Open 474 - Friends and Enemies - Game Over!

[KX]

I can confirm what HD says, I am scum in 100% of my games. Or at least apparently I seem that way. So, first game here, looks to be fun!

OMGUS and such, plus I seriously distrust him (not that it means anything, being the norm and all)

Vote: HD

[KX]

Just a quick note, when I said "not that it means anything, being the norm and all" I mean that this is mafia and so everybody should be distrusted. Personally, having seen HD's play style and knowing him, I trust him the most out of everybody since I have something to go off of. Though I will confess upon re-reading it, I found it scummy myself. Not sure what you mean by contrasting tones, I found it such due to the "Or at least apparently I seem that way" in combination with the aforementioned in parentheses parts, which make it seem to much like I'm trying to cover for further actions.

Though I'm not really helping my case, though I will be helping my point, I tend to just post without thinking unless specifically making a lengthy analysis of another player. As such, sometimes I'll post things which don't exactly look the best, or which contradict things I've already said or the facts. The only upside to this is that it means I'm pretty truthful. Or I could not be, and instead be scummy as hell. My only defense towards that is I'm not stupid, so if I'm scum, I'd probably be covering my tracks a little better. Uh, yeah, rather then debate myself, since it's the only thing I see to do, I'll let you people.

[KX]

No, but given time, I could say it he was playing abnormally. Though considering I'm pretty bad at getting reads on people based on feel rather then facts, people who read over his other games could probably give info better then me.

[KX]

On the subject of my being defensive, I respond to things. If you call that defensive, then yes, I am defensive, just by natural play style.

[KX]

Also, for future reference, if I'm not swearing heavily, I'm not emotional. Like, at all. Everything I say should be read in a bored, slightly condescending tone.

[KX]

It's Day 1 and Page 3 . . . is there anything more then nothing to argue over?

And correct me if I'm wrong, but the argument for lynching a VI would be that they're stupid, can't do anything, and hurt the town in the long run, or are mafia, and so the best option in either case, provided a better target is not present, is to lynch them, correct? Well, since the first part doesn't apply, I'm not stupid, I will contribute decently intelligently, and due my policy of honesty, it should be pretty easy to get a read on me. If you have any other reasons to propose a lynch on me, or to say my explanation does not eliminate your point, then explain them.

And one more thing I'd like to object to is you describing what I've explained as scumslipping. What I am likely to do is not scum slip, but instead change opinions and/or make mistakes. These do not make one scum; They make one human. Since I tend not to proof read what I type, in order for the message I want to convey to be gotten without me changing it based on over thinking, it means I'm extremely prone to this. Only in a few cases (in depth analyzing of another) will I check facts before posting, and so I'll go off memory, which for me is pretty bad, or impressions, which vary drastically for me as new information is presented. Simply put, I just tell the truth.

On the subject of your lynching Venrob, I agree with it, but lying about how a game went, especially when a player who was in the game is in the new one, in, as you seem to imply, an attempt to misrepresent his past play, seems like a really, really stupid idea. So while I won't say there are no idiots on the internet, as that would make me one, I will question weather or not we believe he possesses that level of short-sightedness, or if there is an alternate explanation. And on voting in general,

Unvote

. I think it's clear I do not wish for HD to be lynched, and that their are people who I may want to soon have it on.

[KX]

There are a few examples of meta you could look at, though they're from a different site. Unfortunately, the best example is an ongoing game, and so can't be used. If you wish to see the one example which can be presented, though it was my first mafia game with no outside contact allowed, either me or HD can link it. Hopefully when I make a mistake or change an opinion, should it happen at all, it will be obvious as genuinely those things, and not due to a failed attempt at manipulation.

[KX]

For clarification once again: When I say I trust HD the most our of everybody, that do not means I trust him. All that I mean is I trust him more then the rest of you, since I know him and so could judge him better. Also, I don't really get the problem with what I said: I'm enlightening the rest of the game on how I tend to play. No matter what, I can't prove myself as village, and being an impossible goal, was not my intention. Should this not be my normal play style, and so I'm lying about meta, HD could easily object, unless people mean to imply that we're both lying, the only possible reason for being we're both scum. At this early phase, since once again, neither of us are stupid, we wouldn't try such an event which could out us so early.

Anyway, pretty much what I mean to say from all of this is that I'm only explaining my play style, it being impossible to clean myself so early, and that if I'm lying, you would know via HD. Now, just because the way I play is what some consider scummy, just my pointing it out doesn't make me clean. Thing is, it also shouldn't make me suspicious. Either way, it doesn't provide any information towards my alignment which can't be second-guessed, and so the only outcome one should get from it is information about my play.

Let me put it like this: I have two possible ways to play, both with advantages as scum and village:

I can either check my posts, and make them all careful and calculated, trying to subtly accomplish goals, avoid slipping up, etc. As village, it could establish me as a strong leader, give my opinions more voice, which if I have confidence in their correctness would be a good thing, and over all hopefully have a positive effect on the game. It would also prevent people from suspecting me as much and so not waste people's time. Downsides are that if I slip up about anything, it would be hard to explain.

As scum, playing in such a style would be useful as it would allow me to use the information I possessed to attempt to control and manipulate the game, shifting attention from my partners in an attempt to cause mislynches. I would be unlikely to be lynched myself, which for a mafioso is a great thing, and would give me voice. Overall, all helpful things. Some might question me, but as long as I stayed calm, which I could definitely do, hopefully there would be no harm. Worst case scenario, I get lynched, in which case I can put traps on misinformation into my posts.

The second option would be the one I have chosen:

Simply say what I think and feel, attempting honesty at all times. Explain myself and my actions to players, attempting to eliminate criticism that's unfounded and provide opinions. Most likely I won't have much voice, and my opinions won't me as much. Also, due to how it works, generally most suspect me. Plus are though that should I live to late game, most should get a very good read on me, and so at that point it would be highly advantages. Also, as it seems to have done already, it tends to generate much discussion. Also, the reason why I picked it, it's simpler to do, and I'm lazy.

This option would also be good as scum though. As mentioned, if I can get through initial criticism and play well, it could lead to a late-game victory, and the general suspicion and so chance of being a lynch target would be a good reason for why I wasn't getting killed. All actions would seem pro village, and as long as I avoided partnering with my scumbuddies, it would have a high chance of success. Also, especially via explaining this whole set-up, it provides a great fake-out play. Nobody would expect a scum to do this and then ruin the strategy by explaining it all, and too choose the option which, of the two scum options, at first seems the lesser, and then make it out to be the greater.

Point being, there are valid explanations for playing just about any way for any side, and so based off an early game announcement of one's play style, it's extremely hard and really just luck what you get from it, at least in a situation with a player like me who dissects the game. All you can get is an idea how they should play, and then see if it holds up. And don't point out the irony of me choosing this style because it's easier, then making these tl;dr posts. I realize it, and it's since I can just type without thinking, even if it takes a while to type.

[KX]

Also, forgive me if I'm not participating as much in presenting my opinions on others. Though I know it's not optimally helpful for the game, I like to have a little to go off of before I start judging people, and I justify the lack of such activity with the fact that my own posts about myself hopefully generate as much if not more discussion then me posting about other players. Something I left out of the most recent post is that with the latter style as scum, the fact that most scum wouldn't want to draw attention and close criticism is both a reason to not play as such while scum and another helpful part of the reverse-psychological aspect.

Oh cool, @HD somebody responding with the point as I type my response to it.

[KX]

ArcAngel9, y u no reading comprehension?

What I'm saying is I have no clear idea of how any of you will play, while I have a slight idea how HD will play. That means I can understand the way he posts a little better then for everybody else, and so I trust him more. I still don't trust him, but in comparison to the rest of you, he's the one I think, at this time, I could most accurately judge. So, I trust him to be understandable, not a certain alignment. If he flipped scum, as I've already stated, I'm not the best at getting reads off of feelings, and so I wouldn't be surprised. I won't follow him blindly, and want you to show me were in my posts I say I will. Our relation is that we've played mafia together and talked on a different site.

[KX]

Also, to add on, I am not understanding at all where people are getting my posts being emotional from. Even if it's a single sentence, I would like somebody to show me exactly what makes it seem that way.

[KX]

City, why must

2. Do not insult your fellow players.

be a rule?

Anyway, I'll answer said question only if another user wishes to know the answer. Otherwise, I'm just going to stop talking with you, and leave you with the request that you think about my posts and what's your saying very carefully.

[KX]

can I insult people provided it is obviously impersonal and I have no intention to offend by doing so?

[KX]

I see it as working with what I know. I know myself and how I plan to play, so I comment on that. I don't know about anybody else, and don't see anything I can comment on. Otherwise I would be posting just about nothing, which is far from helpful and almost detrimental. I figure that the more information it out there, the better it is for the village. If I'm wrong, then correct me. Should information appear on something which I feel I can comment on, then I will. For now though, I do the best that I can which remains useful.

In response to Nic, I'll admit the multi-paragraph post wasn't the most helpful, and could have been shortened, but it was to prove a point. Other the the TL;DR nature, how is the information not helpful? It's proving something to talk about, it gives people insight into my play style since there's no meta, and if gives something for people to go off of. Also, I tend to be a reckless person. I don't exactly crave attention, but see no problem with sticking out, and won't change my attitude to avoid doing so.

And, rather then talk about myself, many of you will be happy to know that I plan to soon make a semi-constructive post of how I see the game so far based on other people.

[KX]

Player List:

Human Destroyer

:
Perhaps a little more jovial then I'm used to, but over all pretty solid play, and I believe that his judging of other players so far seems reasonable enough. His check for a double standard in particular seems like something a scum wouldn't be likely to do, but not sure, as HD's pretty smart. I would say leaning town for the moment.

ArcAngel9

As far as I can tell, they seem to be trying to help and understand things. So far though, iirc, they haven't really contributed much. The closest to helping they've done is their prodding of me, which as far as I can tell was unbased. They couldn't support anything they said, and were just asking questions which didn't relate to what was said upon anything more then a quick glance. I'm not sure if they just weren't reading my posts closely, but either way it's enough to warrent them leaning scum.

Docteur Gudsight

Sorry, but I'm going to be worthless for this. Never played with one before, and I've got to be honest, I object to the practise. I've never been that good with reads, and this just further complicates it, so no opinion. Maybe later I can figure something out, but now, I got nothing.

JacobSavage

Seems like somewhat of a flightly person, but playing without any hesitation, and an over all positive feeling. I really think I need to see more, especially more with quality substance to it, to get something definitive. So far though, I'd say leaning town.

Klick

Seems to be an interesting character. I should probably read over other games of his, since some background information seems especially useful. The self-vote is an pretty pro-town seeming move, as I can't imagine it's likely a scum would endanger themselves to create discussion. If it's a common tact of his though, the point is somewhat less so. Otherwise, most of his post are decent enough. As said before, I'd like to see more from him. Townish leaning for now.

NicCage

Low activity to begin with, but it seems to have picked up. Mainly just calling out minor corrections or adding his vote, but comparatively, that's actually pretty decent. So I suppose I'll have to go with town leaning. As always though, more posting would be good, especially in his case.

Spencer22

I think he's made literally one post. That post made it look like he was trying to fill a leader-type role, get things going etc, only problem being such a role would be impractical and unneeded. So yeah, post more pl0x. Gonna have to go with neutral or perhapse scum-leaning for not fullfuling his promise of activity.

serrapaladin

So far, really everything they've said makes sense and works, based around logic. Though that doesn't definitively make them scum, it certainly doesn't harm their case as a player. If they're village, they should be helpful, and if they're not, then it should be easy enough to find when it comes to partners. Potentially highly dangerous if they can completely give up partnership, but oh well, problem will be dealt with as they arrive. As said, no flaws to far, so gonna guess town until I see something against it.

Josh Lyman

So, his first post is a random vote. His second is one saying that we're all arguing over nothing, and directing a derogatory nature towards it. Guess what his third post is? He criticizes

me

for for contributing, and not talking with other players. Off this he concludes that I'm scum. Unless I'm wrong, literally every other post he makes is about how I'm bad, and a number of them are posts with no actual substance. Even those with substance lack solid reasoning. In my books are least, hypocrisy + targeting = scum, and as such, VOTE: Josh Lyman. If he pointed out my flaws like serra, I could respect him, and might even take it as a pro-town read. However, due to the nature of presentation, I'd say he's scum, and so my vote.

Cheery Dog

He reminds me of a Jacob with more quality. Their attitudes seem similar, posting seem around a similar frequency, the manner in which they act presents itself to me as the same, etc. However, Cheery's posts seem to contain a little bit more original thought and reasoning then Jacob's. So if I think Jacob is town, Cheery is most certainly leaning town.

goodmorning

They remind me somewhat of serra. Their posts are logical, make sense, bring up interesting posts, and are helpful. The two main differences are that they seem to view things in a more positive light, and that they have significantly less posts. However, if they continue at their current rate, I may consider them one of the cleanest players. Even despite the lack of evidence available, I'll still have to say they lean town.

Venrob

Honestly, I don't know. I think their case has been pretty well outlined, and I have nothing else to add, so I won't. As for my thoughts about it, I currently have to say they lean scum, but I'll remain open minded and if more information appears, may be willing to change my opinion.

So there you have it, my opinions on every player in the game. Hopefully this will clear up some of the accusations made against me based around the fact I haven't presented opinions on others, and have instead remained on the topic of myself. Discuss as you wish. Also, forgive me for any mistakes, grammatical or otherwise, this post was made at 3 am. And expect a follow-up post outlining specifically what I mean about Josh, and why my vote is on him.

[KX]

Well, looks like what I was going to say about all of Josh's posts has been done already. On the topic of the wagon filling so quickly, while it's an interesting discussion point, I for one don't find it that surprising: That manner in which he is acting is extremely suspicious and possibly harmful, and I think anybody who plays mafia knows those two factors mean you should vote somebody. All I can say on the topic is Josh has almost 300 posts, so we should be able to find some meta on him which /might/ clear things up a little bit. No matter what though, the manner in which he's acting I think speaks for itself. Unless something extremely unexpected happens, I'd be all for his lynching. However, rather then hammer quickly, it seems to be in the village's best interest to hold off the lynch and keep talking things over.

[KX]

Also, to add on, how is putting effort in a town thing? As far as I know, all commitment and putting time into a game means it that you want to win. Yes, it was to do reads, which generally help town, but the reads could also be argued as having been made to throw away accusations on me, something which benefits me either way.

[KX]

First I wanted to say that I am still here, and trying to stay up to date, though I won't have high activity for a few days. Anyway, back in #244 I was asked why we should talk more. I think this should probably be a self-evident answer that most anybody who's not a first timer should know the answer to. That answer being if people talk, you can get an idea of people's personalities, and the more a person talks, the more chances it are for them to slip if they're scum. Correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I know, purely statistically most games favor the mafia. That is made up for by the fact that the town can talk and make more accurate lynches based on people's actions. We can't, however, get reads if people don't talk. Therefore, in order for the town to maximize it's chance to win, the town must talk.

Also, with the ongoing debate, I want to question why a player talking to one they suspect to be scum is a slip. Yes, you can say that they actually know the person is scum, but you can also say that they're trying to make sure of it and maximize information. If you simply suspect a player of being scum, you shouldn't tunnel them, you should try and confirm or dismiss said suspicion. And if you truly believe a player is scum, 100% in your mind, and you think you're good enough to make reads at all, then not doing everything you can do to get them lynched is the anti-town option.

Of course, of the issue of Josh, HD's point still remains. Yes, he did try focus in almost exclusively on me, and with the supposed purpose of making me contribute. The problem for him, and what I think makes him scummy, is how he himself wasn't contributing at the time, and was using repetitive posting against as a way to avoid making any real contribution. That hypocrisy as the ease with which alternative motives can be given is what the problem, for me, is.

Say I truly was some unmotivated nube town who knew next to nothing: Most likely I would have been able to make anything close to a quality read, and if I displayed the previous abilities, most likely would be overwhelmed by it. Combined with the inherent scummyness of my previous post, I find it probable I would have become a decent if not a great target, in which case I feel the attitude against Josh would be somewhat different. The hypocrisy might still have been pointed out, but until a later time, I feel not much attention would be given to it, and meanwhile even more attention then there already is would be focused on me.

And yes, this is a somewhat introspective post as well. Please don't give me any grief about it, I think I said it already, but just in case, if I see something I have the knowledge to respond to, I do. At this time, what I know most about is myself. So, until I gain more information, I use what I have as best I can to reason. If I haven't said something, it's because I've concluded nothing.

[KX]

Why is being introspective bad? Because it means you don't contribute. What was Josh doing? Not Contributing. What is Hypocrisy? Promoting, making, or calling out others on standards you don't follow. Have a nice day.

[KX]

I don't disagree with his reasoning. What I disagree with is his hypocrisy, tunneling, and attitude. Now listen, I have no clue why you're so vehemently defending him, maybe you're scum buddies, it seems like that would be too easy, but idk. Either way, I have stuff to do, and you're not convincing anybody, so can you just give up? inb4 I'm "trying to kill discussion" or some such bs.

[KX]

so can you just give up?

Nope.

First thing, why? Why are you so determined to defend him?

And second, by failing to present an argument, I think you did, even if you don't admit it.

[KX]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't nay-saying simply taking a negative view of something or putting it in the worst possible light? From what I know, all I'm doing, and all my intention are, is proving your defenses of him invalid. If you were simply presenting an optimistic light of the situation and I the opposite, then as soon as we both stated our opinions there would be nothing more to say, and neither of us could gain any ground. However, instead, I've disproved your views, while you have yet to disprove any of mine or present any which I can't disprove. Also, if you truly think he's innocent, since I would hope it's obvious he won't be lynched at this point, wouldn't it be better to, upon presenting an opinion, step back and let him defend himself, so rather then getting another's interpretation, we get what the person in question's take on it is? And if, upon him presenting a defense as best he can, if he fails to provide a reasonable explanation, shouldn't you consider changing your views?

As for the possible implication of me trying to group both of you as scum which I got from your last sentence, should one of you be lynch and flip scum, then it would most definitely be a possibility and something to be discussed, however, for the moment, all I desire to know is what has led you to hold the opinion which you do. Having given reasoning against what you've presented for holding your opinion, I want to know why you still hold it. If I take away your reasoning, do you still hold it due to the point of conflict were it's simply opinions, or are there other reasons? That point of conflict beings, does pointing out a person doing what you yourself are make you scummy? Your opinion being that no, since you still try and help, it's not scummy, while mine is if a person is truly interested in helping the game, they won't call one out on something they themselves can be accused of while they hold the ability to change it. If that simple conflict is what it comes down to, then so be it. However, if you have any more reasoning to back it up, please present it now.

[KX]

To start out with,

Unvote

. Obviously Josh is gone, and I'm inclined to believe he simply wasn't the best player (once again though, meta would be appreciated). Anyway, for why people weren't called out, on the Jacob issue I haven't had a chance to, sleeping and all, and for goodmorning, I share their feelings on the hydra and AA9, but, as with them, see nothing new to add. For them voting, I can see your point, but I really don't think it's that big a deal. If somebody were to hammer without the consent of everybody, then they would most likely be lynched the next day, making it so nobody was likely to and possible motive was null. The discrepancy on stance is interesting to say the least, but with a lack of people to pressure at that time I don't see it meaning much. Certainly not something to discard in either case, but I don't think it's highly relevant either. Will post more later on the Jacob issue and whatever else comes up.

[KX]

To start out with, Unvote. Obviously Josh is gone, and I'm inclined to believe he simply wasn't the best player (once again though, meta would be appreciated).

>Obviously Josh is gone, and I'm inclined to believe he simply wasn't the best player<

???

[KX]

Btw, just an idea I wanted to throw in. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me like what Panzer is trying to do is pressure some who are generally considered town and, more importantly, have managed to slip past any major criticism. While I fully agree with and endorse this idea, at the current time, I think that trying it is rather impractical. Given the current situation, even if you're making a false case, there simply isn't enough to go off of for anything substantial to emerge. The idea behind making a false case should be that a person who's mainly considered town has been, in their own way, flying under the radar, and avoiding criticism. Your goal would be to create a probably highly biased case against them were you jump to many irrational conclusions, and test how they react to pressure and defend themselves. Ideally, this let's you confirm your belief in them being village while eliminating most doubts.

Of course, via this post I would somewhat ruin the point of it, but at this point you may be damaging people's opinions of you. Simply put, there just isn't enough to go off of, even if you try and present things in a tainted light. Ordinarily I would just let things run their course and see if you have anything you haven't said yet, but give the scarcity of the case, I think no good will come of it, and only harm will be done to you. Now, if you truly do think the players you've mentioned are scum, I have to question if you're village. While it's good to pressure those who are more "clean," a useful tactic if you want disruption is to play on people's paranoia and call out said "clean" people as scum, which spreads doubt and can make people fall out of the reach of logic in their assumptions.

So pretty much, if you're bluffing about it all, say so now and hold off until later before you hurt yourself, and if you're serious, then please say why, as I doubt I'm alone in wondering why and being unconvinced.

[KX]

Hey Panzer, would you mind responding to the questions/statements posed again once you get some sleep? I'm sorry to say I can't draw anything from what you've said, and so they result in being utterly useless and unhelpful.

[KX]

Pretty much just be more specific. You've made a number of claims so far, but call me stupid, I haven't been able to figure out how you arrived at those conclusions. Site specific examples and explain the reasoning behind your conclusion. I mean, you've made stabs at how your logic fits together, such as #358, but, at least for me, you never quite connect them together or to reality. I don't entirely disagree with you, as I said I find they should be investigated more, but I'm not seeing you doing that.

[KX]

I never said the hydra looked town, please check over what I've said again. And while you could be correct about HD, please read what I said in the post. There simply isn't enough to go off of at this point. In case I haven't made this clear, I haven't seen how Panzer's logic fits together, and that was the only conclusion I could think of. Due to the lack of information, I believed that would only hurt Panzer while gaining us nothing. Perhaps Panzer is scum and deserves to be hurt, idk, but to me at least I would find reaction testing to be a pretty pro-town move, especially considering the target.

[KX]

@serra, isn't your question basically what I've repeated throughout all my post, that being I don't think there's enough information? In my mind, it was sabotaged from the start, and what I was doing was either confirming their intent, or preventing them from going through with a flawed plan. I will admit though that I am somewhat of an egotist, so yeah, to say that I'm the kind of person who might say they know what a person is doing better then the person themselves is a true statement. Also, I believe Panzer asked what I thought of the other subbed spot, and I never directly answered. My response is I'm neutral, while Josh behavior makes sense as scum, it's possible he was just acting nubishly. He didn't respond, and so I can't really judge.

[KX]

On the subject of things which mean nothing, is it just me, or does it seems like only about one out of every six posts for the last 4~5 pages have had coherent meaning? I'll point out what I mean later today, but is essence it feels to me as though logic has been thrown out the window for those making posts, most likely as a product of walls, bad grammar, and misconceptions.

[KX]

welcome to the game, and gl reading all this.

[KX]

Forgive me if there are link substitute/secret tags, if so, I didn't see them. Anyway, link:
http://pokemon-online.eu/forums/showthr ... a-Postgame

First NOC ever. I'm currently in one other NOC as well, and there are a number of completed OCs which may provide information on that same site. In addition, I've read over something like 15 games from here and another site. So yeah, that's pretty much my experience with mafia.

Also, on the subject of GM, responding only to the reasons given in #476, I disagree with the first point, and so my main suspicion of them comes from the second, though I don't think I find it scummy to the extent jenn does, and the fourth point, which I don't see an explanation for.

[KX]

np, and I was actually thinking of doing that myself. Probably today or tomorrow, depending on when I get the time.

[KX]

Just want to make a quick objection @borkjerfkin
First, on 163, yes there was information, however, unless I've lost my ability to read, I also explain what said given information makes me think of the person, making an "a" in place of the "io" more accurate. On the subject of jennifer, I must confess that I'm somewhat null about them atm, play seems town-leaning at a glance, but due to the nature of the slot I'm hesitant. However, I haven't had a chance to read over the thread in detail, which is most likely part of the problem, and really only skimming. I should have a chance later today, at which point I'll see if I notice anything.

[KX]

Eh, I know I'd promised to do a post now, but ended up talking the night away, and at this point I don't believe I have the mental ability to make a comprehendable post of any significant length. Will hopefully post thoughts in the morning. Also, amazing visual game representation, I look forward to more!

[KX]

I hate to make this post, but so far, I think I have a scum read on a somewhat large portion of the game currently. Those not on it are Human Destroyer, ArcAngel9, NicCage, borkjerfkin, serrapaladin, Cheery Dog and Klick. Of those, AA9 and Klick are neutral for the reasoning of I haven't seen anything paticularly scummy, but they don't strike me as town either. Borkjerfkin I think I need more information on, and I simply haven't seen enough yet. Cheery seems town in their actions, but I've had a little trouble getting a read on them, otherwise they might be higher. HD is probably my third town read, with his contributions significant and having done little that's overly scummy, though I don't quite trust him. NicCage and serrapaladin, though unlikely, seem the most town to me atm. I can understand what they're saying, why, and I can see it making sense as town, and that's more then I can say for anybody else.

Now, on to the heart of the matter. To me, it seems like anybody getting involved in this mass of suspicion is just becoming more and more scummy. For Jennifer, as I may have mentioned, the scum slot plus the ways they've been acting, immediately coming out offensive and jumping with Panzer. Not specifically scummy, that could just be their play style, but to me, that combination is enough to eliminate the townish read. Docteur Gudsight seems largely town to me, however, he's made a number of questionable plays so far, which one should be able to find pointed out, and those I agree with. JacobSavage . . . tbh, I don't know what the hell they're doing, and whatever it is, it seems to be harmful and inconsistent to such an extreme I find them being town unlikely.

Panzerjager, I have no clue wtf he's doing. He's been calling people out on things which make no sense at all to me, then following these calls. I really just am not sure what to make of it, but it doesn't seem like normal town to me. Goodmorning started out as one of the most pro-town players to me, but based on some of the responses they've made, it's been brought into question within my mind. They simply don't seem town to me.

Now this gets to an uncomfortable situation of some people are scummy because they've been pressured, and others because they pressured. Put simply, I thing both sides are horrible. The offence and defense are done very poorly and in a scummy manner, with reasoning and responses being weak. If that situation, or any other, changes in my mind, I'll update those here on it.

[KX]

If I had to choose somebody to lynch, Jennifer. Their death could potentially reveal quite a bit of information. If not them, Jacob, since if they flipped village I think there death wouldn't be to much of a loss. Probably goodmorning for my third choice, for the reason it would give us the most information (imo) of all the lynches. At this point, I do not wish to cast a vote, since iirc deadline is still a while away, and I don't think I can make an accurate assumption now.

[KX]

To your first question, it's because of the informational gain and that your lynch would probably break up this stalemate of sorts while I don't believe lynching Jacob would let us say to much. I mean, we could FoS those who defended him, but otherwise nothing really. Also, I think the main difference between the two games it that in the linked game I new everybody, not just from that game, but from other games and talking with them. In addition, until I get somebody who I strongly believe to be scum, I generally don't vote? At this point, I have 5 people, none of who strikes me with that level of scummyness. You'll notice I voted Josh this game, and that he's my only lynch so far; This is because, so far, he's the only person i've gotten that much of a scum vibe from.

[KX]

Yes, that's because I'm scum with them. It's because in that sentence, my point is that even if he flips we don't get much from it.

[KX]

Why do you say that?

Why do I say what?

And @Panzer, it's less because I don't understand your playstyle, and more like I don't understand your reasoning, and find what you've presented for people being scum to be questionable at best.

[KX]

well, unless I'm wrong, which I could be, Jacob hasn't stated very many solid opinions, or engaged in many debates over matters which could be looked at. And even if he has, due to what seems to be his nature of non-consistent opinions, I don't think even what he has said would provide much usable evidence.

[KX]

The problem is, do those making such opinions think of them as vague and circumstantial? If yes, I want a lynch on that person for doing something I consider damages the game. If no, then I want to lynch them for bad reasoning. Either I find them scummy, or I find them dislikable. Well, when the time comes around, I'll vote whoever I think is the best choice. For now though, I think none of the targets are the best, and see no reason to cast a vote.

[KX]

As seen in post 561,

If I had to choose somebody to lynch, Jennifer.

[KX]

So Panzer, since your actions are making me believe you're scum as well, why am I not scum? After all, by objecting to you and calling your claims ludicrous, I'm obviously HD's scum partner panicking about him getting offed. Or am I not scum because unlike HD I've been somewhat inactive and withdrawn instead of getting things done? But wait, that can't be, I've made lists and cases, so forget that, I'm scum just like him!

[KX]

"Friends" from another site. But regardless of that, I maintain my position that your accusations against him, and really most people you're accusing, make little to no sense. And while I may not be the most weathered veteran, how can said lack of experience clean me? Honestly curios, how can you be sure I'm not just a scum who's not letting themselves be changed too much by the arrangement?

[KX]

Can you name a "mistake" I've made? Also, a question for you, when I vote Josh after he voted me and got a wagon started, how is that not OMGUS in the same way HD is voting you now? Either way, one player gets attacked by another, and they then make a case against the attack based on how they were attacked. The only main difference I see is that the second example directly involves you, while the first involves me, who, like Jenn and some others, you for some reason seem to believe are clean. (unless I missed something) Also, I take back what I said,

Vote: Panzerjager

. Explanations please. And one last note, how can you call me newbish when you yourself seem to be playing by a completely different rule set then everybody else? It seems if anybody doesn't know what they're doing, it's you.

[KX]

This game is intensely frustrating.

@CD: Opinions on Panzer? HD?

Both still reading town.
Although I don't see what Panzer its saying as a tell, I can see he himself believes it to be such.
HD is making a right mess of his defence, but his posts appear to be genuine and it reads as townie emotions.

I don't like KX cutting into their argument though, it's just fueling the fires and we don't need three probable town engaged in such an all out war. It'll end up distracting from actual scum.

I have to agree with this sentiment to a certain extent. I wish to know why Panzer is so focused upon those he outlined in his original post, and if it's because he truly believes them to be scum, what to do with it. My vote lies upon him because I wish for answers, and should answers not appear, I think lynching is an option. It may seem like they're too obviously scummy to actually be scum, but you never know. As mentioned in this post, it certainly is distracting from other measures, and I feel as though very little has been gained since they were subbed in other then some repetitive (and meaningless) arguments.

[KX]

@AA9, In that post I use myself as an example of not only how his "scumtells" don't make sense, but also how he hypocritically applies them to people.

[KX]

Actually, I think if Spencer was still here, we might have gotten more done. And who says we can't turn mafia into a talent quest?

[KX]

dang, HD beat me to it. Anyway, read through the whole thing, makes a little more sense to me. I think we should probably move on from this subject though, unless Panzer wants something to come of it, since I believe it's been discussed in detail, and it's been shown the end result is Panzer gets lynch, something that I think wouldn't be for the best now. On that,

Unvote

[KX]

KX expressed her opinion

Were the fuck do you get that my gender is female? I mean, seriously, I see nothing to make one thing that.

On Klick being prodded, City hasn't been online (at least visibly) in 12 hours, and judging via timezones, I would say she probably just hasn't had the time yet.
However, now they've posted, so a question. What are your reads, even if you can't justify them?

And yes, I'm an extremely good liar, also good at controlling not only others but my own emotions, so. Tbh, I almost want to be scum just to see how I do. And I have three main uses of my vote. The first is prodding somebody to be active, the second is to obtain information, pressure etc, and the third is if I actually want somebody dead and out of the game. Otherwise, I see no reason to vote, and so don't.

[KX]

Also, who exactly was voting Panzer when they said that?

[KX]

Still not sure on the lynch, going to be thinking about it. As for a claim, imo, Masons should only claim if a scum claims, and so to counter-claim. Say we try to lynch a mason, and they claim, then there's no counter claim. Then, the player does get killed that night because the scum decided to fake the village out. End result, next day we try to lynch a mason, and a second has to claim. The end result being that, to prevent such situation happening, if a scum claims mason, the masons should always CC. If there is a counter claim and it's debated, then a second mason should claim in addition to the first should it look like the situation is going badly. If a second or third mafia claim to try and beat it out, the village pretty much gets the rest of the game on easy mode. Yes, it means all a scum needs to do when they're about to be lynched is claim mason and then they get some masons revealed, but I think the worth outweighs the risk.

[KX]

GDI, are you people really going to make me pretty much decide who the Day 1 lynch is? If yes . . . screw you, and we have three days, I'd like two use the next 6ish hours to make a choice. If no, then you should be able to debate knowing that I'd support any of the lynches without me actually voting, and if I see something to comment on, I will.

[KX]

Alright then, good to hear.

[KX]

So, we have a number of people who are acting suspiciously, but because there are a few for each of those people who strongly oppose the lynch, we're going to lynch a completely different person. Oh yeah, and we're not going to say why, it's just what we're doing. Admittedly I haven't looked through Nic's posts too carefully, and there aren't very many of them, but still, how does this make sense?

[KX]

I take it back. While he hasn't exactly done anything scummy, looking through the thread, he hasn't exactly contributed much or posted any concrete opinions, and for me I think he could do better. However, with AA9's post, I want to know, what did he have to defend himself against? So far, it seems like nobody has throw accusations at him, and so he would have no reason to defend himself. It certainly does seem like he's avoiding attention, but I think Klick could be accused of that as well. So, why are people voting him, and why the suggestion of him in the first place?

[KX]

Well,

Vote: GM

I guess. If this doesn't get counterclaimed, that would suck. I mean, @Panzer, I didn't think you were that scummy, but let's face it, your play sucked. I won't claim that everybody here is top-notch, but you seemed to be playing by a completely different set of rules.

[KX]

I'm not the Mod, but:

Votecount 1.13
Jennifer (L-3): Docteur Gudsight, Cheery Dog, JacobSavage, NicCage
goodmoring (L-3): Klick, Panzerjager, serrapaladin, KX
JacobSavage (L-5): borkjerfkin, Jennifer
Panzerjager (L-4): goodmorning, Human Destroyer, ArcAngel9

Not voting (0)

With 13 alive, it's 7 to lynch. Day 1 ends in 1 days, 6 hours, 10 minutes

So yeah, a while left yet to talk.

[KX]

Also, on the subject of vote counts, at some point somebody should make a full list of every vote that's been placed, with time stamps. So for instance,

Player A: Vote 1 ~ (player) (timestamp) -> Vote 2 ~ (player) (timestamp) -> Vote 3 ~ (player) (timestamp)
Player B: Vote 1 ~ (player) (timestamp) -> Vote 2 ~ (player) (timestamp) -> Vote 3 ~ (player) (timestamp)

Think it would be pretty interesting to see things such as the rate people vote, and who they vote for. Also might make it easier to see how certain trends arose.

[KX]

Doesn't (or, shouldn't) something like 90% of this site go to school? Anyway, though official vote tallies do help, I think we should all be able to manage for ourselves. Btw, @AA9, why the delay in voting GM? And if they're your main suspect, why not press for their lynch? Specifically, why jump on both the Nic and Panzer wagons when there was quite a bit of time left?

[KX]

@AA9, I meant the delay after Panzer claimed. Also, @bork, nice hammer.

[KX]

so yeah, now we just continue on were we left off except with the addition of factoring in GM's scum flip?

[KX]

No duh HD, the whole lynched a scum thing after claiming Mason didn't tip you off? Also, interestingly enough, reading through the thread, it seems like a large amount of the more suspicious players expressed opinions of me being town. Will post more if I see anything else.

@NicCage, why the fuck would Panzer survive?

[KX]

tbh, looking through it, I've become suspicious of Jacob and HD. Panzer's logic about HD actually makes sense, and he seemed to buddy with GM quite a bit, and get many town reads on them. Tbf though, most people were getting town reads on HD. An interesting point, though this doesn't help me, is that many read lists people gave had me, HD, and GM at the top, or HD and GM near mid/bottom. One other thing I'd like to draw attention to, though once again I'm not helping myself, as I rated them pretty high, are NicCage and Jacob. People put Jacob pretty high up, including a read near the begging by GM rated, and continued to rate, Jacob somewhat high. HD seems to have had it out for Jacob and been pressing for their lynch since the begging, something I doubt would be done if they were scum together. Anyway, with Nic, looking through his posts, I maintain what I say. He hasn't been the most active, and so while what post he's made have been decent, he hasn't really acted on them much. With them and rankings, it seems like most people either put them low, or if GM and HD were put low, they were ranked near middle or higher. Implications make it so I think one of HD or Jacob is probably scum, and Nic is somebody to look out for. AA9 and serra both went against GM pretty early on, something which, considering what most thought of GM, is something I doubt would be done should they have been partners, so we can probably lose some suspicion on them. Future plans for me include making a list of everybody in the game's read throughout the game, that advanced vote tally I mentioned, and trying to get a read on the hydra. For now though, I have a paper I need to get done by tomorrow, so yeah, don't expect anything for a while.

[KX]

that post being? and anything else about the Hydra you want to add?

[KX]

Hey HD, why not accuse me, I did almost the same thing? Could it be since Panzer was correct and you want to get out of a possible bad spot, and think you've got a better shot against serra then against me? tempted to vote you, but don't see a point to it atm. Also, @Bork, what did you see last second that made you hammer?

[KX]

Yeah in serra's ISO I see a lot of town reading GM without explanation, a lot of "Let's see what happens", and then a complete flip around at deadline; bussing a partner for town cred.

Look through my reads, GM is town in most. As for "Let's see what happens" I don't quite understand what you mean, so could be, and unless I missed something both of us voted GM directly after Panzer's claim, and didn't say that much more afterwards, so yeah.

[KX]

Not to mention you've been obvtown as fuck all game

Fuck does this mean I'm gonna die? And I suppose I see your point, will look it over, you still seem scummy. Also, I can join you in saying "screw weather," it's hailing atm I live in Cali because I like upper 80s and beachs, not lumps of ice.

[KX]

Eh, really not in a state to post right now, late and pretty tired, but prodded, so. Anyway, the one thing I want to immediately point out is why is Serra voting their second suspect scummy? I mean, I get the logic behind not voting your main scum suspect, but still, it's a scum suspect, i.e. somebody who you also believe to be scum, it's not like you're withholding your vote or something, and his reasoning for it does make sense. Even more so though, I want to question what the motivation for a scum player doing it is. Anyway, sorry about this, but I'll have to put off posting more for a while longer.

[KX]

First, I want to apologize for my inactivity, both to our host and the other players. I'll try to make something more decent with this post. Also, another thing, for the sake of the game, can people not say stuff like I'm obvtown or whatever? Idk about other people, but it kinda kills the game for me and seems pretty harmful for discussion. Moving on though, I find the HD vs Serra debate to be rather dull. HD's point is interesting, but tbh, I think he's going after nothing, at least in regards too GM. I'll certainly admit that him voting along with his main suspect is suspicious, however, considering his reasoning, I don't find it that outlandish, and certainly not as big a deal as people seem to be making out of it. Pretty much, even though some of it looks suspicious, it seems natural to me.

Also, HD, though you say it's a discussion for postgame, in just a few sentences, can you say how masons being revealed/claiming is a good thing? It means they'll be kill off, and so completely eliminates a very good source of information, i.e. who died and trying to figured out why those who died did, it doesn't really give people that much information as such, and while is does mean there are cleaned players, having a clean player alone doesn't help the village. Even if one were to be lynched, as in Panzer's case, they can just claim. Them being confirmed village shouldn't help there points much, as we should really be basing points and reads off of validity of arguments, and only partially who they come from. Overall, I just don't see it.

Finally, on the subject of the Hydra, having read through all there posts, I maintain my inability to get a read on them. However, having read through, I believe I can now state more precisely why I'm unable to get a read on them. This lies primarily on the combination of two things: The first, and most obvious, is the difference in play styles, yet enough similarity and difference in activity for it to be annoying. The second is the style of posting of Mehdi, the head who I notice more. A large amount of these posts seem to have to do with others, and asking question, shifting things around, etc, and that fact that the way in which people are questioned is quite random as I can see, with few patterns. If Mehdi has any meta I could see, that would be helpful, since currently I'm having to go for scum leaning, just do to how they seem more artificial and all their posts too well thought out. As for Els, even having read through all posts, I still feel I haven't seen enough consistently to get a read.

So yeah, don't sub me, and I'll try to be more active and rather then doing wall or wall-esq posts every once and a while, have more short, relevant posts.

[KX]

Given the small amount of time remaining, I think we should probably get a wagon started. From what I can tell, there are quite a few different wagons, so some kind of compromise will have to be reached. I personally think HD would be the best lynch, though one on Serra, the Hydra, or Nic I would support. Also, both thanks to the Hydra for their answer, and a question, since the heads seem conflicted, which will be deciding their vote? Anyway, I guess I'll

Vote: HD

for now, do to a lack of such votes already, and reasoning being in addition to what's been said before that I think it would provide information. Also, as I may be wrong in my reasoning, if somebody could make a quick case against all the main targets, no walls or anything, just a few lines saying why, that would be great.

[KX]

Alright HD, will do.

[KX]

More like it makes you all seem possible scum, and so I'm voting the one who I think is most likely to be scum and most helpful if they're not. I think I've shown through my defenses of Serra that I disagree with HD, though I'll admit they do have a few points that aren't completely invalid. On you/Mehdi, if it Mehdi alone I'd probably consider you town, so. Nic I believe I've mentioned as suspicious before, and so the end result is two people who I think lean more town then scum, and two people who lean more scum then town. By lynching one of the group, I think it's likely we'll get the information to break the lock, and so any of the four I'd be willing to vote.

[KX]

Seeing as how we have only a few minutes over three days from this post, it seems like we should start solidifying a lynch target, wagoning, seeing how they react or if they claim, and then letting things go from there rather then discussing this until the last second. I'll want to look over the case once again, but for now I'm leaning towards HD, as said before, so

Vote: Human Destroyer

. If I see something else while re-reading, will change.

[KX]

Sorry to do so, but I'm going to be going V/LA, but mainly LA, for a little over a weak. Since this will most likely be a pretty crucial vote, I'll try and if nothing else read up and place it were I think it belongs before the days end. Other then that though (not that I do anyway), don't expect me to say much.

[KX]

Sorry to do so, but I'm going to be going V/LA, but mainly LA, for a little over a weak.

You have declared your V/LA to take until the 27th on your profile, is that correct?

Yes. Throughout that time I will have varying access to the internet, ranging from none at all to a few hours. Most of the time, however, I should be able to have at least a few minutes per day, and it's effective starting in an hour or so.

[KX]

Having read over one more time, my suspicion of HD has cleared somewhat, however, I maintain my belief that serra is town. As such, VOTE: Vote: Doteur Gudsight. I don't see a Nic wagon getting much momentum, and they still seem suspicious, even if not as much so.

[KX]

This game . . . going to make a quite sizable post pretty soon, but my initial thoughts are that this situation seems to be extremely confused and disordered, and that the Cheery situation seems to be something blown completely out of proportion. I believe everybody should take a step back and look at the game from a large scale picture, begging to end, not just in the moment.

[KX]

I'll post everything I've thought of from reading stuff over later, but for now one quick thing. Read HD's #776 compared to him now. Wtf is all I can say.

Yeah, that's kinda pathetic considering all I read over, but it's 3:24, so you'll all have to wait.

[KX]

ugh sorry about this guys, going to have to put off making a post once more, been really busy today, and now it's way to late. @Cheery, what can I say, I've been busy, and I doubt you guys care for excuses. Hopefully that feeling will change once I can finally get around to contributing.

[KX]

Well fuck and here I finally had a couple hours to sit down and post everything.

[KX]

Fuck I think I'm becoming a brony. Anyway:

@Jennifer
And why wouldn't both scum be on it? Both of them were village, so why would the mafia have voted one on each? And tbf, I think most people pretty much assume you're conf town after the counterwagon, otherwise I think you'd have been lynched for the slot. As for keeping off the radar, sorry about that, I've been really, really busy. I think there are a few things I should point out.

A little something about Human Destroyer:

Though I found him pretty town early on, I think I'm going to have to say scum at this point. This may be pretty bad reasoning, but it really seems to me like he should be playing better then this. On an additional note, check out #149:

The difference is Venrob did something that scum really can't afford to do; misrep their own play. Josh Lyman, on the other hand, has singlehandedly managed to avoid absolutely everything in the entire thread.

In fact, he's ignored my own vote on him, while Venrob has not ignored the votes on him.

If you want to know what it's in response to, check the post. Anyway, the first defense is total OMGUS, and I think that somebody like HD wouldn't be using it as a defense. But moving on, it seems pretty strange to me for HD to be defending him like that, considering it's really his only defense up to that point. Early on, he once again covers for venrob by saying he's probably a nube town, in #75.

He then talks about how he finds Josh to be scum, since he avoided everything in the thread aside from me. Well, guess what? So did venrob, who did nothing but respond to thing people said to him. That was it. And yet he defend venrob. Not that much alone, but check out #102:

KX, please stop talking about your own playstyle and scumhunt instead, thanks.

This is how he reacts to me doing the same, exact I was a little more active and did a little do one small reads thing iirc.

A couple more things I'd like to add. These have to do more with Goodmorning. First, in RVS, their vote was on HD. Not saying it makes him scum, and it's something that could go either way, but it is something. Now, check this out. Their second vote in the game? venrob. Wouldn't it be insane if a scum were to vote both their partners? And keep in mind GM was looking pretty town, so if they both flipped, that'd be great for her, and probably might make them win it all. Also, in GM's scum reads list, they have ven as the scummiest player. It seems like they realised ven wasn't playing top quality, and were planning to buss them for even more town cred. My overall feel on GM as scum, then, would be that they tried to appear town and distance from their partners.

On bork himself, seemed to be jumping around with votes and suspicions a ton, while avoiding HD, and there was an interesting shift in his thoughts on me plus a strange lurking almost contrasted with the aggressiveness. So while not obviously scum, doesn't do anything to dissuade me. Also, on thoughts on me, wtf has nobody pointed out how GM acted towards me? Idk about you guys, but if I was you, I would have been considered for a lynch long ago.

So yeah, that's all I can think of atm, if you'll excuse me it's now 6 am and I think it's gonna be another sleepless night, so ima see if I can get anything. There's probably more evidence out their, or perhaps even a whole in the reasoning or something, but it's what I noticed re-reading the thread and ISOing, so yeah. HD/Bork for scum, if not them, I'd say Jacob needs investigating.

There's probably a ton more stuff I wanted to mention, both about the case and other things, but can't remember atm, this seemed the most important/valid.

Vote: Human Destroyer

[KX]

@bork, yes, extremely annoying. As for the vagueness, looking through your posts, I noticed you seemed to jump around between a lot of opinions, and so while that's expected that as the games goes on, opinions will change, however, always insisting upon HD being town despite that attitude matches up with the point about HD's actions, which stands out to me quite distinctly as out of character for him, not sure why I didn't catch on earlier. So it's not really something you yourself have done, it's more of nothing you've done has convinced me I was wrong about HD.

@Jenn, ok, so I voted a player who flipped town. So did you, and three people we have as confirmed town. I want you to tell me exactly one thing: What is the point of one mafia voting on each wagon? What do they gain from doing it? And if you're argument is simply I wanted a mislynch, then why didn't I vote serra who was one vote higher then gudsight at that time? If your argument is I didn't want to be on a mislynch, ok, why would I? I believe I was considered pretty pro-town at that point, so it's not like I wanted some towncred, and it got to the point were both wagons could easily have gone. It's not like I switched between the two as one built and one didn't, I saw the options, and I voted my opinion.

As for Jacob, while I don't exactly like his style, he seems town enough. There's a suspicious feel to his post, but that's not really something to go off of. So I suppose my read is town, especially since PoE with HD/bork, but if bork isn't HD's partner, I could see him being it.

[KX]

*though if bork isn't scum, HD, while isn't cleaned, becomes quite a bit less likely in my mind. However, I think if one of the two were to be lynched, it should be HD first. If HD isn't scum, I think bork would become they only person in the game I wouldn't lynch.

[KX]

>Calls it useless WIFOM
>Seems to have it as their main reason for me being scum
???

@HD, any explanations you can provide on what I'm pointing out?

@Bork, my point is really about the difference in how HD reacts to venrob compared to others. His covering for them seems abnormal, and if you add to that GM's voting trends, I think it's something. Also on HD, perhaps it's confirmation bias, but every time I look over his posts I see more and more reasons for him to be scum.

[KX]

How is opinions that something you've done is extremely out of character nothing? Let's face it, of our three lynches, one has been scum, and two have been village. You have been a large part of both the village lynches, and the only mafia lynch was led by the same person who said you were scum. You were voting on the near lynches of both masons before they claimed, which means we almost had an additional two town lynches you were on. You also seemed to have gone after Josh quite a lot, and since we can assume they're town, that's another one for the list. While it can be correctly argued that they all did seem scummy at the time and given the context (with the exception of the serra lynch), and other people went on these lynches as well, particularly of you it seems extremely odd to me. Most of it is just saying how things work out if your scum, or how I believe them to, since based mainly upon opinion (there's no one thing I can point to that proves it), I'm adamant you're scum.

So in a way, I suppose I am calling you scum based on pretty much nothing. Thanks!

[KX]

What the actual fuck Jenn? Are you even reading the thread?

Also, @HD, what are you scum reads now anyway?

[KX]

Jennifer, you know that bork was venrob's sub, right? As for things between HD and bork, I think I said this already, but HD mentions bork in literally one post, which is understandable considering bork hasn't drawn much attention to himself, but once again, considering HD, seems a little abnormal. As for bork, the insistence on HD being village is something, but once again explainable. However, neither do anything to dissuade me from the connection. I would be willing to lynch Jacob, however, if they go town, get HD.

Also, on a closing note, inb4 the scum are the inactives.

[KX]

Oh that's right, we lynched them all/they turned out to be masons.

(exception: see one Jacob)

[KX]

Oh cool, if I have the time, I'll definitely sign up! PM me when/if it starts?

Also, for something relevant, is everybody forgetting how Docteur asked us the lynch HD, in addition to Panzer? Also, Jenn, what do you mean when you keep saying an HD lynch isn't happenng? Me, AA9, and Nic all support it, and considering Jacob is the alternative lynch, he probably will as well. That's four players right there, making it, I think, a real possibility.

[KX]

We get one more mislynch, after that, it's game.

[KX]

And who's fault is that HD? Anyway, how long would you need to make a response, if you even have one?

[KX]

Um, HD, what happened to the whole "Jacob is scum" thing you've been saying since Day 1?

[KX]

Aw dang it and here I was gonna try and go an entire day without a prod.

What I'm worried about with this NicCage wagon is that it may end up as just a diffusion, and avoid the main problem.

Also, for Bork's response that HD isn't scummy for following those lynches, since scum would inevitably buss, think about it. Of the three scum was lynched D1. That meant only two were left. We're assuming HD is the second, so that means there's only one aside from him left. To buss them would mean he'd have to win the rest of the game only himself. A good way to get them both to survive would be for them to pressure others, and push for lynches of innocents. And look how that went?

Also, HD, sorry if I missed it, but reason for the change of heart about Jacob?

[KX]

Also, for Bork's response that HD isn't scummy for following those lynches, since scum would inevitably buss, think about it. Of the three scum was lynched D1. That meant only two were left. We're assuming HD is the second, so that means there's only one aside from him left. To buss them would mean he'd have to win the rest of the game only himself. A good way to get them both to survive would be for them to pressure others, and push for lynches of innocents. And look how that went?

This is circular reasoning. You can't assume HD is scum when you're trying to prove he's scum.

It's not circular reasoning if you bothered to think about it at all. First, it was in response to a comment about how being wrong on so many lynches doesn't make him scum, and so this explains why it actually does. Secondly, if you assume that HD is town instead, as you're implying, it means we have to believe HD, who is known to be a good player, managed to mislynch so many times, which, I don't know about you, but I find far less probably then him being scum himself.

[KX]

HD, did you miss the part about "If the player in question does tend to find more scum as town than they do as scum, then by Bayes's Theorem the fact that they haven't found scum raises their likelihood of being scum themselves."? Obviously I'm not saying this proves you're scum, but I'm saying it makes it, to me, far more likely.

[KX]

Really, a baseball bat? Tbh, I'm more of a knife type person, assuming I couldn't get a gun of my own. Also, no ambush/trap? You've let me down fictitious, flavor based me. Anyway, forgive me my Mason brethren, for I have failed you. GL town, you need it.

[KX]

lol I was right about bork, tbh didn't even think you were scum that much unless HD was. HD, why you mess the town up? GG all, to bad I died right then, or Jacob woulda been going down today, so nice kill.

[KX]

As I said, I thought that was

extremely

uncharacteristic play for HD, and I was convinced he was scum, so. Tbf, you hadn't really been doing much, but I subscribed to the whole Jenn is town thing, and I thought AA would have outed themselves by now, so. Also, can't believe you guys went with the thing about Panzer between me and him, I though it was hella' shallow, and my playing around him made me pretty much confirmed mason. Also, as stated, very nice QT, and great planning, the HD push pretty much won it for you.

What I really want to know is how Jacob never got lynched.

That so many times. How did the whole Serra vs Docteur vs HD thing happen again?