926 A Game of Thrones Mafia - Over.

[Seacore]

Hello all,

Name claiming, or role claiming,

It's bad right now

And I do not worship the drowned god! The new gods are fine for me. By the light of the seven, we'll see this through!

[Seacore]

Oh, and I meant to

vote for Kinetic

For proposing the name claim. If it was just a mass claim suggestion, It'd merely warrant an FOS, but the name claim is sneaky.

I really think the lannisters, plus somebody like littlefinger or grand maester pycelle will come up as the scums.

[Seacore]

... except for the Imp. Tyrion rocks!

[Seacore]

Actually

I'm pro name claim I've decided, which is a complete flip I know.

I think we should post our names in order of the list on the OP

I will honestly be very suspicious of people I consider to be the "bad guys" in the books.
Sure, "bad guy" is a moving feast, since book 1, Jaime is painted as a bad guy, but later on he's not so bad. But anyway.

So I'm for a name claim. In the specific order. Because that way, scum have to choose, do I admit I'm Tywin Lannister? Or do I hope that "The onion knight" is not in the game and choose him. And then somebody else goes "But I'm the onion knight!" and bam! scum!

Who agrees?

[Seacore]

Also,

unvote

because now that I've stopped to think about it, name claim is good. Apologies.

Thirdly, I'm okay with doing the claim in reverse order. Since that will put me second.

[Seacore]

I just had some time off.

I blame the stars aligned II game that I'm in for my original thoughts that I now think are incorrect.

I have a fairly main character (he/she has never had a POV chapter, but none-the-less is a main character) and I don't have a PR. Thus, I don't think names will reflect PR.

I just don't think it can hurt too much to do it, and it may lead to some scum avoiding their scummy names, and thus cause them to slip up.

I am strictly against PR claiming. (I know I just kind of did it, but it was to support my point)

[Seacore]

Well, that's why I said using the list backwards Kinetic, if you chose to actually read my posts.

But fine, lets do it in some other way. i don't care, but I think it's information that can be good, and can make lying tempting for the scum, which is also good.

[Seacore]

This is going nowhere fast. If some people are going to flat-out refuse to nameclaim or just keep stalling by talking about the relative pros and cons, it's not going to offer any benefit anyway. Can we either do it or move on? I'm for it. With that said:

Vote: Seacore

For doing a lot of talking but talking about nothing else but the nameclaim. Even his vote was made because Kinetic proposed one.

Inconsistency is noted. You want people to start name claiming and I'm being voted for because that's what I'm arguing for.
I'm waiting for somebody to choose a 'random' order.

[Seacore]

Sounds good to me, lets get this out of the way, so we can start scum hunting.

Yay

[Seacore]

I believe MacLock is saying we have to take into account that the scum believe nameclaim is a good idea for them, thus requiring a higher number of town to believe it'll be good for town.

[Seacore]

I'm not agreeing with MacLock, I just thought you'd misunderstood. My bad.

[Seacore]

Yay

3 Votes
Seacore
Miserable
Kinetic

Nay

2 Votes
Macavity
Raivann

Yet to Vote

7 non-votes
Xvart
Locke Lamora
Bogre
TheButtonMen
Mina
Heliograph
The Inquisition

Button could you please confirm your vote if you now agree (considering your conditions have been agreed to) Could the other 6 weigh in?

[Seacore]

Yay

4 Votes
Seacore
Miserable
Kinetic
Buttonmen

Nay

2 Votes
Macavity
Raivann

Yet to Vote

6 non-votes
Xvart
Locke Lamora
Bogre
Mina
Heliograph
The Inquisition


Also, just to clarify. The initial claimer will be chosen at random, using random tags (which is awesome, the site I was from never let you use random tags). Once that person claims, they will nominate the next person to claim, who will claim and nominate and so on.
The claim will be purely character name, no PRs.

And if I see the Mountain that Rides, my vote will fly hard and fast (probably not, but I've loved hating that character)

[Seacore]

Actually, while that question is fine to answer in hypotheticals...

And while I'm guilty of it as well, with me mentioning of Clegane and others...

I think we should stop listing characters now. All we're doing is providing scum with our expectations, so they can avoid scummy characters, and claim, for example, Hodor.

Yes, it's likely that at least one scum has read the books, its probable that all scum have read the books (I mean, they're freaking good books), so yes, it's likely that they all know the characters. But by listing what level of character (in plot importance) we expect is giving information to the scum.

So, FOS:The next person to give hypothetical characters

[Seacore]

xvart

I answered that question, even if Kinetic didn't. I claimed to have a very prominent character and a Vanilla Role. Thus I don't think that the names will lead us towards PRs.

What I hope they will do is point us towards scum.
And if so, I expect the scum to lie about who they have.
And then I hope to catch people out in lying.

[Seacore]

Yes, I want everybody to be for or against a nameclaim

Name claiming helps town under the reasonable assumption that names reflect scum roles.

Why do you not like voting for nameclaim? Got a problem with people being forced to answer a question?

[Seacore]

I completely disagree with that assessment.

To use characters that have already been hypotheticalled.

I can see "Syrio" and "Hodor" having as much chance of a PR as prominent characters.

Also, I don't see why we would be playing a game themed on the books if the bad guys didn't have obviously scummy characters. Sure there might be some borderline ones, but I think they'll likely be lannisters (mostly).

[Seacore]

Note:
I've played the Game of Thrones Card Game. And it's actually the minor characters that have powers more often. The major characters just have good stats. Granted that doesn't translate directly in this game (there are no stats) but I'm just saying, your assumption isn't valid.

[Seacore]

More fun than magic.

Or at least it was. I haven't played it or even looked at it in many years.

Anyway, I'm happy to discuss the card game with you post game or in PMs, but I don't want to clutter this thread now.

[Seacore]

I'm not voting because I haven't started scum hunting yet.

I'm waiting for either names or for us to decide that we aren't going to do names.

When I'm scum hunting I like to ask questions and force people to answer them, I feel that doing this now will allow people to avoid voting one way or the other on the name claim, and instead respond to my scum hunting. Conversely they may respond to the name claim and ignore my scum hunting. I find that it's easier to get the town to focus on one thing at a time.

I feel that the name claim could be an amazing thing.

Person one claims: A
Person two claims: B
Person three claims: C
Person four claims: D
Person five claims: B
Person six claims: D
Person seven claims E

etc

BAM, we find two scum.
Do I think it will be that easy? No. But it might happen.
I think fake claims might also, possibly, stick out a little, even if they aren't double ups, but I don't want to go into that as it might coach the scum out of trouble.

[Seacore]

Fantastic level of lurking here people. Catch up and vote on the name claim so we can have a strong last week before the lynch.

[Seacore]

Yay

5 Votes
Seacore
Miserable
Kinetic
Buttonmen
Bogre

Nay

3 Votes
Macavity
Raivann
Xvart

Yet to Vote

4 non-votes
Locke Lamora
Mina
Heliograph
The Inquisition

Locke, Mina and Inq, if you don't vote soon, I'm going to look very suspiciously at you, I don't care if you vote yes, no or actively abstain, but you're dragging the day on. Helio is a waste of time, so I'm not going to bother addressing him, he flakes and lurks in every game I've seen, and doesn't offer anything much when he does play

[Seacore]

Vote The Inquistion

Actively avoiding making a stance either way is scummy.

I'm pretty sure we can say this name claim isn't going ahead. But Inq discussing people discussing the name claim without actually having a position on it rings my bell.

For the record, I dont' believe a name claim would "break" the game. I believe it would put scum in a difficult position of having to lie and risk doubling up with somebody or telling the truth and then having to argue that Cersei isn't scum.

I'm going to argue again for name claim tomorrow once two people have flipped.

[Seacore]

Great contribution there heilograph

xvart, my resistance to discussing two things at once is exactly because of players like Inq and Heilo.

It's hard enough to make them actually take a stance and/or answer questions without letting them hide from one train of thought by kind of answering another. I've seen it happen again and again.

[Seacore]

Wait, dammit, this is what happens when you play as you're getting ready for work. I take back everything i've said about inq, I missed

a) that he voted (because he didn't bold) and
b) that xvart mentioned he voted

sigh. Good job seacore.

So I withdraw post 118 and some of 121

unvote

I'll be back soon with a post that's actually read and not skimmed poorly

[Seacore]

Yay

7 Votes
Seacore
Miserable
Kinetic
Buttonmen
Bogre
The Inquisition
Heilograph

Nay

4 Votes
Macavity
Raivann
Xvart
Mina

Yet to Vote

1 vote
Locke Lamora

Looks like it's down to Locke to decide whether we name claim or not.

[Seacore]

Actually, Locke's last post says he is for the name claim


... and then he votes for me, but whatever.

8 votes, which is what was agreed to has it.

We have a name claim.
Somebody other than me (who doesn't know how to do it) do a random tag, lets start this name claim up.

[Seacore]

Shit

That means we'll be waiting for another two days

[Seacore]

Let me clarify. I'm definitely against the idea of a mass nameclaim now. Like I said before, on the off-chance Faraday forgot to choose faction-independent names or send out fakeclaims...well, this entire discussion just jogged his memory, so now we can guarantee that a nameclaim would be useless. But I'm "interested" in where Kinetic is going with this, because he's hinting at some grand theory about the set-up.

Vote: Mina

I don't like her whole train of thought with this anti name claim argument.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not voting for her because she's a Nay vote, I'm voting for her because of how she's been arguing against it.

I'm fine with the argument that outting PRs is bad. I don't think it'll do that, name a character and I can come up with a potential mafia power (or three) for that character (don't actually do this btw, I'm just saying I could) and if you think about it, you could too. But anyway, I'm fine with this being an argument.

What I'm not fine with, is her suggestion that Faraday will change the game to stop us from doing this.
To me this sounds like somebody who knows it will hurt the scum and is hoping the Mod will step in and stop it.
Kinetic and I (the two biggest pushers of the name claim) have both said that we don't think this will break the game. So why are you worried that it'll be so game breaking that the mod will have to step in? Did you not discuss fake claims during N0 with your scum buddies?

[Seacore]

But randomness just killed the name claim. Heilo's not going to post until he's prodded again. And by the time he does that we won't have enough time to use the name claim, discuss the fallout etc.
So while I hope in vain that I"m wrong, might as well start building cases without it.

[Seacore]

You won't find me too much against a Heilo policy lynch

But I'm curious for feedback on my (admittidly small) Mina case

[Seacore]

Screw you Raivann


I'm stuck at my desk at work and now I want nothing but peppered beef jerky...

[Seacore]

Say the character name you were given.

Do not say anything about your role.

Also, say if you are scum.

[Seacore]

Now you choose who you want to claim next

[Seacore]

I see nothing "breaking" about scum being given a name that they know is scummy, not being gift wrapped a fake name by the mod, and being forced into telling the truth and trying to argue that there is nothing role related about their name or trying to come up with a fake name themselves.

There is no hand that faraday needs to take in this to keep the game fair.

Even somebody who has never heard of the book has had a chance by now to somehow find a fake name.

[Seacore]

Watered down version: Maybe we're looking for good guys, not bad guys, for scum.

[Seacore]

Can somebody refresh my memory of who coldhands is?

[Seacore]

Thank you.

I'm rereading at the moment as I've just bought the books on my kindle, but I've only just reached clash of kings.

[Seacore]

I'm Renly Baratheon

Raivann, you're next


I definitely support Miserable due to Sandor.
I support Helio but I'll openly admit that to be a policy lynch.
I support Mina due to my early post.

[Seacore]

Given that we're not getting an extension, which I think is fair, lets get a move on.

I suggest Heilograph as a policy lynch we can all get behind.
It's also true that he may be scum. His difficulty in understanding the claim process, despite the fact that he agreed to it, can easily be viewed as a stalling and delaying tactic due to the fact that he had to be prodded each step of the way.

He's also made no contribution whatsoever. ISO him to your horror.

unvote

So here's my platform

A

vote for Heilograph

Is a vote against no lynch, lurking and useless players. Join me, in this brave new future.

[Seacore]

I find Locke's slightly less horrific. He's weighed in with his opinions, he appears to have actually read more than the three posts before each reply.

Granted his vote for me stinks of contradiction, but thats cool for now, I'll catch him out later.

[Seacore]

Oh god, now I want to lynch locke just because of his character.

But I don't believe it would be a pro-town thing to do, I just want to strangle Sansa Stark

[Seacore]

I've definitely got some things to contribute, but also waiting for Inq to claim.

[Seacore]

Xvart - Coldhands
Locke Lamora - Sansa Stark
Raivann - Robb Stark
Kinetic - Jon Snow
Bogre - Catelyn Stark
TheButtonMen - Arya Stark
Mina - Ser Rodrik Cassel
Heliograph - Tyrion Lannister
The Inquisition - Samwell Tarly
MacavityLock - Theon Greyjoy
Seacore - Renly Baratheon
Miserable at best - Sandor Clegane

Okay, a quick note before I head off to work.

Everything I say in regards to the name claim will assume it reflects innocence/guilt. It obviously may not.

I think we can assume that the Starks aren't the bad guys.
That's not to say that all those players aren't scum, but if they are, they're lying about their names.
There's 6 -7 stark related characters up there, too many to be scum.
I think that Theon is a good choice as Serial Killer, if there is one, but I'm happy to wait to test that hypothesis. Obviously Sandor is a good SK option too, but I think he might be scum with one or two Lannisters that lied.

It's worth noting that we have three Night's Watch related characters... I suppose they could be the scum team. Making Xvart, Kinetic and Inq the scum. Again, I'm not saying they are, but groups of three are always interesting.

Anyway, from here on in, I expect to be addressed as 'Your Majesty' or 'Your Grace' , as I am the Heir to my late brother's throne. Well, kinda the heir, best man for the job anyway.
Now where is Ser Loras... I need to... uh 'discuss' something... in his pants.

[Seacore]

@Macavity
I do assume scum may have lied. My assumption that I refer to is that 'actual' names reflect guilt/innoncence. Thus they would either need to lie, or hope that we don't find their names guilty.

Secondly, I don't think there's an SK in the game, but that's what sprung to mind when I saw Theon.

[Seacore]

On the assumption that Ben Stark = Coldhands, which I vaguely remember, but I'm not up to that part in my reread,

This means that we have only one character that doesn't have noble blood. Ser Rodrick.

To me, Coldhands also stands out. As the only character not in the first book (unless you consider the fact that Benjen was in the first book, but still)

@Kinetic, I don't really follow your "at least one of these is scum" groups. I also think you're pushing it as far as a 'location' for these events. We've got name claims from the wall to kingslanding with several locations in between. Not to mention that 'Valar Morghulis' (the latest vote count flavour) isn't mentioned until Clash of Kings.

Also, Macavity not referring to me by 'your grace' is noted. But then again, Greyjoys always have been uncivilised.


Anyway, all this is besides the point. We don't have time with all these V/LAs to really run a constructive name claim attack. So lets just kill Heilo, he's contributed absolutely nothing except delays.

More Heilo votes please.

[Seacore]

Helio has the upside of
a) Being worthless in every game I've seen him in
b) Potentially scummy due to his absolute feet dragging on his turn to claim
c) Being a Lannister, and in my experience, not 'with it' enough to lie. (Although he's Tyrion, so not a bad Lannister)

Buttonmen has the upside of
a) Flipflopping on the name claim issue
b) Being one of the plentiful starks
c) Being lowish on the claim list (potentially a liar, and I agree that likely some starks are liars)

So Heilo removes a definite anti-town player, buttonmen removes a vaguely potential scum.

Can you please explain to me what info we get from Buttonmen's lynch?

[Seacore]

A) You had to ask a question each step of the way

B) You haven't added anything to this game

Give us an opnion! Who do you think is scummy? CONTRIBUTE

[Seacore]

Also, I'll happily switch to Buttonmen and will do so in the next 24 hours.

But Heilo posts just enough words not to get replaced, regardless of the fact that he doesn't say anything. Whereas at least buttonmen is kind of contributing.

So I'd rather us lynch Heilo.

[Seacore]

Renly would be a terrible person to lynch as he's related (familialy nor thematically) to nobody else in the list. So if you're trying to reason for my lynch that way, that's dumb.

Lynch me because you think I'm scummy, fine. (Although I obviously disagree with your reasons).

I'm so sick of being labelled a scum because I'm "eager helpful". I was trying to move the conversation on. We needed to make a decision whether to name claim or not, and I got us an answer. Was I also arguing for something I thought was in our interest? Yes. But if I was scum, I could have just pushed for a name claim and shut up and let the clock tick down.

As for my pushing the lynch of a lurker, just look at Heilo's last post! He's read enough to know my argument against him, yet doesn't post his own opinion.

[Seacore]

And now he wants a no lynch!

Can you get any scummier???

[Seacore]

No lynch is never a good idea for town.

We get zero information out of it and then the scum kill somebody tonight and we start day 2 with one good guy less and no information.

It's always better to go with a lynch.
Have a read through these 9 pages and find somebody who you think should die. And then tell us why.

[Seacore]

unvote
vote: buttonmen

Unfortunately, it seems Heilo's just a VI

[Seacore]

If you look closely I say that Heilo is 'mostly' a policy lynch. Mostly. But I felt that the dragging of his feet, and other uber-lurks could actually be a scum, hoping that we'd take too long to get to a good lynch (and this seems to have eventuated, due to lots of v/la)
But his recent posts are just so bad that I feel he's now more likely to be a VI. I've got another theory too, but I won't go into that.

Also, I object to the idea that I'd be the prime candidate if Heilo flipped town. Tunnel much?
Yeah I've been pushing a Heilo lynch, because I felt it was the best we could do on short notice when people like you, xvart, go on V/LA. I'm not the only one. Others have been saying we lynch him or get him replaced. And I don't see him getting replaced.

[Seacore]

Pushing something that turns out to be a mislynch does not make you a prime candidate. That's stupid.

I have had good reasons to want Heilo gone. He's absolutely useless and for a little while I thought he 'might' be scum. There's no bad logic there, no tricks, nothing that makes me scummy in the slightest for wanting him dead.

If I was in your shoes, I'd be more suspicious of him turning up scum now that I've 'jumped ship', maybe I was distancing but didn't actually want to kill him. That would have been an argument I could have respected. But you've assumed that I was pushing for town to lynch a useless town member and when it became even more likely that he would be lynched, I got nervous and backed off?

a) Why would scum want a useless town lynched?
b) If I did want that useless town lynched, as a scum, why would I back off when it became more likely?
c) Why do you assume that I'm scum worried about a town being lynched rather than a scum worried about a scum being lynched?

[Seacore]

Also, we've got just over 24 hours left (if my clock is right, I'm in Australia, so I get confused sometimes).

Buttonmen is the most likely lynch for today.
The other two contenders are myself and Heilo
Many people including myself feel that Heilo is town, and while a policy lynch might be okay at this point, we're not going to get consensus for it in the last 24 hours.
Obviously I don't think I'm a great lynch, but I also don't think there's enough time to convince 4 more people of my guilt. (Assuming that xvart, locke and mina are currently happy to vote for me)

So we need three more votes. Xvart has said he'll move his vote, so we need two more.

[Seacore]

And I'm fine with changing to Heilo. To summarise my thoughts
1)I think we've got a better chance of finding scum by going after Buttonmen, but at least he's contributing
2)I think we've got a better chance of making the game more enjoyable and flow faster by killing the anti-town that is Heilo, but I think we have a lesser chance of hitting scum.

1) wins because scum hunting is more important to me than policy lynching. Who knows, a day or two in, maybe Heilo gets replaced.

[Seacore]

Also, for those who are still suspicious of my move from Heilo to Buttonmen,
his "vote:no lynch" finally triggered my, "oh I remember, he IS this useless" from the games I've shared with him.

[Seacore]

A) You misunderstand me, I'm not dismissing scummy behaviour. I'm interpreting it in line with what I've seen from him before. The very fact that he hasn't come back online and changed his vote to you makes me think town, not scum.

B) Several things; they aren't huge, but they rarely are day 1.
1-Your flip on the name claim without giving a decent reason to why you were suddenly okay with it.
2- Mina's points are valid, you seemed to go for easy targets
3 - Your attack on Locke, compared to Buttonmen. Yes Locke was posting little, but his posts had opinions and substance in them, compared to Heilo's.
4 - I don't like the way you're picking at a single point of Locke's case, dismissed Mina's points out of hand and aren't actually building an alternate case.

[Seacore]

1- The vote was close, particularly at that point, you could have voted Nay and ended the noise just as easily. Yet you completely reversed your opinion without stating why at the time.
2- ISO 1

Apologies, I hadn't seen the game start.

FOS: Kinetic

, as people have already said Mass name claiming i entirely worthless with this setting and he keeps pushing for it. He's also voting for someone who didn't even confirm not one of the people who has confirmed but never posted.

Vote:Locke Lamora

for being first on the list of people not posting yet.

Jumping on the Kinetic suspicion wagon, and then voting Locke for a fairly easy reason.

3- ISO 10

He's also made no contribution whatsoever. ISO him to your horror.
....
A

vote for Heilograph

Is a vote against no lynch, lurking and useless players. Join me, in this brave new future.

You want Horror try ISOing Locke Lamora.

You ignore the fact that I say "he's made no contribution" as I"m saying he's not just lurking, but doing nothing at all. I would say that this is at least "looking at him funny" and potentially "making a case on him"

4- Locke is concerned about the fact you don't even want to talk about the content of his posts compared to the content of Heilo's posts. I disagree that her points are 'poop'. And you're making me feel better about you being lynched because this way we're lynching a slightly scummy usless town, rather than just a useless town. If you weren't useless, you'd be trying to convince us to lynch somebody else. Even if you're going down, you can at least leave us with some points to try and win the game.

Finally. I don't think any of these points mean you are obv-scum. I don't see too many obv-scum day 1. But you're the best we've got.

[Seacore]

Sigh,

You must be purposefully misreading posts, not just mine but others.

Can you find anybody else that's even slightly as scummy as you?

I'm not over the moon that you're our lynch today, but you're by far the best we've got. And you're getting better every post.

I'm not "pushing that hard" I'm stating that I'm voting for you and following up with why. The scum tells are slight, but I declare they are scummy.

I've ISO'd you at your request and either one of two things is true
1) You've made really lame cases against other players and then won't back them up
2) (And this is the one that you actually suggest) You've posted a lot but haven't made cases against people. Posting to post is a common scum tactic.

Anyway, I'm over this, I feel even more comfortable about lynching you now, thanks.

[Seacore]

Oh my god xvart.

Your tunneling is at a ridiculous level.

But lets go through it in points.

1) Of course in your scenario I'm scum because you're tunelling me. And I answered within your scenario, I don't think it would be a very productive conversation if it was "you're scum" "no I'm not"

2) So scum seacore can back off when somebody becomes obv-VI, but town seacore can't? Interesting scum tell.

Finally, how is this a scum slip? I've already said several times that I wasn't happy about the Buttonmen lynch, but he seemed to be the best lynch of the day, given our time frames. My recent conversation with him has made me actually happy for the lynch, but that was after that quote.

[Seacore]

I felt the VT claim would help us move towards a beneficial name claim. That's why I did it. So there is a benefit to the town. You can agree or disagree with whether it worked, but in my opinion, it was for the town's benefit.

I like how you've waited this long to scum hunt, too.

[Seacore]

So you don't want to read my posts, Buttonmen?

1) Buttonmen is tunnelling me because he explains my actions as scum tells when a town would do the exact same thing.
e.g. I'm scum because I was voting for Heilo until he did something that was obv-town, and then I switched my vote. Even though a town would and should do the exact same thing. That's tunnelling.

2) I just explained how I felt that my VT claim was justified. A single VT claim to persuade the town to move towards a name claim that I felt would benefit the town.

[Seacore]

EBWOP

Sorry,

1) Should be Xvart, not Buttonmen

[Seacore]

I like how you've waited this long to scum hunt, too.

People actually posting makes it easier to scum hunt.

I VT Claimed on the 20th of February, and you've chosen to discuss it now.

Next excuse please.

[Seacore]

Wow Heilo, just wow.

Its called Mafia.

Normally, players engage in a discussion about who to lynch. They discuss this as a group, looking for evidence in past posts and actions.

Your tactic of posting nothing of substance, voting for a no lynch and allowing the scum to do whatever they want is interesting, but ultimately, will get us nowhere.

So your accusation of me boils down to me being scum who has a devious plot of discussing lynches with his fellow players, having the town killed off one by one, despite the fact that I have a single vote and players can make up their own minds?

[Seacore]

Kinetic, I don't think it can be a double voter, because the previous vote count had the same players on the list with a 4
So its either a mistake or a shadow.

Buttonmen- I have no problem with people assuming that I'm scum while building a case on me. But providing a scum tell that is explainable in the exact same way if I'm town, is not a scum tell, it's evidence of tunnelling.

[Seacore]

Votecount is correct

Hmmm, interesting.

Town should have no reason to shadow vote. They should be upfront about their votes.

@Mod - Was the previous vote count correct?

Assuming that it was, that means we have a scummy shadow voter.

Which suggests that Buttonmen is town... unless that's what they want us to think... If it was a scum, why wouldn't they hammer with the shadow vote? Maybe they didn't think it would show.

[Seacore]

Idk there I's an extra vote in button and you seem oh very happy in lynching him.. Maybe u have 2 votes and yes players can make up there own minds but persuading them will cause them to agree with your idea.

Well you certainly can't make up your own mind. You want us to not vote.

Answer me this. How does not lynching help town?

[Seacore]

Yeah, I'm leaning towards Heilo now. I think he might be the shadow voter.

[Seacore]

Incorrect.

A mislynch helps the town because it provides us with information. Who voted for that person. Where their reasons good? Who didn't vote for that person? Who switched their votes at last minute? Who was the competing bandwagon? Did people defend that person?

A no lynch gives us Nothing.

[Seacore]

It cannot be a double voter unless they have the option of switching it on or off. Is that normal?

I think it is more likely to be a shadow voter.

[Seacore]

Unvote. Vote Heilo

I believe that this lynch will provide, best case scenario a lynched scummy shadow voter and worst case scenario, a dead VI.

[Seacore]

Heilo. Yes, we might kill town. In fact, on day 1, we'll probably kill town! But if we sit around and wait for a definite kill, we'll die.
Nobody is going to say "Hey guys, I'm scum, I mean town, dammit!" There's no way we can know.

[Seacore]

There are 9 people voting for lynches at the moment. Some of them have good reasons, some of them don't. But they are all providing us with information. None of them are using OMGUS reasons, which suggests that there is info out there that they have used.
Go find it, and make up your mind. A no lynch is good for scum, not town.

[Seacore]

I feel you could be a scummy shadow voter because the vote count went up when you came online.

[Seacore]

You are correct, there isn't much.

There never is on Day 1. And unless we pile up our straws of information and try to make the best case we can, there won't be info on Day 2 either.

But it's who you choose to vote for, out of the two or three cases that are floating around.
It's how that person reacts.
It's how other people react.
It's who, out of these cases, actually gets lynched, and then how they flip.

[Seacore]

The potential for you to be the shadow voter makes you scummy.
I don't see how shadowvoting can be a town thing.

[Seacore]

I've never seen a shadow vote,

But from it's name, I think it's a secret vote that doesn't put your name against the person you voted for, you probably vote with a PM. Whereas a double vote is like a normal vote, it just counts for two.

I could be wrong.

Also, you should change your vote to the best vote of the day, because as we've explained several times now. 'No Lynches' are bad.

[Seacore]

Um, no, Buttonmen is back on L-2

But I'll change the vote, also given the lack of time we have.

unvote. vote Buttonment

Now you're at L-1 and should claim

[Seacore]

I'm happy to move to Heilo for the lynch, given the claim. I don't believe it, but it's too risky.

Actually, Heilo should claim too at this point (forget waiting til we get him to L-1)
Then we decide who to lynch.

[Seacore]

They will already be able to RB or NK you, so that's not much of an excuse.

[Seacore]

Okay, so it looks like we're going to go along with the claim.

unvote. Vote Heilo

[Seacore]

I'm torn between Mina and TheButtonmen

So for now I'll FOS them both, but I'll be VLA for a couple more days

[Seacore]

Also, sorry Inq.

You have armour? Samwell Tarly has armour? Explain the flavour please.

[Seacore]

Hello all,

Sorry for the V/LA. Long weekend here.

First of all I'm going to temporarily remove my FOS of Mina.
My original FOS of her was based on Day 1 issues, and while I'm not going to say I don't find her suspicious-ish. I liked her recent post.
Particularly the point about the real cop claim. I think whoever is the real cop (if not Buttonmen) should claim. We'll get a Night 1 result on top of a 1:1 trade (assuming there's no Doc and also assuming we lynch the right one of the two claimers - likely Buttonmen)
I think scum wouldn't recommend such a claim.
Conversley, I think there must be a kind of cop role in this game, so if nobody does step forward, I think that makes Buttonmen safe.

Anyway, now on to answer some of the questions that have been asked of me

1) @ Locke - See above really.

2) @ Inq -

I believe Seacore is scum. Here's why: I think most town members when faced with a ridiculous "no lynch" vote will see it as VI play. This is because for helio to be scum it asks for two things to exist at once: (1) Consider that a no lynch would be good for scum and (2) Not realize that no one is going to bite on a no lynch and it will cast suspicion on him.


Please note that Seacore's vote, unlike the majority of those finishing off Helio, was made before buttonman's claim.

Seacore knew the way things were going and knew that Buttonman was heading for a lynch or a power claim. Seacore wanted to dissassociate himself with whatever that outcome was, so he moved to the safest alternative -- safest but not wisest.

This is an interesting version of what happened. Here's another version, one that I'd probably call 'the truth'.
1) I found Heilo's disengagement and delays both slightly scummy and majorly anti-town. Due to the lack of time, I decided he was the best lynch option for Day 1 (and was not alone in this). Please note that during this time I was open about a Buttonmen switch, as I was aware of the deadline.
2) When he started to post a little I tried to push him into scum hunting, which is when he posted the no lynch. At first I called it scummy, probably due to a little tunnelling. The next post cleared it up for me and I finally saw it for what it was, a VI play. So I called it that.
3) I then switched my vote to Buttonmen
4) I then saw evidence of shadow voting which I thought (wrongly) must have been a scum ability. I've never seen one in a game before. I changed my vote to Heilo. To me, I thought his speech about not finding a reason to vote for somebody, and then clearly voting for somebody, reaked of lies and thus was scummy.
5) I think changed my vote back to Buttonmen to force the claim (and due to time running out)
4) He then claimed (due to being at L-1)
5) I then switched back to Heilo.

So where is the "unlike others I made my vote before the claim?" a) I wasn't the only one voting Heilo before the no lynch/VI post. b) I was voting for Buttonmen before the name claim.

And that's what it boils down to. Seacore has spent the vast majority of his very active day seeming helpful without providing actual help. This, to my mind, is the very essence of scum detection: someone who is aiming to have the appearance but not motive of being town.

I disagree. I was the one who took steps to actually organise the chaos that was a few people arguing for the name claim, a few people disagreeing, a couple of people ignoring it and scum hunting and a couple of people not weighing in at all. I believe that without my actions we would have been in the same last minute position, without the name claim. And we were only in such a bad last minute position due to so many V/LAs (which is cool, life happens). I don't see where I get labelled with "not helping". I was also engaging a VI, trying to make him contribute.
Where is your assistance on Day 1? I'll get to that in my case against you below

Finally, take note that when Seacore places his vote on helio that he does so saying that it will either be a scum or a VI lynched, good for the town. He's already setting up the mitigating circumstances for his vote.

This is just stupid. I was stating my thoughts. I was stating from my original vote of Heilo that he was 'mostly' a policy lynch with a sprinkle of hiding-scum. The town team is stronger for not having Heilo in it, if weaker for having a higher scum-town ratio.

I'll be honest, Seacore had me fooled at first. I thought he was actually too eager a helper to actually be scum. Scum don't usually like to be noticed as much as he has. But on balance, Seacore seems our best option.

Sigh. Let's summarise this. "Don't pay attention to how much Seacore looks town, he's actually scum."

Anyway, on to my Inq case.

I call bullshit on his role claim.

1) Samwell Tarly gets Bullet proof and "abilities" (note, not just 'an ability, but "abilities") and Renly and Syrio get vanilla, no abilities at all? That seems unfair. - Note, this 'out guessing the mod" piece of argument wouldn't be enough on it's own, but I think in addition to the rest, it's a fair call.

2) His flip over the nameclaim. He was samwell with bulletproof and he thought that name claiming would reveal roles? I don't buy his explanation of this.

3) His comment about full claiming compared to trickle claiming, and yet he's trickle claimed.

4) I don't buy his explanation of explaining the bulletproof is limited. He's worried about the Vig wasting his shot? Clearly the Vig (if there is one) thinks he's scum, he'll probably keep shooting until Inq is dead.

5) For somebody who is bulletproof he did a terrible job of being obv-town day 1. What would have made scum go after him?

6) Speaking of Day 1 posts, look at the lurking and inactivity.

7) His case against me is pretty poor. This is not OMGUS. I was one of the first to come out and say I found his Samwell-Bulletproof claim odd, xvart died and suspected me, I was an easy case for him to push and he did it poorly.

That will do me for now

Vote Inq

[Seacore]

As do the other "abilities" (again, I emphasise the plural)

Maybe its an abilities like Roleblock and Night kill

Or simply Night Kill and Secret Communication.

[Seacore]

I find it unlikely that there are two investigation roles in a 12 player game. There is a chance (albeit small, especially if it's limited cop) that they both succeed N1 in finding scum. That would be broken.

Also, Flutter, what do you mean by "pushing the switch to Buttonmen D1"?

I wanted Heilo lynched most of the day, the only thing that stopped me going for Heilo was his clear VI play. Then it became clear he was a shadow voter and I thought he was an idiot scum.
I only pushed for Buttonmen when we were running out of time and he seemed the only viable alternative to Heilo. (The third alternative, and by a distance, was me, so I'm hardly going to push that).

I made a reasonable Day 1 case against Buttonmen to show people that he was a good lynch option.

[Seacore]

Interesting post Inq.

1) You don't address the majority of my points

2) Honestly, I haven't even looked at my Role PM since I got it, I saw that I was renly and that I was vanilla. I didn't go back to see that it said "abilities". So I withdraw that aspect of my case.

Or at least I would, but you seem to have contradicted yourself.

My abilities are (1) bulletproof (2) voting.

I don't have additional abilities. I have flavor text that explains I have armor. Then I have a section that actually details my "abilities."

In the second quote (which was earlier than the first quote) you seem to suggest that your armor is only refered to in your flavour text. Else, why bring up the flavour text? Why not just say "bullet proof is my only ability".

So is bullet proof one of your abilities, or is it something you only found out from flavour text and last night's results? I feel you're being inconsistent. Especially since you've mentioned that you believe in a complete claim, not a trickle claim.

Why even talk about flavour text at all?

[Seacore]

Yes, I asked you to talk about the flavour, but that was in a separate post, where I was probing as to why sam would have armour.

But what I'm asking about is the second quote of my last post.

I don't have additional abilities. I have flavor text that explains I have armor. Then I have a section that actually details my "abilities."

Why the middle bit? Why not "I don't have additional abilities, I just have bulletproof"

[Seacore]

Also

I thought he was actually too eager a helper to actually be scum. Scum don't usually like to be noticed as much as he has

does not equal

thought you were so scummy you were town but then decided you were just scummy

1st is saying, "you seemed to be helping too much and jumping into the spotlight too much to be scum. But now I think you are scum"

2nd is saying "your actions seemed too scummy for a scum to actually make them"

So which is it?

[Seacore]

Inq, I'm going to assume that your Role PM lists your armour and explains that you have two safe shots of it.

If so, I don't understand why, when people were questioning whether you have multiple abilities, you didn't make it clear what your abilities were.

Instead you talk about your armour being mentioned in your flavour text and then about 'abilities'.

You did this twice.
Clearly, the first time (if you were being honest), you were simply answering my flavour text request. But then more than one person got confused, thinking that you had more than one ability.

You chose to mention your flavour text again in your clarification, which to me is still confusing. You don't mention here that the armour is listed in your abilities, only that it is listed in your flavour.

Anyway, I'm over it. Please answer to the other points of my case.

[Seacore]

Okay, sorry Rai, I missed those questions.

1) That sentence would not have made sense if I wrote innocence.
I was arguing that our Day 1 lynch could only be, with the time available, Heilo or Buttonmen.
I was saying that even if you thought I was guitly, there wasn't enough time to convince enough people of that, so people who thought I was guilty (xvart mainly, from memory) needed to choose between the two actual possible lynches of the day. There wasn't a real wagon yet, so there was no need to waste any time arguing my innocence, instead I was arguing that there was no time to argue for my guilt.

2) I don't think that was a scumslip.
Again, I'm arguing that there were two possible lynches of the day, Buttonmen and Heilo. At the time I didn't think either were definitely scum. I did think they were both useless. I switched (at the time) from Heilo to Buttonmen because the no lynch play convinced me that Heilo was town, whereas I wasn't convinced that Buttonmen was town. The more I pushed him on it, the scummier he looked to me, thus my comment. Both of them were, at the best, useless town, and Buttonmen was scummier.

Then of course came the shadow vote, which changed things, but there's my explanations. Apologies for missing it earlier.

[Seacore]

Also, to address the new comments, above your quoted, missed questions.

I'm not going back and forth on whether I thought Buttonmen was guilty. The problem is that it was a fluid situation and there were times I thought he was guiltier than others. So depending on the question of "Seacore, explain this comment/action", it might have come from a time when I thought he was simply the best lynch of the day, possibly scum, or whatever.

I'll state it clearly though, I never thought he was definitely scum. I never thought Heilo was definitely scum.
But we had a tiny amount of time left, people absent, others lurking and a bunch of people not contributing at all. I did what I could to assure us a lynch. My flip flopping is evidence of me trying to get the best lynch of the day, instead of just saying "well, one's as good as the other"

[Seacore]

Also, I admit that the "abilities" attack is not the strongest thing in the book.

It's about as strong as your guilt/innocence scumslip attack on me though.

[Seacore]

I don't know. At this stage I'm honestly happier just to hunt for scummy behaviour. I always keep an eye out for multiple scum teams, SKs and Vigs (as well as anything really) unless its a completely open set up.

I think Inq is scummy, not just because of my admitidly weak "abilities" attack, but for my compiled case.
Trying to work out whether there is an SK based on his testimony is fraught with circular logic. We can't believe a word he's said. So whether or not he actually has armour, whether or not he was actually attacked by a SK/Vig/Scum(maybe he's the SK), its all too up in the air. I'll come back to it later.

Meanwhile, one of the biggest issues with Inq is his inconsistency. He was originally against name claims because he believed they'd betray power roles.

However he is a) interested in flavour (by his own testimony) and b) well read enough enough to know that the Night's Watch take no part in politics. I take this to mean that he has read the books.

Therefore, how could anybody who has read the books, and gets Samwell Tarly with bulletproof, think that a name claim would betray power roles, for even an instant.

[Seacore]

Hehe, I must admit I enjoyed typing that

[Seacore]

@Locke, it was one of those "aha!" moments. Albeit, one that didn't go well.

About that quote, that came after my realisation that it wasn't the strongest attack. What makes it not "my attack was rubbish and so is yours" is that it was only part of my inq case, where it was the majority of Rai's case against me.

[Seacore]

Can you give us anything to describe the nature of your failed investigation?

Was it that I was innocent, or protected, or what?

[Seacore]

And I assume you still feel it advantages the scum to explain the limited nature of your ability?

[Seacore]

Cool, just asking really, while waiting for other people to post. I'm content with where my vote is.

How do you feel about Inq?

[Seacore]

I dislike the early claim of VT from Seacore, especially as he was willing to ascribe Heilo's D1 actions as scummy and not VI play. Claiming VT out of the blue essentially loses a big chance on helping the town- soaking up a NK instead of a power role. Adding to that is the possible scumslip, the 'I'll be the top suspect if Heil comes up scum' comments, and speculation that the Starks are probably all good and other role-name related judgements. In a game like this, as its been stated, mods can guard against nameclaim breaking by making 'good' characters part of the mafia. (or by giving safeclaims).

Can you please find quotes to go with your accusations, I don't recall saying most of those things (you know, apart from the VT claim).

I don't see the relation between my claim and me finding Heilo scummy, please explain this connection.

I don't recall saying I'd be top suspect if Heil comes up scum, I do recall arguing against Xvart who said I'd be top suspect if Heil came up Town.

My argument against the Starks being scum was that there were two many of them for them all to be scum. It had nothing to do with them being good guys.

I really don't like this post of yours at all, it's taken a lot of what I've said out of context and without quotes.

[Seacore]

Apart from Inq, who I've argued for fairly completely at this point, I have two other suspicions.

Bogre - Yes for the reasons that others have mentioned, but also for his terrible attack on me. Comments out of context and a lack of quotes to back it up make it hard to respond to, which is what scum would want.

Buttonmen - He's doing even less today than he did yesterday. No real case building or scum hunting, picking on Mina for not completing her case against him when he has done absolutely nothing himself.

Those are my two other suspects.

Now, Flutter - Mina's issue is that other people still had to claim before the question came out, so how was Bogre to know that someone didn't have Brienne or some Dornishman.

And finally, a little defence of myself against the issues brought up.

1) The poor "abilities" attack against Inq - My bad. I do this all the time and it's something I need to improve. I think I see something and I pounce. I once wrote a wall of text, building a huge case on a player because I thought he was fake scumhunting and fake contributing to conversation, and my major piece of evidence was that he hadn't voted despite his 'case building'. He had of course voted and I looked like an idiot. Blame the fact that I'm mostly doing this at work (and that I'm a moron sometimes). In this particular case, it's because I read my PM when I first got it, saw that I was renly, had some flavour text and that I was VT. I hadn't looked at it since.

2) My "fake helping" - There's not too much more I can say except "I disagree", but I'll try. I've been in Day 1s in which something like this comes up. It may not be a mass claim, it may instead be whether everybody admits to "hearing noise" during Night 0 (one of Percy's games) or it might be whether to all declare what our night actions will be, or something like that. Or it may even be everybody picking a different person as their scum, and the wagons going nowhere. In my experience, particularly with (I think we can all admit) the low posting rate from many of the players in this game, if you have two lines of conversation it's easy for scum (and lazy players) to avoid one of them. So, my method has always been to get them done one by one.
In summary, I feel that if I had scum hunted while I was pushing for a vote on the name claim, players would have come online, answered to one of them, and then dissapeared for another 48 hours, ignoring the other.

Anyway, thats my play style, I won't be changing it and I won't be answering to it again in this game.

Did I miss any other points against me?

[Seacore]

think BP is a role more likely to be given to scum than town

Why?

[Seacore]

I'll join the Bogre wagon.

unvote. Vote Bogre

[Seacore]

I think we need something to get this game going a little stronger.

I've tried a "top three" suspects thing before, and while I feel that it has worked in the past, people get a bit funny about how it points out who everybody thinks is obv town, thus providing a good NK.

So I'm okay with avoiding that.

Perhaps though, everybody should be forced to build a case on somebody they want lynched today.
We've got people who have yet to give us their opinions on who should be lynched.

Bogre, who says I'm suspicious, but that I"m probably just crap town.

Buttonmen has been only vague in his suspicions, apparently declaring himself limited cop who didn't get a result, and then pointing that Macavity is not pushing strong cases is enough for him.

Flutter hasn't voted yet at all, but replaced and is V/LA, so I'll forgive him for now,

Kinetic, still waiting his promised post, and I'm also curious what could have informed his unvote that he can't discuss.

Inq, while VLA, also posted nothing for 2 days before that, and his response to me asking him to defend himself against the harder parts of my case was fairly poor.
ie. "Here are my seven points as to why Inq is scum" "But three of those points are weak" "Okay defend against the other four" "Ask me about them specifically or I won't"

I'm happy with everybody else. Not that I'm saying I think everybody else is town, but I think everybody else is posting in a way that is pro-town (ie, furthering discussion)

One extra thing I noticed in my quick ISO skims just then is Miserable, in this first post, voted Bogre for his over defensiveness in RVS stage. Possibly coaching from scum to scum? The wording struck me as a little odd.

[Seacore]

Not that bit, this bit

@Bogre: Your first post, and it really hasn't said anything in terms of the game/gameplay... What are your thoughts on some people thus far? Why was your first post in the game (somewhat) extremely defensive in terms of someone who voted for you? It was the RVS after all.

[Seacore]

And to summarise why it feels oddly worded, it seems a little like *cough*Buddy, you're making a seen*cough*

[Seacore]

I didn't see the word 'only' in Mac's post, did you Buttonmen?

He likely doesn't want to put bogre at L-1

Please now go and do something useful.

[Seacore]

Do you mind backing up vote with why he's your top suspect? Why you're not as convinced by the Bogre case as the rest of us?

[Seacore]

Then look at what we've posted so far and make a case.

Yesterday you were pushing a case against me. Do you still believe I'm likely scum? If not, why not? And who now do you believe should die? Your vote isn't on anybody, as the deadline approaches, who do you want to see lynched?

[Seacore]

This, among a couple of other posts, seemed to have you painting me as scummy when I was putting pressure on you.

@Seacore:

Why did you claim VT during D1? That's scummy as hell.

But okay, so you found Mac scummy yesterday. Do you still find him scummy? If so, why is your vote not on him? If not, why not. And my question of who you find scummy was still not answered.

You can't say "nobody's posting, so I don't know"
Scum aren't going to go "oh gee, Buttonmen is having a tough time finding us, maybe we should post more/differently" So start applying pressure where you think it's deserved.

[Seacore]

The fact that Bogre is stalling gives me hope that we've caught scum

The fact that a bunch of other people are stalling fills me with fear that we haven't.

[Seacore]

But Seacore, why did you have a problem with TheButtonmen for not having cast a vote, but go out of your way to defend MacavityLock for doing the same thing?

Why not let MacavityLock defend himself? I'm sure he's a big boy who can come up with his own arguments against Buttonmen (who, let's be frank, isn't a master of rhetoric). There was no reason for you to dilute what little pressure there was on ML like that.

I thought twice about defending him, but there's such sparse posting that I was hoping to move the conversation along. I normally hate people answering pressure off other people, but I felt it was warrented. Also, Buttonmen was annoying me by misquoting. I feel there is a significant distinction with the only.

Yes, I have a problem with Mac not voting. But I do not have a problem with him not voting Bogre.

However, I can see the Mac case now. But I'm happier with Bogre.

[Seacore]

Agian I'm not a full cop, I wasn't expecting A) people to believe me or B) Helio self destructing.

Yes, but why the hysteria prior to the role claim?

[Seacore]

Mac, just one small comment on your response.

I don't like that you aren't voting.

Yes, it's a playstyle of mine compared to a playstyle of yours, but in my experience, people who avoid voting (unless there is a specific mechanic factor invovled, such as voting costing a point from a finite pool of points) are scummier than people who do vote.

Votes make you accountable for your stances.
A clear counter example of this is the fact that you said you would be willing to vote for Bogre.

I interpreted this, in my head, as basically a vote. In my head, you would be as responsible for a Bogre lynch as anybody else, even if he was hammered before you got there. (Obviously this is conditional, someone who did a sneaky hammer to end the day before questions are answered is different, but what I mean is, I considered your comment as good as a 'normal' vote, similiar to my actual vote)

But Mina seems to have interpreted it differently. She's not wrong, I'm not wrong, the issue is that it's unclear.

A vote is not unclear, it says "here's my opnion".

If you refuse to vote for people, fine. But you do so accepting that some of us find you scummy for it.

[Seacore]

I'm still around, but there's nothing to say until Bogre gets replaced and Inq and Flutter start posting.

I'll restate that I can see the case on Mac and agree that it goes further than his not voting, although I still find that to be a scum tell. I don't tend to vote people for a single scum tell, so that shouldn't be too big a problem.

[Seacore]

Hey Percy!

Now I really hope we're wrong about Bogre, because Percy is a strong player.

Convince us why we shouldn't hang you, Percy.

[Seacore]

Lol, Faraday, Happy Birthday.

As my Grandfather said to me on my 21st. "Enjoy it, you'll only have one. You might have plenty of weddings, but only one 21st." [/true story]

[Seacore]

Also, let it be known that one confirmed townie voted against nameclaiming, so I find it far more likely that either the scum split down the middle for the vote or all voted for the idea.

This doesn't hold true. A town (vanila townie at that) has no way of knowing whether a name claim benefits town or scum or neither. So to say that because a townie was on one side of the argument means that all the scum can't be on the same side, that doesn't hold water.

TheButtonmen gets no result. Scum RB or scum Button.

Or Limited Button, which is what his case is.

I mega agree with your vote on Inq, since obviously you aren't going to vote yourself.

I find myself with some difficulty. Most of the bogre case is lurking and really poor contributions. Percy has stopped both of these things. But Percy is also better scum than Bogre (assuming bogre was scum) so I wouldn't expect these things of bogre.

I'm going to go back to Inq.
a) Because I think he's scum
b) Because a bit of pressure on him to answer those questions would be good

unvote. Vot inq

[Seacore]

xvart was a townie who voted no. I find it extremely unlikely that the scum also all voted no. Don't you? If not, what do you think of Raivann's and ML's "no" votes?

Unlikely? Maybe. But certain? No. I don't think Mina and Raivann are ruled out as a scum team. I made a small case against Mina on Day 1 that wasn't pure rubbish and even you have found Raivann less than amazing. So I don't think we've proven anything about the name claim vote. Are either of them my top suspects? No. But still, nothing certain.

What? Are you implying that the only two people worth voting in this game are myself and The Inquisition? That's a very big false dichotomy right there.

It's a current personal dichotomy. You and Inq are my top two suspects (well Bogre and Inq was).

Basically, I feel that Inq is scummy, for the points I've raised previously.
I feel that Bogre was scummy because of heavy active lurking.
Bogre's particular brand of active lurking felt scummy. (Side note, do you agree with this read of him?)
However you have posted some cases and some reads, which was a good step away from active lurking. But I'd expect that of scum Percy.
What I'm happier about is that you've found my other top scum suspect to be scummy.
Are there other people who I've been finding scummy? Yes. But none are currently at that point where I want them lynched. I'm actually suspicious of everybody, there are no confirmed townies in my eyes.

This also brings me to Mina's question that I forgot to answer.

Not sure if I understand you. Are you saying you would or wouldn't vote for MacavityLock based on the evidence (i.e., more than one scumtell)? What do you mean by "shouldn't be too big a problem"? I'd like you to go on the record with an opinion.

I wrote really long paragraphs answering these two questions, and then made a TL;DR summary. But the summaries work on their own better than the long explanation, so I'm just going to go for them.

1)At the moment, I wouldn't vote for Mac, I find other people scummier, but your case against him doesn't make you scummy, I find it to be a good town case.
2) By the "shouldn't be a problem" I meant: Mac, stop telling me not voting isn't scummy, I'll nearly always read it as scummy, but don't worry, if I vote you, it won't only be for that.

Anyway, I'm now going to post a little bit of an attack on each player, because as I've said, I find you all a little bit scummy. Hopefully you can answer me, or at least other people can see what I'm thinking.

Flutter - Mega lurking, but he's getting replaced, so yay.

Kinetic - For somebody who was speaking down to us because we had more recent join dates than him, he hasn't exactly been leading the way with good analysis. Percy has crystalised my concerns in his posts. I was unimpressed by his analysis of the names and exactly what has he done since? I really dont' like his modkill concern. Surely if he knows something he shouldn't no, he should replace out. I can't think of anything that he would be allowed to know but can't share.

Locke - He's doing what I think of as sniping. He's posting micro cases, comments on other people's cases and awarding points on other people's interactions (i.e. I won out of Seacore vs Inq. Mina vs Mac is a draw, etc) I'd be happier with stronger cases. He's leaning on the "not enough people are voting crutch, which is a little fair but still.

Mac - I've spoken about this already

Mina - I made a case against Mina Day 1, I don't think it's rubbish, but neither should it be front and centre today. She's voted for a popular Day 2 lynch (bogre) and then spent time focusing on Mac. There's also the potential it's just to make a lot of noise to run the clock out so we vote Bogre, he flips down and scum mina says "I'm really disappointed I went with the crowd on this one, I should have focused on Mac", and bam, into a Day 3 mislynch.

Percy - There's been a couple of skips of logic in Percy's posts that I'd normally overlook and just disagree with for other people, but Percy has a strong logical mind and I don't seem him making these mistakes. I've already brought up the main one about the name claim votes. Another is his two interpretations on Buttonmen, immediately assuming it wasn't the limiting factor that gave a no result (yes, Buttonmen has confirmed this but how could he know?) Also, I don't like his setting up of Raivann as Inq's scum buddy. I think there's also a case for scum-Percy entering the game, seeing the Inq-Bogre scum team has done a rubbish job and now decides to bus his buddy.

Raivann - However, Percy does have a point. Seriously, you don't think Percy's scummy enough to vote, you never liked the Inq lynch. Where's your vote going? You're either scum or terribly anti-town at this point.

Inq - All my previous case still stands, and now we have 'convenient-oops' lurking. But this I mean he comes back from V/LA, sees that Bogre's almost a sure lynch of the day and then disappears for a reread. His plan is probably to come back Day 3 and go "sorry guys, work/school got the best of me, I had this huge post about how it's not bogre, it's seacore, but too late for that now" Pity we got the extension. Well, pity for him.

Buttonmen - Thanks for answering the questions about your role. But really? A small answer about Mac, those other answers and then you dissapear for 48 hours? This close to the deadline? Fantastic. If you had access right then, and knew you wouldn't for two days, why not give us something more?

[Seacore]

Yes. I'd also like to hear why you find Percy guilty. As Percy is not Bogre.

Granted, Percy does not forgive Bogre, but he certainly changes the situation enough to warrant more than you've posted.

[Seacore]

I like this confucius fellow. I feel he's already adding to the game. Just like Percy did.

Good job boys and good job Farday for finding good replacements.

I am now for either a Mac or Inq lynch.

Con, I would like to hear your thoughts on the Inq cases.

[Seacore]

Oh, I meant to respond to Kinetic's post.

Thank you for taking the time and effort to discuss with faraday.

However, the end result is null.

A) It was a coincidence
B) He got it from his Pro town PM
C) He got it from his fake claim PM (if there was one)

So it tells us nothing. Please ignore it.

[Seacore]

I'm interested in Con's point about the Inq - Mac dynamic.
If I read it correctly, he seems to be suggesting that they are unlikely to be scum buddies.

Con, is that a correct read?

If so, what do other people think?

[Seacore]

Obviously with a mafia/SK dynamic they can both still be scum, so the scum flip of one does not clear the other.

But yes, what do other people think?

[Seacore]

Actually, I just had a flash of thought, and maybe this is overlooking somethink that negates it, but

Con, you say that you believe Inq's ability claim, because he was under no pressure when he made it. But what if it was just a balsy move.

Think about it, what if Inq is mafia. And thinks, "we killed Xvart last night, there was no other death, there probably isn't an SK. So I'm going to get people hunting a SK to give us a little bit of a smoke screen. He then, for flavour, decides to make his limited too, to tie in with Button's claim. Instead of a one shot BP he gives himself a second one to discourage any Vig that finds him suspicious, if one exists."

Whether Inq is doing this or not, I think it's brilliant and will do something like this one day when I'm scum.

[Seacore]

Ninja'd by Mac, (for context)

[Seacore]

Okay, with Mac's post, I'm happy with him surviving a day.

When the original name claims were posted, I remember noting to myself that Theon would make a good SK, but I suppose he's equally likely to be a good Vig, thematically.

So I think it comes down to Inq vs Raiv

I don't think anybody is as hugely scummy as the two of them.

I don't like Buttonmen either, but I'm happy to give him one more night too.

Mac, in a 12 person game, I think it's unlikely the scum have a protection ability. I would like you to nominate who you are going to kill.

Personally, I think it would be best if you kill Raivann and we lynch Inq.

Actually, how's that for a plan.

Vote Inq, Vig raivan? Aye or Nay

That way, even if Mac's an SK he's working for us.

[Seacore]

One important point here: This is A Game of Thrones mafia, not ASOIAF mafia. Throughout AGoT, Theon's a good guy.

I'm not happy relying on this, it's been brought up before. I'm not certain every quote that Farday has used has been out of the first book. If someone can prove that to me, I"ll be happier, but still not content. That's not a way I'm looking to attempt to out guess the mod.
And even so, Theon is an arsehole, and totally a potential SK, even in AGOT.

As for your fake name claim comment
A) You may have chosen not to use a fake name claim
B) Scum may not have been given a fake name

Yes, there may be an RB, maybe giving you a choice of 1 out of 2 vig targets then... I'm not happy with you have free reign. Happy to have others weigh in on this.

[Seacore]

Sorry, just to confirm what I said. The 2.2 Vote Count quote alone is from Storm of Swords. So I'm defnitely not happy with this "only the first book" stuff people have been bringing up.

[Seacore]

Mina, I think that we should drop Mac for now. He's given good enough reasons for his actions.

Do I believe him? Not completely, but at least he's providing reads, is potentially on our side with a PR and must justify his NK every night.

Whereas we have other issues.
We have Button and Inq who have lots of questions to answer about their dodginess and we have Raivann and Kinetic who are also dodging questions.

Personally I'd be happy with Raivann or Inq getting lynched tonight, with the other one getting Vigged. Other Vig targets are Kinetic and, to a lesser extent, Button.

[Seacore]

I agree with most of this Con, but I'm willing to give him one more night.

I don't have a straight yes or no answer to the question you ask. It would depend on who he had investigated.

If he's mafia, then we lose nothing by trying to hunt for his scum buddies instead of him.
If he's an SK, then the mafia RB will likely target him again the same as last night.
If he's town, even if we eventually lynch him instead of his target, we get more information.

I don't believe he's the best lynch for today. I believe that falls on Inq or Raiv

[Seacore]

My issue with your statement is that it assumes Buttonmen is the scummiest of all.

I don't believe we have "nailed" scum.

I think that Buttonmen is scummy. But I also think Inq, Raiv and to a slightly lesser extent, Kinetic.

Given that Buttonmen is AS scummy as Inq and Raiv, his claim gives me a slight pause that I don't get from the other two.

I also have a problem with Mac NKing Inq being the best plan

There will be no difference (I assume) with a BP blocked Vig and a RB blocked Vig. So we won't know whether Inq is telling the truth, just from an unsuccessful kill.

[Seacore]

Okay, I'm satisfied by this.

unvote. Vote Button

[Seacore]

Like you did? You refused to tell us what the limiting feature of your ability is, why should Con?

[Seacore]

I still declare you haven't full claimed, so don't cry when other people don't do it either.

Fact is, the reason why we believe Con and don't believe you has nothing to do with the claim, its because he's been contributing, you've done crap all.

[Seacore]

Yes, there is the possibility that Inq is an SK and Mac is mafia

[Seacore]

Unvote. Vote Raivann

We need a kill

[Seacore]

Also, my recommendations for a Vig are Button and Inq

[Seacore]

Percy, I would prefer Buttonmen lynched. But with less than 24 hours to go, I moved to the larger wagon.
I'm incredibly busy at work and also have no internet at home for the time being. So I voted in case I couldn't return.

[Seacore]

I think Buttonmen is the way to go today. Although I'd like him and locke to post first.

I agree with the Kill analysis.

The unclaimed deaths are all easily mafia kills.

Mac is certainly not cleared from being an SK, but I don't think he can be mafia. Again, unless there's two scum teams.

I think our scum team is Button, Locke and Kinetic.

In that order of suspicion.

We should also discuss who our vig/sk should target.

Obviously, I think that Button should be lynched, and one of the others shot with an arrow.

Also, cut to pieces makes me think we have a ser gregor around...

[Seacore]

I honestly didn't even think about the numbers actually... work is a nightmare and I just blurted out my thoughts.

You're right though. Looks like no more shots for you.

[Seacore]

Actually, I remember a game when we were in this situation (and I was the vig, I'd replaced in to almost exactly this situation). I ended up vigging that night, despite it risking the game, because it was clear who would be lynched the next day.

I think we'll almost certainly end up killin Buttonmen.

So the answer is, what information will we get from Buttonmen's death?

If he flips scum, I don't think we get anything. Although we should look at his posts and attempt to ascertain relationships. Who is it that saved him over the last two nights. (I know I'm probably on that list)

If he flips town, I think we can trust his results. But so far thats been zilch and pending.

So anyway, the point is, I don't think we'll really learn too much from Buttonmen's lynch. So we should discuss who would die tomorrow. Barring strong information from Con, I'd be leaning towards Locke.

The danger here though, is that if we vote for who should be vigged (i.e. who we would likely lynch tomorrow) then the scum are definitely not going to NK that guy, should we be wrong

[Seacore]

Can we get a prod on Button?

[Seacore]

No Button

To start with, what results did you get, and who did you target last night?

[Seacore]

I know it doesn't hurt us, but it annoys me that our 'cop' didn't declare his results with his first post, despite the fact he knew he'd posted late.

Very scummy.

Town who have information to contribute, whether they are busy or not, will tend to give it, even if they can't stay around to contribute.

Scum who are busy may forget that they are supposed to have that information to share.

[Seacore]

Can we just lynch him already?

He's refused to answer the questions, he hasn't claimed his results. And we know he's read the question because it was directly above Con's claim.

[Seacore]

In fact, fuck it.

If Button is town, he's lost this game for us

vote: Button

[Seacore]

Also, prior warning, I'll have limited access over the easter period (which for me in Australia, starts some time tomorrow).

I'll probably still be around, but I'll pretty much only accept a Buttonmen lynch at this point anyway.

If he had a guilty find, and he was town, it would be the first thing he would tell us.
That didn't happen, which means there's no better lynch for today.

Locke or Kinetic should get Vigged tonight if a vigging happens.

[Seacore]

I believe it's a left over OMGUS from when I was trying to lynch him on Day 1.

From another point of view, it might also be seen as WIFOM. But that point of view has me as scum, which I'm not.

[Seacore]

Because I'm bored at work, nobody is posting, and I'm flippant about Button's answers? This game has stagnated because we're waiting for somebody we're pretty sure is scum to answer questions, so that we can be sure he's scum.

[Seacore]

Yeah, I did really poorly this game. I'd apologise to the town, but there's really only Percy, Xvart and Mac to apologise to. I feel that all other town did at least as bad as me.

With my VT claim, I really hope I'm scum in some game soon, because I think I really suffer from not knowing quite what it's like to be scum, and what helps. I genuinely felt that a name claim would have helped, and felt that giving one role away wouldn't hurt us too much.

I also feel, and maybe I'm wrong, but the scum seemed very powerful in this game. Getting a Doc and an RB and an investigation role? It didn't help that apart from Mac, all of our roles landed in very seemingly scummy hands.

And of course, the scum played very well.

I've decided to go back to basics and start playing some mini-normals. I think I get a bit to excited by "differences" in games, and my standard skills go out the window.