Mini 749 - Antarctic Mafia [Game Over]

[Jazzmyn]

Hello, all.

I am the replacement for pacman. I am reading the thread and hope to be sufficiently up to speed by Sunday to post something substantive about my thoughts and observations of the game thusfar.

Regards.
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Sorry for the delay, folks. I have re-read the entire thread three times now and I've pretty much completed my post by post notes on all the players, so now I just have to summarize those notes and distill my analysis from them, and I should be able to post my analysis about my current prime suspects tomorrow.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

First things first, my predecessor, pacman, was utterly useless, posted nothing of value and then flaked for no stated and no apparent reason. I have no idea why he did so. I've only ever played in one other game with pacman in the past and he was virtually absent in that game as well, posted next to nothing of value, and also had to be replaced in that game. That's all I know about him.

This is a tough game to get a good handle on. I've read the entirety of Day 1 three times now but I'm still not getting very many really strong impressions of the alignment of several of the players, which is a bit unusual for me. Hmph. I did my first read of the thread deliberately avoiding posts that would tell me who had been lynched so that it wouldn't cloud my judgment, and I got a town read from DDD and a very scummy read from freeko, so I can't say that I blame anyone for lynching freeko. Had I been here on Day 1, I would have voted to lynch him, too. But I was surprised that DDD came under so much fire. I really didn't buy several of the arguments made against him as I was reading them. I realize that it's different coming in as a replacement and not actually being here live, as it were, but still, those who were making what appeared to me to be fairly spurious arguments against DDD seemed suspicious to me from the get go.

Anyway, from my post by post reviews and subsequent analysis of Day 1, this is what I can offer at present as to those who are pinging most loudly on my scumdar currently.

NOTE: The following is based on Day 1 posts only. I will add more later re: Day 2 posts.

ZEEnon:

He completely freaked out over random votes and completely missed the humour that was self evident that led to the beginning of what appeared to be an obvious joke wagon. His wayyyy over the top reaction resulted in a real wagon forming on him and then he went ballistic. After he calmed down, he didn’t seem to have anything more to say except to point out the bleedingly obvious – that Mizz.Mafia and pacman hadn't posted much or contributed very meaningfully to the game. But ZEEnon didn’t contribute meaningfully even though he was actually participating and posting. His post-freakout contributions read like "oops, I'm just going to say 'safe' things now and hope that nobody looks in my direction again". And there was this strange little post directed to Light-kun:

i agree with the rest of your points, so i didn't address them or else it would be seen as me agreeing with you too much and/or me just posting for the sake of posting.

That just struck me as odd, as it looks like ZEEnon either trying to explain to his scum partner why/how he had screwed up or, alternatively, trying to

appear

to be explaining to his scum partner why/how he had screwed up, i.e. buddying up to Light-kun.

ZEEnon later, after having said that he was not going to quit the game, did just that without any notice in the thread at all. He just disappeared. The overall impression of ZEEnon that I am left with is that he was most likely scum who just couldn’t take the heat of having a wagon on him.

Drake:

His first 14 posts were ostensibly all joke posts. That's a lot of joke posts. Mind you, they led to ZEEnon's meltdown and if ZEEnon is scum, as I suspect he is, that's not a bad result. But still, something seems not quite right here. Very soon after his lengthy series of joke posts, Drake moved quickly to DDD, and seemed to focus on DDD pretty much exclusively from that point forward, but the suspicions that he levelled at DDD seem somewhat contrived to me. Then in his post 23, Drake says that DDD still thinking that ZEEnon is scum is suspicious. That seems off to me because it sounds like Drake saying that he KNOWS that ZEEnon is town, which he couldn't know unless he is scum.

Then Drake tells DDD that he "despises" softclaims by townies saying that they 'win with the town', accuses DDD of being 'schizophrenic' for accusing ZEEnon of tunnelling, (pretty strong language there - "despises" and "schizophrenic" - in circumstances that do not call for such extremes) and says that DDD was "buddying up" to Drake and Light. (again, what makes Drake so sure that Light is town, which he couldn't know unless he is scum?) In other posts to DDD, Drake also utilizes the false dilemma fallacy and offers another soft defence of Light-Kun before turning his sights to freeko eventually when it appears inevitable that that's the way the wind is blowing.

Light-Kun:

Another one who seemed to make rather disingenuous accusations against DDD on Day 1, without backing them up. Then there was that weird and unduly hostile post he made to na85 that just seemed to come out of left field. Subsequently, he seemed to side with freeko for a while before eventually voting for him, even though freeko was the scummiest player by far (despite having ultimately flipped town). Something definitely seems "off" about Light's Day 1 play but I'm not getting a "Omg, he's scum, lynch him immediately" feel from it at present. ZEEnon and Drake are pinging slightly louder.

Howard:

Not enough to go on yet, due to his predecessor, so I have to keep him in the top tier of my suspect list at present, by default.

So, those are my top suspects as of the end of Day 1. I won't post the rest of my analysis of other players, or my town reads, etc., as it wouldn't be in the best interests of the town to do so at this point, but I will catch up on the Day 2 posts asap and post more soon, hopefully tomorrow.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

I see that I have much to catch up on. I wasn't able to get on last night due to my Sympatico service being out yet again (it hasn't been a factor in this game, but I've had many problems with my ISP recently) but as of this afternoon, I should have no more problems as I had cable Internet installed. Woot!

Regarding Light-Kun's vigilante claim, it's plausible and it is certainly testable, so we should be able to ascertain soon enough whether he really is town aligned or not. But I think that we

should

test LK to ensure that he will follow town consensus, whether that consensus is to take out a particular target tonight or to no-kill tonight, rather than have him act alone.

I don't know what a "prisoner's dilemma" is so I'm going to have to look that up before I'll be able to understand the post that referred to that scenario.

Regarding the paired wagons, from my review, the "shift" appears to have begun at post 271.
As of post 270, the votes were 4 on DDD (Drake, freeko, Jere, Fishy)and 3 on freeko (DDD, Howard, Light).
In post 271, Fishy switched from DDD to freeko, making it 4-3 in the opposite direction.
Then Drake and Jere both unvoted DDD.
Then, Nuwen, Drake and Jere voted freeko (with Howard unvoting and re-voting freeko in between Drake's and Jere's votes)
So, those who switched from the DDD wagon to the freeko wagon were Fishy, Drake and Jere.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Prisoner's dilemma (Classic):
...
Prisoner's Dilemma (mafia):
<snipped for brevity>

Thanks for that. I understand it now, much appreciated.

Note that L-k's mafia prisoner's dilemma relies on the serial killer knowing the identity of the mafia (as well as vice-versa, but this is already true). If this is unknown, the townies chance of winning is 50%, as is the mafia's. The point that the serial killer has thrown the game still stands.

Thanks for that addition, also much appreciated.

A note on vote analysis: L-k here thinks I am scum based solely on a vote- apparently independently of context. Myself, I think think my switch was both justified and explained. I think it is likely that the reason the DDD wagon turned into a freeko wagon was because during day 1

DDD got less scummy and freeko got more scummy

.

Well, as I said previously, from my perspective as a replacement, I was surprised to see so much suspicion directed at DDD in the first place. As I also said previously, freeko's play was so poor that nobody could be faulted for voting for him, and I would have done so too had I been here from the beginning. So, case analysis on the freeko wagon is pretty much a wash, and we are left with vote analysis as a result.

There were three switches - probability says that some of those switches were made from a pro-town perspective. Again, we need to determine which switch was opportunistic.

Jazz expressed surprise that DDD's wagon advanced as far as it did. It's very likely that if the early support of DDD's lynch and the late support of freeko's lynch align, those votes came from scum.

There is overlap among Fishy, Drake and Jere on the early DDD wagon and the late freeko wagon. On the early DDD wagon were 1, Drake; 2, freeko; 3, Jere; and Fishy came later at #4. On the late freeko wagon were 4, Fishy; 5 Nuwen; 6, Drake; 7 Jere. I think it most likely that there is scum among the overlap.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Hohum, it has been 12 days since you replaced in and you have yet to post anything. Would you please share your thoughts on the game so far? I think that new eyes and new reads would be very helpful.

Also, welcome aboard Looker. I look forward to reading your thoughts on the game so far, as well, once you have had the opportunity to read the thread.

Regards,
Jazz

Listen to them. Children of the night. What music they make.

hohum - 1 (Light-kun)

Not Voting - 8 (Jazzmyn, HowardRoark, Nuwen, hohum, Fishythefish, JereIC, DraketheFake, Looker)

9 alive, 5 to lynch.

LK forgot to unvote hohum, so his fishy vote doesn't count.

-Mod

(Vote Count accurate as of Post 426)

[Jazzmyn]

I tend to agree with much of what Light wrote regarding Fishy, but I think I need to do another read of Drake and Jere as well. I expect to be able to complete that over the weekend.

Meanwhile, @hohum and Looker: I hope that you will soon catch up on the game and post your thoughts and analysis.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Mod: please prod

Drake (hasn't posted for a week) and Nuwen (hasn't posted for six days).

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

I'm just kind of waiting for the absentees to check in and offer their thoughts as we're down two players (hohum and Looker) and a couple of others have been busy with other things for the past week, so I don't really have a lot more to say at the moment. Looking forward to having a full complement of players back in the game.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

I find the case against Fishy more compelling than the case against Drake, although I get a scum-vibe from both of them. Yet, they are currently voting against each other. Pretty bold bussing if they are both scum.

I plan to do a re-read today in order to firm up my thoughts, update my game notes, and cast a vote.

@Looker, you have yet to contribute anything to the game since replacing. Please give us your thoughts and input on the game so far.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Just a quick head's up - I will have little to no access until Tuesday night.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Upon re-reading, I still think that there is scum among Fishythefish, DraketheFake and JereIC, largely due to the vote analysis. Of the three, I find Fishy the most suspicious, not only for the voting pattern and his role in steering the wagons, but also for being so quick to accept Light_Kun's Vig claim and for being so against the idea of having the town direct LK's night kill or no-kill, purporting to prefer to let him choose independently, despite the fact that we need to test Light-Kun's claim since he could just as easily be a SK as a Vig. (And then a couple of weeks later Fishy posted, apropos of nothing and only after the hot light of suspicion had been directed to himself, that 'incidentally', he is no longer in favour of letting LK choose his own kill. That looks to me like Fishy realizing that he needed to backtrack in order to attempt to look more like a townie.)

Netlava's 'case' on JereIC is about a weak a case as I have ever read. While I do find Jere's "kill em' all" idea to be rather bizarre, the rest of Netlava's case is based upon her personal bugaboos about the choice of wording that Jere uses, and I just don't see his word choices as scumtells. As noted above, I do think that there is scum among Fishy, Drake and Jere, but the rationale put forward by Netlava is strange and possibly indicative of scum just trying to manufacture a case on a player who has suspicion directed at him by others.

Looker comes across as useless, and potentially scummy. Why replace into a game if you have no intention of participating meaningfully in the game? It's very annoying and in my (admittedly somewhat limited) experience, it more often turns out that the lurking replacement is scum than town.

In the result, at present I am inclined to vote for Fishy today.

First, however, I would like LK to confirm that he is still in agreement with taking direction from the town as to his night action, including whether or not to take any such action.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Light, that's cute but I would like you to confirm specifically whether you will or will not follow town instructions regarding your night action, if any.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

"still"- was he ever in agreement?

I thought that he was, but looking back in the thread, it could be that I misinterpreted his earlier posts in which he said he would shoot himself if we wanted him to, to mean that he would also follow our instructions with respect to other kills besides himself. (Posts 388 and 468)

Do you really believe a SK would go against the town's orders?

Where do you get from my posts that I think that?

The main reason I changed my mind was because I think there's a fair chance that, if L-k is SK, he won't be able to follow our orders to no kill.

Is there some reason why you didn't post your rationale at the time?

OK, you may think my position was totally wrong, I'm not too bothered about that. But how could a loose cannon of a vig/SK benefit the scum?

I don’t imagine it would, any more than a loose cannon LK here will benefit the town. I’m afraid I don’t understand your point or why you’re asking me the question.

If I was scum, I'd sure as hell want to know whether he was a vig or a SK.

Makes sense. Wouldn't you also want to know if you were town?

I'd just love him to get lynched.

And? Again, it isn’t clear to me what point you’re trying to make.

Knowing his target couldn't hurt either.

Makes sense, but the tradeoff is that as town, we need to be able to test his claim and control his kill or no-kill.

there had been no suggestion that I was scum for my position, though many disagreed with it, apart from a very minor point from Howard. Why would I feel the need to backtrack?

I think it’s more accurate to say that

everyone

who was active in the game at the time disagreed with your position, and I seem to recall that there was also some suggestion that your position was scummy. In addition to Howard’s post to which you refer, Nuwen FoS’ed you for it in her post 392 and Drake’s 399 sounds pretty accusatory as well.

Do you think my voting pattern is more scummy than the other two players?

Yes.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Jaz, what prevents you from voting for the Fish?

I just want to figure out the vote count first. I intend to vote for him once I do that.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Ahh, it looks like there is just one vote on Fishy at the moment, but I see that he is away until Tuesday, so I am going to hold off on my vote until he returns.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

You quoted the part where I pointed out a major flaw in it, and said a townie wouldn't consider "this."

Which... makes it odd that you were considering it.

It was Netlava who said a townie wouldn't consider "this", not Jere who said that.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

I have a little bit of catching up to do in all of my games as I have been crazy busy in real life these past two days, but on the Killer Whale claim, it seems as though the only basis for thinking that it is "very likely false" is based on flavour, and based on the assumption that a vig or SK would be human rather than a denizen of the Antarctic ocean.

I don't think that we can legitimately make those assumptions, and here's why: one of our fellow townies flipped krill. Krill is a crustacean (not a species of penguin) and one of the main staples of the penguin diet in the Antarctic. So, based on flavour, this would mean that all of us penguins are cannibals, eating our fellow townies who are krill.

I sincerely doubt that the flavour is meant to be taken literally, because it would mean that we are cannibalizing fellow townies, but that's the cold, hard fact of the flips we have so far.

In the result, I don't think it's a good idea to use flavour as the sole basis for disbelieving LK's species claim. If the moderator is using an Antarctic food chain type of thing for flavour, the Killer Whale claim makes sense for a vig/sk, but it doesn't make much sense that we have townie krill. Yet, we do.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

I still think there is scum among Fishy, Drake and JereIC. As I said previously, Fishy is most suspicious to me. He went V/LA for a bit, which is the only reason I didn't vote him sooner (see prior posts) but nothing he has posted since his return has changed my mind.

DDD was shot. This is a pretty strong flavour argument- killer whales simply do not shoot people. I suppose it is possible that the mod decided the mafia kill method would be in keeping with the situation, but the vig's would not. However, it seems fairly unlikely.

It seems equally unlikely that townies would not all be penguins, and bizarrely unlikely that some of them would be krill. And yet freeko flipped townie krill - not only un-penguin, but the main staple of Antarctic penguins' diet.

Your insistence that the flavour makes LK's claim "very likely false" is very odd in these circumstances. Same goes for Drake.

Vote: Fishythefish

FoS: Drake

I agree with those who think that we should direct LK to not kill tonight.

Welcome aboard, Tubby.

Also, this thread needs more Netlava and more Looker.


Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

I have not much experience of flavour, but the inconsistency of a killer whale with a gun seems on an altogether different scale than the inconsistency of two species which don't make sense together.

This strikes me as a distinction without a difference. The flavour doesn't make sense regarding co-existing townies as both penguins and krill, so why do you suddenly expect it to make sense regarding a killer whale not having opposable thumbs?

I also don't think L-k's recent conduct (ie. repeated refusal to acknowledge that he will obey the town) is that of a vig, but rather of a SK who is unable to no kill. The people who are urging leaving L-k alive based on being able to lynch him if he disobeys us haven't thought about the numbers. Unless we are exceptionally lucky (ie. lynch scum AND shoot scum), we won't be able to kill L-k tomorrow without handing the game to the scum.

He said quite some time ago that he would not shoot if half the town indicated that preference, and we have done so, have we not?

I would much rather lynch scum than a town aligned vigilante, and I find LK's claim quite believable, and I find his play more consistent with that of a vigilante than a serial killer, so I would prefer not to lynch him unless there is some more compelling evidence that he is a SK above that which you have provided to date. I do not buy your "flavour" argument at all, as your argument is inconsistent with the

known

flavour, of which we can be 100% certain. Therefore, I am more suspicious of you, as it appears that you are scum who wants to lynch a town aligned vigilante.

Jazz, your other reasons for voting me I have responded to (551), and you have not commented.

I have pointed out my reasons for voting for you previously. They have not changed. Your post 551 was inadequate, as it was a selective response to my prior post; it addressed only parts of my post and left out other parts; and much of it (just like your prior post to which I was replying in a prior post) was in the nature of strawman arguments, addressing things that I did not raise in the first place. Your 551 only further solidified my take on you as scum, and did nothing to alleviate it.

I currently am very unclear on why you are voting for me, other than a disagreement over the importance of the flavour argument which is shared by 3 other players (jere, drake, tubby). I think your vote looks bandwagonny, as it is not well backed up, and I am clearly a player whose lynch is a possibility relatively soon.

If that is the case, it appears even more strongly that you are not paying attention. I have previously set out my reasons for voting you, and as I said above, your responses since have done nothing to alleviate my suspicions. Admittedly, I am just as capable of anyone of being wrong, but this is how I feel at present and I'm not going to back off of someone who I think is scummy just because you say so.

This thread needs more Looker, the Greatest Woman to Ever Live...I pray she arrives swiftly...


Regards,
Jazzy-Wazzy

What the ? It is very poor form to change someone's post while pretending to quote it.

@LK - You would sound so much more convincing if you were a babbling idiot, but you aren't. You are a highly-intelligent vigilante mastermind, which leads people to distrust you no matter what you put so obvious before their faces.

Hmm...

I say the fish fries

unvote vote: Fishythef**kinfish

and you shoot drakethefrigginfake

What the ? Now, this is just getting downright weird. Looker, why would you (a) feel the need to bastardize the names of both Fishy and Drake to incorporate swearing; and (b) ask the claimed vig to NK someone when it has already been established that (i) it is better to direct him to hold off on killing during the night in order to better test his claim (which we still need to do despite the fact that I, for one, believe his claim) and to better protect the town; and (ii) he has already said that he will not kill tonight if half the town indicates that preference?

Looks like claiming time, Fish.

I shouldn't be vigged tonight regardless of whether or not Fishy flips scum because I am the

doctor

. My species is

Emperor penguin

. The flavor is that I am the top of the penguin food chain, and can therefore protect all the other penguins.

And this is weird too. Drake, why did you tell Fishy to claim and then immediately claim yourself when you did not even have any votes on your except for Fishy's?

Up to post 602 so far, and this is getting long, but there are some very strange things going on here, it seems. I need to think some more. More later.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

I'm terribly sorry, folks, but real life and unexpected contingencies are absolutely killing me this week. I am doing my best to keep up, but writing substantive posts is a real challenge in light of current circumstances. I hope to be able to be back in full stride this weekend.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Hello, all.

I apologize for my absence. The last week has been hellacious in real life, which made it almost impossible for me to post, as I said on Thursday. I was trying to catch up on all of my games last night, but in the midst of note taking on another game, my computer shut itself down. It appears that one of the internal fans stopped working so when it got to a certain temperature, it shut itself down. I have someone coming over to replace the fan, hopefully later today, but until then I can't use that computer as I don't want to fry it. I won't have access to my game notes until it is fixed, but that should be very soon, and hopefully it won't take me too much longer to catch up the rest of the way and post my thoughts and conclusions, and answers to any outstanding questions.

Again, my apologies, but this could not be helped.

More substantive content coming as soon as I can recover my notes and update them with the latest happenings.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

I still don't have my game notes as my nephew was unable to replace the faulty fan in my main computer yesterday since he didn't have one the right size/shape/config or something so he has to obtain one and come back tomorrow, but I've had time to read back through the thread enough to write this, I believe, without the benefit of my notes.

Despite Fishy’s assertions to the contrary, I have in fact set out my reasons for voting him. I am not satisfied with his responses and I do not have any reason to move my vote as there is nobody else who I find more suspicious than him at present.

As I have already said, there is overlap among Fishy, Drake and Jere on the early DDD wagon and the late freeko wagon. On the early DDD wagon were 1, Drake; 2, freeko; 3, Jere; and Fishy came later at #4. On the late freeko wagon were 4, Fishy; 5 Nuwen; 6, Drake; 7 Jere. I think it most likely that there is scum among the overlap. This is not to say that I think that all of those in the overlap are scum, because I don't think that, but I do think there is scum among them, at least one, possibly two.

Looking at those two wagons, certain patterns emerge, some of which I have previously commented upon. Drake started the DDD wagon and the second player to join it was freeko. Fishy started the freeko wagon and the second player to join it was DDD. After DDD voted freeko (vote 2), Fishy switched to the DDD wagon with his post 212 (vote 4). Fishy stayed there for quite a while but nobody else followed him to vote number 5. Then, once freeko’s wagon got up to 3 votes, Fishy jumped back over with a fourth vote, tipping the balance of the lynch from 4-3 DDD to 4-3 freeko. It looks suspicious to me, the timing of these votes, as does Fishy’s subsequent posts that seem to be trying to brush this all aside essentially say, ‘nothing to see here folks, move along, vote analysis is useless.’

Fishy also said (on Day 2 long after the fact) that “by maybe post 230, it was clear that DDD or freeko was likely to be lynched.” This looks to me like Fishy trying to give himself an out after the vote analysis led to him as a suspect. Back when post 230 was written, there was no looming deadline, there was no reason that other players could not be discussed, there was no reason to drop discussion on other suspicious play by others or to stop scumhunting by post 230. It is also suspicious to me that Fishy chose to cite post 230 as the delineating mark of Day 1, as that post was not one of his own posts, but rather a post by LightKun which only put freeko at 3 votes. Looks like Fishy was trying to ‘blame’ someone else by choosing that post by LightKun as the do-or-die mark, rather than one of his own posts/votes, when it was actually Fishy who tipped the balance, not LightKun, and that wasn’t until Fishy’s post 271.

As I have also already said, I am not voting Fishy only for his voting pattern and his role in steering the wagons, but also for being so quick to accept Light_Kun's Vig claim while simultaneously being so against the idea of having the town direct LK's night kill or no-kill, purporting to prefer to let him choose independently, despite the fact that we need to test Light-Kun's claim since he could just as easily be a SK as a Vig, and then only a couple of weeks later coming suddenly posting that he has "incidentally" come around to the way of thinking that most of us had already expressed re directing LK’s kill or no kill.

I have also indicated that I agree with some of the points that others have raised about Fishy; I'll have to look up the details when I recover my notes, but I think that they include points made by Drake, Jere, and LightKun.

I also contend that Fishy's insistence that the flavour of the game somehow makes LightKun's claim "very likely false" is ridiculous. I note, as well, that Fishy continues to ignore the fact that the flavour of the game makes it 100% clear that those of us who are townie penguins are also cannibals (cannibals!) feeding on fellow townies who are krill. It is one thing to have an idea about how the flavour might play out and to suggest that Light's claim might be false as a result of what you thought, but once it has been established beyond doubt that the flavour is, in fact, somewhat odd and inconsistent (i.e. those of us who are townies are cannibals), it is quite another thing to cling to your idea and to ignore the proven reality that the flavour is unreliable as a means to support your belief.

Regarding the unsatisfactory response by Fishy in his post 551 to which I earlier referred:

Do you really believe a SK would go against the town's orders?

Where do you get from my posts that I think that?

You say that directing L-k's kills tests his claim. This is only true if L-k the SK can be distinguished from L-k the vig by directing his kills. The relevance is that if directing L-k's kills is not helpful in this regard, it is less important.

As I said, Fishy’s response here was both strawmanning and unsatisfactory. The former because instead of addressing what I actually wrote, he asked “Do you really believe a SK would go against the town’s orders?” when that is not what I said at all. The latter, because when I asked Fishy where he got from my post that I thought that which he attributed to me, he completely misrepresented my post. He left out what I actually said in favour of what he wanted others to believe I said. What I actually said in the post to which he purported to reply was that I was also suspicious of him “for being so against the idea of having the town direct LK's night kill

or no-kill

, purporting to prefer to let him choose independently, despite the fact that we need to test Light-Kun's claim since he could just as easily be a SK as a Vig.” Fishy misrepresented my post by ignoring the fact that I specifically said that we needed to direct LK's kill

or no-kill

in order to test him since he could be a SK rather than a Vig. The duo-combo of strawman and misrepresentation only reinforces my suspicion of Fishy.

Fishy goes on to say:

My rationale is all but explicitly stated by the post in question. I wonder whether L-k would be able to no kill as the SK, and then say that I have changed my mind because L-k's motives might differ from ours over whether to shoot.

But it wasn’t stated explicitly at all. Rather, in the "post in question", which I note that Fishy didn't cite, he asked a question “by the way”, and then said that “incidentally” he had come to the conclusion that most of us had come to a long time ago, and that he was against until then. The post was this:

By the way, a question to any experienced players: in a normal game, how common is it for a serial killer to be able to no kill? This is obviously relevant to testing L-k's claim.
Incidentally, on reflection I no longer support letting L-k choose his own kill. The benefits are marginal, and if L-k is the SK, his interests may not align with ours, particularly over the matter of whether or not he should be shooting at all.

That doesn't look or sound to me at all like someone who is 'explicitly stating' their rationale for an about-face. The first sentence is prefaced with "by the way" followed by a question to experienced players. The second sentence is prefaced with "Incidentally" Neither looks to me like explicit rationale for changing his mind all of a sudden and coming around to the view that many, if not most, of us had already expressed. The first is just asking a question of experienced players, which suggests that Fishy has not come to any conclusions at all. As for the second, when one prefaces a statement with “Incidentally,” that means to me (and to most people, I would think) that it is not specifically related to what you said just prior, but rather that it is something that you just want to add to something that had been discussed elsewhere, previously, or nowhere at all. Perhaps that was Fishy just misusing the term, but that’s how it read to me, so I do not know how anyone would be expected to take from that post of Fishy's that that was his rationale for changing his mind all of a sudden. Given the strawman and misrepresentation above, I am more inclined to think that Fishy's further misrepresentation is deliberate rather than accidental, though.

And Fishy, you ignored parts of my post, including specific questions, so it should come as no surprise to you that I found your response unsatisfactory. Here are the parts you left out:

If I was scum, I'd sure as hell want to know whether he was a vig or a SK.

Makes sense. Wouldn't you also want to know if you were town?

I'd just love him to get lynched.

And? Again, it isn’t clear to me what point you’re trying to make.

Knowing his target couldn't hurt either.

Makes sense, but the tradeoff is that as town, we need to be able to test his claim and control his kill or no-kill.

Why did you just ignore those? I didn’t ask the questions for no reason, you know, and I don’t post just to see myself post. It is not at all sufficient to say, after the fact, and after you’ve wholly ignored those portions of my post that “the next 4 are all completely covered by my next point- viz that if there is no reason for scum to take my position, it’s not scummy. You were asking why I brought a few things up- this was the answer to all of them (and that was obvious).” This answer is wholly insufficient. I was not, as you claim, simply asking ‘why you brought a few things up’. I was asking you specific questions and you ignored them. You also ignored (again) the fact that I referred to the necessity of controlling LK’s kill

or no kill

– which you later went on to pretend I hadn’t mentioned.

In the result, I am happy with my vote where it is. Fishy is the player who I find most suspicious at present.

Other stuff: I remain troubled by Drake's unsolicited doctor claim at the time and in the circumstances in which he made it; Jere looks more town to me than I previously thought; I need to re-read Howard as I don't know anything about him and have never played with him before; as for Looker, I've played in a few games with her recently (some are still ongoing so I can't say much more) but I think I'm beginning to get a bit of a read on her and I think it's safe to say that while her play style might be unorthodox, that doesn't necessarily mean she's scum (Doesn't preclude it either, of course, but just saying).

Sorry for the wall-o-text. Just realized on preview how long it is.

More to follow once I catch up on the most recent posts and once I regain access to my game notes to plug in the mos recent stuff for further analysis.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Due to recent developments, i.e., Jazz's vote, I now decree Fishy off the hook. The scum is either Jazz or me...

Huh? What are you talking about? And did you just claim scum?

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Looker, your 677 made no sense, and you were asked repeatedly to explain it, and you haven't. Frankly, the only conclusion I can draw from your recent posts is that you are a mafia goon trying to protect Fishy from being lynched, which leads to the conclusion that Fishy is one of your scum partners with a more powerful role than your own.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

She has repeatedly refused to consider anybody but me, Fishy, or Jere to be scum (except for in her replace-in catch-up post, the reasoning in which she barely ever mentions again), and when she does allow that other players might be acting scummy - as she did above - she uses that as reasoning why her target, Fishy, must still be scum.

You raise a good point here, to the extent that you've made me realize that I am tunneling too much, and I really shouldn't. It's not that I

refuse

to consider anybody but you, Fishy or Jere to be scum, but I do sometimes struggle with tunneling and have to make a conscious effort to avoid it, so I appreciate you raising it.

I think that Fishy's take on Looker makes a lot of sense, and I owe this game a re-read with my non-tunneling goggles on. I will do that this weekend, barring any unforeseen catastrophes, etc.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

In Jazzmyn's first content-ful post (367), she fingers ZEEnon, me, Light-kun, and Howard.
Most of this feels fair to me. There are individual points in the case against me that I don't like, but her point about my 14 joke posts (which I counted upon her notation of them, much to my chagrin) is solid and there's nothing horribly out of line. What I don't like is her treatment of Howard, and what she says about him the player could apply to a smattering of different players in the game at this point. But that's pretty minor, too.

And for the sake of completeness, you left some things out in what you quoted there, which have some bearing on your (mild) criticism. Namely, that I also specifically said: "NOTE: The following is based on Day 1 posts only. I will add more later re: Day 2 posts" and "So, those are my top suspects as of the end of Day 1. I won't post the rest of my analysis of other players, or my town reads, etc., as it wouldn't be in the best interests of the town to do so at this point, but I will catch up on the Day 2 posts asap and post more soon, hopefully tomorrow."

Regarding Light-Kun's vigilante claim, it's plausible and it is certainly testable, so we should be able to ascertain soon enough whether he really is town aligned or not. But I think that we should test LK to ensure that he will follow town consensus, whether that consensus is to take out a particular target tonight or to no-kill tonight, rather than have him act alone.

Nary a comment on L-k's conduct at the beginning of the day - which I still find completely contrary to the idea that L-k is a pro-town vig - coupled with acceptance of the claim.

By the time I got back to the thread, Light-Kun had already claimed, and perhaps I over-analyze things sometimes but what I got from Light-Kun's conduct at the beginning of the day was that he was deliberately trying to garner suspicion and votes for the purposes of claiming. My game notes indicate that after reading Day 1 a few times upon first replacing in, I thought that he might be a town power role angling to look suspicious enough not to get NKed on Night 1 (which I wasn't going to post in the thread, for obvious reasons) so I was viewing his conduct at the beginning of Day 2 in that light, and then when I looked at Day 2, I thought his conduct was consistent with that of a somewhat overzealous player with a power role who was anxious to claim his role. So, since that fit my read on him, and since his claim could be tested, I didn't really feel the need to comment more explicitly on his early Day 2 conduct which had already been discussed at some length by that time.

The rest is just a basic re-hash of the detailed analysis that Nuwen posted of the wagons yesterday, boiling it down to just the vote-switches that, conveniently, finger Fishy, me, and Jere.

Not true. That was actually a

correction

to posts by Nuwen and Fishythefish, not a rehash.

At the end of her 418:

There is overlap among Fishy, Drake and Jere on the early DDD wagon and the late freeko wagon. On the early DDD wagon were 1, Drake; 2, freeko; 3, Jere; and Fishy came later at #4. On the late freeko wagon were 4, Fishy; 5 Nuwen; 6, Drake; 7 Jere. I think it most likely that there is scum among the overlap.

Again, that was actually in response to a specific post in which another player queried whether there any alignment among the players on the early DDD wagon and on the late freeko wagon. It wasn't a rehash, but an answer to a specific point.

She declares her intent to vote for Fishy pending a votecount, then posts to say she realized that Fishy has only one vote, but will wait until he returns from V/LA to do so, which seems overly cautious to me.

Ahem. You complained when Fishy voted for you while you were V/LA when you had no other votes on you at all, so this seems rather contradictory coming from you. (See your posts 463 and 467)

So the accumulated crimes:
1. Tunneling.
2. Tunneling.
3. Tunneling.
(Har.)

Yeah, I know. I've already said that I have to make conscious efforts to avoid tunneling as it's something I struggle with.

I actually might find this sort of replace-in conduct okay if she hadn't essentially been parroting what Nuwen first set forth all day,

Except you are wrong about that, as I have pointed out above.

It's her initial suspicions that make me suspicious: the fact that she never again mentions ZEEnon's many replacements' conduct specifically in context of continuing to be suspicious of that player chain

Except that I have, indeed, mentioned ZEEnon's replacements (hohum, by calling him out to participate, which he never did, and Netlava, by commenting on her lack of posts and her poorly crafted case on Jere) but I do agree that I need to pay more attention to Netlava - and others - since my focus has been too narrow.

and the fact that she seems so ready to accept L-k at his word,

I have always said that his claim should be tested, as have others.

and especially that she felt the need to feebly finger Howard at the beginning of the day.

I have already addressed the parts of my initial post that you left out, and it appears that you deliberately selectively quoted that post in order to try to paint that post in a negative light, when it didn't deserve it.

Jazz is taking her time with that reread, although I can't blame her.

Yeah, it's slow going, but I'm getting there.

In the meantime, I am going to

Unvote

pending the rest of my re-read.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

I've been prodded, and I apologize for needing to be, but real life has been absolutely brutal recently. I got pretty close to finishing rereading last night and brought my game notes to work with me this morning in hopes that I might be able to read the rest over lunch (which turned out to be impossible) and then I accidentally left my notes at work when I came home tonight. So, I don't have them, but I will try to post the crux of my take on each player from memory.

Drake: As I mentioned previously, the timing of his doctor claim is weird (read: unnecessary, unjustified, and therefore suspicious). His "case" on me was contrived and based on selective quoting and outright misrepresentation as I set out in my responding post, to which he never replied. His following of Fishy in jumping on and off the Freeko and DDD wagons on Day 1 still doesn't sit right, and his Day 2 actions in making a case on Fishy, voting Fishy, unvoting Fishy, and then defending Fishy seems very odd as well. It almost looks like he's deliberately 'following' Fishy and then deliberately 'accusing' Fishy for purposes of later 'defending' Fishy. I don't know what to make of this, really, but it sure looks strange.

Howard: his predecessor was useless, but so was mine. He's been reasonably active and his posts generally make sense, but I have to question his recent agreement with Drake about Drake's "case" on me, since it was so obviously contrived and selective. And he seems to be pushing hard for a Looker lynch, while I don't get scum-vibes from Looker, so this makes me wonder about him.

Looker: I've played several games with Looker and in none of them was she scum, despite playing the same way as she is playing here. In one of them, in fact, she was a town power role, and in one of them she was my town lover-partner. While I take the point that Howard made about that being a nice meta for Looker to have if she's scum, I'm just not getting a scum feeling from her here.

Netlava: Her predecessors both look scummy (ZEEnon for freaking out as he did early on Day 1, as previously set out in an earlier post, and hohum for replacing in and then not posting at all). Rereading her posts, she looks scummier to me than she had previously for reasons raised by others, and I just remembered that I played a game with her in which she was scum and I was a town mason, and in that game she played much like she has here. So, that's something I will have to look at later in more detail, but I don't think she's the play of the day on the basis of that.

Light-kun: I believe his claim for the reasons I've already set out. I could be wrong, of course, but his play fits with my take on him since when I replaced in. If I'm right and he's town Vig, great. If I'm wrong and he's a SK, we can deal with that tomorrow, but either way, he's of better use to us alive than dead today.

Tubby: I am not getting very much from his posts as they seem to be minimalist in nature. I've never played with him before so I don't have any first hand meta info on him either. His predecessor, Nuwen, struck me as pretty pro-town, though, so I'm not really seeing much there to be suspicious of yet.

JereIC: Rereading, he looks more town to me than I previously thought (as I mentioned earlier) and I haven't seen anything overtly scummy emanating from him.

Fishy: I've already set out the reasons that I think Fishy is scum previously, and rereading has not really done much to undermine or change that. While I do think that some of Fishy's responses have been valid, and while I have questioned myself about my take on his alignment as a result, it hasn't been enough to sway me from thinking that he is, in fact, scum. He has continued to misrepresent facts in subsequent posts (i.e. when he said that Looker hopped to Jazz then to Fishy after "we" voted for him - I never voted for Looker) (i.e. when he said that Looker "tried to set up a conflict" between Fishy and Jazz - which is silly since I was voting for Fishy at the time, which is about the biggest 'conflict' you could possibly have, and was not in any way 'set up' by Looker). And then there is the sheer disingenuousness of his post to Jere when he names the "possible scumpartners" for Looker and names Jere, me, Tubby, Netlava, DraketheFake, and Howard - i.e., everyone but himself.

Previously, Fishy went after LK, (then backed off), went after Drake (then backed off), went after me (then backed off) and now is going after Looker. All of this seems to have been spawned by Fishy trying to deflect votes to anyone but himself.

In the result, I sure hope I am not wrong about this but everyone is voting at present for either Fishy or Looker (except Netlava, who is voting for Jere and is unlikely to do anything but float along trying to avoid any wagon on anyone at any time) and nobody loves a coward, so

Vote: Fishy

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Amazing. You respond to my last post within 9 minutes, but you couldn't reply to my prior post refuting your nonsensical 'case' against me over the course of several days.

Something tells me that you know something I don't know.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

I've been prodded. Sorry, I didn't notice the start of the new day. I've read through the new posts, but I don't have time to do any lengthy analysis of the walls of text posts at the moment.

I'm a bit surprised that Looker was NKed and that DraketheFake is still alive. It could be that Drake is a doctor as he claims and that the scum left him alive for purposes of making him look scummier; it could also be that he is scum who has fake claimed and killed Looker to introduce a heaping helping of WIFOM; but there's not much point in speculating on WIFOM and the other possibilities that may arise from it.

Someone commented on me doing rereads; yeah, I do a lot of re-reading. It's the most valuable tool I have to help me analyze players' posts and try to look for clues that I might have missed before, especially when it seems there isn't much to go on, and especially after a few flips, when things might look different in retrospect. So, yeah, I'm going to have to do yet another re-read with the latest information in mind.

I agree with the species claim suggestion, and I have no objection to going first, although revealing my species will also reveal my role, so the suggestion that we species claim first and role claim later will be rendered moot in my case. I'm an Adelie penguin.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Oh, sorry about that.

I'll pick Netlava.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Hello, all

My apologies for my absence. I had work matters that rendered me V/LA until Wednesday night, and then just when I thought that I would be able to get caught up, a medical emergency struck and my daughter had to have emergency surgery on Thursday morning, so I have been completely without access since then as a result. She is now recuperating at home, but she is going to require additional surgery in the next 2-3 weeks.

As a result, I am going to have to ask to be replaced rather than having to go V/LA again on short notice, and further disrupting the flow of the game.

Again, my sincere apologies. I hope to play with all of you again some time in the near future.

Regards,
Jazz

I am really sorry to here that! Real life is more important, so no need to apologize. Best of luck towards your daughter!

Replacing Jazzmyn.