Mini 765 - Welcome to Hambargarville GAME OVER!!

[qwints]

/confirm

[qwints]

vote X

False start. 1 vote penalty.

[qwints]

unvote, vote The World No. 1 Noob

Preemptively using the "I'm new defense" is troublesome. Also, he has a dirty mind.

[qwints]

The clear implication of Wall-E's post was that he had had the opportunity to press the button to watch the topic, i.e., he was in the thread. It would be a reasonable explanation if had confirmed in thread and not posted again until he was prodded. It would also be a reasonable explanation if he had arrived at the thread and the thread had been locked because the mod was taking pm confirmations. Neither applies in this case. I'm interested to see where this leads:

unvote, vote Wall-E

[qwints]

Wall-E is fast approaching prod-time. (Last post was on March 28th.) That should tell us whether he's lurking or inactive.

[qwints]

Wall-E, two questions:

1) Why didn't you confirm the first time you came to the thread? (That is, the time you were in the thread and forgot to press the button)

2) Why claim right there? You were at L-3.

[qwints]

Fair enough, but IGMEOY

unvote

[qwints]

2.) Ojanen and Wall-e are both not scum-aligned (although one or the other may be). There is no way Ojanen would have called out Wall-e on such a subtle point if they were both scum.

This is absolutely wrong. In fact, you'll often see scum pointing out phantom scum tells by their partners. Scum tells stand out more when you know the person making them is scum.

On the watching the topic issue, I think Wall-E solved it when he said that he meant that he hadn't even gone to the thread (which is why I unvoted.)

[qwints]

@qwints: While I *definitely* would have a lot to say in response to that, did you read Hambargarz's post in 138? We aren't allowed any further discussion on anything which came out of their discussion of PMs.

On another note, aren't you going to post your impressions of people? You have been extremely quiet and haven't been saying much when you do post. What gives? You seem uninterested in scum hunting.

A closer read of 138 convinces me you're right - I had thought it was just conversation about the pm and response to it, but I see that it's anything sparked by the discussion.

I'll try and do a re-read to get a better perception of everyone in the next couple days.

[qwints]

Apologies for the lack of posting, but I'm not seeing a lot that I find scummy. I know I still need to due a re-read.

I like Wall-E's latest set of defenses. @yellowbunny, I don't think Wall-E's defense was that obvious because I hadn't thought of it.

[qwints]

/acknowleding prod, will post when I wake up (about 6 hours)

[qwints]

All right, I couldn't sleep so here's some analysis.

Wall-E has consistently been the most scummy. Late to the thread, preemptive vanilla claim and a failure to scumhunt characterized the beginning of his play. His bizarre vote and unvote in posts 191 and 200 represent the height of his stupidity and this post:

I'm too close to the action in this game to be unbiased. I'm hoping someone else makes a strong case for me to analyze. I think that for today that might be all I can manage.

represents a final abdication of a desire to produce content. 10 of his 25 posts are basically empty including this classic in iso post 15:

vote: Wall-E

Now, for my other suspects:
I still don't think idiotking has really redeemed himself from his early scummy posts (see 53,59 and 84). He has also has a lot of hedging in his posts: [I'll meta this when I have the time]
Iso 14

I don't think Wall-E's lack of posting is scummy, just lazy, but that doesn't change the fact that it looks bad.

Iso 17

I basically agree with the sentiment that CUBAREY was overzealous, but not necessarily scummy ....

I don't see anything scummy from X, but it's little unsettling to me that he seems to be clinging to me a bit, subtly defending me ....

I don't have any scum vibes from anyone in particular, to be honest, but Wall-E's strange posting behavior's a bit annoying.

Next on the list is Jase, solely because of this post:
Post 101

The vote was because he was the focus of my suspicion. Also I changed my vote from a random one so it isn't as though I was trying to jump off a dead wagon or something like that.

I think that the discussion about wall-e is pointless until he's prodded. If he IS in fact lurking that might merit some discussion, but I'm beginning to suspect that he just flaked.

I'm also not liking the way Cubarey is looking. Though I did find IKs response a bit over-defensive it seems like Cub is trying to make it seem like much more than that. As a matter of fact...he contradicts himself saying that Xs question was not serious but meant to see how IK would react, then later he says that Xs remark was a simple request for information, and any townie would have taken it as such.

Seeing this now I'll change my vote once more.

Unvote

Vote: CUBAREY

Note how he dismisses the legitimate attacks on IK and wall-e.

As for the rest ... I'd say its a mixture of pro-town players and lurkers. It's unlikely that these are the scum team and only the scum team, but I'm fairly confident there's at least one and probably two scum in the group.

[qwints]

@X, hedging just means saying that you could be wrong.

e.g. wall-e's lurking is scummy BUT he might just be lazy.

It's not necessarily a scum tell, but scum can use it so that they can point back and say they were suspicious of their partners.

[qwints]

I find this series of posts rather bizarre:

Iso 16

I agree with X's post 56 that IK is the best lead at the moment. I'll put my vote on IK for now.

Vote: Idiot King

Iso 17

Hm. Interesting.

Unvote

.

Nothing to add for now.

Iso 19

Oh, I see I'm being an idiot in this game. Let's stop that now.

Next, some damage control:

I agree with X's post 56 that IK is the best lead at the moment. I'll put my vote on IK for now.

Vote: Idiot King

Idiot King abstained from random voting because he says he doesn't like it...that was why X voted for him. Two questions:

1.) Aside from not liking to vote initally, has Idiot King done anything to make you suspicious of him?
2.) X has since removed his vote from Idiot King. X's vote is currently on you. What do you think of this?

1) No.
2) I think that you are right. What about it would you like to discuss?

IK: No idea why I voted for you. I'm reading again to see, but I think it was the way you refused to random vote...

Iso 26

Idiotking's 53 looks like a mini flip-out.

Then Idiot King distracts from the bit of attention the flip-out granted him by bringing up a RVS policy discussion and baiting people into joining it by taking the unpopular side (pooh on all of you who participated, scum helping their partner distract).

It's the same RVS discussion, in fact, that we've all groaned through in every game ever.

Vote: Idiotking

Wall-E seems to be all over the place on what he thinks about idiotking. I don't like these inconsistencies nor the way he seems to keep going back to the same point without addressing idiotking's responses.

[qwints]

@idiotking, if you routinely hedge as both scum and town then it is not a tell. I would advise trying to break the habit in your everyday speech as it makes you sound indecisive.

[qwints]

yellowbunny, is that L-1?

[qwints]

Nothing substantive.

Ik's spew on page 15 makes him more suspicious to me. That's a lot of posting with little accomplished which is anti-town.

Wall-E's play continues to be scummy. I don't know if I buy the Asperger's claim in 407. It seems like the symptoms would preclude one from being able to effectively play mafia. I also don't like his claim that tunneling = scum in 396.

Right now I'm fine with a wall-e lynch. IK is probably the second most suspicious over the last stretch. A couple of posts from Krevriov and yellowbunny made me a little suspicious (282 and 393 respectively), but not enough to do much about.

I wrote this without reviewing my previous long post, so I'm sure somebody slipped off the radar.

[qwints]

A dozen posts including

And you're taking me seriously?

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

and

Just said it in the post above yours.

after a simulpost. You posted short, fast and fairly pointless posts. I don't think that saying Cubarey's replacement couldn't know what he was thinking was helpful (which is what I got out of your posts on that page.)

[qwints]

Holy crap, that's a lot of activity.
@those asking about my lurking: I had a huge paper due friday that ate up all my time
this week. I'll try to up my activity level, especially given the recent storm of posts.

unvote

to give me time to evaluate and a bigger post should be coming tomorrow.

[qwints]

Post 452

My questions aren't purely reactionary. Lots of people have gone after me thusfar, but I only stuck to the ones I found interesting.

IK posted this is response to Sajin. After this post, he stuck on only pressuring Wall-E (though he did ask Jase and me for opinions.) IK's tunnelling on Wall-E has been quite interesting and it makes me think that they are very unlikely to be scum buddies.

I absolutely hate Sajin' suggestion that we should stop talking after we find a day 1 lynch. Getting information from people before reveals is EXTREMELY useful.

post 462

Alright, so most seem to agree that a Wall-E lynch would be good. I've already explained my reasons for suspecting him. I've got no problem putting down the hammer. My question to you is: Do you think we're at a good time to end Day 1?

Asking for permission to hammer can be a scum tell. Especially when the lynchee is a consensus town lynch that flips townie. Scum are often more willing to bus their partners without a blessing from the town than to hammer a townie. If Wall-E ends up being town, this is a strike against hero.

post 483

Not good enough.

First, outline your own perspective of the events in the thread in such a way as to explain away my points against you. When you've done that, find every question you claim I have not answered and put them into a single post to back your claim that I have not been answering questions to a degree deserving of a vote. When you've done that, I'll know you deserve what you've been screaming for for the last three pages and I will answer every single one of said questions (presuming none of them are rhetorical or unhelpful in other ways, such as someone asking me who I think looks most town).

Wall-E's posts, such as this one and 543, where he lists why he won't respond are unhelpful and anti-town. One, they make scumhunting townies frustrated. Two, they don't provide any useful information to the town. The large number of posts like this are my number one scum indicator against Wall-E

Which makes the following post quite bizarre
Post 488

I don't really think Wall-E is scum especially considering his post 483.

Scum trying to clear a scumbuddy?I'm not sure what to make of Jase's post here, but I don't like it.

Missed IK's post:

I don't exactly think I can respond to Hero's statement against me without it turning into another WIFOM situation. Hero, how would you say I've been acting scummy, in detail? Or point me to a place where you already have; I may have missed it.

As disappointing as this may sound, I'm just getting really bad vibes from all of your posts. I'm not too fond of your style of attacking Wall-E, and you're "holier than thou"(ie. the(not exact quote) YOU KNOW WHY? CUZ WE AIN'T AS SCUMMY AS YOU, BITCH!) attitude kind of pisses me off. Like I said before, you're doing the same thing I accused Wall-E of doing on page 12. Acting like you're so frustrated when someone suspects you to help ensure everyone there's no other way than you being town.

The "I'm not too fond of your style of attacking Wall-E" bothers me. I don't think it's something scum would say to a townie attacking scum. I do, very much, think that it's something scum would say to a buddy attacking town.

Post 622

And I don't think we'll know Wall-E's role until he dies, to be honest. While I'm not as annoyed by him lately (kudos to yellowbunny and Kreriov on getting him to actually post a semblance of a defense (maybe (?))), I still think he could be hiding his real role. The reason for this is that if it took us this long to actually get him to respond reasonably, it could equally be difficult for us to extract a true roleclaim from him (assuming he isn't actually a VT or scum).

I REALLY don't like this post. IK, after spending a ton of time attacking Wall-E, suggests that he might be a power role. This really feels like rolefishing to me.

tldr Summary
Although I still don't like Wall-E (for early claim and stonewalling posts), I think that if he is town, an IK + hero scum team is quite possible.

[qwints]

@ Jase
PBPA of kreriov (all post number's iso)

Post 2:

Yes, it is.

Um, quick question, wasn't Wall-E replaced by Kieraen? It is a bit confusing as I see Wall-E being voted for and in the vote count and I was a bit confused.

An early confusion about Wall-E not being in the game makes me think a wall-e + kreriov team is quite unlikely. People know who their scumbuddies are and this is very early in the game to try such a gambit.

Post 4:

I am more interested in the Wall-E thing. The game rules clearly state that scum can only talk at night and this was a day start. Is there some sort of implied N0?

An interesting newbie question - possible town tell as scum would already have nighttalked pre-confirmation.


Post 5:

Hmm, well idiotking you make a very good point, while I do think you overreacted a bit, it was only 1 vote. That is almost the problem in the early game, until votes start stacking up on someone, there is very little to go on and thinking you are scum from one post, well, its almost as good an excuse as any so maybe just keep being levelheaded like your last post.

Anyway, on to more important things, IMO. I am getting more and more curious about Wall-E not posting. The 'he might be scum because he might have been PMing' is WILDLY speculative. The possible X / Wall-E connection is a bit speculative and Wall-E's failure to participate is NOT speculative. Also, at some point we have to stack a few votes on people to get em to talk.

Therefore....

unvote

Vote: Wall-E

An interesting reference to scum pm'ing. In 5 of the 5 games in which I've been allowed to night talk, there's been a quicktopic thread. The only one where there wasn't was a noob game. Town slip? Also, pressuring lurkers early is a solid pro-town move.

Post 7

Oh, I am not stopping looking at others and good point about the VT thing as far as it goes. It is the fact that the very first thing he does is claim, wether VT, Doc, Cop or whatever, that just throws up flags. There is really nothing much to go on when deciding the first lynch other than odd behavior. Claiming simply because a few people have voted for you and SAID the only reason they were voting for you is because you have not been participating is decidely odd.

As for other things I am looking at and would like people to discuss.

How about Cubarey? Only 3 posts so far. I would like to hear more from him.

Or Noob, who hasn't posted in 4 days.

Or X, who seems to be jumping around a bit.

Or back to Idiotking who just seemed so defensive.

There is just so little to go on I feel like it best to get everyone involved until something weird happens and those are really the only things that stand out to me right now.

Maintaining pressure without tunnelling - another solidly pro-town post.

Post 8

Yeah Noob, that is the biggest problem with day 1, everything is supposition and accusation with little or no backing. If I say I hate it for that reason will that be ok?

A quick, unnecessary claim is not supposition. It is concrete evidence. True or not, its also a bad move to claim with no real reason. Actually, I also do not like some of the following

@yellowbunny and anyone thinking I'm good at this game: omg fffff ahahahahaha No I suck. One thing I have going for me is bull-headed stubbornness, which is often a trait of experts, but rest assured it's a by-product of my single-mindedness and not skill.

That's not to say I haven't caught my fair-share of scum in my day, though I'd attribute that more to my understanding of logic.

Anyway, this is going to take some undoing, but I'm down.

As I've tried to explain, it's a common error for me, since I'm typically in five or six games at a time, once in a while one slips through the cracks

Ok, so you are not an expert at this game and yet you are in 5 or 6 games at once. Even if you are not an expert, you should know better than to claim to quickly.

Having said all this, I am still going to do this

unvote

I already have limited time and access on the weekends, this Sunday is Palm Sunday, and I do like Wall-Es willingess to admit 'this is going to take some undoing'. I look forward to reading the resulting discussion on Wall-E and Cubarey in particular on Monday! Enjoy the weekend all.

I'm not a big fan of this post. I don't really see this self-proclaimed stubbornness in his other posts and a solid reason for the unvote.

Wow, um, weekend was actually a bit slower than I thought. Two people did say some things that stand out to me however -
barfy and Cubarey.

Here are the two quotes -

If i were scum, and i'm not, unvoting to leave me free makes no sense at all.

( I am a townie but if you really believe I am lurking then you do not believe me anyway).

Simple little posts, but why the 'I am townie' comments? (This is directed at everyone else, not Cubarey and burfy). This is mafia. There is absolutely no reason to reassure everyone that you are a townie. When it comes time for you to claim, great, claim. But realize, EVERYONE says they are townie right now. I actually find this type of unnecessary reassurance suspicious, almost like you feel you need to reassure us for some reason. Actually saying you are a townie when it is already understood you say you are a townie, well, there is a reason. Are you trying to make it seem like your post has more validity? Are you scum trying to slip that in there because you consciously or unconsciously feel some need to reassure the town to try and appear less suspicious? Are you simply a newer player who does not realize that every thing you say will be parsed closely? I do not know, but I do notice and think about them.

Anyway, yellowbunny asked if we would all post our thoughts so far on people. I think its a good idea and I will help out by doing my part now.

yellowbunny - a bit town. Definitely trying to get discussions going. Tries to make clear observations

Jase - a bit town. Aggressive in stating his opinions and has clear reasons for his suspicions but aware it is day 1 so it will all be supposition in the end

X - a bit scummy.

Solid point about why claiming townie is dumb. I find it curious that his reaction to yellowbunny asking him for opinions is to compliment yellowbunny's play.

Post 10

Sorry, hit submit to early.

For X he seems to be jumping around a bit, to aggressive in trying to get something started. New and anxious to be involved is more my read, but that applies whether town or scum so scum it is for now.

Cubarey - a bit scummie. somewhat contradictory in some posts and of course seemed to need to reassure us he is a townie.

Wall - E - scummiest so far to me. That quick, unnecessary claim really bothers me. Some who, even if by their own admission is not an expert, IS experienced (in 5 or 6 games at once) should know better than to claim so quickly with so little reason.

Everyone else is neutral to me.

I do think we need to ratchet up the pressure a bit on someone sooner rather than later so
VOTE: Cubarey[/b]

Cubarey has actually posted the least of everyone and the content leaves a bit to be desired. (It is ontradictory, unnecessary, or even suspicious.)

This is kind of a WTF post. Wall-E is "scummiest so far to me" and yet he votes Cubarey? On the other hand, it continues his policy of pushing lurkers.

Post 13

I therefore have unvoted him (actually did this when he explained that his reply to X my have been partially caused by paranoia) and Voted X who seemed overly eager to lead the bandwagon that had started to form around me .

Ok, two things here. First, so you voted for X because he was leading a bandwagon against you? That is pretty much the definition of OMGUS.

Second, X NEVER VOTED FOR YOU! In fact, he barely mentions you in any of his posts, asking a question or two and responding to things YOU have to say about HIM. Here is what he even says in his 'list of thoughts on people':

CUBAREY is not scummy, just confused, I think. He doesn’t get that the natural gut reaction to a loaded question is to think that your inquisitor is scum.

If anything, Jase would be leading your bandwagon and with only Jase and I voting for you, its more of a donkey cart. Talk about being paranoid!

All I can say is maybe X has you pegged dead on as confused. Personally, it looks like you are scrambling and contradicting yourself to me.

A solid catch of Cubarey's misrep.

Post 14

Wall-E, I would like to point out that, while it might feel that way, there has been alot going on that does not involve you in the first 9 pages. I have laid off your trigger happy role claim and will continue to give you opportunity on my part to, as you put it, 'take some undoing'. The continued persecution complex does not help you. Its day 1. Any lynch will be done off of gut feelings and circumstantial evidence. Despite your adherence to logic, there really isn't all that much concrete data to use logic on until the first lynch and NK actions occur.

Anyway, I wanted to see what people thought of Cubarey not posting. It has been two days and there are questions asked and 2 votes on him. I do not like that he has not answered yet. In particular it really looks to me that he was trying to fabricate a case against X. A few people had mentioned they thought X was a bit scummy and all of a sudden Cubarey is making this weird case against X.

I'm not sure what to think of the part to Wall-E. Could be trying to coach a townie or could be scum trying to coach scum. Good continued pressure against Cubarey - makes me wonder if I didn't pay enough attention to this case while it was happening.

Posts 17-19
I note that Kreriov responded to an attack accusing him of having a double standard in ignoring me. He puts a question to me. I didn't get much out of these posts but wanted to note their presence.

Post 21

@Wall-E - So you are unhappy that I am NOT voting for you? You have been spamming a bit and it does look a bit like desperation. This is a common theme with you given the premature VT claim. All I can say is I, for one, do have suspicions but I found your request and dedication to work your way out of the hole you are in to be sincere.

@All - I am going to beat the Cubarey drum again. He basically fabricated a case against X, contradicting himself in the post where he tries to get a case going against X as well as the other post Jase originally pinged. Now he has failed to post in over a week. I do not advocate lynching someone because they have not posted, but it is suspicious as well as very frustrating.

I'm a bit confused at where his new-found trust in Wall-E originates from, since he was the scummiest player in post 10 and his actions since have been desperate. This is a shift worth noting.
The prolonged case against Cubarey is interesting. His determination to push a harder case than he has to (since Wall-E would be an easier lynch) is probably a town tell unless Wall-E is scum.

Post 24

I still do not understand, Wall-E. Do you think I have cleared you or that I think you are definitely town? I am trying to figure out why you would use that quote of mine and then say you prefer it when players never clear other players.

Here he claims that post 21 was not intended to clear Wall-E. I agree with Wall-E's reading of the post and don't understand Kreriov's reaction here.

Post 25

Hell yeah! THATS the kind of participation I am talking about! I check the thread at 4pm last night, and this morning at 8am there are over 3 more pages of posts. I love it!

Of course that makes for alot of reading and I appologize if I miss something specific. I am going to comment on a few things I noticed.

First is this one. I think it is priceless.

Defending yourself is good. Being defensive is bad. It looks a little scummy.

This is IK to Hero. I think it is wonderful because if anyone should realize this, its IK. He rightfully caught flak for his initial very defensive reaction to Xs scatter shot posting when it hit him. He is still very defensive, but at least he is defending himself and not being as defensive in his post. @IK - one observation though. No one is voting for you, so you really have no need to defend yourself SO much!

@YB - Ok, so it does seem a bit OMAGUS in how you have switched to Hero so suddenly. You have a good case against Wall-E and suddenly switch to Hero once he mentions he is getting scummy vibes from you. I say only a bit OMAGUS because you have given concrete reasons for your vote. I would ask you to think about your reasoning and consider if you are finding reasons or thinking there is more substance in your reasons because Hero said you seemed a bit scummy.

I obviously think there is a good case against Cubarey. You seem to ignore that there is indeed a good case there and instead make an immediate jump to Hero teaming up with Jase as the reason for his vote. (Why not me is one obvious question.) I do not see the connection other than that Hero liked the case against Cubarey better then Wall-E. Not sure that makes Hero anyone's partner.

Some of this applies to IK as well. IK, it seems you REALLY want to lynch Wall-E and therefor attack Hero I guess with the intent to get him to switch to Wall-E? I find Wall-E suspicious for many reasons, but is there any reason to lynch him right now? We do not have a deadline, we have people who are still lurking, and we have another viable suspect with concrete scummy actions, not just poor posting or suspicious activity. I will unvote and will not support a lynch of Cubarey without him or a replacement getting an opportunity to post. Is it not prudent to wait for this before lynching Wall-E as well, no matter how scummy you find him?

it is never fun to put a game into a holding pattern waiting for one person. However, among other things, Cubarey clearly tried to fabricate a case against X and got caught. IK talks about looking for slip ups, that is certainly a biggie. Bigger than Wall-E's premature claiming or his continued spastic posting. We really need Cubarey or a replacement to post!

Another post dedicated to shifting pressure from Wall-E to Cubarey. Note how he casts aspersions on both IK and Hero's attacks on Wall-E.

Post 27

@YB - Great, well, I still think the best case out there is against Cubarey, but will consider the Hero case.

Its Friday, so as usually, I will bid everyone have a good weekend and say do not expect much from me, if anything, until Monday.

Posted only because I don't think he has considered the hero case yet.

Post 30
Finally votes Wall-E for being obstructive. Certainly consistent with scum bussing a buddy, but also consistent with a townie giving up on his top target for another player.

Post 32

I am not so sure Sajin is correct in that we have to lynch him. If we have a cop, Wall-E is a prime candidate for an investigation.

At first I am inclined to say its WIFOM. I took Wall-e's initial claim of VT not seriously -- I thought to myself...well, he might be <insert PR here>, and just saying VT to be a smart ass or w/e.

QFT

This has been my biggest fear about Wall-E. I am still afraid he might be a PR claiming early to avoid a NK by the scum. My initial gut reaction was that Wall-E is a nervous scum who claimed early to try and avoid more scrutiny has only been reinforced by his subsequent actions. I obviously have no problem lynching him, but at the very least we need to give him the opportunity to re-claim should we proceed against him. If he does indeed claim a PR, well, a CC fight sucks but is not the worst thing that can happen on day 1. Who knows, we might have a doc.

Another example of the stupid speculation about Wall-E being a power role. Wall-E absolutely SHOULD NOT have claimed VT pre-emptively if he was a power role. That would be an absolutely stupid move. Furthermore, we should trust him to correct his claim when he is about to be lynched.

Final thoughts:

A couple of pro-town slips early on combined with generally pro-town play has me seeing Keriov as fairly likely to be townie. If he was scum, wall-e would be a likely partner.

[qwints]

For the record, Post 583

It may just be impatience but hero seems to be trying to rush the lynch, and I do not like it.

@Sajin:
Would you kindly state your thoughts of YB.

@qwints:
I'd appreciate it if you'd tell us what you think of kreriov.

[qwints]

@ Sajin
I understand you are claiming that reducing the amount of information going into night one will hurt scum. But, tomorrow we will most likely have two players whose roles are revealed. Analyzing people's comments made before the roles are revealed is quite useful in revealing player's hidden knowledge (i.e. finding scum.) The latter helps the town more than the former hurts the scum.

Furthermore, the proposal seems designed to justify lurking in general - which helps scum. Thus, it is anti-town and you are suspicious.

@Jane, Why did you want to know my thoughts on keriov?

@yb,

And more something more substantial and opinionated just for you: We should lynch walle because he claimed vanilla. Now that he claimed vanilla, if hes scum he will sit there and kill off people and if he is not, scum will not touch him in an effort to kill power roles, not that we have any of course. Thus, we must lynch him eventually, and its better to lynch this today.

I think this a good explanation of why early townie claims are bad, I don't think it implies we MUST lynch Wall-E today. One thing it misses is the fact that Wall-E is confirmable if we have a cop. Indeed, he would be the obvious investigation if he's not lynched today. Another problem is that it overstates the harm caused by leaving Wall-E alive - one extra going is not going to harm us. Of course, he might be a mafia PR or a sk, in which case lynching him would be a huge boost to the town.

On a higher level, I think the proposal is internally consistent and intended to be pro-town so it makes Saijin somewhat more likely to be town.

Ultimately, I think the better argument for lynching Wall-E is that he has been quite scummy and we don't have much to lose if it's a mislynch. The pre-emptive claim followed by his obstructive behavior makes me want to lynch him. His reveal will also be quite useful in determining IK and Kreriov's alignments. I think I've talked myself into a Wall-E lynch.

vote: Wall-E

[qwints]

IK, If Wall-E was town, that would not mean that you were scum. It would make it more likely that you were scum because of the fact that you've tunneled on Wall-E so much. It's certainly possible that you might be a honestly mistaken townie.

[qwints]

Asking for permission to hammer can be a scum tell. Especially when the lynchee is a consensus town lynch that flips townie. Scum are often more willing to bus their partners without a blessing from the town than to hammer a townie. If Wall-E ends up being town, this is a strike against hero.

Flawed point. You're under the assumption that I must be scum. I'm more likely to vote for someone if they're my partner? Ever considered that maybe I don't have a partner?

I made no such assumption. I said 1) asking for permission to hammer is a mild scum tell and 2) that IF you were scum, then your play would be more consistent with Wall-E being town. I do admit, however, that the conclusion is flawed. The conclusion should be IF hero is scum, Wall-E is more likely to be true. The statement that IF Wall-E is town, THEN Hero is more likely to be scum is the converse of the proper conclusion and not necessarily true. The statement that is implied is that if Wall-E is not town, THEN Hero is more likely to be not scum. I'm not sure how I feel about that conclusion, even though it seems to follow from my initial premise.

[qwints]

Notice that Wall-E hasn't posted since Wednesday. Once the pressure comes off him, he starts trying to hide.

[qwints]

Wwwwwaaaaaaa-llleeeee!
Where are you?

On another note,

Because I don't think it's clear, I want to clarify why my original reasoning about Wall-E being town implicating hero was incorrect:

I said that scum often ask permission to hammer townies, but don't to hammer partners.

So in this case,
If (hero is scum) and if (wall-e is town) then (hero will ask permission to hammer)
but
If (hero is scum) and if (wall-e is scum) then (hero will not ask permission to hammer)

Let H be "hero is town" and !H be "hero is not town"
Let W be "wall-e is town" and !W be "Wall-e is not town"
Let P be "hero asks for permission" and !P be "hero does not ask for permission"

Thus my propositions can be reduced to:
If !H and W then P
but
If !H and !W then !P

These statements imply only their contrapositives, not their converses.
In other words they imply,
If !P, then H and/or !W
and
If P, then H and/or W.

Now, we know that P is true: hero did ask for permission to hammer Wall-E.
That means, assuming my initial premise, either Hero and/or Wall-E is town. All we can learn from that is that Hero and Wall-E are not both scum if scum never ask for permission to hammer scum buddies.

In symbolic terms
If !H, then W
and
If !W, then H

[qwints]

Wwwwwaaaaaaa-llleeeee!
Where are you?

On another note,

Because I don't think it's clear, I want to clarify why my original reasoning about Wall-E being town implicating hero was incorrect:

I said that scum often ask permission to hammer townies, but don't to hammer partners.

I challenge this idea and everything you predicate upon it. How do you know this is a tendency and that your statement here is accurate?

Experience combined with reason. The most common mistakes made by scum are predicated on their informational advantage - in this case, an unwillingness to press for a hammer without explicit permission from townies. It's certainly not an iron clad tell.

look who got caught in a slip

Could you clarify what you are referring to?

Finally, Wall-e, who do you think are the two scummiest players right now and why? 4 sentences since being called out for lurking is not sufficient.

[qwints]

And guys, I don't know how many times I have to say this, but Wall-E should not be lynched based on claiming Vanilla. Claiming so early is a tell, and there are other reasons that I've enumerated (and he is still ignoring).

Just to be clear:

You favor lynching Wall-E, right?
You're only saying that his claim is not sufficient warrant on its own?

Roleclaiming to me would mean NOTHING at this point

I find that very hard to believe, and it would be problematic if it were true. It would mean something even if it didn't save Wall-E from a lynch.

I don't understand how you can misunderstand the phrase "I don't want to know your role if you're a townie"

That's a very easy phrase to misunderstand because "townie" is ambiguous. It could refer to either role ("vanilla") or alignment ("pro-town").

Does anybody besides Jase think Wall_E is a bad lynch?

People who've said they're ok with his lynch:

Qwints

Sajin in post 691

I support a Walle lynch based on post content too btw, the statistics part of it only adds to it, just to clarify.

X in post 619

And I think we

should

lynch Wall-E, in the likelihood that we

have

to lynch him to win.

Idiotking? in post 505 - though he has retreated somewhat

Ok. Wall-E. You fail. Your defense is so pathetically hollow that it's sickening.
If you've got anything else to say, fine. Do as I ask and list your arguments against me as I have against you. But as far as I'm concerned, this day is over. I'm just waiting for someone to hammer and put an end to this nightmare.

Hero in post 660

If I thought the best move was to lynch Wall-E I would've done it. I didn't know if it was the best move though, and I was just asking the town if it would be. I said I had no problem lynching him, yeah, but I didn't make some stupid mistake. I didn't think I would be wrong in asking for advice.

yellowbunny in post 603

(Although if it comes down a deadline, I'd support a Wall-e lynch.)

People who've said Wall is scummy

Looker in post 679

I'm guessin' either [hero] or Wall-e [is scum] but i really want to know what you think

Kreriov in post 630

I also think Wall-E is probably scum. He has not reacted well under pressure.

Ojanen in Post 331

You vote, get some flak for it and unvote. You disappear for a couple of days, get some flak for lurking and come back with the same argument and vote again. That looks scummy.

Burfy in Post 246

i would not vote for anyone other than Wall-E because i thought he was scummiest but i didn't vote for him because i didn't find the evidence worthy of a vote.

People who said Wall-E is not scummy

Jase
Post 488

Also I forgot to

unvote

I don't really think Wall-E is scum especially considering his post 483.

If anyone objects to my classification of them, please let me know.

Jase, given your lone objector status, I want a case from you on who you think we should lynch instead of Wall-E. Re-reading your posts in iso, you seem to have been active lurking this past month.

[qwints]

uhoh

looks like qwints wants me or SOMEONE ELSE to die tonight

do YOU have any alternatives, qwints?

This is not the kind of question that will prevent your lynch Wall-E. Try harder, scum.

[qwints]

Wall-E, my question for you is who do you see as the two scummiest players. That's not a loaded question.

[qwints]

Wall-E, my question for you is who do you see as the two scummiest players. That's not a loaded question.

I'm waiting for you to answer me. Who would you suggest as an alternative, if any, to my lynch (as you seem to have one as is inferred by the language of your recent post)?

I'm actually not sure who you're referring to and wouldn't tell you if I was. You're on the chopping block, it's your job to persuade us otherwise. I'm not going to tell you in advance what cases I'd be most sympathetic to. Scumhunt or die.

[qwints]

You refuse to play along with my scumhunting? Isn't that why you're voting for me, though? For not playing along, answering questions, etc?

Tell me who you think the two scummiest players are or die. I want you to make a case, not ask questions to get others to make a case. I've already made clear what I think.

[qwints]

Jase's play is starting to bother me. Specifically this claim he has made:

Iso 41

My case against looker is well documented, as it is the same as my case against Cubarey. As for you and hero, I could go back and outline the points that I have against you.

I don't like when people say they "could" do something as a support for an argument but then don't follow through. So here's my summary of Jase's case:

Looker:

Iso 38

Welcome looker. If you could do your best to answer for your predecessor, I'd appreciate it.

Note that Jase has not actually said anything about looker (of course, looker hasn't said much.)

Cubarey:
Iso 10 (the prima facia case)

I'm also not liking the way Cubarey is looking. Though I did find IKs response a bit over-defensive it seems like Cub is trying to make it seem like much more than that. As a matter of fact...he contradicts himself saying that Xs question was not serious but meant to see how IK would react, then later he says that Xs remark was a simple request for information, and any townie would have taken it as such.

This case referenced these two comments

Hmm, X put Idiotking in a Catch 22 to see if he would squirm. Idiotking immediately says X is trying to get him in trouble on baseless claims instead of seeing the point was to see his reaction.

[X] was not accusing [IK] he was asking for [IK] to explain [his] vote. Moreover, such a question is not a witchhunt its a request for information. Any innocent player would have viewed it as such"

Jase followed up on this case by saying that Cubarey was his "current scum pick due to the way he contradicted himself" in Iso 6. He further attacked him in Iso 8

CUBAREY-Very scummy, for his contradiction early on, tunnel vision on IK, he has ignored my accusations of him

He reiterates Cubarey's failure to defend himself in Iso 9 and dismisses an attempted response from cub in Iso 10 as "only addressing the first part of [his] contradiction."

The case against Cubarey thus has three prongs:
1)The early contradiction
2)A failure to adequately respond when called on his contradiction
3)Tunneling on Idiot King.

Cubarey's only defense is in post 179 which comes between Jase's 9 and 10.

I don't agree that this case has been "well documented." Jase pointed out one inconsistency and dismissed Cub's defense without much elaboration. It does, however, deserve some attention from looker.

Hero

Jase first mentions hero in iso post 18 after hero replace W1noob.

As for hero I'm not liking him very much right now, not sure why, I've got a lot to process with 3? new pages, but I'm getting bad vibes. Also I don't see how my thoughts on him and noob could mesh, it isn't as though he has picked up where noob left of with the same train of thought and strategy.

He continued in iso 19

Why the hell would you suggest we pressure you? If you're town, and you know you're town, you suggested we fucking waste our time.

I find your hostility frightening.
[Jase's reasoning for suggesting he should be pressured]

Then in iso 27

It may just be impatience but hero seems to be trying to rush the lynch, and I do not like it.

which he backed up with a couple of hero quotes "Discussion usually picks right back up on Day 2" and "ending the day isn't as bad as they make it seem" over his next couple of posts. After which he has pretty much dropped the case except for throwing in hero's name as a possible lynch.

So Jase's case against hero:
1) Bad Vibes
2) Frighteningly hostile
3) Impatient

I find it strange that hero is the first name Jase mentions for a lynch based on the paucity of his case against him. Especially considering that he also accused Saijin of trying to end the day too soon.

Two requests:
Jase, please correct any errors or omissions you see in my summary and then outline the points you've made against Saijin.

Looker,
Thanks for replacing in. Make some observations about the game once you've finished reading. I'd appreciate if you'd try and explain Cub's "contradiction." Also, who do you think is the best candidate for a lynch today?

[qwints]

Holy rolefishing batman!

[qwints]

unvote vote sajin

Don't take it personal, but i think you're scum

Want to explain that all looker?

If Wall-E doesn't answer the questions posed to him by Monday, I say we lynch him. We've spent way too much time trying to get him to meaningfully participate (instead of debating the meaning of "rhetoric.")

[qwints]

unvote

while I take time to evaluate this. The only thing that jumps out at me is:

I assure you that preventing my own death is my third priority. My first is lynching IK and my second is winning the game.

I assume this is a joke, but it's an unhelpful attitude.

[qwints]

I'm just posting to say I've been trying to keep up, but studying for exams is eating up too much time to post in detail right now.

I don't like looker's last few posts - it feels like he's trying to get people to tell him who he can join a bandwagon against.

Wall-E's sudden helpfulness puts me in a bind. On one hand, it does negate what I had seen as the scummiest point against him. On the other, it seems like it takes extreme amounts of pressure to get him to post. I'd be reluctant to lynch him today, but if he stops participating tomorrow, he'll be right on the top of my radar.

Lastly, I'll be taking my Will + Estates Exam on Wednesday, so I won't be able to get to the computer all morning. Thus, my last chance to vote will be Tuesday late afternoon or early evening.

[qwints]

Whoops, mixed my games up. I see this games deadline is next Sunday. Access shouldn't be a problem.

[qwints]

Ok,

vote: Looker

[qwints]

Expect me to outline my case against hero and sajin by tonight.

Also I plan to elaborate on my bad vibes, I was being sarcastic when I said "I find your hostility frightening" and "impatient" is not what I believe him to be. Your representation of my case is rather skewed, as none of what you've outlined will make up any part of MY case.

Jase made these two posts last Wednesday and hasn't posted since. I'm really bothered that he hasn't provided the promised case.

Mod, could you please prod Jase?

Wall-E is no longer my number one choice for a lynch. The fact that he continued to participate after looker took the lead in votes removes my biggest factor for voting him. I still don't like his early claim, but I'm fine leaving him alive for today. I do need to find time to evaluate the X-Wall-E argument.

Jase, on the other hand, is an increasingly likely suspect. He took a little heat and defended by promising to outline his cases. He then disappeared when pressure was removed. That style of play is quite scummy and was one of my main point against Wall-E earlier.

Looker continues to be non-responsive, but he did call out Jase's disappearance. The fact that he labeled himself as one his chief suspects in 827 bothers me. The fact that's he done very little analysis bothers me. Looker, if you think Wall-E and idiotking are a scum team, who should we lynch first?

In conclusion, Jase needs to post before the deadline or be replaced. Looker needs to pretend to care before the deadline or be lynched.

[qwints]

Wall-E has at least made an effort. I'm fine with lynching looker.

[qwints]

Wait, did I miss someone claiming scum?

[qwints]

unvote, vote: Wall-E

We need a lynch and Wall-E is definitely the scummiest if looker isn't an option.

[qwints]

Ojanen, don't fall for that shit. I fully support you hammering Wall-E. His lynch is certainly is better than a no lynch. The only alternative I could see is Jase and creating a wagon on an absent player at deadline is generally a good idea.

[qwints]

Yes, I meant to to say "not a good idea."

[qwints]

Dammit. What a waste.

[qwints]

gg mafia!

[qwints]

qwints - Is doing marvelously compared to what he usually does. If anyone has any knowledge of his meta, they'll know he's town.

Thanks X! - this may be the best reason for being night killed ever!