Mini 1126 - Game over - Was Averagely Suspicious saved?

[subgenius]

Game on! WOO!!
(game face)

[subgenius]

That reminds me of how I paused that super bowl commercial with all the tv characters watching football so I could see what team the Simpsons rooted for, in the hopes that I could figure out what state they're from. Home had a Steelers jersey, and Marge was wearing a Packers jersey. What a let down.

[subgenius]

We should lynch everyone at the same time!

Vote: Mass Suicide Pact

It's the only way. I'll start mixing the kool-aid.

[subgenius]

Lets get this over 5 pages before the game even starts. That'd be pretty .

[subgenius]

What was it, 11 votes to start early?

[subgenius]

Congratulations, Ashblade, you wrote the 100th pre-game post! Here's your prize!

Vote: Ashblade

[subgenius]

If current trends continue, day 1 might be shorter than pre-game chat.

[subgenius]

unvote: Ashblade

vote: Hiraki

For copying Bill's FoS, even after Barry explained his mistake and put his vote where his mouth is. Trying to appear townie by mirroring others is a definite scum tell.

[subgenius]

If I wanted to copy someone, I'd vote Errant.

Casting the vote to bring someone to L-1 less than a page into D1 would not be a good move for blending in. FoS is subtler and less likely to attract attention.

I take back my FoS though. I didn't mean Barry. I meant Bill.

I don't buy it. If you were bringing up a new point of suspicion, why wouldn't you explain it in the same post? It seems more likely to me that you were echoing Bill's FoS and didn't feel any need to explain it further since he already provided the reasons.

Also, I don't find your made up reasons for FoS'ing Bill all that convincing. A decent chance of scumminess is plenty of reason to put an early vote on a player. I think your reasons were made up in attempt to prop up your back peddling FoS switch.

I think you're lying, and I think there's a more than decent chance that you're scum. My vote stays.

[subgenius]

If you insist.

Bold: Nice job on Meta Telling

I happen to think this particular meta interpretation makes a certain amount of sense. It was, in fact, to scum's advantage to delay the start of the game, and Erratus admitted that he didn't vote to start the game. I don't think this is damning evidence against Erratus, but it is a bit fishy, and a better reason to cast a vote than is usually seen at this point in the game.

Italics: Decent Chance and voting. Ehehehemeee. No, this doesn't make any sense.

I already said this, but I think feeling that a person has a "decent chance" of being scum is more than enough reason to cast a vote against them. I don't consider Bill's vote or use of the word "decent" scummy or nonsensical.

Are you honestly going to tell me that you're more than "decently" sure of Bill's alignment?

Why didn't you write out your reasons out when you first FoS'd Barry?

[subgenius]

Also, I didn't call your reasons stupid, just unconvincing.

[subgenius]

I already said this, but I think feeling that a person has a "decent chance" of being scum is more than enough reason to cast a vote against them. I don't consider Bill's vote or use of the word "decent" scummy or nonsensical.

Doh, I just realized I was misreading Bill's post, and that he was saying there's a decent chance of Erratus being town rather than scum. Oops. Before I get called out on this misreading, I'll go ahead and admit that Hiraki's reasoning makes more sense than I originally thought, but I still find his backpedaling extremely suspicious. Also, I'd still like to know why an explanation wasn't posted with the original FoS.

[subgenius]

No, that's a misinterpretation. A ballsy player from either alignment might post that they did not vote for the quicker day start.

Cool, then let the record show that I wish to have my earlier apology stricken from the record. I am now back to my original level of finger pointing at Hiraki.

[subgenius]

So Erratus is town yay let's move on.

As far as I know, the only people that know whether or not this is true are Erratus and scum...

[subgenius]

So what the hell? If I was a better vote than random, why did you random vote instead of voting me? Heck, why didn't you mention my post at all before saying Bill was right to attack me for it?

I knew people were going to pile on you for your pre-game post, and I think you deserved the scrutiny, but I felt no need to hop aboard your band wagon when it almost certainly wasn't going to amount to anything and others were going to say what needed to be said anyway.

As far as I know, the only people that know whether or not this is true are Erratus and scum...

I'm pretty sure this post is the equivalent of roleclaiming scum if you're not in a newbie game.

What?:neutral: I honestly don't understand how pointing out that townies cannot know the alignment of other players with certainty is a scum claim, but feel free to enlighten me.

[subgenius]

As far as I know, the only people that know whether or not this is true are Erratus and scum...

I'm pretty sure this post is the equivalent of roleclaiming scum if you're not in a newbie game.

What?:neutral: I honestly don't understand how pointing out that townies cannot know the alignment of other players with certainty is a scum claim, but feel free to enlighten me.

Nah, here's how town would say it:

"I don't think we can conclude EA is town because of how awesomely cool that wagon was."

Here's how scum say it: "Hehe, I think EA could still be scum, but Papa Zito is obvscum too for saying he knows who is town."

Yeaaaahhh, just waiting for someone else to start the wagon are we?

Well, those two statements are both making two pretty different points. I made the second one, and I don't think it's a scummy one to make. I do like how you paraphrased my version accompanied by sinister chuckling and over-the-top accusations, though. Was I twirling my handlebar moustache when I said that?

I standby my comment. Acting like you know someone is town is scummy, especially since a hypothetical cop wouldn't have had an investigation yet. If my vote wasn't already on Hiraki, I'd be perfectly willing to vote for Papa Zito.

[subgenius]

Grey is town, you going to lynch me for saying that?

If I thought there was any probability that you're serious, I might.

It's a shame, I wanted Hiraki to talk a little more while I picked at him, and then you became scum. I'd have brushed off or thought minorly on the thought that "you can't clear people 100%", and I would have brushed off the "scumslip" (Don't truly believe in most scumslips other people think they see), but add all you're contradictions in thoughts and posts answering these accusations and I think we have someone who thinks they are trying to be town but isn't.

Yeah, I'm going to answer accusations. I guess that makes me scum. I feel like I've explained any "contradictions," but if you've got anything specific to cite, please do so. I'll answer your questions, which will be win/win, since I'll have a chance to explain myself, and apparently by offering explanations, I'll be outing myself as scum. I also find it amusing that I'm being accused of "being all over the place" when I've kept my vote in the same place after my RV and only referenced two players as possible scum.

No it's not. You need quite a few snap judgments on day 1 in order to narrow the suspect pool. You can revise those as appropriate, but there's no reason not to snap assume certain people are town to narrow down to the scum for your first lynch.

Scum tend to HATE this, because frequently the method is good at narrowing down to them or a partner. Check out how many day 1 bandwagons have been started on scum - they happen because the scum is acting scummy, and people filter out the town posts until they have a list of scum.

This seems like putting on blinders to me. If Zito wants to privately assume Erratus is town, that's his business, but I think issuing a proclamation that so-and-so is town is unhelpful at best and scummy at worst. Unhelpful because it's artificially putting an end to a conversation that might lead somewhere, scummy because it conveys a certainty that a townie simply can't have.

[subgenius]

So you're willing to be silent and let others talk for you if you can get away with it? I like where my vote is.

When I feel like the points to be made are blatantly obvious and wouldn't benefit from my input, yeah. You made a superficially scummy admission pre-game, everybody saw it, you got to L-1, you withstood the pressure, and the whole situation got the scum hunt rolling. It was a case that deserved to be made, but not a serious one. I thought it would be more interesting to start digging in a different direction.

1) Alright seriously? Errantus didn't score to start the game. Whooptedoo. If you can honestly tell me that it's a small scumtell, I'm going to murder you.

I'm not convinced it's a reliable scumtell, but it was a little scummy and deserved to be pursued.

2) You're missing the point. Bill's case wasn't even decent. His entire post was based off the motive of Errantus' actions. FFS. I could be writing this because I'm scum and want to live. This isn't decent

[in reference to Bill's vote] Decent Chance and voting. Ehehehemeee. No, this doesn't make any sense.

I guess I missed the point because you implied in your first post that it didn't make any sense to vote based on a "decent chance", not that voting based on assumed motivations makes no sense. I don't think these two quotes mean the same thing. Sorry that I can't read your thoughts. Again, this makes me feel like you're rewriting history.

3) To be honest, I was hoping I could find some idiot to accuse me of voting with no reasoning, since Bill's first post already sucked. Didn't happen though.

Are you talking about your vote for GreyICE or your FoS on Barry/Bill? I don't find it all that surprising that nobody cares about your apparently RV on GreyICE. If you mean the FoS, then someone did call you out, and it was me, ergo I'm an idiot, and now I feel bad. In any case, either you didn't address my question, or you answered in a way that seems specifically tailored to imply that I'm an idiot, which makes me less than inclined to take your answer seriously. I still consider the question unanswered.

[subgenius]

Scumbait is an easy and convenient excuse, and I don't see any evidence to make me believe you.

[subgenius]

You thought it would be more interesting to vote Ash for making the 100th post than to vote me for a superficially scummy admission?

Judging by where we are now, you can't say I was wrong.

[subgenius]

1. You agreed with the EA wagon but decided it would be better to random vote me. You've already explained this but that doesn't mean that it shouldn't at least be put up there to note. That's the contradiction.
2. "All over the place" is EA yet not on EA, to Hiraki for his fos and vote, to Zito just because of his comment that EA was town. (and let the record show that if/when I decide to call someone town with little doubt you've threatened to vote me as well) YOU look like you want to keep your options open to me with this one and don't have the guts to call someone town.
3. The thing that really changed my mind is that Zito would be voted just because he declared someone town. It happens all the time in these games and just because someone says it doesn't mean it will stick around forever. The thought that you would actually entertain a vote to such a comment is laughable.

1. Reasonable, but not quite right. I recognized that there was justification for an EA bandwagon and that it would serve the purpose of getting the ball rolling, but also felt like it wouldn't ultimately lead anywhere or benefit from my presence.
2. I was never on EA, I just think that those who jumped on him were acting rationally and predictably. I've consistently said that EA's pre-game admission was a bit fishy, but I didn't take it very seriously. Hiraki has been my main pursuit, Zito was an aside that was blown out of proportion since people have decided that it was out of line. I feel like I've been pretty focused on Hiraki. No, I'm not going to call anyone town. I might have my guesses, but that's the as far as it goes. I think it's silly to think any differently.
3. Honestly, I haven't played in awhile, and what you're saying about Zito type comments might be true. Although it is scumtell #5 according to https://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?ti ... ding_Mafia. I'll readily admit that I haven't played or read as many games as you probably have so it's entirely possible I'm way off base on this one.

Oh dear, you seem to have missed my questions, scum.

If you're addressing your list of questions to someone in particular maybe you should quote them or address them with your list, and don't call me scum, jerk.

1. Strikes me as a player that mistakes impulsiveness for aggressiveness and is unwilling to stand behind actions after he's questioned because there wasn't much reason for them in the first place.

2. I'm not going to re-read a whole game for some quiz you made up, but I think Rob has been reasonably active. I'm not particularly persuaded by meta arguments. Even if he was lurking in a similar way as he was in in his scum game, there's no way to know why.

3. First let the record show that I understand the concept of hypothetical questions and don't actually believe you're claiming to have this power. Some people...
Hiraki-well documented
Papa Vito-I'm not as sure on this one as I was earlier, but he'd still probably make the list.
Bill-because I think his flip would be more educational than most other players.

[subgenius]

I've played a grand total of two games in that time, but hop aboard the wagon anyway. There's still more room.

[subgenius]

subgenius - I am struck by several things in your posts. You kept after Hiraki for a number of posts for his mistaken FoS on me, continuing to press on why there wasn't an explanation posted with the FoS at the time. Then, you backpedal in some of your posts, while stating that Hiraki looks scummy for backpedaling. You accuse Hiraki of "rewriting history", and though I may be missing it, I don't see that point.

Everything you write might be true, but you don't point out how any of this makes me scum. The backpedal was based on a confused reading. I admitted it without any pressure and re-framed questions based on my new understanding of Bill's post. Bill then corrected me, so I reversed my backpedal. Read the exchange, and I think it makes sense.

Papa Zito - would like to see you post more, as I do have a question. You "support a bw on sub, by the way" in Post 188, but your vote is still on Bill. Why? I don't have a scum read on you right now, but I would like to know a bit more about this seeming contradiction.

also if sub kept calling you scum, what is the problem with lynching him? (@Hiraki)

I just thought I'd point out that the two late-comers to my wagon have both had somewhat questionable reasoning (Barry because he doesn't agree with my Hiraki case, RobCapone because--i don't know--a townie wouldn't play like I play?). Also, they have both since directed posts at folks who voted elsewhere that would seem to be urging them to put the final votes on me. It could just be me, but the quotes above both seem like pretty shady attempts to push my wagon. I've been humbled enough in the last few pages that I'll moderate my accusations a bit, but I do not like these posts at all considering I'm at L-2 and we still have over a week and a half before the deadline.

[subgenius]

you consider backpedaling as evidence of scumminess when applied to others, yet you don't think so when it is applied to you? I also note you didn't try to explain your "rewriting history" post on Hiraki.

Yeah, backpedaling, changing your opinion, and claiming a post meant one thing they appear to mean something different

as a response to someone confronting you about contradictions and weaknesses

is scummy, imo.

I'll point you to exactly what I meant by rewriting history, feel free to agree or disagree, but don't go and say that I didn't explain myself. That's an out and out lie. I think you'll find I go to great pains to explain myself, and I think that's part of why I find myself at L-2.

I guess I missed the point because

you implied in your first post that it didn't make any sense to vote based on a "decent chance", not that voting based on assumed motivations makes no sense. I don't think these two quotes mean the same thing.

Sorry that I can't read your thoughts. Again, this makes me feel like you're rewriting history.

(Post 181)
By 'rewriting history', I meant claiming an earlier post meant something different after being confronted about it.

Contrast this with the backpedaling you accuse me of, which simply was an attempt to correct myself for a misreading. I thought I made a mistake and wanted to clear it up. The difference is that I was trying to correct a mistake, not evade a question by rewriting a previous post. I'd call the post referring to ironic, but not scummy.

re:going all over the place: I think this has been thrown around a bit this game as a good non-specific reason to vote for someone... Maybe I am, maybe not. It sounds negative, so why not throw it in as 'evidence'.

As for Papa Zito - my post simply questions why he is voting one way and supporting a BW on someone else.

It's a simple question about a simple contradiction with a simple solution of casting a vote. This is more of a leading question than you let on.

That being said, if I am voting for someone, why would I not be in favor of others voting that way?

Because one more vote puts me at L-1, which could very easily end the day a week and a half ahead of time.

That quote of mine wasn't pushing your lynch as it was questioning his stance

Same thing as Barry, simple question, and it could be innocent, but it implies a certain amount of pressure to change votes.

[subgenius]

And you bringing it up doesn't help your position at all.

Please explain.

[subgenius]

Seems like that would be beneficial from my point of view whether I was town or scum. Scum out of a sense of self preservation, town out of hopes that more time=more info=more chances to find scum, not to mention avoiding a ML.

[subgenius]

you are using Bill's explanation of his own post (which frankly looks bad for Bill)

Here's some more subtle prompting to get the last few votes on me.

Anyhow, I don't see anything else new in this post. You've made your accusations, I've given my explanations. I admitted to misreading, I explained why I thought Hiraki's backpedal was scummy and mine was not, and you can disagree with my case all you want, but it doesn't make me scum.

At this point I'd rather wait for some more people to contribute than continue running in circles on this.

[subgenius]

@ sub - Oh noes, posting a case = "encouraging others to vote"... Seriously, sub, that's WIFOM plain and simple - if you want to make the act of presenting a case look shady, then you could say that about anyone's case at any time. If you disagree with the case, then disagree with the case - but stop with the "poor me" speech after you spent so much time "encouraging others to vote" with your own cases.

I'm not saying it's shady that you posted a case against me. I'm saying it's shady for you to hop on my bandwagon late and then prod Zito about why he doesn't have his vote on me. I think it makes you look a bit blood thirsty. All the evidence you've cited in your case against me happened early in the game, and you've been active the whole time, yet you waited until there were 4 votes on me, and now you've twice nudged others towards voting me. This has nothing to do with your case against me, and it has nothing to do with "poor me". It has to do with you opportunistically jumping on my wagon and then trying to manipulate others to finish the job. I'm probably going to be lynched today. I accept that (though I'll keep fighting until the end), but I think you're looking scummy as hell in the process.

1. Reasonable, but not quite right. I recognized that there was justification for an EA bandwagon and that it would serve the purpose of getting the ball rolling, but also felt like it wouldn't ultimately lead anywhere or benefit from my presence.

How the hell is it even possible to think "EA wagon will get the ball rolling" and "EA wagon won't lead anywhere" at the same time?

Some people hop on your bandwagon, some don't. People proceed to talk about why what you did was or wasn't scummy which then spins off into other conversations. Soon everyone forgets all about it because it was just a pretext to stir things up, and they've found bigger fish to fry. Do I really have to explain this? Isn't this a pretty accurate description of how the game actually proceeded? Just so we're clear, "anywhere" is meant as a lynch for you or, at the very least, a bandwagon with staying power.

How would you even know in advance that my wagon wouldn't lead anywhere? That's also bullshit. Townies can't predict that.

If you'll read what you quoted, I didn't claim to know anything. And yeah, townies can predict (meaning make an educated guess, not know) that. Your pre-game "slip" was on the radar before the game started, it was clearly going to be a topic of inquiry. At the same time, it wasn't enough to build a strong case around on it's own, not to mention it would be moronic for the town to quick lynch someone on day 1. It doesn't take a psychic to have a pretty good guess about how the first stages of the game are going to go in this situation. The only way it would have gone differently is if you completely imploded under the initial pressure somehow.

Also competing bandwagons are tech.

I'm honestly not sure what tech means in this context.

[subgenius]

EBWOP

VOTE: Unvote: hiraki
VOTE: vote: Barry Allen

Current status: bracing for omgus accusations.

[subgenius]

Jesus H. Christ, go ahead and keep ignoring what I'm actually saying. I'm almost absolutely certain that either you or Rob is scum. Probably not both, but I'd be

SHOCKED

if one of you doesn't turn up as mafia. Clever use of my free straw man, btw.

Does it look like Barry or Bill would have just forgotten my pregame post if I didn't actually have a good explanation for it? It sure as hell doesn't to me.

Barry ignored one of your pre-game posts, so there wasn't anything there to begin with, and Bill pretty much did ignore your case with no explanation. You simply deflected the case by claiming you're incredibly ballsy. So, no, I don't think either of these attacks were very serious.

Who said anything about a quick lynch? My accusation was that it is NOT reasonable for a townie to predict that my wagon wouldn't lead to new evidence against me.

If that's what you're saying, then you're right. You'll see in my response that I allowed for the possibility that you might have imploded. I did not, and could not predict that.

[subgenius]

@Rob
That quote is directed at Barry. Hiraki posted while I was writing it, so I can see how it's confusing. I should have specified who it was aimed at. I'm certain that either you or Barry is scum.

and this point was a 100% complete misrep of me,

I can't imagine how that must bother you.

I can't say about the other person, but my post was more trying to get an explanation from the person, not trying to get them to vote for subs.

Maybe, maybe not. I'm content with pointing out my opinion on it and letting others decide.

Also, those quotes where I'm "trying to earn town points" are so WIFOM it's not even funny.

[subgenius]

@Rob
Two separate points that neither you or Barry seem capable of recognizing or addressing separately:
1)Obviously, I don't like either of your cases, and I'll continue rebutting them as well as I can. I didn't say your case is WIFOM and therefor you're scummy. It's WIFOM, and therefor it's a bad case, but that doesn't make you scum. I think all of the cases against me suck, but you'll notice that of all the people on my wagon, I'm only calling you and Barry scummy.

2)You and Barry are both scummy in my view due to timing and subtle nudging to other players to finish me off. You can both say you're just asking simple questions, but I think that they were meant to get some fence sitters to put the final votes on me. This, combined with your late arrival on my wagon makes me extremely suspicious of both of you.

On top of this there are little things like dismissing the value of taking extra time to lynch, not answering Hiraki's question about your reasons for voting me until asked a second time, and then answering by saying you don't have to convince anyone of your reasons but proceeding to attempt to do so anyway (post 236). At least one of you two is scum.

[subgenius]

I don't think I did what you say I did, in attempt to get fence sitters to vote you, however if I genuinely think you are scummy, what is wrong with that? If I think you are scummy I am going to try and get others to vote for you.

they are my opinion, if it's WIFOM, oh well, WIFOM isn't even a scumtell anyway.

This, to me, is an acknowledgement that your case is WIFOM. If that's the best you've got, I don't think you can possibly be sure enough of my status to start suggesting a lynch so quickly. Also, I find the form of your rebuttal strange:

"I didn't do it, but even if I did do it, it's not scummy."

If you did do it, it was scummy.

I don't like that you're even entertaining the notion that you're scum. Why would you do that if you were town?

Just to point out the WIFOMness of it. There are reasons for both town and scum to want to delay a lynch in my situation, so it's useless to draw conclusions from the fact that I would like to delay my lynch. If I wrote that only a townie would want to delay the lynch, that would be blatantly untrue, and I wouldn't expect anyone to take it seriously.

[subgenius]

I don't have to convince you of my reason for my vote.

refusal to make a case IS a scumtell

Hm.

you accused me of trying to get fence sitters to vote you but I have not done that. how many times do I have to explain the same thing over and over again.

my question was trying to get hiraki to explain the reason why he is defending the person that is calling him scum, it doesn't make sense.

I get your explanation. I just don't believe you.

[subgenius]

So you're admitting that you already knew he posted his reasons, maybe ones that aren't up to your standards, but we've already established that according to you, no player is under any obligation to make their reasons convincing to other players (or does that only apply to you?), yet you're accusing him of committing a scum tell by not making a case. Neat.

[subgenius]

Hi, bvoight.

That's not the point though. Your response indicates an anti-town mindset. A townie would think and say that they shouldn't be lynched because they're town, whereas scum would be more inclined to say that it's a null-tell when they defend themselves. What's more, the way you said it makes it even more suspicious. You're saying that from your point of view, it would be beneficial whether you were town or scum. Which implies that you actually considered it from both alignments, something you should only need to do if you were actually scum.

I didn't have to think about the scum perspective, Rob provided the hypothetical scum perspective, I responded with the town perspective, which is what I had in mind when I mentioned the deadline. I guess I'm not up-to-date on the townie buzz words.

can you pay attention please?

No, YOU pay attention.

refusal to make a case IS a scumtell

viewtopic.php?p=2803844#p2803844 Hiraki asks for you to clarify your case on me.
viewtopic.php?p=2804051#p2804051 You respond to his post without clarifying.
Whatever scumtell hiraki committed, you've done as well.

and again you have not provided anything valid for your vote. My reasoning may not make sense to you, but I don't have to convince you of my reason for my vote.

You're hypocritically demanding satisfactory explanations from Hiraki after not providing them yourself. Eventually, when you did clarify, you pasted a long string of quotes together and proclaimed that all of this added up to a case. When I said it was WIFOM, you said:

they are my opinion, if it's WIFOM, oh well

Meaning, you don't feel a requirement to make your case persuasive to the rest of us. With this in mind, why should anyone go out of their way to make their cases persuasive to you?

Hiraki gave his reasons. You've quoted them. You know they're there. Yet, you keep demanding that he meet some sort of "Standard of Case Validity" when you've said you feel no obligation to do so yourself. If he strung together a list of quotes and declared that they demonstrated attempts to score town points, then ignored comments that the case still didn't make sense, you'd be happy?

I agree that it would be nice if Hiraki would give an update on Bill, but everything you accuse him of, you've done as well.

[subgenius]

1. Even the "I agree with the wagon" would have done better than just outright saying nothing and then voting somewhere else.
2. Having town reads prevents you from getting into a trap as town of finding everyone else scum. There's this one ongoing game where that situation is proven quite well.
3. Lol wiki.

1. *shrug* Maybe. It's clear that what I did didn't work out very well.
2. I'm ready to admit that I was probably way off base on the whole Papa Zito scum tell thing. I brought it up, and clearly nobody else agrees even a little bit. I honestly did base the comment on the wiki, and now I feel like a huge idiot about it.
3.

[subgenius]

Oh. Oh boy. Nice catch. Damn it, subs needs serious rope today.

Are these two separate points, or am I somehow wrapped up with Wikki now as well?

[subgenius]

Sadly scum come in teams

Yes, they do. Interesting point, indeed. Now could you answer my direct and simple question, please?

And one other one: Why only 3 of your last 75 posts in the last two days for us?

And Subs - you have fixated on the last two folks to vote you (myself and Rob, who btw also seems fixated on Hiraki) while seeming to forget that there are three other votes on you. If you give us a reason to accept you are town instead of telling us what scummy jerks we are for looking at you in the first place, you might actually find someone listening.

Addressed this in Post #241. I'm only focusing on you two, because you two put the only votes on me that I think are scummy. I haven't accused anyone else of being scum for casting their vote on me, because they strike me as sincere. Wrong, but sincere. I don't think that's the case with you or Rob due to your timing and comments after you cast your vote. I've answered the cases against me as best as I can, and I'm trying to resume a normal life of scum hunting. You two are my top suspects. I've stated my reasons (which you've continued to ignore), and they have very little to do with the fact that you claim to find me suspicious.

[subgenius]

If I believe you're scum I should try to convince others.

Sure, If you believe I'm scum, that makes sense, but I don't think you legitimately believe I'm scum, primarily because of the discrepancy between the lateness of your vote and the early availability of the evidence you used to justify your vote, which I mentioned in #228, but never fully explained. So here we go:

You voted for me in post #203:

subgenius - I am struck by several things in your posts. You kept after Hiraki for a number of posts for his mistaken FoS on me, continuing to press on why there wasn't an explanation posted with the FoS at the time. Then, you backpedal in some of your posts, while stating that Hiraki looks scummy for backpedaling. You accuse Hiraki of "rewriting history", and though I may be missing it, I don't see that point.

I was wrapped up with Hiraki by post #186. You made three posts in between 186 and 203 without any mention of my back and forth with Hiraki. Then, after seeing I have 4 votes on me, you come back with #203, which claims that an exchange which you had already let pass with no remark is the entire basis for your vote, and in the same post you start asking Zito why he isn't voting for me. This does not strike me as a legitimate progression.

1. I posted that question to Papa Zito because I did not get why he was voting one way, then throwing in what seemed to be a bit of a random line that he supported a BW on you. That didn't sound to me like "I am voting player X but am keeping my eye on Player Y as well" - it hit me as odd so I asked for a response. I get why you are looking at this one in a different light, but that was my intent. I will say once again though, even if your opinion had been right on this post I don't believe it is "shady" to try to convince others of your stand on a player. If that's true, then everyone who has posted an opinion so far must be scum.

We've been through this. Your post on Zito was a great scum post, because it's subtle and you have a very clear out. I can't prove your intent, but the fact that you waited so long to cast your vote, combined with the evidence you chose to use, combined with asking Zito about his vote, looks incredibly scummy. Unfortunately, it will probably take my death for people to believe it.

2. Your post 214 includes a partial quote of me, which you interpret as "subtle prompting to get the last few votes" on you. Let's put that quote in context..."further, you are using Bill's explanation of his own post (which frankly looks bad for Bill) as evidence on Hiraki (who actually voted Bill)." I directed that sentence squarely at you, as evidence that YOU are scummy. Bill's explanation of his prior post didn't hold water to me, and your attempt to use Bill's bad post as evidence of Hiraki being mafia struck me as scummy. If mentioning any other player's name is "subtle prompting", that's in your imagination, not in my case.

Providing the whole quote makes no difference. "(Which frankly looks bad for Bill)," is an attempt to link Bill and me. You're saying, "Subgenius, you're scum, and the fact that you're using Bill's quote as part of your case makes Bill look scummier as well." This is baiting a response from Bill concerning me with the understanding that if he doesn't come out against me, you'll probably consider it a scummy.

[subgenius]

Yes, they do. Interesting point, indeed. Now could you answer my direct and simple question, please?
And one other one: Why only 3 of your last 75 posts in the last two days for us?

6 posts in other games since this question, and still no answer. Are you avoiding us? Do we smell funny?

[subgenius]

@Barry
I'm through believing that addressing the cases against me is useful in any kind of way. You're voting for me because you think I pushed against Hiraki for too long, my "backpedal", and disagreeing with the 'rewriting history' comment. I've explained the back pedal and 'rewriting history' several times to no effect. It's been explained several times why simply making a case isn't scummy. What more can I say? Also, I've never called you a jerk, and I don't think you are a jerk, just scum.

@Bill
Similarly, Bill has decided to vote me for an off handed comment inviting more people on my wagon. I can truthfully say it was a mix of sarcasm and frustration, but I think it's pretty futile at this point. Congrats on finding a new and unused reason to vote for me, and welcome aboard, though.

@GreyICE
Not asking you to discuss ongoing games, just wondering why you're ducking this one. If it's stalled, try to unstall us.

[subgenius]

I'm saying it's shady for you to hop on my bandwagon late and then prod Zito about why he doesn't have his vote on me. I think it makes you look a bit blood thirsty.

But I agree with this too, in principle. I'm willing to label Barry's play as "perplexing," but I might not go so far as to say "scummy" yet.

1. subgenius - Has spent a lot of time under pressure, has done almost nothing constructive during that time except lash out at the people voting for him,

1)You agree that I had a point with Barry, even if you aren't ready to say it's scummy.
2)I have only made accusations against two people who have voted for me, Rob and Barry, and both for the same reason, which you appear to agree with on some level.
3)I don't see how you can admit that the only accusations I've made against people on my wagon make some amount of sense and then say that I've been merely lashing out against people on my wagon.

is extremely fidgety about phrasing and post frequency, both of which look like desperate attempts to build mountains out of molehills and survive.

I guess you're referring to my recent posts about GreyICE. I don't see where you're getting a mountain building vibe out of that. I just thought it was strange that he's been so active elsewhere and not here, especially since this game has been moving quickly (in circles at times, but quickly). I wanted an answer, but I wasn't handing out torches for the lynch mob.

I also feel that subgenius is a townie getting attacked for poor play rather than scummy play.

Thanks, I guess.

[subgenius]

(so subs, I was the 5th vote, that makes me clear by your list, right? Guess not in your estimation ).

Don't tell anybody, but 5th vote is the new 4th vote, and 4th vote is the new 3rd vote. Shhhh... It's a secret.

[subgenius]

Please. That wagon was built on stupid and scum and should never have gotten to L-1.

Who was being stupid, and was there anyone besides Bill that was being scum?

[subgenius]

ebwop: I'm not asking you to call people stupid, but I would like to know who else you thought was scum.

[subgenius]

@GreyICE
I would expect you to include Bill in this list. What's your current read on him?

[subgenius]

@GreyICE
I would expect you to include Bill in this list. What's your current read on him?

Uh, he's fairly town to obvtown?

I get more of a null out of a lot of people than Bill. Why am I including him, again?

It would be nice if you'd explain your town read on him.

You might remember that you voted for him based on his mealy-mouthed accusation of Wikkiden and lame response to Hiraki, both direct results of EA's wagon. Bill has yet to respond to any of that, so why the town read on him now?

Sub - your own posts haven't helped you. You've mostly lashed out at me and a couple of other folks, with some strained logic and implied motivations - but again if you are using JEEP's list for scumtells it is possible that you are inexperienced enough that this is just how you post (you've been on the site for a long time but IIRC haven't played much lately - someone please correct me if I'm wrong on this). But, with EA taking his vote off you we are back to L-2, meaning we do have time to talk more. Bill's vote isn't enough to take my own vote off you, but it is enough that I want to hear more before we do a quickhammer here.

If you're asking for a rebuttal of your original case, here it is, it's the last you'll get:
1)

You kept after Hiraki for a number of posts for his mistaken FoS on me, continuing to press on why there wasn't an explanation posted with the FoS at the time.

Maybe I did go a little too far on Hiraki. So? I really don't ever want to use inexperience as an excuse, but I'll admit that maybe I went further than necessary without realizing it.
2)

Then, you backpedal in some of your posts, while stating that Hiraki looks scummy for backpedaling. You accuse Hiraki of "rewriting history", and though I may be missing it, I don't see that point.

Backpedal has been explained ad nauseam. I thought I misread a post and made a correction. Hiraki was revising previous posts in response to questioning.

Those were your reasons for voting for me, and those are my responses. If you want to lynch me over those reasons, I have nothing else to say about it.

Now, I'm through talking with you about this. I'd appreciate if you'd stop characterizing my accusations against you and Rob as lashing out, because I really do think at least on of you is scum.

[subgenius]

Actually, better question: Subgenius, do you think the same thing about bvoigt?

Are you suggesting that he's being too confident about his town reads? I've been told in no uncertain terms that this is an obsolete and useless scum-tell. Anyhow, I'm leaning town on him. I think he could have gotten away with hammering me pretty damn easily after he subbed in, but he didn't.

Could you answer my question from #311, por favor?

[subgenius]

Am I out of line to be irritated and a bit suspicious that GreyICE is clearly quite active in other games while ignoring this one despite having questions awaiting his answer? This seems entirely unacceptable to me. Is there any possible town motivation for purposely dragging his feet likes this?

[subgenius]

Good lord man, cool your jets. I'm asking because you acted so damn offended the first time I brought it up, but nobody else really commented. I think your posting behavior is pretty damn strange, but I'd like to hear from other people, people who aren't you.

If you don't feel like deigning to answer my questions, maybe you'd like to respond to Snake Eye's point, which happens to be the exact same. Why the sudden town read on Bill?

[subgenius]

Allow me to answer that question with another question: Is there any town motivation for obsessively pointing out even the most generic of suspicious behaviors of every other player in a game while under suspicion yourself?

This is a case of the pot calling the kettle black if I've ever seen one.
I hope the irony isn't lost on you.

[subgenius]

It's a sudden read?

TELL ME WHY YOU THINK BILL IS TOWN.

I've had enough of your evasive bullshit.

[subgenius]

So you're accusing me of doing what I accused you of, which - again - is: to "obsessively [point] out even the most generic of suspicious behaviors of every other player in a game while under suspicion [one]self."

And I suppose Zito, Hiraki, Rob, Barry, and Grey qualifies as every other player in the game. Lets both admit that we're exaggerating and move on.

@GreyICE

Christ, I hope you're scum so much that it literally just gave me a headache.

[subgenius]

I wish I was lying. Please don't call me subsy.

[subgenius]

... are you

leaning

town, or are you

leaning

town? This could be both important and lolmod.

I am both

leaning

and

leaning

in a combination of

boldness

and

italicized

style.

Leaning

something like this:



I don't know what 'lolmod' means.
Interesting point on Rob's post, btw.

[subgenius]

subsy

What are you, 13? I made a pretty reasonable request to not shorten my name into a diminutive, and you're continuing for no other purpose than to irritate me. Could you please play the game without being an immature jackass about it?


Reiterating from earlier, I'd be happy to see either Rob or Barry swing.

[subgenius]

2.I laid out my reasons for voting Sub, I didn't sheep anyone elses reasons

my reasons for subs may suck, but they are my own and don't mirror anyone else

You've been acting awfully forceful about wanting my lynch, considering that it now appears you were more concerned about making sure your case didn't look like sheeping than making sure it didn't suck.

unvote

vote: RobCapone

[subgenius]

No.

Aw, don't do us like that. The game has actually changed quite a bit since your last post. Wikki's gone, and apparently one of the friendlier of Grey's multiple personalities has appeared. Are you sticking with sweet penpen? Shifting to SE? Thoughts on Rob? What's going on in bvoigt land?

[subgenius]

How in the hell could you tell mocking was clueless but can't read Haker? Mocking didn't post once, and haker's at least posted a little bit.

[subgenius]

@rob
One thing I don't get, how is Hiraki's vote opportunistic when he called you out as lynch material days ago in post 200? It's not like he's coming out of nowhere. It'd be more surprising if he didn't switch his vote to you.

And yeah, I saw that after I posted. I don't know how I forgot about that one... Honestly, I assumed you meant wikkiden rather than mocking. I still really don't follow your logic, but thanks for answering, I suppose.

@penpen
Nope, just managed to forget a one line post with no content.

[subgenius]

Someone give me a rundown on the Rob case plz. I'd like to see it all in one place.

I was thinking about doing this anyhow, because everything is quite spread out. So here's the omnibus version of why Rob is scum, as I see it anyway.

1)For me, the most telling post is this one:385

my reasons for subs may suck, but they are my own and don't mirror anyone else

A few things here:
a)Biggest one is that it shows he was making more effort to not look sheep-like than make sure he had good reasons for voting.
b)despite knowing he didn't have good reasons for his accusation he:
i. dismissed the value of more time (211)
ii. I know rob disagrees with me on this, but I think he absolutely was trying to round up further support on my wagon by going out of his way to question people that he thought would have a good reason to vote for me (zito and Hiraki). I feel more strongly about the interaction with Zito than hiraki. Particularly this quote:(221)

zito how do you go from supporting a subs wagon to trying to de-rail it when he is L-2, just curious

2)The quickness with which he mounted a defense against the sheeping without even being singled out is pretty conspicuous.(376)
3)Insistence that people are scummy when they haven't explained themselves to his satisfaction accompanied by a disregard for when people don't think his cases make sense.
4)New one as I write this, that last post of his seems extremely un-town.


I feel extremely strongly about point 1a.

[subgenius]

I would like to make a side bet:

penpen will still be alive on the last day. Too crazy to night kill too weird to lynch.

[subgenius]

I would also like to note that while I would like nothing better than to see Rob lynched, it would be unwise to not take his threat seriously and end up in night time without hearing from the half of the town that hasn't posted today.

[subgenius]

Glanced at Subs post and it's mostly butt hurt for me calling him scum and twisting me trying to get hiraki to explain why he defends his accuser as trying to drum upvotes

Your insistence on only addressing what I fully admitted was the weakest part of my case makes me feel all the better about the rest of it.

[subgenius]

Also, I think the role claim would have made a hell of a lot more sense before the suicide threat rather than after.

[subgenius]

So I was thinking about the game in the shower, and I'm becoming more and more convinced that Rob is scum, aside from everything I listed in 464

-I really, really don't like this role claim. It doesn't make sense that he would threaten to self-hammer without role claiming first, second it seems pretty premature to claim at L-2 when there hasn't been anyone threatening or even hinting that they might switch their vote to him. If he really had a PR, I think he'd want to hold out a bit longer. Being relatively inexperienced, I'm not sure if the right course of action is to directly question the claim or to start meta-gaming to test the claim, but I have to say the whole things stinks to me.

Also:

the people on the list were sheeping so 1 or 2 people on it have a good chance to be scum, so mother fuckers need to explain why they are not sheeping.

I'm not responding to anyone's case on me
lynch me and you will see I'm not lying

The scummy thing here is that he became defensive when nobody was directly accusing him of anything and then refused to respond to actual direct accusations. He seems to think that offering explanations is a townie behavior, but then refuses to do it later.


Note: Dismissing a case as nothing but distortions based on butt-hurtedness is not addressing a case.

go ask any guy falsely accused of rape if he would go have coffee with the chick later

This is pretty offensive. Doesn't make you scum, but this is a horrible choice for an example.

[subgenius]

I'll post between 12am-2am pst tonight a bit.

C'mon, man.

[subgenius]

Thanks.

I really hope to hear more than this out of you today.

I'm sticking with my wiki/penpen vote for now, although Barry would also be a good vote after looking at Papa Zito's ISO #19.

Why Barry out of the five other people on that list?
It seems like penpen is as good as a no-vote if you're not going to put his feet to the fire a little bit.

I think the Pie is a lie also. Which means he is misrepresenting the pie.
And I think that is scummy.

What.

[subgenius]

@Hiraki and Rob
God, this last 2 pages or so is painful to read. When grammar starts being brought up, it's a good sign that neither of you has anything else useful to say.

until I die in this game I will for always be voting Hiraki or until he is somehow cleared

This is one of the goddamn stupidest things I've ever read, especially when you go out of your way to point out that there can be no proof for anything on D1. You're tunneled in deeper than a Chilean miner, and you look insane. I don't think it's even scummy. It's just insane. Have a stiff drink and cool off.

@GreyICE
I think you're setting yourself up for a brain hemorrhage. I hope you have medical personnel close by.

If we are looking for a counterwagon, I believe we’ve found it. If you wish to follow it, remember who took you there.

So, if you're the counter-wagon to Rob, you're saying Rob is scum along with one of or both of penpen and Ashblade, but you're still voting Bill. This makes no sense at all.

[subgenius]

This and Rob’s later post are awfully convenient. If we are looking for a counterwagon, I believe we’ve found it. If you wish to follow it, remember who took you there.

I still don't get it. You go out of your way to call the votes against you a counter wagon and seem to feel like you're scum hunting by doing so.

As for not voting Ashblade or PenPen - I also do not believe in OMGUS votes. If you will note my original vote on EA was based in part on the OMGUS, and in part on claiming there was a case posted when in fact that wasn't a real case (at least not from my read). So to summarize: Yes I think this looks like a counterwagon, and no I'm not OMGUS'ing or voting a role claim even though that would be easy to do. I'm leaving my vote on someone I've suspected of being scum for quite some time, and I am comfortable with leaving my vote there.

But you seem to be going out of your way not to call anybody scum. This doesn't make sense. If you think this is a counter wagon, you must think rob, ashblade, and penpen are scum. Whether you vote them or not, you're already OMGUS'ing by calling it a counter-wagon, so you might as well go all the way and tell us who on your wagon is scum.

[subgenius]

Once again....
1. My vote is on Bill - I've suspected him for a long time and believe that is the right place for today's vote. While I do not like the mini-BW here, I'm not OMGUSing with my vote. I want to lynch Bill, who is now hiding from us, then we can sort out the little bandwagoners here.
2. I am not OMGUS voting - I made part of my case on EA due to OMGUS voting - WHY would I turn around and OMGUS vote here? If I believe I am voting for scum (and I do) then my vote should be based on the case rather than my being annoyed by someone else.

What's your fixation with avoiding an OMGUS vote? I repeat: You are already labeling rob, penpen, and ashblade as scum by calling your wagon a counter-wagon, whether you vote for them or not, so I think you should be willing to come out and say that and give some reasons.

You're looking more suspicious to me based on your extreme self-consciousness about OMGUS'ing than you would if you'd come up with some evidence to backup your counter-wagon theory.

[subgenius]

I just confirmed in on my first official Newbie game yay!

Penpen, I have no doubt that you're a newbie, and I don't know if you're town or scum, but I'm quite sure that you're not being especially helpful to the town right now. I'm hardly qualified to give tips, but I know that I and probably everyone else would like to see more evidence that you're reading the thread closely, logically forming opinions about it, and trying to find some scum. The only way we can form an opinion about you is by reading what you write in this thread, and if you don't write something at least somewhat rational, you aren't helping us catch scum, and therefor, you're not giving us any reason to think that you're not scum.

[subgenius]

We're going to have to lynch him eventually, so why not today?

I'd say the obvious answer is that penpen's flip would give us literally no new information if it turns out he's town. I think this is the lazy way to go, and we'd be far better off lynching someone who people have built cases against and actually looks scummy.

[subgenius]

The more I think about it, the more I'm not liking bvoigt.

1)He suggests lynching penpen today, which I think is a really terrible idea, for the reasons I explained earlier. (Gives us no information if he flips town, and gives us an excuse for lazy scum hunting today)
2)No posts with content yesterday (real life yesterday), but promises a good post today. His 'good' posts today give us: 595 & 596
-a rehash of EA's post against GreyICE
-a vague opinion about Barry being scummy
-a PBPA about how penpen isn't making sense. This is shooting fish in a barrel and not all that helpful.
With all that's been going on, I don't see either of these posts as addressing the game in any meaningful way.
3)He admits that Barry looks scummy, but keeps his vote on penpen for not making sense. Why would you keep your vote on the crazy player and not the scummy player if you genuinely have the goal of lynching scum?
4)Aside from his initial skirmish with SE, which involved a fairly trifling argument (and I know something about trifling arguments), has contributed very little original content to the thread. I am getting a distinct coasting vibe from bvoigt. I think he kept his vote on wikkiden for so long because wikki clearly was not going to be present to defend himself, and he is keeping his vote on penpen because he is also unable to defend himself. He says he thinks Barry is scum, but has done nothing to pursue it or add to the case against him. Instead, choosing to take easy shots at penpen.

Biggest point is (1). Lynching penpen just for the hell of it is a horrible, horrible idea and as untown as it gets.

As of now, it looks like Rob won't be lynched today. I still think his claim sucks and stand by everything in my case, but clearly my vote is not useful as long as it stays on him.

so

unvote

vote: bvoigt

I, too, am really looking forward to Bill's post. I still don't know what to think about him, and I want to hear more from him.

[subgenius]

Going back and re-reading your case, I'll agree that you have some pretty solid points. Sticking with bvoigt, but observing with interest.

[subgenius]

I really, really wish we could have waited for Bill to defend himself rather than pressuring Grey to do it for him.

[subgenius]

Eh?

We've all been waiting for Bill to reappear and address his wagon. I'd personally prefer him to do it from scratch rather than building on points Grey has made. Maybe I'm overreacting. All I can say is that I'm really interested in Bill's next post.

[subgenius]

Hopefully, penpen will answer my questions soon.

For those who think I'm trying to get a VI policy lynch, I'm not. I'm trying to get a scum-VI lynched. wikkiden was shown to be lying scum, and penpen has done nothing pro-town.

I can't say for sure whether or not penpen will answer your questions, but I'll bet money that they won't give you any reads. I still don't like that you're doing nothing but picking really easy fights. I feel like you're trying to stay out of the way more than anything. I have a hard time believing that wikkiden is your strongest scum-read at this point. You've said that you find Barry scummy, but you haven't done anything about it. This does not have a townie appearance to me at all.

P.S.

Still following the GreyICE wagon, and also find his refusal to explain some very obvious contradictions and flip-flops quite scummy.

[subgenius]

Touche. My point still stands about you taking small stances and tackling small targets, though, and I really think you ought to have stronger scum reads than a replaced players's contradiction from 20 pages ago.

[subgenius]

@Bvoigt
Still not liking the lack of productivity, I still think that trying to get a scum-tell that makes sense out of penpen is a fool's errand, and I REALLY think it's scummy to suggest lynching penpen because we'll have to do it eventually anyway but...

GreyICE is looking worse and worse. His points about starting the majority of the town's bandwagons are provably false, and Rob isn't the only one to think so, yet he continues to avoid answering on the grounds that Rob is retarded and/or scummy. His most recent response to bvoigt (671) is little more than insults and really misrepresents what bvoigt was asking in the first place, and again, bvoigt is not the only one to ask about Grey's quick flip from thinking Ash had the most scummy post in the game to granting him a strong town read. Clearly, several people want answers to each of these questions, and Grey has responded by ignoring them, giving incredibly evasive answers, or insults. I'm pretty sure Grey is an experienced player and has the capability of being quite helpful, but right now I'm only seeing evasions, insults, and lies.

TL;DR: Flip flop on Bill, flip flop on Ashblade, did lie and continues to lie about the wagon issue, refuses to address valid questions by either ignoring them or calling them stupid.

unvote

VOTE: GreyICE

[subgenius]

I really don't think Grey was "flip flopping" on me, but him still refusing to answer the questions is getting ridiculous.

Flip flopping is maybe a strong word, maybe it was an apparent contradiction, or just something that deserves clarification, but it shouldn't be too hard to give a simple explanation for giving you a town read immediately after calling your post the scummiest in the game. The refusal to answer is more suspicious than the act itself. The same could probably be said for the flip-flop on Bill.

[subgenius]

Ugh, penpen may be a newbie/VI, but newbies can be scum.

I don't disagree with this, and you have every right to do it, I just don't think we're going to hear anything coherent enough out of penpen to start making alignment reads. My issue is that it's easy to pick at penpen and carries little risk of saying something controversial, so it ends up looking a little bit like you're trying to stay under the radar. Even if you're sure that penpen is scum, there are still more to find.

[subgenius]

Jesus, lol. 28 pages, and that's how it ends. Oh, well. I think it was a good choice.

[subgenius]

ICe ahs already said he wont say anthing els.e

so

GUSY it's page 28 which is longer than some other games here let's hamemr this ok? ok

I spent quite awhile trying to figure out what "GUSY" is an acronym for. Then I realized that it looks like you're posting from a phone and it was probably a typo for "guys". *sigh*

[subgenius]

Sadly, neither of those NK's or Grey's town flip have triggered any alarm bells about any particular person being scum. I will say that I find those NK choices unexpected. Who did you track, Rob?

[subgenius]

@Rob
What were your reasons for targeting Ashblade?

[subgenius]

@bvoigt
I agree with you about Barry. He has a knack for finding himself snuggly in the middle of the biggest wagons. It's been mentioned many times, Barry plays very cautiously. I can't really decide if this is scummy or not. Add this to his strange counter-wagon defense, his refusal to outright say that he was accusing anyone of being scum by calling it a counter-wagon, yet claiming credit for scum hunting by labeling it a counter-wagon and a sense that he goes out of his way to avoid possible scum tells, and I'm quite suspicious of Barry.

As far as penpen goes... I just don't know. I'm leaning towards VI, but that hammer from yesterday was reckless. I'm not second guessing the GreyICE lynch, but I'm not sure penpen even realized he was casting the killing vote. Also, the fact that he's blaming his vote on Zito is troubling. He's looking very easily manipulated, which will become more and more of a liability as the town:scum ratio becomes worse. So, my opinion is that he's dangerous to town, but I'm not convinced he's scum. I don't know what to do about it, but I need to see more before I think lynching is the answer.

I'm starting to feel a bit better about Rob's town cred, although I think his insistence on keeping his vote on Hiraki is retarded as hell.

My only other thoughts are that I really want to hear more from Bill and mozamis today, because I have very little read on either one of them, and I need to do a re-read with a more critical eye towards EA and Papa Zito. I think both of them skated through D1 with very little attention, and I need to make sure it was deserved.

[subgenius]

*shrug* You seem absurdly tunneled imo, but that's just me. I think at one point you vowed to never move your vote from Hiraki, which seems crazy to me. Anyhow, I don't think it's scummy, just weird.

Forgot you were a tracker.

This is either a town tell or a damn devious scum trick.

[subgenius]

I'm reeeeeally hoping Ashblade was a vig shot, because a vig would be welcomed re: penpen.

Uh... How do you know SE wasn't a vig shot?

VOTE: Papa Zito

[subgenius]

Zito why do you say ash was the vig kill and not vice versa?

That's an interesting question, but I think the better question is why someone would pose the question without mentioning any possibility that Snake Eyes was vigged?

[subgenius]

I had a solid town read on Snake Eyes and I don't remember anyone else mentioning a scum read on him, so he'd be a fantastically poor choice for a vig. (Assumption here is the vig is competent of course)

Ashblade on the other hand was coasting quite a bit Day 1 and didn't contribute terribly much. Given the flip I guess he was either having an off game or is just a slow starter but yes I did have him on my scum list and he makes a lot of sense as a vig shot to me.

I don't remember you expressing a lick of suspicion about Ash yesterday. Neither SE or Ash contributed all that much, neither of them garnered much, if any, serious suspicion, and nobody voted for either of them. I think they both played a similar game on D1, and I don't see one as being a significantly better vig target than the other.

Why is this the first we've heard that you had a scum read on Ash?

[subgenius]

Oh, if scum list=list of sheepers, Zito's post makes a bit more sense, but Ash still wasn't close to the scummiest person on that list, imo.

[subgenius]

Surely Bill is due for a replacement at this point? He was prodded Saturday, and the thread has been open for more than 24 hours. I'd love to have him come back and answer questions, but I'm tired of waiting for him.

[subgenius]

Any comments on my penpen case?

I've already expressed my opinion on the penpen case. I agree with pretty much everything you've said about him, but I don't get a scum read out of it. I don't get a town read either. I only get a not-making-sense read. I think his seemingly random votes and willingness to follow the leads of others is dangerous, but I'm not sure it's scummy.

Oh, hello there thread.

So you pop in with no content just a few hours after replacement is mentioned and postpone content for another day and a half? I understand that real life intervenes sometimes, but that is truly irksome.

[subgenius]

I would add EA to the list of people I'm slightly surprised to see alive today.

The more I think about it, the surer I feel that we don't have a vig. Neither Ash nor SE strike me as great vig targets. I think either penpen or Bill would have been the clear targets for a vig. I'm guessing we either have two scum groups or scum + sk.

[subgenius]

Actually, I just re-read the flavor from D1 and D2, and there is some info to be found:

There was a note found next to the nameless murder victim of N0 which read, "You're next." There was an identical note found next to Ashblade. There was no note found with Snake Eyes.

This would lead me to believe that Ashblade was the mafia NK and Snake Eyes was hit by either a vig, a serial killer, or a non-note leaving second scum faction. I'm guessing SK.

[subgenius]

I still think Papa Zito is scum.
So my vote stays right where it's at.

Who else do you think is scum, and why? Work must be shown for full credit to be given.

[subgenius]

Good catch. IIRC, Papa Zito was saying that Ashblade was probably a vig kill, so this makes him very likely to be town.

Hm, I find myself agreeing with you. The whole issue with Zito neglecting to even entertain the possibility that SE was a vig kill makes more sense as town than scum. It could be a purposeful trick, but it would be fairly subtle and rely on us eventually reading the flavor correctly and then coming back to notice his tell. It doesn't confirm him as town, but I do find it fairly compelling. If I'm wrong, hats off to you Zito, you're a devious son of a bitch.

So, I suppose I'll have to move my vote.

I'm really disliking Bill's play right now, but I can't say I have anything more than a null read on him. There just haven't been enough posts from him.

unvote

VOTE: Barry

I find it suspicious that he takes so much time to cast his vote each day, yet reliably ends up on the biggest wagons after waiting for others to cast their votes. 5th vote on EA, 4th vote on me, 5th vote on GreyICE, and now 5th vote on Bill. The only exception I'm seeing is when he sat on Bill for awhile after my wagon dissolved. Yeah, he's given reasons for each vote, but it's easy to manufacture reasons, especially on a wagon that's already started.

I'm also still confused by his counter-wagon defense from ISO 34. His choice to label the votes against him as a counter-wagon clearly implies that he thinks that his wagon was a scum driven attempt to distract attention from a wagon on one of their partners. The fact that he asked for credit for his 'scum-hunting' proves that he was consciously accusing his attackers of being scum:

This and Rob’s later post are awfully convenient. If we are looking for a counterwagon, I believe we’ve found it. If you wish to follow it, remember who took you there.

When asked to stand behind these accusations, he refused, claiming that any such accusations would be OMGUS. In my book, it's not OMGUS if you think you've caught some scum. Also, his refusal to make accusations out of fear of committing an OMGUS scum-tell is pretty suspicious. A townie would happily build a case against someone who is voting against him if he sincerely thought he had hooked a scum.

TL;DR
1. Pandering for town credit.
2. OMGUS defense with a refusal to follow up, which shows he probably lied about thinking his case was a counter-wagon
3. Refused to build cases because he didn't want to commit a scum-tell.
4. Consistently on the tail end of BW's.

[subgenius]

As for why I wasn't earlier with my vote...maybe it had to do the fact that I was V/LA.

You could have voted in your first D2 post, you know, before your V/LA.

Let's get this straight. You did not ask me to "stand behind my accusation" - your REAL challenge to me was why I didn't change my vote to one of the folks who started the BW on me. I didn't and don't think OMGUS votes help the town...it just turns into "No YOU are scum" and "No YOU are scummier".

Re-reading that exchange, you're right, I was asking about votes at the time, but I still think it's scummy that you wouldn't even clearly FoS the people you had just finished implicitly accusing. I'd like to hear your current read on Rob and penpen. Do you still think those votes against you were a counter-wagon?

Also, I think you're being a bit dishonest here. Your given reason for not OMGUS'ing at the time was, "I made part of my case on EA due to OMGUS voting - WHY would I turn around and OMGUS vote here?" (Post 581) Clearly, you didn't want to do it because you thought it would look scummy, not because you feel it's unhelpful to town.

If you have a problem with that, fair enough - but I am not going to OMGUS just for you and your outdated guide list for scumhunting.

Newbie guides have nothing to do with my counter-wagon read. This defense is lame as hell. You're the one that thinks OMGUS is a scum-tell, not me. I think your refusal to engage your accusers out of fear of OMGUS is scummy.

1. Not true - I've seen penpen try it, and others try it, but you have not given a single example of me "pandering". You may not like my votes, but this is simply not true.
2. I did not OMGUS defense, instead I defended NOT using an OMGUS vote - please keep that straight.
3. This is out and out false - I have stated my case on each and every person for whom I have voted, usually in the same post as my vote.
4. This is a modified JEEP's guide argument again, and it is as outdated now as it was before. If I were hammering for no reason (like our VI/Scum penpen) or if I threw in votes for no stated reason, I would get your point...but again I have stated my reasons for every vote and don't agree with your analysis. But, simply stating what number vote I was doesn't make me town or scum. Again, I've not sheeped and I have stated my reasons prior to voting each time I have voted this round.

1. I did give an example of your pandering:

This and Rob’s later post are awfully convenient. If we are looking for a counterwagon, I believe we’ve found it.

If you wish to follow it, remember who took you there.

2. I say it was OMGUS because you accused your wagoners of being on a counter-wagon. You didn't vote for them, but you might as well have called them scum. If you want to say it wasn't OMGUS, because you didn't vote, fine. We can make up a new name for accusing your wagoners without voting.
3. It's easy to make a case and hop aboard. Just writing up a case doesn't mean you aren't sheeping.
4. Get off the JEEP bullshit. I'm accusing you of habitually joining wagons late, and I'm saying it's scummy because it shows a common pattern of waiting for the chips to fall and following into the safest wagon. The voting numbers were included only because they prove my point.

[subgenius]

Hiraki's vote on EA really is strange. If there's one thing he's been consistent on for the entire game, it's that Bill is scum. Now Bill's wagon is actually getting close to lynchville, and he votes for EA? Wtf?

Serious FoS on Hiraki

[subgenius]

Ugh, whatever. I get the feeling you and I could both argue and redefine and clarify for pages upon pages without settling anything. I really don't feel like you're addressing my points, but I'll leave it for other people to read and decide rather than write another wall post.

[subgenius]

ISO post 39 says Haiiiiiii~

Oh... this explains everything! Er, wait, no it doesn't.

[subgenius]

Ultimately, your lynch on greyice seemed purely based on him not answering your questions cos he "lied".

To be fair, that's pretty much why everyone else voted for him too. I wish he hadn't been acting so scummy, because it makes it hard to blame anyone for wanting to lynch him.

[subgenius]

I'm not 100% sure, but like I said earlier, he assumed that the scum killed Snake Eyes when they actually killed Ashblade.

I'm having trouble following this...the flavor of the PC did note Ashblade's death prior to Snake Eyes, but other than that why do you assume the scum killed Ashblade and why do you assume they did not kill Snake Eyes? You seem rather sure of yourself...and I'd like to know why you are so confident of this.

Actually, I just re-read the flavor from D1 and D2, and there is some info to be found:

There was a note found next to the nameless murder victim of N0 which read, "You're next." There was an identical note found next to Ashblade. There was no note found with Snake Eyes.

This would lead me to believe that Ashblade was the mafia NK and Snake Eyes was hit by either a vig, a serial killer, or a non-note leaving second scum faction. I'm guessing SK.

Post 780, I'm not sure if you missed it or if you disagree for some reason, but it seems pretty clear to me that mafia NK'd Ashblade.

[subgenius]

GreyICE didn't like bvi or penpen. I want to look at both later.

GreyICE also didn't like Rob or me. We also have two other confirmed townies dead who had their own suspicions. Why focus on bvoigt and penpen in particular?

Do you think we'd be better off lynching EA than whoever it is that replaces Bill? Why?

[subgenius]

Because Bill honestly wasn't that bad. The only reasoning I can see for half of this wagon is that he's inactive. That's not a very good reason at all. EA, on the otherhand, just randomly sees Bill as a target. Scum bells should've rung long ago.

Honestly, I think you have a point, and I'd like EA to respond. Quite frankly, I never understood the case on Bill, although his lurking annoyed the hell out of me.

On the other hand, I can't believe you're the one that's making this point since it more or less proves that you were being dishonest about your case on Bill from yesterday. I really don't know what to make of this. I could interpret this as townie brashness or scummy waffling. I just don't know. Also, if you're right about EA being scum, I start thinking about my nightmare scenario of a Zito and EA scum team.

[subgenius]

@EA
I'm having a difficult time believing that your strongest scum read at this point is low content.

You've had pretty limited interactions with others, so I'm trying to figure out what you're thinking about people. You haven't expressed opinions on many people, but you've acted awfully certain when you have.

Rob-Town
Hiraki-Town
Subgenius-Town
Hayker/Mozami-Scum?
Bill-Scum

Any reads on anyone outside of this list?

Why do you prefer to lynch Bill over Mozami?

Zito has been singing your praises all game, but I don't think you've commented on him or anything he's said yet. What do you think of him, and why do you think he's been so sure about your town credentials since nearly the beginning of the game?

[subgenius]

@hiraki
I, for one, am not a fan of justifying crappy play as "just testing to see if you all were paying attention." What conclusions could you draw if somebody called you out on it at the time?

Both scum and town have reasons to draw attention to poor play, so it's not ever going to give you a viable read.

[subgenius]

@Agar

Do you have anything on your case beyond Hiraki voting for someone who you think is town?

[subgenius]

@subgenius: Generally being unhelpful to the town at large. Snarky attitude about "reaction tests" that no one reacted to, voting an obviously town player and weak D2 reasoning. If you're going to vote for someone that multiple players view as town, you better have a damned good reason for doing so if you're town. Hiraki does not have said "damned good reason." The fact that his vote on EA was a "reaction test" but he has yet to unvote now that this "test" is over.

That good enough?

Yeah, that's fine. One minor correction is that I believe Hiraki is saying that his case on Bill from D1 was a reaction test while his vote on EA is for real. I could be mistaken, though, and I don't think it affects your case either way.

[subgenius]

So, if you think the quickness of EA's wagon proves his innocence, then you must think it moved so quickly thanks to scum support. Who are the scum on the wagon? Couldn't have been Ash, couldn't have been GreyICE. So that leaves Bill/you, wikki/penpen/[TBA Replacement], Barry, and Rob.

I wouldn't expect you to incriminate yourself, so who of the remaining three were the scum who helped get EA's wagon to L-1 so quickly?

[subgenius]

Doh, my bad, then the list is Bill, Barry, and Rob. Thanks for the correction.

[subgenius]

I can tell you nothing about his play has convinced me oh him being town buy point is more at zito adamant he is town.

I'm trying and trying to figure out what this sentence means, but I'm not making much progress.

since you guys might as well be talking in Linear B,

If there's anything you'd like to see clarified or explained, I think most people would be willing to do it.

[subgenius]

581.

Strangely, that post made me more suspicious of him.

[subgenius]

unvote

VOTE: Hiraki

I don't like "reaction tests" as an excuse for poor cases.
I don't like the nonchalance of your defense.
If your Bill case wasn't serious, and you're not willing to lynch Rob, then you haven't done anything all game.

I believe that's L-2.

[subgenius]

3. Can you re-read that sentence? You sound like a whining baby. I have done things all game, and just because I haven't done things that you've wanted me to do, doesn't mean that I have done absolutely nothing.

3. It's got nothing to do with what I do or don't want you to do. You spent all of day 1 defending yourself from Rob and only gave your admittedly half-ass case on Bill after pages of obnoxious exchanges with Rob. You had something of a case on Rob, but it was even less than what you had on Bill. This all might add up to slightly more than nothing, but not much. I'm not seeing where a serious effort to scum hunt figured into your D1 plans.

[subgenius]

I guess EA was nothing then. Not like, any point to it.

Considering the fact that you appeared perfectly happy to park your vote on EA with the remarkably sparse case of "crappola vote" until you took several pages of pressure, I'm not entirely impressed by this example.

[subgenius]

And so therefore, I didn't go the easy way and

buss

Bill because um.

Are you fucking kidding me?

[subgenius]

Also, Hi, Pod Person.

[subgenius]

Guys. It was sarcasm showing that if I was scum, how bad of a play that was. Only an idiot would actually slip like that. Notice the extra spacing.

Why does your sarcasm indicate that you know Bill is scum as well? Your point would have worked just as well if you replaced "bus" with "BW", but you didn't.

[subgenius]

It did? I didn't really get that.

You're being intentionally obtuse now. You can't bus a townie, and you specifically said "bus". A townie would have said "BW", because he doesn't know if Bill is scum or not.

[subgenius]

No, I wasn't talking about that. I don't really get the deal what one word that would've intentionally looked scummy for the sake of sarcasm, but I don't see how it made it look like I knew Bill well. Unless by "well" you meant his alignment, in which case, it was being used for sarcasm.

You're not sure about my use of "well"?

Why does your sarcasm indicate that you know Bill is scum as well? Your point would have worked just as well if you replaced "bus" with "BW", but you didn't.

I'm saying that your remark indicates that you know Bill is scum as well as yourself. "As well," meaning "in addition to".

[subgenius]

Losing a scumbuddy is always worse than losing town cred.

I guess that's why you decided not to bus Bill.

[subgenius]

I'm not 100% sure, but I'm more than sure enough to keep my vote on you.

[subgenius]

Pods, I hope you included this as an LOL...you DO realize Dekes is our GM, right? XD

Shouldn't you have some questions for Pod?

[subgenius]

Now, @ subs - do YOU have any questions for Pods?

I'm reading his catchup with interest, but I don't have any questions at the moment. Of course, I haven't spent the last day and a half talking about how suspicious Bill was.

Subs, THIS is where I'm wondering if you have additional questions for Pods

He's entitled to his read. I'll admit that I probably overreacted to that wagon, but I'm learning a lot this game, and I most likely wouldn't be as afraid of a hammer out of nowhere if I was at L-2 or L-1 today.

[subgenius]

I don't understand what you don't understand.

[subgenius]

So, Subs, THIS is what I don't understand:

1. Bill calls you out at the top of his post, then lists you as scum...ranked as higher scum than even me when I've been FoSing Bill for a very long time, as you have noted.
2. You have absolutely no response for Bill, instead asking me if

I

have any questions for him.
3. When I respond and then ask for your response to Bill, you basically blow off the post as if you had not been called out and called scum.

This hit me as very odd, and I didn't (and don't) understand it.

1. You'll just have to forgive me for not being overly concerned about being listed as the 3rd ranked scum read by someone who's only read half the thread.
2. Because I think the fact that you've mostly restricted your suspicions to a lurking, non-responsive Bill is suspicions. You said you had questions waiting for Bill or his replacement. Now we have a sharp and responsive Bill replacement, and your first post directed at him was nonsense about Dekes being the mod. Considering how suspicious you've been of Bill, I'd expect you to be chomping at the bit with questions for him. The fact that you weren't seems odd to me.
3. I did respond, possibly not as vigorously as you expected, but see #1.

[subgenius]

@Hiraki
So you've concluded that Bill replaced himself, and you have no theories about why or how it might be worth thinking about? That seems extremely implausible to me.

For the record, the idea of Bill replacing himself seems absurd to me, but if it were proven to be true, I'd want him lynched asap.

[subgenius]

I hate when people would rather be clever than clear and concise.

[subgenius]

My theory is that pod person is somebody's (probably not Bill's) gimmick account, and the gimmick is to replace into games and change the account's personal info to match the person who dropped out as much as possible. Other reasons for not thinking Pod and Bill are the same person:
1)I find it quite unlikely Bill would plan this kind of thing a week and a half in advance
2)Pod has put more time into this game over two days than Bill ever did.
3)Their writing styles are quite different

Reasons for thinking maybe they are the same person:

i apologize but something came up and i no longer have time to post tonight. i most definitely will post something tomorrow.

That, right there, is a classic Bill move.

[subgenius]

I agree that it's not pro-town, because we're now spending time discussing a gimmick. I'm not sure I'd call it scummy either, though.

Also, I can't figure out what you mean in the first sentence.

Also, do you think pod person is a gimmick, or do you still think he is Bill in disguise? If he is a gimmick, why do you find this to be scummy?

Also, what was the reason for secrecy you had in mind when you wrote:

I was thinking of a different reason for secrecy, but I'm becoming ever so increasingly doubtful of it.

Also,

I think it's pretty obvious that Bill is pod. But here's my question.

What's the point.

Why did you dismiss the importance of Bill subbing in for himself if you had a theory that he was being secretive for a reason?

[subgenius]

The above post is directed at Hiraki, in case it's not clear.

[subgenius]

@Barry: Were you writing #981 when sub posted #980?

Since we're talking about not answering questions, when were you planning on getting to this?

[subgenius]

[sarcasm]Guys, don't you understand? He says he's a town PR, and we know he's telling the truth, because a town PR would never lie. It makes total sense and isn't at all circular. [/sarcasm]

I'm done defending myself

Thank goodness, because your defense sucks.

[subgenius]

it is called "having a life" which means things come up that are more important than a game on an internet forum.

Yeah, I understand that. Take it easy.

[subgenius]

How am I null? You just called me scum a moment ago.

I agree with this point

Also, answer these questions from last page, please:

Also, do you think pod person is a gimmick, or do you still think he is Bill in disguise? If he is a gimmick, why do you find this to be scummy?

Also, what was the reason for secrecy you had in mind when you wrote:

I was thinking of a different reason for secrecy, but I'm becoming ever so increasingly doubtful of it.

Also,

I think it's pretty obvious that Bill is pod. But here's my question. What's the point.

Why did you dismiss the importance of Bill subbing in for himself if you had a theory that he was being secretive for a reason?

[subgenius]

@Pod Person
I consider your catch-up a pretty good summary of the game, but:

1)I'd like to hear why we should lynch Rob today rather than waiting another day to see if something useful comes out of him.
2)Am I correct in assuming that Agar makes the second slot due to penpen's actions, or do you also think Agar has been acting scummy?
3)I'm not clear on why Barry is on your list (although I'm glad to see him there).

[subgenius]

@Hiraki
If you don't answer my questions, I'll be forced to assume that you have no reason to think that pod person is scummy and are voting him anyway in an obvious attempt to bolster the competing wagon. I would hope that anybody watching would arrive at the same conclusion.

[subgenius]

Anyone who says my defense this game sucs needs to explain how a person can defend themselves from nothing.

You just found your own problem right there. You can't defend yourself from nothing, yet you insist on trying to do it anyway. The result is that you look overly defensive, which can be interpreted as foolishness at best and scumminess at worst. I lean towards foolishness, but I can't really blame anyone for thinking it looks scummy.

Also, you're making the Hiraki case look horrible, and that's coming from someone who believes Hiraki is scum.

[subgenius]

Missed that one, I'm going to ignore Rob for now because I'm tired.

I was thinking of a town motivation to try and clear his role. I mean he was playing a meh game until then.

I guess you missed this one too, even though it was in the same post:

Also, do you think pod person is a gimmick, or do you still think he is Bill in disguise? If he is a gimmick, why do you find this to be scummy?

Why is your vote on pod person?

[subgenius]

Pressure. I answered the other one somewhere. I'm still sure that it's Bill though.

If you started pressing Pod even a little bit, I might take this pressure claim more seriously.

Who's on your scum list right now? Please provide reasons for each.

[subgenius]

I agree.
Hiraki and Barry are at the top of my list, but at this point I'm willing to compromise on some people at this point.

Here's my list:
1)Hiraki-Reasons should be clear
2)Barry-Case has been made (the fact that he still isn't voting only adds to my suspicion of him)
3)Agar-Due to wikki/penpen wackiness. I lean towards attributing their actions to VI rather than scumminess, but I'd be willing to lynch to find out.
4)Mozamis-See above
5)Bvoigt-I'm feeling better about Bvoigt lately. He's moved away from picking on lurkers and VI's. I still hate how he suggested lynching penpen D1.
6)Rob-I'm not a huge Rob fan, and I'm by no means sure about his claim, but I feel more comfortable keeping him around one more day.
7)Pod person-I never really understood the case on Bill, and I think Pod has been active enough that it would be worthwhile to observe him for one more day.
8)EA-Hasn't been as active today, but I haven't seen much not to like about him. To be honest, I have a completely baseless hunch that he might be scum, but I don't trust hunches if I can't find anything to back them up.
9)Zito-Seems pretty town to me, and I happen to believe in the town tell from earlier in the day.
10)Subgenius-I dunno, I just trust him for some reason.

I could probably bring myself to vote for anyone 4 or above. Needless to say, this list is subject to change with or without notice.

[subgenius]

@Barry
Could you explain what Pod has done that convinced you to put his vote on him? As far as I can tell it's just momentum from Bill's posts (or lack thereof).

I still haven't shaken the idea that you could be scum, giving us wall-o-post versus the wall-o-missing that Bill gave us previously.

What changed from 9:45 pm last night, where Pod "Could be scum" to 10:12 am this morning when you cast your vote.

Clearly, you're very cautious with your vote, so I'm guessing that something happened in the intervening time to convince you to cast your vote, but I can't find anything that would have affected your choice except that people finally began getting annoyed that you weren't voting.

[subgenius]

Pressure. I answered the other one somewhere. I'm still sure that it's Bill though.

This post is an example of how terribly Hiraki is scumhunting. If pods isn't your top suspect (at least, it doesn't sound like he is), why do you still have your now-useless vote on him? Actually, who are your top suspects?

FTR, he's already ignored this question from me. I don't think he actually has suspects, just people he parks his vote on as he skates through the game without doing anything meaningful. He's scum all the way.

-Sat on a lame case on Bill for nearly all of D1 and excuses it as a "reaction test"
-I have no idea what he thinks of Rob at this point, but he surely hasn't been pursuing that line of suspicion lately. His posture is almost entirely defensive when it comes to Rob, so I'm guessing he's not serious about that scum read at this point.
-Voted EA with a one line case, upon which he only elaborated after considerable pressure and then quickly abandoned when he saw an excuse to hop on to a safer band wagon.
-Voted pod person for... I don't know why. For pressure? Does he really think Pod is scum at this point, or is he hoping to shake loose a scum-tell? I don't know, but I do know he isn't doing much shaking. Lets not forget that he's admitted that his case on Bill sucked, so his reason for voting Pod must be something that happened since he replaced in. I also refuse to believe that he genuinely believes that Bill replaced himself. That's one of the most retarded theories that has appeared in this thread. It seems far more likely that he's only claiming to believe in this idiocy because I wrote that I think Pod would deserve to be lynched immediately if the theory was true. Here's something else I think; Anyone who claims to believe that Bill replaced himself is either crazy or lying. I'm guessing lying in this case.

The guy isn't doing anything besides coasting along on cases that he won't stand behind and remarkably lazy defenses, and it reeks of scum to me.

[subgenius]

That's L-1, unless I've lost count somewhere.

[subgenius]

A penny for your thoughts.

[subgenius]

Well, one scum dead at least, but I'm still thinking SK rather than vig. With Rob dead and mozamis confirmed scum, I think the game is about to take on a very different feel. I'm going to have to re-read a bit to get my bearings. Initially, Barry is my top suspect by default, but I'm going to have to reread the last day to be sure it stays that way.

[subgenius]

Set up question: Would it be safe to operate on the assumption that there are 2 mafia left, 1 SK, and 4 town? If this is the case, a mislynch today ends it, assuming there are no crosskills. That would leave 2 mafia, 1 SK, and 1 town.

I'm finding my town reads are feeling a lot more secure than my scum reads at this point. So I'm going primarily by process of elimination here. I'm feeling like bvoigt, Zito, and EA are town, which leaves Barry, pod person, and Agar as scum. I'd be willing to lynch any of these 3.

I'm going to vote Agar, because if the game is set up as I'm guessing, L-2 could theoretically allow scum to hammer and win, and I'm not certain enough to place a second vote and allow that possibility without listening to what other folks have to say first. Of course 2 of my 3 scum are already voting for each other, so if my grouping is right, a quick hammer isn't going to happen, but again, I'm not sure enough to set us up for a stupid mistake.

VOTE: Agar

[subgenius]

We can agree on that.

[subgenius]

@ bvoigt - again, simply pointing out that I've been consistently on Pods for some time. You may not like my posting style - but we've seen in this round that such a view has nothing to do with affiliation. No one was more rude, personal or insulting than Rob, who really was what he said he was (tracker).

You're the king of answering accusations without addressing what people are actually saying. Post #1125 isn't bad because of "posting style". It's bad because you're still preemptively addressing accusations, and because you're implying that not being on any of the townie wagons is a town tell.

[subgenius]

I'm not implying anything about whether being on a wagon or not is a town tell

Let's talk a bit here...

if I was mafia it would have been far too easy to jump on the Hiraki scumwagon yesterday. I could have sped it much faster to it's very poor conclusion. Instead, I have stayed on the consistent stand I have taken all along...

Pods is scum. Sub - where was YOUR vote? Oh, that's right...you voted for Hiraki, didn't you? Where was Pods' vote? On the tracker. My vote was on Pods, along with Hiraki and EA. My vote is STILL on Pods, and will remain there.

You're impossible. Here is what the bolded portion means if it was written by a logical person:

Statement 1: If Barry was mafia, he would have joined the Hiraki bandwagon.
Statement 2: Barry did not join Hiraki's wagon.
Clearly Implied Conclusion: Therefor, Barry is not mafia.

This is equivalent to what I said:

you're implying that not being on any of the townie wagons is a town tell.

I'm not over analyzing anything. I'm reading what you wrote on this very same page and following it to it's logical conclusion, which I'm sure you were aware of when you wrote it.

[subgenius]

Perversely, I'm beginning to lessen my scum read on you Barry, not because you've convinced me with anything that you've written, but because I'm starting to think that your utter inability to comprehend and address points about why you're scum is because you're completely sure of your town alignment and can't process why someone would think otherwise. It still irritates the bejesus out of me, though.

[subgenius]

You'll just have to forgive me for not being persuaded by your assessment of what one of the wackiest players in the game said when he voted for the other wackiest player in the game.

[subgenius]

EA, you want me to sheep here or what? I feel like I owe you for yesterday.

Are you two neighbors or scum or what? You clearly have something going on, and it makes me nervous.

[subgenius]

We have a townie block going on. You want in?

Since I find myself agreeing with the three people on your list, I suppose it would make sense. I can't quite shake the suspicion that I'm going to feel extremely naive after the game is over, though.

[subgenius]

Barry, you've got some sort of problem where you write a post that means something and then imagine it means something different.

It's just you Zito...glad to see you are back, but I'm disappointed that your first post back at a rather important time in the game was simply to offer to sheep. As I've said, I have no problem with an AGar lynch, but I hope you have more reason to vote than simply sheeping at this point.

There is not a question in this post. There is not even a question mark in that post. Bvoigt did not ask the same question that you asked, because you did not ask a question.


And the answer that you quoted does not answer bvoigt's question in the least.

It's due to lack of time more than lack of interest. When I get some more time I'll look through more thoroughly but I have to catch up elsewhere as well.

I told ya'll from the beginning that EA is extremely likely town and nothing has changed that. His Hiraki read yesterday tells me he's reading the game better than I am. So.

This addresses why Zito is fine with sheeping, but does not explain his thoughts on whether or not Barry and Pod choreographed their argument at the beginning of the day. It does not answer bvoigt's question. It isn't even an evasion of bvoigt's question, because he is responding to a poster that did not post anything similar to bvoigt's question. He's responding to one poster that commented on his lack of substance (Barry) and another who asked about his trust of EA (Me).

[subgenius]

Pod, that was a good move to suggest no kills. I was almost certain you and Barry were going to night kill each other until you did that.

[subgenius]

I don't blame you for handing out "I told you so's" on that, but it was still a crappy case.

This was my first game with an SK (actually my first game out of the newbie queue). It was fun, but it leaves almost no margin for error with ML's.

[subgenius]

BTW, what would have been the best way to play in the 1:1:2 endgame?

The consensus in the dead thread was to lynch one of the townies and force the scum into a night scenario where if one shot the other, he would win. Of course, this would require one of the scum to vote for one of the townies, and it's quite possible they would both refuse. With that in mind, I think you and Zito did it right, and were heading towards a good chance of cross-kills until Pod Person suggested no kill. That really was a great move on his part.

Also, hats off to Barry for maintaining a flow of walls of false suspicion towards Bill/Pod for the entire game. I thought it was a screening tactic, and I was right, but I'm quite certain that if it were me, I would have lost my focus at some point and started stirring up trouble where it wasn't needed and drawn attention to myself. You played a good game, and your walls of semantic defenses were too annoying to untangle, so I gave up on continuing to pressure you. Well played.

[subgenius]

I will say that I somewhat regretted the Hiraki lynch. I really thought GreyICE had a good chance of being scum, but I wasn't as sure about Hiraki, and I wish that EA or somebody else had made some kind of defense for him. Even as the lynch was going through, I didn't feel great about it, but I couldn't find any good reason to unvote and didn't see any better candidates. I'll admit that I had questions about Bill, but didn't want to give Barry the satisfaction of admitting it. Also, I would have felt bad lynching Pod Person after he gave a quite thorough read and summary of such a long thread.

I definitely learned not to dismiss VI's as bad town players, but I still don't know how to tell the difference between VI town and VI scum, and I don't feel like we had the any spare lynches to throw at questionable VI's.

I enjoyed the game. I sucked ass the first day, but I'd like to think I progressed from overly enthusiastic and jumpy newbie to decent player fairly quickly. I'm glad I wasn't lynched D1 so that I had chance to somewhat redeem myself.

[subgenius]

I really don't see the benefit to rehashing the case on GreyICE. In hindsight, his wagon went too fast, and it would have been nice if he had more time to defend himself, but he didn't do himself any favors by letting it get to that point without making a serious defense. Similar story with Hiraki, if he had shown any interest in not being lynched, he probably could have escaped.

I don't know if this refusal to address a case seriously is done in the hopes that the suspicions will blow over or in the belief that a strong defense will make the accused look desperate and scummy or what, but it definitely did not work to the town's advantage in this game.

bvoigt and Zito could have forced one scum to lynch a townie, by threatening to lynch that scum if he didn't.

Good point.

[subgenius]

JoAT=?

[subgenius]

I agree. This game would have benefited greatly from some delicious JoAT.