Open 289 - Hard Boiled - Game over.

[Snake Eyes]

@ Snake Eyes: I'm asking one more time: why did you find CS to be town at the start of the game?

It looked like an attempt to move the game into something more meaningful than RVS, in a way that was likely to bring attention to him. There's little scum motivation to do so, but there is a pretty clear town motive.

Not seeing much benefit of a massclaim straight away as opposed to just lynching claimed VT. If someone claims PR when put to L-1, it will confirm him, unless someone counterclaims which means we have narrowed down 1 scum out of 2 people. The only thing that may mess up town is if the vig kills a PR, but I'd rather let the vig take that risk, if he so chooses, than out every single PR in the game.

I'd recommend the vig choose tracker unless he's sure enough of his reads to potentially single-handedly lose the game for town.

[iamausername]

I've been trying to find where this setup was originally proposed in the open setup nomination thread, becasue I'm sure massclaim possibilities would have been discussed at the time, but no luck so far.

Regfan, after you run through the numbers if scum counterclaim the PsyDet, go ahead and check out what we can do if scum counterclaim the hider or hider tracker too. (You can leave out vig, because duh, real vig shoots the fake vig) I want to see high percentages on every combination of possible scum counters before I'll consider massclaim as a smart strategy. Because my instinct would be that one scum claiming PsyDet, one claiming Hider and one claiming VT, for example, does not create a particularly positive situation for us.

Incidentally, I'm pretty sure Regfan is town after this. Whether or not he actually has a breaking strategy, I believe that he believes he does.

[Regfan]

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... start=1075

This page and the following page involve it, and multiple people state the town-sidedness of the setup. I'll have the other claim possibilties up in the next hour or two.

[Vordark]

I'm not liking the massclaim on Day 1 idea at all, personally. For the record, here's the actual worst-case scenario, including probabilities.

Assuming 8 VT claims, 3 of which are Mafia:

With three Mafia alive and 8 VT claims, the lynch pick has a 62.5% chance of killing a VT.
If a VT was selected, the vig pick has a 57.1% chance of killing a VT.
There is a 35.6% chance that we will kill two VTs and no Mafia on Day 1/Night 1.

The Mafia kills a power role Night 1. We are 6 Town vs 3 Mafia going into Day 2, with 6 VT claims remaining.

With three Mafia alive and 6 VT claims, the lynch pick has a 50% chance of killing a VT.
If a VT was selected, the vig pick has a 40% chance of killing a VT.
There is a 20% chance that we will kill two VTs and no Mafia on Day 2/Night 2.

The Mafia kills a power role Night 2. We are now 3 Town vs 3 Mafia. Town loses.

To be crystal clear, if we mislynch and misvig on Day 1/Night 1, we actually get into a lylo-like scenario on Day 2, because if neither our lynch nor the vig hit a Mafia then, town loses the game. And of course all of this assumes the Mafia doesn't take out our vig on Night 1, which I haven't seen mentioned as a possibility. Then again, I just woke up so I might have missed it's mention.

It's true that the odds of this scenario (assuming totally random actions based only on claims and flips) is rather low, but when you consider it's only Day One and we already have at least one viable lynch candidate, it seems like a

really

bad decision to just start rolling dice.

[Abelcain]

Wow, okay, talking setup theory. I'm going to postpone my ISO reads for a while so I can get into this. I'm not fantastic at running the numbers in a situation like this, but here's some things to think about:

If we try using the hider to identify someone's alignment: If he chooses to hide behind Mafia, he will die and he won't be able to tell us who he hid behind. Assuming the mafia kill "a power role" in the first night, they might very well choose to kill the hider tracker so we end up with a dead hider and a dead HT so nobody knows who he hid behind. So to avoid that scenario, the hider has to announce who he plans to hide behind during the night. This not only makes the HT essentially useless, but if the hider hides behind a townie the Mafia can just kill the townie and take out the hider as well, which gives the Mafia an extra free town kill. Both of these scenarios are undesirable to the point that the hider should just about not hide, which renders both the hider and the HT useless as power roles.

If the Det/Psy is a Psychologist: Is this really a useful role? If the vig and the mafia both kill on night one, then the Psychologist should get a "cannot kill" result for everyone in the game, right?

In which case the scum will have to claim detective or psychologist. Hider-tracker and hider are cross-confirming, vigilante would just shoot his CC, and tracker would be confirmable.

I'm not exactly sure how hider and HT are cross-confirming, since both would have to survive to the next day to be sure. Assumedly, if there are two hider claims, each one will "hide" during the night. At daybreak, they will both announce who they hid behind and the HT will confirm who he tracked, but there's nothing stopping the Mafia from NKing the HT and thereby leaving the hiders unconfirmed as to which is which.

If it's the HT which is doubled, then the hider would have to hide behind the Det/Psy or Tracker in order to guarantee his survival (as in, not hiding behind Mafia) and if the Tracker/Vig chooses Vig, that means the hider MUST hide behind the Det/Psy. If the Mafia then shoots the Det/Psy at night, the Hider dies too AND the HTs are left unconfirmed. If the hider doesn't hide behind the Det/Psy, he risks getting killed anyway by hiding behind Mafia, which frees up the fake HT to name one of the townies as the Mafia he hid behind.



@iamausername: I know it's WIFOM, but it's possible that Regfan

doesn't

really believe that this is a breaking strategy and is only proposing it because he thinks it gives him a good shot at winning as scum.

[Umbrage]

Day 1 massclaim is always a bad idea, mainly because town cannot judge who is lying. Whereas if you wait a couple days, you can check the claim with vote analysis and other elements of the player's game. If we massclaim now, scum WILL counterclaim, be assured of that. And then it's absolute chaos. Scum love chaos. We have a total of THREE investigative roles, counting hider and hider tracker as one role, and assuming the tracker/vig chooses tracker. That is a lot. This is a very swingy set-up. All the PRs could get guilties on each of the scum N1: hider hides with scum1, tracker tracks scum2 who made the kill, psychologist investigates scum3. Game over. So let's at least wait until D2. Then, we'll know where we stand.

One final note: normally I consider it better to have a tracker than a vig, but there're a few lurkers here. Vigs are good for lurkers. Thoughts?

EDIT:

@ Abelcain: Here's an idea, we could all say who we would hide with before that night if we were the hider.

[Ythan]

Regfan are you kidding.

[Ythan]

I guess thanks for suggesting it so we can read over players' reasons for supporting or not supporting it.

[DarthYoshi]

DarthYoshi: Reading him in ISO, there's tons of scum motivation for his post history. First off, in post #3, all the questions are aimed in a way to cast suspicion on the people involved.

Town should suspicious of everyone at the outset because there are so few clues as to alignment (barring being a mason or a similar role—clearly not an issue in this setup). Are you saying that there were/are people that early in the game that I should have been giving a pass on?

There and in later posts he's very much keeping all his options open and not saying anything of who's scum, just pointing out anti-town behavior.

Anti-town behavior can be indicative of scum alignment. And FWIW, I’ve been beating the Xtoxm-is-scum drum for quite a while now.

And how exactly is keeping options open and being open-minded indicative of alignment?

There are tons of other points I agree with but am too tired to find right now from Vordark/Iamausername, but let's just say that I'm pretty sure this guy is scum.

Read: I’m just going to sheep from the one person actually doing the legwork to get you lynched. For me apparently being your most voteworthy scumread in the game, this is an awfully weak case.

Also, chalk me up as not being in favor of a massclaim. I suck at math, but if this setup could be broken by a D1 massclaim, no way it would have been approved.

[Umbrage]

I suck at math, but if this setup could be broken by a D1 massclaim, no way it would have been approved.

[Quaroath]

Massclaims just brak the game and make them duller than dull. *shrug*

[Umbrage]

Massclaims just brak the game and make them duller than dull. *shrug*

VOTE: Quaroath

There are plenty of reasons to be against a massclaim, but to be against it because it would be dull? Wait, ARE you against it? You don't state a definite opinion here. Want to be able to switch to either side, eh?

[Regfan]

Apologies for the delay in this, been focusing on getting up to date in my other games as well as dealing with uni.

All 2 VT Claims, 1 Detective/Psychologist Claim.: 3 Clears. 9 Unclears, 3 Mafia. Then lets assume that town manage to lynch town before mafia in every give scenario

D1.
Two scenarios: Scenario #1. D/P claim #1 was mafia. (9 v 2)
Two scenarios: Scenario #2. D/P claim #1 was D/P (8 v 3)

N1.
Two scenarios: Scenario #1. Vig shoots VT claim #1. (8 v 2) Mafia shoot D/P. (7 v 2) -> Hider no hides.
Two scenarios: Scenario #2. Vig shoots D/P claim #2 (8 v 2) Mafia shoot Vig (7 v 2) -> Hider no hides.

D2. Two scenarios:
.
Two scenarios: Scenario #1. Town lynch VT #2 (6 v 2)
Two scenarios: Scenario #2. Town lynch VT #1 (6 v 2)

N2:
Two scenarios: Scenario #1. Vig no shoots. Vig dies. (5 v 2)
Two scenarios: Scenario #2. Vig no shoots. Tracker dies (5 v 2)

D3:
Two scenarios: Scenario #1. Town lynch VT #3 (4 v 2)
Two scenarios: Scenario #2.Town lynch VT #2 (4 v 2)
N3
Two scenarios: Scenario #1. Mafia shoot Tracker (3 v 2)
Two scenarios: Scenario #1. Mafia shoot Hider (3 v 2)
D4:
Two scenarios: Scenario #1. Lylo. Alive are: VT #4, VT#5, VT#6, VT#7. 4 Unclears, 1 Clear. 2 Mafia.
Two scenarios: Scenario #1. Lylo. Alive are VT #3, VT #4, VT#5, VT#6, VT#7. 5 Unclears. 2 Mafia.

Scenario 1: Town get to lynch VT#1, VT#2, VT#3, VT#4 4/7.
Scenario 2: Town get to lynch VT#1, VT#2, VT#3. 3/7

Alright, mass-claim doesn't work if this is the case, as lynching incorrectly D1 would give us only 2 MLs and assuming we lynch incorrectly both times we end up at a 5 way no clears lylo.

Unvote

I need to catch up with the Yoshi/Vordark case.

[Quaroath]

Massclaims just brak the game and make them duller than dull. *shrug*

VOTE: Quaroath

There are plenty of reasons to be against a massclaim, but to be against it because it would be dull? Wait, ARE you against it? You don't state a definite opinion here. Want to be able to switch to either side, eh?

Yes I am, because it makes the game far more boring. I like how you jump on me when I'm not the first one to point that out.

Krazy was

[iamausername]

@iamausername: I know it's WIFOM, but it's possible that Regfan

doesn't

really believe that this is a breaking strategy and is only proposing it because he thinks it gives him a good shot at winning as scum.

I find that extremely unlikely, because for Regfan to think that would work, he would have to assume that no one else would notice that it wasn't a breaking strategy, even though he had no trouble noticing it himself. No, Regfan is town.

@ Abelcain: Here's an idea, we could all say who we would hide with before that night if we were the hider.

The hider tracker is there so we don't need to do this. If the hider hides behind scum, the hider tracker can claim tomorrow and get that sum lynched. And if the hider hides behind town, this helps scum find him.

Here's an example of twelve players, and who they say they will hide behind:

Alice -> Harry
Bob -> Daniel

Charlie

-> Fred
Daniel -> Harry
Evelyn -> Fred
Fred -> George

George

-> Fred
Harry -> Alice
Ian -> Daniel
Juan -> Charlie

Katie

-> Bob
Louise -> Evelyn

Scum names in red. Now, the scum know that the hider will not be hiding behind Bob, Ian, Juan or Louise. Instead of there being nine possible townies the hider could be hiding behind, there are only five. They have a much greater chance to get a two-for-one kill than they would without the hypoclaim.

The only way this wouldn't happen is if everybody picks a different target. So if we all agree that if we are the hider, we will hide behind the person below us on the player list, for example, that could work. But I think it's better to just let the hider make his own decision.

VOTE: Quaroath

There are plenty of reasons to be against a massclaim, but to be against it because it would be dull? Wait, ARE you against it? You don't state a definite opinion here. Want to be able to switch to either side, eh?

Isn't it pretty clear by now that the town as a whole is against massclaim? Why would scum Quaroath bother trying to sit on the fence at this point?

[Krazy]

Krazy was

Indeed I was, after I also mentioned that instead of being an auto-win the game could easily became a 5 player lylo with no power roles.

But yes, it does ALSO result in a dull game until the end.

[Umbrage]

Argh, I've gotten too caught up with this TBL/xtoxm/Quaroath stuff. I'm going to make a big post at some point in time that outlines my case on Snake Eyes, because my arguments have been spread out all over the place. So if I don't post for a while, I'm working on that.

[ConSpiracy]

Pfff. I have some spare time. Let's get to vordark.
First thing I want to say is that I really shouldn't make a case when I am very tired. There are many odd sentences between it or things that I explained in a strange way. I will read through my Xtoxm case to see if I have it there, as well. Oh well, the more you learn...

1.

Can you show me where I said the reason for you vote was strange and scummy? I cannot see where you are getting this at all and given in that post I said you seemed more town to me at the time, your remark here seems very out of place.

2.

Also, can you show me where I contradict myself in the catch up post?

3.

Showing me what you consider "buddying" might be helpful as well.

1. I meant this: "Umbrage vote on me", not my vote on Umbrage. My bad. I am not a native English speaker and have often problems with English.
2. Nvm. I read back, that wasn't true.
3. Such as:

16 - This is obviously trying to get a bandwagon going on the most viable person.

You seemed to be the only one who found that obvious...

19 - OMGUS vote from Umbrage.

OMGUS? Why didn't you get the vibe of him trying to get out of the RVS? <- The thread's consensus was that my vote was good and his was bad.
In every thing else you are telling us everything some players (me, SE, Abel) have posted very good while others (Umbrage, DY) have only posted bad things. This was in consensus of the thread back then, although for example I hadn't done a thing back then: The RVS-thingie, and some questions towards Umbrage.

Can you show me anywhere I appear to have been unclear or did not back up my remarks with reason? I have posted a fair amount, so it should not be difficult to find something that does not make sense, as you believe makes up the bulk of my posts.

Bad wording again. I didn't find much that made sense being town. Almost every thing was more null than town.

You say "buddying" three times. It would definitely be nice if you presented your reasoning for this. The latter sentence is almost certainly true. At that point, there was very little content in the thread. I am not surprised that others would make similar observations given the same, limited material.

For buddying, read the above. The content thing, I don't get why you bothered telling us that then. Informative information isn't useful if we already knew it.

This reply makes very little sense. Your vote being right and all others being wrong?

Why can't DY try to get out of the RVS with voting me because he didn't see my vote trying to get out of the RVS? Okay, the "My vote... wrong" was a bit exaggerated, but you get the idea of what I implied...

1.

"Town wouldn't unnecessary post" is not the reason I put forth as to why I was at the time leaning scum on DY (whereas now I have concluded he is scum), nor did I say it was.

2.

You say my "other reasons are bad as well" but don't explain yourself. As for "DY didn't vote for Umbrage at all", you are correct and that was a mistake on my part. He had been voting you and overly-explained why he moved it.

1. Yes it was one of the reasons:

To summarize: Some of what DY is critical of I actually read as pro-town (moving us out of RVS, looking for relationships between players), he spent too much time FoSing CS's bandwagon on Umbrage while saying CS gave no reason for it, appeared to backtrack on that in the same post he continued to defend it

and looks like he's trying to keep the Krazy train running

. I also don't like how he felt the need to tell us why he moved his vote off Umbrage when he voted for Krazy.

2. FoSing my bandwagon could be because he didn't get that I tried to get us out of the RVS. <- Nothing bad about that. I can't find a backtrack you mentioned in your iso about DY. Those aren't really good reasons to vote for DY.

No, I did not find him scummy for this. I noted only that the manner in which he was defending himself amounted to nothing more than "I'm town, so I must not be doing what you say".

Read above, you did.

I do not feel the need to move my vote around as much as some other people. I have also since looked at Snake Eyes and will look at Ythan when time permits. I believe some people do not remember there are nearly two weeks left before the deadline.

Only mentioning it and not doing anything with it later isn't voting. BTW: 2 weeks? WTF? That is short.

I think that is all. And I would like every body to remember we are playing a game here. Mass-claiming may give us better odds, but it ruins the fun of the game. Setup speculation always seems to help us, but it distracts us from playing mafia. Please stop it.

[Vordark]

@ConSpiracy:

I found your vote on Umbrage as obviously trying to get a BW going to get us out of RVS because I had just read no less than six games in a row in the archive where that very thing had occurred.

I found Umbrage's vote an OMGUS because of the remark he made in that post:

VOTE: ConSpiracy

You singled me out for a reason, but why would you ask for my thoughts when I said I find RVS meaningless?

The phrase "singled me out" generally rubs me the wrong way. That choice of words implied victimization. Subtle words choices like this tend to jump out at me. I read that he was at least moderately upset by your vote and voted you back.

So I'm still not seeing what you are calling "buddying".

Regarding the rest of your post, I'd like to point out that we're discussing my stream of consciousness catch-up post here from early on. There was next to no content in the thread at that point, but I find it very important for people to weigh in on what is there because it spurs conversation. Regardless, there's been quite a deal more from me since then that you haven't weighed in on, apart to say it all looks null.

I'd like to see more detailed discussion from you regarding the case on DarthYoshi.

[Umbrage]

Awesome. Got it done while waiting for class to start.

Why Umbrage Thinks Snake Eyes is Scum:

Since it IS a very good place to start, let's start at the very beginning.

When I made voted ConSpiracy, I tried to make why as clear as possible.

Why me? As I said, I don't consider RVS means much in the way of scum versus town. I really don't think anyone can find scum on page one... You singled me out for a reason, but why would you ask for my thoughts when I said I find RVS meaningless?

Which I think explains my position clearly. However, when Snake Eyes voted me, this was his post:

OK, so my vote on ConSpiracy is about as serious as you can get for page 1 reads. Xtoxm stands out as odd to me, he didn't random vote, he didn't really say hello or anything, he just answered the questions. I'm not saying it's scum or town, it just looks odd.

Why is ConSpiracy asking you specifically a question a somewhat serious scumtell? What about it is more scummy than a person who is arguably not doing much to get the game out of RVS, and why point it out if it's not scummy?

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Umbrage

I find a few faults in this post. For one, he more or less says that I should find xtoxm more scummy than ConSpiracy because he's not getting out of RVS, which is weird. But more to the point, he says he doesn't know my reasons for voting CS, although I outlined them in my previous post. Apparently, he didn't see that post, or it didn't grab his attention. Which means that it was likely my saying that the vote was serious that triggered this response, since that is what he quoted and to what he responded. It wasn't the vote itself; it was his knowing that there was a serious vote that made him vote me.

If he truly didn't understand my reasoning, then why did he vote me at this point? The logical thing to do if you don't understand someone's reasoning is to ask them to explain, not assume the reasoning is scummy and vote them.

Snake Eyes later tries to cover his tracks by claiming that this vote on me was simply to get a wagon started. This would explain why he voted without knowing my reasoning, as well as his apathy for said reasoning. However there are a few holes in this story. Firstly, why would he bandwagon me? CS was the better choice, simply because he already had a serious vote on him, mine. I explicitly said that it was serious, and clearly Snake Eyes saw that the vote was serious, as he quoted me saying so. Now, if he was really trying to get out of RVS via a wagon, voting CS would be the logical step, since he already had a serious vote, the wagon was serious, and not a joke RVS one. What's more, he would've likely noticed that I was trying to do the same thing to CS. A wagon is stronger when it has more than one person pushing the wagon. I was already pushing hard on CS. Why didn't he just join up with me? By wagoning me and not CS, he makes it clear that

he knew CS was trying to get out of RVS, but he didn't know I was doing the same, even though I explicitly said my vote on CS was serious

.

It's less scummy to join a bandwagon on someone I don't have a scumread on, than it is to pressure you after you've made a questionable post, and then push a wagon on you when I do have a scumread on you?

In this bit, he inadvertently reveals that he did find me scummy at the time of his vote, so the claim that it was to get out of RVS was a lie. Watch:

It's less scummy to join a bandwagon on ConSpiracy, than it is to pressure you?

That's a shortened version of the above quote I made for clarity's sake. The person he didn't have a scumread on was ConSpiracy.

It's clear the point he was making was that since he didn't have a scumread on CS, it was better for him to pressure me. But he said he didn't find me scummy at that point, so he was wagoning someone he didn't have a scumread on anyway. Why then, would he say CS was a poorer wagon because he didn't have a scumread on him? By saying that his lack of a scumread on CS influenced his decision to wagon me, he admits that he wouldn't bandwagon someone he didn't have a scumread on, and yet he maintains he didn't have a scum read on me.

And for bonus scumpoints, we have the attitude towards CS. He said he found CS town at the start of the game. When I asked him why, he insisted this was the reason:

It looked like an attempt to move the game into something more meaningful than RVS, in a way that was likely to bring attention to him. There's little scum motivation to do so, but there is a pretty clear town motive.

I don't see why scum would not want to move the game past RVS. In fact, the faster we're out of RVS, the faster a lynch will happen, and scum want fast lynches. So if anything, wanting to move the game past RVS is a scumtell.

TL; DR: Snake Eyes is lying scum. He contradicts himself. His play shows a relationship with CS, either they are both scum, or Snake Eyes is trying to buddy him.

[Ythan]

I just escaped from a Reck/Dram/Kise meet. Catching up.

[Ythan]

Massclaims just brak the game and make them duller than dull. *shrug*

VOTE: Quaroath

There are plenty of reasons to be against a massclaim, but to be against it because it would be dull? Wait, ARE you against it? You don't state a definite opinion here. Want to be able to switch to either side, eh?

He's not the only player to make that type of argument, and regardless it doesn't look good for you to jump on a player for one post at this point in the game.

[Umbrage]

I just escaped from a Reck/Dram/Kise meet. Catching up.

You poor thing.

[Ythan]

Argh, I've gotten too caught up with this TBL/xtoxm/Quaroath stuff. I'm going to make a big post at some point in time that outlines my case on Snake Eyes, because my arguments have been spread out all over the place. So if I don't post for a while, I'm working on that.

And here's why. You jumped on some player, not even the first one to do what you accused him of, when your vote should clearly be elsewhere.

[Snake Eyes]

DarthYoshi: Reading him in ISO, there's tons of scum motivation for his post history. First off, in post #3, all the questions are aimed in a way to cast suspicion on the people involved.

Town should suspicious of everyone at the outset because there are so few clues as to alignment (barring being a mason or a similar role—clearly not an issue in this setup). Are you saying that there were/are people that early in the game that I should have been giving a pass on?

And how exactly is keeping options open and being open-minded indicative of alignment?

You were not just "being suspicious of everyone", you just made questions that hinted at scumminess but didn't follow up on whether or not you found them scummy or not. It is very scum-motivated to cast suspicion on as wide a range as possible, as that way it's much easier to manipulate on whom to pick for the (mis)lynch. Even better when it's combined with hedging like yours - as far as I can tell the only person you've said is scummy is xtoxm, and that is for lurking and other reasons that came after your vote.

Massclaims just brak the game and make them duller than dull. *shrug*

VOTE: Quaroath

There are plenty of reasons to be against a massclaim, but to be against it because it would be dull? Wait, ARE you against it? You don't state a definite opinion here. Want to be able to switch to either side, eh?

Yes I am, because it makes the game far more boring. I like how you jump on me when I'm not the first one to point that out.

Krazy was

I agree that it makes the game boring, but if it had been a gamebreaking strategy it would have been anti-town to oppose it. This second post where you just deflect to Krazy makes me think you have ulterior motives for not going through with it.

I find a few faults in this post. For one, he more or less says that I should find xtoxm more scummy than ConSpiracy because he's not getting out of RVS, which is weird. But more to the point, he says he doesn't know my reasons for voting CS, although I outlined them in my previous post. Apparently, he didn't see that post, or it didn't grab his attention.

Which means that it was likely my saying that the vote was serious that triggered this response

, since that is what he quoted and to what he responded. It wasn't the vote itself; it was his knowing that there was a serious vote that made him vote me.

Bingo on bolded.

If he truly didn't understand my reasoning, then why did he vote me at this point? The logical thing to do if you don't understand someone's reasoning is to ask them to explain, not assume the reasoning is scummy and vote them.

Snake Eyes later tries to cover his tracks by claiming that this vote on me was simply to get a wagon started. This would explain why he voted without knowing my reasoning, as well as his apathy for said reasoning. However there are a few holes in this story. Firstly, why would he bandwagon me? CS was the better choice, simply because he already had a serious vote on him, mine. I explicitly said that it was serious, and clearly Snake Eyes saw that the vote was serious, as he quoted me saying so. Now, if he was really trying to get out of RVS via a wagon, voting CS would be the logical step, since he already had a serious vote, the wagon was serious, and not a joke RVS one. What's more, he would've likely noticed that I was trying to do the same thing to CS. A wagon is stronger when it has more than one person pushing the wagon. I was already pushing hard on CS. Why didn't he just join up with me? By wagoning me and not CS, he makes it clear that

he knew CS was trying to get out of RVS, but he didn't know I was doing the same, even though I explicitly said my vote on CS was serious

.

I thought a question with a vote created more pressure. Remember that I was also suspicious of you namedropping xtoxm for no reason and wanted to see if you waffled on him.

Where did I claim that the vote on you was just to get a wagon started? Also, I didn't know why your vote on CS was "serious" as you put it. Yes, you had given some reasons for your vote on CS on an earlier post, but when you say your vote is "serious", the usual implication is that the person you are talking about is really, really scummy. I didn't agree and thought you claiming the vote was serious was far more worth my attention. Still don't get why you keep bringing up that CS was the better choice, as I really don't see why, or why it's somehow scummy that I chose to pressure you over CS.

It's clear the point he was making was that since he didn't have a scumread on CS, it was better for him to pressure me. But he said he didn't find me scummy at that point, so he was wagoning someone he didn't have a scumread on anyway. Why then, would he say CS was a poorer wagon because he didn't have a scumread on him? By saying that his lack of a scumread on CS influenced his decision to wagon me, he admits that he wouldn't bandwagon someone he didn't have a scumread on, and yet he maintains he didn't have a scum read on me.

I didn't make a conscious decision between either of you, like you're implying here and in many other places. The notion that I shouldn't pressure you unless I have a scumread on you is laughably bad. I've already said why I wanted to pressure you - your post where you said your vote on CS was serious and then brought up xtoxm for no reason.

I don't see why scum would not want to move the game past RVS. In fact, the faster we're out of RVS, the faster a lynch will happen, and scum want fast lynches. So if anything, wanting to move the game past RVS is a scumtell.

Hey Umbrage, who's scummier, me who's "lying scum", or Quaroath, who you're voting for not supporting the massclaim? And why?