Mini 578 - Mistery at Montescuro - Game Over!

[Joudas]

Greets, folks!

Vote: Dasquian

Comes first alphabetically, therefore he must be scum.

[Joudas]

Vote: Joudas

Sounds too much like Judas.

[Joudas]

Evilgorrilaz fails at life.

[Joudas]

Wow, this game really took off today. Awesome to see.

Correct, putting 2 or 3 votes on someone during the random phase in a game this size is usually pretty meaningless. The fact that it didn't happen by the time 10 votes had been cast makes me think at least a couple people near the end of the voting didn't want to deal with even the light question you just gave to Sensfan and Guardian. Being that afraid of questioning this early in the game seems a little odd.

Personally I see it as more likely that people just didn't see a reason to multivote one person during the jokevote stage, but who knows. *shrug*

[Joudas]

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?

[Joudas]

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?

Going on the knowledge that you're not new at this, it's therefore assumable that you're merely trying to pull out comments rather then actually thinking this is a good idea. I'll humor you, however: "Yes, that would be bad. We don't want to lynch anyone on this little evidence, nevermind this soon, especially on day 1, as fast lynches = less evidence = less to go on day 2+. This is bad."

[Joudas]

fos: Near

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

Because... logically, the more posts you have, the more information you can get from it. Sure, you could theoretically get enough information out of two pages to win the game, but the chances of that would be incredibly slim. You increase your chance of getting useful information by letting the days last longer. It's been proven over many, many games that longer days are more beneficial to town.

And why are you acting naive?

Unvote

FoS: Guardian

for playing dumb.

[Joudas]

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.

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'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.

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.

[Joudas]

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?

I considered voting him, I suppose, in the sense of 'considered' where I thought "Why would I vote him, based on this evidence?" and decided that I would not. So, yes, I considered it, but the amount of consideration that I gave was not considerable. Or something.

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.

Seriously though, FOS everyone who accused me of being a scummy for my joke FOS's following my random vote. In particular, FOS Singing Librarian for nonrandom voting me because of it.

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.

How do you decide what is useful content and what isn't?

"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.

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.

As a heads up for everyone, my fiancee is going to be having a baby within the next couple weeks, and as such, I may disappear from the face of the internets for a few days at some point here, possibly without much notice. I'll have my mobile with me, so I'll be able to post occasionally during this time when things are slow there, but obviously she's going to be taking priority over Mafia. Please don't replace me during this time.

Also on that note, I'll be gone tomorrow and Friday on business, and likely won't be able to post then either (don't know what the internet situation at the hotel is going to be, heh) - sorry about that in advance.

[Joudas]

As for the Guardian / VH / Near scumgroup, I'm not sure I'd classify Guardian as scum quite yet, but I'm leaning towards thinking Near is. VH, we don't really have a lot to go on besides inactivity, which while certainly not helpful to town, isn't necessarily indicative of scum either. Out of the three of them, I think I'd be most comfortable with Near. I'm not really getting much in the way of bad vibes from anyone else, honestly. At least not in a magnitude warranting a vote. As I said, I'm going to be gone for 2 days starting just about now, so I'm going to hold off on voting until I get back. A lot can happen in 2 days, and I don't like having a vote sitting somewhere when I can't reasonably remove it if the situation changes.

[Joudas]

Back home again!

How would my style be effective at getting townies to slip up?

I know this question wasn't aimed at me (this time), but it was previously and it was originally my suggestion that that's what you might be doing. I didn't get a chance to answer it before, so I'll take my turn now.

It seems your style is to lash out at anyone and everyone and bombard them with questions, either asking for explanation of their actions, explanation of their explanations, etc, until they crack, or until you're satisfied with their answers then moving on to someone else. It's just as easy for town to say something you could (mis?)interpret as scummy as it is for scum to do so, and it comes off as trying to find someone to latch onto, keeping the fingers pointing to avoid any fingers coming to rest on you. After all - if you keep the focus shifting as soon as the previous 'target' is vindicated (or at least, the argument starts subsiding), it's that much harder for it to settle on you.

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.

Near has been under fire for a long time, and has been posting very little. This indicates, to me, that he's not sure what to say and is afraid that if he says anything, he's going to further incriminate himself. He might be thinking his scum buddies will come to his rescue. Whether or not this (wild assumption) is the case, he needs to post a pretty heavy list of responses. For now,

FoS: Near

for lack of backing up his actions and lack of defending himself from the ongoing attacks (this one included).

[Joudas]

Game went from fast and furious to stagnant quickly. Ho hum.

I for one am not willing to vote for an inactive player this close to a lynch. While pressure votes do hold merit in some situations, this is not one of them. Yes, he's looking guilty, but I'm not convinced to the point that I'd condone lynching him without an explanation.

[Joudas]

I'm much more inclined to believe the VH accusation then the Near one. This in particular struck me as funny:

I'm quite used to newbie games so Unvote:Jamesthephox

EBWOP: Also I removed my vote because I have only just returned from leaving Mafiascum and have been recently playing Newbie games and it's only 4 to lynch.

Maybe I'm misinterpreting, but he seems to be saying "I removed my vote because I forgot this wasn't a newbie game and takes more then 4 to lynch", yet his previous post comes off to me as noting that this is not a newbie game and using that as a reason to unvote. It also seems like he was looking for an excuse to unvote, possibly because they're both scum. If VH came up scum, I'd look twice at Phox.

I'm not at all convinced by Near's latest post, but I too am wondering where on Earth VH is - stuck on page 4 of the re-read?

I was never really too convinced by the case on Near, but VH is a much more convincing argument. Once again, though, I'm not voting until he either gets replaced, or posts something.

[Joudas]

Hi, Coron - may you be more active then VH was!

[Joudas]

Going to have to disagree with you there, Coron. I wasn't defending Phox - I was attacking the suggestion that it would be a good idea to lynch anyone on page 2 (or anywhere near that, for that matter). Having re-read the pages in question, I didn't speak up on Phox's behalf once - I spoke up against Guardian plenty, and against the idea of an early lynch plenty.

Call them as you see them, but this feels a little bit like you're trying to twist what was said to fit your argument, which makes me somewhat suspicious of you.

I'd appreciate if you could quote specific posts by myself, Mac, pyro, lib and Yos that back up your statement.

[Joudas]

I can see Pyro's play in general as being very 'me too' oriented. Whether this constitutes scum or a new player, I don't know.

I don't see how a post like:

[Joudas / Guardian quote]

Clearly points out some craplogic used by Guardian, he leaps to the idea of a lynch on page 2, which guardian didn't even talk about (strawmanning), and really it seems like a reaction that would come from the person being voted not a 3rd party person.

The purpose of this statement was to inquire as to whether Guardian was pushing for a lynch with his rather vague 'use your votes wisely' statement, or whether he was suggesting people should not lynch. It was also to clearly state my opinion that lynching anyone on page 2 is fool hearty, as it gives us very little to go on for subsequent days. I guess I can see how you could interpret this as defending Phox, but the fact of the matter is, it wouldn't matter who the votes were on, the response would have been exactly the same.

Looking at Coron's suggested possible scummers as a whole:

Joud

a

s - I've been addressing this. Not going to reiterate it all.

Macavenger - I don't think he's scum. His responses are reasonable and appropriate pretty much across the board.

pyrodwarf - Aforementioned 'me too' playstyle causes me to find him not particularly townish. Especially in the second half of the thread thusfar - most of his posts include the words 'I agree..." in them.

singing librarian - I don't see much of a case here.

Yosarian2 - I don't really see a case here, either.

Looking at some other people...

Guardian - I see him as rather townish. I don't like or agree with his methods early game for reasons I've already addressed, but I don't think they're indicative of scum, either. Just a difference of opinion.

Dasquian - There's a good bit of 'me too' inherent in his posts, also. He also has a relatively low post count, making it hard to get a good read on him.

Near - He made an error early on and dug his hole deeper by pointedly not posting in this game. The longer he goes without posting, the more I find him a likely scum candidate. As I said before, I'm not willing to lynch an inactive player purely for being inactive, but while I didn't find the initial reason for all the votes on him to be too valid (his 'joke' early on), he's looking rather suspicious now.

I'm going to hold off on voting for anyone right now, but I'd love to hear Near's, Dasquian's, and Pyrodwarf's thoughts on the recent developments.

[Joudas]

It's difficult to prove that, and I feel no real reason to believe it.

It's difficult to prove anything in Mafia, until someone dies. Believe what you want.

and in that whole thing you don't even address one of the three I called as the potential scum group, JamesThePhox.

I didn't see Phox as scummy then, and I don't see him as too scummy now. Cue you coming back with "OMG SO YOU WERE DEFENDING HIM AND YOU'RE DOING IT AGAIN!" in the same word-twisting way you've taken most things I've said so far. Good job.

[Joudas]

I think you are misunderstanding what I'm saying, when you talk about the group of people I find suspicious you completely ignore JamesThePhox, but include people I didn't even say a found scummy for some undecernable reason that I don't know.

I ignored JamesThePhox because he wasn't part of that group of five you mentioned.

I included people you didn't mention after those you did to pre-empt the question, "If you only find one of those 5 scummy, what do you think of everyone else, and who do you think the scumtrio is?" The second part of my post had nothing to do with your posts - it was an additional bit of commentary from me.

"It's not all about you, you know!"

[Joudas]

Um... when did I say these people were suspicious?

JamesThePhox was mildly bandwagonned early, then there was an unexpected reaction by Joudus, Macavenger, pyrodwarf, and to a smaller degree singing librarian and Yos

I don't think it's an unreasonable assumption that if you're making a claim that someone's reaction was "unexpected" and then go on to call 2 out specifically as scum based purely on that scenario, that you find the "unexpected" reaction to be a scumtell (since you're basing your argument against 2 people on it), and as such find the other 3 to be "scummy" to some degree as well. Clearly I'm not the only one that made this connection.

Or are you saying that something that makes one person look scummy doesn't make another person look scummy?

Makes a lot of sense.

so, you include 3 people I don't ever call scum or scummy in a list of "Coron's suggested possible scummers as a whole", but ignore one of the three that I actually mentioned as possible/probable scum...

If you'd come right out and said "I find it likely that [these 3 people] are the scumtrio." in your initial post, it would have prevented a lot of problems now, wouldn't it? As it was, you made passing reference to 6 people, never stating in plain text your true suspicions - this kind of smells of leaving things vague until you can gauge reaction so you can adjust your argument if need be before committing. Noncommital arguments are indicative of scum.

See what I did there? Sound familiar? To quote the source,

The only things I could really be accused of is misunderstanding your motives.

[Joudas]

Also, can we get a re-prod on Near? Because seriously, his inactivity is getting a bit ridiculous for someone who picked up a prod and avoided replacement.

[Joudas]

To Disney Land! Can I come?

[Joudas]

While I can see the case against Phox as being somewhat valid, Near seems to be staying as far from the spotlight as possible since he came under scrutiny a while ago. He got out of the spotlight once and seems to be avoiding saying anything that anyone might look twice at. Let's look at his posts over the last 4 pages (since the focus moved off of him) (italics my summary):

[Macavenger quote]

LOL. You actually counted huh. I like the fact that you take this game seriously.

I will have to do a re-read to refresh my memory, but I think there was another reason other than imagining you and Phox were scum-mates. I don't think I have anything else to add really. I will do a more through read. But I can't promise content.

Unvote

Vote JamesThePhox

Seriously, I don't have much to say except the fact that looking at his vote history, he was trying to bandwagon from best lynch target to the next.

Where's the rest? Oh, wait, that's it. Five days, 2 posts. Now, he's moved his vote onto Phox but only after the idea was thrown out there by Yos2.

As I said before, I don't support voting someone for inactivity, but this is more then inactivity.

He also had no comment on the recent scum group suggestion by Coron, except indirect non-support of it through his vote.

Near: A direct question for you: What are your opinions on Coron's recent posts, his methods, and his suggested scumgroup? Also, why wait until someone else suggests Phox before jumping to him yourself? Also, what was the 'other reason' you had to suspect Macavenger and Phox as scumbuddies?

[Joudas]

In an effort to back up my accusations,

Vote: Near

.

[Joudas]

Joudas, when will you get it through your thick head that JamesThePhox *is* one of the people I was accusing of being scum, and thus his vote is *not* a show of non-support for my theories about scum groups.

I guess a better way to put that would have been, 'a show of non-support by not following your and Guardian's votes and, despite voting one of your suspected scum groupies, voting them for completely unrelated reasons."

Would you say that his reasons for voting Phox supports your argument? I wouldn't. It's got nothing to do with it, and he didn't comment on your theory at all. This was my point.

Near has been acting somewhat suspicous(possible sk?), but I'll stick with my vote for now, although I'd like to point out that 2 posts over 5 days isn't really THAT low, it's below what would be preferred, but a busy person can have that happen, that being said, I've seen him post in other games a lot while avoiding this one(even since I joined), which does make me think he's trying to stay out of the spotlight a bit.

The 'posting in other games a ton while not posting here' thing is what we've been getting at. It's been said a couple of times here - for someone who is quite capable of posting upwards of 50 posts in that timeframe, as evidenced by his activity elsewhere, 2 posts in 5 days really is THAT low.

This is exactly why I said that even though I don't condone voting people for being inactive, this is completely different - it's obviously intentional inactivity, not just lack of time to read.

[Joudas]

Near's lack of posting here is getting rather irritating.

[Joudas]

I'm kind of torn on whether Near is a good candidate for a lynch right now or not. On one hand, he's noncommittal, he's non participatory, and in general, he's not helping town at all. On the other hand, though, after going back through and trying to find some semi-valid links between him and other people, I'm really not seeing anything that could be called anything but circumstantial. This is bad, in that if he's lynched today, no matter what he turns up, it doesn't really give us a lot to go on tomorrow. The lynch is town's main weapon if and only if it provides useful information.

Am I missing something? Going back and looking at Near's posts and others posts about Near, what links could we establish? What direction would you want to go day 2 if he turned up scum? If he turned up town?

I'm not saying he's a

bad

candidate, merely that we might want to consider this before moving for a lynch.

[Joudas]

Put another way... if candidate A is scummy and has no links, and candidate B is scummyish but less so, but has had some clashes with a number of other players, the right lynch IMO is still candidate A.

So what makes Near scummier then other people? Aside from his lack of posting, of course.

[Joudas]

Guardian pulled this early game, too - tried to play Mr. Charisma and pull people into his way of thinking.

Examples:

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 Wink.

First line places himself above others. He's asking for other folks' motivation behind their actions, grilling them on it, in fact, and when he is asked, he declines to answer and moves on. I didn't like it then, I don't like it now - it has a very "I don't need to convince you I'm right, you need to convince me you are" air to it.

Second line leans towards casually suggesting without actually saying it that folks should lynch Phox. He later comes back to this with:

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.

When asked 'why the mystery', he responds, simply:

Why not?

And still doesn't answer folks' questions.

Further, he constantly asks other folks question after question, almost exclusively about why they're doing what they're doing. This serves to keep folks answering his questions and ensure they ignore his lack of answers and (in a lot of cases) lack of solid logic.

He also stays away from the VH bandwagon. He defends his position with:

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

He switches to VH at #148, the bandwagon never approaches critical mass, and when VH is replaced and Coron seems to be making more sense, Guardian immediately drops the former VH wagon and sidles up to Coron.

Coron has a similar playstyle - very charismatic and pointing a lot of fingers.

FoS: Guardian, Coron.

When I've got a little more time later tonight, I'll re-examine this. It is possible Guardian was bussing VH when he seemed a lost cause, reversing his strategy when Coron replaced in and his buddy became active again.

[Joudas]

So, um, you're FoSing me for being charismatic and for scum hunting. Good work.

To clarify, the FoS on you is contingent upon Guardian being confirmed scum. My beef with you is dependent on him being found scummy to establish the link.

But Librarian nailed it pretty much on the nose. Guardian, your arguments are mostly transparent - it's as though you're trying to reinforce a weak argument with a lot of subtle "Come on, guys - let's do this, k?" suggestion, hoping to cause someone to "go with the flow" and jump on your bandwagon with little to no evidence so you can "spring the trap" or whatever and catch them in it, or something - this is all I can gather from your two attempts at getting someone lynched this game. If that's the plan, it's a bad one, because it's just as likely to catch town as it is to catch scum. If you're honestly trying to get Dasquian lynched, you have essentially ruined your credibility. Again, good job.

[Joudas]

Then why bring these facts up? Confused

Which facts? That there's a possible link between you and him? To make the theory public? No, I'm not FOSing you for being charismatic and scum hunting, I'm FOSing you for acting similarly to Guardian, whom I'm FOSing for acting that way. It would be inconsistent to FOS one of you and not the other.

[Joudas]

The fact that I'm "charismatic and point a lot of fingers"

That's what I thought you meant - and I already answered it. To point out the similarities between your style and Guardian's, coupled with the similar opinions and Guardian's "I'm with Coron!" bout there, if Guardian turns up scum at some point I intend to revisit this based on this evidence. Consider it a forewarning.

[Joudas]

What did you mean when you said transparent?

I almost agree with you.

Transparent = easy to see the reasoning behind = easy to evaluate = easy to see the motivation behind = easy to come to the conclusion you're trying to manipulate folks into voting for your supposed scum-find.

While Dasquian certainly isn't the towniest of the townies, I don't think he's scum. At least not based on the evidence you've presented.

[Joudas]

I was feeling pretty good about Guardian's towniness until recently, but this last 'Hay guyz come vote for this guy k?" thing has changed my opinion. I feel I've made it pretty clear why, but it feels a bit like he's trying to plan ahead and sow seeds for subsequent days. If he plants suspicion about a number of different people, it's easier to convince folks to lynch them later, and he's simultaneously testing town's malleability with his "Come on, do it, it's the right thing to do, wink!" attitude.

His recent change of direction lends credence to one of my earlier points, though - Guardian,

that

is why it's better not to lynch someone in a hurry on a hunch. I love how you went from "Dasquian's scum, lynch him now, yep! You're all dumb for not trusting me!" to "Dasquian may not be as scummy as I thought, let me rethink my position." in the course of a half page.

[Joudas]

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 don't like this. This almost has a hint of "Vote Near first, because then you'll see he's town and since you think I'm bussing him, you'll (incorrectly) assume you were wrong and won't jump to the conclusion that I'm town, too."

He sounds somewhat confident that once Near is lynched he won't come up scum, and there's only one way he could know that.

FoS: Dasquian

[Joudas]

in the past like 3 days he called me and Guardian scum

I'm still thinking Guardian might be scum. I'm thinking if he turns up scum, you might be, too, and will re-examine that if the time comes.

and then completely flip flopped into agreeing with Guardian

Er, what? Are you referring to my finding something Dasquian said to be suspicious? As Guardian stated, he read it entirely differently then I did - how is that me agreeing with him?

and all this time leaving his vote on Near, even after his last post where he said it was scum's plan go get Near lynched.

No, what I said was:

He sounds somewhat confident that once Near is lynched he won't come up scum, and there's only one way he could know that.

I'm actually

disagreeing

with Guardian - I don't think Dasquian is bussing Near. If anything, he's using him in a desperate bid to vindicate himself. On the other hand, my original reason for voting Near (lack of activity, generally lacking play) hasn't been rectified either. If Near turns up scum, I wouldn't take that as a reason to lynch Dasquian, or vice versa.

[Joudas]

so you think Dasquian is scum completely separately from thinking that Guardian and I are scum? Or do you think that Guardian poined out his scumbuddy? Honestly if Dasquian is scum I do not see it as very likely that Guardian is also scum, unless of course one of them is an SK. The point is your two views of who is scummy doesn't really mesh up very well.

The two are separate, unrelated theories. I don't suggest that I'm some omnipotent source of scummer knowledge, and as such have no problem with presenting multiple theories with the foreknowledge that at least 1 of them is incorrect. The point of doing so is to generate discussion about them such that other people can offer their input and insight, to determine which, if either, is more likely to be accurate. I do not understand what you find odd about this.

Er, the Won't in there I think is supposed to be a will, but you can correct me on that.
To me this is saying that Dasquian's plan is to get Near, who is town, lynched to help clear himself, and that Dasquian is scum... yet you're still voting Near. Somehow this does not sound at all protown...

I changed the wording on that line before posting and evidently botched it a bit, but you (clearly) know what I meant.

What I'm saying is that I have a few different, unrelated theories about who the scum might be.

1) Guardian might be scum, possibly with Coron.
2) Dasquian might be scum, trying to buddy with Near (a townie) and push the blame onto Near such that when Near is lynched, he will come up town and make Dasquian look more townish.
3) Near might be scum, for reasons detailed when I voted him.

I'm throwing out suggestions for discussion. Right now, I'm going with #3 and leaving my vote on Near as a policy / pressure vote if nothing else, until we see some kind of improvement in his posting. Because I'm presenting multiple possibilities, your argument could be played regardless of which of them I was going with.

If I vote for Near, I'm clearly scum because Dasquian might be trying to get him lynched. If I vote Dasquian, I'm clearly scum because Guardian might be scum trying to get Dasquian lynched and if I vote Guardian, I'm clearly scum siding with Dasquian because Guardian is "on to him".

So really, regardless of who is actually scum, you can use this to make me look scummy regardless of who I vote for. That doesn't really prove or accomplish much.

[Joudas]

If it is not (x and y)
and everything is proportional, then as the probability and Y increases the probability of X decreases and vice versa, making strong attacks in two different directions rather weak, it's like tying 2 horses together and having them run opposite directions, it might strech the rope some, but only so far and in the end you're getting nowhere.

Except in this case, it can be X, Y and Z. Or it could be X and Y, or Y and Z, or X and Z, or just X, Y, or Z, or none of the above. None are mutually exclusive of the others.

Single mindedness leads to mislynches. I guess this is just a difference in play style - I don't like yours, you don't like mine. We'll both just have to get over it.

[Joudas]

What made you think Dasquian was scummy, DBE? The 'same old' that's been rehashed for the last few pages, or something different?

Also, what're your thoughts on Near, Guardian, and Pyrodwarf? Do you find them scummy, do you not find them scummy, and why, in either case?

[Joudas]

I for one disagree with the 'don't suspect someone based on their predecessor' theory. As you said, their roles are the same. I don't think it's worth it to let it cloud one's judgment of someone's play style purely because their predecessor was acting scummy - if the replacement is otherwise town, then it may well have just been a bad play by their predecessor, but when you have nothing to go on as far as the replacement is concerned, look to your opinion of their predecessor.

[Joudas]

I don't see DBE as a particularly viable lynch. Most of her mistakes strike me as more 'newbie-based' rather then scum tells. On what basis are you wanting to lynch her (or me, for that matter)?

[Joudas]

Honestly, I don't see Macavenger being scum. The arguments against him don't seem very solid, and in reading his posts initially, scum was not what I took from them. Near's recent posts seem far more so. He's had a good bit of 'No, I didn't mean that...' 'What I really meant was...' - either he's making a lot of slip-ups, or he's choosing his words extremely poorly if getting his point across is his intention. Also, Near:

so, you were a scum...

Can you explain this, please, because I'm not seeing it.

Confirm vote

for Near, as he's looking like the guiltiest party at the moment.

[Joudas]

Hmmn. unvote, vote DarlaBlueEyes

What are you seeing that's making you do this? I ask because we're a few days from deadline, you moved your vote onto someone who is definitely the minority, so there must be a reason, and if you see something we don't, we need to know so we can adjust our votes accordingly if it's sensible, and verbally berate you if it's not.

[Joudas]

Joudas, you seem to be angry. Is it because I've bumped your scumpartner up from being in the "minority" to "a viable candidate"?

Yes, that's it, it couldn't possibly have been a legitimate question asked for the reason I stated when I asked it.

I was asking for the reasoning behind your vote, and you still haven't provided it.

I, too, am still not sold on Macavenger. Or DBE, for that matter.

[Joudas]

Holy shit, go out for the day and come back to near 3 pages of fighting. Awesome.

I claimed a role that if I didn't have would be hard to maintain, so um, usually those are bad things for scum to claim...

I call BS on this. It's not hard to claim any investigative role - "Hurr I got RB'd guys sorry nothing useful tee hee!" is easy enough to type. So is "Found nothing useful, maybe tomorrow rite guys?". I really don't like your logic of "You'll see by my results that I'm a tracker", as it's flawed. What if you are the tracker, and do get RB'd, or don't get any useful results? We'll be at the same impasse we're at today, as we'll have to decide if your claim is truthful or if you're bluffing. It doesn't make things any easier on anyone.

The SK suggestion was a fairly useless bit of conversation, too. You essentially said, "I think there's 3 possibilities for a SK, but I'm not going to tell you why, or who the other two are." So why mention it at all? It wastes time and forum space.

I had initially said that I thought Guardian was scum with a possible Coron partner, but now I'm having to re-think that. Guardian is seeming a lot less scummy in my eyes, but this last bit by Coron isn't doing much for my confidence in him. I see it as unlikely that both Guardian and Coron are scum. Maybe neither, but I'd go so far as to say I'm fairly certain they're not partners.

Near, however, has gone silent again, and this close to deadline, that's the most unhelpful thing anyone's been doing lately. I'm going to keep my vote on Near for the timebeing, but I would probably hammer Coron if it came to that.

[Joudas]

why would I lynch My scumpartner?

seriously?

and be trying to get more votes for them? I wouldnt, so that logic is really flawed.

I don't see anyone lynched yet, so you haven't done anything of the sort. And saying incriminating stuff about your scumpartner in an attempt to distance yourself is called bussing and is a common scum tactic. Try again.

[Joudas]

sorry for the sudden inactivity - posting this via cellphone from the hospital, fiance had our baby yesterday! So I'll be home tomorrow morning and will contribute more then.

[Joudas]

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

Um, no really.

Oh, okay, then.

Well, that 10-page lynch party extravaganza last night was a little surprising. I'm going to have to go with Dasquian on this one, though - let me address something Guardian asked in his own defense:

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?

Now it is trivially obvious that Near is town. Last night this was not the case.
DBE was a worse lynch then Coron.
These were the three realistic options.

However, now it is trivially obvious that Coron was town, too - last night this was also not the case. The first one doesn't really hold up.

Personally, between the two of them? Near would have been a better option, in my opinion. A claimed power role is not a good option for a lynch - a claimed vanilla townie is a much better choice given the two. I find it fairly suspicious that you chose the PR over the townie. His claim was unnecessary, yes - and it was suspicious, but seriously. Now we're down an information role, left with (probably) just the Watcher. We also need to seriously hope we have a doc, or we stand to lose her, too, soon.

I'd really like to hear a retrospective from the other three folks on the bandwagon to lynch Coron. We heard from DBE a bit already.

[Joudas]

MBF, lynch macvenger. What do you think?

That's coming strait out of right field, isn't it? Where'd this come from?

[Joudas]

Yes, I was hoping for a no-lynch.

Whoa. Then let me ask you this: Why did you put your vote on someone at all? If a no lynch was really your idea of a pro-town move, why not just unvote and leave it at that? There is no divine edict that demands you be voting for someone at the end of the day, and there is no way that having a vote on someone generates a greater chance of a no lynch. I don't buy this answer one bit. Try again.

[Joudas]

I am inclined to believe we have either one or both Cop/Doc and I am doubtful Guardian is either of those things.

I highly, HIGHLY doubt we have a cop, tracker, and watcher. Highly. I find it much more likely that the watcher / tracker combo was to make up for the lack of a cop, as was previously said.

DBE: Why would you want a cop / doc / whatever else to claim? How would this benefit town? Especially the doc. Catching 1 scum is not worth losing the doc (assuming we even have one to begin with, which is as yet unconfirmed.)

[Joudas]

Hmm. Well, this is an interesting development.

I'm actually inclined to believe both claims - 3 investigative roles wouldn't be unreasonable if there was also, say, a roleblocker, and no doc. I'll go so far as to say that I think that's the setup we have.

That makes this a bit more difficult, though...

We're left with (assuming all claims and whatnot can be trusted)

- Dasquian
- Macavenger
- PyroDwarf
- MikeBurnFire
- Singing Librarian
- Yosarian2

Singing Librarian has been pretty silent for a while, apart from a vote on Guardian. I'd like to hear some kind of elaboration from him on this now that we've got a bit more to go on.

I really don't like voting for anyone until I'm sure I want them lynched (which is why I'm particularly suspicious of MBF's Day 1 activity re: the Coron vote, that was pretty sketchy), but I'll go so far as to

FOS: Singing Librarian

due to generally sitting on the back burner for much of this game.

I also really don't like MBF's play, as mentioned above.

The case against Macavenger feels weak and forced. It does, however, seem a bit of a stretch to say there were no scum on Coron's wagon. It was just too convenient.

[Joudas]

Well, that is cretainly interesting. I like the cop for scum. unvote, Assuming you are correct, for now. If I were the cop, I would have investigated DBE, because I thought there was a lot of investigative roles. I don't know about mass claim. Maybe we could have DBE and guardian target the same person tonight. They would either be lying scum, or we could confirm guardian, assuming DBE is a watcher.

FOS: PyroDwarf

This makes essentially no sense from a pro-town standpoint.

If they target the same person, they'd have to announce who they're targeting in advance. This would mean they'd have to not target either of them (unless you're suggesting Guardian wastes his investigation targeting himself or DBE wastes hers targeting herself), and that the scum would know exactly who to kill to avoid detection. It essentially opens up the killing field for the scum.

Also, scum will most likely (assuming no doc) kill one of them or the other. So this wouldn't even work - one would die, and we'd still only have 1 result which we'd have to assume correct (or incorrect, but we'd have no more to base this on then we do now). Also, if one is lying about their claim, the other will be targeted for the NK and the scum-claimant will remain alive with no chance of detection. This is bad.

We definitely do not want them to announce in advance who they're targeting, as far as I can see it. Can you please explain why this would be a good idea?

[Joudas]

My reasoning with that plan was If guardian is lying, he wouldnt target playerX and dbe would, she would say "hey guardian never showed up." more in a min

If guardian is lying, all he has to do to get out of his pickle is to NK DBE night 2. Then she's not around to give her results. I find it extremely unlikely that we have 3 investigative roles *and* a doc, unless scum is magnificently overpowered too and we're looking at, say, 6 power roles in a 12 person game, which is somewhat unheard of.

[Joudas]

He hasn't been very active for most of day 2

Yeah, sorry about this, I've got this whole 'new baby' thing taking up a solid 98% of my time right now.

I've been saying Pyro's suspicious and have been getting essentially ignored. Thanks for that, by the way. Nobody seemed to want to take their attention off the big debate to touch it. Since we're looking in his direction again, can I get a little bit of a response to the allegations I made a few pages ago?

FOS: PyroDwarf This makes essentially no sense from a pro-town standpoint.

If they target the same person, they'd have to announce who they're targeting in advance. This would mean they'd have to not target either of them (unless you're suggesting Guardian wastes his investigation targeting himself or DBE wastes hers targeting herself), and that the scum would know exactly who to kill to avoid detection. It essentially opens up the killing field for the scum.

Also, scum will most likely (assuming no doc) kill one of them or the other. So this wouldn't even work - one would die, and we'd still only have 1 result which we'd have to assume correct (or incorrect, but we'd have no more to base this on then we do now). Also, if one is lying about their claim, the other will be targeted for the NK and the scum-claimant will remain alive with no chance of detection. This is bad.

We definitely do not want them to announce in advance who they're targeting, as far as I can see it. Can you please explain why this would be a good idea?

As far as MBF, I'd consider hammering but not until we get a claim. Also, 3 information roles isn't that out there, if there's no doc and a roleblocker on scum side. Actually, I'd go so far as to say that having a cop instead of a doc is actually more beneficial to scum then town. Lots of info roles, sure, great, but we have no way to keep them alive, so we won't be getting much information out of them.

[Joudas]

I am feeling pretty good about Guardian as cop. His 'Let me change my vote oh by the way see you in a week guys" play is a little sketchy, though. Especially for the cop - what if the day ends tonight? He's not much use to us as cop if he's not going to be here to investigate someone.

I'm not really convinced on MFB, either, honestly. And I believe DBE's claim, and Near's. This leaves 5 people:

- Dasquian
- Macavenger
- PyroDwarf
- Singing Librarian
- Yosarian2

I'd bet on our scum being among these. I'm specifically not feeling good about PyroDwarf and Mac, maybe Singing Librarian, but the third is a bit of a guess.

[Joudas]

Greets, Albert!

[Joudas]

its rare that there is both a tracker and a watcher in a game.

That's quite a logical pairing, honestly. I'd say the oddball in the group is Guardian with his cop claim, but I'm more inclined to believe we have all 3.

Why would you target a player you find suspicious ? Are you looking for power roles ??

This, I think, is more a matter of her being new to Mafia and not fully understanding roles and role interactions. If this was some devious scum plot, she wouldn't have targeted anyone (since she's not actually a power role), and the whole story would be a fabrication. If she was intelligent scum, she'd have fabricated a better story then this (and targeted, say, Near perhaps, since he was the only claimed townie other then herself at that point).

I'm open for discussion regarding Dasquian - he's on my 'likely suspects' list right now, but DBE, I think, has claimed honestly. I see your points, but I disagree with them.

[Joudas]

I'll tentatively agree with that. At this time, Guardian is the most logical target for DBE.

[Joudas]

My friend, I've played maybe 40 games more than you on this site. I've even modded with Claus before.

Are you suggesting with this statement that you are right and I am wrong purely based on experience on this site? I will be very surprised if you end up being right on your DBE analysis.

I think the axis of evil is in the area of duck, mac, yos, dbe.

Of the four of them, I'd be most willing to vote for Dasquian or Mac if it came down to it. Yosarian seems sincere to me, and I've already stated my thoughts on DBE. Maybe I'm just naive, though, who knows.

[Joudas]

"Joubert"? Who the fuck... never mind. I'll assume that at least superficially you're referring to me.

This is an interesting question, however, let me pose a counter-question: Can a townie, having read the fiasco that happened night 0 due to "Hey he claimed PR and I think he's lying!" syndrome, honestly be suggesting that we lynch a claimed power role on the chance that they may be lying?

That said, we know she's new. Maybe she's just using that to make excuses to cover herself. But I don't buy it, at least not right now. Watcher + tracker is a much more likely pair then cop + tracker, and as I've said, I'm inclined to believe we have all 3.

[Joudas]

In the meantime, I'm going to put my money, or in this case my vote, where my mouth is when I say that I'm in complete agreement over Singing Librarian's nearly complete lack of discussion thus far. I voted Near for it on day 1 and for now, I'm doing the same for Singing Librarian.

Just so I don't take (as much) shit for it later, I'll say right now that I'll immediately switch my vote to either PyroDwarf or Mac if it'd hammer them.

Vote: Singing Librarian

Singing Librarian: Can you comment on recent developments, please? That'd be great, thanks.

[Joudas]

That's just fucking stupid.

no u r.

Seriously, though, are you suggesting we lynch a claimed power role now, rather then seeing how things go and doing it day 3 if necessary?

[Joudas]

Joudas, you are willing to hammer me or mac, yet you voted for SL...

I'd vote for all 3 of you if I could, but I can't, so I had to place a vote on someone and declare willingness to move to the other two should the opportunity to hammer become available. If you'd rather, I could put my vote on you and declare willingness to hammer SL?

[Joudas]

Honestly though, how is that much different from Albert's crusade against DBE?

[Joudas]

To respond to the question before it's asked, I'd support a Dasquian lynch. Honestly, I'd support anyone on my previously declared list at this point. Plenty of information can be had from any of them: Dasquian, Macavenger, PyroDwarf, Singing Librarian, or Yosarian2. I'm most partial to Mac, SL, or Pyro, though, and if it came down to it, I'd hammer one of those three over the other two.

[Joudas]

Joudas, we don't need an INFORMATION lynch right now. We would be left with 8 players. 3 of which are scum, and it would be essentially lynch or lose.

By this logic, a no lynch would be the best option - then we'd end up with 9 players 3 scum on day 3, lynch + nk = 7 players, worst case 3 scum, which would still be lylo but would give us better odds. This logic is also bullshit.

Any lynch is potentially an information lynch. I'm not suggesting we lynch a townie just to prove they're a townie - the 5 people on that list are all scummy in their own way. Everyone has theories on who is scum with who - no matter who we lynch, we rule out a lot of those theories. Can we prove beyond a doubt who the scum are today? No. It's impossible. Looking at everyone's theories, I'll feel pretty lucky if we can come to a majority consensus. Everyone seems to disagree. This is bad.

However, from your point I'll take another: A lynch we can get information from is far better then one we can't get information from, as right now, we're not in lylo. If we lynch someone that gives us nothing, regardless of their alignment, we're no better off tomorrow then we are today. As such,

Unvote

, with the intention to move to either Dasquian, PyroDwarf, or MacAvenger tomorrow once I've had a chance to re-read a bit.

Lynching SL as a policy lynch or otherwise right now would give us nothing because he's been fairly inactive since the game started. This would be bad.

[Joudas]

Re: the Pyro / Dasquian / DBE scumgroup theory, it makes more sense (to me) to target Dasquian today to prove or disprove at least part of this. If Dasquian turns up scum, I will be willing to rethink DBE. Having re-read the case against them, it does make sense. Pyro isn't really connected to the two of them very solidly at all (or to anyone, that I'm seeing, with the possible exclusion of MBF as noted above). If Pyro turns up scum, it doesn't really give us much information regarding the other two. If Dasquian turns up town, it would solidly reinforce in my mind that DBE is town.

Of that proposed group, DBE is the weak link, in my opinion. I think Dasquian / Pyro / MBF is much more likely right now.

MBF's refusal to claim under pressure seems weak - the chance of another power role right now (assuming we can consider DBE and Guardian's claims to be truthful) is slim at best, and it almost feels like he didn't want to raise suspicions about himself or possibly DBE (his proposed partner) by making a 4th PR claim, until she's proven to be scum at which point he may come back with "Hey I'm doc k?" or something similar. By claiming vanilla townie he'd have locked himself into it and wouldn't have been able to pull this off nearly as easily.

It's a reasonable assumption that he may also have seen DBE as a likely target and taken the opportunity to buddy up to her following her newbie mistakes in hopes that she'll get killed, making it easier for him to off Guardian without getting caught.

The 'I want a no lynch so I'm voting Coron' thing yesterday still sits wrong with me, too.

On these notes, I'm going to go ahead and suggest a Dasquian / PyroDwarf / MBF or Dasquian / MBF / DBE group. Dasquian being scum or not would implicate or clear DBE in my mind, and is a common link between both groups, so I'll

Vote: Dasquian

, which'll make it easier tomorrow while still lynching likely scum today.

[Joudas]

Vote Count!
Dasquian 4 - ABR, Guardian, MBF, Joudas
MBF 1 - Yos2
Pyrodwarf 1 - Singing Librarian

Not voting:
Pyrodwarf, DBE, Macavenger, Dasquian

Oh, okay, I'll vote Dasquian again, then.

/*
* Whut?
*/

[Joudas]

Holy shit, Darla. I was totally convinced you were town; now, not so much. I'm sticking to my guns with Dasquian for the timebeing, because I want to see where this is going, but Albert's theory is looking better all the time.

[Joudas]

On another note, I'm going on a short vacation tomorrow mid-day and won't be back till Sunday afternoon. I'll re-check things up till about 10:00 am EST tomorrow, but after that point, my vote stands till I get back. Just so there's no "Hay where'd Joudas go when stuff started heating up?" crap.

[Joudas]

"weekend" excursion lasted a little longer then planned, sorry about that.

Darla, you should read this.

Honestly, however this goes, I'm fine with it. Dasquian would still be my 'first choice' followed (now, considering recent events) by Darla, but I'm perfectly okay with PyroDwarf, too. The problem with Pyro is that no matter what he turns out to be, we can't really learn anything from it, and we're at a similar impasse as this tomorrow. We can learn a lot more from Dasquian or Darla.

As has been mentioned, lynching a claimed power role is always a bit sketchy. However, it's more disastrous (as has been mentioned) if she's scum. In that case, we basically lose the game, do not pass go, do not collect $200.00. With that in mind, what if she's town? How do we know that's not what's happening? We'll once again be at an impasse tomorrow - do we believe her claim tomorrow, when she has a supposed result, or do we second guess ourselves again?

I was inclined to believe her claim initially. I thought everyone was stupid for wanting to lynch another power role. Then she said

I don't think he is scum But I'd vote Dasq to prove a point that I am not his scum buddy, you can call it distancing or not but a good scum buddy wouldn't put their partner at L-1 now would they?

This, and

I have said it a hundred times, I am the watcher, it would take a ballsy scum to be that blaringly open about it. Obviously i dont know half of what I should to be IC or even Semi IC, so a move like that as scum for me seems unlikely.

which reeks of WIFOM to the point it's sickening, and

I don't care if they lynch me, Because i'm not sucm and if I die its their own damn problem

and

I am the watcher, do you really think if I were scum I'd be so stupid as to NK guardian if I promised to watch him then LIE to pin it on someone else?

This, as Yos so kindly pointed out, is WIFOM and craplogic.

Also, I don't know about everyone else here, but I find it extremely unlikely that the massive Coron bandwagon at the last second didn't have at least 1 scum involved. I just can't see 4 townies being that willing to last-second lynch a claimed power role.

Final Vote Count!
Coron 4 - MBF, Guardian, DBE, Mac

DBE and Mac were the last to jump on, with MBF's vote being the "I want a no lynch so I'll vote someone, tee hee" thing. We all know Guardian's role, though he explained his part in the endeavor fairly well, imo.


And Darla: Let me answer a question you asked while I was away:

I simply am at a place where you guys seem gungho to lynch all claimed power roles. So what AM I supposed to say to fix my screw up?

You're supposed to say, "I'm not scum, but ____ and ____ and ____ are, and I think so because ____." That would be the best way to get you off the hook, honestly (protip: Fill in the blanks with appropriate words and sentences).

[Joudas]

As has been mentioned, lynching a claimed power role is always a bit sketchy. However, it's more disastrous (as has been mentioned) if she's scum.

EBWOP: It's more disastrous if

we don't lynch her and

she's scum (because of logic that follows above statement).

[Joudas]

Actually, the more I read it, the more I hate this line:

I have said it a hundred times, I am the watcher, it would take a ballsy scum to be that blaringly open about it. Obviously i dont know half of what I should to be IC or even Semi IC, so a move like that as scum for me seems unlikely.

That almost has me convinced the 'I'm a newbie guys! I'm not scum!' has been an act. It comes off like "I'm telling you guys I'm the watcher, clearly this means I'm town because I'm too new to think of lying about this as scum, why is nobody seeing this? Let me spell it out for you!"

This hasn't really been addressed, am I the only one that sees it this way?

[Joudas]

Is this some sort of practical joke ? Every time we're about to lynch DBE or Dasquian, someone tries to kill the wagon.

Sorry, mate - I'd help ya if I could. I'm feeling pretty darn good about the possible Dasquian lynch.

[Joudas]

Guardian could be a roleblocker. 3 (2) investigative roles and a day vig with no scum PRs would be ridiculous - and it needs to be considered. RB is the reasonable expectation, assuming we're not calling Darla a scum watcher. Scum would have known we had 2 targeting PRs - Darla and Guardian. Why would they let both of them get an investigation through? Logical choice if they were both really PRs would have been to RB Darla, kill Guardian. She wouldn't have been able to prove herself and would have looked like a pretty good lynch. If Guardian (as a scum RB) targets himself, Darla "confirms" him as having done so, and we think he's a cop. Claiming me innocent may have been an ace in the hole - if he gets lynched, he comes up roleblocker, then everyone turns on me since he called me innocent. In this case, he knows my alignment, so claiming me innocent is a safe bet for him - if I get lynched, he says "I told you so!" and we believe him to be a cop.

Something to consider.

[Joudas]

Nolynch logic makes sense to me.

vote: No lynch

Definitely not ruling out Guardian-scum, but that's a discussion for tomorrow, I think.

[Joudas]

Someone has complained about my playstyle to the mod. Since I am alive, it wasn't scum. Whoever you are, confirm yourself as town please.

This seems like flawed logic to me, but I'm interested to see where it leads.

[Joudas]

I think Claus did a great job messing with the 'normal' setup in this game, and included 4 power roles, including 3 I-roles and a sane cop.

You have to ask yourself, however, what the scum have to balance this. Maybe there's more then 3, for example. Assuming we can consider Guardian town, we can assume they don't have a roleblocker, unless they're stupid. Thoughts?

[Joudas]

If Joudas is town, why aren't I dead, and why isn't he?

Scum wanted to:

1) Incriminate you, by leaving Darla alive for her to 'prove' you and then killing her. This might have been somewhat foiled by your targeting yourself, or they might have decided that the 'Guardian might be a roleblocker!' excuse was viable. Going to take a look back through and see who was quick to agree with me on that a little later tonight.

2) Incriminate me (and whomever else you targeted for an investigation, and you) by leaving the lot of us alive. If they'd killed you as soon as your role was revealed, I'd be essentially confirmed town right now, rather then a suspect. Perhaps you are naive, they reasoned this out based on role claims and their own roles, and knew that if you targeted one of them, and they were subsequently lynched, all of your investigations would immediately be suspect (possibly even lynched as a result, if everyone decided you were insane rather then naive).

That's my guess, anyway. Killing you would have been the "obvious" solution - by leaving you alive, they make you look increasingly scummy simply because you didn't die.

I believe Guardian to be town. I believe MBF and Albert to be town. I am a townie. I believe the scumgroup to be Yos2, Pyro, Mac, by process of elimination.

[Joudas]

On that note, though: Mac - why do you suspect MBF? He's the one I'm least sure about. I'd be interested to hear your reasoning.

[Joudas]

I can at least take solace in the fact that if Albert is protown, that after this game I won't have to ever again hear him bragging about his "perfect scumcatching record."

If he's scum, though, you'll

never

hear the end of it.

[Joudas]

Okay.

vote: Yosarian2

[Joudas]

<Albert>That's because we're right! YAAAHHGH! Listen to us, seriously, or you'll regret it later!!!1</Albert>

[Joudas]

So far, of the people who are dead and who's alignment we know lynched, I was right about Coron, right about Dasquin, and wrong about DBE. You were wrong about all 3 of them. So yes, my "sucess" ratio this game is better then yours, and better then most people in this town in fact.

Of course, this is a pretty shoddy argument. Of course you were right - you knew they were town. In fact, you know everyone who's town - being as you're not. Good job there.

[Joudas]

I think we basically agreed that Pyro was the best lynch for today a while ago. I said it on day 2 and I'll say it again: He's said a lot of things that strike me as extremely scummy and have been basically overlooked.

Vote: PyroDwarf

[Joudas]

I see what you did there.

Let me lay this out for you:

We have 5 people left right now:

ABR, MBF, Joudas, Macavenger, Pyrodwarf.

ABR, I think we've all pretty much agreed upon, is town due to his Near replacement status (and in no part due to his play, which has been decidedly scummy, imo).

This means that 2 of (MBF, Joudas, Macavenger, Pyro) are scum. Or werewolves, as it were.

MBF:
-Was on the Coron wagon day 1. Last survivor to have been. As has been noted, due to the speed of the lynch and the last second status, this isn't much of a tell.
-Refused to claim at L-1.
+Yosarian was going at him pretty hardcore day 2 (and vice versa). Yosarian is now confirmed scum. This didn't strike me as bussing.

I find it unlikely that MBF is scum. I know I'm town, this leaves Pyro and Macavenger.

I've been up in Pyro's shit for a while now and it seems to have been for the most part overlooked. I am, therefore, much more willing to lynch him then Mac, on whom my vote would be largely based on process of elimination.

One of two things will happen here:
1) You'll lynch me for "attempted speedlynching" (and/or I'll get speedlynched) as Albert is trying to do, it seems, and Albert will feel like a moron.
2) We'll lynch Pyro and, when his role is revealed and we go into night 4, Albert will feel like a moron.

Either way, I like the end result.

Honestly, if it wasn't for Albert's Near replacement status, I'd be all over him. His play this game has been ridiculously scummy.

[Joudas]

Fair enough.

[Joudas]

Actually, unless I missed something, Joudas is still voting for Pyro. I never unvoted.

/*
* I stand corrected.
*/

[Joudas]

Not only was Pyro discussed yesterday, but he's the scummiest one here, and by process of elimination, is almost certainly part of the remaining scum-group. He's by far the safest option.

[Joudas]

And if he does, it'll only be because he's bussing his partner. I don't see the argument for Yos / Joudas / Mac scum team. I do see the argument for Pyro. He's said a number of scumtastic things throughout the game that've basically been ignored; I usually don't advocate process of elimination type lynches, but this one makes sense.

[Joudas]

You forgot something.

Points to Pyro being scum with Mac:

Pyro agreed with Mac at least five times, talked to him directly once.
Mac defends Pyro four or five times

You're also basing your argument completely on comparisons with other people, not on the scumminess of statements in general. It's a flawed argument.

[Joudas]

Yeah, just like his last few cases were persuasive. Look where those got us.

[Joudas]

Or we could just lynch Pyro. Problem solved.

[Joudas]

What? I don't. I think Pyro and Mac are scum. Mac by process of elimination, Pyro on the same basis I've been bitching about for a few days now. I think your play is scummy, but I think your alignment is town based on the Near replacement.

[Joudas]

Oh. So you wouldn't mind voting Macavenger.

I'd much rather vote Pyro. I'm much more certain about him then Mac.

[Joudas]

How does that make Macavenger the obvious lynch? I'd say there's as big a possability that Mike is scum as there is that Mac is town, which while small, is greater then 0, which is what I'd say the probability of Pyro being town is.

[Joudas]

No.

There may be, say, a 10% chance that Mike is scum. There may be, by this example, a 10% chance that Mac is town. There is, by my opinion, a 0% chance that Pyro is town. Apply these numbers to my above post. Then apply them to yours, and you will be forced through the awesome power of logix to deduce that 10% != 50% and therefore your analysis of my statement is inaccurate.

[Joudas]

10% was just an example number, so let's say there's some low but greater than 0% chance Mike is scum, a high but less then 100% chance that Mac is scum, and a 100% chance that Mac is scum, in my opinion. Where are you going with this line of questioning?

[Joudas]

err, EBWOP: 100% chance that Pyro is scum*

[Joudas]

Wow, that was sudden. Well, okay: let's lynch

killa seven

now, then?

[Joudas]

*sigh* Is this error of perception the main point you're basing your 'Pyro is town!' crusade on?

Pyro has had a number of fairly questionable statements throughout the game that have ingrained into my head that he is not pro-town. While normally I wouldn't convict him based on this alone, I feel quite safe in doing so considering that Albert is almost certainly town, and Mike is almost-but-not-quite-as-certainly town as well. Based on Albert's "You don't need to re-read, just vote for someone!" logic, I can deduce that you are, in fact, scum.

I'll offer up some examples of Pyro's 'errors of communication' later tonight, I'm not in a position conducive to re-reading a thread right now.

[Joudas]

Wait, you consider irritating Pyro to the point of quitting to be a victory? What?

[Joudas]

he was scummy as hell

Couldn't agree with you more, now why aren't you voting for him?

[Joudas]

DBE was a new player making new player mistakes.

[Joudas]

Who is this Pyrodwarf you speak of?

/*
* I don't know what you're talking about.
*/

[Joudas]

i felt bad hammerin joudas, but he left me no option. dude refused to let up on gettin me lynched.

Hammering me was kind of the intent all along. The whole purpose behind the quick vote at the beginning of the day was to make me look scummy as all fuck. I thought you were going to blow the whole thing out of the water when you didn't vote me, honestly. All worked out though. Go go Albert.

[Joudas]

Was the "100% mac is scum or 100% mac is scum" slip intentional?

Yes, and I was going to leave it there till someone pointed it out then act all "Oh shit my bad", but after I re-read the post I thought it might be a little overkill and corrected it. I'm a pussy.

I was also trying to think of some say, after it became obvious I was scum (and Albert pointed out that fact), something along the lines of "Yeah, maybe you're right, lets lynch Macavenger, Pyro's obviously innocent." to try to "appear" to be changing my tune in preparation for the lynch to "bus my partner", but I couldn't come up with a way to put it that wouldn't have either been overkill or too obvious. I was seriously scared killa seven wouldn't lynch me, too, or that he'd kill the wrong person due to not having been in the game the whole time. Glad it didn't turn out that way.

[Joudas]

Honestly, though, I had a great time playing this one, mostly because of the self destructive town aspect. It was a lot of fun watching the discussion go from which townie was obviously scum to which other townie was obviously scum without any influence from us. The day 1 Coron lynch was the pinnacle of the game, in my opinion, from our perspective.

[Joudas]

Yeah, sorry about that We thought there was a doc, so we were going for the person least likely to be targeted, and... well...

[Joudas]

Agreed, I LOL'd at that.