Mini 1250: That 70s Smalltown - GAME OVER

[IceGuy]

/confirm

[IceGuy]

Semi V/LA:

I only have a very bad Internet connection until Thursday afternoon (CEST) and my participation will be limited.

I've already sent my picks per PM to The Fonz.

[IceGuy]

Okay, back in full swing.

farside should definitely be saving her ability for taking Seacore's ability when he is inevitably killed before D3. (Even if he's scum, the SK will want to be rid of him too, so.) The only other role that I might see her taking is the tracker. She should not have the option of taking any role that would help her as scum in any way.

Quilford should be jailing Seacore every night. If Seacore is scum, it keeps him from making the kill, if he's town, it keeps him alive.

Seacore is jailed N1 and survives. If Quilford isn't killed, he survives N2. If he is killed, jason delays the kill and he also survives N2. No point in wasting farside's ability for that.

Everyone who has an

unlimited

action to perform should be performing it every night; the more limited scum are in who can make the kill for them, the better.

FTFY

Otherwise, useless advice because what do you think we're going to do?!

Hey, Red, man, Red. I served in WW2, you and I, we gotta stick together.

But I agree with Midge, man, Hyde's sneaky. Sometimes, I can't even see him! Like when I'm at home and he's not there.

Unvote. Vote kdowns

Your fast jump on the kdowns wagon is noted.

---

So you're proposing that you should mislynch me and then during the night phase there will be 2 NK's leaving us at 9 people starting day 2. I'm sorry I am going to prevent my lynch because I will not let it go by that the many reasons for starting towards a lynch on me is because of my Role.

This is bad. I mean, bad as in caught scum by chance bad. You've got your standard AtE in there, your useless fluff (yes, we're 12 people, when 3 are dead, that means 9 are left. Do you think we can't do basic math?), and your hollow threat "I am going to prevent my lynch".

Seacore, You are pretty much proposing to Lynch me because my Role is essentially helpful towards scum if I was scum, but I'm not.

Useless again; do you think scum is ever going to claim scum?

I think Iam is possibly the more scummier one for now due to the fact that he actually brought this up as a case when the RVS had pretty much started.

Before, you only attacked Seacore. You probably noticed yourself how stupid that was since iaau noted your role first, so you decided to change your target, but then continue to accuse Seacore as if nothing happened. Still you kept your random vote on hiplop. Why didn't you vote one of the people you actually had down as scum?

VOTE: kdowns

Go explain:
- whom of iaau and Seacore is scum and why;
- why you didn't vote one of them;
- what your reads are;
- what your utility to town (as compared to other roles) is.

---

Quilford, why are iiau and CS scum?

---

Kdowns comes out clearly ahead in the Seacore versus Kdowns debate.

No, by the time you posted this (106) either Seacore or Iam would be better lynchs than policy.

Chainsaw defense of kdowns noted. Don't you get any scummy vibes from his response to the lynch suggestion?

Directing Town actions, especially minor ones like Bob’s inventions, overwhelmingly benefits Scum. The uncertainty of what is going to happen at Night is one of the things that keeps Scum honest. Having a full road-map of what is going to happen only lets Scum plan their Night actions more effectively.

And this is just scum trying to throw town into disarray. Neighborizer, backup, and inventor all need to be directed since:

- an undirected town player brings no extra benefit (for neighborizer and inventor, scum could try to kill the target but that's mostly wasting a kill; with backup, scum can't interfere at all),
- an undirected scum player does a lot of damage to town (scum circle for neighborizer; extra night action or loss of vote for town for inventor; powerful role in scum's hands for backup).
- it is easy to check whether the player followed the directions.

The other night actions could be undirected, with the exception of JK and kill delay with regard to Seacore; but it also might make sense to direct them to deflect the scum's kill from a powerful role.

[IceGuy]

No, I don’t. I get newb vibes from his responses. I don’t see anything scummy at all about saying “hey, I’m not rolling over for your stupid policy lynch”. Which is basically what happened, IMO.

Countering a case by saying "I'm town, I would be a mislynch, don't lynch me!!!" is now a town tell? Changing targets back-and-forth without good justifications and still not voting them isn't fence-sitting any more? This as a response to this makes perfect sense?

How does an ‘undirected’ scum player damage Town again?

How about reading my post.

Neighborizor has to claim target the next day. Target confirms or denys. Other players that may have information to confirm or deny weight in.

Scum player is already in the circle, damage is done. Neighborizer has no possibility to lie anyway.

Inventor’s cause of loss of vote on Pro-Town player causes high levels of suspicion on scum inventor.

Except this doesn't come into play until the pro-town player actually flips pro-town, and he can always argue how scummy he looked. We know the drill.

Backup, if they are deemed scummy, can be lynched.

Everybody can be lynched if deemed scummy. Worthless statement that doesn't address my point.

Where is the benefit to not directing the backup?

And what roles do you consider ‘powerful’ in this case? Please elaborate.

You don't think a scum jailkeeper is powerful?

The preceeding is an Appeal to Fear. Noted.

Throwing mud and hoping something sticks noted.

@Iceguy -

I want your opinion on the record - you support the 'Kill the Role' approach that Iam and Seacore pushed, correct?

No. I wouldn't support a kdowns lynch simply because of his role. I'm supporting a kdowns lynch for his scummy behavior, with the role being an additional factor.

[IceGuy]

Um what case? The “His role benefits scum potentially the most, lynch him Day 1 screw scumhunting” 'case' (I'm using ''s because it really isn't a case at all)? If so any response is a Town tell because that is a stupid and scummy ‘case’.

So you don't think a response to a bad case can be scummy? No fluff as usual, just a simple "yes" or "no".

Reality check – publicly known Neighborhoods aren’t radically powerful scum-hunting tools in an open setup. True story.

So you're agreeing with me? Or what point are you trying to make?

Are you asserting Farside is scum?

Do you have her as confirmed town? If not, it does make sense to consider the possibility she's scum?

And what powerful roles are you seeking to keep out?

You don't think a scum jailkeeper is powerful?

In an open setup with no Vig or Strong Cop? No, not really. At best he can perhaps stop a Serial Killer kill. In the end JK in this setup is MUCH stronger in Town hands than scum.

How about stopping town powers, especially in a game where every town player has a power role that is known?

In this setup the probable most powerful role a scum backup could take would be mine. Nothing like a surprise "Hey, you lynched me now I get an extra kill".

So you assert there are no powerful scum roles, and your role would be powerful for scum? Pick one.

Let me illuminate your hypocricy with the following quote from the post you originally made –

And this is just scum trying to throw town into disarray

So pick your poison Mr Guy. Is the above mudslinging? Or is it scum-hunting.

It's scum-hunting. So far, you've failed to give a pro-town reason why we shouldn't coordinate night actions.

So let me get this straight.

You don’t agree with the original position Iam and Secore took. But you are saying his response to what is effectively a bad policy lynch is scummy?

Yes. I'm not giving him a free pass simply because the iaau/Seacore case was bad.

[IceGuy]

I'd say Seacore on the basis of pushing for a Policy lynch.

And what about iaau, who started that wagon?

I didn't vote either as I don't like voting for people who currently have their vote on me, I hate being accused of OMGUS

Voting somebody who's scummy isn't OMGUS.

Reads: Iam and Seacore Null Scum

So iaau and Seacore are now both "null scum", whatever that is?

I don't really have a utility for town as I have a role that can easily backfire on us, I can possibly see what the scum might pull.

What are you seeing? Scum is trying to mislynch the least useful town role?

[IceGuy]

EBWOP:

How about stopping town powers, especially in a game where every town player has a power role that is known?

what?

I was talking about a scum JK.

[IceGuy]

So you don't think a response to a bad case can be scummy?

No fluff as usual,

just a simple "yes" or "no".

Heh he, nice try but sorry … you don’t get to dictate the rules of conversation.

The bolded is more mudslinging on your part. Scummy, especially in light of your own hypocrisy on the issue.

And I’ll tell you once again – I do NOT find kdown’s response to the ‘case’ scummy in the least. Because the case itself is scummy. Seacore himself is pulling back from saying it was an actual case but was a method to ‘get out of RVS’.

It's funny how you accuse me of mudslinging for calling you out on posting fluff and replying by posting fluff.

Anyway, here's what you're saying with the mudslinging and the fluff removed, everybody take note:

A reaction to a bad case can never be scummy.

So scum, just make a bad case on one of your partners and MoI will give him a free pass.

No, I’m refuting your position that scum infiltrating ‘the Circle’ is some significant deal that justifies your Appeals to Fear.

Again, mudslinging. You don't care at all when scum is infiltrating the circle?

So who’s fluffing now as opposed to answering in a simple Yes/No. Hint – it’s you.

You didn’t answer – do you think farside is scum?

Of course I don’t have her as confirmed Town … that’s not the point. Your reasoning on why farside’s ability should be directed is predicated on farside-scum. So it’s simply an Appeal to Fear if you are trying to assert reasons why she should be directed if you don’t actually have reason to think she is scum.

And mudslinging again. Why are you simultaneously conceding farside isn't confirmed town, while refusing the possibility she's scum?

Why do you want to deal in absolutes when it comes to town and scum reads?

This is a completely open setup. Everyone knows everything about everyone else’s role and abilities (excluding alignment). So you are positioning a scum JK as extremely powerful when because it can ‘block Town powers’.

Exactly.

Fact 1 – There is no other role-blocking mechanics in the game. Fact. So scum JK blocking an Town power essentially sets up the JK and Town PR in a 1v1. This is bad for scum (outside of LYLO) as even if the JK wins that Day when the Town player flips he is the next day’s lynch for lying or get killed by the Serial Killer overnight.

He can always argue he didn't think that was a town player and was behaving scummy. Even a town JK is going to block a town player once in a while. Fact 1 is Lie 1.

Fact 2 – There is only one role that Town has that is overwhelmingly powerful – Tracker. The rest are fairly innocuous (Self Watch / Inventor / Neighborizor).

So the inventor, which might postpone LyLo for one day, is "innocuous" in your eyes? And you're not even mentioning the kill delayer and copycat, which also have a night action? Nice try. Fact 2 is Lie 2.

Fact 3 – A scum JK has to use his JK abilility and thus is greatly restricted from making the scum kill.

That's actually true, but rather irrelevant when there is more than one scum player alive.

Nice straw-man. I’m asserting your suggestions of what ‘powerful scum roles’ are is incorrect.

ISO #13:

And what roles do you consider ‘powerful’ in this case? Please elaborate.

ISO #14:

Your ‘It keeps dangerous powers out of scum hands’ is a hypothethecial. Are you asserting Farside is scum? And what powerful roles are you seeking to keep out?

Oh, so you calling me scum is scum-hunting but me calling you out on an Appeal to Fear (you know, a scum move) is mud-slinging Nice hypocrisy.

Yes, it was mud-slinging, because I wasn't appealing to fear, I was showing why your plan is anti-town.

ATTENTION:

Inventing scumtells out of thin air is a typical scum-MoI move. For meta reference: see this game (starting MoI ISO #32) where MoI was scum from day 2 and I was a vanilla townie as part of the Cosca hydra. We were MoI's designated mislynch because we expressed suspicions about him (and called two out of three scum, including him, later on Day 2) and he used

exactly the same tactics

.

And why he might try this on me, he gives the reason himself:

Fact 2 – There is only one role that Town has that is overwhelmingly powerful – Tracker.

Here is his preparation:

UNVOTE: Seacore

My vote will likely be going to either Cons, Iceguy or on an outside shot Iam pending on the next round of responses and posting.

Read - "I want to get rid of the most powerful town role now, but if that wagon doesn't get off the ground I'm voting the player who already has some votes on him and is garnering suspicion." iaau is possibly his scum buddy.

The burden of proof is on you to provide a convincing reason why coordinating night actions is a Pro-Town action. Your arguments so far fail the logic test.

You wanted us to not coordinate the night actions and failed to give a pro-town reason for that. Now you're trying to shift the burden of proof to me, with you as the arbitrator who's getting to reject arguments for whatever reason at all.

I don't care what you think about my arguments, you will always reject them. I care what town players think about my arguments.

And I’m asserting his reaction is in no way scummy.

And if that case would've been good, his reaction would've been scummy?

So iaau and Seacore are now both "null scum", whatever that is?

See this furthers my scum read on you. Having a null to scum read on someone is pretty standard Mafiascum play. That you are trying to push it as something that isn’t obvious is scummy.

Again, typical scum-MoI play: taking a quote out of context to justify his fake "scum read". I was calling him out on first claiming he only has a scum read on Seacore (and none on iaau), and later changing it to a "null scum" read on both players, without any justification or even posting by iaau in between.

---

tl;dr:

Inventing scumtells out of thin air is a typical scum-MoI move. For meta reference: see this game (starting MoI ISO #32) where MoI was scum from day 2 and I was a vanilla townie as part of the Cosca hydra. We were MoI's designated mislynch because we expressed suspicions about him (and called two out of three scum, including him, later on Day 2) and he used

exactly the same tactics

.

And why he might try this on me, he gives the reason himself:

Fact 2 – There is only one role that Town has that is overwhelmingly powerful – Tracker.

Here is his preparation:

UNVOTE: Seacore

My vote will likely be going to either Cons, Iceguy or on an outside shot Iam pending on the next round of responses and posting.

Read - "I want to get rid of the most powerful town role now, but if that wagon doesn't get off the ground I'm voting the player who already has some votes on him and is garnering suspicion." iaau is possibly his scum buddy.

[IceGuy]

I find Iceguy's case to be mix of overapplication of Wikitells (see how often he uses the word Mudslinging in that post)

I'm calling it mudslinging because it is mudslinging.

and a sad Meta attack (he fails to mention half of the things he attacked me for in said game were WHEN I WAS TOWN, since I was recruited N1).

This is another scum-MoI lie. Most of the case was based on your behavior D2 and later. For everybody's reference, here's the original case on MoI, with the parts about D1 marked in red, and the parts about D2 and later marked in green. Unfortunately the formatting got lost (I can't quote it since the thread is locked).

Spoiler: MoI's lie illustrated

ISO #1/#2:

*

MagnaofIllusion wrote:First – don’t elect me Executioner. I’ve surveyed the playerlist. There aren’t nearly enough players whose scum-hunting I trust that I would agree to listen to the Town as a whole. .


Or, to rephrase, "You all suck, I'm the greatest."

* The rest are basically attacks on the usual scummy-looking players, i.e. SK, Codfish and Captain. Nulltell at this point; it is however interesting he's defending vezok and jason, listing them as his #2 and #1 townread, although both of them have contributed very little so far.

ISO #6:

*

MagnaofIllusion wrote:Jason you were on a hot streak there in providing quality posts with content. Don’t backslide into fence-sitting like this and make me question my Town initial read on you.


Notice how he in the rest of the game never "warns" a player he might question his town read on him, he either changes his read or doesn't mention it at all. The reason he does this here? He's coaching his scumbuddy jason.


ISO #7:

* Contains his scum reads SK, Codfish and Captain again.


ISO #8:

* Suddenly, havingfitz also goes on the list:

MagnaofIllusion wrote:

havingfitz wrote:You are annoyingly pretentious. You don't think enough of the people you play with to follow their opinion/wishes if you were to be elected executioner but you have no problem doling out instructions "in case" you die before Day 2 start.



Oh how quaint. So NO OTHER INPUT? Like who is scum.

Nice.

@Quil - Throw having on my "Would like to see Executed list" if you are updating that list still.


Why this sudden attack on a player who has just returned from V/LA and posted little? MoI starts noticing he's going to run into a problem.
o He knows it's very likely vezok will be elected day executioner and kill Codfish
o and MoI will be elected as night executioner.
o With his scumlist SK, Codfish and Captain he can only explain away a kill on SK and Captain.
o But since both of them appear scummy, he'd like to keep them alive as long as possible.
o So he needs another victim.


ISO #12:

* MoI defends jason against IceGuy after he has noticed his strange fence-sitting regarding Quilford.


ISO #12/#13/#14:

* MoI and IceGuy talk about IceGuy's night strategy. Note how MoI states:

MagnaofIllusion wrote:Your logic is borked.


To which IceGuy replies:

IceGuy wrote:Yes, it is, because I was thinking of normal day voting, and I didn't take into account that the Night Executioner isn't voted by majority but by plurality. So yeah, my strategy wouldn't work.



From this point on, MoI ignores the strategy and does not reply to IceGuy.


ISO #22 onwards:

* He starts building up heat on havingfitz to prepare his night execution.


Day 1 ends

,

Day 2 starts.

ISO #31:

*

MagnaofIllusion wrote:Given my explicitly stated reads (as discussed below) the fact that I got control of the Nightkill means the likelihood that multiple scum were in that read group is pretty much nil.


Wait a minute here. During N1 executioner voting we were down one townie. Assuming a town doublevoter, no scum doublevoter and three or four coordinated scum, that's 10:6 or 9:8 for town.
Why is he so sure that scum voted for him? Does he know something about night voting we don't know?

* Also answers to our lurking accusation.


ISO #32:

* This is where it becomes interesting.

MagnaofIllusion wrote:Ok, I’ve managed to give you [Cosca] enough room to distance yourself from this ridiculous stance as necessary. And you’ve clung to it so strongly despite being told by multiple sources it makes no sense.

Into the scum-pool with this slot. Iceguy’s “Hey why should we agree on the Night-executioner” “Oh wait, nevermind” two step put you on my radar Day 1. This combined with your stance that Vezok is scummy qualifies you for my ‘Approved Execution’ list.


Is somebody else reminded of the havingfitz attack in ISO #8? He takes a player that has neither strong town reads by most of the players (to avoid resistance) nor strong scum reads (because they're going to get executed anyway) and invents a reason for why they're scum. It's exactly the same pattern.

* Also, he immediately attacks Scumhunter.


ISO #33:

* We have become his top scumread after jason (with no explanation - the usual "<Scumbuddy> is also scum, but we need to focus on <Townie> now" bus) and Tragedy (since she was in a similar situation as we were, few strong town or scum reads, she's the alternative planned misexecution.)

* We will not discuss MoI's attacks on us in detail here, but will focus on other aspects of his play. For a detailed discussion of his attacks, see the next section.


ISO #34:

* More Scumhunter attacks. Notice how Scumhunter is still not in his execution list although we got the top space for nothing.


ISO #35:

* Again, Scumhunter attack and a small attack on Tragedy, to prepare for the gambit (see following).


ISO #36:

* Finally, Scumhunter takes up his place in the execution list, still after us.

* Tragedy gets removed because

MagnaofIllusion wrote:I've removed Tragedy due to the buddying displayed by Scumhunter. I can't see them as scum together and I have a stronger read on Scumhunter at this juncture than Tragedy.


Read: If the gambit goes the other way and MoI gets lynched and flips scum, Scumhunter will be seen as confirmed town and MoI's attacks on us will also prevent our execution. In this case, a Tragedy mis-execution can be pursued.


ISO #39, after Scumhunter's fake cop claim:

MagnaofIllusion wrote:ATTENTION EVERYONE - It is him or me today. Not other Executioner votes are going to be acceptable at this juncture.


The gambit is now in full swing. If we had proceeded as MoI wished, there would be two outcomes:
o (likely) MoI gets elected as day executioner and executes Scumhunter. Scumhunter flips scum thereby semi-confirming MoI as town. MoI gets elected night executioner because of this and can execute us.
o (unlikely) Scumhunter gets elected as day executioner and executes MoI. MoI flips scum thereby semi-confirming Scumhunter as town. Scumhunter gets elected night executioner and can find a suitable mis-execution, for instance Zang, whom he found very scummy despite many others finding him to be town.


ISO #41:

* After being pressured by implosion for his "him-or-me"-stance he retracts:

MagnaofIllusion wrote:Ok, perhaps in my quick reply last night before bed I didn’t phrase it as clearly as I should have.

No other votes for WHO to be executed are acceptable.

* Also, it's turning out better than expected. The town cop is now not only out, he also has a guilty result on somebody else. Of course, Scumhunter (or MoI) is still doomed, but he sees a good opportunity to postpone the kill to the Night, therefore having an extra two votes for a scum night executioner.

MagnaofIllusion wrote:I support Zang for Day Executioner to kill Quilford.


ISO #56:

*

MagnaofIllusion wrote:Zang - Make your execution decision and let's move forward.

Zang should be the Night Executioner ... no questions asked. He's almost assuredly confirmed Town and no-one else is even close. Arguing against that is an exercise in claiming you are scum.



MoI is trying to stifle discussion (he knows that a wall from us is upcoming and he tries to suppress it by ending the day know) and tries to pressure all of us into voting Zang, knowing Zang will kill Quilford.


MoI's "case" on us
Here is a full summary of all the allegations MoI has made against us:

* ISO #32:
o 1. MoI was showing much less activity then he usually was, and we called him out on that. After he made a content post, we retracted our suspicion and agreed this post was enough to satisfy our activity requirements.
o 2. IceGuy made a mistake and thought the night executioner was elected by majority voting, not plurality voting. He therefore thought up a scheme which would have lead to the exposure of at least one scum player.
o 3. Vezok posted fluff and we called him out on that.


Please note MoI has never called us out for 2. or 3. before this, although they happened much earlier.

* ISO #34:
o 4. We cut out a piece of his quote irrelevant to our current argument. And then he did exactly the same thing in the process of calling us out for that.


ISO #37:
o 5. After 4., we posted that MoI did exactly the same thing he accused us of doing. He claimed this was scummy because we turned his accusation back on him.
o 6. We summarized MoI's allegations against us and he claimed we did it in a way "completely to favor us". His "arguments" against our summary (reproduced here verbatim as 1.-3., only in a different order) can be summarized as "You are wrong and I am right", for instance claiming vezok wasn't active lurking or that IceGuy didn't post such a plan, without actually showing this or posting quotes to support his claims (which he couldn't, as they didn't exist).


ISO #38:
o 7. We changed our Scumhunter read because he committed a scum-tell (reading his predecessor's posts). MoI claimed we changed the read without justification.


ISO #44:
o 8. He ignores our arguments and calls us scummy because don't want to execute Quilford immediately, but rather a player who's actually behaved very scummy.
o 9. Similar to 7., he claims we "backtracked" on our Scumhunter read after "pressure began to build on him", although we already posted we changed our Scumhunter read because of the scumtell, and there was no pressure except for MoI's gambit preparing posts.


* ISO #47:
Repeat of 8.


* ISO #50:
o 10. We didn't want Zang as an executioner because we thought he'll be the scum's useful idiot. MoI claimed this is scummy because Zang is "confirmed town".


* ISO #51:
Repeat of 9.
o 11. This "argument" is so stupid, I can't even summarize it. Here is the original text:

MagnaofIllusion wrote:

Cosca wrote:If Scumhunter was merely a fed-up townie, he'd have either called for implosion's hammer (since implosion has pledged to execute him) or anybody's hammer. However, he specifically requests a Zang hammer.



Look who isn’t reading the thread. Here’s Zang’s latest pronouncement on the subject (from ISO 44)

It shouldn't change anything though. We either kill scumhunter or quilford today and the other tonight.

I would prefer scumhunter today because of his fakeclaim and just in case Quilford has papers that he is willing to pass on.



When you don’t have to read the thread to know who the scum are (aka your Partners) it is tempting to skim and make up crap to support your ‘position’, isn’t it?


* ISO #52:
o Repeating 9., again, completely ignoring what we wrote in response the first two times it came up.


* ISO #53:
o 12. MoI claimed we used the word "traitor" first, which makes us scum looking for our traitor. Actually, "traitor" was used much earlier both by us and implosion, and a traitor was present in the first Execution Mafia.


* ISO #54:
Repeat of 12.


* ISO #55:
Repeat of 12., again ignoring what we wrote.


It should now be clear that MoI's case is simply pure bullshit, and we have already given an explanation why he concocted this bullshit. There is no pro-Town reason for continuously inventing scumtells (in both senses of the word - claiming something that happened was scummy when it wasn't, such as 10, or claiming something scummy has happened when it didn't, such as 7).

MoI is scum. There is no other explanation for his actions. Period.

But look closely and see what is missing from the post - a vote for me.

Yup, he builds this large case that is he purports to prove I ams scum. And doesn't vote me. Because he knows I am Town and that I will kill scum on my wagon if I am lynched.

No, I know when you get lynched, you're going to try to kill me because you're scum and I have the most powerful town power - as you said yourself. And since my power is useless to the town if I'm killed D1, I'm not giving scum-MoI that shot.

So I'm voting the other scum player, and hope you'll be lynched without my vote.

VOTE: Iceguy

Called it.

This latest post is another shining example of scum-MoI play.

[IceGuy]

@ IceGuy

, why aren't you voting MoI when you are so pinned on him being scum

As I said, because when he gets lynched with me on the wagon he can vengekill me, and the tracker is too powerful a role to be lost D1. I want to get at least one investigation.

[IceGuy]

Are you kidding? What's more important: Lynching scum and losing tracker or not lynching scum and keeping tracker? You give far too much credit to your role.

What is better: Lynching scum and not losing tracker or lynching scum and losing tracker?

I expect the wagon to go forward without my vote.

[IceGuy]

So scum, just make a bad case on one of your partners and MoI will give him a free pass.

Pure fluff right here.

Here is the same "fluff" in your own words:

And I’ll tell you once again – I do NOT find kdown’s response to the ‘case’ scummy in the least. Because the case itself is scummy.

Because it’s a fully open game. No inherent significant ‘Town advantage’ to a Neighborhood that isn’t hidden. Period. As I’ve said before and that you ignored.

Why do you keep crying “Infiltrating the Neighborhood” is some very damaging thing to Town? You can’t provide any reason why it is.

*facepalm*

Are you seriously asking me how a scum-and-town neighborhood is worse than an only-town neighborhood?

Complete misrep. Please quote where I refuse to believe the possibility she’s scum.

You're pushing a plan that doesn't change anything if she's town and benefits us if she's scum.

In the meantime you again dodge the facts - that you are predicating the so-called advantages to Town of directing her action when it’s only advantageous if she is scum. And you steadfastly refuse to take a stance on that element.

So once again – Do you think Farside is scum? Yes or no please, no fluffing or dodging.

What is so hard to understand about "I have a plan that doesn't change anything if she's town and benefits us if she's scum, so I'm in favor of implementing it unless she's confirmed town"?

I currently have her as neutral leaning town.

He can always argue he didn't think that was a town player and was behaving scummy. Even a town JK is going to block a town player once in a while. Fact 1 is Lie 1.

Your refutation fails to consider that said claim can be examined by the Town and judged. Fail on Lie Attack 1.

What has this answer to do with my refutation? Read it, understand it and try to reply.

So the inventor, which might postpone LyLo for one day, is "innocuous" in your eyes? And you're not even mentioning the kill delayer and copycat, which also have a night action? Nice try. Fact 2 is Lie 2.

Yes, the possible scenario where the Inventor becomes “powerful” is such a narrow case that has NOTHING to due with current game-state I do call it innocuous.

So LyLo is a "narrow case" in your eyes? Also, I only mentioned one possible course of Inventor action.

I don’t mention either the Kill Delayer or Copycat because it is pretty obvious neither one is strong. The Kill Delayer is a much weakened Doc.

Please elaborate on why the Copycat is powerful.

Fail on Lie Attack 2.

I'm not explaining the basics of Mafia to you. We have a very good wiki where you can look up what the PRs' powers are and how they can swing the game in favor of their alignment.

Yes, you were Appealing to Fear. That’s exactly what yelling “OH MY GOD THE DANGER” is when the ‘dangers’ you provided don’t reflect the realities of how Mafia is actually played.

*yawn*

You're not the god of Mafia. And you're lying.

Also once again – you are the one with the Plan (direct all Night actions). I’m just pointing how bad that plan is.

So far, you only tried to show why your "plan" (i.e. uncoordinated town) is not worse. I haven't seen a single argument that is even trying to show why it's better.

Regarding your meta – I’m just going to chuckle and leave it at that. If you think a single game where I changed alignment midstream is going to suddenly let you read my scum games you are either scum making it up (which I think you are) or pretty stupid. We’ll see after the game is over.

Considering I'm comparing your behavior on D2 (when you were scum) to your behavior now, your point is invalid.

My vote happily rests on you beceause Tracker is a powerful Town role … but you are scum so lynching you is Pro-Town.

Here is a shining example of this. "You're scum" repeated over and over to both drain my energy and hope something sticks.

I’ll let people read the red and see all the false ‘scummy’ play you highlighted about my Day 1 play that wasn’t from a Scum perspective since I was Town.

As I mentioned, this doesn't matter as I'm comparing your scum play on D2 to your scum play now. And the similarities are striking.

And why didn’t you highlight any posts where you went off on some tangent making long posts ‘proving’ I was partners with Scum-hunter again? Oh that’s right … it would show how bad your play was there. Hmmm … then again that would bolster the perception you are now Town since your play is equally bad here.

It's still funny you're calling my play "bad" when we called two out of three scum on Day 2, and the only reason we didn't call the third scum correctly was a) a vanilla townie (who was later modkilled for his behavior) with a very bad fake cop claim and b) we not knowing you were recruited instead of being scum from the start.

I was hoping you’d make this sort of argument. Because it is total crap.

Scum don’t have an incentive to try to push on perceived Pro-Town roles. Because they have a Nightkill. DERP.

Except that a lynch or vengekill can not be protected or prohibited by any means, but a NK can.

Here’s the facts. There are no full Doctors in this game. At best you can be either

1. JKed at night to protect you – in which case your power doesn’t work and you are useless to Town
2. Killed Delayed at night – you get one successful track in before you bite the dust. Hardly the grand danger to scum since you could possibly only get 1 guilty before dying (and that is dependant on you actually making the right call Tracking the killer).

I want to be kill delayed so I can get one investigation. And it does not depend on tracking the killer; proving somebody did something different to what he claimed is also enough.

These both assume you are Town. In that case it benefits scum to NOT push for your lynch. Under your ludicrous scenario scum risks being Identified pushing on you as ‘Town Powerful Role” and then you possibly getting a successful track on them Night 1.

Pure bullshit. Scum wants me to gather as little information as possible, which means me dying D1.

But that’s why I think you are scum … your play is scummy. You use rhetoric and Appeals to Repetition as opposed to using logic to analyse motives. You use Appeals to Fear to smear those pointing out how your ‘Direct all Night actions’ plan is Pro-scum. You call someone scum but then refuse to vote them because you are afraid for your life – that’s a Scum motivation not a Town one.

So once again … I’m calling you scum because you are scum. Scum scared to actually vote for the Vengeful Townie.

Classic false dichotomy. You only consider the possibility I am scum. Town of course tend to not be 100% sure as you are presenting here. But that’s of course because you are scum.

tl;dr:

See, this is what I meant by typical scum-MoI play. Repeating "you're scum" over and over; bringing up points that already have been refuted many times; inventing "scumtells"; and taking statements out of context to make them appear scummy. Bonus points for claiming something is scummy and then doing it yourself (I'm sure you're scum because you're sure I'm scum!)

There is no pro-town motivation for such play.

[IceGuy]

I’m not pushing any plan. I’m just calling yours anti-Town.

So you're saying directing night actions is anti-Town, yet you're not pushing for not directing night actions? Or how I'm supposed to interpret this?

I’ve already explained the Number one reason why it is better – providing scum with a detailed map to Town Night actions gives scum more information by which to effectively use their actions.

Except you haven't shown how this is supposed to work. An unsubstantiated claim isn't an argument.

It was bad. You keep clinging to the “I called 2 of 3 scum” mantra and making excuses for why you didn’t find the third (who you kept defending as Town, BTW).

Let this sink in for a moment:

We were VT.

We had two VIs on our team.

We had a VT fake-claiming cop.

We didn't know MoI was recruited or that there even was a recruiting ability.

Yet, we called two out of three scum on D2.

Yes,

this

is what MoI calls bad play.

What was the outcome of that game? Scum sweep. I’m calling you bad because you had all this ‘knowledge’ and in the end you weren’t able to convince people to actually follow you. Because your cases were poorly presented and lacked compelling logic.

Another lie. By Day 3, we had every Town player following us, with the exceptions of SleepyKrew and vezok, two well-known VIs. See, for instance, this rant about vezok's, uhm, play.

Scum only won the game because vezok quick-hammered MoI (it was an execution-style game, i.e. you didn't vote for the guy that should die, but for the guy who should decide who should die) on LyLo day. All scum had to do was quickhammer.

You didn't win this game because of your play, you won it despite your play.

LOL. You do understand that scum have no motivation to divert from your ‘direct all night action’ plan anyway so the only way you would catch scum (and not the Serial Killer since they are Track immune) is to observe the Nightkill.

Look, another benefit to my plan! Thanks for finally agreeing with me it is a good plan because it keeps scum from doing their own thing!

(Just kidding, MoI is lying. For instance, a scum Inventor who is supposed to give an item to $player could use his factional kill on him and give it to a scumbuddy instead.)

It’s called using logic. You can’t actually refute what I am saying so you just call it bullshit. Weak.

Yeah, because scum letting a tracker live longer than necessary is

obviously

logical.

---

Anyway, what we need are more MoI votes. The following players please get their vote on MoI, in this order of preference:
kdowns
kondi

The following players please stay off the MoI wagon at all costs:
Seacore
Quilford
Jason

[IceGuy]

So you're saying directing night actions is anti-Town, yet you're not pushing for not directing night actions? Or how I'm supposed to interpret this?

WTF is this? Seriously.

Yeah, I thought the same thing when you said this:

I’m not pushing any plan. I’m just calling yours anti-Town.

So...

I’m not pushing any plan. I’m just calling yours anti-Town.

I’ve called the people floating the “we have to direct all Night actions” scummy. How is that not pushing for not directing Night actions?

WTF is this? Seriously.

Under your ‘plan’ all Night actions are directed.

Wrong:

Neighborizer, backup, and inventor all need to be directed since:
[...]
The other night actions could be undirected, with the exception of JK and kill delay with regard to Seacore; but it also might make sense to direct them to deflect the scum's kill from a powerful role.

I proposed the direction of Neighborizer, Backup, Inventor on all nights and JK and kill delay on N1 and N2.

Thus scum (including the Serial Killer, who is also scum) knows

1. Exactly who is getting Jailkept.
2. Exactly who is getting Kill delayed.

Thus scum can absolutely make sure their Kills target some to die.

JK and kill delay actions are obvious for N1 and N2 anyway.

Neighborizor and Inventor are able to be directly confirmed in thread simply by claiming of Night actions.

Copycat and Tracker can theoretically be confirmed in thread by the claiming target and any effects BEFORE others claim.

Confirmability is not an argument for not directing actions; having a confirmable action is also an advantage for directing actions. Having the Tracker claim what they saw before the target can claim makes his investigation worthless in most cases.

Even better reason not to direct the Inventor so he has to justify his choices. Glad a little bit of logic has seeped into your head.

Except in my example, the inventor doesn't need to justify his choice and can safely lie about it, so your argument is invalid.

What’s that flavor I’m tasting? Is it the flavor of sour grapes?

You've got your metaphors mixed up.

See, you once again are dodging the issue. There is no reason for scum to go after the Tracker slot (assuming the Tracker is Town) for lynch without reasoning. So your point that I'm simply pushing you because you are the Tracker is absurd.

I'm not saying you're pushing me

just

because I'm the tracker. It's just that my Tracker ability makes me an excellent target for scum. Do you want to deny this fact?

[IceGuy]

JK and kill delay actions are obvious for N1 and N2 anyway.

Wrong.

Right. We already agreed on JK actions regarding Seacore.

No. Directing actions that are not of great consequence (yes, I'm directly stating that the Neighborize and Inventor powers are not that strong) robs you of any relational tells that can be drawn from that publicly confirmable set of powers.

I see this as I see night kills: might be useful in special, limited situations; generally an useless pool of WIFOM.

Definitely less useful than the benefits gained from directing.

Dayplay > Nightplay if you are Town. You someday probably will come to understand this.

Again, you are not the god of Mafia, stop pretending you are.

Also the inventor’s Pink Beer is publicly confirmable regardless and the double action is publicly confirmed by MOD if it is used for a double kill

A double kill is well worth the scrutiny which can be defended against by "oh he was SO town-looking to me!".

Can you read? I’ve already gave a detailed and logical explanation as to why it makes no sense.

I can read, and you've failed to give a detailed and logical explanation for just about everything you've claimed. But I don't blame you; it's hard to give a logical explanation for bullshit such as "scum will leave a town tracker alive longer than necessary".

[IceGuy]

1. Who agreed on what again? I said that the N1 JK action was the only action I COULD see as directable, based on my Seacore read.

iaau, kdowns, Seacore himself, you. No opposition.

2. It’s wrong because the Kill delayer (you know, the other role you mentioned) isn’t obv.

The kill delayer will be going to me N1, and to Seacore N2 if the JK is dead.

Since you’ve never listed the benefits of directing that made any sense I’m just going to assume you are going to stick with your position regardless.

I've already listed them several times. Just because you choose to ignore things that don't fit in your "argumentation" doesn't mean that they aren't there.

Do I have to explicitly state why this isn’t logical at all?

So, scum trades in the worst case two and in the best case three town deaths for one scum death.

Sounds good. For scum.

No wonder you're endorsing this.

You keep repeating this crap. Why?

Because it's true.

If you are Town you are dead at best by the end of Day 2 unless Town JK decides to neutrialize your powers. That gives you 1 possible action.

Yeah, and scum is trying to take this one action away from me, by either getting me lynched or vengekilled. Is that so hard to understand?

Under your theory scum would specifically chose to go 1 v 1 with the Town tracker which could result in a scum lynch and 1 possible action.

Thus you are arguing scum would be more willing to risk two of their lives rather than 1. Especially when the first would be a 1 v 1 under your theory.

DOES NOT COMPUTE

.

Even if you somehow manage to get the tracker lynched, this doesn't mean an autolynch for you. You can still try to defend yourself by the usual "but he looked oh so scummy" defense, which will be followed by all the people on the wagon who don't like to concede they fell for a scum play. And even if you are lynched yourself, you get to kill another town player. So, no.

[IceGuy]

Why don’t you explain where this comes from because you basically seem to be pulling numbers out of the air to bolster your non-existent position and throwing on a heaping pile of rhetoric for good measure.

You know … show your work.

I actually used your work. That's just the short version.

Inventor gives out Double Action item and scum gets double-kill.

This places the Inventor and the claimed Receiver in a 1 v 1. One of them MUST be scum. No other option.

If it isn’t LYLO you lynch the Inventor. If they flip Town they had no reason to lie about their target and said player is confirmed scum to be lynched the next day (unless the opposing scum faction uses a NK on them, which would be dependant on the gamestate).

If the Inventor flips scum the target isn’t clear but shouldn’t likely be immediately lynched unless the double kill is confirmed Serial Killer (and since don’t have any kill information yet it is impossible to tell if they are distinguished). It’s possible the scum Inventor would try to gambit claim their partner and possible they would try to hang Town. Other relational and gameplay tells come into play.

Lulz. The odds your track actually yields results that confirm scum (assuming for the sake of this argument you are Town which I don’t buy) is pretty low. But sure, ignore the facts that pushing on hypo-Town you as scum makes no logical sense.

So what town role should scum push on?

Yes, when you lynch scum people tend to like that …

At least I'll die well-liked when I'm NK'd N2.

[IceGuy]

Why MoI is scum, abridged

The single most important scumtell (i.e. the one which would justify a vote on his own) is 6. Other strong scumtells are 2, 4, 7, 8, 12, 13. 9 is a nice recap.

Spoiler: 1. Justification for picking Red

What was your thought process for picking Vengeful townie?

It was a combination of playing to my wincon and a little bit of greediness.

Wincon -

1. If I drew Town I wanted to be sure any scum did not have access to it as it gives scum a free kill. Reducing the number of kills in a Small game is paramount to Town’s success IMO. Dayplay needs as many shots as possible to get scum lynches.
2. If I drew Mafia / SK it helps my wincon to varying degrees.

Notice how he elaborates on why his role benefits him when he's town, but confines himself to saying "it helps my wincon to varying degrees" for Mafia and SK. Why doesn't he give a better justification how his role helps him as scum? Maybe because that would (partially) reveal a plan he's put out for himself, and players could simply compare his plan with his play, connect the dots and see he's scum?

Spoiler: 2. Claiming a scumtell when it didn't happen

And this is just scum trying to throw town into disarray. Neighborizer, backup, and inventor all need to be directed since:

- an undirected town player brings no extra benefit (for neighborizer and inventor, scum could try to kill the target but that's mostly wasting a kill; with backup, scum can't interfere at all),
- an undirected scum player does a lot of damage to town (scum circle for neighborizer; extra night action or loss of vote for town for inventor; powerful role in scum's hands for backup).
- it is easy to check whether the player followed the directions.

The other night actions could be undirected, with the exception of JK and kill delay with regard to Seacore; but it also might make sense to direct them to deflect the scum's kill from a powerful role.

[...]

The preceeding is an Appeal to Fear. Noted.

Note how I give a perfectly logical reason why actions should be directed (even with scenarios!) and MoI calls it an "Appeal to Fear".

Spoiler: 3. Intentional misrepresentation

@Iceguy -

I want your opinion on the record - you support the 'Kill the Role' approach that Iam and Seacore pushed, correct?

when my justification for voting kdowns was...

This is bad. I mean, bad as in caught scum by chance bad.

Spoiler: 4. Irrelevant distractions and another fake scumtell

I argued that farside's role (backup) should be directed, and lay out why there is definitely no harm done if she's town, and a lot to be gained if she's scum.

His response...

You haven’t shown the benefit of NOT directing the backup. Your ‘It keeps dangerous powers out of scum hands’ is a hypothethecial. Are you asserting Farside is scum? And what powerful roles are you seeking to keep out? Until you do so all you are doing is fear-mongering.

You didn’t answer – do you think farside is scum?

Of course I don’t have her as confirmed Town … that’s not the point. Your reasoning on why farside’s ability should be directed is predicated on farside-scum. So it’s simply an Appeal to Fear if you are trying to assert reasons why she should be directed if you don’t actually have reason to think she is scum.

In the meantime you again dodge the facts - that you are predicating the so-called advantages to Town of directing her action when it’s only advantageous if she is scum. And you steadfastly refuse to take a stance on that element.

Basically, he claims I'm appealing to fear because I'm pushing a plan that helps us

in the case

she's scum, and

at least

does no damage if she's town. He avoids discussing the actual merits of the plan because he knows he's on losing ground, so he's trying to deflect attention.

I ask him...

So far, you've failed to give a pro-town reason why we shouldn't coordinate night actions.

...and his response is:

The burden of proof is on you to provide a convincing reason why coordinating night actions is a Pro-Town action. Your arguments so far fail the logic test.

He flat-out refuses to answer my question.

Spoiler: 5. Defending kdowns because of Seacore's case, or a Contradiction

Um what case? The “His role benefits scum potentially the most, lynch him Day 1 screw scumhunting” 'case' (I'm using ''s because it really isn't a case at all)? If so any response is a Town tell because that is a stupid and scummy ‘case’.

Note how he explicitly says how any response to Seacore's case is a town tell.

I ask for clarification and get this answer...

And I’ll tell you once again – I do NOT find kdown’s response to the ‘case’ scummy in the least. Because the case itself is scummy.

So he essentially says that a response to a bad case can not be scummy. Period.

Later, he claims:

Yes. I'm not giving him a free pass simply because the iaau/Seacore case was bad.

And I’m asserting his reaction is in no way scummy.

So...is he town because the case on him was bad, or is he town because his response was town? I can imagine why MoI is intentionally ambiguous - kdowns' response

was

scummy as hell.

Spoiler: 6. Another blatant intentional misrepresentation

I ask kdowns:

Go explain:
- whom of iaau and Seacore is scum and why;
- why you didn't vote one of them;
- what your reads are;
- what your utility to town (as compared to other roles) is.

kdowns answers:
(to the question "whom of iaau and Seacore is scum and why"):

I'd say Seacore on the basis of pushing for a Policy lynch.

(to the question "what your reads are"):

Reads: Iam and Seacore Null Scum

I call him out on the contradiction (first he says only Seacore is scum, later he says iaau and Seacore are both "Null Scum"):

Reads: Iam and Seacore Null Scum

So iaau and Seacore are now both "null scum", whatever that is?

So what does MoI do? He deliberately clips the quote and takes it out of context to twist it into a "scumtell":

So iaau and Seacore are now both "null scum", whatever that is?

See this furthers my scum read on you. Having a null to scum read on someone is pretty standard Mafiascum play. That you are trying to push it as something that isn’t obvious is scummy.

Spoiler: 7. Scummy voting

UNVOTE: Seacore

My vote will likely be going to either Cons, Iceguy or on an outside shot Iam pending on the next round of responses and posting.

Read: I'm his preferred lynch. ConSpiracy is the alternative if my wagon doesn't work out (his wagon already has four votes). iaau is either a scumbuddy being weak-bussed or yet another alternative.

Spoiler: 8. Flat-out lie

I find Iceguy's case to be mix of overapplication of Wikitells (see how often he uses the word Mudslinging in that post) and a sad Meta attack (he fails to mention half of the things he attacked me for in said game were WHEN I WAS TOWN, since I was recruited N1).

When I'm comparing his behavior on the other game's D2 (when he already was scum) to his current behavior:

For meta reference: see this game (starting MoI ISO #32) where MoI was scum from day 2

D1 played only a small part in the case, and of course MoI knows this.

Spoiler: 9. Repetition, Repetition, Repetition

But that’s why I think you are scum … your play is scummy. You use rhetoric and Appeals to Repetition as opposed to using logic to analyse motives. You use Appeals to Fear to smear those pointing out how your ‘Direct all Night actions’ plan is Pro-scum. You call someone scum but then refuse to vote them because you are afraid for your life – that’s a Scum motivation not a Town one.

So once again … I’m calling you scum because you are scum. Scum scared to actually vote for the Vengeful Townie.

Note how this short paragraph contains

seven

mentions of "scum" or "scummy" directed at me, but

zero

actual quotes or other references (such as links) to my play.

But let's take the allegations apart.

Most of them are pulled out of thin air.
- He claims I used rhetoric and Appeals to Repetition instead of logic, when I simply didn't. Actually, Appeal to Repetition is a common scum-MoI tactic.
- He also claims I wanted to direct

all

night actions, when I only wanted to direct

some

night actions and claims he's shown that this plan of directing all night actions - which doesn't exist and has never been discussed because it hasn't been brought to the table - as "pro-scum".
- Furthermore, there is "Appeal to Fear" again, when I've actually given a logical answer and showed how my answer was not an Appeal to Fear. He dropped this line of attack when I challenged him, and is now trying to rerun it, hoping somebody doesn't remember my response.

And there is one claim that's not invented, but taken out of context to make me appear scummy. He claims I'm not voting him because I'm scum. I've already shown around a million times why it makes perfect sense for town-IceGuy to not be voting him.

Spoiler: 10. Claiming something is scummy, and then doing it himself

I included this one mostly for the laughs:

Classic false dichotomy. You only consider the possibility I am scum. Town of course tend to not be 100% sure as you are presenting here. But that’s of course because you are scum.

Spoiler: 11. "You lied! And you're scum!"

No comment:

You're pushing a plan that doesn't change anything if she's town and benefits us if she's scum.

I’m not pushing any plan. I’m just calling yours anti-Town. Continue to lie about that over and over and over.

So you're saying directing night actions is anti-Town, yet you're not pushing for not directing night actions? Or how I'm supposed to interpret this?

WTF is this? Seriously.

I’ve called the people floating the “we have to direct all Night actions” scummy. How is that not pushing for not directing Night actions?

I don’t understand how you can come to any other conclusion.

Oh wait … I take that back … it’s because you are scum.

Spoiler: 12. So, what town role should push scum on?

Lulz. The odds your track actually yields results that confirm scum (assuming for the sake of this argument you are Town which I don’t buy) is pretty low. But sure, ignore the facts that pushing on hypo-Town you as scum makes no logical sense.

So what town role should scum push on?

No answer so far, although he's replied to the rest of the post. I wonder why he has ignored this part...

Spoiler: 13. More Meta Tells

Keep in mind this quote, from after the Execution Mafia game...

I certainly did accent my arguments with you with rhetoric. It helped pull you off arguing the facts and instead pushed you to an emotionally based attack which damaged your chances IMO.

And then, look at this quotes from the current game...

Regarding your meta – I’m just going to chuckle and leave it at that. If you think a single game where I changed alignment midstream is going to suddenly let you read my scum games you are either scum making it up (which I think you are) or pretty stupid.

Oh that’s right … it would show how bad your play was there. Hmmm … then again that would bolster the perception you are now Town since your play is equally bad here.

I do have serious questions about your ability to understand the game and how it is actually played outside the ‘Wiki’ given what you are posting.

What was the outcome of that game? Scum sweep. I’m calling you bad because you had all this ‘knowledge’ and in the end you weren’t able to convince people to actually follow you. Because your cases were poorly presented and lacked compelling logic.

Since you’ve never listed the benefits of directing that made any sense I’m just going to assume you are going to stick with your position regardless. Nice attempt to spin what I said into WIFOM. Ok not really but I thought your ego could use a boost.

This is what MoI does when he doesn't want to argue the facts. He's saying it himself.

[IceGuy]

Everybody claims their night action in their next post.

[IceGuy]

Everybody claims their night action in their next post.

For real.

farside22 - ?
ConSpiracy - ?
Quilford - ?
jason - ?
kondi - ?
Seacore - No action
kdowns - ?
mb53 - ?

[IceGuy]

farside22 - ?
ConSpiracy - ?
Quilford - ?
jason - Kill delay IceGuy
kondi - ?
Seacore - No action
kdowns - No action possible
mb53 - ?

[IceGuy]

farside22 - ?
ConSpiracy - No claim
Quilford - Blocked mb53.
jason - Kill delay IceGuy
kondi - ?
Seacore - No action
kdowns - No action possible
mb53 - ?

I'll offer my observations when farside and kondi's and mb53's replacements have posted their night actions.

[IceGuy]

EBWOP:

farside22 - ?
ConSpiracy - No claim
Quilford - Blocked mb53.
jason - Kill delay IceGuy
kondi - ?
Seacore - No action
kdowns - No action possible
mb53 - No action possible

I'll offer my observations when farside and kondi's replacement have posted their night actions.

[IceGuy]

farside22 - ?
ConSpiracy - No claim
Quilford - Blocked mb53.
jason - Kill delay IceGuy
kondi - Copycat Seacore
Seacore - No action
kdowns - No action possible
mb53 - No action possible

[IceGuy]

Since everybody has claimed their night action, I can claim mine.

I tracked farside22, since her behavior was suspicious on Day 1, but nobody called her out on that, and her night action is 1-shot. I figured scum was going to send somebody who a) didn't appear suspicious and b) whose loss of the night action didn't matter much to do the night kill.

Her claim was correct.

---

For today, I'm going to go with kdowns. VOTE: kdowns

When a townie is quickhammered, always lynch the hammerer. I haven't played in a single game where a quickhammer on town was performed by a town player.

Other players I'd be willing to lynch are kondi and ConSpiracy. Feeling uneasy about Seacore.