Mini 520 - Triumvirate Mafia - ABANDONED

[Miztef]

/confirm

[Miztef]

vote: Sir Tornado

using nuclear bombs are bad.

[Miztef]

I agree that triumvirates basically have to claim if about to be lynched. The mafia will probably do this every time as well, so we will have an ultra tough time finishing people off. I get the feeling this game will be very long, and probably have some "no lynch" days.

[Miztef]

well this game has kinda stalled a bit I see. We need more substantial posts then just random votes.

@somestrangeflea: What do you mean by lynch all liars? I know what it means, but how would we use it in this context, there is absolutely no way for triumvirates to prove they are that (to my knowledge).

Let's say a mafia is at L-1, and claims triumvirate. The 3 actual triumvirates have little power to counterclaim, since they don't even know what their power is, or who has it, or any control over it (I think). Claiming becomes almost mandatory for triumvirates that are about to be lynched, and so imo, the mafia will claim it every time they are close to lynch as well.

Basically, the claims become almost worthless in finding out what someone is. It's WIFOM if there is a claim, or if there isn't a claim.

Triumvirate - Almost certainly must claim, unless they are a very good player.
Mafia - can choose to claim or not, completely WIFOM
Townie - really, really shouldn't claim. However, since there is no way (that I know of) to prove triumvirates, they could claim.


Conclusion: The town is gonna be hard pressed in this game. Our only advantage is that detectives and doctors and roleblockers can claim as such any time during the day, and they are no more likely to die, since they lose that power the next day anyway. Actually... need to get that clarified -

Mod: When exactly are the power roles for the day told they are power roles, and when exactly does it end?

If they are in a position where they can use their power before being NKed, and claiming the day before. Then we have a good advantage in that sense, especially since when a triumvirate is NKed, one of the powers is lost, so by claiming daily, we may be able to tell which it is, depending on if we know roles after death. Also, mafia could claim the extra power role, but since they don't know which it is, I don't think that's likely to be successful, or at least it would only be successful 1 or 2 days at most.


Sorry for the long post guys, I was just thinking through how this theme would work, as I've never played it before. It's really interesting, and I hope I helped bring some insight into how this theme works. Not much else to comment on at this time.

[Miztef]

@SSF: My mistake, doesn't matter all that much though, I wasen't really suspicious of you or anything.

@FaerieLord: Your reply confuses me. Can you clarify your position? Are you referring to the roles are "completely sucking" or how I said the claiming would work?

The conclusion from that table basically is that anyone could claim triumvirate, and the claim itself is almost always WIFOM. However, it is close to necessary for triumvirates to claim, because if they are lynched, the town is in a huge amount of trouble.

[Miztef]

As YuanTi said, we can't even afford to lose 1 triumvirate. Therefore, if someone does not claim at L-1 (or at any point close to being lynched) and is a triumvirate, that would turn out really bad (most likely).

That's basically all I was trying to point out.

[Miztef]

Horrible plan, if we get 6 claims, and the Cop triumvirate is NKed at some point, the plan goes to hell. Not to mention accidents like the roleblocker hitting the cop. Mathematically, I don't think there's enough days in the game for the cop(s) to find every mafia. There's also fake cop claims.

I could probably name off another 5 reasons why it's a bad idea. So, no.

The only thing I'm sticking with is that Triumvirate's are basically forced to claim when near lynch. We cannot afford to lynch one, especially on day 1 or 2.

(With the townie claim, I was referring to each of those people claiming "Triumvirate" not their true role, in case that was misinterpreted)

Also, mastermind of sin brings up an interesting point about Sir Tornado, but I'm not sure how vote worthy it is.

[Miztef]

this game is really stalling. I have seen pretty much no evidence against anyone... now that I think of it, usually I do something "out there" just to get some accusations going. That usually ends up bad for me though .

The whole distancing stuff... basically WIFOM at this time. Even if it's not WIFOM, it's definitely not strong evidence.

That's the first time I ever say a massive unvote train. Amusing to say the least, although nothing substantial to say of it.

I think YuanTi's vote is misplaced, but not necessary scummy. Anything that moves this game forward is welcome right now.

[Miztef]

vote: Phate

[Miztef]

oops,

unvote vote: Phate

That last comment really bugged me. I didn't see it that way with MoS's reply at all.

[Miztef]

I kinda meant the tone you used. I've heard it before and it seems scummy. No one better to put my vote on, so there we go.

[Miztef]

@Phate: I don't agree that unvoting = scum. Basically, I felt like moving some stuff forward in this game and didn't like the way/tone you were posted, so I just send a vote out there to see what happens.

I absolutely agree that Spider Jerusalem is looking scummy as well.

Not much to go on but I'm going to

FoS: Mastermind of Sin

because so far I find that he pushed something on some very fishy logic then after people disagreed dropped the I've put too much into this to do anymore line. However, we don't want to start bandwagoning over something so small, so I'd love to hear some of the more quiet give their points of view.

Agreeing with the majority view here.

I agree that in your specific post there was nothing seriously misleading, and if my statement came off that way I'll clarify. I was trying to speak in a more general tone, largely because I felt you intended a clear response but I have seen posts done that way get muddied up very quickly. Perhaps it's just a difference in opinion but I think it's much clearer to the town as a whole if you avoid the use of witty devices.

I don't disagree with most of this. However, if you'll note your discussion with SirT started shortly before the large amount of unvotes. In my mind and perhaps in others, that discussion was worthy of the end of random voting whether we agreed with your stance or not. This in addition to the other discussion about claims gave us something in game to discuss and analyze.

Again, more agreeing.


I'll

unvote vote: Spider Jerusalem

on just these minor tells only because no one else strikes me as scummy.

Also, besides a random vote on me, Spider has not voted on any of his suspicions. To me, being non-committal, especially in an early phase in the game, is scummy because it leaves no real tracks to follow for inspection on later days.

[Miztef]

@Miztef Post 104: Does that make me scummy aswell? I rarely vote...very rarely. Also if being agreeable is a scum tell, you need to read your post. "I agree that agreeing is scummy."

I will admit I was a little off the mark with that. However, it's not so much the "agreeing" part that makes SJ scummy, it's the idea that he puts very little extra input on things, basically trying to blend into the town. His arguments seem weak to me, in addition to his lack of voting, is another scummy act to me.

I'm not calling for an immediate lynch or anything, he just tops my scum list at this point.

EBWOP: Oh, btw. "might become another player" = "might become a better player."

94 - What do you mean by rinsing it out?

103 - You could be right; I'm about due for a readthrough... but if so, it escaped my attention.

106 - That is exaggerating my argument. I pointed it out as a possibility. I was careful to point out that I WAS only counting as a possibility. I didn't say "I KNOW you're scum," and my reason wasn't "you're new."

108 - Maybe I'm a jester. *eyebrow waggle* No, seriously, I was out on a limb with post 106. I accepted MoS' ridicule (because I wasn't at all sure my theory was correct), but quibbled a bit on the details. Then I asked WHY the post was so preposterous, which he'd failed to address.

As for the bullshit, quote, you're way over-analysing; I meant no such thing. My only point is that a one-word expletive does not an argument make. It wasn't even a joke, per se, it was basically a "see how unhelpful this is"? If I meant his post was bullshit, trust me, I'd say it. And then I'd explain why.

As for the multiple suspicions, let me tell you how I operate. As far as I'm concerned, everyone starts out scum, and I narrow it down to who's the scummiest. The opposite of innocent 'til proven guilty. And those four people are people that I consider it at least a minor possibility that they're scum. But those are just suspicions. We're too early in the game to have an immovable scumlist, and I wouldn't support anyone's lynch yet.

In the bold Phate states that everyone is guilty until proven innocent. Why is his top 4 only "minor possibilities" then? Is everyone else even more "minor possibilities"?.

Phate's consistently odd, somewhat scummy posts have been keeping him at the near top of my scumlist. Although, you can argue that it's just a playstyle issue, I'm not really sure yet.

As far as I'm concerned, everyone starts out scum, and I narrow it down to who's the scummiest. The opposite of innocent 'til proven guilty. And those four people are people that I consider it at least a minor possibility that they're scum.

[Miztef]

so, I got prodded.

I don't have a whole lot to say right now, however phate has been looking more and more suspicious.

I'm still struggling greatly with the claiming. I do agree that leaving players at L-2 is much safer then L-1. I am starting to think no lynch is the only sensible solution at this point. Having some info from a detective (if mafia counterclaim, that's fine, deal with it as normal) would be helpful. Plus, with the roleblocker and doctor still in, there is a chance there wont be a nightkill, and information could be gained.

The way I see it, information from the roles is the only way to get us started on a good foot this game. I think I'm gonna go right ahead and

unvote Vote: No Lynch

(I couldn't find in the rules if we can vote no lynch or not, but I assume here it's a possibility)

[Miztef]

@MoS: But what if, by some crazy chance, phate is actually triumvirate? Can we really afford to risk losing all power roles day 1?

If he does happen to be a triumvirate, that means we have 10 players left come tomorrow, 7 town and 3 mafia, no power roles. It would be a horrible horrible position.

It is very rare to hit scum day 1. The only time I've seen it happen was when I was the scum. (Although, I've only played a few games on this site, and a few more on others) So, the we could be hitting town, which is still 7 - 3 tomorrow (most likely), but we do have power roles intact.

By doing a no lynch, at worst we are at 8-3 tomorrow, with no extra info (if the detective died or was blocked). Doesn't seem horribly bad to me, considering we are likely to get at least some information for the cost of 1 player.

[Miztef]

I suppose we are going to have to lynch at some point, and the value of the night role powers may not be as great as I had thought. (I didn't even really consider the fact mafia may get powers).

One thing I am wondering though is how exactly the roleblocker works... is it 1 specific mafia he has to block (the top one) or will any mafia work?

If it is any mafia, then the roleblocker is more powerful then I had originally thought. I think I would still be happy with a no lynch if this is the case.

==================

My observation about Phate's vote on me is this:

Phate basically couldn't jump on the no lynch wagon. It would make him look even more scummy, as it would be the easiest way to get himself off the chopping block. So, by attacking me, he looks like he is trying to be helpful (scum hunting).

However, the flaw I see here is that his voting me implies himself as scum! Why in the world would I go out of my way as scum to save phate (as town) and go for a no lynch instead? Unless he was my scumbuddy, there is really no good reason for this.

To my knowledge, no one else is under any real suspicion besides phate. Why no lynch when I could sit back and let a townie be lynched?


I do agree however, that the speed at which people agreed to the no lynch was quite fast. I believe it is likely 1 of the other no lynchers, plus phate, are scumbuddies.

I'm just gonna simplify what I mean here:

Phate = in danger
I suggest no lynch.
spur + SSF agree with no lynch

Phate suggests I am mafia. However, with me as mafia, and himself as town, why would I want to get attention off him?

If Phate = mafia, then spur and/or SSF could be trying to get heat off of him, in a townie looking way.

So,

HoS: Phate, FoS: spur, SSF

[Miztef]

I also saw that line, but followed Phate's logic, and assumed it just meant the triumvirate out there in the town, not that he is in that group.

I think he would outright say it if he did want to claim.

[Miztef]

wow, I'm actually not surprised at all I'm being voted, but with no evidence at all? For someone that just made a massive speech, that seems very odd. I will accept it for now and continue playing as normal though.

Due to Elmo's helpful clear-up on the RB power, I will go ahead and

unvote vote:Phate

. As Elmo has pointed out, the triumvirate are only as valuable as their powers. Hitting a triumvirate as the lynch today would be a horrible error, but I concede that a no lynch may not be as helpful as I thought.

When I decided on the no lynch vote, I had not thought of mafia getting the roles (I knew it was possible, but had forgotten to take it into account) and I did not know how the roleblocker works fully. My mind has been changed.

Elmo, your correction about the triumvirate rules is wrong... I think you meant the correct answer (and know it), but I am clarifying here for those who may mistake it. You said "If we lynch one. not

just

lose.". All triumvirate powers are lost

only

if the triumvirate is lynched, no other way. If a triumvirate is Nked, only their specific power is lost, and all surviving triumvirate powers continue to function normally.

Elmo is definitely correct that the town should never look for pro-town roles. However,
spurgistan's claim could be interpreted as a scum planting evidence as a claim. I don't agree that SJ gets off the hook for being scum based on this comment, that's an upsurd assumption.

I am not sure about the discussion of who we want investigated. Based on who is lynched, it may be more valuable to investigate someone different (based on the lynchee's role). I suppose we could discuss this for all cases (if scum... , if town...., if trium... ) but I think the town would not reach a conclusion easily in any case. Therefore, just leaving it to the actual cop is probably the best plan. Just by stating your suspicions normally, you are pretty much saying who you want investigated indirectly. Is it really that much different?

[Miztef]

scum probably wouldn't even say that they got the cop power in the first place, or could just lie about who they investigated completely. There is no use at all to the town if a mafia gets cop power imo.

[Miztef]

sorry, I have been losing track of this game a bit.

@Cephrir: Wow, that's an ironic post. You state "most players have been pretty much useless this game" and you just state opinions on players with very little evidence... Wonderful. So your "not having a read on anyone" is makes you not "pretty much useless? Okay there.

SJ was pretty bad on his own, now we have Cephrir... ugh.

Flying Hawk is not at all suspicious to me. He's neutral at worst. I honestly don't care too much how new he is, I'd say he must have the basics down by now being on the site for that period of time. I do agree that I would like to know the experience of a scumbuddy, but MoS could have gotten that information from other sources, and I don't consider that good evidence against MoS.

Phate continues to seem scummy to me. I want to get my thoughts clearer on this, so I may be posting a case against him soon.

Elmo has dug himself into the game heavily. It would dangerous if he is scum. Nothing I have seen of his has struck me as extremely pro-town, so I think I will be looking into him as well.

[Miztef]

I agree with massclaim. The mafia will be torn as to choosing to claim trium vs. town. No matter which they pick, the situation does not turn out better for them. I still want to look into all the possibilities of this, but for now I agree it is a plausible plan.

[Miztef]

I think it's definitely best if we hear all the cases and what can happen with a mass claim. I for one am having a tough time thinking through all the possibilities. Of course, I could be scum, but I'm sure others are having issues with this as well.

I condone giving any information you can about what a massclaim can/may/might/will do for the town and for the scum, as long as it is worthwhile for the town to have it be known.

[Miztef]

I think in any case, knowing the triumvirate will push the town through the hurdle of having to worry about the triumvirate every lynch. If the scum don't all claim trium, then we can focus all lynches on the townies first, and therefore keep our triums for at least the 3 days the scum will take to kill them.

[Miztef]

well, don't the mafia have to guess what the other mafia will claim? Unless they planned this out beforehand, they basically have to guess which claim is the correct one...

oh... wait... they'll see other claims before theirs... hmmm... is it possible to do encrypted claims, so we each claim in an encrypted message, then give the decrypt key after everyone has posted their "claim"?

[Miztef]

very true phate, but there is no reason not to do it, and it puts the scum at even more of a disadvantage then if we did not do it.

[Miztef]

@phate: I was refering to cyphering the claims, not the mass claim itself.

[Miztef]

I have actually just come across the idea recently in another game, and it was seen as unethical there as well.

However, I don't understand how this is so in this situation. Should we not be allowed to all claim at the same time? Must claims be said in a particular order? If that is the rule of the game, then so be it.

Even with the mafia getting to choose how they are each going to claim, I still believe one of the greatest advantages of doing such a plan is having no careless risk of hitting triumvirate. If we so choose, we can go after townies as long as 1 mafia claimed townie and keep the triums alive. That way, the power roles, at worst, would be eliminated in 3 days, and, if that's the case, the mafia who claimed trium would be found.

[Miztef]

I still stand by the idea of a massclaim, because, barring how helpful it will be to the town to find scum, at least we won't have to deal with a claim every single time someone is near lynch. Especially when people claim triumvirate, it's gonna be hard as well to actually decide on lynching someone because of these claims.

I also still believe though, that a massclaim will benefit the town by knowing how many scum are in each particular group. The worst case is probably 7 civs, 5 triums, but even then, if the scum decide to start plucking off triums, once it gets down to 3 triums, it's not even so bad if we lynch the last 1, since we only lose that 1 power, plus we have 2/3 chance to hit scum anyway.

[Miztef]

ah, so it's unethical in the sense that it's "too good" and is basically considered a cheat. That's understandable.

So, we still have to decide between a doing a massclaim or not though.

I'm still for a massclaim, How many people are still against it?

[Miztef]

except in the case of 6 trium claims, we always look into the townies first.

Let's say we get 7 civs, 5 triums. By lynching only townies first, we first of all, have a chance of hitting a scum, even if the odds aren't amazing. In this situation, the triums opinons could be seen as less useful, because it is a 2/5th's chance they are scum, where as townies are 1/7th, and therefore likely town. Once we hit that scum, we either have a decent amount of confirmed townies (if they didn't nk many) and just have to beat through the scum in the trium. Or we have only 3 or so candidates left in the trium, and we can crush the scum in there easily.

In the case of 8 civs, 4 triums, we still try to eliminate the civs, and once the 2 scum are found in there we have a good amount of confirmed civs, and we can pick apart the trium.

In both cases, the mafia can't just kill off all the trium, because they would be found. although, in the 4 trium situation, they may narrow it down to 1 trium 1 mafia quickly.

I think it's fairly obvious what happens in the 9 civ, 3 trium case (always go after civs with 3 confirmed civs right off the bat) and the 6 civ, 6 trium case. (although, maybe a no lynch or 2 may be useful in this situation, since if a civ claims cop, they are for sure the cop and we can completely trust their intell)

[Miztef]

but if we do get it right, we are at a good advantage (since all leftover civs are confirmed)

[Miztef]

faerieLord... if all the scum claim town, it would be 3/9, which is 1/3. They most likely will claim 1 town, 2 trium, which is 1/7 chance of finding scum in the townies.

I do think that a mass claim is not the best idea anymore.

[Miztef]

That is exactly the conclusion I have come to SSF. I realized that a massclaim is not as good of an idea as originally thought, and I think it's time to move on to the scum hunting again.

[Miztef]

right now, no.

I'm not convinced what he has said is lynch worthy.

[Miztef]

sorry, exams, but nothing much has happened anyway. I'm not really willing to lynch FL or Thin man, so I can't be of much help.

I'll try to participate a lot more now though (hopefully), this game has horribly stalled though.

[Miztef]

Why the new wagon, MoS?

He's noticed the scumtell of "I'll not attack a townie that is being attacked, so then I'll look innocent when he gets lynched." by Elmo.

I don't really agree in this case, but I don't like the farielord lynch, so

unvote vote: elmo

[Miztef]

fair enough elmo. That's quite the compelling arguement, and I do agree, the FL lynch is quite scum driven looking. Not sure it's MoS though.

Right now I will

unvote

, but this day is being prolonged, and finding a good lynch candidate is quite difficult in a game with these rules.

[Miztef]

I've been trying skitzer, but this game is messed up with the mass claim and attacks on FL. I don't have a good answer as to who is scummiest at this time.

There are a few names I want to mention, but right now, there is a gaping lack of evidence. I know I don't want FL lynched, so I can say that anyone on the FL lynch (or pushing it) is under some suspicion in my books. SSF's vote on FL was very sketchy imo, kind of a jump on and leave it running.

Elmo got my attention with his belief in FL as town, which I first interpreted as scummy (as did MoS), but now I see his full reasoning behind it, and agree.

Phate has been sketchy most of the game, and he is on the FL lynch. Overall, I just don't like what Phate's been doing in this game.

Cephrir may be on to something with you(skitzer) being useless, but at this point, it does not constitute a vote.

Thin_man has a fair position, I don't like how he is voting FL, but he has been very clear about it, and if FL does get lynched and turns out town, I will be looking into him. At this point though, his activity is good enough for me to not vote him.

[Miztef]

Thank you. I just wanted your opinion, I never said you were lurking.

I don't think I defended that I was lurking .


@SSF: What are you trying to get at with elmo's post? Do you find putting that filler in scummy?

@Elmo: I'm not certain what you are referring to with the "MoS - flyinghawk" thing.

[Miztef]

I don't think that MoS would ask flyinghawk about gameplay experience as scum. I never do so as scum. To me, MoS's story checks out. That's not to say I don't find MoS scummy, I just think this evidence is not a good reason to think so.

[Miztef]

Miztef: I thought you seemed a little defensive, and I thought it was due to you concluding that I picked you to explain because you were lurky-ish.

Mizzy: Be warned, I do a lot of little posts as well. I'm not an explanative type.

Thin_Man: Not explaining votes is a fail. It makes you appear scummy. Just saying that in a post almost warrants a vote.

ah, understandable.

Welcome Mizzy. Nothing much else happening. Mizzy's evaluation was quite bland, nothing of too much interest. I guess more waiting is to be had.

[Miztef]

Welcome Mizzy! You've made a possible suggestion for a nickname for Miztef completely pointless, just by existing! Congratulations!

huh?

[Miztef]

Welcome Mizzy. Nothing much else happening. Mizzy's evaluation was quite bland, nothing of too much interest. I guess more waiting is to be had.

I found this strange. Miztef sounds like he is talking to Mizzy in the first two sentences, and then he opinionates on Mizzy's evaluation, as if there were two Mizzys. I don't know about this...

Ya, I'm actually not too sure about that myself. I assume I meant to put that into 2 paragraphs, 1 being the first 2 sentences.

I could have said "I find your evaluation quite bland" instead, but I think that's a bit too harsh. That's probably the reason it turned out like that.

[Miztef]

However, I stand by my original statement - I find you too agreeable. Your points of dissent are always surrounded by things like "I agree with most of this", "I definitely didn't mean to say", and "I could see how I was a little unclear." Perhaps this is just your playstyle, but I don't trust diplomats.

Is this directed towards me? or SJ again?

Phate, from the start of the game, has been disconcerting at best. There have been times when we, as a town, have been close to lynching him (it's hard to tell how close, but I'd say 2 more people convinced at a good moment and he would be 6 feet under).

It's hard to tell if scum have driven accusations towards him, or kept him alive. At this time, the evidence against him is not so great, and I think it would require a great deal of case presentation and solid evidence finds to actually get phate lynched.

I would, however, be fine with going after phate at this time if there was a backing for this motion. More so then Elmo or FaerieLord at least.

[Miztef]

Hm. Mizzy, do you see anything interesting about post 456?

Hrm... *goes back and re-reads it a couple times.*

Is this directed towards me? or SJ again?

Phate, from the start of the game, has been disconcerting at best. There have been times when we, as a town, have been close to lynching him (it's hard to tell how close, but I'd say 2 more people convinced at a good moment and he would be 6 feet under).

It's hard to tell if scum have driven accusations towards him, or kept him alive. At this time, the evidence against him is not so great, and I think it would require a great deal of case presentation and solid evidence finds to actually get phate lynched.

I would, however, be fine with going after phate at this time if there was a backing for this motion. More so then Elmo or FaerieLord at least.

Well, honestly, the first time I read it when he posted it, I glossed over it because it didn't seem like it held anything at all. I do see something when I re-read it but I can't tell if it's because I'm looking for something or if it's something I missed and is actually there.

What I find interesting is this:

There have been times when we, as a town, have been close to lynching him (it's hard to tell how close, but I'd say 2 more people convinced at a good moment and he would be 6 feet under).

Just because someone is close to being lynched doesn't mean it's a good lynch.

At this time, the evidence against him is not so great, and I think it would require a great deal of case presentation and solid evidence finds to actually get phate lynched.

Why would you want him lynched when the evidence hasn't been very good? Why would you mention how close he has been to being lynched when also at the same time think it would be impossible or at least really hard to get him lynched?

I would, however, be fine with going after phate at this time if there was a backing for this motion.

Why would you back a lynch wagon with little-to-no solid evidence?

I'll try to answer all questions in 1 paragraph. I'm surprised a mini bandwagon has just sprouted up against me, I suppose the evidence against me is this post.

So, why vote phate? honestly, not too many good reasons here. Basically, I feel that at some points, he has been shown to be scummy, but he always just slips away, which I think is the scum moving attention away from him. Especially since no one jumped on right now, I think he is more so scum, as if he was not, the scum would have jumped on this and started killing him. I believe scum were also a heavy contributor to the FL attack, and will analyze that more later.

I know it's not a fantastic explanation, but basically I felt the game was stalling, and just went with some gut instincts to see where it goes.

If you honestly want to make a wagon against me, can you give me more evidence to defend against, I don't particularly like just being attacked.

[Miztef]

If you honestly want to make a wagon against me, can you give me more evidence to defend against, I don't particularly like just being attacked.

Well, honestly, I didn't attack you, nor did I vote/fos you. I simply answered a question someone had asked me.

well, by wagon I meant people voting me. So your in the clear.

[Miztef]

I see we are getting back to the topic of to no lynch or not. I think the conclusion was that losing a townie during the night was worse then the potential knowledge of the power roles.

A random lynch may be a viable option, however, I think it should be narrowed down to about half the game, so at least it isn't purely random. Maybe everyone puts their top 3 scum, and we count all the names up (with a point system, like 3 points for most likely scum, 2 for 2nd and 1 for 3rd) and the 6 players with the most points will be randomly chosen between for the lynch, possibly giving more weight (chance of lynch) to those with the most point.

I don't think we will come to a useful conclusion today, but I think a lynch is necessary. Therefore, I opt "semi-random" lynch as the choice for today.

[Miztef]

well, by semi-random, I mean some kind of randomized lynch choice the town agrees upon, with weighted favor for people the town finds more guilty. I gave an example of how it could work in my last post.

[Miztef]

You really think so phate? That we will come to a conclusion soon?

I for one have no one I find particularly scummy, only people I would vote on if others felt they were scummy as well.

I think everyone is just really tired of this day. I realize my plan isn't flawless or even great, but it works, gets info out, and does get someone lynched who the town finds at least somewhat scummy.

I do agree finding the best candidate is the best idea, however, I think it's what will move the game along in the best possible manner.

[Miztef]

I agree with the condorcet voting. Although, I'm not particularly sure how to fairly figure out the winner, so hopefully others know how ><.

[Miztef]

Mastermind of Sin>phate>Thin_Man>somestrangeflea=Rishi=Cephrir=skitzer=spurgistan=Sir Tornado>Elmo>Mizzy>Miztef

[Miztef]

I'll be honest about mine MoS, I only voted you first because I'm close to being picked and your also close, so even though I'm fairly neutral about you, I decided that it would be better you then me.

If people were really adamant about going after phate or some others, I would have voted that candidate first in an instant.

[Miztef]

it's not opportunistic, it's that between him and me, I think it's obvious I would choose to lynch him.

If I put him in a neutral position, the likelihood I would die (which, from my view, can in no way help the town) would increase a good portion.

Also, Rishi, does it really give the scum more information then it does the town? There is no reason why the town has to be completely honest about their lists. (I for one, don't actually believe MoS is the scummiest player or even very scummy for that manner, but my list would probably mislead the scum into thinking so).

If this is the only reason you are voting me, I would consider

your

vote as opportunistic, as I cannot see much of the logic behind it.

[Miztef]

Basic reasons for FOS:

Miztef: Originiator of the "let's generate lists" idea. It's another example of over-providing information, and it's also in a manner that isn't particularly helpful to town. Sure we have a bunch of suspicion lists, but I'd rather we go the traditional route and present reasons why we find someone suspicious and so forth. Since we have gone through two failed "global action" schemes before (the No-Lynch Period and the Massclaim Epoch), I would think someone would have more sense than to rely on something like this to jumpstart discussion.

Mizzy: Very uncomfortable with some of your low content posts. There are far too many that state in no uncertain terms that this game is "really hard" and this is justification of why you are unable to scumhunt properly or so forth. "The game is hard" is an illusion. I realize this setup is unconventional but that should not be a mental block against the basic way to play the game, which is to find scum and destroy them.

Somestrangeflea: Do not understand your accusations against Elmo at all. His two paragraphs had good points and I felt that they corresponded with his genuine feelings upon the situation at hand. Then there is your anxiety to finish Day One because it's running longer than you would like. There is also the matter of your vote against MoS supported by a sense of consensus logic "I'm going to vote for him because the general sentiment is that he's scum." That's not helpful, that's just trying to end the day.

Vote: somestrangeflea

I'm pretty sure anyone who has played a game with me would realize I try unconventional approaches regularly. I have been lynched on many occasions day 1 because of my adamant way of pushing through days.

To me, 9/10 posts are worthless in the average game, because it is just people squealing about the same stuff said 20 pages ago (I myself do so way too often), so many of my ideas are there to change the way people think about the game and throw off most conventional ways for scum to hide.

This list idea was in order to find out where everyone's position was as to who they wanted to lynch, it doesn't have to correlate with who they find suspicious or townie. This day has long ago gotten to a point where not many feel they can be helpful anymore. Most of these posts are going to be "lost in the void". I would have no problem if everyone finished their lists and we lynched the most wanted lynch (after they had a few words in their defense at least though).

I will also admit I was part of the No lynch movement and Massclaim epoch. They were both interesting ideas in this situation, and although they both turned out to be unfavorable, I don't think the average scum would know exactly how to deal with each situation.

Your whole idea that over providing information is a bad idea is flawed imo, because you seem think Townies must act completely honest at all times. While I agree that LAL is a great ideal, it's use is to stop idiotic pro-town players from acting like scum and throwing off the town. Townies can manipulate information and hide/provide what they want without ever having to lie. even list generating does not stop this ability.

You say "I'd rather go the traditional route"... well, ok, but how does that make me scummy? Because my methods are not traditional?

You say the prior 2 "global action schemes" are failures, as if that's some horrid evidence against me, however, I see it as they generated certain opinions and ideas for use at a later date. Not all ideas are just meant to be "successes" or "failures", they are there to create new obstacles for scum to trip over and to open the minds of players that think the traditional way is the only way, any other way is scum trying to screw the town.

[Miztef]

My point is that none of those things

do

help the scum. Neither of you have shown any evidence that those things did indeed help the scum and/or will help the scum. You just say "oh yea, those are bad things, obvious you are scummy since you did bad things".

Yes, in the end, we decided those actions were more hurtful to the town then the scum, however, after that point was made, I backed out of each in turn. Many other players also found those ideas worthy of looking into, are all those players scummy as well? I see nothing wrong with looking into ideas and plans on how to win this set-up. I don't believe any of us has been in a set-up exactly like it.

Also, imo, I really doubt scum would continually submit plans that benefit scum in hopes that the town will agree and give the scum advantage. In theory it looks like a good plan, but scum are usually smart enough to avoid looking ridiculously scummy.

Most of the plans focus on the desperation to keep triums alive while still being able to hunt scum. Your view seems to be that killing scum is the only point of the game, and trium death is largely irrelevant. You don't try at all to protect the triums, and would rather kill whoever looks scummy by the traditional gameplay.

The massclaim plan, for example, works well in most cases, only if the scum decide on very precise claims do they get the advantage. If I was scum planning this, I would have to desperately hope my scum buddies knew exactly what to claim. There is the added bonus to the town in this case of being able to keep away from the trium lynches as long as they want unless all three scum claimed trium. It is difficult to see all the intricacies of this plan easily, and it took many pages to convince the town it was not a good plan. I was just one of those people who couldn't see the flaws in the plan easily.

The no lynch plan works in much the same manner, protect the trium in order to gain information. Only after all the statistics are rolled out can you realize this isn't the best plan. Actually, there is a good chance this plan would actually work out to the towns advantage as well. Not enough to promote it, but enough that the average townie could be at fault in thinking it's a good plan.

If you are suggesting that I am the "mastermind" behind all these plans, then you must believe I have a good extent of analytical ability in order to figure out that each of these benefit the scum. If I am smart enough to figure out all these, then wouldn't it be reasonable to assume I'm smart enough not to stick my neck out and be caught on each of these? I would also have to be very confident in the ability of my scumbuddies to make the correct choices in the massclaim plan and the "list" plan. (Actually, I still hold that the list plan is a fairly good one at this time, but I realize you do not, and believe it's another scum helping plan)

[Miztef]

I completely agree with SSF's last line "No, I'm voting for him because Condorcet results don't generate their own votes. In taking part in the vote, I agreed that I would support the resulting lynch. I call it honour. "

We are doing the list voting in order come up with a fair and reasonable lynch. No one wants to "take the plunge" today and risk killing a trium by a hammer. If we abide by the rules of condorcet voting, a fair candidate will be lynched, one that is most agreed upon by the entire town.

I see the problem in my voting MoS, it looks like a plan by scum to start the condorcet voting and then I'm using the opportunity to kill a townie (MoS). However, if you look at it from the townie perspective, I pretty much have to choose MoS (or someone else high on everyone's lists) or else I increase the risk of my own death, which I know cannot help the town.

Trustgossip, your brand new to this game, we've been at it for months upon months, to me at least, and from the looks of it SSF as well, it seems pointless now to continue our bickering. We just want this day to end.

I'm not saying your case against me is terrible, but I doubt I will be lynched soon by regular voting, only because regular voting has failed so many times throughout today as well. Too many people don't want to run this risk of killing a trium on day 1. I think that's a proven fact that's been shown in this game. By doing condorcet voting we can finally move this game along in a fair and organized manner. If I'm lynched from that, so be it. If you really want to, you can just do Miztef>everyone else as your list. Or is that giving away too much information as well?

[Miztef]

alright, so it seems MoS is quite correct in what happened.

There is a problem with the list in that these "false dilemmas" happen. I'm not sure if this happens or not with regular voting, but it has obviously become a large problem here.

@trustgossip: The point of the lists is to choose who to lynch without causing too much trouble. The reason I originally suggested it was because of absolute lack of morale in the game, I felt there was a definite need to progress to day 2 by trying to eliminate the problems we are having in coming up with a consensus.

There is continuing talk about giving scum too much info, but you can choose exactly how much info you'd like to give with your list. So, I don't see it as all that much different then regular play. I didn't choose the lists idea because I thought it would generate loads of great info, I did it in order to swiftly and fairly end the day.

SSF seemed to have a similar impression, although took it too far in voting before all the info was in. I agree with mizzy in that regard. Not sure it constitutes a vote though, as my first impression when I saw mizzy's vote was opportunistic after MoS's suggestion.

[Miztef]

Not sure what'll happen if we wagon someone claiming triumvirate. I would suggest that

we never put anyone at more than L-2 without a claim

as a scum quickhammer would be very viable if people didn't unvote.

How useful are claims in this game though? If a scum is going down, there's a good chance that they are going to claim Triumvirate which will force us to turn our attentions elsewhere. (Since the Three Triumvirates aren't going to counterclaim.)

I have to agree, claims are basically useless. Even if scum claims townie, everyone is gonna be up in arms saying "oh, a scum wouldn't claim townie, they'd claim trium!".

My stand on this is that

claiming is irrelevant

because it will only cause more confusion. I won't condemn someone for claiming, just saying it's unlikely to affect my decision.

[Miztef]

about what? I'm still here, just have nothing much to say. Basically I was gearing on that list voting to end the day, and now that it has not, I'm kind of at a loss.

I don't really have anyone I want to vote for, find most players that are active right now helpful, but unfortunately none of them of put up compelling arguements as to who to lynch at this time. I've been thinking of voting SSF, but that seems like I'd just be following the vote, and I don't find the evidence against him compelling.

I will bring up though, that I've found your (Mizzy's) posts misleading and at times unhelpful. You post quite often, but with too little actual substance imo. You give reads of scumminess on those already getting much attention, and basically agree that they are scum. Whoever looks pro-town you decide to agree with quite often. Overall, I find your tactics scummy because you tend to follow and agree, traits I find prominent in scum.

The lurkers are everywhere in this game, and I hope their post rate increases soon. I will not go into detail on why to lynch them though, because I don't feel they need to be lynched today.

Phate hasn't got my attention in a while. He latest post reminds me completely of his scumminess, as he states the obvious, has very little constructive arguments, and has been under scrutiny before, yet got out much too easily imo (I'm implying scum helped moved the lynch away from him).

Elmo and Trustgossip have seemed, to the most extent, pro-town, however, There level of influence on the game may get higher then necessary by blinding agreeing they are pro-town, and I do have reservations about both of them.

Thin_Man, Skitzer and Sir Tornado are all on my "lurker" radar, mostly because I have very little opinion on them, and they have not posted very often or recently. I don't like people I don't have much of a reading on (because that usually means they are not doing enough to catch my attention).

[Miztef]

what? I'm lurking? Are you kidding?

your telling me that I lurk as much as Cephrir, Thin_man, Sir Tornado, phate. Heck, even Skitzer doesn't post that much.

Ok, I suppose I haven't been

that

vocal, but I'm definitely not a lurker. I just recently had a huge argument with trustgossip (post 582, 584, 586 597), as well as replied to a claim of being a lurker (post 633). None of these posts very short either (well, maybe 1 or 2). I mean, sure Mizzy posts a lot, but there is next to no content in the average post, elmo is better, and trustgossip has been quite the loudspeaker. Other then that though, I'm just as vocal as the average player.

What about Cephrir for example, he voted me out of the blue, with very little explanation. He has yet to post since then. Yet, I'm the best lurker vote?

Look at the content of Phate's last 5 posts. 6 lines total! 1 of which is the list of list voting. 5 posts back is page 22. In those 5 posts he manages to contradict himself by saying he doesn't like my plan (list voting), yet makes a list.

Or Thin_man, who has been pointed out as someone who has said obviously scummy things, and yet I'm the lurker vote?

and how about Sir Tornado has not posted since DEC 09, and yet I'm the lurker vote?!

This is horribly upsurd that your conclusion is to lynch me as the lurker vote. So much so that I feel the need to

vote: Mizzy

at this time. I can't see how a town player could make such a claim and see it as a pro-town act.

[Miztef]

Sure, I overreacted, but that was ridiculous. I don't care that there was no FoS or whatever, how do you logically conclude I'm the worst lurker when there are so many that, in the lurker sense, are hugely worse. God, I don't even care if you lynch me anymore, I'm sick of all these attacks against me. People just seem to decide I'm the most scummy.

How in the world, trustgossip, does my reaction make me scummy? That I overcompensated? Isn't that just better? I'm called out for being too lurky, and yet there are so many more lurker players then me that it's not even questionable in my mind.

and now, you

credit

to mizzy? My god, she didn't even try to do anything amazing, just just send out a random accusation at me, which is horribly flawed, and yet that's totally okay.

OoooOooOOoh, I'm overcompensating again in this post. oh god, better lynch me straight away, no way a frustrated town player could possibly do that!

I'll

unovte

though at least. I don't actually think mizzy is that scummy, but I think she came to an upsurd conclusion at least. Of course, no one really bothered to discuss my points on the actual lurkers.

Mizzy: you say you "only" expressed a difference between me and MoS...

I feel the need to QFT the entirety of TrustGossip's last post. Lurking really hurts the town, guys.

I rather like the idea of lynching lurkers.. I'll give it some more thought, I have a couple other people in mind (MoS / Miztif).

MoS DID at least give us some warning about his decreased activity and he IS trying when he can...I'd be more inclined to

a Miz (the other Miz) lurkerlynch.

To me, you clearly implied me as the lurkerlynch. You also implied my lurkiness is worse because MoS warned of decreased activity. I did see that you wanted thin_man lurkerlynched, and that's why it shocked me even more when you implied I was the best lurkerlynch.

Blah, I'm just rambling in this post now, I'm gonna need some time to clear my head. You'll probably arbitrarily decide to lynch me by then of course, but whatever.

[Miztef]

alright, sorry, I blew that out of proportions. I just thought by "lurkerlynch" you meant best lurker to lynch.

@trustgossip: well, I for one like emotions (not appeal to emotions, just emotions) because they make the game a lot less stale then a bunch of number crunching and logical deductions. Heck, everyone plays with emotion, it's just not obviously present in every post. If your now accusing me of being scum based on having emotions... then just, wow.

@mizzy: It's amusing that you don't want to analyze me, yet the post just before was exclusively about me.

@elmo: I agree with random accusations, but I thought Mizzy's in particular was not random but rather a direct attack at me for being a lurker. Trustgossip and Cephrir's I'm sure wasn't actually random, but I'm upset that no one cared at all about Cephrir's vote on me, and I don't like Trustgossip's because he voted me for some I can't really defend against, because it isn't actually a scummy thing (having an emotional outburst). Or at least, I can't defend it in a logical way, because I was just being a bit upset there.

@MoS: that's too bad that your leaving due to assholes.

[Miztef]

I completely agree with mizzy's analysis of phate. Active-lurker is written all over him for me as well, although, lurker doesn't always mean scum (as was pointed out by mizzy with scum attacking lurkers for easy kills).

Trustgossip: Why the "cyptic" message to mizzy... I'm not sure either which you feel at this moment.

[Miztef]

so, do you condone a lurker lynch based on what info we have available now trustgossip?

If so, who are your candidates and maybe a brief description why those?

I for one condone a lurker lynch at this point, and agree that the most of the scum are probably lurking. (I mean, it's either that or a crazy alliance of Trustgossip, mizzy and MoS)

of all the "lurkers" I'd say phate is the worst, although he is not so much the worst actual lurker. Between thin_man, sir tornado, and cephrir, I'd say thin_man is the worst of those (which I consider the actual lurkers).

[Miztef]

I agree rishi, I'll

vote: phate

Trust, did you just FoS me after your already voting me, are you kidding? I picked thin_man because he is who I consider the best lynch of all the players that are actually horribly lurking. Phate isn't truely lurking, but he's much worse overall.

[Miztef]

not against the rules, I just think your being a little overdramatic. I'm not implying you are scum because of it, just think your being a bit hypocritical of the fact you voted me for being melodramatic.

Why does it matter if you mentioned phate or not. I think thin_man is the worst of the actual horrible lurkers, where as phate does post, but he is more guilty to me nevertheless, so I voted him.

[Miztef]

you know, you guys make me want to pull my hair out.

so, I got voted by ssf... great.

Chapter 3 - Vote: No Lynch

If Phate = mafia, then spur and/or SSF could be trying to get heat off of him, in a townie looking way.

So, Too Townie then?

For someone that just made a massive speech, that seems very odd. I will accept it for now and continue playing as normal though.

"I do not believe that Elmo's argument is a good one against me. Moving on..."

Spurgistan and Miztef stand out as potentially scummy, as does Phate to a lesser extent.

to my knowledge, this is the only stuff your using as evidence against me. Somehow, this makes me much worse then any other lynch out there. great.


Mizzy: I'm not sure how I just popped in your plans and got a vote in 1 post, but whatever the reason you didn't even mention me as a lynch candidate (lately) until that post, I don't like that post nevertheless.

The MoS "vote": As MoS stated, I got myself into a false dilemma. If we had definitely done that voting (the assumption I was going on), I would have died had I not voted MoS (most likely).

and how in the world is that last quote make me scummy? cause I reiterated some posts and clarified that I don't actually think he's scum. Ok then, do you want me to go through and name the last 20 of your posts that do the same thing? I'd probably only have to look about 50 posts back of yours to get 20. This is not even mentioning the fact that you accused phate of the same thing, yet he throws a measly explanation, and oh, now your on my bandwagon.

On top of this, you keep changing your position on lurkerlynching, at first you said it was the way to go, then you decided to pressure phate saying that scum like to lurkerlynch to get easy lynches. I don't understand what went through your mind here at all.

Anyway, since I'm near lynch, I'm gonna

claim triumvirate

. So, yeah, take it as you will. Also, I realize I said claims were irrelevant, but that only applied to my opinion, which is actually now changed a bit on that subject. I know others said they thought claims were valuable, so I decided it best to say mine.

[Miztef]

well, I claimed like that cause I was again just upset by the end of the post.

Looking back, it does sound quite scummy, but yeah, I'm triumvirate. I think anyone could notice my wish for protection of triums in most of my previous plans.

The massclaim for example, was because I was quite fearful of being lynched early, and wanted to have the protection of saying my role.

what do you mean by "I told you guys"? I don't find it at all surprising that mizzy and phate are 2 that wish me lynched still.

Imo, Mizzy's latest jump from phate to me seems like a scum jumping from a bussing vote to an actual attack vote. As you should know, I've wanted phate lynched for a long time now, so it's not at all shocking that he wishes me lynched. Does anyone agree/disagree with this theory?

So, since I'm feeling talkative today, I'll bring up some other points as well:

Elmo has been looking pretty good throughout the game. so, yeah, don't lynch him.

Trustgossip, as much as he was opposing me, I see as fairly pro-town.

MoS, for the most part, is neutral for me. I understand he can't be online as often anymore, and I haven't seen much scum activity from him.

Thin_man and Sir Tornado are horribly lurking... I'm not sure why they haven't been replaced. before thin_man stopped posting, I was finding him somewhat scummy.

Cephrir is the next heaviest lurker, and I must say I think many of his posts lack explanation and usefulness. Overall, I just don't like the way he plays and wish for more activity.

Skitzer has been fairly off the radar, I see him as mostly neutral.

SSF has been all over the place, So even though at times I've found him scum, and other times town, it's really a toss-up at this time.

Rishi has been pretty good overall. He's the most "genuinely" townie player right now for me. Pushes hard, but not too much, and is sometimes emotional, understands the situation, and plays fairly. I would find it hard to believe if rishi is scum.

Phate and Mizzy have become my 2 top suspects. Both for their "active lurking" type play, phate much more so in that category. Mizzy I find guilty of bussing phate, flipflopping opinions, too agreeable at times, contradicting approaches to playing (let's lynch lurkers, oh wait, only scum lynch lurkers), and way too much fluff posting. Phate has a ridiculous amount of active lurking, does next to no scumhunting, and tends to join bandwagons with little input.

[Miztef]

So yeah, fun mess I've started up here.

Mizzy said I didn't place any real evidence in my posts... that's true, I was kind of in a rush and was rambling for the most part. I wasn't trying to be too serious, just thought I'd bring up my views on a few things in case I was lynched quickly. There was also an accusation that my post "did nothing" which is true, but as I said, it's just an opinion piece in case I'm lynched quickly, with my latest views. I didn't FoS or anything mostly because I wasn't really thinking about it. I already have my vote on phate, which is where I want it to be.

To be honest about the massclaim thing, I actually believed I had initiated it as well. Guess I was just thinking it in my head early on or something.

Phate's logic concerning how I handled claims seems fair, but here's what I was thinking: I said claims were irrelevant to me because I knew scum would try to claim trium, and I am definitely at a point where I am sick of the day, so listening to this claim would only extend our day, which I didn't prefer. On top of that, since I am Trium, I decided that it was more likely a person claiming trium was trium, and more likely that they are scum (2 triums / 3 scum for me in the game). Of course, this sounds like an awful defense, but I think everyone can at least admit I have been antsy to end the day, and my actions may reflect that.

My mind changed on the subject after replies came to my post, which touched on the importance of information from a claim. At least I'm spurring powerful conversation by claiming, even if it ends in my lynching. My position on claims now is that they shouldn't radically change your mind as to lynching the person or not, but are useful for discussion building and risk assessment. Especially if we get 2 or more claims in the same day, then it becomes quite relevant as calculating what is more likely true and helps root out scum (when they are forced to claim that is).

[Miztef]

I don't think it was too early. I was at L-2, and deadline is in 6 days, so I thought it best to claim while the town still had a chance to debate over it.

Your right that nothing has happened quickly in this game, but is it scummy of me to have said all those things before my possible lynch? I see no reason why a scum would do so.

Well, thanks for the vote of confidence at least.

[Miztef]

Mizzy... are you saying a trium wouldn't claim before dieing?

I, being a trium, think that pretty much every trium will want to claim before their death. Heck, I wanted to claim right when the game started. It's nerve-wracking to be a trium, you want to hunt scum, but if your logic is too faulty, or say a slip of words, the town wants you dead and you being lynched means massive damage to the town.

[Miztef]

So basically, there is no logical basis to why I'm more likely scum, it's just you

feel

a trium would not act in such a way.

I can't really defend against you saying you "feel" scum would act the way I do, and Trium would not. It's basically just a random opinion.

The reason I said it was hard being a trium is because you said that triums would not claim as I did. Well, I say we would, because I don't want the town to think I'm being too crazy defensive (by saying "ZOMGZ, Yourz all teh n00bs 4 lynching meh, I am de trium, GOD!") and I was just kinda sick of writing by the end of that post.

I'm not "trying way too hard" to prove myself by saying I am trium, I'm just stating that it is because of that fact that I came to such a conclusion. If I were trying to prove myself as trium, I'd do it with evidence from my previous posts. Unfortunately, I was trying pretty hard to hide my identity, so anything I bring up just becomes WIFOM.

[Miztef]

I went "wall of words" mode under pressure because that's what I do. If you meta-game me, you'll see that is a normal habit of mine.

You'll also see that I get lynched day 1.... a lot. Maybe because I suck, I dunno, but it happens to me quite often. (although, my first game I was scum and was lynched day 1, so I guess it doesn't have much to do with my role)

I do understand cephrir's thoughts though. I don't want to lynch him today. Phate or even skitzer as he mentioned are more intriguing choices for me.

[Miztef]

does this deadline end with no vote or lynch most voted player?

If no vote, I really suggest we come to a conclusion very shortly.

[Miztef]

unvote vote: cephrir

phate's latest claim and "I think that's a lynch post" seem more frustrated town to me then scum. I guess I'm willing to give him another chance.

[Miztef]

phate... why don't you just wait till tomorrow when I'm confirmed trium, so you don't have to waste so much effort suspecting me.

true, if mafia get the investigation and say I'm scum, then the town will be pretty bloody convinced I'm scum, but I don't think your gonna get a bandwagon on me in the next few hours.

and why in the world would I think cephrir is trium? I suppose from the logic that your almost definitely town that makes cephrir more likely not town. but still, I don't see why I, if I were a scum, would switch my vote.

I switched my vote because I think your more likely townie then scum, that is all.

[Miztef]

your claim and "that's a lynch" post.

it's funny that you believe nothing you could have done could change my mind.

[Miztef]

I feel somewhat horrible, but I think what I did was just my gut. If I were scum, there is no way I could have known cephrir would have had the cop power. But alas, I was roleblocker, and I choose cephrir.

[Miztef]

I was gonna post a whole ramble about why I choose cephrir, but there's a lot of things I forget, so it'll probably just end up making me look worse.

1 thing that pops out at me is that mizzy died, yet I would think that a scum would attack rishi not mizzy if they knew they couldn't bother attacking me (as it was likely I was going to be doc protected). So, just a little

FoS: Rishi

there for me.

I completed believe MoS's doc claim right now, maybe he is scum, but this gives him some + points for me. (well, of course I'm biased cause I obv wanted doc protect).

From cephrir latest post, I am somewhat more inclined to think he is town. Although, scum would probably say the exact same thing. So it's pure gut... again.

[Miztef]

@rishi: There was actually another flaw in my argument, and so I take it back. It's that you claimed townie, and mizzy was the (maybe) the next most likely townie, so the scum killed her, hoping to hit a trium too. Plus, you were somewhat likely to be doc protected.

[Miztef]

After thinking it through, I must agree with CES's reasoning. Here's why:

1. MoS is Town - if this is true, he would have thought threw the plan and realized it's mistakes, considering his meticulous attention to details (as I've seen in other games with him) and knowledge of the game. Only if he was being extra lazy at that time could MoS being Town be plausible.

2. MoS is Trium - ok, there is a bit of an argument to be made here. I myself was quite excited to push for massclaim as well, clouded by my wish to reveal my role. I don't have the experience that MoS has though.

3. MoS is Scum - then the action of pushing massclaim makes sense. He knows it hurts the town, and, looking back at which players were playing at that time, there are very little threating players in this game (even now), MoS probably guessed he could get away with a bit more then usual.

On top of this, He probably did get the doctor role, and did not protect the kill that happened tonight. Of course, it is more likely to fail then succeed in the first place, but with MoS's skill, it is plausible that he could have protected the correct player. I think he would have at least protected someone other then myself, as it was likely the scum would avoid me N1 due to probable doc protection.

For all these reasons, I find it highly likely MoS is scum.

[Miztef]

woops,

vote: MoS

, forgot to put that in there.

[Miztef]

fine, I agree that you didn't "push" as badly as CES said you did. I was going off memory there, and I remembered your agreement of the massclaim. Sorry.

Well, would you not agree that town players "should" make good plans? If your just throwing around "outrageously flawed" plans in many games, is that town-like behavior. I agree with the argument that it is scum who would benefit from bad plans, and therefore, people who push for/start/agree with bad plans should be scrutinized. I was, heavily actually in this game, and I agree that I deserved it, my defense was/is that I scum would not continuously advocate bad plans, and that I'm triumvirate.

However, even in light of that, your push was quite light, and I really like that 5th post, so I'll move on and

unvote

for now.

[Miztef]

As much as I don't like much of CES's play, I don't find it expectionally scummy. Beep! Beep!'s attack on rishi and justification for it seem loose at best, and since I consider rishi one of the most likely pro-town players, I really can't see justification in it.

Even so, I don't think such action is vote worthy.

I think the "half" of the game missing is a good point to work on though. Most notably trustgossip's complete dissapearance, which is very odd. Maybe equally notable though is cephrir's lack of content, which, considering his posistion day 1, is not looking good.

[Miztef]

so, still missing a bunch of players, almost 0 activity, great.

I'm gonna

unvote vote: Cephrir

, so many players have just fallen off the map, so I'm going to focus on getting lurkers to post. Cephrir was heavily suspected yesterday and is just 1 that came to mind.

TrustGossip is the other major one that comes to mind.

The beep! beep! wagon is too shallow. Although, I am willing to lynch Beep! if need be.

[Miztef]

alright, beep beep it is.

unvote vote:beep! beep!

Maybe after this day ends something will happen.

[Miztef]

I vote for abandon, I've stopped paying attention to this game a while back.