Mars 3 - Weasel Mafia -GAME OVER

[Glork]

/confirm, comrade!

[Glork]

Vote: hasdgfas

, for obvious reasons.

[Glork]

Holy crap this game has grown quickly.

Reading now.

[Glork]

i comprehend the statement that random voting is generally a useful method of opening a meeting, therefore, i will assimilate with this idea and open with a

Chose to eliminate Thanatos

for the reason that he is filled with only fail

does this look like an attempt to daykill to anyone else?

unvote vote niv

pregame talk coupled with this warrants my vote.

I'm curious to know what makes you think that pregame talk is in any way relevant to Niv's role and/or alignment. Also, before jumping the gun and saying "hay, he's trying to daykill," have you considered A) Waiting ot see if Thanatos actually dies; or B) the possibility of Niv being a protown killer (in the event that Thanatos *does* actually die)? How fair would it be for Niv to be a scumkiller who has to post in-thread to kill his target?


You definitely come across as overeager. Given that I've never played with you, though, I'm not yet set on whether you're overeager town or scum.

Clearly you happen to be expressing inaccurate suspicions,

That may be, but its day one, it's not unusual.

as I am much more Valuable than you shall ever Be.

Prove it.

My worth will be evident to the town in approximately, this game. quickly one special tidbit that should sustain your simple mind until a later moment. due to the murder that occurred the previous night. is suspect there is a murderer among us

Okay, honestly... I know this isn't game-related, but if you're going to try to sound like a verbose intellectual, at least use proper spelling, grammar, and capitalization. Proofreading your posts isn't a bad thing, Niv.

This is Niv as Niv always is, unable to string coherent sentences together and spell correctly.

Okay, nevermind my last comment.

Nevertheless, Niv's vote for Gorrad is pure unadultured OMGUS, and I felt that Gorrad's stance is not unreasonable.



In the interests of starting some conversation that doesn't involve Niv's complete social (and English language) ineptitude, I'm going to bandwagon somebody else for no particular reason at all.

Unvote, Vote: Oman

[Glork]

Sure.

He has to votes on him already. I was already voting hasdgfas, so I couldn't switch to him. And the other person with two votes is Niv himself.

[Glork]

Right.

So why is Oman still alive?

[Glork]

I think GreenLiquid's Post Restriction games were pretty instrumental in changing that general "rule."

[Glork]

EBWOP: But either way, if somebody insists on posting a certain way (such as rhyming couplets), we can deduce that they either have a PR or they are lying. As long as it doesn't inhibit their ability to contribute in a meaningful way, I don't really care one way or another.

[Glork]

Meh. Niv's inability to articulate set aside, I've noted that this is his second OMGUS vote in a row.

FoS: Niv

[Glork]

Unvote, Vote: Thanatos

JDodge is :goodposting:

[Glork]

Quag pretty much wins at Mafia strategy in general. I'd just like to point that out.

After a few currently-running games end, I'm going to sit down and write a few mini-essays regarding scumhunting, and Quag has hit upon some of the things I'd like to look at. However, I realize that this doesn't really have anything specific to do with this game, so I'm going to add something game-relevant.






I'd like to know what fueled Mandalorian's hypothesis. I've seen players forget to bold votes plenty of times, and I don't think it's ever been indicative of one thing or another. What makes you feel this is a distancing tactic, as opposed to any other average start-of-game vote?
I'd like you to expand upon your thoughts as much as possible. Explain why you came to your conclusion and try to explain why those thoughts occurred to begin with. I'm genuinely interested by this... I don't necessarily see your behavior as being protown or scummy, but I want to investigate a bit more.

[Glork]

I would like anyone who's around to read this to give an overall update on their thoughts about players in the game.

After concluding my re-read, you should probably lynch yourself.

[Glork]

Unvote, Vote: Gage

[Glork]

Riddle me this, Oman. For somebody who voted himself because he saw a wagon developing on that player, your vote for Thanatos seems odd. Thanatos said he wants Gage to explain his post, which is basically

exactly

why I'm voting Gage as well, so I don't see how his vote is "horribly explained."

If it was just to get his reaction why did you wait untill a wagon formed.

I thought about it

, and after seeing that alot of people agreed with me,

I decided it was worth voting him to press into him

and see his reaction, which can be pretty telling.

Pretty sure you should learn to read posts before asking stupid questions.


I take Thanatos' behavior as a sign that he was thinking Gage's behavior was questionable, but was unsure of himself. Getting the reinforcement from a couple of people echoing his sentiments is probably one of the factors that drove him to turn his IGMEOY into a vote. Note how I had voted Gage, too, and he asked if I noticed the same thing.

[Glork]

Another terrible vote by ZONEACE.

It has been shown that DruPip's behavior runs across games, meaning that it cannot possibly be indicative of alignment.

It should be quite obvious that you are not going to be able to change his chosen posting style, so a "pressure vote" doesn't really apply here.

I don't even see how his posting style is harmful to the town. I'm pretty sure that DruPip can rhyme at least as well as some people around here can type. His style is no more "harmful" than anybody else's. As long as he's coherent and plays the game properly, I couldn't care less if he posted in sonnets.

[Glork]

Egads! That's me! It's my other name!
I forgot to switch accounts from a different game!

Apologies to all, I feel so dumb.

Unvote, Vote: ZONEACE

. He's dirty scum.

[Glork]

OMG the logic is not that difficult.


If someone intentionally places a restriction on themself (a limitation) how can we trust they won't do the same thing at night in some way?? I'm not advocating the lynching the power roles, so stop making it seem that way. I'm advocating the lynching of someone who clearly doesn't have the town's best interest in mind. and Someone INTENTIONALLY RESTRICTING THEMSELVES WHEN NOT REQUIRED TO BY THEIR ROLE DOES NOT HAVE THE TOWN'S BEST INTEREST IN MIND.

Once again, this won't apply.
Across the forums, DP's poems fly.
You're assuming that his choice of speaking
Limits him from information-seeking.
But you've still yet to provide explanation
On why this PR is anti-nation
You haven't shown that his intents
Are not with the townsfolk meant.

The central point here, everyone:
ZONEACE won't let us have fun.
He claims we're being detrimental
Yet it's nothing more than sentimental.
When I point out it's mostly without harm
ZONEACE won't buy into charm
He states that daytime post restriction
Lead to more than quirky diction
This isn't true; ZA is flailing
'Cause his theory's simply failing
He's really reaching to make Drunk seem a threat
But "He might do it at night" ain't proven yet.

At any rate, if he's scum indeed
His buddies would likely take the deeds.
So the "restriction at night" would be a favor
For those of us with weasel flavor.

And if a good guy Drunk should be
Rhymes or not, he must be free
Policy lynching in this particular case
Is just horrible, Mr. Zoneface.

[Glork]

Apologies to all, I feel so dumb.

Unvote, Vote: ZONEACE

. He's dirty scum.

[Glork]

Drunken Piper's posts
Are a fun twist to this game
And not restricting

Quagmire has been
Recently ignored and so
Zoneace in spotlight

Zoneace is scummy
But Quagmire has been worse
That's still where I stand

Lighten up Zoneace
We're scumhunting still, but now
We're having more fun

Haiku! Why didn't I think of this?
In fact, I hosted MMMH bliss
I must say, this is rather fun
To post in meter with everyone


Could you reiterate why you dislike Quag?
My observations hit a snag
I wouldn't say I agree with you
Elaborate why you think Quag's life's taboo.

[Glork]

oh hell, a scavenger hunt. If i find it, will you unvote me?

Buying unvotes for a scavenger hunt?
Whose vote is detrimental now? What is this stunt?

[Glork]

I don't know about the ZONEACE lynch. Sure he's not been very helpful and he has been an asshat, but if that makes him scum, why didn't we lynch Niv again?

Hmm, good point, Why aren't we lynching Niv?

I would say it's most likely because
Those of use who stop and give pause
Invariably conclude that being an ass
Is not scummy -- just hideously crass.

Why is Gage protecting ZONEACE?
Do they conspire at the scums' base?
This is clear deflection of momentum sound
An additional scum we may have found.

[Glork]

How is it breaking the rules?

Jddodge posted it, but to reiterate:

Do not bring outside influences into the game - this includes threats, bribes, wagers, promises, alliances, etc. Using knowledge from previous games is perfectly acceptable, but try not to carry grudges from one game to another.

Yeah, I'm pretty fed up with MoS's behavior regarding DGB. I enjoy playing games with DGB (even though she and I almost invariably get into some kind of lengthy debate). She's fun and entertaining.

I'd like to see MoS's behavior stop immediately. If not, I am giving serious consideration to asking that the mod replace him, and to reporting his behavior to ye olde admines. He's breaking what is probably the most important rule across the site, by intentionally ruining the game experience for one player and by extension skewing it for everybody else.

[Glork]

I'm thinking about MoS's vote and what should be done about it. If you feel the need to talk about it, go ahead, but please not for too much longer. If you feel the need to talk to me about it, go right ahead and PM me.

If I may give my two cents publicly, I think it'd be only fair to allow MoS to man up, grow a set of testicles, and unvote and be mature about playing with DGB. If he fails to do that, I feel that disciplinary action of some kind (at your discretion, naturally) would be required.

[Glork]

ZA, I still fail to grasp just

HOW

rhymes are such a bust
In terms of benefit to the town...
Something wrong seems going down.

The best you've given, as far as I can tell
Is that he might restrict night play. That's good and well,
But as I noted, if Dru Pip is scum
Restricting action is rather dumb
And if he's town, he should not die
So your policy lynch comes... why?

[Glork]

Unvote, Vote: MoS

One bad policy lynch deserves another!

[Glork]

Not really, no.

[Glork]

Vote based partially on JDodge's "hint", and partially on MoS's scummy behavior. If he (JDodge) isn't right I imagine we'll be coming for him next.

Unvote, Vote: Mastermind of Sin

Is it just me or does this reek of "mislynch X and set up to mislynch Y tomorrow"?

Unvote, Vote: Gage

[Glork]

Remember that time we lynched Gage as scum?

[Glork]

@ Glork

Post 239
What was the point of this post? To defend Thanatos, or criticise Oman? If it was a criticism, to what end?

The first part was a criticism of Oman's play.

The second part was pointing out that Than had already answered Oman's question.

The last paragraph was me giving my analysis of Thanatos' behavior.




Take that as you will.

[Glork]

Do you think it was suspicious of Oman to be asking Thanatos what he was? Actually, I'm not so interested in what you felt was worth criticising, but

why

you did at all.

Why? That should be obvious.
1) As I said, Oman's claim that Thanatos' vote was "horribly explained" was completely erroneous.
2) I wanted Oman to explain himself to get a little more info on what's going through his head

About Thanatos, yeah, it looks like an analysis, but it also looks like you were stepping in to do Thanatos' explaining for him. Would it not have been better to let him answer himself?

Again, I just called it like I saw it.
Do you think that my "explaining for" Thanatos is significant? Do you feel I went out of my way to protect a scumbuddy?

[Glork]

STOP WITH THE DS VOTES.

YOU ARE ONLY VOTING DS FOR BEING AN ASS, WHEREAS THAT SEEMS LESS LIKE A SCUMTELL AND MORE LIKE HIM BEING AN ASS.

DS IS A TERRIBLE LYNCH CHOICE

AT THE MOMENT

AND I WILL BE LOOKING CLOSELY AT EVERYONE WHO HAS JUMPED ON THIS WAGON WITHOUT REASON.

I was pretty much about to paste the exact same thing.

If somebody can put together a logically sound case as to why DS's behavior makes him likely to be scum, I'd be willing to listen. But right now, I'm not seeing it.



Later on, I'll pick through this wagon and figure out where the scums jumped aboard. I've got shit to do right now.

[Glork]

DGB, you should A) Be less obvious; and B) get your sanity checked.

Seriously.

[Glork]

Okay, then. If you're not oozing an erroneous investigation result, give me something to respond to. Like Destructor said, pressuring me with nothing to go on doesn't really do anything.

[Glork]

I'm going to go ahead and assume that she has a "guilty" result on me, because she couldn't have tracked me to the deceased.

If that's the case, then I've nothing to say. It'll be unfortunate if I'm ly nched and I turn up town, and then you'll have to decide whether DGB is of questionable sanity or whether she's pulling a Lepton's Gambit. (I should note, I could see Lepton's actually occurring here, since DGB and I have a bit of a history. I've been primarily responsible for her lynch in every game we've played together where she was scum. I think that DGB trading herself for me would be a perfectly reasonable play.)

The other option, of course, is to give DGB another night or to verify her insanity/paranoia. DGB, what on earth possessed you to come out D1 with a guilty result anyway? That's a pretty terrible play, and I thought a player with your experience would know better by now.

[Glork]

You're making that up. You've advocated my lynch when I was town as well. I have not noticed that you "primarily responsible" for my lynch "in every game we've played together" where I was scum. If anything... maybe you've more often advocated my lynch when I was town... that's my overall impression... I don't keep track of wins and losses, check my wiki, that's not how my mind works.

Nope. I defended you in Best of the Internet. The only game where I got you lynched as town was LO1. I've also explained my meta on you (I believe it was in CoOps), and

since then

, that meta has

continued

to hold fast regarding your behavior.

I'm not making up anything, DGB. I'll go dig up the posts if I must, but I have a very clear meta on you, and it has proven accurate.

DGB, what on earth possessed you to come out D1 with a guilty result anyway?

Why do you assume I have a guilty result? What do you *think* I have???

DGB, at least three other people have come to the same conclusion that you were breadcrumbing (a little too) heavily.

I assume a "guilty" result because I know you can't have an incriminating Tracker, Watcher, or Gunsmith result, and Cops can have questionable sanities. I don't understand any other rationale for your "HAY GUYZ LOOK AT ME HINT THAT GLORK IS SCUM" behavior.

Now you're making a really pathetic attempt to back down from your blatant hinting. Is it because you're scum or beacuse you realized you're an idiot? Or both?

[Glork]

Surprised? I'm an innocent on whom you practically stated you have a condemning result on. What kind of reaction would you expect?

[Glork]

Now you're making a really pathetic attempt to back down from your blatant hinting.

Go look at my second post of the game. My hint is there. I'm not backing down from it. In fact - it's more than just a hint - the whole thing is there.

I have no idea what you're talking about. All I know is that you've strongly suggested that you have an incriminating result. I don't know the nature of your "information," I don't know what role you're hinting at, and unless you come out clearly, I don't see anything to respond to. You're either making a bunch of noise for no reason (and in the process have outed information about me and possibly yourself), or you're scum trying to rail a bunch of people against me for no good reason.

[Glork]

I can't see a way out of this without Glork claiming.

I can. It's called me refusing to claim.

At this point, I think DGB is stirring the pot for malicious reasons. It reminds me of the way she behaved in Covert Ops Mafia. She was a scum cop in that game and tried to trump me, outing herself when I mentioned the concept of doc protections in the game. Some posts from that game:

Glork. Do you KNOW that there is a possibility of being protected against nightkills? As if you've got a role PM that reveals this possibility to exist?

Glork, I am serious. I need to know. Please help me. Can someone get night protection in this game? I don't care how or what or who. Rolefishing and hinting towards power.

Glork, come on. You're an intelligent fellow. Can I be more obvious? You've got to know where I am heading, and if you're Town, and you know where I am heading, you tell me whether it's possible to get protection at night. Don't tell me you can't figure that one out... are you playing dumb?

You're not getting codenames from me, or anyone.

I know more than you. WAY more. Now, do you get it?

So Glork, you have no idea whether it's possible to get nightkill protection?

Crap. Unfortunately, I am really going to need it now, I have reached a point of no-return. I am going to need it more than you. WAY more than you.

Let me crack my expert spy knuckles, and demonstrate my awesome power and knowlege. Fasten your seatbelts.

For starters, since we already know, but just to prove my point that I know more than you, Glork...

Pooky is indeed innocent. Pooky's codename is Wolverine. He has no special abilities.

We already knew he was cleared, so he is in no greater risk than he was before I revealed this. But note that I know his codename, and his role. Pooky can back me up, that he has not told me this.

Claiming in order to "prove" that she "deserves" protection.


I go on to observe that every claimed and revealed role has some kind of significant drawback, whereas DGB seems to be a full role cop with no drawback. She asserts that she does have drawbacks to her role, but says two things:

I am not allowed to reveal the drawbacks of my role.

Another reason why I was mulling coming out, is that I have not one, but TWO guilties.

She then

REFUSES

to reveal either her drawbacks or her codename (each role in CoOps had a codename)

OR

her other guilty result, instead being as cryptic as possible and just throwing shit against the wall hoping something will stick.



She's already starting to do the same here.

[Glork]

Unvote, Vote: DGB

, by the way. I'm interested to see how this plays out.


I also still want some protown rationale for why DGB would A) volunteer non-incriminatory information about me and information about her own role; and B) why she would so blatantly fish for information from me by admitting to some kind of information but not revealing its nature.

I don't understand the reasoning behind this at all.

[Glork]

Gah, Edit:

Some posts from that game:

Glork. Do you KNOW that there is a possibility of being protected against nightkills? As if you've got a role PM that reveals this possibility to exist?

Glork, I am serious. I need to know. Please help me. Can someone get night protection in this game? I don't care how or what or who.

Rolefishing and hinting towards power.

[Glork]

What makes you think that openly fishing for role information (not just from me, but from anybody) is a good thing, DGB?

[Glork]

Can you show me other games where you've openly rolefished for information D1 as a protown player?

[Glork]

With all due respect, Fonz, that's completely retarded.

Any protown player will not reveal information about his role without solid evidence compelling him to do so. Any halfway decent scumbag will not reveal information about his role without solid evidence compelling him to do so.

Against incompetent scum, it may work. Against town or competent scum, it accomplishes absolutely nothing.

[Glork]

EBWOP: Also, Fonz, that gambit really only works if a player has a truly damning result. DGB has admitted that whatever information she has can at most be "potentially incriminating." That is entirely too weak to force anything at all.

[Glork]

Well, yes, but the solid evidence was there, in the form of a claimed investigative role, and a large wagon insisting he claim or die.

Then based on what you've said, I would venture to guess that the context of that was completely different. It wasn't D1 with no other evidence to go on, was it? Was there other in-thread evidence pointing to that player likely being scum?

I'm telling you right now that if a wagon built up on me, I would refuse to claim, I would probably get lynched, and then you'd be questioning DGB for the rest of the game once you see my role.

And in fact, a wagon/claim should

not

be built up because if that becomes acceptable in the meta, then it opens the door for scum to fake doing basically the exact same thing. Suppose a player claims to have an incriminating result, gets a power role lynched D1, then claims that they've stopped getting results, as if there's a Mafia Roleblocker? What do you do?

Suppose the coppish role wagons a player to claim, that player claims a confirmable role (say, confirmed-innocent Mason), then the coppish player is wagoned for presumably lying, and they're forced to claim. Is that a good result for the town?



Fishing without knowing what one is getting into is a horrendously risky proposition. Sure, it

CAN

lead to good results, but the ends do not justify the means.

[Glork]

I see no reason to. There is nothing remotely damning about your claimed result. Thus, you are making a bunch of noise with no evidence to back it up, and as a protown player I am not privy to volunteer information that would help the scums far more than it would help the rest of the town.

[Glork]

You'd need to explain the circumstances in which a genuine town investigative role would turn up a positive on a mason. Mason is a really bad example, since it doesn't have any night actions that could be misinterpreted.

I was thinking in the event of a player who claims to be an Insane/Paranoid cop. But yeah, Mason's not the best example, probably -- I just had to think of something confirmable in a complete vacuum, rather than making some long-winded explanation for another 'confirmed' role.

Now, DGB may be

lying

: but if she wants to trade 1-1 for a town player as scum, I don't care who it is, that's a deal worth doing for town. IF you refuse to claim upon being run up, that's very anti-town.

Bzzt. The information obtained from a lynch as controversial as mine would be invaluable to the town. There would be so much :goodposting: to read and analyze, you kids would be set to bust all of the non-DGB scums. Seriously.
And yeah, I would be okay with trading 1-for-1 D1 with any scumbag, in any game. That's probably why I'm not horribly upset if I go down in flames today. But if DGB were to get away with getting me lynched without revealing the nature of her information, that gives her the flexibility to make things up as she goes along, if indeed she is scum -- yet another reason that wagoning somebody to death on cryptic information is such a bad idea.

[Glork]

Which is why you not claiming when wagoned on cryptic information is really bad. The best case scenario for DrippingGoofScum here is you claim, she 'confirms' your claim, and then she's got her claim sorted and you outed- but Glorkpower is like, the biggest lock ever to be doc-protected, and she's got to continue faking her results from day one onward. If you claim, and she says that's inconsistent with what she knows, then she has to die DII if you come up town. Simple, no?

No, not simple. At all.

Me claiming would be the obvious play if I was upwards of 85% convinced that DGB was scum. But if she's town as well, then the result is: Two outed power and nothing gained.



What further alarms me is this, from Post 3:

Mass claim. I dare ya!

OUTING INFORMATION WITHOUT BEING POSITIVE YOU ARE BUSTING SCUM IS A HORRIBLE IDEA.

This is one of the reasons I question the validity (or intelligence) of DGB's play here. She seems content to force out information when the mod has basically told us that outing information will be bad for the town. This suggests at least one among many possible pitfalls to early claims: Mafia RB, Superkill, no Doc, etc, etc, etc.

It's a bad play, Fonz. Period.

[Glork]

Yeah, I fucked that one up. That's what I get for posting on emotion and not thinking/re-reading before I posted. :/

Some risk of outing power in order to have some possibility of catching scum is sometimes a deal worth doing- particularly if catching one scum is about the limit of DGB's power.

I'm... not really sure what you're getting at here.
With or without a claim, there's a distinct possibility of catching scum. Heck, we've got 25 pages' worth of information to use in catching scum. The question is:

Does outing more information significantly increase the possiblity of finding scum to a high enough degree that it makes it worthwhile?

I do not believe this is the case.

[Glork]

[Glork]

Unvote

, btw.

[Glork]

DGB is a tracker, everyone gets that right?

A) It's far from certain that she hinted Tracker specifically.
B) Even if that's how you genuinely feel, there is zero reason to just state it in-thread

Vote: Oman

[Glork]

hmm, this vote does not make sense.
Is this vote based on him being scum or just dense?

He made what is absolutely a very anti-town play. Thus, his chances of being scum rise dramatically.

[Glork]

Pfeh. I forgot about this game entirely. I will catch up and post this weekend.

[Glork]

Okay, forutnately there wasn't much to read (only about 4.5 pages) since I last checked in on this game.


I don't like my Oman-vote much anymore. I think his play was moronic, but not necessarily indicative of him being

scum

. I guess you can call it a slap on the wrist or something, but I don't like that kind of play at all.

Unvote

I like Foolster. A lot. He's moving the game forward, and his posts seem very reasonable. I don't agree with his analysis of Quag, although I can understand if he isn't familiar with Quag's playstyle/personality.

I also like Oman's 792... while I am not entirely comfortable with people who just wagon across the board (I have yet to see any of the young guns fully explain how their use of wagoning has actually helped them find scumbags with any significant level of consistency), I will account somewhat for playstyles such as what Oman has showed.

I'm not yet sure who I want to vote, but I'm about ready for this day to end soon.

[Glork]

Vote: DiscipleSlayer

This day seriously needs to end. Soon.

[Glork]

Admittedly, we are kindof in need of some action. Hell, I've even compromised to vote DS. 35 pages and a month and a half is ridiculous for D1, and this game has gotten horribly stagnant.

[Glork]

Good case: Vote DS because he's closest to lynch.


Surefire winner, MoS.

[Glork]

Good case: Vote DS because he's closest to lynch.

= Lynch of convenience = crap

Why have you been neglecting to comment on the Gorrad case?

Neither of these cases really interest me, but DS has more votes on him.

[Glork]

I like what undo is doing here. Mise well reply to his points against me.

Glork

Issue #1 (page 6) – Glork votes Oman “In the interests of starting some conversation that doesn't involve Niv's complete social (and English language) ineptitude”,”for no particular reason at all”. But then, some posts after, he says that he chose Oman because he already had 2 votes! Random votes at that stage are suspicious, but this blatant contradiction is surely worthy of a

FoS: Glork

.

Wow, um... you couldn't be more wrong. To grab the full quote:

In the interests of starting some conversation that doesn't involve Niv's complete social (and English language) ineptitude, I'm going to bandwagon somebody else for no particular reason at all.

I stated that I was going to bandwagon somebody without reason (as in, with a baseless vote) to start a bandwagon.
I then said that I voted Oman because he had two votes -- which was the most at the time, unless I am mistaken, besides the person I had been previously voting.

I cannot tell if your decision to ignore the fact that, in

both posts, I stated that I was simply joining a bandwagon because it was there

is malicious in intent, or just a result of a misinterpretation. "No particular reason at all" means "I don't have a reason for thinking this person is scummy" -- not "there is no reason whatsoever for my vote."

Issue #2 (page 7) – Follows JDodge’s vote without adding further reasoning.

...would you rather I repeat exactly what JDodge says? The reason was obvious. Thanatos blatantly said he wasn't following the thread and asked somebody to sum up recent happenings for him. At the very least, it's worthy of a slap on the wrist.

In fact, Issue #1 in your Thanatos section is quoting this post and saying "common scumtell." Can ya guess why I voted Thanatos there, champ? What separates your ThanatosIssue #1 from my post from JDodge's post?

Issue #3 (page 8) – He seems to be defending Thanatos, who is a potential mafia member. He does the same page 10. There seems to be a connection between Glork and Thanatos, because I’m not seeing Glork defending anyone else.

I can see how you could misconstrue my post as "defending Thanatos," and given the context of the rest of your post, I also undersatnd why you may believe that to be scumm, but I don't have much to say here. I asked mandalorian to explain his vote because it didn't make sense to me. I'd say that if anybody based a case off of "X pretended-to-forget to bold his vote so he could distance from his scumbuddy without actually lynching him." Why? Because like I said, people make silly syntax or procedural goofs (such as forgetting to bold a vote) all the time. Furthermore, mandalorian's hypothesis could only have held if there were a less-than-significant chance that MoS would have been lynched in the

very beginnings

of the game. But, as that simply doesn't happen nowadays (shame, isn't it?), there would have been no viable difference between "a fake-botched random vote on his scumbuddy" and "a random vote on his scumbuddy." Hypothetical Thanatos-scum would have no incentive to protect hypothetical MoS-scum in that situation by "forgetting" to bold his vote.

Issue #4 (page 22) – He seems again to be defending Thanatos, one of the scummiest players at the time. FoS still stands.

Not much to say here. I basically did answer for Thanatos. You're not the only one to have interpreted it as a defense.

Issue #5 (page 25) – DGB seems to know that Glork did something at night worth voting. Glork starts to post much more often. Refuses to claim, but he subtly suggests he has a power role.

Yes, we've already established that DGB/Thok has some information that stated that I did something last night. And I didn't "subtly suggest" having a power role, so much as "accidentally let it slip." Somebody called me on it, and I acknowledged that I had a role and took an action last night. There was no attempt at subtlety there.

Issue #6 (page 34) – Glork jumps on bandwagon to lynch DS.

Big FoS: Glork

.

Guilty as charged. Furthermore, I have openly stated that I mostly want the day to end sometime before the spring thaw comes. If you'd like, I can show you other examples in which I do this as a protown player. I'd hardly call it a scumtell, by any means. It's more indicative of personality or playstyle.

[Glork]

...Gorrad seems like Good Peoples to me.

DS can still die.

[Glork]

Undo: You give some pretty good reaon to think Quagmire is scummy yourself, and I give a few more in previous posts (for the most part saying what you said.)
One extra point is I found it seems he's been trying to take control of the town (Act like he's caught scum with little or no given evidence, not once but TWICE)
I don't think anyone else (besides Quag himself) has actually denied a scummyness from him, for that

FOS: undo

I can see no scumminess in Quagmire's posts. He clearly likes to provoke, but as I see it that's a characteristic of his playstyle. His attitude is too risky for a scum. Despite not being very nice, Quagmire is clearly assertive and firm, while scum tend to be much more careful and fickle.

Yeah, this post is made of pure, unadultured truth. Quag stirs up the muck, but if he's protown, you can bet he's doing it in a way that's helpful.

Also, taking control of a town is by no means a scumtell, Foolster. After a game (in which I was the protown Doctor), mlaker called Ibby (protown Gunsmith) and me the "J.D. Rockefeller and JP Morgan of mafia" because he felt we monopolized and controlled the entire game. And we did. I rode everybody's asses, browbeat people into doing or talking about what I wanted, and pushed lynches with endless stubbornness at times. If you know what you're doing, it can actually be a pretty useful tool. So basically, I

perfectly

agree with Undo's analysis here. Quag's a bad lynch today. Period.

[Glork]

We don't yet know whether Quag is town or not. But
A) Nobody has "give[n] up the town" to Quagmire; and
B) My point is that Quag being "controlling" is not indicative of him being scum, which is what you are basing your vote on.

[Glork]

Vote: Porochaz

[Glork]

FoS: Oman

, too.

[Glork]

Vote: Porochaz

Care to explain this vote Glork?

Sure.

I took a look at people whom I felt were most likely to be busing DS (I would suspect 1-2 busers, based on numbers and assuming one scumgroup), and I came up with Fonz and Porochaz as my two most likely suspects. Fonz's vote was a hold-over from basically a policy vote (he voted DS for rolefishing, but made it a point to state that rolefishing happens too much in general, which I felt weakened his point significantly). It did feel like distancing. Furthermore, Fonz's behavior regarding the whole DGB/Glork incident definitely had an "I want people to start blurting out information" feel, which felt very much like the rolefishing he was accusing DS of. Alas, it would appear as though somebody either agreed with me or felt quite the opposite on Fonz, because he bit the bullet last night. Porochaz's attack on DS seemed the opposite -- it was way too over-the-top for my liking. In Post 592, he listed twelve reasons for voting DS. There were a handful with which I take issue.
Reason 1, he cites a PBPA done by DS and says "it's basically an attack on Niv." I don't see how this is out of the ordinary or indicative of scumminess. People who are making attacks against someone often run PBPAs.
#2 and #3 attacks the style/format in which DS chose to post -- which, again, I don't see as being indicative of scumminess. Porochaz even

states

"Once again fleshing out arguments badly" -- Since when is poor articulation or presentation evil?
4 and 5 are fine. 6 again seems to be attacking him for his approach without actually stating why it's "a reason to vote for DS." 7 is fine, 8 I actually wholeheartedly agree with because it felt like a form of appeal to emotion.
9 irritates me, because though Porochaz doesn't state that he's not going to talk to DS, he does spend an awful lot of time attacking DS's posting style... the big difference, of course, is that he just concludes that DS was scummy because of it. 10 follows in the same vein
#11 doesn't make sense, because Post 588 was made by

me

pointing out the stupidity of the early DS wagon. I'd like explanation on this from Porochaz, but I'm counting it as a non-point until then.
#12 is, again, a vote based on playstyle/personality as opposed to any actual scummy behavior.


I would venture to guess that Porochaz expected DS to calm down -- and, if not, he'd supposedly look good for having pushed so hard against DS. It's really too bad that over half of his reasons for voting DS were terrible.

I will add that since I voted for Porochaz, his Thanatos vote makes me even happier to lynch him dead. By the way, I don't like this Thanatos wagon at all... it is probably chock full o'scum.




Oman's suggestion of a cult as a second scumgroup is

VERY

interesting to me, though. Is there any particular reason you suggested this, Oman?
I also want to know what makes you think that large games "usually" have two scumgroups. I think that is blatantly false, and I do feel that you're trying to pull a fast one here.

[Glork]

So wait, what new post are you referring to?

[Glork]

I have a very distinct meta on Gorrad that tells me he's just being an idiot, but that he is almost certainly town.

Also another question... why would I go about bussing the mafia godfather for 20 pages without wavering? It seems a very anti scum thing to do...

To make a post like this? I've seen harder, longer, stronger busings. Saying "I wouldn't bus like that as scum" really doesn't do much for me.

[Glork]

I think I answered them as best as I need to. I told you, I believe that he's off the mark but not scum.

[Glork]

13 and 14 seem like reasonable observations. In fact, I would take his observations a step further and state that Niv, DruPip, and Gorrad are somewhat less likely to be scum, because I doubt that DP would have distanced hard in his situation.

[Glork]

FoS: mneme

That first line is about as noncommital as one can get, and both comments are just statements of agreement with recently voiced lines of thought.

[Glork]

Oman, please respond to my questions for you:

Oman's suggestion of a cult as a second scumgroup is VERY interesting to me, though. Is there any particular reason you suggested this, Oman?
I also want to know what makes you think that large games "usually" have two scumgroups. I think that is blatantly false, and I do feel that you're trying to pull a fast one here.

[Glork]

A cursory glanse shows that 9 of the last 13 completed large themed games had only one scumgroup (not counting SK as a "group," and not counting one game that was abandoned which I couldn't determine the setup of). 6 of the last 8 completed non-Open New York games had only one scumgroup, and one was an open setup with just 3 SKs.

[Glork]

EBWOP: I will say that I didn't realize you had so little experience in large games, and that a quick check of your past games seems to support this. Meh.

[Glork]

Have never really gotten on my feet this game.

That said...undo is scum with DS, and well worded as it was, 919 was an attempt to deflect.

unvote
vote: undo

Okay, I'll bite. What makes it deflection and not the "wow, this wagon is dumb, it exists just because DS was an arrogant ass" like so many other posts?

[Glork]

Yarr
harr
fiddle
dee
dee

[Glork]

So are you saying that six people tried to deflect from the DS wagon because they were scum?



I'm mostly just curious as to why you skipped out on basically all of D1 (Ten posts in three months? Seriously. No wonder this game dragged on forever...) and suddenly pick ONE person for "deflection" when numerous people addressed DS only to say they didn't like his wagon (mostly because it was based on playstyle and little actual suspected scumminess).

[Glork]

Glork: I replaced in fairly late, was in a lot of games at the time, and therefore took a -long- time to read the damned game.

Yeah, I forgot about that. This game has had entirely too many replacements.



A. Calling DS being scum a "problem" for naysaysers is hardly valid. Objectively speaking, it

IS

true that a number of people attacked DS's playstyle and erroneously called him scummy for it. I don't think you can deny that.

B. This one is deliciously ironic, because that is exactly how JD and I felt about the early wagon on DS. The first half of the DS wagon was a "witch-hunt" through and through. It just happened to be accurate.



In retrospect, I do think that the DS wagon was pretty terrible, and if I could've gotten myself interested in the game after 2+ months, I almost certainly would have argued vehemently against it. I won't argue with the results, but it was sheer dumb luck.

I'm still not seeing why undo (not echo) is "very likely scum." Stating it was "very conscious" is hardly unique to undo's post. JDodge, destructor, MoS, and I also "very consciously" stated that the DS wagon was bad, and I would argue that Foolster did the same.
You still haven't explained why it was "an attempt to disrail the DS wagon" to my liking. What he said about the wagon is this:

I think people are voting him mostly because of his arrogant posting – I dislike it too, but again, one must not let personal views to interfere with the game.

Again, I maintain that

this is a perfectly accurate analysis of the wagon

. JDodge, destructor, and I made the

EXACT

same observation, because we were willing and able to look at it objectively instead of saying, "Wow, you're a jackass, I'm going to vote you."

[Glork]

I'm revoking my IGMEOY for Glork.

Son, I know better than that. You never take your eye off the prize.

Foolster, you're probably going to kick me for this, but could you re-hash why your opinion of Quag differs from others' opinions of DS? I vaguely remember arguing that Quag's situation was very much playstyle, too, and I don't remember if you gave proper reasons to go after him.

[Glork]

Knowing DS was scum makes me much less interested in Thanatos. This should be obvious.

Glork: you seem to be falling into the fallacy that scum cannot engage in good play. undo's (undo, sorry for thinko-ing your name as echo. that was funky) posts (well, 919 and 932 ) are very good -- but the first (in context) also constutues a very well done attempt to derail DS's bandwagon. I haven't seen Undo put that much effort into the game when it wasn't a scum on the block.

I can't say I agree with you. I am not calling him town based on the fact that he made a well-reasoned post. My only point is that several people tried to derail the DS wagon, and I don't understand why you select him out of all of those people to be the one you call scummy. You seem to be doing a lot of hand-waving and name-calling without rigorously explaining

WHY

you came to your conclusions.

[Glork]

See V/LA.

[Glork]

I'm vaguely surprsied nobody's considered asking me about what happened to me last night. Curious.

I figure you probably had a reason for not speaking up. I could take a wild guess as to what that reason is, but I don't really want to.

I should probably re-read some stuff. I want to know more about these two wagons (even though the Thanatos one is obviously crap and Porochaz is obviously scum).

[Glork]

Korlash, why don't you stop being Korlash for once and try actually doing something? Being a self-proclaimed bad, stupid, worthless player isn't something to be proud of.

[Glork]

I'm vaguely surprsied nobody's considered asking me about what happened to me last night. Curious.

I figure you probably had a reason for not speaking up. I could take a wild guess as to what that reason is, but I don't really want to.

I was actually roleblocked last night. Putting that info out immediately isn't so useful, but the day has gone on long enough that I think I want town to know about this.

Interesting. Not what I expected, but I think it makes sense.

Glork must be amused by this conversation, given how DGB/Glork went yesterday.

Actually, I want to punch a baby right now. Given what DGB did yesterday, if you are protown I can understand you saying you were roleblocked, but Korlash's behavior (if he is telling the truth) is completely out of line. If he has particularly damning evidence on you, he should reveal everything. If it doesn't give at least like an 80% possibility of you being scum, he never should have said anything at all.

The thing that was getting me about DGB/Thok right now is that I've seen DGB be overzealous when having a scum power-role (i.e., Covert Ops Mafia -- which, incidentally, I just read a vew days ago), and Thok really hasn't done all that much to impress me. I had him in my tentative protown list upon reading overnight, but not by a whole lot.

This recent information makes me much more confident that he is town, and it does explain his IGMEOY of me rather well. If he did get blocked last night, after D1, that says an

awful

lot. I'm definitely thinking that Thok is town and that there's a scum roleblocker in the game.

[Glork]

Information incoming, got me full of frown.
Foolster, what has Thok done that makes you think he is town?

is there some post that really hits it home
or just a general feel registering in your dome?

What are

your

thoughts on this whole Thok/Korlash thing?

[Glork]

I'm not catching what you're throwing, Gorrad.

[Glork]

Thok, that's the first post you've made in a long time that just flat-out makes me cringe.

The first one is possible -- I don't know -- but it could be an attempt to obfuscate results everywhere if you've been firmly outed just now.

The second one bothers me, but I'll wait for Gorrad to answer before responding to it myself. I bet you could guess why it bothers me, though.

Third one....

what

exactly makes you think that there will be a Death Miller in this game?

[Glork]

You're wrong, Thok, I don't know who you targetted. I know who I targetted. And I can safely say that, unless Oman has any explanation for this or there was some kind of target-switching role used on Foolster, myself, Oman, or you last night, there is no chance you're telling the truth.

If anyone DID use such an ability on one of these people, please say so now. Otherwise, Thok is lying.

No! No no no no no NO.

You're fucking idiots. If Thok, Gorrad, and Korlash are all claiming information-roles, there is a

VERY

reasonable chance that at least one of you has sanity issues of some kind and/or that at least one of you is lying.

Having more people claim more roles and more results is probably

IDEAL

for the scums right now, because everyone who is protown is confused and lashing out on questionable results. Just fucking STOP IT already.

I want every single player to respond to these happenings, but I don't even want anybody to HINT information, roles, or targets right now. Color me paranoid, but I don't see this going well at all. Let's all just stop, think, and read before we start blurting out everything. Virtual massclaims on D2 are not generally helpful to winning the game.

[Glork]

The set up would be screwed if Mars put two RBers in a game of this size. I find that likelyhood to be next to null, hence why I didn't address it earlier.

I could not disagree more with this statement. I am absolutely willing to believe that there are two roleblockers in this game.

Glork, have you been roleblocked at all this game?

I haven't been told that my ability has failed, if that's what you're asking. I have no interest in revealing anything else at this time, for a variety of reasons.

Do we agree that hearing this clearification from Korlash is important? I think so. I tend to think at this point a vide that Korlash is misguided town, so I'm not sure a reasire to lynch would work.

Yes... getting this clarification is

VITAL

, IMHO.

I was not RBed. Thok

DOES NOT

have a power role. Now, who thinks it is important Thok FULL CLAIM?

You're positive on this? Your result was that Thok does not have a power role?

--> Does anybody know if Korlash has a history of lying or bending the truth when town?
--> Korlash, do you think there is ANY possibility that you A) were roleblocked last night; or B) are not sane (as in, your results on Power/No-Power are backwards).

Another thought that popped into my head --

what if the power/information roles have only a percentage (say, 50%) chance of being effective

?


I'm still trying to work through all of this, but if Gorrad's and Korlash's information align, then there's a very reasonable chance that Thok is a scumbaggo. I'm just hung up on the fact that Korlash

EARLIER

said e got "no result" and

NOW

is saying Thok "does not have a power role." I'm also trying to work around how Gorrad feels there is zero chance of there being both a protown and a scum RB in the game. I'm sure I've seen

mini games

that had multiple RBs and were properly balanced.
(OH! In fact, Dantes in Fresno was a recent theme park game with 20 players and 2 limited roleblockers -- one scum, and one protown.)



By the way, Porochaz is still scum.

[Glork]

Glork:
Why do you beleive that Poro is scum?
Sorry no re-read yet, I'm a lazy bum.

Yeah, I'm not catering to lazy bums right now. Go look it up yourself. The explanation is very clearly laid out in the thread, and after I posted it you even

SAID

that you were tempted to move to Porochaz.

FoS: Foolster

Given you can't even recall this happening, it makes me wwonder if your comments at the time were insincere. Thank you for outing yourself as Poro's scumbuddy.

[Glork]

--> Does anybody know if Korlash has a history of lying or bending the truth when town?

Yes. But he is always pro-town in intention when doing it. I cannot see this being a pro-town lie.

So what exactly do you think of it?

Do you think Korlash is lying? If not, do you think Thok is scum, or do you think something else might be going on?

[Glork]

I'll be as snippy as I damned well please.

[Glork]

If Mars confirms Korlash's result, I would be very inclined to vote Thok, although I still think Poro and Fool are questionable at best.

[Glork]

Can we get a vote count?
I'd like to hear more from Meme since that's I think the last person I don't have a read on one way or the other.

What is your read on ZONEACE? On Niv? JDodge?

[Glork]

(Sneaking in a post at work.)

Unvote, Vote: Foolster

I'm still undecided on this whole Thok/Korlash/Gorrad thing, but Foolster is pinging MEGA-hard right now. Obviously I asked a leading question because I don't remember Foolster saying anything about those people. Based on his response (and the fact that there are more people he hasn't mentioned about whom I didn't ask), I don't think he's even trying to get an overall view on the game. He seems very content to just ping on recent issues brought up by others, aside from his earlier vendetta against Quag/Bookitty. Them's the marks of a dirty scum.

[Glork]

Oh, and this post:

Hmm. If this is true, then perhaps the best move is to lynch Thok (Ala Lynch All liars). Obviously then if Thok is town Korlash would be the next to go.

Then again, I suppose there could be a sanity thing going on, or something else. I'm not sure.

...made me want to punch a baby. False Dilemma/Double Mislynch, much?


I don't know. Maybe I'm paranoid. Or just stubborn. I don't think Thok has played like scum, and I don't see DGB having done what she did D1 without at least some shred of credibility. Mafia version of the role Thok claimed? Possible, but not especially likely IMHO.

Also, who the heck is Ouman? In another place JDodge voted this "Ouman" which makes me think it is not a mistake. Does this have some hidden meaning, or perhaps I'm reading too much in to it?

ScumChat joke: Ouman = British spelling of Oman.

[Glork]

Again, I can't see Foolster as scum (or at the very least scum with DS) given his reaction to Oman's comments in twilight. Foolster's comments there seem to suggest he wasn't expecting DS to come up scum, and are sort of pointless if he was partners with DS.

I disagree entirely. His reaction to Oman's "LAL fails again" could easily have been feigned ignorance (or even an attempt to fish).

Also, why Foolster and not mneme, who is also mainly doing the "ping on recent issues brought up by others" thing?

Foolster seems like hella scum right now. I'm not taking my eye off of mneme, but Fool is definitely higher on my "People who need to die" list.

[Glork]

1) I'm not JDodge.

2) It was "lynch all lurkers" -- I'm not entirely sure why I posted "LAL," but it refers to Posts 998 and 999, the twilight after DS's lynch. Thok claims it makes you very unlikely to be scum, but I obviously disagree.

[Glork]

Re: 2, it was just a response to Thok's comment about how he couldn't see you as scum. It's not a main point by any means. All I was trying to do was to point out that, unlike Thok, I don't see your Twilight-1 comments as being a protown sign. Never did I insinuate that they were a point against you.

[Glork]

Meh.

Unvote, Vote: Porochaz

[Glork]

I sincerely doubt that there are two (killing) scumgroups. If there *ARE* two, there's virtually no way that more than one can kill on any given night.

[Glork]

lol.

Assuming Niv is town, him getting modkilled would obviously be a bad thing, but I can't help but find Destructor/Niv thing to be absolutely hilarious.

I am especially interested to see the fallout of this tomfoolery.

[Glork]

You're starting to make me think you really are scum, Thokkity.

[Glork]

So.... Destructor is fishing for a modkill, and Niv asserts that he should've been modkilled even though he wasn't.

Instinct tells me Destructor is more likely to be a scumbaggo here, though I'd really like to see some explanation from Niv regarding this "great, now I'm going to get modkilled, "No you aren't" business.

[Glork]

Hi.

Really drunk.

Porochaz is still scum.

XOXO,
Glork

[Glork]

Hmmm, Im waiting for a vote count before I say anything constructive... because Im a little confused where everyone is at, at the moment.

...


SERIOUSLY. Why isn't Porochaz dead yet?

[Glork]

Because Thanatos has been at L-1 for quite a while with no hammer, implying that he's either scum, all scum are on his wagon, or there's some MAJOR WIFOM going on.

Or it just means that scum aren't stupid enough to hammer prematurely.

Assuming you're protown, you've convinced yourself that Thanatos is scum based in part on the fact that he hasn't been hammered yet.

[Glork]

First off, it's not WIFOM at all. You're blatantly misusing the term.

Secondly, the fact that Gorrad is the one who put Thanatos at L-1 and stated he's good with a Thanatos lynch indicates that he's already made his position clear, and it implies that he's trying to badger somebody else into hammering Thanatos by making a narrow assertion (either scum, already wagoned by scum, or "MAJOR" wine in front of me). If anybody's "reaching" on anybody else, Gorrad is trying to bait somebody into hammering Thanatos.

[Glork]

Hey Glork, what made you say this:

By the way, I don't like this Thanatos wagon at all... it is probably chock full o'scum.

I'd have to read back to give specifics. What I do remember is thinking that the tail end of the early-day Thanatos-wagon probably had some opportunistic scumbags on it.

And there's this from before as well:

So.... Destructor is fishing for a modkill, and Niv asserts that he should've been modkilled even though he wasn't.

Instinct tells me Destructor is more likely to be a scumbaggo here...

Elaborate please.

I'm sure you realise that fishing for a liar and fishing for a modkill are different things. I explained my position in my previous post.

"If she sinks, she was innocent. If she floats, she is a witch and we must burn her!"

[Glork]

FYI: It's been a hideously busy week at work. I fly home late Thursday, have a ton of work and personal stuff to take care of on Friday, but by Friday night I'm hoping to turn my full attention to my games. Sorry about the lack of posting lately.

[Glork]

Eh, I'm not particularly sold on either Niv or Destructor as being scum, but I felt the need to weigh in on the situation.

Also, I disagree with the "do it privately" point. Suppose Niv were an alternate non-town role (Cult, Survivor, SK, whatever) and had faked the restriction. I can't say for sure, beacuse I've never been in that situation, but if I were scum and somebody not-on-my-team had claimed a PR which they didn't follow and didn't get punished for, I think I'd almost certainly bring it up publicly, too.

[Glork]

Porochaz needs more dead.

[Glork]

RTFT?

[Glork]

Yeah, you're pretty busted.

[Glork]

I'm pretty sure I've said multiple times that the Thanatos wagon is full of scum. You, too, should try reading the thread.



Thanks for playing, though.

[Glork]

Take a wild guess, champ.

[Glork]

Take a wild guess, champ.

Why have you ruled bussing out?

How often do you see relatively inexperienced players make a gambit like busing scumbuddies on both Days One and Two?

[Glork]

The only other player that was also on DS' wagon is Foolster. Given that you said Thanatos' wagon was full of scum before Foolster voted him, it seems that, besides Foolster, you believed more than one of Gorrad, Porochaz, Niv and Oman were scum. It's already clear that Porochaz was one of them, but who else and why? If your opinion has changed since then, I'd also like to know why.

I did state earlier that I believed Oman to be scum. I have since wavered in that opinion. Again, see thread for details.

Gorrad has a penchant for joining every bandwagon that pops up, regardless of his alignment, so I'm still working on evaluating that. I do have marked down that Gorrad and Niv get bonus points because of the way DS went down in flames. I hadn't really gotten a read on you until this exchange (and have moved you into my solidly protown category).

Now that you mention it, though, there

is

less in common between the two wagons than I thought. I had categorized both the DS-wagon yesterday and the current Thanatos wagon as "default wagons that popped up because the game has slowed down and seems to be dragging," which is why I assumed a stronger parallel between voting patterns and whatnot.

Either way, I still feel that Thanatos is town and is being taken advantage of. I could be mistaken (and perhaps this weekend I'll run an analysis), but there seems to be a voting bloc of [Oman, Gorrad, Niv], who (when not poking at each other) have largely railed on the same people. Experience tells me that this is the sort of thing that makes a good hiding place for scum. If this 'voting bloc' is indeed accurate, I would give less weight to the "DruPip/Gorrad/Niv unlikely scum" comment I made earlier, and I would want to take a closer look at those three.

[Glork]

Glork, what's your current opinion of Destructor?

95% protown. Easily.

[Glork]

Eh. 75-80%

[Glork]

Either way, I still feel that Thanatos is town and is being taken advantage of. I could be mistaken (and perhaps this weekend I'll run an analysis), but there seems to be a voting bloc of [Oman, Gorrad, Niv], who (when not poking at each other) have largely railed on the same people.

That's a really weird group of three to be suspicious of, as I'd argue that all of them are likely townies given their previous behavior.

Also how does your "Destructor is 99% town, easily" comment match up with your earlier suggestion that destructor was scum trying for a Niv modkill?

I've since then changed my mind?

Destructor's interrogation of me feels very protown. I don't know what else to say.

Hmmm. Glork, what do you think of Mneme, especially given recent posts?

Still a pretty reasonable scum candidate, I guess.

[Glork]

Oman, that is not only WIFOM, it's hideously flawed as well.

As scum, your goal is to get enough non-scum roles killed until you control the town and win. Who dies and how/when they die is irrelevant. This emphasis on power vs. townie is ridiculous. As I've said multiple times in recent months, FAR too many players put FAR too much emphasis on power roles.

[Glork]

I'm not saying that having power die sooner is a bad thing... and many times it will help make achieving majority come easier. But to claim that you universally try solely to get power-roles killed off first is a bridge I cannot buy. I dare you to tell me straight-faced that this is a time where it wouldn't look bloody fucking obvious if you were like "oh, he's a Townie, better start harping on somebody else."

[Glork]

Part of me feels this discussion would go nowhere, but when grilled on why you believed the claim, how would you respond?

A flip-flop like the one you claim you'd make would not go unnoticed.

[Glork]

FoS: ZONEACE

That last post reads

really

poorly to me.

[Glork]

It occurs to me that I've never actually said my full night 0 results. Huh.

Glork left his house N0. Nobody else came to Glork's house N0. The first part was heavily breadcrumbed by DGB; the second part was sort of implied by my questioning of about whether Glork had been roleblocked or not before my claim, if Glork had claimed to be roleblocked I would have started pushing for his lynch.

Maybe I just missed something over the last several posts because I skimmed it and I'm somewhat intoxicated, but I'm not sure why you felt the need to point out the second part of this.

FYI, I don't think Thok is scum. The whole Gorrad/Thok/Korlash thing from earlier still makes zero sense to me, but Thok is giving me townvibes again.

[Glork]

I could go for a mneme lynch at this point.

Unvote, Vote: Mneme

[Glork]

Thok claimed a result on me Night One. He mistakenly called it "N0" (there was no N0), but here it is:

Glork left his house N0. Nobody else came to Glork's house N0.

[Glork]

Did you read my post?

HE CLAIMED A FUCKING RESULT ON ME NIGHT ONE.

[Glork]

1686 makes me happy with a mneme lynch.

[Glork]

Glork: why?

I'm just hopeing to get -something- useful done today before the apparently-inevitable mislynch.

You seem to be making an assumption/conclusion about the setup that I'm not convinced a protown player can make.

[Glork]

Semantics.

You seem to be making an assumption/conclusion about the setup that I don't think a protown player could

comfortably/confidently

make. Yet you state your assumptions very matter-of-factly as evidence that you're protown.

Combine that with iffy, lurky play and a claim that does not hold much water for me, and I'm more than content with lynching you.

Incidentally, open speculation by a dying person is also more likely to come from scum. If you were town, you'd shut up about what you thought about Foolster/Glork. I'm not going to confirm or deny your musings in any way (and Foolster, I would suggest that you decline to comment on it as well). I'd rather not give the scums information one way or another, thank you very much.

[Glork]

Hmm. That's actually pretty interesting. linking + night action = scum?

Yes, mneme. Foolster and I are bringing into question your assumption of the setup and inexorably linking oureselves to each other in the thread because we're scumbags. Your deductive abilities astonish me. I have no idea how you figured us out.

[Glork]

I'm not going to bludgeon you over the head with my point - just rest assured that it exists. I feel mneme is scum. I feel that wagoning him is pointless as of a short while ago,

This is mostly :badposting:, especially the last part.

[Glork]

oic


lulz

Unvote, Vote: Porochaz

[Glork]

Wait.

FoS: JDodge

[Glork]

Actually, I don't know. I guess not really FoS, but now that's got me thinking about something I said earlier:

Another thought that popped into my head --

what if the power/information roles have only a percentage (say, 50%) chance of being effective

?

I guess I'll wait for the mod before jumping to any conclusions.

[Glork]

unvote, vote ZoneAce

, assuming JDodge isn't lying. This vote may change depending on what we learn when Iammars gets here.

This is also :goodposting:

[Glork]

unvote, vote ZoneAce

, assuming JDodge isn't lying. This vote may change depending on what we learn when Iammars gets here.

huh?

Translation: Thok thinks you're scum, but would jump JD if this daykill thing turns out to be a farce.

[Glork]

I would totally support a ZONEACE wagon in lieu of lynching Porochaz. In fact,

Unvote, Vote: ZONEACE

Guys, I'm pretty sure we have this one in the bag.

[Glork]

lol Thok

I could answer that one.

No offense but I think you're being kind of a jackass right now.

I mean, ZA is obvobv the scums, but badgering him? Who do you think you are? Me?


This message brought to you by two unusually large vodka martinis. Shaken, not stirred.

[Glork]

Bookitty, can you give us a quick rundown of how you feel about your fellow players right now?

How would mneme turning up scum affect some of your suspicions? What about if he turned up town?

[Glork]

Yo.

[Glork]

Unvote, Vote: Mneme

[Glork]

Werent we going to check out JDodges vig role? Sorry if Ive missed something somewhere...

You really need to be vigged.

[Glork]

Bah. I'd have to go back and read context to answer that question.


I'll do it later. First, mneme needs to die.

[Glork]

Yeah, he could be morally opposed to self-hammers.

Oh, and thanks Gorrad.

Basically, this.

If I'm scum and I think there's a remotely reasonable chance that I'll survive, I sure as hell wouldn't self-hammer. That's just giving up.

[Glork]

Glork, if you were scum in mneme's position, what would you do?

Yeah, he could be morally opposed to self-hammers.

The only reason to self-hammer as scum in this situation would be to prevent the town from getting more info through extended discussion. For example, in Caddyshack Mafia, Ibby announced that she had a guilty on Raj, and when he got run up to Lynch -1, he self-hammered because nobody had really stopped to talk about anything. In

this

situation, there appears to be *VERY* little to be gained by a self-hammer, as most of this endless day's discussion has been exhausted and re-exhausted. And if mneme were to convince even one person that he were legit, he'd still be giving himself a fighting chance.

[Glork]

lets get mneme then

thanatos

porochaz.

FIXED.

[Glork]

I did it in Tapioca Mafia, one of my earlier games. It's a question of mindset rather than experience.

I think there's a strong correlation between having experience and having the kind of killer instinct it takes to make a move. Sure, you can find counterexamples, but do you honestly believe that newer players are as likely to run advanced gambits as experienced players?

[Glork]

Modprod: Bookitty, JDodge, Porochaz, Drunken Piper, undo, ZONEACE

[Glork]

EBWOP: No, wait. Better idea.

Modprod: Bookitty, JDodge, Drunken Piper, Undo
Modkill: Porozhaz, ZONEACE

<.<

[Glork]

Die Prozac die.

I'm not even interested in hearing an explanation. Just die, scumbag.

Vote: Porochaz

Diescumdiediedie.

QFT

Vote: Porochaz

[Glork]

Are there other reasons other than the hammer?

Yes. Read thread for details.

[Glork]

Destructor - How do you 'know' that Gorrad didn't target you last night?

Why are you fishing for more information?

[Glork]

He wasn't a "target swapper." That doesn't fit "Demotivator" in any way whastoever.

A "Motivator" traditionally makes their target either do better or use their ability twice. Mneme's Demotivator role must've made them 'worse' somehow. Perhaps Thok would've only watched for house-leaving and not visitation. Or a cop becomes less-than-sane.

Naturally, so as to make the role useful, it has to do something to the scums. (Make the GF no longer immune to investigations/kills, for example.) This gives us :goodinfo:, as it means it's very likely that the scums have abilities. Thus, I buy the existence of a Mafia RB.



Skruffs, you're not making sense to me. What player is "he" in "He did the kill"? And either way, what does that have to do with you trying to out info from Destructor?

[Glork]

That kinda stood ou to me. He had been mentioning Glork lately... so i think the two of them had been getting it on... sorry Oman... need a hug? =D eww don't touch me...

If you've been paying attention to this game, you'd realize that I've been calling for Chaz' death for the better part of like... 40 pages now. That's why he expected me to vote for him.

[Glork]

But you mentioned us "getting it on" in the context of a recent statement by Porochaz, and immediatley after you said "[Porochaz] had been mentioning Glork lately." Naturally, I assumed that your observations were of recent happenings and not the course of the game.

[Glork]

BTW, Korlash, that post may be large, but it's basically a whole slew of wishy-washy "thinking aloud." You say you "need to read" up on a handful of people, but I'd like to see some actual concrete suspicions ASAP.

[Glork]

You're right, Korlash. Sorry for giving your speculations any credit at all. I'll pull a glork next time anad blanket write you as a retard, because that's, well, just so much more entertaining and informative for all of us.

Hey, now. That seems a bit harsh.



Seriously, Chaz should've died

ages

ago. The vig isn't doing his job well enough.

[Glork]

Mostly JD trying to dayvig mneme yesterday.

[Glork]

JD: -, +, -

Any thoughts/insight on why your vig didn't happen yesterday? Did you receive one of those

messages

?

[Glork]

Oh. I missed that somehow. My bad, yo.

[Glork]

Ok, wow, and

MAJOR FoS: Foolster

for that last post. Not only did he try and screw with our minds (especially the mind of me the RB) by saying JDodge's death could have been part of his ability, which it CLEARLY was not, but he also jumps onto Bookitty like he'd been there all along right after I post my suspicion.

QFT.

The death scene says JD was SHOT IN THE BACK OF THE HEAD.

I'd like an explanation, Foolster.

[Glork]

Zoneace is still playing? I thought we had lynched him already.

Interesting. What did you think his alignment was?

[Glork]

BooKie: I was very confident that Porochaz had gone out of his way to bus DiscipleSlayer back on D1, to the point where he made some REALLY bad arguments against DS. I explained this back in Post 1057, and Porochaz's response ("Why would I bus my GF for over 20 pages? That seems like a very anti-scum thing to do") was gushing WIFOM. After that point, I was very unimpressed with his play. He skirted contributions, made a number of throwaway posts, and sheeped a little bit. It seemed pretty much like a done deal, to me.

As far as my current suspicions, I'll need an extended re-read to do that. I've been trying for a few days to convince myself to look through all 80+ pages of this game, but that just hasn't happened so far. Off the top of my head, I will say that Foolster looks bad. Additionally, the "who is worse -- Skruffs or Bookitty" looks like somebody trying to set up a "one or the other" lynch for today -- I would be wary of expanding upon this discussion further and would seek to go after whomever brought it up to begin with.

[Glork]

Mod: Please Prod/Replace ZONEACE

. He hasn't posted in over FIVE MONTHS.

[Glork]

Hey, I misread "Jun" as "Jan."

I feel like an idiot.

[Glork]

Vote: Foolster

, I guess.

[Glork]

What do you think of Korlash?

better question...

What do you think of Korlash?

Why would I ask Foolster what I think of you? How is that a better question?

Korlash is asking you what you think of him, as he thinks that is a better question to be posed in the general case (as opposed to being posed by you to Foolster).

[Glork]

Unvote, Vote: ZONEACE

Your complete uselessness is astonishing. Who are your top two candidates for scum, and why are they scum?

[Glork]

I dislike ZONEACE hate.

'kay. Why?

[Glork]

Hi, got prodded, life's been kicking my ass, will post tonight. Promise promise. <333

[Glork]

Me and Glork on a team... man... we could probably set a new record for premature bussing...

Except neither of us have gotten the other lynched yet.


That said, I can't say I'm thrilled about BooKie's Glork/Korlash theory. I claimed to have an ability, but aside from N2 (and N1, presumably random), the scums have killed power anyway.

My guess is that the scums expect me to be doc-protected. I hear that, from time to time, Docs protect "good" players who claim to have abilities.

[Glork]

If you're protown, then you're alive because you are completely and utterly useless to the rest of us.

[Glork]

He's renowned for being a bastard mod.

Elaborate?

[Glork]

I could totally go for a Knight of Cydonia wagon.



FYI.

[Glork]

Why is directing the vig a scumtell?

[Glork]

EBWOP: Oh, I missed this:

Glork - why?

Well, it could be because I don't like you very much.
It could be because I have a super-secret win condition to kill all players whose acronym letters are found exclusively in the word "cock."
Or... and this is a

huge

stretch... it could be because you're scum.



Personally, I hope it's all three.

[Glork]

Actually, the deadline is at 8:00 PM

Eastern Standard Time

, which is in just over four hours.



That said, I am happy to leave my vote on ZONEACE. I think I would rather lynch Knight of Cydonia (who has gone after anyone not named ZONEACE with any sort of momentum against them) than the FACE... but ZONEACE is leading Bookitty 4-3 by my count, and that's just fine and dandy.

[Glork]

Lynch Zoneace dead immediately.

[Glork]

I support this wagon 100%. BooKie hit the nail on the head regarding KoC's patented avoidance of all things ZONEACE.

Vote: Knight of Cydonia

If it was you or Boo, who would you choose to keep around?

Pants, what exactly is up with this question? Why would you pose this to Korlash?

[Glork]

Korlash was a thief, not a "cop" - maybe he claimed thief, i thought he didn't. regardless, if he was pseudoclaiming, he may not have been roleblocked; I am on my phone but will look at the situation when I am home and can do such. Him being killed might mean that the mafia is down to a roleblocker who can't do both actions at once.

Glork: look at what happened in context, and you'll see why i said that. If you are beginning to try to imply what it sounds like, then we will have words. I want to see if the librarian weasel is self destructing scum, first.

Skruffs, it is

awfully

funny that you should post these two paragraphs next to each other.


I know the context, with Korlash championing BooKitty repeatedly. You asked if he'd rather himself die than BooKie, and he said yes. The only reason I could see anybody (Korlash or otherwise) saying something like that is if they are 100% certain that the other person (BooKie in this case) is protown -- and likely if they are reasonably certain that the other person's role is more important than their own. With ZONEACE in trouble, you obviously needed to know whether Korlash was a must-kill.

What you asked Korlash is the definition of a Loaded Question, and you rolefished like HELL in the process. I'm actually *THIS* close to switching my vote over to you, but I'm actually really interested to see what happens with this KoC wagon.

Additionally, what are you trying to pull with this whole "there may be a Mafia Roleblocker who can't kill and block" thing? You know that ZONEACE was lynched as the Mafia RB yesterday.

Oh, and Glork, don't you have a scanning ability? if so, despite the fact you "100% agree" with a wagon on me, why didn't you scan me? Or did you scan me, and are you just a Mafia Cop?

I never implied whether I did or didn't have an investigative ability. All I've stated about my role is that I have a role action. You are OMGUSing and also fishing, and you're doing a damned poor job of it.




Seriously, guys. KoC and Skruffs are our last two scums.

[Glork]

EBWOP:

Seriously, guys. KoC and Skruffs are our last two scums.

Check that. For some reason, I thought we had three dead scums. As I'm assuming 5 scums (especially with the amount of town power we've seen), they're two of the last THREE scums.

[Glork]

EBWOTP:

Additionally, what are you trying to pull with this whole "there may be a Mafia Roleblocker who can't kill and block" thing? You know that ZONEACE was lynched as the Mafia RB yesterday.

Oh, durr, the RBer maf got lynched. Stupid, sorry.

...what comes around goes around, I suppose.

Still, point about your blatant fishing from Korlash stands. Again, I want you to explain WHY you asked the question you did.

[Glork]

Vote KoC

It doesn't say last editted by x at y.

...I hadn't even noticed that.

Confirm Vote: KoC

[Glork]

...with ten alive, shouldn't it take six to lynch?

[Glork]

Korlash was a thief, not a "cop" - maybe he claimed thief, i thought he didn't. regardless, if he was pseudoclaiming, he may not have been roleblocked; I am on my phone but will look at the situation when I am home and can do such. Him being killed might mean that the mafia is down to a roleblocker who can't do both actions at once.

Glork: look at what happened in context, and you'll see why i said that. If you are beginning to try to imply what it sounds like, then we will have words. I want to see if the librarian weasel is self destructing scum, first.

Skruffs, it is

awfully

funny that you should post these two paragraphs next to each other.


I know the context, with Korlash championing BooKitty repeatedly. You asked if he'd rather himself die than BooKie, and he said yes. The only reason I could see anybody (Korlash or otherwise) saying something like that is if they are 100% certain that the other person (BooKie in this case) is protown -- and likely if they are reasonably certain that the other person's role is more important than their own. With ZONEACE in trouble, you obviously needed to know whether Korlash was a must-kill.

What you asked Korlash is the definition of a Loaded Question, and you rolefished like HELL in the process.

Again, I want you to explain WHY you asked the question you did.

Skruffs is still avoiding/ignoring my questions. Everything else goes on hold until he dies. Surefire, 100% guaranteed scumbag.

Vote: Skruffs

[Glork]

It's funny that you've used my lack of answering (I had missed those questions, and will answer them later in this post) as an excuse to avoid commenting on anything else in the game. OR as you said, "Everything goes on hold until he dies." If you do'nt have to comment on other players because "I" am holdin gyou up, you don't have to scum hunt.

I will point that Glork has in the past gone after me when I am town and he is scum, when he is town he usually does not go after me. So this is not a point in his favor.

Blah, blah, Glork is going after me, he's more likely to be scum, OMGUS OMGUS, blah blah blah.

Plus, I'm willing to bet I could find counterxamples if I really cared enough to do so.

How would I have known that Korlash was championing Bookitty repeatedly because he stole an item from her? I asked the question because Korlash was under pressure and was potentially fake claiming a role, and was trying to clear someone as town for no apparent reason. He was claiming to have been roleblocked for several nights in a row, remember? I saw a connection between him and boo that seemed off; I thought it was more likely that Korlash was mafia nad maybe bookitty was the mafia roleblocker (Or something like that).

You didn't know that Korlash was championing Bookitty

because

anything. All you saw was that Korlash was championing Bookitty repeatedly and adamantly. That much was quite obvious. You clearly wanted to know

HOW

certain Korlash was about BooKie's innocence -- i.e., you wanted to know if he had role-based information (whether as a Cop, Tracker, Gunsmith, Thief -- whatever role he might have).

Now, if you thought Korlash was Mafia and

BooKitty

the Mafia Roleblocker, then:
A) Why the fuck were you voting

OMAN

the whole time instead of lynching

BooKitty

; and
B) Why do you think Korlash would openly admit to wanting to preserve BooKie's life more?

I call bullshit. You're just blowing smoke now.

What you asked Korlash is the definition of a Loaded Question, and you rolefished like HELL in the process. I'm actually *THIS* close to switching my vote over to you, but I'm actually really interested to see what happens with this KoC wagon.

I did? How was I rolefishing? And how was it a loaded question? And, also, why did you wait until today to bring it up - why did you not point it out yesterday when bookitty was close to being lynched at deadline and Korlash was trying to save her? You ignored it, instead only mentioning that you didn't like Bookitty's insinuations that you and Korlash were a team together.

So were you saving it for today, after you killed Korlash?

You asked if he would rather DIE HIMSELF rather than let her die.

THINK ABOUT THE ONLY SITUATIONS IN WHICH A PLAYER WOULD SAY THIS ABOUT ANOTHER PLAYER.

Korlash obviously wasn't a Mason, so that's out the window. He claimed to have power, so if he wants BooKitty alive more, he would presumably have to have A VERY DAMNED GOOD REASON to prefer his own death to hers. This is also why it was a loaded question. The presupposition here would be Korlash being protown. If he's scum, his answer won't mean a damned thing, but if he's town, he gives away information regardless of which way he answers.

I see ZERO protown rationale for you having asked Korlash that question, and TONS of anti-town rationale for having done so.

Also, I didn't "save" anything for today. At the time you answered the question, I really hadn't been on Scum much at all, and I was way behind on this game. I responded to a couple of recent, relevant-looking posts, evaluated the two primary wagons (ZONEACE and BooKitty) and voted for ZONEACE, and decided I would be content to re-read overnight. That's why I came out the next day wanting to know why you asked such an awful question to Korlash.

I also find it interesting that you would directly say that you have claimed an ability and thus are being doc protected (Which is why the mafia hasn't killed you), but then immediately attack other players for role fishing. Why did you say you have a role action if you then didn't want anyone else to comment on it; you are obviously not a dcotor, you are unclaiming to be cop, the roleblocker is dead. What else is there?

No. I said "perhaps the mafia assumes that I'm being doc-protected; I hear that happens from time to time." That's not the same as "The Doctor is protecting me." I may or may not be a Doctor. I may or may not have another role. There may or may not be a Doctor at all. I don't care to divulge anything at this time, unless we end up massclaiming or I fall to Lynch-1.

Interesting to note, you ask "what else is there" after "eliminating" Cop, Doctor, and Roleblocker, when there have already been SEVERAL unusual protown roles. You're being awfully simplistic for a game like what we've seen so far. A one-shot post editor? A spy? A thief? And you're sitting here saying "What else could you be if you're not Cop/Doc/RB?"

Vote: Glork

Your turn ^.^

Bad Response + Bad Counterattack/Countervote = The Scummy Kind of OMGUS

[Glork]

I just have time for a quick post -- but by my count, even if three scum quicklynch today, they'd have to nightkill Foolster (assuming Foolster is town) to autowin. I don't know what Mars/Yos's criteria for a scum win are, but the way

I've

always run things, if there's even a chance that scum can lose (say, failed kill + scum lynched), the game isn't over.

7 alive if a kill fails means 4 to lynch tomorrow still, And even if 6 are alive and Foolster is alive as protown, they can

still

get lynched. I'm not yet willing to say that anybody is deliberately leading townies to a false conclusion here, but I think that several of you are making assumptions that you simply cannot make at this stage in your efforts to "clear" people.

[Glork]

What if he's scum

with

Undo? (I think that's where Skruffs was going with this, but I could be mistaken.)

[Glork]

So what caused you to assume that Undo is town?

[Glork]

Des: Zoneace, I would guess max 1 scum. Mafia RB takes some serious balls to bus.

KoC seems more likely to have scum on it, simply because he seemed an easy target.



I still want to know why nobody has even looked at Skruffs, and why once again Skruffs has chosen to ignore my most recent post. On the other hand, I'm not a big fan of how Gorrad concluded Foolster's innocence based on Undo's hypothetical innocence, yet he found himself unable to explain how he concluded "Undo-innocent" beyond "I find it less likely than other pairings." This reads llike an actual slip (a phrase which is all too commonly thorwn around nowadays), and if Gorrad is scum, I'd give 99.9% that Undo is town.

DruPip: My inactivity is site-wide, and independent of my games. DT:SF was an exception due to the strict posting requirements, but the most recent other game I played in, I was lynched as town mainly due to my inactivity. I just haven't been around, but I swear to God I will hunt down and throttle the next person who accuses me of being scum for not posting too much.