Open 441 - Chosen Mafia (OVER)

[Whiskers]

For the record, I can vouch that he does this OMGUS, can't-argue-for-shit as town.

^ and what makes you think that town will inevitably vote on this wagon?

Speed at which it was moving.

Pedit: Either whiskers is brilliant as scum or just town.

...the speed at which it moved actually tells us that it's more likely to be scum-driven. Opportunistic scum see an opportunity, hop on the lynch.

And I am both brilliant as scum, and currently town.

[Whiskers]

Your strategy of lynching a player, seeing their flip and then lynching the player that provided a case seems to me a setup for a double mislynch. Everyone who votes on a player's lynch is responsible for that lynch. You not giving reasons for your vote makes it more likely that you are the scum as opposed to less likely.

This is... just wrong.
Do you understand

why

he is trying to "lynch the player that provided a case"? It's not

because

you provided a case.
Can you tell me why he's trying to lynch you?

[Eidolon]

You answer my question: are you seriously buying McStab's argument?

yes, i'm buying it. it makes perfect sense.

he could have just lied and said he was sure pasch was scummy.

but that wouldn't have made sense because he wasn't sure.

I'm not sold on you being scum though.

[McStab]

McStab, have you ever seen a townie provide a case for lynching another townie? It happens extremely often.

Your strategy of lynching a player, seeing their flip and then lynching the player that provided a case seems to me a setup for a double mislynch. Everyone who votes on a player's lynch is responsible for that lynch. You not giving reasons for your vote makes it more likely that you are the scum as opposed to less likely.

Your strategy wouldn't work simply because town is just as likely to provide a case for lynching town as is scum. The fact that used such a flawed strategy is indicative of your alignment.

I've also seen scum provide cases for lynching townies extremely often. To paraphrase your whole defense against Pasch accusing you of being scum trying to look town, you can't claim you are town because you look scummy. These defenses are WIFOM circular reasoning forever and ever.

Tell me, what's more incredulous, that I knew Pasch would get lynched, and at the time concocted a mislynch against the player who had the most detailed rationale for voting him, then decided to kill the guy who did a suspicious hammer? Or that you setup a mislynch of someone who was suspicious of you (Pasch) because you had already been nervous under pressure in RVS, and then shot the only other player expressing suspicion of you (Om). Then, that you come out swinging at me for sheeping, despite me being able to provide a detailed explanation as to what I'd been trying to achieve within four minutes of your accusation against me.

Flawed strategies =/= Scum.

Your case against me is flawed, but more importantly, your case against Pasch was flawed AND scummy. Your behaviour in RVS serves as supporting evidence, and you are just about the only player in the game who I could see has a clear motivation to kill Om. Your case against me is motivated by concern of the pressure I'm putting on you, the SAME pressure that Paschendale and Om put on you.

[rapidcanyon]

@ Whiskers, lol. Scum often pretend to not understand what townies are saying and throw out accusations. The fact that you actually explained this to Eidolon is what makes me think you are really good as scum or town. Well, I am not sure right now since you say you are very good as scum.

I am leaning town on Eidolon though because McStab seems to be going all buddy-buddy with her in order to get her to vote me saying that she carefully balanced arguments and other compliments. I doubt he would say so of his scumbuddy. He doesn't need to since he knows his scumbuddy will vote for him.

[rapidcanyon]

@ McStab, I already explained why are scum. You voted a player based on MY case and are then accusing me of being scum while defending someone that you voted against.

I could just as well say that I made a case for lynching a random player just to see if anyone bandwagons. You did.

[McStab]

You asked me why I didn't think she was scum. I told you why. I wouldn't have mentioned this unless you hadn't asked me. You then go on to buddy up to her.

Everything you say is a fabrication.

[McStab]

@ McStab, I already explained why are scum. You voted a player based on MY case and are then accusing me of being scum while defending someone that you voted against.

I could just as well say that I made a case for lynching a random player just to see if anyone bandwagons. You did.

Not so. Pasch's flip was especially informative. No other wagon that day would've provided the kind of information that one did.

Om's flip was just a bonus when it came to information, because no other scum would've killed him.

[rapidcanyon]

You answer my question: are you seriously buying McStab's argument?

[quote="In post 177
yes, i'm buying it. it makes perfect sense.

It makes 0 sense. He bandwagoned and then he is accusing the player who posted an argument.

[quote="In post 177
he could have just lied and said he was sure pasch was scummy. [/quote]

Then he would have no basis for accusing me.

I think we should lynch McStab today. How is this not obvious?

[rapidcanyon]

@ McStab, I already explained why are scum. You voted a player based on MY case and are then accusing me of being scum while defending someone that you voted against.

I could just as well say that I made a case for lynching a random player just to see if anyone bandwagons. You did.

Not so. Pasch's flip was especially informative. No other wagon that day would've provided the kind of information that one did.

Om's flip was just a bonus when it came to information, because no other scum would've killed him.

Or you killed him to make me look suspicious.

[Whiskers]

@ Whiskers, lol. Scum often pretend to not understand what townies are saying and throw out accusations. The fact that you actually explained this to Eidolon is what makes me think you are really good as scum or town. Well, I am not sure right now since you say you are very good as scum.

I am leaning town on Eidolon though because McStab seems to be going all buddy-buddy with her in order to get her to vote me saying that she carefully balanced arguments and other compliments. I doubt he would say so of his scumbuddy. He doesn't need to since he knows his scumbuddy will vote for him.

1: What is this referring to?

2: I don't see any "buddy-buddy." Eido is asking McStab questions and McStab is answering them. Eido is saying, "Huh, yeah, that makes sense."
One might be suspicious that she's buying it too easily, but you aren't.

[Eidolon]

metawise, rapid is stubborn as town so his responses to pressure so far give me a null. i'd ask people to look at his motivation rather than his responses in making a decision for a lynch.

[rapidcanyon]

@ Whiskers, lol. Scum often pretend to not understand what townies are saying and throw out accusations. The fact that you actually explained this to Eidolon is what makes me think you are really good as scum or town. Well, I am not sure right now since you say you are very good as scum.

I am leaning town on Eidolon though because McStab seems to be going all buddy-buddy with her in order to get her to vote me saying that she carefully balanced arguments and other compliments. I doubt he would say so of his scumbuddy. He doesn't need to since he knows his scumbuddy will vote for him.

1: What is this referring to?

2: I don't see any "buddy-buddy." Eido is asking McStab questions and McStab is answering them. Eido is saying, "Huh, yeah, that makes sense."
One might be suspicious that she's buying it too easily, but you aren't.

McStab: "I'm pretty certain Eidolon isn't, but that's for reasons totally independent of the wagon (his meta, his inquisitive attitude, his careful balancing of points, and willingness to force people to answer)."

[McStab]

Posting arguments =/= town. It is pro-town because we can then verify your arguments and see if they hold up. They did not. Hence, your play was pro-town in that you gave us information that will let us lynch you. Your alignment, however, is most certainly not pro-town.


There is zero scum motivation for most people to try and lynch you as opposed to Om. After Om's hammer he was the easiest mislynch ever. This is what makes his death so interesting. You're the only person I can see who had motivation to kill him.

[rapidcanyon]

Posting arguments =/= town. It is pro-town because we can then verify your arguments and see if they hold up. They did not. Hence, your play was pro-town in that you gave us information that will let us lynch you. Your alignment, however, is most certainly not pro-town.


There is zero scum motivation for most people to try and lynch you as opposed to Om. After Om's hammer he was the easiest mislynch ever. This is what makes his death so interesting. You're the only person I can see who had motivation to kill him.

Or I am the chosen townie and you killed Om to make me look suspicious and bandwagon-lynched Pasch for the same reason.

[Whiskers]

@ McStab, I already explained why are scum. You voted a player based on MY case and are then accusing me of being scum while defending someone that you voted against.

I could just as well say that I made a case for lynching a random player just to see if anyone bandwagons. You did.

Not so. Pasch's flip was especially informative. No other wagon that day would've provided the kind of information that one did.

Om's flip was just a bonus when it came to information, because no other scum would've killed him.

Or you killed him to make me look suspicious.

The problem is that you already look suspicious. It's possible you could have been framed, but that's WIFOM; it's also possible that you're scum and killed Om.


Oh yeah, lol, there's also this:

There is zero scum motivation for most people to try and lynch you as opposed to Om. After Om's hammer he was the easiest mislynch ever. This is what makes his death so interesting. You're the only person I can see who had motivation to kill him.

I forgot about that. Yes, it could have been pretty easy to mislynch Om, so why kill him?

[rapidcanyon]

@ Whiskers, same applies to me. I too could have mislynched Om. That doesn't indicate that any particular person is scum.

[rapidcanyon]

Why would I remove a mislynch target out of the way?

[rapidcanyon]

metawise, rapid is stubborn as town so his responses to pressure so far give me a null. i'd ask people to look at his motivation rather than his responses in making a decision for a lynch.

Explain.

[McStab]

Literally the only defense that's held up on rapidcanyon is his meta as town. He has played here since July 20th, that's two months. Players change playstyles frequently when starting. Has anyone here seen a scum rapidcanyon meta? What's to say he's not stubborn as a mule as scum.

Meta is a bad reason on it's own to hold off lynching someone also.

If you think I'm good enough as scum to organize a mislynch (without saying much about my vote, keeping in mind) then kill an easy mislynch to attack a player who is as verbose as yourself, then I thank you for the flattery, but you're scum.

Even if you were a townie, probability alone dictates that it's unlikely you're the chosen townie. Your argument is based off of slim probability, the assumption that I calculated and engineered a plan that had no guarantees of working, just to get you lynched as a Chosen Townie, which, if you were, I would almost certainly be lynched the next day.

Somehow I think the alternatives are far more likely.

[McStab]

Why would I remove a mislynch target out of the way?

Because he pressured you, which means two things:

1) Anything you say against him is suspect. Your arguments are more discredited.

2) There's a higher chance he would catch on to you being scum.

[Whiskers]

Eido: You keep saying "town meta this, town meta that." Since that's apparently not strong enough to hold up against McStab's case, and I have

only

town meta of rapidcanyon, can you provide some scum meta of him?

rapidcanyon: You had said at one time that you did

not

know/have history with Eido. Do you or do you not know Eido from your old mafia site? Would she be able to provide meta on you? Would she have your townmeta engraved in her brain? Or have you two not played together before this game?

[preedit]
McStab:
You fucking ninja me with the things I'm trying to say.

[rapidcanyon]

Your plan will result in a complete failure if a townie acts scummy and another townie provides a case for lynching them. If that is the case, you will simply end up mislynching twice. For that reason, I don't believe that you would concoct such a plan as town.

The fact that you bandwagoned as scum on my case and are now voting for me based on a case you agreed with proves that you are scum.

Which is more likely - town made a case on another townie and scum bandagoned to get a lynch OR scum made a case on a townie and town bandwagoned with no reasoning to see their flip just so they could accuse the player who provided the reasoning as scum?

Obviously the former.

[rapidcanyon]

So, McStab is obviously mafia. Why are we even considering lynching anyone else.

[McStab]

So which is it? Am I a mastermind who engineered a mislynch and then killed a suspicious player to go after someone who wasn't suspicious? Or am I the scum who bandwagoned a townie quite blatantly to get a lynch, then went with it as it happened? You paint two possible pictures of me, both are flawed, and both are diametrically opposed. This is proof that your accusations against me are fabrications, rather than a clear, concise picture you have of me being scum.

And I've already answered why I did what I did countless times, if you think I'm going to rehash it you're wrong.