Mini 739 ~ Mafia Jailbreak, Game Over

[popsofctown]

Vote: Rhinox

I challenged him on appeal to emotion, and more or less all i'm getting is him saying that that's the only defense he has for himself.

Issues like totally misinterpreting me (ties in with "scum skim threads") and contradicting himself about his suspicions (ties in with scum aren't genuinely suspicious of anyone) are major issues. Appeal to emotion just makes it worse.

Spyrex, everyone in this thread complains about fluff, perhaps without the keyword. 12 players is a lot in a game and i just haven't really addressed you i guess. It's OK. Everyone's inner child wants popsofctown to pay attention to them.

I'm giving specific attention to Rishi because he has no vote right now, and i'd like to hear some opinions with him. I figure my case on Rhinox would either put him one way or the other. I already know where you stand, you're voting me are you not?

I'd also like to hear the points on me because i want to know what the most important points against me are.

[Korts]

Why the specific talk to Rishi?

Why mention Korts and username and leave me oddly out, once again?

You know, this is a fairly good point, SpyreX, but it doesn't help you that you pointed it out. To me this whole situation looks like pops tried to avoid having to distance you and you called him out for it before anyone could make the connection between you.

My main points on pops are still that he'd admitted to having committed to a minor scumtell and that he'd deliberately mischaracterised my argument about serious discussion rooting in jokes. In addition there's now an implied connection with SpyreX from his side. I think that sums up the case pretty well.

[RedCoyote]

(picking up exactly where I left off from in post 126)

Okay, bionic died. bionic didn't particularly have one of the more forceful opinions on the SK discussion, what does this mean?

Okay, I died, I was sounding the alarm bells on this town's reluctance to acknowledge the probability of an SK.

Okay, Rishi died, Rishi thought it was ridiculous to talk about an SK.

I don't presume to try to predict what type of mod Vi is, or what roles Vi likes to use and considers balanced. For all I know, this game could be 100% Vanilla... or maybe it contains every single role on the list. You or I don't know, and I want to know how speculating or assuming what is in the setup is going to help you catch the scum today.

That's true, the game could be 100% vanilla.

Let's say it is, has the discussion then, in your mind, been useless?

I guess what I'm trying to say, why do I have the burden of proof? Why do I have to prove to you how it's helpful to discuss the probability of an SK and you don't have to prove how discussing the probability of "dunno wtf the roles could be??? mystery mod!!!" is helpful.

So you're assuming 2 killing parties right now... how are you playing D1 any differently than if there was only 1 killing faction?

If there were two killing parties I would assume (again, trying my best not to push the situation as far as I can) that those parties who may or may not have night actions would necessarily act in a way that would be more approriate to having two killing parties and not one.

Would it make any sense to lynch anyone today on the grounds they might be the sk? And to re-ask the question that I think Rishi was trying to ask, how should we play differently today by assuming there is an SK, as opposed to assuming there is not an SK, as opposed to not assuming any factions at all?

It would make sense to lynch someone on the grounds that they are scum period.

Your questions are becoming so obtuse. Okay, let's not assume there is an SK. Let's assume that everyone is Vanilla. Let's assume that we will lynch a townie today. Let's assume that all discussion today is kind of pointless because we don't know enough. Let's assume today that the night actions will give us weird results therefore giving us a kinda crappy Day 2 discussion as well.

You see where I'm going with this? Why are you trying to draw a line on what is and isn't helpful to the town? To arbitrarily say that all SK talk on Day 1 is useless without any regard for the implications it might have

later in the game

sounds naive to me.

Oh, ok... My bad.

This isn't good enough for me. You had a vested interest in tying me so closely with pops as it helped your argument against him.

---

some other people won't admit it though..

I know the answer to the legs one!

---

(Simple version: The disparity between the actives and the lurkers is startling enough that I am mentioning it so that the lurkers, in fact, start speaking up. Yes, I know the apparent hypocrisy.)

I love your salt story Spy. What troubles me is why you aren't following through with it.

Your pops vote is reasoned enough, but right after you got through telling me how pops is disguising his inability to follow the game with a book of riddles on his shelf, you tell me that all the lurkers in this game are bad news.

---

What does this mean? Do you think that someone trying to teach the game while they’re playing means something about themselves?

I was picked on for stating the obvious, to which my response was that I forget how stating the obvious isn't looked upon as well here as it would be at other places I play mafia.

I wanted to excuse myself mainly because I do think stating the obvious is a versatile tell.

Vi probably knows how roles complement each other but we, the players, do not know how Vi decided on the roles. It’s trying to outguess the mod to think that something is a random choice or not, or an obvious choice or not. That’s what I think you are doing here.

This, however, I do not find to be a versatile tell or a good tell at all really.

The town should always necessarily assume they've been given the worst hand, as should the mafia, as should an SK.

What frustrates me most is that I don't think I should have to explain why that is.

---

I think certain players, like RedCoyote, were avoiding any real issues in this game and avoiding making accusations. You can discuss some theory, but if you're doing nothing but discussing theory, you're just spinning your wheels.

No, absolutely wrong.

For one, I'm certainly not afraid to make any accusations at all. I think Rhinox is guilty of both misrepresentation and preemptively excusing his play as VI-ish.

Two, if your basing your suspicions off of those who aren't willing to push allegations, why am I such a worse fiend than Huntress?

Here's my issue with you, you're running around saying, "Hey, guys! We might have an SK! We should take that into consideration!" But, as far as I've seen (and you can correct me if I'm wrong), you have not offered one specific suggestion on what we should do to account for an SK. Okay, if we're supposed to play differently based on an SK, then HOW should we play differently? That's why it seems like you're creating a lot of noise but not providing any content.

If every way I've brought up still doesn't pass your bar for necessity, try this question on for size.

Does an SK necessarily have an easier time winning this game if we are to ignore (delibrately ignore) his probable presence until we can prove, without a doubt, that he exists?

If we managed to get to Day 3, and by some combination of Doctor saves, double shots, and any other interventional behavior, only one kill has gone through each night, is it then

still

unhelpful to discuss an SK?

---

Do you think our lynch choice, or our way of determining our lynch choice should change based on assuming any setup with any number of scum?

The lynch choice should not change, no, but that's not the question that was being asked.

Maybe I just have a narrow view right now, but all i'm getting out of our back and forth is you saying, "its stupid to assume there isn't an sk", followed by me saying "thats not what I'm assuming, but how does assuming there is one help us?", followed by you responding with "its stupid to assume there isn't an sk."

I will be happy to stop talking about it. I think I've gotten enough insight into you and Rishi based on it.

---

No, that's true, if you state only that. My point is that there are far superior cases to be made and have already been. At this point, you putting a vote on Rhinox for a near nulltell smells of you being afraid to commit to a proper case.

What better case might that be? pops for posting riddles? Huntress for "refusing to vote"?

Get with the program Korts. This is Day 1. No "superior cases" are being made. I'm content with voting Rhinox, and I read what you're saying as borderline defending Rhinox by implying that the case against him is any less valid than one already out there.

If you concede this point, then what gives you the notion that it's still pro-town to talk about it? There may be some huge benefit to the town that I'm missing, but if you can't think of anything like that either, then I don't see any pro-town purpose in discussing this further.

That's why I said 'may' instead of 'will'.

It is

always

pro-town to assume the worst (e.g. an SK). Neither you, Rishi, Rhinox, nor OGML have proven to me otherwise.

---

Anyway, I agree that discussion concerning Huntress and her own contribution should move past this RVS event because I don’t think there’s anymore to be gained and she should catchup in other areas of discussion.

Agreed.

---

Why the specific talk to Rishi?

Why mention Korts and username and leave me oddly out, once again?

pops was canoodling with the mod about riddles and replacements and so forth, that's not good enough for you Spy?

FoS: popsofctown

[SpyreX]

Spyrex, everyone in this thread complains about fluff, perhaps without the keyword. 12 players is a lot in a game and i just haven't really addressed you i guess. It's OK. Everyone's inner child wants popsofctown to pay attention to them. Wink

I'm giving specific attention to Rishi because he has no vote right now, and i'd like to hear some opinions with him. I figure my case on Rhinox would either put him one way or the other. I already know where you stand, you're voting me are you not?

I'd also like to hear the points on me because i want to know what the most important points against me are.

No, not everyone complains about fluff in the same way. See, I brought this up before because this stance you've taken on "fluff" does not mesh with your own posting history.

That, of course, is coupled with the bizzarre reaction to Kort's vote and total ignoring of mine.

Rishi doesn't have a vote, thats true. Neither does Huntrees, MME or Rhinox. Again, why Rishi? Why would your case on Rhinox push HIM and not the others? It doesn't make sense.

I've laid out my points. If need be I'll do it again later.

You know, this is a fairly good point, SpyreX, but it doesn't help you that you pointed it out. To me this whole situation looks like pops tried to avoid having to distance you and you called him out for it before anyone could make the connection between you.

My main points on pops are still that he'd admitted to having committed to a minor scumtell and that he'd deliberately mischaracterised my argument about serious discussion rooting in jokes. In addition there's now an implied connection with SpyreX from his side. I think that sums up the case pretty well.

Well, if he's trying to distance and I'm trying to bus, so be it. If I am right about pops and I end up being a mislynch tomorrow for it, fine. 1-1 is alright by me.

However, I brought it up simply because it doesn't mesh with his earlier replies to votes on him. You get pages of riddles and I get... nothing. It doesn't add up.

I love your salt story Spy. What troubles me is why you aren't following through with it.

Your pops vote is reasoned enough, but right after you got through telling me how pops is disguising his inability to follow the game with a book of riddles on his shelf, you tell me that all the lurkers in this game are bad news.

Well, some of the lurkers have picked it up some. Not enough, but some.

More importantly I think pops is genuinely scummy - and thus we've moved away from the salt metaphor into the classic villainy.

[Rhinox]

hopefully, this post won't be too big... want to make sure I answer everyones questions though.

RC 152

That's true, the game could be 100% vanilla.

Let's say it is, has the discussion then, in your mind, been useless?

Of course not, but when the setup isn't known, or at least 100% known, I think it helps scum more then town to speculate about the setup. You said so yourself...

I guess what I'm trying to say, why do I have the burden of proof? Why do I have to prove to you how it's helpful to discuss the probability of an SK and you don't have to prove how discussing the probability of "dunno wtf the roles could be??? mystery mod!!!" is helpful.

I think you're fabricating a burden of proof. The point I've been trying to make is that nothing should change D1 based on any idea of a setup. You're argument is that we should prepare for the worst case scenario, but you've yet to explain what preparation we should make or how to support your argument. You've done an excellent job skillfully dodging that question, though...

If there were two killing parties I would assume (again, trying my best not to push the situation as far as I can) that those parties who may or may not have night actions would necessarily act in a way that would be more approriate to having two killing parties and not one.

So, you insult everyone by thinking that any town power roles would be too stupid to take into consideration any possible roles when making their night choices? Thats what all this has been about? So you can state the obvious, in an attempt to look like a perfect little highly informative townie?

It would make sense to lynch someone on the grounds that they are scum period.

Thanks for agreeing with my point.

Your questions are becoming so obtuse. Okay, let's not assume there is an SK. Let's assume that everyone is Vanilla. Let's assume that we will lynch a townie today. Let's assume that all discussion today is kind of pointless because we don't know enough. Let's assume today that the night actions will give us weird results therefore giving us a kinda crappy Day 2 discussion as well.

You see where I'm going with this? Why are you trying to draw a line on what is and isn't helpful to the town? To arbitrarily say that all SK talk on Day 1 is useless without any regard for the implications it might have later in the game sounds naive to me.

This is a complete distortion of my argument. Now that this conversation about sk's has been had, maybe later in the game there will be something we can use later in the game... however, it is my belief that the town will have been better off not having this conversation. Scum can use this information NOW, and have an effect on any events that will happen between now and LATER. This might mean that scum will make sure this conversation means nothing, or it might mean that scum will be able to set up false connections. I'm no more drawing a line between what is pro-town or not than you are... we just have a different idea of where that line is.

Oh, ok... My bad.

This isn't good enough for me. You had a vested interest in tying me so closely with pops as it helped your argument against him.

Do you read the posts, or just ignore all the context? That comment was in regards to pops seemingly allowing my vote to stand despite my obvious contradiction. He cleared it up, I said my bad for thinking he was just conceding the point.

I love your salt story Spy. What troubles me is why you aren't following through with it.

I'm content with voting Rhinox, and I read what you're saying as borderline defending Rhinox by implying that the case against him is any less valid than one already out there.

I got the feeling I was the one who spilled the salt in Spy's story... I see nothing to indicate spy is not following it in his only post after posting the story. If you like the story, RC, there must be something about it you agree with. Which parts of Spy's story do you agree with? disagree with?

It is

always

pro-town to assume the worst (e.g. an SK). Neither you, Rishi, Rhinox, nor OGML have proven to me otherwise.

You're right. A mafia player would have no interest in convincing the town we should be hunting for an sk, instead of the final mafia player. Oh wait, did I link to Meerkat manor mafia yet? Notice how at the end of the game, CKD (the final scum) argued that we should lynch strangercoug (a townie) on the grounds that he was an sk. CKD even claimed a predator cop aka sk cop to do it. It might have won him the game, except the town still had 2 lynch choices left, so we were able to know he was lying and lynch him the next day.

Anyways, this is a pretty clear example where its NOT always "pro-town to assume the worst (e.g. an SK)". If there is one situation, there are probably many more, just as there are probably some situations where assuming an sk IS protown. Bolding always and speaking in absolutes like that is kinda suspicious to me...

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

Bio 137

There may be an article about it, but I don't know. I am just taking what incognito said at face value and analyzing the statement on its own. A good scum player will be able to post-rationalize any mistake they make, so the initial action is more important than the subsequent defense. Lack of justification or poor reasons for an action would IMO add to the suspicion of the original action. A good defense would hold the suspicion at its initial level.

Well you've created a bit of a paradox in logic there... so, you're saying if I'm scum, that I'm a good scum player who will be able to explain away my mistake. Although even good scum players can make some mistakes, do you think a good scum player would make the obvious mistake that I made?

Also... what incog posted is all well and good... but ever since CKD convinced the town in, again, meerkat manor mafia that someone useing a phrase similar to "To be honest..." is a tell that proves they are being dishonest about something, I've been skeptical of every new tell or strategy that I've heard that someone says is valid. What you're saying may be logical, but I don't believe that defenses can't alleviate suspicion beyond the original level. Especially, looking from a 3rd party perspective. A 3rd party doesn't know if the accuser's suspicions are genuine or fabricated, and doesn't know the same of the accused defenses. A back and forth between attack and defense may entirely eliminate any suspicion from one particular action (or, maybe it will arouse more suspicion).

For example, player X does something that could be scummy. Player A is suspicious and starts attacking player X. Player B is also suspicious, but doesn't say anything to hear the back and forth between player A and player X. At the end, player B's suspicions might grow, shrink, or remain the same.

The best defense for any suspicious action is a mountain of overwhelming town play to go alongside the action.

This I agree with. Unfortunately for me, there just hasn't been enough time for ANYONE to have stacked up a mountain of overwhelming town play... if you guys quicklynch me, that won't change. If you don't, then maybe I can turn around and be more pro-town.

Is being pro-town after the fact enough to defend against a previous suspicious action?

Take this example. Now your explanation may very well be true, but the only way the defense could eliminate the initial suspicion would be if I believed you 100% about your explanation.

So you don't 100% believe my explanation. Fair enough... I haven't really given you or anyone a reason to trust anything I've said. So I guess the question I should be asking everyone right now is if the initial suspicion from my contradiction is strong enough for a lynch, are I can't say anything to alleviate that initial suspicion, are you all prepared to end the day now with a quick lynch on me, or do you feel conversation should continue?

I would have seen that as suspicious. I am not reading the link just because I understand your example and the point you are making. If the offense was on Day 1, it might be a lynchable offense for me depending on the scumminess of others. Later in the game, I would definitely need more than just one suspicious infraction from a player in order to lynch them.

That was on Day 1, but near the end (like 20 pages in I think). There were other suspicious comments besides that one comment, but the point I was making is that an obvious contradiction does not necessarily mean the player is scum.

That is a little extreme, but I think you know that.

You're right... maybe I was being a little melodramatic... but does it make what I said any less true?

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

Jahudo 136

I did not try to correlate them as a fact for your gaming all the time, I just wanted to investigate it in this instance. I also said in that same post that there were factors going against this conclusion. You asked questions and your suspicion might not have been that strong as we are not that far into the game. But I do think that you may have leapt into the vote and it could have been a decision that was made by conventional wisdom as opposed to your own feelings.
----------------------
Possibly. I’ll look into it if I think you are doing it later in the game when the stakes are higher.

Ok then... so I guess to answer your original question, my vote on pops was not based on any idea of a policy idea of what I feel I should vote for, and what I shouldn't, and you have the option to look into my past games to verify if you feel its necessary.

However, I will say that I've been trying something new in some of my games that hasn't exactly been working... I feel as a town player, I should always be able to identify who is "scummiest". As such, I should always be able to place my vote for who I feel is scummiest. I'm not really a fan of players who never vote because they're waiting to get an idea of who's scum - it always sounds like fence-sitting to me. I guess I just tried a little too hard to conform to my own idea of a standard, when I'm not quite ready as a player yet to be there.

How would you define scummy to go along with your usage of suspicious here?

I kinda feel like this is splitting hairs... I'm not quite sure how best to answer this. Someone is scummy when they say something that makes me think they're scum. I can be suspicious of someone even if they've never given me a definitive reason to think they're scum. For an example, in our newbie game, even though I was scum and knew you were town, you weren't considered scummy at all. But I don't think that meant that everyone else didn't suspect you at all, or didn't have suspicions, or thought you were confirmed town. Thats really the best way I can answer the question.


P.S. that is all. Sorry korts, I know I'm causing you a lot of reading

[iamausername]

The first bold is me saying he didn't answer his questions as curtly as he could. It's suspicious, especially in terms of his meta.

I'm gonna need to see some sources cited on this meta. Can you show that he tends to answer things more curtly when he's town than when he's scum?

pops, do you have an answer to this question, or were you just throwing in the word 'meta' to make it look like your case was stronger than it actually is?

Really? I think there is a clear distinction between scummy and suspicious. Its the nature of the game to be suspicious of everyone until we are given definitive reasons to believe otherwise. I would still be somewhat suspicious of even the most pro-town player in the game if they're not confirmed town, even if they never did a single thing I could call scummy.

Regarding bio, I'm suspicious of all the early talk about the sk, but i wouldn't call it scummy right now.

If all you mean by 'suspicious' is "It's possible they're scum, because it's always

possible

that somebody is scum", then why bother pointing out specific behaviours as 'suspicious'? Isn't everything anyone says 'suspicious', by your definition?

What better case might that be? pops for posting riddles? Huntress for "refusing to vote"?

Get with the program Korts. This is Day 1. No "superior cases" are being made.

There has very clearly been a stronger case posted against pops than "posting riddles", if you'd care to read the thread. And why do you say "this is Day 1" here? Are you implying that, on Day 1, it is impossible for a stronger case to be made than the one that you have against Rhinox?

[Vi]

Vote Count:

Rhinox (L-3) ~ Jahudo, RedCoyote, popsofctown, bionicchop2

popsofctown (L-4) ~ Korts, iamausername, SpyreX
Korts (L-6) ~ OhGodMyLife

Minimum (L-7)

Not Voting:

Huntress, My Milked Eek, Rishi, Rhinox

First Deadline Review: Feb 14 2009
Current Deadline: Feb 18 2009

-----

Note to those of you I'm in other games with: I won't be able to reply for a while today; I'm glad I got THIS much access. All vote count errors are to be blamed on this MacBook. In fact, all future errors are to be blamed on this MacBook, even after I'm done using it.

Also, first prod of the day goes to OhGodMyLife. As soon as I can convince the touchpad that I want to do it.

[OhGodMyLife]

Huh.. has it been that long since I posted? Real response coming soon.

[bionicchop2]

Well you've created a bit of a paradox in logic there... so, you're saying if I'm scum, that I'm a good scum player who will be able to explain away my mistake. Although even good scum players can make some mistakes, do you think a good scum player would make the obvious mistake that I made?

I thing VP was a good example of how someone who is a good debator (which makes for good scum) can make a 'scummy' mistake (D1 hammer). I would prefer not to discuss too much more about mistakes, defenses and reactions to accusations since it is hard to do without revealing how I plan to analyze your play moving forward. I think you understand the concept of what I said.

Also... what incog posted is all well and good... but ever since CKD convinced the town in, again, meerkat manor mafia that someone useing a phrase similar to "To be honest..." is a tell that proves they are being dishonest about something, I've been skeptical of every new tell or strategy that I've heard that someone says is valid.

This doesn't relate to what we were discussing. I was not talking about a tell and we certainly weren't talking about a tell that a scum player made up during a game. You are coming out of left field with this one. I try not to put to much weight into a single 'tell' because every tell has an exception.

What you're saying may be logical, but I don't believe that defenses can't alleviate suspicion beyond the original level. Especially, looking from a 3rd party perspective. A 3rd party doesn't know if the accuser's suspicions are genuine or fabricated, and doesn't know the same of the accused defenses. A back and forth between attack and defense may entirely eliminate any suspicion from one particular action (or, maybe it will arouse more suspicion).

Again, I am not sure I see your point here or what the further discussion of defenses will accomplish. I never said players shouldn't defend. All I am saying is that if a player does something that is scummy, that player should get a bump on your scummy meter. This should not be minimized by a great defense. If that is compounded by future scummy actions, then the player may very well be scum. A single mistake may end up being the lynch factor on a day 1 with nothing else to go on, but that is probably not going to be the case in this game which is fairly active and I already see a few players who are battling for my vote.

if you guys quicklynch me, that won't change. If you don't, then maybe I can turn around and be more pro-town.

Is being pro-town after the fact enough to defend against a previous suspicious action?

For me, initial suspicious action does not disappear. This may tie in to how you look for the 'scummiest' player. I think all town players will inevitably do somethign that could be percieved as scummy. If everybody has 1 action counting against them, then they all return to the same level.

So I guess the question I should be asking everyone right now is if the initial suspicion from my contradiction is strong enough for a lynch, are I can't say anything to alleviate that initial suspicion, are you all prepared to end the day now with a quick lynch on me, or do you feel conversation should continue?

Odd question since nobody is advocating a quick lynch of you. You aren't even really in the danger zone of lynching yet, but you seem slightly resigned to getting lynched and/or are focusing now on what you an do to minimize the suspicion on you. Hypothetically if I knew you were scum 100%, I would still want the day to continue a little longer.

the point I was making is that an obvious contradiction does not necessarily mean the player is scum.

You are making a point to me I already agree with. You can read where I said that town players do sometimes contradict themselves. I don't think there is a single action that is exclusive to scum. It is just one action that increases the chances of someone being scum. Scum need to make cases they know are false and when pushing something known as a lie, they can end up contradiciting themselves.

That is a little extreme, but I think you know that.

You're right... maybe I was being a little melodramatic... but does it make what I said any less true?

What you said is completely not true. You said nothing you say could stop it. That is false. There may not be a magic phrase or word, but it is still false.

[bionicchop2]

Question(s) for Huntress, MME, Rishi, Rhinox and OGML:

If you were forced to vote for one player right now, who would it be and why? Does not require an actual vote, so basically I am asking for your top 1 suspect. I would prefer to not see a list of scummy rankings. I know OGML is voting, but his suspicions haven't been clear since the vote was placed as he addressed Rhinox as scum a few times.

[Huntress]

Question(s) for Huntress, MME, Rishi, Rhinox and OGML:

If you were forced to vote for one player right now, who would it be and why?

If I were forced to vote for one player right now it would be RedCoyote as I indicated in my last post. I've just caught up with the reading and am in the middle of putting a post together but I thought I might as well answer this one now.

[Huntress]

Now I was going to be the bigger man and drop this entire SK thing because it seemed to have run its course, but I will gladly continue to talk about why I think it serves the town much better to assume that there is an additional scum (e.g. Serial Killer) than not, Day one or no.

So you continued to discuss it even though you thought it was better not to?

If you are going to tell me with a straight face, based on those role possibilities, that we should assume there isn't an SK, then I absolutely have to snicker.

I'm pretty sure no-one did.

Lest you think I am starting some big player-Mod WIFOM, there is a perfectly good reason why we should, why every player should, assume there is an SK before we end this day, or any day, until proven otherwise: night actions.

On day one night actions only concern those who have them. Do I see some subtle role-fishing here?

There's no reason why we should be naive about the situation. I think it's very safe to say that it's probable there is an SK, and every townie should play like there is another scum out there.

There's a big difference between being naive about a situation, and wanting to keep quiet about it. As we have been told all possible roles, and as there are no newbies in this game, I think your comments are unnecessary, to say the least.

Putting things in quote tags = actual quote.
Putting things in quotation marks = paraphrase.

That's the way I tend to work it.

The trouble with that is, not everyone reads it that way. To me quote tags and quotation marks both mean exactly the same thing, they show what someone actually said.

The first bold is me saying he didn't answer his questions as curtly as he could. It's suspicious, especially in terms of his meta. See, there you go Rhinox, i was warning you there might be questions about the way i evaluate RC and there's already been some.

I'm gonna need to see some sources cited on this meta. Can you show that he tends to answer things more curtly when he's town than when he's scum?

I'd like to see this too.

That isn't my problem with Huntress, though. The vote (or absence thereof) doesn't matter, its the fact that the vote itself really appears to be acting as a shield from entering into the discussion.. AND, of course, the fact that Huntress was quick to call out MME for doing the "same thing".

How was it a shield? And where did I call out MME? I used him as an example to question Rhinox and later I followed up a comment that pops made about him but I never accused MME of anything.

But on D1, there's no reason for us to make any calculations about how many scum there are.

I flatout disagree. I mean, you might as well make the argument that "well, we can't lose on D1 regardless... let's just lynch on page 1".

The more scum there are, the more connections we have to be on the watch for. I don't have to tell you that people interact with each other differently based on knowledge they have.

If that's the case, then wouldn't you think contrasting, say, a discussion between Player A and Player B Day 1 and a discussion between the same two players Day 2 could aid the town in figuring out if one of them knows something that we don't?

For me, yeah, it is important that this town is willing to say that it's probable there is an SK around so I know that the town will be on the look out for this sort of interaction.

If we don't realize this as soon as possible (e.g.

Day 1

), then we're already at a disadvantage.

How does this put us at a disadvantage? All interactions are recorded in the thread to be re-read once we have more information. Why is it so important to you that the town actually says it's probable?

Essentially, it's my opinion that forcing the town to talk about the SK may help the mafia, but in general I think it's good practice to talk about all roles and their implications to the game regardless of what day it is.

That's always pertinent to the game itself and it always helps us poke one another for theories about what is taking place. You tie this in with night actions, all of a sudden you see a couple of strange kills for Day 2.

All I can see from this is that you're helping the mafia and/or SK choose the most profitable victims to NK. Later in the game, I can see it may well be helpful for the town to discuss roles, but I don't see that right now.

Maybe I just have a narrow view right now, but all i'm getting out of our back and forth is you saying, "its stupid to assume there isn't an sk", followed by me saying "thats not what I'm assuming, but how does assuming there is one help us?", followed by you responding with "its stupid to assume there isn't an sk."

I think that's a fair summary.

Vote: RedCoyote

[popsofctown]

Hatchet, you asked me if I thought Shuga was suspicious.
In what context do you mean? Of course I think it's possible that she, or anyone here, is scum, but I don't find her specifically suspicious. I would never go so far as to say someone is 100% safe (aside from myself) but for the time being I'm much more suspicious of your and your agenda than I am of her.

Excusatio non petita, accusatio manifesta...

Such a discourse. Worried about what you have said maybe...

Sometimes he's longwinded, and sometimes he can't get to the point faster (usually when he's not lying about something it would seem to me. I haven't played with him as town, but sometimes he's lying about something and sometimes he's addressing points that aren't lies. In retrospect those are less longwinded). The quote sort of represents the game as a whole really.

There you go. If it's a legit tell, now he's acutely aware of it and it won't happen again. The guy's nearly unreadable and you take what little scraps i can put together away from me. It makes me very very emo kid.

[popsofctown]

@ Spyrex: I picked Rishi because when i think, i remember where he stands the least. I felt like going one at a time. Deal with it.

[SpyreX]

@Everyone regarding RC:

Although I think the SK talk is becoming a sticky point, what about this focus is scummy? I'm having a hard time finding a scum-motive for "WATCH OUT FOR THE SK" in the fashion its been. Is it bordering on silly now? Yes. I'm still not seeing the scum maneuver for it, though.

@Pops:

I am dealing with it. Hence the vote. My bad in asking for reasons for it.

[popsofctown]

It's ok Spyrex. Toad is back, making everyone subliminally think i'm town.



You guys could lynch me for trolling this thread. But we all know that itself is not good play ~

[Vi]

Vote Count:

Rhinox (L-3) ~ Jahudo, RedCoyote, popsofctown, bionicchop2

popsofctown (L-4) ~ Korts, iamausername, SpyreX
Korts (L-6) ~ OhGodMyLife
RedCoyote (L-6) ~ Huntress

Minimum (L-7)

Not Voting:

My Milked Eek, Rishi, Rhinox
[size=0]bionicchop2 - 0 | Huntress - 0 | iamausername - 0 | Jahudo - 2 | Korts - 1 | My Milked Eek - 2 | OhGodMyLife - 0 - PROD1 3 | popsofctown - 0 | RedCoyote - 1 | Rhinox - 1 | Rishi - 2 | SpyreX - 0[/size]

First Deadline Review: Feb 14 2009
Current Deadline: Feb 18 2009

[Jahudo]

@Huntress: What in your post 161 would you count against Coyote that supports your vote on him?

I'm giving specific attention to Rishi because he has no vote right now

That sounds legit to me though I don’t see why he couldn’t have asked the other non-voters at the same time.

I don’t think pops is purposely ignoring anyone like Spyrex. Like he said there’s 12 players and I don’ think there’s been enough pages of discussion for a sample size of distancing.

To arbitrarily say that all SK talk on Day 1 is useless without any regard for the implications it might have later in the game sounds naive to me.

Did Rhinox say this thing that you think is naïve? Did he imply it?

I wanted to excuse myself mainly because I do think stating the obvious is a versatile tell.

Can you explain versatile tell?

do you think a good scum player would make the obvious mistake that I made?

That sounds like your using its obviousness as a defense. What is obvious about it that scum are not expected to make it? Couldn’t both scum and town accidentally make it?

Unfortunately for me, there just hasn't been enough time for ANYONE to have stacked up a mountain of overwhelming town play... if you guys quicklynch me, that won't change.

I think you are misreading the groups sentiment to your wagon. I don’t think anyone has been saying lynch yet.

However, I will say that I've been trying something new in some of my games that hasn't exactly been working... I feel as a town player, I should always be able to identify who is "scummiest". As such, I should always be able to place my vote for who I feel is scummiest.

Okay, that actually explains and rationalizes the vote you made. I accept that you want to have transparency in showing your top suspect even if the reason is small, like at the start of a game.

Although I think the SK talk is becoming a sticky point, what about this focus is scummy?

There might be room for a contradiction to take place later on in the game but right now it looks like swapping ideas on strategy and theory but not helping us find scum.

[RedCoyote]

Well, some of the lurkers have picked it up some. Not enough, but some.

More importantly I think pops is genuinely scummy - and thus we've moved away from the salt metaphor into the classic villainy.

Mmm.

I want to see what pops has to say. I'd like pops to lay it all on the table, tell us where he is, where he's coming from, and where he intends to go with the rest of this day.

---

The point I've been trying to make is that nothing should change D1 based on any idea of a setup. You're argument is that we should prepare for the worst case scenario, but you've yet to explain what preparation we should make or how to support your argument.

I've explained about as best as I can how it can be imperative for a town to be in the mindset that there are two killing parties based primarily on night actions which I think could/would be significantly different on the basis that there is a third-party in this game. If you disagree with that, you disagree with that, but do not pretend like I haven't said it more than once today.

So, you insult everyone by thinking that any town power roles would be too stupid to take into consideration any possible roles when making their night choices?

Rhinox, you are trying your hardest to make sure I don't change my vote.

Night actions are necessarily dependant on the individual's prediction of the roles in the setup. Do you disagree with that?

I mean, how am I insulting anyone? You're the one telling everyone not to think about the possibility of an SK. All I want to make clear is that it's my intent that every player in this town

should necessarily

consider there to be an SK in this game until proven otherwise.

Whether or not they would've come to that conclusion on their own is not my concern. If anything, I have to assume that a lot of players would

not

have based on certain players antipathy toward the idea that someone bring up setup possibilities.

So you can state the obvious, in an attempt to look like a perfect little highly informative townie?

Yeah. You know what, yeah. I'll label myself as "stating the obvious". If you, Jahudo, or Huntress wants to run a case on that basis, so be it.

If you want my personal opinion, I think that's a weak idea of a tell given the context of this setup. There's little room to run with it.

I think this whole SK thing was blown way, way out of proportion. I think I've made it clear that I wanted to move on multiple times, but certain players continue to drag my name in the mud regardless of how I approach the situation.

So if you are going to sit there and say the best tell you've found in this game so far is that I've been "stating the obvious", then so be it.

Thanks for agreeing with my point.

Thanks for delibrately not addressing my statement in its proper context, makes me much more comfortable in my vote.

I'm no more drawing a line between what is pro-town or not than you are... we just have a different idea of where that line is.

No

.

I don't accept you putting our two positions on the same platform. You're entirely the one who is drawing a line. I'm drawing no such line. I don't make arbitrary lines on what a town should and should not discuss in regards to a setup's possibilities. I don't think information should be censored because "we're at Day 1" or "we don't know for sure if such-and-such is a factor" or "we don't know this mod" or any other such nonsense.

That's the entire reason why I made the argument the way I did.

I got the feeling I was the one who spilled the salt in Spy's story... I see nothing to indicate spy is not following it in his only post after posting the story.

I did not get that feeling, nor did I see anything to indicate that Spy did follow through with his castigation of lurkers after making the salt story.

I think the story is apt, but he then proceeded to vote pops. pops is not lurking.

pops is not a lurker. Spy is anti-lurker. Therefore, Spy is anti-pops. Doesn't make sense does it?

I realize there is more to Spy's vote on pops, I'm not doubting that. What I'm having trouble with is Spy pushing his salt story and then blantantly voting someone who was at the proverbial table.

A mafia player would have no interest in convincing the town we should be hunting for an sk, instead of the final mafia player.

Is this Day 5?

I'm sorry y'all made a poor decision. I don't need to read another game to know that scum try to trick the town to keep themselves from being lynched.

My statement does

not

necessarily mean you should assume an SK

as opposed

to regular mafia.

So you don't 100% believe my explanation. Fair enough... I haven't really given you or anyone a reason to trust anything I've said.

Cry me a river, Rhinox.

---

pops, do you have an answer to this question, or were you just throwing in the word 'meta' to make it look like your case was stronger than it actually is?

I believe he's refering to this.

There has very clearly been a stronger case posted against pops than "posting riddles", if you'd care to read the thread. And why do you say "this is Day 1" here? Are you implying that, on Day 1, it is impossible for a stronger case to be made than the one that you have against Rhinox?

I'll be the first one to admit I use hyperbole to make my points.

Despite this, I think Spy has done a much better job convincing me to look at pops than either you or Korts have.

Moreover, I am implying that cases on Day 1 are necessarily weaker than cases on succeeding days. Do you disagree with that?

---

Hypothetically if I knew you were scum 100%, I would still want the day to continue a little longer.

What impressions are you getting from Rhinox being at L-3?

---

So you continued to discuss it even though you thought it was better not to?

No, I didn't say that. I said it ran it's course, as in, I thought there wasn't much left to be discussed. Never claimed that it was "better not to" talk about it.

I'm pretty sure no-one did.

The implication is what counts.

On day one night actions only concern those who have them. Do I see some subtle role-fishing here?

I was pushed into saying it. I was content with leaving it at a disagreement over whether or not setup discussion was good for the town on Day 1, but Rhinox and Rishi both

insisted

that I give them a reason as to why having multiple killing parties makes a determining factor in this game. This forced my hand into talking about things I would rather not have talked about. I'm wondering why you're pressuring me because of this, and not Rhinox or Rishi.

Hell, Rhinox said it himself that it was an insult to think that townies couldn't come to that judgment on their own. If it really was such an insult, why did he push me so hard to say it Huntress? Specifically after I made it clear my intention that I was no longer interested in talking about it.

There's a big difference between being naive about a situation, and wanting to keep quiet about it. As we have been told all possible roles, and as there are no newbies in this game, I think your comments are unnecessary, to say the least.

I accept that there is a difference. On the same token, is it not unnecessary to push one player who happens to have a disagreement of opinion to keep talking about it?

Let me put it another way. If I had stopped talking about the SK altogether, you would've been just as interested in pushing me for ignoring arguments now wouldn't you?

How does this put us at a disadvantage? All interactions are recorded in the thread to be re-read once we have more information. Why is it so important to you that the town actually says it's probable?

Because I feel comfortable knowing the town isn't taking the game lightly.

Why would you not think that?

Let me ask it another way. Is it important to you that your team is willing to consider every possible option? I mean, I'll ask you the same question I asked Rishi. Suppose, hypothetically, that one kill happens every night based on whatever circumstances for the first 3 nights. On Day 4 then, would you still make the argument that it is advantageous for the town

not

to discuss the possibility of an SK and therefore the interation from one player to another?

Why is it that you can arbitrarily draw the line at an undisclosed, later date without feeling as though that puts the town at a disadvantage?

Later in the game, I can see it may well be helpful for the town to discuss roles, but I don't see that right now.

Right. Later at an undisclosed date depending on when you say it's okay.

No, sorry, I don't accept that. Circumstances beyond one player's control necessarily affect the outcome of each night and consequently cause the game to take on different forms. To then say, despite this, that discussing the setup never helps the town is naive at best, dodgy at worst.

---

The guy's nearly unreadable and you take what little scraps i can put together away from me. It makes me very very emo kid.

XD

Being mafia is, like, a million times as much fun as being town.

---

Although I think the SK talk is becoming a sticky point, what about this focus is scummy? I'm having a hard time finding a scum-motive for "WATCH OUT FOR THE SK" in the fashion its been. Is it bordering on silly now? Yes. I'm still not seeing the scum maneuver for it, though.

I absolutely agree with this. The only reason I gave Huntress the time of day is basically because we are welcoming her to the game.

It's unfortunate that her vote is based on "stating the obvious" as her primary tell, which I continue to think is an ancillary tell that should have some deeper connection behind it.

---

bionicchop2 - 0 | Huntress - 0 | iamausername - 0 | Jahudo - 2 | Korts - 1 | My Milked Eek - 2 | OhGodMyLife - 0 - PROD1 3 | popsofctown - 0 | RedCoyote - 1 | Rhinox - 1 | Rishi - 2 | SpyreX - 0

Mod, what does this mean?

---

I don’t think pops is purposely ignoring anyone like Spyrex. Like he said there’s 12 players and I don’ think there’s been enough pages of discussion for a sample size of distancing.

Well, depends on how you are defining "purposely ignoring". My problem with pops was how Spy directly asked him something (and voted him) and pops just kind of had a little discussion with the Mod instead.

Are you making the case that Spy is more guilty of the problems he has with pops than pops is?

Did Rhinox say this thing that you think is naïve? Did he imply it?

Absolutely he did.

Can you explain versatile tell?

I mean to say that when coupled with other things, like lurking for instance, the combination is potentially harsh.

Alone it's much weaker than when you can tie it to something concrete.

do you think a good scum player would make the obvious mistake that I made?

I missed this little gem, when did he say that? If I ever write a dictionary I want this quote to be listed under WIFOM. This is definitive WIFOM.

No wonder Rhinox doesn't think WIFOM is bad, lol.

unvote, vote: Rhinox

You're ALREADY voting for Rhinox... ~Vi

(Just to let username and Korts know that I am not backing down, the case against Rhinox is absolutely

at least

among the strongest here today.)

[Vi]

bionicchop2 - 0 | Huntress - 0 | iamausername - 0 | Jahudo - 2 | Korts - 1 | My Milked Eek - 2 | OhGodMyLife - 0 - PROD1 3 | popsofctown - 0 | RedCoyote - 1 | Rhinox - 1 | Rishi - 2 | SpyreX - 0

Mod, what does this mean?

It's an activity table so I can keep track of prods when I'm half asleep.
Now quit finding my secret stuff.

[Rishi]

Gotta catch up tonight. Will post in the next 24 hours with some content.

[Rhinox]

I've explained about as best as I can how it can be imperative for a town to be in the mindset that there are two killing parties based primarily on night actions which I think could/would be significantly different on the basis that there is a third-party in this game. If you disagree with that, you disagree with that, but do not pretend like I haven't said it more than once today.

I absolutely disagree with your reasonings for talking about 2 killing parties. I see it as a BS cover for speculating on the setup and distracting the town from scum hunting. Everybody in the game knows exactly what roles are possible. You saying "BEWARE OF TEH SK" isn't going to enlighten anyone...

Night actions are necessarily dependant on the individual's prediction of the roles in the setup. Do you disagree with that?

I wish I could do this without being accused of rolefishing... so, hypothetically, and rhetorically, I'm a watcher, or jailer, or doc... I could assume there is only mafia, I could assume there is mafia + sk, or I can assume nothing about the mafia roles other than whats possible... I don't see how any of my actions change by assuming there is an sk, compared to not assuming one...

I mean, how am I insulting anyone?

You're the one telling everyone not to think about the possibility of an SK.

All I want to make clear is that it's my intent that every player in this town should necessarily consider there to be an SK in this game until proven otherwise.

No, not really, but since you're either content in twisting everything I say into something I didn't say, I guess I better respond to this too...

I didn't say "ignore the sk, assume theres not one in the game b/c there's no evidence there is". What I have said is there is no reason to assume anything at all about the scum factions until there is evidence to support any assumption.

Whether or not they would've come to that conclusion on their own is not my concern. If anything, I have to assume that a lot of players would not have based on certain players antipathy toward the idea that someone bring up setup possibilities.

We all know the setup possibilies... stated very clearly after the rules... And you still haven't shown how any particular town role should play D1 differently by assuming there is an sk.

Yeah. You know what, yeah. I'll label myself as "stating the obvious". If you, Jahudo, or Huntress wants to run a case on that basis, so be it.

Stating the obvious can be a way to say something that appears to be pro-town, even though the reality is that nothing need be said on the subject at all...

But you're right, that in and of itself is nothing... unless its all you've done all game. I've seen minimal scumhunting from you otherwise... even your comments directed towards other players have me as the subject matter... Either you're 100% tunnelvisioned on me, or you think you're gonna piss me off enough to start acting rediculous so you can justify lynching me.

Moving on... I actually like quote wars

If you want my personal opinion, I think that's a weak idea of a tell given the context of this setup. There's little room to run with it.

I think the town should decide the strength of any tell in context... not what you say is strong or weak.

I think this whole SK thing was blown way, way out of proportion. I think I've made it clear that I wanted to move on multiple times, but certain players continue to drag my name in the mud regardless of how I approach the situation.

I think you're being paranoid if you think people are "dragging your name through the mud." Has anyone even voted for you for any of this? I know I haven't... Huntress did I guess... But, You can't have a conversation with someone without thinking you're being attacked? Sounds overdefensive, imo...

So if you are going to sit there and say the best tell you've found in this game so far is that I've been "stating the obvious", then so be it.

Another distortion... aside from this post, please quote where I said anything to point to me even thinking "stating the obvious" was a scum tell, let alone the best one I've found... I want to see it in my words, not your paranoid interpretation/blatant misrepresentation of what I actually said.

I don't accept you putting our two positions on the same platform. You're entirely the one who is drawing a line. I'm drawing no such line. I don't make arbitrary lines on what a town should and should not discuss in regards to a setup's possibilities. I don't think information should be censored because "we're at Day 1" or "we don't know for sure if such-and-such is a factor" or "we don't know this mod" or any other such nonsense.

I don't see anyone censoring anything... I see you forcing a view onto the town and instead of justifying why, you attack anyone who questions you or disagrees with you.

I mean, I'm sure whoever is mafia loves your argument right now about sks... get the town paranoid about an sk, so maybe the town PR's spend tonight looking for the ghost sk instead of looking for mafia, or looking for scum in general. And on top of that, you're helping the mafia even more by trying to get me mislynched.

Basically, your "line in the sand" is that anything can be pro-town, so don't hold anything back. My line is that things that do not clearly benefit the town should not be said. A potential to help the town in the long run is not good enough when the conversation will help scum now. You still haven't shown how anything you've said regarding the SK discussion is helping the town right now on D1 catch scum.

Is this Day 5?

I'm sorry y'all made a poor decision. I don't need to read another game to know that scum try to trick the town to keep themselves from being lynched.

Actually, we still won. Who cares if it was day 5 or not... you said that it was

ALWAYS

pro-town to "assume the worst (i.e. an sk)"... you said nothing about it being day 1 only, or anything else. You said always...

Cry me a river, Rhinox.

Resulting to

ad hom

now to try to get me lynched, or at least get a rouse out of me? That statement was meant for BC, and not you. So, why the need to respond? What does this statement add to anything? How is this scumhunting?

No, I didn't say that. I said it ran it's course, as in, I thought there wasn't much left to be discussed. Never claimed that it was "better not to" talk about it.

The fact the you're pretty much using the whole conversation as justification for keeping your vote on me means that the topic obviously hasn't ran its course. Don't just think you can say "there's nothing more for me to say" and expect me just fold without defending against your smears. If you really wanted to be the bigger man, you wouldn't HAVE to have the last word...

I was pushed into saying it. I was content with leaving it at a disagreement over whether or not setup discussion was good for the town on Day 1, but Rhinox and Rishi both insisted that I give them a reason as to why having multiple killing parties makes a determining factor in this game. This forced my hand into talking about things I would rather not have talked about. I'm wondering why you're pressuring me because of this, and not Rhinox or Rishi.

Here's why I "pushed it" aka asked for an explanation:

Essentially, it's my opinion that forcing the town to talk about the SK may help the mafia, but in general I think it's good practice to talk about all roles and their implications to the game regardless of what day it is.

...because you said in your own opinion, talking about the SK may help the mafia, and you continue to talk about it. If you also think this conversation is pro-town, you better damned well be able to explain why. You still haven't done so. Hey, if you can't, you can't. Just admit it so we can move on and actually scum hunt. At least I was man enough to admit when I messed up.

Right. Later at an undisclosed date depending on when you say it's okay.

Thats a pretty big distortion of what huntress and I have both said, since I seem to remember you directing a similar comment towards me. Firstly, the date is neither undisclosed, nor arbitrary. There are some clear points where it would be beneficial to speculate on the scum killing factions:
1)when there is more than 1 kill in a night.
2)when 3 mafia players have been killed.
3)when there are no kills in a night.
4)When a town PR reveals with information that might give insight into the factions.

Until 1 of those 4 things happen, I don't care how many times you repeat to take an SK into all considerations, I'm just hunting factionless scum. Its worked for me so far. I've never lost a game because I failed to account for a possible SK on D1. Have you?

Second point... what gives you the right to proclaim when its ok or not ok to talk about anything?

Being mafia is, like, a million times as much fun as being town.

You seem to be having a lot of fun so far...

(in case you can't tell, this comment was meant as a joke)

do you think a good scum player would make the obvious mistake that I made?

I missed this little gem, when did he say that? If I ever write a dictionary I want this quote to be listed under WIFOM. This is definitive WIFOM.

Wow... first, lets revist some context, since you still haven't shown you consider it before saying anything... In fact, in this instance you admit to not even remember reading where I said it originally... so here you go:

There may be an article about it, but I don't know. I am just taking what incognito said at face value and analyzing the statement on its own.

A good scum player will be able to post-rationalize any mistake they make, so the initial action is more important than the subsequent defense.

Lack of justification or poor reasons for an action would IMO add to the suspicion of the original action.

A good defense would hold the suspicion at its initial level.

Well you've created a bit of a paradox in logic there... so, you're saying if I'm scum, that I'm a good scum player who will be able to explain away my mistake. Although even good scum players can make some mistakes, do you think a good scum player would make the obvious mistake that I made?

Bolded to assist with my explanation. Bio was arguing that even if I had a stellar defense for my early contradictions, that it wouldn't erase the suspicion because a

good scum

would be able to post-rationalize the mistake. So, if I had a good defense, that would make me a good scum. The paradox in logic is that although even good scum can make some mistakes, do you think good scum would make such an obvious mistake as I have?

It wasn't meant as a defense of myself, RC, it was actually a question to bio. Since I didn't exactly have a stellar defense to go along with my mistake, there is nothing to indicate I'm playing like any allignment of a good player so far.

But I understand why you don't consider the context of anything, RC. Its easy to fabricate a case when you ignore the context...

No wonder Rhinox doesn't think WIFOM is bad, lol.

Again with the distortions... Yes, I stated in this thread that I have argued before that not all wifom was bad. There are times when its ok to use wifom, and times when its not. Here is an example when its ok to use wifom:

Player A is at L-1 and everybody is just waiting for a hammer from player B. Player B doesn't hammer, and instead brings up a case on player C. Player C is lynched scum. The next day, someone suggests that Player B might have been bussing player C. Player B says "thats stupid. If I were scum, I would have just hammered player B instead of derailing the wagon to deliberately lynch my scum partner."

In other words, its OK to use wifom when its true - when both sides of the wifom aren't equally beneficial to the player.

In my situation, it is true that I've never seen scum make such an obvious contradiction so early in the game as I have... If that was my only defense for my actions, then sure, go ahead and call WIFOM and lynch me for it... but I've said a lot to explain my self, only a small part being this particular point.

Also, I'm suspicious of pops due to his early wifom post about bio when this whole sk discussion was beginning... I've been clear about that for a while now. So what makes you think I don't think WIFOM is or can be bad?

unvote, vote: Rhinox

Now this is interesting... On one hand, maybe you're trying to make a point, or just be an ass, by unvoting the player you're ALREADY VOTING FOR and voting them again... On the other hand, this makes me think you're not playing serious enough to remember who you were voting for. This really makes me think you are just fabricating this case on me - if you had genuine suspicions of me, you would have remembered you were already voting me...

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

That sounds like your using its obviousness as a defense. What is obvious about it that scum are not expected to make it? Couldn’t both scum and town accidentally make it?

Of course... I think my paragraph above should explain for you though. The key word was

good

scum, and was meant as a question for bio and not a defense of myself.

I think you are misreading the groups sentiment to your wagon. I don’t think anyone has been saying lynch yet.

It doesn't have to be said... a vote is a representation of a desire to lynch. If some quick votes get piled on me and I end up quick lynched, nobody voting for me right now gets an out by saying "I wasn't ready to lynch anyone yet"

Obviously, I view the wagon on me as a serious threat to me being mislynched, and I'm acting accordingly. Are you saying I shouldn't think that I might be lynched, and that I'm just some sort of utility wagon? That I shouldn't be defending myself right now because I'm not really going to be lynched?

[popsofctown]

gosh, walls.

When did spyrex ask me a question, and what question was it? Maybe i thought it was rhetorical.

[bionicchop2]

Hypothetically if I knew you were scum 100%, I would still want the day to continue a little longer.

What impressions are you getting from Rhinox being at L-3?

I have known for the past few days that my vote wasn't going to stay on Rhinox. Typically I don't remove my vote until I have decided where it is going to be moved to (not voting is not too common for me).

With that said, your latest post and confirmation of a vote on Rhinox has inspired me to

unvote

despite not having determined a new home for my vote.

I am seeing a ton of repetition in your posts. You have posted many words, but your case against Rhinox is unclear. You challenge people to identify how your talk of a SK is scummy, but I would challenge you to identify how the dissension against such talk is scummy.

I also challenge you to make a few posts that are on a new topic or display you hunting for scum.

Now, for closure, I will write this statement:

I, bionicchop2, solemnly swear to acknowledge a distinct possibility we have multiple killing roles. At no point during this game will I forget this possibility. During my decision making process for hunting scum, I will constantly ask myself how a 2nd killing party would affect the decision I am about to make.

I do not need a response to this post, except for:

I would challenge you to identify how the dissension against such talk is scummy.

If you could respond to that part as succinct as possible, I would appreciate it.

[bionicchop2]

When did spyrex ask me a question, and what question was it? Maybe i thought it was rhetorical.

I am not sure who this is to, but you should easily be able to track down any questions to you once someone has identified who asked the question if you are really concerned about it. Asking somebody else to find it for you only serves to delay answers.