Open 272 - Near-Vanilla (Over!)

[Bella]

OHHAIGUISE!

First things first, I'm going to

unvote

until I've managed to read through the game.

[Bella]

Oh, awesome, there's some juicy content right off the bat!

I'd like to propose a policy lynch of Bella.

a) What policy?

b) How does this policy produce a pro-town outcome?

I'd like to propose a policy lynch of Bella.

Seconded. Sometimes, winning the game must be preceded by considerations of a higher nature.

It may not be a rule in this particular game, but I find deliberately playing against your win condition to be generally frowned upon on the site on account of the fact that it ruins games.

Also, since she didn't introduce herself, she was known as DizzyIzzyB13 before, and is very far from being a newbie (just so we don't waste time with false assumptions).

True, but entirely irrelevent since the mod knows who I am.

And? I still want a policy lynch.

I was adding to her case. She's doubly guilty for having a perfectly decent identity before and still changing it, for trying to conceal this fact, and for not even having very young age as an excuse.

FOS for interpreting my post otherwise.

Well, that's a post choc-full of nonsense. Please demonstrate that any attempt was made to conceal my prior identity. Perhaps it was this post in the Mini Theme Queue, where I was so deliberately obfuscatory* as to my prior identity? Perhaps it was the numerous posts acknowledging it made around the Discussion areas of the site? Perhaps it was the contact information that - shock, horror - use the exact same accounts I've been publically using for ages? No, sir, this is most definitely a case in which I've tried to conceal my identity, by publically announcing (well, in Scumchat, anyway) that I was dropping my old name for something a little less childish, publically acknowledging the new identity all over the site and making zero effort to hide who I am by sharing contact information.

I am very interested to hear the other ways in which you intend to deliberately pursue activities counter to the objectives of the town which are a) lynching scum and b) see a.

*This is sarcasm, in case you didn't get it.

[Bella]

@farside22: can you link me some recent games of you playing as town?

I found scum has a hard time finding scum because they are scum and don't' want to rat out their scum partners. As town I know I'm suspicious of more people then not.

I really like this. I'll use it in future games.

I am intrigued by this because I find the opposite to be true. As scum, your information level is much greater - you know who is or isn't scum and thus you never have to consider the possibility that you are wrong. As town, this is clearly not true - someone who is genuinely scum-hunting will always have a voice in the back of their head that they may be picking up on the wrong trail or misinterpreting someone's behaviour. This fact leads to greater equivocation, especially when it comes to making a suspect list at an early stage of the game.

[Bella]

Yes, and lynching him for being lurky and generally unhelpful is pointless because that's what he does regardless of alignment.

[Bella]

It doesn't matter if you judge my other account or not. I doubt it'll be helpful, though.

[Bella]

Anyway... It seems strange to be asking for a scum list at this stage of the game, with the general activity levels of some of the players and there being several replacements already. The data doesn't exist to perform such an action. So, I decline to provide one. I will, however, provide my current thoughts on each player.

JesseSheffield - 20% of posts promise futher posts. 10% of posts are confirm. 10% of posts are irrelevent to the game. His other posting is safe, and justifiable but lacks quantity to tell whether he's actually trying to engage in scumhunting or scum residing in safe, uncontroversial play. Also, promised a post "in the morning" at 8am GMT on Friday after a four day gap in posting. It is currently 5am-ish GMT on Tuesday morning. If forced to categorize him, I'd probably have to go with slight lean towards lurker/busy town.

andrew94 - Well, he seems to be trying. He's not posting much in his posts, but what's there has the appearance of attempted scum-hunting Mild lean town.

DavidParker (Replacing: MidnightHike) - MidnightHike didn't post at all beyond confirming, whereas David's made a good solid attempt to get teh game moving since replacing in. The policy lynch stuff is stupid, but meh... the rest of his posting seems productive so far.

Egg - Five posts isn't enough to make any kind fo judgment - especially when 3 of them are confirmation and two posts promising future content. Given that he's a newbie making his first post, I'm tending to agree that he's probably a flaking newb who could go either way.

Looker (Replacing: slMagnvox) - slMagvox provided nothing of note. Looker's posting thus far has yet to really set me off either way.

brokenscraps - Urgh, started off really poorly with his talk about "confirmed scum" early on, but he seemed to pick up once the game got going. I'd lean townish based on his later play, but I'm open to a slim possibility that he's just trying harder to make up for the poor start.

Nachomamma8 - I really could go either way on Nachomamma8. Started slow, by jumping on brokenscraps post for all the wrong reasons and was unconvincing when defending against the confirmation accusation. I hatehatehatehatehate the L-1 thing, and the reaction to AntB refusing to claim to it was... strange, since generally speaking, claiming is a valid consideration at L-1 and Nacho's the one who planted that seed. Still... when pressured and pressed into pushing the AntB case, there seemed to be quite a shift to far more pro-town play. Coinflip, really.

smashbro_of_the_SSS - Concentrating too much on lurkers for my liking. There's some oddness with his "slightly more serious" vote for the same person early on that he never really justified well. There are seeds planted that could blossom into a full-blown scum-case, but it's too soon to come to a judgment.

AntB - There's a very solid case against him, but there's something in the conviction and the confidence of his defence of himself that pings town, even if I can't find anything else to base that read from.

lord_hur (Replacing: Chaotic Neutrality) - Chaotic Neautrality got off to a bad start before the replacement by copping an attitude and making a much bigger deal out of the "confirm 2nd" thing than it warrented. lord_hur hasn't done much better, but I can't quite put my finger on why. Sure, there's the absurdity of pushing for a policy lynch with no justification when I replaced in, but there's just something more to it that I can't qwuite grasp. Maybe it's the language. There's a lot of overly-emotive and over-reactive language being used in conjuction with stuff like lynching lurkers that strikes a chord as trying far too hard. Eh... I'd probably lean scummish, but without confidence since I can't really articulate why.

farside22 - farside's expreienced so, so you have to be alert to the possibility that she's just playing well, but given the way she's pushing along discussion and pressing for answers to questions she asks puts her as a solidish town player for now.

Archer - Mmm. The anti-Nachomamma8 thing over the "confirm tell" seems dicey, to me. He also seems slightly out of sync with the game - he made a random vote when it seemed the game had move on from that and he posted that he wasn't used to the speed. He's a goon, though, so it might just be inexperience with the MS style of play. He's a bit on the over-emotive side like lord-hur. He also seemed to play the newb card, yet he's trying to link potential scum in ways that seem more experienced than that. I'm really undecided. Something seems off, but I'm not sure what.

Need more data for better reads.

[Bella]

Part of the problem you guys are having with my general equivocation is that I find it much harder to get solid reads on people when I'm reading through a game rather than experiencing it. I find it much easier to form opinions when reacting to things as they happen rather than looking over them with the benefit of hindsight - and it's harder to add anything "new" to a discussion after the fact when other people have had a chance to make all the salient points. But meh...

OK, Bella, you realize that your views on most of the people are "I could see them as scum/town, but not sure." right? You give one, maybe two strong stances. Actually, one, on lord_hur. It seems like a pretty easy way to sit back and then side with the biggest wagon. If you had to lynch one person right now, who would it be any why? (and preferably place a vote)

If I had to lynch one person right now it would be lord-hur, but I wouldn't be entirely happy with it.

Demanding a vote is pretty much the best way to assure that I woun't be providing a vote until I'm damn well good and ready.

I will try hard not to judge the dizzyizzy account.

Why would you do that? You've been pretty heavily on the meta side until now.

If dizzyizzy is the one I"m remember it was the one that flaked in a game and did nothing.
My first reaction to seeing the alt account name was to joke about the policy. Bella's reaction was felt like someone not amused.
Mostly I wasn't going to join the policy joke after that or think about that flaky person and judge her for her worth in this game.
I still plan on seeing if I have the right dizzy when I have time, but I have a feeling she may be telling the truth about it doing no good if she is.

As far as I remember, I've been replaced three times - twice because of an unforeseen family situation that made meeting the obligations of the games impossible and once because I fell behind when I was ill and couldn't get caught back up. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong though.

Anyway... It seems strange to be asking for a scum list at this stage of the game, with the general activity levels of some of the players and there being several replacements already. The data doesn't exist to perform such an action. So, I decline to provide one. I will, however, provide my current thoughts on each player.

I don't see why it's strange to ask with 13 pages and deadline in about a week. There should be an impression or idea which you had but I don't like the wishy washiness you have in your post were you don't want to make a firm stance as though you are scared to make a stand.

I dislike scum lists at the best of times, I just find them to be unhelpful. Well, when I'm town anyway. Day one with a page of contribution prer slot and a lot of them falling well short of that... there's just not enough data to pull something liek that together, in my book.

Also, I don't like how everyone is so passive, except a few (farside22 and DavidParker). And no, smashbro_of_the_SSS, repeating what I've said two posts before in a menacing tone doesn't qualify, in my opinion.

Being passive isn't necessqarily a bad thing, although not in such quantities. If everyone was strong-willed, unable to compromise, set on being aggressive and leading a lynch, nobody would every get lynched.

227- DavidParker is distancing = scum if nacho is town

249- I see this as scum hurting his faction (1 bad scum is much more harmful than 1 bad town) more than town guilt. = probable scum

260- Smashbro "getting on the wagon" without voting =

probable

town if nacho is town, scum if nacho is scum

298- Farside gives her scum meta ("I try to avoid scum bussing D1") = null leaning scum

Vote: Nacho

as it will give me the alignment of Smashbro

for sure

, and a scum read on DavidParker if Nacho is town.

Will be willing to switch to Bella.

This a strange post highlighted by the inconsistency between the Smashbro analysis. The later posting when it was picked up by andrew94 and lord_hur makes it even more curious considering you're defending yourself by denying you said the "for sure" part. Very curious.

[Bella]

Oh replacing in is too hard for you?? But you chose to replace in. Obviously you believed yourself capable of doing so or you wouldn't have replaced in. Toughen up princess. We aren't going to let you sit there without/fence sit and just coast through the game.

Harder is a comparative qualifier.

If I had to lynch one person right now it would be lord-hur, but I wouldn't be entirely happy with it.

Demanding a vote is pretty much the best way to assure that I woun't be providing a vote until I'm damn well good and ready.

Cool, until you do vote (and maybe even when you do),

Unvote, Vote Bella

With 4 days until deadline, I see no town motivation to not voting.

There's also no scum motivation to do it. Wasted vote attempting to appear town much?

[Bella]

There's no scum motivation in responding to pressure to vote with a refusal to vote, because it provokes suspicion from people like you.

[Bella]

EBWOP: Refusal is a bad choice of words. It's more a case of not voting just because you tell me to. I'll vote when I'm ready to, when either I'm confident enough in a read to put one there or time forces me to lower my standards enough to choose someone. 4 days is a long time.

[Bella]

That's like the same line of arguing that there is no scum motivation behind intentionally avoiding questions because they did it on purpose. If the action itself is scummy, it's still scummy even if the person realizes they are doing it. The only difference is the way you analyze it in the context of the player as a whole being scum.

It'd help if you picked an action that in and of itself is scummy. Not answering questions isn't inherently scummy, since there are some good town motivations to avoid answering some questions.

Hey I got a bright idea: let's all decide this game is "too hard" and that finding scum is "too hard", and just unvote and wait for something to happen. Sound good?

Don't be a complete idiot.

Preview edit: 4 days is not a long time with weekend coming up and the biggest wagon being 3 or something.. How do you expect us to get to a claim, and then what if we don't want to lynch this person based on their claim? We rush another wagon to L-1 in our final few hours? That is bad play.

4 days is plenty of time. Or rather, it is if you decide to stop pushing the no vote thing so I can actually place one.

I think Batt has defend himself well.

I am interested in a further explanation of this because what I'm seeing is him being caught saying something that didn't make sense and changing hi story as he goes to stuf fthat continues to fail to make sense. I find it curious that you'd draw this conclusion from the evidence presented.

Oops, must have been a mistake. I think I meant to write DavidParker, as that's the only one that I'm confident in would be scum based on the flip.

No, that's not right either.

Vote: Nacho

as it will give me the alignment of Smashbro for sure, and a scum read on DavidParker if Nacho is town

Original quote.

Vote: Nacho

as it will give me the alignment of DavidParker for sure, and a scum read on DavidParker if Nacho is town

DavidParker substituted in for Smashbro and it still doesn't make sense. Farside, how exactly is this Batt "defending himself well?"

Unvote, Vote: Battousai

Nacho makes good points.

[Bella]

@Bella
Scum motivation to not vote would be for a no-lynch providing them with a free kill.
You missed this:

Why is it too soon to build a scum case? When

isn't

it to soon to build a scum case?

@Looker
My reasons for nacho are in the wall-of-words debate we had. Starting with his claim at me at L-1.
As for andrew I have already stated is dodging questions and not really doing much for town. If i remember correctly it also took about 3 or 4 pages at least to get a reason for his vote on me out of him.

I didn't miss it, I ignored it because it was entirely irrelevent to what was being discussed. Scum list =/= scum case. But if you want pith answers, then it's too soon to buuild a scum case if there is no justification for a scum case and it's not too early to build a scum case when there's justification for said scum case. But that's not what was being said at all.

@Batt:
I don't get this statement at all here:

"249- I see this as scum hurting his faction (1 bad scum is much more harmful than 1 bad town) more than town guilt. = probable scum" is why I suspect Bella.

When post 249 is this:
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 3#p2743203

I think his point is that Shotty's request for replacement tries too hard to seem town, which is probably does. It doesn't make him/me scum, though.[/quote]

@Nacho:
Batt explain most of his reason's for his post well under pressure.
When asked about explain his reasoning to each question.
There are still two items yet to resolve.
1) is the for sure statement (which I don't get the difference if it's smash or DP), why would it be for sure you know the alignment based on Nacho flip
2) why he would vote for Bella

How on earth can you classify Batt's shifting, unsure defence that still makes no sense as "posting well under pressure"?

DavidParker substituted in for Smashbro and it still doesn't make sense.

That's not true. Smash is still in the game.
Why are you voting Batt? Why actively lurk in a game?

Batt's defence was that he confused DavidParker and Smashbro. Nacho substituted DavidPArker into the Smashbro comment anbd pointed out that Batt's defence still makes no sense.

I'm intentionally lurking at the moment, actually.

I've pegged two scum so far, I'm just wondering whether farside is the third or not.

Intentionally lurking... hmmm... Is it just me or does this have more of an advantage if you are playing scum? Sure as town you may get to analyse people without having to defend yourself, but even those attacks against you can provide more information, and hopefully a better decision on who to lynch. More info = better for town, provided you make the correct conclusions of course. You deliberately putting yourself in a position where town gets less info is not helpful.

Sometimes the best thing town can do is shut up and stay out of the way so as not to disrupt a line of enquiry or to allow a situation to play out. Sadly, not enough people do this. However, it's a questionable approach for one of the top suspects with one of the larger wagons in the game.

[Bella]

Battousai replaces JesseSheffield.

Yah!!! Someone I know something about and don't have to research as much!

Batt's flapping about his contradiction and farside's strange defence of him make me wonder whether this is less a case of "Yay, new player" and more a case of "Yay, new scum partner". It's a more reasonable interpretation of this comment than Batt's interpretation that the way Shotty replaced out screamed scum.

[Bella]

Mmm... after careful consideration, VOTE: Battousai.

[Bella]

Please explain how Batt is flipping out?

I didn't say that, I said he was flapping about, which basically means he has a shifting stance that he can't stick with.

[Bella]

I didn't miss it, I ignored it because [1]it was entirely irrelevent to what was being discussed. [2]Scum list =/= scum case. But if you want pith answers, then it's too soon to buuild a scum case if there is no justification for a scum case and it's not too early to build a scum case when there's justification for said scum case. [3]But that's not what was being said at all.

[1] I made it relevant
[2] Never said it was.
[3] You said the seeds were planted, seeds need nurturing to grow, you could just leave them to it and hope they grow... putting this into Laymans terms:
You find him scummy and see the potential for a case, why not push him and see what you can get? Why just leave it?

1) So, instead of doing something useful, you inititated an irrelevent discussion of theory that doesn't have anything to do with the current game in an attempt to seem like you're doing something more than nothing?

3) Seeds grow perfectly well if you let nature get on with it. Or, in Layman's terms, the aggressive approach isn't for everyone and nor is it for all situations.

[Bella]

@Bella
So you'd rather just sit back and let the scum slap you in the face instead of rooting them out. Fair enough...

That's not what I said.

[Bella]

bella's "careful consideration" - What was it?

Try reading my previous and following posts re: Batt, and other people's points against him.

[Bella]

Well, congratulations, Batt-scum, you've managed to out the jailkeeper.

[Bella]

unvote vote batt

although egg could be scum doing a 1-1 trade. (jk cant be nk'ed now cos doc just protects him)

Outting the JK still helps scum, since it makes it easier to identify the doc.

[Bella]

unvote vote batt

although egg could be scum doing a 1-1 trade. (jk cant be nk'ed now cos doc just protects him)

Outting the JK still helps scum, since it makes it easier to identify the doc.

Oh yes, could you stop talking about PR not claimed yet? Thank you.

Why? We know there's a Doc and it's a pretty obvious and non-controversial statement. Why so concerned about nothing?

[Bella]

VOTE: AntB

He's one of the people Nacho was confident was scum, he didn't interact with Batt at all beyond one very minor comment, he didn't interect with JesseSheffield aside from voting for him at the beginning of the game and he tried to push counterwagons against the scum lynch.

[Bella]

Should I say who I jailed?

Yes. Since you've claimed already it's best to have that information available to the town for future analysis.

[Bella]

antb, i dont care.

vote antb

Every attempt at making sense of this post failed. Please explain.

the 'i dont care' was talking to antb, who asked me why i had 9 posts in between voting him and justifying

I find this answer insufficient and/or stupid.

[Bella]

Guys, just posting to let you know I'll probably be v/la until the weekend or so due to a family thing.

[Bella]

I need to do some catching up before I post. Expect something either tonight or tomorrow morning.

[Bella]

• Bella's response to andrew's answer is also off-putting...off-putting, exaggerated, and harsh. Her exploitation of the WIFOM induced by Nachomamma's final rundown is also off-putting...off-putting, opportunistic, and scummy. UNVOTE: VOTE: Bella

This is also insufficient and/or stupid voting. Nice job, Looker.

2 more down.
@Bella: Why did you not want to place a vote after reading the game? I looked into your alt in as scum or town you never withheld a vote before. I was wondering what brought on this stubborness.

You didn't do a very good job of looking then. I never vote when it is demanded of me and there are definitely several games where I've been bugged about not voting enough. If you try looking again, I'd look at more recent games than not recent games, because I've really hardened against the notion that you should have your vote on someone at all times over the last 6-12 months or so.

Caught up as much as I'm going to.

Andrew is scum, if not then kill me.

I hate when people do this, mostly because I can't recall a case when someone has said this and then one of them is actually scum.

behold the epic-ness:

antb, i dont care.

vote antb

why has nobody pulled him on this? Other than "tagging for later"? DavidParker gains a +1 at this point.

Pay attention. He was pushed to explain himself and people have reacted to his explanation. How is this not "pulling him" on it?

farside I'm trying to stand back a little so that I dont manufacture reasons like that game. Made me completely lose sight of actual scum and being so loud and attacking made things way too easy for scum. Well thats the lesson I learned at least. I find your case a bit reaching - making a meta call based on a single previous game.

You're wrong. If cases were not made, nobody would post anything and mafia would be a game of dice. Cases need to be made to obtain exploitable reactions. But if you have to "manufacture" a case, it's not a case. A case isn't a completely (or mostly) artificial construct. You get town points for this, though, as it's very consistent with some earlier posts from you.

I find myself in agreement with this.

• I think jumping right in using WIFOM induced by Nacho's scumlist is scummy. "Nacho said X was scum and Y was town and then scum killed him so he must be right." Seems like an easy setup.

Recent experience has been that this sort of thinking is currently prevelent on MS in my experience and thus scum teams are currently comfortable enough to make the night kill of the guy who suspects them knowing that someone will point out the WIFOM and muddy the waters.

[*]RE:Egg's refusal to claim his night action

• If you had no intention of claiming in the first place, why ask everybody? I'm on the fence about you.

[/list]

I do agree with this to an extent. Why ask if you don't intend to do it? It doesn't make Egg scum because the uncountered claim is pretty compelling, although it's not entirely unheard of for people to avoid counter-claiming in order not to out themselves.

I realize my content has been lacking of late, even my lasts posts have sucked. I'll definitely be able to post more soon I have the weekend off work.

@lord_hur: well.. Obvious reasons. For one thing, we lynch Andrew and he flips town... Will antb actually sacrifice himself at that point? no. So the post is a lie for a start. It's just a way of AntB saying, "Hey I am 80-90% sure andrew is scum". But he's posted in such a way that it is really ATE because he knows he is a likely lynch candidate so he is getting desperate at this point to put the lynch on anyone but himself. I see it more likely to come from scum than town, as there's more motive for scum to say "lynch this guy and if he flips town then lynch me" from a slot that has a probable lynch candidate. Essentially, I can see antb trying to get a mislynch before his own lynch, rather than seeing himself lynched today, then andrew appearing town because of a scum-flip on himself.

I don't see why town-AntB would have posted as such.

I agree with this post up to the point where David says he thinks it comes more from scum than town. It's textbook "town who thinks he has an awesome read that nobody else is going for", and in my experience it's primarily townie-on-townie crime.

@smash: Who else do you find scummy and why?
@Bella: I would like the same from you. It's day 2 no excuses.

Well, despite the reservations I have because of past experience with the ATE stuff, AntB is still my favorite scum-choice. While I disagree withthe characterisation David has with regards his ATE, I do see how it might be a scum tactic, and that would be consistent with his other play. Plus, there's this whole "I was dealing with a spam attack" when he was posting in other games that doesn't help his cause, although I know that sometimes when you're busy and dealing with other stuff, you can catch up with some games and neglect the same one again.

I was undecided on Archer when I last made a post on people, but I'm swayed to a lean-scum position based on the playstyle difference farside uncovered and Egg's analysis of the interaction between Archer and the Battscum slot.

Looker is a potential scum at the moment. Re-reading the game, he curiously disappeared for the tail end of day one. The deadline was established, and we were pushing close to it when he last posted, yet he posed questions that he didn't return to check the answers to and made no comment reagrding where his vote was resting. He definitely posted on-site between his last post and the end of the day. As a result, he completely missed the Battscum wagon gaining momentum. In fact, his entire interaction with the scum slot is reduced to commenting on how town he thought JesseSheffield was. His posting on day two has been characterised by pushing weak cases and a very curious rookie error re: the JK claim that Looker's been around long enough to know better than to make. In fact, the process of writing this has made me wuite like Lookerscum, actually.

Hmmm... I'll leave my vote on AntB for now, but I'm seriously considering moving it to Looker.

[Bella]

I don't really have the time to spend researching my own behavior for you and the only other game that jumps to mind is ongoing and thus is useless. Umm... there might be something in Secret Invasion mafia about how I use my votes, but I don't remember that very well because of the reasons I replaced out of it.

I changed my views because I saw the general pointlessness of hopping them around and placing votes on people you aren't willing to lynch and don't have a motive to pressure and so I started playing around with placing votes less often and got really irritated with people bitching that I should be using my vote to let other people trakc my suspicions when they could damn well read my posts and see who I';m suspicious of.

[Bella]

@bella - I find it really strange that you would agree (with farside) on what I term a really poor reason to suspect me - meta based suspicions that come from a single game. I'd like to know how you justify this. Trying to figure you out I noticed you often agree with farside so far D2. Not the most scummy thing, after all a good case is a good case, but when you start agreeing with (imo) poor reasons thats when I get interested.

Just because you have a small sample size doesn't invalidate the data. In this case, the fact that you've played a better game demonstrates that you're capable of playing in a more productive manner and thus you lose the newbish excuse for your play thusfar.

Examples are (original farside first, bella echo second)
476 : 478

They're both very good votes for that point of the game and nothing happened in between those posts that changed anything about the game. Plus, my reasoning isn't identical to hers, it just has a lot of overlap on account of the fact that AntB has been pretty scummy and all.

524 : 525
Granted the last one is lame but I felt like going for 3 examples.

Agreeing that someone should take a pro-town action when they ask what they should do is scummy now? Plus, I'm not the only one who agreed with farside.

[Bella]

bella, in 580 you heavily contradict yourself. at the davidparker place you say 'town-town action', then you said antb is scum

Just because every example I've experienced has been town-on-town crime doesn't meanit's always teh case. In this game, there's more than enough of a case against AntB that the scum-possibility is left open.

[Bella]

That's not a major part of my case against him, or really any part of it. andrew94's point was that my opinion of the type of AtE he engaged in was inconsistent with my opinion that AntB is scummy. The point you quoted explains why it is not necessarily an impediment to AntB being scum. It's never been part of my case against him, which you can find clearly stated earlier.

[Bella]

Okay, can we please get on with lynching AntB now?

[Bella]

So, exactly why has the AntB wagon stalled? There are enough people who aren't voting for him who agree that there's scumminess there. What's the problem? How can I help you lynch scum?

[Bella]

So, exactly why has the AntB wagon stalled? There are enough people who aren't voting for him who agree that there's scumminess there. What's the problem? How can I help you lynch scum?

I'm waiting to see what the SotS replacement has to say and am in no rush for a lynch. He/she may have something new to add, and I'd rather wait a day or two or three to hear it. This is the second time you have tried to push this along. Why are you in such a rush?

Wagon has lost moment, he's really scummy, he's made his claim and confirmed data dtrumps potential data.

So, exactly why has the AntB wagon stalled? There are enough people who aren't voting for him who agree that there's scumminess there. What's the problem? How can I help you lynch scum?

I'm waiting for a replacement. Every player slot should be filled before we go to night.

Do you have any thoughts on his replacement request given that he hasn't requested replacement in all his games?

[Bella]

What exactly do you expect to get from him by dragging out his lynch?

[Bella]

Just posting to say that I'm likely to be v/la until Monday.

[Bella]

I'm posting to acknowledge I've been prodded. I'm working on other games at the moment, but I hope to be up to speed and posting in this game at some point within the next day or so.

[Bella]

Catch up post!

Bella

: Null-to-town. I hate the vote withholding thing gone over in 580. I have circled and underlined Bella's "If you try looking again, I'd look at more recent games than not recent games, because I've really hardened against the notion that you should have your vote on someone at all times over the last 6-12 months or so." in 580 vs "I don't really have the time to spend researching my own behavior for you and the only other game that jumps to mind is ongoing and thus is useless. Umm... there might be something in Secret Invasion mafia about how I use my votes, but I don't remember that very well because of the reasons I replaced out of it." when Farside tries to actually look it up.

That said, Bella's early attack on Battousai and second place on the Battousai wagon is a heavy towntell. Bus, bus, yeah, possible, etc, but to do it so early and so out of the blue, I'm not buying.

Generalities are easier to remember than specifics. And I hate people demanding that votes be placed, so we can both be unhappy together!

A TLDR

1. Although saying Nacho was certainly scum and would be lynched, she shifted her attention from him to Andrew.
2. Farside bussed Battousai at start, then defended him, then got him as her third suspect (which is a scumtell), then tried to get through an AntB lynch instead of a Battousai lynch. This all if heavily implying a farside-battousai scumteam.
3. She gave us some big scumtells day 2, such as wanting to know Egg's frame of mind and posting AntB couldn't fake-claim before he claimed.

Aside from the "third suspect" thing, which I'm unconvinced has any merit to it, this is a pretty strong case against farside. At the very least, it merits reevaluating farside because I had her solidly down as town up 'till this point.

I think it's safe now to say that the answer is yes. And why would this happen? A claimed VT has less value to town than an unclaimed town, so if she were town, she'd push even more. While on the contrary, mislynching an unclaimed town, or getting another claim, is so much more tempting...

I was waiting for looker to respond to my questions. I missed that he replaced out.
And yes I do still think AntB is scum. I'm sure my last post where I point out Batt's interactions was missed, since no one said I missed Broken (which I realized after I left).

unvote:
vote: AntB

I find the contrast between farside's defiant player descriptions when she quotes them with the comple4te surrender she makes in going back to AntB the second she's challenged for forgetting about him entirely intriguing.

@Farside:

Opinion on Conspiracy please.

Based on SoTS's play and Batt's comment I would say likely scum. Conspiracy only made one case, but hasn't stated anything on anyone else. I would say in terms of the case, it's a well thought out case. I could have made the case on myself (as even I saw things in my play I would call scummy).
I would like to also note I don't care for SoT's signing in for other games, but stating he is too busy to play in this one. It sets me on edge as he did it more under pressure, which again looks scummy.

This is quite OMGUSish, and the reasoning for suspecting Smashbro's replacement doesn't work.

@Egg: I still don't get why you exclude Looker from your list. I reread you, and you said you see many interactions between Battousai and Looker, but, rereading Looker's ISO, I can't find a single line directed to Battousai...

Battousai also only mentions Looker once, and just to say he has played with him before. Sorry about the double post.

That's because Looker only posted three times between Batt replacing in and being lynched, and he did reference Batt - placing him equal with Nacho on the third tier of his little color coded chart thing. I mean, you could try and link them together with this, but I thinkg a more reasonable explanation is that Looker wasn't active enough at that point for them to get much chance to interact.

2) I honestly cant believe you are still pushing the whole meta based on one single game thing. I really have nothing more to say on this. If you cant fathom how basing a players entire playstyle on one single game is faulty then there is no point arguing. Plus, you dont even know how I played in that one single game that I played before coming to this forum, and yet you are making conclusions based on it? Please tell me exactly how with one game here, and one somewhere else that you have no clue of, you come to my current playstyle as being a scum read? Manufacture away!

If you can scum hunt in one game. You can't say you can't do it another game. It's BS excuses

Remind me, how many scum did I actually find in that game? Zero? So how is finding zero scum an indication that I know how to hunt and what to look for, and that I shouldnt change something about how I play in order to be a better townie?

The results are less important than the mindset and methods. You're capable of trying to look for scum, yet you are not.

Well, it seems farside22 forgot that the VT PM was posted by the mod at the start of the game (and it didn't hit me either, until now).

Open 272: Near-Vanilla

You are a Vanilla Townie. You have no abilities or actions. Please confirm in thread.

It doesn't look to me at all like what farside22 soft-claimed, as it doesn't mention that voting is the only thing VT can do. I doesn't mention vote at all, actually.

This is an immesnsely stupid argument and you should be ashamed for making it.

Blech. UNVOTE: AntB, VOTE: farside22

[Bella]

This is quite OMGUSish, and the reasoning for suspecting Smashbro's replacement doesn't work.

Really? How is it when someone asked me my views on SoTS (who I had on a scum list prior to this question) OMGUSish?

You appear to have turned much harder on the slot based on little more than ConSpiracy making a case against you - I mean, the case you made against him is based on another player's play when CS has contributed enough that you could have made some judgment of him.

[Bella]

I moved my vote to farside at the top of the page, inHim.

[Bella]

Yeesh, I'm starting to get major town-on-town vibes from farside and CS. I still like the case against farside more than the one against CS, though.

I don't suppose there's any chance of a last minute wagon against, say, Looker on account of voting the all-but-confirmed jailkeeper, is there?

[Bella]

Color-coded vote count summaries.

Official Day 1 Final Vote Tally

13 players remain; 7 votes needed for a lynch.

Battousai (7)

-

Nachomamma8

, Bella,

lord_hur

, Archer, Egg, andrew94, farside22

Nachomamma8 (3)

- brokenscraps, AntB,

Battousai

Bella (2)

-

smashbro_of_the_SSS

, DavidParker

smashbro_of_the_SSS (1)

- Looker

Official Day 2 Vote Tally

11 players remain; 6 votes needed for a lynch.

ConSpiracy (6)

- brokenscraps, Magua, farside22,

lord_hur

, Egg, AntB

farside22 (3)

-

ConSpiracy

, Archer, Bella

AntB (1)

- andrew94

Egg (1)

- Looker

Scorecard:

100% pro-scum voting (off Battwagon, on CSwagon): AntB, brokenscraps

50% pro-scum voting (on Battwagon, on CSwagon): Egg, farside22

50% pro-scum voting (off Battwagon, off CSwagon): Looker, Magua

0% pro-scum voting (on Battwagon, off CSwagon): andrew94, Archer, Bella

[Bella]

Color-coded vote count summaries.

Official Day 1 Final Vote Tally

13 players remain; 7 votes needed for a lynch.

Battousai (7)

-

Nachomamma8

, Bella,

lord_hur

, Archer, Egg, andrew94, farside22

Nachomamma8 (3)

- brokenscraps, AntB,

Battousai

Bella (2)

-

smashbro_of_the_SSS

, DavidParker

smashbro_of_the_SSS (1)

- Looker

Official Day 2 Vote Tally

11 players remain; 6 votes needed for a lynch.

ConSpiracy (6)

- brokenscraps, Magua, farside22,

lord_hur

, Egg, AntB

farside22 (3)

-

ConSpiracy

, Archer, Bella

AntB (1)

- andrew94

Egg (1)

- Looker

Scorecard:

100% pro-scum voting (off Battwagon, on CSwagon): AntB, brokenscraps, Magua

50% pro-scum voting (on Battwagon, on CSwagon): Egg, farside22

50% pro-scum voting (off Battwagon, off CSwagon): Looker

0% pro-scum voting (on Battwagon, off CSwagon): andrew94, Archer, Bella

EBWOP on account of putting Magua in the wrong place.

[Bella]

scum can ride each others wagon you know...

Indeed.

I couldn't draw a conclusion from Bella's color-coded summary.

Interesting.

Blergh. Other stuff: Bella's vote analysis is IIoA, and seems to be missing some fairly obvious pieces of information -- eg, Egg is town, yet Looker voting Egg at the end of D2 is treated as if its any other scumread.

Egg has not flipped. Egg is almost certainly town, but his status has not been confirmed. This would obviously disqualify it from a presentation of 100% confirmed and accurate data.

@Bella, what did you want to demonstrate with those vote counts? You didnt actually come to any conclusions. So the only thing I can conclude from it is that you want to be seen as town since you put yourself in the 0% pro scum voting group.

I wanted to summarise confirmed and accurate data. The fact that my vote has been used in a manner that fails to achieve scum goals is irrelevent to the exercise.

[Bella]

Do you think Looker-town would vote Egg?

More to the point: Do you think Looker-scum would vote Egg?

[Bella]

Why?

[Bella]

That doesn't answer the question. Why do you believe Looker-scum would vote for Egg?

[Bella]

Because scum want to act antitown to avoid helping the town.

Because it means he doesn't need to lay a read on Conspiracy or Farside that he'd have to answer for.

Because he can then join whichever wagon he wants later.

Because if someone calls him on his vote, he can go, "lolz" and several people will give him a pass.

And you think those benefits outweigh the negative ramifications of throwing a vote on an all-but-confirmed-town player? I don't buy that lookerscum would throw that vote down if he was paying attention to the game and voting for pro-scum reasons. I am of the opinion that teh vote tells us nothing about Looker's alignment, but everything about the level of involvement in the game. Which brings us to...

What I want to know is, why am I arguing with you about this when you wrote this:

I don't suppose there's any chance of a last minute wagon against, say, Looker on account of voting the all-but-confirmed jailkeeper, is there?

That's easy. I believed ConSpiracy was town. There appeared to be no traction for my preferred farside wagon. Looker did something stupid and was far more expendable on account of providing no benefit at all to town through non-participation and a careless lack of attention, and thus would have been a better option to die.

[Bella]

• Archer's point is valid: I knew that Egg was the jailkeeper.

@looker, so are you saying you knew egg was the jk before voting him

[Bella]

Game dies due to inactivity. AntB/andrew is town on town. Looker is scum. brokenscraps is probable scum, but that can wait until a replacement comes in.

Bella and Archer need to put votes up.

I don't see a compelling reason to vote for anyone at the moment. Especially Looker.

[Bella]

I didn't say that.

[Bella]

I didn't say that.

What, exactly, do you think is going to happen between now and then? brokenscraps will get replaced, that's about the only thing that I can think of.

I see Looker's #900. I'm also ignoring it for the time being.

Well, I think you're going to respond to Looker's post, for one.

[Bella]

That counts as a response. It's a pretty interesting one, too.

[Bella]

Magua's refusal to respond to Looker's points against him doesn't exactly testify to his towniness.

[Bella]

That counts as a response. It's a pretty interesting one, too.

Ellaborate

Magua's refusal to respond to Looker's points against him doesn't exactly testify to his towniness.

[Bella]

@Regan: I disagree with outing the doctor. I don't care about the statistics. Keeping the doctor save as long as possible would be great, however if the JK saves the doctor the JK dies. I know it's 50/50 chance of this happening.

Considering who the JK is, I'm not sure I see how much of a loss that'd be.

One of the second because I don't (fully) believe Egg's claim and Magua strikes me as mislynch-happy.

At this point, there isn't anybody who is willing to lynch Egg. Under these circumstances, why would a JK who, who thusly knows egg is almost certainly scum, fail to have counterclaimed by now? I don't think Egg is a credible suspect at this point.

How is lurking town? How is posting in other games even considered town and not avoiding a game?

How is it a scum-tell? It's a null-tell. There's no two ways around it.

Context matters. Lurking in one game but not in others is indicative of active lurking, which is a known scum tactic. Lurking by itself isn't a tell, and if anything, the player is more likely to be town than scum. In this case, I believe farside called him out for neglecting this game, but not others.

I even have an ace in my pocket and I'm not using it, that is how much I believe in my own theory.

And not using it until it's requested makes you town? Considering it turned out to be WIFOMish stuff that doesn't proove anything... meh. I am distnctly unimpressed.

[Bella]

Also and point of order to Consp who quoted my post. He missed my soft claim (which I did on purpose) which tells me since he received his PM just recently. He doesn't recognize a town PM.

This was actually one of the reasonings you used behind the Consp lynch, if you believed the mod had made a mistake (That being given a certain role out before another in replacements) why would you beleive that he gave all the players the exact same role definition. A VT is a VT, the wording behind and with it means nothing. Therefore you stating that you had a theory along with this part of the previous post is a complete contradiction.

[Bella]

goddammit, it posted before I could reply to this...

Also and point of order to Consp who quoted my post. He missed my soft claim (which I did on purpose) which tells me since he received his PM just recently. He doesn't recognize a town PM.

This was actually one of the reasonings you used behind the Consp lynch, if you believed the mod had made a mistake (That being given a certain role out before another in replacements) why would you beleive that he gave all the players the exact same role definition. A VT is a VT, the wording behind and with it means nothing. Therefore you stating that you had a theory along with this part of the previous post is a complete contradiction.

It's an open game and the role PMs that were sent out are posted in the game thread. However, I think farside suspecting ConSpiracy for not picking up on the so-called "soft-claim2 is poor reasoning because while it may be true that all townies have is a vote, it's not necessarily the thing that comes to mind when you think about it and it bore no relationship to the townie PM posted in the thread, pluus since ConSpirady was a replacement, he might not necessarily have been sent the role PM because some mods just send the role to replacements, especially when the PM is already posted in the thread. Likewise, lord_hur calling farside out for not sticking to the wording of the townie PM was stupid for similar reasons. Really, I think this stuff doesn't tell us anything about anybody and more than likely, since softclaims are by their nature vague and ambiguous, it's just a case of people calling someone scummy for little more than miscommunication.

[Bella]

It's clearly plain miscommunication because we lynched ConSpiracy and he flipped town, yet a case was made against him for not recieving a town PM, which he clearly did.

I lean towards farside being scum at the moment, although there's no real certainty behind it. Scum partner would be one of AntB, Magua and you, in that order of preference.

[Bella]

Because I'm of the opinion that what you're putting down to scumminess is more due to carelessness and a lack of attention being paid to the game. Particularly the Egg vote, I just don't consider it likely that Lookerscum would make that vote whilst employing a lurkerscum strategy (which is what he's done if he's scum) because it'd draw unnecessary attention to him.

[Bella]

[[*]Bella's point

• I guess it wouldn't be smart to try to find the other scum while simultaneously jailkeeping Egg every night, then. O well, apologies for my stupidity and negligence.

That would be a pretty poor strategy if you have a confirmed scum we can kill and no chance of stopping a kill through blocking Egg.

[Bella]

I'll vote when I'm damn well ready to vote.

[Bella]

In that scenario, Eggscum and his partner would know that there is a JK out there who can block kills and knows Egg is scum. Thus, the partner will be submitting all the kills. The only change of a kill not going through would be through a Doc protect. It's just a bad, bad plan that only matters after several night phases that would be better spent finding a single scum who has no partner on account of Egg being dead.

[Bella]

We as in the town. I don't understand why you have a problem with that?

[Bella]

That's a pretty ridiculous interpretation of what I said.

[Bella]

Aside from the fact that I'm insulted you'd think I'd be that sloppy, there's absolutely no justification for that interpretation of it when you take even the slightest look at how the ConSpiracy wagon went and how I was nowhere near the damn thing, which you pointed out yourself. How could I,. as scum, have considered myself as playing any part in getting ConSpiracy lynched? I did not vote for him. I did not advance any sort of case against him. I was on his side over his farside case and I raised the possibility of lynching someone other than him at the end of the day. I did nothing that could in any way be construed as helping that lynch go ahead.

Just... pay attention, dammit.

[Bella]

I guess there's not much else to do but VOTE: farside22.

[Bella]

Official Day 1 Final Vote Tally

13 players remain; 7 votes needed for a lynch.

Battousai (7)

-

Nachomamma8

, Bella,

lord_hur

,

Archer

, Egg, andrew94,

farside22

Nachomamma8 (3)

- brokenscraps, AntB,

Battousai

Bella (2)

-

smashbro_of_the_SSS

, DavidParker

smashbro_of_the_SSS (1)

- Looker

Official Day 2 Vote Tally

11 players remain; 6 votes needed for a lynch.

ConSpiracy (6)

- brokenscraps, Magua,

farside22

,

lord_hur

, Egg, AntB

farside22 (3)

-

ConSpiracy

,

Archer

, Bella

AntB (1)

- andrew94

Egg (1)

- Looker

Official Day 3 Vote Tally

9 players remain; 5 votes needed for a lynch.

farside22 (5)

-

Archer

, Regfan, AntB, Egg, Bella

Archer (1)

- Magua

Looker (1)

-

farside22

AntB (1)

- andrew94

Yet to vote (1)

: Looker

Scorecard:

100% pro-scum voting (Off Battwagon, on Conwagon, on farsidewagon): AntB, RegFan

66% pro-scum voting (On Battwagon, on Conwagon, on farsidewagon): Egg

66% pro-scum voting: (off Battwagon, on Conwagon, off farsidewagon): Magua

33% pro-scum voting (off Battwagon, off Conwagon, off farsidewagon): Looker

33% pro-scum voting (On Battwagon, off conwagon, on farsidewahon) Bella

0% pro-scum voting record (On Battwagon, off Conwagon, off farsidewagon): andrew94

andrew94 has managed to have a perfect record. Good job.

Both AntB and Regfan's slot have perfect pro-scum voting records. I am of the opinion that we should really be deciding which of these two is scum right now, because I very much doubt that both of them are town.

[Bella]

0% pro-scum voting record (On Battwagon, off Conwagon, off farsidewagon): andrew94

This worries me more than anything. No one ever has a perfect record as town... VOTE: Andrew
I'm happy calling out Looker and Andew at this point as definitive.

I oppose the Doc claim until (s)he is 100% sure of scum being lynched.

Uh, this is the stupidest post I've seen in a long time, which is saying something. Town has an actual motivation to not vote in pro-scum ways. Town with good reads and doing a good job are pefectly capable of achieving a good voting record. On the other hand, scum with such a record is severely sandbagging his team, and making it much harder for them to win. And you think it makes him scum?

lol.

[Bella]

By the way, I'm waiting for the vote count before I throw down a vote.

[Bella]

[Bella]

My view on Looker is very clear. I do not believe Looker is scum. I would like to find scum. Why would I waste my time with not-scum when I could find scum?

VOTE: AntB. He's been scummy throughout the game, failed to redeem himself and his voting record is unambiguously scummy. Not to mention the fact that he's trying to push an andrew94 lynch because Andrew has been completely useless to the scum team.

[Bella]

VOTE: Regfan.

Four straight days of pro-scum voting from that slot? Yeah.

[Bella]

VOTE: Regfan.

Back to where I was yesterday.

[Bella]

I believed you were scum, Regfan, why would I remove a vote on you just because you asked?