Newbie 1138 - Game Over! Town Win!

[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.

[I Am Innocent]

I am here. I will try to get in as much as I can before my kids wake up.

[I Am Innocent]

D1 lasted 4 pages, less than 2 real life days. Nobody expected D1 to last so short other than cavjj, or if cavjj is scum and his scum partner told him to hammer first available chance, than that player as well.

I did not like BBmolla early on. I did not provide my case, but I have no problem putting out there what bothered me:

Post 6 he tries not to walking on anyones toes by making his RVS vote truly random "Also, trust the dice roller"

Post 36, he follows Scumhunters lead about hating RVS to unvote. Despite being one of the first people to RVS, he said " must admit, I'm not a fan of it. It's a tradition though, and I've found that fighting tradition can only end badly." Read the end of that like BBmolla was concerned what other people thought about his slot. Which is scummy behavior.

Post 40, he says he is not ready to vote Honest Abel "I haven't voted Abel because I want to take everyone into consideration before I vote to lynch somebody. Also, I've learned that first looks can be decieving, so I want it to go on a bit more and see his and everyone elses interactions with each other before I make a vote." but then in...

Post 44, just hours later, he pulls a 180. "VOTE: Honest Abel" Same post he starts targeting the 'lurkers', tho with me I see hints of some buddying. "I am Innocent - 2 posts I like you're second post, but show me some more good posts so I can develop a better read on you."

It may surprise Honest Abel and others, but D1 outside of his initial comment, I found him very townie and did not like the wagon on him. I was absent for much of that, hence I never got the chance to move my RVS vote. As soon as I saw what happened, I called the BBmolla/cavjj scumteam (Post 85).

I was obviously wrong about half of that, but the interesting thing is the other half was the hammer vote. Was scum cavjj trying to disprove some suspicion by proving what he knew was a town BBmolla? Definitely a possibility.

[I Am Innocent]

Whilst and Dicknose I have found to be the most townie of the bunch. Still, here are my notes on them:

Whilst

Post 50, not willing to step on toes/make a stance "Regardless, I also will not lynch another player, unless he or she is obviously mafia."

Post 76, worried what others think of him "If I'm trying to avoid attracting any attention, it's because I'm being a good townie." and again, unwilling to step on toes/make a stance "There isn't anything in anyone's argument that makes me want to cast my lynch vote."

Post 87, more of the same "I am just not comfortable with leaving my lynch vote on a player who I am not 85% convinced to be mafia aligned."

Overall though, D2 he has played townie, which makes me think D1 was more of an aberration or townie cautiousness. (The flip side being that he could have received some N1 coaching from a teammate, but the lack of anything really scummy D2 does not make me believe this is the case.)

Dicknose

D1 laid really low. After asking him why he has not voted as of Page 4, he pops right in and cast his vote in Post 88. Signs of active lurking.

D2 I have not been a fan of his tunneling of DC. As a fellow player who has fallen in the trap of being confident in his reads as a townie sometimes, I think it is more the latter (being confident) rather than picking on an easy target/avoiding stepping on other player's toes.

@Dicknose tho, one thing I notice D2 was that you cast 3 straight votes for DC. Can you explain why the redundancy?

**********

One other thing I noticed in my skimming, Dicknose and DC's listing of townie to scum at first glance felt very sincere and how I'd imagine my list would look by D2/12 pages in. I'll discuss what I mean in more detail when I put together my list after fully catching up.

Read closer, our lists are nothing alike.

What I meant by sincere was the absence of "likely townies" at that stage in the game. Though I felt good about you and whilst, I'd still say would have put you two as null reads on page 11. On the other hand, Honest Abel had two "town" players already. I did not see where his confidence came from in that regards, hence my concern for him possibly buddying to you and whilst.

[I Am Innocent]

The last four players, and some brief notes on what I have so far:

1) Honest Abel and Nobody Special/Wicked - Honest Abel pushed D1 hard on what was the optimal strategy N1 for scum. It put in a lot of people's heads that the IC was in danger. This could be just scum trying to get a free shot at 5 other players N1 (assuming IC is town and town is mislynched), or it could have been a more longer term reason to show why a scum IC continues to last Night after Night. Along with that, an SE died, and now he is pushing for the other SE to go. (not to push appeal to fear, but) A 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?

2) DC and cavjj - The play D1 was atrocious. We literally played less than 2 real life days out of 21 possible. There were two players jumping around on the two easiest wagons. I'll be shocked if neither is scum. But the coaching that goes on N0 would have certainly included the "not drawing attention" to oneself, unless there was not an experienced player to give said coaching. Which would be the case if these two were scum.

3) Honest Abel & cavjj - Ah, here is the winner. Honest Abel has turned all attention away from cavjj, onto DC and me. This scum team lines up nicely with the evidence from the two scenarios above, 1) Honest Abel pushing protection on the IC giving free shots to the scum team, 2) cavjj having a newbie teammate who did not proper advice N0 on how to play D1.

cavjj has been all defense D2. It looks like he was coached N1. And who was it that made the first post D2, which coincidentally invited cavjj to release said defense:

So cavjj, why did you hammer? Remember when I said people should be sharing their thoughts on all other players before the day ends because it's very useful later? Did you not want anyone to do that? You ended the Day very abruptly, and did not give a fair warning of your intent to hammer. Explain your big rush to lynch BBmolla

.

It's also fitting that Scumhunter was killed overnight considering his most substantial post was about how silly it is to bring people to L-1 so early in the Day, and he warned of people using any dumb excuse to hammer and end the day prematurely. This was about the L-1 on me, but it applies just as much to the BBmolla case:

There is absolutely no reason for anyone to be at L-1 this early. There are other ways to pressure people. One of these days I'm going to be scum have a cop-read on someone who is at L-1 and hammer away to waste a ML and kill a pr d1. I mean do the people voting Abel "actually" want a lynch to go through right now? No. Of course you don't. So why are you voting him to L-1? It's obviously for "pressure" but it seems an unnecessary step and can only lead to a sad outcome if a true newbie/scum hammers.

For those of you saying, oh no one is newbie enough to hammer here (yes you are probably right, but is it really worth the risk, a newbie town hammering another town would cost us 2 ML!)

Pretty pathetic that this was discussed so bluntly and it still ended up happening. What do you have to say about this, cavjj? It also strikes me that Scumhunter's promise to you to become more involved in the game could have been a determining factor in his demise:

@cavjj, Yes, you could call my usual behavior during RVS/early day 1 lurking. I will become very engaged in the game as we progress here.

Well, cavjj, let's hear it.

I also like how he says "It also strikes me that Scumhunter's promise to you to become more involved in the game could have been a determining factor in his demise" almost hinting at that he feels cavjj may be scum (distancing?), but the rest of D2 he defends cavjj to no end.

[I Am Innocent]

Two other notes I have on Honest Abel:

1) Post 229 "Then again, I think at a certain point, things begin to regress. I'd say we were nearing the pinnacle of a good time to lynch if not for Wickedestjr." A good time to lynch? D2 hasn't even been going for 2 real life days at this point. Someone likes quick days apparently, maybe he did coach cavjj to quick hammer D1...

2) the insults. I have not seen anything this bad since I was town and veridis was scum (Nobody, remember that game, you modded it) and attacked me D1/D2 until I got his butt lynched.

Here is one example, but there was other's in that thread to show how scum like to belittle town with insults and such.

Ah yes, logically arguing against someone making false accusations against me, savy indeed, I must have used my super-extra scummy knowledge to break through

IAI's excellent, never beatable play

. You attacked me with

weak evidence

and a

weak argument

, and

your killer evidence

did not exist until page 5. I defended myself against said

weak attack

with reason, I did not require any extra information to do so.
If you had a real case on me,

a player such as yourself

would surely have been able to prosecute that case effectively. Now you're trying to use the fact that you have no case on me, and that you're under threat of lynch to also prove that I'm scum? Wild flailings, nothing more.

Underlined continues to show your belittling efforts. Scuminess noted.
...

I need to reread the last 5-10 pages. People are saying that I am not posting enough, I think it is that others are posting at a ridiculous rate. This being my 27th post in 8 days of real life play is about right for me.

Like I said, I'll catch up on the voting history, address Honest Abel's accusations against me, and address any outstanding questions anyone has for me. If there is one I missed, please repost and I'll do my best to keep up. My vote will be coming shortly, either for cavjj or Honest Abel, whoever has more votes at this point.

[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.

[Honest Abel]

Honest Abel pushed D1 hard on what was the optimal strategy N1 for scum. It put in a lot of people's heads that the IC was in danger. This could be just scum trying to get a free shot at 5 other players N1 (assuming IC is town and town is mislynched), or it could have been a more longer term reason to show why a scum IC continues to last Night after Night.

I don't get how my question gave scum a free shot at anyone. First of all because I merely asked the question and didn't know how people would respond. Second because we got various responses, from "lynch the IC, duh," to "IC would lynch, SE, or anyone could use WIFOM to lynch anyone." The variety of response paired with me not controlling the answers should free me from whatever blame you're trying to push on me for Scumhunter's death. What am I missing here?

Along with that, an SE died, and now he is pushing for the other SE to go. (not to push appeal to fear, but) A 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?

I'm after you for some legitimate reasons. I'm targeting you specifically for those reasons and because there are so many of them. I hope you will acknowledge this when you read my treatise on you, and I'm rooting for you to come through with some solid answers that aren't just deflection. If you're going to be as active in the rest of the game as you've been on this page so far, and considering your good record at being town, you'd certainly be a good ally.

Ah, here is the winner. Honest Abel has turned all attention away from cavjj, onto DC and me. This scum team lines up nicely with the evidence from the two scenarios above, 1) Honest Abel pushing protection on the IC giving free shots to the scum team, 2) cavjj having a newbie teammate who did not proper advice N0 on how to play D1.

My relationship with cavjj is simple: I attacked the easiest target from D1 to see how you and DC would react. I suspected you both for some iffy D1 conversation and because of the shared bandwagons. cavjj was also on those bandwagons, but he seemed the most obviously clueless/oblivious. So following my early D2 attack on him, I defended him only enough to cancel out what I said merely because I was using him as a target to get a response.

I also like how he says "It also strikes me that Scumhunter's promise to you to become more involved in the game could have been a determining factor in his demise" almost hinting at that he feels cavjj may be scum (distancing?), but the rest of D2 he defends cavjj to no end.

"Almost hinting"? I was using real reasons to go after cavjj to make him look as scummy as possible, so if any one of my reasons made him look like scum, it only makes sense. I just didn't personally believe those reasons added up to definite scum. This does not clear cavjj in my book, but I had two bigger fish to fry at the time. You'll see that he's been on my scumlist consistently, I think. Maybe I moved him to null when whilst dipped into scum. cavjj has had a very weak D2, though, and my current appraisal of him is scum.

[Honest Abel]

Honest Abel pushed D1 hard on what was the optimal strategy N1 for scum. It put in a lot of people's heads that the IC was in danger. This could be just scum trying to get a free shot at 5 other players N1 (assuming IC is town and town is mislynched), or it could have been a more longer term reason to show why a scum IC continues to last Night after Night.

I don't get how my question gave scum a free shot at anyone. First of all because I merely asked the question and didn't know how people would respond. Second because we got various responses, from "lynch the IC, duh," to "IC would lynch, SE, or anyone could use WIFOM to lynch anyone." The variety of response paired with me not controlling the answers should free me from whatever blame you're trying to push on me for Scumhunter's death. What am I missing here?

Also, when

didn't

scum have a free shot at anyone? Were they bound to lynch someone in particular before I came along? No. The fact that you are still attacking my deliberately weak comment with the is strange, unless you're trying to show through redundancy that you didn't just go after it because it's deliberately weak. Which might be even scummier.

[Honest Abel]

I just realized the preface I typed up to #482 is missing. General gist: "IAI, thanks for responding to some points against you, but I have some problems/questions about them that I hope you will address:"

I believe this is important at least because I don't want to give you the impression that I am attacking you, here. I would prefer if we could talk about my concerns calmly.

[Nobody Special]

Early morning thoughts:

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; I'd like it to stop (just my personal wish; not telling either of you to shut up).

IAI's note-dump is classic distancing. Start with some (mostly) irrelevant D1 analysis, move onto distancing of the partner (whilst) along with random town-calling of the non-partner, then lump Everyone Else into a short third post.

Still very willing to lynch IAI.

Preemptively: Am I tunneling? Not really. I'm equally as good with a whilst lynch.

[Honest Abel]

The other two things that IAI mentioned:

I said we were nearing the pinnacle of a good time to lynch because DC put so much anti-town material in the thread that it was enough to lynch him based off of it. Everyone had taken their stances by that point, I think, including you, but not including the IC slot. The good news is that things certainly haven't regressed. NS coming in and you finally answering to your actions have been good things. DC's whole episode was a regression, but I think we're over it now.

You're really trying to push the idea that I'm somehow insulting you by saying you're not scumhunting and not doing anything protown. These are observations, not critiques. Let's take a look at some hypothetical examples of the difference:

Observations:

You're scumhunting
You're not scumhunting
You're protown
You're not protown
You're twisting my words
You're not twisting my words

Critiques/insults:

You're scumhunting poorly
You suck at being protown
You're twisting my words, you sniveling shitbag

[Honest Abel]

DC, I will respond to your wall on me later, since I've determined that it is protown, or an attempt to be protown. And just for that,

UNVOTE: DarkClaymore

[Honest Abel]

I'm reading DC's non-lynchbait case on whilst, and while I haven't come to a conclusion about it yet:

Yeah, I'm pretty bad. Which is probably why I wasn't mafia killed during N1.

This is just awful. That's pretty much the kind of thing you lynch people for saying.

[whilst]

DC, I will also respond to you shortly, but first:

I'm reading DC's non-lynchbait case on whilst, and while I haven't come to a conclusion about it yet:

Yeah, I'm pretty bad. Which is probably why I wasn't mafia killed during N1.

This is just awful. That's pretty much the kind of thing you lynch people for saying.

Remember what that was in response to? You said "he's going to hate me for saying this, but whilst is pretty bad", or something close to that. You made a pithy remark about me, so I gave you a shallow response.

[Honest Abel]

DC's case on whilst:

1) Pleasing both sides.

whilst has done this before, and it's been one of my main critiques of his play in the past. The other thing he used to do was assume a "style" of posting. One game, he was as much of a stubborn asshole as he could be. It was very anti-town. He's stopped doing that kind of thing, but he still seems to be trying to please people. Good point.

2) Suspecting and not suspecting [DC].

Another good point. Why was DC on whilst's suspect list, and then later he claims he has no reasons to vote for DC? It's wishy-washy. I will admit that the lynchbait "strategy" ONLY serves to make this point BECAUSE whilst said he suspected DC beforehand and not afterward. Other than that, the lynchbait thing makes no sense and is too anti-town to justify using. We will talk more about this when the game is over, DC. I hope you do not use that strategy in the future.

3) Outguessing.

This seems like a stretch. I don't get this from DC's first or third examples. I see it in the second example, but it's so subtle that it seems like a stretch. 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.

4) Denying your own suggestion after others use it against you.

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.

DC, overall, I'm pleased with this case on whilst. Some of your logic is weak and you're stretching, but at least you are trying now. I'll respond to your case on me next.

[Honest Abel]

Remember what that was in response to? You said "he's going to hate me for saying this, but whilst is pretty bad", or something close to that. You made a pithy remark about me, so I gave you a shallow response.

I remember what it was in response to. But you used it as a reason to say "I'm alive because no mafia would have killed such a bad player." You offered this part up for no reason. Nobody was questioning why you were alive. It's scummy.

[Honest Abel]

This just crossed my mind for no reason:

NS, what do you think of cavjj given his D2 performance? All you've said about him is that he seems town based on #139, which you didn't explain. Explain and tell me what you think of cavjj overall.

[whilst]

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.

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.

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.

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? Also, don't say you weren't feeling pressured by my "list". 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?

UNVOTE: cavjj
VOTE: DarkClaymore

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.

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?

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.[/area]

You bring this up again? I just told you about the word nice. It's an adjective, and yeah -- I did like your hypothetical question. So what? Did you ever think of this: 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. And yeah, I maintain that you've confused yourself. For some reason, you just can't see that I'm not mafia. Like I said, move on. I mean, you don't have to. You could probably kill me during N2, right? Assuming you don't get lynched now. Do you feel bad that you didn't lynch me during N1? Maybe your mafia partner will avenge you and kill me during N2 anyway.

[whilst]

Remember what that was in response to? You said "he's going to hate me for saying this, but whilst is pretty bad", or something close to that. You made a pithy remark about me, so I gave you a shallow response.

I remember what it was in response to. But you used it as a reason to say "I'm alive because no mafia would have killed such a bad player." You offered this part up for no reason. Nobody was questioning why you were alive. It's scummy.

Right, and no one in the game could've guessed I was a bad player. Just take it as a "fuck you".

Preemptively: Am I tunneling? Not really. I'm equally as good with a whilst lynch.

I'm sure you will eventually, but be sure to post why first.

[whilst]

DC's case on whilst:

1) Pleasing both sides.

whilst has done this before, and it's been one of my main critiques of his play in the past. The other thing he used to do was assume a "style" of posting. One game, he was as much of a stubborn asshole as he could be. It was very anti-town. He's stopped doing that kind of thing, but he still seems to be trying to please people. Good point.

Is it a majority of people that think I am pleasing everyone? Or just Abel and DC?

[Honest Abel]

If you were town, I'd expect you to move on; and hey--you did. You posted a nice section about Abel, congrats.

...

VOTE: DarkClaymore

???

VOTE: whilst

[Honest Abel]

Seems like whilst is suddenly being extra offensive because we pointed out how placid he is.

[whilst]

If you were town, I'd expect you to move on; and hey--you did. You posted a nice section about Abel, congrats.

...

VOTE: DarkClaymore

???

VOTE: whilst

You didn't even read my whole post, or why I voted for him. Let DC respond, I want to see how he reacts.

Is that to get a reaction out of me? I doubt you expect anyone really to hammer me, and neither do I.

[Honest Abel]

I did read your whole post. It's not looking good, chum.