Mini 581 - Andy's Death - Over

[JDodge]

It goes like this:

Ythill>Sethaniel>avin>goborage>Dave>camisade>Jenter

Jenter has committed most all of his personal town-tells.

[Andycyca]

Vote Count:

avinashv- 3 (camisade, goborage, Ythill)
JDodge- 1 (Jenter Brolincani)
camisade- 1 (avinashv)
Ythill- 1 (JDodge)

Not voting (2): Sethaniel, Dave

5 to lynch.

---

Strike count

[mrow]Player[col]Strikes avinashv[col] camisade[col] Dave[col] goborage[col] JDodge[col]X JB[col] Sethaniel[col]X Ythill[col]

[avinashv]

I'd like to say that I never abandoned my stance...I don't know where people got that from. I did let that argument go, because it was going nowhere. If that's what you meant, fair enough.

Furthermore, if I'm attacking other players, it's because they did something I felt was scummy. May not be the best from someone else's point of view, but it's how I feel I should scum hunt here.

JD: why is Senthaniel your #2, as opposed to say, me?

Ythill: When you posted that gob was a weaker poster than Dave, I wholeheartedly disagree. Dave has picked it up a little since, but he was not helpful at all before that.

Dave: are you voting for me because I am active?

[JDodge]

If you want to be my second most scummy, you can be. No consequence to me.

I forget why. I'll give reasonings once I look it over again.

[avinashv]

I would think it's glaringly obvious that I don't want to be--I'm trying to reasonably ask you for some reasoning...you said you will, and that's cool.

[Jenter Brolincani]

If you want to be my second most scummy, you can be. No consequence to me.

Hell scummy. You don't even CARE who's your second most scummy? If you were town it would have a consequence as you would be trying to lynch scum, so you would keep at the top of your list only those committing scumtells. You just said it has no effect on you who is your second most scummy...

[JDodge]

If you want to be my second most scummy, you can be. No consequence to me.

Hell scummy. You don't even CARE who's your second most scummy? If you were town it would have a consequence as you would be trying to lynch scum, so you would keep at the top of your list only those committing scumtells. You just said it has no effect on you who is your second most scummy...

I'm not trying to lynch scum. I'm trying to lynch a SK, for which "second-in-line" is fairly immaterial until I no longer believe Ythill most likely. And who are you to say that I didn't find avin asking why he wasn't #2 scummy? You jumped on that line of reasoning without thinking through all logical reasons for why someone would say that.

[JDodge]

All my reasons for Sethaniel can really be traced mostly back to one post.

All right, I guess I should vote. I can either put JDodge at L-1 or make it a tie between JD and avinas. (noting that JD and avinas are the two dissenting votes.) As a town, we seem pretty committed to either JD or avinas as scum, so I think voting for anyone else would pretty well be a waste of time.

Why does he not want us to look at anyone else?

I'm going to base my vote on one main thing:

I don't think JDodge is the SK finder.

He's the most vocal proponent of massclaim, repeatedly saying that the SK finder should have no reason not to claim. If he's truly 100% behind that statement, then if he were the SK finder, he should say so.

So, he isn't the SK finder.

So why such a push to identify the finder? It's at least possible it's because he's the SK.

vote: JDodge

1) Why doesn't this logic apply to avin?

2) What is the point in publicly stating who you believe (or believe not to be) the SK finder (whom from now on I am going to refer to as the FBI Agent, as that is the term I am used to for such a role)? All you can do is narrow down the suspects. You seemed intrigued by the massclaim idea before this - now suddenly you snap against it on a line of illogic.

Any more questions or am I not presenting enough of a case on someone I don't want lynched today?

[Jenter Brolincani]

Ok, why aren't you interested in lynching Mafia today then? It seems a silly gamble to gamble a whole lynch on trying to lash out for the SK when the Mafia are easier to find with less information.

[avinashv]

JD: Thanks for the input. I've highlighted some similar lines of thought in my earlier posts--I didn't touch on the fact that narrowing down the list of FBI agent's is strange considering he is against a mass claim. I see you're not putting this down to a slip--fair enough. I will stand by Jenter in asking why mafia-hunting isn't a priority for you?

[Ythill]

Sorry about being light content. The new job is taking a lot of time and another of my games has required a lot of attention over the last couple days.

To those harping on JD for wanting to hunt the SK first: I believe there is a valid pro-town argument for that approach. I also believe there is a valid pro-town argument for hunting the mafia primarily at first. I'm playing based on the second but I

do not

think it is scummy, per se, to be playing based on the first.

Ythill seems town because the bulk of his posts are non-opinionized inquisitive posts designed to give the impression of scumhunting while not committing to any actual stance.

This is a strategy that would befit mafia, who need to rely on the mislynch but would work against the SK, who must only avoid the lynch himself. So you are, in essence, accusing me of being mafia.

Yet, more recently, you have declared that I am the SK and even said you have no interest in hunting mafia before we find the SK. Please explain your contradiction.

[JDodge]

It is a strategy that would befit an SK as well considering that mislynches help the SK, too.

[Ythill]

Every lynch helps the SK equally (except see below). There's no need for him to change his position, and therefore no need to risk suspicion by sitting on the fence or being vague. Not that I'm actually doing either anyway, but if I was they would be indicitive of a mafia alignment.

Killing at least one scum before D3 is crucial to the SK, because if D3 starts with 2 scum, the SK loses with town. Therefore a scum lynch is slightly more beneficial to the SK than a mislynch.

I don't believe you've explained the contradiction in your accusations.

[Jenter Brolincani]

I'm just personally unsure without an entire day to look at and information from a night whether we can resonably hope to gamble upon definitely catching the SK and win, especially since the SK should really be far harder to tell from the townies by playstyle.

Looking at it the argument for trying to catch the SK first is not anti-town, but it's too risky for my liking, I would far rather SK hunt on Day Two.

[JDodge]

Every lynch helps the SK equally (except see below). There's no need for him to change his position, and therefore no need to risk suspicion by sitting on the fence or being vague. Not that I'm actually doing either anyway, but if I was they would be indicitive of a mafia alignment.

Killing at least one scum before D3 is crucial to the SK, because if D3 starts with 2 scum, the SK loses with town. Therefore a scum lynch is slightly more beneficial to the SK than a mislynch.

I don't believe you've explained the contradiction in your accusations.

You mean the supposed contradiction that you pulled out of thin air that has no basis in fact whatsoever? Yeah, not touching that one.

[camisade]

Ythill seems town because the bulk of his posts are non-opinionized inquisitive posts designed to give the impression of scumhunting while not committing to any actual stance.

This is a strategy that would befit mafia, who need to rely on the mislynch but would work against the SK, who must only avoid the lynch himself. So you are, in essence, accusing me of being mafia.

I think his post was meant to be sarcastic.

[Ythill]

I don't see how you came to that conclusion JD. The contradiction is: you accused me of actions that would benefit mafia but work against the SK. Then you accused me of being the SK exclusively. Also, your statement about your goal for today (catching the SK, not mafia) shows that this apparent contradiction was not you changing your mind about my alignment.

Your only argument against this was that the SK benefits from mislynches, which is only tangentially true and, even then, doesn't address the contradiction. Now you change gears to say there was no contradiction to begin with? If that's the case, then why did you try to explain it?

Show how I pulled this contradiction out if thin air, if that is your stance. Where is it shown to have no basis in fact?

I dismissed my earlier suspicions against you but this slipery style of argument is making me suspect you again. Please address the contradiction directly or show how it is invalid.

[Ythill]

Ythill seems town because the bulk of his posts are non-opinionized inquisitive posts designed to give the impression of scumhunting while not committing to any actual stance.

This is a strategy that would befit mafia, who need to rely on the mislynch but would work against the SK, who must only avoid the lynch himself. So you are, in essence, accusing me of being mafia.

I think his post was meant to be sarcastic.

I caught that, which is why I am treating, "the bulk of his posts are non-opinionized inquisitive posts designed to give the impression of scumhunting while not committing to any actual stance," as an accusation.

[JDodge]

You admit that SK benefiting from mislynch is true - how is it a contradiction if it is true? And furthermore, how did you leap to the conclusion that what I accused you of befits mafia more than SK anyways?

[Ythill]

@ cam: Taking the above as an accusation, do you think it portrays me as mafia or the SK? If the SK, please explain how. Others are invited to answer these questions as well.

[Ythill]

You admit that SK benefiting from mislynch is true - how is it a contradiction if it is true?

I said "only tangentially true" because the SK benefits from

any lynch

but, in fact, benefits more from a scum lynch at this point. So the statement "the SK benefits from a mislynch" is true but the inference that the SK would prefer a mislynch is patently false.

And furthermore, how did you leap to the conclusion that what I accused you of befits mafia more than SK anyways?

I've already explained this but will reiterate. "...the bulk of his posts are non-opinionized inquisitive posts designed to give the impression of scumhunting while not committing to any actual stance," refers to fence sitting and vague suspicions, which would benefit a mafioso, allowing him to reserve his suspicions for strategic play. This would happen at the risk of appearing suspicious. However, the SK gains absolutely no benefit from this type of strategic play, only reaping the risk.

In short, there is no benefit (just risk) for the SK in failing to commit. He is as clueless as to the alignments of others as a townie, and he stands to benefit from catching scum. Your accusation, therefore, only befits a mafioso, which you say I am not.

Now will you address the contradiction, or are you going to insist on playing the slippery game with me?

[JDodge]

So it's a contradiction because an SK would prefer a mafia lynch to a mislynch but what I said is still completely correct?

And fence-sitting/vague suspicions helps the SK equally considering it allows them to avoid heat on themselves. In fact, there is even

more

reason to do so since scum can still win if one of them dies - the SK has no safety net.

I maintain that there is no contradiction and that you are solely trying to shift suspicion off of yourself by disregarding my claims without basis.

[Ythill]

And fence-sitting/vague suspicions helps the SK equally considering it allows them to avoid heat on themselves.

Explain how this allows one to avoid heat. I think it's clear that the opposite is true.

I maintain that there is no contradiction...

Then explain why your first answer attempted to address the contradiction with the inapplicable statement that the SK benefits from a mislynch.

...and that you are solely trying to shift suspicion off of yourself by disregarding my claims without basis.

There was no attempt to shift suspicion. Initially, I questioned your claims

with basis

(that you are choosing to disregard) purely in my own defense. There was no attempt by me to reflect the suspicion back onto you. My only mention of suspicion against you came later, when you argued from a slippery stance, meaning one that embraces any claim in pursuit of the win, rather than attempting to determine and/or clarify the truth.

You've moved back up my scumlist but I'm still happier with my vote on Avinas.

[goborage]

JDodge and Ythill have brought up the fact that hunting for scum and SK are different. Until now I've been treating the word scum as an all-encompassing term for town threats. I'm curious if anyone else has been playing under the same assumptions. More importantly:

what role does everyone think their most suspicious players are playing as?

I think that avinashv is an SK, not mafia. Right now all I have going is the FBI claim.

It's interesting that JDodge is dichotomizing mafia-hunting and SK-hunting. Maybe I'm just a newb but aren't they nearly the same thing? Hunting either bad guy is just a matter of asking questions and pointing fingers. Can't we hunt both of these bad guys at the same time?

[Ythill]

More importantly: what role does everyone think their most suspicious players are playing as?

My suspicion list refers to mafia. As I said, I am going with the "mafia first" plan, at least for D1. I may change tactics tomorrow.

Can't we hunt both of these bad guys at the same time?

We can only cast one vote.

On a side note, gob's last post seems townish to me.