Mini 626 - Crew vs. Pigs - GAME OVER!!

[darkdude]

@raider.

If he is the god father then as scum he would not pick himself to be nk'd. That would make him non night killable.

As I also said before if we have an SK or town night kill role that might be able to take him out, we just dont know though.

Dude, by this argument, you might as well call

all

scum, vigs and sk nk-immune.

You don't even know we have a godfather either, but you don't seem to have a problem with that.

Is there a point you're trying to make with this back and forth?

I think this is what Forbiddenlight is talking about.

Yeah, this sentence makes little sense. From what I know scum

could

claim NK immunity just because they don't kill themselves. Raider was suggesting the possibility that my claimed ability is false, while Ting assumes it was true in the argument. What they were arguing were two different things.

I don't get all this clamoring for a vig test to mean anything. If he is scum then it's most probable to assume he made that claim as a Godfather, knowing he would be vig proof and have NK immunity. Thus it gets "tested" he lives and his claim looks better. I really don't see how we could be more sure of him then than we could be right now.

But this makes little sense. You're just saying that even if my claimed abilities were true I could still be scum. Yeah that's right, but such logic is applicable in all situations. If I claim vanilla town you can say "he's scum". If I claim cop you can say "he's scum cop". If I claim doc you can say "scum doc". It doesn't really explain your perspective on my case.

[Kison]

Forbiddan Light, thanks for the analysis. Still content with my vote on you for the time being, though. The Chen wagon wreaks of major scumbaggery, and your threat to put him at L-1 could have turned that bumpy ride into an interstate pileup. You also changed your story up by claiming you

didn't

plan to put him there without rereading, and you conveniently decided against voting him after I called you out on it. Let's rewind...

chenshi, you generally defend a bandwagon like that. I was prepared to go at bat for you saying I didn't like how quickly that bandwagon started, but if you are going to roll over without a defense, I can't say I blame them. I'm not gonna join it because I'm not fully convinced that you didn't have good reason, but I want to hear that reason, and fast. Your saving grace is the fact no one has provided more reason than your really annoying lurkiness, and there was too much "I agree" to see that wagon as really legit.

- You planned to defend Chen because you didn't like the growth of the wagon, but because he didn't defend himself, you no longer can blame those who are voting him.
- You still won't join the wagon, because you're not sold on Chen being scum.

Ugh...yanno what? If Chenshi doesn't actually defend himself before 9 PM EST tomorrow, I'll take him to L-1. I mean, at first I thought it was a really crazy wagon, but judging by his reactions, he's rolling over and dying, possibly in an AtE. It's scummy.

- You previously thought the wagon was crazy, but his 'reactions' and lack of defense is scummy, and you will therefore put him at L-1 if he doesn't 'defend' himself, stat.

I call everyone out, asking why Chen would find lurking beneficial

as scum

when he's being threatened with a lynch if he doesn't shape up. I then call you out on not speaking up. You return with this response :

Please note I haven't had a chance to reread to be honest, and apparently thought I said I'd do a reread, not just vote based on defense or lack thereof. I've been posting elsewhere, but mostly single things taking in at most a page of information.

- No chance to read. That's fine.
- 'Apparently' thought you said you'd do a reread. -> Well, you didn't. You made it pretty clear you found his reactions and lack of defense scummy, remember? You also made it clear you were going to vote him if he didn't respond.

As for chenhsi...I lean scum on him, as I said, but I don't like some of the reasons people are voting him. If he dies and flips town, I think I'll be elevating my scum read on some of the people who went with "Let's kill a less than useless townie". Realize we have 12 days to decide (deadline is the 28th). There's no need to rush chenhsi.

- ...Yet, you

still

are leaning on him being scum.
- You don't like the reasons that others are voting him, despite previously claiming you couldn't blame them, and even threatening to join the wagon for the very same reason(lurking). How can you simultaneously threaten to put someone in a hammer-able position if you dislike that same line of logic?


Basically, what I see here is you pushing this wagon without being on it. I then see you threatening to vote him, but backing down, backtracking with the 'I thought I said I'd reread first' comment, and using the excuse that you don't like the reasons people have given for voting him for ultimately deciding not to place your vote there.

As a result, here's what I request :

- Point out who's votes you dislike, and what reasons they gave that you dislike.
- Point out what your reasons for voting Chen would have been, and how they differed.
- Exemplify the 'reactions' you didn't like from Chen.

[forbiddanlight]

- Point out who's votes you dislike, and what reasons they gave that you dislike.
- Point out what your reasons for voting Chen would have been, and how they differed.
- Exemplify the 'reactions' you didn't like from Chen.

Well, the first one is answered if you actually read the analysis rather than just pretending to because it looks better for you to make bullshit cases, k thx.

The secone one...hey, that's ALSO answered in my analysis. I really don't think you read it.

Finally, the third one is also answered in my analysis. I think you didn't read it, and are trying to kill me off for some unknown reason. Your case is rendered bullshit when you actually read what I have to say in that post I made. I did backtrack, yes, but that's also because I honestly forgot what I said. I'm human, that sometimes happens. We now have a replacement for chen, and I want to see what happens with that. Happy with my Ting vote, btw.

Oh, where in the analysis did I answer? Let's SHOW you

chen: The man of the hour, and wow he looks bad. Every post he's made has been essentially irrelevant to the game, and when he's in trouble, he rolls over and dies. In fact...it's kinda reach a level of scumminess that makes me wonder if he's honestly scum or just a horrid player. But, either way, it's anti town to roll over under a wagon if you are town. If you are scum, the only reason to do it that way is the appeal to emotion I mentioned. As town, any wagon on you should be fought to the death, and THAT is why rolling over is a scum tell. Either way, I hate the early hypocrisy and the later giving up...so I still lean scum here.

This covers any reasons I'd have for voting chen (early hypocrisy, later giving up. I also explained why rolling over is a scum tell).

Also, there are clear differences between the policy lynch attitude of MAtin:

"imo, the speed of the wagon is bothersome, but as of right now I think Chenhsi is probably the best target for it. Either he's scum or useless town (which isn't a horrible thing to shake off on day 1)"

And the attitude that uses more evidence of say, Ghyrt:

Ghyrt: Another chen voter, but with the same sort of hypocrisy on lurkers and the idea that if you don't post, you can't slip reasons for voting (as Ennui). I think this looks better than that "bad townie needs to die" policy lynch attitude. I lean slight town.

I think it's clear what I was looking at in the chen voters, and if you had actually read my analysis, you'd have no need to ask these questions. I don't lean as much town on you now, but I guess you MIGHT have made an honest mistake and missed that. Try to make my gut feel a bit better about you Kison...I'd probably vote you if I had evidence.

[raider8169]

I'd probably vote you if I had evidence.

I dont know about you but if I had evidence on anyone I would vote them.

[forbiddanlight]

I dont know about you but if I had evidence on anyone I would vote them.

That's why I said IF I had evidence. All I have are REALLY bad vibes from Kison, and it's possibly just OMGUS. But I feel really uneasy about Kison, and I have no idea WHY! I can't vote him based on that.

[raider8169]

I dont know about you but if I had evidence on anyone I would vote them.

That's why I said IF I had evidence. All I have are REALLY bad vibes from Kison, and it's possibly just OMGUS. But I feel really uneasy about Kison, and I have no idea WHY! I can't vote him based on that.

Sure you can, only it may not have the desired affects you wanted.

[Matin]

Also, there are clear differences between the policy lynch attitude of MAtin:

"imo, the speed of the wagon is bothersome, but as of right now I think Chenhsi is probably the best target for it. Either he's scum or useless town (which isn't a horrible thing to shake off on day 1)"

I don't understand how you get policy lynch attitude from that? It would be, I suppose, if the sole reason for voting him was lurking, but Chenhsi was suspicious to me from the moment he called out other inactive posters while not being active himself. The discovery that started the train was certainly damning to me as well.

I also stand by my statement about shaking off "useless town" early as not a bad thing. Certainly nabbing scum day 1 is the goal, but considering the hit rate there isn't likely to approach 100% any time soon, I'd say I'd prefer a mislynch to occur on a player like Chenhsi over someone whose more actively hunting scum..

For example, the two players i'm most suspicious of right now are Chenhsi and Darkdude. I'm simply stating that I'd much rather be wrong lynching Chenhsi then wrong lynching darkddude

[darkdude]

Try to make my gut feel a bit better about you Kison...I'd probably vote you if I had evidence.

Uh...I don't feel this is a very good sentence. What do you want him to do? Make you feel better about him? Okay why don't we have everyone feel good about everyone else?

Seems like you're trying to offer a way out of the argument for both yourself and Kison, the "feel better" being an incentive. And the last part "I'd probably vote you" is just an empty threat, as Raider said. If you had evidence, why wouldn't you vote for him?

[Kison]

FL, your responses never cease to amuse me. I'm sitting here wondering how you think that of all parts of the post I just made, that the part containing the three questions was the head honcho and damning case against you. I asked those for a couple of reasons : not only to make sure you actually maintained a consistent story, but also for simplicity. Sorry, but questions are asked for a reason. I'm not here to bury you in the sand unfairly. I want to make sure I have everything I need from you before I decide what to do next. If that's a problem, by all means vote me and rally up the troops.

rather than just pretending to because it looks better for you to make bullshit cases, k thx.

Finally, the third one is also answered in my analysis. I think you didn't read it, and are trying to kill me off for some unknown reason.

Kison...I'd probably vote you if I had evidence.

Evidence is embedded in your accusations. There's not much more 'evidence' you can find. If you think my actions are scum-driven, you should be voting me. If not, then not. It's really as simple as that.

This covers any reasons I'd have for voting chen (early hypocrisy, later giving up. I also explained why rolling over is a scum tell).

The paragraph above doesn't demonstrate the clarification I'm looking for. What 'reaction' did Chen give you that you found scummy? Was it anything beyond his 'rolling over and dying'? If yes, please clarify. If no, please tell me why you think scum would be more likely to 'roll over and die'.

And for the love of god if you already answered that do not explode in fury.

Anyway, I'm going to (again) summarize the main things I dislike about your play so you can more easily address the issues.

- Dislike the insertion of 'I thought I said I was going to reread' excuse. -> You already responded to this.
- Dislike you threatening to vote Chen for something I fail to see as beneficial for scum over Town, which would have put him at L-1.
- Dislike you pushing the wagon without being on it. ->Possibly unintentional.

Admittedly, looking back, I can see the difference between your reasons for voting Chen over some of the others(in fact it's what I plan to transition to next). Still, I would have rather you have clarified this yourself.

[forbiddanlight]

If no, please tell me why you think scum would be more likely to 'roll over and die'. And for the love of god if you already answered that do not explode in fury.

IT WAS ALREADY FREG...oh, ok

Yeah, I already answered that.

But, either way, it's anti town to roll over under a wagon if you are town. If you are scum, the only reason to do it that way is the appeal to emotion I mentioned.

As for specific reactions. There was the "Oh A bandwagon. Am I supposed to say something? Cause I have nothing to say" the "I work better when I can answer questions" And when presented with questions answers them in a rather offhand, offputting way. I admit my attack on your case was born of fury, and I really don't know why. I guess this game I don't really like what you are doing and I took it personally :S. Ah well, anyway, I think in my gut that something is off about you. I really don't know why, and since I can't back it up well except with possible perceptions that are easily argued, I'm not voting you. Especially when my current vote looks worse, in my opinon.

Uh...I don't feel this is a very good sentence. What do you want him to do? Make you feel better about him? Okay why don't we have everyone feel good about everyone else?

If I TOLD him what I wanted him to do, then he'd do it. It's for him to figure out, and there are probably several answers. It's mostly I hope he does something that assuages my gut read on him.

[Goatrevolt]

Hey goat! Very pleased to see you replace Chenhsi. That also takes away the reason for my vote (I think I can safely assume Goat isn't a lurker).

Hi! No...I can't say I often get accused of lurking .

I've read through page 4. Here are some notes I have so far. Please answer any questions directed at you.

Post 20, darkdude: Wow a claim already. I disagree with your reasoning for making the claim. The entire point of your role is to soak up a night kill, and claiming kind of defeats that purpose. Regardless, while I disagree with you claiming, I see no reason not to trust that claim. Scum generally don't come out that early with a claim like that, because it defeats their purpose of remaining undetected by the town and paints a huge target on them. Unless further evidence surfaces, I see no reason to disbelieve him.

Post 22, forbiddanlight: Wants to have a cop check him immediately. My question is why do you want him to be checked by a cop?

Post 26, Kison: Why is it important to you whether or not he can be killed in the endgame? I don't like this fishing at all.

Post 27, Matin: I'm not a fan of this post. Your end result is that you believe his claim, but throughout the post you plant seeds of doubt in people's minds (could be lying scum, could be godfather). You remain in the camp of "believe his claim" but you're throwing information out there to lead others towards a disbelief in his claim. I find that scummy.

Post 29, Ghyrt: Don't buy the push on raider here. I think him asking everyone to weigh in on darkdude's claim was a reasonable request.

I don't see an issue with raider's post 23. There's no harm is forcing everyone to put down an opinion on the claim this early. I consider it a null-tell basically.

Post 47, DarkDude: How do you think you claiming is going to help us towards catching scum? Edit: Never mind, answered later on.

Post 48, Cass: I don't see darkdude not thinking about wasting a cop investigation as a point against him. The general consensus here seems to be that either he's telling the truth or is a mafia godfather. Having a cop investigate him is purely a waste. Also, your statement that he should have considered "all possibilities" is a bit unfair. YOu can't expect him to have seen every possible scenario on page 1 when claiming. I don't agree with him claiming, "but it smells more like a judgement error than an outright lie" as Ghyrt said.

Post 54, forbiddanlight: I have a strong urge to just ignore this post. .

Post 59, Cass: I find it interesting that you note that DarkDude's claim is the kind of claim you don't believe when he's at L-2, but then go right ahead and ask why he didn't wait until L-2 to claim it.

Post 60, DarkDude:

"I disagree. I think we have a good idea of players' behaviour by looking at their reaction at my claim."

I agree with this statement. Players reactions to claims like this are invaluable resources.

Post 62, raider8169: Yeah, I think that's pretty much the general consensus, hence he shouldn't be investigated by a cop.

Post 69, raider8169: I like this post, or at least where he's going with it.

Post 70, Ghyrt: Doubtful. He'd have no way of knowing whether or not we'd jump to the conclusion of a godfather, etc. It'd be a ballsy play as scum.

Post 71, Ghyrt: I like this post here. I think this is a pretty good analysis of the situation.

Post 73, forbiddanlight: Disagree. I don't think the cop should investigate him.

Post 84, ting =): Why don't you think discussion of darkdude's claim is helpful in any way?

Post 85, raider8169: Good point in the top half of this post, which actually leads me to a suggestion. If we have a vig, they should shoot darkdude. If he's bulletproof, it won't hurt. If he's a lying scum godfather, then we nailed a lying scum godfather. Thoughts?

Post 86, Ghyrt: Agreed almost entirely here, except for the part at the end where you say it's a null-tell. Ghyrt is absolutely correct. Calling this action WIFOM and ignoring it is being short-sighted.

I'll hopefully finish my read tonight and be able to jump right into discussion.

[Kison]

ForbiddanLight

and

Goatrevolt? Awesome.

Post 26, Kison: Why is it important to you whether or not he can be killed in the endgame? I don't like this fishing at all.

It was an instinctive question as a result of a game our moderator and I were in last year where he had the very same role and was disappointed by the fact that he could be endgamed. Whether or not that holds very much significance considering how long it's been since then, I'm not sure. Holding back the info doesn't really do us any harm, so I'm not sure what you dislike about my question. Only disadvantage that comes to mind is that scum would be more eager to lynch him if he answered no to the question. If he answered yes, it still wouldn't change anything - they'd be unable to kill him until they'd already won(which is what an endgame kill is). This all assumes he's Town and telling the truth.

[Goatrevolt]

I guess I can buy the instinctive question bit. That was actually the first question that came to mind for me as well based on a discussion I remember reading somewhere about bulletproofs.

My issue was simply that if he's town, it's free info to scum. If he can be endgamed, the scum know they can leave him be. If he can't be endgamed, then they'll have to figure out a way to deal with him. Basically, I don't see that information as useful at all to the town but potentially helpful to scum. It rang alarm bells for me when you got that info out of him.

[forbiddanlight]

ForbiddanLight and Goatrevolt? Awesome. Twisted Evil

No, this isn't spies, Kison. I'm not a mafia roleblocker, and you aren't chasing after me in a cat and mouse game . Also, cicero isn't here .

[forbiddanlight]

EBWOP: Of course...cicero is modding...so nevermind, lol.

[Matin]

Post 27, Matin: I'm not a fan of this post. Your end result is that you believe his claim, but throughout the post you plant seeds of doubt in people's minds (could be lying scum, could be godfather). You remain in the camp of "believe his claim" but you're throwing information out there to lead others towards a disbelief in his claim. I find that scummy.

Not sure if this is a question or not, but I'll answer it anyways..

As I was working through my thoughts on the claim, my initial interpretation was that I didn't like it, but also that I would cautiously believe it because it seemed to risky for scum to pull.

You'll note I'm sure that as the day went on, my trust in the claim has dissipated even more to the point where I'm now highly suspicious of it.

Also, I wonder why you've been such a fan of Raiders posts yet he came to a very similar conclusion as I. Seems inconsistent..

[Goatrevolt]

Ok, I'm fully caught up. I have much less thoughts on the second half of the day because I wanted to get caught up quicker and it was taking me forever to comment on a ton of posts like i was doing earlier. Anyway, here are the rest of my comments while reading through

Post 105, forbiddanlight: First you say that the cop should investigate darkdude, and then later backtrack into the cop shouldn't listen to you anyway so it doesn't matter?

Post 112, raider: I disagree with some of this. I'm inclined to believe darkdude is town for now, but that doesn't mean that he should be deciding our lynches. Town =/= correct. Can you explain why you think he should lead us around and why we should follow?

Post 115, Ennui2778: Can you explain this post? I don't see how darkdude's claim could be construed as a way to draw out other claims.

Post 141, Ennui2778: This post rings some bells for me. It strikes me as a "I can't believe the town has an overpowered role" type of post. Lamenting the balance of a town power role really doesn't sound pro-town to me at all. I'll admit though, that this argument is based on my current read that darkdude is town. If he's scum, then it's a null-tell.

Post 159, Ennui2778: Nefarious? I'm not liking that added justification to the vote, which makes your vote sound better, but isn't real reasoning. Nefarious implies that chenhsi had been actively posting things that were directly anti-town, when in reality he was simply just lurking.

Post 177, Kison: I like this post. Maybe I'm just partial because I'm still here as a result, but Kison is bringing up legitimate points. Some of the Chehnsi votes were pretty awful, such as Ennui's on post 159, which is some indication of a poor wagon.

Post 178, darkdude: I'm not a fan of this mentality. If you have a player who is hard to read you can solve it with a cop investigation or figure out whether they are town or scum through other means. Lynching someone for the sole reason of "lynch him now because he's unreadable and he'll be trouble at Lylo later" is really poor in my opinion. That completely fails to take into account any external factors which may be used to clear a player as a townie. Cop investigations, voting histories, etc.

Post 181, raider: If a townie is a bad poster and you lynch them you still lynch a townie. Can you explain how that's a benefit because I don't see it?

Post 210, forbiddan: Rolling over is not a scum tell. It's a null tell. Are you trying to say that only town try to fight their lynch and scum just always accept it? It's in both town and scum's favor to fight their lynch. It's not in either's favor to roll over and die. Other than that, I don't have much of a problem with your mega post. Usually people are too wishy-washy, but you at least take some solid stances here which I like. I agree with most of your positions as well.

Coming later: who I think is scum and why.

[Goatrevolt]

Also, I wonder why you've been such a fan of Raiders posts yet he came to a very similar conclusion as I. Seems inconsistent..

Hmm...I'll have to check into that.

[Goatrevolt]

By far, my top suspect is Ennui2778. I feel fairly confident that he's scum, but I will admit that a lot of my arguments against him hinge on darkdude being town, so take that as you will. I feel fairly solid about darkdude based on his claim and posting today, so I'm willing to make the bet that he's town for the purpose of this case.

Soudns true to me.

I'll start with this as a framework. Ennui believes darkdude's claim, meaning he thinks darkdude is town. Keep that in mind.

Perhaps darkdude was claiming to get others to claim as well, I don't believe this has been suggested, but while Darkdude clearly has a

very powerful role

, there could be a counterbalance to his power.

This post right here reeks of scum fishing for a way to deal with a powerful town role. Seriously, if Ennui thinks darkdude is town, then why is he fishing for a way to deal with darkdude's role? He should be happy that darkdude is a tough customer for the scum to deal with.

I was just saying that there's probably an equally powerful person on the side opposed to DD, whichever one that may be. And it may not be suicide, a person with a similar role to claim could just as well say that he was town and we'd be faced with yet another variety of WIFOM.

Meaningless speculation about the scum having an answer for darkdude.

I'm not claiming anything. I just thought it would be a tad unbalancing if it turns out that we have this nigh-untouchable character with no "yin to his yang" as the saying goes.

This post right here is pretty much where I stopped and said, "yep Ennui is scum." Why is he worried about the balance issues associated with a pro-town role? Shouldn't he be happy that the town has a role that's tough for scum to deal with? This in combination with the earlier post I quoted suggests a mentality of worry and frustration with a seemingly overpowered town role. Scummy.

This opens an interesting point, how many factions are there?

Speculation on the number of factions. This definitely piqued my interest as well.

What bothers me a bit is the question about factions. Why do you need to know? If you are town, kill scum. If you are scum though, knowing about another faction to use might be beneficial.

This right here is a good point, and I agree. It's day 1, we try to lynch scum and we figure out the setup as we go.

vote- Chenhsi

for all the reasons everyone else did. He's gone beyond simply being quiet and is now nefarious.

Shameless bandwagoning, and extra but meaningless information to try to sweeten up his vote as something more. This is in my opinion the absolute scummiest vote on the Chenhsi wagon.

And honestly, that's it. He has 10 total posts in the game.

Ennui has shown a few notable signs of being scum and to top it off has basically lurked his way through the entire game. His vote on Chenhsi is also interesting considering he's only put in slightly more game related conversation but yet is willing to vote a lurker. I think there's a really strong chance Ennui is scum.

Vote Ennui2778

[Kison]

Strongly agree with the shameless bandwagoning and fast acceptance of DD's role. Not so much on the 'yin for yang' part. Ennui is actually the second most bothering vote on that wagon(actually, most bothering if you consider that FL actually never voted), simply for the lack of reasoning alone.

[Goatrevolt]

Strongly agree with the shameless bandwagoning and fast acceptance of DD's role. Not so much on the 'yin for yang' part. Ennui is actually the second most bothering vote on that wagon(actually, most bothering if you consider that FL actually never voted), simply for the lack of reasoning alone.

I think the yin for yang part is a pretty strong tell actually. A natural townie response is not to bother thinking about the overpowered nature of a role that he thinks is town or possible ways to counteract it. If darkdude is telling the truth and is town, then scum are probably fearing his role, and I think we're seeing some of that mentality slipping out in Ennui's posts.

[Kison]

The problem is that the counteracting ability would already be in the hands of scum. Why would scum speculate about a role they know doesn't exist?

[Cubsfan4ever]

But this makes little sense. You're just saying that even if my claimed abilities were true I could still be scum. Yeah that's right, but such logic is applicable in all situations. If I claim vanilla town you can say "he's scum". If I claim cop you can say "he's scum cop". If I claim doc you can say "scum doc". It doesn't really explain your perspective on my case.

Ok. I'm saying I don't like the way you came out with your role and basically tried to manipulate the town into thinking you were somehow confirmed or confirmable. You stated you made the claim so we can know to trust you, but surely you would realize that there is no way we can possibly know you're completely telling the truth. I just don't see the town's motivation for claiming. Your only usefulness is in possibly deterring a kill but now that would be impossible. It looked like an attempt to win trust and somehow convince the town that "we can't afford to waste a lynch on you".

I don't get why people that are sketchy of darkdude are afraid of lynching him. There is no way possible way to be more or less sure of his claim tomorrow as if he's scum and made the claim it's likely in a godfather (and thus NK-immune) role anyways. It's not like the role he's claiming is so pro-town that losing it would cripple our chances. In fact, with it out in the open, he would basically just be a townie now and have increased the chance that a cop or doctor or something gets killed at night. Great.

The fact that there was little advantage to claiming if true and your attempt at manipulating the situation to make us believe you can be a confirmed pro-town player as well the OMGUS nature after my vote on you is fueling my suspicions primarily of you.

[Goatrevolt]

The problem is that the counteracting ability would already be in the hands of scum. Why would scum speculate about a role they know doesn't exist?

That's a good counterpoint.

I still don't like that post though. I fail to see any pro-town motivation for discussing ways to counteract the bulletproof role, especially when he claimed that he thought darkdude was town.

I still don't like the "tad overpowered" comment either, because I hold it's a natural scum response but not something a townie is going to intuitively come to. The tone of the post reads to me like he's lamenting the fact that the town has a powerful role. That just doesn't read like town.

[ting =)]

I sort of agree with your feel on Ting, Fonz and Kison. It seems their style is to address issues when needed, but otherwise keep the posting to a minimum...

Take a look at the lurker attitude

I have

limited access

right now. I posted it in the v/la thread, and I even posted it here.

What got my eye on him was the fact that he quite often attacked raider based on the supposed NK immune GF argument,

No, that's not what I was attacking him about. You missed my point.

Darkdude claimed nk immunity, right?
After that, raider said:

or a bad guy and does not show up on a cop's investigation.

Darkdude's claim would already have made any role with a killing ability (eg. vig) wary about targetting him. Raider's addition would have made any role with an investigative ability wary of targetting darkdude too.

That plus all the, 'let's just trust darkdude,' or, 'let's leave him alone for now,' sounds like wrapping darkdude in a don't-touch-me cloud.

ting =): Why don't you think discussion of darkdude's claim is helpful in any way?

I answered this. I think discussions of the player's reaction to it is helpful. Discussion of the claim itself would be recursive. e.g.

player x: No scum would have the balls to do what he did, he must be town.
player y: Ah, but that's exactly what scum

want

you to think.
player x: Do you really think scum would have gone out and made a fake claim right when the day started?
player Y: Argggh. Can't you see that that kind of thinking is exactly what scum would want you to have on the claim?

..... and on and on. To have a discussion on it, you'd have to assume him being either town or scum at the get go, which kind of spoils the point of the discussion, which is to find out if he's town or scum.