Tomorrow I finally get full access to the internet again!!
---
I've been reading along on my mobile (much to the detriment of my phonebill) so I've had a kind of outsider's perspective on this whole affair, and either way it's worrying. We're getting far to close to the deadline without a clear lynch candidate. More on this later...
The Calcifer Case
Percy wrote:How I read it now: Perhaps there's something else at work. It was as SpyreX said, a botched attempt to claim a cop guilty, and Calcifer doesn't know who Enigma targeted, so if he claims radar and his target doesn't match up with Enigma's, he's lynched scum. If he claims espionage and gets CC'd, then he's dead.
I think it's even more subtle than that. I think Calcifer *does* have the radar (in fact, with the lack of CCs he almost certainly does). But I think he could be scum who opted to block town from getting the radar. This added element ought to affect your later post:
Percy wrote:Enigma's confirmation (I guess since he's not voting Calcifer) of Calcifer's target means I feel much more comfortable about things. It's clearly not what SpyreX originally suggested (a scummy attempt to draw out the cop), and I for one am willing to let the matter rest.
Calcifer knowing Enigma's target does not make him any less suspicious at all. There is no reason for scum to lie about who visited who; in fact, telling the truth "reluctantly" might just garner enough town points to dismiss earlier concerns - exactly as it played out here.
So now retroactively popping back to this part:
Percy wrote:I will hammer Calcifer if he's put to L-1 and continues to refuse to claim.
Would you still hammer Calcifer now?
---
The Enigma Case
Percy wrote:Guys, we've got less than a week until we have to lynch somebody. We can waste that time on more claiming and setup speculation, or we can scumhunt.
This a thousand times. And - who has willingly made that much harder than it need be?
Enigma wrote:Gee fucking Gee
Enigma, having seen how the Calcifer affair played out, has now done the EXACT same thing, but rather than doing it at the start of the day, he's done it very close to the end. To me this smacks of scum opportunistically bungling town's lynch capacity, or trying to rush a mislynch near deadline.
Doombunny9 wrote:Also, I'm willing to trust Enigma at this point. I don't think scum would try to claim cop at this point when they could easily just wait until it would be more important for them to do so. Also, even if it were a ML we would still have caught Enigma-scum tomorrow. Either way we have scum.
Uh, back up right there Doom. Let's look at what Enigma has said.
Enigma wrote:Percy, I received a
result
which I believe is quite likely to be incriminating. Do you have an idea why that might be?
The wording of this has left plenty of wiggle room for Enigma to avoid getting lynched tomorrow. He hasn't said "He is confirmed scum" he has said he
believes
* it to be
quite likely
** to be
incriminating
***
How careful Enigma has been to avoid saying anything absolute! The ONLY ability that he could have that would lead to something incriminating would go further, and give him an absolute indication. And yet he's been careful to dance around it. He's also been careful to not claim that role, because he knows that claiming that role backs him into a corner. And scums hate dem corners.
*"Belief" does not equal fact - he can say he was just mistaken
**"Quite" likely, not even "very" likely. Far from certain.
***"Incriminating" instead of "guilty" or "scum"? Incriminating just means leading to more suspicions.
Doom, operating under the assumption of mislynching Percy and autolynching Enigma is flawed. Put another way, would you have been willing to lynch Enigma today and if he flips legit get Percy tomorrow? Look again at how Enigma has worded himself - look at his lack of vote at the start of the day - it is far from certain that he caught scum, and yet you're operating under the assumption that he is claiming that he has. He's left enough distance from the result and the vote to have to take full responsibility for it.
Let me restate: The only role that Enigma can have that would be incriminating would be FULLY incriminating. And yet Enigma's words have him as "likely", as "believing". This isn't a townie PR with a result; this is a scum PR with a result. And so;
Vote: Enigma
Enigma: if I'm reading too much into your words, tell me. Come out, fully, and tell me that you HAVE, 100%, caught scum, and I'll listen.
---
Calcifer wrote:I don't understand. Why didn't you autovote him at the start of D2 then?
Enigma wrote:Are all investigative roles supposed to claim on Day 2? I must have missed that memo.
I must have missed the memo where votes were the same as claims.
Percy wrote:Fuck, I think I just figured it out.
If it's what I'm thinking, Enigma, then I am going to be fucking speechless.
Does "what you're thinking" make Engima more likely scum or more likely town? Share your thoughts: we can't have two "tee-hee" dances going on at once, or SpyreX will have a heart attack.
---
Now, this vote does not lessen my Calcifer suspicions. Considering that the Enigma vs Calcifer ended early into D2 (with Enigma saying Andy was townie, no less) I'm still considering the possibility that Calci and Enigma had a plan that backfired a little. I am interested in either of their lynches, but I accept that just one being scum is probably more likely than both being scum.
Ninja Edit: Oh, looks like Socio has just responded to Zhero on this very point.
Socio: Do you think that Radar is useless for town? Do you think scum have no use for it?
Zhero: Why would Calci claiming to have tracked Enigma be "outing" his partner?
