Pledge of Allegiance (Game Over! Page 76)

[Fishythefish]

##vote: Jack

Giving a reason why you chose to be scum is scummy. Weird defense of Oj also - doesn't feel like a genuine reaction to Parama's comment, trying to undermine it before it was either explained or commented on by Oj.

[Fishythefish]

@Jack:
- I think that the line "Here's why I would have chosen scum if I had, but I didn't" is more likely to come from scum than town. Because you would be thinking more about reasons for choosing scum.
- You undermined Parama's comment without really knowing what he was saying. The line

It sounds like Parama has some weird idea that Ojananen is rolefishing or made a slip or one of those silly things people jump on.

is discrediting Parama's attack without really knowing what it entails, and I can't see any reason to do that.

You say Nico's defense is "minimalist". What, exactly, has he failed to defend, or how should his defense be expanded?

[Fishythefish]

I of course mean I can't think of any scumhunting/protown/getting interesting information reason for doing it. Saying things for something to say is definitely a scumtell in my book, and that feels like what you were doing here.

You said Nico's defense was a "bare minimum". AFAIC, he answered the point against him - which was whether he saw the player list in picking his side - with just a fact. What more could he possibly have said, and where did you get the idea that he was worried about sounding defensive?

[Fishythefish]

Gut is good, but I like my book too, thanks. Posting without point is something I think scum do more, because they want to look like they are contributing.

I'm criticising your attack because I think it's rubbish. There's nothing in his short, factual response to a short, factual question that "sounds like he was worried about being too defensive". Whereas what I jumped on you for doing is making a very vague comment about an attack which you didn't know the meaning of, with no protown purpose that I can think of.

[Fishythefish]

Firstly, accusations of hypocrisy are just saying that something you did isn't scummy because someone else did it. It's attacking the player rather than defending the argument. It's an irrelevance if I commit a scumtell I also use, and a terrible defense/argument.

Secondly, there simply is no hypocrisy here, however you try to play with words. What I am attacking you for is:
a) making a pointless comment on Parama, when it was unclear what he was saying.
b) making a bad attack on Nico
You haven't given me any reasons why you made that comment on Parama, and I'm not remotely convinced by your comments on Nico - your interpretation of his posts simply doesn't make any sense.

What is it that you think is hypocritical in my play? Do you have anything to add about either of the things I find scummy about you?

[Fishythefish]

However, you are still basing your argument on a) your "tell" about scum making pointless posts and b) disagreeing with my read of Nico's posts. Neither jive with proper tell theory.

What do you mean by this last sentence?

Both those tells can be summarised well for me by "I just can't see myself posting that". OK, the first one was very early game, and I suppose you'd expect more pointless posts from all quarters. But here is your Nico vote's basis:

So, which alignment do you guys personally prefer and why did you choose town?

I felt I had no chance of playing scum successfully against this player list.

##Vote: Jack

Really? You saw the player list before picking alignment?

It was included in the Pick Your Side pm I received.

And from this, you get that Nico was trying not to look defensive? I just don't see where this is coming from. I just don't see how what Nico said wasn't a full and natural (if factually incorrect) defense.

Some good arguments about Para floating around. Bringing up his own meta and then arguing against meta arguments shows some inconsistency - does he think that these are worthwhile arguments, or not? His point about Oj's first post makes no sense, but not in a particularly scummy way. I certainly thought Para's saying VP was using meta excessively was being used as a scumtell, even though that wasn't explicitly stated, and his denial of this seems rather odd. The posts of VP's he saw nothing good in were filled with meta. Feels here like Parama is hiding behind the literal meaning of his post.

##vote: Parama

[Fishythefish]

I didn't bring up my own meta.
I didn't explicitly state that I thought VP was scum because of use of meta - my reasons sat next to my vote.
I didn't see anything good in any of VP's posts.

You did bring up your own meta. You said "Anyone who understands how I play knows my alignment. ". Later you said this was more about your personality than meta. What is the functional difference, in a game of mafia, between your meta and your personality?
I know you didn't explicity state you found VP's use of meta a scumtell. I think it was heavily implied, and was surprised when you denied it as a reason, particularly now, when you are clearly saying it was scummy in your "paraphrasing" post. The fact that you didn't see anything good in VP's posts

must

have had a lot to do with disliking his meta arguments.

[Fishythefish]

I’ve changed my mind about Parama. He comes off as genuine to me. I disagree with a lot of what he’s said, but I feel he believes it. I think this comes partly from the feeling that he really wants his arguments read.

- DDD’s 143 reeks:

##vote: Nicodemus

I think the Jack thing was/is a distraction from hunting scum and I'm suspicious of those who voted him bceause it seems like an easy vote for scum. I think even if Jack is a cult leader that DGB is right that Jack is an obvious target for any manner of PRs and hopefully a vig. Since Oj and Gama have actually contributed they're lower priorities leaving Nicodemus as the one who showed up, dropped a bad vote and scurried off.

This really doesn’t feel like somebody hunting for scum.
- No sign he’s compared various reasons for voting Jack.
- No sign he’s thought about the actual chances of Jack being cult leader (very slim) – more like he’s parroting DGB.
- No reasons for Jack thing being a distraction, or why it was an easy vote. Why does this apply more than to any other early game bandwagon?

xvart’s posting is thoroughly meh. A lot of extremely minor/null points, questions with really obvious answers, “you’re scum” statements at Parama, and general lack of anything useful. Llama’s assessment of grasping at straws is pretty accurate. It really doesn’t fit well with my picture of town xvart.

Fos: DDD

##vote: xvart

[Fishythefish]

@Jack: why did you change your mind about me?

[Fishythefish]

What? All I can see is this:

Fishy may be scum after all. I'm reading DGB's accusation of Zorblag. It's a tell I've never heard of and I don't see it. Yet I'm feeling no inclination to be suspicious of DGB for it.

##unvote
##Vote:Fishy

which doesn't give a reason that I can see.

It's totally absurd to call me scum for asking why you are voting me.

[Fishythefish]

Oh, I see. I probably should have got that.

Anyway, I don't find reads or tells I disagree with automatically scummy. If I can see where a player is coming from, I don't have to agree with them to believe they are being genuine. But when I simply can't see the point of view - as applies here - it feels like the case/read is a stretch. Our difference of opinion on that Nico post is not finding different things scummy - you claim to see something in his play (specifically, trying to avoid looking over defensive) which I just don't think is remotely there, and I don't see how anybody could see it there. That's why I don't think your read is genuine, and that's why I find you scummy.

[Fishythefish]

Wait. Are you saying that disagreeing with someone's case is always a bad reason to vote for them? Because that's what that argument says.

[Fishythefish]

@Jack: my point on you is that you interpreted a player's posts in a way I don't believe you could have done genuinely. This makes your case bad in a scummy way. It's pretty difficult to express what makes a bad case scummy in a general setting, and trying to put that into words is probably a silly thing to try to do.

@DDD: that clarification helps, thanks. I agree with you that voting Jack for cult leader reasons is silly and a bit scummy. I don't think that post is a particularly good towntell - I see no reason it couldn't come from mafia (it's unlikely it was calculated to draw suspicion to Jack from any alignment).

[Fishythefish]

Things:
- Nico’s 217 feels strange. DGB’s case is not drifting into “too townie to be town” land. Why even comment on this case without really drawing any conclusions about it? I don’t see why Nico would ask LF to guess how many scum are in the game.

- I don’t know where charter gets a VP-me link from (222). Anything in my play you’d like me to explain or comment on, charter?

Fishy: Is there any reason you attacked Jack for his I would have chose mafia but ignored RC for saying close to the same thing?

Not particularly. By the time RC made his post, much more had happened – I was having a useful exchange with Jack and felt Parama was scummy – so this point just wasn’t as significant in the context of the game as it was when I first posted.

Phate’s post that got jumped on was scummy. But I think his recent defense is pretty good; I can believe that train of thought there.

[Fishythefish]

What would you say if I told you Gamma majorly scumslipped in our neighbor qt?

I would say you should paraphrase it.

LA until the 10th or 11th.
Right now I think that out of the 3 major wagons Phate and xvart are town. The latter wouldn't have been so stupidly stubborn on the whole QT shenanigans issue and certain things the former have said felt genuine.

xvart ( 8 ) Ellibereth LLamaFluff ojanen Nicodemus fishythefish charter UncertainKitten VP Baltar
I have a town read on everyone on the xvart wagon EXCEPT for...

##Unvote

##Vote: Fishy

A poor reason for voting. Townreads on people voting the same way as me are simply not a reason why I'm scum.

Why I'm voting xvart:
He asks obvious questions and makes minor/stretchy points a lot. It really feels like he is jumping on anything he sees in order to look like he's scumhunting, rather than taking the time to actually try and work out people's alignments. The obvious example is the QT thing, but there are a couple of others
1) Iso 1, criticising Jack for asking UK about a PR.
2) Parama's guessing the exact number of scum.
On these three issues, it feels like xvart really isn't bothering to think about the situation. For me, the continued stubbornness on the QT thing feels like he doesn't want to admit his error. I think this posting lots without thinking about what you are writing about is much more likely scum than town.

[The VP-me link] was mostly a declaration of once Balter flips scum, you're the first to go.

Cool. In that case we shall discuss it if and when that happens.

@Phate: you forgot ## in front of your RC vote.

[Fishythefish]

@Elli: you might think the wagon is bad, and so has scum on it. But if lots of the players on it are town, it's not reasonable to automatically conclude the last one is scum - instead, you should be less sure that there is scum on the wagon.

It's like saying "1 coin in 5 almost always flips heads. I just flipped 4 tails in a row, so heads is certain to come up now.". Knowing (or rather thinking) that a bad wagon is largely town driven isn't a good reason to be sure about the other people on it.

[Fishythefish]

I don't understand your post at all, DGB. I think the argument "8/9 of that wagon look town, so the last is scum" is totally illogical. It's obviously also based on 8 tenuous assumptions, but I'm less bothered about that.

Are you saying that

every

wagon of 9 people has at least one scum on it?

[Fishythefish]

I'm confused.

Sometimes, it's valid to say "more than likely, at least one scum would have bussed/lynched the townie/whatever. We know most of the alignments of the wagon are town; there is probably scum in the other ones". I tend to be very skeptical about such arguments - I don't think wagon composition is that predictable - but sometimes they work.

But applying this to an early game wagon is ridiculous on two counts. First, obviously, you don't know the alignments of anyone on the wagon. But the point I was making is that there is just no reason to think there is any particular number of scum on a wagon when we are just out of the RVS.

The case against me is:
1) There is always scum on a wagon (or maybe there is always scum on a bad wagon).
2) Everyone else on xvart's wagon is town.
therefore
3) Fishy is scum.

I think 1) and 2) are both clearly broken.

[Fishythefish]

Oh, and it was PYP1.

[Fishythefish]

It's generally a relatively protown bunch. I don't have reads on all of them, but none are scummy, apart from Nico, perhaps. But the point is that there are 7 reads there! You are declaring 7 people to be town in order to make your argument work. To make that argument make any sense at all, your reads have to be absurdly solid.

It's a subtle point, but actually it's irrelevant that wagons in other games have scum on them. How many 8 player wagons with 7 confirmed town (which is how you are treating them) had scum on them? It's just the same argument as "most strings of 8 coins have 1 head in them. The first 7 were tails - the last one is certain to be heads.".

[Fishythefish]

Para is soooo town.

FISHY IS SCUM.
After getting confronted by the vote analysis, instead of trying to
1) Convince me he's town.
2) Convince me someone else on the wagon isn't town.
HE DISCREDITS IT.

PARA, JOIN US. WE'VE CAUGHT A BIG FISH.

1) Traditionally, the burden of proof is on you. You have said nothing that shows I'm scum.
2) If you want to say that

seven

people are all town, you are predicting a ~one in a thousand event. It's ridiculous to say that I should have to discredit that by calling one particular one of them scum. You are almost certainly wrong that they are all town; telling me I have to disprove that by specifying one scum among them is another logical fallacy.
3) Let's go over the Gambler's Fallacy (thanks for terminology pops) one more time, this time by analogy:

1) The players numbered 1,4,7,9,12,14,16,18 in this game are {whoever they are are}
2) I have town reads on {1,4,7,12,14,16,18}
3) In the last 100 theme games with >18 people, there was scum in this set of players (this is probably true)
4) Therefore, 9 is scum.

This logic is clearly false (I hope), due to the arbitrary grouping of players. Your argument against me is not this bad - but it relies on the fact that wagons of 8 people

must always

contain scum - and not just because a random grouping of 8 people almost always contains scum.

So. I think that the logic of your case fails. I think it relies on a ludicrous number of unconfirmed reads. I'm amazed at the support it has received.

@Llama, charter, Parama:

You paid lip service to this wagon (and in Parama's case voted). Do you share the conviction that EVERY SINGLE ONE of
Ellibereth LLamaFluff ojanen Nicodemus charter UncertainKitten VP Baltar
is town? Do you think that an 8 person wagon is significantly more likely to contain scum than a random group of 8 people?

I plan to do something that isn't defending myself this evening.

[Fishythefish]

Honestly, Fishy's reaction sounds like something Fishy would do. I understand that discrediting the tell is generally bad but...this doesn't feel like scum Fishy in situations I've played with him.

Hmmm? You've still never seen scum Fishy, I believe.

Right about the math doesn't mean not-scum.

What do you mean by this? Why do you think I'm scum? What exactly do you think about Elli's argument against me?

Fishy's defense from Ellibereth is pretty terrible and his one from DGB is even worse.

I'd really like more detail on this. Firstly, it's the same defense, so this added detail reads like trying to sound like you're making stuff up. Secondly, I really don't think this is true.

Anyway. Other things:
I really don't get the pops wagon. Could someone explain it to me? I don't see anything more than someone who needs to get caught up and, now he has, get some reads out.

DGB's case looks good, although I admit it seems to be drifting into "too townie to be town" land.

What did you mean by the second half of this sentence? I can't really see how DGB's case was doing that at all. Later, someone called this a dreadful opinion. Your response was to say "does a dreadful opinion make me scum". That seems bizarre - surely you have something to say in defense of your opinion? If it was terrible, why did you say it in the first place, and if not, why reply like this? This doesn't feel like someone who believed his sentiments about DGB.

@Nico: what makes you feel better about xvart? Worse about pops?

Fos: Nico

[Fishythefish]

What a thing to wake up to. A modkill, a night and a damning report on me.

Which is true. I'm not, in fact, town. Technically. I'm other. Here's my win con:
- I have certain criteria for amassing points.
- If I amass more points during the game than anyone else with this win con, I win.
Here is my power:
- One shot transmitting weak tracker. I target a player, and someone to get my results. The find out whether (but not who) the first player visits that night.
Here are the details of my win con:
- Town win + some number of points
- Surviving the game

without claiming

some (smaller) number of points
- Transmitting to a townie + snop
- Transmitting to scum - snop
- Being on a scum lynch wagon + snop
- Being on a town wagon - snop.
I'm not specifying the numbers of points because it would help my rivals. I will say that the track is kind of important. So. zoraster didn't get very many town picks, one assumes. Because my role is, in almost every way, protown. I suppose if I were to find out the other points factions, and their points conditions, I could act against them. But my interests are always going to be directly aligned with the town's, now my survivorness is invalidated.

[Fishythefish]

Actually, I'm currently a non-hostile neutral effective townie. Having (mostly) claimed, I get nothing for survival.

[Fishythefish]

Yep. My points system doesn't include anything about my survival or manner of death, now that I've claimed.

[Fishythefish]

Oh, and from my flavour xvart was almost certainly a member of a points-based faction. If he wasn't, it wouldn't be an outright lie, but it would certainly be bastard modding.

[Fishythefish]

@People who think using statistics like I did is something for scum to hide behind (off the top of my head, DDD and Jack?):
Statistics/maths/maths type logic is something that informs my thinking in mafia (as well as in everything else). When this is particularly relevant, I say so. In this case, someone was attacking me with a fundamentally unsound argument. I think it would have been bizarre behaviour not to point this out. Using statistics certainly shouldn't be a scumtell in general, and applying it in this case is utter nonsense. Would you really expect me to ignore the fact that someone is using a flawed argument to show I'm scum?

[Fishythefish]

I am competing to get points for my faction, which is not the same as xvart's (I had no knowledge of xvart or his faction prior to his flip). I haven't claimed and won't claim anything about the composition of my faction - that would damage my interests by giving other points factions information about how well I am likely to be doing. If there are other players in it, I know who they are, we all win or lose together, and except in specialised night actions (if any) we have the same points system.

[Fishythefish]

@Fishythefish, your claim brings up a couple questions.

1. What counts as a claim for your point system? Could you have fake claimed something else and gotten the survivor points? That's a pretty nebulous thing to hang point values on and is easily the part of your role I find least believable.

2. Do you learn if the person you transmit your information to is town?

3. Am I reading right that you get no points (positive or negative) for transmitting to those of other alignments?

4. Have you used your track/transmit ability yet?

1. Specifically, claiming name, role name, or win con accurately counts as a claim. Within that, it's up to the mod's judgement. I can ask the mod for clarification or judgement on a particular claim. The only clarification I ever received was that claim one-shot weak tracker was absolutely fine. My impression is the concrete things of name and rolename invalidate survivorness, plus anything that says or implies I'm not protown.

2. No.

3. Indeed. Same goes for lynching them.

4. No. I intend to use it tonight.

[Fishythefish]

Sorry, I should have made that clear initially. Claiming my ability does

not

count as a claim from the point of view of "surviving unclaimed". Only things related to flavour and alignment count.

[Fishythefish]

@farside: what?

[Fishythefish]

Are you claiming to have a report that has me visiting RC?

If so, I have nothing to say except that it's false. I didn't visit RC last night.

[Fishythefish]

I realise that at this point my situation is dire. I'm going to make it a little bit worse.

While my roleclaim contains nothing that isn't true, it isn't quite the whole story either. There is a good reason not to quicklynch me. I can see that I'm most likely the lynch today, whatever happens. But I can provide information for the town that will be helpful after I'm gone (and flipped non-hostile). I can do this during the day. I ask not to be lynched for a couple of RL days. What I say after that probably won't derail my lynch, but it may well help the town, and the town winning is a good thing for me.

The reason I haven't claimed the ability I propose to use now is that it is one case where the town's interests and mine aren't precisely the same. It is protown whenever I use it, but possibly better for my modified win con if I used it a little later. The fact that I'm about to be lynched obviously changes that somewhat.

So. Give me a little time. I have a little more claiming to do, and then you can get on with lynching me.

I really, really didn't visit RC, though .

[Fishythefish]

RC was roleblocked last night? That's the last fucking nail in the coffin. I'm dead.

My priority is to do what's best for my faction now. This means I'm not going to tell you everything. I want the town to win, so it's in my interests to tell you some stuff. All I'm asking is a couple of days. It

will

help the town. At the end of that, lynch me. You will still not be able to trust my information - but there's at least a decent chance that at some stage in the game, you will be grateful for it.

I will state unequivocally at this point that I did not (intentionally) visit RC last night, and I do not have an action that would roleblock someone.

I did visit someone last night. I doubt I'm going to claim who, because I've no intention of giving away what that action is. It's a protown action, but frankly my points rivals already know plenty about me.

Please. From your points of view, I am overwhelmingly likely to be scum or scummy other. But we are in the very rare case were I happen to be fundamentally protown other who got bussed onto someone who got roleblocked while doing an action that it wasn't in their interests to put in their claim. It sucks, and I don't expect not to be lynched. It'll probably take me about 24 hours from this post to do something protown (and pro-me). At most, it'll be 48. Then lynch the hell out of me.

In the scenario that, at some point, there is a reason to believe I was being broadly truthful today - nothing I've said has been a direct lie. The points system is as I described, and my targets are a subset of real points conditions, all of which align with the town's interests to a large extent.

I'll claim what I'm going to as soon as I can - I've no intention of stalling for time.

I urge some people to unvote. I am very near a lynch, it is not in the town's interests to lynch me without hearing me out.

[Fishythefish]

@farside: I imagine your track results came about as the result of a bus. I might even tell you who got bussed with RC. But who cares? I'm dead.

[Fishythefish]

In This Thread, people can't count votes. He's at like L-4. (7 votes 11 to lynch)

I'd like anybody who plans to act on this advise to verify it for themselves.

[Fishythefish]

My win condition is not the same as the town's. However, on almost every issue, it may as well be. The process of me claiming hugely emphasises the other bits - because it's in my interests to keep information from the town, and in particular my opponents. Claiming is actually the only time I was likely to do anything other than be protown all game.

There are good reasons to lynch me. But withholding information is a bad one.

[Fishythefish]

Information time!

There are exactly

3

factions with "points victory" conditions. They are, shockingly enough,

The Legislature

,

The Judiciary

and

The Executive

. One of these you've already seen; you'll see another when I flip. There is no possibility that there are any more, and there is no possibility that these do not all exist. They could have any number of members each, but if I'd had to guess I'd say they all have at least two. Best of luck trying to lynch them all

Analysis time!
1. With the points system,

non-hostile other can be directly aligned with or against the town

. Being non-hostile is neither a scumtell nor a towntell. Other non-hostile protown people

will lie

to protect their survivor conditions and the secrecy of their actions. They'll probably lie rather more than I have, and particularly in massclaim. If you carry on getting reports on them and lynching them, you will lose. You can't afford to waste your lynches on people who are more than 90% aligned with you. The argument that I'm openly not protown is silly and meaningless - while I'm not doing the best possible thing for the town, my continued existence is most definitely protown, and that's all you should care about.
2. It's very possible that all of the points factions are actually protown. It feels like putting in some players who win with the scum is likely not to be needed.
3. You have a bus driver among you, assuming farside is telling the truth. If I thought that it would save me, I'd claim who I visited last night, and you'd know who got bussed. But even if that were confirmed, all you'd conclude is that I was trying to roleblock someone else, so there's absolutely no point.

Explanations!
This section is intended to explain why I acted as I did. The main point is that I'm believed after I'm dead, or at some later stage, though if you want to find it convincing enough to let me off the hook that's all good as well.
1. My partner(s). The abilities of my faction are all factional abilities. If I trueclaimed all my abilities, I effectively removed a safe (or rather true) claim for them. It would also give other points factions significant information about how riskily they needed to play, and possibly ways to stop us scoring points. I gambled on noone knowing I visited last night; I lost.
2. Thinking. It's in my interests to stay alive. After farside's report came out, I was all but dead, but it's still in my interests to tell you quite a lot. These conflicted with 1). I needed time to think about the best course of action, and to discuss with my partner(s), who I'd like to thank for their excellent input.
3. Applying "Lynch all Liars", "withholding information", "not playing for the town" is a mistake. My win con isn't to make the town win. These tells/slogans are all designed to tell town from scum or hostile other (in zoraster's terminology). I have throughout acted in a protown way, except where I felt there was a risk of harming my faction through too much claiming. You will not win this game without opening your minds on this issue.

All I'm really saying is, read what I've said and when. My claim is consistent with my actions. If you believe the points system, I don't think there's any reason to disbelieve me. And I'll say it one more time, for luck:

TL;DR: There are 3 points scoring factions, probably comprising at least 6 people between them. It is possible that these players are mostly or all protown. If you lynch them all, you will lose.

[Fishythefish]

@Fishythefish, did you have any sort of fake claim? A truthful answer to this is more likely to hurt the other factions than your own (or at least the one that's not the Legislature I suppose.)

-Zorblag R`Lyeh

No. I grumbled to the mod about this; I'm not allowed to claim my name, but have no fake claim of any kind.

[Fishythefish]

@charter: the excellent strategy "if it's not town, lynch it" has evolved in conditions where the town almost always have a significant majority until very late in the game. In all likelihood, this is not the case here.

[Fishythefish]

No reason. A vague feeling that giving other point factions information is a bad plan. There's no link between the role or flavour name and the abilities or win con that I can see.

[Fishythefish]

They are all between -5 and 5, and most if not all between -2 and 2.

[Fishythefish]

Further to this; it wouldn't need extreme events for us to finish on - points. The day and night phases carry approximately the same weight.

[Fishythefish]

None whatsoever. Everything concrete I know, other than the particulars of my faction, is out here. If I had that option, I'd have to think hard about it - I'll give the pros and cons a little thought today.

I'm afraid I'm off now. I hope to be alive when I return later today.

[Fishythefish]

@Zorblag: Knowing the identities of the other points factions would leave with the options of outing them and hoping they die, trying to get them lynched or ignoring them. I don't know what I'd do. Not actually knowing what they want out of the game makes it pretty hard to oppose them.

I do know one thing. The other points factions will be among those who have been pushing hardest for my lynch - particularly if there's anyone who pushed for it between my claim and farside's.

[Fishythefish]

Not much happened between my claim and farside's. I'll have a look at the wagon generally, but I'm guessing there's little to be drawn from it.

[Fishythefish]

...Fishy doesn't deny using a roleblock...

I'm pretty sure I did. At any rate, I do now. I did not use any power last night that would lead to you (or anyone) being blocked.

[Fishythefish]

Fishy: What was it that you targeted RC with last night?
IE: What ability did you use on him?

I didn't target RC.

Assuming my action did resolve on him - I'm not saying what it was. It couldn't block him.

[Fishythefish]

@DGB: I only win on points. My win condition can be satisfied with or without the town.

[Fishythefish]

No points either way for other lynches (or transmitting tracks).

[Fishythefish]

I'll be answering (or at least addressing) all points in the morning (~7 hours time).

[Fishythefish]

If at this point we as a town want to lynch someone other than Fishythefish then I might have an alternate plan for him that would tie up a few things. I'm going to take it that most people believe his claim about both the one shot tracker/transmitter and the points. If I'm right that there aren't a lot of scum in this game then we don't actually want Fishythefish sticking around; I think he's a fair amount more likely to be on town lynches than scum lynches which hurts his faction in terms of points so I suspect that he'll be a bit more likely than town to simply try to stay off lynches as a whole which isn't something we really want.

On the other hand, we've got a claimed PGO. It seems to me that it might be acceptable to those who still want the Fishythefish lynch that we have him target Gammagooey with a track and whoever he thinks is most likely to be town with his transmit. His death should verify Gammagooey's claim (or not) and we'll potentially get tracking information (at least whether or not he targets anyone) on Gammagooey that I imagine trackers would be somewhat reluctant to get on their own. Whoever receives the transmission doesn't even have to worry about sharing it as they're not revealing anything about their role. Fishythefish should find that a much better deal than just getting lynched today so it should be an all around win for town and his claimed non-hostile other faction. It'll also give us a fair amount more useful information to work with.

I gain more points for a scum lynch than I lose for a town lynch. You do not have to worry about me keeping off lynch wagons.

Unsurprisingly, my firm order of preference is
Alive>Visiting a PGO>Being lynched
This is the order that is in the interests of both the town and my faction.

[Fishythefish]

MMMMMMmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm hey fishy you said the track would be sent to someone, did the ability you used last night's result get sent to someone who could confirm that it isn't a roleblock?

No. If there is a way to confirm my action, which I'm not claiming either way, I judge it not worth outing the action to stay alive. You are unlikely to ever have confirmation of who I visited last night, or what I did there.

Listen up people. He didn't say he did anything last night. That is withholding information. That is not town.
He went to Red Coyote and even if that is not his intended target he still did something last night that he is not telling people.
HOW IS THIS TOWN?

In answer to your last question: I AM NOT TOWN. In claiming, my interests are not the same as yours, and I refuse to do what is best for the town. In virtually all other matters, our interests directly align. In this game, not being town is not a sufficient reason to lynch someone. See my recent long post - iso 37.

So what's your opinion on the Targeting matter?

First he claimed he didn't, now it's clear he did.

See iso 37 again. I lied. I've got no intention of ever claiming the action I used last night. It would hurt my partner(s) (and yeah, I decided in iso 37 it was worth admitting they exist) by removing their claim.

Town Cop says Fishy is not-town

Fishy claims other with one shot tracker

That they hadn't used

Tracker says Fishy visited RC

RC admits being RB'd

Fishy admits visiting someone,

Not RC

. Therefore Lied about not using ability.

But Fishy doesn't want to say who they visited, or what ability.

Therefore we cannot trust Fishy.

--

Any objections to that analysis? Thoughts?

I have an objection! The dogma that you cannot trust me because I don't share exactly the same interests as you fails in this game. 90+% of the time, we want the same thing. The last 10-% is when I claim (and some rather unlikely scenarios involving idiocy from other points factions)

I'm just baffled that the Fishy lynch has fallen apart like it has. He's been outed as a completely self-interested actor and while he claims to want to help the town there's obviously no evidence to support that other than his word. And Zorblag's idea is completely ridiculous, why would Fishy kill himself if we don't have the stones to lynch him now when he's already been incredibly deceptive, why not go back to day alive with either a chance to earn more mislynches if he's scum or an SK or to earn more points if he is indeed this "non-hostile" other.

Furthermore, if the wagon falls apart I have no idea how it isn't Nicodemus who isn't getting strung up. Ignoring his dreadful play from yesterday he then just blatantly rolefished today to try and completely out a PR whose claim has been verified by the person they claimed against.

Absolutely I'm a completely self-interested actor. Lucky for the town our interests align virtually all the time. You (presumably) implicitly claim you want to help the town, and there's obviously no evidence to support that other than your word. That is not a point against me unless I have given you reason to think I don't want to hurt the town.

I think I agree with you on Nico. Given the unexpectedly warm reception to my claims, I'll be taking a good look at some players tonight.

[Fishythefish]

@RC: if all I wanted was not to be caught roleblocking, I could have claimed any number of roles. The fact that I haven't claimed a specific role is a silly reason to think I'm lying about that.

Focusing on players who aren't town sounds very noble. Unfortunately, it's a sure route to defeat if you don't discriminate between those who have been put in this game do balance it back in the town's favour and the others.

I'm no danger to this town, except in very unlikely scenarios. Lynching me seems kind of clean - get rid of anything that isn't town - but there are probably 4 more like me out there. You do not have 5 lynches to throw away on these people, some of whom are for all practical purposes (other than claiming) protown.

Perhaps fishy can tell us why he picked other.

Sure. I've never been other, and wanted to see what it was like. The answer is "stressful if you get investigated by two PRs".

[Fishythefish]

Right. This is bad.

I have just realised there may be good reasons why I can't or shouldn't visit the PGO tonight. I need to commune with the mod and my partner(s) on this - it might be absolutely fine, depending on some stuff. But it's possible I'd rather be lynched than visit him; and it's even possible I'd rather be lynched than tell you why that is.

Expect more asap.

[Fishythefish]

Further to this, on reflection it's likely that if I can't visit the PGO, I can explain why that is.

[Fishythefish]

Is everyone missing the fact that Fishy admits to having partners? Do you really think he is going to go visit a PGO?
You people are smoking crack.
He did something last night. Doesn't want to say what it is and to me it's not obviously pro-town.
He is not part of the town.

*mutters pissy comments to the town people*

Why would saying what I did make any difference? Would you really care which of the huge number of roles out there I claimed, or who I visited?

The fact that I'm part of the town cannot in this game be a reason to autolynch me.

What's the relevance of me having partners?

Anyway, time to make things worse: I

will not

visit the PGO tonight. The reason is that, as I claimed originally, the transmitting track is of great points value to my faction. It needs to go to a townie, and that could easily be the difference between me winning and losing the game. Tonight, we have two nearly confirmed townies - from the two reports on me. That makes our chances of transmitting to a townie who lives through the night higher than they are likely to be again. If I agree to visit the PGO, I'm a scum roleblocker magnet. Not only will this get me lynched tomorrow, it will also make it significantly less likely that my faction transmits successfully to a townie. I'd much rather get lynched today and get those points than get lynched tomorrow and not.

[Fishythefish]

@Fishythefish, I'm not sure what you think the problem is here.

If you're telling the truth why would scum bother roleblocking an action that's going to eliminate someone who would be working against them otherwise? Scum shouldn't care whether your faction wins the point game or not should they? I'm very skeptical that you'd be a prime candidate for a roleblock.

Further, I've checked with the mod and confirmed that one shot abilities, if roleblocked, can be used again unless there's some specific mechanic that prevents it. Do you know of some such mechanic in this case? For your statement to make sense it must be a factional ability (otherwise, if you got lynched today your faction wouldn't be able to use it) so even if for whatever reason you did get roleblocked your partner(s) would still be able to use it later.

I'd be roleblocked in order to get me lynched tomorrow because of non-compliance - the effect that I wouldn't get to do the action would be an unimportant side effect. I think that would make me an extremely attractive target.

As I've claimed before, it is a factional ability. The reason it's important to use it tonight is that tonight we can pretty well guarantee sending it to a town player. That probably won't be true any other night.

[Fishythefish]

Systematic deceptions and omissions? I didn't claim a factional ability I used last night. That's my only deception. Omissions, sure. I've been open about what I'm not telling you, and why. I think my reasons are sufficient - where do you disagree, exactly?

I'm not willing to follow town instructions. Doing so is not in my interests. However, my interests overlap enormously with the town's, and not following your instructions or not doing thing best possible thing for the town is a bad reason to lynch me.

@Zorblag: I think a guaranteed mislynch would be a tempting option at least for scum roleblockers, and more importantly it would be irresistable for other points factions. It's worth a lot to my faction to get tonight right. It's not worth a lot to us that the town doesn't need to waste a lynch on me - and it would actively hurt the town if I got roleblocked tonight. It's simply the best play for me to let someone else take the track tonight. I could lie and say I'm willing to visit a PGO, but really I don't see the point. If you're going to lynch me, better for the town it happens today than tomorrow.

@DDD - and actually everyone else who thinks I should be lynched: to what extent do you think my claims are true?

[Fishythefish]

It's very hard to say - the three points factions could have any manner of points conditions. It really depends on how many people chose scum and town, which is impossible to tell at this point.

[Fishythefish]

This. We have no way to know if Fishy is actually helping us or if he is extrapolating his claim from a similar point based role that wants to help scum.

You are lynching me because you don't know I'm protown? I didn't realise we have 20 lynches today.

[Fishythefish]

When you claim non-town, refuse to tell us your actions, refuse to do what we say, and admit your only going to act in your own best interest, yes, we might consider lynching you for not being pro-town.

- Non-town does not mean anti-town.
- Withholding information does not, with my role type, correlate to being anti-town.
- Acting in my own best interest does not, with my role type, correlate to being anti-town.

There is

nothing

that anybody has said that says I'm anti-town. Anywhere. Do not confuse me being anti-town with me not acting in the best interests of the town 100% of the time.

Either
1. This is a dogmatic position, that you should lynch anything that doesn't share your win condition.
Or
2. You need to give some evidence that the role I'm claiming should be lynched.
Or
3. You need to give some evidence that I'm not the role I'm claiming. What have I said or done that doesn't fit perfectly with that role?

If it's 1, that's very foolish. If it's 2 or 3, show me why you think those things.

[Fishythefish]

Fishy, who do you think is Scum/Other?

Good point. Looking at players I suspect and those other people do now. I'll get back to you later tonight.

[Fishythefish]

OK. Let's take that slowly.

1. The track on me does not conflict in any way with my claim. I have said why I'm not revealing that action.

2. There's no proof I'm helping the town. Equally, there's no proof that you are town. What, exactly, is the difference? Lack of evidence is not evidence of lack. If you think I should be dead, you have a duty to explain why. The burden of proof is on you.

3. You can't trust my word because I admit to playing for my faction. Are you playing for your faction? I'm betting the answer is yes. You claim that faction is the town, I claim mine has the same motives as the town. Where is the difference? Why does that automatically make me less trustworthy than you?

(You are merely an example here, I'm not intending to say anything about your actual alignment)

Not acting in the town's best interests is not the definition of being anti-town that I mean here. I mean "hurting the town's chances of winning". A cop who takes no action any night is not acting in the town's best interests; nor is he antitown.

A false trichotomy? What is your fourth option? Your points seem to be flailing around my three, without wanting to come down on any of them.

If you think I'm saying whatever I think will get me through the day, all I can do is advise you to read my posts. I think it's perfectly clear that survival is not my number 1 priority here.

----

Argh! It's too much more easy and fun arguing this than scumhunting. I will not post again on myself until I have got some reads on other people.

[Fishythefish]

@DGB: what is your level of confidence in you meta based read on Troll? For example, in comparison to your extremely strong and correct read on elvis knits in PYP1, if you can remember that?

[Fishythefish]

Some stuff:

Jack (RC)
- Disliked his reaction to the whole statistics thing. It reads like “you’re argument defending yourself is right, but you are scummy for making it”, which stinks. This also applies to some other people, I think.
- Other than that though, I don’t see much wrong with him. I don’t particularly think he’s scum. He’s mostly on this list because he’s someone lodged in the back of my mind as likely scum, for reasons I’m now thinking are bad.

Zorblag
- I can’t see anything that gives me a read on Zorblag. I put a fair amount of faith in DGB’s read, based on my experience of her in PYP1. I like the company on this wagon – it seems to be full of sensible protown people, which has got to be a good sign.

pops
- Claim of VT seems off. Fake daykills happen enough that claiming in response to one is weird. Could well be scum glad to have the chance to get a claim in – a claim that avoids the nightkill.

Nico
- I didn’t like his comments on DGB/Zorblag a long time ago.
- I didn’t like the way he switched xvart to pops at a rather convenient time, with no reasons.
- His asking for clarification from chronopie feels like a rolefish, or maybe just wanting to be seen to be measured and cautious. Either way, it doesn’t feel like a townie reaction.

##vote: Nico

[Fishythefish]

Fishy: Tracker? RB?

Sorry - is that an answer to something? If so, I can't work out what.

OK. Let's take that slowly.

1. The track on me does not conflict in any way with my claim. I have said why I'm not revealing that action.

2. There's no proof I'm helping the town. Equally, there's no proof that you are town. What, exactly, is the difference? Lack of evidence is not evidence of lack. If you think I should be dead, you have a duty to explain why. The burden of proof is on you.

3. You can't trust my word because I admit to playing for my faction. Are you playing for your faction? I'm betting the answer is yes. You claim that faction is the town, I claim mine has the same motives as the town. Where is the difference? Why does that automatically make me less trustworthy than you?

1. You didn't claim going anywhere till I caught you in withholding information. How is that town?
2. Yeah let me out myself that looks so scummy. Hey all did you note I'm a tracker and fishy didn't deny after the fact that he didn't go somewhere.
The cop got a not town results. The person you went to says he was roleblocked and your doing something at night that is for your faction not in town's interest in my view
3) because you with held information which means there is more to what you are not saying that = not trustworthy.

I'm not town. The question "how is that town?" is the wrong one. The question should be "how is it in the town's interests to lynch me or not".

Re: night actions. I've claimed that my night actions will be good for the town. You may or may not believe that, but the fact that they are good for me

has no bearing on that

. Here, as elsewhere, the argument "you are working for yourself, so you are working against us" fails.

Do you disbelieve my claim, and, if so, why?
Suppose that my current set of claims is true (including what I'm not telling you). Do you think I should be lynched and, if so, why?

[Fishythefish]

@ Fishy

Why aren't you voting for Troll? Nico is not exactly a likely lynch today.

There's lots of time left in the day. I currently think Nico is likely scum. I also think there's more to be got out of pressuring someone I think is scum myself than riding on your coattails.

[Fishythefish]

Not town = lynch is an equation which will lose you this game. There are at least 4 more players who have similar roles to me. You cannot afford to lynch 5 players, at least some of whom will be on your side all the time except when they are claiming.

You don't know that what I did was in the best interest of the town. Nor do you know it was not. The fact that RC was roleblocked is certainly a point against me. That he says nothing else happened to him is deeply unsurprising - name some other actions which people are aware of.

A question: if I was tracked to RC, who was roleblocked, and then claimed some other (town) power role when that came out, would you want me lynched?

[Fishythefish]

@Fishythefish, it would surprise me a fair amount if scum roleblocked you over investigative roles; the mislynch you're talking about is too easy to find other places but being investigated in some way is something that scum certainly want to avoid. On the other hand, I do believe that you'd be worried about your competing factions roleblocking you if you thought there was any reason to think they might have that ability. You don't think that do you?

I've also got another theory as to why might prefer to be lynched and waste the town's action for a day. If you were surprised to learn that your action last night targeted RedCoyote it seems pretty safe to assume that you don't know who it targeted yourself. You also don't seem to want to target Gammagooey with anything tonight (or else you could target him with some other ability while your partner(s) took care of the transmission.) I'm wondering if you don't have one shot weak track that you don't learn anything about and then a one shot transmit to be used later to try to get that to someone else.

I have no reason to believe that other factions have a roleblock. The possibility (maybe 1 in 3, say?) is enough to make it too big a risk, even if I thought the scum would never roleblock me. Getting the track right is worth a lot to me.

I was surprised to learn I targeted RC precisely because I know who I meant to target. I'm a bit confused by the last sentence - are you saying you think I have already performed my track, and have a transmit to perform later? If so, why do you think I am lying about it?

I've explained why I will not target Gamma with the one shot track. There may be other things I could target him with. If there are, I am not prepared to do so. All I will say is this - all my night abilites score points, and it is important whether I target town, scum, other or get roleblocked while using them.

[Fishythefish]

@Zorblag: I'm not really finding new things I won't tell you. I've said throughout I'm not going to tell you anything about abilities other than track, and quite clearly I can't explain why an ability is inappropriate for targetting Gamma with without telling you what it is. I've also barely changed my story - just gone from lying by omission to admitting that omission.

On roleblock likelihood; my faction has at least two abilities (track + what I did last night). So a working assumption is that the other factions between them have at least four. Out of four abilities, how often is one of them a roleblock? IMO, often enough that risking a substantial proportion of the game on there being no roleblock there would be foolhardy.

[Fishythefish]

Access note

I probably won't be posting so much over the next few weeks; shouldn't be awful though.

@farside etc:
I think I've adequately explained my role, and my motivation for everything I've done. I don't think there's anything unbelievable about it. I think statements like "I find it hard to believe a person who withholds information to be anything that helps the town" are rather silly. From what I can see, all you are doing is repeatedly saying that I don't fit into your picture of what town does, and therefore am not town. But I'm not claiming town, and you really have to address my actual claim here. Do you disbelieve my role because you think it couldn't exist? Or because, if it did exist, I wouldn't have played it like I have?

Really, all the points against me are nothing more than "he's not town, lynch him". Yes, I am obviously not town. Of course I

could

have a similar role to the one I've claimed, and be working against the town. But really, that's no different from saying that anyone could be scum.

The fact that I have lied to you really isn't relevant. Because that fits perfectly with my role! Of course you shouldn't "blindly trust" me. Any more than "because I'm town" is a reason not to vote for someone. What you should do, as you do for anyone else, is look at my actions, look at my votes, and decide whether you believe me about various things, and whether it's likely that my interests are different enough from yours to warrant a lynch. As far as I can tell, you've made absolutely no attempt to do that. If you think lieing to the town is a good indicator that I'm going to hurt the town, please explain that - because it needs justification, given my roleclaim.

[Fishythefish]

I don't know what to believe from you fishy. I could see you as scum with a really good fake claim.
You could be an other who's win condition has nothing to do with a town win.
I don't know and frankly you haven't given me a reason to believe you when what you did in the beginning is anti-town.
Your not part of the town. There is no reason to trust, believe or want to see you continue in this game in my view.

The thing is, if you think my claim might be mostly true (ie. the points system is real), the last sentence isn't good enough. You might want me gone, but you don't have enough lynches to kill off a large number of non-hostile others.

If you believe my claim, I'm a terrible lynch. If you don't, I'm a good lynch. Exactly the same situation as a claimed town power role. The difference - that even if I'm telling the truth I'm not town - isn't actually important at all. In both cases, what matters is how well my claim fits the facts and my play. The argument "you're not town, so we can't trust you" is a silly one - because you can't trust anyone before you know their alignment. My alignment - again if you believe me about the points system - is effectively unknown. There is no reason to think I'm mostly protown, or that I'm not. The situation is really very similar to any other claim.

[Fishythefish]

No! The facts do not tell you I'm scum. They only tell you I acted anti-town. Give me a fact that doesn't fit with a mostly town points system.

You seem very unwilling to discuss my actual claim. I think that's because there's absolutely no reason to disbelieve it.

You are stating and restating facts which show very nicely just how not-town I am, but have no bearing on whether I am scum or pro-townish other.

[Fishythefish]

@Fishythefish, I actually said that I don't like that you're finding more things that you are willing to share, not things that you're not willing to share. The new information that all of your abilities contribute to points based on who you target is specifically what I had in mind. I'd sort of expect that if one of the other two factions had a roleblock the same thing would apply to them. Unless they gained or lost points for targeting others with it it'd actually be an advantage to the third faction if they were to target you with it. Doing so would stop either of your two factions from getting points that night but leave a competitor without that restriction. There's also some question as to how many times it could be used but you seem to think that keeping that information from us is useful for some reason.

It's true that another other faction might be failing to get points for a night if they roleblocked me. On the other hand, they'd prevent us doing anything useful on a key night, and probably get me lynched. I'd say that was a good trade.

[Fishythefish]

@charter:
1. Do you believe my claim? If not, why not?
2. Do you think the role I've claimed should be lynched? If so, why?
If you think my claim might be largely true, then you simply cannot afford to waste 5 or more lynches on non-hostile others, some of whom are not working against the town.

[Fishythefish]

@RC: there is no chance I'm town. There is pretty much no downside to me being dead. But to kill me, you have to use a lynch. You do not have many lynches.

I've never said that non-hostiles are mostly against the town. I've got no idea about that.

If you were the mod, and got (for example) 12 town picks, 6 scum picks and 6 other picks, can you imagine how difficult it would be to balance the game? There is absolutely no way you can produce a setup where town can indiscriminately lynch non-town and win. It's reasonable to assume that, if I'm telling the truth about these factions, town lynching a random non-town player each day

is a guaranteed loss

.

You say you don't want to focus on non-hostile others; but that's exactly what you are doing today. Completely ignoring the scum to lynch someone who is not a threat to you. It may well be the case that you have another non-hostile outed tonight, with three more players dead in the morning. What will you do about that one?

Your strategy relies on ignorance! If you had some extra alignment information, you would be guaranteed to lose the game. It seems to me that a strategy like that simply can't be good for the town.

[Fishythefish]

Pretty sure I haven't said that I targetted someone I thought was town.

There are lots of actions people have at night. Almost none of them alert the target to being targetted. The fact that RC doesn't know I visited him for another action is no indicator at all that I didn't.

If you tracked me to RC, who got roleblocked, and then I claimed a non-confirmable town role of some kind, what would be your position on how likely my claim was to be real? Because AFAIC, that's pretty much the situation we are in.

[Fishythefish]

I've asked you time and again if there's any way in which you think that my roleclaim doesn't match with what I've said and done. Time and again you have not replied. Hiding information

makes perfect sense for what I'm claiming

If you don't have reasons to disbelieve me, your stance really is nothing more nor less than "if it's not town, lynch it". It would apply just as well to any non-town player. I've given reasons why that's not a valid argument in this game.

Here is a summary of how I see things here:
1) If you don't believe the points system is likely to be real, then lynching me is obviously correct.
2) If you do believe the points system is likely to be real, then you have to discriminate between non-town players - whether are they harmful enough to the town that they are worth lynch. Saying "you've lied, you're not town" is not a valid method.
3) There is exactly one reason (that anyone has so far given) to disbelieve my claim - the unfortunate roleblock on RC. If that is enough evidence to disbelieve a claim, then fair enough, you should lynch me. I don't think it is, but then of course I wouldn't.
4) Your continual repetition of my anti-town actions that fit percectly with my claim is irrelevant. These actions can't possibly make my claim less likely to be true.

[Fishythefish]

You don't have a reason to believe anybody, about anything, until you know they are town. You judge people's claims on how well they fit their actions.

Anyhow, this argument is clearly going nowhere. I don't intend to make another post on the subject, if I can hold myself back.

[Fishythefish]

Yeah. I think that's a fair summary. Sorry about that

[Fishythefish]

(Obviously, that was a response to 1011)

[Fishythefish]

I think at this point it's probably worth getting exactly what I've claimed in one place, for reference:

1) Points system: I win by amassing points. If my faction scores more than all other factions, I win.
2) There are one or more other members of my faction.
3) Through the use of an ability, I know that there are precisely three points scoring factions, The Judiciary, The Legislature and The Executive.
4) My faction has a one-shot transmitting weak track (which we intend to use tonight).
5) My faction also has one or more other abilities. All of these abilites are factional rather than personal.
6) I used one of these last night on a player who is not RC (every time I type this, I accidentally type the name of the player I actually targetted, then on preview I change it to RC). No ability that I used last night could roleblock a player.
7) All my abilities score points depending on how they resolve (and on whom).
8) In all cases, the scores I get for these abilities will be better if they help the town. In particular, the one shot transmitted weak track scores positively if I send it to town, and negatively if I send it to scum.
9) I score negative points for a town lynch, positive for a scum lynch. The positive number is larger than the negative one.
10) I would have scored positive points for surviving the game unclaimed (which means without claiming alignment, rolename or flavour).
11) I score positive points if the town win the game (whether I'm dead or alive).
12) All the points scores for the various actions are all between -5 and +5; most if not all are between -2 and +2.

Things I have not claimed:
1) Who my partner(s) are.
2) What my other night action(s) are.
3) Who I visited last night.
4) Which faction I am from.
5) The details of my scoring system.
Of these, there is no way I could be persuaded to disclose 1) 2), or 5) - I'd rather die. 3) and 4) I probably could tell you, if I thought there was a good reason. 3) I don't want to tell you because it might hint a little at 2), and 4) just because it gives unnecessary information to another points faction, but if there was significant benefit those wouldn't be major objections.

[Fishythefish]

Oh lets do more shit and giggles at this point
Oh fishy do you know the people that are in your group? If so will you answer honestly if people asked you if player X was part of your group? If not why? If so why?

- Yes. Sorry, that should be in the big list of claims.
- No, I won't answer either way. That's just the same as outing my group. And that's a bad idea because it means they are less likely to lynch scum, less likely to use night actions effectively and much less likely to survive unclaimed until endgame.
- Of course, if someone claimed to be a partner at L-1, trying to save themselves from the lynch, I'd probably confirm or deny it. There may be other circumstances when I'd confirm or deny a specific person as a partner, although none spring to mind.

A note on my repeated use of 6 as a number of points scoring people -
- My faction has at least two people.
- xvart was a member of his faction - which implies at least two people.
- I'm guessing the third faction isn't just a loner either.
But other than me having partner(s), I don't have any special information here - I'm just using 6 as a likely minimum for the number of point scorers.

[Fishythefish]

@d3x: the only question to me I think is worth answering is what I'd like to lynch today.

- I score points for lynching scum.
- If I lynch other point scorers, that's probably going to hurt them.
- Lynching "other", apart from point scorers, is neutral, but slightly good as it helps the town
- Lynching town is bad.

So it probably goes
Scum>Other point scorers>Other "other" players>Town
With the first ">" being pretty close, and the others being clear.

TBH, I don't know what Nico is. His play does not seem town to me, and all non-town lynches are good for me.

[Fishythefish]

No, they don't get me points. Scum get me points.

[Fishythefish]

On lynches, only mafia and town score me points. This means that, while I'm perfectly happy to lynch anyone not-town, I'd certainly prefer mafia to SK.

[Fishythefish]

Town score me minus points, scum plus points (This is all claimed elsewhere).

[Fishythefish]

@DGB:
1) It's rare that you can tell someone is SK/cult recruiter specifically. Much more likely you just lynch people you don't think are town.
2) There's no reason to think that all the other point scorers will have that same condition.
3) My interests aren't always aligned with yours. That doesn't make me antitown. Overall, a player who is going to vote for scum, then point scorers, then SKs, then himself, then town has got to be better to have around than not.
4) If I'm unsure about a likely scum lynch, or it looks like it's not happening, I'll happily jump on a likely SK lynch. I don't think portraying point scorers as a voting block which won't lynch SKs is fair.

Does anyone happen to know how many votes Troll has atm?

[Fishythefish]

Fishy said that his goals are not Town, but aligned with Town. If his position is that Lynching NonHostile Others is his priority over Hostile Others, he's either Lying Scum or AntiTown. Hostile Others are by definition AntiTown and he's more inclined to let them live and go after NonHostile Town, which he claims are proTown.

Look. My goals are not that of the town. I'm not always going to do the best thing for the town.

But that should not be an automatic reason to lynch me. I'm working, always, for a good - if not best - outcome for the town.

The position is that almost all the time, I will be working for something which is very good for the town. I think that means that my vote is worth having around, and certainly that's lynching me is not worth it.

Some of my actions are antitown. That should not be a reason to automatically lynch me. As a

player

I am not antitown - in the sense that my continued presence in this game will help the town more than it will hurt it.

To bring back the cop analogy; what I meant was, a cop not investigating is an antitown

action

. That doesn't make him an antitown

player

, and certainly doesn't make him a good lynch. Obviously, in my case it's a little less obvious whether I'm an antitown player or not, but I think it's fairly clear that an otherwise protown player who doesn't like lynching SKs in the rare cases they admit to being such is not a good lynch.

[Fishythefish]

Wait wait wait what? ani doesn't want to lynch mafia so that I don't get points?
1) Why don't you want me to get points? My win con and the town's are totally independent. There's no reason that I'll listen to you more if I have fewer points.
2) How can you possibly think that leaving mafia alive so that point scorers don't score points is a good idea? When will you be up for lynching mafia?

Troll should probably claim, given the votecount.

If he's going to be lynched, I'd be grateful if people gave me a chance to get on his wagon first - I think it's more likely to do me good than harm, pointswise. Should be on in about 14 hours.

Still much more up for a Nico lynch.

[Fishythefish]

@RC:
1. My non-hostile claim has some credibility solely as a result of being the first. If a player at L-1 claims non-hostile, there's no reason you have to believe them any more than you would a town claim.
2. I'm not playing the fear card. I am no threat, and you should lynch people who are threats. Where is the "fear card" in that argument?
3. I dislike the statement that thinking about who the best lynch is outguessing the mod. You are the one presuming things about the mod; you are presuming that he designed a game where you can win by lynching everything that's not town. That's usually a good assumption; but here, where it's totally possible the town are a minority, it's more unlikely to be true. Either way, keeping an open mind about whether it's always right to lynch non-hostile other is totally not "outguessing the mod".
4. The roleblock on you is a good point against me. I think it's possible that the reason you set so much store in that roleblock is that it was on you. The possibility that I targetted the same person as a roleblocker (the bus driver really isn't important here) is hardly a remote one.

[Fishythefish]

@RC:
1. My non-hostile claim has some credibility solely as a result of being the first. If a player at L-1 claims non-hostile, there's no reason you have to believe them any more than you would a town claim.
2. I'm not playing the fear card. I am no threat, and you should lynch people who are threats. Where is the "fear card" in that argument?
3. I dislike the statement that thinking about who the best lynch is outguessing the mod. You are the one presuming things about the mod; you are presuming that he designed a game where you can win by lynching everything that's not town. That's usually a good assumption; but here, where it's totally possible the town are a minority, it's more unlikely to be true. Either way, keeping an open mind about whether it's always right to lynch non-hostile other is totally not "outguessing the mod".
4. The roleblock on you is a good point against me. I think it's possible that the reason you set so much store in that roleblock is that it was on you. The possibility that I targetted the same person as a roleblocker (the bus driver really isn't important here) is hardly a remote one.

[Fishythefish]

IMO, I'd rather not have the point grabbers grab points and get too far ahead of themselves, or else they'll betrying to force the lynches. We want

town

to force the lynches.

@ani: I really don't understand this stance at all. Why would points grabbers try to force lynches more if they had more points?

[Fishythefish]

But... what? We are likely talking about factions of size 2-3. These factions do not know how the other factions are doing. They can't force a lynch with 3 people, even if they knew the right lynch to force. In my particular case, if I could force a lynch I'd only do so on scum.

Your worries really make absolutely no sense. And you are saying that this is worth avoiding lynching scum over? That's pure insanity.

[Fishythefish]

@ani: I really don't understand this stance at all. Why would points grabbers try to force lynches more if they had more points?

You point grabbers ARE screwing up with the town lynches.

You are forcing us AWAY from a cult-recruiter lynch - Jack.
You are forcing us AWAY from a possible SK lynch - Troll.
You are forcing us to ELIMINATE your competitors - farside.

You say these alignments like they are known. Jack being a cult recruiter is a random stab in the dark, from what I've seen.

It's true that at least my faction prefer to kill mafia than SKs. That's hardly major screwing up of lynches. IF others have the same condition, it's not going to be so easy to lynch out SKs if there are also outed mafia. But how often does that really happen? I don't think this is likely to cause major problems for the town. It's much easier to determine someone is not town than to discern between types of antitown - particularly because someone playing unusually (eg. Troll here) could just as well be a point scorer as a SK.

In what way is anyone forcing anyone to eliminate farside? Last I checked farside had no votes and no suspicion.

[Fishythefish]

He breadcrumbed it in his FIRST POST!!! He has not once denied it! He has claimed to have tried to recruit me and failed!!!

In my last game with Jack, he breadcrumbed SK in the first post, as town. I don't think insane breadcrumbing is a tell for him. I can't see any reason why non-cult leaders would bother to deny your accusations any more than cult leaders. His claim to have tried to recruit you was clearly a joke. I'll be very surprised if Jack flips cult leader.

[Fishythefish]

@Nico: some other reasons for you being scum other than the rolefish -
- When attacked with the accusation that one of your stances was "dreadful", you responded "is that scummy?". To me, this strongly suggests you never believed the stance in the first place, as you weren't in any way trying to justify your thinking.
- Your stance on DGB's attack on Zorblag made no sense. Felt you were just trying to set yourself up to be able to follow DGB if you needed to.
- You switched from xvart to pops with no reasoning just when xvart's wagon was losing steam, and pops's was getting going. A very convenient change of opinion.

[Fishythefish]

@mod:

Can actions also be conditional on flips?

[Fishythefish]

Zorblag should be claiming.

[Fishythefish]

Here is why I seriously doubt Zorb's claim:

May 11, 3:35am - start of day 2. xvart has flipped government, non-town.
May 11, 3:53am - Chrono claims "non-town" result on me.
May 11, 8:21am - I claim "non-town"
May 11, 5:45pm - Zorblag posts for the first time on day 2.

So. I don't think that after someone claims a non-town result, you fire off a day vig you know is aiming for non-town before the matter is resolved. I certainly don't think you do so after I claim not to be town.

[Fishythefish]

Well. If I'm dead in the morning, and he misses government with his supposed shot, be sure to lynch him.

[Fishythefish]

@DGB: Zorblag should have shot me. Zorblag didn't shoot me. He didn't post in the only possible time he could have shot pops. It's likely that he didn't shoot anyone at all.

[Fishythefish]

GMT. The point is about the intervals, so it doesn't really matter.

[Fishythefish]

@Zorblag: 18 minutes into day 2, Chrono declared a "non-town" result on me. At that stage, you knew your targets were non-hostile other (at least some of them, anyway). Are you really saying it didn't occur to you to wait until I claimed to see if it was a good idea to shoot me? FYPOV, there was a significant chance that you wanted me dead, but the town didn't.

[Fishythefish]

I don't see why Troll can't just be scum/SK here.

[Fishythefish]

@Llama:
I'm sure my judgement is to some extent clouded by the fact that, one way or another, he's almost certainly going to put a bullet through my head in the next 24 RL hours - but do you not think it's at least very surprising that Troll would shoot at pops in the position he was in this morning? He seems to say that my wagon was going when he sent in the kill - surely anyone in that position would wait for my claim, knowing that he needed to shoot at non-hostile other?

EDIT: Zorblag's explanation isn't so bad. I suppose he could well have thought that my death would take care of itself.

Well, I guess I'm really actually dead this time . Be wary of Zorblag. Some people didn't like my tendency to vote for scum over SKs - Zorblag's motivation in this game is to take out a set of players who may well be predominantly protown.

[Fishythefish]

Zorblag is clearly real. Let's fruitlessly demand Nico claims until someone gets bored and hammers (N.B. this should be before deadline).

[Fishythefish]

It is certainly possible for points gatherers to have a night kill. All I have to go by is my conditions - other people's could be radically different. Going by mine, a one shot NK would fit in just fine (there may even be one there), but a regular NK would skew the points towards one ability in an anomalous way. But there could be a points faction whose whole purpose is to shoot at town/scum/ducks.

Something I'll reiterate, lest it be forgot - my list of points factions is exhaustive. In particular, the Secret Service are not a points faction.

@Zor: oh yeah. Guess I live to fight another day. *Cheers on Secret Service*.

[Fishythefish]

Someone who isn't me and will be here in the morning should unvote. There may be stuff to be said before night should happen. (I can't do it because my Nico-is-scum-points depend on my being on the wagon)

[Fishythefish]

If I had to outguess the mod on this one, I'd say that you'd be pretty damn sure if someone was in the government. I'd speculate that's it's very unlikely Elli will get any (truthful) claimants.

[Fishythefish]

No. But I judge it likely enough that I want the points from his lynch.

[Fishythefish]

I'd like it if I could not be killed before I've had a chance to speak tomorrow. There may be things arising from the night which are worth me mentioning.

[Fishythefish]

That's a really rubbish lynch/night in many ways.

If all went well, someone should have received a transmitting track result. If so, they should probably claim it.

[Fishythefish]

@Plum: my track is weak, so if you got a result of "X didn't visit" or "X did visit", that may be me. On the other hand, you weren't the intended recipient.

I think it would be a mistake to shoot me before the question of last night's actions from my faction is sorted out. I'm in the dark at the moment, as I didn't take any of them.

[Fishythefish]

That's mine. Not sure if that was the best use for the information, but there we go.

[Fishythefish]

I knew our intended target (Plum), and recipient (you). I had no idea if the action had resolved successfully until you claimed. Indeed, I thought it might not have done when you didn't initially claim anything.

[Fishythefish]

Ooh. A weak amnesiac watcher. An indication, possibly, that there is another points factions with somewhat similar/symmetrical abilities to my own.

[Fishythefish]

[/unwarranted setup speculation]

[Fishythefish]

Full claim of tracker action:

(Someone else) tracked Plum, transmitting the result to Chronopie. Chrono, in accordance with this, claims Plum made a visit last night.

UK targetting Plum and hitting Jack is weird - from my action, it would seem that actions could hit Plum last night.

[Fishythefish]

Actually, no, Troll. The only person who should have found you a tempting target was me, and the Secret Service if they've got my back.

[Fishythefish]

My partner(s) have no intention of claiming.

I'm looking forward to d3x's information on whether I'm protown or not.

Right now, it looks like the points people have similar abilities; each have claimed a one-shot transmitted investigative ability. Going on targets; DGB is clearly an attempt to transmit to town, and I'd trust Shotty to be likely townish point scorer. d3x claims to have attempted a transmission to Chrono, which is interesting as I did so successfully. If he really did try to send to Chrono, likely he was also going for town.

As Shotty at least seems to share one of my abilities, I'll claim it. Once during the game, I can ask the mod where the factions stand in terms of points (ranking only, not number of points). I did this yesterday, with the primary motivation to find out the names of the factions. I'll share the rankings I got from that if it's useful, which depends on the following:

@d3x: if I were to tell you at the beginning of day 2 you (very likely) had more than 0 points, would you be able to confirm someone as town/scum? What if I told you it was less than 0?

[Fishythefish]

Hang on... are you claiming you can be 100% sure that you were on 0 points at the start of day 2, and that you are from The Executive? Please check your role PM carefully before answering.

[Fishythefish]

Shotty; do you now have a ranking then?

If I were to tell you that at the beginning of day 2 you had +ve points/-ve points, would you be able to confirm town/scum?

[Fishythefish]

I'm sure this doesn't need saying - if it's not obvious, at this stage it is likely that we can get alignment information out of these rankings (even just mine from the start of D2). Shooting a point scorer now would be an incredibly bad move.

[Fishythefish]

@d3x: you say you don't know if your partner(s) targetted anyone N1. This is a very important point; could you check with (t)he(m), or the mod if that's possible?

[Fishythefish]

@Shotty: are you also saying that there is no way you could have scored any points on D1/N1 (since there was no lynch and you used no abilities)?

[Fishythefish]

@d3x: sharing my findings now would likely make claiming easier for at least one scumbag.

[Fishythefish]

Interesting. Shotty and d3x both claim to be sure they had no points at the beginning of Day 2, when I used scoreboard. However, while I'm not willing to reveal the precise rankings right now, I will say that they were not on the same number of points when I used scoreboard. So one of them is lieing.

[Fishythefish]

Oh, and for completeness's sake I confirm that I am in the Judiciary.

[Fishythefish]

@the branches, is there any chance that you have the points for surviving without claiming until you either die or claim? I don't know how things work but that might explain some discrepencies.

At this point I'd suggest that d3x and Shotty to the Body take turns verifying eachother's information from the score board. You should both have gotten the information at the same time, right? If you're both convinced that eachother are telling the truth then there is something to be said for Fishythefish having potential motive to get me to shoot at one of the two of you. If they don't match then perhaps in the process of verifying Fishythefish can pick out which of you is likely to be the liar.

I checked this with the mod some time ago; the only points that count are those which are definitely in the bag. Surviving and similar do not count. From my conditions, it is very unlikely indeed that a faction could accrue points and not realise it. I would

have

to be on a lynch or take a night action to get points for the purposes of the scoreboard before the end of the game.

Note that my scoreboard was taken on Day 2, before last night's actions. The information from today's boards can neither confirm nor deny it.

Unless...
@Shotty/d3x: I lose points if I fail to take certain night actions in certain circumstances. Could either of you have lost points n1 for that reason?

I'm thinking and hoping that Chrono counts as town for us.

[Fishythefish]

Telling the format of a communication from the mod is presumably breaking the rules of the game.

[Fishythefish]

@Troll; wires crossed. Thought you were asking for the format of my scoreboard ability

[Fishythefish]

@d3x: I'm afraid there's at least a possibility that I've got points from places other than my track and the lynch.

I think there's something to be gleaned from the situation, and I need to think about how to handle this. I'll probably be claiming more this evening.

[Fishythefish]

Just a note - d3x's algorithm stuff is probably a bit off. For one thing, FMPOV it's extremely likely that he had scored points by D2. I strongly suggest d3x's partner checks that QT and explains to d3x the action he took without telling him.

I'll explain why I think that, and crunch the numbers we've got on things, tonight. What I say is rather sensitive - it is linked to both whether my partner was on yesterday's lynch, and my own currently hidden ability/abilities - but I'm sure I'll be able to say enough that the town hears everything it needs to.

[Fishythefish]

vote:charter

Scum who forgot he had a "motive" in his PM, so didn't realise what a "motive cop" was.

[Fishythefish]

##vote charter

[Fishythefish]

Oooh, quadruple post!

@RC: isn't it likely that your "roleblocking" was just the result of targetting another administrator?

[Fishythefish]

Right. Here's what I think I can safely say:

Facts

- On Day 2, the scoreboard was:
Executive 1st
Judiciary = Legislature 2nd
I.e. d3x was on a different number of points.
- Last night, my faction successfully transmitted a track to Chronopie.
- On each of the last two nights, my faction has used at least one other ability (on N1, one of these abilities ended up targetting RC).
- I have exactly one partner. I'm betting that applied to all the points factions - so Shotty is alone and d3x has one partner.

What I am happy to rely on as true, though it comes from others

- Shotty and d3x have claimed truly. They transmitted abilities very similar to my track, so very likely they are genuine.
- The scoreboard today is given to us by two players. It almost has to be real:
Executive 1st
Judiciary = Legislature
- The Executive sent a watch to Plum.
- The Legislature sent a rolecop to DGB.

What I think is likely to be true

- Since Shotty and d3x are wrong/lying about being on 0 points when I scoreboarded, it's a very good guess that one of them was on 0, and the other wasn't.
- It's pretty likely that I

was

on 0 points at the beginning of day 2. There is some possibility i was either above or below that, but it would need a rare chain of events (the nature of which would give away my role, so you will have to take my word on that). So I surmise that, most likely, Shotty and I were tied on 0 points, with d3x on positive points. This says something about the alignment of, I'm guessing, d3x's partner's target.
- Having said that, I see no motivation for Shotty and d3x to be lying. It's been pretty well demonstrated that holding back information about night actions as other is understood by the town (I think the town has done well in that respect). The most likely reason, I'd guess, would be that they weren't protown, and performed an action which is obviously antitown.
- Either way, we can be certain that Shotty and I scored the same number of points in the last day/night cycle. Which is interesting, because my faction scored -x for yesterday's lynch, where x is 1 or 2. Shotty scored nothing for it. So I certainly outscored Shotty last night, by exactly x points. With the information I have, and ruling out DGB-town, this points strongly to:
DGB other (hostile or non-hostile), Chrono town.
If Chrono is mafia, it would need serious lying on Shotty's part, and some epic losing of points - this seems inconceivable. If Chrono is other, then DGB is certainly scum, but this would need another rare event to have happened.
I'm pretty good at dealing with the possibilities in a situation like this. I'm conferring with my partner as well. Even though I can't share some of the finer details of my reasoning (for fear of outing other night actions and/or my partner), I'd strongly advise you to take this analysis as true insofar as you trust me - I'd be extremely surprised if I was missing anything.

What I think should be done

- d3x's partner needs to speak up in their QT (or here) - likely he has the information to condemn or clear a player. Can someone compile a list of proddable people and get prods on them (I'll do it some time if noone else does)?
- Massclaim is a good plan. My partner has lied/will lie about their role.
- I favour not being shot in the face by Troll. I think I've been pretty helpful to the town whenever that's been possible. Since there's a decent chance d3x is actively lying about his actions, I'd favour shooting him as the most likely of the three of us not be basically protown. Of course, Troll is right not to be shooting until we've sorted out everything we can.
- There's almost certainly more questions I could answer without giving too much away. Feel free to ask me anything that occurs.

TL;DR: most likely DGB is other, and Chrono is town. Significantly less likely, but still possible, is DGB scum and Chrono other.

[Fishythefish]

Note: my information on DGB draws no distinction between other or non-hostile other.

[Fishythefish]

What did Dex claim the scoreboard to be?

I had

1. Executive
2. Legislature
3. Judiciary

for today.

If I scored nothing for transmitting and your judiciary Fishy whoever you sent to is scum if we we're tied the day before.

Judicial is tied with Legislative for 2nd so if they would've gained points from a Townie Lynch, they would be higher or at least tied with us, the Executive.

So. You two conflict on the scoreboard.

There's no way I could have gained or lost points during day 3. Could you, Shotty?

When did you each use this power, exactly?

[Fishythefish]

Yeah, there are all sorts of ways the scores could have changed between yesterday and today. The fact that you and d3x disagree about today's scoreboard is really weird.

I would be very surprised, and also feel somewhat cheated by this game, if I don't have control over my score, and that is something I would only consider as an explanation if all else failed.

[Fishythefish]

Well. I also received that clarification from the mod - the x points we all get for surviving unclaimed have been counted in the scoreboards. I was rather misled by the result of an earlier question I asked him, but there we are.

So, revised scoreboards:

D2
d3x 2x (surviving points)
Fishy = Shotty = x (surviving points)

D3a)
d3x 2x + Plum (I'm pretty sure he listed

before

he claimed - please confirm d3x?)
Shotty x + DGB
Fishy x + Chrono + mystery ability - lynch

D3b)
d3x x + Plum
Shotty DGB
Fishy x + Chrono + mystery ability - lynch

Firstly, I am now certain that I scored no points on N1. This says very little about RC's alignment.

So, the main thing we have to work with is:
DGB - x = Chrono + mystery ability - lynch
ie. between the two points at which we were equal, Shotty gained points for DGB, and lost survival points by claiming. I gained points for Chrono, and for my mystery ability, and lost some for the lynch.

I'll check carefully, but I'm pretty sure there is zero chance that Chrono is town (given that DGB isn't).

[Fishythefish]

Sorry, sorry. I used "gained points" there whenever I didn't know they were lost points. Gained points can be +ve, -ve or even 0.

I'm not going to commit myself to 100% on Chrono until I've thought harder about it. It's not the simplest of situations, and getting it wrong would be bad. I'll give you an answer on this very soon.

[Fishythefish]

Sorry. By "gained points" I meant "did an points related action on". I wasn't meaning to imply that those points were +ve, or even necessarily any.

I'll think hard about Chrono soon. I won't commit 100% to that statement until I've done so.

[Fishythefish]

@imag: I'll get back to you on that. I'm not going to do anything that might out my partner, but I may be able to tell you more.

[Fishythefish]

Assuming the following are true:
- Shotty visited DGB
- DGB is not town
- Shotty used no other ability
- Shotty does not gain points for visiting non-town
Then I conclude with 100% certainty that Chronopie is scum. Of these assumptions, the first is confirmed by a transmittee, and the second is claimed by DGB. The third and fourth are claims of Shotty's which I believe - the third because he has very little motivation to lie, and the fourth because his role mirrors mine so well.

##vote: Chronopie

[Fishythefish]

Ahhh! Ahhhhhh! Time to hastily withdraw my 100% conclusion!

Sorry. BAD typo. Under the assumptions in my last post, I conclude with 100% certainty that Chronopie is

not town

. There is room for him to be other, or to be scum.

[Fishythefish]

@Fishythefish, by your assumptions could Chronopie and DrippingGoofball have different alignments or do they have to both be mafia or both be other? I think it looks like you're getting that they have to have the same alignment.

-Zorblag R`Lyeh

I'll comment on this when Chrono answered me. For now, you are correct in at least thinking I have more to say on the link between their alignments. There are slight complications due to mystery roles.

@Chrono: ofc zoraster is hardly going to confirm the existence of point scorers to you. But for me, it seems unlikely that a miller acts as scum for points factions. It's just not an investigation.

You claim to be a town/not-town miller. Have you asked how you would show up to an other/not-other or a scum/not-scum investigation?

[Fishythefish]

OK. Then here is exactly where I am:

I used a mystery action on each of the last two nights. First night, it didn't resolve (99% sure). Second night, it probably did. If it did, I know how it scored (I targetted a dead person), and then for the purposes of my points faction at least, DGB and Chrono have the same alignment. If the action did not resolve, then I need to do rather worse - this guarantees Chrono scum and DGB other.

So. If Chrono is telling the truth, either:
1. DGB is scum, and Chrono "looks like scum to pointers"
2. DGB is other, Chrono "looks like scum to pointers", AND a rare event occurred with respect to my mystery action, so that it failed to resolve. (For comparison, an example of a similarly rare event; if you have no reason to believe that Player X got protected by a doctor last night, Player X having been protected by a doctor is a rare event).

For myself, I doubt that Chrono looks like scum to pointers, because it's not an investigation. If he does, DGB scum becomes likely. If DGB is indeed other, Chrono other becomes very likely.

I'm still trying to get onto my partner to have two heads on this analysis, and to talk about the possibility of me claiming this mystery action.