Mini #704: Hunchback of Notre Dame, Game Over

[Battousai]

Vote: Caboose

For thinking that I know why. I do, but still, STOP TELLING ME WHAT I KNOW argh!!!!

[Battousai]

UNVOTE,
Vote: Ramus

Pressure good.

Mizzy: Ramus might have thought those questions were rhetorical, as I did. When you ask someone why they are so stupid, the person usually doesn't tell you he was dropped on his head a lot as a kid. Usually. But Ramus has also not answered questions from Machiavellian-Mafia as well, so Ramus might be intentionally stopped answering certain questions.

[Battousai]

Sorry if I pulled out too soon but I didn't want to leave a general bias against me in case the plan failed and I didn't foresee anyone voting me anytime soon.

Giggity!




To clarify my vote: Pressure is good. Therefore by voting you, I added a little more pressure; which by what was already pointed out, is good.

To clarify WHY I thought you needed more pressure: You seem to like to dodge questions, questions that should be answered. Therefore I felt that by putting another vote on you, you might answer the questions.

[Battousai]

@TheAdmiral, Why are you defending Ortolan? He is perfectly capable of responding himself.

I wasn't defending ortolan per say. I was rather defending one's right to defend someone else, and have that not be necessarily viewed as scummy.
If someone thinks an attack on someone else is fishy, then he should call the attacker on it/point holes in the arguments rather than just sitting back silently.
Imo.

Actually, it would be best for the person to try and defend themselves first, AND THEN point out the flaws in the attack. That way you can gain info from the person being attacked.

Unvote: Ramus
Vote: ClockworkRuse

I feel you need more pressure. Also, I think you are acting scummy: The adequate pressure remark.

[Battousai]

Actually, it would be best for the person to try and defend themselves first, AND THEN point out the flaws in the attack. That way you can gain info from the person being attacked.

Maybe, but sometimes when you let just two people attack and counter-attack each other it is far less effective than if other people chime in with their opinions as well. Furthermore it makes it less likely that the town as a whole will start looking at the only two arguing people as viable lynches, narrowing the town's potential scope.

See Mizzy post 106. That was the jest of what I meant by it.

Alright Battousai, I'm alright with you voting me. But I'll tell everyone now, I don't really feel that much pressure from votes. If you are going to vote me, ask me questions.

I agree with this as well.
A vote coupled with "cause you've been acting scummy" (or something of the kind) is basically worthless and is impossible to respond to/defend against.

Don't know if you were directing it at me since my name was mentioned in CR's quote, but I did give a reason for my vote (the adequate pressure remark). See the end of post 82.

[Battousai]

Battouasi: can you explain in your own words why the adequate pressure remark is scummy?

To me, I feel that he was just saying "Yah, Ramus is scummy, but I don't want to place a vote on Ramus because Ramus is feeling pressured." I believe he was coming up with a reason to NOT vote Ramus. The scum reasons I can see are that CR may not want to vote his partner OR CR didn't want to appear scummy by jumping on a bandwagon to just add pressure OR wants to stay away from a growing bandwagon in case it comes to fruitation and Ramus is revealed as town.

[Battousai]

Was this game always this inactive?

Mod:

Is MiteyMouse due for a prod?

Vote: Battousai

I better defend myself... I'm not scum. If you want me to have a better defense, post a case.

[Battousai]

Oh, I'm lazy because I don't want to go back and sort through all your posts and find any mentions you've made about me and figure out why you thought I was scummy instead of expecting you to put it in your post, posting a link, or at least talking about it in your last post. Yeah, I'm the lazy one. Also what has changed since that post and this post that would make you put your vote on me? You said you didn't want to vote me because Caboose was already voting me...

[Battousai]

Nothing was happening.

What was the point of putting pressure on CR?

???? Because pressure can make people react.

[Battousai]

Destructer: Pressure votes can do more than just make someone post... Now CR may act differently with x amount of votes than x-1. I also feel there is a good chance CR is scum. I'm just getting the same feeling from him this game as the last game we were in (he was scum, obviously). I didn't really want to say that as a reason of why I feel he is scum since you can't defend yourself from it.

[Battousai]

Destructer: Pressure votes can do more than just make someone post... Now CR may act differently with x amount of votes than x-1. I also feel there is a good chance CR is scum. I'm just getting the same feeling from him this game as the last game we were in (he was scum, obviously). I didn't really want to say that as a reason of why I feel he is scum since you can't defend yourself from it.

And what would that feeling be?

What are you expecting here? I already said I felt you were scum.

And I'd like to note, last game you got this feeling I was just attacking a claimed doctor and lurking. Am I doing either at the moment?

You can't do the exact same thing every game....

ortolan's response to me (and Mizzy, I guess) is... more OMGUS?

Destructer: Pressure votes can do more than just make someone post... Now CR may act differently with x amount of votes than x-1. I also feel there is a good chance CR is scum. I'm just getting the same feeling from him this game as the last game we were in (he was scum, obviously). I didn't really want to say that as a reason of why I feel he is scum since you can't defend yourself from it.

So... how has your vote changed the dynamics of his play?

That's like asking what would have happened if you went to the mall instead of the movies. You can only speculate on how he would act.

What have you learnt through your "pressure" vote on him?

From what has been said, I don't think CR has done anything worth being lynched yet. But maybe being at L-2 he has kept up being active.

"I'm just getting the same feeling" means gut?

Yes, that's why I haven't really listed it as a reason for the vote, since you can't defend against gut.

How is his play similar as a game where he was scum? Do you know that he hasn't played the same as town?

I get the same feeling I had as the game I was in when he was scum.

And I don't buy into this whole idea that you can call something a "pressure" vote and it will automatically mean anything. Your vote on CR is doing nothing but increasing the chances of him being lynched, not because it's outing him as scum, but because of cold and impartial game mechanics. You haven't made a case on CR and I see your reasoning - "pressure" - as an excuse to jump onto his wagon.

Destructer: Pressure votes can do more than just make someone post... Now CR may act differently with x amount of votes than x-1. I also feel there is a good chance CR is scum. I'm just getting the same feeling from him this game as the last game we were in (he was scum, obviously). I didn't really want to say that as a reason of why I feel he is scum since you can't defend yourself from it.

I'd also like to point out that this is almost the exact same situation as the first Newbie game I played with you.

How does my play here add up to my play there?

Honestly, I haven't looked back at that game at all

[Battousai]

First off, like I said, I don't want CR lynched today so

UNVOTE

The following quotes are all from Destructor:

Battousai wrote:
destructor wrote:
So... how has your vote changed the dynamics of his play?

That's like asking what would have happened if you went to the mall instead of the movies. You can only speculate on how he would act.

You've just said that his play is unpredictable. So, if you couldn't know what CR was going to do, how would his reactions to the pressure have been meaningful? That is, what was the point of pressuring CR, again?

You don't understand what I said. My analogy applies to EVERYONE. No one knows how someone will react or if they will, or how if they didn't do it, how they would have played without that vote. Now to answer the question, if CR was scum, I felt he may out his partner unintentionally, or confirm another player, or maybe confirm his guilt.

Battousai wrote:
What have you learnt through your "pressure" vote on him?

From what has been said, I don't think CR has done anything worth being lynched yet. But maybe being at L-2 he has kept up being active.

You're sending mixed messages here. You don't think CR's done anything lynch-worthy, but you think he's playing like he does as scum. If he's playing like he's scum, shouldn't that be enough to lynch him?

No, I usually do not lynch someone with such little reasoning backed up with gut.

Battousai wrote:
"I'm just getting the same feeling" means gut?

Yes, that's why I haven't really listed it as a reason for the vote, since you can't defend against gut.

...
How is his play similar as a game where he was scum? Do you know that he hasn't played the same as town?

I get the same feeling I had as the game I was in when he was scum.

So... the point here would be for you to quantify your gut. You're claiming that your gut is based on CR's meta. If this is your claim, you should be able to back this up and show us where CR has played the same as scum.

Your confusing FEELINGS with actual posts.

FoS: Axelrod

, asks CR to claim. Why so interested in the claim, when you have only skimmed the thread and haven't really looked into the CR Wagon or cases.

It would be nice if the people voting/FoSing him actually gave some reasons as to why self-voting in the *random* stage of the game suggests one is scum?

I don't think he's scum for self-voting. Remind me to give my reasons for voting later (i.e., after the random stage).

Reason?

Oh, and by the way, I took the original question to be "Why did you self-vote?" The answer to that is not "It's subjective." I want an answer to why he decided to self-vote.

Because I felt like doing it.

So why, exactly, couldn't you have just answered that in the first place? Why did you have to be purposely vague and unhelpful?

Loaded question

Alright, so far I don't see the wagon on Clock, and Ramus' self-important, "Whateva, ah do whu' ah want!" attitude is enough for me to keep my vote on him for the time being. Teamwork is crucial. It also bothers me that he didn't read my post well enough...he asked me to explain something I already had.

So you keep your vote on Ramus because he wanted Caboose to form a case instead of just whining? Do you believe he was trying Fong's Gambit? Does it make sense as he had hinted at it and not answering questions is extremely obvious?


Only half way through rereading the day, but I have to go. Right now I'm leaning on Mizzy, CarnCarn, and/or thAdmiral as scum with Ort more likely town. Since I'm not done reading, I will not vote or put a case on any of the three I listed as leaning scum.

[Battousai]

So, you think because I'm not going to focus on someone that more than two or three people are focusing on is scummy? The rhectoric of 'false' excuse is also unnecessary, it's not even an excuse.

Would you rather I tunnel in on someone who already has two or three players firing questions away?

I'm more interested in why someone is defending him right now than his defense, what reason would ort have defending Ramus? Ramus is perfectly capable of responding to the questions and suspicions that are being thrown at him right now, so one would hope at least.

Ortolan, the point is that the town was applying pressure to him, and his reactions are important. You defending him detracts from his reactions, in my opinion, as you give him a safeguard.

Are you telling me that it's okay to self-vote because it's a fashion now?

@TheAdmiral, Why are you defending Ortolan? He is perfectly capable of responding himself.

Here you take Ort's defense of self-voting out of context and make it sound much more scummy than it was (wasn't scummy at all). You make it sound as if Ort is defending all of Ramus's past actions, which he wasn't since Ort only defended the fact that self-voting is a null-tell and subjective as Ramus ALREADY said.

You then call TheAdmiral on defending Ortolan, for I believe, to (I don't know how to explain it) think that you are really against defending others and to strengthen everyone's belief in that you are going after Ort for something you find pretty scummy. But why did you vote Ort here and did not post a FoS, or anything on TheAdmiral?

So, you think because I'm not going to focus on someone that more than two or three people are focusing on is scummy? The rhectoric of 'false' excuse is also unnecessary, it's not even an excuse.

Your reason for not voting ("there is adequate pressure") doesn't work well in light of Ramus' statement "I'm not feeling the pressure" (said before you voted). That leads me to think you are afraid to be seen taking an aggressive stance on someone this early, especially if that person ends up town. So you had to give some reason for not voting, even though he was acting quite suspiciously, and you figured you could get away with the "but I don't want to put someone at L-3 on page 3" excuse or something.

Would you rather I tunnel in on someone who already has two or three players firing questions away?

What's wrong with that?

So I'm trying to not to appear aggressive... As I'm going after someone else, which is most likely going to grow a little more intense on my part soon.

And I wouldn't mind putting someone at L-3 on page three. I just think it would be better to open the town to more than just one scummy play in a day. Tunneling kills townies, I can show you more that enough references for that.

So you say the reason you didn't want to “tunnel” in on Ramus because you didn't want to appear aggressive. You then give the reason why you didn't want to appear aggressive as “ As I'm going after someone else, which is most likely going to grow a little more intense on my part soon.” I don't understand, please clarify because to me, it sounds like you are going out of your way to appear townie.

FoS's and IGMEOY's suck and I try to keep my use of them to a minimum.

I've played with you, what 5 times? From those games I believe this is a true in case anyone was interested. In two of the games I looked at (1 scum, 1 town) he didn't use any the entire game.

How is your case strengthened by the fact that I felt there was adequate pressure on Ramus? Even if I felt like his pressure was lacking, I wasn't going to go after him over you. As I've already said, in my eyes defending someone before they can give a response is scummy.

Again, misrepresenting Ort. Ort defending self-voting as subjective after Ramus already said the same thing. I'm starting to think you had no case on Ort at all.

@ battousai: I'd say something in response to that, but that would be defending...

^Copout.

No, it was a shot at me that I wasn't going to respond to.

And I love how everyone ignores destructor for doing... pretty much the same thing I did? I don't find this scummy, but I'm going to call the wagon on it if they don't attack it consistently. What about this quote;

I think there is/are scum on the CR wagon. I think Batt may fit the description. I'd vote for Batt right now, but Caboose is on his wagon already.[/b]

qualifies a passing glance when mine is almost exactly the same?

You'll also notice that I'm not going to call destructor on defending anyone, Admiral, because I've already had the chance to speak for myself.

Again, trying to strengthen your case on Ort by letting Destructor's defense of him go since he has already had the chance to defend himself.

@ battousai: I'd say something in response to that, but that would be defending...

^Copout.

That was obviously a joke, yet you take it as him being serious. Trying to make something scummy when it's not.

@ battousai: I'd say something in response to that, but that would be defending...

^Copout.

I agree. ThAd, spill the beans; ClockworkRuse probably won't mind as long as you're defending

him

.

Same as Mizzy, but I believe you weren't making it scummy but trying to get info.

Mizzy, I don't think your vote on Ramus is doing much. Last I remember, it's on him more for being snide than anything scummy he's done. Your first gripe with him, and it was a good one, was that he was being evasive. He's since answered for his early play so far as I can tell. So, why is your vote still on him?

Because a) it's for him being emotional, unhelpful, and scummy, not just for being snide, and b) no, he never fully answered everything and when he did answer at all it was because of pressure to answer, and c) there's no better place for it in my mind at the moment.

A) How was Ramus acting scummy and how is being emotional a reason to vote?
B) So you don't believe in his Fong Gambit
C)Why not just unvote? See below quote

destructor:

How is not voting at all productive? I am reading everything that gets posted very carefully and I have no questions to ask anyone at the moment. So it's either vote Ramus for the time being or no one, and having my vote somewhere is better than no where.

That's your answer to C, yet later in the day (close to deadline) you unvote, but do not place another vote. Isn't this a contradiction of sort?

Also note, that Ort has to use the cases brought against me by others and has little to nothing to add to my case. In other words, Ort has been sitting around and waiting for a reasonable case to build.

Ort voted you, I believe, for attacking him with a baseless case. I believe everyone else voting for you at the time did not bring that up. Therefore I believe you are degrading Ort's case against you as opportunistic or lazy with OMGUS added in. The OMGUS is, true, the opportunistic/lazy is not. Also, I believe the OMGUS is not scummy in this scenerio since I agree with Ort that the case brought against him by CR is bunk.

I'm interested in, if my attack is so unmerited, why you got so worked up over it.

Oh, sorry, next time you make bad arguments I'll just let them stand.

That's not what I said. You have every right to defend yourself. But, if you look back up, you'll see that the diction and the caps lock bits show that you got very worked up over something you consider insignificant.

Well it looked like you basically just made up things he's done and used lies to form a case (the contradiction was taken out of context). If it was me, I would get worked up over it as well.

EVEN APART FROM THIS, there is nothing inherently scummy about an OMGUS vote ANYWAY, so this argument has absolutely no substance.

Actually, I don't agree fully with this sentiment; I feel that an OMGUS vote is scummy because it is an easy vote to make that doesn't take thought, doesn't utilize logic or a case, and in general, is anti-town. Anti-town != scum, but it does = scum

my

.

I also don't like that ort does, indeed, seem to have been waiting around for others to make his cases for him.

Also waiting for an answer to #155.

Seems to me, you're the one waiting around lately. Did you come up with Ort waiting around on the word of CR?

And no, I have been reading, and simply agreed with his point against you. Again, just because you feel like damning me for agreeing with something, doesn't make the thing I agreed with wrong or scummy. It's my opinion, one that happens to be shared. I felt like that before he said it, too.

Ok, so it's not possible that Ort is the same way here? He couldn't have thought what he was accused of instead of just waiting for someone to make a case?

How was I to know that a question which seemingly has nothing to do with me was in fact addressed specifically to me?

Because it was addressed to you, and we even reminded you several times after the fact that it was addressed to you.

Wrong. CR addressed this to no one in particular (I assumed to Ramus since it was Ramus's gambit) in a seperate post. When you "reminded" him, all you said was "waiting on an answer for 155." That reminder wasn't addressed to anyone so I thought it was addressed with who I thought it was originally addressed to (Ramus). I find it completely plausible Ort was not dodging questions (which you seem to subtly suggest as dodging questions).

Before I go through the posts, the Fong's Gambit question wasn't just to you, Ort. It was to the entire town.

That's not what Mizzy seems to think. You both reiterated it as though it was addressed to me, and as though I was somehow to have already known that. But this is a fairly pointless train of discussion.

Please post your more reasons to vote. I would love to see a case summary from you.

I have already done so, I have little of substance to add at this point.

Then please reiterate your suspicions into one post.

Why don't you do the same, even though you are not voting him anymore?

Ok, my opinions after rereading the entire thread is that I believe Mizzy is scum, ThAdmiral could be scum, and CR might be scum. I feel CR really went at Ort prematurely and tunneled in with bad logic, which is scummy (but I can see town doing it as well, so I am hesitant to say with too much certainty of his alignment). A CR lynch today might lead to some interesting information for D2, but I feel a Mizzy lynch would lead to more since I feel she is scum, thus:

Vote: Mizzy

[Battousai]

Ok guys, let's pick up the activity.

CR: Care to respond to anything other than what you already pointed out? There was a question after the very first quote to you.

[Battousai]

Mizzy: You plan on answering any of the questions I asked you in 220?

[Battousai]

So you keep your vote on Ramus because he wanted Caboose to form a case instead of just whining? Do you believe he was trying Fong's Gambit? Does it make sense as he had hinted at it and not answering questions is extremely obvious?

Only half way through rereading the day, but I have to go. Right now I'm leaning on Mizzy, CarnCarn, and/or thAdmiral as scum with Ort more likely town. Since I'm not done reading, I will not vote or put a case on any of the three I listed as leaning scum.

No, that is not why I kept my vote on Ramus; I had already explained why I kept my vote on him before. I don't believe he was trying a specific gambit, no, but I believe he was trying to pull

something

. Don't go into WIFOM.

Well then could you please elaborate on the "Whateva, ah do whu' ah want!" remark? I thought that was in reference to Ramus getting angry at Caboose for whining instead of voting.

So, you have 2 small entries on me, before you finished re-reading the whole thing, and yet you are learning towards me? That stinks to high hell of you setting me up for suspicion and a later vote in order to make said suspicion and later vote look valid.

I found those two entries somewhat scummy. So how could I say I have no read on you when I have two things I found scummy? (rhetorical)

A) How was Ramus acting scummy and how is being emotional a reason to vote?
B) So you don't believe in his Fong Gambit
C)Why not just unvote? See below quote

I already had answered A before and have answered B above. As to your C, I was on LoA and didn't have time for a whole lot due to work and the holidays. Counterproductive? No, I don't think so.

Answer them again please, or give me a post number to where you explain how being emotional is a reason to vote. C) Where did you get counterproductive, I said contradiction. Also you said a vote on someone is better than a vote on no one. But later in the day you unvoted and didn't place another vote.

[quote="Mizzy]

Seems to me, you're the one waiting around lately. Did you come up with Ort waiting around on the word of CR?

Why did you ask this when it had already been addressed?[/quote]
The reason I asked is because it leads into my next quote.[/quote]

Ok, so it's not possible that Ort is the same way here? He couldn't have thought what he was accused of instead of just waiting for someone to make a case?

Doing it here and there is one thing but doing it a whole lot is another thing entirely.

You just made an accusation, as did CR, and didn't post where he took someone else's opinion and applied it as his own.

Wrong. CR addressed this to no one in particular (I assumed to Ramus since it was Ramus's gambit) in a seperate post. When you "reminded" him, all you said was "waiting on an answer for 155." That reminder wasn't addressed to anyone so I thought it was addressed with who I thought it was originally addressed to (Ramus). I find it completely plausible Ort was not dodging questions (which you seem to subtly suggest as dodging questions).

It was in an entire post addressed to him specifically without any sort of note that said, "Oh, by the way, this is to everyone." Even if it was to everyone, it was still ALSO addressed to ortolan.

Then why didn't you answer it?

I have to say that this is what really pissed me off. Never once did you actually have any real case point, you asked things that had already been addressed, and in general, defended ort for what I feel is no apparent reason. You had zero case, don't even bother waiting for me to respond to anything or waiting for my responses before voting, and then just go ahead and vote me? Shame on you! You're a better player than that.

Are you trying to get me to stop voting you by shaming me or something?

[Battousai]

Answer them again please, or give me a post number to where you explain how being emotional is a reason to vote. C) Where did you get counterproductive, I said contradiction. Also you said a vote on someone is better than a vote on no one. But later in the day you unvoted and didn't place another vote.

I can't go back and re-read right now, sorry. You'll have to go look on your own.

The reason I asked you to give a post number or explain again because I didn't find anywhere where you gave a reason on why being emotional is reason to vote.

You just made an accusation, as did CR, and didn't post where he took someone else's opinion and applied it as his own.

My point was that he posted in 138 and then later destructor asked him who else he was suspicious of, which I still can't find an answer to. Then he got into a tussle with CWR and the OMGUS fiasco, and then FoSes me and votes destructor in 163. No case. He just sat around, dodged questions, argued and then made shit votes/FoSes (possibly in an attempt to look productive.)

So you are saying he was lazy because he didn't scumhunt while being attacked. I've been in a game before (you moded) where someone was being attacked, but didn't scumhunt and at the end, were town IIRC. (The game was your Troy meet Helen)

Then why didn't you answer it?

Because at first I didn't think it was addressed to everyone, and then I had no idea what Whoever-the-hell's Gambit was and I still don't. How can I answer when I don't know what it is and why should I answer when I think it's not relevant and a possible distraction? Plus, I was very strapped for time.

Yet you keep wanting Ort to answer this and you get after Ort for not answering.

[Battousai]

Axel: Concerning ThAdmiral- the reason I have him as leaning scum is because I felt he was not really contributing much plus seemed to distance himself from any wagon that was forming (it continued into the Caboose it seems from your analysis)

[Battousai]

Nat: Why are you willing to lynch Mizzy over just gut feeling and not giving her anything to defend against other than "Your gut's wrong."?

[Battousai]

Unvote

It's interesting to see that axelrod/ thadmiral put both CarnCarn and CR at 3 votes each (just 1 under the necessary amount for a deadline lynch. Lynching both CR and CarnCarn could give us some information (obviously lynching CR would give us the most of the two).

I do believe in information lynching (with support from thinking that they are guilty), is not bad on D1, so I'm going to vote CR.

[Battousai]

CR: What???

Axelrod: I found it interesting that two people are put really on the chopping block. I wrote it as a mental note for rereading that the outcome of todays lynch could have been helped along by both you and thadmiral. I'm not suggesting anything you've done is wrong and lynch worthy today, but later looking back it may make you look scummier/townier, to me at least.

[Battousai]

Interesting YOU would say tunneling kills townie considering your earlier play with Ort. Also, replace both with either for a more correct grammar sentence in the post you quoted from me.

[Battousai]

Sorry, I have been less than active playing games lately. It's final time, so I've been really studying lately. I'm going to post a small/quick post so you all know my line of thinking until I can post more (prob later today).

Nat- I do not want to lynch Nat right now. From a past game, this is generally the playing style.

Caboose- I'm on another site with him in which he has signups for a large game and currently running a mini. I've seen him be scum in all the games I was with him in and only once was he town. In all the games, he is usually more active than this and his posting this game is bizarre. I can't personally get a read on him from his current posts. Now that he has been replaced, and his replacement has been forthcoming with insight, I am unwilling to lynch Caboose at this instant.

Mizzy- As I have already stated with my vote, I find her play this game sketchy, but my read on her needs to improve more before I would vote her at deadline.

CR- Even though I don't feel there is enough scum points against him at this injuncture, a CR vote by me is more likely going to happen since the information we would gain on D1 has pushed the advantage of his lynch.

More soon.

[Battousai]

CarnCarn- post 353- offering to selfhammer if it was majority, but takes it back due to it being pointless in this situation. Doubts everyone at wagon is town (Caboose, destructor, ThAdmiral). I find that offering to kill yourself is a slight scumtell, even with the immediate withdrawl in the same post.


3 CarnCarn (Caboose, destructor, ThAdmiral)
3 ClockworkRuse (ortolan, CarnCarn, roflcopter)
1 Caboose (Machiavellian-Mafia)
1 Mizzy (Natirasha)
1 roflcopter (ClockworkRuse)
2- nat (Axelrod, Mizzy,

Ort- If wasn't voting CWR would vote rofl and both aren't scum together. Links Mizzy to CR due to similar tunneling/attacks on him. I find Ort more likely town due to who was attacking him/why.

MM- doesn't like CC or CWR as a lynch (both were one under majority and both very plausible lynches at the time). Said that if had to would lynch CWR due to more info.

Rofl- states that will switch to a Nat or Caboose wagon, even though earlier said not lynching CWR would be a big mistake. The only thing that really changed was that Nat picked up two votes (making the vote count

3 CC
3 CWR
2 Nat
1 Caboose

Mizzy- When asked by CWR, “You are willing to lynch based on one post by a player?” Stated that she doesn't see any way Nat being lynched. At time of her vote the count was 3 CC, 3 CWR, 2 Nat. Then plays the damned if you do, damned if you don't card, which I see as her trying to pre-defend her vote

These are the reasons for the Caboose votes: MM- inactivity, Nat- own survival (2 others before supported lynching Caboose before vote), destructor- inactivity, CWR- inactivity/ serious weak vote, CC- inactivity calls for majority.

[Battousai]

EBWOP:

Vote: Roflcopter

, until explains why he wants to lynch Nat or Caboose over CWR now.

[Battousai]

CWR: I'm I voting to lynch you? No. Do I need to make a case against someone I'm not trying to get lynched? I don't think so. All I said was that I would vote you more likely than Mizzy, Caboose, or Nat and that the information we could gain from your lynch is what is pushing you up higher than many players here.

[Battousai]

Rofl: Looking back at those posts again, I realize that you meant that you would be willing ot lynch Nat or Caboose if a CWR lynch was not possible. My mistake.

Unvote

[Battousai]

CC: Why FoS destructor and vote Ort and not the other way around?

[Battousai]

Just so you know, I am here and reading the thread. I'm just waiting on CarnCarn to get on and respond to recent votes/ my question to him.

[Battousai]

Starting page 18. I'll be using a point system to express how scummy any individual post is to me. Any positive number leans the player towards being a townie, a negative leans them to being scum.

Post 426:

Don't like this post at all. By saying me or CR could make the difference strikes me as if he's trying to shift the blame for a mislynch onto us (mostly me)because we weren't voting at the time and we COULD have voted to save Nat. His post was also at the end of the day, which I think he could have thought the final vote count would be soon and I wouldn't have gotten on. From this Destructor and CR could be a scum team, or Destructor just prefered a Nat lynch due to their being less information gotten from it.

-5

Post 427:

CR basically claims mason

Elaborate on your role please, do you turn up scum when investigated, killed, or both/neither?

. More to add to this once CR answers

Post 428:

Ort hammers Nat giving no explanation. He posted this at the end of the RL day (here at least) and as close to deadline as possible. Unless Ort planned on being killed that night, he should have expected to give a reason to this. I find it strange that he would want to wait until the next game day to explain and have people look towards him.

0

Post 431:

CarnCarn votes Ort for not providing a reason for the hammering unvote and also not suspecting Nat (the person hammered). Feels like CC is focusing on just the final two people on the Nat wagon and potentionally trying to get others to look at them for the blame. While I do agree that the destructor vote was suspicious, CC only FOS him and voted Ort. I disagree with the vote.

-1

Post 435:

Ort explains the unvote. I don't understand how you two would relate and you coming up with CR being town based on this relationship alone. Nothing in CR's claim strikes me as has to be town. It's quite possible scum CR got a fake claim as that, but if you're town I believe CR did not make up that claim, but instead is telling the truth or got a fakeclaim.

-2

Post 436:

I disagree with the post. It seems Mizzy didn't think Ort claiming he believed CR's claim to be the explanation to the Unvote. I think it was a misunderstanding here.

0

Post 438:

ThAdmiral talks about the night. Roflcopter was killed to cause confusion I believe, thus ThAdmiral focusing his entire post on that and not about the wagon on Nat or the unvotes at the end of the day strikes me as him wanting the town to focus on the NK and let the scum's plan of confusion take effect.

-5

Post 439:

This is where Mizzy and Ort seem to take off on a mistake. Mizzy didn't think Ort's post 435 was his explanation for his hammering unvote or as the explanation to all the people focusing on him for it. Ort thought Mizzy didn't make a mistake and was confused to why Mizzy would IGMEOY for unvoting someone he felt was a townie. At this point I believe Ort and Mizzy think the other is scum and any reread they do to the other is probably read already thinking the other is scum, so I'll keep that in mind later for certain posts.

0

This is all I'm able to get to, as I have other things I must do today. I promise to at least finish page 18 and start on 19 by the end of the 26th.

[Battousai]

Post 427:

CR basically claims mason

Elaborate on your role please, do you turn up scum when investigated, killed, or both/neither?

. More to add to this once CR answers

CR: Could you please answer this, as it appears a few other people have made posts that require me to have an answer to that in order for me to respond to?

[Battousai]

He obviously means "miller".

Yes, there are 4 roles I typically switch by accident. Miller/Mason and Watcher/Tracker. I'll wait for you to answer Ort's question before continuing post analysis.

[Battousai]

Post 427:

Initially I thought you claimed miller or had some special ability because I felt the line, "Although the town believes I am possessed by the Devil, I am sided with you all." was written to tell us that. Now that you have came out and said you have no special abilities, I wonder why you wrote that instead of "I am La Esmerelda's goat's Djali. I'm a vanilla townie, which is good." What you said was could have been, and was at least by me, hinted at if you turned up dead you could be revealed as scum when you weren't, your scum pals or a townie could suggest that you could be actually town and the reveal wasn't correct.

0

Post 441:

Well I'm still on the fence about CR. See above post. So if that was the case it wasn't counter-intuitive and he could have made a mistake and thought he had to be the lynch target. I mean as town voting Nat is a good move as allowing yourself to be lynch guarantees a mislynch, where as a Nat lynch did not. Of course the CR lynch does seem to give the most information from it, but CR seemed critical of that D1. You say CR seems town and that scum had to be on his wagon and vote one of them with that being your only reason. Go back and look at their reasons and see WHY they voted CR and see if there is logic behind it or that they actually thought CR was scum.

-2

Post 445:

Voting for no reason.

-2

Post 452:

ThAdmiral continues to vote then unvote almost immediately after.

0

Post 456:

While I do find Mizzy somewhat suspicious, some of these attacks are just wrong. First Mizzy has explained in the past that the vote on Ramus stayed on Ramus due to his actions/reactions after the initial vote. The inconsistancy thing is off.

0

Post 467:

Why is a hammering unvote worse than any of the other votes in the day (except it doesn't leave time for the lynchee to defend themselves)?

Post 469:

While there is a difference between not having a reason and not posting a reason, it leaves the other readers to just assume why you voted or if you even had a reason. Also not posting a reason is anti-town as it leaves the person you're voting in a position of not knowing why you voted them and defensless.

0

Post 471:

CC seems to be scumhunting and going away from his play from D1.

1

Post 473:

Urza explains that not giving a reason to his vote was to get reactions, something that I feel town or scum would try to do to find/incriminate someone. Your reason that only scum would get antsy is complete bull, IMO. As town or scum, I wouldn't be worried persay about a vote like that, but as town I would find it at fault and somewhat scummy and as scum I would try and get people to see it as scummy. As scum, if I felt you got a guilty on me I wouldn't get worked up over the vote or try to get you lynched since that would get you to claim with a guilty on me. Instead I would save my NK for you.

0

There, that's up to page 19. I will try and finish page 20 tomorrow if there is any meat in there.

[Battousai]

@ Everyone

- How many of you have read the setup rules? I see Batt, ort and CR talking about CR being a Miller, but a Miller isn't even a possible role in this setup so I think Batt's reason for being iffy about CR (504) are null.

You say CR seems town and that scum had to be on his wagon and vote one of them with that being your only reason.

This wasn't my only reason and I thought I made that clear. I noted his "noisy" FOS, hop to Caboose when the opportunity arose.

First, I don't see CR as being a miller. What I see or think may have been CR-scum trying to use his death and turning up scum as a way to get people to think he was town because of how he claimed. I asked other questions on whether or not he turned up scum under investigations and what not, just to feel out what he was actually claiming (special abilities and all) and not just townie.

Second, my response was directly to that post and did not take into account other posts. If you would have posted something about these other reasons from D1 into that post via link or mention of it, I wouldn't have said what I did.

[Battousai]

Urza- I wonder what your response is to my post 504 in which I comment on your posts 469 and 473. I don't agree with your vote on CC, with the reason why in that post.

[Battousai]

Mizzy: If you are going to use your past games as a defense on anything, you should give links to and instances of in that game.

[Battousai]

TSQ: Are you even in this game?

[Battousai]

Note the

0

I gave post 473. I find it just as likely that town or scum would have not given a reason just to get a response. If you are town, I disagree with the logic; if you are scum I believe you are just trying to make CC look more scummy. Right now, my read on you is neutral.

[Battousai]

Basically, I included it as it stuck out when I was reading and I wanted everyone to see my opinion on it. Later, I wanted your opinion on two of your posts because you kept your vote on CC for reasons I don't think are correct and if you are town, I wanted you to see the disagreement with the reasoning and hopefully come up with another to vote CC or drop the vote. While it didn't result in scumhunting, it does help other players in knowing where I stood on some of the recent posts.

When I get time tomorrow, I will go back and look at voting yesterday. From memory only, I think there migt be something noteoworthy with the 3 wagons and how they built up and how Urza's lost steam.

[Battousai]

Battousai

(38 posts in the game):

No comments about Uriel (Nat's predecessor). First opinion of any kind on Nat. comes in Post #394 where he says he doesn't want to lynch Nat. Says that in his experience this is generally Nat's playing style (not 100% what kind of playing style he is referring to here. Lurking and not contributing?)

Generally, I found that Nat has a scummy playstyle.

I'll also note right off the top that this is one of the things I am specifically looking for in this review - people who avoid the Nat. wagon for the reason "oh, that's just the way Nat. is."

When I said that I did not want to vote for Nat at this time, it was in reference to the two votes that started building up right before deadline. The deadline, I might add, which was supposed to be the 11th at the time of the votes (5 days after Nat entered the game). I felt it would be best if Nat would be given more time and more of a chance to change his playstyle and contribute a bit more.

At this point, there are 2 people voting for Nat., myself and Mizzy. For myself, it's specifically because Nat. is being completely and totally useless. From my perspective, there's no excuse for this. Nat. cannot be defended here. What's more, I see no reason why a townie would even

try

to defend him. He has done nothing worthy of defense. So when people pop up and say things like this it's going to be an immediate Red Flag for me.

That doesn't mean that you can't think someone else is scummier looking. That doesn't mean you can't think that it's a better idea to go after someone who's more active, rather than engage in what's essentially a lurker-hunt. But what you can't do is excuse Nat. for "just being Nat." and have it not come off as mightily suspicious.

So, negative points to Bat. for that.

[Battousai]

3 ClockworkRuse (urielzyx, CarnCarn, Machiavellian-Mafia)
2 Battousai (Caboose, Ramus)
1 Caboose (Battousai)
1 Machiavellian-Mafia (MiteyMouse)
1 ortolan (ClockworkRuse)
1 Puta Puta (ThAdmiral)
1 Ramus (Mizzy)
1 ThAdmiral (ortolan)

4 ClockworkRuse (urielzyx, CarnCarn, Machiavellian-Mafia, Battousai)
2 Battousai (Caboose, Ramus)
1 destructor (ThAdmiral)
1 Machiavellian-Mafia (MiteyMouse)
1 ortolan (ClockworkRuse)
1 Ramus (Mizzy)
1 ThAdmiral (ortolan)

I switch my vote to CR, CR is now lynchable

5 ClockworkRuse (urielzyx, CarnCarn, Machiavellian-Mafia, Battousai, ortolan)
3 Battousai (Caboose, Ramus, destructor)
1 ortolan (ClockworkRuse)
1 Ramus (Mizzy)

Ort switches vote from ThAdmiral to CR. Putting CR at L-2.
ThAdmiral unvotes

5 ClockworkRuse (urielzyx, CarnCarn, Machiavellian-Mafia, Battousai, ortolan)
3 Battousai (Caboose, Ramus, destructor)
1 ortolan (ClockworkRuse)

Mizzy unvotes Ramus

3 ClockworkRuse (urielzyx, Battousai, ortolan)
2 Battousai (Caboose, destructor)
2 Caboose (Machiavellian-Mafia, CarnCarn)
2 ortolan (ClockworkRuse, ThAdmiral)

MM unvotes CR and votes Caboose. CR is no longer at L-2.
CC unvotes CR and votes Caboose. CR is no longer lynchable.
ThAdmiral votes Ort
Ramus unvotes myself

3 ClockworkRuse (urielzyx, ortolan, Axelrod)
2 Battousai (destructor, ClockworkRuse)
1 Caboose (Machiavellian-Mafia)
1 Mizzy (Battousai)

I unvote CR and vote Mizzy
Axelrod votes CR
CR unvotes Ort and votes me
Caboose unvotes
CC unvotes Axelrod
ThAdmiral unvotes Ort

5 ClockworkRuse (urielzyx, ortolan, Axelrod, CarnCarn, roflcopter)
2 Battousai (destructor, ClockworkRuse)
1 Caboose (Machiavellian-Mafia)
1 CarnCarn (Caboose)
1 Mizzy (Battousai)

CC votes CR. CR is now lynchable.
roflcopter votes CR. Putting CR at L-2.
Caboose votes CC

5 ClockworkRuse (urielzyx, ortolan, Axelrod, CarnCarn, roflcopter)
2 CarnCarn (Caboose, destructor)
1 Battousai (ClockworkRuse)
1 Caboose (Machiavellian-Mafia)
1 Mizzy (Battousai)

Destructor unvotes myself and votes CC

5 ClockworkRuse (Natirasha, ortolan, Axelrod, CarnCarn, roflcopter)
2 CarnCarn (Caboose, destructor)
1 Caboose (Machiavellian-Mafia)
1 Mizzy (Battousai)
1 roflcopter (ClockworkRuse)

CR unvotes myself and votes roflcopter

4 ClockworkRuse (ortolan, Axelrod, CarnCarn, roflcopter)
2 CarnCarn (Caboose, destructor)
2 Mizzy (Battousai, Natirasha)
1 Caboose (Machiavellian-Mafia)
1 roflcopter (ClockworkRuse)

Nat unvotes CR and votes Mizzy. CR is no longer at L-2.

3 CarnCarn (Caboose, destructor, ThAdmiral)
3 ClockworkRuse (ortolan, CarnCarn, roflcopter)
1 Caboose (Machiavellian-Mafia)
1 Mizzy (Natirasha)
1 roflcopter (ClockworkRuse)

Axelrod unvotes CR. CR is no longer lynchable
ThAdmiral votes CC
I unvote Mizzy

5 urzassedatives (Machiavellian-Mafia, Natirasha, destructor, ClockworkRuse, CarnCarn)
2 CarnCarn (urzassedatives, ThAdmiral)
2 ClockworkRuse (ortolan, roflcopter)
2 Natirasha (Axelrod, Mizzy)

Nat unvotes Mizzy and votes Urza
Destructor unvotes CC and votes Urza
CR unvotes roflcopter and votes Urza. Urza is now lynchable
CC unvotes CR and votes Urza. Urza is now at L-2.
Axelrod votes Nat
Mizzy votes Nat

5 Urzassedatives (Machiavellian-Mafia, Natirasha, destructor, ClockworkRuse, CarnCarn)
3 ClockworkRuse (ortolan, roflcopter, Urzassedatives)
2 Natirasha (Axelrod, Mizzy)
1 CarnCarn (ThAdmiral)

Urza unvotes CC and votes CR

3 ClockworkRuse (ortolan, roflcopter, Urzassedatives)
3 Urzassedatives (Machiavellian-Mafia, Natirasha, ClockworkRuse)
2 Natirasha (Axelrod, Mizzy)
1 CarnCarn (destructor)
1 roflcopter (ThAdmiral)

Destructor unvotes Urza and votes CC. Urza is no longer at L-2.
CC unvotes Urza. Urza is no longer lynchable.
ThAdmiral unvotes CC and votes roflcopter

5 ClockworkRuse (ortolan, roflcopter, Urzassedatives, CarnCarn, Natirasha)
4 Natirasha (Axelrod, Mizzy, Machiavellian-Mafia, ThAdmiral)
1 CarnCarn (destructor)
1 Urzassedatives (ClockworkRuse)

CC votes CR. CR is now lynchable.
Nat unvotes Urza and votes CR. CR is now at L-2.
MM unvotes Urza and votes Nat.
ThAdmiral unvotes roflcopter and votes Nat. Nat is now lynchable (2)

5 Natirasha (Axelrod, Mizzy, Machiavellian-Mafia, ThAdmiral, destructor)
4 ClockworkRuse (roflcopter, Urzassedatives, CarnCarn, Natirasha)
1 Urzassedatives (ClockworkRuse)

Destructor unvotes CC and votes Nat. Nat is now L-2 (2)
Ort unvotes CR, CR is no longer at L-2. CR is (2) and Nat is (1)

[Battousai]

Misclick, post should look like this:

3 ClockworkRuse (urielzyx, CarnCarn, Machiavellian-Mafia)
2 Battousai (Caboose, Ramus)
1 Caboose (Battousai)
1 Machiavellian-Mafia (MiteyMouse)
1 ortolan (ClockworkRuse)
1 Puta Puta (ThAdmiral)
1 Ramus (Mizzy)
1 ThAdmiral (ortolan)

4 ClockworkRuse (urielzyx, CarnCarn, Machiavellian-Mafia, Battousai)
2 Battousai (Caboose, Ramus)
1 destructor (ThAdmiral)
1 Machiavellian-Mafia (MiteyMouse)
1 ortolan (ClockworkRuse)
1 Ramus (Mizzy)
1 ThAdmiral (ortolan)

I switch my vote to CR, CR is now lynchable

5 ClockworkRuse (urielzyx, CarnCarn, Machiavellian-Mafia, Battousai, ortolan)
3 Battousai (Caboose, Ramus, destructor)
1 ortolan (ClockworkRuse)
1 Ramus (Mizzy)

Ort switches vote from ThAdmiral to CR. Putting CR at L-2.
ThAdmiral unvotes

5 ClockworkRuse (urielzyx, CarnCarn, Machiavellian-Mafia, Battousai, ortolan)
3 Battousai (Caboose, Ramus, destructor)
1 ortolan (ClockworkRuse)

Mizzy unvotes Ramus

3 ClockworkRuse (urielzyx, Battousai, ortolan)
2 Battousai (Caboose, destructor)
2 Caboose (Machiavellian-Mafia, CarnCarn)
2 ortolan (ClockworkRuse, ThAdmiral)

MM unvotes CR and votes Caboose. CR is no longer at L-2.
CC unvotes CR and votes Caboose. CR is no longer lynchable.
ThAdmiral votes Ort
Ramus unvotes myself

3 ClockworkRuse (urielzyx, ortolan, Axelrod)
2 Battousai (destructor, ClockworkRuse)
1 Caboose (Machiavellian-Mafia)
1 Mizzy (Battousai)

I unvote CR and vote Mizzy
Axelrod votes CR
CR unvotes Ort and votes me
Caboose unvotes
CC unvotes Axelrod
ThAdmiral unvotes Ort

5 ClockworkRuse (urielzyx, ortolan, Axelrod, CarnCarn,

roflcopter

)
2 Battousai (destructor, ClockworkRuse)
1 Caboose (Machiavellian-Mafia)
1 CarnCarn (Caboose)
1 Mizzy (Battousai)

CC votes CR. CR is now lynchable.

roflcopter

votes CR. Putting CR at L-2.
Caboose votes CC

5 ClockworkRuse (urielzyx, ortolan, Axelrod, CarnCarn,

roflcopter

)
2 CarnCarn (Caboose, destructor)
1 Battousai (ClockworkRuse)
1 Caboose (Machiavellian-Mafia)
1 Mizzy (Battousai)

Destructor unvotes myself and votes CC

5 ClockworkRuse (

Natirasha

, ortolan, Axelrod, CarnCarn,

roflcopter

)
2 CarnCarn (Caboose, destructor)
1 Caboose (Machiavellian-Mafia)
1 Mizzy (Battousai)
1

roflcopter

(ClockworkRuse)

CR unvotes myself and votes

roflcopter

4 ClockworkRuse (ortolan, Axelrod, CarnCarn,

roflcopter

)
2 CarnCarn (Caboose, destructor)
2 Mizzy (Battousai,

Natirasha

)
1 Caboose (Machiavellian-Mafia)
1

roflcopter

(ClockworkRuse)

Nat

unvotes CR and votes Mizzy. CR is no longer at L-2.

3 CarnCarn (Caboose, destructor, ThAdmiral)
3 ClockworkRuse (ortolan, CarnCarn,

roflcopter

)
1 Caboose (Machiavellian-Mafia)
1 Mizzy (

Natirasha

)
1

roflcopter

(ClockworkRuse)

Axelrod unvotes CR. CR is no longer lynchable
ThAdmiral votes CC
I unvote Mizzy

5 urzassedatives (Machiavellian-Mafia,

Natirasha

, destructor, ClockworkRuse, CarnCarn)
2 CarnCarn (urzassedatives, ThAdmiral)
2 ClockworkRuse (ortolan,

roflcopter

)
2

Natirasha

(Axelrod, Mizzy)

Nat

unvotes Mizzy and votes Urza
Destructor unvotes CC and votes Urza
CR unvotes

roflcopter

and votes Urza. Urza is now lynchable
CC unvotes CR and votes Urza. Urza is now at L-2.
Axelrod votes

Nat

Mizzy votes

Nat

5 Urzassedatives (Machiavellian-Mafia,

Natirasha

, destructor, ClockworkRuse, CarnCarn)
3 ClockworkRuse (ortolan,

roflcopter

, Urzassedatives)
2

Natirasha

(Axelrod, Mizzy)
1 CarnCarn (ThAdmiral)

Urza unvotes CC and votes CR

3 ClockworkRuse (ortolan,

roflcopter

, Urzassedatives)
3 Urzassedatives (Machiavellian-Mafia,

Natirasha

, ClockworkRuse)
2

Natirasha

(Axelrod, Mizzy)
1 CarnCarn (destructor)
1

roflcopter

(ThAdmiral)

Destructor unvotes Urza and votes CC. Urza is no longer at L-2.
CC unvotes Urza. Urza is no longer lynchable.
ThAdmiral unvotes CC and votes

roflcopter

5 ClockworkRuse (ortolan,

roflcopter

, Urzassedatives, CarnCarn,

Natirasha

)
4

Natirasha

(Axelrod, Mizzy, Machiavellian-Mafia, ThAdmiral)
1 CarnCarn (destructor)
1 Urzassedatives (ClockworkRuse)

CC votes CR. CR is now lynchable.

Nat

unvotes Urza and votes CR. CR is now at L-2.
MM unvotes Urza and votes

Nat

.
ThAdmiral unvotes

roflcopter

and votes

Nat

.

Nat

is now lynchable (2)

5

Natirasha

(Axelrod, Mizzy, Machiavellian-Mafia, ThAdmiral, destructor)
4 ClockworkRuse (

roflcopter

, Urzassedatives, CarnCarn,

Natirasha

)
1 Urzassedatives (ClockworkRuse)

Destructor unvotes CC and votes

Nat

.

Nat

is now L-2 (2)
Ort unvotes CR, CR is no longer at L-2. CR is (2) and

Nat

is (1)



[mrow]

Players

[col]

CR lynchable

[col]

CR L-2

[col]

Not Lynchable

[col]

Not L-2

[col]

Urza lynchable

[col]

Urza L-2

[col]

Not Lynchable

[col]

Not L-2

[col]

Nat lynchable

[col]

Nat L-2

[col]

Not Lynchable

[col]

Not L-2

Batt[col]1[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0CC[col]2[col]0[col]1[col]0[col]0[col]1[col]1[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0CR[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]1[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0MM[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]1[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0Ort[col]0[col]1[col]0[col]1[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0Destructor/PP[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]1[col]0[col]1[col]0[col]0Axelrod/Ramus[col]0[col]0[col]1[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0ThAdmiral[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]0[col]1[col]0[col]0[col]0

From just the voting records alone, I have concluded that there is at least 1 scum amoung these 4 players: Urza, Destructor, CC, and CR. The wagon on Urza grew pretty quickly and for bad reasons, IMO. The main point was that Caboose was not active enough. For the wagon to build up quickly, I believe that scum either jumped on it, a few players made a bad town mistake, or a few players made a bad town mistake that might have resulted in a positive result.

From the table, I have noted that neither Urza or Mizzy have done anything to make it into the table. Are they scum trying not to do anything that might appear bad if/when the vote records are looked back on? It's all speculation, but later on I may go back and look at it more closely. CC has also stuck out. He placed CR at 4 votes (enough to be lynched at deadline) twice, yet had placed CR at under 4 votes once. I believe CC-scum could have been wagon-hopping, trying to get a good wagon to end the day. CC-scum could also have been bussing his scum buddy CR, but that is unlikely as CR was almost lynched and CC was on his wagon.

Thoughts, opinions, anything I missed on my inital read through?

[Battousai]

Ort: The top half is all the vote counts (minus the first couple), whereas the table is shows a more visual interpretation of when someone was placed at 4 votes (needed to lynch at deadline), 5 votes, and unvoted from 5 votes and 4 votes. What's written under the quotes are the changes that happened in between vote counts.

CC: From the voting records (not the table), Caboose/Urza jumped from 2 votes to 5 votes in the span of 1 vote count. IIRC, the main reason was because Caboose was inactive, noncontributive. Therefore the three players that jumped on are listed. I then have to list Urza in the group because I'm basing the other three players on Urza being town and it being too quick (don't know how to explain this better. Since I'm basing one group on another factor, I have to add that factor to the group).

The table shows a more visual interpretation of when someone was placed at 4 votes (needed to lynch at deadline), 5 votes, and unvoted from 5 votes and 4 votes. Since I believe scum have two main goals: 1) The most important, don't get lynched. 2) Keep your partners alive, unless it would cause goal 1 to come into jeapardy; I think seeing who saved who from being the one lynched is worth pointing out.

[Battousai]

Well I'm going to focus on those four. To start off, I'll order them from scummiest to least scummiest:

CarnCarn
ClockworkRuse
Destructor
Urza

CC- When lookng back at vote records, CC seemed to hop on and off all the major wagons. When the wagon seemed to plateau, CC seemed to jump off. At the end of yesterday, CC was on the wagon that would have been lynched until Ort unvoted minutes before deadline hit.

I think CC has the best chance to be scum and therefore...

Vote: CarnCarn

[Battousai]

Well I'm going to focus on those four. To start off, I'll order them from scummiest to least scummiest:

CarnCarn
ClockworkRuse
Destructor
Urza

CC- When lookng back at vote records, CC seemed to hop on and off all the major wagons. When the wagon seemed to plateau, CC seemed to jump off. At the end of yesterday, CC was on the wagon that would have been lynched until Ort unvoted minutes before deadline hit.

I think CC has the best chance to be scum and therefore...

Vote: CarnCarn

Wait... I was on a wagon that didn't lead to yesterday's lynch of a townie (in fact, I was pretty opposed to it, like you), who never even claimed a role, so I'm more likely to be scum for that?

You were on a wagon in which I think that you thought was going to be the final wagon. This supports my reasoning (and is why I have it last in my reasonings) that you were trying really hard to get anybody lynched.

Hopping on and off wagons is not a real scumtell at all, either. If anything, it shows active scumhunting, or just aggressive playstyle.

That's a matter of opinion and circumstances. I think you were aggressive, yes, but I think your reason to be aggressive was to get a lynch.

Also, can you point to specific examples of where I "jumped off" when wagons started to "plateau"? If you look closely enough, I actually unvoted when CR had 4 votes and Urza had 4 votes

Which vote count was that?

(making them "not lynchable" (at deadline) by your definition), so that's not hopping off when the wagons were stalling at all, since my unvotes were what apparently caused the stalling you're talking about.

My reasonings were directly from the post counts that I posted. From those, when you made CR unlynchable, CR went from 4 to 5 votes through vote counts 6-8. In this I find it stalling as the momentum deterorated, especially in vote count 9 when MM jumps off which surely marked the end of the momentum. My whole case about you is really that you are really trying to get anybody lynched.

Don't have much time now, but with deadline looming I felt answering your defense deserved at least some time to avoid losing time later.

[Battousai]

Well I'm going to focus on those four. To start off, I'll order them from scummiest to least scummiest:

CarnCarn
ClockworkRuse
Destructor
Urza

CC- When lookng back at vote records, CC seemed to hop on and off all the major wagons. When the wagon seemed to plateau, CC seemed to jump off. At the end of yesterday, CC was on the wagon that would have been lynched until Ort unvoted minutes before deadline hit.

I think CC has the best chance to be scum and therefore...

Vote: CarnCarn

Wait... I was on a wagon that didn't lead to yesterday's lynch of a townie (in fact, I was pretty opposed to it, like you), who never even claimed a role, so I'm more likely to be scum for that?

You were on a wagon in which I think that you thought was going to be the final wagon. This supports my reasoning (and is why I have it last in my reasonings) that you were trying really hard to get anybody lynched.

That's garbage. Nat would have been much easier to lynch if I wanted to lynch just anyone.

Hopping on and off wagons is not a real scumtell at all, either. If anything, it shows active scumhunting, or just aggressive playstyle.

That's a matter of opinion and circumstances. I think you were aggressive, yes, but I think your reason to be aggressive was to get a lynch.

So what? How does that make me more likely to be scum?

Also, can you point to specific examples of where I "jumped off" when wagons started to "plateau"? If you look closely enough, I actually unvoted when CR had 4 votes and Urza had 4 votes

Which vote count was that?

I don't remember exactly; I'm going off of your summary table. I could look it up if you don't believe it, but I think you've already done the work yourself.

(making them "not lynchable" (at deadline) by your definition), so that's not hopping off when the wagons were stalling at all, since my unvotes were what apparently caused the stalling you're talking about.

My reasonings were directly from the post counts that I posted. From those, when you made CR unlynchable, CR went from 4 to 5 votes through vote counts 6-8. In this I find it stalling as the momentum deterorated, especially in vote count 9 when MM jumps off which surely marked the end of the momentum. My whole case about you is really that you are really trying to get anybody lynched.

MM jumped off, but CR still had 4 votes at the time, I believe (enough to be lynched at deadline). If I really wanted to get anyone lynched, why would I have jumped off that wagon so quickly? Your accusation is inconsistent with my actions.

Don't have much time now, but with deadline looming I felt answering your defense deserved at least some time to avoid losing time later.

To avoid more bolding/underlining/etc....

1) But the CR lynch was coming to fruitation at the end of the day. If both Ort and Destructor did not change their votes, CR would have been lynched.

2) It makes you more likely to be scum because I find it more likely that scum would try and lynch ANYONE. Emphasis on ANYONE.

3) Ok, but you have to look at the actual vote counts to notice when there is a plateau and not just the summary. I already explained the unvoting of CR, but the unvoting of Urza is different. You unvoted Urza after 2 vote counts. You were the second to unvote him after people (myself and Mizzy at the top of my head) called suspicion onto that wagon.

4)When the deadline was retracted, I think that you thought the wagon wasn't going into fruitation, even with the bare minimum votes required, so you went with a wagon that might come to fruitation due to a policy of lynching active lurkers. Then when Caboose actually starts to scumhunt your main reason is gone and you have to unvote. Then when deadline comes close again you go back to your CR vote. (this is all page 9 and 10 for reference)

[Battousai]

CC: Why would anti-town =/= scum carry less merit? A traitor knows they are a traitor so they would behave as scum. Traitor should only take affect when a townie is killed and people are debating on whether they are the traitor or not.

[Battousai]

1) But the CR lynch was coming to fruitation at the end of the day. If both Ort and Destructor did not change their votes, CR would have been lynched.

So why do I need to be on that wagon if I thought he was going to be deadline lynched anyway? Would would I do that as scum? How does adding on to the CR wagon make me more likely to be scum?

You're just going around in circles around my main point. You wanted to get someone lynched. What's the best way to do that? Vote for them...

4)When the deadline was retracted, I think that you thought the wagon wasn't going into fruitation, even with the bare minimum votes required, so you went with a wagon that might come to fruitation due to a policy of lynching active lurkers. Then when Caboose actually starts to scumhunt your main reason is gone and you have to unvote. Then when deadline comes close again you go back to your CR vote. (this is all page 9 and 10 for reference)

This is one big assumption from the start and it's based on nothing, really. Yes, I choose to jump off a wagon that would be lynched at deadline to become the second vote on a wagon because that was more likely to be the lynch /sarcasm.
I went back to pages 9 and 10 and your facts of the story are simply wrong:
Caboose only gets up to 3 votes within that page. MM first, then me, then ThAd (whose vote post, on reread, is REALLY scummy).

1)

He is never lynchable during that time. And do you really consider Caboose's post on page 9 "scumhunting"? He was just answering questions here and there after his long hiatus. Also, again, ThAd's unvote post is scummy and it actually does what you are accusing

me

of. Are you by chance confusing my posts with his?

1) Missed the point again. I claimed you went to the wagon that had a good chance of going into fruitation (due to Caboose not contributing). When Caboose actually contributed (you like this term better than scumhunting?), you had to withdrawl your vote and go back to the largest wagon.

[Battousai]

You're just going around in circles around my main point. You wanted to get someone lynched. What's the best way to do that? Vote for them...

OK, I wanted someone lynched so I voted them (that's the game, after all). But if I were scum and knew they were town (which is what you're suggesting), I have no reason to "pile on" (add more votes than the minimum necessary at deadline). That's just inviting suspicion without reason. Therefore, that's not scummy at all.

You were the 4th vote on the wagon, therefore not "pileing on."

1) Missed the point again. I claimed you went to the wagon that had a good chance of going into fruitation (due to Caboose not contributing). When Caboose actually contributed (you like this term better than scumhunting?), you had to withdrawl your vote and go back to the largest wagon.

That's big reach. There chances of Caboose's "wagon", which only had 1 vote on it, having a better chance of being the lynching wagon at the time were not good (not when CR already had the necessary number of votes to be lynched at deadline). Therefore, that's not scummy at all. What did the "contribute"? He just posted to defend himself against lurking, then went back to lurking. And you are twisting/misrepping completely the reasons why I unvoted Caboose and went back to CR (which I gave already).

1) I don't know the exact reason, but I can guess from what you have already shown as to you going on wagons and this time I figure you're trying to get on early.

2) Again, the CR wagon plateaued... I've said this like 5 times, yet you continue to ignore this part to use the CR wagon in your defence.

3) Why did you unvote Caboose then? I'm pretty sure it was because he became more active. Also, you can't use the "went back to lurking" as you unvoted before Caboose could be considered lurking again.

4) These were your reasons for unvoting/voting:

Caboose is the worst offender since not only are his contributions just Mafia theory and minutiae, he has been much more active in other places than in this game. In his last 40 posts he has 1 post in this game, in his last 90 posts he has 2 posts in this game, etc. I consider lack of motivation to contribute to be very scummy.

Unvote ClockworkRuse, Vote: Caboose

Unvote: ClockworkRuse
Vote: Caboose

Unvote [Caboose]
Caboose, I see you're still keeping your early vote on Batt. Did you mean to do this?

I will be V/LA 12/2-12/4 (returning 12/5)

Right now, no one stands out at an obvious suspect. I feel that a CR lynch is the best, though. If he flips scum, then I can understand why his wagon stalled out earlier. If he is town, then we can investigate his wagoners tomorrow. It puts his earlier comments in some context.

I also find Axel mildly suspicious for his "townie" list, especially this early in the game.

Vote: ClockworkRuse
FoS: Axelrod

Reason to vote Caboose: Not Contributing
Reason to unvote Caboose: Contributed
Reason to vote CR: Information

5) If Caboose just posted to defend himself from lurking (in his post I saw no mention to the votes on him for lurking and instead saw questions directed at others), why did you unvote him when your case against him was MM's case that he wasn't contributing? The only logical answer is that he CONTRIBUTED...

6) I hate laptop computers. This is just about my 4th time writing this post due to hitting the wrong button, either making my computer go to the previous page or to erase an entire paragraph and replace it with the sentance I was currently writting elsewhere...

[Battousai]

Mizzy: How is the sentence you quoted wishy-washy, in a point that is scummy? He's holding the same stance, but doesn't quite know why he feels it.

Destructor: What was your read on Mizzy yesterday, did you post one? The reason I ask this is because Mizzy is similarily doing the same thing today as yesterday (defending someone and attacking their attacker); except this time you are Ort and CC is CR. I don't recall you calling out Mizzy for it yesterday, which makes me think you only think Mizzy is scum because its happening to you.

[Battousai]

Vote: Destructer

I still contend that the quickwagon on Urza wasn't done entirely by town. Now that CC has came up town, that leaves Urza, Destructer, and CR. I picked Destructer because I went back to my notes. I noted that I found it strange that after attacking me, and I don't think I made that good of a defence, you thought I was pretty pro-town. Then you went on to vote CC yesterday because of a FOS. I find that pretty weak.


Also, I find it suspicious Ort has called Mizzy out. There are a few reasons for a lack of a NK. There is a possibility of a successful doc protection according to the rules. I would think you would have thought of this instead of A) Outing yourself as roleblocker, B) Potentionally taking us to LyLo with you as a lead canidate for lynch if Mizzy is actually town.

[Battousai]

Unvote

I'm still suspicious of you destructor, but in light of Urza play... Also, yesterday I was sure CC was scum, I was willing to take any vote on him.

Urza, I was giving you a pass for awhile, which I shouldn't have, because when you came in so many people piled on. But after your play today, I'm having doubts.

Vote: Urza

[Battousai]

1) Your initial post on this page said "lets believe ort and lynch Mizzy. If Mizzy is town then lets lynch Ort." It is damn well possible that there are other roles out there and other circumstances that would make both of these players innocent. To me, as scum, you are setting up back to back mislynches in order to win.

2) If there is another powerrole out there that blocked/deferred the kill last night, it would be best for scum to figure out who in order to kill them (aka a doc would think that who they protected is town and thus: confirmed innocent. Actually a role/no role claim would be worse if this was the scenerio.

3) Only after Mizzy called you out on your idea did you come up with the mass claim. That suggests you were happy with lynching Mizzy today and Ort tomorrow without mass claiming...

[Battousai]

We have exactly 2 days in worst case scenerio. We will have 3 days if neither the town or scum use their vig kill (if there is one). So ya, I'd rather not bank on the third day.

This game has got to be one of the harder games I've played on the site. The amount of scum mistakes is equal to the amount of town mistakes so it is getting hard to figure out who is who.

Urza: What if someone comes out and claims doc (as roleblocker would mean that either Mizzy or whoever the roleblocker blocked is scum)? That would mean it is possible that Mizzy and Ort are both town and the scum now knows who are all the town powerroles while the town gains nothing. Mass claiming, even role/no role, is completely out, IMO.

The only other explanation for the lack of the NK that is reasonable is a successful doc protect. In case the doc gets killed tonight, maybe we should all list the towniest person (other than self) so we have a confirmed innocent the next day?

[Battousai]

Did he use both? I missed that part if he said he used both blocks.

I went back and looked. He claimed he RB'd roflcopter N1.

Destructor: I don't think it is a viable option to massclaim at LyLo. What if it comes down to Player A or Player B is scum? We get a 50/50 chance of getting it right. Whereas if we do it a day before we will have a 100% chance of getting it right, eventually.

I'm against massclaim and I think instead of voting Ort or Mizzy because of last night, find something else to vote them or someone else, because we do not have enough evidence to lynch either based on that alone.

Also, is no one going to list the most pro-town player? This is so the potential doc can claim who they protected last night.

[Battousai]

Urza: I'm against a mass claim at LyLo as scum can use it to put a townie on the chopping block along with scum. That would change the chance of a mislynch to 50%, whereas the day before would change the chance to correctly lynch scum to 100% the second day if there was a mislynch previously. I'm against a half claim, as the only possible reason for Mizzy and Orto to be town is a successful doc protect (assuming another roleblocker would have already came out and said who they blocked last night). A half claim would tell the scum who the doc is. Now a full claim today would result in forcing Mizzy to roleclaim (as her reason for not telling us her power is to protect a third powerrole), and outing a doc or a vig. Or it would result in Mizzy still not roleclaiming and no one claims a powerrole. The first one is we gain more info, but it would result in finding scum less likely than the second. If there is a doc, he/she would have to have enough trust in the town (with a confirmed innocent if Mizzy is found town) not to mislynch the next day.

Out of everybody, I think Axelrod is the most protown. He has made the least amount of posts that have striken me as more likely coming from scum. Now would others please give us the most protown player (1), so the potential doc can hide who he/she protected last night. So far its:

Axelrod- N/A
Battousai- Axelrod
Destructor- N/A
Korejora- N/A
MM- N/A
Mizzy- Battousai
Ort- N/A
ThAd- Urza
Urza- N/A

I think it might actually be best if the town lynch Mizzy today. I'm pretty sure the scum aren't going to kill her (she's one of them, alive adds WIFOM). If she turns up scum- good. If she turns up town- doc claims and we will have 2 confirmed (if the doc is believed) making the 2 scum we have to lynch to hide among 3 townies.

[Battousai]

How does it help the scum more than town? By giving the one person you find more town, it be like giving the scum some info on who is most townie (so far its all been different so its not much info) and in exchange taking the chance to get a CONFIRMED player at LyLo (if Mizzy is town).

Axelrod- N/A
Battousai- Axelrod
Destructor- N/A
Korejora- N/A
MM- N/A
Mizzy- Battousai
Ort- N/A
ThAd- Urza
Urza- Korejora

[Battousai]

How about reasons? Other than "Those are the three people that most want me lynched right now."

Why are you lessening Mizzy's list of scum/look at tomorrow? Of course you and ThAd have posted your conviction in Mizzy being scum, but MM has only said that Mizzy should be the play today (along with a few others).

Axelrod- N/A
Battousai- Axelrod
Destructor- N/A
Korejora- refuses
MM- Battousai
Mizzy- Battousai
Ort- Battousai
ThAd- Urza
Urza- refuses

Oh no, looks like I'm going to be NK'd tonight /sarcasm

[Battousai]

I sure do agree. But to get the outcome desired, a simple "Could you please elaborate?" would suffice. But by saying her reason was, "Those are the three people that most want me lynched right now" throws at her list unnecessary suspicion and doubt. Since her suspicions are only useful if she's town, throwing suspicion on them isn't the way to go since we are assuming she flips town (to plan for tomorrow if its worstcase and LyLo.

So in short, I agree with the goal, not the course.

[Battousai]

Destructor: It's plan B for in case Mizzy flips town. If she does that means either Ort lied or there is a doc (or a RBer, but I would have assumed that they would have came out of the woodworks by now and tell us who they blocked). If we give a list of the most townie, or even one random name for everyone that has refused, then tomorrow, if the doc dies in the night, we will know who they protected and we will have a confirmed innocent for Lylo, which is obviously very beneficial. [i[So for all those who have refused to list the most townie, list one person at random. If one of you is a doc, put in who you protected.[/i]

[Battousai]

Urza: The reason I have settled on a Mizzy lynch today is through you making such a bold stance on her early. I don't know if she's scum, it's about 50/50. But a lynch on the person I feel IS scum will not happen and if they do turn up town, I get hardly any information.

Also, I don't get why people want Mizzy to reveal her role. When she's lynch and is revealed as scum, she lied. If she's lynched and is town, she didn't lie. We will know if there was one power role in play, thus scum have lost one role to fake claim. That's all the information we need. Any more would be just extra and usable by scum.

Now that I think about it, and rerealized that powerroles are revealed as town/scum, my idea about getting everyone to post who they are most likely town to give a potential doc an out is a bad idea as we will not know if a doc died. I was actually banking on dieing tonight, that way there would be a confirmed innocent tomorrow in Axelrod. I gave out enough hints in trying not to lynch Mizzy from the get go, trying to help the doc above all else, and kept mentioning the possibility of a doc. Normally a doc wouldn't claim in this scenerio, but with the limited death reveal, I think I should. Tomorrow, if I'm dead, there would be a confirmed innocent, and no more powerroles (Ort has claimed to use his two shot ability).

I am the doc. I protected Axelrod last night (night before I protected MM, but roflcopter was killed). So tonight the scum could kill me, or Axelrod. Killing me gives the town a confirmed innocent. Killing anyone else gives me a chance to protect them.

Just want to bring up a note on Ort. His goal, after knowing there was a correct doc/roleblock could have been to out the rb/doc. The next day would be/could be LyLo and used the fact Mizzy turned town and I claimed cop to mean he made a mistake and bank on the town being cautious and not lynch him. Just want the town to keep that in mind.

On a side note, this is about my fourth game as doc. I'm hoping Mizzy is town for my own, selfish reasoning that I protected correctly. That would bring my average to 75%

[Battousai]

I believe that means there is an equal chance that Battousai/Axelrod are town or that Mizzy is scum. (assuming discounting that scum could have deliberately submitted no-kill).

Just want to bring up a note on Ort. His goal, after knowing there was a correct doc/roleblock could have been to out the rb/doc.

Yes, the whole thing was an elaborate ruse to out the rb/doc even though I am the roleblocker and I claimed at the start of day two (although apparently neither you nor Mizzy noticed this???)

That must of came out wrong. I meant that, if I don't make it through the night for the remaining players not to dismiss that you could be scum. Also, why does you claiming have anything to do with it? In this setup, anyone could have claimed RB any time they want, especially under pressure. Now if you were scum, you could have planned on saying you used your last shot today, so you can have a defense of not being killed at night as "not a threat to scum." With the lack of a night kill, it could serve as a double bonus to get someone lynched (Mizzy is the obv choice since you claimed to think she is scum) and to out the powerrole that canceled out the night kill.

[Battousai]

N1

Batt protects Machiavellian-Mafia
Ort blocks roflcopter
Destructor investigates CarnCarn (guilty)

N2

Batt protects Axelrod
Ort blocks Mizzy
Destructor investigates Mizzy (innocent)

[Battousai]

I'm not sold on Destructers claim, and I will protect whoever I like. I probably will be killed, so it doesn't matter anyways. I would rather protect Axelrod to make sure he makes it through. But you never know.

[Battousai]

I knew Ort was scum, ha. If only I was alive at endgame. So, what was your goal for claiming RB with a block on Mizzy?

Destructor, though, I thought he was scummy D1 just cause he focused on me so intently and then all of a sudden dropped it. Since there were other players I felt were scummy, I probably wouldn't have voted to lynch you except for when your investigation came up wrong.

Also, TSQ, that was a poor show. Honestly, I don't think I want to play in another game with you if that's how you play when you get frustrated.

[Battousai]

The reason I brought up miller was on the off chance CR would agree with it since his flavor sounded similar to a miller's. If he did claim we would have him in a lie. Unfortunately he didn't fall for it, nor was he scum.

[Battousai]

The reason why I failed to realize this was a limited reveal game was the fact that I read that it was a limited reveal game at the beginning, but when it doesn't come into effect for a long time, I forgot about it.