Mafia 87 - New Age Mafia - Game Over!

[Vi]

You don't have to browbeat me, Vi.

Apparently I do, since you still haven't given your suspicions outside of a narrow look at iamausername.

I'm thinking about the numbers (6:2:1 definitely seems most likely) and wondering if today is the day for massclaim. If it's not, I think tomorrow certainly will be. What does everyone else think?

Given the large number of kills and the high numbers of vanillas/Milleresques that have flipped, it would be better to wait until tomorrow. Outing power roles now would be similar to sending the scum a hit list with a love note.

----

Please, show me where I argued against the PP lynch, as I have previously stated I was willing to allow time for the possibility of him turning up innocent.

Stalling at the deadline -is- effectively arguing against the lynch. Further... how would you know he was innocent? As I said, Masons are not worth very much and can't really be confirmed until a partner shows up... and one dies. Unless there's something I'm missing; I've never played with confirmed Masons before but that's how I see the logic.

Had PP turned up innocent and as a Mason I would undoubtedly be facing the same charge for "hammering without allowing them to comment" as I have been facing for my screw up on day one.

Doubtful. Understand that the obvious question was

why Gimbo wouldn't tell who his partner was

. That's information he COULD have given, but chose not to. Moreover, even if he did turn up Mason, that would mean there would be someone who could claim to be his Mason partner the next day, and thus confirmed... or counterclaimed. No, there was good reason to hammer.

I notice the stuff about voting Scheherazade has gone unanswered.~

I was not overly suspcious of al4xz as I have said before. However, he had gained enough support to be at L-1, (all but 1 well reasoned votes), and so I was prepared to admit that I had overlooked something and I wanted to hear from him.

All right, I can see where you said an abridged version of this. Unfortunately, without seeing the full version I could not have gotten what you just said from (paraphrasing 398) "btw al4xz is at L-2, he should talk now".

Yes I do care why people vote for others. I consider the arguments made by everyone, rather than simply parroting the questions others have already parroted (honestly by now I feel like I'm answering the same questions 5 times). I am aware of the smaller wagons but I only feel the need to comment on the larger wagons.

Then either your playstyle is naff or your alignment is. You can look at people who are attracting attention and ask them questions OTHER than those that have already been asked. Saying that you only feel the need to comment on larger wagons sounds like a good way to cap lynches while not actually dealing much with them until it's convenient (as you can bicker with Scheherazade in the meantime).

I said it was a possibility, by no means concrete, and read my earlier defense (within this post) regarding the mason claim.

And I've already noted why the outcome should have been the same.
"DoomCow's question" was the one that I asked DoomCow in the post you quoted from me; sorry for not being clear.

I will need to do a reread when I have time, as it is most of my time has been consumed by defending myself from the same accusation put forth in a number of different ways.

>_>
There might be a more efficient way to answer similar questions than answering each iteration of them. As it is,

anything

(OTH reads and such) is better than nothing.

I'm not satisfied.

Vote: Gerrendus

[Jazzmyn]

Hello, all.

I am back from the west coast, and I thank you all for your patience and understanding, your good wishes, and for not replacing me in my absence. I have a lot to catch up on after nearly a week away, but I will do so as quickly as possible. I think that I will scan the posts since I left for questions directed to me specifically and respond to those first, and then do a more detailed catch-up and more thorough analysis after that.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Jazz, you were flat wrong in the end about Sche.

Unfortunately, I was indeed wrong about his alignment (although I was not wrong about his play style being scummish, distracting, and unhelpful). Lesson learned, though, that players whose posts are scummish, distracting and unhelpful are not necessarily scum.

THIS needs explaining.

In the previous (but still ongoing) game that I was referring to, PutaPuta acted like pure scum but turned out to be a townie who, after a very short stint, self-hammered to screw the town over. My reference to him being 'scum in other games' meant in 'games other than the one in which I know he was a townie.' I was saying that although I knew him to be a grossly anti-town townie in that game, I could see the possibility that he played that way in that game in order to set himself up for a pass in other games in which he is scum (that is, in games other than the one in which he was a grossly anti-town townie who self-hammered) As an aside, the game that I'm referring to was his first game here, or so I thought at the time. I didn't know then that he was actually here with a different name as a reincarnation of a previously banned poster.

Another quote that jumps out at me--

If I were scum, I would have voted for DerHammer somewhere around the middle of the pack and been quite happy with a town lynch, any town lynch.

There's a glaringly obvious problem with this statement. If you need a hint, look at posts 179 and 183.

Heh. Good one. But, it ignores the most important point, which is that if I was scum, I would have been happy with any town lynch at all, and it ignores the glaringly obvious point that, if I was scum, I would most certainly not have pointed out where I would vote on any given bandwagon, especially if I had, in fact, voted for someone in roughly the same area of a given bandwagon. I was born at night, yes, but it wasn't

last

night.

If I've missed any other posts and/or questions directed specifically to me, I apologize, but the foregoing are the only ones that I saw on my first quick review. Night 2 was a brutal night with staggering losses and I will be re-reading the posts since my departure much more closely in the next couple of days in order to offer up my own analysis (and suspicions) in light of the current state of affairs.

Regards,
Jazz

[OhGodMyLife]

Second Vote Count of Day 3

Gerrendus (2) -- Tom Mason, Vi
DoomCow (1) -- iamausername

Not Voting (6) -- DoomCow, Jazzmyn, ribwich, Gerrendus, Caboose, ZazieR

With 9 alive, it takes 5 votes to lynch!

[Vi]

I was saying that although I knew him to be a grossly anti-town townie in that game, I could see the possibility that he played that way in that game in order to set himself up for a pass in other games in which he is scum (that is, in games other than the one in which he was a grossly anti-town townie who self-hammered)

That looks like it makes sense. 'Coulda been worded better, but it's not as bad as it first seemed.

But, it ignores the most important point, which is that if I was scum, I would have been happy with any town lynch at all,

'Not sure how this changes anything.

and it ignores the glaringly obvious point that, if I was scum, I would most certainly not have pointed out where I would vote on any given bandwagon, especially if I had, in fact, voted for someone in roughly the same area of a given bandwagon.

Or

WOULD

you?

It's quite plausible for you to have said it without anyone (yourself included) remembering or checking when you voted, and saying it's something you wouldn't have done it as scum is just casting WIFOM on it.

I was born at night, yes, but it wasn't

last

night.

I'm going to have to debate the truth of this statement *shot repeatedly*

----

Where is ZazieR? Where is... everyone, actually? If OGML is still up to his two-week deadlines, we've only got five-ish days left.

@mod: I'm on the Vote Count twice. Also, please spam prods/replacements.

[Tom Mason]

Where is ZazieR? Where is... everyone, actually? If OGML is still up to his two-week deadlines, we've only got five-ish days left.

We do only have until this weekend (Sunday night, I believe?) to commit to a lynch.

I have nothing new to offer at the moment sadly. Some thoughts on Gerrendus and the case presented by myself and followed up by Vi would be appreciated.

[Caboose]

Will summarize feelings on this game tomorrow. I want to go back and mostly see how the lynch went down yesterday.

[iamausername]

Mod, lets get some good hard prods on ZazieR and DoomCow

.

Given the large number of kills and the high numbers of vanillas/Milleresques that have flipped, it would be better to wait until tomorrow. Outing power roles now would be similar to sending the scum a hit list with a love note.

OTH, with the large number of VTs/GDs down, there's a high chance of scum hitting power roles tonight even without them having claimed, since for balance reasons, there's got to be a high ratio of power to non-power amongst the remaining townies (Or less scum than I thought, I guess). And if they're going to die anyway, it would be better if they shared any info they've got before doing so.

Another quote that jumps out at me--

If I were scum, I would have voted for DerHammer somewhere around the middle of the pack and been quite happy with a town lynch, any town lynch.

There's a glaringly obvious problem with this statement. If you need a hint, look at posts 179 and 183.

Heh. Good one. But, it ignores the most important point, which is that if I was scum, I would have been happy with any town lynch at all, and it ignores the glaringly obvious point that, if I was scum, I would most certainly not have pointed out where I would vote on any given bandwagon, especially if I had, in fact, voted for someone in roughly the same area of a given bandwagon. I was born at night, yes, but it wasn't

last

night.

Actually, I believe you are ignoring the real most important point, which is that if you are scum, it is in your interest to make us believe that you would do things differently to the way you have been doing them. This makes any post saying "If I was scum, I'd have done this" inherently untrustworthy.

Some thoughts on Gerrendus and the case presented by myself and followed up by Vi would be appreciated.

I'm still not remotely satisfied with DoomCow's performance thus far, so my vote is staying where it is for now. But since deadline rules mean we need three votes for a lynch to happen at deadline today, I'd certainly be willing to supply that third vote on Ger if nothing changes by then. 6/9 players not voting is ridiculous, though.

[OhGodMyLife]

Prodding ZazieR, DoomCow and ribwich.

[Vi]

OhGodMyMorning. I'm a little disappointed with how I did on one part, but at least I don't have to take the GREs again.

OTH, with the large number of VTs/GDs down, there's a high chance of scum hitting power roles tonight even without them having claimed, since for balance reasons, there's got to be a high ratio of power to non-power amongst the remaining townies (Or less scum than I thought, I guess). And if they're going to die anyway, it would be better if they shared any info they've got before doing so.

I'm neither wild nor crazy about setup theory, but there's a difference between "high chance of scum hitting power roles" and "100% chance of scum hitting power roles". I guess I can understand your point of view though, at least with info roles, but I still don't like the idea of a massclaim in light of the killing-spree nights we're having.

The lack of talk (and votes) ITT is really getting depressing...

[Caboose]

nope, claims are fun and exciting. it would be more fun if alx4z makes a riddle and the solution is his role

^Scummy post by PP that started yesterday's lynch wagon

Vote: Puta Puta

Putting someone at L-1 that you don't find scummy because it's "fun and exciting" isn't pro-town.

This just jumped out of me. So you come out of nowhere and put al4xz at L-1 for some fun and giggles?

Vote: Puta Puta

...I hope to all that is holy that you have a good reason for this and you're just toying with us. You've got one post.

Are you kidding me?

It is far too stupid of a move for Puta to make though. It begs us to vote for him, but I think it is just stupidity, not scummy.

As for Puta Puta, I can't make heads or tails of it. Is it stupidity? Is it some crazy way to try and save al4xz by pushing him to L-1 for bad reasons? Is it a scum move to try and remove a townie? I have no idea. Please post a better reason, Puta.

Puta Puta is not wrong. It is time for an al4xz claim.

^ Seems weird to me. I don't know why you don't question PP's undeniably anti-town behavior, but instead try to continue with the al4xz claim.

Juls did not set off my scumdar while she was here. Juls' replacement, PutaPuta, appears to be quite useless and his posts and play style are decidedly anti-town, but without breaking the rules about ongoing games, I cannot say much more. Suffice it to say that I know exactly what Zazie is talking about in her prior post, to which I replied above.

A reaction from me, you mean? Does "Puta Puta is not wrong" not count as a reaction?

OK, I think it's clear that Puta Puta has decided that being unhelpful is a valid strategy, and I hope we have a vig who can deal with him, but right now I don't think we should let his irreverance distract us from the issue of how al4xz is totally scum.

^ Again, couches PP's behavior as "unhelpful" and not "scummy." Tries to continue with al4xz lynch.

I don't know what's going on with Puta Puta. I'm not sure what he's trying to accomplish, except maybe distraction. If there is no explanation from him, we should probably keep focus on al4xz, as has been mentioned.

^ Kind of aleviates the scuminess of trying to continue with a al4xz lynch as Sche is obviously not scum.

Seems to me Sche isn't making good on his succient promise. Especially since to me it all looks like several different refrences to something he admits as a week point? Sche's been told already to stop wasting our time, and yet continues to do so. Any misgivings I might have had at the beginning of the day about voting for him are now gone.
Vote: Sche

^ This pinged on my scumdar. He doesn't address PP at all or his behavior, could be seen as a diversion.

I addressed that in post 387 (at the beginning) and again in post 398 in response to Tom Mason's questioning.

Now @ Sche:
Don't accuse me of not reading your posts. I do. The entire length of them. Honestly why I don't post sometimes because I am so tired after reading your "analysis" that I cannot form a coherent argument. You admitted to using a post for a diversionary tactic to prevent the hanging of someone whom we see to be scummy. Now I will grant that these players may provide us with new insight, but someone that is acting scummy shouldn't be allowed to walk free.

I've been suspicious of you from the start, that's one of the reasons why I had my vote on you for so long on day 1. As I explained I found your behavior as scummy as Ders. (Note: Behavior, meaning that while Der Hammer was town he still acted scummy in my opinion), I have already responded to the al4xz lynch claim, as I addressed at the beginning of this post. I do not recall where you addressed al4xz, although it may have been lost in the mountains of posts you have been submitting on Jazz. My misgiving at the start of the day was that if DH was innocent and I was suspicious of you for similar reasons it might be possible that you were also innocent.

And I did not say you were adhering to the town's wishes. I said you Were not, which I have said time and time again. All cases have their flaws but you seem to enjoy utilizing long posts to make a single weak case, when you have been asked to keep it succinct.

^ Again, doesn't address the PP wagon at all in that whole long post.

How do you know my posting habits? I've only done this one game here. The only other reason I don't post is if I have nothing more to contribute to a discussion, rather than waste time. My suspicions of you, stemming largely from day one and your desire to continue to attack individuals and utilize logical fallacies and overall waste time are the same as they have always been, I'd prefer not to waste more time pointing them out when they are readily apparent in your own posts.

Seeing as I believe you to be scum wouldn't it therefore follow that I would disregard anyone you are pushing to be lynched at this point in the game? I think your arguments are mostly weak and possibly borderline OMGUS, although there are a number of targets you could ahve selected, she perhaps presented herself as the easiest target for your tactics.

My apologies, it seemed like taht is what it seemed like you were saying with al4xz.
So day one evidence is good enough for you? You don't have any recent evidence to support your claim?

There is yet another misinterpretation (or perhaps a total disregard and intentionally taken out of context?) My remark on "He seems to be doing what the town wants" was in regards to the fact that at the time I made it, it looked like you were going to follow through with shorter, more succinct posts rather than subject us to logical fallacies, as has been shown. My latter post saying you weren't was in regards to the fact that you did not stick to that resolution.

^ And again, he doesn't say a

single

word about PP.

Now My question is this: Could he not just be crying mason to explain away his working in collusion with someone else in a scummy factor? Even when thus pressured he still doesn't seem to be taking it seriously. I'm moderately annoyed that we only have until tomorrow to decide when al4xz only got replaced today seeing as he was primarily the chief target of suspicion.

^ Still talking about al4xz as being the "chief target of suspicion."

If PP is not mafia outright there is the possibility he is a sympathetic. I'm not sure if OGML (or this site) uses them, but essentially a symp is a non-power role that does anything they can to ensure that the mafia doesn't get lynched. They usually know who the mafia is, but the mafia doesn't always know who they are. PP's behavior made me believe he is more likely a symp than a mafia because he seems to have self hammered with that post.
(Simplification: Symp=Anti-Town role taht is not mafia, but protects them).

^ Brings up possibility of mafia traitor, which is interesting, but not scummy. On the same post, he asks for a deadline extension because we were "deprived of our chief suspect" which now looks fishy considering that PP flipped scum.

As bad as this looks on Gerrendus, DoomCow wasn't there

at all

, unless I missed a post of his in there (and since I have a sinus headache right now, that's a possibility), which makes him just as, or maybe even more suspicious than Gerrendus (unless DC was V/LA at the time, which could be true).

I'll decide on my vote in a while, but for now, it looks like Gerrendus or DC.

[Vi]

And what of iamausername? You mentioned him more than DoomCow in your post

I find this thread's lack of ZazieR disturbing. Not to mention up to half of the other players.
It's already late Thursday; we don't have this kind of time to stall.

@mod: Halp

[Caboose]

And what of iamausername? You mentioned him more than DoomCow in your post [/b]

What are you rolling your eyes at Vi? I sat and looked at the lynch yesterday and IAUN didn't really pop out as my top suspect. While him trying to say that "PP was right" is a little bit weird to me, I still think that Gerrendus' avoidance of the subject for a long time and DC's absense are scummier.

For reasons stated in my "long" post above (that is, for avoiding talking about PP for the longest time):

Vote: Gerrendus

[Gerrendus]

It seems to me that all of the issues with me are that I essentially did not look at Puta Puta and I was in favor of considering the options. I had no more foreknowledge of PPs identity than anyone else (with the exception of his scumpartners). So by all means if you wish to lynch YET ANOTHER townie who simply made a mistake on Day 1 and wished to consider the options as long as possible on Day 2, then proceed with the line of reasoning on myself. If you actually wish to lynch a scum, then i would suggest highly looking elsewhere. Doom Cow seems to be the popular choice, but I have not had time to read over all of the arguments except to defend myself. Which I see now are the same argument in about 50 different disguises.

I will also be out of town Friday/saturday

[Tom Mason]

It seems to me that all of the issues with me are that I essentially did not look at Puta Puta and I was in favor of considering the options. I had no more foreknowledge of PPs identity than anyone else (with the exception of his scumpartners). So by all means if you wish to lynch YET ANOTHER townie who simply made a mistake on Day 1 and wished to consider the options as long as possible on Day 2, then proceed with the line of reasoning on myself. If you actually wish to lynch a scum, then i would suggest highly looking elsewhere. Doom Cow seems to be the popular choice, but I have not had time to read over all of the arguments except to defend myself. Which I see now are the same argument in about 50 different disguises.

I will also be out of town Friday/saturday

When you have no actual suggestions on "looking elsewhere" I see no reason not to pursue you.

Telling us we are making a mistake is nothing but words. What have you done so far that gives us a reason to keep you alive and lynch someone else?

Better yet, who is a better lynch than you? You say DoomCow without any explanation of why other than he "seems to be the popular choice." And he is not the popular choice, at the moment. You have the most votes. DoomCow just has been receiving attention in discussion.

[OhGodMyLife]

Deadline may be extended depending on whether or not those people I prodded on the 10th require replacement tomorrow.

[DoomCow]

Sorry, but life has been a bit hectic this past week, and when I did have time, my connection failed, so I'm not fully up to date here (and I only just picked up my prod).
Now, for the game, I'm not fully read up, but am willing to

vote: Gerrendus

based on Vi's and Caboose's suspicions/reasonings. Further I should be able to have the time to focus more on the game from Sunday on, so I'll start a reread then..

[iamausername]

Gerrendus is at L-1. Claim time.

Again, couches PP's behavior as "unhelpful" and not "scummy."

I don't believe that Gimbo's behaviour was scummy. That would imply that it suggested he was more likely to be scum than not, which I didn't find to be true. He acted exactly the same way in all of his games. The fact that he turned out to actually be scum in this game is pure coincidence.

I can understand why people thought he was worth voting, because that kind of player is never going to be any help even if they are town, and you don't want to have to deal with making a decision about them in lylo. But I challenge anyone to show me that he was doing anything he wouldn't have done as town.

[Vi]

...Sadly, looking through Puta Puta's posts outside this game I think we actually came out ahead with him replacing late, posting seldom and dying quickly - especially as Mafia. So I agree with the above post that an excuse could be made for people who knew his meta.

With that said, I'm not sure if it changes the circumstances of pressing the al4xz lynch at that time, considering I know

I

wouldn't place a serious hammer vote on someone after that kind of L-1 vote.

-----

*I dislike DoomCow's jump on the wagon; placing someone at L-1 with incomplete information and promising to reread at/after the stated deadline are two red flags I really hate to see.
*Gerrendus likely will not claim for a while given that he said he's out of town.
*ZazieR needs to exist ITT, thus I advocate the deadline extension.

As bad as this looks on Gerrendus, DoomCow wasn't there at all, unless I missed a post of his in there (and since I have a sinus headache right now, that's a possibility), which makes him just as, or maybe even more suspicious than Gerrendus (unless DC was V/LA at the time, which could be true).

As for me not voting Puta Puta, by the time I read her posts, she was already at L-1. I wasn't willing to hammer after the claim.

Not V/LA; lurking.

[OhGodMyLife]

Deadline suspended; seeking ZazieR and ribwich replacements. Deadline will be three days from the filling of both replacement slots.

[Caboose]

Sorry, but life has been a bit hectic this past week, and when I did have time, my connection failed, so I'm not fully up to date here (and I only just picked up my prod).
Now, for the game, I'm not fully read up, but am willing to

vote: Gerrendus

based on Vi's and Caboose's suspicions/reasonings. Further I should be able to have the time to focus more on the game from Sunday on, so I'll start a reread then..

Make it good. Because all I see here is, "What Caboose/Vi said. Vote: Gerrendus. More Later."

[Tom Mason]

Sorry, but life has been a bit hectic this past week, and when I did have time, my connection failed, so I'm not fully up to date here (and I only just picked up my prod).
Now, for the game, I'm not fully read up, but am willing to

vote: Gerrendus

based on Vi's and Caboose's suspicions/reasonings. Further I should be able to have the time to focus more on the game from Sunday on, so I'll start a reread then..

Make it good. Because all I see here is, "What Caboose/Vi said. Vote: Gerrendus. More Later."

Not only that... His vote put Gerrendus at L-1.

This is not a repeat of the Puta Puta situation, I hope...

[Jazzmyn]

In addition, in post #491, DoomCow purported to explain why he didn't vote for PP by saying, "As for me not voting PutaPuta, by the time I read her posts she was already at L-1. I wasn't willing to hammer after the claim."

However, PP was put at L-1 in post #450 on November 26 (and he was lynched on November 29). DoomCow's most recent post prior to PP being put at L-1 was on November 18 and DC didn't post at all between November 18 and December 1. So, either DC is lying about having seen when PP was at L-1 and lying about his reasons for not voting PP, or DC is admitting not only to actively lurking, but doing so to the extent that he made absolutely no comment on a player being at L-1 - not even to say that he wasn't comfortable hammering in light of the claim.

And yet, now he comes along and puts a player at L-1 without reading the thread, and justifies it by relying upon two other posts by two other players? This is way off base.

And how on earth does one justify having only 14 posts in the two full months that this game has been going on?

Vote: DoomCow

Regards,
Jazz

[Vi]

Tom Mason brings up a decent analogy, especially since I have a meta on DoomCow suggesting that this is par for the course.

I think there are valid reasons for lynching Gerrendus AND DoomCow, tbqh. 276 forces me to question Gerrendus's motives considering he hammers the utility lynch Der Hammer immediately afterward (why lynch someone else who's equally useless but not as scummy IYO as the person you're looking at?). In addition, Post 45 seems like a petty attempt to push suspicion onto Scheherazade at the very beginning.

Something else I re-found--

Scheherezade: I voted him yesterday, and the reread made me happy with that. Especially now that Percy died tonight, who had some strong posts against him (97 and 132 especially)

Now see, this is something that I feel should bear more discussion. By itself it is not much as most smart mafia do not aim for the person they argued with during the day because that line is pretty easy to connect, however combined with the number of fallacies in Sheh's posts yesterday...I'm not sure if that totally clears him. Though I would like to hear some other opinions on this matter as I feel it does bear further investigation. Perhaps we should be asking ourselves: 1)Would Sheh have killed percy due to his disagreement with him during the day, or 2)Is it more likely there is someone who would benefit in having percy killed by using taht as an argument to have sheh lynched?

NK WIFOM is bad, but Gerrendus is using Scheherazade's reputation as a poor debater to try pushing it as worth considering!

This is DoomCow's premier analysis post.

Al4xz: some strange vote hopping at the end of the day and his mentioning of a possible GF are both sending me bad vibes.

Juls did some strange things in the early day, and added some minor confusion near the end. But she asked to be replaced, so I'm not sure of her motives.

Finally I'd like to mention Gerrendus who did some minor semi-scummy things, and got the lynching vote.

There, finished. Events of this day have made me more suspicious of both Al4xa and Scheh, but I didn't like the vote hopping and the way Al4xz tried to talk himself out of it, that weighs the most, so that's where I'm voting for now. Still seeing Scheh as a good second though...

vote: Al4xz

al4xz did "strange vote hopping", but Gerrendus did "some minor semi-scummy things"; while al4xz did change his vote more at the end the difference in scale is noted (plus we never found out what those "semi-scummy things" were; I'm assuming it refers to Gerrendus's last-minute vote hop alongside al4xz). We've already asked about Juls, and it turned out to be mostly gut and turned to mush by the replacement. And I sense from the second post that the direction he chose to place his vote toward was somewhat arbitrary. (Note that while Gimbo put the L-1 vote on al4xz, DoomCow placed the L-2 vote.) The entire analysis is heavy on vagueness; I'd like to see clarification on Gerrendus's "semi-scummy things", at least.

I'm starting to think Gerrendus and DoomCow are together.

[ZazieR]

I'll accept the second chance OGML. Thanks for it.
Will post my thoughts tomorrow as I have been a bit busier than normally.