Newbie 853 (Endgame, Mafia win!!)

[Concerned]

/Confirm

[Concerned]

From what I can gather lurking is most decidedly anti-town but sadly not always indicative of scummy behavior.
Scummy behavior will indeed always take precedent for me in terms of who I vote for.
I realize I've basically just repeated what everyone else has said but, it seems to be the logical conclusion. It seems villagers get replaced for inactivity just as often as scum on this forum.

/VOTE VENDELWALKER
From what I understand, two votes are just as safe as one. Worst case scenario is that two villagers voted for the person and with only two wolves L-5 should be impossible even if the decide to jump on the bandwagon. Your logic is faulty, which although not indicative of scum in a noob game makes me wary.

@DTMaster, In a newb game an experienced player can take advantage of the logic fallacies of the new players, it might make spotting scum easier but it seems the most advantageous when an experienced player is scum. The experienced player could then point out the newb logic, to get the village to vote out an innocent (albeit newb) villager.
What do you think is the best way for us to spot newb logic as opposed to faulty and potentially scummy logic?

[Concerned]

EBWOP

VOTE : VENDELWALKER

Did not bold my vote.

[Concerned]

Let me explain: I know that DTMaster was using a joking reason for voting for LolIMadeAnAccount, but I was thinking of this: it could make other players, who don't want to be voted out, think "Hey great, let's take him, not me." What made me think of this kind of behavior is that I have seen it in real life, so I know people work this way. And I am thinking, this could be in DTMaster's mind also.

All right, I can agree to

weak

logic, but not

faulty

.

Vanilla's shouldn't have self-preservation at heart but I understand that noob villagers

might

not know this and vote for someone else to preserve their own lives. That said...

Your reasoning is based on DTMaster figuring that we have such villagers in this game and they all might jump on to the vote to save themselves. If DTMaster is scum that seems like a bit of a weak tactic to say the least. There would have to be at least three vanilla's with this faulty mindset plus his scum buddy for LolIMadeAnAccount to get lynched.

If you had told me you just stretched for a reason to randomly vote DTMaster and came up with something silly, I would be more inclined to believe it. It just seems like something you made up. An attempt to cover tracks which you didn't even leave.

[Concerned]

OK well firstly I bookmarked page one and posted without bothering to look if page 2 existed missing the two posts above mine, when I posted earlier.

I realize self defeatist play solves nothing and is poor play in general but his whole argument is based on the assumption the vanilla's are so eager to not be voted off they would jump on your second vote simply to not be voted off themselves.
I don't believe townies are willing to go such lengths to ensure their own survival.

I never said VT townies should not defend themselves. I understand we have to lynch scum by the end of day three or lose so losing villagers hardly helps. I think you misunderstood the point I was trying to make, whether deliberately or not I obviously don't know.

[Concerned]

If you had told me you just stretched for a reason to randomly vote DTMaster and came up with something silly, I would be more inclined to believe it. It just seems like something you made up. An attempt to cover tracks which you didn't even leave.

This particular quote is striking me as scummy. You're grasping at straws here and even admitting it in the same post!

Firstly my vote against vendel is obviously not serious, the very idea that I would have enough information after such a little bit of time to make a

serious

accusation is ridiculous. I was trying to pressure him for information and I think in doing so more information is now available to the town.

You say I'm grasping at straws when all I was doing was pointing out his bad logic, "grasping at straws" implies I was trying to build a serious case against him which is an incorrect assumption.

The townie should be playing to scum hunt, not to play as scummy townie looking for defense even if he is on the leading wagon. If a towns person decides to follow this path that you outlined he just self implicated himself as ultra scummy, making it an easy lynch against him.

I am well aware of this and this was precisely my point, vendel used the reasoning that townies would act in this manner when casting his vote. Clearly a flawed premise.

Actually we need to lynch scum before they have 50% of the population. Depending on the setup this may extend past day 3 FYI (ie a doctor protects someone, or we choose to not lynch on a day)

Granted . I shouldn't assume, but the likelihood of us needing to lynch a wolf by day three is still high. From what I have read, not lynching is usually not a pro-town tactic except for a few specific late game scenarios and it's not even certain that their is a doctor in the game.

[Concerned]

Firstly I made one comment after you originally voted DT, at that stage it was more of a random pressuring vote based on the only even slightly scummy play I observed.
My main arguments and suspicions came from how you then justified your vote in a way which made me suspicious. So saying I just took your one comment and "took this ball, ran with it" is completely false.

Secondly I said more information was now available to the town about you. Not once did I say this information pertained to you being scummy.
Yet you immediately claimed it was "one last attempt to cast suspicion" how is having more information on you an attempt to cast suspicion? The village having more information on you is only a negative for you, if you're scummy.

This last one sounds like, "I couldn't get more people to follow, so I'll turn around completely and say I wasn't serious, but I'll throw this one last attempt to cast suspicion on him out there - saying there is more information about Vendel to consider now...."

Here you just seem a little to eager to paint me as scum. Almost quoting me on something I didn't say. It's one thing to discredit my reasoning and posts, it's quite another to invent a thought process which isn't there.

Why is it so important to you that I am discredited, because my suspicions were on you?
I have no desire to "duel" with you, I am simply trying to gather information so I can make an informed decision when it is time to lynch.

[Concerned]

@VW, I dislike random votes and the RVS in general. I'd rather try to find a reason in which discussion can come from and before you say anything I realize that this could be exactly what you did with your reasoning. My goal in this whole discussion was information, despite what you are implying.

@Geek, I tried to use serious reasoning yes, as I said above I'm not a fan of random votes as I don't believe that they benefit the village at all. That said did I honestly expect to build a strong case that VW after such short a time? Of course not. That's all I've been trying to communicate.

@LolI, voting for yourself brought your tally up to three. Surely this opened yourself up to a hammer by the wolves? Do you think it was prudent to do this? Why?

[Concerned]

No I realize this . Was hoping for a different and therefore scummy response.

[Concerned]

t;]Firstly my vote against vendel is obviously not serious, the very idea that I would have enough information after such a little bit of time to make a serious accusation is ridiculous. I was trying to pressure him for information and I think in doing so more information is now available to the town.

You say I'm grasping at straws when all I was doing was pointing out his bad logic, "grasping at straws" implies I was trying to build a serious case against him which is an incorrect assumption.

Don't really like this. I'm not sure what, exactly, I'll try to articulate my uneasiness regarding this post later, it's not clicking right now.

/UNVOTE VENDELWALKER

/VOTE CRUELTY

I'm still waiting to here from you as to why my post made you uneasy .


@Ezekiel, don't you agree that feigning ignorance could be a very crafty way of remaining free of suspicion?

@DTMaster, who do you think came out the most scummy in my little "duel" with Vendel and why?

OT: My timezone is +2 so I might be a little out of sync with our American players.

[Concerned]

/UNVOTE

@DTMaster (post 67),
Can you explain what ISO means? I've checked in the wiki but it doesn't come up. I can make an a general assumption but exact wording would be nice.

As to what you actually said, it seems you're implying VW voted completely randomly and I based my entire case on a random vote, which is a complete fallacy. I based my first vote on his reasoning for the vote (which he admitted to being a bit weak), and my subsequent suspicions were based on his responses and not his vote. That said the whole point of my discussion with VW at least from my side, was to glean more information and in the end (although I'm not ruling out VW as scum) he came across as more pro-town than not.

ISO 5: Is an attack on you.
ISO 6: Is another attack on you.

This reads as fake case.

To me you come off as scummier with obvious misrepresentation of Vendel.

He attacked me, and I attacked him, we both used our own reasoning.

I don't see why my reasoning is any worse than his, obviously we can't base our cases on hard fact at this stage, hard fact is hard to come by in this game, we were doing the best we could to gain information from each other. It's a bit of a strong statement to say I obviously misrepresented Vendel, how are you so sure of that?

You just seem a bit too eager to paint me as scum.

This reads as fake case.

Kindly justify this statement. I would like to hear your reasoning.

@Cruelty, I intend to play aggressively. Do you think there is anything wrong with me playing this way?

@Lizzy Tsoi, firstly welcome to the game and thanks for the replacement . On to business:

What strikes me as faintly suspicious is Concerned's vote for Vendelwalker ("VW" - hope that's okay). VW's logic was not faulty. While two votes may not be truly dangerous in the RVS, a person placing anyone a bit closer to the lynch is suspicious. Why not choose someone who hasn't a vote yet? Or who hasn't posted yet?

VW logic was based on the assumption that pro-village players might follow suit on the bandwagon, which as far as I'm concerned (and I am lol) isn't stellar logic, villagers simply would not complete a bandwagon so early for the reason of "Hey great, let's take him, not me." as Vendel said all the way in post 1.

Once again why are you so convinced Vendel is pro town, do you really think voting for someone with no votes accomplishes more in the early stages. Can you explain this to me please?

[Concerned]

1. You didn't just attack Vendel, you misrepesented him with your "townie behaviour" case on him. If you read the full analysis, Vendel didn't comment on townie votes but you based your case on what he said was a townie behaviour.

Let me explain: I know that DTMaster was using a joking reason for voting for LolIMadeAnAccount, but I was thinking of this:

it could make other players, who don't want to be voted out, think "Hey great, let's take him, not me."

What made me think of this kind of behavior is that I have seen it in real life, so I know people work this way. And I am thinking, this could be in DTMaster's mind also.

All right, I can agree to

weak

logic, but not

faulty

.

Is this not Vendel commenting on towny behavior? Did I miss something here???

2. If you do use Vendel's vote at the beginning of the day and use that as your reasoning to attack Vendel for the above reasoning this is a false premise because:

I didn't use the random vote reasoning...

I believe you are actively scum hunting DT, but you have missed an important piece of information and based your suspicions on information which you missed.

OT: The ISO thing is neat .

[Concerned]

@Concerned

That is his reasoning for his RVS on me. Note that it was addressed to me on why it would make me scummy. Not on how this is a townie behaviour. if you focus on the bolded part:

I know that DTMaster was using a joking reason for voting for LolIMadeAnAccount, but I was thinking of this: it could make other players, who don't want to be voted out, think "Hey great, let's take him, not me."

It's a round about way to say: I am bandwagoning with a joke RVS vote. I'd prefer if Vendel clarified this detail.

Also if this was true: the last part:

All right, I can agree to weak logic, but not faulty.

Makes no sense if he was trying to reason town-DTM because he is maintaining his vote on me since he thinks I'm scummy-DTM. It would make it self contradictory in the first place.

I doesn't sound like joke reasoning and I certainly didn't interpret it as such.

Also I don't see how admitting that it was weak logic doesn't make sense. It

was

weak logic as we both acknowledged. To be honest I think we are wasting time on this and I

know

you are wasting time with your suspicion of me.

@Far-Cry, This is probably pointless as I doubt you are so inactive purposefully, but we could really use some input. How about an analysis on what has happened so far?

@BrotherNature, you've said you voted geek for information. If this is the case why did you retract your vote so quickly? It was the first game related post he had made since Sunday, don't you think we could have benefited from more info if you had pressed him further?

[Concerned]

Vote : brothernature

Everyone's too afraid to be the third vote on the wagon. When everyone knows the scumtells they lose their meaning.

[Concerned]

I don't quite understand your justification of your vote. What about scumtells losing their meaning...?

I wasn't justifying my vote. I was referring to the "the third or fourth person on a wagon is usually scum". It's a popular scum tell.

[Concerned]

Fos: Far_Cry, Ezekial

The way we all responded to Geeks original question i.e. "Scum before lurkers" made it very easy for scum to get away with not saying anything and I don't like it.
Being new to the game is not a good enough reason to avoid posting.

[Concerned]

I also only have a vague idea what WIFOM means but I think I see what Geek is trying to say.
Basically the argument that BN used:

Well, first, I would like to say this: Why would I want to draw attention to myself if I were scum? Scum's goal is too stay under the radar, and a self-vote like that would be sure to draw the attention of everyone in the game. Secondly, I was trying to create discussion. Vendel and Concerned had been there arguing for a page and a half. Rather than allow them to spam up the next 3 pages, I wanted to try and create some discussion in the form of a self vote. And it sorta kinda worked. We got maybe 3 or 4 posts on it.

Proves nothing, if it is generally acknowledged that scum should stay under the radar, then they would be easy to spot. Basically everyone under the radar would be scum, so in order to appear to not be scum, scum would make a concerted effort NOT to stay under the radar.

After this is established the village might think that people staying under the radar are actually pro town, so scum would be seen as the active players, therefore scum should GO BACK to staying under the radar etc etc etc

The argument can go on forever, and it will always be inconclusive. That's why it isn't a pro-villa excuse to use, it doesn't prove anything either way.

I'm starting to get a hunch that we are on to something with regards to BN. Many people have been the target of suspicion in this game and BN is the first one who just gives me a bad feeling.

His attitude just seems too much like a "hiding in plain sight" kind of vibe.

There's absolutely no way someone who votes for himself could possibly be a wolf right???

[Concerned]

Once again at the library. It seems I'm going to be frequent this place until I can do something about the situation.

The above speculation is WIFOM. If scum always laid low and didn't draw attention to themselves, then conventional tells would be meaningless. Additionally, why were you trying to disrupt the discussion between Vendelwalker and Concerned to begin with? Potentially trying to create a diversion away from a scum buddy?

No, because it was only the second page and they were sitting there over-complicating things that weren't complicated and didn't need complicating at all.

So claim time? Mkay. I claim cop. Anyone care to counter? I'd advise you not to, because then we'd know you're scum when I flip.

Hmmmm very interesting.

Well, first, I would like to say this: Why would I want to draw attention to myself if I were scum? Scum's goal is too stay under the radar, and a self-vote like that would be sure to draw the attention of everyone in the game. Secondly, I was trying to create discussion. Vendel and Concerned had been there arguing for a page and a half. Rather than allow them to spam up the next 3 pages, I wanted to try and create some discussion in the form of a self vote. And it sorta kinda worked. We got maybe 3 or 4 posts on it.

Tell me BN, why would you bring attention to yourself if you were cop?
I think a vanilla claim would have been the wiser move mister scum.

[Concerned]

Oh and I would not recommend a counter claim at this point. If we are playing one of the following settings:

Setting (one of these):
* 1 Mafia Goon, 1 Mafia Roleblocker, 1 Sane Cop, 1 Doctor, 5 Townies.
* 1 Mafia Goon, 1 Mafia Roleblocker, 7 Townies.
* 2 Mafia Goons, 1 Sane Cop, 6 Townies.
* 2 Mafia Goons, 1 Doctor, 6 Townies.

We only have a 50% chance of actually having a cop, and a 25% chance of having a cop and a doctor to protect said cop. Coming out now seems like a scummy way of ferreting out if who the cop is if we have one.

My thoughts are that BN is hoping we are playing a mode with no cop, or failing that, at least making it easier for his scum buddy by revealing our real cop.

I realize I am going to have major egg on my face if I am wrong but I think we have got one folks.

What I need now is unbiased input from the rest of the village. I'm willing to admit I may have succumb to tunnel vision in my over eagerness.

[Concerned]

"Whats that BN? All I heard was hawooooooooooo." - Concerned said as he tightened the noose .

[Concerned]

Tell me BN, why would you bring attention to yourself if you were cop?
I think a vanilla claim would have been the wiser move mister scum.

I didn't bring attention to myself. I posted my thoughts on certain things and you guys interpreted them as scummy. I didn't claim Vanilla because I'm not. Go ahead and lynch me. You'll see. But you'll regret it come Day Two.

When Geek first accused you of "drawing attention to yourself" why didn't you say that then. Why did you use a questionable WIFOM? Instead of just saying "I wasn't trying to draw attention to myself, you misinterpreted what I was trying to do."

Also your wishy washy scum hunting now mates perfect sense.

Reactions. I wanted to see if you'd freak out and overreact. Obviously, you didn't, and handled the situation as a townie most likely would.

You knew he reacted like a towny because you knew he was a townie, either that or it was a lame ploy to distance yourself from your scum buddy. Either way, wishy washyness explained .

[Concerned]

Whatever. I'm honestly beyond caring at this point.

Vote: brothernature

. Someone, please hammer. Good luck playing without your cop.

Well if you are the cop you deserve to get lynched for this.
Me and VW put some pressure on you and you fold like a wet cloth.
If you were innocent you should at least try and defend yourself, it shouldn't be that difficult considering your innocence right??

[Concerned]

STRONG REVOTE : BROTHERNATURE

I'm almost certain he is scum and on the small chance he isn't, he deserves to get lynched for giving up.

[Concerned]

No. I tried convincing you. You just waved them aside and kept repeating the same things. Over and over.

So I'm an overzealous bloodthirsty lynch-crazed fanatic.

I'm one person.
Last time I checked you needed 5 votes.
Really, Geek JUST unvoted.
You had your opportunity to make a case.

Lynch it.

[Concerned]

I'm giving up because your so stupid. I tried to defend my self, but EVERY TIME, you were all, NO! I DON'T BELIEVE YOU! YOUR SCUM! Every time. And just repeated the same facts. Over and over. Again and again. I don't see the point in even trying if I'm going to be lynched due to your tunnel vision.

Sigh and if I was scum?
Should you just fold as a power role, because one person keeps accusing you? I'll remember that next time I play scum, just accuse the power role until they lynch themselves.

You deserve to go. At this point I don't care if you are the doc, we're better off.

And I think Geek is right. Looks like L-0.

[Concerned]

No. Just Concerned. The rest of you are cool. And I was never joking about my claim.

Sigh, obviously I have nothing against you personally loli. The game was going no-where so I changed my approach to try and get something done.

It's a game, I was implementing a tactic.
If you are doc, you've just ruined it for the rest of us.
I love how you are trying to paint me as the bad guy when I'm just trying to play the game.

If you are doc you basically voted yourself to prove a point, if you don't want to play the game. Don't sign up.

[Concerned]

Concerned, why do you keep saying, if he's the "doc" when he claimed cop?

Lol where I come from we play with werewolves, seers and angels.
Gonna take a while to get used to the new roles, I'm not comfortable with them yet.
Don't see how it's a scum slip.

[Concerned]

If you're part of a scum team that has a mafia roleblocker and you know the cop has just been lynched, then you similarly know that there must be a doctor present; therefore, you could be slipping and making reference to the prescence of that role.

OK fair enough, I didn't consider that. I've given my explanation I assure you it is accurate, but I'm sure that's not going to convince you .
I suppose I will hope BN flips up scummy.

Anyway it's 4am here and my excitement at finding scum has somewhat dwindled now that the possibility of BN just having no spine has arisen. I'm off to bed.

[Concerned]

Blah, I can't even explain the depths of my annoyance with brothernature...

I'm hesitant to do anything rash at this point. Geek seemed just as suspicious as the rest of the active players (DT, VW, Cruelty) and now with geek and brother gone the bottom line is 3/7's of this game haven't been active enough for me to have any information on them at all... I'm starting to wonder if being inactive makes a player more likely to be scum or pro-village...

For now

VOTE : DTMaster

Time to talk.

[Concerned]

Oh and welcome Troll .

[Concerned]

While I'm doing that I'd like Concerned to explain why he's voting for DTMaster without giving any reasons

In time.

[Concerned]

/UNVOTE

My reason for the vote was simple, scum would feel more pressure on L-2 and hence divulge more information, players makes slips when they are nervous and I we are more likely to get a response that tells us something if a player is on L-2 then if they have a single meager vote.

Explaining this at the time would obviously render this moot. I can hardly say "My vote to add pressure in hopes of inducing a slip." it just alerts potential scum to what I am doing.

If you justify the reason for your vote straight away it just loses any potential impact it may have had.

I hardly think putting someone on L-2 is a "rash" move. No pro-village player would ever put him on L-1 after the first day and I don't think scum would make such a risky move as to hammer him either.
As far as I'm concerned it was perfectly safe to place DTM on L-2.

For now:
@DTMaster, you keep saying we lynched the cop who had no counter-claim against him but in this set-up if BN was scum there would only be a 50% chance that a counter-claim would come...

No counter claim simply wouldn't have proven his innocence. That said, I agree with you that the hammer was a bit rash. Although I find it hard to blame VW for this, as at that point in time I was so sure BN was scum I might have hammered him myself.

@Cruelty, I hope my explanation satisfies you for now, I would also like to add that my vote on you and Loli were not entirely unjustified either, the one on you in particular was more to get you to talk than anything else, after you cast suspicion on what I said without reasoning.



A lot has been said recently and I need a little more time to go through everything thoroughly before I contribute anything more meaningful.

[Concerned]

@Concerned, I don't have anything against pressure but using a vote without a reason isn't a particularly good form of it so far as I'm concerned. I find it much more effective to press on issues that exist involving the person to see if any slips show up. As for the vote being safe, town players are certainly capable of making mistakes. If brothernature wasn't evidence of that this game I don't know what would be. Assuming that no one would turn an L-2 into a lynch in this situation isn't something that I think is wise; if two people had cast more votes what would you have taken away from that?

Firstly I live the life of a lazy first year university student so in the event that someone did vote, I would have immediately unvoted if I could.
Obviously I'm not on my pc 24/7 (just almost ) and had there been a quick hammer on DTM and he flipped pro-village I would assume there would be at least one (if not two) scum who voted after me and depending on who voted, perhaps one scum before me.

I base this on the fact that, as you said we have a fairly knowledgeable group of players. If you, cruelty or lizzy had got on the wagon it would go against everything you have said and done previously.

Therefore I concluded that the only way DTM would have been lynched is if the wagon included at least some scum (more likely both, unless a pro-village Ezekiel was included, and he made a newb mistake).



To be honest I am a little wary of you Zorblag, I found this in the wiki under "How to be a good IC":

As scum, I think you should be as helpful as possible without compromising your own ability to win the game. Play like you would if you were scum in a regular game, but explain all the things that we assume players in regular games would know and understand. If you're scum, it's very important to sit down after the game and explain anything you omitted during the course of the game.... [Y]ou shouldn't purposefully give bad advice on how to play the game, because that turns people away when they find out you screwed them over like that just to win a newbie game when you're supposed to be helping them. - Mastermind of Sin

If you are scum it seems to me that voting Ezekiel is a good way of voting for a pro-villa player without giving us "purposefully bad advice" on someone innocent.
Not that I am certain Ezekiel is innocent, but considering he has given us virtually nothing to work on it's extremely difficult to say.

[Concerned]

@Zorblag, post 182.
I didn't say it was a scum tell I just said I am wary of you. Surely it's an understandable worry that someone with far more experience than me is scum, you're in a position that has a lot of influence with the players and since your over-all goal might not be a town win, I have to be careful of that.

As for the fact that a reasoned vote has greater pressure, if the reason you are voting is "I'm voting to increase the relatively small pressure of a single vote to a L-2 situation." I don't believe it's helpful at all to give my reasons.
By stating that I am voting to add pressure, it takes away the potential threat of the vote, as the player would know I am only voting to add pressure.

@Lizzy, post 183.
I gather that you are alluding to the fact that Geek was suspicious of me, and therefore if I was scum I might try to get rid of him that night. I am tempted to say that scum would never be that stupid but I realize that's a WIFOM situation.
All I can do is urge you not to jump to conclusions based on as little evidence as that.

I would also like to request that you articulate your suspicions and perhaps reveal who you find most suspicious at this point.

@Ezekial, post 189.
This isn't near enough for me.
Please explain:
- Why you think Vendelwalker is scum.
- Why DTMaster doesn't seem harmful.

It is starting to seem like you are only contributing enough to not get replace.
Posts without any meaningful content to not help the village.

@Concerned
A scum night kill will. Even scummy cop would get killed by mafia since he is game breaking against scum.

If there was no night kill then on day 2 I would test to see if brother's cop claim is true. These are the conditions I set for myself in all PR claims. Even scummy ones since I have experience with scummy PRs.

Please explain this to me, not your past experience but what you are talking about when you refer to scummy PR's and scummy cops. Maybe I am missing your point but I want to know what you mean when you refer to scummy PR's?

[Concerned]

@Concerned, being wary of players is a good move in general and there's no reason that I should be exempt from that but when you say something like:

If you are scum it seems to me that voting Ezekiel is a good way of voting for a pro-villa player without giving us "purposefully bad advice" on someone innocent.
Not that I am certain Ezekiel is innocent, but considering he has given us virtually nothing to work on it's extremely difficult to say.

I don't have any reason not to think that you might be taking my vote for Ezekial to be a scum tell because I'm an IC and it was an easy vote to cast or some such thing. My point is mostly that my being an IC isn't going to have any affect on who I choose to attack.

As for the fact that a reasoned vote has greater pressure, if the reason you are voting is "I'm voting to increase the relatively small pressure of a single vote to a L-2 situation." I don't believe it's helpful at all to give my reasons.
By stating that I am voting to add pressure, it takes away the potential threat of the vote, as the player would know I am only voting to add pressure.

And here you're missing the point that on day two you should be able to come up with some reason other than just wanting to apply pressure to vote for just about anyone. Saying that you're casting a vote just for pressure isn't helpful, you're right. At this stage in the game voting for no given reason isn't helpful either as it's going to make you look fishy. The reasons don't have to be overly profound but you should be able to give something. To adapt something you said to Ezekial, voting without meaningful reasons isn't helpful to the town.

All valid points. Obviously I'm fairly new to the game and still testing things out and developing my style.

I don't have much more to say at this point except that I'd like to hear from DTMaster and Lizzy.

As for the VW situation, I had semi-cleared him as villa earlier in the game, more on intuition than anything else. I'm not overly opposed to him being lynched, but before anyone hammers I'd like to hear an explanation from Ezekiel at the very least.

If VW gets lynched and flips villa I believe we should look very closely at Ezekial and to a lesser extent Zorblag.

[Concerned]

To clarify when I say an explanation from Ezekiel I mean I would like the reasons why you are voting for VW. (not that your vote was counted but my point stands)

[Concerned]

@Concerned, you say that you're not overly opposed to a Vendelwalker lynch right now despite having him semi-cleared earlier. I take it that's a result of the exchange that he and cruelty have been having today? I'd like to hear what you think of both of them based on what they've said. There are some accusations flying and you seem to be dodging responsibility for taking a side with post 201 while neatly pointing a few fingers ahead of time if we get one particular outcome.

-Zorblag R`Lyeh

Actually I "semi-cleared" VW in my mind fairly early in the game, we had that early back and forth and most of the players seemed to be more suspicious of me after the exchange, it seemed to me that if VW was scum it would have been fairly easy to press the case against me. Especially since he already had support against me, but he dropped the case this told me a few things:
- If VW was scum why drop the case on a villa, who already has suspicion on him.
- If VW was scum why change the attack from one villa (myself) to another villa (Brother).

To me it just doesn't make sense from a scum perspective to drop the case against one villa for another villa.


All this said, it's hardly concrete. Scum VW could have done this for any number of reasons. Even if VW flips villa I believe it tells us enough to catch a wolf in the next voting phase.
I don't have a stronger case against anyone else at the moment, so although I won't be a part of the VW wagon I'm hardly going to vehemently defend him for my reasons which simply aren't concrete.

I find the Cruelty / VW exchange to be largely pointless repetition. They are both accusing each other of lying but all of the perceived lies are just that. Perceived. They both seem to be looking at what each other has said from their own perspectives, and interpreting them in such a way that furthers their cause against the other player. I simply don't see all that much in the way of scum-tells in what either of them are saying.

As for "pointing fingers" if VW flips villa, I don't see a problem with that. Ezekiel's vote was completely unexplained and if it turns out VW is pro-village it makes Ezekiel look like he just jumped on to a pro-village wagon.
I also have to admit I am hugely paranoid about you, which is why I am perhaps over-analyzing everything you say. That said I still refuse to drop the possibility that you are scum.

@DTMaster, ah... understood, I thought you were referring to genuine scum PR's and I didn't see the relevance .

[Concerned]

@Concerned, that's a fascinating reason to have semi-cleared Vendelwalker. Looking back at his play I see that he didn't even cast a vote on you. In fact, the suspicion that you say built up around you based on the exchange seems to have culminated in a single vote from cruelty. I'm not particularly convinced that there's much of a case there on you that he was dropping.

Even if he was, why shouldn't scum move from one town case to another? Not even looking at the particular play involved here the scum don't have any particularly vested reason to get particular players lynched. Moving their votes and suspicion around can be advantageous as it allows them more flexibility to follow wagons as they see fit. If they're seen as set in stone with some view then a sudden change will look out of place which can be strategically devastating if it comes up at the wrong time.

Is there anyone else that you'd semi-cleared in this same manner on day one or was it just Vendelwalker?

As for how you're reacting to the cruelty-Vendelwalker discussion I'm getting from what you said that you're leaning towards no intentional misrepresentation on either side. If that's true then you're not finding scum there. Who are you looking at as more likely to be scum in that case and what are you doing to catch them? What I see is from your play since I've gotten here is largely reacting when people ask you questions along with a pressure vote with no reasoning behind it and now saying that you don't find the central issue that's come up so far today to be helpful to you in finding scum. I'd like to see more evidence that you care about figuring out who scum are proactively.

To follow up some on the pointing fingers bit, let me ask who you think we should be looking at closely if Vendelwalker flips scum?

Mod: Could you please prod Lizzy Tsoi?

-Zorblag R`Lyeh

I'd like to stress that although I may have filed certain people into the "less suspicious" category I certainly haven't cleared anyone at this point.
At the moment I find Cruelty and Vendelwalker slightly less suspicious, this is based on a culmination of a lot of small things and basically boils down to intuition, not much to go on at this point but it's all I have.

Also saying I haven't hunted scum proactively is simply not true, I answer all questions that are addressed to me but if you look at my posts in ISO my scum hunting is apparent virtually from the start of the game, maybe I am going about scum hunting in the wrong way, but I'm certainly trying the best I can with my limited experience.

What I see is from your play since I've gotten here is largely reacting when people ask you questions along with a pressure vote with no reasoning behind it and now saying that you don't find the central issue that's come up so far today to be helpful to you in finding scum. I'd like to see more evidence that you care about figuring out who scum are proactively.

This whole statement comes across as suspicious to me. You're saying I haven't contributed to scum hunting and also bring up my "pressure vote", you're basically painting me as scummy and I believe you neglected to mention my actual scum hunting for a reason.

I'm starting to develop a little theory. Hypothetically if VW did flip villa and you were scum you would need to discredit the only person to have shown any suspicion on you at all. I'm starting to believe you are setting me up to be the final lynch for the village and a scum win.

I suppose if VW flipped scum I would be the obvious choice, I'm certainly the only player VW has even come close to buddying. This certainly wouldn't be the end of the world in my opinion as one VT for one wolf seems like a fairly decent deal to me. Assuming the following scenario played out:
- VW (scum) lynched
- Myself (villa) lycned

The village would be three strong and the remaining mafia member should be quite obvious, not the worst resolution for the village.

[Concerned]

Concerned, though, is making me concerned. I feel he has too much of a follow-the-leader behavior on cases and, given my estimation of his game knowledge, it looks more like scum trying to lay low but active just enough to pass on the blame for a bad case to a townie. [It feels like Concerned is adding strength to VW's cases and using him as a screen. Though because of recent attacks specifically on him he's being more independent in his choice/style of arguments.]

I have a practical in ten minutes but I would like to say this first.

I feel you have (deliberately or not) misinterpreted how I have been playing and I don't like it.
- Please provide examples where I added strength to VW's cases.
- Please point out where I "laid low".

[Concerned]

Sorry for the inactivity. Finals have started and I write my first exam this afternoon. It's the only one I'm worried about so I should have more than enough time after it's finished. I'll post properly tonight (+2GMT).

[Concerned]

Ok I have some time this afternoon so I'll do my best to contribute.

I don't like the speed at which the game is going at the moment either, and I know I am a large part of why this has occurred but there hasn't been genuinely helpful content since about 5 RL days ago. Most people seem to have just stated "I don't like how this is going." and left it at that.

I'm really dislike Lizzy's style of just wishy washiness in general. I feel like she is not aggressive enough to actually put pressure on suspected players.

I need to point out that what I'd posted weren't cases on anyone. They were my impressions and interpretations of how people have been acting. I grant you that my posts have been a bit vague, but it's because they are not hard cases on anyone - just feelings from what I've been able to understand and see. I'm attempting to put something of myself out there for town to use, but I can't do any more from what I have to go on.

This is just an example of what I mean. If Lizzy is scum, it makes sense that she wouldn't have any solid reasons to build a case agaisnt anyone, because anyone she potentially built a case agaisnt would be a villa.
Maybe it's just her play style but to me her fence sitting atitude isn't helping the village, whether this is because she is scum or not is still to be seen. For now all I can do is keep an eye on her.

For now I am going to

VOTE: EZEKIAL

He has frustrated me time and again with his lack of content, you could literally fit everything he's said into any one of Zorblag's posts and it just doesn't help us at all.
What he has said has made little sense and his attack of VendelWalker just seems like to much of an excuse to jump on a villa who is under heavy suspicion.

I find it ironic that he suspects VW based on his lack of posting when he himself has contributed the least in this thread.

Vote: VendelWalker

Well I don't really know how to put it into words but it was something I read something back, that gave me the impression that he's got an hidden agenda.

You never told us what this was, can you please articulate exactly what made you feel this way.


All of this said I need to look at VW in ISO. I think I have been a little silly in semi-clearing him, I need to have a re-look.

[Concerned]

I just don't see how a period of inactivity is a scum tell.
He could be busy, like me and DTM were/are.
He could be bored of the game.
He could be on a short vacation.
His internet connection could be down.

I hate to keep defending VW but I don't see how any of the above are scum tellsl.
Can you rather find examples in VW's posts that make you suspicious.
I just want something substantial from you.

[Concerned]

Well it's 6 days to deadline.
VW is L-1.
DTMaster is the only one yet to place a vote.

I think we need to hear from DTM and VW.
I have a few inquiries I'd like to make but they rely on VW being innocent, something which obvious has yet to be determined.
I almost feel like I should hammer VW for information's sake but I refuse to hammer someone I believe innocent.

[Concerned]

@Vendelwalker, just some food for thought, the only ones who would have known that brothernature wasn't scum and therefore was worth defending would be the scum themselves. You seem pretty keen on making sure we know that you thought that for most of the day yesterday. Being the only person to have seen something that doesn't seem obvious at all to me in this case doesn't strike me as that much of a point in your favor.

Hmmm I know this is a double (arguably a triple) post but I just picked this up upon another reread. It's something that VW, Cruelty and DTM seem to have missed/ignored.

It's actually a very solid point that just highlights the futility of the argument of "Is VW lying about defending Brother or not." Perhaps VW is scum but I can't accept the argument of "VW didn't really defend Brother, and he claimed he did. Thus he is scum." when in the end it's irrelevant as a scummy VW could have countless reasons to defend Brother.

With this in mind I do have a question for some of the players.
@VW, Why is it so important to you that you convince us you actually did defend BrotherNature?

@Cruelty, You seem to feel VW DID NOT defend BrotherNature, if VW was defending Brother how do you feel this makes him more pro-villa?

@Ezekial, I haven't forgotten about you. More justifying your suspicions without the "VW is inactive BS.

[Concerned]

@Concerned, have you done your isolation read of Vendelwalker yet and do you think that Ezekial would be a better lynch at this point? I agree that we need to get more out of him (though at least he's posting now which gives us something to work with) and although I'm bothered by Vendelwalker's recent disappearance (I can think of a couple game related reasons that might have caused it which seem to be independent of alignment) I'm not currently opposed to an Ezekial lynch. For me it's mostly a matter of lack of information as opposed to what looks like misinformation.

To be honest no, I hadn't done the ISO. I've skim read this thread many many times, but his complete ISO seemed a tad intimidating, however I've done so now.
My general impression is that of an active scum hunter but perhaps I am underestimating the player level here. VW is quite capable of being scum and appearing to scum hunt. I suppose it would be to easy if this were not the case. That said, I

think

he is pro-villa but there are certain things I picked up which worry me.

Firstly he does seem to be fairly certain at some points that BrotherNature is pro-villa and it doesn't seem like he has all that much reasoning to believe this. This comment in particular strikes me as odd.

Vote: brothernature

String him up, no jury in the world would convict us. Then we can go back to playing the way it should be played. Bye, Loli.

His last comment is almost acknowledging the fact that he is well aware Brother is innocent i.e. why would a jury need to convict us if Brother was scum, I certainly wasn't sure at that point in time.
Maybe he was just saying "No jury would convict us in the event of him being pro-villa." Hard to say.

This also bugs me and it's along the same line of thought.

Everyone? I made the point several times that the strange behavior (not talking only about the bandwagoning here) could simply be your personality, and wasn't a sure sign of scummyness. And geekalicious unvoted, bringing the vote down to three. But you go and suicide in so many ways: sounding arrogant - you have to agree on that, joke-claiming cop and daring the cop to reveal himself and be night killed, and then self-voting....

This quote is taken after BrotherNature reached L-0 but before his alignment was announced. To me it seems like he's trying to distinguish himself from other people on the bandwagon, already he is trying to say "I was opposed to this lynch." before we even find out that the lynch was a mis-lynch.


The other thing is that after BrotherNature flipped cop, he basically attacked DTM and Cruelty for starting the bandwagon and ignored me. I don't really see why I was free of suspicion here, but this point has already been brought up. If VW had cleared me in his mind at an earlier stage in the game, then it makes sense.

In fact if you work along the lines of "A pro-villa VW was fairly certain myself and BrotherNature were pro-villa."
I have very little suspicion on him. I certainly do this myself, attempting to clear players who I think are acting pro-villa in an effort to narrow down suspects.



My general feel is that VW is pro-villa, but there is enough suspicious behavior there that I am willing to acknowledge the fact that he may be scum. Is he a better lynch than Ezekial? Hard to say considering how little Ezekial has contributed. I will say this however, if VW and Ezekial are both pro-villa I would far rather have VW around.

[Concerned]

Firstly welcome XScorpion .

Secondly I don't really have time to add anything substantial at this point but, I have a quick question.
If we reach deadline and no-one has reached L-0 what happens?

[Concerned]

Sorry I had back to back to back midterms and it's killing me. I'll post ASAP but I want the town to compile all their questions into a post so it'll help coordinate my posting. Rather then a wall/certain post analysis I'll get back into this game starting from there.

Personally I would just like your opinion on who you think is scummy at this point and perhaps your vote.

[Concerned]

Wrote my second exam today, that's why I've been slightly absent these past two days.
For now welcome Agar .
Haven't read anything yet (did notice the second vote on me however), because my brain is a tad fried but I'll contribute properly after a hour or two, I really need a nap.

[Concerned]

OK I needed that. Glad to see we've had a nice bit of activity lately.

Firstly I think I need to say my piece about the VW/XScorp spot.
Yes I defended VW, but I honestly believed he was town and still do for that matter. Perhaps there is no reason for townie to defend townie, perhaps that's generally accepted play at least, but if that's the popular belief then I just don't subscribe to it.
I believed VW was innocent, I believed lynching him would have sent us straight into LYLO, I got this belief from a general feeling of how he was playing, perhaps I was/am incorrect. I never claimed to be the mentalist, but that was my opinion and I didn't feel right letting VW get lynched when I truly believed his innocence. In short, I think that slot is townie, I believe that. Yes I could be wrong but that's what I believe.

To answer Lizzy/Agar's queries no, I am not going to change my vote. The main reason I voted Ezekial was for his completely unreasoned vote on VW (a player I believed townie) which to me looked like an easy bandwagon jump for a scummy player. Him lurking certainly didn't help matters but that was still the main reason.

On top of that Agar's posts have hardly done anything to convince me otherwise.
- I don't think acting emotional is a scum tell at all and to be honest prior to your post I had actually thought acting emotional was a scum tell (thought I read it somewhere). Not that I picked up emotional behavior from VW but there it is.
- I find it rather ironic that one of your reasons for your suspicion of me is my buddying up to VW when you seem to be doing something very similar at the moment.
- You are using the fact that myself and cruelty did not unvote on the claimed cop as a scum tell, as if we were supposed to have the clairvoyance to realise that VW would hammer. Not to mention the fact that BN was acting scummy at the time.

I'm perfectly happy with my vote at this point. Sadly I don't have anyone else who I am confident enough to finger but I will give my read on the other players thus far.

- Cruelty, I'm leaning villa
- XScorp, I'm leaning villa
- DTM - Completely unsure.
- Lizzy, Unsure, she seems to be a little too solidly behind my lynch, and if she were scum she would know I would flip villa. I would expect scum to be slightly more hesitant, in order to cover their ass.
- Zorblag, I'm leaning villa, it still worries me that he may be manipulating me, but he seems to be acting completely pro-town. Hard to justify suspicion for pro-villa behavior .

[Concerned]

The deadline is tomorrow I believe?
I'd like to know at what time and at which GMT, because I will jump on the XScorp wagon to prevent a no lynch if it looks like we will run out of time.

(I'm at GMT+2)
I'll wake up early tomorrow to check the deadline so I know what I must do.
If I check right before the deadline and the only person on L-1 at the time is myself I will gladly suicide if need be.

[Concerned]

Concerned, I don't like that you're willing to jump on XScorp/VW's wagon and I don't like your professed willingness to hammer yourself. Both options that you've stated would, since you obviously maintain that you're town, make it so that you'd be mislynching either way (since you are leaning toward thinking XScorp/VW is vanilla).

Yes by jumping on the XScorps ladder I would be lynching a player that I believe villa and suiciding would certainly certainly be a mis-lynch.
However I believe it is far more important for a town win that SOMEONE is lynched rather than no-one.
If we don't lynch we are left in exactly the same situation we are now (minus one probably pro-villa player). I think it's far more important that the town receives the results of a lynch, regardless of whether it's a mis-lynch or not.

Do you find this reasoning dis-agreeable? If you do, why is that?

[Concerned]

^^ so by your logic, it would be scummy for me to save myself by voting you and making it a no-lynch in response to you voting for me?

Haha it'd be annoying but I'd have to hammer myself before the deadline I guess .

Which is why it's important to know when that is. Remember I have a timezone clash here.

This is more of a hypothetical discussion atm, I still have hopes we will lynch a wolf. It's certainly preferable to suiciding.

[Concerned]

As Zor says we have far more time than I thought we have. It's basically another whole day to discuss. So the talk below may not be relevant.
Let's see what DTM does and observe if anyone changes there vote.

If our situation does not change by about 4pm tomorrow, using EST time we we may have to consider self hammers.
The town has to decide whether they would prefer me or XScor to self-hammer (not sure if Agar is willing).

I think we need to establish the ground rule, and myself and XScor are active enough that we shouldn't miss this:

IF I AM ON THREE VOTES BY TOMORROW 4PM EST I WILL SELF-HAMMER AND IF I FAIL TO DO SO, INSTA-LYNCH ME THE NEXT DAY. I WILL HAVE ACCESS TO INTERNET TOMORROW AND FREE TIME. DO NOT ACCEPT ANY EXCUSE FOR ME NOT HAMMERING MYSELF, SHOULD THE DEADLINE PASS.

I'd like XScor to offer us similar assurances. I don't want us to be in a situation where someone is on 3 votes, we expect him to hammer himself, and he fails to do so. If a person says he/she will self-hammer and fails to do so I will not accept excuses. I suggest you do the same for me.

4pm EST is about when I hit the sack, and I won't be able to vote after (I actually have an exam the next day).

[Concerned]

@Concerned/Scorpion
Ok what the eff. You do realize that if you Concerned and/or you Scorpion are town and you self hammer lynch this puppy to the deadline you just put us into lylo scenerio. Stop this self voting business and get back you scum hunting you two. It both reads as self defeatist and just plain anti-town to do something like that. And you can almost say it's scummy to appeal to the masses that way.

I understand that but we're in a bit of a desperate situation at this point. Do I have enough evidence agaisnt Agar/Ezekial to convince another two townies to vote for him? Probably not.

I'm also starting to get a weird feeling about Lizzy. The whole "I've changed my play style for this game because everyone was doing a good enough job." just doesn't satisfy me. It's starting to seem like she's realized her scum style of play has a noticeable difference and is now covering her ass.
But is it even conceivable that I will convince another three people of my suspicions? Probably not.

It comes down to the fact that finding out whether myself or XScorp are villa might be the only information we can get at this point.

[Concerned]

I'm up late studying for one of my finals.
I'll hammer XScorp in an hour and a half (when I'm finally gonna go to bed), if we are still in the situation we are now.
Unless Zorblag changes his vote to me in that time, in which case I will self-hammer.

That is all. I need to cram.

[Concerned]

/VOTE XScorpion

Despite everything I sincerely hope you're scum. Otherwise we're in for a rough day 3...

[Concerned]

VOTE : XScorpion

Just doing things properly.

[Concerned]

Wow, the kill surprises me a little. During the night I managed to convince myself of an Agar/Lizzy scum pair, and now one of my prime suspects gets killed.

I'm now inclined to believe that Agar's scum partner is DTMaster not so much out of scummy behavior but more due to the fact that Zorblag and Cruelty come across as more pro-town at this point.

I also looked at their posts in ISO and they have very little to do with one another. DTM comments once or twice about Ezekial lurking and there is one other exchange in which DTM shares his opinion with Agar on emotional responses, but they never really defend each other and they never really attack each other. It's hardly a definitive scum tell, but in my fairly limited experience scum generally try to have nothing to do with one another, in support or agaisnt. It's hard to be certain about DTM, if Cruelty and Zorblag are scum I would be surprised but they both seem to be good enough players to pull off convincing townies as scum.
Another thing that supports the DTM is scum theory is how late DTM casted his vote on VW, I believe he may have been hesitant to jump on a wagon which would soon be revealed towny and only did so because he had little choice.

Agar on the other hand remains my prime suspect, my current theory is that when he first replaced in for Ezekial he realized Ezekial's vote on VW was a shaky one and unreasoned one, which would look even worse when VW flipped villa.
I believe he switched to the only other towny under suspicion at that time so he would look less guilty when VW was lynched (as looked likely at the time). I was never quite convinced about his reasoning to be suspicious of me "Not building my own cases and jumping on to what VW did" was more or less the reason from what I can remember, which I just don't think is accurate. I may have defended VW but I don't think you can make a convincing case that I just jumped on to his arguments.
I feel he was looking for a reason, and he decided that was good enough.

He also seemed awfully certain Cruelty was tunneling, and I believe his convictions that XScorp was villa so close to when he was about to get lynched a tad suspicious, yes I felt the same way, but I had felt that way for a substantial amount of time and Agar believing that just before his almost inevitable lynch just seems a little to perfect to me.

Lastly I find this last post quite suspicious in itself:

Of course. What I meant to say with that post was that I'm not concerned about not getting info from the lynch. Wording things isn't a strong point for me sometimes.

Perhaps this is slightly knit-picky but at this point he seems to know we are in fact going into lylo. Like brother before him, at this stage before the mod post I was still hoping the lynchee was going to turn out to be scum. It just seems like he is fairly certain that we are in fact entering Lylo.

It's late so I still have some serious rereading to do, but I wanted to share my thoughts before I hit the sack

HoS : Agar

[Concerned]

@Concerned, I'm not thrilled with DTMaster's play at the end of the day yesterday either and I started to complain about it some. On the other hand, unless there's some compelling evidence to link two players I'd rather keep focusing on getting a first scum rather than trying to hit both at the same time. Finding one scum is almost always easier than nailing both before you know either one's alignment for sure.

Fair enough, but with five people in the game and 40% being scum, I can't help but wonder "If X is scum, who could his possible scum-buddy be?".

I have another exam tomorrow so expect limited activity from me until it's over. Shouldn't be more than a day and a half's absence.

[Concerned]

Exceptionally busy, apologies all round, I know it doesn't help anything.
I'll read what's been said and comment as soon as I have time.

[Concerned]

Once again extremely sorry about this. I just can't justify the time it would take to read over what's been said and comment when I have such important finals to write. After my exam tomorrow my next one is on the 24th so I will post tomorrow evening without a doubt!

[Concerned]

OK have some blessed time, quite a bit to catch up on. First I feel I need to explain a few things regarding myself before I continue with the hunt.

There seem to be two main points agaisnt me, the first being that I didn't push my case agaisnt Lizzy "Yesterday" and the second seems to be the redressing of me not unvoting the claimed cop back on day 1.

To address the Lizzy issue, yes I was fairly suspicious of Lizzy on day 2 but at the time I felt pushing my case at such a late hour, on someone who was not at the time under heavy suspicion and who had no other votes cast on her at the time, was completely pointless.
Furthermore although I was suspicious of her, I certainly didn't think she was more suspicious than Agar at the time, I saw no reason to push a case agaisnt the person who I felt was the second most scummy that day.

As for not unvoting the claimed cop, I will be the first to admit I succumbed to rather sever tunnel vision. At the time I didn't even seriously consider the possibility that BrotherNature was the doc, I only really started having doubts after he reached L-0 and was still claiming cop.
Yes I know tunneling is bad but this issue has been discussed at length, Brothernature was simply acting too scummy to justify me unvoting.

Personally I find both these reasons to be rather weak. I think Agar is stretching at this point.

Ok, people want scumhunting, I guess I'll provide what I got.

I've become more suspicious of Concerned for a few points. You already know my base of this belief, but if you don't, do my iso and read it.

New interests:

#1 - Post #329 - Concerned basically makes a plea to the masses with a "woe is me, I guess I'll self hammer" post. Also pushes the idea that maybe XScorp should self-hammer.

#2 - He was calling Lizzy out on her playstyle in the 11th hour to make for some kind of fake scumhunting effort.

#3 - His first post today calls me out for jumping on to the belief that VW/XScorp was town in the 11th hour, even though I had stated pretty much from the get-go that I felt XScorp was a town player and that you guys were beating down the wrong path. He then proceeds to throw a HoS based on a twilight post which occurred after our lynchee had claimed townie. Now obviously, XScorp could've been lying, but I really don't think there was a reason for him to lie at that point.

My second suspicion lies in DTMaster. You're grasping at straws with some things, and turning a blind eye to others. You post that I should've posted a massive case at 3 AM, and you call me out because I didn't throw up a wall of text in the 11th hour. Yes, I could've likely pushed harder to get Concerned lynched yesterday, but everyone was so set in their ways on the XScorp wagon that it wouldn't have mattered.

As for most of what you're accusing me of, in not pushing a case and such, Concerned is doing all of the same. The only difference is Concerned didn't oppose a self-hammer (which I only opposed in the case that there were other options) and he ended up voting for XScorp. But he admitted that he also had a gut feeling (mind you, for a longer time than myself apparently - because I had that feeling in the 11th hour) that XScorp/VW was a vanilla townie and that the scum duo was myself and Lizzy. Rather than pursuing this, he simply said "But I guess I can't convince you of this" and in the end decided to hammer on XScorp. Does that not reek of a cop-out to you?

But in essence, that's the very thing you're accusing me of, but you turn a blind eye to Concerned.

Re: Cruelty's post, I'm providing more than one, because honestly, I'm suspicious of all of you for that half-assed lynch yesterday. Concerned and DTMaster are my top two, but all four of you had very weak cases on VW but let the lynch go through without really investigating other avenues. It was mostly based on the fact that you had a cop who claimed, and one person called bullshit and others followed. You all turned a blind eye to Concerned (who also voted on a

claimed cop

) and you all focused hard on one person for Day 2 without really pushing into other avenues. You were like sheep led to the slaughter, following one lone mislynch and now we're in lylo with two scum creeping among the five of us and everyone panicking at the fact that I wasn't on the bandwagon.

This post to me makes me more than uneasy for a variety of reasons:
- Agar goes on at length about the fact that I supported the idea of a self-hammer or hammering someone I believed scum, when it was something that needed to be done for the village at the time. He's trying to make a big deal out of something that was necessary for the town, and I don't think Agar is stupid enough to not see why it needed to be done. It's just more "false evidence" Agar is trying to conjure in an attempt to incriminate me.
- He is comparing his not pushing his case, to my one post "case" on Lizzy where I voice my suspicions. In the end I still though Agar was scummier at the time.
- The last paragraph I find particularly interesting, he basically berates the entire village for their weak cases on XScorps (despite thinking XScorps was town, I'm not sure the cases were weak...), and goes on to point out how cruelty turned a "blind-eye" with regards to me, it seems he is referring to the fact that I didn't push the case on Lizzy yet again, another attempt to steer the village in my direction it would seem. The whole aggressive attack vibe that is on display in this paragraph makes me think he is trying to forcibly remove suspicion from himself. Trying to induce guilt about past decisions, in an effort to remove pressure from himself. What I'm trying to say is he seems to be deliberately belittling the day 2 lynch and everyone on it, in an effort to make himself look less scummy for not being on the wagon.

As for Concerned, he pretty much said "I think Lizzy is scum, but whatever, let me vote for XScorpion, I can't change anyone's minds."

Reads like scum painting, taking my suspicions of Lizzy completely out of context. Basically misquoting what I said.

As for the night kill, I have my own views on why the scum killed Lizzy, but since they are heavily WIFOM and supplemented by the fact that I know I am town, sharing them seems pointless.

The last thing I would like to point out is the very wishy washy suspicions DTM and Agar exchanged after I came out and basically accused them of being scum buddies. I pointed out how they didn't have much to do with each other up until that point and I believe they felt they needed to rectify this, what's interesting is that in post 394 by DTM, when he gets to the bit where he addresses Agar he starts out half-heartedly accusing him, but ends up basically agreeing with what Agar has said about me, subtly adding to the case.
I don't really think DTM has enough evidence agaisnt him to be clear scum at this point but I thought I would share my train of thought at this time.


I may have missed someone said above, I didn't read everything

thouroughly

particularly DTM's posts which I find kinda difficult to follow. If you want to bring something to my attention let me know.
That's all I have for now, I'll follow what's happening more closely in future.

[Concerned]

As I said earlier I have an exam tomorrow (the 24th) it's also my very last one so from then on I'll give my full attention to the game.
That said I have been reading over everything people have said and I simply don't have all that much to add.
At this point I'm willing to actually vote but considering I could potentially lose the game for the village if I'm wrong, that idea won't be looked upon favorably.

Either way I'll continue with the hunt tomorrow, I just need to get this last exam out of the way.

[Concerned]

Prod received, replacement really not necessary, I've been more or less here. I just don't have all that much to add at this point. I'll post something substantial within the next day guaranteed. Thanks for the extension Sironigous.

[Concerned]

OK well sadly I don't have as much to add, as I've said before.
The reason being, I am sure enough in my mind that Agar is scum, that not much he could say is going to convince me otherwise.
It's not just his scummy behavior but also the fact that "I believe players x and y to be pro-villa, I am not sure about player "z" so I shall vote for player A".

I find DTM scummy enough to vote for as well, but his posts are very difficult to follow for me, and it's therefore hard for me to get a solid read off him.

Cruelty I believe to be pro-villa, call it buddying if you must, he's done enough to convince me that he isn't scum. Since he is unlikely to be lynched today, I will deal with the possibility of him being scum tomorrow, if it comes to that.

Zorblag has worried me since he joined the game, the fact that he suspects DTM the most makes me a little concerned because he is the only other scum partner I'm willing to consider for Agar, I'm not saying him suspecting DTM makes him scummy, I'm just saying it worries me because I see the path to a Agar + Zorblag scum win.

Therefore from my perspective, the best vote is Agar, in my eyes he has exhibited the most suspicious behavior, and has shown he is the least pro-villa.
I worry about a Zorblag + Agar scum partnership as Zorblag has been a little to quick to defend Agar in the past (aside from the vote Zorblag made when he first arrived) but if i must I could probably bring myself to vote for DTM if it comes to that (particularly if Cruelty is on the wagon).

[Concerned]

Vote: Concerned

I'm going to give everyone a chance to post now. Is it fair to say that if the scum doesn't now hammer me, either myself or Agar is scum?

It will be good to know for certain that I was right.
As a side note, OMGUS? I think you will find I have been suspicious of your slot long before you have been suspicious of me.

I haven't voted yet because I feel it is to risky to do so unless I am as certain as I will ever be, if I am wrong about you it means I could potentially lose the game for the village, not something which I want to do lightly.

As it is, I'm fairly sure at this point that you are in fact one of the scum, I'll let some of the other players talk before I cast my vote.

[Concerned]

Now that Agar has voted for me I'm not really comfortable voting for anyone else.

Vote: Agar

As cruelty said we can be fairly sure either me or Agar is scum, his willingness to vote off DTM concerned me, he could just be willing to vote off his scum buddy to make himself look innocent, but there is another possibility, where Zorblag and Agar are the scum and voting off DTM would be an easy win.
Zorblag has already said he finds DTM most suspicious and now that I said I might be willing to vote off DTM, Agar is suddenly willing to do the same.

Voting DTM off might be a big mistake for us.

[Concerned]

DTM if you are town you are barking up the wrong tree with your appeal to Agar. I'm the other townie.
However I'm hardly willing to vote for Zorblag when Agar could easy come in behind me and hammer if you are his scum partner.
We'll see what Cruelty thinks about this but we are running out of time.

[Concerned]

Concerned: Your AtE is less flattering considering you did:

As cruelty said we can be fairly sure either me or Agar is scum, his willingness to vote off DTM concerned me, he could just be willing to vote off his scum buddy to make himself look innocent, but there is another possibility, where Zorblag and Agar are the scum and voting off DTM would be an easy win.
Zorblag has already said he finds DTM most suspicious and now that I said I might be willing to vote off DTM, Agar is suddenly willing to do the same.

Voting DTM off might be a big mistake for us.

As part of your case against Agar.

Do you mind if I ask what AtE is?

All I was trying to point out in the above comment was that: Either me or Agar are likely scum, considering we have now voted.

Therefore I know that Agar is likely scum and at the very least the village knows one of us is probably scum, I would rather we vote for someone who is almost definitely scum than take a stab at someone else. Especially since from my perspective it's probably either you or Zorblag who are the last scum.

[Concerned]

EBWOP:
Since we are so near deadline I think it's fair to ask that everyone keep fairly active today? It would be nice if people stayed on hand for discussion.

[Concerned]

It wasn't an appeal to emotion I was simply sharing my thoughts, if you look at it from my perspective for a moment you will see that it's hardly an unreasonable analysis.

Anyway it's out of my hands at this point.

[Concerned]

vote: AGar

I honestly don't know, working without enough information. Sorry if I missed scum, town.

Fear not, you haven't missed scum.

The scum hammer claiming victory is not going to come.
At this point we just have to rely on the last towny to vote before the deadline.

The only way we can mess up now is if the last townie fails to hammer before the deadline. By all means take your time (whoever you may be) but not

too

much time.

[Concerned]

Vote: Agar

Since cruel decided. If Agar flips scum then tomorrow its a troll lynch since we have two confirmed townies: Concerned and Cruel.

Cruel is confirmed through his end day posting.
Concerned is confirmed if Agar flips scum.

Nice try but you're just as likely to be scum. We'll see what happens tomorrow.

[Concerned]

lol DTM it's over bud, give up .

A bit disappointing scum won in the end, but it was still a fun game imo.
It's ironic how all of our early paranoia about the mastermind IC turned out to be correct .

I learned a lot in the end, gg wp.

P.S. I don't really think DTM was to blame any more than any other villa (apart from maybe Cruelty)