ZOMBIES! - Zombies take over for the win!!!

[ODDin]

vote: evilsnail

Being wishy washy already?

[ODDin]

tatetothetot, any specific reason you're avoiding to cast an actual random vote at this stage?

evilsnail: seriously, what's up with changing votes every second? You always do that in the RVS?

[ODDin]

@ODDin: Nope.

Then what makes this game special?

[ODDin]

vote:cooldog

I agree with Yosarian2.

wut

[ODDin]

Reckoner, what you're talking about has nothing to do with OMGUS, though you might have a point nonetheless.

Really don't like post 57 by zazie, however, it seems he's trying to get reckoner to vote for cooldog.

[ODDin]

tate - wolf is the only one voting for cooldog.

@farside: you probably want to make it clearer that the "vote count" in post 64 isn't actually correct for post 64 (doesn't include wolf's change of vote). I know it's just an example and not an actual vote count, but it's better to avoid confusion.

[ODDin]

EBWOP: Eh, forgot to bold that last part.

@farside: you probably want to make it clearer that the "vote count" in post 64 isn't actually correct for post 64 (doesn't include wolf's change of vote). I know it's just an example and not an actual vote count, but it's better to avoid confusion.

I posted in bold that the vote count was taken from post 64.

[ODDin]

Uhh, somebody edited post 46? I can swear it wasn't bold earlier.

that was me.

[ODDin]

WRP: On MS, days last longer and people usually change their votes quite a lot as the day progresses. I think that's why farside wanted one game on

MS

...

[ODDin]

Thank you, Farside. That makes a lot more sense

WRP, this is the RVS (Random Vote Stage). People throw votes left, right, and center until someone reacts oddly, then a bandwagon will usually form. From there, people will start to notice inconsistencies or subtle mistakes in a player's posting, and will then act accordingly.

As such, Tate, you seem extremely leery to have pressure on you. Why would that be?

I have noted the exact same thing. He seemed to not like the pressure, even if it was very lite, I mean this is still very early in the game. I think it is worthy of a vote, and that is why I

did

forgot, to vote him in my first post. so here it is

vote tate

... but you waited to see how where the wind was blowing before actually casting a vote...

[ODDin]

If you think he waited until the wind was blowing before actually voting, then how come you aren't voting him?

Because I want him to explain himself first.

[ODDin]

Also, perhaps to better explain my play: this is my first large game, I'm used to smaller ones. 11 votes to lynch seems like so much to me right now that I'm less thinking about using my vote, trying instead to get a better feel of things.

[ODDin]

Of interest: McGriddle has been active elsewhere. So he's either lurking or hasn't realised the game had started.

[ODDin]

If you think he waited until the wind was blowing before actually voting, then how come you aren't voting him?

Because I want him to explain himself first.

Are you implying that we would be putting to much pressure on him by you casting a vote to put him at l-8?

"Him" would be you, you know...

I also said why I behave the way I behave with votes in post 91.

Anyways, now that you seemingly avoid to give an explanation on purpose and just ignore the issue,

unvote, vote: cooldog

[ODDin]

Diamond: I'm not going to keep not voting forever. My playstyle was not a decision made after long consideration but rather the way I viewed the game at the moment. I'm not used to large games, so I neglected my vote somewhat. That, combined with my wish to see cooldog's explanation to his actions, led to me not voting.

Putting my "playstyle" into words helped me see that neglecting my vote probably isn't the best thing to be doing, and then I saw cooldog seemingly decided to avoid the issue and not provide an explanation (and play it dumb?). With both reasons for my not voting lifted - I voted.

[ODDin]

Let's put it like that: CD saw me talking about a "him" that I want to explain himself. CD either knows that "him" refers to himself but prefers not to answer (in which case he's avoiding the issue on purpose) or he hasn't got a clue what we're talking about, but that doesn't bother him and he just posts away anyway (which means he doesn't care much about what's going on in the game and prefers to post for the sake of posting and showing activity).
Either way, it's pretty scummy.

[ODDin]

Way to go being a nice obedient puppy and doing whatever you're told. "You didn't want to get into trouble"? Seriously?

[ODDin]

*shrug*
I've been trying to explain myself to help people get a better read of me. Giving more reasons to your actions never hurts.
If you think I'm lying, well, nothing I can do about it.

[ODDin]

Isn't it obvious from post 139? I find his actions scummy, because he seems more concerned with what people think of him and his actions than anything else, and is willing to do whatever he's told.

[ODDin]

Argh, too much content too quickly. Will catch up tomorrow.

[ODDin]

I haven't got much time right now since I've got some stuff to do IRL. I logged on to see what was going on, saw 2 new pages appeared that I haven't got time to read ATM, that's all.
It's midnight over here right now, you know.

[ODDin]

I felt like I was losing track on the game, so I reread it. So I'll start with a few things I've missed along the way and then move forward.

My post 57 wasn't me trying to let xReck vote CD. My post 57 was to look at xReck. He stated before that he's ignoring a scummy action on purpose. Add that he later stated that he normally tries to policy lynch types like CD.
Talking about policy lynches, didn't you see that xReck is still having his random vote, while he normally tries to policy lynch types like CD or that he rather keeps his random vote over Wolf's 'kinda-sorta-maybe' scummy action?
xReck is one of those players that deserves attention at this point, don't you agree?

This feels like zazie is trying to get me to vote for reck, or more generally, to push me into the direction he wants. Regardless of the validity of the stuff being said, that whole personal tone and "didn't you see" and "don't you agree" is disturbing. Saying "didn't you see" nudges the other person in a conversation towards saying "of course I saw".

And later in that very same post, when talking to tate,

When would you vote for CD?

This is almost blatantly "come on, vote CD already".
Zazie seems to be pushing people a lot.

Unvote, Vote Reck

I'd also be willing to vote evilsnail.

Why not Tate?
Tate>EvilS

... And yet again, in that very same post.

---

The only game I played with CD is mafia 101, Plum's Dodgeball.

And yet you're confident enough to say he acts that way in every game he plays.

Policy lynches are not good wagons. They are good to get conversations started but I do not agree with policy lynching. My brother is DeathNote so I have a soft place in my heart for giving scummy players a chance.

The votes for CD are hardly a matter of policy. They are based on valid scum-tells he dropped in this game. At least, mine isn't, won't speak for anyone else.

----

Kmd, why are you being purposefully cryptic about your intentions? You're not helping anyone by forcing people to guess why you're voting for somebody. Also, you still haven't explained why you find evilsnail scummy.


------

I like kmd's point about xReck. I think I noted this myself too. He has shown very little interest in actually finding scum.

You

think

you noted it yourself. You're not sure. Oookaaay....

----

McGriddles's not reading the game and then FoSing yos for pointing it out is ridiculous and scummy, obviously. I actually don't think the not-reading-the-game part is that scummy, I get lazy too sometimes, but a proper reply to yos would've been "no, I'm sorry, I will just a bit later", not "you're putting words in my mouth FoS!". You know perfectly well yourself that not reading the game is anti-town.

----

You're probably completely correct that he doesn't really care about scumhunting. Unfortunately, this attribute isn't exclusive to scum.

I lold.


-----

tbqh the fact that this is a cult-ish game kinda makes me >.>; because I've never played one before and I'm not sure if there's any difference in cult-hunting than scum-hunting. i'm not gonna replace out though i just need to get my head into this game.

You're saying this like you didn't know it was a cult game when you signed up.


------

Who else thinks manho's scum?

Uh, where did that come from?

----

iLord is making an excellent point about diamond going completely defensive. All he's doing is saying "vote ODDin / I'm innocent". All other players in the game are forgotten completely.
Talk about reacting poorly to pressure.

------

CD is ignoring tons of content, including things directed at him. However, him being a possible VI weakens the arguments. I freshen things up by:

unvote, vote: ZazieR

For reasons stated above.

[ODDin]

EBWOP: My vote on CD

wasn't

for policy reasons. I only decided to move my vote when I finished with the post and looked back, so yeah.

[ODDin]

cooldog:
1) I specifically said that I'm only speaking for myself, I can't guarantee that others are voting based on scum-tells. I, myself, was voting based on scum-tells (or, at least, things that are scum-tells for people who aren't VIs).

2) You've missed quite a lot. Why don't you start by saying why you've ignored things said at you?
a) you voted for wolf for something he quite obviously didn't do - he didn't vote for zazie and didn't say that zazie's actions constituted a scum tell. For that matter, as it later turned out, the "scum-tell" wasn't even about lack of posts to begin with, so you've basically defended zazie against arguments that were never brought up against him (ding ding, didn't notice that earlier, keep in mind for later).
b) I accused you of testing the waters before voting for tate. At first you completely misread what I was saying, and then you answered by repeating your reason for the vote. That's not what I was talking about. I know why you voted, the question is why you first accused him, but only actually voted after other people have expressed similar feelings?
c) You were asked (don't remember by whom) what you meant by forgetting to vote for tate. This basically ties in into the previous point.


P.S. Also, it's ODD

i

n, with an i.

[ODDin]

*KMD votes reck, says is willing to vote evilsnail*
"KMD, why do you find reck and evilsnail scummy?"
"because reck is scummy [ignoring evilsnail]"
"why?"
"read his posts"
"not getting it"
"read them again, excluding posts such and such"
"still not getting it"
"your last post contains a clue to why I find him scummy"
*somebody else comes and clarifies*
much later, kmd says he's "less sure about evilsnail". still not a single argument on him, however.


All of that, instead of, you know,
*KMD votes for reck and says is willing to vote for evilsnail, and explains why*

------

I played with zazie once, don't remember him pushing all that hard.

[ODDin]

So, you don't really know what zazie's playstyle is at the moment, but you're still confident it's only a matter of playstyle and try to defend him.

I also don't think we're having trouble getting yos involved...

[ODDin]

If you provide a link it'll be nice. But with the whole changing playstyles, I'm much less inclined to write it off as such.
On the whole, I'm a little disturbed you chose to defend zazie before he even said anything to his defence himself. He's in no danger of being lynched and there's no wagon on him that needs to be stopped. If he has a legitimate defence, he can present it himself, can't he?

Getting people to read things themselves is nice, but people are generally expected to read and reread the game and individual players from time to time on their own. One's arguments are supposed to help others see what they missed themselves. Also, they help the town get a better read of you, which is something you want to happen unless you're scum.

And funnily enough, still no case on evilsnail.

[ODDin]

... So you were willing to vote somebody over a case that doesn't exist.

unvote, vote: Kmd

This here is more serious than what I had on Zazie.

[ODDin]

4>1

[ODDin]

You also equaled him to reck, whom you, supposedly, suspected for active lurking (and his stance on cooldog, but since there's no real explanation to what you didn't like about it, let's leave it be for the moment).
So, there's one player you suspect for active lurking and another on whom you've got nothing but a gut read - and you're equally willing to vote both?

[ODDin]

No hate. In post 93, kmd says he's willing to vote for evilsnail as much as he's willing to vote for you (that's the way I understand what he said, anyway). After long struggles and tribulations, we finally get kmd's case on you (post 251). However, apparently there's no case on evilsnail, only a gut read. So, apparently kmd was equally willing to post for somebody on whom he had a case and somebody on whom he had only a gut read.

[ODDin]

EBWOP: "equally willing to

post

vote for somebody"

[ODDin]

What's up with people not getting sarcasm? (reck and evilsnail)

Looking over the game ani provided, I actually see Kmd there has a tendency for longer posts, giving details and providing backup for his actions. Not all of the time, but more than what I see here. If this impression is wrong, correct me and direct to specific locations in the game you have in mind. (I haven't got the time to read 80 pages of game for meta on a single player, mind you.)

Actually, what were you trying to show with that game, ani? Was it a defence of kmd's playstyle or something else entirely? And why is it important to mention that that game was also modded by farside?

[ODDin]

[/sarcasm] tags would be nice.

Read posts 253-258 attentively. Should be pretty obvious that kmd's vote on evilsnail is mostly sarcasm and a jibe directed at me.

ODD, are you suggesting the length different in posts regarding KMD's meta makes him look scummy or townie in this game?

The crux is the "giving details and providing backup for his actions" part of the sentence.
My latest discussion with kmd was, among other things, about him not providing backup for his votes, leaving it to others to find out why he cast his votes. He argued that it was his playstyle. I assumed that ani provided that game in that context - to show that kmd spoke the truth and that it was indeed his playstyle (or maybe to show that kmd lied and that it wasn't his playstyle, I'm really not sure.)
So, I looked over it, and my first impression was that he did provide more reasons for his actions in that game.

Btw, my vote on kmd is mostly because of the whole evilsnail issue, less because of his "playstyle".

[ODDin]

ODDin, I can't even tell if you can tell that this is sarcastic.

Should be pretty obvious that kmd's vote on evilsnail is mostly sarcasm and a jibe directed at me.

[ODDin]

Wow.

[ODDin]

well, why don't you
a)start spelling my name out in full, and why don't you capitalize all of the letter correctly

Fine.

1) I understand, still you said all, all means everyone, not you...

If I wanted to mean "everyone", I wouldn't have said "I'm only speaking for myself", now would I?

2) I have a real life I can't hit the refresh button 50 times hoping a new post pops up

I'm not expecting you to sit at your computer and read every post when it appears. I'm expecting you to catch up with everything you've missed once you do come and over and before you post. Or, at any rate, catch up with everything that is relevant with what you're posting (though I do expect you to catch up with everything else as well eventually).

2a) I also got a scummy scent from him early on, I vote him on gut, and because he DID say that zaz was scum baste on him not having many posts

No, he didn't, he said so himself and it's absolutely clear he didn't from his posts. Read them again, and try to understand it this time.

2b)Because I un-like you don't have two hours to randomly hit the re-fresh button, I have to work. And I don't have all the time in the world to write up posts. I was going to put it at the end of my post. I hit submit thinking it was over. I had a litle more time on my hands so I hit the refresh button. I then saw his post and it hit me that I forgot to put that in my post...
2c)above...

Fine. Why didn't you say this earlier?

* * *

@ODDin
Wow? Wow what?

Wow at McGriddle saying that he doesn't need to read the game because he's already caught the scum. It's just so completely obvious to anyone that bothers to think for even a little bit that "I don't need to read the game because I've caught the scum" (on D1, no less) is at the very least completely and utterly anti-town and not the thing one is supposed to be doing, that I was contended with simply expressing my emotions.

* * *

A. WTH is a cult game B. I figured there were only 2 scum because every game I have been in has had 2 scum, and C. You think EVERYTHING is a slip.

Yet another wow. For starters, read the rules of games you sign up to.

This is a cult game which means players become zombies or if they are a power role they will die.

Frankly, when I read the original post I thought you meant "I've caught my 2 scum for today and won't read the game until they're lynched and I can move on to the other scum". Now that you made it clear that you actually thought there are 2 scum in the game, I'm with yos, definitely sounds like a slip. I mean, for your sake, I hope it's a slip, and not that you actually thought it makes sense to have 2 scum and 18 town in a non-cult game.

* * *

No, I'm more willing to vote Reck. You want me to hold on to my gut read for the entire game though because it came so late in the game.

Just to make it clear, I don't specifically want you to do anything here.

I was more willing to vote Reck, my top suspect, which is why I did. I said that I was also willing to vote Evilsnail at that time because he was my next suspect.
[...]
ODDin, I'm not sure where you get "equally willing" from. You said it multiple times, but I don't believe I ever even implied that.

You said "vote: reck, also willing to vote evilsnail". When people say such things, I understand that they are equally willing to vote for both of them, so they just select the marginally scummier among them. When I have two suspects, one significantly more scummy than the other, I say "vote: X, FoS: y".
There's a difference between "willing to vote" and "fos".

* * *

Starbuck: calling somebody dumb is not ad hom, per se. ad hom is a logical fallacy where your argument is based on the personal qualities of a person which have nothing to do with the matter at hand.
For instance, "I hate your political opinions and therefore you must also be a bad mathematician" is ad hom, since political opinions have nothing to do with the understanding of mathematics.
In the case of mafia, to say "you're an idiot and therefore you're scum" is ad hom, since your intellectual qualities have nothing to do with the role you're being given.
What iLord said was in no way ad hom. If anything, it was protecting against ad hom coming from others.

[ODDin]

I haven't been in any 12+ games and every game I have played (for the most part) is a newbie game, so no, I didn't know that scum increased with number of players. I have been in a 12 person a 9 person and a 7 person game, so I have never had more than 2 scum per game. Besides, how is that scummy? wouldn't that be pro-town that I didn't know how many scum there were in this game?

2 scum in a 12 player game also seems too few, even with no PRs for the town. Care for a link?
Also, understanding the setup is an important part of playing. Different setups call for different strategies and different behaviours.
I'd think it'd be obvious that 2 scum out of 20 players is ridiculous under normal conditions, but then again, you didn't even know what the setup was, you invented one yourself, so you obviously didn't bother to stop and think about it.

And what is being said is not that you didn't know how much scum existed the game. On the contrary, what is being said is that you did know how much scum existed in the game, namely 2, and you could only know so by being one of them.


Also, some general questions, now that I'm thinking about the setup:
1) Has anyone played a cult game before? Any general tips and advice?
2) The way I understand it, if the zombies target a vanilla, he becomes a zombie, but if the zombies target a PR, the PR simply dies. So, it's not clear whether we want the zombies to target VTs or PRs - on one hand, we lose a PR, on the other, we don't gain another zombie. I guess it depends on the strength of the PR. I'm not really sure what this means, strategically. Should this change the circumstances under which PRs claim and such?

[ODDin]

ODDin, I very rarely FoS. If I have a second suspect, I'll state that I'm willing to vote them. You can probably only find about 5 times I have EVER FoS'd anyone and some of those were in the RVS.

FoS ODDin

Hmm. Well, this makes some more sense, then. Let's move back to zazie.

unvote, vote: ZazieR

Also, the FoS on me is sarcastic, I take it? Or are there actual reasons behind that somewhere?

Also, Mcgrid asking what a cult is has me second guessing that vote. If he was scum, he'd know, right?

Not necessarily. "Cult" is a general term, while the scum PMs are likely written with game flavour - zombie lords instead of cult leaders, I guess, eating brains, turning people into zombies etc. It would make sense that the word "cult" wouldn't actually be mentioned in the scum PM, even if all the relevant mechanics were described.

[ODDin]

As a guess, yes, but it also depends on the town PRs and the specific mechanics. 3 scum and maybe even 4 scum could make sense.

But there are 2 options, the way I see it:
1) McG is scum. He doesn't know what a cult is because it wasn't mentioned in his PM, but he knows there are 2 scum for a fact - and makes a slip.
2) McG is town. He doesn't know what a cult is, and since the cult mechanics are unlikely to be discussed in a town PM, he doesn't unerstand that scum convert people into scum. He assumes there are 2 scum. He doesn't stop to consider how ridiculous it is, seeing that in this scenario he doesn't understand the cult mechanics involved.

Sadly, scenario 2 is also possible - if he didn't bother to understand the setup, I guess he could've not bothered to think about it either.

[ODDin]

ODDin, I very rarely FoS. If I have a second suspect, I'll state that I'm willing to vote them. You can probably only find about 5 times I have EVER FoS'd anyone and some of those were in the RVS.

FoS ODDin

Where did this come from?

Unvote

Yeah, it's sarcastic/ironic.

Hmm. I see your point about the cult...

Also, about the 2 scum debate, that's a number that makes sense in a cult game. Too many makes it unbalanced and just one leaves the chance that they are lynched Day 1.

Also, why did you unvote? You haven't said anything about ani in your post.

[ODDin]

EBWOP: him, not her.

[ODDin]

WRP: If you don't find anyone scummy, then explain why you so about each of the cases (me, kmd, tate, McG, CooLDoG, Zazie, reck, mcsuave etc).

Also, zazie needs a prod too if I'm not mistaken.

[ODDin]

Actually, I think what McGriddle did is modkillable in the game he linked to, but going into the reasons would just make matters worse.

[ODDin]

Nothing much, really. He's a bit on the lurking side, but he's hardly the biggest offender in that category. What content he posted wasn't really new or original, but made sense.
Also, he did explain his vote on tate, look at him in iso, will make more sense.

Now, why did you ask that? (Why specifically me and why specifically manho?)

[ODDin]

Why are you so certain that manho is scum?

[ODDin]

McG: The setup in that game is

closed

. You don't know how much scum there are there. Unless, you know...

[ODDin]

Ok, to answer all of your questions about me:
I

usually

never place random votes and all of the people I

usually

play with find scummy to random vote without information. I do, too. I really haven't understood why you place them like that yet.

We've moved past voting for random reasons long ago. Right now people are voting based on their analysis of the situation and what others have said and what they think is scummy.
As has been explained to you before, here on MS we usually begin by a round of random votes, called RVS (Random Voting Stage). Eventually, discussion begins to emerge and we move out of the RVS and into actual analysis and thinking.

We're on page 16. We've been out of the RVS since page 3. Actually, by the time you first posted we were already out of the RVS. So, catch up and start playing.

[ODDin]

@mod: Could you prod zazie please?

DONE!

[ODDin]

Diamond: So let me get it. At first, you believed that yos was correct and that what McG did was a slip. But then you didn't vote. Then, you started to think it's possibly not a scumtell and just a mistake on McG's part. And

then

you vote. Interesting timing.

reck: Stop playing dumb.

That being said, I don't think reck saying he finds what McG modkillable is an offense. It's expressing an opinion on the rules, and an honest townie with such an opinion could've perfectly said so.

[ODDin]

O hai bv. Who is scum?

[ODDin]

Wolf? I think you mean McG there.

[ODDin]

Then post content.

[ODDin]

Blegh, lots of catch up to do >.<
Will get to it today or tomorrow, depending on my mother ._.
So can somebody tell me the juicy gossips that I've missed? Other than that Tate ate some brains. That I already knew, hence why I'm voting him

But Tate, why aren't you voting?

I'm voting you for this.

[ODDin]

WRP, this is NOT content.

[ODDin]

ODDin, do you still think Zazie is your best vote?

Yes. Especially seeing he's lurking the hell out of this game and not responding.

As for the two prominent wagons, the tate wagon is bullshit. Its sole reason is the vote on a zombie lord, which may indeed be a little scummy, but there are far better arguments out there. I mean, almost any argument is better than that.

The McGriddle wagon makes more sense, McGriddle's behaviour is indeed scummy. But I don't think adding my vote to it will do any good.

Other than that, I haven't got anyone standing out as scummy in any special way (other than zazie, that is), if we don't count varying degrees of lurking (which is scummy, but hunting lurkers is what I do when everything else fails, and everything else hasn't failed yet.)

[ODDin]

I think I should also say what I think about reck as well. Well, I don't find what he originally said on the modkill to be scummy, since I don't see it as asking for a modkill.
His later reaction raises a brow, but doesn't really strike me as scum-under-pressure. Though I might need to keep a closer eye on him.

[ODDin]

ODDin, do you still think Zazie is your best vote?

Yes. Especially seeing he's lurking the hell out of this game and not responding.

hunting lurkers is what I do when everything else fails, and everything else hasn't failed yet

wat

I'm not voting him because he's lurking. What I mean is that my vote should serve as a good reminder to him that he's got stuff to address.

[ODDin]

Active

lurking and

he is voting me.

Do I even need to say that this is OMGUS?

[ODDin]

reck, I answered 477 in post 481.

[ODDin]

Hmm, I followed iLord's example and browsed the game reck linked to. Seems like it supports that that's the way he behaves when being accused, what with the caps and f-words. So, this makes his play look even less like scum-under-pressure to me.

[ODDin]

ABR:

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 64#1846264

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 04#1849204

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 99#1850699

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 84#1862584

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 24#1862924

[ODDin]

@ODDin: Was RECK under pressure in those examples? I looked post-fisherman-claim and there wasn't anything unusually similar to his play this game.

Basically, I think he always posts like he has done so far, town or scum, and it's a null tell. It's not even really a pressure thing - his posting style is pretty constant across the board whenever he's aroused.

I think at least some of these posts were made in defence, but either way, whether he always posts like that under pressure or always posts like that period, it makes his posting style a null tell in the context of this game.


Reck: You saying to CD "show me where you scumhunted first" is scummy. It's defending yourself by trying to discredit your attacker. Indeed, CD hasn't scumhunted much and there's lots to be said about him, but this doesn't still mean his cases are null.

McGriddle: Defending yourself is a null-tell. If you're town, then you know you're town, and thus it's in your best interest to prevent a lynch on yourself, since it helps the town (they won't be lynching a town player).
I can't believe I just had to say this...

WRP and bv310 have stepped up from lurking to active lurking.
Post. Content. Now.
There are

lots

of things to comment on. Like, what you think about the prominent wagons.
WRP, you better say

why

you're unvoting reck.

[ODDin]

Myself, I'd appreciate an extension to the deadline. I feel there's lots and lots to be gained from today still.

[ODDin]

@Tate: Please answer:

@tate: What do you think about WRP, MrSuave, Zazier, and evilsnail?

What about bv310, crymeariver, or ani?

No.

El Oh El

[ODDin]

tate: iLord isn't leading the town. If you think answering his questions can actually hurt the town, then explain why.
But if you don't think these questions will hurt the town, then by not answering you're simply denying the town of potentially useful information.
Also, you're appealing to emotion. No, I don't know deep down that you're town. What I know is that you're refusing to answer questions which, until proven otherwise, can only potentially help the town.

Not having the deadline extended sucks. reck - it's 2 days, not 5 days from the deadline.
I'd really want to keep my vote on zazie, but I'm willing to vote for either McG or tate for a lynch. (I still don't consider his "slip up" with the zombie lords to be a meaningful scum-tell, but his latest behaviour is ultra scummy.)

[ODDin]

By the way, not requesting a deadline extension is scummy IMO. Scum benefit from cutting the discussion and having a premature lynch, town don't, and I think it's obvious that there's still a lot of discussion to be had.
IGMEO everybody not requesting a deadline extension, especially those who have posted / will post after farside said she'd be willing to extend the deadline.

[ODDin]

Corrected. I doubt any player would admit to not wanting a deadline extension, but I saw no need for twenty "deadline extension plz" comments.

Well, we're not getting one because only four people have requested it, so there's your need.

[ODDin]

You could, uhh, express your wish to extend a deadline right now?
If you want it, it won't harm you to ask for it, right?

[ODDin]

... Or so you say. Tricky.

[ODDin]

I can't help but wonder, do kmd and reck actually think anybody will go "you know, I really didn't intend to vote tate [McG], but now that kmd [reck] said so, I will"?

[ODDin]

CMAR, that's blatant rolefishing right there. McG is far from being a certain lynch.

[ODDin]

After I look an CMAR's ISO, I actually have a few questions of my own to McG.

McG:
1) Have you actually read the thread from its beginning?
2) You were certain that kmd and ani are scum. However, your vote is on reck. Do you think he is scummier than kmd and ani? Why? What do you think of kmd's case on reck? What part does it play in your vote on him?

[ODDin]

EBWOP: I look

an

at CMAR's ISO

[ODDin]

So you agree that the case on you is logical?

[ODDin]

Why are you doing things that you yourself consider scummy?

[ODDin]

(Previous post was @tate, obviously)

[ODDin]

Well, with zazie replaced, my vote is pretty much wasted. e_k can't really answer my questions for zazie in a meaningful way.

unvote, vote: tate

His latest actions (refusing to answer questions without any evidence as to why these questions can possibly hurt the town - and they can't as far as I myself can tell) are scummy. (Yes, it's more than anti-town IMO, since scum actually might have a motivation to not answer the questions, for instance, if some of the people being asked about are scum partners, or candidates for recruiting or whatever.)
McG is scummy, but I'm more willing to let it pass as general newbiness/VIness, whereas tate seems much more aware of what he's doing and how one should be playing.


Also,

Tate,

several other members of the town

have expressed that they too would like to see the answer to my questions. It's not only unhelpful to me, but unhelpful towards everyone for you to refuse to do so.

(Emphasis mine)
Is it just me, or is this a slip? I mean, iLord doesn't know that the others who expressed their wish to hear the answers are town.

[ODDin]

[quote="Kmd4390"]Um, if you thought Zazie was scum, shouldn't you think EK is scum too?
/quote]
1) e_k isn't going to be lynched today anyway, so the vote's sole purpose at this stage could only have been pressure - which is pretty much useless now.
2) I think that what I had on zazie is weaker than the current case on tate. I didn't switch immediately only to keep the pressure, in hopes that if zazie showed up, he'd first answer to the one actually voting him. Whether it's stronger than the case on McG depends on whether it is indeed zazie's current playstyle.

[ODDin]

Hi Dr.C and E_K!

Hi scum

wouldn't that mean that I am lazy rather than scum?

Let's put it like that: if you're town and intend to continue playing the way you do, then the only way in which you can play to win is replace out.

[ODDin]

I don't really see how that is scummy. I am just trying not to get a vote on me for NOT RVing. It has happened before and I figured I would cross that bridge before someone brought it up. If that was wrong of me to RV I apologize, but I don't really think I did anything wrong there.

Not RVing isn't scummy per se, it can be somewhat scummy if you neither RV nor do anything else to help move the discussion forward. Also, RVing is mostly of any "use" in the RVS. By the time you posted we were long since out of the RVS (which you could've guessed by only glancing at the recent posts), and thus at that stage, RVing didn't help the town in any way.
What's concerning is that you RVed not because of belief it was useful, but simply because you wanted to protect your own hide.

I FoS'd him for a VERY legit reason. He lied and put words in my mouth. That, IMO, merits an FoS at the very least.

No, he hasn't He didn't lie, and his interpretation of your post was a very logical one. Granted, it wasn't 100% accurate, but normally, a player who is willing to read the thread explicitly says so (compare your entry to what e_k and dr cyanide said when they replaced in). So, it was pretty logical for Yos to assume your attitude expressed unwillingness to read the thread.

Yeah I don't really have an excuse there. I have been dealing with RL problems all semester, and I have been really short with people and have been rather lazy, so I apologize again. But that being said, if I were scum, why would I tell everyone that I am lazy and draw suspicion and angry feelings to me?

This is WIFOM. Plus, if you were scum, then it makes sense that you want to (a) lurk and not participate and (b) not get heat for it. Saying you're lazy helps in this regard.

That was a while ago I was worried about Yos. Go read my cases then you can complain about my suspicions because obviously, you haven't.

Let me tell you why he hasn't read your suspicions: because you've never written them.
There was a sort of accusation on kmd, but there wasn't a single word about ani (read your own ISO).

You are defending him pretty hard when clearly he wanted a modkill on me. And that being said, just because I have suspicions on people doesn't mean my attitude can't be swayed when new evidence comes about.

CMAR is hardly the only one to say that. There are many people who don't think what reck said was asking for a modkill (myself among them). It's not called "defending pretty hard".

1. To this day pretty much (from page 5, the first 4 struck no true interest in me sorry) but if you wish I could read them if you want.

Yes, I do.

[ODDin]

On ODDin

McG is scummy, but I'm more willing to let it pass as general newbiness/VIness

I'm not comfortable with you giving McG, more or less, a free pass.

FOS: ODDin

I'm not giving him a free pass. What I said was that his newbishness/VIness are a factor which make the issues I have with him to be weaker than they would've probably been if he were a different player.
He is still scummy. I'm just saying that he's less scummy than tate, because in comparison, tate's behaviour isn't VI-ish, and thus the impression is that tate chooses his actions with full understanding of the consequences, the benefits and the disadvantages (unlike McG, as it would seem.)


* * *

Also, something I forgot to say about McG in my previous post: his play lately seems like he's trying to appease people. All the "sorry if I offended anybody" and "is this better play" etc. Not too scummy and could be honest, but still worth a mention.

[ODDin]

Says the one who admitted the case on him to be logical...

[ODDin]

kmd, remind me if you will what your stance on tate and McG is?

[ODDin]

Remind me your cases on ani, diamond and iLord, then.
Also, saying "they're not as scummy as reck" is effectively avoiding to answer the question. Obviously you think they're less scummy than reck, otherwise you'd be voting for one of them (or you're scum, of course )
What do you think about the cases on them? Are they valid buy weaker than the one on reck (why?), or are they, in your opinion, wrong to begin with?

[ODDin]

e_k: do you have town meta on him as well? The fact that he acted like he does in this game in some other game and turned out to be scum doesn't mean he doesn't act that way always.


suave: Well, a very brief summary would go something like this. There are 3 main wagons - tate, reck and McG.
tate:
- possible slip with referring to the zombie lords in his RV.
- refusal to answer questions directed at him without providing a reason.
- acknowledgment of the fact that not answering these questions makes for a logical case on him.

reck:
- lack of scumhunting / active lurking.
- pushing for a modkill on McG.
(There was also something about wanting to policy lynch CD)

McG:
- not reading the thread and still being confident in whom he wanted to lynch.
- accusing people without a case (though a case was later presented, more or less).
- claiming laziness while finding lots of time to lurk around.
- saying stuff that could be interpreted as him knowing there are 2 scum.
- refusing to answer questions directed at him (again on account of laziness and RL)


kmd: say, you mind linking me to a game when you acted like this as town?

[ODDin]

For the record, I don't personally agree with everything I said above, I just summarised the points. Two arguments I don't find reasonable are tate's slip with the zombie lords and reck's pushing for a modkill.

[ODDin]

kmd: repeating "X is scum, vote for him," over and over and over (and over) again, and more or less implying that everybody doing otherwise is WRONG.
Especially on D1.

[ODDin]

Seeing that this is a cult game, I'm wondering whether it's more important to hit actual scum as early as possible, rather than removing dead weights. (Not saying I'm certain, but I am wondering.)

[ODDin]

What I mean is, it might become harder to win the longer the game lasts, since there will be more zombies around.
It depends on the nature of the scumteam, of course. If extra zombies don't give the scum any special benefits and the role of a "zombie lord" (presumably cult leader) can't be passed to somebody else, then I guess it doesn't matter much.

[ODDin]

No, bv, I use scum and zombies interchangeably.

Nice to know you're following, though. Finding any interesting brain recipes during your active lurking?

[ODDin]

kmd: you're still pushing for reck way harder, and with much less attempts at long reasoning, here. Look at your iso from recent posts back: beginning at around iso 20, about half your posts are about how people should be voting reck or not voting anyone who isn't reck.
"vote reck"
"if you're smart vote reck"
"you shouldn't vote other people because they aren't reck"
etc. (not exact quotes, but almost exact)

That's almost everything you're doing.

I mean, pushing hard is fine. I've been pushing hard myself quite enough. But this is beyond pushing hard for a lynch, this is just ridiculous.


bv: how do you manage to follow the game closely but only get time to post late at night or early in the morning? Have you got a special "read only interenet access" at all other times?
Plus, what does your personal time have to do with what was or wasn't discussed in the thread? If you only had free time in the afternoon stuff wouldn't have been discussed? People have different time zones, you know.
Also, even if you haven't got anything new and original to add to the game, you can at least say what you think about it. What arguments you agree with, what arguments you don't agree with etc.
People don't only post to share new and original opinions. What people say is also important for later analysis and comparison. And if you're town, you want people to be able to better analyse you (since you want them to understand you're town), and thus you want to give us as much info as possible. But apparently you don't...

[ODDin]

Currently Reck, but I'll switch it when I get a firmer idea. Might try to do a reread later tonight.

Says the man who supposedly follows the game intently.

Also, abr: Diamond has already said it, but you suggesting that kmd was a daycop was pretty damn bad. If you're town, you should shut up about these stuff and hope the scum don't notice. Doing what you did doesn't help you at all - especially not if your ultimate conclusion is to vote him anyway. You could've said such a thing if kmd was about to get lynched or something, and even then, I'd leave the claim up to him if he found it necessary.
Also, your play doesn't make sense. Why did you unvote kmd? What convinced you that your case on him was wrong?

[ODDin]

ABR: So if kmd claimed daycop, then you'd know he's scum... You risked exposing a town PR for some serious WIFOM. Way to go.

As for McG's claim... well, it does make sense for the town to have a cop. It also explains his lack of desire to read the thread, to an extent, since if he's a cop, he could hope to hunt simply based on his findings.
McG, have you already got some sort of investigation available, or do you only investigate nights?
Personally, I don't think it's a good idea to lynch McG today. He could be lying, sure, but there's no real reason to assume he's lying at the moment, and keeping him alive will not hurt the town in any way I see (especially seeing there are other good wagons available.)
Unless somebody counterclaims, of course. Then we'd have to think (having 2 cops for the town seems a tad overpowered, even for a cult game, but I guess they might have sanity issues or something.)

[ODDin]

I really don't like this coming from bv. What with his general behaviour in the game, this looks awefully like "aha, he's the cop, lynch lynch lynch."

Point is, if McG

is

a cop, then claiming now makes sense. A bit on the early side, perhaps, still at L-3 and 2 days from the deadline, but not outrageously early IMO.

[ODDin]

I just really don't believe that claim. McGriddle said twice he doesn't mind being the lynch today and was pretty fatalistic about the whole thing, not like a cop panicking and begging us not to kill him. Now all the sudden "I'm the cop...lol, oops."

Check it out:

Fair enough, I wouldn't mind being the lynch today, I know I have bad play in this game, and if it came to a lylo situation and I was still alive I know I would be the killed person. So if you guys decide to lynch me I am with it.

it looks like there is no exit plan for me so I am accepting my fate.

I suppose we should be careful and not lynch a possible cop, but I really, really don't believe McGriddle.

Hmm, this is a really good point, actually, I didn't notice it.

[ODDin]

reck means, what sort of results will you get from farside?

When I reread McG's ISO, I tend to agree with e_k, McG is most probably lying. A cop would've tried harder to avoid a lynch, instead of saying "I'm okay with you lynching me" (which, coming from town, is a sign of vanillaness).

[ODDin]

The mod almost always says the sort of information a cop gets, so this "most likely" is another nail in the coffin of "McG is making his role up".

Also,

For someone who's case on another person is that he was pushing for modkills you sure are quick to try and get someone else modkilled.

QFT

[ODDin]

But McG, if you aren't lying, please remember that actually quoting your role PM is most definitely modkillable, so don't.

[ODDin]

I didn't answer before him. Look here:

@ E_K sorry, I misread that.

It's Day 1 I haven't had the chance to investigate anyone yet. If you are asking me what I will get back from an investigation, it will probably be somewhere along the lines of "This player is from _____ faction" ____ being town or not town.

This is the answer to the question you've just asked. All you did was restate the question once again, but the answer is already there, and that "probably something along the lines of" suggests he's likely making it up.

All I did was warn him not to do anything stupid like actually quote his role PM, because there's no reason for people to get modkilled just like that.

[ODDin]

unvote, vote: McG

(L-1)
Openly lying is just bullshit.

Also, CD is not pushing harder for your lynch than anyone else.

[ODDin]

That was the hammer, btw.

[ODDin]

Well, at least this means nobody new became a zombie, so we don't need to look for changes in behaviour today. (I'm guessing the zombies don't target multiple targets each night, that is.)

It's interesting that iLord was actually correct about McG, but seeing that McG was town, I don't think it means anything special.

So, continuing my line of thought from D1,

vote: tate

.

[ODDin]

unvote, vote: bv310

Nice to see you continuing your active lurking, not posting any content whatsoever while merrily jumping on the forming wagon.

Diamond - good point about ABR.

[ODDin]

After some thought, I reached the conclusion that while ABR's original role-fishing is indeed scummy (as I've already said D1), the NK doesn't make it scummier.
Suppose ABR-scum was rolefishing in his interaction with KMD. So, ABR knows KMD is town, but doesn't know his role. KMD then says he isn't a daycop - without saying anything that implies that he's a different role. So, if it was ABR-scum doing rolefishing, then the conclusion should've been that KMD isn't a PR. (If anything, it should've made him decide against NKing KMD)
So, the NK doesn't make ABR look more scummy to me.

I'm also not convinced by the case on iLord. If he's scum, he knew McG wasn't scum, but he didn't know he wasn't cop. And either way, I see little reason for iLord to advise McG to admit that he wasn't a cop. I don't really see how it matters to iLord either way. If anything, the longer McG claimed to be cop, the more time it gave for people to potentially counterclaim and expose themselves.

Post 848 by evilsnail is scummy. First, he horrendously twists Starbuck's words. He may not agree with the point being made, but it's quite obvious she wasn't referring to the fact that the phrase had been underlined.
Also, suddenly he says the case on tate is crap. Not only did he not say a single word against the case on D1 (although he's read the relevant part of the thread, as indicated in post 718), but he had actually agreed with the original argument about referring to the townie PM (which was actually the weakest and least logical part of the case), as can be seen in post 9 and later in post 128.

FoS: evilsnail

[ODDin]

I said the reasoning given for the wagon today is crap, not that there isn't a case to be made against tate. There are too many people jumping on the tate wagon on the basis of nothing or weak arguments, like bv310, CMAR, iLord or ani.

The reasons for the wagon today are the same as the reasons for the wagon on tate yesterday. Doesn't it make sense for people to begin D2 by voting for the next best suspect on D1? There weren't any new reasons made against him, it's still the same reasons from yesterday.

[ODDin]

This is maybe true of the iLord, but CMAR and bv310 weren't voting him yesterday. Ani was, but for the same weak reason. It's scummy when people slip onto a wagon like that.

That's a completely different thing from what you've said earlier. You've said that the case on tate was crap. Now you're saying that it's scummy for people who weren't voting him yesterday to vote him today.
You may have a point there, and I myself stated that I find bv's actions in this regard to be pretty scummy (combined with other stuff). But this has nothing to do with the case on him being good or bad.
"The case on tate is crap" and "people are too eager to join the wagon on tate" are two completely different things.

[ODDin]

Nah, I said the "reasoning given so far," referring to the fact that too many of the votes on there (bv310, CMAR and ani) were not backed up by good reasoning.

The reasoning that had been presented by that point was either no reasoning at all or reference to the case from yesterday (and one would assume, in the context, that those who didn't present a reason - CMAR and bv - also referred mostly to the case from yesterday).
When you say "the reasoning is crap", it means you think there

is

reasoning, and the only reasoning that could be there was the case from yesterday. If you thought that people were voting without reasoning, you should have said "why are you voting for tate?".

Bottom line, you can't simultaneously say "you didn't say a reason" and "your reason is crap".

[ODDin]

Hi, sorry for my absence recently, been busy with some IRL issues. Catching up now, content forthcoming.

[ODDin]

Additionally, what do you feel about tate not answering questions asking him about his reads on other players? Do you feel it's okay for anyone to do so with impunity?

I don't think it's straightforwardly scummy. It's obviously not helping the town, but it's very counterproductive as scum. So I don't feel it's a strong tell either way.

Why didn't you say that D1? I remember I, for one, have specifically said on D1 that I

do

think it might benefit tate as scum to do so. If you disagreed, why didn't you say anything on the subject?

---

Why is evilsnail getting into so much trouble because he doesn't want to lynch me? That's not normal and I can't help but think that someone is pulling the strings here.

Vote: Diamondilium

What? Starbuck was the one accusing evilsnail for defending you.

---

And let's not pretend that tate coasting through this game refusing to answer questions is a reasonable scenario. Obviously that's not going to happen.

Seeing that you're arguing in favour of his actions not being scummy, that's pretty hypocritical.

---

vote: iLord

for correctly finding McG fakeclaiming townie. there is no way you can do it unless you are scum.

@iLord, by which post of McG you are sure he is pro-town?

This feels kinda opportunistic. Don't you have anything else new to say and you just choose to reiterate things that have already been said?
(Although now manho unvotes. Hmm. It does speak in favour of he simply not following the game much, rather than knowingly jumping on wagons.)

---

-The mechanic of the game strongly suggests that the cult can grow indefinitely. That is, it's not like once we lynch the cultmaster, the cult loses their ability to recruit. That means that

we cannot win this game on lynchings alone

. Which further implies that we have at least one vig on our team, with likely even more killing roles (SK, maybe?) out there somewhere. I expect all of you to be killing, every night. Even in a non-cult game it's a good idea. In a cult game, it's basically mandatory.

Not necessarily. The term "zombie lords" from the sample townie PM implies that there are zombie lords who aren't regular zombies. So it seems possible that we can win as town while there are still zombies alive out there (or unlive, as the case might be )
(This has been later addressed by yos, but I'll leave it here anyway)

---

Yes, that's why I'm voting you. I think there's a legit case on tate also, but there's no rush in getting to that.

Incidentally, you mention the legit case against tate. Most interested to hear what this constitutes.

This is a very good point. evilsnail says that tate's not answering questions is a poor case and not scummy, and at the same time believes there is a legit case on him. What would that be, him referring to the sample townie PM?

---

I also think the case on tate/pie is still valid. In contrast to what e_k has said, I don't think tate was a VI. I've explicitly said that D1 when I was voting for him, in fact: he seemed to be very aware of his actions and their implications.

---

Okay, I'll believe that.

Either way, I'd like to see what you think of the ABR mini-wagon.

How about you say some of your opinions? The only real "opinion" you've expressed today is that tate replacing out makes him scummier in your eyes (which didn't stop you from unvoting him, though).
What do

you

think of the ABR mini-wagon?

---

Pie, if that's as far in as you are, you're going to be very upset in like two pages.

It's disturbing how you apparently follow the game intently enough to remember what was going on where at the beginning of D1, and still post practically zero content.

---

reck: it has been said many times already, and confirmed by farside, that when the cult targets a PR, that player simply dies instead of being recruited.

[ODDin]

Why is evilsnail getting into so much trouble because he doesn't want to lynch me? That's not normal and I can't help but think that someone is pulling the strings here.

Vote: Diamondilium

What? Starbuck was the one accusing evilsnail for defending you.

Yeah that was my bad I changed my vote.

Yes, to reck, who also wasn't accusing evilsnail for defending you.

[ODDin]

You presented an argument: that the accusations against evilsnail were scummy. Then you vote for diamond, supposedly for being the one behind the accusations. Then you unvote and vote for reck, but you didn't say it was because you realised you were wrong about diamond, you just said it was because you found reck scummier, but he also has nothing to do with the argument above.
The "scum are accusing evilsnail" argument is forgotten and not brought up again, even though it is at no point answered by anyone (neither diamond nor Starbuck). Why have you forgotten about it? Why aren't you accusing Starbuck over this argument?

[ODDin]

Previous post was @ABR.

[ODDin]

I understand you have reasons for voting for reck, that's not what I'm talking about. What I'm talking about is post 886:

Why is evilsnail getting into so much trouble because he doesn't want to lynch me? That's not normal and I can't help but think that someone is pulling the strings here.

Saying this certainly implies "scum are behind the accusations of evilsnail". Can't see any other way to read it.
And if you bothered to say it, it means you found it important enough. And yet, even though nobody has addressed this point, you're not pressing anyone and not trying to question anyone. It seems you just blurted the thought and then forgot all about it.

[ODDin]

So, this

I never said "scum are accusing evilsnail", ever.

turned into "I did say it but then realised it was ridiculous"?

[ODDin]

I see very little difference between "scum are accusing evilsnail" and "scum are pulling strings to frame evilsnail", as far as the meaning goes. Scum don't telepathically control the town, so the only way scum can frame somebody, other than through NKs and other special actions (which obviously weren't involved) is to go ahead and accuse them, hoping town would follow.
Post 886 didn't imply that your observations were more "gut" and "only a feeling" than any other thing you've said.


Also, when exactly did you realise your feeling was unfounded?

[ODDin]

Post 886 didn't imply that your observations were more "gut" and "only a feeling" than any other thing you've said.

ORLY

Why is evilsnail getting into so much trouble because he doesn't want to lynch me? That's not normal and I can't help but think that someone is pulling the strings here.

Vote: Diamondilium

YES RLY

"I can't help but think that" doesn't imply that what is being said is more of a baseless gut feeling than usual. Almost all arguments are a matter of how you look at things and how you interpret them, so saying "I think that" before an argument doesn't seem special to me.
What, if you don't say "X is scum lynch him now plz" I'm supposed to infer that what you're saying is baseless gut feelings?

Also, when exactly did you realise your feeling was unfounded?

When there weren't any more people voting me, that's when.

So, you needed people to unvote you for you to start thinking straight?
Also, reck is still voting for you. If he unvotes you, will you reach the conclusion that your argument on him is a baseless gut feeling as well?

[ODDin]

What, if you don't say "X is scum lynch him now plz" I'm supposed to infer that what you're saying is baseless gut feelings?

If I don't vote the player, if I don't mention the player anywhere else, if I don't even vote for that person in the post where I'm making a vague allusion to that player, then yes! It is safe to assume it is a feeling and not an argument!

Post 886 seemed to imply that the one "pulling the strings" was in fact diamond.

So, you needed people to unvote you for you to start thinking straight?

Now you're just inventing things. Where did I say that I needed people to unvote me? Nowhere! After a few posts when no one bandwagoned me I assumed that I was wrong about someone trying to set me up as a tate v2.0.

You said you realised your argument was baseless when people unvoted you. You'd think that if something were baseless, you wouldn't need anyone to unvote you to realise that. You'd just need to notice that there was nothing to support the claim, with or without anyone voting for you.

Also, reck is still voting for you. If he unvotes you, will you reach the conclusion that your argument on him is a baseless gut feeling as well?

This is a follow-up question to "so you needed people to unvote you to start thinking straight?", which doesn't make sense in the first place because I don't need anyone to unvote me. Like I said, after a few posts with me not being martyred or quicklynched, I just took it as a sign that 2012 is still 2 years away.

You were never in danger of being quicklynched. Plus, you were talking about evilsnail being accused, not you.

Do you want to attack me?

I am attacking you.

Do you want me to attack you?

OMGUS much?

Are you trying to say something? Huh? Wanna start something!?

Why so edgy?

[ODDin]

Okay, here are my points against you in a clearer fashion.

1) You say you never said scum were accusing evilsnail. But you did say something which means exactly that you thought scum were accusing evilsnail. You're being terribly nitpicky about the specific formulation, but it's pretty obvious what the meaning was.
This is contradiction and backtracking.

2) You say your argument was merely a baseless gut feeling, and that you not voting anyone based on it was supposed to be an indication to that. However, you did vote diamond based on that argument. Also, you didn't actually say your argument was unfounded until I started questioning you about it.

3) When asked about when you realised your argument was unfounded, you said it was when people weren't voting for you anymore (post 1007). If an argument is wrong, you don't need anyone to unvote you for you to realise it's wrong.

4) You're suddenly all edgy and annoyed and moved to semi-insulting me. Fascinating.

[ODDin]

Realized with a z.

It's the British spelling.

1) The way I formulated it is indicative of my ideology that some thoughts arise not as a conscious endeavor but as something you have no control over, feelings that come and go as they please.

That's why we put a filter between our brain and the keyboard.

2) Obviously I don't want to undermine my own credibility by retracting a statement. Did Ford recall the Pinto when they discovered a deadly flaw in the car? No, they did not, because that would tarnish their reputation, which they need if they want to sell cars, and that I need to be taken seriously.

You've undermined it, all right. To admit to being wrong does not undermine your credibility. To not admit, twist the situation and try to say you weren't wrong even though you were - does.

4) What's the matter? Can't take a joke?

It's just curious how annoyed and angry you get, that's all...

If I was not to use your own methods against you, I would say:

3) You have misread, sir, because I never said that I changed my mind because people unvoted me. I said that more people weren't voting for e]me. Not that anyone unvoted me.

Well, it looks like I misunderstood what you meant by post 1007. Now that you've actually bothered to explain it properly, I see that I was mistaken. (See? Not difficult to say at all.)
My point 3 against you is no longer relevant, then.

[ODDin]

Rememberd I forgot to answer Starbuck about why I've talked about bv. The reason is, I feel very strongly that bv is actually

active

lurking - he's following the thread, he knows what's going on quite well, he's paying attention, but he almost intentionally doesn't post content.
There are other lurkers, but I don't feel as strongly that they are active lurking, that is, choosing to lurk as a playstyle decision.

ABR: Sure.

[ODDin]

Yos, just so you know, it's not "almost the end of D2", as deadline is 28th, not 21st.

[ODDin]

[quote="Pie_is_good"]Done rereading. Would like to add to my IGMEOY list:
-ODDin/quote]
Hmm?

Also, bv is being opportunistic as hell yet again by voting manho with all the cool boys.
Yeah, manho is active lurking. bv is active lurking a whole lot more.
bv lynch > manho lynch

I'm also not getting an

active

lurking vibe from McSuave. Sure, he's lurking, but it really doesn't seem like he's following the game.

[ODDin]

You can accuse me without pushing for my lynch. You can get people's opinions on stuff for later analysis and whatever. Good for the discussion.

[ODDin]

How is Starbuck not getting lynched yet?

Umm, since when do you want to lynch Starbuck? What is your case on her?

[ODDin]

I have to admit that I myself got a little confused what iLord's been talking about in regards to me questioning bv. I thought he'd been referring to something else. So, I went and sorted it out, and here's what I came up with:

In this post, bv asks pie what he thinks on the ABR mini-wagon.
This results in several interesting things:
1) pie never answers this question. However, bv doesn't seem to care. Which raises the question, why the hell did he ask that in the first place?
2) I ask bv for some opinions in this post. He ignores that. I first thought iLord meant that, thus didn't push harder myself. (Yes, I know iLord said "yesterday" and this wasn't asked yesterday, I got confused... )

* * *

Anyways, manho, if you decide to show up it might be nice for you to defend yourself and/or claim. Preferably the latter.

This feels too early to be asking for a claim. It was 6 days before deadline and with only 5 votes on manho.

* * *

manho is lately becoming more scummy in my eyes due to him basically saying "yeah, sure, whatever you say" to everything iLord says. Still think bv is scummier:
unlike manho, I really get the feeling bv is intently following the game and decides not to post content. The moment he's attacked he's quick to respond, and then he sinks back into oblivion again. Plus, what I said above in this post.

* * *

CD's vote on manho feels horribly opportunistic. He brings ideas as if they were his own, though he just repeats stuff that's been said.

[ODDin]

@Oddin: I mentioned mid-reread at some point that I was keeping an eye on ABR to see what I thought of the wagon, but thusfar found him unremarkable. I didn't expressly say so, but I still find him kind of unremarkable. So I half-answered the question.

It's not a point against you, it's a point against bv. I know you mentioned you were going to keep an eye on ABR, but you never gave an actual opinion, until right now. I don't mind you finding it unremarkable or the question slipping your mind - there, when I brought it up again you answered it, so it doesn't seem you were trying to avoid the question.
What bothers me is that bv, who actually asked the question and didn't get an answer, didn't ask it again, didn't push it, didn't attempt to draw any conclusions - nothing. It's almost the only question he's asked anyone the whole game, and he isn't doing anything about it.

Also, I will be the first to admit that I tend to push for claims earlier than most people are comfortable with.

Links to games you did that as town?

[ODDin]

i usually use gut feeling, a bit tunnel vision, and some strange scum tell, like trying hard to look pro-town, to make the cases you are talking about in those games.

Wow.

You know, if you already

know

your scumhunting skills suck, you might want to try and improve than, rather than lurk and sulk. It's not the town's fault you can't scumhunt.

[ODDin]

EBWOP: improve

than

them

[ODDin]

We should at least wait for the NS replacement to join in and hopefully give at least a rudimentary opinion before hammering.

[ODDin]

The worst thing that can happen is that we wait until deadline to hammer and the replacement doesn't post an opinion.
Patience is a virtue.

[ODDin]

reck, let me refresh your memory:

Oh, cult can only recruit VTs? I guess I skimmed over that.

And suddenly CMAR saying the exact same thing is a scumslip?

Also, the rules do say that if scum attempt to recruit a PR then he dies. It follows that scum can only recruit VTs.

* * *

CMAR is scummy for his hammer. He was essentially peer-pressured to hammer. Then he said that if he'd seen my post he wouldn't have hammered, but now he's suddenly defending his actions.
Not to mention that beside not waiting for NS's replacement, the hammer didn't even allow manho to have final words during L-1 (which yos obviously wanted to allow, since he said that in the post he put manho at L-1).

* * *

Still think bv is scummy.

* * *

Thus:

Vote: bv
FoS: CMAR, reck

[ODDin]

P.S. While I agree with ABR's reasoning regarding yos, it's still possible that he wasn't killed by the cult. Yes, killing+recruiting each night is horrendously overpowered. But they can have a one-shot kill, or there can be a rule like "if the bodyguard protects a zombie then he dies", which might mean that yos simply protected the wrong person. So, it's

possible

that scum did recruit somebody, though it's a less likely scenario.

[ODDin]

p_i_g, that's a very interesting point, actually.

[ODDin]

Link or ongoing?

[ODDin]

What do you mean, "I'm trying to think of something better"? You either think what you said was a scumslip or you don't.

[ODDin]

(By "what you said" I mean "what you referred to", obviously)

[ODDin]

Rolefishing, are we?

[ODDin]

Huh.

unvote

Will need to think this over.

[ODDin]

Oh, missed post 1302 by evil. This puts this in a somewhat saner perspective.

[ODDin]

evil, what other results have you got? I mean, you've already pretty much claimed PR.

Starbuck makes an interesting point, but it seems a bit too elaborate a gambit to make at this point. Neither evil nor ABR were under that much heavy fire, and if we assume they're scum, it means reck is town, and then what he said about bv is true, so all the more reason for scum to shut up while we lynch bv.
All of this just to lynch reck? It doesn't make sense. Perhaps if they somehow discovered that he was the cop, but even then it seems way too risky.

[ODDin]

evil, you didn't have to reveal your special ability yesterday in order to push for reck's lynch. You could push for his lynch legitimately, by bringing up arguments. Yet you didn't.

[ODDin]

Argh, I'm getting ninja'd.

evil, I think it will be better if you do go into details about your ability.

[ODDin]

Uhh, reck already said he targeted bv N1 and me N2. evil says reck targeted kmd N1. If evil is correct, then reck is lying, thus scum.

[ODDin]

Actually was asking about why you didn't push for his lynch yesterday, when I still didn't see your post where it said you didn't have that info yesterday. But what you answered is also a question that was good to ask.
This conversation is one huge ninja fest.

Anyways, either reck or evil is scum.
I think reck is scum, since it doesn't make sense for evil to make this gambit just to get reck lynched, even if he knew reck was the cop.
And also, reck checking me doesn't make much sense for a cop. I don't think I was anyone's top suspect or a lynch candidate, thus making me a pretty bad decision for the cop. Cops usually check those who are either the town's top suspect or their own top suspect, or at least those whose role will reveal the most information somehow, and I really don't see how I fall into any of these categories.

As for ABR's plan, it has pluses and minuses. The sooner we know who is scum, the sooner we can draw conclusions from it to find the rest of the scumteam. As long as we're pursuing the "one of them is scum but we don't know who" avenue of thinking, we can't really try to discern what it means.

[ODDin]

reck, now you're just playing it dumb. First of all, we're talking about N1, where you (supposedly) targeted bv.
Second, evilsnail obviously means you were scum, and thus you targeted kmd in order to kill him.

Also, explain why you investigated me.

[ODDin]

Read that in context of the rest of the message, he obviously means N1, otherwise the rest of the post doesn't make sense.

[ODDin]

Starbuck, evilsnail either made a typo or meant "on N2 I doscovered that reck targeted kmd". His post really makes no sense otherwise - read the context, he says that he didn't push to lynch reck D2 because he didn't know his info yet, not because the info was about N2 to begin with.
You're seriously reaching.

Even if he's lying, this isn't evidence to that.

[ODDin]

@ABR: when I have an investigative role and no really strong scum reads on anyone, I target the most neutral players that I can.

So bv was the most neutral player D1? I remember at least I've been accusing him already then.

[ODDin]

Unfortunately, there will be too much WIFOM going around if we just let both reck and evil live. ABR's plan of waiting until tomorrow might make sense, but by the onset of N4 one of them must die, one way or the other.

Also, there isn't necessarily a vig. There's the option that:
1) kmd was actually killed by the cult, so there's only one recruit.
2) yos was killed because he protected the wrong person (bodyguards and docs who die when protecting scum aren't too uncommon, I believe).

[ODDin]

wolf: yos was the bodyguard, kmd was the deputy.

No lynch is obviously a bad idea. Interesting that reck brings up the idea of lynching neither himself nor evil as if it were his own idea, and not ABR's idea, which had already been discussed a lot by the time he posted 1411.

[ODDin]

I didn't say I was completely certain, but the "how about this" part sounds as if he's bringing it up as his own idea. You say "how about this" about something you expect people to not have considered before.

[ODDin]

By the way, your defense of reck and valiant attempts to get evil lynched are noticed.

[ODDin]

Hold the phone, am I even voting for evil?
OH LOOK.......
I'M NOT.
Obviously, you missed my Post 1414.

Post 1414 said you wanted to follow ABR's plan of not lynching any of these two (reck / evil) today. This just postpones it, but eventually one of them will be lynched, and you were advocating that this one should be evil, not reck, by talking so much about evil's gambit, the contradictions in his words, and then even by defending reck.

* * *

Also, kmd flipped deputy, iirc. Evilsnail claiming sheriff fits with that flavor. Cop doesn't. And Reck claimed cop. Also, worst case scenario if reck is actually the cop is we get two confirmed town in bv and oddin.

Actually, the wiki mentions the deputy in the context of a cop (here), so it does make sense.

* * *

ABR, so, seriously, what happened to the "let's wait for tomorrow" plan? Why the change of heart?

[ODDin]

Starbuck, you were advocating postponing the lynch, so of course you wouldn't be voting evil. However, when two people are contradicting each other, everyone must have an opinion of who of these two they think is scum - even if they think that the actual lynching can wait a day.
Until now, it seemed you thought evil is the scum in the pair.
Now, even more disturbingly, you as if back down, and try to avoid making an opinion whatsoever. Post 1422 has a backtracking / trying-to-appease feel to it.

So, to avoid confusion: who is scum, reck or evil?

[ODDin]

So, is the fence comfortable?

[ODDin]

CMAR does have a point in that we must let everyone say their opinion on the subject before hammering.

[ODDin]

A hated townie is a townie whom it takes one vote less to lynch? If so, the correct thing for town is to lynch him, since his survival till lylo will likely spell defeat for the town.

And what relevance has this got to here and now anyway? Yeah, it happens that everybody thinks X is scum but he then flips town. So? Are you going to bring this meta every time the entire town thinks somebody is scum?

[ODDin]

wolf, I must side with reck here, you should be paying more attention. He was behind ABR's plan of lynching neither himself nor evil today and waiting for tomorrow instead to see what happened during the night. His list was of people up to lynch today with this in mind.

[ODDin]

ani: that scum might be on reck's wagon is quite possible, regardless of his alignment. This doesn't mean he's not scum.

Do you think evil is scum and reck is town? If so, please explain why evil-scum wanted to do what he did.

[ODDin]

This is seriously the most herpa derpa retarded town ever.

herpa derpa?

[ODDin]

And, you're really missing what I'm saying and throwing up a false dichotomy. There could very well be another role interfering in those results.

Occam's razor. (Though if you really want to go there, there could also be sanity issues without additional roles involved.)

I understand that, Yes, because he got N1 and N2 results on the same day, which is a contradiction (he got 1 result 2 days after he investigated, and the other 1 day). It makes no sense as a mod to put in.

He never said he got a N2 result. In fact, he said he didn't - he said that his find on reck is the only mod-given info he's got.

[ODDin]

There was a post by evil that could be interpreted as though he had some info from N2, but he said it was a typo later (and it did look like a typo in context).

Also, now that you find your main point void, how does this affect your stance?

[ODDin]

Please quote the rules where this is stated. My blind ass can't see it.

It wasn't actually in the rules in this thread, it was said in the signup thread.
Specifically:

This is a cult game which means players become zombies or if they are a power role they will die.

* * *

Evil is lying. He never stated which night he used his skill, ie use it N1 get results N2. He claims to have gotten his results on N2. He was then asked why he didn't try to get Reck lynched on Day 2 with his results, here he tries to act like he DID have the results on D2, as Oddin was clearly talking about D2, and was waiting to see if the Reck wagon developed naturally. His scumbuddies quickly showed themselves after this, I will get to them later. Lying Evil is the focus and the lynch now.

As evil already said, he was answering why he claimed today instead of trying to get reck lynched naturally.
The question of when evil chooses is an interesting one, though I don't see how it matters.
evil, when do you choose your target? Did you choose reck N1 but only got the results N2, or did you simply do nothing N1 and your role only became relevant N2?

* * *

Anyways, I did a bit of rereading and I totally understand what's going on now.

Do share.

* * *

I'm also willing to lynch Pie or iLord.

You have cases on them?

[ODDin]

You are both reaching, this read of evil's words today is simply idiotic.
But Starbuck, if you thought you weren't reaching, why did you let the issue drop? Why did you need Sly to support you?

And Sly, I'm still waiting for a case on iLord.

[ODDin]

Sly, I just reread everything evil said today in ISO, and he's perfectly consistent in what he's saying throughout. What he answered me is a valid answer if he thought I meant today and not yesterday, and considering the amount of sniping that was going on at that point, people were bound to get confused about what people were referring to.

Also, for somebody who'd asked reck to tone down the curse words, you're cursing quite a lot yourself...

[ODDin]

No, it isn't clear he meant yesterday. Look:

evil, you didn't have to reveal your special ability yesterday in order to push for reck's lynch. You could push for his lynch legitimately, by bringing up arguments. Yet you didn't.

Yeah, I considered this, but, if convincing to lead to a lynch, it makes me a good NK target anyway. If it's not convincing, which is pretty likely, it risks scum targetting me because I'd make a good conversion (I'm on to one of them). So I waited for a bit, to see if a wagon would naturally develop on xReck. That way, I could have pushed for it relatively surreptitiously. But it didn't.

If he was talking about yesterday, then this doesn't explain anything and doesn't answer the question at all. There is no explanation here why he claimed today instead of yesterday. What he says here explains why he claimed instead of pushing for a lynch without claiming.

And I'm defending him because I think what you (and Starbuck) are saying doesn't make any sense and is correct, and I don't feel there's any value in letting evil answer himself, since he pretty much already said everything there was to be said.

[ODDin]

I still don't see how evil is lying, but this isn't going anywhere.

Starbuck: where have I defended ABR? I remember attacking him, I don't really remember defending him.

sly accusing pie of tunneling is ridiculous. Pushing hard for lynching somebody isn't tunneling in itself. Pie most certainly didn't tunnel, and in fact I believe he was the one to originally bring up the case against yos.
This isn't a town-tell, considering yos was town, but it isn't a scum-tell either.

Anyways,

as you can see in my sig I'm V/LA beginning as of tomorrow and until April 3rd

, so this here is my last post before the V/LA.
After considering the pros and cons I think I like ABR's original idea of waiting till tomorrow and deciding then.

Since in theory we should have enough time till the deadline from when I return, I won't be voting anyone at the moment.

Have fun here without me.

[ODDin]

Yay, I'm back. Hi SpyreX. Woo, 13 new pages to read. I'll be updating myself and hopefully will have a post with actual content later today.

[ODDin]

On Pie wanting to out PRs: Either way outing PRs is a bad idea, since it gives the mafia the choice. If killing PRs is good for town, then by knowing somebody is a PR, the mafia will know not to lynch him. I can't believe nobody saw this.

* * *

Sly disregarding reck's results (willing to lynch me / bv) even though he believes them and wanting to lynch myself and bv is idiotic.
I'm not saying that the cop's investigation is a 100% clear, even if we know it's a cop - there can be an SK or even an uninfected mafia group, and zombie lords may indeed be investigation immune. But being uninfected is a pretty serious town-tell, statistically.
Let me demonstrate: if there are two scum in the game, goon A and goon B, out of 10 people, then any player's chance to be scum is 20%. However, if you know that player x isn't goon A (he might still be goon B), then his chances of being scum at all drop to 10%. It's called conditional probability.

* * *

The mass exodus to tate at 835-839 can't be all town. It just makes the mind blow - DOUBLY so when so many vanished when pie jumped in before he said anything. (Oddin, Animo, iLord, CMAR, BV)

I didn't unvote tate because pie replaced in. I unvoted tate in order to switch to bv, and I did that before pie replaced in.

* * *

Also, it's curious how Sly is so adamant about Occam's razor when it comes to evil's claim (which really wasn't as messy as he wants everyone to think), but he's constantly choosing the not obvious setup conclusions to fit his theory (ZLs are investigation immune, there are recruits around despite the NKs).

* * *

reck should answer evil's question, and then I'd really like to hear evil's answer to why he only asked it now.
I'm talking about this:

Okay, xReck, I'll explain why I really think you're lying and there's nothing messing with my results. Were your results on bv310 and ODDin exactly the same?

* * *

Personally, I think I'd actually be willing to lynch pie. His predecessor, tate, was quite scummy, and I've been voting him for that. pie hasn't done anything extremely pro-town. He did scumhunt actively, but both yos and manho were town. I don't think it's a scumtell in itself, since people make mistakes and that's fine, but it isn't a towntell either. And finally, his rolefishing is scummy, and as I've explained above, even if he is correct about town wanting the PRs dead, exposing them is still a horrible idea.
So,

vote: pie

* * *

The only thing that currently disturbs me about CMAR is that first he says he believes reck, and then he goes on to vote for reck. That's ridiculous, especially considering all of iLord's points (about recruits etc) were already brought up several times before, and so CMAR should've seen them and considered them already.

I find pie scummier, but will be willing to switch to CMAR closer to the deadline if it's the only way to prevent a reck lynch (still think he's probably lying, but want to lynch somebody who isn't reck/evil/bv today.)

[ODDin]

Err, yeah, I meant the mafia will NK them, not lynch them...
Bottom line, outing a PR gives the mafia the choice of what to do with him - NK him by attempting to recruit him or attempt to actually recruit a townie instead by knowing not to target him. And the mafia will obviously do their best to choose what is best for them, which is not what we want them to be doing.


Also, pie and e_k, please explain what you mean by your chicken sandwich discussion to all us idiots who don't get the joke.

[ODDin]

@CMAR: You're right, and that's why you haven't seen me ask for claims arbitrarily (

I

haven't claimed PR/not PR, for example). The point I am making is that it's simply much less dangerous to out our PRs than usual, so if outing PRs gives us some sort of useful information we shouldn't hesitate to do so.

I'm not saying you were asking for a massclaim. I'm just saying that you discussed outing PRs as if it's a given fact that the mafia will kill revealed PRs, and that this is good for town, in this post, for instance. You seem to disregard the fact that outing a PR only gives scum the necessary info, meaning that if we actually do WANT our PRs to get nightkilled, then outing them is a good way to ensure they won't be NKed.

Either way, the main reason I'm voting you is tate's actions, which were very scummy, and your actions didn't give that player spot any town tells. Even if your actions didn't give your player spot a slightest towntell, I'd still be willing to vote you for you.

Accordingly, Fos: Oddin. Now would you like to vote for someone who actually stands to get lynched today?

I'm willing to switch for CMAR come deadline if nobody else appears as a real alternative to reck. I just think that 5 days before deadline is too early to say "there's nothing that can be done about it". You're closing the day way too early, there's still time. So, I'm voting for you. Why are you in such a hurry?

[ODDin]

First of all, EBWOP on my previous post:
"Either way, the main reason I'm voting you is tate's actions, which were very scummy, and your actions didn't give that player spot any town tells. Even if your actions didn't give your player spot a slightest

towntell

scumtell, I'd still be willing to vote you for you. "

Now:

ODDin: That's a pretty bad misrepresentation of what I said. The conversation went like this:

Pie: Vig should claim if they have info that will help the town.
Sly: What? But then the cult will kill the vig! FoS: Pie
Pie: That's fine with me. If the cult is dumb enough to shoot at the vig, we WANT the vig outed - a dead vig is better than a recruited townie.

You are now quoting the last line as evidence that I want our power roles to claim to try and "trick" the scum or something, when that's not what I meant at all.

In any case, you've still yet to explain why that constitutes a scumtell. Are you trying to argue that ScumPie thought to himself "I know, I'll trick our power roles into claiming using obviously faulty logic so that I can make my recruiting choices with SLIGHTLY MORE PRECISION!?"

Fair enough. I might have misinterpreted your words - when I look at your line of thought as you explain it here, it does make more sense. Either way, as I have said, tate gave your playerspot some serious scumtells, and you didn't give any towntells, and so I'm willing to vote you for tate's actions alone.

And my "vote for someone who is likely to die today" has nothing to do with the deadline. You've just been gone for a few days, and so when you return, I would expect you to weigh in on some of the more hot-button issues (such as the emerging CMAR wagon). Instead you ran off and made an independent point of your own, which struck me as noncommittal and therefore scummy.

I don't want to lynch reck, and frankly, I don't really see the CMAR wagon at the moment. I'll ISO him later when I get some more time and see what I can make of it.
This led to voting you. I prefer to vote for the person I myself think we should lynch, in an ideal world, unless we're really close to the deadline and there's absolutely no chance we'll actually lynch that person. As I've said, I'd be willing to vote for CMAR come deadline, if only to prevent a reck lynch. But, I don't think we're close enough to the deadline to warrant such an action.

[ODDin]

Also, e_k: myself, I'm not voting reck because I think ABR's original plan is good. We'll lynch reck/evil tomorrow, after we see what tonight brings us.

[ODDin]

@iLord: you were voting for tate yourself on D1, which means you think the arguments on him were valid. Do you think they stopped being valid? Do you think pie dropped any towntells which help compensate for tate's behaviour?

[ODDin]

unvote, vote: CMAR

1) He's reacting horribly under pressure - repeatedly saying "I'm not scummy, I'm not scummy" is a scumtell. As starbuck already said somewhere there, you can't judge your own scuminess.
2) Saying "don't lynch me, lynch him, he's scummier" is a scumtell.
3) Saying you breadcrumbed stuff already basically says "I'm a PR". By not claiming, and by avoiding to even address the point for some time, you're only generating confusion.
4) Your vote on pie is ridiculous. Pie isn't even defending reck. It looks forced.
5) You almost voted reck but the vote didn't count because of wrong formatting. It only generated confusion, and myself, I still have no idea whether you actually wanted to vote reck there or not, and what the point of that thing was.

[ODDin]

You're saying this as if you're certain that reck is a zombielord. I'm not.
I was more certain of this earlier, but I really don't like how evilsnail asked reck that question about whether or not his results were the same, didn't explain why he asked it, and then simply disappeared.

So, evil, what gives? Why did you ask reck that question and why not earlier?

[ODDin]

@ODDin: Your point 4 is silly given that your Pie-vote wasn't much better justified, and your point 5 is silly because what?. I guess this is a mental note to yell at you about that tomorrow. For now we can use all the CMAR voters we can get. Woo team CMAR!

I voted you because of tate's actions, which I find scummy. i found them scummy all along, and I disagree with iLord that you replacing in nullifies tate's actions. Yes, there is a possibility that it was simply tate's personality and pride, but I still think what he did are scumtells, even if not the strongest scumtells out there.
My point 5 refers to this post. Some people continued believing CMAR was voting for reck some time after that. Only thing it did was generate confusion.

[ODDin]

Pie - that post in itself isn't a scumtell. Mistakes happen. I just don't understand what CMAR was actually trying to do with it. If he wanted to vote reck, then I'd expect him to actually do so in a later post.
Doing it knowingly also doesn't make sense - a vote would have only put reck at L-2, and it'd be ridiculous to expect the scumteam to quickhammer hammer in this situation.

[ODDin]

@evilsnail: I got "not infected" for both of them.

[ODDin]

CMAR should seriously get lynched for his previous post, but there aren't enough people to vote for him less than 3 hours before the deadline.

So,

unvote: vote pie

As I've already said before, it's mostly for tate's actions D1.

[ODDin]

Adding to the list: "Because ODDin hasn't found anything since a couple pages into day 2 that's worth voting."

At this point it's just funny.

You do remember that this was after I decided not to go after reck, evil or bv, and today i would prefer to lynch CMAR (after his "doc claim"), but I prefer to lynch you over reck.

[ODDin]

[ODDin]

I'm here at my computer until the deadline, so I can change back to CMAR if necessary.

[ODDin]

Fine, I don't really care either way. I'm still at my comp to change back to pie if necessary.

unvote, vote: CMAR

[ODDin]

No.

Especially not after this bullshit evilsnail pulled lately.

[ODDin]

(My last post was me missing the fact that there was a new page.)

Also, I'm with SlySly. I have no real reason to trust you, iLord.

[ODDin]

I didn't leave, I looked at your behaviour in ISO today, iLord, and I don't really like the fact htat you initially thought ABR's idea of lynching neither reck nor evil is good. If you had info of your own that reck is scum, why wait?

[ODDin]

Then wtf have you claimed?

[ODDin]

Also, on whether I believe reck is scum: I'm leaning towards yes, but evil's bahviour lately made me less sure.

[ODDin]

Well, if you're not claiming any mod-given info, then no, I'm not voting reck. You're just a guy with an opinion, and possibly scum.

[ODDin]

Starbuck, why the hell did you not claim vig yesterday? if you're telling the truth, it means somebody was most likely recruited N2.

evil, why did you not reveal your role fully yesterday?

[ODDin]

ES didn't find scum today - he investigated Starbuck and his finds are the same as what she said. So if he isn't scum, neither is Starbuck (most likely, although she could be faking the vig claim and telling her correct targets - if the targets are unique to a ZL. That is, only one ZL actually targets someone, the other does nothing. Which would she wasn't RBed but rather chose to do nothing, while another ZL killed CMAR.)
Another possibility is that ES and Starbuck are scum together, in which case they could've coordinated his "investigation" and her "claim" however they wanted during the night.
Also, we've suggesting the possibility of a scum role detector here (they found out that reck was a cop and recruit-es suicide-bombed him). This makes it much easier for reck to correctly "find out" the PRs. Notice that only after Starbuck said what happened es said "yeah, that's exactly what I found out".

[ODDin]

evil, you still didn't answer my question: why did you not reveal your role fully yesterday, although you were asked several times to do so?
Also, why did you practically disappear towards the end of yesterday?

For what it's worth, I confirm that I indeed didn't use a night action N2 (not saying whether I have one or not, just confirming what Percy said).

Personally, I'm not too sure about evil-reck, what with evil's ever evolving claim and the fact that apparently we did have a recruit around D3, which makes the es-recruit option more reasonable.

I tend to believe percy, especially seeing that he likely isn't a recruit. We most likely didn't have a recruit today, and recruiting bv would've been a stupid move, considering quite a few people wanted to lynch him and he was hardly popular with the town. So, if percy is scum, it means he'd need to be a ZL, making his move against ABR pretty stupid.

So,

vote: ABR

[ODDin]

Actually, I can get Starbuck shooting evil - I was getting more suspicious of him myself. But, seeing he was the sheriff after all, it means he was telling the truth about reck targeting KMD (unless we have scum busdriver or something of the sort, but that's pretty farfetched). That would mean reck is a zombielord, and hopefully there are only two of those.

So,

vote: reck

Also, since Starbuck accounted for killing evilsnail, it means there's most likely another recruit around.

[ODDin]

Sly: yes, she could be. There are other options besides reck. Still, it should be obvious that reck is the best lynch for today. For reck not to be scum, you need one of the following:
1) evilsnail, who actually was the sheriff as he'd said, lied about what he found.
2) There is a scum busdriver or similar role.

Option 1 is obviously ridiculous. Option 2 gets cut with Occam's razor.

Also, if we assume there were originally 2 ZLs and no other recruits, then:
N1 no recruit (most likely, since no vig has accounted for killing KMD, and having an SK doesn't fit with the rest of the nights)
N2 recruit (since yos was killed by Starbuck)
N3 no recruit (almost for certain, since ABR, a ZL, targeted CMAR)
N4 recruit (since evil was killed by Starbuck)

It means there's 1 ZL and 2 recruits. If we lynch town today, tomorrow there will be at worst 1 ZL and 3 recruits out of 11 players (I'm assuming there are no other killing roles around). That is, 4 scum / 7 town. That will be big-lylo (if scum recruit, the day after is 5/5). But it means we're most likely not in lylo today. Even if there's an additional recruit out there, it will still be 5 scum / 6 town tomorrow at worst.

So, there's absolutely no reason not to lynch reck. (Though lynching him would be the smart thing to do even if we were in lylo)

[ODDin]

I'm really disturbed by Sly not voting reck. Think he might be a recruit.

[ODDin]

Let me expand: not voting reck and not providing any reason not to vote reck after my post 2305.

[ODDin]

Also, notice posts 2303 and 2304: Sly desperately looking for people other than reck to vote for.

[ODDin]

It's mafia with a cult, I'm supposed to be paranoid.

Being extra cautious and wanting to get all possible info gathered before placing your vote kinda goes against hammering ABR without even letting him respond to percy. And by "kinda goes against" I mean "180 degree shift in behaviour".