Mini 1368 (Game Over)

[Idiotking]

Vote: pappums rat

Because it's the only name I remember.

[Idiotking]

I have doubts cheery dog is actually scum. He is Jester at best. His posts don't seem indicative of something mafia would do, TBH.

Why? As pappums rat has said, Cheery claimed a minor scum read for something that means nothing at all. That led to a stupid argument about the nature of circles and triangles. I personally don't see it as a tell either way, just an annoying distraction, but you seem to indicate that it means that Cheery is somehow not scum. What would lead you to that conclusion?

[Idiotking]

So I can tell for sure, pecanpie, was your miller claim a joke or serious?

[Idiotking]

Hold the phone. I am getting FOS'ed because I said I honestly don't think Cheerydog is scum? In the exact same that you were replying to, you said yourself that he didn't either. I am not defending him, but I don't think He is worthy of my vote. I don't have a scum read on him TBH, and it seems like the bandwagon on him accrued WAY too quickly for my liking. I never said that I knew cheery dog was scum with 100% accuracy. You put those words in my mouth. I don't feel like his posts are Indicative of him being mafia.

There is a clear difference between saying that you don't have a scum read on someone and saying that you don't think they are mafia. One allows for a neutral read, the other is necessarily a town or third party read (given that this is a mini, almost certainly town). You have twice indicated that you have a town read (or "not scum" read) on Cheery. Once in the above quote, and in your earlier one:

I have doubts cheery dog is actually scum. He is Jester at best. His posts don't seem indicative of something mafia would do, TBH.

I'm asking you why you have a town read instead of a neutral read. All Cheery did up to this point was talk about circles and triangles, which has nothing at all to do with reads one way or the other. So why town?

[Idiotking]

Picking the meat off of ribs aren't you? I am being FOS'ed by you because you feel I am not justified in keeping my vote from some one, who I have no indication of him being mafia. I NEVER SAID I THOUGHT HE WAS TOWN. I said, I don't think he is scum. At this point I don't have any scum reads, but I am starting to build some off of the way people are voting for this guy, over something utterly ridiculous. I am not "buddying" with cheerydog either. But the amount of votes and FOS he is getting for merely acting a little weird in providing some analysis about mathematical equations is a bit odd to me.

Tell me, why exactly do you feel cheery is mafia?

This is a very interesting reaction to a simple question. I haven't FOSed you at all yet. And, you do not think Cheery is town,

and

you don't think he is scum, then what the hell is he? He is either one or the other. Saying you do not think he is scum

is the exact same thing as saying he is town

.

I also have never said that I think Cheery is scum. I said that all he had done up to that point was engage in a distracting discussion that had nothing to do with the game.

For your overreaction, waffling over your read of Cheery, and your assumption that I think Cheery is mafia just because I wanted to know why you thought he was town,

Unvote

Vote FUT

[Idiotking]

If Cheery is not scum, then he is town. Thus, if FUT does not think that Cheery is scum, then FUT must think he is town. There is very obviously a difference between "I don't think Cheery is scum" and "I do not have a scumread on Cheery." As I said before, one requires that you think Cheery is town, the other leaves the possibility of a neutral read. What's scummy about FUT's posts is that he defended Cheery by effectively saying he wasn't scum, then freaking out and insisting that that wasn't what he meant at all, just that he didn't think he was town OR scum. Again, if Cheery isn't town and he isn't scum, then what the hell is he?

The waffling alone is not scummy enough to justify a vote, as townies who aren't thinking could do the same thing. The overly defensive reaction tips the scale though, because only the very paranoid would get that defensive over a few questions, and for obvious reasons, mafia have more reason to be paranoid than townies. Overly defensive behavior is not scummy by itself either, because bad townie players can be overly defensive too, but again, tied with the buddying and waffling, it becomes suspicious.

[Idiotking]

[quote="In post 127, Hellhound1"
First bit i've bolded, its called "gathering information". Second bit, why would I? It's five pages in, half of the players havent posted anything of worth. Theres been no reason for me to shout my opinion out at people.[/quote]

Doesn't this effectively let you avoid scumhunting? You have to develop arguments and such based on information you've gathered to scumhunt, and there's plenty of information to do that. According to your earlier statement,

Am i not allowed to agree with the majority of town? CD was clearly being scummy, you were voting him anyway, gonna call yourself scum for that?
Also, i explained why i didnt like FUTs posts.
Maybe switch your brain on here and think:

Most scummiest people = most likely to be lynched = top of most peoples scum lists

you clearly state that you saw at least CD and FUT as scummy, and in that case, why not build arguments against them? By NOT building your own cases, you're just going along with whatever the majority seems to think.

FOS Hellhound1

I hate people who just go with the flow.

[Idiotking]

I'm pretty sure it's scummy. Scum can use it to hide behind the majority and act like they're doing something when they're not. Townies who go with the flow are not scumhunting, which is completely opposed to their win condition. At the very least, it's anti-town, and I am absolutely willing to lynch anti-town players on D1. I've been in enough games with bad townies at LYLO.

[Idiotking]

Unvote

Sorry I've been gone, guys. There was a spider on my front door, so I slept at a hotel for a few days.

I'd be content with a Hellhound or Lupo lynch today. Hellhound for effectively the same reasons as my earlier FOS, Lupo because, as killerjester mentioned, his waffling over NS's L-1 vote being scummy.

[Idiotking]

There are vastly better ways to word that than saying it would be a mislynch. A scummy hammer, maybe, but don't overreach your assumptions.

As a side note, if Hellhound doesn't come back then both of the people I've tried to pressure will have gone MIA. In that case I'm either omniscient or really keen on flakes.

[Idiotking]

Sorry I've been missing for most of the past few days, guys. It's the first week of a new semester and that always takes a bit of adjustment. So here are my thoughts (as I develop them, sorry if they turn out as a big mess) on the last few pages:

Pecanpie's post 246 seems very off to me. I don't like posts that exist just to say "Hi, I'm here, I'm town, goooo town you should totally scumhunt and stuff." I do find it funny that pecanpie suggests people examine those of us who haven't gone under any major scrutiny (when he hadn't been pressured much either), and then he immediately gets pressured.

I think CheeryDog hit on something though when he called out pecanpie's 250, when pecanpie said he wanted it to look truthful. While I don't necessarily think that pecanpie slipped there specifically, it does seem that some of pecanpie's recent posts (including 246 and 250 when he talks about building up town cred to give his advice more umph) are intended to shore up his townie image. I hate people saying that they should be treated as confirmed townie, even if they offer to be lynched before LYLO, because scum seen as confirmed townie can still lead the town in circles to protect their friends.

I don't think this is enough to make pecanpie worthy of a vote (because admittedly townies still want to look townie to prevent a mislynch), but there seems to be an unnecessary amount of effort directed to improving his image.

@Cheery Dog: we aren't lynching pieceofpecanpiece today, so I dontknow why you're wasting valuable pre-deadline time talk to and about him.

Oh dear, it's Hellhound all over again.

FOS Kublai Khan

for basically saying that we should only focus on who is most likely to be lynched today. Why on Earth shouldn't we focus on other people before the deadline? That's just silly. Stop being silly, Kublai Khan.

Lupo, NS, and idiotking need to explain why they think supporting a wagon that isnt happening today is a good idea. idiotking isnt even voting atm.

Which wagon do you mean? And hold up a second... why shouldn't I want to wagon people I find suspicious? Isn't this the same damn issue as with Kublai Khan up there? As for why I'm not voting, I wanted to give Hellhound a little while to see if he was coming back before I hammered. I am sorely tempted to hammer now anyway, but a few things have come up since I last read the thread and I want them addressed, now that the deadline has extended.

----

Ok, I think I'm caught up.

[Idiotking]

Hi.

Thank you for your contribution.

[Idiotking]

I agree with pecanpie that vigging him would be a bad idea, mostly because vigs would be better off killing lurkers like NS on the first night. Pecanpie is at least here to be studied, and so the town can examine him and lynch him based on how he acts. Lurkers are obviously not here, and while I'm all for killing lurkers as a D1 vote (especially those who flake from pressure), it is a bad idea to do it later, because you should really be basing your votes on how people act. Because of that, if scum lurkers can survive the first day, then they have a decent chance of making it to endgame just because they are staying out of sight. I would much prefer a vig kill NS if we even have one (and we don't know if we do).

As it is, this day seems to be lagging severely, so barring any amazing revelations, I will hammer in five hours (7 o'clock PM Central Time).

[Idiotking]

And even an hour and a half late, nobody's posted anything else. I know we have two days left, but until we get a flip I think we're stalled, so

Vote Hellhound/ChannelDelibird

[Idiotking]

I can see Paschendale's argument about killerjester rehashing what KK said about Lupo (in KK's ISO posts 114 - 136 he argues his case with Lupo, predating killerjester's 206 and going over much of the same material), but something about Paschendale's 378 screams buddying to me. Maybe it's because the whole thing is dedicated to getting killerjester off of Lupo's back, I dunno.

Also,

Vote basketballstar24

I hate, HATE appeals to emotion. If you are actually vanilla town, replace out or stop being useless.

Hmm? I'm not lynched? I thought those votes would bandwagon, so I put this bah post knowing that I would get lynched before I went on again.

What the hell even is this?

[Idiotking]

On top of that, when you say that you are voting just for pressure it doesn't put any pressure at all. "Oh look you, I'm not actually voting for you because I want you lynched, I just want to have my vote on you because... well... um... but yeah! So squirm you little person, you!" It looks more like NS is just trying to look like he's doing something.

On Friday I want to do a full examination of pecanpie, Paschendale, and killerjester, particularly the last two. Something about them just doesn't sit right with me.

[Idiotking]

Holy shit, did you just hammer when D2 is only 4 pages long?

Ok, guys, the scum are basketballstar and pecanpie.

[Idiotking]

Ok, false alarm, NS only has 3 votes on him. Hmm...

Basketballstar, did you actually think that you were hammering, or were you just going along with pecanpie?
Pecanpie, why the hell would you say that NS was at L-1 when he wasn't?

[Idiotking]

Unvote

I do not necessarily buy the idea that bbstar is town, but a newb I can take. Newb scum would make extreme outbursts too, new players just do not deal well with pressure.

I am going to begin my (very, shamefully late) examination of pecanpie, paschendale, and killerjester tonight. Since the deadline is coming close, I'd be willing to accept a NS lynch if necessary, but I'd rather vote for people for reasons that aren't just lurking (given the fact that I've been lurking like hell too, it would be more than a little hypocritical). Which is why I want to examine those three.

[Idiotking]

OK, so my reads of the three I mentioned. Sorry if this is a little underwhelming. If it reads like I wrote it as I was reading through the thread, well, that's what I did.

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

Pecanpie:

As I've said before, I don't like pecanpie's miller claim, specifically the fact that he seems to be trying to hide behind it in order to avoid suspicion. He is clearly working under the assumption that we should just let him do whatever, because he is a miller, and therefore townie town. For example,

My reasons for doing so are thus: it puts town in a stronger position with at least one conf town to begin with,

as well as basically all of post 246 and the discussion that followed. He seems particularly interested in appearing to be town. His reaction in post 253 is also interesting, since (as Paschendale pointed out) it is one big OMGUS. If is effectively screaming "CD is scum because he does not buy my miller claim." His defensive whining about any sort of suspicion leveled at him after 246 may also be suspicious, but only given his apparent urge to have a good townie image.

As for his general play, on D1 he seemed to have done remarkably little scumhunting of his own, always following after others. He followed me on FUT, followed triangle on Hellhound, and followed killerjester on Lupo (admittedly this is the weakest example, as in 170 he gave different reasons for going after Lupo than killerjester). Pecanpie only seemed to follow the general moods of the town. While this may be fair in some cases, like if someone provides a particularly strong case against someone, it gets to where it's a little unusual when it happens over and over again. Also, pecanpie (rightly) indicates that scumhunting should involve asking questions, as here:

His #155 pinged because it was a pro-town speech that completely sidestepped an important element for good townplay: asking questions.

And yet through all of D1 pecanpie asked no significant questions. Never once to my knowledge did he ever directly question someone he thought was suspect. Sure, he posted a lot of information about the suspects and came up with theories, like a Lupo/Hellhound scumteam, but he didn't ask any hard questions. Also of note is the fact that in post 326 pecanpie expressed suspicion of killerjester and CD (both of whom were suspicious of him by that point), and yet did absolutely NO scumhunting on these two for the entire time until post 455 against killerjester, which was more of a response post. The only thing he did in the meantime was vote for killerjester (immediately following Paschendale's 378, a MASSIVE defense of Lupo and claiming that killerjester is scum) with no argument attached, only to change it later because no one else was following him.

In reading pecanpie I've come to notice a general shift in his play ever since the pressure on 246. Beforehand he was distant, bouncy, and acted positive. Ever since he's been very defensive and angry. This is more of a feeling having read all of his posts in ISO though, so take it with a grain of salt.

Overall I find pecanpie scummy for the reasons listed above.

FOS pecanpie

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

killerjester:

Right off the bat I like his play style much more than pecanpie, because he actually asks freakin' questions, and a whole lot of them. He started in hard on Lupo very shortly after he joined, arguing against him based on NS's L-1 vote on CD, which Lupo at first went along with and later questioned. He seemed to be reluctant to rush to end D1, waiting for the deadline and such. This could be taken either as him being town for wanting the town to slow down and not rush into a bad lynch, or scum trying to distance from what he knew was a town lynch, so this is null. Killerjester then rightly calls out pecanpie for asking about whether Hellhound should be replaced and using circular reasoning in defense of his miller claim ("I am town, so you can trust me when I say that I am town").

Then in posts 372-377 he re-argues his case against Lupo, this time adding in the accusation that Lupo was wasting his vote on NS while Hellhound (who Lupo claimed was not scummy) was being lynched. I agree that if Lupo thought the cases on the Hellhound wagon were bad he should have picked apart the reasoning and scumhunted. The big thing about these posts is that they lead to Paschendale's 378, which I will examine in more detail when I get to him. This of course gave pecanpie the chance to hop on killerjester.

Overall I have a town read of killerjester. His arguments generally seem solid, he asks a lot of questions, his thinking is consistent (by this I mean that he has not waffled), and he seems genuinely interested in catching scum.


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

Paschendale

:

Surprisingly less active than I had assumed. Starts out by going after me about my argument against FUT, basically saying that I was twisting FUT's words into saying that CD was town instead of implying a null read. Then Paschendale pounces on NS for his L-1 vote without reasoning. In a beautiful twist (given his 378), Paschendale basically reiterates Melmond's 122, which talked about NS lurking, putting CD at L-1, and asked NS to give a reason for his CD vote. Then in 171 he follows triangle and pecanpie in their attacks on Hellhound while providing no input of his own other than saying that he agrees with their arguments. He then appropriately calls out pecanpie's 253 for being OMGUS.

Paschendale has been exceptionally cold toward arguments about Lupo. In 205 he dismissed the case against Lupo, then in 374 called Lupo town for saying that Hellhound was town (which is absurd, since Lupo scum could have been distancing from the wagon, so Paschendale is seeing a towntell where the exact opposite should be true). And then Paschendale's magnum opus, 378, his massive defense of Lupo by attacking killerjester. The first chunk of it is mostly just saying "nuh uh" to killerjester's arguments that a town player would question a wagon that was supposedly based on bad reasoning. Then we get to this:

I'm not willing to give a definite read on Lupo. I think he's towny, but I don't know. But your case against him is manufactured nonsense. It's all "town would do this" and "town would do that".

Isn't the entire notion of scumtells based on what scum would do? Conversely, shouldn't towntells be based on what town would do? If a player is not acting as a townie should, isn't it altogether appropriate to call them out for it?

Your entire case is that he's not as active as you'd like. Yeah, being absent from a bit of the end of day 1 is weird... but that alone is not suspicious, and the other things you cite are sheer nonsense.

You dismiss the rest of the argument against Lupo (the waffling over NS's L-1 vote, the apparent distancing from Hellhound's wagon) as nonsense. How is it nonsense?

You tunneled Lupo from the start and didn't offer a single opinion until you sheeped KK's argument and spat it out at me. And it was ridiculously weak, and based off of 1) the very reasonable criticism of a L-1 vote without sufficient reason, and 2) asking for a claim from someone already at L-1. Those are both town things to do. Do you really have any idea how town and scum act?

And here we reach the low point. Paschendale again ignores the fact that Lupo waffled over the L-1 vote, this time

outright saying that it was a townie move

, and further arguing that it was good that Lupo asked CD to claim at L-1,

while also (according to Paschendale's own argument) questioning why NS made the L-1 vote to begin with.

What the HELL? That is some truly terrible reasoning there. It seems like Paschendale is hellbent on seeing Lupo as town no matter what he does. Lupo could burn down an orphanage and Paschendale would say those children deserved it.

And yet just after this, Paschendale says in 388,

I basically have a null read on Lupo.

What? Didn't you just list like 4 things that make Lupo town with absolutely no scumtells? Didn't you JUST SAY that you saw Lupo as town?

Paschendale is clearly buddying Lupo. Comically so.

FOS Paschendale

And in response to your question killerjester, I would be OK with a Lupo lynch for the reasons you've listed, and so that we can find out just what the hell is going on with Paschendale.

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

woo its over

[Idiotking]

That is the most useless post I have ever seen. There should be a Scummies category for that.

[Idiotking]

Fair enough.

Vote Lupo

[Idiotking]

Does anyone have a comment on my 486?

[Idiotking]

Paschendale, do you have anything to say in response to my 486?

[Idiotking]

You think I'm defending Lupo when I'm actually just pointing out flaws in the arguments against him. That's kind of meaningless unless Lupo turns out to be scum. I don't want to waste a lynch and night phase on a wagon that looks wrong to me. I want to catch the actual scum.

Well that's interesting, because you are effectively doing what killerjester said that Lupo should have done about the Hellhound wagon. You are arguing that the case against Lupo is bad and trying to point out reasons why. That is scumhunting. However, you let Lupo slide without giving a reason for why the Hellhound wagon was bad. So how come it's OK for Lupo to forego scumhunting an iffy wagon? This indicates that you are not just pointing out 'flaws' in the case against Lupo (if that were all then you'd be fine even if I didn't agree with your arguments), but willing to let him get away with scumtells, turning your arguments into protection. That goes way over into buddying territory.

But I do think that very clearly not lynching town is a decent reason to see someone as town.

This is just flat out wrong. Lupo did not explain why the Hellhound wagon was bad. If he did, and if his arguments were solid, maybe then it would be town. Lacking that, the only reasonable explanation is trying to distance from the wagon, which scum are more likely to do if they know that the lynch is a sure thing.

Of course, that will evaporate if NS flips town, since Lupo voted for NS, who is our prime suspect right now. You even admit how scummy NS looks. Choosing one town over another to lynch is equally towny or scummy. But if NS flips scum, then Lupo is essentially cleared. Why waste today's lynch on Lupo when NS looks scummier and that flip will tell us about Lupo?

I'm willing to buy the possibility that NS is a blithering idiot, in which case scum could use him to bus if NS is scum. What about a NS scum flip would clear Lupo? A NS lynch shouldn't clear anyone at all. A Lupo flip, however, would go a long way to clearing up my suspicions of you if he flips town, and would basically set killerjester as confirmed townie if Lupo flips scum.

[Idiotking]

That's... strange. Having information on living players would let us catch scum easier, leading to more dead scum. Given that a Lupo flip would help us narrow down the possibilities of potential scum, whereas a NS flip wouldn't at all, a Lupo lynch would be better.

[Idiotking]

As a rule, the town should always, ALWAYS want more information. It's really sad that I should have to explain that.

Anyway, the information aspect is just one part of why Lupo is better. Lupo is outright scummy. NS is useless and anti-town. While I am all for killing anti-town players when there are no straight-up scummy players present, if one IS present, then killing the scummy player is a better lynch. The only thing that NS has done of note that I can remember is putting CD at L-1 on D1, and Lupo's reaction to that is scummier. Other than that NS has been an utterly useless active lurker, which is anti-town, not scummy. There have been a whole lot of lurkers in this game, including me. Are they all scum?

I'm beginning to think that the driving force behind a NS lynch is that NS is easy pickings, thus appealing to scum. Obviously if my Lupo/Paschendale scum theory is correct, then there would be at least two scum on NS's wagon, and they wouldn't support a Lupo lynch, again for obvious reasons. Unfortunately, as I've said before, a NS lynch would not really indicate anyone's alignment, because he is such a horrible player. Thus D3 would come and we'd still be in the exact same position we are today, minus a townie if the scum NK.

[Idiotking]

Pecanpie, do you have any response to my read of you?

[Idiotking]

Do you want one?

One would be nice, yes.

[Idiotking]

Why are you so intent on having everyone respond to that post?

I asked the two people I called out. That's all. Why is it strange that I would want to talk to the people I'm accusing of being scum?

[Idiotking]

Well, and this.

Does anyone have a comment on my 486?

Still, I don't see why it's odd that I would want some sort of reaction to my reads. If I didn't want some sort of response then I wouldn't have bothered.

[Idiotking]

I am legitimately confused. Why on earth would the scum kill Paschendale? With the Lupo flip he was almost certainly going to be wagoned today. He was about the worst person to NK.

This gives me hope, strangely, because it means that the scum are either very, very stupid or aren't reading the thread. To that end,

Vote NobodySpecial

[Idiotking]

It could've been pappums replacement. Innocent, what have you read so far?

That's what I'm thinking. I'm going to do a reread of pappums play when I get a chance. The other option then, assuming 3 scum (which I think is normal for a game this size), would be NS, who has clearly indicated that he does not follow the thread.

[Idiotking]

I placed myself into scum shoes to try and work out why that would could the case - yes he would have been easy to get him lynched today because of the chainsaw defence of lupo, however the problem would come when he flips town after a lynch.

I don't see where the problem would be for scum. There would have been an excellent reason for the town to push him, so there would be no way to tell whether scum or town motivations contributed to the wagon in each case.

but then maybe it was something he said and they thought he was involved in the no night 1 death.

Scum should let the town kill PRs, just because that lets them focus on others and let them maybe get another PR at night. So smart scum should still have let Paschendale get lynched. I'm still going with inactive/absent scum.

[Idiotking]

I'll try and find two good ones, but they would both be two or three years old. This is my first game after coming back to the game.

This is Mini 951, which is both my best game and one in which I was scum. It's also the only game in which I think I did genuinely well, and was the last full game I played before quitting.

Mini 842 is my town game. I honestly don't remember this one, but since I was lynched D2 and I think the town lost, I apparently didn't do well.

[Idiotking]

My guess, scum is just messing with town. For this very reason. MOI likes to do that, which means we could have solid scum players. If this was a just WTH lets mess with them NK, look for the scum to be someone who starts the day off saying, why did scum do this, they must not be paying attention. (idiotking???)

Why would I do that if I were scum? Paschendale was almost certainly going to be lynched today. Hell, I was gearing up to make that happen at the end of D2. There was a very town reason to do so (he buddied Lupo like crazy, and Lupo flipped scum). So if I am scum I would have to be stupid to waste a perfectly good lynch on Paschendale just to screw with the town. That would also mean I bussed my scumbuddy in order to waste a NK. I am not that stupid.

"let town kill PRs"??? Why do you think it is normal play to ask for a claim? Hmmm, maybe to avoid killing a town role....possibly....

Obviously if the scum can get the town to kill a townie who happens to be a PR and is acting suspicious, they will go for it. It gives them a chance to get another PR at night. If the town believes the claim then sure, scum can NK the PR, but again, that is only if they believe the claim. The case we're talking about is whether or not scum would have been right to kill Paschendale if they assumed he was a PR. Since Paschendale's claim would have almost certainly been ignored given the overwhelming amount of evidence against him, even if he were a PR, he would most likely have been lynched. So scum would have to be stupid or inactive to NK him.

Okay, whether you're misguided town or scum with an agenda, how about you just play along for a second and tell me who is scum for reasons other than the inactive/absent scum thoughts. I mean, we did just have a scum flip 1 day ago!!!

My major non-absent/inactive scumread is pecanpie, as I said in post 486.

You're adorable.

[Idiotking]

My vote was a reaction to the NK. I find it hard to believe that anyone who is paying attention at all to the game would want to kill Paschendale, given how strong the case against him would have been. NS has indicated that he is not paying attention to the game. Since Pappums was being replaced overnight, and IAI would likely have not been able to read the thread fully before deciding who to NK, he is similarly a candidate. However, I am prone to giving replacements a chance (with the exception of Hellhound's replacement, given the peculiar circumstances), so my vote went to NS.

It is possible for NS to be scum at the same time as Lupo. I don't see what is strange about that. The two potential scum I was referring to in 513 were Paschendale (who wound up being town) and Lupo. There may be three scum in the game, so even when I thought Paschendale was scum, there was the possibility that NS was also scum. My two posts do not contradict, at least as far as I can see.

[Idiotking]

I am not proposing that hypothetical scenario. IAI suggested it when he said that scum might just be screwing with the town, and that in such a case scum would try to act like WTF when the next day started. He then said my name, since I was someone who reacted that way. I was responding to IAI's implied scenario.

Also, if you look at my meta, you will see that I hate, HATE appeals to emotion, to the point where I will absolutely go after anyone who does it. It's a pet peeve of mine. Again, the only thing I can say to defend it is to look at my meta.

Now what I want to ask you is this: If I were scum, why would I let Paschendale be NK'd when I was clearly building a case against him in my 486?

Why would I do that?

There is no good reason for me to do anything of the sort. I seriously want to know how you get past this little gem if you think that I am scum.

[Idiotking]

Oh, and why I would bus Lupo just to waste the opportunity to kill the person I was building a case against. That would require two screwups on my part: I would have lynched my partner for no good reason, and I would have ruined my chance to go after the guy I was building a case against via the bussing. I would have to be a scum VI to do that.

[Idiotking]

That's fascinating. This whole game is about determining the motives of the players. Figuring out motives is absolutely critical to the town winning the game. And yet you say you don't care about what I would do as scum. Tell me, killerjester, what is scumhunting?

[Idiotking]

...

Ok, so from the Mafia wiki, scumhunting is: "analysis of actions,

intent

, voting, previous posts, etc"

But you are literally ignoring any intent I would have had for the NK. Yet my possible intention for the NK is absolutely critical for your case here, because you say that my reaction to it, and ensuing turnaround on NS, is the main reason why I am scummy.

Why in God's name would I do ANY OF THESE THINGS if I were scum?

As for the "turnaround", my thoughts on the intent of the scum are also critical, because I can only assume that scum would have no clear intent and didn't even think about what they were doing. Which reasonably leads me to the conclusion that NS, who is a blatant active lurker, and pappums/IAI, who was/were absent during the night phase, are suspect.

It is a theory based on the intent of the NK.

I honestly don't understand what the problem is with that.

[Idiotking]

Good God, killerjester.

Obviously I know that I am town. I ask questions so that people can give me their reasoning. If they can't give logical, coherent answers, then their reasoning is flawed. If people argue that I am scum, and there is a hurdle they have to cross before they can make that make that judgement (such as that I as scum would make that NK), then asking them why I would do that is an entirely appropriate line of questioning.

Hell,

even the post I am responding to is couched in intent

. It's based on what a pro-town player would do and what a pro-town player would not do. So obviously you know that intent is important. Does it just suddenly become less important when it conflicts with an argument you are trying to make?

[Idiotking]

Later on in that same little blurb, "At present, NK analysis is considered simply another possibly-reliable piece of evidence, neither useless nor authoritative. ". You don't have to know for sure why someone died, just have a reasonable idea.

Since this argument seems to have rambled on a bit, could you do me a favor and explain to me, simply and shortly, why you think I am scum? So far it seems to mainly be based in the turnaround (which I have explained repeatedly), but I want to see if there are any other parts I haven't responded to.

[Idiotking]

Since this argument seems to have rambled on a bit, could you do me a favor and explain to me, simply and shortly, why you think I am scum?

Because you've essentially claimed scum.

I'm assuming you are referring to the hypothetical. Tell me why my explanation is unsatisfactory. It's like you've never seen someone argue by questioning reasoning before.

[Idiotking]

1. How is it impossible for my line of reasoning in 601 to be pro-town? I still don't get why it

has

to be anti-town, even if you don't necessarily agree with it (and clearly you don't).
2. Like I said before, look at my meta and tell me that I don't always go after AtE's.
3. I never said that NS was not scum. I never even implied it. I DID say that

if

my Paschendale/Lupo theory was correct, then the NS wagon was probably scum-driven, since his poor play makes him an appealing target to scum, and that Paschendale would not support a Lupo lynch.

This does not preclude the possibility that NS is scum

, and to suggest that I meant that goes way too far.
4. As I've said before, I reached what I believe is a reasonable conclusion about the NK (that scum must not be active), and picked NS and IAI as the two most likely candidates to fit in that section over N2.

I have never said that NS has to be scum

, and if you can find where I definitively said that, you can go ahead any lynch me right now. I have a

theory

that NS is scum based on the NK. Just because you don't want to question the intent of the NK does not make it an illegitimate source of information. I admit that I may have gone too far in proclaiming my innocence because of the NK intent stuff, but you are trying to string me up for taking it seriously into consideration.

[Idiotking]

Wow.

Quite the ego you've got there.

[Idiotking]

Ok, you guys want a claim? Fine.

I am the town doctor. On N1 I protected Melmond and on N2 I protected killerjester. The fact that there was no N1 NK either means that Melmond is definitely town or that the scum are so inactive that they didn't even notice that there was a night phase. I assume this because for a town to have a doctor, cop, vig, AND roleblocker would just be overpowered in a mini normal.

I'm beginning to think that killerjester is not so town as I thought, though this may just be OMGUS talking. I may have been wrong in my assumption that the scum would be inactive, or at least that both remaining scum are. I was making it clear on D2 that I was going to go after Paschendale. Scum might have killed him on the off chance that I would go after NS like this, and then twist my words to make it look like I'm scummy (I

am

scummy, I know that, but not for the reasons killerjester has claimed.)

Now here's a bit of evidence from D3 that I think is interesting. Killerjester has gone after me for my supposed turnaround against NS, but other than the fact that I never said NS was town (

ever

), my reasoning for going after him was based in the reasoning behind the N2 kill, or lack thereof. Killerjester further claimed that he didn't care about the reasoning behind the NK. But earlier he said:

Please, Paschendale would've been all too easy to lynch today. It's more likely that the scum wasn't paying attention to the thread.

Isn't that sort of what I've been saying all along? And if we're opening the door for inactives to be the scum, why is NS

not

a good target, based on the NK? See, killerjester is coming after me for things that he himself has stated. I don't understand why a townie would do that. What I DO understand is why the town would follow killerjester so eagerly, since he was right about Lupo. But that does not necessarily mean he is town. Scum bus each other all the time, and if killerjester thought Lupo would be a liability when he replaced into the game, then it's reasonable that he would bus until Lupo died, because that would secure his read as town for almost everybody.

In saying this I'm

not

claiming that killerjester is scum. What I'm saying is that there is no reason for people to assume he is town. Killerjester is null at best. I have several problems with why the town has been so eager to follow him. 1, his scumpool from today was only 4 people. I think it's silly for the town as a whole to be OK with limiting themselves to 4 people. Sure, if killerjester thought that scum were in those 4, then by all means, he should examine them.

But the whole town shouldn't

.

Something I failed to respond to was this:

This FoS is a bit scummy as well:

FOS Kublai Khan for basically saying that we should only focus on who is most likely to be lynched today. Why on Earth shouldn't we focus on other people before the deadline? That's just silly. Stop being silly, Kublai Khan.

The FOS implies that he found KK's actions suspicious, but then the last line shows that he thinks KK is just being silly, which in this context implies KK would be town instead of scum (since scum might have motivation to do what KK did, whereas someone being silly would be a town player being, well, silly).

That was an attempt at sarcasm. I didn't think KK was just being silly, I thought he was being scummy. Sometimes I like to be vaguely condescending toward people I'm arguing against if I think they're being stupid. There are several examples of this type of behavior in my runaround with killerjester.

At any rate, regardless of whether killerjester is town or scum, and regardless of whether the town wins the game,

No, fuck him. My post is a better representation of IK's play. NS is just trying to sound like he's not sheeping my brilliance by saying something I haven't.

I am content that killerjester has made an ass out of himself.

[Idiotking]

I don't crumb. I don't know how to without flat out giving it away. Crumbing is a fine art that I have never been bothered to master.

As for the Melmond protection, that was largely just because I had no true town reads going into N1, so I picked someone I didn't have a strong read on. Since Hellhound was the vig, I figured that there wasn't any risk for me to accidentally protect scum from getting shot, so I had no reason to forego protecting someone. I just guessed right. Since then there has been no reason to mention it, mostly because Melmond has never been heavily suspected. I'd have brought it up if he had been wagoned, but until then I figured it'd be best to stay quiet.

The killerjester protection was obvious. At the time I thought he was the most townie player here, and I figured that it would be best for him to help push against Paschendale.

[Idiotking]

Barring the very remote possibility that both Cheery and I are lying AND scum didn't do anything on N1, yes, it seems like Melmond is a confirmed townie.

[Idiotking]

Whatever.

[Idiotking]

Could somebody tell me what the case against Triangle is? Or point me to where I can find out?

[Idiotking]

There is none as such, a promise from killerjester that he is and I made some conjecture towards him being scum on the previous page.

On the other hand, you could read through the thread, do ISOs or think independently rather than asking for things to be spoonfed. I mean you want everyone to read your post when you feel it's important to look at and be heard. Treat others with the same respect and read through their shit. Read through Triangle/CES, in your opinion is he currently bussing his buddy?

I didn't see an explanation for the Triangle-scum argument, which is why I asked. I don't think asking for people to explain their reads is such a big goddamn problem. I do read every post, you know, but just as with everyone who plays this game, I may reach a different conclusion than you do based on said posts. Asking for your reasoning for your suspicion of someone is not asking to be spoonfed, it's playing the game. Everyone in this thread seems hellbent on not explaining why they think anything.

As for reading through ISOs and such, I did, on you specifically, and the closest you ever got to explaining any kind of argument against Triangle was saying that he may be buddies with IAI, simply based on IAI claiming a town read on Triangle. That one thing jumped him up from a null read to a scumread, according to your posts.

I do appreciate that killerjester actually just gave his reasons rather than getting all snooty and condescending.

Heavily distancing Lupo D1 while still supporting (and voting for) a Hellhound lynch. This is some-what explained by saying the Hellhound lynch should've given us valuable information about BBstar and Lupo, but this aspect in particular is never quite followed up on in terms of what a town flip meant for the cases of BBstar and Lupo. Has the feel of scum that was just looking for an excuse to lynch town.

Having read through all of D1, I don't see Triangle distancing from Lupo. To me distancing requires buddying first, which didn't happen. All Triangle did was suggest that Lupo may be a good lynch, which is sort of the same thing you did, so if Triangle distanced Lupo, so did you. As for what a Hellhound flip would mean for BBstar, I think Triangle may have been referring to BBstar's mislynch comment about the Hellhound wagon on D1:

Quick thoughts because I have to go soon.
I don't see bbstar's mislynch comment as a scumslip, and the way he explained it was pretty much what I had interpreted from his comment when I first read it. CD's jump on it, especially the odd reasoning (if it's a scumslip, then how can it be a distancing strategy?), is scummy, and after we get a flip, I'll definitely be reviewing his ISO Day 2.

That's the only thing I saw, though. My read of Triangle is that she was a semi-active eventual flake, much like me (sans flaking so far).

Also, if these were your reasons for claiming that Triangle was scum,

VOTE: triangle123

This one's scum. I promise.

Why didn't you say them when you were making your vote? What possible good is a vote without an explanation? I mean, you just explained it now, but why not earlier?

[Idiotking]

Actually, to further elaborate on that rapid, unexplained switch, why did you drop your wagon on me so fast, killerjester? You kept saying stuff like I couldn't get more guilty, I was obviously scum, I'd outright claimed scum, etc. Then you said "scum wouldn't have attacked me after claiming a doc protection on me" and just dropped the case altogether. Why? What makes you believe my claim, if I'm

so

incredibly guilty? And why were you so quick to jump on Triangle without having ANY previous arguments against her, and without explaining your vote?

[Idiotking]

Why? If you want Triangle lynched,

why did you wait to explain your reasoning?

[Idiotking]

Read through Triangle/CES, in your opinion is he currently bussing his buddy?

Well, Triangle's last vote was against me, so obviously I'm going to have to say no for her. For CES, until he posts more, I have no idea. As I said, I don't think Triangle/CES is necessarily scum. I have an overall null read of Triangle. I can only think someone is bussing if I assume that they are scum.

That's a rather loaded question.

[Idiotking]

Because I wasn't asked to, I suppose. I promise I didn't just pick a name out of my hat.

You have to know that this is entirely unacceptable.

Unvote

Vote killerjester

There is no good reason for voting without giving a reason. The town relies in information, which partly comes from people's arguments. If you don't give any argument for your votes then you are being comically scummy, on the same level that NS is scummy.

At this point I'm willing to lynch killerjester or NS. I need to look through IAI and Kublai Khan more before I make up my mind on them.

[Idiotking]

Why move your vote from a wagon of 4 to a wagon of 0? Do you really think killerjester is going to be lynched today? I'm thinking not, so why take pressure off of NS?

Killerjester needs more pressure than NS at the moment, because he has received practically no genuine pressure thusfar, while NS has been pressured for practically the whole thread. I don't think NS is suddenly going to stop lurking and start contributing, no matter how hard we wagon him. As I've said, I'm still all for a NS lynch today, but killerjester is more in need of a vote at the moment. His play has deteriorated rapidly since the beginning of D3, and I want to know why.

More importantly, I'd be interested in why #682 is scummier than #691. Thoughts, IK?

I don't like 691, but for the moment I'm willing to chalk it up to a random vote. CES had only replaced Triangle four minutes before voting, so clearly didn't have time to read anything (though if he continues in this behavior he will definitely be suspect). You have no such excuse. You've been here since D1, and have read the thread. Thus, making unexplained votes and waiting until I ask for an explanation to give one is far worse coming from you.

At any rate, I don't buy your case against Triangle. It seems to me to be more of an after-the-fact excuse. Like, "I voted Triangle, but I guess now I've got to come up with a reason." You were flat out wrong about Triangle distancing herself from Lupo, and I don't like "these reads feel fabricated" stuff. People don't have to interact directly with each other to build reads. They can look at how they interact with others and make a judgement. I hadn't interacted with you significantly before I gave my read of you, pecanpie, and Paschendale. Similarly, you had hardly interacted with Triangle before proclaiming her scum. Now you may be right about Triangle not really giving a clear reason why a Hellhound flip would indicate anything about BBstar, but that alone is not worthy of a vote.

[Idiotking]

My point is that I shouldn't have

had

to ask for you to post a reason (reasons which I think are bunk). Not giving a reason for your votes when you make them is one of the most basic scumtells there are. I refuse to believe that you don't know that.

[Idiotking]

Not everyone follows Idiotking's Guide to Scumhunting.

That's not just a me thing. That is almost universally regarded as a scumtell. Look up "is voting without giving a reason scummy" in Google and see how many results you get. Reasons are information, information benefits town. If you give no reasoning you are giving no information, which is necessarily scummy. If you don't realize that then you should stick to newbie games.

So

A)

If the timing is that much of a dealbreaker why did you wait to bring it up? and

B)

How can you appreciate giving my reads and have a problem with giving my reads at the same time?

I didn't bring it up immediately because I hadn't hit on it yet. S'why it wound up being a double post. Sometimes I'm slow to realize things. But the two things are not comparable: I didn't make a vote for you without giving a reason. Votes are serious things, as are scumreads, and require immediate reasons.

I appreciated the fact that you didn't get all pretentious about it like pecanpie did. That doesn't mean that I don't have a problem with them, or the fact that you withheld them until I asked for them.

[Idiotking]

I don't get how killerjester is scummy. I feel that he has been participating a lot and trying to do many reads.

Being active shouldn't be the yardstick by which we measure the scummyness of other players. Killerjester can be active

and

scummy.

[Idiotking]

Well, I'm still keeping my vote on you. Sorry.

[Idiotking]

Awesome.

Cool. Apologies to Idiotking. But not too much, cos we won anyway. Your fakeclaim was good too.

No hard feelings.

I was actually considering claiming an odd-day cop, but I figured it was more likely that there was one of those than a doc, given we already had a vig. I also figured that if necessary I could spin it to where the game was designed to prevent follow-the-cop, given that there were two of them and I would have had only one protection. I did it fully hoping to get NK'd, and luckily that's what scum did. I've never been so happy to be killed.

[Idiotking]

If I'd been outed, sure. As it was, I was at L-1, and I was trying to prevent a town lynch (granted, it just shifted over to you, but from my point of view you were unknown). My fakeclaim would have only done harm if there was a doc, and as I already said, it would be a stretch to assume that the town had two cops, a vig, AND a doc going for them. Even if the town had one more power role, with that setup, a roleblocker was more likely, so doc seemed to be a pretty safe bet.

Fantastic cop play by the way, IAI and Cheery Dog. 2 scum in a row is pretty amazing.