Mini 630: Council of Eville: Game Ovah!

[Goatrevolt]

Vote StrangerCoug

StrangerCoug's signature notes that he is "Stranger than you". Now, for the majority of players in this game, "you" denotes township, and if StrangerCoug is "Stranger than you" then he must therefore be scum.

This is an airtight case ladies and gents.

[Goatrevolt]

Either:

1. His signature is a lie. In that case we should lynch all liars.

or

2. His signature is true, and therefore my earlier case stands that he is scum.

[Goatrevolt]

What's the name of scum in this game?

This really strikes me as an attempt at a "Hey guys, I don't know anything about scum, so I can't be scum!" kind of post.

What did you expect to learn by asking that question and what would it benefit you to know it?

Unvote, Vote Rage

[Goatrevolt]

Hey guys, nowhere in the main post (or the posts with story in them for that matter) does it say what the name of Scum is in this game.

Yes, but that doesn't answer my questions.

Why does it matter what the name of the scum are?
How did you expect to get the answer to your question?

Basically, I'm wondering what the point of that post was. I don't understand why you'd benefit from knowing the name of scum, or how you expected to get that knowledge in the first place.

[Goatrevolt]

Unvote: forbiddanlight
Vote: Rage

Goatrevolt pretty much said it.

This to me is opportunistic. But anyway, vote stays.

Wait a second here. You're accusing StrangerCoug's vote of being opportunistic, but then you keep your random vote on Rage without any explanation. Is that not even more opportunistic?

[Goatrevolt]

I was merely stating we are still in the random stage.
Really, I don't see anything that bad in what he said, and he defended it well enough.

Wait a sec, this doesn't fit. Why would we still be in the random phase? You even commented that StrangerCoug's vote was opportunistic, which is real discussion, suggesting that we're out of the random phase. My vote and SC's vote on Rage at that point were both real votes. We were definitely out of the random phase. Also, if you thought we were still in the random phase, why would you say "But anyway, vote stays." Why would you feel the need to point out that you're keeping your random vote on? That doesn't really make sense.

Unvote, Vote alvinz95

[Goatrevolt]

Goatrevolt: so if we are not in the random voting stage (as you suggest), then are you saying you would be comfortable with lynching alvinz95 right now? or, are you perhaps putting pressure on him with your vote to see how he would react, and to see what kind of discussion ensues (which sounds an awful lot like the random voting stage)? something tells me it's the latter...also, you ask us to "wait" quite often, when you are the fastest moving player of the game so far

The latter. Are you suggesting that I can only put pressure on people during the random voting stage? I'm going to beg to differ. Besides, whatever would make you think we're still in the random stage? Your last post contained discussion and not a hint at a random vote, which would suggest the opposite. I'd argue that the random stage ended the moment Rage made his post and the comments that followed regarding it.

The "wait a sec" comments I make are not meant to be taken literally as "please pause for one second prior to reading this post." It's basically my way of saying "hold on, I take issue with this."

Pouncing on something measley is opportunistic,

regardless

of what stage we are in. So I'm guessing that the whole purpose of your vote is that it doesn't make sense? Calm down... Really, you need to lay off a bit during the random stage.

So since it's the random phase, I'm not allowed to try to make real discussion? How do you propose we ever move past the random phase in that case? Pouncing on something measly and the resulting discussion is exactly how the game moves past the random phase and we can start to find scum. Besides, we've been out of the random phase for a while.

Really, your super eagerness to start lynching gives bad vibes. What did you hope to achieve with your vote? Why did you vote hop from Rage to me? Is my confusing play more scummy? Would you be happy if I was the lynch today? Is your "real" vote used for pointing out scumminess or as to point who you want to lynch?

Who said I was super eager to start lynching? I never said anything about lynching.

What did I hope to achieve with my vote? I wanted to gauge Rage's reaction and his explanation for his strange post when I voted him. I wanted to gauge your reaction with my vote. I also wanted to see your explanation for your actions, and I feel that you haven't suitably answered that yet. If it was still the random phase, as you suggest, then why did you feel the need to assert that you were keeping your random vote on Rage? If it was still the random phase, then why were you accusing SC of an opportunistic vote? Wouldn't you be able to classify your attack on SC as pouncing on something measly?

Why did I vote hop from Rage to you? Rage explained himself. While I'm not totally sold on his explanation, he at least provided motive for why he made that post. I then jumped to you for what I considered to be a fairly contradictory stance. You specifically making a point to keep your vote on Rage while also lamenting StrangerCoug's vote on Rage as opportunistic seemed a bit contradictory, so I jumped on it.

Would I be happy if you were the lynch today? I'm not interested in having you be lynched right now if that's your question. It's page two. I'm just pushing what I perceive to be the scummiest thing in the thread so far. The more discussion that takes place, the more I'll be able to evaluate others and see where my vote should be.

Is my vote meant to push scumminess or who I want to lynch? The answer is both, really. Later on in the game, that answer is basically one and the same. Scummy people are who I want to lynch. For right now, I find you scummy, but I'm not interested in lynching you at the moment because there is plenty more discussion to be had, and perhaps someone will do something even scummier and thus be more deserving of a lynch.

Whooo...and that was a novel I just wrote on page 2...

[Goatrevolt]

People seem sad that the random phase has ended.

alvinz:

If it was still the random phase, as you suggest, then why did you feel the need to assert that you were keeping your random vote on Rage? If it was still the random phase, then why were you accusing SC of an opportunistic vote? Wouldn't you be able to classify your attack on SC as pouncing on something measly?

Could you answer those for me, por favor?

[Goatrevolt]

It was a basic comment, not intended as an "accusation of scumminess". Hence that we were in the RANDOM STAGE.

So you think StrangerCoug's vote was opportunistic, but you don't feel that his opportunistic vote was scummy? Why point it out if you didn't think it was noteworthy?

Also, I'm still interested in why you felt the need to point out that your "Vote Stands" on Rage when you're professing that it was the random stage and your vote was still a random vote at that point. Why go to the trouble of asserting that you're keeping your random vote on, especially on someone who has two legitimate votes on them at this point?

Obviously skillits that are able to talk and type are a threat to humanity

If he was a figurative skillet, or a skillet that isn't able to read or write then it would be fine. But a literal literate skillet? That's scary.

[Goatrevolt]

Anyway, @goat, I'm done talking dumb random stage moves mkay?

I'm not, because discussing what happens in the random stage is not dumb, and your complete dismissal of my questions directed at you really is not pro-town at all. If you think posts in the random stage are dumb and should just be ignored then I suggest you look at Mini 604. Dcorbe was correctly called out as scum for his very first post of the game. The way you dismiss my arguments or simply brush over them without suitably addressing my concerns doesn't give me good vibes.

Why go to the trouble of asserting that you're keeping your random vote on, especially on someone who has two legitimate votes on them at this point?

Does this matter?[/b]

It absolutely does matter. I think you've been contradictory. You claim you're keeping your vote on Rage, when he has a real wagon on him with non-random phase votes. Then when I ask you about it, you claim it was just a random vote. I've never seen anyone say "Vote Stands" when talking about a random vote unless they're actually turning it into a serious vote.

Dude, StrangerCoug, people jumping on a bandwagon is not a scummy action by itself. You can't just vote everyone who jumps on your bandwagon. If someone is voting you for poor reasons, by all means, point it out, but jumping on every single player who votes you is not productive at all.

I'm not a fan of Coug's play, but he's been lynched as town in both of the other games I've played with him for similar type stuff, so I want to compare his posting in this game with his posting in those games before making a decision here.

[Goatrevolt]

1. I haven't dismissed any of your questions.

Why go to the trouble of asserting that you're keeping your random vote on, especially on someone who has two legitimate votes on them at this point?

Does this matter?[/b]

That question was finally somewhat answered in this post. It had been ignored in every other post, or brushed aside, as in the above quote.

3. Detracts from real discussion such as Strangecoug, which you don't attack viciously like Rage and mine.

This is real discussion. See, this is exactly what I'm talking about. You're completely dismissive of anything I'm saying against you. My attacks against you "aren't real discussion" because your post took place during the random phase, which is complete rubbish. I still don't like the fact that you're ignoring/brushing aside anything I say under the premise that it's not real discussion.

Its a matter of opinion for god sake. You think it was a real wagon, I thought it was a fake wagon/random. And that doesn't have anything to do with contradictory (me having the "trouble" to say vote stays).

100% Contradictory. You thought it was a fake wagon, yet you accused SC of having an opportunistic vote. If it's a fake/random wagon (which it is very obvious that wagon was not fake or random) then how was SC's vote opportunistic? Your behavior is completely contradictory. Your words are saying your "vote stays" and accusation of SC were random and meant nothing, but your actions only make sense in the context of that post being serious.

I've seen this countless times done by scum to their partners. Seems like you're just giving him advice and lecturing him rather than attacking him for scummy like you've done to Rage and me which is not consistent and rather contradictory. You are semi-supporting him by using a meta. I have been in a few games with him and he has NOT acted like this. What makes this even more convincing to me is how you barely even bothered to attack him.

FoS: Goatrevolt

You think I'm scummy because I didn't attack StrangerCoug enough to your liking? Absurd. I agree with you that I don't like his play thus far, but I'm not convinced on his case yet for the meta reasons I brought up. Also, you're pairing me as a scum buddy to StrangerCoug when we don't even know if he's scum yet. Getting a little ahead of yourself here?

Basically, you're OMGUSing me because I didn't attack StrangerCoug as hard as I attacked you. Until we see players alignments, that's a pretty poor argument.

I'll review the meta on SC and make a decision on him. Until then, my vote's sticking on alvinz.

I'd like other players to weigh in here. This shouldn't be a two way discussion.

[Goatrevolt]

Goat, you claim to have played with him and seen him get lynched for similar stuff. If those games aren't ongoing, would you mind linking to them? I'd like to see and judge for myself.

One game is mini 601, which is still ongoing. He got lynched day 3 I believe, so you can check out that game if you wish, but I'm not going to discuss it since it's ongoing, even though that's the game that most mirrors his play in this game in my opinion.

The other game is Mini 604, which just ended today. StrangerCoug basically got lynched for putting a vote on someone for a poor reason, and then when pressured for it, he promptly unvoted and voted a lurker instead. In other words, he got lynched for making really poor votes.

In both games he got lynched for making poor votes, and poorly defending himself afterwards. I'll admit that his play in this game is more venomous and OMGUSy than those other games which makes me hesitant, but there are some definite similarities. His barning of my logic early on strikes me as standard play for him, and some of his indignation at being wagoned strikes me as a genuine frustrated townie response. That combined with the speed of the wagon definitely gives me pause.

[Goatrevolt]

You're lingering on the facts that I have simply downplayed before.

Seriously?

That's the entire point. You're just sitting there downplaying anything I say against you as unimportant or a distraction rather than addressing the issues.

Of course I'm lingering on these issues. You're downplaying them, rather than addressing them. Do you honestly think you can get out of a bandwagon by just saying that your attacker's points are dumb, unimportant or a distraction and call it a day? Yikes...

I've already said that calling it opportunistic wasn't a "accusation of scumminess" as it was a comment. And I don't get what you're goal in this attack is, seriously. We're accomplishing nothing lingering on random stage moves.

My goal is pretty obvious. I don't like your defense period, and I'm pursuing you because I think you're scummy.

Also, I don't buy the "comment" rather than accusation of scumminess. Saying someone's vote is opportunistic implies that it was scummy, because opportunistic votes have a connotation of being something scummy. Then you confirmed your vote on a player being legitimately wagoned after saying that the person voting for him was opportunistic.

I want everyone to answer these questions. Do you think alvinz's comment that StrangerCoug's vote was opportunistic and then comment that he's confirming his vote on rage to be odd? Do you buy his explanation that it was just a meaningless post and not anything serious?

I'll say it again. I don't like you downplaying everything I say simply because your post happened during the random phase. Your post happening during the random phase doesn't mean that it automatically doesn't count and should be ignored. There was real discussion happening during that period, and your post contained real discussion, that you're now trying to play off as simply useless banter (which I don't buy).

1. You weren't consistent at all in scumhunting as you viciously attacked one single move then VOTED with both me and Rage, rather you just noted to Strangecoug that is was scummy and didn't even bother to FOS.

Again, this is really bad logic. I've been perfectly consistent in scum hunting. I'm going after things that I find scummy. Just because I'm not scum hunting what you want me to scum hunt doesn't make me contradictory at all.

Basically, I'll vote who I think is scum. I'll FoS someone when I feel they deserve it. My votes and FoS's have nothing to do with what you perceive as scummy.

Think about this for a second. If I were to apply the same logic you're using then I should find you scummy because you're not voting yourself. I think you're scummy, therefore you're being inconsistent in not also finding yourself scummy and voting yourself.

2. It seems like you are more lecturing and giving Strangecoug advice rather than pointing out scumminess.

Ah, yes. I'm making the coaching scum tell. Congrats, you caught me. I knew I should have attacked StrangerCoug because alvinz thinks he's scummy, therefore I have to as well...

An OMGUS is a "oh my god you suck" which cedes a VOTE and the basis is usually just because he/she voted him, and this situation doesn't fit that. And so you're saying, we can't investigate into partners until he/she's role is revealed? Anyway, I haven't even voted you.

I have a looser view of OMGUS. I consider you pushing poor reasons for finding me suspicious (regardless of whether you vote or not) at the same time that I'm pushing a case on you to be OMGUS.

You can search for partners, sure. But calling me out as scummy because I'm not attacking the same person you think is scummy is really dumb, especially when we have no clue if that person is scum yet or not. If he gets lynched and is scum, and you think my actions fit as a scum buddy, then by all means go for me tomorrow. Pushing me today for those reasons is putting the cart before the horse.

[Goatrevolt]

*slaps head*
Of course, if you don't buy anything in this game, you'll get no where. This whole argument is based on you thinking it was serious, when it really wasn't to me.

So because I don't buy your explanation, that means I don't buy anything in this game? Misrep. Again, you're downplaying my case against you by suggesting that if I "don't buy your defense, then I won't buy anything."

Basically, you're correct. The entire argument comes down to the fact that I think your post was serious, and thus contradictory, and you're suggesting that it was a meaningless post. Looking at that post in context, it doesn't seem meaningless at all for reasons I've brought up over and over again.

Wait, so you're saying OMGUSing most people on the wagon, using a cruddy defense, hypocritical in opportunistic voting, and lack of consistency isn't as scumming as saying "Who is the name of scum?" or "Opporunistic much?"? I'm not saying who you should attack, but still, thats not consistent. You've agreed on AT LEAST one of those points.
Votes and fos have nothing to do with scumminess? What DO you base your suspicions on then?

You're completely missing the point. You're saying I'm inconsistent based on who you think is scum. You're saying that my scum list doesn't match up with your scum list and thus that makes me inconsistent, which makes absolutely no sense.

Again, apply that logic the other way. You're inconsistent for not voting for yourself because I think you're scum.

You're measuring scumminess in almost a bureaucratic way. StrangerCoug has committed 4 scum tells, and you have committed 1 scum tell thus he's scum and you are not. My votes are entirely based on who I think is scummy, however I don't measure scumminess strictly on a "who has committed the most scum tells" level. There are other factors in play as well.

[Goatrevolt]

Guess I lied. This is about the millionth time my saturday plans have been cancelled. Allow me to mope for a few hours and I'll return to check cases.

Lynch all liars.

[Goatrevolt]

Oh pickles.

Hahaha. Definitely a scum response there.

[Goatrevolt]

Skillit: that's kind of the barebones version of the story, but yeah, that's basically what it is.

- Alvinz's post contained two comments that sounded serious in nature: Calling StrangerCoug's vote opportunistic and mentioning that his vote stands on Rage. It was a random vote, and saying that "vote stands" implies that he's making it a serious vote, because I can seriously think of no reason why one would make a point to suggest that they're keeping their random vote on someone with 2 legitimate votes on them.
- This makes his post contradictory in nature. He mentions that StrangerCoug's vote on Rage was opportunistic, but yet provides an even more opportunistic vote in the same post.
- When pressured on it, he's skirted the issue, and tried to downplay my arguments against him as being useless or a distraction from real discussion. He's repeatedly implied that because his post took place in the random phase, it was meaningless and shouldn't be held against him.

So, in summary. He made a contradictory post, and has since then defended (or deflected from) himself in a completely unsatisfactory way.

[Goatrevolt]

FoS: Goatrevolt

because I feel she did not lie. She is not psychic, and I don't know what her plans were or what cancelled them, but this is not enough reason for a policy lynch.

I wasn't being serious. Of course her plans falling through on Saturday has absolutely no relevance on her alignment.

[Goatrevolt]

random phase does not equal say whatever you want with no consequences phase.

[Goatrevolt]

Ok, I don't get why people can't see what Coug did, rather than one dumb post

I see what Coug did. I'm just not convinced it means he's scum.

[Goatrevolt]

Its actually hypocritical for you as because in the beginning you said you weren't going for a lynch with what I did, and now you still linger on that point, but it seems you ARE going for a lynch.

This clearly states that Goat is with Coug.

I originally pressured you to get a response. I was unimpressed with your response and sheer dismissal of my points against you. In essence, I've seen no reason to take off my vote.

I'm not happy ending the day right now with an alvinz lynch, though. There are a lot of people I'd like to hear from. Is Twiglees even in this game? Has he posted yet? I'd also like to hear more from joonster, Gojira, Ghostwriter, and Veerus.

[Goatrevolt]

I'd like to see skillit take a stance here.

[Goatrevolt]

Does that mean that Twiglees has picked up his prod?

FoS Twiglees

. I'll change that into a vote if you don't start posting.

[Goatrevolt]

Since there's nothing else to talk about, why shouldn't I throw an FoS on damn near anybody for lurking?

Because if you FoS everyone, it is a meaningless action that shows nothing about who you actually suspect and why.

[Goatrevolt]

You aren't DEFENDING your points, you are redirecting off them.

and alvinz is just naturally overdefensive

Can you explain this? How can alvinz both be not defending his points and also be overdefensive?

[Goatrevolt]

How are the cases on those two identical?

[Goatrevolt]

@Mod

Can you prod Gojira and joonster?

I anxiously await what Ghostwriter has to say. I also still want to see skillit take a stance on alvinz. He seems to be avoiding this issue like the plague.

[Goatrevolt]

I also still want to see skillit take a stance on alvinz. He seems to be avoiding this issue like the plague.

- can you show a single word i have said that can in any way show evasiveness towards this issue?Where i implied an immediate reaction?Or maybe where my "aversion" is so much more than any other person who hasn't commented on it? Did you read in my post 123 where i said i intended to post a follow up to my summation? Goat, your post 126 "I'd like to see skillit take a stance here" was in the context of the whole "thinking flawed" area, not alvinz and you, so to later charge that i am actively avoiding an issue i had only just 2 days ago said id address seems totaly baseless and. . .frankly irreverent. Do you feel that in any way enough time had passed to justify that comment? I avoided nothing and don't like the implication that i did. Its very much like your trying to discredit anything i might say before i even start talking. or is there another reason for you to be so . . vivid? did you not think i was going to post what i said i was going to post?

Actually, 126 was me asking you to give a stance on alvinz and me. You've posted 3 times and none actually addressed your stance on the situation, so I really don't see why you have cause to act so self-righteous here. Your first post simply summed up the situation (why this was necessary, I don't know). Your other two posts were frivolous arguments that had almost zero in game relevance. It certainly appeared that you were avoiding taking a stance. Three posts and no visible opinion, can you fault me for pushing you to take one?

And then you still don't really take a stance here. You make allusions to alvinz being scummy, but don't back it up to show support of the case, or make any sort of move to condemn the case. In other words, you're still sitting on the fence here. I'm waiting for you to take a concrete stance.

[Goatrevolt]

Alright, I guess there was some misunderstanding about 126.

I agree though that there is a lot more to discuss before prematurely ending the day. At this point I'm pretty much waiting for replacements or the lurker's to chime in. I've picked out some people that I think are town, but I don't have a whole lot of suspects other than alvinz at this point.

[Goatrevolt]

Nothing more, vote stands. Lynch, me, lynch scum tomorrow.

That's so wrong. This isn't an either/or situation. Both you and SC could be town. If we lynch you and you are town, then lynching SC based solely on your word would be really dumb. What if you're both town? Then we're in deep trouble.

[Goatrevolt]

Why is it so wrong? Of course he could be town. What if he isn't? Why can't we deduce from day 1?

You're missing the point. Of course he could be scum, anyone could be. And yes, we try to deduce scum from day 1.

Here's why it's wrong. You want us to lynch you in order to prove that you are pro-town. Then you want us to lynch StrangerCoug after you've been shown to be pro-town. The reason this fails in logic is because proving that you are pro-town doesn't prove that StrangerCoug is scum. You could be wrong about him. In other words, we'd be throwing away a lynch for information that is meaningless and if followed could possibly lead to us throwing away yet ANOTHER lynch.

The lynch Player X and if X is town then lynch Player Y only works if there is a connection between those two players. For example, if Player Y counterclaimed player X. You could lynch X, and if X is town, then X's alignment directly relates to Y's alignment. This situation is not similar at all. Whether or not you're town doesn't mean jack about whether or not SC's town.

[Goatrevolt]

umm...strike 3? Alv why do you want us to lynch you so bad? now its like well, we lynch him and either get scum or we get rid of an anti town townie. you are either scum or your trying to help the scum - but does it matter anymore? im was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt here, but now there is no doubt. saying lynch me is

almost

straight up daring us to ice you. desperate scum gambit or townie who dosent care are the choices we have now, acting like that really makes my decision for me

vote alvinz95

- the thing is, acting like this wont make sc or even goat look bad if your town, because your demanding to be lynched and refusing to answer simple questions. Im just asking you to explain why you are so reaady to end the day and all i get is "no more"?? there is no devils advocating that. this looks like a despeate last ditch attempt to get out of answering my very simple question. That makes me think you are almost certainly scum, or very anti-town town, and if you

are

town play like this will only distract us from chasing scum if you stay around.

Unvote, Vote skillit

Willing to lynch alvinz even if he's town because he's unhelpful?

His asking us to lynch him is pretty much a null-tell in my book, because it's simply bad play as both town and scum. I'm not liking your jump on this wagon under the premise that he's a fine loss even if town.

[Goatrevolt]

I say "why ready to end the day" he says "kill me im not going to answer." My position was there wasn't enough to be sure, now i have little left to doubt. why would a townie do this? i now support his lynch as he is just spitting in my face instead of answering a simple question asked by someone who was unsure.

Why would scum do that as well? It seems counterproductive to both sides.

[Goatrevolt]

At this point I'm waiting for FL's analysis, and for the lurkers to weigh in.

If things don't start picking up naturally, I'll start trying to generate additional discussion.

[Goatrevolt]

tl;dr?

Too long; didn't read.

[Goatrevolt]

Hey everybody I'm going to read over all the pages immediately and try to digest some of what's happened.

Awesome. Welcome to the game, and I'm interested in hearing what you come up with in your reread.

[Goatrevolt]

P.S. I know this is a more experienced game, but if someone could enlighten me on how to include quotes in a post it would be most useful in proving my points.

How ironic that you have a /quote tag at the end of this statement.

To make quotes you just do:

text that you are quoting

You start with a quote tag that looks identical to mine above, except without the *. Then you have your quoted text, then you end the quote tag with [/quote].

You can also hit the "quote" button under someone's post and it opens up a reply with their post already quoted for you.

Also, how many votes is Alvinz at? I don't want him to get lynched at all right now. I'm actually starting to think he might be town simply on the nature of his meta.

Also:

In closing I feel that Alvin is a scum

and if he is not then he should learn to use more logical arguments and not attempt to appeal to emotion

and for this reason

Bolded for emphasis. These type of arguments really don't instill confidence in me that Alvinz is a good lynch.

[Goatrevolt]

Lots of tattleing along (more than once)

Does tattling make someone scum?

very opportunistic

Where?

extreme panic-omgus.

This point is valid, but crazy panic-omgusing everyone who votes you just seems like dumb play as town or scum. It's basically asking to be lynched.


I'm hoping to scour through the thread today and come up with my top 3 suspects and reasons why to hopefully get this game rolling again.

[Goatrevolt]

I don't want to lynch SC for a lot of the reasons Mega brought up. I can't really read his playstyle very well, because he's made these same kind of scummy mistakes in every game I've played with him. For that reason, as of yet, I haven't seen anything that would really make me think he's scum.

I'd rather lynch someone who I think has a decent chance of being scum, rather than someone who is always scummy and is tough to read.

I actually agree with almost the entirety of Megatheory's post, and am still happy with my vote on skillit.

[Goatrevolt]

I sense goat/strange/forbidden team if theres 3 scum.

I think it's funny that you accused my means of scum hunting as stupid early on in the game. Your means of scum hunting seems to be simply "Goat is scum because he's attacking me instead of StrangerCoug, and SC and Forbiddan are scum as well because they agree more with Goat than me."

That's just glorified OMGUS, not really trying to find scum.

[Goatrevolt]

Vote: Alvinz

Is it just me or is alvinz seeming more and more like a liability to Town each time he posts?

Liability, how? Is that you saying you think he's scum, or is that you saying you think he's an unhelpful townie that you want to lynch anyway?

[Goatrevolt]

Yup, I definitely agree with where Skillit is going with this.

Vote: StrangerCoug

The overall pressure on StrangerCoug looks to me like a

distraction

, if you will, from the pressure on Alvinz

Care to explain this? It was a distraction you took part of.

FoS Rage

[Goatrevolt]

That's 3 votes on Rage if I'm not mistaken I don't want to put in the fourth vote and risk a quick lynch on Rage if a scum hammers until I hear his explanation. If he skirts the issue at all though on his explanation then I'll give a swift vote.

It's 7 to lynch.

[Goatrevolt]

I think he's trying to "buss" me.

Whoa, stop everything. Do you have any idea what you just said?

He almost certainly simply misused the term or doesn't really understand what it means. I wouldn't read too much into that.

[Goatrevolt]

Unvote, Vote Rage

Sorry, I don't buy the "more votes on me please, defense." If you're not even willing to try to validate your stances this game, I'm seeing no reason not to just lynch you.

I don't know if I'd go so far as to call Alvinz town, but I don't see how his bus comment incriminates him in any way. Also, I'd be surprised if he was a lyncher. It's not even worth speculating over.

[Goatrevolt]

Don't worry, I called the hammer. You won't see a vote on him from me til 6th is piled on .

How about we don't hammer or do anything of the like until we extract a claim and make sure we want to end the day.

[Goatrevolt]

@GR, please don't mistake my call for votes a defense. I wanted to see who bandwagonned, which so far happens to be you. Thanks for that.

Ah, the ol' act as scummy as you can and then see who attacks you for acting scummy gambit. I'm sure you'll catch a lot of scum by doing that.

Still waiting for your defense...

[Goatrevolt]

First of all, Rage, why you don't you actually look at the posts where people gave reasons for voting you and finding you suspicious and then respond to those posts. That would be why everyone is clamoring for you to defend yourself. People gave reasons to find you scummy, and you've ignored them and instead just asked more people to vote for you.

For starters, why don't you respond to Veerus' post when he votes you and my post when I FoS you.

@Goatrevolt, I've noticed that you are acting fairly different than your earlier approach to this game. You almost seem eager for a lynch.

I don't see how I'm acting any different. You say I'm eager for a lynch, but later on in that same post you quote me when I say I don't want him to get hammered until we're ready to end the day.

As examples of what I recall finding fishy, explaining Avlinz's use of the term "buss" (doesn't matter how it's spelt, we all know what it means and the reactions to it) in this post:

He almost certainly simply misused the term or doesn't really understand what it means. I wouldn't read too much into that.

Where is your justification?

I feel my justification is quite obvious. Do you honestly think Alvinz actually would come out in the thread and say "I think StrangerCoug is my scum buddy and he's trying to just get me lynched so that he looks good when I flip scum." That's what his post reads like if you take the literal meaning of the word bus. There's no way that's what he actually meant.

Sorry, I don't buy the "more votes on me please, defense." If you're not even willing to try to

validate your stances

this game, I'm seeing no reason not to just lynch you.

How about we don't hammer or do anything of the like until we extract a claim and make sure we want to end the day.

In the first quote, you say you see no reason not to just lynch me I assume you mean apply more evidence than just bandwagoning instead of controlling the Town's actions) but in the second you want a claim out of me. Explain please.

Why would I want to lynch you without a claim? Me saying "there's no reason to not lynch you" does not equal "let's lynch him right now before we get him to claim." I was merely saying that you've given us no reason to suggest that you're town. In no way, shape, or form did I imply that I didn't want to go through the normal channels of claiming and then making a decision based off of that.

Also, I don't quite know what stance

you

want me to validate.

See, this is just ridiculous. People have given plenty of reasons why they find you scummy. Veerus pointed out some reasons when he voted for you. I pointed out something and FoSed you soon afterwards. You have not once responded to any points brought against you, and have instead taken to attacking people for bandwagoning you. Go back, find where people provided reasons for thinking you're scummy, and answer them.

[Goatrevolt]

You seem prone to chronic miscommunication as well, which renders a significant amount of your debate useless. I agree with most of your reasoning, with a few rather curious exceptions.

I'm prone to chronic miscommunication but yet you agree with most of my reasoning ? You're going to have to quantify that for me, because I don't know what you're imply by chronic miscommunication or where I've committed it.

I think it may look like I'm giving SC a much bigger pass than I actually am, because I haven't been pressuring him as hard as some others. I've got him at about 50/50 right now for me, though.

I thought your analysis was decent, but I greatly dislike when players go back and make lengthy analysis but toss suspicion on every single player. It makes it really hard to figure out your actual opinions (as everyone is generically scummy for one reason or another), and gives you plenty of leeway to pick and choose whatever stances you want to take. If you don't think someone is scum, then I don't see it as beneficial to point out a couple of minor scum tells, avoid pointing out any town tells, and leave it at that. It paints a picture of that player being scummy even if that's basically a complete straw man and not the case.

[Goatrevolt]

Huh? I'm not trying to get lynched, I'm trying to see who wants to bandwagon on me.

To what end? How is that pro-town at all?

[Goatrevolt]

@Megatheory: I don't know how you see that as buddying at all. Your stances already agreed with much of what I was thinking (and had said in the thread already), and I was already voting for skillit at the time.

[Goatrevolt]

Huh? I'm not trying to get lynched, I'm trying to see who wants to bandwagon on me.

To what end? How is that pro-town at all?

There can only be so much scum in this game. My role is one that the Town can afford to lose on Day 1.

Oh, and, nice opportunistic FoSing, StrangerCoug.

Nqah, that's still missing the point. My question is what do you expect to learn by having people waon you? Are you suggesting that if you act scummy only scum will wagon you? How do you differentiate between town/scum on your wagon?

[Goatrevolt]

Seriously? Why rush it? I wasn't ready to end the day.

[Goatrevolt]

I'm still pissed off about Forbiddan's hammer, but I guess there's no use crying over spilt blood. Or maybe that's the point of this game, I don't know. Either way, I don't think that is suggestive of Forbiddan being scum. I'd actually argue that it's the opposite.

Skillit, GhostWriter, and Sthar8 would be my top 3 right now, pending reread.

[Goatrevolt]

I'm still pissed off about Forbiddan's hammer, but I guess there's no use crying over spilt blood. Or maybe that's the point of this game, I don't know. Either way, I don't think that is suggestive of Forbiddan being scum. I'd actually argue that it's the opposite.

Did you miss the part where forbiddan reserved the hammer vote? In reality, StrangerCoug is the actual hammer vote since she expressed her intent.

No, I simply didn't expect her to hammer so fast. Generally players will make sure we're ready to move on. I had no issue with her wanting to hammer, but I did have issue with the quick end to the day.

[Goatrevolt]

Sorry, I'm extremely busy, and have fallen behind in basically every one of my games. By tonight I'll hopefully be able to review and figure out where I want my vote at.

My reasons for finding forbiddan's hammer as not indicative of her being scum are the following:

1. She puts herself out there in the open and will immediately draw suspicion if she hammers a townie. This is not pro-scum play. Scum don't want to be in the spotlight and don't needlessly do stuff like this that will draw attention to themselves. Think about the number of votes that have piled on her today and ask yourself why scum would do something so easily avoidable yesterday with no real benefit that's going to result in this many votes.

2. Her play here reminds me almost exactly of mini 624 where she was town. The one time I saw her as scum (a similar to mafia game) her play was much more under the radar and not nearly as out in the open.

Granted, I haven't read any of the reasons people are voting her yet, but these are the reasons I think she is town. Tonight, I shall hopefully get caught up.

[Goatrevolt]

Goatrevolt, who do you think is most suspicious at this point and why?

The 3 I mentioned earlier on today. Reasons will come tonight with reread.

[Goatrevolt]

My reread is going to have to come tomorrow. My brain is fried after rereading through a couple of other games.

@Megatheory: His continued insistence on StrangerCoug, lack of opportunism in jumping on potentially easier targets like Rage, and the genuine feel I got from his lynch me then lynch StrangerCoug post from yesterday all gives me townie impressions.

[Goatrevolt]

Actually, I'm pretty sure sir refers to a man. Lynch all liars?

Anyway, I'm rereading the entire thread (or "reading for the first time" some of it) right now and taking some notes along the way. I'm moving along at a whopping pace and am currently midway through page 3! Expect a post tonight.

[Goatrevolt]

I'm on page 11. I will say on reread that forbiddan is a lot more scummy than I had originally thought. I've found this reread to be extremely helpful, as it gives a completely fresh look at the entire thread without any preconceived biases. Thus far my current scum picks are forbiddan and Ghostwriter. Ghostwriter doesn't have many posts at this point, but I find 174 to be the epitome of scummitude if anyone wants to take a look at it and maybe see what I see.

[Goatrevolt]

Here are the notes I took. They pretty much stopped at a certain point when I wanted to just finish my reread.

Post 21, joonster: Don't really like this post much. Why only a FoS? What does whether or not he's asked that question before matter?

Post 30, joonster: Don't like this post either. Joonster's last post was a serious post about Rage, and now in this post he comes in and suggests we're still in the random phase. He pretty much defends alvinz via attacking me for weak reasons.

Post 38, veerus: I'm curious as to why you find this interesting and rather than comment on rage/alvinz you instead bring this up. Does 3 votes on the same person in the random phase mean anything about finding scum? If so, what does it mean?

Post 40, Gojira: I don't like how he mentions that alvinz is "too aggressive" but doesn't quantify what that means at all and doesn't back it up at all. I also don't like him also jumping on the 3 people voting the same person as meaningful or why he has to clarify that he was there first. Is he trying to say that he wants to shift discussion over to that, but wants to make sure that he's not going to be found suspicious?

Post 41, forbiddanlight: I agree about the random stage wagon bit. Calls me out for being aggressive and alvinz for being hypocritical but doesn't act on it.

Post 50, cerebus3: Ignores alvinz discussion and instead focuses further on the 3rd random vote wagon bit. Why does the 3rd vote mean anything? You say it does, but I'd like an explanation. Personally, I dislike this post, because I feel it has the illusion of scumhunting but doesn't actually do so.

Post 53, skillit: I think this is a fairly solid post all around. I agree with his first paragraph entirely. His case on Coug is decent, but rather than suggest that SC's fishing for a modkill was an attempt to get a townie killed (which would be actually scummy), skillit instead played it up as "he's sick of tattletales" which I don't see as a means to place a vote. That would be my only real issue.

My take on SC's tattling is currently that I see it as him basically looking for something to talk about. There really isn't anything in the thread for him to comment on, so he decides to comment on that basically in an attempt to add something to the game. I read his later attack on me for my "lynch all liars" comment to forbiddan the same way.

Post 64, skillit: Decent post. I think skillit at least seems townie thus far from his line of questioning towards SC.

Post 65, skillit: Sc was at L-3, I think this is somewhat of an overreaction. My qualms with this post are that the unvote severely lessens the strength of your attack on SC considering it suggests that you don't feel that strongly about what you are accusing him of. Up to this point your posts had been fairly townie, but this one gives bad vibes.

Post 66, StrangerCoug: Explain why the people who voted for you were being opportunistic? Surely not everyone who voted for you was scum, correct?

Post 67, cerebus3: Decent analysis in that it appears strangercoug is trying to scare people away from voting for him. However, it seems clear that you set him up for this entirely with post 63. I don't really like the setup here.

Post 68, forbiddan: you call out the wagon as being scummy. However, in this post and post 62 you essentially agree with everyone's opinion of SC who is on the wagon and FoS SC yourself. You can't have it both ways. How is the wagon scummy if you agree with the stance of everyone on it?

Post 74, GhostWriter: I'm not sure about his statement regarding the wagon on SC. I don't see how lack of originality in jumping on it makes it any scummier of a wagon.

Post 103, forbiddanlight: I think this post is quite scummy. You finally agree with the alvinz case after people start pushing him? What took you so long, public opinion not swaying quick enough for ya?

Post 105, forbiddanlight: why?

Post 150, StrangerCoug: So you think alvinz is scummier than me because I'm defending you and he's attacking you?

Post 174, GhostWriter: Scum vibes from this post right here. He suggests he's not convinced of alvinz as scum, and seems to genuinely imply that alvinz is town from some of his statements throughout this post (you're not helping us as a lynched townie) but yet still throws some suspicion alvinz's way and doesn't seem opposed to alvinz's lynch. Very scummy.

Post 175, StrangerCoug: As if proof of my previous statement, StrangerCoug votes for Alvinz based on Ghostwriter's case. This to me suggests that Ghostwriter surely tossed enough suspicion on someone he thought was town (alvinz) if it was enough to push StrangerCoug to vote.

Post 179, forbiddanlight: vague meta check on alvinz with unsupported data to support your vote.

Notes are getting sparse at this point because they take too much time....

Post 293, GhostWriter: Don't like this post. Cerebus may hate me for this classification, but I'm going to call this an opportunistic hop onto a harmless statement.

Post 298, Jshark: I get townie vibes from this post. This strikes me as a solid townie thought process. I was otherwise neutral on Jshark up to this point, but this post makes me lean slightly town on him.

Post 300, StrangerCoug: Freudian slip!

Post 310, forbiddanlight: Boggle. You want to speedlynch Rage prior to extracting claim? Tsk tsk.

[Goatrevolt]

Here are my scum predictions:

1. ForbiddanLight.

The cases presented today on Forbiddan I feel fail to address the most scummy aspect of her play. I think people are on the right track on Forbiddan, but what I consider to be the most scummy aspect seems to have been missed.

I've come around to thinking the hammer vote as more of a null tell. I stand by my assertion that scum like to avoid the spotlight, but the speed of the hammer and her desire to lynch Rage prior to getting a claim out of him balance that out in my opinion.

The ultimate reason I find forbiddan very scummy, and the reason that I find most people have overlooked completely is what I consider her horrible voting opportunism. Don't worry Cerebus, I hope to clarify that .

Exhibit #1: StrangerCoug.

To be honest, SC, you look VERY OMGUSy right now. It sounds like panic in a way. I could be wrong, but it rubs me the wrong way.

FoS: STrangerCoug

. I would probably vote you if you didn't have a wagon. You don't need to die for your reactions yet, but they are noted.

The fact that you have now cast suspicion on every person that has voted you, claiming that a person voting for you because you are acting scummy is "opportunistic", sounds to me like you are trying to scare people away from voting you.

I think that is scummy.

I agree with this sentiment, but I disagree with the wagon. While SC looks scummy, the wagon that appeared on him looked worse, in my opinion.

I mentioned this in my reread notes, but I find this extremely scummy. Both of these quotes show forbiddan in agreement with the people voting for StrangerCoug and she even backs it up with a FoS on Coug herself. However, in the same breath she condemns the wagon. This doesn't make any sense. If she legitimately agrees with the arguments of those voting for StrangerCoug, then why would she feel the wagon is scummy? This is her playing both sides. She's pushing along the wagon with her words, but remaining off of it herself which seems contradictory and scummy.

Exhibit #2: Alvinz.

SC, I'd probably vote you for terminal ridiculousness if I hadn't seen you do the same thing before in an ongoing. However, given my QUICK reread (i.e not my usual 2 hour in depth summary and thought analysis of doom), I actually have to say I finally agree with the alvinz case.

vote alvinz

. I can't add much, but he seems to be panicking and trying to make too little of your points against him. SC is of note but that same ongoing gives me a feeling he just sucks as town (no offense). Also of note is it seems skillit might be attempting to cover for alvinz, but that was just a quick impression.

She joins the Alvinz wagon once it picks up steam with what I would classify as hasty recycled reasoning. Why would she just now come to the conclusion that Alvinz is scummy and for reasons that have been stated for quite a while? My take is that it's because said wagon is finally picking up steam.

Her reaction to Alvinz's claim is also suspicious. Why is a vanilla townie claim lame, and what does you saying you've done it before matter at all? I've claimed vanilla town before myself...both as scum and actual vanilla town, so what's your point? I also think she slips up a bit when she accuses Alvinz of both deflecting from his points and also being overdefensive. It strikes me as BS reasoning used to drive home the stake, since both of those are contradictory.

Exhibit #3: Skillit.

I think my vote will go back to alvinz, but I still want to finish my summary first.

skillit

: TOO MANY DAMN WORDS! AS I SAID BEFORE! CONCISENESS IS YOUR FRIEND! Moving on to the actual meat of your posts...or lack thereof. I mean, you have points in each post, but they very quickly devolve off that to some argument that sounds pretty but really has little to do with the actual game. At least that was my opinion. I don't know if you always do this, but personally, I'm feeling the skillit wagon. You post for the sake of posting for the most part. I sense scum.

vote:skillit

Ah, the fresh skillit wagon begins and Forbiddan reneges on her statement that she'll likely be going back to alvinz. Her reason for voting him is basically that he says a lot of stuff that isn't really necessary and is posting for the sake of posting. Neither are supported arguments. She says she senses scum. I sense opportunism .

Exhibit #4: Rage.

b]HoS: Rage[/b] for inconsistency, random movement on the alvinz issue, and overall non pro town behavior. I still see alvinz as possible scum, but Rage and skillit are definitely looking more to fit the bill.

Hasty, unsupported reasoning for jumping aboard. Doesn't classify the inconsistency. Doesn't suggest what random movement on the alvinz issue means or why it's scummy, and doesn't even begin to explain "overall non pro town behavior." I'm not seeing any solid reasons for a change to Rage here outside the fact that it's now the wagon du jour.

How about we don't hammer or do anything of the like until we extract a claim and make sure we want to end the day.

We aren't going to get a claim. You can see that Rage is just trying to stretch the day by confusing us.

This is so scummy. Trying to quickly get off a lynch on Rage before a claim. This right here is why I've changed my mind on her quick hammer, because I now see it as consistent with her desire to get Rage done quickly before people have a chance to change their minds.

Exhibit #5: Cerebus3.

Good enough cerb. Just putting out some feelers. I knew as I was writing the case it wouldn't stand up.

unvote cerb, Vote: Skillit

. That case I feel a lot better about .

No, I'm sorry but that doesn't work. You can't make a case on someone and then later say "I knew it was a bad case" after the fact.

I also haven't liked fobiddan buddying up to me but yet at the same time leaving the door open by saying I'm good at playing scum. I feel she's trying to buy my support but yet also keep open the possibility of changing her mind in case the town wants to lynch me.

So overall, I think there are a bunch of good indicators that Forbiddan is scum and I haven't even touched into the reasons others are voting Forbiddan (some I find decent, others I find weak).

Vote Forbiddanlight

2. GhostWriter.

I'm not so much convinced of alvinz as being mafia, so much as I'm annoyed by his continued reluctance to give any kind of backing to, at first, Goat and SC being mafia, other than them being on, and pushing his wagon when asked and, secondly, not responding to why he wants to be lynched so bad. However, I believe these are two question that can easily be answered together. I think this is because the answer to the second is that he believes that his death will cause enough people to look guiltily at SC and goat, thus raising the chances for us to see whatever it is that he sees and vote them. I don't like that. If you have a good reason for them to be the focus of the town's votes, other than your role claim and the fact that they pushed your wagon, then say so. Stop all this crap about us lynching you today, and then lynching them tomorrow, because it's already been shown that going on the word of a lynched townie (if you are indeed on the town's side), who had no inside information to base his ranting on, would be an incredibly stupid move of the town. You really want them lynched so back, then make your reason known and stop trying to get yourself killed without helping the town.

I explained my suspicions of this post in my summary, but I'll lay them out here again. He suggests he doesn't think Alvinz is part of the mafia, and later on his "word of a lynched townie" statement he further implies that he finds Alvinz town. The rest of his post is him attacking Alvinz and pointing out suspicious things Alvinz has done. That doesn't compute from the perspective of a pro-town player who feels that Alvinz is also pro-town. It fits from the perspective of a scum player who does want to further Alvinz's lynch but doesn't want to dirty his own hands. He shows a mentality of supporting Alvinz's lynch despite his words suggesting that he thinks Alvinz is town. Scummy.

I think he's trying to "buss" me.

Whoa, stop everything. Do you have any idea what you just said?

Mentioned this as well in my recap, but I think this was an easy one for scum to jump on to throw unsupported suspicion on Alvinz for a slip in words.

Just know that I'd rather have a vanilla lynched at this point in the game than potential pro-town power roles claiming, and although I do think alvinz is scum, he probably won't be lynched today. I'd much rather it be me. Anywhoo, I'm not sure how many votes there are against me now, but, to me, it can't hurt to claim now. I am a Council Member.

In other words, you're essentially claiming vanilla, and not a power role, correct? Okay then, with a claim out of the way, I feel comfortable with your lynch, but I won't vote unless everyone is ready to end the day.

Doesn't explain why he thinks Rage is scummy or why he'd be happy going along with his lynch. Also the "essentially claiming vanilla" bit I consider telling, but I won't delve too much into it right now. I'd rather not discuss it but I do find this entire post scummy.

So, I really think both GhostWriter and Forbiddan are scum, and I saw a few places that would support this pairing, but I'm not interested in that until one of them is dead and has shown up scum as it's meaningless until that point.

3. Cerebus3/Megatheory. Both of these rely on my assumption of Forbiddan as scum, which is why I won't press them for now. Cerebus is because I feel the Forbiddan push on him and then instant back off seems fishy (and I'm decidedly neutral on his posts throughout the game anyway). Megatheory is because of his push to place the hammer suspicion on StrangerCoug rather than Forbiddan. The rest of his play had me leaning town on him yesterday, but after review I'm decidedly neutral.

[Goatrevolt]

This feels like bussing to me.

Well, what will you say about him when I flip town?

Preying on fear.

Post 68, forbiddan: you call out the wagon as being scummy. However, in this post and post 62 you essentially agree with everyone's opinion of SC who is on the wagon and FoS SC yourself. You can't have it both ways. How is the wagon scummy if you agree with the stance of everyone on it?

Um, how about I disagree with the fact that every other vote except the first one was "I agree"?

You also agreed. You can't condemn people for sharing the same belief you have, which is exactly what you did. You agreed with their reasoning, but attacked the wagon anyway.

Post 103, forbiddanlight: I think this post is quite scummy. You finally agree with the alvinz case after people start pushing him? What took you so long, public opinion not swaying quick enough for ya?

Maybe I had to look at the case first? I dunno, how about this, you find me scummy now that everyone has expressed suspicion on me. Public opinion not swaying quick enough for ya?

The difference is reasoning. I've just laid out plenty of reasons for my vote. All of your votes day 1 are with minimal reasoning, or unsupported vague reasoning, and every single one of them happened on the current top target right as people were switching over.

Post 105, forbiddanlight: why?

Already explained in post 109

And I want more reasoning than that. What does "I've done it before" mean, and what does a dramatic claim have anything to do with alignment.

Post 310, forbiddanlight: Boggle. You want to speedlynch Rage prior to extracting claim? Tsk tsk.

To be honest, that made sense given Rage's other posts. Try again.

Prove it. Show me exactly where Rage displayed signs that he was uninterested in claiming his role.

[Goatrevolt]

Pro tip. Don't clear Ghost when I flip. I beg of you that much.

I think GhostWriter is scummy independent of you.

Again, you DAMN well better not clear them when I flip.

Your alignment will not clear/condemn anyone. I will definitely use it though in my determinations of who I think is scum.

Also, to take myself to L-1 so I don't quick hammer as I might do it I were frustrated,

unvote, vote forbiddanlight

May you have much info from my death (Oh yeah, I'm a vanilla townie).

Oh, and don't go saying that I'm being a hypocrite given my view on alvinz. He didn't throw out any cases (good or not), I'm at least trying to do as much. Good luck .

You want us to have much information from your death but you rob us of good information by voting yourself. I don't know what you hope to accomplish by voting yourself, but I'm not going to unvote you if your defense to my case is to vote yourself rather than address my points.

Because the wagon was scummy and fast as hell. You know this.

How was the wagon scummy? You agreed with the reasons people voted for SC, so why are you suspicious of them for sharing the same belief as you?

So? You still did the same thing. Whatever.

No, you just ignored my explanation.

Actually, it doesn't. It's more for fun. I never said his claim was scummy, just lame. Don't misrepresent me. I think you've dug up enough without making yourself look like an ass.

My interpretation was that you were implying lame = scummy.

Nyeh, you can see them yourself

You're the one who asserted this is the case, you're the one who has to back it up, not me.

[Goatrevolt]

(Oh yeah, I'm a vanilla townie)

Lame

[Goatrevolt]

Oh, to be fair, and this will be OMGUSy as hell, and likely not paid heed...look at goat closely when you get a chance. He's feeling more like his scummy meta than his townie. The way the case feels, really. I mean, I can't really explain it...just...keep an eye on him, please.

If you feel my case is scummy, then why not defend yourself and show why?

[Goatrevolt]

So why exactly are you voting yourself?

[Goatrevolt]

Unvote

. I don't want a hammer before people get a chance to weigh in.

FoS: Forbiddanlight

however as an intention to vote.

How do you suggest we get information out of your self-vote? This is the exact same dumb scenario Rage tried. If you do something anti-town, you're going to attract both scum and town. There is really no pro-town rationale for voting yourself. There is limited pro-scum rationale, such as cutting short discussion, which is part of the reason I'm unvoting. I would certainly like to hear what you plan on learning from this exercise though.

[Goatrevolt]

We gather information from lynches based on who was on the lynch. If you're on your own lynch, that's one less person to gather information from, which is why it's not at all pro-town.

[Goatrevolt]

I disagree with the idea that your actions here are pro-town, but I'd like to hear others thoughts on the matter.

[Goatrevolt]

Forbiddan, I find it funny (and telling) that you go from repeatedly saying I'm town over and over again this game, to all of a sudden I'm obviously scum but yet you can't think of any reasons why. OMGUS much?

[Goatrevolt]

So you've played one game with me as scum, never seen me play a game as town on this site and despite saying many times throughout the thread that you think I'm town, I'm all of a sudden scum after pushing a case on you. Uh huh. I love how your impression of me is directly related to my impression of you. I'm town as long as I'm not trying to get you lynched, but the moment I change, I'm all of a sudden scum for reasons you can't elaborate.

[Goatrevolt]

You are getting rather defensive for mere OMGUS. If it's truly nothing, why do you care? And I've played with you as town before. Even if it's not on this site, the meta is similar. Your attacking my weak attack is not making you look good, at least in my opinion. Almost feels like you are trying to stamp out the thought before it catches?

That game wasn't mafia and was one of my first games. I would say I'm a completely different player at this point. I may have won that game for the town in the end, but I did not play very well.

Also, you're completely missing the point. My entire point in these last two posts is that your attack on me is scummy. You're not scum hunting, you're trying to toss suspicion around wherever it best suits you.

Finally, the burden of proof is on you to prove how being defensive is scummy.

[Goatrevolt]

Finally, the burden of proof is on you to prove how being defensive is scummy.

If it's not a case, why defend it? You are jumping at shadows. You honestly are in full rights to dismiss it. By trying to attack it you are basically lending it credence.

Read my above post because it completely answers what you've just said (Hint: I think your actions are scummy is the point). Attacking weak arguments doesn't lend them credence either. That's pretty fallacious.

[Goatrevolt]

So your scum team is the one where I came out of the gates and ferociously attacked Alvinz, taking him to claim range, and then later jumped off him only to start yet another wagon on a scum buddy skillit?

[Goatrevolt]

So your scum team is the one where I came out of the gates and ferociously attacked Alvinz, taking him to claim range, and then later jumped off him only to start yet another wagon on a scum buddy skillit?

I only said maybe alvinz. He was acting scummy and got thrown to the wayside. And that's still WIFOM and you know it. As for skillit, you barely got on him.

That's not WIFOM, that's one of the most important ways to find scum.

Vote Forbiddanlight

At this point, I'm nearly positive you're scum and I'm willing to bring you to L-2. Both times I've seen you as scum you've done this exact same thing where you throw suspicion around and OMGUS your attackers as being scum trying to push home a mislynch on you. I'm guessing your tactic is to either scare them away from voting you in the chance they are wrong or to try to create WIFOM after you're dead.

[Goatrevolt]

So which is it?

Contrary to popular belief, those aren't contradictory. Even if it's a bad case, had he responded in way that was scummy, would have strengthened the case and my cause to vote. I also couldn't push as hard as I like since that would be "deflecting". Especially considering good enough was a reply to his response. You know, this is getting a little zany here. Don't you all think you have enough on me not to have to make stuff up and make yourselves look bad?

You basically defend every single argument against you by saying that the person is misrepresenting you or strawmanning you or making stuff up even when that's obviously not the case. That last post by cerebus was nothing more than him showing two posts with two seemingly contradictory ideas, and rather than simply address the contradiction, you take it upon yourself to also accuse him of making stuff up.

People quoting you in a non chronological order - Not scummy.
People pointing out something for you to address - Not scummy.

Anytime anyone brings up anything against you, you basically hit them with an ad hom attack, which is not pro-town whatsoever.

[Goatrevolt]

At this point I'm just waiting to hear from replacements or players who haven't said much. I'm still in favor of a forbiddan lynch, and would also support a push on GhostWriter (bridges?), because I feel there's a strong chance he's scum.

[Goatrevolt]

It's not the lurking. It's the reasons I outlined a while back when I laid out my top 2 suspects earlier today. You can attempt to address those points if you wish, but I understand there's not much you can do to explain away the actions of your predecessor.

[Goatrevolt]

I'm on page 11. I will say on reread that forbiddan is a lot more scummy than I had originally thought. I've found this reread to be extremely helpful, as it gives a completely fresh look at the entire thread without any preconceived biases. Thus far my current scum picks are forbiddan and Ghostwriter. Ghostwriter doesn't have many posts at this point, but I find 174 to be the epitome of scummitude if anyone wants to take a look at it and maybe see what I see.

Goat suddenly decides that forbiddan is more scummy, and plants her at his top spot, but decides not to vote. Blending in but not causing much.

Thanks for ripping that post completely out of the context of the situation and using it to plant suspicion on me. This is such a huge stretch right here. First of all, I'm not in the habit of blindly voting people after only reading through half the thread. Second of all, I did vote for Forbiddan immediately after I finished my read, which I believe was either my next post or the one right after it and happened in the same night.

Going through and pulling out a few random posts out of context and using it to support theories of who is scum is not scumhunting. You also happened to miss the part where Forbiddan says I'm scum now after I made a case on her. I can already guess your response though, which is that earlier on she was calling me, her scum buddy, town and then now she's trying to distance. There, I've even provided it for you.

[Goatrevolt]

I still don't understand why he thought Goat was scum yesterday. Maybe it's something he can't articulate, I don't know.

Seems to be a common theme.

I just got to page 22 right now, and I'm very confidant FL is scum now:

Still out on

the third scum,

actually. For all I know it could be alvinz

This was a slip. I had to post this as I was really excited to find this.

I don't really see that as much of a slip or all that conclusive. The majority of 12 player games have 3 scum, so it's not much of a stretch or indicator of hidden information to make that assumption.

[Goatrevolt]

Also, I would go ahead and guess that we're not playing mountainous based on the lack of a kill last night.

[Goatrevolt]

I don't really see it as being fishing. I generally find fishing to be a pretty weak tell as it is, because I've never really seen where scum do it more than town. What I don't like is BaB using weak justification to hop on the forbiddan train. I'm interested in hearing what reactions reaffirmed his previous beliefs, and also who his promised mysterious other suspect is and why.

[Goatrevolt]

16: GR votes for Rage based on the "what's the name of scum?" Gr attacks him for trying to look townie.

These reasons seem really forced to me. It seems an oportunistic vote to add a second vote on Rage. Also note SC adding a third vote immediately after

.

That was page 1. I'm not going to be voting on any airtight cases at that point. Early votes to get the game moving are always a little bit forced because there's very little to go on. Also, I don't see how you can say I was being opportunistic by putting a 2nd vote on, considering the first vote was completely random. This was the first non-random vote of the game, opportunism hardly applies.

29: GR switches to alvinz because alvinz called SC's vote opportunistic while keeping his vote on Rage. It makes perfect sense to me why SC did this, but GR insists what he is doing is hypocritical and continues attacking him for a bunch of posts.

This whole case on Alvinz is utterly ridiculous. It

was

still the random voting stage. In fact, the thing that ended the random voting stage imo was this bandwagon on alvinz.
Cerb put it best on post 146.

The case on Alvinz is identical to the case on SC, yet people are excusing SC for being erratic and not seeing if the same can be applied to alvinz.

Wrong. The random voting phase ends the moment real discussion starts happening. When Alvinz makes a post that calls someone out as being opportunistic then that's not a random post, thus we're not in the random phase anymore. Alvinz's defense, which you seem to also agree with, was that his post was in the random phase and thus doesn't matter. I heartily disagree. Everything you say in this game can and should be held against you, especially something like Alvinz's post which was not random at all.

Also, I find it funny that you're accusing me of being scum for starting the bandwagon that you yourself consider moving us out of the random phase. It's pro-town to pressure players and generate discussion to move us from random banter to real discussion. Your entire case thus far on me seems to be that since I'm pressuring people early with weaker cases that I'm scum. That's preposterous. It's very rare to see a very solid case early game on a player. The pressure on Alvinz generated a lot of useful discussion and really moved this game along quickly.

Finally, the cerebus quote doesn't fit. The SC and Alvinz case were simply not the same at all, and I already had given reasons why I didn't consider SC's actions to be a strong indicator that he was scum based on meta. I'm not sure what your implications are...perhaps wondering why I'm attacking Alvinz and not SC? If that's the case, I answered that plenty in depth and provided examples from other games to support it.

also on 36, GR misrepresents alvinz by saying things like, "
Who said I was super eager to start lynching? " when alvinz never mentioned GR being eager to start lynching.

Wrong again. Look at post 31. Alvinz says: "Really, your super eagerness to start lynching gives bad vibes." So yeah...you're misrepresenting me here.

Then there's the rage wagon, which had some extremely poor reasoning. What's with all these poor bandwagons? Anyway, when rage asks for more votes, GR falls for it AGAIN.
GR fails to provide good enough reasoning to put someone at L-2 this late in the game in his post 303.

Falls for it again? Seriously, please back up your accusations with fact. Alvinz asked to be lynched earlier and I unvoted him and voted for skillit who "fell for it." So please, stop misrepresenting me. And simply saying "GR fails to provide good enough reasoning to put someone at L-2" without backing it up at all is meaningless dirt tossing. Also if it's "late in the game" then putting someone at L-2 is not a serious offense. I gave reasons for my vote on Rage, why don't you look them up and tell me how they were inadequate instead of just saying so without any underlying basis.

And there's a general feeling of scumminess coming from GR I can't explain. I wrote in my notes "GR is scum" several pages ago during my read through.

Ah yes, this. You wrote that in your notes and it coincided nicely with when I listed you as a top suspect, am I right? Four people thus far have said they found me scummy but none have been able to actually say why. Of those 4 people, 3 of them are people who were recently attacked by me (Alvinz, Forbiddan, BaB). The only person who's attack has not happened literally directly after I attack them was Megatheory, and his reasoning was basically that I agreed with him (when his stances were agreeing with my earlier posts).

Anyway, regardless of FL's alignment, GR's post on 381 says that FL's hammer actually makes him pro-town. HOLY BATMAN!!! THIS IS JUST... ridiculous. How can you completely dismiss a quick lynch like that? Uh, not pro-town at all.

I gave my reasons for thinking that. Basically, you continue to attack stances I've taken this game, but you have failed to show why those stances are scummy. Simply saying "GR's vote here was scummy" but not providing any reasoning whatsoever to back it up doesn't mean anything. I want you to tell me directly how my reasons for not finding Forbiddan's hammer to be scummy were wrong. You can't just accuse me of something and not back it up.

So yeah, overall, I'm not liking any of GR's votes. I think he's been scummy.

So out of my votes, you've disliked my discussion starting vote on Rage (page 1), my jump to what I perceived a scummier target on page 2 (Alvinz). Both of those votes came early in the game where there is not a lot of information to go off of. Your expectations for me to have a solid airtight case at that point are simply unfair, and pressuring players and generating discussion are pro-town early on. My only other vote you disliked was the one on Rage. You said my reasons for voting him were not good enough to put a player at L-2. You haven't shown why that is. Your word is not good enough, you need to provide examples and suggest why it's scummy.

----------------

All in all, I think your attack is really weak. Much of it is simply "I think GR is scum but I can't explain why" and the explanations you've given so far are that you don't like my votes, but the burden of proof is on your shoulders to show why they are scummy. You can disagree with my reasons for voting someone, and that's fine. The issue, however, is that you seem to be saying that since you disagreed with my votes that I'm scum, which is not fine. You need to show it by showing

Why

my votes are scummy, rather than just simply summarizing what I've done and putting a blanket "this is scummy" label on it. I mean, I could go through and look at anyone's vote and say "This is scummy." It doesn't mean anything unless I actually gives reasons why that is. You simply have not done that.

[Goatrevolt]

It seems odd that almost half our players have expressed suspicion of goat recently, but I haven't given much thought to him as scum. I'm going to reexamine goat tomorrow; I'll update you all with my thoughts.

To be honest, it's frustrating to get repeatedly attacked by people who provide barely any justification beyond "bad vibes." BaB is the only person who has really elaborated any reasons for that suspicion, and he mostly just provided actions that I've done and stamped "scummy" on them without any reasoning why. If I'm someone's top suspect they should be able to elaborate why that is. Vibes don't cut it.

Regardless, I'm interested to see what you bring up, and I'm interested to see what you get on Cerebus, who would be my number 3 suspect right now.

[Goatrevolt]

Personally, I feel a maddeningly subtle difference between his town meta and his scum meta. Just...the way he's presenting things.

Read through Mini 604 and Open 70 (after I replace in) for examples of me as town. You really don't have a town game to compare my play to. The game we just finished was weird. I didn't make a single case that entire game, which is fairly unusual for me as either scum or town.

Also, how does my play in this game compare at all with Mini 624?

@Veerus: I understand the fear, but fear doesn't make something true. I think people are blurring the distinction between me playing well as scum and me actually being scum. Just because I've had success in looking like a townie when I'm scum doesn't mean that whenever I look like a townie I'm scum.

[Goatrevolt]

the end of yesterday's alvinz wagon makes my skin crawl

How so?

I noticed that goat doesn't respond to posts that answer him, presumably unless he disagrees, but if that assumption is correct there is nothing anti-town about this behavior.

That's basically correct. If I ask someone a question, and they respond satisfactorily, I see no reason to press it further.

[Goatrevolt]

Quick comments: I believe that GR has used all his votes as ways to get that person closer to a lynch, rather than scum-hunting.

Really? Everytime you vote someone, you move them closer to a lynch, and when I find someone I think is scum (scumhunting) then I wish them to be lynched. If you can explain how you scum hunt without voting, and how you vote someone without moving them closer to a lynch then I'm all ears.

[Goatrevolt]

Goat: You spent two posts talking yourself off of alvinz wagon, then turned around and vote Skillit for basically agreeing with what you had said before.

After

you had jumped on Skillit, you announced that you no longer wanted to be on the alvinz wagon. I understand that you were undergoing a process in your thinking, but your vote

was

a bit hypocritical, and it was the scummiest thing I've seen you do so far.

Skillit's reasons for voting Alvinz were not the same as mine. He voted for Alvinz basically for something that I considered null-tell or even a slight town tell, which is why I switched.

[Goatrevolt]

I'm kind of torn right now. I think BaB is more likely to be scum than Forbiddan, who would be in second place. The issue is that I think it may simply be better for us to lynch Forbiddan anyway because it would bring some closure to this case.

I think Alvinz is town. I'm 50/50 on StrangerCoug.

[Goatrevolt]

Well anyway, those words really appealed to my emotions. If you aren't scum, I'm REALLY, REALLY sure that Goatrevolt and Strangercoug are scum.

If Forbiddan is scum, then I'm her scum buddy. If she's town, then I'm scum.

Why exactly aren't you voting for me then? Clearly I'm scum in every possible scenario you have.

[Goatrevolt]

Unvote

More to come.

[Goatrevolt]

Truly, you're unvote again proves that you can still be partners with Forbiddenlight, or you know she's town, so you're getting off at the last second. Really, what changed your mind that Forbiddenlight is not scum?

The nature of the attack against her.

At this point I'm back to where I was early in the day. I think Sthar8 is scum, and my guess at scum buddies would be BaB and Veerus.

Vote Sthar8

My abrupt switch is basically a result of a couple of things, one of which is this:

Correcting your scumtells after they are pointed out doesn't make them less valid. If someone were to become scummier than you, I would certainly move my vote. At this point, though, a good number of the theories being discussed assume you to be scum, and we can't act on any of them until after you're dead. In addition, you've been scummy enough today that anything we get from you is tainted until we're sure about your alignment. You said it yourself, you've been scummy enough up to this point that if we were to leave you alive, you'd distract the town and create confusion. I can't think of a reason why we'd let you live one more day. Catching scum and letting them go is just... scummy.

I don't like this paragraph one bit. First of all, I'll start with this part:

At this point, though, a good number of the theories being discussed assume you to be scum, and we can't act on any of them until after you're dead.

Alvinz is the only person who has really pushed any theories about who is scum with Forbiddan. I mentioned possibilities, and BaB mentioned something about me fitting, but neither of us really pushed those at all. In other words, the only person pushing theories whatsoever about who is scum with Forbiddan is Alvinz.

The issue is that Sthar suspects Alvinz, so why is he buying into Alvinz's theories and using them as a way to justify forbiddan's lynch? That doesn't make any sense. He wants forbiddan dead so we can act on the theories of someone he finds scummy? Bad justification.

Catching scum and letting them go is just... scummy.

This I also do not like. Here Sthar8 assumes Forbiddan is scum, while the previous parts of that paragraph have justifications for why her lynch is good and necessary even if she's town. That doesn't fit. Why would Sthar have to justify how her lynch is beneficial in the case she's town when by this statement here he's completely convinced she's scum?

Another reason I find Sthar scummy is this:

Sorry guys, but I'm just not seeing goat-scum right now. My earlier expressed opinions of his day 1 play stand. I don't like his reliance on meta, and the end of yesterday's alvinz wagon makes my skin crawl, but he seems to genuinely want to gain information for the town. I noticed that goat doesn't respond to posts that answer him, presumably unless he disagrees, but if that assumption is correct there is nothing anti-town about this behavior. The shifts in opinion seem honest to me, and they coincide with things like rereads that explain the sudden changes satisfactorily. I'm not going to clear him, but I just don't see him being very scummy.

His end result - I'm not very scummy.

His paragraph - Three things he doesn't like about my play and the statement that he doesn't want to clear me.

The issue: This is the second time Sthar has gone about pointing out scummy actions and focusing on scum tells even when he finds someone town. This fits perfectly from a scum mindset. Sthar8 wants to get townies lynched, and by clearing players and pointing out town tells he prevents that from happening. However, him pointing out scum tells on someone he thinks is townie provides two benefits to scum. 1. It allows him to get on the case if need should arise. 2. It gives others reasons to push my case even if he doesn't choose to himself. In other words, if he legitimately thinks I am a townie, then why is he pointing out actions that could fuel a push in my direction? That doesn't fit a townie mindset. A townie doesn't want to get another townie lynched, and thus is not going to point out things that would further that agenda.

Finally, I don't like how Sthar is suspicious of almost everyone. He's suspicious of Forbiddan, but also Alvinz, and also StrangerCoug. Likewise he's suspicious of Cerebus, and has shown some weak suspicions of BaB. While he thinks I'm town he's shown that he's suspicious of me as well. He's suspicious of skillit. Many of those players do not fit as scum very well with each other, but Sthar has managed suspicion on both of them. The issue is that by maintaining suspicion on so many players he leaves himself open to push whomever he wishes. He can pick to side with StrangerCoug against Alvinz if he wishes, or he can pick to side with Alvinz against SC.

So at this point I find Sthar8 to be the scummiest. BaB I still also think is scum, and my best guess at a 3rd suspect would be Veerus. I liked Rage's analysis on Cerebus/Veerus in 806. Forbiddan I'm not sure on, but I think if Sthar/Veerus end up being scum it would mostly clear her and at the moment I find it more likely that they are.

[Goatrevolt]

Truly, you're unvote again proves that you can still be partners with Forbiddenlight, or you know she's town, so you're getting off at the last second. Really, what changed your mind that Forbiddenlight is not scum?

I want to address this more.

You're wearing scum-tinted glasses. You take every action I make and try to fit why I would do that as scum to fit your already preconceived notion that I am. You can literally look at everything I do from this point on and find some way to justify how I could have made that play as scum. Does that mean it's true? Not at all. You need to show why I'm scum, not just assert that I am and then show how my actions could fit if I were scum.

[Goatrevolt]

First of all, why is Veerus defending my attack on Sthar prior to Sthar even defending it himself? I attack Sthar and Veerus comes to his defense? That serves to reinforce my opinion that they are scum together, but that can be dealt with later after we see Sthar's alignment.

I don't like this paragraph one bit. First of all, I'll start with this part:

At this point, though, a good number of the theories being discussed assume you to be scum, and we can't act on any of them until after you're dead.

Alvinz is the only person who has really pushed any theories about who is scum with Forbiddan. I mentioned possibilities, and BaB mentioned something about me fitting, but neither of us really pushed those at all. In other words, the only person pushing theories whatsoever about who is scum with Forbiddan is Alvinz.

This is a stretch. Everyone who's voting for FL obviously has reason to think she's scum. However, since this is the game of imperfect information, theories that hinge on her alignment may or not be correct. Just because not everyone has voiced their assumptions doesn't mean that no one else is thinking of them.

It's not a stretch at all. Why is Sthar using theories of someone he finds scummy as additional reasoning to justify a lynch of a player? When I see someone add justification to a case that simply isn't meaningful, doesn't indicate that a player is scum, or doesn't fit with their current or previous stances then it sets off huge alarm bells. This justification by Sthar8 doesn't fit with his stance that Alvinz is scum, and furthermore who is scum with forbiddan is completely meaningless towards determining whether or not forbiddan actually is scum.

So at this point I find Sthar8 to be the scummiest. BaB I still also think is scum, and my best guess at a 3rd suspect would be Veerus. I liked Rage's analysis on Cerebus/Veerus in 806. Forbiddan I'm not sure on, but I think if Sthar/Veerus end up being scum it would mostly clear her and at the moment I find it more likely that they are.

How did I get thrown into this mix? This is the first time I've seen you mention me and you don't even bother to back it up.

Do I need to back up my suspicions on my 3rd suspect? I don't see a pressing need to go through and layout exactly why I find you scummy and have a big back and forth considering you are my 3rd suspect, and I'm not interested in pushing you or lynching you today. It would serve as a huge distraction. Needless to say, I'll lay out my reasons for finding you suspicious around the same time I actually am pushing you as a suspect.

This is also quite a turn-around from your earlier posts. You've spent the past 3 weeks attacking FL, giving well-presented justifications and examples of her scumminess and then suddenly you do a 180 and declare that she's not even a top 3 suspect? This looks like an opportunistic attempt to save your partner in a quick bandwagon right before the deadline now that there has been enough suspicion cast on some other people.

FOS: Goatrevolt

You couldn't be more wrong here.

1. There is 9 days until deadline. It certainly isn't right before a deadline.
2. If I were scum and wanted to save my scum buddy forbiddanlight with a quick bandwagon right before the deadline, I would have picked a target that it could have happened on, like Alvinz or StrangerCoug. Instead, I'm pushing a target who has remained almost completely unsuspected the entire game. This is a completely offbase accusation.
3. "Now that there has been enough suspicion cast on some other people" Show me the suspicion cast on Sthar8. Then I will yield this point.
4. Changing my mind isn't scummy as you seem to want to portray it as. I see weak attacks on Forbiddan, and scummy justification for lynching her. I change my opinion on her based on that and instead attack those pushing weak attacks.

I think it's extremely telling that Veerus is using the "chainsaw defense" to defend Sthar8. As soon as I attack Sthar8, he steps up and defends Sthar and then attacks me right back. Classic scum buddy defense right there, especially since his reasons for attacking me are completely off base. I just put my balls on the line for forbiddanlight, and if she's scum, then I'm going to have a hard time defending myself. Does that makes sense from the perspective of us being scum buddies together? Even if we were scum buddies and I was ballsy enough to stand up and defend her at L-2 with people not voting her stating their intent to do so (basically, she was going to be lynched) then why would I attack literally one of the most unsuspected players in the game?

Finally, I'll leave you with this bit addressed to Veerus:

This is also quite a turn-around from your earlier posts. You've spent the past 3 weeks defending Goatrevolt, giving well-presented justifications and examples of why players' baseless attacks on him aren't meaningful and then suddenly you do a 180 and declare that he's a suspect? This looks like an opportunistic attempt to save your partner by using the chainsaw defense right before the deadline now that there has been some suspicion cast on him.

Now that I've addressed that, reading through the rest of what's been posted...

[Goatrevolt]

Quick comments: I believe that GR has used all his votes as ways to get that person closer to a lynch, rather than scum-hunting.

Really? Everytime you vote someone, you move them closer to a lynch, and when I find someone I think is scum (scumhunting) then I wish them to be lynched. If you can explain how you scum hunt without voting, and how you vote someone without moving them closer to a lynch then I'm all ears.

Some votes don't really progress a lynch as much as others. For instance, if I voted for veerus right now, he probably wouldn't be any closer to a lynch. Sure he's

technically

one vote closer to a lynch, noone else would be likely vote for him let alone four more people. In that case, my vote really isn't progressing his lynch.
However, my vote would be scum-hunting in the way that I would see his reaction, and everyone else's reaction.
AND, I could have a case on veerus, so I would be scum-hunting by voting, but this day, there's no way anyone but FL is going to get lynched.
Therefore, this vote on veerus would not really be progressing his lynch.
Understand what I'm saying?

I certainly do. I was the first vote on Rage. I was the first vote on Alvinz. I was the first vote on Skillit. I was the first vote on Sthar8. Do you see where I'm going with this? None of those votes were progressing a lynch by any stretch of the imagination based on your definition. In fact, you've defined them as scum hunting. I rest my case.

Most of your votes have just felt that you have been voting just to get a person closer to a lynch. It seems like most of your votes aspire to gather more votes on the person, jumping from wagon to wagon to see who you can get lynched. I'm exaggerating this to make you understand what I'm saying here.
You're not bringing up many new suspects, and you just seem to go with whichever person you can get lynched easiest. That's what I'm attacking you for, but remember...

I have brought up more new suspects than any other player in this game. Give me a break. See above where I reference Rage/Alvinz/Skillit/Sthar8... I have currently cast 2 votes out of 6 this game which were not original votes. In other words, 2/3's of my votes this game started bandwagons or reflected completely original suspicions that other players followed. This is an extraordinarily weak attack. You're attacking me for something that

1. Is untrue
2. I'm the person who has exhibited the least signs of doing that thus far.

I have mentioned numerous times that the bulk of my case is based on your connections to FL. It's why I'm not voting you or anything. I need to be sure of FL's alignment before I see whether my case on you is much worse or much better.

Would you consider that justification for lynching forbiddan?

I just want to say that I think the attacks on me are extremely scum driven. I've been attacked based on

1. Gut feelings
2. That my votes are just trying to progress a lynch rather than scum hunt, when my votes fit the precise definition of scum hunting provided.
3. Because I changed targets 9 days from a deadline, obviously tying myself to another player who is probably going to get lynched anyway.

[Goatrevolt]

Also, can we please not hammer forbiddan light right now.

1. Sthar hasn't responded to my case
2. There is plenty of information to be discussed.
3. I think there are better lynches out there than forbiddan, and I want to hear other players weigh in on my case.
4. Alvinz's response to Rage's post.

People are too quick to toss aside my case on Sthar8 as "Goat defending his scum buddy forbiddan" without considering whether or not I have a valid case on Sthar8 or whether or not it's even worthwhile for me to defend Forbiddan as a scum buddy when she's probably going to get lynched anyway. If I was forbiddan's scum buddy and was so gungho on keeping her from being lynched, I wouldn't have posted my huge case on her earlier in the day, and then later backed off her case with a deadline looming and her lynch almost a done deal.

I think Sthar8 is scum, and honestly, I'd be fine with lynching BaB as well, since his case on me is really poor and coincided very will with the lingering gut suspicion on me at the time. Also, his posts all read of him wanting to lynch Forbiddanlight for the purpose of figuring out whether or not his tie between the two of us is meaningful. Horrible justification. It doesn't show why forbiddan is scum, just the implications IF she is.

[Goatrevolt]

Please explain how 1 and 2 are scum driven.

1. Gut feelings. There is no real reason behind a gut feeling, and that player provides no actual reasoning for thinking that the other player is scum. However, it does throw suspicion on that player. Plenty of players have went back and reviewed my play simply because others have had gut feelings on me. It tosses suspicion on, but doesn't actually provide anything to suggest why I would be scum.

2. I find this scummy because it couldn't be more off base. Normally, attacking someone for having poor votes is perfectly legitimate, and is not a scummy attack. However, you basically gave an explanation of what you considered scum hunting and what you considered to be just furthering a lynch, and yet failed to recognize that almost every single one of my votes this game has fallen under your "scum hunting" category, and that I have done more of that scum hunting than any other player in this game. That's why I find this point extremely weak, and since you completely ignored my response and yet still push this point in the face of contrary evidence, I find it scummy to be pushed on this front.

In fact, your attack on veerus is probably one of the first times I feel like you've really been scum-hunting rather than trying to rack up votes for someone.

Did you read my response? Your definition of trying to rack up votes on someone involved voting people who others were already voting for to push a lynch. Your definition of scum hunting was to push relatively unsuspected targets to generate a response out of them.

I've shown you how my vote on Rage, Alvinz, Skillit, and Sthar8 are ALL classified as scumhunting based on your own definition, and you have ignored that. Instead, you continue to push the idea that my votes are merely trying to get people lynched rather than scum hunt. You ignore the obvious evidence I keep presenting to you. Based on your definition of scumhunting, I have done the most scumhunting of any player in this game. You couldn't be more off base.

[Goatrevolt]

Also, let it be known that I do want to get Sthar8 lynched. In fact, I'm voting him because I want to get him lynched. That's what you do to people you think are scum. Scum hunting and wanting to get players lynched go hand in hand, because scum hunting, which I'll argue I've done a lot of this game, involves trying to find scum, and then voting them involves trying to get those players lynched. Please explain how this is anti-town.

[Goatrevolt]

I've shown you how my vote on Rage, Alvinz, Skillit, and Sthar8 are ALL classified as scumhunting based on your own definition, and you have ignored that. Instead, you continue to push the idea that my votes are merely trying to get people lynched rather than scum hunt. You ignore the obvious evidence I keep presenting to you. Based on your definition of scumhunting, I have done the most scumhunting of any player in this game. You couldn't be more off base.

oh, okay goat. I'm wrong, you're not scum.
You can stop sweating now, I'm not attacking you...

This what you want, right?

What are you talking about? You're attacking me, I'm defending myself, and then you're ignoring those defenses and continuing to attack me on points I've defended myself on. This has absolutely nothing to do with me wanting you to stop attacking me or not, and again you continue to dodge the issue.

I don't care if you continue to attack me or not. I will continue to find your attacks scummy though, considering you STILL haven't addressed my defense yet. Stop stalling and focusing on irrelevant issues, and do so.

[Goatrevolt]

What are you talking about? You're attacking me, I'm defending myself, and then you're ignoring those defenses and continuing to attack me on points I've defended myself on. This has absolutely nothing to do with me wanting you to stop attacking me or not, and again you continue to dodge the issue.

I don't care if you continue to attack me or not. I will continue to find your attacks scummy though, considering you STILL haven't addressed my defense yet. Stop stalling and focusing on irrelevant issues, and do so.

My previous post was pointing out how amazingly upset you're getting. Right now, you think FL is town, right? I mean he's not even in your top three for scum. So why the hell are you worried about my attacks?
I mean, I have mentioned numerously that the bulk of my case is built on connections with FL. If you think FL is town, there's really no reason to defend yourself.
But you are defending yourself.

I'm not upset in the least bit. When players attack me, I defend myself. It's how I play the game.

A theory: You know that FL is going to turn scum, so you're already going gung-ho on the defense in order to prevent you're own lynch tomorrow.

Wrong. I was defending myself just as hard from your attacks prior to my change of mind on forbiddanlight. Try again.

1)I've pointed out numerous times the the bulk of my case is based on connections to FL.
2a)I also understand that most of your votes were the first one, but still, they come at times that make them seem as if they're trying to gather a lynch -- not pro-town (thus scummy) with such weak votes. You've argued against this and provided your defense. I have nothing to say to them. I'm not ignoring. You've defended yourself. Do I

have

to attack your defense?
2b) You're recent votes have been better.

If I'm the first vote on a target, how would I be able to gather a lynch on that player? That would mean my case would have to be good enough (AKA scum hunting) for 6 others to hop aboard. If all I'm doing is just looking for a lynch with the

initial

vote on a player, then what are the other 6 players doing then? Aren't they just looking for a lynch even worse than me since their votes agree with my vote and assessment of the player?

Also, I want to note that now you're trying to paint me as scum because I've defended against your attacks. If I didn't defend against your attacks, would I be scum for evading player's attacks on me? Trying to paint me as scum because I have addressed points that you brought against me is patently absurd.

Also, I now note that your attack on me has changed directions. Originally, my connections with forbiddanlight were just a small aspect of your case that you would bring up if forbiddan was scum. Now they are the bulk of your case. Why specifically do you think forbiddan is scum? I've heard you talk more about how I'm scum if she is scum than I've heard your reasons for finding her such.

FoS BridgesandBalloons

Reading through the rest now...

[Goatrevolt]

I must say, Goat, you're pretty good at putting words into people's mouths and railroading them for stuff they didn't say.

1.

I did not defend Shtar from your attack

.. I only attacked your faulty assumptions that just because no one is voicing their theories doesn't mean they don't have any.
2. You DID mention me as a suspect, so your post was an attack of sorts on me as well

1. You attacked one of my points against Sthar8. Perhaps chainsaw defense was the wrong term (I thought that was the terminology for an attack on a player to indirectly defend another player that first player is attacking). If you're attacking the points I make against another player, you're in essence defending that player. It's one and the same.
2. I mentioned you as a suspect, but far down the line and didn't elaborate on it at all. I didn't actually attack you with any reasoning, and the part you "defended against" was entirely directed at sthar8.

Just to emphasize my point above that you're making baseless attacks,

my post did not defend Sthar

. If anything, it defended many of the other players (myself included) who have yet to present a theory on FL's scum partners. Your arguments assume that FL isn't scum when from the looks of it most of the town feels like she is. Theories on her being scum are a waste of time since we don't know if she is.. we just know that her

play

has been scummy.

Your post attacked one of the points I made against sthar8, thus defending him. It's one and the same. If you think the points I'm using to attack a player are bad, then you are defending that player from those points.

Your reasoning here is that sthar8 was a mind reader? That sthar8 knew others had theories about who was scum with forbiddan, but nobody voiced them yet? He's just that good at reading people's minds? I'm going to continue to work off of

what's in the thread

when I determine the validity of a statement, not

what might be later in the thread depending on if other players have something or not

.

My arguments do not assume FL is town. Instead, they look at the nature of the way players attacked her, and suggest that those attacks are not townie in nature.

1. This day has gone on for a month.. 9 days can be considered as right before the deadline... especially if you consider the posting frequency of some players.

9 days is roughly 1/3 of a month. Plenty of time. Also, forbiddan is still hanging around at L-1, and can be lynched if deadline nears, so me presenting other suspects is not an issue. Would you prefer I sat on my hands when i see something I don't like?

2. This is WIFOM. You're gambling either way, and with alvinz and SC being in their own little world that no one seems to be paying attention to, a fresh suspect is not an offbase play.

Again, this doesn't address the issue. You think I'm trying to save forbiddanlight with "a quick bandwagon right before deadline." The issue is that my target, sthar8 doesn't fit with your assessment, because he was relatively unsuspected. If i was looking for an "anyone but FL wagon that might result in a lynch before deadline" I would not have chosen Sthar8. You can try to dismiss it as WIFOM, but it certainly is not, because pushing sthar8 before deadline is a tough lynch to pull off.

3. see #2

You can't paint this off as WIFOM. You mentioned specifically that since there is suspicion on other players I saw an opportunity to hop off of forbiddan light and onto them. The problem with your accusation here is that there was no suspicion on sthar8, which 100% debunks your attack. You can't just ignore that.

4. Changing your mind isn't scummy. Changing your mind when you've been pushing FL for the better part of D2 *is* scummy. Changing your mind and downgrading your top suspect from the past 3 weeks to completely off the radar is VERY scummy.

No, it's still not scummy. It's called reacting to new information. You keep calling it very scummy, but you're not saying why it's scummy. Forbiddan was my top suspect, but when I see new information in the thread to change my opinion I will go with it. That's how townies are supposed to play, go with whoever they find scum and constantly be on the lookout for scum. Picking on player and staying on that player until they die, even if you see evidence to suggest that they might not be scum is what's scummy.

I find it scummy how you put words in my mouth and misuse terms (presumably because "chainsaw" sounds intimidating) to create further confusion and strengthen your argument. Please show where in my post I defended Sthar. Use quotes... I'm guessing they'll probably say something along the lines of "I think you're wrong about Sthar because..." You won't find them because

I didn't defend Sthar

.

I apologize for chainsaw defense, I thought that was the correct term.

"I think you're wrong about sthar8 because X doesn't suggest he's scum." That is the nature of your post. That is called a defense. You are taking my attacks and defending against them by showing how you don't think they suggest he's scum.

As for your argument about it making sense for you to defend your scumbuddy FL at L-2.. that's more WIFOM. I find it interesting how your post is full of it.

It's not WIFOM. WIFOM assumes a scenario in which the likelihood that a player will do A or B is exactly the same and you cannot logically infer whatsoever which one they are more likely to do. My argument is that the likelihood that I would step forward and defend a scum buddy

who is probably going to get lynched anyway

while they are at L-2, after I attacked them early in the day, and which serves to put a huge spotlight on myself (as is shown right now) is not something I'm likely to do as scum. It's not WIFOM, it's behavioral analysis. It's how you catch scum and find townies.

[Goatrevolt]

I'm really frustrated. I had much of this post typed up and went to go to the bathroom and get a drink and windows update automatically restarted my computer. It's really annoying to have to retype a bunch of it over again, but anyway, my response to Sthar8.

You didn't, however, ever provide support for

why

you felt this way earlier in the day. I'd still welcome the chance to respond to whatever that was.

That mostly stemmed from your analysis of every player for the reasons I brought up against it before. There was one additional reason, but I'd have to go back and figure out what it was because I can't recall off the top of my head. Needless to say, it doesn't mean anything on my suspicion towards you since I don't have it handy.

Maybe not as many as I thought, but definitely not just alvinz. Just because no one but alvinz is repeatedly beating us about the face with their speculation doesn't mean that no one else needs the info. And I'm on the record about alvinz, saying:

I don't want to commit to anything regarding him without the insight that the lynch will give us on his list of suspicions

He's suspicious, but FL's lynch will go a long way toward showing us how suspicious his behavior really is.

I mentioned BaB's as being not very meaningful because he wasn't pursuing it. At the moment, it's now the meat of his case against me, which does lend validity to your stance, although after the fact. I don't recall that post by megatheory, but it's valid in your defense. Veerus's post is completely irrelevant.

What theories do you personally buy in to? If theories about who is scum with FL is part of the reason for your vote, then I'm curious as to which ones you find especially meaningful.

I don't see any place that I'm

not

assuming FL is scum. I provided several reasons why her lynch would help us, then I reaffirmed that the most important reason is that I believe she is scum. I don't see anything wrong with this, nor do I think her lynch would be beneficial if she's town. It's just that, short of a cop claiming with an innocent, there's not much that will outweigh the pile of scumtells against her. Where do I justify lynching FL-townie?

I'm also not certain that FL is scum. I'm about 85% sure, but it is still possible that I'm wrong. I think 85% is enough that she should swing, however.

Finally, even if I

had

condoned FL-town's lynch,

you

are not justified in attacking me on that basis:

The issue is that I think it may simply be better for us to lynch Forbiddan anyway because it would bring some closure to this case.

This is quite amusing considering that this clearly states the viewpoint that you ostensibly attacked Skillit on yesterday. Unless you think we should find you scummy for this, I think your credibility on the topic is compromised. In short, you're falsely accusing me of violating a double standard.

I'll drop this. You're absolutely correct that I have no right to accuse you of that at all.

You think I'm scummy because my analysis of your play found you to be more pro-town than not, but didn't clear you? A townie shouldn't be clearing players in the absence of a proven cop investigation or irrefutable logical proof.

Ever

. Clearing someone based on behavioral tells is just begging for a loss. Can you show me where this evidence is that I should have cleared you on?

Obviously, you are correct in that someone should not be cleared barring certain circumstances, but why mention that? You specifically saying "but I don't want to clear him" gives off the impression that you are not solid in your opinion. Whether or not it's true that you don't wish for me to be 100% cleared (which is true, naturally), mentioning that you don't want to clear me creates the idea that your read isn't strong. By saying this along with pointing out scum tells,

even if your final analysis is that I'm town

, you still generate suspicion and leave the door open for others to push those reasons against me. It's like saying "I think he's town, but I don't want to clear him, and here are some reasons you might find to think he's scum. Have at it".

Also, I've already stated that I think it is anti-town to list the reasons that someone is protown, as you are basically telling scum who they should kill, and it's possible to accidentally out power roles this way. It is always protown to point out scummy behavior, and it is anti-town to highlight townie behavior unless it is necessary to prevent the lynch of someone you think to be townie.

Agreed fully. I don't think you needed to list reasons why you found me pro-town because I agree with this stance. I think it's also anti-town to list reasons you find a pro-town player's actions scummy though.

As for your "scum advantages,"
1. I sure would hop on your wagon if you started doing scummy things. Doing so would be admitting that I was wrong, but that's not a scumtell so far as I know.

No, I don't find that a scum tell. One of veerus' points against me is similar to this (scummy to change targets), and I disagree that it's a scum tell in the general sense.

My point is that if you were to hop on my wagon at a later point, even if it were for legitimate points, it doesn't reflect as poorly on you if your town read of me from earlier contained some points which allowed you to easily transition.

2. If you read my post, I point out everything that I

could

see as suspicious, then

refute every point

. How is it helpful to scum to have points against you that have already been dismissed as irrelevant?

For the record, here is your post:

Sorry guys, but I'm just not seeing goat-scum right now. My earlier expressed opinions of his day 1 play stand. I don't like his reliance on meta, and the end of yesterday's alvinz wagon makes my skin crawl, but he seems to genuinely want to gain information for the town. I noticed that goat doesn't respond to posts that answer him, presumably unless he disagrees, but if that assumption is correct there is nothing anti-town about this behavior. The shifts in opinion seem honest to me, and they coincide with things like rereads that explain the sudden changes satisfactorily. I'm not going to clear him, but I just don't see him being very scummy.

Show me where you refute.

I'm suspicious of FL, alvinz, and Skillit, in that order. That is the full and complete extent of my suspicions. I

was

very lightly suspicious of BaB, based on GW's actions, but BaB hasn't done anything that aligns with what I was thinking there. I am concerned about cerberus, and I hope his replacement can up his activity level so that I can get rid of the nagging feeling that cerb was trying to avoid attention, or give me some evidence that will expand it into more than a gut reaction.

I don't think I've expressed suspicion of SC since day1, and he hasn't done anything to make me rethink my evaluation there. I was willing to reexamine you when a number of others expressed that you were their suspect, but I concluded that there was very little merit to the case.

I have no idea why you think I'm particularly suspicious of everyone. No one is cleared yet, but I certainly have some suspects, as well as some players I'm not really worried about. I may not make townie-lists, but you haven't proven that I need to.

I inferred you were suspicious of SC based on your statement about people having theories of who was scum with FL. I assumed you bought into at least one of those theories, otherwise why use it as logic for voting FL? Other than BAB, those theories all involved SC, and since you mentioned that you found me town, I assumed you didn't buy into BaB's.

I'll clarify why I found this scummy, since I don't think I explained it very well. My issue was that you had so many suspects, but I didn't see any real town reads out of you and the one explicitly mentioned (myself) could easily be used as a basepoint for others to push a case on me, even if you yourself were not on it. My read is that you're playing the field, pushing as many players as possible, and leaving things open-ended to allow you to go wherever best suits you as scum.

------

On to your second post.

-----

Weren't you just attacking me for this?

No. I don't have an issue with theories of who is scum with X. I don't think those theories should be pressed until after X's alignment is known, though. My point wasn't that you acknowledged those theories, but that it appeared you were buying into them as a reason for your vote on FL, without any real indication of whose theories you supported or why this was meaningful whatsoever. Since the only real theory I saw at the time was Alvinz's, and since you expressed suspicion of Alvinz, I found it scummy.

Want to back this assertion up with evidence, please? You didn't think the points against her were so weak a few pages ago. What changed?

That was the basis of my case on you, was that I didn't like your attack on FL.

That isn't the only reason that I no longer think FL is town. Perhaps she's exceptionally skilled at WIFOM and I'm buying into it but I feel her play has been pro-town as of late. Her suggestion that we lynch her so the town can move on to discussing other targets, thus expressing worry about the town losing track of scum by focusing solely on one target, speaks to me of a pro-town mindset. Her dropping of suspicion on me after I stopped attacking her doesn't come as a surprise to me, as I considered her attack on me to be 100% OMGUS anyway.

At this point, I really get the feeling that forbiddan is a mislynch and thus I am switching targets. I think the people trying to hammer home the idea that I'm doing this because I'm a scum buddy to forbiddan and am just trying a last ditch effort to prevent her lynch are completely wrong, and I actually find that scummy. I find that a stretch to explain how both forbiddan and I are scum together and a means to keep pressure on forbiddan, while also attacking the one person defending her. I need to figure out what that term is called, since apparently it's not chainsaw defense. Anyway, the point is, I defend FL, and people attack me, which makes me look bad, thus making my defense of FL look bad, thus making her an even more appealing target for a lynch.

You've also attacked me for "being suspicious of too many people." It's protown when you do it but antitown when you (falsely) accuse me of doing it? Yet another double standard.

Actually, that's not quite true. I'm no longer suspicious of Alvinz or Skillit. The difference here is that I've

brought up

a lot of suspects over the course of the thread, many of whom I don't suspect anymore, whereas my interpretation is that you

currently have

that many suspects, which i found scummy for the reasons I earlier addressed.

Straw man. If you were scum, you might have seen SC's abandonment of the FL wagon as a sign that town were open to other suspects. Giving us a new one would be a good way to decrease the chances that your partner is lynched. Veerus is attacking the motive behind your lack of conviction here, not suggesting that you are leeching off general suspicion of me.

I understand the idea behind this. The issue, however, is that Veerus has explained my motive behind leaving forbiddanlight as basically a "last ditch effort to save a scum buddy once suspicion has been flying around on other suspects." The issue is that if I were scum looking to do this, I would have picked a target that was easier to accomplish it with. He dismisses it as WIFOM, but I disagree with that assessment. The fact that none of the suspicion being thrown around was on you is meaningful, and not to be dismissed. You have shown that you are a strong player, and unsuspected. If I were looking for an "any lynch but FL last second save" you would be about the last choice for who I would pick. Skillit for instance, is a target with some suspicion on him who I have shown signs of being suspicious of earlier in the game. That would have been a more optimal choice, etc.

-----

I think sthar8 defended himself well, and he definitely caught me in a web of hypocrisy on that one point, which serves to make my points against him seem weak and contrived. I still think he's scum, however, based on my read that he's willing to keep the door open for pushes on a wide range of suspects and for the reasons related to his statements that he found me pro-town.

I'm interested in seeing how other players feel about my case on Sthar. FL and Megatheory have both chimed in basically with a "I want to see where this goes" type thing, but now that he's posted his defense I'm interested to see others reactions.

At this point, I am also willing to lynch BaB, basically for the following:

1. The reasons I laid out earlier today about Ghostwriter and how I found his posts scummy

2. His attack on me. Originally it was because he found my votes weak, and the tie between me and FL was an afterthought. I defended myself against those points and he has not acknowledged those defenses or conceded any of those points, but yet he subtly changes his case such that my tie with FL is now the meat of his case and those points are just side points. In other words, the entire focus of his case on me has changed, suggesting his realization that he was wrong about my other points, but yet he has not acknowledged such and has instead taken to attacking me basically because I'm defending myself from his attacks while I'm not a lynch target. Under that same logic, sthar8 should not have defended himself from my attacks, but yet BaB has made no attempt to prevent Sthar8 from doing so. And why should he? Defending oneself from attacks is perfectly natural as town or scum. In other words, his assertion is ridiculous.

3. His willingness to lynch FL rings insincere. He's more focused on me being scum if FL is scum than he is of FL being scum in the first place. I don't recall him expressly stating the reasons for why he thinks FL is scum outside of a blanket "I agree with the evidence provided" statement, so if he could point that out it would be appreciated.

Finally, to end this monster of a post:

Goat, you're just too good at being mafia that I see right through it. I'm not going to bother reading walls of text. FL/SC/Goat any of the possibilities. If i'm wrong? Screw it.

[Goatrevolt]

Also, everybody should voice their suspicious on who may or may not be scum based on FL's alignment. The only reason not to would be to stall for time and wait until more people die. The only people who would want to do that are scum.

If FL is scum: Then I think BaB is scum, and to a lesser extent Cerebus/Megatheory based on reasoning I presented much earlier in the day.

If FL is town: BaB -> sthar8 -> veerus

I'm going to grab some dinner. I'll answer veerus/sthar later tonight.

[Goatrevolt]

Yep, BaB is scum in both of my scenarios, so I should be voting him.

Unvote, Vote BridgesAndBalloons

I'm going to continue my attack on sthar, though, as I also believe him to be scum and would like to keep pressure there as well. However, it's been over 24 hours since I've last slept, so I'm going to sleep. I'll address sthar/veerus tomorrow.

[Goatrevolt]

That isn't the only reason that I no longer think FL is town. Perhaps she's exceptionally skilled at WIFOM and I'm buying into it but I feel

her play has been pro-town as of late

. Her suggestion that we lynch her so the town can move on to discussing other targets, thus expressing worry about the town losing track of scum by focusing solely on one target, speaks to me of a pro-town mindset. Her dropping of suspicion on me after I stopped attacking her doesn't come as a surprise to me, as I considered her attack on me to be 100% OMGUS anyway.

At this point, I really get the feeling that forbiddan is a mislynch and thus I am switching targets.

How do you explain away her earlier inconsistant behavior that got her into her current predicament?

Bad play. Her earlier play was scummy, yes, but my recent read is that she's been more pro-town, and combined with my outlook that sthar/you are scummy it makes me feel she is a mislynch. I'd say she's about 4th on my scum list right now, behind BaB->sthar->veerus, and the situation is such that I feel if FL is town then sthar->veerus are scum, and if FL is scum then my suspicion on sthar->veerus is lessened. Likewise, I feel if sthar->veerus is scum that FL is likely town.

Your reasoning here is that sthar8 was a mind reader? That sthar8 knew others had theories about who was scum with forbiddan, but nobody voiced them yet? He's just that good at reading people's minds?

Horse Laugh. With the number of people who had expressed theories about FL's partner, and having such theories myself, it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that the evidence is indicative of a trend. That's not actually what happened, but attacking that assumption as you have shows poor reasoning.

Wrong. This is an example of Hasty Generalization. If 3 players express in the thread that they have a theory of who is scum with FL, it's a logical fallacy to assume that others have a theory as well. Furthermore, I cannot know that you have a theory of who is scum with FL because you didn't announce it as such.

In other words, you mentioned that one of the reasons why we should lynch FL is to figure out the validity of theories about who is scum with her. When I attacked that standpoint on the basis of the theories currently presented, I was attacked back with the idea that I should have known about theories which were not presented. That's an absolute ridiculous argument, and clearly based on fallacious logic.

I mentioned BaB's as being not very meaningful because he wasn't pursuing it. At the moment, it's now the meat of his case against me, which does lend validity to your stance, although after the fact. I don't recall that post by megatheory, but it's valid in your defense. Veerus's post is completely irrelevant.

Why is it not meaningful that BaB's waiting for the evidence that I said he was waiting for? And veerus's post is entirely relevant. It's a summation of an argument between SC and alvinz that assumes a particular result from FL's lynch, making it a theory that needs the info from her lynch in order to develop.

BaB's wasn't meaningful, because his original case on me wasn't based on FL's alignment (I'll get to that in a moment, when I address BaB). Veerus' quote still seems completely irrelevant to me. I can't see at all how that quote relates to FL, considering it looks like discussion over alvinz being a cop and what that means for SC.

I don't and they're not. Without the solid information from the lynch, scumpartner theories are worthless, which is why I've kept

mine

out of thread. My vote is based entirely on the

pile of scumtells

that FL has cranked out this game. Everything else is bonus.

Here:

At this point, though, a good number of the theories being discussed assume you to be scum, and we can't act on any of them until after you're dead

That's additional justifcation for her lynch based on theories of who is scum with her.

Ding Ding Ding! We have a winner! When did I say my read on you was strong? And how is it scummy that it isn't? To my eyes, this looks like you're suspicious of me because I'm not sure enough of your alignment to outright defend you, even though I expressed my opinion that you are probably not scum.

It's not scummy of you to have a less than strong read. Your manner of presenting your information was scummy though. I honestly don't see any problem with you saying "I'm not sure about goatrevolt" or anything along those lines. I do have an issue with you saying "verdict: town, but here are some scummy things he's done. I personally don't think they make him scum, but here they are anyway."

You seem to be arguing that it's anti-town to point out town tells on someone unless you are doing so to prevent their lynch. I agree. You also seem to be insinuating that it's pro-town to point out any scum tells you see in the thread whatsoever of circumstances. I disagree, or at least disagree with the notion of scum tell in this sense. Scum tell is something that you consider makes someone else more likely to be scum. The purpose of pointing them out is to get players lynched who you think are scum. If you find me town, then my scum tells aren't really scum tells, because you don't think they suggest I'm scum. In that case, why point them out? There's no pro-town reason to do so. The argument "I'm just providing information to the town and maybe they can act on it" is exactly the same argument I'm calling you out on over and over again. You're providing information to the town that would allow them to pressure a player you have listed as townie. That is not a pro-town action, and completely fits scum mentality.

Why? Isn't it in the town's best interest to make sure that everyone has all of the information? If I were wrong about you, or anyone else, providing my thoughts on any anti-town play could allow someone else to point out the error in my thinking and help us catch scum. I would agree that it would be counterproductive to provide examples on someone that I'm sure enough about to defend, but there are only a few people matching that description in this game, and none of them are under serious attack currently.

Again, I've addressed this above. If your entire point of reviewing my play was to say that you didn't think I was scum, then it's completely counterproductive for you to also in that same breath provide reasoning why others might find me scum. If you yourself do not think that it means I'm scum, then you don't think it's worthwhile information to pressure me on. Why give it to others and allow them to pressure me on that information then? You personally don't think it's indicative that I'm scum, so you obviously aren't going to act on it, right? Why allow others to do the same?

It's like saying this: "Goat has committed A. I don't think A means goat is scum. However, it's suspicious because of B. So maybe you will think goat is scum from A." You personally don't think it's a meaningful scum tell or else you'd be voting me for it. Why then would you present it so others could vote me for it?

So I'm suspicious because you think I'm defending against something that isn't a scumtell? Why would changing my mind on you reflect poorly on me

at all

, if I provided solid reasoning to go with it?

For the exact same reasons that my change on FL is reflecting poorly on me right now. Earlier I provided reasons why I thought she was scum, and now I've changed my mind. I've come under a lot of pressure for that change. If I had previously been wishy-washy and been like "Well I think FL is scum, but here are some town tells and maybe you'll think she is town from them" then I could have been able to cite that and say that my read wasn't strong and that I now consider those town tells to override my idea that she was scum, etc. It wouldn't seem as much of a drastic change and would likely allow me to make a swap like this less noticeable.

Show me where you refute.

1. "I don't like his reliance on meta" is not a scumtell, it's just bad play. (in my opinion)

You didn't mention that in the post.

2. "the end of yesterday's alvinz wagon makes my skin crawl" corresponds to "The shifts in opinion seem honest to me, and they coincide with things like rereads that explain the sudden changes satisfactorily." This would be obvious to anyone who checked the context of the alvinz wagon.

That doesn't correspond at all, and it completely non-intuitive to connect, considering the first point was early in the paragraph and the 2nd point was later in the paragraph and is very seemingly unrelated. Also, my change of opinion on Alvinz/Skillit didn't have anything to do with a reread.

3. "goat doesn't respond to posts that answer him, presumably unless he disagrees, but if that assumption is correct there is nothing anti-town about this behavior." I hope I don't have to point this one out

Nope, that one is obvious and the only point in your favor.

So you agree that I shouldn't announce town tells in thread, but not doing so makes me suspicious if I also express my own suspicions?

And since when is three suspects and one worry too much for a twelve person game?

Three suspects and one worry is understating it. I listed 7 suspects that you had shown some suspicion of in somewhat of a recent time frame.

As evidenced by my single-minded pursuit of FL today, right?

Single minded pursuit of

lynching

FL. You've attacked and generated plenty of suspicion on other targets as well throughout the day which is what I find suspicious.

For example: You think FL being scum makes Alvinz look better. You mentioned an 85% chance FL is scum. By that logic, you should feel that Alvinz is probably town, yet you have been pressuring him. I don't think it would be absurd to assume that you would be able to be on an Alvinz wagon, should things start to change towards lynching him instead. That's what I find scummy. You are completely open to pushes in plenty of directions.

But my desire for information that would allow us to evaluate these theories, because they are held in part by someone who I find suspicious, is scummy?

You yourself claimed that this was not a reason for your vote. I'm assuming here you renege on that?

This is horrifyingly flawed. The fact that we've pointed out FL's scumtells, and she subsequently stopped displaying them, only proves that she can read. Nothing she has done nullifies the huge amount of scummy behavior we've seen in any way. And the suggestion that her "giving up" is a town tell is laughable as well. In her situation, it would make sense for scum to emulate the behavior of alvinz from yesterday, as that made you drop your suspicions of him and saved him from a lynch. In addition, the "lynch me, it's best for the town" strategy is a good example of WIFOM, and could be used to scare votes off of her wagon, as we have already seen.

I think her mentality has been pro-town, mainly in that she seems interested in steering the town towards talking about productive things. Furthermore, my read that you are scum does play a role in my perception of her.

I'm no longer suspicious of BaB or SC, and I've never been suspicious of you. I see no difference in the situations, because your

interpretation

of my suspicions is a list of everyone I've suspected

all game

plus some random guesses that are only tangentially supported by a misinterpretation of my arguments.

If I'm able to interpret that you're suspicious of those players, it's just as easy to see how you could get on their wagons without it being an issue. Again, the alvinz example I provided above is kind of the idea I'm talking about. I could seriously see you on almost any wagon today and it wouldn't be a stretch.

The issue is that if I were scum looking to do this, I would have picked a target that was easier to accomplish it with.

I've already brought this up, but it has no bearing on the fact that your argument was a straw man. Had you expressed

this

sentiment, your objection would have been valid.

I did express this sentiment.

Response to BaB to come...

[Goatrevolt]

Also, I now note that your attack on me has changed directions. Originally, my connections with forbiddanlight were just a small aspect of your case that you would bring up if forbiddan was scum. Now they are the bulk of your case.

that's a complete

lie

.
I never said the connections with FL were a small aspect. I have mentioned that I suspect FL as scum more than you did. THe only reason I mentioned my suspicions on you was to get people to get a read on me. Normally I wouldn't have mentioned my suspicions on you at all. That's because it's weak.
It's all weak until FL turns up scum.

It's all gone if FL is a townie.

Oh. Really. Post 683 is your post where you lay out your suspicions on me. Let's have a look shall we?

While Goat and FL have been connected to an extreme extent, that doesn't mean anything until FL is lynched. Anyway, I will bring up these connections if FL turns scum. And, If FL is scum, I will be that more confidant with Goat,

but if FL is town, I will probably still be suspicious of Goat.

Bolding emphasis mine. In fact, this is the only mention of connections to FL in your original case on me, the rest deals with my votes and how you find them scummy. Is it so ridiculous for me to assume that connections with FL are a secondary aspect of your case when you even said that you would still find me suspicious even if FL is town? That suggests that those connections are not the bulk of your case.

Is there any reason to repeat all the myriads of scummy things she's done? I'll give you a choice:
a) I stay with the current discussion and am able to defend myself.
b) I spend the next week or more digging up evidence that's already been cited on a player that's going to be lynched in a week anyway.

I honestly cannot find a place where you've specifically said why

you

think FL is scum, outside of the inconclusive "slip". And yes, it's certainly meaningful for you to say why you think she's scum. Blind agreement with the leading wagon and then just saying "I agree with what others have said" without any indication of what specifically you agree with is not enough. Since I haven't seen you provide anything like this at all, it definitely feels to me that you want to lynch FL specifically for the purpose of your case on me.

1. Wrong. That was never the focus of the case. This is a huge EXAGERATION. Read my previous post. The strongest part of my case is your connection with FL, who I believe to be scum.

Yes, your previous post states that it wasn't he focus of your case. Originally, it was, based on 683, which is my entire point. The focus of your case changed and you haven't acknowledged why that is.

2. Strike two. Again you claim the main point of my case was your voting when it never was. Also, you say that it's scummy to not concede points? Are you fucking kidding me? Do I need to pat your head everytime and say, "oh, good defense?" How does that help the town?

Again, the main point of your case was my voting as referenced above, and again I find it scummy that your case has changed gears but you haven't given any reason why that is. Since your case on me is now entirely based on FL's alignment (and originally was not) I can only assume that something has changed. I want you to explain that.

What if I don't concede your points? Maybe I'm just choosing to not respond because I know that will drag the conversation out, intent on talking until you convince me.
You will not convince me of your own alignment. Ever.

Again, this isn't the point. You seem to think that the only reason I'm defending myself is so I can get you to change your mind and feel good about myself, or some BS like that. I'm defending myself because you've attacked me and suggested that you find me scum, and it's to my benefit as both town and scum to counter arguments that suggest I'm scum. Furthermore, the reason I keep bringing up the issue of you conceding points is unrelated to my defense. It has to do with my attack on you, which is that your case is crap, and has changed gears without you giving any indication why but yet you continue to push it.

3. Strike three. The third time you mentioned that I changed the focus of my case.
YOu really need to read my posts before you attack me for things I didn't do.

I'd suggest you reread your own posts.

4. THIS IS A HUGE MISREPRESENTATION!
I am not attacking you because of your defense in isolation. That's freaking idiotic.
I'm attacking you because of the context. There's no need to defend yourself until tomorrow. Likewise, same for me. It appears as if you're preemptively defending yourself so you won't have to do as much tomorrow.

Again this is stupid. Was there no need for sthar to defend himself either then? Let me ask you this, do you find his defense scummy? Why does Rage continue to push Alvinz to defend himself? Clearly Alvinz shouldn't defend himself until tomorrow.

It's to the town's benefit to have as much information as we can get and clear up as many loose ends as possible before the end of the day. It's pro-town to get people to defend themselves prior to the end of the day and it's not scummy at all for me to defend myself for attacks against me, much like it wasn't scummy for sthar to do it or Rage to ask Alvinz to do it.

Your argument is along the lines of: we're going to lynch FL, so let's not discuss ANYTHING else today because it detracts from us lynching FL. That is wrong in so many ways. First, it assumes FL's lynch is a foregone conclusion. Second, it leaves us with considerably less information to consider tomorrow. Thirdly, based on NK's it will diminish the impact of information. Say I get NKed, and you address my original case on Ghostwriter tomorrow. Perhaps I have an excellent rebuttal to your points, but nobody else thinks of it. I'm dead, and cannot provide that information, thus it gets lost.

[Goatrevolt]

Note to players: votes for yourself will not be counted, unless you are actually serious about wanting out of the game, at which point I will modkill you or have you replaced.

Out of curiosity, why the policy change? An earlier vote count has forbiddan's vote on herself counted.

If no consensus can be reached on a target I deem scummier by deadline, I am willing to vote Forbiddan, because her lynch is vastly > than no lynch.

[Goatrevolt]

I'm not protown, but I'm town...I'm oblivious cause I'm a neutral.

I'm assuming that "I'm a neutral" implies that he's literally of neutral alignment, and his followup "please don't modkill me" post would support that. Please correct me if I'm reading this wrong.

To be honest, I don't really think he's scum. I could see him as a neutral though.

I'm going to drop the back and forth with Sthar for now. Nobody has expressed any interest in pushing him, and I'm not even voting for him. I'll pick it back up later if applicable.

I don't like how both Alvinz/Forbiddan tried to approximate my reactions. Why not just let me react then discuss it post reaction? Alvinz, if you thought I was going to jump off of BaB onto you and would find that action scummy, isn't it in your best interest to let me do that then call me out for it?

Basically, i want to settle the issue of whether or not Alvinz is actually a neutral. If so, I don't have an issue lynching him, but my preferred method would be to wait it out a day and let someone vig him if we have a vig.

[Goatrevolt]

Basically, i want to settle the issue of whether or not Alvinz is actually a neutral. If so, I don't have an issue lynching him, but my preferred method would be to wait it out a day and let someone vig him if we have a vig.

The way I read that post was that he is supposedly a vanilla townie but he's sick of this game and basically going to ignore any and all attacks on him, making him effectively neutral so that post game he can laugh at the town despite doing absolutely nothing to help it. I don't see where you picked up a neutral role after he claimed town in that very post.

If that's the case, then I'm not really interested in lynching him.

Out of the current wagons, my preferred lynching order would be BaB -> Forbiddan -> Alvinz.

[Goatrevolt]

Unvote, Vote FL

Are you seriously considering that we have a vig and a mafia, and of the two of them, they both had to have been either roleblocked/doctered, or forgot to send in their NK?

I hate calling people out for role-fishing, because I would almost never do it as scum or as town, but what the heck were you trying to do here?

Vigilante's don't always shoot. I'm not saying that we have a vig, or even suggesting whatsoever that if we do have one that they should claim. All I'm saying is that if we do have one, Alvinz is a good shot, because I don't want to waste a lynch on him but people want him dead anyway.

[Goatrevolt]

Hey FL.. what are the odds of you volunteering to replace cerebus3? It's obviously not the best solution but I'm sure it's not easy to find a replacement for a 2-day, 40-page game. This way it would at least preserve a player and not force the mod to modkill him due to inactivity or whatnot.

The other option is to see if there's a NK and see if that person wants to replace. Of course this is less ideal because if cerebus is a power role, he'd miss a night action..

Well, if FL is scum, as you believe, then she can't replace in for another player...

[Goatrevolt]

Hey FL.. what are the odds of you volunteering to replace cerebus3?

if FL turns town, does anyone think this is a slip?

I don't see it as being that much really. I could see it as an honest mistake. That said, Veerus will be up on my scum list if FL is town anyway.

[Goatrevolt]

Unvote, Vote FL

Whoa there, cowboy! What's this about?

The deadline is tomorrow. Nobody has expressed any interest (other than you) in pursuing targets I find scummy. I don't really think Alvinz is scum, and while I don't really think FL is either, I would vastly prefer her lynch over his.

If we lynch Alvinz and he's town, we're left in almost the exact same situation we were in before anyway. Nobody is really listening to what he's saying anyway, so we don't have a whole lot of new info to go off of. Forbiddan has a higher chance of being scum in my opinion, and even if she's town, then it will at least lend credibility to my scum list and give us loads of information for tomorrow.

Basically the gist is that I would prefer a Forbiddan deadline lynch over Alvinz, and am voting Forbiddan as such.

[Goatrevolt]

Your deadline will not be enacted until 7PM PST, so you have a while until the day ends still...

What happens at deadline? Majority lynch or no lynch if nobody has reached 6 votes?

If it's no lynch, someone needs to hammer FL before deadline, because no lynch would be awful.

[Goatrevolt]

Someone hammer FL before 7PM PST. No lynch here would set us back so much.

[Goatrevolt]

Vote Sthar8
FoS Veerus
FoS BridgesAndBalloons

I feel very confident about Sthar/Veerus being scum. BaB I'm slightly less sure on, but still would be my top 3rd choice.

[Goatrevolt]

I am surprised that no one noticed what looked to me like a modslip confirming her. I tried to post pointing it out, but by the time I got back to the thread, she'd been hammered.

Do explain. Also, you noticed this but didn't point it out and then when you finally were going to she had already been hammered? Why would you not simply point it out immediately? I mean, with a deadline and all...

I also don't buy the "ugh, sorry about FL" bit. If you truly thought she was scum, then why would you feel remorse about lynching her?

Sthar, you've played a solid game, I'll grant you that. But to me, it's fairly obvious you are scum. You're strong logically, but have kept the door open on pretty much anyone (including myself). To me that suggests you are scum, because you certainly have the capability to narrow it down and figure out town tells and find scum, but you haven't been doing so.

Also, if either Sthar or Veerus gets lynched and is scum then I think the other is fairly clearly scum as well. They have pretty much ignored each other the entire extent of this game, except when Veerus stepped up to defend Sthar against my attack yesterday. BaB still strikes me as the most likely 3rd target here.

I'm hoping that with Alvinz getting killed we can focus on Sthar/Veerus and finally lynch scum. Also, assuming that was probably a vig shot that killed Alvinz, if we mislynch today, the vig

MUST

shoot tonight otherwise we lose. In other words, we're basically in Lylo.

[Goatrevolt]

@Goatrevolt, I don't understand what exactly makes you certain that Sthra8 is scum. Leaving yourself open to suspect everyone else is both a scum and town tactic, because if you are scum, you can buss (bus?) your partner without drawing attention, and as town you have to be suspicious of everyone.

As town, yes, you can be suspicious of players, but you also have to write people off as town and narrow down the scum suspects. Actions such as saying he finds me town, but still tossing suspicion on me anyway are simply not pro-town and are very easy things to do as scum. When I play scum, I have to hold myself back from doing that exact thing, because it's really easy to do and fits the scum mindset perfectly. Scum don't want to write people off, because they want as many possible available mislynches as they can have. If Sthar is able to convince you that I'm town, then I'm no longer a possible mislynch. It's better for him as scum to say he thinks I'm town but toss on a bunch of suspicion and let the town do the dirty work for him.

It's difficult to explain exactly why Sthar is scum. Like I said, he's played a good game, but there are a couple of things he's done that just make me positive he's scum. Tunnel vision, perhaps, but we're at Lylo. At what point do we start tunneling in on scum? This game has honestly been frustrating for me. I was correct about both FL and Alvinz to no avail, and I feel very confident I'm correct in my scum suspicions, but because the scum have simply outplayed the town in this one it's tough to nail them. Point blank, the townies in this game have made more mistakes and played scummier than the scum. Take FL and Alvinz for example.

Something to think about: When I said I found FL town and pushed my case on Sthar instead, both Sthar and Veerus pushed to keep pressure on FL and get her lynched, and Veerus both tossed suspicion on me and defended Sthar at the same time. Other than that, the two have seriously not acknowledged the other's presence in this game at all. That's a perfect match for scum buddies right there.

The fact that Mega was the vig makes things tough because we have to lynch correctly today and don't have a vig shot tonight to rectify things if we mislynch.

Also, I feel that if there is a doctor or other role that prevented a kill that first night, they should claim and also claim the player they saved as it would confirm 2 players as pro-town and narrow down our search by a lot. What's the consensus on this?

@Goatrevolt, it's LyLo and the first thing you do is vote for someone? Come on, don't develop alvinz's tunnel-vision.

I've looked at every player in this game and made my decision. What's the difference between tunnel vision and zeroing in on scum? I'm not going to be like Alvinz and just say screw it and not answer questions or read posts, and I'm open to hearing arguments.

[Goatrevolt]

And why wasn't Goat NKed?

Tons of possibilities to explain this.

Also, I feel that if there is a doctor or other role that prevented a kill that first night, they should claim and also claim the player they saved as it would confirm 2 players as pro-town and narrow down our search by a lot. What's the consensus on this?

Bad idea.

As someone said before ( I think it was you?) it's possible vig did not killing night one. We might not have a docter.
And if we have a doctor, it's possible the doctor protected the vig kill, and so we would only have one confirmed (and not even).

No. There were 0 kills night 1. That means that either a doctor/roleblocker type role prevented a night 1 kill or the scum willfully chose to not kill. Scum willfully choosing to not kill is extremely unlikely. the Vig doesn't play into this at all.

Is this a slip? Do you just know that mafia's kill was protected Night one, and that there was a vig? That would make sense if you were the person who suggested the vig to kill alvinz

I'm guessing the mafia's kill was protected night 1. It's the explanation that makes sense. The only other explanation involves the mafia choosing willfully not to kill someone.

I was also the one who suggested a vig shoot Alvinz. I had no clue if we actually had a vig or not (is your implication that I'm scum and miraculously know town roles? Do clarify), but I didn't want us to waste the entire day today arguing over and possibly lynching Alvinz.

[Goatrevolt]

I see Goatrevolt's earlier posts as protown, but the two posts setting me off are this and this, and both happen to be with vote reasoning. I'm the kind of person who expects voting to be accompanied with reasons for it, and failing that where to get it from.

I have plenty of reasons for those votes.

The first vote doesn't address forbiddanlight at all other than voting her. I understand it was deadline, but your post before this says she was second behind BridgesAndBaloons in order of who you wanted lynched. I see your case on BAB, but I can't find any reasoning for the switch.

The reason for the switch was that we had a deadline in 2 days. I still believed FL was town, but I felt Alvinz was even more likely to be town, and FL was a much more valuable and informative lynch. Yes, I would have preferred that we lynch BaB, Veerus, and Sthar over FL, but Megatheory was literally the only player in the game even mildly considering my direction. Lynching any of those 3 players simply wasn't going to happen, and FL's lynch was far better than Alvinz, who at the time was either tied with FL or only 1 vote behind.

The second vote is more of a timing issue since this is the first post in a lynch or lose situation. Goatrevolt has pushed Sthar8 a lot, so I'm not as worried, but what happened to player reviews, and why do you suspect Sthar8 over veerus?

A couple of points. First, even though it's Lylo, it takes 2 townie votes along with 3 scum votes to lynch someone. My vote isn't threatening a town loss unless Sthar is town, another townie jumps on, and all 3 scum are able to time a quick lynch. I consider the above likelihood to be slim.

Secondly, I believe Veerus/Sthar to be a scum team, and would be willing to lynch either. I haven't provided a review of each player, but I certainly can, and I probably will do so.

Also, suggesting that a vig kill alvinz95, the vig actually doing so, and then the vig dying that same night is making me suspicious of a Mafia role cop in the setup. I'm not going to play outguess the mod, and I'm trying to avoid going

post hoc

on Goatrevolt, but something is rotten in the state of Denmark.

I'd still argue that what I did was pro-town. Quite a few players were deadset on Alvinz as scum, and he was serving as a huge distraction. I simply didn't want to waste the entire day today discussing him and invariably probably lynching him. I had no clue if we had a vig or not, but I don't see an issue with directing that vig shot to an already claimed player who was purposely being unhelpful and eating up the town's attention.

Your argument seems to be that I knew we had a vig based on a role cop ability and then killed that vig the following night after getting him to shoot a townie? Is that the accusation? First of all, that's pure theory. Second of all, my earlier posts today would have to be completely faked, when I suggested that the vig has to shoot tonight. If I knew Megatheory was the vig and was dead, then I would have had to just fake that statement off of the mod's mistake. Third of all, Megatheory shooting Alvinz only hurts us if the town was going to be able to overlook him and focus on other targets, which is something I simply do not see as likely.

That's helpful information, but you still missed my question. Why do you suspect BridgesAndBaloons?

I don't think he does. His statement was that BaB was the one who suspected me, not him. I think this is just a misunderstanding here.

[Goatrevolt]

OK, sthar8's a pretty active scum hunter, and I have a pro-town read on him. His most recent post is also what stands out to me the most from him, and I like his case on Goatrevolt. When I start seeing stuff that warrants a vote on Goatrevolt, I'll consider doing so, but I want to look at everybody else first.

I know town shouldn't be lazy, but that's unfortunately me right now, so those are the two I'll do at the moment. Willing to hear cases from anybody about anybody, though.

This really causes me to question here. Sthar doesn't have a case on me, so how exactly do you like his case on me?

[Goatrevolt]

I did NOT defend Sthar.. we've been through this. Why
are you still telling those fairy tales?

You can keep denying it, but you attacking one of my points against Sthar is indirectly defending him from that same point. Fairy tales? Hardly.

As for FL.. she was *by far* the scummiest and most inconsistent player in the first two days. How can you possibly even think
of defending that kind of behavior?

It's easy. That type of behavior was bad play but it didn't mean she was scum. I was correct about that. Scummiest and most inconsistent =/= scum. What bothers me is that when I jumped off and mentioned that I found FL town, rather than wonder if there was possibly something there and if I was on to something, instead you attacked me as just being her scum buddy. That's not the pro-town response. The way Megatheory handled the situation was pro-town.

Of course I accused you of being scummy for that. Ignoring obviously scummy behavior and focusing on people who have been scum-hunting is highly suspicious and not at all pro-town.

Entirely subjective. Scum Hunting is a term that implies one searching for and trying to find scum. Your actions, and those of Sthar strike me as "bad townie hunting," or looking for a townie who has made enough mistakes to serve as a suitable lynch without looking at the bigger picture or whether or not they actually seem likely to be scum. Your unwillingness to even consider me possibly being right about FL, and instead pushing her harder and me as a scum buddy strikes me as someone pushing townie mislynches, not scum hunting.

This is a game of imperfect information so unless someone is a cop, it's perfectly understandable for them to observe conflicting tells and voice their concerns as such.

But yet it's scummy for me to voice concern over the FL lynch and observe conflicting tells to suggest she's town?

You like to twist people's words a lot. Since you've started your off-shoot attack on Sthar8 (throwing my name in there whenever you can), I've called you out on several attempts to twist my words and create misconceptions. For that you are currently one of my top suspects, which is ironic considering you seemed one of the towniest in D1.

Wrong. You keep arguing that I'm twisting words with the defense of Sthar thing, but that's entirely based on perception. I see you step up and argue against one of my points on him, and that to me is pretty much the bona fide definition of defense. Sure, you two have mentioned each other, obviously that is going to happen. I wasn't literally suggesting that the two of you simply hadn't ever once said the other's name. I was merely saying that the two of you have more or less focused exclusively on other targets the entire game, coordinating your attack on FL, and you've stepped up to defend each other when I attacked yesterday.

Why do you think the doctor/roleblocker should claim? How would a doctor/rb claim help the town at this stage? What if Sthar claims doctor/rb? Since he's your top suspect, would you even believe him?

I think the doctor roleblocker should claim because if we mislynch today it's game over. Clearing 2 targets of being possible mislynches right off the bat gives us a smaller number of suspects to look at, and allows us to analyze information based on people's confirmed alignments that we normally would not have unless they were dead.

If Sthar claims doctor and can provide an uncounterclaimed result from the first night, then I'd be inclined to believe him. It seems highly unlikely that the scum would willfully select not to kill night 1, and thus an uncounterclaimed claim of that sorts would be one that I would almost certainly believe.

Personally, I'm actually in favor of a mass claim straight up. I want all information on the table for this lynch. We lose if we do it wrong, why wouldn't we want the most possible information out to do it right?

[Goatrevolt]

Why are so many people opposing mass claim here? Are you afraid of having a doctor come forward and clear 2 people of being town? I mean, there is minimal to no downside to doing this. There is huge upside. We clear out a few players from being possible scum suspects and can analyze their relationships with others from the vantage point of them being town. This is a huge help here.

So only claims you believe will be the ones that are not counterclaimed? That seems illogical and unrealistic.

For someone so bent out of shape about your perception of me telling fairy tales, you sure laid on a fairly healthy bit of misrepresentation here. I have no idea where you get this idea from or why you would assume this.

1. If someone claims doctor or another role that prevented a night 1 kill, and is uncounterclaimed, then I will almost certainly believe that person. Reason? There is legitimate information in the thread (no kill that night) to support this claim as fact, and the lack of a counterclaim cements the idea that this player is the one who is that role. It becomes clear that they are telling the truth.

2. This doesn't necessarily apply to other roles, which you have tried to suggest and thus are completely misrepresenting me. Other role claims will be taken under consideration based on who claimed them, what results they have, etc.

I disagree with the mod that this is lynch or lose under a strictly technical sense. I certainly hope that if we lynch town today that the mod would at least allow for a night phase for any pro-town roles to possibly prevent a loss, because after a lynch it would be 4 town 3 scum (which isn't game over).

Most likely, though, we have to lynch correctly today.

[Goatrevolt]

I understand the reasoning for mass-claiming as it would at least give us a chance to clear one or two people. Here's the problem I have with it -- if the doctor/rb claims and we still end up lynching town, then it's game over for sure since the doctor/rb would get NK'd. This is the scenario you are not mentioning with your suggestion of a mass claim.

If we end up lynching town, the doctor has an extremely small chance of correctly saving someone anyway. Furthermore, perhaps the doctor can self-protect, etc. This right here is an "if we lynch town" reason why not to do something that would by all rights help us prevent lynching town. If we lynch town, we're almost certainly screwed as it is. We might as well do everything we can to prevent that scenario.

[Goatrevolt]

unvote

until we sort out the massclaim

Ok, massclaim is definitely our best course of action here. I'm not sure how many people have played a game to Lylo before, but mass claiming at Lylo is pretty much always standard fare. Why would the town pretty much always mass claim at Lylo if it wasn't something that benefited them? The answer is that it does benefit, significantly.

We have 8 players in the game, and I'm going to go ahead and say 3 scum. There are probably 2-3 town power roles and based on the lack of a night 1 kill I'm going to guess 1 confirmed townie from a doctor protection (or bulletproof). We can go from a 3/8 shot in the dark of hitting scum, or we can significantly narrow that down to around a 3/5 - 3/6 chance.

So far, the only arguments I've heard against mass claiming are flawed. They all fall under the "if we get it wrong" part. We're at Lylo. We can't get it wrong any more. So we should do everything we can to make sure we get it right, which involves getting all the information out in the open.

If massclaiming is the best way to find mafia, then why don't all games have a massclaim on day 1? :p

Day 3 is not Day 1. Mass claiming on day 1 is dumb because town roles haven't had a chance to collect information and nothing is known about the setup. Mass claiming at Lylo on day 3 is smart, because you accumulate that information town roles have been collecting and narrow down the list of potential scum to make an educated decision.

[Goatrevolt]

If we do go through with mass claim, I'd prefer a non-randomized mass claim. Preferably no dice. I would suggest popcorn starting from SC, who already claimed.

[Goatrevolt]

What i mean by popcorn is exactly what Sthar said.

BaB...we WANT scum to go first in claiming. If the scum want to all pick each other in a row and claim first then that is helpful to us. Claiming early is a disadvantage if you're intending to false claim, because you could easily be counterclaimed later on. By forcing scum to claim first, we either force them to claim vanilla, or they have to risk a fake claim and hope they don't get counterclaimed. Scum claiming last means they get to see every other claim and can possibly concoct a realistic sounding fake claim based on player's expectations of the setup from what they've seen.

Popcorning is good because it helps show who people are suspicious of and if the town picks well, prevents the scum from being the last to claim.

[Goatrevolt]

Sorry, busy last couple of days.

I'm vanilla. Veerus, you're next.

[Goatrevolt]

I'm waiting to hear all the claims prior to commenting.

[Goatrevolt]

I believe veerus' claim. He's the only one to claim to have a protection, and megatheory makes sense as a target for it. Also, it would explain the hesitancy to claim, as he wasn't able to confirm someone as pro-town since mega is dead.

Not totally sold on Sthar's claim, but it does make sense we would have a cop if scum have a RB.

Sthar, why target me after FL flipped town? Did you think it would make any sense for me to step out and defend a townie like that if I'm scum?

Also, Sthar, did you get roleblock flavor and if so, what was it? I'd like to hear Sthar answer this and then afterwards get verification from veerus.

[Goatrevolt]

Goat, why did you pick me to claim over Sthar?

I started to suspect you more than Sthar. In retrospect it was a poor move.

I also looked through sthar's posts, and he started the day by saying that he thought goat was a misguided town, which I took as a scum tell, but it makes sense if he got an innocent on goat.

My issue is that he thought I was town

yesterday

, which is why I'm hesitant to accept his claim. Why investigate me if he's said he thinks I'm town?

Again, I see plenty of scum motivation for this claim. If he's scum and his night 1 roleblock is on a vanilla townie, chances are they didn't receive any flavor of being roleblocked. If that is the case, he can claim that roleblock happened on himself and get away with it. Furthermore, his claim that I am town provides us with absolutely no change in information regarding Sthar. He already claimed he found me townie, so he provides us with nothing new. If he had, say, investigated StrangerCoug or Cerebus it would make more sense, as he had supposedly suspected them more than me. FL flipping town should have made that even more so.

Hence, I want him to

paraphrase

any possible flavor or lack thereof regarding his roleblock. I then want Veerus to confirm/deny if that flavor makes sense or matches.

Strictly from a percentage based analysis, the chance that a scum roleblocker hits two roles in a row with roleblocks is pretty low, hence my suspicion. Sthar being the last to claim also gives him leeway to pick and choose what he wants to claim (I should have picked him).

I don't have a good reason to doubt the claims right now, but given two people claim to have been roleblocked, I'm pretty sure they're either both town or both scum.

Not necessarily. Vanilla townies generally do not get any knowledge of being roleblocked, which means that Veerus could legitimately be town and have been roleblocked while Sthar is scum, and claim the roleblock even if the scum actually roleblocked any number of actual vanillas.

As for top targets, I don't honestly know at the present. I think Veerus is telling the truth, dropping him off my list, but I don't quite buy Sthar's claim, keeping him on there.

[Goatrevolt]

I guess right now my top 3 would be Sthar, Coug, BaB.

[Goatrevolt]

I don't like the plan veerus. There is way too much leeway for scum manipulation. They put their buddies around 2-3, and they manipulate that top spot to hit a townie. If townies can remain undivided enough to pick out scum and lynch them, then we can do so through a normal lynch, rather than a process that allows plenty of scum manipulation.

Personally, I'd prefer a case be made on someone and we go from there. I'd like to go back through and analyze each player in the game myself.

Sthar: Why would you be worried about me being able to get a mislynch on you if you are a town power role with a solid safe claim?

I think Sthar's claim makes sense from a purely "what we should have in the game" standpoint. Cop/Doc/Vig makes sense against goon/goon/RB. RB is something we almost certainly have in the game, because I see basically no likely scenario where Veerus is lying. I'm hesitant to buy it for a couple of reasons, and I don't want to write Sthar off completely, but at any rate, Sthar is certainly not the play for today.

[Goatrevolt]

Well, I was thinking that 5 (3 confirmed) townies vs 3 scum would favor the odds for a scum lynch. /shrug

The problem lies in the idea that the town could be divided. Say 3 town pick scum as number 1, and 2 town pick a townie as number 1. Undivided scum could get that townie lynched easily.

[Goatrevolt]

This seems like much fanfare about nothing concrete. Inconcise =/= scummy. BaB voting for SC doesn't mean that he's admitting to being scum.

[Goatrevolt]

Unless I am persuaded otherwise by the other two confirmed townies (goat & sthar8), I will probably cast my vote for BAB soon.

Don't. SC/Electra/Skillit are all ganging up on BaB right now. I'm sorry, but that doesn't inspire me to vote BaB. All 3 of those players maintain that the others are suspicious, but yet they are all pushing BaB. Electra then SC would be my current top picks for who we should lynch.

The arguments against BaB are weak. Him agreeing that SC is scum shouldn't implicate himself, and him leaving himself off his own list is pretty much null to me.

[Goatrevolt]

Alright, I just read through SC and Cerebus/Electra's posts.

Cerebus/Electra: Cerebus alone isn't a terribly easy read. He doesn't really commit strongly to any opinions, maintains logical posting for the most part, but has little in terms of actual scum hunting. I don't see anything directly condemning, but I could certainly see his play from the perspective of scum. He maintains the type of play I generally shoot for as scum, which is provide reasoned commentary and solid logical opinions, but push opinion from the sidelines and not the frontlines. Alternatively, this could be simply a not aggressive townie. Electra's posts, however, have rubbed me the wrong way. The suspicion on Sthar seems weak, considering I don't recall any real underlying reasoning behind it. Any reasoning seems to be based on Sthar's response to the original lack of reasoning, which seems like purely fabricated suspicion. Coming into the game and tossing completely unsupported suspicion and following it up with poor logic on the only player currently with a vote on them seems scummy for sure.

StrangerCoug: I have 3 main complains about his play:

1. Self-conscious posting. He has corrected minor grammatical errors, or other seeming minor problems with his posts countless times this game. I don't recall such behavior from him when he was town. It suggests a mindset of being worried about how his posts come off to others. "Oh crap, I made a grammatical error, I should correct that, because I want my posts to look like perfect townie posts, unmarred by any sign of error." It's unnatural.

2. Blindly following town suspicions/lack of real scumhunting. This became blatantly apparent earlier today, when he said he liked Sthar's case on me, despite Sthar not actually having a case on me. If Sthar doesn't have a case on me, how could SC like it unless he's just blindly following along with what he perceives public opinion to be? Looking at Coug's posts in context, he's following along with every wagon, from alvinz to rage to forbiddan to alvinz, back to forbiddan.

3. His interaction with Alvinz regarding his perception that Alvinz may be cop with a guilty on him. Sign of a guilty conscience? If I'm a townie and someone says they "know I'm scum" I assume they are just really convinced of it. If I'm scum, however, I start to wonder "is this guy a cop with a guilty?"

Additional benefit but not reasoning: If Coug is scum, he seems like a decent bet for being the roleblocker, who if lynched today would grant us an extra investigation basically.


I'd like to get around to Skillit/Rage 2.0/BaB tomorrow. If I find nothing game shattering reading those players, I'd be up for a Coug lynch today. It's also entirely worthwhile to check up on Veerus/Sthar to see if their play makes sense from the perspective of their claimed roles. If anyone else wants to step up, feel free, otherwise I should get around to it eventually.

[Goatrevolt]

Goat: It seems like you and I are thinking along the same lines regarding electra, but I don't understand why you think SC is the roleblocker. I was thinking that cerebus's play was much more consistent with an attempt to avoid attention and suspicion, so much so that I briefly thought that he might be the doctor yesterday.

Cerebus went inactive before the end of yesterday, and Electra didn't replace until today. Unless there are some shenanigans at work, I don't think Cerebus could have possibly blocked Veerus last night.

[Goatrevolt]

Oh, right. Good point.

But why SC, specifically?

Why male models?

Do you mean why do I think he's scum? Or why do I think he's the RB if scum? I think he's scum for the reasons I said above.

There's nothing about his play that makes me specifically think he's the roleblocker, but BaB and Cerebus both don't make sense as the RB due to being inactive during various night phases where they would have to submit a roleblock. That leaves Skillit/SC/Rage, and SC would be my top pick for scum out of those 3.

I think Electra and SC are both scum, but SC makes sense as roleblocker whereas Electra does not, hence I think SC is a preferable lynch.

[Goatrevolt]

BaB: The self vote is dumb, meaningless, and really proves nothing. The only way it proves anything is if you are town and it works, which means we lose the game. If you're scum, by all means go ahead and self-vote, as it's entirely meaningless, but if you're town, doing so is purely stupid. Risk without gain.

The issue is that it takes 2 townies and 3 scum to make a mislynch. The only way we would learn anything is if both you and SC were town, in which case the 3 scum could hammer you. In the case of one of you being scum, but not both, by having a townie place a vote on you, that would be 2 townie votes, allowing 3 scum to hammer. Furthermore, there are additional problems with the idea that maybe scum aren't coordinated enough to risk a hammer, etc. The only way we learn anything is if it succeeds, and in that scenario we lose.

Goat if you want to go to bat for bab again and explain why he shuold be allowed to just walk away from direct and valid questions w/o being suspiscious then step on up

Seriously? Since I defend BaB against one thing (the nature of the push on him) that implies that I'll defend against every attack against BaB? Wrong. He should answer questions directed towards him, definitely. Also, me going to bat for BaB carries an incorrect connotation. Your insinuation is that people are pushing cases/questions at BaB and I'm serving as his public service representative and fielding them. In reality, I haven't actually provided any defense/answers for BaB at all, I simply provided reasoning why I don't think Veerus or any townie should vote BaB right now.

Since you take issue with my defense of him in the first place, feel free to address anything I said in that post. Rather than make assumptions of how I will react to a completely different situation, let's take it back a step and discuss any problems you have with my actual stance.

[Goatrevolt]

I think that SC and skillit are two scum

What do you think about the interaction between Skillit and SC very early day 1?

who the hell self-votes as town in LYLO?

Self-voting period has always boggled my mind. It's almost never a good play, yet it so frequently happens. Here, I can at least see the mindset behind why BaB did it, although it's pretty much a null tell to me. Scum ploy vs. legitimate gambit? Hard to tell.

BaB seems to be more and more erratic as this day progresses, but I don't really understand why. It looks a little like panicked scum

To some extent it does, definitely, but it doesn't seem to fit. Why would scum be panicked in this scenario? Why would BaB be panicked with 1 vote on him? Even if he is scum and goes down, there are still 2 remaining. Why would he panic today and not yesterday when there was actually a wagon on him?

[Goatrevolt]

I think Coug/Electra are a scum pair. Does BaB fit as scum with them? That I do not know.

@Electra: Why did you vote Coug over BaB?

I simply don't feel that BaB is our best lynch today. He doesn't work as the roleblocker, and I think there are signs of him being pro-town beyond even the one I pointed out earlier. I'm not fully sold on this read, by any stretch, but I'm wary about lynching him today.

Anyway, I feel comfortable voting Coug. Anyone have any reasons why I should not do so?

[Goatrevolt]

EBWOP: Goat, where does Electra's latest vote on SC fit in your scumpair theory?

I call people out for ganging up on BaB, and Electra votes Coug without any reasoning of why she chose Coug over BaB. Distance, Distance, Distance. It was certainly not unexpected. I would have been more surprised if she had voted BaB.

I'd be much more inclined to write Skillit off as "couldn't be partner to Coug" then Cerebus. Skillit pushed the initial case on Coug. Cerebus just jumped on at 4 votes. His previous discussion was merely maybe trying to get something started over Joonster putting the 3rd random vote on Skillit.

After the case on Coug died down, Cerebus really didn't push it any more. He kept his vote on for some time, but didn't do much towards pushing others to do the same.

Here is his statement regarding SC vs. Alvinz

The case on Alvinz is identical to the case on SC, yet people are excusing SC for being erratic and not seeing if the same can be applied to alvinz.

Personally, I believe that both acted scummy, but I am leaning toward SC for now because being a bad player doesn't change the fact that what he did was suspicious, and if you think it DOES excuse him, then you at the very least owe it to alvinz to consider it excusing him as well. Doing otherwise is inconsistent.

At this point though, I think they are about equal and I could be swayed one way or the other pretty easily for now.

The last paragraph is especially important. If things swing back to lynching SC, then Cerebus is still on the wagon and looks good when SC is lynched. If things lean towards lynching Alvinz, then Cerebus is ready to ditch the SC wagon and hop aboard.

[Goatrevolt]

I'm still here. Going to hopefully read through BaB, Skillit, Rage 2.0 and give some analysis before voting, but if I don't get around to it, my vote will be on SC.

[Goatrevolt]

Also, I have a few things to say about SC's last post, but I'd like to let BaB address it first.

[Goatrevolt]

Could someone explain the case on SC to me? I understand that for some of you it's process of elimination, but you'll understand my reluctance to trust that. I don't see him doing anything that he hasn't been doing all game, and none of it seems that scummy to me. Maybe I'm suffering from confirmation bias, but he still seems genuine to me. I think it would really help to see the arguments from a viewpoint that doesn't assume he's scum just on the numbers.

I made some points earlier in the same post I addressed Cerebus/Electra. One of the big things for me is the concerned about image tell. I feel SC is overly concerned about how his posts sound to others.

I also took some time to read up on a completed game SC played as scum. I notice he committed a lot of those same type of tells in that game as well. One thing that struck me as similar as well was the whole "guilty conscience" thing. In this game, he jumped to the conclusion of Alvinz being a cop with a guilty on him. In that game, he was a tracker and assumed someone counterclaimed him when they actually did not. I think he's guilty and thus paranoid about getting caught. If you're town and someone says "I know you're scum" your instinct is to think "they must just think they have a strong read." Why would you ever think they were a cop, because if they were a cop obviously they would have a town result on you.

[Goatrevolt]

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8741 That's the game I looked at.

[Goatrevolt]

In that game, he was a tracker

Correction: I

claimed

tracker in that game. I wasn't really a tracker there, as you wrote that sentence to say, even though earlier in your post you correctly say I was scum.

Yep, that's what I meant. Sorry for the confusion.

[Goatrevolt]

I think we should just go through with it. I don't see a whole lot more happening between now and the deadline, and no lynching at deadline would be pretty bad.

Vote StrangerCoug

I'd rather we hold off on BaB. I'm unsure about him being scum, and he doesn't have much of a chance of being the roleblocker, which is who we most want to hit.

[Goatrevolt]

Actually, no Electra has it right. There are 3 votes on Coug. Myself, BaB, Electra. I voted him after the most recent votecount.

Where Electra's logic fails is that her argument fails to take into account that both her and BaB could be scum. Obviously, from her perspective of her being town she is 100% correct, but it's not a solid basepoint for others suspicions because we can not assume those same initial conditions.

[Goatrevolt]

My list for '

most likely

to be scum' now goes (

most to least

):
Electra, BridgesAndBaloons, Skillit, Sthra8, Goatrevolt,

StrangerCoug

, Veerus

But, I still think a

StrangerCoug

lynch would be safer than anyone else.

How does this make ANY sense? StrangerCoug is the person you think is the second most townie in the game and you're fine with his lynch?

My current thought is that the scum team is Coug/Skillit/Rage. I'm hoping the hesitance to lynch Coug is because he is the roleblocker. Electra's recent posts have actually struck me as somewhat pro-town. BaB's posting for the entirety of today has likewise struck me as such. Call it tone/vibes, whatever, but BaB has given off the impression that he actually cares about the town winning, which is something I haven't seen out of really any of the other 4 up for debate. Rage is the one who has struck me as the least caring about the town winning, based on the tone/nature of his posts today.

One thing that has really boggled my mind, but I don't know what to make of it is the sheer calmness of StrangerCoug. He's made no effort to defend himself and doesn't seem at all nervous about the votes on him. In a post I made calling him out as scum, his only response was to correct an error I had made. It's unnerving, and a complete 180 from his OMGUS everyone mentality from early day 1.

[Goatrevolt]

I've read your back and forth through 1304. I've haven't read anything after that point yet. I won't comment until I've seen all of it, but once I read through it all I shall. I'm going to bed right now, but I'll check it tomorrow, unless the game ends.

Also, deadline at noon. Can someone hammer before then? No lynch means we throw away any possible chance at using power roles again and have 1 less townie to use as a "buffer" towards making a correct lynch.

[Goatrevolt]

Oh, just thought of something.

That's 4 votes on Coug, 2 made by townies (Veerus/myself). If SC is town, the scum could hammer him already. This hasn't happened, and Rage/Skillit have both posted since this point, and BaB and Electra are already voting for him. If StrangerCoug is town, either Skillit/Rage are scum who just decided to not win the game for some unspeakable reason (unlikely), or Sthar is scum (I would also argue unlikely).

Since there is no plausible scenario in which SC could be town, the reality is simple.

StrangerCoug is scum!

So please, if you are town, hammer Coug before the deadline.

[Goatrevolt]

A few more thoughts I want to get out there, since I'm not sure I'll be on at all prior to the deadline, and I want to make everything known in case of a NK.

1. Rage is my top pick for scum buddy to StrangerCoug by far. His play today has been to say he's willing to go for either BaB or SC, which is very non-committal. He's been sitting in the background waiting for things to develop before making his move. Definitely scum.

In addition, he didn't hammer Coug when he had the opportunity to, instead wanting to wait and see how discussion between other players panned out. Interpretation: He wanted us to get a deadline no lynch. I call complete shenanigans on that play. Skillit/BaB are not going to get night killed to shut down their discussion, and if they do, that is a huge benefit to town because it removes a possible mislynch. That discussion can take place later. This was nothing more than a lame excuse to hope to ride out the day to a deadline no lynch.

2. BaB is town. He's the mislynch the scum wanted to have happen rather than the Coug lynch. Electra/Skillit/SC/Rage all suspect him and all have expressed willlingness to lynch him. While there is some busing that will happen, this is clearly not it.

3. The 3rd scum after Coug/Rage is either Skillit or Electra. I'm currently leaning on Skillit, but I'm not sold to that opinion whatsoever. Therefore:

4. I hate to direct the cop, but I REAALLY think you should investigate Skillit or Electra tonight Sthar. Getting a result on either of those players would really give us excellent chances at winning this game. From my perspective, investigating BaB or Rage would be less of a benefit, because I already feel strongly about their alignments. Skillit seems to be a wildcard that nobody really seems to be able to place, and thus is an excellent choice for investigation.

5. Oh...and please hammer Coug.

[Goatrevolt]

Goat, do you realize that you've named as likely scum the two people who are yet to vote? Considering neither one has made a vote even though they posted this close to the deadline tells me that we've got all of our scum pegged (sc/skillit/rage) and after the no lynch today and a NK at night, we'll be down to 7 people with 4 townies, which is still a win for the town.

Yep. It'll be close with no room for error, but I think we can still win it.

I'm still holding on to hope that Sthar logs on and hammers, though.

[Goatrevolt]

Veerus: Yeah, I should have picked Sthar to claim. I decided to swap basically on a whim, because I was suspicious of both of you. I wish I had simply stuck with my gut and kept pressuring Sthar even after the cop claim. This is certainly not the first I've pressured someone for an extended period of time only to back off from their claim and they end up being scum anyway. Live and learn I guess. Gah, I freaking KNEW Sthar was scum too. I need to stop trusting claims....bah.

BaB, I thought you were town for pretty much the same reason I thought FL was town. Your actions, though maybe not the most pro-town, seemed to be of good intent. You legitimately seemed to want the town to win, and were willing to try to things to work it out. I thought the attacks on you by Skillit/SC were weak as well, and I felt pretty confident Coug was scum.

Skillit, you didn't hammer Coug because you didn't realize there were 3 scum? I guess that was a surprise for both sides. I thought Coug had to be scum after that point.

Also, no lynch would have simply meant Veerus died, and we would have still been none the wiser about the cop.

Sthar, you defended yourself exceptionally well, and I did a poor job of presenting a case on you. I wish I had been better able to present that and been more convincing. Lynching you instead of FL would have been a huge benefit to town.

[Goatrevolt]

Forbiddan, to be fair you suspected almost the whole game .

Sthar, you played strongly. I had a huge gut suspicion, but couldn't get others to see it at all, and you completely decimated any attempts I made. The suspicion on myself also didn't help, as you mentioned. I don't actually understand why people were suspicious of me. Alvinz was likely straight day 1 OMGUS, which was alright, but was my quest to save FL really something scum would put in the effort to do?

Mass claiming only really hurt us if people were willing to wagon/lynch Sthar anyway, which didn't seem to be the case. I made a mistake in making Veerus claim first, which did hurt us, unfortunately.

[Goatrevolt]

Dean, I think you did a fairly good job with modding. A couple of suggestions I have are: I wouldn't express that it's Lylo (as others have mentioned). I would also try to remain consistent with rulings through the entire game. For example, stuff like town self votes, or whether or not deadline results in a lynch or no lynch, etc. If you've decided one way, make sure to keep it that way. Other than that, I think you did good. You were quick with vote counts and prods and answering questions, which is ultimately a hugely important aspect of modding.

[Goatrevolt]

Thanks much for the comments and compliments. I had hoped the setup would suprise people, as I have never seen a Traitor in any game so far. I was anticipating the reveal of that role the entire game to be honest .

I really like the traitor role a lot. My first game on this site had a traitor, and I really thought it brought a really neat aspect to the game. We were aware of the traitor, but not who it was. It was fun both trying to get mislynches and also avoid night killing our traitor by narrowing down who it could or couldn't be.

I think the setup was balanced. Our speculation on the setup (that there was a cop based on the assumption of 2 goons 1 roleblocker) screwed us the last day. I guess that is yet another lesson not to game the mod.

[Goatrevolt]

Anyone arguing that we shouldn't have claimed based on numbers is missing the big picture I feel.

The fact is, we had no information roles left over. Choosing not to lynch would have simply meant nothing more than we lose a town player and have less townies to try and lynch scum with. We would have gained absolutely no knowledge unless veerus was not roleblocked, not chosen for a night kill, and managed to correctly make a doc save. That's the only scenario in which a no lynch would have been to our benefit.

Also, I don't think mass claiming was a problem. It would have worked out better in retrospect if I had simply continued to pressure Sthar and hoped people hopped on that wagon, because I highly doubt he would have claimed cop if he were claiming by himself. The reason I wanted a mass claim is that I wanted any information out on the table for deciding a lynch (I wrongly assumed we would have a confirmed player from the doctor save, not considering the possibility it was megatheory). I simply don't think mass claiming or not made a difference.