Open 291 Frenenemies (+ other guy) - Game over: Wolves win!

[Glass]

/confirm

Dammit, ninja'd

OMG AGAIN

OMFG 3 times

[Glass]

VOTE: ahhh for being in 1000 games.

[Glass]

VOTE: ahhh for being in 1000 games.

vote glass

yes although im in a few games but not 1000 at the same time, or ill die :/ and im in neither of your games :/

Yes you are, you are in this game

[Glass]

K > C

Not true, watch this:
C = 5, K = 3
C > K
Q.E.D.

VOTE: Krazy

[Glass]

Come on ride the train, it's a choo choo train!That is an odd thing to say considering that you are not on the crazy wagon yourself.

Odd thing to say considering that you are not voting krazy yourself.

[Glass]

Not getting that much out of this RVS so far, so let's do some RQS.

Hahah, no.

-Asking questions about role mechanics (Is this always role fishing?)
-Talking about No Lynch
-Talking about theory in the first few pages

Asking this is just ASKING to get into a theory debate, which is exactly be what we should be avoiding.

6] I enjoy discussion and rather hate RVS, so it's pro to me.

If you hate the RVS so much why did you participate in it?

@Park + Lebowski + Jerbs
What is with just responding to the random questions? Don't feel the need to say anything else?

Personally, I'd like to hear more about this, and more, from everybody else before I continue.

More about what in particular? I have to say that I agree with crazy here, saying that it was dismissible just killed a potentially useful conversation point and made a 2-man conversation where it is very difficult to penetrate and become part of the conversation.

[Glass]

btw,

i will be V/LA from march 4-6.

I will be posting tonight still and I might even get something in tomorrow before I leave.

[Glass]

I thought that the conversation was over.

WAT

So it's more productive to vote two people in RVS? Did you get what you wanted out of your vote for aah?

I don't see how voting for 2 people has anything to do with what I mentioned but RQS. I did not get what I wanted from my aah vote, which is why I switched to you.

[Glass]

EBWOP: I don't see how voting for 2 people has anything to do with what I mentioned about RQS.

[Glass]

Hey guys I am back a little early, and I see that I did miss much except krazy's wagon dying D:

I absolutely have no idea on what this guy babbles.
Someone translate him for me? (or her?)

I can translate (I think): Wizrak tried to get a reaction from chk from voting him without a reason and then you came in and criticized it, making it so that chk would not have to respond to it.

I'M JOINING THE WAGON BECAUSE WIZRAK IS A WAGONER

>implying wagoning is scummy.
Wagoning adds pressure
Pressure makes reactions and conversation
reaction + conversation = good for town
wagoning = good for town
Albeit the way that wizrak is wagoning without any reasoning is counter-productive. I thought that this is what wizrak thought, but since his unvote for no apparent reason came up I am quite suspicious.

Quaroath definitely earned an unvote from me with his last post.

lol wall void of content = worthy of unvote? Noted.
Can you tell me anything you learned from Quaroath's post besides:
-he is busy on friday-saturday
-he agrees with crazy on essentially everything

Answering questions is scummy. Gotcha.

At the end, I think I'll unvote: vote: chkflp for getting his knickers in a knot and portraying me answering two peoples implied questions and saying that its odd that I did so.

He said no such thing. He said:

I felt the need to point it out because, to me, at that current moment, it's not worth much; NOW, however, it strikes me that Quar still felt the need to elaborate.

Worst misrep I have seen in a while, although it is possible you just misread what chk said.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: wizrak
@quaroath IGMEOY

[Glass]

idc why you unvoted, I care about why you did not vote anyone else after unvoting or even make an effort to find scum.

[Glass]

chkscum

lol, anyways I reread and still do not see what I am missing. chk did not attack quaroath and quaroath seems to think that he was attacked. Help?

Pre-edit: you are already voting me aaah, thanks for keeping up.

[Glass]

wagoning = good for town
Albeit the way that wizrak is wagoning without any reasoning is counter-productive. I thought that this is what wizrak thought, but since his unvote for no apparent reason came up I am quite suspicious.

line 1 Wagoning is pro town
line 2 That wagon is anti town (which is how i interpret counter productive)

Incorrect. Note the "without any reasoning" portion in line 2. That is a very big difference.

The post wasn't empty of content, it was a direct answer to a question posed to me. The person that asked the question was satisfied with it. I'm pretty sure void of content =/= satisfactory answer.

1. The question crazy asked was rhetorical.
2. Not true, it is very easy to give a satisfactory answer void of content. Let's say you ask me what my favourite colour is. I say green. My answer is both satisfactory and contentless.

The only part you pull from that quote is “Answering questions is scummy, gotcha” Way to strip away the context of the quote.

Yes, because posting quotes in quotes in quotes extremely irritating to read and write and in this context is entirely unneeded since I took the part of the sequence out that I wanted to comment on. If people need clarification of what I am saying they can look back a couple of posts.

The fact that he thought out loud saying “it strikes me that quaroath had to elaborate” is like waving a flag saying “hey look, this might be scummy, but I’m not going to say it because I don’t want to take a stance.” I don’t feel that I misrepresented what he did at all. It wasn’t striking before I answered the question, but it was afterwards? Then why ask the question in the first place?

If you still feel I misrepresented what he said, I'm willing to agree to disagree, I just don't feel that I did.

Sigh, I guess it is just a gross misinterpretation on one of our parts. To me "it strikes me that" = "It now comes to my attention that". But you and crazy seem to think that "It strikes me that" = "It strikes me as odd that". Would love for chk to comment on what he meant.

Anyways, onto other people.
@Krazy
Anything useful to say? I just did an iso on you and still find nothing that you have contributed to the game. It goes the same with people like TBL, aaah, wizrak and jerbs; but active lurking is much scummier than simply lurking.

[Glass]

A bit of both I suppose, I would not poke at him if I was not suspicious of him. I cannot really make a case on him with such limited information. I also wanted to see wizrak say something which clearly is not going to happen now.

You should be commenting on anything that will get people to stop lurking and get into the game.

For example: aaah, why come in and just vote without any reason and run off? Are you so sure of glass being scum that you don't feel the need to contribute to the conversation?

[Glass]

@Aaah
-palm collides with face-

note. SSS is a very lurking type player and has flipped scum in my current game Modding by Crazy.

Not only is talking about an on-going game a big no-no, but this has absolutely no relevance to anything.

i voted again glass just to indicate what i have done previously.

....;O_o

Also, whats +ve? Are we talking about electrical charges in mafia?

Regarding the c/krazy exchange... I will need to sleep on it.

[Glass]

WTF THIS GAME HAS SERIOUSLY JUST GONE TO SHIT. PARK AAAH AND WIZRAK ARE DELETED AND TBL IS REPLACING OUT? WTFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF

The real only saving grace is that chk is back.
Game-related post to follow.

[Glass]

Ok, sry for the wait (I tried to do some digging on the park/aaah/wizrak deletion and didn't find anything, I will post before I go back to searching).

First off I think that the crazy-krazy exchange from last night is rather ridiculous on crazy's part. Don't think that needs any more covering.

He's setting himself up for calling anybody from this group scum if somebody starts a wagon.

That is such a stretch, even if he goes on to say that it is not dismissible, attacking someone for something that would have happened pages ago without any support is ludicrous. If he does have other support than it is not really a scum move to reconsider his thoughts.

now that chk hasn't been around, there really isn't much more to comment on, so I'll
vote Krazy for now, at least until chk or a replacement comes back.

You don't think that chk might feel more inclined to post if there is pressure on him?

And why would we assume that we can't spend 5 days lynching lurkers? If all the lurkers do is lurk, and never send in their night actions, then maybe there won't be any nightkills! Easiest town-win ever!

/facepalm. But I know you are joking so I will let it be. If you actually are serious say so so that I can come back and rage.

My attention is very drawn onto SSS, but I am going to UNVOTE: until some shit gets sorted out regarding the 4 needed replacements.

[Glass]

Nah, I do see where you are coming from crazy, but I think that you are misinterpreting. In his posts krazy essentially said how he liked the wagon even more because of his dislike of wizrak. So there are 3 possibilities. The first is that he gets emotionally involved in the game and that influences his decisions (granted, this happens for everyone, but I mean more so than the average joe). The second is that he is open to policy-lynches, he sees wizrak as being a hindrance to town even if he is town. The third is that he was being an opportunistic scum trying to lynch wizrak for being thin-skinned.

Number 2 seems the most likely to me considering his postings about lynching-all-lurkers, is it poor play? Yes, but poor play does not equate to scummy play. I honestly do not see how krazy was trying to push a lynch by saying wizrak was thin-skinned, he was not marketing that to anyone, just saying that it makes him feel better.

I just went and looked to see if krazy was emotional/open to policy-lynches in his previous games and I find that when he was town he actually played the game a lot more seriously (I unfortunately cannot link it because it is on-going, but you are free to look at krazy's games yourself). So I guess that is a black-mark on his name.

[Glass]

he was being an opportunistic scum

Why can't it be all of the above?

Lol. VOTE: krazy

[Glass]

Welcome signer and llama. Good work thadmiral for getting replacements so quickly.

Havent done an indepth read, but just a skim shows Quar is probably town (along with Crazy and SSB).

You think that SSS is town? Care to explain why?

i could see people referring back to something that may have been looked over earlier, but adds to a case later. People go back and say "oh, hey, this looked innocent at the time, but now that x has flipped scum/town it might make a connection. I don't believe anyone would make a case solely on that sort of thing

So..... How is it scummy?

no. people come back when they're ready, not when someone votes them. he was already under suspicion, and throwing on another vote wouldn't change that. If he was scum worried about clearing his name, he wouldn't have left when there was attention on him, so I don't think the vote would have helped.

Fair enough.

[Glass]

Sorry about the absence, these last couple days have been intense so I have not really gotten around to posting. Hopefully I can post something useful tonight (if not then tomorrow)

[Glass]

Right now I like a Zordiark wagon more than a park wagon, but I'm willing for the moment to give him the benefit of the doubt that he actually will catch up some time before I die of old age.

Same person lol.

Are you asking me to pursue a case on a player that has been replaced?

I think it is foolish to simply ignore what a replaced person has done.

Yes that is exactly what I am asking. Why WAS wiz scummy?

Well besides her totally trying to appeal to town in ISO 6 and 7 she votes and unvotes without any reason given, and fails to do anything in terms of scumhunting. As my first IC once said:

Lack of scumhunting and illogical voting practices equate to scum.

@Llama
I prefer would prefer a krazy or wizrak lynch to a zordiark lynch because I have a semi-town read on park. At least he was trying to scumhunt (unlike some people).

[Glass]

Not so much defending krazy as explaining why I did not like your argument, as looking for people who are lynching using fallacious reasoning is a good way to find scum. But krazy was complaining that he can't scumhunt when so many people are inactive and when there are posts to dissect and look through he does not even read them. (either that or that was an incredibly lawlful scumslip).

Why wait until now to bring this point up?

[Glass]

Glass, why would that be a scumslip?

Because you insinuated that it was all three.

You seemed to be thinking that if I was trolling then I couldn't also be guilty.

....no I didnt?

Setting up explanations for why they give town reads to town is a very skilled scum play, and your jump on to my wagon after it was a nice deflection of what was strictly speaking a false dilemma

English please?

[Glass]

Why can't I simply be applying pressure on an under-performing player to see how that player reacts when in the crosshairs and how the wagon-forming members pursue the case?

I did not consider that possibility since when you jumped on the wagon you did not see her as an under-performer.

I'M JOINING THE WAGON BECAUSE WIZRAK IS A WAGONER

Why can't it be all of the above?

Odd that you forgot the smiley face, as this changes the context entirely. A serious question is not attached to a smiley face. This makes the question rhetorical as if saying that it is all of the above.

It seemed like no matter which option you chose above, you were going to be positioning yourself somehow:

If you opted for possibility one, then I am, if not trolling, then 'emotionally involved.' This is your null-read that leaves open the most possibilities, but can in any situation be used to attack my ethos or credibility should I turn my crosshairs toward you.

you had no problem with this post of mine until I attacked you.

If you opted for the second possibility, then you could use that as a "mostly town" read, which you could use to explain a town-read of me to help you "buddy" me.

Having a town read does not equate to buddying. Glass is trying to develop reads on people, what an inane concept!

If you opted for the third possibility, you could begin making a case against me.
It seemed like the most profitable for you at this point in the game probably would have been possibility two, which is why I raised the possibility that it might be more than one: why can't I be both two and three; opportunistically lynching the player that I can say that, even though they might be town, were still being a hindrance? I mostly just didn't like how you were setting up possibility three as a stand-alone possibility. Perhaps you could claim possibility two today, but then after wizrak flips or later down the line, begin a "but maybe I was mistaken... maybe it was possibility three all along!"

If I was really trying to keep all these options open why would I attack you after your post? If I was scum I easily could have brushed it off being like: "Well, ya. That's a possibility too. Thought that that went without saying."

*My text is bold*
To summarize: this entire thing is a big mountain of "If glass is scum.. blah blah blah". Not impressed, I could do that with anybody.
Ex: If the queen was a guy she would have balls.

[Glass]

FoS Glass

You are voting for krazy though...
What's up?

[Glass]

Welcome DRK!

Well it wasn't a very serious attack, as I said earlier, it seemed like you were just kidding at first.

O_o

So Glass, I can't exactly figure out what you think Krazy's post #180 is. Do you think it was a scumslip? Krazy just not reading your post? Or do you buy his current excuse that he was commenting on how your points about him seemed mutually exclusive?

Don't really feel like answering this question since you totally ignored my last one to you, but whatever:
I don't even get why krazy would bother to leave a single "What if I am scum?" line, so I would have to opt that he did not reading my post sufficiently. I am sure that you can verify that he does not give direct answers to your questions (of course you classify it as backpedaling).

Also, a tribute to this:

as for me, thanks for giving no reason, but why throw me on there? I was on v/la.

That is my bad, actually. I will downplay my mistake by saying you didn't bold your v/la announcement

I'll explain my FoS on Glass once he answers my question.

Looking forward to it.

singer wrote:Aaah’s comment about town being fun-sided make me think he’s town.

How? That sounds 9001% more like scum talking about being town than town talking about being town. (Also, hi)

I have no idea where either of you are getting this from, I totally took it as null.

Krazy thinking that scum kill lurkers is truly lame.
Another possible scum = jerbs, active lurking entire game, even chk surpasses him in terms of actual content.

[Glass]

Glass' reason for voting Krazy was pretty weak to begin with, and then in post #191 Krazy basically destroyed that reason entirely.

Are you crazy? Where in post 191 did he destroy my reason for voting him?

For the rest of you that don't understand my point here, see Krazy's posts #191 or #194. It's blatantly obvious to me that Krazy did read Glass' post #148.

There is no way that krazy might have read my post after being called out for not doing so!

[Glass]

SCCHHHOOOOOOOLLLLL

Will be back tomorrow to catch up.

[Glass]

Crazy, I literally just started leaning town on you again. Please stop destroying this view with every post you make. Again.

Yay, fear mongering!

You can call this OMGUS now, but what will it read after a flip? Ask yourself that, chk, no matter which side of the aisle you're on. You will look even worse tomorrow than you do today

Yay, more fear mongering!

If you were pressed for time, then why would you rush to push a player to L-1?

WAS is the operative word there krazy, chk is clearly not as busy as he was before.

Activity is not a part of my case. I am completely fine lynching a scummy lurker. Furc is getting close to that point because I know he is active elsewhere.

Lurky... yes. Scummy though? I thought you did not have a scum read on wizrak? How could you have a scum read on someone who hasn't even posted?
I think it is highly probable that he forgot he was in this game.

"It's dismissible," meaning it is, meaning you don't have to dismiss it, but some might.

Just... no. If you meant "I find it dismissible" you would have said "I find it dismissible".

@MOD PROD FURCOLOW PLEASE?

[Glass]

First thing: Hate the new avatar crazy D:
Now...
SSS, not all the events you said (36 or whatever) have the same probability of happening, but arguing this is still a moot point. Beggars can't be choosers. We will lynch scum without prejudice. If you personally want to put your focus on mafia/wolves go ahead, but I personally will be looking for both mafia and wolves.

My attention right now is on llama. He was essentially calling park out as obv scum and then totally released all pressure and stopped attacking a few posts later. Once DRK comes in llama really looses up. A slot does not suddenly go from scum to town, thus not commenting on anything that DRK is strange.

VOTE: llama(at L-2)

Tclaw is an interesting case, and I want to ask him a question:

Looking back at it, and with the addition of this post, I can pretty confidently say.
VOTE: Furcolow

Looking back at what exactly? furcolow made zero contribution prior to this post. I will have you know that I have played with furcolow before and his play here (so far) has been pretty similar.

I liked chkflip
I disliked crazy

Elaborate?

Going to reread llama + tclaw.

[Glass]

If all the replacements do not post, scum has no idea what their reads are, and are shooting off what they think the general reads for the town is as opposed to cleaning out someone or using it as a tiebreak due to who they suspect. Makes the scum have less info for thier kills.

This is the worst argument ever. By that logic we should hammer as quickly and recklessly as possible so that the mafia/wolves don't have reads. Scum not having reads means that town won't have reads either.

[Glass]

In fact the reasons of the people jumping on this wagon are so ridiculous and unfounded I think it would be better to look at one of them, i.e. Smashbro and Glass, for potential scum.

Simply love this. Tclaw just buddied llama and at the same time told everyone "what we should be doing" instead of taking any initiative to do it himself.

My reason for attacking llama is unfounded and/or ridiculous? O:
I would love to hear more.

Is Llama a likely werewolf due to his insistence that we go mafia-hunting today?

I don't think it makes him any more likely to be a werewolf than mafia personally.

If you arent sure on a read, then yes its a bad move. If you have a scum read on them though, its a great move since the lynch will likely end up there anyway, and gives scum far less to work with.

-twitch- It also gives town far less to work with the following day.

[Glass]

Ooh, flashwagon. Neat.

I got Glass voting me for something I really am not too sure on. It seems that when I hammered I asked people to stop talking which IS the correct thing to do.

lolwtf? Although I did mention your hammer it is not my main reason for voting you, and I never said anything about you asking people to stop talking. Try again.

with the vote gambit cementing it, so I moved on.

Maybe if this was a 1-scumteam game this would justify it, but it has already been clearly established that scum are looking for the other scum team. How exactly does this gambit make DRK oh so townie?

He stopped attacking because no one was joining his wagon and one of his other reads had a wagon already on it. But it is clear that he still thought park was scum if you actually read his posts. As for his supsicions of DRK, I would just like to say his vote was on DRK until DRK went about his gambit, immediately after which Llama unvoted since usually gambits are a town tell.

See above for gambit.
I never said that llama did not think that park was scum.
Even though he was voting for DRK for a bit after he replaced in he put absolutely NO pressure on him.

I read it like Llama wasn't happy with how parkscum was doing, but felt much better about his new partner DRK.

I think that distancing is far more likely than llama actually trying to bus.

[Glass]

it seems like he just kept his head down trying to get the lynch down. When you combine that with him being clear and away a top two chance to be a partner to DRK, I want to see what a wagon there does.

So I went out of my way to get my head up to keep my head down? Also, care to explain your analysis of why I make a good DRK scumpartner?

Also, you have yet to respond to anything I have directed at you llama. What's up?

[Glass]

I think scum would search out one of the numerous easier wagons.

I would be happy with LF/Glass/SSS wagons actually and would hammer them near deadline.

I know that something is wrong here and I just can't quite put my finger on it...

[Glass]

A interesting part of dual scumteams is that scum actually have to watch out for crosskills.

Oh, I guess I missed this. So you responded to ONE thing I directed at you, completely ignoring everything else.

[Glass]

I personally think that he is town, otherwise I would have been poking at him.

[Glass]

@Llama
Please explain crazy's case on me

[Glass]

I dont see how as scum you dont flinch at that response at all as town.

huh? I am going to assume you mean "as town". Simple. Krazy's response had awful logic. Anybody can make an excuse if having awful logic in it is acceptable. Why would I flinch at something that is ridiculous?

If you want more as to why you are scum with park, your brushing off my push on him early as "he is townish" and then just ignoring him from then on out is good.

Maybe it is just me but I typically talk to my scum reads as opposed to my town reads, not to mention that he kind of got banned+replaced near that point. I didn't see you talking about park at that point.

[Glass]

I'm sure you dislike your name being in there.

/facepalm

Glass- Why do you think Chk is town?

A better question is why do you think he is not town? The only thing that I can see as remotely anti-town was when he said that our comments were dismissible. compare that to what everyone else has done (specifically llama, SSS, wiz).

[Glass]

vote: glass

Why?

He did just blast apart what you had said though with regards to giving reads, and you just sat there and looked unphased, which I really dont see you doing as scum.

Um.... You just called me town... What we were talking about was not about giving reads at all either. Almost every post now you say ridiculous things about me that are not true. And why are you not trying to get reads on anyone else? Looking for only one scum makes me think that you are a wolf.

You do realize that most of your votes and suspects this game have been people with a wagon on them already? This seems kind of suspicious to me.

You are a suspect of mine. You don't have a wagon on you. But my votes have mostly been on people with wagons. The reason for that is because I believe town will get more from pressuring one person than spreading the votes over many people.

If you see furcolow as scummy (I see your point with this post, but not sure what I feel about furc at the moment) why not vote him?

Because I do not think he is as scummy as llama?

[Glass]

First, his defenses seemed more to be trying to get to actual content rather than just him trying to draw attention off himself (see ISO 8). Also, If he were scum he easily could have wagoned on me with the same ridiculous reasons as everyone else instead of looking back at how llama and park/DRK were interacting with one another. I know this does not make him town in your eyes since you could just say that we are scumbuddies; but you asked why I think he is town, not why you should think he is town.

[Glass]

I pretty much have town reads on singer, Llama

O_O How can you have a town read on singer when she has posted barely anything?
And lol @ town read on llama. Would like to hear an explanation on that one.

[Glass]

1) Crazy seeming a bit more town being in-game with him than reading through the thread, and after I had picked off

Ok.... So besides how my facepalm is scummy, your entire case on me is that crazy is town. I don't get it.

[Glass]

For me, it's because of Glass' abrupt jump on the Krazy wagon using poor reasoning (top of page 7). Then when Krazy refuted that reasoning, Glass didn't budge.

You can yell until you are blue in the face that krazy refuted my reasoning. But he really didn't.

Ok.... So besides how my facepalm is scummy, your entire case on me is that crazy is town. I don't get it.

this post makes no sense and is entirely false

ORLY?
Here is your stated reason for voting me.

Glass, my vote is on you due to
1) Crazy seeming a bit more town being in-game with him than reading through the thread, and after I had picked off
2) Your reaction to me being suspicious of you

I felt your reaction was scummy, so you got my vote.

The "reaction" you are referring to is me facepalming, and there has been no explanation as to why that is scummy, you seem to have completely ignored that question.
So your only other reason is that crazy is town. My post just brought your nonsensical voting reason to light, and it is entirely true.

Furcolow jumping onto this wagon with these "reasons" is really making me worry about his case. If llama flips scum I think I have a good idea of who the partner is.

[Glass]

Yes, he did, Glass. Your argument against Krazy was that he didn't read your post. His later posts about your post were so long and detailed that it was obvious that he did read your post. But don't bother arguing with me about it

idc if you don't want to hear it, you are going to hear it since I actually want to be lynching scum today and you seem to have enough sheep that if I don't convince you my lynch is going to happen. You totally ignored the fact that krazy could have read my posts AFTER I attacked him for not doing so. Do you think that if mafia was being attacked for not reading a post they would continue to ignore the post? It is pretty obvious that the ONLY move scum could do in that scenario is read the post and make up whatever excuse they could for their actions. Krazy's inanity in his followup showed just that to me.

[Glass]

I also did a quick ISO on Glass. The thing I noticed most was the buddying.

where?

Glass is curious as to why Llama stopped challenging parknourie/DRK when the switch happened, but at the same time seems to have liked park/DRK.

hmmm... I don't see what is wrong here? I thought that park/DRK was town and I thought that it was odd that llama (who thought they were scum) suddenly stopped attacking them.

Glass has also failed to establish a good defense for himself.

Yes, because my only defense is the truth. If you think that it is a poor defense whatever. I personally think that crazy's "evidence" has a major gaping hole that everyone is ignoring because
1.They have a major town read on crazy
2.They WANT to believe I am scum. Confirmation bias ftw, huh?

I have made my case on llama in various posts, and I will reiterate it tomorrow morning when I am more awake.

[Glass]

@Toast

I can't help but thinking that understanding llama's logic makes you more inclined to see him as town. Last I checked you thought:

Because I think llama is obvwolf

And now you think that it is possible I am scum. Do you tend to vote for someone who is possible scum over those who are obvscum?

[Glass]

yay, past 1 and i cant sleep.

Anyways...

I'm essentially taking a risk--looking for mafia in the presence of wolves. In other words, I see why he thinks we should go after the second mafia--in order to reduce NK's.

Llama is purposely skewing the numbers, and crazy already explained this. But for him to continue to insist that a mafia lynch is better is ridiculous. read on:

If we lynch mafia, that means that there is 1 NK. Correct. This leaves us with a 4-2 spread. What llama fails to mention is that this is a mylo position and thus another no lynch and NK is inevitable. So either way there are going to be 2 NKs. If we have a mafia and a wolf dead there is not only a chance of a cross-kill, but we can also make relations of who is mafia and who is wolf much easier when we are at 3-1-1.

The odds of there being any number of masons is identical in both situations as there are 2 NKs in both situations.

Some examples: For whatever reason, you LOVED DRK. saying hi when he arrived, among other things
That is not my entire argument but definately added scumpoints

Great, let's hear the entire argument. Why hold back?
I greeted him as he came in, just as I did with other replacements.

Welcome signer and llama.

I seem to have forgotten you. Does that make you sad?

You say you genuinely thought DRK was town, but why?

He seemed town throughout his posts. You came in after he flipped scum, but read his iso and tell me it does not look town. I could ask you why you think crazy is town; It is pretty obv, but if you had to find a irrefutable town thing that he did you would be hardpressed because there are no things that only townies do in a multi-party scum game. chk was an exception because he did something that only a townie (and now that I think about it, a mafia (since mafia HAS to hit wolf today)) would do in that position.

But, look at the llama lynch. It was you and furculow. Not the towniest players.

wtf? Furc never voted for llama IIRC.

Also, I will claim when I am L-1 and there is intent to hammer thx.

[Glass]

>Completely ignore that I refuted all your points
>Still think that a maf lynch is better
>Continue to vote for "maybe maf" instead of "obv wolf"

Now what I find humorous is even though I will have completely refuted your reasons for voting me and I have already refuted furc's reasons for voting me, he will not mention them at all even though that is his ENTIRE CASE ON ME, where he continues to ignore my defense. You would think that after >50 posts you would have a bit more crazy?

Anyways... Time to refute some more arguments it seems.

No answers to RQS. I understand that this may be a matter of theory, but I for one love RQS because its great for reaction-fishing. I actually find it more useful than RVS

first point you bring up in the post and it is not an attack.

93 you use an obvious joke to make krazy look bad

No I didn't. I simply explained to him that wagoning is town.

Quaroath pointed out the problem with this in 110

And I respond with 115. Saying: "You were attacked for this" without looking at my defense is really a problem. Go and refute my defense there if you want this to be a point.

Your post about saying things without content has no content in it; Quaroath backed off, but now he’s dead. Earliest challenge to Glass taken out.

Wait, so you are saying that I killed quaroath for challenging me at the very beginning of the game over crazy who has been tunneling me hard since near-end day 1?

You also say Krazy contributed nothing to the game. In reality, he started the RQS(Giving the biggest contribution that far into the game)

PFffffftttttttt. The RQS did nothing to stimulate conversation and just made that portion of the game's post artificially more cluttered.

he also

later

gave a TON of reads

-points to bolded part-

You were against Crazy’s reasons for the vote, but left the option open to vote Krazy. This came off as being opportunistic. Krazy’s wagon hadn’t been solidified yet—you just had to wait and set a trap. The trap is post 148. You say there are 3 possibilities, which is a false dilemma of sorts. “You are one of these: A, B, or C.” How was Krazy supposed to respond to that?

Ok, so me NOT voting for krazy is opportunistic? False dilemma is such a false term too, a dilemma is a decision between two negative choices, which is not the case at all. I expected krazy to ignore it, I in no way grabbed krazy by the scruff of his neck saying: YOU HAVE TO RESPOND TO THIS!!!

Oh, there was this 191 and 194—those should have given you enough doubt to unvote.

Very much like post 405 and this post, huh?

so you prefer someone who has a terrible case against them AND the person he’s voting for. Does that make much sense? Nope. And it turns out the person you have a town read on is scum.

It does make sense because there are TWO SCUM GROUPS. And the person I "have" a town read on is scum, so I must be scum.

After Krazy’s 194 post, you conveniently add bad points that manage to be passed on by town. Really? Speculating based on the lack of an emoticon?

It is a valid point.

Very opportunistic scum to vote Krazy immediately.

Did you not just say a moment ago I was being opportunistic for NOT voting krazy?

accident, I mean SSS. point still stands

Awful point, look at my wagon. Furc and llama. Not the towniest players, huh?

SOB, I actually have stuff to do today. Llama case will be in the afternoon.

[Glass]

Ok, let's see if I got this all:

Crazy is voting me because he didn't like my reasoning for voting krazy.
Llama is voting me because he is scum trying to save his own ass.
Toast is voting me because ???
Furc is voting me because of gut + sheeping.

5 points goes to anyone who can determine why toast is voting me.

Now, onto my llama case:

First thing is the most obvious and the biggest scumtell:

Llama has voted me and let his other reads rot for no explained reason. Clearly only a wolf would be looking for a single scum when the rest of us (minus mafia) should be looking for 3 scum. This alone should be getting him lynched.

He expressed the desire to lynch furc because he was "lurking" when it was pretty obv he wasn't aware he was in the game.

I am completely fine lynching a scummy lurker. Furc is getting close to that point because I know he is active elsewhere.

He has not responded as to how furc was scummy when he had zero posts.

I got Glass voting me for something I really am not too sure on. It seems that when I hammered I asked people to stop talking which IS the correct thing to do.

^Here he is insinuating that I am voting him for because he asked people to stop talking when he hammered, which I never mentioned. That was SSS in fact.

Please explain crazy's case on me

He did just blast apart what you had said though with regards to giving reads, and you just sat there and looked unphased

That is NOT crazy's case, and llama really should know better than to actually understand someone's case before sheeping them.

Llama continues to insist that a mafia lynch is better than a wolf lynch, when that is clearly not the case. Crazy (and recently I) have shown this. Since it has been explained so many times I am not going to bother to explain it again here.

Llama's biggest suspect was park/zordiark, but when DRK replaced in llama had nothing to say about him; he kept his vote on (until the gambit) but did not try and sway anyone else to vote DRK and pretty much ignored him.

[Glass]

EBWOP:
That is NOT crazy's case, and llama really should know better than to actually understand someone's case before sheeping them.

I meant:

That is NOT crazy's case, and llama really should know better sheep someone without knowing their case.

[Glass]

OMFG

That is NOT crazy's case, and llama really should know better than to sheep someone without knowing their case.
Ok, I got it right that time (hopefully)

[Glass]

@Crazy
When I first read your post I thought you were agreeing with the quotes crazy (I thought I was going crazy). Upon reading it a second time I noticed that it appears you are trying to show some sort of contradiction in these quotes. I kind of see where you are coming from, so I will clear things up:

quote 1: I say that llama is not more likely to be a werewolf because of his insistence to hunt mafia.
quote 2: Llama is a wolf because he is ONLY trying to hunt mafia.

There is a big difference crazy; in quote 1 llama had yet to do any scumhunting today and him thinking that it is advisable to hunt for mafia was excusable before actual logic was laid out in front of him. If he believed his own logic I can understand him trying to hunt mafia more than the wolves, but to simply ignore that other scum are out there completely is just absurd.

I don't care what we lynch, but I think you are both scum. HOWEVER, taking out the possibility for 2 kills in one night sounds great, so I'm naturally voting the person I think is most likely to be mafia.

DID YOU SERIOUSLY NOT READ MY POST WHERE I EXPLAINED HOW LYNCHING A WOLF IS MUCH BETTER? DID YOU ALSO IGNORE WHERE CRAZY DID THE SAME THING?

[Glass]

Glass, I want to hear from everyone. That was the point.

If that was the point you would have had it in your original post. I highly doubt you made up you post completely forgetting your whole point.

[Glass]

How is that different from the masons getting killed one after the other over two nights toasty?

But I shall amuse you:
(numbers based on werewolf being lynched)
Odds of mafia hitting a mason = 1/3
Odds of wolf hitting other mason = 1/6
Odds of both masons dying = 1/18

(numbers based on mafia being lynched)
Odds of wolf hitting mason N2 = 2/5
Odds of wolf hitting mason N3 = 1/4
Odds of both masons dying = 2/20 = 1/10

Why does the wolves have a higher chance of killing both masons? Because they know that one person is not a mason (their partner)

Numbers, biatch.

[Glass]

How about this now?

Assuming that wolf is lynched:

Odds of mafia hitting wolf = 1/6
Odds of wolf hitting maf = 1/6
Odds of one of them dying = 1/3
Odds of insta-win = 1/36

Of course, there is no possibility of either with a maf lynch.

[Glass]

Of course, the mason statistics are without counting the backup mason, but since I am a math nerd I shall do that real quick:

(assuming wolf is lynched)
Odds of mafia hitting a mason = 1/2
Odds of wolf hitting a different mason = 1/3
Odds of 2/3 masons dying = 1/6

(assuming mafia is lynched)
Odds of wolves hitting mason N2 = 3/5
Odds of wolves hitting mason N3 = 1/2
Odds of 2/3 masons dying = 3/10

Clearly either way the wolf lynch is better

[Glass]

Your numbers are such BS that I don't even know where to start.

What Glasses analysis misses is optimization of kills from scum. The odds of scum hitting a mason if they are actually shooting for a mason is much higher then if they are shooting for the most town looking person, the biggest threat to them, etc. Roles change these odds. While the odds of scum killing town remain the same, which town changes, especially when you pick up on visual cues of the masons if they have to protect their partner, get ran up, etc.

The scum will be aiming for masons, yes, so the odds of masons dying will increase. But it increases whether the mafia or wolf dies, even more so if the mafia dies because the wolves don't have to worry about the mafia targeting the same mason as them and they can throw ideas between one another.

You pretty much took actual numbers and said: "No, because the odds of masons dying are bigger". Ok fine so instead of the 1/6 and 3/10, it will be 2/6 and 6/10. happy? You then substituted faulty numbers with no reasoning other than to make it look like a mafia lynch is better.

[Glass]

Even if both the mafia and wolf pinpoint who both the masons are, the odds of them hitting opposite ones is only 50%, if we lynch a mafia and they pinpoint who the masons are it is 100%.

[Glass]

wow, I am triple posting far too much.

Note: The odds of the wolves pinpointing the masons are far greater than both the mafia AND wolves individually pinpointing the masons.

[Glass]

I'm partial to lynching mafia, mostly due to the chance of killing both masons in one night if both scum groups live.

How is that different from the masons getting killed one after the other over two nights

If we leave one member of each alive, then they might join up to help protect themselves and both attack town.

1. How?
2. Unlike how 2 wolves would NEVER team up to help protect themselves and attack town.

[Glass]

Where is the contradiction?

[Glass]

However, placed in context, glass was trying to convince me not to aim for solely mafia.

Sort of...
Toast is confident that he has pegged the mafia and a wolf, he thought that the mafia lynch was better. Unfortunately he has NOT got the mafia correct, but if by showing him that the wolf lynch is better leads to a scum lynch I am all for it.

[Glass]

Just noting that I also do not like tclaw jumping from SSS to me as soon as he is questioned about being on said wagon.

[Glass]

Dear mafia, the wolves will not be killing crazy tonight. You are free kill him if you want.
Sincerely, Glass

That is right, I am...

A WOLF

VOTE: Glass
I will be taking my leave now. Good luck fellow wolf.

I still think that crazy's case on me is crap. But that can wait until after the game is over.

[Glass]

Or you can argue that mafia is all luck and I just got lucky in guessing you as scum.

Lol, I am not that butthurt. But this is discussion for later.

[Glass]

I forgive you SSS. -fist bumps llama-
Thanks for replacing me in TGtN as well.
Tclaw, do you need that question answered still?

[Glass]

Crazy played like a beast, first time I got lynched too. After looking it over I see where he came from.

[Glass]

OH THAT REMINDS ME.

I AM A GUY FFS!!!!!!!!!!

[Glass]

QT

[Glass]

Day 2 was fun because it was some friendly competition , I was genuinely trying to get llama lynched up until near the end when I realized that many people had a town read on llama and with me flipping wolf he was going to go far. If llama had gotten lynched I would have had to kill the mafia at night to even think about surviving day 3 and then there would be 2 masons to worry about, so ehhhh.

[Glass]

Well, I would have killed SSS (as noted in qt) and so we would have signer, toast, me, furc, tclaw. I would have definitely attacked furc for being llama's partner (it may have worked, who knows) and then it would have come down to what happened night 3. idk if i would have killed you or you killed me at that point, so it could have been anyone's game really.