Micro 71: Lucid Dreamers - Night 4

[Mitillos]

I was hoping we'd get the votecount before there were 3 people on a single person... The idea was, say that, for example, qwints is scum and he stole your vote last night for today. Then Mist would have had 3 votes on her, even though you voted Zoidberg. But now that you moved to Mist, if that's what happened, then it won't be seen in the vote-counts. The same is true for all other pairs of voters. If no one wants to test this possibility, that's fine, but I don't see why you wouldn't. It's not like it would take that long.

[Mitillos]

EBWOP: I meant 2 people on a single person.

[Zoidberg]

Sorry guys. Super hectic weekend. I'll try to post tomorrow am.

[T-Bone]

Vote Count

Mist7676 - 3 (qwints, Empking, ScreamIampost)
ScreamIampost - 1 (Miltillos)
Qwints - 2 (Siveure DtTrikyp, Mist7676)
Empking - 1 (ProHawk)

Not Voting - 1 (Zoidberg)

Activity Check - All ok

Deadline is Thursday November 15th, 8:59pm EST

With 8 Alive, it Takes 5 to Lynch

[Zoidberg]

I'm still catching up, but just so you can see that I haven't stolen anyone's vote:

VOTE: Mitillos

[Siveure DtTrikyp]

Well, I was going to give myself a dayvig.

Actually, I was going to set up somebody so I could vig them at any time (basically one of the ways that arsonist works). Then I realized how unhelpful that was, and that I should just make myself a dayvig and give town the choice. Then, I decided to make myself a daycop.

Pity I siteflaked. Actually no, I didn't, to be truthful, I admit I am scum. With mist.

If mist is scum, she's going for a too scummy to be scum attitude. Which works so rarely it isn't worth bothering your time with as scum. If scum, why waste your time with a confirmable action that is also scummy? If you're scum and doing a useless yet confirmable action, you'll have thought hard about the choice before you make it. If you have thought about it that hard, you'll also have probably thought somewhat about WHAT action to do, and you won't do a dumb action.

FML when mist turns out to be scum though.

I'm pretty sure you haven't stolen anyone's vote as there'd not be 7 votes out already, zoid.

[qwints]

unvote: Mist

Siv, you speak sense. I need to re-read more, but I'm willing to drink your wine for today at least.

[Mitillos]

@Siv: Why did you admit to be scum in 330? You did so in your previous post and you and Mist said that it had to be every 3 posts.

[Siveure DtTrikyp]

So I don't need to keep track of how many posts I've made since I last did it.

I admit I am scum.

Also, UNVOTE: qwints
VOTE: empking

[Mitillos]

But that's even more annoying. Also, is that a serious vote, or a number-testing one?

Damn it, Mist. I'm just glad you didn't target me.

[qwints]

Scum's failure to kill combined with the fact that no one's claiming protection is really messing with my head. I kind of want to lynch Siv on the general principle that scum wouldn't willingly choose not to kill.

[Mitillos]

@qwints: Not sure I follow the logic from scum not killing to Siv being scum.

[qwints]

Siv's admitted to flaking. He failed to submit an action, and I think that's the most likely explanation for a scum no-kill. The problem, of course, is that he told us he flaked.

[Mist7676]

He could always have submitted a lag-action. An action that takes a day to work (eg- kill qwints on day(night?!!?) 3) so on that day, he can do a "confirmable" action, to prove he didn't do it.

But that's even more annoying. Also, is that a serious vote, or a number-testing one?

Damn it, Mist. I'm just glad you didn't target me.

I can change that

[Empking]

Scum's failure to kill combined with the fact that no one's claiming protection is really messing with my head.

I got myself protected.

[ProHawk]

Thoughts on Night Actions: Please comment, and let me know if I am missing anything. There are a lot of logistics that I probably am missing because of my inexperience.

The

Scream-Zoid

cross investigation to me says that they either

both

have to be lying or they are

both cleared

barring any role-redirects. If Scream flips scum, that would then make Zoid's result false and scum (without having had a role redirect). The opposite should also be true.

I believe that it would be less probable that scum would make such a connection as it would lead to a swift loss. Therefore my reads on Scream and Zoid are most likely town for now.

Mist's

action has provided for distraction and a bit of an annoyance.

Still leaning town on Mist.

Mit

- I believe that investigative claims are one of the easiest claims to make as scum because of the information already at your disposal.

Aside from that, Mit has been and continues to be town. He claims third which would be risky as scum IMO.

Qwints

- Making Mist reflective is null in my opinion.

Also a leaning town read for me. I find his quick attacks of scummy behavior townish.

EmpKing

- Making yourself immune to everything

including

any investigative role is chalk full of scum-motivation - especially when you could have used something else like self-priest, or bulletproof which would allow you to survive being night-killed while still allowing people to investigate you.

This action screams scum to me, especially considering his D1 play.

Sive

- This was the first claim which was no action. This claim has the very nice benefit of not having to come up with a back-story to explain any counter claims that could arise should a false action be presented.

I am leaning towards qwints reasoning on Sive from post #337. His failure to present any action is a huge mistake at best, if not a scummy lie. I can see scum being Sive along with EmpKing.

[Mitillos]

@Pro: The thing is, my investigation cleared Siv. so, you'd have to be suggesting that he actually used his action to make himself a godfather. But why would he be expecting to be investigated, by anyone?

[ProHawk]

And, thats what I missed.... thanks mit, re-running things again.

[ProHawk]

Siv's admitted to flaking. He failed to submit an action, and I think that's the most likely explanation for a scum no-kill. The problem, of course, is that he told us he flaked.

Qwints, please explain. Also, how much of the other game did you read?

[Empking]

EmpKing - Making yourself immune to everything including any investigative role is chalk full of scum-motivation - especially when you could have used something else like self-priest, or bulletproof which would allow you to survive being night-killed while still allowing people to investigate you.

You're being completely dishonest in your thinking here. You know as well as I do that scum won't do a straight forward kill, and will take pains to get round bulletproofs; even simple actions such as: The target dies when they make their first post can get round BPness.

HFOS: Pro

[ProHawk]

The target dies when they make their first post can get round BPness.

HFOS: Pro

So this is your explanation as to why you made yourself "untargetable"? Whats with the OMGUS? I am not being dishonest, I am posting my thoughts. For the record this is my first Lucid Dreamers game.

[Zoidberg]

If we had at least taken a little time to plan out N1 this sortof shit could've been avoided, but NO that's just completely out of the question.

Are you serious with this post?

We already know that any concrete plan will be mod-rejected.

I don't see how that's such a tough concept.

[qwints]

Mit, I get that if Siv is scum, then either he made himself godfather, his partner did or you're lying.

Siv's admitted to flaking. He failed to submit an action, and I think that's the most likely explanation for a scum no-kill. The problem, of course, is that he told us he flaked.

Qwints, please explain. Also, how much of the other game did you read?

Read the whole thing, and I know the no-action was from a town player. That doesn't change my analysis.

[Zoidberg]

Here's what struck me as odd about Mist. She is showing a serious lack of internal consistency with her reasoning here. Spoiler tags to avoid a textwall:

Spoiler: She assumes he would be cautious, and caution would be a scumtell

O.o why me?

And I am the one that gave Siv he post restriction. Every third post he makes he has to claim scum.

I assumed, if he is scum, he would do it in such a cautious way it doesn't seem real, but he is outright saying he is scum, I believe he is town.

Spoiler: Siv must explicitly post "I admit I am scum"

Checking back it wasn't "claim scum" He just has to post "I admit I am scum."

Spoiler: qwints' question touches on how much leeway Mist gave Siv

So Mist, you thought that Siv might try to be "sneaky" in saying "I admit I am scum"?

Spoiler: Mist says that saying it outright is townish, when that's what she required him to do?

Well, I wanted to see how he took the PR.
He just says it outright, which makes me believe He is town.

1. Puts a post restriction on Siv
   
2. When he follows the restriction, she says he's town
   
3. Had he broken the restriction, he would I guess be scum?!?!

Of course, by that logic Siv can either be town or modkilled, so there's really no way for Siv to fail this "test."

Leaving aside the merits of giving someone a post restriction (which IMO is almost universally anti-town) for a moment, I can't decide if this is mistscum trying to throw down a smokescreen for her partner or if this is mistscum trying to gain towncred, but it's definitely one of these two scenarios.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Mist

[Mitillos]

@Zoid: Not that I'm against the Mist votes or anything (that's whom I'm going to be voting for as well, unless things change dramatically), but weren't you going to wait for a votecount to see if your vote was stolen by someone, or if you stole someone's vote?