Mini 973: "Bawhston" Brawl (WHAT A WIN!)

[Oso]

Never trust a palindrome.

A palindrome? That's not so bad. It's not like you can spell my name the same forwards and backwards or something really scummy like that.

VOTE:Nikanor

Because he's first on the list and I can't think of any good jokes that use any player's name...not clean ones anyway.

[Oso]

Oh, and by the way...Happy Birthday Hoopla.

[Oso]

.
.
Also did not like those who chose to ignore the Hoopla claim. Seems to me that either they genuinely missed it(

in which case they cant read a few posts

), felt it was not serious or did not know how to act and so chose to avoid and wait to see what way public opinion went. First two show

incompetence

and the last comes across as scummy.

Managed to get two logical fallacies for the price of one there didn't we? Ad Hominem and a variation of of a False Dilemma.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion of course but there is at least one other reason that I can think of (possibly more) that someone would choose not to comment on Hoopla's RC right out of the barn like that. I find it disturbing that you have seemingly limited the choices to just three, all of them either denoting either poor game play or outright scumminess.

And since we are out of the RVS it seems,

Unvote

[Oso]

Also Oso. Way to STILL fail to address or react to the claim

Unfortunately for the both of us I think, you will get no in-depth reaction from me on Hoopla's claim other than this:

Whatever she is doing, it is rather ballsy but there is no context yet for me to put it into the perspective of pro-town or anti-town. There is obviously some direction she is going with it but the direction is not clear to me. The best thing for me to do, at least in my opinion, being that it is early in the game and we have had only half the player's chime in here, is to get out of her way to do whatever it is she is going to do.

Her RC is going to be center stage for most of this game day I'm thinking and there should be a whole wealth of information on the players that can be gathered today to be used in context later in the day and later in the game.

To answer your point as to why I random voted after Hoopla's RC it is because I am more interested in seeing others reactions to her than I am about being worried if I am coming off pro-town or scummy.

[Oso]

You are making an assumption that is not true. I never indicated that I wasn't going to participate. I won't simply lurk and take notes. I simply stated that I have no opinion on Hoopla's RC at this time and that her RCing this early should provide some interesting discussion. Or at least that was the point I was trying to get across.

Right now, I find some of the vote hopping more alarming than I do Hoopla's RC. Being that we are just now into page 2 and just out of RSV it's only a minor twitch but still something that is itching.

[Oso]

Ok then Hoopla, come take a walk in Oso's mind for a minute. (I'll try to keep the sarcasm to a minimum.)

Reasons why I think Hoopla might RC Paranoid Gun Owner right off the bat.

1) She is Vanilla Townie and simply wanted to get a discussion point out there right away for information gathering. Perhaps as a way to draw fire tonight away from other pro-town roles or maybe she justs hate the RVS.

2)She is any number of pro-town roles and using a gambit to get at least one night (or maybe more) in which to act.

3)She actually is a PGO and hopes that mafia will think she is using that to cover another role and try and pop her. One dead mafioso.

Non-Town reasons to claim PGO.

4)Doesn't exactly guarantee she won't get lynched the first day but a high probability that she is lynch immune for Day 1. Very few people are going to push a lynch on a claimed townie especially if there no counter-claim and no supporting evidence that she is in fact scum.

5)She is an SK. Pretty much eliminates the Cop (among other roles) investigating/following for the first night. Too high a chance that she might be telling the truth to risk an investigation Night 1. They'd want other evidence that she was actually scum before investigating. Down side is that Mafia might still go ahead and test the claim. Mafia can't stand to lose one for one with town but depending on their thinking, this might be an acceptable risk.

6)She is mafia. Again, pretty much eliminates any pro-town role from targeting her Night 1 with the added benefit of an SK probably is not going to take a chance either.

7)She is simply messing with our heads.

Now, you tell me just how am I (or anyone else) going to have any sort of definite read on which way you are swinging with this? You have a total of 4 posts so far. There is no way anyone other than God or the Mod can make any sort reasonable guess WHY you RCed. You asked for my comments but you have them already it from my post original and the text you quoted:

..There is obviously some direction she is going with it but the direction is not clear to me....

You say I haven't commented or addressed your RC when it seems, at least to me, that you have rejected that comment simply because it didn't fit neatly into “I think she's scum”

(*)

or “I think she's town”.

I still have no, AS IN ZERO, opinion of the validity of your RC or how it might reflect on your alignment.

As for trying to divert attention, that wasn't my point at all (although on re-reading my post it does seem that is what I was doing). What I wanted to point out to Radical Hijinx was there there are some minor signs that are setting of some bells for me other than your RC. Granted your RC is the biggest thing happening in the thread right but not the ONLY thing nor do I think it is the most important. I got the impression he thought I meant that I was going to go “hide and watch” how other reacted to your RC and I do plan on watching reactions about that, but I'm not not going to focus exclusively on it nor am I going to lurk while doing it. That was the point I was trying to get across. You came into the room and set off an almighty big bell, I'm trying to hear other noises that may be using that loud bell as cover, hoping to pass unnoticed.

As to unvoting, personal preference on my part. I vote to lynch or sometimes to pressure. If I am doing neither, it goes back in my pocket where it can't inadvertently hurt anyone. Apologies if that annoys you but there it is.

[Oso]

.....That said, I fail to see these other issues you are talking about in this post, please enlighten me.

In Post #24 I said:

Unfortunately for the both of us I think, you will get no in-depth reaction from me on Hoopla's claim other than this:

Whatever she is doing, it is rather ballsy but there is no context yet for me to put it into the perspective of pro-town or anti-town. There is obviously some direction she is going with it but the direction is not clear to me. The best thing for me to do, at least in my opinion, being that it is early in the game and we have had only half the player's chime in here, is to get out of her way to do whatever it is she is going to do.

Her RC is going to be center stage for most of this game day I'm thinking and there should be a whole wealth of information on the players that can be gathered today to be used in context later in the day and later in the game.

To answer your point as to why I random voted after Hoopla's RC it is because I am more interested in seeing others reactions to her than I am about being worried if I am coming off pro-town or scummy.

I may be mistaken but I think that is what prompted Radical Hijinx's Post #25

Surely you realise that if everyone adopted that viewpoint then nothing would be gained at all, everyone would be waiting for everyone else to react first anf would be too worried to respond. And since we don't know who is scum then we cannot allow anyone to be exempt.

I got the impression, maybe a mistaken one, that he was thinking I was going to go into lurker mode and just watch and that he wasn't going to let that happen.

That prompted me to make post #26

You are making an assumption that is not true. I never indicated that I wasn't going to participate. I won't simply lurk and take notes. I simply stated that I have no opinion on Hoopla's RC at this time and that her RCing this early should provide some interesting discussion. Or at least that was the point I was trying to get across.

Right now, I find some of the vote hopping more alarming than I do Hoopla's RC. Being that we are just now into page 2 and just out of RSV it's only a minor twitch but still something that is itching.

The bolded part is what Hoopla picked up as an attempt to divert attention. Upon a re-read I have to say she has a point, it does look like an attempt to divert attention no matter what I intended it to be. It was mainly an attempt to show that there are other things going on in the topic rather than Hoopla's RC itself.

Look at it realistically. Hoopla is not going to get lynched or confirmed today. There is no way to confirm or deny her RC today without lynching her and that just isn't going to happen. While her RC should be talked about, the lynch today is going to come of the way the rest of the players react to her RC rather the RC itself plus the usual Day #1 scumtells.

My having no opinion her RC stems from the fact that with all the ways it can go it is completely a 100% NULL TELL as far as indicating alignment goes, at least as far as I am concerned. And you certainly don''t jump all over someone who has nothing to say about a null tell. The fact we had a player RC on her first post has, I think, blinded most folks to the fact that it is completely useless information at this point in the game. It neither helps nor hinders the town. It may come in handy later but I'm afraid that because it was an RC and an early no-vote RC to boot, anyone who chooses to disregard it, file it away for later or go look in another direction is going to get autolabeled scummy.

"Dammit, we have an RC out there, how can you look elsewhere? You are obvscum...." or something similar.

I'm certainly not going to advocate a lynch to check it nor am I going to blindly accept that it is true. I'll fall back on my old standby routine and file the fact that she RCed as a PGO until a later date when I have some other knowledge that might tend to indicate her guilt or innocence.

In the meantime, she(Hoopla) has certainly generated some discussion right off the bat so that is a good thing. Whatever her alignment is, she did manage to get discussion started in a hurry and that allows plenty posts to look at.

[Oso]

I am doing the same as Hoopla, re-reading the thread to see what I may have missed while answering the concerns about myself. But I have this to say first.

Furry was absolutely right about comparing a PGO to a Miller. Miller is completely impossible to prove without lynching the person who claimed it and then it is too late to anything other than say "Oh, I guess they were telling the truth, my bad...." Hoopla, if she is true claiming, is pretty much in the same boat.

In Post #28 I listed this as one of the reason I thought some some might false claim a PGO:

4)Doesn't exactly guarantee she won't get lynched the first day but a high probability that she is lynch immune for Day 1.

Very few people are going to push a lynch on a claimed townie especially if there no counter-claim and no supporting evidence that she is in fact scum.

I said that because it is true, at least in my opinion, especially at this point in the game. Despite the way the role has the potential to royally screw up town (way more than a miller can) it is still a pro-town PR. You don't lynch a claimed town PR as a policy lynch or any type of lynch for that matter without a counter-claim, investigation or some

very

solid scum patterns to point to. Not on Day 1 anyway.

I hope to post again tonight with my vote and reasons why but sleepiness may get the better of me.

[Oso]

@Hoopla, I believe your RC just enough at the moment to change this vote and put my vote on fitz if you want to L-2 him and get a claim out of him or pressure cook him a bit more. His play so far hasn't been town in my opinion but I'm not completely convinced that he is scum. My money for Day 1 is on Radical Hijinx.

Vote: Radical Hijinx

Here is why.

He voted Hoopla. Anyone with a vote on Hoopla at the moment is at the top of my list scum candidates.

He voted Hoopla the post immediately following her RC. That strikes me as a knee-jerk and not well thought out reaction especially since he gave, in my opinion, the worst reason possible for it: Policy Lynch.

Then, in Post #18, he goes on the attack

-snip-
Also did not like those who chose to ignore the Hoopla claim. Seems to me that either they genuinely missed it(in which case they cant read a few posts), felt it was not serious or did not know how to act and so chose to avoid and wait to see what way public opinion went. First two show incompetence and the last comes across as scummy.

Not a specific attack, but a general one as myself, xRECKONERx and havingfitz have all continued to play around with RSV a bit. A broad attack is not necessarily scummy, even if it did contain a fallacy, because I think it was specifically designed to start an argument. Town have just as much interest in doing that as scum have. Get someone mad or even a little irritated and they can start tripping over themselves. I went ahead and took the bait and called him on it. (Post #20). He concedes I may have a point on one part of my post and disputes the other part (Post #22) then in his next post (and this is where he gets really scummy in my opinion) he says this:

Also Oso. Way to STILL fail to address or react to the claim

He even capitalized the word “still”

(*)

and created, at least in my opinion, a blatant distortion by creating the impression that I had been dodging the issue for quite some time. At that point I had made 1 serious post and that was attacking his post #18. The 2 posts prior to that had been responding to his palindrome joke about my name and wishing Hoopla a Happy Birthday. I tell him I'm not going to address in depth and I tell him why.

After that he pretty much leaves me alone.

Nikanor comes on makes a vote, gives a reason and then states his opinion of Hoopla's RC. It's close enough to my attitude that I'm starting to get the impression that Radical Hijinx is looking for a particular type of player to pick a fight with because he starts in on Nikanor as well. (Posts #30-#34). He doesn't attack Nikanor's vote (which in my opinion is a bit of a weak reason) but rather his low-key reaction to Hoopla's RC. Nikanor pretty much declines to take the bait by dismissing it.

This is why I am not fully convinced havingfitz is scum, in Post #40 he writes:

I don't have a comment on the claim ATM as I have not played with a PGO before either. I'm not sure what the benefit was to town of such an early claim. Does a PGO only impact the people who try to kill or does the PGO also impact people who make any kind of contact (such as investigative or protective contact)? I lean towards there being more benefit to scum fakeclaiming PGO (especially so early in the game) than town legitimately claiming it.

Is lynching the PGO a standard policy lynch? Why...isn't the PGO a town affiliated role?

Radical Hijinx writes this is Post #42 in response:

Policy lynch was perhaps a bit silly on my part. I can see now how claiming it can seem better than not. I saw a giant "Never target me with night actions" sign and failed to recognise the the possible protown motovations based therein. The role, particulary when claimed does spook me a bit.

And this (Post #46) in response to Furry:

I felt that its dangers as a lie outshone its benifits as a truth. Since then Hoopla has acted well and I was probably too quick in calling for a policy lynch. PGO was pretty new to be and I reacted poorly.

My impression is that Radical Hijinx wants off his Hoopla vote and he wants off it badly. I don't see two partners being so uncoordinated that one would jump on a wagon while it's obvious his partner wants off. Especially since the trend even before Hoopla's explanation for her RCing seems to be that a large fraction of the player's thinks a Hoopla lynch is a bad idea today. I just don't see a real connection between them(fitz and RH). By my thinking Radical Hijinx is most probably scum so havingfitz probably isn't.

My conclusion, RH made a bad decision to vote Hoopla in the first place and he realized it. What makes him scum is that instead of just saying he wasn't thinking and made an honest mistake he instead went looking for a plausible way to change his vote without looking scummy. He was unfortunate enough to pick two targets that wouldn't give him one.

As to Slepz, he may be scum but my impression is that he read the thread, saw the RC and called it bogus. Unlike Radical Hijinx, he actually gave reason why he thought it might be bogus rather than just call for a policy lynch, I'm thinking that he's convinced Hoopla is lying. Athough his last post does sound a bit like a policy lynch, lynching someone as being too high a risk isn't the quite in the same category as calling for a policy lynch.

I'm not calling havingfitz or Slepz town but I don't have them at the same level of scumminess I have RH at. I think Radical Hijinx is the best candidate for today.

[Add on before submit. I thought about waiting to see RH's reaction to Hoopla's explanation but decided to post anyway. No matter what he does with that I think this still stands, he should never have voted Hoopla for that reason in the first place]

[Oso]

I dislike the way you seem to be offering your vote to Hoopla here. If you think fitz deserves a vote, voe for him. Otherwise don't. That said the rest of this post is a good reasoned argument which I happen agree with on rereading.

That's just it, he does deserve a vote. As do Radical Hijinx and Slepz and all for the same reason, in my opinion: Voting and pushing a case against a player they shouldn't be at this point in time.

I think that RH is the best candidate for the pressure (and lynch) right now but it seems that right at the moment, havingfitz is the one in the cooker but he has only 4 votes and that is one under L-2 where most people generally RC or start to feel the heat really badly.

My offer is just that, a willingness to loan my vote temporarily to those folk pressuring fitz. Unless he really falls to pieces though, I won't be in on the lynch. I think RH is the lynch for today so unless things radically change, that is where my vote is going to stay.

[Oso]

Oso: so what you're saying in your big post on P3 is basically: one of havingfitz or RH is most likely scum - if one flips scum than the other is town?

Not quite. I don't see an obvious connection between the two. I'm convinced enough that RH is scum to vote and lynch him at this time. So if that happens and he flips scum, then my estimation that fitz is his partner in some way is going to go down.

The opposite is not true, if fitz gets lynched today and he flips scum, it isn't going to change my opinion much at all on RH simply because of the way fitz got on the wagon in the first place. fitz might be following a partner's lead by waiting until there is some clutter in the thread between his partner's vote and his own but I just don't see that happening. If I could put myself in scum's place in a situation like this, if my partner voted on an RC like Hoopla's in the same situation, I'd do my best to distance from that. I certainly wouldn't follow him on to it unless it was much later in the voting process.

[Oso]

EBWOP (hit reply instead of preview)

The way Hoopla RCed, I am convinced there is at least one scum on the wagon (I'm going on the premise for the rest of the day that Hoppla did true-claim) and that Radical Hijinx is that scum. Because of not being communicate during the day and not being able to discuss collectively the response to Hoopla's RC, they(the scum) might trip up some so my belief is that if fitz is scum, he made a big mistake by being on the Hoopla wagon so soon after his partner was.

[Oso]

I'll try to answer both of these concerns at the same time.

Oso...how are you tying me to RH?

Oso, so if fitz flips scum than RH could be his partner, but if RH flips scum then fitz would become less scummy? Still a bit confused.

The short answer fitz is that I'm not tying you to RH.

The point I am trying to make is that if RH flips scums (I think he will), my opinion of your scumminess is going to drop some simply because of the of the order you two are at on the Hoopla vote. He was first and you came on right after him and after the controversy over Hoopla's RC was under way. I just don't see two scum partner's doing that. If by chance you are lynched today and do flip scum. my opinion on RH isn't going to change and I log it off the novelty of Hoopla RCing that early and that you got a bad case of nerves or something and followed a partner where you shouldn't have.

When I went back to re-read the thread, I did on the premise that Hoopla has true claimed and that there was at least one scum on the vote when I did. I didn't go back to see who I could make the best case on though, I went back to see which two of you three (Radical Hijinx, havingfitz and slepz) might stand a chance of still being town, at least in my opinion. I might have let my underlying suspicions about RH color my judgment but I tried not to let that happen.

You (fitz) and Slepz came off slightly better than RH in my estimation.

[Oso]

Welcome The Buttonmen. Glad to have you here.

As much as I'd like to give you time to settle in really good before starting in on you....

You don't like Hoopla's claim but you come off the Hoopla vote that you inherited from RH with no explanation and then put one on Gwynplaine, also without any explanation.

Could you elaborate some? In both cases.

[Oso]

Sorry, got caught up in real life and then realized it has been about 3 days since I posted. Apologies.

Honestly, I can't quite figure out what is going on with Furry, Nik and JS. Bizarre covers it for the moment, I think.

I am going to go back and re-iterate my concerns about The Buttonmen. He (by the way of RH) was the only person to initally mention 'policy lynch' of Hoopla's RC without giving any sort of justification about it. When asked about it directly he backed off it some but hadn't taken off his vote by the time The Buttonmen had replaced.

If anyone wanted to get momentum started for a quick Hoopla lynch based on 'policy', it was the Buttonmen.

While I disagree with both fitz and Slepz for having votes on Hoopla after The Buttonmen and agree neither of their play has been particularly town (at least in my opinion), on my re-read earlier in the game day, I got the feeling they weren't after a straight policy lynch but rather saw the claim and decided that scum were more likely to use it that early than was town and that the risk of keeping her(Hoopla) around wasn't worth the potential harm to town. I don't agree with that thinking but that is why I decided to vote The Buttonmen over either of them. I am convinced enough in my mind that The Buttomen is scum. fitz and Slepz, at least in my mind, hold a possibility that they might be townies who simply are "dense" as Furry put it.

[Oso]

I may be wrong but I think that is 6 on JacobSavage. L-1.

A claim from him would be useful before someone hammers him.

[Oso]

- snip -

I had hoped to appear as scummy as possible before the night phase so I could go about my duty, hence the deal with Nik

- snip -

It satisfied me. Im more convinced then I was at first over you being scum.

- snip -

Do you understand that this is why people want to lynch you?

"Think ya used enough dynamite there, Butch?" (Translation: you may have got that scum impression across

TOO

well.

Couple of questions while I think on this some:

Are you One-Shot or unlimited? (Not that that really matters, just want to clarify for my own curiosity).

Are you willing to turn your power over to the town vote (we make a vig vote and then a lynch vote, get a twofor based on popular consensus) or are you going to use it as you see fit? Regardless of anything the other players may say?

[Oso]

@Oso

1. Unlimited

2. I would be happy with that.

q21 looks like a quite hammer?

Ok then, at the risk of suggesting something that my lead to my own lynch, the main problem I have with Hoopla's RC is that up until now, I haven't figured out a way to prove it on my own.

Vig Hoopla. And the rest of the town PRs stay the hell away from her tonight.

If she lying, she is dead. If she is true-claiming then that is about the closest I can think of being able to confirming her RC. Granted, you will be dead but we will have a

NON-NKable, CONFIRMED TOWNIE

in trade. I think it is well worth the trade-off.

Think about that for a second, a confirmed townie that no scum killing role can touch, except through convincing the rest of the game to lynch her. Hell, in your shoes as a vig (if you have true-claimed) I'd do it myself. If she is lying then minus one scum if not, I'm dead but the town has a middling powerful weapon to use against scum in that there is no need to protect/watch/investigate her for the rest of the game.

Now when I first read Jacob's RC, this idea came to me and I have time to think on it some but I haven't had time to think it all the way through and there may be some holes in it. I wanted to get it out there quickly because q21 has put Jacob back at L-1 and there is still a great danger that JS could be hammered before we discuss this some.

[Oso]

Sorry about that. I was composing while Hoopla posted. Didn't refresh before submitting

[Oso]

The Paranoid Gun Owner, similar to the Army Veteran, involuntarily kills anyone who targets him during the night, regardless of alignment. He can be a liability to the Town for this reason, as he indiscriminately kills Cops, Doctors, etc. He can not choose to kill.

@Hoopla, I assumed that the PGO lived through the attempt since it didn't specifically address being targeted by a killing role. My assumption was that the PGO preempted any target attempts. But in all honesty, this is the only game I have been in that even had a claim of PGO in it, so my experience with the role is exactly zero.

So I'll take your word for it unless someone else has some input on it.

[Oso]

Good idea Buttonmen, wrong person. If you replace Slepz with The Buttonmen in your post, I might go for it.

From your predecessor's final posts, I think I know what reason you will give to get off the Hoopla vote, but you still haven't explained why the Gwynplaine vote.

I read all of your posts in isolation and I can't see anywhere that you have advanced any reason at all (even a bad one) as to why you think Gwynplaine is scum.

@JacobSavage, This applies to you and xReckonerX as well. You have repeatedly stated you want him gone but have advanced no reason as to why that is.

[Oso]

Sorry Reckoner, I think I wasn't clear there. I wasn't referring to any votes you made or anything you said but rather why JacobSavage is so dead set on seeing you gone.

Like The Buttonmen's push against Gwynplaine, Jacob has given no reason why he is so hot to get you out of the game.

[Oso]

Here is the post where I first initially laid out a case as to why i thought The Buttonmen(then Radical Hijinx) was scum.

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 33#2275733

Nothing that happened after that caused me to change my opinion other than to reinforce it.

1)- His continued trend of calling for more Gwynplaine votes without voicing a reason and this:

2) -

Considering we have a vig (

I find his claim highly belivable

) and a lurker I'm agianst lynching Slepz. Instead we have JS kill him tonight (I don't trust JS to use his gun responsibly if left to his own devices) thus making sure we get the best possible value from our vig and we don't waste our lynch today.

Thoughts?

I find the highlighted part highly disturbing. I too, generally try to give a claimed town PR the benefit of the doubt especially on Day 1 and there is no counter-claim but, unlike Hoopla's claim and play so far, there is ample (overwhelming actually) evidence from his posts that JS wasn't playing in a pro-town manner. Doesn't mean that JS was the scum he turned out to be, he could have been playing a Vig very badly, but to give the level of certainty that The Buttonmen did in light of JS's play up to that point is just way off.

The Buttonmen's statement that he found the claim highly believable makes me think he chose either to disregard, erroneously in my opinion, Jacob's play up to that point OR that he had a good reason to believe that Jacob's claim could be true. I.E that The Buttomen knew that JS wasn't Mafia. Granted, there could be other reasons that I haven't considered but the second option is what I find the most likely.

At the risk of being accused of tunnel vision, I am very comfortable putting my D1 vote back on The Buttomen.

Vote: The Buttonmen

[Oso]

Not sure I agree with you 100% on that Furry.

[Note:All quotes are from Furry's Post-314 in case someone else posts between us]

Hoopla doesnt work due to RH trying to policy lynch

Only if you assume no prior collaboration. If this is a con being run by Hoopla, then The Buttonmen could easily be a shill.

GP doesnt work due to TBM moving in and requesting that lynch

Not sure I agree there either. Unless something radically changed, Gwynplaine had very little chance of being lynched yesterday. It is a safe place to park a vote and set up early antagonism between the two.

Slepz/dsister doesnt work due to TBM trying to get JS to NK them (scum-TBM expects that kill to exists).

This one I agree with. Too much of a chance that suggestion might have been followed eventually.

Oso probably doesnt work due to TBM putting pressure on my town read of him

For completeness with your list . See GP/TBM above, same reasoning applies here. My vote on him yesterday could have simply been my attempt to park my vote safely for the day. The Buttonman had very little chance of being lynched yesterday, too many others made better lynch candidates.

fitz probably doesnt work due to early today

I will conditionally agree with that. I still haven't really made a decision in my mind about fitz yet, just when I think I have him pegged as a scum candidate, he goes and posts something that makes me doubt and reconsider. But I do agree with you. I can't see him being partner's with The Buttonmen at the moment.

[Oso]

From your predecessor's final posts, I think I know what reason you will give to get off the Hoopla vote.

I must admit I never figured out what you meant by this.

Actually, that was a bit of attempted subterfuge on my part. I have no real idea why you got off of Hoopla, I can guess but at this point that is all it is, a guess.

My hope was that the way it was worded would come across to you, as I was going to make the reason so bad that it would make you even more scummy in the eyes of the thread

so that you might be convinced to answer the question.

You see, aside from the fact that I think you are scum, you have completely ignored my question as to why you unvoted Hoopla with no reason given and why you pushed Gwynplaine, again with no reason. I mentioned that you had a no reason unvote/vote in 2 other posts and you still didn't respond to them. I'd have to check but I think some others have mentioned it as well even if they haven't made it a direct question (Gwynplaine I know for sure has and IP I think). So I'm finished skirting the issue and trying to be polite about it.

At this point in time just about any answer you give is not going to satisfy me and as they say in Miranda "Anything you say can and will be used against you....". That is pretty much the approach I'm going to use. Any impulse on my part to give you the benefit of the doubt based on any explaination you might have given, has been well and truly squashed. I no longer care what your answer is.

[Oso]

As an add-on to the above post.

It may have developed quickly but I don't think we should let the votes on The Buttomen go to waste. I'd happily lynch him and I am advocating his lynch but dsister has a point, the day looks to be developing very quickly.

At the very least we should keep the pressure on him long enough to get a claim out of him. That's what I'm asking for at the moment.

[Oso]

I think I'm a lot more interested in what your trying to imply TBM.

You tell him, MS. If I can't get a rise out of him, maybe you can.

@Furry

Nik-TBM is looking like a very good pairing to me actually. I like nik lynch a little more though given his recent change on the TBM front, as I can see this interaction coming from Nik(S)-TBM(S) or Nik(S)-TBM(T)

Not arguing with your vote. As I am convinced that TBM is scum and since I wouldn't be the best person to look at his play in an unbiased light at this point, can you give any points to consider as to why TBM might be town?

[Oso]

TBM should claim though.

I completely agree that he should.

In case you didn't notice TBM, Nikanor said this earlier:

If someone puts TBM at L-1 I'll hammer.

I don't know if he would actually do that without you claiming first but with 4 votes on you at the moment, you should probably start doing something to get some of them off because you are effectively at L-1 right now. One more vote on you, with Nik seeing that vote before anyone can unvote well....you can see where that might lead.

And that L-1 vote is out there. I get the impression that Furry might add his vote at some point and q21 might do the same at some point as well. I got the feeling that the only reason q21 didn't vote you at the beginning of the day is that he felt it was too early in the day to L-1 somebody for a claim.

[Oso]

I think I can agree with that. I've held the opinion that the original (Slepz) initially voted Hoopla because he legitimately thought it was a bogus claim. Gut feeling perhaps on his part as there was no sort of evidence to really back it up but he did get some town credibility as far as I was concerned, especially since he didn't back off.

His entire response to the claim seemed, to me at least, that was he was saying 'liar' rather than 'policy lynch'. When I made a re-read of the thread before making my first vote on TBM on day one, of the three I looked at: fitz, (RH)The Buttonman and (Slepz) Midnight's Sorrow, MS came off to me as the most likely to be town voting Hoopla at the time.

See actually, this is the post that made me want a Nik lynch. Go through his posts and watch his opinions of TBMs slot, it actually is quite entertaining.

I'll read Nik in iso concentrating on the TBM slot. See if I see the same thing as you.

[Oso]

Tired of waiting for Oso to see what I see.... so im just going to point it all out. Niks on RH/TBM doesnt add up to me.

Apologies there Furry. During the week I sometimes have time to get into a deep analysis but generally not right away. (Not unless I get lucky or use up some sleep time). I should have qualified that and said "...it may take a while."

[Oso]

Like, you know that feeling where you just know that it's two townies going at it in a big argument? That's how I feel about them.

That Oso and RH are both town.

If someone puts TBM at L-1 I'll hammer.
....

I said I'd hammer TBM because a) Hoopla was upset and I wanted to make her feel better and b) I have this weird tendency to be wrong most of the time. I figure that if the majority wants it, I can go with a Buttonlynch.

Until you had pointed that out, I had completely forgotten about the bolded post. Even on a re-read I had missed that. Definite -1 for that pair of posts. Even though I did use one of them to try and pressure TBM with.

The rest I'm not so sure on but that could simply be two people who disagree on tells and I have never played with Nik before so I can't comment on his meta. But it does hang together.

I am still comfortable with my vote on TBM. I believe he will flip scum and I'm convinced in my mind that he is the lynch for today. I'll keep in mind your points on Nik though. The most telling part of your post though that I hadn't even considered up until you mentioned it was Nik equating slepz-flaking with slepz-lurking. I agree that calling for a lurker lynch on that player slot is way off considering that Yabba has managed to get replacements for it so quickly.

[Oso]

I know you asked Hoopla this but I'll give my opinion as well. With the presence of an SK, I'm thinking 2 mafia is as good a possibility as 3 mafia.

In either case, we need to start hitting mafia with our lynches pretty much starting today. As just about every theory I had got trashed when The Buttonmen flipped town, I am starting over from day 1 with a re-read, perhaps concentrating on what xReckonerx and Furry had to say (maybe even TBM as well). With their deaths, we know they didn't have any ulterior, scum motives for proposing any reads they had.

[Oso]

Non game related:

yabbaguy:

Has anyone else complained of posts being truncated since the conversion. I'll try and find some specific examples if I can but it seems to me some of the posts in the thread now, aren't as long as used to be. Here:

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 3#p2275733

That's one of my posts and I know it was longer than that when I posted it.

[Oso]

I don't think a mass claim is necessarily a bad idea. My first thoughts are for everyone to review first paying attention to any thoughts put forth by Reckoner, Furry and TBM. As I stated earlier, their motivations for posting reads are no longer in doubt. Then decide if a mass claim is something we want/need to do.

Look for who attacked their reasoning, who attacked them (yes, I realize I'm putting myself in the bulls-eye there esp. in regards to The Buttonmen) and if you think their reason(s) for doing so bear scrutiny. That is what I am currently doing.

I would like to reinforce Gwynplaine's question to Nikanor.

TBM said he was going to claim, since no one seemed inclined to rescind their vote until he did, why not give him a last defense?

[Oso]

Well, I haven't quite finished a re-read yet (having trouble finding the time to be able to read and think at the same time, during the week) but here are some thoughts that have occurred to me while trying.

Worst case scenario 3:1:8 and we mis-lynch today, then Mafia wins tomorrow morning as we come out tomorrow with a 3 Town : 3 Mafia balance.

This presupposes that there is no Pro-Town killing/protective roles out there.

A Vig or Doctor could quite naturally prevent that.

Better case scenario 2:1:9. Mis-lynch today means tomorrow starts with 4 Town : 2 Mafia.

The point of all that above? Hoopla's idea of a mass-claim is starting to sound better to me. If we are in a 3:1:8 setup with no Town killing/protective PRs, then we

HAVE

to lynch right today.

Granted, there are roles out there that can alter the above if their players use them properly but since I'm going to go ahead and use the worse case scenario and assume that any killing/protective roles the town have are going to be ineffective during the night. A Mass RC isn't a bad way to go, in my opinion, as it opens the door to counter-claims and post re-analysis based on claimed roles.

I'm going to hold off voting right now because, in all honesty, I'd rather have the RCs as additional info before committing my vote to anyone at this point. Especially in light of how wrong I was about TBM's alignment.

[Oso]

Hoopla has already claimed as has Nik.

If we presuppose that Nik is true claiming, then I'd suggest that q21 claim next if we are going to go for the mass-claim. As to the rest, I'm not sure except to say that I personally have no problem giving my RC anywhere in the order though.

[Oso]

Vanilla townie here as well. I have other thoughts but I'll wait until everybody's claimed. Which is Oso and q21 at this point, unless I missed something.

I think you are correct. Q21 and myself and I'll fix half of that now.

Claim:

Vanilla Townie

[Oso]

- snip -

At the moment, I'd prefer q21 not to claim unless he has significant information that can improve lynch odds today.

- snip -

Strongly disagree here. The rest of the thread has claimed, best to get his as well. It's not like scum is going to be able to use his claim to eliminate a safe claim.

[Oso]

Tell me the benefits of q21 claiming. Saying he should claim because everyone else did isn't a reason.

I'll reserve further comment until we hear from q21.

[Oso]

Don't make assumptions simply to give your brain a workout. My comment means exactly what it says, I reserve any further comment on the subject until we hear from q21. No more, no less.

After I know that, I may or may not take up the argument again.

[Oso]

No I don't. If you think the reason that I did that is scummy, then by all means, convince the rest of the thread that is so and have me lynched. But I certainly don't have to explain my reasoning to the person who first advanced the idea of a mass claim and then tries to stop it one short of an actual mass claim. q21 is the only person right now that has the standing to object to his RCing as I see it.

The mass claim was suggested, he voted Nik, and as far as I can see he may not even have been on since since the MassRC sort of spontaneously happened. I modified my position after I thought on that. If he claims, argument over. If not and he advances good reasons why he feels it is not in the town's best interest for him to RC, I'll take those into consideration before I decide to continue my argument or not.

[Oso]

Think for a second Nik (no sarcasm intended there). Before Q21 even makes a comment on whether he wants to RC or not we already have 2 people who are against it in some way. You and then Hoopla.

You yourself raised the fact that there is a possibility you are a flavor cop here:

q21 is town,

unless I'm insane

. I suppose there is a mafia roleblocker who blocked me last night, meaning there shouldn't be a mafia godfather unless the town is overpowered.

Now my main problem with him not even being asked to RC is that he avoids any comments that might reflect on your sanity. You may be a straight cop with no sanity issues but if you are insane or naive, then perhaps a clue to that is in how q21 chooses to justify his not RCing if he, in fact, chooses to not RC.

[edit before submit, Hoopla posted while I was composing this]

@Hoopla. I think you pretty much hit on the head. The default is "claim under pressure or claim when you can do the most good for your side" and the requisite suspicions attach to both. With the Mass-Claim, the default flip/flops. Not claiming then automatically becomes suspicious as do those who support a non-claim. Justifying a non-claim becomes almost a prerequisite.

@All Players.
Granted, I believe the odds of Nik being a flavor cop are low. Maybe even low enough to be dismissed out of hand. Part of this is playstyle, I have never been comfortable with mass-claims but have seen how they can be beneficial on occasion (this was one of them, the usual methods aren't working) however, I have never been comfortable with a person being exempt from it without at least justifying why they should be exempt. The player themselves justifying it, not relying on others in the thread to make the argument for him.

And for the Mass RC to be a bit more structured to avoid this type of situation and accomplish what Hoopla said here:

-snip-

When you consider what massclaim aims to do - hopefully confirm people as town or scum, or at least give hints either way on your own (or others) alignment, it doesn't make sense for q21 to claim, because we have already confirmed him as town. I think I followed this logical path without really acknowledging it in my arguments. So, unless he can give reasonable insight into anyone elses alignment from his role information, there is no reason for him to claim, because we gain nothing.

Unfortunately, there is plenty of fodder in the thread now where he can pick and choose reasons not to claim without having to think of any on his own and, again unfortunately, they are all reasons he would use if he were town so there is no way to differentiate between an honest response and a contrived one.

That was one of the reasons I hoped he would post before we got in too deeply. It cuts both ways here.

Town: He uses many of the same reasons advanced and they are honest reasons, but tainted now because of previous discussion.

Scum: He has plenty of usable excuses that bear up under scrutiny and avoids mistakenly pulling a boner that may have some indication, however unlikely that it is, that Nikanor is not a sane cop.

[Oso]

Double post.

I re-read and may have been unclear in what I am trying to say. I am less interested in the RC's of the Mass Claim as I was more interested in if anyone objected to giving and RC and what their reasons might be for not RCing.

[Oso]

Pending a few things I'm going to go back and look at as a check to a faulty memory, I am going to go ahead in my mind put Nik and q21 into confirmed town. This is the point in the game for me that I have to start making definite choices based on what is there to see rather than what might be there, if that makes any sense.

Hoopla, I still don't like the early RC but, in all honesty even despite our recent disagreement, I don't see anything that screams scum or even indicates it (although, I wouldn't mind knowing what that seemingly bizarre series of posts were yesterday). So I am putting her and Midnight Sorrow in the 'most probably town' category in my head. Midnight Sorrow gets there mainly based on slepz D1 play. I'll explain that one in detail if anyone wants. Basically, I don't see a call for 'policy lynch' in his posts. It is close to the line but I think Midnight Sorrow inherited a bad rap for that.

So that leaves Gwyne, Inflatable and fitz (and myself, of course). Hoopla's points on Gwyne's voting patterns are compelling once pointed out.

I'll make a vote and reasons for that vote once I go back and check some things.

[Oso]

I'm going to go ahead and

Vote:Gwynplaine

Gwynplaine: (This is in addition to what Hoopla pointed out about his voting pattern) He hasn't had one solid reason for a vote or a vote change during the whole game. Early in the game, this can be overlooked as there just isn't that much info out there but as the game progresses, reasons should be given, cases made, patterns pointed to. Gwynplaine hasn't done this. The only valid reason I can find that he gave for a vote is here:

[Posts don't seem to be numbered any more. Here is the link http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 2#p2291602]

How does that help the town? You're not helping to find scum. You've said that you're willing to lynch town and follow scum-led bandwagons. You're making plans based on the assumption that the person you're voting for is town. You've also said that you could be a lot more scummy, but frankly I don't see how.

vote: JacobSavage

1 out of 7 votes (excluding the first which I always throw out because of the usual RVS confusion) that has what I would consider a valid reason.

InflatablePie: Still not sure mainly because of Here and Here.

Granted, in hindsight, his suggestion would be have been not the best, we would have lost a possible PGO at the benefit of of the SK suiciding on her and there was no real way to ensure JS would have killed Hoopla but the idea was sound just not optimal. Unless InflateablePie is a good actor, my impression was that he was trying to use JS in such a way that would be either completely good for town or at least a wash as far as balance goes. The caveat here here being that InflatablePie does seem a bit spastic in his voting patterns but not enough to point at him on that alone.

fitz: Same argument as for Midnight Sorrow basically with the exception that I still believe that there was at least one scum on the D1 Hoopla vote. Too good a chance that an early claim like Hoopla's could be pushed into a quick-lynch. If Hoopla true cliamed, one townie down that could only be killed safely by lynching. If Hoopla false-claimed then town cred for being in on the vote. Of the two who are still alive that were on that vote, Midnight Sorrow still comes off better in comparison in my opinion.

[Oso]

Vote: havingfitz

It's either him or

MS

fmpov. Has to be.

Note bolded part.

GUYS.
I GOT A RESULT ON MIDNIGHT'S SORROW LAST NIGHT.
HE'S A NO!
Yeah, the mod gave me a result of no on MS. Isn't that great?

Any reason to think that Nik got a bad result on MS?

[Oso]

I realize that. But it seemed that Inflatable Pie seemed to think That MS was still a viable suspect by the statement he made in vote.

Perhaps I didn't phrase it well but that was a question to Inflatable Pie as to why he thought that or to clarify it in some way.

[Oso]

Ah, misunderstanding on my part then. You said you had a result and that it was a "No" as in "No, he is not scum"

I blame a mixture of a long day's work and a few too many after dinner drinks. Best come back in the morning. I drank a bit too much I think waiting for the thread to open back up.

[Oso]

Whether we are in a 4:2 situation right now or not, I think it is the smart play to assume that we are. Worst case scenario the whole thing.

Right now, I see it this way.

Nikanor-Confirmed Town.

Myself (yes, I am putting myself in here), Hoopla and Midnight Sorrow in 'Unconfirmed, but most probably town'. I'd be surprised if Hoopla or MS flipped scum at this point.

That leaves the remaining scum, at least in my opinion, in the Inflatable Pie and/or havingfitz pair. Simply by a process of elimination.

But we have enough time here to take our time. So I agree that doing a speed vote/lynch without discussion is a bad thing.

[edit before submit, havingfitz posted during composition]
@ havingfitz. To answer your concern about my lack of mentioning IP as a scum candidiate, until I eliminated those I had reason to think might be town, IP hasn't really shown on my radar all game. The only reason he is there now is because of elimination. Nikanor,Hoopla and MS all are registering to me as town.

The reason I voted Gwynplaine yesterday was because I had changed my focus after blowing the call on TBM so badly, I quit scumhunting so much and seriously started looking for folks who might still be town. Aside from a very few posts (one of which I quoted) he hadn't really done much to help town.

Nik is a confirmed cop, at least from my thinking, Hoopla has been contributing very well almost the whole game and it seems she is legitimate town doing it. Midnight Sorrow (via slepz) gets a 'gut feeling' town stamp from me. Elimination leaves you and IP. If we had more candidates, I doubt IP would be very high on my list even now.

[Oso]

@Hoopla. At the moment, I'd say yes.

I'm currently re-reading both fitz and Inflatable Pie in iso and then referencing those posts to posts that prompted their responses so that might change as I work my way through that. It's taking a while and I have confused myself several times as I have about half a hundred tabs open at the same time.

But I can guarantee, barring some major, unforseen change, I am not going to vote Nikanor, you or MS. So it is down to either fitz or IP.

[Oso]

Prod received. Weekend busier than I thought it would be. Will post sometime Monday at the latest.

[Oso]

Some random thoughts at the moment.

At least one of the scum remaining has already placed a vote, if we do in fact have have 2 left. A safe assumption at this point. (For reference, when I started this post, MS and fitz have voted IP and IP has voted fitz).

If both scum were uncommitted at this point, IP would be lynched and the game would be over. This tell me that 1) Either one of the uncomitted players (Nik, Hoopla or myself) is lying about our roles

OR

2 that both scum have already voted. I think that option 1 is the least likely and option 2 is the most likely.

I'd like some thoughts from others if what I just said has any obvious holes in it's logic. And reference the probabilities of the following.

1)There is only one remaining scum and they haven't cast their vote at all yet.

1A) Nik, Hoopla or myself is lying about their roles and the second, non-voting scum is among us. I regard this as the least likely being as I am willing to bet the game that Nik is not lying. Further, I'd be surprised (and very disappointed in my skills as a player) if Hoopla flips scum. Finally, I know my alignment. The rest of the thread might have doubts but I get the impression from the remaining players that you rank my towniness below Nik's but probably on about the same level as Hoopla's or perhaps a notch lower.

2)There is only one remaining scum and they have cast their vote already.

3)That there are two remaining scum and they both have their vote on the same person.

4)That the two remaining scum aren't voting each other.

5)That there are two remaining scum and they have their votes on each other.

I have listed them in order of #1/1A being the least likely and #5 being the most likely.

My thinking
1/1A - Pretty much covered it above.

2 - I'm not thinking that way yet. Best, or at least safest, move right now is to assume a 3:1:8 setup.

3 - Possible but not very likely, in my opinion. This late in the game, with everyone exploring all possibilities the scum almost have to find a way to stay separate unless they can guarantee a mislynch.

4 - Still not very likely but more probable, in my opinion, that both of them having a vote on the same person. I don't like this because it presupposes that MS is scum, something I have already said in the thread, and in my mind, that I disagree with. slepz/dsister/MS's play hasn't been really strong town but I can't find anything consistently scummy in that player slot.

5 - Most likely in my opinion. With the elimination of most of the players, one of the Mafia lynched and many pages of posts to draw upon, the scum are in a bad way as I see it. They have a claimed cop that is by most people's thinking is confirmed. They have a claimed Town PR (PGO) that while unconfirmable, has a player that has consistently played town, at least in my opinion. They also have two claimed town players (myself,MS) who have consistently been referred to as more town than scum even though there have been times some of the players have expressed doubts.

My conclusion: If option 4 is the correct one then MS and IP are scum. MS is voting IP and IP is voting fitz. If option 5 is correct then the Scum are IP/fitz so IP is the correct vote in both cases.

I'm going to

Vote:Inflatable Pie

I'm not to worried about a hammer getting a townie because I trust Nik and Hoopla. The only two who still have votes out.

[Oso]

EBWOP:

I'm not to worried about a hammer getting a townie because I trust Nik and Hoopla. The only two who still have votes out.

Should read

I'm not too worried about a SCUM hammer getting a townie because I trust Nik and Hoopla. The only two who still have votes out.

(capitalized the word that should have been in there)

[Oso]

This is a cautionary post. If for some ungodly reason Nik is scum, this post does no good.

It morning here (I just woke up about half an hour ago). Give me a few hours to make a post as I have some errands to run this morning. I don't discount this may be last post however and on that note I can tell you something I

KNOW

right now though. If there are indeed 2 scum left

havingfitz isn't one of them.

I'd have been lynched before being able to post.

[Oso]

[DISCLAIMER: This is a long one folks. Mainly because I am not discounting this may be my very last game post.]

Ok, here goes.

Nik is town. Q21 hit it on the head when he explained his reasoning as to why he believed Nik's claim. It was early enough that there were plenty of opportunities for a counterclaim. There were, obviously, no counterclaims and Nik's play so far didn't lead anyone to believe he was trying to force one either.

havingfitz is town if there are two scum left. If there is only one left then Mafia is pretty much screwed if Hoopla is trueclaiming. In order to avoid the draw if Hoopla is trueclaiming, scum have to get a mislynch today so that they can sacrifice one of their members in the endgame to kill Hoopla. Any scum lynch today forces a draw at best and sets up a total mafia defeat tomorrow if town lynches scum unless that final scum somehow manages to get Hoopla lynched. Not a very high probability event. So, havingfitz is town because I know I'm town. If he were scum he has to hammer even though it will throw mighty suspicion on him when I flip town. If scum see a townie at L-1, they pretty much have to hammer and deal with the consequences. It's not a sub-optimal move, it's the only move. Havingfitz didn't hammer, therefore he is not scum.

Myself(Oso) is town. No concrete evidence to give you guys except to point at my play so far. I realize that there are doubts as I am in a pool of players that are possible scum by simple process of elimination. Plus I have made at least one verifiable bad call, TBM. I arrived at my conclusion based on a line of reasoning that was flawed (I had a townie tagged as scum) and a premise that may have been flawed. Mainly that there was at least one player on the D1 Hoopla wagon that was scum. He came off as the scummiest of the three. I'm still not ready to totally abandon that theory either, mainly because I don't believe that Hoopla false-claimed. Probably many instances as well you could infer I was setting up something if you re-read my posts and assigned a bad motivation to it. Trust your instincts there. Most of you at some point have stated you think I have a good possibility of being town. You aren't wrong.

Hoopla is still town as far as I'm concerned. She has done nothing so far that has really tripped my scumdar. Even at this point, I'd rather assume there was at least one scum on her D1 wagon than to grant there were none and thus throw her back into the pool of players that might be scum. Why? Simply based on her play. If she turns out to be scum after this is all said and done, she is going to get a sincere 'Well Done' from me. Her logic is flawed though as it has lead her to an erroneous conclusion that I am scum. Understandable since I know something she doesn't, my alignment. But I'm not willing to admit at this point there is something sinister about her arriving at that conclusion.

Midnight Sorrow is scum. Process of elimination.

Inflatable Pie is also scum for the same reason. Process of elimination.

I'm keeping my vote on Inflatable Pie because of the three people I had tagged as possibly being scum, havingfitz has eliminated himself simply by the fact that he has not hammered me and IP was in my original pool of scum candidates from the beginning of the day.

The question for the rest of the players, is what do you think? Here are the pairing excluding Nikanor and havingfitz. I have tried to step outside my point of view where possible but in regards to those two, no. No way in hell that I can see that either of them are scum.

Oso/IP – This works, if you assume that we would bus to the endgame but fails as then we would know that Hoopla is a PGO and the best we could hope for was a draw. We would have basically given up any reasonable chance of winning for a 'not lose' or 'everybody lose' instead.

Oso/MS – Same as Oso/IP. It would be bussing. The only way I can be scum with either of those is if you folks think we have given up any hope for an outright win. The only thing I can say to counter that is: No way. This is a game and I 'simply don't do that'. Clear win with gloating and bragging at the end or clear loss and congratulating the winners on a well played game. Draws are particularly unsatisfying to me.

Oso/Hoopla – This works. We've had words and enough banter back and forth that most folks wouldn't see any blatant distancing but we really haven't buddied up to each either. If this is case, then one of us bussing the other near the endgame (or better yet me doing something just scummy enough that Hoopla can jump on and further reinforce her town/PGO claim) is an optimal move. The one remaining threat (Nik the cop) gets removed during the night, Hoopla then uses her intellect, persuasive powers and pretty much bullet proof role-claim to lynch/NK townies to a scum win.

So of the pairing that have me in them, if I am lynched and flip scum then IP and MS most probably aren't scum but Hoopla's chance of being scum goes way up. When I flip town, you will know that IP and MS are still in the running for scum and it greatly lowers the chance of Hoopla being scum. Plus my flipping town clears havingfitz in the eyes of the entire town and you don't lose any advantage of having a confirmed townie knocked off during the night. On my lynch you will still have a confirmed townie for tomorrow because they can't kill both Nik and havingfitz in the same night.

It won't do any good though

as the game will be 2 town-2 scum and if Hoopla has true-claimed then it is No-Lynch/NK Hoopla/No-Lynch/NK remaining town. For town to get a clear victory out of this, we have to lynch right twice.

Now the pairings with Hoopla having false claimed.
Hoopla/Oso – See above.

Hoopla/MS – Can't happen. Hoopla would have Hammered the second she saw IP at L-1

Hoopla/IP – If Hoopla falseclaimed then this is the only possible pairing that makes sense. She didn't hammer him. But this also fails because if she false claimed in the beginning, then there is no reason to worry about having to default to one mafia/one PGO in the endgame. She can bus her partner near the endgame and ride the PGO-claim and renewed credibility to a scum victory. Same as the Hoopla/Oso pairing. This further reinforces my impression that she is not scum and is true-claiming.

IP is scum folks. And MS is his partner.

That's it. Every theory and justification I can come up with that takes into account all the facts as I see them.

Nik-Town
fitz-town
Hoopla-Town
Oso-Town

IP-Scum
MS-Scum

[Oso]

@ Nik and Hoopla

Here

- snip -

I think Midnight Sorrow and Oso could potentially be unwittingly bussing without the knowledge that it leads to an endgame where they can't win. I make this assumption on the basis that they are new players and may not understand the function of my role in endgames - in any case, they should check out the link I provided as it explains the mechanic of my role and if I survive.

- snip -

One thing I can agree with in that is that yes, in the beginning of the game I didn't understand the role. Until this game, I hadn't even seen a PGO claim in any of the off-site games I have played in before coming to mafiascum. Only a few roles that I can only guess that were based off that basic role. One thing all those games off-site did was nail in my mind that a defensive killer preempts all kill attempts on them. Hence the confusion I had when I made this post and this post

The first post shows that I was trying to use the claimed Vig (who turned out to be the SK) to confim a PGO or at worst, kill a liar. The second, where I quoted the wiki article, asks for clarification as even after reading it, I wasn't going to assume the PGO wasn't preemptive even though the article didn't explicitly say so. Hoopla answered me and explained why my understanding of the role was off. No one contradicted or clarified her answer so I took it at that point that was how the role worked. Now unless you think I was deliberately lying in that exchange about my knowledge, then I ask you to consider this.

If Hoopla is correct, then I am scum because my inexperience with mafia (a wrong assumption in itself, I am simply new to the MafiaScum site) has caused me to help get my team into a situation that we can't get out of. So, with my inexperience with mafia in general and the PGO in particular I must also be dense enough to have first made an attempt to get the PGO confirmed first?? Before hosing up my play so bad I helped back my team into an unrecoverable corner?

Remember, if I'm scum, I have to know that that Hoopla's PGO stands a pretty good chance of being true but even knowing that I went ahead and tried to get an un-NKable townie confirmed thus making her unlynchable as well?

I'ma have to go retake the I.Q test. I think maybe a relative paid someone off so I got a higher score than I was supposed to. If I was scum and thought the PGO was unNightKillable, the last thing I (or anyone else who had a thinking capacity greater than a turnip) would do is push to have anyone confirm her.

You can't have it both ways really there Hoopla. Either I am so unfamiliar with the role and how to play mafia in general, that I helped back my team into a corner after having tried to confirm the one player at that point that would have guaranteed she never would be lynched. Or that I lied about my knowledge and tried to 'Forrest Gump' my way into getting someone not-mafia to try and kill you so the we wouldn't have to. Or, as a final thought, maybe you do think I am really that dumb and that poor of a player and I did both.

That where Hoopla's logic chain has it's flaw at least in today's discussion. She is basing on the premise that the 'Oso' part of the poor fitz/Oso team has let my unfamiliarity with the PGO role and game get them into trouble while ignoring evidence in the thread that shows the opposite, Namely that while I am unfamiliar with the role I did attempt to use another role to confirm her claim based on the knowledge of the role as I understood it before it was explained to me.

If Hoopla is right, I am unfamiliar enough with the role (and she's right, I was) that I tried to use my erroneous understanding of a PGO to get her confirmed. That is town. If not then I lied about my knowledge. That is scum. The problem here is that Hoopla is basing her attack today based on her perception of my abilities and my (lack of) understanding on PGO role and not on the fact I might have lied about that knowledge and thus keeping me in her pool of suspects and eligible for being scum for the wrong stated reasons.

I am unconfirmed to the vast majority of the town. I am confirmed with fitz as I have used my alignment to make a call on his alignment and he knows I am telling the truth just as I know he is. That's where Hoopla is getting the fitz/Oso team. This breaks that. I may have been lying in my knowledge of the role and was trying to get Hoopla VIG killed and am basing my knowledge of calling fitz town based on my being scum and he's not on my team. Or I didn't lie about my knowledge of the PGO role and tried to confirm Hoopla's claim in the only way i could think of and I know fitz is town because he didn't hammer me when he had the chance. Hammering an exposed townie is something I think scum would have almost have to do at this point in the game.

Hoopla has arrived at the conclusion that I'm scum based on flawed logic or the assumption that I am just really stump dumb and therefore hasn't eliminated me from her pool of elimination suspects. fitz, as I see it now, gets the 'guilt by association' from that and the fact that Hoopla hasn't eliminated him from her pool of suspects for other stated reasons. Get right with the fact that I am not scum, at least not for Hoopla's stated reasons and fitz gets a stamp of 'Town' leaving us right back at IP/MS.

[Oso]

Ok, Inflatable. Re-read my last post and tell me what you think of my referencing those first 2 posts after the quote.

Was I lying about my reasons for thinking that sicking a Vig on Hoopla was a good idea, but a bad play based on not understanding the role? Or an outright lie to kill the PGO so Hoopla could be gotten out of the way without a mafia loss and I used supposed ignorance to cover it up?

If you think that I am lying and that I did understand the role, how is it that Hoopla was able to catch the MS/Oso "possible bussing" because of inexperience/not understanding" Granted anyone can make a mistake but do you think in a team of three people (the assumption that everyone is going on at the moment and one I happen to agree with), that somewhere along the line at least one of them would have gamed it out into the endgame and figured it out and discussed it with their partners? Assuming that three people collectively made that big of a mistake is beyond reason. It is very remotely possible in my opinion but so close to zero that my belief is that option shouldn't even be considered by any thinking person. And I certainly wouldn't base any real assumptions off of it.

For that work, you'd have to assume that Gwynplaine, fitz and myself all managed to miss it.

Hoopla was right in the fact that I am inexperienced as far the role goes and I made a mistake with it. But that mistake came on day 2 when I made an assumption that we could prove Hoopla as a PGO. Why? Because I had no one else to discuss what I thought it meant with anyone other than in thread during the daytime, not by missing the fact that it would be a bad move to have 1 scum/1 PGO in the endgame.

[Oso]

I'd have to get out the sheet I have buried somewhere to get the exact game count, but that finally breaks my streak. Over 40 (43 if I'm remembering right) games played at various places on the interwebz, and this is the first time I have ever been lynched.

[Oso]

The smiley is for what I have been told on other sites "You can't call yourself a real mafia player until...(whole list of conditions)," and then ".....until you have been lynched at least once and you have won as an SK." This checks the "having been lynched" off. Now all I have left is winning as an SK. Probably take a while as in all those games only was SK once. I got killed by a newbie playing playing a Vig. He claimed, "someone who found scum one day one has to have had inside information." Apparently, I was too townie

But I am one step closer to being a true mafia player according to that list.

[Oso]

Ain't saying one way or another. I'm dead remember? As a ghost I lost all memory of this game until it's over.

It's in yabbaguy's hands now.

[Oso]

@Hoopla, I take back every mean thought I had about during this game

Well done doesn't cover it but I just don't have the words

[Oso]

Question that really doesn't need answered but did you Hoopla, MS or Fitz catch this one?

Taking his posts into complete isolation, I would say fitz is scum regardless of Oso's alignment simply due to the sheer buddying to Oso that's going on there. In the context of this game, however, it IS pretty obvious they're buddies.

It was in twilight and easy to miss though.

[Oso]

NK any claimed PGO night 1? Even if it does take you down to 1 player?

[Oso]

Add on: I think you did exceptionally well IP. The only thing I think you did wrong was that post in twilight after my lynch. Other than that you did very well I think. I mostly had you on my scum list because of a process of elimination. Not because you had done anything outright scummy in my eyes.

[Oso]

You did very well I think yabba. I thoroughly enjoyed the game. It broadened my experience as well. Until this this game I hadn't really thought about the ramifications of an unmodified PGO (even though there wasn't actually one present) and having never played a vengeful townie (or my dead lounge guess, a bomb) I am now open to how both those roles can be used quite effectively in a game.

All in all, one of the better games odf mafia I have ever played. Definitely in the top 5 on a sheer enjoyment scale.

[Oso]

One more thing: I had to literally prod the dead people to get the Dead Lounge going at one point. Once it started up, it hardly stopped, but something in me thinks it's not terribly used D1 and D2. My thought: open it D3 when action is really starting to unfold and it becomes an interesting game as an observer.

Plus it's fun. Then you get watch to watch along and spout of all those gambits, swashbuckling, seat of the pants theories and things you'd never be able to use to use in a game. Or even mention w/o fear of being (rightly) lynched if anyone thought you were serious.

Plus it still sharpens your game. Even though you can be as off the wall as you want, it still helps improve your game even though you are not directly particpating

[Oso]

It showed he had knowledge of the setup before my role reveal.

Paraphrased. "I think is Fitz is scum no matter what Oso flips."

Taking his posts into complete isolation, I would say fitz is scum regardless of Oso's alignment

simply due to the sheer buddying to Oso that's going on there. In the context of this game, however, it IS pretty obvious they're buddies.

That jumped out at me the moment I read it and even before yabba came in and acknowledged the lynch, I knew the game wasn't over.

[Oso]

[Add on]
And that was just about all I had right about the end game though. Just before my lynch, I had taken Hoopla out of the confirmed town category. I was entirely ready to think that the scum team was IP/Hoopla mainly based on on the 3 scum setup we all were operating under. Under that erroneous setup assumption, I knew you couldn't be scum because I wasn't. The same logic I used to try and clear myself also cleared MS. Even though there was no PGO, one person missing the inherent PGO end game trap for scum would be understandable. But three people missing it was a bit of stretch.

Nik was cleared as the cop. I was cleared because I knew my alignment, you were cleared because you didn't vote me. That left MS/IP/Hoopla. Every thing I had, even if most of it was a process of elimination after taking out probable townies included IP as as member of the team, so that cleared MS, if only weakly because MS voted IP. That left IP and Hoopla.

I was completely wrong clearing both you and MS as it turns out because all my pre-lynch reasoning that day was based on 2 scum still left and that the team as a whole hadn't missed the inherent trap of a 1-scum/1-PGO endgame.

[Oso]

So, then I could have made a post about what I thought of both Hoopla's and IP's twilight posts and that would have been cool?

Something along the lines of "You're wrong." - Hoopla's
and
"In yer dreams, you scum. This game isn't over yet as I can see that you well know." - IP's