Mini 645 - Innocence Falls (Game Over)

[Ythill]

Hello.

Hmmmmm.... all new faces, except Andy, who modded a game I was in. This game is going to be meta-free for awhile, at least from my PoV.

[Ythill]

@ nureins: Never joke-voted, never will. I'll vote soon enough, and it will be with purpose.

But thanks for asking.

[Ythill]

I don't like the way Pope's #41 completely ignores what's been posted, and assumes Matin's alignment based on a null-tell.

Not a great case, but good enough for my first vote.

Vote: The Pope's Tiara

[Ythill]

@ Pope: I'll consider that response, but my vote's staying put for the moment.

Was there any point to your post, other than being funny? Why did you choose to post what you did in response to a serious defense against your initial jab?

[Ythill]

Wow... super activity levels. Forgive me if I'm a little slow in keeping up. I'm a busy guy and one of my other games is a little overwhelming ATM. Anyway...

@ Simeon: I didn't choose to refrain from arguing. I opted to refrain from arguing at that moment, for two reasons. (1) I was leaving for work. (2) Pope's answer caught me a little off guard because I couldn't imagine anyone claiming that his previous statement (#25) was a joke. So I decided to have another look before taking a stance, anlalyze what he'd said and when rather than just arguing against someone who might have been a townie I'd misread. That is not the same thing as backing down.

I do understand the tactic of posting statements like "TPT is town" even when one is not sure, but I would like to read at least a summary of your reasons for finding him innocent.

@ Pope: Now that I've considered your answer, I have some problems with it. The reason I took #41 as being serious was that your questions in #25 ("Are you trying to avoid acting scummy so as not to draw attention to yourself? Why would a townie be worried?") came off as very serious; too serious, in fact, for what had prompted them. Then Matin seemed to catch that same vibe, explicitly stating that his previous action had been a joke (which was obvious anyway).

Your answer was to post #41 and, now that you point it out, I do see the irony. But I still don't see anything funny (or even attempted funny) about #25. Nor do I see the benefit, for town, of ignoring the way Matin took you so seriously. I'm wondering if you realized you'd gone too far too soon and tried to back out with #41.

In the past two pages you have digressed into abstract posts, which has no benefit if you are town. Yet it could have the benefit of giving you the image of a VI/jester if you are scum. You are an intriguing case. I'm still not sure you're mafia of course, but I think you're the most suspicious at this point.

[Ythill]

1. Ythill QUICK vote after saying he doesnt like random-joke votes...
2. pope INSISTING on you so much
3. tpt voting back to Ythill in an OMGUS way
4. They playing to vote each other to DISTANCE in a semi-random phase...

1. It's my apology for refusing to post a random vote. I try to get a content-based vote out as soon as I have a lead, even if it's a minor one.

2. I wouldn't so much call it INSISTING as I would call it SLINGING MUD. Pope got too serious too quickly, then backed out, then voted for me. INSISTING would have involved more posts, more argument, and one less OMGUS hop.

3. Yes the vote was OMGUS, but I consider it a null-tell in most situations.

4. This is horrible play. Relying on conspiracy theories (assuming two players' alignments without knowing either) leads to confirmation bias and therefore mislynches. I welcome you to point out alignment tells against myself, Pope, or anyone else but... please... don't start accusing us of distancing until one of us has been confirmed as scum.

[Ythill]

I don't like nuriens' "beautiful dance" post (#75). It poses as being meaningful but is a study in ambivalence. He takes all sides without really saying anything, and he quietly discredits the arguments against Pope while doing so (which doesn't say

anything

about Pope's alignment).

@ nuriens: There's been time to see what's developed. Now, do you find me scummy? Or Pope? Or both? Or neither? Why?

@ habit: Good catch on the possibility of Jahudo mason-fishing, but I think it's equally likley he's scum-hunting and the rest of his posts have given me a townie feel (all gut, but that's okay at this point). Can you show why his comment is more likley to come from scum than town?

[Ythill]

I'm getting a slightly more townie vibe from Sim lately, but I still don't agree with him about Pope.

@ Simeon: I didn't choose to refrain from arguing. I opted to refrain from arguing

at that moment

, for two reasons. (1) I was leaving for work. (2) Pope's answer caught me a little off guard because I couldn't imagine anyone claiming that his previous statement (#25) was a joke.

So, in other words, you chose not to argue it, whatever your reasons.

Absouletly not. Choosing to argue something

later, after consideration

is not the same as choosing to not argue it at all. You seem too bright to have misread that accidentally, but I'll ask rather than assume. Did you?

@ nureins: You've got it wrong about Sim and Pope. Sim's baseless "defense" might be said to tarnish his rep, but it doesn't tarnish Pope's.

If

Sim is lynched and flips mafia, it would be strong evidence of Pope being townie. But, once again, you're heading down the road toward conspiracy theory.

It may be just your posting style, but I'm starting to become suspicious of someone who is willing to say so much without actually taking a stand.

@ habit: mason-fishing = role fishing for masons

Ugh. This post contains my three least favorite words: "scumtell", "evidence", and "least-helpful"

You don't like evidence? That's gotta be some kind of a scumtell.

That's the least-helpful thing you've posted.

[Ythill]

@ Sim:

Please answer my question from the last page...

@ Simeon: I didn't choose to refrain from arguing. I opted to refrain from arguing

at that moment

, for two reasons. (1) I was leaving for work. (2) Pope's answer caught me a little off guard because I couldn't imagine anyone claiming that his previous statement (#25) was a joke.

So, in other words, you chose not to argue it, whatever your reasons.

Absouletly not. Choosing to argue something

later, after consideration

is not the same as choosing to not argue it at all. You seem too bright to have misread that accidentally, but I'll ask rather than assume. Did you?

In spite of this, Sim is looking more and more town, as is Cass. Nuriens, on the other hand...

@ nuriens:

When I said you wouldn't take a stand, it had nothing to do with you not voting. It had everything to do with your extensive use of qualifying phrases. Good townies are not afraid to be wrong and, especially since English is not your first language, I'd think you understand the power of qualifiers to make a statement ambivalent.

Other things I find suspicious: basing your current case on theory disagreements, suspicion growing against Sim while his tells have been showing more town than scum, suddenly both taking a stance and making a vote in answer to my accusation, and buddying to Cass.

unvote; vote nuriens

[Ythill]

The grammar debate was entertaining but utterly pointless.

@ Simenon: For chrisskaes, answer the question. Did you accidentally misread my response about arguing later vs. not arguing at all? What, am I typing in braile?

@ nuriens: I said I don't joke vote. Then I explained the difference between that and early voting. Stop twisting my words, scum.

I'll have little to no internet access until Tuesday night. Going camping for my birthday. When I return, I'll give comment on whatever has transpired.

[Ythill]

Got some time to check in briefly and I figured I'd comment on a few recent topics.

The theory discussion is still annoying.

Pope being experienced but not knowing stuff (self vote, OMGUS) is not a contradiction because he said his experience was from MW and other sites.

Sim's posts just seem long because of all the quotes.

Nuriens' most recent defenses amount to "no I didn't." It is a fair assessment to say that he has buddied and put out a smoke screen of noise. The second may only be a n00b tell, but there are enough other scumtells to keep my vote where it's at.

The only thing you have said is :

"1. It's my apology for refusing to post a random vote. I try to get a content-based vote out as soon as I have a lead, even if it's a minor one. "

Look at post #15, which was a reply to your #14, and which you replied to in #16, and then explain to us why you are lying.

Now few posts later, not only you have moved again from your minor case, now you claim another person is definitely SCUM.

I will move my vote as often as I like. Changing one's stance as the evidence changes is good for the town.

Nothing is

definite

D1, but it's become pretty obvious to me that you are scum. I don't understand what's wrong with me saying so.

Now hurry up and implicate your buddies so we can lynch you.

[Ythill]

Goebels isn't playing this game. Let's stick to reality, scum.

You can call me whatever you want, it doesn't change your alignment.

1. Refuse, not hesitate. Stop lying.
2. Yes. So what?
3. No. My suspicion of you grew over several posts, based on your behavior.
4. That person

is

scum.
5. That person

has

lied, or at least hasn't demonstrated otherwise. I didn't talk about your buddies, I told you to.

[Ythill]

...too many quick votes for someone who is

reluctant to cast votes in the beginning

.

Ythill. In my view, he has jumped over two persons with very poor arguments. Especially inconsistent with someone that claims

early voting is not his speciality

and that

claims that never goes for early voting...

@ nuriens: I said I don't joke vote. Then I explained the difference between that and early voting. Stop twisting my words, scum.

The

only thing

you have said is :

"1. It's my apology for refusing to post a random vote. I try to get a content-based vote out as soon as I have a lead, even if it's a minor one. "

Nuriens, not having a proper defense for himself, decided to deflect suspicion by suddenly attacking me. He did this by claiming that me refusing to joke vote somehow meant that I wouldn't vote in the "early" part of the game. I never said any such thing. His first lie.

When I point out what I actually said, and that I explained the difference between that and early voting (that an early content vote is something I will do), nuriens claimed that I'd only made one post on the topic, rather than two. His second lie.

When I pointed that out, the "king of qualifiers" backtracked, asking us to believe that he posted the phrase "the only thing you have said," without qualifiers, to mean "the only thing you said about the difference between joke voting and early voting." Third lie is the charm.

Give it up, dude. I'm not Goebels. I've simply been trying to keep it brief, since we have so many wordy players, and since I've had limited access.

Your "attack" is nothing but a weak attempt to keep the heat off of yourself. You haven't answered my initial accusations satisfactorily. You haven't answered the accusations of others satisfactorily. And I

haven't even shared

all of the scumtells I've seen from you.

[Ythill]

Quick post before work.

It looks like I've cornered nuriens-scum. He's backing out of the argument and blaming it on me, but his next post contains a passive-aggressive jab. I will be rereading this game soon, probably tonight. When I do, unless I find some heretofore undiscovered town-tells, I will be posting a complete case against nuriens.

@ habit: I don't find Pope any less suspicious than I did, but there are bigger fish to fry. Why would you threaten to hammer someone (who is only @ L-5) without reading his posts? Seriously dude, if you don't like to read, why are you playing this game?

[Ythill]

Scum.

[Ythill]

And I haven't even shared all of the scumtells I've seen from you.

Bad idea.

I've had worse.

I think it's funny that nuriens has been busted by a "child."

Off to do my reread...

[Ythill]

First things first...

I read nuriens' posts (and those he quoted) carefully, skimmed the rest.

I've identified three people likely to be town (one of them is about as solid a read as I could have at this point). Not going to name them.

Nuriens is still my PE#1. Matin and habit are looking suspicious to me. A few others are looking creepy, but less suspicious than these three. None of my tells on them are based on relationships with one another and I am

not

saying that all three are scum, just that they are the three most likley

individuals

in my view.

I've decided that the Pope evidence is inconclusive.

Anyway, I promised a case on nuriens... get out your reading glasses...

[Ythill]

PbPA of nuriens

Starts forcing conversation through serious questions as early as #14 and theory debate by #20. (null)

Names 7 of 12 players as possibly implicated in #38-39. Gives ambivalent “town-soft” reads on two of them, with little new evidence, in #53. (scum)

Posts the “which is a joke?” quiz (#58) to his declared townies, myself, and the lead suspect. The examples all shed suspicion on two opposed players. The post leaves a very obvious exit from any attempt to discredit it (scum).

Considers Pope “a bit suspicious” while coaching him in #65 (scum).

Changes his Ecto read with the evidence (town) and puts words in Jah’s mouth (scum) in #71.

“Beautiful dance” post (#75) suspecting all three players in the most current drama. Confirms his vote while saying, of it “randomness has not disappeared a lot.” (scum)

WOW (#105-107) is a study in ambivalence, “answering” all questions without taking a solid stance. Interpretation could take things either way. Uses the outs he seeded in #58. Coaches Pope twice. Avoids a direct question about his stance by claiming he’d already answered it (major scum).

Second WOW (#111) minimizes his own suspicions, attacks Sim for null tells, eluding that he is scum and Pope is town. Uses the “too rational to be a townie” argument (scum).

Third WOW (#128) makes slippery arguments against Sim, using them to finally take a stand (as well as vote) immediately after I have called him out for being wishy-washy. He does this while claiming that he’s in no hurry and trying to convince us of a semi-random stage (scum).

In #129 he’s territorial (not sure if that’s the right word) about his treatment of Sim (null).

In #144 argues semantics, offers a false dichotomy, and continues baseless arguments against Sim (scum).

A confusing misquote in #146 just makes me wonder if he’s paying attention (null), but he goes on to use his earlier ambivalence tactically, invite suspicion, and give a baseless townie read on Cass (scum, though some are very mild).

In #157, he says he’s not arguing theory, but rather arguing about the three word post that his THEORY ARGUMENTS started with. He then claims that the separation of his posts somehow proves the order in which he read. Then OMGUS attacks me. (all null, but not compelling defenses to the allegations). Chimes in on the infer/imply situation in #158 (null).

Scumeter (#161) does not follow the progression of evidence/accusation as stated by its author (major scum). Reveals the poor semantic argument of his Sim case in #171 (null, but weakens the argument). Also blathers a defense to a hard question about wagons and his vote (scum). Second of three alleged lies in #172 (scum).

Pushes good questions in #173 (town).

In #184, explicitly offers to sway his opinion if people can convince him (scum). Gets involved in the “agent of scum,” discussion, which is

somebody’s

smokescreen, but not his own (null).

Posts the no-I’m-not defense in #187, includes a very mild appeal to emotion (null, but not a convincing defense).

Growing weary of debates in #189. Not a solid tell but this looks like an escape hatch (cornered scum).

Argues with me in #194 (see my #195). Argues more in #197: funny that

he

calls

me

out for arguing semantics when I’d pointed out his misleading bombast. Even though a lot of his points were crap, it’s very hard for me to tell the difference between cornered scum and frustrated townie in these posts (null).

In #198, bases much of his case against me on the assumption that my case against him (which he never really answered) was weak (scum).

In #205, refuses to answer “repetitive” posts by me, thereby declaring that me clarifying the truth about his misleading assertions is just repetition. Makes a passive-aggressive stab at me, a sort of underhanded defense of himself, in #206 (cornered scum).

In #208, again makes the baseless assertion that I am lying. Comes back in #210 with ad hom (cornered scum).

[Ythill]

@ nhat:

Having not shared scumtells

yet

is not a secret. Especially since I let it all hang out

before

your accusation.

When I first started playing this game, I learned that giving town reads too early helps the scum, so I will not be divulging that sort of information unless it becomes extremely important, such as if one of my townie-reads is involved in a counter claim.

But I shouldn't let you pull me into a theory debate. There are

plenty

of pro-town reasons to withhold information.

Also, you are going tit-for-tat with a player whose English is far from perfect.

Nothing I've said requires fluency beyond that already demonstrated by nuriens. Nor does he have a problem following complex arguments. Nor is he the only one who can discuss the points. Nor is being multilingual a town tell.

...it looks like a good opportunity for scum types...

As does everything. Please explain why scum would be more likley than town to treat nuriens as I have. Saying something "looks like" scumminess demonstrates nothing.

Besides, who's bandwagoning?

[Ythill]

I guess I've made another OMGUS enemy.

@ habit: I never said there were three scum. I said I had main suspects. I also said I had three town reads. Do you think I was saying there are only three townies?

[Ythill]

EBWOP: "main suspects" should be "three main suspects".

[Ythill]

I do liek to read, but more succint stuff would be good.

It

was

a PbPA. I will try to keep things brief when I can.

highligth teh main ones or top 3 for me please?

Sure. #58, #105-107, and #161.

[Ythill]

Check the post times. We had pretty much simultaneously posted.

Conceded.

You didn't say being a polyglot was a towntell, but you suggested that arguing with one was a scumtell. Unless you're suggesting distancing, you are assuming that nuriens is town based on his language.

It's easy to exploit lots of people for lots of different reasons. That doesn't mean they can't be scum, and it doesn't mean I'm scum for calling them on it. If nuriens manages to convince me that I'm mistaken, I'll lay off him. Until then, I'm not going to baby him.

And if you think my

arguments

were unfair, I'd appreciate you addressing them.

[Ythill]

I have to leave for work soon, and so will not have time to respond to nuriens' post immediately, but I

will

answer it later. I do have a few brief words for now...

@ nuriens: I noticed that you defended yourself against null tells and even one town tell. Did you not realize that the parenthetical words null, town, and scum were meant to identify the tells? This is an honest question. I just cannot see why

anyone

would post a defense to a town tell.

@ habit: I think you misunderstood what I meant about the scummeter post, but that is a valid point about the backdoor left by nuriens. I do think that your ideas about why scum would buddy are a bit off the mark, but let's save that conversation for after we have had a card-flip.

@ Cass: You've posted an interesting contradiction. Nuriens' defense is mainly based on the belief that I am misinterpreting him on purpose. How can you claim that his defense is good while still not seeing me as suspicious?

[Ythill]

As promised, my response to nuriens. You’ll note that I don’t bother arguing when he has tried to “clarify” things I didn’t list as scumtells, though I’m still laughing that he attempted to disprove one of the few things that might lead me to believe he is town.

I DIDNT MENTION ANYONE AS POSSIBLY IMPLICATED IN 38-39.

I guess I misread this part, and will concede the point. On first read, your “I want to hear more from” sounded like a call-out. One scumtell withdrawn.

It is not "my declared townies, yourself and the lead suspect". It is "my declared townies (if you want to call them that way, that is ok) and MY TWO SUSPECTS.

This doesn’t change the fact that your “two suspects” were on two sides of a debate, which was my point in identifying them. This would be the same as another player shedding implicit suspicion on both you and I right now. Wouldn’t you find that suspicious?

My vote was on you among the three of them due to a "random" reason, so I wanted to point out that the reason was partially random.

There is no such thing as partially random. Calling a vote partially random is a tactic that allows one to pursue it if the town agrees or abandon it if the town finds it suspicious.

You are very fast in making conclusions. I am not, and I like to see the game developing. So I took a solid stance. But for you, solid stance maybe is a different thing.

This is about #105-107. You make statements that seem torn between myself and Pope as the scum choice, still ready to spring on whichever side of that debate the town leans towards. Your suspicion increases on Pope, following the town’s current lean. Meanwhile you introduce suspicion on Sim and place those FoSes, which has the effect of giving another either-or choice. This is what I mean when I say you are not taking a stance. Saying, explicitly, that you find one of us scummy and pursuing that one would be harmful to you as scum, especially early in the game.

A townie isn’t afraid to change his mind later. A mafioso is.

I do not see here your point about "minimizing" my own suspicions.

“...probably because my suspicions on all of you are milder than hers...” and “of course, this is only my opinion...”

Eluding that sim is scum and pope town ? where have you read that?

"Oh congratulations, People is wrong and you appear as being correct after the lynch of an innocent..."

"too rational to be a townie" argument ??

Maybe you are too inexperienced to understand this one entirely, so I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt. No matter how it is phrased, and argument that comes to the conclusion “so-and-so is either a stupid/irrational/etc townie or a mafioso” is likely to make the subject, regardless of their alignment, freak out and seem scummier. It does this by creating the illusion that they must either admit to being scum or admit to being your pejorative, thereby strongly involving the ego. By town, this argument should only be used if you are

absolutely certain

the person is anti-town which is pretty unlikely this early (and you said you were not). As scum, it’s a very useful tactic. And I notice that you’ve now used it again, against me.

1. He misquoted.
2. He accused (Cass and Me) of him having backtracked.
3. It was pretty clear that neither Cass nor me had done.

1. This could be a scum move, or it could have been a mistake, or laziness. He didn't actually attribute the quote to you, he just neglected to attribute it to her.

2. He did no such thing. Cass accused him of setting up a backtrack, he said "Show where I've backtracked," to point out that her hypothetical accusation was meaningless.

3. Agreed, but this doesn't matter if you read what Sim said in the correct context.

Also, why are you so concerned that Sim put you and Cass on the same team?

With respect to the misquote, which one is it ?? I havent misquoted in 146...

Actually, my mistake. I was confused by Ecto speaking of himself in the third person. At least now I know you're paying attention.

Clearly, my read on Cass was based in our Simenon experience, in which I perceived that she was scum-hunting. Very different to Simenon on TPT that was simply "tpt is town", totally baseless...and that curiously, u dont find scummy

Sim didn’t give a read. He gave an opinion without trying to disguise it as a read. You tried to base a READ on the fact that Cass was attacking a suspect of yours and you agreed with her. For your read to be valid, we have to assume that (1) you are town, (2) Sim’s action was scummy and (3) Cass is not manipulating you. That’s a lot of assumption and, to me, #2 is clearly not true.

Now... on to current matters...

[Ythill]

Sim vs. Ecto seems kind of pointless. Both sides make sense. Sim was, perhaps, a bit too quick to judge and Ecto a bit too quick to be defensive, but I don't see any of their posts as scumtells.

@ nuriens: I'll only attack you for honoring Cass' request if your case against Pope seems scummy to me. And I'll do that no matter what you do, so long as it seems scummy to me. Did I mention that your hesitation seems a little scummy to me?

Even though I say this, I

am

entertaining a small doubt about my nuriens read and it is this: in rereading to answer his post, I noticed that a fair number of those scumtells

could

be n00b tells. Though the sheer number makes that theory sound like a stretch, he is new. Not enough to unvote him yet, but I will be reading him more carefully as we continue to squabble.

And I'd appreciate everyone's opinion as to whether nuriens is more likely to be inexperienced scum or simply inexperienced.

...could you please each make a case on anyone that isn't the other?

I don't find you particularly anti-town but this question raises a red flag. It

could be

you trying to put a stop to our argument before one of us is implicated.

Basically, I don't take kindly to the suggestion that I post a case on someone who is not my top suspect. However, I do have other suspects, and I suppose it couldn't hurt to harp a little on one of them. Just don't expect the full PbPA case, at least not yet...

[Ythill]

For Cass... a starter case on one of my secondary suspects. Habit, please respond...

Habit attacked Jah when Pope was in the spotlight. He claimed to have found Jah suspicious for reasons I don’t agree with and then, within a day’s time, cleared Jah based solely on WIFOM. He used the too-scummy-to-be-scum argument, which is like WIFOM+1. He also stated that he was abandoning the case “not because everyone doesn’t agree” which seems like a very odd statement for a townie to post if he believes in the reason for changing his mind.

Later, habit used further WIFOM (and admitted it) to rekindle those suspicions on Jah, after claiming that his initial case had been for the purpose of starting discussion. It all feels very... false.

Habit gives Pope a lot of leeway when he’s in the spotlight and even posts an anecdotal defense for the auto-vote. It could be subtle buddying, especially since it is retracted a bit once Pope is in the clear.

He claims to misread a lot, which may be true, but it may also be a ruse to allow him to make inflammatory statements and then retract them. One mention of this, in his tenth post, includes the story about how he was hammered for it in another game, which seems like an unnecessary appeal to emotion.

Habit’s accumulated stance on scumhunting bothers me. He doesn’t like “taking it to the next level.” He doesn’t like arguments based on joke votes. He doesn’t like questions directed to specific people, or focused arguments, or multiple conversations happening at the same time. He doesn’t like arguments in general, or all-inclusive attacks, or using pressure to draw out slip-ups. He doesn’t like posts that don’t go deep enough, or posts that are too long. I suppose these could be honest peeves, but it seems odd that a townie would tell so many people to stop scumhunting.

[Ythill]

No worries... it was poorly worded.

Basically, I'm wondering if people see nuriens' scummy behavior as null-n00b play. Or, more generally, I started to see that such is a possibility and I wanted others to weigh in on that topic.

[Ythill]

There are so many accusations here that I believe few players would actually go back and see if Habit actually exhibited all of the behavior listed.

I wrote that paragraph with habit's posts open in isolation so, yes, I assure you that there is a quote for each one. Rather than have me post them all, why don't you quiz me by picking a couple?

But yes, it was a bit excessive. Such is my style. It leaves room for town to defend and scum to slip up.

Habit's defenses make some sense, but I'm not entirely convinced. Not going to argue at length with him, since the case (though honest) was mainly for Cass to get her read. If I feel like pushing habit, I'll come back to it.

I will say that his no-lynch suggestion is a little unsettling.

[Ythill]

Go back and re-read or just flat out pick somebody, but a lynch is happening today.

I endorse this product and/or service.

[Ythill]

Habit's speculation about the setup is just that. The flavor doesn't include any definitive statements. It mentions the

possibility

of inclusion of the three most common town power roles, but also hints that any number of other roles might be included.

@ nuriens: Why did you pick Tritch and not Sim for your current case?

I'm looking forward to the Cass vs. Tritch situation that's brewing.

[Ythill]

I, on the other hand, just haven't had anything new to say. Will probably be pretty light for the next two days as well... very busy... but I'll be back up to speed after that.

[Ythill]

I'm not interested in lynching Tritch at this point, but I'll hear what he has to say.

Not waiting for anything specific, just working long hours, got a date tonight, and tomorrow is poker night. I'll be able to poke my nose in for a moment like this, but don't expect any serious research.

[Ythill]

No worries... it was poorly worded.

Basically, I'm wondering if people see nuriens' scummy behavior as null-n00b play. Or, more generally, I started to see that such is a possibility and I wanted others to weigh in on that topic.

After reading the nureins-only I find him a newbie. That theory about him being an experienced-player-but-first-time-scum doesn't make any sense. An experienced player would know a better approach to the game, both as scum and town (even more, if person X has been protown a long time, he knows how to think protown)

I think you've misunderstood what I meant originally. I didn't suggest that nuriens was an experienced player but first-time scum. I believe it was he who claimed minimal experience at one point, though I don't have time to look back at the moment to verify it.

I just chose poor wording to ask whether people believed that his suspicious play stems from inexperience alone. And, for the record, I'd still like to hear more folks' answers to that.

[Ythill]

Though habit is still a stated suspect of mine, I'm not liking this latest development at all.

One of the reasons I've been reluctant to pursue him was the dynamic involving nuriens + Cass + habit. I was grilling nuriens but had also listed alternate suspects. Cass asked for a secondary case and, after I turned my guns on habit... you see what's developed.

I don't buy a lot of the reactions to his latest post. It was an unnecesarry appeal to emotion, yes, but he's done this before, just not so explicitly. The added intensity seems to have naturally developed from the increased number of arguments against him.

Nor do I see how the post could possibly serve his purposes as scum.

Nhat's "case" on habit is pointless. It's clearly possible, even probable, that habit misread the flavor. And this wagon has grown too quickly for my liking. I'm especially suspicious of Cass' FoS here, because of the aforementioned dynamic and the way it allows her to push the wagon while avoiding cuplability in the vote count.

[Ythill]

I don't think a FoS is more opportunistic than a vote in this instance, but I think it accomplishes some of the same goals (pressuring the target, pushing the lynch) without the culpability of a vote and is therefore more suspicious.

I don't buy a lot of the reactions to his latest post. It was an unnecesarry appeal to emotion, yes, but he's done this before, just not so explicitly. The added intensity seems to have naturally developed from the increased number of arguments against him.

Oh come on. It was plain silly and unreal.

True, but silly and unreal do not tell me anything about his alignment.

Nhat's "case" on habit is pointless. It's clearly possible, even probable, that habit misread the flavor.

You left out the part where he's jumped back on to Jahudo for the flimsiest of reasons.

My statement was unfair and my only excuse for this is that I was in a bit of a rush when I made that post. To clarify, your case was not pointless, but the bit about him knowing the set-up was. Its inclusion made the whole case seem somewhat contrived, like it was bad icing on an otherwise reasonable cake.

Goat's read of me in #316 demonstrates that he is a skilled player. It can be read as a gambit from either scum or town. I don't know that it indicates his alignment by itself but, coupled with the right card-flip, it would

nearly

confirm him one way or the other.

The accusations against Andy are intriguing to me, as are those against Cass.

[Ythill]

True, but silly and unreal do not tell me anything about his alignment.

They sure do tell me something!

About his alignment? Really? Please explain what and, more importantly,

how

.

[Ythill]

@ Sim: I obviously wasn't reading "unreal" as literally as you meant it. Rereading habit's appeal, I do see what you mean but it's a tone he's had all along. What do you think of earlier examples like his #27 & 30 (#s in isolation)?

...a scum wants to fake emotional explosions because they keep them from getting lynched.

Yes, but habit was in no danger at all. The effect of the post was to draw the spotlight to him, something which could have been foreseen. To play the WIFOM game... what do you think of a player who is crafty enough to employ this tactic but daft enough to time it so poorly?

That said, I'm not convinced that habit is town. I just don't see much of a scumtell in his latest post. This wagon has been very good for information though.

[Ythill]

Ythill, Im reading positively from you lately

This is another gear change for which I don't see valid reasons but I'd rather not discuss what makes you see people as townie, so I guess we'll let it lie for now.

I've got some problems with Jah's #311 but I'd rather not state them until habit responds to it. So...

@ habit: Please respond thoroughly to #311.

[Ythill]

unvote

A lot has been revealed since the habit wagon started. My views of this game have changed considerably. I sense the need for an extensive reread, though I will not have time until the weekend.

For a little while, I considered putting a pressure vote on habit just to see the reactions, but it seems like we've got bigger fish to fry.

Jah was one of those I had privately listed as townie. #311 made me look twice. Now Goat has done a great job of analyzing Jah and I agree with many of the points therein, though they differ from my own. My only real problem with the Goat case is that he doesn't seem to have any doubt, which is unsettling but may be a function of his playstyle.

Anyway... here's what I thought about #311...

Yes I feel the heat of beign suspected by a lot of people. I can only ask that I be given benefit of the doubt, like really really give me benefit of the doubt.

What heat were you referring to? Besides not having any votes on back then, you do know how many votes it will take today to lynch? With 12 alive it's 7 to lynch unless I'm mistaken.

And once someone is at L-2 and L-1 every rational townie will discuss thoroughly because a fast hammer is scummy. You have no reason to act this way, but I'd like an explanation.

I'm glad habit answered this first, because I didn't want to offer the defense to him. Habit was caught up in a gear change. My case came for odd reasons (to offer Cass a read of me) and therefore was sudden. Other sudden suspicion fell upon him. There were no votes but there was a good deal of pressure.

His reaction is fitting for someone who is used to getting himself killed D1.

Also what benefit of the doubt? That you don't think before you type because you've said its stupidity? That you're inexperienced? That you're not experienced with your role?

This picks up the unreasonable argument Andy already questioned and runs with it: whether a player is new to the game or to the role. The hole in the argument is that a player with experience as town will play better as scum.

The quote also contains unecesarry ad hom aimed at a player who was already against the ropes a few votes ago. Intended to draw further emotional outbursts? Maybe.

Honestly, can I redo with a clean slate? I wish I never posted anything now.

Now it's much better to get everything out in the open and try to fix yourself up. Be honest and clearly outline your opinions of me and the rest.

Maybe outline like nureins and Ythill did

if you think I've been overlooked. I have nothing to hide, do you?

I very much dislike the way Jah is attacking a player who is apparently unskilled while complimenting some of us who have argued strongly. There was no linguistuc reason to name examples. It sounds like positioning to me.

Not only am I going on a rave, I think that if I just let everything go, then maybe you will see me better.

This post certainly changed my position of you, yes.

Vote: habitang

This statement is very empty. Its tone says that Jah caught on to some really convincing evidence, but the case he gives amounts to very little and all of it full of holes. Jah has shown himself to be intelligent and perceptive. Why would such minor evidence change his mind so strongly?

I think what happened is that a skilled mafioso saw the town pushing his only attacker toward the noose, got cocky, and slipped up.

vote: Jahudo

[Ythill]

I'm curious as to why you are unsettled by what you perceive to be a lack of doubt in my thoughts about Jahudo.

Please realize that "unsettling" was meant to indicate

mild

suspicion. I did explain that your lack of doubt

might

be a facet of playstyle and I am voting the target of your attack.

Basically, I'm noting the lack of doubt as something that may be revealing. If I have more cause to suspect you later, I'll do the meta to check out this lead.

That said, I will explain... Your case was sort of a PbPA in that it extensively analyzed many of Jah's posts by number. Now, if you look back at my own PbPA on nuriens, you will see that, even though I was pretty convinced he was scum, I noted some townie and null moments from his play. I did this because, as you said, there is always some doubt and I'd rather entertain discussion about that doubt than let an aggressive attack push a possible townie to the noose.

You are experienced enough to know, as I do, that an attack of this nature can sway people pretty effectively.

Now, knowing that I had decided Jah was probably town, there are obviously some tells (IMO) leading to that conclusion. Though it's possible you missed them, the theory here is that you ignored them, posting only what you found scummy. This seems like a dangerous tactic for a townie to employ, but would suit scummy purposes.

However, I know that some players purposely avoid explicit doubt in posting a case and, if you are one of those players, then this is only a null-tell.

And now, after habit stops pointing to jahudo ythill joins you.

What does the former have to do with the latter?

In my defense, I had stated suspicions of #311 (which was the only subject of my case) before Goat voted Jah. I had said that I was waiting for habit to answer #311 before I explained myself and, during the interim between that statement and my case, habit had done so.

Someone that is going down in my vibes but yet high (answering to ythill, I have not completely changed my view, "my buddy", I read your posts as more townie later, that is different...)

It's still a gear change but, like I said, we should let it slide because,

if

you are town, defending yourself here will give the scum too much information about how to deceive you.

My main concern with this quote is "my buddy." This is not the first time you've mentioned your own buddying, which has the potential to create confusion and mislynches later in the game. I've seen several scum use this tactic but I've never seen a townie do it.

[Ythill]

I put this in a separate post because it's important and I didn't want it to get lost in the above.

Jah should be given time to respond to cases posted by myself and Goat before more evidence is brought against him. There's already an overwhelming amount of information for him to address and I'd rather not make it worse, in case he is town.

[Ythill]

Do not start to see ghosts around again... do not focus so forcedly in an expression...

Are these threats? I don't intend to alter my play in any way so as to avoid your suspicions. You were wrong about my alignment and I will not consider it the fault of my play if you continue to mistake me for scum.

That said, I understand the "former vs. latter" situation now, so thanks for explaining. I thought you had been insinuating that the timing of my actions were somehow based on habit's but I see that I had simply misread your meaning.

I too saw Jah as town before #311 but, reading Goat's case, I also see that there are things I missed.

[Ythill]

@ Jah: You didn't answer my points about the ad hom, the weak arguments, or the unreasonable difference between the tone of your vote and the evidence leading to it in #311.

Now Ythill also answered correctly, as he realized he misunderstood again and didnt doubt to admit it to someone with whom he had a fierce debate...

Not to argue against myself but I've done this a fair amount as scum as well, so it's really a null-tell. I'm always willing to admit when I'm wrong, which should tell you (and others) something about the earlier argument between you and I, where I didn't admit such things.

...he started the mail asking if I was threating him for pointing him out that he was seeing ghosts again...

You were not "pointing out" that I was seeing ghosts (or focusing too strongly on a single statement), you told me not to do those things, which is different. Telling somebody not to do something can imply consequences. I was asking if that was what you meant... as well as telling you that no concequence you could offer would cause me to abandon what I see as optimal play.

Though I still haven't done my reread, I'm going to change my explicit suspect list to: Jah, nuriens, & Cass. Still not sure about habit's alignment but the actions around his wagon have cleared him enough to bump him out of the top three.

[Ythill]

I don’t catch how Andy’s suspicions addressed habit’s appeal to inexperience.

I never said that they did. I said that Andy had discredited the

inexepienced player vs. inexperienced scum

argument. He did so while talking about nuriens...

That theory about him being an experienced-player-but-first-time-scum doesn't make any sense. An experienced player would know a better approach to the game, both as scum and town (even more, if person X has been protown a long time, he knows how to think protown)

What I meant towards habit was: what doubt should we have that your post is from a frustrated townie or scum, that we should draw a conclusion from it and, if not, what are we overlooking?

But that's not what you said. You gave three examples of potential reasons we should give habit the benefit of the doubt. The only one that assumed he was scum (which seemed to be your opinion of him) suggested that he was inexperienced with his role and was posted as opposed to him being inexperienced altogether.

Please explain how the sentiment posted in #311 and your new rewording equate.

My point was that the argument had already been discredited. You didn't address that and therefore the argument was weak. I don't believe that a weak argument is scummy in and of itself, but when a vote change and opinion change are accompanied by only a few weak arguments from an intelligent player, it rings bells.

I look forward to your synopsis of suspicions (and, probably, to picking them apart).

[Ythill]

Nuriens, you roll too easily.

Jah claims, in defending against you, that he thinks habit is semi-experienced. Then he argues against me that habit obviously hasn't learned from his measly four games. Jah's playing both sides of the coin when it suits him.

Furthermore, faced with his decisive vote and weak case, he continues to back off from his surety. I've heard the "it was just for pressure" story before and my question is always the same.

@ Jah: If yours was a pressure vote, why did you bother pretending you had a case?

Also, welcome Karne. Enjoy your read, I look forward to seeing your opinions.

[Ythill]

@nuriens: The question is pointless because you've answered it with the quote you've given. Calling somebody "more experienced than others here and still learning aspects of the game" is calling them semi-experienced.

But, more than the words, look at the angle of each argument. To paraphrase...

Q: Is habit a weak player?
A: No. He's semi-experienced and as good as I.
Q: Isn't it true that experience as town would be the same as experience as scum?
A: No. Habit should have learned to be more pro-town but it looks like he hasn't.

Welcome sirdan.

[Ythill]

@nuriens: The question is pointless because you've answered it with the quote you've given. Calling somebody "more experienced than others here and still learning aspects of the game" is calling them semi-experienced.

Are you serious ?
He said "more inexperienced" not more experienced...

Uh... yes I was serious but you are right that I misread what Jah had written. Perhaps because of the way he uses the argument in saying that habit is not a weak player. I guess the context threw me off.

So my two-sides-of-the-coin argument is somewhat invalidated. However, I do find Jah's response to that argument a little odd, knowing now that I had simply misread what he meant.

Nor do I like nuriens' coaching in #413.

Now, I’ve felt that these are not great scum tells if you still think Habit is less experienced at the slow flow of these games and his impatience is the cause of these problems.

The question here is what

you

think. Habit is not a weak player? Habit is inexperienced? Habit is scummy? Habit is just a n00b? I am honstly confused as to your opinion.

Out of nhats / Simenon / Andy’s votes before me, only Andy really gave support to his vote for habit as scum beyond the fake uncalled-for-ness.

Which makes your vote less scummy how? I'd rather someone post "habit is obvscum" then try to make a weak case sound plausible. The former is lazy. The latter is scummy.

Answer to Jah's mass question: I agree with some of your points, where they correspond to what I've already said about habit. It was not his #306 that cleared him a bit in my mind but, rather, some of the reactions to it... including yours.

Question for Jah: If it is true that you refrained from posting your pre-306 case in #311 because you feared habit wouldn't read it, then why do you explicitly say (in #311) that #306 changed your view of him? I seriously smell a rat here.

[Ythill]

The question here is what

you

think. Habit is not a weak player? Habit is inexperienced? Habit is scummy? Habit is just a n00b? I am honstly confused as to your opinion.

Of course this is an interesting question. That I already answered when I commented Jahudo's case in a long post. If you make me to repeat everybody is gonna hate me

The question was directed at Jah.

Nuriens is actually seeming a little more townie to me these days, though I don't know if it's because I'm getting a clearer read on him or because he's being more careful.

Good points (in #411) about sirdan's positioning. I'm looking forward to sirdan's response.

Still comfortable with my vote on Jah.

[Ythill]

Good points (in #411) about sirdan's positioning. I'm looking forward to sirdan's response.

huh? That post is Jahudo's case on habitang.

EBWOP: #441 rather than #411. Typo.

I've noting that sirdan's response was something like "nuh-uh, look what I said".

[Ythill]

THank you, habit. Somebody needed to say something. Let's put the conspiracy evidence on hold until we have a confirmed alignment to work with.

[Ythill]

As for what I think, I have said that inexperience could explain impatience because people who have played more games should be used to playing longer days.

This is neither a stance nor a solid opinion about habit's alignment. Why so slippery?

Question for Jah: If it is true that you refrained from posting your pre-306 case in #311 because you feared habit wouldn't read it, then why do you explicitly say (in #311) that #306 changed your view of him? I seriously smell a rat here.

Since I said that post 311 was not to lynch but to question, I saw it as a starting place from where the case would be given to habit after he answered my question on using a logical fallacy.

I don't see how your answer addresses my concern. Maybe I'm just being dense, but here's the contradiction I'm talking about. This...

This post certainly changed my position of you, yes.

Vote: habitang

...followed shortly thereafter by a long PbPA which identifies habit's scumtells from earlier than his #306, followed by this...

My vote did not explain all my suspicions on habit but it would have been as long as my recent defenses if I had, and some people (habit) would have ignored them for aversion to long posts.

The problem is that you said #306 changed your mind. Then, later, you said that you had a large case at that time, much of which was based on posts before #306. So which was it? Did #306 change your mind or not? It can't be both.

Explain why you've claimed it's both.

[Ythill]

Quick post before work...

I don't agree with any of the case against Goat and I believe it may be more damning as evidence against sirdan, though I'll have to see some more of his play before I decide if it's a reliable scumtell.

@Nureins: I would very much prefer if you didn't defend other players before giving them a chance to defend themselves.

100% QFT. I don't think defending another player is scummy, or even anti-town. But defending that player before he defends himself is certainly the latter.

Also, nuriens, just wanted to tell you that in English "going down on" is slang for "performing oral sex on." So when you keep repeating that I'm going down on your scum meter... well...

[Ythill]

Sirdan is seeming a little slippery to me.

Karne seems solid which is odd, because Matin was on my suspect list. I'm looking forward to reading more from him.

306 changed the way I looked at habit from 288 and I needed to re-examine his posts like he was a different person...

When did you perform that reread? Reference to either date and time or post # is sufficient.

[Ythill]

"Slippery", in my vernacular, refers generally to arguing in a way that is indecisive or indirect. It is a vague term and for that I apologize.

An example of the former sense (context used in #458):

Player X is scummy because he did these things but I've seen him do them as town in other games, so either he's town here or he is skilled scum playing the meta game.

Some example of the latter sense (context used in #481): arguing around an accusation by pretending ignorance, making a weak case against someone and then calling him defensive for defending himself, making an argument that ignores previously raised counter-points, etc.

In the case of sirdan, stating that he seems "a little slippery" refers to his general argument style. A few examples include: the way he discussed the simplification issue with nuriens, the shifting appeal to Goat's experience, and his failure to understand a very simple and obvious point I made about his defense. I don't know if these issues are a factor of his playstyle or alignment, but I figured I'd mention the impression so as to keep my opinion transparent.

@sirdan: Look back at my scum-list, votes, and cases. Rest assured that if I vote for you or push you toward the noose, I will do so with an evidence-based case that gives you something to defend against. However, if I did so for every minor shift in opinion, my posts would become (even more) tiresome to read. In most cases, I'm willing to elaborate if asked to do so.

THank you, habit. Somebody needed to say something. Let's put the conspiracy evidence on hold until we have a confirmed alignment to work with.

This gave me a bad vibe. I think it's the "somebody needed to say something" bit. What prevented you from saying something?

I don't see what's odd about this. I'd already made my opinion about conspiracy evidence clear in #101. When Karne first made mention of the possible pairing in #439, it was a brief point in a complex post and I simply let it slide because there were actual tells on my mind and I don't see the act of using on conspiracy evidence to be a scumtell, just unreliable.

Then, when Karne elaborated on the subject in #453, I read it and thought to myself,

He's going to keep pursuing this, I should probably reiterate my beliefs about such things.

But, before I posted, I read the rest of the thread and saw that habit had already schooled him. So, me thanking and agreeing with habit was simply a conversational lead in to restating my opinion.

[Ythill]

Okay Jah, I've considered your words carefully and I can certainly see you acting like you did from that point of view. I'm still pretty damned suspicious. I sort of feel like I cornered someone who has a silver tongue, but I don't really see so much of the case against you anymore.

I will be watching you closely.

For now, though, I'll

unvote; vote sirdanilot

for the previously stated reasons. Let me know if you want quotes or explanations to go with my assertions.

[Ythill]

@sirdan: I'm leaving for work in a few minutes, so only have time for a short post right now. I

may

have time to post that case later today, but it's doubtful because Tuesday is poker night. I will definately have time tomorrow.

For now, I will say that one of the chief reasons I put my vote on you was that Jah has defended well against me and you are next in line for scrutiny. But I do have a case (it was eluded by a couple of my posts including the definition of "slippery") and I will post it as soon as I have time. Thanks for your patience.

[Ythill]

...you simply voted me after you shoved off Jahudo, like I was the next in line, and IIRC you hadn't even expressed a FoS on me.

You

were

next in line (I even said so). I don't like to leave my vote unused unless I have a good reason, and I

very

rarely FoS at all, because they are pointless.

Anyway… I finally got some time.

Sirdan’s first scummy moment comes across in #428, 434, & 437. The FoS on Sim has two motivating factors: “vibes” (which is really nothing) and telling someone to shut-up. Sim told nuriens to shut-up in response to what was a frustrating post in which nuriens made a ridiculous assertion (only scum get frustrated) and continued to call what Sim said about Pope a “defense” (which was the subject of an earlier argument). Sim’s seemed like a very natural reaction.

Saying it was simply “shut-up” takes it way out of context. Nuriens had said that Sim’s lack of comment on Jah’s case was a scumtell. To which Sim said (and I paraphrase): ask me what you want to know or stop calling it a scumtell.

So sirdan has placed a “Finger of Shame,” later transformed into a FoS without further motivation, for basically nothing. It had the tone of someone who wanted to adopt an air of authority.

Next came the “case” on Goat. Which boiled down to a (flawed) case against PbPAs, lurking, and changing gears (even though the gear change came between early- and mid-day, when the whole game is naturally shifting in intensity), as well as vague meta. He adds in the part about Goat’s experience level, like it has anything to do with his alignment, including this gem:

Secondly, he knows that he has to add some pro-town bits (with that I mean something like: '#x - good post, town tell'), and he did.

…which is funny, because the

only

thing I found suspicious about Goat’s play was that he

didn’t include any “pro-town bits”

, which I asked him about, and he replied to. No idea where sirdan got this idea but it’s completely off base.

Anyway… much of this could be seen as bad, rather than scummy, play. Then comes nuriens simplification which I found decently accurate. It did rip out some of the rhetoric (example: it called tunnel-vision and out-of-context scumtells rather than alluding to them as such by calling the PbPA process scummy from an experienced player), but was also pretty fair. Sirdan’s reaction to it is where I started to see the warning signs.

Basically, sirdan reiterated, solidifying the claim that Goat is so experienced we can’t believe any town read on him. So experienced, in fact, that meaningful scumhunting techniques are mere scumtells from him. He answers a couple of nuriens’ accusations with no-I-didn’t (which isn’t scummy, but isn’t a proper defense either) and then, unexpectedly, accuses nuriens of “manipulating [his] posts.”

This even though nuriens explicitly said he was simplifying for clarity, politely invited corrections, is more likely than most (due to language barrier) to accidentally misinterpret, and (most importantly) did a pretty good job of representing the bullet-points of the case.

This is followed by Goat posting a very good defense to the meta accusation which was IMO the only (barely) valid point of sirdan’s case. Now, I’d expect a townie to rethink himself when faced with such a defense but sirdan just blows it off, claiming that it is still

possible

that Goat is scum and then going on to argue things like: Goat is scum because he did something that Goat might have done if he was scum, and Goat is scum because he’s good enough that there’s no way we can tell if he’s scum or not.

He also slips around the spot where I called him on his weak defenses by pretending not to understand. He uses this same technique when nuriens improperly uses the word “collaborating,” thereby ignoring the rest of the point.

This slippery argument style continues, allowing him to ignore some very good points that nuriens made (why is Goat’s lurking notable while others’ worse lurking is not, open tunnel-vision is not anti-town). And, in the next post, dodges nuriens defense of simplification by answering that whole point with annoyance at the word “essence.”

Concerning “random thing” and whether or not sirdan assumed that Goat was scum (which I saw solid evidence of), sirdan’s counterpoint amounts to

I never said that

which is him using the outs left by his slippery argument style. For example, one who posts a “case,” argues against simplification of that case, resimplifies it himself, and then adds to it can be fairly said to have demonstrated an opinion. However, sirdan believes that because he never actually said the words “Goat is scum”, he can escape that opinion when it suits him. Scumtells 101.

[Ythill]

Since my point was that the "shut up" was natural, I saw no reason to go back further than the last frustrating post. I am not denying that Sim was already somewhat frustrated with you when that post was made, just saying that it escalated him enough to make the "shut up" seem in character.

FTR, and I don't know if I already said this or just meant to... the problem with you (nuriens) is not your habit of defending others but the fact that you do so

before they defend themselves

which gives people way too many outs if they are scum. On that subject, I agree with Sim.

I don't think this aspect of your behavior is a scumtell, just inexperience.

[Ythill]

@nuriens: LOL. At first I had attributed it all to Goat. Then, before posting, I realized that Sim had said the first part. Then I changed both names to Sim. Sorry I got confused. The real point I was making was about the timing of your defenses, irrespective of who it was I was agreeing with. Understand?

@everyone: Sorry about the wordiness below. Such is needed to combat slippery scum.

So you had me next in line, however, you did not have any reason to before you posted this post.

Bullshit. I had already posted reasons in #493, and cited them with my vote. Stop lying, scum.

Also, why are FoSes pointless? Do you not think it helps the town to know who you suspect? Do you prefer to keep that completely hidden to the town? How is this helpful to the town?

These questions are asinine. It's been clear all along whom I suspect. I don't need to use bolded pop-culture to demonstrate that, and you can meta me to see that I am being honest.

(1) How was that post scummy? (2) Do you think that mentioning scummy vibes is scummy, even while I was reading the game? (3) Do you not think this is helpful to the town?

(1) It was scummy in context with your other play because the level of explicit suspicion does not match your reasons, relative with your other attacks.

(2) No, I do not. Nor did I claim that it was, except in conjunction with other aspects of your play.

(3) No, it is not, except that, like any other baseless assertion, it marks your opinion (pretended or otherwise). But whether or not it was helpful to the town was not why I found it scummy.

(1) You think it's natural to tell someone to shut up in a mafia game? (2) Do you think it's pro-town to tell someone to shut up?

(1) Yes, in this instance. (2) Yes, in certain circumstances, including this one.

Nice job of playing dumb to overlook what was actually wrong with your attack here.

(1) Without further motivation? You conveniently ignore that I was still reading the game at that time, and in that last post where I FoSed Simenon, I had finished. (2) Is it not natural for me to make up the balance and FoS the player I found suspicious?

(1) I didn't conveniently ignore anything. You didn't state any new reasons when you upgraded to a FoS.

(2) Sure it's natural. Is it natural to place a two-part FoS in response to "vibes" and a null-tell and then lead an inquisition against a different player without placing a FoS or vote? No, it isn't.

Why was that 'pretty fair'? Was it fair for him to manipulate my words?

(1) I explained why. Stop pretending you can't read.

(2) He didn't manipulate anything. He simplified by removing your own misleading rhetoric. And said he was doing so. And invited you to correct him. You are the manipulator here.

(1) What do you mean, ''no I didn't' isn't a defense'? (2) I actually didn't say some of those things. (3) How do you expect me to defend myself against something I didn't do?

(1) Just what I said. See below.

(2) The accusations had to do with motive, not statements. See below.

(3) A motive defense should at least attempt to explain why your stated motive was more likely than your accuser's suggested motive. See below.

"No, that's not true, I don't post a case to satisfy people, I post a case because I am suspecting them. And I stated why I fosed simenon." Here you might have elaborated on your crap reasons for suspecting Sim. You might have pointed to previously stated susppicions that didn't fit with nuriens' theory (except that there weren't any), etc. You didn't.

"No, I didn't postpone it, I didn't even notice the request until I started writing this very post. Anyway, it's above." Here you might have explained what caused you to miss the request or given a more elaborate explanation about why you felt it unimportant to talk about your predecessor. But you didn't.

To reiterate: I don't think your statements here are scumtells but I also don't think that they do anything at all to invalidate nuriens' accusations.

That's just WIFOM.

You obviously don't know what WIFOM means (or are pretending the same).

I don't 'slip around' things, if I don't understand something it means you have to reword it, and not ignore it and use it in an argument against me later on. That is not protown, and you know what, I even think that's a scummy technique.

Here’s another example of the no-I-didn’t defense. Here it is used to claim that you don’t slip around things, two thirds of the way down a post in which you do nothing but slip around things.

Your only defense up to this point has been to say that one of my attacks is scummy.

I made sure not to base my case off the assumption he's scum...

Yet another example of the no-I-didn’t defense. Explain how your accusations against Goat (the points you are supposedly not avoiding) lead you from a neutral read on him to suspicion. Explain how claiming that

Goat’s experience level means he cannot be read as town for dropping towntells

does not assume that he is scum. Explain how the claim that

Goat is suspicious because he did something that he might have done as scum

does not assume that he is scum.

Note that I left some bits out, or that I did not comment on some, so don't go like 'OMG HE AVOIDED THAT', just properly ask me to comment on them.

Oh, I’ve noted it. And I’m sure others have too. You skipped over the meat of the entire case. You posted a bunch of questions designed to shed doubt on the case, and once claimed that an attack was scummy, but otherwise hardly defended yourself at all.

I see no need to chase you down on these points. You have proven my accusation about slippery arguing and have made me feel very good about my vote on you.

If you choose to go back and address the meat of the argument, I’ll certainly listen. Until then, I intend to nitpick and badger you and, eventually, see you hang because you are scum.

[Ythill]

Yes, I do see your point about Sim. I just feel that there isn't a lot of evidence against him and that there are bigger fish to fry.

Sirdan-scum and chips, anyone?

[Ythill]

Hahahaha. Whatever, scum.

[Ythill]

Hahahaha. Whatever, scum.

That is awful, Ythill. Even if you are town, that is really anti-town as you make your arguments weaker with that attitude...

There's nothing anti-town about badgering someone. Remind me after the game and I'll even tell you what's protown about it.

I've shown my case and I've already answered a whole slew of slippery questions about it. I'm not going to fill the thread with meaningless debate over details that sirdan is going to keep sidestepping.

You've first hand experience with my badgering, but it came out alright in the end, didn't it?

[Ythill]

@nuriens: I was talking about my read on you, not the other way around.

[Ythill]

vote Ythill

Is there anyone that didn't see this coming?

And now you are refusing to continue the debate, thereby not giving me any chance to defend?

I've given you every chance to defend yourself, scum. I'm continuing to give you that chance. What I'm not doing is participating in your side-stepping game. I made my case, and I answered the questions you had about it. I've already demonstrated a propensity to consider and accept valid defenses. You haven't made any.

That's your choice. Not mine.

Also, the fact that you were town and something worked in another game doesn't mean you can do it now, that's just such a wrong attitude. Nureins probably knows what game you're referring to, and you're trying to manipulate him with something like 'I was town then, and it worked, so just trust me now mkay?'

If you were reading this game (townie) rather than skimming it (scummy), you'd know that I was talking about my history with nuriens in

this game

, wouldn't you?

Jahudo, Citizen Karne, what do you guys think...

When the heat goes up, the gambits begin. Do you already feel so doomed that you need to set up red herrings for after your death?

[Ythill]

Sure. I was suggesting that after he dies and card-flips scum, sirdan is hoping that we'll see Jah and Karne as his buddies. It would be a beautiful WIFOM game if one of them actually was, but I'm not sure he's that complex of a player and I'll leave that sort of examination for after he's dead.

Good catch on the duality of his relative evidence, nuriens. It's the same story when comparing his suspicions on Goat vs. those on Sim, but even more pronounced when you look at me vs. Goat.

Since sirdan is not defending himself, does anyone else have a compelling case for him being town?

[Ythill]

Are you so sure about sirdan?

Nothing is certain in mafia, especially on D1. But the day must end with a lynch. I'd rather engineer it myself, knowing my own alignment, then leave it for the mafia to engineer.

[Ythill]

Again, I don't see how quoting me as 'sirdan-scum' is witty or helpful at all, so stop doing it.

Was that a shut up?

Define my 'side stepping game'.

Already have. More than once.

I am defending myself against your case, and even if you do think that my defense isn't good, why don't you reply to it?

If your defense was valid, I wouldn't need to reply to it. Except to say something like, "well, that makes sense."

I posted a case. You did nothing but ask a bunch of inane questions and pretend to not understand. I answered all of your points. After which you asked more inane questions and continued to pretend to not understand. At least the second time you argued some points, but they were points that had nothing to do with my case. For example, you answered an obvious paraphrase (which was neither in block quotes nor quotation marks) by claiming that you'd never said those things. No shit, Sherlock.

It doesn't take a psycic to know where this is going.

How is it anti-town to do that?

How is it anti-town to allow scum to control the argument, make it pointless, and fill up the thread with garbage? Are you serious?

You're assuming that I'm scum...

No. First I suspected that you were scum. Then I read your reactions and became more convinced that you are scum. Now I am treating you as if you are scum, and your reactions have embroiled you even further.

You're going to hang, sirdan. You've failed your buddies. For them, shouldn't you at least try to defend yourself? I'll make it easier for you...

Why would a townie upgrade a Finger of Shame to a Finger of Suspicion without any new evidence?

Why would a townie place a Finger of Suspicion on someone who hasn't dropped scumtells while giving no such notation about somone on whom he'd presented and defended a complicated case?

What would a townie be trying to accomplish by raising multiple case points that assume the target of that case is scum? Don't try to say you didn't. We all know that you did.

Why would a townie argue semantics and minor points, thereby ignoring major points made against him?

Why would a townie vehemently argue against another townie for summarizing by removing rhetoric from his case?

[Ythill]

Cross-posted. So...

Prove this claim.

The proof is all here in the thread.

Why goat's lurking was notable? You're just reversing things here. Why is Goat's lurking any less worse when there are big lurkers around?

More slippery argument. Read what I wrote, which was "why is Goat’s lurking notable while others’ worse lurking is not."

The point was not that Goat's lurking was okay. It was that you found Goat's lurking noteworthy but didn't find others' worse lurking noteworthy, which suggests ulterior motives, which tells us that you are scum.

The only way to back it up is by replying to my defense!

Post one and I will. I've even gone so far as to ask others to defend you. Still waiting.

nuriens' posting strategy:
Make bad argument.
Respond to contrary opinion by repeating the bad argument.
Respond to contrary opinion by repeating the bad argument.
Respond to contrary opinion by repeating the bad argument.
Respond to contrary opinion by repeating the bad argument.
Accuse poster of contrary opinion of repeating himself.
Respond to contrary opinion by repeating the bad argument.
Respond to contrary opinion by repeating the bad argument.
Accuse poster of contrary opinion of not reading nurien's posts "all along" and of repeating himself.

Which is exactly what sirdan's posting strategy will do to the appearance of an opponent who engages him in his silly game. Do you really not see that?

[Ythill]

obviously obviates

That made me smile.

You're right that I didn't take the same tone with Jah, the difference was in your arguments. His responses were entirely reasonable and there was no need to go there (much). Your defenses centered around reflected suspicion so I badgered you until I had a good read. I also think that the language barrier made your points harder to understand until I got used to your "accent".

[Ythill]

Well, in my opinion those were not just minor discrepancies.

Establishing that personal opinion is a valid argument in mafia? Okay. In my opinion you are scum.

...acting like a scummy prick.

So the ad hominem begins. This was as predictable as your OMGUS vote. IME, there's a way that slippery scum act when they are pushed against the ropes, and this is the next step.

I have no idea what 'inane' means.

You're sitting at a computer. Look it up.

What is the obvious paraphrase you're referring to, the one with the two italicized sentences?

Yes.

If that was paraphrased, that part of your case is completely void.

Nice try. Paraphrasing is a completely valid form of argument. It only becomes invalid if you can show, definitively, how the paraphrase misread or misinterpreted your actions. Which you haven't.

Just because I'm in a pleasant mood, and I want people to see how scummy you've been, I'm going to go ahead and re-explain this part to you. Don't get used to it. Pretending you have comprehension problems will not save you.

1. What I said:

Goat’s experience level means he cannot be read as town for dropping towntells

, which was in reference to two statements from my initial case (#517): “Basically, sirdan reiterated, solidifying the claim that Goat is so experienced we can’t believe any town read on him,” and, “Now, I’d expect a townie to rethink himself when faced with such a defense but sirdan just blows it off, claiming that it is still possible that Goat is scum and then going on to argue things like... Goat is scum because he’s good enough that there’s no way we can tell if he’s scum or not.”

My first statement referenced both #437 (“Goatrevolt is a skilled player. Firstly, he has the ability to make the PBPA so that it looks (and, to some extent, is) sophisticated, thought out well and not just thrown together.”) and #444 (“Sophistication is not a scum tell, it's there to prove that Goatrevolt is a skilled and experienced player, so things perceived as town tells by you are not necessarily just that.”).

2. What I said:

Goat is suspicious because he did something that he might have done as scum…

, which was in reference to the following statement from my initial case (#517): “Goat is scum because he did something that Goat might have done if he was scum.”

This statement was, of course, inspired by your #463 (“People were starting to suspect Goat for not participating, so he might have wanted to suddenly participate more, and you know that scum are paranoid.”).

The ironic part is that, in rereading to find those quotes, I found more evidence against you. I’ll post it below.

No, how is it anti-town to allow someone who is accused to defend themselves?

I'm only going to say this one more time. I'm giving you the chance to defend yourself. I am not giving you the chance to smokescreen with garbage.

And, quantity=/= quality.

I addressed the quality issue at length. See, this is how slippery arguing works. Sirdan-scum posts explicit suspicions that do not match his stated evidence (serious scumtell); Ythill points this out, addressing the quality and quantity of sirdan-scum's evidence; sirdan-scum blathers around the accusation, pretending not to understand it; Ythill simplifies the accusation, addressing only quantity; sirdan-scum then argues that it was the quality of the evidence, not the quantity, which motivated him.

Anybody with a sixth grade reading level can see what you're doing if they take the time to go back and read our argument.

Yes I am going to say I didn't do it, because I didn't.

You are lying. See above.

And you actually did do this yourself (sirdan-scum and chips anyone? you're going to hang, scum etc.).

What I did: suspect you, post evidence that has not been refuted, read your reactions to that evidence as scummy, come to the conclusion that you are scum, treat you as if you are scum.

What you did: seem like you suspect Goat; post unreliable evidence that was refuted by several players; make arguments that assume Goat's alignment, using them to back up your flawed case; claim that you never thought Goat was scum because you never said it; drop the subject.

I explained this point in an earlier post, and you did not reply to it. Because I properly defended myself when you brought up this accusation using a concrete case, you decided to bring it up abstractly?

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt here, because I may have missed a valid point in your mountains of bullshit. Quote your response or point me to it and I'll address it directly.

Because I feel he misinterpreted my case...

Again with the opinion. You might be of the opinion that you can fly, but I still wouldn't recommend jumping off a roof. You might think you have a decent vocabulary, but the fact is that you don’t. Etcetera.

Opinions don't mean squat. Nuriens' summary was a fair representation of your points when given in the context he gave it, and I explained why using

facts

. You haven't demonstrated otherwise.

[Ythill]

I have to say i don't see the case on Sirdan. His predecessors were pretty bad, but he seems to be acting like a townie. (A frustrated townie by now...) Mostly a gut feeling. But I have seen no scum-tells from him at all.

I asked for defenses. It's not enough to say "I don't see the case," please refute the points of the case.

Ythill is either scummy or a horribly tunnel-visioned townie..

False dichotomy. You neglected to mention: Ythill is a townie who has found scum.

Anyway... as promised...

5. A scum tell you did not include is that Goatrevolt lurks at times where it's convenient for him to do so.

The fact that you were very active as scum doesn't mean that you can lurk and look town, it's not simple like that.

Of course your lowered activity doesn't mean you're scum, but it reinforces the other points.

It's a scumtell before Goat responds. It's a scumtell after Goat responds. It's just a corraborating factor after it is questioned reasonably. Sirdan-scum's opinion does not change with the evidence but, rather, it changes with his position in the argument. Another reliable scumtell.

[Ythill]

LOL @ Sim.

Hey kids, no time for content today, probably not tomorrow either. Sorry... the usual Monday-Tuesday routine.

[Ythill]

How is that scummy, actually. Why can't you explain that by a townie who got a tad frustrated there and used a different word choice.

I've just seen scum do it more than town is all. I've seen a few really bad players do it as town, but you don't strike me as that bad of a player. Just scummy.

Do you say that you are only going to be pro-town as an exception to the rule?

Not quite. I say that I'm only going to repeat myself as an exception to the rule. There's enough people grumbling about long posts as it is. They can read the evidence I've already posted, and so can you.

I made one argument where I accidentally assumed his alignment, and I was wrong when I did it.

Well... see... at first you were saying that you didn't make any. And I was saying that you'd made a few. Now you're saying that you've only made one, while I'm still saying that you've made a few. So your story is changing but mine isn't. Interesting.

(1) Bolded part is an attack on me as a person. Sorry, but I don't tolerate that. (2) This is a game and my vocabulary doesn't matter at all in this game.

(3) And again you didn't reply to the point itself.

(1) My apologies. I was using in-game examples (inane, asinine, essence) to demonstrate how facts trump opinions. Didn't intend to do more than rattle you and gain information... won't go there again. You have a great command of English for someone who speaks it as a second language.

(2) Correct, but someone

pretending

a poor vocabulary to sidestep arguments is

very

relevant. It seems to me, now, that your lack of understanding was honest, at least in those three cases.

(3) I've already replied to the point. I addressed (factually) why nuriens' summary wasn't underhanded, and so did he. I'm not going through it again.

Now... on to other matters...

[Ythill]

To my detractors:

I understand completely. It is a natural instinct to see an adversarial player as being a "bad guy." However, is it a scumtell?

Consider the playstyles of TheStatusQuo, Oman, and vollkan: players I try to emulate on purpose, because they are effective scumhunters.

Consider the fact that adopting this style puts me in the limelight, makes me more responsible than others for a particular lynch, and sometimes rubs people the wrong way. Is it a safe play for scum? WIFOM says it can be, but only if I also do it as town, which makes it a null tell.

Consider who my targets have been. People favored for the noose by others? People at L-2 or L-3 where such a bold move might at least win a mislynch for my supposed mob? Not exactly. Every one of my attacks has started because of play that suggested an anti-town alignment, regardless of what others thought at the time. Every one of my reads has progressed based on new evidence that arises, irrespective of others' votes.

I also don't see how it's helpful or pro-town for YThill to repeatedly declare that the player he's attacking is scum.

Your lack of understanding has nothing to do with my alignment. The question is, can you see how it is helpful for anti-town Ythill?

It's an attempt to strengthen his argument by repetitious declaration and certainty in belief...

You are correct. See, I'm pretty sure sirdan is scum (I've said why) and I would like people to help me lynch him. Isn't it pro-town to try to lynch scum?

...and just serves to frustrate and confuse others.

Is it the attack-style, or the defense-style? I said that sirdan's case on you was contrived. Do you disagree? I said that his case on you was more detailed and reasonable (prima facie) that that on Sim, yet his FoS was on Sim, not you. Don't you find that odd as well? Etc.

Now I'm still saying those same things while adding "scum" to sirdan's name. I argue that it isn't confusing at all. You may find it frustrating, but that's a matter of personal taste.

[Ythill]

@ Goat:

Also, you dodged the initial question of "why is it helpful or pro-town."

I didn't dodge it. I turned it around on you. It isn't my job to prove that I'm town. The burden of proof lies with the accuser.

Yes, I can. Doing something like this can be used to manufacture additional suspicion on someone that isn't real.

Would you believe it if I only posted "sirdan-is-scum" without other evidence? Have I done so? Don't tell me about "can." Tell me about "did."

Yes, it is pro-town to try to lynch scum. Is it pro-town to try and lynch Ythill's target?

For Ythill, absolutely. You decide whether you agree with me.

Repitious declaration and certainty in belief do not make sirdanilot more likely to be scum. Nor are they meaningful whatsoever in determining whether or not he is scum.

I agree 100%. His actions (which I've noted) make him more likley to be scum. His habits in responding (which I've noted) are meaningful in determining whether he is scum. Repititious declaration and certainty in belief punctuate his slippery blather, reminding y'all of those actions and responses. Among other things.

So rather than merely present your points against sirdan and why you think that makes him scum...

I did that. First I attacked Pope a little. Then I came back to call sirdan slippery, then I explained why. Then I voted him, citing that explanation. Then I elaborated at his request. Then I answered 651248071249512487 questions that did nothing but distract from the case. Then he posted 8612481248651234 more and I decided it was time to stop being nice.

But don't take my word for it, go back and read it.

Aren't you doing the exact thing you grilled me about but to an even larger extent?

The phrase "grilled me" is misleading bombast. I mentioned it as a single point of doubt about your alignment, and it came with the qualifier "but may be a function of his playstyle." You know, like it is of mine.

Furthermore, when I spoke of your surety, it was about a PbPA which, in many instances, are a neutral examination of a player leading to a conclusion of alignment. Plus it was earlier in the day. Your surety was of a different context than my own.

@ Cass:

He never mentions Matin/Karne until this quote:

Karne seems solid which is odd, because Matin was on my suspect list.

Yet he never named Karne as such, must have been one of his unnamed suspects (very convenient to have some of those to later fall back on...)

Untrue. In post #215 I said, "Nuriens is still my PE#1. Matin and habit are looking suspicious to me." At the time, he was in my top three.

Of my interactions with sirdan you say, "I may dislike the style in which he attacks, but the case itself seems solid." Of sirdan, you say, "I find it hard to decide. Scum? Or frustrated and insecure town?" Please explain how both of these can be true.

[Ythill]

@ sirdan-scum:

In defining detract, you missed the archaic definition: “to speak ill of, belittle.” All I said was a variation of

to my accusers

. I’d advise against semantic arguments.

I am going to accuse you of cherry-picking here.

I’ve replied to what I found relevant. If I post enough to show that you are dishonest, then I’ve done my job. Here’s some more cherries for y’all…

You have failed to say why it is scummy in my case.

Lie.

In #595 I said, "I've seen a few really bad players do it as town, but you don't strike me as that bad of a player." Since you paraphrased this, you can’t plead ignorance here.

When you posted your case that was based on paraphrases, you did not make it clear that those were paraphrases...

Lie.

I refrained from placing the words in a block quote or quotation marks. I

did

post them in italics, which I've used to paraphrase before.

You only showed me one.

Lie.

I cited (and quoted) your #s 437, 444, & 463. I even separated them into two types of assumption (experience level means can’t be read as town, and did something he might have done as scum) which were numbered. This is all in my post #568, but was also repetition of things I’d already stated and explained. You quoted the cites from #568 so, again, you can’t plead ignorance.

No, you only said that what he did was fair and that you thought it was pro-town of him.

Lie.

In #517 I said, “It did rip out some of the rhetoric (example: it called tunnel-vision and out-of-context scumtells rather than alluding to them as such by calling the PbPA process scummy from an experienced player), but was also pretty fair.” Which I repeated and expanded on in #529 when I said, “He didn't manipulate anything. He simplified by removing your own misleading rhetoric. And said he was doing so. And invited you to correct him.” You even quoted me saying this in #532, so you can’t plead ignorance this time either.

Seriously people… why are more of you not on this wagon?

[Ythill]

See, Sim? Now he's doing it to you.

[Ythill]

A serious question, Ythill. Do you think something else can be extracted from your (our) conversation with Sirdan?

Sorry man, I don't understand what you're asking. Could you rephrase?

I agree that it's time for everyone to list their suspects. The reason? The thread is getting loaded down with info and I feel like we should be moving towards a lynch before the mod deadlines us. So I'd like to start talking about consensus.

Obviously, sirdan is my top pick. Seems like a lot of people don't support that (even though nobody has actually defended him, as requested) so I feel like I might have to compromise. Which is okay. There's always future days for lynching sirdan-scum and I feel that it is equally likely to happen whether I live or die tonight.

I've performed a pretty thorough examination of nuriens and Jah. The former, I believe, is n00b town and I'd rather not hang him. The latter seemed to clear himself but I'm still wary of him. I'd be okay with a Jah lynch if none of my other choices was viable, but I will not advocate it.

My other suspects are somewhat minor. Both Cass and nhat have struck me as scummy from time to time. Matin is also pretty high on my list, though my initial impression of Karne cleared him somewhat. I believe I'd be willing to compromise-lynch any of these three, but I'd have to reread before actually placing my vote.

Pacman (habit) would be an excellent information lynch, but I don't really find him very scummy. I might be tempted to hammer this guy if no better options were available but, again, that would depend on the situation at the time.

On everyone else I have either a null or town read ATM, and I'd probably argue against lynching any of them them unless one of them drops a smoking gun or some such thing.

[Ythill]

Sure, my english is not so bad. The previous post was a quick one. Do you really think your wagon on sirdan can produce new interesting output?

I still don't quite understand. Are you asking whether it has information potential? Well, not as much as some others' would, but I'd still rather have dead scum than information. Besides, there would have to be a lot more votes to lynch him, which would most likley increase the information potential.

If that isn't what you're asking... then... um... try again?

So I tried to wonder who your top were, to analyze easily the votes and suspicions of everybody. And I got lost.

They weren't meant to be in any sort of order, except that sirdan-scum is my PE#1. If asked to order them, I'd have a hard time of it. Pacman would be at the bottom, vying with Jah for last place. Of the other three...

...I don't know. Like I said, I'd have to reread before I voted any of them. Off the cuff I'd probably put Karne as my PE#2, then Cass, then nhat but that's from my overall impressions, I haven't done much research on any of them.

[Ythill]

Yeah. I mean, for a guy that claims to not be slippery, that's a whole lot of

Argue like I tell you to or you are obv-scum and I'm not talking to you anymore.

Seriously guys, sirdan is the play. I don't see what's so obscure about that.

[Ythill]

What was "Hahahaha. Whatever, scum."

That was simply

you are obv-scum

, with a little bit of

your last post confirms my view

.

[Ythill]

As for talking about the lynch...

It seems you have only listed those whom are not your lynch candidates but are close. Do you have any candidates? Who are they?

With the whole sirdan v. Ythill issue, I found Ythill's approach fair but I can't decide who is right. I really need to sit down and go through it piece by piece.

Please do. I'll gladly answer reasonable questions.

I'm also not sure what all this compromise on people you don't think are scummy is.

My part in this is Pacman and it's really quite simple. I'd rather not lynch Pacman. However, if the choice came down to hanging him, hanging one of the five I've not listed, or going no-lynch, I'd hammer Pacman. The reason? His wagon has great information potential if his card is flipped. Plus the second wagon would offer more information.

In short, I'm not willing to no-lynch and I'd rather risk a mislynch that provides good information than risk one that doesn't. Of course in an ideal world, we'd just hang sirdan and none of this would matter.

[Ythill]

I find pretty funny that some people use NOW your aggressive style. That was pretty obvious from our goebels-scum vis a vis, dont you think? Im sure there is something there to be explored, though probably some info is needed before...

Another good catch. I'll appreciate your help looking into this on future days if you are still alive. Also, this facet is another decent reason to hang sirdan.

[Ythill]

I meant that Ythill said that a wagon on me would be "informative". He must explain it.

No problem.

First, I'd ask Jah to stop answering questions posed to others until after the recipient has answered. That said, he has made a decent guess at what I meant, which is...

Habit seemed scummy to me in the early game. While my vote was on nuriens, Cass asked me to post a case on another of my candidates so that she could get a read on me. I chose habit. Immediately following my case, a few people attacked habit without voting him. If you are confirmed town, the actions of these folks could have been an attepmt to mislynch habit or steer attention away from nuriens (or someone else, I'd have to reread to tell you).

Habit felt the pressure of the attacks and appeared to crack. This drew votes, some of them suspect, and a wagon built on him quickly. If you are confirmed town, an analysis of when and how people jumped on that wagon will reveal scumtells. If you are confirmed scum, it will be interesting to look for signs of the bus or to examine the people that worked against your lynch.

The wagon stagnated quickly, and suspicion was thrown back onto it. I selected Jah as a good candidtae for further investigation and spent some time attacking him. As I did, the habit wagon evaporated. If you are confirmed town, the speed and timing of the unvotes (compared with the votes themselves and the arguments in between) will be very revealing. If you are confirmed scum, I would look for people who manipulated the evaporation of that wagon.

Furthermore, lynching you would take a substantial number of new votes, which would be very likley to offer some of the same clues about the alignments of people who push for your death, quietly ride the bandwagon, or work to avoid it.

Again, I am not advocating your lynch. We are speaking of consensus and compromise and I have simply been transparent with my thoughts. I am not sure you are town. If I was, no amount of information potential could tempt me to vote for you. And there are at least four (possibly five) peole I'd rather lynch. But, if it came down to the choices I mentioned earlier, I'd vote for you.

Also, realize that there are other ways to confirm your alignment. We would get the same benefits from a sane cop investigation, confirmed mason claim, vig kill, other NK, etc. Which is another reason I am not advocating your lynch.

Unfortunately, I'm not habitang.

I think you misunderstand. Nobody has asked you to answer for habit's actions. The potential information to be gained from your reveal has more to do with others' actions.

[Ythill]

On sirdan's meta read of me: For the most part, it sounds like an honest analysis. Maybe he's starting to feel the pressure. Anyway, I'm only discussing what I disagree with...

Now, I didn't read into that other player that much so I'm not sure if he really offended him, but this does remind me of something with pot, kettle, black...

He spent entire posts arguing that I was a prick and an asshole and hardly mentioning my alignment. Honestly, I'm surprised he wasn't modkilled.

Anyway, every single post of his is absolutely humongous (as in, really really big) so I'm not too sure what to think of that.

I've learned to trim them down a bit. For aggression, check out my arguments with Northjayhawk and Incognito. This was my first real game, and where I started to learn how scum react to aggression (Northjayhawk was scum).

In this game you can also see my habit of selecting a single target and attacking him until I get a read. I've done this to varying degrees over my games, but it's a common theme regardless of my alignment.

Not very aggressive imo.

I beg to differ. Though I hadn't learned the badgering technique yet, check out my arguments with vollkan and Justin Playfair.

He is slightly more aggressive in this game than in others, or at least it gives me that feeling.

Only when bussing at the begining and again in the endgame. Still no badgering though. That didn't develop in my playstyle until more recently.

He utilizes HoS, FoS and whatnot in this game (and he claimed not to do that here in 645!).

Actually, what I said (in #517 of this game) was, "I

very

rarely FoS at all," which agrees perfectly with your meta read.

I notice that sirdan skipped two of my completed games. Most notable was mini 609 in which I was a town-friendly neutral power-role. This is my most recently completed game and is an excellent example of me using aggression, tunnel-vision targeting, and badgering to hang scum. I stewarded the attacks leading to scum kills on D1 and D2, by N2 BOTH scum groups NKed me and one of them even RBed the doc just in case.

Also, note the similarities in the actions and attitudes of Gimbo (in mini 609) and sirdan (here). Hence the weight of my suspicions here.

No badgering in the games he has finished (and that I checked). As far as I know, this is the first time he is badgering like this.

It is a recent development, but there is

very

strong evidence of me doing this to effectively hunt scum. Only it's from a game you didn't check. Why didn't you check my most recently completed game? What was your method for looking up games?

My apologies to those of you who find meta distracting. I can't just let myself go undefended here. Hopefully I kept things brief enough to be acceptable. Rather than get into a long argument about the various points of these games, I'd suggest that interested parties check out the games and come to their own conclusions.

[Ythill]

While I agree that scum could manipulate an ordered list, I believe that those manipulations will be obvious. So I’ve taken it on myself to finish what nuriens began. The conclusion of this post is an ordered list that is my objective attempt to quantify the lynch candidates of the seven players who have stated choices (as well as the votes of those who have not). I will update the list if others state their choices.

This is meant to be informative, not argumentative. I am working as best I can with the data given. Here’s the method I’m using, so as to be entirely transparent.

Explicitly stated top suspects OR current votes get 4 points*. Explicitly stated secondary subjects get 2 points. Candidates explicitly identified as compromise or tertiary lynches get 1 point. In the case of vague lists (a.k.a. Goat’s candidates) I gave everyone secondary lynch status (2 points).

Here is a list of everyone’s stated suspicions as I read them. Please let me know if I’ve interpreted yours incorrectly.

Nuriens: sirdan (top); Sim (secondary); Karne (honorable mention)
Ythill: sirdan (top); Cass, Karne, nhat (secondary); Jahudo, pacman (honorable mention)
Cass: Karne (top); sirdan, pacman, Ythill (secondary)
Sirdan: Ythill (top), Sim, Jah (secondary); pacman, Karne (honorable mention)
Goat: Jah, Karne, sirdan, Ythill, Andy, Sim (secondary)
Sim: pacman (top); sirdan (secondary); Ythill, Jah, nuriens (honorable mention)
Jah: Karne (top); sirdan (secondary); Ecto, nhat, Andy, Goat* (honorable mention)
Ecto: nuriens (vote)
Karne: nuriens (vote)
Nhat: Ythill (vote)

*In Jah’s case, I gave his 4 points to his top suspect. I only included his vote target (Goat) as honorable mention because he explicitly said that he would be uncomfortable lynching him right now. Which begs the question, why is Jah still voting for Goat?

Anyway… here’s the leader board…

sirdan (16)
Ythill (13)
Karne (10)
nuriens (9)
Jah & Sim (6)
nhat & pacman (4)
Andy (3)
Cass (2)
Goat (1)

My suggestion is that everyone cast a vote for one of the top 3-4. We’ll work it out from there. Ecto (the only person nobody suspects) is right, we need to end this day.

[Ythill]

Actually the vote count says Goat is voting for me...

Yeah. My bad. Thanks for catching it.

So I guess we can remove Goat from the list altogether.

Incidentally,

the vote count is wrong

: pacman's vote is still listed even though he unvoted in #622. I

did not

count his listed vote in my last post.

[Ythill]

Also, I guess this means Goat's main suspect has been identified by his vote, giving Jah 2 more points. The corrected leader board looks like this...

sirdan (16)
Ythill (13)
Karne (10)
nuriens (9)
Jah (8)
Sim (6)
nhat & pacman (4)
Andy (3)
Cass (2)

Doesn't change the top 3-4.

[Ythill]

my top 3 in order:

Jahudo->Citizen Karne->Ythill

...which moves me, Jah, Andy, sirdan, & Sim from secondary to honorable mention.

sirdan (15)
Ythill (14)
Karne (10)
nuriens (9)
Jah (8)
Sim (5)
nhat & pacman (4)
Andy (2)
Cass (2)

Also, can you really compare me to this?

No. My comparison was about your slippery styles before my attacks and during the early part of them.

Anyway, what I meant is, you do not reply to my defenses.

How do you expect me to stop this?

Reply to the accusations directly. Convince me that you are not scum. It's that simple. I may not have replied to everything you said, but I have read every word. Usually more than once.

You're not going to trick me into clearing you. You have to show me that I am wrong. I don't think you can because I don't think I am.

A Ythill lynch would seriously give us heaps of information here.

Would it? There's some, but... heaps? The majority gained would come from the last few pages, which means we'd get the same info by lynching you. Plus, with you, we'd get to take a fresh look at the reactions to Pope's nonsense.

But I'm not calling for an info lynch on you. I think you're scum.

[Ythill]

I just can't take Ythill seriously when he just insists on referring to anyone he attacks as scum and just harps on them about it. If he has such good arguments, then why resort to petty name-calling? And he's been doing it all game. He's pushing way too hard in this case.

Unvote
Vote - Ythill

That's the entirety of your reasons for voting me. Now meta reveals that I have done this recently as a town-friendly role, and that it worked in that game to catch scum (hence me using it again). Even my most adamant attacker said, "Anyway, yes, you did utilize 'LOL whatever scum' here, and you badgered a bit, so yeah you utilized that tactic here," but you say the meta doesn't change your view.

Okay. If you're town, I'd suggest rethinking here because a Ythill card-flip today will put you on the gallows tomorrow. You've got all of sirdan's emptiness without any of his slippery tricks to hide it in.

Your secondary suspicions are no better. An abandonned wagon from midday and an annoyance policy lynch? I wonder why you're coming off this way now, I thought you were pretty solid in the early game.

Firstly, I am pretty damn sure that you are scum, so won't be just an info lynch.

All you've got is OMGUS and a weak playstyle case that's been disproven by meta. You cannot possibly be sure.

Secondly, why do you say that most information will only come from the last few pages? Nureins/ythill as well as earlier arguments will give us a lot too.

When I flip town, it will confirm that my suspicions of nuriens were honest but it will also confirm that my subsequent n00b read and clearing of nuriens was honest. You'll still have to figure out which was correct.

If we were living in some magical, hypothetical world where I could somehow flip scum, the hard debate with nuriens that faded to me clearing him and then working with him could equally be me distancing or failing to railroad a townie. It's a WIFOM nightmare.

From nurien's end, nothing about my alignment tells us anything about his Goebels argument.

Sirdan-scum's other points are more of his lies and nonsense, so I'll fall back on, "whatever, scum."

Nhat's suspect list and Ecto's vote change have been applied to the leader-board...

sirdan (15)
Ythill (14)
Karne & pacman (10)
Jah (8)
nuriens (6)
Sim (5)
nhat (4)
Andy (2)
Cass (2)

I'm noting how quickly nuriens has dropped out of the top 4, to be replaced by pacman. Ecto had a major hand in this, and I'm remembering nuriens odd town read on Ecto from the begining of the day. Nhat also played a part, with horrible reasoning. Interesting...

[Ythill]

Ahahahahaha. You are so wrong, but so damn clever. Does everybody see what he's doing here? I metaed Ythill, and I said beforehand that meta doesn't prove anything...

So your premise here is that if you say something, that makes it true. You've confirmed that I've utilized this playstyle as town, which

proves

that it is a null tell. And it's the entire basis of your case.

And I don't care that you did it once before as a town, and that you were right.

More slippery stuff. You use "it" to refer vaguely to my behavior. I've said "whatever scum," once before. I've been aggressive plenty of times. And I've been right enough times that it's shown me why aggression is helpful. Which is why I've refined it in the past few games.

Having been right

does not

prove that I am right here. It

does

demonstrate why I think it is good play.

Ythill, I am pretty sure you know more than well that you can't disprove things by meta.

So if I said I'd never played in mini 542, you couldn't look to see that I had and disprove my statement by meta? You're making baseless assertions that are not even close to the truth. Also known as lying. With as much as you've lied in this game, I'm surprised we even need to talk about compromise.

First, Im not sure if this moves you from secondary to honorable, or mantains you at secondary.

If you read the initial criteria, you'll see that my move was legit.

Second and more important, you add one point to yourself instead of reducing one point of your total sum. If you consider this "honorable" you should have decreased your number to 12 contrary to what you did.

True, and thanks for catching my error. I think it's moot at this point though, because I agree with the suggestion that it's time to narrow the list anyway. I am entirely comfortable with the top three choices being sirdan, myself, and Karne... with one qualification: we should not lynch anyone without giving them the chance to claim. That means no hanging Karne until his replacement arrives.

As one of the top suspects, I'm awaiting cases and questions. Though it is Tuesday, so this will probably be my only post until tomorrow evening.

[Ythill]

Hi kurbio.

@nuriens: I do not like your "semi-final" thingie at all. There are lots of things I don't like about it, including false dichotomies and narrowing choices so that they are made by fewer players. I think you should probably just abandon it.

Furthermore, I find it highly questionable (especially after what I said recently about the possible link between you and Ecto) that you would suggest that Ecto should make a lone final decision about

anything

.

Let's just see if we can agree to narrow down the choices. K?

In fact, considering that Karne is going to be replaced, we already have the votes narrowed down to the top 4. Let's keep it that way. And start culling it further.

[Ythill]

LOL. I mean kur

ib

o. It was a typo... I swear...

[Ythill]

You want it or not, Sirdan and you are on top of the suspicions.

I understand this, but your system proposes that only one of us enter a run-off against one of #3 & #4. It isn't impartial.

I am not narrowing players, just Ecto is not suspect and he has not expressed a clear opinion among you two... Moreover, as far as I know, you wrote a list of 6 suspects, and neither Ecto nor me were there.

Then Ecto made a vote change that seriously cleared you, immediately after which you started pushing for this new model of compromise. I still don't have serious suspicions about either of you, but you have to admit that this bit does look bad. I'd rather not participate in a system that is both flawed and suspect.

how ?

Well, if I can manage to find the time, I plan on putting together a comprehensive defense of pacman, because I believe that he's the worst lynch on the list. Others' could do the same for their objections. Or people could further question one or more of the accused, or elaborate on cases.

I think it's possible to narrow this list and a agree on a lynch. Let's all just pretend we have a deadline.

[Ythill]

OMG Darox, you're stalking me.

No time for that defense of pacman yet. Maybe tonight.

[Ythill]

Yeah, me too.

I've played with kuribo a lot. I don't think he's scum here.

[Ythill]

As promised... why I think habit/pacman should not be today’s lynch:

My initial case on habit was in post #256. I will not bother going back further, but will address my thoughts at that time.

At the time, habit was one of my top three. My main suspicions were directed at nuriens and I had two secondary suspects (habit and Matin) based on notes from a reread I’d done. My case on habit can be summarized into five points: (1) heavy reliance on WIFOM for position changes, (2) his strange opinion changes regarding Jah, (3) his soft treatment of Pope, (4) the

I misread a lot

claim, which could have been a ruse, and (5) his practice of decrying various scum-hunting styles.

(1) Reliance on WIFOM is not a sure-fire scumtell because there are plenty of people who mistakenly believe that WIFOM is solid logic. Habit didn’t really have a lot of solid logic, and there were other areas where he came across as an unskilled rather than scummy player. Without the other tells to back it up, I would be comfortable chalking up his WIFOM use to poor (rather than scummy) play.

(2) The original argument was that he jumped on Jah for weak reasons when it might have protected Pope but then jumped off of Jah, citing lack of town support. However, future posts revealed that habit never actually stopped

suspecting

Jah, he just stopped making arguments that were not going anywhere, which agrees with his attitude regarding (5) below.

(3) Habit went easy on Pope, and even defended him. The first part, in hindsight, isn’t incredibly scummy. Habit went easy on everyone including his top suspect (Jah) and the people who attacked him. The second part also makes sense to me because habit cited several times where he had been in similar situations and also demonstrated that his skin maybe wasn’t think enough for the pressure of the game. These two things combined tell me that habit is the type of

person

likely to feel honest sympathy for someone in Pope’s position, which has nothing to do with his alignment.

(4) It’s still possible that this could have been a ruse, but a

possibility

is not an airtight case.

(5) This part really bothered me about habit, but his answer was that he was actually decrying the act of muddying the waters. I’m still not sure I believe that defense, but it fits perfectly with his treatment of Jah (see 2) so I suppose it is at least possible.

On to current matters…

The unvote issue was bad, but it came across as the act of a new, unskilled player confused by the wordiness of this game. Habit later replaced out because he was having trouble keeping up, which fits nicely with this theory.

Habit spends a couple of posts interpreting the flavor and talking about the set-up, which made him seem lost. He then votes Jah and actually makes some pretty compelling points.

Then comes the infamous #306. I really don’t know what got people all riled up about this post. It didn’t seem out of character at all. Habit was not good at arguing, nor at mafia-scum. He’s played a few games here and they’ve left him feeling dumb. That’s not a good feeling. What strikes me here (and this is where I started to clear habit) is that the wagon on him started so quickly at that point. Votes came with little reasoning

from people who had seen habit act similarly already, without saying that it was supicious

.

I also find it extremely scummy that the wagon on habit derailed so quickly when it faced a lack of further support. I haven’t looked too closely at the individuals on that wagon (except Jah) but it strikes me as odd that suspicions of that level of seriousness would be abandoned with hardly any defense at all. The most obvious explanation was that the habit wagon was an engineered distraction from the Pope or nuriens cases which lost its usefulness after the chief scum-hunters had turned to look elsewhere.

Post #354 has an interesting bit. Habit uses an appeal to expertise

to argue against himself

, which demonstrates to me that his weak logic was integral to his person rather than tactical.

Habit’s announced reread of Sim that accidentally became a case against Andy was strange, but I find it transparent enough. The case against Andy is not solid, but I can understand why habit had those notions.

He continues attacking Jah and questions Karne, but the rest of habit’s contributions are extremely light. Which makes sense. University classes started at the end of August, when this change occurred, and habit cited schoolwork overload as his reason to request replacement.

Pacman replaced in and went through the usual welcome. He cited confusion with we windbags, but soon addressed habit’s play and then got right into the scum-hunting.

He caught Sim exaggerating in #561 and being slippery in #564, and continues to take jabs at him as the thread progresses. He adds Karne to his suspect list as well. The reasoning in both cases is not huge, but it is valid, and it’s not like pacman is placing votes based on it.

The rest of his posts are defenses (one of them very valid) and an argument about when to end the day, which is a null tell. I’d like to see more from this guy but I haven’t seen a single scumtell from him yet, which suggests that habit’s bad play was to be forgiven as stemming from him personally rather than from his alignment.

I’m still on a bit of a time crunch (full time job, father of a toddler, etc) so I didn’t bother to address specific accusations but I’d be willing to if those supporting a pacman lynch would quote them or at least give me a post # for reference.

Anyway... my conclusion here is that habit was a bad player, sort of a natural VI, who was used by scum to protect others who had come into the spotlight. I think that pacman's play has been null or slightly townie. Compiling the two, there is certainly still the possibility that the role is scum, but I wouldn't count on it. Sirdan is a far better lynch. Karne may be as well, though I'd have to reread him to make that statement definitively. And of course I know that I am town but, like I said in #596, I at least understand why I have drawn suspicions from some townie-seeming players.

[Ythill]

Heh, I guess I will not be the only suspect for people who think aggression is a scumtell.

It's good to have you around kuribo. Also because you see clearly. Except the habit/pacman case. What the hell? Maybe he's scum, yes. But there is at least one other who is more obviously scum.

Please address my defense of pacman. If it's horribly wrong and you can show me how, maybe I'll vote with you, but only because I've got a good read on you.

Also, I want to know what you think of the nuriens--->Ecto interactions I pointed out. They were very one-sided. What do they mean?

[Ythill]

Also, I know it annoys you, but sirdan

was

lying. Look at where I pointed it out. It's not like I just

said

it. I quoted several places where he actually did it.

[Ythill]

But I don't like alot of pacman's reactions in the last several pages of my read.

Could you summarize this case briefly? Maybe I just lost your points in the rhetoric of your catch-up WOWs, but I don't recall a lot of evidence being raised.

I feel like alot of your defense in regards to pacman relies on the assumption that habit was a village idiot.

Not "assumption."

Possibility.

Honestly, the strongest evidence of habit being town has nothing to do with his behavior. It is the way that the wagon on him grew and diminished so quickly, as well as the timing of that wagon. Pope and/or nuriens, if either is scum, would have benefited from the distraction even if there was no mislynch of habitang.

I also don't want you to think I'm suggesting that habit=VI therefore habit=town. Not at all. I am simply saying that a lot of his behavior could be interpreted that way, which makes him a less favorable lynch than sirdan, who has done plenty of things which can't be easily explained from

any

town perspective.

...I think that alot of it makes assumptions that the reader shares your view of some of his actions. (ie, things that you don't find scummy, but some of the rest of us do)

Again, there is no assumption. I am asking those with different views to explain them to me, and perhaps debate a little. If you can show me that pacman is a better lynch than sirdan, I will vote with you. So far, you have not.

Anyway... I'm going to try to do a reread of Karne and company at some point this weekend. I'll share my thoughts once I'm done.

[Ythill]

Worry could suggest a number of things. I believe he's been transparent, so let's just ask him.

@pacman: Are you worried about being lynched? If so, why? What did you mean by "trapped into a misread"?

[Ythill]

Just waiting on pacman to answer my questions.

I've skimmed Karne and company but haven't had time to do a thorough reread. My general impression was that he's not the best lynch at this point... not even as scummy as pacman.

@Darox: Why is pacman the play? Please address my defense of him (#716). You complained about wordiness so I'm wondering... did you read all of the long posts or just skim them? Is there anything of mine that you would like summarized?

[Ythill]

Also @Darox: You mentioned a "group of people" you found scummy. Mind sharing their identities?

[Ythill]

Yawn. More baseless assertions from a few people.

Sirdan is actually scumhunting now? A miracle. Or maybe appeasing pacman.

I've seen nothing that affects my opinions very much. Carry on.

[Ythill]

Obviously not me, since sirdan isn't swinging.

I've stated a willingness to compromise because I agree that we need to end this day, but I'm keeping my vote where it belongs until a lynch is within reach elsewhere. You know, in the vain hope that others read my case and vote with me.

[Ythill]

Er... cross posted. My first statement was in response to nuriens.

[Ythill]

@Jah: Such cross-replacement behavior indicates distancing or assisted buddying, but working with three unconfirmed alignments is more problematic than two. It pains me to see such a good chance to verify your catch, yet be so certain that sirdan is scum. Good catch though. I'll consider it.

Speaking of buddying...

@nuriens: I'm touched. Really. What was your purpose in taking such a friendly stance?

[Ythill]

I agree with Ecto that kuribo vs. nuriens is pointless. It is easy to see how nuriens took kuribo's statement as being in support of sirdan's argument. It is also easy to see how kuribo didn't mean it that way.

We've got a deadline now. Enough minutae.

Sirdan is the play. He showed us a number of classic scumtells and most of his defense was wriggling. Most telling is the way his cases do not match his actions. That alone is enough for a D1 lynch. Also, thanks to Pope, we'll get some good information.

Vote sirdan-scum. Do it.

[Ythill]

Holy hoppin' Jesus on a toast platter!

Kuribo, how can you not understand the

apparent

link between these posts?

Nureins, assuming someone is town is very bad, even worse than assuming someone is scum. Why would you defend Ythill?

Oh, and I once lost a game because I assumed Ythill was town. Just so you know.

Nuriens, how can you not understand that kuribo was

warning

you that your read on me could be wrong?

Can we just agree to get along and hang sirdan? Thanks.

[Ythill]

People are voting, Cass. Except pacman which, considering the circumstances, is another suggestion of his alignment. With the deadline in place, scum pacman should already be voting for sirdan.

Anyway, to reiterate, I

will

hammer pacman @ deadline to avoid no lynch. However, I will be campaigning for a sirdan lynch until that time.

[Ythill]

I looked over it again in context.

We already know where Habit got the vig assumption from and, though he was wrong to assume, it seemed like an honest msitake. As for the no lynch, I've seen n00b-town suggest this more than anyone. I think this is because n00bs see the lynch as solely an instrument of killing, rather than a way to create a good record for future hunts. From that viewpoint, the lack of a clear candidate makes it seem like a bad idea to kill, because a mislynch is so likely.

In habit's case, he seemed genuinely confused by the ongoing arguments and disillusioned about the fact that nobody was listening to his case on Jah. He had given up on Jah for the moment, Most scum in that case, I think, would have moved on to another target or picked sides in one of the ongoing fights. Instead, habit took a stance against lynching altogether, while harboring continued suspicion of Jah (which came out later).

I don't think any of this

proves

that Habit is town, but there is certainly room for reasonable doubt.

The most damning evidence in the post is habit's 4 scum assumption. I've never seen townies assume more or less than 3 scum and there could be ulterior motives in assuming 4.

[Ythill]

Anyway, more important matters. I am going to keep my vote on Ythill, since I am rather sure that he is scum and I do not see a reason to vote anyone else... Only if changing my vote could prevent a no-lynch, I would lynch someone not named Ythill.

That's odd. Rather than cling to a lost cause, most townies would probably pick the scummiest of the top candidates at this juncture so as to best avoid a mislynch. Oh wait... that would be you...

Okay, I understand you perfectly. Don't worry, you shouldn't have to change your vote.

I also find the timing of this comment defensive because we were just talking about how scum would vote the other candidate and, well, you want to... don'tcha? But only at the last minute...

[Ythill]

Cross-posted.

Compare the last posts of sirdan and pacman. Do it... you know you want to do it.

Which one is the play?

[Ythill]

Also...

@pacman: If you know you are town and you know the lynch is down to you and sirdan, why haven't you voted him yet?

[Ythill]

They want us to think they're scum? That doesn't make any sense. There is a bit o' WIFOM involved, but not as you've described it.

WIFOM is pretty unavoidable in MS, especially D1, but it's not like I've made these arguments in a vacuum. There is still a substantial unanswered case against sirdan; I don't see as much of a case against pacman and the points I do see have other possible explanations.

I've never stated that pacman is obv-town. My argument has been that sirdan is a better lynch.

Did you compare their lasts posts? Any conclusions?

[Ythill]

i neither understand why you ask pacman about his no-vote to sirdan if you find this a townie behavior...

I'd like to know his reasoning because I would like to talk him into voting for sirdan soon (see below).

Cross-posted.

Compare the last posts of sirdan and pacman. Do it... you know you want to do it.

Which one is the play?

Absolutely horrible. My last post is not a good indication of my alignment, same for pacman. Another scumtell for Ythill.

So your assertion is that your opinion is the truth and you don't need to back it up? Hardly.

sirdan's #827: sliding stance on bickering, annoyance. with. punctuation, annoyance with a pro-town compromise vote, slippery comment, two cites to the deadline strawman, baseless assertion, defensive unwillingness to compromise.

pacman's #830: brief on-topic opinion, valid tell on sirdan (who is deflecting suspicion to the bickerers), calls sirdan out on pointless comments, townie view of the deadline compromise situation (+ accepts his role in the top two), defense of Ecto's reasonable vote.

Come on. 'do it...you know you want to do it'. This is just ridiculous. This is just an appeal to emotion.

What difference does it make if I use a logical fallacy to talk others into

making their own comparison

? Besides, it was more of a directive than an appeal, made with tongue in cheek.

We don't have much time left. Stop arguing un-pithy minutae. Implicate your buddies instead.

As far as I understand it, this is what ythill thinks that sirdan is doing by avoiding to vote pacman. I am lost because I thought this was not scummy at all...

I think people are missing my point. Sirdan has tunnel-vision based on very weak "evidence." His vote currently has a lack of town support. It would behoove him, as either scum or town, to vote pacman but he can't really do a natural vote change because he's dug his feet in on me. If he was town, this would be no problem because he wouldn't be so worried about being lynched.

Pacman, meanwhile, has been floating around. He had no aggresively pursued target. As the town has slowly been turned on to the idea of sirdan-scum, pacman has had multiple chances to jump on that wagon. As suspicions narrowed to sirdan and he as the top two, pacman was in a perfect position to vote for sirdan but still refrained.

When I pointed this out, sirdan made a post about why he was voting me and what, exactly, would cause him to vote for pacman. He's setting up his escape hatch for deadline so as to avoid suspicion tomorrow if he gets the chance to save himself by hanging pacman. Meanwhile, he's pushing suspicion on Ecto (for the same compromise sirdan has announced, just with different timing), nuriens and kuribo (using a sliding stance to finger them for an innocent misunderstanding), and myself (because OMGUS and cherry-picking makes me obv-scum, don'tcha know). None of this smokescreening is pro-town at all.

These are the actions of scum under pressure. Pacman is acting more like a bandwagoned townie close to deadline.

Lynching pacman would be a mislynch, since I am not convinced pacman is scum at all. I am however rather sure that you are scum, so the chances of us mislynching would be smaller if we lynched you.

You are asking us to not only trust that you are town (in spite of the case against you) but to also trust that you are endowed with magical perceptions that have allowed you to make correct reads based on OMGUS and crap-logic. I don't believe either.

@ Sim & pacman: You've both stated suspicions of sirdan, please vote for him soon. We have four days left during which to prompt, receive, and analyze his claim. I doubt I am wrong about sirdan but it is possible. Just in case, I'd like to have time to seriously consider any claim he gives.

[Ythill]

I wouldn't say necessary, I was just asking.

You've said sirdan is your PE#2, so your vote is either in your #1 or #2. Whereas I don't see much of the case against pacman. But this comparison has to do with the

lynch

, I am asking for your

vote

.

You've said that you'd vote for sirdan at deadline. Would you rather have a claim from him first? Please consider voting sirdan soon. You can always switch back later if you want to.

[Ythill]

Sirdan is obsessed with you due to your aggressive attack, and if you have not so many votes it is only due to the compromise issue...

It doesn't matter why there is a lack of support. My statement was about sirdan's dilemma and was not meant to be a defense of me.

Pacman is not scumhunting and tries to fly down...

Which is a valid point against pacman. However, my point was that this aspect of his play has been consistent even when it would have suited scum to abandon it and even when doing so would have been safe.

I think both should claim right about now.

It's optimal for town to get one claim at a time because we might not need the second one and it may needlessly endanger our power roles. However, I do not feel that it is a

huge

disadvantage to get both claims at once. Not enough to get in a distracting argument over it anyway...

The real question is, will both (or either) of our candidates actually claim @ L-3? And can we reasonably read anything into their refusal if they choose not to?

[Ythill]

Dear Ythill,

Why are you defending pacman with WIFOM?

Because WIFOM only invalidates an argument if the possibilities are equal, which they are not.

Why are you trolling rather than providing counterpoints?

[Ythill]

@Darox: You mistake what I mean by equal. The benefit of impressions gained by ignoring the "inherent advantage or drawback" must be at least equal to the benefit of the advantage itself.

Example: I drop a $20 on the ground and a guy points it out to me. I then state that the guy is honest. It's not invalidated by WIFOM because an unseen stranger would never have hand me the $20 just to convince me he's not a thief.

Why didn't you answer my question?

[Ythill]

uh? kuribo was the one who DID. Not you. If you did, where did you do it?

#750: "Ythill: I did read your post, but to me it just reads as you dismissing his actions as newb town, when they could easily be newb scum just as well as newb town. I think his reactions have been largely more characteristic of scum than town, and as such I think he is a good lynch for today."

I don't like his vague reasoning, but he

did

make the comment.

[Ythill]

Pope wasn't playing like a doc. Sirdan has not played like a doc. Doc is a favorite fake-claim and, knowing Erratas, there's a pretty good chance that any protective role we have is non-standard (bus driver, bodyguard, jailer, etc).

However, it is true that there is no sense lynching an uncounterclaimed doc. This will work itself out.

Unvote, vote:pacman

. If a more acceptable wagon somehow gains steam over the next three days, I'll be likely to switch, but I think this is where we are now and I'm going with it.

@Pacman: claim please.

@sirdan: If you are town, my apologies. However, I will not take all of the blame. Any proactive playstyle is likely to be wrong on D1, especially when a townie acts as scummy as you have. Next time we meet, answer my charges directly instead of trying to outsmart me. K?

[Ythill]

@Jah: Such cross-replacement behavior indicates distancing or assisted buddying, but working with three unconfirmed alignments is more problematic than two. It pains me to see such a good chance to verify your catch, yet be so certain that sirdan is scum. Good catch though. I'll consider it.

Still considering it. I'm going to reread Matin/Karne/Darox today at work and may return to drop the hammer.

I don't think pacman is very scummy. However, I have a strong town read on kuribo and am willing to put some faith in his instincts here unless I independently see good reasons to hang Darox.

Please do not hammer Darox until I have posted again.

[Ythill]

I tried to forget everything I've said about the two candidates and read from a fresh perspective. It's very long, sorry. Conclusions at the bottom for those who trust me.

Matin vs. habit

:

Early in the game, Matin gets caught up in the misunderstanding about his joke vote. This is pursued by nuriens and Matin’s response is not suspicious in any way. Jah tackles the subject, taking a reasonable stance. Then Habit throws a FoS on him for “trying to take it to the next level” (#34). Why FoS Jah but not nuriens?

Nuriens continues to take Matin to task over the joke vote, but there isn’t a word of complaint from habit, who actually shifts his stance on the worth of pursuing joke vote evidence.

Matin assumes that Pope is innocent and joking with no rational basis (#56). He backs out of this view as soon as he is questioned about it (#63).

As the discussion becomes more serious (July 30 - August 1), Matin questions or suspects three people (Pope, habit, and Cass) over a few posts whereas habit explodes with excited babbling. During that explosion he fingers Jah and nuriens but quickly forgives the latter; he also starts proactively pursuing the n00b role. This comparison is interesting because habit is getting a bunch of attention while Matin quietly pursues several of the town's suspects. Agenda?

Habit goes on to declare that nuriens is town. Then he votes Andy for lurking. Meanwhile, nuriens asks him some hard questions (distancing?). Habit’s answer (#174) seems pro-town but maybe a bit too enlightened for his n00b persona.

Matin’s final post (#186) is interesting in that he pushes suspicion on the public’s three top suspects rather than on the people he’s focused on. This effectively switches nuriens in for Cass. He adds quote-based attacks against habit, both of which are weak.

Karne vs. habit

:

We have two weeks of habit acting without comparison. He reiterates his defense against nuriens (again seeming pro-town). He attacks nuriens, then complains at length about our post lengths, then defends nuriens from me. Then he accuses nuriens extensively. Meanwhile, he has voted (and immediately) unvoted me! Pick a side, maybe?

There is a strange, unfinished false dilemma (#233) that seems to be reaching toward the conclusion that either nuriens is scum or nuriens is scum. This post is VERY odd, especially considering the recent interactions between these two.

Habit’s defense vs. me is solid, but then he cites agreement with me in reducing his suspicions of nuriens. What?!

Then comes the vote for no lynch, pointless conjecture about the set-up, an “instinct” vote on Jah, followed by a justification of that vote that is much more head than gut, some noise, and then the infamous blow-up post (#306). This is followed by some buddying to Cass and a very good point against Jah (#346). He follows this with an explanation of his blow-up post which, again, seemed very townie to me. I’m seeing this pattern where habit, left to his own devices, comes across as either clueless or suspicious but then answers valid points with good defenses that belie both.

Habit rereads Sim which leads to him suspecting Andy, yet he continues to attack Jah. This part seemed very natural and transparent. I

really

liked his QFT (#394) because it seemed like knee-jerk honesty at a point when n00b scum would have gotten overly-defensive.

Karne replaces in with a barely passable set of conclusions (too little suspicion) and claims a willingness to elaborate (#439), which he fulfills regarding his vote on nuriens. However, he cannot follow up with his town reads on Andy and Jah (#516). If he knew it was a “vibe” thing, why did he offer extrapolation?

Meanwhile, habit questions and coaches Karne. He compares Andy to Ecto, explaining that Andy is more of a lurker (though he posts less) than Ecto because Andy doesn’t commit to suspicions. However, habit’s new buddy Karne has acted similarly: his conclusions only listed two solid suspects who were in the spotlight solely for conspiracy theory, which

habit had named as invalid

. These two stances do not add up.

Habit replaces out with an oddly proactive defense over minutiae. Karne is “really trying not to lurk,” then saying he agrees so fully with Sim that he no longer needs to talk to nuriens, then

almost

defends me from Cass. After that it’s *poof* no more Karne.

Karne vs. pacman

:

There is only a brief moment of cross-play. Pacman calls Sim out for being overeager, but excuses Karne for agreeing with him while putting a “slight FoS” on both. Karne ignores him and replaces out.

This is followed by a couple weeks of pacman without comparison. He posts a good FoS on Sim, which is followed by ongoing suspicion. He raises a minor beef with info lynching when he’s the subject, but doesn’t pursue it as an attack against me. He argues with Ecto about ending the day, which is perfectly understandable from the PoV of a replacement.

Darox vs. pacman

:

Darox replaces in with an interesting bit about his slow read which takes him only two days. Note that most other replacements took as long

even though they were reading far fewer pages

. Darox read 29 of these wordy-ass pages in two days and

still cited an excuse

for his read time. It feels too measured to me.

Darox votes pacman without stating any reason. He then disputes my defense by saying n00b does not indicate alignment. This is problematic. I never said n00b = town. I said n00b was a second possible reason for things that could be scummy. Darox goes on to say that pacman seems more scum than town

again without any reasons whatsoever

. He finds Cass and nuriens scummy as well, but cites a reason for the former.

Meanwhile, pacman completes an exercise in vague (#736). He defends himself a bit, and it sounds okay, but he includes that bit about how he’s a bad player under pressure. Then (later) we see that he isn’t. So why did he say that?

Darox continues to justify his pacman vote without giving any reasoning and then says that he’s not going to give evidence on his #3 (nuriens) because he reserves such practices for his #1. What?! He’s doing no such thing about his #1, so this excuse is very plainly a fabrication.

Darox rushes the day, spars with Jah, and adds weight to the pacman wagon, still without saying anything. He then goes as far as to cite a questionable fallacy in order to shoot down my transparent defense of pacman

though he has still posted no case at all against him

.

After a period of activity from the latter, both Sirdan and pacman are subtly pushing against one another but

pacman seems more suspicious of Darox

for his baseless vote. Meanwhile, Darox has come under fire and pacman is irked enough to threaten Darox with a vote except that “it might be extremely useless given the situation.”

Pacman claims as requested, drops his vote naturally onto Darox, and bows out.

Darox straw-mans nhat badly. He twice defends himself by acting like people have not mentioned why he’s being suspected. Not only have they mentioned it often and clearly, but the reasons are fully within his power to answer.

He reacts badly to Cass’ attack. Remember that Cass highly suspected Karne, then she gave a very good summary of Darox’s scummy play. He gets slippery with her overall, but the worst point is where he suggests that

buddying on her part

lead to her catching that he had misrepresented Jah.

Darox goes on to badly misrepresent nhat in order to back up his straw-man. He insists that Cass hasn’t provided a case on him which is absolutely untrue. He starts using big, bold letters to make his case seem more valid rather than, you know, using evidence.

Conclusions:

We need to be careful to note that there are far more posts from habit/pacman than there are from Matin/Karne/Darox. Important lest we let quantity of tells overshadow the truth revealed by them.

Habit seemed scummier on the surface than both Matin and Karne, but a lot of that is playstyle and persona, plus post-number inflation. I stand by the fact that a lot of what he did

seemed

scummy, but it adds up to very little in the way of scum tactical play. The things that stand out the most to me is his odd flip-flopping on nuriens and his strange treatment of the Andy/Ecto/Karne triangle. Though habit is far from clean, there’s also a decent number of town-tells on him.

Pacman is the towniest of the bunch. Meanwhile, Darox is the scummiest of the bunch by far. Much of the Darox case

could

be playstyle and persona, which is ironic, because he’s argued that this type of evidence is unreliable. Comparing just these two, it’s easy to pick the lynch, but we have the problem of habit’s egregious play.

I’m looking at it like this… unless we are declaring that both roles are scum (which I don’t see as a possibility), the playstyle/persona defense

must

be valid for either habit or Darox. If it is valid for one, then it must be valid for both. Therefore we are safe taking the hard edge off of their play.

When we drop these two back into the pack a little we are left with Karne and Matin, each of whom was slightly scummy, each of whom lurked a bit, and neither of whom showed any obv-town moments versus pacman who, from what I’ve seen, is trying to win this game for town.

The choice seems obvious. I fully intend to hammer Darox but I will allow some time for a claim. Don't take too long.

unvote

[Ythill]

Finally, this long ass day ends. In case I die tonight...

I've got a ton of experience with kuribo and I'm pretty sure he's town. Kuribo can be bombastic and rub people the wrong way. These things do not mean that he is scum.

If I die, you'll all see that I'm town. Don't be lazy. I've done a lot of investigative work in this thread. Go back and read it. Just don't forget that I am capabale of being wrong.

Anyway... Darox's appeal to emotion doesn't sway me, and his technical difficulties didn't prevent him from making a long, detailed post elsewhere.

Vote: Darox

Goodnight.

[Ythill]

Ythill repeated a couple of times that Kuribo was town. Please explain me which scenario you had in mind for repeating it so much, as I only thought of two of them...

None of your scenarios. I said it at first because it was my opinion. I repeated it at the end of the day because it was an opinion based on my own personal experience with kuribo (aka based on factors that would be gone if I died) and I thought I might die if sirdan was telling the truth. You have already attacked kuribo for his attitude, so you should understand why I warned people about it.

I agree that Ythill deserves some of the attention...

I'm a Leo, we love attention.

...since he was also instrumental in helping to derail the pacman wagon the second time around by repeatedly defending him.

And you've seen me defend my scumbuddies when? C'mon kuribo, you know me better than that. I'd have been on at least one of his wagons if I was scum. I defended him because the speed of the first wagon suggested that he was town. Also, when I compared him to either sirdan or Darox, each seemed like a better lynch (especially sirdan).

I also didn't like that the hammer came after I had asked Darox a question...

I'd had enough talk for the day and I didn't see it as an important question.

Anyway...

Suggesting that the mafia killed one of their own is retarded. One of three things happened. The mafia kill was blocked by a doctor/bulletproof, the mafia killer was RBed, or we have a bus driver that switched the mafia target for pacman. The latter seems most likely, and would suggest very highly that sirdan was telling the truth.

We could clear a lot of this up if the scum would tell us who they targeted. Please?

Well then how 'bout sirdan tells us who he targeted? I doubt the scum targeted anyone but him (unless he's scum) because the obvious choice for the kill if not sirdan would have been me (the only person they could be sure he wouldn't protect).

I suppose I will eventually have to reread the pertient parts of D1. Yuck. That's a lot of garbage to sort through...

[Ythill]

Ythill, you're also ignoring the most obvious possibility: That we have / had a vig (possibly one-shot) who thought pacman should have been the lynch.

I didn't ignore that possibility at all. In fact, I so thoroughly took it for granted that I didn't bother to mention it as the way pacman would have died in the first

two

possibilities I mentioned.

I'm revoking your gold star.

Also, include the idea of two mafia groups in that.

[Ythill]

...the idea of two mafia groups wouldn't be very balanced, would it?

Probably not, considering that the only card-flipped mafioso was a power role. However, I don't think we can make guesses as to the balance without knowing all of the roles, so we should at least keep it in mind.

[Ythill]

@sirdan: Why did you protect Ecto? Also, could you please expand on why you think the mafia would have targeted Ecto?

@Sim: I will eventually read back over D1, but I'm dreading it.

[Ythill]

Okay, for starters, I skimmed over pacman's posts in isolation.

He and sirdan refusing to vote one another was odd knowing that pacman was scum. Why would scum not protect himself? He certainly did so when Darox became an option. Pacman also pleads a lack of understanding and thereby avoids the me vs. sirdan debate until his gambit post (#736).

Pacman placed a FoS on Darox. His other FoS targets were Sim and Ecto (plus one on Karne before he replaced out). The attack against Ecto was an argument against ending the day while pacman and sirdan were the lynch choices.

Pacman buddied quite blatantly to kuribo, probably trying to ass-kiss him into laying off the pressure. This suggests even more heavily that kuribo is town, because scum-pacman would have trusted his real buddy. His defense of nuriens was even more blatant and I'm not sure what to make of it.

That's all for the moment... my son just woke up from his nap.

[Ythill]

Hmmmm... re-replacements are always confusing even without the cross-role OMGUS. Not that I think Darox II's case is invalid...

I wish you would had made an alt for this, but welcome back anyway.

[Ythill]

I find it a bit weird that you are asking me to give all this information, though. Motives?

Simply put, I'm still considering your claim. It was odd that you didn't die last night, but there may be reasons for that other than you being scum. Your process of elimination seems transparent enough. Warning to you though: if you are town, use a different process tonight so as to keep the scum guessing.

I have my doubts that

A) Sirdan saw Ecto as the most pro-town player

and that

B) The Mafia saw Ecto as the biggest threat to them.

A) Read his last post. He didn't.
B) Just because sirdan protected Ecto and he didn't die doesn't mean that the mafia NKed Ecto. It is still entirely possible that we have a redirect role that switched pacman with sirdan, or a riposte-kill role that was targeted by pacman.

Anyway, here's another slice of reread... the first habit wagon...

Sim earned himself townie-brownies. To a lesser extent, so did nhat and Andy (kuribo).

Habit buddied to Cass right after the wagon, which suggests that she's town. Her actions on the wagon were not blatantly townie, but habit's card-flip negated one tell I pointed out on her. Same with Jah, except multiple tells were negated. I don't think either of these two was implicated at all.

Tritch had already disappeared, so this wagon doesn't give us any information about sirdan.

Goat's defense of habit seemed natural enough, but there are a few extranious interactions that make me wonder. I wouldn't say this wagon implicated him but, due to other factors, we will probably want to keep an eye on him.

Ecto ignored the situation altogether. Add this to Darox II's points against him.

Nuriens practiced elephantine circumlocution, touching on the wagon but avoiding the topic of habit's alignment. Instead he pushed suspicion back on the wagon and, only 25 hours after the first vote on habit, twisted Cass' words to start a lurker hunt. Shortly thereafter, he inexplicitly changed his opinion about me so as to agree with me about habit's behavior being excusable.

[Ythill]

Some conclusions from my read so far:

I'm jumping on the nuriens wagon. I originally suspected him for some pretty serious tells. After I attacked him, he changed his behavior a bit which supported the theory that his bad play was due to inexperience, but it also could have been scum cleaning up his act.

There were some late-day actions from nuriens that piqued my suspicions again, like where he started buddying to me. Kuribo's reread also seemed valid.

Now that habit/pacman has flipped scum, nuriens is implicated worse than anyone. I don't think there's a clearer lynch candidate at this juncture, though further rereads may change my mind.

My secondary suspects, in no particular order, are Ecto, Goat, and sirdan. Evidence links Ecto to both nuriens and habit/pacman but the former is linked through nuriens' own buddying, which gives me pause. Goat is only implicated if nuriens flips scum. Sirdan is linked to pacman worse than the other two, but I am of the opinion that we should let him live at least one more day.

vote: nuriens

[Ythill]

@nuriens: Sirdan's crap-logic is to be expected, especially when he in analyzing a player as swingy as yourself. What I really want is for you to answer my comments.

If this was not a game with experienced players that seem to suggest your claim is 90 per cent true or above...

I hope you're not including me in this group. I still don't believe sirdan's claim, but I just don't see a compelling reason to disbelieve it and, strategically speaking, it behooves the town to keep him alive at least one more day.

[Ythill]

I've missed a lot. Going to focus on nuriens' response to me.

1. My writting style is probably explosive...

2. People do not read completely my posts...

3. I have nothing to clean up, and you can come back to any of your arguments...

4. My inexperience is a fact...

1. This has no correlation with your alignment.
2. I've read every word, usually more than once.
3. I may later, for now I'm content with current info.
4. Your inexperience, whether used as an argument or not, cannot explain habit's behavior. It would be a stretch to find a way it could explain your behavior regarding him.

I can behave funny and buddy even with enemies in a harsh fight...

I don't think anyone is talking about your demeanor or sense of humor when they cite buddying. We all know that this is just a game. However, you acted as if Ecto was obv-town without good reason, you swore an oath to defend me or whatever that was, and these are just two examples. Yes, townies sometimes defend others and whatnot, but there is usually purpose behind it. For example, I defended pacman right up until sirdan claimed doc. Your actions seem to be based on some sort of trust that doesn't fit with a pro-town outlook.

In the POST-GAME analysis of my first mafia game, some people voted for me, ironically saying they would have liked me to stop talking, even if they thought I was townie.

Yeah, some people are assholes. Your posts can be a little hard to read but that facet of your play is a null-tell.

But in serious business, I didnt accept your points and I debated plenty of them.

Again, you mistake the meaning of "buddying."

I cannot see where I am implicated at all.

This is the "nuh-uh" defense. Problem is, I

can

see it. And I explained it.

Ecto was the one pointing out buddying, which is probably the most serious behavioral scumtell on my side (even I think it is not hard to explain) so hardly I see this connection.

This means nothing. Scum buddy to townies all the time. In fact, part of my reasoning against pushing Ecto harder is that, as long as I suspect you, your behavior suggests that he is town.

Also, I don't like how you just rolled over and accepted what he was shoveling.

Glad you noticed that too. Remember it for tomorrow.

"Awwww, there there little nureins, it's okay. kuribo's mean to everyone. Don't overreact. There there. Shh... it's okay, I've got you."

OMG you're an evil bastard. LOL.

[Ythill]

It's getting a little nasty in here, huh?

To all that attacked me, I defended.

Not to my satisfaction. To this...

Now that habit/pacman has flipped scum, nuriens is implicated worse than anyone.

...which refers to this...

Nuriens practiced elephantine circumlocution, touching on the wagon but avoiding the topic of habit's alignment. Instead he pushed suspicion back on the wagon and, only 25 hours after the first vote on habit, twisted Cass' words to start a lurker hunt. Shortly thereafter, he inexplicitly changed his opinion about me so as to agree with me about habit's behavior being excusable.

...all you said was this...

I cannot see where I am implicated at all. I asked couple of harsh things to habit as you pointed out. Then my view on him was basically shared by most people, including some of those I firmly thought townies (you can check it easily). Then he went on "bad player" category.

And when I challenged you about your response, you ignored it.

[Ythill]

BEFORE THE WAGON
It doesn't matter what you thought before the wagon, not for this discussion. However, having the singular belief "X is a bad player" says absolutely zip about what you think of his alignment.

AFTER THE WAGON
Nuriens, do you know what

elephantine circumlocution

means? It means to talk your way around a subject by using verbose sentances, rhetoric, repetition, etc. The suggestion is that you avoided taking a solid stance on habit's alignment by saying a lot of nothingness. Let's look back at that first paragraph from #318.

I really dislike the recent push on Habitang, and a lot of those votes seem all too opportunistic. After reading through the thread, my top 3 suspects were Andycyca, Ectomancer, and Jahudo. I was somewhat suspicious of Ythill, mainly because I thought his top two targets of Nureins and Habitang were soft, easy targets, but his hesitance to jump on the Habitang wagon here gives me better vibes about him.

I agree in the basics.

Your agreement is very vague. It leaves the interpretation of what "the basics" are up to the reader which, concequently, leaves you the option of morphing your opinion later. Considering the length and complexity of the statement you quoted, your agreement here could have more than ten different specific meanings or a combination of them.

I find Habitang partially suspicious, though I relaxed these suspicions due to Cass' first arguments (his previous game with her shows the same kind of erratic and poor playstyle).

"Partially suspicious" is entirely subjective, which is exacerbated by your qualification, "I relaxed these suspicions." We can't be sure how much you suspected him, how much you suspect him now, or if you currently suspect him at all.

The latter participations showed his need of fast posting-voting, which can be understood as playstyle or as scummy in my view.

Translation: habit could be scum or town. Pure rhetoric.

So I fully understand that Cass Fossed him and voting him is also more or less correct.

Translation: habit could be construed as scum even if he's town. You tell us more about your view of Cass than of habit.

I agree with you about Ythill, and therefore I'm going to reread a little bit our tense debate. Maybe there was even more of tunnel vision in both sides than I arrived to believe.

As habit's buddy, it makes perfect sense that you'd want to change the subject to something as arduous as this. I know you didn't bring it up first, but you

were

ready to embark on a Ythill reread while habit's very important wagon was happening.

Do you see? While other players were either attacking him voraciously or defending him off-hand, obviously convinced they'd discerned his alignment one way or the other from his actions and/or the resulting wagon, you

never

took a solid stance on his alignment.

Paraphrase of #318, p1

: I sort of agree with Goat. Habit is less suspicious now. He could be town or scum. Cass isn't suspicious for attacking him. Ythill is less suspicious for not attacking him. I'll reread Ythill.

I don't feel like I have to address the rest of this section because, in your reiteration, you only prove my premise: "Instead [nuriens] pushed suspicion back on the wagon..."

LURKER HUNT
You exclusively dedicated two posts, spanning over 16 hours, to the subject. So maybe me calling it a lurker hunt was a little bombastic. It was certainly a digression. One of many. Your favorite topic during that phase was anything-but-habit.

Oh, you mentioned him now and again. Let's look at #343 which, in your own words, is an example how you, "did not escape at any moments to comment on the wagon or habit."

(@sim)... what do you think of a player who is crafty enough to employ this tactic but daft enough to time it so poorly?

Ythill, Im reading positively from you lately, so do not take my words as an attack

I had the same impression from Habitang since the very beginning.

This, I think, is the only solid stance you took on habit during that wagon. You

hint

at his alignment by agreeing with the too-dumb-to-be-smart-scum argument. It's interesting to me that when you point out that habit

could

be town, you cite others' arguments.

Indeed, if you contemplate a bit the game, Cass is CONSTANTLY worried about what habitang can make in the game... have you seen it? At some moments I found it excessive indeed.

If you remember, I think I did a read of this game at the beginning, and I understood what Cass meant about Habitang.

After some people started to point out suspicions on Cass, and having read her insistance about habitang, I decided to re-read the game, because she was townie for me...

A careful read confirmed my first read and I extracted no suspicions on Cass. I believe she is really worried about the bad play of habit, and habit is so erratic that is very hard to read...

The rest of this is about Cass. Habit is briefly mentioned. So your example of how you didn't avoid the topic only strengthens my own argument that you wanted to talk about anything-but.

Just because I've already pasted it, I should probably also mention that this quote is a great example of your buddying. Cass is the target.

AGREE WITH FOE TO CLEAR BUDDY
Your opinion

did

change, at least in the public record. You went from stating

habit is a bad player

to

habit is too dumb to be smart scum

. That's a crucial difference because, in the context of the allegations, it was the difference between reading him MotR or leaning town.

It is very telling that you didn't clearly state a definitive opinion of habit's alignment, but instead posted multiple digressions while occasionally agreeing with one of the players who was reading habit as town. You even agreed with me to this end. Odd, since I had been so suspicious to you.

That's scum behavior. You've been caught.

[Ythill]

Ythill: Why did you vote for Pacman yesterday?

Sirdan claimed doc. Pacman was the only other serious wagon at the time, and he wasn't in my will-not-lynch list. You should know by now that I like to keep my vote out there unless I have a very good reason not to.

This makes absolutely no sense considering your constant defense of him yesterday.

Constant defense? I was the first to post a case against habit. I also advocated pacman as a good info lynch and later argued to defend that statement. My main defenses of him were (1) my arguments against the speed-wagon that formed on habit for, IMO, no good reason; and (2) an argument against pacman as the alternative lynch to sirdan.

Your vote was at a juncture where things were undecided as well, making it even more suspicious.

Then be suspicious of sirdan for claiming doc . He dictated the timing of my vote change.

To me, this reads like you wanting to change gears from defense to bus, but then when things swapped back to Darox being the lynch you returned to Darox being scum and Pacman town.

This is all very cute, arguing through hindsight. Of course it

seems

suspicious knowing their roles, but I didn't know their roles. I was acting on what I saw. If you have a problem with my reasoning

from yesterday

then point it out.

Please explain.

Hyper-summary: habit was a suspect of mine, I cleared him mainly because of that wagon on him and the interaction between he and Jah, I filed him as a good fallback lynch for information and moved on, we narrowed the choice to two people, one was my top suspect so I pursued him (and defended the other guy) until he claimed doc, then I dropped my vote onto the fallback wagon, then I saw another wagon forming and compared the roles at length, finding Darox to be a better lynch.

It's not scummy to be wrong.

[Ythill]

@Goat: I'll reiterate simply. My main defense of pacman (the one you're speaking of, I believe) was an argument against lynching him over sirdan. I

never

backed down from the stance that I thought he'd be a good info lynch or that I would vote him over no-lynch at deadline.

I might have misread the count on Darox at that point. I was pretty tunneled on sirdan when his claim came.

[Ythill]

@Goat: You and I must have different definitions of buddying. When I use that term, I mean behavior that could point to a scum-buddy relationship after the guilty party card-flips scum. Nuriens' main buddy targets have been Ecto, Cass, and myself. I think what you quoted was sarcasm and comradere and maybe, like you said, kissing up to kuribo a little, but I don't think it was buddying.

Thoughts?

Sounds reasonable enough. So we have nuriens implicated by habit's actions and his own. The problem with the former is that it could have been habit buddying to nuriens. However, that possibility doesn't give me enough pause to change my vote. It's pretty clear to me that nuriens is the play today.

[Ythill]

And we discussed all that much before Ythill and Goat started to say that i was buddying you...

I said, quite clearly, that I thought you were NOT buddying to kuribo in that post.

Please, tell to me WHICH OF MY WORDS WERE POSITIVE FOR KURIBO and therefore, where I was

buddying

/comrade/kissing up him.

Comradere: I'm wondering if you mistake my meaning here. I meant you were arguing in a "hard" (to use your word) but playful way. Saying things like "we, the retarded open you the doors of our house." That's what I meant by camradare.

Kissing up: In defense of my point, I said "maybe" kissing up. I said it about your phrase, "while I re-consider the situation and formulate my own questions, I can enjoy your majesty of the perfect scumhunting.." This phrase sounded sarcastic and playful to me, but "maybe" it wasn't. "Maybe" it was kissing up. Now you've clarified what you meant. Enough said.

I stand by the statement that none of this stuff is buddying by my definition of the term.

[Ythill]

I consider Kuribo a shit player...

The ad hom is uncalled for and it's incorrect. Kuribo is not the best player I've ever seen, but he's far from the worst. I find it interesting that you question his abilities because he was right about pacman. If he's town, which you and I seem to agree that he is, then only good play allowed him that catch.

You have discarded logic to discredit an attacker. Ooooooops, huh?

I still think Ythill is the best lynch today, though. He was very scummy day 1 (1. 'hahaha whatever scum', 2. not adressing my proper defenses, 3. slippery voting style towards the end) and I haven't really seen otherwise day 2 yet.

1. Still feeling the sting from my needling?

2. Proper defenses? You came out on the bottom end of that. It was only your claim that saved you. Don't get cocky, the amnesty will not last forever.

3. There was nothing "slippery" about my votes. I explained them fully. They only

seem

suspicious because pacman was scum.

I still don't see the scumminess of Nuriens. He buddies to poeple, yes, true. Seems like a weak reason to lynch him. Kuribo upsets him: a null-tell.

Do you realize how much you have minimized the case on nuriens? He was implicated both ways by our scum confirmation. He was vague and ambivalent early D1, which was called a scumtell, then he changed his play. This means he is either scum trying to avoid suspicion or n00b town who took the attack as a lesson. Except he goes back to being vague later when habit is under attack, which invalidates the n00b read. There's plenty more.

Nuriens is the play today. Sim's style is empty, but his treatment of pacman and the wagoneers was 100% townie.

Actually, I think a lot of players in this game are getting way too emotional.

With nuriens "pleasing Ythill" and calling our fight a love affair and me going down on his scum meter... and now kuribo's latest offer... I'd say it's more homoerotic than emotional.

[Ythill]

I lost a big post to a CPU error last night. Sorry. I'll try to recreate it...

Bad, bad, bad. You did not even reply to this accusation, just stating that you 'won'.

The accusation was that I failed to respond to your "proper defenses." My response (and my opinion all along) was that there weren't any.

The rest of your accustaions are a repetition of Goat's and I've already responded to him (twice). No point in repeating it here. I wonder at the convenient timing of your smokescreen attempt.

The ad hom was correct as none Goat or you seemed to understand the irony in my post to Kuribo.

Fair enough.

Your argument on him guessing correctly is ridiculous. 2 observations, 1 correct guess (Pacman), 1 incorrect guess (me).

They were not guesses but, rather, eductaed conclusions. And the premise here is that he's not wrong about you. Good argument though. If I had been setting a trap, you would have successfully dodged it.

I do not remember any serious reference about my ambivalence that I took into consideration. I did not. May you explain this to me ?

Not sure I understand the question. Are you talking about the return to ambivalence? It is apparent in the weak stance you took on habit during his wagon. And in other places but I didn't bother mentioning those.

By the way, that game was 4 days long. I voted essentially 3 persons. Two of them were scum.

Your argument does not correlate. I wasn't talking about kuribo's overall record or his alignment, I was simply stating that your experience with him does not logically lead to your view that he is a "shit player." However, your appeal to past experience proves nothing about your alignment here. Nor does it say anything about your skill level, since we don't know how much luck and other factors played a part in your success.

I was recently in a kingmaker game where I accidentally made a mafioso king D1. Then I cornered him into executing his buddy, got the ex-king executed on D2, then made a post naming all of the remaining scum. Freaked them out so bad that both groups NKed me N2, and one also RBed the doc just in case. Yet I am still wrong often enough, and my alignment is still unproven here.

We shouldn't call each other 'shit players', 'dumb' or 'failure' and what not.

Since you brought it up, could we also stop using vowels? They hurt my feelings.

[Ythill]

Who are we trying to string up?

Nuriens. Look to his relations with habit for the best reasons.

Sirdan is trying to lynch not-nuriens. Cass still thinks Sim is the play, but she's wrong.

In post 1120'5, nureins twisted the last statement of Kuribo trying to incriminate him with a quicklynch desire without discussion!!
How cannot you vote nureins?

Why aren't you voting for him?

[Ythill]

In post 1120'5, nureins twisted the last statement of Kuribo trying to incriminate him with a quicklynch desire without discussion!!
How cannot you vote nureins?

Why aren't you voting for him?

Because post 1120'5 only existed in Kuribo's mind. As many other things.

I was joking. As evidenced by the:

[Ythill]

P.S. - Kuribo needs some investigation for possibly bussing Pacman.

Yes, because the best possible move would have been to continue to push for the lynch of a scum partner long after the wagon's moved on and then complain loudly the next day about how the rest of you got it wrong.

How would that help me in any way if I were scum?

I hope you're not serious. It's an excellent scum strategy similar to things you've seen me do as scum. And I don't know that Ecto meant cop investigation.

However, I see enough towntells coming from you that I don't think this is a crucial subject for today. Nuriens first. Then we'll see where we're at.

[Ythill]

Calm down, Sim. There's no reason to hurry. If you're a cop with a guilty, say it explicitly. We can lynch her today and you tomorrow if you're lying.

I am a tracker. Unless a townie who protected kuribo or RBed sirdan counterclaims right now, sirdan is confirmed doc. Either way, kuribo is confirmed town.

Cass targeted nobody N1, but that doesn't mean she's innocent.

[Ythill]

...in case you didn't get the hint, sirdan targeted kuribo last night.

[Ythill]

/in (obviously)

Sirdan should be able confirm that I am either the last scum or the tracker, because otherwise I would not know his target.

[Ythill]

Compiling data...

Kuribo is confirmed vanilla townie, Jah's claim would be a ridiculous lie so we should believe him for now, which means Cass is also a mason. Darox, the claimed RB, did not block sirdan so sirdan is looking like the doc.

So far, it looks like we need to hang Sim, Goat, or Ecto.

Waiting for the last two claims...

[Ythill]

So yeah you guessed my target right, that gives us a good reason to think you are town...

No it doesn't. It means I am either scum or a tracker. Really, it tells you nothing about me that isn't apparent from my claim. See, if you're the doc, I could know that you targeted kuribo because I could be scum who tried to kill him. I'm not, but it's a distinct possibility from your point of view.

What my claim

does

confirm is that you are the doc (unless one of the last two people claims doc who protected kuribo). It also confirms kuribo as town. See, either he was protected from the NK or Ecto is scum who got blocked targeting someone else. Either way, kuribo is

not

the last scum.

Unless you believe this was a 4:8 setup with Ecto and kuribo as buddies, which is extremely unlikely.

[Ythill]

sirdan- Doc
Ythill- tracker
Simenon- Roleblocker
Darox- Roleblocker
Jahudo and Cass- Masons
Goatrevolt and kuribo- Vanilla

It's kind of obvious what ecto is going to claim, isn't it?

It's obvious he'll claim vig, but will he claim one-shot or full? That's the most important question. The other is... will it be a fake claim?

We have only 3 'nillas, two dead scum, and six claimed power roles, with Ecto being an obvious secondary killer. The most plausible scenario in my mind is Sim as scum and Ecto as SK RBed by Darox N2.

I think our best course of action is to demand that the RBs target each other tonight; we hang Ecto today. There should be no NK. Tommorrow we hang Sim and, if he comes up town, we hang Darox. Or the other way around. If there's a NK tonight we can rethink things.

What does everyone think of this plan?

Vote: Ectomancer

[Ythill]

Goat, I believe we cross posted. I think your reads sound solid, but my suggestion is the safer course of action, and it will potentially provide more info. We should play this my way.

[Ythill]

Otherwise, why wouldn't he shoot the claimed doc or someone else considered likely to be town?

When I've played SK, I've tried to get a scum early, b/c it legitimizes the vig claim and makes a tidy endgame more plausible (in theory, I've only lost as SK). Your alternative sounds okay, Sim's does not. We could combine them...

Lynch Darox or Sim. The other is killed by Ecto and blocks Ecto. Sirdan should protect one of: me, kuribo, or Goat.

I'll change my vote if we decide on this combined plan.

[Ythill]

If Ecto is a SK, it should give us the same result.

Should it?

If Ecto is the SK, he wants to kill town today. So if we lynch the town RB, he will not kill the other RB. And a scum RB, knowing this, will also kill town. Which leaves us @ 1:1:4. I believe there are some worst case scenarios that could cost us the game with those numbers, but I'm not sure how likely they are.

Anyway, I still feel it's an acceptable risk and will swap my vote if more people agree, but I stand by the statement that an Ecto lynch is the safer play, because it will prevent all NKs except in one of those worse case scenarios, which will reveal itself by the existence of a NK and leave us at 1:6 or 2:5 to deal with it.

[Ythill]

...if I wasn't 95% convinced that you weren't simply guessing on the targeting last night, you would be very high on my suspect list.

I don't understand what you mean. Guessing on what targeting?

Anyhow, yeah, I could be an SK. That's really not a concern today...

This makes my arm-hairs stand on end.

So, we'll get into the details, but of this I am certain: Sirdan should protect

me.

Fail. We don't need your NK to win, but we may need to know your alignment.

Nothing about Ecto's claim changes my stance. I think an Ecto lynch with RBs saying they will target each other is the safest plan, but lynching one RB with the above-mentioned target arrangements is an acceptable alternative.

[Ythill]

Hello? What do you mean guessing on what targeting? Quite irritating for people to conveniently forget what they just said.

I didn't forget what I said, I just figured you meant something else because to suggest that guessing = town in this situation is absolutely retarded. If I'm scum, i know who he targeted. If I'm tracker, I know who he targeted. If I'm neither, why would I claim tracker at all?

Either way, it's pretty obvious I didn't guess, but that fact says absolutely nothing about my alignment. So I don't understand why you are hinging your suspicions on it.

With my plan, the roleblockers are tested, town retains an additional way to remove suspects, and still has plenty of time to kill me off.

What difference does time make? Kills are all that matter. If we limit the number of kills, we've got plenty of opportunities to lynch scum. Even if the scum is not one of the RBs and that person chooses to not kill, it will allow us to have at least one day with no NK. That's good for town, not scum.

But whatever...

I've already said that I agree that the lynch-one-RB plan is an acceptable alternative and the few people who have stated their opinions seem to think it's okay. Why are you arguing it so vehemently?

I think that my numbers show that even if I am an SK, I have almost no chance of winning...

Chance or no, if you are a SK (which is quite plausible) you're going to try your hardest. One of the reasons I like my plan better is that you like the other plan better.

...while I've outlined your path to victory as scum very explicitly.

You mean that fairy tale where I card-flip a mason and then still get his claimed buddy mislynched? Yeah, right. Too bad for hypothetical-me-as-scum that Jah just confirmed the masons.

If you and our first RB lynch both come up town... and the second RB is town... it will be obvious to him that I am scum and he will RB me. Not to mention have a good chance of getting me lynched when that N4 no kill is revealed.

It's interesting to me that you ask us to take your alignment at face value. Not a very townie thing to do.

I like this plan: We lynch Darox. Ecto targets Simenon for a kill. Simenon roleblocks Ecto. Ythill tracks Sirdanilot. Sirdan protects anyone except Simenon.

Sure, I'll track sirdan if we go with that plan. I'm still waiting on others to give support one way or another before moving my vote. This decision should not be made by a few of us.

[Ythill]

Ecto, why would you try and kill the uncounterclaimed doc?

He already explained this.

@Jah: Your recap looks okay. Which plan do you prefer?

Same question for everyone who hasn't answered it. Which is your preferred plan?

[Ythill]

In case Ecto isn't town, I'd prefer to lynch the scummier of the two RBs. I think Goat's logic is flawless and I believe that both are RBs, so I'd prefer a Darox lynch. But whatever.

unvote

And where the hell is Cass?

Mod, is it time to prod Cass yet?

I'd rather not go to night until she's confrimed the mason claim.

[Ythill]

If both are RBs and one is scum, that one is Darox. Still willing to hang Sim if that's what the majority wants, but I'll place my vote with my beliefs for now.

vote: Darox

[Ythill]

Can we get a hammer here? Amen.

[Ythill]

Don't be dumb you guys. If I was scum, which I'm not, I could NK sirdan and then say he protected whomever I want.

Yeah, I said I wanted to hear from Cass before night, but I'm starting to lose patience.

[Ythill]

To risk beating a dead horse, I'd like to point out that my own discarded plan

does

actually prevent a NK so long as one of our RBs is mafia. It's not too late to switch.

IS IT THAT GOD DAMN HARD TO JUST GO BACK AND INTERPRET PEOPLES' ACTIONS?

That means we have to reread nuriens-scum. Oh-noes!

I will probably have some time before or during the weekend, but I better not be the only one doing it.

Unvote

for a while to do some actual scumhunting...

[Ythill]

Actual scumhunting Ythill? Waiting until page 52 to do it?

Way to twist my words. I mean

today

. See, I came out with a claim to confirm kuribo and clear sirdan, then we massclaimed, then we started moving towards a lynch based only on the claims.

The entire town almost forgot that we lynched a GF yesterday and, with as wordy as nuriens was, there's bound to be a lot of evidence in the thread. Thanks to kuribo's cool head (I never thought I'd say that) we might actually get to use that evidence.

Why does it make you "suspicious" that I would want to look back before we move forward. Kuribo-town suggested it, are you suspicious of him too?

Im leaning towards Ythill as he tries to toss out the last few pages of discussion for "actual scumhunting".

The last few pages of second guessing the mod was

not

actual scumhunting. Examining nuriens' posts and the statements of others about him is. And it'll be much easier now that we have a mass claim.

There's no deadline and no reason not to use all of the information we have. Do you have something to hide?

[Ythill]

Reread complete.

Sim is town. He was targeted heavily by nuriens out of the blue, he argued for a pacman lynch when lynching pacman wasn’t cool, and he’s demonstrated plenty of honest curiosity throughout the game. His hunting has been flawed at times, but not in any way that suggests ulterior motives. His viewpoint changes naturally with the flow of evidence.

Nhat/Darox B is scum. He made nicey-nicey with the GF for no good reason. He was quick to attack habit, but made sure to link Cass to him while doing so, which stinks of the bus. He pursued a weak case against VI TPT ad nauseum (across two replacements) and was one of the first to raise the “playstyle” case against me. His attack on Sim (for “role fishing”) was pretty weak and his jump to Darox A was a stunning example of opportunism.

A skim of nuriens definitely implicates Darox B over Sim. One telling moment is in his 51st post, where he examines the habit wagon: nhat is given the immediate townie pass with almost no reasoning. Nuriens continues to treat nhat lightly throughout the game. One very telling aspect is that every one of nuriens attackers

except nhat

gets the OMGUS treatment.

The most telling piece of evidence in this whole reread was found in #663 by nhat, summed up in my own #667. We were discussing a compromise lynch and two players made actions which drastically affected the totals, moving the GF far away from the gallows. One of those players was nhat.

As a final note, anyone who insists on suspecting me (ahem… Ecto) should do a ctrl-F search for my name in nuriens’ posts. The dude attacked me, buddied to me, claimed that my read cleared pacman in his mind, and generally treated me exactly how I would expect scum to treat town.

Not that it matters because, unless Ecto is the SK, this game should be over right now.

Vote: Darox B

. Goodnight.

[Ythill]

Sounds like good news.

[Ythill]

Good show, teammates! That was a nice tidy win.

My apologies to Jah for the attacks, good job defending yourself. I'd apologize to sirdan to, but I still think he looks scummy.

I think kuribo gets MVP.

[Ythill]

Yeah, although I should have killed Ythill instead.

When in doubt, always NK me.

Sirdan got VERY lucky when he decided to claim doc without saying he was a one-shot. I didn't track him N1 because I figured he'd be killed if he was the doc. If I had tracked him N1, we would have hung him D2. If we had gone with the Sim kill on D2, we would have hung sirdan D3. It was a

very

risky move but, lucky for us, it worked out miraculously. Sirdan, I promise I will never again say "hahaha, whatver scum" to you so long as you promise to never fake-claim as town again. K?

@ nuriens: I don't think you played horribly. Actually, your prima facie play was quite good. Where you could use improvement is in your buddy relations. You need to realize that at least one scum will most likely be caught and then town will use that confirmation to find the rest of you. Just keep that in mind.

Also, don't be afraid to have solid opinions as scum. The average townie will believe a change in stance so long as you take care to make it look natural, but the lack of a stance is a surefire scumtell.

@ kuribo: Although your townie play in this game was quite good, I should warn you that I have a pretty solid read on you. If you are scum against me in the future, you'd better mix up your play.

[Ythill]

@Goat: I'd have to reread to tell you the exact reasons but, generally, your opinions adhered strictly to the evidence and you demonstrated a certain level of restraint and wisdom in everything you did. Early in the game, when I said that I had identified some townies but would not name them, you were on the top of that list. And you never really did anything to change my view. There were a few times I questioned my read but I always came up with the same answer.

In my mind, you were the sleeper. Meaning that I was willing to consider you obv-town but, if things started to go extremely wrong, I would have moved you up to the top of my suspect list. But, you know, nothing went wrong.