Mini 1166: Town Hall Mafia (GAME OVER)

[Rhinox]

/confirm

[Rhinox]

ah crap I forgot to bookmark this game. Are we still in RVS?

[Rhinox]

C-Worl Noooooooooooo I miss you're other avatar

kuz asking about gambits and LAL seems like it could be newbscum trying to figure out how much he can get away with. And post #29 is entirely overdefensive.

I agree that C-worl seems town but due to his exchange with kuz.

@iam: does it bother you that kuz realized what gave you the town tell on him? What I mean is, do you think he knew all along there were probably only 2 scum in a 9p game and was just feigning ignorance?

vote: kuz

[Rhinox]

Since this is my first game on the site, I wanted to hear the site-specific view of it. Why you both are assuming malicious intent behind the question is beyond me.

Because you're asking about it in game, you're only trying to get a feel for how the 8 of the rest of us feel about gambits. If you wanted the site meta, you could have asked in the Mafia Discussion subforum or hell just done a search, I'm sure there's probably already a topic out there with this discussion.

Also, Iama has a town read on Cworl and his phrasing, not me.

@Iama: Are you honestly clearing CWorl from saying the word scummates instead of scummate? You do realize any half decent scum player could consciously on unconsciously throw that in? What bothers me more is that CWorl actually picked up on where you were going with it before you explained it.

yeah my bad but clearly iam would have recognized I mean cworl there. But hey, thanks for parroting what I said as if its your own unique idea :bigsarcasticthumbsup:

[Rhinox]

To answer your question, no. If anything it makes me feel even better about him, because the fact that he has taken the effort to think about why I declared him town suggests he was genuinely suspicious of my motives for doing so.

Nothing much. Question to iam feels slightly like he's testing the water on you - I don't see why he'd ask iam rather than just make the point himself.

Fishy, keep in mind my original post was a mistype on my part - the question was about c-worl, not kuz.

that being said, early in the game, when I'm still trying to get started on figuring out player's alignments, I tend to ask questions rather than just coming out and making a point. I wanted to know iam's thoughts because I don't have a read on him yet, without keying him into exactly my thought process. So its not testing the waters, though I can see why you would think it.

Now that iam has answered, I can make the point. It basically echoes what kuz said:

@Iama: Are you honestly clearing CWorl from saying the word scummates instead of scummate? You do realize any half decent scum player could consciously on unconsciously throw that in? What bothers me more is that CWorl actually picked up on where you were going with it before you explained it.

Yeah, no need to rephrase it, basically this. I do see where iam is coming from in his response and it seems reasonable enough, I just disagree that its a good reason to call cworl town.

I'm going to

unvote: kuz

And

vote: ThAd

He seems upset that I have identified a townie so soon.

This is the best point in the game so far.

vote: kuz

that's -1

This is a horrible reason to put kuz at L-1. Even if that is the best point in the game, its not a L-1 worthy point. Especially because I see the same reasoning regarding iam/cworl as he does. He may have picked the wrong choice of words to express the point, but its sound logic.

The overdefensiveness is not the main point, it's the fact that he seems really upset that someone has a town-read on someone else.

Question: what does scum have to gain by claiming to have a town-read on someone? Oppose that to: what does a scum have to gain in a situation where no one has town-reads on anyone else?

c'mon, one look at your join date tells me you should know better than this. You're telling me in your 4-5 years on site, you've

never

seen scum call out town reads or agree with town reads? That scum

always

try to make sure nobody has town reads on anybody and are likely to get visually upset if someone expresses a solid town read? I don't buy it.

[Rhinox]

He seems upset that I have identified a townie so soon.

This is the best point in the game so far.

vote: kuz

that's -1

This is a horrible reason to put kuz at L-1. Even if that is the best point in the game, its not a L-1 worthy point. Especially because I see the same reasoning regarding iam/cworl as he does. He may have picked the wrong choice of words to express the point, but its sound logic.

I think we will have to agree to disagree here.

Furthermore in a 9 player game people are going to be getting to -1 fairly quickly. To me this is a good thing as the main point of wagons are pressure, and being at -1 is as much pressure as a person can be under. This will help with reads as people's behavior is most telling when they are under pressure.

Talking about behavior...
Note that since kuz has been at -1:
- he hasn't claimed, even though he has posted and therefore has had a chance to do so.
- other than the one post he has basically stopped posting. This is particularly odd as during the first few days of this game he was involved in a flurry of posts.

The overdefensiveness is not the main point, it's the fact that he seems really upset that someone has a town-read on someone else.

Question: what does scum have to gain by claiming to have a town-read on someone? Oppose that to: what does a scum have to gain in a situation where no one has town-reads on anyone else?

c'mon, one look at your join date tells me you should know better than this.

You're telling me in your 4-5 years on site, you've

never

seen scum call out town reads or agree with town reads?

That scum

always

try to make sure nobody has town reads on anybody and are likely to get visually upset if someone expresses a solid town read? I don't buy it.

Bolding mine.

That's not the point though. Town-reads just shouldn't really be questioned, even if they are by scum. If scum want to claim a town-read on town, fine by me. That's just one less town they will be able to lynch come end of day. In fact if scum want to claim a town-read on

scum

, great! Just makes it that much easier to catch their buddy when they die.

Well let me say it another way. I questioned iam's town read on cworl because it seemed like a questionable reason to call cworl town. Scum don't need to find legit town reads, because they know town from scum (not 3rd parties or other scum but you know what I mean). Calling another player town for a bad reason looks like fake scumhunting (er, townhunting? POE scumhunting?) in an attempt to look like a townie.

I disagree that town reads shouldn't be questioned if the reason for the town read is bad. Townies shouldn't be riding other players off as town so easily for weak reasons. Bad town reads should be questioned to the same extent as bad scum reads.

Given your examples:
scum claims bad town-read on town: I see town and scum reverse town reads all the time. They're certainly not locked out of not voting the townie at the end of the day, and it isn't a scum tell to do so because townies do it all the time too.

scum claims bad town-read on scum: "great! Just makes it that much easier to catch their buddy when they die." - given this is your thought, wouldn't it be plausible that clever scum claim town reads on townies to set up false scum partner links in the event the scum dies? Don't say it never happens because I once got lynched as a townie due to a similar false connection to a dead scum.

also:

town claims bad town-read on scum: scum potentially gets a free ride if the town doesn't question the bad town read.

to be thorough...

town claims bad town-read on town: a bad read is a bad read even if it happens to be correct. It deserves to be questioned just like a bad scum read even if it happens to be correct.

I don't have any problem with putting someone at L-1. I have a problem with someone placed at L-1 (or any vote really) for a bad reason. So back to your original vote, what makes kuz's objection to the town-read vote worthy, but my objection not?

Last point - automatically claiming at L-1 isn't a mandatory procedure. Kuz wasn't stalling, it was clear he wasn't - well, shouldn't - be getting lynched yet, no one was asking him to claim, and no one was threatening to hammer. If you wanted kuz to claim, why didn't you ask him to?

C-W:
Sorry, not ready to compromise, not while

Rhinox is being this slimy. (Most recently: voting for ThA because ThA *agreed* with the case Rhinox was making.)

Though while we're waiting, if you assume kuz to be guilty, who do you think his partner might be?

uh... you wanna try this again? ThAd agreed with iamausername. I disagreed with iama and unvoted kuz. Or... is there something I'm missing?

First sentence makes no sense. If it's the best point in the game, then of course it's an L-1 worthy point.

Well yeah ok I see what you're saying but the "Even if" comment I made was suppose to imply that I didn't think it was a good point. But I guess, even if L-1 is ok, neither you or ThAd questioned kuz - something like "why are you upset IAUA thinks Cworl is town?" ya know, do some scum hunting? And then ThAd already insinuated that kuz is scummy because he didn't claim at L-1, but notice ThAd never asked him to. It seems like ThAd isn't trying to pressure kuz trying to get a read on him, but more like he's just trying to convince the rest of us to suspect/vote kuz.

Last sentence is also wrong. It's not sound logic. People discredit these kind of 'townslips' all the time, on the basis that "scum could fake it", but have you ever actually seen any scum player do that? I know I haven't.

eh.. I don't know if I could find you a specific example, but it sounds like something I would try to do, maybe even accidentally - such as, I'd be thinking about trying to confuse the town about the total number of scum or something. Yeah, I'd say its reasonable to assume its something scum would think of doing intentionally or unintentionally.

But I'm not saying its always null (or if I did, thats not what I meant). If its a new player and you have to explain to him why he has to be town and he still doesn't get it, then yeah its probably a town tell. The issue I took was that c-worl figured it out

on his own

. Makes me think its plausible he could be clever enough to plan that sort of a town slip. Doesn't make it a scum tell, just less of a town tell and more towards null. Definitely not "confirmed town".

But like I said already, I understand what you're saying, I just disagree. I don't like that ThAd just sheeped you among the other things I've mentioned.

Second point is entirely accurate, and telling, though.

Yeah. Newbscum has disappeared. No surprises here.

right, because newbtown

never

get frustrated and disappear either

Seems to me there's a pretty blatant contradiction between you saying he's scummy for not claiming at L-1, and you saying you weren't thinking about claims when putting him there. If you think that being at L-1 is a good reason for claiming, you don't put someone there without wanting them to claim.

bingo.

[Rhinox]

Rhinox is being this slimy. (Most recently: voting for ThA because ThA *agreed* with the case Rhinox was making.

does not equal

Rhinox:
You said that kuz was suspicious and voted him.
Other players said that kuz was suspicious and voted him.
You said that the kuz-voters were suspicious, because of how they were voting kuz.

I don't think I've ever seen an innocent player get upset that their suspect is being voted.

Moving the goalposts FTW I guess
Also, I only was suspicious of ThAd for the way he voted kuz, not "the kuz-voter

s

".
You're either deliberately misrepping me, or need to read my posts without the confirmation bias you somehow developed on me for whatever reason. What was it, because I joined the thread late?

Back to the first quote, show me where ThAd agreed with this:

kuz asking about gambits and LAL seems like it could be newbscum trying to figure out how much he can get away with. And post #29 is entirely overdefensive.

hint, this is why ThAd voted kuz:

He seems upset that I have identified a townie so soon.

This is the best point in the game so far.

vote: kuz

that's -1

@ kuz: why would you assume that we would know your playstyle, and then get all whiny when it turns out we don't?

This reason I disagreed with. And this is why I unvoted kuz, in case you were wondering:

@Rhinox: Overdefensive? It's called I don't let anyone try to take advantage of me. I am known throughout smashboards for doing town gambits. It's just what I like to do because it makes the game more enjoyable/exciting for me. Since this is my first game on the site, I wanted to hear the site-specific view of it. Why you both are assuming malicious intent behind the question is beyond me. Also, Iama has a town read on Cworl and his phrasing, not me.

@Rhinox: Or I could have just asked about it in thread, which was much easier.

His responses to me seemed genuine. Also, he saw the same thing I saw regarding iama's town tell on cworl.
Just because kuz was the first player I voted does not mean:
A) He would always be my top suspect.
B) He would be my only suspect.
C) That I should be ok with anybody voting him for any reason.

----------------------------------------------------------

I think a lot of people- on both sides of the argument- are missing the point.
The issue is not what the correct reaction in an abstract lynch-1 situation.
The issue is how *kuz* reacted in *this game*.

Don't just narrowly look at the single reaction. Compare that to how kuz has acted elsewhere in the game. Kuz had absolutely no problem responding to C-Worl's initial accusation. He's talking about LAL and chainsawing. He is not a newbie. Let me repeat that: Kuz is not a newbie. Stop shielding him with that excuse. (The only way I'll believe he's a newbie is if he's mafia, and his partner overstuffed his ears with too much advice.)

I don't think I recall seeing anyone giving kuz a newbie pass. Or at least, thats not what I'm doing if thats what you're insinuating.

I think a lot of people- on both sides of the argument- are missing the point.
The issue is not what the correct reaction in an abstract lynch-1 situation.
The issue is how *kuz* reacted in *this game*.

Bing-fucking-go!

What about kuz's reaction to being at L-1 makes him scum?

----------------------------------------------------------

This is plainly ridiculous. If he was deliberately playing dumb, why on earth would he tell us that he'd figured out what I was getting at?

You're saying that C-Worl, being a devious scummy type, deliberately pretended to think there were more scum than he knew that there actually are, in order to make people think he was town due to ignorance. Then, when his plan succeeds, and someone actually does declare him town due to his ignorance, he first pretends not to know what they are talking about, and asks them to explain, but then explains it himself, because what, he got bored of waiting?

Let me ask you a simple, direct question; do you think C-Worl is scum?

Its all in my posts, man... quote the whole thing next time.

But I'm not saying its always null (or if I did, thats not what I meant). If its a new player and you have to explain to him why he has to be town and he still doesn't get it, then yeah its probably a town tell. The issue I took was that c-worl figured it out on his own. Makes me think its plausible he could be clever enough to plan that sort of a town slip.

Doesn't make it a scum tell, just less of a town tell and more towards null. Definitely not "confirmed town".

Also:

I agree that C-worl seems town but due to his exchange with kuz.

I was originally thinking it could be accidental rather than deliberate as scum or town, but I guess thinking about it a little more (I was previously thinking on the basis of not realizing this was a 9p game and failing to realize there would only be 2 scum), that were cworl scum he would have (probably) talked with his scum partner pre-game, and forgetting you only talked to 1 scum partner is a bit unrealistic.

What are we arguing about anyways? You made a point, I disagreed with it but saw your point of view. I don't think you're scummy and I don't think cworl is scummy. If you're trying to get me to believe cworl is confirmed town, its not going to happen at this stage of the game. Doesn't mean I'm arguing to lynch him.

----------------------------

You're probably right that this does happen, but I'm not sure how much scum do this. Do you think Iam was doing it in this case?

No, after questioning IAUA, I don't think he was doing that. But I wouldn't have been able to determine that without questioning him.

But if you're trying to say it doesn't make them look worse/more suspicious at all you are wrong. Sure they can make up a reason for their behaviour flip, and sometimes it might even be a good one, but any given scum would rather not have to go back on one of their reads if given the choice.

eh I see what your saying, but I think it forces me into a WIFOM loop if I think about it too much. For example, if it was always more suspicious to reverse a read that scum tried to never do it, then it would actually be a town tell to reverse reads because scum would never do it.

Sure this happens. But occams razor. That is all.

Yeah, but also scum could call a townie town just because. Or when a townie is about to get lynched for towncred. Or etc.

I guess what I was really getting at between the 4 scenarios is, suppose IAUN gets lynched or vigged or something today/tonight and happens to be scum. Would you think, based on IAUN calling cworl town, that cworl is more likely to be scum, town, or null? What if IAUN is town? Is cworl town/scum/null? What if cworl dies first and flips town. Is IAUN town/scum/null? What if cworl flips scum? Is cworl town/scum/null?

Basically, I'm saying town or scum can point out town tells (or scum tells) on town or scum, and the only way to do that is in fact through questioning players' town reads and scum reads. There is no set rule that if a player calls town on another player, you will no for sure the other's allignment when one of them flips.

Fishy said he thought kuz was "scummy" and emp said "I'm ready to shift my vote back to you", so I'm not sure where you are getting the "no one was threatening to hammer" from.
Perhaps I should have asked kuz to claim, but I didn't.

Fair enough. I remember emp saying that but I guess I didnt remember kuz was in the VC at the time emp made that comment.

I don't remember your objection sticking out from before. I went back and had a look and the tone and content of your objection compared to kuz's is totally different. You were asking a question to iama, kuz was basically getting mad about it.

It looked more like obnoxious disbelief rather than anger to me, but in the context of his playstyle I can see how it looks like anger. Isn't it just semantics though? I mean, 2 different ways of saying the same thing. Emp's argument is that kuz isn't a newb, but if this comment makes kuz scum I would have to believe he is newbscum because experienced scum aren't going to get mad about a townie calling town on another townie (especially in the first 4 pages of the game) let alone show that anger in thread. Whereas, if I thought scum hated townies to have town read on other townies, I'd look first for the more experienced guy going about it discretely (not to implicate myself or anything ). Just thinking about the possibility that you singled out kuz because his playstyle would make him an easier lynch.

Can't I be doing both?
I thought the whole point is to try to convince others to vote who you think is scum?

You can do both, but not a the same time. If you're convincing others to vote who you think is scum, you have to already think the player is scum, and thus already have a read. IMO, it seemed like you skipped the figuring out stage and jumped right into the convincing others to lynch him stage. Unless you "figured out" he was scum entirely from his reaction to iaun calling cworl town, then I stand by my original comment that its a weak reason for thinking kuz is scum.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

For the people voting ThAdmiral, I want to note that I was recently in a game with him where he was town, and he hammered two players within the first eight pages of the game without waiting or even asking for a claim, and I would like to know if this information has any effect on your reads here.

Btw they were both scum as well.

That game was awesome.

@iaun: well yeah, but...

yeah, I guess then I wouldn't expect ThAd to ask for a claim then...
but, why would ThAd care to point out that kuz didn't claim at L-1 then if he doesn't care about claims before lynches?

@ThAd: *twitch* is the fact that they were both scum in that other game supposed to make us think you're town who's right about kuz in this game? (rhetorical question, mostly).

[Rhinox]

Because there's a difference in context. He can not care about the claim at L1 (bc anyone can fake claim at L1 and it's easier than some make it sound) but the fact that Kuz DIDN'T claim shows that he needed time to MAKE a good fake claim (Good ones take time) It's scummy as hell.

I don't think kuz didn't claim because he needs days to make a "good fake claim." All it takes is a couple of minutes at most, so I don't see this as any argument at all. It's been 5 days since he hasn't posted so I am assuming by the rules we are going to get a replacement.

Just... no. Easy fake claims can be though up in second but won't always accomplish the purpose of killing a wagon. GOOD fake claims can take forever to get right but once done will derail almost any wagon against you.

Cworl, do you see where anyone actually *asked* kuz to claim?

I would have handled the situation the same way were I at L-1. Townies shouldn't ever

want

to claim. Even if 1 person asked me to claim, I would have refused on the grounds it was like page 3 and I'd need at least a few people to be demanding my claim.

Unvote; Vote: TheAdmiral

Let's just lynch him so we can get the game moving forward.

I don't like this at all. Do you think ThAd is scummy at all?

unvote

[Rhinox]

sorry guys I'll try to get caught up soon!

[Rhinox]

Rhinox's posting is sensible without really committing him to anything. How do you feel about our current wagons, Rhinox?

I fell a little behind, but the current wagons being cworl and archaist? I'm not too happy about lynching either of them. Aside from voting ThAd to move the game along, cworl hasn't really done anything I object to.

Possible

the townslip iam pointed out should weigh in a little. archaist/kuz seems like the "every game typical D1 scummy looking townie mislynch" to me. kuz got more attention for his playstyle - being a cocky ass - more so than for doing anything really scummy. archaist I'm null on right now.

Rhinox:
It's not the what of the micro, it's the how of the macro.
When you placed your vote on kuz, what were you hoping would happen? What were you expecting would happen?
Other people voted kuz. And you got upset that *your* suspect was being pressured to lynch-1. If there was enough evidence for you to vote, there wasn't enough for additional reasons?

I see what you're saying, but consider - kuz was my first vote. I guess you could call it a pressure vote. He was scummy enough for my first real vote of the game, but then his response to my reasons seemed like a townish response, and then I saw ThAd vote him for a reason I didn't agree with at all. So you're exactly right, it is the how and not the what. I wasn't upset about kuz being at L-1 (the what), I was upset about "how" ThAd tried to justify that vote. It looked opportunistic I guess. I'd have had the same response if it wasn't an L-1 vote. A bad (IMO) vote is a bad vote, regardless of where it comes in the VC.

And like I've been trying to say, just because I was voting kuz for some reasons doesn't mean I'm locked into that vote for the day or that I should be happy if anyone else votes kuz for any reason. You're trying to say that I got upset at ThAd for voting my suspect, but that is a misrepresentation. I got upset with ThAd because he placed a vote for a weak reason IMO.

[Rhinox]

Emp: it wasn't anything specific he said. Basically, his iso 12 and 13, it just seemed like he really believed what he was saying in his responses to me and they seemed genuine. He responded to all my points in a way that left me with nothing new to say or ask. Basically, I felt like I no longer had a case.

Mitsuru: ThAd is still my top scum pic. Archaist hasn't been great so far since replacing in, but I just have my reservations because the slot seems like the "easy mislynch" slot. Sab also seems kinda in the background happy to fly under the radar. He's made a couple nice posts and a couple fluff posts, and I'm keeping an eye on him because I've been burnt in a few of my recent games by the under the radar player who makes it to the end of the game and turns out to be scum. You're kinda in the same place as Sab for me - not really on my radar, makes me a little nervous. I'm not sure about IAM, emp, and cworl right now but I guess if I had to say, my gut is leaning town on the 3 of them. I have no reservations about calling fishy town.

[Rhinox]

Vote: ThAd

I'd switch to Archaist at deadline to prevent no lynch, but I really don't think he's scum.

[Rhinox]

I think I just changed my mind.

unvote, vote: MK

Why would someone on my wagon be scum?

Have you ever heard of... bussing?

[Rhinox]

Mitsuro's reaction felt like cworl struck a nerve with his comment.

"Why would someone on my wagon be scum?" - blanket statement not referring to anyone specific. Counter-question: Why wouldn't someone on your wagon be scum?

"Considering that aside from Emp, Fishy is the only one with a vote on me, and that no other suspicion has fallen on Emp during Day 1, what does he possibly have to gain by voting a scumbuddy, assuming your theory is correct? You're reaching." - this says a whole lot of nothing. What does it matter that no other suspicion has fallen on emp? that doesn't mean he's not scum (nor that he is). What does he have to lose by voting a scum buddy? Up until my vote, Mitsuro was mostly being ignored and there was no real threat of him being lynched. Scum parking their vote on a scumbuddy who's not under threat of lynch is a good distancing tactic.

Emp unvoting as soon as Mits wagon gets a little momentum is like... *twitch*. Kinda makes me rethink because I believe scum empking would keep bussing at this point if thats really whats going on rather than unvoting, because if mits really is scum, once he flips this would look really bad for emp.

[Rhinox]

@emp: I'm not really proposing that you're mafia at all, other than if mits flips scum then you're unvote is like ???? considering I had just tied mits for the leading wagon before you voted.

My last post wasn't really that clear. Its not that I think you're both scum, its that mits reaction is one of being nervous of being called out as scum - arguing that IN NO WAY could you be her scum partner thus she is not scum. I don't see it being implausible you could be mits' scum partner, but its more that mits' argument seems kinda strawmannish I guess. Assert that you wouldn't bus thus she is not scum. When actually looking at C-worl's accusatory post iso 44, it wasn't even clear at the time if he thought you were scum partners or just mutually exclusive scum suspects. Mits (or noone else) stopped to ask, mits just jumped right into trying to prove that you both can't be scum together thus he is not scum.

"Rhinox who meanwhile is arguing that mafia would be doing the exact thing he himself is doing." - I don't follow

Actually, didn't you just do the same thing you accused me of doing earlier in the game? I mean, all I have to do is switch a couple names:

Rhinox

emp:
You said that

kuz

Mits was suspicious and voted him.
Other players said that

kuz

Mits was suspicious and voted him.
You said that the

kuz

Mits-voters were suspicious, because of how they were voting

kuz

Mits.

I don't think I've ever seen an innocent player get upset that their suspect is being voted.

Is it not pretty much exactly the same scenario you were accusing me of?

[Rhinox]

iamausername: Had a town read on C-Worl for

one line

(#39).

...but then he goes right back to arguing with C-Worl about how I never explained my town read at all. What the hell?

Catch of the game right here.

That actually is a good catch.

ugh, I guess I'm starting to buy this kuz/arch scum theory, but if arch flips town then ThAd is prob scum and I'll be taking a closer look at IAUN as well.

unvote, vote Archaist

That should be hammer. Archaist, if you're town give us your thoughts before the mod locks the thread quick!

[Rhinox]

Just for fun, what's your explanation for that fake lynching vote?

I've seen times where a player who thinks he is hammered reacts as town / as scum and the town gets a big clue into his alignment without actually hammering. Thats what I was going for.

The difference is that I decided that MK was innocent because of what *MK* did.
You decided that kuz was innocent when other players voted kuz.

Didn't we already go over this?

Emp: it wasn't anything specific he said. Basically, his iso 12 and 13, it just seemed like he really believed what he was saying in his responses to me and they seemed genuine. He responded to all my points in a way that left me with nothing new to say or ask. Basically, I felt like I no longer had a case.

I unvoted kuz because his responses to me seemed genuine. I would have unvoted regardless of what anyone else was doing. It wasn't until later on that I felt like kuz looked like the proverbial D1 VI easy mislynch, but that was because I

already had a town read on him

- no thats not really it, I just didn't think he was scum. He wasn't really acting scummy IMO. I was wrong.

At that point, *you* thought MK was mafia.
So the one who "kept bussing" MK was... you.

I'm still confused about what you're trying to say here. Mits was town so... no one was bussing
But you were the one accused of being scum with mits by [whoever it was]. Then when Mits becomes tied for leading wagon you unvote. I wasn't accused of being scum with mits and I made him the leading wagon (well tied). After you unvoted, I hypothesized that IF you really were scum with mits as suspected, you wouldn't have unvoted right then.

How exactly was I doing exactly what I thought you as mits's scum partner would do? because I don't see it.

[Rhinox]

I actually didn't notice rhinox's "That should be hammer" until now and that is pretty terribad.

Why is it bad?

[Rhinox]

I actually didn't notice rhinox's "That should be hammer" until now and that is pretty terribad.

Why is it bad?

Um, because it was so close to deadline, and if other people believed you there may not have been a lynch.

hmmm... good point I didn't think of that.

So, do you think my intention was to cause a no lynch then?

[Rhinox]

At that moment you, who were voting MK, didn't unvote!

So what? I didn't say

anyone

who didn't unvote is likely scum, I said if YOU were scum WITH MK, I wouldn't have expected YOU to unvote. you're comparing apples and oranges. You were the one who was accused of being scum with MK.

If you really were scum WITH MK as whoever said

, I wouldn't have expected you to unvote. The bolded is part of the statement you seem to keep ignoring. I had just voted MK, why would I unvote? Yes, if I was scum with MK, I wouldn't have unvoted just as I left my vote on MK at the time (actually, if I were scum with mk, why would I have voted him to begin with?), but a) no one was hypothesizing about ME being possible scum with MK, and b) mk is not scum, therefor I am clearly not scum with MK, and neither are you, so.... what exactly? sorry, but I still have no fucking clue what it is you keep trying to say here.

[Rhinox]

responding to prod. get caught up tonight / this weekend.

[Rhinox]

Is the thread locked or something?

No, but it looks like I need to massprod. Over a day with no posts from anyone is outright ridiculous. If this happens again, the day will end immediately. Also, I'm pulling the deadline a day closer.

I'm trying to decide between voting emp or ThAd. Currenty leaning emp at the moment but I still need to go back and look at his D1.

[Rhinox]

@Rhinox: Do you have any reasons why you are leaning towards emp instead of ThAd?

ThAd was the counterwagon to Archaist. while its certainly possible they could both be scum, I'm sorta playing the odds that the 2 leading wagons weren't scum.

I'm leaning Emp, well firstly I suspect him due to POE with help from IAUN's #275 and fishy's claim - if its not {fishy, IAUN, sAb, or me} then its gotta be emp or ThAd. I disagree with #275 that emp pointing out sAb's town tells is itself a town tell for emp - scum emp gains nothing by NOT bringing attention to the town tells since they were already brought up and someone else would have pointed to them again eventually anyways. So its null. I also still don't understand why emp is voting me exactly. I've tried to engage him on a couple of his points and he hasn't tried to explain his position. I get the feeling he doesn't care if his points are valid as long as they "stick".

Secondly:
He goes from this...

I don't think I need to explain why ThAd is town.

...to this...

Unvote

VOTE: ThAdmiral

...in 24 hours.

Be fair. In #275 he listed everyone but fishy as town, and then fishy claimed and became prob town to him. He was going to have to go back on one of his town reads. Its not like nothing happened in those 24 hours to justify his change in view.

[Rhinox]

Hmmm... that is weird from Rhinox. Fake hammering there is pretty dangerous - if it works at all, it's more likely to do harm than good. Why weren't you concerned about the possibility of a no lynch, Rhinox?

I guess I was thinking there was a chance archaist could not pay attention to the VC a few posts before, but others in the town would realize I didn't actually hammer. Also, after archaist responded, or if he didn't respond by the time I got home and checked the thread with a few hours before deadline, I would have announced that I didn't really hammer, but archaist was actually hammered before that could happen so...

I understand where you guys are coming from, but I don't really see how if I were scum I would have expected to get away with causing a no lynch in such a manner. If I wanted to cause a no lynch it probably would have been more productive to not vote achaist at all and just leave my vote on mk. Also, especially after archaist flipped scum, why wouldn't I have argued that I missed page 11 when I voted and really thought I hammered - try to save face and make it look like I was intending to lynch archaist rather than something that could be misinterpretted as trying to prevent archaist's lynch?

If I really wanted to prevent my hypo scum partners lynch, I could have voted ThAd to L-1 and expected Archaist or emp to hammer ThAd. If I'm scum with archaist and wanted to bus, why wouldn't I try to do it in a way that might get me some town-points.

The only angle that would make sense as an argument is if you think I'm archaist's scum partner and was giving him a chance to react to being fake-hammered as a townie would to get out of his lynch and make him quasi-confirmed town for a while. That argument would at least make sense, where as "intending to cause a no lynch" really doesn't if you think about it.

[Rhinox]

Well, I'll play the "what-if" scenario. What if arch wasn't paying attention to the VC and claimed a power role? Rhinox set up a scenario that could no way help the town. If Arch had claimed a power role, then we might have had either a no-lynch due to the fact that it was close to the deadline, or MK being lynched.

I think fishy was referring to the fact that you pointing out that it wasn't a hammer isn't a town tell as iaun claimed.

Regardless, I don't follow what you're saying.

firstly, if arch thought I fake hammered, why would he then claim in response to being *hammered*?

secondly, suppose he did claim a PR, isn't not lynching a PR and no lynching better than lynching a PR*^?
*in most situations, depending on the PR and believability of the claim
^see #1, he could have claimed a PR at any time and it would have had nothing to do with me fake-hammering.

thirdly, I didn't actually think archaist was scum at the time I voted. If it was some alternate reality where he wasn't scum and would have reacted in an obv-town way (such as a bah go town type of post), then it could have spared a mislynch and the lynch could have shifted to someone more likely to be scum. Alternatively, he could have given a "bah go scum" type of post and then he gets hammered for realz for claiming scum. Thats the intent of fake-hammer gambits. I already knew there wasn't a high liklihood of it actually acomplishing anything what with the VC a couple posts back, but I didn't think it would hurt anything either. I didn't think about the possible ramifications about it being so close to deadline.

It very well might be that fake-hammering arch at the time wasn't the smartest thing to do, but I don't see how your statement: "Rhinox set up a scenario that could no way help the town." - is at all justified by the "claiming a PR" example you've given, let alone justified at all. Fake-hammer gambits DO infact help the town and I don't think I've ever seen someone argue that its an anti-town gambit in general, although I certainly see now the possible bad outcomes that could have happened with it being in the context of less than a day to deadline. But just because something bad COULD have happened, doesn't mean I did the fake hammer thing with the INTENT of causing bad things to happen. It just wasn't the smartest play to make.

Fishy:
You're ignoring an important piece of context:
Rhinoxscum is 8 hours from deadline, wagons split 3-3 scum-town, he's on the town wagon, and iama *just* caught his comafia in a "catch of the game"-level contradiction.

*That*'s the full context for Rhinox's fakehammer voteswitch.

You're still not making any sense. If that was the case, if I'm scum I've got 2 options. Bus like hell and hope for town cred, or ignore that iaun said anything and hope he doesn't get hammered, without posting anything for the last 12hrs to deadline. If it was really the "catch of the game" (and it kinda was a good catch), and I'm arch's scum partner, what do you think I was really trying to acomplish by fake hammering? What was my scum motivation for doing it?

[Rhinox]

been busy all weekend. will get caught up tomorrow.

[Rhinox]

Emp, what makes you think mafia wouldn't be able to both RB and kill at the same time?

Rhinox: who's scum?

I'm having a hard time not thinking its emp. It still only seems like the only reason I'm scum to him is because he's declaring it so. I'm also still suspicious of ThAd and I'll look more into sAb given he's your choice for lynch.

Rhinox:
You found a 3rd choice: Make it seem like you wanted Archaist to die while actually effecting a no-lynch. Best case C-Worl's attacks against me and MK carry. Worst case Archaist dies anyhow the next day buy there's one less lynch for the town.

ummm... no? Thats just an unjustified theory there's really nothing for me to say about it. I see you trying to manipulate me into a corner. First, iam's catch is so good that voting arch is my only play, but then you also argue I was trying to cause a nolynch. None of it makes sense because if I were scum, there was a better play to cause a nolynch (leave my vote where it was, or vote ThAd for a mislynch > no lynch), and there was a better play to bus (just vote to L-1, no fake hammer). My play accomplishes neither very well if I'm scum.

Considering the fact that Arch was scum, if he knew you fake hammered, he could have taken advantaged and claimed a power role or something so that people would unvote him. That's what I would have tried to do if I was Arch.

But what does my fake hammer have anything to do with what he claims or when? He could have claimed a PR at any time. He could have claimed a PR if instead of fake hammering, I just announced he was at L-1. He could have claimed a PR if someone else put him to L-1. You're trying to link my fake hammer to something arch could have done, but there's nothing to justify the link.

Well as you said it depends on the claim and then seeing if anyone else counter-claimed. But still, wouldn't that be why it would make sense to claim if Arch (still scum) thought you faked hammered?

Sure, if he actually realized he was only fake hammered and not real hammered. But if I would have voted and said *L-1* he still could have claimed a PR the same way. So what I'm getting at is trying to figure out why you're trying to make my fake hammer seem more evil than it really is. If I'm arch's scum partner and wanted to set him up to make a PR claim, I didn't have to fake hammer, all I had to do was put him at L-1.

I get what you tried to do about trying to get the "bah go town" kind of post. But if Arch claimed a PR (and actually was that PR), then that would hurt the town, since at that time we didn't know there was a doc in play to protect him so scum would target him.

[/quote]Hurt the town compared to what? If I follow what you've been arguing, you're saying my fake hammer could have cause arch to claim a PR, and if he really was a PR that would hurt the town because scum could target him. Are you comparing this to me not voting at all, or me straight up voting him to L-1 rather than fake hammering? I still argue that a PR not getting lynched and getting nked instead is better than a PR getting lynched, but worse than the PR not claiming at all.

Let me ask you this, would you be questioning me all the same today if I'd have just voted arch to L-1 and not fake-hammered?

[Rhinox]

or c) he's scum, trying to appear to be a) or b) so as to persuade fishy to not shoot him per your reasoning
or d) he's a scum RB and knows fishy is getting blocked no matter who he tries to shoot
or etc.

--------------------------------

Like I said before, your vote on Arch seemed really defeated.

What do you mean by this?

After you had been pressuring MK for some time,

you said that you would focus more on ThAd and iama, and seem to ignore MK.

I guess I'm starting to buy this kuz/arch scum theory,

but if arch flips town

then ThAd is prob scum and I'll be taking a closer look at IAUN as well.

Key phrase you must have missed. If arch would have flipped town, I'd have been looking into ThAd and iama.

Also, how exactly did I ignore MK? My iso #15 was my firts post that didn't have anything to do with MK since I voted in iso 12, and 15 was also my last post of the day, and then MK died overnight. So... how did I ignore MK after pressuring him?

[Rhinox]

vote: sAb

hammer.

[Rhinox]

also vanilla

next

[Rhinox]

I actually wouldn't mind either way. I know the accepted procedure is to no-lynch in this situation but in 3 man lylo one town votes wrong it's all over. With 4 man lylo 2 town have to vote wrong.

eh, its less about how many wrong votes it takes, and more about whether the nk will narrow down the suspect pool IMO. I don't think anyone is clear-cut obvtown so IMO the nk would help me make a better lynch choice.

[Rhinox]

Rhinox:
At end of D2 you were thinking me or ThAd. (Really, you weren't thinking anything, but I'll be generous with [350]).
What changed about iama?

nothing changed.

[Rhinox]

The most logical thing to do would be to lynch Rhinox, who suddenly has decided that iama could be mafia, but won't explain how, or even why he's now saying that.

I knew if I dangled the carrot in your face you couldn't resist misrepping me.

I still think you or ThAd is the last scum, and nothing I said implies otherwise. I said earlier:

I don't think anyone is clear-cut obvtown so IMO the nk would help me make a better lynch choice.

Which meant that Just because I think the scum is either you or ThAd, that doesn't mean I think iama is the obv-nk tonight. If you or ThAd were the nk, then I'd feel pretty confident about lynching whichever of you survived. I purposefully didn't elaborate on that more in #382 to try to keep as much WIFOM out of the equation as possible. After #383, I knew exactly what accusation you were going to try to spin.

The point is, nothing I've said implies I no longer think iama is least likely to be scum, only that he's not the obvious nk tonight.


This isn't the first time this game you've misrepped a situation to paint me as scum, but thats not why I think you're the last scum. The reason you're scum is because when I've pointed out you're misinterpretting/misrepping a situation in the past, you just ignore what I have to say about it and continue insisting I'm scum based on your misrepresentation. You don't seem interested in actually making sure you're interpretting a situation correctly. Before I was thinking it was maybe confirmation bias, but now it just looks like you're scum trying to get me mislynched no matter how incorrect the arguement as long as its convincing.

[Rhinox]

hmm.

Rhinox, why would ThAd kill Emp after a no lynch? Why would Emp kill ThAd?

Or I guess "why would either of them kill you?" if you prefer.

Well I've definitely seen weirder scum kills from scum trying to cause confusion or WIFOM. I could spout out a few guesses at specific reasons but that wouldn't really help very much. Its all pretty moot at this point anyways since bringing attention to the ramifications of a hypothetical nk choice after a no lynch pretty much means that we won't get any useful info out of the nk anyways. So I'm with ThAd we might as well just lynch today.


@emp: still trying to misrep me. I've already explained myself I'm not going to do it again. Other than to clarify that my "nothing changed" comment with the lack of elaboration was the dangling the carrot I was referring to because I knew what you were going to try to accuse me of after you asked me what changed regarding iam. It wasn't a "trap" in the manner you're referring to, more of me just sitting back letting you stick your foot in your mouth.

do me a favor and go through my posts and point out where I ever called iam town. Now, also explain how me saying essentially "iam is not obv-town" today in any way means I think he's more likely to be scum than you or thAd, or that my read on iam at all changed. Why you're at it, why don't you go ahead and summarize everything you've seen that makes me scum, I'd love to draw attention to the rest of your misreps again.

[Rhinox]

Yeah, I realize that. I'll throw a post together about emp later tonight. Just to be upfront, I don't have anything to post against emp except for his attacks against me. I know thats usually not a very convincing case, but its the nature of his attacks - he posts something that doesn't make sense / is a misrep, I explain why its a misrep, and then he ignores it until the next misrep, yet some how after all that I'm still scum for no valid reason that he is bothering to defend. I'll show examples when I make my post later.

[Rhinox]

At the start of D3 you were vaguely saying anyone (ThAd or me or iama).

That is the misrep, and I have clarified and explained, and you're still insisting that I said or implied something I didn't.

I also like how you keep saying things like: "Really, do you still need me to respond to this?" - as if everything I say is so scummy it should be obvious to everyone why I'm scum. How bout you actually try to put an argument together about why I'm scum that involves anything besides lies and misreps, rather than spouting rhetoric like this.

I also stand by my misrepresentation of your play as OMGUSy games which seem designed to let you weasel out of accusations on technicalities,

where, exactly, do I try to weasel out of accusations on technicalities? quotes, please, or it didn't happen.


@ThAd: I fell asleep last night, so I'll get to that post I promised today.

[Rhinox]

OK, here are all of emp's posts about me:

Hm. Okay.

Unvote: th3kuzinator. Vote: Rhinox

vote placed with no justification. OK, so placing votes without explaination early in the game can be an acceptable tactic, but emp didn't address me directly for a week after this.

in the meantime...

C-W:
Sorry, not ready to compromise, not while Rhinox is being this slimy. (Most recently: voting for ThA because ThA *agreed* with the case Rhinox was making.)

thats the first misrep. I did not vote ThAd for agreeing with any case I was making. In between my posts, kuz's posting made me not suspect him as strongly, and ThAd looked like he could be opportunistically pushing an easy mislynch, so I unvoted kuz and voted ThAd. Emp's argument basically boils down to that because I voted kuz at one point, that I should be locked into thinking kuz was scum, and that I shouldn't suspect anyone else who votes kuz. That's completely rediculous.

We went back and forth a little bit, and then emp unvoted me for no explained reason. Until later in the day...

C-Worl and Rhinox are proposing that I'm mafia because I voted MK (who they are saying is mafia) instead of voting Archaist (who would have to be town).
How about Occam's razor- the guy pushing a lynch on Archaist despite saying the above is the guilty one?
And with him, Rhinox who meanwhile is arguing that mafia would be doing the exact thing he himself is doing.
Especially after C-Worl declares Rhinox town for voting MK right after declaring I'm obvscum for voting MK.

I made a mistake letting up on Rhinox. It won't happen tomorrow. If there weren't less than 36 hours left and 0 current voters, it wouldn't have happened today. As it is:
Vote: C-Worl

There are 2 misreps here. Firstly, I didn't propost that emp was mafia. I commented on what C-worl said about emp being mafia with MK, and actually at the end of that commentary that implied that I didn't think emp/MK very likely due to emp unvoting after I made MK the leading wagon. The second misrep is emp saying "rhinox is arguing that mafia would be doing the same thing he is doing" - which wasn't the case at all, and I've tried to explain it, but to briefly go through it again:

-cworl says emp/MK are scum
-emp is voting mk
-MK reacts poorly as if Cworl struck a nerve, so I vote MK
-emp unovtes
-I comment that emp's unvote doesn't make sense if he's really scum with MK because if MK would flip scum, emp would look suspicious for unvoting immediately after MK became the leading wagon.
-Emp misreps me by (1) saying I'm arguing that he's scum, and (2) saying that I said scum would be voting MK and I'm voting MK so I'm the one who's scum.

By the way, emp has been accusing me of omgus, but as of this post, emp think cworl and I are attacking him, and he ends up voting cworl (rather than kuz, the guy he was pushing as scum all day while he was voting elsewhere), and spouting out some rhetoric about how he won't let up on me tomorrow. So, he suspects the 2 people he thinks were attacking him (even though I wasn't even attacking him at that point). I don't even think thats OMGUS by the way - emp was clearly trying to argue that me and cworl were scum because in his opinion we were making bad arguments, which by the way is exactly the reason I suspect emp today.

Moving on to day 2:

In his first post of the day, he immediately votes me, and reaffirms a couple of the misreps he already used in D1 (namely, that I only unvoted kuz because he was getting votes, and that I'm scum because I was still voting MK after saying if emp was scum with MK I wouldn't have expected him to unvote after MK became the leading wagon [and I still don't understand how emp is making any sense with that last one, and no matter how many times I had asked for clarification, all he ever did was reiterate that I was scum because my vote was on MK - my vote had nothing to do with me speculating that if emp was scum with MK, removing his vote after MK became the leading wagon would look suspicious if MK ever flipped scum. After MK flipped town, it would have been the end of it, except MK kept insisting that I was being hypicritical scum basically])

This is not a misrep, but its a bad argument:

Whereas with Rhinox, as just pointed out: he hopped onto both the ThAd and the MK counterwagons. He only voted Archaist hours before deadline, only after your catch all but nailed Archaist's coffin.

Given as a reason for why I am scum, but emp was on the Rhinox, and MK, AND cworl counterwagons, and never getting back on the kuz/arch wagon at the end of the day despite calling kuz/arch scum all day from off the wagon.

This is another bad argument:

Rhinox:
You found a 3rd choice: Make it seem like you wanted Archaist to die while actually effecting a no-lynch. Best case C-Worl's attacks against me and MK carry. Worst case Archaist dies anyhow the next day buy there's one less lynch for the town.

this is a bad argument because I as scum don't gain anything from this course of action. Suppose I was scum trying to cause a no-lynch, if the no-lynch fails and arch gets lynched, then I would know I would be suspected for trying to cause a no-lynch when scum was about to be lynched, and if somehow my alleged plan to cause a no-lynch succeeded, then arch would probably be lynched the next day anyways (if not me), and then I would definitely be under high suspicion for causing a no-lynch rather than a scum lynch once arch flipped. 3 better things for me to do if I'm scum: 1) do nothing and hope a no-lynch just happens, 2) vote ThAd and cause a mislynch instead, or 3) just outright bus without the games that don't help me if I'm scum.

This is getting long so I'll just skip to the last misrep, where emp said I'm scum for allegedly expanding my suspect list to include everyone. I think we've said enough about that recently.

Basically, emp hasn't made a single valid point against me, but I'll repeat that its not the bad points that are the problem - sometimes townies make bad points - its that he isn't trying to unbiasly determine whether his points are valid, he's just declaring them to be valid and hasn't had to back them up because everyone else either thinks he's town or I'm scum, so he's been getting a pass. Up until now, I'd have probably been willing to except if emp admitted he had confirmation bias and attempted to legitimately reexamine his reads - aside from emp's bad cases and misreps against me, I've been more suspicious of ThAd.

[Rhinox]

@iam: I think you could be scum, but you are 3rd on the list of 3 suspects. I never in the game said I thought you were town / weren't scum. All game, emp has been trying to paint everything into little black and white boxes. I voted kuz, so I'm not allowed to changing my mind if I think the wagon is growing too quickly / opportunistically. I said yesterday I thought the last scum was either emp or ThAd, so that means I must think you're the obv nk? no, my opinion alone doesn't mean shit and wouldn't influence who the scum kills. And just because I still say you might be scum doesn't mean "ZOMG RHINO IS TRYING TO GET ANYONE LYNCHED TODAY SCUMMMMMM!" - no, it means exactly what I said, you're third on the list, you might be scum, but I'm not arguing to get you lynched and there's no way as of right now I can see voting you before emp or ThAd - you'd have to do something pretty scummy, or both emp and ThAd would have to start looking pretty town. Actually, I'd have a hard time even voting ThAd at this point.

You asked for examples, I don't think these very helpful, but here are a couple off the top of my head. The list is literally endless though because scum could kill anyone for any reason or no reason or randomly or whatever.
-scum-thad kills emp to frame me because emp suspected me.
-scum thad kills me to make emp look bad for being wrong about me and to make you look bad for still being alive.
-scum-emp sees you just say you'd under no circumstances votes him so kills me because ThAd is your top choice.
-scum-emp kills thad for the same reason, predicting I'd still be lynched or alternative you're suspected for still being alive
-scum-you (if I'm wrong and your scum) will still be alive tomorrow no matter who you kill.
-scum-thad kills emp just to try to wifom us both into thinking there's no way he would leave both of us alive
etc. etc. etc.

btw, I don't see myself voting EmpTyger today under any circumstances.

Well then the game's pretty much over anyways at this point and I'm wasting my time typing. Given everyones implied voting preference (you will only vote ThAd or me, emp will only vote me, and ThAd is probably voting me with an open mind of hearing me out about voting emp), its clear that today will only end in my lynch or no lynch, and if we no-lynch today, I'm almost certainly going to be lynched tomorrow anyways. I'm not just giving up and throwing in the towel, but there's not a lot I can do when you're telling me you're not going to vote my top suspect under any circumstances.

Why, exactly, are you unwilling to vote emp today, anyways?

[Rhinox]

Wow this is fucking bullshit by the way.

[Rhinox]

No the games pretty much fucking over and no ones posting more than once every 2 days but if hitler mod wants to force replace me over a fucking holiday weekend then screw it. Why don't you go count posts all 4 of us are right around the ssame count its not like I was holding up the game.

[Rhinox]

I'll make this easy. I don't want my spot back, lynne can stay. enjoy the rest of the game, this is my last post. I apologize for my language use but not for being pissed about the situation.

[Rhinox]

So thats a lynch huh? You want the bad news now or wait for modscene?

[Rhinox]

I've been avoiding this post game but I think I've calmed down enough to post something.

Game related, I think had I still been in the game I'd have been convinced by iam's arguments to vote for thAd, but I'm not sure it would have mattered because emp would have had to vote there as well. The reason I was so stuck on emp being scum is because his arguments against me were so bad it came across as scum trying to force a lynch by making a convincing case even if it was wrong, just ignore anything said to oppose the case.

Procedurally, obviously I'm disappointed that I was forced replaced. I think it was the wrong call and aparently others agree with me. I do apologize for the language I used in thread after the decision was announced. Its just disappointing to be told I'm not allowed to finish a game I put a couple months of effort into because of a mod decision that did not appear to be for the betterment of the game or its players neither at the time nor looking back at the outcome.