Mini 578 - Mistery at Montescuro - Game Over!

[Guardian]

Hey guys! Lots of familiar faces, even thought many are new ones. This should be fun .

vote: Evilgorrilaz

. It says he's evil right in his name!

[Guardian]

Heh, Yos, you don't agree with me as much as you think -- 6 of the players are new acquaintances of mine, from mafia discussion, or my moding their newbie games (or IC newbie games), or ICing in their newbie games.

So they are new familiar faces. What do you think of that!?

And why no random vote?

[Guardian]

Let's leave the discussion on meta out of this thread, for now... I legitimately am coming to the opinion that using meta is a bad policy.

Yos, why random vote only half the time?

[Guardian]

unvote: EvilGorilaz vote: JamesThePhox

[Guardian]

I don't wish to answer at this time. My choice was not random, however.

It requires 4 more votes to lynch Fox. Use your votes wisely .

[Guardian]

It requires 4 more votes to lynch Fox. Use your votes wisely Wink.

Surely you aren't suggesting it would be a good idea to lynch

anyone

on page 2?

Why? Would that be bad? Why would that be bad?

I don't wish to answer at this time. My choice was not random, however.

It requires 4 more votes to lynch Fox. Use your votes wisely .

I'm starting to think I rather like my vote right where it is.

Why?

Dasquian, why is VampanezeHunter more voteworthy than JamesthePhox?

[Guardian]

Lots of questions at this stage is good. Any scum suspects from the answers you're getting?

Possibly. Give it time.

Guardian, why the mystery?

Why not?

VampaneezeHunter, if you had to say who you find most suspicious right now, who?

[Guardian]

fos: Near

Joudas, why do you assume that fewer posts and quicker days equate with less information?

Some more foxy votes would be nice. His post 38 seems to be a good blend of hypocrisy mixed with WIFOM considering he was one of the last people to 'not come up with 2 votes out of 10 cast', yet he agrees that the occurrence is fairly suspicious.

[Guardian]

In an ideal world that's true. In the real world, most players don't spend enough time re-reading to justify days where, on average, each player posts more than 20 times or so imo. I think when days get much longer than that, they start to be detrimental to the town.

I'd like to see your evidence for many, many games proving longer days are more beneficial to town.

How would you respond if I told you that Adel did a study near the end of last year showing that in 200 or so random minis, day ones where scum were lynched were on average about a page shorter than day ones where town were lynched (8.5 as compared to 9.5)? What if I also told you that she said that day ones where the town eventually won were shorter than day ones where the town eventually lost, to an even greater extent, about 2.5 pages (7.5 as compared to 10)?

How am I acting naive? What do you think about my case on Foxy?

[Guardian]

1. Mac, you say that poor play by scum results in faster lynches.
   
2. That means that the scum playing comparatively worse than the town resulted in faster lynches.
   
3. That means that the town playing comparatively better than the scum resulted in faster lynches.
   
4. That means that good play by the town resulted in resulted in faster lynches.
   
5. That means that if the town played well, faster lynches occured.
   
6. That means that if the town plays well, faster lynches will occur.

Do you find the above faulty? If so, how?

I don't engage in theory debates every game.

And for future reference, don't answer questions directly addressed to others. That's a big no-no/scum-tell of mine.

mfos: Mac

. Anyone else who does the same, after my saying this, I'll find quite suspicious.

[Guardian]

Mac, what do

you

think of my case on Foxy?

[Guardian]

Mac, what do

you

think of my case on Foxy?

I think it's mildly weaker than my case on Vampaneze; worth a few questions and your own vote, but not exactly something worthy of trying to rally a full bandwagon over.

Peculiar... what is worth rallying a full bandwagon over? What is the criterion for a case being worth one's own vote, but not being worth attempting to gain further support?

If what you're actually doing is scum hunting Guardian, I'd like to see some more persuasive results, or something that actually looks like scum hunting, soon. Right now it looks like random attempts to distract the town. I'm seeing merit in the play of a couple other players who are being obscure right now, but not yours.

What does scum hunting look like? You say my play is obscure... does that make it scummy? Why do you say I attempting to distract the town?

[Guardian]

How would you respond if I told you that Adel did a study near the end of last year showing that in 200 or so random minis, day ones where scum were lynched were on average about a page shorter than day ones where town were lynched (8.5 as compared to 9.5)? What if I also told you that she said that day ones where the town eventually won were shorter than day ones where the town eventually lost, to an even greater extent, about 2.5 pages (7.5 as compared to 10)?

I'd respond by telling you that there's a pretty sizable difference between 8.5-9.5 pages and 2 pages. I'd also respond by suggesting that that study should have counted the number of meaningful posts in those games, rather then the page count. You could have a 20 page game with only 2 pages of actual "useful" content. On the other hand you could have a 5 page game with 5 pages of useful content, and in this case, sure - you'd definitely get more out of the short game.

A good response. How do you decide what is useful content and what isn't? Which player in this game would you say has the most useful content in proportion to their total number of posts? Which player would you say has the least?

Honestly, though, the suggestion that players are too lazy to re-read threads is beside the point - that's a fault of the players.

I disagree, but my view is a minority view, possibly for good reason.

I'd agree that having a day 1 that's too long is bad, as it gives the scum more opportunity to sow seeds of doubt and cause the town to second guess themselves - but having a day 1 that's too short is almost worse, as regardless of the outcome of the day 1 lynch, town has very little to go on for subsequent days.

Reasonable.

As for Phox, I haven't seen anything to make me consider voting him. I find your case against him to be far too weak to warrant even considering a lynch.

Well, obviously you've considered voting him, I asked you to consider voting him. However, you reached the conclusion that he was not worth voting for. Do you see what I am classifying as (possibly intentional) WIFOM? Is WIFOM not meritorious of your vote at this stage in the game? Do you find your no vote (and FOS of me) a more useful state of affairs?

[Guardian]

Peculiar... what is worth rallying a full bandwagon over? What is the criterion for a case being worth one's own vote, but not being worth attempting to gain further support?

A 2 line suggestion of hypocrisy isn't worth bandwagoning.

Would it have been more worthy of bandwagoning if I wrote a full paragraph?

Hypocrisy and WIFOM aren't worth bandwagoning?

Why do you think your case on Phox does merit a bandwagon?

My standards for bandwagoning are fairly low.

What does scum hunting look like? You say my play is obscure... does that make it scummy? Why do you say I attempting to distract the town?

Obscure play is not inherently bad. Yours, however, currently looks like trying to run the town in circles with inane theory questions, while making vague insinuations against lots of players.

Vague insinuations? The only insinuation I see that I've made is that Phox should get more votes.

Asking lots of questions can be good scum hunting, but right now I feel like you're doing more twisting/distracting than looking for reactions.

Justify this.

The discussion about length of days seems entirely pointless; you're leading in a direction so far from conventional wisdom that the discussion clearly belongs in the MD forum, not an active game. I can't see any purpose for making it in a game other than trying to make normal responses into scummy ones.

I've seen people respond scummily to theory discussion in games numerous times.

I haven't specifically demanded to know what you're doing yet because I know that if this is some kind of crazy scum hunting that I'm not experienced enough to recognize, revealing that would defeat the purpose. This needs to produce some tangible results or a better case than you have on Phox pretty soon though, or I'm going to start asking some pointed questions in that direction.

I'm not sure why what I'm doing looks

that

crazy; I'm trying to garner responses and reactions from players, and I'm trying to get people to justify their actions and opinions.

I'm currently quite suspicious of how hard you're pushing for votes on Phox. Multiple people have told you they don't find your case worth voting for, and you haven't produced any new accusations, but you're still fishing for more votes. Why?

Examining players reactions to intense scrutiny is one of the best ways of scum hunting. Examining players reactions to a call for a bandwagon is a close second.

[Guardian]

I legitimately am coming to the opinion that using meta is a bad policy.

How would you respond if I told you that Adel did a study near the end of last year showing that in 200 or so random minis, day ones where scum were lynched were on average about a page shorter than day ones where town were lynched (8.5 as compared to 9.5)? What if I also told you that she said that day ones where the town eventually won were shorter than day ones where the town eventually lost, to an even greater extent, about 2.5 pages (7.5 as compared to 10)?

I lol'ed

Why?
I'm talking about a very different kind of meta; there is a thread in Mafia Discussion about it if you'd like to read called 'On Ignoring Meta' or something.

Guardian, I don't see any case against Phox. I'm sorry if I am answering a question not directed at me, but this is just my personal opinion. You seem to be pushing really hard on phox, but your case is nonexistent.

I'll ask you too -- WIFOM and hypocrisy are not meritorious of your vote?

I can at least see the logic behind sensfan's vote changing shenanigans, but you are to suspicious to pass up.

Unvote, Vote:Guardian

Why?

[Guardian]

Would it have been more worthy of bandwagoning if I wrote a full paragraph?

One small instance should not merit a bandwagon.

Why not?

FoS: Near

Failing to OMGUS is not scummy.

Why doesn't Near's FOS count as 'one small instance'? Why is Near worthy of a bandwagon for one small instance, but Phox isn't?

[Guardian]

Evil, you haven't answered my questions, try again.



Pyro, Phox was the 9th to vote, and voted one of the 4 people who didn't have any votes on that time.

He later agreed something odd was going on that the first 10 people to vote voted 10 different people, while he was one of the most guilty of doing this.

So he said that what "those people" did was suspicious, and he was one of "those people", while never taking responsibility for that or explaining his actions.

[Guardian]

Waiting for phox's response to Guardian's allegations before I move my vote. I want him to elaborate on this:

I think that's a fair assumption. Not that bandwagoning is a major accusation these days. It seems to me that as long as the votes are spread out evenly, then the reasons for voting don't have to be held by strong opinion. It allows for wishy washy votes.

This was in response to the "fair and balanced" vote count, after he voted next to last.

Moreover, this is what he meant when he called something a fair assumption:

Does anyone else find that "fair and balanced" vote count up there a little suspicious? No one coming up with 2 votes out of 10 cast strikes me as odd. We've either got some crazy luck here, or a couple people placing their votes carefully so as not to attract attention.

I think that's a fair assumption.

I found it fairly suspicious that he said it was a fair assumption that he placed his vote carefully so as not to attract attention.

This is more than bandwagon worthy from my POV.

[Guardian]

One small instance should not merit a bandwagon.

Why not?

I don't believe it should. No other reason.

Why doesn't Near's FOS count as 'one small instance'?

Evil, you haven't answered this.

Does Near's FOS count as 'one small instance'? Why or why not?

Why is Near worthy of a bandwagon for one small instance, but Phox isn't?

I believe that Near's logic was more faulty than JtP's.

[Guardian]

I see what you are classifying as WIFOM, but I don't really see it as being WIFOM. No, I don't think that that level of WIFOM is meritorious of my vote this early in the game. I find my lack of a vote (and FOS of you) a more useful state of affairs, yes. The lack of a vote because there's nobody I have any desire to lynch right now based on what we've seen, and the FOS because while what you're doing could be considered scum hunting (by pointing a lot of fingers and raising a lot of often-moot or frivilous points and gaging the reaction people have), I don't like your methods, at least not at this point in the game. The way you're doing things puts people on edge which makes them watch what they're saying much more closely. A better method, in my opinion, is to let the conversation flow early on, and start grinding down on folks once they've had a chance to incriminate themselves, not try to get them to incriminate themselves by grinding down on them.

I find that your method leads to scum being on edge and townies being careless, whereas mine leads to only scum being logically inconsistent.

Now this, this is WIFOM. He says so himself, actually. However, I still don't think this is meritorious of my vote. It's too early to be band wagoning on anyone.

It is never to early.

"Useful Content" might have been poor wording - "contentful content" might be more accurate. What I meant was, you can easily have a 20-page day 1 if everyone's posting little 1- and 2-liners. Or you can have a 3 page day 1 with the same amount of content if everyone posts thought-out, multi-paragraph posts as the norm. Granted, there's some posts that are flat out useless - my image macro response to the joke vote on me, for example - that's an entirely useless post that does nothing to further the game. I believe it was you who was moderating a game I replaced into recently where the first 6 pages consisted of about 15 useful posts and a lot of stupid bullshit. This is an extreme example, but that's more or less what I'm talking about. My point is, post count is not a good indicator of whether or not it's a good time to lynch. Evidence is. We don't have enough evidence to warrant considering a lynch right now. Would you disagree? Do you honestly want to lynch Phox right now? How about Near? You certainly appear to be pushing for it.

I appear to be pushing for Near's lynch?

If we don't bandwagon now and think seriously about lynching, we'll wind up on page 20 and wonder how the hell we got there, and I'll point back to this post in intense frustration.

As for the whole 'everyone voting different folks during the jokevote stage' ongoing discussion, in all honesty, I don't see this as being particularly scummy. Chances of anyone getting lynched because of one of those jokevotes are so slim it's not even worth mentioning. It could be a matter of someone not wanting to draw attention to themselves by ganging up, sure - but town or scum, who wants to draw attention to themselves? No one. Sure, scum would be more conscious of it, but this early in the game? This is a null tell.

No.

[Guardian]

Evil, you haven't answered this.

Yes I have.

I believe that Near's logic was more faulty than JtP's.

Thats my answer.

So Near's logic being more faulty than JtP's makes Near's FOS be more than 'one small instance', while JtP's WIFOM still fits into the category 'one small instance'?

[Guardian]

Would it have been more worthy of bandwagoning if I wrote a full paragraph?

Depends entirely on the content of the paragraph. In this case, most likely not, because I don't think there's enough of a case on Phox to fill a paragraph right now.

Interesting.

Hypocrisy and WIFOM aren't worth bandwagoning?

Depends on the severity. I'd say Vampaneze is every bit as guilty as Phox, if not more so (same end of the random phase 'offense,' moving his vote when a bandwagon built off it). In light of that, why would you be trying to bandwagon Phox over VH?

VH also merits bandwagoning. I'm more interested in Phox because I see him as about equally guilty, but there is much more resistance.

Vague insinuations? The only insinuation I see that I've made is that Phox should get more votes.

Partially, this is a tone thing, but:

I think it's mildly weaker than my case on Vampaneze; worth a few questions and your own vote, but not exactly something worthy of trying to rally a full bandwagon over.

Peculiar...

what is worth rallying a full bandwagon over?

(Italics mine)

This was the best concrete example I could find.

Me finding your logic peculiar is a vague insinuation of your scumminess? This is a reason to find me suspicious?

You are questioning ordinary statements about reasons for actions in a way that seems to imply that they are scummy, when there's nothing scummy about them. It feels like you're trying to plant an impression of scumminess over ordinary statements, which I think qualifies as making insinuations.

Positing this is true, why is this bad? Is being suspicious of everyone and trying to interpret everyone's actions in a scummy way indicative of me being scum?

Asking lots of questions can be good scum hunting, but right now I feel like you're doing more twisting/distracting than looking for reactions.

Justify this.

1. I get the distraction point from the fact that you are barraging so many questions at everyone right now that it seems people are having a difficult time fitting their own scumhunting in around reacting to your questions. You are dominating the thread. The majority of posts I see are either you or people reacting to you. This theory debate you started doesn't seem to be progressing the game at all.

I disagree strongly with the assertion that all, or even the majority, of what I've been talking about is theory. I also disagree strongly that my 'dominating the game' is at all indicative of me having anti-town motives.

You appear to be trying to force people to react to you more than think about the game for themselves.

If people don't make time to respond to me and think about the game themselves, how does that become my problem? How is it my problem when a good portion of my questions are asking people to scum hunt and think critically about the game? How is at all indicative of me having scum motives?

FoS: Near

Failing to OMGUS is not scummy.

Why doesn't Near's FOS count as 'one small instance'? Why is Near worthy of a bandwagon for one small instance, but Phox isn't?

A great example of the twisting I'm talking about. He's not even voting Near, let alone asking for a bandwagon on him. You're either not paying attention here (which I find

highly

unlikely almost to the point of absurdity based on your other questions), or you're trying to twist his argument into something it isn't.

I'm trying to get him to respond to me, and see if he notices and defends what I'm claiming he said. He pretty much agreed that Near was worthy of bandwagoning. That's noteworthy to me, and I'm happy I asked that question.

I'm not sure why what I'm doing looks

that

crazy; I'm trying to garner responses and reactions from players, and I'm trying to get people to justify their actions and opinions.

Based on my points about twisting and such, I feel you're fishing for certain types of reactions that benefit you, not honest reactions.

What sort of reactions would benefit me that aren't honest reactions? Why would townies react in a non-honest way to my questions?

This doesn't look like scumhunting, it looks like witchhunting, in the Salem Witch Trials style.

You haven't convinced me that this is a justified view, in the slightest.

Happy with my vote on Guardian right now.

I assume you're serious now, as there is no smiley face?

Some of [Guardian']s questions could almost be interpreted as defending [VH and Near], in fact. (Why is Vamp more vote worthy than Phox, and similar.)

The color blue could also be seen as orange if you're wearing funny glasses.

Have you considered the possibility that I'm trying to get reactions out of suspicious people that I

don't

see anyone else focusing on?

[Guardian]

Phox, I found Near suspicious because he first posted after being prodded: almost immediately after Yos2 called him out for lurking, he OMGUS'd Yos. His entrance was completely unhelpful, and he hasn't been very helpful since.

I wanted Joudas to back up what he asserted. People having logical consistency is indicative of their being town. I wanted to see if he does.

Phox, what do you have to say about my case against you?

I just re-read; I find many people suspicious. Near, Phox, Pyro, VH, Mac, all have an elevated chance of being scum, in my opinion, roughly in that order. Accordingly:

unvote, vote: Near

Mac and Pyro are the only ones that hasn't been explained:

Mac: I don't see any reasonable justification from him for me being suspicious of me. He sees obscure play, points "ooh, bad!", and is attempting to back it up with reasons... but I'm really not buying any of it.

Pyro: I'm suspicious of him because his play has largely been "me too" -- e.g. he's doing a lot of agreeing and not much original thought.

[Guardian]

Hm. Reading over this page, I see I missed a sentence of Phox's. So if he has anything additional to say I'd welcome it, but he has responded about my case on him.

[Guardian]

Would it have been more worthy of bandwagoning if I wrote a full paragraph?

Depends entirely on the content of the paragraph. In this case, most likely not, because I don't think there's enough of a case on Phox to fill a paragraph right now.

Interesting.

Elaborate. What do you find interesting about that statement?

Well, I think I could fill up a paragraph with a case on him, and basically did earlier.

Peculiar...

what is worth rallying a full bandwagon over?

(Italics mine)

This was the best concrete example I could find.

Me finding your logic peculiar is a vague insinuation of your scumminess? This is a reason to find me suspicious?

As I said, that was simply the example of it that stuck out the most to me.

Yes -- and me using the word 'peculiar' doesn't seem to be at all indicative of me being scum...

Your choice of the word peculiar there implies to me that you find my logic wrong somehow. Many of the questions you've asked come across that way to me. The fact that you seem to be doing this to a number of players is a reason to find you suspicious in my opinion, yes.

I don't understand why.

Positing this is true, why is this bad? Is being suspicious of everyone and trying to interpret everyone's actions in a scummy way indicative of me being scum?

You seem to be trying to force the interpretation that several players actions are scum. To me, that helps scum more than town, so I think this makes you more likely to be scum.

Most of my posts this far have been questions. How am I forcing an interpretation of anything?

I get the distraction point from the fact that you are barraging so many questions at everyone right now that it seems people are having a difficult time fitting their own scumhunting in around reacting to your questions. You are dominating the thread. The majority of posts I see are either you or people reacting to you. This theory debate you started doesn't seem to be progressing the game at all.

I disagree strongly with the assertion that all, or even the majority, of what I've been talking about is theory. I also disagree strongly that my 'dominating the game' is at all indicative of me having anti-town motives.

More twisting. I never asserted that the majority of what you were talking about was theory, simply that I didn't think the theory discussion was helpful. The majority comment refers to the way you ere dominating.

Oh, k.

I notice you seem to have stopped posting in this dominant/questioning style recently - why?

It has gotten some useful reactions, but I want to act on the evidence collected now, I don't see a reason to continue a style that many players are finding me suspicious for.

As for dominating being indicative of your motives, I think we both know you've said... other... things about that in the past. (Unfortunately I don't believe I can say more about this point without referencing an ongoing game, but Guardian should know what I'm talking about.)

I know what game you're talking about, but... I'd have to re-read to know exactly what you're talking about. I think you're equivocating about what the word 'dominating' means though.

What sort of reactions would benefit me that aren't honest reactions? Why would townies react in a non-honest way to my questions?

If you're scum, obviously getting townies to react to your questions in a scummy fashion would benefit you, as it makes it easier to lynch townies. Many of the subtle insinuations I've seen from you give me the impression that you are trying to get townies to react in such a fashion. The fact that you haven't asked any questions of this type to a couple of suspicious players also leads me to this view.

Again, why would townies react in a scummy way to my questions? How would my style be effective at getting townies to slip up?

I'd have to dig up one of my old E&M textbooks to be sure, but I think based on the composition of light necessary ot produce the color orange, this actually isn't the case. Admitting that I'm right?

This isn't the point. But okay, you might be right?

Now that you've suggested it, yes. I consider it more likely that you're trying to push weak cases against people that aren't your scumbuddies.

Which of the people I'm asking questions of and pushing cases on wouln't be my scumbuddies? Would Near count as one of these people?

Basically, I'm getting a gut feeling from Guardian that he's trying to twist and distort town statements into scummy reactions. His posts just seem a little bit off to me. I've been able to pull up a few specific examples supporting my feeling, which I think makes pursuing it legitimate.

You have brought up examples, pointed to them, and said 'i get bad feeling here' You still haven't articulated in any persuasive sense why you are getting those bad feelings. You might want to chalk them up to what they are -- bad feelings.

He seems to be trying to cast suspicion everywhere, not just on legitimately suspicious people.

I'm trying to shine the light of truth upon every player. Why is this bad?

Guardian, your last post seems to imply that you're happy with Phox's response to you. Is this correct?

Well, he basically admits that I have legitimate reason to find him suspicious.

Are you dropping your case on him for now? Why or why not?

I don't see why. He might overcome my suspicion of him. Others might be more suspicious. But dropping it as irrelevant -- no. And I really don't see why his post would make me do that, since he himself admits that he did have WIFOM, or that it could be reasonably interpreted that way at least.

I'd also like to see some elaboration of your suspicions about Pyro. I agree that he's been doing a bit of agreeing with people this game, but I'm also seeing original content from him when he does.

0 - no real content
1 - nrc
2 - 2 mild questions
3 - mild suspicion of sensfan
4 - apologizes to me, and votes me for something others are finding me suspicious of.
5 - asks me questions about case. builds momentum agreeing with people about near. agrees with mac about vh.
6 - quotes the part of phox's post i've been referencing all along.
7 - agrees with mac, but more suspicious of me and near.
8 - agrees he's been "me too", pushes case a little on sensfan.

he seems to be going with what's popular, with the only original thing he's contributing being mild prod-ing/suspicion of sensfan. (shrug). Doesn't seem terribly pro-active to me.

[Guardian]

Now, I don't necessarily think this is indicative of scum - as I stated before, I'm not particularly inclined to think you are scum at the moment - but I certainly haven't ruled out the possibility.

That's perfectly reasonable. I'm not saying I should be thought of as ultra-townie right now or anything, but Mac is trying to say that my style is indicative of me being scum... which I find unjustified.

[Guardian]

Near's recent post strikes me as quite town-like. I'll go so far as to say I think he probably was a townie who didn't want to miss out on the random stage, and that he shouldn't be the play for today, at least not because of his first post.

Before you ask: yes, I realize that this is a significant change from my prior position.

Expect a re-read from me within a few days.

Unvote

[Guardian]

VH, Phox, Pyro, Mac, Near, everyone else.

is where I'm at now. VH, lurking, logical inconsistencies, saying he was re-reading the disappearing.

vote: VH

[Guardian]

Guardian, why am I third on your scum list. My response was not acceptable? What was wrong with it? You didn't even comment on it, I thought you would have, but you didn't.

So, I don't think I am being too aggree-full, I just happen to have the same scum list

This second quote sums up your response for me; you're saying you don't think you have been just going with the flow... but the end result is that you have been.

Your response is nice and all, but the general trend of you going with the flow is there.

[Guardian]

Hmph. Now what? Another re-read, in the next few days...

[Guardian]

I re-read.

I see what Coron is seeing to a good extent. I am not sure if I see it as a genuine scum-hunting attempt; I think so, though.

unvote: Coron

Evilgorillaz hasn't done much scum hunting, I find that suspicious. Pyro I see what Coron is seeing, and find his general body of work suspicious. Joudas less so, I see Joudas's play as pretty reasonable. I'm not that interested in pursuing Near again, for the moment.

vote: Pyrdodwarf

. I'm following Coron and seeing where he takes me.

[Guardian]

I'm still seeing where you're taking me. Where are we going, Coron?

[Guardian]

Well, I was asking cuz it doesn't seem like we're going much of anywhere. What's our itinerary ?

[Guardian]

That sounds good, I like instant gratification more, but we could wait a little bit.

Yos's 200 feels vaguely like he might be purposefully trying to divert attention from the main target.

Oh, I'd been meaning to point out: look what page it is! If you don't start seriously considering lynches like page 3, all games go this long, and we're right on the road towards 15 or even 20 pages, something I *do not want*. So I hope we get a good lynch soon.

[Guardian]

Well, there goes trying to see what happens if Near is lulled into a false sense of security .

I believe we have acquired some data, however. Near, proceed in responding. Also: what do you think about Yos2's play so far?

[Guardian]

Until school's out (Early May), expect my dedication to mafiascum to suffer, perhaps greatly. Then I'll have little access at all for a week. Then I'll be back in full swing. I'm posting this notice in all games I'm playing; sorry if my activity suffers.

[Guardian]

Coron, what info have you gathered?

I think Pyro is a good lynch, that's what I'm getting.

[Guardian]

I'm unsure if Pyro is a better lynch than Near.

I'm troubled by Near's posting habits; I do find them suspicious.

However, while posting habits can often be a good contributing reason to lynch someone, it seems that that would be the

main

reason that we're lynching Near. There is the early game stuff too, but had Near been posting regularly since then, they wouldn't be playing nearly the factor they may be now.

Also, Near seems like an easy lynch, and easy lynches don't work out well, in general. This case may be an exception... maybe not.

I definitely want Near to respond and explain himself. If Near fails to explain himself, I'd likely be resigned to lynching him.

Near -- why are you posting in other games, but not here?

Near -- when you do that -- have different posting habits in different games -- unless you have a good explanation for it, it is very suspicious, especially in the games you are posting less in (here).

[Guardian]

Near, to clarify, Phox is your #1 target, but the evidence on him is so shaky you don't want to see him lynched?

[Guardian]

Ok, Near, then, what do you think about Pyro? You haven't really commented on Coron (and my) suspicion of him.

[Guardian]

Near, strong weak whatever, you have a week to convince people that there's someone out there more worthy of being lynched than you. If you don't try and do that, you *will* be lynched.

[Guardian]

I find it likely that Near's scum at this point. I'd vote but I don't like people claiming unless they are to be lynched in absence of a compelling claimg; claims are not a scum hunting tool.

[Guardian]

Guys I re-read...

And I found the scums!

unvote: PyroDwarf

Let's have a look at...

Dasquian's

play.

His main contributions have been:

Vote VH, maintain suspicion of Near. When VH is replaced by a good player, unvote VH and vote Near. Pressure Near, give impetus on Near to be lynched, etc.

Dasquian has (for the most part) not done anything but pressure these two players all day. He's attacked the (arguably) two weakest players in the game, and with deadline coming up (right?) he is keeping with his game plan, on the Large & Easy Near wagon, and isn't doing much of any creative scum hunting.

The most we've gotten is post 227, in which he attacks favorable targets, expresses mild suspicion of me after buddying earlier, and overall is a scummy scummy scumbag.

Post 234, where he asks if I prefer Near or Pyro, REEKS like he knows ONE of them is scum, and wants to catch me in a trap later when one of them turns up as scum.

Dasquian wants the easy, reasonable lynch, and doesn't want to comment on too many players and leave connections. He has only attacked the mainstream obvious targets, and is quite happy to sit on his main two targets all day, only casting peripheral suspicion on others.

Now, if you want to lynch scum today, follow my lead and vote him. Thanks.

vote: Dasquian

[Guardian]

Evil: most people have expressed interest, but that is about the sum total of Dasquian's contribution.

His attention to them and no others, and his willingness to carry that to a lynch, is what makes him suspicious.

Try voting him. It just feels so right.

[Guardian]

You're also straw manning me Joudas.

I never wanted more phox lynch, I just wanted to leave the implication that I did. I think that that's fairly obvious from my later postings.

I've almost never refused to answer direct questions in this game. Sometimes I am cryptic in my responses... but if whomever wanted me to answer a question doesn't follow up after a muddled response, whose fault is that?

You appear to be attacking me for playing the game. The link between me and VH is convoluted. Your attack on Coron is based on a convoluted connection to me.

I find your post unreasonable.

[Guardian]

never wanted more phox votes makes no sense re-reading.

that should say

"didn't want more phox votes at that time"

[Guardian]

Oh, and, cheap tricks ahoy. It's much easier to make your case look sexy if you play around with the php tags, isn't it

Guardian

?

That's actually the first time I tried it; I'll let you know how much it helped once we lynch you :D.

(more duckscum votes plz)

[Guardian]

Nah phox was a pretty crappy bandwagon to start the day off.

Dasquian I want lynched.

[Guardian]

Maybe I vary my playing style. Maybe I'm ADD this game.

None of that doesn't change that my post 259 is accurate and that Dasquian is scum.

[Guardian]

I hate mafia, because I have to convince people of stuff I'm pretty sure about. Why can't you just trust my motives and judgment?

My case on phox was weak. I have no idea how you can possibly say that my holistic analysis of Dasquian's play throughout the game is anywhere near being on the same level as my case on Phox.

My case on Phox was about one minor inconsistency, which he admitted to later, and then I remained suspicious of him for, but shoot, that wasn't something to lynch him over, at least not on its own.

My case on Dasquian is an analysis of all his posts, his play, and suspects throughout the game, concluding that he hasn't been interested in creative scum hunting and instead has focused on two of the weakest, newest players in the game, VH and Near.

It seems that in general your posts are making less and less sense, and your arguments don't have very much substance.

That's such a load of whooey. Dasquian's play this game is not consistent with pro-town motivations. He hasn't tried to scum hunt hard targets, or look into players who don't seem that suspicious to see what their motives might be. He's only focused on the easy, gimme, low-lying fruit suspicions -- suspicions that many (first me, then Coron, then others) have agreed are "easy" lynches.

But Librarian nailed it pretty much on the nose. Guardian, your arguments are mostly transparent

What?? Transparent = easy to see the reasoning behind = easy to evaluate = easy to see are correct = you should be voting Dasquian. If my arguments were transparent to you, we wouldn't be having this disagreement. What did you mean when you said transparent?

I still don't like Guardian's methods this game. He's moving back up my scum list somewhat.

Why? Is focusing on players that have gone entirely unnoticed a bad thing? Is focusing on players that have gone entirely unnoticed -- and are likely scum -- a bad thing? Justify your statement. Why are my methods indicative of a pro-scum alignment?

[Guardian]

285 is a very reasonable post. I shall retreat to the bat-cave and consider if changing my stance is appropriate.

In the meanwhile, can you summarize, or link me to an appropriate summary, of all the reasons you find Near suspicious? Coron?

[Guardian]

In the meanwhile, can you summarize, or link me to an appropriate summary, of all the reasons you find Near suspicious? Coron?

Is this two questions directed at me

,

one question directed at me and Coron, or one question directed at Coron

? 263 has my most recent summary though.

263 seems to have a good summary on why Near is suspicious. Can you link to or restate your current stance on Coron and why you have that stance? If you no longer find him suspicious, can you explain why you found VH suspicious and at what point your suspicions changed?

[Guardian]

Why can't you just trust my motives and judgment? :(

Because we're playing Mafia.

You'd be surprised at how many games I'd finished and realized that we'd have won had the town just trusted me implicitly.

You'd also be surprised at the shockingly few times that doing so would have switched a town-win to a town loss; I think I've lost exactly two games as scum in which I was lynched without direct role-related information saying I should be (I've been NK'd, copped, lover'd, you name it, and lost as scum... but when I'm lynched as scum statistically speaking, I'm about as likely to win as when I'm not). I've also have been off in my suspicions when I was pro-town a shockingly low percentage of the time.

Moving on...

I still don't like Guardian's methods this game. He's moving back up my scum list somewhat.

Why? Is focusing on players that have gone entirely unnoticed a bad thing? Is focusing on players that have gone entirely unnoticed -- and are likely scum -- a bad thing? Justify your statement. Why are my methods indicative of a pro-scum alignment?

I'm tired of playing your everyone-has-to-justify-everything-to-me game.

You're not playing the right game. I'm playing the everyone-has-to-justify-everything-to-me-and the-rest-of-the-town game, and I think that's a great game to play in mafia, leads to successful lynches, and town wins.

Justify why your vote-hopping

Vote hoping is a great way to keep players on their toes, draw out reactions, and force scum to comment on a wide range of targets, hopefully including their scum buddies -- something that, as Coron rightly pointed out, can be very difficult for scum to do without leaving a trail connecting them with their partner.

immediately following the replacement of a player you agreed was scummy

I'm not sure how this could be construed as unhelpful. Unorthodox, sure. But I'm confused as to how to justify it, because it is difficult to wrap my mind around assuming the activity to be suspicious.

I followed Coron to see what would happen; I think I made that abundantly clear. I wanted to see both how he reacted to my zealous support of him, and thought that adding some more oomph to his suspicion of Pyro might be helpful.

holier-than-thou attitude

If people feel that they have to justify themselves to me, that's a step in the right direction towards them feeling they have to justify their views, opinions, and actions to everyone. People -- importantly the scum -- explaining their motives, and then the town analyzing those motives and finding any anti-town motives or inconsistencies is the crux of mafia.

If getting on a pulpit aids this endeavor (and I'm experimenting in this game to see if it does -- trending yes, but I'll reevaluate at the end), then I'm all for being holier-than-you.

I'm certainly holier than those evil scums ;)!

[Guardian]

Hmm, at first when I read Guardian's post where he says:

I hate mafia, because I have to convince people of stuff I'm pretty sure about. Why can't you just trust my motives and judgment? "

I was like wow, guardian must be cop and he checked out dasquian N0.

Had I cop'd dasquian, I'd have gotten a guilty result? Thanks for that tip :D.

But then, this was a day start game. My first reaction was, wtf is guardian talking about. I actually started quoting Guardian's original post regarding his suspicion of Dasquian with an intent to argue why his post was scummy. But upon a re-read, it doesn't look that scummy. It actually sounds pretty reasonable.

Sweet, being suspicious of Dasquian is reasonable! Cuz he's your scumbuddy right?

Guardian, your main argument for suspecting Dasquian seems to be that he's been targeting weak preys all day. His initial suspicion of VH, you said, came to an end because he was replaced by a "good player". And now he's focusing on me.

Well put.

But then, aren't most people who are voting for me in the same category as Dasquian? What differentiates Dasquian from, say Macavenger? I think Macavenger is the main person who's been behind my wagon because I am not contributing much to this game.

Yeah but, Macdaddy has the significant difference that he's also been focusing on more difficult to read targets, like me for example. And then there's the fact that Mac's probably town, so, ya know, there goes that.

Post 234, where he asks if I prefer Near or Pyro, REEKS like he knows ONE of them is scum, and wants to catch me in a trap later when one of them turns up as scum.

I think you are reading too much into this. But if this was true, then he probably hoped that you say you prefer Pyro lynch over me, for reason obvious to me (that is, if Dasquian is indeed scum).

Hm so uh, you are denying that, if Dasquian is scum you are his scum partner? Remember, if you lie in answering this question we'll have to lynch you.

Also, what do you think about post 246 where Dasquian explains reasons for voting me.

I find it similar to 263 and a not unreasonable basis for finding you suspicious.

Current readouts give a projection of 68.3% likelihood that Near is being bus'd by Dasquian, and Near just tried to get me to be suspicious of Macavager instead of Dasquian and himself, hoping I'd be likely to OMGUS Macavager.

Pro-tip: If you're an investigative role, target Yosarian2 night 1. He's such a tricky bastard. If this causes the scum to kill him, I would not be that displeased. He's a great scum hunter but, his ability to look pro-town when he's a scumbag are of a caliber I've seen in only a few players.

[Guardian]

I was like wow, guardian must be cop and he checked out dasquian N0.

Had I cop'd dasquian, I'd have gotten a guilty result? Thanks for that tip :D.

So you seem to think I made a slip here. Don't you think my saying this was too deliberate to be a slip?

Librarian responded to this already. WIFOM much?

Your reasoning for suspecting Dasquian was reasonable.

Sweet, being suspicious of Dasquian is reasonable! Cuz he's your scumbuddy right?

But then, aren't most people who are voting for me in the same category as Dasquian? What differentiates Dasquian from, say Macavenger? I think Macavenger is the main person who's been behind my wagon because I am not contributing much to this game.

Yeah but, Macdaddy has the significant difference that he's also been focusing on more

difficult to read targets, like me for example

. And then there's the fact that Mac's probably town, so, ya know, there goes that.

I thought the bolded part of your post makes you scummy. Can you guess why I thought so?

Because you think I'm an easy target? I think the response you wanted was "because I am calling myself a difficult to read target." But I don't see anything suspicious about that in and of itself. The only thing that possibly could make me suspicious is if I am in fact a piss-easy to read target, and am trying to lie about how easy to suspect I am. I'd love for you to comment further about this.

Also, what do you mean "And then there's the fact that Mac's probably town"?

I think it is fairly obvious what I mean. I am of the mindset that Macavenger is probably town.

Post 234, where he asks if I prefer Near or Pyro, REEKS like he knows ONE of them is scum, and wants to catch me in a trap later when one of them turns up as scum.

I think you are reading too much into this. But if this was true, then he probably hoped that you say you prefer Pyro lynch over me, for reason obvious to me (that is, if Dasquian is indeed scum).

Hm so uh, you are denying that, if Dasquian is scum you are his scum partner? Remember, if you lie in answering this question we'll have to lynch you.

I'm simply denying that I am a scum, which goes without saying. What did you mean by "if you lie in answering this question we'll have to lynch you"? What are you saying! Did you think, if I were a scum, I would fall for this trap?

I think your response to the question might have been informative. Not sure it was.

Anyway, even if I were a scum and Dasquian was my scum partner, I might even say Dasquian was my partner to make it look like he's not. This is wifom and won't provide any information even if I were to turn scum when lynched.

While I can understand the reasoning behind your post where you explain your suspicion for Dasquin, I do not agree with the extent you seem to think Dasquin is scummy.

Okay, you are milking the Dasquian connection a *BIT* too much for my liking.

You need to be focused on your own defense right now, and trying to convince us who is more likely to be scum than you. You're almost at the point of no return from my perspective; I'd love it if your next post was a case on someone else, saying why they are a compelling lynch target as opposed to you.

[Guardian]

So you're going to vote Near then, right? Given you think that there's a 68.3% chance I'm bussing him, it follows that you think we're both scum. Near has the bigger bandwagon.

I think so, Mr. Duck.

I want to think it over and be 99% resolved to it; getting claims and then not lynching in mafia is usually really poor.

[Guardian]

Double standards much?

Yes.

[Guardian]

Hm. I read it that Dasquian is desperately trying to cut Near off before he makes things even harder for Dasquian, but Joudas's reasoning is viable as well.

Either way, I still feel strongly that Dasquian is scum. Near is approaching that level for me, though, and I think his lynch would be incredibly informative.

[Guardian]

Nice question Yosarian2.

[Guardian]

Near, I need you to give me a name: who is the most suspicious player, and why?

ps: I think it is cute how Dasquian just tried to draw a line between me and Near.

[Guardian]

ps: I think it is cute how Dasquian just tried to draw a line between me and Near.

Nonchalant dismissal noted.

Curt response to nonchalant dismissal noted.

[Guardian]

Okay, I'm at the point where I'd hammah Near.

[Guardian]

mbf, that's such a bad plan. uncharacteristic of you.

what led you to believe in this folly?

[Guardian]

Your foul attack on the duck, mostly.

I see what you did there.

Why am I more likely to be scum because of my attack on our yellow feathered friend?

[Guardian]

You need to explain better than that and in more detail for me to understand.

Do you literally mean I am suspicious because I attacked a good player? If not, what do you mean?

[Guardian]

I mean that you are suspicious for attacking him for insufficient reasons and for reasons

Justify this in detail; I don't see this as at all being true.

that can apply to multiple players.

They key here is in the details. Sure, some players have behavioral patterns that could be construed as similar, but I think his is definitely among the most exemplary of what I'm trying to attack him for. Again, feel free to build detailed examples to the contrary.

Also for your indifference between killing duck and nair.

Hold the fort, let's be clear: First I wanted to lynch Dasquian much more than Near. Then I was persuaded that maybe Dasquian could be town, or that if he was scum, it would make sense for him to be busing Near. Then I decided that Near and Dasquian had about equal probability of being scum, and that Near would be a much more informative lynch (not for ducky, but for other players). That's where I stand now.

Regardless of Near's alignment, I'll still find Dasquian suspicious. However, Dasquian's arguments against Near do have some merit, and a Near lynch has the advantage I mentioned.

None of that means I'm indifferent about who's lynched.

[Guardian]

So, you didn't want him lynched, but you wanted to seem like you wanted him lynched? sorry for the short post, ill be back after work.

Yes. Newbie scum often cook well under pressure.

[Guardian]

Where'd I saw he fell off my radar?

There is more than one player who would be a good day 1 lynch in this game.

[Guardian]

Yeah, he would certainly not be a bad lynch. Evil wouldn't be bad too, I think I've mentioned this (right?). Near's had a lot of focus though, so that's good for reading tomorrow, and I'm very serious about long days being horrible for town.

[Guardian]

Yeah, Wizard, you want to trade about 3 rules for a seer and cult.

Otherwise your rule advantage will become not that useful, and you won't be able to accrue the cards needed to win.

[Guardian]

First, you never know, I'm usually right, and people have just followed me a few times before. I feel the players in this game are really good and that was unlikely, but hey, why not try.

In addition to that, reactions are what mafia's all about, and now we have a wealth of reactions about Dasquian.

I wasn't nearly sold on Near at that point, and no one was buying into Pyrodwarf. One shouldn't be ready to end the day until you feel a good candidate is being lynched, so I was still searching at that point for one I agreed with and the town could accept.

btw: ROFL @ Dasquian's post 'Sorry Guardian, I am not really a duck. Bad times.' I keep cracking up re-reading that. Remind me to nominate him for funniest scummy post-game.

[Guardian]

so feel free to inform me of any mistakes I may make

DBE, voting for your scum buddy so quickly was a poor choice. You should probably have tried to get another target with a few votes on them, like me, lynched instead.

Oh, and welcome .

[Guardian]

Macavenger, I was trying to give DBE some advice, don't confuse her. I really think busing there was a poor tactic.

I still want to call you Mav btw .

[Guardian]

hm. evil may be town. post 377 has one of my favorite newbie town tells.

[Guardian]

hm. evil may be town. post 377 has one of my favorite newbie town tells.

I hope this wasn't just for my benefit regarding you know what. :P The thought did cross my mind, and while 377 itself has nothing bad in it, I'm still pretty suspicious of the rest of his posting prior to that.

Mac's post bothers me

greatly

. Why? He asks if I am applying my newbie town tell (that town newbies often use the faulty logic that attacking replacements is "unfair") for consistency's sake to appear like I use it as town always, in this game and the other; he may or may not know I'm town in the other game, but for me to be doing it for consistency's sake, it implies strongly that Mac knows I am town in this game.

For it to look good and consistent as comparing this game to the other, that would mean that there'd have to be little possibility of me being scum here. Granted, I'm not scum here, but how does *Mac* know this, as to compare my play to another game?

Mac, what do you have to say for yourself?

[Guardian]

unvote Dasquian vote: Macavenger

I'm not sure what Mac can say for himself to explain.

[Guardian]

This game is next on my re-read list.

[Guardian]

unvote, vote DarlaBlueEyes

Pressure cat is pressuring.

[Guardian]

Alright, well obviously to protect myself, I am going to

vote:Near

Self preservation first!

Is just so blatant...

Upon re-read, I'm really not sold on lynching Near.

I'd prefer Macavenger or Dasquian.

DBE is a close but significantly behind third preference.

unvote vote: Macavenger

DBE, you will probably get my vote at the end of the day if it is between you and Near.

So don't think I'm letting off .

[Guardian]

He's been of one mind pushing the Near lynch, in great part due to Near's "lurking", which I find more fair to classify as "inactivity".

His other main target of suspicion has been me. He attacked me, voted me, unvoted but still said I was suspicious -- up until the post where I said that he was probably town.

Then, he made 323, right after I said he was probably town, and said

I'm also totally confused by post 301. Despite seeing several things in it I shouldn't like (buddying with me, radical change of posting style, conclusion that duck = scum that I'm not sold on), I get hit with this overwhelming townvibe when I read it. Very confusing.

I'm reasonable, and that change of heart could be true and coincidental.

However, when I recently say I'm suspicious of him for his possibly knowing for a fact that I'm town in this game, he changes his stance in 392, now saying he's somewhat suspicious of me again.

So when I find him townlike... I'm townlike, giving an overwhelming town vibe... when I make a case against him... I'm not?

That seems to be the general pattern from my POV.

Then, there's the logical slip I pointed out, that seems highly indicative to me that he knows I'm town in this game, because he wondered if I was pointing out something as a newbie town tell "for his benefit" -- 'in order to look like I consistently do this as pro town' -- 'so I look pro-town in the other game'.

His trend of buddying with me/finding me suspicious when I find him, his logical slip that indicates to me he knows I am town in this game, and his one-minded attack of Near, who's play (at least read in isolation, thus ignoring timing) seems pretty reasonable, make me question his motives.

[Guardian]

Coron, in 426, you didn't mention me or Macavenger, while ranking all the other players. Why?

[Guardian]

Yah I missed that line.

Guardian as a potential SK?

wtf?.. explain? SK tells???

[Guardian]

no. I've never understood comments like "X could be an SK" and I want to hear why now, since half the time they seem like bullshit offhand things said by scum.

I've personally never ecountered a reliable "SK tell" as opposed to "scum tell" so I'd love to hear your justification for thinking I might be an SK, otherwise I'm going to assume that you fall into the half that's a BS offhand scum comment.

[Guardian]

no. I've never understood comments like "X could be an SK" and I want to hear why now, since half the time they seem like bullshit offhand things said by scum.

I've personally never ecountered a reliable "SK tell" as opposed to "scum tell" so I'd love to hear your justification for thinking I might be an SK, otherwise I'm going to assume that you fall into the half that's a BS offhand scum comment.

Jeep seems to think there are tells for things other than just scum/not scum:
http://www.mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php ... mmon_Tells
he even has a section for finding the SK, however it is unfinished.

First off, you seem to be appealing to authority here; just because jeep reuptedly may have thought something, doesn't make it so.

Second off, the article you are referencing had an expected completion date of mid-2004, and is still completely unwritten -- the thing says 50%, but when you click on the link it only says "article coming soon". Maybe in trying to articulate these "SK tells" jeep had a harder time than he thought he would.

Thirdly, and most damning, I've asked why I should believe YOU'VE seen an SK tell from ME in THIS GAME. You've provided a possible reason for me to believe that SK tells exist, at all, and done nothing to assert that it's even plausible I've committed an "SK tell" in this game.

I never said I'm sure they don't exist. I have said that if you don't say what "SK tell" I've comitted, and soon, I'm going to think that you, Coron, are just making it up that I've comitted some SK tell.

[Guardian]

Coron, while you're at it (I don't think I was reading very clearly last night, as we saw..)

if you could also explain what "SK tells" you found on the two other players you accused of having elevated chances of being and SK, that'd be great.

[Guardian]

vote: coron

this vote will be moved if coron explains adequately.

if not, based on what I've been saying, and what PD pointed out, if Coron doesn't explain adequately I think we have our SK, or at least some flavor of scum.

[Guardian]

I don't use ANY set group of "tells" a lot of my accusisations are based on tendencies, and not one specific thing I see.

I'm having a hard time figuring it out, do you believe that sks actually act exactly the same as mafia, or are you just doubting my ability to figure out how they would act differently?

Saying that an SK and a mafia member act exactly the same is ridiculous, the mafia member has to think about his partners, where an sk does not, the sk then has a lot more freedom to move his vote around, where a mafia member might feel a bit restricted. Just as one of the things I look at.

In order to find role X I think about how I would want to act if I were role X, I also think about how I've seen the role act in the past(not specifically and games, just an abstraction).

SKs have amazingly a lot in common with mafia: Survival is critical, less care for who is lynched, want to make friends, etc.. Until someone shows up mafia, and we can solidly speculate on connections (and then we see someone scummy but with no connections -- SK), I'm perplexed as to how you can "tell the difference" between SK and scum. Day 1, with no partner connections, saying you can see 3 good SK candidates boggles my mind.

I see no reason it would be detrimental to the town to explain reasoning that me and the 2 others 'could be SKs', and you continue to evade doing so.

[Guardian]

"Since I feel slightly pressured, I'll claim."

*HeadDesk*

....

[Guardian]

I have the inexplicable urge to hammer Near.

odd.

[Guardian]

Why do I want to vote Near so much?

I think I am going to hammer Near.

[Guardian]

Let's lynch Coron.

Not Near.

Coron may well be scum with Near.

But the prior 10 posts or so form Coron just don't make sense from Coron town.

Coron, your claim was really bad if it had the purposes you purport, since your claim makes me want to focus on you much more not less, and makes me think you are scum more, not less.

More votes for Coron would be great.

[Guardian]

Also, he's danced around it and talked in generalities, but he's never pointed to specific in this game reasons why in this game me and the other 2 people he fingered as SK are likely to be SKs.

You've said I could not be scum with people -- I can think of a few people it would be totally plausible to say I'm tied to or whatnot. You smell of rotten fish.

[Guardian]

Coron, you think we should lynch Joudas or DBE.

I am not that off from you on DBE.

I think lynching Mac would be even better.

But a few pages ago I was so sold on Near. I then re-read, and wasn't. But now, Near seems like a very appealing lynch again. Hmpuh.

[Guardian]

vote: DBE

Coron can be dealt with tomorrow.

Near and DBE could be scum partners.

I'd hammer Mac, as well.

[Guardian]

Guardian, just.... stop. Everytime you post you look scummy. I don't see what "SK tells" Coron sees from you, but it could be the fact that you don't seems to care who dies.

Why do I look scummy? Do I look scummy, or *am* I scummy? You give me advice like you're advising a town player playing badly.

Since when do I not care who dies? I have minimal preference as to who dies among my top 3/4 suspects. Did you confuse the two concepts?

Hey Vegeta, What's up?

[Guardian]

vote: Near

non-power > claimed power.

Near's inactivity near deadline & claim phraseology, and "need for a case on someone" all hit me wrong.

If there is a doc...
Think about how to play appropriately with two claimed power roles.

Coron, if you are really a tracker...
Thinka bout how to play appropriately here, with a claimed non-you power role.

[Guardian]

I disagree with Coron.

[Guardian]

Side note: Be Wary of Yosarian2. He's done almost nothing but pressure lurkers. Yeah yeah, I know, Nuke all Lurkers -- but that's

it

?

I feel like confining your scum hunting to lurker pressuring day 1 is a really easy way out, bad idea, less than what I'd expect from Yosarian2 town, etc.

Random speculation to think about: Yos2-Coron (From Yos's super quick unvote)?

[Guardian]

Yos2, what other non lurker suspects have you attacked?

[Guardian]

vote: Dasquian

to no avail.

Near seems hugely like a mislynch now. I find her saying ' I could have claimed doctor to at least get the real doctor to counter claim. I am a vanilla townie'

so sincere.

I get these super strong vibes around lynches, and when they happen before the lynch, I act on them.

Yeah, I want a last minute bandwagon.

Not on DBE, or Near.

Mac, Duck, both reasonable choices.

[Guardian]

We have 4:30 lynch.

Why must Near be lynched?

[Guardian]

wtf. you fos me for starting a speedwagon, and then attempt to start one?

pot, kettle, black???

[Guardian]

realizing the hypocrisy isn't enough.

you obviously claim to be town, and are trying to start a speed wagon in your view in the best interests of the town.

then you're like, oh, guardian is doing the exact same thing I think is in the best interests of the town.

but eh he is scummy.

[Guardian]

Guardian,

I disagree with you on everything so far this game

. Coron is scummy, I don't want to lynch Near, I don't think Dasq is suspicious, and I don't want to lynch DBE now that she's claimed a power role, but there's only 8 hours until the deadline.

I agree with you on 3/4 of the above (all but Duck)... Your attacks on me this game have been irrational and ill founded...

Coron's play has just stunk.

I'd support lynching him over Near if it came to that.

However, I believe we have

3.5 hours

, not 10 still, as people are saying.

So anything that happens's gotta happen fast. I'll be on for about an hour, and will make my final vote then.

According to the mod's rules, 4 votes = lynch at dealdine, so as long as someone is >= than that, they die.

[Guardian]

I'll be back in 40 minutes to reskim and rethink and decide.

Mac, I'd prefer Duck to Coron. But I'd consider a Coron lynch.

I'm sure Near would prefer Coron to near.

so...

[Guardian]

vote: Coron

out of anti-preference for near lynch, and coron's scumy claim.

dont let near die mac, if possible. im counting in u.

see you tomorrow dudes, unless the scumz kill me (plz?)

(:

[Guardian]

seriously ne1 who checks, dont let near die, let coron.

nite.

[Guardian]

last bit:

near im trusting u to prevent a no lynch. dont log off if you are leaving the game in a state where no one else is here and no lynch cud happen.

bye 4 real.

[Guardian]

mac*

damn im tired. nite

[Guardian]

<-insomniac

I find 1 and 2 most likely also. 2 maybe more likely than 1. HM.

I dont believe Coron, and you shouldnt either near.

know why? his claim was bullshit. mbf pointed this out. and coron has been playing for years. he knows enough to know that tracker isnt a likely role -- AND THATS EXACTLY WHY ITS GREAT FOR SCUM TO CLAIM.

in additon, all the stuff mbf said about coron being able to come up with 1 of like 5 different kind of results that are useless, without being directly suspect for the results at all.

near, vote coron.

[Guardian]

if near isnt gonna vote coron, then im prolly gonna switch my vote back to near, unless im asleep.

near, you know you are town. you can AT BEST spculate that coron is town.

letting a confirmed townie die so a maybe townie power role can live may seem like good idea, but ISNT.

[Guardian]

i say 'near you know you are town'

cuz if he's scum, my logic dont matter to him. but feel free to say that 'o shit guardian knows near is town'..

[Guardian]

Guardian go to bed you crazy freak, it's got to be 2am where you are. :P Staying up that late in college isn't any good, I should know; I did it way too much.

but but but we gotta lynch the scumz....

[Guardian]

near, voting coron will gain you great benefit.

im shutting off

[Guardian]

it can, likeliness depends.

but even assuming it absolutely could not:

would you want a cop to come out day 1 in response to coron's claim?

the manner he claimed was so supsiocus.

getting a cop to come out would be exactly what he wants if he is scum.

[Guardian]

coron is by far better die coron die scum scuk die

claim early to draw doc protect and get counter claims that he can weasel out of definitely scum die suck die lynch kill coron!!

this is the way of truth.

[Guardian]

near,mac could be busing. for example, if mac is scum with coron, if you vote coron, mac might just be like 'well nah, i prefer near to coron'.

voting who you find most suspicious & has a chance to be lynched if mac is town is the best play here.

if mac isnt town, and you vote someone, and he is like, oh, well, actually, ill lynch near, that gives us good info for tomorrow.

assume he is scum and choose between coron (good choice) or dbe (much worse choice imo) and run with it.

[Guardian]

too tired to be intelligible *assume he is town...

[Guardian]

near, coron is super likely lying. vote him.

::good decision::

follow the force.

lying scum = lynch = die = town profits.

[Guardian]

yeah, except that mac being around to be a decision make is pro-town, imo...

scum would lurk out your lynch, not try some ridiculous gambit to lynch a person they know will show up power and then theyll be lynched the next day.

scum NK power roles, not lynch them.

Near, mac is at least average; hes not super likely scum.

coron should die. please near. for the puppies

[Guardian]

lynch coron so I can sleep plz?

/*
* New Rule:
*
* Regardless of the end result, Guardian Wins the game.
*
* Claus
*/

[Guardian]

fluidity in one's opinions is beneficial in mafia for making correct choices, if not for "appearing pro-town".

i have conflicting views on you.

you being here seems like a town move -- scum would lurk out the lynch.

also your phraseology like 'why did i do this' seem like a town distressed at the burden of having to make a good choice

so vote coron?

[Guardian]

Coron is scum because the timing at which he claimed is something that would only be done by a scummy, scummy, scumbag.

Townies only claim when near deadline or at lynch -1 at threat of them being lynched.

Coron claimed a while before deadline, and because he "felt pressured by my attac" of one vote

town players who do this draw the doc to them, MAYBE, IF THERE IS ONE, and have given the scum more info. there is damn little reason for a townie to do what Coron did.

scum otoh would hope to deflect all attention from them, since "ooh they are a power role". also, draw doc protect is AWESOME for scum, free range to kill whomever. Also they might draw out another investigative role like you said. if a cop for instance claimed, coron could be like "OH, but COP + tracker = legit". ANd wouldnt even be lycnhed maybe, and get a counterclaimd cop.

Town ==> VERY LITTLE to gain from claiming.
Scum ==> SUPER LOTS to gain from claiming.
Premise: Coron is a rational agent
Conclusion: Coron, acting rationally, only would have claimed like he did as scum.

Voterz for coorn

[Guardian]

"I'm also somewhat put off by how hard Guardian is driving it right now. " I think Near lynch is just as bad as you do. I also think DBE lynch is bad.

I think Coron lynch is a LOT less bad, and am trying to explain why.

vote coron plz. where's the trust? lol

[Guardian]

I'm willing to stake the game on this:

There is no way coron is town and near is scum. If that comes to pass, lynch me, and then lynch me for real after the game ends.

IF coron is a tracker, IF, UNLIKELY, but IF IF IF, he MAY get useful results. HE very well could get jack shit, or be NK'd tonight, or roleblocked.

Near, the above sentence should convince you to vote him. IF you are town you KNOW u are town, and only GUESS he is. Since even if he is a tracker, his longevity and usefulness is limited, vote HIM.

Mac. For real. Coron needs 2 die.

[Guardian]

DBE saves the day. well played. well played dbe.

1 more vote pls.

[Guardian]

1 hour 11 minutes until deadline. if one more vote for coron, he probably dies. if near and mac vote him, he surely dies.

forget sleep, I have the chance to pull a scum lynch from the jaws of a town lynch in a mafia gma.e

I am staying here until you vote coron, or until 4 am baby....

[Guardian]

Coron, you think we should lynch Joudas or DBE.

he thought this

I am not that off from you on DBE.

at that time I thought this.

I think lynching Mac would be even better.

at that timne I thought this.

But a few pages ago I was so sold on Near. I then re-read, and wasn't. But now, Near seems like a very appealing lynch again. Hmpuh.

at that time I thought this.

Guardian, why did you say this AFTER coron claimed then?

that post reflected my thoughts at that time.

that post doesn't mention coron at all, btw; those thoughts arent indicative of me thinking coron was town.

[Guardian]

dbe, dont claim.

you're a funny new player; i am like 77.4% sure you are town from the way you claimed and promised to claim, while in a vacuum with a more experienced player I'd be like 36.1% sure only.

[Guardian]

Near, trust me, and vote Coron temporarily.

You can unvote him in 15 minutes, and find me really suspect if I don't explain why I had you do this.

[Guardian]

We just defined the questions to: Near lynch, Or Coron lynch.

To get a DBE lynch, yet another random player would have to come on, and then that player AND Mac would have to vote DBE, for him to be at 5 votes.

So Near, if oyu can, stick around for the 1 hour until deadline.

If you are still unconvinced, then vote yourself.

But I hope to convince you and assuage your concerns.

---

Had I not had you do this, Mac (especially hypothetical Mac-scum which I'm not worried about but you are) could have voted for DBE, and a random person would have had to come for us to be able to lynch Coron.

I want the debate to be Coron or Near, since I am very confident DBE is town power, and Near and DBE I get that vibe from you two as well.

So now it is basically down to Near or Coron. I find Coron highly superior.

[Guardian]

Oh.

Well, I find Near's going to sleep to be a null tell, and I'm happy his/her vote is on Coron.

Pretty sure Coron is scum.

I'll stay to win over the hearts and minds of Macavenger, though.

[Guardian]

No, don't full claim until Day 2 starts, assuming you live that long. Your weird claim timing is weird enough that you'll pretty much have to I think, but actually saying your ability at the moment can only advantage the scum.

Yes.

Don't neccesarily claim immediately when day 2 stars.

Looking at votes, I just realized DBE was previously voting Near. So Near, DBE, and Coron are all at 3.

I am less than entirely pleased with the revelation that a Near lynch is now basically impossible, even though I don't think it's what I wanted.

I'm pleased.

Near is still possible if you convince me and DBE to abandon this late charge but... very unlikely.

Mac I want you to be sold on COron lynch, not like, going to bed and thinking "damn".

so what can I do for you?

[Guardian]

EBWOP: Oh, well great. But if you have doubts/want me to explain more let me know.

[Guardian]

BTW: If Coron shows up scum, and there is somehow a doctor in this setup, and you don't, at the very least, highly, highly consider protecting me, there will be hell to pay.

Hell. To. Pay.

If Coron somehow shows up town, doctors stay the hell far away from me as possible .

[Guardian]

I have doubts. But I have doubts about any of the possible lynches we could have done tonight, and my only real doubts about Coron boil down to "lynching PRs iz bad k?" I have much larger doubts about the others.

Ah.

Yeah. Okay, I agree with you there.

[Guardian]

lol, I definitely do want to see that Mac. If Coron shows up scum after this, I'm going to be damn proud of all you guys, and myself a little ^_^.

dbe: Yeah I've definitely considered it. Thanks .

[Guardian]

I am just going to vote Coron. Like voting third-party in an American election,

my vote will do nothing

, but it is what I support.

rofl

[Guardian]

Coron scum implies Near, Mac, DBE town, to me, by the way, if I die.

Not a sure thing, but smething like Near = 70% town, Mac = 85% town, DBE = 90% town.

Guardian is 100% town obvobv.

MBF could easily have been making a protest vote that was really him distancing and now it helped lynch his scum buddy ^_^.

Oh man, suspense.

[Guardian]

I totally stand by this lynch.

Coron's claiming was not pro-town, and strongly so.

Near I'm 99% confident is not scum with Coron town, and DBE I'm fairly sure is town.

Those appeared to be the legitimate options, and lynching Coron was the best bet.

Coron would have remained suspicious for me in later days, whereas now I have around people I am much more confident are pro-town.

I definitely think we are doing well to lynch Coron here.

[Guardian]

Near, I'm:

Not claiming one way or another... we JUST went over... and lynched Coron... for claiming when he didn't need to.......

Regardless of my role, I'd argue I'm a great person to NK if Coron is scum, and thus a great person to protect.

[Guardian]

3) Near is town believing Coron's claim, but is wrong and Coron is scum.

this^.

Mac, DBE, I thought I had you and Near all convinced, apparently it was just you two.

But I truly believe Coron is the most superior option here...

my limiting my claim in any way is foolishness.



I probably should have just pretended not to be here and slept, but I will stand up and hold true to my convctions.

Coron is scum and should be lynched, regardless of my role, or Near's delusions otherwise.

[Guardian]

1) Near and Coron are both town, and probably Guardian is scum trying to get us to lynch a tracker.
3) Near is town believing Coron's claim, but is wrong and Coron is scum.
4) Near and Coron are both town, Guardian is a nincompoop.

I find 3 to be far and above the most probable.
4 has a small but not completely insignificant chance of being true.
1 is dumb.


Near.... I'm not confused.

[Guardian]

I'm confused.

I'm town; obviously me being town plays a part in my underlying assumptions.

Were I scum, my case for Coron being scum would not hold.

?

By the way: any last minute moves (literally in the last 3 minutes) will likely result in a no lynch or mislynch. If you want to do something, decide now.

What we should do is ride out the Coron lynch and lynch him.

[Guardian]

Pro-tip:

Best possible decisive action:

Do nothing, change nothing, lynch Coron.

For the Win!

[Guardian]

No. No. No.

Coron. See the light.

[Guardian]

8 am GMT comes up in 4 minutes. An attempt for all four of us to agree upon and move votes to someone else will most likely result in someone messing up and a no lynch occuring.

What's worse, Coron wouldn't be lynched then.

[Guardian]

We are past the critical threshold. Coron it is and must be, or no lynch will occur, someone for sure guarantee will mess up.

[Guardian]

Sorry, at this point, we have to ensure a lynch. Pressuring anyone else risks them claiming a power-role with too little time to get a turnaround. This means we basically have to stay the course and lynch Near.

Guardian is a good player, he

knows

this, and his attack on Yos2 was exactly the same one as the one I got from him earlier. He's on tomorrow's list, I can assure you.

Not sure why mike is going for the tracker, either.

:sees Dasquian's face:

[Guardian]

Whee, we just lynched Coron.

Macavenger, DBE..... Mikeburnfire.... congratulations. We did it. Whatever

it

is... o.O

[Guardian]

Even if I'm not online at that exact time, any votes made past the deadline will not be counted.

Coron got lynched by the bare minimum, from the rag-tag team of Guardian, mbf, Mac, and DBE.

It's pretty much official.

[Guardian]

Hold on... we lynched

Coron

? The tracker?

*headdesk*

:sees Dasquian's face:

[Guardian]

I'ma sleep now for reals, now that I know the streets are safe from the evil scum like Coron.

[Guardian]

Hey guys, good morning. So, I'm town.....

Um, no really.

Preemptively: I thought Coron was a lot scummier than Near for reasons outlined. I find it likely from Near's play that Near is indeed town, much more likely than I'd ever have thought Coron to be. Sorry for rush lynching the tracker, but I think it was the best option we had. His claiming was entirely out of order, his trying to get DBE to claim was bad, his play was in general, bad, and Near was a worse lynch, and so was DBE.



Secondly, how the hell did the scum decide to kill Evilgorillaz. I was pretty suspicious of him reading over the game last night.

Hm. Time to re-read again with Evil=town in mind...

[Guardian]

Yos:

Coron is scum because the timing at which he claimed is something that would only be done by a scummy, scummy, scumbag.

Townies only claim when near deadline or at lynch -1 at threat of them being lynched.

Coron claimed a while before deadline, and because he "felt pressured by my attac" of one vote

town players who do this draw the doc to them, MAYBE, IF THERE IS ONE, and have given the scum more info. there is damn little reason for a townie to do what Coron did.

scum otoh would hope to deflect all attention from them, since "ooh they are a power role". also, draw doc protect is AWESOME for scum, free range to kill whomever. Also they might draw out another investigative role like you said. if a cop for instance claimed, coron could be like "OH, but COP + tracker = legit". ANd wouldnt even be lycnhed maybe, and get a counterclaimd cop.

Town ==> VERY LITTLE to gain from claiming.
Scum ==> SUPER LOTS to gain from claiming.
Premise: Coron is a rational agent
Conclusion: Coron, acting rationally, only would have claimed like he did as scum.

Voterz for coorn

Dasquian -- since when does me convincing other people with logic I am convinced by become an indication of me being scum?

[Guardian]

...

What's that mean? Are you annoyed that you are responsible for a tracker lynch, and going to lash out at me now for my leading question, or for daring to suspect you for supporting the same lynch I did?

Going to respond to this?:

Guardian,

I disagree with you on everything so far this game

. Coron is scummy, I don't want to lynch Near, I don't think Dasq is suspicious, and I don't want to lynch DBE now that she's claimed a power role, but there's only 8 hours until the deadline.

I agree with you on 3/4 of the above (all but Duck)... Your attacks on me this game have been irrational and ill founded...

Coron's play has just stunk.

I'd support lynching him over Near if it came to that.

However, I believe we have

3.5 hours

, not 10 still, as people are saying.

So anything that happens's gotta happen fast. I'll be on for about an hour, and will make my final vote then.

According to the mod's rules, 4 votes = lynch at dealdine, so as long as someone is >= than that, they die.

[Guardian]

And convincing people to vote for whom I think is suspicious is suspicious because _____....?

Fill in the blank for me Dasquian.

[Guardian]

You're missing the point, and you know it.

that's not correct.

You are suspicious because you are attempting to drum up bandwagons more through enthusiasm and emotion than reason and logic, using the former to make up for deficits in the latter.

Why? Why is drumming up bandwagons I find to be good bandwagons suspicious? How does that possibly follow?

If I had unlimited day-vigs that ended the day, would I be 'suspicious' for using them every day to kill my best guess of scum -- knowing that my best guess may be wrong, but is not scum influenced?

If I could convince, in some manner, a majority of players every day, to lynch a player of my choice, would I be 'suspicious' for doing so to lynch my best guess of scum -- knowing that my best guess may be wrong, but is not scum influenced?

Dasquian, I hate to break it to you, but lynching players you find suspicious, and convincing others to do so, will never be a scum tell. At least not in my book.

You've failed to demonstrate in any manner that Coron wasn't my best guess of possible lynches as to which would be a scum lynch. It was, so I tried to, and succeeded in, making it happen.

[Guardian]

All you've said is that

if

you're pro-town, you have the best of motives. Which is just the original assumption.

You've failed to demonstrate in any manner that Coron wasn't my best guess of possible lynches as to which would be a scum lynch. It was, so I tried to, and succeeded in, making it happen.

[Guardian]

Claiming power role =/= town, 'specially under the circumstances he claimed, and considering his other actions.

Do you disagree that it is trivially obvious that Near is town, now?

Do you disagree that DBE was a worse lynch than Coron?

Do you disagree that those were the three realistic options?

blah blah blah blah "true majority". I wanted a "good lynch". I didn't think those "coincided" in "lynching Near".

[Guardian]

Darla, who did you target last night?

[Guardian]

Joudas, to me Coron being better than Near was obvious last night:

I'm willing to stake the game on this:

There is no way coron is town and near is scum. If that comes to pass, lynch me, and then lynch me for real after the game ends.

That sentiment and the logic behind it made Coron the preferred lynch.

[Guardian]

...

What's that mean? Are you annoyed that you are responsible for a tracker lynch, and going to lash out at me now for my leading question, or for daring to suspect you for supporting the same lynch I did?

Going to respond to this?:

Guardian,

I disagree with you on everything so far this game

. Coron is scummy, I don't want to lynch Near, I don't think Dasq is suspicious, and I don't want to lynch DBE now that she's claimed a power role, but there's only 8 hours until the deadline.

I agree with you on 3/4 of the above (all but Duck)... Your attacks on me this game have been irrational and ill founded...

Coron's play has just stunk.

I'd support lynching him over Near if it came to that.

However, I believe we have

3.5 hours

, not 10 still, as people are saying.

So anything that happens's gotta happen fast. I'll be on for about an hour, and will make my final vote then.

According to the mod's rules, 4 votes = lynch at dealdine, so as long as someone is >= than that, they die.

So I take it that you are just gonna lash out?

Interesting.

[Guardian]

I said "lynch me if coron is town and Near is scum"

Nice misquote/partial quote.

There's no flipping way Near is scum, now that Coron has been shown to be town.

Someone else said that there was a false dilemma of Coron/Near

No there wasn't!

Near and Coron were the players that had the votes on them.

There were 4 to lynch, and until DBE showed up, we had 3 votes.

It had to be Coron, OR Near.

Dasq, who had 0 votes, for example, wasn't possible until DBE showed up.

[Guardian]

On the contrary, I think that I was justified and aided the town in lynching Coron over Near.

Lynching suspicious players has the added benefit that they won't be around to be mislynched later on.

[Guardian]

see mikeburnfire about how trackers are most likely to get no useful results, and how useful tracker results are piss easy to fake or lie about.

[Guardian]

Why DBE?

[Guardian]

as said in my previous Post I didn't like Mac's statement about Dasq, and I think near makes a good point,

Vote Macavenger

Now you don't think Mac is scum?

What changed your mind?

To me it seems like you saw a wagon growing on me and decided that now was a good time to hop on.

Lynch -2 isn't "a little pressure" that "couldn't hurt".

[Guardian]

I find your bandwagoning highly suspicious when you admit 'you aren't that suspicous of me' just a few pages ago.

Yeah I'm paranoid about you. I'm very paranoid about you. Your actions and role don't make sense.

Explaining your shameless banwagoning by deflecting attention back to me doesn't cut it.

vote: DBE

[Guardian]

Ah, damn.

Well, I was going to have to claim soon anyways.

I am a cop.

I asked mod, and I am likely sane, whatever that means .

Tracker + Cop to me didn't make a whole lot of sense, and Coron's bullshit play made me decide to try and get him lynched.

Tracker + Cop + Watcher? No way. I was hoping to not have to claim today, but it was looking like I'd have to claim anyways, and I boxed myself in a corner by saying DBE's role didn't make sense . I asked who DBE targeted, hoping against hope he'd say Joudas, but that didn't happen. I can't be 100% sure that Claus didn't put 3 investigative roles in a mini, but I'm 99.99% sure.

Joudas came up innocent night 1.

I had no read on him, and he was the person Coron most suspected.

confirm vote: DBE

You are only making me more suspicious with the OMGUS vote, and extremely defensive stance.

My vote isn't at all OMGUS, and saying it is is a complete straw-man.

[Guardian]

I am afraid if you lynch me you are gonna have a repeat of Night 1. I am the watcher, I cant change the setup. therefore your .01% bit of doubt is correct. If you learned anything from night one, then why don't you investigate me tonight and see if I am telling the truth. If I am, we have a watcher, if I am not, then you can lynch me.

How about I not waste an investigation?

and if you ARE the cop, why are you going so hard after claimed pro-town roles?

I'm only going after other claimed investigative roles.

vs. the unclaimed ones who are also voting you?

wtf justify this.

You think there are what, 5 power roles in this game?

It doesn't make much sense.

vote stands.

You don't say.

[Guardian]

Yos2 you're online and posting what are your thoughts on this now before everyone else comments?

i gtg for long time later.

[Guardian]

I didn't claim 'just to attack dbe'

I claimed because I boxed myself into a corner saying her role didn't make sense, and I am at ly-2 anyways because of DBE's vote 'to pressure me some'.

[Guardian]

So if I attack you I'm scum?

[Guardian]

I would suggest that nobody else claim *anything* at all now unless they're at L-1. At the rate we're going, scum could soon be aware of everyone's role while town is still in the dark.

I was pondering this as I fell asleep last night.

With 1 power roll dead, and 2 claimed, I think we should mass claim.

If no other power roles claim, we can assume DBE and me are telling the truth.

If someone claims, then we know DBE or me are lying.

Scum may know all 3 town power rolls right now; I think it might be a great time to lock everyone in the game into a claim, so the scum can't claim on the last day "o shit I was doc".

Pie is right about mass claims, and I think one is appropriate now.

[Guardian]

The only bad thing about mass claim is if we had doc-tracker-cop.

But even then, doc dies tonight, I get another investigation, I die, DBE is scum, it isn't that bad.

If we DONT have a doc, mass claim = win, win, win, win.

[Guardian]

DBE should almost unquestionably target me tonight, so she can say who killed me if I die, imho.

I would have investigated DBE, because I thought there was a lot of investigative roles.

Can you expand upon this further? You think I should have investigated DBE last night?

[Guardian]

DBE should almost unquestionably target me tonight, so she can say who killed me if I die, imho.

then why don't you investigate me tonight and see if I am telling the truth.

How about I not waste an investigation?

Yeah except that DBE wouldn't be wasting an investigation.

Either I would not die, or DBE would find out who my killer was.

If I target DBE, and say so in advance, she very well could be killed, and I waste an investigation.

I like how mbf tried to quote stuff as an argument, and instead it was revealed that he hadn't thought it through at all.

[Guardian]

ABWOP: Guardian, you still haven't answered my question further up this page:

What was Joudas doing that caused you to not have a read on him, Guardian? My read was very strongly pro-town, so the result makes sense, but he really didn't seem hard to read to me.

There isn't a positive justification needed for this; I re-read and saw nothing that swayed me one way or the other strongly, and I noticed Coron was calling for Joudas's blood.

[Guardian]

I'm tempted to just leave DBE and Guardian alone entirely and lynch mbf today

FOS: mbf

Mass claim = bad?

[Guardian]

unvote vote: mbf

[Guardian]

yup.

[Guardian]

DBE should almost unquestionably target me tonight, so she can say who killed me if I die, imho.

then why don't you investigate me tonight and see if I am telling the truth.

How about I not waste an investigation?

Yeah except that DBE wouldn't be wasting an investigation.

Either I would not die, or DBE would find out who my killer was.

If I target DBE, and say so in advance, she very well could be killed, and I waste an investigation.

I like how mbf tried to quote stuff as an argument, and instead it was revealed that he hadn't thought it through at all.

respondse?

[Guardian]

You're claiming that he's MORE scummy BECAUSE people weren't voting for him, which seems silly.

Why? That's dumb. Power roles shouldn't claim unless they have results, mass claim, they legitimately fear NK, or they are about to be lynched.

Coron was 0 for 4.

[Guardian]

draw doc protection, cause other town power roles to react oddly...

[Guardian]

DBE should almost unquestionably target me tonight, so she can say who killed me if I die, imho.

I would have investigated DBE, because I thought there was a lot of investigative roles.

Can you expand upon this further? You think I should have investigated DBE last night?

?

[Guardian]

no i didnt

[Guardian]

unvote

FOS MBF

but I dont want a claim until I think this thru.

fair warning: MBF if you call this unvote suspicious in any way, I will knee jerk vote you again.

If you find it suspicious thats fine just keep it to yourself.

[Guardian]

Good posting^

Cuz generally no lynches suck, and seeing as how you are experienced etc. etc., MBF wassup?

Also, why werent u crazy suspicious of Dasquian if you were just paranoid of the experienced guys?

[Guardian]

you cant point us to places where you've espoused this view in the past?

dasq's join date is earlier than yours... you didn't 'consider him experienced'..?

but I am? o.O

[Guardian]

ya:

NO ONE HAMMER UNLESS U TELL MBF U ARE GOING TO AND THAT HE MUST CLAIM.

MBF: only claim if someone threatens to hammer, as above.



I dunno, the above post from mbf is like, super town vibes. His thoughts on me, DBE, Pyro, Joudas, all make sense.

I know this isn't at all fair to Yos2, and I probably won't gain support for it, but a mix of bad vibe + Yos2 is just so damn good at scum is making me just want to lynch Yos2.

shaft.ed and Yos2 are the only two players I've played with who I put the category: "no leads? lynch them".

I need to re-read and re-evaluate.

If I'm sane, then obv Joudas is cleared (or GF). If I'm not sane, I'll be a bit miffed. Imagine if I'm insane... . I only bring this up because if DBE is town... 3 investigative roles??

[Guardian]

fos: mac, yos

too lazy & busy to explain.

[Guardian]

vote: Macavenger

[Guardian]

"Guardian's vote looks opportunistic"

..........????

Explain.

[Guardian]

im goin after mac cuz I think he's suspicious.

i also disagree with yos's fos on mac it was really dumb.

[Guardian]

how is it 'opportunistic' for me to place a 2nd vote on a mac wagon when I have like you said found him suspicious for a while? how is it opportunistic when I fos'd him in my last post?

for that to be even possibly 'opportunistic' it would require mbf to be scum, me to be scum with him, and mac to be town. is that what you mean by 'opportunistic'??

[Guardian]

Last week of final exams; I'm not allowing myself to check the site from now until I am done with this semester's work. 1 week. I shouldn't be missed...

like i said id have to be scum with mbf for that to make any sense, and mac'd have to be town.

lots of assumptions....

anyways talk all you want, peace.

[Guardian]

I call shenanigans on post 919.

'sudden'? 'then disappear'?

wow im tempted to hammer u right now. whatever youll still be here in a week.

note how i just posted that in every single g ame im in
note how my vote wasnt sudden.

BTW: DBE, town, DBE should be watching me tonight. If I die, and DBE is all "oh, I didn't watch guardian." just lynch DBE, lying scum. It sure is directing the watcher -- watchers are intended to watch who will be NK'd -- "likely sane" cops are pretty good NK targets.

bye

[Guardian]

still busy, but im all for voting for duckscum. welcome albert and thanks for replacing.

albert just articulated my sense of smell better than I could.

dbe & dasq makes a lot of sense.

unvote vote: Dasquian

couldn't help reading mscum .

[Guardian]

i agree with joudas disagreement on w/tracker. but otherwise i dont agree with joudas above.

btw: people need to start voicing their agreement with me that DBE should target me or be lynched tomorrow.

repeat: DBE should target me or be lynched tomorrow. If I'm alive, and DBE claims she targeted someone else, etc etc, then I'm going to support a DBE lynch unless I get a guilty on someone.