Mini 971: Princess bride - They all lived .......

[ekiM]

/confirm

[ekiM]

I have no popcorn.

Vote: Parama

.

[ekiM]

Never seen a miller claim before. I feel like ML would want to discuss making a fake claim with his team first, and there wasn't much time before the game started. So I'm inclined to believe him.

I don't agree with Sensfan's vote on ML, but I don't see why it's scummy. Some people do like to lynch millers D1. This is where meta would be useful, to know how Sens has reacted to miller claims before.

No idea if Jack is serious about wanting a quicklynch. Actually, no idea what Jack is doing at all. That's his MO. Not going to quicklynch someone on someone else just asking, though.

So, Parama. He asks people to vote him at the start so he can OMGUS. That's removing information about whom he chooses to go after. "Let's not worry about the miller claim, we should scumhunt" then... doesn't scumhunt. And spams a page arguing about meta. Fine with this vote.

[ekiM]

There's not necessarily just one scum faction but it's a reasonable assumption until we see evidence to the contrary. Also, if he's lone scum then he's putting his whole game on the line assuming this isn't the kind of town that likes lynching claimed millers.

[ekiM]

Ok, this is a bit tricky because D1 was so short the game didn't really get into full flow before it was over.

bv310

- The only game relevant thing he did yesterday in 6 posts was make a random vote.

curiouskarmadog

- So pretty much the only thing he did was hound SensFan, but that's a legitimate thing to do. He asked about his policy on miller lynching, which is reasonable. Is that something you can show he's done before?

DDD

- Asked why he should vote Sensfan.

Jack

- Went straight on Sensfan and asked for a quicklynch. That turned out pretty well. Now, you said there were two very good reasons why you were doing that. Share now please?

KMD

- Makes a bunch of dubious assertions with little reasoning. I think that's just a playstyle I hate. I have to give him some credit for actually questioning people's reasoning.

ekiM, however, is legitimately scummy trying to stay in the background by jumping the main wagon and contributing to the popular joke.

How is putting the third vote on someone right at the start of the game trying to stay in the background?

These stances seem to give you an out either way. Basically you are saying Sens is wrong, not necessarily scum, but meta could help get that read. And pretty much IIOA on Jack. Oh, he's doing something. Not sure what. Not gonna say he's town or scum.

Those were the major things going on, those were the conclusions I drew from them. I wasn't going to pretend to get more out of them than I did.

The only real read you give is on Parama, and it's pretty much crap. He random voted the wrong way then commented a few times on something that he feels strongly enough about that it is in his sig? That's why he's scum? You can do better than this.

The first complaint that you had about me was that I random voted in a way you didn't like! My random vote might've helped move the game forwards, whereas Parama adopting a purely reactive stance early on seems like an attempt to hide in the foreground to me. Not super-strong, but enough to attract my suspicion, especially when he continues to post a bunch while saying almost nothing.

In other news, Sens might be scum. Meta.

You can explain that now.

MacavityLock

- Miller claims still looks good. In 116 he's asking pertinent questions and calling out some of the abundant craplogic. Also being quite clear he doesn't expect to make it to end-game.

Parama

- Reactive in RVS. Made 27 posts and said about three non-trivial things. Votes for me because I voted for him. Yippee.

Steam-Powered Shovel

- Said almost nothing.

wolframnhart

- Said almost nothing. Ho hum.

---

Vote: bv310

. Say something.

[ekiM]

eikm, ok, so you broke down everyone...would like to see how you would do this out of the box though....in the same way you "evaluated" everyone, could you do the same for yourself?

I can't even hope to be objective here, but as you wish:

ekiM

- Only made three posts yesterday, but what he did say is all reasonable. Need to see more from him today. His analysis is a bit scant today but not much has actually happened, and at least he's asking questions. Why did he vote for bv310 over the guy who is seemingly his top suspect?

Useful?

or are you asking if I have seen Sens do "something" like this before???

What made you say that SensFan had a policy of lynching claimed millers?

---

Shovel, yesterday you were asking wolframnhart to follow you onto Para. Now you're voting for wolf. What, if anything has changed?

---

Jack, what were your two "very good reasons" for pushing a lynch on Sens?

[ekiM]

I often ask people to join me in bandwagonning early on in the game. There's no longer a Paramawagon and I see no particular reason to recreate one.

I don't think Parama is innocent, I just don't think he stands out. I see no reason to wagon Parama over wolf.

Let's

vote: wolframnhart

.

And this vote came from what now? Hell saying "Let's vote:" is like you picked someone at random.

@wolf, that's exactly what I was implying.

So you don't have any suspicions and are making random votes on D2 after 6 pages? Not good enough. There is more than enough material for you to start forming opinions. Do so.

---

reaching for reasons to hold onto an RVS vote ofc

Weak. Why would scum have incentive to hold onto a random vote?

Still an open question.

They can't find a better reason to vote so they make stuff up to hold onto the only vote they can.

They can't find a better reason to vote so they make stuff up to hold onto the only vote they can.

Why is scum any more likely to do this than town?

Scum need reasons to push a lynch, regardless of their quality. Their goal is to lynch townies.

The question is: why would scum find it hard to find a reason to move their vote?

*headdesk*

If you agree with fail logic then I have no reason to be arguing with you, because you will just miss the point.

Dodging the question. Answer it.

ML, here's why my point is better than you think it is:

So, Parama. He asks people to vote him at the start so he can OMGUS. That's removing information about whom he chooses to go after. "Let's not worry about the miller claim, we should scumhunt" then... doesn't scumhunt. And spams a page arguing about meta. Fine with this vote.

1. Doesn't even consider that it was an RVS vote

2. Accuses me of not scumhunting even though I was and am scumhunting

3. Didn't spam a page - others started the argument after I brought it up, and it's an argument I've had 100 times and am tired of. Stupid reason

Look at how BS his reasons to vote me are. There's really nothing there.

And this is all the content he provides D1 (I admit, it was short, but still...)

And then in ISO 4 he calls my vote on him OMGUS even though I provided plenty of reasoning to vote him (the same reasoning I

restated

here).

Here were your positive contributions up to that point:

ISO 0-6: nothing
7: I need to scumhunt.
8: Gut says one of the Sens votes is scum. I like my vote for how Jack is acting.
9: Jack is pushing a sensfan lynch without providing reasoning!
10-14: Nothing.
15: Jack, why should we lynch Sensfan?

Summary: one of the Sens voters is scum. Jack is pushing Sens without giving reasons. Zero analysis whatsoever on either point. Since then you've made about 20 more posts to say "I suspect ekiM for suspecting me with reasons I don't like".

You are active lurking, not scumhunting, and it's suspect. You're posting a lot in this game so you must be paying it some attention but I see no evidence you're actually thinking about the game in a critical way and trying to figure out people's motivations.

If you think the amount of content I provided D1 was so low as to be scummy, what do you think of those who provided less? What do you think about the relative content levels people are providing today?

---

bv not scumhunting is null tell. Who are you going to vote for now?

We're not giving bv310 a free pass to not scumhunt.

---

Jack, what were your two "very good reasons" for pushing a lynch on Sens?

[ekiM]

If you think I'm active lurking then you obviously don't understand my logic.

I think you're active lurking because you have made 36 posts and said only a handful of things:

Claiming as miller is OK.
My gut says one person on SensFan is scum.
Jack isn't explaining his push on SensFan, and I don't like it.
ekiM's case on me is so bad he just has to be scum.
The scum are Sens, Ani, ekiM.
ekiM's case on me is so bad he just has to be scum.
I don't understand why CKD is asking SPS about me.
I'm not active lurking!

The depth of analysis on any of this is at most wafer-thin. I've not seen a credible attempt at analysis of anyone's motivation for doing anything.

---

As for your logic, it goes something like this:

• ekiM's reasons for suspecting me are terrible.
  
• Scum are more likely to suspect for terrible reasons.
  
• => ekiM is likely scum.

I've pointed out problems with your logic in 176. You just ignored that, preferring to say "well, you just don't understand!". To recap:

• My reasons for suspecting you were sensible.
  
• There's no reason why scum would find it hard to move their vote.
  
• There's no reason why scum can't find plausible suspicions to use.

Try answering.

---

We're not giving bv310 a free pass to not scumhunt.

By "we" you mean you and DDD? Why would you say that?

By "we" I mean the town, collectively. If we give bv310 a free pass to not scumhunt he'll probably use it, and that's bad.

Jack, what were your two "very good reasons" for pushing a lynch on Sens?

Humor me and guess.

"Reactions" is probably one of them. Second might be some reason to suspect him, maybe meta about his reaction to the miller claim or the aftermath.

What were your two "very good reasons" for pushing a lynch on Sens? Why have I had to ask this like five times to get any sort of a response at all, and still not an answer? What are you looking for by asking me to guess?

---

It's not RVS anymore, even though day 1 went by quick, a real opinion and a real vote is needed at this point and time. FoS SPS just not sure if you are scum or VI.

Bv310 unfortunately plays like this as scum or town, i agree lets not give him a free pass, but let's not get caught up on him and let people slip by.

So, whom do you suspect?

Look, I'd like to have a good reason for a vote right now, but I don't. I'm just a slow starter; my gut needs more to work with. I will "stay in RVS" as long as I need to.

Ckd, I said "misinterpret", not "misrepresent". And my stance on Parama is that Parama is he is about as likely to be scum as an average person.

I have sympathy for having trouble getting started, but you need to do more than report that you have no suspicions. Comment on events. Question people. What do you think of what Parama is saying? What Jack is saying? What I'm saying?

You can't just be reactive.

[ekiM]

Sorry, had an exam yesterday and needed more last-minute cramming than I was planning for.

ekiM, your reasons are ones that *look* good on paper but when you really analyze them they're full of crap logic and are completely false. Those are the types reasons that scum use, btw.

There was no reason to vote someone who obviously wasn't going to be lynched D1. So I bandwagoned because nobody would listen. I bet if we lynch ekiM he'll flip scum and I'll have been on two scum wagons instead of just one.

Hey guys, a revelation: ekiM is scum.

Literally the only reason you've given to suspect me is "I didn't like his reasons for voting me, so he must've been scum who couldn't find anyone else in the game to vote for". You've yet to explain how that makes sense. And it's pretty much the only thing you've said since you decided to vote for me yesterday...

How is putting the third vote on someone right at the start of the game trying to stay in the background?

How is it NOT staying in the background. You just do what is popular and roll with it.

It's more likely to get attention than putting a vote on someone who doesn't have one.

Those were the major things going on, those were the conclusions I drew from them. I wasn't going to pretend to get more out of them than I did.

Conclusions?!? Sorry, but "maybe town but maybe scum, we'll see" isn't a conclusion.

Semantics. Several people found Sens scummy for voting for ML. I didn't. I said so.

The first complaint that you had about me was that I random voted in a way you didn't like! My random vote might've helped move the game forwards, whereas Parama adopting a purely reactive stance early on seems like an attempt to hide in the foreground to me. Not super-strong, but enough to attract my suspicion, especially when he continues to post a bunch while saying almost nothing.

Ok, don't even try to pretend that my issue with you was "they way you random voted". It was the content of the post and how it went right with what everyone else was doing.

Now you are shifting the argument to say that your post "moved the game forward" and that because Parama didn't do that, I have to suspect him. No.

That's what I meant by "the way I random voted". Semantics again.

You said my read on Parama is crap because part of it is that he "random voted the wrong way". That's part of the reason you voted for me, because I "random voted the wrong way" by putting the third vote on someone.

I'm not saying anything about whom you do have to suspect. I'm saying it doesn't make sense to suspect me for using RVS behavior in my suspicion of someone when you did the same thing.

A "reactive stance" isn't scummy or contrived. It's a natural reaction that most people have. Something comes up that triggers a reaction and, well, there's bound to be that reaction.

Huh? Parama said "someone vote me so I can vote them". That's not at all the same thing as reacting naturally to something that's happened.

Parama, would you nightkill ani as scum?

Only a vig would kill Animorph, I'd think.

Or scum trying to set up Parama.

Hmm.

...

Question for you. Why did the scum kill fail last night? Inactivity by scum? Animorph protected the right person? Something else?

Doubt we had a SK and a vig. 3 kills in a 12 man game?

P.S. Parama is looking a little town now although I don't agree with his stance on ekiM.

Why? To both.

Okay, 1 catchup down, 2 to go.

First up, SPS.

Ckd seems town.

Parama, would you nightkill ani as scum?

Let's

vote: wolframnhart

.

What is the purpose of this question? How is introducing WIFOM into the game on page 8 helpful? Also, if you are suspicious of Parama, why vote for Wolf?

Next up, ekiM. I'm not a fan of his play so far. His calling me out at the start of the day for non-contributing when he has less posts than me is actually quite funny. I'm also a huge fan of his self-evaluation. "what he did say is all reasonable". That plus his IIoA for all of Day 1 and a good part of Day 2 means I'm going to

Vote: ekiM

This isn't a catch-up. You've asked one inconsequential query, looked at the person voting you, seen some other dudes voting for him, and added to it with crap reasons. This is your first post with content in the game, and you've still done zero analysis.

As for your "case", I had fewer posts than you but way more contribution. It's absolutely valid to point out you said NOTHING AT ALL on D1. What do you expect from a self-evaluation, and why is what I said scummy? And do you even know what IIoA means?

[ekiM]

KMD, I'm not sure how strong you think "people in the middle of the lynch wagon are more likely scum" is? Does it apply the same if the wagon is on a SK?

200 where you analyze why you think people got on the wagon is better...

Parama just kind of hopped on. Not in an RVS way, but in a bandwagon-near-lynch kind of way. This actually has me rethinking my stances on Parama, Steam, and ekiM.

There was no reason to vote someone who obviously wasn't going to be lynched D1. So I bandwagoned because nobody would listen.

Wait, what? So you're saying in post 112, on page 5, with 4 votes on Sens, it was obvious that I would not be lynched D1, and Sens was the lynch for the day? Or... what?

And you give no indication of this when you make your vote, you talk about how Sens must be scum because ani named him as scum and ani must be scum with me for naming you as scum, or some other BS.

"I bandwagoned because nobody would listen"... so it wasn't because you suspected him?

---

On DDD

a) kind of requires him to think that a lynch going through so early was at all likely... and I don't see why he would.
b) and c) I don't see why suspecting the person with zero intent to contribute is obv scum behavior.

---

hey, Jack. What were your two "very good reasons" for pushing a lynch on Sens? Why have I had to ask this like five times to get any sort of a response at all, and still not an answer? What are you looking for by asking me to guess?

[ekiM]

Why was there no point in doing otherwise? Why would you think the day was effectively over at that point?

[ekiM]

If you thought "there was no point doing otherwise" you must have thought there was no way to get another lynch that day? That his lynch was inevitable. Or what else?

Why did you think "there was no point doing otherwise"?

[ekiM]

At the point you voted, you didn't suspect Sens, thought there were no reasons behind his wagon, but thought his lynch was going to go through? And instead of arguing against the lynch you decided to contribute to the wagon you thought was bad?

[ekiM]

Unvote; Vote: Parama

.

[ekiM]

Prodded again.. sorry, I'm in the middle of exams, I'll try to be more active. Not much has changed though.

Parama said that he got onto the Sens wagon yesterday despite thinking there was no reason behind it. I think maybe people are noticing this less because Sens flipped scum, but remember the mafia wouldn't know Sens wasn't a townie. If you asked someone why they wagoned a townie and they said "Well, I had no reason to suspect them, actually I thought their wagon was full of shit, but I thought I'd just hop on anyway rather than try to stop it"... that's pretty damn scummy. There is no town reasons to act like that. It doesn't matter than Sens flipped SK, the way Parama joined the wagon was really scummy and I don't really get why it's not getting much attention.

His refusing to explain basically anything and saying "suspecting me is just dumb" "if you vote me you're stupid" doesn't help at all, nor does his unprompted name claim. Actually that makes it worse to me because he seems to have no explanation to give and is just waving those around instead.

I don't understand why SPS is voting for me. I noticed what KMD said about the way Parama got on the Sens wagon, then while Parama was online at the same time as me I quizzed him about it to see if there was any explanation. He didn't have one so I voted for him. Probably if I voted Parama before the conversation he would just start bitching instead of engaging, like he's done for most of the game.
+ the stuff other people have said, dumb stuff about parama's name claim, etc., i agree with the wagon on him too

I don't really get Jack's push on DDD, and just saying "MORE VOTES!" doesn't do anything to convince me. More analysis pls?

bv has still had one post with content all game. He needs to get active or else be replaced/lynched if he won't replace.

[ekiM]

Parama, simply asserting that people shouldn't suspect you isn't at all convincing. Nor is claiming your name. If you want people to stop suspecting you you should:

A) explain why their suspicions of you are ill-founded
B) do some scumhunting

At the moment you're doing neither. In fact, you're barely playing the game at all. Since the middle of yesterday all you've been doing is saying that I'm scum and you're not. Since post 167, more than a week ago, you've not given any analysis of anything, whatsoever. This refusal to engage with the game is scummy in and of itself.

What town motivation is there for you joining the Sens wagon yesterday? What is the case on me? What do you think of everybody else in the game aside from me or you?

[ekiM]

I've already done A, and I would be doing more B but nobody is listening to the scumhunting I've already done.

Yes, I am barely playing this game at all. This game is boring as hell. But I don't replace out of games except for policy reasons.

What town motivation was there for anyone joining the Sens wagon?

I already explained the case on you.

I don't care about everybody else at the moment. Yes, I am tunneling. Deal with it.

This game is boring largely because people aren't engaging with it. Acting like a broken record player loaded with the sound of a whinging child won't help.

A town motivation for joining the Sens wagon would be suspecting him. You've said you absolutely did not suspect him. So you joining his wagon when you thought he was in danger of being lynched makes you either scum or a monumental cretin.

You stated a super weak case on me a couple of weeks ago and refused to respond to the flaws Macavity and I pointed out in it. That's not enough.

I have been dealing with your blatantly anti-town behavior by pointing it out and asking for your death.

---

there is no "real" reason to lynch anyone day one...we only have assumptions and metas to go on (unless there is a night 0)..the statement from Para is silly.

Just feels like Day 1 to me I guess..the Sens lynch was so fast and we got lucky we nailed scum. I guess cases and arguements can be made from that lynch, but it still boils down to we nailed scum. Sure mafia has just as big a reason to quickly wagon an unknown (in this case a SK), but they also have a reason to stay off of the wagon (see bullshit, why did you jump on the Sens wagon cases)...being on or off that wagon is a null tell...and cases based on it are worthless.

You seem to be saying there is no meaningful day game in Mafia. I don't think that's true.

---

Jack's a competent player so I doubt he's a townie making a mistake. I don't see a scum motivation for coming out like that to take out one guy. I don't see any particular reason to believe DDD to be town.

Unvote; Vote: DDD

.

[ekiM]

I didn't lie, but I'm more interested in Parama and SPS at the moment, explain why later.

"Role-related information" is a clever way of saying "I really think so-and-so is scum and I want you guys to lynch him."

How did you

know

this Parama?

So have you taken back your claim of having role related info or? Or if you can't explain now, when will you? I'm not sure what you've done here, and finding it confusing.

You should add Mike to the list (though this conflicts with Parama unless extreme bussing has occurred) because he's seen me get called out by a paranoid cop in Second String Muppets before when I was town. He was scum and completely dropped his town read of me to play follow the cop, just like this game.

Fool me once, Mike, shame on you; fool me twice, Mike, shame on me. You're not pulling that shit on me twice.

Yes, I worry about mike, but that's a playstyle I misread a lot (he writes very carefully). I misread him as scum for a long time in gonzo.

Sure, but unlike the others who may or may not have been in a situation like this before I know Mike has done this before and should have the sense to be a bit more cautious.

Too bad no one manned up and defended me, that'd have been a nice town tell.

Unvote; Vote: ekiM

Game is stagnating and Mike should die for so casually tossing aside his read to play follow the alleged power role, put those two together and Mike needs more votes.

It's a fallacy to say that because I've done something as scum it means I wouldn't do it as town. I do actually believe that if someone comes out with role-related info as Jack did they're probably not scum sacrificing themselves to take out one guy. The difference between this game and Muppets is that there the cop was too careless to note the obvious hints that he was paranoid. I doubted Jack would claim info unless he thought it was solid. I trust his competence at this game so I deferred to him and was willing to follow his claimed power role. You haven't explained why anyone wouldn't. Yes, I've seen town roles get bad info before. That doesn't mean I discard claimed info out of hand.

I don't know what read you're saying I'm going back on. I don't have any particular reason to think you're town. Asserting that anyone who suspects you is stupid isn't actually persuasive to me.

Gah, stop messing with us, Jack. You're lucky there wasn't a Night 0 and/or I don't have a vig power.

DDD brings up a salient point in 306, so back to my previous vote.

Unvote, vote: ekiM

What's salient about it? I've seen DDD be implicated by bad info before. This means I should assume that any info claimed on him in future is bad? That doesn't make any sense.

Given that you also voted for DDD on Jack's say so, I don't really see where this vote is coming from.

[ekiM]

Steam Powered Shovel

- The claim is plausible, crumb is plausible, jibes well with him believing the miller claim, and his interaction with CKD. Questions: why did you claim before someone was threatening to hammer? What's the flavor justification for the granddad being a cop? Why did you investigate CKD? Not the lynch today I guess.

curiouskarmadog

: Which means CKD isn't either, and I didn't find him scummy before anyway.

Jack

- I find this guy hard to understand but I think his antics are town-motivated.

Kmd4390

- Provides most of the analysis I feel has been worthwhile today.

MacavityLock

- Feel he's town.

---

Parama

- Still a good lynch.

wolframnhart

- Kind of a lurker today... dark horse candidate for scum then.

Debonair Danny DiPietro

- I'm not sure if Jack is still claiming role info on this guy. But the way he reacted is off. It doesn't make sense to think I'm scum for not drawing some faulty conclusion based on the Muppets game.

horrordude0215/bv310

- bv310 total lurker. And horrordude is not making me think town. Question for you: if you don't think there's a need to rush the end of the day, why did you ask for a claim from SPS before someone was willing to hammer him?

Hmm.

Unvote; Vote: horrordude0215

.

[ekiM]

Got any previous games where you were an investigative role, Shovel?

[ekiM]

I don't have any problem believing Grandfather is in the game. I'm less happy with him being a cop with no given flavor justification. I don't see that we can lynch a claimed cop without something being more seriously wrong with the claim though.

The only lynch I will be happy with at this point is ekiM's.

I am tunneling, yes.

Narrating your anti-town behavior doesn't somehow make it acceptable.

It's a fallacy to say that because I've done something as scum it means I wouldn't do it as town. I do actually believe that if someone comes out with role-related info as Jack did they're probably not scum sacrificing themselves to take out one guy. The difference between this game and Muppets is that there the cop was too careless to note the obvious hints that he was paranoid. I doubted Jack would claim info unless he thought it was solid. I trust his competence at this game so I deferred to him and was willing to follow his claimed power role. You haven't explained why anyone wouldn't. Yes, I've seen town roles get bad info before. That doesn't mean I discard claimed info out of hand.

I don't know what read you're saying I'm going back on. I don't have any particular reason to think you're town. Asserting that anyone who suspects you is stupid isn't actually persuasive to me.

The fact that you've seen cops and other power roles get bad info means you shouldn't blindly follow them as you've done in this game (and this assumes a truthful claim which given Jack's erratic and aggresive style isn't a very safe assumption). You take your time to get the full truth instead of cravenly rushing to hide behind someone else's claim. And no, you didn't flop on a town read of me, but you did show a certain reticence and skepticism to my wagon that still makes your sudden conversion suspcious.

Everyone is aware that investigative roles can get bad info. That doesn't make it irrational to sometimes decide to follow claimed results. Especially in a pseudo-D1 with little information to go on due to the SK quicklynch. Saying that because I've seen you be implicated by bad info before I should be especially wary of it happening to you again is a bad argument.

Also, if I were lying about my beliefs, wouldn't I have been acutely aware that you'd remember Muppets and call me out for my skullduggery? So it must be the case that I do actually believe what I'm saying.

[ekiM]

Speaking of which, Shovel your vote for me is ill-placed. You're voting me for following Jack, which is something you should be OK with seeing as you did too. We only have a day and a half until deadline so who are you going to vote for?

[ekiM]

Oh wow, good point. Shovel what were you thinking Jack was doing then when you followed him?

[ekiM]

Speaking of which, Shovel your vote for me is ill-placed. You're voting me for following Jack, which is something you should be OK with seeing as you did too. We only have a day and a half until deadline so who are you going to vote for?

1) That's not my only reason for voting for you (and I don't like that you're implying that it's THE reason I'm voting for you).

Oh right, I'm sneakily trying to brainwash you by telling you you only have one reason for voting for me. Because that would work. No, I just forgot about your earlier reason. Come on.

There was a dialogue between you and Parama earlier that felt off to me.

Yeah, but your reasoning for why it's off is just weak sauce.

"I don't like ekiM's part in the exchange between him and Parama at the bottom of page 9. Why wait so long with the vote? It's fairly clear where it's going and if Parama had suddenly decided to deny it, that would be genuinely suspicious. ekiM seems more concerned about looking justified in voting for Parama here."

Here's what I said then, which you never responded to:

"I don't understand why SPS is voting for me. I noticed what KMD said about the way Parama got on the Sens wagon, then while Parama was online at the same time as me I quizzed him about it to see if there was any explanation. He didn't have one so I voted for him. Probably if I voted Parama before the conversation he would just start bitching instead of engaging, like he's done for most of the game."

2) The same action by 2 different players can still be interpreted very differently. I agree with the argument that the vote was out of place for you while I know that vote was not out of the ordinary for me.

You can say you "agree with the argument" but you've not said what's convincing about it. You've been linked to one game as scum where I followed a power role's claimed info. How does this mean ever following claimd info is "out of place" for me? It doesn't; it isn't. And Macavity who was also in that game doesn't seem to find the argument compelling.

Do you have any other suspicions at all at this point? After three-and-a-bit weeks?

[ekiM]

Also, if I were lying about my beliefs, wouldn't I have been acutely aware that you'd remember Muppets and call me out for my skullduggery? So it must be the case that I do actually believe what I'm saying.

Isn't this just straight up WIFOM? Here's nearly half a dozen thought process that could've justified your behavior in your mind...

1) Because you forgot you did the exact same thing in Muppets and thus thought the play was safe.

2) Because you knew you were doing the same thing as in Muppets, but you hoped I wouldn't remember it.

3) Because you knew you were doing the same thing as in Muppets, but you were hoping for my quicklynch and thus I wouldn't be able to object anyways.

4) Because you knew you were doing the same thing as in Muppets, but you figured you could argue that the move was technically correct even if it wasn't.

5) Because you knew you were doing the same thing as in Muppets, but you figured you could shake suspicion because of the WIFOM potential.

So, no, I'm not exactly buying the WIFOM back door you've left yourself as a sufficient defense of your play.

I don't generally do things as scum that blatantly contradict what I believe about Mafia theory, because that's a stupid and unnecessary thing to do and it's easy to get caught out.

If you don't care for that truth, it was an aside anyway. Here's my main "defence" which you seem to have just straight-up ignored: "Everyone is aware that investigative roles can get bad info. That doesn't make it irrational to sometimes decide to follow claimed results. Especially in a pseudo-D1 with little information to go on due to the SK quicklynch. Saying that because I've seen you be implicated by bad info before I should be especially wary of it happening to you again is a bad argument."

It's just not the case that it'd be incorrect to follow a claimed result today. I know you like to act outraged that anyone would ever vote for you, but it doesn't change anything. Following a claimed result on someone on a D2 like this where there has been little productive discussion and D1 was a quicklynch on an SK is fine.

There's no reason to believe that I don't believe that, or wouldn't make the rational judgement to follow Jack as town. Nothing you cite from Muppets changes that or has any relevance to this game. Everyone knows that roles can get bad info. The fact that you can cite a game where I've seen it happen is

totally

irrelevant.

[ekiM]

Deadline is tomorrow morning by the way, Cry me a River.

[ekiM]

Parama, a couple of weeks ago you had a hissy fit and stopped responding to anything. I'm not going to do the same you, but please actually respond to what I said here:

]

reaching for reasons to hold onto an RVS vote ofc

Weak. Why would scum have incentive to hold onto a random vote?

Still an open question.

They can't find a better reason to vote so they make stuff up to hold onto the only vote they can.

They can't find a better reason to vote so they make stuff up to hold onto the only vote they can.

Why is scum any more likely to do this than town?

Scum need reasons to push a lynch, regardless of their quality. Their goal is to lynch townies.

The question is: why would scum find it hard to find a reason to move their vote?

*headdesk*

If you agree with fail logic then I have no reason to be arguing with you, because you will just miss the point.

Dodging the question. Answer it.

ML, here's why my point is better than you think it is:

So, Parama. He asks people to vote him at the start so he can OMGUS. That's removing information about whom he chooses to go after. "Let's not worry about the miller claim, we should scumhunt" then... doesn't scumhunt. And spams a page arguing about meta. Fine with this vote.

1. Doesn't even consider that it was an RVS vote
2. Accuses me of not scumhunting even though I was and am scumhunting
3. Didn't spam a page - others started the argument after I brought it up, and it's an argument I've had 100 times and am tired of. Stupid reason

Look at how BS his reasons to vote me are. There's really nothing there.

And this is all the content he provides D1 (I admit, it was short, but still...)

And then in ISO 4 he calls my vote on him OMGUS even though I provided plenty of reasoning to vote him (the same reasoning I

restated

here).

Here were your positive contributions up to that point:

ISO 0-6: nothing

7: I need to scumhunt.

8: Gut says one of the Sens votes is scum. I like my vote for how Jack is acting.

9: Jack is pushing a sensfan lynch without providing reasoning!

10-14: Nothing.

15: Jack, why should we lynch Sensfan?

Summary: one of the Sens voters is scum. Jack is pushing Sens without giving reasons. Zero analysis whatsoever on either point. Since then you've made about 20 more posts to say "I suspect ekiM for suspecting me with reasons I don't like".

You are active lurking, not scumhunting, and it's suspect. You're posting a lot in this game so you must be paying it some attention but I see no evidence you're actually thinking about the game in a critical way and trying to figure out people's motivations.

If you think the amount of content I provided D1 was so low as to be scummy, what do you think of those who provided less? What do you think about the relative content levels people are providing today?

If you think I'm active lurking then you obviously don't understand my logic.

I think you're active lurking because you have made 36 posts and said only a handful of things:

Claiming as miller is OK.

My gut says one person on SensFan is scum.

Jack isn't explaining his push on SensFan, and I don't like it.

ekiM's case on me is so bad he just has to be scum.

The scum are Sens, Ani, ekiM.

ekiM's case on me is so bad he just has to be scum.

I don't understand why CKD is asking SPS about me.

I'm not active lurking!

The depth of analysis on any of this is at most wafer-thin. I've not seen a credible attempt at analysis of anyone's motivation for doing anything.

---

As for your logic, it goes something like this:

• ekiM's reasons for suspecting me are terrible.
  
  
• Scum are more likely to suspect for terrible reasons.
  
  
• => ekiM is likely scum.

I've pointed out problems with your logic in 176. You just ignored that, preferring to say "well, you just don't understand!". To recap:

• My reasons for suspecting you were sensible.
  
  
• There's no reason why scum would find it hard to move their vote.
  
  
• There's no reason why scum can't find plausible suspicions to use.

Try answering.

You still haven't responded to this, just said "This is an oversimplification". Ok, so what is your logic then? WHY is "holding onto a vote" something scum are more likely to do? Is it really that hard to think of a reason to move your vote around?

---

As for the points you raised in your last few posts:

I don't like ekiM's part in the exchange between him and Parama at the bottom of page 9. Why wait so long with the vote? It's fairly clear where it's going and if Parama had suddenly decided to deny it, that would be genuinely suspicious. ekiM seems more concerned about looking justified in voting for Parama here.

Unvote, vote: ekiM

Guys, this is exactly the point of my posts on page 9 and throughout the game. I’m just flat-out telling the truth – yes, the truth may not be what you guys want to hear, but it’s better than lying. And SPS has picked up on that. And sees why ekiM is scum. He’s a pretty cool guy in that way.

Saying "Yes, I have been acting in a blatantly anti-town way, aren't I honest for admitting that?" doesn't somehow make it OK.

Also I'd love to hear from someone how voting for someone at the end of a conversation is a scumtell.

---

ekiM:

(the moment you’ve all been waiting for)

So, Parama. He asks people to vote him at the start so he can OMGUS. That's removing information about whom he chooses to go after. "Let's not worry about the miller claim, we should scumhunt" then... doesn't scumhunt. And spams a page arguing about meta. Fine with this vote.

Reaching for reasons to hold onto a vote. I've been over this before. This is just terrible.

No, you've stopped responding and engaged sulky-child mode when you can't think of why this is actually scummy. See the top of this post.

bv310

- The only game relevant thing he did yesterday in 6 posts was make a random vote.

DDD

- Asked why he should vote Sensfan.

Steam-Powered Shovel

- Said almost nothing.

wolframnhart

- Said almost nothing. Ho hum.

Vote: bv310

. Say something.

Calls out 4 people for saying nothing... and only waits for a response from one. Pretty weak. That's basically "lynch all lurkers".

It's pretty obvious I want more content from all of them.

Also, from the same post.

Parama

- Reactive in RVS. Made 27 posts and said about three non-trivial things. Votes for me because I voted for him. Yippee.

He throws off my case as me OMGUS voting. This is blatant misrep and he's obviously not even paying attention to my reasons.

No, I listened to you reasons and critiqued them. Eventually you stopped responding and started whining instead. SEE ABOVE.

Shovel, yesterday you were asking wolframnhart to follow you onto Para. Now you're voting for wolf. What, if anything has changed?

Seeming like he wants to turn the town against me but doesn't vote himself and doesn't give much real reasoning. He wants others to make the case for him.

No, I was asking why he seemingly changed his opinion without reasoning (turns out the D1 vote was random). You know, scumhunting?

This from you is what reaching actually looks like, by the way, making up bizarre contrived scummy motivations for stuff that has a much simpler explanation.

ISO 6 he makes a wall about how he finds me scummy and then proceeds to hold onto his bv vote. Um, hello? Did you lose your brain? Did you have it in the first place?

It's possible to suspect more than one person at once. It's possible to have more than one person you want to apply pressure to.

You're awfully insulting for no good reason. I shan't respond in kind, but I'd ask you to can it. It adds nothing.

As for your logic, it goes something like this:

• ekiM's reasons for suspecting me are terrible.
  
  
• Scum are more likely to suspect for terrible reasons.
  
  
• => ekiM is likely scum.

Oversimplifying my logic - he doesn't understand it (it's not too difficult to grasp) so he tries to blow it off as worthless. He also accuses me of active lurking even though I'm certainly scumhunting.

Next post is more of the same - still blowing off my reasons as "worthless"

You realize you haven't actually responded here, right? If you think that's not the logic of your position, EXPLAIN WHAT YOUR POSITION IS.

ISO 10-12: He completely misses the point. He's singling me out for a vote that I admit was bandwagoning... while most votes on the wagon were nothing more than that, though several players would try to cover that up. And he finally votes me because of this one little thing, not everything else. Reaching for reasons more? I'm just being truthful - I don't have to lie to make a good case.

Supporting a wagon you totally don't agree with and previous argued against for no reason whatsoever is amazingly scummy. Saying "Yes, I did that. Aren't I honest?" doesn't change that, at all.

"Reaching"... you keep using that word...

Jack's a competent player so I doubt he's a townie making a mistake. I don't see a scum motivation for coming out like that to take out one guy. I don't see any particular reason to believe DDD to be town.

Unvote; Vote: DDD

.

"blah blah blah Parama is scum guys blah blah blah oh hey the DDD wagon is taking off I'm going to appeal to Jack and join it."

Did you see any particular reason to believe DDD to be scum? You didn't give any and you haven't done so prior to this post.

Because Jack claimed to have role related info for believing him to be scum. Duh?

MacavityLock

- Feel he's town.

Parama

- Still a good lynch.

....

horrordude0215/bv310

- bv310 total lurker. And horrordude is not making me think town. Question for you: if you don't think there's a need to rush the end of the day, why did you ask for a claim from SPS before someone was willing to hammer him?



Hmm.

Unvote; Vote: horrordude0215

.

3 things to point out.

1. Lack of willingness to comment on ML. Just gives town read with no reasons and little mention of him all game.

2. More pushing of my lynch... he's not voting me anymore, if he supports my lynch then he should be on it.

3. Gives the most reason for the wagon being built up - just an excuse to wagon with Jack again. Why are you buddying Jack so much, anyways?

1. He's not done anything I think is scummy and I agree with most of what he says.
2. It's possible to suspect more than one person at once.
3. I'm voting for horrordude because I suspect him.

There's just nothing to make me feel he's town and plenty leading me to believe he's scum. Add to the fact that he's extreme distancing from ML (the other scummiest player) and guys I think we've found our team!

Seriously, I ctrl+f'ed his entire ISO and found about 7 mentions of ML in all.

You realize your whole case for ML being scum is predicated on me being scum? Circular logic much?

[ekiM]

Glad to replace in! I'm so psyched (this was the oldest large theme game that I was familiar with)

So I've never tried this before, but I know I like it when replacements do it and refresh my memory, so if I like it, must be good. Here goes nothing (and by nothing I mean a page by page analysis).

Page 1

Confirmations

Wolf does what I would have done and policy votes bv. Good job wolf!

Parama bandwagon

Beginnings of Sens bandwagon

Page 2

Hey look, Sens, bv, and animorph are all from the same place! MS reunion!

KMD "serious" votes ekiM, seriously? Later reiterates how scummy he find ekiM

ML claims Miller and has a "semi-random" vote on SPS for trying to force a joke

Sens vote ML for claiming miller

Parama wins town points for reaction to miller claim

Page 3

Wolf gains town points for his open mind about miller claim

I like Parama's scumhunt joke, but KMD ruins it and takes it too seriously

Parama and KMD argue about JackScum because Jack didn't provide reason for his vote. Guess who else didn't? Kmd! +scum points

Parama's sig is awesome +awesome points

Yet another pointless meta argument that just sidetracks town

Parama points out that argument is just sidetracking town +town points

KMD finally posts reason for saying ekiM is scum.

ekiM, however, is legitimately scummy trying to stay in the background by jumping the main wagon and contributing to the popular joke.

For the same reason Parama suspected Jack, that you shot down? +scum points

Page 4

Sens selfvotes +scum points

ML says Sens' selfvote is very townie. +dumb points

DDD and Jack argument-I think Jack is just trying to be funny, but DDD has a good point +little town points

ekiM says he has never seen a miller claim, but then says that some people do like to lynch millers. Also has bullshit reasons for find Parama scummy. +scum points

I've never played with a miller claim. I've read games with them. I've read MD discussion about them.

Reasons for voting Parama not bullshit.

SPS chimes in saying he likes his vote on Parama. No reasoning. +little scum points

CKD says that "ML is not the lynch for today" which I don't like. If you find him scummiest, you vote/lynch him, no matter what his claim. Maybe just a slip of the tongue, so I'll let it by for now.

Sens switches from voting himself to voting Jack because he is voting him for no reason

Page 5

Animorph distracts the town with meaningless banter

Jack continues to tunnel Sens

Parama drops suspicions and bandwagons Sens with no reasoning

ML makes a protown vig comment +town points

KMD drops suspicions and bandwagons Sens with no reasoning

Sens hammers himself. +Fuck you points

Page 6

Wolf says that Sens is probably a frustrated townie but leaves a caveat at the end. Trying too hard to appear town? +little scum points

Twilight banter. Hey, look Bv returns after lynch. +scum points

Probably still at least on scum on this list due to the SK flip:

SensFan (7) bv310, curiouskarmadog, animorpherv1, Jack, Parama, Kmd439, SensFan

ekiM's 143 is actually pretty sweet +town points (Question though, were you working on this during the night or did you do it after the lynch?)

I wrote the whole post after daybreak of D2.

SPS and Jack vote without reasoning. If you know my meta, I hate this. +little scum points

ekiM's objective standpoint on himself should not be read as protown. He SHOULD answer his own question to himself though.

Two reasons: I wanted to see if bv could be pressured into providing content, as he was the least content D1. I wanted to see if Parama would behave more reasonably if I was voting someone else for a while. No and no.

[ekiM]

By the way, I forgot to ask, is there any claims that have occurred up to this point and is there any reason I should claim now (I have found it useful in games that I replace into to claim upon replacing to clear myself).

ML claimed miller right at the start.
Sensfan was SK and lynched.
Ani was Doc.
Parama claimed the role name "Westley" for no reason at all.
SPS claimed Cop, "Grandfather" with an innocent on CKD N1.
Horror just claimed hider.

[ekiM]

Parama, a couple of weeks ago you had a hissy fit and stopped responding to anything. I'm not going to do the same you, but please actually respond to what I said here:

I'm not responding when the whole argument against me makes no sense and you're failing to respond properly.

This is a joke. You completely failed to explain why me holding on to a vote was scummy. You still haven't. You've "failed to respond properly" to most of what people have said all game, as you've cheerfully acknowledged "I'm just tunneling LOL!!!" "SORRY, only interested in ekiM right now!!".

As for the points you raised in your last few posts:

Saying "Yes, I have been acting in a blatantly anti-town way, aren't I honest for admitting that?" doesn't somehow make it OK.

Also I'd love to hear from someone how voting for someone at the end of a conversation is a scumtell.

I'll admit to screwing up because I have nothing to hide.

You can keep saying that but it's not actually any kind of a defense.

And it's not simply voting me at the end, it's your reasons and the fact that you waited so goddamn long to vote me.

And why is this scummy?

It's pretty obvious I want more content from all of them.

Then why did you vote one over the other 3?

Because I only have one vote and bv had the least content so far. Is this meant to be a serious question?

This from you is what reaching actually looks like, by the way, making up bizarre contrived scummy motivations for stuff that has a much simpler explanation.

I'm working out what the most likely explanation for each scenario is.

The most likely explanation for someone asking why someone suddenly changed their opinion on someone else is not "because they're trying to subtly turn the town against the someone else". It's "because they want to know why the someone suddenly changed opinion.

It's possible to suspect more than one person at once. It's possible to have more than one person you want to apply pressure to.

You're awfully insulting for no good reason. I shan't respond in kind, but I'd ask you to can it. It adds nothing.

I'm sorry, when scum makes themselves so obvious yet nobody seems to care I get pretty pissed.

I'm not scum. The reason you've given for suspecting me are garbage. Sorry. If you're town, reassess this game.

You were being rude to other people too. It's just unnecessary.

You realize you haven't actually responded here, right? If you think that's not the logic of your position, EXPLAIN WHAT YOUR POSITION IS.

I explained my logic first, THEN you simplified it. And I went over it again in 402. You're just not even trying to respond to it.

Bull. You said "I've been over this before".

Supporting a wagon you totally don't agree with and previous argued against for no reason whatsoever is amazingly scummy. Saying "Yes, I did that. Aren't I honest?" doesn't change that, at all.

It doesn't change what I did, but I'm admitting to a mistake. The point about oversimplifying my logic is a mistake you're not willing to admit to, so you keep pushing it. That's how I know I'm right.

I'd be willing to discuss your logic if you didn't refuse to do so. Direct quote from you in this game (to ML): "If you agree with fail logic then I have no reason to be arguing with you, because you will just miss the point." --> this is just a blatant refusal to engage with someone because they disagree with you.

Because Jack claimed to have role related info for believing him to be scum. Duh?

And you believed him without a second thought? Did you ever stop to question him?

(Note: I knew he was lying but I voted anyways because I knew Jack had reason to find him suspicious and I tend to trust the reads of my townish reads. Plus nobody was switching to ekiM anyways :/)

I believed him after thinking about it a bit.

1. He's not done anything I think is scummy and I agree with most of what he says.

Examples?

Huh? There are no examples of someone not doing something, and I'm not about to quote most of what he's said.

2. It's possible to suspect more than one person at once.

But you appear to be suspecting me the most out of everyone, yet your vote is in a different place.

No, I

dislike

you most, almost viscerally. That's different. Horrordude is more likely to be scum, which is why I'm voting for him.

3. I'm voting for horrordude because I suspect him.

You suspect me too, so why aren't you voting me? This contradicts your last point.

Because I suspect horrordude most and I only have one vote. What the fuck? How is this worth asking? This really is a waste of time.

[ekiM]

It's not a valid point. I still don't understand why a scum is any more likely to hold onto a random vote than a townie would.

They're not actually scumhunting, they don't feel like coming up with good "real" reasons to suspect someone so they hold on to what they've already got in hopes to push a lynch without much effort.

Scum want to look like town. It's not hard, at all, to come up with something that looks like plausible scumhunting.

The only time this logic would work is if someone's scum game is A) incredibly lazy B) too stupid to come up with something that looks like scumhunting. Mine is neither.

[ekiM]

Not much time to post right now, just going to say that ML is keeping his cool under pressure while ekiM is getting incredibly pissed and is attacking me directly instead of my case, which is not the reaction of a townie to a good case. So ekiM is definitely still top of the priority list.

In 434 and 435 I absolutely attack your case. I also say "I dislike you". Maybe that was uncalled for, but it doesn't somehow mean the rest of those posts isn't attacks on your case.

Your case isn't good. Once again you're refusing to defend the old stuff on the merits. A lot of the new stuff you said is just terrible. "Why did you only vote for the least-content giving guy at the start of D2?" "The most likely explanation for asking someone why they changed their opinion is a subtle plot to drive town's opinion" "Why are you voting for horrordude if you suspect us both, this is clearly a contradiction".

---

I don't see any reason horrordude would be able to claim "I am Westley's lover that Humperdinck tried to marry" but not "I am Buttercup". Hider is a weak role that scum like to claim, and he's even claimed a variant that doesn't have the pesudo-investigative power of the normal one. The second and third best lynches also claimed or soft-claimed.

Still think we should kill horrordude. But we have 4 more days to decide now.

---

As for Parama's claim that he can confirm horrordude's role:

1) Role confirmation isn't alignment confirmation. I've read games with a commuter/hider as scum. Seems especially plausible when horror says "only hiding with the SK will kill me". Would be similar to a bulletproof-only GF in a game with an SK.
2) The ways I can think of that horrordude's claim could be "confirmed" are either only partial confirmation, bad ideas, or don't make sense with the game so far. No, don't explain further.
3) I don't trust Parama to breathe without screwing up.

[ekiM]

In Futurama Mafia the mafia were Leela, Fry, and Mom. In Family Guy Mafia the mafia were Brian, Meg, and Bonny. There's no reason to assume the scum in a farside theme game are the obvious characters. Otherwise we'd just ask everyone to claim their name and lynch the villains from the source material.

And, hey, fakeclaims.

---

re: your original reason for voting for me. It's so weak it's hard to rebut. Like, there's almost no logic to point out the flaw in.

I made a couple of big catch up posts, including noting that Parama apparently didn't suspect Sens when he voted for him. Parama responded, confirming he thought there was no point in doing anything other than bandwagoning. I asked why. He didn't have an explanation why, repeated that he had no reason to suspect Sens. I asked again. He said "because the wagon was illogical but grew". I asked one last time for him to confirm what he was saying. He did. I voted for him.

Why is it scummy to vote for him at the end? At what point would you liked me to have voted for him? If I voted him instead of asking him to confirm one last time, would that be ok? I really don't get this.

Your posited scummy motivation for waiting until the end of the conversation, "ekiM looks like he was concerned in looking justified in voting for Parama" is contrived. You yourself said it was fairly obvious where the conversation was going. Why would it look less justified to vote him as soon as he said "Yes, I bandwagoned him without suspecting him"? If it was I'm baffled how giving someone a chance to explain their action then voting them when they don't have an explanation is scummy. Should I be voting people before letting them explain themselves, is that a better idea?

Especially having trouble understanding how giving someone a chance to explain their blatantly anti-town behavior then voting them when they don't is scummier than, say,

acting in a blatantly anti-town way

??

---

re: DDD's meta reason for voting for me. You've ignored my comments on this. You've not explained

why

you find this a compelling point. You've not explained

why

one scum game where I follow claimed info as scum means it's "out of place" for me to follow claimed info as town.

---

And I have to ask,

again

: are these the only suspicious things you've found after three weeks of play? That I voted someone at the end of a conversation, and some nonsensical meta argument you can't even be bothered to defend? Nothing else scummy has happened? You have no other suspects?

[ekiM]

And what if I told you that

I can confirm if Horror is telling the truth or not,

if you give it a night

?

I could fullclaim and explain to you why

Horror's claim

is

almost certainly true

but I'm not going to do that.

Now that's an interesting discrepancy.

---

ekiM, it's scummy because you built up all these arguments prior to the conversation yet in the end you were just paying lip service without acting upon it.

What is scummy about building arguments against one player whilst also applying pressure elsewhere? Why is that something scum is likely to do? What is the scum motivation? Why wouldn't town do it?

And once again we have arguments in this game of the form "I don't like the way X did Y" instead of "the way X did Y is more likely to be scum motivated than average, because...". Ugh.

And then after a conversation over one minor point you vote. It's like you were just waiting for a chance to jump on me but you couldn't find a good one.

It makes no sense to say that I was "looking for a chance to jump on you". I'd been voting you on D1, if I wanted to continue to vote for you it would've been a perfectly natural thing to do at any point. As it happens I preferred to try and put some pressure on bv to contribute. That didn't go anywhere, so I moved my vote back to you after you admitted to something especially scummy.

Admitting that you bandwagoned Sens, in the expectation that he'd be lynched, despite not suspecting him, at all, is not "a minor point". It's really scummy. That you frankly admitted it

once called out on it

didn't make it OK.

---

Also ekiM please stop directly attacking me. Ad hominem does not make for good town play.

I'll note that this is amusingly hypocritical and leave it at that.

[ekiM]

I don't generally do things as scum that blatantly contradict what I believe about Mafia theory, because that's a stupid and unnecessary thing to do and it's easy to get caught out.

If you don't care for that truth, it was an aside anyway. Here's my main "defence" which you seem to have just straight-up ignored: "Everyone is aware that investigative roles can get bad info. That doesn't make it irrational to sometimes decide to follow claimed results. Especially in a pseudo-D1 with little information to go on due to the SK quicklynch. Saying that because I've seen you be implicated by bad info before I should be especially wary of it happening to you again is a bad argument."

And I'm saying that the Muppets game disproves the theory that it's good play to automatically follow someone claiming PR and that after that no rational person should do so blindly. I cannot believe your position is authentic and thus you're stuck using (one of) the reasons I listed previously to try and cover for the mistake you made trying to sheep behind a pseudo-claim like that.

Muppets has got zip to do with this game. Everybody knows roles can get bad info. That's the only thing your meta from that game brings about me: that I know that roles can get bad info. Everybody knows that. I knew it before I played Muppets. Doesn't mean I can't make the judgment call that I want to follow someone's claimed info in this game. Why would it? Info is right way more often than wrong, no merit to scum coming out like Jack did, not much to go on today. Based on that I decided I wanted to follow Jack. How does this make me scum?

Your logic implies that everyone who followed Jack and is aware roles can get bad info must be scum. Nope.

[ekiM]

Your logic implies that everyone who followed Jack and is aware roles can get bad info must be scum. Nope.

I'm willing to bet a majority of them are idiots and hacks who could actually hold the terrible position of "lol follow power roles". I know you aren't an idiot or hack which is why you holding that position is uniquely terrible.

Parama - I'll give you that one.
Macavity - Nope.
Shovel = CES - Nope.
Kmd - Nope.

I don't think it's

true

that being willing to follow claimed role info on D2 after a low-info D1 is a terrible position.

And once again we have arguments in this game of the form "I don't like the way X did Y" instead of "the way X did Y is more likely to be scum motivated than average, because...". Ugh.

That's because scum don't only make intentional mistakes. It's quite possible for scum to betray himself without making a play that's scum-motivated.

In which case one should explain

why

that action betrays scum alignment more than town alignment.

He can't specifically nameclaim or be modkilled but he can still claim exactly who he is?

Which is weird, sure. I don't see how it's scummy though.

It's scummy if we think it means he might be fakeclaiming.

[ekiM]

Unvote; Vote: DDD

[ekiM]

Interactions with DDD:

CryMeARiver

wolframnhart

DDD never mentioned wolf or CMAR. wolf never mentioned DDD.

In CMAR's analysis of the first six pages he gives DDD town points for the D1 Jack vs DDD argument. Later he says "In what I have analyzed DDD hasn't come up that much, so I don't really have a read on him." Makes futile votes for the whole day.

Suspect.

Kmd4390

Early D2 DDD says he likes what he's seen from KMD but adds a caveat that KMD is tricky scum. Later says he doesn't think KMD's VC analysis is useful.

KMD called DDD Parama's scumbuddy in 210, quickly switches to voting for DDD. Keeps that stance until Jack claims role info, accuses Parama of bussing. When DDD wagon evaporates moves to other people. Not on the final DDD lynch.

Pretty good, D2 attacks on DDD seem like an actual attempt to move town against him.

Steam Powered Shovel

Only mentions DDD to ask him a fluff question, until putting on L-1 and asking for a claim after Jack claims role related reasons. When that falls apart he thinks DDD brings up a salient point (i.e., bullshit meta arguments) and votes me. That's pretty much all he's done since then, even now DDD has flipped.

DDD only mentions shovel to answer that question ("what do you think of parama vs ekiM").

Suspect.

horrordude0215

bv310

DDD voted bv early trying to get him to contribute. "Unimpressed" with his later contribution. Mentions horror only to ask about Parama's claims of role info, and to finally move to his wagon as it looked like that was the day's lynch. Does criticize him a bit at that point but not before...

Horror said he has a scum read on DDD, requested a claim from DDD. Final message thinking he will be lynched is "Jack and DDD are scum".

Looks OK. Came into the game firing at DDD. Was also the competing wagon yesterday or course.

MacavityLock

DDD never mentioned Macavitylock.

Demanded content from DDD. Voted DDD early on D2 when Jack was kind of hinting at role info. Later came back to this when Jack claimed info on DDD explicitly. Undermines DDD's BS on me. At the end of the day moves from horror to DDD, the second vote there, leaving 3 horror, 2 DDD, giving KMD and myself the chance to make DDD the lynch.

Finding that DDD never mentioned ML gave me a second's pause, but ML's actions towards DDD look good.

Parama

Early DDD said Parama vs Me made Parama look scummy, later changed to "town vs town". Wonders why Parama name-claimed. Questions Parama's lack of content. Votes Parama when Parama votes him. Later says he thinks Parama is an idiot, but votes with him...

Parama never mentions DDD before Jack-claim. Votes him. Back to me once DDD evaporates. Wonders if KMD's vote for DDD is random. Says SPS's claim request on DDD "looks like a post to force a claim" (no shit?). Criticises horror for suspecting DDD and requesting a claim on him. Criticises ML for voting DDD after Jack claims (which Para also did...). Says ML is buddying me for underlining DDD's BS on me. Says Jack's early case on DDD is fairly solid (although Para NEVER mentioned it at the time). His DDD PBP is mostly "oh i don't like your scumhunting", but he does actually give a good point in that DDD copped out of his reads. Gives him the ol' FoS (but he named half the game as scum, with DDD rather far down the list).

Suspect. Stuff after Jack-claim looks a lot like last minute distancing. Criticises people for suspecting DDD is bad. Saying Jack's early case was solid much later but ignoring it at the time is bad.

Jack

Argument about lynching Sens. Argument about bv. Jack makes an early D2 case on DDD. Later claims role info which nearly gets DDD lynched. Resists DDD asking him to vote for me. Right at the end of D2 switched to DDD again which leads to him being lynched.

Very good. If this was bussing it was risky and high-quality.

ekiM

Early on DDD called me townie and agreed with my reasoning a lot, attempting to get me on side. Later tries to lead some BS push on me for most of the rest of D2.

I didn't understand Jack's early case on DDD. Voted him on Jack's say so. Thought of him as scummy since then, especially with his BS on me. And, whaddayouknow, I make the last vote of the day which switches the lynch from horror to DDD.

[ekiM]

My suspects are CMAR, SPS, and Parama.

Parama should give a full and complete claim in detail. Especially whether he had info on whether rolename is correlated with alignment. What do you mean "ignore my RB comments"? Why? Who did you target N1 and why didn't you say so yet?

SPS, does DDD flipping scum change your opinion about the quality of his meta on me any? Did you ever think it was good? Is this vote just continuation based on "I didn't like the way he voted Parama at the end of a conversation"? If so, have you actually thought about this game at all for, like, the last three weeks?

horror, Jack led two lynches on scum. Including saving you from being lynched. How are you seeing this as anti-town? Because you don't like his posting style..?

So you're not going to even consider an ekiM vote? I know you're town Jack but you really think I'm scum?

Random WIFOM time!

If I was scum with DDD, why did I jump on the wagon when it first formed without giving a real reason?
If I was scum with DDD, why wouldn't I have voted him when I posted right around deadline? Scum would love the bussing points, I'd think.

Yes these are WIFOM. But really, there's no good answer to these questions.

Why would scum pull away from a wagon likely to go through to lynch in order to bus a buddy to a lynch? Makes no sense. I can only see a townie doing that.

I guess this explains why you're no longer holding on to your vote for me.

[ekiM]

If you missed it, it's not clear what exactly you're claiming.

Do you have any mod-confirmed info on whether the other rolenames are correlated with alignment? What do you mean "ignore my RB comments"? Why? Who did you target N1 and why didn't you say so yet?

[ekiM]

Quick thought: what do people think about massclaim today?

[ekiM]

@Mod: Would you kindly prod KMD if possible?

[ekiM]

I like the way my three suspects all want mass claim. Heh.

Based on interactions I think CMAR is our best bet today.

Vote: CryMeARiver

.

@Mod & All: V/LA until Wednesday 23rd.

[ekiM]

Parama and SPS continue to base their votes on early reads on the guy who A) decided to kill scum yesterday and B) was being pushed by scum. They give no attempt whatsoever at arguments or attempts to persuade people to vote with them. Thing is, I can't figure the point of this behavior, whatever their alignment is.

I really don't think scum would pull off one player to jump onto another player that happens to be scum as well

Why would scum pull away from a wagon likely to go through to lynch in order to bus a buddy to a lynch? Makes no sense. I can only see a townie doing that.

If ekiM isn't scum (there's about .001% chance of this) then CMAR is next in line. Hell, if there's 2 scum left then both are scum but ekiM still needs to die first.

Massive fail. And yet interactions mean CMAR is still a better lynch.

I don't have much else to say at this point. Twiddling my thumbs until deadline. We have a big problem if the scum is not in these three.

[ekiM]

Are you really this bad at logic? That is the question I have to ask myself.

[ekiM]

And horror reached that first so he would've been lynched. Except I moved my vote. Which killed DDD.

[ekiM]

Sounds good to me.

[ekiM]

Grandson, townie.

[ekiM]

I don't have time for a complete catch-up + thoughts right now. Hopefully tomorrow.

Flavor for Dread Pirate Roberts = miller, grandfather = cop is fine.

Last scum is Vizzini and kill flavor has changed because it's him carrying out the kill now? I question how common a roleblocker that can also kill the same night is. But I don't really know. I don't think any particular role is more or less likely to be given as a fakeclaim.

Doubt there's an extra kill running around from a poisoner.. we already saw an SK and a mafia kill in a 12p game. And where did the mafia kill go if KMD was an "extra" death? If KMD was poisoned he'd have just said so...

Still don't understand horror's name-claim ban. Doesn't seem like something that would be made up though?

Parama should've investigated the claimed miller (off chance).

It's dangerous to assume things like "scum would definitely be on that D1 wagon". Ain't so.

... and loads of mac vs Jack stuff I need to digest.

---

Interactions, jack vs mac, setup stuff comes later

SPS, Parama, horror need to be saying more than they are.

[ekiM]

VOTE: Steam-Powered Shovel

I will have limited access this week.

[ekiM]

Question to ekiM and Parama: if I were scum, wouldn't I have just claimed Vizzini (since that would presumably be my real role and he was the cop in the last Princess Bride in which he survived till endgame despite questionable results) and left the safe claim to the count fellow?

Why would I claim Grandfather instead of Vizzini

Under that thinking why wouldn't any hypo-Vizzini just claim their real role right now? If we're demoting flavor in importance why can't the Grandfather be scum?

Is this game balanced without a cop on the town's side?

I think so.. depends what a swordsman is.

Why would this game contain an additional Dread Pirate Roberts even though Westley is the Dread Pirate Roberts (note that there's a good reason why ML would've had to make up a role name)?

Westley wasn't always the Dread Pirate Roberts, and the flavor for DPR fits well with being a miller.

And what good reason is that..?

---

If I'm going to vote for Jack or Mac I need the case summarized for me pls.

[ekiM]

Ah, so that was a town-town fight. SPS you're right nobody really explained what set-up you were scum under but it existed and you'd been scummy all game. Mac really hadn't.

Good game. Thanks to farside for modding + fun flavor and to all players.

Quite pleased with my performance here. Managed to make the right decisions in the end and see past the false positives.

---

I think the set-up was decent and good flavor (liking the torturer thing especially).

Was Sens's win condition actually just the standard SK one?

Would Mac have appeared as the Prince to Parama? As an ally to SPS?

I think things would've been clearer if people with role-info had been explicitly told, for example, "the prince is anti-town and the princess is town" or "the six-fingered man is anti-town". Otherwise you get the tendency to just ignore role flavor as a possible trick.

I don't see the need for horror's nameclaim restriction. Or the 75%-ness of the doc.

75% Doctor
Limited name-cop
Limited name-cop
Hider
Miller
Townie
Townie
Townie

Goon
Roleblocker/Vote remover
Traitor/Rolecop

SK

Dunno if this game was balanced or not. It seemed tough going for town, getting 3 lynches correct in a row then still being 2 mislynches from defeat. And that could've been worse if the SK didn't die early. On the other hand we managed a perfect game with almost no useful help from PRs...

[ekiM]

The scum here is obvious.

vote: ekiM

.

*headdesk*

If you agree with fail logic then I have no reason to be arguing with you, because you will just miss the point.

If you think I'm active lurking then you obviously don't understand my logic.

Hey guys, a revelation: ekiM is scum.

I've already made an ekiM case and it's the lynching I'm sticking with today. There's not much else to do, this game is kinda boring. If people aren't voting ekiM then there's nothing I can do to move this game forward.

I could totally retype up my ekiM case in a single post but I doubt that would be worth my time.

I'm still tunneling on ekiM if you didn't figure it out.

SPS is right though

.-. ekiM is a good lynch and deadline lynches ARE lame.

Like I said, CKD is town and

SPS is not a good lynch

. Why don't you guys listen to me?

The only lynch I will be happy with at this point is ekiM's.

I am tunneling, yes.

Scumlist:
ekiM-MacavityLock (the actual scum)
horror
DDD
Kmd

Not much time to post right now, just going to say that ML is keeping his cool under pressure while ekiM is getting incredibly pissed and is attacking me directly instead of my case, which is not the reaction of a townie to a good case. So ekiM is definitely still top of the priority list.

The case is good though .-.

I think I would rather

unvote

vote: ekiM

*sigh*

WHOOPS DEADLINE PASSED AND I'M NOT CHANGING MY VOTE ANYWAYS. NOT THAT I NEED TO. I BET WE JUST LYNCHED THE MOST POWERFUL TOWN ROLE ON ACCIDENT OR SOMETHING. OR WE LYNCHED SCUM AND MY ML/EKIM THEORY IS WRONG. IF DDD FLIPS SCUM EKIM IS STILL SCUM THOUGH.

Okay, done with the caps for now.

I'm not the moron who brought setup WIFOM into play, you moron.

I STILL WANT AN EKIM LYNCH BTW

Well, it starts with the fact that I'm not scum, continues with the fact that I almost guarantee horror is town by my role info so he's being dumb by voting me, and ends with the fact that ekiM is scum.

Well obviously nobody is willing to unvote and vote ekiM like they should be doing, so what the hell am I supposed to do?

Stop playing the "Woe is me, everyone else is a dumbass" card. It's sad.

Yeah but it's true.

If ekiM isn't scum (there's about .001% chance of this)

then CMAR is next in line. Hell, if there's 2 scum left then both are scum but ekiM still needs to die first.

My vote's not moving.

---

Also did you ever get the feeling that your reads are wrong?

There was never a good reason to suspect me and your only allies throughout the game were both scum. Just saying.

Consider being less actively anti-town and more willing to re-think in future.