The Werewolves of Millers Hollow (Game Over)

[Yosarian2]

Vote:The Fonz for mayor

[Yosarian2]

I don't buy X's claim. I've heard of Unlynchable as both a town and scum role anyway.

Seriously? Scum with lynch immunity seems like such a bad idea...I mean, Flay tried it in that Lost Boys game, kind of, in a very limited sense, but even there I think it was a really bad idea.

I'd be in favor of testing X's claim today. Frankly, my biggest concern would be that we lynch him and find out he was just a vanillia townie claiming a role he dosn't actually have.

[Yosarian2]

Does not compute, Yos.

If he's not unlynchable, there's no pressing need to lynch him now.

If he is, it's a complete waste.

If he's not unlynchable, then lynching him probably nails us a scum; like I said, his meta makes me worry that there's a chance that he's lying town, but if he's lying about his role I still think we have to assume that would make him more likely scum then town. Lynching a liar is usually a good thing.

And if he is unlynchable, then lynching him today confirms his role, which gives us useful information. Plus, lynching him today means we spend our day 1 lynch to test his claim, rather then, say, our day 4 lynch; as the town is much more likely to hit scum day 4 then day 1, I'd much rather test his claim today, if we're ever going to test his claim.

[Yosarian2]

So let's say we've got a couple of middling wagons, a couple of people making cases... everyone's supposed to drop their cases and just vote Xtoxm?

(shrug) If there's a good case on someone, if I'm pretty convinced that they're scum, I'd be in favor of lynching them instead; I'm always pragmatic about such things.

For the most part, though, I think lynching Xtoxm today has a much better risk/reward payoff then most day 1 lynches do.

[Yosarian2]

Izzy: In general, for a scum, voting is more dangerous then not voting, all else being equal; it makes it easier for the town to figure stuff out, either if you get caught, or if one of your scum-buddies gets caught, or if you are in favor of mislynching too many townies, ect. So, in general, I tend to find "not voting" a little bit scummier then "voting"; basically, I tend to think that in most situations the "agressive" types of behaviors (Voting, leading bandwagons, attacking people, being agressive in general) are something that, ignoring the WIFOM, is generally a better play for pro-town people then for scum.

That's just a general case; it's not always very STRONG scumtell, since individual variations tend to be much greater then alignment variations, but in general the point Fonz/BM are making here is a valid one.

Do you think you have a general meta of not voting much, early on, Izzy?

[Yosarian2]

Guys. I want everyone to post their current opinion on the following question, be it based on gut, meta, whatever.

Do you feel that Xtoxm is lying to us?

I don't really know yet; need to hear more from him about why he claimed and such. I don't really know why he would lie, unless he just really wants to be mayor that badly, but I don't really have any idea how Xtoxm to act yet in any situation, other then that he apparently has a history of making up wierd claims for no apparent reason.

Let's just say that considering his history of fake claims, and considering how rare the role he's claiming is, I think there's a fairly good chance he's lying. I just wish I was sure that he was "either telling the truth or scum", since the worse case scenerio would be we lynch him and he actually dies because he was lying but he was town.

Xtoxm: If you are lying but town, feel free to withdraw your claim, ASAP; at this point, it would probably improve your odds of not being lynched today, oddly enough.

[Yosarian2]

As I already pointed out, if you had that role, the most protown thing for you to do would be to claim it early (like a miller role).

Wait...why?

If you had a miller role, it makes perfect sense to claim it day 1, because otherwise a cop investigation is horrible.

On the other hand, I see no reason to claim a "unlynchable" role day 1, at all. If you're about to get lynched, then sure, might as well claim first; short of that, why bother. Unnecessarary claims are almost always bad for the town, and the claim seems completly unnecessary to me.

So, why do you think unlynchable is a claim that should be made early day 1, exactally?

[Yosarian2]

My vote for myself is because I don't fear a lynch, and for now it is a place holder as I am transiting into the new game and wrapping up the old game.

Ok, but there's a fair amount of stuff that's happened already in this game, especally xtoxm's claim and the various reactions to it, and I'd be interested to hear what you think about it all, as soon as possible.

Also, is there any specific reason you're voting Fonz for mayor?

[Yosarian2]

@Yos: If you claim that ability while under investigation for scumminess, it is far less likely to be believed.

Um, no. You should often claim if you're about to be lynched. A claim like that woudn't necessarally stop a lynch, but it wouldn't really matter much at that point anyway; plus then no one would be surprised when lynching you causes a no-lynch.

On the other hand, if you don't have a reason to claim, you don't. Period. Claiming without reason is anti-town.

Just like claiming miller

after

an investigation on you is less likely to be believed, even if it's actually true.

That's a completly different situation. Miller probably should claim early, because otherwise a cop investigation might be wasted, and a cop outed, and all that. On the other hand, there is absolutly no reason for a "lynch immune" guy to claim this early.

Let me put it another way. He claimed unlynchable, and now many players want to kill him, just for that. If he was already looking scummy and

then

claimed unlynchable, he would be put down like a dog, even if he was protown.

Well, his claim would probably be tested.

If he's some kind of Jester role, we shouldn't lynch him.

Scummy comment.

fos

This looks like I'm defending Xtomx, which is really not where I want to be.

Well, yeah. You are.

I just think that the claim had to come out, and I'm glad it came out now, and we should be looking at his playstyle rather than policy lynching him based on his claim.

Why did the claim "have to come out", exactally?

[Yosarian2]

I got the feeling that Fonz didn't want to be mayor. The Fonz, is it just you don't think you would be a good mayor, or you don't want to accept mayor?

Oh, I don't think I'd be terrible as mayor or anything. But, my objection to me as mayor is basically the same as my objection to Yos as mayor. Myself and Yos will produce enough content and be prominent enough for y'all to get a read on regardless.

I'd rather it went to someone who has good ideas, but is characteristically a bit more reticent, and unused to being in the spotlight. The advantages of this is a) a player who is pretty good, but can sometimes be ignored gets more chance to influence things and b) it's easier for the rest of us to get a read on said player. So, in my mind that's win-win whether that player is town or scum. I have no particular fear of a scum mayor (quite difficult for a scum to know how to play it) unless that player is a noted manipulator, like you-know-who.

That's an interesting theory, Fonz, but personally, all I'm worried about is getting someone as mayor who's not scum, so I'm pretty much just going to vote for someone who I think looks most pro-town (or myself, but I don't really expect to be elected mayor today and that's fine).

In my mind, a town mayor, no matter who it is, would be at best a small bonus to the town; while a scum mayor, especally as they coudl be mayor for the rest of the game, could be absolutly disastorous; every lynch the scum would have a better chance to get a mislynch, and in endgame the game could basically end a full day earlier then normal.

[Yosarian2]

I think the risk of a scum mayor is overrated. At least, at this early stage. Whoever is mayor will be under particular pressure to scumhunt successfully. I don't see how it's possible a scum mayor could survive to endgame without some serious bussing- and if they want to bus, that's fine by me.

Eh...I donno, even at this early stage, an extra vote for the scum can be pretty bad. I mean, what you're saying makes sense, but I generally consider double-voter to be an ability that is pretty weak for a pro-town person but really, really dangerous in the hands of a scum. And, honestly, I'm not really sure about your logic here; are you really suggesting that if the mayor dosn't lynch scum in the first few days we'll just automatically lynch him for it?

I do agree about the risk of an illogical town player being mayor, in any case.

[Yosarian2]

You know, I'm getting tired of WIFOMing Xtoxm's stuff back and fourth here with absolutely no input from him.

Let's let him come back and answer some of the questions about him, explain his role in a little more detail, ect. If he dosn't do so in the next few days, I'll probably vote him just for lurking at this point.

[Yosarian2]

So far, up to post 146, Yosarian2 is not taking any of the other players thoughts on Xtomx's claim whatsoever.
In particular, the Miller role. Why is Yos trying so hard to convince everyone else they're wrong about this?

...I'm sorry, perhaps it's because it's late, but I have no idea what you're talking about. There are some people who agree with me about Xtoxm, and Fonz seems to disagree with me.

Also, what miller role? Xtoxm didn't claim miller; no one claimed miller. What are you talking about?

Scum as mayor early in game is less of a benefit than scum being Mayor late in the game. Particularly if the scum-lynched so far is low.

Sure, but worst of all is scum as mayor elected day 1 and then staying mayor all game. I don't know why people keep acting like that's impossible, it certanly is not.

Anyway, I'm still happy with my Fonz vote for mayor at the moment.

[Yosarian2]

[quote="Percy" That said, saying that a vanilla townie should wish for death is ridiculous. A vanilla townie can be so much more beneficial to the town (in the long run) than a powerrole, given the right play and the right player. One townie can be better than another. [/quote]

Wishing for death, no.

Wishing to get nightkilled by scum, absoltuly. Unless a town role gets really lucky, scum kill someone every night. If you are a vanillia townie, you WANT that someone to be you, rather then a power role.

So, Fonz, do you think Yosarian is as scummy as me for making his statement? How about the others I quoted? If not, why not?

I was attacking Xtoxm. You, and Zwert, were defending him. If he comes up scum, then you both are scummy as anything.

"IT'S ALL WIFOM" is a crappy reason to demand that other people unvote someone who's only action all game has been a fairly unlikely (and completly anti-town, since there was absolutly no reason for it) claim and demands that he be elected mayor.

[Yosarian2]

Yeah; Firestarters "let's try to give a scum a double vote" plan is just a terrible idea.

[Yosarian2]

[quote="Dr Pepper"
@ Yosarian2: Giving scummy players a power (ie mayor) only becomes harmful if it is used without our knowledge. Having a double vote is like waving a giant sign around saying "hey guys look at me!" and having that much attention on scum is generally not the best plan.[/quote]

(shrug) If a scum knows what he's doing, if he knows when to distance, when to bus, and when to lynch a townie, then giving him more power to do so only makes him more dangerous.

Or, to put it another way; tommorow, if there's 10 people alive, it would normally be 6 votes to lynch. If there are 3 scum alive, then you still need at least 3 townies on the wagon to lynch. HOWEVER, if one of those scum is a double-voter, then they can push a bad lynch with only 2 townies on their side; or, conversely, they can get a mislynch while less scum need to actually be on the wagon, which makes it harder to find the scum.

And it only gets worse later in the game.

[Yosarian2]

1.

The Power is not the Mayors, its Towns. The Mayor simply has a double vote which is pretty useless at this stage of the game.

(shakes head) An extra vote can make a big dfference. In any case, there is absolutly no advantage to giving an extra vote to someone you think is scummy. Zero. Zilch. Nothing. We don't need to make someone mayor in order to keep an eye on them; if you think someone is scummy, then you should keep an eye on him and on who he votes for anyway.

This whole plan of yours is kind of crazy. "Let's take someone we think is scummy, and give him more power, so we get more paranoid about the person." If the mayor is town, then that paranoia you're pushing is just more likely to screw us over, and if the mayor is scum, then giving him power is a bad idea.

And remember, the mayor has two powers. One is the double vote, the other is the power to pick the next mayor if they die. Those are BOTH powers we REALLY don't want the scum to have, at all, ever, at any point in the game.

2.

The fact is there's 21 people alive, not 10. which makes it alot

HARDER

for scum to do what your saying.

Meh. An extra vote still matters.

3.

Exactly. If scum gain control of Mayorship late in the game, then that is disastrous.

If scum get control of the mayorship at ANY point of the game, it's bad. And the town can never really get it back; the scum would either be able to give it to another scum, or give it to a townie he wants to WIFOM the rest of the town into lynch, preferably a townie that he knows will give the mayorship to his scumbuddy.

The whole thing is just a bad, bad idea. The obvious stratagy of "We give the mayorship to someone who looks really, really townie, and try to keep it out of the hands of the scum" just seems much, much better, from every point of view.

[Yosarian2]

All Im hearing is WIFOM from both of you, and that scum will get extra power... however useless it is right now.

If there are 5 scum, then giving one an extra vote increases the scum's day power by 20%. That is bloody HUGE. Why you keep trying to say it's useless?

A lot of people underestimate the power of the scum voting block, but it's very significant even early game, since they have information and CAN work together when townies can't. Increasing that power, even on day 2, would be a very bad thing.

But.. cannot the same thing happen voting in a player who seems pro-town?

"Hey, you know, if we lynch a player who looks scummy, we might be wrong. Why not lynch someone who looks pro-town instead!"

<-------this is what you are arguing here.

If we try to nominate someone who looks pro-town to be mayor, we may be right, or we may be wrong. If we try to nominate someone who is pro-town but screw up and nominate someone who is scum instead, then later, we can look back and see who was trying to argue that that person is pro-town and if they had good logic, ect ect. It's useful infromation, but not if we do it your way.

Anyway, I certanly would hope that us trying to nominate pro-town people to be mayor would have better odds of actually getting a pro-town mayor then if we try to nominate a scum for mayor; that seems pretty obvious to me.

But your WIFOM arguments are nothing but mere... WIFOM.

No, dude.

"Giving scum more power is bad" is NOT a wifom argument, at all. Not even a little bit.

Voting me to lynch is a an easy thing to do, and too simplistic.
You both do not understand where Im coming from, thats fine.

It's not that people "don't understand where you're coming from", it's that you are proposing a plan that is very anti-town, period. I'm not surprised you're drawing votes for it; suggesting plans that would hurt the town and help the scum if put into effect will tend to make people suspicious of your motives, for obvious reasons.

VOTE 4 LYNCH: Dingoatemybaby
Enough info for me.

Why?

[Yosarian2]

Im also more inclined to believe that more townies will be lynched if we opt to elect them to Mayorship. This is of course, assuming they are Town.

Only if we're dumb and let paranoia rather then sense dictate our actions.

There is absolutly no reason we should assume that a mayor making a bad vote is any more scummy then anyone else making that same vote would be; we need to evaluate the mayor just like we'd evaluate anyone else.

[Yosarian2]

The whole thing is just a bad, bad idea. The obvious stratagy of "We give the mayorship to someone who looks really, really townie, and try to keep it out of the hands of the scum" just seems much, much better, from every point of view.

Except that 'looking townie' when no-one has been lynched yet just leads you to give it to someone fairly reasonable sounding, leading to the RTP. Let's face it, scum are going to get it at some point.

(shrug) That's ok, though. I think we get the best information when we try as hard as we can to try to give it to someone who's town; then, if we fail and give it to a scum anyway, the whole wagon and all the people who argued that person looked town and why they did should be very interesting.

Besides...I donno, I often get a town read on someone day 1, and it's usually pretty accurate. Not always, of course, but I bet we can do better then random, unless the scum try to really push hard to elect on of their own, and if they do that could give us information later.

Rather than agonising infinitely over whether someone's scum, let's look at how they are likely to use it, and how much them being mayor might help us read 'em.

I still don't think that someone being mayor will make them easier to read...it might put a little more focus on them, but that's about it. I'd think the mayor would still vote just like anyone else does, would still react the same way anyone else does.

[Yosarian2]

Yos, can I ask you this... would you LIKE to be mayor?

(shrug) I'd vote myself, just on the general "I know I'm town" principle, but of course if we all do that we get nowhere.

That being said; meh, I wouldn't mind being mayor, but it dosn't really matter. I don't expect it would affect my play much.

[Yosarian2]

Firestarter: If we can please get away from theory discussion for a bit, I'd still like you to answer this question.

VOTE 4 LYNCH: Dingoatemybaby
Enough info for me.

Why?

[Yosarian2]

No

Ok then, if you're not going to tell us anything else, or play the game, or have an opinion on anything, I guess we just have to lynch you and see what happens. Looks like that's the only way we're going to get any info on you...

Vote to lynch:Xtoxm

[Yosarian2]

Note that even if you can survive a lynch, Xtoxm, you refusing to tell the town anything like this or do anything, and thus forcing us to use a lynch on you is quite anti-town.

[Yosarian2]

He's not forcing anything, Yos. Opportunistic much?

(shrug) He claimed just enough to hurt the town, and yet is refusing to clarify, or claim flavor, or actually play the game. So, yeah, I think we pretty much are forced to lynch him unless he changes his behavior. Do you disagree?

[Yosarian2]

I've said it at least three times already: DON'T LYNCH XTOXM YET

Why, you'd rather let him lurk a while longer first?

[Yosarian2]

I think Xtoxm is trying too hard to GET lynched. This automatically makes me want to *not* lynch him.

I would reccomend against going off the "he's trying too hard to be lynched, we'd better not lynch him" WIFOM cliff here.

[Yosarian2]

Shadow Knight: If a jester wins or loses, it has absolutly no effect on the town's win condition, at all. Not even a little. In fact, generally, if someone *claims* jester, you *still* want to lynch them ASAP, just because you don't want to risk a jester getting into a lynch or lose situation where he votes himself, the scum votes him, and town loses. Besides which, jesters are incredibly rare on this site. ALmost every game, someone act scummy, and someone else says "BUT WHAT IF HE'S A JESTER???". First of all, he's almost certanly not; they're way too rare for that. And second of all, we don't care anyway. So that's why jester speculation is just a bad idea.

Anyway, moving on:

So we're agreed on the necessity for his death. We just need to agree on the method. I don't want to lynch him because I think the scum will kill him for us.

That dosn't make any sense. Why would the scum want to nightkill someone when there's a good chance that if they don't the town will use a lynch on him? Plus, are you now assuming he's not scum?

Now, if we lynch him and he dosn't die, thus semi-confirming his claim, *then* the scum *might* want to nightkill him, since he could be considered semi-confirmed by that point and thus a threat. But, in that case, we'll have gone an entire day/night cycle, and only lost Xtoxm (if there's only one killing scum group, anyway.) That's not bad, especally if other town power roles get a chance to do stuff.

[Yosarian2]

It's quite plain that Xtoxm isn't trying to survive- he can't be both lynch and nightkill immune, and I still think it's scummy that he tried to trick us into thinking a failed lynch would make him a confirmed townie. Is an unlynchable scum-player just too unlikely?

It's pretty darn unlikely, IMHO, for balance reasons. I would have said impossible, but that assumption bit me on the ass in Lost Boys mafia, when the cult recruiter claimed unlynchable; if he actually had been lynched, his "bodyguard" would have died instead of him. Still, a scum who, if you lynch him, he dosn't die? That seems terribly unbalanced; for one thing, it means if he gets into a 3 man endgame, he automatically wins, and that's a game design problem, IMHO. And that's just if he's 1 shot lynch immune. A scum who is completly lynch immune really is impossble, because that would mean that if the vig dies night 1 and that guy is still alive, the town just autoloses, which is horrible game design.

[Yosarian2]

unvote:xtoxm

for now...might as well hear what the replacement has to say.

[Yosarian2]

Lets give him the chance to read 18 pages and catch up on the crapstorm his predecessor started.

Actually, I'd feel better about him if he claims ASAP, before reading the thread.

MILLAR: Please claim in full, including rolename, right now.

About the mayor thing; as I said, I wouldn't mind being mayor, but I'm pretty happy with my vote on Fonz for the mayor right now; based on his posting, he looks very pro-town to me right now. Plus, the fact that he dosn't seem to want to be mayor is actually a point in his favor from my point of view, heh.

[Yosarian2]

In that case, my vote stays. I don't see why Xtoxm-vanilla would claim unlynchable. It makes no sense at all unless he was trying to gamble and draw a NK, in which case he'd try to convince us not to vote him and call off the gambit at the end.

There is absolutly no reason he should do that.

However, he does that kind of crap fairly often. I even said, at one point, that the only thing that worried me was the chance that Xtoxm might be a vanillia fakeclaiming unlynchable for absolutly no reason. So I actually think there's a reasonable chance Millar is telling the truth, sad to say.

Of course, being a claimed vanillia who lied about about his role at least once, he's still a reasonable lynch. It's just not a slam dunk.

[Yosarian2]

Okay I admit I am not a vanilla townie

I will give you five guesses, and then if you don't get it right I will tell you. This replacement is a farce, and my former should have been mod killed

I guess that...we'll find out your real role after we lynch you.

Vote to lynch:Millar

[Yosarian2]

village idoit

What does that mean, exactally? ANd why should X have been modkilled?

If you are pro-town, you might as well tell us whatever you know at this point; it can only help the town now.

[Yosarian2]

Yos blatantly rolefished last page, and noone noticed.

"Tell me your role right now or die" is not "rolefishing", zwet.

I was actually trying to find a reason to NOT lynch Xtoxm/Millar. Millar completly failed to give me one, so I voted him.

[Yosarian2]

It doesn't matter any more. I hammered him.

You realize it dosn't work like that, right? He's not actually "hammered" until we have both a lynch and a mayor; until then the day does not end.

[Yosarian2]

I'm actually somewhat suspicious of the way Zwet has been acting in the last few pages. He defends Xtoxm hardcore for much of the day, attacks me for asking him to claim...then tries to hammer him not long afterwards? All while trying to set it up so I'll look bad for "rolefishing" if Xtoxm/Millar comes up town? What, exactally, were you trying to accomplish with that series of actions, Zwet?

[Yosarian2]

Yos, BM is right about the votes.

Really? Huh. I had read this mod post the other way:

Today you must elect a Mayor by majority vote. Do this by posting

Vote PLAYER for Mayor

. You may unvote this if you wish. The Mayor's vote will be worth two for the rest of the game. Should the Mayor die, they may choose their successor. The day will not end until both a Mayor has been elected and a player has been lynched.

But I guess it's kind of ambiguas.

MOD: Is Xtoxm/Millar now lynched, or is he only dead if he's got a majority when the day ends? If he is lynched, do we get to find out his alignment now, or only after we pick a mayor?

[Yosarian2]

Ah, the votecount 2 posts above me just got edited in...I suppose that answers that question.

[Yosarian2]

I win with the town! GO TOWN!

You know, all you had to do is say:

Xtoxm told a half truth; if I get lynched, I won't die, but I'll basically be tree stumped; I will be able to post, but I won't be able to vote and won't count towards the vote count. My role name is "village idiot".

and there is a very good chance you would have been believed and not lynched; it makes sense, and I wouldn't have been at all surprised to hear that Xtoxm told a half truth. If you win with the town, then I'm not sure why you did all that stuff yesterday...

[Yosarian2]

Anscumone wanting to get in my face about double hammering yesterday?

Hmmm...interesting to see you get so defensive.

Anyway, I really don't entirly understand why you defended Xtoxm/Millar all day but then hammered him anyway. Could you explain? The only explination you gave yesterday was that you "enjoy hammering" and that dosn't do it for me.

[Yosarian2]

If you think about it....I am the only pro-town player that i confirmed, although I have no vote. Therefore, if I start playing properly I can be a huge asset. Only opposition to the town, are going to discredit me in an attempt to reduce the town further.

Your general role is confirmed. Your alignment is not; you may have some strange kind of role with a win condition other then "You win when the threat of lycanthropy is eliminated".

That being said, you most likely are pro-town, and I'm interested to hear what you have to say.

[Yosarian2]

Noticed I am the same colour as the other town players?

You have a point there. In the OP both your role and Shadow Knight's role are listed in blue. Typically a third party is a different color.

Hmm. It is a good point, actually. Also, in the death scene:

Wait! You recognize where you've seen millar13 before! Why, he's just the

Village Idiot

! Surely somebody so simple couldn't possibly be a werewolf!

So, yeah; we basically should consider millar a "tree-stumped" townie at this point, I think.

[Yosarian2]

my bad didnt realize battle mage was a female character

Lol. Battle mage is a guy.

dingoatemybaby: Why? Voting someone until they start acting in a pro-town way is a perfectly reasonable way to act. Lurking is anti-town, and the town should never let people get away with lurking, and instead put pressure on them until they start scumhunting and start playing properly. The vote, and the threat, makes perfect sense to me.

[Yosarian2]

Yes Yos but battlemage is listed as a female in the character list

oohhhh...as in, "female, so he can't post". Got it.

[Yosarian2]

Anyway, I'm currenlty leaning towards either lynching one of the lurkers, like Zoneace, or lynching Zwet for general wierdness involving the millar wagon yesterday.

Vote:Zoneace

Remember, I'm a doublevoter, so I think he has...3 votes on him now? Something like that?

[Yosarian2]

Why lynch lurkers? He's getting replaced soon.

Because lynching lurkers is basically always a good idea, or at least a good place to put your vote while waiting for something better.

If he gets replaced, that's one thing. But if he comes back, he should do so with a significant amount of pressure on him to start making real content ASAP or die.

[Yosarian2]

LOL@myself for calling Zoneace "Zoneface". It was unintentional. I guess I can't read.

Everyone does that. It's even the basis of his title, heh.

And yes, he was prodded.

[Yosarian2]

[quote="Percy"
Also, the WIFOM surrounding millar has

not

gone. People are still talking about whether we can assume he's a stumped townie or something more malevolent. [/quote]

Eh...didn't the mod basically tell us he was pro-town in his post?

[Yosarian2]

Wrong percy, he was at L-3 when yos asked for a claim. Read more closely next time.

At that point, him claiming would have only helped the town, it would have not hurt the scum. For one thing, if he had given a full, detailed, and honest claim at that point of both role and name, he might not have been lyched.

[Yosarian2]

Percy: But...the mod told us millar is pro-town. Not only did he post his name in blue in two different places; when he was lynched, he specifically told us that millar, the village idiot, could not be a lychenthrope. I'm not sure how much clearer we need it to be...

[Yosarian2]

dingo earned my FoS for his repeated critisms of Percy's vote plan. His opinion was made known. It was responded to by myself repeatedly and Yos in post 649. dingo keeps pushing for Percy to change the vote style only because someone might be scumiier. I have repeatedly asked dingo to provide a better target and he hasnt. dingo is trying to get a vote changed without providing a solid reason.

And there it is again. I have not once asked Percy to change his vote. I am done giving your the benifit of the doubt. I'm done using polite language.

Um, he didn't say you "asked" him to change your vote. He said you "pushed" him to change his vote; considering the way you were attacking him for his "I won't change my vote unless..." comment, that actually seems pretty accurate to me.

Your earlier post really seemed to convey the message that you strongly disagreed with his vote and his stated intent to keep his vote there. I find it a bit odd you seem to be distancing yourself from your earlier position there now...

[Yosarian2]

Um, he didn't say you "asked" him to change your vote. He said you "pushed" him to change his vote; considering the way you were attacking him for his "I won't change my vote unless..." comment, that actually seems pretty accurate to me.

Your earlier post really seemed to convey the message that you strongly disagreed with his vote and his stated intent to keep his vote there. I find it a bit odd you seem to be distancing yourself from your earlier position there now...

My position has not changed, and Dr. Pepper's representation of my position is utterly false.

But...it's not.

I DID say that it was bad strategy to keep you vote on a person who is not posting regardless of whatever else is going on in the game.

I DID NOT say that Percy's vote was unreasonable in and of itself.

First of all, you didn't just say it was "bad stratagy". You specifically said that he was trying to avoid commenting on a lynch, which implies that you think he is scum because of it.

And if you attack someone for doing X, then it is perfectly reasonable to say "You are trying to push that person into not doing X". So Pepper was entierly accurate in saying "you were trying to push Percy into removing his vote", when you attacked him for not being willing to move his vote.

Frankly, I'm starting to think you're scum at this point, possibly with Zoneace; you didn't want Percy to keep his vote on Zoneace indefinatly, but you are now trying to deny that that was your position and actually are attacking Dr. Pepper just for saying that. The only logical reason I can think of for that is if you were trying to protect Zoneace, but didn't want anyone to notice you were protecting him.

Unvote

Vote:Dingoatemybaby

(Again, remember everyone; this is a double vote.)

[Yosarian2]

First of all, you didn't just say it was "bad stratagy". You specifically said that he was trying to avoid commenting on a lynch, which implies that you think he is scum because of it.

Untrue. Please quote me "specifically" saying "he was trying to avoid commenting on a lynch". I said his strategy was one that could be used to avoid "committing" to an actual lynch. As I said before, it IS a strategy that I personally used in my last game to avoid committing to a lynch.

Ok. So you were accusing him of trying to use a scum tactic, right? As I said, you were attacking him for the threat he made of threatening to keep his vote on Zoneace unless Zoneace started scumhunting.

And if you attack someone for doing X, then it is perfectly reasonable to say "You are trying to push that person into not doing X".

True. But I did NOT attack Percy for voting for Zoneace. I attacked him for the conditions he required before he would be willing to change his vote. So it is not "perfectly reasonable" to say I was pushing Percy to not vote for Zoneace. It is "perfectly reasonable" to say I was pushing for Percy to change the conditions under which he would be willing to change his vote.

Feh. Semantics, really. Especally since Percy had not actally kept his vote on Zoneace for very long or to the exclusion of other wagons, he had mearly threatened to do so.

you didn't want Percy to keep his vote on Zoneace indefinatly

Again, untrue. I never said Percy should not keep his vote on Zoneace for as long as it was appropriate. I said there should be conditions, other than the one Percy stated, which would cause him to change his vote.

Note too that you personally have employed the strategy I have said Percy should use. When you saw someone you believed to be acting more scummy that Zoneace, you changed your vote. Percy's strategy does not allow for that.

Isn't it funny that you voted to lynch me for my endorsement of a strategy that you, yourse4lf, employ? For reference, he was the line from Percy that I criticized. I have underlined the part that I objected to.

I am going to

Vote: ZONEACE

until he comes up with some fucking

excellent

scumhunting.

Percy himself understood what I was saying.

Oh, I don't think there was anything wrong with Percy saying that, but that's not really why I'm voting for you here.

Dr Pepper disliked your move, and he felt like you were trying to get Percy to move his vote off of Zoneace. Which is a competly rational reaction to your post; any reasonable person could read your post and see it as kind of a sideways way to try to discourage Percy from keeping his vote on Zoneace. You could have just defended your position or whatever and I would have been ok with it, but instead you responded with a massive over-reaction; you accused Dr Pepper of lying and of misrepresenting you, voted him, and have been attacking him since then. The degree of your response seems completly out of propotion to a rather rational and logical post by Dr Pepper, who didn't even FOS you in his initial post, and it makes me think that you may be hiding something, or that your motives may not be what you're saying they are.

I don't think dingo didn't like my vote. I think he didn't like that I said I would keep it there until ZONEACE's replacement actually contributed to the game. He wasn't asking me to change it; he thought it was scummy that I wasn't willing to change it.

"You should be willing to change your vote"
is not the same as
"You should change your vote".

Perhaps not, but "you should be willing to change your vote" could very easily mean that you don't want him to keep his vote there long enough for Zoneace to be in danger, but don't want to actually say taht. Even if that wasn't your intent, you really don't understand why other people might decide that that may have been your motivation there?

[Yosarian2]

Confirm vote: Dingo

[Yosarian2]

Confirm vote: Dingo

Should this be taken to mean you are not willing to discuss why you are voting for someone, and that once you vote there is no point in providfing you with evidence?

No. It should be taken to mean that your last post, where you called him a liar like 5 more times even though he was clearly not 'lying', made me more happy about my vote on you.

You claimed I reacted to Pepper by calling him a liar and voting for him when I should have defended my position. As I showed you, I corrected him is SIX separate posts before accusing him of lying. Before voting for him.

But what you have not done is explained why you think he's scum. He may or may not be right about your motives; his suspicions of you look reasonable to me, but they may or may not be right. Either way, why do you think he's scum?

Since your stated reason for voting for me seems to not be based on the facts of the discussion, it would be helpful if you explained why you are still voting for me.

I am voting for you because you seem to be using your vote to "punish" someone for daring to question your motives, rather then using it for scumhunting; and because your general over-reactions, accuastions of "lying", and general attitude dosn't really make any sense to me from a pro-town persepective.

[Yosarian2]

He most clearly is. I get that you didn't want to read through the discussion again. But I really encourage you to. I don't just call him a liar. I quote his lies, explain why they are lies, and back that up with direct quotes.

(sigh) Ok, let me go into more detail:

Dr Peppers basic summery of your argument, here:

A) Percy is not moving his vote
B) Not moving your vote is a scum tactic
therefore the implication is drawn
C) Percy is using a scum tactic

Is completly reasonable. To be precice, A should have said "Percy said he was not going to move his vote", or something to that effect, but it was close enough for you to get what he was talking about.

You called A a lie, when it was actually pretty close to the truth; it wasn't precice, but since he was trying for more of a vauge summery then a actual quote, it wasn't that far off. You called B a lie, when it *is* the truth; I have no idea how you could consider that a lie at all, you pretty clearly stated that keeping your vote on a lurker is a scum tactic. And C clearly *is* implied by what you were saying; you *were* trying to imply that Percy was using a scum tactic (or was going to use a scum tactic, or was talking about using a scum tactic, or was thinking about using a scum tactic, or whatever); you WERE basically, more or less, semi-accusing Percy of being scum who wanted to keep his vote on a lurker wagon so he wouldn't have to comment on other wagons. And, again, I would be fine with you making that accusation, but I hate the way you seem to be running from your own words right now.

"Liar" is a very strong term in mafia, especally since the standard meta is "lynch all liars". When you keep repeating that someone is a "liar", when that does not seem not accurate, it makes me suspicious of you.

[Yosarian2]

Yeah, I'm here.

This accelerating ad hom stuff between dingo and dr pepper is really getting frustrating, and it's going to just get in the way. It's actually possible they're both town just bashing heads, but dingo's reactions seem more scummy to me and Pepper's seem more town.

[Yosarian2]

any reasonable person could read your post and see it as kind of a sideways way to try to discourage Percy from keeping his vote on Zoneace. You could have just defended your position or whatever and I would have been ok with it, but instead you responded with a massive over-reaction; you accused Dr Pepper of lying and of misrepresenting you, voted him, and have been attacking him since then. The degree of your response seems completly out of propotion to a rather rational and logical post by Dr Pepper, who didn't even FOS you in his initial post, and it makes me think that you may be hiding something, or that your motives may not be what you're saying they are.

Now, the first sentence is worth considering, but after dingo's repeated clarifications in game I can't see how this read might still stand. dingo started off polite, and it got worse when Dr Pepper continued to not see the point.

The thing is, the clarifications are what make me suspicious. It's not just that he didn't want you to keep your vote on Zoneace indefinatly, it's that he didn't seem want to ADMIT that that's what he was doing, that set off my alarm bells.

When one scum is defending a scumbudy, they usually want to try to somehow discourage other people to vote for him (or to keep their vote on him, or whatever), but they don't want to LOOK like they're defending their buddy; in fact, if asked, they'll usually deny that that's what they're trying to do. And that's kind of the vibe I was getting from dingo's "clarifications".

[Yosarian2]

Aha! The third person reference psychological scumtell in all its splendor!

Unvote; Vote: Dr. Pepper

Hmm? What scumtell is that?

I most definitely do think Dr Pepper is scum, he pushes lynches way harder than dingo has.

I'm curious...how is "pushing lynches" a scumtell?

[Yosarian2]

Scum's want it to get to night time quicker so they push for a lynch faster.

I don't know about that; I usually find agressivly scumhunting, activly pushing lynches, to be more of a town tell; on average, scum tend to be more passive then town, in my experence.

[Yosarian2]

*facepalm* Is this international out the powerroles day? Mufasa, why the heck did you claim?

Good question.

I'm getting jester vibes from you.

Ugh. Bad comment.

[Yosarian2]

Jester speculation is never a good idea. Didn't we go through this already on day 1?

Anyway, he didn't actually ask to be lynched, nor did he specifically say he would "gain new powers". He said there was a trigger,which is a very different thing.

[Yosarian2]

Eh...there's no reason for us to all speculate about what his role is, Jaudo. If we want him to claim it, we'll make him claim it, and then we'll judge if we believe it. If we don't, then we shouldn't. Either way, speculating now can only hurt us.

[Yosarian2]

(shrug) Considering we already had one role like that, it wouldn't necessarally surprise me if we had a second role where some kind of thing happened when he died.

Of course, that would also make it an easy fake claim if Mufasa is scum, except I don't really see any reason for him to make a fakeclaim like that here. I say we let it go for now.

Only exception is if Mafusa really thinks that lynching him today is better for the town then lynching someone else today (which I really doubt); if that's the case, perhaps he should claim and we'll figure it out. Short of that, though, I don't think we need or want to lynch him today or to know anything else about his role today.

[Yosarian2]

Reread the discussion and dingo's scumminess should stick out like a sore thumb.

Zwet: (I assume you mean "pepper" and not "dingo" here, right?) Could you be a little more specific about why you think pepper looks scummy?

[Yosarian2]

So, since that appears to be the end of the day, does anyone feel like writing a summary for all those players who were barred from participating today so that we can limit the flake out rate?

I would, but I honestly have absolutly no idea why we lynched Pepper today, and no one seemed interested in explaining their votes to me. I was *here*, and I don't understand what happened.

[Yosarian2]

I would, but I honestly have absolutly no idea why we lynched Pepper today, and no one seemed interested in explaining their votes to me. I was *here*, and I don't understand what happened.

I get that you don't agree with the reasoning, but I feel like it was explained ad nauseum.

Well, fair enough; you gave a reason, you thought he was misrepresenting you, although he really wasn't. I don't think anyone else gave any kind of reason for voting him, though, as far as I can tell.

I donno. We'll see what happens when he flips, I guess.

[Yosarian2]

Yeah, not surpised about Percy; I thought the Dr Pepper wagon was scum driven, especally towards the end. I just wish he hadn't self hammered, we might have gotten more info that way.

Mufasa: Why did you put Dr. Pepper at lynch -1 here?

vote dr pepper

Its your time to go

Also, yesterday you were saying that it would be good for the town if you were lynched today, because you claimed a triggered ability that triggered after you died, but only if you were lynched. Considering we've now seen 2 pro-town people with stuff that triggered when they died (the ghost and the hunter), that claim seems possible to me now, honestly, but I still don't get it.

Do you still think it would be good for the town if you were lynched today, Mufasa?

[Yosarian2]

If we're gonna lynch Mufasa today, should we be asking for a full claim?

Probably. I'm curious to see how he answers my question first, though.

In short, my hypothesis is that experienced players would have killed Yos2 already, based on his reputation. Those who arent aware of his reputation, are bound to kill a townie with a double vote in order to give themselves the chance of getting it themselves.

As to your first sentance; take a look at, say, my last 5 or 6 games as town. How many of them was I nightkilled by the scum on night 1 or night 2? I think the answer is 1; the only game that's at all recent where I was town and was nightkilled by the scum night 1 or night 2 was Mafia Lolwat, and that was just because I was attacking both members of the mafia that day. You really can't say "Yos being alive day 3 is a scumtell", because I really don't get nightkilled by scum much more often then random.

As for your second part; meh. If scum had wanted one of their own to be mayor, they could have done it day 1. I mean, I didn't even vote for MYSELF, I really didn't even especally want to be mayor this game, it just kind of happened. If the scum had wanted to gently nudge the town into electing one of their own mayor on day 1, they could have. They didn't, probably because they don't want to be anywhere near as high profile as that.

[Yosarian2]

@ Yos I voted him into L-1 because we had all agreed that Dr. Pepper was the one to be lynched.

That's not how it works, you know.

We "all agree" to lynch someone when a majority of people think he's scum and vote for him. There were a few vocal people pushing for his lynch, for reasons that were pretty clearly wrong IMHO, but that's hardly the same as "we all agreeed" on anything.

Did you think he was scum when you voted for him?

Also, answer my other question, please. Do you still think it would be good for the town if you were lynched today, Mufasa?

[Yosarian2]

In short, my hypothesis is that experienced players would have killed Yos2 already, based on his reputation. Those who arent aware of his reputation, are bound to kill a townie with a double vote in order to give themselves the chance of getting it themselves.

As to your first sentance; take a look at, say, my last 5 or 6 games as town. How many of them was I nightkilled by the scum on night 1 or night 2? I think the answer is 1; the only game that's at all recent where I was town and was nightkilled by the scum night 1 or night 2 was Mafia Lolwat, and that was just because I was attacking both members of the mafia that day.

Ok, it's time for me come clean. I'm afraid...i'm not the superfan you might have thought i was.
If you could link me to those games, i'll gladly check them out.

Sure, let me check. (uses search function).

As far as I remember, this, mafiaLolwat is the only recent game where I, as town, was scumkilled early on.

viewtopic.php?t=10205&highlight=

In that game, the reason i was killed by the scum night 2 was because on day 2 I managed to call and attack out both members of the scum team at the same time (although I mistakenly thought one was the cult leader, which didn't help since I was trying to lynch him anyway. )

The two games I was in as town before that were mini 732 viewtopic.php?t=10268&start=0 and mini 728 viewtopic.php?t=10198&start=0. In both of those games, I was pro-town, and still survived the entire game, winning while still alive in endgame both times. (Granted, in mini 732, half the reason I survived was badly absuing the smalltown game mechanics. )

Before that, in mini 720, I was lynched, not nightkilled. viewtopic.php?t=10086&highlight=yosarian2

Before that, was medieval mafia, where I was not killed by scum; I was actually vigged by a pro-town mason group. (Stupid vigs. :stillbitter:)

So, yeah. Out of my last 5 games when I was pro-town, I was only nightkilled once. You can look at games when I was scum and there were multiple scumgroups as well; I didn't really often get targeted by the other scumgroup in those game very often either.

As far as I remember, to go back to the last time before lolwat when I was killed by scum early on, you have to go all the way back to 2008 an US Election mafia; and the only reason I was killed in THAT game was because I delibratly hinted at a pro-town power role in order to draw a scum kill, becuase I had the most useless pro-town role ever and so wanted the scum to kill me rather then someone useful. (I couldn't even vote for a lynch, I could only vote no-lynch. )

So, yeah. I really don't think I'm much more likely to draw a nightkill then most people when I'm pro-town. I get hit with the "Yos is still alive, so he must be scum!" argument ALL the bloody TIME, but it really is not at all true; I make all the way to endgame pretty often as town, in fact.

maybe you're right. But given the player list, and the mechanic of the game, i can see that most mafia combinations here would have killed you already. Especially as you aren't really coming across as scummy. You aren't what id consider 'lynchable' based on your actual play. Likewise, you havent even been wagonning like crazy, which would be a possible incentive for mafia to keep you alive.

Well, you know, if that is all true, mafia often avoid "the most obvious target" because that person is often doc protected. Docs are pretty common in warewolf games, too. (Well, they're usually called herbalists or healers here, but same thing.)

I mean, I didn't even vote for MYSELF, I really didn't even especally want to be mayor this game, it just kind of happened. If the scum had wanted to gently nudge the town into electing one of their own mayor on day 1, they could have. They didn't, probably because they don't want to be anywhere near as high profile as that.

It's ok, i can see why you wouldnt wanna be mayor. The longevity of such a post in early game is not looking great. Tbh, i think you're doing a pretty good job. But, let's face it, if you were town, you'd be happy to be mayor for one simple reason-it means that:

A. Town has control of the double vote.
B. You get to choose a successor in the event of your death, so you can use your intuition to keep the mayorship out of the hands of scum.

(nods) Right. And I was never opposed to the idea of being mayor, for that very reason, as I made clear day 1. Still; I decided not to really go for it this game, and was actually pushing pretty hard for Fonz (who looked pretty obv town to me) to get the mayorship instead.

I think half-decent scum are far less likely to WANT to be mayor, because survival to endgame is virtually impossible, and it thrusts them into the limelight early on. More importantly, it means they have to choose a successor, and they have to either concede the mayorship to a townie, or implicate another scumbuddy, starting the cycle again.

BM

Heh. My usual habit is to actually go after stuff like mayorships hard no matter what my alignment. I just kind of figured that after what I did in 24 mafia, doing so this game would make people freak out (see Fonz's reaction to even the idea I might become mayor day 1 of this game for an example of this, heh), so I was planning on just trying to make sure someone else who looked pro-town to me got it. I was actually kind of bemused to see that I ended up with it anyway, lol.

[Yosarian2]

Yeh, i can see how that would be a pain. One question-if you get attacked under this argument "all the time" how come you often manage to survive to endgame? Clearly this cant be as big an issue as you suggest.

Well, people do try to attack me with it all the time, but it's really not a valid argument for any number of reasons, so it generally dosn't actually work at lynching me, at least not on it's own.

Well, you know, if that is all true, mafia often avoid "the most obvious target" because that person is often doc protected. Docs are pretty common in warewolf games, too. (Well, they're usually called herbalists or healers here, but same thing.)

Hmm, valid point.

(nods) Especally since scum killed off the "Second to most obvioust target", Fonz, who is also a very experenced player, a very effective scumhunter, and who basically everyone thought was pro-town on day 1.

Of course, now that you've made this argument, scum might keep me alive in order to support your "Yos isn't dead so he must be scum" argument. So, thanks, you may have just saved my life.

What was the story with 24 Mafia? You said Fonz didnt want you to be mayor because of that.

Yeah. This was what Fonz said about me becoming mayor:

Because, if he's town, he doesn't need the extra vote to be influential, and you're just painting a big target on his back.

If he's scum: see 24 mafia.

In 24 mafia, I, as scum, managed to get the town to elect me "Director of CTU" on day 1, and then abused the hell out of the powers that came with that office while leading the town. That was the game I won the "best manipulator" award for.

Also, i must hasten to highlight in

ORANGE

the contradiction here. Your story seems to have changed.

It really didn't.

This is what I said day 1:

Yos, can I ask you this... would you LIKE to be mayor?

(shrug) I'd vote myself, just on the general "I know I'm town" principle, but of course if we all do that we get nowhere.

That being said; meh, I wouldn't mind being mayor, but it dosn't really matter. I don't expect it would affect my play much.

I was never opposed to becoming mayor, but I didn't activly persue it either, mostly because I really didn't expect to become mayor in any case. I was not opposed to becoming mayor, in order to avoid keeping it out of scum hands, but I wasn't terribly excited about it.

Besides, if I was scum, why would I have tried so hard to get a very smart pro-town person (Fonz) elected mayor?

I forgot what bemused meant... :'(

Anyway, i do hope that given you fit my conclusions pretty well, you can see why i'm feeling fairly ok with my vote on you atm.
I dont think town-Yos would be so scared of the limelight.

Oh, I'm not scared of the limelight. I just didn't think figting to become mayor would be especally productive.

Also, i might live to regret this, but,

Mod

:

ALL the bloody TIME

BM

Lol. Nice try, but unless the mod is British, I'm not worried.

[Yosarian2]

Yos wasn't killed because we wanted to kill danchao more than him, and after that I was stuck in a situation where I pretty much could not NK without outting myself.

so you're saying you effectively could only make 1 NK before you were the last man in your scumteam, and were unable to make your top choice NK?

BM

Actually, I arranged it so the scum wouldn't be able to kill anyone at all, and especally not me, without giving themselves away. And, espeally, I made sure Gorrad, who was a jailkeeper and who I I suspected, wouldn't be able to do anything at all except jailkeep me, since I had announced in thread I would attempt to vig kill him every night. Breaking smalltown games is fun.

[Yosarian2]

and who basically everyone thought was pro-town on day 1.

This is a ridiculous assertion to make. Firstly, Fonz was killed Night 2. Secondly, i dont recall any declarations of Fonz being defo town on Day 1. And i dont think anyone had grounds to say for sure that anyone was town at that early stage.

Eh? I said that everyone thought Fonz looks pro-town day 1, not that they had grounds to know for sure. And while that might have been a slight exageration, I don't think anyone attacked him, multiple people said they thought he was pro-town, and he got a bunch of votes for mayor.

From my past experence with Fonz, I thought he was really obvtown on day 1.

Of course, now that you've made this argument, scum might keep me alive in order to support your "Yos isn't dead so he must be scum" argument. So, thanks, you may have just saved my life.

It's ok, we'll call it quits if you win the game for the town at endgame.

It's a deal

What was the story with 24 Mafia? You said Fonz didnt want you to be mayor because of that.

Yeah. This was what Fonz said about me becoming mayor:

Because, if he's town, he doesn't need the extra vote to be influential, and you're just painting a big target on his back.

If he's scum: see 24 mafia.

In 24 mafia, I, as scum, managed to get the town to elect me "Director of CTU" on day 1, and then abused the hell out of the powers that came with that office while leading the town. That was the game I won the "best manipulator" award for.

And i'd assume that this is why you couldnt afford to be seen to push for the Mayorship here-because any attempt to do so would have been called out by Fonz, who you felt was "very protown".

(nods) By Fonz and by anyone else who saw me in 24 mafia, yeah. After that game, I would kind of expect a giant red flag to go up if people saw me trying to get elected on day 1, so I figured it wouldn't be productive to try for it.

Also, i must hasten to highlight in

ORANGE

the contradiction here. Your story seems to have changed.

It really didn't.

This is what I said day 1:

Yos, can I ask you this... would you LIKE to be mayor?

(shrug) I'd vote myself, just on the general "I know I'm town" principle, but of course if we all do that we get nowhere.

That being said; meh, I wouldn't mind being mayor, but it dosn't really matter. I don't expect it would affect my play much.

I was never opposed to becoming mayor, but I didn't activly persue it either, mostly because I really didn't expect to become mayor in any case.

Why wouldnt you expect to become mayor?

Because, again, I figured people like Fonz would oppose it.

I was not opposed to becoming mayor, in order to avoid keeping it out of scum hands, but I wasn't terribly excited about it.

Besides, if I was scum, why would I have tried so hard to get a very smart pro-town person (Fonz) elected mayor?

1. Fonz was clearly wary of you. It made a good deal of sense to keep him on side. It stinks of buddying.
2. Obviously, after Mafia 24, you wanted to play in the exact opposite way in order to look protown. That means not trying at all hard to get elected, and indeed, fighting hard to get someone ELSE elected.
3. Fonz was far from confirmed town, much as it might be convenient for you to say otherwise. He was just as lynchable as you or I.

Eh. He wasn't confirmed town, but I can't imagine he looked very lynchable, especally on day 1; I can't recall anyone offhand being suspicious of him.

Anyway, if I was scum, the last thing I would want to do would be to put the mayorship into the hands of someone who was both a good scumhunter, who looked pro-town, and who is very smart and very unlikely to give the mayorship to a scum if he died.

I kind of see what you mean by the buddying thing, but, meh. Fonz is too smart and too carefulv to easily manipulate with that kind of thing.

Also, i might live to regret this, but,

Mod

:

ALL the bloody TIME

BM

Lol. Nice try, but unless the mod is British, I'm not worried.

You've lost me. Is that not considered a profanity outside of the UK?

BM

Nope, it's not. It's not a word that would be censored on American telivision, for example.

No, it's not. But should that matter? I mean, would it make a difference if someone swore in German or French?

Well, I was speaking in the language "American English", and in the language I was speaking, it is not a swear word.

Anyway, why are people trying so hard to remove my vote here?

[Yosarian2]

Neah, BM's probably town. I thought he was town day 1, and he's acting like town today; he's being agressive, going way out on a limb on basically a paranoid town "Yos is mayor, and he's still alive, he must be scum" feeling , he's putting himself in a place where he'd look really bad when I flip town, and I don't really think he would take risks like that if he was scum. It's just a gut feeling, but I don't think he's all that likely to be scum at the moment.

Anyway, the whole thing with Mufasa seems to have slipped by the wayside here. Yesterday, he said it would be good for the town if he was lynched today, because of some trigger-when-he-gets-lynched ability he was claiming; today, he's saying it wouldn't be good for him to get lynched. Mufasa, why did you change your mind?

[Yosarian2]

Gee, it must be really nice to be able to APPARENTLY instinctively know who is town, without being considered suspicious...

(shrug) That's a big part of how I scumhunt, is I sometimes first figure out who looks town, and then vote for someone else. It generally works pretty well, although of course I am wrong sometimes. Just look at those recent games I posted, in mafia lolwat, I used a process of elimination thing on day 2 by going through and eliminating everyone who looked pro-town to me; in mini 728, I knew Fonz was town from the way he acted on a day 1 wagon.

Do you really have a problem with me trying to figure out who looks town and who dosn't, BM? I mean, if you read day 1, there's a HUGE number of people who mentioned that they thought you were looking pro-town or that Fonz was looking pro-town, I'm hardly the only one who said either.

And i like the way you've left yourself sufficient scope to shift from this position if necessary.

(shrug) I could be wrong, of course. I've been wrong enough times in the past about that that I keep an open mind.

Yeh im just a tad bitter that you arent gonna be lynched today-partly down to the fact we only have a handful of people actually playing.

I'm not going to be lynched today because there's absolutly no case against me, as even you admitted.

[Yosarian2]

On a side note: Zwet, why did you vote Dr. Pepper?

You went from this:

Fine.

unvote;
Vote: Dr. Pepper

Giving in to WIFOM that quickly?

to this

Unvote; Vote: Dr. Pepper

*smiles at Kaiveran's post*

The only explination you gave was later when you said:

3rd person reference scumtell and twisting of Dingo's words.

Could you be more specific? Why did you think Pepper was scum? What's the "3rd person reference scumtell"?

[Yosarian2]

Actually, Mike, this claim makes me a lot more suspicious of Mufassa then I was before. Seems like the kind of thing a scum would make up, and his claim about what happens if he gets lynched seems like it's based on how the day ended yesterday, except with an extra random kill added in to his claim to make it sound scarier. Plus, in my experence, newbie sucm tend to make overly complicated fake claims very often.

Mufasa: What have your night targets been?

[Yosarian2]

Last night I chose to save Jahudo

Ok. Night 1 action?

Also, if you're a doc/vig/jailkeep, and if you get lynched if you get to kill someone but some extra random person dies as well, why did you ever think that you getting lynched rather then staying alive would be better for the town? I really don't see how this claim fits your claims yesterday.

[Yosarian2]

Yeah. I'm thinking the right move here is to

Vote:Mufasa

. He's almost certanly lying about at least some parts of his claim; it's just got too many moving parts to be a real role.

Mufasa, if you're a pro-town person who is lying about your claim for some reason, come clean now, or you will die. Look at what happened when Xtoxm lied about his role day 1. Telling the truth right now is your only chance.

[Yosarian2]

I was randomly assigned the river

What is the river?

That was the wrong game, again.

[Yosarian2]

I'm no longer so certain that Mufasa's scum, I found the claim believable.

Which part of it? The part that he's claiming to be another hunter, even though 2 hunters seems kind of crazy? The part that someone else randomally dies when he does? The part where he has a whole series of roles he gets that somehow gets interfered with by random game actions? The part where he's claiming to have the exact same role as the guy we lynched yesterday except with a lot more bells and whistles added on randomally? The part where the flavor of his role dosn't seem to make sense? Or the part where his claim today seems to be mostly incompatable with his semi-claims from previous days?

[Yosarian2]

Something I do agree with is not letting Yos survive til the endgame though. I think we should lynch Yos sooner or later before the endgame, and keep lynching until we have a townie mayor that gives the mayorship to millar. A scummy mayor would do far more damage than a townie mayor would help, in my opinion.

:eyebrow:

That's horrible logic, by the way. If you think I'm more likely town then scum, then lynching me just because I got elected mayor is incredibly anti-town. We need to be lynching scum, not wasting lynch after lynch killing off townie mayors like you seem to be suggesting.

In any case, if I do die, I highly doubt I could give the mayorship to a "ghost" who is confirmed town but can't vote, but we can ask the mod.

Mod: Could Millar become mayor now?

Plus, the whole thing about "kill off Yos or BS" is pretty bad as well. BM attacked me, and he's wrong, but that dson't make him scum either.

[Yosarian2]

Mod: There's an error in the votecount, I'm currently voting mufasa.

Which, by the way, means he's at l-1, everyone, since I have 2 votes

So you did. Damn, I thought I double-checked for you specifically.

EDIT: And I just lost my vote.

[Yosarian2]

(shrug) I'd be worried, if I thought there was much of a chance you are telling the truth.

Just for the record; how, exactally, have I been giving you "bad vibes"? Other then trying to get you lynched of course.

[Yosarian2]

For crying out loud, could pro-town people PLEASE stop lying about their roles? That's the second time this game we lynched someone for a clearly fake roleclaim, and both times they were lying town.

[Yosarian2]

Is anyone else worried that Mufasa might be a vampire? How would we kill him if he was?

Um...if he was a vampire, then he wouldn't be dead right now; vampires come back after they die with the opposite alignment.

[Yosarian2]

dingoatemybaby was entirely on the correct side of that argument, which seems pretty damn obvious if you actually read the thread

Um...no. Not at all. Not even a little bit. Dr. Pepper was obviously town there, anyone reading the thread should have been able to tell that, and Dingo focused on him for terrible reasons.

I don’t think Mufasa was the correct lynch. I fail to see how his claim would be more likely made as scum than it would be as.

Because he was obviously lying? IF you catch someone lying about their claim, if they keep talking themselves farther and farther into a corner trying to lie themselves out of a hole they dug for themselves, then 99% of the time, the right play is to lynch them.

People who unvoted Mufasa on day two just to vote him on day three are very suspicious for doing so, especially since this allows them to effectively ignore half of the players for two consecutive days.

Did you miss the part where Mufasa said on day 2 "the town should lynch me tommorow"? You'd better not say something like that without having a damn good explination the next day, and he did not.

Yosarian2, as a veteran player, who I do not take as a poor player, you should know better than to let all that bad play happen on day two, and you even jumped in with them on the poor playing. You've said you would be using your vote as mayor also, I have hardly seen any evidence of you doing any scumhunting on your own.

Excuse me? "Let" the bad play happen? I was doing everything I could to try to prevent Dr. Pepper from being lynched, since there was absolutly no good reason to lynch him. I tried to *prevent* the bad play from happening, and it's frustrating that peple were unwilling to listen, and instead followed people like Zwet who wanted to lynch Dr. Pepper while giving either no reasons or at best no good reasons.

[Yosarian2]

If scum know who everyone protown is voting, they make a greater knowledge gain than we do, and most importantly, they can ensure that we dont lynch scum.

BM

Actually, the best way to avoid this would be to do an informal poll of everyone in the town before the lynch (something along the lines of "if X turnes up town and we get a second lynch, who would you vote for then?") and then we all agree to follow that poll for the secret ballots, even if we don't personally agree with it. If everyone who's pro-town in the game votes the same way, then it dosn't really matter what the scum do.

[Yosarian2]

if the vote results are revealed the next day, that does put a slightly different slant on things. But you can bet ur ass that some townies will lie.

BM

Eh. In that situation, they shouldn't.

If everyone agrees to go with the majority here, then if you break your promise and place your secret ballot somewhere else, the only thing that might do is it might help the mafia avoid getting one of their own lynched.

[Yosarian2]

If you don't think Dr Pepper was misrepresenting Dingoatemybaby, then I will extend Dingoatemybaby's challenge to Dr Pepper to you. Go and find where Dingoatemybaby says what Dr Pepper claims of his stance.

I don't really feel like going through this all again, but I did already explain all of this. Dr Pepper's interpretation of Dingo's posts were a plausable interpretation, a reasonable attempt to scumhunt and to figure out a possible scum motive for dingo's posts. That's kind of how you're supposed to scumhunt, is you read people's posts and try to figure out if they might have a scum motivation or a town motivation, and that's all Dr Pepper was doing. Dingo's reaction to some perfectly reasonable scumhunting on Dr Peppers part was to flip out, call him a liar, and vote him.

They were both at each others' throats for the wrong reasons

Dr Pepper turned out to be wrong, but there realy weren't anything wrong with his reasons.

Anyway, I'm going out now, I'll finish this response later.

[Yosarian2]

Because he was obviously lying? IF you catch someone lying about their claim, if they keep talking themselves farther and farther into a corner trying to lie themselves out of a hole they dug for themselves, then 99% of the time, the right play is to lynch them.

Town is perfectly capable of lying. Your response doesn't actually address the point I made of why scum would be more likely to make HIS claim than town.

Town shouldn't lie about their role, because when they do, it generally really hurts their side badly. (As this game proves, by the way). On the other hand, scum quite commonly lie about their role, and it's often the right move for them. So when you see someone lie about their role, it really increases the chances that they're scum; it's probably the single most reliable scumtell there has ever been, and by a big margin too. There's a good reason that lynch all liars is a good rule of thumb.

It's even more true when someone is clearly trying to lie their way out of another lie.

In this case, the reason a scum would make his claim is obvious; because the way he made that claim convinced the town to delay lynching him. For a mafia member, "getting lynched tommorow" is usually much better then "getting lynched today".

People dig themselves into lies because they believe coming out of the lie will be worse than trying to stay in it.

Right. ESPECALLY SCUM. Because scum can't ever tell the whole truth, and their main goal is to not get lynched, so they tend to pile one lie onto another.

And don't respond with "Oh I told him it would be better if he came out and told the truth" because you said nothing to actually make him believe that it would be a better idea. Pointing to Xtoxm's lynch isn't very convincing. You simply saying that something is better if done a certain way does not make it true.

TOWN SHOULD NOT LIE. SCUM DO LIE. So if we catch someone lying, then lynching them is the right move 95% of the time. And I'm more moderate on this then a lot of people, because I say 95% instead of 100%.

I mean, how do you suggest catching scum, if you refuse to accept that "proving someone was trying to lie about their role claim in order to avoid a lynch" is a reasonable reason to think someone is scum?

By your logic, asking someone to come out of a lie would just further give you reason to lynch them based upon catching them in a lie.

(shrug) The thing is, I already knew he was almost certanly lying, because his claim made no sense. If he was town and confessed to lying, and explained why he had done it, he might not have been lynched. You are right, he still would have looked suspicious as hell (becuase, again, *HE HAD LIED*), but I personally would have listend to him and then made a judmenet based on what he said.

In any case, you trying to attack me because I've twice now correctly figured out someone was lying about their role is insane.

People who unvoted Mufasa on day two just to vote him on day three are very suspicious for doing so, especially since this allows them to effectively ignore half of the players for two consecutive days.

Did you miss the part where Mufasa said on day 2 "the town should lynch me tommorow"? You'd better not say something like that without having a damn good explination the next day, and he did not.

The town should never be aiming to lynch a town player.

Well, duh. What made you think we were aiming to lynch a town player?

He made such an extrodinary claim, I was willing to give him enough rope and give him that extra day he asked for; I was even willing to wait until the next day to finish the claim. HOWEVER, that always comes with a price; if you make an outlandish claim like that, you NEED to be able to back it up when we call you on your bluff, or else we have to assume that you are lying scum.

Often, in a situation like that, the best way to figure out if someone is lying scum or not is just to give them enough rope and see if they hang themselves with it. Which was exactally what I did.

I don't care if you are a Hunter or have some if-lynched triggered ability. The town doesn't need to lynch those kinds of players to win.

Well, yes. Which was actually how we figured out he was lying, if you remember, was because his actual claim on day 3 didn't at all fit the "it's good for the town for me to be lynched tommorow instead of today" claim he made on day 2.

We would be better off lynching scum. We win by eliminating the werewolves, not seeing the cool effects that town players have when they get lynched.

Right. We want to lynch scum. And a big part of how you figure out who the scum, especally in a setup with a lot of unique roles like this, is partly by figuring out who is telling the truth and who is making up fake claims to try and not get lynched, because the scum make up fake claims to try and not get lynched, and town never should.

If you don't like partial claims then where was that insistence to get a full claim from him on day two instead of leaving it hanging?

Eh? I never said there was anything wrong with partial claims. In fact, I specifically said on day 2 that if we were not going to lynch Mufasa that day, that we did not WANT him to claim fully that day, because it would only help the scum figure out if they should kill him or not.

Again, I gave him that leeway, because the situation was such that if he was lying scum, there was very little chance of him getting away with it, and if he was town telling the truth, then it's better for the town to wait until day 3. Perhaps I should have also considered the "what if he's a vanillia townie making up a stupid fake claim for some stupid reason", BUT I DON'T, BECAUSE TOWNIES SHOULD NOT EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER DO THAT in that kind of situatiion.

Once again you fail to actually address the point I make, which is that of it allowing you to essentially ignore half of the players in the game for two days straight.

Because I have no idea what you're talking about or what that has to do with Mufasa. I don't think I ignored anyone.

Excuse me? "Let" the bad play happen? I was doing everything I could to try to prevent Dr. Pepper from being lynched, since there was absolutly no good reason to lynch him. I tried to *prevent* the bad play from happening, and it's frustrating that peple were unwilling to listen, and instead followed people like Zwet who wanted to lynch Dr. Pepper while giving either no reasons or at best no good reasons.

Then what you should have done was to tell him to back the hell off and wait for Percy to actually come and respond to the points brought up against him first. What Dr Pepper did was deprive the town of Percy's response, you further contributed to that by jumping into the argument yourself.

Um...no. Just no. If a person makes a bad argument, I'll point out that it's a bad argument. That's the pro-town thing to do. If you think person A's attack on person B makes person A look scummy, you should say so.

Why would you want to limit discussion like that, by telling people what they can and can't respond to? When person A attacks person B, it's actually other people's reaction to the wagon that's especally useful in gathering information, more often then not.

If Dr Pepper truly thought that was Dingoatemybaby's stance then he should have waited first to see how Percy would handle it.

Well, I don't at all agree; if you see something worth commenting on that you think is scummy, you should point it out. Also, I don't understand the double standard here. Percy wanted to pressure someone. Dingo attaked Percy for that, before the guy who Percy wanted to pressure responded. Dr Pepper attacked Dingo for that. Why do you have a problem with Pepper's play and not Dingo's?

Pepper thought Dingo was trying to protect the lurker by attacking Percy's attack on it. That was a completly reasoable suspicion, considering the circumstances. If he had that suspicion, then saying so was absolutly the right thing for him to do; there's no need for him to wait to Percy to respond, because Percy's response is really irrelelevent to Pepper's suspicion at that point.

You did very little to prevent the situation, if anything, you augmented it.

Why should I have tried to prevent Dr Pepper from trying to hunt scum? Right or wrong, Pepper was playing in a very pro-town and helpful way there, and he should have gotten more support from the rest of the town then he did.

[Yosarian2]

Why should I have tried to prevent Dr Pepper from trying to hunt scum?

Because what Dr Pepper was doing was actively interfereing and distracting with other players' hunting of scum.

No, it really wasn't. Especally since Dingo didn't really appear to be hunting scum there.

If I directed a question or a case at someone, and somebody else stepped in to defend the points directed at a player other than himself, when is this ever a protown thing to do?

Um, in this very example, it was a pro-town thing to do, especally since Pepper's main point wasn't to defend Percy; it was to raise a logical suspicion against Dingo. Dingo's "case"(if you even want to call it that) was irrelevent. The kind of "no one is ever allowed to attack anyone in X situstion" rules you're trying to set up here are very bad for the town, because they restrict discussion and make it harder to find scum.

On the other hand, illogical OMGUS attacks, like the one Dingo did, really are anti-town.

[Yosarian2]

(shrug) I still say there's nothing wrong with shooting down a bad argument. And it was a bad argument; there's nothing wrong with saying "I will vote person X until he contributes". I understand what you're saying about letting the person respond, but I still don't agree; if you just let a bad argument that you know is a bad argument fester without countering it quickly, then it's more likely that the town will just go down the wrong road for the wrong reasons; waiting isn't always the best option.

[Yosarian2]

Personally, I've had kind of a bad gut feeling about Mike for a while now.

Vote:MikeSC6

[Yosarian2]

Why is this game stalling...

Because the scum don't want to bus their buddy MikeSC6, probably.

[Yosarian2]

Why is this game stalling...

Because the scum don't want to bus their buddy MikeSC6, probably.

How can that comment have helped anyone? If you honestly think I'm scum, why would you want to make a comment that dissuades people from voting for me by pre-emptively branding them scum?

No, actually, I said the scum aren't bussing you, wich is the opposite of saying that people who vote you are scum.

The comment helped by hopefully making whatever scumbuddies you have that aren't currently voting you a little more nervous and twitchy.

[Yosarian2]

Do you think it's a townie action to vote for someone because of an open threat of being considered scummy if they didn't? Do you think it's townie to say "anyone who doesn't vote this way is scum" in order to push a lynch, rather than argue the point?

If I had said that, then no, but that's not what I said. I simply made an observation. There's probably a significant warewolf faction left, and it dosn't feel like there is a group of scum pushing for your lynch right now.

Anyway, I really am basically voting you on gut right now. For much of this game, I've had a scummy vibe from your posting, although I was never really able to articulate why. Sorry if you don't like that as a reason, but it's the truth.

[Yosarian2]

As most of you probably already know, I am going to be V/LA for the beach bash. Will be leaving later this evening.

[Yosarian2]

I'm back from V/LA. Will be attempting to get caught up on all my games as quickly as I can.

[Yosarian2]

Ok, that didn't take long, not much seems to have happened.

Anyway, I'm not sure I understand your case against Battle Mage, Mike. Could you explain a little more exactally how you think BM changed his posting style, or how that makes him scum?

[Yosarian2]

hi

dramonic is town

gorrad is scum

wish the piper would stop making me play with his flute

bye

...wow, I actually had no idea you were playing, which isn't good.

Have you read through the whole game yet, rock?

[Yosarian2]

Mod's been gone for two weeks. Alot of the players just aren't playing. Is this game going to be abandoned?

I hope not...do we have a mod here?

We don't know if Zwety's play will be a liability down the road, even if he isn't NK'ed. Maybe he is cleared by a PR or maybe he lynches scum. Alot of things can happen, so I don't see why lynching based on playstyle is a good tactic now or ever. His contribution does not really hinder the game more than any of the lurkers here anyway.

Yeah; if someone has a reason to think Zwet is scum, I'll listen, but we aren't going to lynch him just for being zwet.

[Yosarian2]

I got in touch with one of our backup mods, MafiaSSK. He said that if the mod dosn't come back before then, he'll be able to take over modding on Monday.

[Yosarian2]

Well you say you're researching our game setup "Werewolves of Millers Hollow". The real life game is an open setup from what I can tell, and everyone know what power roles exist and what they do.

I thought dramonic was asking which power roles were still alive, (like the thief, cupido, fortune teller, etc), which you don't have to ask for claims to figure out they haven't been killed yet.

Yes, but you do realize that is a way scum can rolefish, right? Ask a question like that, see who reacts and how.

[Yosarian2]

In theory that sounds like something scum could try to do, but I don't see how his question increased the odds that a power role slipped their own role. For instance, my knowledge of a fortune teller does not mean I am a fortune teller.

So if I had told dramonic about the fortune teller when people say he rolefished, I can't imagine why he would then NK me thinking I was the fortune teller.

Well, we don't actually know if this game is using all the roles from the card game, plus not everyone is familiar with the card game. If the first thing that pops into your head is "well, the role X is still alive", then that does increas your chance of being role X. On the other hand, if the first thing that pops into your head is "Huh, I donnno, that's a good question", then that increases your odds of being vanillia.

Also, it's a little trickier to spot, but a person who is trying to not reveal their role might react differently to a question like that then a person who is vanillia.

There's a lot of ways questions like that can be used to role fish.

[Yosarian2]

?

Not really interested in doing this until you let us know what's going on, dramonic.

[Yosarian2]

Um...so, basically, you're fishing for town roles again, draconinc. Nice.

[Yosarian2]

Alright. I'm here. I'd like everyone who still wants to play in this game to send me a copy of thier PM to my inbox. An exact copy. If you lie then you break the rules and will get immeadiately replaced.

Role PM sent in.

You don't have a list of all the roles?

[Yosarian2]

call it fishing if you want, but the lovers are going to be a nuisance to the town in the long run if they are both town, and if they are half town half scum its one less third party to worry about.

If you think it would be good for the town for the lovers to claim, then you should have said so, and we could have discusses it. Instead, you tried to trick them into revealing themselves, which seems bad.

Also...if we do make the lovers reveal themselves, dosn't that just give the scum a free 2 for 1?

[Yosarian2]

Therefore, the

only

way dramonic's plan will do what it is supposed to do is if the lover's non-voting clause is enforced in some way that is publically noticable but not a modkill.

Well, or it works if everyone else goes along with the plan and the lovers simply refuse (or are unable) to do go along with the plan (or else they fake it and just don't vote each other and hope no one notices).

Honestly, if we knew the lovers were guarenteed to be anti-town, I wouldn't mind doing that as a test. As it is, though, if there are lovers, they're probably pro-town, plus (if draconic is right) there is already a pro-town "cupid" who knows who they are.

[Yosarian2]

I haven't posted because there is jack shit going on. We're at the same place we were.

Jack shit is going on because you (plural) are not posting.

[Yosarian2]

I'd totally be in favor of lynching a luker here. I think the odds are very high tht we've got some lurkerscum in this game.

[Yosarian2]

I said earlier, if you have something that you need me to comment on, please bring it up. Link me to the post, quote it. I'm not going to go on a wild goose chase for you.

Unvote

Vote:Starbuck

[Yosarian2]

It proves your not if and only if there are loves in this game and they follow those same exact rules, dramonic.

Also; if the lovers are town, then we don't want them dead, ok? Granted they're less useful to the town then 2 vanilla townies would be, but they're more useful then 2 dead lovers, ok?

[Yosarian2]

Anyway, I'm ready to just lynch someone and move on, this game has gotten really boring.

Any voulenteers to be lyched?

[Yosarian2]

Lynch Dramonic, he's the most deserving and has been for, like, 2 months.

Meh. I hate to lynch, like, the most active person in the game, though. Also, while he's made some anti-town plays, I'm not really convinced they're scum motivated, although they certanly could be.

[Yosarian2]

Lynch Dramonic, he's the most deserving and has been for, like, 2 months.

Meh. I hate to lynch, like, the most active person in the game, though. Also, while he's made some anti-town plays, I'm not really convinced they're scum motivated, although they certanly could be.

This sort of stalling attitude doesn't help. He's been lynchable for 2 months and we still haven't found a better candidate. Let's just move along, lynch him and if he's scum, yay we have stuff to work from, if he's not... well, we 've narrowed down teh suspect list and we'll have another nights worth of night actions to help us along.

C'mon people, we can end this game at some point, if we actually lynch the scummy people!

I'd totally have lynched him ages ago, if I thought he was scummy.

Honestly, at this point, I might lynch him anyway, just because it might be the only way we can lynch anyone.

[Yosarian2]

How are the search for replacemtns coming? If we don't have at least some replacements, I'd be about ready to just declare this game abandoned.

[Yosarian2]

The only problem with your plan to vote for Millar13 is that I doubt anyone would want to replace in as a tree-stumped player, and replacement of him isn't necessary for the game to advance.

They don't have to read the game; they don't have to post any content. All they have to do is report on allignments. If we don't get any replacements the regular way, I'm all for advertising the role like that.

Basically, I'm just trying to make use of this resource (a confirmed townie, treestumped or no) that we've been neglecting the whole game.

If we are going to get a replacement for millar before the end of the day, and if he can be made executioner, I'd be in favor of that. I think there's a significant risk we won't get that replacement, though. And if he gets modkilled for lack of replacemetns, or just never ends up getting replaced, then he wouldn't even be able to choose a sucessor...

[Yosarian2]

I'll once again say that, if made executioner, i will retract my replacement request. I wont reread, but i'll be around to tell you the results (which is effectively what the executioner is for).

I do have to say this rubs me the wrong way; it seems like he's saying he'll keep playing if we bribe him, so long as he's not expected to actually read or scumhunt or anything.

I don't want battle mage to replace out, and frankly we're going to have trouble finding enough replacements to keep this game going no matter what, but...eh.

[Yosarian2]

I got to say, I'm just really unhappy with this "I'll replace out unless X happens" stuff. I don't really know if it's a scum tell or not, but replacement out of a game should never be s tool to help you in a game, and threatening to do so seems almost as bad.

[Yosarian2]

Well, if you're going to be replaced but the mod hasn't found one yet, there's nothing wrong with continuing to play. In fact, it makes the game work better that way.

[Yosarian2]

Mod: Could Zwet be elected executioner? I know we tried to elect that role mayor and failed.

If he can be elected executioner, I'd be behind it.

[Yosarian2]

My gut says Yos is scum

Well, your gut is wrong. Again.

How is Zwet not a good choice?

[Yosarian2]

Mod: Could Zwet be elected executioner? I know we tried to elect that role mayor and failed.

If he can be elected executioner, I'd be behind it.

I believe so.

Cool.

Vote:Zwet for executioner

It's especally good for the town because he can't be killed, so we know the role will never end up in scum hands.

[Yosarian2]

Whoa! I can be nightkilled.

Really?

Huh...I was assuming you were a tree stump, but looking back at HC's post, I guess he didn't actually say you couldn't be nk'd.

If they do, though, that's fine; you already have no vote and don't count towards a win condition, so if the scum feel they have to use their kill on you to silence the executioner, that also helps the town since we don't lose a voting member instead. Just make sure you pick your sucessor well then, Zwet.

[Yosarian2]

Ok. Izzy and NN, check with the mod and see if you can confirm who is and is not dancing. Hopefully we can get this sorted out.

Also...it sounds like warewolves can dance too, right? Otherwise the piper win condition dosn't make sense.

If we've got a likely warewolf suspect who's also a dancer, that would be a pretty good lynch, actually; lynching dancers makes it harder for the piper to win then lynching non-dancers.

[Yosarian2]

Dizzy is SO the piper.

I'm not familiar with the origional game; would the other dancers see the piper dancing with them?

I would tend to doubt it, since then, whoever the piper targets night 1 should instantly know who the piper is.

...and, actually, there were two people dancing night 1. Huh.

I donno. Still seems like a bad role design, to make all the dancers see the piper dancing with them.

[Yosarian2]

Ztife is the best candidate for inactive-piper. BM posted closer to night, but Ztife was inactive for a whole month whereas ztif was around for the other nights.

It sounds like the piper targeted someone every night, so the piper actually must be someone who's been consistantly active.

[Yosarian2]

This still seems odd to me though.

Night One: BarryLocke, DizzyIzzyB13

If the piper can only recruit one a night (and it looks that way, by the rest of Izzy's list), then why were there two dancers night 1?

[Yosarian2]

BM is gleeful that he's manipulating the town into thinking that he can't be scum just because he can't be the piper.

when i die, you could tell them i'm scum, just to improve the town's confidence, and to confuse the living hell out of the baddies. Just a thought.

BM

BM, did someone just bet you that you couldn't make the scummiest post ever in a mafia game in 3 lines or less?

[Yosarian2]

Eh. He could be a dancing warewolf. (which is kind of a funny image. ) I don't really think it's all that likely (although the whole "i'm confirmed because I said mod should modkill lurkers" thing is just bad), but I'm not sure I can read BM at all; he had me fooled last game I was in with him until process of elimination set in.

[Yosarian2]

Do you have a better candidate in mind?

Good question. Let me see...

[Yosarian2]

I think this is the current player list...I just took out THe Replacement (who died last night) and put Zwet in as replacement for Millar.

2) MikeSC6 (Male, 19)
4) DizzyIzzyB13 (Female, 17)
6) Zwet

millar13

Xtoxm

(Male, 18),

Village Idiot

7) Rockatansky

knox

(Female, 18)
8) zwetschenwasser (Male, 1)
9) Yosarian2 (Male, 28),

Mayor

10) Jahudo (Male, 73)
11) Gorrad (Female, 42)
12) NabakovNabakov

Barrylocke

(Male, 19)
17) Dramonic

Firestarter

(Male, 32)
19) Ztife (Female, 24)
20) Starbuck

KaiveranZONEACE

(Male, 21)
21) Battle Mage (Female, 19)

[Yosarian2]

Actually, there were two dead people on that list, dramonic and old-zwet, my mistake.

Things we know:

Zwet is pro-town
Last night, two new people started dancing, and THe Replacment was killed (I asssume by the warewolves). So, I'm going to assume that both the piper and at least one warewolf were active last night, and going to suggest lynch out of the pool of active people.

People who are getting replaced: Battle Mage;Ztife;Rockatansky;Millar13.

(Battle mage dosn't actually count, since he clearly could have sent a choice in last night. Also, we know millar is pro-town)

Ok, that didn't actually help as much as I thought it would. Take those off, and we have:

2) MikeSC6 (Male, 19)
4) DizzyIzzyB13 (Female, 17)
9) Yosarian2 (Male, 28), Mayor
10) Jahudo (Male, 73)
11) Gorrad (Female, 42)
12) NabakovNabakov(Male, 19)
20) Starbuck (Male, 21)
21) Battle Mage (Female, 19)

Hmm. Well, assuming the piper isn't dancing, he must be one of

2) MikeSC6 (Male, 19)
9) Yosarian2 (Male, 28), Mayor
10) Jahudo (Male, 73)
11) Gorrad (Female, 42)
20) Starbuck (Male, 21)

I also don't really think Izzy or Nav look scummy to me, so I wouldn't really want to lynch one of them anyway.

So anyway, I'd be willing to lynch someone off that list (who's not me, obv). The piper is almost certanly there, and I strongly suspect that at least one warewolf is as well (There may be a lurker warewolf as well, but there must be at least one acitve one who sent the kill in, and I think it'll be on that list). So, based on process of elimination I would be willing to lynch one of ( MikeSC6, Jahudo, Gorrad, Starbuck); out of the 4 of them, I'd bet that at least 2 are scum.

Out of those, I know I was suspicious of Mike a few days ago (this game has been dragging on so long, I honestly don't remember why anymore), and Starbuck's seemed a little off to me today. I'll do some targeted re-reads at some point in the near future and try to be more specific then about who on that list I want to lynch today.

[Yosarian2]

Gorrad's age stands out a bit too, since everyone else is either in their 20s or teens.

Gorrad is in his 40s, and Jahudo is in his 70s.

Everyone picked their own age and gender when they joined the game, starbuck.

[Yosarian2]

BM is so the last werewolf.

"the last" warewolf? How many do you think are in this game, zwet?

[Yosarian2]

one or two.

This was a 21 person game...

[Yosarian2]

Gorrad's age stands out a bit too, since everyone else is either in their 20s or teens.

Gorrad is in his 40s, and Jahudo is in his 70s.

Everyone picked their own age and gender when they joined the game, starbuck.

Please remember that I replaced in when the game was very far in. I wasn't here at the beginning.

(nods) Yeah, I know, that's why I was lettign you know.

We all picked our gender and sex when we joined the game. I think it was before we got our roles, if I'm rembering correctly.

[Yosarian2]

Vote:Gorrad

Out of the 4 people on my list, he's been completely hiding in the background, and just being generally useless to the town, for basically the entire game, while sitlll posting often enough to not be replaced (and being around enough so he could easily have sent in either the wolf kills or the dancer targets).

[Yosarian2]

Yeah. Gorrad has been in the game for 4 months now, and has made not a single post at any point anywhere in the game that looks like honest scumhunting. He's probably scum.

[Yosarian2]

I'm vanilla.

And he claims vanilla with two votes on him.

Let's hang him.

[Yosarian2]

Meh. I don't have absolute disdain for your playing.

If you're town, then he's playing a heck of a lot better then you are this game, Gorrad. Of course, you're probably not town, so that's ok.

. Then, suddenly, I'm back IN the game and expected to do a huge reread of what I missed?

Sorry, not my bag. I'm vanilla, and therefore have NO vested interest in that as I'm basically a redshirt. Sure, I can distract the monster long enough for Kirk to blast him, but other than lynching? I'm useless.

Um...if you really were a vanilla townie, then I would expect you to try to find scum. Which you didn't do even on day 1. If you're not going to do that, then yes, you would be completely useless.

How the hell could a vanilla town have "no vested interest" in trying to find scum and play the game? I really hope that's a scum lie; otherwise, you should probably stop signing up for mafia games, if you're not going to play if you get vanilla town.

Plus, if you were actually concerned about your value as a "redshirt" as a guy who could take a scum kill, then you wouldn't have claimed vanilla so early.

Yeah, you're scum. At least, you'd better be.

[Yosarian2]

you should probably just go ahead and finish me off.

'k.

[Yosarian2]

Thanks, Starbuck.

I remember really not liking Yos D1, Mike. It's been a good while, though. I suppose I could try and dig up some quotes....

Uh...that's not at all what you said, day 1. All you said about me on day 1 was this:

Yos is speaking much sense. As usual. Jester talk does nada except distract town from a lynch of someone who could hurt the town later. Xtoxm's refusal to state anything makes it clear in my mind he's not working to help the town out here. He could be just waiting for an 'I told you so', that seems like his MO, but I rather doubt it. He's stupid, not an asshole.

BM's still my top mayor choice. I'll swap to Yos if the next votecount shows him ahead of BM.

And this:

As stated, I'm totally down with a Yos elect.

Unelect, Elect: Yos

You sure you're not thinking of a different game or something?

[Yosarian2]

Bah. Good game.

Yeah, I knew mike was scum from pretty early in the game, and I was pretty sure Starbuck was scum too, but I just couldn't seem to get them lynched.

NN, you played well. The biggest factor, though, is that a town this inactive really just can't win. It also didn't help that we had two separate times this game when a pro-town player lied for no good reason, was caught lying, and was lynched because of it; that, itself, really hurt us.

[Yosarian2]

It also didn't help that we had two separate times this game when a pro-town player lied for no good reason, was caught lying, and was lynched because of it; that, itself, really hurt us.

I was following the game on some level as it went on. Care to clarify on this?

Well, day 1 Xtoxm and Millar both lied about their role (both before and after the replacement), and were lynched because of it; they became a tree stump, but it was really just a waste of a lynch and of a pro-town body/vote. (They weren't "dead", but they couldn't vote, so it still brought scum one day and one body closer to a majority.)

Then day 2 Mufasa lied about his role. Day 3, it became obvious he was lying, but even when I gave him a chance to do so he refused to admit he had lied. He got lynched for that, and he was also town.

Really, town need to not do this, it's quite bad for the town; not only did it make us mislynch twice, it made us mislynch twice in ways that gave us no information, since when someone is caught lying like that anyone, town or scum, will vote to lynch them.

[Yosarian2]

Yeah, that wasn't good, that led to some of the problems that made the game crash due to lack of activity.