Newbie 1138 - Game Over! Town Win!

[DarkClaymore]

Alright, I'm just gonna get some questions out just so we can get to know each other a bit.
1. How many games have you played at MafiaScum?
2. Have you played anywhere else prior to MafiaScum?
3. Do you believe in magic?
4. Know any of the other players in the game from prior games?

1. First
2. Played 3 before on another forum and playing my 4th one there atm.
3. Not in RL
4. Honest Abel. From this very game which took place before this game.

For delaying the game's beginning:
VOTE: Honest Abel

[DarkClaymore]

@Everyone- Did you want to be mafia or town this game? Which allignment would you have liked to receive the most?

I personally think being town is harder than mafia. So I'd prefer being town as it's more challenging. However, considering it's my fifth mafia game and I yet to be scum even once...

i have a couple questions. townies, what's your strategy? mafiosos, what is yours?

I think both as town and mafia I would attempt to look very pro-town. While I have never been mafia, I always tell myself that once I finally become one - I'd "forget about me being a mafia and think like a townie to the extreme".


And honestly, I hate D1. There's hardly any information that can be extracted during this phase. Especially since we can't force a tie between players and are forced to make a majority. I'd say atm there's no one I really suspect too much.

However, sometimes scum tend to make longer posts and make everything look VERY reasonable. So I'll keep my current vote as Abel fits the pattern.

[DarkClaymore]

Oh, right. I didn't answer the question regarding N0 kill...
I personally think it's rather pointless compared to asking this question latter on regarding other nights but...

Many said they would have killed one of the more experienced players, but that's wine tbh. Think about it.
Most people here believe that one of the experienced players would be killed. So N0 passes and a newbie is killed. What would you think? Would you think that means all the experienced players are scum?

This can be a pretty good strategy to easily take out two or more townies. Kill a newbie at night and make the experienced ones suspicious so it'll be easier to kill them during the day.

As this is how I see it, I can't be sure who I would have killed. I believe that if the IC player were part of the mafia, I would have killed a newbie. People would expect the IC to be killed above anyone else. If a SE player is killed, they'd conclude the IC is most likely scum. Thus killing a newbie will be the right move as it'll make both the SE and IC players suspicious.

I believe in any other case I would have killed a IC as expected from me . Or perhaps a SE in order to make the IC a lynchbait due to reason stated above. But then again, I could always kill a newbie in order to make them all suspicious. So I think this is wine and there's no definite answer. Not for me at least.

[DarkClaymore]

However, sometimes scum tend to make longer posts and make everything look VERY reasonable. So I'll keep my current vote as Abel fits the pattern.

Can you elaborate on this, please?

I have seen not once how a scum who sees that people vote him/her starts writing very long replies with various reasons and deep explanations. I suppose this is their way to gain the favor of others and show that not only they contribute a lot, but also good thinkers. I'll never forget how I let one like this to slip away in one of the games I played elsewhere.

[DarkClaymore]

I have seen not once how a scum who sees that people vote him/her starts writing very long replies with various reasons and deep explanations. I suppose this is their way to gain the favor of others and show that not only they contribute a lot, but also good thinkers. I'll never forget how I let one like this to slip away in one of the games I played elsewhere.

Doesn't your long-winded response to my question also fit that description? Why put so much effort into answering a question that you yourself described as "rather pointless"? You're showing us that you are a good thinker, but you did it by applying your analytic skills to a hypothetical situation rather than something that has a real bearing on the present game.

Of course, you didn't have any votes on you, so you'd say that there was no pressure to avert. But seeing as you're so aware of the premise, your early post could have been a preemptive defense.

I knew this will come

Well yes, I did write more than needed for this question but what I meant is more "huge walls of texts" which I didn't do. I just tried to show a different aspect because everyone here easily jumped on the "kill the most experienced player" option. I just felt that it's wrong.

Honestly, I just want D1 to end and hopefully N1 will give us more info to work with. So I'll just join the wagon. Also, when people tend to see two players arguing, they often say "Nah. It's probably two townies gunning at each other". But I have seen cases in which it was proven false. While not too much of a solid reason, at least it still is a reason.

VOTE: BBmolla

[DarkClaymore]

Oh no!
BUSTED!
He got us

I Am Innocent

cavjj

is really quite weird. It's true how his attempt to make others look as bad as him while it's

only

him who hammered is kind of
Also... wall of text some people don't even bother reading.

So the IC wasn't killed. Wine or scum?

Maybe now we should ask "Who would you have killed during the night?".
I still would have chosen the IC. Based on the given answers here to the similar question before, I doubt the mafia would have attempted to use the same logic I used when answering the question (which was: trying to frame the IC by not killing him). Simply because it looked like I'd be the only one who'd think in this direction. And I doubt they have any reason to mislead a sole individual from the town who others find suspicious anyway.


Hence, since you weren't killed even though you should have been:
VOTE: Wickedestjr

[DarkClaymore]

And looking at the activity, with Darkclaymore and Wickedjstr each posting less than Bbmolla and only more than Scumhunter, we need to hear more from them, or else.

vote: Dark Claymore

I could post more but I have nothing decent enough to say atm.

Nobody goes for the obvious kill on the first night because the potential doctor will protect the obvious kill. Also, nobody would be going after the IC after my question about N0, would they?

Why are you so sure we have a doc? Of course, we might have one but no one can know for sure. Besides, what if Wickedestjr is the doc or other power role?
This is all wine. I think the mafia should have targeted Wickedestjr in any case. I'm pretty sure I would have. Though since they have a role cop, perhaps they only investigated him...?

Also, for anyone not pretending day one's lynch was a good thing, who would you have preferred to lynch instead?

I generally believe that there's an awfully high chance to mislynch on D1 so... while it's wasn't "good" neither was it "bad". I'd say "average". And tbh I have no one to offer instead. If I could just pick up someone, I'd pick cavjj as he feels rather scummy lately.

[DarkClaymore]

VOTE: Honest Abel

For insulting

[DarkClaymore]

I'm just being playful. Do you have any actual thoughts on my point?

I suppose that if anything, they investigated him. But it's true they most likely decided to kill a target that won't be protected that night. I forgot for a second the 2of4 got a mafia role cop tbh.

And... nothing else interesting to say. It's much harder when you don't know the people you play with. But a challenge is always welcome

I guess I'll go with
VOTE: cavjj

It's true that the whole hammering thing makes him an obvious target, something scum shouldn't do, but he tried to defend himself in very awkward ways. This make it impossible for me to ignore the possibility he planned to use all these excuses from the beginning in order to clear himself latter on

Yeah,weak but I don't think anyone here got anything solid anyway

[DarkClaymore]

It's true that the whole hammering thing makes him an obvious target, something scum shouldn't do, but he tried to defend himself in very awkward ways. This make it impossible for me to ignore the possibility he planned to use all these excuses from the beginning in order to clear himself latter on

So I hammer BB knowing everyone is going to come on here D2 and go "WTF?" having planned those excuses?

You can never guess what scum will try to do. On another forum, one mafia member willingly put himself in a three-way lynch tie on D1 in order to clear himself for the days to follow. Lucky, he died thanks to the power of random

Yeah,weakl

Said it yourself friend.

Have anything better to offer?

[DarkClaymore]

I'm going to agree with cavjj at the moment since it's more likely that he was set up and used for his eagerness to lynch. The wagon on me was pretty much a test run. When they saw that cavjj would jump on that, they probably assumed he would jump on BBmolla, too. And they were right.

Whatever they did or didn't expect him to jump on it, they couldn't expect him to hammer as well. To think that "they planned that cavjj will hammer BBmolla in order to latter on use this to frame him" is really off.

First of all, this guy only has 10 posts, which would be scummy in itself if so many other people hadn't been contributing just as little.

Yeah, sorry for sleeping while the thread is the most active.

#121: "Oh no, he got us" comment is trying way too hard to look unaffected. Predictably, he goes on to accuse cavjj both of hammering scummily and trying to make him and IAI look bad. He then brings up WIFOM again to talk about the night kill, which is meant to make it appear indecipherable. Useless. Now he's saying that "I still would have chosen the IC." Still, huh? Compare to #90 when he says the response of killing the IC is "wrong." He then votes for the IC for not dying, because according to his own crazy rambling on the subject, anyone dying but the IC means the IC is guilty. Love it.

Well, what did you expect? After how no one really expressed that they think in the direction that the IC not dying during the night is suspicious, there was no longer point in keeping him alive in order to frame him. After seeing the answers then I would have either killed the IC or at the very least investigated him.

DC has voted a lot of people and even lynched someone, but hasn't given one good reason yet

I love when people say this. Because I could always just say the same thing back to you or anyone else. Everything is speculating so any reason is weak. I actually developed a habit of following weak reasons because they hit scum so many times in my previous games. The strong and obvious ones are usually bad ones.

I proposed in one game using alternative voting pattern in order to simulate what people really think. That idea was that every player can vote for as many players as he/she wants to lynch. My goal was to see whatever the person everyone was talking about and pointing fingers at was indeed the one who would get the biggest number of votes.

But no, someone else did. And that someone was scum. How did it happen?
X was a player about who everybody talked and discussed whatever he is scum. He was the "most suspicious player" that day. Aside of that, there was also player Y who many people suspected but didn't have anything to solid in order to make others follow them for a lynch so they didn't really stress it. But since in that voting pattern you can vote for whoever you suspect, people tended to vote for X

and

Y. Yet it turned out that actually Y got more votes because he was on more players' "suspects list" even though rarely was the first one.

My point is. It's not like individuals don't hit scum in their speculating, it's just, when we need to lynch together, people just prefer to vote in agreement with others so that we can actually lynch someone. So in that example, people would have voted X because "everybody talk about him and seem to suspect him" rather than Y because "no one really seems to strongly suspect him". That's why I believe many times weaker reasons are better to follow than the loud ones.

[DarkClaymore]

I don't think using cavjj is really off. You had no reason to bring yet another player to L-1. You actively ignored Scumhunter's criticism of it and whoever else agreed with him by doing it AGAIN. cavjj discussed his intent to hammer and progress the day as quickly as possible. You expressed the same reasoning as he did earlier, probably to make him feel like he had someone who agreed with him there. Bringing someone to L-1 for bad reasons after it was already revealed to be a dumb tactic so early and knowing that someone hammer hungry was there all adds up to using cavjj. What's so "off" about that?

I personally don't think putting a player at L-1 is bad. It's not the same as killing him. L-1 is the best way to pressure people. I know I wouldn't be pressured no matter what unless I'm in L-1. I don't find it dumb tactic or whatever. But people tend to not agree with my way of thinking so what more can I say? Nothing.


As for the "making him feel that someone agrees with him" part. I'm fairly sure I stated I hate D1 way back at the beginning before he even expressed any desire to end it. I just did what I wanted to. I could easily be in his place and hammer for the sake of ending D1. The only reason I wouldn't have done it if I were him is that many players were against doing it so soon. I suppose he refused to seriously consider this fact and it's obvious that he should get all this attention for what he did.

Sadly, my own belief is that players who catch too much attention with something negative tend to be innocent. But I'm always ready to be proven wrong as mafia can't be such a "black & white" game. On the other hand, people who try to catch attention with positive actions, like you, are very suspicious. If you are town, all you are doing is becoming night kill target. However, if you are scum, you manage to avoid lynch. I believe the latter you have much more to gain from such play style. But yeah, sure. People will call this weak, illogical or stupid reason so I'll just leave it as it is.

[DarkClaymore]

Fix:

I believe

as

the latter you have much more to gain from such play style. But yeah, sure. People will call this weak, illogical or stupid reason so I'll just leave it as it is.

[DarkClaymore]

On the other hand, people who try to catch attention with positive actions, like you, are very suspicious. If you are town, all you are doing is becoming night kill target.

if you actiively scumhunt, you're suspicious, gaining nothing for townj and going to die? way to threaten the guy leaning into you.

All you do by being

too active

as town is becoming night kill target. True, active scumhunting is good. But no need to overdo it. If you believe you are good at scumhunting and can really help the town, why do this in a way that will night kill you? It's much better to do in a more moderate way and survive longer for the sake of the town.

A good player should know not only how to catch scum but also how to survive longer in order to be able to catch scum latter on. Doing only the latter while saying "I play as if every day is my last" doesn't quite cut it. But whatever suits you.

[DarkClaymore]

Here's a question: if you were scum, how confident would you feel right now?

Who are you asking?

[DarkClaymore]

everyone

But we aren't all in the same boat here...
For example I'm quite close to lynch so... I don't feel too confident as town or even I would have been mafia. If that answers something...

so claymore, if i can call you that, how do you think your scumhunting is going right now?

I suck at scumhunting. I try to do something but rarely do I ever come with something decent. Apparently I'm better at townhunting, but in this game I kind of fail in this too. That's why I tend to rely more on weak reasons that based on repetitive patterns I have seen before.

[DarkClaymore]

You have one vote on you.

We all know that I'm the lynch target right now.

How confident do you think our mafia are right now? Do you think this town is heading in a good direction? Do you have any thoughts at all you'd like to share?

Who? Me? Or everyone?
It's kinda confusing if you don't state who you are talking to

Well, obviously I'd say that Abel working so hard to make me look like scum is heading in the wrong direction since I'm town. While the right thing to do as town is to try and prove him I'm town and put him back on the right track, it's not something I can do since many things I did - I did while knowing they would make me suspicious. Therefore I can't really defend against many of them as I find them suspicious myself.

As for the rest, focusing on me will be a mistake for the very same reason. Though it's not like I have a better candidate to offer, nor can I assure them of my innocence. Hence I can't prevent this anyway right now.


All I can add atm is that I agree with what Innocent said a while ago regarding Abel. Of course, wanting to wait for a while before revealing what you think is legit. But saying stuff like "I'll reveal what I think if I get into at L-1" when you say that you want to contribute as much as you can during the whole day is kinda off. He was pretty much asking for people to put him at L-1. There was no reason to say that otherwise. He could just stay quiet and keep everything to himself until a L-1 actually happens. And I'm pretty sure it wouldn't have happened if he hadn't said that one line.

[DarkClaymore]

I expected you to answer those questions since I was in a conversation with you, but I also left them open in hopes others would answer as well.

While the right thing to do as town is to try and prove him I'm town and put him back on the right track, it's not something I can do since many things I did - I did while knowing they would make me suspicious. Therefore I can't really defend against many of them as I find them suspicious myself.

So you did things knowing it would look like you weren't town? Of what benefit is that to the town? Were all of these scummy things addressed already or are there others?

I believe Abel mentioned all of them. One example would be giving a very analyzed answer regarding his N0 question. But it's not like I'm asking to be lynched. It's just that sometime I feel like I have to say certain things even if I know people will suspect me for it.

Appearing scummy will most likely not make me a night kill target, thus keeping me alive longer in case I manage to avoid lynch. Of course, you can claim that in a way it harms the town as I become a suspect and possibly draw attention away from the real scum, but I find it very interesting to see the reactions of people when it comes to lynching a player who plays like this. Scum tend to slip in such situations.

[DarkClaymore]

Has anyone slipped?

Umm... I haven't seen anything good yet. Still, I believe it is worth observing. Well, now maybe not since I already came and said this. It's just that Abel put too much effort into searching for why I'm scum, so I felt like I'm doing more harm than good atm.

DC, you're actually saying that you've been intentionally scummy? So you won't get killed at night? What is the use? Do you really think you're of more value to the town than anyone else playing that you need to be the one who's kept alive until the end of the game?

No, I'm not. Actually, that's why I play in a style that can get me easily lynched. It's just that I like observing this kind of situations. It is most interesting to see people react to actions like this. In another game I'm playing atm, I tracked down scum on D1 by relying on this kind of stuff. Not that I could convince anyone to follow, but I was still right.

[DarkClaymore]

If you like observing situations like this, read other games where it happens. You're not helping town. You're actually hurting town by appearing scummy if you are a townie. Stop defending your actions as though they make sense in some way. They don't. Start helping the town or you're getting lynched.

Again. People tend to not agree with me most of the time. Hence there's nothing I can do to convince you otherwise.
And how exactly am I supposed to help? Entertain you with silly jokes?
Every reason I give you write off as "weak" anyway. I have nothing to do to help town as I have nothing more to say atm. I said everything I could and no one found it interesting anyway. Playing lynchbait is the only option I have which could help me to get better reads. And I hope it still can as people find my reasoning about it scummy.

[DarkClaymore]

X was a player about who everybody talked and discussed whatever he is scum. He was the "most suspicious player" that day. Aside of that, there was also player Y who many people suspected but didn't have anything to solid in order to make others follow them for a lynch so they didn't really stress it. But since in that voting pattern you can vote for whoever you suspect, people tended to vote for X

and

Y. Yet it turned out that actually Y got more votes because he was on more players' "suspects list" even though rarely was the first one.

My point is. It's not like individuals don't hit scum in their speculating, it's just, when we need to lynch together, people just prefer to vote in agreement with others so that we can actually lynch someone. So in that example, people would have voted X because "everybody talk about him and seem to suspect him" rather than Y because "no one really seems to strongly suspect him". That's why I believe many times weaker reasons are better to follow than the loud ones.

Every other active player has suspected you, even if you aren't at the top of their list. You're at best an ineffectual player who's done nothing to help town and according to you, may as well be lynched.

This is not true. Of course, it's not like this idea is optimal and will always work. But it worked in that game. People just tend to suspect the right players with not enough basis to make others follow. Or even to convince themselves for that matter. Scum tend to slip away like this a lot. Playing the "somewhat suspected" role which can be used as a reason to explain why the player wasn't night killed, while in the same time not being suspected enough to get lynched. A very simple and efficient scum strategy.

[DarkClaymore]

@DC: So how has playing lynchbait helped you, and how are you planning to us it to help town?

I'm not sure whatever I should or shouldn't say out loud the way I tend to analyze players' reactions to lynching a lynchbait. If I reveal everything then scum will know how to mislead me. However if I don't, you'll now say something along the lines of "you are scum who attempted to justify his scumminess with some poor logic and now running away with yet another shitty reason as you can't make up new stupid reasons".

Still, I think I'll keep quiet for now. If you want to lynch me then go ahead. At least I'll have more to work with for a while.

I'd like everyone to list their top 2 suspects.

Umm... I hardly have a list tbh but if I had to pick then the list would be:

1) Wickedestjr
2) Honest Abel

Despite what I said, cavjj's hammer sounds like an "obvious" and "loud" reason so I'll pass on it for now.

[DarkClaymore]

I'm going to assume you put Wickedstjr at the top because of the fact that

he could be waiting for us to lynch each other

, and is not really missing in action. Am I correct? I'm asking because I've had the same rising suspicion. I don't think it's paranoia.

Inactives aren't helping anyone. If anything, they only cause harm.
And yes, the fact he didn't respond at all for such a long while makes me wonder whatever he assumes he won't be lynched even if he lurks. Scum or not, I don't like this kind of play. That and what I said before about him not being killed. Yeah, the weak reason.

[DarkClaymore]

Abel, I never really said my reasons are good IMO. But neither are anybody else's reasons for me. Give me one vote with a good reason. I'd like to see it.

[DarkClaymore]

dicknose
————————
————————
Nobody Special
whilst
Honest Abel
cavjj
DarkClaymore
I Am Innocent

my verrsion.

What is exactly the point of putting yourself on your own list...?

[DarkClaymore]

Looks like you're more concerned with making dicknose look stupid than in posting anything thoughtful or uncovering the truth.

VOTE: DarkClaymore

Putting yourself on the "cleared" side of your list can mislead others when they skim. Of course, it can always be either a joke or unintended mistake, but who can tell.

What makes it even stranger is the fact he based his list on yours and you didn't put yourself there. But he, for some reason, thought it is necessary for him to add himself on the top.

I'd really like him to answer that question.

@dicknose

Why did you do that?
And was that list even serious or you just wanted to say "I suspect everyone aside of myself"?

[DarkClaymore]

i was joking. i don't play to convince the skimming players, i play assuming everyone is reading everything i say attentively, as well they should.

i don't know how that would trick anyone skimming in any case. presumably they'd at least double check to see what the list was for, why it was formatted as such, and why or if someone was arguing a single townie game. i appreciate your help in settling the discussion at hand, though.

So in the end you didn't do anything better than I did. I wonder why Abel always jumps on everything I post and says I'm not contributing while letting others slide. Tbh he reminds me of a certain player in the mafia game I was playing until recently. That guy tried to make me look stupid with each and every post I made. I was originally sure he is town, but after dying I learned he was scum...

And it can mislead people. True, you are supposed to double check but there's always the chance you'll miss it. Especially if it's the second or third time you are reading something and just skipping through most stuff.

Okay, then I think we should discuss whether to lynch DarkClaymore or Nobody Special.

What makes you think these are the only options?

And if you want to choose one of the two, you better go with me. Lynching an inactive only because he is inactive isn't exactly a good move as he might eventually be replaced with someone

active

. And it's not like you'll gain anything from lynching him. If he's town, you'll have less allies left and his death will teach you nothing new. If he is scum, it'll bring town closer to victory, but will also make the victory feel shallow (at least to me).

[DarkClaymore]

you're right, my one post of nothing equals your whole iso

You have posted quite the amount of useless posts yourself. Amazing how Abel actually considers you most likely townie while me most likely scum due to not contributing.

[DarkClaymore]

Didn’t like this. Didn’t like this at all. The point of the game, from a town point of view is to search for scum. We will all suspect townies throughout the course of the game, but those players should be convinced of your alleged PT role and dissuaded from the lynch via argument, not just “You must be scum because I say I’m town and you’re still suspecting me"

I... never said anything like this...
I didn't tell anyone to stop suspecting me. You

should

suspect me as I'm playing lynchbait. Technically, scum can also play lynchbait.

??? Why stay quiet then? Surely that way of playing would mean you would have to play in a more active role? Observing doesn’t (necessarily) help the town, especially when you add in this quote:

My point is. It's not like individuals don't hit scum in their speculating, it's just, when we need to lynch together, people just prefer to vote in agreement with others so that we can actually lynch someone. So in that example, people would have voted X because "everybody talk about him and seem to suspect him" rather than Y because "no one really seems to strongly suspect him".

In fact that was from the same post! So we all have to agree on our lynch, but you don’t want to join in the discussion just yet and keep observing?

I don't see any solid discussion right now in which I can participate, and many times I just don't have something contributing to say either because it was already mentioned or because I simply... don't have it. And note how everything I say is blocked and called "weak" anyway. It's not like I'm staying quiet on purpose. I actually tend to play very actively in most games.

I’ll just threw in this little beaut by the way:

All you do by being too active as town is becoming night kill target.

So you say, discuss the lynch but be quiet. Eh? How many times can you contradict yourself in two posts?

I never said to not discuss it. I just said that being awfully active and appear like a very hard protown worker isn't exactly the best way to stay alive for long. And Abel should understand this fact. Hence the fact he keeps playing with this style bothers me, even if he said he doesn't care about this stuff.

Inactives aren't helping anyone. If anything, they only cause harm.

Again. I compare VERY ACTIVE with VERY INACTIVE. I belong to neither of these groups and I explained what my opinion regarding those two extremes.

And again
3.

Yeah, sorry for sleeping while the thread is the most active.

No. Sorry. Not good enough. I am also away from the “regular” time zone. While I presume most players in this game are from the States, I’m from the UK. I’m also asleep when people are most active. Yes that means you can’t often have constant one on one discussions with people because you are both online at the same time, but this shouldn’t contribute towards activeness.

I said that because suddenly people started calling me inactive when they talked a lot as soon as N1 ended. What could I do? I was sleeping and then I wasn't at home. It's not my fault you just went and made lots of comments while I was away. By the time I came back I somehow turned into an inactive player for whom players vote with this reason.

you're right, my one post of nothing equals your whole iso

You have posted quite the amount of useless posts yourself. Amazing how Abel actually considers you most likely townie while me most likely scum due to not contributing.

alright. let's the two of us do a post recount of our own posts and each other's. i'll have mine up within twelve hours.

That's... the most pointless thing to do. Posting more doesn't make you any better. And how exactly it came to posts counting when I was talking about making pointless posts...?

[DarkClaymore]

i'm talking about counting pointless posts. the criticism lobbied against you is that you've made mostly or only pointless posts. you're trying to assert that because i've made several such posts, that i am just as bad as you are or that you are just as good as i am. since the criticism is defined by a matter of degree, quantifying it should settle the matter.

We could do that, but I think it's really pointless. Also, I would have an advantage since I posted less than you.
All I said is that Abel seems to jump on every thing I write, even when it actually have sense and he just wants it to appear useless, while doing nothing to others like you who sometimes post obviously useless things. Like that joke on the list due to which I still not sure whatever I should or shouldn't treat seriously the rest of the it.

I just can't understand the logic in branding me scum and you town while the same reason could easily be used against both of us and for some odd reason is used only against me. If anything, at least make me scum and you neutral. Making you most protown like this just feels awfully off.

[DarkClaymore]

whatever, i'm tired. you've been trying to make everyone who criticizes you seem unreasonable,

I never said that whoever criticizes me is wrong because I admit I would have done the same in their place. The only part that is wrong is focusing so much on me while not paying as much attention (the way I see it) to others.

and contributing little to nothing besides continued remarks about how people should be doing less or how hard and pointless our situation in the game is

And what do you expect me to say? To make up reasons to blame people? Because sure, that's VERY protown. And I didn't tell anybody how to play. I just wanted to point out that playing too actively makes you a night kill target and that you all should consider this aspect when deciding whatever Abel is suspicious in your eyes or not.

But of course, I'm inactive, not contributing and my posts are useless so there's no need to take anything I say into account at all.

All I said is that Abel seems to jump on every thing I write

he's done to several players, you aren't special.

Oh really? Did he go and summarized all the posts made by another player aside of me? I don't think so.

I just can't understand the logic in branding me scum and you town while the same reason could easily be used against both of us and for some odd reason is used only against me. If anything, at least make me scum and you neutral. Making you most protown like this just feels awfully off.

that would be bad logic except 1.) that isn't the only reason against you and b.) i'm town.

1) Yet it's a reason which he keeps using in order to point fingers at me and not at anyone else
2) How I hate when people say this... Well YEAH? I'm also town. What do you have to say about this? Huh? HUH?

Dark Claymore - to be fair your only realy argument so far seems to be "well it's not my fault you all did this or you all thought that"....

It's just that people choose to write off my other arguments so I see no point unless I find something that will be "strong" enough to convince someone. Even though I'm sure that if I find something like this - it'll still hit a townie. The loud reasons are not the good reasons. I just can't understand why people refuse to accept this. Not even once I have seen someone hitting scum with some kind of "loud and obvious" reason.

I by much prefer to search for repetitive patterns as I manged to hit scum quite a few times like that. But others seem to think all the things of this kind I present are stupid and useless. Because sure, following obvious stuff is always easier.

[DarkClaymore]

how old are you?

Does it matter?

how unfair this game is to you.

What do you mean?

what are your rreads and opinions? what does your town/scum list look like?

I already said, I'm a poor scumhunter. Thus I don't really have anything I'm willing to follow and I rarely ever get something like that. I can make a list but I'm pretty sure I'd change my opinion soon anyway:

None
------------------
I Am Innocent
cavjj
dicknose
------------------
whilst
Honest Abel

I didn't put the inactive IC because there's no point in doing so...

[DarkClaymore]

why is whilst more scummy than me?

He did something that appeared like indirectly defending me while arguing with Abel. I don't like people defending others when there is no a VERY good reason for that. Especially defending a lynchbait should be out of question. Players should be defending themselves.

Scum tend to slightly defend townies who most likely will be lynched. This gives them some town points when that player flips town after lynch. What more is that Abel seems to be doing something similar and even more actively.

Thus I believe that at least one of them should be scum. Or maybe even both of them.

for someone who thinks extreme playstyles are horrible you seem pretty intent on ignoring the ic.

Problem is he isn't lurking or anything like that. He just... isn't playing. I can't even consider him a player right now...

[DarkClaymore]

why am i scummy?

You on the neutral side. It's just that Cav is still under some suspicion due to hammering even though I leaning toward beveling he isn't scum. You are below him due to Abel strongly pushing that you are town. I find it strange and more scummy than Cav's reason. Though the possibility I'm just falling into Abel's trap still exists.

And I personally didn't find anything against IAI so I just let him to be on top as there are reasons for the rest.

[DarkClaymore]

Dark Claymore is making a Big Deal over the 'fact' that he's never been scum. Could be overcompensating.

I didn't make a big deal out of it.
However, on that matter, I know I person who was mafia in 6 out 7 games he played. And I was mason in the 3 out of 3 games I played which had the mason role.

Just saying.

[DarkClaymore]

Fix:

However, on that matter, I know

a

person who was mafia in 6 out 7 games he played. And I was mason in the 3 out of 3 games I played which had the mason role.

[DarkClaymore]

DarkClaymore, you've thrown more half-assed accusations at me last night than I can count.

Please summarize your case against me

if you truly have one and cite sources. No more of this "well one time this thing happened and this guy turned out to be scum..." nonsense. Just stop, it's irrelevant, especially if you can't muster up the effort to cite. And please do it like you actually care about the result of the game and aren't just here to act scummy and see how it turns out.

It's NOT irrelevant. As I said, I prefer to follow repetitive patterns rather than all these obvious reasons that never hit scum. You fit quite a few of them:

1) Long posts.
2) Arguing strongly with some specific individuals while leaving others alone and hardly gunning at them.
4) Protecting a townie, or at the very least strongly stressing how you believe he is town. This is my main one and is the strongest reason I'm ever willing to follow in mafia games (aside of cop claim).
5) Ridiculing everything I say and making it appear as useless and dumb. This I'm not sure whatever is a repetitive pattern or not as I have seen it only once so far but might as well test it with this game.

Stuff that doesn't rely on previous games:
4) Saying you'll reveal more info at L-1 during D1. No point to say that as you should have known no one would really try to lynch you so soon. You were put in L-1

because

you said that one thing.
5) Considering a strange, IMO , possibility of mafia planning Cav's hammering when at the same time denying any wine theory I presented regarding night kills. The mafia members are

not

superhumans. They couldn't have known he'll hammer.

And what do you want me to cite? Posts from mafia game on another forum?
It's not like most of the reasons can be proven with a single post anyway.

[DarkClaymore]

DC, I also want you to know, if you are town, that the way you are acting is not fair to the town. There are clear and definite ways to help the town in this game, and then there is doing what you're doing, which you've admitted is entirely out of self-preservation. The goal of this game isn't to stay alive as long as you can (unless you're mafia), it's to bring to light as much truth as possible while you're alive. You can still win the game after you die as long as your team wins. It's a team game. Confusing everyone else to suit your own hidden agenda is not townly conduct.

This I know and said the same thing once to another player. I believe I adopted a few features from him into my playstyle. But the difference is that I try to gain data from what I do rather than just surviving longer. In the end, my playstyle is always suicidal. Perhaps I might avoid a few night kills, but I can already see myself lynched soon enough.

I'll put it the other way around. I can play more normally, but I'll most likely won't help you at all to catch scum due to my poor skills. For the town, it's either kill me due to being suspicious while attempting to gain data or keep me alive as a player who only looks useful but in the end always makes mistakes.

That's how I was in my first game. Did I help at all? No. The rest did everything. On the other hand, with a similar playstyle to my current, I manged to get scum killed on D1 and hit some more scum by analyzing their reactions toward my playstyle.

As I said, I prefer to follow repetitive patterns rather than all these obvious reasons that never hit scum.

How much data do you have to back up these 'patterns'? Most of your points are either misrepresentations or inconclusive.

I base most things on at least two or more games.
For example scum supporting a townie - happened in EVERY game I have played. EVERY damn game. The moment I see it I just can't to not automatically brand that player as scum.
Scum doing long posts - happened in at least 3 games. Tbh maybe it even happened in each of them but I wasn't strongly following patterns from the very beginning.

5. I'm not attempting to make you look stupid. I'm pointing out that your reasons for doing what you're doing are not sufficient, and thus I don't trust them and neither should anyone else. You're taking personal offense at that. Please don't.

I didn't take it personally but rather decided that "choosing a player and blocking everything he says" might be a scum pattern. It doesn't have to be me. It's just that it's me this time around too.

5. Way to underhandedly pat yourself on the back by calling yourself superhuman.

I meant that what I said about wine thinking regarding night killing is more normal than planning Cav's hammer. No one here even knows this player . And he didn't really appear to me "Hammering Hungry" to me (though I need to reread the first pages to be 100% sure that there were no signs for this. I personally didn't see him as such). I just think it was impossible to foresee that some player you don't know will hammer.

You should not have brought yet another person to L-1 after the backlash from the first L-1 bandwagon. That's just silly and scummy.

Why? L-1 is most likely the best method town has to put pressure. I wanted to see whatever something happens if he is brought to L-1. Perhaps scummy but silly it's not.

If you're not going to cite something, don't even talk about it. It is not proof to me or anyone that you "saw something once" and it turned out a certain way. It's fluff. It's making you look like you're thinking about something when really you're just spinning yarns.

Most of the stuff can't be cited with just a few posts and neither will I be able to find the right posts from previous games most likely. I could stop bringing these things but then you'll have a lurker. Because these are the main things I'm searching for. Everything else I notice tend to mislead me. This is, also, based on what happened in previous games. I'm a poor scumhunter. I said it.

[DarkClaymore]

Only read the first part of your post and have a quick response, I'll respond to the rest after my break/meetings.

You say that your current playstyle ended up helping the town lynch someone on D1. Can you explain how? Can you link to the game so I can see? I just can't picture you convincing anyone to vote for who you want to vote for, not when you're acting scummy on purpose.

What I was doing is convincing people to make a lynch tie while making myself part of the tie as well. I was planning scummy for the sake of being included in the tie while talking a lot about how tie is a very good solution for gaining info in D1. What I was saying is that whoever survives a tie most likely isn't scum as scum should be able to easily save their friend. At the same time, I wanted to see the opinions of others regarding my lynchbait play.

My initial idea was more townhunting than scumhunting. But apparently all this talk of mine about whoever survives the tie is clear made a scum ready to take the chance and participate in a tie even though he could easily avoid it. And he was killed. While you could say it was luck or whatever, the initial lynchbait playing style also let me suspect a player no one suspected. That player ended up being scum. But they figured that out only on D4 with cop claim while I was telling them it's the case from the

very beginning

of D1.

Sadly it has too many posts and too many stuff happened so I doubt you'll really want to read it...

But here is where the game began if you are interested:
http://nisamerica.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 50#p226638
I don't think I can really pinpoint any part in which my influence started though I only became active from this point due to certain silly issues in the forum:
http://nisamerica.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 00#p227253
For me, the part I wasn't active in actually yield the best info. But sadly others couldn't see that and forced me participate (even though I promised to not post for a while in the forum). Just like you all here resent my lynchbait playstyle.

There's also a summary I made since D1 there was TOO active
http://nisamerica.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 15#p222570

And you also have an archive here.
http://nisamerica.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 15#p222458
The OP is just ahead of it too.

According to the wiki, the jargon for Darky is VI.

What...?

[DarkClaymore]

The way I read it, Village Idiot didn't speak to alignment,

What I was saying is that whoever survives a tie most likely isn't scum as scum should be able to easily save their friend.

How does this work?

Simple. If scum in a tie, especially a three way tie, the mafia should be able to easily save their member as they have numbers.

When it's a tie between two players, true that it's hard for the mafia to save their friend. I was in a situation like that where I was in tie against a scum and the most the mafia managed to do is to keep the tie between us. They couldn't break it in favor of their member.

However, in a three way tie the number of votes on every player is dim. In a situation like this, mafia should be able to save their friend if they try to. Look at the current game for example. 7 townies and 2 scum. In a three way tie, if all players vote for the three players (something I expected to not happen and it really didn't in that game) every player should get 3 votes on him.

Now think. 3 votes and the mafia are 2. Don't you think they can easily change the odds in their favor in such situation? Though I suppose this isn't as convincing as when I assume not all the player vote for the "trio". In this case every player will have only 2 votes on him and the scum are also two. Not only they can easily create another tie in this situation, they can also easily break the tie or turn it into a two-way tie between two townies.

[DarkClaymore]

You said that tie survivors aren't scum because scum can save themselves. Following that, those who die in tie situations would be scum? In every situation you named, the easiest way for the scum to escape would be to shift votes and hammer the other person in a tie, meaning that the scum are most likely tto survive. And sure, scum could obfuscate things and make the tie situation more complicated, but that iisn't necessarily more likely. I don't know why you're bringing up this sort of example when it has never occured in this game, so your entire nonsensical situation has absolutely no bearing on this game. You need to start playing this game, including adjusting your play to suit this game (the game you are playing, the one on this site, not that one) or you shouldn't be playing this game.

What I proposed was a method to clear as many townies as possible during D1. I didn't really expect scum to willingly come and become part of the tie. I knew we'll most likely hit town with this method, but at least we'll have less suspects the following day. True, if the scum had survived that tie - it wouldn't have been as efficient. But he didn't and it cleared not only the other players in a tie but at the same time every player who voted for the scum.

Also, the part I'm applying to this game is only lynchbait play style which proved very useful as I manged to suspect scum on D1 and NO ONE suspected him aside of me.

What the fuck is a tie?

In some games, you must lynch everyday. There's no "No Lynch". So if majority isn't reached by the deadline, the player with the biggest number of votes will be lynched. If there is a tie in votes between two or more players, one of them is randomly lynched.

[DarkClaymore]

Why are you still talking about rules and games that have nothing to do with this one? Somebody lynch this goon already.

My point was something entirely different. I just explained why I prefer playing lynchbait instead of the regular townie. It's because I helped the town much more like this in that game. I explained the rules because it is necessary in order to understand what happened in the game which inspired me to keep playing with this style. And this is all.

I don't get why people love so much jumping on the useless stuff I say while calling everything else "useless" and "not contributing". You just try to make me look bad one way or another.





Also, if we are already on this. I'll now say something that most likely will earn some extra scum points. But I'm not planning to not say it only because of this. Not saying what you think in order to not arise suspicion is scum play. I usually don't really like saying such stuff like this out loud but if others do it then I might as well do it too...

I'm protecting a townie? Wow, I must be scum. I've given town reads on dicknose because he's the only one acting in what I think is a clear pro-town manner. He questions people for good reasons, thinks about the logic behind people's posts and picks out the glaring flaws, and puts pressure where pressure is needed. Knowing whilst from previous games, I can see this being town whilst, even though some of his skills aren't sharpened. I reserve the right to change that impression on day 3 if DC or IAI turn up town.

It's okay if you say you suspect someone less than others. But calling someone town without any solid reason isn't imo. Anyone can easily give protown reads with such actions. Both town and scum. Saying you think someone is town helps no one while it appears as if you are thinking and contributing. Also, it'll earn you town points when these players die and as mafia you'll easily be able to arrange that.

If you think someone is town, why say it out loud? Why not just keep it to yourself and keep observing the situation? You can never be too sure in mafia. They can always slip at some point. Saying you think someone is scum is protown as you point suspicion toward players that others might have missed. But saying you think someone is town is just useless to the town. You are convincing no one and no one will be convinced. All you are doing is, like I said, gaining town points and also possibly these players' trust.

But of course no one will agree with my way of thinking, like always, and will only think I'm more suspicious after this.

It's pointless but still:
VOTE: Honest Abel

How does acting like scum help you find scum?

Let me ask you. Let's assume you are scum. You see a player who is awfully suspicious and will almost certainly be lynched. What do you do during that day? Remember, as scum you know I'm innocent in this hypothetical situation..

[DarkClaymore]

I refuse go take part in that hypothetical. You know who goes after scum? Everyone. Going after scummy players is not a scumtell.

Then I refuse to answer you question. As long as you don't try to think in this direction then there's nothing for me to explain to you.

why is whilst more scummy than me?

He did something that appeared like indirectly defending me while arguing with Abel. I don't like people defending others when there is no a VERY good reason for that. Especially defending a lynchbait should be out of question. Players should be defending themselves.

Oh man, that's a great reason. I know it's just a list, but like I've said to dicknose before: cite your arguments.

The other points at which he votes for people to lynch are interesting to note, but none of the votes have "meant" anything, except for the vote on cavjj (as I have the second vote against cavjj). Do you get what I'm saying? The vote on wickedestjr didn't amount to anything, nor did the vote on you. It's just a pattern, imo -- his play style probably. I don't think it's anything to lynch him on. Or am I missing the point? Clarify if I am.

Here you are saying how you think most of my the votes are my playstye. Feels like a defense, as weak as it is. Strange how you try to make some of Abel's reasons seem off while you too said that I'm one of the top suspects on your list.

I'm going to assume you put Wickedstjr at the top because of the fact that he could be waiting for us to lynch each other, and is not really missing in action. Am I correct? I'm asking because I've had the same rising suspicion. I don't think it's paranoia.

Still, I would put him at three or four on my list. I still want to hear his thoughts. My top two (yes, still):
1. cavjj
2. DarkClaymore

Also, here you try to outguess my reason and say you quite agree with it.

It feels like an attempt to show that you actually thought that I might be a reasonable town and that Abel was off by accusing me. This can work wonders for you if you are scum. Atm it seems like I'll be lynched. Once I get lynched and flip town, you'll be able to use some of these things you said against Abel in the next day. You can say that "I told him that he rushed too much and that some of his reasons were off".

It also appears like you are trying to please everyone. Both the town by agreeing I'm suspicious, and me by saying we agree about some stuff. That's just scummy.

Actually, I wouldn't wage a massive war against the player, I would let someone else do the arguing for me, but I would agree and hope my lynch helps the bandwagon fall through. Something like that.

And that's what scum usually do. And THAT'S exactly what I was looking for by lynchbait play. And you seem to fit the pattern to some extend with me being that very suspicious player.

DC, why should we even listen to your reasoning if it has nothing to do with this game? You're acting scummy because it somehow hypothetically helps you in a game with different rules than ours? Great. I have a feeling your references to fictional/irrelevant games is a nervous tick you develop as scum because it helps you avoid answering questions honestly.

Again. It has nothing to do with the different rules. It can work perfectly here as well.

[DarkClaymore]

If you think someone is town, why say it out loud? Why not just keep it to yourself and keep observing the situation? You can never be too sure in mafia. They can always slip at some point. Saying you think someone is scum is protown as you point suspicion toward players that others might have missed. But saying you think someone is town is just useless to the town. You are convincing no one and no one will be convinced. All you are doing is, like I said, gaining town points and also possibly these players' trust.

But of course no one will agree with my way of thinking, like always, and will only think I'm more suspicious after this.

Why say it out loud? So people have a clear idea where you stand. So players who you think can help you in your win condition will survive. To fish for reactions. Every single one of these reasons: could motivate anyone of either alignment. You're right, there is uncertainty. There is also uncertainty of scum, and by your reasoning, just as much chance to mislead and just as much reason to stay quiet.

This is a major problem of yours and one you seem unable or unwilling to grasp: describing an action that could be taken by either town or scum and assuming it's scum doing it. That is weak reasoning. Decrying someone for misleading the town when there is no evidence of such is weak reasoning. Do you know why no one agrees with you? You don't make sense. Again: stop playing like this. It is dumb. It helps no one. You've admitted as much. Play better or just stop.

The only legit one here is fishing for reactions. You can't as town trust someone unless he did something OBVIOUSLY protown. And I'm not talking about some random stuff like attacking others which anyone can do. I'm talking abut stuff like successfully building a wagon on scum and actually getting him lynched.

It's true that town could do that as much as scum. Heck, town can do pretty much anything as much as scum. Including suddenly ending D1. But to me it appears as a more scummy thing. Though I think Abel and Whilst aren't both mafia, but I believe one of them is. Actually, not that any of you care, I might change my vote to Whilst latter depending on how he responds.

DC - you're refusing to answer questions now?

What questions? The one that dicknose asked? If he can't think for a second about a hypothetical situation, which is actually HAPPENING right now as there are scum in the game, then there's no point in answering him. He'll just call it stupid.

[DarkClaymore]

Right now it looks like Abel & dicknose vs. DarkClaymore & whilst.

That's false as I'm ready to vote for whilst at any moment.

[DarkClaymore]

I think we found our scumteam, everyone.

And I think you found a scum who does exactly what I expect him to: avoid voting for the lynchbait in order to not look bad latter on.

[DarkClaymore]

BTW Abel, from the very same link you gave

When done skillfully, Double Bussing is even known to cause actual townies to dismiss suspicion of both of the bussing individuals,

under the mistaken assumption that it is a town-on-town fight, and shouldn't be taken seriously.

Remember the reason I voted for BBmolla? What did I say back then?
That your fight shouldn't necessarily be seen as town vs. town. Yet you called it a weak reason. Want to explain why? I'm sure you read this before as you are the one who gave the link.

[DarkClaymore]

I think we found our scumteam, everyone.

And I think you found a scum who does exactly what I expect him to: avoid voting for the lynchbait in order to not look bad latter on.

He voted for you.

But he isn't atm.

@DC:

First of all, to your response to me, all I can say is: WHAT?! I have no idea what you are saying there.

Do I have to explain EVERYTHING? I mean seriously. Didn't you understand from what I was saying earlier?
Scum will prefer to not actively go after the lynchbait as that will make them VERY suspicious latter on. Whilst is doing this. Heck, you know what? I'm changing my opinion. If you are scum, your play style has too many risks. It's a reason that has been holding me for a while and that's why I should really make Whilst the top of my list and

VOTE: whilst

Second, you're using the argument that two scum fighting looks like two town fighting to explain why I was fighting with someone who is confirmed town. You talk to much for how little sense you make. You are clutching at straws. Somebody lynch this goon for god's sake.

It can apply on many things and not only on that particular situation. Didn't that fight appear as town vs. town?
It did to most. And I thought it is the right thing to point out that such situations often happen and shouldn't be overlooked.

[DarkClaymore]

So DarkClaymore trying to say that

• He's been playing lynchbait and that's a great strategy
  
• I didn't vote for him
  
• Not voting for lynchbait is scummy

Not one part of that is true.

Then how would you explain the fact that in another game I managed thanks to this very play style to suspect scum on D1 when no one suspected him until D5 when a cop claimed? Or the fact there is a player on that forum who has a very similar play style and always leads town to victory?

I also have to say that the player I suspected acted pretty much like whilst is acting now. He was asked to vote but he refused without any solid reason. But again, I base this on a previous game and you won't like this reason.

And I never said everyone who doesn't vote lynchbait should automatically be considered scum. But those who say they suspect the lynchbait but suddenly switch to a different target once the lynchbait becomes the obvious lynch - should.

Like I said earlier, I think cavjj is scummier than you. I'm not going to jump on your lynch wagon and put you at L-1 -- (again), I don't want D-2 to end this early. Oh yeah, can I see the rest of your list? Assuming you've updated it.

You were quite against me when the day started. But suddenly somewhat changed your mind when it was obvious everyone suspect me.

Looks like at least DC learned a thing from the bussing article. Get it? Get it? He voted for whilst.

DC, I'm going explain again why your reasoning about me vs. BBmolla makes no sense: because he is confirmed town. You quoted something saying "two scum sometimes argue, and people dismiss is as town vs. town." BBmolla was confirmed town when he died. It doesn't apply.

I just pointed out that people shouldn't write it off as town vs. town and that I'm not planning to. It doesn't matter whatever you both were scum or only one of you.

He voted for you.

But he isn't atm.

Show me where he unvoted you and I'll agree with your point and vote Abel.

Who are you talking about? I was talking about whilst...

[DarkClaymore]

DC can vote for me if he wants, I don't know why he should. He hasn't cited a reason for thinking I'm scummy -- other than this reason. Which I still don't understand.

I explained everything here

[DarkClaymore]

How would I explain the fact that FICTIONAL UNCITED STORYTIME YARN? I wouldn't. I'm not bothering with your nonsense anymore, DC.

Why would quoting change anything?

Okay, if you really insist. So the player is Aphrah.

Here is the first time I FoSed him (though I didn't know the term FoS exists back then and thought I made up something new) and he is the only one who I have never unFoSed during the rest of the game. Here I say the exact reason after being asked. Me being absent was the same as playing lynchbait but even more extreme.

Only here the scum is finally lynched and I tell them I was saying this all along and they refused to listen.

The strategy worked. You can't deny that. I seriously don't get what's your problem.

[DarkClaymore]

I'd say starting from here. You said Abel shouldn't be suspecting me and IAI that much while you yourself made me one of the suspects a few posts before.

From that post on is seemed as if you dropped the idea of chasing me.
And you ignored how I mentioned you outguessing my reason for putting the IC on the top.

At that moment in the game (and now), you were/are in no danger of being lynched. If you were innocent, why wouldn't anyone suspect Abel for arguing with you?

Because I'm lynchbait of course.

What method exactly do you use to become lynchbait, Darky?

Giving reasons I know no one will follow seem to be the best method. You can't argue with the fact it's working. AT LEAST say you agree with this.

[DarkClaymore]

DC is pointing out how whilst is scummy for being his teammate. I love it.

Why did you suddenly decide that it's DC & whilst rather than DC & IAI?
Just strange that you suddenly make the active player scum and the lurker innocent.

[DarkClaymore]

whilst

I'd say starting from here. You said Abel shouldn't be suspecting me and IAI that much while you yourself made me one of the suspects a few posts before.

From that post on is seemed as if you dropped the idea of chasing me.
And you ignored how I mentioned you outguessing my reason for putting the IC on the top.

I don't know how to react to your own interpretations of my behavior. All I can really say is, you were wrong to think that.
About the "outguess": It was just an idea I had, and maybe you had the same reason as me. I didn't have any ill-intentions by saying that. Mind you, it's still a plausible theory.

All I can say is that you did and you are still doing it. Pleasing both sides. Here you do it again by calling my theory "plausible". Maybe you really think so, and maybe you are scum. Since I have no better ideas atm - I'm willing to go with the latter.

dicknose

What I proposed was a method to clear as many townies as possible during D1.

But saying you think someone is town is just useless to the town. You are convincing no one and no one will be convinced. All you are doing is, like I said, gaining town points and also possibly these players' trust.

lingol

I was talking about saying you think someone is town based on shallow reasons like reads. That's why I was searching for a method that can clear townies with ACTIONS. Things like voting for scum or surviving a tie. True, they aren't perfect as well. But I find them much more trusty than just reads as scum supposed to give town reads as well.

Your strategy: "found" one scum, lynched no scum, left you without credibility, annoying.
The town's strategy: found three scum, lynched three scum, has various values for crebility and bearability.

Oh yeah? You know how it happened?
The first was killed in a lynch tie. The second when a sibling vanilla said that people lynch him so that his sibling scum dies at the night. And the third was cop claim.

There wasn't much of a strategy there. More stuff like luck or circumstances. And if anything, I'd take some credit for the first scum death as I was the one pushing the tie idea the most and working very hard in order to make it happen (Yes, by playing lynchbait. Get over it).

And I was right about the scum that was lynched on D4 from the very D1 and never left it alone as opposed to some others who I unFoSed. If I had survived longer, I would have pushed his lynch more. But apparently scum decided to get rid of me, most likely due to me being one of the players who survived the tie.

Abel

I love the worldview that DC would have us believe: the scummier he is, the more protown he is.

Never said that. I'd be playing lynchbait as scum as well most likely.
True that my general view is the loud and obvious scummy reasons never hit scum as I myself have never seen such thing happening, but maybe others have.

Nobody Special

I find this phrasing quite odd, and rather forced. I think a true townie would say that I'm feeling anxious...... or I'm feeling worried...... But a townie really has no reason to not be confident in their own alignment. Also, the "I would have been mafia" -- townies would (more likely) say "If I were/was" -- there's no logical reason for a townie to use the pluperfect subjunctive.

Also, one vote is hardly "quite close to lynch."

I just gave the result part of an "if" sentence. If I had used "if" I would have to add: "If I had been scum" or something like that. I believe I thought the sentence would look awkward with this.

And people were talking about lynching me back then as well. So it was pretty obvious, as it's now, that I'll be lynched. Right now I also have only one vote on me. But does that make me far from a lynch? I don't think so.

Even if you're not scum, you're admittedly anti-town. Tell me why you shouldn't be lynched today.

You can't honestly blame town for lynching such a decidedly anti-town player like you ....can you?

You can lynch me if you want. I suppose in a way it'd be a protown move, especially if I'm wrong regarding the way I analyzed the reactions toward my lynchbait play. If Whilst isn't scum then you should really lynch me then. While it'll still be a townie lynch, at least you'll get a person you suspect off the road.

You could try to find scum rather than trying to be scum. How about that?

I already said. If I try to use the traditional ways and "reads" as people call them - I always miss. I can't find scum unless I do something

different

and

unusual

. Yeah, I'm bad at scumhunting.

his is a solidly non-scum statement. (It's not at all pro-town, but scum wouldn't say this unless they were very, very brave.) HOWEVER, this is only one non-scum statement out of countless scummy statements, so.

What part of it...?
If I were looking from the side as a townie, I'd think it might be an attempt to defend

Interesting. A list with no reasons. Let's examine these two suspects, shall we?

1) Our beloved Wickedest. The IC (naturally a target), and Lurker Extraordinaire. Lurking is not always scummy, and ICs are not always scum. Any reason, DC, for choosing such low-hanging fruit?

2) Honest Abel. One of the more solidly town players in the game (unless you ask IAI). Again, a reason??

I was sure the IC is lurking at the time and isn't just "inactive". He's no longer on my list atm.
Abel seems to be working very hard. Of course, it can and it does look protown but it looks

too much

protown. I believe a townie shouldn't appear as too much of a hard worker because that leads to being targeted by night kill.

If you really think you are a good player who can contribute, you should also think how to make yourself a less likely night kill target and survive longer.

Also, if people want me to cite something legit to base how extremely protown players are dangerous:
http://mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=Wifom

You are a Townie in three-player LyLo with two other players who have cross-voted - who you vote for will decide the game. One of them has looked moderately scummy throughout the entire game and appeared to fly under the radar, while the other one has for the most part looked extremely pro-Town throughout - enough to make you wonder why they were never targeted by a night kill. Who should you vote for?

Caveat: A surprising proportion of the time, the correct answer is to lynch the one who looks extremely pro-Town.

Well, since we obv don't have a 3-man scumteam, at the most, two of those bolded above are scum. cavjj is pretty town to me,, based primarily on post #139.

The way I see it, most likely one or both of the mafia members didn't vote. Exactly because you, and I believe many others, started analyzing these votes like this.

[DarkClaymore]

Please remember that it is against site rules to mention ongoing games. That means even if you are currently dead or have replaced out and no longer playing, it is cause for modkill to talk about it. This is a warning; should I hear or see any such talk or discussions, I will be forced to take disciplinary action.

You see? That's why I didn't want to give any links. I had a feeling it's not appropriate.
As long as I didn't give links, no one could really know whatever the game ended or not. And no one could know about which game I'm talking anyway.

[DarkClaymore]

Why would you want to stay alive as long as possible if you know you suck and couldn't bring the town a win? That's pretty much playing against your wincon.

I originally copied some of the lynchbait idea from another player. I believe his reason for using it was in order survive longer, and it works awfully well most of the time. But unlike him, I mainly focus on the aspect of analyzing reactions toward an "obvious suspect". Surviving nights is something that comes as a set with this play style. However note that I put myself in obvious danger during the day. Also, I prefer to be lynched rather than night killed because before getting lynched, at least I'll be able to analyze some votes and say whatever I think (even if no one going to listen like in this case...).

I don't really see why analyzing how scum will act when there's an obvious suspect is pointless. Scum should stand in front the dilemma whatever to follow everyone and end up being wrong and gain suspicion points, or rather say that they aren't sure about the lynch - what will give them some town points. I believe they tend to do the latter in most cases. Hence I believe Whilst is scum. Coming from a very similar reasoning, note how he didn't vote for neither you nor BBmolla on D1. Or rather, I'd say that he hasn't voted at all so far (unless I missed it) from the very beginning. And I believe he is the only one who hasn't (aside of the IC with whom we have obvious issues). Strange how he only points fingers at people but never starts a wagon nor hops on an existing one.

All I have to say is that if I'm right and Whilst is scum - then my playstyle worked. If I'm wrong, then I'll admit I ended up playing as an idiot here and that I should change my playing style.

[DarkClaymore]

I still think cavjj is scum, so I'm on a 'wagon' right now. Feel free to hop on. I wouldn't mind seeing him lynched.

You say that and don't even bother to vote. This isn't a wagon. This is BS.

Why should I even bother voting for people who I have no evidence of being scum? To pressure them?

That's the point. You MUST find me suspicious. That's how lynchbait works. The idea is that NO ONE should be able to say "I don't find DC suspicious". You are the only one who is doing this atm.

And how you can say that after putting me in second place of your top suspects? If you have nothing on me, why put me there? If anything, I turned into more and more suspicious as time passed. You should have even MORE reasons than you had back then.

All I have to say is that if I'm right and Whilst is scum - then my playstyle worked. If I'm wrong, then I'll admit I ended up playing as an idiot here and that I should change my playing style.

Sorry, but you're wrong. Just look over your own posts. None of your "arguments" against me have any substance and I've offered a proper rebuttal to everything you've said. You still haven't been able to come up with a solid point to lynch me on. I'm only trying to help: you should move on.

Well sorry that I'm not like most people who think that it's so easy to lynch scum with some "solid" and "obvious" reasons. I don't believe in that as I have never seen it happening. If ever my deduction hit scum, it was only with reasons no one found "solid".

I really don't think "suck" is a big deal

I agree with this.

[DarkClaymore]

Oh, wait. Did you vote for Cav?
I checked many times and never found that post...

[DarkClaymore]

NVM. Finally found it.
I suppose one reason is off then.

[DarkClaymore]

And if we already at that.
When you voted, you called Cav my most likely partner

We're still missing a few people. Until then, I will vote DarkClaymore's probably partner:

And now you say you have nothing on me?

[DarkClaymore]

Nobody ever votes for anybody, huh Darky?

True. Nobody Special hasn't voted yet. Your point?

[DarkClaymore]

The thing that struck me over and over again about D2 DC is that he admitted he was being lynchbait early on and then just kept being scummy.

I believe playing lynchbait is possible as long as I don't reveal how I analyze players' reactions. Since I already have, now all that is left is to try and point out anything I can against the one I consider scum based on that analysis. While I'll still be lynched most likely, at least I'll feel good with myself in case Whilst flips scum latter on. If he doesn't, the I'd feel like a total asshole

Question. DC - what are you hoping to have achieved by the end of D2?

Finding scum thanks to my lynchbait play and point anything I can find against him. Whatever I would or wouldn't be lynched after that is the lesser matter. Trading "townie for scum" isn't a bad deal imo. Of course, the question remains whatever I did or didn't hit scum.

[DarkClaymore]

So you're willing to sacrifice yourself if town sees whilst as scum later on? How's that working for you? Doesn't look like its been the greatest strategic move IMO.

Well, I already said I'm quite the useless player in most games. So I'm not the type that have to survive for a long time. I'm not trusting my scumhunting abilities (if we are talking about the regular "scum reads" and "town reads" thing), so it's better that people who do will live on rather than me.

And lynchbait play is the best idea I could come up with until now from all the games I have played. I might be lynched, but at least I might become somewhat "useful" by finding scum. Better than staying longer and being useless IMO.

[DarkClaymore]

I'm not trusting my scumhunting abilities (if we are talking about the regular "scum reads" and "town reads" thing), so it's better that people who do will live on rather than me.

Except earlier you said that the reason you're being scummy is so that you can survive longer. Explain the contradiction.

I didn't say I use this in order to survive longer myself.

I originally copied some of the lynchbait idea from another player. I believe his reason for using it was in order survive longer, and it works awfully well most of the time.

But unlike him, I mainly focus on the aspect of analyzing reactions toward an "obvious suspect". Surviving nights is something that comes as a set with this play style.

However note that I put myself in obvious danger during the day. Also, I prefer to be lynched rather than night killed because before getting lynched, at least I'll be able to analyze some votes and say whatever I think (even if no one going to listen like in this case...).

True that I believe playing at least a little scummy is always good, but my own lynchbait is about finding scum and not necessarily surviving.

Though let me ask you. Who would you suspect now without my lynchbait play? Cav? We didn't have much to go by. I doubt we would have reached anything by the end of the day. Unless you do something drastic - scum won't slip. If you just sit around and hope to find slip in scum's post by attacking them, then maybe you'll really find something. Once in 10 games or more.

Unless you analyze their

actions

, not only how many and what they post, finding scum is hard. You must catch them

doing something

or

not doing something

and not just saying something random. Town can make mistakes as much as scum can. Rather, I'd even say town are the ones who usually do mistakes which appear scummy.

I believe my lynchbait play does exactly that. It makes the life easier for scum while extremely alerting the town. Therefore anyone who votes for me (note: vote is an action not just a "post") is less likely scum, whereas those who refuse to vote me, especially strongly refuse and even say they think I'm not suspicious, are more likely scum.

[DarkClaymore]

The reasons that Darky finds whilst scummy had already been adressed in the first few pages. Tons of help.

Yeah? Where?
I don't remember him saying I'm most likely scum and then suddenly saying he got nothing on me in the first pages.
Would you cite that please?

[DarkClaymore]

I see no conclusive evidence that whilst is scum, and you flipping town won't change that.

Good luck finding a conclusive evidence for someone being scum. I'd really like to see you doing it. Maybe it'll change my way of thinking.

[DarkClaymore]

Maybe "conclusive" and "evidence" are strong words, but any information we can glean from your lynchbait tactic will be useless. It will not be as good as the information that good ol' scumhunting reveals.

I disagree. But maybe it's because I'm a poor scumhunter.
Well, I hope I'll be proven wrong. Until then, I'll keep considering lynchbait analysis by superior to "reads". Because that's the only thing that ever worked for me.

[DarkClaymore]

whilst

whilst has been playing the people pleaser. Despite the criticism BBmolla and I exchanged about our questions, whilst continually agreed with both of us about everything until post #50, in which he disagreed with both of us.

whilst

All I can say is that you did and you are still doing it. Pleasing both sides. Here you do it again by calling my theory "plausible". Maybe you really think so, and maybe you are scum. Since I have no better ideas atm - I'm willing to go with the latter.

why is whilst more scummy than me?

He did something that appeared like indirectly defending me while arguing with Abel.

So you say it was all to please both you and me?
That's just going too far.
He can't just come and say he really suspects me and then, when I really become suspicious to ALL of you, he suddenly says "nah, I have nothing on you". Where did the previous reasons go to? What about the fact I created many new ones?

You just call that pleasing? I think that's going beyond it. Far beyond.

[DarkClaymore]

Appearing scummy will most likely not make me a night kill target, thus keeping me alive longer in case I manage to avoid lynch. Of course, you can claim that in a way it harms the town as I become a suspect and possibly draw attention away from the real scum, but I find it very interesting to see the reactions of people when it comes to lynching a player who plays like this. Scum tend to slip in such situations.

Scum tend to slip away like this a lot. Playing the "somewhat suspected" role which can be used as a reason to explain why the player wasn't night killed, while in the same time not being suspected enough to get lynched. A very simple and efficient scum strategy.

re: surviving

What exactly do you want to prove? That my playstyle is scummy? We all know that.
As for surviving, this is not a lie. But it's neither my overall intention. I just put it there in order to make sure people don't try and dig the true reason behind my play. I actually didn't want to reveal it until the very end. The only reason I did was Abel putting

too much

effort into finding why I'm scum. So I thought I might as well fish for reaction with a slightly different approach.

Not even my words, dude. Point is, his playstyle is noted. And we already saw what he's pulling on you when his reasons for calling me scum were "lol i can't think ahead."

So why exactly we let it slide?

NS, I like it. But If you think the team is IAI/whilst, I'd rather go for IAI. I've played a couple/few games with whilst and have gone after him for pretty much the same reasons he's displaying here, and he's always been town. So I'm giving him the shadow of a doubt here. What do you think about that? I am willing to link to the offsite, completed games in question if you are curious.

Oh, just great. You do realize you do something worse than me, right?
While I tried to make general theories based on the patterns repeated by

different players

, you try to conclude something from how one player plays. This is totally wrong. Are you going to just let it slide every game? Saying "Nah. He is always scummy like that" in every game?

And if he does that "I suspect you and pretty sure you are mafia! Huh? Why do I suspect you? Haha. I got nothing" every time then... wow... if I'm a "bad townie" then what dies that make him?

DC - Would you do anything different if someone put you to L-1?

Umm... Nope. What more can I do?

If we end up lynching someone other than DarkClaymore, I need to know that he's not going to pull the same hijinks on D3. DC, please do not keep doing the same thing the whole game. We've provided a ton of reasons why it's not a good strategy. It's just not. Move on.

I already revealed everything. There's no point in keeping it up now.

Well did you ever consider that I might've thought your lynchbait ploy to be complete garbage? Because I do.

That's not something that town would do. Even me, the one who is totally against loud reasons, would still find myself suspicious if I were watching from the side. You can't say you have nothing on me. Because you have by default. Maybe you don't trust these reasons but they are there and you have them.

You really want to see a problem with me. I followed Abel's argument with you the entire time (remember? You said I was "just pleasing everyone"). If it's any credit to Abel, I did agree with some of his points. I'm glad you pointed out that post, you felt a bit pressured, didn't you? Are you feeling more pressured now because I may have the same opinion?

Pressured? You kidding? I even forgot that post existed and that you even suspected me at first. You just totally didn't look like you are even trying to chase me. You didn't vote nor did you attempt to attack me with arguments. You just put me there and like "Lol. Let's see what happens." . That's not protown even in the slightest.


And I myself have nothing on IAI so I can't join the wagon. And of course since it'll be a lynch then I'm not allowed to do so anyway.

As for calling my strategy a fail. You have no proof it failed as we don't know Whilst's alignment. Just because YOU don't want to agree with my theory doesn't mean it's ME who is wrong. And maybe I just hate norms and that's why I prefer to do unusual things. Though, I still think this strategy is better for a poor scumhunter like me. I prefer to do this than each and every time ending up being frustrated due to missing scum.

[DarkClaymore]

Way to miss the point and retreat to your same old defense. The point of juxtaposing those two quotes was to point out not that you are acting scummy, but that you yourself say that acting that way is something scum do. Note the difference between "acting scummy" and actually being scum. This is one thing that your "You can't prove I'm scummy because I'm doing it on purpose" defense actually can't defend.

I wasn't trying to defend with this. I didn't say "please don't lynch me because I'm obviously scummy". I just stated my reason for playing in this way. I not even once said that you shouldn't lynch me because of it. Rather, I'd even say it won't really make much difference if you lynch Whilst first. If he flips town, you'll think I'm scum. If he flips scum, you'll think it's bussing due to my reason being poor in your eyes and no way it hit scum. The way I see it, if you were to lynch Whilst, I'd most likely be lynched the day after it. So protecting myself by asking you to not lynch me due to being scummy didn't really have much point. I was pretty sure I'd be lynched whatever you lynch me or Whilst first.

DC. Thoughts on trying to change your playstyle, since this one obv isn't working?

This:

I already revealed everything. There's no point in keeping it up now.

And this:

As for calling my strategy a fail. You have no proof it failed as we don't know Whilst's alignment. Just because YOU don't want to agree with my theory doesn't mean it's ME who is wrong.

Darky, is English your first language?

No

Sure then, I think you're scummy. Happy? Seriously, you need to find someone else to argue with. You haven't persuaded the other players and you only seem to have confused yourself.

I didn't confuse myself. Atm, you fit what I was searching for with the lynchbait play. If my theory failed, so be it. I'll make a new one. You know? I have more. You are implying my idea was a fail, right?
But who was the one who called my question about the hypothetical situation with lynchbait "nice"? And who, after answering it, fits atm to the very pattern he gave in the answer?
That's right. It's you. Because the lynchbait isn't Cav. It's me. I'm the one who most people suspect.

Um, why can't I do some scumhunting of my own? And no, I wasn't kidding. But I guess you didn't feel pressured. Be careful when you throw around "that's not pro-town". We wouldn't want to end up being a hypocrite, would we?

But you didn't even put effort. It was said and I'll say it again. You were trying to please people. But it seems like we all know that so there's no point to keep mentioning this. I personally don't buy the "Whilst always plays like this" wine. If you are known for playing like this as town, moreover you'll be playing like this as scum.

Except there are three people that know my alignment. 1. Me 2&3. The two mafia scum.

Or 2 if you are scum.

[DarkClaymore]

How much is too much effort into winning the game?

Going and summarizing all the post I made for example?

Since we all love mafiascum so much
http://mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?tit ... e_At_Mafia

Mt favorite part is:

If you attempt to do a "meta read" on someone to see if they do or did something the same way in a different game, you are heavily biased toward seeing what you wanted to see in the first place.
If you attempt to make a Post by Post Analysis (abbreviated PbPA, wherein you list each of a target player's posts and critique each one), you are very likely to find yourself stretching to justify a conclusion you already had in mind beforehand with posts that don't actually add anything.

In fact, PbPAs are quite possibly the most pointless ways you can waste time in Mafia

.

Of course, you can counter attack me with this from the same article if you want:

Even if you're just a Vanilla Townie, the fact that you are Town doesn't legitimize everything you do as pro-Town or not scummy.

In essence, don't play like lynchbait

- you know that you're Town, but everyone else doesn't and they're not going to take your word for it.

The ppoint was to rebut that your playstyle has found scummy behavior or revealed whilst as scum. It hasn't.

I consider him scum now. If you don't like my reasons, again, it's not my fault. For me, my lynchbait play made me suspect someone.

IAI is scummy for the same reasons whilst is, ScumClaymore.

He seems like a lurker to me if anything...

Your strategy revealed nothing new

I didn't suspect Whilst before that. If you did, congrats. You are a good scumhunter if he flips scum at some point.

That's just lame.

Norms are BS and I hate them. I really find it difficult to understand why people refuse so much to accept new things. If you haven't seen something as "strange" as my lynchbait play, I'd say you have seen nothing.

I saw a player claiming JOAT on D1. Town somewhat suspected him as they didn't believe his claim, so he was lynchbait. But not enough to be lynched. The mafia didn't believe him either and hoped he'll be lynched at some point due to him being lynchbait.

In the end he survived like this even though he

really

was JOAT. I'd say this is even more unusual then my lynchbait play.

DC, stop saying wine, you don't know what it means.

I do and I'm using it correctly. Tell me why I'm not and I'll stop.

Your defense for my previous point is irrelevant. Let's repeat: you admitted a great strategy for scum would be to act scummy so that they would have a reason to never die at night, because we would think scum wouldn't kill such a scummy player. I don't get why you started talking about whilst. Irrelevant.

I wanted to stress that from my point of view there was no point in defending myself at all. And I already said it - I could be scum playing lynchbait as much as town. You expect me to make up some kind of reason which will make me appear town?

Then sorry:

1. How many games have you played at MafiaScum?
2. Have you played anywhere else prior to MafiaScum?

3. Do you believe in magic?

4. Know any of the other players in the game from prior games?

1. First
2. Played 3 before on another forum and playing my 4th one there atm.

3. Not in RL

4. Honest Abel. From this very game which took place before this game.

Also, explain why whilst not voting for you proves that he's scum. I thought lynchbait is supposed to make scum vote for you because you're giving stupid reasons for people to vote for you?

No. Scum

aren't

supposed to vote for me. They are supposed to avert their eyes from the lynchbait or even try to protect it a little. They want town points, not suspicion points. Is this way of thinking so unrealistic in your eyes? I think it's fairly logical no matter who you are.

Let's go over this one more time for clarity: Your lynchbait strategy is a fail regardless of whether whilst is town or not. It's a fail because you put the spotlight on yourself, muddled up the game, acted scummy enough to ruin reads on other people, have done nothing useful, put town in a tough position, and played against your wincon.

First, for me finding scum with this strategy beats anything else. So if I hit it's not a fail in my book no matter what. Second, I hate when people make drama out of it. Why am I the only one who thinks this kind of situations are actually better for reads? Or rather, I'd ask the other way around. What makes it worse?

The most important question here is whether or not you're going to change your playstyle to help the town, or if you're going to muck around uselessly for the rest of the game. Which is it? Pick one now.

I already said that there's no point in keeping it up. Especially as I already found my target.

[DarkClaymore]

I expect you to act like town. I expect you to show us that you are concerned about the town win condition if you are town. I expect you to find any way to avoid doing so if you are scum. And that's what you've been doing, and are still doing.

So what should I do? Point fingers at people with reasons YOU will find reasonable and I won't?
That's just acting and it's scum play.

How would voting for you, a clearly scummy scumbag, cast any suspicion at all on whilst? It's not only illogical, it's unsound, and so are you.

Maybe because I'll flip town latter on and he knows that?
Why you want to present me as some kind of alien when it makes OBVIOUS sense.
It's basic logic that scum will want to avoid gaining suspicion point. And if you say that being on a wagon of a townie doesn't give you suspicion points, then I give up.

And what have you done to your target? How has whilst being your target helped the town? If whilst turns out to be scum, you've actually hurt the town, because I'm certainly not lynching whilst for your nonsense.

That's your choice. If you insist so much on resisting everything I say because you can't for a moment to think in a different direction, then there's really nothing I can do.

Nobody gives a flying fuck about what's in your book. We are trying to win a team game here. Fuck you for ignoring that if you are town. A+ job if you are scum.

Oh, yeah? Then when do you get better reads?
When nothing happens or when something happens?
If you say it's the latter, then you agree with me that my lynchbait actually improves the reads. Because nothing was happening before that.

[DarkClaymore]

From now on, I'm not going to respond to anything you say that isn't protown. I think that's a smart move for everyone.

What is protown then? Tell me please. I'd like to learn.
Attack players?

[DarkClaymore]

I'm personally not convinced about most of the thing Abel pointed out for various reasons. I believe negative summary could be done easily about almost anyone.

For their "fight", I personally didn't like Abel's responds much more. They were insulting and bashing for no reason. You can't tell a player how to play and you seem to do it a lot. Not everyone must play like you or scumhunt like you.

He sticks to what's easy

Players who can't form a solid opinion, yet don't want to be called inactives and not contributing, tend to do this. Both scum and town.

He's not playing his self-proclaimed town meta

While this is an interesting aspect which has a point, problem is not all of us have the same idea abuout what is "playing as town". Not to mention the fact he did give excuse for his absence.

He's careful not to step on people's toes

Many would like to do that, either in order to avoid enemies or merely because that's their kind of personality.

He was followed by the same two players on each of his D1 votes.

I personally didn't even notice I was "following" him until you pointed it out back then. So this reason just doesn't speak to me. Maybe Cav was really following him. But again, that doesn't have to be scummy as in my first games I also followed others to some extend.

He acts confused about the Scumhunter nightkill

I'd say at the time Scumhunter appeared even more useless than the IC. Rather, the IC was still just fine back then. Of course, if we consider all the talk with the doc then yes, his death makes more sense than the IC's. However, wouldn't killing someone loud like you would be a better choice rather than someone who is hardly posting? Of course, there's a decent chance the SE part was the main factor and how ScumHunter said he'll be more active latter. And we can't take out how you were the main reason BB's wagon started.

All I have to say is that to a degree I found his death strange as well initially and even now there are slight doubts. So if this reason doesn't work on me, then I can't think in a direction that it works on someone else.

He simultaneously suspects and defends whilst

The same thing that Whilst does, yet you refuse to go after him because "he always does that". If you are going to use this reason, then apply it on Whilst as well. Because it's one of few here which I think are more likely scummy than town.

While I agree that the fact so many points can be pointed against him is scummy, I believe it's always possible to compose such list about anyone if you think hard enough. Thus, he still not on the top of my list. However, at least now I have a few things to consider about him.

I actually have a few new reasons, which for a change don't rely on any of that logic you call "poor" due to being based on previous games, so I guess I'll just post it latter. Talking about lynchbait appears to be useless because people here just refuse to accept the logic behind it. Talking in circles like that helps no one and that's what

really harms

the town. Because I think you'd agree that we won't come to any agreement here any time soon. You'll just keep denying its logic while I'll keep supporting it until it proven wrong.

have you ever gone by the screenname Words of Ivory?

No.

[DarkClaymore]

Okay, here is what I have on my two primary suspects

without

all the reasons you hate so much:

Whilst

1)

Pleasing both sides

. I don't give a damn he did that in previous games. He is doing it now and it's scummy. Rather, if he were town, I'd expect him to stop. I doubt no one mentioned this to him in previous games and told him it's a bad thing to do. I really don't like the way he insists on doing it. As if he waits for a game in which he'll be scum and will be able to use this excuse in his favor.

2)

Suspecting and Not suspecting me

. This I'd say goes beyond just pleasing. When he pleases people, he just agrees that both sides are logical or/and praises them. There are people like that and logically there's no contradiction here. It's just scummy and that's all. However, saying that you suspect someone and then saying you have nothing on that player goes beyond that. Here you have an

obvious contradiction

.

Here and here he states how he is sure I'm scum with Cav and how I'm his 2nd primary suspect. But then here he says he got nothing on me and doesn't even plan to vote me for putting pressure.

3)

Outguessing

. Stop it. It's annoying, pointless and not protown. What are you trying to prove? A much more protown approach would be to ask the person why he said something and see whatever the reason he gives fits yours. You can easily get a few town reads like this.

Here you try to outguess my playing style. Here you are trying to outguess my reason for voting the IC. And finally here you try to outguess whatever I was pressured.

I personally hate the second outguess the most because you obviously lost your own chance to gain town or scum reads. You practically gave me more reasons for voting the IC because no, the reason you stated wasn't my main one. By doing that outguess, you could actually give a way out to a scum who didn't have a solid reason for his action. That's far from being protown. I'd even call it anti-town to an extend.

4)

Denying your own suggestion after others use it against you

. Here you call my hypothetical question about lynchbait situation "nice". But then, when I say I suspect you because you fit THE VERY pattern YOU gave as an answer to my question, you suddenly say "DC confused himself". How can you say that when YOU admitted that how you'd play as scum yourself in this situation? You pretty much called your own answer "stupid" by saying this.

Abel

1)

Dictator

. I'd be frank. Your whole playstyle screams "if you don't agree with me - then what you think is BS and should be ignored". You seem to have a set idea of how players should play and when something doesn't fit that - you'd call it illogical or bash it for being bad and anti-town. I just can't find any better analogy than a "dictator" for what you do.

1.1)

Leader

- you play in a very loud and bold style. It's as if you assume you are some kind of leader that others should follow. The way you left your vote on BB was inviting others to follow. Intended or not, that's how it appeared and I doubt I'm the only one who saw it as such. Here you also say how the town will be stupid the let me off the hook as well as here you say how everyone shouldn't respond to what I say.

It's obvious that you are trying to play some kind of leader everyone should follow and who is "always right". You try to tell them what to do and openly invite them to join everything you think. And if they don't you agree, then the TOWN will be stupid to let something slide only because YOU think so. The town doesn't need a leader. You even said here how you played in a game in which an IC mislead everyone. So you of all people should understand this fact. If anyone supposed to assume the role of a "leader" it should be the IC, and even this only at the beginning as the IC is still a player. You aren't even SE and still trying to do it.

This misleads the town as you try to force your opinion on others while not letting them to think for themselves. This is obviously not protown play. Actually, it's obviously anti-town because you KNOW that following one person is bound to mislead the town. And misleading is something only scum would want. Of course, in the position of a leader you are also less likely to be lynched. Yes, even if you make a mistake. You'll just easily put the blame for the mislynch on someone else and will make him the next target.

1.2)

One Ideology

. Apparently, you have your own set of rules and your own way of thinking regarding how town should and shouldn't play. Of course, it's good to be sure about something. Problem is that you think that ONLY what you think is correct. Here you even say how there are well defined ways to play town. But no, you are wrong. There is no such thing. Every player chooses to play as he pleases. You can't blame a player when he doesn't play the way YOU want. This generalization of yours and the refusal to accept new or different ideas is very anti-town.

You are strongly trying to fight against pluralism. Every time someone does or says something that defies your "set rules", you'll start bashing them, calling them anti-town or simply insulting. Here you call what IAI does "not scumhunting" only because it's not the way YOU are used to seeing players scumhunting. Here you automatically brand everything I said "irrelevant" only because I was talking about a game with slightly different rules. This just shows how you aren't even planning to accept others' opinions. The moment you see something that doesn't fit with your "Ideology" - you immediately bash it without even trying to understand it.

Again, here you call me telling you about a certain situation from a previous game something "fictional" and "nonsense". Rather than asking me to cite it, you immediately attack it as it doesn't fit what you want to hear. Also here and here you are bashing my talk about wine. Note how you are the only one who ever expressed dissatisfaction with it, yet you say it as if it's obvious that it hurts the rest as well. Yet again generalization of YOUR OWN ideology and making it appear as if everyone think like you, and if they aren't - they must do so.

Denying the opinions of others while strongly pushing ONLY your own is scum play. Mafia is a flexible game and there are no "set rules" as to how players should play. If there were, this game wouldn't be as fun. The only reason for someone to attack the opinions of others is to get rid of as many opinions as you can. Town shouldn't try to dismiss opinions. They should try to hear as many of them as they can and see if they can conclude something from this. What you do is attacking players because what they do doesn't satisfy YOU and by that you also prevent many other possible opinions. People see the way you attack and start thinking twice or thrice before posting their opinion. A great way to motivate discussion I must admit.

My point in this part is: Mafia is a democratic game. The fact we need to vote pretty much proves that. By playing like some dictator you are far from helping the town. You are causing harm. Because we all know how Democracy and Dictatorship are always enemies.

2)

Ignoring your own previous deductions

. You seem to easily switch your opinion as time passes without even comparing it to your previous deductions. Apparently, at first you were pretty sure IAI is scum with either me or Cav as a partner. Suddenly, when IAI becomes less active which should alert, you are suddenly switching and strongly think it's me and Whilst. You say this here and here in a very happy-go-lucky attitude of "lol. I got them". Where has you previous deduction gone to? Shouldn't you be frustrated how you were wrong before? And shouldn't you at the very least give a proper comparing between your current theory and your previous one in order justify that silly way in which you are pushing it?

All you gave was this which could easily be interpreted as "Well, IAI is not here atm so I think it's you and Whilst". Oh really? How exactly that proves anything? You mean that it's more reasonable to suspect the active players because they are here while forgetting about the less active player who, I'll remind you, you initially

suspected the most

. Back then you were pretty sure IAI is scum no matter who his partner is. How all this anti-town? You are just accusing people for teh lulz because they are easy bait. If someone here thinks it can be protown in some situation, then let me hear it.

3)

Playing extremely protown and jumping on every little thing

. Okay, I'll change my approach. I gave the reason how this will make you night killed. You said you prefer to go all out and don't care about it. While I don't like to hear this way of thinking from a player who have finished a few games - I have to say that it's legit and depends on your own way of thinking.

Now let me shed light on a different aspect of this playstyle and why it harms the town. You are posting a lot, attacking people and jumping on every little thing people post. Obviously, this makes you to appear very protown and you could say that the advantage is that the town has one player less to suspect for a while. But there are also disadvantages to this. You just come and point EVERYTHING as soon as you see it. Then let me ask you. What other players are supposed to do? I often find myself reading what I missed and noting stuff I'm going to point out. And then, what I see? Abel pointing out everything out and I have nothing constructive to say. What are my options?

a) Restate a reason that was already stated. This is not only pointless but is scummy. You said that yourself here when you accused IAI of being scum.
b) Hop on the reasons you mentioned and say "I agree". While this will last longer, it'll be a matter of time before people start pointing fingers at me for not contributing new material.
c) Give some kind of reason in order to say something even if it makes me suspicious because I know others don't like these reasons. At the very least people won't say I'm inactive or lurker with this.
d) Say nothing. Be a lurker and get lynched.


I don't know if I'm the only one, but your play style without a doubt harming ME and I'm town. By clearing yourself with extreme activity, you take away my, and perhaps others, chances to contribute and show that they actually care. Perhaps you clear yourself and most people don't see you as a suspect for now, but in return you make one or more other players appear scummy since they have nothing to add.

It's funny after that how you are one of the people who push the idea "those who don't contribute are scum" when you are the one who doesn't allow others to contribute. You clear yourself, make others suspicious in the process since they can't clear themselves and then - point fingers at them. I have to admit that it's a great scum strategy. And why can't it be town strategy? Because giving people a chance to post their own opinions should benefit the town. Instead of just rushing forward and posting everything you notice, you should wait for a while with some of the material. If you see someone posting what you were planning to - you can get some town reads from that player. By posting everything yourself, you not only miss many town reads - but you also put some townies in a problematic situation in which they become a easy lynch target

.

I'll cite something for you:
http://mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?tit ... e_At_Mafia

Note that you can go too far with this - there is such a thing as posting too much. If other players are having a hard time catching up on the discussion because of the immense volume of posts that flowed in while they were away, it will hurt those players' contributions as well as your ability to read those players. It is possible to use this as a tactic as scum, but it has a tendency to result in inactivity replacements/modkills as the other players prefer to just let the game go instead of reading it all and trying to make sense of it.

Note: It's not me who wrote it. It's someone with much more experience.

I'm ready to take this the extra mile. I'd call your playstyle "solo". You are just thinking about what clears YOU and not about what happens to the rest of the town. You said before that mafia is a game which you play as a team. I don't see you doing it. You only care about yourself and about making yourself appear protown while harming other townies. I don't see how exactly you take the town into account in all this. I'll say what you told me here back to you. Surviving, not only night kills, is not the goal of the game. Sadly, that's exactly what you are doing with your playstyle. I'm amazed how this wasn't mentioned, but playing EXTREMELY potown also can defend you from night kills. The doc will most likely see you as confirmed townie and will try to protect you. The mafia should consider this as well and most likely won't target you before getting rid of the doc.

4)

Doing what is wrong and make it appear protown

. You summarized my posts and then IAI's. I said it and I'd say it again:
http://mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?tit ... e_At_Mafia

If you attempt to do a "meta read" on someone to see if they do or did something the same way in a different game, you are heavily biased toward seeing what you wanted to see in the first place.
If you attempt to make a Post by Post Analysis (abbreviated PbPA, wherein you list each of a target player's posts and critique each one), you are very likely to find yourself stretching to justify a conclusion you already had in mind beforehand with posts that don't actually add anything. In fact, PbPAs are quite possibly the most pointless ways you can waste time in Mafia.

You are doing both. You are basing your opinion on Whilst from previous game and you are doing PbPAs. The latter of course makes you appear very protown because they see you are putting effort. But what you are doing called "pointless" by more experienced players. Then why do you keep doing it?

5)

Publicly saying someone is town

Here you said you consider dicknose the most innocent in your eyes and you have been pushing the idea ever since. I'll make it straight. It appears more anti-town then town. Want to know why?

No one suspected dicknose at the time enough to vote him or lynch him. I could see you stressing your opinion he is town in case he was in danger. But he wasn't. Rather, by saying you think he is town - YOU are the one who put him in danger by making him a more likely night kill target. Because we all know scum hate confirmed townies. You helped no one but yourself. In case dicknose is night killed - you'll gain some town points from that. Other than that, what you did helped no one and especially not the town. I'd also like to point out that calling someone "town" on D2 really shows you have wishful thinking. No way that you can clear him as town as soon as D2. Some reads are not enough to justify this so early in the game.

[DarkClaymore]

Whilst's posts

Cry more, and really: learn to accept my play style. "If he were town, I'd expect him to stop." -- why? You repeatedly bring up the same points. If you were town, I'd expect you to move on; and hey--you did. You posted a nice section about Abel, congrats.

I accepted it's your playstyle. I'm not like others here who hate accepting scummy playstyles be default.
Problem is, we all tell you "you make yourself look suspicious". You are

clearly

harming the town. I'd say that you are playing lynchbait as much as I did. So why won't you stop? If you are really town and want us to catch scum, you should stop making yourself suspicious needlessly. You are just making us go after you instead of the real scum in this case.

But no. You prefer to say "lol idiots, it's my play style. Get over it". That's NOT what a townie should do. If you were to care about the town at all, you'd try to change your ways. And no, it has nothing to do with the "general protown" idea. It's basic logic.

You're bringing this up because I didn't "vote" for you? Because you claimed you were playing lynchbait, but I think it was bullshit? Putting you at number 2 seems to have done something: you won't get over why I've put you there. Why not? Will this make you flip out even more?

You couldn't possibly know that what I was doing from the beginning because I wasn't planning to play lynchbait. It's only after seeing how little I manage to contribute is that I started playing it and to the greater extreme. Saying things like "I saw this from a mile ahead" when

I

myself couldn't is a lie.

And no, I can't get over this list because you contradicted yourself with that list.

Should I bring back the "whats pro-town" remark you made earlier? Get over me. If I decide to outguess you, so what? I think you don't like me because of my username. There's an outguess for you. Do you hate me for that too? If I was out to get you, I would've brought up more points to get you -- not tried to 'outguess' you and...magically persuade people to vote for you?

If you were suspecting me, then you should have done

something

. Let me ask you. If you didn't suspect me, why you put me on the list at all? You say you don't want to pressure me with votes, yet you apparently (according to your third outguess) tried to pressure me with a list. I don't see any logic here.

Why would I point out that I fit the pattern, only to have people suspect me more? Does that make any sense to you? Become paranoid if you wish

Sorry Abel, but I have to say it this time: WINE. You gave the answer most players would have given. Whatever or not people will suspect you because of that is unclear. Rather, I'd say they should suspect you less due to the very reason you are bringing now. They wouldn't suspect you more because you fit, they'd suspect you

less

because you willingly admitted that you fit.

For me - you fit and that's that. If you flip town, then the only reason would be the fact you couldn't let go of your regular scummy playstyle. In which case you can blame no one but yourself.

Do you feel bad that you didn't

lynch

me during

N1

?

What the-?

Let DC respond, I want to see how he reacts.

"Oh, god! You voted! I'm sure you aren't scum now "
Is that what you expect me to say? Obviously voting now, especially as you are quite cornered, will change nothing.

Abel's posts

whilst, instead of just asking a question, offers an answer to his own question and asks the target if he agrees.

It just shows no desire to know the truth

, just a desire to see whether the person agrees or not. But it shouldn't be a main point, and it's not something town mightn't do.

And isn't that scummy by default? Scum are the only one who don't care about the truth. True, lazy townies neither. Thing is, he wasn't that lazy the way I see it. And he did say he want to be "certain" that he lynches scum. How can one become certain of this if one doesn't attempt to uncover the truth? Another contradiction to the list.

This would be a good point, but DC's evidence doesn't lead to this conclusion. It makes sense that whilst might find DC's tactic interesting (and, again, this is from knowing whilst: he has a penchant for trying to develop strange strategies) but later say that DC confused himself, because DC was talking in circles for quite a long time.

If I didn't get it clear enough then:

DC: "How would you play as scum in a situation there's a lynchbait which most likely be lynched?"
Whilst: "I'll probably let others argue about it and just say I agree without waging a war myself "
DC: "You are exactly doing this right now and that's why I think you are scum"
Whilst: "What? That's stupid and doesn't make sense at all. Sorry dude, you just confused yourself"

If I were to put it in an ironic way: he indirectly called himself stupid.

[DarkClaymore]

DC is looking more town (to me). I highly doubt that a newbscum would put in THAT much effort.

HA vs. DC strikes me as town-on-town bickering

While I could just stay quiet and let you point out something in my favor, I still think I better point out that I'm actually quite used to making long posts. There was a game in which me and another player did "wall wars" and people were begging us to stop writing so much. Also, that player was actually scum. And it wasn't the first time I found myself arguing with a scum yet people easily wrote it off as town vs. town.

So I'd be frank - I can't easily see any argument as town vs. town after past experiences. If it's really town-on-town, so be it. But I rather push until the very end than giving up because it

might be

"town-on-town".

[DarkClaymore]

Glad you accept it, perhaps now you can move on. 1. I'm not harming the town, please point out how I am in your mind. 2. No I'm not playing lynchbait. I don't know why that would help me. 3. I'm not making myself look suspicious, you are convincing yourself that I am. And it's all been pointless remarks about how you don't like how I'm pleasing everyone or how I put you high on my scum list. You have a personal problem with me. I want you to stop arguing with me, and move on.

1. I already said how. By making yourself suspicious. What part of it you didn't get?
2. But players tell you that they think your are suspicious because of the way you play. Even I stopped and I

was

playing an intended lynchbait from D2.
3. Contradicting yourself + not listening to the opinions of others when they tell you that you are misleading the town. Don't you find this suspicious? What would you find suspicious then? Nothing? Like what you said you have on me? How exactly are you planning to play when nothing is suspicious?

Yeah, I didn't know. But you're still arguing with me about it, so now I do know. It's a problem for you, I'm sorry. You just react to it too much, for no reason. When did I say "I saw this from a mile ahead"? Please don't put words in my mouth, it's unhealthy.

You didn't say that but your playsyle combined with your arguments do. You said you suspected me, yet you didn't do anything to catch me. When I asked why, you said "because I think you lynchbait play is BS". Thing is, when you were suspecting me at first - I WASN'T playing lynchbait yet. You are just trying to cover up for your lack of action with a reason that only could come much latter. There is a thing called timeline and you miscalculated that.

What's the difference between L-3 and saying "i think these guys are scummy, here's a list" -- almost nothing. Are three people going to hammer you? No. I'm sorry you don't see the logic, but maybe you will learn to in the future.

Then what was the point of putting me on the list if you say you didn't suspect me? Answer this and I'll agree that perhaps there was no big difference whatever you voted or not.

Didn't understand what I was implying? Really?

I didn't get whatever you were talking about D1 lynch or N1 kill.

You know DarkClaymore, you're starting to please me. You have funny arguments.

And you have stupid ones. And I rarely ever insult people I don't know.

[DarkClaymore]

Didn't I put you on the list in the beginning of D2? Why is my list the only one you're unhappy with. You're on other people's lists too, near the top as well. You should be arguing with them too, or is my case just special?

It's is special and how you don't want to see it is just stupid. Point me at another player who put me on top and not only did nothing to argue with me and show my faults - but also latter on said he got nothing on me?

I'm not arguing because you put me on the list. But rather because you latter on said you have nothing on me. I would gladly argue with whoever did the same thing.

[DarkClaymore]

You thought I was supporting both sides when Abel was arguing with you. Was this the post that I said "I have nothing on you"? I'm reading it over again, and I don't quite get how you came to that conclusion. I said I wasn't sure about the lynch.

Then how am I supposed to interpret:

Why should I even bother voting for people who I have no evidence of being scum?

This doesn't look like "I have reasons for suspecting you, but I'm not sure about them". And you didn't even present any reason if I recall correctly. If anything, you only defended me and my playstyle on a few occasions.

However, I can say that you suspect me, and also have nothing on me.

I have more than enough to convince myself. I'm willing to follow my lynchbait reads.
But people don't like them, so I'm forced to present other reasons. Abel agreed how some of them are good so you can't say that I "have nothing on you". Maybe YOU think these reasons are shallow, but I think they aren't and there are people who agree at least SOME of my arguments are legit. Saying that I have nothing on you is a blunt lie.

I actually think the main reason you weren't lynched yet is the fact you have a record of playing in such scummy way. Maybe you are used to the fact others let everything you do slide because of this but I'm clearly not going to do this.

[DarkClaymore]

ABEL

I believe you haven't gone over my reasons against you yet, so I'd like to add something I forgot to

reason #4

.
From the same source I quoted other stuff there:
http://mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?tit ... e_At_Mafia

Do not fool yourself into thinking you can call the scumteam, especially before anyone has flipped scum. Don't bother with trying to draw connections between players until one of them is dead. It's tempting! but futile.

You are doing it. You are always saying you think X & Y or Y & Z are the scumteam. Again, something that appears protown because it shows you think. But just like what written there - it's pointless. If I told you that and tried to explain why - you'd just write me off as an idiot and ignore my opinion. So I'm not even gonna try. It's all written there and that article isn't there for nothing.

[DarkClaymore]

ABEL- Part 1

Stop quoting the wiki

Says the person who first brought a wiki article. I hoped at least something from the wiki will get through you, but sadly it seems like it doesn't. So I'll just conclude that nothing will.

First of all, you're not proving anything about yourself by quoting something you didn't write.

What...? Why am I supposed to prove something about myself when I'm trying to point out something about YOU?

Second, any goddamn idiot could have written that, it's a wiki. And if the person who wrote it isn't an idiot, I reserve the right to disagree anyway

Okay, then the second link here:

Game Theory (See also: Theory in the wiki).

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED READING!

This is taken from the "Newbie Game Queue" thread. As you can see, people HIGHLY RECOMMEND to read this. And you are't going to say the ones who created the thread are also idiots, right?

This clears part one. As for part two - sure, you have the right to disagree. If you are going to ignore the advice of the more experienced folks and just play however you want - I wish you good luck. I believe you'll need it.

Third, anything put on a wiki about strategy in this game is immediately null and void because it becomes public knowledge and everybody knows the tricks

This wasn't "strategy" but "advice". There's a big difference between the two as the latter should always be helpful. And just a note: none of what I cited were "tricks" to catch scum, but rather things you shouldn't do as town because it's either pointless or harms the town.

Also, here you said, and I quote, "There are

clear

and

definite

ways to help the town in this game". Isn't this also part of the "public strategy" that automatically becomes null? You are confusing me. I don't understand whatever you do or don't believe in what you said there and whatever you believe in well defined known strategies or not.

Fourth, I haven't made any decisions in this game based solely on potential scumbuddies

I just said you are pushing it a lot. Like when I asked why suddenly me and Whilst are the scumteam in your eyes, you said you see "more connection". If this isn't an obvious attempt to conclude something from connections between players then I don't know what it is.

don't outguess me that I'd write you off as an idiot and ignore your opinion, you don't know that.

I just added that so you won't ask me why I didn't put any effort into explaining what is written there.
Though, based on this:

it's going to lead to is just going to provide you another outlet to propagate your

nonsense

.

I believe my "outguess" was correct anyway.

Also, DC, why are you so faithful to your beloved wiki when you're all about using the "weird" strategy?

This thread, along with others there, aren't recommended for teh lulz. I read it and I think it's legit.
True, I came up with a strategy that goes against some of the things written there. But it's a "strategy". I wasn't just playing the "normal way", if that's how you'd like to see it, and relying on normal reads. I made something different, which I initially didn't really want to try in this specific game, and tried to see whatever it's better than the "normal" playstyle which, tbh, I find boring at times because everyone do it.

When I'm playing normally then I following what's written there and in other articles as much as I can or see fit. It's not like I have OVER 9000 unusual strategies.

ABEL- Part 2

I'm not letting someone think for themselves? Show me where I've turned down a good case or good pressure on someone. Show me any evidence at all that I'm making the town follow one person. You can't say such things without examples, especially when they're so obviously lies

You strongly attacked not only my lynchbait strategy, but also IAI's scumhunting. Only because you don't like it doesn't mean you have to attack and insult. You just make yourself appear like some kind of "ALL CAPS RAGE" guy that no one want to mess around with. This automatically blocks many opinions that could have brought forth by players.

Some people will just avoid messing with you and will refrain from stating their opinions.

I'm not unaccepting of new ideas and strategies. I'll listen to anything, evaluate it, and tell you whether it's shit or not, honestly

You have no right to call my strategy "shit" when you yourself doing many things against what town should do. Yes, I'm talking about that article from wiki. If my lynchbait doesn't fit the "defined way to help town" then neither many of your own actions.

I did ask you to cite your sources first and foremost, if I recall correctly. After a while without citing, I started calling your stories nonsense.

True, you asked: #289
I did give you the links, as pointless as I thought it is: #298
Then you attack me and call what I say "nonsense" because I didn't cite: 343

There was no need to attack. You could just ask me to cite again like you did the first time. You saw that I gave you the links back then, but you still chose to attack me the second time. And I still gave you the more specific links anyway: #345

And this is all with putting aside I was referring to the same game the first and second time anyway. But you couldn't have possibly known that.

Appearing confident is an important part of adding pressure. A statement so self-assured and intuitive like "lol, looks like we have our scumteam" is going to dismantle a scumteam more than "Well, here are all the reasons my previous case doesn't work anymore. I admit its shortcomings could apply to any case I make in the future. That said, my next suspicion is that these two gentlemen are a scumteam."

I think neither put any pressure more than votes or pointing out new things. Just going around and singing how you found the scumteam puts pressure on no one. As townie I know you are wrong and if I were scum I'd know you are just guessing. You are just wasting our time by making us read pointless material.

Otherwise, what am I supposed to do? Keep talking to IAI all day and let DC just sit there silent at his computer? Nah.

What I didn't like is how you never gave a solid reason as to why me and whilst as scumteam is the winner in your eyes even though you were pretty sure it's IAI a short while ago. You just said there's more "connection" which is weak reasoning as you should know that most likely you won't find any obvious connection between the scum before you lynch one of them.

but I'm not concerned about whether or not I make you look scummy by not leaving anything for you to say

Then I could say back to you that I don't give a damn that my lynchbait play made reading players harder to YOU. Because I found it much better and I always do, even when the specific lynchbait isn't me in other situations.

Your reply just shows how much you think of mafia as a game you play as a team. You don't care about this at all. You are playing for yourself. And for someone who relies on the classic reads, what you are doing is obviously anti-town. As I said, you don't allow players to contribute and just let many good reads slip away. If you have never considered this disadvantage of this playstyle, then perhaps you should.

You're concerned about whether or not you look scummy, which is scummy

1) I'm concerned with the fact I can't contribute anything and not helping to the town
2) So basically you are telling me that as town I'm free to make myself look scummy? Tell me, who insulted my lynchbait play because it makes me suspicious and draws attention away from scum? Pretty much everyone.

Please go back through each of the seven points you made about me and explain why a townie wouldn't do those things and why scum would

I believe it's all explained in

bold

. I can restate that if you want.

Leader

- True, you can do that as town and as scum. Problem is, YOU know this can easily mislead the town and that many noobs are easy followers. You said how you witnessed this happening before and the fact you are doing something similar right now can be seen as only this: anti-town and scummy.

One Ideology

- While this depends a lot on one's personality - it doesn't change the fact this approach is anti-town. Insulting players who bring up some innovative ideas is not a protown approach. If you don't like it - so be it. But no reason to start attacking, saying you'll put me on the black list and such. The only times I saw a player getting angry is when a townie was right in what he was saying and the angry scum couldn't shake him off despite how his reasons were, supposedly, baseless.

Ignoring your own previous deductions

- The only reason I see this as a more likely anti-town behavior is because town want to find scum. What you did there accusing me and Whilst as scumteam looked like an attempt to lynch those who are in the spotlight. Of course, this approach is always easier. However, it doesn't help in lynching scum.

Playing extremely protown and jumping on every little thing

- I could put aside what I cited from the wiki and how it's said there that this can be used as scum strategy - but I won't because that's exactly what I think. True, a noob townie could still play like this. I don't see you as one. Thus letting good reads slip away while not allowing others to contribute + posting a lot which can easily scare noobs, cause them to be inactive and easy lynch targets = anti-town play = more likely scum play than town play.

Doing what is wrong and make it appear protown

- As town I would have expected you to read that wiki article once I pointed out that there are well known flaws in the way you play. You didn't do that. It seems like you have no intention of improving how you play, even if you think that article won't help you much, and that's no what a townie should do. You also keep pushing these all these "wrong" things in order to appear protown no matter what. Maybe you are fooling others but not me. You are just wasting out time with that. Sounds more scummy than protown, don't you agree?

Publicly saying someone is town

- This I agree can be done by both town and scum. However, at the time there was nothing the town would gain from you saying this. Only scum would - town points once dicknose dies and flips town. Also, as a person who said "I'll reveal what I think when I'm at L-1" I'd expect you to keep such insights to yourself unless there is a REAL need to point them out. There wasn't such thing in this case.

[DarkClaymore]

Time zone: GMT +2

[DarkClaymore]

Before anyone is lynched by a majority vote, all voters must post "why" they are following through with their lynch target. If they want, they can "quote" previous posts. Please link to those posts, however.

-- Fair enough? I'd hope so. If not, please express why.

My main reason is the lynchbait play analysis. However, tbh, the longer this day goes on - the more doubts I have about it...

Putting aside the reason no one here likes. There is the stuff you do which I already mentioned: pleasing, outguessing, suspecting without giving solid reasons and not putting pressure on the ones you suspect. True, all can be something caused by your personality or simply some townie mistakes. HOWEVER. Three things:

1) You protect yourself as if nothing wrong with any of these points - which is far from being true.
2) You insist on doing it despite how people say it looks scummy.
3) I don't think there is any reason for the town, or at least for anyone who suspects you, to keep living in paranoia that you might be scum this time around despite how, apparently, you usually play like this.

[DarkClaymore]

Before anyone is lynched by a majority vote, all voters must post "why" they are following through with their lynch target. If they want, they can "quote" previous posts. Please link to those posts, however.

-- Fair enough? I'd hope so. If not, please express why.

My main reason is the lynchbait play analysis. However, tbh, the longer this day goes on - the more doubts I have about it...

Putting aside the reason no one here likes. There is the stuff you do which I already mentioned: pleasing, outguessing, suspecting without giving solid reasons and not putting pressure on the ones you suspect. True, all can be something caused by your personality or simply some townie mistakes. HOWEVER. Three things:

1) You protect yourself as if nothing wrong with any of these points - which is far from being true.
2) You insist on doing it despite how people say it looks scummy.
3) I don't think there is any reason for the town, or at least for anyone who suspects you, to keep living in paranoia that you might be scum this time around despite how, apparently, you usually play like this.

Ah, I should've clarified when to post your reasons against the target. I meant if whoever was at L-3, and someone said they would go through and seal the lynch on that person, then everyone should cite their reasons. Those reasons will be the subject of debate during D3/4/5 etc.

Oh, well. Anyway, I stated my reasons in case you'll be lynched.
As for IAI I'm not going to join unless I think I got something.
Even though Cav pointed out something that I liked. He said IAI posts "analysis that don't help anyone". While not exactly, this is pretty close to what I meant by scum doing "long in-depth posts" at the very beginning and might be worth looking into. For me at least.

[DarkClaymore]

To be fair, I haven't read a majority of the "newbie guide" or any other 'self-help' articles.

I recommend reading that one particular article as I really found it helpful. It has very general pieces of advice that can be applied in many situations. True, what's written there won't help you find scum for the most part (or maybe yes if Abel is scum) but at least you'll possibly be making less mistakes in the future.

To be Honset, what I pointed against Abel are the main things I learned from that article.

[DarkClaymore]

Because only scum wouldn't follow the newbie guide, right? Not convincing.

No. Not only scum. But a player who insists on pushing so hard many things which are known as "pointless" just for the sake of posting more and appearing protown - definitely feels scummy. Won't you agree?
Also, I'll say it again. Posting too much:
1) Does good to no one aside of you who appears protown and most likely won't be lynched.
2) Steals the ability of others to contribute.
3) Encourages inactivity, especially when playing with newbies who play it on the net for the first time, due to others having problems following or simply having no patience to read all the posts.
4) Due to #1,#2 and #3 it's a great scum strategy.

[DarkClaymore]

DC, your statements against me are arguments against yourself. You're actually convincing me that you're scum more and more. You're unarguably the #1 person who's use prolific posting to look like you're concerned about town, whereas very little of the content is protown.

Apparently if I don't post enough, you and others will start pointing fingers at me. Just like you did with IAI a while ago. And just a reminder - the one who started extreme posting was you and not me. I'm now forced to post a lot because of you. People started calling me inactive because you posted a lot and replied to everyone's comments as soon as you could.

And I don't see how reasons 2 and 3,and hence 4, apply on me. If anything, I'm doing the opposite of what encouraging inactivity as I post stuff people want to respond to due suspicion. And this is how I can get more reads. You just post what others might want to and miss many reads. While I can't say I'm 100% sure you missed others' reads with that, you definitely missed many of my reads as I couldn't find what to contribute and hence hardly responded at first.

You never give up discussions. You keep them going past the point of usefulness. I'm concise and know when to stop.

This can be debated. What if

I

find the discussion useful? The same way that you find all these things you do useful while the wiki states otherwise?
Besides, the more you discuss - the higher the chance the one you are talking with will slip.

You're also the #1 reason this game is so long and confusing. All of your activity today is verbose, headache-inducing, painful to read, and talking in circles. It makes rereading and analysis a bitch.

You can get your "normal" reads whenever you want. However, you won't get the chance to have reads from situations with extreme lynchbait as often. Look at this situation for example. Is there only one main suspect? No. There are many of them. I believe I provided a one-time opportunity. If you didn't find it helpful, so be it. Because I did. Now things are back to how you like it, as much as possible, and you can keep getting your reads.

[DarkClaymore]

(I *should* be looking at HA, but he's very Town right now.)
.

And this is EXACTLY why you MUST look at him. Whoever appears extremely protown is dangerous by default as it's hard to lynch him in case he is scum.

You made the very first unnecessarily long post in this game. Remember when I asked who you would have killed N0? You're also padding your arguments with fluff. Please, from now on, just try to get to the point and say nothing else. Thank you in advance.

Would you have been happier if I just said "kill the IC"?
Yes, that what I was about to answer. Before reading everyone's answers.
Then I realized this answer is actually BS and is very poorly constructed. True, I could still answer it as I knew me being an exception will cause trouble for me. But I still chose to say it.

Why? Because I thought that perhaps some people here have never tried to think in this direction. If I recall correctly, someone actually did say that latter. So my goal was achieved. And that post wasn't that long. True, perhaps longer than others' answers, but only because it required a deeper explanation in order to appear reasonable.

You're also padding your arguments with fluff. Please, from now on, just try to get to the point and say nothing else. Thank you in advance.

This might be true. Would you mind showing me a few examples? I think there might be something wrong with the way I present my arguments but I can't find it myself.




And I'd like to ask people. Who do you think will be killed at night?
No. Wait.
After I finished writing the answer I realized it might not be so helpful to the town to discuss this before the said night happened. Though, maybe I'm just overthinking this? I'd like to know what others think.

[DarkClaymore]

Here's an example for you:

Why? Because I thought that perhaps some...

Nobody asked why.

That whole section about asking me if I'd prefer you saying "kill the IC" is not necessary. It's not going to change anything about how we perceive your long answer to my simple question. Just accept that some people make points about things and just try to make your own instead of trying to explain everything to death.

I still believe I can't omit it because then I someone might ask. If possible, I prefer to address all the possible questions in the same argument. However. If you find that distracting or unnecessary, which is reasonable if that part doesn't apply to you, then

I'll just bold the "main point" and leave the rest to whoever is interested

.

Is that okay? Or you believe it's better to not mention it and answer only if asked?

_____________________________________________________________________________

So after this whole day we are back to Cav?
Since I don't have two suspects to fit the scumteam (I suspect Abel and Whilst but believe there's a high chance only one scum if at all) then

I'd say that Cav is a somewhat reasonable choice. Problem is, we don't and we can't know whatever his hammer was townnewb or scumnewb mistake as it could apply to both. Other than that, I think he presented enough interesting arguments on D2, despite doing so only when people put a little pressure on him the way I see it.

_____________________________________________________________________________

Also, since no one mentioned.

Here and here IAI tries to defend himself based on how he played in previous games:

player with an 8-3 town record, and one that is undefeated in LyLo. Not a bad person to get out of the way D2 if your scum, huh?

In case your not sure, I have 3 perfect scum wins to my credit, the one loss I have I replaced in to a hopeless situation. So if you are going to accuse me of being scum, please keep it consistent with my play as scum which has been pretty good, not this sloppy crap I have been accused of this game...

I got a few things to say about these reasons:
1)

WEAK. Any player can make mistakes at some point. And moreover in a game which is more active than what you are used to

. You are forced to post, so your posts aren't as good as they could have been in a game in which you'd feel more comfortable. While I was pointing fingers at Abel because forcing townies to post something when they have nothing or don't plan to post makes them scummy - luckily the same thing applies to scum players as well.
2)

BAD. You ask us to look at your score or previous playstyle and become biased. Basically, you are asking us to do what players SHOULDN'T do

. Just like I said I don't care how Whilst played in the past, the same will apply to you. And I think others should do the same. Also, you are a SE. True, you aren't a IC so you are not expected to point out newbie mistakes and recommend others what they should or shouldn't do. HOWEVER, the fact remains these games still include SE players for having a smoother play. And I believe a SE supposed to, at the very least, give an example of how to play the game. Asking newbies to do what is

wrong

doesn't exactly befitting of a SE, won't you agree?

To me it appears like an attempt to just post something, ANYTHING,in order to slip away

. If anything, this is the strongest thing I have against IAI atm.

_____________________________________________________________________________

Also no one answered what they think about discussing who will be night killed BEFORE the actual night

.
I see ups and downs so I'm not sure whatever it'll help the town or not. On one hand, we might block possible strategies in which scum kill someone and then plan to frame someone else with a certain reason. If we publicly mention this reason now - scum will think twice before using it. On the other hand, we might present some aspects the scum didn't take into account and there are chances scum are newbs (it's a newbie game after all). Though we still might help the doc, if he exists, at the same time.

[DarkClaymore]

DC, I 100% disagree with "You ask us to look at your score or previous playstyle and become biased. Basically, you are asking us to do what players SHOULDN'T do." The more you know about a player, and how they play in a certain alignment, the easier it gets to look for those differences.

1)

The wiki advises against it.

2) Looking at how someone played before only misleads you. Every player should try to play the same as both town and mafia. If you see someone playing the same now as he did when he was town in another game - it gives you nothing. If he is playing scummy like he did in another game, then maybe yes - it can worth checking. BUT.

What you ask us to do - is to see how you played scum before and see how you are playing differently now. If anything, this only proves that odds are higher you are scum this time around. Because I'd expect someone to play differently as scum so that people won't be able to catch you based on your meta.

Sorry, but I don't think this can be used as a defense. All I can see is an attempt to say something that would sound "reasonable" yet is very misleading.
3)

Mentioning the score was obviously unnecessary. Even if you won 100 games out of 100 as scum, this wouldn't mean you can't make mistakes.

4) On the other forum I'm playing, we got a player who is known to cause havoc and say strange stuff. That's why, after a while, people started ignoring him and treating most of the "strange" stuff he says as joke. This allowed him to claim JOAT on D1 as everyone saw this as joke. Both town and mafia. So the mafia didn't even attempt to night kill him, yet he REALLY was JOAT. True, in this example it played in favor of the town. But only because the mafia members are the one who did the mistake and based their actions on his meta. In the following, game this almost worked against the town if not for one of the mafia members bussing this player.

Looking at meta is a good idea. Someone asking you to look at their meta actually ruins the purpose. If I were scum and playing poorly and said "Look at my meta, I'm better than that, so I'm not scum," it would invalidate the whole point, because I'm likely using it to my advantage. On the other hand, if someone else were to say "Look at Abel's meta, he ain't that dumb as scum," then that would be an excellent point.

That's also part of what I'm saying.

[DarkClaymore]

DC, again, you're not adding anything to the discussion here. Even if you were to somehow disprove IAI's point about meta, all you've done is disproved a point, which doesn't make us a single shred closer to figuring out whether he's town or scum.

I believe pointing out he wants us to clear him because of his meta, and how it's a weak and scummy argument, was worth it if no one thought about it. Just that.

[DarkClaymore]

Sure, but two things: #632 is long as fuck; #635 added nothing to the discussion.

I said to read only what's in bold if you want only the "main points".
In #635 I tried to stress why it's wrong IMO. Both in general and specifically in this case. I believe someone has to present these points or otherwise the whole thing will go unnoticed.

[DarkClaymore]

DC - surely who people think will be killed over night will depend on their suspected scum team?

Am I to interpret this as "If we ask players who they think will be killed tonight, don't you think the answers will depend on each player's suspected scumteam?"

If so then - yes and no. The way I see it, that's depends on each player's way of thinking

. When I originally was writing my own answer, I assumed that any player could be town. So I went over why scum would or wouldn't choose each player over another.

[DarkClaymore]

Yeah, but I've noted suspicion of everybody, even dicknose a little, I'm posting a lot, and I'm, like, really smart.

I usually die young without a doc. Exception could be if I'm focusing on one or two people and I'm wrong. That's a great reason to leave someone alive, but I don't think that can be said this time.

P.S. still not proving how this conversation isn't useless.

It's basically similar to the question you suggested at the beginning "who would you have killed last night?"

. I believe it can serve the same purpose.

Aside of the fact it can either help the town or put it in a bad situation

depending on whatever the given reasons help scum or the doc/s.

And I don't think it's so certain you'll die. I think they should aim for a more "certain kill"

. Chances are you'll be protected by the doc if there's one. If the mafia doesn't know whatever there is a doc or not in the game, and I don't think they do, attempting to kill you can be rather risky.

[DarkClaymore]

It doesn't serve the same purpose because it could change future events. It's dangerous. My night follow-up question is merely meant to make scum confront their guilt and present them with the difficult decision of telling the truth or lying. And lying makes things harder for scum. It's not the same at all, man. Especially because we're not talking about something that's set in stone. This has to do with the future. It's useless.

Aren't they still standing in front of the choice whatever to lie or not? Whatever to say who they think will be killed and then actually kill him or not?

But yeah, I said it might be dangerous and that's why I didn't want to answer right away

. It could help the doc perhaps, but I personally don't really think it worth it. Though, I thought perhaps others will disagree with me. You know, like always.

[DarkClaymore]

Isn't it pretty much set that NS agreed to lynch IAI?

I don't see why we have to wait for the claim.

IAI, for the sake of saving time, isn't it better if you just claim now and when NS finally shows up he'll decide whatever to hammer or not?

Because now we wait until he arrives and says he wants to hammer. Then you claim. And then we wait again until he arrives and hammers (assuming your claim doesn't change anything). Looks like a waste of time to me. We could at least to skip the first stage, especially as it's pretty obvious it'll happen.

[DarkClaymore]

Would the claim really change anyones mind?

If anything then this:

Yeah. If he says cop and then says "O.K. guys, I investigated whilst and he's town" and then we kill him and he turns out to be cop... yeah.

Isn't it pretty much set that NS agreed to lynch IAI?

I don't see why we have to wait for the claim.

IAI, for the sake of saving time, isn't it better if you just claim now and when NS finally shows up he'll decide whatever to hammer or not?

Because now we wait until he arrives and says he wants to hammer. Then you claim. And then we wait again until he arrives and hammers (assuming your claim doesn't change anything). Looks like a waste of time to me. We could at least to skip the first stage, especially as it's pretty obvious it'll happen.

DC, if you intend to hammer, I will claim. If not, I will wait on whilst and NS. Chances are NS will call for a claim, and if he does, I will claim. I will not claim prior to that though. Giving scum more information than is absolutely necessary is not a good thing.

But he already said he wants either you or Whilst lynched many times. I think we are just wasting time.
I could come and say "I will hammer" but tbh I'm not sure about hammering you so I won't trick you into claiming just for the sake of ending the day faster. That's scummy.

[DarkClaymore]

Also, it's noteworthy that whilst has been silent and is steering clear of this whole situation. Classic aversion.

If you think so, sure. I already stated I wasn't going to lynch IAI --

I don't think he's more scummy than DarkClaymore

. I've been lurking the entire time. If there was something that deserved my input (as opinionated as that may be...), I would've given it.

Assuming NS comes back and votes for IAI, will you be repealing your cavjj vote and returning to IAI?

I just don't get it. If Abel was mafia and IAI was innocent, he would've just kept his vote on IAI and waited for the final lynch vote. If IAI and Abel are scum partners, then there is no way Abel would've let his partner get to L-1

and

stay there for such a long time. Thoughts on my reasoning?

What the-?

You were pushing Cav's lynch the whole day and suddenly you say you prefer me?
You changed your vote here with a stupid and pointless reason. And there's also this post. How comes suddenly I'm your #1 suspect?

I didn't see you saying that you have changed your mind at any point until now. Yet suddenly when Cav is at L-1 you say "DC is more scummy".

[DarkClaymore]

But you're right, he did say that you're scummier than cavjj in #745. You quoted the wrong post.

whilst is allowed to change his mind. A few people have, including me.

Oh, right. Wrong post. Sorry
Nevertheless, he was pushing Cav's lynch the whole day. Why suddenly change his mind when his lynch target is FINALLY in danger? It's like: "Lynch Cav! I'm telling you, he's scum! I'm know there is no solid wagon atm but still, he's scum and I'll keep my vote! .... What? Cav's at L-1? I dunno... I think DC is somewhat scummier but ok guess...".

This stinks.

[DarkClaymore]

DC might vote whilst.

My vote is currently on Whilst and I believe it'll stay there for quite some time.

[DarkClaymore]

1.If IAI claimed cop and said that he investigated you N1 and said you were town?
2.If he said he investigated you and said you were scum?
3.If he said he investigated me and said I was town?
4.If he said he investigated whilst and said he was town.

For all those questions my first thing would be to analyse the validity of the claim. Does anyone else counterclaim for example, are there any other reasons why his claim may or may not be true. Let's remember that at the minute IAI is nowhere near a position of needing a claim considering the bandwagon has changed so dramatically.

The simple answer to all four of the questions is that if it came out he was lying, I saw something or someone convinced me he was lying on his claim I'd press even harder than I have for his lynch.

All these answers assume that we, collectively as town, accept IAI's claim as cop.

1. Depends on the reaction of other players. However since we believe IAI in this hypothosis then I would probably admit I was wrong about my vehement belief of his scuminess. This would have to be backed up by some hard evidence mind.
2. If IAI genuinely was the cop, this would not happen. If it did I would protest my innocence and I'm sure IAI would press for the lynch. It would be up to the town to decide who would then be going, and I suspect it would be me.
3. Apart from that brief spell, you've never really or consistently been top of my scum list. You seem town to me, I would be inclined to believe him.
4.Again if we believe IAI is the cop and whilst is confirmed town by IAI then my scum readings go out the window. Because my two top suspects have been confirmed town in this scenario, I would have a serious re-read of NS and DC who would be third and fourth respectively on my list at the moment.

Aren't you basically saying your, and perhaps others', mind could change depending on the claim?
This sounds TOTALLY different than what you said here. Didn't you, indirectly, just answer your own question?

[DarkClaymore]

Wow. This is amazing. I mean, I saw discussion going after scum was revealed, but not when a scum does a silly mistake and then admits he is scum once it's revealed.

And I'm astonished how it took people a while to notice

. You should have at least read the cop PM in the first post in order to see whatever it's possible...

Especially how NS didn't notice that... Perhaps an attempt to wait for a counter-claim while still pointing fingers at the partner?

I'm leaning toward changing my vote on NS tbh. The way this day went on anyway, I'm no longer as sure Whilst is scum as I was before.

[DarkClaymore]

Oh, right. There was also the thing of Abel attacking Cav at first and then suddenly saying how he thinks Cav was used by the mafia.

Here he asks how it's possible. But here he agrees it might have been the case. True, there was something between about not "fully reading the posts" but I dunno...
Also here he says he won't be on Cav's lynch unless me or IAI flip town. Of course, his mind could have changed since then but he sure stated he isn't gonna lynch Cav there.

He also latter argued with me when I also said it's unlikely Cav was used by the mafia, which was what he said at the very beginning himself.

Yeah, or, IAI pointed out the obvious alignment thing so that he could point suspicion at NS.

True. But apparently SOMEONE had to point it out and NS didn't. I won't give any town points to IAI for pointing out the obvious, yet I'll give some scum points to NS for NOT pointing out the obvious.

[DarkClaymore]

Fair enough cavjj, then

someone else, please repeal your vote?

Let me put it this way: you kill off cavjj now then you earned yourself a lot of suspicion for D3.

If we come to a "no lynch" on everyone else, then yeah let's just kill cavjj. But if we can figure out who the other mafia is then let's just kill cavjj during D3.

I just realized how scummy that is.

You do realize that Cav most likely relied on the Jailer to actually support him to an extend, right?

I don't think he would have made such a totally BS claim. I believe he AT LEAST had minimal logic.

Thing is, unless my knowledge fails me, that scum can speak in PMs only during the night in this game.

Therefore, the scum partners couldn't share their knowledge about the rolecop's investigation. What does that mean?

Cav is most likely the rolecop

.

Lynching someone we aren't 100% sure is scum while letting the rolecop survive another night and tell his partner who's the jailer - is scummy

. Rather, maybe we should lynch him quickly so he can't say it in thread. Of course, maybe he won't say it anyway in order to not confirm a townie for us. But who knows...

[DarkClaymore]

Anyone else hesitating about lynching dicknose, just talk to me, I'll convince ya.

I think the potential rolecop is more important. He might know who is the jailer. If we miss with dicknose, then most likely our jailer will be gone. It's problematic if we lose someone who can become a confirmed townie once he claims.

[DarkClaymore]

Oh, wait. I just realized how silly what I said was.

The partner most likely knew who Cav investigated as they must have planned it before on N1. So his partner most likely already knows who is the Jailer

. Unless Cav was

blocked

by the jailer rather than investigating him. Though it doesn't seem to be the case as he said "the jailer isn't here to confirm my story" which means he knows who it is.

Still, if we let him live, then he'll investigate someone else at night if not blocked. If dicknose isn't scum, then next day Cav will still be able to come and say "I investigated and got [input role name here]" and his partner will get only more info.

While theoretically block should be superior to both kill and investigation and hence Cav can be blocked if he stays alone, this only perfect if he REALLY stays alone. And for that we must hit scum today. Otherwise, even if Cav is blocked, his partner will kill the Jailer.

As such, I personally don't see any reason to drag this on during D2 rather than D3. But whatever you wish people. I'll vote Cav only if we decide to lynch him.

Also, two notes:
1)

Whilst asked Cav to NOT reveal who he investigated. While may appear protown, it could also mean he is scum who doesn't want others to know who is the jailer

. The point of asking for a cop claim was, for the most part, to give information to the town in case the lynched player really flips cop.
2)

Whilst was pushing Cav's lynch the whole day and then hesitated hammering him. Could be a distraction.

[DarkClaymore]

You tried to claim. It means you expected it to pass. If you claimed a FULL BS thing then wow, you are very brave. Or maybe just plain stupid. And I already said. If your claim wasn't FULL BS and you really found the jailer - then you must be the rolecop. Because you didn't have the chance to speak with your partner after N1 ended.

This post is for anyone here who didn't get the logic behind what I said (assuming it exists). Because tbh - I have nothing to say to scum. Burn in hell Cav

[DarkClaymore]

Obviously his claim his bullshit. He essentially made three claims about our power roles, and in such a way that any of them could disprove his claim. Even if he had been a rolecop and found one power role night one he still made an assumption about the other potential PR slot. It's next to worthless to speculate on that without a little more information.

He did say there's no doc and also claimed cop himself. Chances are one of these exists in the game and could counter-claim. Perhaps that was his intention in the first place. Maybe he even hoped the Jailer will claim and will make him clear assuming we have one. I believe I would have gone with something of this sort if I were on the verge of dying as scum.

Really IAI, couldn't you play around with him a little bit and extract info? That would have been much better

I still think we need to lynch him and not someone else, unless we get another scum confession. It'd be much better to work on D3 with, potentially, less suspects and, most likely, more info. I really don't understand why we are dragging D2 for such a long time.

[DarkClaymore]

Really IAI, couldn't you play around with him a little bit and extract info? That would have been much better

Sorry, never had a scum make that kind of claim before. We caught one, now catching the second with no power role(s) outted should be easy. Continuing down this path that whilst has suggested of trying to lynch scum #2 is very dangerous and we have a 25% chance of outting a power role*** if we take someone else to L-1.

My vote stays.

*** Chances are we have 1.5 power roles out of 6 unknown playes. 1.5/6 or 3.0/12 is 25%.

Like I said, I also disagree with Whilst's suggestion.

Hence, if the town decides to lynch the scum - count me in.

I personally think we should lynch Cav and move onward to D3. On D3 I suggest doing mass-claim

. In the worst case scenario if we had only one PR and he was killed at night - it'll change nothing. In the best case scenario a VT dies at night and with the mass-claim we'll automatically clear two players out of five. By examining their night actions - we'll most likely be able to clear some of the remaining three and hopefully find the scum.

What do others think?

[DarkClaymore]

I disagree with a mass claim. Why out power roles before their effectiveness is used up? How will examining anyone's supposed night actions other than the supposed cop's clear anyone?

If there are two role claims then we'll have only three suspects. Hopefully if we have cop then he'll be able to clear at least one of them and then it'll be 50%-50%. A Jailer can also clear one player in case he blocks someone during the night and someone still dies. I personally believe that from D3 onward, we just have to get the full picture and then work it out with deduction. The thought that we might lose both our RPs without hearing what their night actions were isn't one I like.

Should I hammer or someone here is waiting for someone to say/answer something?

I suppose I'll hammer before I go to sleep unless someone asks me not to. Or hammers before me.

[DarkClaymore]

So I guess I'm hammering?
Okay then.

VOTE: Cavjj

Hopefully the night will end quickly and we will be able to continue discussing soon

[DarkClaymore]

The night lasts the full time in newb games.

From the rules in the thread:

Deadlines may be shortened

if activity is too low, or

if all Night choices have been received early

.

[DarkClaymore]

Okay so... the jailer didn't die. Rather, no one died.

As much as, in a way, it's a good thing, it has it's disadvantages as Abel stated

. I was looking forward learning something new.

Guess I'll have to reread as well

. Was waiting until N2's death is revealed but... it was pointless...

BTW, I have a question to everyone. Assuming a jailer were to be killed on N2, what would be your conclusions from that?

I think there is one interesting aspect to that but I'd like to hear what others think about it first.

[DarkClaymore]

If the jailer had been killed, my conclusion would be that the mafia actually knew who the jailer was and killed him.

And that's all? Nothing regarding the fact Cav was the goon and couldn't know there is a jailer?

This formatting method is just annoying to read. Just make an attempt to be more concise and protown, and that will be good enough.

What is your brilliant insight, DC?

It won't apply now since no one was killed. Honestly, it's the worst result from my perspective. Because of this - it's impossible to judge to what extend Cav's claim was BS. Basically I just want to get some reads from people and see if anyone going to say what I thought about it. Though maybe not everyone here thought what they would conclude in case a jailer dies... It seems like you didn't put much effort into it...

[DarkClaymore]

I'm personally leaning Abelscum, for reasons that I will expand on after some discussion. I'd like to hear everyone's thoughts (

especially

Abel's).

Hmm... I have to admit I'm also leaning toward Abel being scum. I has been doing for a while. And wow... if you are really Jailerkeeper then my deduction was correct. I assumed if mafia knew the jailer, it'd be the IC. Because he'd be the first one I'd investigate as scum.

As for this specific situation, I'd say aiming at Abel isn't the smartest move during the night. Whatever scum did or didn't know if there are protective roles, a sole scum should try and

kill

someone. Even if the target isn't the most protown player there is. If we are dealing with an awfully tricky scum who knew there is a jailer, he could choose to not kill and then frame whoever the jailer blocked. But I'm not sure about this...

[DarkClaymore]

Night One I (or, specifically, Wickedest) jailed DC.

I actually hoped this will be done during N2 and will make me clear once someone dies. Of course, another alternative was investigation as I didn't know whatever there is a jailer or cop here. Or anyone for that matter. Guess this didn't happen...

Here goes my last part of the lynchbait play. I was really hoping I'll be cleared by some PR on N2 due to being awfully suspicious and surely not becoming NK target, hence surely surviving to D3...

Though I obviously didn't foresee the mafia possibly knowing the Jailer, nor how soon after me - almost any other player would be come nearly as suspicious.

And wow... if you are really Jailerkeeper then my deduction was correct. I assumed if mafia knew the jailer, it'd be the IC. Because he'd be the first one I'd investigate as scum.

Except if cavjj actually knew there was a jailkeeper, then the mafia must have created some kind of code to convey the message in broad daylight that we didn't pick up on. Maybe try looking back through that time period to see if someone said anything particularly strange about NS and even better, if cavjj responded to it in some way.

But using a code like that is probably something newbscum wouldn't think to do. So cavjj's partner must have thought it up, if we were to conclude that cavjj did actually know there was a jailkeeper.

Oh, good. That's exactly the direction in which I was thinking in. While figuring out the code will most likely be fruitless since it can be something awfully random (even like using a specific smiley to indicate a result) but reading the first few posts of any player on D2 can't harm. I personally tried it but didn't find anything worthy myself.

My initial thinking was that if a Jailer dies (who I hoped isn't NS, even though I guessed chances are high he is) then indeed they used a code. Question is whatever NS, as a replacement, could still view the scum night chat and give the right sign. At first I thought such situation can easily clear him, but now that I think about it... maybe he could view anyway?

A suggestion: How about ending this day with no lynch and letting NS jail Abel again? If no one dies again, then Abel most likely scum. I doubt scum will overlook the opportunity to kill the jailer. Of course, in exchange this will make Abel confirmed townie next day, but he can always be killed the next night. So I believe if Abel isn't scum, the Jailer will be killed. While scum can choose to not kill in order to frame Abel, it's debatable how likely that is and whatever this is the best move for scum or not. I believe killing a powerful PR should take priority to framing a townie who can be killed latter anyway.

[DarkClaymore]

DC, if we nolynch and let NS jail me again and there's no kill again, what does that prove? NS could be scum and purposely choose not to kill at night.

If we don't lynch, scum can't win in any way unless he kills at night. I say if there is no NK, then we should lynch you. I think this method will give us clearer picture of NS. If you flip town and the following night NS isn't killed, then it'll automatically put him in a bad situation since it'll appear very unlikely to happen. This will automatically block the possibility of him "automatically winning" with this claim.

On the other hand, if NS is killed this night despite blocking you - then you'll become a confirmed townie next day and we'll have a better chance lynching scum. If we just lynch someone we aren't sure about today, we'll just help scum IMO.

True, we can also lynch someone anyway and

then

let NS block you. But I believe with this setup - the chance scum will decide to not perform NK is higher. Thus it will not be as helpful as what I suggested IMO.

DC, explain how your realization that the mafia would have had to use a code to convey to cavjj that there was a jailkeeper would have had any bearing on the game at hand.

As it is, I suppose it won't help us much as I originally thought. Still, I'm willing to believe NS is the jailer because that's what I expected him to be and because I'm not certain about whatever or not he could read the scum night conversation and give his partner the code. My idea was to clear NS with the code thing in case a jailer dies (as paradoxical as it is since I thought NS might be the said Jailer). I'm not sure how convincing it is in this situation though...

Therefore I wanted to see who aside of me put effort into thinking in a similar direction. To see the mentality of the remaining players.

Unless you can find the code. I actually made a topic on the rolecop a while back and posted in it today. There's some discussion in there about possible codes.

I don't think it'll work... we aren't even sure what post we should check. Finding the code, no matter how simple it is, is very unlikely IMO. I admit, I tried to look for something fishy. There was one thing that caught my attention. But obviously, such speculation are never convincing. In #100 Cav makes a bold "5". In #102 Whilst makes Cav's name bold. True, he does bold the names of the players, but not that often. Also, if I were to count the roles as they are shown on the first post from top - then JK will indeed be 5. (if we see the whole mafia PM as a "1").

[DarkClaymore]

Why are you so confident that we have a jailer at this point?

I was hoping Cav's claim wasn't full BS. So I tried assuming we have a Jailer, which is found by the mafia, and see what I can conclude from his death. This sadly didn't work as no one died, but I still wanted to ask what others would have concluded. And I didn't say I think we have a Jailer at that point anyway.

Can you explain this sentence more? What you mean by it?

Cav claimed he found the Jailer. Yet he flipped goon. So only his partner could have known who is the Jailer during the day. Were the Jailer to die during N2, this would lead to the conclusion they somehow communicated in the thread under our noses. Though I don't know whatever it's really the case the way things stand now.






If we aren't going to do "no lynch", then this might turn into a weird situation. Assuming Abel is scum, if NS blocks him every night then no one'll die at night. However then, during the day, Abel can claim scum tried to frame him and refused to NK. Then he might convince us to do another mislynch and perhaps another. He could just win like this.

Of course, we could just lynch Whilst, or whoever, today and then lynch Abel tomorrow in case there's no NK again. But I think we are just helping the mafia like this as he might

really

give up on NK for the sake of lynching Abel on the following day. If anything, I'd suggest Abel's lynch first then. I still think no lynch is better as losing Abel just like that can be pretty bad if he's town. But...

[DarkClaymore]

I will not allow a lynch of me unless you present me with some infallible plan that proves how lynching me would win the game for town.

All I'm saying is that not lynching you will bring about a big problem to the town in case NKs won't occur while you are blocked. We'll never have a way to know whatever scum decided to not kill on purpose or whatever you, as scum, were blocked. If we lynch a townie today, this will put more suspicion on you for the following day, yet will also become a good excuse for you to say "scum tries to frame me and decided to not conduct NK".

That's why I think rather than living in phobia, we should either lynch you or possibly sacrifice the Jailer at night with no lynch - but in exchange make you a confirmed townie for at least one day. True, we can lynch Whilst first. But question is what is more helpful to the town. If Whilst flips town, you'll most likely be jailed again. What if there's no NK again? What should we do then? Should we lynch you? We can't know and we are back to square one. You'll yet again become a suspect, yet not enough to become automatic lynch target.

On the other hand, if we lynch you and you flip town - then at least the Jailer will have a better chance to Jail scum during the night because there will no longer be any need to Jail you in order to see whatever NK happens. Also, we might get a clearer read on NS from the whole thing and possibly block his opportunity to easily win with the claim if he's scum.

[DarkClaymore]

This is just a thinly disguised attempt at town-damning strategy. NS will have a better chance jailing scum in the night no matter who is killed because the pool will be smaller.

But he'll most likely try blocking you again in order to check if someone NKed. As long as you live today, you'll probably end up as his target. So no, if you aren't scum then his chances to block scum won't increase even one bit no matter how many other players we lynch. Of course, that depends on how much he is willing to jail you again in the first place.

you are trying desperately to get an obvious townie lynched

Obvious townie? How so? Because you are somewhat protown? BS. I already said that this only makes you more scummy in my eyes. This is a great scum strategy which I have seen numerous times before. The most protown players I have ever seen ended up being scum in most cases.

You are basically the most dangerous player in this game to be the remaining scum. That's why if we have a chance to either clear you or conclude something from your death - we should do one of those while we have the chance.

You said it yourself:

Jailkeeper is dead tonight no matter what

If he's going to die anyway, why not make you a confirmed townie along the road? Atm we have 0 confirmed townies, as much as I personally willing to believe to NS's claim. The more we mislynch just for the sake of lynching, the greater chances are that scum will win. Why not come back and find the scum after we have two more confirmed townies? I don't think we have enough on Whilst as it is. You were the one who said "that's how he always plays". While he is one of my top two suspects, the same goes for you. Yet only one is scum. And right now I'd personally prefer your lynch first unless we find a way to clear you.

You're hoping for a scenario in which we have to choose between you two.

And you for a scenario in which there's 0% chance someone will want to lynch you. As protown as it's scummy.

[DarkClaymore]

Mislynchnig for the sake of lynching is what you'd be doing to me. You have no scumreads on me other than the fact that the jailkeeper said he was leaning toward me being scum more than being town, yet you want to lynch me? Your whole case reeks of opportunism. You should be wanting to lynch people you think are scum, not defaulting to/relying on calculated strategies that won't offer proof either way. That is supremely scummy. I am absolutely ready to lynch you or whilst depending on whose lynch has greater support at the moment.

As I already said, I don't trust the regular and obvious "scum reads" as it never works for me. And who are you to decide what are "scum reads" and what are "town reads"? If I see a extreme protown play as a "scum read", then that's how I see it. You can't just come and say "WTF? That's not a scum read idiot! You have nothing on me!". There are reasons to be extra cautious when it comes to extreme ptotown playstyle and that's what I'm doing.

Letting such a player stay alive without properly turning him into a confirmed townie is not something I'm willing to do. I did offer a plan to possibly clear you. Since no one agrees, then all that is left for me is hope people will want to lynch you. As sad as it'll be in case you are town.

One of you is town and just playing poorly. One of you needs to admit that and lynch the other or die for the cause.

What if we are both playing poorly? This is always a possibility. Though my scummy playstyle was intended to an extend and I did admit my actions were scummy, whereas Whilst kept protecting his actions throughout D2 by saying they aren't scummy. I could join Whilst's wagon I suppose, but before then I'd like to see what others have to contribute. Problem is that if Whilst flips town then we lost since apparently I'll be the next target.

I still can't believe how I didn't become confirmed townie today. Such a bummer.

[DarkClaymore]

I believe that's what you did and think it's reasonable to come to that conclusion, but that I'm scum is not the only conclusion and shouldn't really be the main one.

Actually, there are legit reasons to conclude you are scum from this, especially from my prespective. The one who was blocked during N1 was me. But I know I'm town. Therefore, if the mafia knew who is the Jailer, then it was trough investigating a player and not due to being blocked. Which means they not only knew there is a Jailer, but also knew

who

is the Jailer.

Assuming the above is correct. Why target you? Why not NS? Due to fear of a possible doc protection? I don't think so, considering their target would be one of the protective roles. Fearing to take down a protective role is quite silly IMO.

[DarkClaymore]

Here's a way to win (

assuming NS is really the jailkeeper

and

assuming IAI is townie

):

D3.

Lynch me, NS jails Abel (5 players remaining)

D4.

Lynch DC, NS jails Abel (4 players remaining)

D5.

Lynch dicknose, NS jails Abel (3 players remaining)

If the mafia is

not

Abel, he will have killed someone on N5, to win the game. That would only include: NS and IAI. IAI pointed out cavjj's mistake -- I really don't think he's mafia. Remember, I'm assuming NS is the JK, so he is also town.

If the mafia is me, DC, or dicknose -- well, the town wins.

The only way this plan fails is if NS is mafia, or if the pattern is broken. For example, if Abel is jailed during N3, but NS also dies during N3 -- then Abel is cleared of suspicion, as well as NS. You are then down to 4 players, with Abel and IAI there to root out that last scum. In that scenario, I am confident they can pull it off. This assumes the mafia kill NS (because he's the JK) during N3 and not anyone else.

By the way, I don't mind being lynched first (D3), and for the win, I don't think dicknose or DC will care either in what order they are lynched in (for D4 and D5). You can rearrange those lynches in any way you want. If there are any holes in the reasoning, point them out. I read it over a few times (it might take 2 or 3 reads to understand), and I'm all for pursuing this strategy or a better one if someone proposes it.

Abel

, you'd like to lynch me and/or DC, correct? You get both your wishes from this scenario. Of course, I'd still like your case against me (based off of cavjj's ISO, or whatever else you want to use).

And if Abel survives to D6 then he's the scum and gets lynched then?
That's an interesting idea. Problem is that it really relies too much on NS and IAI being clear. While I agree to bet on the former, I have trouble doing the same with the latter. IAI could easily not NK anyone in this setup and win in the end. I rather not offer scum an easy way out.

However, perhaps we could do that if another PR claims and will take IAI's place as a townie in the plan. I don't think scum will attempt to fake claim now due to the obvious risk of counter claiming. If scum isn't Abel, then the scum will be able to cause some confusion with a random kill in order to break the plan. PR claim should only lower his chances to win the way I see it.

[DarkClaymore]

DC two things:

1. I don't get why you believe NS so easily and not IAI (like me). IAI ousted cavjj by pointing out the flaw in cavjj's claim. If IAI were cavjj's partner, he would've kept his mouth shut at all costs.
   
   
2. In my scenario, do you care if you are lynched on D3, D4, or D5?

1) Because the moment Cav claimed he investigated and found the Jailer, the first thing that to pop in my mind was "if mafia really investigated and found the Jailer, it must have been the IC". If you don't kill the IC due to fear of him being protected - then at least investigate him. That's my way of thinking and the reason I'm willing trust his claim to an extend. I expected him to be the Jailer before he even claimed.

As for IAI. True, what he did was quite protown. I would have liked him to keep quiet for a while and try extract more info, but I admit I most likely wouldn't have thought about doing this as well in his place. Thing is, it still could be intended bussing or/and an attempt to shut his partner up so that others can't extract information. While I agree that IAI is more likely town, I don't really want a plan which bets on this.

2) I don't really think it matters. But as I said, I'm not willing to be part of it unless the second assumption is a townie cleared by actions which are nearly 100% town. Like claim, cop investigation (btw, if scum claims cop then anyway whoever he says is cleared - is definitely cleared) or being Jailed when NK occurs.

whilst, dude, the mafia gets to kill people at night. How are you forgetting this? They most likely tried to kill me last night and were blocked. There was no reason for the mafia to not kill anyone unless NS is mafia and did it to claim JK, which I doubt. There's no reason to think they will allow three successive lynches by not killing at night.

The first part of the plan will most likely happen either way with either mine, Whilst's or Dicknose's lynch. Then, if someone is really NKed at night, the plan falls either way. Don't see why use this reason to reject the plan. If this is the main reason, then it's not a reason at all. All you say is "you're plan will most likely fail due to NK" while still willing to go trough its first step one way or another. No real need to argue about it if you are so certain someone will die this night.

[DarkClaymore]

Rather than jailing Abel continually until the end of the game, why don't we .... oh, I DON'T KNOW .... lynch him today?

The plans seem to be to jail Abel (because he's scum) until we flip all the rest of the townies ...why? To prove a point?

If Abel's as scummy as you all seem to think (and I'm including myself in that), we should just lynch him today. IF he flips town (which I doubt) then the mafia will likely kill me; if not, I'll jail someone else and we'll go on tomorrow.

Better plan?

I actually agree with this.

The only shred of evidence against me is that NS jailed me and there was no nightkill. That means either I'm mafia or I was the mafia target. Why are you willing to believe the former more than the latter? I just don't fucking get it.

I already stated how I want to assume mafia really found the Jailer. Thus, there was no point to target you over him. Why target you, who can possibly be protected, and not the Jailer who is also the IC? I just don't fucking get it.

[DarkClaymore]

DC, that's a good point. I don't know why if mafia knew NS was the jailkeeper why they wouldn't try to kill him. Probably because they didn't really know?

Maybe. Or maybe you are scum.
The way how Cav claimed to know the Jailer and how the Jailer was indeed the IC like I expected - fit each other too well. It can be coincidence and I have seen amazing ones before (like cop investigating the godfather on D1), but I'm still willing to bet on this one. Not to mention how you have been on the top of my suspects list since D2 along with Whilst.

VOTE: Honest Abel

[DarkClaymore]

Why don't you guys come up with some other evidence on me other than the possibility that I'm scum because NS jailed me? It makes no sense why you are hinging the entire argument on that

Don't forget that you play the "extremely protown boy" role. If done well, it's close to impossible to find anything convincing against you from your posts. Thus, the only way to lynch you is with reasons based on

actions

.

True, cop investigation or jailing twice in a row with no NKs would have made things more obvious. But we missed the latter and perhaps can't have the former at all.

The way how Cav claimed to know the Jailer and how the Jailer was indeed the IC like I expected - fit each other too well.

So? What does that prove?

For me, it makes assuming "scum knew NS is the Jailer" more likely. Hence, there was no point in targeting Abel at night over NS. And atm, Abel is clear only if we assume he was targeted at night by the mafia.

[DarkClaymore]

For me, it makes assuming "scum knew NS is the Jailer" more likely. Hence, there was no point in targeting Abel at night over NS. And atm, Abel is clear only if we assume he was targeted at night by the mafia.

Ok. If that's true, scum could only be Abel, but the info leading to NS was that he's an IC. No reason to assume only Abel would investigate him based on that and, as we learned (thanks to Abes) on day one, everyone would have been gunning for NS at least for an investigation.

I didn't say I suspect Abel because he might have investigated NS. Rather, what you said further proves my point since I assume that no matter who the rolecop is - he must have investigated NS. I was blocked and I know I'm not the rolecop. So scum must have got their result. Then why attempt to kill Abel when you could kill the Jailer who is also the IC? Two birds with one bullet.

[DarkClaymore]

Same question to you DC. And why are you waiting to see what others have to contribute?

I was waiting to see:
1) How many are willing to lynch Abel. I thought it might be impossible today, but maybe I was wrong.
2) Whatever someone want to claim or point out something good which will change my mind.

As for who is Cav's partner. I don't know from this specific angle as I didn't really put much effort into finding something against players based on "interactions" with Cav. And I don't think I'll find much even if I search. Though, I did at least make sure my prime suspects fit to be Cav's partner.

Whilst was pushing Cav's wagon all along. So he might fit being his partner assuming he thought Cav won't really be lynched. Or, if Cav is really lynched then he could get some town points. Abel as accusing Cav a lot at first, yet then agreed with how mafia might have used Cav, despite how initially he denied such theory. So he also fits. Even more I'd say.

[DarkClaymore]

Everybody, who would you have nightkilled last night?

You.
I mean, seriously.

If I knew NS is the Jailer then sure I'd kill NS.
However, if I assume I didn't know then:

Me and Whilst should be out of question as we are the scummiest by the end of D2.
Abel and NS could be protected and aren't safe bets.
This leaves IAI and Dicknose. Now, my impression during D2 was that: IAI is a SE who appears rather scummy, Dicknose is a player who many can't exactly say whatever he is scummy or not.

I most likely would have chosen Dicknose in order to have a safe night kill, as well as get rid of a player who doesn't seem like a very likely lynch target.

i would've killed Darky

Why...? Am I not one of the more scummy players?

[DarkClaymore]

Out of annoyance.

That's a very poor reason. Asking a question and not giving a proper answer yourself? Wow. How protown of you. Were you even asking that seriously or just to appear like you are doing something protown?
And it's interesting to hear. What about me annoyed you enough to kill me as scum? Assuming of course, your answer wasn't just a joke.

fair enough

, i assumed there was more.

I also have a question.

If you were the rolecop, who would you have investigated on N1 and why?

If your answer is the IC, like in my case, then a follow up question:

You found out the IC is the Jailer. Is there any reason that would make you to

not

go after the IC on N2 and target someone else instead?

For me: nope. I'd definitely go after the IC now that I know he's a protective role.

I just thought the whole thing is kind of hanging in the air at the moment and most players didn't really take a well defined stance regarding the matter. So I'd like to have clear and definite answers regarding the matter.

If most of you give the same answer I gave, then, whatever Cav's claim was

full

BS or not, NS should have been targeted on N2 and not Abel. Thus, it should be awfully hard to believe Abel was really targeted and got saved.

[DarkClaymore]

I would think this would be the popular argument:

1. Premise:
   cavjj claimed he was the cop and knew the jailkeeper.
   
2. Premise:
   cavjj is scum.
   
3. Inference:
   cavjj was lying about being the cop.
   
4. Conclusion:
   cavjj was lying about knowing the jailkeeper.

But DC's looks more like this:

1. Premise:
   cavjj claimed he was the cop and knew the jailkeeper.
   
2. Premise:
   cavjj is scum.
   
3. Inference:
   cavjj was lying about being the cop.
   
4. Inference:
   cavjj was telling the truth about knowing the jailkeeper.
   
5. Premise:
   If scum knew the jailkeeper, they would have killed the jailkeeper.
   
6. Premise:
   There is no doctor.
   
7. Premise:
   Scum didn't kill the jailkeeper.
   
8. Inference:
   Scum must have been blocked by the jailkeeper.
   
9. Premise:
   Abel was blocked by the jailkeeper.
   
10. Conclusion:
    : Abel is scum.

I doubt the soundness of IV and VI, and VIII is, by extension of VI, illogical.

I have no problem forgetting Cav's claim. Really. I'm using basic logic. Tell me, Abel. Wouldn't you investigate the IC on N1 if you were rolecop? Because I believe most players would (though I can change my mind if I see a variety of answers) and thus mafia should have known NS is the Jailer by N2. Is it so illogical to conclude NS were to be targeted on N2?

Now, you were blocked that night. Assuming NS is indeed the Jailer, there are only two logical options here I think:
1) Abel is scum and was blocked
2) There is a doc who protected the IC

I don't see any reason to favor the second conclusion over the first. The second assumes there's another protective role as well as that the target was the IC even though there were quite some other possible candidates. In short: the second option requires too much assumptions while the first is rather straightforward and simple.

[DarkClaymore]

If I were rolecop, no, I wouldn't default to the IC. I would pick the best target given what happened in D1. Who would care about such an inactive IC as Wickedestjr was on D1?

Then who would you have picked on N1?
And if I already have to, I'd say that PRs tend to lurk or being not as active quite often (as much as I think this is a bad strategy). So if anything, the IC being not too active would only motivate me more to investigate him.

You're also assuming that the mafia would definitely kill the jailkeeper on N2, which isn't 100% positive. I personally think the jailkeeper has the capacity to screw things up for town. Just look at this game.

Nothing is ever 100% in mafia. But okay. You say perhaps you wouldn't have targeted him, as strange as it is in my eyes. If there are others here who think the same, then I'll reconsider the whole thing. Because I'd definitely target the Jailer as I personally consider it the strongest PR out of the trio.

Interesting thing about #4: IF scum did indeed know that a jailkeeper existed, as you insist, wouldn't choosing not to kill cast a lot of suspicion on the jailkeeper's target? That makes #4 kind of likely.

No, #4 isn't all that likely. Because scum couldn't know who would be jailed. It could easily be

him

and then he is the one who'll be under great suspicion. I don't see much point betting like this. Especially since every player ended D2 as quite suspicious.

And I'll consider #3 only in case I hear others saying they might have not killed the Jailer for some reason. Otherwise, even #2 is much more likely then #3 IMO.

[DarkClaymore]

This is the third fucking time I'm making this post.

You say perhaps you wouldn't have targeted him, as strange as it is in my eyes. If there are others here who think the same, then I'll reconsider the whole thing.
...
And I'll consider #3 only in case I hear others saying they might have not killed the Jailer for some reason. Otherwise, even #2 is much more likely then #3 IMO.

Did you not read the last page? Out of five people who've declared who they would have nk'd, you're the only one who chose the IC. At most, only one of them is lying. Way to tunnel.

In response to your question: I was honest about nk'ing you. I would then make the argument that scum was trying to make me look suspicious for having tunneled you.

I would have chosen the IC only assuming I know he is the Jailer. No one aside of me really gave an answer which takes this into account. Yet, I'd really hear how many here would have +80% killed the Jailer if they knew who it is. Because it's the only way I see to either prove or disprove that my assumptions are logical or not.

You still haven't said what about me annoyed you enough to go this far. There are surely quite big disadvantages to killing me as scum.

[DarkClaymore]

DC, now you're trying to "prove your assumptions are logical" based on opinion. Man, you know nothing about logic.

I'm trying to prove it's logical based on whatever others agree it's logical. Because if it's only me who thinks it's logical, then it's obviously helping no one if I keep trying finding scum with this logic. I want to check how "general" that logic is. If I'm one of very few who think in this direction, then it'd mean I was wrong to apply this way of thinking on the mafia's action.

Yet, if many think like me then chances are high mafia thought the same thing. This would mean there is no reason to stop pursuing this theory.

Also, why are you trying to prove that your assumptions are logical in the first place? Is it of any importance other than making you look smart? You're slipping into focus of your own scumminess/towniness. That is not something town do.

Of course it's important. If it appears logical to many, then it means that it's very likely to be correct. And if it's correct, then we found our last scum. Isn't that important?

Yet, I'd really hear how many here would have +80% killed the Jailer if they knew who it is. Because it's the only way I see to either prove or disprove that my assumptions are logical or not.

logic =/= true

Logic is a method of reasoning. It can be false.

Other than that, I'm not spending another day on you. VOTE: Darky. Anyone who wants to lose this sucker, join me.

Two things:
1) Okay. Fine. You say that we aren't going to use logic and reasoning because it might be false. What we gonna use to find scum then?
2) Wow... voting someone right after being voted + not answering my question. Just great.

[DarkClaymore]

I am not even saying that and not part of my post even suggests that.

But you said it might be false. Isn't that the same as saying "What the heck you are doing relying on logic? You know it's not always true.". I just don't see any other way to interpret what you said.
And still not answer to my question.

If I were the rolecop, N1 would have been Cav and N2 would have been NS.

Er, jailkeeper.

And what was this about anyway?
Did you say who you would have jailed if you were the Jailer? I don't think anyone asked that

There's something seriously wrong with him.

Like what? Not playing how

you

expect me to?
Besides. No matter what I say, I already stated my point in the very beginning. The rest are just reasons I try to force in order to stress the idea and make it appear as one with more basis.

In the end it all comes down to this: if we lynch a townie today, scum might decide to not NK and then tomorrow we'll yet again be wondering what we should do with the jailed Abel. That's just awfully wrong. Sorry, but I see no reason for the town to be in paranoia for one more day. Especially when all the parts fit together so well.

I really don't see what is so wrong with my way of thinking here, but whatever suits you.

[DarkClaymore]

Because something doesn't become logical just because it's true or because someone agrees with it

Then how something becomes logical? Everything I said was a possible scenario. My logic says it was a "likely" scenario. How do you suggest me to check whatever it really was "likely" or not other than asking what others think?

I don't see what more I have to add about why I was annoyed with you.

Weren't you just having fun ridiculing me back then? I didn't see anything that implied you were annoyed. Let's say Abel sure expressed annoyance. But you? Didn't see anything like that.

I'm sorry for volunteering information?

How about answering the question with the rolecop then?

[DarkClaymore]

No matter what I say, I already stated my point in the very beginning. The rest are just reasons I try to force in order to stress the idea and make it appear as one with more basis.

Why do you want to "make it appear" that your ideas have more basis? Should you want people to pick apart your arguments if they're flawed? Wouldn't that bring you/us closer to the truth? Why are you so concerned with how you and your arguments appear?

I'm just trying to convince people from different angles. The more angles I offer, the more likely I'll either convince others or will be able to find more flaws in my theory and finally drop it if I conclude it's not likely.

Why do you think scum would choose not to nightkill?

It's a possibility. And one whose chance to happen will dramatically increase if we lynch a townie today and not you. But true, I won't say "it's very likely to happen. much more than NKing" because I have nothing to support that.

But think about it. NKing anyone this night will make you clear for the next day. It's not in the best interest of the scum. On the other hand, no NKing will both cause confusion and will make you even more suspicious. Then, once you are gone, there will be no problem to kill the Jailer because the rest won't know who he jailed and no one will be cleared.

Also, another problem with keeping you alive is that you'd most likely be jailed. If you are town, then this is bad since the Jailer loses its opportunity to block the real scum.

Choosing to not nightkill means that town would still have two more lynches after today. It would be INCREDIBLY dangerous not to nightkill at this point. Try thinking before you talk, scum.

True. That's why I can't say for sure what is more likely. I think having 0 confirmed townies is much safer during lylo but that depends in this case as there are other factors.

All in all, your lynch should be piratically much more helpful. The sad part is how it might not bring us closer to the truth in case you flip town. But then again, every flip brings the town closer to the truth to some degree.

I didn't see anything that implied you were annoyed. Let's say Abel sure expressed annoyance. But you? Didn't see anything like that.

whatever the outcome, i wish you had gone before anyone else in the game, and when you're gone i'll be glad.

I have to say that it didn't convey the "OMG! I want this idiot dead no matter what!" feeling like in Abel's case. Strange that you'd choose to kill me as scum for such a reason, but each and his own way of thinking I suppose.

Ok. If that's true, scum could only be Abel, but the info leading to NS was that he's an IC. No reason to assume only Abel would investigate him based on that and,

as we learned

(thanks to Abes) on day one,

everyone would have been gunning for NS at least for an investigation.

As scum rolecop I would have investigated Abel N1 and whilst N2.

You said anyone would have investigated the IC. Why you wouldn't then?

[DarkClaymore]

BTW, I just thought about the whole NS thing.
I see a little problem with his reaction toward Cav's claim.

The first weird thing was that he didn't notice the obvious slip even though he is a IC who played over 30 (iirc) games. But okay. We are all humans. We make mistakes.

The second thing was him saying this:

I have a very real problem with a

cop hammering

as you did on Day One.

Lynch at will

.

If he didn't see the obvious mistake in Cav's claim, then I'd assume he considered the possibility it's legit. Cav claimed there is a JK in the game. And NS says he is the JK. Shouldn't he, of all people, be willing to believe this claim? Or at least ask some questions to check whatever it's legit?

I find his automatic "lynch at will" response rather weird. Also, the reason for that response was "cop hammering on D1". Why would it matter whatever VT or cop hammered? Rather, now that I think about it, it's more likely cop hammered as he wanted to investigate at night.


So I decided to rethink about the whole thing. Problem is, I see his claim unlikely as scum for three main reasons:
1) He wasn't really under extreme suspicion, so there was no need to claim.
2) The same role could easily counter-claim.
3) He said he jailed me on N1. Now, if I were a cop and got result on N1 - I could also counter claim. Another risk.

I tried denying every point and reasoning why scum still could do this:
1) Perhaps it was planned with the no NK. Either he didn't NK on purpose, which I doubt, or he failed to NK Abel. Seeing how he might not be able to NK Abel, he decides to frame him with the claim. Because let's admit it. Even if Abel flips town, NS can easily get away with saying "Oh, so I didn't block scum but protected a townie that night. My bad".
2) Could be a blind bet, which I don't like as a reason. Perhaps he investigated someone and found out a PR which isn't JK. So in this case, betting with a JK claim, while still risky, have much more chance to pass. We could take this even further and even assume he might have investigated both the PRs and that's how he knew there's no Jailer out there.
3) He investigated me on N1 and found out I'm not a PR. So saying he jailed me will be a safe bet as I can't counter claim in any way.

The reasons for #2 and #3 collide with each other to an extend, so one way or another there was a bet at least at

one part

of his claim. And the reason for #1 isn't too convincing as it doesn't explain how he is going to win latter on in case two power two roles die or he isn't NKed at night. So tbh... I dunno.

With the right investigations, his bet could have been not nearly as big as it appears, yet it doesn't seem like a strategy with which you can win. Am I missing something? Or is there really no way to disprove the claim and we should treat him like a confirmed townie?

[DarkClaymore]

Oh, wait. Actually, if he found two PRs then it's obvious that I'm a VT. So perhaps there was no risk at all to the claim itself...
Though, I still don't really see how he is planning to win with this... Perhaps there is some kind of strategy for him...?

[DarkClaymore]

Oh and one last thing I forgot. If we assume there was a lack of coaching during N1, then the inactive IC surely fits this.

[DarkClaymore]

Oh and one last thing I forgot. If we assume there was a lack of coaching during N1, then the inactive IC surely fits this.

I brought this up earlier. I don't know, your whole thing on NS just seems like a last-ditch deflection effort just because we're putting pressure on you. Not looking too good.

Well, we need a starting point. People don't agree NS should have been targeted on N2.
Okay. Let's go one step back. People don't agree NS was investigated on N1.
Okay, let's go

another

step back. Do people agree NS is the Jailer?

We need to have some starting point for the sake of future discussions. If we just going to add "assuming X is true" to every argument we give, then that's not going to convince much. We need some basic assumptions on which most/all of the town agrees. I think going and pointing fingers at other players should be done

after

we make it clear where we, as town, are standing right now.

[DarkClaymore]

I struggle because I think there are definitely scummier players out there, but I also think we all will have this uncertainty if he continues in the game. If he is town, he is a huge liability in LyLo/MyLo. Also, if we lynch him and he is scum, game over, if he is town, well, JK gets to play cat and mouse tonight with the scum. If we lynch a townie today and HA/NS are still alive, I fear there will be a huge temptation for the JK to jail the same player again and scum will plan around that.

Agree with this.

So in summary, I vote for a cop claim at this point. A claim should give us more information that should narrow things down, a no claim should convince us even more that NS is likely the JK. Once we have that figured out, I think we all vote on whether HA should be the lynch or not today.

This is interesting. I did propose a mass-claim yesterday too. Though this sounds much better.
Indeed, cop claim is quite useful in case he can clear someone. And it can be even more useful if there is also a doc out there who would understand he can counter-claim. The way I see it, the only way NS could claim JK without any risks to be immediately counter claimed, is by finding the two other PRs first. So a cop claim can possible block his strategy as well.

I'm also for cop claim

.

Whoever ends up being the lynch candidate today should provide a list of order of those to massclaim (who should go 1st, 2nd, etc). The assumption being if the lynchee is scum, game over. If not, we have an unbiased list which should hopefully have scummier players forced to not claim or fake claim earlier in the claiming process.

I actually thought about the order as well. How about giving 24 hours to all the PRs to claim first? This way scum shouldn't be able to come in the last second and claim PR if he sees everyone is VT.

[DarkClaymore]

My list would be:

1 whilst
2 dicknose
3 DC
4 IAI

Abel already claimed he isn't a cop so...

[DarkClaymore]

Oh and perhaps we could just let NS do this in one go? If he is scum then we have nothing to worry about since the list will be filled with townies anyway. If he's town then it's as good as any I suppose.

[DarkClaymore]

DC, why are you not last on your own list? That is retarded. Please redo it. Putting yourself anyone other than last on your own list is saying that you want to be able to claim before scum, which makes no sense.

Actually I thought it'd be interesting to see if IAI claims cop in the end, considering he is the one who suggested the whole thing. I personally think we don't really have a cop, but that's just a guess.

On second thought don't even bother putting yourselves on your own lists. It isn't necessary.

TBH that was my initial thinking as well.

1 Abel
2 whilst
3 dicknose
4 IAI

[DarkClaymore]

My list is in my first post on the subject, so I won't be reposting it. I forget, are we claiming today if we do it this way, or still tomorrow? If tomorrow, maybe we should hold of until then to do it since people's opinions may change.

Wasn't the plan that only cop claims today? Though we haven't got everyone's opinion on the matter yet...

[DarkClaymore]

Actually, I don't know. Cop claiming today means he might be the target tonight. And it would mean pressuring NS to protect a particular person or otherwise risk losing probably our best bet at a win. Jeopardizing the cop when he could still return results tonight might not be a good idea.

The Jailer can clear a player as much as cop can in this situation. If someone is jailed and cop dies, then the jailed person is clear. I think cop claim could help us a lot right now, especially if he investigated you. Because as IAI said, there is a technical problem with you being alive and NS's claim.

[DarkClaymore]

People, what's with the random votes lately?
Whilst says what I already said >> You vote Whilst
Dicknose said something sarcastic but you didn't get it >> You vote Dicknose

Are we even making any progress like this?
Shouldn't we either discuss who we gonna lynch and why, or just lynch someone already if we got nothing to add?
All this random activity is just... I dunno...

I'm ready to go with either Whilst and Abel. I'd prefer Abel, but if it's impossible then Whilst.
As for Dicknose. I suspect him because... I don't suspect him. Since I suck at finding scum, many times they end up being the ones I don't suspect. But since this reason is dumb, then guess I have not

actual

reason to go after him atm.

As for the cop claim, I'm personally still in favor but true that it has some grave disadvantages as well. Though I still bet we don't have one. Call it gut feeling or whatever.

[DarkClaymore]

Whatever happened to questioning Whilst?

[DarkClaymore]

I don't really know what whilst can say to being questioned about his responses, really. I just felt a surge of uncertainty and wanted to pick at him a little more. But I don't think talking about what happened is going to add anything to the discussion. It's also just getting kind of boring now. There's so much on the table that I think it's time to act.

UNVOTE: DarkClaymore
VOTE: whilst

dicknose is making himself a good lynch candidate for D4. DC, ask whilst to claim if you intend to hammer.

Yeah, surely all these random votes prove we have nothing better to do than

act

.
Okay, I'm ready to hammer.

Whilst. Your claim please.

My suspects have been stated, mostly in order. Do I need to restate them?

Tbh, I thought about a few things after you said that and rechecked.
#771 - Abel unvotes the L-1 Cav and asks him to not claim. He also tries to gain support for mine or Whilst's wagon soon after that.
#797 - I think it might have been mentioned already, but I overlooked it. Cav said:

Unfortunately, said jailkeeper isn't here to corroborate my story

And this happened 4 minutes after NS's post. So I'd conclude he didn't know NS is the Jailer but rather expected his partner to come and claim JK for him (or something like that?). I think the only ones who weren't there at the time are me and Abel.

But I think it most likely won't get trough today, especially since the only thing the second post proves is that scum most likely didn't know NS is the JK, so I say we better get rid of one scummy player and see what the night brings.

[DarkClaymore]

Geh, wrong dicknose's quote:

Abes does throw votes around willy nilly. Perhaps to distract from leading a wagon on his scum partner cav and then leading it away again?

[DarkClaymore]

Oh, right. He also requested something:

If I do get lynched (after deliberation), I have two requests before I am officially lynched:

1.

Everyone explains why they are lynching me.

2.

I get to say what I would do if I were still alive during D4.

I'd say your overall playstyle is quite scummy in my eyes. It might be just that you are indecisive or too careful, but the problem is that I have no way to know for sure - unless you flip. You seem to avoid taking stances a lot and I think the only thing you have ever appeared rather "sure" about is Cav's wagon which you pushed the whole D2. But even this you dropped when he was at L-1 and said you're no longer sure and think I'm scummier.

There's also your passive reaction to my lynchbait play and your outguessing. Again, it can all be your personality and own way of playing, but I can't possibly know that before you flip. And I'm not going to check your meta as you should aim to play the same as scum and it'll teach me nothing.

True, I could also point out some things in your favor as well. Like in the end forcing Cav to claim by putting him at L-1. Abel on the other hand clearly didn't want him to claim.

In the end it all comes down to this: You're one of my two suspects. Since apparently Abel's lynch won't work today, you're all that's left for me atm.

[DarkClaymore]

Oh yeah, you also didn't say what you would do once I flipped town. I'd like to know what your strategy is. I want to help.

Actually I'm not so sure it's the best idea to reveal. IAI already pointed out before that it'll help scum come up with a strategy. My strategy for D4 depends a lot on how the night will turn out in case you're town. And I believe others' as well. So I think it might be better if at least

some of us

keep this information hidden until the said D4.

If others think I should say then I would, but right now I believe it's the kind of situation in which it's better to not reveal everything in the open.

As for the hammer. I can wait for their responses.
Though really, I think in the end mafia relies a lot on intuition and that's why something that appears scummy to Player A might not appear scummy to Player B. I think the whole thing is pretty useless but okay. Considering today you have become #2 on my list, I'm willing to get as much info as I can before lynching you. Even if most likely it'll prove useless.

[DarkClaymore]

Anyone willing to revisit either dicknose or HA?

Well, I'm still for Abel. Not dicknose atm though.

As for IAI. I think Abel mentioned most/all of it but not quite in this format:
#218 - Cav says his top suspects are me and then IAI.
#386 - Cav says his top suspects are me and Whilst. True, that lots of post away but I don't remember him saying he changed his opinion clearly.
#424 - Cav says I'm his top and that Whilst is next on his list. BUT he prefers to push IAI's wagon more.

This is I sure Abel already pointed out, but Cav promised to post his thoughts on Whilst and never did so. Now, what I'd like to add is that he did post his thoughts on me and IAI who were, apparently, his #1 and #3 on the suspects list.

What I'm saying is:
Cav tried to throw suspicion on both me and IAI. He added Whilst in the whole thing, made him #2 but never really tried to go after him.

HOWEVER, I see another way to look at this. I have to admit he didn't really put THAT much effort into going after me as well. He did post his thoughts, but I didn't see him actively going after me as much as after IAI. You could think he was strongly going after IAI because he's his partner.

The first part personally convinces me more. Another reason to find Whilst scummy. As well as a reason why his flip is possibly more informative than some other players'.

[DarkClaymore]

Wasn't most of what Abel said against NS addressed before? Because I remember going over most of this myself at some point... Maybe it was just me then...?

My conclusion at the time were:
1) This is how NS plays.
or:
2) NS is playing other games as well, so this inconstancy is the result of him not focusing on this game alone.
or of course:
3) NS is scum

Obviously, doing stuff and giving reasons only after being somewhat "forced" to doesn't look protown. This most likely the main reason I was thinking so deeply about whatever his claim should or shouldn't be trusted. Because usually I'm quite willing to clear townies based on such actions. Hence why I'm for trying a cop claim.

[DarkClaymore]

Well, I was and still is for:

Copclaim

There's the part of confirming NS's claim as well as having at least one less suspect. I see it like this:
If cop claims and doc claims, then yeah it's good.

If cop claims and no doc claims, then we might be putting both JK and Cop on the line since one of them might be killed. In this situation, my suggestion is: NS jails Abel and Cop investigates someone. No matter who out of the two dies, someone will become confirmed for next day. And if there's no NK again, then Abel is likely to be our scum. Unless scum really decides to not NK. Which is

awfully

dangerous as the cop might investigate the scum that night.

So all in all, I think cop claim will help us more than it'll cause harm.

[DarkClaymore]

In that case, if a cop claimed and no doc did, my suggestion would be for NS to block the "confirmed townie", which would have to be vanilla (assuming it is not himself, which would be the worst case scenario...)

Why...?
Because that player will be the only one in that situation who is 100% cleared, even if cop claimer is scum?
I don't really agree with this course action as the confirmed townie should bother the scum much less than the cop.

All I can think about is scum killing the confirmed townie in order to frame the cop, who should have been the obvious NK target. But surely if scum knows that townie will be jailed, then he'll target the cop no matter what. In this case, we get 0 extra confirmations for next day. It'll be 4 players out of which only one is confirmed instead of two.

On the other hand, if scum targets the confirmed townie in my plan, then both JK AND Cop can clear one player each. EVEN if Cop or JK is scum, they'll be FORCED to clear players the following day.

Nobody Special

I have a very real problem with a cop hammering as you did on Day One.

Lynch at will.

From: #796 as response to Cav's claim.

Now I addressed this before but never asked you directly. You didn't see the obvious problem with Cav's claim. Naturally in this case, I'd expect a townie to think over whatever or not the claim sounds legit. Because, I'm pretty sure we are all interested in lynching scum and

only

scum.

Moreover that he said he knows there is a JK and YOU are the JK. How comes you wrote his claim off so easily when, from your point of view, he should have been telling the truth?

[DarkClaymore]

DC, I don't see your first point about NS's post. I think the reasoning is a little forced there, which is why I said it sounded bussy, but he's just saying that he doesn't think a cop would hammer like cavjj did on D1, so he's pushing the lynch.

Look how he was the only one to say "Lynch at will" without even asking anything. Dicknose and Whilst both asked things or at least weren't too hasty to see the end of this lynch. True, IAI said "Lynch at will" as well, but only after pointing out the mistake.

So I'd say only NS's automatic "Lynch at will" reaction appears anti-town. He could at least ask what Cav, as cop, was thinking when he hammered. Perhaps he could now give a new or different reason to his hammer. Don't see why NS was so hasty to lynch Cav without proper confirmation and questioning. No matter how you look at this, protown it is NOT.

[DarkClaymore]

Oh no. Anyone but this guy. I think some people here are gonna explode. Because you know from who I initially copied the lynchbait play from? Xeras. So yeah, we might all be here for a ride of chaos and confusion.

NS you didn't answer my questions

[DarkClaymore]

So Xeras, what is your opinion on the latest issues:

1) Copclaim or not?
2) NS is JK or scum?
3) Should we lynch Abel based the NS's JK claim?
4) How you suggest town to act in order to win?

[DarkClaymore]

Nobody Special

I have a very real problem with a cop hammering as you did on Day One.

Lynch at will.

From: #796 as response to Cav's claim.

Now I addressed this before but never asked you directly. You didn't see the obvious problem with Cav's claim. Naturally in this case, I'd expect a townie to think over whatever or not the claim sounds legit. Because, I'm pretty sure we are all interested in lynching scum and

only

scum.

Moreover that he said he knows there is a JK and YOU are the JK. How comes you wrote his claim off so easily when, from your point of view, he should have been telling the truth?

Sorry for missing this before.

As I mentioned before, I was so upset/bothered with his hammer that his claim nonsense didn't even register with me. I was just really incensed that a claimed cop would hammer like that, which gave me a gut-reaction that said player could in no way be town. That's all.

Just like that? Without even thinking about how he said there's a JK and you are a JK?
That

should have

at least

made you think twice about the claim.

Also, why cop wouldn't hammer but VT would? The only role in this game who is useless during night - is VT. I can easily see cop hammering for the sake of using his night action. Whereas VT actually have no reason to hammer too early.

[DarkClaymore]

Sorry for the inconvenience. Good luck to everyone.

Wait. Why were you replaced if you're back so fast...?

[DarkClaymore]

Gee, NS

. Do I have to make big text EVERY TIME I address you?
Anyway: answer my follow up questions.

[DarkClaymore]

DC, relax.

The guy isn't reading the thread properly or is taking him time searching for a good defense. Just saying.

[DarkClaymore]

Also, why cop wouldn't hammer but VT would? The only role in this game who is useless during night - is VT. I can easily see cop hammering for the sake of using his night action. Whereas VT actually have no reason to hammer too early.

I'm not saying that a VT would or wouldn't have ahmmered; I'm just saying that his hammer struck me as off, and odd, and scummy.

Then you should have gone after him from the

very beginning

to the

very end

. Why you wanted to lynch other players so much in the middle if you already convinced yourself Cav is scum?

There were many times you said we should lynch X or Y but not Cav (you wanted Whilst's lynch quite strongly if memory serves right). Not to mention the reason you presented there against Cav was the one existing from the beginning of D2. You brought it in the very end in order to counter the cop claim when it was already addressed and, to some degree, "accepted" a long time before that.

[DarkClaymore]

NS

this

[DarkClaymore]

Okay, DC, but my recollection of that is different than yours. I'd have to go back and re-read pretty much the entire Day in question to refute it or not; can this wait till tomorrow, if I'm still alive?

I went over some of your posts now.
You actually called Cav "pretty town" in one of your first posts in the game. #363

Yet again contradicting how you saw him as scum no matter what due to his hammer. All of this just don't add up.

NS

sign for attention

So if you jail me and someone is killed, most likely you, to be honest, I will be cleared. That's fine. It doesn't help me in the slightest, but if other people seriously think I could be scum despite my protown performance thus far, then so be it.

You are using the "protown" excuse again. It's simple. If you play protown as town, you'll do the same as scum. You just CAN'T do it differently or your meta will easily reveal your alignment. And there was also that game you mentioned in which an IC was sure you're town. It's just can't be used as a reason as to why others can't find you scummy.

The harder you work to appear protown, the higher my suspicion of you rising.

Actually, it seems like based on the way the game breaks down from here on, scum would be in a better position to kill tonight than not to kill. If we mislynch and scum doesn't kill, that leaves 5 alive tomorrow, which means even if I get lynched and scum kills someone again, there's still a final day after that. So we still have three mislynches that way.

However, if we mislynch and they choose to kill, and we mislynch tomorrow, it's game over and they win. Only two mislynches that way. The only downside is that they don't get rid of me. Although I probably wouldn't go down without a fight tomorrow in any event. Scum seems better off killing tonight. Although, and I see the wine now, now that I've said that, scum might take the reverse approach and do something that is less advantageous merely to make the case stronger that I am scum.

I just don't think reverse psychology like that works. Will the wine approach give someone that much of an advantage? I don't think so. The penalty is more severe than the small aspect of "OOH I did something you weren't expecting, what noOow?"

Don't forget how killing today will make you 100% confirmed. So it's a mylo with one confirmed townie. Which means there are only three suspects to deal with. Which means a chance of 33.34% to lynch scum. Or maybe even 50% with another role claim we are willing to trust. And maybe even 100% if the second PR claim is cop.
However, if NS is killed today then we have no way to defend during N4 and scum wins if we mislynch.


The chances of scum winning with no NK are actually worse now that I think more about it. Assuming you are lynched D4, scum have no reason to not NK N4 unless NS states who he'll jail (which will create another wine similar to this and should be avoided IMO). Now there is a chance of 33.34% NS will be able to block the right player and hasta la vista, baby. Or 50%/100% based on another PR claim. If not and NS dies, then it's a lylo, possibly with zero, one or two trusty/totally confirmed townies out of three based on PR claims. Again a 33.34%/50%/100% situation.


*Since there is so much wine, I think looking at the results as nearly random isn't really that off.


True, not NKing appears to be more risky but we can never know who we are dealing with. I say let's just see what happens and deal with it as it comes. No point just outguessing the scum with so much wine, especially since by doing so we only add more wine. I think we dragged the whole thing long enough as it is. We can always discuss it

after

it happens.

[DarkClaymore]

Is it only me or Whilst always "comes up" with what I said/suggested ages ago?
I already suggested No Lynch around the beginning of this day (shortly after NS's claim IIRC).

[DarkClaymore]

Honestly, what is the point of that? Instead of just agreeing or something, you're just trying to make yourself look good. You are so scummy.

What I'm trying to say is:
1) He isn't reading the thread properly
2) HE is the one is trying to make himself look good by showing how he "thinks a lot". But after all that thinking, we come back to something which was already suggested and/or denied. Note, it's the second time already.

I'm not saying this because I already pointed it out sooner and it makes me good. Actually, the fact it was rejected pretty much proves I wasn't "good" back then.

If he were reading the thread

properly

, he'd see that he's hardly contributing anything new because most of it it was already stated before. Or maybe even denied like the No Lynch idea. I mean, that latest post of his, just WTF. It's so damn long and messy that tbh I didn't even try much making sense out some parts in it. No to mention how he restated many things which were already pointed out and NOT only by me.

He not only tried to add but rather just threw everything together in one post. Which resulted in one big mess. Maybe it's only me, but it even somewhat looks like an attempt to cause some confusion and uncertainty. All the while looking as if he's contributing.


The only reason I prefer Abel lynch over Whilst lynch today is due to technical issues with the JK claim. But since I see it won't work today:

VOTE: Whilst

[DarkClaymore]

Technical issues, huh? Mind going into more detail about that?

Didn't I already say it a few times before? The wine of no N3 NK when you're jailed. True, after thinking further, I think that no NK is less likely than yes NK. But possibly I missed something that scum might know and it'll change the picture. I also just now realized a big flaw in my initial plan, other than No Lynch, in which we lynch you and NS doesn't tell who he is blocking at night - hopefully hitting scum and ending the game next day.

Sadly it doesn't remove the no NK wine because the scum knows there won't be NK if he's blocked. So he might just not NK at all and hope to frame the blocked player. And if it was him who was blocked - use the no NK wine.

@Xeras

Didn't you promise a case against Abel?

[DarkClaymore]

My god, the wine! Not the wine! If it hurts your head, don't think about it. It's not necessary. Look for scummy people and lynch 'em.

I think that's what I'll really do for now. I'm getting the feeling it's impossible to draw a solid conclusion at our current situation no matter how much we think about all these possibilities.

Jailkeeper cannot "hit" scum. Jailkeeper cannot prove that someone is scum with his ability.

He can in a situation in which scum

must act

. Like if there's a cop around who the scum knows might investigate him. Hence why I was for cop claim in addition to possibly figuring out NS. Unless we

force

the scum to act, then he really can't "hit" scum.

[DarkClaymore]

Okay so... the jailer didn't die.

He said this in his first post of D3, before NS claimed. "

The

jailer." He knows one exists at this point. Sounds like

someone

rolecopped NS N2. Of course, he probably rolecopped NS N1 as well, but was blocked by NS's jailing. Also, I can picture being DC's kill target. I was the most aggressive with him D2. It explains the nokill in N2.

I don't think I've gone back to look at the cavjj/DC relationship since D3, but I will fix that soon.

I already said how I believe NS was rolecoped N1. Hence making me think that if scum really knew the JK, then it'd be NS. And there's 0% chance I'd target you on such N2 unless I know you're doc or jailer. No point betting like this.

Also, just the way he immediately agreed with NS's claim with hardly any suspicion and the way he's been jumping on whatever bandwagon appears is just very opportunistic. These are just simple, no-b/s reasons. I think he's very lynchable and has been all along. I think he fell back on the "purposeful lynchbait" nonsense because everyone realized how scummy he was.

I already said I suspected you on D2 as well. It wasn't like I jumped on the rare opportunity to lynch you out of the blue without any suspicion.

And you want one of these reason you hate for me jumping on your wagon? I have seen more than once JK successfully blocking scum, hence why I like this role. And in one game the blocked scum was actually a very protown player who the JK planned to defend rather than block.

So yeah, I like the idea of trying to lynch the one who the JK targeted when there was no NK. I think it really worth trying. Something I'm willing to follow much more than many other "reasons" people, including me, might come up with.

So if there's no lynching Whilst atm then:

VOTE: Honest Abel

Possibly, he did seem to be slightly... off using my strategies. Then again, he could have just been making alterations to make it his own. <3

Well yeah... I didn't really plan to use it to this extend at first. I only gave some weak scumtells (of sorts) on D1 and thought to do the same on D2. I'd say the fact I missed a lot of D2's starting conversation which made me look lurker + Abel's playstyle which didn't give me much chance to contribute back then = I found myself in a bad situation from which I didn't see a direct way out. I tried to give some of my own reasons, which I'm quite used to people finding scummy even though sometimes they hit, but as I thought it didn't pass and only added to my suspicion.

So I said "Whatever. Let's go with the flow and do lynchbait to the end." I guess the fact it wasn't intended from the beginning and rather forced - made it come out somewhat poorly.
I'm quite sad JK/Cop didn't target me in order to clear me (though maybe the latter did...?). People just had to go and all become suspicious together with me, didn't they?

Is it only me or Whilst always "comes up" with what I said/suggested ages ago?
I already suggested No Lynch around the beginning of this day (shortly after NS's claim IIRC).

Is it only me or Abel always "comes up" with what I said/suggested ages ago? I already said shitty.

shitty

shitty

Man, Abel must not be reading the thread.

This is but one word and perhaps even used like that on purpose.
You did this twice AND in both cases you did an awfully long post with many points already not only pointed out - but also discussed. You added very little with so many words. Funny how you made that joke about NS not reading the thread.

Also, the first time you did this - Abel immediately jumped on you and asked "why he hasn't been lynched yet?". And now that you did it

again

he thinks it's not big deal? Really?

[DarkClaymore]

Betting, huh? So you agree I was a good target N2 enough for the thought that I might be protected to cross your mind?

Yes. That's why I have very hard time believing you were targeted and saved rather than blocked. You're a BAD N2 target for scum. VERY BAD.

You leapt at the opportunity without the thought crossing your mind that NS could be lying. It's 1. as if you knew he was jailkeeper, naturally, and 2. were waiting for some kind of reinforcement against me. The opportunism against me makes it even clearer that you wanted me dead N2 and immediately found another avenue to attack me.

They are both kinda true actually, unlike many other things you say about me. I did think NS is the Jailer shortly after Cav's claim, as well as he's a PR even before that. And I was searching for a way to make you a possible lynch, because you're the hardest one.

Also, Xeras, maybe you can shed some light on the lynchbait thing. Summarize the strategy in a sentence or two.

Lynchbait, classically, means that scum are keeping you alive because you're scummy enough for the town to lynch in daylight, isn't that right? DC's strategy was to see who

didn't

jump on his wagon, which seems awfully strange if the point is that lynchbait is supposed to be someone scum want to see lynched during the day. I see absolutely no reason why scum wouldn't get on the wagon of someone who is clearly scummy. At most, it's something that varies from person to person. Lynchbait as defined by DC is a very poor, illogical strategy, not to mention the harm it does to town by adding confusion.

Tbh I never really heard it as well. I might learn a thing or two too. In the end I just took some aspects from it without even asking the inventor himself.

The use I found for lynchbait is probably different from his, as I saw scum not hopping on lynchbait wagon before and tried to make use of this.
And there's also the hope that I'll be targeted by some PR that night, as a player who surely won't be killed and is scummy, and will turn out confirmed the following day/s. What the plus with me being confirmed? The fact scum won't kill me and Jailer/Cop will have his confirmed player alive until he claims. That of course, if I'm not lynched by then.

And I think confusion is good because people slip there. But I know some people don't agree. I know Xeras does though.

So basically you're saying that you weren't using the "purposeful lynchbait" strategy until people started finding you scummy? WHAT? This reinforces what I said earlier about using the "purposeful lynchbait" strategy to explain away your scumminess. It seemed contrived then and seems contrived now. You're full of shit.

You should have seen how I was't playing extremely lynchbait from the very beginning. There was a certain point on D2 from which I started doing it much more actively. During D1 I just dropped some little things I knew will be suspicious enough to keep me alive for D2. However, during D2, I really played an attention drawing lynchbait.

Someone certainly seems disappointed I canceled the whilst wagon. Looks like it was the right move. Let's lynch this scumbag.

And that all you have to say? No reason as to why you stopped seeing this kind of thing suspicious all of a sudden? And you're great. Really. Just so great. You are always trying to connect my actions with "being pressured" whereas you clearly didn't do such thing with Whilst. Doesn't his long posts appear to you like an attempt of a pressured scum to look like a thinking protown? Doesn't it?

If it doesn't tell me why. If it does, tell me why you didn't point it out.

He certainly gave up on it rather quickly. One minute he was being scummy, the next minute it was "Don't lynch me, this is just my lynchbait strategy! Calling me scummy only proves that I'm not scummy!" Also, if I recall correctly, he never even had that many votes on him. So giving up under little pressure is very suspicious and seems to go against the strategy entirely.

I never said "Don't lynch me". I don't understand where you got that impression from. I merely explained the point what I did before dying. Lynching me or not was up to you. If you saw this as defense rather than an attempt to contribute as much as possible before being lynched - it's your choice. I actually stressed this quite a few times along D2, and you still bring this back.

[DarkClaymore]

You, who are scummier than whilst and have joined lots of wagons opportunistically.

Ahem, ahem. I wanted Whilst lynch since D2 if you don't remember. And how many wagons I joined? Only you and Whilst.

True, on D1 I did join your and BB's wagons but never truly with the intention of seeing the lynch through. Only for pressure reasons. I do admit I hop on existing wagons for pressuring quite easily.

I don't believe you dropped any scumtells in D1. You were just being natural. Natural scum, probably. I don't like your revisionist attitude, telling us that anything you did that looks scummy was actually just a part of your strategy. It's an attempt to look protown without actually being protown. You're scum, admit it.

My detailed answer for the N0 question for example? I even admitted after that how I knew it'll make me scummy. Voting BB with the reason of not wanting to write off the whole thing as "town vs. town"? It's not like the reason wasn't serious for me, but I'm already used to people seeing such reason as suspicious and/or stupid. It's just always like that, and it's sad IMO.

On Xeras: he's been nothing but scummy since he joined. I don't know if this is his lynchbait strategy, but it seems stupid to do it on D3 after having replaced someone. Xeras is making his slot a good lynch for D4, although he hasn't yet overturned my town read of dicknose. I still believe that dicknose did a couple things that scum just would not have done.

Like? You never really presented what made you believe so strongly Dicknose is town since D2.


BTW, for that game with JK blocking a protown player. I really don't get why you want me to cite stuff, considering how it not gonna change your mind in the slightest. But I could do that:
Night actions summary
Here the JK says why he protected the protown player on D1 - in order to keep him alive. Yet he blocked scum instead. (Sj is Sharks is the same player because his full name is nickname is SjSharks)

[DarkClaymore]

I wasn't asking you to cite stuff. I was pointing out that it's a bad argument. Something happening in your experience is not a reason to believe it happens every time. That's stereotyping.

Yes, that might be true. But sadly this works for me more often than reads and regular deduction. So no reason for me to drop that. I prefer to trust it much more than all these methods that not even once worked for me.

Your detailed answer to my N0 question isn't something that you could know someone would think is scummy. And even if you did think it was, why would you agree by calling it scummy back then if you were playing the lynchbait game? You said early on that long posts are scummy because it looks like too much effort. Why call yourself out if you're lynchbaiting? Your story doesn't line up.

I

did know

it will. It was plain obvious.
And as I said, I wasn't playing lynchbait back then and initially wasn't to planning play lynchbait at all in this game. Throwing around little things people will probably consider scumtells without drawing much attention, and going around actively giving lots of reasons people don't like and even arguing about them - is very different.

Though, the reasons I give are always ones I really believe in. It's only that I know others don't like them. I just

know

. Because it's not the first time my reasoning met with such reaction. But when there's a player like you around who always points out the easy stuff I could point out in order to appear contributing - all I have left is reasons people don't like. And when I present them, what do I get? Suspicion points! So I didn't see any other way than playing lynchbait and at least making out something out of the hopeless situation.

I presented another reason why I believe dicknose was town when I was examining people's reactions to the cavjj claim. Your interaction was great: you just disappeared. You were also pretty much absent at the start of D3, which reveals that you're being cautious.

Yours was also great. You also disappeared.
And again, it's not my fault for finding out night ended latter than others. You used the same reason against me on D2 as well.

Whilst, NS, and IAI.

What are your opinions on Honest Abel?

Also, Abel, You are curious on the lynchbait strategy right? I actually prefer to call it the chaos theory. Basically, when the game starts I will act overly scummy. Then, on day two, I will enter the chaos phase. What is the chaos phase? I fish for information under people's noses. I ask questions in such a way, the only people that will realize they are there, are the people that know the question is for them.

So our strategy is quite different after all. Rather, each of us took the scummy playstyle to a different direction.

[DarkClaymore]

DC, I wouldn't care if you thought about things on your own head, using what happened in your previous experience as examples. That's fine, do what you want. My problem is that you're using these examples in order to defend yourself or make points to us, which just won't work.

I know it probably won't, but neither will "normal" reasons I find. Even if they slightly convince others, they rarely convince me myself. So you suggesting me to lurk and do nothing?

So you were intentionally dropping hints that you were scummy before you decided to intentionally act scummy... that makes a lot of sense, DC. It's all coming together now.

VOTE: DarkClaymore

Not moving.

Again, there's a big difference between the two. In the first part I actually dropped possible scumtells against which I could easily protect myself. And I did so a little in order to assure people only see them as "somewhat" suspicious and not "clearly" suspicious. My sole goal was to not end the day as null or protown player. You saw how the former was killed.

I like how you are for a whilst lynch when he's the popular target, and now that I'm going after you, you're back at trying to make me look scummy. You were also on my wagon in the beginning of the game and helped cavjj quickhammer on the BBmolla wagon. You are a purely reactive player, only following others' leads.

I'm going after whoever I suspect and can lynch atm. And I already stated how I prefer your lynch more in the first place. Also, I don't want to hear it from a player who changed his deduction of the scumteam every page during D2. Not to mention you gave pretty much the same reason I gave now: that you were going against the players who were there at the moment.

As for D1, I enjoy voting players in order to pressure. Even if I don't really think they are more likely scum than others. As to why, I'd say because on D1 I don't really have a well-defined suspects list anyway. So going around pressuring players is a good strategy IMO.

Furthermore, any original ideas you have, which are few and far between, you never act on them or follow through. You postulate and blabber a helluva lot, but you never pressure people, rally votes, or do anything active or protown. This is scummy behavior.

That's because the more I'll insist on my ideas when I see others clearly disagree, the more scummy I'll look and the ideas won't pass anyway. It helps no one.
And never pressure people? Keeping my RVS vote on you, putting BB at L-1, questioning Cav, Whilst, you and NS. I do what I can or see needed. Tell me what makes, let's say, IAI better in this aspect?

Nobody Special

. Maybe I didn't make it clear but I want you to explain the contradiction I presented here


And wow, this day is rather tough. Maybe it's time that everyone make a list of, let's say, their two prime suspects (players they are willing to vote for today) and do the lynch based on that? The more time passes, the further away we are getting from the lynch, going more in circles by talking about pretty much the same subjects over and over, and lastly just dragging the game and making it more boring (my opinion at least).

I know it was pointed out how this will help scum and I agree, but seriously. We need to lynch at some point. I think it just might help the town much more than scum atm. What do you all say?

[DarkClaymore]

I don't think the game is boring at all, DC. I'm blowing you wide open.

You are going over old material you mostly presented during D2. And the whole thing progressing nowhere. I don't mind being attacked. Rather, I enjoy it. But it feels very shallow being attacked by a single player like that and I can't even feel death drawing closer. I started thinking lately "The hell with it. Just lynch someone already, even me if you want so much, and KEEP GOING ON".

It feels like we are all digging stuff just in order to create discussion. I'm sure we'll have lots of stuff to talk about - AFTER we know for sure what happens this night. I think it's time, rather it was quite long ago already, to start discussing who to lynch FOR REAL.


BTW, since some of my posts long and some people probably don't bother, I'll copy this and bold it:

And wow, this day is rather tough. Maybe it's time that everyone make a list of, let's say, their two prime suspects (players they are willing to vote for today) and do the lynch based on that? The more time passes, the further away we are getting from the lynch, going more in circles by talking about pretty much the same subjects over and over, and lastly just dragging the game and making it more boring (my opinion at least).

I know it was pointed out how this will help scum and I agree, but seriously. We need to lynch at some point. I think it just might help the town much more than scum atm. What do you all say?

[DarkClaymore]

Okay, DC, but my recollection of that is different than yours. I'd have to go back and re-read pretty much the entire Day in question to refute it or not; can this wait till tomorrow, if I'm still alive?

I went over some of your posts now.
You actually called Cav "pretty town" in one of your first posts in the game. #363

Yet again contradicting how you saw him as scum no matter what due to his hammer. All of this just don't add up.

NS

sign for attention

You don't understand how a read on someone can change throughout the course of a Day? I really don't know how to address that. At all.

But if the hammer made you so "angry" (exaggeration), how comes you didn't go after Cav from the very beginning? You even protected him on various occasions. I mean, it's not like you realized he hammered only latter that day. You knew it all along. My problem with what you did is how you presented his hammer as the main reason for wanting to see the lynch through. There must have been other reasons to want and lynch him since you didn't pursue him from the beginning for the hammer.

I am pretty solidly convinced he's our last scum. He's very active, he's picking at everything, and -- it's really just a gut thing, but I just think it's him.

A good way to summarize my opinion as well.

And I believe we have 3 against Abel. We need one more.

Lynching Abel is my most desired thing. It seems as if DC suspects Abel quite a bit as well. I say we lynch him. If he turns up town, then we should pursue DarkClaymore.

Stop going after me in both games you scum

[DarkClaymore]

I'll be jailing Dark Claymore tonight.

I wanted to suggest this myself. Glad you did.

[DarkClaymore]

Remember, DC is only cleared if you assume NS is jailkeeper. No result you get from the jailkeeper will be confirmed until NS is dead.

That's not true. Even if NS scum and says he jailed me and someone other than NS dies - I'm still cleared. If scum clears someone at this point - that player is still cleared no matter what because there's only one scum.

And I don't think NS is town pretending to be PR, which is the only case in which I won't be cleared if someone other than NS dies.

[DarkClaymore]

Finally confirmed.
FREEDOM!!!




Though I really hoped this would happen N2 and not N3

I'll be jailing Dark Claymore tonight.

Well Claymore, Keep your trust in me, and we have this game.

Vote: I am Innocent.

Whilst claimed Vanilla Townie. What is your claim?

Actually, I'd rather hear your claim first. Ya know, because you have a wild history of fake claiming. Even as town

My personal claiming order would be:
1) Xeras
2) IAI
3) DC

We can either go with mine since I'm confirmed, or everyone will make their own lists and we count like Abel suggested before. After all, it's 3 Vs. 1 right now.

Also, I think it'd be good if every player puts a list of all players in the order he suspects them. With the first being the one he believes the most is scum. I rather go last so that scum can't see my list before posting his.

[DarkClaymore]

Edit by way of post...

My order of suspects.

IAI
Whilst
Xeras
Dc

So you suspect yourself, who should be a confirmed townie to you, and me who is a confirmed townie for everyone. Not only that, but you suspect yourself more than me, even though you have the most solid proof you're town (if you are).

Seriously, why put us on the list in the first place?

[DarkClaymore]

Okay so I'm the last one...

I'm a cop. I investigated Cav on N1 and got "Innocent" and then Abel on N2 and got "Guilty".
In other words: I'm VT

I pretty much figured we don't have another PR. I think "outguessing the setup" is my sole talent in mafia...
Anyway. Interesting thing is that scum didn't claim PR. Which means that, despite how there are three townies and there were three nights, the rolecop DIDN'T investigate all three of us.

So here's my questions:
1)

If you were the rolecop, who would you investigate every night and why?

2)

Who do you think the rolecop, who supposedly is your top suspect, investigated every night and why?

Make sure to explain how, in your eyes, the night targets of that suspect fit with his behavior in thread (or at least don't collide with it)

I'll answer the second question last as well.

[DarkClaymore]

Myuu...

Unvote, Vote No Lynch

...

I went over this option already and ended up concluding it'll be worse. Try convincing me how it's better than attempting to lynch the scum TODAY. DO IT, scum.

[DarkClaymore]

BTW, I wonder what happened to Whilst...

[DarkClaymore]

Because I am a doctor. I was waiting for someone IAI to slip. But it didn't happen.

I am going to protect you during night four, and cut it down to to only two people to choose from. ^^

Here you go again with fake claims...

Who you, or rather Dicknose, protected on every night?

And I think the current situation might be better as we need three votes to lynch over two in your scenario. In three votes, there is always a town majority as two of the voters must be town.

What you're offering here, assuming you're really doc, is to let me choose the scum next day. While a 50-50 situation is nice, I still might miss. Well, let's see what others think. Both IAI and Whilst are pretty quiet, especially the latter, and it doesn't make the game any easier.

[DarkClaymore]

I didn't protect anyone during night 3. Otherwise it would mess with the results concerning you and your being cleared. Before that. I have no idea. There was no real reason for singersigner to tell me the previous actions.

How comes? I believe it's still something you should be told when you replace a PR

[DarkClaymore]

Just something I noticed by going over the thread...
D1 L-1 wagons:

Honest Abel (4):

I Am Innocent

,

Dark Claymore

,

BBmolla

,

cavjj

BBmolla (5):

Scumhunter

,

Honest Abel

,

I Am Innocent

,

Dark Claymore

,

cavjj

IAI. You said at the very beginning of the game how you tend to analyze vote histories. Assuming you were looking at this objectivity, forgetting how you're town, what would be your conclusion?

Also, you said you suspect Xeras, hence former Dicknose, the most. How close was Dicknose to being your top suspect BEFORE he was replaced?

[DarkClaymore]

Rereading some stuff, I'd say that I think IAI is more likely town than Dicknose was and than Whilst who I suspected from D2 on. I'm ready to be convinced otherwise, Xeras.

My main reason would be that IAI is an experienced player, and especially mafia player. First of all, I believe he is aware how a fakeclaim should be prepared as soon as possible if you're scum. It's not something you come up with at the last moment unless you plan to claim vanilla. I'd say Cav did exactly that - came up with a claim once he was about to be lynched.

Not to mention how his claim was awfully WRONG. I don't see IAI letting his partner go through with that. All in all: If IAI planned all that to be clear and win, then I'd even admit he deserves this win. So one way or another, atm I'll clear him and focus on the remaining two.

Now, I'm personally leaning toward Whilst over XerasNose ( )
But actually I got some PR reads from Dicknose at some point. Maybe these were the reads of a rolecop...?

And where's Whilst? Limited Access or something?

[DarkClaymore]

But you are right. I am lying about being a doctor. ^^ I wanted to see what kind of information I could gain from a fakeclaim.

So obvious. Guess obvious not only to me who is familiar with your methods, but also to others as well.

Unvote, Vote Whilst

So now you're after Whilst? What caused your change of heart? The fact he might prove an easier target perhaps?

[DarkClaymore]

People should really read my mod notes.

Oh, lol. Sorry about that

@Xeras

Interesting. I am glad I choose to reread your post. You have played scum four times, on this site. All of which was in newbie games, which prohibit day time communication with your fellow partner

You may communicate privately via QuickTopic with your fellow Mafia up until the game thread is opened (this is called Night 0). Once the game begins, all outside communication must cease until the night cycle.

Read the role PMs once in a while before jumping like this. Scum


And basically yes, the only alerting thing about IAI would be his doubtful connection to Cav. My sole question is: Was it really worth it? Wasn't it better to coach Cav a little, make sure he plays well and make a perfect win?

Maybe IAI tried and Cav didn't want to listen or did something IAI didn't expect him to. And then was bussed, let's say, after his hammer on D1. Still, I think Whilst and XerasNose are more fitting partners to Cav. I guess we won't progress much here until Whilst comes back and participates in the discussion.

[DarkClaymore]

Not much time elapsed before cavjj hammered, but whilst never did get a vote in that day,

and when dicknose finally voted in Post 88, surprise, surprise, it was for cavjj

(afraid to get on any townie's bad side that early in the game?)

I actually saw that too.
He never really gave a reason for his vote as well IIRC. And this type of distraction is quite popular. I really start wondering whatever my PR reads from him were due to rolecop...

Him switching out twisted the game quite a lot.

[DarkClaymore]

BTW, did anyone understand what this post #125 was about...? I tried reading before, after and... I just don't get what it is...

For some reason it really bothers me

[DarkClaymore]

Also, there's #678 where Dicknose asks whatever a claim is necessary from IAI (who was at L-1).

I mean, wow. Was he serious? Doesn't that remind you of Cav's post #695? Where Cav asks whatever a claim will change someone's mind. Does that, perhaps, imply on scum mentality and is a scumslip made by noobs?

Dicknose was really pushing this lynch #706 too, despite saying here and here how he REALLY wants me lynched, going as far as saying "my vote stands until lynch". Even on D3 he was yet again pushing MY wagon.

In addition, his reasons for suspecting IAI are nearly identical to Cav's reasons which include: Bad defense, not posting enough.

There's also the funny possible slip here where he said "If I were

role cop

" instead of "If I were

jailer

". No one asked about Jailer in the first place. So...

NS also made a decent post against Dicknose with some of my points and others.


Sadly, Dicknose was switched and Xeras pretty much can't defend against these points because he can't know what Dicknose was thinking at the time.

Mod

, any chance of bringing Dicknose back?

So I convinced myself for now:
VOTE: Xeras

[DarkClaymore]

Post 125 doesn't mean anything, at all.

But what is that post doing there? What does it mean? I totally can't connect it to anything else said prior to it.

[DarkClaymore]

I am assuming when he said he got results, he meant the kill data, to analyze patterns and stuff. I always enjoy working with the day 1, night 1 kill data. ^^

Maybe. Or maybe not.

About trying to lynch you. How do you get mad at someone trying to lynch the lynchbait?

Are you scum? I never said this. My point was how he pushed IAI's wagon at one point while always saying "I want Darky dead". He literally said "Whilst or Claymore, change your mind and hammer IAI". What was the rush? Especially how, once this failed, he yet again came back to me. I don't remember him mentioning wanting to lynch IAI again latter. Strange, don't you think?

It's like "Claymore looks like obvious scum so I'll lynch him. Wait, maybe he'll be lynched latter anyway and it's better to take the opportunity to lynch IAI who is a SE". Until recently I was sure that his reaction doesn't fit what I was searching for from my lynchbait play. But, upon rereading, my mind has changed.

BTW, did anyone understand what this post #125 was about...? I tried reading before, after and... I just don't get what it is...

For some reason it really bothers me

It is page 6, less than 30 posts from the beginning of the day. You think it was dicknose's way of telling cavjj his N1 investigation?

That's why it caught my attention. Though it looks as if it's TOO obvious and hence unlikely but... who knows...

[DarkClaymore]

So I convinced myself for now:
VOTE: Xeras

In a situation like this (MyLo with you being the only confirmed townie), you should really be the last to vote.

Meh. It seems like it'll take a while for voting to begin (especially for the hard to convince Whilst). Lets not forget that there's only ONE scum out there and we need THREE to lynch. Aside of me, another townie must be wiling to vote. Since we can't atm conclude anything 100% from the thread, might as well see how players act today as well.

Xeras reaction to my case on Dicknose felt rather scummy tbh. So my vote stands for now.

[DarkClaymore]

Mod

, any chance of bringing Dicknose back?

Once a player has been replaced, they will remain replaced.
~singer