of your post, but xvart it doesn't look like you carefully read the thread. You missed key points like losing two roles instead of one

1

, and you asked me questions I've already answered in thread.

2

You are also using the same tactics in your posts that you find scummy.

3

Large posts don't necessarily mean well-reasoned posts, and giving a lot of quotes doesn't mean you really read the thread all that well.

4

1

You're right about me being incorrect on the number of lost power roles. But what does that say about my alignment? Do you think it was intentional and that I was just trying to push a scummy agenda or do you think it was an honest error? And I fail to see the connection with this one thing meaning I didn't read the thread carefully, especially since, at the time of this post, you had only read the section specifically about you.

2

Well, that is an unfortunate byproduct of reading 35 pages in about 28 hours.

3

This is highly debatable since you claim I am using these scum tactics in a wholly different manner while avoiding the underlying point I was making.

4

OOooohhh... The whole "long pretty posts don't make you town and don't mean you read the thread". Do you think I'm scum or not? Is there scum motivation behind what you are saying because it seems to me that you think I am scum but you aren't saying it.

Don't you like lynching scum?

This is just stupid; especially in a game where all of D1 was discussion about how important it is to provide content and I have specifically asked to wait on the hammer so I could get everything typed up. What's the rush? Foilist's buddy already said he would hammer tomorrow to buy himself some town cred.

[xvart]

Okay, so foil was scum, which means ace, SH, bob, or BA could be the other scum on the first wagon. This clears Giitah and Heliman, as neither of them was on the second lynch, yet, two scum were on it. These games usually have three scum, which means that xvart is confirmed scum.

Vote: xvart

You better double check with the mod to make sure there isn't a mod error on your result. Otherwise you are lying scum. I have to give you props on the Sensor fake claim though, even thought it isn't sustainable long term (obviously). As you probably realized, you could have executed it better. Since you will be lynched tomorrow you'll be down one scum member then; so you should have faked the results so that you outted another scum member and given yourself a ton of town cred and you would have been down one scum member that way with a much better chance of lasting long term.

Since NES is faking this result on me it makes me think that his team isn't worried about losing a member if they are going to trade 1v1 so they might have four scum members (so town must have some strength in PRs). Best guess at this point is that BA is scum (someone that, given our day end interactions, archaebob and I probably would have gotten lynched together). If there are four scum, that rounds out as hiplop being the fourth scum member.

OK - report is

hiplop targeted no one

hiplop - looks like I may well have been wrong about you.

How does hiplop not targeting anyone clear him of being scum?

I'm trying to wrap my brain around this, but I think I get it. Bascially, if you accept nintendo's claim as sensor, he has mathematically proven that xvart MUST be scum. There is no other way to read it as the only way xvart can be town is if nintendo is lying about his claim and is therefore scum himself.

In other words, an xvart lynch will tell us a lot no matter which way it flips.

The bolded is spoken like a true scum member who knows I am going to flip town.

Scum team: Foilist, nintendoaddict, (Barry Allen and/or hiplop)

I wanted to get this post out since everyone seems to be thinking a quick lynch is a good idea; but I would like a chance to crunch the numbers a little bit if there are four scum.

[xvart]

Obviously you should lynch nintendo tomorrow and then mass claim the following day.

If there it is a 4 man scum team then it looks like this (T:M)
Today - 6:3
Tomorrow - 4:3 (my lynch and NK)
Next Day - 3:2 (nintendo and NK)

So if it is a 4 man scum team on that day I'm guessing the plan was for Barry to fake a track result on a townie to the dead body to finish off the game. Although it is possible that there are only three and they just got busted and realized the Sensor claim was unsustainable long term and had to make the best of it.

Now I'm going to look at the D2 Sensor result and see if anything can be parsed out of that.

[xvart]

There's already so many roles flying around, and you doubt there could be a Doc? Don't outguess the mod, ace.

This is a logical fallacy.

[(There are a lot of exposed power roles) THEREFORE (there is a doctor)] is not logically consistent.

If anything, the abundance of roles would mean it is less likely there is a doctor because the town would be way overpowered. Of course, that assumes that nobody is lying about their role, but we both know that isn't true which makes your assumption that there is a doctor even more scum biased because you know the known roles are filled with fake claims so it is possible there is a doctor.

[xvart]

As I said yesterday, Giitah is town for this post alone:

You're missing another piece of evidence there, Barry. I don't think we'd only have two scum in a game of 13 players, right?

Pine - 7 (ace5993, Giitah, Scumhunter, archaebob, Barry Allen, Heliman, foilist13)
Barry Allen - 2 (Valern, hiplop)
DemonHybrid - 1 (

Pine

)

Not Voting - LittleGrey,

DemonHybrid

,

nintendoaddict1

DemonHybrid's dead and nintendoaddict has to be town if we're even going to play with this evidence. Pine's also town by death call. That leaves hiplop, Valern, and LittleGrey (Jilyne's replacement) as possible suspects.

This is intentional scumhunting and logical thinking based on available information that would only come from town. It doesn't really matter now since nintendo is lying about all his results, but under the deceitful context of him telling the truth no scum would say this.

[xvart]

And have you considered that there are scum PR's to balance all of those roles out?

You are dodging the point. You are pretending like all the claims are true and you suggest because all the of the available claims there must be a doctor. There is no way, if all the roles are true, that there is a doctor in this setup (but again, we both know not all the roles are true). The only way you would even suggest there being a doctor was because you know there actually might be one because of you know there is at least one person fake claiming (you).

Hey Barry - speaking of dodging questions, how does hiphop not going anywhere last night clear him of being scum????

[xvart]

Barry - you also never answered what sort of flavor you expected to have been associated with a mafia kill if it wasn't "shot."

[xvart]

1. Of course my result on hiplop isn't absolute proof of town, since I'm not a cop. However, I do believe with only 2 scum left I would likely have caught him visiting someone had he been scum. Again, not absolute proof, but good enough for now.

And apparently good enough for you to say "I guess I was wrong about you yesterday" meaning "my scum read of you was wrong" and not "my scum read of you could still be correct but I know you didn't commit the kill."

Now, xvart, what do you make of the math? Is it just coincidence that you OMGUS'd the first three people who voted you as being the likely maf? And, do you think the entire mafia would mass vote you this quickly if you were town?

Calling it OMGUS is at least inaccurate and at worst a total misrep of the situation. Look at my outline post of you and hiplop yesterday. Look at my conversation with you yesterday. Did you think that you and hiplop were suspects of mine

before

this fake sensor report came out? Since you both obviously were how can it possibly be OMGUS? And obviously I'm going to vote nintendo because he is lying scum and

I know this for a fact

.

[xvart]

And, do you think the entire mafia would mass vote you this quickly if you were town?

What risk is there to the entire scumteam piling on to a mislynch that is being facilitated by a falsified report? All the blame tomorrow will fall on nintendo because tomorrow he will be called out as the obvious liar and you scumbags can put the full court press on him for lying to town in an attempt to score town points with no fear of retribution ("I was following the result of someone else that confirmed a townie as scum, so it's solely his fault").

[xvart]

@ xvart - I think it becomes OMGUS when your maf reads are exactly the same as the people voting you.

No. You are wrong. OMGUS is voting someone

only

because they are voting for you, which is clearly not the case here.

I'd like to remind you that I've said since this day began that we learn something no matter the result of this vote - if you are town then nintnedo is scum. However, given the choice between you two, I think my vote is well-placed.

And I'd like to remind you, in light of what I just said in my previous post, that

you called my lynch a good informational lynch regardless of my alignment before it was even suggested that nintendo might be lying

. It's almost like you knew he was lying...

[xvart]

2. As far as flavor text, my last mini-normal (okay, my only other mini-normal that I've played on this site) had a bit longer explanation for mafia kills and a very short note for SK kills. This obviously could be different since we are in a different round with a different mod, but the text the first night made me think SK.

You mean Mini 1126? Where the kill flavor had a bit longer explanation for the mafia kills was this:

2. GreyICE, Vanilla Townie, lynched D1
7. Ashblade, Vanilla Townie, killed N1
12. Snake Eyes, Vanilla Townie, killed N1
11. Hiraki, Vanilla Townie, lynched D2
6. RobCapone, Town Tracker, killed N2
13. mozamis Hayker, Mafia Watcher, killed N2
8. AGar penpen wikkiden, Mafia Doc, lynched D3
5. Erratus Apathos, Town Mason, killed N3
1. subgenius, Vanilla Townie, killed N3
3. bvoigt mockingjaye, Vanilla Townie, killed N5
4. Papa Zito, Town Mason, killed N5

Barry Allen is confirmed scum on the basis of lying to cover up something he said.

[xvart]

Too bad you guys weren't able to quick lynch me to shut me up.

Scum team is confirmed to be Foilist, nintendo, and Barry Allen

. If the game is still going on at that point hiphop is the final member.

[xvart]

Yes, I mean 1126, where I was the SK. The mafia kills were accompanied with notes saying "You're next" left behind. There were no notes left behind by the SK. While Dekes did have a lot of flavor text in general as mod, there was a difference in how he treated maf versus SK kills.

Not buying it. You referenced the exact line of flavor you were referring to, not the flavorful story.

Given the description of the night kill

(saying the player was shot)

, I would also guess we either have a vig or a serial killer out there.

DemonHybrid, Town Mason

, was shot Night 1.

2. GreyICE, Vanilla Townie, lynched D1
7. Ashblade, Vanilla Townie,

killed N1

12. Snake Eyes, Vanilla Townie,

killed N1

11. Hiraki, Vanilla Townie, lynched D2
6. RobCapone, Town Tracker,

killed N2

13. mozamis Hayker, Mafia Watcher,

killed N2

8. AGar penpen wikkiden, Mafia Doc, lynched D3
5. Erratus Apathos, Town Mason,

killed N3

1. subgenius, Vanilla Townie,

killed N3

3. bvoigt mockingjaye, Vanilla Townie,

killed N5

4. Papa Zito, Town Mason,

killed N5

xvart, your AtE and pot shots are not helping you. In fact, your increasingly wild posts make me even more comfortable with my vote.

I really don't care about your vote because

you have made it quite clear that you want to lynch me regardless of my alignment

because of the loads of information it will reveal.

[xvart]

Barry - are you even remotely interested in a claim from me? If not, why not?

[xvart]

Nobody has expressed an intent to hammer so why would I claim? Once the threat of quicklynch was over and I was able to get some stuff posted I wasn't too concerned about it. It's interesting because we have an unaccounted for mason out there and nobody posting right now seems to think or care about that, which is also suggests that the scum are on my wagon.

Plus I'm not really scared of being hammered because there are two people who haven't even posted today and I am confident they are town, so at the very least they might want to contribute something.

[xvart]

Ok then Xvart, are you the Mason? You can save us a mislynch right now if you claim.

This is exactly what I was getting at. Heliman - are you concerned at all about the people that wanted a quick lynch in light of there being mason out there unclaimed? And for the record, Barry. I only claim when there is an intent to hammer.

Something else to think about is Ace. I really doubt that scum Foilist would bring a scum partner into the fold as a fake claim when one of his partners already had an unsustainable fake claim out there. That would just be suicide and torpedo the entire town. I really believe it was all a setup so that if Foilist flipped it would incriminate Ace; which another thing to bank on in LYLO. Since it came out early the gambit failed, as Foilist said.

In the coming days be very careful about quick hammers since that is what the scum team is hoping for. Lynch nintendo tomorrow, then mass claim. I am 95% confident I know who the other mason is.

I am a Vanilla Townie. Drop your hammer.

[xvart]

It was fun while it lasted...

[xvart]

Scumhunter - it's no problem. Once he claimed his fake result I knew I was dead; I just had to buy some time to get as much info out as I could. I'm just glad I'm not the mason. I'll be interested to see post game if Sensor is even considered a "normal" role.

And last thing, for whoever accused me of being scummy for suggesting a mod error, it is a completely justifiable response since the absolute worst possible scenario is if nintendo was town and got a wrong number in the pm or misread or looked at yesterday's pm instead resulting in two dead townies. Since I've given him the opportunity to check, tomorrow he won't be able to say "whoops, I read N1's pm on accident!!!!", not that anyone would buy that. It is an unlikely scenario but I'd rather rule out any outliers.

[xvart]

Giitah - your 721 post was town gold. I knew you were town from that line of thinking that you were pursuing. Thinking abstractly about efficient scumhunting is good, and something scum would not do. I think you did very well considering the circumstances of the late game game state.

I felt pretty bad once I got into the dead thread and the setup was revealed since, while going down in flames, I threw every town member under the bus and cleared the remaining scum. I guess I got caught in a tizzy being the victim of scum lying.

It was a fun game and I am glad I replaced in.