Mini 542 - Game Over

[Ythill]

Not a random voter. I'd rather jump start the game. How about some meta?

I can be a little long winded and sometimes keep info secret as town. These are a part of my playstyle and should be considered null-tells. Anyone else have preemptive playstyle warnings for the rest of us? Anyone have meta information to share about other players you've encountered before?

[Ythill]

I am ultra-aggressive towards lurkers, and to people who don't post things if I demand it (I will tolerate intentional secrecy).

The secrecy thing isn't something I do often, and it will be clearly intentional.

Vote: Mr. President

i saw your avatar

Haha. You voted for Bush.

DD was scum in my last one.

Which game was this? Tidbits like these are why I bring up meta right away.

[Ythill]

Thanks, I'll check it out.

Realized I missed Jennar's comment. What game did you play with Mookeh in? I really like past games with more than one current player in them. Meta information on the players

and

the dynamics of their interactions.

[Ythill]

Um... I mean that is one of the things good about past games with more than one player. I think my punctuation could have been better to make that more clear. Sorry.

[Ythill]

Thanks for all the games to read. Looks like I'll be busy for awhile.

About that wagon on Spurg: voting without a reason, bandwagoning, and following are all a bit scummy. What are you trying to accomplish here?

[Ythill]

@ vollkan: I like the way you play. Hopefully you’re town.

Why is a wagon scummy?

I’m not going to entreat a theory discussion. Suffice to say that in my limited experience based mostly on reading, I’ve seen the act of wagoning often decried as a scumtell. I didn’t mean to infer that such behavior was infallible evidence. My statement was made with the intention of prompting further reaction from those involved.

Of the three people you questioned, who do you see as the most suspect and why? Will you back up your early suspicions with a vote?

@ Hypatia: Why is your vote still on spurg?

@ Mills: I understand what you’ve explained to vollkan though I too would like to know what exactly it was in DD’s post that conveyed nefarious purpose. Or was this perception (and vote) based solely on “what [you] personally feel” (41)?

Why would any scum want to get off a bandwagon here if they were the FIRST to vote?

Unless one has not visited the forums (and sometimes even then) neglecting to remove a vote at any point is as willful an act as casting a vote. This is far more suspect when the vote is placed for arguable reasons. Yours was a based on a weak, semi-serious information quest as early as post #9 (deep in the random voting phase), and was removed the moment I cast suspicion on the wagon.

Upon jumping off, you immediately turned a weak, gut-based attack back onto the wagon: not simply an inquisition but another quick vote. You say that you didn’t intend to start the spurg wagon, do you intend to start one on DD?

It’s not much but it’s a case. For now, my first suspect gets my first

vote: Mills

.

[Ythill]

Do not put 'words' in my mouth by implying that I intend to create bangwagons on people however.

I never implied this intention. I asked a fair question considering your previous posts. If the question implied any accusation, it was that you vote too quickly without quantifiable reasons. Let me rephrase the question...

What things are you trying to get done with your vote on DD?

I went back to read the thread and, now that I think about it, you weren't even questioning me here. You questioned votes 2, 3 and 4 for the above three reasons.

For the record, I was only questioning votes 3 & 4 because DD's vote seemed "random" to me. Regardless of whom I was directly questioning, I had cast suspicion on the wagon. If your vote was an innocent quest for information, then the timing of your unvote was indeed unfortunate.

It seems obvious that spurg would have shared that particular information had you simply asked for it. Why did you feel you had to vote to prompt it from him?

[Ythill]

@ Hypatia: I appreciate that you are leaving and might not have had time to post content, but your unvote does not answer my question. I hope you will still answer it when you get back or have time.

[Ythill]

@ Mills: No need to alter your playstyle. Your actions made you my

first

suspect but I fully intend to examine each player, regardless of how they play. This is how I ferret out those I believe to be scummiest.

Will you please answer the questions I posted in #52?

[Ythill]

@ Mills: Thank you for your answers. My vote will remain for now, while I consider what has been written, but I feel that I've gotten all of the information I'm going to from this exchange.

Time for other topics. I'd like to hear from some of the players who have been silent during the last two days of heavy posting. Surely someone has something to say about all of this...

[Ythill]

Not really. Bunch of random votes followed by two days of discussion on mafia theory and playstyles. Very little of substance to go off of.

Is this all you are going to post until someone else gets lynched and you feel you can contribute?

I agree with Mills’ sentiment but not his point about someone getting lynched. Here is a reality check for town: a non-retractable deadline means that lurking and low-content posts are more reliable as scumtells. Either one is, in essence, a vote for no lynch. I challenge all of our less-than-talkative players to post their opinions regarding those who have been more active. What are your current reads on Dean, Hypatia, Mills, Mookeh, vollkan and/or myself? Do you have any questions for one or more of us?

@ vollkan... Of the three people you questioned, who do you see as the most suspect and why? Will you back up your early suspicions with a vote?

I would still like an answer to at least the first question here, either in context (as of #49) or a current read of your most suspicious person.

I personally feel a little safe with Mills around...

Immediately after this (48 minutes later, in #69) you turn around to cast suspicion on Mills. What changed your mind? What is your current read on vollkan?

...I'm at least giving a FoS Mills... I'm also in general going to tell all those arguing with him that it isn't really getting anywhere... I'm thinking we need to get off this before it consumes even more of our day.

I do agree that the Mills inquisition had outlived its usefulness, however it seems suspect for you to say so in the same post which you FoS him. It’s like saying,

You’re scummy but let’s talk about something else.

What was your intention here? What is your current read on Hypatia?

[Ythill]

Thanks to everyone who answered my questions.

I am curious Ythill as to whom do you think is intentionally lurking and who is just asleep at the wheel?

Anyone who hasn’t posted much could be intentionally lurking. Sort of like what you say of your playstyle, we’re looking at a case of guilty until proven innocent. This was one of the reasons for my challenge to everyone.

That said, KD and Bush (my nick for Mr. President) have both made comments about how they have nothing to say, which seems more like active lurking than the others. Sig:noise is another lurk indicator, the worst offenders being KD (@ 1:3) and Dean (@ 4:5). KD being in all three categories, as well as his reaction to Mills on the subject, is the reason why I quoted him at the top of my last post.

The only ones I would excuse from

any

suspicion of lurking are Hypatia (10 posts @ 7:3), Mills (18 posts @ 7:2), vollkan (16 posts @ 7:1), and myself (12 posts @ 1:0, counting this one).

On the topic of Mills behavior in general, which I have been contemplating... The only definitive conclusion I've reached is that Mills tends to make quick reaction posts without thinking them through but makes more reasonable arguments if he takes a little time. This doesn't speak to his alignment but may help us avoid false reads later. As for my vote, it will remain for now because I see no reason to remove it.

[Ythill]

@ Dean: Mills' assumption about "4:5" is correct.

@ DD: Thanks for answering my questions. I haven't given you a pass on lurking. You were not one of my worst offenders, but neither were you listed as excused from suspicion.

[Ythill]

Ythill: He was the biggest opponent to Mills in the argument over the vote on me. He accused Mills of vote hopping even though he only made 2 votes total, and says Mills jumped off the wagon once a little suspicion was given to it.

I agree: Ythill has been sloppy.

Sloppy? That's a vague accusation, can you explain what you mean? I certainly haven't been careful, but I have no reason to be.

Regarding what DD wrote, I didn't respond because he had asked us to drop the discussion about Mills' vote on him, and I agreed. For the record, I didn't technically accuse Mills of vote hopping, did I? I inferred that his vote came

too quickly

and said it was based on weak reasons. Also, I

did

say my suspicions of Mills weren't much of a case. I'm certainly not going for a lynch here.

[Ythill]

I take elaborate notes because I feel they help me find the bad guys. In my three games on this site, I have only been town but have wondered if, as scum, I would still take notes. It is fair to say that scum might not study the thread as carefully as honest townies.

My point here is that it makes me a little suspicious when players get confused as to people’s identities. I realize that to err is human, but glaring errors

could

be a scumtell. Both Mookeh (in #105) and vollkan (in #116) claim to have confused the identities and/or arguments of players. In this case, I feel vollkan’s mistake is a little more suspect, but only because I read him as otherwise intelligent and thorough. None of this is enough for even a FoS, but I wanted to mention it.

I agree that Mills went a little overboard on the meta-lie argument vs. Mookeh. I see Mills’ point but agree that it’s somewhat unimportant, at least in comparison to the effort involved in making it. The #112-116 exchange with vollkan, however, has improved Mills’ image in my mind. This is enough for me to

unvote: Mills

.

@ Mookeh: You have promised a more elaborate defense to #106. I ask that you do so only to the extent that you believe the attack is relevant. Basically, keep it short. I don’t think too many people are going to jump your case for the accusations in #106 but I do think that an elaborate meta-argument is going to distract from other scumhunting.

And finally… Bush is at it again. In spite of direct questions and suspicions that she is lurker-scum, our President has popped in for another “hi there” post. The timing of this one is interesting because of Mills’ suggestion (in #110) that we do not have a VI. This is a stretch, but the Mr. President account could be a smurf created to try out the VI playstyle. All of this makes me very suspicious and I believe pressure is justified so I will

vote: Mr. President

.

@ Bush: Want to clear yourself? Post your suspicions of (or questions for) the other players. Directly address our accusations that you are lurking and answer me this: do you play under another name on this site?

[Ythill]

Sort of an EBWOP...

I agree that Mills went a little overboard... (etc, etc) ...I do think that an elaborate meta-argument is going to distract from other scumhunting.

This block of text may seem odd in context. That's because it was cross-posted with Mookeh's #118. Mookeh seems to have felt the same way I did... thanks for keeping it brief, dude.

[Ythill]

@ Bush: could you explain what was meant by "hrsh much?" in your last post?

@ spurg: Mind posting something about

this

game?

I'm going to be at a loss if we need to start working toward a lynch alreday, but I honestly don't disagree. I'll try to get a reread in tomorrow and see if I can find anything like a case anywhere, but I doubt I'll be able to... grumble, grumble...

[Ythill]

@ Mills: Please refrain from answering questions I address directly to another player. In this case it's not that big of a deal, but it

can

be so please just don't do it.

@ Hypatia: Welcome back. Looking forward to your thoughts.

[Ythill]

:::kicks the game:::

We were so active at first. Now... nothing of game-relevance has been said since my last post. So I guess I'm just checking in.

[Ythill]

Regarding Vollkan

He’s taking the reins again, which is appreciated but says nil about his alignment. I’m assuming he’s not going to get around to a PBPA on himself, so I will try to do one on him soon.

The percentage system he’s using is not clearly objectified and is therefore dangerous. So long as we all realize he is only stating his opinion (not factual statistics) with those numbers, there should be no problem. Not saying vollkan is scummy because of this, just reminding town that

if he is mafia

the percentages will be manipulated to mislead us.

@ vollkan: Are you using the % system as stated on the wiki, your own version, or a mix?

Regarding Hypatia

I agree with vollkan’s take except I’d like to add… I saw two instances in which she preemptively justified “accidental” claim-fishing. Not damning by itself, but could play against her if there are other signs of fishing later.

Regarding Jennar

People on this site take every opportunity to misconstrue every fact and point you make. I've tightened my playstyle to be less "in every conversation going" because of this. And no, I'm not lurking, there just has been nothing to comment on that isn't a semantics debate.

Translation: I’m lurking because people play too aggressively here but I’m not lurking, it’s just that people don’t play aggressively enough here.

This comment bothers me. It’s too early to tell whether the blame-dodging is just a facet of Jennar’s personality, so I’m not really picking on that aspect yet, but the apparent contradiction seems to indicate someone who is looking for the best excuse rather than the honest one. For the record, I think we have far worse lurkers than Jennar.

It also bothers me a bit that he asks barbed questions of vollkan when the answers to those questions can be clearly deduced from vollkan’s last post.

[Ythill]

It also bothers me a bit that he asks barbed questions of vollkan when the answers to those questions can be clearly deduced from vollkan’s last post.

@ Mills: Please refrain from answering questions I address directly to another player.

Quoted for effect.

Right, but I didn't answer your questions. Still, it's good to see the hunt starting.

Where does he state that there is a reason for leaving people off his list? Why are you making assumptions and excuses for him?

If you can't find it yourself, we'll have to wait for vollkan to answer you. I've made no assumptions, though it's fair to say that it is only my opinion that the answers to your questions appear in post #151. Nor have I made excuses for him. I have simply wondered aloud why you asked (IMO) point

less

barbed questions. You seem to be claiming that you do not see the answers in #151, which is a satisfactory explanation.

Why do you knock me for not playing aggressively (i.e. lurking in your view) but then hash me for asking pointed questions?

Nor have I done these things, though I could see how the first could be inferred from my post. I specifically said you weren't our worst lurker, and the only mention of "aggression" in my post is where I am quoting/paraphrasing you. What I knocked you for, specifically, was the mildly contrived dual premise of your defense. Could you address that?

[Ythill]

For the record, my purpose is not to "try and label" you with anything.

Regardless it was not your defense to mount unless you are stepping up for him? Why post a comment about it when it wasn't directed at you

My comment cleary wasn't a defense. It was a suggestion that there might be ulterior motives behind

your

questions. You keep "misunderstanding" me and, by doing so, have now avoided the topic of your initial defense's suspicious duality twice.

Do you normally have problems with comprehension? If not, why now? Is it deliberate? Please answer these questions directly.

[Ythill]

Regarding vollkan's % system: Thanks to vollkan for explaining the system a bit, but it is still not objective. Nor do I expect it to be made objective. I just wanted to remind everyone (and still do) that

the percentages refer to vollkan's opinion and nothing more

. Vollkan, for clarity of record, could you post a simple "I agree with" or "I disagree with" the italicized part of this statement.

14: Doesn't think Mills is as scummy now due to "The #112-116 exchange with vollkan" Could you explain this please, Ythill?

No problem. Primarily, it was the way he reacted to your mistake. From a reader's POV, such miscommunications can often seem manipulative, yet he seemed convinced, even before you noted it, that your failure to communicate was an error rather than a deliberate manipulation. Considering Mills' habit of posting before thinking things through, I don't think he would have been so forgiving if he were scum and you were town. This leaves two scenarios: Mills is town or you both are scum. Assuming that you are scum based soley on this scenario would be very faulty logic on my part, so I'm consiedering it to be a town-tell on Mills for now.

Ythill tends to play more by questioning other people than attacking on his own accord.

Lol. No worries here. My tone thus far has been uncharacteristically inquisitive because I haven't seen anything too major. Rest assured that I

will

be attacking and, when I do, you'll share in my "lol" at your read here.

"mildly contrived dual premise..." ...I answered your question based upon what I thought you were referring to. It is obviously not what you were expecting me to comment so please be more specific in your question.

Fair enough. Simply put, the two parts of your defense (#152) contradict. In the first paragraph you say, "People on this site take every opportunity to misconstrue every fact and point you make. I've tightened my playstyle to be less "in every conversation going" because of this," which seems to suggest that

you are posting less because people here are too aggressive

. In the last paragraph, you say, "And no, I'm not lurking, there just has been nothing to comment on that isn't a semantics debate," which seems to suggest that

you are posting less because people here are not aggressive enough

. Which is true? Why state both?

The second duality exists in the fact that both of these statements admit that you are deliberately posting less, but in one of them you say "I am not lurking." This is probably just semantics, a case of you avoiding the negative slant of the word "lurk," so I will not bother asking you about this point, just wanted to mention it because it was a part of the original statement I am reiterating here.

[Ythill]

I'll vote to put the extension at L-3.

However, I think it's a safe bet to assume that the deadline will not be rescinded. Which means we have five days to settle on a lynch with the majority of players not participating. Yuck. I think it's important that we lynch

someone

. Due to the circumstances, we are less likely than usual to hang scum. We may be in one of those rare cases when it is not anti-town to discuss who would be the best mis-lynch (ie: who would provide the most information, who is detracting worse from te game due to bad play, etc).

The only players who have aroused my suspicions significantly are Jennar and Mills, with the latter having cleared himself to a certain extent. I would be comfortable with a Jennar lynch. I might be willing to lynch Mills if it comes down to that, but mainly because I think his death would provide the most information. Due to the deadline, I would also be comfortable with lynching a lurker. In this case, I think Bush is our best choice but others are just as applicable.

I am unwilling to lynch myself (obviously), vollkan, or DD simply because my gut says they are town. Hypatia would also be in this catergory if not for her justification of claim fishing. That said, I wouldn't mind letting her live long enough to get a real read on her.

In brief: my vote will remain on Bush but y'all should be expecting me to jump on a bandwagon soon. Say it's scummy if you want but I honestly believe that a no-lynch is our worst option here.

Question for those who are inactive: will you come out of hiding long enough to vote? If so, whom are you willing to vote for? Unwilling?

[Ythill]

In conclusion, I rather resent this statement of Ythill's because it implies that I want town-harming information out in the open. That is not my intention.

To be fair, it was vollkan that called your statements "claim-fishing." All I said was that you had preemptively justified claim fishsing. I did not mean to imply that your intentions

were

anything in particular, but that one motive for taking your particular theory stance

could be

ulterior. I don't consider this possibility damning at all, but argue that it should at least be noted in a PBPA of you, especially as it may become relevant if you were to later engage in behavior that could be construed as fishing.

I did log your explanation for this and you need not repeat it. However, your explanation, being a suggestion of noble motives, is no more confirmable than the possibility I have proposed. As such, both are applicable lines of reasoning until one is disproved by fact.

I am personally not backing a Hypatia lynch. However, I believe it to be preferable (barely) to a no-lynch and that's all I was saying in #179.

[Ythill]

PBPA on volkan

General Statistics

Total Posts = 34 (on topic 28, check-ins 5, off topic 1)
Sig:Nosie = 11:3
Attacks = Dean (1), DD (1), Hypatia (4), Jennar (3), Krad (5), Mills (8), Bush (2), spurg (1), Ythill (1)
Defends = klebian (1), DD (1), Mills (1)
Follows = Mookeh (1)
Cheerleads = Mookeh (1), Ythill (3)

All numbers refer to # of posts during which the behavior occurred; I’ve tried to keep things as mathematical as possible though my read of any particular post is somewhat subjective.

Vollkan is one of our most active posters and manages to keep a very respectable sig:noise. He is actively scum-hunting. His attack numbers are balanced per content, though attack intensity seems slightly unbalanced (see below). Defenses of others (for the most part) come at appropriate moments and stand on solid logical ground. Following and cheerleading are minimized and stand polarized with his suspicions.

The PBPA

Numbers refer to posts as listed in isolation with the oldest first.

• 00 ~ nothing
  
• 01 ~ helpful and amiable
  
• 02 ~ nothing
  
• 03 ~ “Let’s get a wagon rolling” on spurg
  
• 04 ~ unvotes, questions everyone on wagon
  
• 05 ~ questions Hypatia aggressively
  
• 06 ~ attacks Mills hard, rhetorical questions; explains his own part on spurg wagon
  
• 07 ~ continues vs. Mills; argues too hard against random vote being pulled; glazes over Mills’ defense, which is applicable; asks for quantification of Mills’ gut vote on DD
  
• 08 ~ continues vs. Mills & Hypatia; both arguments wax semantic, frustration evident in vollkan’s tone
  
• 09 ~ continues vs. Hypatia, less emotional thrust than Mills debate

Up to this point, I question the unbalanced intensity of vollkan’s attacks. He seems to hit the seemingly weaker player hardest, taking it easier on those who seem more likely to post intelligent arguments (could be coincidence with this little data).

• 10 ~ makes peace with Mills @ appropriate time
  
• 11 ~ tears Krad up for justifying lurking, elaborately defends Mills in discrediting Krad
  
• 12 ~ very odd interaction with Mills: argumentative word twisting immediately explained as a joke, what is the purpose of this?
  
• 13~ nothing
  
• 14 ~ quantifies PE#1 correctly based on his own tendencies in timely context, accidentally clears up difference in approaches vs. Ythill, Hypatia, & Mills
  
• 15 ~ theory chat with Jennar seems amiable, first mention of % system

This segment gives us a slightly-too-quick peacemaking with Mills, though the timing seems to suggest that vollkan thought no more useful data would come of their arguing. Also herein is a peaceful beginning to the future crusade against Jennar. #14 suggests that vollkan's imbalanced attacks have only leaned in line with his suspicions, a fair explanation.

• 16 ~ meta defense vs. DD’s vague suspicions
  
• 17 ~ argument based on a mistake of perception ~ no reliable tells
  
• 18 ~ same as above
  
• 19 ~ clears up the above ~ considering the misread, #17 and #18 are reasonable
  
• 20 ~ defense post, “misses the point” with Ythill, argues reasonably against Mills’ conspiracy theory
  
• 21 ~ nothing
  
• 22 ~ prods Krad
  
• 23 ~ points out the obvious; nothing
  
• 24 ~ agrees with Ythill about spurg-lurk

Lots of light content posts and digression. No tells in here that I can find.

• 25 ~ first PBPA series, alphabetical order up to klebian; percentage system utilized; last two entries say Jennar most scummy, klebian least scummy; break could be placed to angle conversation/suspicion; vollkan clears klebian of lurking here, why?
  
• 26 ~ explains % system at length; gets into the Ythill vs. Jennar debate, sides with Ythill against Jennar
  
• 27 ~ second PBPA series; opens with Krad as scummiest, minor suspicion of Mills and Bush, posts correct summary though mentions raising Jennar’s %; fingers Krad and Jennar as current lynch choices
  
• 28 ~ EBWOP to fix tags; nothing
  
• 29 ~ jumps Jennar; some good points, some weak; tone closer to that vs. Mills than vs. others; uses the argument to preemptively justify aggression
  
• 30 ~ clearly agrees that % refers to his opinions only
  
• 31 ~ prods Bush
  
• 32 ~ prods Bush again but with suspicions
  
• 33 ~ agrees with extension request; slips in a bye for Mills & Ythill

Here we see the crusade against Jennar. I was going to point this out as heavy-handed but a context reread has made me see Jennar as a bit more scummy and I have to sympathize with vollkan’s gut here. I don’t like how vollkan appears to buddy up with me and Mookeh. Also, him letting klebian off the hook for lurking at ths point doesn’t sit right with me.

Summary

Vollkan’s aggression could be considered suspicious but he’s directed it where appropriate. Some of his posts could be said to have ulterior motives but that is not to say that they

do

have ulterior motives; just something to keep an eye on. Vollkan likes to be seen as the voice of authority and we should be careful not to accept his opinions too readily. That said, he is good at wringing information from a slow game.

My read on vollkan is middle of the road with a raised eyebrow which probably equates to 55% on the aforementioned scale. My gut says town but I am questioning it a bit. Even if he is scum though, his activity level has helped to prod others and he has accidentally set a couple of traps for himself that would be likely to indict him later. I don’t think vollkan should be our D1 lynch.

[Ythill]

@ vollkan: I feel as if two points from your reply beg response.

As for the allegation of buddying to you and Mookeh, I don't think it is justified given what I said.

I wasn't referring to your PBPAs of us, but rather to your tone of general agreement with us. In fact, the PBPAs putting us at 50% makes me wonder why you would so readily support the views of someone you see as middle of the road. This whole thing is quite minor though, specifically because none of the points of agreement was particularly dynamic or unnatural.

It is most important that you do not take me as the "voice of authority". Over the games I have played, I have been accused many times of "leading", "acting as a judge" "taking control" etc.

Obviously a justified jab then, considering your playstyle. I will try to keep your statement here in mind but would suggest that you do the same because you cannot expect us to ignore it if this style of yours plays out into an overtly scummy situation.

[Ythill]

Mr. President, you keep asking for questions. Here are some I have already posted. Please answer them.

@ Bush: ...do you play under another name on this site?

@ Bush: could you explain what was meant by "hrsh much?" in your last post?

(refers to the post you made on 12/28)

Question for those who are inactive: will you come out of hiding long enough to vote? If so, whom are you willing to vote for? Unwilling?

[Ythill]

Thanks for the content, klebian. As I was reading your early opinions of me, I was expecting your analysis to end as a Ythill witch hunt. To your credit, you seem to be keeping an open mind and spreading out your suspicions. I have addressed several points below.

On second read, I noticed that your early accusations against me stem heavily from my interactions with Mills. Then I noticed that your accusations of a lot of people stem from their interactions with Mills. Combined with your own stance on Mills, which is far too forgiving and short on suspicion considering his post count, this looks a little creepy. What is your read on Mills? Why have you given him this early bye?

Anyway, on to defenses…

Ythill ends the page by voting Mills. I don't really get his logic.

It was an admittedly weak case ~understandable seeing as how early in D1 it takes place~ but there was logic there. If you really want it explained, I can reiterate but I think it’s pretty moot at this point and the fact that I said, in the vote post, that it wasn’t much of a case should excuse your not getting it.

I also don't get what Ythill really meant when he was asking what Mills what he was 'trying to get done' with a vote. This seems like a loaded question…

It was quite obviously a loaded question. Earlier Mills had said something like

where I come from, we vote to get things done

so I was taking the opportunity to call him on that statement as regards the DD vote. At this stage in the game, my strategy is all about getting information into the thread.

…the only other question ythill poses to mills in 52 is based on why Mills voted spurg on page 1, which was QUITE clearly a random vote.

I felt it was a random vote too, which is why it struck me as odd that Mills defended it as having the purpose of eliciting information. Hence my question.

There is too much talk about how vollkan was doing his percents thing. It seemed pretty clear to me in his first post and actually earlier in the game.

I partially agree. Because vollkan apparently misunderstood my original point about his % system being subjective, he does explain a bit too much about it but I think my point was pretty valid. Elaborate scum-calculating systems, if accepted at face value, are an effective tool for scum to sway town. I wanted to get agreement from vollkan that his % system communicated “his opinion only” so that this could be cited later if he started to credit that system as a more factually based one.

I sense a slight link between vollkan and ythill… I pretty much agree with Ythill's pbpa of Vollkan. I like vollkan's responses.

I have to question these parts of your analysis. I do see the “slight link” because vollkan and I are similarly active, we have twice argued with the same target at roughly the same time, and we have cheerleaded each other a few times. I insist that this is happenstance, but I

do

see what you are talking about. What I question is how you reach both of the conclusions quoted above, especially because my PBPA and vollkan’s response

specifically address

his apparent buddying-up and explain it away. So, in short, how can you “agree with” my PBPA and “like” vollkan’s responses while continuing to believe something discredited therein?

[Ythill]

Once again klebian, glad to have another high-content player aboard.

I'm not sure what his post count has to do with anything. I should be more suspicious of him because of his post count? Or are you saying something about I had not much about him in my list compared to how much he posted?

Clarifying here, not arguing. Mills had the highest post count in the game up until yesterday when vollkan overtook him. Your analysis seems to find the most suspicions in the players with the highest post counts, which is natural since they have posted more to be suspicious of. Yet your view of Mills seems uncharacteristically benign. Just wondering if this was natural (i.e. you read him as town) or contrived (i.e. you are scumbuddies).

I believe you’ve answered clearly enough, I just wanted to answer your question.

I just did not like your statement "You say that you didn’t intend to start the spurg wagon, do you intend to start one on DD? "

This was identical in tone to my “what are you trying to accomplish” loaded question. Mills had switched from spurg to DD because he didn’t intend to start a wagon on spurg. I was admittedly bullying him, which I’m not above doing if I think it will produce information.

I also didn't really agree that his vote on spurg was semi-serious, it seemed no less random than DD's on spurg.

As I’ve already said, I also thought the vote was random when I saw it. However, in post #34, Mills explains his spurg vote by saying, “I just wanted him to explain his initial vote.” So

he had explicitly said

that it wasn’t random before I made any such assumption. Even though he said this, I still saw the vote as somewhat random which is why I used the term “semi-serious.”

To clarify for all: this post is not an attempt to revisit the Mills debate which reached a satisfactory conclusion. I am simply defending my positions at the time because they have been questioned, nothing more.

[Ythill]

A reasonable answer. The continuation of the appeal to emotion you started at the bottom of post #162 has been noted. You will find that I, at least, will read every word of every post.

The timer is ticking. I know I'll probably get run up for rushing the game later but somebody has to keep us from going no lynch. I've been voting Bush for lurking. Spurg has made fewer posts, and has a worse sig:noise. Bush has made a reasonable excuse, spurg has not. Plus, there's already a vote on spurg, which is a plus at this point.

We have 5 active players and several partially-active players. I suggest that we bring spurg to at least L-2 and then have a conversation about the wisdom of lynching lurkers. Spurg, you are invited to attend.

unvote, vote spurgistan
mod: please prod spurgistan and let us know when you have

[Ythill]

Yay!

Thank you ChaosOmega!

Crisis temporarily averted. I withdraw my suggestion that we bandwagon spurg but will leave my vote until I have somewhere else to put it.

Vollkan, you seem to have assumed that I wanted a lynch on spurg. I want to clarify that this is not necessarily the case. I wanted a wagon on spurg and a related discussion. This would have served three purposes considering deadline (1) provided us with a last resort lynch candidate to avoid a no lynch, (2) possibly shed light on the motives of everyone on the wagon or involved in the discussion and lead to a 12th-hour content lynch on someone else, and (3) pressured our worst lurker to become involved immediately.

To Krad's credit...

It's Christmas weekend. As such, my posting on here will be rather limited due to family commitments. Returning January 2nd.

Nor do I think anything he’s posted has been worthy of a lynch. A little scummy maybe, but not damning. My main fear was that the deadline/holiday dynamic would have allowed one Mafioso to lead town in a crusade against minor townie mistakes while his buddies hid in the shadows. Which is why I was hesitant to hang someone on incomplete evidence.

@ Krad: I certainly hope your suspicions of me are based on something more than your bussing hypothesis. Looking at the evidence and following it to a scum-buddy conclusion is reasonable. Supposing a scum-buddy relationship and then digging for evidence of individual scumminess to support it is a conspiracy theory.

Finally, to all the townies who were still not voting when we were three days from deadline: you were voting for no lynch. Please get off the fence and get your vote out here so that we can generate information.

[Ythill]

Lookin' a little slippery there, vollkan. Could you explain exactly what you mean by

oppose a lynch

(or its equivalent) as regards both Krad and spurg? In what situations, specifically, would you have let this game go to no lynch on D1?

I'd personally put Jennar higher on the scumlist than Krad, though neither is without tells. Honestly, I'm a little disturbed by how many scumtells I

haven't

seen in this game. Our mafia are either lurkers or they are good players. Or I suppose I could be dense.

[Ythill]

Gotcha. Thanks for clearing that up.

[Ythill]

Thanks, I like you too Dean. Oh well, I guess it's better that you're voting for

someone

.

Back from a reread of each player in isolation. I also read in context where appropriate. Below are my revised opinions, sorted into categories by post count. I’ll leave these up for a little while so as to allow for defenses, then I’ll be posting my top 3 and a content-related vote.

The Blabbermouths

• Dean: Lowest post count and highest s:n in this category. He seems to hunt a little but not much, preferring jokes, OT comments, and one-liners. Hasn’t posted a read since the 21st. I really didn’t like that his first read was a weak pro-town on Mills either.
  
• Mills: Comes out of the gate scummy but then seems to adjust which could be taken a number of ways. After clearing himself, he embarks on some pretty pointless scumhunting, then he does the check-in thing for a while. I don’t like the way Dean and klebian are treating him with kid gloves either.
  
• Vollkan: Smart and good at the game. Has dropped a few tells but has defended them almost flawlessly. Reiterating my first read here: if he is scum we may be in for a tough game, though I have some ideas on how to catch a potential vollkan-scum a little later on.
  
• Ythill: I know what my alignment is and you don’t.

The Normals

• Hypatia: Highest post count in this category, but it’s all been either defense or theory. Her one question, to Mills, was pretty pointless. She was gone for awhile, but hasn’t done any hunting while present.
  
• Jennar: Claims his initial lurking was strategic. Makes some sketchy responses to an accusation and drops scumtells when arguing, but seems to get more sensible a little later on. I’d love to see some offense from this guy.
  
• Klebian: Replaces, checks in a bunch, summarizes the game, backpedals while defending his summary, checks in again. His suspicions seem spread evenly against 7 out of 11 of us but he goes easy on two active players: Mills and Mookeh. Although Klebian has explained this to some extent, it still makes me wonder.
  
• Mookeh: I’m starting to see why everybody seems to like this guy. He often performs our reality checks and, though he hasn’t hunted a lot, what he has posted has seemed honest. Mookeh defends more than he attacks though, and I can’t help but feel that he’s trying too hard to stay on our good sides. We’ll see what happens when he gets back home.

The Mimes

• DD: Blending nicely so that he doesn’t seem like a lurker, but he doesn’t even have the highest post count of this category. Good early player analysis. His other few comments are content-heavy and sensible.
  
• Krad: The post wherein he votes Mills is pretty damned scummy, and he tries to get away from it later. Not much hunting other than the Mills thing. He’s given two reasons for lurking (low-content & vacation) at two different times.
  
• Bush: Lurks before and after the “phone speak,” which only appears when she is called out on lurking. But she’s got the highest post-count in this category, has managed to keep a decent s:n, and she’s even done some borderline scumhunting. My opinion here will depend greatly on what we see from her after the holiday break.
  
• Spurg: King of the lurkers, but at least he admits it. Other than that, there really isn’t anything to go on here. I’d love to reach a content lynch but, in case we can’t get one, I suggest we keep this guy in mind for a last resort policy lynch. Maybe he’ll start posting some content, at which point this statement becomes moot.

As a side note: the players in this game, in general, are far too cordial and forgiving. I feel like we're playing Sweet Little Old Lady Mafia. Lol.

[Ythill]

LOL. Look back @ #206. The mod extended the deadline four days.

[Ythill]

All I said was that you had preemptively justified claim fishsing. ...it should at least be noted in a PBPA of you, especially as it may become relevant if you were to later engage in behavior that could be construed as fishing.

I would like the bandwagon to go quickly, so that Spurg has time to defend and claim...

Ythill raises his eyebrow inquisitively @ Hypatia.

@ vollkan: This is now the second time that you have missed something obvious in the thread. Last time, your defense seemed to sidestep what I actually think is scummy about this so I will try to explain better. I will not accept a sidestep defense so readily this time, so please answer clearly and/or ask for clarification if you don't understand my point.

Someone who is

actually

looking for scum should be reading the entire thread carefully. Someone who is

only pretending

to look for scum only needs to read the posts of his targets carefully. Someone who is as intelligent as you appear to be should not be regularly missing details if he is reading the entire thread carefully. How is it that you keep missing obvious things?

@ Everyone: Even though I don't trust my wagon-mates, I'm comfortable with my vote on spurg for the moment. As promised however, I will be looking for someone to hang on content as soon as a fair amount of time has passed for people to respond to my latest analysis. I'm thinking sometime tomorrow unless we have entered a good debate about lynching lurkers by then.

[Ythill]

@ vollkan: As expected, flawless defense. If you are scum, I'll catch you one of these times.

@ Hypatia: I got a chuckle out of you continuing my 3rd person silliness. However, even in your defense post you still seem awfully intent on the claim thing and that's the only thing I'm calling you out on. Maybe you're just wording things oddly but it sounds like you're expecting/encouraging claims whereas the majority of us are vanilla and shouldn't false claim to avoid lynch.

@ Krad: I like your last post but the "claim" slap on the end seems like you are focusing a bit too much on vollkan here. Do you feel his mention of this was scummier than Hypatia's? As scummy? I do look forward to you making a case against me instead of just saying you think I'm scum (and I'm distancing and bussing and whatnot) without anything to back it up.

[Ythill]

Also, Krad, if you're a fan of the conspiracy theory approach, take a good look at the interactions between Mills, Klebian, and Mookeh. It's not enough for me to start (or believe) a case, but if such things help you spot scum, you'll certainly want to check their dynamics out a little closer.

[Ythill]

I am still planning on entering a content-based vote tonight. I will, at that time, begin working towards consensus. I just wanted to address current topics quickly beforehand.

@ vollkan: After a reread of page 9, I am withdrawing my statement about your defense being flawless. You'd made two posts in between #206 and your error, which suggests that you read the thread for content (not just to clarify the deadline) at least once. Even if you honestly missed the mod's post entirely during a careful read, I find it suspicious that you missed me mentioning it in #207, the rest of which post you directly replied to and even quoted. I insist that you are reading the posts of Krad and Jennar more carefully than you are reading others', which could point to dishonest scum-hunting.

@ Jennar: Your point about conspiracy theories seems to confuse your stated playstyle (guilty until proven innocent) with Krad's (guilt by association) but they are two very different approaches. Yours is similar to what I would call the common method, in that all players start in the same catergory and are examined equally. Krad's is different in that it supposes the scumminess of one or a few players based upon the actions of a different player, thereby falsely limiting the possible targets of the hunt. In short: conspiracy theories look for evidence to conform to a conclusion rather than looking for a conclusion that naturally flows from evidence. I think both approaches are valid personal tools for finding scum. I think that the conspiracy theory approach is not a valid tool for demonstrating or arguing a case, whereas your approach would be.

I don't like that you're insinuating I'm wanting false claims. Where do you get, "I want townies to lie!" out of my wanting claims?

I do not mean to insinuate that you want townies to false claim. The tone and number of your statements on this topic seems to indicate that you want people to claim and counterclaim, period. Either that or you are setting the stage for a false claim for a scumbuddy. My point about 'nillas is that, statistically speaking, we are most likely to get a vanilla townie claim, which shouldn't be much of an complication at L-1 and with a looming deadline.

Overview: by my read at this point, you have demonstrated more desire to get power role claims than you have to find scum.

[Ythill]

unvote

Time to move toward consensus. There is never a guarantee of a good lynch on D1. IMO, there is even less of a guarantee in a game with preset deadlines. In other circumstances, lynching based on alignment would vastly outweigh any other consideration and I still think it’s the most important factor here, but I also believe that the other factors are important, so I’m going to try to look at the big picture.

This following sums up my meditations on this topic. For consideration I have included those suggested by others (Krad, Jennar, Mookeh, and spurg) as well as my own choice (Mills). I’ve only left off two people who currently have votes on them: DD (who carries the random vote of a lurker) and myself.

I'm not digging me feet in the sand here. Explicitly? I will vote just about anyone at deadline to avoid a no-lynch and am open for debate between now and then.

Alignment

• Jennar/Krad: I trust scumtells dropped while defending far less than I trust those dropped without provocation. It is a fact that some players argue better than others, it is also a fact that some players seem slimy when trying to debate with someone more skilled than them. I bring this up because each of these guys made only one scummy post without provocation. Neither of them is even on my most wanted list at this point.
  
• spurg: nothing except lurking (see below).
  
• Mookeh: I disagree with some points of Mills’ case against Mookeh (specifically, I see Mookeh’s attacks as honest) but some of it is solid and telling. The only thing I’ve personally found scummy in Mookeh’s behavior is the way he seems to be trying to stay on everyone’s good side. Then again, maybe he’s just nice. LOL.
  
• Mills: I’ve seen more scumtells than towntells here. My major concern is what he passes off as scumhunting. He also seems quite concerned with our opinions of how he is playing. Mills is not my PE#1 but he is in my top three, for the reasons stated here and in my last analysis.

Information Potential

(I could be mistaken here, this stuff is pretty complex)

• spurg: confirmed scum suggests nothing, confirmed town suggests nothing, the wagon without culpability or elaborate defenses (if any) will suggest very little
  
• Jennar: confirmed scum would cast light suspicion on Krad and falsely clear vollkan/me; confirmed town would cast light suspicion on vollkan/me; wagon defenses would be solid and give us some good leads
  
• Mookeh: confirmed scum would cast light suspicion on vollkan and Hypatia, and would send mixed signals about Mills; confirmed town would cast light suspicion on Mills; wagon defenses would probably be solid and give us some leads, depending on how strong he returns from vacation
  
• Krad: confirmed scum would cast light suspicion on Jennar, clear Mills, and falsely clear vollkan; confirmed town would cast light suspicion on vollkan; wagon defenses would be decent and probably give us some leads
  
• Mills: confirmed scum would cast suspicion on Dean and klebian, give mixed signals on Mookeh, clear Krad of vollkan’s accusations, clear DD/spurg, and falsely clear vollkan/me, it could also lead to light suspicion on vollkan; confirmed town would cast suspicion on me, cast light suspicion on vollkan/Krad, cast very light suspicion on a few others, and falsely clear Dean; wagon defenses would be weak at first but stronger as time passed, which could create a mixture of good leads and red herrings.

Lurking

• Mills and Mookeh: not applicable, Mookeh’s been light lately but only because of a pre-announced vacation
  
• Jennar: started light, defended his lurking as strategic town, has posted content since
  
• Krad: gave one excuse for early lurking, played for awhile, another excuse for later lurking, now is playing again
  
• spurg: doesn’t post content, doesn’t respond to player prods, responds very lightly to mod prods, obviously the worst

Chance of Reaching Consensus

• Jennar/Krad/Mookeh: Each has come under serious attack from one player (two for Jennar). Each has been suggested openly as the direction for some time now without apparent interest from others. I must wonder if the time spent pushing one of these will end in a lynch, or if it will be wasted. Another problem with any of these guys is that we are being asked to follow a single accuser.
  
• Mills: At least three of us have made separate serious attacks against Mills, a few others have made smaller attacks or have otherwise disagreed with him. I think consensus is more likely here than on the three listed above. I also feel a little safer going with someone who has been seen as scummy by more than one outspoken accuser (and with the fact that I am one of the most outspoken accusers).
  
• spurg: There’s three votes on him now and at least one player willing to vote him as a last resort. It would be a policy lynch (so there’s little culpability in voting) and may go off without much defense. My problem here is that he’s a lot of people’s last resort and I think we can do better than that.

Power Role Safety

• Jennar/Krad/Mookeh: There is nothing to suggest heavily that they
  do not
  have power roles. Not taking logic of this sort any further.
  
• spurg: He seems unconcerned with this game, including being unconcerned with the prospect of a wagon on him. To me, this suggests strongly that he is either scum or vanilla. Less chance of lynching a power-role here, less need to call for counter-claims on the event of a false claim. I could be wrong though.
  
• Mills: Said, “I would support a lynch on me.” If he’s town, he’s come right out and told us he’s not a power-role. So, if he’s scum and fake claims, we know he’s lying. No chance of lynching a power-role. No need for counter-claims in the event of a fake-claim.

I am certainly open to debate on any of the above, and will clarify when asked. To summarize: I think that Jennar and Krad are poor choices, I think spurg is only viable as a policy lynch and (except for the slim chance of catching him randomly as scum) isn’t much better than a no lynch. Of the listed candidates that I am not voting, Mookeh is the best but I do have reservations concerning hanging him.

Note that I am not attempting to limit our choices. Of those players not listed, I would be most comfortable lynching from my top 3 (Dean, Mills, Hypatia). Almost tied with Hypatia for #3 is Klebian. But, as it stands, I think that the best move for town is to…

vote: Mills

(hey, at least I addressed your Mookeh case)

[Ythill]

Do you find their responses scummy, even if you are choosing not to factor them into your assessment (if that is what you are doing; I may be mistaken)?

Yes and no. I found some of their responses scummy, some of these were later explained by them, a few weren't but seemed minor. Overall, I don't place either of them super-high on the scumlist but neither is my vote for mayor either.

(Question: What does "falsely clear" mean?)

Example: Ythill falsely cleared by Jennar as scum. I could say, "See, I was attacking scum, I am town," which seems valid but is not automatically true.

This as opposed to simply "cleared." Example: Krad cleared by Mills as scum. He could say, "You can stop calling my attacks against Mills scummy now, because you can see that I was right," which is valid, because the case here relied on Mills being town.

I do feel you missed a good deal of dirt on Mills and will galdly make a full case. The above was just a comparison to other choices. I also don't mind explaining the information potential of his lynch, but I will tackle these things in a future post, probably sometime tomorrow. It's been a long day and I am too tired for this right now.

[Ythill]

And quickly, @ Mills:

You claim that me, Dean and Hypatia are your top 3 suspects but your analysis completely ignores Dean and Hypatia under every heading you list.

This is due to the fact that I was only comparing you (my choice for a content-lynch) to the other current choices. My reasons for the others being on my top three are mentioned here. Clearly, neither Dean nor Hypatia will provide as much information as you, nor will they be as likely to get us to consensus. They have posted less content than you, but so has everyone except vollkan.

I also don't see how you can put Dean in your top 3 but call spurgistan 'a last resort'. I can't see any difference between them not least of all because both barely post.

Dean's active lurking is far more suspect than the guy that comes back long enough to say the wagon on him is justified and then goes away again. There's that completely unexplained vote on me, the really glaring "Mills is town" post, an unreasonable attack on Hypatia that seems like pretend scum-hunting, the complete lack of actual hunting, etc.

[Ythill]

Mod: please see the above post, I'm just bolding for your convenience.

[Ythill]

Playing catch-up here. Will post an actual case against Mills later today.

[mrow]Responses to vollkan

Mookeh: In what way does [Mookeh as scum] slightly embroil Hypa and myself?

He registers defenses of you both: Hypatia in his 4th , you in his 8th.

Mills: I'd like a bit of elaboration on this, if you don't mind.

Not at all. I’ll just copy-paste and elaborate parenthetically. Mills: confirmed scum would cast suspicion on Dean (for the unbidden “I like this guy” post) and klebian (for the kid gloves in his first analysis), give mixed signals on Mookeh (because klebian also gives him a pass

but

he was Mills favorite target), clear Krad of vollkan’s accusations (obvious), clear DD/spurg (because Mills attacked them early and it didn’t seem like bussing), and falsely clear vollkan/me (because we attacked Mills heavily), it could also lead to light suspicion on vollkan (because you jumped Krad for his attack on Mills); confirmed town would cast suspicion on me (I attacked him, cleared him a bit, then came back to attack again), cast light suspicion on vollkan/Krad (you both attacked Mills), cast very light suspicion on a few others (there have been some other jabs, light enough that I didn’t look them up), and falsely clear Dean (“I like this guy” again).

I don't know how reliable it is to judge power likeliness from activity. The argument can also be made that power roles will lurk in order to avoid the scum.

Really don’t want to debate this, as I questioned bringing it up in the first place. You’ve apparently missed my point, but I’m willing to let this stand with us disagreeing. Besides, at this point I totally agree that spurg shouldn’t be the lynch. [mrow]Responses to Mills

I don't see how I can bring this up without it looking like I am trying to deflect heat but I admit I am a little gobsmacked that Ythill would vote for information instead of scumminess.

I’ll let the “deflection” pass, but I don’t like that you are twisting my words here. I’ve clearly stated that alignment reads are my primary concern. Saying I’d vote for information

instead of

scumminess is an obvious misrepresentation of my intent. I am including information potential in my criteria in addition to (and on a lesser tier of importance than) scumminess.

Perhaps you think I am scummy too (you obviously do)

You are #2 on my scum list. I’ve actually seen more scummy behavior from you than my #1 (Dean) but I’ve also seen a few decent defenses and a couple of town tells from you, enough to move you down the list a bit. I wonder if you are confusing my posts and so will explain that when I mention things like my “most wanted list,” “top 3,” or “PE#1” I am speaking of alignment reads

only

whereas information potential is discussed separately.

…but I don't see why an information argument ever needs to come into it (nor a power-role argument for that matter).

Because it is D1 and none of us are infallible. Even if you had dropped a couple of smoking guns, we always have to consider the possibility that we are wrong and you are town. If that happens, I don’t want to sacrifice you without gain for the town. For example, Dean is my PE#1 but I would rather lynch you (my #2) because if I am wrong about Dean, we learn very little. In another example, a vollkan lynch would also provide a great deal of information but, because I do not have strong evidence that he is scum, I wouldn’t consider voting him except as a last resort to avoid no-lynch. As for power roles, I agree that discussing such things is very dangerous ground. However, in the rare case where someone volunteers evidence that would disprove a fake-claim without the need for a counter-claim, I believe that the benefit to our power-roles outweighs the small risk to them from me bringing it up just prior to pushing toward lynch on the player in question.

I have been quietly wondering if that is an acceptable reason for lynching on this website.

This is one of the things that makes you seem scummy in my eyes. In numerous places you make decisions (or announce that you are playing a certain way) based on other peoples’ opinions of what is acceptable town play. It seems as if you have something to hide. On a positive note, thanks for defending yourself diligently and not letting vollkan’s “frustrating” attacks dissuade you.

If you are town

, your job here is to tear apart every one of our attacks and not give up no matter what. Even if your defenses fail to save you, we will use the information you generate to catch scum later and, posthumously, you will still be helping town get the win. [mrow]Responses to Krad

# Jennar: confirmed scum would cast light suspicion on Krad

Why would Jennar being confirmed scum cast suspicion on me? I don't recall ever defending Jennar.

Light

suspicion would stem from the fact that confirmed-scum-Jennar had defended you.

I'd be willing to support a wagon on Mills, Hypatia, or Mookeh, with spurg as a last resort.

Since two of your candidates are on the current list, I don’t see any serious reason to include Hypatia (even though I agree with you) or spurg for now. Mills seems to be the direction at this point but I don’t see any harm in keeping Mookeh as a secondary, especially as abandoning a Mills lynch would mean the reservations of him being the Mookeh driver would become moot. In short, your cases against either would be appreciated. Lets just be careful not to cross the wires too much: putting Mills in a position of candidate for one lynch and driver for another could create some confusion if we are not careful to keep the discussions separate.

[Ythill]

Quick Defenses Against Mills’ OMGUS

Your case against me relies entirely on gut and my interactions with another player (which we’ve already discussed as invalid for making cases). Additionally, you commit misrepresentation again by saying:

“I find it a little contradictory that he says some of my case is solid and telling (ie. here is Ythill making some concessions that Mookeh is scummy) but then finishes off by saying the only thing

Ythill finds scummy

is how polite Mookeh is,” when what I actually said was:

“the only thing

I’ve

(short for “I have”, past perfect rather than present tense)

personally

(meaning without Mills’ help)

found

(wrong tense again)

scummy

...” So, what

you claim I said

is contradictory while what

I actually said

is not only non-contradictory but demonstrated to be true

by the block-quotes you have used

.

I find it incredibly telling that you use your own “mostly gut” accusation of me in conjunction with Dean’s admittedly gut vote to calculate me as being the #3 on that mathematically and contextually incorrect monster you try to pass off as a list of the town’s suspicions. But I’ll get into this a little more in the next section.

Opening Case vs. Mills

I’ve found a number of things scummy in Mills’ behavior but I’m not going to post all of them yet and I want to explain why. Basically, I think it’s better to concentrate on a few points at a time. Also, if I were to list everything I find scummy about Mills up-front, it would be hard for others to make cases against him without aping me. Anyway...

Point One:

Mills has a favored target. Several people agreed that Mills’ first argument with Mookeh (about the meta) was baseless. Upon rereading, I found it so baseless and pointless that it appeared contrived. It was “coincidentally” timed to begin as Mookeh left for vacation (and Mills’ “poor timing” is another one of my points for later). Mills had clear motive to take the stance he did, because Mookeh was challenging Dean’s town-tell on Mills and calling it a null-tell.

Much later (in #210), Mills promises a reread from which he comes back with no evidence or opinions except a mediocre case against Mookeh. The case happens in #222, which is Mills next post after he realized aloud that he is likely to be a lynch target (#217). Again, this sets up motive for his scummy attack.

Questions: Did Mills’ reread everyone or just Mookeh in isolation? If everyone, why not post other opinions? If only Mookeh, was his tunnel vision residual from the first argument? If not, what scum-tells did Mills see in Mookeh before the reread?

Point Two:

Don’t even have to go into the archives for this one. Please take a look at Mills’ #263 above. Dean’s vote on me is given a rating of 5. Why isn’t spurg’s vote on DD given a rating at all? Why don’t the votes on spurg get ratings?

Mills posts my suspect list as an exact copy of my top four most scummy rather than my preferred lynches (which I had just clarified to Mills as two separate things) but spurg is included on vollkan’s list and, though spurg was listed by vollkan in third place as a last resort lynch, it is clear that spurg is not even on vollkan’s list of top suspects. So, is this a list of people’s top suspects, a list of whom people are willing to compromise vote on, or a list of whom is voting for whom? It appears to be all three, depending on which is most convenient to the desired conclusion.

Meanwhile, Mills rates Krad’s suspects as if they had been originally listed by Krad in order of priority. Where does Krad suggest priority in his post (#258) except in mentioning vollkan (as #1) and spurg (as last resort)? Furthermore, Mills manipulates the statistics by conveniently adding to his suspect list. He adds me based on gut and interactions (see above). He adds Hypatia based on tells named earlier by vollkan and I. These manipulations further the contrived conclusion which is as follows:

Hypatia (whom Krad is willing to vote and I suspect) slides into #1, knocking Mookeh (who’s alignment confirmation will have mildly negative effects on Mills regardless) into #2. Ythill (the driver of Mills’ wagon) is raised from single-lurker-gut-vote status to the town’s #3 while Mills himself (under heavy attack from two sources and with at least one more willing to lynch him) slips to a modest #4.

Obviously the statistics touted in #263 are false, which could be the result of (1) mistakes, (2) townie desperation, or (3) scummy manipulation.

(1) Does Mills seem short-sighted or unintelligent enough to make such glaring errors? Is he short enough on posting time that errors of this magnitude could be caused by him rushing? I think not on both counts.

(2) Townie desperation then? Remember that I’ve already shown pretty clearly that Mills is not a power role. Would a townie rationally sew this many false statements in his defense unless he was extremely desperate? Is he under enough votes (just mine) or scrutiny (me & vollkan plus Krad maybe on the way) to justify this level of panic in a vanilla townie? Again, no on both counts.

Which leaves option (3): scummy manipulation. It seems extremely clear, from #263, that I was right about Mills.

As an aside, #263 reduces my suspicions of Hypatia although I will keep distancing in mind. Also, I’d like to note that #263 will need to be scrutinized carefully if we lynch Mills and he is (as he appears to be) scum.

In closing, I’ve got more dirt on this guy but I’d like to hear others’ cases. In the meanwhile, I look forward to Mills’ defense.

[Ythill]

@ Mills:

That's not how we (or I) play where I come from. I posted about my suspect because that seems like the thing to do without making everyone read a bunch of crap they probably aren't interested in.

I will accept this as an understandable possibility but being a foreigner is wearing thin as an excuse. It still only explains the post's lack of variety, not the identity of the target. I just did a reread on everyone and found Mookeh relatively mild, as did vollkan and klebian. It is strange that your only person worth mentioning as scum doesn’t register on the sights of anyone else who has announced a thorough reread.

Question for the field: who else lists Mookeh as PE#1?

Regarding Point 2, you are obviously a complete retard. I stated clearly that the list wasn't complete and hence incorrect.

The ad hom is unnecessary.

A disclaimer proves nothing. Earlier I said that my list of potential information to be gained from various lynches was complex and therefore probably flawed. If that list had contained numerous glaring errors and manipulations of my opinion that all lead to an ulterior conclusion, would my disclaimer have excused me from the obvious attempt to sway opinion? Or would the disclaimer itself have been plunged deeply into WIFOM territory?

I am suggesting that your post was dishonest, which would make the disclaimer equally dishonest.

The manipulation of statistics does not only stem from your possibly accidental misinterpretations of others’ opinions.

You changed your opinions, without new information, in a manner that allowed the conclusion of your post to reflect an outcome beneficial to your position.

You say that the list is incomplete but, since you have demonstrated that you are willing to manipulate the current conclusion, what proof is there that you will not continue to do so?

What evidence is there that this list is an objective but flawed model of the tendencies toward consensus rather than a subjective smokescreen intended to misrepresent those same opinions? Your assurance. Nothing more.

You have a giant whinge because you a third when half the people haven't even indicated their preferences and you are unlikely to feature on anyone else's suspects lists (resulting in you probably falling heavily). Myself, however? I will likely be high on a lot of people's suspect lists which will mean I will end up first... BUT YTHILL THINKS MILL IS SCUMMY FOR MAKING A LIST OF SCUMMY PEOPLE IN WHICH MILLS WILL BE FIRST.

Now you are asking us to accept, as current fact, your predictions of how this system will develop. Whereas if I were to conceive a current account of town’s tendencies toward lynch consensus, it would be quite different from yours, you are asserting that your post is okay because you somehow know that this system will eventually lead to the same conclusion that you assume I have already reached. Declaring the supposed future validity of your spurious substitute for the vote count does not excuse the clear fact that its current conclusions seem molded to fit your needs in the conversation at hand.

Then you spout crap like "Meanwhile, Mills rates Krad’s suspects as if they had been originally listed by Krad in order of priority" when I have made no asumptions of the sort and gave everyone in the middle the same amount of points.

An error on my part. In reading your list where the other players’ entries are numbered in descending order from 5, I misread the choices credited to Krad. I withdraw the statement and concede your point here. You will note that I also accidentally pluralized the word “vote” when referring to spurg although he only has Jennar’s vote on him, a fact I realized after making the post.

You have not addressed why Krad’s entries combine his PE#1 and a list of acceptable alternates, while vollknan’s entries initially contained and still contain a combination of he two, while my entries contain only my top scum list (in order of alignment suspicion, with my voted candidate and only current lynch choice being ranked second), while Dean’s only entry is his vote, while spurg and Jennar’s entries do not credit their votes. Nor do you explain why this flawed and highly subjective system of calculation seems to magically produce current results that conform to your current needs.

Finally (and proabably most importantly) you have not addressed a reasonable purpose for your excercise other than the fact that it allows you to post a skewed running summary of our situation.

Vollkan suggests that all of this could be error and oversight in spite of your apparent level of intelligence. I think he gives your integrity far too much credit and your intellect far too little but I could be wrong on either account. I will accept error as a slim possibility here. Again, error doesn’t explain the extremely convenient timing of your own shift in opinion.

I should also point out that coincidence is becoming your middle name. The timing of your spurg unvote in relation to that wagon coming under fire was

“unfortunate.”

The timing of your attack on Mookeh could have been

coincidence

(according to vollkan). A long list of “mistakes” and suspicious mind changes

incidentally

lead #263 to conclusions that favored your position. You are drawing us a picture of a random world; personally, I believe in cause and effect.

Votecount up to Post 275

Mills (2) - KradDrol, Ythill
Death's Door (1) - spurgistan
KradDrol (1) - vollkan
Mookeh (1) - Mills
spurgistan (1) - Jennar
Ythill (1) - Dean Harper

Not Voting (5) - Death's Door, Hypatia, klebian, Mookeh, Mr. President

7 to lynch.

[Ythill]

@ vollkan:

"Extremely clear" was admittedly bombast. I am a creative writer by hobby and have a bad rhetoric habit. It isn’t intentional.

To the thread at large, please take my use of slanted adjectives with a grain of salt.

You may be right that I have attacked #263 a little too hard but it registered as very scummy to me. Mills didn’t preface it at all, didn’t ask us to list our choices for this purpose, and didn’t make any effort to clarify our opinions before posting. He has a conflict of interest in assigning himself as the list keeper. His manipulation of the conclusion seems obvious IMO.

Would this same list, posted with the same errors and conclusion, be more or less suspicious if it had been posted by someone else? Do you really believe coincidence is responsible for the way Mills’ “errors” lead to the listed conclusion? Do you see how Mills conflict of interest in keeping this list could lead to conclusions flawed in a similarly convenient manner in the future? Do you believe we have time to perfect his list in order that it will be a useful tool for reaching consensus? More importantly, do you think Mills believes this? Finally, do you see how Mills’ incomplete/running summary, with its brightly colored, conveniently flawed conclusion, could affect the opinions of our less active players in spite of his disclaimer?

[Ythill]

Again, vollkan may be correct that my attack on Mills' list was too excessive.

I do not like the timing of Mills' request for replacement, nor the reason.

I do wonder where everyone else is though. Since the attacks started on Mills, all of our lurkers and middle-content players except Krad seem to have fallen through the cracks. Grumble.

I will be pretty busy today and may not post again. I'll check back by tomorrow at the latest though.

[Ythill]

Damn it. I think Mills was an excellent lynch but if he's not here defending himself, I can't justify a vote on him. For the record: in my short time playing this game I have come to absolutely despise the "replace out when under fire" strategy.

For my own culpability:

Do you see how pages and pages of a case that I can barely be bothered to read, let alone reply to, with its masses of paragraphs and conveniently long message, could affect the opinions of our less active players?

Affecting the opinions of other players

is one of the two main points of presenting a case

whereas a list quantifying the town's beliefs should never do this. As for the case being indefensible, I am never opposed to summarizing/simplifying a case if asked to do so by it's target.

And damn Mills for is OMGUS "watch out for Ythill" last words. I hope the rest of the players here are wise enough to ignore these.

On current topics, this replacement request screws me over. Mills was my best lynch and my #2 most scummy. Dean, who is also about to be replaced, is my #1 most scummy. Hypatia was my #3 but I am questioning my case against her , which doesn't amount to a whole lot. This leaves me the option of voting for an unknown alignment.

Unvote, vote Jennar

because he's a better lynch than Krad, which is a stupid reason, but my hands are tied here. I do have a very light case against Jennar that has not been previously discussed. I will bring this up tomorrow (at the latest).

[Ythill]

And re Ythill 271: Please do not make assumptions about me, even in favor of my innocence, based on so scummy a player as Mills. Judge me on my own actions.

My statement was conjecture and opinion only. It is specifically Mills' scumminess and attack on you that lends an air of innocence to my view of you. Rest assured though, I understand that such clues are immensely unreliable.

I know I'm playing strangely. I have specific reasons for this, especially the wanting of claims. And quite frankly the way I can play this game best is to play in the manner I have been...

I know a lot of players here are not fans of the "secret plan" approach to town play, but I am not one of them. I won't question you about your plan at this point, but I do want to clarify...

Are you saying that

you are interested in getting claims

but for pro-town reasons? Or are you saying that your strategy somehow makes it seem as if you want claims though you actually do not? Or, of course, are you saying something completely different that went over my head?

[Ythill]

Lol. Alright, un-damn Mills. Sorry about that. Frustrated Ythill isn't very nice.

Mills, I can see why you'd be overwhelmed with the #263 case. I do tend to ramble. I'm going to summarize the matter for you. IMO, an appropriate defense would:

(1) Explicitly admit that the “errors” are actually errors or otherwise explain them.
(2) Explicitly claim that the convenient conclusion of #263 was the coincidental result of said “errors” or otherwise explain it.
(3) Address the adjustment of your own suspicions (adding Hypatia and myself) and its effect on the list’s conclusion.
(4) Convincingly justify the need for a secondary quantification of our tendency toward consensus, considering the fact that completion of such a device would take longer than the amount of time we have before deadline and that an accurate measure of this already exists in the form of the vote-count.

For the record, I still feel that your defense to my first point (having Mookeh as a favored target) is insufficient. As I’ve said, you’ve registered a questionable but applicable reason for the single-minded reread results in #222 but have not fully addressed the question of Mookeh as the identity of your PE#1. Perhaps you could compare him to your other stated suspects (myself and Hypatia) to show how your reread uncovered him as the most scummy?

Also, I am interested in your response to Jennar’s #297. If you are unwilling to post any/all of these three defenses, please say as much.

I’d like to see others’ cases against Mills but may post another of mine a little later if I feel there is time for Mills to respond.

Unvote, vote: Mills

which puts him at L-1.

Votecount up to Post 300

Mills (6) - KradDrol, Dean Harper, Mills, Hypatia, Jennar, Ythill
Dean Harper (1) - spurgistan
KradDrol (1) - vollkan

Not Voting (4) - Death's Door, klebian, Mookeh, Mr. President

7 to lynch.

[Ythill]

That sounds like a confession and I don't see the strategic value in posting a false one. Additionally, this sounds like final words meant to communicate Mills' NK choice to his buddies.

Vollkan, your vote is available and you have already stated your willingness to pursue this lynch but we have two days before deadline. Is there anything else that people would like to discuss before night falls?

I'll put together some last words of my own, in case I am NKed.

[Ythill]

A retraction then? Bother.

Completely honest question for the field: what is the point of a sarcastic scum-claim and then a retraction? In my short time here, this is the second time I've seen this. The other time (game still running), the confessor was eventually revealed to be town.

I ask that the hammer be withheld until we at least touch on this subject.

[Ythill]

Ack! Mills was a cop? I'm never entirely sure of my reads in this game, and I was prepared for him to be scum or town but... a cop?

I understood before driving Mills' wagon that, if I was wrong about him, I'd face increased suspicions today. Totally prepared for that and don't worry, I'm not going to blow a gasket like he did. The trick, methinks, will be continuing to scumhunt while people are trying to mislynch me. Town: please read carefully to differentiate OMGUS from honest suspicions of those out to get me. Yeah, I'll try to write carefully too.

Anyway...

We've got 3 townie bodies. Any guesses as to the setup? Vig seems likely. Two scum-groups in a mini is pretty rare, isn't it?

[Ythill]

SK is also a viable possibility.

Wouldn't that require one of the bodies to be chainsawed?

[Ythill]

Alright, we might as well get started. I plan on posting an analysis of new information a little later. For now, I have this to discuss...

Completely honest question for the field: what is the point of a sarcastic scum-claim and then a retraction? In my short time here, this is the second time I've seen this. The other time (game still running), the confessor was eventually revealed to be town.

I ask that the hammer be withheld until we at least touch on this subject.

In hindsight, I should have unvoted here. Still I am wondering why vollkan's hammer post seems to credit his vote to me and Mills, as if actively dodging blame for the decision. I am also wondering how he justifies quoting me asking for the hammer when I posted #306 between that request and #312 where it was honored. Vollkan?

He's claimed godfather now. For meta reasons, that demands lynching.

Could you explain what you mean here? What "meta reasons" and why do they demand the lynch?

[Ythill]

This is getting ridiculous.

We can blame the Mills mislynch on my pushing, on the votes of the other living bandwagoners (which are all scummy to varying degrees), or on Mills' own actions but I think the real culprit is our inactivity. We were rushing to reach consensus before deadline and it was bad for town. Are we going to do that again today?

I've finished an analysis of new data, as promised. I looked at the results of all three alignment confirmations and at the histories of each of our four living voters vs. Mills. I was about to post this when I realized that our checkers-in haven't lived up to their promises of content. And four people haven't posted anything yet on D2.

@ Hypatia, Klebian, and Mookeh: Maybe you don't have time for a thorough reread. Can we at least get your initial thoughts? A top three list? The effects of new infromation on your previous opinions? Something? I've already done a lot of the legwork and will gladly participate in discussion, but I don't think I should be expected to take the initiative here and neither should vollkan. Let me put it this way: if either of us is scum you are handing them the game.

Mod: If you haven't done so in the last 72 hours, please prod Death's Door, Jennar, Mr. President, and spurgistan.

[Ythill]

I think the best place to start is by investigating those who were on the wagon, such as was just commenced in respect of myself.

Obviously I agree. No living player on the wagon is free of culpability and the histories of each vs. Mills present compelling questions. Furthermore, the possible mafia motives revealed by the NKs present an interesting duality.

But, yeah, like I've already said, someone else needs to step up. Sounds like klebian's up to the task. Anyone else?

[Ythill]

Ythill... I do think that he was hitting Mills a bit hard for his list of suspicions...

This seems to becoming consensus and I do not disagree. I tend to attack fiercely when I see a solid line of logic. I’d like to point out that I was right in identifying Mills’ fact-finding post as a gambit; my real error was in interpreting his “I’d support a lynch on me” statement as a claim that he didn’t have a power role. In hindsight, things could have been worse. If not for my mistake, Mills would have claimed and Krad would have counter-claimed, which would have likely see us through to LYLO with mislynches.

Anyway...

I find myself agreeing with many of klebian’s reads. Jennar’s spurg vote was the light case I mentioned when I briefly switched my vote to him. I don’t like the way Jennar votes, with just enough justification to cover his ass without leaving room for a defense. However, I like his most recent analysis even if I don’t agree with it all, and his posts seem basically townie when he’s not voting or defending himself.

The two from the wagon who have me the most worried are Hypatia and vollkan, but for different reasons.

He started D1 as motivated town, but vollkan’s late D1 posts have a hollow ring to them. They could be the actions of a townie pushing to avoid no lynch or of sly scum presetting defenses while riding the mislynch. I want to state clearly that I do not consider vollkan scum at this point but a firm MotR. What bothers me is being one of the two uber-active players without having a clear read on the other. For this reason, expect me to interrogate the interrogator a bit today, at least until I can figure him out.

Hypatia, on the other hand, seems scummier to me every time she posts. The one thought restraining me from all-out suspicion of her is the “secret plan” strategy she mentioned. This could be a scum gambit but it could also be a very sound pro-town strategy and I hesitate to pursue her until I have a clearer understanding. To this end, I have a few questions:

@ Hypatia: Will your “secret strategy” play out at all on D2? Do you think it wise to risk continuing this strategy into a LYLO situation? What is your read on vollkan? How did that read change from D1 to D2?

[Ythill]

Mills didn't like Mookeh, but with the way Mills was playing is that really worth consideration?

Absolutely. Mills' blow-up stemmed from his inability to argue quickly when he was cornered with a unclaimable power role and a looming lynch. Nothing about his play discredits his intuitive or cognitive abilities and, as you pointed out, he wasn't under extreme pressure when he gave us the Mookeh read.

Parts of Mills' case against Mookeh were very valid. Now we have the advantage of knowing that the case grew from honest suspicions. Mookeh certainly should be a topic of discussion even though he wasn't on Mills' wagon.

Mod: It's been 72 hours since Mookeh last posted, please prod him.

The spurg-discussion has been swirling AROUND spurg, instead of ABOUT him. We need to talk ABOUT him...

I’m in agreement with you here. I just did a reread on the tiny footprint he’s left in this game and found a tidy, content-based case. More interested in what you have to say about him though.

He makes you a bit nervous if only by association with what or whom? Is this the only reason for your suspicions? Why is your read on him not “inconclusive due to lack of posting” or “I don't like him, but lack of posting makes this inconclusive?”

[Ythill]

One day until ultimatum now. Which means we're almost 1/3 of the way to deadline with little done in the realm of scumhunting. And no activity at all in 24 hours.

::weep::

I'll look back over the recent posts from kurbio, Jennar, and Hypatia and try to come up with some more content later today. Right now I've gotta feed the kid.

[Ythill]

@ Hypatia: My #343 contains questions for you.

[Ythill]

Alright Hypatia, I'm starting to see that you and I play this game very differently. I'm still nowhere near a town read on you and I do not like the double-edged sword presented by your secret plan, but I've picked on you enough for now and I'm going to turn my hunting elsewhere for the moment, but first...

@yth340: I'm surprised that the only thing restraining you from all-out suspicion of hypatia is her secret plan.

I've played the "secret plan" strategy before so I can see where she might be coming from. That said, this point of restraint was weakened a bit by recent interactions. I'd rather not discuss this topic further until it is important to do so.

Yth345: kurbio? Is this me or krad?

My bad: kurbio is in my other game. I meant you, klebian.

[Ythill]

@ vollkan: I've promised an interrogation and we're not getting any younger, so... Looking at you in isolation here (post numbers with oldest first).

In #39 you say you "will oppose any move to lynch Spurg on the basis of lurking when KradDrol is, to me, a much better candidate" after which you toy with the idea of a spurg lynch, saying he's better than no lynch in #42 and then suggesting him parenthetically as the lurker lynch in #43.

This seems like a natural willingness to compromise to avoid no lynch.

When Mills attacks Mookeh, you agree with much of what he said, cite evidence in support of his case, and raise Mookeh to 55% on your scale, but you go on to say, "I don't think it is worth a content-vote at this stage, though, given what I see as much more tangible cases on Krad and Jennar." (all in #49)

This seems very in-character from what I've come to know about you: self-motivation for a minor change in opinion, but sticking to your guns as regards the big picture.

Then I put forth my opinions on those people suggested for lynch and add Mills, finding him to be the best lynch. You analyze my post intricately in #50, but of the conclusion you simply reiterate your early read on him (he is @ 55%, same as Mookeh). Then you spend your next two posts (#51-52) attacking Mills, stating the conclusion, "Your explanation is "sufficient" (it covers everything) but it's also very slippery," and then repeating the sufficiency comment in the next post (#53) where you register another minor attack.

It seems out of character here that you didn't engage me in serious argument about the value of a Krad lynch over a Mills lynch, but rather turned to attack Mills. The conclusion of your attack on Mills was a non-opinion, effectively dropping the topic without leaning one way or the other.

Then I attack Mills and you step in to defend him, posting (IMO) a stronger defense than he did. This defense comes in two parts: #57 in which you are adamant, and #58 in which you seem to talk yourself into a more agreeable stance. Then, even though there's time on the clock, you start pushing people to vote (#58-61) with scarcely another word about Krad or Jennar. Finally, you hammer Mills after his scum claim.

The defense of Mills is way out of character but I'll address it below. You giving in to my argument so easily seems out of character as well, compared to your arguments in other situations.

I think that the above is an accurate depiction and I've put my opinions in italics to more clearly separate them from the facts.

Here are my questions:

Why did you abandon arguing in favor of a Krad lynch while there was still time for the debate? Did you really not see any new scumtells in Mills behavior that were worthy of argument between the DD vote defense and the begining of his wagon? Why did you argue strongly in support of Mills (55%) case against Mookeh (50%) while arguing adamantly against my (50%) case vs. Mills (55%)? How is it that I changed so much of your opinion regarding Mills' gambit so quickly? Finally, if you had to guess, which NK would you say the mafia is responsible for and why?

[Ythill]

On a completely presonal level, vollkan, I really like arguing with you. I appreciate the fact that you understand my points and debate them intelligently. A lot of what you said was valid and enlightening. For the most part I'm only going to address points of disagreement below.

This seems very in-character from what I've come to know about you: self-motivation for a minor change in opinion, but sticking to your guns as regards the big picture.

"self-motivation"? I'm not too sure I follow what you mean by that.

I mean that you changed your public opinion (and presumably your mind) only after rereading Mookeh yourself and posting your own evidence that Mills’ accusations were accurate.

Why did you abandon arguing in favor of a Krad lynch while there was still time for the debate?

Whilst I continued advocating a Krad lynch, I did not make any effort to argue my reasons to you, because you had declared an approach which was significantly different to my own in respect of those two. I was as clear as I could have been that I did not think the case on Mills was damning, and that I persisted in suspecting Krad and Jennar.

This is a very valid reason for not trying to convince me personally, but we are talking about consensus to lynch here. Arguing in favor of Krad over Mills could have altered the opinions of other townsfolk. You did repeat your suspicion list a lot, demonstrating that you thought Krad was a better lynch than Mills right up until the scum claim, but you never factually compared the two in response to my own comparisons. I am wondering why, especially since you seem to like arguing and have said that you do.

Also, the "sufficient" thing was not a non-opinion. I can understand why you might see it is as that, however.

Since you've registered understanding for my read here, I am comfortable taking your explanation at face value and chalking this bit up to misunderstanding/projection on my part.

#57 - Adamant? Aside from my insistence that you were being heavy-handed, I would hardly go so far as to call this defence adamant. I don't think #58 was "more agreeable" therefore.

Not going to play the semantics game. I think “adamant” was an appropriate description but we can use another word if you like. What I am pointing to here is the obvious tonal difference between #57 and #58. I can and will demonstrate this with facts, but I’d rather not have to since it’s a lot of dissection. So, semantics aside, do you deny that the difference exists? Either way, I believe this point to be one we will have to examine further so I’ll stop here and wait for your reply.

As for why scarcely nothing more on Krad/Jennar: Well, I did refer to them again in #59 where I reiterated that I thought either of them was an ideal candidate. I'd been clear on this throughout, and everyone knew where I stood.

I did read that, hence my use of “scarcely.” You also listed Krad’s name in your unofficial vote count. Neither of these things made any attempt to divert people’s suspicions from Mills to Krad, who was your PE#1. This is just evidentiary support for the point we’re discussing above. The only reason I pursue it here is to show that I was not attempting to make a misleading statement.

I did not strongly support Mills' case on Mookeh.

Basically, I think you raise a few valid points about Mookeh (Let me raise Mookeh to 55%). I don't think it is worth a content-vote at this stage, though, given what I see as much more tangible cases on Krad and Jennar.

All I am saying here is that I think he makes some valid points to the point where Mookeh is no longer a "neutral", but no more than that.

When I refer to “strong support” I am not just talking about your conclusion. You posted a hefty amount of evidence in the form of Mookeh quotes followed by brief interpretations. These agreed with and deepened Mills’ case, thereby supporting it strongly.

Finally, if you had to guess, which NK would you say the mafia is responsible for and why?

I would guess Dean. He was a lurker with relatively little suspicion on him. A "safe" kill.

KradDrol makes sense as either a vig or SK kill. I had expressed suspicion of Krad and it is possible the vig/SK followed me.

However, the other possibility I see is Krad being killed to beef up the suspicion on me which would potentially accumulate on D2 (showing that the hammerer had serious suspicion of a townie).

On this point we are in almost complete agreement. I say "almost" because I would add a few points to what you’ve said. Primarily: Dean’s death embroils me in a manner similar to (if less telling than) the way Krad’s death embroils you. Secondarily: because of the possibility of suspicion-building motives against you and I and our own public suspicions, a Krad death serves as a defensive move from Jennar-scum and a Dean death does the same for Hypatia-scum. Not claiming they are scum here, just discussing possibilities.

I know that the possible suspicion-building motives of the NKs were one of the main reasons I was hesitant early D2. Perhaps you were of a similar mind? Unless we are wrong about the NK motivations, it seems our scum have the patience/finesse to sit back and let town take the shots.

[Ythill]

PS: regarding the theory topic, I'll be brief.

I like large analyses and discussion/argument about those analyses (exactly like what we having now). You, in contrast, seemed to be much more focussed on independent behaviour - at least in respect of Jen and Krad. Whilst I disagreed with your approach, in no way did it seem illegitimate or foolish to me.

FTR: I do see the value of these sorts of debates but, to me, they are a way of confirming and/or disproving independently commited tells. For the most part, I believe that new tells committed during an argument are

not as reliable

in a read because the act of arguing brings pride/ego/eloquence and all sorts of other human factors into play whereas the motives for someone's unprompted actions flow more directly from that person's alignment and resulting strategies.

I am not saying my view is "better" than yours here or attempting to change your mind. Just clarifying my view FTR, in case this comes up again.

[Ythill]

When I use the word "adamant" I am not addressing the word specifically (to avoid a semantics clash) but, rather, the idea that my tone is "too forceful".

This phrase explains alot. I wasn't attempting to call the post "too forceful" or "too" anything. By adamant I meant something like forceful or stubborn but I absolutely did not mean to say this made your post scummy.

The adjective was inserted to point to the difference between #57 and #58. Because of this, and because you don’t revisit discussion of the “Mookeh as Mills’ preferred target” case in #58, I’m dropping/conceding that part of the argument. I never had any problem with your statements in that area.

What I see here, Ythill, is a consistent message across both posts. Where you challenge what I say, I elaborate in more detail and explain (perhaps in more detail than 57) why I thought what you said is legitimate but whilst I believe it to be extreme.

I do see the consistent message that you point to, but it does not make up the entirety of the posts and, overall, their message is not consistent. I’ll try to show you what I mean. What I’ve done in the following two quotes is to remove all of your block quotes, leaving only the things you said. I’ve highlighted in red those statements which defend Mills or challenge my case against him. I’ve highlighted in green those statements which attack Mills or agree with my case. I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt when a statement’s proper color was ambiguous. FTR: I’ve also left out the “Mookeh as Mills’ preferred target” part, which is irrelevant to my point.

I did a similar thing in Mini 495 (vanilla townie).

I did mine differently to Mills in that I got all active players to post lists and, when I did make assumptions, I clearly identified them/listed nothing.

I don't think what Mills did is prima facie scummy, though. And he DID acknowledge it was inaccurate. He seems intelligent enough, but I wouldn't rule it out as an error.

Forming a "suspicion consensus" thing SHOULD NOT be done this early in the game. The problem here is that we have very few active players, and suspicions are all over the place.

You may have a point here. It really looks like deflection,

but again, he admitted it was not meant to be accurate. It doesn't make your view "extremely clear" in correctness. I don't really like how strongly you have attacked #263. Mills wasn't holding it to be authoritative.

Here we see a predominance of red. Of the two green sections, one is a disclaimer about the red statement you made just before it, the other backs up the fact that I “may” have a point with evidence and then refutes that possibility before the sentence even ends. You repeat several statements of disagreement. Furthermore, the conclusion of the post is, “I don't really like how strongly you have attacked #263. Mills wasn't holding it to be authoritative.”

Mills' list was deeply flawed, I am not disputing that. Everything you say about it being a false smokescreen is "valid" - it is not ridiculous.

BUT (and this is a big BUT) I think the extent to which you are hammering Mills on this point is excessive. It's either a cock-up

or a conspiracy (by Mills)

and I don't believe we have anything which suggests either way.

I am not being overly-generous towards Mills;

I am simply saying that I do not believe the significance of this as a scumtell is as much as your attacks on it would seem to suggest. He admitted it was going to be inaccurate and didn't even list anything for 7 players. No matter what his alignment, it is clearly a mistake from Mills, but is it more likely to come from town, or scum? As I have said, I formed a similar list in Mini 495 as town,

but I was more accurate

(though not entirely so)

in my listings.

Sure. I used to get attacked for the same thing, and have since made an effort to tone down my language. I'll keep it in mind.

But he even said in the following post: (cite to Mills’ second disclaimer). If he was really into misrepresenting, why would he bother posting something like this? I guess I am seeing this sort of as him posting a deeply flawed "draft list" and then asking for improvements. No more suspicious, and no less.

I really don't like the way he added in suspicions which just happen to get him out of the top 2.

The rest of it is feasible as a mistake,

but is still drastically wrong. I don't think where you are coming from on this is ridiculous,

but (again) just too extreme.

I'm not excusing Mills for this,

but I am more wary of the possibility that this might just be the result of error than you seem to be. Since he asked for clarifications, I don't think that the grossly erroneous results would have lasted very long.

The concern niggling on my mind here is if it was just orchestrated to get a Hypatia lynch today by having the lurkers slap votes on

but, again, the fact he asked for clarifications makes me doubt that any attempt to falsify consensus would last.

No. Right now, we don't have enough time to wait for everyone to post a list.

We need EACH PERSON TO VOTE so that we can get a lynch today. I will not accept a last-minute lurker lynch.

I'm very skeptical. See above for my concern about trying to use this to get a lynch on Hypatia. Again, see above. To recapitulate: I believe that such a dodgy list could have the effect of prompting lurkers to try and fit with the concocted consensus. For that, I dislike it. I am not impressed.

Here, the post is predominantly red at the top and fades to predominantly green at the bottom. Which is why I described it as, “#58 in which you seem to talk yourself into a more agreeable stance.” There are multiple green statements that neither serve as disclaimers nor are refuted by a “but.” You connect your personal niggling thoughts in support of the case (the Hypatia thing). You do continue to repeat statements of disagreement, but you also repeat statements of agreement. There is no clear summation to this post but leaving it to interpretation, due to the flow of the post, suggests some level of newfound agreement.

Do you see the difference I’m talking about here? Will you insist on asserting that it doesn’t exist?

Here’s the thing, vollkan. I don’t think #57 is scummy by itself. I don’t think #58 is scummy by itself. I don’t think that the differences between them are suspect, because I don’t believe changing one’s mind is scummy. However, when the opinion shift between #57 and #58 is compared with your other shifts in opinion (regarding spurg, Mookeh, etc) it seems out-of-character and therefore insincere. It reads as if either your "adamant defense" of Mills or your "talking yourself into a more agreeable stance" are contrived. And, since Mills came up town, this read worries me.

[Ythill]

I'm not entirely sure why "

No. Right now, we don't have enough time to wait for everyone to post a list

" actually merits being put in green.

I am not expecting us to agree on the specifics of the red/green thing, as it was an admittedly subjective method of demonstrating to you (and others) the tonal difference I perceived in your posts. In this quote, however, you’ve expressed doubt rather than disagreement, so I’ll explain myself.

This green statement was an answer to a direct question from me: “Do you believe we have time to perfect his list in order that it will be a useful tool for reaching consensus?” In context, the statement directly opposes your disclaimer regarding the Hypatia niggling, and so stands in agreement with the case. Green or non-colored was a tough call, but not tough enough to fall into the “benefit of the doubt” category.

But we are discussing a tree.

I understand what you mean by there being a "difference" but I disagree with your conclusion that it suggests insincerity in the one of the two stances. The difference is in what each post was specifically addressing… The next bit of green is the most supportive of the post, which is why I think that your idea of it becoming progressively "greener" is legitimate… So, Ythill, I maintain that there was no actual shift towards agreement…

I want to clarify this stance, because it seems to be your conclusion and it is woven throughout a complicated post. I believe you are saying that the

apparent

shift in opinion exists incidentally, but was not accompanied by an actual shift in opinion. Is that a fair summary? If not, how would you amend it? Not trying to misrepresent you here, just grok fully.

To suggest that is somehow indicative of some "shift" in my attitude is to miss the forest for the trees.

To be fair vollkan, you post a lot of trees. I’m doing my best to figure out what the forest is like.

Suppose the ordering was like this (eg. might have come about if I had not responded to you in the precise order of your questions). What effect, if any, would this have on our current discussion?

It would certainly be different. I can’t tell you in what manner it would differ though. Considering all the factors in my psyche at the time I read and then reread the initial post, the situation you present is too hypothetical for a definitive answer.

It doesn’t matter anyway: #58 was posted in the order we are currently discussing it. We’re making progress talking about reality here, let’s not get sidetracked.

[Ythill]

Thanks for reiterating. The forest/tree analogy keeps making me chuckle.

What I am saying is that if the ordering of each "tree" in 59 was scrambled the flowing you allege (remember, I have argued that there was no such flow anyway) would, in fact, not even exist on an apparent level.

And therefore the

apparent

shift was incidental. Yeah, I got that from #360 alone. I can't really fault you for posting a second illustration of it (considering that this argument is not just about you and me), but I do think hypothetical situations like that are generally unecesarry. I just wasn't sure if the question you posed in #361 was rhetorical, but it appears that it was, so I guess it doesn't matter why I'm not going to attempt to answer it.

I don't see this argument being any more revealing, though it has been thoroughly enjoyable. I'm ready to move onto other things for now, unless you have something else to add.

[Ythill]

Yeah, sorry about the wordiness. If Dean is still skimming along, he's really glad that he's dead, LOL. The fruits of #354-364 IMO:

Direct Results

• Accurate speculation of NK information at the bottoms of #355 and #356.
  
• Enlightening reasons for several of vollkan’s more mysterious actions (i.e. not arguing for a Krad lynch, posting evidence in support of a case he didn’t fully agree with, defending the guy he later hammered, etc) which help us understand how he thinks.
  
• A reasonable case against vollkan when considering only my stated read, reasonably refuted considering only his stated intentions. Still bordering on viable considering both but nowhere near a smoking gun.
  
• A mildly scummy defense from vollkan in the end game: a little too slippery as my argument came to a head. My biggest problem with this is vollkan’s willingness to elude to the possibility of something
  apparently
  existing in spite of its actual non-existence but his unwillingness to say as much explicitly. That said, he was under pressure and you all know how I feel about tells arising in this manner.

Indirect Results

• Possibly re-reveals my tendency to strike too forcefully when on attack? I guess this really depends on others’ views.
  
• Reveals vollkan’s tendency to nitpick the details in support of his thesis on defense as well as on attack (which clears up one of my unstated suspicions of him).
  
• Profiles vollkan as the type of player who stands by a statement until the end while pushing him into a position where he has declared several of his reasons for possibly scummy actions. If vollkan is scum, this will come in handy later.
  
• Shows that vollkan will back off from his semantics debates if called out on them. This is very useful for town, both in defending against vollkan and attacking him.
  
• Shows that while vollkan is quite intelligent, he does occasionally miss the obvious, which accidentally reinforces defenses he made vs. my D1 attacks on him.
  
• Demonstrates vollkan’s desire for mutual understanding in an argument rather than a simple desire for the win, even under pressure. This is a huge towntell but, again, I have less faith in tells that come as a result of an argument.

My Conclusion

The interrogation was met with reasonable defenses (which I expected) and most points were refuted or explained satisfactorily. My logical read of vollkan (as opposed to a gut read) is starting to lean more towards town and I am more comfortable working with him to find scum. However, we already know that vollkan is very good at arguing. Because of this I am giving him less credit for his defenses than I would give another, less capable player.

The point of my attack was not to move vollkan towards the gallows but to pigeonhole him by moving him away from MotR and to examine the validity of him being placed on the suspicion list of every other player who has posted a D2 analysis. My current read on him is slightly less scummy than MotR and I find myself questioning others' scathing reads.

IMO, we need to perform similar examinations of Jennar, Mookeh, and myself, as well as a more thorough interrogation of Hypatia. I’d like to finish these things this week, so that our last week before deadline can be spent questioning the replacements and moving toward consensus.

[Ythill]

I'll answer any questions you have Ythill...

I really don't have very much for you. I'll probably chime in with my bit at some point but somebody else should lead the attack against you. I'm wondering who will be investigating me.

Enlighten me, please, as to how Dean's death would defend me?

It proves that Dean was town. Mills was also town. This discredits my scumhunting abilities because they were my #1 and #2. You were my #3. It doesn't so much "defend" you as "serve as a defensive move" from you-as-scum. Again, this is not an accusation, just specualtion about the details of the NK.

@ vollkan: I still disagree with some points as stated above and reiterated in #367, but you have made your position clear and I see no point in continuing the argument. Our disagreement could very well be a function of perception. If it becomes pithy, which I do not foresee, we can battle it out more later.

[Ythill]

Hi Justin. Glad to see a player of such high caliber joining us.

And hi killa, I haven't read any of your games but thanks for replacing in.

[Ythill]

Ythill...you and Vollkan in the same game? No way was I passing that up.

I hope we're all town.

This game has been quite fun but suffering a bit from inactivity. I look forward to hearing your read-through analysis (and killa's). Oh and, killa, welcome to Mafia Scum.

Might not get any scum hunting done tonight because its poker night. Finally, I get to play a game I'm good at.

[Ythill]

Hi thinktank. Welcome to our cop-less world. Sad, isn't it?

@ Jennar: Seems nobody else has stepped up so I'll have a go at you in the name of keeping things moving. Will try to keep it light in respect of our replacements but I'm not going to wait for them to catch up because, you know, tick-tock.

By the time you made your seventh post (#297), you were firmly entrenched in defense vs. what started as an accusation of lurking. You had made attacks against myslef, vollkan, and Krad and had mentioned a few other players. Spurg was not one of them. In #297, you have only this to say about spurg:

Unvote
Vote: Spurgistan

I'm no poster boy of well articulated, frequent and meaningful posts but you are worse then I am.

IMO, this seems like you are trying to wriggle out from under scrutiny by directing suspicion somewhere else.

Questions: Can you explain how being "worse than [you]" equates to spurg being scummy? By accusing him of not making well articulated, frequent and meaningful posts, are you simply accusing him of lurking? If not, what else are you accusing him of? At that point in the game, several people are lurking worse than you were; of them, why did you single spurg out?

[Ythill]

EBWOP: In my last post, where I refer to #297, I am actually refering to #162. Confused Jennar's vote posts because I was reading both, sorry.

I was voting him to try and get him to talk up so we could have more meaningful discussion of content on more players instead of the limited amount on very few players.

I'm obviously not against placing pressure votes on lurkers but, if one is pressuring a player for content, doesn't it make sense to post a question with your vote? Or an ultimatum? Or a case that can be argued? You post none of these things with your vote nor anywhere before it, nor do you mention other players' questions.

The brief statement that accompanies your vote leaves room for four replies:

• "I am not doing this, proved by (insert false defense)", which is a lie because he was shading.
  
• "I am not worse than you, proved by (insert false case)", which is also a lie because he was shading worse than you.
  
• "I've done a reread. Here are my answers to others' questions and some notes about who I think is scum." The best result, but probably not to be expecetd (at least not without some direction) from someone lurky/absent enough to have ignored questions and scumhunting so thoroughly already.
  
• "I am doing what you say worse than you, but it is not scummy because..." This seems like the most likely reply from a light content poster, but you have already told us: "It had nothing to do with Spurg being scummy per se."

How much weight are you putting on "per se" in this statement? What were you expecting spurg to say in response to your vote?

[Ythill]

From what I read it seems like the cop who got lynched last game day wasnt doing much to help the town...

Though a lot of his posts were made in defense and reflective offense, Mills did help a little. He was the type of player who forms multiple reads but only posts the part he feels is most relevant. He showed us some valid tells on Mookeh. There may be other stuff but I cannot remember off the top of my head.

Mills was also very active and his participation in various conversations may have drawn out subtle tells to be found by an eye sharper than mine.

...and just wanted to get out?

I think what happened is he blew up under pressure. We already knew Mills had this tendency but I, for one, didn't realize how far he would go. My early hypothesis about how he couldn't be a power role might have convinced him that a claim would be futile and, as the votes built on him, he felt cornered.

In hindsight, I wish we'd had the time to calm him down. I made an attempt at the end but it was already too late.

[Ythill]

It's readable, vollkan. Was there more content to add or just formatting?

These are good questions but I will wait to answer them until you post the finished version (or say that you're not going to). Will have time to do so tonight, but we're about to start a movie here, so it won't be for a few hours.

[Ythill]

A fair read for the most part, vollkan. Obviously my perceptions differ in places from yours, but I won’t bother arguing the minor discrepancies until they are part of a case. There are three points I wanted to address before I answer your questions though.

28: Questions why kleb attacks people for their stance on Mills but is very forgiving of Mills himself.

You've accidentally made this statement misleading. FTR: my indication in #28 was that klebian was too forgiving of Mills. I was not "very forgiving" of Mills in #28, and I don't think vollkan meant to suggest that I was. It's just inconvenient grammar.

32: Finds Jennar scummier than Krad…34: Large analysis post… Noteworthy that Krad moves back down to the same level as Jennar despite a slight rise before with the "pretty damn scummy" remarks.

You seem to make a blunder in your read here. I never made comparisons of the players in my #34. During the comparisons I believe you might be referring to (in my #40) Krad and Jennar were included together because my comments about them were very similar, not solely because of similar reads. It is true that my view of Krad had been sullied by the reread, but it didn’t “move him back down to Jennar’s level” it moved him up the suspicion list to somewhere around Jennar’s level (whom I had found more suspicious than Krad two posts earlier).

This issue has been discussed ad nauseum, but I shall reiterate my views up here in the black part.

Couldn’t find the “black part.” Did you forget to post it?

1: I don't like things based on "gut". Could you explain why you felt DD and myself were pro-town, and why Hypa would have been if not for her justifications for claim-fishing?

I cannot. “Gut” refers to first-read impressions without the realization of quantified facts. If I searched for those facts now, my answer would suffer from the same confirmation bias that taints conspiracy cases and would be dishonest. If there had been facts to cite, I would have said as much then. My reason, as stated, was gut. Sorry you don’t like it.

2: What was wrong about Dean reading Mills as weak pro-town?

It came out of the blue. I don’t mind people giving town reads, but this was a sudden opinion from a relatively content-less player. I believe that the logic behind Dean’s tell had already been successfully questioned at that point as well.

3: In what way/s did Jennar get more "sensible"?

His first answer to my question about the duality of his defense was not “sensible” in that it “missed” the meat of the question. I see this as possibly scummy behavior. Then he admits to not having fully understood the question, I reiterate, and he provides a more “sensible” answer.

4: Could you elaborate on why you felt Mookeh was trying to stay on our good sides? What I mean is that there is a difference between "playing in a pro-town way" and "trying to look pro-town". Your comments suggest you felt Mookeh was "trying". Also, how is this different from "too townie"?

When a player pussyfoots around hard hunting and offers more praise/defense of others than suspicion, I feel that he is more worried about his reputation than he is about finding scum. I don’t think he’s doing so by “acting pro town” but by kissing up to other players. I don’t believe that there is anything “pro town” about trying to stay on people’s good sides in this way and I hope you are not attributing that thought to me. “Too townie” is a construct all your own and sounds a little like a trap.

5: How come Krad's post is now "pretty damn scummy" whereas before he was "a little scummy"? I gather that you are only referring to one post as "pretty damn scummy" but that is strong language and I don't think it makes sense for you to reduce your total read on him to "a little scummy".

The post I was referring to seemed more strongly indicative of Krad’s alignment upon rereading. Also, there is a world of difference between a read on a single post and an overall read on a player, which these two reads were.

6: You don't like conspiracy play, and yet you direct Krad to look at a trio whom you have raised a conspiracy about (not with the conviction of Krad, obviously). If conspiracies are not good, why you do this?

It’s not that I don’t like conspiracy play, it’s that I feel conspiracy evidence is insufficient upon which to build or argue a case. I’ve already said this. But if Krad finds it useful in locating targets, I’m comfortable letting him play that way. I gave him the conspiracy lead for two reasons: (1) because I’d noticed the possibility of a link and thought someone who used such information to find scum could make more sense of it than I and (2) as a trap for Krad, to see if he was tunneling on us.

7: Jennar was your primary candidate back in #23. Why does he move from #1 to a "poor choice"?

Again, I had performed a reread. Listing Krad and Jennar as “poor choices” is somewhat misleading because I meant “poor choices in comparison to Mills.” This is made a little more obvious when I list spurg (and, by inference, all lurker lynches) in a lower category and by the fact that I separately (if briefly) address “those players not listed,” meaning anyone who was not included in my comparison.

8: By your own admission, Krad's vote was "pretty damn scummy". I don't think the Mills case was significantly more persuasive (again, there were only 3 actual arguments, and only one struck any real chord with me). Why, to you, was the case on Mills so much more powerful than the case on Krad?

The case I posted on Mills was incomplete, a fact I referred to when I said, “I’ve found a number of things scummy in Mills’ behavior but I’m not going to post all of them yet and I want to explain why. Basically, I think it’s better to concentrate on a few points at a time. Also, if I were to list everything I find scummy about Mills up-front, it would be hard for others to make cases against him without aping me.”

For an idea of the other things I found scummy about Mills, see my #34, in which I mention “pretty pointless scumhunting” (involving more than the Mookeh attacks), borderline lurking, and questionable relations with Dean and klebian.

9: Why do you rule out errancy on Mills' part when he was clear that it was just a draft version that needed further input?

The “errors” were decidedly glaring, a point on which we agree. I didn’t see Mills as dull enough to make such errors and it appears that I may have been correct. As stated earlier, my failure in ruling out options was where I ruled out his gambit as the actions of a town aligned power role, not where I ruled the discrepancies out as erroneous.

10: Why not Dean, your #1? (and has this Jennar case been released yet?)

We were closing on deadline and looking for consensus. There had been no support for a Dean lynch, no cases raised, and no opportunity for him to defend himself. Of those discussed and supported for lynch, I preferred Mookeh to Jennar but, for similar reasons, didn’t vote him. As for the vote I did make, I believe you and Krad would have supported the lynch and Jennar was there to defend himself. It was a clear-cut tactical choice, and I think I mention not liking to have to resort to it at the time, but it was also a necessary compromise considering the deadline.

The Jennar case foreshadowed was his spurg vote so, yes, the case is at least in the process of coming out.

11: Why was Mills' explanation of his behaviour to Mookeh insufficient to you?

I explain in the post but will reiterate here. In response to why he was singling out Mookeh, Mills had explained that he only posted dirt on his #1 because he thought the rest was irrelevant, which does not answer the question of why Mookeh was his #1. It simply repeats that he found Mookeh most scummy (comparatively) but doesn’t explain the comparison or enlighten us as to the selection process.

12: Was the "secret plan" the only reason you found Hypa getting more suspect?

No. In fact, the plan is a double-edged sword here. In one aspect, it could be very scummy; in another it could be very pro-town. As I’ve said to klebian though, I will play the cards close to my chest here. We can discuss the other tells freely if and when the microscope swings back in her direction. I’ll not attempt to water my defense by turning matters onto her.

[Ythill]

Regarding “gut”: You will be pleased to know that I only rely on such things in the opening game, before I have formed explainable reads. Don’t worry about me placing a D4 vote based on gut or anything like that .

First off, "too townie" is a pejorative reference to any alleged scumtell along the lines of "He seems to protown".

I thought this might have been the case but wasn’t sure. I can’t imagine thinking that something like this would be a scum-tell except in an extreme circumstance that involved other factors (i.e. a player who’s meta shows that they are naturally scummy as town, or who begins acting “too townie” in response to attacks, or something like that). Even then, I’d seriously question the tell.

Now, you certainly didn't seem to have any deep suspicion; in fact you seemed quite pleased with him. This made it all the more interesting that you would say that you feel he was "trying too hard to stay on our good sides."

Fine, he had defended more than attacking, but as you yourself said: He was performing our reality checks and "seemed honest".

Okay, I think I understand our miscommunication here. You seem to be reading my analysis of Mookeh as a single tell whereas it is a list of (sometimes conflicting) tells, as follows. “He often performs our reality checks

(null tell)

and, though he hasn’t hunted a lot

(minor scum tell)

, what he has posted has seemed honest

(town tell)

. Mookeh defends more than he attacks though, and I can’t help but feel that he’s trying too hard to stay on our good sides

(the scum tell we have been discussing)

. What these tells had in common is that they showed why “everybody likes him.”

I wouldn’t say I was “quite pleased with him” though you are right that I didn’t have serious suspicions at that point (I think I said as much in response to Mills later). My suspicions became more serious after Mills pointed out the copy-cat tells and I did another reread on Mookeh to confirm them.

The reasons from #34 were actually the 3 arguments I was referring to:

Sorry about misunderstanding you. The word “argument” seemed too strong to refer to #34 and I thought you were referring to my actual case against Mills. I understand what you meant now.

3) "the way Dean and klebian are treating him with kid gloves"

I don't consider 3) a legitimate reason to suspect Mills - and the rest is hardly very compelling.

I agree that 3) was the weakest of these. Not quite a conspiracy (because I saw Mills as scummy prior to seeing the connections, not the other way around) but close enough to be unreliable. I disagree about the rest though. IMO, the case was compelling. I’ll address why below.

I wonder at your use of “compelling” here and its relation to the word “persuasive” (and “struck a chord”) from question 8 in #390. Are you saying that the case on Mills is less viable because it didn’t convince

you

? It was far more convincing to

me

than the Krad case was, which I think is the only important point in examining my actions.

In #40, your only alignment comments against Mills were:

My major concern is what he passes off as scumhunting. He also seems quite concerned with our opinions of how he is playing.

Thanks for pointing this out. Though it was still on my mind when I voted Mills, I’d forgotten about it by the time you posted #390. I’ll add this into my summary on the Mills case below.

I don't understand why Krad's vote and subsequent bad arguing (even if you choose to minimise the latter) were less scummy than Mills - the case on whom was hardly damning.

We are comparing apples to oranges here. Krad’s “pretty damn scummy” behavior was in only one post. I didn’t see his love of conspiracy as a scum-tell, just imperfect play. I didn’t see his arguments as altogether scummy, and the few tells I did find in his defenses were minimized, as you say, by the situation that prompted them.

Mills, on the other hand, had dropped a serious amount of tells stretched over the course of D1. There were some town tells (which I mentioned in my comparison) but these were overshadowed by what was, IMO, a very compelling case. In hindsight, I was wrong, but that doesn’t change what my views were at the time my suspicions were raised. I think it’s a little silly to go into detail about the Mills case now, but I’ll elaborate briefly in the name of clearing myself.

(1) “Scummy out of the gate…” This is a summary referring to the timing of some other tells, rather than an actual tell.

(2) “pointless scumhunting” (also “what he passes off as scumhunting”)… I think this point is deeper than how you are perceiving it. First we have Mills’ “random” vote on spurg, which he claimed was placed to elicit information (a purpose for which it seemed unnecessary). Next we have the quick, defensive, gut switch to DD. Then we have the first Mookeh debate which was pointlessness personified. Then there’s a brief, paranoid view about how your response to that spat was contrived. Then we have the second Mookeh case which was the only public result of an extensive reread. The overall pattern here suggested that Mills wanted to be seen as a hunter but couldn’t back that desire up with real hunting. He didn’t demonstrate a lot of curiosity or initiative. IMO, “pretend hunting” is more damning than scarce hunting (i.e. Mookeh) or a complete lack of hunting (i.e. Hypatia D1).

(3) “checking in…” This is what Jennar calls “shading” (I prefer this term to “active lurking” and will be adopting it as my own). I think shading is a reliable scumtell, especially when it surfaces for an extended period in the behavior of a player who has established himself as high-content.

(4) “kid gloves…” Admittedly the weakest part of the case, but cannot be ignored in light of other indicators.

(5) “concerned with our opinions…” In several instances, Mills asked what would be appropriate or changed his behavior based on others’ opinions. This is a pretty serious scumtell.

(6) “convenient timing…” I mentioned this briefly in my opening case against Mills. His unvote of spurg came on the heels of suspicion. When we found that as scummy, his unvote of DD was posted significantly later, as if to avoid our perception of it as scummy. The first argument with Mookeh comes when he is leaving for vacation. The second Mookeh case comes right after Mills publicly realizes that consensus is likely to center on him. There were other minor instances of this as well. Overall, Mills timing seemed far too strategic, rather than a series of natural reactions to the flow of dialogue.

(7) “Mookeh as a preferred target…” though this bit contains aspects of (2) and (6), it is also a tell in itself. Mills first attack in this arena was in response to Mookeh discrediting him. The second appeared to be similarly self-serving and came as the lone result of an extensive reread without explanation as to why it was the lone result.

(8) The Mills-list… As you said, my attack was too strong, but his post did seem like a gambit for multiple reasons. It wasn’t a part of the case as late as my #40, so I may be wrong to include it here, but it did play a part in my growing suspicions and eventual lynch of Mills so I’m throwing it into the list.

(8) In addition to all this, Mills had registered some scummy responses to others’ attacks. I minimized these tells in the same way that I did Krad’s.

In summary: Mills’ unprompted behavior, to me, showed an ongoing and deeply rooted pattern of scuminess whereas Krad’s was a single damning post. Obviously it’s pointless now to go into depth about which cop we thought was scummier and I’m not trying to convince you that Mills was the bad apple of the two. However, I think I’ve made it pretty clear why I thought he was at the time and I stand by those reads as honest (if horribly mistaken).

I am quite concerned about the possibility of you being scum, given how tight your play has been.

How is this different from me being “too townie?”

[Ythill]

On other topics...

@ Jennar: In spite of the back-and-forth between me and vollkan, I am still eagerly awaiting your response to #382.

@ Hypatia: Your response to vollkan seems a little terse, but I am very much looking forward to your expanded analysis of him (or of anyone else, for that matter). Please don't keep us waiting long.

@ The Replacements: Having fun wading through the walls of text? I, for one, am willing to put current matters on hold and give my full attention to your readthrough analyses whenever you are ready to post them.

[Ythill]

I see you have elaborated on your reasons for suspecting Mills. That answers my question, because I can now see, in full, why you suspected Mills.

Sorry I didn't earlier. I was just trying to keep it brief by pointing you to some examples.

How is this different from me being “too townie?”

"Too townie" is where I suspect you for seeming too pro-town. What I am saying here is that the possibility of you being scum is something that makes me uneasy due to the lack of tells.

No worries. I was really just being a smartass there. Hence the:

[Ythill]

Ythill, do you think Vollkan is likely scum?

No. It is a possibility and I have seen some suggestive tells, but most of those have been defended against satisfactorily. So it's not "likely." My current suspicions revolve mostly around Hypatia and thinktank (for spurg's behavior, not his own).

Re: vollkan/Hypatia debate... That's the second time Hyp has requested a defense from spurg when none is applicable. Scumtell? Buddy prompt? Bad habit? Hmmmmm...

@ Hypatia: Why didn't you ask Mills for any sort of defense or statement?

[Ythill]

Mod: can we get prods on killa seven, Jennar, and Mookeh. Also, would it be possible for you to add deadline information into your vote counts?

D2 began on the 11th, so it seems that our deadline is this Friday. Could people either vote or at least post suspicions so that we can work toward consensus. I'd rather not be the moivational speaker this time, but will if it comes down to it.

Vote: Hypatia

, who is my #1. I will post a case soon, but also want to see others get their votes out there.

[Ythill]

ythill why is hypathia your #1

As I've said, I will bring a proper case soon, but want other people to get their votes out. In the meanwhile, look to my past posts for suspicions against Hypatia. To reiterate: preemptively justifying claim fishing, no hunting on D1, her second spurg vote, her Mills vote, and one edge of the "double-edged" sword of her secret plan.

Recent answers to my questions have dulled the "town edge" of that sword. Also, I've seen new tells in her early D2 analysis, but I will reserve those until I bring my case. I think vollkan has pointed out some valid stuff too, but I'm not going to claim his reasons as my own.

Come on people, let's not tread water here. I've just replaced into two other games and so have had to do more than 30 pages worth of rereads in the last two days, yet I am still one of the most active here?

@vollkan: I appreciate your hunting but the clock is ticking. Please vote for

someone

.

[Ythill]

...and Hypatia tries to resharpen the dulled side of the sword. Sigh. Okay, okay. Unless it seems to be the town's direction, I'll not push hard for your lynch. Yet. But, really, daring me to bring a case isn't helping you at all here. Nor is the hint of an OMGUS attack. Instead, how about answering my question?

@ Hypatia: Why didn't you ask Mills for any sort of defense or statement?

Also, your conclusion on vollkan doesn't make him seem scummier to me, but it does help explain what I was saying about how scumtells dropped in defense are less reliable.

@ vollkan: a sound case against Jennar. I'd add that his slipping away midway through defending against me doesn't improve his reputation in my eyes. I wonder if he's strategic lurking again, LOL.

@ everyone: vote for somebody, damn it.

[Ythill]

Interesting... Jennar's answers to my questions are sufficient, but "shooting a warning shot across the bow a ship" still seems like an odd action from someone already under fire of is own. Jennar's answers to two of vollkan's questions (4 & 5) dodge the meat in a manner similar to what we saw earlier from him. He is a blatherer. I could see him doing this as town if it is habitual, but it otherwise suggests that he is a mafioso.

Just to see what happens...

unvote; vote Jennar

.

K7 is letting everyone else do the work for him. This could be laziness or scumminess.

Deadline in three days, everyone needs to vote! Join a bandwagon or start a new one, whatever. Just vote!

[Ythill]

Just to see what happens...

unvote; vote Jennar

.

And what happens is... (wait for it)... nothing. Where is everyone?

[Ythill]

We should start a site where people go to play Mafia.

Mod: Did Mookeh pick up his prod? Also, please prod klebian and thinktank. It's been more than 72 hours since they posted.

[Ythill]

I have a lot to say in response to this welcome flurry of activity, but first I want to state my thoughts as regards the deadline.

We have no time left for second guesses. I don't think anyone but k7 (and maybe vollkan) takes the klebian case seriously so I'm assuming we have two choices for today: Jennar or vollkan. I'm not ecstatic about either, especially because these are Hypatia's two favorites and I don't trust her, but we're in a corner now and I would like to avoid a no lynch.

We have five voting and two more hovering in the wings. Jennar and Mookeh are MIA and I don't think we can count on them to vote before deadline. With seven potentials and one of them vollkan, his lynch might be a tougher consensus to reach but not impossible. IMO, k7 should abandon the klebian case until tomorrow. He, klebian, and thinktank should vote their conscience against vollkan or Jennar.

IMO, Jennar is scummier than vollkan and the cases on Jennar are stronger. However, I will be checking in just before deadline and am willing to hammer vollkan to avoid no lynch.

[Ythill]

Responses

@ Hypatia:

I am unimpressed with your “case” against vollkan. The global playstyle arguments are worthless because he is playing meta-consistent. The “people you focus it on” argument is worthless because (other than the early spurg wagon, which was explicitly started by vollkan to generate discussion) his lightest touch has been against lurkers and he has already registered a dislike for lynching lurkers.

Is he unwilling to take on Ythill? Can he find nothing to nitpick? Generally they seem to have similar trains of thoughts, but Vollkan's a lot more subdued around Ythill than he is around others.

Vollkan has picked on me. Regarding the first spurg wagon, I was questioned with the others. He defended Mills’ against my attacks and has repeated the conclusion that my case against Mills was heavy-handed. He performed the earliest and most extensive of his second-round PBPA’s against me. The difference that I see in vollkan’s attacks against me is that he is satisfied with my answers and so withdraws from debate before we hit the nitpicking stage. Which makes sense because my answers are both transparent and honest.

He responds to Ythill's questions reasonably and doesn't counterattack.

I don’t see many counter-attacks from vollkan. Those statements which could be construed as such are registered against people he was already attacking (ie: vol attacks Krad, Krad counter-attacks vol, vol re-counter-attacks Krad). I don’t think his behavior in response to me is any different than his response to others’ attacks. What is true is that there hasn’t been extensive attacks from others until now.

He has a minor nitpick on Ythill's Mills case (274).

He argued more strongly in Mills’ defense than Mills did, and continues to repeat the conclusion he came to in #274. Calling this a “minor nitpick” is extremely slanted bombast and is misleading.

Why don't you jump on Ythill? You were very cool towards the Mills lynch at the beginning, why no attack about that?

Vollkan’s second PBPA on me amounts to an elaborate attack about the Mills lynch. I don’t understand how you have missed that. Vol asked me a bunch of tough questions that would have cornered and revealed someone clumsier or scummier than me.

@ Justin:

Your attacks against vollkan are more reasonable and revealing than Hypatia’s and I am not going to register defenses for him. What I abhor in your case is the way you package me with him. If you read carefully, you will find that much of the buddying/tag-team action is motivated by vollkan and, if he is scum, he is certainly a good enough player to choose a “town buddy” during the early game. Examples: vollkan’s explicit agreements with me, jumping in on my attacks against Jennar, jumping in to preempt my Mills case with one of his own, him adopting my “red questions” posting style, etc.

I have complemented vollkan’s game skills and have eventually come to a slightly town-leaning read on vollkan, but I have also been jabbing him since early D1, disbelieved his Krad case, and made an all out attack against him D2 to determine his alignment. Your “packaging” not only ignores this evidence of a scum-vol-buddying-to-town-Yth scenario, it also completely discredits the possibility that our apparent team play is the incidental result of our playstyles interacting.

Mills… the pages leading up to his lynch reminded me of an old-time tag-team wrestling match, with Mills tied up in the ropes.

This “wrestling match” comes in two parts. The first, where Mills is acting pretty damned scummy, is early in the game. Vollkan attacked everyone on the wagon, I attacked Mills whom I saw as the most suspect. Both of us continued separate, concurrent debates until we were individually ready to move on. There’s nothing tag-team about this.

The second part starts when I disagree with vollkan’s suggestions for lynch under a looming deadline. I post a lengthy analysis of lynch candidates and vote Mills. Vollkan then jumps in to attack Mills extensively before I can post my case. At the time, I was a little annoyed with him for bringing up old dirt and putting Mills on the defensive, but there was nothing I could do about it. In all honesty, I wouldn’t include vollkan as an “architect” of the Mills lynch. That honor was mine and I will take full responsibility for it. Vollkan was drawing up plans for a Krad lynch but got involved in my project anyway.

And here’s some WIFOM to consider. If vol and I are scumbuddies, why create waves to lynch Mills? I think a Krad lynch was within reach at the time, he was equally town and less active, meaning less information would be revealed by his alignment. Seems like the far better choice.

And the deadline was approaching, with little room for changing directions and still getting the votes needed to lynch. It rendered Ythill’s last minute nerves irrelevant to the point of seeming a bit contrived.

I only wanted to point out that you have included a vague and purely anti-Ythill detail in your vollkan case for no apparent reason. I do not fully understand this comment but do not need to at this time. I would like you to elaborate on this if/when you bring a case against me. For now, it looks like very weak circumstantial evidence of the alleged Yth-vol scum-team used, conspiracy-style, to further embroil vollkan.

But then Vollkan and Ythill, who ended day one proclaiming to not be very suspicious of each other, engage in an extensive, intricate and sometimes color coded correspondence between each other. It consumes time, breaks the threads (such as they were) which had come from other players’ pbpas, and at the end of this intense dual scrutiny our two stalwarts found themselves still not suspecting each other.

This is an absolutely ludicrous observation.

Both of us examined all of the players on the Mills wagon individually. The only reason our correspondence was more extensive is because we were looking at a higher content player than Hypatia or Jennar. The only reason it was more intricate is because we are both wordy and detail-oriented in our arguments, a fact that

you know

from other games with us. The only reason it was “sometimes color-coded” was because doing so was the most succinct way to make a point at the time, or would you have preferred that I tried to re-explain my observations with words?

Our debates only consumed the time it took people to read them and, in a few minor cases, respond. And we broke no threads of discussion. You are acting like this is an oral forum, where one topic gets the floor while others wait in the wings. Such is not the case: multiple threads of conversation can be pursued completely at the same time, and even if our WOWs distract the reader from simpler statements, posts can be viewed in isolation or copy-pasted to remove OT discussion.

I can’t speak for vol’s conclusions, but I can certainly defend mine. I spent most of D1 with a gut town read on him that I didn’t trust. N1 information lead me to question him further. I attacked vollkan with the explicit intention of solidifying a read on him. Many of my suspicions were addressed directly and sufficiently, leaving only a few points of contention. This is why I answered you that vollkan was not “likely” scum. But to say that I

still don’t suspect vollkan

is highly misleading. I have harbored minor suspicions of vollkan since the first wagon and some of those remain. There are players I see as less suspicious than vollkan but there are also those I see as more suspicious than him.

[Ythill]

Other Observations

(1) The NK choices made it clear to me that scum were setting up attacks against vollkan and/or myself. If vollkan is scum, then I was to be the target of choice. If I am scum, than vollkan was to be the target of choice. If we are both town, then scum would probably attack whomever was most heavily suspected by others. Vollkan was more heavily suspected by others than I was, and now he is being attacked under deadline pressure. I consider this to be the most damning tell so far against Hypatia and I am logging it as a tell against Justin as well, though my earlier read on DD is causing me to give Justin a little more leeway here.

(2) I don’t like the dichotomy posed regarding Jennar and vollkan. The alignment of one of them will not prove that of the other. As one example: vollkan and Jennar’s interactions could be a very convincing and well-played bussing strategy. As a second example: oh-so-suspicious Hypatia limiting lynch choices to the two of them could suggest that they are both town.

(3) I am not convinced that we have an SK. Due to both bodies being “shot” I find it more likely that we have a vig or a second scum group. That said, I believe that it would benefit an SK, a vig, and/or a second scum group to kill scum tonight. So here’s my advice to whomever is responsible for our second NK: kill the person you find scummiest from among our least active players. Personally, I think Mookeh and thinktank (spurg) are the most suspect from this demographic.

[Ythill]

Wow Justin, I've not seen you push this hard before. I don't agree that vollkan's stated intent could not match the post in question but I am still a little curious about his unwillingness to admit that the post gave the impression that I (and presumably you) got from it.

I can't believe you slipped in that "color coded" comment and, a couple hours later, are verbosely trying to restate what the color coding demonstarted. Lol.

[Ythill]

I'm unwilling to admit that it

ought to

give that impression..

(itallics mine)

All I asked you to explicitly admit was that it

could have

given that impression, but you were unwilling without inserting a disclaimer about the incidental post order being the sole cause of this. That's all I was pointing out.

This last minute shit is killing me. If D3 finds me alive, I'm not going to come out of the gate timid.

@ Justin: I'm not ignoring our discussion about the way you accused me above, I'm just dropping it until D3 since I'm not subject to a vote ATM, and it is beside the pith of these last minutes.

[Ythill]

Drat. It looks like we're over deadline.

Vote now if you're going to!!!

[Ythill]

All minor, really. As I've said, I'll hammer you (vollkan) if that will avoid no-lynch. As I see it now though, we will be lynching nobody today. This is the sort of town that might just deserve to get wiped out by the mob.

I hope everyone alive will vote first thing D3.

[Ythill]

hmm... this post makes me a little suspicious of ythill...

I don't know why. Of course I was willing to drop a last moment hammer because it was D2 and we're still gathering information. But did I vote vollkan pre-hammer or even read him as scum? No. I was on the Jennar wagon because I preferred it to a vollkan lynch. I think that was pretty clear.

You'd do better to accuse me of bussing Jennar. Personally, I am far more suspicious of those who weren't voting at all.

Anyway... I'm rereading now but will return sometime today with solidified views and a vote. I don't know about lurker wagons but I will be highly suspicious of anyone who doesn't get a vote out there very soon.

[Ythill]

Jennar’s #13

• Dead: Discredits Mills, non-stance on Krad, calls low-content Dean an obvious mafia kill.
  
• Living: Warms to Ythill though explicitly reads as MotR, vollkan is under higher scrutiny. Vollkan is in his top 3.
  
• Too Little Info: Mookeh is shading, Hypatia is slightly scummier shading, klebian will post more (saves him from the lurker category). Mookeh is in his top three.
  
• The Lurkers: spurg/DD/Bush are all scummy. DD is in his top 3.

I don’t think Jennar’s alignment reads can be trusted, as this is a gambit post, but the way he treats klebian is notable. Klebian is given immunity to inclusion in the lurker section because Jennar feels he will post more. This is a stretch and could either be scumbuddy coaching or, more likely, the accidental echoes of a N1 conversation.

Also notable is the set-up of a fake bussing move in the Krad entry quoted below, because it points to the level of manipulation Jennar was capable of.

The loss of the second cop hurts the town greatly and causes a second look over my posts and Volkan's to be mandatory.

Based on Jennar’s analysis and actions, I’d guess the N1 mafia kill was Krad.

Jennar’s Votes

• Mookeh/Rogueben randomly in #0. Explicitly confirms in #3.
  
• Spurg/thinktank as a defense in #7. Justified via attack in #11, morphs to claim fishing (see below). Defends vote as not based on alignment in #16 and #17.
  
• Mills as a defense (and at deadline) in #11. Justified via attack in #12. Justified heavily in #13 after Mills was revealed as town.

Note how the pattern vs. Mills follows the pattern vs. spurg: vote, justification via attack, heavy justification when vote seems suspect. This could suggest spurg as town but, by itself, is far from definitive. The Mookeh vote follows the same pattern though it was never questioned.

Jennar’s Other posts

For the most part, Jennar’s posts were check-ins, defense, and theory. He gives no definitive reads except in #13, he doesn’t even hint at a town read anywhere but in #13. He only sides with somebody once, arguing theory in support of Krad, and then only because he perceives the argument as effecting his position personally. I don’t believe much can be learned from this.

Jennar makes at least one casual attack against me, Krad, Dean, vollkan, Mookeh/Rogueben, Mills, DD/Justin, and spurg/thinktank. Outside of the gambit post he does not attack Autoclus/klebian, Bush/k7, or Hypatia. FTR: by “attack” I mean a phrase or series eluding to or explicitly mentioning someone’s alignment as scummy while naming that player.

In non-attack statements outside of #13, Jennar mentions (by name) everyone except Bush/k7. Atoclus/klebain and Hypatia only get one mention each when they are credited for “moderate content” in the midst of an anti-lurker sentiment.

Most telling are the light-content treatment of k7, klebian, and Hypatia. Jennar makes a point of mentioning each player in his #13 but gets a little sloppy in the ongoing record. Was he sharp enough to pre-plan his omissions? Regarding these three, k7’s D2 klebian vote is a very important clue because it was provided as a weakly touted alternative to lynching Jennar or Hypatia.

Where are Mills, Mookeh and Ythill on your list?

Jennar liked to work in threes. There’s the three lurkers and his top three in #13, there’s the three that weren’t attacked, and his three votes. He even slips in a statement about every three options having a likely scum. We need to be wary of his threes because they smell of a gambit.

That said, I know the alignments of Mills and myself. I wonder why Mookeh was included with us here, while Krad, spurg, and Bush were omitted.

Why do you think you would be NK'd? What makes you more a target then anyone else?

This attack from Jennar doubles as subtle claim-fishing. Though there is a WIFOM argument to be raised, I don’t think scum are likely to risk the tell by claim-fishing a scumbuddy. The only gain relies on Jennar getting busted and the risk to himself is substantial. Jennar's move here is a pretty convincing argument for spurg/thinktank towniness.

Conclusions

Weighing past evidence against current finds, I’m going to drop thinktank from my suspect list for now.

I believe that we will find at least one (and perhaps two) of our scum among k7, klebian, and Hypatia. Klebian, IMO, is the least likely of these and either he or k7 are scum, but not both. Based on past evidence, I’d still list Hypatia as #1.

Krad and vollkan were the mafia NKs. Dean and Jennar were the targets of our extra killer. Vollkan was set-up for mislynch by the Krad hit, but killed after it didn’t happen (and in defense of Jennar).

We are probably at 2:5 (1/1:5 if we have an SK). If the vig/SK doesn’t kill (so there’s no chance of killing town), we’ve got a non-critical lynch with which to test theories. I think we can hang scum today but there’s no pressure. If town, the extra killer should stay home tonight. We don’t want to risk our win by rushing it.

A case and vote are to follow...

[Ythill]

@ Hypatia:

You talked about claim-fishing early. When called out, you dismissed it as an inevitable side-effect of normal play. When called out again, you started talking about a secret plan. I’ve wanted to discuss that secret plan for awhile now, but I didn’t want to risk it failing in case you were town. Current evidence weighs even more heavily against your alignment and I am no longer willing to withhold suspicions.

I can’t imagine any town player posting as much as you have with so little curiosity and so few direct reads.

I can’t imagine any town player suggesting lurker lynches at this point, with dead scum to pick apart.

The events of D1-N2 demonstrate that Krad was used as a tool to set up vollkan. When Jennar became the D2 direction, you hit vollkan with a fury. The timing virtually forced a no-lynch. Then vollkan is slain in a WIFOMy roundabout of possibilities.

One reason for justifying claim-fishing is to set up a defense for such behavior, another is to set up a fake claim. You assuming that our extra killer is an SK helps both fishing and faking. It goads a vig if we have one, and it reads like a vig hiding technique if a fake claim is your gambit.

You have been not-so-subtly hinting at having a power role, which could be part of your fake claim strategy. This raises two questions: Would an actual power role hint so obviously? Would scum have failed to notice these hints (and the reactions to them) and NK you if you were town?

I would like a full disclosure of your plan and a claim. I hope that others will assist with their votes. Expect me to question your responses heavily. I hope that others, especially Justin, will do the same.

If by some miracle you are a power role and scum didn’t catch your hints, I apologize for outing you, but your play has been exceedingly suspect and I cannot ignore it any longer.

vote: Hypatia

[Ythill]

Please withhold counter-claims. I don’t think we need to out power to disprove this one.

Well, you'd better be sorry, because now I've lost many of the benefits and gained all of the drawbacks.

The righteous indignation is a nice touch. Why, for even a moment, would I believe your claim? I listed a bunch of scummy things you’ve done, basically said that I’ve finally seen so much that I’m willing to risk the small chance that you’re townie power. Then I accuse you of setting up a fake claim.

Your response is to ignore the case I’ve brought up and jump out of the closet with your claim. But why would a miller not scumhunt? Why would she push for lurker lynches when we have perfectly good information to go on? Why would she tread water for three weeks and then start an aggressive attack against a wordy townie two days before deadline?

Go back and read my obvious breadcrumbs.

I'm obviously a power role.

That’s my main problem with your “secret plan.” It’s not a secret. This is only my third game of mafia and even I knew what you were up to. Do you believe Jennar didn’t? You say that your “work in the open” will endanger town power because scum will kill them. Why didn’t they kill obvious Hypatia? Why risk taking out vollkan (an active player with singular suspicions on one of their own) when a power role is sitting out there for all to see?

I was somewhat suspicious of you when you lived through N1 but, after the outrageous obviousness on D2, finding you alive in the morning was both a shock and a revelation. I also found your D2 play suspicious because you started to lean your fake claim to miller after the cops were revealed.

Why have I been playing scummily? Because smart scum will keep me alive then as a smoke screen.

Yeah, I know this gig. Justin can attest to that. But it is equally important, when playing this way, to leave a trail of information by defending yourself well, just in case you are mislynched. You have not.

Also, tainting oneself is useless once things reach LYLO because it leaves us with the possibility of a “smokescreen” claiming to avoid the noose and, with a counter-claim, a very tense situation for town. Yet you said that your plan would help us through LYLO. Explain something to me, what good is a miller’s information to a town that doesn’t trust her? It’s good if her alignment is revealed, but that can’t happen without losing once we reach LYLO. So how, exactly, were you going to help town with your plan?

Also, you attribute your ongoing life to “smart scum” keeping you alive but how smart would someone have to be to not “know” you are a power role. Also, if our scum are smart and smart scum don’t kill suspicious townies, then why was vollkan killed. You assert that you are town and you were adamant about lynching him. By your reasoning, shouldn’t the same scum who let you live also let him live. Shouldn’t they have killed me instead, because so many people have read me mildly?

I think the real answer to your question is: Hypatia has been playing scumily because she’s scum. Also, I took to heart what vollkan said about policy-lynching people who claim scum:

if you allow statements which dismiss all scummy play as a non-tell, then you break the game in favor of scum

. I think that logic applies here.

So now I'm forced to work in the open.

Actually, no. Your work is done. We’ll never hear the results of tonight’s “investigation” because, if we don’t lynch you and you

are

town power, the mafia would kill you tonight. I think this is irrelevant speculation though, because I’m pretty sure we are going to lynch you and I know you’re scum.

Ythill, for what it's worth, does not have a gun.

This is excellent. See, when Hypatia-scum’s alignment is revealed, people will wonder if she was bussing me here. After all, why else would Hypatia-scum clear Ythill’s name as he was attacking her? It’s okay, because if we lynch scum today, we can afford to mislynch me tomorrow.

What entertains me the most about this is that you only know that I am town. You have no clue whether or not I have a gun. In fact, you’re probably wondering because, if I’m a vig, it makes perfect sense that I would have hit Dean and Jennar.

I thought [Ythill] would at least have figured out what I was doing.

I did. You were setting up a fake claim. It’s obvious from many angles, but especially from where I’m sitting now.

I was even unlucky enough to check him twice (I wanted to check vollkan last night, but I screwed up the reply button and said "Ythill" again…

Please explain this “reply button” error in detail. How was it that you had a reply window open with my name in it without it being in a block quote? If you sent an unedited block quote of your previous investigation, wouldn’t the mod have caught the error? If it was a button error, you should have noticed immediately when you hit it; why wouldn’t you simply PM the mod about the error? Even if you didn’t, wouldn’t Chaos Omega have questioned you when he got a repeat night action?

I think what happened here is you got spooked when you realized that we were going to ask for a second guess as to who the vig/SK isn’t. And you spouted a cover story with some pretty serious holes in it.

4) Earlier, you made it sound like the claim thing was a product of your mafia background (that you came from a site that used claims differently). Now you seem to be saying that you have some "plan" which specifically involves the claims. The two do not appear to be consonant with each other.

4. They are both true. I come from a site that does use claims differently. I do have a plan involving claims. I thought of this plan when I was comparing the difference in playstyle between this forum and my other forum.

Your response here didn’t explain how the two are consistent with each other. Please explain, in detail, how claims were different at your old site and how thinking about those differences lead to your “plan”. Also, please explain why you treat your play as obvious local miller strategy (in your last post) even though you claim to have come up with it, revelation style, while pondering the differences between this forum and another.

confirm vote: Hypatia

I really want to hear other peoples’ opinions about this claim and Hypatia in general. We have three weeks and no need to rush yet, but there’s also no need to dawdle. If you think someone is a better lynch than Hypatia, tell me why and vote for him.

[Ythill]

Where did I ever claim I was a miller? I am not a miller (that I know of), I am a gunsmith.

I was under the assumption that they were the same thing. Sorry if I am mistaken about my mafia terminology. FTR: I meant gunsmith/miller when I said miller.

Please, again, give me a little credit for being not entirely stupid... claiming gunsmith is INCREDIBLY STUPID because scum know that their buddies have guns, but don't know the identities of cops, vigilantes, etc. Therefore their claim is very easy to disprove.

Actually, I put the poison in both glasses. I built an immunity to Iocaine years ago.

Much harder to disprove if the false-claimant conveniently flubs one of two investigations and then gives a "no gun" read on her attacker. Besides, I don't believe the main point of fake-claiming is long term survival through "proving" the claim. Rather, the point is to draw out other power roles and survive long enough to sew some reverse psychology in the thread.

I don't think it's the mod's job to give second chances.

I agree, but I don't think the statement is relevant. Chaos said the deadline was non-retractable, but he gave us an extension for the holidays. He said we would have to prod lurkers four times before he replaced them but then he put his foot down with that one-week ultimatum on D2. Chaos Omega has shown that he is willing to adjudicate on the fly for out-of-the-ordinary circumstances. I believe that a repeated investigation PM is an obvious enough error that Chaos would have noticed it as such. And, though it’s not his job, I have trouble believing he wouldn’t have double-checked, at least to make sure it wasn’t an error on his end or a problem in the system.

Besides, I still fail to understand how you committed this error, especially without noticing. I stand by my theory that this is a cover story you should have spent more time thinking about.

More notable than your responses, however, are the things you haven’t responded to.

[Ythill]

@ everyone except Hypatia:
Post. Vote. Now. Please? Thanks.

[Ythill]

Lurker lynches: The three major posters were Ythill, myself, and vollkan. Vollkan is dead, I know I'm town and Ythill doesn't have a gun, therefore the remaining scum must be in the lurkers.

Personally, I do not consider Justin or klebian to be lurkers. Nor do I consider a content-based lynch of a light-content player to be a lurker lynch. As our definitions seem different here, this point of disagreement might be a function of our different vocabularies.

@ Hypatia: Your #478 sounds a little more town IMO. I still cannot ignore the combination of your looming-claim's obviousness and the fact that you were not NKed. Can you explain this?

@ Everyone else: Please chime in and answer the following two questions. (1) Did you think Hypatia was hinting at a power role? (2) Is there a logical reason why scum would have left her alive if they thought she was a gunsmith?

Also, a reread has demonstrated one point of my case against Hypatia to be wrong. Her gunsmith-specific breadcrumbs start before it was revealed that we had two cops. This was an honest mistake on my part, which is why I'm correcting it here.

[Ythill]

I still think that you are the best lynch for today but we might as well gab about other topics since we have plenty of time.

K7 is the best lurker lynch IMO. This because of his vote for klebian near the end of D2, because of the way Jennar ignored him even while heavily attacking lurkers, and because Bush's D1 phone-speak seemed like a ruse.

Thinktank is probably town.

Rogueben should be given the opportunity to catch up and post before we put him in the spotlight. Mookeh was nowhere near the worst of our lurkers. Though there were good points questioning his alignment, none of them were damning enough to railroad a replacement out of the gate.

Who do you think is the best lurker lynch and why? Who do you think is scum from among Justin and klebian and why?

[Ythill]

@ kleb: That's an awful lot of agreement but I like the original points you do make. How about throwing a vote out there? Doesn't have to be on Hypatia but please vote for someone who you find scummy.

I'd like to have options when we reach deadline. As many of us who are active should vote early, thus preparing those options.

[Ythill]

...that post sounds like you could be scum asking for a vote because we are at lylo...

We are not @ LYLO. It is only possible if there are two scum groups which I doubt. Though I suppose with two NKs we have to keep this in mind. Note, however, that if I am scum, I have no extra knowledge of a second scum group.

...and you know i find [Hypatia] scummy.

If Hypatia is not scum, then she is telling the truth about me not having a gun. It is nearly impossible for me to be a mafioso trying to mislynch Hypatia.

The real reason I am goading people to vote (and have been since D2) is that we hit no-lynch yesterday due to town not voting, even in the final hour. Why didn't you vote on D2? Why aren't you voting this far into D3? How can we be sure you'll post a vote later when you've already demonstrated that you don't care if we lynch someone or not?

[Ythill]

Mod: It's been 72 hours. Please prod killa seven, Rogueben, and thinktank.

@ ben: I understand that you are probably still reading but since it takes four prods (@ 72 hours each) to replace and our auto-deadline is 3 weeks, I'm asking for prods whenever appropriate.

@ k7 & thinktank: Why didn't you vote to lynch someone yesterday? Specifically, what were your reasons for not voting vollkan or Jennar?

[Ythill]

i saw post saying i was the best lurker lynch... ive posted more times then a few other people im sure.

When I called you the best lurker lynch I wasn't talking about your post count. I was saying that among the three low-content players, your actions seem the most suspect ATM. Specific actions are listed a few posts back.

I asked everyone what they thought of Hypatia's claim and would appreciate your answer.

[Ythill]

I agree with Justin that Hyp’s plan was bad. I think that long-range plans are not well matched with a scummy-to-stay-alive stance and that the combination of breadcrumbing and purposeful scumtells makes one too likely a kill from both sides. However, I do not see this as such a glaring error that it is unlikely to be a natural one.

Though I distrust tells dropped in defense, one of the things I find suspicious about Hypatia is the wide variety spanned by her excuses.

The most glaring tell against Hypatia at this point is her story about an accidental repetition of her night action PM. I thought it an odd error and asked her about it.

I opened my previous Night One message and typed vollkan's name in place of Ythill and sent it off to Chaos Omega.

Concerning your mistake: guess what? it is NOT POSSIBLE to open a sent PM and quote it or anything.

I checked on klebian’s statement and it is true. There is no way to open a previously sent message and re-send it. There is neither an edit button nor a quote button. Hypatia’s story about why she only has one result simply cannot be true.

@ Hypatia: You have obviously lied. Explain why and deliver the result of your second investigation if you have one.

It has also occurred to me that a false-gunsmith gambit can seriously narrow the mafia’s field for finding that non-aligned gun. Explicitly, I have neither confirmed nor denied whether I have a gun and I don’t plan on it.

[Ythill]

@ Justin: You're attacks are coming harder and faster here than when I've previously seen from you and it makes me wonder. What hasn't changed is your role as the follow-up attacker. Both vollkan and Hypatia were under heavy scrutiny from others when you went for the throat.

I don't know that this equates to you being scum, but it's worth a mention.

I am perplexed by your accusations of D1 claimfishing from Hypatia. She justified claimfishing heavily, yes. She said we should prepare for a claim at deadline, yes. But that's pretty much the end of it. Can you quote her D1 scumhunting?

[Ythill]

@ Justin: The first quote you give is just Hypatia asking spurg to post because his wagon is growing quickly. The next four are what I called her justification of claim fishing; they do not seek claims but explain why it is okay to later seek claims. The next two are where she says we should prepare for a claim at deadline, leaving time to properly consider a claim if it were to come. In the last two quotes, she is defending herself from attacks stemming from her justification of role fishing.

You still have not quoted actual D1 claim-fishing from Hyp and, though I can understand confusing what you did quote with fishing, I have trouble seeing how you would honestly perceive it as "almost comically over-the-top role fishing."

I bring this up because it is an important distinction in your case where you said "Worse, it doesn’t give any more reason for Hypatia’s ravening hunger for claims on day one. Her plan clearly calls for demanding claims only after she has managed to find something in her night investigations." This would be true if Hyp had been fishing, but she wasn't.

Justification and consideration of fishing fit with her story. They also fit with scum preparing for a false claim.

My concern is not that you are scum making a false case but rather that you are mistaken. We are in a precarious position here: examining a very scummy player who has claimed a power role. It is extremely important to check our perceptions for inconsistancies.

I want to further address the Hypatia situation but I'll put it in a separate post for clarity.

Votecount up to Post 500

Hypatia (2) - Ythill, Justin Playfair

Not Voting (5) - Hypatia, killa seven, klebian, Mookeh, thinktank

4 to lynch.

[Ythill]

Hypatia as Scum

She starts the game with a plan to claim gunsmith (or gun-toting vig) and breadcrumbs heavily. This begins before she could possibly have realized that we have two cops and a gun-toting second killer. She is sloppy scum because she commits classic tells regularly.

On N1, Hyp-scum and her partners kill Krad because they know that vollkan will be tough to mislynch and they want to discredit him. She and Jennar test the waters by reading vollkan as scummy early on D2. There is some town support for this. Meanwhile, my “lack of a gun” is breadcrumbed to set up the less obvious benefits of her future claim.

At the end of D2, when Jennar seems to be the only real lynch direction, Hypatia-scum initiates the attack on vollkan. When it doesn’t end in his lynch, she and her partners decide that leaving vollkan alive is more dangerous than punctuating his suspicions with his death and he becomes the NK. This suggests that klebian is the third mafioso.

Hypatia-scum knows she will be under heavy fire D3 and is not surprised when the attack comes. Her claim plan is put into action. I am named as lacking a gun because the identities of the secondary NKs suggest that I am a vig. If, in response to her “investigation,” I claim vig to discredit her, the mafia bags their most important target N3. Conversely, if I claim vanilla, a N3 kill on me credits living Hypatia-scum as having made an honest claim.

On one hand, it seems better for Hypatia-scum to post two “investigations” because it gives her two guesses with which to find the vig and it doesn’t require her coming up with a cover story for not having the second result. On the other hand, guessing once makes it less likely that she will sacrifice her life without finding the vig/SK.

We could lynch Hyp-scum today to clear a lot of this up, or we could keep examining others. Hypatia-scum will be even more suspicious if alive on D4 and, if we nab the other scum today, we could net even more evidence against her. If Hypatia-scum is left alive today, she will try to “confirm” her power role D4 with another “investigation.” This puts her in a dangerous gray area that could provide us with crucial information for the endgame.

Hypatia as the Gunsmith

She starts the game with a gunsmith plan full of holes but this possibility explains the coincidence of her early breadcrumbs coinciding with our gunsmith-friendly setup. Her D1 classic tells are dropped purposefully to keep her out of scum sights which I think is bad play here, but not unbelievable as a tactical error.

The most unbelievable error is the one she claims to have made while sending in her second night action and this is, by far, the biggest hole in her story. However, there is a reason for Hypatia-smith to lie here. She’s told us that certain power-roles will be protected and that she is not planning on announcing a “yes” result prematurely. Could it be that Hyp-smith has found a gun and is stubbornly sticking to her plan?

Anyway... Hypatia-smith’s claim and investigation result puts the scum in an interesting position. They know that she is town, and therefore know that she is telling the truth. They know that she is a power role, that I am without a gun, and that our secondary killer is among the three players who are neither scum, Hyp, nor myself.

If scum kill Hyp tonight, they confirm me as town. If they kill me tonight, they lend credence to her story and give her time for another investigation. If they kill us on consecutive nights, they leave the secondary killer alive into endgame. If they kill from the remaining three in order to find that secondary killer, they leave a gunsmith and/or confirmed townie alive into endgame.

Conclusion

Correctly lynching Hypatia-scum gives us the advantage of killing mafia, which is huge, but not lynching Hypatia-scum does not remove this as a possibility for D4 and beyond. Furthermore, it gives her more rope with which to hang her buddy.

Mislynching Hypatia-smith would be understandable considering her play, but it relieves a huge amount of pressure on the real scum. Not mislynching Hypatia-smith hardly costs the town anything. If we don’t lynch her, and she’s town, and scum don’t kill her, and we don’t lynch scum today, D4 could find us facing this same decision @ LYLO but that’s a lot of ifs.

Finally, I think we’ve spent enough time on this topic. The case against Hyp is convincing and I am considering her one of our options for lynch at the end of D3 but I feel strongly that we need at least one more option.

Therefore I will

unvote; vote killa seven

for reasons already stated. I am willing to reiterate/elaborate the case against him if asked to do so. Moreover, I still want others (including Hypatia) to get their votes out. Townies withholding their votes are helping scum to hide.

[Ythill]

495: ythill has spotted the weirdness in the night choice PM explanation

To be fair, klebian spotted this first, but it was hidden in a lengthy post. I was repeating because Hypatia appeared to miss it.

501: I disagree with you on whether she would claim one or two results if she were scum.

Theory point and not very important, will explain if it becomes a deciding factor for anything.

I'd like Ythill to reiterate his case on K7.

The case against k7 can be broken down into five points. It's not extensive. Enough for a first vote, maybe not enough to lynch. He's my suggestion for a second candidate but I'm not intent on hanging him. Anyway...

1) Phone Speak: Bush used shortened "phone speak" while supposedly checking access over a phone. Cell phone typing is intuitive, meaning that it is often easier to enter "tonight" than to enter "2nite" so laziness or efficiency shouldn't have motivated the abbreviation. The posts were short enough that phone memory could not have been a factor. I can think of two other reasons for the use of phone speak: habit and as a gambit to justify shading. While habit is a possibility, I would assume that someone with such habits would abbreviate similarly at a computer keyboard, Bush did not.

2) Jennar's Avoidance: Bush/k7 is the only role that Jennar never speaks to or about, even neutrally.

3) The Klebian Vote: Vollkan-I posted two quick PBPAs on klebian and Jennar, finding them both scummy and voting Jennar. K7 voted klebian shortly thereafter with no other reason than to agree with vollkan-I. This seems like scum trying to distract vollkan-I from Jennar to klebian.

4) Not Voting D2: Shortly before deadline, k7 came in and removed his lone vote on klebian but did not post it elsewhere. His choices, at the time, were a mafioso and a townie being read as such by an active scumhunter. He has to choose between endangering his reputation or bussing, so he doesn't vote.

5) Shading: low content from both players.

[Ythill]

Sorry to have been absent. The family is out of town, and I have been drunk.

His day one argument against Mills was weak in of itself, the argument that continued was also weak, slightly scummy.

Which argument? The opening one was admittedly weak. The “mills-list” one was noted as too heavy handed, a perception I agreed could be the case. I think the others were solid but am willing to entertain/address your specific points.

The argument for Vollkan/Ythill scumpair was a stretch but could have been possible.

Um, except that vollkanI was town. What are you getting at with this statement?

I could see Ythill buddying to Vollkan, there are many times when he complements Vollkan's playstyle and also the big debate on day two could be seen as buddying at the end.

I will agree that the “big debate”

could have been

buddying on my part, though I believe vollkanI was being set up for attack by scum, not buddying. Complimenting someone’s playstyle is a neutral comment. Do you find it ironic that you point to this as a sign of buddying immediately after complimenting my playstyle?

@Ythill. Who do you see as more likely to be scum – Hypatia or Justin?

Hypatia. Though her claim makes me believe that we should put off her lynching for one more day, just to see what happens. I do not have a town read on Justin, am suspicious of his deadline attacks on vollkanI, and wouldn’t be opposed to hanging him. The main reason I haven’t attacked him extensively is that I had a town read on DD, but that's not a very good reason.

Just to see what happens:

unvote; vote Justin Playfair

.

[Ythill]

What is interesting now is that he gives his top 3 as "Mookeh, Volkan and Deaths Door". Now, it's very common for scum to place a buddy in their top 2-3 suspicions. We KNOW that Vollkan-I was pro-town, which leaves Mookeh (Rogueben) and DD (Justin). The anomalous and unexplained singling out of DD among the lurkers is very interesting in this regard.

I agree with this speculation regarding Justin.

I'm VERY surprised that Justin would not even take the time to evaluate the arguments I had made against Jennar.

Another good point. I wonder at this dual (Rougeben and vollkanII) attack against Justin though. Especially because of the fact that Mookeh was also listed in the top three (see above point). By the logic therein, Rogueben + vollkanII could very well be the remaining scum, though I’ve already said why I think spurg/thinktank/vollkanII is likely town.

killa seven (Mr. President)

{Pres}
Nothin'
{k7}
Nothin'
~~~~~~~~~
Unreadable

I stand by the belief that absolute failure of known-scum to mention/address a role, especially over replacements, is evidence of scumminess.

klebian (Autolycus)

13: Doesn't like the Mills vote by jennar and wonders how jennar will use the information he seemed so desirous of. Doesn't actually call Jennar scummy.
14: Asks why Jennar singled out DD
~~~~~~~~~~
Unreadable

I disagree with your conclusion here. It is my belief that scumbuddies will usually distance, ignore, or support. One buddy raising good questions to another is counterproductive except in its WIFOM value of being seen as such. Even then, the trade heavily taxes scum. I think what you’ve pointed out about klebian must lend

some

credibility to him being town.

Rogueben (Mookeh)

{Mookeh}
13: Thinks something is very much amiss with Jennar's play here, but also says that in a previous game a scummy jennar was FBI. Promises to post more, never does.
~~~~~~~~~~~
Unreadable

Are you kidding? Being a singular statement, this isn’t damning, but it is definitely a scumtell against the role. In fact, it’s probably the strongest one Mookeh dropped.

Ythill

Other than that, it doesn't give me a firm read either way.

Let me help you out. I’m town.

[Ythill]

@ vollkan: Good to have you back, if only because you post around the same time as I do and are quick to reply to me.

Regarding K7: I misunderstood your read as being inclusive rather than one-way (k7-->Jennar). Now that I understand, I retract my statement.

Regarding Kleb: I was not suggesting that the evidence should "rule him out as scum" but only that, IMO, it points in the direction of town. Specifically the second point but the first as well, to a lesser extent. I just don't see one scum calling out another without turning it into distancing, but I don't see our difference in opinions here as being indicative of your alignment.

Regarding Mookeh: The fact that it is a meta observation leading to a non-read on known-scum makes it even a stronger tell for me. It is true that I might have noted the same meta in your hypothetical situation, but this only proves that the tell is not definitive rather than disproving it altogether. And, if I

had

done that, I would be rightly attacked for it. Again, not damning, but not "unreadable" IMO either.

Regarding our level of disagreement: I don't know that it has to do with the definition/use of "unreadable" as much as with my perception of a change in your play from vollkanI to vollkanII. You seem less willing to commit in this incarnation and I am trying to determine whether I think it indicates your alignment or not.

Reagrding Hypa's claim and her "investigation" of me: see my #501.* I am very interested to see how this plays out.

Anyway... Hypatia-smith’s claim and investigation result puts the scum in an interesting position. They know that she is town, and therefore know that she is telling the truth. They know that she is a power role, that I am without a gun, and that our secondary killer is among the three players who are neither scum, Hyp, nor myself.

If scum kill Hyp tonight, they confirm me as town. If they kill me tonight, they lend credence to her story and give her time for another investigation. If they kill us on consecutive nights, they leave the secondary killer alive into endgame. If they kill from the remaining three in order to find that secondary killer, they leave a gunsmith and/or confirmed townie alive into endgame.

[Ythill]

"Less willing to commit"?
...I acknowledge I have been keeping a very open mind in relation to the Jennar analysis I did.

That's what I meant. Your explanation is being considered in my deliberations which, for the moment, have not yet reached conclusion.

@ everyone: Deadline is in less than four days. Time to get a real consensus going.

I am unwilling to lynch klebian or vollkanII. I'd be willing to hang Rogueben in place of a no-lynch but otherwise don't support it. I'd support a lynch on anyone else.

My suggestion is that we bring Justin's wagon to L-1 soon if we are going to do it at all today. We still have a second killer unclaimed and will need time to deliberate should such a claim come.

Justin, I'd like some defenses. Specifically, to the allegations that scum were setting vollkanI up for attack and that your deadline attack on him was the continuation of that plan, though there are some other things...

[Ythill]

I've considered this and there's no way he can claim a vigilante, so I don't know what would happen to out the second killer

Are you speaking of a timing issue with DD's disappearance and a NK? I hadn't considered this point and it is a good one. However, because of what happened with Mills, I'm a little hesitant to make preemptive assumptions about claims.

@ vollkan: Would I be correct in assuming that your FoS on Justin would have been a vote if he was not at L-1?

Complimenting someone’s playstyle is a neutral comment. Do you find it ironic that you point to this as a sign of buddying immediately after complimenting my playstyle?

Not particularly. In this case I was talking about you having played a very good game, whether it be for scum or town. I don't see this as "buddying" because I explicitly stated that even though you were playing a good game, there was reason to be suspicious of you as well. The buddying comments I was talking about were "I like your playstyle" "I hope you're town" (not exact quotes).

I agree that your paraphrase catches what I meant, but I still fail to see how this is different from what you said. Specifically of the statements in question, "I hope you're town," indicates room for suspicion. Or...

"I like your playstyle" + "I hope you're town" = "talking about you having played a very good game, whether it be for scum or town"

Furthermore, my actual suspicions of vollkanI, though posted separately throughout D1 and D2 further demonstrate that I had room for suspicion of vollkanI.

Votecount up to Post 525

Justin Playfair (3) - Rogueben, Ythill, Hypatia
Hypatia (1) - Justin Playfair

Not Voting (3) - killa seven, klebian, vollkan II

4 to lynch.

[Ythill]

Okay, thanks for answering my questions everyone.

It seems we have a lynch candidate with a hammer waiting in the wings. I find it telling that Justin hasn't posted, especially since he's made some pretty in-depth posts in Mini #539 during his absence here.

Vollkan, I hope you will forgive my lack of trust...

unvote

. Go ahead and place your vote, I'll drop the hammer just before deadline.

I'd like to have a second candidate in case something goes awry at the last moment, but I don't know if that's a realistic request with klebian and k7 still not voting. Though evidence points to klebian being town and, as I said, I'm not going to vote for him today, I'm finding his continual lack of voting more and more suspicious as the days go by. Expect me to look at him more closely tomorrow.

Also, a reminder to our secondary killer: you should probably stay home tonight unless we lynch correctly. Reason: a mislynch plus a secondary kill of town will most likely put us at LYLO tomorrow.

[Ythill]

Ythill, I would be thankful if you could grant me the grace of a final post before I die.

Absolutely, with the one exception being that I will cut you off as much as thirty minutes before deadline.

Which brings up an interesting point.

I have made a happy accident. Deadline is not actually tomorrow, but a week from tomorrow.

I say “

happy

accident” because, though it was truly an error on my part, I like what’s developed since I posted it.

I am a bit surprised that there hasn’t been a harder look from anyone as to whom VollkanI might have seemed most threatening on day one and two...

There’s no need to look closely. Voll-I’s PBPAs followed his attacks and most of the people he had it in for are dead. I think the one exception is Rogueben (Mookeh) and suspicion from vol-I in this area was mild.

Okay, Vote: Justin. However I've considered this and there's no way he can claim a vigilante, so I don't know what would happen to out the second killer (whether that person is vig or SK).

Not sure precisely why I couldn’t. I won’t because I’m not.

Careful. If Hypatia is scum you’ve made her job easier. If she is not, you’ve taken N3 pressure off of the scum. This all, of course, assumes you are town.

But to reiterate why you couldn’t claim vig: (1) DD was either lurking or absent at the end of D1 (absent if we assume vig) yet there was a N1 kill and (2) Vig-Justin would have killed vollkanI, not Jennar.

Anyway… not much to say about the above posts because I believe that Justin's defenses (as well as the accusations against which they were raised) miss the point of what is suggesting his alignment as unfavorable to town. I agree that his attacks on Voll-I and Hypatia seemed to rely on weak points of evidence, but I can also say that reaching attacks are meta-consistent from him. I believe Justin convinces himself of something and then goes too far, making mountains out of molehills, in order to convince others. I am not certain, but doubt that this indicates his alignment.

In order to facilitate Justin’s defense, I will condense my own case in my next post.

[Ythill]

I'm not so good at condensing sometimes. Sorry...

But at the most generous this extensive and decorative exchange resulted in an inconclusive waste of precious time, and at worst it could be seen as keeping the town occupied until, with deadline looming, Ythill and Vollkan could debate their way to the same lynch again...

Our debates only consumed the time it took people to read them and, in a few minor cases, respond. And we broke no threads of discussion. You are acting like this is an oral forum, where one topic gets the floor while others wait in the wings.

This statement of your bothers me, because I know you know better... One of the hardest lessons for me playing this game has been accepting the general dislike for long posts, the danger it poses of stunting general discussion and the sheer intimidation factor a long (and especially long, complex) poster exerts on other players. Square that by the two of you making extremely long posts which end up clearing each other.

The above demonstrates several important facts: (1) Justin believes that long debates waste time, especially if they are complex. (2) Justin is aware of his own wordiness. (3) Justin is aware of vollkan’s wordiness. (4) Justin is aware of the deadline.

When #433 was posted, there was one vote on voll-I. Hypatia had placed it and raised a weak case (#430) which had been refuted (#431). I had already explicitly told Justin that I lacked conviction about voll-I as scum (#404 & #440) and obviously voll wasn’t going to vote himself. There were two votes on Jennar. Both myself (#420) and voll-I (#412) had accompanied those votes with cases; Jennar had disappeared during his attempt at defense. Hypatia had demonstrated willingness to wagon-hop for a deadline lynch (#295). We were a day away from deadline.

Yet, in #433 Justin makes an elaborate attack against voll-I. This leads to a debate that is both long and complex. By Justin’s reasoning, it wastes the remainder of the day and further deters our low-content posters from getting involved. It is clear that Justin understood the ramifications of this. Could he have supposed twenty-four hours was enough time to build and bring to lynch a wagon against voll-I? I believe it unlikely. Who did he hope to convince?

We know who he kept from the gallows. Nor was this protection of Jennar limited to smoke-screening. Justin posted #453 less than an hour before deadline but was still unwilling to move his vote.

This intrigued me simply because I couldn’t imagine rational Justin, as town, preferring a no-lynch over a possible Jennar-mislynch. However, this topic has been brought to new light recently by the following quote which clearly and succinctly states a valid case Justin claimed to have had against Jennar at the time.

As for Jennar, I was rather suspicious of him. Specifically, Jennar attacking VollkanI for posting his list in parts (this as a scum tell would make me scum in almost every game I’ve played in), which I thought was just a terrible deflecting move.

Also, the identity of Justin’s D2 targets is telling. His smokescreen focuses on voll-I but attempts to package me as a scum buddy. Is it coincidence that we were (in that order of importance) the drivers of Jennar’s wagon?

More recently, Justin’s D3 actions have been limited to defense of himself and a narrow-minded attack against the claimed gunsmith, which was initiated on the heels of my own inquisition and came close to matching its intensity. Strange, because my suspicions had built naturally over time, came prior to Hyp’s claim, and expected a fake claim. His started D3 (he was in a bloc with her D2) and were exclusively stated after her claim, which he never suggests he expected.

Interesting here is that the timing and nature of the attack could be scum pushing to quickly hang the power role or it could just as easily be necessary distancing from a buddy caught in a gambit gone sour. Honest suspicion from a townie is possible, but is made less believable by (1) the fact that his attack came after her claim and (2) the fact that he was comfortable with her on the voll-I wagon.

[Ythill]

Mid-day check in. Probably will not be on again until tomorrow.

[Ythill]

when is the deadline?

Tuesday, February 26th @ 10:22 am (GMT-7). We have five days, lets not waste them.

@ k7: What do you think of a Justin lynch? Do you believe Hypatia's claim? What's your opinion of klebian? What's your read on vollkan II?

[Ythill]

I have become the deadline nag and the prod police. Lol.

Mod: It's been 72 hours. Could we get a prod on Hypatia, Justin, and Rogueben please?

@ Justin: Your defenses vs. others are appreciated but I'd like to see you address my case.

@ Hypatia & Rogueben: Just a policy prod request, nothing specific for you but I'd love to read more about your current views.

[Ythill]

There is a certain irony in having a long, complex argument close to deadline; about having a long, complex argument close to deadline; about having a long, complex argument close to deadline. Sigh.

First, about my knowing that by voting and making a case against VollkanI I was creating a probable no-lynch. I actually thought it would cause a VollkanI lynch.

Again, who did you hope to convince?

Did I prefer a no-lynch to a lynch of Jennar? Yes, because of what I perceived as the tag-team destruction you and VollkanI had engineered of Mills on day one.

Weren’t you the one who coached me about not taking all the responsibility for the hunt onto my own shoulders? You have admitted that you had suspicions of Jennar at the time. His lynch would also have provided information about the validity of your vol-I + Ythill suspicions. I simply cannot imagine Justin-town preferring a no-lynch to a questionable one on D2, yet you admit that this was your preference. I think I might have you cornered on this one.

Regarding my knowing that long posts would eat up the thread. I sure knew it was a risk, but I thought it was important enough to push VollkanI that I did it.

Thought it was a risk? You've already claimed that similar behavior during the second week of D2 was likely

designed

to distract people, “keeping the town occupied until, with deadline looming, Ythill and Vollkan could debate their way to the same lynch again…” Yet your entire barrage included vollkan, occurred

within the last 24 hours

of D2, and

might have been

an acceptable risk?

Besides, what do you mean by a risk? A risk of what? You’ve already admitted you’d have preferred a no-lynch to a Jennar-lynch. Or are you getting tangled here?

As for not posting on others, I came in close to deadline and didn’t have time to do the kind of post-stripping I usually do before making cases, but I use that only as a reason why I didn’t post more on others...

This only explains your narrow suspicions during D2. The allegation also covered D3, of which an isolated Justin read is pretty telling.

Finally good of you to only include two possible interpretations of my suspicions of Hypatia.

Are you purposely misrepresenting me? Let’s count to three together: (1) scum pushing the power role to lynch (2) scum distancing from a buddy (3) honest townie suspicion. I mentioned all three, I just said that IMO, the last was the least likely. Nor did I mean to preclude other options, I just didn’t feel they were likely enough to mention.

If you lynch an innocent today and scum kill someone tonight, it really doesn’t matter whether the second killer kills or not. You’ll be down to five...

Right, but if the lone killer hits an innocent as well? We don’t get to vote tomorrow. And if town hits scum today, then the second killer has the power to put us at LYLO by tomorrow. There isn’t enough information in this thread to risk it at this point. A pro-town killer should stay home tonight.

If Hypatia dies tonight you do no worse than you would if she was lynched today.

I know its cheap, but I can’t resist pointing out that you keep “assuming” Hypatia is town. But the real meat in this quote is that, in assuming Hypatia as town, it lets us know how you really feel about a mislynch. To paraphrase: if a townie who is not lynched is killed by mafia, it is the same loss. Yet doesn’t a mislynch cost us the lynch, a cost that you admittedly levied against the town D2? Wouldn’t we be able to lynch you in her place, for instance, and leave your buddy to take care of her?

But if she’s alive tomorrow, are you really going to lynch a claimed power role in that situation?

Statistically speaking, it doesn’t matter when a mislynch occurs, only that it does or does not occur. Tomorrow we will have more information.

What if she’s alive tomorrow and claims she’s found a gun on someone (or clears someone, for that matter)?

I’d rather wait to discuss this until if/when it comes up because I’d rather not tip off scum, but I believe the answer to this puzzle is easier than you’re making it out to be.

What value does she have to the town as a power role when the first and probably only test of her reliability would ultimately be the same decision you would make today, whether or not you trusted her claim?

The most obvious value is the pressure she puts on scum, I’ve already explained how. I wonder how it compares to the pressure apparent in your attacks.

There is no logic at all in me attacking Hypatia after her claim if I’m scum. If anything she would be of more value alive.

You got it here folks: Justin, as scum, would prefer to have a town aligned gunsmith alive. Please briefly explain what your strategy as scum would be in this specific case.

Votecount up to Post 550

Justin Playfair (2) - Rogueben, Hypatia
Hypatia (1) - Justin Playfair

Not Voting (4) - killa seven, klebian, vollkan II, Ythill

4 to lynch.

[Ythill]

@ Rogueben: QFT on all counts.

@ Everyone: Do you think we have enough time for a quick "vote for someone or die" wagon on klebian?

vote: klebian

Seriously dude, OMGUS me if you gotta... but vote for

somebody

.

[Ythill]

LOL. I crossposted with vollkan

and

Rogueben. Wouldn't want to be in Justin's shoes.

@ Justin: Please don't pull a Mills if you are town. Continue to defend yourself. This game is hanging in the balance.

[Ythill]

I know you don't actually care about this other than I am still not voting. But I guarantee that tonight, if I don't make my own post, I will be making a vote at least.

Thanks for understanding. The crux of my problem with your play is that you seem too timid. What do you have to hide?

When you have contributed information, it's been useful and insightful, but the lack of a vote to back it up, especially considering yesterday's no-lynch, looks

really

scummy.

I have confidence Justin will not be pulling a Mills even if he is town.

Me too, but the game of mafia has a way of finding me wrong when I am confident about things. No offense, Justin.

Current Views

• Hypatia: She's been acting a lot less scummy since her claim, which lends credence to her statements about dropping scumtells on purpose. I'm still willing to hang her if it comes down to it but I believe that she is not the proper play for today.
  
• Justin: Scum. He's dropped a bunch of defensive tells, the sort that I don't swear by, but enough of them to paint a pretty clear picture. His play isn't meta-consistant here, and his self-motivated actions have been very suspect. I think Justin is our best lynch, though I wonder about the ravenousness of the attacks against him. Be warned that, if we lynch him and he comes up town, I will be hounding my wagon-mates.
  
• k7: Scum. I really don't like how he changed his mind about klebian. I'd like to hear how this change came about. Again, either k7 is scum or klebian is, but not both, though it is
  possible
  that both could be town. I like this lynch second behind Justin's, if only because it has a decent chance of stringing up scum
  and
  solidifying a read on klebian.
  
• klebian: MotR. I've quickly gone from a town read on him to not being so sure. He hasn't voted in over a month, including during the no-lynch. Yet he manages to explain why he isn't voting every time I bring it up. We'll see what happens tonight.
  
• vol-II: MotR. There is a difference between the play of vol-I and vol-II, and this from someone who prides himself on being meta-consistant. It could be the difference between early and mid game though. The one consistancy I do see is him playing both sides of a wagon, but that is something I found scummy in vol-I, so it doesn't make me see him as more town.
  
• Rogueben: Town. If he's scum, he's done a good job of covering it up lately. I'm starting to get a pretty solid favorable read on him.

Considering the above, I am currently willing to lynch Justin, k7, Hyaptia, or klebian (in that order). I am withdrawing my willingness to lynch Rogueben and standing by my unwillingness to hang vol-II: the former because of my town read, the latter because of my lack of a read. Klebian will be on my untouchable list again if/when he places a realistic vote.

[Ythill]

unvote

Thanks for voting, kleb. I will read and respond to your post after I feed my son breakfast.

[Ythill]

Yth 514: Just to see what happens votes are a bit strange. I understand that justin was your favored candidate for lynch but you went into it slightly awkwardly it seems...

Actually, Justin was not my favored candidate for a lynch at that point. I wasn’t sure who was. The point of my vote was to stir the pot regarding Justin: see attacks against him and his defenses and, eventually, make my own attacks against him. The move was meant to test several people, including but not limited to Justin, and has given me some good information.

Please note that I

did

include mild reasons for suspecting Justin with my vote and that my case against him, brought later, had points that were both unique and valid.

A long post before deadline may not necessarily be there just for the wagon but to give a good reflection of his points if he dies that night. So I disagree with part of yth 538 that justin had no real reasons for 433…

First off, my allegations were not limited to #433 but to the entire debate that started with #433. Secondly, #433 is pretty focused on vol-I. It does not have the variety that a last-words post usually holds. Tertiarily, I don’t see any reason for Justin to have suspected that he was going to be the N1 kill, at least not heavily enough to justify smokescreening the Jennar lynch.

At this point it may be worth considering a ythill/hypat pair.

Thank you for pointing this out. And no, I'm not being sarcastic here. I realized that there was evidence for Hyp + Yth as scum several days ago and was cursing town as being either lazy or dumb because nobody had even suggested it.

To buy this theory, one would have to believe in an elaborate amount of pre-planning. Hyp would have to have been breadcrumbing her fake-claim and I would have had to have been distancing from her, both from D1 on. But it

is

possible and perhaps even in character for the two of us.

The one glaring problem with this is why did we pull the trigger when we did? As scum with a plan like this, I would have waited until someone else followed my distancing to heavily suspect Hypatia and would have been going for another mislynch today, rather than just opening up on her and forcing her fake-claim. Also, with the town reading me pretty strongly as one of their own, there was no reason for me to be parked on the Jennar wagon at the end of D2. I could surely have gotten involved in vol-I’s demise, assisted k7 in attaining a kleb-lynch, or pointed suspicions somewhere else.

There are other places where I am shown as likely to be town, but I won’t bother with these until there’s a more direct accusation against me. I’m not too worried because the best course of action to determine if this possibility is true would be to lynch Hypatia and,

if she comes up scum

, lynch me. But if we lynch Hyp-scum, we’ll have more room for a mislynch on me.

What I would like to discuss is

why other people haven’t mentioned this possibility

…

• vol-II and klebian: As town, it’s likely these two were blinded by town reads on me. Which is forgivable, especially because their reads were accurate.
  
• Rogueben: As town, perhaps he was blinded by his suspicions of Justin.
  
• k7: If he’s town, he’s not a creative thinker or a talented sleuth. It makes sense that he wouldn’t have thought of this.
  
• Hypatia: If she’s town, I am confirmed gunless to her and both of these facts would lead to her not thinking of this. Combine this with the fact that, even if it did occur to her, she wouldn’t have mentioned it for the same reasons that I didn’t.
  
• Justin: Here’s the strange one. Justin is smart, he is perceptive, he looks for patterns and has demonstrated that he likes evidence that ties two potential scum together. Hypatia is the explicit target of his current suspicions. I was one target of his D2 suspicions and am now attacking him aggressively. So why, as town, would Justin not examine the possibility that Hyp + Yth = scum? I don’t think there is a valid explanation (but am open to hearing one). However, if he’s scum, he’s not curious about our alignments and so probably wouldn’t have analyzed the possibilities honestly enough to come up with this.

In closing: kleb has not only voted, but has added more insight to the thread. I’m putting him back on the untouchables list for now. I am perfectly willing to hang Justin, k7, or Hypatia (in that order) and will withhold my vote to hammer one of them as the deadline approaches.

[Ythill]

Come on Ythill. You know you’d like just a little to see me do it. Game aside, just for a moment. I would have an amazing, wordy, insanely paranoid meltdown.

Point conceded. Maybe someday I’ll mod an invitational and give you a jester role.

On more serious matters, I wholly approve of the current content level in this game. Lots to respond to, sorry in advance about the length of this post.

the way u quickly voted for hypathia day 2 and 3 had big cases on her then.. quickly moved on to someone else ie jennar, then day 3 me then justin now me again.

So you think it’s scummy for someone to change their mind as more evidence is revealed? Please note that three of the four people you’ve accused me of swapping between are my current top three. The last one was confirmed scum. You’d have been better off mentioning Mills and Dean.

but im offended u called me stupid...

Please don’t take it that way. There are plenty of smart people who are neither creative thinkers nor talented sleuths and, even ignoring this, not-smart is a far cry from stupid. When I said that, I was referring to your habit of repeating others’ points as evidence and I was only referring to your play hypothetically, assuming you as town. I wasn’t suggesting that you are stupid; if anything, I was inferring that you are scum.

Again, who did you hope to convince?

Well, you, for one.

No need. It was explicit (and pretty believable) that I would have hammered. For that to happen though, you needed one more. So who was it?

If she does. And even if I were scum, which I’m not, she wouldn’t to me.

She should, if you're scum, which it seems you are. You've put some thought into what to do as scum if Hyaptia is town, huh? I wonder why.

Your strategy is deep enough to back up your

belief

that Hypatia-smith, left alive, would be good for scum but I absolutely disagree that the belief is

true

. You've inspired me to spend some time with pen and paper. I've gone through all of the scenarios and there isn't a single one that can benefit scum. Though her investigating a dead body would leave us with a tough decision, even that scenario doesn't guarantee a scum win.

Remember that the SK loses if scum wins, so in essence, even an SK is pro-town from now until endgame. So long as the vig/SK stays home tonight, the second kill is used to settle counter-claims N4, and the town figures out how to use the no-lynch in the case of a claim with no counter, the worst we’ll be left with is a proven gunsmith, a vanilla townie, and a single Mafioso, which is a town win.

I think that the way you "clear" a lot of people from suspicion about this point is stretching slightly at times and a tad scummy.

Point taken. There was some confirmation bias behind that list, based on my reads, and it probably wasn’t fair. However, I’d like to point out that I was discussing possibilities that had occurred to me, not concrete facts. Just because I am capable of thinking of a reason that someone didn’t consider Hyp + Yth = scum doesn’t mean that

it is

the reason and I didn’t mean to suggest otherwise.

The way that you paint it, Justin is the only one on that list who should definitely have noticed it, which is making a few too many assumptions for me.

My statement was that I couldn’t think of a reason Justin hadn’t thought of this even though he was very likely (arguably the most likely), as town, to suspect such things. I don’t believe this statement is invalidated by the confirmation bias discussed in the last point. Illogically clearing one player does not mean that the accusation of another is also illogical. Justin’s lack of suspicion in this area is questionable even if I have made too many assumptions about others.

Of course now Justin (and everyone else, and their grandmas) has claimed that he thought of this earlier but had reason not to bring it up. Vollkan validates what I assumed about him (citing a town read on me), as does k7 (by repeating what has happened without new insight). Justin’s explanation is plausible but there is a problem with it. His tact here is inconsistent with his earlier play.

Justin is not to be lynched until he gives his thoughts.

In full agreement, which is one of the reasons why I’m reserving the hammer. It may come a bit before deadline (because of my schedule) but I’m assuming Justin won’t wait until the last second if he’s town.

However, if a majority of us are this interested in Justin’s last words, perhaps we shouldn’t hang him. I’d rather discuss his points with him involved than discuss them after his death. K7 is a viable alternative lynch and interesting in the fact that he could be buddies with Justin or Hypatia, whom I do not believe are buddies with each other.

It seems almost unavoidable that either Justin or k7 will be lynched but let’s not forget Hypatia. She could be scum and, if not, is arguably the most favorable mislynch. Not that I want a mislynch.

[Ythill]

P.S. Justin, how do you feel about a k7 lynch?

[Ythill]

So you're suggesting k7 as the VI. It's plausible, and I'd agree that it doesn't look like a calculated act on his part. There are other theories though. Bush could have been setting himself up for the bus and k7 didn't get the memo, etc.

The most suspicious thing about Killa Seven to this point is his lack of a vote on day two and his lack of a vote to this point on day three.

I disagree. The most suspicious thing was that he only took definitive action when a (now confirmed) scum seemed like the most likely lynch. Whenever a player acts outside his habits, there must be motive. What do you think motivated k7's vote on klebian?

I also find that a lack of creative thinking often demonstrates a lack of curiosity, which is telling.

I'm not disavowing that k7's played like a n00b, but suggesting that there is evidence of him as n00b scum. But you are right to say the evidence is scarce for this level of pressure, which is one reason why I prefer lynching you.

This brings us to an odd point: you've demonstrated that you know your lynch is likely, and you claim to be town so, in defending k7 as the VI, are you saying that you'd prefer a definite mislynch over the (roughly) 25% chance of a VI lynch hitting scum? Or is this strictly for consideration after you are killed? Basically, when I asked for your feelings on a k7 lynch, I meant now, in place of you, and I still want to know how you'd feel about that.

...it bothers me that there is a possible element of stacking lynches with first me and then him when the town is in such close quarters. To that end I discount almost entirely Ythill’s finding no connection between me and Killa Seven.

No such element was intended. No matter who we lynch today, and no matter what is revealed by that lynch, I will go back through the evidence and come to the fresh day with a fresh view, just as I have on every other day.

And it was vollkan that pointed out the lack of conection, not me. I just said that k7

could be

your scumbuddy or Hyp's (I didn't see any evidence against it, either way) but that it seemed unlikley for you and Hyp to be buddies.

So, to clarify... are these the last words of which you were speaking? I'm not trying to cut you off (pretty sure you're still @ L-2 anyway), I just want to know where we stand.

Also, please either claim or explicitly refuse to do so. I believe a couple people have asked.

[Ythill]

I didn't really want to hear your claim, it was pretty obvious to me. I just didn't want to hammer you while someone else wanted that claim, before you either made it or refused to.

By the way, how do you justify these two seemingly contradictory positions on what seems scummy?

(see above for Justin's quotes of me)

The part about you putting a lot of thought into the Justin-scum + Hyp-smith scenario was a jab and I'm surprised to see you treating it so seriously. But, to answer your question, the differentiating factor is that your burst of creative thought works towards scummy ends. It doesn't demonstrate curiosity about the roles any more than k7's play does.

In another example that does serve as a town-tell on you, I believe that your explanation of your attack on Hypatia demonstrated the sort of creative thought that suggests curiosity. However, compared with everythig else you've done (and Jennar's treatment of DD), this tell is minor, especially since I think you're good enough at this game to fake curiosity to some extent.

BTW, I've got to say, if you are scum (which I think you are) your #570 is a WIFOM work of art.

[Ythill]

My god, we’re in a tough situation. But I am loving this game.

We are currently about 22 hours from deadline. Please get your vote out there if you haven’t already.

@ Justin: I don’t think your last words are OMGUS at all. The endgame speculation could have pre-lynch value to scum but is otherwise indicative of a town alignment. Most importantly, I see in these last words a great deal of the townie variety of creative thinking we discussed. If you’d posted these thoughts closer to the beginning of the day, I probably wouldn’t have suspected you, but you didn’t. There are holes in your case against me but, again, the timing and nature of that case requires that I refrain from defending at this time. Other than the above, I’m going to let your last words stand without comment because it is time to make our decision.

@ Everyone: Here is a summary that will hopefully help us make a good decision.

Alignment

Hypatia

: The most telling cases against her are (1) the flubbed investigation that she cannot explain (2) the fact that her breadcrumbs were obvious but apparently not detected by scum

*

. The most telling cases in her favor are (1) it makes sense that there would be a gunsmith in this setup but Hyp started crumbing smith before that fact was obvious (2) I do not have a gun (finally willing to admit it explicitly). Her actions regarding Jennar were damning, Jennar’s treatment of her was suspicious.

Justin

: The most telling cases against him are (1) his play is not meta-consistent in that he has been narrow-minded and lurky here (2) his late D2 attack on vol-I and entanglement regarding his explanations of that case. The most telling cases in his favor are (1) his attitude near lynch and last words seem townie (2) a discrepancy regarding Hypatia’s alignment

*

. His actions regarding Jennar were damning, Jennar’s treatment of him was suspicious.

K7

: The most telling cases against him are (1) D2 the klebian vote and subsequent treatment of klebian (2) an apparent lack of curiosity. The most telling cases in his favor are (1) his play has been consistently empty (2) it’s plausible he’s a VI, which means he shouldn’t be lynched when town is under pressure. His actions regarding Jennar were damning, Jennar’s treatment of him was suspicious.

*This is a new realization, and probably an important one. If we are to believe that Justin is scum, then it follows logically that Hypatia is town. Which means that she is telling the truth about being a gunsmith. Accepting her as a gunsmith, we must ask ourselves if the scum would have missed her breadcumbs. I do not believe Justin would have.

Information/Strategy

Hypatia

: Lynched, Hyp-smith would confirm me (and get me NKed), embroil Justin, and slightly embroil Rogueben. Lynched, Hyp-scum would embroil me (on purpose?), and falsely clear Justin. Not-lynched, Hyp-regardless could be problematic for town. Not-lynched, Hyp-smith secures a town win but

only

if we can believe her, which we may not. Not-lynched, Hyp-scum has a good chance of costing us the game.

Justin

: Lynched, Justown embroils Hypatia. Lynched, Juscum clears Hypatia and embroils vol-II. Not-lynched, Justown helps our endgame with his strategies, so long as we trust him, which we may not. Not-lynched, Juscum isn’t super dangerous, and the right info will guarantee him a noose.

K7

: Lynched, k7-town would make us all feel pretty dumb but not really tell us anything. Lynched, k7-scum would confirm klebian as town. Not-lynched, k7-regardless will continue to do what he has been doing, which probably will not help the town, but probably will not hurt us either.

As a side note, I believe that lynching either Justin or Hypatia will give us a good read on the other. Due to all of the reasons stated above, I am changing the order of my lynch preferences (Hypatia, Justin, k7) though I will still hammer any of the three. For now, I will park my vote but will certainly move it tomorrow morning (or very late tonight) if such will get us a lynch.

vote: Hypatia

[Ythill]

EBWOP:

Lynched, Hyp-smith would confirm me (and get me NKed), embroil Justin,

and slightly embroil Rogueben.

I added the bolded part, after the fact, to the wrong paragraph. It is a mislynch of Justin (not Hyp) that would slightly embroil Rogueben in my opinion.

[Ythill]

I agree that Hypatia's vote count is accurate.

Not voting: k7 and vol-II

[Ythill]

Justin's post on ythill makes sense. I didn't realize how much flipping he's been doing today. ...I still feel comfortable with a k7 vote and plan on keeping it...

Do you see the problem in this logic? If I am scum, Hypatia has to be scum, and therefore k7 is almost definately not (unless we have two scum groups or one of us is a gun-toting SK). In this case, you would be better off helping me bus her, because revealing her alignment would prove mine.

Except I'm not scum (kind of wish I was, honestly). My flipping on Hypatia has a simple explanation, I've been going back and forth on whether I believed she was really a power role, and I've been doing it for longer than today. Even the stuff about the double-edged sword (before she claimed) was me talking with her about it while trying to be subtle.

@ vollkan: No argument with your case against k7 but I will be interested in hearing how you came to this decision when D4 dawns. Specifically, why you chose k7 over the other candidates. And I'd like to hear it even if I'm the NK, okay?

It seems the town has decided. Vollkan's vote seemed final. Justin and klebian have stated that theirs are final. K7 could slip in at the last moment to vote Justin but I''m not going to count on it. Rogueben said he'd hang k7 and I'm giving him the hammer.

unvote: vote killa seven

If we no-lynch again today I am going to be pretty upset about it.

[Ythill]

I figured it was something like that. Problem is, who does that leave as k7's buddy?

If we assume Hyp-smith then I must be town. In this scenario we're assuming Justin is town as well. And if k7 is scum then I'm pretty sure klebian is town. The only two left are Rogueben and you, and I have a pretty solid town read on Rogueben.

Are you scum? Perhaps the more important question is, was Jennar crafty enough to claim-fish a scumbuddy? It

was

his only instance.

[Ythill]

Why do you think you would be NK'd? What makes you more a target then anyone else?

This was the only reason I've cleared spurg, who didn't post much but managed to come across scummy with what he did say.

[Ythill]

Klebian is also viable. His vote for Kleb on D2 was for a very weak case, and he soon abandoned the vote. It looked like distancing.

I'd agree, except that the timing doesn't suit distancing. The reason I think k7's vote was scummy was because he uncharacteristically took action as if inspired to do so by Jennar being in danger. I just don't see a newbie player having enough finesse to bus the other buddy in those circumstances. I think that k7 was offering klebian to you as an alternative to Jennar.

But, as always, I could be wrong.

[Ythill]

Thanks Hypa. It makes me feel a bit better about you. I mean that you play mafia at work, of course.

Roughly 100 minutes until deadline.

[Ythill]

This makes me feel like I've got a handle on this game. I had an inkling that klebian was a vig. I'm glad he stayed home last night. Now we know there's only one scum group and, if we're careful, we can probably get them today.

K7's role provides evidence as to the honesty of Hypatia's claim. What I mean is that she claimed a flubbed investigation N2, which was a very fishy story. Though I hadn't said it earlier I wondered: if she was lying why did she not choose a more believable story, like suggesting that there must be a mafia roleblocker? This is especially odd considering the fact that there

was

a MRB and Hyp-scum would have known this. Not only could k7's role have inspired a better lie, but he could have been bussed to validate that lie. This does not

prove

Hyp-smith's claim, but it is the best evidence I've seen of it so far.

Note to the field: unless you suspect there might have been 4+ scum, I am now confirmed town because if Hypatia is town she is telling the truth about me and if she is scum, she's the only one left.

I'm going to do some rereading, but I have a few questions...

@ Justin: You have now advocated (or acted in favor of) a no-lynch as better than a lynch twice and, in both cases, the lynchee was scum. Comments? Also, I'd like your opinions about the second paragraph of this post.

@ Everyone: What are your opinions about a mass claim at this point? Would anyone but Hypatia claim anything other than vanilla? The only ones left who haven't are vollkan and ben. It could be very smart to do this

before

Hypa gives her result, though it may be pointless because I'm pretty sure we all know who she investigated.

[Ythill]

In retrospect it seems clear I helped murder Klebian

(because who keeps track of the thread but tries not to commit to much who isn't scum?)

.

I understand neither the bolded part of this quote or the point of the post it was taken from (#601). Justin, could you explain please? It seems very likely you’re town. Thanks for your defenses yesterday, you’ve probably earned us the game.

I’ve seen the phrase

godfather theory

used pejoratively on this site but I think we should at least consider it.

Have any of you seen or heard of a godfather being immune to a gunsmith before?

I really don’t think it’s likely, but I’d hate to lose this game because we were too confidant to talk about it.

Barring that, I find no problem with assuming we are at 1:4 with Justin and myself confirmed town. I agree that the benefit of the doubt should be granted to Hypatia for the day and that we should concentrate on vollkan and Rogueben.

I do not agree that we should simply lynch ben on vol’s word. I also do not agree that we should set up a D5 argument between Hypatia and the remaining suspect in the event of a mislynch. We have three weeks to make an informed decision about

today’s lynch

. Here’s what I propose we do...

Hyatia, Justin, and myself form a bloc. None of us votes unless all of us votes. Each of us, to the best of our ability, analyzes the hell out of the two suspects, their predecessors, their interactions with scum. We discuss the tells and the angles whether they indicate town or mafia alignment. Feel free to play devil’s advocate; there’s nothing scummy about defending one of them. We do this until we have strong consensus or until deadline.

During this period, I am

not at all interested

in reading vollkan’s opinions of ben or vice-versa. Whichever of you is town, please understand that sacrificing your reads, which must be held in question, is a fair exchange for keeping your opponent’s manipulations out of this decision. For that reason, I ask whichever of you is town to just keep quiet about the other.

What I am interested in from ben and vollkan is defenses to the evidence we uncover, opinions as to the viability of a godfather’s immunity to gunsmiths (but not who the godfather would be), and as much analysis as you can muster as to Hypatia’s alignment.

Everyone please explicitly agree or disagree with this course of action. If you disagree, please explain why.

[Ythill]

When D3 ended, I had preconceptions: town read on ben and null-read on vollkan. I am now abandoning those reads, putting them both back @ MotR. I hope my bloc buddies will do the same.

I am of the opinion that, if we have a 4 scum steup, this game belonged to scum from D1. I have no problem betting the game on 1:4. Considering what's been posted, I am also ready to abandon the GF theory. On to the analyses; current events are up first...

Rogueben

Ben said he would hammer k7. He knew when the deadline was but didn’t hammer or even post during sunset. He entered the thread this morning with a justification though nobody had fingered him. You already know how I feel about risking the no-lynch, I also think the entrance was a bit defensive.

Scum left Hypa and I alive for whatever reason. This narrows NK choices to Justin, klebian, and the townie of our two suspects. If ben is scum, the klebian kill makes sense because, of the three choices, klebian was going to have the cleanest reputation D4.

Ben’s #607 attempts to point suspicion at Hypa and Justin. The mention of Hypa is to be expected. The mention of Justin seems unrealistic and designed to give ben an out tomorrow if we hang vollkan today.

Ben completely respects the call for silence. His only mention of vollkan is a question about the setup that I would have included in my “what I want to hear from the accused” if I hadn’t already dismissed the 4 scum setup.

vollkan

He entered this morning with a plan that protected him from today’s lynch and set him up for a D5 confrontation with Hypatia. No offense Hypa, but I believe the suggested argument would be won by vollkan regardless of your alignments and, more importantly, I think vollkan believes this. What’s more, the tone of vollkan’s #603 seems to inspire townie confidence and rush our decision. He achieves this with a false dichotomy. This entrance is, IMO, quite scummy.

Combining my incarnations, I have pegged two of them so far.

What vol-I did has nothing to do with anything. Nor did vol-II “peg” k7. By his own explanation, k7 was his fallback choice when Justin started to seem more protown. Combining these incorrect statements as vague evidence of scumhunting prowess seems manipulative. Especially so because it was proactively seeded into a long post.

Vollkan really wants to argue with ben. His #610 clearly violates the call for silence. I wonder if this is ego, or scum concerned that his manipulations are being shut down.

Vollkan has made up his mind about Hypatia and, even though she is one of the three possible scum, he is still standing by that read. In spite of this, he intends to pick her posts apart today, just in case he’s wrong about ben. IMO, these are the views and intentions of a townie.

There’s one more thing but it relies on an assumption so I’ll check myself before giving the read.

Vollkan, who did you think Hypatia was going to investigate and why?

I’d love to hear defenses from the accused and comments from the bloc. My next analysis will focus on the LCT (light content triangle) of Mookeh, spurg, and Bush. It should be finished sometime today, tomorrow at the latest.

[Ythill]

Should I put future violations of the diktat in spoiler tags for you?

Do whatever you like. Big brother is watching.

Seeing as you didn't make any tacit predictions about Hypa, I'll just drop that other point. FTR: its conclusion was in favor of vol-town.

[Ythill]

I knew when the deadline was but I got called to a rehearsal that night and got home at 4:30... it took preference over an internet game (no offense).

None taken.

Where were you when you got the call?

I expected the question to come at some point today

You were right. I was going to ask it. However, I don't think the preemptive defense makes it seem any less concocted. Not that it makes it seem more concocted either, just a tad defensive is all.

Anyway...

[Ythill]

LCT Interactions

Ben = Mook; Spurg = vol; Bush = k7 = scum

Bush only questions or attacks myself, Dean, and DD. She answers questions from myself and vol-I. She random votes Hypatia. Never mentions anyone else.

Neither spurg nor Mook ever mention Bush. Spurg has a brief confrontation with Jennar, inspired by Jennar’s attacks. Mook mentions Jennar once, suggesting that Jennar drops scum-tells as town power.

LCT PBPA

Pointless posts (which is most of them) aren’t mentioned.

• #53: Mook makes a joke; admonishes against all past discussion as pointless; points out high quality of posting; unvotes his random, citing good discussion.
  This seems hypocritical but I can’t see what scum would gain from it.
  
  
• #79: Mook clears those involved in initial baiting and criticizes those who question it; argues against Dean’s towntell on Mills while also suspecting Krad; ambivalent about whether early wagons are scummy themselves or attacked by scum; clears Hypatia; attacks lurkers.
  This post seems like scum positioning. Note how he sets up suspicion on the people who don’t argue well or aren’t present while taking a kinder stance on the more dangerous townies.
  
  
• #81: Mook provides meta evidence at the beginning of the argument with Mills
  
• #83: unprompted, Mook clarifies the meta he gave; he wants town to suspect everyone, offering more meta evidence that the innocent-looking can be scum.
  He quietly supports Jennar’s everybody-is-scum style here while furthering the position that even obvious townies should be lynched.
  
  
• #102: Mook cheerleads DD’s LoS (vol-I, Yth, and Krad are suspect; spurg and Bush are lurking; Dean and Mook are light content; Hypatia and Mills are MotR; Jennar is cleared; klebian has immunity). His only arguments are in defense of vol-I and a vague accusation of Yth.
  Of note, Jennar is cleared and Bush is just a lurker. His attack on me is dodgy, as if designed to sully me without needing evidence.
  
  
• #105: Confronted with a defense, Mook says he confused Yth with Krad.
  He withdraws the attack immediately onto a safer player. He never explains the problems I pointed out with the with the attack itself, which were not entirely dependant on the identity of its target.
  
  
• #117: Mook’s vacation begins; he accuses Mills morphing their argument
  He takes a null-tell argument on the offensive here, but there is evidence of OMGUS which, IMO, is itself a null-tell.
  
  
• #118: Mook says Mills is straw-manning him
  The spat with Mills has turned ugly. Remember that this effected our decision D1. Was that the intention?
  
  
• #152: Jennar: “Where are Mills, Mookeh and Ythill on your list?”
  Why is Mookeh on this list?
  
  
• #190: Mook “Jennar is playing exceedingly scummy here. Unfortunately, he was also playing scummily in Open 45 - and he turned out to be FBI.”
  This makes me want to hang ben right now, but would mafia be bold enough to say this about a buddy?
  
  
• #192: Bush: “im willing to vote 4 anyone whose lurked more than me”
  (see next entry)
  
  
• #202: Yth argues that spurg is a worse lurker than Bush
  I never got to use this trap because Bush never posted again but, see next entry.
  
  
• #213: spurg living on a couch, “Not quite sure where the (justified) lurker wagon is on me”
  Is this spurg telling Bush about the trap?!?
  
  
• #288: spurg’s meta reads; vol-I is town, DD could be scum, Dean is definitely scum; spurg says he has a history of lurking as scum
  The most eloquent is the most townie, and on down the line. All turned up town in the end.
  
  
• #297: Jennar role-fishes spurg
  I think this is a very important detail, but it’s a huge WIFOM trap.
  
  
• #299: spurg says mafia usually kill light content players and drops the most chilling scumtell of the game, “Also, while I generally hate self-voters, Mills has played reasonably well except for that, and I seriously doubt he would self-vote while asking for a replacement if he were scum. It's not like we had him particularly well to rights, or anything.”
  Note the tense of the last sentence and the fact the Mills hadn’t been hammered yet. Very creepy.
  
  
• #325: Mook check in, “Did Mills just sabotage the game?”
  This equates to “ooops” which is generally thought scummy. Not sure if I agree.
  
  
• #336: Jennar’s LoS (see below)
  
• #349: Mod: spurg and Bush to be replaced (spurg has requested replacement, see below)

Maybe I’m just paranoid, but both spurg and Mook are seeming highly suspect here. There’s far more dirt on Mook but he also posted a lot more content. The few tells on spurg are intensely incriminating.

Mookeh

Not high content by any means. Mookeh's posts give me the impression that he is shading, that is that he is posting enough to shrug suspicion without giving a read either way. I need to see more from him before pinning anything down.

Spurgistan/DeathsDoor/Mr. President:

Flat lurkers. There is no strategic reason not to post at this point. You are either not present and not playing or you are deliberately lurking to avoid content dissection. I suspect that at least one of these players is scum based strictly of probability. Replacement would be the best option IMO.

(1) Note how Jennar subtly demands that

at least

one of his buddies get replaced. It might have been directed at spurg

and

Bush. Three posts later, spurg has asked for replacement.

(2) For all practical purposes, the difference between the Mook entry and the lurker entry is slant. Jennar uses Mook’s slightly higher post count to justify clearing him of lurker charges in spite of light content.

(3) Would Jennar have placed both his scumbuddies in the lurker section? Remember that a couple of us had agreed that the most likely scenario was that one scum was active while the other two were lurkers (we must be psychic).

(4) Note the lack of a colon after Mook’s underlined name. Every other entry in the LoS has a colon. I’m not suggesting that this is a bread-crumb but rather an honest typo. However, is it possibly the sign of a different frame of thinking? When one is lying, there is more tension, more creativity in thought, and perhaps more of a likelihood of making a little mistake like that. I know this borders on insanity and I would never make this argument as other than confirmed town, but I am considering all the angles here.

That's all from me for now. I'd like to discuss the two analyses I've already made before doing any more. I may go light-content for a couple of days so that the rest of the bloc can get a word in edgewise. Rest assured, I'll be doing a PBPA each on ben and vol-II before a week of D4 has passed. Comments?

[Ythill]

@ Hypatia: Yes. MotR = Middle of the Road.

• #192: Bush: “im willing to vote 4 anyone whose lurked more than me”
  (see next entry)
  
  
• #202: Yth argues that spurg is a worse lurker than Bush
  I never got to use this trap because Bush never posted again but, see next entry.
  
  
• #213: spurg living on a couch, “Not quite sure where the (justified) lurker wagon is on me”
  Is this spurg telling Bush about the trap?!?

I'm not sure what "trap" you are referring to. Could you clarify?

I think it was clear from my post. I’ve expanded the block-quote you made of me to include the relevant information.

Do you understand now, or do you want me to explain further?

Ythill, I firstly dispute that Spurg actually forms any real ideas about DD or myself from this - he quite clearly maintains an open mind. Regarding Dean, yes he does have the most incompetent player as the most suspect, but the point he makes is valid.

This reminds me of our disagreement about Mills. Just because someone posts self-argument, self-doubt, or a disclaimer doesn’t remove from the fact that they made the original point. However, your argument here is valid from a certain point of view and I’ll keep it in my mind.

What does the rest of the bloc think?

I read over 299 several times, and the last sentence is incoherent to me:

Also, while I generally hate self-voters, Mills has played reasonably well except for that, and I seriously doubt he would self-vote while asking for a replacement if he were scum.

It's not like we had him particularly well to rights, or anything.

"particularly well to rights, or anything"? What does that mean?

I trimmed down your block quote a bit to leave only what matters to this point. What is it you don’t understand? The idiom?

Having someone “well to rights” = having them in a inescapable position. In this sense, “particularly” inescapable. In the context of this game, spurg was saying that Mills wasn’t obv-scum based on the cases at that time.

What’s creepy about this is it comes just before Mills’ death. Spurg points out what he believes to be a serious scumtell (the self vote) but diminishes its meaning with a “serious doubt” that is not fully explained. Then he throws that last sentence in, which suggests that spurg knew Mills alignment and was posting his scummy “ooooops.” Problem is, Mills wasn’t dead yet.

I don't think this can be read as a subtle demand for buddy replacement (Why bother doing something like that in thread when one could just PM the mod?).

I don’t understand how you can claim this is a valid argument. Of course the statement

can

be read this way because, no matter what we think about spurg, the statement

did

serve this purpose as regards Bush, who has been confirmed scum. The only question was whether it was also directed at spurg.

Assume Spurg is a town lurker - he doesn't post for 9 days. He's going to ask for replacement. You've suggested a link here on conspiracy grounds.

Spurg had periods of inactivity lasting longer than nine days, yet he didn’t ask for replacement earlier. I think you might be using “conspiracy” in a different sense than I do. This link is not based on conspiracy grounds because Jennar’s alignment is confirmed rather than assumed.

Please explain what you mean by “conspiracy grounds.”

Votecount up to Post 625

Rogueben (1) - vollkan II

Not Voting (4) - Hypatia, Justin Playfair, Rogueben, Ythill

3 to lynch.

[Ythill]

None taken. Where were you when you got the call?

Not that I see it as relevant, but I was at work.

I was just wondering if it was someplace with computers and access to the internet. Not that I would have expected you to make a content post at that point, but you could have let us know you wouldn't be posting.

Again, I am not suggesting that I have taken personal offense because I haven't. I am merely discussing the truth of your explanation for a course of action that is possibly very scummy.

Where are Mills, Mookeh and Ythill on your list?

At this time from the perspective of content alone I'd have to place Mookeh, Volkan and Deaths Door at the top of my list...

Because as of now we have good content on you and volkan, moderate content on me, Hypatia, Mookeh and Kledian and nothing on everyone else basically.

Justin, you’ve told me you look for patterns. What do you think of the

town, town, Mookeh

tendency in Jennar’s posts?

I find it telling that Mookeh is not similarly included in a trio in Jennar’s analysis gambit (#336).

[Ythill]

As I understand it, Spurg is saying that there is no justified lurker wagon on him. The way I read this, without the gloss of conspiracy you add, is that he is simply wondering how a lurker wagon on him can be justified.

I see this very differently than you, and don't forsee my mind changing. I think spurg was asking where the wagon was (i.e. why are only Ythill and Jennar voting him for lurking) though a larger wagon would be justified because he has been lurking badly. I think this is clear from his post and in context considering his other posts.

As for whether it was a mention of the trap, it's possible. I'm not saying it's fact.

Regarding "conspiracy grounds," I now understand what you are saying. Much of what I (or anyone) brings up about you or ben at this point is going to be at least partialy founded in what you call conspiracy grounds. I agree that this diminishes any specific post as damning evidence, but I don't know that it diminishes the validity of multiple points when viewed in a more global sense.

Basically, a theory about intention can be explained away with as little as an opposing theory or a claim of "conspiracy grounds" but, as those theories add up, such excuses wear thin. Also, note that I am discussing first impressions here. It's not like I'm reading a post and saying "how can I turn this into a scumtell?" I'm reading something that seems scummy and sharing my perceptions for discussion of other explanations.

Much of what we uncover this week will probably be dismissed as meaningless or misleading, but hopefully the search will reveal some good evidence. At least you have the assurance that Justin and I (and probably Hypatia) are town.

[Ythill]

Can't... stop... analyzing...

I'd love to hear from my bloc-mates.

[Ythill]

Meh. We have argued ourselves into agreement. How boring.

*bump*

[Ythill]

Nu-uh!

@ vollkan: If you

are

scum this time, how will you record the win and loss in your sig?

Mod: It's been 72 hours. Please prod Justin Playfair.

[Ythill]

Yeah, "the plan" didn't consider inactivity. I'd like to move on but really want comments from the bloc about the analyses I've already posted. FTR: ben is looking slightly scummier than volk ATM, but that may very well change once we get to post replacement analysis.

@ ben: I know you can't really defend your pred's actions, but feel free to chime in on the topic of Mookeh's behavior.

@ vollkan: I was looking for signs of fore-thought. You two smart fore me traps.

[Ythill]

*bump*

Helloooooo?

[Ythill]

I'm sick of waiting. Here's my analyses of both vollkan and Rogueben from the time of their entrances until k7's lynch...

[Ythill]

Rogueben

PBPA

0 – hello, LA –

Nada.

1 – sorry about LA, off to bed –

Nada.

2 – entrance analysis (see below)
3 – agrees with vol-II that Juscum might have taken out vol-I –

Doesn’t add any insight, just sort of rehashes.

4 – clarifies case on Yth –

Ignores the logic part of my quote, blathers a defense for the hypocritical part of his accusation. This seems a lot scummier on rereading.

5 – retracts part of case on Yth –

Gives in where he’d been blathering before. This still seems townie to me.

6 – retracts part of case on Justin, questions Hypa –

Here ben retracts the only original point he’s made, which was the strawman accusation. He also backs away from (but doesn’t retract completely) his complaint about Justin’s treatment of Hypa.

7 – k7’s analysis is aping, defends Hypa, calls Justin out for pushing her mislynch, asks Justin to claim. –

New evidence entered against k7 doesn’t seem to increase ben’s suspicions, yet ben continues the argument about Justin’s treatment of Hypa and uses it to further embroil Justin even though he partially dismissed it in his last post.

8 – accuses Yth for clearing people via assumptions, qft re: Justin’s thoughts before the hammer, offers to switch to k7 if necessary –

He says I’m scummy for an assumptive attack on his PE#1, which is very odd. I can see him questioning the attack but there was no realistic way for myself and Justin to both be scum because of Hypa’s claim and investigation. His treatment of me here is more aggresive than his earlier treatment of my attacks on now-confirmed townies.

Entrance Analysis

• Hypatia – Finds her scummy, agrees with the most obvious evidence, adds no new evidence, rates her @ 60% but believes her claim. (Asks: are hypotheticals good?) PE#2. –
  This post sits ben on the fence. All he has to do is “change his mind” about her claim and he can justify a vote on her if that’s the way things are going. The question here is a loaded one.
  
  
• Justin – calls his play vs. vol-I+Yth assumptive and accuses him of strawmanning, doesn’t like his accusation of Hypatia, rates him at 60% but says Justin wouldn’t have likely killed vol-I. (Asks: why does Hyp’s claim bother you?) PE#1. –
  This could be designed to manipulate the Interrogator into attacking Justin. Ben’s one original statement is a thorn in vol’s side and his one point in Justin’s favor is something easily refuted by vol. The question asked Jus is loaded and the most open ended of all of them.
  
  
• K7 – lurker, repeats others’ evidence, rates him @ 55%. (Asks: Is Ythill buddying?) PE#3 –
  This question is the most cut and dry of them all. It’s also the only one in which he directly feeds a case to the person questioned.
  
  
• Klebian – the most pro-town because ben agrees with what he says, but thinks he needs to commit more; rates him @ 45%. (Asks: Hyp or Jus?) –
  Had ben already guessed that kleb was the vig? In that case, it would make sense to be nice to him. Ben never mentions him again.
  
  
• Vol-II – spurg and thinktank uber-lurked, vol made good points, rates at 55%. (Asks: k7 or Jus?) –
  This entry is very empty and I get nothing from it, except a global argument about the questions (see below)
  
  
• Ythill – solid (not townie) play, repeats others’ evidence, suggests buddying to vol-I; rates @ 50%. (Asks: Hyp or Jus?)
  There’s a little ego stroking in here, which could be manipulative. He gives credit to the vol-I + Yth buddying argument here, including vol-I’s inconvenient town confirmation as evidence that it was all my doing. What gets me about this is that the assumptive nature of this argument was one of his three reasons for suspecting Justin and he’s already backing off of it.

Global Points

Rogueben gives three reasons for suspecting Justin. One is partially dismissed in the same post. Another is entirely abandoned when challenged. The third is backed off of and then re-ignited. During this, ben’s behavior towards Justin seems to indicate that he is becoming more suspicious of him rather than less. All of this changes in ben’s last post of the day, in which he puts forth a theory that requires Justin to be town, agrees that Justin should be allowed to speak before he’s hammered, and

keeps voting for Justin

.

The questions posted with ben’s entrance analysis are very manipulative. His prime target is wordy and is asked the only truly open-ended question; it’s about a touchy subject for which Justin is already being scrutinized. Ben’s secondary suspect is asked about theory, a subject for which she has been reprimanded for visiting. Ben’s third suspect, now confirmed scum, is fed a case and asked to either agree or disagree with it. The other three (two heavies and the vig) are asked to choose between two targets, one of which (in every case) is Justin. Vol is the only one asked about k7; meanwhile other manipulation points him at Justin.

Rogueben disappears more than 48 hours before the day ends and doesn’t check back in until morning. He leaves with the impression that he’ll switch his vote at the last minute, if needed, but doesn’t even check back in. If not for Hypatia’s vote, we’d have had another mislynch.

vollkan

PBPA

102 – Back from the grave.

Nada.

103 – WOW analyzes the posts between incarnations, believes Hyp’s claim and finds Justin scummy, asks for reiteration of Yth’s case on k7, promises to review Jennar.

This post is huge. The analysis feels honest and touches on various topics from different angles. I not only got a townie vibe from this, but could imagine vol writing it as he read, so natural were the changes in opinion. Also, would scum have asked for more dirt on k7?

104 – Counters ben’s one defense of Justin, claims no clear read on k7.

It feels like vollkan fell into ben’s trap here.

105 – Analysis of Jennar generally embroils Justin, Ben, and Hypa. Clears Yth. Neutral on others.

This post seems very scummy to me. Note how the most embroiled are the three people that vol-scum needs to out-argue to win the game. And, like I said in thread, I felt like vol-I, who was town, would have drawn more conclusions from the information at hand.

106 – Defends three neutral reads from 105.

Not scummy, but possibly defending a scummy post as valid. Remember that vol being stubborn is a null-tell.

107 – Defends against “less willing to commit” by citing his suspicion of Justin.

The defense here really doesn’t apply to the attack, which accused him of being less willing to commit on people other than Justin.

108 – PBPA on DD/Justin finds DD mildly scummy, aggressively attacks Justin, ends with FoS on Justin.

Big scumtell here (see below).

109 - PBPA on Mook/Ben finds Mook slightly scummier than DD but largely agrees with ben and needs to see more from him, not a suspect so far.

Nada.

110 – FoS on Justin would have been a vote if not the hammer.

Nada.

111 – WOW argues with Justin about Hypa vs. spurg.

Here is where vol first returns to suspecting Hypa because of her claim fishing though he’s already said that her own claim (which he believes) justifies her desire for claims.

112 – Will not vote Justin because Hypa might have been tacitly demanding claims.

The suggestions raised in 111 become explicit here. Vol doesn’t trust me to withhold the hammer even though he’s reading me as town (this seems like honest townie paranoia).

113 – Revisits vol-I vs. Jus debate in pursuing an accusation of Justin.

This feels like one of his information-gathering attacks. It also seems to contain some of emotional attachment to the original debate, which is a null-tell.

114 – Continues the debate with Justin, seconds the claim request.

A natural continuation of #113. If Justin had been lynched, I might not think these two posts were so innocent, but he was not lynched almost entirely by vollkan’s actions.

115 – Pointless EBWOP.

Nada.

116 – Justin will not pull a Mills.

Nada.

117 – WOW defends against allegations of changes in his play (the only difference is situational), claims to have thought of but dismissed the idea of a Hyp + Yth scum pair, is motivated by kleb to further investigate k7 and is swayed as to k7’s alignment.

For difference in play, see below. I don’t buy for one second that vollkan thought of a Yth + Hyp pairing but didn’t bring it up. Why? Because vol thinks out loud about less viable theories. That said, I feel that scum wouldn’t discredit this theory. The sway towards k7 fits with my earlier analysis of the process of vol-I changing his mind and therefore seems natural.

118 - Wants Justin’s thoughts before hammer.

Nada.

119 – Deeper suspicion of k7, asks him pointed questions, asks Justin if he believes Hypa.

Leans further toward a k7 lynch. It could be suggested that this slow lean is the act of careful scum making sure to bus a partner naturally, but that’s reaching.

120 – Yth’s post has motivated him to reread and clear Justin. Votes k7, listing his reasons.

The punchline of the last few posts. Noting how much the balance of the lynch hinged on vol’s action here, which could have believably gone either way. Would vol-scum choose the bus in this situation?

121 – k7 vote was process of elimination finding Yth, Hyp, & Jus town, k7 was scummiest of remaining three.

I like that vol was up late and online the night before deadline.

122 – Answers about k7’s hypothetical scumbuddy, claiming it could be anyone but Yth (though Hyp is unlikely). Skirts (but doesn’t avoid) the suggestion that his reasoning in his last post limits the choices to himself and ben, with vol being the scummier of the two.

I find this last bit highly ironic but not scummy. Vol’s later comment about his treatment of kleb removes the one doubt I had about this post at the time it was made.

Global Points

Vollkan claims that there is no difference in his play between incarnations and says that any apparent difference is circumstantial. This could be true but a factual difference exists and it suggests manipulation. In vol-I’s PBPA of DD, he finds DD’s large analysis (#2) reasonable. Vol-II offers a PBPA of DD in which he finds one point of the same analysis scummy enough to warrant discussion in the post bullet and further mention in the summary. This when Justin was vol’s preferred target.

Suspicions of Justin falter based on a point that doesn’t make much sense to me. Vollkan has already given Hypa a bye for role-fishing but he backs off of Justin when evidence of her fishing becomes more clear. Backing off Justin is further attributed to a reread and the case on k7 builds over a few measured posts that follow. This feels a little like vollkan made a tactical decision to bus k7 after he’d already started down another course.

Vollkan’s treatment of Hypa would be a very good strategy to avoid her investigation while he took out the vig.

Based on past analysis and that posted above, I believe Rogueben is the right choice for today’s lynch. This is my preliminary opinion. I’d like to discuss the views of the bloc and hear defenses from the accused before reaching a final decision.

Considering how badly “The Plan” has failed due to inactivity, it might be fun watch ben and vollkan have a go at each other as well.

[Ythill]

I’ll reserve comment about Hypa until D5, except to say thanks to vollkan for his analysis. I feel it’s very important for whomever we don’t lynch today to have been very explicit in his read of Hypatia. It puts scum in a very tough position on D5.

The fact that Justin, Ben and Hypa are the three most suspect is a null-tell with respect to my own alignment. What is important is the evidence I present against each of them - and I notice that you fail to look at my post in that level of detail.

In fact, when you commented on this in thread, you actually agreed with what I had said on Justin. Moreover, the only disagreements you expressed were with me ignoring k7 and klebian's lack of interaction with Jennar and with me and my not thinking Mookeh's statement was scummy.

I did look at the evidence and still agree with it, therefore saw no reason to bring it up in the analysis. I do not find it odd that the “Best Newbie” (congrats on that BTW) would be capable of stating valid evidence whether or not his search for that evidence was honest.

Your conclusion that interactions with Jennar found these specific people scummy is as much a function of your

lack of evidence

on others. This aspect was one I disagreed with at the time and still stands out to me here. My assertion here is not that you created false cases but that you unrealistically supported those cases by omission in other areas.

You weren't clearly talking about "people other than Justin". You just generally said that I am less willing to commit

I'll agree here because you inserted "clearly" but my statement was made in conjunction with my opinion of your reads on kleb, k7, and Mook and I think you're smart enough to have understood what I meant. I still think the I-am-attacking-Justin defense is inapplicable and a little opportunistic, but the rest of your defense here is sufficient.

I knew it was possible (in the same way that Kleb's post showed he knew it was possible) but that was the extent of it. Ythill's behaviour made me doubt it as a possibility. It was still something I was pondering seriously, but I never had any really tangible ideas about it.

This feels a little slippery and is heading toward semantic territory. I think I can put this to rest now by clarifying that my original statement was not indicative of your alignment, except that I thought your dismissal of the

possibility

seemed townie to me. I am not a proponent of LAL, I just think you overstated your forethought about the possibility of the pairing because your pride got in the way. I probably shouldn’t even have brought it up.

Was my (Voll-II's) criticism of DD unreasonable in some way?

Not IMO, except that it emerged when it would have served the purposes of vol-scum. There are other valid explanations: two of them in fact. Noting that you didn’t bring up either and I’m thinking that this may indicate honesty in your defense rather than reaching for the most convincing answer. FTR, the two explanations were (1) unconscious confirmation bias and (2) Krad’s alignment confirmation changing your views.

I think you know you are verging on the conspiratorial.

Yes. I'm enjoying the confirmed-townie status because these sorts of reaching arguments leave lots of room for defense, which (I hope) will assist us in making a good decision.

[Ythill]

@Justin: I'm going to let Rogueben comment before I address your analysis of him, considering the good questions you've asked.

I can't defend against your interpretation of the results of my analysis. I can only say that the evidence I found lent itself to the conclusions I made.

You understood me properly and I agree with your conclusion here. There's nothing scummy about conceding this argument and the point itself is not damning.

The context was something I had missed at the time.

As dumb as it sounds, I didn't even consider you missing the context or that your understanding then would have been any different than your understanding now. Must've been using one of my hippie brain cells. Sorry 'bout that.

As for the suggestion that the I-am-attacking-Justin defence is "inapplicable and a little opportunistic", you are missing the forest for the trees again.

You got somethin' against trees. Obv-scum!!!

[Ythill]

We've got a little time to wait for your input. I'm still wanting to hear more from my bloc-mates too but, since there's no relevant discussion ATM, I have some completely unrelated questions...

@ vollkan: What's with the avatar? I've seen a lot of peep's pics changing to include that monkey. It's Erg0's old avatar, isn't it? Is there some sort of inside joke or are profiles getting hacked?

[Ythill]

Deadline is one week from tomorrow.

Everyone please try to get your thoughts in the thread within the next couple of days so that we are not rushed in our decision. As it stands now, I still think ben is the play.

I thought that by getting killa 7 respond to a generated case it might either provoke some scum-hunting from him, or provoke a slip. Since his suspicion list was so weak I thought that getting him to comment on a case, which I believed to be pretty weak, would be a good idea...

Except for the few words I cut off of the end, this statement would be true from the perspective of ben as scum or town. Imagine the mindset of k7's buddy with one scum dead. Bussing seems unavoidable but do you really want to be lone scum in a game with me, Justin, and (if you're ben) vollkan alive as town?

[Ythill]

I wasn't backing off about his treatment of Hypatia, I was saying that his more recent post on this had some valid points that I had to consider.

Which is what I was referring to when I said “backing off.” Sorry if my terminology was a little sketchy. Note that I don’t think this “backing off” is scummy at all. It only becomes indicative of your alignment when viewed in concert with your ongoing treatment of Justin, which doesn’t reflect the change.

Yes I didn't update k7 on a suspicion percentage, I'm new to that system, using for the first time in this game. I forgot to update him. This doesn't mean that mentally I hadn't taken this into account.

I wasn’t talking about explicit percentages but overall tone, scumhunting, etc. In short: your findings created a premise for lessened suspicions of Justin and heightened suspicions of k7, but your actions toward them did not follow that premise.

I was not saying you were scum, and definitely not saying you were likely to be scum with Justin. My point here was that the way you added evidence based off so many assumptions could be seen as scum throwing extra onto the fire.

This defense is slippery and I don’t like it. What you said in your #8 was, “I think that the way you "clear" a lot of people from suspicion about this point is stretching slightly at times and a tad scummy.” Without further qualification, this is an accusation and it doesn’t make sense from a town perspective at the time it was posted.

I found a lot of her hypothetical arguments frustrating. It was my hope that by thinking about the question she would stop the IF X is scum arguments… I thought it had been weak up till that point, and that by asking him to think about what part of the claim bothers him, he may uncover new evidence or dig himself a hole.

And yet…

Whether you believe this or not, I have no where near the subtlety in my playstyle to attempt a trap like that, whether scum or town.

I think I’ll take the “or not” option, thanks.

The difference between that and the Justin argument is that his assumption formed the basis of a whole case, mine was supporting a minor point for possible consideration.

Justin had other evidence as well, most of it against vollkan. I think you’re missing the point of my argument here. I am not saying that I think your treatment of me in this regard was scummy. I am saying that you claimed Justin’s assumptions could be true and extrapolated on them, thereby diminishing your own argument against Justin for those assumptions. Even this is only evidence of your alignment when viewed in conjunction with your ongoing pursuit of a Justin lynch.

I was not getting more suspicious of Justin, I was retaining my current suspicion. Can you site any evidence that suggests I was becoming more suspicious of Justin?

I probably could but, thanks to your statement, I don’t need to. You have explicitly said that you were retaining your current suspicions. In determining scumminess (increasing suspicions + diminishing evidence) = (unchanging suspicions + diminishing evidence).

I did see it as likely that I would be around come deadline, hence leaving it off. When I was called to the rehearsal, that took priority (money before fun everytime).

The rehearsal call explains why you didn’t show up at deadline. It does not explain why you were absent for two full days before deadline. Personally, I don’t think your absence is damning in itself but it becomes another straw on the proverbial camel when considered alongside other factors.

Ben, I'm pretty sure you're going to be lynched today. In case we're wrong though, I am VERY interested in seeing your analysis of Hypatia. Also, I am wondering why you didn't participate in the mass claim.

[Ythill]

A tad scummy implies that it's not full directed suspicion. It is also not an accusation, just like getting bumped up 5% in a scumdar is not accusation, it is merely the view that you are slightly scummier now than you were before.

This is semantics and does not change my mind, but I will at least consider your explanation.

I probably could but, thanks to your statement, I don’t need to. You have explicitly said that you were retaining your current suspicions. In determining scumminess

(increasing suspicions + diminishing evidence) = (unchanging suspicions + diminishing evidence)

.

What are you getting at here?

I've bolded the meat of the statement above, but I'll also extrapolate.

One of my main concerns with your play is the way your actions (votes, arguments, etc) don't seem to flow naturally from your points. As one example, I said that your treatment of Justin suggested

increased

suspicions at the same time that your points of suspicion against him were diminishing.

The premise here is that your actions were not motivated by changes in the evidence but by an ulterior motive. In this regard, it is no less telling that your treatment of Justin was based, as you've said in defense, on

unchanging

suspicions at the same time that your points of suspicion were diminishing. In this case the evidence is

different

against you but still points to the same conclusion.

I don't see how you can retract the unchanging suspicions statement and you've now conceded that your points of suspicion

appeared

to have diminished. The only argument left, I think, is one of perception.

[Ythill]

Me too, and discussion seems to be winding down.

I want to hear Justin's view of vollkan (either an analysis or his comments on mine) and his preference for the lynch. Unless he disagrees, I'm ready to vote.

[Ythill]

Checking in.

Deadline Tuesday morning. I suggest that we vote tomorrow. Even if Justin doesn't check back in, two of us from the bloc should be suffiecient.

Ben, I think we're lynching you but you might want to vote for vollkan in case we have any last minute mind changes.

[Ythill]

Last chance for Justin to speak up. I'm going to check my other games and post in them first. Then I'll drop the hammer.

[Ythill]

Okay, time's up. Sorry if you had more to say Justin, but my curiosity has reached a fever pitch.

Vote: Rogueben

. Goodnight.

[Ythill]

I felt I had to try and take down Ythill though because I thought he would hurt the town. I wasn't too far off since he made poor choices on Day One and Day Two but thankfully we won anyway.

I'll give you that poor choice on D1. Sorry 'bout that, at least we went on to win the game. D2 though, I voted for scum, so you can't really say I made a mistake there.

I like it that vol, Hypa, and myself were three of the four who really got the game going and, because vol was allowed to replace back in, we were also the three who finished it.

This was the first game I've finished.

Thanks Chaos! Great set-up and I really liked the automatic deadlines. I've gotten myself into the mod queue and will be using deadlines like these in my own game. Cheers to all!

[Ythill]

Also, vollkan, I want to be scumbuddies with you sometime.

[Ythill]

This game frustrated me a little, as I thought that the mafia was playing along pretty well for the miss-lynch on Justin, which would have set us up much better.

That was certainly the turning point. Which is why I gave credit to Justin for those defenses. Note that it was his arguments, not K7's scumminess, that changed our minds. Much credit is due to klebian as well. He followed the most valid arguments with his NKs and, in doing so, started town down the winning road.

@ vollkan: IMO, replacements are a huge advantage to town, sometimes because of the chance of getting (or getting back) a good player, but constantly because of the chance to get two different reads on two different players that only have a role in common.

[Ythill]

Ythill can you confirm. Did you pick me to lynch for my play in particular, or how much of it was due to Mookeh's early play.

Not much to do with Mookeh's play. There were a few tells on him but nothing too bad. It was predominantly your play and the fact that it was being compared to vollkan's. Until it came down to a choice between you two, I'd been reading you as town.

Specifically, your opinion of Justin and the way it didn't match with your arguments was the most damning thing I saw. Also, bussing k7 might have helped you. Not that I know squat about playing as scum, just telling you what stood out the most to me, because you asked for pointers.

What I found difficult was that there were so many basically confirmed players.

I can see that. Honestly, if I had to pick out one mistake you made, it didn't have anything to do with your behavior being scummy. I think killing the vig was an okay play, but killing Hypa would have left you in a 1:4 with only one confirmed townie. In that scenario you probably could have engineered a Justin lynch based on his defense of k7 alone. Don't know if that would have given you the game, but it might have.

Oh and, BTW,

klebian

, thanks for not killing during the last night phase. I think it helped us a lot. I'm assuming that you would have killed Justin or Hypa.

[Ythill]

Thanks Jenter, I was wondering about that.

Worst Scum Mistake:

K7 voting klebian on D2. Other than this, I think K7 did a great job of playing lurker-scum, but he showed his hand too strongly with that vote. The lesson? If you're lurker-scum, never come out of hiding to save a doomed buddy.

Worst Town Mistake:

Hypa's double investigation. I still can't fathom how she managed to edit and re-send an old investigation but I guess she did. BTW, I'm kind of glad she did because the runner up for this catergory was me for quite logically explaining how Mills couldn't possibly be a power-role.

Best Lie:

Jenter explaining how lurking was a pro-town strategy. Kudos, dude. You fooled me and vollkan both with that one.