Mini 1250: That 70s Smalltown - GAME OVER

[farside22]

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

what?

Anyways, MoI skims as overeager in this game. Some of his attacks are irrelevant.
(I may or may not give reasons for it, I am totally not in the mood for it now as I hate those walls)

What? Are you saying you skimmed what he wrote? If his attacks are irrelevant what is the point of his attacks then?

@kondi2424: Why did you just follow what CS said to do?

[kdowns]

[quote=Iceguy] 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.
[/quote]

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

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
Reads: Iam and Seacore Null Scum
Farside Town
Rest Null for now.

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.

[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.

[Seacore]

Pushing a Lynch on that basis is more of a Null-Scum action.

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.

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

At want point did this change? Was it due to an iam post or one of mine?

There's a lot to read, and I don't have the time really. Plus from my skimming there's a lot that doesn't add much.

For those who are attacking me for trying to policy lynch instead of scum hunting, I'll say again that I was arguing for starting our discussion focussed on kdown and going from there, rather than just having random votes and wasting time. Basically, i was agreeing with Iam. And I think most people have to admit it's been fairly successful in starting a real conversation.

I haven't loved kdown's responses to the pressure, but I'm willing to see newb in it as much as scum. I still get an inkling of him being upset in a "damn, I hadn't even scumslipped yet" kind of way.

But lets move on.

One post has concerned me more than most

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

How convenient, when you happen to be Leo. And that you were supportive of this 5 minutes after iam and didn't even think of this yourself before.

What does me being Leo have to do with anything? And yes, I hadn't really thought about it myself, I was actually too busy having fun with the idea of talking in character and then when Iam posted I thought "yes, that's a really good idea".

This seems like a mud throwing attack, saying as much about me as possible in the post and hoping it just kind of paints me as bad. If it wasn't me, I'd actually suspect cons and my slot of being buddies, because it feels like that kind of vague FOS that is often used that way.

I'm not liking MoI and Cons either. MoI finds me scummy for my pushing of the policy lynch, fine. But then he says to Cons

@Conspiracy

– so in 121 you properly call out Seacore on his scummy play and then vote Quilford for making what you call a joke? Explain how what he did was scummy at all.

I draw attention to the "properly". Cons did nothing of the kind. His two points against me were the one mentioned above about me being Leo and not coming up with it on my own, and Cons not understanding that I was jokingly giving up scum hunting based on kdown's requirements.

So, just because Cons targeted somebody that MoI found scummy (ie Me) MoI has declared it "properly calling me out". It was nothing of the kind, there was nothing of substance in Cons attack. MoI is a better player than this, he knows that just because somebody agrees with you, it doesn't make them right. He also knows that scum will often try and come up with extra reasons instead of just sheeping, to make it look like they're contributing.

MoI doesn't attack him for this, instead he attacks him for where he put his vote. This looks a little like coaching to me.

That's enough of a wall for now

Unvote. Vote ConS

FOS MoI

[MagnaofIllusion]

Sure. Sounds good. UNVOTE: VOTE: Quilford

Now this … this is scummy. Why exactly are you sheeping Cons again?

--

For those who are attacking me for trying to policy lynch instead of scum hunting, I'll say again that I was arguing for starting our discussion focussed on kdown and going from there, rather than just having random votes and wasting time. Basically, i was agreeing with Iam. And I think most people have to admit it's been fairly successful in starting a real conversation.

This is all well and good but this post itself is the first sign that you are actually interested in looking for scum movations.

I draw attention to the "properly". Cons did nothing of the kind. His two points against me were the one mentioned above about me being Leo and not coming up with it on my own, and Cons not understanding that I was jokingly giving up scum hunting based on kdown's requirements.

In my opinion it was properly. Sorry, your stance was (since you seem to have backed off it) scummy and ConS propely called you out on it. His refusal to vote said proper call out over his Quilford attack attracted my attention.

You go on to say I don’t attack ConS. That’s because questioned him. I needed to see response to why Quilford was worthy of a vote when IMO you were much scummier than him. This is part of the scum-hunting process.

His response at 132 wasn’t sufficent and his further focus on the ‘joke’ element of what I see as standard Quilford play is scummy.

--

Seriously, if you all keep posting walls I am replacing out of this game.
Especially when those walls are extremely useless.

Replace out then. I’m not changing my personal style of play which is effective at catching scum because you dislike reading.

Anyways, MoI skims as overeager in this game. Some of his attacks are irrelevant.
(I may or may not give reasons for it, I am totally not in the mood for it now as I hate those walls)

I’ll just mark this down as rhetoric you can’t back up til the point you get ‘motivated’ then.

@ kondi, we are all voting Quilford. Please blend in with town.

Nope.

@ConS

– So you think Quilford's play is sufficently scummy to warrant his lynch Day 1 as a JK. Do you think Seacore is Town or scum?

--

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’.

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

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

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

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.

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

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’.

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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.

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 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.

[MagnaofIllusion]

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.

[jasonT1981]

Trying to catch up, but very slowly, in bed dying with flu today

[farside22]

Seacore himself is pulling back from saying it was an actual case but was a method to ‘get out of RVS’.

He stated that pretty early on with the back and forth discussion in game that Seacore and I had. Did you miss it earlier?


@Jason: If I catch you fluff posting promising to catch up one more time I will scream for your blood. It's only 7 fucking pages and the first 2 is people picking their roles.

[MagnaofIllusion]

He stated that pretty early on with the back and forth discussion in game that Seacore and I had. Did you miss it earlier?

Looking back I see him say "I think this is a good way to get out of RVS". I also see continual attacks on Kondi based on the policy lynch and statements like "Policy lynches on roles, not always a bad thing" that indicated to me he was using that ostensible RVS stance to push hard for Kondi.

Add in his "How's your scum-hunting working out for you" little rhetoric that he threw at you after you called him on not scum-hunting and I saw it was worth pursuing.

His last post where he explicitly backs of Kondi as a good lynch for any reason and where he goes after Cons and I was the first solid sign he was interested in scum-hunting IMO.

[iamausername]

Last time I played in a Smalltown game, town secured a guaranteed victory on D2 by coordinating night actions, so I think I can say with some certainty that you are wrong here.

So you want to coordinate Night actions Day 1 before lynch when it worked on DAY 2 in the game you are talking about?

But please elaborate on the facts of that game. Was it played here? If so link? What happened Day 1? What was the role make-up of the game? Did it have a Serial Killer?

This'n here.

I was in a game where town was had a JK. This was American Dad Mafia. The role benefited the town. JK can used not only as protection but possibly jailing someone you find scummy in the hopes you stop someone from dying.
I don't see it just befitting scum.

I never said the JK

only

benefits scum. Just that it would benefit scum too much to allow you to take that role when there are other roles that would benefit town more and scum less.

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".

Inventor could give scum an extra kill without the need to be lynched to activate it, among other things, so.

@ConS

– So you think Quilford's play is sufficently scummy to warrant his lynch Day 1

as a JK

.

Why do you mention Quilford's role here? Haven't you been arguing the entire time that giving consideration to people's roles in deciding who to lynch is super scummy?

[MagnaofIllusion]

This'n here.

So you are relying on a game three or so years ago where two Scum and zero Town were dead by Day 2 as the basis for saying coordinating actions Day 1 here is a good idea?

Have you played any other, more recent Smalltown games?

Inventor could give scum an extra kill without the need to be lynched to activate it, among other things, so.

Yes he could at the cost of guaranteeing his demise the next day when he has to claim who he gave the skates to and is summarily lynched to test if he is lying.

I suppose that sort of scenario could accelerate LYLO or to give scum the ability to kill and use their action in the same Night. But that’s not what you are presenting … you are pushing the extra kill as dangerous.

Why do you mention Quilford's role here? Haven't you been arguing the entire time that giving consideration to people's roles in deciding who to lynch is super scummy?

1. Why didn’t you wait until ConS responded before posting this?
2. Why did you specifically eliminiate the second line from my question? The original quote was –

@ConS – So you think Quilford's play is sufficently scummy to warrant his lynch Day 1 as a JK. Do you think Seacore is Town or scum?

The second part is integral to purpose of the question.

What I see here is possibly scum cherry-picking in an attempt to paint a false picture of my motives.

[The Fonz]

Farside22 (0)
MagnaofIllusion (2) mb53
ConSpiracy (3) Quilford hiplop Seacore
IceGuy (0)
Quilford (3) ConSpiracy Farside22 kondi2424
hiplop (1) kdowns
iamausername (0)
jasont1981(0)
kondi2424 (0)
Seacore (0)
kdowns (2) iamausername IceGuy
mb53 (1) jasont1981

Not voting: IceGuy MagnaofIllusion

[Seacore]

I still stand by that, all other things being equal, lynching kondi based on role is not a terrible idea, but yes it was mostly to generate conversation. I'm not in the habit of announcing exactly why I'm making cases or pushing stances, it tends to detract from them. If I'm attacking somebody to get information out of them, I'm going to say that I find them really scummy, not that I think they may be scummy and I just want to see how they react.

Anyway, I'm going to be on a bit of V/LA it's the weekend and inlaws are visiting. Plus, there's a baby I haven't seen much of all week. But I'll be checking in now and then.

[farside22]

@MOI: Do you think Seacore is scum?
Here is why I ask

Pushing a policy lynch over actual scum-hunting is a scum-move. Absolutely. You may be positioning it as "Gettin out of RVS". But you are specifically doing it in a scummy way and getting attention for it should be expected.

Why would scum do this? What is wrong with trying to get out of RVS?

And the bolded is why my vote is staying with you and is now non-RVS.

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.

If scum gets the extra kill isn't it best if the town states who they agree should receive an invention? The inventor should explain why they gave anything to anyone during night, but I don't see Seacore saying give me the invention, he's suggesting telling the inventor to look at whom the majority find as town. Since town holds the majority this is not scummy.

FTR I don't find Seacore scummy. I questioned his motives and reason's for why he was pushing a PL. I was satisfied with his answers.

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.

Why Cons or Iam?

I never said the JK only benefits scum. Just that it would benefit scum too much to allow you to take that role when there are other roles that would benefit town more and scum less.

After what happened in Flash Mafia I most likely be staying away from JK, but there is town benefits that you seem to ignore.

So you are relying on a game three or so years ago where two Scum and zero Town were dead by Day 2 as the basis for saying coordinating actions Day 1 here is a good idea?

Have you played any other, more recent Smalltown games?

What's wrong with that?


And I have to go out to diner. I will finish up my thoughts later or tomorrow.

[kdowns]

I still stand by that, all other things being equal, lynching kondi based on role is not a terrible idea

I'm not sure if this is a Slip but I am pretty sure you were pushing for a lynch on me, and not kondi....

[Seacore]

sorry, so many letters in common and me distracted are not a good combination. Yes I meant you.

[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.

[ConSpiracy]

voTe conspir

Something feels incredibky wrong aboutthis guy

Are you going to play? I have never seen you being so lurky.

What? Are you saying you skimmed what he wrote? If his attacks are irrelevant what is the point of his attacks then?

Paint others as scum?...

I draw attention to the "properly". Cons did nothing of the kind. His two points against me were the one mentioned above about me being Leo and not coming up with it on my own, and Cons not understanding that I was jokingly giving up scum hunting based on kdown's requirements.

So, just because Cons targeted somebody that MoI found scummy (ie Me) MoI has declared it "properly calling me out". It was nothing of the kind, there was nothing of substance in Cons attack. MoI is a better player than this, he knows that just because somebody agrees with you, it doesn't make them right. He also knows that scum will often try and come up with extra reasons instead of just sheeping, to make it look like they're contributing.

MoI doesn't attack him for this, instead he attacks him for where he put his vote. This looks a little like coaching to me.

When MoI does something bad, why is your vote on me?

@ConS – So you think Quilford's play is sufficently scummy to warrant his lynch Day 1 as a JK. Do you think Seacore is Town or scum?

No-one is scummy enough, yet, to be lynched in my eyes. However, it's a good start.
What is the JK element in it for?
I think Seacore is neutral. I didn't like the above and I didn't like his policy lynching etc, but every thing else reads town to me.

1. Why didn’t you wait until ConS responded before posting this?
2. Why did you specifically eliminiate the second line from my question? The original quote was –

this is no answer.

I liked IceGuy's last post.
MoI is acting scummy in his last posts and needs to be voted for it.

unvote
vote: MoI

[MagnaofIllusion]

I'll respond in full when I have more time when I am not V/LA ...

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).

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.

That's scum play right there.

VOTE: Iceguy

Yup ... why don't you call it OMGUS for me so I can have a laugh while you are at it.

[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.

[farside22]

The second part is integral to purpose of the question.

What I see here is possibly scum cherry-picking in an attempt to paint a false picture of my motives.

What does your second question have to do with your first question?

@ConS – So you think Quilford's play is sufficently scummy to warrant his lynch Day 1 as a JK. Do you think Seacore is Town or scum?

Iam's question is still valid point. Why does it matter that Quilford is the JK?


Okay the short version: I find MOI to be scum. He spinned a case on Iam for trying to coordinate the town into someone that is doing it for town brownie points. He OMGUS voted IceGuy. He avoiding a valid question directed to him from Iam about Quilford and his contradiction. The argument and points that MOI brings up against Iceguy is pointless (the neighbor/inventor comments).
I believe CS is bussing his scum buddy with that last post. CS does not stop attacking someone that quickly to vote someone else when he is town (total meta but very accurate read on CS). Plus the post from MOI to CS about properly calling out Seacore reads as coaching in thread.
Not sure about Quilford or Kdowns as the third scum suspect at this point. Also the Kondi who voted and left is an unknown variable.

unvote:
vote: MOI

cutting the head off the snake is best.

Oh and to answer in full to Iam about why I asked MOI about his choice.

I had thought about taking vengeful before I knew my alignment. It was my first choice. My reasons on why I wanted the role where as follows:
As town I would have pushed my lynch so I could shoot the person I find the scummiest without arguing. As scum I would have pushed my lynch so I could shoot the player I found the most town that would also hurt the town.

I think MOI lied about his reason's for picking his role.

[Quilford]

Prod-dodging again; running into Internet troubles.

[The Fonz]

mb53 is going to be prodded when I get to a computer tomorrow if he hasn't posted by then. (I won't be online tonight).

[ConSpiracy]

@ IceGuy

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

@ Farside

, why am I getting the feeling you are trying to do the same I did? You're not doing this on purpose are you?
I can't see you being so non-learning about it when town.
Hmmz. Too bad I can't elaborate on this.
- Also, weren't you the one that was against scum-team calling?

Anyways, I have never seen MoI saying such unthoughtful things like he said in his last post. He must be scum.