Mini 1243: Magician Mafia (Game Over)

[Fishythefish]

Hi hydra head.

Reading the thread, thoughts soon.

[Fishythefish]

Read the thread, but tired and having trouble actually working out what's going on. Content tomorrow.

[Fishythefish]

Vi is awesome at her restriction. I applaud her.

sotty vs. CC is an epic win for CC

CC 63: don't modkill bait Vi. Doesn't seem unreasonable.

It all kicks off in sotty 139: has issues with CC 63. First one is that CC seems to know Vi isn't faking it – but that seems a natural assumption. Second is that CC is shutting down discussion. More true, but rather massively overstated – sotty changes “stop discussing Vi's PR, she might get modkilled” to “stop talking to Vi”. Also notes that CC is non-committal on Shift, calls this an associative tell. Very meh - why can't it just be CC not having a strong opinion?

CC 140: he claims to know who Vi is, which seems a pretty killer argument against “how did you know she wasn't faking the PR”. Points out the overstatement.

Sotty 147: in response to CC pointing out the overstatement in 139, says

It's funny, I knew your response was going to be something along those lines.

I think your statement can be interpreted to have that effect.

At the very least, you were attempting to cut off a line of discussion.

(About Vi's post restriction.)

Seems to me that the italicised is false, and the bolded is true. Lumping them together doesn't justify the former – it's clear that CC was not trying to shut down all discussion with Vi.

CC 155: saying the above.

Sotty 160: accuses CC of semantics, strawmanning and softy suspecting. Not seeing this. It seems to me that Sotty has changed on 63 from “stop talknig to Vi” to “stop discussing Vi's PR” - but he hasn't acknowledged that the original 139 was way off.

It all rather degenerates after that. Sotty resorts to generic statements like:

. Regradless, VP's twisting and squirming thought his pressure has been pretty bad. I don't think he has reacted well to our vote at all. What do you think?

My overall impression is that CC has argued this logically, and well. He hasn't gone overboard in attack against sotty, and kept it specific – mostly he's been refuting Sotty's weak points against him. Sotty is the opposite – resorting to lots of rather non-specific accusation of “semantics”, “strawmanning”, “twisting”, “squirming”, and being like “Fox News”. He's refused to engage on key points – notably he hasn't ever withdrawn the bizarre accusation that CC 63 tries to shut down

all

discussion with Vi, hasn't commented on how CC knowing who Vi is affects his point that CC probably has inside information, and hasn't bothered to explain how CC is arguing unfairly – which he manifestly is not.

Sotty moving off CC also feels off. If he believes half of what he says, there's no way Sotty can want ace lynched more than he wants CC lynched. He also generally seems to try to shut down the discussion with CC.

I expected to find this argument really unilluminating. But I don't see how Sotty and Zach can read CC's side and come to the conclusions they do. I thoroughly recommend a double iso of them, and a:

UNVOTE: VOTE: sottyrulez

Other things

@Anxiety: in sotty/CC, where do you think CC tried to twists sotty's words? You say that CC argued with sotty over his words, not his points – which points of sotty's did CC ignore? Also, what do you think of Junpei's case on you?
@Vi: your reason for voting CC is pretty reasonable – I also dislike CC's 86. Your CC-ace link is also pretty strong, at least for an associative tell with no flips. I don't really get how this translates into an ace vote rather than a CC vote.
@G_N_R: why do you think ace is scum?

[Fishythefish]

Yes, Crab Canon can be the only person we think is scum, and we can't shift our efforts towards someone else who we also happen to think is scum who has more momentum bandwagon wise. (And is also going to disturbing levels of effort to defend said Crab.)

You were the second vote on ace. Hardly a momentous bandwagon. And since then, you've been totally ignoring CC, except this gem:

what do you feel I'm twisting then exactly?

Everything?

Care to share your thoughts on Ace's play thus far?

This really doesn't read like the play of someone who is convinced CC is scum and is trying to demonstrate that to the town.

Fishy, do you think CC is scum or town?

Well, if sotty is scum he is probtown because of their fight. If not, I'd still guess town but with much less confidence. His side of the argument was exactly how I would expect town to do it, but nothing there would be that hard for scum to fake. I disliked his post 86 on Junpei's start to the game (the reason Vi voted him) - I felt he expected too much of a RQS and was going after someone for lack of content rather early - but nothing else in his play makes me thinks he's scum.

[Fishythefish]

I don't understand why Fishy is making the argument between ourselves and Crab to be almost strictly Scum v Town. Post 292 seems to be him talking about the argument in his own words (I obviously disagree) but I don't really see how us being WRONG to Fishy makes us auto scum.

It's like he breaks the fight down and votes us for being wrong, but I still don't get why that makes us scum. See logical players will do that and logical scum players can take anything and make it scummy and I kinda feel like that's what he doing here. I think I need more explaination on why the actions we did are scummy OUTSIDE being wrong. Cause like, townies can be wrong too. Townies are more likely to be wrong right?

For the why you are scum bit see the last section on you in 292. You've argued this

dirtily

. You've accused CC of lots of bad buzzwords, without any serious attempt to back most of them up, and you haven't commented on important things brought up by CC in response. I think it's totally obvious that CC isn't executing a squirming, twisting, semantics using, strawmanning Fox News blitz. And I don't think, even through the distorting lens of being the other side of the argument, that you can really believe that. In fact, in the rest of this post, you seem to say you've been out-argued:

We still think Crab is scum. But we know when we're beat. The VP head of Crab cannon is freaking EXCELLENT when he is scum, at taking an argument, twisting it on it's head and making it a personal battle. This is what has happened in this game and it is also what happened in Pie E7 mark II. That will provide meta for three players in this game cause Vi is also in there. But it starts from post six where we start to pressure VP right away and if you read though you'll see how quick things get messy.

I'm not interested in playing that all over again. The game got bogged down and everyone got all shitty and crabby (har har) but yes. We made an internal choice to deflate the fight between us and Crab to stop the stupid mass posting, and to let the game breathe. I wanted to see what other people would do when the stage wasn't hogged up by us and Crab. I also wanted to see if maybe I was wrong and that I read Crab wrong, so I wanted to see what he would do when we weren't in his face. The answer is not a lot really. So yes, he is still a scum read. But no he isn't our only scum read.

~Sotty.

You saying you know that you're beat here doesn't square with what I see in the thread. If CC is all that you say he is, you should want and be able to demonstrate some or all of it to the town. You really haven't made any serious attempt to do that for a long time. Your manner of withdrawing from the argument - unjustified name-calling for a while, and then just stopping responding meaningfully - is bad.

I need to read and think some more before I give more reads - haven't got a full picture of all of the game yet. Quite busy this weekend, so expect that on Sunday.

[Fishythefish]

@sotty:
No, of course it's not my position that town can't be outargued by scum. And of course if that happens, sometimes there's no point pursuing the matter. But this really doesn't look like that. You've refused to engage CC, and you've not bothered to back up your accusations - like the following:
160: semantics, strawmanning points, softly suspecting us
168: being "twisty"
172: strawman
174: actually, I'm not sure what
198: twisting and squirming
222: in response to CC asking what he'd twisted: "everything".
These are what I mean by "unjustified name calling". Now, I suppose this would be nearly ok if it was well explained in previous posts, or if it was self-evident. But that's not the case for these accusations. If you were town who thought CC was scum, I'd expect you to justify these accusations - because it would better explain why you think CC is scum. Backing off slowly shouting "stop twisting my words" is a strategy for getting out of the argument, and maybe making CC look like scum who's twisting your words. I don't think your arguments were anywhere near exhausted if you believe what you say you believe, and that's why I find it scummy that you stopped the argument.

When I reread, some things jump out at me, and some need much more effort to make sense of. You vs. CC jumped out at me, and nothing else did. Looking at the other wagons in the game, none of them looked nearly as good as a vote for you.

[Fishythefish]

You realize nothing you posted there is unjustified name calling right?

Yes, I suppose "name calling" is the wrong choice of words. Rather "unjustified generic accusations".

[Fishythefish]

Caught up now. Very happy with my sotty vote. I don't have any other particularly strong scumreads. I don't see why ace's wagon is popular.

Re: Vi

Mostly town but pushing

weak

associations between us and ace are, well weak.

...

Vi probably wants CC to explain why the associations are weak. As do I.

@Anxiety, Vi: Please could you answer the questions addressed to you at the end of My 292? For Anxiety: why do you think ace is scum?

Anxiety's play has been ridiculously similar to sotty's – he's always voted with sotty, and defended him in the argument with CC by practically quoting him. I really don't know what to make of this.

G_N_R's vote for ace is pretty awful – based only on sotty voting ace after Vi did, G_N_R somehow deduces that sotty and ace are partners. And this vote is the only thing he's done in the game.

@G_N_R: why do you think ace and sotty are scumpartners? Do you have other reasons for thinking ace is scum? Who else do you think is scum?

[Fishythefish]

Got you. The switch to ace was before you'd drawn the ace-CC link.

Ok, so going back to the reason for voting Ace: in 184, he said that CC's wagon looked like a "scum-driven counterwagon [to the Junpei wagon, which Ace was on]". Not sure why you think that's particularly scummy.

[Fishythefish]

You realize nothing you posted there is unjustified name calling right?

Yes, I suppose "name calling" is the wrong choice of words. Rather "unjustified generic accusations".

Weeeee bracktrack!

Yes, I've backtracked. I used the wrong word to describe my point. So what? It doesn't change anything I've said.

[Fishythefish]

Wow. Springlullaby just gained a 4 vote wagon in just over a page, for lurking. She has been lurking all game. This feels very much like a distraction from either ace or sotty.

Yeah, I agree with CC about ace. He put up a post saying SL was active lurking, unlike Locke. This to justify a "leaning scum" read. By his logic, lurking instead of active lurking shouldn't have made her more scummy - and she hasn't posted since then. Now he thinks she's scum, and is prepared to switch off a wagon he's supported strongly to vote her. Feels like ace is prepared to massively compromise on the quality of the lynch to increase his chances of saving his own skin.

I've never like the rest of the case on ace, though. I'm still happier with a sotty lynch.

SL will get replaced at some point, and then we'll be able to read that slot. Let's lynch someone scummy.

[Fishythefish]

Why do people find spring going after GNR scummy? At this stage, I'd have thought scum would have more reason to go for one of the other wagons to avoid their lynch, rather than sit on an unpopular lurker wagon. Still really not seeing where this spring wagon came from.

[Fishythefish]

I'm curious, why is everyone ignoring GNR?
Just from that my vote stays.

I've seen the sotty and ace wagon. I find neither more scummy than GNR.
Their lynches aren't going to be informative either because:
1. sotty wagon has been led by crab who is a dead town read of mine. it's contaminated by too much town anger.
2. the ace wagon has been led by sotty who is 50/50 manipulative town who's saving neck when his case on crab explodedor manipulative scum who's saving neck when his case on crab exploded.

Between sotty and ace, I find Sotty to be slightly more at risk to be scum.

But neither are glaringly obviously bad as GNR.

Why do people find spring going after GNR scummy?

*turns off smoke machine*
*gestures for assistants to remove mirrors*

Here, SL is saying that she doesn't like the sotty or crab wagons, preferring to stay on a lurker wagon. Not quite sure what you're trying to say, but this is not the behaviour I'd expect from scum, and lots of people have used it to confirm their vote for her. Which I find a bit suspect - feels like they really knew their votes for SL weren't that good. Again, fits with the counterwagon vibe.

SL has notes like that, and

lurks

. Grrrr.

Walls, walls. I'll read them this evening, and probably move my vote. No idea why, but sotty doesn't seem to be getting lynched.

[Fishythefish]

So, Vi's case on SL, I think:

My opinion is that my current vote is a good one. Please see last

reversed chainsaw defense

in:

So I was catchting up on reading and saw Spring had about 3 votes added to him?

I must have missed it, can someone tell where the case agaisnt him is?

Deciphering this for you: GNR is defending un-defendable behavior (namely lurking) because
1) he is a lurker himself so what he is saying is in reality 'I'm a lurker and I shouldn't be lynched'
2) he is pre-emptively trying to associate town points for himself when/if I flip town because of our likeness of behavior.

*points to bolded*
*reads "deciphering"*
*reaches into pants*
*pulls out steaming pile*

SL is talking bullshit. She is talking out of her arse in order to justify her vote for G_N_R.

*checks calendar*
*marks springlullaby's entrance*

You are voting me 3 days near deadline

springlullaby (L-3) %u2013 Shift, Vi, Amrun, ace5993

In between all lurkers, GNR is certainly scummier than me.

*grabs life preserver*
*throws it around springlullaby's neck*

SL popped up near deadline to save herself from the lynch.

Pattern of dismissing other's effort at deciphering her while not putting in the effort of making herself more clear.

@Vi

Do you have a post restriction with you being a mime/only allowed to do emote? (make a flower appear if yes/a carrot if no)
Does it have a time limit? (Make a rabbit appear if yes/ a parrot if no)
Does it have a word count limit? (make a tv appear if yes/ a radio if no)
Anything else we should know about? (make two shoes appear if yes/ a pair of knickers if no)
Are you scum? (a rope if yes/ an apple if no)

*dirty look*

Why?

*extends one-finger salute*

*writes novel*
*holds novel up*
*puts on reading glasses*
*opens mouth*

I don't understand this bit.

...

*shoots deathglances at springlullaby*

Three 'confirm votes' on Ace with weak reasoning (association tell as far as I can make out), dropped

speedily

for a lurker vote.

*returns to calendar*

*

confirms vote on ace5993

*

*marks a week ago today*

*

votes springlullaby

*

*marks yesterday*
*draws line through entire week between the two dates*

SL is misrepresenting how Vi's vote move. A week is not speedily.

*

points fist of imminent death at springlullaby

*

My thoughts:
1. Yep, the reasoning for G_N_R vote is a stretch, and it's scummy.
2. Well, SL has certainly become more active near deadline, quite possible to save her own skin. But wanting to save your skin isn't something only scum do.
3. ?
4. Interesting.

@SL:

Why did you say Vi moved from ace "speedily"?

Meh. That's a bit more than a lurker lynch, I suppose. For my bits you quoted:

Wow. Springlullaby just gained a 4 vote wagon in just over a page, for lurking. She has been lurking all game. This feels very much like a distraction from either ace or sotty.

At this stage, I'd have thought scum would have more reason to go for one of the other wagons to avoid their lynch, rather than sit on an unpopular lurker wagon. Still really not seeing where this spring wagon came from.

Here's what I see:
1. SL has been lurking all game, and done nothing else.
2. A wagon on her starts, suddenly and nearish deadline, for lurking.
3. She makes a post confirming a vote which wouldn't help scum avoid the lynch.
4. People already on the wagon (Amrun, Shift, you) said that was scummy. My impression was they were saying it was scummy for being a useless vote (Amrun said this explicitly), which I don't think is at all scummy here. This is nullified in your case by the above, because it's the reasoning you find scummy and I rather agree.
5. I didn't like ace's vote at all; see here. ace hopping back off when the momentum fell off makes this even worse - with his reason of "SL posted a great big wall".
I see a pretty poor wagon here. It went fast for little reason, and then people on it confirmed their votes with a pretty poor reason. ace's participation just stinks.

SL has notes like that, and

lurks

. Grrrr.

Walls, walls. I'll read them this evening

What I am saying here is that it's very annoying that SL is clearly lurking out of choice, not out of lack of time or motivation. I don't see that as scummy - it's pretty clear that it's in her meta. It just makes me angry. Not sure what you are saying here.

*eyebrow raise*
*starts flipping through Fishythefish's deck of cards*
*finds deck is stacked in favor of springlullaby*

*

points finger of suspicion at Fishythefish

*

I think the wagon on SL is poor, so I'm going to defend her.

I'm prepared to vote for:
1. Sotty. I think he's scum from his interaction with CC.
2. Ace. His play recently has smacked of scum trying to avoid the lynch.

[Fishythefish]

Tell me, why not vote GNR since you think I'm bussing him?

GNR, Fishy, and me now. The suspicions for the formers seemingly only based on association tells (on day one).

Yeah, this stinks.

@Vi: that's who and I'm prepared to lynch (and the order) out of the people who could get lynched today (ace, sotty, SL). So it's hardly surprising that they are at the top of the votecount.

[Fishythefish]

This game only reveals alignments, not roles, so it is important we find out whether GNR and Vi are masons or just neighbours. If one of them dies without telling us, we'll never know.

New/newly understood points from Vi are that SL's points against Vi suck. Which they do, massively. Fuck it, time to flip like a pancake chef:

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Springlullaby

SL has done a remarkable number of bad things in a remarkably short space of time. Points on Vi, points on G_N_R, asking Vi to move on to G_N_R. That's less evidence than I see against sotty, certainly, but a higher density of scumminess.

@Anxiety, Amrun, SL:

There are three wagons today that could end in a lynch - sotty, ace and SL. With a day until deadline, you need to be on one of these wagons.

[Fishythefish]

Fishy: are you suggesting that 'higher density' of scumminess is outweighing what is obviously a stronger scumread on sottyrulez? Do you now think people on the SL wagon are bussing?

What I mean is that sotty has done more scummy things, but he's had more posts to do them in. SL has done fewer scummy things, but that's hardly surprising since she's hardly posted.

No, I doubt the SL wagon is a particularly bussy one. My problems with the wagon only really make sense for it being a wagon to save either sotty or ace. I'm finding it hard to make up my mind about this - I don't like some of the play on this wagon, but aside from ace it comes from people who I tend to think are town (Vi and Amrun, certainly), and Vi's case is pretty convincing.

I don't see any reason for a deadline extension.

[Fishythefish]

I'm going to have deadline access problems. Other than

hopefully

a brief period in about 12 hours, I probably won't be on again.

[Fishythefish]

Time check

[Fishythefish]

Ohhhh the timer changes! Clever.

Well, what an exciting votecount. I'll try hard to get some access nearer deadline, but this is probably my last post.

[Fishythefish]

That's at L-2, SL is at L-3. Either could easily make it, and I prefer SL.

[Fishythefish]

Some people:

ace

I thought ace's play was fine up until his SL vote. About the SL vote, I still think this:

Yeah, I agree with CC about ace. He put up a post saying SL was active lurking, unlike Locke. This to justify a "leaning scum" read. By his logic, lurking instead of active lurking shouldn't have made her more scummy - and she hasn't posted since then. Now he thinks she's scum, and is prepared to switch off a wagon he's supported strongly to vote her. Feels like ace is prepared to massively compromise on the quality of the lynch to increase his chances of saving his own skin.

Then ace unvoted spring, on the basis of the wall post, with no analysis of it. The way he jumps on the wagon when it's got lots of momentum (3 quick votes), and jumps off it again when it stalls, fits perfectly with scum driving anything that isn't him. ace is also a great candidate to have killed sotty - I can't see anyone else in the game who would have had any motivation to do so.

Anxiety

@Anxiety: in Post 600 you criticise CC, and you say the reason for doing this is because he was the first to call you scum. Why is him calling you scum a reason to make unrelated points against him? This looks like a very pure form of OMGUS.
The read on SL - "either a VT or possibly third party" - is pretty bad. I just don't see anyone actually having that read on SL - where did it come from, Anxiety? Also, Anxiety now says he doesn't have to justify the read because it was right. This is wrong, and also reveals that Anxiety thinks that he should get towncred from calling a town lynch correctly - which would fit very nicely with him being scum calling a flip he already knew.
His latest post is horrible - without any real reason, he paints ace as flailing scum and saul as a defending buddy. This is just flinging mud around.

saulres

Saulres is pretty contentless. There's a lot of stuff that just doesn't seem to be designed to work out who's scum, or give reads. He makes a case on Anxiety, and that's really it for reads until post 275. After that, he thinks (like I did) that sotty came out badly of sotty vs. CC - and says that my post was what he was thinking. He feels like scum doing the minimum to get through the game.

G_N_R

I don't see any reason to think he's scum.
@CC: why are you voting G_N_R?

[Fishythefish]

Why? I probably wasn't going to be posting again, and near deadline it's worth saying that so people know what lynches are possible.

[Fishythefish]

Yeah, but at the time, you were voting for springlullaby, who is now confirmed town. Most of the progression of that wagon has gems from you like this:

Wow. Springlullaby just gained a 4 vote wagon in just over a page, for lurking. She has been lurking all game. This feels very much like a distraction from either ace or sotty.

Your turnaround to voting SL didn't happen in a way that reads as organic to me.

A few points against SL came up which I agreed with - and some of the stuff I disagreed with got better (in particular, the objections to SL's 421 made more sense after Vi's explanation). A read on a lurker is always going to be pretty volatile, since with so few posts any evidence against them is significant. In the end, I objected seriously to ace's vote on and off spring, and thought the wagon had spring up fast, but on the other side of the coin spring was pretty scummy. When you have a conflict like this the decision probably isn't likely to feel "organic" - because really you have to decide between two competing ideas.

@Vi: I don't see why I'd want an excuse to post. I don't see why it's scummy to say you find a votecount exciting. I think it's a good idea to say when you're not going to get back on before deadline.

[Fishythefish]

So ace is also in the neighbourhood?

@Vi: please make a post in the QT explaining what you don't like about G_N_R in there, and have it relayed here?

[Fishythefish]

Ah, ok.

In that case, I think that Vi should make a post in the G_N_R QT saying exactly what she doesn't like about him there - it seems important to her case on him. If G_N_R doesn't relay it, we lynch him.

[Fishythefish]

I don't know what you mean by that. It wouldn't have to involve your neighbourhood at all.

[Fishythefish]

@Vi: 645 is pretty general. Is G_N_R posting much in there? His ignoring your attempts to get him to do stuff sounds much like his in-thread play unless he's also active. And your secret scumtell is... secret.

[Fishythefish]

And my attempt to "score points" in 649 is asking for clarification on a very vague case. You seem to find everything I post scummy, and you never respond to any of my responses.

[Fishythefish]

Actually... that post is rather unfair. You have quite often responded to my responses. More true is "you seem to find everything I post scummy, I don't really know why, and I'm finding it rather frustrating".

[Fishythefish]

@Vi: you said there that GNR has been "a deer in the headlights" and ignored your pleas to say something. And that you had a secret scumtell on him. The first is pretty vague, the second depends a lot on the detail of the QT and the third doesn't mean anything unless you explain it. I think asking for more on that is totally reasonable (and I'm looking forward to ace giving us some of it).

[Fishythefish]

Yes, sorry - ignoring your pleas to scumhunt. Same applies - how much that matters really depends on the vibe in the QT.

[Fishythefish]

I'm waiting on ace to decide what he can/should say about Vi's theory. Seems kind of critical.

[Fishythefish]

Rolefishing from GNR is scummy. Two town BPs also seems relatively unlikely, so a GNR lynch looks ok. Waiting on further explanation for the other bit - like others, I don't really get how a vig killing sotty would make GNR scum (or be relevant to that question at all).

@Vi: it's not giving Riggs credit to not just take your word for a secret scumtell. To just go with someone's secret scumtell you have to be super-confident in both their alignment and their ability.

[Fishythefish]

VOTE: Anxiety

I'm quite liking the ace-Vi vibe. Vi looks like town with elaborate theories which won't quite come straight. And her analysis of ace in 767 is pretty good. Anxiety is still bad - wanting to know the details of ace's claim for no good reason, not caring what Vi says so long as she doesn't think he's scum (716-718), and really just fluff posting through the whole ace-Vi-GNR claims.

Also,

I'm partially claiming

. I roleblocked Anxiety last night. Given two BPs and the SR kill, I'm strongly suspecting scum missed their kill last night - I doubt we only have one kill, and I doubt the scum would shoot SR. Me blocking Anxiety isn't the only explanation for a missed kill - Vi being shot at by a scumteam not including GNR is the other obvious one - but it's certainly one explanation, and that makes him more likely scum. It also makes him a much better lynch than GNR. Because if GNR is scum, then scum wouldn't shoot at Vi (or indeed GNR), and so we need another explanation for a missed kill.

[Fishythefish]

Things I haven't claimed:
- My name.
- Whether my roleblock is constrained in any way.
- Whether I have any other powers.

[Fishythefish]

Oh, the bolded was mine, so you were just posing contemplatively generally. Carry on.

[Fishythefish]

fishy do you agree with vi or cc about saulres.

Don't know. My opinion of him can be found in a post today where I call him, you and ace scum.

Won't be around much this weekend. Some access, but not a lot.

[Fishythefish]

Also, I don't interpret that post by fishy that way at all. I think he is offering multiple scenarios, one of which is that he blocked anxiety from shooting player X. Another is that Vi was shot. I don't get how you think he is saying BOTH occurred.

This.

[Fishythefish]

I blocked saulres last night, because I thought he might be scum. This makes him more likely scum of some ilk. Particularly if we ever see two kills in a night.

GNR isn't Teller? Surprising. Any idea why, Vi?

@Vi: I think my claim was pretty sensible at that point. My lurking afterwards is something that just happens at the weekend. I can absolutely see why my play there would make sense as scum - clearly, my claim had some chance of deflecting the wagon off GNR. On the flip side, is there any reason you think I wouldn't play like that as a town roleblocker?

[Fishythefish]

@CC: I can see why scum might play how I did in the position I was in. No point denying it - I definitely did something that could have derailed the GNR wagon. That's not why I did it, and I think my town motives for it were sensible, but clearly it's not unreasonable to think I'm more likely scum based on that. It's like if I was a vig and I got tracked to shooting a townie - I wouldn't say "scum don't shoot townies", I'd say "vigs also shoot townies, and here's why I shot him".

I'm not understanding all the Vi accusations very well here. I'll respond to what I can.

You all assemble the next day outside the Magic Castle and there’s a body lying face down in the grass outside. One of you with a strong stomach rolls the corpse over and the majority of you retch as the body has a large crater in their chest and their heart has been removed. You slowly scan up to their face to find…

sottyrulez –

Criss Angel had his heart removed N1

You really need to find out who is behind this and stop them.

I roleblocked Anxiety last night.

*swings orange circle around twice*

Me and Vi have agreed that putting it out in the open is the best thing to do right now, so...

Both me and Riggs are 1xBulletproof (Penn and Teller, or more specifically Teller but that doesn't seem to be important to this game, can do a very dangerous bullet catch trick).

I roleblocked Anxiety last night. Given two BPs and the SR kill, I'm strongly suspecting scum missed their kill

Rolefishing from GNR is scummy. Two town BPs also seems relatively unlikely, so a

GNR

lynch looks ok.

*swings sun around again*

VOTE: Anxiety

Also,

I'm partially claiming

. I roleblocked Anxiety last night. Given two BPs and the SR kill

G_N_R's vote for ace is pretty awful – based only on sotty voting ace after Vi did, G_N_R somehow deduces that sotty and ace are partners. And this vote is the only thing he's done in the game.

G_N_R

I

don't see any reason

to think he's scum.

@CC

: why are you voting

G_N_R?

In that case, I think that Vi should make a post in the

G_N_R QT saying exactly what she doesn't like about him there

- it seems important to her case on him. If G_N_R doesn't relay it, we lynch him.

*walks up to door*
*puts ear to door*

@Vi: 645 is pretty general. Is

G_N_R

posting much in there? His ignoring your attempts to get him to do stuff sounds much like his in-thread play unless he's also active. And your secret scumtell is... secret.

*sees wagon rolling toward me*
*pushes wagon as far offstage as possible*

At the time of 754, I was deciding whether to claim. Your/ace's 767 is what changed my mind - I think because it convinced me that one killing role was unlikely. Hence the change in 769.

373 to 649 - meh. I forgot something I'd thought about GNR after a week. It wasn't a strong scumread. When you posted against him, it was very much based on the QT stuff, and I think wanting to know what it was was quite sensible. Up until the claim, I think my play would actually have been pretty unlikely from a scumpartner of GNR - who the hell flip-flops and questions every scumread on their newb partner? Anyone who's played with me before should expect I wouldn't be that stupid. Inconsistencies like this just aren't scummy, and particularly aren't typical of the carefully managed interactions that scum have with their partners.

The *walks up to door* bit I don't understand at all. If you're saying I wanted to know why you were going after GNR - yes! I did!

The deflecting wagon bit - yes, certainly what I did could have deflected the wagon. I'm not arguing against that point. What I'm saying is that the protown explanation of my behaviour perfectly sensible. And, in fact, true.

Re: who I blocked last night. If Anxiety was scum, he wasn't going to try to kill again, so why would I block him? saul was a lingering scumread of mine, and reading him I thought he looked like a decent guess at a GNR partner, with having GNR sitting at "second scum" yesterday.

On not voting saulres; I just haven't had time to think the situation through. And yeah, I think I will
VOTE: saulres
We're looking for at least one missed kill last night. Anyone who got roleblocked has to be a fairly serious suspect.

[Fishythefish]

I honestly don't know.

Points for scum team: we've missed at least one kill, but if there's a sk we've missed at least 3, and that's a lot.
Points for both: Two BPs, including a scum one. That suggests there should be a decent amount of killing power. sotty looks like a scumhunting kill.

It's not very important to saulres's alignment. Either way, getting blocked when a kill is missed is a serious scumtell.

[Fishythefish]

Interesting. saul is a vig/SK. At any rate, he's not the kind of person you lynch.

UNVOTE:

When I get a chance to think, I'll look at Anxiety and probably vote him. This makes it more likely my block on him was the reason for the missed N1 kill.

[Fishythefish]

Sounds like saul and Junpei are telling the truth. I'd probably guess they are a vig and SK? No real idea how the tiger is likely to be controlled.

This does open up some interesting possibilities on how Montecore works, though, and I think it's reasonable to assume this:

1) If both of us agree on the target, the kill goes through.
2) If we don't agree on the target, the kill does not go through.
3) If one of us is blocked, the other kill goes through.

If 2 and 3 are accurate, then Fishy's claim about blocking me is a lie, or he in turn was blocked. If they're not accurate, though, it doesn't prove anything. Yech, what a mess of WIFOM

4nxi3ty's the only other one Fishy claims to have blocked, so it would be interesting to see what he claims if we go through with a mass claim.

3 doesn't seem "reasonable to assume".

Why has everyone suddenly become convinced I'm scum? Nobody is giving many reasons for this. For people talking about me admitting Vi's points aren't stupid: read my response to CC. Then read it again. How would you act in my situation? Claim that no, scum would never try to save their buddies?

Why don't you believe I'm just a pro-town roleblocker?

Bear in mind that if I'm scum I pulled a

big

gambit for what was clearly a

small

chance to deflect my wagon from a

newbish

partner.

Anyway, here's a fullclaim:
I'm David Blaine. The form of my roleblock is street magic - I can perform this to one person a night, and they get distracted from their other actions.

If you lynch me, do observe my flip and set the tiger on Anxiety.

Won't be around a great deal this weekend.

[Fishythefish]

Fishy: You pretty much full claimed earlier except for a nameclaim which we never actually decided on doing. You implied you had more /abilities/ earlier, at least that's how I read it and probably others. Also you think that the SK has a kill which is dependent on a townie in some manner? I really doubt that Saulres is SK, in fact, independent of my town read on him, I would say that there is no way he is SK, that's a silly notion.

No - all I was saying was that I wasn't necessarily fullclaiming earlier. It's something I usually do when claiming unforced - no reason to tell the scum more than you need to.

And yes, you're quite right, it would make zero sense for either to be a SK. Wasn't thinking hard enough. Either town/town or (probably less likely) town/scum.

Looks to me like snake's "amazing" ability is independent of his role. Amrun probably should have claimed it if VT, but I don't think it's at all unlikely he just wouldn't have bothered. Also see no scum motivation for it. Don't know about other points against him - don't have time to read them.

[Fishythefish]

Fishy, apart from the "Amazing" gate, how do you feel about Amrun? You seem awfully quiet today about who you think is scum other than Anxiety.

Yes, I do. I'm afraid I've simply not had the time to give this game my proper attention yet. This will change no later than Monday.

[Fishythefish]

Glancing at Anxiety's late day 2, I see him arguing strongly against a specific theory - that GNR was scum and scum shot at Vi. He's right, that particular theory was odd, but he pushed that wrongness disproportionately hard to its importance. I can see this from scum with GNR who didn't shoot at Vi - it's nice to be able to defend your scumbuddy while still actually being right, and even arguing against one specific GNRscum theory is pushing against his wagon.

@Amrun: you seemed to push against that theory very hard yesterday, when IIRC noone was really pushing it or voting based off it. Why?

Today, Amrun's play makes sense to me as scum or town, and is pretty much null. Town in Amrun's position would emphasise, as he has, the distinction between defending GNR and pushing against Vi's theory. But so would scum.

[Fishythefish]

This is a crap lynch. It's based almost entirely on my claim which a) makes perfect sense as town and b) would be a really odd scum play. I'm town. Don't lynch me.

[Fishythefish]

It's wrong. I wish you'd at least waited until I have time to get a decent post in. Go town!

When I flip town, tiger ANXIETY.