Mini 701 - That's a Wrap! (Game Over)

[SpyreX]

At this point I'd just like to see it move. So, if that sparks something, go for it.

[Rage]

Activity List:

(player's name) (date and time of last post)

Spolium

Mana_Ku

(Mon Nov 24, 2008 8:39 pm)
orangepenguin (Wed Nov 26, 2008 2:20 am)

ortolan (Thu Nov 27, 2008 4:21 am)
mykonian (Thu Nov 27, 2008 4:58 pm)
springlullaby (Thu Nov 27, 2008 9:51 pm)
Ectomancer (Sat Nov 29, 2008 2:51 pm)
vollkan (Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:55 am)
SpyreX (Sat Nov 29, 2008 3:35 pm)
mrfixij (Thu Nov 27, 2008 4:29 pm)
TDC (Tue Nov 25, 2008 2:40 pm)

Will prod orangepenguin and Spolium if they do not post in the next 24 hours

.

[Ectomancer]

Let's string up Springlullaby, Mykonian, or mrfixij today.

[SpyreX]

Short summaries on why?

[mykonian]

Yes, I don't agree with everybody just following spyrex.

vollkan, ecto and mrfixij just see a big post, with lot of argument, and they hop on the bandwagon. Is it so hard just to check out how valid the points against spring are? Yes, his votes haven't been that strong, but really, is selfvoting to make a point and accusing vollkan of starting with a selfvote such a contradiction? I can't see town people make a point of it.

based on meta: last game I was in with spring, he got lynched the same way day one. He actually was spot on with finding scum, he only put his reasons the wrong way, and he found scum out of small tells. I and more people didn't believe him, saw his votes the wrong way, and we had our first mislynch.

I don't want to make the same mistake again, and I see history repeating itself here.

Just look at the way mrfixij and to lesser extend vollkan hop on. Now ecto is doing the same. You just say: these three people I want to be lynched. No reason, nothing. In case more people vote spring, you can just hop on. In case I can convince town in voting mrfixij, you can say you agreed all the way. I also would like to hear what you think scummy about me. I am certain I can explain it.

[Ectomancer]

C'mon, no fair playing by different rules. The game goes, you give your 3, then we get to ask questions.

[ortolan]

I will play.

vollkan, SpyreX, mrfixij

[vollkan]

If you didn't want to communicate something to us by it, you shouldn't have told us.

FFS. As I have already said, I wanted to say how I was feeling. That's it. That's what I wanted to communicate. It doesn't mean anything, but there is no harm in my saying so - especially given I have stressed its inconsequentiality.

may not make sense as you "appear" to have already responded:

I quote this only to note the way Orto feels the need to put "appear" in inverted commas.

Orto, I responded. Why the hell would you need to put inverted commas around the word "appear"?

This would "appear" to affirm my point about you being prejudiced. I made a reasonable response (you didn't attack it or anything), but now you just aspersions on it.

I still want to know how exactly it was craplogic?

The craplogic proceeds thus:
1) Vollkan thinks gut is scummy when used to justify votes/decs of suspicion
2) Vollkan said he had a gut feeling that something was weird with Ixfij
3) Combining 1 and 2, Vollkan is inconsistent and therefore scummy

The craplogic lies in the assumption that there is any congruence between my opinion in 1) and my action in 2). (Hint: There isn't).

I beg your pardon. If I am reading you correctly, your chief complaint is my timing, which is a core part of my case against Spring. So if you are accusing my vote timing correlation of being a weak scumtell, then you're damning your own accusation.

You're seriously simplifying the case he made against you here. Timing in isolation wasn't the problem, it was timing combined with a lack of reasons provided.

Yes, and I did not expect anything particular, I just wanted to see what Voll and to an extent others people would say. No, I'm saying that I could imagine very well Volkan doing the self-vote as a sort of gambit, creating a false peek of interest toward him and appealing to the 'why would he attract that much attention to him as scum'. My answer to that question is that it is very probably not a good question to be asking oneself when it is apparent that it is a question that is dictated in the subtext of the person's action.

So, in essence, you self-voted for a reason that was essentially the same as mine - to provoke reaction.

I love that when

you

do it is pristinely pro-town but when

I

do it you seem to object to it becasue you can "very well imagine" me doing it for nefarious purposes. Your hypocrisy is truly astounding.

No, I did not like the fact that Ecto was pushing Vollkan while staying short of being really aggressive. aka I think his behaviour toward Vollkan could be qualified as passive-aggressive, he was needling him on many things but never expressed suspicion that was backed-up with a vote. This is bad because it puts people in a defensive position whereas there is no clearly stated game relevant opinion opposite.

"no clearly stated game relevant opinion opposite"? Say what you will about the viability of Ecto's arguments, but it is absurd to say that he had no clearly stated opinion. Backing a point up with a vote does nothing to alter whether or not there are clear opinions - the two exist independently of one another.

a) It is my view that the symbolic behind the greeting-ritual that can be said to be the nature of the self-voting stage is to signify one's willingness to find scum and lynch.
i.e.
Ritual: hand-kissing
Symbolic: historically/culturally to signify one's respect and allegiance.
.
Again, I'm not open to debate on this subject in this thread as it this theory and has no relevance on the game itself; I have expressed my view on this only in direct reply to Vollkan's inquiry and made it clear.

Note here that it is self-evident, and that by definition, the symbolic of a gesture is not the same thing as the intention/motive of its execution

Uh, this is very relevant to this game - because it was a basis of your argument against an action of mine. You've essentially just made your own assertion about the point of random-voting and now expect us not to debate the viability of it. Again, as I keep saying, the random voting stage is just to kick off the game. There is no symbolic point to it.

b) I do believe that self-voting is antitown as lurking is antitown, and should never viewed otherwise for the reasons I have explained (i.e. Imagine a town in which everyone self-voted etc.). This describes the inehrent value of self-vote, which I think is nil. Yet I do not believe that antitown=scum.

FFS. By that logic, being an accountant is inherently bad because, if everybody were accountants, there would be no food. Just like self-voting, accountancy is only viable as a profession because not everybody does it.

vollkan, ecto and mrfixij just see a big post, with lot of argument, and they hop on the bandwagon. Is it so hard just to check out how valid the points against spring are? Yes, his votes haven't been that strong, but really, is selfvoting to make a point and accusing vollkan of starting with a selfvote such a contradiction? I can't see town people make a point of it.

It's really rather a mischaracterisation to say that Ecto, Ixfij and myself just hopped on a wagon after seeing a "big post". I went through the reasons (many of which I had expressed previously myself), and found they added up.

[mykonian]

vollkan, ecto and mrfixij just see a big post, with lot of argument, and they hop on the bandwagon. Is it so hard just to check out how valid the points against spring are? Yes, his votes haven't been that strong, but really, is selfvoting to make a point and accusing vollkan of starting with a selfvote such a contradiction? I can't see town people make a point of it.

It's really rather a mischaracterisation to say that Ecto, Ixfij and myself just hopped on a wagon after seeing a "big post". I went through the reasons (many of which I had expressed previously myself), and found they added up.

you know I don't agree with the adding up part . But anyway, you did the best job of the people I named. How mrfixij hopped on was really ugly, and until ecto explains why he is doing it now also, it is the same.

To me mrfix stands out. I will vote him. there are a few people I have no read on: spolium, vollkan and TDC. Ecto is not helping my view about him, I thought him protown earlier. orangepenguin is lucky he is a mason, because his play hasn´t helped us a bit. orto, your play has improved after you got confirmed, well done.

I mainly got to see what happens with the lynched person, and what happens at night, to find a top 3 scummy players.

[Ectomancer]

You are semi-playing my game mykonian, so you get your comment.

You've been extremely defensive of SpringLullaby. Established yourself as the SL protector you have. You've even been the attack dog against MrFixij and his vote against SL.

So I throw you (mykonian), SL, and MrFixij on a list and see what happens.

Mykonian the Defender steps up immediately to stick up for SL again. Though I gave 3 names, 1 his own, the other his target, he fixates on SL again and lumps me in with the SL 'bandwagon'. He criticizes the bandwagon itself because he thinks it follows a 'big post' by Spyrex as if Spyrex cant possibly have a valid point, but no recent Spyrex bashing.

We have 1 mason pair claim already, it is Day 1 so no investigative time. What do you know about SL that we do not Mykonian?

When you gave your analysis of players, I noticed that two names were glaringly missing. SpringLullaby and Spyrex. Why fail to establish your feelings for these two, of ALL the people in the game? One you are defending heavily, the other is the attacker you are defending against. What is it you are wanting for us to assume about your position on these two players?

-----------Break for an aside. I'm going through the posts a number of different ways. I wanted to see which side of the initial argument SL and Mykonian took. I've been looking at the thread as a whole, and then filtered by player.

I didnt see what I thought to find, I found something different when reading Mykonian:

What I saw was Mykonian putting some early hits on SL. The points were actually fairly reasonable. He jumped off SL before building any steam on him and chose to vote Spyrex instead. A short time later he unvotes until he places his most recent vote on MrFixij.
Now he is actively defending SL, placing suspicion on anyone who looks to be convinced by Spyrex, or even saying anything against SL, and yet nothing against Spyrex now that his vote dropped.

Where did this 180 degree turnabout on SL come from?
What's the deal with attacking people who might be convinced by Spyrex's arguments, but not on Spyrex?
Why would you address only SL's name on a 3 person list, and not your target or even yourself? It looks to me like you ignore yourself because you aren't a serious lynch candidate (until this post), and your target didn't look like he would be lynched anytime soon, while SL was rising rapidly.

Some people play by logic, some people by gut, I like to look for patterns, or sometimes broken patterns. So, somebody interpret this pattern I found (or think I found).

vote Mykonian

[SpyreX]

I was going to say my 3 are SL (by far), Ecto and Mykonian (for the record).

SL still has been more than independantly scummy enough for me to move towards a connection between SL and Mykonian.

Ecto is right about the bizarre nature of Mykonian's chainsaw defense of SL. The fact that it is partially backed up on meta also really bothers me.

However, I am hesistant to assume both SL and Myko are scum just on the basis that I really doubt two scum would attach themselves so early.

This is very noted and I am definitely going to keep it in mind. Its not an act of God however so my vote stays.

[mykonian]

ok, lets see if I can answer this.

I didn't defend myself, because there was no case yet. I stated I thought it weird, but waited for this. Mrfixij I vote, not just because he votes spring, but the way he jumps on the wagon. Could you please look at that again?

And tell me, why would I vote Spyrex? because he makes a case? because he believes he is right? I would think it very unlikely that both Spyrex and Mrfixij were scum, Mrfixij is very scummy in my eyes, so Spyrex is not very suspected. Also, Spyrex got this town alive again, posted a big case (doesn't matter if I don't agree with him), clear pro-town behaviour.

It is true I didn't like that vote of spring in the start, and I still don't like it. but like I said:

The closest I can get to a non-random vote.

and like I stated, that makes most of the case, joined by lurking. People jump too easily on that. The "contradiction" you think you have found, is not really there, but still it is the point that keeps returning against spring.

You ask me where that turnabout comes from. I think it happened a bit unconcious. Between my "fos" against spring, and spyrex his case, the game spring and I were in ended, and after game discussion started. The point how we (and me in special) were wrong (you won't find how I was wrong, but I felt like I was the person that started it) came across there. I don't know how to post links, so it is in the game C9++, and if you isolate at me, from post 59 you can find most of the case. A bit of a weak vote, a small contradiction, some bad used words, and using votecounts got spring lynched. Look what happens now. It is so similar.

But is also that I just don't agree with most of the case that spyrex posted. Small things about it I do agree with, but it is not as strong as it looks. But in stead of discussion the strength of the case, people hop on easily. You certainly don't want me to let that happen?

I've been accused of this before, of defending an other person, and I have sometimes defended the wrong person, but I'm not going to sit and watch a lynch happen based on a case that I don't agree with like it seems to be expected. It looks like it is not appropriate do discuss a case. I don´t know if I want to change my play in this, although it gives me pretty much every game problems day 1. I know you don´t have much to go on day 1, but still you can try to make the best of it, and I feel we won´t with a lynch of spring. mrfixij is much more scummy on his own, and plz don't strawman me by saying that I vote him for voting spring, I vote him because of the way he voted.

[orangepenguin]

Sorry, have been busy with Thanksgiving, but will be back tonight with my thoughts. [/excuse]

[TDC]

Ecto: Is myk's "turnaround" scummy regardless of sl's alignment?

--

The fact that it is partially backed up on meta also really bothers me.

Why?

--

mykonian: I found mrfixij's timing of his vote suspect, too. He did however afterwards present his own case (which was somewhat different from Spyrex', and disagreed with it on quite some points). So, in that sense, he did not rely on Spyrex' case (which is also evident by the fact he voted before Spyrex actually presented his case. For all mrfixij knew Spyrex could've come back and said "Just wanted to see who'd jump on it" and then scum-mrfixij-who-has-no-own-case would've been screwed..)

[mykonian]

pfff. That last point of you, I really got to think about that. I don't think scum-mrfixij would have thought about it, but I will look at it tomorrow. It's too late for that now. Maybe I place this vote back tomorrow, but

unvote

.

And you are again turning a minor point, into a major contradiction. You are comparing the stance I take, day 1, in my first post, with the stance I take on page 13. Do I have to stick with my first impression? I certainly hope I can change my opinion about someone.

[SpyreX]

Why?

Meta holds way to much weight. Defending behavior like that on the basis of meta bothers me because it denies the fact the behavior warrants suspicion to begin with.

[Rage]

Spolium has asked to be replaced, beginning search now.

[mykonian]

...

You know meta wasn't the first thing I had against the case, I have pointed out why most of the arguments against spring were null-tells. I said only lurking and a weak vote I saw left of the case after I let those "null-tells" out.

A weak case was left, and then, only then I used meta to explain why nobody should vote. As soon as you can show me why most of your case that I dismissed is valid, meta can never hold my defense against your case, and I won't try.

[SpyreX]

No, but it is an issue that I've brought up more than once. Along with the dismissing of the major issues as null-tells (and part of your dismissal was a meta).

And the attempted strawman, etc, etc.

[Ectomancer]

Ecto: Is myk's "turnaround" scummy regardless of sl's alignment?

It could be argued either way. If SL is town, I would say that the case would not be as strong unless you argue that Myk's initial vote was weak and now he is defending hard in order to be vindicated if SL should turn up town. (Of course for Myk, it would be when SL turns up town)

A better question I think TDC, would be if that turnaround is a 'natural' or 'contrived'. That's probably an opinion based question.

Let's say it this way, SL's alignment is not dependent upon Myk's, but if SL were to turn up scum, I would expect that Myk is also scum.

[SpyreX]

^

Thats kind of my feelings on it.

[mrfixij]

I see a lot of us are offering a big 3 suspicions list. Well, for the record, mine are almost my voting history. SL by a wide margin. Vollkan afterwards, although now that is more due to a remnant of early-game controversy, and right next to Vollkan is Spyre, who I happen to have the same suspect with.

Also Mykonian, in a lighter tone, I'm slightly offended that you don't think I'd be able to see a potential gambit. I've been caught in them before on AIM mafia, but I'd like to think I'm learning

Also, as a last side note, I will be LA this week starting Tuesday.

[mykonian]

spyrex, could you point out where I dismiss a major point, just like that? If I remember well, I have looked at the individual points and given my opinion of it. You should be able to tell where I went wrong.

And mrfixij: I didn't see any possibility for a gambit not that experienced as you are I guess. But anyway, why did it take so long for you to post reasons for your vote? why did you wait for someone to point out that you hadn't given any?

[mykonian]

@ spyrex: I can see now where you thought me using meta again. Wasn't it in the part I talked about defending some other person, and that I was attacked for it more? The point I tried to make is that I think it weird people get attacked for it, not to make that it is something that doesn't count for me only. If I were scum I would do it too.

The ideal protown group should in my eyes all come up with there own ideas, and after that try to get to some sort of consensus. A group discussed choice is most often better then any of the invidual choices. Then what needs the ideal protown group to do? They need to discuss their thoughts.

Here is the point I think we go the wrong way. Spyrex comes up with an idea, and without any questions or discussion the case is accepted. I point out where the case is not strong, and on what points it lacks. Does that mean I'm never going to vote spring? No, it means that I want to discuss the case. If Spyrex, or any other, could point out where my logic goes wrong, why those points are valid, you have a logical strong case. However, there is no discussion about what I said, only that I defended spring.

I presented something against mrfixij, he reacts that he did make a case, I say it is mainly a copy of spyrex's with 2 extra null-tells and a discussion. There it stops again, until TDC questions something about my "case". Does that mean TDC is defending mrfixij? Doesn't seem to be like that. It looks to me he is trying to make the best decision.

[springlullaby]

Well, yes and no. The main contradiction I am not seeing as small - I expect rational coherence in town; I may not always agree with what someones thought process is, but normally a town is going to connect-the-dots as it were. The idea of condemning self-voting while self-voting doesn't do that. When combined with the other pieces it sets off a scum klaxon.

1) I have explained this. 2) So you don't expect rational coherence from scum? 3) Personally, one of my favourite scumtell is excess of obivous logic, because what scum want is to be beyond criticisms.

I absolutely agree. I felt like there was a gigantic bell of irony tolling when she self-voted, as if to signify a "lynch me" sign.

You do realize that my self-vote was my first post in this game, don't you? So tell me, what are you trying to say here?

So to get down to the nitty gritty, the good and bad of the spring case.

good

Post 47 wrote:
Hi guys,

vote: springlullaby

OHH NOES another self-vote. This, in and of itself, wasn't a big deal. However, this self-vote came in after the ball had started a rolling on the discussion about Volkan's - and it slid right in. What really makes this stand out is her next post:

Post 68 wrote:
Lol, at least you seem to be consistent with yourself.

IMO self-vote is clearly antitown because random votes, beside the joke-ness, is meant to signify a willingness to catch scum. Self-vote however is an entirely selfish act, which give nothing about yourself and who you are willing to vote. However I do think that given the present state of the meta, even though the 'you have no proof you can't lynch me' state of mind is IMO best left to scum, people who self vote are equally likely to be scum than town.

What is left is judging the self voter's character. I think you may just be pretentious enough to be the type to play on the 'you can't prove what I did is bad' thing.

Vote Vollkan

You've been talking lot, tell me, have you gained any insight on people's alignment from your discussion?

That said, I also don't like Ectomancer, there is something muffled in his toeing the line of aggression with Vollkan.


This one has a few key points that stand out

1.) She calls self-voting (not Volkan's specific instance) an antitown play. More to the point, he says it shows no willingness to catch scum.
--- See her first post.
2.) She parrots Ecto's sentiment of "you cant lynch me"
3.) She parrots my sentiment of Ecto's aggressiveness.

Obvious Phoenix Wright-ism here. I'm satisfied as to the scumminess of this play by the self vote followed by calling a self vote anti-town. Being that spring stated this opinion as an absolute, spring basically gives herself no wiggle room out of that arguement. Also interesting is how she's parrotted my views on self-voting and the purpose of random voting (expressed in my infamous spherical cow). Also, the note about Ecto's aggressiveness is a good catch because like I said to you, aggression isn't scummy.

I've answered to this already.

Regarding post 114:

This post isn't doublespeak. It's not a contradiction. It's not even a post. It's complete nonsense. Again, Spring tries to play back to my spherical cow and the purpose of a vote. She tries to double back on terrible reasoning, and keeps digging her grave deeper in the self-vote. She's not even using crap-logic to defend it, she's using non-logic. I think the only point that she may have tried to make, but missed on the delivery is this:

However, as I already said, I do acknowledge that, given the current meta self-voting is not indicative of alignment, or even always an antitown move. But this not because of any 'inherent property' to self-voting, but simply because you can sometimes derive value by going against custom.

She uses a poor instance of Il nya pas de hors texte (nothing beyond the text) and misinterprets meta. Instead of using meta as a sitewide metagame on a player's alignment, she uses it as a local form of standards and norms in a single, isolated game. She then tries to refer to that as justification for a self vote and simultaneous condemnation of a self vote, when it is really a non-point because our localized meta is not established, since vollkan's alignment is not concrete.

I have already responded (please reply to it) and think that your description of my post is wrong, but this is actually the third time you commit a heinous crime against French language, and beside the pointlessness of quoting in a foreign language thrice when you obviously do not know to do it right, I also think you have a very poor grasp of what deconstuction is - the very idea of 'poor instance' of

Il n'y a pas de hors texte

is ridiculous and actually quite ironic. Tell me, can you explain what you mean exactly here and how your use of Derrida's

formule

is in anyway relevant here?

You know, I have noticed a trend toward unwarranted pompousness in your post, spherical cows and stuff, at this point I do not know if it is saving-face and making out as 'bigger than you are' scummy or just your personality.

regarding post 144

I'm not really sold on the "You are scummy because of X". Especially not on day 1, where it's rare that we find such an obvious contradiction like we did in SL's self vote condemnation. What bothers me about this post is an open admission of nonchalance and not really following the game, as if to compensate and make one seem uninformed. That's usually one of my favorite scumtells.

You mean the part were I say that I am rereading the game? This game takes a lot of concentration, big posts with lot of stuff that isn't always relevant, was difficult to separate 'le grain de l'ivraie', so yeah, I had to reread.

regarding post 279

The big thing I want to address here isn't the content of the post, but the timing. Statistically, the closer a vote is to the numerical mean of a bandwagon, the more likely it is to be scum. Had a vollkan lynch succeeded, Spring would have been right at that numerical mean. That's enough to add suspicion to SL for me, even without all the additional information that you posted. Especially because this is the second time that Spring has been the third vote on a wagon. I have my own theory that if a wagon reaches the halfway point, and the lynchee is town, then someone on that wagon is scum. IF vollkan and ort are both town, AND Spring is scum, then this theory remains true.

I think you will have a hard time coming up with 'statistical' backing for you theory, because to my knowledge no one ever bothered to compile the data, but beyond that what disturbs me here is that you are talking about one of the clichest scumtell that exists within the mafia-meta as if it is a novel and original idea. I'm not sure if it is true newbiness or what.

I'm also of the opinion that if there is any truth to that theory, it is because scum often don't bother to start cases of their own and dislike to have a vote to close the the lynching one. And that often only apply to newbscum, except when it does not.

addendum to the case

Vote Vollkan

I think Ectomancer is ok, a couple of his earlier post sounds extremely town. Though I do not like his apparent willingness to squabble interminably with Vollkan. If Vollkan is scum I'd say Ecto is the more likely to be scum too.

Does anybody else see the obvious contradiction with this? I noticed it before the case sprang up, but couldn't put my finger on it until I made this reread. Let me put it in a systematic approach for you all.

IMO self-vote is clearly antitown because random votes, beside the joke-ness, is meant to signify a willingness to catch scum.

Interpretation: You vote to catch scum. A random vote has a chance of hitting scum, as you get more information you vote based on thinking your target is scum.

Vote Vollkan

Interpretation: I think Vollkan is scum.

I think Ectomancer is ok, a couple of his earlier post sounds extremely town. Though I do not like his apparent willingness to squabble interminably with Vollkan. If Vollkan is scum I'd say Ecto is the more likely to be scum too.

Interpretation: Ectomancer is alright. If Vollkan is scum though, Ecto probably is too.

Resulting train of Spring's thought:

I think Vollkan is scum because I voted for him. I think Ecto is town based on X. I think Ecto is scum if Vollkan is scum based on (message drops off here in a fit of circular nonlogic).

What non-logic? I have already explained the linearity of the first point and I have written an entire post on why I think Ecto and Vollkan could be scum together.

Points I have against the case for spring: holes if you will

Spyre's conjectures.

Today the town has been killing itself.

1.) The town has more power roles than the masons.
--- one of those power roles is investigative in nature (tracker, cop, etc)
2.) There are two scum and not three.

1.) The masons are confirmed town.
2.) Volk and Ecto are town.
3.) An investigative role will cover one of the other players.

There a bit too many jumps in logic here for my own taste, it reeks of tunnel vision. Yes, I think Spring is scummy and is our most likely scum target. But aside from the masons, I'm not willing to stake ANY wager on anyone else in the game (aside from me, obviously) being of one alignment or the other.

Poor assumptions that you're making right now, IF Spring is scum.

1: Volk and Ecto are town.
Spring has been consistantly vouching for Ecto's person. I don't know if spring is dumb enough as scum to do that first day for a scumbuddy, but the possibility can't be passed up. Or on the opposite end of the spectrum, spring's recent attack on Vollkan could have been bussing as he gained momentum which she didn't see as likely to stop.

2: You're town.
This is a hell of a case, no doubt. But Spring's play has been deteriorating, and it was really only a matter of time before she was called out on it. It's fully possible that you decided to take a gamble and pull off a massive bus on the scale of LlamaFluff in the game he's being mentioned for in the 2008 scummies awards, or Demonikuski in newbie 663 D1.. In short, it's fully possible that after Ecto made the second vote for you, spring tried to chainsaw your wagon, got called out on it, and you made a massive case against her.

I don't think this is likely, but it's possible and been done before.

3: Setup. Namely 2 scum, 8 town.

It's usually considered a very small scumtell to speculate on setup. Also, in my own experience, the setup you're suggesting is wrong, as a 1/3 scum to players ratio is usually desired. But to verify one piece of your idea, I can tell you that town DOES have another power role, although I won't elaborate any further.

4: The absence of 3rd party/anti-town/cop-proof roles.
Your speculation would be thrown off a great deal by roles such as miller, princess, or my personal favorite, miller princess. Also, SKs and the like. I don't want to speculate on setup any more, but you're taking a very optimistic stance here.


I think this about sums up my thoughts on this case. Spring definitely looks scummy, although I think moreso for her timing and circular reasoning, rather than most of the reasons that Spyre has stated.

Also, for the TLDR inclined, I just got a new job, and have been training for Christmas, so that's why I've been less active recently.

I really don't like the softclaim in there and see no point in it but I am not willing to push the point atm. It should be however noted.