Mini 1782 Game Over

[Froot Loop]

The confusion between FA and RC is weird. I didn't know what RC was talking about because scum know each other. It's a strange interaction anyway.

[Froot Loop]

APF's pushes feel really disingenuous and the page 2 declaring people confscum shit is just awful.

If he's town and this is actually his scumhunting then I think town is better off without him anyway.

I really don't think FA's scum atm.

(my bold)

This is super weak. I haven't read APF's posts as close to a push, I agree with Roshar in 44 but that's why I'm basically disregarding what APF's saying. It doesn't seem to be meant to be taken seriously.

I'm more worried about the pushes against APF, particularly RC but also Roshar.

[Froot Loop]

It's not about any

pushing

, it's about the way he's talking like an idiot suggesting that people are confscum on the second page.
Most games that I've lost as town have been either due to tunnelers who can't reconsider things or to scum disguising themselves as tunnelers and getting away with it.
I'm going to policy lynch anyone who does that shit.

I didn't take his assertion that strongly. I agree with you (not sure about the policy lynching,) I just don't think that's what he's doing in this game.

The confusion between FA and RC is weird. I didn't know what RC was talking about because scum know each other. It's a strange interaction anyway.

Do you think it's weird in any alignment-indicative way?

I guess I think it's unlikely something that would happen if they're both scum.

[Froot Loop]

Did you read it is as genuine or fake excitement when RC thought frozen slipped?

I read it as genuine.

I didn't take his assertion that strongly. I agree with you (not sure about the policy lynching,) I just don't think that's what he's doing in this game.

What do you think he's doing in this game, then? For the record, he still stands by his 'case'. I do find it hard to believe scum would throw themselves this way, but I also cannot come up with a town thought process.

APF hasn't been tunnelling and he has been talking about other things in the game and his later vote references other things smith has done as well.

Maverick came off pretty well from his interaction with RC - it feels like he's genuinely looking for information and not jumping on RC's behaviour which could be done as scum. I'm not saying that scum would definitely do it, but not doing it is a measured move.

RC seems sensitive but I'm not sure what this indicates, while it's definitely not useful to town. I can't really see anything useful to the town in his responses to Maverick.

[Froot Loop]

I'm not using it as a synonym for towniness. I mean being useful to town.

[Froot Loop]

To share what I thought.

Town should try and be useful to the town, that doesn't mean they always are though. I'm not saying "not useful to town = scum." It can easily be "not useful to town = nothing," especially in the situation of a reaction to questioning from another player. But, "not useful to town" does not equal "useful to town," which for me would be town-indicative.

[Froot Loop]

RC seems sensitive but I'm not sure what this indicates, while it's definitely not useful to town. I can't really see anything useful to the town in his responses to Maverick.

you don't know RC at all

That's true but is there something I said in particular?

[Froot Loop]

It's not impossible to read someone but it's difficult. Regardless of that, there's a lot of people who believe they can read people so that's no indication of anything.

VOTE: JFSF

Not dealing with someone with that attitude, regardless of alignment.

I basically agree with this.

I don't appreciate how Jake is acting, but playing so blatently anti-town just isn't something I can see scum doing so early into D1.

I think this was mentioned somewhere but I didn't see it. Too scummy to be scum isn't a thing. He's done something anti-town, if that's what you think, and it can be left at that.

Why is there a discussion about scum motivation for ignoring the thread? Any reason for changing votes quickly, claiming ignorance or contradiction is in scum's best interest. That's why there's so much overlap between scum and lazy-town play. Jake's play has a second level, where he's asserting that he's doing something anti-town in thread. He's being honest about his anti-town play so he seems town.

5. Who said I'm looking for allegiances? Idk even what that means. I'm looking for scum and I'm perfectly able to do that without reading pregame.

yeah I guess since you don't know me you don't really know any better but that's exactly how I play. It is a one player game where I am like screw you all I do my own thing. I don't look for town, I only look for scum.

There's no indication for me that Jake is looking for scum and to clarify, that's why I'm voting for him.

VOTE: Jake from State Farm

[Froot Loop]

I understood that you're voting for RC because of his play in a previous game. Are you looking for scum in this game, or in the things people have done in this game?

[Froot Loop]

vote: mhsmith

and people question my scum hunting techniques

Can you clarify the techniques that you're talking about?

Why is there a discussion about scum motivation for ignoring the thread? Any reason for changing votes quickly, claiming ignorance or contradiction is in scum's best interest. That's why there's so much overlap between scum and lazy-town play. Jake's play has a second level, where he's asserting that he's doing something anti-town in thread. He's being honest about his anti-town play so he seems town.

5. Who said I'm looking for allegiances? Idk even what that means. I'm looking for scum and I'm perfectly able to do that without reading pregame.

yeah I guess since you don't know me you don't really know any better but that's exactly how I play. It is a one player game where I am like screw you all I do my own thing. I don't look for town, I only look for scum.

I don't see how these two posts are him being deliberately anti-town, explain pls?

whoops

Those two posts were related to his scum-hunting (I commented on them afterwards in my post.) The anti-town bit was not reading the thread, or saying that he's not reading the thread properly.

[Froot Loop]

I mean, fine. I don't know what you're trying to achieve and I don't see the problem with being open if it is obvious.

If the play was to park on a quasi-random vote to try and lure out scum, I'd ask how legitimate your vote was on RC and whether we're to read that as your feelings or part of the technique. If not, then it's not obvious to me.

[Froot Loop]

I shared my feelings about both already. if you can't see that I'm null townlean on jake and scum lean on RC atm. RC plays seems a bit fake and closed that I'm not sure what is he trying to do and whats his agenda.

plus RC is not suggesting policy lynches.

he is not just playing open and you need analysing his posts to understand him - which is extremely hard becuase he is basically doing nothing.

and Jake push on RC is becuase he is afraid of RC play as both town and scum and he thinks RC didn't done anything to make him say otherwise.

none of them are policy lynches.

(my bold)

This seems like a policy lynch:

VOTE: JFSF

Not dealing with someone with that attitude, regardless of alignment.

Maverick's gone hard on Jake and I don't like this post:

@Jake: You didn't prove me wrong. You lied about people applying pressure on mhsmith

to make the retraction of his vote seem scummy

. You're backtracking with

pedantic little arguments that anyone ought to be able to see through

, you've

hunted for towncred

and willingly ignored a large portion of the game. (People were talking in pregame. It's part of the game. Deal with it.) You claim you aren't being defensive yet you've gotten worked up about me thinking you're scum and are appealing to emotion by insinuating that you're angry about being called a liar. Bull.

You're angry about being caught out.

You claim you're looking for reads elsewhere whilst your vote remains on mhsmith. Well if you're looking for reads, what do you think of me? Of Roshar? Of FA? Of APF? Or are we all still null-reads for you after 25 pages? Because that, too, stinks of lazy scum.

Nos-ja'd: @Nos: I can agree with Lowell's drifting. There's votes and some reads in there.

(all my bold)

I don't like this kind of representation in the thread. I know it's after a long conversation so there's context but it's presenting contentious assertions as fact.

Maverick doesn't know why Jake lied about applying pressure on smith. Maverick's categorisation of Jake's arguments as pedantic is subjective. Similarly, "hunted for towncred" is an interpretation of Jake's actions as scummy, rather than presenting the actions themselves. Maverick quoted the posts he's referring to but it's presented objectively in this post. Maverick doesn't know why Jake is angry.

Jake has presented conflicting motivations in thread. He said pregame was useless (post 198) and that he was busy (post 201) and then when he was called on saying the thread was useless (post 272) he said it was because he's busy and didn't acknowledge the actual foundation for the comment (post 269.)

Similarly, he posted a vote for RC (post 340) and a subsequent explanation (post 427) which doesn't mention any posts in the game. Then (post 460) says that he's also read some things in the game which make him think RC is scum. (I can't see any reference to what those posts are but that's a different thing.) Then, when Nos says it's a policy lynch (post 462, Nosferatu"],) Jake only quotes his post saying that he has read some of RC's content (post 468.)

This is the kind of thing that comes across as lying in the thread.

I don't know what lying Maverick is referring to about smith, maybe I missed it. Maverick, can you confirm?

I'd also still like to know if Jake's vote on RC was serious or if it was part of gambit. It will help me analyse his play.

[Froot Loop]

1) Jake said the people pressuring mhsmith were pressuring him so that he'd remove his vote (but Jake didn't say this. He was saying that mhsmith got pressured in general, so then removed his vote in hopes that it would reduce the heat on him).

Just seen this explanation of the lying about pressure. I'm guessing that's what's being talked about.

I like FA's read list. Maybe I'm getting distracted by the pretty pictures, but it's good to see something in thread and about some people who haven't been posting as much as well.

I'm reading up on Nos' posts and the votes against him just now. Jake's still my strongest scum read.

[Froot Loop]

RC, you're voting for Nos.

This is another of the votes on Nos:

Jake is town, farmer is town. I'm back up to 'meh' on smith.

VOTE: nos

I like this idea. Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice... something something... you DONT GET FOOLED AGAIN.

tbh, FA's is the most reasonable, whether or not it's going to stand after his run through, it looks like he's calling Nos out for changing his read a bit baselessly.

[Froot Loop]

I was calling you he. Sorry FA.

[Froot Loop]

I still think Jake/Max is a scum slot. I'll read through everything again tomorrow but when I was reading it, that's what I was thinking and it's what I'm feeling. The thing about the readlists is another problem for me - it felt like fake-town, theory play rather than anything helpful/investigative.

I think someone asked me about this post before:

VOTE: JFSF

Not dealing with someone with that attitude, regardless of alignment.

I basically agree with this.

I didn't phrase this very well because I don't agree with the policy-lynching side of it but I do agree with the difficulty of interacting with someone who acts the way Jake was acting. It's frustrating and I think it's anti-town so I don't know why it's done.

[Froot Loop]

Was Jake close to being lynched? That's not the impression I got when I was reading through, people were telling them to take a break and stuff.

Re: Max's post 937 - It's true that scum can hide away during a tunnelly TvT argument but I also think scum could dominate the thread like this. It's way more ballsy but looking at the way things turned out, and the likelihood that people will interpret it as TvT, it could be worth it. I think Jake's pregame play shows a player who isn't afraid of having attention, whether that indicates scum-Jake or town-Jake, I don't know, but I don't think scum will necessarily avoid the argument. I think mhsmith mentioned that Jake seemed to be getting panicky and I agree. I think the aggressive behaviour can be a response to being pushed, as well as backing off. Backing off appears to be more survivalist but they both can be.

You are more than capable of scumhunting and are not scumhunting.
So either you're scum or you're not making an effort and I'm fine lynching you either way.

Another suggestion for what equates to a policy lynch, which RC never responded to earlier.

I didn't read this as a policy lynch, I thought it was like "You're a good player but you're not playing well, that indicates that you're scum."

[Froot Loop]

@Shaddowez - ah ok, sorry, I was caught up in the context and missed that part of the post.

About Jake/Max, most of this is repetition but it's what I'm thinking:

1) I think he's presented conflicting information in the thread and then been misleading about it. I linked to the posts I'm talking about in post 663
2) The way Jake was posting at the beginning of the game and the way he reacted to questioning about his pre-game opinion makes me think that he wouldn't back down from being questioned. The argument that he would do this as town isn't applicable, for me.
3) I get a bullying impression from his interaction with FA. I think he was panicking and responded like this to FA's questioning.
4) His discussion of reads lists (post 356, post 446, post 472) is theory-based posting rather than analysis of the game.
5) About Max - I don't think Jake was close to being lynched, so presenting this as a context in which to view Jake's behaviour (post 938) isn't valid IMO.
6) Pointing out the lurkers and Jeanne's vote is pretty null for me.

[Froot Loop]

I second Roshar's question to Huntress.

I feel good about smith's vote on Clumsy, it's not just for being a lurker. I still think Max is the better choice.

VOTE: Clumsy

L-1

Let's get things moving.

Do you mean to a lynch, or is this a pressure vote?

What is town arguing anyway?

it's a bunch of town-aligned players arguing amongst themsleves

[Froot Loop]

@Clumsy - when/why did your read on Maverick change? You said he's lean town in post 561.

[Froot Loop]

Sorry, just saw this, although a bit more information would be nice:

That post was about Maverick. But now I'm back to on the fence with him. It's almost exclusively gut though. Something is bothering me about him, and I can't figure it out.

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

and he was a lot more aggressive and talkative in each. One was town and one was scum, so it's hardly certain, but the difference here is jarring, and I suspect it's because he's been trying to keep his head down among what's been, let's just say, some aggressive personalities. He hasn't been scum reading anyone, he hasn't been getting into the fray, he's been keeping his head down as much as he can.

If he was chatty as town and scum, he could be posting less as town and scum? Interestingly, I get the impression that he's a bit non-committal in general which conflicts with the aggressive play you saw in his other games.

Also, I've had a read through his ISO and come up with these:

-_- If you would care to look at my game history, I only have 2 completed games here. Both of them Newbie games. 9 players, 2 scum. Haven't been in a 12 person game. I thought there would be 3 scum, but I wanted to make sure so I didn't have any errors in logic. The fact that you think it's a ham handed fake townslip is one of the more egotistical things I've seen in a while. Which is saying something.

I read this as a firm response to Lowell saying he faked a townslip. But APF thinks he missed an opportunity to question Lowell further (post 964)

At first, I had the impression that Maverick was just vote hopping to whatever looked good repeatedly. Going with the flow. After going back and ISOing though, it's not true. Decent vibes from this so far. Lean town.

Town read on Maverick.

@APF - you interpreted these as empty words in post 964?

My eyes are throbbing as I read the frst 8 pages.


RC is kund of floating around, and that indicative of him being scummy. But Titus I feel much better about reading.
APF is kind of naughty too. Didnt like much he did.

He has been kind of quiet, which is odd because from the games I've read, he's usually pretty talkative, right? (Not that I can say much on this. >_<)

Just for clarity, is this saying Titus is a town-lean for you?

[my edit]

As for the ISO, I did look into it, but didn't find as much as I had hoped. I like your side of it more, but I could see a scum team between you with this used as distancing. What is interesting is that while you're pushing him pretty hard, you stay near the middle of his readlist. He looks kind of passive while under pressure for you, which pings me as somewhat scummy from my (limited) experience.

Asking pisskop for a concrete read/clarification. Attempted analysis of Roshar/APF ISO. (Fair enough that this was after being pressured.)

I'm way more convinced by my own argument for lynching Max

[Froot Loop]

Anyone who asks things like "is this a pressure vote, or a lynch vote" is inherently suspicious, IMO.

I was trying to clarify Roshar's comment when she voted. Why is asking that scummy?

I get it with Clumsy but I just think that lack of activity and lack of reads go hand in hand. If he'd been posting loads without reads, I'd be more suspicious.

Thanks for clarifying, APF.

[Froot Loop]

Max - why are you reading the fights as TvT? Is there anything specific you can point to? Also, can you clarify why you think Jake was close to getting lynched?

And I realize I'm scumreading Clumsy more than shaddow now.
VOTE: Clumsy

Could you explain why exactly? I can understand, because of my inactivity and the fact that others are thinking the same as you, but I'm wary of the runner up wagon jumping onto the leading wagon.

I won't keep harping on about this, but this post from Clumsy shows a total disconnect from the game. APF clearly stated the reasons for his suspicions and I don't see any reason for scum, in this situation, to ignore it. Also, unless my reading of the game is wrong, APF doesn't have any wagon. I would say that Max is the other person being talked about.

[Froot Loop]

Max, what's your interpretation of the Jake/FA fight?

Max - why are you reading the fights as TvT? Is there anything specific you can point to?

Also, can you clarify why you think Jake was close to getting lynched?

(my bold, on my post! haha)

What about this question?

[Froot Loop]

Ok, I've also just seen Roshar's intent to hammer.

[Froot Loop]

I literally cheered at Clumsy's post 1037 then I saw the page one and was like "Oh nooooo.." hahaha. That being said, I don't mind it and the spoiler tags are helpful.

I agree about Lowell advocating for something anti-town.

Anyone who asks things like "is this a pressure vote, or a lynch vote" is inherently suspicious, IMO.

I was trying to clarify Roshar's comment when she voted. Why is asking that scummy?

Lowell, can you clarify this? I hadn't thought about devaluing the vote but considering Roshar's comment when she voted, I wanted to know what she meant.

[Froot Loop]

Awww

Thanks Mav!

[Froot Loop]

Why Huntress? This is the second time you seem to have scumread someone without giving a reason.

I'm leaning town on Shaddowez. I like his post 950 - I think it's asking for and responding to clarification. I do think it was a bit early for his vote on Clumsy though.

[Froot Loop]

Clumsy - what is it about my play that you would describe as coasting?

Lowell - some people have asked you some things or commented on your play. Can you respond?

2) Well we're discussing me and my opinions right now, and have been nearly this entire game so that's just contradictory, and

town shouldn't aim to be town read

, it should be to find scum and let people know when you think you've got one, which is the quintessence of my playstyle. I'm not advocating this playstyle, but it's what works for me.

(my bold)

This is a bit of talk about theory but I disagree with this. Perhaps it's not the main objective but all town players have a responsibility to find scum and not get lynched. Maybe that's what you meant by 'aim.'

@Max - this is the first time I was talking about:

vote: Clumsy

I would focus on either Clumsy or A Plain Farmer.
...snip...
i feel Clumsy's been overly quiet in general anyway.

Why APF?

The same as Clumsy, just to a lesser extent.

Your vote on APF was baseless and shaddowez had to ask you to clarify.

Max, are there any points in my post 965 that you want to talk about? The reasons are there why I'm scumreading you.

[Froot Loop]

That's fair enough, although I'm not sure at what stage you'd be able to catch enough scum, with the possibilities of bussing and 3rd parties etc.

[Froot Loop]

I'm on my phone so I can't quote.

I think there's evidence that that inactivity was legitimate, rather than scum avoiding saying anything in the thread. Voting for clumsy for inactivity is now illegitimate for me.

APF - I think a lot of your reasons for voting for clumsy can be explained by his general inactivity. What do you think?

The jake/Max slot has done provable scummy things in the thread. I've talked about the Jake thing and now Max has been posting badly as well. He hasn't given reasons for multiple votes and his responses to my points on Jake are unsubstantial. I said Jake had posted misleading information in the thread; Max called him obnoxious. I stated that I thought there was evidence that Jake would t back down from an argument as town or scum. He ignored this point. I accept his point 3, although it doesn't invalidate my point. He didn't address my point that Jake presented town-looking theory in order to look town.

We should lynch Max today.

[Froot Loop]

Sorry, the inactivity I'm talking about is Clumsy's, not huntress.

[Froot Loop]

I'm on my phone so I can't quote.

I think there's evidence that that inactivity was legitimate, rather than scum avoiding saying anything in the thread. Voting for clumsy for inactivity is now illegitimate for me.

Is that the only reasoning behind the wagon on clumsy? That would seem rather odd considering they seem to be the only wagon at this point.

Here are what I think are the posts with the main reasons for voting clumsy:

Lowell - post 674
Maverick/FA_Q2 - post 962
APF - post 964
mhsmith - post 977
Shaddowez - post 1003

There's more, particularly Lowell talking about clumsy's (lack of) scumreads and maverick has a previous vote on clumsy, but that's what I've got from seeing where they talked about clumsy in their ISOs.

There's a few reasons but I think a lot of them can be explained by his inactivity, which I think is genuine.

@mhsmith - ok. I've been thinking about how Max plays in general and had a quick look at some of his previous games yesterday. He's a little more quiet in this game and less definitive I think. I also haven't seen a scum game yet. All I need to do is find a game where he's replaced into a scum-slot under a decent amount of pressure and with some questionable play and it'll be fine :/

[Froot Loop]

I was also pinged by Jeanne's vote on Jake. I do believe her when she said she doesn't like tunnelers, but I don't think Jake had really been tunneling at the time. So one way to make sense of that post is to see it as scum pushing through a lynch using one's established preferences as cover. So of course

I also buy Max's scumread of the slot as legitimate.

(my bold)

@APF - can you explain what you mean by 'legitimate'?

Second scum read was Froot Loop but I can't remember why at the moment and it isn't clear from her ISO, which means it may have been some interaction or other which looked off when read in context. I'll get back to that later.

Let me know!

I'm having trouble getting reads in this game over and above Max, maybe because of the activity. Lowell hasn't been responding to the questions people have been asking, but I don't think this is AI as yet. Nos seems ok; I don't see anything too scummy in the argument with smith. I'll have a look at Huntress' comments about Roshar next.

[Froot Loop]

Damn, I didn't realise that. I'm not sure I'll be on again before the deadline (it'll be around 7am my time.)

I think Max is the best lynch today (I've said it a few time :S) and I think there's enough support that I don't need to move it now.

[Froot Loop]

OK, change of plans, I'll be here for a couple of hours! If that makes any difference.

Lowell's a strange one. When I look back at his ISO, there's so much dodging and procrastinating, along with the unsubstantiated vote on Nos and he just hasn't participated in discussion. There's a lot of anti-town/scum-looking things but I just get a town vibe from him. I'll compromise on him if necessary and I guess he'd be my second choice.

[Froot Loop]

I'm going now so I'm not going to be able to move my vote again. We need to definitely get a lynch through.

[Froot Loop]

I posted a bit about what I thought about Max yesterday.

Lowell - some people asked you questions yesterday but you haven't answered.

[Froot Loop]

This is what I posted about Max:

@Shaddowez - ah ok, sorry, I was caught up in the context and missed that part of the post.

About Jake/Max, most of this is repetition but it's what I'm thinking:

1) I think he's presented conflicting information in the thread and then been misleading about it. I linked to the posts I'm talking about in post 663
2) The way Jake was posting at the beginning of the game and the way he reacted to questioning about his pre-game opinion makes me think that he wouldn't back down from being questioned. The argument that he would do this as town isn't applicable, for me.
3) I get a bullying impression from his interaction with FA. I think he was panicking and responded like this to FA's questioning.
4) His discussion of reads lists (post 356, post 446, post 472) is theory-based posting rather than analysis of the game.

[I want to clarify that this was town-leaning theory posting i.e. posting theory that looked beneficial to town.]

5) About Max - I don't think Jake was close to being lynched, so presenting this as a context in which to view Jake's behaviour (post 938) isn't valid IMO.
6) Pointing out the lurkers and Jeanne's vote is pretty null for me.

(bold added now)

I just read through APF's ISO, he was one of my null reads, and I'm getting a townie vibe from him. There's a good mixture of questioning, analysis and he's changed his manner/tone when dealing with some people (I'm thinking about smith) which I think is hard to fabricate as scum. We obviously disagree on the clumsy/max thing but I don’t think the way that was played is indicative.

[Froot Loop]

@froot, re: questions- either I ignored them because they're dumb or I forgot. remind me what you asked.

Waaaa, Lowell, I don't have time to do this just now. I (and others) mentioned it a few times. Did you notice when we were asking you? Right now I'd be more interested in why you didn't answer at the time than the answers to the questions.

The group was presented with two wagons. One took off and the other didn't. Why? Why did the game stall with Maxous's wagon but Clumsy's wagon went through when Maxous has done nothing?

It strongly suggests Maxous is scum as well.

Even in the rare event I'm wrong, a lot of the game state reveals itself in a Max flip.

Overall, a Max wagon is an excellent place to be until he proves otherwise.

(my bold)

I think this is a fair interpretation of events although I disagree with the idea of lynching Max for the info. Max didn't respond to my questions until I pushed him on it. Could be that he felt like he didn't need to because he was feeling particularly secure. Although, this is fair enough because it really didn't take hold. If that's because he's scum and the other members were pushing the Clumsy wagon, I don't know.

[Froot Loop]

@Lowell - here are some questions/comments I found.

Anyone who asks things like "is this a pressure vote, or a lynch vote" is inherently suspicious, IMO.

I was trying to clarify Roshar's comment when she voted. Why is asking that scummy?

Aw, man. Maverick's getting replaced too?


Titus (RC) and Huntress (Kain Tepes) are both mysteries to me. Moving on to D2 with so little is so frustrating.

Let's see,

Lowell

, can I get current reads from you on each slot? I can't help but notice that you keep jumping on every wagon created.

In terms of Clumsy's actual content, I don't feel better about it. It's more him feeling bad about being a liability. That parts kinda getting to me. B/c that would be the correct town response to being falsely accused as town. But shouldn't there be some anger and bitterness too? Like 'Screw you guys, I hope it hurts when I flip town?'

Now, on to the actual content. I don't like how his read on me changed. Reading something the first time and thinking it's town, then going back and thinking it's scummy, is a thing. But vice-versa, reading something and finding it scummy the first time, then upon a reread thinking it's town, is just never a thing that has occurred to me. Which makes me think his read on me the first time was empty and going with the flow of things.

He gives lukewarm reads without backing them up and easily retracts them. His read on froot has changed as well, and it's almost making me feel like he gave his original town read on Froot just to appease us.

But his tone is making me hesitate.

Input anyone? Mhs, Apf, replacements maybe?

What do you think Lowell?

(my bold)

@roshar

VOTE: nos

I like this idea. Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice... something something... you DONT GET FOOLED AGAIN.

I'd also be up for a lurker hunt, if we have the time for it. Frankly I don't have a lot of bad vibes from anyone yet, so I'm clearly missing something. Either I'm wrong (impossible!) or one or more of the lurkers is scum.

^this is lowell somehow agreeing with some part of FA's case on me (mind you was pretty non-existent)

what part, the world may never know

VOTE: roshar

This guy is barely holding it together and we've just started. Come do this with me and watch this poor rube flail. His ISO reeks of careful scum... already, somehow.

Also clumsy's ham-handed "omg how many scum are there guyz" is the worst fake-townslip I've seen in a while. which is saying something.

maverick is town.

rosh is fine now. done with him.

smith's 351 looks like a try-hard filler post after he got called out for lurking. what i can do in one charismatic and awesome sentence he takes a text-wall to do. except he still does nothing.

VOTE: smith

Jake is town, farmer is town. I'm back up to 'meh' on smith.

VOTE: nos

I like this idea. Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice... something something... you DONT GET FOOLED AGAIN.

I'd also be up for a lurker hunt, if we have the time for it. Frankly I don't have a lot of bad vibes from anyone yet, so I'm clearly missing something. Either I'm wrong (impossible!) or one or more of the lurkers is scum.

UNVOTE:

VOTE: clumsy

Lowell has also been voting every major suspicion of the town

The only bitterness I have is towards Lowell. I'm finding it increasingly scummy that he's trying so hard to put the nail in my coffin. In fact, I could easily see it as pushing a mislynch, and purposefully leaving himself open for a team bus for towncred. Just a theory though.

[Froot Loop]

I posted a bit about what I thought about Max yesterday.

Lowell - some people asked you questions yesterday but you haven't answered.

This is an annoying response to a call to action.

What do you mean?

I saw you respond once to the idea when I posited it here, but that was hardly a defense from the accusation.

Don't worry about it.
I was tired and being a bit snippy.
Maybe I wasn't clear before but I think it's scummy because she has struggled to come up with content to give. I don't think it's case where she's just lurking,

I think suspect she

can't

come up with much which would indicate a scum struggling with the game.

i'll vote lowell though because i'm really not inclined to just ignore the nos night-kill.
People will argue WIFOM but nos was not an obvious kill nor a universal strong town-read so i'm inclined to think there was a particular reason for it.
Not like Lowell has been a shining beacon of town play regardless

vote: lowell

(my bold/italic)

That's what I understood. There was also the discussion of the flashlynch on Lowell at the end of D1. Lowell's play has been noticed by a few players, I'm not sure NKing Nos would make that pressure disappear.

@max - you did provide analysis of Jake's play when I asked you more directly.

I had a look at the votes on Nos yesterday. In the vote counts, they're Johnny Farrar (voting as FA,) Lowell, Shaddow, Titus (voting as RC) and Rosh. I'd be interested in people's reads on nos yesterday. I had quite a positive reaction to their play.

[Froot Loop]

I would still say huntress is scummy, she seemed pretty content to let the mislynch go through without getting her hands dirty so to speak.

Can you quote what makes you think this?

I would still say huntress is scummy, she seemed pretty content to let the mislynch go through without getting her hands dirty so to speak.

Strikes me as one of those 'damned if you do damned if you don't' situations, because I can just as easily imagine you saying something like 'she used deadline as an excuse to vote for that mislynch' had she voted

I get this but it's a bit hypothetical to influence anything.

[Froot Loop]

@Lowell - ok.

I get this but it's a bit hypothetical to influence anything.

I mean that whole point is so nothing

Yep. We'll see what Max says about why he made that comment.

[Froot Loop]

i'll vote lowell though because i'm really not inclined to just ignore the nos night-kill.
People will argue WIFOM but nos was not an obvious kill nor a universal strong town-read so i'm inclined to think there was a particular reason for it.
Not like Lowell has been a shining beacon of town play regardless

vote: lowell

@max - I posted in 1294 about the implications, re Lowell, of nos' death. What do you think?

Oh shit fack caught me

@Max had you stated that 3-4 times then before I brought it up or we're you exaggerating to try to make my point seem uninformed? As for your explanation

I just can't bring myself to assume scum is lost, well, ever, really.

(my bold)

@Johnny - what do you mean by 'lost'? I understand that Max is saying scum can have difficulty with reads because they're basically all made up. You don't agree with this?

In order: fruit I was just annoyed by, Titus take some getting used to, but I'm fine with her for now, the fact is either being scummy or stubbornly obtuse, I'm not sure which is worse. Max's the most skinny person mentioned in that post, but the point being made there are not why I find him scummy it's just me trying to figure him out

I get that my initial post didn't contain much but by the time you said you were annoyed, I'd posted a few more (1276, 1285 and 1287.) Did you think they were annoying also? Or they didn't do anything to make you feel better?

I'm really curious as to why Nos was NK'd. Did they crumb? Otherwise kinda nonstrategic. I'm not gonna bother with wifom with this (i.e nos voted lowell).

I'm not entirely following this. You say you're curious, but you're not going to worry about the nos voting lowell part.

Is there some other insight you think is worth gleaming from her death?

(my bold)

@smith - I'm surprised you didn't get what Roshar was talking about. I think this post is a bit shade-throwy. You're implying (I think) that Roshar's post doesn't have any content.

[Froot Loop]

I'm guessing the Roshar/Lowell thing is about 1089.

@Roshar - Lowell's saying that you tried to maintain the wagon

without taking responsibility for it.

Not that you were just trying to move the wagon on.

@Johnny - what do you mean by 'lost'? I understand that Max is saying scum can have difficulty with reads because they're basically all made up. You don't agree with this?

Oh see I hear that as "scum is bad at Mafia" which is a dangerous thing to assume

This is a good point. What do you think about Max making that argument? He's made a few weak arguments today (Huntress and the lynch avoiding, Lowell as a reason for Nos' NK [

I really don't think this is strong enough for a vote, I'd be interested in other people's thoughts.

])

And I was just annoyed with that response in the moment frooty. You responding to my "where everybody at" post with a "same shit I said yesterday" made it seem like there was nothing new you could be saying.

@JF - I get that and I also get why that post was annoying, it's a bit nothing. But why did you mention one specific post when I'd posted two afterwards and you didn't mention them?

[Froot Loop]

@Titus - the post I quoted which Lowell responded to initially is 1089

Why would there be suspicion on the neighbour? Because of the possibility that Nos slipped something or claimed in the thread which led to the NK? I don't think that's a very strong reason. I think it's more likely that we would assess the alignment based on play, which is what we're doing anyway. I think the speculation about whether Nos said something in the thread or the neighbour slipped is useless. You're (smith, Titus, Roshar) saying that there would be suspicion on the neighbour, so nothing would be taken for granted and everything would be questioned. We wouldn't get anything definitive from the claim but scum would.

@Froot, Lowell is saying I'm trying to get him to move the wagon instead of myself. I.e, I want the wagon to move forward, I just want him to do it instead of me.

The assumption implies that I wanted that wagon moved at all (albeit indirectly). That's what I was addressing in my later posts.

After I already pointed my reason for trying to include him and all the people on the clumsy wagon in the conversation.

I see that you asked other people as well and I understand your reasons. If you didn't want to take responsibility for Clumsy, then pushing someone else hard and asking Clumsy to join you are pretty good things to point to the next day as "see how little I wanted to lynch Clumsy?" So those points don't counter the argument for me.

About the hammer - you did start questioning Clumsy and pressuring him. I don't characterise your hammer as a last-minute-before the end of the day-hammer.

@Froot, In terms of the weak arguments from Max, let's try to remain non-biased here. His reason was him saying Huntress was struggling to come up with reads, which is a scum thing to do. And this is end of day 2. I'm starting to see some sense in that.

And in terms of his Lowell vote, did you also see 1286, where he gave another reason why he found Lowell suspicious?

Re Max - I'm trying. I spoke to Johnny about the Huntress comment and his reply (1329) is a good point. I wonder what Johnny thinks about Max using an argument which he (Johnny) thinks to be pretty weak. The other specific argument I was thinking about is his comment about Huntress in 1286 which Max agreed isn't the strongest argument in 1317.

About Lowell, I saw the other post and the comment about the vote at the beginning of D2. I responded to the vote in 1294 and asked what Max thought in 1328. I think it's a weak reason for a vote (1345) but this could be subjective.

@JF - I get that and I also get why that post was annoying, it's a bit nothing. But why did you mention one specific post when I'd posted two afterwards and you didn't mention them?

Because I play off the cuff. Saw something, said something. It's easier to see in games where mods don't hide my kpop gifs but I'm actually quite fluffy.

But what did you think about the other posts? It just seems strange - my initial post annoyed you for lack of content, then I posted more content so I would guess that you would be a bit appeased, therefore there'd be no need to say anything at all.

@Huntress - you're not pushing anything at the moment.

[Froot Loop]

@Titus - you were talking about the "natural suspicion" which would fall on the neighbour but I don't think there would be any, or none with any foundation which would help us.

@Roshar - It's easy for scum to come in and last minute hammer and take no responsibility, that's why I mentioned that I don't think this happened in your case. You did specifically name people who were already on the Clumsy wagon (smith, APF and Lowell.) The new analysis and asking for responses to your reads is the strongest response, IMO, and that seems like a genuine a reason for your question. I also get that asking for responses from people who already think Clumsy is scummy isn't the most helpful, because you kind of know what response you're going to get, especially when your read leaned towards Clumsy being scummy.

[Froot Loop]

Sorry for double posting.

I also think it's noteworthy that Roshar had already asked Lowell for some input (1080) so she was interested in that slot specifically.

[Froot Loop]

The possibility that her neighbour being scum is pretty high after her NK, imo.

I doubt the neighbour would come out, as either alignment.

(my bold)

Why?

[Froot Loop]

But what did you think about the other posts? It just seems strange - my initial post annoyed you for lack of content, then I posted more content so I would guess that you would be a bit appeased, therefore there'd be no need to say anything at all.

I don't remember them so they were probably fine. You're assuming I've put more thought into my posts than I have. Trust Me, if I found more shit to say about your posts I would have spoke up.

Yeah, it's just that the only thing you did speak up about was something negative which was corrected by subsequent posts. It wasn't a huge comment or anything but that's what I'm trying to get at.

Faq's 1395 seems rather fabricated to me, and trying to snowball a wagon would be a something I'd expect from scum at this time of day. Lowell was right when he suggested his general unhelpfulness up to this point makes him the easy wagon to jump on, so his would be a good choice for scum looking to make one of the wagons the frontrunner.

What is about FAQ's post which makes you think it was fabricated?

+1. "Wolf neighbor" is actually a plausible reason to NK Nos. Especially if the wolf slipped in neighbor chat post hammer somehow.

The possibility that her neighbour being scum is pretty high after her NK, imo. I doubt the neighbour would come out, as either alignment.

edit: the neighbour thing is talked about later. yeah, it's possible scum didn't want to be stuck with a town-neighbour throughout the night. More chances to slip up.

@smith, Roshar and Max:

All of these posts are completely empty speculation but suggesting scum scenarios for the neighbour. Why?

[Froot Loop]

why not.
We're speculating why the scum-team decided to kill nos.
dunno why so many people are having a fit over it.

Is there any basis for this speculation? Is it helping you figure out why Nos was NK'd? I don't think it's a good idea to post baseless conjecture in the thread, especially conjecture which scum-reads a player.

@Froot, here's my thought process on why the neighbor slot has a big possibility of being scum. Correct me if I'm wrong in my following assumptions.

So, Day 1 a town neighbor was NK'd. One who had multiple scum reads enough to make you wonder why they would have been NK'd.
If scum were their neighbor I can imagine Nos being a pretty good candidate for their NK because 1) The fact that neighbors sometimes have PR 2)The scum neighbor would be under more pressure talking to town one on one.

I would question the assertion that the fact that Nos had multiple scumreads makes you wonder why they would've been NK'd. I don't think there's a lot to be gained by thinking about it.

I'm having a hard time answering this post without succumbing to speculation, so I will, to try to show why I don't think it's helpful:
- If there was suspicion that Nos was a PR, because

sometimes

neighbours have a PR, it might be thought useful for scum to have an avenue into the thoughts of that PR.
- I don't think it's true that scum would be under more pressure one on one. PTs can be easier to post in because there's fewer critics, if you want: you're only dealing with one person rather than the whole game.

Because there's not enough information, none of this helps determine the alignment of anyone and it also doesn't help determine why nos was NK'd.

Either way, if Nos' neighbor is town, they shouldn't come out. They'll be getting suspicion from town and possible NK from scum.

This rings so disingenuous to me: you have helped create the suspicion the neighbour would be under from town. Why do you think they would be a possible NK target for scum?

I have a problem with the speculation in the thread, but that's one thing. I also have a problem with solely scummy conclusions being posted in the thread. I can't see any evidence for it and posting these possibilities without any foundation is shade-throwing.

[Froot Loop]

My point is that there's not enough information for this kind of conversation to be useful. I'm not saying one or other is correct, I don't know, but because I don't know, and there's very little use from mentioning it, I wouldn't.

What was your motivation for posting about this? I'd really like to understand it.

There's things on the wiki which I could quote to highlight the town possibilities or positive-scum possibilities of the neighbourhood as well. It's listed as an informative scum role type, for one.

I understand it that the possible reason for Nos' NK is that his neighbour is scum and that you're scum-reading their neighbour. I can also imagine a scenario in which a scum player wouldn't kill Nos if they knew they were a PR. Again, it would depend on the player, the information they had, the state of the game, what the PR is and what roles were on the scum team.

I think the majority of the rest of your post is speculation or subjective, which I'm going to try and avoid. If there's anything specific you want me to respond to, let me know.

[Froot Loop]

To point out that scum/town neighbor wouldn't come out. And if town, they should esp not come out.

I just don't see that motive in this:

The possibility that her neighbour being scum is pretty high after her NK, imo. I doubt the neighbour would come out, as either alignment.

I would read this and think that the main objective was to emphasise how likely it is that the neighbour is scum. There's no reasoning given why you think it's unlikely the neighbour would come out, unless it's because they're scum.

What if there was something useful in the thread? This kind of conversation is making it harder for a town player to contribute and I think the probative value of this conversation is nil so it's not worth it. It's creating and cultivating an aura of suspicion which is unnecessary. I think that's something which is often done by scum players.

@Titus - I agree that Max is still scummy. He's voted for Huntress before so this is going back to a previous thought. He seems kind of apathetic and isn't responding much to the suspicion on him. This is subjective, so I don't think it's AI, but it's not doing anything to change my opinion.

on a related note, given that we're talking about Nos (sort of), does anyone want to claim being her neighbor? It's obvious that someone was her neighbor;

I haven't played much with neighbor mechanics before

, so I don't know if it does or doesn't make sense for anyone to step forward on that front. If you presume she was an

SPK

, then it seems reasonable that she may have said something interesting or useful in neighbor chat that's worth sharing with the board.

(my bold)

We just came out of a game with like 8 million neighbour mechanics. That didn't give you an idea of how they can be played? What's an SPK?

[Froot Loop]

Maybe he hasn't played with neighbours in many other games but there were so many neighbourhoods in that game that I came out of it with a feeling of loads of different ways they can be played in different situations. The neighbourhoods were a little bit different than it would be in this game (everyone was in a neighbourhood, some neighbourhoods/PTs which were created were public, so people knew who was going into them.) He was also a mason in that game and had two scum members in his neighbourhood.

(It literally finished today - Micro 600)

He's definitely got an idea of how neighbour mechanics work and how people can play in them. My reaction is that he presented this as an excuse to question or introduce the idea of the neighbour claiming.

[Froot Loop]

@smith - That's fair enough, there were so many neighbourhoods in that game it is different but what I was getting at is the way different people responded to being in a neighbourhood. I refused to give my colour (each neighbourhood had a colour,) for example, while other players were more open about it. There was also discussion about the implications of the neighbourhoods so I would have thought that would contribute to an understanding of the mechanic.

As far as the PR/scum likelihood, I don't know either.

About the Roshar comment, I understood that she was saying that maybe Nos crumbed.

@Roshar - I'm not questioning your opinion and I'm not questioning that the neighbour could be viewed with suspicion. I'm questioning that this has been mentioned in the thread three times and it's speculation and won't lead anywhere. I don't think speculation is helpful and I'm more worried about it when it fosters suspicion because that's what I think is done by scum players.

I didn't consider the value of the conversation, mainly because value to me would mean a PR result. One they wouldn't get at that point. If there's another form of value to be gained, please enlighten me.

Do you mean about the conversation in the neighbourhood? You want me to try and come up with possible valuable things that could have been said?

If I was scum and neighbor was town, I'd hope they'd come out to throw shade at them. Not emphasize the fact that I think they'd be considered suspicious.

WIFOM

I really don't want to get bogged down with more speculation because I don't think it's helpful.

[Froot Loop]

Titus, I responded to you as well

[Froot Loop]

@Titus - I agree that Max is still scummy. He's voted for Huntress before so this is going back to a previous thought. He seems kind of apathetic and isn't responding much to the suspicion on him. This is subjective, so I don't think it's AI, but it's not doing anything to change my opinion.

[Froot Loop]

@Roshar - I'm not questioning your opinion and I'm not questioning that the neighbour could be viewed with suspicion. I'm questioning that this has been mentioned in the thread three times and it's speculation and won't lead anywhere. I don't think speculation is helpful and I'm more worried about it when it fosters suspicion because that's what I think is done by scum players.

I wouldn't call it speculation. I'd call it an association. That's where we disagree.

My point is that there's little value to it. If you can tell me why talking about it is helpful, I can try to understand.

I didn't consider the value of the conversation, mainly because value to me would mean a PR result. One they wouldn't get at that point. If there's another form of value to be gained, please enlighten me.

Do you mean about the conversation in the neighbourhood? You want me to try and come up with possible valuable things that could have been said?

I want you to back up your idea that there is some value to be had that doesn't involve a PR result. Hypothetical situations. I'm taking into consideration that I've never played a game that involved a neighbor and that there may be value I haven't considered

We don't know how many people are in the neighbourhood so the conversation could be ongoing. Nos could also have said that they were suspicious of another player or interpreted something differently which they mentioned in the PT. I think most comments by confirmed town players have value because you know what their motivation is for posting. Because of the posts I highlighted, it'd be more difficult to come forward with like, an interesting comment, or something Nos might have been thinking. Maybe the value isn't as concrete as a PR result, but it could still be interesting.

@Titus - I agree that Max is still scummy. He's voted for Huntress before so this is going back to a previous thought. He seems kind of apathetic and isn't responding much to the suspicion on him. This is subjective, so I don't think it's AI, but it's not doing anything to change my opinion.

well, what do you want.
I'm trying to explain to people to lynch the lurk-scum but everyone is being a backseat driver nitpicking

how

i'm trying to push the read.
Somebody explain why they think she's town then.

I think your play has been a bit reactionary - it seems like you're always responding to something or answering a question or being pushed to answer questions. The vote of Huntress seems a bit easy and there's not much else to go on. This is Johnny's response to your accusation of Huntress, I don't think you've addressed it?

@Johnny - what do you mean by 'lost'? I understand that Max is saying scum can have difficulty with reads because they're basically all made up. You don't agree with this?

Oh see I hear that as "scum is bad at Mafia" which is a dangerous thing to assume

@Titus - I agree that Max is still scummy. He's voted for Huntress before so this is going back to a previous thought. He seems kind of apathetic and isn't responding much to the suspicion on him. This is subjective, so I don't think it's AI, but it's not doing anything to change my opinion.

I think it is AI.

I'm thinking about the implications of it (see above.)

[Froot Loop]

@smith - Roshar was responding to Lowell's accusation that she hadn't taken responsibility for the Clumsy lynch, or that's what she'd tried to do. That's why she was highlighting the ways that she had taken responsibility.

Umm Frozen Angel and Jake from State Farm aren't in this game?

@Titus - have you read the earlier parts of the game? Before you replaced in?

@Max - the reads list isn't reactionary play so it's good to see this kind of content from you. Again, there isn't much to go on in the reads list though, so something more in depth or questioning/being more involved with the game will help me sort out your play.

[Froot Loop]

@Titus - ok, that's fair enough. Just wondering.

Vote: Maxous

I think Max is the most likely to be scum today; I think he's played in the scummiest way.

I'm more suspicious of mhsmith and Roshar today, because of the neighbour thing, but I think that can wait to see how they play tomorrow. I have more things to say about mhsmith's post, by the way, but it's along the same lines. Lest it be said that I'm thinking about it. I also have mixed/lukewarm feelings about a lot of smith's posts.

Lowell/Roshar is an interesting one because I think it's a surprising conclusion from Lowell. He's so inactive. I'd be happy to have more contribution from him or start strongly suspecting that this is more than lazy town play/not being interested.

FAQ/APF - I think APF jumped on something FAQ said and I don't agree with his conclusions/interpretation. But this could be because of active scumhunting attempts.

[Froot Loop]

I'm going to the beach today!

But how would you know that any comments reported were actually by Nos, unless the player reporting them was lynched/killed and flipped town of course?

That's true. I think it's likely that if the neighbour did come forward, I would base my judgement on them on their play so far in the game. The arguments/possibilities for them being scum are not strong enough, IMO, to warrant suspicion immediately. So, hyping up the scummy interpretations of their position is making it harder for any potentially useful information to come out (by making the player more aware of the possible suspicion) and creating suspicion about the player without reason.

3) This is specifically referring to Titus's 1289. I'd point out here that Max wasn't really doubtcasting 3-4 slots, but rather two (Lowell and Huntress), and was only disagreeing with two more (Johnny and Froot) who had posted things about him. And, as I said above, I don't see reason to think Max's scumread of Lowell and Huntress is scummy.

One of the things I didn't like about 1286 was that Max said I was asking him to analyse Jake's play, which he couldn't do. He'd already commented on Jake's play in 938 and 1031 so he'd provided analysis of his own volition. Then, when I asked him again, he did respond to the points in 1132.

[Froot Loop]

There's a lot of more specific points against Max which have been pointed out but I'm also worried by his general play. He replaced in under some suspicion and he hasn't really probed and questioned like I would expect a town player to do. He's provided some reads, with some reasons of varying strength but he hasn't, what could be called, 'played the game.'

[Froot Loop]

There's a few options. We can definitely keep note of it and it's a point to discuss but we shouldn't let that be the only option. Either way, we can now see people's attitudes towards lynching two townies.

[Froot Loop]

@MrSmith0, while VCA won't be 100% accurate, it's still worth laying the groundwork and establishing what we think scum were doing and appealing from there.

I think it's unlikely to help if we start with an idea of what scum might have been doing and then working backwards. I think VCA can help but most likely when it's compared with what a player's been saying or their attitudes towards the wagons in the game. There's so many possible patterns of scum behaviour that starting from that side is pretty difficult.

I think it's relevant that there weren't very many other options yesterday apart from Max although I guess Lowell was the counterwagon. A lot of the votes on Max in D2 were the same as D1. It's possible that scum saw/understood the pressure on Max, and the willingness to lynch him, and saw that they didn't need to do anything to try to get a mislynch.

That makes me recontextualise Lowell's push on Roshar, FA_Q2's questioning of Titus and APF's vote on FA_Q2. I'd also say that Johnny and Titus' behaviour in D2 fits this description of possible scum play from reading D2 in this context. Garmr came in and talked about APF but it was a little late in the day (because of the replacement, totally null) to be considered for this point.

Also, to continue rabbiting on about the neighbour speculation - this was discussion that wouldn't actually lead to a lynch or present another option apart from Max. So it's totally free for scum to discuss without worrying about derailing a mislynch. I'm not saying it's AI (Max talked about it as well, so obviously) but that's another point.

About Lowell's Roshar push - he voted for Max, Max called him out, then Lowell pushed Roshar. Considering the pressure on Max, I think it's an unlikely scum play to move onto Roshar. There seems to be more value and it'd be legitimate to continue pushing Max.

[Froot Loop]

Froot, you keep bringing up the pointless discussion on the neighbor slot like I kept yapping and yapping on my own about it for no reason. You were the one who kept asking me multiple times about as if it was the most pertinent thing in the world.

And now you are saying you find it scummy for clarifying?

Are you listening to yourself?

(my bold)

What do you mean by this?

I think the speculation about the neighbour is pertinent and it was done by many players. There was conversation and points made about it outside of our conversation and I noted Max's comment and the fact that he was speculating about it as a town player. I didn't mention you at all in that post. I also think the new context in which I was reading D2 shows a different interpretation/motivation. That's why I mentioned it again.

What do you think about the more general D2 point I made? That's what I was trying to discuss, more than the neighbour thing specifically.

[Froot Loop]

Also, to continue rabbiting on about the neighbour speculation - this was discussion that wouldn't actually lead to a lynch or present another option apart from Max.

So it's totally free for scum to discuss without worrying about derailing a mislynch.

You keep referring to it as a, 'discussion'. It was one comment. You keep making it seem like I spent so much time discussing this like I wanted to avoid actual discussion that would lead to a lynch.

You didn't refer to me here specifically. But you and I were engaged primarily in this discussion for a lot of D2. So, why are you surprised that I'm considering that I'm part of who you're speaking about?

You made one comment. Max commented, smith commented, Titus and JF commented and I commented. Between 1372 and 1383 definitively, there was a discussion about the neighbour. I'm talking about you and others as well.

I think it's possible scum would've seen the likelihood of a Max lynch at the beginning of the day and let it go through. If that's the case, Lowell's push against you is unlikely scum play because it's introducing a new ML candidate when there's already a perfectly good one. The same with FA_Q2 (with the addition that he was questioning Titus on Max, who turned out to be town) and APF.

[Froot Loop]

@MrSmith0, while VCA won't be 100% accurate, it's still worth laying the groundwork and establishing what we think scum were doing and appealing from there.

I think it's unlikely to help if we start with an idea of what scum might have been doing and then working backwards. I think VCA can help but most likely when it's compared with what a player's been saying or their attitudes towards the wagons in the game. There's so many possible patterns of scum behaviour that starting from that side is pretty difficult.

Then we have fundamental differences on the point and function of VCA. What people say is charisma]. Who benefits can be NAI.

Yeah. I was thinking about conflicts or changes between what people say and what they do. Or VCA can show patterns of play which can be suspicious (being on all the wagons, not voting, last-minute hammering, etc.) If you think it's unlikely that scum were on both wagons, or pushed both wagons, or pushed Clumsy and then let Max go through, VCA can confirm who fits that pattern of play, but it doesn't help confirm how likely it is that any of those things happened.

[Froot Loop]

I was thinking about the likelihood of Lowell's play as scum. I hadn't thought about them both being scum but it's a possibility. At the moment I'd say it's unlikely based on the discussion. It's also possible that Lowell is town and Roshar is scum or that they're both town.

I'm not making the assumption that the other pushes are on town players. There's nothing AI to me about being the target of the push. I'm thinking that a scum player might not push another player when there's a clear ML candidate. I think Lowell was a counterwagon yesterday, so I don't think this applies as much to votes on him so I looked elsewhere.

[Froot Loop]

@Titus - do you think Lowell was doing any of those things? Or that there's any reason to think one is more likely than another?

I get your point about the individual pushes and encouraging the counterwagon. I was thinking it'd be easy to jump on the Lowell wagon but the individual points are making a stand when it'd be unnecessary.

[Froot Loop]

In all of her 9 content posts in D1, she mentioned Clumsy and Max scummy at some points. She withdrew her Clumsy scum read when he was at L-5 because of his wagon. She shows preference in lynching Maxous as she didn't find his posts town like his predecessor (when choosing between lynches). Yet she doesn't vote him, with less than 24 hrs left in the day. Until I start cornering her about it. In which case she reluctantly votes, reminding us time and time again that she really doesn't want to do this. She's so adverse to lynching Max, that she's willing to have a flash lynch on....Lowell. With less than 24 hrs left. When more than half the players at that time were either replacing out (shaddow and mav) or inactive. That would have been impossible. And she knew that. She knew there was no way in hell that the lynch could be diverted.

She was just trying to look like she didn't want the Max lynch.

(my bold)

Do you think the aim of the suggested flash-lynch was to make it clear that she didn't want Max lynched? I feel like that was clear and if that was her aim, as scum, aren't there different ways she could make that clear rather than suggesting something pretty difficult? I'm not understanding why this suggestion itself is scummy.

All of this active lurking and now, she's promising to stay for the entirety of the last day (D1).

If she wanted to actually make a difference in the lynch pattern, she would have attempted to pursue her scum reads in the 10 days that she had in the game. Not post once every 2-3 days.

And now she's trying to pretend like she gonna try her best to help with like 20 hrs left in the day.

(my bold)

I don't think it's fair to assert how someone would play if they really want to impact things, I think that's more a matter of playstyle. Also, in this case, I think both the things you mention (pushing scumreads, posting frequency) can be explained by apathy.

@Froot, what is your read on Huntress?

I haven't got one yet. I understand the points you're making so let's see what happens today and we can make a decision when it comes to deciding who to lynch. I think you're being a bit tunnelly at the moment. I understand about the lurking and what you think is a disingenuous attempt to move the wagon at the end of D2. I think they're good points, although lurking is so difficult to contend with.

Can you clarify which days you're talking about WRT the wagons? Seems like D1 and D2?

I think Roshar's posting is NAI and I wouldn't say that it looks like fabricated content but more pushy. There's some examples here of some questionable posting but I think it'd be questionable as town and scum. I'm thinking about her refusal to move her vote and a disconnect between actions and subjective interpretation WRT Huntress' play. Here:

You're saying you found Clumsy suspicious on your first read. Then after you started looking at individual players and wagons, you started backing away. That is exactly what I just described. After looking at the wagon, and realizing you were late, you backed away.

No, that is not what you described. What you did, and repeated here, was to claim that I changed my reads after "realizing you were late". That is simply not true.

@smith - I'm worried and suspicious of your play at the moment. I see that you're getting involved in conversations and commenting on things but you're not coming to very many conclusions.

@Titus - have you had a look at the wagons D1? Can you clarify which players you think fit your description of possible scummy play?

[Froot Loop]

@Titus - do you have anything about Huntress or Pisskop/Johnny? You've identified the line of investigation but haven't actually investigated.

Semantics. You'll be 'around' your computer. Until end of day. Monitoring the thread (I.e checking from time to time).

In an attempt to divert the lynch.

(my bold)

This rhetoric is out of control.

I don't get the problem here. Huntress suggested other alternatives (1210) and Clumsy responded (1212.) Nos asked what people thought of Lowell (1219,) you (1221) and I (1231) posted about Lowell and what we thought. After this, Huntress comes back in and votes for Max (1239.)

1. I don't think what Huntress did is scummy. She suggested two alternatives; she acknowledged that you weren't likely to be lynched but there was more discussion about Lowell; and she'd mentioned that she didn't love either Clumsy or Max because of the way her reads had changed.
2. Nos did almost the exact same thing and they were town.

Vote: mhsmith

Smith hasn't come up with any scumreads on his own and his play in general has been asking questions or coming to watery/town conclusions. He did some meta and then voted for Clumsy but said he was open to other cases (1137.) He speculated about the neighbour - whatever you think about this, it's empty posting at best. His speculation around the time of the Max lynch (1501 and 1503) wasn't helpful and he again asks for any other cases which he'd listen to (1501.)

[Froot Loop]

You think I've been using rhetoric? When?

There wasn't really anything to respond to before you posted about Huntress and Pisskop/Johnny. I don't think this is the time to be waiting to see how other people respond to so little. That's my opinion but I don't think it's that helpful.

[Froot Loop]

@Roshar - ok, let's see what they say. I think Huntress' posts are quite deliberate, so when I read her comment about Lowell (1121) I took that to indicate that she's thinking about that slot. She responded to Max in 1171 and asked him about his motivations. She posted to say why she felt conflicted in 1196 and her explanation about Max matches her earlier play. She said she didn't want to vote the same way as you in 1209.

I do think it's strange that she didn't come back and have a conversation about Lowell. I can't think of a better response to a flashlynch suggestion that what she got, really, which makes that surprising.

@Froot:

What's your read on Titus?

I think she's been quite involved and asked some good questions to get clarification and make decisions which is good. I do feel like I don't know a lot about her interpretation of players in the game and she focused a lot on Max yesterday, or more than I expected/thought/I don't know.

I think her second comment in 1574 is odd and that she missed/mis-answered FA_Q2's question. I'll also see what she says about my comment just now.

[Froot Loop]

I'm not asking for your reads explicitly, it's a part of your profile for me. That point is connected to the play with Max yesterday, because that was the only strong inclination I got from you.

FA_Q2 asked a question about why you assumed the mislynches on town players were pushed by town players. You replied that people play to their wincon. It's a fairly abstract point considering you guys hadn't determined who you were talking about.

I think I didn't mention it because I was talking to Roshar and thinking about other things.

[Froot Loop]

@FruitLopp, Yup. Scum rarely push another mislynch when they have options open (Clumsy ftr). So it makes it more likely that Max and other mislynches were pushed by town.

Second, I am abstract.

I understood that you meant Clumsy and Max were the two wagons. Which other mislynches are you talking about?

@APF - which posts from FAQ do you not like? I thought his pressure on Titus at the beginning of D2 was ok and now that Max has revealed to be town, even better. Not concrete, obviously.

I'd like more activity from Titus and Johnny. Both of them have commented on things which is cool but I guess I'd describe their play as passive/reactionary. I don't think this playstyle is AI, to be clear, but I think it can be a method used by scum.

[Froot Loop]

Just to clarify the thing about Johnny and Titus - I think open play and discussion is a good method and providing analysis is an important part of that. Agreeing/disagreeing with others is like half the step there.

When I was reading through Huntress' ISO, it was really clear that she posts differently from me and I think the same is true of Johnny and, to a lesser extent, Titus. I'm not trying to impose a playstyle on them, just noting that I think that open, direct play leads to less uncertainty.

[Froot Loop]

Bruh I'm open all day

Wahey. Good to know.

ftr I really want to see this. My mental priority right now is to try and sort this issue; I'll listen to other cases, but it seems like these are likely to be the two main wagons today, and I want to hear from huntress before I weigh in on what I think here.

Cool, listen to this:

Vote: mhsmith

Smith hasn't come up with any scumreads on his own and his play in general has been asking questions or coming to watery/town conclusions. He did some meta and then voted for Clumsy but said he was open to other cases (1137.) He speculated about the neighbour - whatever you think about this, it's empty posting at best. His speculation around the time of the Max lynch (1501 and 1503) wasn't helpful and he again asks for any other cases which he'd listen to (1501.)

[Froot Loop]

OK, let's see what Huntress says.

I'm a bit sick today, I'll respond to smith tomorrow, I hope

[Froot Loop]

No no, a bit fluey so my brain isn't working properly.

[Froot Loop]

Back! Thank goodness.

My reads in this game have basically been poo, which is nice.

Anyone else planning on getting banned?

BTW, sorry h_a, but you've replaced into a scumslot as far as I'm concerned.

VOTE: heuristically_alone

Is this primarily because of the vote analysis?

The most obv town for me. Plus claimed a roleblocker role, which which was the main reason Huntress for sure got lynched, so there is denying it, so no point in talking to much about it. Even so,

Roshar has been making lots of pro town posts with great analysis and thought out points.

(my bold)

Can you point out some specifics here?

My read on APF is a little out of date but I did get a good feeling from their posts when I last did an ISO (1276.) FA_Q2 questioned Titus' vote on Max, which gives me good vibes.

[Froot Loop]

Is this primarily because of the vote analysis?

Largely, but Garmr and shaddow's posts look like those of one who's trying to hide, and also not like those of one who's trying to find scum.

Are there any posts in particular you can quote/point to? I had a look through Shaddowez' ISO and nothing jumped out at me.

I also had a look at Huntress' ISO to see if there's anything interesting. Some notes:
- Her initial scumreads were me, Roshar and Clumsy. I believe Roshar's town, so this is a totally town pool (bearing in mind that I know I'm town.) This might have some bearing on her subsequent pool (1464.) Again, we've got Max and Roshar (town) but also Lowell and APF. She also subsequently speculated about Lowell and APF being scumpartners (1597.)
- I remember thinking at the time that her questioning of Titus' VC post was weird and unnecessary. Now it can be viewed as fabricated content but it's an interesting choice.
- I searched her ISO for Johnny and there's basically nothing. Johnny asked her about when she was going to post and she said she watched him on N1. From a search, there's also nothing on the Shaddowez/Gamr slot.
- She posted positively about FA_Q2's play (1586) when asked, but similarly about mhsmith, so this isn't indicative for me either way.

So, Huntress posted an all-town lynchpool and she stated strong scum reads on Roshar and Max, town players. I think this indicates that she's likely to avoid her scum partners in-thread. This puts Lowell and APF in a better light for me. Her questioning of Titus is odd and I think it's possible that this was designed to allow her to question another player safely when she was under a bit of pressure from Roshar.

Also, this point:

Probably Titus's move onto Huntress after Roshar's push deserves the most scrutiny, given the claimed NK block and the plausible outcome that Huntress had been caught by a PR.

We need to remember that throughout D3, scum would have known that Huntress had been caught. Titus voted for Huntress very early following Roshar's posts, possibly to avoid being seen defending her. Titus also came out saying that she'd wanted to push Huntress during D3 but hadn't said anything about her previously.

Vote: Titus

(voting now for reasons above even though she's V/LA)

@Roshar/Everyone

Considering scum players would have known Huntress was caught, do you think it's likely that a scum player would come out and townread/defend her during D3?
You said that it was likely that scum would already know who you are, which is fair, do you think it's likely that a scum player would push you the way Lowell did? Bearing in mind that it was likely you were subsequently going to be revealed as (very likely) town?

[Froot Loop]

Second, the only reason Roshar claims is if he doesn't get the votes without claiming. The scum would hard defend Huntress or offer counters or lurk to get Roshar's claim. The same people who quick voted Huntress are Froot/Lowell. If they hard townread Huntress, why didn't they pressure Roshar's claim? Because they knew it was true.

Do you think scum would hard defend when they knew Huntress had been caught? This seems unlikely. I don't know what you mean by quick voted Huntress. I didn't vote for her at all and I never said I was townreading Huntress, let along "hard townread" her.

@Titus

- What was it about Roshar's 1578 that made you vote for Huntress?

[Froot Loop]

Your point (mhs as well I believe) is that scum wouldn't have defended huntress knowing she was most likely caught by a role-blocker. And I agree. Would you feel better about players who town read her on D3?

I think it's about the responses to your case. Almost no one was convinced by it because it wasn't actually that strong. For Titus to come in a vote for Huntress off the back of it makes me think she knew Huntress would be outed, she knew you were the roleblocker and she wanted to be on the right side early.

Johnny did this as well but a little later on. Also, the random conversation between Johnny and Titus at the beginning of D2 doesn't ring true for me. I've got a little bit of concern about Johnny but not as much as Titus.

[Froot Loop]

Sorry to hear about your foot Titus

I agree with Roshar's analysis in 1755.

VOTE: Huntress

I can follow that for now. Seems legit. I am not liking the pushback on you for "trying too hard" either.

This. I was thinking Huntress for my VCA and I just wanted to see if Roshar had an intelligent thought process that I could follow.

So the quotes made it too complicated for you to follow and you were able to do this better because of her summary?

Yes. To force the claim. Scum avoid sheeping and claim the case is bad to force Roshar to claim. If Roshar gets the votes, he doesn't claim.

It sure seems like your avoidance of Huntress and demanding excellent cases is too much. If people vote my scumreads, I am in.

Do you think it was super important to scum that Roshar claim? I mean, I think it's likely that they knew who she was, knowing that Huntress had been tampered with and Roshar coming out hard against her. They did get further information about her role from the claim but I think they essentially would've known.

Do you genuinely think that it's scummy to have questioned Roshar's case? Because almost everyone else did, including mhsmith who is now confirmed town.

I also question your scumread of Huntress which you stated in the thread only after she'd been caught, although we didn't know that yet. As far as I can see, you hadn't mentioned anything about it before D3.

Yes, players had responses to my case. Some developed their town read as the interaction went on, some hopped on. The players that developed a town read, would you feel better about them?

Can you clarify who you're talking about? I think it was natural to question your case, although this could have been faked by scum. There wasn't anything else about the responses which pinged me.

I don't see a Titus/Johnny scum team. I don't think titus would be that blatant with her scum buddy (if she was scum). I also don't see titus scum calling her scum buddy 'obvious town.'

This is fair, although Johnny has fit with potential scum play in D2 and D3 which is a bit worrying for me.

@APF

- I'll have a think about Shaddowez/Garmr, you're right that there's very little in their ISOs and two players playing like this in one slot is interesting. I'd also like HA to clarify his comments about Roshar.

[Froot Loop]

@froot I'm referring to FAQ's slight town read in 1567, Lowell's town read, and APF (small town lean) in 1585.

I don't necessarily feel better about them but I think FAQ and APF's responses were fair and town responses. I'm also backing this up with the fact that it was mhsmith's response and my response. But, when that response is so close to doing nothing, it's difficult to put too much weight behind it.

Lowell, as always in this game, is difficult. There's two possible interpretations in my mind:
1) He's scum: he knows Huntress has been interfered with and that because of this there was no kill (ie. there's corroborating evidence.) So, when you come out and post your case against Huntress, he attacks you and townreads Huntress?
2) He's town: you come in with a case against Huntress which he views as questionable. He sees it as fabricated content and his response to this is to scumread you and completely ignore you and your legitimate question in 1564.

I think the second situation is more likely. I'd really like to hear anyone else's interpretation of his play though.

[Froot Loop]

@heuristically_alone

- can you clarify my question in 1715 please?

My point exactly. They wouldn't know until Rishar claimed. Voting Huntress disincentives claiming and makes Roshar obvtown. So bussing is the last thing scum would do until the claim happened.

I just tried to play a little game of 'Who's the PR?' at the beginning of D3. Here's my notes:
Garmr votes APF (1515)
Smith and I talk, nothing about Huntress (1518/1519, 1522)
Roshar posts case against Huntress (1523)
Titus asks Johnny about Huntress (1530,) Johnny is non-committal (1532)
APF mentions Huntress when discussing players who didn’t vote D1, concludes that FAQ is scummiest (1549)
Lowell town reads Huntress (1555)
FA_Q2 town reads Huntress (1567)
mhsmith shows an interest in Lowell and FA_Q2’s posts, nothing about Huntress (1570)
Garmr says Huntress is hard to read (1573)
I say I don't have a read of Huntress in 1584.

So, I think scum would have known almost 100% that Roshar was the PR by post 1573 but definitely by 1584.

I think 1. It has to deal with basically how scum should approach the game. Namely, determining if Roshar was stubborn town or if he had a PR result. The last person to suspect Huntress was lynched the day prior. Determining if Roshar had a PR and thus was likely unlynchable versus a lynchable VT is a very high priority.

You haven't answered my point about whether the claim was important to scum. My point is that scum would've known that Huntress was interfered with and would've been looking out for any signs of players coming after her (see above.)

But, let's say they didn't know for sure and they really wanted 100% confirmation through a claim - do you think Lowell's play is the best scum-tactic for drawing out the claim?

He accuses Roshar of fabricating a case discrediting Roshar but after the claim Lowell's concerns evaporated and hammer happens.

Roshar's case

was

fabricated, so Lowell's interpretation was correct. I don't know how he felt after Roshar's claim, I'll let him offer some insight about that.

Given Max was right on his reads and the current push on me for being too smart because I looked at vote patterns, it's highly likely I am right.

Can you clarify your point about Max? And can you quote your progression and comments on the VA throughout the game?

[Froot Loop]

I hope people aren't glazing over these walls! Sorry! I feel like I have a lot to say :/

@Froot,

You just gathered a collection of posts and said scum had to know. That's besides the point anyway. My point is scum wanted to draw a claim to see Roshar's role.

There's no way scum deduced his role in there and you trying to fit that read is absurd.

(my bold)

Is it? If it is and others confirm, then maybe I'm reaching but Roshar's already said that she thinks it's possible as well. I think it's likely that scum would've thought Roshar is a roleblocker. To have a player come out strongly against a scum player whose kill didn't go through is a pretty strong indication for me. That, alongside no one else in the game showing any interest. It's true that if there's a BP or protection ability, the town player wouldn't know the source of the prevented kill, but I think Roshar's play was an indication.

I do think Lowell's tactic along with others not voting Huntress does draw out the claim. Scum wouldn't want to be seen attacking Roshar, but get a claim out regardless.

Ok, so Lowell did attack Roshar. Does that mean he's not scum?

I'm wondering if attacking Roshar and townreading Huntress is likely scum play. That's different to just not voting for Huntress.

Town cases are not fabricated. Roshar just had evidence his case was right.

The case was weak and didn't match Roshar's convictions before she claimed.

Max was lynched day 2. Look at who he voted and tunnelled...Huntress. Scum have been playing to try to lynch the smarter players in the room.

So, do you now think that scum were pushing the lynch on Max? I thought you thought scum were letting mislynches go through.

Do you think this push on you is because you correctly identified Huntress' play? In that case, do you think Johnny is scum, as he's the other player you identified? Can you explain that thought process?

[Froot Loop]

@Johnny

- I can feel myself leaning towards tunnelly on Titus so I'll try and control that. What do you think about her response today? It's made me think she's more scummy than before - she's been posting pretty random things which don't make sense (her point about scum not attacking Roshar while voting for Lowell; the previous lynch on Max and whether that was driven by scum.) I don't believe her explanation that Roshar's post without quotes made her case easier to understand. I think that was all fake.

If you're including me in the group of people pushing you: I thought about two scummy ways of playing in D2 (letting the Max lynch go through) and D3 (not questioning Roshar's case and voting early for Huntress) and you did both of those things. Do you think there's something questionable in that?

@Everyone

- Do you think scum would've known that Roshar was a roleblocker? Not dragging you into the conversation between Titus and I, but the likelihood of that is a pretty compelling part of my thinking. A yes or no answer would be enough for me to see if it's a reasonable idea.

@HA

- how do you feel about that post considering the quote below? I'll be honest and say that your original comment in 1706 seems like empty content to support a pretty-certain town player.

Everyone else didn't buy my case. And I can see why as I was working backwards. I was actively looking at everything she posted from scum perspective, so I'm not surprised people thought I was tunneling or suffered confbias.

[Froot Loop]

So, people not voting the heur/Garmr/shaddow slot, are you townreading him, or scumreading him but only at #2 scum, or what?

I'm townreading you, Roshar and FA_Q2 and I think Lowell's play is unlikely as scum. So I'm left with Titus (scum read,) Johnny and HA.

I didn't mind Shaddowez' play and he asked a lot of people questions. If he were scum, he'd have had to be questioning his scum partner at some point now that we've seen flips. That, as well as town players. He asked Huntress for clarification of her reads in 1003.

You're right about Garmr, there's practically nothing there. I'm leaning towards giving HA more time to get into the game but I pointed out the comment I didn't like and 1782 and 1794 are odd posts to me - I don't really think they show an understanding of the conversations or what's going on.

I'm also unsure about your conclusions in 1688. Can you clarify what it is that implies there's one scum, or more, in each category?

What do you think about Titus and our conversation? And:

@Everyone

- Do you think scum would've known that Roshar was a roleblocker? Not dragging you into the conversation between Titus and I, but the likelihood of that is a pretty compelling part of my thinking. A yes or no answer would be enough for me to see if it's a reasonable idea.

[Froot Loop]

What do you think about whether or not scum would've known that Roshar was the roleblocker?

[Froot Loop]

What do you think about Titus and our conversation?

I am not sure you and Titus disagree with each other as much as you think you do. Titus's position seems to be: scum didn't know what Rosh was, but they thought she was *something* so they acted unconvinced by her case in order to draw it out. This also seems to be your position too

I think that scum would've known so they wouldn't have needed to draw out the claim. Also, it would make scum more likely to buddy Roshar and disown Huntress. This:

I think it's about the responses to your case. Almost no one was convinced by it because it wasn't actually that strong.

For Titus to come in a vote for Huntress off the back of it makes me think she knew Huntress would be outed, she knew you were the roleblocker and she wanted to be on the right side early.

(my bold now)

I didn't get Roshar's hint either but scum had more information than us, and based on that information, I think they would've had a good idea.

Lynching Heur is a far, far second choice for me today. I understand your VA but I think to have as a foundation that scum wouldn't be voting the same way is a little weak. There's no indication that that's the case as far as I can see.

If people aren't convinced about Titus, I totally understand, but it'd be good to hear why, referencing the points that have been made against her.

[Froot Loop]

@Johnny

- can you clarify your thoughts on Titus, our (mine and Titus') conversation today and whether or not you think scum would've known that Roshar is an RB? Deadline's approaching now so it'd be good to have your thoughts. Can you clarify what you mean about APF?

@Heur

- you haven't answered this:

@HA

- how do you feel about that post considering the quote below? I'll be honest and say that your original comment in 1706 seems like empty content to support a pretty-certain town player.

Everyone else didn't buy my case. And I can see why as I was working backwards. I was actively looking at everything she posted from scum perspective, so I'm not surprised people thought I was tunneling or suffered confbias.

@Titus

- two points which I feel you haven't addressed:
- You said today that you think Max was lynched for scumreading Huntress. When did your thoughts on this change? What are the implications of this changed interpretation?
- You said that you don't think scum would want to be seen attacking Roshar but Lowell did this. Does that make you reconsider your vote against Lowell?

[Froot Loop]

@Titus

- two points which I feel you haven't addressed:
- You said today that you think Max was lynched for scumreading Huntress. When did your thoughts on this change? What are the implications of this changed interpretation?

And why did they change?

[Froot Loop]

@Titus - What about your vote on Lowell and the fact that he attacked Huntress?

[Froot Loop]

I just can't believe that Huntress flipped scum and your reaction to that was to think that Max was lynched for suspecting her.

You

supported the lynch on Max, so you know that he acted in a scummy way, or, if you are town, he acted in a way which could be interpreted as scummy by town players. That doesn't make any sense.

Do you think I'm scum for pushing you today?

[Froot Loop]

The strongest point against Titus is probably Rosh's in 1808. Looking at Titus's 1576 retrospectively made me think Titus thought Rosh could be a power role, and the wording is such that one could even interpret it as rolefishing. I was thinking that maybe Titus had been coming to the realization that Rosh was a PR, and that's why she voted Huntress a few posts later- in hopes of quickly lynching Huntress so Rosh wouldn't feel like she had to claim. But apparently that's not the case.

I was thinking this and that's why I asked her what changed her mind in Huntress' post. I actually would have had more respect for her vote if she'd said that she suspected Rosh had a PR and wanted to support her, or something. Instead she said something about preferring links to quotes which I can't believe.

I also think it's relevant that she's changed her opinion of how the lynches on Max (and Clumsy? We don't know) went through and that her vote on Lowell contradicts her own assertion of how scum would play D3.

I think RC replaced out because Pisskop joined the game? Or there was an implication that FA had said something?

[Froot Loop]

I was thinking this and that's why I asked her what changed her mind in Huntress' post.

Should be *Roshar's post.

[Froot Loop]

I see why you bring this post up and why it might be seen as scummy, and if I already didn't feel so good about Roshar being town, I would find it scummy.

Yet, I feel like Roshar has a serious attitute of "I was walking in the shoes of my enemies to see what I might think/do in their situation".

I still find Roshar as town.

(my bold)

Roshar knew that Huntress was scum and went back to look at her ISO. Roshar then tried to construct a case based on her existing knowledge that Huntress was scum. Your comments don't really make sense, bearing this in mind.

I'm not questioning your town read; Roshar is practically conftown. The fact you haven't mentioned that she has claimed RB and outed Huntress is odd.

We have one dead odd night PR for both town and mafia, so it is likely there is an even night PR for both town and mafia, right?

It's possible, although Roshar has also claimed even-night Roleblocker, so if the roles were going to pair up, scum would need two even night roles.

Nos was a follower and Huntress was an odd-night Ninja - so Huntress' role counteracts Nos'. To follow this pattern, there could be another every-night role and then an odd/even night power which counteracts it. We've got an odd and an even role so that'd imply two every-night roles for the scum? Although their kill could also count as a power which both smith and Roshar's roles counteract. This doesn't really get us anywhere but it's another way of thinking about the distribution of roles.

Also, we've had two PRs killed. Ircher said there's no N0 ability, so maybe this is an odd-day role? Or scum have some information about roles in the game.

I've got to say, I'm super happy about Titus' lurking earlier today, avoiding questions and now claiming with ~20 hours to go. Makes this discussion super easy.

I don't believe Titus' claim and I still want to lynch her today. However, I know that some people aren't as convinced as I am. I'll be around for basically the rest of the time until deadline (it's daytime for me IRL right now) so I'll check back regularly. If everyone wants to move onto Heur and talk about Titus tomorrow, I'll move my vote.

[Froot Loop]

No I'm not.

You received a prod today. Everything else I said is true and is now influencing our decision. I'm annoyed that time is a factor.

[Froot Loop]

Ok, but what about discussing something now?

[Froot Loop]

Maybe I have been shouting but I think the questions were fair. If we're trying to get to a lynch today, at least, the point about Lowell and his attack on Roshar is something to talk about. The lynch on Max: that was so different from your previous idea that I thought/think it's a surprising change.

[Froot Loop]

Talking to drunk Johnny sounds great.

I don't know what to do about Titus today. I think she's scum and the claim doesn't do anything to change that. I get APF's point about Heur being scummy as well and without a doc claim. I'm going to move my vote now. I'm also thinking that now Titus has claimed doctor, we have at least some information to work with and it might be difficult to continue for a long time as a claimed doctor if that's not true.

Vote: Heur

(L-2)

@Johnny

- Titus' posts today have been jumping around and selective. There's been no continuity to what she's been saying (Max's lynch) and some things straight up contradict each other (her Lowell vote, whether scum would've known Roshar is a roleblocker.) That, on top of her play D3 which I think is scummy.

Why did you vote for Huntress on D3? Can you explain your thoughts?

[Froot Loop]

Town can be inconsistent, but Titus said "I don't think scum would attack Roshar" while voting for Lowell, who did that. I mean, that's a huge inconsistency. It just seems like she just wanted to say something and hadn't thought of the implications or contradictions with her own play. Also, that that play is fabricated.

But I do now feel we should look at Heur today, bearing in mind Titus' claim.

[Froot Loop]

I focused first on Huntress given the vote wagon. Huntress flipped scum. Ok, who acted funny regarding the claim? Lowell/Garmr slot.

What does Huntress scum tell us? Scum weren't bussing and lynching smart people (Max) and content using me to do it.

(my bold)

Can you clarify this?

[Froot Loop]

That's fair enough about her scum game.

Do you think it's lylo today?

[Froot Loop]

Ok, that's what I was thinking as well. What do you mean about this?

but still two mislynches in I don't see her hard bussing like that when winning is so close for scum, assuming yesterday was lylo/mylo precluding PR activity

[Froot Loop]

That's L-1 isn't it?

Yesterday we had ten players, the game started with 13. Assuming three scum and seven town, it wasn't lylo or mylo. Phew, I didn't think about that all day.

Also invalidates the argument that Titus wouldn't have bussed for that reason.

[Froot Loop]

Argh! That is the hammer, I counted wrong when I voted.

[Froot Loop]

Hahaha, I was kind of hoping you'd do that Roshar!

So, we have two options - that scum didn't send in an NK or Titus is scum?

[Froot Loop]

It doesn't make as much sense as you're saying it does. I think killing APF would've been the best move.

I'm town and Rosh and APF are clear for me. If Lowell, FA_Q2 or Johnny is scum, I don't see them no-killing last night. There's enough players to try and get a ML today and take it to MYLO tomorrow with another cleared player dead.

[Froot Loop]

Why do you think I'm being disingenuous?

They'd be replacing a cleared townie with a cleared townie but also reducing the player pool. Killing APF would mean Day 6 mylo with one cleared player from four; no killing takes it to day 7 with three uncleared players.

[Froot Loop]

If FA_Q2 were scum, he could kill APF yesterday and win the game with two MLs from me/Lowell/Johnny. Same if it were Lowell, Johnny or me. D6 would be tough but notice that this would be practically the same as a no-kill day 7 lylo, just with a confirmed player as well. It's definitely not substantially better or worse.

So it seems that the setup was designed with the following interactions in mind: there is some town role(s) that the jailkeeper is meant to block. The roleblocker can then block the jailkeeper's block, allowing the role to do whatever it does.

One of those town roles could be the Follower (Nos). But follower is a rather weak role, so I would expect there to also be another role for the JK to block. Titus's doc claim fits the bill.

I don't know what to think about the quote from the rules. Natural action resolution is used in all normal games I think, and clarification of the RB/JK resolution is needed because they have partially the same functions. But yeah, having a JK in the game raises the questions APF mentions.

Having said that, Nos was the only investigative role we've seen so far, which makes it pretty powerful in this game. Also, the only role we've seen that was every night. If there's another role, like Titus', then scum have no chance of blocking both PRs in a night. AND with the RB as well, it's possible both will go through. Does that seem too town-sided?

We can get more information about this with a claim as well. I'm not saying at the moment it's necessary, but if it's a large contributing factor, it would help us to find out if there's any other role which was meant, or could, interact with the JK. I don't know about claiming. If there's some odd-night PRs, they'll be active tonight.

@Titus

- can you clarify your 1915? I don't really understand it.

[Froot Loop]

Ok, I don't really understand the logic. Why is killing APF followed by a no lynch? And why do scum have to no kill?

Titus is scummiest for me from yesterday and now this no-kill. I think the likeliest situation is that Titus is scum, I think I've considered why scum might no-kill but I still think it's unlikely.

When I was thinking about no-killing, the only player I can see who would truly benefit and take the risk of no-killing in order to spread suspicion was Titus, hahaha. If she no-killed and was blocked, that's super unlucky, but I don't think any other player would take the risk of a whole extra day in order to spread suspicion.

[Froot Loop]

It's more likely for me that scum no-kill than Roshar is scum, so I don't think there'd be that much suspicion on Roshar in reality. But I think it's more likely that Titus is scum than scum no-killed last night.

@APF

- Do you think scum would risk having Roshar alive N6 going into D7? I feel like that'd throw even more suspicion around, which is more likely to get thrown at the scum player if they no-kill and are blocked with only four players left in the game.

I wasn't voting because I thought it'd be best to have some discussion first, but that seems to be over so I'll vote now.

Vote: Titus

[Froot Loop]

@APF, Suppose for a moment scum had a strongman. Why would they use it? When they can chain lynch the PRs?

Who's chain lynching PRs? There's discussion today about no-killing vs. you being scum. Roshar came out D3, identified a scum player and lynched them. You haven't.

Do you think we'd come to the conclusion that it's more likely that Roshar is scum than scum no-killed?

I don't think it's possible that scum would have a plan that involved lynching Roshar. I definitely don't think that there's any situation where they would think that getting a lynch on Roshar would be easy.

PEdit

: see Roshar's reasons above for why it's unlikely she'd be under suspicion.

I still don't understand your references to no-kills solving the game.

[Froot Loop]

Can you at least take a look at him? I feel pretty ignored on Lowell and the last two lynches have been right when looking at my vote patterns. Plus, he's hammered without a claim twice now.

What's your case on Lowell? Can you post some points so that I can have a look?

[Froot Loop]

@Titus

: I understand your points against Lowell and they're valid, of course. Some of it is IIOA (1953) but the things you're saying happened happened. I have a different interpretation of some of those actions, particularly his vote on Huntress.

I think your play has been scummier, and more likely as scum, and there's more evidence to support you being scum than Lowell.

@FA_Q2

: What help do you think we'll get from a claim?

[Froot Loop]

Is there anything else outstanding? I've made my decision about Titus. If there's nothing more to talk about, people not voting can make a decision and then if there's a disagreement we can talk about it. I think Titus is the best option today.

[Froot Loop]

I don't know. What do you think?

[Froot Loop]

We've been talking about things all day and your stance has been pretty clear. Not voting isn't that bad today.

I just ISO'd the Heur/Garmr/Shaddowz slot.

I think it's unlikely that Heur would've come out and voted/scumread his scum partner so I don't think Johnny's a likely partner for him. That doesn't really help much with our options today but it's worth noting.

There's the most content from Shaddowz but I don't think it helps us very much. He mentions throughout the day that the RC/Titus slot is suggesting policy lynches and there's some comments about RC and Lowell in 760. He also asked Huntress to comment on her reads in 1003 so he did talk to/question at least that scum partner.

As I said before, I understand the reasons for voting Lowell but I think the evidence for voting for Titus is more compelling:
- I think Titus' behaviour on D3 (relating to Roshar/Huntress) is more likely as scum than Lowell's.
- I think having a doc, follower and RB active on the same night is over-powered so I don't believe her claim.
- Her response to my questions on D4 were inconsistent and conflicting. It doesn't indicate a town mindset for me.
- She was blocked and there was no-kill.

[Froot Loop]

I'm listening but I think the evidence against you is stronger.

I'm not going to be convinced by you saying "They were not" or telling me something "has been discussed." If it has been discussed, I've read it and these are my conclusions. If you think something I said is incorrect, please highlight how and where the contradictory evidence is.

[Froot Loop]

@Titus - If you think I'm not listening, I guess it's because there's something definitive which you think I'm missing. Otherwise, it's possible that I am listening and these are my conclusions.

It's not like the thread is super active, bogging it down isn't really an issue :/

[Froot Loop]

You want to convince me you can be reasoned with, that's on you to do.

I mean, I don't think that's the way it works but ok.

Can you be more specific? Is it possible that I've listened and I don't agree with the conclusion? I feel like I've posted my logic so what is it that you think I've dismissed out of hand?

If you say something in the thread that I think is vague or unsubstantiated, I'm going to ask you to explain. I don't think you should be making me feel hesitant about that by bringing up bogging down the thread. That makes me think you want to discourage discussion.

[Froot Loop]

Like we addressed that anyone benefits from a no kill as scum. Yet, you just plugged your nose in as many words and said well I still believe Titus was blocked. No one's disputing I was blocked (well even if we did, we'd get to the no kill scenario anyway). We're stating that a no kill benefits everyone. You plugged your nose at this and tried to argue that conftowning me was actually a good move for scum.

If you think that I didn't consider the options for no-killing vs. killing, you're wrong and I have plenty of notes to prove that I've considered multiple options. If there's been something in my posting that made you think I wasn't considering different options, then I wasn't clear or you haven't read/are ignoring the posts when we discussed it.

Do you think that my conclusions are impossible given the information that we have? Again, if there's something compelling that I'm missing, please highlight it for me. Otherwise you're casting doubts on my conclusions and logic without justification.

You're presenting my thoughts in a pretty skewed way but yes, I essentially think that conftowning you was a better option for scum today than no-killing.

[Froot Loop]

I get that Lowell has done some things which are scummy but I really think the evidence against Titus is much stronger. I'm a little bit stuck here because I can't defend Lowell's play in order to break the deadlock.

We should still keep on talking. Is it also a point that if Lowell were scum, he would've come in and hammered Titus already? Or maybe that would show a knowledge and understanding of what's going on in this game which Lowell hasn't shown since it started?

[Froot Loop]

Yeah, I think it's unlikely that they're both town. There's no reason I wouldn't vote FA_Q2, if Titus and Lowell turned out to be town, everyone would basically be fair game again.

[Froot Loop]

Vote: Titus

[Froot Loop]

We should wait for everyone to post today, just in case.

[Froot Loop]

Yey! I could have taken more of a stand about Titus on D5, maybe I got a little bit lazy and when it seemed like she was going to be next, I kind of sat it out.

I'm glad I got townread throughout the game though, I guess the smith kill had a lot to do with that. I really had problems with reads all game but there was enough at the end which was AI.

[Froot Loop]

APF's push on heur and that lynch was super important as well. After Titus claimed, moving on to lynching another scum member and clearing APF was good.

@Ircher

- Thanks for the Unsung Hero award! That's really cool. I would feel better about the game in general if I'd been able to have some influence over what people were thinking. Lowell's lynch is a bit of a failure for me from that perspective.

don't feel bad, you aren't the only one playing this game that was bad. Fruit's tunnel on me was absolutely horrible

I'd need to have a re-read but I didn't feel that during the game. Why do you think so?

[Froot Loop]

Speaking of influence, it was super fun to be dead and have the town seemingly ignore my Titus case

I quoted it at one point!

[Froot Loop]

I had to restrain myself with Titus during D4. I've had some bad experiences in the past with getting SUPER harsh and it looking bad. I'm interested in what Titus was thinking, and looking at the Mafia PT, because it seemed like she was floundering a bit. When Johnny said that he had more respect for Titus' scum play I felt like shouting at him, like, her play's more likely to be bad as town?

That was part of why I didn't push the Lowell thing. I was thinking that if other town players weren't totally convinced yet and wanted to lynch a scummy townie first, I understood that. Lowell felt lynchbaity to me though and I didn't feel like his play on D3 was scum play. I could've talked about that more.

@Roshar - I didn't really suspect you for the push on Huntress, it just felt like you were more convinced than the evidence. When you claimed, it was like it all made sense.

@Smith - I was totally ready to run at you before you were killed, I don't have any notes about you specifically, unfortunately. I'm quite happy I looked back and saw your point about Titus because it really was influential thinking that scum would know that Huntress had been blocked. Titus was helped by APF believing that scum might not have known completely.

[Froot Loop]

@Roshar

- Yeah, I was hesitant about mentioning the neighbour thing again but there was a new context so I felt like it was relevant. I feel like we both did well to move past that on D3 though.

@Smith

- it was harsh that I couldn't really compare it to the game we'd just played because you were a mason then, so I felt like that would influence your play enough that it wouldn't be valid meta.

[Froot Loop]

Of course I'm biased towards myself but his arguments were fucking weak as shit. You have to look at motive and there was absolutely no scum motive in my actions. Plus like RC said (and I don't care if the mod's disagree). Once the mod stepped in we were both basically confirmed town.

I'm not going to look back and read and I can't remember exactly what was happening. This is a game where people make mistakes, there's no need for you to jump on me afterwards and criticize my play, especially by talking about it like this.