Cyclic Experimentation Set x01 - [Game Over]

[Saint]

Never mind then. Still works if there is a doc or something on me though.

No doc is going to protect you
if a doc would protect you he is an idiot
The town is going to vote on who you shoot if I have any say about it

I actually have to take back what I said here. Doc protection might be the best thing that could happen, but I don't want anything directed in case of them having a role that can stalk or intercept, or something we simply don't understand yet. Playing slow and cautiously is the best in this setup, as we will get to see who is not scum with who based upon the passing of abilities and who dies.

Me saying "WE AS A TOWN ARE DIRECTING YOUR KILL", themanhimself, is "protecting one of my buddies with a threat of retribution"? Wouldn't this imply:
1) I have buddies
a. I am town, so my buddies are unknown to me
b. if I was scum, would you expect to "catch me" with this ploy? I don't believe something like this would work. Where is this flak coming from? I had been reading you as town, but I'm not understanding you misinterpreting me. I see scum going for my lynch very often, as I am an easy mislynch typically, but with Vi in the hydra coaching me this is less so.
2) I would act anti-town through said retribution
a. this implies we would need retribution, which means diddin would be acting against the town's wishes, and would be anti-town and probable scum
b. in fact, wanting a general consensus from the uninformed majority is pro-town, bro

this leads me on to MoI's recent postings, which I feel the need to address. I agree with many of his reads, and am nearly willing to push for pops hardcore. I also like themanhimself's vote on EC. I'd be happy lynching either of these, or Narsis, who has been generally posting no content whatsoever, or what little content he has posted hasn't been worth a fuck.

MoI, we don't need to hold diddin accountable through getting rid of him as scum NOW. Of course I want to medic protect/doctor save him from vigs/hits(if he's actually town

, on the off chance) to keep the ability alive... although he said it is possibly limited? If there is only 1 kill, and he wastes it/uses it on town, what's the use in the ability anyways? where the ability has to pass to town, if he's scum, who is to say they won't pass it to their hit? I will want to know who he passed it to, and if the person ends up dying then he will end up frying. I really hope this doesn't happen, and I am actually somewhat leaning on him being town. Kind of neutral on him, but he has helped his image recently with me as opposed to hurting it. I am just worried that he will end up dead, or the person he passes his ability to will.

Typically when people have "passed their ability to a dead player" they are just looking for an easy out.
I don't care to lynch diddin on d2 or d3 if we find out on d3 that he has passed his ability incorrectly, or in the d2 scenario if he has acted against the town's wishes.

I have generally not had success with lynching lurkers d1, as they are easy targets for scumpushing just as much as VIs like myself are. For this reasoning, and anything I have said previously... which I feel like my statements have changes little... I am very willing to lynch pops/ec/helghast as opposed to someone like Narsis who I feel is more apt to be vig bait.

town imo:
MoI - agree with his reads
CKD - posting similar to his town meta from MoHO
Q21 - very pro-town posting
Lateralus22 - based upon thelonging, who was my first town read (ask Vi)

proposed target:
and I had to really think about this one... but helghast
I feel like he has been posting fluff
He has a post that incriminates WC, who he could be trying to baby
I went to see votes on him, and I'm happy to see pops... I hope he doesn't jump off if it gets wagonned... that would just be

too easy

like I said in (i believe it was #372? just saw Vi reference it.. wait no it'd have to be previous to that.. let me check... well, I can't find it, nm.

It's 8am and I haven't been to bed. Real life has been hectic.

I'll cut this short, but I like MoI recently...

a lot
vote to dayvig: narsis
unvote

VOTE: helghast

[MagnaofIllusion]

@MOD – Please confirm that Mafia members are prohibited from trying to pass a Cycling Power to a player they will use their Factional kill on.

@Pops

– I’ll be addressing your responses that started at 445 but as I addressed above a large part of your arguments about Diddin as scum eliminating the abilities I think are invalid. In 1040 when NoPoint as scum was passed the Vig power he was prevented from passing it to either myself or LMP (the Factional and Vig shots that night). I don’t see anything in Mod’s rules the demonstrate this process had changed. If I am correct in my thoughts than any argument that follows the line that 'we lynch Diddin if we think he is scum because he'll just pass the ability to a dead player' are invalid.

This is a very important point regarding 1040 - Had Mykonian pushed for a no-lynch and used the Vig successfully Town would have won the 3 player endgame. NoPoint had no reason to want to pass the ability to a still living player as it opened the slim possibility that he could lose without being lynched.

I do it with both alignments. It's good play. Deal with it. Lurking is a weak scumtell, and a promise not to be readable for the rest of the game.

And lurker hunting is good play when no better cases are available.

So which is it … good play or conditional good play? Because even at the point where you went lurker hunting I think there was scummy behavior being exhibited that warranted pressure.

Also, self provided meta is as useful as a $3 bill.

Explain why fencesitting is a scumtell, or this is an offtopic post. I've been accused of fencesitting in far more of my town games than scum ones and still fail to understand how it's a scumtell, so you'll need to enlighten me.

Fencesitting is a scum-tell. When fence-sitting you are establishing a position that can be used to argue that you were correct on an issue at a later date, regardless of which way the issue fell. Town doesn’t generally have need to do so this and be able to say "See, I found WC Town / Scum" regardless of the outcome when people begin looking at relational tells.

The net result is still negative. Info about who is not scum with who seems to only have marginally use. One of two players has to flip scum, and then we only get one confirmed innocent.

Disagreed completely. In the later stages of the game having a large pool of information about players who cannot be scum of the same alignment with other players is invaluable to a PoE process, which Town will likely be using since no Town roles look to be ‘set’ in this game.

And democratic daykilling is bad because the mafia are influencing it? Man, we should stop lynching, the mafia influence that too. vote: No lynch. *eyeroll*

I love this dismissiveness. Straw-manning for the

win

loss.

No, I'm not scum because I support a better procedure for handling the dayvig than you do. It just means you don't understand it yet, or at the very worst, I'm mistaken. Knowingly pushing bad theory is something I would never try, have never tried, and have never seen with either alignment. It's next to impossible to make a town go along with incorrect approach to the setup, 25 (or even 12) players can't and won't be that dumb. Pushing bad theory as scum has a risk with almost no possible reward.

Yeah, I’m almost positive that you aren’t supporting a ‘better’ procedure when it eliminates possible information. And again, self-provided meta is useless. Finally you overestimate any Town’s ability to be led with scum-driven advice when there is enough vocal and powerful personalities in the scum pool.

--

@chkflip re 471

– You feel the need to respond to Pops non-game related comment regarding the Wiki but nothing regarding being called scum by me?

--

^This is a scum claim.
Because scum know there's no counter-argument to that incredible WIFOM - regardless of what you think, my stances on it are the only ones that make sense. And he doesn't like it because he can't use it to push a crap case on me.

Yeah, that’s cute. WIFOM statements like you made at 147 don’t really need anyone to express a counter-argument because, you know, it is built in. Let’s look at your post since you got so hot and bothered by a little criticism.

But the simplest one - Parama is town bombing muhscum - is the simplest one.

Now for some counter-WIFOM:
1. If I was scum, why would I publicly claim that I have a bomb? Couldn't I just keep it silent and quietly pass it to a lurker?
2. If I was scum, why wouldn't I pass the bomb ASAP? I could've passed it in the pre-game, for crying out loud. But I held it until I saw someone ping my scumdar.

First of you’ve just pointed out how Occam’s Razor is full of fail for Mafia. Because the scenario you presented as the simplest one clearly wasn’t the case once we got his flip.

1. As scum you’d publicly claim the bomb for the Town cred you are trying to claim. Duh.
2. Passing it to the first person who you see do anything you could portray as scummy would make them target you would not get attacked for choosing. In an attempt to, again, claim Town cred. Again, duh.

I’ll chock up your reaction to what I see from Fate or any other out-of-control ego on site for the moment.

--

I get what you're saying here, but after diddin claimed, don't you think this throws all individual responsibility out the window? I mean, to an extent, diddin is going to be responsible regardless of what he says or does, but when you claim before shooting, you're effectively trying to rid yourself of total responsibility.

I agree with what you are saying but I don’t ascribe to letting diddin divest himself of responsibility. As Town I think the proper course of action is to let him make the shot himself and thus bear the responsibility for it.

This is hypocritical, Magna. You say this and then in the next breath say Narsis or EC should be shot. Longing/Lateralus has more posts than EC and Narsis combined as of WC's post count.

It is absolutely not hypocritical.

1. EC is not a lurker and I don’t see how you attempt to classify him as such.
2. Regardless of how many posts Lateralus has made since replacing in when Pops made her lurker-vote Longing had between 2 and 4 posts. You can’t say give Pops credit for pushing on an active player when the activity came after the push. The fact that Pops has agree that she was lurker hunting makes this particular part of the argument by you confusing to me.
3. You are mis-repping my position. I stated that all four of my suspects would be good Vig targets (as I think all are scummy). I stated the Narsis was the best of the four due to low activity. If you disagree that Vigging scummy players with low activity is better than Vigging scummy players who post a lot (and therefore are more likely to slip / respond when questioned) we have a difference of opinion.
4. If it was hypocritical I’d be voting for Narsis. I’m not voting for the ‘lurker’. I’m voting for Pops, the active scum.

As a cherry on the top, I don't particularly like your chkflip argument either. Helghast, among others, is worse than chkflip in the "concealing his scumhunting" department.

My suspicion of chkflip can be summarized as such but read my long response post for specific posts by chkflip I find scummy.

Helghast is mostly avoiding my wrath based on meta evidence that tells me his ‘I don’t post lots of suspicion’ shtick is a Null-tell.

--

If there is only 1 kill, and he wastes it/uses it on town, what's the use in the ability anyways? where the ability has to pass to town, if he's scum, who is to say they won't pass it to their hit? I will want to know who he passed it to, and if the person ends up dying then he will end up frying.

You can’t use the argument that ‘What if there is only 1 kill’ to justify your approach as we have no idea how many shots diddin’s power has. What if there is more than 1? Then it has plenty of use, including eliminating Mafia pairings.

And as stated above I don’t believe scum are allowed to pass a Cycling ability to someone they use their kill on.

[The Eruci]

@MOD – Please confirm that Mafia members are prohibited from trying to pass a Cycling Power to a player they will use their Factional kill on.

The only restriction any existing anti-town faction may have on their cycling abilities is that they may not pass a standard ability to any living partner that they may have.

Narsis is now under replacement, simply waiting for confirmation from the replacement.

Most of the V/LA that have been announced should be expiring today.

[LimMePls]

Wrath's latest posting should earn a bullet.

I'm gonna /barn RedCoyote and

Vote: Helghast

Not a fan of tmh's play either.

[LimMePls]

I agree with what you are saying but I don’t ascribe to letting diddin divest himself of responsibility. As Town I think the proper course of action is to let him make the shot himself and thus bear the responsibility for it.

QFT. I think the voting on the vig is bad.

[Powerrox93]

I still doesn't see how Helghast is scummy.

[WrathChild]

Wrath's latest posting should earn a bullet.

Expand?

I'm back at work now and can become more active. Doing a re-read through.

Just trying to get myself situated here, but it appears the major suspects today are:
-Myself
-Helghast
-Parama
-CKD
-Pops
-Lateralus

[Powerrox93]

WC, please answer my post 463

[WrathChild]

Post Count:

-LynchMePls: 2

-RedCoyote: 12
-MagnaOfIllusion: 11
-themanhimself: 21
-Lateralus22* (Thelonging): 24
-WrathChild: 23
-curiouskarmadog: 28
-Helghast: 11
-Powerrox93: 13
-quadz08: 19
-chkflip: 17
-Nero Cain: 11

-Narsis: 6
-Q21: 3

-diddin: 27
-popsofctown: 54
-SnakePlissken: 1
-I Am Innocent: 15
-StrangerCoug* (UnofficialRuler): 4
-Parama: 35
-Implosion: 16
-EtherealCookie: 14
-Saint/Vi: 27

What do you wanna achieve with doing that kind of list?

Looking at lurkers and distinguishing them from inactives is just a first easy step for me to begin scumhunting. I'm not sure what this meta is like, but where I come from, scum lurking to victory neared epidemic proportions and lynching lurkers became a necessity. I'm always open to lynching based on scummy plays, but I did just want to take a quick look at the low-post-counters. Now that Narsis will be replaced:

UNVOTE

[diddin]

Post Count:

-LynchMePls: 2

-RedCoyote: 12
-MagnaOfIllusion: 11
-themanhimself: 21
-Lateralus22* (Thelonging): 24
-WrathChild: 23
-curiouskarmadog: 28
-Helghast: 11
-Powerrox93: 13
-quadz08: 19
-chkflip: 17
-Nero Cain: 11

-Narsis: 6
-Q21: 3

-diddin: 27
-popsofctown: 54
-SnakePlissken: 1
-I Am Innocent: 15
-StrangerCoug* (UnofficialRuler): 4
-Parama: 35
-Implosion: 16
-EtherealCookie: 14
-Saint/Vi: 27

What do you wanna achieve with doing that kind of list?

Looking at lurkers and distinguishing them from inactives is just a first easy step for me to begin scumhunting. I'm not sure what this meta is like, but where I come from, scum lurking to victory neared epidemic proportions and lynching lurkers became a necessity. I'm always open to lynching based on scummy plays, but I did just want to take a quick look at the low-post-counters. Now that Narsis will be replaced:

UNVOTE

<_<

I really want to shoot this guy AND Helghast. Oh, how I wish I could. I'll probably be shooting WC though since he seems to be the most popular choice.

Also, I go back to school tomorrow, meaning my posting may increase or decrease based on what I have going on. Just letting you all know.

[WrathChild]

I guess I just don't understand how things work here because I just read over Helghast's posts and those who are voting him's reasoning and it seems like crap. It essentially seems like the very thing I am getting hate for too.

I saw CHK jump on Helghast for no other reason then that he saw no other wagon, gaining momentum and him not voting or FoSing. I really don't like how certain people are calling not-voting/fosing a scumtell. It's flippin Day 1, we have relatively little information to go off and obviously voting is going to be a bit harder. When I vote for someone it is because I would like to see them hang, not to troll for reactions.

Lynchme and Pops also throw pretty weak bandwagon votes on Helghast.

So I'm moving on to Pops now. I don't think Helghast is scum. I know people are going to jump all over this with "Helghast and Wrath don't think each other is scum... CHAIN LYNCH!" Whatever. I'm not going to change my reads on people to cater to those people.

[popsofctown]

@MOD – Please confirm that Mafia members are prohibited from trying to pass a Cycling Power to a player they will use their Factional kill on.

@Pops

– I’ll be addressing your responses that started at 445 but as I addressed above a large part of your arguments about Diddin as scum eliminating the abilities I think are invalid. In 1040 when NoPoint as scum was passed the Vig power he was prevented from passing it to either myself or LMP (the Factional and Vig shots that night). I don’t see anything in Mod’s rules the demonstrate this process had changed. If I am correct in my thoughts than any argument that follows the line that 'we lynch Diddin if we think he is scum because he'll just pass the ability to a dead player' are invalid.

That's not anywhere in the rules of this game. I'll be rather upset if it's an "invisible" rule.

If this is true, then the source of our disagreement is a misunderstanding of the game's mechanics, reducing a large portion of your case on me to "Pops refused to spend 4 hours to read 1040". That's not very voteworthy at all.

I do it with both alignments. It's good play. Deal with it. Lurking is a weak scumtell, and a promise not to be readable for the rest of the game.

And lurker hunting is good play when no better cases are available.

So which is it … good play or conditional good play? Because even at the point where you went lurker hunting I think there was scummy behavior being exhibited that warranted pressure.

Also, self provided meta is as useful as a $3 bill.

I know better than to try to defend myself with meta, silly. I spent six words on my own meta, and it's for explanatory purposes so you can understand lurker hunting is part of my philosophy.

Lurking is a weak scumtell and generally a promise not to be readable for the rest of the game. I will target a lurker if I don't find someone significantly scummier in the town. (They have to be significantly scummier, to overrule the other reason for lynching lurkers, that they tend not to be readable for the entire game).

If you want to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that there were players who were more scummy in the town in that point in time, and that I am so competent at mafia that I wouldn't have missed that as a townie, please, go ahead, and show your work. Since town's only lynch a few percentage points above random chances, though, I somehow think there's room for honest disagreement.

Explain why fencesitting is a scumtell, or this is an offtopic post. I've been accused of fencesitting in far more of my town games than scum ones and still fail to understand how it's a scumtell, so you'll need to enlighten me.

Fencesitting is a scum-tell. When fence-sitting you are establishing a position that can be used to argue that you were correct on an issue at a later date, regardless of which way the issue fell. Town doesn’t generally have need to do so this and be able to say "See, I found WC Town / Scum" regardless of the outcome when people begin looking at relational tells.

Seems just as dependent on flips as chainsawing. I don't see any validity going on here unless one of the targets the fence sitter feebly poked at was actually scum.

The net result is still negative. Info about who is not scum with who seems to only have marginally use. One of two players has to flip scum, and then we only get one confirmed innocent.

Disagreed completely. In the later stages of the game having a large pool of information about players who cannot be scum of the same alignment with other players is invaluable to a PoE process, which Town will likely be using since no Town roles look to be ‘set’ in this game.

We'll disagree then. I think connecting players before actually identifying them as scum is massively difficult and take no stock in it.

And democratic daykilling is bad because the mafia are influencing it? Man, we should stop lynching, the mafia influence that too. vote: No lynch. *eyeroll*

I love this dismissiveness. Straw-manning for the

win

loss.

Explain the superior alternative method of directing the daykill. Have a confirmed innocent do it? There is none. Have a townie people think is protown decide? (that's not diddin, you know). Still democratic at its route. Tell Diddin not to daykill anyone? Then the lynch comparison is totally fair.

I'm sorry if it looked like a strawman. I intended only to debunk "mafia influence as a drawback to democratic daykills", not your entire set of policies based on that point. I have to take things one piece at a time.

No, I'm not scum because I support a better procedure for handling the dayvig than you do. It just means you don't understand it yet, or at the very worst, I'm mistaken. Knowingly pushing bad theory is something I would never try, have never tried, and have never seen with either alignment. It's next to impossible to make a town go along with incorrect approach to the setup, 25 (or even 12) players can't and won't be that dumb. Pushing bad theory as scum has a risk with almost no possible reward.

Yeah, I’m almost positive that you aren’t supporting a ‘better’ procedure when it eliminates possible information. And again, self-provided meta is useless. Finally you overestimate any Town’s ability to be led with scum-driven advice when there is enough vocal and powerful personalities in the scum pool.

It is a better procedure if the mod doesn't have an invisible rule. If there is an invisible rule, I can't be expected to know that when I develop a strategy. It's abundantly clear from my repetition of the kill+cycle possibility and your disputing of kill+cycle legality that everything hinges on that point.

"Finally you overestimate any Town's ability to be led with scum driven advice when there is enough vocal and powerful personalities in the scum pool."
Vocality is correlated with being town aligned, posting makes you readable so scum avoid posting. So unless you know that specific vocal people are scum, which you can't possibly know as town, this statement is ridiculous.

And please identify what your alternative to a democratic dayvig is.

@chkflip re 471

– You feel the need to respond to Pops non-game related comment regarding the Wiki but nothing regarding being called scum by me?

Well, I had become rather abrasive.

I agree with what you are saying but I don’t ascribe to letting diddin divest himself of responsibility. As Town I think the proper course of action is to let him make the shot himself and thus bear the responsibility for it.

Woooooow. This is what you want to happen?

Why don't we do this with lynches Magna? It's quite feasible. I nominate a player we're curious about, say, chkflip. We tell chkflip to select a player to die today. He votes that person, we all vote with him, he takes full responsibility.

Please, please, explain the difference. There's a reason we don't nominate "Kiras of the day" to pick someone to die. That player has an X/N chance of being scum, the amount of scum influence doesn't change with the method. The kill doesn't provide conclusive evidence about the player's alignment, chkflip might mislynch a townie because he made an honest mistake. And we get info about one players alignment instead of every single player on a giant wagon.

All of this applies with diddin. When a dayclaim is outed, and a democratic down dictates how it will be used by ultimatum, it becomes identical to a lynch, it's a death of the day that will go to the most popular target. Bundling that responsibility back up and handing it to one person is the same as proxying 20 votes to an arbitrary player is.

The only possible justification for this would be that learning diddin's alignment is considerably more important than anyone else's because of his power, but that justification doesn't even exist in this game! He has to cycle his power! He's a VT tomorrow morning as much as I am. Why don't I get to choose the dayvigging today. Why don't you?

[popsofctown]

This is hypocritical, Magna. You say this and then in the next breath say Narsis or EC should be shot. Longing/Lateralus has more posts than EC and Narsis combined as of WC's post count.

It is absolutely not hypocritical.

1. EC is not a lurker and I don’t see how you attempt to classify him as such.
2. Regardless of how many posts Lateralus has made since replacing in when Pops made her lurker-vote Longing had between 2 and 4 posts. You can’t say give Pops credit for pushing on an active player when the activity came after the push. The fact that Pops has agree that she was lurker hunting makes this particular part of the argument by you confusing to me.
3. You are mis-repping my position. I stated that all four of my suspects would be good Vig targets (as I think all are scummy). I stated the Narsis was the best of the four due to low activity. If you disagree that Vigging scummy players with low activity is better than Vigging scummy players who post a lot (and therefore are more likely to slip / respond when questioned) we have a difference of opinion.
4. If it was hypocritical I’d be voting for Narsis. I’m not voting for the ‘lurker’. I’m voting for Pops, the active scum.

Yeah, timestamps are important here. I don't perceive any hypocrisy either.

@MOD – Please confirm that Mafia members are prohibited from trying to pass a Cycling Power to a player they will use their Factional kill on.

The only restriction any existing anti-town faction may have on their cycling abilities is that they may not pass a standard ability to any living partner that they may have.

Narsis is now under replacement, simply waiting for confirmation from the replacement.

Most of the V/LA that have been announced should be expiring today.

You should go hang out with chkflip and read past games and wikis so you two can skip reading rules and lose games. You had pages and pages to clarify this point, and now your mistake has wasted a lot of time and energy.

[curiouskarmadog]

post coming I swear (posted in all current games).

[LimMePls]

Lynchme and Pops also throw pretty weak bandwagon votes on Helghast.

It's not a weak bandwagon vote, it is a BLATANT bandwagon vote. Note here:

I'm gonna /barn RedCoyote and

Vote: Helghast

It doesn't get more blatant bandwagonny than that.

Expand?

Ok. All of the following makes me think you are scum and should get vigged:

PS
If people think my death will give the town valuable information due to the circumstances, go ahead and shoot me. If you do, you better lynch scum today or I'll be super bummed.

This is quite possibly the lamest attempt at "too townie to be scum" I've ever seen.

So you're supporting the death of a player you don't think is scum?

Also, Major FoS on Didden for having tunnel vision on killing me.

@LAteralus: What IS the case against me?

Laughably terrible posting.

Post Count:
-LynchMePls: 2
-RedCoyote: 12
-MagnaOfIllusion: 11
-themanhimself: 21
-Lateralus22* (Thelonging): 24
-WrathChild: 23
-curiouskarmadog: 28
-Helghast: 11
-Powerrox93: 13
-quadz08: 19
-chkflip: 17
-Nero Cain: 11
-Narsis: 6
-Q21: 3
-diddin: 27
-popsofctown: 54
-SnakePlissken: 1
-I Am Innocent: 15
-StrangerCoug* (UnofficialRuler): 4
-Parama: 35
-Implosion: 16
-EtherealCookie: 14
-Saint/Vi: 27

Ok, had some extra time this morning. There are three players with disturbingly low post counts. I need to double check the V/LA status on these people.

OK, so I used the most awesome feature of this forum "Display posts by user" and looked at LynchmePls, Narsis and Q21.

LynchmePls looks to have no access.
Q21 announced a V/LA from 12/26-1/3 but had a nice wall post.
Narsis announced a V/LA from 12/24-12/28 and has contributed nothing of value.

In fact, he's made some scummy posts:

1st Post: RVS Vote on LynchmePls
2nd Post: Fixes #1
3rd: Agrees with ability passing confirmation strategy
4th: When Quadz votes Parama for a scumclim, Narsis defends the so called scumslip. The only reason I see people doing this is A: when they are scummates or B: Scum trying to stick up for town, so when that person gets lynched they can give you the I-told-you-so.
5th: Defends self when Magna calls him out for trying to break the game as opposed to scumhunt.
6th: Votes EC on a "Gut-Feeling"

So I think I'll:
(See next post because of Quick Reply non-boldability)

Lurker hunting is NOT a good place to start to find SCUM. It is a good place to start to find mislynches.

Expanded enough?

[q21]

Right, technically I'm back, but I'm 9 pages behind and getting really tired. Rather than read up through bleary eyes and try to make sense of the game I'm going to leave it until tomorrow and then reread the entire thing. Then post like I know what I'm talking about.

[WrathChild]

Lynchme and Pops also throw pretty weak bandwagon votes on Helghast.

It's not a weak bandwagon vote, it is a BLATANT bandwagon vote. Note here:

I'm gonna /barn RedCoyote and

Vote: Helghast

It doesn't get more blatant bandwagonny than that.

Expand?

Ok. All of the following makes me think you are scum and should get vigged:

PS
If people think my death will give the town valuable information due to the circumstances, go ahead and shoot me. If you do, you better lynch scum today or I'll be super bummed.

This is quite possibly the lamest attempt at "too townie to be scum" I've ever seen.

So you're supporting the death of a player you don't think is scum?

Also, Major FoS on Didden for having tunnel vision on killing me.

@LAteralus: What IS the case against me?

Laughably terrible posting.

Post Count:
-LynchMePls: 2
-RedCoyote: 12
-MagnaOfIllusion: 11
-themanhimself: 21
-Lateralus22* (Thelonging): 24
-WrathChild: 23
-curiouskarmadog: 28
-Helghast: 11
-Powerrox93: 13
-quadz08: 19
-chkflip: 17
-Nero Cain: 11
-Narsis: 6
-Q21: 3
-diddin: 27
-popsofctown: 54
-SnakePlissken: 1
-I Am Innocent: 15
-StrangerCoug* (UnofficialRuler): 4
-Parama: 35
-Implosion: 16
-EtherealCookie: 14
-Saint/Vi: 27

Ok, had some extra time this morning. There are three players with disturbingly low post counts. I need to double check the V/LA status on these people.

OK, so I used the most awesome feature of this forum "Display posts by user" and looked at LynchmePls, Narsis and Q21.

LynchmePls looks to have no access.
Q21 announced a V/LA from 12/26-1/3 but had a nice wall post.
Narsis announced a V/LA from 12/24-12/28 and has contributed nothing of value.

In fact, he's made some scummy posts:

1st Post: RVS Vote on LynchmePls
2nd Post: Fixes #1
3rd: Agrees with ability passing confirmation strategy
4th: When Quadz votes Parama for a scumclim, Narsis defends the so called scumslip. The only reason I see people doing this is A: when they are scummates or B: Scum trying to stick up for town, so when that person gets lynched they can give you the I-told-you-so.
5th: Defends self when Magna calls him out for trying to break the game as opposed to scumhunt.
6th: Votes EC on a "Gut-Feeling"

So I think I'll:
(See next post because of Quick Reply non-boldability)

Lurker hunting is NOT a good place to start to find SCUM. It is a good place to start to find mislynches.

Expanded enough?

Let me get this straight:
#1: Blatant Bandwagon is OK
#2: Supporting the death of a player you don't think is scum is OK
#3: Looking for active lurkers is NOT OK
#4: Looking town is NOT OK

[LimMePls]

No, let me correct you:

#1: Calling someone out for bandwagonning when they explicitly said there vote was bandwagonning, is NOT OK.
#2: No clue where you dreamed this one up.
#3: Hunting lurkers and trying to pawn it off as actual scum hunting is NOT OK.
#4: Looking town is OK.

[WrathChild]

No, let me correct you:

#1: Calling someone out for bandwagonning when they explicitly said there vote was bandwagonning, is NOT OK.
#2: No clue where you dreamed this one up.
#3: Hunting lurkers and trying to pawn it off as actual scum hunting is NOT OK.
#4: Looking town is OK.

#1: Forgive me for not knowing the /barn term means the same as blatant bandwagon. Regardless, this does not make blatant bandwagonry any more acceptable.

So by your logic, it would be OK if I said, "I fake-claim Doc so the real Doc and counterclaim me"? If I do something blatantly scummy, saying that it is blatantly scummy does NOT make it any less scummy.

#2: You called:

I don't see helghast as scum at all, I read and re-read his posts and I just don't see it. Lateralus however has given me a very weird vibe since he jumped in this game. Does anyone second that? I think a WC shot would give us a lot of information on someone who very well could be scum but I don't see it as necessary to a D1 scum lynch. I don't think I'd vote for a helghast shot but if you guys wanna discuss other candidates for day-vigging I'm sure I could be convinced. If we want to switch to a WC lynch though I'm not so sure that I would vote for that, seems like a waste of the effort to get a majority together when WC isnt obv-scum in my eyes, whereas a dayvig shot is much more easily decided.

So you're supporting the death of a player you don't think is scum?

Also, Major FoS on Didden for having tunnel vision on killing me.

@LAteralus: What IS the case against me?

Laugingly Terrible posting when I was irked by the fact that themanhimself would support a Dayvig on me, but not a lynch. On top of that he said that I am NOT OBV-Scum. I felt this was a bit scummy because dead is dead. It doesn't matter how you dress it up.

#3: Like I explained, there were two parts to that, 1) that I had not had enough time to do serious scumhunting and was just look at something simple for the time being and 2) Active lurking (where I usually play) led to many scum victories fairly recently, so naturally I felt the need to at least look at those actively lurking.

#4: Agreed.

[quadz08]

Ok, big epic catch-up post of DOOOOOM. Here goes.

Parama, your lack of response to my post 255 does not look good on you. You have neither provided a rebuttal to my point, nor provided a sufficient explanation for why you utilized your earlier playstyle/why said playstyle was beneficial to the town.

Okay, have come to a conclusion:
Scum are using me as a target to defend and attack others with. Would it surprise you if I said I've been doing some dumb stuff on purpose?
Wouldn't be shocked if 2 scum are defending me and a third is attacking me.

I would like to know who you think those scums are. Just saying that you think there are some scums interacting with you really isn't enough.

QFT. In fact, most all of q21's post 263 is quite good. I'm not s ure how I feel about his suggestion of vigging implosion, though. He makes good points, but I don't know if it outweighs the loss of someone who looks to be a townie.

Why does amount of posts mean you have to have a read on someone? That makes no sense.

Not amount of posts. Amount of action. Parama has been involved in the first kill of the game, justified who he sent his ability to, etc. IMO, looking at those justifications and the person he decided to send the virus to should provide enough information for a non-null read, or at least some kind of opinion.

Idk. This is one of the things that bugs me about the general site meta here; after so much stuff happens, neutral reads are seemingly not allowed. (I consider nullread and neutral read one and the same; if that's incorrect/not what you meant, please inform me.)

p.s. I would also be happy voting EC or AntB

Your happy to vote me, yet have made no mention of me or aired any suspicions? The post I've quoted is the only one that contains my name in it.

FoS Saint

This is a good observation.

FoS Saint

from me, too.

FoS me for me being willing to lynch you?
Isn't that similar to OMGUS a little bit?
you're a great player!

you're a nice guy, and good at reading! (see what I did thar?)

I don't see why people are acting suspicious of diddin based on how he has handled his dayvig ability because it's been appropriate in every way, not fullclaiming, making it democratic so it's an extra lynch, all that.

I think the issue with diddin on the dayvig thing is that he's been very, very eager to use it. It's... disquieting, for lack of a better word.

AntB hasn't. HoSing someone for being a newb, then throwing around a ton of suspicion on Sait while keeping a vote on Narsis for voting for gut. Earlier he FoS's Saint for ...swearing and randomly posting... yeah.

Hello, misrep. No likey, diddin. Count yourself lucky you have the power you have.

Meta Hunt
PM'd

....... *facepalm*
Oh, great. Next few posts is you digging the hole deeper. Awwwwwesome.
Aaaaaaand off he goes. *waves goodbye*

Nero Cain's post 340

This is the whole post. All of the quotes from this section will contain only the first bit of what I'm responding to, for brevity's sake.

I fully admit that...

Fair enough, I suppose.

I agree that Diddin...

If you think that diddin democratically using the daykill is protown, then why'd you say it was fishy before? Additionally, if we're not determining roles from town vs. scummy play, then what game are we playing?

As far as my question goes...

Well of course that's the whole point of the game. However, just saying "So is Parama scum or is diddin scum? Or are they both town?" does not contribute to finding the answers to any of those questions. It's an empty question, and is not only fluff, but scummy fluff: you're trying to look like you're scumhunting, while really just typing empty words. Also, which question of diddin's are you referring to?

I really like how you blast me...

My response to Narsis' vote:

Coooool. A vote with pretty much zero reasoning, followed by a 4 day V/LA. While I don’t fault him for the V/LA (obviously), the fact that he placed a vote that we can’t even question him on for the better part of a week concerns me quite a bit.

My response to your ISO:

WHOA. Nero Cain, MAJOR FoS. You called out CKD on posting fluff in your 3rd post; however, your 4 total posts contain pretty much nothing EXCEPT for that vote, in fact. No bueno, my friend.

To be fair, Narsis should have gotten pretty much the same attention from me as you did, after going over his ISO. Nonetheless, I did specifically point out his vote as a negative, and your deflection to Narsis is duly noted.

I think Innocent had...

Side note, I agreed with most of quadz's post 240, then some of the players he questions that I totally agreed with the line of questioning (EC, theman) were not in his top 3. A bit suspicious.

I didn't have anything else to say about my top 3 than what I had already said. Not much else to it.

[quadz08]

assuming that implosion is telling the truth he's unkillable therefore Diddin's kill would not work.

Not so. I believe that implosion has declared unlynchable, not unkillable.

Helghast, I don't much care how often you vote (though there are people on this site who very much will). I DO care how often you post your reads and thoughts. You have done that approximately zero times so far (and looking through your ISO, about twice total. Once was saying you had gut feeling on diddin and parama, the other was saying you didn't see the scummy side of WC.). That makes you unreadable, and therefore scummy at worst, and anti-town at best. Consider yourself on (or at least near) the top of my vig-list.

I disagree with Quadz that he's unable to question Naris 'cause he's on V/LA. You can ASK you just wont get an answear till he comes back this way we can tell if he's reading/paying attention to the game.

If he's paying attention, he'll figure out that I want an explanation from him whether I directly ask it or not. Perhaps I should have said "that he can't even answer questions about" rather than "that we can't even question him on," but I feel that the point remains clear.

Additionally, you pointing out that post so quickly after this:"I really like how you blast me for the vote with no reason when Narsis did the same thing in is ISO #5 yet I'm scummy and he's not." seems hypocritical to me.

Well hello. Here's the thing, you haven't presented any evidence at all, you've made little to no effort to find scum.

QFT.

You're admitting their was no pro-town motivation for your play there...

which is essentially claiming scum?

Wait, what? That's kind of a stretch...

diddin, IAI's catch on ckd is not a good catch. I think that's a completely understandable misunderstanding.

Can you elaborate on this, please? To me, this sounds like you have information about scumkills that I didn't get in my role PM...

This, on the other hand, is a good catch.

In response to the sudden interest in vigging EC: wtf? why?

chkflip: post 417 is a pretty solid post. Town points for that one.

Reading IAI's response post, perhaps it's not as strong as I first thought. Well done, IAI.

No it is not anti-Town the entire game. The ability to publicly pass it for several days gives us solid sets of X and Y are not scum together data.

We'll have plenty of that, I imagine. Losing one role won't cost us that much data.

So does lynching Diddin if he doesn’t bow to public pressure which is sure to have some Mafia influence. Yet you are all for that.

Those are far from equivalent. Mafia has some small influence on what happens in the day. They have (pretty much) 100% control over their NK. Comparing the two is basically apples and oranges.

OH, SNAP. Hi StrangerCoug.

Awwww. Sad I'm your first vote? Boooooo.

RC, I like your post 473. Very good, I think.

MoI, your 476 has a lot of good stuff in it. The only thing I disagree with is this:

I agree with what you are saying but I don’t ascribe to letting diddin divest himself of responsibility. As Town I think the proper course of action is to let him make the shot himself and thus bear the responsibility for it.

I think that the responsible thing for us to do is use it as a second lynch. There’s a better chance of hitting scum. I don’t understand why holding diddin accountable is so important to you (or LynchMePls, after reading ahead).

I think connecting players before actually identifying them as scum is massively difficult and take no stock in it.

Ummmm… the whole point of this technique is that with the cycling mechanic, connecting players is a built-in feature. I don’t know how to do the math, but my guess is that by D3, between flips and connections from ability passing (assuming we do this based on MoI’s plan, which I haven’t seen any arguments against) we’ll be able to know that at least 1 or 2 additional players are scum. I don’t understand what your beef is with this.
Otherwise, your 486 and 487 are excellent. Well done, sir.

My current VI readings put chkflip, Saint, and powerrox at the top of the list. Powerrox is probably first.

I am going to VOTE: Nero Cain. diddin is scummy, but I don't want to lynch him. Nero is scummier anyway. I also think Parama is still scummy.

Vig Candidates

: Nero Cain, powerrox, Helghast, and Saint (Narsis was here, but now he's being replaced)

Sorry that was so long. :/ I should keep better updated now that the holidays are over.

[Parama]

Stop wallposting.
I haven't and am not going to read the past 20 posts.

[quadz08]

I had 10 pages to catch up on. Sorry if your eyes hurt.

[StrangerCoug]

Thanks for the walls of text ><

Saint's response to themanhimself at #475 sticks out like a sore thumb, but the more I read it the less I can really fault Saint.

I'm having a bit of a hard time getting into LynchMePlz vs. WrathChild. WrathChild accuses LynchMePlz of "weak bandwagoning", LynchMePlz counters that it's blatant and not weak, and any more detailed than that I'm getting a mental block. Could anything else important about the argument be summarized please?

[The Eruci]

DarlaBlueEyes replaces Narsis, effective immediately.