Open 11 - Pie C9 (Game over) - before 400

[Patrick]

O rly. Nightfall, you're up.

[Patrick]

Also Ripley, you can go wild now with your reasons for protecting me.

[The Fonz]

O rly. Nightfall, you're up.

I'm guessing I should wait to make the case for me/Twito and against Ripley until after he's posted his results then?

[Ripley]

Here’s why I protected Patrick. Bear in mind that other than thinking Twito was more likely to be scum than anyone else, I had no idea who was what. So:

1. I had just been in a similar 7-player game with Patrick, where he played much the same way on Day 1 and got killed Night 1 after we lynched wrong Day 1. Which made me think:

a. There was a slight inference that Patrick was the kind of player likely to be nightkilled in that situation, and, more importantly;

b. Having started down this line of thought, I knew that if I didn’t protect Patrick and he actually did get nightkilled, I’d be really annoyed with myself. Far more than if it happened with anyone else.

2. I reasoned as follows: “If you have to choose someone to protect, pick the player you’d be most glad to have alive and cleared next day. They’re no more likely to be the right choice than anyone else, but if they are you’ve maximised the efficiency of the anti-scum team.” I picked Patrick because I find his style to be clear, helpful and logical. Not that the rest of you aren’t all wonderful in your own special ways.

[Ripley]

Oh, and btw, good manners require me to welcome The Fonz to the game even though he's a FILTHY LOATHSOME SCUMBAG OF THE VERY WORST KIND.

Welcome!

[The Fonz]

Oh, and btw, good manners require me to welcome The Fonz to the game even though he's a FILTHY LOATHSOME SCUMBAG OF THE VERY WORST KIND.

Welcome!

Your politeness is appreciated, my scummy friend.

[Nightfall]

I'm guessing I should wait to make the case for me/Twito

You have a case? Shoot...

[The Fonz]

Shooting.

Now, as regards Twito, the guy was annoying, let's face it. But being annoying does not necessarily imply scum, even if it can sometimes be a scumtell. Perhaps Twito is always a spammer. Perhaps he just adopted the tactic to protect his power role. I don't know, but it's pointless to speculate.

In any case, being a bit of a spammer is far less scummy than what Ripley's been up to.

The first signs of Ripley's scummishness start showing up in the run-up to the deadline.

Ripley's case on Nightfall sort of disappeared - people basically said "Ripley looks protown" and then talked about whether that was a null tell for him. If it had been just one person doing that I would have FoSed them for trying to take the heat off a scumbuddy, but quite a few people did that, so I can't.

Quite a few people? It was

Twito and Fircoal

. The Spammer Twins. When one says "WEEEEEEE!" the other says "WOOOOOO!" To say a statement is more valid because it was made by both Twito and Fircoal is like saying it must be true because it was confirmed by both Laurel

and

Hardy.

Attack ad hominem, anyone? Anything coming from Twito and/or Fircoal is invalid.

I also already explained that Ernie is no longer with us and I thought his replacement was worth keeping around, judging by post quality at least, whereas Twito and Fircoal (and ShadowLurker, as you failed to mention) would be less of a loss.

Here, he suggests the notion that it really doesn't matter if Fircoal or Twito are lynched even if they are Town, that because of their posting style they are a liability to the Town anyway.

I just suggested that if nobody had a coherent case to make against anyone else, we would do better to lynch one of the poorer contributors.

Repetition to reinforce the notion that it really doesn't matter if we lynch FirTown or TwiTown. Rather than thoroughly probing in the time leading up to lynch, he's settling for lynching the spammers.

We have at least two days?

No, it's

tomorrow morning

.

We need to act now.

An attempt to trap one of the Townies into lynching Fircoal before he has a chance to claim?

(in case I have some dilemma like Fircoal claiming something other than Mafia Roleblocker, which I think he's just about devious enough to do.)

Setting himself up to hammer Fircoal

even if

he claims.

Let me refer you to something Patrick said later:

. It doesn't bother me that Ripley hammered Fircoal, I would have done the same in his situation. I'd be more suspicious if he'd lurked around deadline and done nothing. As I pointed out before, no lynch is ridiculous in this setup on day 1.

Apart from, he did hang around. If he were really convinced Fircoal was scum, why did he not hammer as soon as he was sure? No, he hung around, and waited to see if any pro-town player would be helpful enough to drop the hammer and incriminate himself. Only when the threat of deadline nears does Ripley feel safe to hammer:

OK, I guess I have no alternative. It's Fircoal or nobody.

Vote: Fircoal

Making sure that everyone understands

it's not Ripley's fault

.

He also said this:

(in case I have some dilemma like Fircoal claiming something other than Mafia Roleblocker, which I think he's just about devious enough to do.)

Here, Ripley sets himself up to hammer Fircoal

even if

he claims, by suggesting that any claim would be the desperate flailings of a trapped scummer.

So, Ripley hammers the townsperson, and the next morning he's very keen to make sure that everyone is aware a no-kill was a possibility:

Well, it's either a doc protect or else the mafia deliberately didn't kill. I'm still thinking about that second possibility.

Followed by:

And we don't even know for sure if last night's protectee is cleared. This is the kind of thing that's making me stop and wonder whether the scum did do this on purpose.

and yet, after he himself has claimed Doc, he says:

(b) I protected Patrick. My reasons for the choice were a bit haphazard but I'll provide them if anyone wishes.

I know the scum are Twito and one of Skruffs/CDb.

Emphasis mine. So before he claims Doc, he wants to make sure everyone is aware of the possibility of the scum having opted for no-kill. After he claims to have protected Patrick, he states with absolute certainty that the scumpair does not include Patrick.

Let's also take a quick look at Ripley's contributions to the setting up of the mass claim. First:

Would the scum be hoping that we claim or that we don't? My guess is they hope we don't. I could be wrong. Any other opinions?

.

Well,

I

think my plan is pro-town. Doesn't everyone agree with me?

Then, the discussion turns to deciding the order.

I'd probably have picked Twito as my first choice, but I didn't mind Nightfall and I wouldn't have minded Skruffs either.

I think having everyone post their entire preferred order is possibly divulging too much information. Patrick's list is fine by me. Probably CDB should go above Patrick because of the Nightfall/CDB clash, and someone could roll a dice between those two to see which goes above the other. So:

Skruffs
Twito
Nightfall / CDB
Patrick
Ripley

Anyone object to anything?

I think we should get on with roleclaiming right away. The following list has everyone within a place of where they were on my list, Patrick's list

and

Skruff's list.

Skruffs
Nightfall
Twito
CDB
Patrick
Ripley

Let's just do it.

Notice that Ripley is happy with just about any order that has him claiming after Twito. This is because he knows that due to Twito's spammishness and apparent lack of content, Ripley will have a fairly easy time persuading people that Twito, and not himself, is the right lynch. Note also that each list suggested keeps CDB and Patrick, one of whom is likely his scumbuddy, near the back as well.

As regards Ripley's scumbuddy, I think there are pretty decent cases linking him to both CBS and Patrick, the CBS link seeming the more likely from day one, but the events of day two suggesting Patrick. I'll elaborate later if needed.

[The Fonz]

EBWODP: Stupid repetition of the 'Setting up Fircoal even if he claims' part. What I get for writing in notepad, then pasting into the reply box.

[Ripley]

I'm quite happy to respond to all this in detail, but since it would take quite a long time to do so, I'm first going to ask Nightfall to confirm that he needs me to do so. It's not impossible that he has an investigation result on me or Twito/Fonzie but asked The Fonz to make his case anyway in the hope of him implicating his scum buddy. (There's no chance of Nightfall needing me to reply in these circumstances because he would know I'm innocent.)

[The Fonz]

I'm quite happy to respond to all this in detail, but since it would take quite a long time to do so, I'm first going to ask Nightfall to confirm that he needs me to do so. It's not impossible that he has an investigation result on me or Twito/Fonzie but asked The Fonz to make his case anyway in the hope of him implicating his scum buddy. (There's no chance of Nightfall needing me to reply in these circumstances because he would know I'm innocent.)

Agreed. It's only worth continuing here if Nightfall investigated Skruffs, CDB or Patrick and got not-guilty, or got roleblocked. Any other result and we have confirmed scum, and the lynch is obvious.

[Ripley]

I'm quite happy to respond to all this in detail, but since it would take quite a long time to do so, I'm first going to ask Nightfall to confirm that he needs me to do so. It's not impossible that he has an investigation result on me or Twito/Fonzie but asked The Fonz to make his case anyway in the hope of him implicating his scum buddy. (There's no chance of Nightfall needing me to reply in these circumstances because he would know I'm innocent.)

Agreed. It's only worth continuing here if Nightfall investigated Skruffs, CDB or Patrick and got not-guilty, or got roleblocked. Any other result and we have confirmed scum, and the lynch is obvious.

Though actually even if he has a guilty result on a non-doc-claimant and therefore an obvious lynch for today, I will need to respond to your post at some stage since the remaining scum would have to be one of the two of us, and looking at it purely from the POV of my own real life I should do that today, when I am lounging around at total leisure (whereas tomorrow I'll have virtually no time at all and I'm pretty busy for the whole of the next week). So... I think, to avoid holding the game up any further it might be right for me to reply now. Hmmm... but it would be so tiresome if it were all unnecessary. I'll see if we hear from Nightfall in the next few hours and take a view then.

[Skruffs]

Well, the obvious kill for the night is the cop - with the doc blocked.
I"ve been scrutinizing posts for any sign if people 'know' that nightfall was blocked or not, but so far it's been pretty well covered up, if he was.

Twito is unfortunately not around to share why he protected me (or if he even did for real), me and him have had our issues in the past, though, in other games. It could be that, not having lynched fircoal himself, he protected the only other person who wasn't on the fircoal wagon - and scum just got unlucky in choosing to kill me rather than him.

THIS IS ALL SPECULATION, THOUGH

. I don't have any real leads, so I Am tossing this out. Patrick has already suggested that it is more likely that scum weren't on the lynching wagon at all, than that they were, which while I know to be inaccurate, also seems illogical at best - I'd like to peruse some nerbie games (Similar setups) and see the likelihood of one vs both vs none of scum to be on the wagon.

[The Fonz]

If someone else turns up scum, I don't see why it would make you any scummier to wait until then to respond, and besides, you'd have to respond with the scumminess of that player in mind (as would I, of course). That would give us more information and a better discussion anyway, which is more likely to result in the remaining townies being better informed, which is a pro-town result. So I don't expect anyone to hold it against you.

[The Fonz]

I'd like to peruse some nerbie games (Similar setups) and see the likelihood of one vs both vs none of scum to be on the wagon.

I think this is an interesting point, beyond the ramifications for this game- testing Stoofer's law. I've got an hour or so free, so I'm going to try to go thru the 50 or so most recent games in which a protown player was lynched day one, and see what proportion of those were with one, two, or none on the wagon, and which of those most often led to a scum win.

[Skruffs]

HEre's a question I would like opinions on:
Scum know wether or not the cop was blocked. THey therefore know how likely it is that he could incriminate one of them. KLnowing that, how likely is a real scum to claim to have protected their partner? I was honestly hoping that both docs would claim the same person - it would at least clear THAT person. Knowing that one doc is being truthful and that one has no reason to be truthful, what does that mean about CDB?

I am fully and completely aware of the wifomness of this question, however, because there's no complete and direct answer, i think we have a unique possiblity to discuss it. FOr prestige's sake.

[Patrick]

Patrick has already suggested that it is more likely that scum weren't on the lynching wagon at all, than that they were, which while I know to be inaccurate, also seems illogical at best - I'd like to peruse some nerbie games (Similar setups) and see the likelihood of one vs both vs none of scum to be on the wagon.

I think this is an interesting point, beyond the ramifications for this game- testing Stoofer's law. I've got an hour or so free, so I'm going to try to go thru the 50 or so most recent games in which a protown player was lynched day one, and see what proportion of those were with one, two, or none on the wagon, and which of those most often led to a scum win.

Stuff like this so makes me think that you two are scum together. Seriously. Of course in the general case, not being on the lynch on an innocent isn't a scumtell. That would be silly. I'm not suggesting a Skruffs/Fonz scumpair

because

the two of you weren't on the lynch on an innocent. There are other things that point me to it as well.

What

is

a scumtell in my opinion, is the number of times Skruffs keeps harping on about it. He seems extremely eager to take credit for the fact that he wasn't on the Fircoal lynch, and keeps trying to throw suspicion on those that were, and comically suggests that a no lynch would have been a viable option on day 1. Fonz's case against Ripley also seems to be based largely on this. I don't buy it. I've played in a newbie game before where both scum were off the day 1 lynch of a townie and constantly came out with the "I told you so" line the next day. I'm also not especially clear on Skruff's stance on the two claimed docs. Which one do you think is most likely to be legit, Skruffs, and why?

----

If Nightfall wasn't roleblocked last night (which I tend to think he wasn't - otherwise he wouldn't have been quite so eager on the massclaim plan), then the scum know he has a useful result. Knowing that, I think a doc claiming scum would be less likely to claim to have protected their partner, because it would contain more risk. I too think that we should have Nightfalls result at this point.

[The Fonz]

What

is

a scumtell in my opinion, is the number of times Skruffs keeps harping on about it. He seems extremely eager to take credit for the fact that he wasn't on the Fircoal lynch, and keeps trying to throw suspicion on those that were, and comically suggests that a no lynch would have been a viable option on day 1. Fonz's case against Ripley also seems to be based largely on this. I don't buy it. I've played in a newbie game before where both scum were off the day 1 lynch of a townie and constantly came out with the "I told you so" line the next day. I'm also not especially clear on Skruff's stance on the two claimed docs. Which one do you think is most likely to be legit, Skruffs, and why?

Yet

you

seem to be harping on about how you don't think we can tell anything from the voting record. Which is convenient, considering both you and Ripley were on the lynch.

I find this curious. I don't especially find the players on the lynch more suspicious, in fact I could conceivebly see both scum staying off the lynch. I think you've mostly ignored the context here, that we were on a deadline. Nightfall's and Ripley's votes on Fircoal seemed to be made mostly with that in mind. Lynching someone was better than not lynching at all, and I didn't exactly see Twito coming up with a brilliant alternative lynch for us either.

As for the going thru newbie games thing- i wasn't planning on doing until the game is over, and perhaps to do it in MD. Though as I'm halfway through, I'll say that both staying off the bandwagon is more common than I might have thought (these games obviously finished in quick scum wins as the scum tagteam the third or fourth voter).

[Patrick]

Yet you seem to be harping on about how you don't think we can tell anything from the voting record. Which is convenient, considering both you and Ripley were on the lynch.

Your scumbuddy is the one who was bringing it up, I was responding. I think that it's easy to try and get us to look at it in the general sense, whilst ignoring the context of the situation. Do you think that a no lynch is a viable option on day 1 of a c9 type game?

[Skruffs]

While we wait for Nightfall to post his stuff, I'll just cut down through impossible scum arrangements.
First : no counterclaim to the cop : Night fall can not be paired with anyone.
Second - one of the two docs is real - they other is scum. THey can't be paired to each other or to nightfall.
Third: One of the townies is scum - the other two are real - they can't be scum together.
THat leaves us with six possiblities.
Twito-Skruffs, Twito-CDB, Twito-Patrick
Ripley-Skruffs, RIpley-CDB, Ripley-Patrick
Not too shabby. Those are the facts.
Lastly - we are going to assume scum tried to kill last night - and that the doctor was successful in preventing that kill. This means that, the real doctor protected a real townie. Knowing that, we know that the scum doctor can not be paired with the people that the real doctor protected.
Twito-Skruffs, Twito-CDB,

Twito-Patrick

Ripley-Skruffs

, RIpley-CDB, Ripley-Patrick

Four choices left. If me or patrick are lynched and turn out to be scum, the person who protected them is also scum. However, with CDB, we still won't know who the real scum would be, ASSUMING That CDB is scum. I'm not assuming that, I'm merely showign which correct lynches would be most helpful.

Lynching the correct scum doc will clear the real doc, and the real townie that the real doc protected.
If, then, the scum that was lynched was the roleblocker, the correct doctor will die during the night, and the cop will get another result - clearing one of the last unknown townies and giving us the game.
If the scum that was lynched was the goon, then the doctor is blocked, the cop is killed, and we go to lylo with 2-2.

Okay? So that's the situation. Had anyone not gone through this before now?

[The Fonz]

Yet you seem to be harping on about how you don't think we can tell anything from the voting record. Which is convenient, considering both you and Ripley were on the lynch.

Your scumbuddy is the one who was bringing it up, I was responding. I think that it's easy to try and get us to look at it in the general sense, whilst ignoring the context of the situation. Do you think that a no lynch is a viable option on day 1 of a c9 type game?

No, I don't. But that's not the same as saying Ripley did everything in his power to try to avoid a mislynch.

And what makes you so certain, if I were scum, that Skruffs is my scumbuddy? Sounds to me like you're pandering for CDB's vote here.

[Patrick]

No, I don't. But that's not the same as saying Ripley did everything in his power to try to avoid a mislynch.

This would seem to undermine your case against Ripley then. To reply to the part you addressed to me there:

Apart from, he did hang around. If he were really convinced Fircoal was scum, why did he not hammer as soon as he was sure? No, he hung around, and waited to see if any pro-town player would be helpful enough to drop the hammer and incriminate himself. Only when the threat of deadline nears does Ripley feel safe to hammer:

I'm not really getting what you're saying here. I don't think Ripley ever said he was "really convinced" that Fircoal was scum, did he? As I see it, he waited for a claim, then hammered. I'm not getting what part of that is meant to be scummy.

And what makes you so certain, if I were scum, that Skruffs is my scumbuddy? Sounds to me like you're pandering for CDB's vote here.

I'm not actually certain, though it's fairly common to say it in that way to get better reactions or simply for fun. A Skruffs/Ripley pairing is incredibly unlikely, so if Skruffs is scum, I'd be pretty confident you're the other. Skruffs/Ripley requires me to believe that all their arguments are staged, and that scum no killed on night 1 for some reason.

[Skruffs]

a skruffs/ripley scum pairing is impossible, see above. (Assuming scum tried to kill)
same with a patrick/fonz pairing. If I am scum, than so is fonz.
I'm not scum, though. However, that doesnt' clear fonz.

To be honest, statistically, I think it's more likely that CDB is the scum out of all the townies. Scum - especially if they know thtey didn't block the cop - would have no reason to tie themselves together, in the event that the cop investigated their buddy.

But this is all theoretical. CDB tended to side with ripley against nightfall, twito, and fircoal day one.

[Patrick]

So which doc do you think is more likely to be telling the truth Skruffs?

[The Fonz]

No, I don't. But that's not the same as saying Ripley did everything in his power to try to avoid a mislynch.

This would seem to undermine your case against Ripley then.

Why? You're trying to make it sound like, if I think Ripley is scum, I have to also be in favour of a no-lynch. That doesn't follow. Although: if the main benefit of lynching someone you're at all not sure about over no-one is information, ie that you can analyse the voting record, what then is the point in doing it then claiming the voting record doesn't tell us anything?

And what makes you so certain, if I were scum, that Skruffs is my scumbuddy? Sounds to me like you're pandering for CDB's vote here.

I'm not actually certain, though it's fairly common to say it in that way to get better reactions or simply for fun. A Skruffs/Ripley pairing is incredibly unlikely, so if Skruffs is scum, I'd be pretty confident you're the other. Skruffs/Ripley requires me to believe that all their arguments are staged, and that scum no killed on night 1 for some reason.[/quote]

I'm pretty sure Skruffs is Town, so yeah, given the minuscule possibility he turns up scum,

I

would have to be

his

scumbuddy. Ripley-Skruffs doesn't make sense, you're right. But that's not what I asked you. I asked you why you are not even considering the possibility of Me-CDB. Perhaps because you're going all in on this Skruffs-Twito theory, and need to lobby for CDB to join you in a mislynch?

I can see reasons to think CDB-Ripley might work, though you're making me steadily more confident of your guilt with every post. Do you, or do you not, think Ripley-CDB is a possibility?