Mini Normal 1187: Game Over

[Scumhunter]

Alright then.

vote: foilist13

Ace, last chance to say you are actually a mason here.

[hiplop]

was that a hammer?

[Scumhunter]

@Barry, your reasoning about your track targets makes sense to me although that town thought process could easily be faked. I appreciate the explanation though.

So now that it is practically confirmed foilist is scum (unless both bob + ace are scum), that leaves our powerset as:

Town role blocker (confirmed), 2 masons (confirmed), Tracker (unconfirmed), Sensor (Unconfirmed), Any other unclaimed power roles??

I think that is a reasonable power set.

[Scumhunter]

I don't think it was hiplop, but I'm not too concerned even if it was.

[Barry Allen]

@ hiplop - no I don't believe it was a hammer. If I'm counting right foilist is at L-2. Before I take it to L-1 I want to confirm my understanding here, so bob please tell me if I have this right:

1. Bob is visited by foilist, claiming he is a mason with Ace.
2. Foilist takes Bob to a QT, but it is just bob and Foilist and not Ace.
3. Based on posts in thread, Bob starts to suspect that Ace isn't aware of the claim that Foilist and Ace are masons together.
4. Foilist claims in thread to be a friendly neighbor and NOT a mason.
5. Ace claims not to be a mason.
6. Foilist continues to claim he and Ace are both masons.

Add to that DH having referred to his "partner" in the singular, and foilist's claim of being mason with Ace and DH doesn't add up. At the least this points to a fakeclaim of some sort, which given our discussions regarding roles is a dangerous and ill-advised move at best (ok, let's just say "stupid").

Let me know if I have this right. If so, this truly reeks. For now I will

Unvote

[hiplop]

ya you have it right

[Giitah]

Okay, so before we kll Foilist, is there anything left to say? I don't think an analysis of Nintendo's report will help us at this point since we have a target, we can reanaylze it tomorrow.

Nintendo, quickly, without regard to reasoning, can you tell us your gut claims on all the players?

[xvart]

Yes do not hammer until after I post.

[pappums rat]

Vote Count 2.5

foilist13 - 4 (ace5993, archaebob, xvart, Scumhunter)
ace5993 - 3 (foilist13, nintendoaddict1, hiplop)
nintendoaddict1 - 1 (Heliman)

Not Voting - Valern, Giitah, Barry Allen


With 11 alive it takes 6 votes to lynch.

The deadline for Day 2 is 7 P.M. EST on July 11, 2011.

Valern is on V/LA until July 2.

[archaebob]

@ Barry Allen -

That's the gist of it, yeah.

I still think ace is scum though. Foilist has even less reason to bring some random townie into it than he does his buddy. If he thought beforehand that his plan would fail, he wouldn't have done it to begin with. If he

didn't

think it would fail, then there's no reason he would make it a confirmed failure by including some random vanilla town that could flip at any moment, and who wouldn't claim mason with him when the massclaim happened. Whatever he did, it's a bad idea, but it seems more likely that he was relying on me to assume both he and ace were confirmed. I mean, what's the alternative?

"Let me do this random gambit that is SURE TO FAIL. Since I already know it's sure to fail, I will randomly pretend that ace is also a mason, which makes it exponentially MORE likely to fail, but gives me some chance that ace will GO DOWN WITH ME"

I don't buy it.

Ok people, I'm calling the scumteam:

foilist
ace
Barry Allen or nintendoaddict

I don't buy that both those claims can be real. Roleblocker AND sensor AND tracker is too much. I have no clue about which one though.

[Barry Allen]

OK, then, let's go to L-1. Given that foilist has already given a defense (though a rather fail defense at that), it's time:

VOTE: foilist

Foilist has made two claims now, mason (privately to bob) and friendly neighbor (publicly to the rest of us). He claimed Ace as his mason buddy, though Ace is refusing to back him up right now, which makes it even MORE odd that foilist continues to claim mason with Ace. Given the large amount of discussion regarding whether so many roles are in the game, claiming two roles is really a bad idea.

[Heliman]

HELI SUMMARY

Given Foil's very Bum claim, I'm willing to hammer him tonight, I can see basically no chance of him flipping town.

Archaebob, I'm very disappointed you never had any argument, but fortunately Foil's transgressions far outweigh your own right now. To mimic you're own closed hand behavior: I may tell you why I wanted your argument later.

Either Nintendo or Barry are likely to be killed tonight, if it isn't obvious.

It's also interesting to note that if Foil and Barry are scum Barry doesn't need to be a tracking role.

[xvart]

Introduction

:

For reference, when I replace into games I read the thread and make notes of scumtells, behavior that might be scum motivated, inconsistencies between behavior and actions, mismatched votes, and links between players. One thing you'll notice is I have a real problem with the way the game was played D1 with all these pressure wagons being more important than voting scummy behavior. Had I been in the game D1 there would have been some serious arguments going on.

Giitah

:

Post 80

-

Hiplop, you plan on defending yourself yet or are we going to have to finish this up before we move on to you?

I don't like the precognition of "finish[ing] this up" and "mov[ing] on to [hiplop]". The part I don't like is the underlying assumption or allusion that hiplop is scummy because he hasn't defended himself while sitting on a pressure wagon. And then the follow up post about "exactly; you haven't done anything."

Post 345

- This is a very strange post. Explain how killing any of us would be helpful or any different than killing you??

Post 422

- lol @ foilist not having enough content considering he just replaced in and had some some decent posting; but there was not scummy insinuation or undertone. Also this:

Decisively town so far. He's done some good work so far but he also shot down the Jily case, which looks pretty bad on him. I think it was simply a mark of bad judgement rather than scumminess.

How does shooting down the Jily case make him look bad?

Post 496

- I know that Giitah has softly suspected Pine but it seem to be more on the coat tails of others, so when he says "Pine is really scummy in my books" it seems a little forced or overstated, especially considered he was omitted on his player by player analysis. Someone that scummy would warrant a summary especially since she has no stated concise case anywhere but rather some random lucid thoughts.

Post 500

- This is just a terrible post.

Post 505

-

I think Jilynne's rather used to pressure; I've read through some of her games, actually, and she doesn't normally react too strongly to wagons. I would say it's a null tell, actually.

Big issue with this post. Why are you just now saying this? Wouldn't this have been important to say days ago?

Post 721

- This is a solid town post. This is intentional scumhunting, looking for possible scum in a narrower pool. Unless Giitah is scum

with

this can only come from town.

Barry Allen

:

Post 335

- If your vote is "free up now" and you are not satisfied with hiplop why are you not voting hiplop?

Post 664

- I don't like the whole ramp up "I've waited as long as I can to reveal this information."

Post 673

-

I hate this coming down to a vote between role claims. But, given the choice I'm choosing Tracker over a blocker claim that could be town or scum.

This is worded incredibly strangely. As town, wouldn't he be voting for the person he knows is town and not because of his role?

Post 688

- Similar to hiphop, Barry is employing the classic scum tactic of misdirection. Given the kill flavor of being shot means vig or serial killer? Mafia don't typically use guns in mini normals? Plus the countless other roles that could have visited including cop, JoAT, etc (but many people weren't thinking outside the doctor box).

Post 720

- Diminishes his own play, acknowledged a bad move on his part.

Post 747

- Barry sensationalizes the night kills saying "we've already lost too many roles" when we've actually only lost one.

Post 786

- the whole argument for removing votes to not out more PRs is crazy. If you think someone is scum you want to wagon them and get them claim and lynch them, unless you know they are town and might be a PR. Being cautious about who you wagon to not out PRs is terrible because:

1. You are scum and don't have a legitimate case;
   
2. You are scum and don't want to wagon another town person and look scummy; or,
   
3. You are scum and don't want to be the driving force of another mislynch.

Barry

- why did you choose to track Foilist last night?

Heliman

:

Post 89

- Irregardless of the cult/survivor thought process, how does creating typos prevent someone from dying at night? The typos thing is such a petty and ridiculous thing on which to latch.

Post 171

-

I'm pretty sure what archebob is doing right now is trawling for a reaction tell. I'm personally going to leave him be on it for now, but if he never follows up on what he was looking for or was looking for somthing really stupid then it will be a+ + scumread to me and I will push to lynch.

What is the point of exposing a reaction fishing plot? Doesn't that undermine everything? Also, why are you answering for archaebob when being questioned by nintendoaddict? This looks like someone wanted to show how observant. Also, the "I'm going to watch archaebob to see if he follows up" also seems to undermine the intent.

Did he follow up adequately in your opinion?

Post 242

-

A policy lynch? really? Archaebob, why doesn't this argument apply to Jil, who hasn't contributed to scum hunting enough? Better yet, why doesn't this apply to Hiplop, who has been sheeping and reasonless voting since we started?

I felt this was spot on due to my opinion on the D1 lurker hunt fest.

Post 753

- the 2:11 ratio is wrong, but I understand that he has other site experience.

Heliman

- can you provide links for games like this from your other site?

Foilist

:

Post 432

-

Choose 3 people as scum. We know there should at least be that many, so any fewer scum candidates is unreasonable. Go.

If you know there are at least three scum and are demanding three scum reads from others, why have you not provided three scum reads? Especially since you said in your first content post that several people stuck out to you but you never really followed up on this.

Post 555

- I thought the exact same thing about archaebob's post.

Post 815

- Claims friendly neighbor. Not mason friendly neighbor which he actually claims he is.

Going back in chronology based on the mason claim:

Post 488

-

RE: Outing Masons: You have two choices. Either you keep it a secret who it is, and maybe plant a breadcrumb that your partner knows about which they can then reference later when they claim, or you can out them. If you out them, you will either get lynched anyway, in which case your partner will probably be killed and that will be the end of the masons, or you defer the lynch and the scum have to decide and either paint both of you as scum or to spend their time killing you off instead of other PR's and having no hope of lynching you during the day.

It's up to you.

This doesn't sound like a mason partner to me. Especially when after the day breaks and you have claimed to be mason to archaebob in the QT you all the sudden start saying "mason(s)". When speaking cryptically about the situation a mason partner wouldn't leave it up to the other one to decide. He would say definitively "I think it is bad play for the mason to claim" or the "the mason should claim" while speaking from an outside perspective.

To be continued...

[hiplop]

I dont like how scumhunter has vanished. Hes posting in other threads..

[Scumhunter]

I'm here hiplop. I'm voting the confirmed scum, (aka foilist). Mind doing the same?

[Barry Allen]

I've included my replies in blue after each of your points, xvart.

Barry Allen

:

Post 335

- If your vote is "free up now" and you are not satisfied with hiplop why are you not voting hiplop?

This is a question I have answered already in this thread, but since you ask, this was when I was FoS'ing hiplop and giving him the opportunity to defend before I put my vote on him.

Post 664

- I don't like the whole ramp up "I've waited as long as I can to reveal this information."

This is more of an AtE than analysis. Of course I waited as long as I could - it was a pretty fail D1 for us when we outed 2 roles in one day (blocker and tracker) and then had a lynch vote that came down at the end to our two roles.

Post 673

-

I hate this coming down to a vote between role claims. But, given the choice I'm choosing Tracker over a blocker claim that could be town or scum.

This is worded incredibly strangely. As town, wouldn't he be voting for the person he knows is town and not because of his role?

Again, at the end of the phase we had waited so long for Pine to defend that we were left with a choice between two role claims for our vote, and no time left to raise new cases. I stated that my vote was in favor of a tracker (me) that I KNEW existed over a roleblocker claim that I didn't know for sure was real.

Post 688

- Similar to hiphop, Barry is employing the classic scum tactic of misdirection. Given the kill flavor of being shot means vig or serial killer? Mafia don't typically use guns in mini normals? Plus the countless other roles that could have visited including cop, JoAT, etc (but many people weren't thinking outside the doctor box).

This "analysis" from you is also a classic scumtactic. You are directing our attention away from my noting who was visited during N1 in that post. You are instead trying to create connections that don't exist between players, hoping that one or both would look scummy.

Post 720

- Diminishes his own play, acknowledged a bad move on his part.

Your point being....what?

Post 747

- Barry sensationalizes the night kills saying "we've already lost too many roles" when we've actually only lost one.

This is where you are wrong. We lost our blocker on D1 through lynch and we lost a mason by night kill N1. That's two roles we lost, not one.

Post 786

- the whole argument for removing votes to not out more PRs is crazy. If you think someone is scum you want to wagon them and get them claim and lynch them, unless you know they are town and might be a PR. Being cautious about who you wagon to not out PRs is terrible because:

1. You are scum and don't have a legitimate case;
   
2. You are scum and don't want to wagon another town person and look scummy; or,
   
3. You are scum and don't want to be the driving force of another mislynch.

This is another scumtactic. You disagree with me, so you list several scenarios that all assume I'm scum. The last scenario is just what I stated it was. We had lost two roles already (not one as you mistakenly noted above), and I did not want to risk more fail. On D2 we do have time to continue hunting elsewhere, and if we later choose to not believe the claim and go after Nintendo we certainly have time. In fact, not going to that very quick lynch has given us a LOT of valuable discussion and information, so in retrospect I still believe I did the right thing.

Barry

- why did you choose to track Foilist last night?

I've already stated how I looked at my short list for tracking. How I picked foilist out of that group? It wasn't just that foilist dropped the hammer, it was that there was a post FoSing foilist before the thread was locked. Since there was an FoS on foilist, the maf might let a town foilist live in order to try to BW him early on D2, and of course a scum foilist was sure to live and might actually visit someone. When foilist DID visit and bob lived through the night, I thought at first that I had found the doc, so I only released the name of the person he visited (bob). The later neighbor/mason claim obviously blew that doc theory out the window.

I'll read the rest of your post, but xvart it doesn't look like you carefully read the thread. You missed key points like losing two roles instead of one, and you asked me questions I've already answered in thread. You are also using the same tactics in your posts that you find scummy. Large posts don't necessarily mean well-reasoned posts, and giving a lot of quotes doesn't mean you really read the thread all that well.

[Heliman]

Heliman

:

Post 89

- Irregardless of the cult/survivor thought process, how does creating typos prevent someone from dying at night? The typos thing is such a petty and ridiculous thing on which to latch.

Post 171

-

I'm pretty sure what archebob is doing right now is trawling for a reaction tell. I'm personally going to leave him be on it for now, but if he never follows up on what he was looking for or was looking for somthing really stupid then it will be a+ + scumread to me and I will push to lynch.

What is the point of exposing a reaction fishing plot? Doesn't that undermine everything? Also, why are you answering for archaebob when being questioned by nintendoaddict? This looks like someone wanted to show how observant. Also, the "I'm going to watch archaebob to see if he follows up" also seems to undermine the intent.

Did he follow up adequately in your opinion?

Post 242

-

A policy lynch? really? Archaebob, why doesn't this argument apply to Jil, who hasn't contributed to scum hunting enough? Better yet, why doesn't this apply to Hiplop, who has been sheeping and reasonless voting since we started?

I felt this was spot on due to my opinion on the D1 lurker hunt fest.

Post 753

- the 2:11 ratio is wrong, but I understand that he has other site experience.

Heliman

- can you provide links for games like this from your other site?[/area]

1: It's common for players to feign stupidity and lay low so scum will pass them off as an easy lynch and abstain from NKing them, this holds true for many third party roles.
2: A "reaction tell" can also mean "scum covering his own ass," depending on what or if he was actually looking for some kind of specific response.
3: In retrospect, I don't really know why I thought that. My bad.

[Heliman]

what the fu- man that came out wrong. Just look at the tiny numbered answers at the bottom instead of the shitload of garble above it.

[Barry Allen]

EBWOP - when I replied to xvart's note on post 786, I meant to say "there IS a last scenario, just what I stated it was" that I am town who didn't want to risk a PR after losing 2 roles (blocker and mason). That's what I get for posting near midnight my time.

[Scumhunter]

Can we hammer the scum and head to night phase? On the rare chance foilist is town, that confirms both ace + bob for scum. zzz.

[hiplop]

ill hammer sometime tomorrow. Just letting you guys know.

[nintendoaddict1]

ill hammer sometime tomorrow. Just letting you guys know.

Why wait until tomorrow? ace and foil are obviously both scum together.

Unvote, Vote: foil

[Heliman]

*click* there's the hammer.

SHAME ON YOU NINTENDOADDICT FOR HAMMERING, YOU SHOULD BE FOSED AND VIGGED FOR DOING SUCH A THING TO A CLAIMED Pfffffffthahahahahaha. Ok, seriously, lets see that flip then, scum or no scum I'm curious about what his rolename is gonna be.

[xvart]

wtf on the hammer. I still have to type up archaebob but I'll post everything else I have so far just in case it closes.

[xvart]

Ace5993

:

Post 150

- I don't like this post because Ace says he doesn't like Pine at all then votes content lacking Barry (which he explains that posting without content is always scummy) but he doesn't stick his vote around there much longer and removes his vote in his next post (during which time Barry only posts once - see below).

Post 176

- Ace says in this post that Barry's one reply (mentioned above) is terrible, which presumably would increase his case on Barry Allen and justify his vote staying. However, Ace now comments on how "almost every post since page 4 has been directly related to archaebob's comments or questions. He isn't trying to generate discussion, he's trying to control it and lead the town to a mislynch D1." The problem with this is, if his comment about archaebob controlling the conversation is true (which I believe it was) and has been true since page four he could have easily made this comment in his last post. This post and the one previously are mixed up in terms of motivation and intent with each vote and the reasons behind them.

Post 338

- The long ISO post against Pine followed by a vote on DH with a one liner case. Especially strange since he hasn't said two words about DH prior to this post. The intent of his ISO post is obvious in the suspicion of Pine. There should have been a vote attached here if he believed it.

Post 658

-

1+2 - Revealing different reasons in different posts is scummy. It's kind of like the old spreading out a role claim over several posts thing. It seems like you're coming up with reasons for your actions, rather than acting on your thoughts.

If this is scummy why didn't you comment on it when archaebob did it? Why is it only scummy in this instance?

nintendoaddict1

:

Post 350

- You call Barry opportunistic for drawing attention to someone not post or someone not here. What about archaebob and his countless pushes on people not posting? Isn't that opportunistic for similar reasons?

Post 391

- This is a huge misrep.

Post 701

- NES's self quotes do not align with the original question posed by ace saying NES had not indicated that Pine might be scum. NES's quoted examples include meta example of a scum member claiming town RBer and then called the claim sketchy. Knowing Pine's flip could indicate that his original posts were planting a seed of doubt behind the claim without committing to a solid stand.

Post 827

- Lynch order incorrect, suggesting that if Foilist is scum that NES might be his partner, trying to get ace lynched first. If NES is scum I doubt ace is because scum, at this game state, wouldn't be quite so obvious in putting both partners on a platter; plus, if they are all three scum together NES would want to lynch Foilist first since his PR is spent with the neighborizor role being used up and ace might still be another scum PR.

hiplop

:

Post 114

- Tells DH to settle down and that nobody took that vote seriously but him. What vote is hiplop talking about? His own? Was it not a serious vote? Did you include yourself in the set of all people that did not take the vote seriously? It seemed serious especially when you upgraded it and suggested a wagon form on DH.

Post 142

- Unvotes because DH is "smartening up". Does this override the suspicious behavior of DH "worshipping archaebob"?

Post 181

- Why is giitah scum? Nothing you have said up until this point has indicated as such. If you are so certain that giitah is scum then why are you voting for something you are simply willing to "go with"? The only thing that happened with giitah between this post and your vote on archaebob is that she also voted archaebob?

Post 198

- How were archaebob's reactions townie? I always have problems with posts like this because it is a super easy way to bail a wagon.

Post 213

- I think this post is a scummy response to something that was obviously a misunderstanding in intention. The fact that hiplop said in post 198 that archaebob's reactions seemed townie and then a short time later said "archaebob is town" it should be obvious that the absolute was in the context of likely town and not definitive town. This seems like scum getting caught for some stupid error and had to over explain the explanation to justify it.

Post 425

-

Graiie, explain where DH has ever been pro-town. Now. He hasnt done anything useful all game. Make sure to include evidence.

Are we now lynching people who have done nothing town? You ask for evidence that he has done anything town when you yourself are unable to provide evidence that he is scum ("Also, theres something just wrong with his posts, they come across very scummy, cant really explain it"). Do you always call out people who want to policy lynch on D1? Can you show me some examples or explain how this case is different?

Post 426

- asks for a scum/town list. From a personal point of view, I despise town lists and feel they are more beneficial to scum than town (especially early game). It is strange that he wants a complete ordered list, too, from only one person. Feels like fluff posting to appear to be advocating contributions.

Post 447

-

alright,ill explain it to you. Look at the clear connection between scumhunter and demonhybrid. They're distantly defending eachother, and scumhunter is using some LOL defense about a policy lynch. Giitah, he hasnt handled pressure well at ALL, he continues to tunnel Jil, with no real case; all hes saying is that shes a lurker, and we all know that. Hes clinging to one person so that he doesnt have to squirm around as scum. Also, his blatant overexaggerations/practically worshipping Bob in earlygame is incresibly scummy.

When pressured for his case on DH and shown that he hasn't stated it (despite him saying he had) he says that it is because he and scumhunter have been actively defending each other? Do you typically think scum pairs defend each other so openly on D1?

Post 478

- "That claim is awful" regarding DH's mason claim. Why is it awful? Have you played in a game with mason's before?

Post 683

- Scum obviously misdirecting. No vig in their right mind would vig a claimed mason on D1 and the whole doctor thing is absurd since town already has a confirmed roleblocker (two town roles that can block kills?).

Post 731

- This could be a forced bus with hiplop thinking he found something original that nobody else had seen or it could just be hiplop running a mislynch. Either way, this post has scum motivation all over it. It's especially strange since he was voting Barry Allen at the end of D1 and the start of D2 so how could he "just now realize that BA was the scum"? This is such a scummy contradiction. Also, I would like links to sensor being a common fakeclaim offsite. I've never seen a sensor in all the games I've read here and I doubt it would be a common role off site and common enough that people would use it as a viable fake claim.

Post 768

-

There’s no way we have THAT many power roles,

and it sounds to me like Barry is covering Bob’s ass

. Mafia would have tried to kill bob no matter what, he’s too strong of a player/

pretty much everyone agrees that he is town

. Much more dangerous than a Mason.

That's why i thought a vig killed DH

, because of how strong Bob is.

But since the Mafia killed DH,

that makes it seem like Bob is mafia

.

I highly doubt we have a killing role on our side, plus all of the others. The tracker result, even if Barry is town: DOESN'T PROVE ANYTHING, it just means that someone visited bob, That guy could have been the mafia godfather, easily....

The contradictions in this post astound me. First,

hiplop is speaking out of both sides of his mouth on archaebob's alignment

. Second of all,

the vig comment is especially strange since hiplop was convinced (or at least wanted us to be convinced) that there was a vig in his D2 opening post

. Plus the night action WIFOM is so obvious that nothing should have been considered absolutely definitive.

Post 833

- Again, voting ace instead of Foilist. Foilist should be the obvious first lynch since he is the one being called a liar by both parties he is claimed to be connected with.

Post 863

- subtle scummy implication on someone posting elsewhere on the site.