Open 193 - Friends and Enemies: It's over!

[Ojanen]

not sure if we're meant to confirm while waiting for the setup issue resolution but hi.

[Ojanen]

Yup.

[Ojanen]

Serial 2 - Sando 1

vote: Vi

[Ojanen]

@Ojanen, are you done with your trip at this point? Should we reasonably expect to see you posting regularly or are your posts going to be sporadic because of your schedule for the next while?

Yes. I am home, and I have all means and the intention to be active.
I in fact admit to lurking since this game started yesterday morning which is evidenced by this fast reaction, I have been around the site. A now already ended game's lylo day started about simultaneously; I was scum in a bad spot; I didn't feel like posting anywhere until some claims had resolved in that game and I had kicked myself to make a case (which wasn't needed in the end, they lynched me before that).
The Scien/Vi argument looked boring on the surface. Felt generally a little weary of mafia.
Allow me to read the thread again now, hopefully there's something worth saying.

[Ojanen]

1. What was your role in the aborted version of this game?
2. Did you know before the game started that Friends and Enemies is intended to be run with 3 mafia and 3 masons?

1. Townie
2. Yes. There's currently another ongoing Friends and Enemies and I'm in that.

Troll, why did bother to you ask about my schedule when in the same post you stated aloud the observation that my lack of posting was apparently not due to access issues (posting in other threads)?

I'm actually interested in Porkchop.
Since he didn't provide it despite obvious prodding from Vi, I'll explicitly request his stance on Scien/Vi.
(My stance: there's almost nothing I can get a read out of there.)

The Scien/Vi argument looked boring on the surface. Felt generally a little weary of mafia.

Good choice of words.

Why? What did you try to communicate with this comment?

I find it dubious that you apparently consider PorkchopExpress a wagon when you put the third vote on me.

I didn't get this line, specifically the thought connection before and after when. What did you mean?

[Ojanen]

That reads as a little strange, VP, with the standard of play generalization rhetorics.

I don't believe I've seen ABR so touchy before.

This does imply meta, and I'd find it useful if you answered more specifically from where it comes.

[Ojanen]

Also, thanks for using my post reference system

That's the second time you've used a tangential positive tone regards to something I did...who are you and what did you do to Vi

Everyone plays differently, of course, but there is a certain standard of play I expect from people who I respect as players and are experienced. If I see variances from that, expect me to call him/her on it.

Coming back to the strange snippet. So would you call ABR's play bad here; if yes, why?

My playing experience with ABR is limited, but from my memory I don't recall him being so personally reactive in various games I have read him in.

No, seriously, surely there's some memory trail of the

various

games you've read him in, some fuzzy idea what those might have been (you don't need to dig up links or anything, just gimme some names).

Sure. I think Vi is making a bit of a mountain out of a molehill and that Scien's L-# point isn't leading anywhere. It looks to me that they are engaging in similar tactics (slightly exaggerating stances on issues to generate content). Not getting any scummy vibes from either of them yet.

Why are you interested in getting stances on something you find apparently boring as well?

[Ojanen]

Porkchop, what were the incorrect assumptions Sando had regards to your first vote?

[Ojanen]

Ojanen - no votes yet?

I have a random based vote on Vi. No ping has felt significant enough to change and improve the accuracy.

VP, my problem with you is that at first you implied meta from ABR that was contradictory to what I (and several others seem to) have; when asked to provide this you said it was more because

Everyone plays differently, of course, but there is a certain standard of play I expect from people who I respect as players and are experienced. If I see variances from that, expect me to call him/her on it.

which picked my bs-rhetorics-o-meter. What does the "standard of play" actually mean, seems empty. Makes me think of "deviant=scummy" (don't like).
When trying to ask more about the standards, I got

I think it was reactionary, which is suspicious because it points out a sensitivity to being called scum.

Which doesn't reference meta anymore, doesn't reference bad play as town anymore. This would be considered a standard scumtell, except that it contradicts my master-of-omgus meta of ABR, and you referenced meta in the first place.
Just seemed somewhat like you were making these up as you went.

I don't think Sando and Serial need to be accused of not being able to play unbiasedly enough together. I remember seeing them accuse each other quite rabidly in mafia 102 as town-town on D1.

Albert, I know nothing of the Warcraft universe, I can be a leftover. If you'd rather have random picking then dragon, cause I used to have one Long Ago.

[Ojanen]

I was mostly curious to see if someone who wasn't really contributing otherwise would jump on the opportunity to attack erratic play that amounts to a nulltell, and whether they would do so in a thoughtful way or whether they would just be like "WTF lunch? Scum!!"

Any conclusions from the lulz reactions since you (intentionally?) seem to be somewhat referencing Amished?

[Ojanen]

I've given you some games I recall reading ABR in, so if you're flat out declaring that is how ABR plays, then link me the games you are referencing. Also, who are these "several others"? Troll is the only one I can see who seemed to be speaking about ABR's specific meta like that.

Ongoing.
Fuzzy impressions about reading some midgame in War in Heaven 2.
From your meta, I was actually in Chosen as a late replacement, Albert never got much heat there.
Besides Troll, I remember charlatan saying he disagrees about the meta before flipping his position.

I think it's unfair to talk about bias in Quick and Dirty when Serial was right about Sando-town and clearly gave reasoning to his feel btw.

What's your read of ABR, btw? Since you're concerned about empty rhetoric, what do you think about his approach to bandwagons here?

I haven't felt anything especially scummy from him.
The selective wagoning makes me think more about his inherent pompous forum style, it is only proper from the righteous role he's playing that

he

should be the one to start a bandwagon and the rest of that stuff.
I dunno. I'm nothing like him as a player but I still relate to it somehow, I feel it.
Hard to say so early, but I've disliked his voters more than him.

[Ojanen]

The Scien/Vi argument looked boring on the surface. Felt generally a little weary of mafia.

Sorry I don't understand this, and its probably just a language thing. The argument was weary? What do you mean?

I felt weary. (Sorry, I have a tendency to shortcut from using personal pronouns, stems from my native language.)

Both times Ojanen killed Serial overnight I think?

Yeah. Serial dying before me is actually a 100% scumtell for me in all our ended games so far.

[Ojanen]

Hard to say so early, but I've disliked his voters more than him.

Well, we all know you and I can't get along, but I haven't heard you say anything about charlatan. What don't you like about him?

A lot has happened on the charlatan front since this question yesterday but I'll answer anyway. At that point I had gotten a gut twinge from him when he disagreed about meta with you early and then soon went back to look and said that the comment from Albert to pile on votes on VP was actually vote-worthy. The food-fishing had felt a little aimless.

It's old with the categorical voter-disliking btw, since Amished-town-feel is one of the few early conclusions I've felt good about so far.

I also do not like that VP tried to call a scumpair so early, then later stuck by it as a legitimate supposition. (I fully expected him to just be baiting Scien, really.)

Hey charlie, what where you referencing here as a later legitimate supposition? Couldn't find at glance.

So, two players I find particularly scummy early in the game are arguing, and I also think the points they are raising against each other are largely weak (which I believe to be a more or less reliable scumtell early in the game).

Why do you believe raising weak points is more or less a reliable scumtell?

That vote is not doing anything anymore.

Do you still find ABR scummy?
Was the vote originally based on anything that you found microscopically scummy or was it pure desire to pressure?

Inclined to go lurkervote route at this point.
From Porkchop, from his few posts, on gut front asking people's opinions on Scien/Vi felt pretty unrelatable when his own opinion was

Sure. I think Vi is making a bit of a mountain out of a molehill and that Scien's L-# point isn't leading anywhere.

nowhere usually leads nowhere.
(For the record, the explanation was

@Ojanen: Because someone could always see something I've missed/overlooked/whatever. Also, getting people to comment on things can be revealing regardless if I'm certain of an issues scumminess or not.

which is reasonable and vaguely alien in the 1st sentence.)
saw u hanging online yesterday1!!1
Post scum.

vote: PorkchopExpress

[Ojanen]

Do you still find ABR scummy?
Was the vote originally based on anything that you found microscopically scummy or was it pure desire to pressure?

I do still find him scummy. The desire to create pressure stemmed from something I find substantially scummy, so both, I suppose.

I don't understand why you unvoted on someone you think is scummy to reread the thread.
"Substantially scummy", the thing I've seen you reference ABR on was the revisionism, is that what prompted you to pressure vote then?

@Ojanen: You’ve lost me at “reasonable and vaguely alien” and their significance. Please to clarify.

There's nothing much to clarify except clumsily trying to word out why you twinged me more than triple D.
Something leading nowhere/creating no scummy vibes from either of them to you as explained afterwards, exposing people to oversensitivity on the matter you found exaggerated by wanting to generate more discussion on it, lurking, D1=>vote.

[Ojanen]

@Ojanen: As evidenced by your lurkervote, are you convinced that the "present" players are more likely Town?

No. But I think I've played too much scum roles in recently ended games; I've gravitated back towards my natural tendency of being a damn wimp with voting.
I liked several of the arguments against charlatan, yet wanted to get a better grasp of him somehow since something felt different to last game and there was electrical momentum already pressuring him.
I disliked Porkchop from the earliest pages and then he disappeared. Hence vote Porkchop, question charlatan for anything I can conceive bettering my read.
I need to catch up what's happened overnight, content shortly.

[Ojanen]

Massive whitescreening argh, haven't even gotten to the end of a couple of pages yet.

charlatan's case against Serial reads to me as very bad, it's aggressive but a bit hard to se as genuine.

First seeds of this are really in 176, in which he claims he has no "real reason" suspect VP, but in 187 suddenly does.

Gut is a reason, and there's plenty content from VP between those posts.

He's nowhere for 50 pages

9 hours when it's night in Australia, actually.

No looking at the actual arguments, and

When he finally tries to fully justify this vote in 291 (why did you wait that long, by the way, SC?) it's full of outright incorrect assertions.

The whole incorrect assertions thing reads to me mostly as the difference betweeen "prepared to vote for either of them" (as in "I am comfortable with voting in either direction more than for anyone else in the game at this time." which is a real quote from charlatan) and "preparing to vote either of them". Hard to see how charlatan sees it as such a significant misrep.

[Ojanen]

I'm sure you re-read the posts in question before defending him, so how do you figure that the conclusions reached in 187 had anything to do with VP's posts immediately before it? They're not related at all.

Well, first, he started the reasons by referring

See, it's rubbish comments like that one from VP that I don't like.

And the extrapolation of the rest of the earlier actions, I find perfectly natural to dissect the reason to one's gut after the fact and don't really understand your problem with it.

No, I'm far more interested in that he said (more than once) that I never addressed specifics about the argument, which I simply did. What's a pro-town reason for pretending I didn't? Even the statement you're quoting is not quite right in my eyes; SC said that I

said

I was about to vote VP, basically, which I did not. Perhaps I'm being oversensitive, but when people say I said things that I didn't, or I didn't say something that I did, I find that pretty problematic.

Being comfortable with voting in either direction more than anywhere, I just don't see what makes you think the fact that you're voting one (presumably then would be voting the other if not the first one then) makes the characterization of you preparing/being prepared to vote for either the Biggest Deal.
Can you show me again where you address the fence-sitting/convenience accusation?
294 which you refer to regards to the "factual inaccuracies" is about semantics to me, then pointing out earlier posts where you suspected VP/ABR.
I guess the attitude to VP was a little striking since what you refer to as the "spat" between you too consisted of the whole of

ABR making a joke about cocaine/your ass does not strike me as particularly out of the norm, for what it's worth.

After which you agreed with him to wagon ABR and we saw no mention of VP suspicion until echoing the LAL thing after others had gotten over it. A bit after which the pair of them were the most desirable targets of vote/attention to you.

[Ojanen]

I guess why both of them being your top suspects rang possibly false was that if it's scum-scum, it's at least somewhat out of norm (though yeah, completely in the realm of D1 possibility), and I would have expected a bit more questioning of VP from you, a bit more calling out the bad arguments from you; if it's scum-town either way you make it easier for yourself to switch, especially when you didn't give a reason to why ABR over VP when Vi asked, if it's town-town scum would love to throw gasoline to the flames either way.

My mind did not "change" about VP. I don't think I've indicated anywhere in the thread that I found him particularly townish. I went from unconcerned with him to finding some of his stances re: ABR questionable.

Sorry if you have to repeat here for me but can you help out and state the ABR stances from VP you didn't like?

ABR, is there anything else to your suspicion of Amished than him calling out a scumteam?

I still don't have warm fuzzies about PorkE - partly because his vote is still on SerialClergyman - but I prefer my DDD angst more because there's less room for error.

Can you rephrase what the "there's less room for error" actually means for me please?

I feel bad about this game for some reason.

[Ojanen]

Oh yeah forgot, ABR: who is more likely to be scum to you, DDD or Amished?

[Ojanen]

294 which you refer to regards to the "factual inaccuracies" is about semantics to me, then pointing out earlier posts where you suspected VP/ABR.

If an integral part of someone's case on you is that you never talked about an argument, and there are multiple posts right there in the thread with you talking about the argument, that matters. If you think it doesn't matter, I cordially invite you to consider this point: you're wrong.

Yeah, I was bringing up though that the VP stuff was a brief mention of this

SC, I did not agree with VP's assertion that Ramp was personally touchy.

before joining him in agreeing and then much later the incorrect late LAL thing echo; so something it seemed you almost flipped on (yeah, you've explained the whole different OMGUS's thing) and an incorrect thing.
But blah blah, it's going in rounds already I think.

Charlatan, my main problem with you is how the serial case feels.
I'd love it if you could tell more exactly what you thought when you unvoted Albert, did you have a conscious "attack is the best defence" type of thought process and went looking for another case or what were you thinking?
I don't get what meaningful questions I answered for him prematurely since he had already responded to the case at the time I first read it.

I'm swamped with a project I had forgotten must be turned in on Monday, more tomorrow after I've finished a couple of books on the subject. There's a couple of players I wanna look more.
Serial, I will join the charlatan wagon if or when I see it fit. Unless you feel me trying to glean a better read by questioning first is fake/pointless I don't see the problem with my approach (in that case you can point which part feels fake and I can try to explain what I'm trying to reach). If I don't get a satisfactorily confident read I'm gonna be wimpy around wagoning already very pressured people, sorry. Part of it is confusing tones, part of it is noticing being slightly lost on D1 lowish content strategy (I hardly ever start games from scratch, last town one was /inv), part that I'm vulnerable to feeling sorry. If I'm confident enough, you'll see me jump to throats, but not before.
I maintain a bad feel about PorkchopExpress.

[Ojanen]

@Porkchop, why DDD over charlatan?
@Serial, I'm quite aware of that meta, we have in fact close to discussed it, and thus totally gleeful to mess it up for you a little. (Not having felt getting a good grip on the game so far is genuine though, as is my start-a-game-effectively inexploredness [<=wow, that's probably not English but yeah].)
(200 pages to go before I'll be back to post.)

[Ojanen]

After DDD's last set of answers, I think I'm willing to give him another day and see how things go. He is right that he has had a propensity to lurk as town day 1 as of late. Even though I don't think his scumhunting thus far is that great, I certainly could see it just as a bad case combined with his strategy of "close my eyes and wait for day two", whereas charlatan I am definitely not seeing that much worth redeeming.
I think DDD is going to make himself more clear as the game goes on, but charlatan is just going to remain one big question mark for me until he's dealt with...so unless something drastic happens, my vote is p. much set.

I don't particularly like this post however regards to charlatan. Compare it with what VP has said in his iso about charlatan and you might see why I get that feel.

[Ojanen]

I don't particularly like this post however regards to charlatan. Compare it with what VP has said in his iso about charlatan and you might see why I get that feel.

Well I'm glad I read that VP iso.
I'm not feeling him.
Besides the little uncomfortable things like the mumbo-jumbo of "standards of play" regards to ABR's meta that we already bickered about and the irritation over Sando-Serial business which I didn't understand when reading the actual argument (that's alien rather than scummy in a present way though), I don't like him on the charlatan wagon.
Looking at the charlatan hate, the elements leading to his vote seem to be largely expressed already here rather tamely

Well, that's convenient for you. So, two players I find particularly scummy early in the game are arguing, and I also think the points they are raising against each other are largely weak (which I believe to be a more or less reliable scumtell early in the game).

In fairness, the points I've raised about ABR haven't really changed since you first agreed with me and voted him. There's merely been some elaboration. So, if you think the points are weak (which is apparently scummy), I don't understand why you voted in the first place

Because I'd rather be voting Rampage at the moment

This seems intentionally obtuse. Troll, eat this man's first child.

His next post is after the charlatan heatwave grows and the vote happens over the same stuff expanded with pre-VP 273 quotes and more aggressive rhetoric, link for reference here. He never mentions hating the SC case when it happens and s talked about after the vote (until right now).
(Subsequent charlatan-talk is follow-up talk of the original conversation here and small mention here.) In fact the next step is

Even though I don't think his scumhunting thus far is that great, I certainly could see it just as a bad case combined with his strategy of "close my eyes and wait for day two", whereas charlatan I am definitely not seeing that much worth redeeming.
I think DDD is going to make himself more clear as the game goes on, but charlatan is just going to remain one big question mark for me until he's dealt with...so unless something drastic happens, my vote is p. much set.

I realise that "reactive" regards to a vote and stuff might sound odd since I have refused to move my vote to charlatan despite expressing suspicion and many questions but can't help, there's different types of it. He probably remembered charlatan having disagreed with ABR meta and charlatan having been converted to wagon already before tame post, since those facts had been coincidentally recounted prior by/to him.

Basically, what I'm saying is disconnect with feel of arguments and conclusive "this guy has no chance to ever redeem himself in my eyes" type of certainty, possible opportunism with following the case.
Mostly gut though, like everything on D1 seems to be, blown up to many words while trying to dissect the basis.

I didn't like PorkchopExpress' last post either but it's a hazy read too.

unvote; vote: VP Baltar

@Troll: I think you had a townlean on VP, can you elaborate reasons for that or correct me if I misinterpreted?

@Porkchop: I don't have a clear alignment read on Sando. We have seemed to be suspicious of a relatively similar set of people. Some of his thread commentary is thin though. I understand how he could find me meta-scummy but at the same time his own reasons for not switching to charlatan after catch up at first was very similar, so dunno.

[Ojanen]

On the Reckoner issue brought up by Amished, I have no definitive stance right away except of needing more Reck to judge.
I actually remember that Scien game he linked.
I was town there and coincidentally remember disagreeing with the guy I replaced so immensely on everything that I commented on it upon replacing, though probably not criticized.

[Ojanen]

I was trying to get a post up but I can't look at the screen.
I fell ill again, I can't believe this.
Hopefully the fever'll be down soon but patchy access until it does.

[Ojanen]

Ok, VP doesn't read as scum in the last pages. The way he handles his ego is townish, and I like charlatan less again with some of his arguments against VP.

unvote

I'm happy with the charlatan case and unhappy with ojanen pushing it but not jumping on it.

This is getting a little blah.
Look, if you're making this argument based on meta, you should stop ignoring the most relevant meta, which is me starting a game from scratch as town, which has happened twice before this game. Hambargarzville and /inv 4, both of which you were in too, both of which I spent a significant part of D1 not voting at all, neither of which had a good D1 for town. There's a

reason

to why I almost always replace in and wrap my dirty fingers hungrily to the already available material.
That answer goes for Sando too, except for the being in it part.
As to Sando's question about me trying to influence my meta, I never claimed anything intentional. Merely glee for my mafialife not being straightjacketed by an obviously transparent meta.

@Ojanen: DDD’s repeated claims of being a pro-town lurker without actually doing anything to earn the pro-town part of that label strike me as more palpably scummy than Charlatan’s shenanigans at the moment. You haven’t really mentioned DDD as of yet, I’m interested to know what your take on him is.

Someone arrogantly claiming to be pro-town isn't a scumtell to me, and I'm not sure why it seems to be a large part of his scumminess to you, unless the whole argument is lurking. I don't necessarily like his attitude or the level of contribution, but I haven't felt anything that opportunistic yet, and he's felt fairly transparent and not that departed from the town-DDD I saw in Amished village.
He's neutral, or even a bit in the fair side of neutral.

I am weak. More in a bit.

[Ojanen]

Well, Albert, I think Porkchop is vaguely going with the flow in his suspicions and substantially scummy.

But I'm actually just looking at putting charlatan to L-1.
I had given up on his early actions being that scummy, just the attacks were bothering me but then this for example makes no sense

Of course I notice it. When Ramp chimes in with a post that just says something like "More votes for PlayerX, please", it's pretty run of the mill and I don't expect anything at all to come from asking him about it.

when the substantial reason for the early suspicion for Albert was, as he explained, not the OMGUS, but calling for votes on VPB (I remember asking him later whether the vote at the time was just for pressure purpose but he said no).
Have you flip-flopped on charlatan, Ramp?

[Ojanen]

Major bullshit alert! Where is the sense of urgency? I'm not rushing anybody to vote you. I have simply stated my opinion on the matter, which is that I feel you are the best lynch for the day. Nowhere in any of my posts am I saying "hurry up everyone, you have to vote immediately!".

No, you haven't said that, and it's mostly a gut and vibe sort of thing that stems from things like arguing that if I'm not lynched today, everyone is likely to forget about Day 1 and I'll just be off the hook. Or, the comment that I need to be "dealt with" because, I guess, your read will never be any better. These things all say to me, "done deal, let's lynch him now while we can." It's not a very important thing, but I do get that feeling and so I'm curious to see if anyone else does too.

Also, I didn't get this - if it wasn't a very important thing to charlatan then wouldn't the whole VP vote kind of crumble? Reading the case attached to his vote it would seem to relate to this point. Which would make this the second vote seemingly switched out of something more akin to convenience than actually overturning scumreads.

[Ojanen]

If they're equal, why do you clearly prefer Porkchop?

[Ojanen]

Sando: Nowhere have I said I want to change my meta, get over your misread already. The games I pointed at weren't recent unless you count my whole mafiascum exisistence as recent, just relevant for D1.
Otherwise whatever man, not much I can/want to do about your misguided meta read, and if it has been correct every time I'm glad you didn't bother to say you thought I'm scum last game.

Your 478 ignores what actually happened in the game as well; you know very well there's a difference between now and then, and what's more the whole point was that Ramp claimed or implied multiple, conflicting reasons for the original bandwagon.

The conflicting reasons happened after your vote, I was looking at cosistency in the thought process of your defence.

There's also characterizing a vote on someone other than me as a "gamble", discouraging considering other routes indirectly through mischaracterizing them as dangerous for the town (they're not).

Yeah, I was wondering about that in your points actually, cause it seemed to me that if you had quoted the second part of his paragraph too the whole line would have been a little moot since he wanted more from xRx to decide.

I'm still hesitant about it because it seems like a big gamble since we have actual scummy behavior from charlatan to lynch on, but it's also day 1 where we have a little more leeway for error. I want to hear more from Reckoner (how he came to his early reads and what his reads are once he's fully caught up) before I make any final decision.

But ok. Let's make wagons exciting/a couple of people crave to strangle me.

vote: PorkchopExpress

Makes me feel a little nervous to keep avoiding the wagon of someone I find pretty scummy. But it's hard to tell, I keep changing minds. I've kind of argued with myself if charlatan wouldn't be the type of player that looks more town/more reasonable in his attacks when scum based on quick&dirty. And his talking is very compelling. And I'd have expected

more

bussing-nudging-seeming activity on D1 (although I do suck at patterns and that probably sounds crazy).

This is not a lurkervote. This is a vote for someone who suspects the rude and the bandwagoned, and writes small points that have felt very bad in my gut since the beginning of times. Porkchop, you need to seriously pick up your game right now if I'm wrong and you're town.

@Amished: I have no idea what you're referencing... How could I hate you? (Maybe you were joking about me infecting you? I don't have a sense of humour.)

@xRx: Can you specify anyhow (by an example, or anyhow so that I could get anything more tangible out of it) how Vi feels so pro-town? Would be interesting because (s)he's been a completely impenetrable read for me so far.

[Ojanen]

As a comment to the meta discussion of Chop (lol for VP who brought it up now not caring about one-sided metas very much): for me, looking at the iso of Porkchop in the linked game made me feel a good deal better of the validness of the scumtells he's exhibited here tbh. Yes, there were a couple of 3-4 day absences in the other game but as to most of the behaviour I actually thought scummy and scared in this game seemed absent in the other one.
In other words, a QFT to ABR's description.
Will post more in a bit.

[Ojanen]

If I was a patient girl, I would ask from you people to go read Porkchop's iso and find the self-offered

stance

on something, an expression of suspicion, something concrete.
I'm not patient though.
It's in iso 9 (corresponding to page 13).
Nothing before that looks like it's gonna go anywhere.
And the stance is

incredibly

safe.

In other news, I think it's dodgy for DDD to cry foul for being an easy target since this is a byproduct of the playstyle that he is wilfully engaged in.

After the next post in a few days he decides to indeed switch his random vote to DDD because of this attitude and not posting much thing.
His other suspicions are the under-bigtime-heat charlatan and Sando. Which is again incredibly safe. And his reason for suspecting Sando is hypocritical to the max, having never directly commented himself ABRvs.VP at all:

You seem to be a little preoccupied with side issues at the moment and I’m starting to get scummy vibes from it. Especially since you’ve barely spoken about the ABR/VP discussion amount.

The last posts, the concerns he's raising/the manner of tugging of charlatan don't strike me well either, but blah. I'm not finding the words to dissect my gut on those right now. Same variety of associating to artificial.

The rare posting does not bother me nearly as much as Porkchop's profoundly vague and go-with-the-flow stuff, and that is what I was referring to when I said the actual scummy stuff I can't see like this in the other linked game.
I spent a good deal of this say voting Porkchop and am happy to have a wagon on him now. Mere low contribution being depicted as a reason is irritating.

[Ojanen]

EBWOP: Second quote is supposed to be from Porkchop as well.

[Ojanen]

Wow that is a real "I am holier" post.

[Ojanen]

But expecting eagerly conclusion.

[Ojanen]

Sigh/slight lol at the usual ABR rhetorics.
charlatan, you're a good player. Won the game to your team last time etc.
Well I was just thinking after the fake feeling holy post and the diametrically opposite hard-to-understand reads to mine that charlatan keeps generating again that I'm enthusiastic enough about seeing him lynched.
I'd still like a claim though.

[Ojanen]

Serial, what do you think about VP at this point? What is the reason you switched off of him D1?
Vi, you implied earlier you thought the PCE wagon was scumdriven. Do you retain this belief, why/why not?
PCE, you've given me no reason so far to not continue to

vote: PCE

[Ojanen]

Serial, what do you think about VP at this point?

Louder please.
Here's what confuses me about your play: you don't like tunnelling on D1. You claimed to want to avoid confirmation bias at all costs. You switched off of VP because you don't want to have confirmation bias and got an impression you might be wrong.
You proceed to tunnel the shit out of charlatan, while the town collectively amplifies that tunneling.

[Ojanen]

To echo SerialClergyman, this is rubbish.
In particular, the bolded seems to suggest that the Town (read: the others on the charlatan wagon) is at fault for SC's actions.
Question. How "legitimate" was the charlatan wagon?

What? That is rubbish. I don't recognize what I said from that, I don't recognize it at all.
I was referring to the fact that Serial initiated/pushed hard on the case while being concentrated very much on it, and the suspicion for charlatan had caught on widely at the same time, resulting in the thread being very concentrated overall on charlatan. Both of which are self-evident facts.

Do you mean by "legitimate" if I thought at the time the case was good (obviously on some fundamental level a wagon on town is not legitimate)?

I liked some parts, I wasn't convinced on others, I disliked some. I thougt a wagon was earned, I thought the ratio of concentrated attention only on him/scumminess of charlatan's actual original comments was possibly inflated. I fluctuated around on whether I thought charlatan was actually likely scum or not and was trying to find out. I did think at some point in time that there was a concentration of at least relatively townish looking people on the wagon.

[Ojanen]

Actually I exaggerate above. I don't think I straight out disliked any points. Just wasn't convinced on parts.

[Ojanen]

I'm looking for how or why this is a scummy thing, considering everyone except maybe ABR agrees that there was a substantive case on charlatan.
What put PorkchopExpress over charlatan, if you agreed with both cases?

Well perhaps you should read the rubbish post of mine then.
I wanted to know what Serial thinks of VP and didn't really get a straight answer. I wanted to know how his concentration on charlatan matches the self-processed avoiding confirmation bias at all costs mentioned earlier D1 in this thread and how switching from VP to charlatan explained partly by this avoiding conf.bias business fits the picture.

There was nothing that said "town" on PCE and he had plentifully bothered my gut from the earliest stages, I loved the pressure on him, the meta defence seemed wrong to me.
While due to simply more content available the charlatan case was bigger,
there was stuff that made me relatively more uncertain about him.
It should be all reasonably transparent in my iso.
Earlier during the day I thought there was quite enough pressure for my liking on charlatan without me voting him although I was asking questions and thus pushing the case somewhat too. You find that scummy about me like the others do?

[Ojanen]

Wow that is a real "I am holier" post.

I saw nothing of the sort in charlatan's post.

I think I'm sometimes tricked by people being more extroverted than I assume or something of that sort.
What I thought felt fake was the fact that there was only a couple of pages of new posts and charlatan came in and said something like "well I am totally not going to jump on this rival wagon right away because it could be scum looking for 2 mislynches and I will now read the new content and decide what I think". Because it seemed a pointless thing to say instead of just reading the couple of pages and posting his opinion then, unless the point was "looook! I am not instinctively self-preserving!".

Your next post feels like a waffle--

charlatan, you're a good player. Won the game to your team last time etc.
Well I was just thinking after the fake feeling holy post and the diametrically opposite hard-to-understand reads to mine that charlatan keeps generating again that I'm enthusiastic enough about seeing him lynched.
I'd still like a claim though.

It seems like you were interested in finding reasons to gravitate toward the charlatan hammer.

There was no chance in hell for another wagon succeeding after ABR switched directions. I wanted a claim unlike ABR. I thought the previous post had been scummier again and I was fine with his lynch. I don't know what you see as a waffle in that post. The first line is a reference to Albert being incredibly obnoxious to him, which I thought was unwarranted especially after how the previous game with a scumteam of me, charlatan, Albert worked out through charlie's effort.

Was my answer unclear?

Yup.

[Ojanen]

Also, it's funny, Vi, how we seem to have had for a while similar concerns about each other. I didn't relate to the reasons of you joining the charlatan wagon. I agreed with ABR on that. There were 3 points relating to charlatan using a bad argument in his defence and one point which I think means you thought charlatan was scum with ABR (referring to a catfight between them).

*Your caricature of the wagon as "based on a quote from Page 5" is wishful thinking from a perspective of wishful thinking. A formal case is not necessary behind each vote, and a defense does not make the problem go away. Or more succinctly: Mafia is not a game of logic.

This one was especially hard to decipher for me; why did this wishful thinking make charlatan scummy?

[Ojanen]

Get better, Porkchop.

Soooo.
Reck. My man.

Also, call it gut, but VP and ABR's back and forth feels like bussing. I dunno.

Top of p.9, ABR joins the VPB wagon. Cool. Charlatan's 228 is too blatant fence-sitting, and definitely decreases my read on him. When I've played as scum, I've used a similar tactic of pointing out two people who are arguing, claim they're bussing without giving much insight into the argument, and then set myself up to look inscrutable by claiming I'd be okay with voting for either since I believe them both to be scum.

@Sando:
You and PCE's scumminess is not mutually exclusive.

PRETTEH SCUMMEH, huh?

[Ojanen]

@Ojanen: D'oh. PRETTEH SCUMMEH, INDEED.

That's a magnificently unsatisfactory answer.
Why did you find charlatan scummy for the "fencesitting on VP/ABR" line of questioning when the same exchange felt originally like bussing to you and you seem to regularly think two arguing parties could be bussing? Like your top suspects PCE/Sando here now again?

Why would Porchop replacing out change your opinion on him?

@VP: Currently undecided on you. At the time, liked you least from the original vote casters who held the wagon on charlatan at a stagnated 4 votes for while. But dunno.

[Ojanen]

Actually, I don't think they're bussing - I think PCE/Sando could either be scum. I think at least one of them is, it doesn't mean that BOTH of them are.

All right... How did I understand your seemingly contradictory previous answer wrong?

xReckx, you think me and PCE are scumbuddies, or just 1 or the other?

@Sando:You and PCE's scumminess is not mutually exclusive.

[Ojanen]

Yay! Welcome hitorogoshi. I hope you pump some life into this. D2 has been anemic.

[Ojanen]

I'm starting to like a DDD lynch simply because his playstyle would be too annoying to lose to if he's scum.

[Ojanen]

So Ojanen was sick twice and traveling during D1, if I remember correctly. I'll ratchet down my expectations accordingly, I guess.

Err, wonder where you got that.
Have you read quick and dirty mafia by any chance?
I was sick on D1 here but have used no excuses here other than saying that once and haven't had absences really, though perhaps some lack of impact.

Ironically time to use the traveling one though. I'm on low access for the weekend. Running 17 hours late due to a blizzard/stuck in transit and will break the heart of someone if I use time tonight to play mafia.

Ojanen. Has your opinion changed on SerialClergyman yet?

No. He hasn't done squat today. Why are you asking?

My hammer on charlatan was simply because I wanted D1 to end. I wanted a flip, I wanted some information on which to go on. Charlatan really had nobody coming to his aid (as in, actively defending him as town, IIRC), so to me that meant he was either scum or VT. If he was mason, I felt like people would've been quite opposed to his lynch. And, IMO, since a PCE lynch didn't look like it was going to happen, lynching probable-scum/at-the-least-VT was the second best option.

Reck, to clarify, is this what went through your head right up until the moment you were hammering?

Sucks so bad that I'm in the same place as with charlatan wagon again.
Reck could well be scum and there's a bunch of arguments I can relatively easily see against him, but not sure yet if he's scummy scummy or susceptible to peer pressure (cause I was feeling it end of D1 too)+not big on memory. Gut isn't convinced either way and that's all that's ever been worth anything in my reads. Aaaargh.
Wagon seems more likely to contain bussing if on scum, a good sign. Amished kill is a semi-valid point.
I totally dislike Vi's vote.
More later, gotta go.

[Ojanen]

I'm trying to catch up now. Unfortunately still super busy. Neeeed to master something or die.

Also, fuck it with the uncertainty.
I do not currently think Reck is scum.
I think he looks reeeeally inconsistent but I do not want to lynch him in the mindset I am right now. I just think we are more likely lynching bad play from town than scum. I wasn't kidding with my last waffle though (thanks for pointing out the obvious, which I also admitted in posting it, Serial). It's a totally flickering read.
I don't get what is so unbearably scummy about pushing the PCE wagon instead of the charlatan-town's wagon, definitely wasn't "dancing around any lynch he could get" since joining charlatan tunnelers was about as easy as it could have gotten in the first place and he switched when any other lynch than charlatan's seemed impossible anyway.
so that comment from VP and stuff like this

And now for Reck. I think you guys have done a lot of the relevant dissecting, but I still want to say how I don't like that his 432 scumlist is the biggest wagon and two lurkers – seems like a pretty easy way to take any wagon that pops up.
And sure enough, a PCE wagon pops up and he takes it.

I just really don't find accurate.
I think VP's case has other mischaracterizations too, btw, like describing the PCE vote as a switch, I don't think answering "you are" to VP's question of who is scum and not elaborating on others is a scumtell when actually in the rundown list VP also quoted he had indeed always had the others as town or neutral. I mostly don't like the shenanigans of reck's wagon.
And blah blah blah.
Gah. This post is junk but I don't like a Reck lynch right now.
I also think the Albert case is very weak on scum motivation front, more so than the Reck one, but need to iso him, not feeling up to date. (yay another waffle for Serial.)
Dunno what is up with me. Maybe I should eat more raw meat.

also,

unvote

Will post more soon.
With actual suspects, you know.
I have an inclination to look very carefully at some of the big boys (Vi, VP, Serial etc.) but blah.
Just snowed in and mind-numbingly stressed atm.

[Ojanen]

@VP: I said where I'm inclined to look, and I said that I currently think the hounded Reck is poor-playing town and that is the wrong way, which is not the non-stance you are describing, and you nicely ignored all I considered bad in your case. I'll be here soon. Looks like I'm staying up the night.

[Ojanen]

In fact,

vote: VP

I still like him clearly least on the long-term charlatan wagoners. I was stupid to move on on D1. Of course there

could

be like all 5 towns pushing and voting on a town wagon with scum having a deliberate tactic of all scum staying out but I just don't find it all that likely, and he stands out from that subset. His vote was the one from the long-term ones that stuck out as reactive as I elaborated on D1. He seems to be reactive towards emerging wagons on the whole too. It surprised me utterly that apparently according to hito he's one of the top posters, yet I have a complete feel of lack of initiative regards to his targets. I can see this with charlatan wagon, I can see this with the Reck support, he goes to Albert after Serial etc.

This argument was used to great effect on D1

Hey people on the PCE wagon, if charlatan is town who is scum on his wagon? Given that he seems to be on the edge of being lynched for forever, I'm going to assume you think there is a large concentration of scum on his wagon that just can't get it over the edge, so enlighten me.

Yes, you're right, scum typically avoid getting a mislynch. This quote is also implying that you think the people on the PCE wagon are scummier....so I guess you think that the scum would rather try and bus their buddy (in your eyes) than to get a mislynch on charlatan

and the conclusion on D2 was this

I was right about charlatan. I obviously don't have the time to wait an extra month on a mod who refuses to provide a deadline, so I voted him out since Vi-Amished-VP-SC-Zorblag were so damn stubborn about it.

Quick, let me get this out there before people question me about it after I was the one being so fucking stubborn and providing no reasoning yesterday.

and this

Really has been a lot of words today without a lot being said I feel. I'm inclined toward Reckoner being scum here. He has been dancing around lynches this game. I need to do an iso first though since my V/LA has put me a bit on the outside of this game now.

so shrug, I guess the charlatan wagon just was all town on town for the bulk of the day and Reck who was intensely badgered about not being on it is the scumz who switched on.
Reck is a juicy easy target in this game if he's town.
This might sound weak but I'm not a fan of his turn of phrase either here, btw, he has in effect already decided Reck is scum. Yet needs to do an iso for justification ie looking good. No way to land on anyone else if looking at one person only.
And I think his Reck case is filled with inaccuracies.
And I just feel baaaad about him.

[Ojanen]

This might sound weak but I'm not a fan of his turn of phrase either here, btw, he has in effect already decided Reck is scum. Yet needs to do an iso for justification ie looking good. No way to land on anyone else if looking at one person only.

Except you skip the whole part where I wasn't fond of Reckoner on Day 1. Also your argument that there is a "lack of initiative" in my targets is funny considering I'm the only person who made a case on Reckoner today and yesterday I spent a very good portion of the day outlining my reasons on charlatan.

Yup yup. Members of the town, very bad representation of my arguments.

Part of my whole point was that you (probably others too, won't check now) badgered Reck D1 mostly

because

charlatan was so OMG scum and Reck went on PCE wagon despite thinking charlatan is scum. And the charlatan wagon was all OMG town and not going through because of scum resistance. Reck hammers when charlatan lynch is inevitable, and charlie flips town. And you go for Reck first thing D2 without intending to look at others because Reck's been "dancing around lynches".
My lack of initiative argument is not funny in the least.
I attacked you D1 for being reactive on getting on the charlatan wagon and coasting on it. I already linked it last post but here we go a-gain.

After

which you proceeded to do all this arguing with charlatan, when you got into this mutual suspicion interaction.
As for you being the only person having made a formal case on Reck today, well how does that make a squat difference in motivation and reactivity when DDD and Zorblag had voted him, Serial had put him up to lynch candidates and I had just made my pretteh scummeh points against him.

Reck is a juicy easy target in this game if he's town.

Translation: "I still have a foot in both camps, but the Reckoner wagon seems to have become less popular now."

Ooh, exciting, you think I'm scum? I kinda like your knee-jerk.
I do

not

want to lynch Reck currently and I said it very clear. Need to take a good breath to do the full town assumption since I can see inconsistencies, being the one to bring some up in the first place. But indecisiveness rarely wins games. And I think Reck doesn't care how he looks, or then is a much worse player than I think he is. I'm expecting him to be town.

I don't get what is so unbearably scummy about pushing the PCE wagon instead of the charlatan-town's wagon, definitely wasn't "dancing around any lynch he could get" since joining charlatan tunnelers was about as easy as it could have gotten in the first place and he switched when any other lynch than charlatan's seemed impossible anyway.

So, you don't see any scummy motivation to support both of the leading wagons for very little reason and yet be unexplainably hesitant to join the eventual mislynch of someone who is apparently your top target? In the words of Mr. Clergyman, that is rubbish.

I find the reason to lynch PCE over charlatan for being far more useless ok, I might be biased since I thought PCE was scummier and charlatan was scummy too but meh.
Albert seemed to be specifically fishing for Reck's support on PCE vote, PRETTEH SCUMMEH in his call for PCE votes was a Reck citation.
What I see is this: people who have been long on the charlatan wagon attack Reck about not being on charlatan wagon. He sticks to the PCE vote but eventually hammers.

Hey people on the PCE wagon, if charlatan is town who is scum on his wagon? Given that he seems to be on the edge of being lynched for forever, I'm going to assume you think there is a large concentration of scum on his wagon that just can't get it over the edge, so enlighten me.

D2, above any implications of above popular line of thought are ignored,
A very similar group of people to the longtermers attack now Reck. Before the breakdown now the cases that have been made have predominantly been on PCE wagoners (ABR, Sando, Reck).

charlatan(4):SerialClergyman, Zorblag, Albert B. Rampage, VP Baltar

charlatan(5): SerialClergyman, Zorblag, Albert B. Rampage, VP Baltar, Sando

charlatan(5):SerialClergyman, Zorblag, VP Baltar, Amished, Vi

xRECKONERx(5): Debonair Danny DiPietro, Zorblag, SerialClergyman, Albert B. Rampage, Vi

with VP making the case and saying he would totally be on wagon if not too early in the day.
All of the core group of long time voters turn to Reck. Could be bussing, could be blah blah, but doesn't feel good, and VP sticks out to me as scummy individually quite strongly, has for a lonf time. And I have related to some of the stuff Reck has said (will elaborate later). Vi, to answer one question of yous, I don't read Reck declaring Sando as town as scummy, it reminds me of patterns of hounded townies' behaviour I have experienced more than scum actually.

As far as the wagon being less popular, I think the fact that it has diminished from L-1 to L-3 shows that it's less popular at the moment or at least that people are trying to look elsewhere before settling on that as being the lynch for the day.

Just look at the thread.
I don't think anyone except me or Sando has been really against a Reck lynch. hito, Albert, VP all seem perfectly fine to make the lynch happen again and that's already L-0.

The case on VP is not bad [...] Besides, we can use your vote if you're scum, you bus-machine

See, it's obviously a win-win. Hmm, how did this thing work? Oh yeah.
I'm sooo awesome. You should get on my sexy wagon.

There is a bunch of questions I need to aswer here and didn't answer all from even VP or read the thread completely to its end, will get back tomorrow. Still having time problems, neeeed to sleep a couple of hours before getting yelled at not playing Brahms concerto good enough.

[Ojanen]

It's not that I put superbly conclusive stock on patterns (it's not my forte really), but it's just that I would be surprised if all of VP, Zorblag and Serial were town, and VP has read to me as individually scummy for a long time (definitely more so than the other two) and they all go after Reck first thing D2.

[Ojanen]

Hi VP. I was just trying to catch up in another game but it went into night. This is getting comical. Thought I had a free night but instead I'm cowering at a train station internet cafe in the middle of the night needing to stay the awake here until morning with drunken people and bums. I'll post after getting some caffeine, getting too zombie.
In other words, still alive, still in trouble but will get here in a bit.

[Ojanen]

Ojanen, you say that you are aware of the inconsistencies you brought up on Reck but still think he's town. Did you think he was probably scum at the point when you started pressuring him and pushing his wagon (in which case, when did you change your mind) or did you think he was probably town even then (in which case, why did you push his wagon)?

To address Vi, Zorblag and hito bringing up similar theme:
I got more suspicious of him at the beginning of D2, I didn't mind him so much on D1 at all, because to me he seemed like he was somewhat genuinely slightly anxious to be on PCE wagon in case charlatan flipped scum. D2 didn't like the way he seemed to be catching on suspicions (I remember this at least in regards to Vi's Sando case).
I reread him and found the point I raised genuinely potentially scummy. Frankly, I've grown disattached of my earlier thought process during the week, I don't remember the exact point when I flickered back. But the inconsistencies being a valid scumtell or not, he genuinely seems to not remember things. For instance, he asked earlier ABR to rank the scum on a list. ABR later explicitly said he thought this was scummy from Reck, to make him decide better who to nightkill. After a while, Reck asks ABR again if he does readlists, and that he'd like to have one.
Frankly, I'm rarely very confident. But extended uncertainty isn't an effective playstyle. Flipflops do the same thing better. So I went fully out on current opinion.
I mean Reck is a bit of an all over the place thing, but yup, I currently do think he's likely town.

Also, fuck it with the uncertainty.

I do not currently think Reck is scum.

I think he looks reeeeally inconsistent but I do not want to lynch him in the mindset I am right now. I just think we are more likely lynching bad play from town than scum. I wasn't kidding with my last waffle though (thanks for pointing out the obvious, which I also admitted in posting it, Serial). It's a totally flickering read.

@Oj-To me, your post basically translates to: "I don't know what to do right now, nor do I have any sense of direction for the future"...which doesn't exactly give me the warm and fuzzies. I realize you're essentially admitting this, but what is the point in posting that if it's all you have to say?

@VP: I said where I'm inclined to look, and

I said that I currently think the hounded Reck is poor-playing town

and that is the wrong way, which is not the non-stance you are describing,

Reck is a juicy easy target in this game if he's town.

Translation: "I still have a foot in both camps, but the Reckoner wagon seems to have become less popular now."

I do not want to lynch Reck currently and I said it very clear. [...] I'm expecting him to be town.

However it's good to see you finally took a stance on it:

I'm expecting him to be town.

At least calling you out got you to make yourself accountable.

I feel the need to this chronology in full.

VP, to address the general "dancing around lynches" line:
A caricature of the color I didn't like:
D1: Reck is scum with charlatan. Reck's reasons for not getting on the wagon indicate a link, everyone on wagon are probtown. Bad reasons for not voting charlatan despite being suspecting him, implied should get on wagon etc.
*Reck hammers when no hope of other wagons succeeding*
*charlatan flips town*
D2:Anyway, Reck is scum for dancing around lynches.

Ugh. More soon.

[Ojanen]

hito, I didn't catch you answering about how an Albert flip would give you more concrete opinion about Serial/VP, can you answer that? would be pretty interested.
There's a bunch of points I haven't addressed but I don't want to use all of my coins and not many of them would actually advance discussion I feel. It's getting old that I say tomorrow but I should have mafia time/access tomorrow.

[Ojanen]

@hito:
All right, but you voted Albert way before Serial*s 761 and 768 and said this:
[quote="hito 710""]# I'll admit a bit of bias in that an ABR flip would tell me a whole lot about my two most ambiguous reads (VP and SC)[/quote]
So what was the thought process at the time?

[Ojanen]

I*m somehow tired of arguing. To VP's assertion of me trying to fool someone, I didn't leave out any of that from what I quoted, I think any opinion on an unknown's alignment has an in-built "if" in it so I don*t see how saying it aloud is vague, flickering is quite obvious since I had just been calling him scummy a bit earlier and the later stance could just as well be argued to have a built in caveat if one operates in this thought system ("currently" and talking about flip-flops as setting up a possibility for bailout or something).

[Ojanen]

VP, what do you think about lynching me?

[Ojanen]

Frankly, I have no effing clue on Serial.
I thought he was town D1, but I gained some meta N1 and I don't think I can read him based on what he has done so far here. I'm generally maintaining a special paranoia on him in mafia until I figure out how to read him since I suspect I might have positive bias towards him. (Could also just be too skilled for me.)
I didn't really understand this recently:

Having said all that, I saw a bit in Ojanen's case that was disturbingly hitting home. Zorblag and I thought Amished was a mason warning us off voting VP on D1, which is what all our crappy secretive code structure was and the double take from me on D1. I imagine the scum were trying to kill masons, so either someone else noticed it or troll is looking scummy. Or our fail secret talk gave it away.

He said he was thinking about joining VP wagon. This was the only reference I saw to it later. I understand the reasoning on Zorblag. But I don't get why he would have thought about joining VP wagon based on this, wouldn't the speculated scum rationale rather indicate a town VP?

Sando has not exactly been the epitome of involved but I don't see him as scummy here.
I hydraed with him as scum once upon a time. I have gradually formed the same clear thing as I had with Amished actually - in quick and dirty mafia qt and game thread there were two very different Amisheds, and I recognized the guy from the quicktopic here. Same with Sando; the two were quite different, and I recognize the guy from our hydra talk, not the one from that game thread.

Why do you think I have a mild bias toward attacking you btw?

[Ojanen]

You scum?
Bloody selfvoters.

[Ojanen]

Lol.

[Ojanen]

DDD isn't making all that much sense btw. All from him:
Reck is trying to secure posthumous town lynches. It's nasty WIFOM. It shouldn't be laughed off or ignored. Just to ignore is to pass on potentially useful info, the correct approach and result is to evaluate it and find that it's at least 50% nonsense and quite likely 100%.
Last comment of not wanting to make others discard any possible information vs. first comment of wanting to make people discard the comment ("trying to secure town lynches").

Quite obvious now, but Reck has been wanting to get lynched already for a while with the amount of effort he's put in. Either he doesn't care or he doesn't care. Earlier bussing likely if scum. Zero coordination with VP now, obv not buddies.

[Ojanen]

Well played, scum.

Not one of my finer moments, this game. Being rather useless for a couple of days would have been still slightly outside the kingdom of terribad given my role I thought, but being obvmason on top of that was not.
But I enjoyed following the elaborateness of the lylo.

This game crystallifies something about mafia I've been struggling recently but find hard to out into words. I want to try to actually read people.
I'm sick of lynches correlating so often with either how able a player in general is or then more or less sophisticated runthroughs of who is currently making the least reasonable arguments, when neither of those seem to be terribly correlated to alignment on average to me. I want to

actually

attempt to see through the posts of the Vis and the Zorblags. Of course this resulted here to me flipping my attack on Reck to defending him through lack of seeing the motivation for the contradictions, which is just as bad in compensation.
I'm rambling a bit - I guess this could be said with a simple "I want to be more able in reading people" but it seems to me I've somehow gone off the rails this year. And it's related to attempting to break through ability to alignment, which gets highlighted in invitationals, and in this game.
Also, I've got to do something to the dislike for mobs I have developed biasing me.

There's not nearly as much to see in the mason qt as the scum one, but from my part it's fine to post it.

[Ojanen]

Yeah, Albert exaggerates some but I did basically disappear from the qt on N2 before getting killed. I was pushing the whole game out of my mind due to my bad day game. Demoralizement at the time. Sorry.