Open 163 (Jungle Republic)- Game Over before 835

[DTMaster]

Vote: Kill-kill

Because he obviously wants us to kill him twice, making him Mafia Sleeper. Lol.

[DTMaster]

Mastin still hasn't confirmed (as of this post). What are the chances that he is reading the game so far. (And L-3, while I don't think is scummy for the RVS, is odd to look at on

just page 1

)

[DTMaster]

Er EBWOP

Just page 1

[DTMaster]

@Hohum

Did I say I have a problem with a L-3 at the RVS? Nope because it's just the RVS. I just said it was odd because of 2 reasons:

1. Its page 1 so its just weird since it is my first game where this happened before.
2. Mastin didn't confirm yet.

My post 11 states both things.

Putting words in my mouth is another thing.

FoS: Hohum

[DTMaster]

Hohum, I'm not bitching about it. I just said it was odd to look at an L-3 wagon on page 1. Again you are putting words into my mouth.

Unvote

Vote: Hohum

You just twisted your own words together to try and make me look scummy out of nothing. (RVS is now dead for me)

@Town
If you support Hohum's statement then show how I am "bitchy" about the L-3 wagon.

[DTMaster]

@Sabre
While I agree that tunneling is bad on lets see page 1 on day 1 on the RVS stage, I disagree that I should forget about it. The issue should be dropped for now until the rest of the town joins in before a tunnel war starts, (and scum can fan the flames), but this exchange can be revealing for later on and it does call for a meta call on both parties.

[DTMaster]

@Nik
I agree that my post can be interpreted as defending Mastin, and concede to that but I wasn't

explicitly defending him nor criticizing the L-3 bandwagon

.

Please bold your claims in my quotes because from what I understand: I just said I find it odd (but not scummy) that someone is at L-3 on page 1 because it is the first time I seen in in any of my games. I also commented that Mastin still hasn't confirmed yet as of this post. Both are stating the facts as everyone RVSes him for his notorious walling.

Talk about fanning the flames.

[DTMaster]

@Nik

1. You didn't point out how I'm bitching.

2. I said in my 22 you can interpret it as a defense. I retort that yes you can see it that way but I was only stating what I saw. What was in parentheses shows that in the context, and time frame of that post, and your RVS vote on post 4 all states: Mastin hasn't confirmed yet.

3. Explain to me how that statement could be used to defend Mastin Nik? I just said: He hasn't confirmed what are the chances he is reading this game? as you quoted.

4. You are admitting to ignoring what I wrote in parenthesis, which is part of what I said. Explain yourself why you chose to ignore it when quoting me?

[DTMaster]

EBWOP: I should say explicitly. Implicitly my 11 would be read as: You think the L-3 is scummy and picking on a person who isn't confirmed is scummy. But you would need to

infer this from my post

using your own judgment, rather then me saying out right: "I defend Mastin".

[DTMaster]

@Hohum

I think Sabre just did (unless that was an expression you just used then I'll hit my head for not getting it and just looked at the literal meaning of the: practice what you preach with what was just posted)

defending others does not [always] equal scummy.

Also there is a concept called pressure voting (but psst. It's a secret so don't tell any one. It's when you vote someone closer to L-1 to pressure them into talking more. Which is something that you wanted us to do in your 13 post against Mastin. /snarky comment)

@Town
Before we go and tunnel each other to death, half the town hasn't posted yet and its only been a couple of days. Give it a couple more to let the town come in before more fanning commences.

[DTMaster]

@Hohum.
I'm doing an impressive job to stop half the town from voting Mastin then, considering they haven't posted anything yet. /sarcasm

[DTMaster]

@Nik

Sorry Nik but I didn't see it (it jumped to page 2 when I was making my post see my 26 and the timing of sabre's 25)

But yes it makes my vote very OMGUS in reasoning. But I interpreted as hohum twisting my words when I'm just stating some information from what I saw and read.

Also my responses:

1. I'm not. I don't care about the L-3 wagon. I care about how hohum twisted what I stated (which applies to you). The wagon is useful to generate a reaction and from there we can gauge the person's reaction since the town doesn't have anything concrete on the player's alignment. As I stated like 3-4 times now:

I just found it odd since it was the first time I saw one on page 1

.

2. The point is read my 27. I agree that you can interpret my post as a defense post, but I'm asking you to

explicitly show how I did it

3. I'm dense and dumb with an IQ of a rock. Enlighten me please since it looks like you can't support your own claim yourself.

4. Engish/Grammer Nazi (but you will be ignoring a large part of my posts. Oh gee, look at that.)

[DTMaster]

Eww simupost city + hyperactivity.

[DTMaster]

@Nik

So it's okay for you to paraphrase, but it is not okay for me to paraphrase the same thing. Double standards much?

You can paraphrase. You just said:

DTM: I don't care about what you said in parentheses

There is a difference from paraphrasing your words and

not caring what I said an parentheses

[DTMaster]

@Sabre

Current Metas:

1.Currently playing with you Sabre and Scott.
2.I played a game with Nik.
3. Know about Mastin, and a little bit about hohum.
4. I know about Admiral (for about 2 posts before... well I can't say since it's ongoing).

[DTMaster]

@Magic
Aww. :< Replacement already....

[DTMaster]

@Hohum

Wouldn't we be following your script if we followed the Mastin bandwagon?

Talk about using your own argument against yourself.

[DTMaster]

@Nik
Look at point 3. Be very, explicit. (I'm a rock talking to a guy running in circles around a thought.)

@Sabre
I can only interpret yours and Hohum having some seriousness in the vote (and maybe Nik but I think that's more RVS talk then actual accusation) The rest is RVS before it got horribly, horribly derailed. I'll make that summary post starting now.

@Hohum
But you are attacking a player (or players) for not following through on that wagon.

[DTMaster]

SUMMARY POST AS OF NOW: TUNNEL MANIA EDITION (end caps lock lol)

Cain

1. Added a third vote to the Mastin Wagon. No reads so far.

Kill-kill

1. Added a vote to Cain in the RVS. No reads so far.

magichands

1. Replacing out, probably the lucky soul to escape the Mastin wall-fest. No reads so far.

Now with that uselessness out of the way:

Hohum

1. I'm attacked and my words are twisted. Argument started post 13. + scum points for twisting my words. +town points for pointing out why L-3 bandwagons aren't dangerous for the town.

2. Hohum points out leading argument. Null tell since it's a stretch for day

3. Null tell on 42. I can interpret both scum and town reasoning. But it reads as self contradictory to me.

Nik

1.Perceptive but not explicit about it. You need to infer his arguments (see the start on post 20) Null tell due to conflicting ideologies.

2. Asking for votes. Null tell. Conflicting scum hunting ideologies.

3. 49 is pro-town. + townie brownies (no points for you).

Sabre

1. Doesn't want tunneling in 18. + town points to stop the impending confusion

2. Post 34: more defusing of tunnel war. Town points.

3. Post 40. Sarcastic pro-town statement about the current situation.

------

Now for comments:

@Hohum
1. That actually is a good explanation. You win that exchange minus the name calling.

In review of what I summarized I cannot support my own vote since I actually just only get null-tells. I'm reacting to comments in a hyperactive setting. So to make my vote useful:

Unvote

Vote: Kill-kill

Read Nik's 20. This isn't a RVS vote (like my first one on Kill), but it is something I want to explore since Kill's RVS vote is after the whole tunnel exchange.

[DTMaster]

@Kill-kill

Wait what bandwagoning are your referring to when you referenced me?

[DTMaster]

Upon rereading I'm dense as a rock. "clunks head"

[DTMaster]

Oh I was skim rereading and in that activity mess I forgot to answer Nik's 56.

Here is my response

@Nik's 56

As of now I do not find neither of you scummy due to the hyper-active fest we went through.

But at that time I found Hohum scummier (and you bouncing on top of the argument) since he initiated the exchange. As time went on he was able to defend himself much fluidly which lead me to question whether or not it was OMGUS due to the situation (and it's the start of the game so you get extremely picky over the small things).

If I applied the same reasoning to you, I find you less scummy because its a null-tell in my POV. You are trying to gain more scum hunting reactions from building on top of Hohum's points which can be very pro-town or scummy in nature. Either way you have my reactions so far.

I apologize for not answering that question but I missed it completely.

[DTMaster]

@Nik

Toro is in another game with me and actually has some game experence, but not a lot. (In the other game I made note of some evidence of potential noobish play, but that is about it.)

@Toro/Admiral

It might be good to just read the analysis that me, and sabre did. It's a summary of the events (and sabre points out an intresting spectrum between us 4). Skipping the "random squabbles" tells me you don't care about the RVS reactions that was gained, which is one of the core parts of going through the RVS.

[DTMaster]

@Scott

I only did find it odd (but I didn't find it scummy). It's funny that in the end Mastin didn't even show up in the game.

@Hasdgfas
Telling people to unvote you? Its day 1, votes get moved around a lot and if you demonstrate a good townie feel then they will move off you on their own.

FoS:hasdgfas

for asking the voters to unvote you based on their policy against Mastin.

[DTMaster]

@Nik
Cow? Lol I assume you mean from that siggy :p

@has
I know this game is about implicit reasoning, but if you have nothing to hide then you should be able to explicitly express yourself. Asking people to do their own interpretations of your arguments (which is the point I put against Nik) is the same thing as putting the words in their mouth for you. Yes it's good to think this out on your own, but it's also bad because you assume too much from them. (My bit of mafia theory)

[DTMaster]

@Has

Forgot to answer your question >>;;.

I find it scummy because you

asked for the unvotes

jest or not. Asking for it joking or not reads as begging to me which at this stage is not necessary. The policy votes will come off (as you said from your experience) with or without mentioning it.

It's difficult to read sarcasm for me, then hear it. I did take what you said quite literally.

[DTMaster]

@Nik
Yes when you are trying to scum hunt and get scum readings you go through implicit reasoning. No scum player would ever claim that (though it would make the game easier). But my view on townies is different and you should be able to ask for their explicit thoughts. Withholding that information is very anti-town to me if he/she is questioned on it. (My scum theory input)

@Hasdgfas

I prefer typing out hasdgfas since it's your username (but the cow avy is fun :p)

I'm also quite a literal person, with or without smilies (but I try to catch the sarcasm/and joking).

@Paragraph you didn't understand.
If you read the exchange between me and Nik:

I go: Explain explicitly please.
He goes: my case is obvious so I don't need to.

I dislike this (no matter how obvious it is) since this mind set makes me put the argument that Nik didn't state in his own post for him. No matter how obvious it is, it isn't

literally what he said, but what you assume he said

.

Make sense? Should I try and clarify more? Nik understood me fine though.

[DTMaster]

@Has

First of read my 26 (point 1) and 38 (bold). I asked Nik to quote me and point it out since I thought I only made a general statement which to me is my first time seeing it. Nik made an argument against me and I asked him to prove it in my quotes.

I don't want to restart this argument all over again, it'll end up wasting time by rehashing my own statements and Nik (and other townies jumping) on the argument that I was defending Mastin. It'll be one big repeat again, which to me is useless unless you can point out something that the town over looked. Then I would be more inclined to revisit that issue that Sabre's 67 didn't already point out.

[DTMaster]

Whoops hit submit, not preview: >>

con't

Also I asked how the quote would be used to defend Mastin in my 26. I would need to make a convincing argument to stop the rest of the town from bandwagoning.

I found it odd in my 11

for the reason that it was just page 1

. Kill-kill was discomforted about it in his 71. I do not hate that bandwagon. People are acting on what Nik and Hohum said. A bandwagon is good to establish reactions from the person who is bandwagoning. The reactions are much more useful then looking at the people who started the bandwagon (unless it went to a hammer then the latter is much more useful).

I agree with this, I even said I do not find it scummy in my 11

.

You try to find the sub-text and make it into a defense post, but I clearly said what I was thinking at that time. I acknowledge this can be interpreted as a defense, but it is your interpretation.

/repeat rant

@question

>>;; My grammar is just weak, I know English. Second time I got asked this.

[DTMaster]

Yes because stating the obvious (since Mastin never confirmed) means I said:

"Stop this bandwagon! He's not confirmed! You are lynching an unconfirmed person. He doesn't have scum tells! etc..."

You can interpret this, but that is all.

[DTMaster]

@Nik
One of the interpretations was I was uncomfortable about the wagon and I tore it down. How does my point not apply to this statement?

(See: Hohum 13. Your 33, Kill-kill 71 ,Scott 92)


@Myself
Thoughts: Greeaat. This is getting brought up again. Cue the recycled rehash.

[DTMaster]

@Has
Which I acknowledge, but I want to understand how

I bitched about the bandwagon

. So far the response was:

You bitched about it, its obvious. If you can't see it I can't help you, sorry!

To me it makes no sense. So I guess no help for poor me. (This gets into an argument about semantics anyways... which is very distracting for the town)

[DTMaster]

My statement shows that I wasn't uncomfortable about the wagon. If you don't believe me and want my 11 post to have that meaning then fine, take it. The only way it'll confirm this is my death which will make it just plain anti-town for me to martyr my point across if I was town (and anti-scum if I was scum).

[DTMaster]

@Has

My stance is: I don't have on the Mastin wagon because I have 0 tells on anyone. The only people I dislike are the people taking a very backseat approach right now (see: Toro, Scott, Link, Kill and Cain, Admiral). Lurking isn't a scum tell, just a null tell right now, and it's been two days since the first post.

To me the only readings I get is a town-tell from sabre and the rest is null and my overreaction due to hyperactivity. This resulted

from the reaction from my original post, not from the reaction on the bandwagon.

Edit:Recent Post

I cannot use that part as an argument against people. If I did, I would contradict myself. This would mean I would be extremely scummy for lying on my mafia theory and being very opportunistic.

[DTMaster]

EBWOP: It should be read: it would be considered as being very opportunistic.

[DTMaster]

@Has

If I had done it then it would warrant a case on me, if I didn't then it doesn't mean anything. >>;; A bit premature to jump on me for this now.

Also Sabre is the only one sane enough to try and stop the tunneling. He was the first person to address this issue, and no one else did. Confusion can only strengthen scum actions, clearing confusion is more townie then anything.

[DTMaster]

To add: It's a very poor backdoor if it implicates me that heavily too.

[DTMaster]

@Has

1. It would mean I would already have a preconceived notion of Mastin's alignment. I don't and I don't want to unless there is sufficient evidence to support Mastin's township/scuminess. (Well refer this to you since you are the replacement). The bandwagon is a tool to learn from reactions. My reaction is, I got nothing because the topic jumped on me and Mastin replaced out. (Plus I agree, your "might" would have more strength depending what I do later.)

2. That would imply that Sabre would be defending one of us no? Also early game tunneling is very bad when the rest of the town can take a backseat approach (read as: if the scum team was everyone else they would gain +town points by fanning the flames of the argument).

It is early to say that he is confirmed town, but to me he hints of towniness from what he did. But I digress since your POV is just as valid from Scum-Sabre POV.

[DTMaster]

@Lumi
No one did the traditional welcome post! "insert that here".

Also since I see sabre as more pro-town then scummy, can you elaborate more on this (maybe even debunk some of my own arguments). I'm not entirely convinced that his aggression against Nik can be interpreted as scummy, I see it as a neutral tell right now.

To me your summary post might read as: "soft defending Nik," but only in a faint light.

@Scott
FYI: Toro's meta shows he posts little, with odd comments. I do not know if this is a town or scum meta (the game is ongoing) but he has shown that his style is easily interpreted as scummy.

@Admiral
Summary post when you get better access to internet. I want one since there isn't a lot to read as of now.

@Town who hasn't contribute more then 2 posts.
If you do not state your reasons why you are so inactive (ie I have work and I can only post once every 3 days) I'm going to have to agree with Nik's 135.

[DTMaster]

@Zazier

I know its your meta to do this (reading the Grimmy's Pokemon madness) But I prefer a wall then this spammage. (Though it is devious and gets your post count up)

My responses:
157: I see the main reasons as two policy votes (hohum,sabre), a typical bandwagon (cain) vote, and a joke vote (nik). I have no reads on the players who voted since it was too early. Bandwagons in general lead to reactions that the town can benefit from (from the player who is getting bandwagoned and others who will react to the bandwagon).

158: My summary post in 62 said my vote was a

bad vote

. Again I was only stating what I saw. My explanation was: I saw this on page 1, it looks weird since it's my first time seeing this. I was stating my mind set.

I did not take it further to discredit the bandwagon itself. You, hohum, Nik and most of the town are viewing this as such and I acknowledge that my post can be viewed that way but I deny that it was my intention to do so. Hence my answer is: I wasn't trying to derail the bandwagon, I was just stating my inner thoughts at that time. Accept that answer as you will.

162:

1. Nik wanted Hohum to pressure vote me. I was being snarky with that statement when I also viewed that Hohum wanted to apply the same situation on Mastin with his 13 (Hohum attacked me for "trying to run interference" with the wagon on Mastin when I said I had no issues with it when I should have voted Mastin. Also see his policy vote. Hohum wanted the wagon on Mastin) I should have added /sarcasm but I put /snarky comment to emphasize I was being sarcastic.

2. I wanted others to chime in because this is mafia and the point of the thread is discussion. The town doesn't consist of

4 players who are the only one posting content on the 16th

. Many of them confirmed, and they only posted 2 days after this (some even got prodded before they posted).

165: I think sabre was responding to the fact that

only 4 people where talking and it took 3 days later for the rest of the town to speak up.

Also suspicion passed around us 4 between us. My thoughts though, not his.

Its premature to assume that he was serious in the fact that there are only 4 scum.

@Kill-kill
By now I find it more anti-town what Cain and Admiral are lurker types. There are little analytical posts, and too many iffy comments. It makes me think they will only respond when they are called upon.

@Toro
You disapproved on Cain's bandwagon vote when Mastin was at L-3 in the RVS? It's stretching that argument. I think he was trying to get more reactions then forcing a lynch during this stage (besides it would be much more useful for the RVS wagon to go to lynch since we would know scum was part of that wagon).

[DTMaster]

Hmm I'm seeing a deja vu here am I not?

@Scott/Hohum/Toro
Do you three see Sabre's 187, 188, and 189 as OMGUS reasons and not actual, legit reasons that would make Zazier scummy. Can you debunk his argument to show how this is done?

I personally agree that with the statement that Zazier's posts can be seen as mudslinging among the four active players (fanning the flames again).

[DTMaster]

Oh whoops. Yes Hasdgfas. >>;; It's easier to type hohum then hasdgfas (I will never type the cow).

MY BAD.

[DTMaster]

@Town
Sorrry! I neglected this game since another one of mine got interesting. My current thoughts:

@Has
I was only intrested if you found something else that Zaszier missed when he posted his "literally" page analysis. Personally I see more pro-towness from Sabre's posts I'll give my take on Zaszier's 169:

Post 52: I read this post as it was from Sabre's POV rather then him speaking on behalf on a few players. (Note: "I'll just claim for me part")

Post 54: This would have more merit if Sabre didn't post his analysis on 67. Out of the 4 of us, the only one who didn't post an analysis was Hohum, which brings me to question:

Hohum, why didn't you do Sabre's request? Zazier, why didn't you point the finger at Hohum for this?

Post 67: Establishing spectrum of townies is another way of narrowing down scum suspects. If one person is lynched out of the 4, then you can see that logically it makes no sense for the other person on opposite ends of the connection is the scum partner (unless it is an elaborate busing maneuver but that gets into WIFOM territory)

[DTMaster]

@Zazier

Responses:

Post 103: By last paragraph I'm assuming my:

It's difficult to read sarcasm for me, then hear it. I did take what you said quite literally.

If it isn't can you quote the "paragraph" (since this is actually a sentence, not a paragraph). I typed it since, it's my thought process? Sarcasm is difficult for me to read on the interwebs because when you hear it from someone you also have voice inflections, and tone to hear it from. I was questioned by Has for literally seeing that his 95 post was begging to get unvoted (with smiley). At the time I ignored the smiley so argument ensued. It's how I think, quite literally (pun intended).

Post 122: It's me rehashing that:

1. I did not say I didn't like the bandwagon. I did not say I was uncomfortable with the bandwagon. I just said I saw it was odd since it was page 1 and it's the first time seeing it.

2. That my 11 post you can interpret it as defending, but I personally did not intend to defend Mastin.

3. The only way to confirm this is by my death, since it will reveal my alignment. I won't play suicidally because that is plain dumb to do so and hurts the faction I'm aligned with.

Anything else that you need clarified on?


Post 127: "It" refers to the back peddling on the original Mastin wagon. I wrote "it's odd" and Has said I could go back and accuse people on the argument that the wagon was "scummy" when I clearly said "it wasn't scummy"

If I used this argument then I would be extremely scummy for:

1. Lying
2. Being opportunistic on the current town opinion

I countered that it's premature to use this argument on me since the "opportunity is there" but I never used it. It's best used if I had slipped.

151: No welcome cakes for you!!!!! Spammer >:<
I'm reading Grimmy's game because I want to :3. The flavour is amazing.

On a serious note:
I was using this meta just as a note since Toro's style is consistent in both games. That was the purpose of the FYI to Scott.

180: Devious means evil and cunning. I was jesting since you get your post count up by posting like this at a really fast rate.

Also why do you post like this? I know it's your style and all but just curious.

Lastly: I agree with the reasons on a policy vote depending on what the policy is and when it's invoked. So I would need to look at this from a case by case scenario.

In this game, the two policy votes were on Mastin for his walling and play style during the RVS. I do not have an issue with these policy votes because:

1. This is during the RVS where people had vote/ and will continue to vote for silly reasons until discussion can occur.

2. I never played a game with Mastin but with his current reputation he's known as the replacement killer. Sabre and Hohum's vote to try and stop the wall seems justified, but only during the RVS. If it was determined that Mastin was townie then I would not agree with the policy vote and would argue that the votes are best spent scum hunting.

I answered for Sabre because I think your point wasn't accurate. It isn't scummy to defend someone who you think it's town or point out inaccuracies when you see them. Again I did say these were my thoughts and not Sabres so I wouldn't be answering for him. I'm not him so I wouldn't know his thoughts.

Again I catch sarcasm sometimes (and I do my best to. I know this reads as weak sauce reasoning but I either see it or I don't. That's it.) It felt premature to assume that Sabre already knew there were four scum. Do you believe this was quite a literal scum slip?

Reading sabre's ISO 5 reads as frustrated townie with the whole -_- smiley.

My last paragraph though that's my fault. I missed Cain's post when I went back and reread the page after you pointed this out. I take back my statement against Toro then since Cain's post is scummy.

Part 1 Done. I'll continue with the second half of my posts but I want to post before I lose this giant blob of text.

[DTMaster]

Part 2: Reponses. I'm going to edit things in a nicer format for you since when I read the blob, it was messy.

Response to 196

I like that scum-tell too and if I can spot it I'm a happy camper. :3 / Mafia theory discussion.

Both analysis are similar except for a few key areas which is why I agree with Sabre's comments that your post could be mud slinging at the time of my posts.

1. Reading Has's ISO 2 (The catch-up post) his problem was not contributing to the active discussion. I someone disagree but when I was going through it the main argument was between Nik, Hohum and I. Sabre's posts trying to stop the argument has already been addressed with both scummy and townie interpretations

2. At the time I disagreed with your 169 post. In the context of the timeline I saw misinterpretation within this post (see my response to 52 and 54). Your later post (ISO 38) clarified some of my issues and now I see your POV.

EDIT: Add in a 3. BTW you missed that lumi did a character analysis too. Same reasoning of Has' argument applies here.

In summary you pointed out specific areas of interests that I did not agree with instead of Has or Lumi's analysis. I didn't comment on them since I saw both interpretations. Yours did not clear up until your more recent post.

Response to your 205

I don't understand why you posted an incomplete list, it just served to generate confusion with the town. (It already got a bunch of people scratching their heads) Why did you do it?

Response to your 225

Actually when I look at it, that piece heavily implies a DTM-Sabre link. Is that the direction you are going for?

Response to your 232

54: Sabre asked everyone in the debate to do it. Hohum was the only one who didn't answer. I dislike this.

67: I concede to your point actually. It's stronger then the spectrum idea, and the latter one assumes too much of people.

[DTMaster]

Comments

@Sabre/Zazier Meta Call

Unfortunately the search button is disabled to fix the memory leaks, so unless someone archives their games (or updates their wiki pages), it might be difficult to track the games down.

Saber did you keep your role PMs?

Also you could ask Mastin for those meta links. Maybe that'll help.

@Sabre
I like the links you establish, but I'm a bit wary to put full faith in this because of the concept of busing. For now though this point is weak since it involves WIFOM reasoning and there is not enough information from personal alignments.

@Admiral
I know you are V/LA and all but when you are rereading this can you do a summary post. Hope your internet gets working again.

(Just a little reminder to the town while lurking is very anti-town, Admiral was the only person with a legit reason to give for it. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt for his situation)

@Town
I'm much more comfortable with a vote on Kill-kill and/or Cain right now due to the outlined reasons. So direct questions for both of them if they ever come and reply:

1. Both: What are your current town reads?
2. Cain: Are you still satisfied with your vote on Lumi/Mastin? It's past the RVS now, so if you still like the vote why are you keeping it? What's your case on Lumi?
3. Both: What do you have to say in defense to your lurkerish actions.
4. Kill-Kill: You are keeping your vote on Cain but you mentioned that his meta involved some odd mistakes (ie town claiming scum, etc). Why did you keep your vote if you knew Cain's town meta was poor and you outlined he was looked like he was acting noobish in your ISO 3?

[DTMaster]

@Sabre

Yep. But aw... :< Then probably Mastin might have some meta links.

[DTMaster]

@Kill-kill
It is true, but you are also guilty of doing the something. You are tunneling on Cain without actively scum hunting him (ie asking him questions). Your recent arguments only read as: I am pressing him because he is newb and anti-town, not I'm pressing him because he is scummy.

Your ISO 3 supports this statement:

About all I have now is a feeling that out of hohum, nikanor, and DTM one is scum. Cain could either be scummy or just plain weird, and Toro seems to be tunnelling on Cain, without solid reasons (I understand there are reasons, I am just saying I don't consider them enough to bring out the pitchforks)

Your vote and your reasoning do not make sense. You were the one to bring up his meta as being very noobish in your ISO 3, what is different from his last game to this game to suggest his current actions are scummy?

Scott brings up a good point with his 305 that you are actively lurking, you only responded to my number 4, the only question that was directed to you individually.

You skipped my number 1 and number 3 questions which is addressed to both you and Cain. Why? What are your responses to them?

[DTMaster]

@Kill-kill
1. Yes voting is another way to pressure someone to answer is another method of scum hunting. No you can't say that you don't have questions to ask Cain in the midst of this. Even I had asked both you and Cain questions to answer for your lurker charges. Your hypothetical situation showing that you cannot question scum hunt Cain to me is just a bad excuse to not participate in the town discussion and to continue on with active lurking.

Even Lumi who has a similar style posted continued with some activity (see her 285) and tried to get some questions answered. She even went further and did a town analysis in her 140 without me asking you.

2. He didn't fake claim scum? In this game yes. In the other game he did.

I think just inexperienced, period. He fake-claimed scum day one in the other game I am in, and just got lynched (vanilla townie).

This suggests that he is still developing his style. If you are basing your argument on this point you still need to answer for the whole

inexperience part of his meta that you gave us

.

3. Not me? Odd sentence to put in (and reads as: hostile to me). Can you elaborate on why they are townie. Can you also expand to your top scum picks are right now?

4. You are making a false accusation of me. First off you are actively lurking right there. Secondly you tell me in the whole 13 pages of content you have nothing, absolutely nothing to comment on other then your case on Cain? I'm not asking you to make 30 weak posts of ZOMG SPAM HERE PLZ, I'm asking you to participate in the town discussion.

If your case is so valid on Cain, why aren't you actively showing how Cain is currently more scummier/deserves to be looked at then say me or sabre wolf. You don't have to actively defend us here, just point out for example:

"While Sabre and DTM show lots of buddying, and sabre is ultra sensitive against Zazier, Cain has been lurking since his last posts. Lurking is very anti-town and blah blah blah... keep with the vote."

[DTMaster]

@Kill-kill

1. Yes because ignoring those questions and "playing anti-town" is another argument against Cain if he doesn't answer them. I don't see how questioning would not be beneficial in your case against Cain, not questioning him is much worse in my opinion.

2. Since you gave out his meta, had you considered that he might be inexperienced in general? Yes his posts are weird and have a sense of scumminess, but as you said he only posted 3 things so far. I can't make a strong read off him just on 3 posts, but your recent statements:

"I did. I feel he is inexperienced scum. Do you have any reason to believe that he is not scum?"

Show a sense of bias against him.

3. I dislike your methods right now which is why I'm questioning your intent. When I do an ISO read this is how it goes:

ISO 0: RVS Vote

ISO 1: Your joking statements on the town reads as of so far. While you did do a partial IIoA rehash on this post, but you did weigh in on your thoughts here on each point. +towniness

ISO 2: Interesting response to Nik's question, though I dislike the fact that you didn't do this summary post until after you were called on it.

ISO 3: This is where you gave the meta information and point your finger at: your top 3 are hohum, nik and me (one is scum). Next is Cain for his odd play and Toro for his tunneling. I note the fact that you haven't gone for the top picks and went straight for Cain. Here you take into account Cain's inexperience to mafia but later condemn it.

ISO 4: Your argument, while true, the problem is Cain is inexperienced in general. It's a double standard to assume Cain's one game with you would assume that Cain's town actions would play along your pro-town scenario. It might be obvious for a lot of players that you should follow up on your vote, but you are applying this argument on the guy who fake-claimed scum. Until more posts are given I'm willing to just

IGMIOY: Cain

and take notes as things develop. It doesn't clear Cain's actions, but I'm more lenient to give him the benefit of the doubt till he makes more effort to explain himself. Also I would prefer to keep a noob townie then a pro-scum player at the end of the day.

ISO 5 and ISO 6 are me calling you out after the giant walls of posts were done. The issue: you read to reply back to me quite quickly but had nothing to contribute to the current debate going on.

I get a sense that your posts reads as person going for the easy target, rather then actively trying to scum hunt. You have a large lists of people to be considered scum and a small list of weak townie links. It just feels off when you aren't expanding on which of those links are true or not.

4. Your Scott statement is interesting, can you point out more on this case?

5. Your statements on the townies I agree with your point but some issues are there:

a. I don't quite understand how Toro fits into a more townie scenario then the rest of the list. Your busing argument is WIFOM, so it is a weak reason to state. You assume too much when you say they can't be on the same faction (it looks unlikely but yes too soon), nor does it excludes the potential for Toro being on a different scum faction.

It reads as bias on someone who agrees with you and should go after Cain since he is the other person who wants to investigate him more.

b. Cow's anti-wishy-washy statements were done a while ago (see end of page 5 start of page 6). While his point is valid can you elaborate on how Has' recent activities support his township?

c. Can you elaborate why Zazier is just a null tell. I personally see him null possibly leaning townie since he's been producing some results with his wall posts, but dislike some parts of his arguments as I outlined in my posts.

Mod: Can we prod Cain and get an Updated Vote count?

[DTMaster]

I don't mind if you want to respond now actually. But ok I'll remind you if you then.

[DTMaster]

Ok. I'll remind you then "makes a note". If I forget remind me to remind you Kay? (Note I'm kidding here )

[DTMaster]

@Kill-kill
Can you source it? But in general I see the null/townie stance. (I'm going to ISO raed to make sure it's accurate, once I'm off work that is)

Also is that all you have to reply to in my 317 post? I'm pretty sure I said more then that one question.

@Cow
Want to respond now?

[DTMaster]

@has
I see your point, though I was mainly trying to pick apart Kill's thinking process. It also acts like a red flag for NKs if you follow that train of logic. :<.

I'll take that advice and readjust my line of questioning.

[DTMaster]

>>;;

I'd much prefer stupid questioning over lurker actions because at least to shows you are making an active effort to catch scum. But noobish argument noted, but since you played two games you should know the basics by now so don't expect this kind of defense to save you all the time.

[DTMaster]

@Kill-kill
1. Actually I was at work when I posted (15 minute break FTL) so thanks for pointing this out. That was a scum-hunting slip on my part.

2. I have no reason to think he is town, but at the same time I have no reason to think he is scum. I have a neutral read on him. This is why I wanted you to outline how his actions are scummy, but it's tough since he hardly posted anything.

Lurking is more anti-town then scummy to me.

3. Oh really? I would consider Cain just as easy because people would use his lurking against him. Sabre at least responds to your posts and reasoning which could back fire against you.

4. I want your thoughts. If I wanted to ISO read him I will when I have time. Please elaborate on your statement. By now you must know I want explicit details about this.

5. Like I said you assume too much. Of course the odds

look better

when you assume a bunch of people to be town, but it doesn't mean it changes. The only real way that this is changed begins on day 2 when we have at least a kill to narrow down the population. Think of this from a statistician point of view, how easily we hit a scum faction or a town faction only changes at the end of each day/night.

@Cain
Answer my questions! Motivation time!

Unvote

Vote: Cain

[DTMaster]

Found in my Post 301

1. Both: What are your current town reads?
2. Cain: Are you still satisfied with your vote on Lumi/Mastin? It's past the RVS now, so if you still like the vote why are you keeping it? What's your case on Lumi?
3. Both: What do you have to say in defense to your lurkerish actions.

Since you unvoted I want to edit my question 2 to: Why did you unvote?

Also it's poor in your image to forget that you had this vote active since it suggests that you haven't been keeping up with the game.

The other thing is you are self imposing a scummy/lurker image (if you are townie) to inflict back at scum hopping on "an easy bandwagon". The issue here is the reasoning looks a lot like OMGUS, which is a weak argument to fight back, rather then opportunism. Also your recent statement reads as AtE, where you full claimed as townie in response to the new pressure.

More scumhunting less AtE nonsense please. (if you are townie)

[DTMaster]

I'll answer you.

OMGUS is Oh My God You Suck. It's an abbreviated form of the argument that: you voted against the person who is voting for you without a solid case. This makes your vote a very weak one and is potentially a scum-tell.

AtE is known as Appeal to Emotion where you try and literally appeal to our emotions in your argument. Rather then use logic and reasoning you are literally using emotion to present your argument.

For example your comment oh how this is your third game can be interpreted as AtE since you aren't defending your lurker actions with positive reasons. The idea that "this is your third game" implies a request to take it easier on you when the pressure is on you because you are newbie, rather then you trying to fully convince the township with a logic case.

[DTMaster]

@Cain

1. Lurking is really bad if you don't have a legit reason to show why you couldn't contribute for a long time. But I'm more willing to give you the benefit of the doubt for now.

2. That is bad play if you don't have a reasonable case to fight back.

3. Toro is right, read his post.

4. Now that you know AtE and OMGUS answer my questions.

My vote stays until you answer them.

[DTMaster]

@Cain

>>; Not those questions.

Out of the 3 the ones in bold are unanswered.

Found in my Post 301

1. Both: What are your current town reads?

2. Cain: Are you still satisfied with your vote on Lumi/Mastin? It's past the RVS now, so if you still like the vote why are you keeping it? What's your case on Lumi?
3. Both: What do you have to say in defense to your lurkerish actions.

Since you unvoted I want to edit my question 2 to:

Why did you unvote?

The exchange we did only answered question 2 and clarified my issues that I had outlined in this same post.

@Zazier

Post 349:

Post 103: Mainly because when I read I sometimes skim over things.

If you look into the biology of the actual process of reading the majority of people do not register each individual letter when reading, but they can still understand the sentence. There is that picture where all the words in a sentence are scrambled except the first and last letters of the word that demonstrates this. You can perfectly read the sentence without registering each letter.

This is besides the point though.

Post 127: It's actually my second post after my RVS vote on page 1. If you ISO read me it's there at the top but here is the link anyways.

I also was being

sarcastic about the statement

, but I guess the entire:

"No welcome cakes for you!!!!! Spammer >:<" Wasn't obvious enough so I'll simply state it. But I do personally dislike your posting style but I do look forward to reading the explanation. Find the link soon. :3

Post 180: Understandable point.

Post 196: Bascially the diffrence between your and Has' analysis was the focus of the scum hunting effort. Yours focused on Sabre and Has focused on me, hohum and Nik. Also your points were, at the time of time in your 169, I disagreed with. They appeared as mudslinging since I did not see your view until you clarified your 52, 54, and 67 points until 249. So basically I did not see them has valid points until then.

In contrary Has' ISO 2 was more valid since the core of sabre's posts included some sarcasm and trying to stop the hyperactive fest the 4 of us were doing, you can see this. Though in hindsight from now I see some weaknesses since sabre did do an analysis in his ISO 8.

Post 225: I wouldn't expect less.

Post 232: Sorry but I thought I answered it 263. But i'll be more specific. I concede to your explanations, and out of the three posts I only disagree with a weak support for Sabre on his post 52.

In your 232 I specifically liked your 187 point since it explained a lot of the issues I had with your original explanation. 182/183 is something that I don't care since I was clarifying this in my 362. 184/185 is a strong point, but most of the town already started to question their motives so I didn't see an issue with it (but it is a point against sabre since he didn't participate more actively). The rest is more reaction and action between the two with valid points against sabre.

As it stands I can see both ends of the argument, but I'm more concerned with the Kill-kill/Cain issue right now since I see something odd here.

The spectrum idea though, at least to me, is that you establish links between people. Your 225 response is a perfect example since it would put sabre and me closer together since I've been supporting him. You would naturally infer a potential scum link if either one of us flips scum. Another thing that sabre did is establish links where it is unlikely that people are scum (ie you and sabre) since one person is heavily attacking another person. This would put them on opposite ends of a spectrum and unlikely to be scum.

The issue I outlined though, which is why I like your arguments better then sabre's scumlinks/nonscumlinks, is the concept of busing/distancing and townie believing someone else is townie. It would be too misleading to just base an argument on these links alone and might act as a diversion away from actual scum.

Post 357: Yes that theory can be applied in that scenario, though I would still be comfortable if Hohum explains himself as well.


Post 362: I was helping to get your metas, so I posted to both you and sabre. There is now no reason for either of you to not supply any metas unless Mastin doesn't archive his games.

BTW Zazie, grats on the "special someone". :p

BTW. Where is Hohum, it feels like he hasn't posted in a while...

[DTMaster]

Mod: Can you prod Hohum? His last post was on the 17th.

[DTMaster]

Since I'm waiting for responses...

OFFTOPIC
@Zazier
Ah, still good luck :p. Never know what will happen.

@Cain
Nice on the job. Good luck!

[DTMaster]

@Peace

Welcome to the game! Now can you outline your general read in the town (like a top 3 scum list).

Also that statement is a bit weak on sabre's change in behavior. I'm more inclined to think the change over a

a course of days

not

within minutes

which would naturally mean he would cool down. If you can point out the time stamps of sabre's change in behavior it would me nice.

[DTMaster]

EBWOP: NVM on the first part lol.

[DTMaster]

@Nik

As Scott points out in your 398 sabre is voting for you. Scum slip? Reading slip? Up for debate.

@Scott
No the replacement is a neutral tell for one reason, Cain requested for one. Had Cain not requested and told us about his new job, and got a forced replacement instead, that would have been stronger evidence against him.

Still the issue of replacement is tricky since these are real people with commitments elsewhere. Alone is too weak to convict cain/peace.

Can you elaborate how Peace's analysis is anti-town?

Peace commented about his list shortly after he did the analysis with:

To be clear on this list. This is only ranking those that had votes on Cain (me) per my thoughts that there must be scum in there somewhere.

This does not mean others aren't scummy. It's just that I'm focusing my attention here while I have the to do so.

To read the list correctly Toro looks town to me.

This to me interprets as starting off scum analysis when we have an easy bandwagon on town, if you assume cain/peace is town. OMGUSy yes, but anti town?

402: WIFOM? I'm confused how that post/OMGUS analysis is WIFOM? You are tunneling heavily on cain/peace though, your last sentence reads it like that.

408: BTW your reasoning on sabre is slightly weak since he V/LAed for monday due to poor internet, so he's a day overdue. Same with Admiral who just got back.

I'm surprised though you haven't questioned Admiral with the same reasoning against SW. Fake scumhunting sign?

Also can you meta link Toro? Had you played with him or is the game ongoing? Yes I agree that this is his play (in a game with him) but I cannot assign an alignment with that play. Therefore it is a weak meta-call just enough to make a note out of it, but that's about it. It cannot be used to defend or attack Toro.

@Toro
Quote tag fail :p

@Peace 407
The strongest thing you get from the SW comment is that Scott chose a side and outlined it. It would have been a strike against him if that statement was: "I support a SW or Peace lynch atm" since it'll be fence sitting. This upgrades from scum sign to just a neutral sign.

[DTMaster]

@Admiral

Can you show this?

DTMaster tries to be very careful in what he is saying but just comes across as cautious scum.

As it stands it's an accusation without any refrence.. so I don't know what you are talking about here.

[DTMaster]

I've been at uni so things has been slow. :<

@Hohum
Is that a cheering emote? :S

@Scott
Welcome!

@Zazie
Awaiting the next chain of events.

I'm willing to wait for hohum though since while he was here he did discuss a lot of unique points. Though that was during the hyper active day and nothing has come ever since. Still I'm just :S.

HoS: Hohum

Unvote

[DTMaster]

err should be @Shotty, I don't know why I put @Scott. :p

[DTMaster]

@Town

Vote : Has

He's lying about Hohum posting in other games. When you do the posts search, you can click on the google search and look up Hohum. I can verify in at least three games that hohum is playing that his absence is consistent with this game.

Do an ISO read on hohum and verify the time stamps.

[DTMaster]

Wait my bad.

Unvote

Vote: Hohum

Hohum posted in other games after the 17th. Some are lengthy posts I just checked the September time stamps and misread. Has' case is verified.

[DTMaster]

@Town
Just playing on Scott's post, verify my conclusions because the more lengthy posts were done in one game. A lot of the other ones were one-liners and across the board Hohum did do his emote in a couple of games after a quick skim. Your thoughts?

@Has/Hohum
Just because the search bar is down doesn't mean we can't do meta calls on you. :p <3 the power of Google.

[DTMaster]

@Zazie

No, the response would be "Well, he hasn't posted at all, it's not suspicious that he didn't answer." Speaking of which, now he has posted, and did not answer any of your questions.

Planning to change your vote in the near future?

This time,

DT

, it's scummy.
But it seems you didn't point it out this time. How come?

Oh I was at work and forgot to follow up on my Cain case. I did say I had 15 minutes to work with the game. Read my post at that time:

Actually I was at work when I posted (15 minute break FTL) so thanks for pointing this out. That was a scum-hunting slip on my part.

So I assumed that Kill-kill was pointing out that I haven't followed through on my Cain case. Your bolded part is a strike against me and Kill-kill.

Against Kill-kill, he trying to lead the vote and also seems to be nervous about my vote on him since he specifically talked about the vote. If he is townie the votes will move on their own and he shouldn't be nervous about one vote.

The closest vote count was found in post 322

Vote Count #5

hasdgfas

: 1

(Cain)

Kill-kill

: 1

(DTMaster)

Cain

: 3

(Kill-kill, Scott Brosius, lumi)

Nikanor

: 2

(hohum, saberwolf)

Saberwolf

: 5

(Toro, hasdgfas, ZazieR, Nikanor)

Not Voting

:

(ThAdmiral, saberwolf)

With 12 Alive it takes 7 votes for a lynch.

Prodding Cain

Note how I'm the only one voting for him so there isn't a need for me to unvote him.

It's also a strike against me since I followed him so you can kinda establish a weak Kill-DTM link there since that is scummy in itself.

In my hastiness I missed this. Good job for pointing this out.

FoS: Kill-Kill

Also what are your thoughts on the whole hohum posting thing? A google search supports Has' case on Hohum actually lurking. See my meta notes in my previous post for more details.

I have a bad gut feeling right now on the wagon against hohum and would like to hear more from him.

[DTMaster]

@Has

Can you elaborate on how Zazie's style is scummy? Yes I dislike the spam style, but I see it as a difference in mafia game play (ie Zazie's spam vs Mastin's wall) and not evidence of scum play.

It's part of his meta to do this (which I'm waiting for the link to the reasoning behind it Zazie).

It's the same thing as saying Mastin's walls are scummy, or Battle Mage's similar posting style is scummy. He does do it similarly to Zazie, but in a more condensed form.

[DTMaster]

@Has

What makes them scummy are also the reasons why they are unique in posting styles. :<

I'd prefer to chalk the whole process up as difference in mafia play style rather then scuminess. To say the posts are "distracting" makes no sense since I've been perfectly keeping up with Zazie's responses and involves that you go back to the original posts. Also his original style gave you the link to the specific post.

If anything it gets you to go back and reread some parts of the game. To say that is like an excuse.

Take my meta call to confirm your case on Hohum. I was able to provide data when

the search bar was broken

and brought something to the table.

While I understand how it can get distracting, there are pros to this kind of play. A good reread solves a lot of this. :<

[DTMaster]

EBWOP: Solves a lot of the issues you are having with the play. The content in the posts are much more revealing then the actual style of posts.

I once had an argument that I was scummy for posting too much and being hyperactive during summer. Its my completed newbie game on my wiki, see Almaster. Style is meaningless, content is where it's at.

[DTMaster]

@Admiral
I was discussing with Nik and Has about my actions (over and over and over.....) so I think it's incorrect to say that there was little pressure for me to respond back.

It would be evidence against me to not respond back since it would imply Nik and Has are right. It would be evidence against me if I post back because I'm "fussing over nothing" or working too hard over some minor points.

Its a lose-lose situation, but the latter is much better because you actually have something to analyze. If I have been consistent in my reasoning throughout the rewording then it supports me. As soon as someone catches a contradiction, I'm scummy.

@Page 15 point
While even I speculated I still say that using Cain replacing out is not worth analyzing since he did say he got a new job. It would be scummier if he did not state his reason why or if he was forced replaced. We can meta him to see if he is still playing with the google search bar to be sure.

@Page 19
You can search hohum. I outlined a procedure to do. Saying that cannot do this is a lie and an excuse to not state a stance.

Since you did do a summary read and you could have missed it I'll ask you: after you do a google search what is your stance on has vs hohum.

You can verify Has' case.

@Mod: I'm worried that my point on page 19 is breaking the rules. If it is. can edit it to fix it.

Post edited

-Fuzzy

[DTMaster]

@Has
Point proven, the style can be said to be scummy based on that interpretation.

@Sabre
Don't party too much :p Uni is work and parties.

[DTMaster]

Oh btw town Hohum is L-2 FYI. Usually this is the claim point if the town is leaning in this direction.

[DTMaster]

@Town
Sorry been awayish. I forgot there was only one PR. :< I'm used to the traditional cop/doc/etc in other mafia and see the anti-town side to the claim. But after reading Nik's posts I also see the pros.

@Scott
I checked the records and the only person who was at L-2 was sabre so unless you can show that people voted/unvoted before the vote count.

Vote Count #4

hasdgfas

: 1

(Cain)

Kill-kill

: 1

(DTMaster)

Cain

: 2

(Kill-kill, Scott Brosius)

Nikanor

: 2

(hohum, saberwolf)

Saberwolf

: 5

(lumi, Toro, hasdgfas, ZazieR, Nikanor)

Not Voting

:

(ThAdmiral, saberwolf)

With 12 Alive it takes 7 votes for a lynch.

Prod going out on hohum

Vote Count #5

hasdgfas

: 1

(Cain)

Kill-kill

: 1

(DTMaster)

Cain

: 3

(Kill-kill, Scott Brosius, lumi)

Nikanor

: 2

(hohum, saberwolf)

Saberwolf

: 5

(Toro, hasdgfas, ZazieR, Nikanor)

Not Voting

:

(ThAdmiral, saberwolf)

With 12 Alive it takes 7 votes for a lynch.

Prodding Cain

I believe the sabre wagon died down to cain afterwards so the L-2 situation was averted. I was also focused on a Kill-kill discussion I think and responding to Zazie.


@Sabre

1. No, claiming seer would make the town's job harder in some ways. He would not get any results in if he was the real seer and would die by NK. If this was a fake claim then we can attack him tomorrow. If it was a fake claim on the mafia side though, yes it would make it would be definately easier for town.

2. I'm fixed on a hohum kill? Um when did I say this? I confirmed has' case and voted on him for lying and right now am pursuing him for that reason. If someone turns up scummier then him or he claims seer, I wouldn't continue pressing him on this. 5 people are pursuing him on this, so obviously there is something wrong with hohum's actions.

You seem to jump to the wagon only after has voted and before I brought up meta evidence to support Has' statements.

This makes you look like you are fixated on "the easy kill". I find it intresting that you didn't vote until Has did, in fact:

\o/

what the hell is this?

Has votes.

unvote; vote: hohum

the hell with this, if he isn't scum, he's a liability.

3. I asked for the claim since hohum has been away and is literally not posting. L-2 is safer to ask it and it brings it out in the open then waiting till L-1 and having someone frustrate lynch over hohum's actions (well lack there of in posting).

Also some people traditionally start addressing claims at the L-2 point, but I forgot that we only have 1 PR and no docs. :s

[DTMaster]

@Scott

Oh whoops scrolled too far down. :<

You are right and this is a big inconsistency then. :< Lazy R Me and scum points added against me.

[DTMaster]

@Hohum
:< When you come back/ if you do, enlighten us with your thoughts.

@Sabre
All true, but it'll all depend on what he posts and when he posts.

[DTMaster]

@Town

Would we even gain that much information from Hohum's lynch? It is day one, yes you would rather go for a lynch, but in terms of information based on character interactions we wind up with very little since he hasn't posted anything substantial.

[DTMaster]

Oh should answer my own question first:

I was trying to see Hohum's reaction based on my meta evidence I provided to support Has' case. So far this isn't working too well. :<

From an information standpoint we gain little from Hohum for the lack of posting he did. From just a general town play perspective its heavily anti-town, especially when he could V/LA or replace out if he's so busy. :<

[DTMaster]

Did I sufficiently answer my question though?

[DTMaster]

@Nik

I'm only leaning towards a Hohum lynch because he blatantly lied about his meta. If we wanted to go forward in terms of information you would lean towards a Sabre or Peace lynch.

Sabre because he has a huge slew of character interactions and we can start isolating them based on Sabre's death. Peace comes in second for people interactions since it semi-clears Kill if he flips scum. In general though Scott is right about Peace's current (and weird) play though there are some odd things about Sabre. :<

@Kill/Sabre 612/613

You know if townie really hammered before deadline, I would be more suspect of the hammerer then anything. It's scummy to hammer pre-defense and before deadline.

Trying to twist this fact is really poor, and you are basically clearing the hammer if someone followed with the "fake hammer" after the "fake vote". Scum has a tendency to hammer, town doesn't have to and have the luxury to wait and scum hunt.

[DTMaster]

@Kill-kill
1. Then if someone hammers, or in this case fake quick hammered, would you still support your theory? You are on a dangerous line because if

anyone quick votes like that it's still scummy.

. No one quick voted so no one else is scummy. You are advocating his play and condemning it at the same time with that justification. Timing is irrelevant if that strategy reveals scum.

2. Your two quotes cannot be interpreted as coaching. I'm not telling Cain/Peace on how to play this game, I'm asking them on their scum thoughts/town thoughts. Anyone who asked a question would be coaching under your definition.

3. I had issues with you all game, the fact that there are contradictions in your posts doesn't constitute of saying "chain-saw". I have a basis on my attack, just saying chain-saw without substantial proof is just scummy and makes you look like you are grasping for straws.

HoS: Kill-kill

Unvote

I change my mind, you are much more scummier at the moment.

[DTMaster]

@Kill

Read this:

1.

Bullshit. Scum would never hammer early, it would set them up for the lynch the next day. Scum do whatever they can to get townies to hammer.

I really don't think you understand the concept of a fake vote.

It's more often seen in Lylo, a townie votes, scum try a quick-lynch, and then the townie says "Haha, my vote didn't actually count. I win." This is OBVIOUSLY what peace was doing, and chainsaw defense noted.

Peace-DTM scumpair, anyone? Remember, he also chainsawed when the wagon was on cain.

The bolded part. You make no sense. It's a townie move but makes peace scummy.

2. Then prove that my questions are invalid and prove that

that my line of questioning is invalid

. I attacked both you and Cain with the same questioning. I asked Peace for a summary when he was done rereading since he replaced in.

Trying to force that I was coaching by asking for what their scum hunting results is poor reasoning.

3.

You really don't. Your attack is based on not understanding or intentionally misunderstanding what I said. I do disagree with his play. I was describing WHAT HE WAS TRYING TO DO.

You can't do this. This is called WIFOM reasoning because

you can only think you know what he does

for you are not Peace. The only way you can know this if

you are scum with Peace and knows what he is thinking

. This is impossible for you to do.

4. I didn't edit my post nor unvoted in a post after my reasoning. I cannot see how unvoting hohum when I think Kill is more scummy is scummy in itself when Nik just said it's townie to do this.

I also unvoted before Nik said anything about this.

Time for a quick PBPA:

Kill-Kill
ISO 1: His RVS vote. Note though the town had an issue with it because he RVS voted after town discussion was on the way. Odd play, neutral bordering on anti-town.
ISO 2: You can call IIoA but there is nothing new to contribute to the town. Basically Kill-kill summarized the town feeling, abet in odd terms.
ISO 3: He responded to Nik's accusation. I don't understand why you had to be prodded to give your town/scum reads when you just posted a summary of the town.
ISO 4: This brings a lot of trouble: You state the following at the time:

I think just inexperienced, period. He fake-claimed scum day one in the other game I am in, and just got lynched (vanilla townie). ThAdmiral was quite quiet in the one game I have played with him. NK'd day one, town doctor. Stated that he often was quiet when asked about "lurking".

Zazie, I commented when I had something to say. About all I have now is a feeling that out of hohum, nikanor, and DTM one is scum. Cain could either be scummy or just plain weird, and Toro seems to be tunnelling on

Cain, without solid reasons (I understand there are reasons, I am just saying I don't consider them enough to bring out the pitchforks)

What's interesting is you kept your RVS vote on cain, supported and condemned him at the same time but called hohum, Nik and myself as scum. So contradictory based on what you said and your actions, and you are really fence sitting on cain in this post.

ISO 4: There is a fallacy in this argument since it took place in the RVS, the original vote on Mastin that cain did. You are also supporting inexperience play here based on Cain's actions.

ISO 5: 1. You asked me how you should scum hunt through questioning.

2. Your reasoning on scummy cain was that

he didn't fake claim scum

.

Your vote and your reasoning do not make sense. You were the one to bring up his meta as being very noobish in your ISO 3, what is different from his last game to this game to suggest his current actions are scummy?

He didn't fake-claim scum.

3. Again you actively lurked. You saw that I addressed you specifically and answered in ISO 4. Note the time stamp difference between 3 and 4.

Thu Aug 20, 2009 12:56 pm and Sun Aug 23, 2009 12:24 pm were both answering the same post. I was pretty clear that I was talking to you both about this.

ISO 6:

1. Rhetorical question:

Cain has three posts. Do you really think questioning him would be effective?

questions the validity of: questioning.

2.

This suggests that he is still developing his style. If you are basing your argument on this point you still need to answer for the whole

inexperience part of his meta that you gave us

.

I did. I feel he is inexperienced scum. Do you have any reason to believe that he is not scum?

See the exchange on this and see his ISO above on his Cain analysis.

[DTMaster]

Whoops forgot:

Vote: Kill-kill

[DTMaster]

@Kill
To add.

I was the one who first voted with provided meta evidence.

Sabre and Has are both guilty on jumping on the Hohum wagon when they could not provide meta evidence to support Has' claim. How did I conviently jump on Hohum's bandwagon when I provided the means for the entire town to go and meta call Hohum?

Grasping for straws again.

[DTMaster]

@Sabre

I'm addressing this comment:

Then [DTM] changes vote from Cain to hohum, possibly realizing that a bus would not be necessary.

However, advocating against a hohum lynch= town points.

Because it would imply that 1: I'm opportune scum and 2. I'm scummy even though I supported my hohum vote with evidence. I was the first person to actually use the google search bar since Has' case was just an accusation without meta evidence.

Still I find it odd that you still voted after Has, and not before when you went WTF at the emote hohum did. It reflects poorly on you with a bandwagon argument which raises some flags here.

[DTMaster]

Oh btw: I'll finish the rest of my PBPA tomorrow so stay tuned to part deux. Homework awayyy!

[DTMaster]

@Nik
You can only speculate at his actions, but not know about it. The only way to confirm this is through death with a player's alignment or if he/she admits it. The connotation of word knowing has a sense of confirmation.

I was probably unclear when "I said it was impossible for you to do", it should be read "it's impossible as a townie for you to do". As scum it's very possible to know.

@Sabre
Understandable then.

[DTMaster]

@Nik
You did since you unvoted me the first time. Restating this is redundant. :< But I assume you accept my answer though, since you have no comments on it.

@Scott
His meta proves he was busy around the days before and after the 3rd. If you did the meta research you would know that. The issue is that Scott stop posting here well before this week of inactivity. There is a sense of half truths and half lies here.

@Town
I just noticed, almost a lot of the people who were addressed in Zazie's posts did not respond to them. Why?

Points at Kill, Sabre, Peace, Toro , hohum (then again he's not been posting in this game for the longest time) and maybe Nik

I responded back in my 516, but I can't seem to find everyone's response back.

[DTMaster]

@Kill
Responding to my post any time soon?

@Scotty
Actually it's mainly because Kill vanished off the radar for me. I forgot about my original case against him when I was initially attacking him. We were on the subject of Has' case on Hohum, Peace's odd bold vote, and Sabre's current play. When Kill posted again I was reminded that he's still in the game.

(Admiral is a forgettable player too which is really bad. :S)

Look at Kill's timestamps between his ISO posts:
Posted: Mon Aug 17, 2009 11:02 am Post subject: 2
Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 12:56 pm Post subject: 3
Posted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 11:17 am Post subject: 4
...
Wed Aug 26, 2009 12:15 pm Post subject: 10
Fri Aug 28, 2009 11:23 pm Post subject: 11
Sun Aug 30, 2009 11:22 am Post subject: 12
Mon Aug 31, 2009 9:53 pm Post subject: 13
Fri Sep 04, 2009 12:16 pm Post subject: 14
Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:04 pm Post subject: 15
<the rest are Sept 09>
Wed Sep 09, 2009 10:50 pm Post subject: 19

With a total of 19 posts. Information wise Kill is a good lynch as well since it brings up two strong character links in question. First it implicates me if he flips town because I was attacking him before. Secondly if he flips scum it semi clears myself and peace (note: this does not totally clear us since well you can never be sure of alignment through this kind of method).

I originally was attacking Kill in the early part of the day if you read my posts in ISO. Kill's recent accusations reminded me of my initial case against him and I'm much more favorable in his lynch over Hohum at the moment.

It's a strike against me I admit due to my timing in this, but the roots of my case existed throughout this day. It's not like this is the first time I'm addressing this case.

@Sabre
I got 3/6 people who

just now responded to Zazier's questions

after my accusation. "narrow eyes at you 6"

[DTMaster]

@Has
I accused people for not answering Zazier's questions, 5 pages later and only now we get them answered. I wonder why people side stepped them (a bit iffy on Nik though since it was a comment rather then a question).

3/6 people who just answered him confirmed this. Kill and Hohum are MIA again and read above for Nik.

[DTMaster]

Contrary to what I've said above, I get the feeling peacesells is town. First, he mistakes scum for being able to talk during the day, which I think is a minor townslip. On this subject, where else have you played mafia, peacesells?
Also, instead of immediately pushing your wagon, saber, he goes and votes someone completely different. His votehop in his first two posts is borderline scummy (change this to 'extremely scummy' if saber flips scum), but refusing to push an opposing bandwagon is a towntell, imo (unless that opposing bandwagon flips scum, in which case it's a scumtell).

Disagreed with both reasons.
First, Peace has claimed that he has read this game before he replaced into this game.
Second, he did try to push a Saber-wagon. But as it was pointed out that his attack didn't make sense, he had to 'retreat'.

This really isn't a question but a comment. Hence the "maybe Nik"

[DTMaster]

I apologize for not posting my iso half today. Uni caught up with me so :< I'll try and get something done this weekend. I apologize.

[DTMaster]

@Sabre...
Wut the eff? You know that you were at L-4 before you self voted? I would hardly consider that effective scum hunting tactics.

You just gave scum "the anti town argument" to vote against you if you were townie.

[DTMaster]

Two days self implosion. :< If you are going to hang this in the background then scum hunting can't take place. It's a giant elephant in the room and we need to deal with this now.

Unvote

Vote: Sabrewolf

Scum hunt now and I'll unvote.

[DTMaster]

@Sabre

You just lied. You made it past day 1 in another game with me. Meta link is in my Wiki. Fail AtE right now.

[DTMaster]

I should say that the game is ongoing but you can look at the player status on the meta link to confirm. That's all. >>

[DTMaster]

@Sabre

.... I would say more but I'll let the town make the meta judgment on this..

@Nik
I was a heavy defender of Sabre early game, why am I particularly scummy if Sabre flips town. Shouldn't it be the other way around or are you discounting my earlier posts.

[DTMaster]

@TOWN

This is the time to meta sabre's games now. I have a bad vibe on this. This goes against the town play I know sabre is capable of.

[DTMaster]

@Sabre

Can you elaborate on this? I was asking Nik about his reasoning since the general feeling before this was: If sabre flips scum, DTM is scum and if sabre flips town, DTM is maybe town.

[DTMaster]

I wanted to say something but I might be breaking discussion in ongoing games rule. I would be analyzing that game, but I'm still kind of alive in there. :<

But I disagree with the fact that you die early because you lived longer then a day. If your play was that scummy then you would have been lynched going in. I would go in depth but that's for the town to read up on and not for me to go into. That's what I meant by that statement.

Your flip should not ever clear me. The only way in this game to get a confirmed alignment (other then scum for wolf from the seer) is death.

[DTMaster]

@Nik
Reasoning of course noted. But it would mean you would attack me regardless of the flip. Why outline conditions like that if you're still IGMEOY: DTM regardless of flipped status.

It looks like you are twisting the scenario around when you outlined: DTM vs Peace.

[DTMaster]

@Zazie

Post 708: A minute discrepancy is something extremely picky to look at.

For all we know Hohum could have posted his original post at 3:34:59 and did his vote shortly after. The fact that hohum posted within a minute between each post in a double post just signify that the two should be linked together as one post.

714: I checked the google meta call on hohum. In fact it was this post that I corrected myself since I double check the time stamps and confirmed Hohum posted in other games after the 17th. I misread because across the board he posted on Sept 3rd with the same post in all his games.

I was the first person to check so its misrep from you to say I didn't meta checked. I even outlined how to google search hohum's games when the bar was down.

717: Are there any specifics you want to address in that post? You point is vague here.

719: I get it. Though if people do not read your posts and you argue back them with proof through quotes then it's the player's fault for not taking the time and effort to read through your posts.

721:

Indigo works

if you want to use it on me. I don't care really since I catch most of your questions and would hope you/the town will point out when and if I miss one.

735: So I assume you are saying 2 things here, let me clarify if this is right:

1. We would gain information here.
2. You make the point that it looks like I'm deflecting the lynch away from Hohum.

What kind of information would you gain from Hohum? You seem to insinuate something along those lines with number 2 here.

739: I was asked the question to weigh the pros and cons of lynching hohum. We have no strong reads on him. He's generally playing anti-town and the meta evidence from the google search confirmed he's lying.

I strongly just get a sense of anti-town play rather then scummy play here, but the latter argument points towards scum-hohum.

Also I wasn't "warning" any one. Read the exchange between Kill and myself on the topic of quick lynching and Peace's fake vote. I was saying that it would be scummy for someone to quick lynch under those circumstances when Kill outlined that Peace is scummy for false voting to lure someone to quick lynch. It doesn't clear the eager hammerer as town nor does it make sense since in Kill's reasoning he outlined that Peace's scenario is a townie move.

I'm still awaiting his response but his classes take priority here.

@Nik
738: How can you for sure say that I'm not getting killed tonight? You can't predict this accurately unless you are wolf-scum.

[DTMaster]

Oh my gawds... Hohum has descended upon Open 163.

Back on topic, what do you have to say with all the accusations on you Hohum. And your recent post suggests 1 thing, you are lurking the heck out of this game.

[quote'"Hohum"] This post doesn't sit well with me at all. He's under considerable pressure here and rather than have a conversation with the rest of us he attempts to deflect by lashing out at people.

the vote reads like a pressure vote (weak reasoning). Deadline looms. I'd like to actually see your CASE on Nikanor. You might just have enough time left to convince someone to reconsider. [/quote]

A lot of this takes information from the recent pages to make up this post. Explain your actions.

[DTMaster]

Aw fail quote tags.

@Nik

You are speculating on future night kills. You can't in no way in a townie POV he will know what is advantageous to scum to night kill until the start of day 2 when we have some alignment flips.

Saying that "I probably won't die tonight" seems like you are certain you will see me tomorrow. Yes the english definition on the word probably does not equate to "for sure" but I don't understand why you are just specifically pointing this out on me on this.

[DTMaster]

@Zazie. Noooo. I'll still answer your questions for town discussions since they are still pending. :<

763: I did not believe Kill warranted my vote at that time due to the situation of Hohum's lurker actions. I used the harder HoS because Kill's posts are contradictary and wanted him to explain himself. When I wasn't satisfied with Kill's 633 defense post, I voted him in my next one.

Hohum is actively lurking. My prevous posts against hohum supports this.

766: i would ask you to clarify about the first point, but. :<. Any townies have a point to make about Zazie's first point in this post?

772/773: Lol are you suggesting (and Nik) I soft claimed scum in that post? Self voting/hammering without discussion is literally the elephant in the room. It's an issue that hangs there and all attention from scum hunting is diverted to him. Which is why in the second half of my statement I said:

Scum hunt now and I'll unvote.

Town discussion cannot continue effectively with Sabre's "lynch me now statements". He began to actively scum hunt more but I was away on the deadline day to change my vote. Scott hammered and night fell before I could respond to your posts.

774: I have meta evidence based on an ongoing game that Sabre and I was in. I already did the meta, simillar to how I did it on Has' argument. That is why I told the town to do it, and also I'm busy IRL to post links to the games.

Sabre could have confirmed this but any townie can confirm this through my wiki link. I would have retorted with: why didn't you do the meta? but you be dead now. :<.

783: I asked it to weigh the pros and cons of a Hohum lynch in terms of player interaction information? I thought I was clear about that. What kind of answer where you looking for? (addressed to town)

My vote was on him because he lied, I asked the question to expand on discussion with the above reasoning.

@Hohum
751/752 - You are actively lurking. Why? This is my second time asking this./

Also what about the charges made against you by the town that you lied to us about not posting in other games when you were "busy". Like 3rd time asking this.

@Kill
Your answers to Zazie's questions and your responses to my posts, and your current top picks as scum. I request them when your classes do not take up all your time.

I'd much prefer focusing on Kill at the moment, but what I addressed to hohum puts him at number two in terms of scummiest.

Vote: Kill-kill

[DTMaster]

Unvote

Vote: Hohum

Answer my questions hohum. Motivation time. I'm not happy with the recent posts.

[DTMaster]

@Hohum

Explain how I am obv scum? I presented legitimate questions with a legitimate meta evidence that you lied about you being away. I can name off the games that you are in. During the start of september I remember you were in 3 ongoing games that I google searched you in. Answer my questions now.

[DTMaster]

@Hohum

You are lying when you say that you "dropped the ball" on games when you posted significant content. The issue wasn't with the days before September 3rd, but the fact that you posted with content after the 17th. Shotty can verify this.

The fact that I metaed you means I'm not attacking you because you are lurking,

I'm attacking you because you lied to the town that you were focused on your mod duties when you in fact posted in other games. In one game there was a longer, more analysis post.

.

If you are town why haven't you addressed the other people who attacked you with less of a case. I presented evidence with the search. Read me in ISO. Explain that.

[DTMaster]

FYI: With the search engine running, pages 9 - 13 prove that Hohum was contributing in other games while this one was running. Explain this Hohum.

[DTMaster]

@Hohum
Address my claims again. a and b are my repeated questions, c and d are expanding on it.

a. How am I lying since I provided you meta pages in your search to prove that you were playing games past the 17th of August when you cease to play here.

b. Address my attack on you with the argument that you were actively lurking when you attacked Sabre and ignored my initial response.

c. Tell me why you ignored my questions, still even though you say I am attacking you with the lurker argument when I provided evidence that anyone can look at.

d. What is your case on me?

[DTMaster]

@Peace

If he's not going to answer these questions then it's a strike against him. Town-Hohum can do a bandwagon analysis/reaction analysis but when you can pull out legitimate accusations against him then its no mistake that he appears scummy.

I don't see why you slightly frown upon the questions given the connotation of your statement.

[DTMaster]

@Hohum
Elaborate on your more recent acusation? I'm waiting. You can confirm me through death. Go on, do it. You haven't voted me when you said I'm obv scum and I know you couldn't possibly have gotten a result off me.

Why haven't you voted me? Why are you still ignoring questions a-d?

[DTMaster]

@Scott
Ummm scum = mafia or wolf. Unless they changed the definition scum = anti town faction.

Hohum accused me as one of the two antitown, not wolf.

FoS: Scott

for that statement and potential slip.

[DTMaster]

@Hohum
Antitown faction = wolf or scum in this setup.

I should edit more, the two antitown = antitown factions. You also should read more. I didn't say you accused me as being anti-town.

You want to lynch me, but you aren't even voting for me. Lol. This reminds me of tubby's play. Hmm bad vibes coming from this exchange.

[DTMaster]

@Scott
How can you be sure that Hohum thinks I'm werewolf? Hohum only stated that I was scum, and did not specify anything.

We are arguing over semantics of plurals here, not the details within the posts. That is getting into dangerous territory.

Also what is your thoughts on Hohum's accusations.

@Kill
Answer my questions. You posted something recently, but you are ignoring my accusations at the end of day 1. Don't tell me AP classes take up that much time if you have enough time to comment on the board.

[DTMaster]

@Kill

Lol I'll quote myself everything you ignored about me.

1.

Bullshit. Scum would never hammer early, it would set them up for the lynch the next day. Scum do whatever they can to get townies to hammer.

I really don't think you understand the concept of a fake vote.

It's more often seen in Lylo, a townie votes, scum try a quick-lynch, and then the townie says "Haha, my vote didn't actually count. I win." This is OBVIOUSLY what peace was doing, and chainsaw defense noted.

Peace-DTM scumpair, anyone? Remember, he also chainsawed when the wagon was on cain.

The bolded part. You make no sense. It's a townie move but makes peace scummy.

Clarify how Peace's original bolded/invalid vote is scummy when here in the above bolded part you outlined it is done by townies.

2. Then prove that my questions are invalid and prove that that my line of questioning is invalid . I attacked both you and Cain with the same questioning. I asked Peace for a summary when he was done rereading since he replaced in.

Trying to force that I was coaching by asking for what their scum hunting results is poor reasoning.

You said I was coaching. Prove it.

To add. I was the one who first voted with provided meta evidence. Sabre and Has are both guilty on jumping on the Hohum wagon when they could not provide meta evidence to support Has' claim. How did I conviently jump on Hohum's bandwagon when I provided the means for the entire town to go and meta call Hohum?

You accused me as being an eager beaver on Hohum's bandwagon. I provided meta evidence

again and again on hohum. I even recently noted which pages in the functioning search bar that shows his posts in other games where he contributes in those discussions, page 9-13 in Hohum's search

.

How is all the above just bullshit reasoning when you refuse to answer me.

[DTMaster]

To add Kill why are you ignoring Zazier's questions.

[DTMaster]

I care to bet 100 township credits and raise it the ale from Mastin's wall.

[DTMaster]

@Peace

That's the same as L-1. >>

[DTMaster]

Actually I did a quick ISO skim on has... you didn't vote for hohum today. Even in the latest vote count you didn't. If you are so clear on a hohum lynch, why didn't you vote for him at all today?

FoS: Has

[DTMaster]

@Town
To put things in perspective we are at 4 townies (with 1 seer) vs 3 mafia vs 1 wolf, which is basically consistent of 50% scum town population. While a wolf killing mafia will greatly benefit town, the reverse can happen and a mislynch/town night kill will cause in a 2 v 3 v 1 worst case scenario. Be wary of this has/Admiral/Nik. The goal remains the same regardless: lynch scum.

[DTMaster]

The wolf can't kill townie in the 2 v 3 v 1 game either since mafia controls half the population. If at any time a townie dies, the wolf dies from mafia since they know each other. So in a sense we are a step away from mylo.

[DTMaster]

Wolf wants mafia dead regardless. If they solely focus on townies and we do continue with a 2 v 3 v 1 scenario, the 3 mafia know each other and control half the town. Basically if more townies die, mafia win. Wolf and mafia are different factions.

Wolf POV: They want both townies and mafia scum to die at the same rate basically so they want to hit 1 of each (1 town and 1 mafia a day)

Scum POV: They ideally want a wolf lynch or two townies dead. The latter being more favorable for scum number wise.

Town POV: We want all scum lynched regardless of alignment. It'll be easier for us to sift through the scum list if mafia is killed since the seer can find the wolf, as addressed earlier.

All the above POVs come with risks vs reward of course, but this is how I see it.

[DTMaster]

:<. The whole pressure voting when you want more answers depends on the situation. In a case where X person says: I have reason to know this Y person is scum and then votes, then it's scummy to attack X since he is obviously cop.

When someone is uncooperative with something like this, there is a concept called pressure voting to get them to talk. It's not like you have information to share to the town, you just baited someone to attack you for being anti-town when you potentially have insight. This just reads as null tells on both counts, and just plain meh.

But you just established two things:

Admiral - Nik linkage.
Toro - Scott linkage.

[DTMaster]

@Nik

It's basically: the only useful results are guilties. Obviously got to keep an eye on it.

[DTMaster]

@Toro
What's with the defeatest stance.... I dislike it.

@Town
Toros 953: It reads as his defeated town meta: Read Internal Struggle Mafia where Toro did the same thing as Town RBer. >>

[DTMaster]

The ghost of meta's past is giving me bad vibes here regardless of that inconsistency.

[DTMaster]

More like Appeal to Township movement. :<

[DTMaster]

@Peace

Who would you accuse to be scummy on the bandwagon Peace and why?

[DTMaster]

@Nik

I'm still getting mildly bad vibes coming from this attack on Toro. Even with your "gambit" the 912,913,914 reads as someone obvious to mafia role. It might be bias based on Internal Mafia though.

In a way your little gambit can be considered a deflection away from the Scott wagon with some distancing mixed into it. It's faint in subtext, but it's there and might warrant a reread.

[DTMaster]

Actually: @Town

Can you describe Hohum's meta to me? I was skimming a few ISO posts and came across something particular. Specifically: Is he known to self hammer himself in games?

[DTMaster]

@Nik
1000: Sorry, my bad with spell checks and such. The correct term is oblivious.

The details of the game vary slightly, but there are a couple of things to remember in comparison between Internal and this game. Toro was a Town Rolebolcker in Internal, where survival of town PRs take precedence. Here the only town PR that is conformable is seer and the rest are VTs and scum factions. Unless this is Seer-Toro, all VT claims become moot since any nonSeer would have no choice but to claim VT in a normal gambit.

@Shotty

1001:

Some things to clairfy first:

1. I didn't say discussing win conditions was scummy. Quote me here but I don't understand what Wincon means otherwise. What I wanted to say which Nik corrected was:

in those posts 912-914 Toro forgot that Mafia couldn't kill. Now Mafia-scum Toro would know this particular detail, especially given that part of their role is night talking. Mafia's powers are minority confirmation of their partners, and their weapons are only town discussion. In essence they are focused on creating mislynches and hunting down the wolves. It's been two nights. Mafia-scum Toro would have to be extremely forgetful to forget that: Mafia cannot kill considering he would have been part of night discussions in the above planning.

Thus I feel that Toro is oblivious to mafia workings from this. It doesn't clear him from being wolf scum, but from the whole exchange it reads as:

Unknowing-Toro then Mafia-Toro.

I'll post this thought first and give you a more detailed ISO read on Toro in response to your original analysis after. Give me a second. You can vote me if I don't give you my case within the next couple of hours.

@Has
Toro is VI? You mean VT? What's VI?

@Town
Anyone going to answer me about my question on Hohum's meta or do I have to search it up on my own.

[DTMaster]

TORO PBPA Part 1: All are done in ISO with notes.

1: Actually this was a general issue that was raised with Cain during the original discussion between myself, Nikanor, Sabre and Hohum. Please note that Kill-kill also interjected with his RVS vote in midst of the discussion and provided little analysis at the start of the day which was a scummy point against him, despite Kill's town flip.

2-6: Is more bandwagon argument banter about Toro and Cain here.

7: Nik pointed out a defensive streak, but Toro admitted to the falling. It's actually a point against Toro here.

8: This is a valid sarcastic given that Cain failed to scum hunt. You can see that I was attacking Cain later on that day and did a lot of the questioning to get him to participate. You said the same thing about Kill in your ISO 2 but he flipped town.

If Peace/Cain flipped town I would say your argument that Toro was tunneling on the noob has more water from here. We don't know Peace's alignment. If he was scum then we caught noob scum. Failure to scumhunt and provide analysis is anti-town, and borderline scummy. Cain failing to produce analysis means he built up a case against himself since the above is an appropriate argument.

A Cain/Peace confirmation would strengthen the first part of the argument.

9: Over confidence/joke = bad on Toro.

10: Actually.. Toro mentioned the Mafia as evil Masons here. Then he forgot that they can kill today. Someone forgot to pay attention to the game methinks. /offtopic thought

11 and 13: Rehash argument. This is actually supporting your side more since redundancy over Cain's first vote is beginning to look scummy.

12: Meta discussion.

14: Began Sabre Attacks. 15-17 are: Sabre attacks, Rehash Cain, and blah statements.

21: Joke is actually another strike on Toro. It supports oart of how jumpy and easy Toro is to go on wagons.

33: The part where Toro jumps on would be a strike against Toro if: Cain didn't post his admission that he was actively lurking. Yes I get noob vibes from Cain, but we also attacked Hohum for actively lurking. You are making this into a double standard here.

The reason i sit back and watch is because this is only my third gama and im just watching, still having very little input, and yeah i know it looks scummy, but if i posted just lots of random posts then chances are i would be suspected of told im stupid.

[DTMaster]

@Sabre's Ghost
"hears the wind blow" Chilly

@Peace
Um that was useless, especially when I googled search him to point out how Hohum was lying and many of us attacked him. What I specifically need is outside complete meta where Hohum self-hammered himself. There is a reason I asked for it.

Rehashing this to "look helpful" when you just know that I asked for meta is really, really, really, really, pointless. If this was a case on a living person I would vote you for rehashing everything to appear townie contributing to discussion.

Frustration: Peace

[DTMaster]

@Peace
1. There is a reason why I asked for a meta read. I see a potential Has Hohum link speculation over a minor detail about why has didn't vote Hohum. If you seek to look at the bussing angle you would obviously know that means presenting a case on Has since he is Mastin's replacement.

Acknowledging that you didn't answer my question, but totally went on a verbal tangent on Hohum himself is pointless. If you read your analysis, there is nothing new present other then: This looks like busing. The rest reads as rehash and: scum trying to hard too hard to "scum hunt" the wolves.

2. Mastin's walls are really tough to read, but he often goes inactive as well. But a pro-town Mastin usually is a good asset, once you sift through the information and he's reasonable caught up from my meta reads on him. You can sympathize with Hohum on the former, but the latter regards Mastin as a threat.

3. To answer your question, while yes it can be useful to look at Hohum's interaction, you do realize you totally sidestepped my question and admitted to it within the same post. There is nothing from stopping you from answering my question and doing a Hohum analysis at the same time.

@Admiral

I assume VI is what Sabre's ghost said, I mean what the wind whispered?

[DTMaster]

@Sotty:

Sorry Part 2 is going to wait, time for homework. You can choose to respond to or not, but the latter prevents bias from you.

[DTMaster]

Problem with that is, it doesn't really make them look anti-town at all. And we've got a long deadline, I'm sure we're going to find scum without any distractions.

And oh that honor hasn't gone to me? Phew!

Well its better to voice one's opinions than not. It's extremely anti-town to just say "I don't know" and offer no reads.

Also the first line of your post seems weird to me. Almost over-confidence that would only be seen from an non-town player.

Anyway, I have never played in a game where there is a anti-town group that does not have NKs. Anyone have experience with this setup?

Don't know how that makes me seem overconfident at all, just pointing it out.

Umm...yeah, just think

they're masons.

Except they're bad.

[DTMaster]

@Nik

I'm condensing my points atm. I'm at 30/100s. If you read above I'm still doing a part 2 of analysis to continue the rest of the PBPA. Why are you rushing this step for my answer Nik?

As it stands I'm starting to reconsider my position as well due to some scum patterns that emerge and a lesson learned from my first newbie game.

[DTMaster]

@Nik
I use cleavers and paring knives to butcher the English language. It makes deboning the root words so the town can digest it easier. But as a side effect it makes grammar nazis like you cry inside. :3 /offtopicness

@Kill
Then why, knowing that you didn't answer question, still didn't give me an answer to my question. Yes your bussing theory is new and might be something to talk about, but the above issue still stands.

@Shotty
Part Deux

Summary:

1. Your first part of the argument states that Toro vote hopped between Cain and Sabre.

The attacks on Cain were valid , even if you use the noob counter argument. In fact Toro's points on Cain are still stronger since he replied to Cain's posts with quotes on these, while the noob argument implies more gut reasoning. There comes a point where we need to evaluate if x person is either playing noob-scum, or just plain noob had he not replaced. It's a dangerous position. Your argument with Cain would be strengthened if we have a Cain/Peace flip as townie but with the above, I don't see how this could be used against Toro. Kill yes with his contradictory posts pre-flip, but not when I did an Iso read.

The attacks on sabre as of 33, this is handed out to you since it's not as well defined.

Return to PBPA:

33-35: These posts reflect the anti-town side to Cain's posts where he ignored questions. Reflect this back onto my original questioning on Cain where it is more blatant.

36: More scummy points on Toro actually. He repeated what I said, you can see it in the quotes.

40-41: I don't see the issue with unvoting Cain/Peace when a new replacement is in. :< Usually you don't want to have a quick hammer of the replacement with the dangers of them being PR roles.

55: Actually Shotty you might be right here. Loookie lookie lookie!

If Saber was scum why would I vote for him earlier in the game and not take it off when he was at L-2?

If sabre wasn't scum then.... /is attacked by the WIFOM ninjas. This reads as a slip to me. The VI argument stretching thin here.

Posting now so await for Part 3! Need to collect brain and such.

@Admiral
I see, then I would like to see has' argument on this then. I would safely assume that you disagree with this VI idea correct?

@Town
No comments on the whole "Toro forgot mafia can kill exchange"? and Hohum's meta?

[DTMaster]

Oh lol. Whoops. Meant Peace. >>;; I'm getting my names mixed up here.

[DTMaster]

There's not much left in the other PBPA: :<

There is a lot of evidence of Hohum and Sabre tunneling later on, then we get to the events of today. Should I continue?

There isn't anything I can now disagree with you Shotty about this.

Vote: Toro

L-1 Folks. Though I still get odd vibes from the conflicting fact that he forgot Mafia couldn't kill, but also knew it at the start of the game. :<

[DTMaster]

I addressed this earlier. I'll quote so you won't miss it:

In Toro ISO 10 he pointed out that the mafia are like

masons that are bad

Problem with that is, it doesn't really make them look anti-town at all. And we've got a long deadline, I'm sure we're going to find scum without any distractions.

And oh that honor hasn't gone to me? Phew!

Well its better to voice one's opinions than not. It's extremely anti-town to just say "I don't know" and offer no reads.

Also the first line of your post seems weird to me. Almost over-confidence that would only be seen from an non-town player.


Anyway, I have never played in a game where there is a anti-town group that does not have NKs. Anyone have experience with this setup?

Don't know how that makes me seem overconfident at all, just pointing it out.

Umm...yeah, just think they're masons.

Except they're bad.

Today Toro did this ISO 91, 92:

@Town
To put things in perspective we are at 4 townies (with 1 seer) vs 3 mafia vs 1 wolf, which is basically consistent of 50% scum town population. While a wolf killing mafia will greatly benefit town, the reverse can happen and a mislynch/town night kill will cause in a 2 v 3 v 1 worst case scenario. Be wary of this has/Admiral/Nik. The goal remains the same regardless: lynch scum.

If we mislynch and the werewolf kills off a town member, mafia wins right? Just seeing if you know this.

Oh forgot they can't kill, my bad.

Hence my own gut vibe: Something doesn't add up.

[DTMaster]

Buddying? Can you point this out?

I can recall some with Zazier I guess.

[DTMaster]

@Shotty

Do you believe Peace is town then?

[DTMaster]

@Toro

Last words?

[DTMaster]

Ahh was that the hammer? Quick thoughts before night falls:



Has 1056: I find it odd that you aren't as agressive here when you suggest that Toro is VI. This post reads as sowing the seeds of deception here since you suggest that "Toro reads as VI and there are other who look scummy". I expect more active attacks rather then this passive: let the town come to their own conclusion here.

You only respond to peace after he attacked you (though wrong reasoning) with his name. Note that: you only attacked peace after he addressed an issue with you.

Nik 1066: I refer to Toro's comment as tubbyism.

Toro 1070: That is just scummy. I posted a PBPA on you (well sorta), why not start from there? There is other evidence then Nik's gambit play which the rest of the town already pointed out.

Peace 1075: Reads as mafia play, but your case as some weight. It will be good to investigate later on.

Scott 1076: Early game distancing ring a bell?

Shotty 1077: Only if the wolf doesn't kill townie every night. Remember I posted a possible preferable kill list on all factions. While yes the wolf can NK the mafia, he also can screw us over with a town kill. It's gamble play.

[DTMaster]

Ok I guess? Just make a post about it in the endgame if it's that off topic. :S

[DTMaster]

I've been meaning to do some ISO reads. Excuse the non posting but yes:

1. I've been posting in other games but they haven't required rereads from the night before.

2. I also just finished midterm week.

Vote: DTMaster

for the lack of posting. I want some answers DTM, now scum list please.

[DTMaster]

Mod: Just making a V/LA note since I'm swamped in homeworks. Will be back Friday/Saturday to post.

Sorry town. Analysis will come later

[DTMaster]

Bah. Sorry I'm going to have to post later. I posted in a couple other games but I got to go to work. Rereading takes a loong time :S

[DTMaster]

K. I can finally comment! Found the time to

@Nik
1. There is a small issue with your obv. distancing theory. Your idea is extremely sub optimal play considering it was day 2 when Hohum was lynched. With a seer running around it becomes a gamble at that point.

That idea is best done when the seer is dead, not the other way around. Considering the fact that the wolf is attempting to target mafia players (ie the scummy townies), I'm thinking he's more comfortable in his seat right now.

@Has
Why didn't you vote Scott? Scott at the start of day 3 was selectively scum hunting for wolf but you let him off the hook. (See ISO 52 onwards) You attacked Peace for the same reasons in ISO 68 but you actually kept your vote on him for this reason. Why?

This to me reads as obv mafia scum from: Has-Scott

@Shotty
What do you mean scum-crossing each other rocks? :S

If we do a NK analysis it looks like wolf is trying to kill mafia but ends up hitting townies (which is the optimal play I outlined before to get Wolf to win I guess). I raise the issue of the double edge sword here. Scum didn't cross kill each other yet. If anything only thing that caught scum is lynching in this game.

[DTMaster]

@Scott

That's a toughie. But I would consider the following.

a. On day 1 and day 2 Has was pushing for a Hohum lynch for easy distancing. When it came down to it though his votes do not reflect his opinion which reads to me as: he didn't have the stones to follow through with it.

So in a sense I would say look for the guy who appears to be on the wagon but really didn't vote on the wagon. Recall earlier when I addressed Peace on this when he attacked Has. Recall my early request for town to meta Hohum for me.

So post wise: Yes.
Votewise: no

This was my original theory before night went into effect and Toro flipped scum. Now I have conflicted theories:

A wolf-Has or a mafia-has/scott.

Either way Has to me is obv scum.

Unvote

[DTMaster]

@Nik

1. With the recent flips it's time to take on a new angle for the seer. Peace, and Kill-kill has demonstrated that we have/had very scummy town playing in this game. You outlined basically the issue we have at the moment:

If you appear townie then you are less likely to be investigated. If the seer has been investigating what appears to be obv scum targets, then the results are useless in clearing people from wolf (but not mafia) if they are getting cross killed. If this is wolf-Hohum starting a bussing himself over, we should run with this.

@Shotty
I see what you mean by crosshunting now.

[DTMaster]

L-1: claim and scumlist if you are town please.

[DTMaster]

@Nik
You do realize that Has is obv dead regardless of what alignment he is. If he is mafia fake claiming the wolf will know and he'll NK has since we need to stop mafia scum from getting the majority. This is

especially true given if town mislynches on town today

Recall my earlier statement: an ideal wolf scenario is to have 1 town and 1 scum die during the day.

[DTMaster]

Sorry to me the order of suspicious goes for:

Admiral, Nik and Shotty.

But I need to do a reread from day 1.

[DTMaster]

I would assume so?

[DTMaster]

Sorry at work gonna post something later tonight.

Preferably my gut is telling me Admiral but I need to do a more substansial read. Just think: too neutral argument plus my defense of Toro involved meta evidence from Internal Struggle Mafia.

Given the false track the town/wolves were won about who's townie and scummy, I recommend everyone keep that in mind.

FYI: Since It'll be a while till I post again I'll obv claim VT.

[DTMaster]

Forgot

Vote: ThAdmiral

for now.

[DTMaster]

Uh what... The deadline is 2 hours away. Anyways last minute comments:

I am town. I have been lynched. Nik is scummy for the sudden buddy movement but the scenario to me is either an Admiral/Nik team or a Shotty/Admiral Team. Has do a good reread since the next phase of this is all on you.

If Has is mafia wolf, kill him now since he is obv mafia.

[DTMaster]

Posting to say Fuzzy is AWOL. I was in a game with him and he's been awol since then. Time to get the back up mod here?

[DTMaster]

Toro made it too obvious I think... but good try <3

[DTMaster]

The thing that tipped me off was: Cow said he was worried that Hohum would self hammer. I don't under stand how anyone would know this. :S

@Zazier
Wouldn't it be the other way: why did wolf think you were mafia :p