Mini 645 - Innocence Falls (Game Over)

[Simenon]

unvote

The water is too murky.

If you have such a clean read, why dont you go ahead and give it?

I did not claim to have one. However, I also didn't throw up my arms and say "WELP LOOKS LIKE THE WATERS ARE TOO MURKY CONTRIBUTE HERE."

That's a load of bullshit. I said nothing about giving up. I removed my vote because I no longer felt like my vote should be sitting on Nurein when I didn't feel confident about what is going on there.

Well, you sure phrased that strangely.

Because I was reading it as "the water is too murky". Which is a totally empty statement.

The

REAL

problem I have with your statement is Pot, Kettle, Black.

Remember this?

Unvote

More later.

It's later.

And there's more. I've been commenting on the game to my satisfaction, certainly.

And I honestly don't see the hypocrisy. You said "the water is too murky", which implies that you can't make a point. I said "more later", which is the direct opposite.

[Ectomancer]

I was referring to your unvote followed by no follow up.

[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 One scumtell withdrawn.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...

[Andycyca]

OK, after a thorough read on Sim I found nothing. Most of it it's his response to other people, most of those accusations being meta-game. Null.

[Andycyca]

Sorry to doublepost. I'm still reading more one-player threads BTW

[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.

[Andycyca]

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

What's the difference? (sorry if I don't follow, no sarcasm here)

[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.

[habitang]

Initial feeling. OMGUS. But I appreciate you didn't do the whole PbPa, and focused especially on my playign style. I hate scrolling though heaps of quotes (I'm probably in teh wrong game eh?) I used to do it, but it always got thrown back at me and I lost credibility. Pretty much same way I feel about Nureins atm actually.

Cool. SO the business about Jahudo. My initial case on Jahudo was for starting discussion, but hey they were genuine scum pick-ups. If Jahudo responded funny then he would of been in trouble. But the onyl funny response I think was when he went and voted someone over semantics, which is just silly. Which felt weird to me, like weird in an 'eccentric Townie sort of way', I find those who suddenly revert 'back to books' when under pressure are scum moreso than those such as TPT who go crazy when they go under pressure. But atm, TPT does need to justify the sudden lurking.

I've learnt all about making inflammatory statements and getting lynched for it. SO if I make an inflammatory statement without thinking again, well I don't see why I shouldn't get lynched if it looks like a scum slip-up. IN all likelihood though, with teh pace fo this game, I don't think I will make any crazy statements, it has always been impatience that has driven me to acting all scum-like. So my claim about misreading alot, well it's more that I'm impatient and don't like reading long posts.

I sound liek full pro-scum the way you put my stance on scum-hunting. NO fair, you took eveyrthign otu of context. In particular, teh context of Nureins who loves posting on absolutely EVERYTHING.
I agree with Ectomancer's favourite analogy, I'm not telling people to stop scum-hunting, I'm telling people to stop muddying the waters.

[habitang]

Well I definitely see it as N00b play by Nureins when he posts on everything. That is if he is Townie. If he is scum, I think he is more N00b scum, since if he was experienced he wouldn't have any arguments against him at teh same time, the massive muddying of waters is a good cover-up.
So he is experienced player but first time scum OR just N00b all round. I havn't read too many of his posts to figure it out, but YtHill has done that for me and his suspicions seem to have cleared Nureins for me at this point, well not cleared, just not obvious scum as YtHill has put it.

[habitang]

A crazy thought. But how in the world are you supposed to detect scum? Sounds stupid i know. But in this game, I mean, scum are trying to get Townie peopel voted off, but at the same time, someone is going to get voted off regardless of what scum say. So scum just need to be pro-town for day 1, and whola, they 1. look Townie and 2. got someone voted off. It is only when they try pressure a vote that they are revealed. And in this game, it seems liek no1 is doing that, I mena scum shoudl have jumped on TPT's bandwagon. Unless they already did, meaning the only two that were on there for a long period of time, I super doubt this.
So what I propose is a no-lynch, or no-vote. Whatever it is. Let me see, 12 people. Night Kill x 1 by scum. NK x 1 by vigilante and we still have a ratio of 8:2 at best or 6:4 at worst.
But in all likelihood,the way this first day is going, I feel like Nureins has sorta stuffed it up for a proper investigation. Any scum coudl easily make a stance by saying Nureins is scum or town and then accuse eitehr nureins or say eveyrone is null-tell. I'm alluding to Andycyca's null-tell statements.

I'm in for a no-lynch or no-vote.

no lynch/ no-vote

[Ectomancer]

habitang make good words

me no read them tho

too big for head, make it hurt

-------------------------------------------

Just kidding. I read them. I have a question for Ythill though:

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.

This just feels like an ad hominem attack to me. 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. In the case of the lazy, they might be inclined to assume all of it was true if they say a bit or two they

knew

to be accurate. Some of it I saw, but some statements look like opinion to me.
My question is: Do you think you maybe took it just a bit too far and would like to retract some of the things I consider more to be an opinion? Or can you actually point out all of these traits? (God help us reading that post if you can)

[Jahudo]

I’m starting to miss TPT, being gone for over five days now. If he isn't scum he really needs to do something proactive. Any number of things could help me change my opinion of him.

But I want to talk about Ythill / Nureins attacks and counter-attacks (and I promise no quotes!)

Ythill’s post 216
- I agree that the nureins joke quiz of post 58 diminished his own arguments, which allowed him to easily let it fall aside if no-one bit. But the game hadn’t developed enough for strong opinions. The quiz had more of a purpose to initiate post-random vote conversation so it didn’t have to be that serious.
- Post 189 could be an escape hatch. Says he was “very open” to finding people to help in scum-hunting. This certainly followed his earlier posts that were more open to looking for town. He gives TPT benefit of the doubt, Matin and Ecto some town tells, and doesn’t go into serious suspicions until about post 105.

Nureins post 229
- I also didn’t see posts 14 and 20 as forcing Ythill to explain not random voting. It did force him to respond or look suspicious but the questions were not as serious as Ythill contributes them as.
- I believe that your posts in 38 and 39 were not meant to “implicate” those seven people as suspicious but further the investigation that they were contributing to anyway.

Nureins post 230
- For the most part I have passed over the whole Nureins buddying to Ecto debate and if you’re all tired of it then skip this question. But is anyone willing to make a theorized conclusion? Nureins is a new player and Ecto has been around a while longer so there was there some IC trust or was it purely circumstantial to the joke vote continuation going on?

Ythill’s post 239
- I did find it a bit odd that Nureins answered your town and null reads of him, but he answers himself well in the next post. I also see it as an extension of his posting tendencies to leave no rock unturned. But in the context of this game, long posts may be overlooked and some points will not have the same strong effect when placed with dribble. You seem to be guilty of this and might be trying to disguise your weak points and tells in them thinking people may ignore it. But if you can summarize reasonably when asked, and I’m not saying you can’t, then that’s another thing.

Nureins post 240
- If you think Ythill is tunnel visioning you incredibly in some of your posts it is because you two are “debating” each other as you also say in this post. You’re defense provides counter-arguments of Goebbels that can also be argued as confirmation bias of his constant lying and misguiding. To me, I don’t see either as being overtly tunnel-visioned, but then again I have a tolerance for lengthy posts and can see the benefit of you two being thoroughly analyzed. If you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to worry.

Ythill’s post 252
- I like your reasoning of nureins claim of making a “partially random” vote. It’s a cautious play to avoid guilt if people disagree and partially random sounds a lot like a weak-reasoned vote early in the game that nureins attacked Ythill for doing in the first place.
- I also tend to believe in your analysis in response to nureins post #105-107. What I see is two different play styles between you two: Ythill puts himself out there by “jumping votes” as nureins says of Ythill; but nureins spreads subtle suspicions that lends him to “spring on whichever side of that debate the town leans towards” as Ythill says of nureins. Neither strategy is an sure tell and this early in the game I see either as legitimate by themselves, but I see Ythill as a stronger town here.

There were plenty more arguments between them, including the Goebbels claims but I can’t decide if it’s exaggerating and misinterpreting on Ythill’s part or false dilemma paired with confirmation bias on nureins part. Maybe a bit of both, but I don’t think Ythill is making big lies as foundation for his investigation, but that is what nureins seems to be using as a primary defense. After reading both sides, I favor Ythill’s position in this argument slightly more than nureins but I don’t get an overly town feeling from Ythill.

[Ectomancer]

I hate simulposts.

Our winning strategy is to lynch. Nobody can make the first day so chaotic that we cant come up with a good lynch. If you are unsure of the Nureins situation, move to a different target. It's ok. Go back and re-read or just flat out pick somebody, but a lynch is happening today.

[Jahudo]

Night Kill x 1 by scum. NK x 1 by vigilante and we still have a ratio of 8:2 at best or 6:4 at worst.

What do you know about this setup? I'm not accusing as much as asking for clarification because you make it sound like 8:2 is our best scenario of any role distribution.

Also I say a no-lynch day causes us to learn far less than say investigating multiple people and deciding on a lynch. With a lynch we have supporters and dissenters and their alignment adds to the conversation in the next day.

[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.

[habitang]

Just a quick response to Jahudo. Set-up I know has at least 2 scum, at least one doc, at least one cop and at least one vigilante. The storyline says so. So best scenario actually on Day 2 would be a win with vig taking one out and we Townies lynchign properly D1.
But this no-lynch/no vote thing makes, I think, equal sense with re-reading. But people are not supporting the no vote thing so I guess I will have to re-read.

[habitang]

Actually, it's interesting. It seems highly unlikely to have a D2 win from a correct lynch D1 and a vig kill N1. I am pretty confident in deducing that with at least 3 pro-town spcial roles, then there shoudl at LEAST be 3 pro-scum roles. I'm going to say with certainty there are at LEAST 3 scum.

[Erratus Apathos]

Mod: how many scum are there?

That's for scum to know and town to find out, as they say.


Vote Count

The Pope's Tiara: (3) nhat, Jahudo, Cass
nureins: (1) Ythill
Ythill: (1) nureins
Simenon: (1) Andycyca
Ectomancer: (1) The Pope's Tiara


Not voting: Goatrevolt, Simenon, Matin, habitang, Ectomancer

The Pope's Tiara is being replaced. Matin has been prodded.

[Erratus Apathos]

Tritch replaces The Pope's Tiara.

[nureins]

Initial feeling. OMGUS. But I appreciate you didn't do the whole PbPa, and focused especially on my playign style. I hate scrolling though heaps of quotes (I'm probably in teh wrong game eh?) I used to do it, but it always got thrown back at me and I lost credibility. Pretty much same way I feel about Nureins atm actually.

Im not lost with my quotes with Ythill. Now Ive stopped due to some petititons by the audience. But indeed I could largely answer to his repetitive points. Again I offer to anyone who ask me about any of the points raised by Ythill...

So do not please conform a view of me which is, to my view, pretty incorrect...as far as I can see, I havent lost "credibility" around...if you think so, you are welcome to the wagon.

[/quote]

[Tritch]

So it's day one; most votes have been made off of jokes or small leads. But I notice that three people have voted for me with still no substantial information. Perhaps one person made the original joke vote, and two scum followed with the already town-made vote because they know that I am not one of them. Jahudo has been fighting aggressively as town, so perhaps we should set our sights on nhat and Cass?

[nureins]

[quote="Jahudo"][/quote]

I was gonna cite you and answer, but having read everything, I consider your summing up quite fair. Be prepared to face a wagon for not taking a stance, haha. This is a joke.

I had few things in which i disagree, but nothing serious.

For the moment,

unvote