Mini 892 - Mayor Mafia (GAME OVER)

[SerialClergyman]

Yep, it's worse than usual, and it's directed at people who suspect you. You have been next to useless today and have an attitude that doesn't match that contribution. Normally when you are prickly it's to discourage argument and force your opinion. When you haven't contributed much and don't have much to go on or much of a theory about the game, I don't get why it's even more forceful than usual. One solid reason is that it completely discourages suspicion of you, and I'm officially calling you out for being pretty useless so far.

You are correct that I've only seen a post D1 DDD though, meta might be on the cards. Still - it's hardly a town tell, it seems all you are saying is that you're always prickly, in which case I've still got your weak votes and general uselessness to go by.

I'm not trying to hti you for anything, I'm lookign at yoru total suspicions all game, which have been on probably 3 of the most likely to be targetted by scum (with only kyle putting his hand up for that group). But even if it was early, so what? You don't have to have a good reason for voting Kerrigan, but I'd expect you to have some reason. Was it a random vote?

I'm not falling into any trap. I have as scum and town both pushed and not pushed for a power role lynch after a claim.

In this particular case, I think it's worth the risk. He's there, he's claiemd, we can lynch him if need be later. Cop is a dangerous role and very powerful, no matter what results he gets (ie innocents are good too, unlike no results from docs/trackers/watchers etc). Keeping him alive is the safe option.

D1, important role, other suspects - that's not worth pushing through a lynch.

Even if you think Money is scum, I see no real harm in keeping him alive tonight.

[Hoopla]

Hoopla, are you on full internaet access now?

No! But I am working on it, don't worry.

[charter]

Don't really have time right now, antiprod.

[Moai Interceptor Cannons]

Ok, gut is gut, I understand. Can you expand your point about my 'fishy play' and 'staying under the radar'? Because I don't think, I'm doing that, so I want to know, why are you accusing me of it.

I've played very similarly to how you're playing in this game on more than one occasion as scum. Not making any points that actually

add

anything significant to the discussion. Sitting back and watching the town kill themselves is favourite scum strategy of mine. To be honest there are probably others guilty of doing this as well, but you stuck out for some reason.

But just because 1 piece of evidence sucks does not mean all of the evidence sucks. Also, you REALLY should not be defending another player in this fashion. There are very few circumstances where this is pro-town.

I picked that out because it looked like the point at which people started jumping on his wagon en masse. It was mentioned that there was no way that post came from a pro-town player, and I'm simply giving a likely reason (in bold). I actually think that post was scummy too, but the fact that his wagon up to that point looked like it was made of air has probably biased me (I'll stop with the overdefending from now on). I was defending him exactly because I'm not really sure

what

the rest of the evidence was. His page one post was slightly scummy, I accept. Would you care to enlighten me on the rest?

You should have just said it was gut if it was just gut. I would have disagreed, but my opinion on gut votes is my opinion. Giving more information, when your more information was not even a reason at all is scummy. Yes, I know your arguments make sense to you. When nobody else agreed, you should have backed down.

There are people who won't be satisfied with just 'gut', but it seems I've learnt a new lesson from this game. I usually back down when people simply don't

agree

with me, but when people claim my argument doesn't make sense when it does to me then I feel kinda

obliged

to clarify. Again, I wasn't trying to convince anyone.

Your explanation was that Serial wanted to stop people from voting him for mayor, because a few people were pushing for this. How is this different from what Saint was doing? Just because nobody was voting for Saint yet?

You said it right there. Nobody even

said

anything about Kerrigan beforehand. His answering of the questionnaire was entirely unprovoked.

How did you get a read on Kyle but not Danny? They both need to post more.

Kyle does need to post more yes, but my reads are not entirely dependent on word count. See that I got a town read on Reck very early on in the game whilst Socrates and his wall posts have yet to induce any kind of read from me. Kyle's earlier posts smelled of noob, but calling you out on your weird reaction to the claim (it

was

weird) was somewhat insightful. I probably gave him too much credit though, consider him 'not too sure' actually.

Define "lack of focus"

Well it's nice to see that you're focusing on me now, but earlier in the day your questions were all over the place and your vote wasn't on anyone.

If he flips town you will be proven right?? This comment pings my scumdar.

Don't worry, it pings

my

scumdar too.

You keep calling me and charter opportunists. Why?

No, I said Nhammen and Charter AND opportunists, suggesting that you two lie out of the 'opportunists' category. I intentially stuck those comments near lines that I know people (especially you, Charter and opportunists) are gonna want to bash me for. See right above. I acknowledge that it's horrible logic, but I really am tempted to want to lynch Monkey in this situation. Some likely scenarios: He flips scum, all good, someone can vig me tonight or something. He flips town, scum can nightkill me, you can all start scumhunting for real.

-----

I read some of Monkey's other games, I did notice a somewhat noticable difference between his play as town and scum. Might not want to say what it is now, because Monkey might start intentionally avoiding his scum meta. His play in this game does not really match the scum tell I picked up, but there are anomalies (which may be related to his alleged role of cop). Also, hindsight bias and all that.

@Monkey, who do you want lynched today and why?

I don't get all the Kyle hate. Currently waiting for Socrates to say stuff. I want to finalise this mayor business ASAP. I, like Reck, don't care enough about it to let it consume D1 and would be willing to go with what the rest of the town thinks (with the exception of some things).

[MichelSableheart]

Seventh support count of day 1:

charter (0)

kyle99 (1)

Hoopla

Moai Interceptor Cannons (1)

MonkeyMan576

Debonair Danny DiPietro (0)

SerialClergyman (0)

Hoopla (0)

* Socrates (4)

Socrates, charter, Col.Cathart, kyle99

MonkeyMan576 (1)

Debonair Danny DiPietro

xRECKONERx (0)

nhammen (3)

nhammen, Moai Interceptor Cannons, xRECKONERx

Col.Cathart (0)

SaintKerrigan (0)

Not supporting anyone (2)

SaintKerrigan, SerialClergyman

With 12 players alive, it takes 7 votes to elect someone as mayor.

an * marks who would become mayor if the day ended right now.

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

Seventh vote count of day 1:

charter (0)

kyle99 (1)

xRECKONERx

Moai Interceptor Cannons (1)

nhammen

Debonair Danny DiPietro (0)

SerialClergyman (0)

Hoopla (0)

Socrates (0)

MonkeyMan576 (6)

Socrates, Hoopla, Col.Cathart, charter, kyle99, SaintKerrigan

xRECKONERx (0)

nhammen (1)

SerialClergyman

Col.Cathart (0)

SaintKerrigan (3)

Debonair Danny DiPietro, Moai Interceptor Cannons, MonkeyMan576

Not voting anyone (0)

With 13 votes available, it takes 7 votes to lynch someone. However, noone can be lynched before a mayor is elected.

[MonkeyMan576]

I am suspicious of SaintKerrigan(the mayor campaiging), xreckonerx(buddying and being rejected by nhammen), kyle99(play seems peculiar, lots of fence sitting), and DDD(overagressive, lack of logic), I wouldn't really say one stands out over the others at this point.

[Socrates]

Responding to SC's problem with me because I put it off.

This looks to me like the goal of the entire bit of play. I don't have much problem with the statement itself, it's the grandiose nature of what he's said that makes me somewhat suspicious.
It is roughly equally important to get mayor for scum and town. Thus both scum and town have a reason to try to get themselves elected to the position.

However if scum refuses the mayorship, then the chances that the mayor will go to their team are greatly lessened. If a town member refuses the mayor role, the chances remain high it will end up in the hands of a townie.

This is my first problem with your logic. 1) scum know exactly who their buddies are. They can easily play the "I don't want to be mayor" card while still pushing scum for mayor. 2) You are assuming that the mayor role is chosen completely at random, which is so obviously not the case I am mildly frustrated that you would argue that.

So on the face of it, before WIFOM is introduced, it looks to me like scum would be more likely to want it than to not.

I actually disagree completely. My first thought going into this game was that the scums were going to try to throw shit on anybody that tried to sell themselves, and most of them would try to generally to prey upon people's general paranoia (see my second point in post 154). Also, scum could feasibly be inclined to avoid the mayor position at first for the same reason they lurk: they don't want to attract attention to themselves. I know this is WIFOM and I don't have a meta to prove it yet, but if I was scum I would not push myself for mayor nearly as hard as I am.

Now, I accept that there is town motivation to want it as well, which is why the action is not scummy. But to call people not wanting the mayorship scummy, when in fact it hurts scum more than town to be in this position, is a bizarre argument that takes a fair bit of WIFOM to even approach. (Scum want to be seen to do things that hurt scum so they refuse the mayorship to be seen to be more town).

First, its less the people that don't want to become mayor are scummy, and more the people who attack people that DO want to become mayor are scummy, and that I extremely encourage townies to campaign for themselves.

Second, where do you get that not becoming mayor hurts the scum more than it hurts the town? I thought I have already explained numerous times how much it hurts the town if scum become mayor, not to mention that scum can NK the mayor quite easily, while getting a scum out of mayordom would take an organized lynch from almost the entire town. If an even halfway competent scum becomes mayor, lynching him will be an uphill battle at best.

As such, I think I'm coming ot the opinion that I don't want Socrates to be mayor. He's just made too big a deal out of his proposition. I dont' necessarily think he's scum, but he has me uneasy because of it.

Let me ask you a question. Say I AM town, see that both Monkey and Cathart have pushed what I think is a scummy agenda, and I do want to be mayor. What exactly to you expect me to do? I can understand thinking that I am scum and had all of this pre-planned out, but do you think I wouldn't do as I am doing as town?

Finally - what's with ignoring the meta you have on me Socrates? You know exactly how I play and you've seen me deliberately take a lynch because I thought it was the best thing for my team. You know that I have a heavy team-first attitude, so why ask me?

I am fully aware of your meta. I never said I was suspicious of you for nominating Hoopla for mayor, and I can fully see you doing it as town. I still think it is suboptimal play in this instance though, and if you are town I want to convince you to behave optimally.

I am sick of talking theory. Maybe we can just agree to disagree for now SC and continue this debate another time? I am not getting anything about your alignment from this.

Ok, now to post something that is actually productive.

[MonkeyMan576]

Responding to SC's problem with me because I put it off.

This looks to me like the goal of the entire bit of play. I don't have much problem with the statement itself, it's the grandiose nature of what he's said that makes me somewhat suspicious.
It is roughly equally important to get mayor for scum and town. Thus both scum and town have a reason to try to get themselves elected to the position.

However if scum refuses the mayorship, then the chances that the mayor will go to their team are greatly lessened. If a town member refuses the mayor role, the chances remain high it will end up in the hands of a townie.

This is my first problem with your logic. 1) scum know exactly who their buddies are. They can easily play the "I don't want to be mayor" card while still pushing scum for mayor. 2) You are assuming that the mayor role is chosen completely at random, which is so obviously not the case I am mildly frustrated that you would argue that.

So on the face of it, before WIFOM is introduced, it looks to me like scum would be more likely to want it than to not.

I actually disagree completely. My first thought going into this game was that the scums were going to try to throw shit on anybody that tried to sell themselves, and most of them would try to generally to prey upon people's general paranoia (see my second point in post 154). Also, scum could feasibly be inclined to avoid the mayor position at first for the same reason they lurk: they don't want to attract attention to themselves. I know this is WIFOM and I don't have a meta to prove it yet, but if I was scum I would not push myself for mayor nearly as hard as I am.

Now, I accept that there is town motivation to want it as well, which is why the action is not scummy. But to call people not wanting the mayorship scummy, when in fact it hurts scum more than town to be in this position, is a bizarre argument that takes a fair bit of WIFOM to even approach. (Scum want to be seen to do things that hurt scum so they refuse the mayorship to be seen to be more town).

First, its less the people that don't want to become mayor are scummy, and more the people who attack people that DO want to become mayor are scummy, and that I extremely encourage townies to campaign for themselves.

Second, where do you get that not becoming mayor hurts the scum more than it hurts the town? I thought I have already explained numerous times how much it hurts the town if scum become mayor, not to mention that scum can NK the mayor quite easily, while getting a scum out of mayordom would take an organized lynch from almost the entire town. If an even halfway competent scum becomes mayor, lynching him will be an uphill battle at best.

As such, I think I'm coming ot the opinion that I don't want Socrates to be mayor. He's just made too big a deal out of his proposition. I dont' necessarily think he's scum, but he has me uneasy because of it.

Let me ask you a question. Say I AM town, see that both Monkey and Cathart have pushed what I think is a scummy agenda, and I do want to be mayor. What exactly to you expect me to do? I can understand thinking that I am scum and had all of this pre-planned out, but do you think I wouldn't do as I am doing as town?

Finally - what's with ignoring the meta you have on me Socrates? You know exactly how I play and you've seen me deliberately take a lynch because I thought it was the best thing for my team. You know that I have a heavy team-first attitude, so why ask me?

I am fully aware of your meta. I never said I was suspicious of you for nominating Hoopla for mayor, and I can fully see you doing it as town. I still think it is suboptimal play in this instance though, and if you are town I want to convince you to behave optimally.

I am sick of talking theory. Maybe we can just agree to disagree for now SC and continue this debate another time? I am not getting anything about your alignment from this.

Ok, now to post something that is actually productive.

I never said wanting to be mayor was scummy, my suggestion was that players should be nominated first by non-campaigning players, and this was more pro-town play than simply stating you want to be mayor. Reason being, a one person campaign has the potential to be misused by scum campaigning, wheras if there are several people behind the support for a mayor there is more of a consensus and less potential for misuse.

[Socrates]

Ive been thinking about connections and whatnot and it is truely driving me crazy.

I am going to post my notes and if anybody has any questions I will answer them.

Right now I can be reasonably comfortable saying that if monkey is indeed scum, there are about five players that probably aren't his buddy.

Me
Charter
Kyle
DDD
MIC

2 of these names might confuse you.

for MIC, a scum would never say this about his scumbuddy:

No, I said Nhammen and Charter AND opportunists, suggesting that you two lie out of the 'opportunists' category. I intentially stuck those comments near lines that I know people (especially you, Charter and opportunists) are gonna want to bash me for. See right above. I acknowledge that it's horrible logic, but I really am tempted to want to lynch Monkey in this situation. Some likely scenarios: He flips scum, all good, someone can vig me tonight or something. He flips town, scum can nightkill me, you can all start scumhunting for real.

Sure, call it WIFOM all you like, but MIC really and truely thinks Monkey is town, whether that is because he is scum defending town or because he just really trusts his read on him. He most certainly is not defending a buddy.

Kyle I will get to in a minute.

--

I would be surprised if these people are his scumbuddy, but it isn't nearly as strong a read:

SaintKerrigan
RECKONER

These reads are based on how monkey chose to attack them, plus the timing of saint's vote. I concede that RECK could be a buddy of Monkey and he was just distancing, but Monkey doesn't seem the type to distance right out of the gate.

That leaves only a few people I can reasonably see as his scumbuddies:

Hoopla
SerialClergyman
Col. Cathart
nhammen

and all 4 of them voted monkey. I don't think all of the other scums bussed him and I have mild town reads on nhammen, and after reviewing SC I don't see much that jumps out at me other than his flimsy jump on the Monkey wagon.

It is seriously wierding me out how every single player in the game other than MIC and maybe REC has attacked monkey in some round about way, and I have reason the belive that MIC wouldn't be his scum buddy. Combine that with Monkey's general meta and the utility of letting him live a day and I am starting to get cold feet about lynching him.

So who in the world SHOULD I vote?

Kyle's vote on monkey is timed just so perfectly to read to me as scum trying to get a power role lynch. He doesn't say anything for the entirety of the wagon building, but jumps on after Monkey claims cop. I don't know, but I can say with much certainty that kyle and Monkey are not scum buddies. A bus just doesn't make sense here. His answers to my questions were pretty consistent with what I expected a scumKyle to say, weak town read on SC, decent but not strong scum read on MIC, and a desire to keep his vote on the claimed power role.

Also, remember those 4 support votes Hoopla got that I keep bringing up? I will go on record and say there is absolutely no chance that all 4 of those votes came from town. (ESPECIALLY if hoopla is scum) I want everyone to remember this for posterity when we get some alignment flips. Who would I pick as the worst support out of that bunch? You guessed it: Kyle.

My reads on other players are generally inconclusive:

Charter is town.
nhammen is probably town.

SC I am neutral on.
Hoopla hasn't posted enough.
I could see a scum RECK.
I am not ready to pursue a MIC lynch at this time.

Cathart started the game in a way consistent with how I expected scum to start (as previously discussed). After I called him out on it he backed down from it and has generally been pretty low key for most of the game. I could get behind a wagon on him at the least.

Saint- Hasn't posted enough. Did what Cathart did. I am not quite sure what to make of how he jumped on the Monkey wagon. I don't agree with MIC's case on him though. Maybe some other time.

unvote, vote:Kyle

Sorry for two wall of texts in a row.

[Socrates]

EBWOP:

Oops, I forgot DDD: Neutral. I haven't had a problem with any of his posts, but none of them seem like they wouldn't necessarily come from scum.

[kyle99]

Ive been thinking about connections and whatnot and it is truely driving me crazy.

I am going to post my notes and if anybody has any questions I will answer them.

Right now I can be reasonably comfortable saying that if monkey is indeed scum, there are about five players that probably aren't his buddy.

Me
Charter
Kyle
DDD
MIC

2 of these names might confuse you.

for MIC, a scum would never say this about his scumbuddy:

No, I said Nhammen and Charter AND opportunists, suggesting that you two lie out of the 'opportunists' category. I intentially stuck those comments near lines that I know people (especially you, Charter and opportunists) are gonna want to bash me for. See right above. I acknowledge that it's horrible logic, but I really am tempted to want to lynch Monkey in this situation. Some likely scenarios: He flips scum, all good, someone can vig me tonight or something. He flips town, scum can nightkill me, you can all start scumhunting for real.

Sure, call it WIFOM all you like, but MIC really and truely thinks Monkey is town, whether that is because he is scum defending town or because he just really trusts his read on him. He most certainly is not defending a buddy.

Kyle I will get to in a minute.

--

I would be surprised if these people are his scumbuddy, but it isn't nearly as strong a read:

SaintKerrigan
RECKONER

These reads are based on how monkey chose to attack them, plus the timing of saint's vote. I concede that RECK could be a buddy of Monkey and he was just distancing, but Monkey doesn't seem the type to distance right out of the gate.

That leaves only a few people I can reasonably see as his scumbuddies:

Hoopla
SerialClergyman
Col. Cathart
nhammen

and all 4 of them voted monkey. I don't think all of the other scums bussed him and I have mild town reads on nhammen, and after reviewing SC I don't see much that jumps out at me other than his flimsy jump on the Monkey wagon.

It is seriously wierding me out how every single player in the game other than MIC and maybe REC has attacked monkey in some round about way, and I have reason the belive that MIC wouldn't be his scum buddy. Combine that with Monkey's general meta and the utility of letting him live a day and I am starting to get cold feet about lynching him.

So who in the world SHOULD I vote?

Kyle's vote on monkey is timed just so perfectly to read to me as scum trying to get a power role lynch. He doesn't say anything for the entirety of the wagon building, but jumps on after Monkey claims cop. I don't know, but I can say with much certainty that kyle and Monkey are not scum buddies. A bus just doesn't make sense here. His answers to my questions were pretty consistent with what I expected a scumKyle to say, weak town read on SC, decent but not strong scum read on MIC, and a desire to keep his vote on the claimed power role.

Also, remember those 4 support votes Hoopla got that I keep bringing up? I will go on record and say there is absolutely no chance that all 4 of those votes came from town. (ESPECIALLY if hoopla is scum) I want everyone to remember this for posterity when we get some alignment flips. Who would I pick as the worst support out of that bunch? You guessed it: Kyle.

My reads on other players are generally inconclusive:

Charter is town.
nhammen is probably town.

SC I am neutral on.
Hoopla hasn't posted enough.
I could see a scum RECK.
I am not ready to pursue a MIC lynch at this time.

Cathart started the game in a way consistent with how I expected scum to start (as previously discussed). After I called him out on it he backed down from it and has generally been pretty low key for most of the game. I could get behind a wagon on him at the least.

Saint- Hasn't posted enough. Did what Cathart did. I am not quite sure what to make of how he jumped on the Monkey wagon. I don't agree with MIC's case on him though. Maybe some other time.

unvote, vote:Kyle

Sorry for two wall of texts in a row.

So you think that monkeys claim of cop is legit? Because claiming cop on day one is almost always a bad thing to do, especially without a known doctor. Monkey being scum is the only logical reason I can think of claiming cop, besides the option of monkey being a bad player, which I don't think. If monkey is actually the cop, then he's almost guarenteed to be lynched tonight, which wouldn't be good for the town. Thus, I think monkey being scum is the only logical reason for claiming cop.

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

Yep, it's worse than usual, and it's directed at people who suspect you. You have been next to useless today and have an attitude that doesn't match that contribution. Normally when you are prickly it's to discourage argument and force your opinion. When you haven't contributed much and don't have much to go on or much of a theory about the game, I don't get why it's even more forceful than usual. One solid reason is that it completely discourages suspicion of you, and I'm officially calling you out for being pretty useless so far.

Wow, now I have reasons for my prickliness, kinda odd that I don't recognize that fact. And again your experience with me skews towards the later game when there are more facts available and thus it's easier to be more assertive.

But even if it was early, so what? You don't have to have a good reason for voting Kerrigan, but I'd expect you to have some reason. Was it a random vote?

Let's see it's effectively my first post since the game actually started, twelveth total post since the game started and had no listed reasons and you're just now coming to the conclusion that it was essentially a random vote? And the credit you get for your correct calls in commie mafia continues to slowly slip away.

I'm not falling into any trap. I have as scum and town both pushed and not pushed for a power role lynch after a claim.

In this particular case, I think it's worth the risk. He's there, he's claiemd, we can lynch him if need be later. Cop is a dangerous role and very powerful, no matter what results he gets (ie innocents are good too, unlike no results from docs/trackers/watchers etc). Keeping him alive is the safe option.

D1, important role, other suspects - that's not worth pushing through a lynch.

Even if you think Money is scum, I see no real harm in keeping him alive tonight.

Okay here's what you do, you check the last twenty mini normal games with town cops and report back how many of them have scum roleblockers or redirectors of some sort. If there's a significant amount lacking a blocking role then I'll move on and we'll try and play the odds that there isn't one in this game. But when there's not a significant amount it effectively reduces Monkey's role into nothing more than a vanilla townie because there is no reasonable reason not to block him and let the WIFOM ride for another day which gains the town nothing other than lynching less scummy people.

[SerialClergyman]

Wow, now I have reasons for my prickliness, kinda odd that I don't recognize that fact.

I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt here mate.. better to have reasons for something like that than it just being you

Let's see it's effectively my first post since the game actually started, twelveth total post since the game started and had no listed reasons and you're just now coming to the conclusion that it was essentially a random vote?

Then it was a bad vote. We were into content and I had already posted why an RVS was unneeded. I assumed it had something behind it because there was no need for a random vote.

And the credit you get for your correct calls in commie mafia continues to slowly slip away.

Say what? Don't give me any credit for last game. Use it for meta and move on. I'm certainly not treating you according to your reads in commie. And you've played with me since in Amished's game and weren't like this at all. I'm not understanding your play this game at all.

This is all I could be bothered, it's a quick skim of the first page for completed games. I'd say it's about 50/50, maybe leaning towards no roleblocker.


872 YES
865 NO
868 NO
838 NO
831 YES
813 YES
827 NO
823 YES
835 NO
807 YES
806 NO

[SerialClergyman]

Socrates - your two big posts were excellent.

There's parts I'll concede (the non-random nature of mayor choice) and parts I think you don't quite get fully, but overall it was an excellent dissertation of your position.

Your second post was also great, but you let a few people off the hook too early. To take me as an example, I was voting him but now am pretty strongly campaigning against his lynch. But it's worthwhile analysis nonetheless and really seems genuine to me.

I'm getting taunted into a DDD vote. Got some meta to do.

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

This is all I could be bothered, it's a quick skim of the first page for completed games. I'd say it's about 50/50, maybe leaning towards no roleblocker.


872 YES
865 NO
868 NO
838 NO
831 YES
813 YES
827 NO
823 YES
835 NO
807 YES
806 NO

I said games

with

cops, I just checked the first two games on your list and neither of them have cops. Do it again and do it right.

[SerialClergyman]

Ah, clearly I didn't see the with cops bit.

However I'll be damned if you're going to respond to genuine effort you aren't prepared to do yourself like that.

You have earnt my vote.

unvote nhammen, vote DDD

support DDD

Even if you aren't irritated by DDD, here's the cliff notes on why he's a good option.

1. Lack of scumhunting.
2. Playing outside of town meta (in my reads I find him to be more active and more firm when town. Here he still hasn't placed a non-random vote until after Monkey claimed, without doing more than vague reads previous to that. His activity was also decidedly low until I specifically attacked him.)
3. A few AtE-style posts, like telling me his opinion of my ability was slipping or calling monkey 'clownshoes'.

There are other bits and pieces that contribute to my vote, but there it is.

[MonkeyMan576]

This is all I could be bothered, it's a quick skim of the first page for completed games. I'd say it's about 50/50, maybe leaning towards no roleblocker.


872 YES
865 NO
868 NO
838 NO
831 YES
813 YES
827 NO
823 YES
835 NO
807 YES
806 NO

I said games

with

cops, I just checked the first two games on your list and neither of them have cops. Do it again and do it right.

Too lazy to do it yourself?

Unvote:
Vote: DDD

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

Ah, clearly I didn't see the with cops bit.

Which is odd because that was the whole point.

However I'll be damned if you're going to respond to genuine effort you aren't prepared to do yourself like that.

I have made the quite reasonable assertion that if there is a cop, there is likely a roleblocker and thus MonkeyMan's theoretical role is no longer of any particular use. You apparently disagree, but I'm sure most would agree that your opinion is the extreme one logically but you've failed to prove any actual evidence to back your claim.

You have earnt my vote.

It's earned, not earnt.

Even if you aren't irritated by DDD, here's the cliff notes on why he's a good option.

So I should be lynched for being irritating? That doesn't appear to be the best method of finding scum.

1. Lack of scumhunting.

About your only solid point, though really countered by a decent meta read of me.

2. Playing outside of town meta (in my reads I find him to be more active and more firm when town. Here he still hasn't placed a non-random vote until after Monkey claimed, without doing more than vague reads previous to that. His activity was also decidedly low until I specifically attacked him.)

Bullshit, you're too lazy to test the cop/roleblocker hypothesis and there's no actual evidence that you've gone back and reviewed any of my games where I was an original player or where I was scum. Your meta read of me is completely based on me being a town replacement after day one which surprise surprise is an extremely limited picture of my play, but I suppose if you're trying to paint a scummy picture of me then the facts shouldn't impede your progress.

3. A few AtE-style posts, like telling me his opinion of my ability was slipping or calling monkey 'clownshoes'.

Town-tell. And just the fact that you're actually using that as a scum-tell is really weak sauce "I just read the wiki" nonsense.

[SerialClergyman]

Look at the time of your post.

Now look at the time of this reply.

Now I'll say I have read two of your games, one of which has a post that specifically details your activity in both posts per day and total characters, and both are significantly less when you play as scum.

So yes, I did meta you.

I'm posting now to prove point, coming back for a reply.

[SerialClergyman]

Meh, not much to reply to.

I don't view AtE's as a town tell, but even if I did there's circumstances where it would fit and some where it wouldn't. Saying your opinion of me is slipping is a bizarre thing to say as town. I haven't seen you say anything else like that as town. It looks like something specifically designed to discourage and dismiss.

Decent meta reads of you point to you pushing cases and votes on D1. You haven't done that at all. And you've been vague in your scum reads, something you are certianly not known for as town.

Either way - all you are doing is saying that you are sometimes useless as town too - something I don't agree with but hardly discourages your lynch.

I won't pretend I am not irritated by your attitude this game and your reaction to my work, not fitting the request though it was. I feel that if you were genuine in wondering if something like that was the case and you were making the right or wrong choice you'd bother to do it yourself rather than get a third party to do it for you. And you forget that even if that is true, wasting the blocker's block could prove useful in and of itself.

But I was suspecting you far before being irritated by you so am not particularly concerned about it being an emotional reaction. I think there's enough substance to what I'm saying.

And in Australian English, almost all -t suffixes are equally valid as -ed endings, so my usage of the word earnt was perfectly correct. I work in captions...

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

Now I'll say I have read two of your games, one of which has a post that specifically details your activity in both posts per day and total characters, and both are significantly less when you play as scum.

And I specifically modified my meta because of that game. I in fact paid for doing just that in another game where I got lynched D1 by VPB who was in the first game and read my behavior as similar to the first, but of course I was town trying to close the gaps in my play.

[SerialClergyman]

Charmingly irrelevent.

You are the one who has been screaming meta me. You can't then turn around and say your meta has changed when I DO meta you and find a solid meta case against you.

Also - the point wasn't to point to that specific post, it was to show everyone that althought you said it was bullshit and you said I was too lazy to meta you, I had in fact done it. I couldn't possibly have gone into a game, found a specific post like that, come back and replied to you all within two minutes.

So I have in fact meta'd you, and could in fact prove it.

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

Charmingly irrelevent.

You are the one who has been screaming meta me. You can't then turn around and say your meta has changed when I DO meta you and find a solid meta case against you.

Also - the point wasn't to point to that specific post, it was to show everyone that althought you said it was bullshit and you said I was too lazy to meta you, I had in fact done it. I couldn't possibly have gone into a game, found a specific post like that, come back and replied to you all within two minutes.

So I have in fact meta'd you, and could in fact prove it.

So you meta me based on older games instead of the newer ones which are more likely to be accurate. Cherry picking again?

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

Meh, not much to reply to.

I don't view AtE's as a town tell, but even if I did there's circumstances where it would fit and some where it wouldn't. Saying your opinion of me is slipping is a bizarre thing to say as town. I haven't seen you say anything else like that as town. It looks like something specifically designed to discourage and dismiss.

Decent meta reads of you point to you pushing cases and votes on D1. You haven't done that at all. And you've been vague in your scum reads, something you are certianly not known for as town.

Either way - all you are doing is saying that you are sometimes useless as town too - something I don't agree with but hardly discourages your lynch.

I won't pretend I am not irritated by your attitude this game and your reaction to my work, not fitting the request though it was. I feel that if you were genuine in wondering if something like that was the case and you were making the right or wrong choice you'd bother to do it yourself rather than get a third party to do it for you. And you forget that even if that is true, wasting the blocker's block could prove useful in and of itself.

Well at least you've convinced me that you're town since I don't think scum would go through so much trouble to get such a bad read.

[Hoopla]

Also, remember those 4 support votes Hoopla got that I keep bringing up? I will go on record and say there is absolutely no chance that all 4 of those votes came from town. (ESPECIALLY if hoopla is scum) I want everyone to remember this for posterity when we get some alignment flips. Who would I pick as the worst support out of that bunch? You guessed it: Kyle.

I don't think this point is as relative and poignant as you'd like to think. These supports were based on reputation - they're the equivalent of voting to policy-lynch someone with anti-town meta before they've posted. They are not relevent to this game specifically - and I could see a make-up of 3/2/1 or even 0 scum on that wagon because they weren't comprised of any actual cases. But you're welcome to guess if you have better insight than me.