Succession Mafia II: OVER!

[Zdenek]

I like the part where you're avoiding any real content towards this vote. Its cute.

Your post is obviously coming from scum since your comment doesn't apply to what I said, and you are just looking for some sort of fake symmetry.

Regarding Flameaxe,

he's a town read at this point.

Why?

To be clear, I did not target bvoigt last night.

After his pathetic reaction, i'd still be okay with lyching him.

I still prefer this:

Vote: Flameaxe

[Flameaxe]

Your post is obviously coming from scum since your comment doesn't apply to what I said, and you are just looking for some sort of fake symmetry.

Uh? What? My comment referred to the fact that in a paragraph of my opinions towards you, you chose only to respond to the part that mentions the OMGUS. Funny enough, this is essentially the same way I said it in my original post. If I'm looking for fake symmetry, you're looking for fake excuses. You can come at me (bro) as much as you want, but please for everyone's sake, use some damn logic.

[ConSpiracy]

No guilty?
Then there is no reason not to vote Tajo.
I really dislike his posting during this day.

Vote: populartajo

The reread will start sunday, I am not home at the moment.

[Magister Ludi]

Hold on.

Question, how many unrecruitable roles did Flay include in last Succession mafia?

[Flameaxe]

I want to say four. Three loose cannons, one cult doc.

[Flameaxe]

Mostly for my own knowledge, and to put it out there for anyone else to read, I'm going through anything Zdenek has opinioned (I made a word, yep) about me. Kind of an ISO, if you will.

Flameaxe's question was completely reasonable, but her answer completely dodged actually responding to the question, but instead posited a situation where Cobbler might have risked making a gambit with an unrecruitable claim.

Nothing worth commenting on really. I had a reasonable question.

So, I had some time today. Here is my list. I couldn't decide on the third, but here are two:

Flameaxe
Herodotus

Note, this is the SECOND post that even mentions me from Zdenek. Yet I am one of two people he thinks is lynchworthy day one (and assuming the list is in order, I am the number one lynchworthy target). Nothing from him at this point shows anything to support my placement on this list, and no votes ever supported it on day one.

I think the reactions of Fritzler, Flameaxe to Herodotus' list and investigation result are suspicious.

A wonderfully vague suspicion. That about sums up any opinion I have on this post. I will add that this is the only post of day two to mention me, as vague as it is.

Vote: Flameaxe

Seriously, Flameaxe basically has to be scum because of his LL vote. He was on Cobbler, who's been pretty scummy all game, and there is essentially no reason to unvote him. In the post where he unvoted it seemed like he acted as though his vote was on Katsuki. If you ask me, it was a move to put his vote in a place where it was more fluid.

Combined these two posts to save some quote blocks. There was every reason in the world to unvote cobble at that point. Well, one reason. A major reason: HIS WAGON WAS GOING NOWHERE YESTERDAY. I had given what I could to convince the rest of the town to go after Cobble, and it wasn't going anywhere. As I even mentioned in that same post, I was fully ready to move my vote to Kat, but Kat was L-1 at the time, and I was not ready for a hammer without at least hearing something from Kat. I made this clear.

I will say, as I said in my original reply to this post, if Cobble was as scummy as you make him out to be when you attack me, you too would be voting for Cobble, but you were not. In fact, at no point in this game have you voted Cobble yourself. You have, in a horrifically non-committal way, declared support for the wagon (and a few others for what its worth).

Here we see Flameaxe doing what Porochaz did day one - shutting down discussion by attempting to predict the reaction to a comment he is making, rather than allowing the discussion to proceed naturally.

A) What I said before: Nothing is stopping you from discussing naturally but you not actually discussing it. You're using a throwaway comment as an excuse to ignore anything I said in the post this was a reply to. I stand by my thoughts there, and expect them to be taken seriously.
B) Explain to me why this is scummy. Because a scum did it? It sure sounds like a personality trait much more than a tell.

I already replied to the posts since then.

The part people on the go should read:

Basically, the point I'm trying to get at: I've been a strong suspect of yours since day one. The only actual points you have made to support that are an incredibly vague suspicion on day two, and events of day three. Something does not work out here. I highly doubt I am the only one who notices this. If anything, this whole post supports my logic here.

Okay with this now:

Vote: Zdenek

. You've been hiding under the radar too long.

[Magister Ludi]

I'm thinking this over. If we have enough unrecruitable people claim, and heord investigates each of them down the line to confirm, and we start speedlynching and vigging through the list of non-unrecruitable people, (with other power roles helping out town), does town auto-win?

[Darox]

No, because the unrecruitable people start dying.

That's stupid. Your plan is stupid.

[Nobody Special]

I think the plan might work, but he's got is ass-backwards.

[Bunnylover]

There is no helpful information to be gained from me saying whether or not I was there. If there is helpful information, don't you think I would claim it? So you are stuck with me being scum or there not being any useful information. All you've tried to do is out me as a PR. ftfy. I'm not claiming, so you can drop it.

Its a simple yes or no question, just answer it o.o.

Since when did you replace in...

I'm waiting on hero to claim result.

Why aren't you reading the thread

[Magister Ludi]

No, because the unrecruitable people start dying.

How? Magic?

[Darox]

Probably the same thing that killed Springlullaby.

JUST A GUESS.

[Magister Ludi]

That was probably a vig, no? You think kinetic cult killed springlullaby?

[Yosarian2]

I'm thinking this over. If we have enough unrecruitable people claim, and heord investigates each of them down the line to confirm, and we start speedlynching and vigging through the list of non-unrecruitable people, (with other power roles helping out town), does town auto-win?

Problem 1: We really want the scum to fail to recruit some of the time. That really improves our odds of winning a straight race, which this is now that we have one cult recruiter. In order to do that, we don't want them to know who they can recruit and who they can't.

Problem 2: It sounds like you're assuming that in a mass claim, if we have several unrecruitable claims, that we won't see any cult recruits lie and claim to be unrecruitable. This is probably not a good assumption.

Anyway, since we apparently don't actually have a guilty, time to get back on the wagon.

Vote: Darox

[Darox]

Night kills are a thing that exist.
It is presumptuous to assume that cults can never gain access to night kills.
This is not even taking into account your plan would take several days to reach the sweet spot of all confirmed unrecruitables, while also providing Kinetic a roadmap to avoid failed recruitments, which would let him win through numbers and sidestep the problem anyway.

[Yosarian2]

So, Darox, you want to comment on the case I made against the person you replaced? Especally the part I pointed out about the huge difference in the way he played on day 1 and the way he played on day 2.

[bvoigt]

Regarding Flameaxe,

he's a town read at this point.

Why?

Mostly for this post, which contains some good reasoning and scumhunting. The case he just posted reaffirms that read.

To be clear, I did not target bvoigt last night.

After his pathetic reaction, i'd still be okay with lyching him.

I still prefer this:

Vote: Flameaxe

What was scummy about my reaction? Also, what do you mean by "fake symmetry"?

[Darox]

Yos, I don't see how I can be expected to account for a change in personality of someone I am not. I don't know anything more about his motivations than you do. They look pretty equally absurd across the board though, rather than some sudden shift on D2. I guess I can see the angle that made him want to vote DGB, but everything else is a mystery to me.

[Magister Ludi]

eh, I think bvoigt is cult now, something about his passive way of dealing with the supposed guilty on him:

"Is this claiming a guilty?"

doesn't ring true as a town who thinks someone is reaction testing on him.

[Zdenek]

Uh? What? My comment referred to the fact that in a paragraph of my opinions towards you, you chose only to respond to the part that mentions the OMGUS. Funny enough, this is essentially the same way I said it in my original post. If I'm looking for fake symmetry, you're looking for fake excuses. You can come at me (bro) as much as you want, but please for everyone's sake, use some damn logic.

Your paragraph of opinions was a waste of time. You say that your read is mostly gut, which is hardly something I can argue against, and considering how this game has progressed most of your points are irrelevant. More on this below. Plus you disown your case by saying that it was a result of skimming an iso, so you could potentially claim that missed anything that was brought up as an argument against what your said.

I think the reactions of Fritzler, Flameaxe to Herodotus' list and investigation result are suspicious.

A wonderfully vague suspicion. That about sums up any opinion I have on this post. I will add that this is the only post of day two to mention me, as vague as it is.

Here is what you had to say:

I won't follow the CORRUPT cop in a smalltown game, thanks. (Even then, I doubt you can call this a smalltown game simply because we have professions listed on the first page. I've yet to see any connection between profession and role that can be seen as logical).

What's wrong with it:

You immediately try to cast doubt on the claim rather than consider whether is could be correct, and more importantly, you do it, by continuing to argue that there isn't a connection between profession and role. I have a problem with that because as scum, one would clearly want to have any claim available to him, rather than having to claim something compatible with his profession.

Also, now it seems fairly clear that there is some sort of compatibility between role and profession.

Here we see Flameaxe doing what Porochaz did day one - shutting down discussion by attempting to predict the reaction to a comment he is making, rather than allowing the discussion to proceed naturally.

A) What I said before: Nothing is stopping you from discussing naturally but you not actually discussing it. You're using a throwaway comment as an excuse to ignore anything I said in the post this was a reply to. I stand by my thoughts there, and expect them to be taken seriously.
B) Explain to me why this is scummy. Because a scum did it? It sure sounds like a personality trait much more than a tell.

It's not a throwaway comment.

It's scummy because it is reactive, not scum hunting, and an attempt to preemptively disparage my response to you.

Mostly for this post, which contains some good reasoning and scumhunting. The case he just posted reaffirms that read.

For the record, here Flameaxe's post:

Flameaxe unvoted right near hammer for Katsuki's claim (which he admits are underwhelming)

Question: WHO did I unvote? Answer: It wasn't Katsuki. (Assuming you're trying to make the point I think you are...) Actually, reading back on the end of the day, this comment is completely false. I never unvoted for a claim, in fact, my vote was never on Kat until AFTER the claim.

On an unrelated note, just to get it out there, my shortlist is looking like:

• Cobble - Nothing has changed regarding this thought except three more days passing.
  
• Lambda - I felt Cecily was pretty sketchy day one, but more importantly, the change in playstyle from day one to day two really stands out to me.
  
• Zdenek - Mostly gut, thus the third spot. Call it more of an "honorable mention" really. I know it was mostly V/LA related, but none of his posting seems to be very memorable or substantial to me. Skimming an iso reads to me like a lot of throwing out names, with little to actually push any wagon behind the names. The few times he does commit to an opinion, it is generally a one time deal, rarely committing to any sort of vote. His posting style feels very passive to me, something that stands out to me. (Queue OMGUS claim...now).
  
• Tajo - 100% gut. Not a very strong gut either. More of an irk than anything really. Will look into it further to hopefully get something out of it.

First of all, making cases is not necessarily townie. Second of all, his good reasoning is pointing out that he unvoted Katsuki, nothing has changed about his thoughts on Cobbler, Cecily was "sketchy" and others, for instance me, had pointed out the change in LLD's play before that, he makes some sort of case against me, calling it gut, saying that the posts don't stand out (as though that is some sort of scum tell), it's true that I haven't pushed any wagons too hard, but Katsuki and Porochaz where obviously good lynches that I didn't need to push. Tajo is also a gut read.

I am not seeing good reasoning here.

What was scummy about my reaction? Also, what do you mean by "fake symmetry"?

You acted like scum trying to be cool when someone claimed a guilty on you rather than like town who someone is lying about. Your other question was answered above.

[Zdenek]

Oops, I meant to answer your question above, but it should be obvious from looking at the quote:

Here we see Flameaxe doing what Porochaz did day one - shutting down discussion by attempting to predict the reaction to a comment he is making, rather than allowing the discussion to proceed naturally.

Here we see Zdenek picking out the one useless throwaway part of my comments towards him, and deciding to make another throwaway comment back, rather than proceeding with discussion naturally.

Two way street.

I describe something that he did, and then he describes something that I did, in an identical way, except when he does it, the comment doesn't apply.

[bvoigt]

Mostly for this post, which contains some good reasoning and scumhunting. The case he just posted reaffirms that read.

For the record, here Flameaxe's post:

[snip, check the post above]

First of all, making cases is not necessarily townie. Second of all, his good reasoning is pointing out that he unvoted Katsuki, nothing has changed about his thoughts on Cobbler, Cecily was "sketchy" and others, for instance me, had pointed out the change in LLD's play before that, he makes some sort of case against me, calling it gut, saying that the posts don't stand out (as though that is some sort of scum tell), it's true that I haven't pushed any wagons too hard, but Katsuki and Porochaz where obviously good lynches that I didn't need to push. Tajo is also a gut read.

I am not seeing good reasoning here.

For one thing, the Cobblerfone case was made in previous days, but it was well-reasoned. Although he could have been recruited since then, a town read from Day 2 or 3 or whatever still decreases the chance of someone being scum. And while he did say the case on you was "mostly gut," there are concrete reasons to back it up: throwing out names without truly pushing wagons, committing to few opinions and votes, and passivity.

What was scummy about my reaction? Also, what do you mean by "fake symmetry"?

You acted like scum trying to be cool when someone claimed a guilty on you rather than like town who someone is lying about. Your other question was answered above.

Well, even if he did claim a guilty on me, I wouldn't be convinced he's scum. I just don't see the scum motivation for claiming a false guilty, because it would undoubtedly result in a 1-for-1 trade. Instead, I would wonder if there is a framer or something.

Here we see Flameaxe doing what Porochaz did day one - shutting down discussion by attempting to predict the reaction to a comment he is making, rather than allowing the discussion to proceed naturally.

Here we see Zdenek picking out the one useless throwaway part of my comments towards him, and deciding to make another throwaway comment back, rather than proceeding with discussion naturally.

Two way street.

I describe something that he did, and then he describes something that I did, in an identical way, except when he does it, the comment doesn't apply.

It's slightly obnoxious, but there's nothing scummy about copying your wording. And I think Flameaxe has a valid point here-- at the time, you hadn't commented on the main part of his post, just a "throwaway" line.

[Lady Lambdadelta]

I have yet to have anyone explain to me how my play style CHANGED from D1 to D2.

[DrippingGoofball]

eh, I think bvoigt is cult now, something about his passive way of dealing with the supposed guilty on him:

"Is this claiming a guilty?"

doesn't ring true as a town who thinks someone is reaction testing on him.

Yes, that tickled my spidey sense too, but I wasn't sure about this.

[DrippingGoofball]

I have yet to have anyone explain to me how my play style CHANGED from D1 to D2.

I'm intrigued.