Mini #1647: Eine Kleine Nacht-Mord, Game Over

[Green Crayons]

Ahoy. Reading through now.

[Green Crayons]

1. Want to lynch onion the most.

lol @ folks saying "would onion-scum REALLY come up with the roommate scenario, that's just TOO MASTERFUL FOR SCUM" and then ignoring the onion wallposts of convoluted logic that supports exactly that type of mentality


2. Llama is a middle second.


3. TTH is a middling-distant third.

UNVOTE: whoever
VOTE: onion

I can do cases when I have time/energy. I'm sure y'all are just waiting on the edges of your seats for more words to read.

As for questions, ask em if you got em.

[Green Crayons]

@Derangement:

Welcome to a thirty-two page thread with some preeetty confusing moments in it.

What did you find confusing?

[Green Crayons]

@TTH:

Hi.

[Green Crayons]

Onion Case

1. Over-Posting.

By posting way too many (convoluted, repetitive) words, onion has become invisible to half+ of the thread.

Why it's alignment indicative:

He's getting a free pass by having folks glaze over his posts, and therefore his suspicious play isn't getting scrutiny. I think it traces back to Post 131, which, as others noted at the time, is basically THINGS HAPPENED. After getting criticized on failing to put out too little substantive input, onion now churns out geyers of words about his thoughts and feelings about the game. Moreover, those thoughts are convoluted, abstract, or logic-symbol based. It's an informational overload that most people aren't reading

because it actively turns people away

. It's also not really useful, it's mostly just THOUGHTS ABOUT THINGS.

Examples:

Post 175, Post 188, Post 217, Post 275, Post 302, Post 310, Post 326, Post 372, Post 456, Post 536, Post 720.

2. Using "post-flip associative tells" to justify votes.

onion continually puts forth a "if we lynch X, we'll get info about Y regardless of X's alignment!" justification behind his votes.

Why it's alignment indicative:

For basically every player, their post-flip reveal will help deduce associative tells for other players with varying degrees of probative value. And this reason is, in and of itself, not based on the lynchee's alignment. Thus, this is an unobtrusive/universal filler excuse to lynch someone, and onion uses it excessively. Emphasizing such a basis to push a vote is what scum would do, because it's easy.

Examples:

Post 156, Post 275, Post 295, Post 302, Post 372, Post 383, Post 396, Post 549, Post 600, Post 711.

3. Baiting UT.

onion continually baits UT with snide remarks about UT's (in)ability to competently play.

Why it's alignment indicative:

It makes another player go apeshit, which draws negative attention to that other player. There's a difference between finding another player's play/style anti-town or whatever, but onion's digs really look like he's actively trying to get UT to have a meltdown.

Examples:

Post 152, Post 156, Post 175, Post 217, Post 275, Post 383, Post 396, Post 482, Post 744.

4. Appears to have knowledge about Llama's alignment.

Post 183 caught my eye during my read through, because I thought onion was saying that CDB being on Llama's wagon, pre-Llama flip, was suspicious. This looked like onion had tipped his hand about knowing Llama's (town) alignment. Rereading, though, I see that in Post 180, onion is saying that all slots on any bandwagon (except first and hammer) are suspicious.

Why it's alignment indicative:

I still think this points to a scum perspective, and knowledge about Llama's alignment. I'm not convinced this universal aspect of the theory in Post 180 really allays my suspicions about onion preemptively suspecting the folks on Llama's bandwagon. Assuming for the sake of argument that all slots on a town bandwagon are scummy, per onion's theory, that wouldn't hold true for slots on a scum bandwagon. That is, onion has taken a questionable principle that applies to reviewing

town bandwagons

, and has preemptively applied it to Llama's bandwagon while also still suspecting Llama.

5. Rolefishing.

I agree with UT. Post 430 looks like rolefishing, not some failed attempt at a reaction test like TTH theorizes. Post 445 and Post 450 confirm this suspicion.

Why it's alignment indicative:

role. fishing.

[Green Crayons]

@w/r/t Llama:

yes, I "would" vote him, but I prefer an onion vote for ^^^ these awesome reasons.

Will put out thoughts on Llama next time I have time/energy.

[Green Crayons]

Will be posting Llama thoughts later today.

[Green Crayons]

Llama Case

1. Bad entry into the game.

I'm always a bit iffy in terms of evaluating RVS-stage play, but Llama entered into the game in Post 47 with one foot decidedly outside of RVS, so I feel comfortable in saying that it was bad and reflective of his alignment. I really nothing the "oh and UT" tag at the end (insofar that I saw the theory that Llama was "keeping his options open" or whatever, because it's not alignment indicative to suspect more than one player at one time), as it's the GIF suspicions that bother me in particular.

Why it's alignment indicative:

Llama's GIF-suspicions are not actually of alignment-indicative play - any alignment could accept Equinox's theory as valid, but then dispute whether any particular player fell under that theory's umbrella. It's a technical argument being made early on that doesn't hold up to scrutiny, which suggests that Llama was really stretching to find something scummy about something. This is particularly true as Llama was selected by the thread to get early D1 pressure to post. Llama's immediate follow up in Post 59 confirm this understanding.

I remain unconvinced by Llama's restatements in Post 234 and Post 237, which read more like Llama having to defend a suspicion he's married to rather than actual belief. This read of 234 and 237 is because Llama appears to be shifting the goalposts to make his position better: first it was why didn't GIF do the town thing and question the validity of Equinox's scum pool (a why question), rather than do the scum thing and question why GIF was part of that pool; now it is why didn't GIF do the town thing and just shrug at the scum pool and ignore it, rather than do the scum thing and question Equinox at all (any why question)?

2. Inordinate focus on the early D1 L-1.

Who cares? It's not a big deal. IF Llama is town AND IF Llama got quick lynched on D1 THEN hammer and setup would (rightly) come under scrutiny. But that didn't happen, and so UT putting Llama at L-1 in super early D1 is unequivocally worthless alignment discussion.

Why it's alignment indicative:

Llama makes an early D1 L-1 a big deal (when it isn't), and a basis to push UT (when it isn't alignment indicative), which scum would do because it's something easy to push.

Examples:

Post 72, Post 74, Post 77, Post 81, Post 100, Post 105, Post 117, Post 234, Post 259.

3. Llama's prawn-suspicions are forced.

I agree with a few of prawn's Llama suspicions (e.g., GIF suspicions), and disagree with a few of prawn's Llama suspicions (e.g., Llama trying to make a counterwagon rather than figure out the game in Post 174, which I don't think is inherently scum play). I think it's important to make that distinction because even though I disagree with that initial suspicion, I think Llama's reaction is suspicious.

Why it's alignment indicative:

Llama eventually shifts to a prawn vote for that latter suspicion (Post 303), which I think prawn rightly identifies as a mischaracterization of prawn's position (Post 340). Llama's framing of prawn's position makes it easier for Llama to justify his prawn-vote. Llama also further warps prawn's position in Post 356), focusing on whether prawn's criticism amounts to whether Llama was engaging in "self-preservation" (not sure where that term came from, I don't see prawn using it at all), rather than to prawn's actual point: that Llama didn't appear to be trying to figure out the game and vote accordingly, and instead was simply trying to get the thread's vote momentum thrown onto someone - anyone - else.

From there on out, Llama goes down a prawn-is-scum rabbit hole. Admittedly, this possibly suggests a town tunnel, but with the basic setup of the prawn-suspicions as discussed above, Llama trying to throw everything including the kitchen sink at prawn could equally be Llama-scum trying to mimic a town tunnel.

Also, some of the accusations are just jaw-droppingly desperate material (see Post 438, Post 441, and Post 442) that I would think Llama-town would take a moment to reflect and evaluate and weed out such accusations, rather than just try to see what sticks.

4. One-shot tracker is a scum-lean claim.

Why it's alignment indicative:

If a scum was going to claim a PR, a one-shot tracker is not a bad claim. Particularly if the power is over on N1, and the result is not really helpful (a no movement operates as a 50% town result if we're assuming 2 person scum group). His PR claim keeps him alive by the town, and his expenditure of his only night action justifies why he hasn't been killed by the scum.

As for Llama's convoluted plan of keeping Marquis alive to track Marquis, I don't think that's inherently alignment indicative, though it's sure as shit convoluted. What bothers me more than the alleged plan, though, is Equinox's observation (Post 625) that Llama is well versed in normal roles and has already thought up optimal tracker-town play. With that in mind, Llama's convoluted plan/theory explanations feels like scum super happy to throw down a textbook of knowledge about why his play is obvtown play (Post 599, Post 644, and Post 650) rather than a more straightforward play/theory that would be subject to typical WIFOM and, thus, not really help Llama-scum much.

[Green Crayons]

Sorry.

[Green Crayons]

@Derangement:

4. Appears to have knowledge about Llama's alignment.

Post 183 caught my eye during my read through, because I thought onion was saying that CDB being on Llama's wagon, pre-Llama flip, was suspicious. This looked like onion had tipped his hand about knowing Llama's (town) alignment. Rereading, though, I see that in Post 180, onion is saying that all slots on any bandwagon (except first and hammer) are suspicious.

Why it's alignment indicative:

I still think this points to a scum perspective, and knowledge about Llama's alignment. I'm not convinced this universal aspect of the theory in Post 180 really allays my suspicions about onion preemptively suspecting the folks on Llama's bandwagon. Assuming for the sake of argument that all slots on a town bandwagon are scummy, per onion's theory, that wouldn't hold true for slots on a scum bandwagon. That is, onion has taken a questionable principle that applies to reviewing

town bandwagons

, and has preemptively applied it to Llama's bandwagon while also still suspecting Llama.

What if Llama's actually

scum

?
How does this affect your reads on both of them?

If Llama is actually scum, then Llama is scum.
If Llama is actually scum, then I'd need to reevaluate onion under the theory of whether onion was preemptively suspecting people on a Llama-scum wagon. I don't really care to do the mental thought required to do so until there's a flip, because effort. Not sure if this would have a domino effect on my entire onion read, or if the other suspicion pillars would still be able to stand on their own.

[Green Crayons]

@onion:

woo this guy's great! lets keep him.

1) yes i do that, i post lots, i love math and logic and theory. i have a terrible memory and so i summarize everything for myself and you people too so i can remember what i thought at the time. i never thought about how it might be anti-town to make long posts because people won't read it though. i always thought it was anti-town to not read my posts. but maybe not, maybe i should include tldr's for people who are too anti-town to read my apparently anti-town long posts. there's an idea.

2) yes i do that, but its objectively better to lynch the equally scummy person that will produce more info on flip. for example, if Equinox and Llama were equally scummy (which they are not, equinox is great!) and Llama had tons of interesting, information rich interactions with people while Equinox did not, it would be better to lynch Llama instead of Equinox. Thus 'this guy will produce lots of info on flip' is a good point to consider when picking who to lynch. nothing is the ONLY thing to lynch on (well, ya know except for scum-claims and stuff) but it's totally a reason to pick one scummy person over another.

3) yes, but its because i hate him. you'll be happy to know i calmed down about it though, see post 775.

4) um, the suspicious seats on the bandwagon are the not-first-or-last regardless of the flip. scum want to lynch townies, so will pile on, and scum want to be on wagons that lynch scum if the wagon is going to happen anyway. what scum don't want to do is place a first vote on their buddy, then push the case, work it up and finally lynch them, because that's a lot of work that could have been put into lynching a townie instead. its just self-defeating. so middle seats are just scummy. early seats are more scummy on town-wagons and later seats are more scummy on scum-wagons. maybe the hammer is scummy on scum-wagons i dunno, case by case.

5) people keep bringing this up and i'm fuzzy on it. we know there's (at least was) power roles out there, and we can suss out kinda sorta what they ought to be by what we know, and we can use this information to judge people's roleclaims, and that's useful. i've always assumed that our power roles aren't going to be like 'oh you talking about doctors thats me!' because that would be entirely terrible. but i don't really get why people consider the discussion of roles without claims to be scummy. please tell me.

--) that god damn drunk housemate thing again. its really truly my drunk housemate. he's funny because he's dumb, and this time he read the list of names and picked some people. i posted them so that at the end of the game i'll know if it turned out he was right or not and that'll be funny too. ITS NOT A BREADCRUMB.

tldr: because long posts are anti-town without tldrs: GC is great. i won't support a lynch on him right now.

1. It's not so much that you habitually long posts. The problem is that a lot of the content of those posts were either filler (off the top of my head, opining about whether people should do full lists or not), or were so repetitive or convoluted that they actively made it difficult to read.

2. I'm skeptical that two people are ever "equally" scummy. In any event, I feel that you used the "post-flip associative tell" basis as a main drive to push lynches moreso than alignment-indicative reasons.

3. Okay. This doesn't respond to my point.

4. Okay. This doesn't respond to my point.

5. I think Derangement and Equinox summarize best in Post 817 and Post 820.

[Green Crayons]

@Derangement:

Hmm... Crayons, who do you think is most likely to be the scum team?

I don't know.

I don't do associative analysis until there is a scum flip. It's not worth anyone's time or energy.

[Green Crayons]

@onion:

@GC, 4) ok i'll try again. i am totally suspecting people for being on the Llama bandwagon, because the scummy seats are all but the first one and the hammer. each of those seats is a bit scummy. somewhere in there is a tipping point vote, which actually causes the lynch, and that one is much more or much less scummy based on the flip and situation. also the flip might make early or later votes more scummy, but at the very minimum, every middle seat is a little scummy. you say that this wouldn't hold true for a scum-bandwagon, but it would, because busing happens. so no, i haven't used a town-bandwagon-reviewing-method to check out the llamawagon, i've used a universal-bandwagon-reviewing-method to check it out. it'll works regardless of the flip.

Scum don't treat town-wagons and scum-wagons the same.

I don't believe that you believe the theory "Slots 2-5 on Llama-wagon are suspicious REGARDLESS OF LLAMA'S ALIGNMENT." I think you're having to adopt that position to cover the fact that you already know that Llama is going to flip town, and was treating the Llama-wagon as a wagon on town.

[Green Crayons]

I guess I should do my TTH case, just to put it out there and because ~*~ ego-stroke ~*~, but I really don't have the time and energy for the real deal tonight or, likely, tomorrow.

It's basically I agree with CDB's early suspicions of TTH's play, and then her complete detachment from the game is not the TTH-town I know and love, and therefore I think it might be TTH-scum not wanting to play because it isn't nearly as fun as being town.

[Green Crayons]

Maybe you're right for once.

/burn

[Green Crayons]

Saturday was drinking + friends + original SW trilogy. Good times.

-----

I'll admit that onion's more recent posts aren't red lights and blaring sirens of "THIS IS SCUM," but I don't really see the "THIS IS OBVTOWN" tenor that's being observed by other folks. However, that fact is what, in particular, is giving me my biggest doubt about onion-scum. That is, just that so many folks from across my suspicions spectrum are saying that onion isn't scum suggests that I may be the one with the wrong perspective on his play.

Just so I don't get too bogged down in focusing on onion, I'll just use a townread as a surrogate to evaluate onion's posts.

-----

Between Llama and TTH, I prefer Llama. Especially so as I'm conflicted on how I feel about TTH's play once pressure started to mount.

UNVOTE: onion
VOTE: LLama

That's hammer.

[Green Crayons]

I think I might help with that, actually, if nothing changes with her next post.

Nothing's going to change. Go ahead.

I also have no intention of claiming.

I thought there was another post, but this is what is giving me pause on my TTH read.

TTH-scum is petulant and stubborn? Like, that's a bad scum strategy. Has that ever worked?

[Green Crayons]

Oh.

[Green Crayons]

That would require at least one of UT and Derangement to be scum, so, no, I do not think there were no scum on Llama's lynch.

[Green Crayons]

Lazy thinking would cross out prawn, because I really understood and just "got" everything he was saying the Llama/prawn situation, which makes me think we're coming from the same alignment.

That would leave TTH and onion from the wagon. Throw in CDB as the no vote, but my recent experience with him has been that he just goes AWOL without that being alignment indicative. So his mere absence doesn't inspire confidence.

Non-lazy thinking requires me to reread.

[Green Crayons]

lynch pool

[Green Crayons]

Reread prawn's and CDB's ISOs.

I'm doubling down on my onion, TTH, CDB lynch pool.

I want CDB's updated opinion on the game.

[Green Crayons]

Ya I agree, the Equinox NK is strange. He was on the LF wagon and he wasn't a particularly helpful townie End of D1 and all of D2. I think a scum-case could have been made on him.

Was someone freaked out that Equinox would suddenly start posting and figure out the game? Who has history with Equinox? Who is most scared of him?

I thought Equinox was solidly town. He was my townread surrogate for my position on onion.

FWIW, I played with Equinox in one other game where he died N1, and I thought his play here matched that game pretty spot on. That probably helped establish my town read of him.

[Green Crayons]

@Derangement:

@Crayons:
You say you had a townread on Equinox.
What made you think of him that way?
Did I miss something in his late game?

FWIW, I played with Equinox in one other game where he died N1, and I thought his play here matched that game pretty spot on. That probably helped establish my town read of him.

----

COMEDIC RECORD SCRATCH

----

lol

I was going to link the game that I was thinking of, and be like "ugh just read this, his play is identical" but I have discovered that the game I was thinking of did not include Equinox at all, but instead Cheetory6.

I thought it was Equinox, not Cheetory, who was in Open 581: Making Friends and Enemies! with me.

[Green Crayons]

Uh, regardless of that brainfart, I still think my read of Equinox was solid (and I'm not just saying this because we have hindsight).

Equinox was being thoughtful and thorough in his reads - which is why I thought he was Cheetory-town back in Open 581, as he mimicked Cheetory's play in that game. They felt genuine, and I could follow his thought process pretty clearly, so I felt like he was being pretty open.

[Green Crayons]

VOTE: CDB

Consider yourself motivated.

[Green Crayons]

Actually.

UNVOTE: CDB
VOTE: TTH

[Green Crayons]

Disappointing.

We'll see.

I forgot to turn off my reaction-to-pressure gauge. It's consistently broken in an inconsistent manner.

[Green Crayons]

@onion:

Llama and Prawn had bouts, and Prawn isn't Tripod, so this is scumish.

Llama suspected TTH+Prawn, and we should at least have a passing interest in his suspicious, being confirmed town and all.

These are the same points w/r/t prawn.

Confirmed town arguing with <unconfirmed alignment player> is not alignment indicative as to the unconfirmed player.

Actually read the Llama/prawn debate and tell me you don't come out agreeing with prawn.

[Green Crayons]

@Derangement:

I'm going to answer your questions about reads with quotes because the answers are already ITT.

1.

VOTE: CDB

Consider yourself motivated.

Actually.

UNVOTE: CDB
VOTE: TTH

I've been trying to figure out why this feels

odd

for a while now, and kept drawing a blank.

So you're searching for a reason to find me scummy, couldn't do it on your own, and are now opening it up to the thread to come up with a "good enough" justification for you to jump onto?

2.

Crayons' entrance made me feel like Llama and Onion were his top two scumreads, with TTH somewhat less so.
He seemed to be pushing Onion with some conviction, and, without an explanation for today's vote, it feels like it could be motivated by how easy lynching her might be.

That is, just that so many folks from across my suspicions spectrum are saying that onion isn't scum suggests that I may be the one with the wrong perspective on his play.

3.

As it stands, I'd like to ask Crayons' to elaborate on TTH, and how his read on her compared to onion changed since day 2, please.

I guess I should do my TTH case, just to put it out there and because ~*~ ego-stroke ~*~, but I really don't have the time and energy for the real deal tonight or, likely, tomorrow.

It's basically I agree with CDB's early suspicions of TTH's play, and then her complete detachment from the game is not the TTH-town I know and love, and therefore I think it might be TTH-scum not wanting to play because it isn't nearly as fun as being town.

I think I might help with that, actually, if nothing changes with her next post.

Nothing's going to change. Go ahead.

I also have no intention of claiming.

I thought there was another post, but this is what is giving me pause on my TTH read.

TTH-scum is petulant and stubborn? Like, that's a bad scum strategy. Has that ever worked?

I forgot to turn off my reaction-to-pressure gauge. It's consistently broken in an inconsistent manner.

[Green Crayons]

This kind of micro analyzing of individual wagons based purely off of global average wagon placement assumes mafia is a game of robots and scum try to pick time and again the perfect analytical townie vote placement (which your one secret that mafia scum hate!, and have deduced without scum knowing it? or they know it and yet are unable to resist succumbing to its wiles?).

Like, give me an argument to chew on why X player on Y placement of Z wagon any day, and I'll let you know how that racks up in terms of suspicious quality given the particular circumstances and human psyche of the situation.

But this type of averaging of suspicion has a bunch of assumption flaws that I could probably articulate more clearly if I were not inebriated and checking the internet for internet games at 1 in the morning.

[Green Crayons]

Oh hey you also posted on a new page. Additional response:

So in conclusion

I AM awesome. Thank you for noticing. My door is always open to complements, because my ego can never inflate so large that it will pop. I will just become so bloated with electronic obnoxiousness that I will clog up the tubes that run the internet and your precious internet mafia will be crashed. Praise me and suffer the consequences.

Also, I'm uncomfortable with the process which got you to your suspicions of other folks. Because of the aforementioned reasons. I feel like I should point to prawn as an example, but thinking is hard at the moment and I'll just stick with: actually real the prawn v. Llama, and you'll read prawn-town arguing with Llama-town, regardless of what your average-vote-placement machine spits out.

[Green Crayons]

This game makes me keep squinting at the screen because I'm not sure of how to respond to what people are saying.

Just how experienced are you at the game of mafia, onion? I see a reg date of 2009 but you're asking about sheeping (following another player's vote/suspicions without critically adding additional reasons) and the "right" way to do a vote analysis.

I don't mean this pejoratively, because whether 1 day or 100 years you can not suck at this, so I'm not trying to say I doubt your abilities. I ask only to put in a frame of reference of how I should be interpreting your posts.

[Green Crayons]

Do you guys like GC's case on Onion?

Yes, it is quite good.

[Green Crayons]

uite the opposite, actually.

You'll notice I wrote that in the past.
Your votes were looking strange to me, and I didn't voice it aloud until I figured out why they were bothering me, because I didn't want to be influenced, and possibly misled, by others.

I find your choice of interpretation is interesting.

Uh.

"I've been trying to figure out why this feels odd for a while now, and kept drawing a blank."

I'm not going to bust out my google.com English grammatical resource that would be validated by my worthless English degree, but I'm fairly certain that you have at least an ongoing-into-the-present tense in there somewhere.

But, to quote my totally awesome 5 year old goddaughter?

REALLY?

You want to fight over a grammatical syntax as a buffer to my accusation in all but name that you're scum posturing?

[Green Crayons]

Too many question marks in there.

I definitely quoted my 5 year old goddaughter.

[Green Crayons]

TTH onion CDB derangement

lynch pool

Would kick CDB out before onion just because I agreed with him earlier w/r/t TTH suspicions, and by god I'm trusting just-replaced-in-GC at least somewhat.

[Green Crayons]

Want that CDB update though.


YOU'RE WELCOME THREAD, I HAVE POSTED ALL OF THE POSTS.


Good night.

[Green Crayons]

TTH onion CDB derangement

lynch pool

Would kick CDB out before onion just because I agreed with him earlier w/r/t TTH suspicions, and by god I'm trusting just-replaced-in-GC at least somewhat.

Ugh.

Not confident about this now that I'm seeing it in the light of day.

[Green Crayons]

I showed my ass last time I posted, and don't really have much else to say since then, so.

Posting.

[Green Crayons]

Bussing

I don't bus.

[Green Crayons]

Ergo

Your theory is wrong.

Ergo

Setting up my mislynch after TTH's flip based on your wrong theory is bad.

[Green Crayons]

You can reduce your eyelids to normal, half-droop.

[Green Crayons]

Bussing

I don't bus.

Have you literally never bussed?

I'm sure it happened at least once.

Nobody is perfect.

[Green Crayons]

While my lynch pool remains unchanged, I think I'd prefer to lynch GC first now, if we can.
FOS: Green Crayons

lol @ FOS

[Green Crayons]

Stop looking for permission from the thread to vote me.

[Green Crayons]

I mean

there's a small but nonzero chance that there's two scum left

it wouldn't be a super balanced setup, but....

I don't want to lose right now

I don't follow what you're saying.

[Green Crayons]

Bussing

I don't bus.

Have you literally never bussed?

I'm sure it happened at least once.

Nobody is perfect.

But, I will add, that it most certainly hasn't happened in the past 5 years!




No, but seriously, bussing is dumb and I don't bus, and predicating a theory on GC bussing is bad.

[Green Crayons]

I mean

there's a small but nonzero chance that there's two scum left

it wouldn't be a super balanced setup, but....

I don't want to lose right now

I don't follow what you're saying.

there's literally nothing else to say to explain it?

No scum have died. There's at least two scum left. How is there anything but a large and assuredly almost 100% chance of at least 2 scum being left?

[Green Crayons]

Put simply, if the player always respects their own self-imposed meta, then it's a trust-tell, which is an actionable offence on this site.

Never doing a thing that hurts your alignment is a trust tell?

Jesus.

Fine.

It is conceivable that I would bus a buddy as scum, but I will most likely, almost always, never do so as scum, but that possibility still exists.

It's still a bad assumption to base a theory off of.

[Green Crayons]

I guess I'm probably looking at either a GC or TTH vote Today. I will probably look at Derangement in more detail later, but I think I would be a bit surprised if there weren't at least one scum in (GC, TTH).

You and prawn both.

Hop to it, this day has taken forever.

[Green Crayons]

I guess I'm probably looking at either a GC or TTH vote Today. I will probably look at Derangement in more detail later, but I think I would be a bit surprised if there weren't at least one scum in (GC, TTH).

You and prawn both.

Hop to it, this day has taken forever.

But your catchup insight is well appreciated, as always.

CDB catchup feels like his play in our previous game. So that's also in his favor for being town.

[Green Crayons]

FTR I was wanting you to hop to voting TTH, but okay.

Anything to make this day end.

[Green Crayons]

Oh. Joy.

[Green Crayons]

So what's the case against me?

[Green Crayons]

From a page back CDB wanted to vote me because he didn't like my cases on Llama/onion and I feel differently than our previous game together.

Not sure how to respond to that other than a (shrug). Okay? I disagree, and think my cases were solid but, in hindsight, are wrong (at least regarding Llama/TTH).


All I recall from the Derangement and prawn "vote GC" mantra is that sns was suspicious.

I'd be happy to try to explain my slot's prior occupant's play if you give me something more specific to respond to.

[Green Crayons]

oh, lol

"unvote GC"

[Green Crayons]

Unsure if necessary.

[Green Crayons]

I think I had a gut onion=scum read and warped my read to fit that initial impression + his town posting = onion is town.

CDB's catchup looks and feels town, even if it's substantively incorrect. His D1 play had suspicions that aligned with mine as I was initially reading through, so that's another barometer of him being town.

prawn and Derangement have been beating the Bub/sns/GC drum for so long, and so consistently, without actually following through that it feels forced and static.


So prawn and Derangement.

[Green Crayons]

Post.

[Green Crayons]

There are a lot of words that I should respond to when I have energy to do so.

[Green Crayons]

Hunh.

[Green Crayons]

Well, I was actually thinking prawn + Derangement.

[Green Crayons]

Which would potentially explain why Derangement didn't vote.

If not prawn + Derangement, I was thinking prawn + CDB was more likely than Derangement + CDB.

[Green Crayons]

Sorry. I think it's prawn + Derangement.

VOTE: prawn

[Green Crayons]

Well.

[Green Crayons]

ALSO i'm disturbed about the existence of the too-pro-town scumtell. why is that a thing?

What are you referring to?

[Green Crayons]

I want to say

That I drunk posted

For this game.

I didn't want to do it. I really didn't. But I needed some way to look frustrated and town.

The things I do for mafiascum.net.

[Green Crayons]

Also

"I never bus"

I something I say only as scum, apparently.

[Green Crayons]

Though I still really think bussing is bad as a general strategy.

But I can now see the temptation to do it. Man I just wanted to yell and scream that Derangement was scum.

But scum is probably my least favorite alignment draw. It feels so free to be town and ignorant of what's going on.

[Green Crayons]

Right back atcha both.

[Green Crayons]

I actually like night starts in theory, as it allows a bit of information for town to go off of on D1 and for respective sides/powers to have a bit of insight.

But games take so long to start as is, adding another 48 hours or so for a night cycle before players can even begin to play would be frustrating, personally.

This is generally why I tend to just replace into games these days, though, so that's my own personal preference.

[Green Crayons]

I honestly thought you were another player when I recommended killing you.

A more thorough kill discussion is in the scum PT. I'm fine with PJ opening it up.