Mini 904 - Narnia: LWW Mafia (Game Over)

[kikuchiyo]

/confirm

[kikuchiyo]

Hello, Starbuck! It has been some time. Hopefully I can be of more help in this one.

Vote: dybeck

Votes should be bolded. Was your "others" vote some sort of gambit?

[kikuchiyo]

Votes should be bolded. Was your "others" vote some sort of gambit?

Is this supposed to be funny?

Why do you ask?

[kikuchiyo]

Last time I played with Starbuck I thought her AtE's were scummy, but unless she is putting it on to build meta(in which case its null), I find it to be more of a town tell. Either way, its not a scumtell.

Unvote

Bye bye RVS.

[kikuchiyo]

Sorry, Starbuck, rereading and I realize you're not using AtE. What I am referring to is the emotional tone I am reading in your posts. The "Why are you suspicious of me?" attitude. Your posts sound alot like our game where we went at it over role pms. Null tell for me at best. Though I don't think L-3 is dangerous in RVS, I agree that you overreacted a bit. To me, that's an emotional move. The only other explanation is scum motivation. But I don't see it.

bv310 post 69 is good. We shouldn't let inactives slide by. If I remember correctly, RBT is going to lurk regardless of alignment. I'll start by asking for some more content from that slot before I vote.

[kikuchiyo]

RBT: What was your question? I am having trouble discerning it.

[kikuchiyo]

Okay, RBT, after that answer: Do you still have an issue with manho?

dybeck: You say we are getting decent reads. Could you expand on that a little with some examples?

[kikuchiyo]

I'd rather keep that to myself for now. I've said who I've got my eyes on Day 1.

I see where your vote is. I guess I am not sure what you mean by "decent reads".

How about some input from you? And how about that vote I suggested you make? Any reason you're not committing?

I am participating as I see fit. Which vote are you suggesting I make? I am not sold on Starbuck as scum. I see no reason to "commit" to anything at this point.

I am a bit confused at where RBT is going with his questioning of manho. I don't disagree with the reasons players are voting for Starbuck(PZ's makes sense), but meta tells me to overlook her for now. Let's here Grandi's take.

[kikuchiyo]

PZ: I never implied or said I was giving anyone "carte blanche". The previous exchange was reminiscent to me of a similar argument involving Starbuck in another game where I convinced myself she was scum. That is why I have been ignoring it.

However, she now seems to be avoiding this thread.

Vote: Starbuck

[kikuchiyo]

I think bv310 will draw my next vote. I'm not moving until we get a little Starbuck in here...

[kikuchiyo]

Starbuck: How is giving you three days to respond to pressure before voting you a "quick" turnaround? You posted an accusation at bv310 on Sat. Jan 12 at 12 PM(my time). You came back today.

In between you posted to this site 19 times in at least six different threads. Of those 19 posts onlny 5 were in the game you are modding. You also posted every single day. I checked that before I voted you. Its why I voted you: because from my pov you have been "ignoring" this thread.

Thank you for serving our country. My vote stays.

[kikuchiyo]

Starbuck: Your vote on me was random. I didn't need a reason to OMGUS you. I could have simply voted you back if that was my intention. I have actually given you every benefit of the doubt I can. Who is Sibelius and why should I care? You seem to be responding to our pressure with misdirection.

Let's get Starbuck to L-1 and get a claim. Though I don't support any type of massclaim as Dybeck earlier suggested, I do agree with him that your response to this wagon warrants you for lynch and that you should therefore claim sooner than later. Theme games can be broken with massclaims and so I would be against it because it is not in the spirit of the game, but if you want this pressure to dissipate you better be someone important. There was no need for you to lie about your activity. You have failed to reconcile the issue.

[kikuchiyo]

As I said: Mass claim is a bit against the spirit of the game. If the mod didn't provide safeclaims then that leaves the scumteam scrambling. So its kind of a gamble as to whether or not you can break the set up. At this point I don't really see a reason

for

massclaim. Starbuck seems to be reeling scum and I agree with PZ that night actions can be more useful before any claiming. I'd rather save a mass claim for when it is

needed

.

More votes on Starbuck. She

needs

to be claiming.

[kikuchiyo]

Star: You are going to be lynched. Please claim. You have been asked by several players, you have still not reconciled the fact that you specifically avoided this thread for several days, and unless you are someone important I see no reason not to lynch you. Name claim is fine, but you must give us something. You have done very little scumhunting besides accusing me of omgus and pointing to Sibelius.

More votes on Starbuck please. If she refuses to claim I am fine lynching her without one. In Aslan's name, let it be done.

[kikuchiyo]

I see no reason not to lynch Starbuck. The claim is what it is and I am not going to try and outguess the mod. I don't agree with everything Dybeck has stated, but I certainly see nothing in Starbuck's posts or claim to stop this lynch.

Anyone else against the Star lynch needs to speak up and explain why.

I find it interesting that when in trouble Starbuck points to Sibelius, and now Sibelius defends Starbuck. Bv310 is also a person of interest. I think we have enough information for a day 1 lynch. That doesn't mean we need a hammer in two or three posts, but this wagon should not be derailed except under extreme circumstances of which the likelihood is slim.

[kikuchiyo]

Wolf: A vanilla claim should not stop a lynch. There is no reason for you to have been on the wagon in the first place if you were going to back off a vanilla claim. The reason for claiming before lynch(especially on day 1) is to help town avoid hitting a power role. Your unvote due to claim is noted. Saying "her role makes sense to me," is a giant cop out. So basically, anyone getting lynched can search the wiki for a name and you will believe them? Does not compute. I agree, however, in further discussion so converse away.

[kikuchiyo]

I think the points against you are valid. You have done zero scumhunting in response. If you are town, accept what has happened and produce some helpful information. Do you think Dybeck and/or myself to be scum? If so, why? That's how this game works. Players scumhunt. You are not doing that. You have failed to reconcile your actions so far as the actions of a town player. There is no reason to run someone else up to a claim on day 1. Do you not agree that your lynch will reveal a good amount of info regardless of your flip? Sorry if you are town, but I can't believe that you are. You have attempted to evade your lynch without producing any significant gains for the town.

[kikuchiyo]

Wolf: So basically, anyone getting lynched can search the wiki for a name and you will believe them?

In case you missed this.

[kikuchiyo]

Wolf: I believe you may be missing my point. You said "I am going to be honest I am not sure, but the reason I believe the role isn't because of the vanilla claim (did she claim vanilla or was it just the name?) but it was

because of the name and the characters part

in the story."

Every character has a name and a part. For someone who doesn't want to "outguess the mod", you are quick to hand out the benefit of the doubt.

Please get back on the wagon.

[kikuchiyo]

I am in complete awe of the anti-town sentiment conveyed by post 243. This is getting ridiculous.

Starbuck needs to be lynched.

[kikuchiyo]

kikuchiyo, first, never change your avatar unless it's to make it bigger, second, what so anti-town about 243?

Sounds like a vanilla soft claim. Has potential to make scum's job much easier at night. I also still think Star is more likely scum. Mod may very well have handed out safeclaims. I just don't like it. Starbuck has reacted terribly. I don't see her producing any in depth analysis, logic, etc. *sigh*

I thought we had plenty of information for a lynch. I thought the lynch would yield plenty more information and quite possibly hit scum. I'd rather not run someone else up to a claim today if it can be helped.

[kikuchiyo]

To clarify: the number was correct. I found Wolf's post anti-town because it looked like a vanilla softclaim. He also does not take into account that Starbuck could be scum with a safeclaim provided by the mod.

Madcrawdad: Somewhat of an unfair question but I'll answer. Had she claimed earlier it would have had more credibility in my eyes. She didn't just refuse then, she fought her claim tooth and nail all the way even though several players asked. That said, by refusing to claim earlier she opens up a period of time which is now questionable. She does not claim power, so why fight so hard? Some town reasons for it, but more likely than not she was either waiting on the mod for a decent fakeclaim(in which case she should be upset one wasn't provided), or busy putting together one of her own.

Starbuck should still be lynched. All suspicions will then be able to stem from her flip. Btw, she said she wanted to reread. I would love some analysis from her seeing as how she has put forth none so far.

[kikuchiyo]

Unfair in that you are asking me to respond to a set of events which cannot happen. It is impossible to say what would have happened had a certain set of circumstances come to pass. Kind of like traveling back in time and squashing a bug. Small changes in the time space continuum can have huge effects so it is difficult to say with certainty how I would have reacted. Not a big deal as I don't think your intention was malicious, but I certainbly think its worth pointing out when answering a question of such characteristics.

[kikuchiyo]

Narn: How do you feel about Starbuck's contribution to scumhunting?

[kikuchiyo]

We've been waiting for twelve pages. I can wait a couple more.

[kikuchiyo]

Welcome, Hackerhuck. Please read up and vote for Starbuck.

[kikuchiyo]

Starbuck: Nice misrep. The case on you isn't avoiding the thread.

ITS THE FACT THAT YOU LIED ABOUT YOUR ACTIVITY WHILE YOU WERE AVOIDING THE THREAD AND HAVE FAILED TO RECONCILE WHY.

As for your questions:

How does reading "emotional tone" not equal reading AtE?

You have an emotional tone in this game just like when I played with you last. Its null tell at best. Differentiating between it and AtE is a semantics argument. Semantics arguments are generally started by scum.

What convinced you there that I was scum versus what convinces you here?

Not sure what you are asking. please rephrase this.

So how am I "reeling scum"?

Semantics. You have played poorly. An Omgus case near deadline is not going to save you. What benefit do I have as scum to push your lynch so hard? A mislynch day 1 is like shooting fish in a barrel. I gave you every oppurtunity to get out of this. Instead of posting content, you avoided the thread. Instead of claiming when you were obviously not going to participate, you denied. You lurked and then claimed that you were busy and only posting in your modded game. When faced with the reality that you posted elsewhere three times as much, you had little to no explanation. This directly conflicts with your own declared meta of solid contribution. Then you claim an obscure vanilla role. Vanilla claims do not stop lynches. Thats a generally accepted fact on MS. You hoped to ride that claim to safety. What you should have done is SCUMHUNT. Have you ever heard the phrase "too little, too late"?

So my other questions is, if you are SO AGAINST lurking, why are you voting for me when I have 43 game posts?

You lied about it. Sorry, hon.

Further:

Vanilla claims do not stop lynches except under extenuating circumstances. Day1 is not one of those circumstances. A vanilla claim signifies that the target is not a power role for town and is therefore a "safe" bet for lynch. I have seen scum gambit with a power role claim on day 1, but often enough they claim vanilla and hope the pressure dissipates. If you had done any amount of scumhunting before you had reached L-1 your claim might have had more credibility. Also, It was explained to you that your actions were unnacceptable(avoiding the thread), which is why you were asked to claim earlier as it was obvious that you were not participating. You refused to claim, but you ALSO REFUSED TO POST ANY CONTENT.

Further:

Buying the vanilla claim because it is "similar to my own" is a cop out because there is the likelihood that scum has fakeclaims. It is also possible to find a claim on the wiki. At best, the claim is null tell. Using it as a jumping off point is suspicious and will bring heat on the jumper day 2 if you are lynched and flip scum.

Quoting me supporting your lynch proves only that I want you lynched. Considering I have been openly advocating it for most of the latter half of the day I don't see the point in you posting it. Way to proof that I am secure in my convictions.

No. I would not have provided an early claim. I didn't need to because I have been a solid contributor all day. Had I been asked for a claim I would have offered up evidence as to why I was not scum. All you did was say "It isn't me,". As Papa Zito pointed out, you employed the "nuh uh" defense. You could have spent the day scumhunting. But thank you for your wall post. It will be taken into consideration once you are lynched. If you are town and truly believe I am scum then you should be satisfied with that.

[kikuchiyo]

Ebwop:

In case you missed it(and I don't see how you could have considering you quoted it), here is the answer as to why you had to claim:

You are going to be lynched. Please claim. You have been asked by several players, you have still not reconciled the fact that you specifically avoided this thread for several days, and unless you are someone important I see no reason not to lynch you.

Name claim is fine, but you must give us something. You have done very little scumhunting besides accusing me of omgus and pointing to Sibelius.

I bolded it so you could see it.

[kikuchiyo]

Actually, Star, avoiding the thread and lieing about it is scummy. Not scumhunting is scummy. Not answering for your behavior is scummy. So yeah, if you use logic you will see that I am voting you and advocating your lynch because I think you have played scummy. You responded poorly to the pressure of my original vote. I find that scummy. But I digress. Please post your next case. We need all of your thoughts in case you are town.

[kikuchiyo]

Starbuck: You are the lynch for today. Stop fighting it and start posting content relevant to this game. Who are your suspects and why? We have your case on me. Now we need your take on everyone else.

In our other game(from what I remember) most of the scumhunting was done surrounding the contents of the vanilla role pm. I do not recall why I thought you were scummy, but I remember finding your emotinoal posting rather scummy in that game and I was wrong. This game is different because you have not been scumhunting at all. You are being emotional, but that is at best null. Early in the day, null leans town because it makes no sense to pursue null tells. At this point, your emotion is null as well, but your actions that I have already laid out lean scum.

I see no reason for a "scummy" town meta to vindicate someone with a bandwagon near a deadline who has contributed very little and is being obstinate and uncooperative. Please continue with your analysis.

You are answering for your behavior. You are answering poorly for your behavior. Sorry, but you avoided this thread, and this thread only, during your "inactive" period. What were you hoping to achieve by that?

Start posting more analysis, please.

[kikuchiyo]

Have fun bowling.

I never said you refused claiming altogether. Why do you keep trying to address the same issues? Let's look at the facts:

1) I am not satisfied with your explanations. Rewording them doesn't help.
2) You have had plenty of time for game analysis and all you have produced is a giant omgus case.
3) You are going to be lynched. Yet you prefer to argue with me than produce any other relevant game analysis.
4) You are "waiting to see if anyone else has questions" when you should be combing the thread and producing useful information for us to use after your flip.

I am done talking to you. Please talk to someone else and give us something. The fact that you aren't only further supports the idea that you should be lynched.

Not sure why you think I'm being condescending. I am working in the best interests of town by requesting as much information as possible from the player who is going to be lynched. I am offering you every oppurtunity to contribute.

[kikuchiyo]

Appeal to Emotion.

It is considered a logical fallacy.

Also, kiku, you can stop being so condescending and rude. It IS against the MS Forum Rules and Guidelines.

This is a good example. Trying to diffuse suspicion by implying some sort of "hostility" or playing the "poor me" card. Earlier in the thread I alluded to Star's play in a previous game where she played rather emotionally as evidence that her initial behavior in response to the rvs happenings was null tell at best. I applied the term in the wrong context but I thought I explained myself well and got my point across at the time.

[kikuchiyo]

That definitely wasn't AtE. I was reminding you of the Forum Rules and Guidelines. Mafia games are supposed to be fun, and you shouldn't start going out of your way to post anything that is an attack of ad hom rather than an attack of a person's actions.

But as I said before it doesn't matter what I say because you will find some way to twist it for your own personal gain.

And that, my friend, is scummy.

By all means. Point out the ad hom. What did I say that was so terribly offensive as to warrant a refresher course on the rules?

You are incorrect. The statement I quoted was most definitely AtE, if not that, then it was 100% an Appeal to Authority, which is also a logical fallacy. Either way you are continuing your pattern of avoiding contributing to this game.

Stop arguing with me and give us your take on what has happened. Do not use my name, reference me, talk about me, or ask me questions. List your other suspects and your reasons why. Your failure to honor this request is contributing to the inevitability of your lynch.

[kikuchiyo]

Simmer down, pussycat. I am not assuming anything here. I have quite openly expressed the fact that I was not willing to use your meta as much more than null tell and never professed to know everything about it.

And who are you to assume that I'm continuing to avoid. You are assuming that I don't have multiple windows of MS open and are keeping tabs as I'm working on notepad documents.

All I am asking is for you to post these documents. Calling me rude isn't helping. I am being quite open with you about the situation.

Holding off on your other suspicions when you are clearly the lynch for today is only hurting town. By hurting town you bolster the case against you. Why is this so hard to understand?

Anyways. I'm done with you. I expect votes to finish this lynch before deadline. If Starbuck sees fit to grace us with her multiple documents of analysis then I that would just be peachy.

[kikuchiyo]

PZ: Can you explain or refer me to the case on bv? As far as I could tell, the case seemed dependent on Starbuck being scum as well. I'd rather not plug the thread with more Star/kiku but if you could explain where you disagree with me that would be helpful. Maybe I'm not seeing something. I am rather convinced that the only explanation for Star's obstinate behavior is that she is caught scum. Deja vu, though. We do need to have something together in the next day or so if we end up with another claim.

[kikuchiyo]

So which is it? You guys obviously have some things mixed up in the mafia QT

Daytalking scum is a rare commodity. Why on earth would you imply that the mechanic exists in this game?

Most of your arguments seem of a semantic nature. I agree with you. You didn't get Sibelius' name out of "nowhere", but your reasoning for pointing him out is terrible so you might as well have gotten him from "nowhere". The issue was not your lurking. The issue was you avoiding pressure and then lieing about your whereabouts and your ability to post. PZ seems to want to give you a pass here. I get that and I will consider another lynch. However, you are also correct in your belief that I am convinced you are scum. That is why I "need" your lynch. I want to be able to adjust my reads accordingly if necessary. The reference to daytalking scum reads like a slip. Sorry, but you're not changing my mind. I'm only moving my vote if necessary. If I have to move, I'd go to bv310 because I think he is one of your partners.

[kikuchiyo]

Seven = majority of twelve.

Seven is needed for lynch.

Unvote, Vote: Manho

This is obviously going to stalemate if we don't do it. We have two days left for discussion. Let's get a claim from manho and decide between the two. I still prefer the Starbuck lynch, but stalling this close to deadline helps noone but scum. Somebody else move. We can always go back.

[kikuchiyo]

So kiku, why do you prefer my lynch over manho's? I have now provided the content that you were demanding.

Too little, too late. I am convinced you are scum.

I also made a request that you provide your suspects (and cases on them) on people other than myself. I have done as you have requested. Why are you ignoring the exact same request from me?

You are in no position to negotiate.

I don't remember you mentioning much of manho. Are you voting him just to lynch someone or are you voting him because you suspect him?

I am voting him because he is the secondary target as voted by majority and it seems that some want an alternate lynch target to you. By getting his claim we have the cards on the table and discuss who should go.

Also, 386 is the second time you have quoted my post. You seem to enjoy taking it out of context. We had already been waiting on some type of response from you at that time. Then I voted to encourage your response. Then you LIED about your situation.

How can she go from one post not being sold to the next voting?

Here was the vote:

PZ: I never implied or said I was giving anyone "carte blanche". The previous exchange was reminiscent to me of a similar argument involving Starbuck in another game where I convinced myself she was scum. That is why I have been ignoring it.

However, she now seems to be avoiding this thread.

Thats not a non sequitur in the least. I applied pressure to get you to respond and you then LIED about your whereabouts and your posting habits. After doing the research to find out that you LIED, I decided to leave my vote on you. You then proceeded to avoid the issue, engage in zero scumhunting and launch an omgus campaign at your attackers. That's scummy behavior.

Hackerhuck: What else could she be implying with the statement?

[kikuchiyo]

Unvote, Vote: Starbuck

Final.

[kikuchiyo]

To be clear:

I ultimately realize it is each players right to make up their own minds in regards to counterclaiming, but if manho is fakeclaiming, I don't think the real Susan should come forward. If I am not mistaken, Susan was the older girl, which would make her more likely to have vig and/or investigative powers(I think the young one would be the healer/protector). Therefore, if manho is lieing, the real Susan already has a guilty investigation to work with(manho) and can claim at a later time as necessary after they have had some time to work. If Susan turns up dead, we lynch manho. If manho is Susan, then that will play out in its own way.

Starbuck is the obvscum imo. Let's lynch her and move on. No sense in getting more claims on day 1.

Starbuck, if you are town then I'm sorry, but I think this is how it has to be.

[kikuchiyo]

I'm not sure I understand the logic behind a partial claim. Don't we want all of the information out there before we get a counter and before we go to night and the mafia have a chance to talk?

Why don't we just have anyone with a power role claim? You can't honestly be this dense, can you? If manho is Susan Pevensie, then we don't want scum to know what she can do. It produces a protective layer of wifom for her to work behind.

Dybeck and PZ: How many games have you played where one scum is lynched day 1 and town wins? It is certainly not an overwhelming majority imo. If manho isn't Susan and Susan exists(which we have no reason to doubt at this time), then we already have one scum caught and the real Susan knows it. Either she counterclaims later with possible night action results, or she counterclaims now possibly jeapordizing her ability to work at night. I'd rather her stay hidden for now. If she turns up dead then we auto lynch manho. There is really little benefit to outingher other than lynching scum on day 1. I don't believe this is utterly necessary as the town win condition encompasses much more than one single correct lynch. Anyhow, its not our decision. In short, if manho is fakeclaiming then he is already caught. Lynching him today may give scum enough information to cripple town's night abilities. We have enough information to lynch. Let's do it.

Starbuck: I have no vendetta. I like playing with you. I just happen to think you are scum.

[kikuchiyo]

I guess I must be really dense. How does WIFOM help the town and why wouldn't the scum kill him regardless of what he can do?

Hypothetically, lets say manho is Susan. Let's say Susan is a power role. Let's say manho says "I'm doc". Now scum can be fairly confident that manho can be killed. Thus they most likely submit "NK: Manho."

Let's say manho says: "I'm cop." Now scum can look elsewhere to find a possible doc, knowing that manho will most likely draw protection from the doc. Or, mafia might have a watcher and submit, "Watch: Manho."

By not revealing his power, manho forces scum to make their night action decisions off of speculation rather than facts. Which would you rather have: the chance of a muffed nk/mafia action, or a map to victory for scum?

Again Star, 417 seems to misrepresent my entire case. Your meta is null tell at this point. You are being lynched for your play in this game. I have not implied nor stated otherwise. I have made my stance pretty clear.

[kikuchiyo]

The question was rhetorical, PZ. Point being, the counterclaim is not necessary, but whatever. Its not our call. Please be prepared to hammer Starbuck if necessary.

[kikuchiyo]

Day 1 hammer is a poor place to look for scum. It was only about 11 hours until deadline. No other wagon was going anywhere. But I digress.

RBT: Day 1 anlysis?

[kikuchiyo]

It would likely have ended that way anyway, but he appeared simply to finish of starbuck, and didn't participate prior to that.

Par for the course with RBT. He should participate today, though. Day 1 is always wifomic and uncertain.

If the Beaver's were a vig kill, I would ask the vig to come forward. Dybaeck had a few detractors yesterday, so I don't see scum hitting him, unless they picked up the mason crumb.

If anyone doesn't think vig should come forward, speak now or hold your piece.

[kikuchiyo]

I don't see the vig coming out even if we ask him/her to, and there is no guarantee there even is a vig, dybeck was a very powerful player, mafia could have just wanted to take him out, bv310 was just a bonus for lack of a better term.

If there is a vig, there is no guarantee he/she is even town aligned, so they would not come forward anyways.

Vigilante is always town aligned. Otherwise they would be called scum or serial killer. I asked for your opinion of whether or not they should come out, not whether or not you think they will come out.

[kikuchiyo]

I don't think it would have been wise for a vig to kill last night.

Why?

[kikuchiyo]

Also by your definition then it could very well be a SK and not a vig, what would make you think it was a vig and not an SK?

Nothing.

Susan, do you have anything to report?

[kikuchiyo]

I'm likely to think that manho is telling the truth, despite being rather scummy. That said, I'd like a CC ASAP if he's lying.

Agreed here.

Vote: Narninian

Iso analysis a little later, but I think this is a good place to start. I really didn't expect people to start voting until Susan dropped in, but this works.

Starbuck's cases yesterday were nothing but omgus. She handled the lynch rather poorly and tunneled on her main attackers and never accounted for her actions. I would be more interested in those who weren't interested in lynching her, or who attempted to fence sit. Narninian fits that bill.

["quote="madcraw"]You say that "Day 1 is always wifomic and uncertain." Why would you feel differently when it comes to trying to figure motives for N1 kills? [/quote]

Not sure what this is asking. I suggested that a vig come forward if they killed Beaver. Either noone claims the kill, or someone claims the kill. If someone claims the kill it may help us piece together what is going on under the cover of night. What's the issue with my question? I need clarification here.

Starbuck was undoubtedly scummy. Papa Zito's late day 180 on her lynch had me wondering. I'd like some PZ.

Susan, have you anything to say?

[kikuchiyo]

Okay. Maybe you misunderstood me. I think if a vig shot Beaver then that player should come forward. I'm not going to fashion my investigation based on assumed motives. i.e. unless a vig comes forward I will believe this to be a scum/sk kill. Assuming it is a vig kill without proof would be "diving in" to a bucket of wifom imo.

[kikuchiyo]

I'm not going to push the issue.

manho: Were you roleblocked?

[kikuchiyo]

I was asking for clarification. Thats not role fishing. He said "no," to results. If he was roleblocked then that could prove to be valuable information to town. Lame accusations are not going to help find scum. How does my question help scum? If manho is telling the truth then scum knows it. They also know whether or not they roleblocked him. Therefore asking for an answer does not give scum any more information than they would otherwise already have imo.

More later.

[kikuchiyo]

Why are you so intent on digging there?

I'm not going to push the issue.

Noone has to reveal anything they don't want to. "Intent" is a mischaractyerization of my stance.

I think other players need to chime in. If you don't like my line of questioning I will stop, but I am not sure what else I should do at this point.

[kikuchiyo]

Omg i forgot i was alive in this game

Kiku you said you were going to ISO narnian later due to your vote on him, which was on Saturday. You have posted since then, even again saying "more later" I would love to see your ISO to justify your vote.

Not sure if the iso will "justify" the vote. The iso may in fact cause me to change my vote. We'll just have to wait and see. Please don't try and paint me into a corner. "More later" means exactly that. I am not lurking. If you have a specific question, just ask. If 476 is your best shot at participation then you have done nothing to get off of my suspicion list today. You have never reconciled your "role pm" reasoning for jumping off a vanilla wagon. Do you think scum was given fakeclaims? If no, then would you support a mass claim? If yes, then why in the bloody hell would you believe Starbuck's vanilla claim based on your own pm? This issue was glossed over yesterday, but with current information I find this extremely relevant.

More later.

[kikuchiyo]

I never accused you of lurking, and if it came off that way oh well.

Okay. Oh well.

Specific question(s): Why did you vote narnian? You said it was a good place to start, but why?

Upon first read, snail's post felt genuine. Rereading it and his subsequent summary dismissal of RBT's play as "town" I realize how poor it is. In iso, you actually give off more of a town read, so I retract my statement. Good place to start meant "we need to start somewhere". We had a "case" and a suspect. A vote adds pressure.

Unvote

I have played with RBT and I don't think it is kosher to write his behavior off as probable town. It is null tell at best. I gave him a pass on day 1 because in previous experience(and two games I've read) his play doesn't change on day 1 even if pressured. Snail writing his play off reads like scum/scum or scum buddying town. In both cases Snail is the part of scum.

Vote: evilsnail

No, 476 is not my best shot at participation, and I could care less if i am on your suspicion list. No one has asked me about my role pm reason for jumping off a vanilla wagon, and if people want an explanation I am more then happy to give one.

I believe I brought it up and felt it got glossed over. After an iso of you, I am satisified at this time. I would, however, be happy to see more participation.

Most scum are given fakeclaims, if we massclaimed popcorn style and scum didnt have fake claims they might very well be found out easily.

And I would not support a massclaim on day 2, horrible idea for town there.

A bit non sequitur here. But oh well. I'd rather not massclaim for the same reason I told dybeck yesterday. Apologies if I have offended you. That was not my intention. I just get bothered when I try to participate and feel overwhelmed with what I percieve to be poor arguments.

Frustrating thing here is that both lead wagons for day 1 flipped town and a third claimed uncountered power. So scum didn't really have to work hard at all. So we are faced with the inevitable wifom of: did scum try and stay off the radar yesterday while town tore itself apart?

[kikuchiyo]

I'm having a little trouble following your train of thought throughout that entire post, but I noticed that you mentioned RBT twice in your post and imply here that he's not likely town. If pressure is so important, why choose someone else to vote for?

I am voting for the more likely scum of the two. Not sure if you saw the part where I said "could be scum/scum or scum buddying town". Evilsnail plays the part of scum in both equations. Therefore he is "more likely" to be scum based off of my read.

I'm also curious why you're choosing evilsnail as your target when you've admitted that his read on RBT is the same as yours. Just how is it that it looks like scum doing it when he says it, but not you?

No. Similar, but not the same. My opinion was day 1 based on meta and was "null tell". He's giving RBT a "town" read on day 2 if I am reading his post right.

Meh, I'm not seeing the RBT case. He's been opportunistic with his vote, sure, and he hasn't contributed too much, but there are plenty of people who play like that when town.

I never said RBT was oppurtunistic. His only quality I am aware of which goes with his meta is low day 1 contribution. "Oppurtunistic" should be explained more. How is he oppurtunistic, and why is it not likely scummy?

[kikuchiyo]

Okay. Then why do you seem so eager to go there?

Again, saying I am "eager" is a mischaracterization. Does Narninian's recent post indicate that he is "eager" to know what ISO means? No. He is asking a question. I asked a question. When HH said he didn't think it was a good idea, I acquiesced and explained that I would not push the issue. I have not pushed the issue. Where does this interpretation of my behavior as "eager" or "intent" come from? Again, what other lines of questioning would you like to pursue? If mine are not beneficial, then where would you like to start?

Here's a question:

Did scum try and stay off the radar yesterday while town tore itself apart?

With three townies(two confirmed) to choose from, do you think scum would have been more or less active yesterday? Was there any behavior around the wagons which you found suspect and which you feel clearly demonstrates scum behavior? If so, what was it and why is it scummy?

[kikuchiyo]

I never said RBT was oppurtunistic. His only quality I am aware of which goes with his meta is low day 1 contribution. "Oppurtunistic" should be explained more. How is he oppurtunistic, and why is it not likely scummy?

Nice strawman, snail. The above question is the one you failed to address. Also, you have implied that I am not contributing much today. Did you mean to imply that? I have been active and have come up with some thought provoking questions. My stance was RBT, null-tell, day 1. Yours is day 2. You also heaped on the "oppurtunistic" voting. Please address the above question.

Madcraw: Not sure what you are getting at. I made my stance clear on the subject with my initial request. In subsequent posts I made it clear I would not push the issue. I do not see how my behavior translates to "going down a path" or whatever you are implying. If you have a direct question or a direct post you would like me to comment on, then by all means. If not, I don't see how the conversation is at all beneficial.

[kikuchiyo]

So, now I have a question for you. Your vote for me, as far as I can tell, has been based on:
- me mispresenting you by saying you called RBT "opportunistic"

This is the strawman. I did not vote you for any misrep.

- me saying RBT is "probable town" over a null tell

Now, both of these points are obviously untrue. They don't even approach the realm of what could be true. So, do you stand by your vote?

No. The vote for you is because my iso read of Narninian reveals a much more clear and concise pattern of thought than your "case" presents. The fact that you seemed to give RBT a "pass" was just icing on the cake.

How is at all relevant whether I describe his behaviour as "opportunistic" when I proceed to then call it a null tell? I just used it in a general sense to describe lurkish behaviour coupled with voting without really contributing.

Yes. Please explain why you describe his behavior as "oppurtunistic" and then proceed to "null tell". Also, please explain how his voting pattern is "oppurtunistic".

[kikuchiyo]

I never wrote off RBT's behaviour as "probable town" or "town." So, your reasoning here is flawed, because it is based on that assumption. What I said was that I have seen plenty of players play like that even as town. It's a null tell without anything substantial (and this you concede also!). So, you're voting for me for something I never said.

This is what I was referring to with the original "strawman" comment. The part of my vote based on your interaction with RBT was a secondary and admittedly weaker part of my reasoning. Rereading my own post, I realize I may be at fault for not being more clear. The vote is mainly because your "vote" post against Narninian seemed genuine at first but did not match up with an iso read of Narninian. Both he and Wolf read town imo.

Do you have any other suspects?

[kikuchiyo]

Meh, I'm not seeing the RBT case. He's been opportunistic with his vote, sure, and he hasn't contributed too much, but there are plenty of people who play like that when town.

@kiku, is the above post the main reason for your vote on snail?

No. I have asked evilsnail to explain what he meant by "oppurutnistic". He has failed to do so. Aside from his RVS vote, RBT voted four times. Twice for you and twice for Starbuck. I would like evilsnail to explain why he characterized this pattern as "oppurtunistic" and why oppurtunistic voting is

not

considered scummy. My vote on snail is mostly because his case on Narninian looked good on first read, but didn't match up with my own iso read on Narn. I can elaborate on that, but I would like some answers from snail.

[kikuchiyo]

A strawman is a kind of misrepresentation and it is not what I did. Strawmanning is deliberately portraying someone's point of view or argument inaccurately to make it sound weaker. Calling RBT's behaviour "opportunistic" is not that, because it's not weaker than HH's or your descriptions.

We don't have the same definition of "strawman". Strawmanning is focusing on the weaker part of an argument and drawing attention away from the more important issues.

For instance: "Hey, that black guy stole my car!"

Strawman: "Do you have something against black people?"

The real point at issue is the stolen car. By focusing on the "race" part of the statement, one is strawmanning. I called your argument a "strawman" because you seem to be placing more importance on the RBT comment and less on the fact that Narninian's iso is not as bad as you make it look imo.

I called his behaviour opportunistic merely to describe the behaviour of voting without contributing. That is opportunistic, because it means taking advantage of the scumhunting other people have been doing to find justification for your vote.

I don't like this answer. your initial post implied two characteristics regarding RBT's play. Now you are using one to define the other.

He's been opportunistic with his vote, sure,

and

he hasn't contributed too much, but there are plenty of people who play like that when town.

He's oppurtunistic and hasn't contributed. Now you are defining "oppurtunistic" as voting without contribution. By this definition, your original statement could read something like this:

RBT is voting without contributing, and he hasn't contributed much.

Sounds kind of silly, which is why I questioned you on it.

Okay, that was not clear to me. I thought you were just voting me because of my comment about RBT. Then please point out where exactly you think I'm wrong about Narninian.

I already did my iso read of Narninian, but if need be, I can pbpa your post. That will take time. I'd like to have other opinions on the matter before I post. There are too many players in the shadows at this point.

Note that I did not give RBT a "pass." If something substantial turns up or someone points why it would be advantageous to RBT-scum to be lurkish, then his behaviour takes on a new significance. On its own, however, I don't think it merits a vote.

So, you don't think on a day 1 when town is deciding between three town targets(two confirmed) that "lurkish" behavior is scummy? We have three flips and an uncounterclaimed power role. What benefit did scum have to be involved at all? Also, what was scummy about my behavior?

[kikuchiyo]

It's just a word. I didn't give it that much thought. I still don't see how this is at all scummy. On your interpretation of my post, it just undermines what I then proceed to say.

Herein lies my issue. Why not give it much thought? Why did you undermine what you said? You have still not answered my questions:

1) So, you don't think on a day 1 when town is deciding between three town targets(two confirmed) that "lurkish" behavior is scummy?

2) What benefit did scum have to be involved at all?

3) What was scummy about my behavior?

It could be scummy if you could show me that RBT is normally very active. Otherwise, there are plenty of people who lurk as town.

RBT's day 1 behavior was exactly what I expected from him. However, scum had three(alleged) town wagons to choose from. It seems that "lurking" is a much more viable scum strategy in that regard. His contribution has not imrpoved all that much today. So with that in mind, why are you giving RBT a pass? By saying there is nothing suspicious about his play, you are giving him a pass. Having described him as "oppurtunistic" and "lurkering" should place him high on the suspicion list after a day 1 in which all three wagons were allegedly town players.

What was scummy about my play? Trying to keep multiple claims from happening and focusing on lynching the "scummiest" player are scum tells to you? Do you believe it is better to lynch players who act scummy, or players who seem townie?

Please try and just answer my questions. At this point I get the feeling you are simply dancing around my inquiries without offering an opinion. I will produce my pbpa on why I changed my mind about your Narn vote, but you seem to be avoiding my questions.

[kikuchiyo]

so kiku is using another crap case to get a mislynch...

if i'm not misunderstanding again, kiku's reason to vote snail is that "snail made a case on Narninian, but then shift the attention away. However, kiku think the original case a good one." i really don't think it is a good reason to vote someone, and i don't think anyone here is seeing this a main reason to vote. but then kiku accuse snail of "strawmanning" that snail avoid kiku's main "case". everyone reading the thread will know that the RBT things is the case rather than the Narninian things, so i think there is nothing wrong for snail to "strawmanning".

No. The original case Snail made was

not

good. On first read I agreed it looked good. However, after doing an iso on Narn I disagree with the case. The strawmanning is not a huge issue for me, because I don't think I was as clear as I thought.

I have a response to 533, but I have one more question first. More like an excercise.

Evilsnail: please place the following players in order for "best reasoned" Starbuck vote, to "least well reasoned" Starbuck vote. I know its hard, but try and ignore the fact that bv and dybeck are confirmed town. Base your answers on the reasoning attached to the votes.

bv310, manho, kikuchiyo, wolframnhart, dybeck, Narninian, Riceballtail
You don't need to justify your answers if you don't want to, just place them in order from best to least.

[kikuchiyo]

Unvote

I have more to post this weekend when I have the time and I want Snail's response as well Madcraw's promised contribution. I will leave it up to Snail if he feels the need to claim. Consider my vote still on in spirit.

[kikuchiyo]

Madcraw: Nice summary of my posts. You even pointed out where I made my "pressure" vote, and then where it turned into a real vote. 143 was posted before I checked up on Starbuck's actions. I voted her to pressure her to get back into the game. Then she said:

If you do a profile search of my posts, you'll see that the only thing I've done mafia wise in the past few days was set up the game I'm modding. I've had to leave my games by the wayside.

So, I did a profile search and turned up the FACT that she had posted only five times in her modded game and made fourteen other posts in several other games. She was never able to reconcile this LIE. Her play spiraled downward from there imo.

Manho: I am voting Snail for the Narninian case and his failure to qualify his description of RBT's behavior. I am waiting on a response from him before I post my next segment because some of what I have to say will depend on his response. I am investigating him currently. I have removed my vote to avoid an untimely lynch and to encourage a bit more participation. Do you have any thoughts on anyone else?

[kikuchiyo]

Sorry. Yes. I checked to see that she was posting and not gone from the site. That's why I voted her. She seemed to be ignoring the thread. It wasn't a lynchable issue until she LIED about her whereabouts. I didn't actually count and divide her posts until she made her claim of

only

posting in her modded game.

I voted her for "ignoring" the thread. She said she wasn't. That was a lie. Therefore the "pressure" vote turned into a "serious" vote.

Had she come back with a believable excuse I would have unvoted her. Had she said, "Sorry for ignoring the thread, I just wanted to see some reactions to my wagon, here is my analysis." Then That would have made sense to me. She claimed to not have time for mafia and yet she was consistently posting in several threads.

[kikuchiyo]

556 is a bit easy. Saying "one or both could be scum" could be a good way to set up a mislynch in the event we are both town. It does, however, contain a stance on PZ. That is good and keeps the post from being a complete fence sit.

I like 553. Snail makes a couple of good points regarding both Narn and wolf. Their votes are particularly weak.

554: The request was to put the voters in order from best reasoned to least well reasoned. If you don't mind adjusting the list to reflect the order I would appreciate it. I've been caught with rl issues this weekend, but I intend to post my pbpa of the original Narn case asap. Evilsnail is correct in that his wagon has progressed with very little in the way of a tangible "case" as of yet.

[kikuchiyo]

My major suspect at the moment is Narninian. The way he handled the Starbuck lynch reeked of scumminess.

First, he doesn't want to lynch Starbuck:

I don't see the claim of rumblebuffin to be a lynch worthy claim at this point. Vanilla townie is a bit of an 'easy' claim, and the name certainly is doubtful to have a counterclaim - but book just doesnt have a lot of better known' characters. There is Aslan, the 4 kids, tumnus, Father Christmas, Mr and Mrs Beaver, Professor Kirke. Personally, I wouldn't see any of those characters as 'vanilla' and if they were limited to those - a mass claim would make the game trivial. For vanilla characters tertiary characters seem most likely.

Interestin gpoint her. Trouble is, that the rest of this post which was snipped actually contained some scumhunting. In fact, Narn actually points to a link between bv310 and dybeck. Granted they are masons, but masons make up an informed minority which is similar to a scum team. Picking out the connection is actually good scumhunting. He also points out bv310's "hypocrisy" in finding Star suspicious for behavior he exhibited himself. If you just read the quote and comment by Snail, then it seems as though Snail's comment is accurate, but Narn didn't just "not want to lynch Starbuck". He had another suspect and concrete reasoning behind it.

Then, after manho claims, he

does

want to lynch Starbuck. The wording here also is terribly non-committal. "It seems a vanilla townie might be our best choice."

Well, That is quite the claim. I definitely expected to see her in the game, and her allegiance is solid. At this point I don't see pushing another bandwagon to be useful for town, if there is no counterclaim, it seems vanilla townie might be our best choice.

I find this to be a mischaracterization. Narn is "committing" to the vanilla townie lynch. Makes much more sense than pushing for further information from manho. Also, Narn clearly stated that he preferred the bv310 lynch and even committed his vote there. The bv lynch was not happening. His iso 10 is pto town. Not pushing for more info in the absence of a counterclaim helps town more than scum.

BUT: despite this, he doesn't vote Starbuck yet. That is definitely a scum move, IMO. He ensures that he's pushing the lynch without committing to it and he's testing the waters a little bit to see if he can get away with a Starbuck vote.

Starbuck actually didn't need any votes. Her lynch was pretty solid for most of the second half of the day. There was less than 24 hours between his unvote of bv and his vote of Starbuck. When he voted Star he also said, nobody hammer in case we get a counterclaim. Granted, L-1 votes are always going to be suspicious, but I don't see this(upon reread) as "testing the waters". Narn was on bv. Its not like he was fencesitting.

Waiting for a counterclaim for Susan of course, not rumblebuffin. I actually agree with you on bv310 and that is why I had a vote on him, but forcing a third claim today might help scum more than it would help town. Choosing between a Vanilla townie tertiary character, and an uncontested Susan claim (power role to boot) seems like we have little choice.

"Seems like we have little choice" = scummy as hell. That is so scum trying to escape accountability.

It was day 1. I have mentioned it before, but vanilla claims should never "stop" a lynch. I think the approach here was pro town. Narn repeatedly stated he wanted the bv310 lynch. It could be clever scum, but with bv flipping town, I don't see the motivation to choose one over the other. Hackerhuck was pushing for more Susan info which is way scummier imo. Its a reach at best.

Finally, J.R., who Narninian replaced, also set off my scumdar. J.R. was opportunistic as heck, placing a third vote on Starbuck for little reason.

I believe it was an RVS vote. Some players think bandwagons are a good way out of the RVS. This is a debatable subject, but I personally don't think RVS interactions are scummy until you can associate them to a flipped scum(which we can't).

Overall, The way the initial case was framed made it appear to have merit. But reading Narn in iso leads me to see much more protown behavior than is presented. There are far scummier interactions going on yesterday. Granted, I am thoroughly unimpressed with Narn today, but I think this case is no good, possibly fabricated.

Waiting on the list before I post more.

[kikuchiyo]

We may need to agree to disagree on some of this. I appreciate your responses.

I have two issues at this point. One more important than the other.

First the lesser:

In your list of "most" to "least" reasonable Starbuck votes you have Narn above Wolf. Yet you vote Narn and FoS Wolf. Any particular reason there?

Second, and of greater importance:

You have RBT's reasoning as the third(effectively second, minus bv310) most well reasoned Starbuck vote. I would like you to iso read RBT and reevaluate his play. Please include his play today in your analysis. Do you still stand by the implication that his vote on Star was "well-reasoned"? Do you still stand by the implication that his play is "null tell"?

[kikuchiyo]

the town-vs-town vibe is very different from the town-vs-scum vibe, so "one or both could be scum" is a correct saying, at least imo. and you shouldn't be worried about the case both of you are town, as you think snail is the scum. it is weird for a townie to vote someone and push for his lynch, but worry that he is town at the same time.

RBT shouldn't have knowledge of our alignments if he is town. By saying "one or both" he sets himself up to take either side of the argument today and push the lynch of the other tomorrow. Do you have 100% knowledge that evilsnail is scum? I don't, therefore I have to accept the possibility that he is town. In that case, RBT is stringing mislynches.

Also, please note the logic fail. If the "town vs. town" vibe is "very different" than the "town vs. scum vibe" then you cannot logically conclude that "one or both could be scum" is a correct saying. If you need further explanation, just ask. Your uselessness is noted.

I am currently engaged in discussion with evilsnail. It is prudent to consider both possibiilities in regards to his alignment and to allow him to offer his opinions and analysis. Starbuck was afforded the same grace and chose to squander it which contributed to the downward spiral that led to her lynch.

If you have a question for me, please ask. Interuupting an ongoing investigation with your opinion is a bit rude. As it stands now, regardless of his alignment, his contribution and responses are only going to help town.

[kikuchiyo]

I'd like to understand what you're trying to get at with all of the debate over where people belong on his ranking. It seems a bit of a distraction and not really leading down a path that would help determine evil's alignment.

Its actually helped me quite a bit. If you have any other ideas, feel free to share. Criticising without offering an alternative is lazy.

I'll pbpa 568 later.

When Narnian voted after me I thought I had a partner, now I am just thinking I have a scum and Evil himself has dropped to a neutral zone for me.

What moved Evilsnail to neutral?

[kikuchiyo]

HH: Questions usually have question marks at the end. Your post read like a statement. In any case, I explained in my post that I would be posting my pbpa later. That means... later. I only have a few minutes right now, but I will have it up as soon as I can, hopefully by tonight.

Madcraw: I agree. Which is exactly what made Starbuck's response all the more puzzling. As I said, there were a number of responses which could have alleviated the pressure. She lied. That didn't make any sense to me.

My vote is still on Snail in spirit. My next post will explain why.

Back to work.

[kikuchiyo]

i really don't have anything to add,

as kiku ask me not to interrupt her investigation against snail

, but i really think kiku is the scum starting to back-pedal when the snail-wagon start to fall.

A) Where and how is kiku backpedaling? Please provide quotes and/or post references as to this accusation and explain how it is scummy.

B) The bolded is an example of you not taking responsibility for your personal level of contribution. This reads as though I am somehow responsible for the fact that you "have nothing to add".

Back home now. Get back to this soon.

[kikuchiyo]

I didn't really understand Wolf's initial Starbuck vote. It was something about Starbuck saying Sibelius was lurking that I didn't quite get. But anyway, I'm voting Narn for the way in which he voted, not the purported reasons.

Yes. You've mentioned that. The question was why vote Narn when Wolf's vote was less well reasoned. Wolf's vote was interesting, to say the least, but his post clearly states what he is questioning in regards to Starbuck's play. Not sure why you "didn't quite get" what he was saying. But as I said, this is of lesser importance.

Hmm, well I could go with putting him below you as well, because he's mostly going by other people's cases. That said, there's nothing in principle wrong with that. I mostly put your vote below his because I don't think avoiding the thread is at all a scum tell. I've done it myself as townie, mostly in situations in which I feel like my defense is falling on deaf ears or when discussions with the players attacking me aren't particularly constructive (because of stubbornness, abrasiveness or whatever). It's actually sometimes easier to answer attacks as scum, because at least you don't have the frustration of being falsely accused.

I voted her for avoiding the thread. I lynched her for lieing about it. Please don't blend the two together. Had she replied honestly, the pressure would have most likely dissipated(at least from me). As for RBT's Starbuck vote: he's not "mostly" going with other peoples cases. He is going with other people's cases. He adds nothing original to the debate. Also, his iso 13 seems to imply that he isn't buying the case on Starbuck and that he simply thinks she needs to claim. Your interpretation here puzzles me.

Anyway, RBT's play: he was one of the first to go after manho, then hopped onto the Starbuck wagon citing the cases developed on her, went back to manho after Starbuck claimed and the wagon lost a little bit of momentum and then hammered Starbuck. Except for the lurking in between, which makes this play a little opportunistic, this is essentially similar to what other players did Day 1. I can see what is grating about this play, because contribution is quite scarce and it's difficult to read him, but I don't think it's a scum tell.

Which "other players" rode both wagons, asked for both claims, and hammered Starbuck? If his low contribution and "oppurtunistic" play aren't a scumtell, how do you suggest we figure out his alignment?

Looking back, his first vote today was a bit off. It's a bit weird that he said he didn't expect Starbuck to turn up scum and his vote for you wasn't that inspiring (the fact that Starbuck was town doesn't mean she was right about who is scum). But yeah, I stand by my original assessment of his lurkish play.

Again, here we have a slough of odd behavior and yet you stand by your assessment. What puzzles me most, is the fact you are also ignoring RBT's acquiescence to lynch either you or I(not sure if he still has that stance). Couple that with the rest of his behavior and I can't understand why townevilsnail would continue to ignore RBT. You are either buddying a townie, or distancing from a scumpartner. Either way, your actions here are scummy.

RBT's decision to keep the pressure on your wagon is probably his biggest towniepoint gainer imo so far. The only other "protown" post I can really credit him with is where he doesn't push for the Susan counterclaim on day 1.

Also, Wolf's wagon jump is a bit off. I don't see why the read went from scum/scum to scum/town based solely on Narninians actions. He could just as easily be backing off his scumpartners wagon as backing off a townie wagon. His initial Snail vote was to "test a theory". Now he is implying it was a gambit? Odd.

Vote: Evilsnail

I am okay with a claim here.

[kikuchiyo]

Its not about his day 1 play. Its about you comparing your suspicions of the players involved. It's not adding up for me, and if you flip scum I have a good idea of at least one of your partners.

I suggest you claim. You are at L-1 again and there is no guarantee that you won't be hammered here. If you are someone we can't lynch then we need to know.

That's it? That's what this questioning has been building up to?

I'm not a magician. Not sure what you expected here. Questioning doesn't have to "build" to anything. Its a way to get information into the thread for present and future use.

RBT's keeping the pressure on exhibits to me that he is more likely not one of your partners. Scum has little to gain by pulling such a move(unless of course RBT is partners with Narninian). As of yet, I find yours and Wolf's play scummier. I kind of have town divided into a couple groups here. If I'm wrong, anyone is welcome to defend you, attack me, attack someone else, etc. As it stands, I think you should claim.

[kikuchiyo]

Unvote

Interesting...

Counterclaim should definitely happen if this is fake.

[kikuchiyo]

Aslan, four Pevensie children, two beavers. Rumblebuffin. That's 8/9 town roles. I have to embrace the idea that Edmund could be a traitor role of some sort, but he does end up as a king in the end. That really only leaves one town role out there.

I would like a counterclaim before any info is divulged, but in a game this size we really need to focus on lynching correctly today. If Aslan has investigative powers then his results need to be public before night. Townies are rarely guaranteed survival as there are scum roles which trump even protection.

I am puzzled here, but I have to say that this claim upends alot of my thoughts. We need some more participation. Without a counterclaim it may be safe to say that scum hasn't needed to be involved all that much in this game which can help us narrow down a lynch pool to our lurkers and low contributors.

evilsnail: You stated you think scum is pushing your wagon. Can you analyze your wagon for us? Give us a breakdown of your thoughts? For instance, what makes you think I am "misguided town"?

[kikuchiyo]

Vote: Wolframnhart

I'm starting here. Post some iso later.

[kikuchiyo]

i really think we can save the alsan claim first before the CC.

What does this mean?

[kikuchiyo]

Agreed. 608 made me chuckle.

I support a mass name claim. No roles need to be revealed unless we get a counterclaim. Rationale is this: A mislynch today can mean possible lylo tomorrow. A counterclaim in Lylo can be disastrous.

In fact, this game seems to have stalled so I'm going to unilaterally start a mass nameclaim.

Peter Pevensie.

Let's do it popcorn. Narninian, you are next.

[kikuchiyo]

uhhhhhhhhhhhh

Well the game has stalled yeah but I mean is it really hard for the scumz to figure who to kill off based on names alone? Plus if you're doing this you're really banking on them not having safeclaims.

No. I am not name claiming in order to find scum. I want a nameclaim to avoid scum trying to counterclaim a power role in lylo. Let's get ourselves out there. By not claiming powers, scum has a real difficult time to figure out whose protective and whose investigative. Also, if any of us have roleblock abilities, we know who not to target. It may imrpove our chances of hitting scum today, but that depends on who claims what. I already have my suspicions. I would hope others have theirs to.

Mod: Please provide scum with safeclaims if they don't already have them

.

I would hope they already have them. Its a shitty way to lose otherwise. In any case, I'd like to know where my brother and sister are. We will need to work together to win this.

[kikuchiyo]

HH: We are nameclaiming. Case closed. I am the fucking high king of Narnia. Both Aslan and Susan have been outed in addittion to Peter. I need to know where we stand before we lynch today. A mislynch today most likely means lylo tomorrow. Mass nameclaim today prevents a counterclaim in lylo. Counterclaiming in lylo is scums best chance of winning as far as I can tell. If they want to sacrifice someone today then I am okay with that. They have no idea what our powers are. They already have three players to choose from. No reason for Edmund and Lucy not to come forward.

Why is a massclaim now "in the spirit of the game"?

I play to win. If I have to lower my standards I have no issue with doing so.

Mass Name claim. I command it.

[kikuchiyo]

Narn. You are supposed to choose who claims next.

[kikuchiyo]

I would be okay lynching RBT at this point. I'd like the other claims, though. One is expectedly Lucy. We shouldn't be lynching based on claims, however. We should be lynching on scumminess. The Wolf wagon doesn't seem to want to go anywhere. Two days to deadline.

[kikuchiyo]

Or we could lynch our traitorous little brother. What good does rolecop do for the town? I don't see why the claim makes him any less scummy.

RBT: Flavor with your role please. Also, why PZ?

Wolf, HH, Gawyn, and RBT should be our lynch pool today. I am also inclined to lynch Edmund. He is the only Pevensie with questionable ties to the White Witch.

[kikuchiyo]

Vote: RBT

Rolecops get role results, not names. I.e. jailkeep, cop, doctor, tracker, etc. Not Jimmy, Susie, Bobby. I call bullshit. 100%. Even if he claims the correct role, he's way more obvscum than town at this point. Drop the Wolf wagon, please. RBT is today's lynch.

[kikuchiyo]

A) Thanks for narrowing down the scum nk.
[/sarcasm]

B) Do you really think town would have a role that reveals names? In other words, RBT would get a result like "White Witch"? I don't see why such a role would exist. Why not just be a regular cop, or be a name cop? Doesn't add up. My role name is Peter Pevensie, but I have a traditional ability. I don't see how a name cop helps the situation. Please explain.

[kikuchiyo]

EBWOP: To wit, I don't see why Wolf would be trying to cast suspicion on PZ. Uncounterclaimed Lucy seems a town lock. 651 could be oppurtunistic scum.

[kikuchiyo]

Not sure what the tunneling comment means. The ebwop was directing suspicion at Wolf. I don't see how that's tunneling.

I guess I could be swayed by 656. Its just odd.

Gawyn: Welcome. Please claim. Name only.

[kikuchiyo]

I guess I just don't like how the Wolf voters are voting based on the claim and not bothering to make any sort of case as to why Wolframnhart is scum. Honestly, he has been on my short list for quite a while so I don't have a huge issue with the lynch and I am comfortable with the Pevensie's being town(except Ed). We have avoided any sort of lylo counterclaim gambit, so I'm okay with moving forward. I'll hammer near deadline. I would like to reread this weekend, though, to see if there is anything that isn't quite fitting.

[kikuchiyo]

PZ: I've been making points about Wolf's play. Others are just voting based on his claim.

Edmund could be a traitor role. He did lead the secret police to the Beaver's, if you recall, and had Tumnus arrested and turned to stone. I would think the Pevensie children would have powers. Four power roles, plus Aslan makes five town power roles with a pair of Mason/Lovers. A bit overpowered. Aslan could very well be a safeclaim, and Edmund could be mafia aligned. Not at all a stretch imo.

RBT: I would like full results from you on PZ. You have no guarantee of surviving the night, nor are you confirmed town. Please reveal your information. I would like PZ to confirm it and if necessary, reveal his results.

[kikuchiyo]

Tell me how creating a "lynch pool" based on claims, and wanting to lynch Edmund based on the role, is any different from the people who want to lynch Wolf based on his role.

Not sure what you mean here. The lynch pool isn't based solely on the claims. All players in the pool have been under suspicion at some time. If anything, I find HH's claim the most suspect, but his play has been less scummy than the others. Narninian claimed Edmund. He has been under suspicion as well. We can use the claims to help us figure things out, but lynching based solely on the claims would be poor form. I'd rather not rush to lynch today as a mislynch puts us into a lylo most likely.

Also, I don't see how RBT revealing anything else is helpful to the town.

I do. Very much so.

[kikuchiyo]

I don't follow. You and I have been under suspicion. Manho was nearly lynched. Why aren't we in the lynch pool?

Do you want to be lynched? I don't. Therefore I am not going to put myself into the lynch pool. I don't think you are scum. therefore I am not going to put you into the lynch pool. Would you like me to put you into the lynch pool?

Is "incredibly scummy" just your meta or something?

I have been told that. Why do you think I am scummy? I am just trying to figure out who the scum is. I need more information to do that.

I do. Very much so.

Explain then.

I would rather not have to. i.e. I do not want to full claim at this time. I would rather that RBT give us his information. He was at L-1. A full claim with results could help town. It may help scum, but I think it is worth the risk. By him putting his info into the thread, you should be able to then determine if he is telling the truth. All he has done so far is say your name after you said your name. He does not need to be a rolecop to get that right. He also said you are town. He also does not have to be a rolecop to get that right. But whatever, if you think we should just lynch Wolf and move on, then so be it. I am not going to fight you on this.

[kikuchiyo]

Unvote

Let's wait the weekend for some more input. Wolf has gone quiet. Shouldn't have any problem with a deadline hammer.

[kikuchiyo]

I don't have an overwhelming feeling that he is scum. Its why I'm not leading the charge to lynch him. His opening post today seemed to come from more of a scum mindset than a townie one, and I pointed that out earlier. I don't like his response to his wagon at this point. I don't see why he would imply that Lucy Pevensie is scum. He latched onto my "rolecop gets roles and not names" argument, but didn't seem to notice the evidence presented in thread to counter the argument. If he is town, he has a vested interest in not being lynched. As scum, if we are way off on who his partners are, he can just coast into the noose. I'm okay with the lynch. Only reason I'm not hammering is for discussion purposes. I'd actually like to hear more from Wolf and I am surprised that he seems to be half assing it at this point. We'll have to wait and see.

What about my behavior rubs you the wrong way?