Mini 1405: The Simpsons Mafia (Game Over)

[Lord Mhork]

VOTE: Klick

For the self vote. Scum shall go down in a flaming mess.

Psst... Tell your buddies to bus you now and we'll go easy on them.

[Lord Mhork]

Just trust me, saulres. I'm, like, 36% sure about it. Although I think I've seen klick self vote before. I don't know. :/

Why no love for the smilies, JD?

[Lord Mhork]

Oh, and more serious, I don't think the self vote would be a post restriction. It doesn't make any sense for it to be.

[Lord Mhork]

Ztife, what kind of flavor would help with this? In fact what kind of restriction would this be? "You may only vote for yourself."? "Your first post must be a self vote."? The former is just about impossible to envision barring a really, really sadistic bastard of a mod, and the later seems like an awful lot of effort and a cop out for the mod. "You must do this highly controversial thing with your first post. And you can't tell anyone about it. "

It makes absolutely no sense to me. More likely this is just Klick being klick.

[Lord Mhork]

Ack. V/LA 'til after Christmas. December 27th

[Lord Mhork]

Hello

Vote MHork

Klick's self vote is null for him, he does it in pretty much every game he is as both Mafia and Town. It's usuallu used to catch tells like yours.

VOTE: Klick

For the self vote. Scum shall go down in a flaming mess.

Psst... Tell your buddies to bus you now and we'll go easy on them.

Sounded a bit like RVS so I was going to let it slide for a while.

But then you confirmed as a sure thing. Saying you vaguely remember him do it seems like a cop out for when or if he flips town. But I do remember. He did that as Town in Open 455 and you said nothing about it. Actually you went after the player who voted for Klick because of that. I remember you were town in that game.

What tell is that?

And that was the game? I thought he did it in a different game. :/
The reason I said vaguely was I thought that I was thinking of one of my ongoing games. >.<

Thank you, Marvin, for reading my posts. You should do that, guille.

Ztife, what kind of flavor would help with this? In fact what kind of restriction would this be? "You may only vote for yourself."? "Your first post must be a self vote."? The former is just about impossible to envision barring a really, really sadistic bastard of a mod, and the later seems like an awful lot of effort and a cop out for the mod. "You must do this highly controversial thing with your first post. And you can't tell anyone about it. "

It makes absolutely no sense to me. More likely this is just Klick being klick.

I was thinking along the lines of a character restriction rather than post restriction, on hindsight I would agree that a first post restriction wouldn't add much to the game (flavour-wise or etc.) We now know that Klick has done this twice, once as mafia and another time in a game that is still on-going..

So what does Klick being klick imply? Pro-town move or pro-scum?

Pro-Klick move. I'd go null on it, if I had to pick.

But then you confirmed as a sure thing. Saying you vaguely remember him do it seems like a cop out for when or if he flips town. But I do remember. He did that as Town in Open 455 and you said nothing about it. Actually you went after the player who voted for Klick because of that. I remember you were town in that game.

This is a misrepresentation. Both of this game and, funnily enough, of the game you link to.

(1) At no point has Mhork "confirmed as a sure thing" his vote on Klick. Quite the opposite, really: in 21 he says he is "36% sure" (so not very sure); he begins 22 by saying "oh, and more serious.." (with the obvious implication that he

wasn't

serious in the earlier post).

(2) In Open 455 Klick did self-vote, and another player (Disturbed_One) did vote for him. But Mhork didn't vote for Disturbed_One

because

of this -- in fact, he only voted Distrubed

after

D_O, under some pressure, moved his way

away

from Klick. Mhork actually says "Dude ... I was with you up until that horrid last vote". That is, rather than voting D_O for his Klick vote, he implies he supported it.

1) Perhaps not a sure thing, but the intent that it was serious, even if just 36% was clear. The words "More Serious" means that the previous was serious.
2) This is correct, I was remembering just the vote. After reviewing the post his intent seemed that Klick's vote is scummy. Regardless, I am satisfied with were I am.

So, are you saying that his vote is nonsense and should be treated as such?

I'm gonna go ahead and mention that saying 'more serious' in no way implies that I was being serious first. 'Course it prolly depends on whether I emphasized the 'more' or the 'serious' (it was the latter). Do you often say 'more serious' when you

were

being serious? I don't...

I like plessiMarvin for town right now, and I wanna see where a guille wagon goes.

UNVOTE: Klick
VOTE: guille2015

And for whatever dude commented on me not moving my vote, why should I have? It wasn't doing any harm and I didn't really have a better home for it, yeah?

[Lord Mhork]

And for whatever dude commented on me not moving my vote, why should I have? It wasn't doing any harm and I didn't really have a better home for it, yeah?

That would have been me. I'm lazy, can you point me to recent games of yours so I can what you normally do with your RVS votes. Games where you've discussed them at length would be ideal. Thanks.

I don't really have a theme for RVSing. Usually I make them, stuff happens, and I move them accordingly.

[Lord Mhork]

I can agree that the name claim would prolly have merit, but have you given thought to the possibility that some roles might be stronger if they know flavor? Or if knowing flavor would help private win conditions? 'Course we may have a flavor cop, so that could help... I'm torn.

[Lord Mhork]

Checking in. Will post later tonight or tomorrow.

[Lord Mhork]

Baby Spice

-- you seem to have missed a question I asked:

Since you've read 48 though, do you mind sharing your thoughts on Mhork/guille2015? Or ... well, anybody but D3f3nd3r, really.

Add Rufflig to the list of people I'd like to hear your opinion on.

You're right I did miss it.

Mhork is Mhork. The kind of player that dribbles scum early on, so you have to wait a bit. Null pending further information/posting.

Guille looks a little the same. Though perhaps a little more scummy. Definitive statements that are wrong from lack of checking could be indicative of a scum mind set, or of a lazy poor player. Null leaning scum.

The rufflig is kinda townish at the moment.

I really think you're Shadoweh. 0.0
Should I start with the righteous townie RAEG?

Why is rufflig townish? I'm getting weird gut scummy vibes that I don't understand. >.<

Lord M

: Post 69: You should know better than any of us if your vote on Klick was serious or not. I assumed it was serious because of your use of the words "More Serious" but that might be a cultural difference between us. Ah man, I kinda wanted you to point out where I was wrong. I guess you simply swept it away since Pless made the argument for you.

Oh, culture, you make discussions difficult. And are you saying that I should have taken the effort to type out what Marvin said? Really? How would that help? It would accomplish the same thing as saying 'oh yeah, what he said,' except then you would call me on parroting. >.<
It wasn't even that strong an attack. Sorry I didn't take it seriously. :/

[Lord Mhork]

See y'all next year!

[Lord Mhork]

Will catch up tomorrow.

[Lord Mhork]

@Mhork: You get to stay a scum read for the sarcastic apology.

Why?

With the Guille wagon now at L-2, I would like to explore some of the reasons behind these votes.

@Lord Mhork: I believe your reason for voting Guille was to see where the wagon goes. At this point, I feel it is fair to ask for a better reason for your vote.

@sword_of_omens & havingfitz: Your votes are based on Guille making a faulty meta argument, as I recall. My question to you is this: have you ever been in a game where this line of thought was validated? Or to put it bluntly, would this scum tell of yours have ever correctly predicted a scum in any game that you've played? Or has it failed more often than it has been correct?

That was really polite.
I'm still voting guille 'cause he's all sketch right now and I don't feel like unvoting him because he hasn't returned from his V/LA and I want to see his reactions and whatnot. I don't like his 143, though, 'cause he mentions he wanted to see me fumbling. I don't like that wording. :/

@guille
What did you mean by 'catch [me] fumbling'?

@Morkh,
Now that our other game is ended ( World of Warcraft )
Can I ask you why you still think that an early mass name-claim might be beneficial to town?
Especially after the backlash you got from me when you asked about one on D1?
In your defense, I did see later that you did genuinely wonder if there was a town benefit from it, but even your scumbuddy told you that it came off as rolefishing.

I'm pretty sure that there's a flavor cop in this game. I'm just gonna say it now. Most theme games I can remember off the top my head have had one. Plus there's extra information that can be attained. Say someone claims to be, like, Dr. Nick or something. That locks him from fakeclaiming to be a cop later on. It's still possible, but unlikely. Still I realize that could be misleading, because I can think of flavor that could back Dr. Nick up as a vig, doc, weak doc, JK, etc, but it does somewhat restrict the lying that can happen.

Also, I just like seeing what roles there are. I like flavor a lot...

I'm still not convinced it would be detrimental to town, but I'm not pushing it 'cause a bunch of other people beg to differ and it really doesn't matter at this point.

PEdit:
Aww... Ztife took most my reasoning...

[Lord Mhork]

PEdit:
Aww... Ztife took most my reasoning...

ummmwhuh?
Ztife's post from yesterday? how is that a PEdit?

Say someone claims to be, like, Dr. Nick or something. That locks him from fakeclaiming to be a cop later on. It's still possible, but unlikely. Still I realize that could be misleading, because I can think of flavor that could back Dr. Nick up as a vig, doc, weak doc, JK, etc, but it does somewhat restrict the lying that can happen.

ok...seriously? did you not see how you just painted a PR target? Scum have the advantage here...they know their own team and they would more or less know who is lying and who isn't, whereas town would have to guess and deduce..so while we are trying to figure out who is lying and who isn't, we have just painted a bunch of bulls-eyes on our backs, allowing scum to prioritize their kills. We would be doing their work for them.

No. His 173.

Do you think everyone has a power role?

[Lord Mhork]

No. His 173.

ugh..i missed that?

@Ztife, any possible way you could get an avatar?

Do you think everyone has a power role?

No...fairly certain that there are VT's in the game..

Do you believe the mod to be so transparent, then, as to only give power roles to the key players in the Simpsons?

Do you think everyone has a power role?

This is rolefishing. Don't.

Is not. I ask this for a reason.

[Lord Mhork]

I realize this. I'm just pointing out that just because one thinks a certain role should have certain abilities does not mean that they will have them.

[Lord Mhork]

Grah. I'll reread saulres. I'm realizing guille prolly won't be a real candidate today, though, due to lack of time to response. Sigh...

[Lord Mhork]

Sorry. I will catch up hopefully tomorrow.

[Lord Mhork]

Yay. Phone posting!

I reread Saulres and I'm seriously not feeling the scum vibe. The trap thing was weird, but I saw more town motivation in his posts that I did scum motivation. The only thing I felt like was really off was finding a lyncher read. I don't know how he did that really. I did like his D3f3nd3r case. If this guille thing doesn't pan out, he may be a decent shot. I also want to look at ztife too. Those two have my rears attention now.

And before any of y'all come guns blazing at me for not voting Saulres, what does the case really amount to? Does any of his earlier substance matter? Or did I miss some giant obv-scum slip?

[Lord Mhork]

I'll need to think on that case, plessy.

Why are you opposed to guille, rufflig?

[Lord Mhork]

I've read quickly through the case, and there are some misreps (or at least misreads). But I'm not going to go into them now because it's going to take time, and it's just not worth it.

Mhork and everyone who hasn't yet, tell us who you will and won't vote for and let's see where we are.

And I'll say this right now, in case stuff happens while I'm sleeping -- if I'm hammered before I can claim, or even after I claim (if I need to), the hammerer is declaring themselves scum by doing so and should be tomorrow's lynch.

I'd be willing to take you, guille, or even ztife. I'd really like guille though, even if plessy is making good points.

I'm not gonna even consider touching plessy or rufflig though. I like them.

Plessy, if you are so convinced saulres is scum, who would his buddies be?

Klick, contributing would really be awesome. Half your posts are promising content and the ones before that are waaaaaaaay early in the game. Who are your top scum reads?

[Lord Mhork]

That's helpful

[Lord Mhork]

I don't see how those really are crumbs...

[Lord Mhork]

2) I am the chief of police

... Clancy Wiggum, at your service. I made that breadcrumb very similar to a breadcrumb in my last game. So, most likely qwints or Plessiez may have tipped him off. I can not counterclaim cop. Anyway, ever get that feeling that there are people out there who are out to get you and that you haven't got a friend in the world? Yeah, I'm feeling it.

What do you mean tip him off?

[Lord Mhork]

So thus you are saying qwints and plessy are likely scum too? How do you know they have daytalk?

[Lord Mhork]

Alright so neither Saulres or ztife are getting lynched. I'd like guille, but I'm interested havingfitz's vote.

Havingfitz, do you really think baby can be lynched this quickly? Why is she worse than, say, guille?

PEdit:
Oh... Good point. >.<
I don't know. I'll take guille or ztife then.

Oh, and a thought on Saulres. Why are we stressing over his name claim? Isn't it kinda obvious?

[Lord Mhork]

guille....I would agree the subsequent posts asking him questions came fairly quickly, so if Zitfe did not see them he must have gotten offline quickly. If he doesn't check in today and address those questions I think it would reflect negatively on him. Especially if he isn't lynched and survives to tomorrow.

@Lord Mhork...I've seen wagons build and finish in less than 24 hours following a claim. She is worse than guille because despite the fact they have the ~same amount of posts...he has provided a substantial amount more of content and opinion IMO than she has. And if I recall correctly...he had had a lengthy v/LA which probably accounted for a reduction in his activity level or it would be even more lopsided. What's a good point?

More an interesting point. I was referring to the speculation from plessy on the cop claim.

@ztife:
Why on earth would it make sense for Saulres to post who he is going to target tonight?

I used wiggum because it was the first name to come up on google("simpsons police"), and

lou is the first name on wiggum's page

.

Hmm.

These are the opening paragraphs of wikipedia's Chief Wiggum entry:

Chief Clancy Wiggum is a fictional character from the animated television series The Simpsons, voiced by Hank Azaria. He is the chief of police in the show's setting of Springfield. He is the father of Ralph Wiggum and the husband of Sarah Wiggum.

The character's comedic value relies heavily on his incompetence and irresponsibility as a police officer, and his laziness and gluttony. Chief Wiggum's more responsible fellow officers Eddie and Lou play the straight men to his shenanigans.

How is Lou "the first name" on this page?

Actually...he's not even the first other cop to come up on the page...Eddie is.

^ This. OK...comes off a bit slimey.

VOTE: Zifte

I guess that's sketch. Why would scum bother to lie like that though?


I had missed this.

So, Zitfe, are you confirmed sane?

I really want to lynch you now.

@Mhork: Are you really suggesting ruff scum slipped when he posted the suggestion in bold?

I think he's most likely town, but it was a big jump, I thought, to scum daytalk. I was wondering if I had missed some post somewhere. In my experience, more often that not, scum only have night chat.

[Lord Mhork]

Precisely, havingfitz.

Baby, where has there been any evidence that name correlates with ability. We so far have had a neighborizer sans name, a Reiner Wolfcastle cop, and Wiggum claim sans ability. And when did rufflig claim cop. He's pretty clearly stated time and again that he isn't cop. Are you really reading this thread?

[Lord Mhork]

What the... Why would you role claim?! You were in no danger of a lynch! You know what's more anti town than a mass name claim? A mass role claim! Now all y'all need to zip about the claiming, yeah?

I'm not sure I really buy that there's both a friendly neighbor and a masonizer too, but I have no real reason not to yet. Seems pretty powerful, and I'd wager scum is powerful too for balance. Therefore we should be

careful

about the amount of information we throw at them.

As for lynch, I will not kill Saulres, ztife, or rufflig (obviously). They are named and claimed and each of their abilities can provide highly valuable information to the town come tomorrow. Assuming scum doesn't have three kills to use, at least one of them will be able to report. This is very good, no? Today I'd say our options are between guille, who has already admitted he'd be alright dying, and baby, who looked sketch as all hell saying that rufflig claimed cop.

Oh, and obviously our three PRs should NOT claim who they will target. Period. There is no way this will help.

(sorry for any errors. Posted this via phone.)

[Lord Mhork]

I can roll with a baby lynch, sure.

UNVOTE:

VOTE: Baby Spice

[Lord Mhork]

No lynch? Really, Baby? Why?

[Lord Mhork]

Can't say too much right now, but

a thought on Saulres. Why are we stressing over his name claim? Isn't it kinda obvious?

What do you think it is, and why do you think it's obvious?

Dude... Friendly neighbor? Who's the friendliest neighbor in Springfield? Flanders!

[Lord Mhork]

Why are you claiming Flanders?

New idea: Saulres is homer and the neighbor is joke. That would be hilarious.
<Real homer, please don't claim.>

[Lord Mhork]

So why did you name claim?

VOTE: D3f3nd3r

[Lord Mhork]

Why?

[Lord Mhork]

Honestly mine actually matches up fairly well. And from what I've seen, others are making sense. Comic book guy inventor? Groundskeeper Willy PGO? Those work.

Defender, I'm having trouble finding out why you're being so over defensive about making sure we know you're Flanders.

[Lord Mhork]

Personality wise they work. How many scenes had Wiggum and the other two cops sitting around talking? How many cool toys did comin book guy supposedly have? Wasn't willy always batshit crazy?

They're not perfect fits, but there's definitely flavor backing up roles. We shouldn't completely discount the connections.

How is suggesting correlation a scum tell?

[Lord Mhork]

It makes sense. He still made the action, even if it was blocked. That'd be like refunding an x-shot vig who targeted someone that got protected...

I thought I explained. A perfect, "obvious" fit doesn't exist, at least among the town roles which have flipped and which have been claimed. The connections are there, they're just more tenuous than "Isn't it kinda obvious?" and "Friendly neighbor? Who's the friendliest neighbor in Springfield? Flanders!". So I say if we get a scumflip which shows an obvious connection, that's a sign that the scum have more solid matches than the townies, and you should be looked at

at that time

as scum for your take on my role name.

Dude, that's ridiculous. I don't like what you're doing here. It's like scum setting up rationales to push policy lynches through. Why are you doing this?

[Lord Mhork]

Was dancing for two hours and now I'm tired. I didn't see anything specific against me, so I'm gonna play catch up later.

Sorry I'm being all useless. I'm really trying to get back into the swing of this.

[Lord Mhork]

Mhork

-- In 297 you said you'd think about my saulres case. Have you?

Also: why are you voting D3f3nd3r, exactly? His unprompted Flanders claim is odd, sure, but why do you think it points to him being scum? Spell it out for me, if you can.

I explicitly only protect against one kill.

Ah. Thanks.

The problem is that the 2nd shot on ztife can't be the PGO b/c of NAR.

People were saying this before, I think. I didn't really understand the logic then and I still don't, despite having read the wiki page. Can you expand on this?

(Also, what do you think about the Rufflig's take on what "1-shot activated PGO" means? Does that affect your reasoing above at all?)

As a matter of fact, yes I have. It's all super sketch and his actions really make no sense from a townie point of view. The issue I have is that no one backed up his confirmation. He claims to have told havingfitz who then denied it. How does this correlate? The only issue viable situation I can think of is that scum saulres told scum havingfitz that he was gonna use his to confirm and then they got into a fight over whether or not the lie would be worth it if a cop were to get a guilty on saulres. This seems too convoluted, though, so I'm having trouble with the Saulres-scum likelihood. What do you think?

I can't figure out why town would so aggressively go for an unprompted claim. It was almost defensive, I thought, in the way he went about it, like he didn't want to risk anyone taking that claim from him. Town is guaranteed that no one else will truthfully have the same claim as them, but (unless the mod is doing that thing where he gives fakeclaims or a list of characters not appearing) scum is not quite guaranteed that same security. Or there's a chance that he was hunting for Flanders for some reason, but the lack of a counterclaim makes that unlikely... I'm more sure about a Defender scum possibility than a Saulres scum, until the lack of night action thing is reconciled, hence why I'm voting for him.

[Lord Mhork]

Qwints, stop being sketch and explain when you vote. Just sheeping? Caught a slip? Agreeing with a case? These things aren't hard to point out and do wonders for reads. >.<

[Lord Mhork]

Saulres, that's stupid. What scum wouldn't worry about a doc protect? I'm trying to figure if this density is a town tell or a scum tell though. Eh... >.<
I wanna just discount this as WIFOM, but I got a feeling it's more than that. I need time to think.

[Lord Mhork]

I'll ask you the same things I asked Plessiez -- got any other reads? And, if I'm scum with that fakeclaim, why did fitz said he didn't get anything -- is he a buddy of mine setting me up for a fall? Or did I choose a townie who I knew wouldn't confirm me so I'd be lynched today?

@Mhork: I think scum would worry about a doc protect in a vacuum. But they weren't in a vacuum. They had a townie with a PR who they could get mislynched by playing their cards right, they had a doc claim from a person a lot of the town thought was scum, they had (assuming Rufflig's town) two masons, they had a flip of a 3-shot inventory: That's (if qwints is town) five town PRs out of (probably) 10. Would there really be a doc

also

, especially with an inventor?

It'll be interesting to see their QT. But yeah, I'm not going to assume they were worrying a doc protect with this setup.

Which was capable of being mislynched? I don't know, though. I would personally expect scum to worry about everything, at least that's what I always worry about. >.<
Maybe some people are less obsessive about calculating everything...

I didn't

have

to unvote Klick. I chose to. The scenarios at the time were shaping up to point to other people, and no one was supporting my argument against him at the time, so I removed the vote so I could focus on solidifying the scenarios. Is he scum now? Probably. When he starts playing the game or gets replaced, I'll revisit.

... this is ridiculous. If you think Klick is "probably" scum, you should be voting for him. Why wait for a scum-read to be replaced by a possibly more active, dangerous player? Being replaced won't change his alignment.

Now you answer my question in 571. And since you're so interested in who I think is scum, other than me who do

you

think is scum?

You don't seem to get how this works. You're answering my questions so I can try to work out who your partners are. We're not exchanging questions for questions. Your question in 571 is silly, so I won't answer it. It's possible fitz could be your partner and it's also possible he could be town -- I'm not playing your WIFOM game. Sorry.

I don't

have

any solid scum-reads other than you. (That's exactly why I want to

lynch

you: when I think somebody is scum, I vote for them and I urge others to vote for them. I don't wait for them to be replaced by a better player .)

Pretty confident that Rufflig, qwints and DoubleJD are town. Much weaker town-read on D3f3nd3r -- his play looks a lot like the earlier town-games of his I skimmed, questioning Rufflig on D1 about not sharing reasons for reads seemed genuine, and I don't see why he claims Flanders when he does as scum. Any of {sword, Klick, havingfitz, Mhork} could be scum-partners with you, based on what I've seen from them (and you) so far. We can work out which after we lynch you. (havingfitz would be a weakish town-read too if it wasn't for the possible connection to you, I guess. Not really interested in examining fantasy hypotheticals though)

My first impression of that post was that Double JD was saying that qwints (unintentionally) killed ztife instead of the scum. If there are two kills tonight then I'm mistaken. If there is only 1 kill tonight, then I need to take a hard look at Double JD.

Why would DoubleJD speculating that qwints was an insane Doc and being wrong make him look like scum?

Qwints, stop being sketch and explain when you vote. Just sheeping? Caught a slip? Agreeing with a case? These things aren't hard to point out and do wonders for reads. >.<

Meh. If you read qwints in iso (or just read his last post before the vote) he vote doesn't seem that surprising. It's not like he hasn't talked about saulres as a suspect before.

I know, but he could add more than just a vote. It would help...

Lord Mhork....your "only viable situation" in Post 570 is not the "only viable situation" IMO. There are several. And when you say you "can't figure out why town would so aggressively go for an unprompted claim," are you saying you do not understand why saulre claimed? If not...what do you mean?

What other situation can you think of? Do any point to Saulres being likely scum?

And I was referring to the "He isn't Flanders--I am!" claim.


Erg... I'm not completely comfortable with the Saulres lynch...

Plessy, why did scum-Saulres' buddy not back him up with his neighborizor thing?

[Lord Mhork]

Prod Dodge... Well prod acknowledgement.

Ergh... I will respond to Plessy's thing. It's interesting, but I still don't know about Saulres. Blech.

[Lord Mhork]

Plessy, why did scum-Saulres' buddy not back him up with his neighborizor thing?

As DoubleJD says, this sort of stuff runs into WIFOM pretty quickly. And I think that's a waste of time, really, and plays into the scum's hands. But briefly:

If saulres is scum (and if he doesn't have any sort of bastard role that would "confirm" him), then he and his partners have a choice. Either saulres has a partner claim to have got town-confirmation from saulres, or saulres finds some reason for his power not to have worked (either by claiming to have sent his confirmation to guille or Ztie, or by claiming to have sent it to somebody who denies getting it and to suggest he was RBed).

It's true that saulres is more likely to be lynched today following the second plan. But the first plan isn't without risks either. Arguably, it's

more

risky for the scum team as a whole (especially if saulres's partners aren't under much suspicion).

What if saulres claims to have sent a message, his partner says "oh, yeah, I got it" ... and then somebody claims to ave RBed saulres?

What if saulres claims to have sent a message, his partner says "oh, yeah, I got it", but later saulres dies anyway (killed by a "tunneling" vigilante or by a SK) and flips scum?

What if people get suspicious on day 3 or day 4 when saulres doesn't die, and end up lynching him anyway?

In all these cases, saulres's partner is in a much worse position than if saulres just sits back and plays the WIFOM card. This way, it's much harder for us to locate saulres's partners (and honestly, half of his posts read like he's gloating about this very fact). But the thing is, if saulres is scum -- and again, if he's not, why the pretend "trap"? -- we don't have to work out who he's partners are today. Lots of people

could

be his partners. We don't need to solve the game before we lynch a single scum though.

But why did he try to say that he sent to havingfitz if he were scum? What does that mean? It looks more like townie getting blocked than scum trying to inspire any WIFOM. All he would be doing is trying to get havingfitz to lie, which doesn't make sense. Really I'm thinking he'd be more likely to be a Jester than scum at this point.

If D3f3nd3r's scum, I don't see why he name-claims. I'm not sure I agree with Mhork's take on this (that D3f3nd3r would be anxious about protecting a fake name-claim, I mean.). I think, given his claim, D3f3nd3r either really is Flanders (still possibly scum, of course), or was given Flanders as a safe name-claim by the mod.

I still like this vote, though, for now. His claim was weird and weird is usually bad.

[Lord Mhork]

So then you're prolly town. Point is that I don't understand why scum would behave like this and Plessy isn't really convincing him.

Plessy, is it possible that this is more tunneling on your part?

[Lord Mhork]

Why do you want to know?

Explícame, qwints.

[Lord Mhork]

If I were a Jester I would have self-voted when I was at L-1.

Duh. That was an odd thing to say on Mhork's part.

Mhork

, what made you suggest saulres was a Jester?

(It's also mod-confirmed that this game has no Jester, by the way.)

Snarky explanation of how the only way that I see non town motivation from his actions would be for him to be some stupid third party that wanted to die.

So then you're prolly town. Point is that I don't understand why scum would behave like this and Plessy isn't really convincing him.

Behave like what? Have you read any of saulres's scum games?

Here's what saulres has "behaved like" this game:

• On day 1, saulres votes for D3f3nd3r for a bad reason.
  
• This vote is greeted with suspicion from several people.
  
• After a period of refusing to respond to questions, saulres comes up with a claim that his vote was deliberately bad, because it was intended to somehow "trap" another player.
  
• Numerous people (certainly not just me) attack this claimed "trap" as implausible and self-serving. Various holes in saulres's account are pointed out.
  
• Saulres starts hinting that he has a role that will confirm him as town.
  
• Saulres reaches L-1 and claims a cool role that would (presumably?) confirm him as town.
  
• On day 2, this proof does not appear.

I fail to see why any of this makes saulres more likely town than scum. Obviously enough, I think it suggests quite the opposite: saulres is probably scum.

Is my account misleading in some way, or do you agree with this summary but think it means saulres is probably town? What part of my earlier case, specifically, do you think is wrong? Do you believe saulres's account of having "set a trap"?

But the way he's playing his role looks more town than scum. Unless you think he's lying about that too? Then why claim in the first place?

Plessy, is it possible that this is more tunneling on your part?

"More tunneling"? When did I tunnel before? (Saulres keeps saying that I'm tunneling, but that doesn't mean I am; I've had other suspects and in fact I seem to remember having a weak town-read on saulres before his D3f3nd3r vote.)

Is it possible I'm wrong and saulres is really town? I guess so. Lots of things are possible. I don't think saulres is town, but I don't have any sort of mod-confirmation that saulres is scum, if that's what you're really asking.

No no no... I mean is the more a case of tunneling rather than you continuing to tunnel. My bad on the miscommunication.

Say that Saulres is actually town; what does that mean?

PEdit:
I don't trust a Hibbert popcorn.

[Lord Mhork]

EBWOP:

Missed this

Why do I want to know?

Because I want to know why he's voting for me! How can I defend myself against whatever reason he may have if I don't know what it is?

No why do you want to know my role?

[Lord Mhork]

No why do you want to know my role?

??? I didn't ask you for your role. I asked if you would be okay giving a "yea" or "nay" to the question, "Are you Hibbert?"

Why did qwints claim to have protected ztife, if he is scum? How would it benefit him or the scum team to make such a claim? Do you favor havingfitz or qwints as scum?

Scumqwints would claim the protection to push forth that he was blocked, and therefore if he was blocked, I wasn't, so I'm scum because I didn't get confirmed. By sheer coincidence, that's exactly what he's saying.

Ask me that last question after the Hibberts thing is resolved.

Dead on my feet from doing mtg prerelease. Will answer questions tomorrow after the next one.

[Lord Mhork]

Screw you, havingfitz. I'm not trying to coast here, but there's a lack of inspiration here.

Jester was snarky 'there's no way in hell I believe he's scum so what else could he be' post.

I'm not hibbert. This popcorn thing is stupid. I don't even care. You can give a shot at this, havingfitz. You hibbert?

[Lord Mhork]

No why do you want to know my role?

??? I didn't ask you for your role. I asked if you would be okay giving a "yea" or "nay" to the question, "Are you Hibbert?"

Why did qwints claim to have protected ztife, if he is scum? How would it benefit him or the scum team to make such a claim? Do you favor havingfitz or qwints as scum?

Scumqwints would claim the protection to push forth that he was blocked, and therefore if he was blocked, I wasn't, so I'm scum because I didn't get confirmed. By sheer coincidence, that's exactly what he's saying.

Ask me that last question after the Hibberts thing is resolved.

You were asking me if I was or was not a certain role. I assumed this was because you wanted to know information about my role. It makes sense and I was confused and hesitant to give information on that, especially with the massive backlash I got early on with my name claim request.

ok, I think I might like to see a Mhork flip…
he has more than just a few inconsistencies...and seems to play off of Pless
#125

- "Why is rufflig townish? I'm getting weird gut scummy vibes that I don't understand. >.<

This comes shortly after Plessie states his suspicions of Ruff in his 106..here Morkh's trying to endorse a Ruff wagon, without having any reasoning behind it..maybe hoping that Pless will fan the flames for him..
after which, he doesn't even really mention Ruff again until 322 where he states the following:
#322

- I'm not gonna even consider touching plessy or rufflig though. I like them

again, shortly after Plessie declares that he's liking Ruff for town now. Morkh has no mention of where or why his mind went from scummy Ruff, to I won't be lynching him at all…
Morkh also pushed for a nameclaim and gave his reasoning in his 177, however, he follows up with the following:

You know what's more anti town than a mass name claim? A mass role claim! Now all y'all need to zip about the claiming, yeah?

Why is he stating that name claim is anti-town, now all of a sudden? because it suits him for his argument...
#482 -[quote=""Morkh""] New idea: Saulres is homer and the neighbor is joke. That would be hilarious.
<Real homer, please don't claim.>

Vote: Lord Morkh

[/quote]

This is because everyone and their mother yelled at me for suggesting we mass name claim, so I fell into agreement 'cause I figure smarter guys than I have thought these things through. A mass role claim is much worse, though, and that you cannot argue. I told real theoretical homer not to claim because Defender's claim was stupid and sketch. Very, very sketch.

Also my thoughts on a player cannot change within 150 posts?

Spoiler: Rufflig felt scummy

UNVOTE:
VOTE: D3f3nd3r

It was my way of saying that I'm not open for name claiming.

These were strange and I don't like randomly throwing votes around sans reason. Posts like this ping scum for me.

Here's another question for you, maybe you'll answer this one. What about Baby Spice's and qwints' postings give you townreads on them?

I won't answer that one, no. I generally do not discuss why I think someone is a townie except under certain circumstances such as my town read being in danger of being lynched.

Speaking of reads, have you got any besides Plessiez is scum?

Refusing to discuss town reads also pings scum for me.

Fine. Let me paint you a couple scenarios.

1) I am a mason and have mod given information about the alignment of 1 or more players and I don't want to disclose.
2) I am the chief of police and days 2 and onward I have inside information on who is town that I don't want to disclose yet nor do I want to be seen making stuff up to justify my reads.
3) I am none of the above, but choose to keep the reasons for my town reads to myself so as not to give myself away when I happen to fall into case #1 or #2.

There are other variants of scenario #1 and #2, but I trust you get the idea, now.

This felt weird as all hell, and I didn't know what to make of it.

Spoiler: Rufflig felt townie

I am going to explain my town read on guille2015. A player who makes a factual error early to mid-game when such an error is otherwise relatively unimportant is more likely to be town than scum. A town player is less likely to check his facts than a scum player. Why? For the simple reason that the townies tend to tell the truth, therefore he doesn't feel a great need to check his facts as he isn't intentionally lying. A scum player is much more likely to check his facts to make sure he is contradicting himself for something he said or stood for earlier. The scum player does have to hide his true thoughts and doesn't want to risk exposing them through carelessness. The scum player does not want the attention that such a mistake would bring - he wants to blend in or appear townie. At any rate, my personal experience has been that this is a town tell - I'm sure I'll run into a scum sooner or later that proves the exception. It's also why I questioned havingfitz and sword_of_omens on this topic as my experience doesn't align with the reasons for their votes. Before anyone states that guille's error wasn't unimportant, I'd ask the nay-sayers to tell me when the last time they have seen a game start off with an early lynch from a meta read (someone always checks meta read claims, btw).

Baby Spice's take on this issue was null with scummy undertones. Not quite my feelings, but she obviously thought about the issue rather than just using it as an excuse to vote guille. This is part of the reason that I awarded her some townie points.

Now guille starts giving real information, which I like.

I'm still unwilling to vote for Guille.

I am willing to vote for ztife or saulres. Right now, I'm favoring:

VOTE: ztife

but not by a whole lot.

I've been doing some rereading. I think my original reason for voting saulres was fairly weak, but my early suspicions have colored my views. It is obvious that I have been tunneling him - I am not objective and I am having a case of second guessing myself. So, I'm playing a hunch.

Hey look, more explaining and reasonable behaviour coupled with an admission of tunneling. Scum totally does that.

Am I not allowed to have my reads progress? Or is a light scummy vibe too much to change over, like, 3 pages? >.<

On my phone, but....
Super late EBWOP:
That last quote in my 677 of Morkh's was put there because I was unsure of why he would say that, considering Homer was a sample pm that died in the opening write up...

Is it unreasonable to assume Homer might still be in the setup?

Jester was snarky 'there's no way in hell I believe he's scum so what else could he be' post.

Firstly .. this doesn't make much sense? A Jester

wants to be lynched

. If you suggest somebody looks like a Jester, you are suggesting they look like they are

trying to be lynched

. You are suggesting they

look suspicious

. You don't suggest somebody is a Jester if you think they look incredibly townie. That doesn't make sense.

I said Jester over scum because he looks way too suspicious to be scum here. What sort of scum would botch a claim that they couldn't confirm without team coordination and then not have the team vouch for it. You would have to have both scumbuddies as having a high level of suspicion, which I don't recall seeing. Your explanation as to how Saulres could still be scum reeked of tunnelvision. Horribly. Not getting backup threw him way up on the lynchlist, why would scum do this?

Jester, on the other hand, would be completely ok with this. But again, it was snarky sarcasm.

Secondly (and more seriously), how and why did you come to the conclusion that "there's no way in hell" saulres is scum? That just isn't consistent with any of your earlier posts about saulres today. You've doubted my case, sure, but you've always sounded willing to consider the idea saulres might be scum. In a couple of posts, you've actually accused saulres of doing scummy things yourself.

I keep thinking and looking for any reason why today's Saulres behaviour could possibly have even the slightest motivation from a scummy perspective and I can't. I simply cannot. This is why there is no way in hell he is scum, because I only see town confusion and town behaviour and townie town town town motivation. I'm very willing to consider he's scum if you can provide any explanation as to how, although that willingness is quickly starting to fade. :/[/quote]

@Mhork:
Hey. Remember to keep working on this starting at Post 721.

[Lord Mhork]

If the theory is correct, then either D3f3nd3r was lying about being Flanders or it seems like there should be a Neighbour-type role (or some other Flanders-inspired role, but that's certainly the obvious one). And while it's not completely impossible, to my mind, that saulres could be scum with the ability to "confirm" himself as town ... it's not really that likely, is it?

To point 1,

I

have the "Neighbour-type role". So I don't believe the name claim is false. Says nothing about his alignment though.

To point 2, if SAD didn't completely randomize the abilities amongst alignments then I have no idea what the bastard element is. Meaning it's theoretically possible that my role might have gotten assigned to scum. I don't want to discount a cross-alignment role seeding in case it becomes pertinent later in the game.

---

@Mhork

I did like his D3f3nd3r case.

You did? Could you please explain why?

Well that's a long while back. I would assume it had to do with Defender being weird about name claims and wanting name claims while simultaneously trying not to seem too eager about them. Also that possible 'scumslip' was interesting. It was a decent case I could get on board with.

Honestly mine actually matches up fairly well.

Could you think of a better match for either?

Umm... Maybe? I dunno. I prolly could, but the flavour still makes sense to me.

And please answer Pless' question. Here it is again (in my words):

Jester was snarky '

there's no way in hell I believe he's scum

so what else could he be' post.

Why is there

no way in hell

that you believe I'm scum?

Because you're actions and results make absolutely no sense from a mafioso's perspective. That's my main issue with your entire case. Sure you've been sketch all game and weird about traps and all, but I would expect that mafia would lie their way through the first night of 'oh yeah I got the PM' and then work from there.

Here, since fitz is having so much trouble coming up with alternate scenarios when I'm town, even going so far as to deny any possibility other than I was blocked, let me present him with one.

"saulres is town and I'm lying scum about not receiving his notification. But if I don't push that he was blocked, I won't have a defense after he's mislynched."

VOTE: fitz

---

Is it unreasonable to assume Homer might still be in the setup?

I'm gonna go with "Yes":

Ser Arthur Dayne, Homer Simpson, Local Fat Man and member of the Mod Faction, was murdered Night 0.

Oops. That's what I get for skimming the opening flavor. Ah well. It really has no bearing on the actual game at hand. The 'Homer don't claim' thing was more a jab at Defender's stupid Flanders claim.

I keep thinking and looking for any reason why today's Saulres behaviour could possibly have even the slightest motivation from a scummy perspective and I can't. I simply cannot. This is why there is no way in hell he is scum

Umm... Oops?

Every post Pless quotes in 713 comes from you on Day 2. So what changed your mind on almost all of them (570 excluded)?

Simple. You're scummy, but situation is dictating that you're likely town. The night actions heavily suggest that you are town having been roleblocked, yet your day actions imply sketchiness. I haven't changed my mind about your sketch behaviour, but the night actions are more or less overruling them at this point.

Need to sleep. Gah.

Still confused, so no vote yet. Will be voting for saulres or Mhork tomorrow though (that is, on Tuesday). Think one of those two is by far the best option (D3f3nd3r as an outside bet, maybe, but that's mostly just irritation as his lack of contribution). Think Mhork makes sense as scum whatever saulres's alignment (if saulres is scum, then hypothetical scum!Mhork is doing his job as partner of playing up the WIFOM 'but surely if saulres was scum his partner would have confirmed him?' angle -- he's been reluctant to go all out and town-read saulres until now but he's been more or less subtly pushing against the wagon for most of the day; if, on the other hand, saulres is town, scum!Mhork is just waiting on the sidelines ready to go "I told you so!" when saulres flips).

Don't really like Mhork's slight obsession with who I thought saulres's partners could be, come to think of it. (That was at the end of day 1, wasn't it? Will check tomorrow.)

... tried to write more, but I just can't focus. Tomorrow. Would be nice (but surprising, sadly) if activity picked up some as we head into the last day or so of Day 2.

I'm just gonna make a fair point and say that you can rationalize anyone's relationship with anyone else no matter alignment. The guessing game doesn't do much here.


I think we should really lynch Defender. Just saying. He's not doing anything except saying 'don't lynch Saulres' without actively providing any real rationale. And I'm not claiming to be a paragon of participation, but he could really be doing a better job himself.

@Defender:
What gives you an uber town read on Saulres? Why aren't you doing anything on his impending lynch?

[Lord Mhork]

What I think Mhork is saying is that even though my individual actions look scummy, he can't see a scumteam motivation behind them, only a town one.

Fitz, offhand here's one.

Now could you link me to where you addressed qwint's claim, specifically why his protection didn't go through in the case where you're considering the possibility of me being town?

This. This is what I'm trying to say. He's being sketch, but I don't see the scum motivation. I only see nonscum looking confused as hell as to why his friendly neighbor didn't work. I maintain that, if he were scum, he'd have been backed up by a scumbuddy.

That is all I have.

Thing about Saulres wagon being bad is because Saulres reads as town for me. Not "OMG we must lynch anyone who votes him" town, but more like "Yeah, not someone worth lynching."

I can see the point behind my wagon, but best of the three there is Mhork's.

This is weak, along with his 'yeah go ahead and vote me, guys, but I prefer Mhork.' After all, what scum would agree to his own lynch?!
[/sarcasm]

But seriously, this backup for Saulres is weak and goes back to his whole waffling 'yeah Saulres is prolly town but I don't wanna take the effort to back it up with reasoning.

UNVOTE: D3f3nd3r
VOTE: Lord Mhork

I don't like my company on the d3f3nd3r wagon.

Company is enough to turn you off of a wagon you believe to be on scum?

@Plessiez: He answered the questions I posed to him about the contradictions, and I accepted those answers.

At to last-minute wagons, look at Baby Spice's lynch wagon and tell me what you learned about alignments from it. If I were lynched earlier in the day you would've been able to do some wagon analysis.

@qwints: That makes no sense. If you don't have a townread on me, how could you possibly have voted for D3f3nd3r using a reason that he was setting himself up for an "I told you so" based on my flip?

^That.


I don't think there is really another option for me at this point rather than a Defender lynch. Can we please get rid of the lurker scum? :/

[Lord Mhork]

Btdubs I'm not gonna be online for deadline because of school and all. Sorry!

[Lord Mhork]

Why not Defender? Seriously? At least I'm playing the stupid game instead of just coasting by with my thumb up my ass.

I'm Moe. I'm a one shot bus driver. Huzzah.

Town is dumb.

[Lord Mhork]

Because I can pull the old switcheroo to trick the bad guys. I crumbed in my first post. Flaming referring to flaming moes (the drink) and I mention a bus.

And it's frustrated player. There is no reason why I should die instead of Defender. What has he actually done? Nothing! This is moronic! The name claim makes no sense, the Saulres defense was fucking pathetic, and he's done nothing but lurker away in the corner setting up outs.

And screw you, Saulres. This is the dumbest case of no good deed goes unpunished. I stick my neck out pointing out your lynch is bad and I die instead? How the hell is that fair?!

PEdit:
I haven't yet 'cause I have no clue how to properly bus drive.

[Lord Mhork]

No this is me phone posting on the bus there.

The flavor made sense as Moe used the bus driver as 'the old switcheroo' on the bad guys.

Of course I'm annoyed that defender isn't being lynched. I know I'm not scum and im fairly certain Saulres isn't. That leaves defender who isn't doing anything and has just been waiting for the town to lynch anyone.

The Flanders claim is scummy to me because it looked really over eager and aggressively defensive of his claim which I point to more likely scum trying to defend their role. Town would not need to worry about lying and would thus be less paranoid about. There's also his cheap defense of Saulres and the fact that he's not even trying to narrow possibilities down. He is just sitting there doing NOTHING.

[Lord Mhork]

Also I'm at school now, so I'm out. Here's to a defender lynch, hopefully.

[Lord Mhork]

@Pless , Ruff , and Qwintz
I very much enjoyed playing with you guys and hope to see you in another game soon. ..

SAD - the game was fun, thanks for being a great mod...


@Mhork - you bastard :p second time in a row you beat me as scum...
I will get you, my pretty. ...

Also, pretty sure i called the bus drive correctly. ..

Is the scum link up yet?

Sorry, pal. I'm just good at scum.

Scum's two biggest successes:

1) Busdriving saulres's target [That was pure luck, right?]
2) The "counterclaim" followed by a no kill.

Regardless of the Judas thing, I think there was no way we found an AA lynch in time given #2.

HF, I'm still really confused why you didn't consider your bp-status as a possible reason for the no kill on N3.

Busdrive was the coolest thing ever, in my opinion.

Holy cow, though. I didn't think we'd win.