Open 555 - Pick Your Poison (Game Over!)

[Knell]

VOTE: Zephyrus

"The gentlest of the winds" is

clearly a cover

.

VOTE: Abelcain

[Knell]

The general voting distribution is not random. It's evenly spaced out. Random org gives slightly less information about a player than "normal" why did you ask such an obvious question? What did you hope to gain from it? Once Abel answers, answer.

[Knell]

No I thought that's what you wanted me to think but it's not worth my time. It's scummy because you think it's scummy. Explaining what you want before both people Answer poisons Abel's response.

[Knell]

I'm conflicted on Tso I knew what he wanted but asked anyway to see where he would go. I suppose I should have voted sharp to get a better read on tso/knife. He's consistent throughout but he didn't play optimally by questioning others while he waited for Abel to return. He did the second best, and he's trying to move the game forward/trying to look like he's trying to move the game forward. But the reason he answered so fast felt like he didn't want me to misconstrue his intentions. Victor everything is contrived this early and what he said wasn't such an uncommon idea that I didn't get where he was coming from, so it has it's uses. He tried to get two reads along with a slight suspicion on knife. But he flubbed it. Why you fumbled it is my question for you tso.

[Knell]

How is your post helpful in anyway victor?Voting someone for contrived reasons is essentially a license to vote anyone at this stage.

[Knell]

VOTE: victordeangelo to answer your question: I was processing my interaction with Tso and hoping someone might talk to me about my perspective. I formalized my question to tso that I hope will solve what is bothering me about the interaction.

[Knell]

Why did you ask that question?

[Knell]

Oh the reason I asked you the contrived thing is because I realized it was scummy to vote people for contrived reasoning when the reasoning Tso used seems common enough from my perspective. It's not contrived if it's a commonly held view ( well it might be but tso didn't contrive it) so the question holds value as a way to get into someone's head . I've answered both potential posts you might have been asking about.

[Knell]

Reply to knife: They're two different ideas I just wasn't clear where one idea ended and the other began, though they both argue the same thing.

My understanding of Victor's argument for TSO scum: Victor is arguing that TSO's argument seems contrived and that he is trying to push a mislynch. This 1: Implies you're town. 2: Implies TSO is scum. Basis of this reasoning? "Seems contrived."

1) Voting someone for contrived reasons at this stage of the game (the earliest point of day 1), when contrived reasons are the most common. Victor would have voted most people who make accusations at this stage, he says "not really" but all I hear is "Well, okay you have me there." I think that voting someone for something you could apply to most players (when most players are of the town alignment) is mafia motivated.

2). I thought about it more and realized that this particular reason of TSO's wasn't even really of his own making, it's a general idea that TSO thinks those with "experience" recognize as pointing to mafia. Thus, TSO's reason was not a reason of his own making, but he agreed with this idea as someone with experience, therefore, he didn't contrive it. Therefore, falsely accusing TSO of something he didn't do and voting him for it.

you might have a point and that Victor just didn't know. Still I pointed out that it gave less information to make a truly random vote than a vote that was unnaturally evenly distributed and I know from my own games a lot of people think that's mafia motivated activity. So either way you came to the conclusion, either through the idea of "responsibility" or by the idea of "not giving as much information as everyone else" you can infer that your vote at the time was probably more mafia-motivated than everyone else's from a general view point and you supposedly thought it would get a reaction as well based off what you've said. What did you think the reaction would be?

Let me ask you and anyone else this. What in your mind is actions that scum do engage in day 1 more than not? Simple answers without engaging in detailed explanations are most helpful to understand what is in your view scummy. Thanks.

They try to avoid being lynched. How much Mafia try to appeal to people or how much suspicion they want on themselves depends on the player. They do what they can to get town player's mislynched, how they go about this is dependent on context. Some Mafia don't play to win, but you said "more than not."

No you don't need to wait for everyone to get here to start pursuing lines of inquiry. You shouldn't wait if you see one that holds promise. We're all at the dining table when the moderator said go, so dig in.

[Knell]

They try to avoid being lynched.

So do town.

Didn't ask me what town did, only what scum did, so I told him. His response that scum do more than that is actually just window dressing/"Details" which he's not into or so he says. You're not mentioning me beyond inconsequential stuff. Why?

[Knell]

Can't respond to the bigger stuff until later.

Toasty, why Knife and not me then? You seem to have no trouble having a conflicted read on Knife while responding to his larger points.

[Knell]

D quick question before you go. What do you thin the scum team talked about before the game started?

[Knell]

It's not a loaded question, but it was trying to trip you up yes.

I noticed that M took over for you here. I want to know what D thinks since you said that he hadn't played here before, not what M thinks.

[Knell]

I'm not answering that question M. there are plenty of things I will answer, but that is not one of them. Feel free to ask a different question.

[Knell]

The longer D takes the more worthless this question becomes. I know that players who share accounts can speak to each other outside of the thread in real time. This question is probably already worthless.

What did you mean when you said it was a loaded question D?

[Knell]

It could give away information that could inform the mafia's night kill. I don't think anyone should answer that question.

[Knell]

Well the question was based on you not having visited this site. In my first game here I rolled mafia and I saw that they could communicate before the game began, but noticed that there was no indication that this was the case in the rule set. Therefore, I tried to trip you up because you said you hadn't visited this site yet, if you were on the scum team you would know that they could communicate before the game began, if you weren't you wouldn't know what I was talking about.

It actually wouldn't have been a problem if you plain didn't know. But your answer was unspecific. Neither a yes nor a no. Why would it have been a problem for you if you had answered?

[Knell]

You're doing a good job of that so far. My opinion of your play is that I have no opinion. Which is problematic for me, given I need to sort through the player list to find three people. Will M contribute while you figure stuff out? What will allow you to provide your own opinion/interpretation of the game and the people in it? Is M going to do all of the voting/decision making for you?

[Knell]

Reply to victor.
1. Simple posts are all I have in this format.
2. I understand where Able and Knife are coming from with their interpretation. But I don't understand your interpretation.
3. I'm assuming this is you saying you were unaware of the underlying premises that are supposedly common here. So my second point is now invalid.
4. Your initial vote is unique because it was the first RVS vote. After the first, there is the potential of a player being voted twice.The reason the votes were evenly distributed is because it wasn't random, no one wanted to vote the same player twice. When someone is voted twice they're one more vote closer to being lynched. This provides more information on the second voter and potentially leads to more information on the one being voted. The underlying premises that were common in my games and the slightly different version that TSO ran with are thus:
1) Scum don't like when information is released that could harm their win condition. 2) Scum don't like to take responsibility for their actions. It's not the specific instance of random.org being used, but rather in reaction to their first premise aligning with an event that leads to the construction of a second premise. Premise 2: Random.org voter voted randomly. Drawn conclusion: Random voter is more likely to be mafia.
5. Your reads are the opposite of mine so far.

So far I have a town read on Abel.
Null Evil.
slight scum Toasty.
slight scum Victor.
Null TSO, but with some undercurrents of town play. However, I feel they were shoved in my face too bluntly to be of any worth.
A slight scum read on knife, for a unique sort of passive play. He's quick to answer questions and interpret events/people but not quick to ask them or make significant waves himself (The initial wave, unintentional. The antagonistic communication with able, unhelpful). It might be a playstyle thing. Also, while I appreciate long posts with high amounts of information related to the game I don't appreciate long posts explaining yourself. I'm being a hypocrite but try to be more concise. I short circuit when I read your posts more than once.

[Knell]

Victor, want to vote Toastytoast? Your million pound question and the fact he didn't think anything about me was particularly worth talking about is a pretty big contradiction.

VOTE: Toastytoast

It's true Toasty, I'm very lonely at this stage of the game.

[Knell]

I'm afraid I share your view on RVS, I'm just more quiet about it.

[Knell]

73. Makes perfect sense.

I didn't say I agreed with the premises, just that I understood them. Or else I would have voted along with TSO.

That's nice that you'd vote Toasty after another player had voted him. You should do that.

A second vote can make a player more aware of their mortality, this might make them start to give out information on themselves that better informs player's decisions about who to vote. Sharp's vote gives less information, the player who gets voted by a random.org vote doesn't can't do anything about it, they can't argue an online vote, so they're like "Meh, It'll just go away when the player actually makes a serious vote" you also don't glean much from it, since you can't define a person as someone who likes to rock the boat. I don't think you understand how an original premise works. Look it up on wikipedia or a dictionary.

I might do the quote thing, it's just bothersome. You should know what I'm referring to, and you seem to have inferred it.

[Knell]

Make no mistake, I still suspect the shit out of you. But I want information first and I can worry about how people try to capitalize on my contradictions later.

Are you the type that won't vote without believing in something? Because you voted TSO, and if you're town there's zero reason to believe you had any chance of ever hitting scum more than random chance. I want to see if you're willing to follow through on your suspicions. Do you think that this is odd of Toasty to avoid me? It's a contradiction, it's tangible, but you're more worried about what? TSO's "Bad" vote? Your vague suspicions that I might be scum? Vote him again later. You have time.

[Knell]

Okay.

I'll do so then. Give me time and I'll adjust. Tomorrow though I'm tired.


"So when was the last game when someone was held responsible for an rvs vote to the point of lynch." <- This is why I don't really agree with either premise. I don't think using random.org points to mafia, it just probably shows that they think they're being ironic.

The mafia are looking for power roles to kill. Discussing power roles could give them hints as to who is and isn't a power role.

"Cute" I intended no offense whatsoever. I'm ignorant of a lot of things you have knowledge of. There's nothing wrong with not knowing everything.

I can't provide links to instances where a player has role claimed after having two votes on them, I've played one other game here. The fundamentals of mafia should be the same though. I play mafia in real life. The more votes, the more a person reveals about themselves in general in an attempt to get out of a lynch.

You should vote Toastytoast because it provides information to the town. You asked Toastytoast who else besides Knife has been posting in the way Toasty said he found suspicious. Toasty said I said nothing that was of interest to him, when I clearly fell under that category according to your own statement. You don't think that's strange or worth investigating?

[Knell]

This thinking is correct though your leaping quite a bit if you think I believe I've caught scum or towncleared anyone over a simple post.

This is what I took to mean that you didn't truly believe that you were likely to be very accurate with your vote on TSO.

[Knell]

My knife suspicion has lost a little of its edge.

[Knell]

I have been easing off the accelerator. I could see the players struggling to keep up, which is why I haven't responded to Victor yet.

I just disagree. I don't think it's a good idea to answer that question and I decided that before the game started. Voting me won't change my decision on the matter. I don't agree with letting people make it past day one due to judgements made on page 6.

[Knell]

Yes. Until the day ends. The decisions I make are based on what a player does and says and they can trip up at any time during any day phase.

[Knell]

I'm not going to vote the people who I think are town. But I don't like calling people an alignment early in my heart of hearts. It sucks when I give them an escort to victory. I don't think you should either. Ideas of fairness or deserving don't account to me. If a player makes 100 posts full of townie stuff and the other player makes 5 ugly and annoying posts but I think that the other one did something inherently mafia, so utterly scummy that I need to vote him. Then yep. I'll vote the person with 100 posts over the person with 5 who lurked his way to a town victory while I tried hard.

[Knell]

While I can read symbols and have a passable level of reading comprehension. I still disagree with you, if my understanding is correct. From what I can see you're running a eugenics program, where the active players live and the unactive ones die, because you think that the active ones will provide enough information eventually for you to come to an answer. No. The way to win mafia as town is to lynch Mafia. In the same way that you win at baseball by getting on base is the first step towards scoring.

I push players who I don't understand. I push people with terrible reads or opinions until they stop having terrible reads or opinions. Your method is poison.

If you want me to be honest, you're voting town right now and that's supposedly against your win condition.

[Knell]

You misinterpret.
I push players who don't make sense and I challenge people on their reads to get a read on them. I rarely call people out for terrible opinions or reads, because I rarely know if they are truly terrible. Calling people town on page 6 and protecting them for the rest of the day because they post a lot and seem pretty open is wrong. What's worse is that the Don_Johnson one seems like a clique read.

[Knell]

TSO: Short question.
1. What has bothered you so far about particular players, what questions do you want to ask them to better understand and solidify your read on them?

[Knell]

Peacebringer.

[Knell]

I just checked. I did the same with Mnenomic. I read previous games, but I don't know if it's effective toward reading people here. The reason I'm voting Toasty is because he has a defensive playstyle and I wanted to see how he would navigate my vote, while also seeing if Victor would be as conservative with his vote as his only completed town game would suggest he would be.

[Knell]

I think I'm giving the wrong impression. I just looked at the other game and checked the playerlist then clicked all users. I understand that discussing on going games is against the rules, so I think it's not a good idea to continue this conversation. I'll just look at his main account now and see what I can pick up from it.

[Knell]

Where's your vote Toasty? Is evil really more scummy than I am with all of that? I really don't get your defensiveness but yet still pushing another's lynch. After all of that.

[Knell]

Why do you think I'm making an excuse or ignoring what he's saying?

[Knell]

Toasty is scum. Because he wouldn't push someone else's lynch while making a huge case against me unless he were scum. It simply makes no sense otherwise. His current case on me is way better than his case on evil.

But no vote.

Why?

[Knell]

Why should I respond to accusations made by scum? Why should I pretend it's you when it's not and you're clearly trying to pressure me?

@Redcoyote, What. Why is Don_Johnson your strongest town read? Show me where.

[Knell]

@Knell: I didn't know it was impossible to defend oneself and attack another.

No vote because I'm going to make my interrogative wall post next.

@ChriVi: Response to what I've said about this RVS nonsense? Knell wasn't my only concern in that post.

That makes zero sense.

[Knell]

I agree with Victor's read on Chivri.

Redcoyote also came in town, but he's bothering me some.

And I disagree with that it makes sense. IF he has all that then he should be thinking about it. When people say someone is scummy or make an argument for why someone is scummy they convince themselves they're scummy. What he is saying and what is doing is being contradicted. He sounds defensive, but he's not being defensive because he's not voting me for voting him. If he's not scum reading me, but wanting to ask me questions, then why say I'm scummy in the first place, and instead just ask me questions?

[Knell]

He's not just defending himself. He's calling me scummy for my actions in this game and with far greater justification than his case on Evil. But he's not voting me. His reason that he wants to ask me questions does not contradict that he thinks I'm scum, but the vote would add to the pressure and would supposedly make me more willing to answer his questions, the reasoning that he's not voting me because he's going to ask me questions doesn't make sense because he can both vote and ask me questions. He is afraid to counter vote me, because of site culture thinking that's a scum tell.

[Knell]

Rather, he is defending himself and attacking me at the same time* Forgot to edit*

[Knell]

...Do you really think that's plausible?

Wasn't his argument against me for "his own reasons" too?

[Knell]

I'm saying

"His own reasons for voting Evil"
Are much less than
"his own reasons for voting me"
But he's not voting me.

His argument that he's writing up questions for me, does not change or redefine the fact that he should be voting me. He's pushing and discrediting someone who suspects him while voting someone else with much weaker reasons than his push against me. That's scummy.

[Knell]

1. Your vote has done nothing on Evil, he's not being more active because you're voting him. He isn't "continuing to be evasive" he's just not even here anymore.
2. Victor tried to direct you to me first, so I tried to see what happened when I redirected him while checking to see if he's still conservative with his vote. I wondered about his controlling behavior. I am not trying to force you to vote me, I am saying you not voting me is scummy, given the extensiveness of your argument, and the fact that Evil has not responded to your vote. It's a dead vote.
3. You aren't counter voting me. That's different from a "counter."
4. Yes, but everything you're saying says you suspect me more than everyone else. I understand that you're selective with who you counter vote as town. You've been selective, you've chosen, me but you aren't voting me.
5. Yes it does. It's not a counter, because there's no vote. Which is what I think you were trying to avoid.

Your questions being for other people still doesn't explain it. Why would you use that explanation for not voting me, but then change your explanation?

You've tried to represent me as someone selfish and egotistical. That's your characterization of me and I think you're doing it on purpose as scum.

[Knell]

Please take what I'm saying seriously Knife, there's no point in me participating if you're just going to mischaracterize and ridicule what I say.

Toastytoast said he wasn't voting me because he was going to ask questions first.
Then he said he's still voting Evil because he's being evasive.

Why not tell us the real reason first? He's moving the goal posts.

[Knell]

I can have more than one reason for something, derpyhooves.

Saying you have questions isn't a "reason"

[Knell]

? I said "why didn't he tell us the real reason first" which is a rejection that the first one is real.

[Knell]

Viomi, what do you want from me?
Knife, what do you want from me?
I've received Redcoyote's request to play more open and be a team player. What are your requests?
Both of you have openly stated your votes on me are for pressure.

I'll follow your requests. In exchange, can I ask you for an interpretation of Don_Johnson for a moment? Personally, my original objective for changing my vote to Toasty, was to understand Victor, while also voting Toasty who I felt a little suspicion towards because of the double standard. I also wanted to see what Toasty would do, because of his defensive playstyle. Victor started to ask me questions to understand me. But in the middle of this Don_Johnson called us both a scum team. This bothers me. What do you think about it?

[Knell]

Knell, what do I want. Just playing the game naturally without focusing on artificial designates of preconceived ideals...
but it is really irrelevant what I want, you play how you play, that is all... while I find certain elements to be inane, it is what it is... I just take it in my mind it is a way of probing... now even asking "what do you want" is to me an evasive action trying to find what will please others. It warrants further probing. For me probing is getting someone to a point of a claim, assessing the claim and moving on.

The reason I ask is because both of your votes were pressure votes which don't give me much information. I'd rather the votes were moved where you had reasons for thinking the player was scum, instead of just going along for the ride until a claim. While I'm not necessarily against players who vote me with reason outside of "pressure" but who genuinely either think I'm scum or an easy mislynch. <- This especially is welcome.

[Knell]

Victor, I've openly admitted I want them to move their votes to people they think are scum with reasons to back up their votes, instead of pressure voting. So, while I appreciate you taking the time out of your day to solve the mystery, there wasn't one to solve.

[Knell]

A second vote can make a player more aware of their mortality, this might make them start to give out information on themselves that better informs player's decisions about who to vote. Sharp's vote gives less information, the player who gets voted by a random.org vote doesn't can't do anything about it, they can't argue an online vote, so they're like "Meh, It'll just go away when the player actually makes a serious vote" you also don't glean much from it, since you can't define a person as someone who likes to rock the boat. I don't think you understand how an original premise works. Look it up on wikipedia or a dictionary.

The reason I ask is because both of your votes were pressure votes which don't give me much information. I'd rather the votes were moved where you had reasons for thinking the player was scum, instead of just going along for the ride until a claim. While I'm not necessarily against players who vote me with reason outside of "pressure" but who genuinely either think I'm scum or an easy mislynch. <- This especially is welcome.

This seems inconsistent.

Why wouldn't it be inconsistent?

[Knell]

TSO is a good person to question.

[Knell]

@Don_Johnson, why is the burden of proof being placed on me? Is being town not good enough for you? I really do like the Toastytoast lynch. I understand that Viola disagrees with the scum tell, but such is mafia.

[Knell]

That'sthejoke.jpg.

[Knell]

Doing the same. I have a post ready to move the game forward some, but there's no point doing so with 5 players missing.

[Knell]

Phone post question to redcoyote. Am I calm or desperate?

[Knell]

Woops thought he was saying toasty toast had a fair point.

[Knell]

I think I've failed at being inoffensive. Probably around the point I used the word eugenics.

[Knell]

So now that you know, I was being offensive and not evasive when I called Redcoyote's method of play a eugenic's program and several players are very clearly offended at my play so far, why are you scum reading me Knife?

[Knell]

Which program would that be. ?

[Knell]

Mne, you posted on the 30th and the last time before that on the 28th.

I'm not a stalker.

[Knell]

I've asked viomi and knife not to vote me for pressure or to get me to claim but otherwise, no.

[Knell]

Toasty, maybe knife or redcoyote. ( phone post). Little paranoid about victor. But there are also a lot of blank players.

[Knell]

1) Toastytoast gave me many scum points(and said he is scum reading me), but did not vote me. I was voting him. Argument: I think he was afraid of the consequences of voting the person voting him. Reasons for not voting me 1) He didn't vote me because he was going to do an interrogation section where he would ask most of the current players questions. 2) Wants to keep his vote on Evil for for avoiding his questions. 3) His post where he gave me scum points was a response to all the things said about him (and was for organizational purposes) rather than the full context of the game, which he states is not enough to make a full judgement on a player(essentially stating it was a "partial judgement," but not enough to vote on).

2) Redcoyote: complimenting people for what they say. Town reading you and others to the point that he was willing to let them live the whole day. Just based on content from the 6th page.

3) Knife: Being evasive, won't answer my questions or explain why he is scum reading me. His explanation was that he didn't like how I was acting, not whether I was scum or not and continues to do so.

4) Victor: I felt some of his earlier questions had a flip side to them, I'm not sure if he is trying to understand me or trap me. #318, in his response to Maziek he doesn't look at anything game relevant that she or he said. Which means he might not be thinking about it. But responds to Cxinlee fully with a lot of questions.

[Knell]

I also don't really see the purpose of the evil vote. Mnemonic will rarely if ever make a substantial post more than one line long. Nor was Zephyr or Venrob likely too from what I got from looking at their old games. If he voted these players and lynched them and they were all town we would lose. They're not going to change because we voted them. Because they've been voted before and still act the same way regardless. zephyr and Venrob were gone. And I think Toastytoast knew Venrob was worthless day one and decided to vote him to "post something" anyway and that's not going to do anything.

[Knell]

...Who did you get that word from? Because it was pretty wise, but I doubt you came up with it yourself, given you're voting me for that reason. There have been plenty of mountains. Why mine?

[Knell]

I'm actually encouraging people to make mountains out of me, so i can call them on their bullshit. While discouraging "pressure votes" on me, because they don't give an actual reason.

[Knell]

Unpack that for me?

[Knell]

why toasty? did you post reasons? you can just link me if you did or give me a post number. no need to regurgitate. I'm probably biased on coyote. if I'm going to turn on him its gonna have to be based on connections.

people I know generally don't try to play me when they are scum. they try to get me lynched because they know I'm a threat to them.

Eh.

[Knell]

Maziek, what is your read on me? Why do you have it?

*Salutes Neil*

[Knell]

Well. I've drawn this out enough I think.
So, I count 8 scum reads, (DJ, Red, Knife, Viomi, Toasty, Victor, Neil, abel). 4 votes and more incoming.

3 null reads and 1 town read from cx.

Who on my wagon or is suspecting me is scum?

[Knell]

Using microphone on phone. Try it out see how it works. let's use a hypothetical let's say I flipped town. Who of the players currently voting me or have me in their scum reads is scum? Please use their posts to determine which one it is and explain why. At some point this is mandatory anyways. Knife should like this he is not really into this whole day one stuff anyways.

[Knell]

Um. I meant those 8 players are scum reading me.

[Knell]

...Not a single one of you thinks its strange that no one has defended me? That there is very little doubt or lack of consensus on me? That Neil had to say at least one player was bussing because otherwise where the fuck were my buddies? No one has tried to move this wagon. No one has tried to shift it. And why would scum try? They're happy where they are.

[Knell]

^ There's no rule against playing with friends, family or significant others. It presupposes that they're dishonest, which they've given no indication of being.

[Knell]

You have access to sharp utensils. Does that mean you're dangerous? That's what I meant by presuppose, it presupposes they'll look at eachothers' messages.

@victor, Toasty is referencing another game. Neil is married to another player who recently joined the website, and she mistakenly posted under his account. I ran into a couple in a game I replaced into recently (rachmarie and nobodyspecial) and that case should have supposedly been worse because one of them was moderating. It doesn't seem too uncommon here and I don't think it's fair for a player to judge someone based off of 'what if' rule breaking.

[Knell]

...Not a single one of you thinks its strange that no one has defended me? That there is very little doubt or lack of consensus on me? That Neil had to say at least one player was bussing because otherwise where the fuck were my buddies? No one has tried to move this wagon. No one has tried to shift it. And why would scum try? They're happy where they are.

why would they defend you? if you are scum they do not want to be tied to you and if you are not scum they do not want the light going there way and just content to see you hang. There is no value either way...

Of course there's value. You have to secure an additional mislynch for each partner you lose. This reduces your odds of winning. There should at least have been initial efforts, to save themselves the trouble later if I were scum. It's much more tangible then associations, which can be misinterpreted or missed.

[Knell]

Yeah, I think your votes on Knell are the correct ones.

Hermy will have to comment on the whole prod/replace thin.

Nope. Why do you think I'm scum victor? You never really touched on it.

[Knell]

@RC agreed.

@Victor, hmm. I don't agree with three of your reasons. Namely, everyone scum reading me, a post i made 30 minutes after and ignoring my explanation as unfeasible (especially because it was true), the other thing shouldn't effect the game any, telling people what I would have chosen as counter factual scum should be null related. It might give information as to how much I think about my decisions, and that was one such indicator, I decided before the game started not to speculate on it. I mean, as far as I can tell historically speaking, most scum teams picked an innocent child and banked on a 2-shot vigilante (who mostly always messed up). With the cop/track/jail keeper being a variable. I read a few of the older games to get an idea of the set up and ran into a player who openly discussed it in the game and people were pretty freaked out about it. 2 of the scum lied about what they had chosen, one scum told the truth. I think town lost that game.

[Knell]

I mean the thing that worried me is that it would inform the scum team's decision. They would know the history (assuming they were competent) so any odd exclusions (E.g., adding not vigilante) or any accurateness as far as the 3 variables, (tracker, cop, or JK), might give the scum team a clue as to who to kill. So I was against it.

[Knell]

@Victor, your defense of two of your points is really bad. There's nothing wrong with assuming incompetence or competence from your opponents and allies. The argument is no less valid, it's not some huge leap. The questions from Evil and I are also very dissimilar in circumstances and planning. Mine had a tangible benefit which I explained and I had decided not to answer the question beforehand, while Evil had made no such decision. Self-conscious and nervous to answer assumes a lot more don't you think? I'm also not trying to "reframe" I'm explaining my reasoning which you misunderstood. This is twice you've denied my explanations out of hand in favor of your own view.

[Knell]

Neil and chrim are both forgetting the number of mafia. @neil post your notes.

[Knell]

Well, I'm looking for you to confirm yourself town or scum by posting your notes Neil.

[Knell]

Oh, there are 3 mafia Neil, not 2.

[Knell]

You don't need to OCD sir, just post the notes that directly point to you being town and I'll move on with my life! Thanks!

[Knell]

I've tried to stall this wagon and hoped everyone else would participate and it would move. I hoped that this would be the case. But both town and scum have decided to just sit here and it is difficult to distinguish between the two because their reads don't seem to be developing any, knife's style is making it hard to determine if he's scum or not. Neil post your notes your rationalization makes little sense. If you get killed so what? I've asked people to think about who is scum if I'm not scum and the majority have ignored this and so it looks like I either have to be lynched to force them to do it or claim.the game has unfortunately stagnated due to idk, don and evil who should have replaced out a long time ago after sending their messages in. I hoped to at least get their input before I claimed so we would have more information to go off of but even that shit was thwarted by broken assurances. I don't think this is a case of lurking, so much as they refuse to recognize the fact they don't have the time to meet the bare minimum expected of them (a post every two days.) except maybe mne. Both Neil and chi seem to have forgotten the number of scum which might imply they're both town. However some of the stuff Neil has said bothers me. Out of game advice giving being one of them. given it was game related as idk's current status is an impediment to town but it would be out of game if he were scum addressing his problem. I didn't ask for all of his notes merely the ones that would directly indicate he replaced in as town, I even logged on quickly to clarify this point hoping he would quickly release them. I don't know about maz and cx it's difficult to tell. Phone post because comp is sort of shitting our on me. :/

[Knell]

For Chiv: #408: She/he says Knell then Maziek. GG <- Good game. Good game -> Implies the game would end if we were lynched in succession.
Neil: 412# He has the "other scum pegged" but there is more than one scum. Scum is singular.

there are 3 mafia. Toast. You've rolled town 20 times and mafia twice. @_@. That's pretty low odds.

[Knell]

computer is being a dick. Ignore bottom segment. I meant to delete that, it's just a whimsical observation that I hadn't noticed until now.

[Knell]

Scratch that. just checked and Neil did seem to know there were multiple. I misread.

[Knell]

Claim: IC.

Sending message now.

[Knell]

unvote

let's see

Wouldn't scum try to draw out something other than the IC. It's not something that an IC would counter claim with 4/5 days to go.

[Knell]

Um. No, it's called pick your poison because the scum get to pick their poison (Power role).

[Knell]

Pretty much. Claiming IC as scum with plenty of time for the moderator to confirm it, means that the IC would never bother counter claiming, because it would become apparent that they fake claimed. There's also no reason to claim IC if there is no IC, because, once again the Moderator can confirm it, and the players would ask.

[Knell]

VOTE: Victor

Rereading the game, but leaving my vote here for now.

[Knell]

@Neil: Do you think that a lurker vote at this point in the game is acceptable and not incredibly scummy? It does nothing. Literally, nothing. It's a "I have to vote someone" vote.

Still rereading.

[Knell]

Not feeling the Neil lynch and vetoing that possibility. Please choose from one of RC, Victor, Knife, Don Or chivri. Or don't. Up to you. Don sadly has a point. I'm town, so I don't know who the scum are.

Probably my wagon stalled due to mixed PR signals and role occupation(I was already being voted by scum, so that role was "taken"). I don't think Neil would be this careless if he were scum. But I guess I should go look at that possibility anyway by looking at older games.

Give arguments as to why. Looking forward to where RC goes with this. Don, you said you're pretty good at reading actions rather than "reading" so you've got a flip here do you need a scum flip to be accurate or is a town flip enough to work your style? If so, what do you think right now?

Since I'm mentioning "role occupation" possibly one of Maziek or cx is also scum. Then maybe one of the two inactives or one player not voting me, but scum reading me. Still this is conjecture and I'm not entirely sure it works out any. Cx has neither been especially townie or scummy. Maziek got jumped on for his work in defending me, but pretty much that was expected. The question is whether he thought it was worth the risk or not.

Million Pound Question - Who would you say is overthinking this stage of the game right now (actually reading on, who aside from Sharpest is doing this)?

^ See the above. this is what I was talking about when I was saying victor was trying to direct Toasty to me. Toasty showed a belief that he thought those that overthink the early game are scummy. Victor already accused me of overthinking RVS. So it's fairly obvious what he's doing here. The million pound question went nowhere, when it wasn't answered and Victor seemed fine with it, but not fine when I didn't answer his questions. He side stepped the whole thing when I tried to get Toasty voted and instead focused on the past. Interestingly Toast accused me of trying to control votes, but didn't seem to care when TSO did it or when Victor did it either. but he was already sort of ignoring certain players in favor of other ones. So. Not really sure what to make of that.

Knife's play is disappointing. But I can't tell if it's scummy or not from the reread. I really can't. RC's read on knife is odd. After knife voted me his contributions went extinct. And before that it was mostly theory. He lied regularly as an alt and feigning he didn't know site culture.He also failed to respond to my argument that there is plenty of value in not bussing your partners.

Abelcain: S had the worst case on me. The set up no where implies that the QT is used to discuss this option. He flipped my reasoning for my questioning back on me. A lot of thrown around accusations that make little sense. For example, me buddying Victor when I asked him to vote with me. completely ignoring post 111# which contradicts his point. I never said Implying you were town was scummy. So he was putting words in my mouth here too. Being meticulous is your personal preference,which you've already stated is your weakness, you admit that you have a problem that thinking that "ideal" play makes someone townie and failing to live up to this ideal makes them scummy. But that didn't stop you from using it here to further justify yourself.

Redcoyote's reasoning for her town reads is alien to me, with the exception of Don maybe. it just felt like excuses to me and it still does.

Finished read and still thinking about it.

[Knell]

I'm vetoing my veto on Neil after reading some of his games. I'll read some more.

[Knell]

^ Solid.

But I've gotten 5 people to label, insult, and misrepresent me(well 8 misrepresentations) and events surrounding my play. :neutral

Why's Toasty town for it?
Why's Maziek town for it?
Why's Abel town for it?

Is it just because it's you?

[Knell]

I'm mentioning these three because they ping all 3 accusations you're taking Neil to task for. Minus Maziek embellishment. But some anti-town play in his play.

@Toasty, Not really. Don did some stuff that it would be pretty common for people to get all googly eyed for. A vote on Evil would've raised my eyebrows a lot more than a Don vote, but I didn't like Knife's reads, because the people that could give him trouble were all in his town reads minus you.

[Knell]

What's your read on Don Cx?

[Knell]

I expected Knell to claim some PR. I didn't get scum feelings from him much at all, but he wasn't playing nearly safe enough for a PR, and I was kind of expecting IC since he didn't really defend himself much at all and he didn't care that he was getting up to claiming point enough.

he kind of soft claimed earlier.

maybe no one noticed.

Wait, Knell soft-claimed, you caught it, and you still voted and put him at L-1????

yup. it was a weak move. what exactly are you implying with your multiple question marks? cause when I read this, I get the "surprise" emotion. and I don't really get why anyone would be "surprised" by my actions. I think it is more likely that a scum player would feign "surprise" at my actions in order to try and paint what I did in a bad light,

when the truth is that scum soft claim rabidly when under pressure on day 1 in order to set up... wait for it... a fake claim.

are you guys sure neil isn't scum? looks like it to me.

[Knell]

@Knife: Merely frustrating, not disappointing. I regretted writing it after looking at it.

@Don: Sure.

don_johnson:

don doesn't really have a lot of content here. He votes himself, complains about how much there is to read, then tries to justify his self-vote as generating discussion although the only thing he discussed about it was whether or not self-voting is anti-town. He describes the Victor/Knell interaction as being scum infighting without going into any detail on why he thinks so. He asks Coyote for gut reads (going so far as to calling him "brother") and then completely fails to follow up in any way. It also doesn't help that the strategy he told us he likes to use boils down to lynching randomly until you get lucky enough to hit scum before trying to scumhunt. I'm reading him as scum right now.

Knell:

Finally, one of the big ones that everyone's been talking about. I'll admit, I was fairly impressed with his early posts around the time TSO was active. But then he gave us these wonderful gems:

Victor is arguing that TSO's argument seems contrived and that he is trying to push a mislynch. This 1: Implies [Victor is] town. 2: Implies TSO is scum.

Is Victor supposed to be pushing an argument that implies

Victor

is scum?

I thought about it more and realized that this particular reason of TSO's wasn't even really of his own making, it's a general idea that TSO thinks those with "experience" recognize as pointing to mafia. Thus, TSO's reason was not a reason of his own making, but he agreed with this idea as someone with experience, therefore, he didn't contrive it. Therefore, falsely accusing TSO of something he didn't do and voting him for it.

"TSO argued something he didn't really believe in and just made an argument he thought would win over most experienced players. Therefore the guy voting for him is scum."

It could give away information that could inform the mafia's night kill. I don't think anyone should answer that question.

There is no way that Evil's question could "inform the night kill." It feels more like a OMGUS response to D not answering Knell's question so he tried to come up with some weak reasoning to not answer.

Well the question was based on you not having visited this site. In my first game here I rolled mafia and I saw that they could communicate before the game began, but noticed that there was no indication that this was the case in the rule set. Therefore, I tried to trip you up because you said you hadn't visited this site yet, if you were on the scum team you would know that they could communicate before the game began, if you weren't you wouldn't know what I was talking about.

This is tremendous bullshit. "There was no indication that this was the case in the rule set"? How about the fact that we're playing a "Pick Your Poison" setup? The whole point of this setup is that the scum got to decide before the start what PRs were available to the town. Of course, D still managed to answer this question in the worst way possible, but claiming that the question was trying to trip him up because "newbie town wouldn't know Mafia could talk beforehand" while there's a link in Hermy's post 1 to the wiki page for the setup is the scummiest way to explain what he was doing.

Post 107 is buddying to Victor.

Post 110is somehow buddying to Victor even

more

in response to Victor's 108. Specifically the line "That's nice that you'd vote Toasty after another player had voted him. You should do that." Victor called you out at the bottom of the post where he said that, why would you try the same thing again here?

Make no mistake, I still suspect the shit out of you. But I want information first and I can worry about how people try to capitalize on my contradictions later.

Pfft. "I'll worry about defending my scummy lies after I start building a wagon on someone else."

From what I can see you're running a eugenics program

Whoa. This is a few posts after you tell us you're easing off the accelerator?

If you want me to be honest, you're voting town right now and that's supposedly against your win condition.

To paraphrase a

wise

man in this game: "This implies you are town." I thought Victor implying he was town was scummy before, but it's not scummy when you do it? Oh, right, I forgot that you'll worry about your contradictions later.

I push players who don't make sense

Delicious irony.

Toasty is scum. Because he wouldn't push someone else's lynch while making a huge case against me unless he were scum. It simply makes no sense otherwise. His current case on me is way better than his case on evil.

And I disagree with that it makes sense. IF he has all that then he should be thinking about it. When people say someone is scummy or make an argument for why someone is scummy they convince themselves they're scummy. What he is saying and what is doing is being contradicted. He sounds defensive, but he's not being defensive because he's not voting me for voting him. If he's not scum reading me, but wanting to ask me questions, then why say I'm scummy in the first place, and instead just ask me questions?

He's not just defending himself. He's calling me scummy for my actions in this game and with far greater justification than his case on Evil. But he's not voting me. His reason that he wants to ask me questions does not contradict that he thinks I'm scum, but the vote would add to the pressure and would supposedly make me more willing to answer his questions, the reasoning that he's not voting me because he's going to ask me questions doesn't make sense because he can both vote and ask me questions. He is afraid to counter vote me, because of site culture thinking that's a scum tell.

I'm saying

"His own reasons for voting Evil"
Are much less than
"his own reasons for voting me"
But he's not voting me.

His argument that he's writing up questions for me, does not change or redefine the fact that he should be voting me. He's pushing and discrediting someone who suspects him while voting someone else with much weaker reasons than his push against me. That's scummy.

3. You aren't counter voting me. That's different from a "counter."
4. Yes, but everything you're saying says you suspect me more than everyone else. I understand that you're selective with who you counter vote as town. You've been selective, you've chosen, me but you aren't voting me.
5. Yes it does.

It's not a counter, because there's no vote.

Which is what I think you were trying to avoid.

Wow. All of this is just incredible. Toast must be scum because Knell knows how Toast thinks and how he should act, and he's not doing those things? I don't see how any of this logic follows other than Knell thinking that votes should go on the people you disagree with. Special mention goes to the bolded piece in the last quote, since I never realized before now that the

only

way to defend yourself from accusations is to OMGUS your accuser. Thank you, Knell, for opening my eyes. </sarcasm>

Victor, I've openly admitted I want them to move their votes to people they think are scum with reasons to back up their votes, instead of pressure voting.

I would, but then that would put the person I think is scum at L-1 and I still have four people to ISO before I'm done.

In conclusion, Knell is either scum or the worst town player I've ever seen (outside of someone in an off-site game who suicided because he didn't like being a VT). He's sloppy, he's desperate, and he's contradicting himself and coming up with weak (or downright bad) reasons/excuses for doing what he's done. By far the strongest scumread I have out of the eight players I've ISO'd so far.



Also, since it looks like idk probably isn't coming back anytime before the day ends:
UNVOTE: idk

My vote's waiting for Knell, but like I said, I'd rather finish ISOing the last four players tomorrow night before I put him so close to the lynch.

I don't like the fact that he is using the whole "No one is defending me!" as part of his defense, but with so many people scum reading him, I guess there isn't much you can do.

I don't scum read him. His logic is crap, but I don't personally believe that it's scummy, so I'm not going to vote him.

Neil, what reasons do you have for voting Knell, since you completely misinterpreted his post?

Knell, you're null-town for me. Kinda dumb-town, honestly (no offense). The only thing that REALLY throws me off is your Toasty stuff, but on the other hand, I don't like Toasty's reaction to your paragraph (The whole "why were you encouraging pressure votes on me if you don't want them on yourself" thing is just awful and doesn't make me like Toasty too much), so I'm not really wanting to go down the whole Knell road.

I've seen quite a few people say "He could be dumb town, but he's probably scum."

Why? Being illogical is not scummy. That's just a reality. People can have poor logic sometimes, and the reality is that they can be any alignment. We're potentially throwing away town numbers because someone has poor logic? If it's just a vote because of what he said to Toasty, then I don't want to be a part of it.

On the other hand.

Vote: ToastyToast

You trying to make Knell look worse by accusing him of hypocrisy is awful. He can call pressure on you because (as he clearly stated and what's obvious by reading the thread) is that there is literally no reason to pressure vote Knell at the point you stated your "why were you encouraging pressure votes on me if you don't want them on yourself" thing. On the other hand, the town as a whole is pretty much looking down one avenue at this time (Knell), so him asking for pressure votes on one of his scum reads is completely different than not wanting pressure votes on himself. It's like me asking for votes on Don but saying not to vote Knell, except I wouldn't get yelled at for it because I'm not the person that could be lynched at any moment. Overall, it looks like an attempt to make Knell look worse when he's not really in the wrong in this specific case.

[Knell]

@Knife: Merely frustrating, not disappointing. I regretted writing it after looking at it.

frustrations come from unmet expectations, so what were you expecting?

1. I was expecting not to be stonewalled. With what appeared to be a genuine disinterest in what I had to say with no room to negotiate.
2. I was expecting a player to continue to develop their reads even though they had found their scum read.

You did not appear to do either of these things. So, I was frustrated. I could neither get a better read on you, nor could I get you to stop voting me.

[Knell]

That's invisible to me. hence appear.
Expectations based on prior evidence that you're capable of developing reads on players.
You've seen how it played out. And you've called all of the player's who voted me town. @_@

[Knell]

@Victor, you said aside from sharpest in your question. Why would it matter that he later said sharpest?

[Knell]

Million Pound Question - Who would you say is overthinking this stage of the game right now

(actually reading on, who aside from Sharpest is doing this

)?

[/quote]

[Knell]

I get it I think. I understand why you didn't prioritize his response after realizing your question was answered by SKOT. The parentheses was an update, because you had a tab open and was reading his post at the same time I guess? However, there really is only one response to an additional "overthinker" in your mind at this point.

[Knell]

Well yeah there probably was, I'd have to look back to be sure. If you have more questions fell free to ask.

What are your current thoughts on Don\Neil?

There isn't. I just reread the game.

I'm still thinking about them both. I need to look at more of Neil's games to understand him better. I was a bit surprised when he got on me, since he knows I have a fairly solid mafia game, that usually explains everything I've done when asked. There's also a line of hypocrisy in his play in that he is also not answering every question directed toward him. But since he recognizes that not answering every question can be scummy (which, lol, no it is not) there's probably a reason he isn't. I don't actually like the push against him for that reason. He's a bit full of holes. And from reading his scum games he's not the meticulous sort that doesn't get called out on his stuff and he does have holes in his game when he's scum. But there are a lot of holes.

Don's weird and I'm still trying to figure him out. One of the things that bothers me about him is his explanation for not reading RC because "this is how scum usually approaches me" and RC isn't doing that. It's passive.

My read on Toasty was dying a little, but I disagree that Toasty was ever directly defending me. I don't know if he's the type to do that anyway, regardless of his alignment. He's clearly about the game, because he's typing in it, but thinking about the game isn't enough (it never actually is enough), looking at what they're thinking about and what they do with it.

I'm sort of thinking about too many players are once right now. Reinoe is playing decidedly narrow right now and it's bothering me a bit. Maziek is also bothering me, i didn't like how he called me out as a potential PR, it's anti-town if you think about it.

[Knell]

Wow, that Toasty read is marvelous. That's try it again.

My scum read on Toasty was dying a slow death. But I disagree that Toasty was ever directly defending me, he was actively contributing to my death without actually voting me, until near the very end and not nearly enough to prevent my lynch. But I don't know if he's the type to defend people he isn't sure of in the first place. Yes, it's clear that Toasty is thinking about the game, but showing that you're thinking about it is not actually alignment indicative. It's what you're thinking about, how you're thinking about it, and what you do with that information that points to your alignment. And it's not clear.

[Knell]

@Reinoe, well.

The reason I ask is because both of your votes were pressure votes which don't give me much information. I'd rather the votes were moved where you had reasons for thinking the player was scum, instead of just going along for the ride until a claim. While I'm not necessarily against players who vote me with reason outside of "pressure"

but who genuinely either think I'm scum or an easy mislynch. <- This especially is welcome.

Using microphone on phone. Try it out see how it works. let's use a hypothetical let's say I flipped town. Who of the players currently voting me or have me in their scum reads is scum? Please use their posts to determine which one it is and explain why. At some point this is mandatory anyways. Knife should like this he is not really into this whole day one stuff anyways.

I've asked people to think about who is scum if I'm not scum and the majority have ignored this and so it looks like I either have to be lynched to force them to do it

or claim

.:/

hey guys. I have a busy few days. anything interesting happen? I see someone was questioning my earlier coments on victor and knell. victor's attack on knell never contained a vote if memory serves, and that was probably what made it most suspicious, but honestly, I'd have to reread to see what else stood out. its not a "hey they are scumbuddies" accusation as much as it was a "hey, that's weird interaction". coyote is right about my playstyle, if you read my town games, I have an excellent ability to tie things together as the game goes on. my day 1's are always a crapshoot, but once I get clarity with some flips, I have a knack for seeing scum teams. if you have any specific questions, just ask. as of now, I would need to reread the game tomorrow or sunday to post a current opinion. I do remember knell's answer to my question as being quite sub par. asking why the onus is on him to give me reasons why I should not vote him is a perfectly acceptable method of inquiry. imo, he just dodged my question. but I'm holding my vote until I get a full reread in. as far as victor and abel go, I think I mentioned that I had been town reading victor, so the connection is just filed until further developments warrant. abel I would have to catch up to get an opinion on.

has knell been convincing anyone not to lynch him?

^ I personally thought this was Don checking to see if I was a power role.

[Knell]

I was giving mixed signals though. When I said, "I'll worry about how people try to capitalize on my contradictions later," that was intentional irony.

@Reinoe, That's not a contradiction? Why would you vote me for that? We're polar opposite, I'm thinking on 9 players at once and you came in and focused on one. By dead line if you didn't open up more we wouldn't have anything on you, but the flip of whoever you chose to vote. They are two extremes and both are bad at this stage given our unique situations. I need to come to a decision because I'm dead tonight, unless town manages to out another power role. You replaced a blank slate.

[Knell]

I'm just going to pretend I understand that thought ending cliche. That neither refutes or explains the heart of my worries about you.

L-3

[Knell]

Wifom is delicious if you do it right

Better get through this now. So you're alternating pressure, between neil and Don, why?

[Knell]

1) No.
2) Why are you more suspicious of Neil? You say it could be his playstyle but say it's suspicious anyway. If it's just his playstyle why would it be suspicious?
3) ....Are you trying to get me to say yes multiple times?

[Knell]

Edit to the questions at the bottom of your post since I misread it: Yeah. those questions at the bottom have already been answered when I discussed it with Redcoyote. 140 I've been showering suspicion on every player in the game. I don't get the purpose of the questions or how it helps you out. Do you think you've tripped some sort of scum tell? Because you aren't playing exactly how I'd expect town to play? I'm simply interested in you and what you're doing and why you're doing it. I know you read the game http://www.quicktopic.com/50/H/n9Lvfg5XWFgP7 You're very involved. I just don't know your alignment, and I'd like to.

[Knell]

1. I don't really think Don's response was especially illuminating.

2. I think you miswrote here, "I could be suspicious of Neil for something that's playstyle related and not alignment related" and you certainly could be. What would it take for you to find out if it was? Why aren't you doing that?

3. If I said "I'm scummy" would you call it really suspicious? I mean the correct answer is, "Someone I'm scum reading" but that sort of carelessness...Do you think it's more likely to come from scum than town?

4. Well the narrow thing, is simply that your outward appearance (posts) were narrow and focused on one particular player, with a single question thrown at him. I was concerned we wouldn't get much out of you before dead line and the player's won't get much of a feel for you to prevent your mislynch if you're town or to lynch you later/today if you're scum. That's not to say I want a reads list. Merely to understand you and where you're coming from

now

.

[Knell]

One of the things I was going to do that perhaps you haven't considered is see if neil will stick to his guns after getting votes for his play. Another thing you clearly haven't considered is that I may be waiting for him to put his argument in another way that isn't so bombastic. Since both of these things require neil to post more there's nothing I can do for the time being. As for what I'm doing about that, what do you suggest?

Well, I've been reading his past games, I'm not entirely it works yet. Why do you expect me to consider things that you've given no indications of doing?

Maybe. I've seen people say "I'm scum" as a joke and I understood it as such immediately. I've seen people say "I'm scum" and then shook my head because they gave up. It depends on context. See how you completely ignored my question about cxinlee? That's the sort of thing that'll get you scum read by me.

Let me reword the question, "given the context of the game and what you've gotten from Cxinlee so far, do you think he would be that careless as scum?" I'm not sure. I shot the question back at you, because I wasn't.

And despite your activity we aren't getting much of value from you except scum slips. For example, clearly you're willing to go through my completed games since you posted a link to my completed OPEN:550 scum QT. But you didn't take from it that I was one of the more active players in that game and even up to the final lynch I engaged with all players in that game except Nobody_Special. Your complete misread of my activity level and contribution style is another thing that will get you scum read by me.

Isn't that their fault for not understanding you well enough? I said you were both involved and active in that game. Not that I found you particularly scummy for how you've entered merely that it's problematic.

[Knell]

I feel pretty good on Reinoe being town. Because he seems genuinely agitated that I'm disrupting his work.
I'm not here to argue, Reinoe, but how was I supposed to know? without asking you what you were doing?

[Knell]

Requesting prod of Abelcain and IDK

[Knell]

Requesting prod of Maziek and Chrivi

[Knell]

How is reread coming? Neil is at l-1

[Knell]

@Toasty, why are you voting Neil? There's a post by Neil's or the absence of text by him that should be bothering you. Is it just worth the risk or something?

[Knell]

@Toasty, why are you voting Neil? There's a post by Neil's or the absence of text by him that should be bothering you. Is it just worth the risk or something?

[Knell]

I would've chosen the IC, Tracker, and 2-shot vig.

[Knell]

Open 355: Town win: IC ?? ?? lost pages or something.
Open 397: Maf win: IC, Vig, Cop.
Open 432: Town win: Vig,IC, JK
open 488: Maf win: Track, vig, IC
Open 505: Town win: Cop, IC, Vig.
Open 533: Town win: Cop, JK, IC.
Open 543: town win:IC, Vig, Cop.

Scum favored the IC, Vig, Cop. Set up even though they lost.

So you can take the IC and vig as a given in any set up. The tracker has some variableness, but it's viable. Cop is more common though.

[Knell]

Just for your FYI, if anyone is a JK/COP, Neil fake claimed most likely.

I don't know if it's worth it, to out yourself (Maybe JK should, COP definitely should not, without using his/her investigate first)

That out of the way, we are indeed not lynching Neil today. So Don, who's scum now that you've gotten your "second!" town flip?

[Knell]

Vig was in 6 of the previous 7 poison games.
IC was in all 7.

I'm stating, that the likelihood of him having fake claimed with someone being a cop or JK is high for that reason.

[Knell]

The chances you'll track the vig or scum kill is 20%. -> But given I'll be shot tonight you'll confirm the vig if you're track him/her.
10% chance you'll find scum.
The chances of Neil flipping scum if there's a cop or JK is 85.7%.
Tracker counterclaim 100%. <- assuming not stupid!

Sample size of less than ten blows though. And can mess with these percentages(I wouldn't risk it). In general though a cop/track?JK (only 1) is optimal just from a pure mechanical stand point.

Good night.

[Knell]

There are 13 of us. Percentages are lower than that. Should not do this at night.l

[Knell]

Don probably did a good job. /: Really, I doubt he's scum because based off of research, his priority is survival not outing power roles.

I would like him to give his reads. Before we go forward, but I'll be hanging around it case we need to quick lynch, as I don't know when dead line is.

[Knell]

VOTE: Don_Johnson

Maziek hasn't posted in 6 days.

[Knell]

Hi there.

[Knell]

So,why did Abelcain die?

1. He had good reads! or/and
2. He was a strong townie!

What were his scum reads?
1. Said Neil might have fakeclaimed. Frame job possible.
2. Noted Victor buddying.
3. Slightly scum reading Chrivi
4. Scum reading Knife.

[Knell]

@Neil, I think you would be more helpful pressuring people and being open than hiding your reads for low chances of tracking right, just track who you want at night, just don't say who. Why did you suspect Maziek of being scum?

What is everyone's read of Chrimi?

[Knell]

BTW, in case people haven't figured it out, I'm the 1-x cop.


My investigation landed on a townie, but the neil/sharpest interactions today are enough to convince me that they're scum.

Sorta hoping you were gambiting yesterday and trying to draw the nk. I sort of expected you to die last night actually.

[Knell]

@Toasty, Yes.

Just for your FYI, if anyone is a JK/COP, Neil fake claimed most likely.

I don't know if it's worth it, to out yourself (Maybe JK should, COP definitely should not, without using his/her investigate first)

That out of the way, we are indeed not lynching Neil today. So Don, who's scum now that you've gotten your "second!" town flip?

How do you figure that neil fake claimed?

Is it because the likely third role is 2-SHOT VIG?

I'm really interested in hearing this.

This implies you were the second role.

[Knell]

@Toasty, why are you voting Neil? There's a post by Neil's or the absence of text by him that should be bothering you. Is it just worth the risk or something?

1. This was me, being hesitant by the way. Neil hinted he was PR when he said he didn't want scum to figure out who he was reading as scum/town to avoid the NK. Toasty, did you notice this by any chance?

[Knell]

Then why did you ask him why he would care about being nked? Or whatever.

[Knell]

Did you know you town claimed when you asked that scum/role question? /: It had been discussed in thread before this point. Did you miss it?

[Knell]

Knife.
A cop confirms himself and his townie and the scum have to deal with it. And they will have to deal with it. His claim is very believable, heavily forecasted, and the benefits for doing so as scum negligible at best. And it's likely there is a cop in this set up given that it is the third most commonly chosen role by scum teams, behind Vig and IC.

It's possible that all of our power roles have been outted, and there is no vig (which might explain the lack of a shot) or a JK. But if there is a vig, there is no question here, Neil is the shot to take. As it saves us from giving the scum team an NK with his lynch.

[Knell]

...Hi again.

[Knell]

@Knife, it's not sketchy to me. I think his claim is extremely valid and that's all that matters.

[Knell]

Neil is functionally dead if he's scum.

Since we either have a third power role that can out at any time (or will eventually be nked) or a vig(do not go along with Knife's suggestion of shooting Reinoe, it's incorrect since the gains (3 nks controlled by town, versus 2) which solves the problem easily. If he is a tracker then it would be a huge mistake to lynch him. So I don't understand the interest in Neil at this point in time.

That said, I'd like if Reinoe would out his target within the week or when we are about to secure a lynch.

[Knell]

Not really, the fact is I think TSO is trying to force an early attack on skot over using Random.org and that's the scummiest thing I've seen thus far. Any particular reason why half an hour after your original post you felt the need to reiterate your point?

Can you go into your "real" reason for this post? I'm interested in the "trying to force an early attack on Skot" since it presupposes TSO is scum. Using the reasoning that scum might have motivation to start an early attack.

Why did you ask that question?

Cause you seemed to read my post and half an hour later decided to question me on it, so I wondered why.

Why did you actually wonder why? What were your suspicions?

This is more of game talk, but since you asked: tells vary from person to person. I don't think there is any set formula to playing mafia. I personally am more of a gut/emotion player, and as such I focus on reactions, interactions, and motivation. As far as RVS itself goes, the scummiest votes are those defend the player before anyone has even attacked them. It is RVS and no explanations should really be necessary, and someone over-thinking that stage is suspicious to me.

Million Pound Question - Who would you say is overthinking this stage of the game right now (actually reading on, who aside from Sharpest is doing this)?

I would like an answer, who besides me(and Knife), was over thinking at this time in the game? What were you hoping to gain from the question?

More questions later.

[Knell]

Step One: Clear your cache and cookies
>Hit Control+Shift+Delete to bring open the clear window in your browser

Step Two: Flush your DNS Cache
>Open command prompt, and type in: "ipconfig /flushDNS" and then hit enter

Step Three: Test it
>MS should work now

Step Four: CHange DNS Server
>If it doesn't, change to google's public DNS server @ 4.4.4.4 and 8.8.8.8
copy paste this every time somebody asks the same question over

^ Stolen from Cabd.

[Knell]

Let's do it.

VOTE: Rachmarie

[Knell]

k.

[Knell]

He is.

[Knell]

@Sharp, discuss something with me for a sec.

[Knell]

Sure.

Do you think the JK should claim if there is one?

[Knell]

Well, in general. My argument is somewhere in the realm of:
The scum team isn't dumb enough to have a cop/JK/IC set up.
It's simply the most advantageous one for town. So, it points at Reinoe fake claim. Which is a lot more messy if there isn't a vig.

[Knell]

Because a Cop/JK presents obvious complications. Which a tracker/JK doesn't.

[Knell]

The other possibility is vig, but no shot. If there's a vig, there's no debate here and Neil is dead. If there's a counter claim to either the cop or Tracker it needs to come out now.

[Knell]

The point isn't moot RC because i'm considering whether it's worth it to keep Reinoe/Neil alive/let the claims stand or if it should be shook up by the JK claiming. In general confirming Neil/Reinoe one way or the other is important at this point. given your and other player's suspicions, which one of the obvious reasons to keep Neil alive if he is town is that Neil fake claimed as town or they think they can garner his mislynch in end game. by fake claiming JK at some point.

[Knell]

So should we get the JK to out or not?

[Knell]

Oh, yeah. RC isn't lying about this, I was stalking him in this regard. He also does like to be scum, but of course. That's not really enough to clear him. Even a little, due to the other things that robbed him of his general motivations, it doesn't have to be that he's town that he's unmotivated given, he was ripped off, slow game, etc.

[Knell]

But the JK outting him or herself here, outs scum now. And the scum will no longer have their only remaining plausible fake claim. Which they will inevitiably pull on Reinoe/Neil at some point.

[Knell]

It clears Reinoe if there is no JK. If the vig doesn't fire it confirms Neil.

[Knell]

Before going forward with the 50/50 strategy I think it would be wise for a JK to claim if there is one. I'd like this discussion to continue, but we can't wait too long to decide one way or the other given the remaining 8 days.

If there's a vig. Shoot Neil tonight and you've done your job for the whole game.

As for lynching, just based off of Knife's invisible thing, I'd personally prefer blind lynching Rach, assuming Neil/Reinoe/Toast town.

[Knell]

1. I wouldn't lynch someone for going V/LA.
2. Maziek, slight paranoia at defending me. Though I suppose it might be smarter to go quiet instead of get in everyone's face, but ultimately did not go into hysterics when I got to L-1 just essentially said, "I've said my piece" which of course, won't have prevented my lynch at all, and therefore makes me wonder why maziek bothered to defend me in the first place.

3. That's why I would want a JK claim. Because I think it clears the air. And while it might complicate the situation, it's going to get complicated eventually and letting scum run free is not optimal and that's only going to happen if the Jk doesn't out, if there is no JK we can run with that information. If there's a vig, easy and solved, shoot Neil tonight and that's it. Reinoe+Vig+Toast = Confirmed town.

[Knell]

@Squirrel/Reinoe for/against Jk claim?

@Knife, meant blind, but wrote invisible.

[Knell]

Well, I can certainly say my paranoia on Victor being not scum has only risen with the current votes on him.

[Knell]

@Toasty, should the JK claim? We kind of had a discussion over it, but still in debate mode.

1. 812 for Rachmarie.
2. I'm still in the questioning Phase with Victor. Chivri, there's not really a reason to lynch/not lynch Chrivi. Cx roughly similar. They should be lynched because "they're lurkers" in the literal sense.

[Knell]

Blind = Blind lynch = Process of elimination lynch.

ChriVi is a big sheep. Doesn't do any thinking of their own, really. Hopped onto me at the entrance, then when it seemed like I was going to fight (which I always do), they began to sheep me. Apparently my answers were good for them to see me as obvtown then, but as soon as D2 opens, they vote me and claim to be sheeping neil. I believe they said their reasons for the town read were highly based on Knells allignment. So why did they fail to mention this after Knell did his innocent child? Why the buddying up to more active players? Also ChriVi's dual personality act has disappeared. If I recall, most people were fine with it, so why the sudden decision to switch (cough cough scumbuddies told her to stop cough cough) most likely scum sheep/bussing lynch if necessary to ensure survival of other scum team members

203 RC asks Chrivi to stop. So, they didn't discuss it in the scum QT if that's what you're talking about. Well, I've read Chrivi's few scum games (as viomi). And they do tend to be that way until they get pressured for it, then take on a more serious tone which we will no longer see from him/her given the slot is being replaced. You have a point about about Viomi not mentioning it of course, but it's possible the slot didn't have the confidence to rock that particular boat/he/she was still thinking on it and didn't come to that conclusion until later/they were bullshiting as town.

[Knell]

I want a JK to claim now.

Cx
RC
Victor
Squirrel
Rach
Knife
Say if you're the Jk or not. Do not claim Vt, simply "Not the JK"

If there's a vig go silent shoot Neil. There's no direct benefit to having the vigilante cliam given they can solve the problem of their innocence through night action. Victor is completely wrong that the vig should shoot outside of Neil to confirm themselves. Reinoe wasn't here to pick the set up if he is scum. Rc's reason for voting with me because I'm confirmed isn't a good idea. Victor can no longer remember his points, but seriously, I can't blame him at this point. Reinoe isn't constantly reminding the vig to shoot Neil if there is one, I am.

@Rachmarie since you asked: Knell claimed Innocent child. Neil climbed Tracker. Reinoe claimed 1-shot cop and investigated toastytoast who he received an innocent on.

[Knell]

Preferably in the order given top to bottom but time is of the essence.

[Knell]

Yes.

[Knell]

Repeating since new page.

Say one of the following: 1) "I'm the Jail keeper" 2) I'm not the jail keeper"

I'm not the Jailer keeper.

[Knell]

It seems like the easiest way to solve the "nobody believes Neil's claim" problem.

[Knell]

Would you like to explain how Rachmarie can't be scum if you tracked her?

[Knell]

Yesssss

[Knell]

Reinoe is confirmed. If there are any other PR's (sides' vig who can do what they think is best) that would like to out themselves for a town victory (either cop or JK) do so please.

I'll go back and look for associations later tomorrow. I'm sure Chrimi gave very little away. But Neil might be more productive.

[Knell]

VOTE: Sharpest

Just for now.

[Knell]

I don't think Squirrel is our third mafia. Anyone disagree?

[Knell]

@victor there are a couple of reasons, but a primary reason I don't think it makes sense is this post by Neil.

Yo. I suck.

This is probably getting old, but I really would rather not be replaced out. Just kinda phone-posting here, but a proper post should come in about 2-2.5 hours. Sorry! :/

Out of game content:

Of course you suck. We all suck in our own way. There are differences of play-style that if you're looking at one certain perspective, some people look good, some people look bad, but if you look at it in a different perspective, the good players aren't so good anymore, and the bad players actually look good.

No matter how you look at it, everyone has bad games and everyone has good games. And everyone has their moments lol. At least try to focus in this game, and if you're town or scum, try your best to play to that win condition. The only way to get better in this game is to play it. I can promise you, lurking isn't going to help in fact, if you're town, it's anti-town because what happens if you somehow make it to Ly-Lo? Then we know you've been lurking and the last scum is making it apparent that you've been lurking the entire game and if the last scum can make themselves appear town some-what, guess what happens? You look helluva suspicious. So by lurking, you're more likely to cause town a mislynch then to be helpful.

Which is completely unnecessary if they're scum partners.

[Knell]

@RC, he didn't seem that confident he wasn't going to be shot to me. He pushed Reinoe to discredit him because he was afraid the answer was too obvious IMO.

[Knell]

Sounds fine to me. Reinoe is mod confirmed town as far as I'm concerned.

So we can discuss it if you like Reinoe.

[Knell]

Abel died because he doubted Neil's claim vocally and he pointed at one or more mafia. One of which was the scum we just random lynched.
He held that Victor was buddying and he was scum reading knife. Those are his two remaining suspicions that are currently with us.

[Knell]

Well, I think we can agree that Knife isn't the vig. So.
That just leaves the rest of them. Since Agar mentioned it he's out. Unless he is feeling particularly trollish this day.
Which leaves us with Squirrel, Rach, RC, and Victor agreed with me so far?

[Knell]

I'm town reading squirrel. I think the order I'd like (from left to right) is Rachmarie, Redcoyote, Victor, Squirrel. That okay with you?

[Knell]

Okay then. Where do you want to put Agar and sharpest? Give your own order.

[Knell]

Sounds good to me Reinoe.

[Knell]

Don't shoot. I'm immune to bullets.

[Knell]

He prob figured he would get shot 100% if he was off the wagon. Why would it be unrelated to the game according to Neil if idk was either his scum partner or they were both town? /:

[Knell]

What I am stating is that Neil said it was unrelated to the game before empathy chat. If idk was his scum partner it would be related to the game because he would be giving his scum partner advice. If idk was town however it would be truly alignment neutral and "outside" the game because then he advice was given from a neutral party outside of of Neil's current alignment.

[Knell]

To put it simply the only reason to use that language I if he's either neutral or clarifying is because he was playing against his win condition . By giving town advice. But there's plenty of other information to go through.Why do you think squirrel voted Chrivi? If they're scum buds? Why at that particular time in that particular way?

[Knell]

It seems like the easiest way to solve the "nobody believes Neil's claim" problem.

Are we going to lynch Neil today? Because I don't think we are, so it really doesn't matter to confirm him today or tomorrow. If a Vig kills him then we're already past the point of needing to much about with the JKer thing, and if a JKer wants to claim tomorrow we can debate that question then, and if none does then he can live until a JKer dies. Seems pretty simple to me.

Maybe I'm doing this wrong. Try completing this post:

"I don't think Victor is town because...."

...because he has done nothing I would deem a town tell, unlike other players have.

However, it's ironic how Squirrel kept pushing me, and was going to "destroy" my case but happened to post after everyone else.

That doesn't even make sense. Your post *was* destroyed. Like, multiple people saw how it didn't jive, I'm not sure why you think it's so unlikely that I wouldn't that I'd choose to lie about it.

Opportunistic scum vote? Appears to be so. Just stay on whatever wagon you think will likely get off the ground and get a lynch for, as long as it's not you or your teammates. Got it, good scum plan.

It's also a fine town plan. I've been pretty open that I have a lot of people I'd be fine lynching, and that my vote is pretty fluid right now. I mean, you're currently sheeping a guy you said you had something of a case on - so your vote is pretty fluid right now too, and that's fine, but why does that make when I do it questionable and when you do it fine? That said, if there is a Vig kill of you tonight, thanks for making me obv. town

also this. Plus deep consideration on claiming and thinking about what is best for town.

[Knell]

Empathy chat. Neil's post was made with sympathetic overtones. He was trying to help someone feel better about themselves after they depreciated themselves for sucking. Neil said the post he was making to IDK was unrelated to the game. If you take what he says at face value, then they're not scum partners because scum partners giving each other advice is related to the game because it potentially improves their performance. You might say the same for giving advice to town as scum, as it would be related to the game and be against his win condition to try and improve the performance of town by giving advice to town. But to me, contextually speaking, it makes more sense for him to clarify that it was unrelated to the game because he was playing against his win condition as there is more motivation to mention your current post being unrelated when it's against your win condition than strictly unrelated to your win condition.

I'm not going to explain this a 4th time.

[Knell]

Victor's early vote and position on TSO in the early game doesn't jive well with him being scum. /:

[Knell]

I'm not sure if Neil was white knighting Rachmarie or not.

[Knell]

VOTE: Rachmarie
Guess we'll find out.

I think we should continue the mass claim.

[Knell]

I dont get how comments about how we played in a previous game of this setup and providing you all with some of the motivations we had for picking the PRs we did in that game is somehow a "slip" in THIS game.

Seems about right.

[Knell]

What are your reasons? You're safe from an nk now.

[Knell]

Actually. While it's nice that we can probably random lynch to victory. I'd still rather win today than carry that potential risk of losing. It would be annoying to watch this victory slip from our grasp.

Agar what do you think about Maziek. Barring initial suspicions related to the claim?

Do you guys see anything interesting in Neil's posts that you'd like to come forward with?

Vic, you were impressing me... until this post. While I appreciate you changing your vote, it seems way too little too late. Not only do you take your vote off of a pressure vote (which you've had since the beginning of the game from RVS, and have gotten nothing out of) which I've never seen someone feel "pressure" from 1 vote before, FYI... but you ALSO decide to jump on the biggest wagon with literally, no case from yourself? Gah, you're making me upset. Just when I thought you were acting townish and even mentioning scooby doo, you go and mess my read up again!

[Knell]

Rereading with skim and I'm back to not being sure about Neil and Victor, barring that one post by Neil where he backed off on his town read of victor to remain on the fence. there are plenty of things Victor did to make that trail run cold on reread. Almost too many. Toasty's town read of Victor was empathy based and had to do with what I assume is reading his previous games and feeling bad for him that he got mislynched a lot as town.

@Knife, that's not super thrilling, but it might do. Do you see anything else that you think might help us win sooner rather than later?

[Knell]

I figured, the only reason any one would be not elaborating on their reasons at this point is because of nk potential.

[Knell]

Ummmmmmmm

[Knell]

Rach you do realize you talked about the set up and know it quite well. So why the change in level of ignorance?