Mini 1258: Marionette Mafia (Over)

[DeltaWave]

/CONFIRM

Hi everyone. I didn't realize the game started. Will read up.

[DeltaWave]

Okay, sorry about that. I somehow missed the start of the game, but don't worry, I've never flaked out and I'm not about to do so now.

To answer the various questions posed:

1) What timezone are you in? - EST
2) What role do you enjoy playing as? - Town Roleblocker by far. My gut reactions tend to be really accurate.
3) Does anybody have any work/school conditions that can hinder posting at times? - My school schedule makes Tuesdays and Wednesdays tight for me. You might not see me on those days past 3pm.
4) What are your opinions on Policy Lynch? - I've had it work spectacularly well in a game I played off-site. I firmly believe in "lynch all liars."
5) Has the game so far produced any helpful information in your mind? - Yes; explained below.

My observations thus far:

I want charter to explain why he thinks there's a 50% chance of shinki being scum, because that's completely out of nowhere. Charter you are the most suspicious right now because of that.

I like RedPanda's scumhunting style.

[DeltaWave]

Charter, your reasoning for suspecting Shinki is valid. My FOS on you has been removed temporarily, although I disagree with the idea that there's a "50% chance" that she's scum.

Charter, do you think that by repeatedly posting that she doesn't find anyone suspicious yet, Shinki is scummier than those that have been more or less lurking through rvs (painkiller, delta etc..)?

I wasn't "lurking through rvs", I was unaware that the game even started. The moment that I realized the game began, I made my first declaring my presence and affirming that I would go back and read the thread.

I like RedPanda's scumhunting style.

...I want you to elaborate on this one. Just that this seems rather random.

RedPanda was obviously reaction-testing with the "you don't like to be special?" line of questioning. I like it because pressure tends to bring out people's true colors.

It's all about psychology. It's like what they do in police interrogations; they sit the suspect down in a chair, and walk in with a manilla folder that's labelled "(Suspect Name's) Criminal Activities" and slam it down on the table right in front of the suspect. The folder is full of random print-outs, but the suspect knows that he's guilty so he exhibits an "OMG I'M CAUGHT" reaction caused by his paranoia and the knowledge of his own guilt.

Redtail was obviously startled by this in Post #38. I'll pick apart the post:

Redtail said: "Even if that were true, why is that a reason for a vote? You think I'm scum based on the fact that I like playing VT?"

The part that really stands out to me is when Redtail says "Even if that were true." I would expect that an innocent reaction would simply assert the truth of the matter and leave it at that. But saying "even if that were true" is dodging the matter, being squirmy instead of confronting it head on. Especially in a matter as trivial as liking to play VT. Townies don't start talking in those terms until the stakes are higher, but to be slippery in RVS and especially when confronted with such an inconsequential question is another thing.

I've seen this kind of behavior IRL as well. Ever catch someone in a lie, and you ask them some question and they start dodging around saying "even if what you're saying is correct, blah blah blah." Those who tell the truth will confront directly, while those who are lying will try to step lightly.

For bonus scumpoints, redtail never actually denies being scum. Redtail is more interested in

whether or not he is perceived to be scum

rather than declaring his innocence. This reflects an "OMG you're on to me" mentality. Ever call someone out as guilty of some bad act, and instead of saying "that never happened!" they say "who told you that?" This is that kind of situation. They're more interested in how they got caught rather than saying "I didn't do it."

tl;dr - innocent people don't need to muddy the waters or be evasive

This is why reaction testing (well, anything that generates substantial pressure really) is the best scumhunting method EVAR.

At this point I'm very comfortable with voting for redtail.

VOTE: Redtail

[DeltaWave]

Hey dank, nice of you to come to the rescue of redtail. Chainsaw defense perhaps?

I wasn't "lurking through rvs", I was unaware that the game even started. The moment that I realized the game began, I made my first declaring my presence and affirming that I would go back and read the thread.

I know its far too early to say someone is lurking; I was looking for reactions, and I'm glad you quickly jumped in to defend yourself. You shot down the fact that you hadn't contributed yet, and quickly build a new case on redtail to focus the attention elsewhere.

Your logic is impeccable. I'm scum if I'm lurking, but if I post a case, I'm still scum.

I've noticed that only newbie townies and scum create Catch 22 situations like this in order to prove their case. Which one are you?

Speaking of which, your whole case on redtail is the fact that he was surprised that he wasn't believed when he said VT was his favorite role. You try to build this into a full case, which I find pretty laughable. "Even if that were true" is in response to the accusation of "not being special." Sounds like a guy sarcastically defending a silly personal attack? You say redtail never denies being scum, so he must be scum. Do you want us to post that we're all not scum on P1? No one in the game has said, "I'm not scum". Are they all scum too?

Oh come on. Now you are deliberately misinterpreting my argument. I never said that everyone who doesn't claim town is scum. I'm saying under the circumstances, it was fishy that he was more interested in how he got caught than maintaining his innocence.

I love post 72. It's someone already rattled by the slightest pressure of my suggesting that they're lurking being very defensive, and bullshitting a case together to divert attention elsewhere. Scummiest post i've seen, thus

unvote, vote: DeltaWave

You said that I was lurking RVS, which is untrue. When I pointed out your falsehood, you decided to vote me. Hmm, why so self-pres, dank?

Also, weird compliment of RedPanda's scumhunting, and then adding your vote to the guy he's voting.

What makes it weird?

Additionally, in the very post that you build your case from,

He asks

RedPanda

to explain his vote, which turns out to basically be your whole attempt at a case. RedPanda never answered this, but you answered it for him, and made your case from it. I find that interesting.

It should have been obvious what RedPanda was doing. Do you seriously believe that Panda cared whether VT was special or not? Come on, be real.

Charter: why didn't you present that case against me in your 1st post? Everything that you used in the case already existed, so the suspicion must have been there. Why wait?

Charter's assertion that sh was "50% scum" stood out to me, but when he explained it, I understood where he was coming from. At that point, I went back and analyzed your post in detail.

[DeltaWave]

Wow the redtail defender team is out in force today. None of you posted walls like these until right now; looks like I hit a nerve on the scumteam! One vote sends the whole scumteam into full on damage control. Nice.

Town, seriously, vote redtail. Then when redtail flips scum, go after Team Redtail and we win, game over.

[DeltaWave]

^You are ridiculously naive, and/or scum.
Will read stuff closely later.

You don't see anything suspicious about redtail, dank and nabnab teaming up like this? How often do townies buddy up so fast?

I'm not even kidding. Mark my words; redtail will flip scum. My argument is airtight. Dank and nab had to misrepresent my argument to defend their scumbuddy. Anyone who gives my argument an honest consideration can see that. We can wrap this game up in three nights if we lynch redtail, then dank, then nabnab. Game over, perfect town win.

[DeltaWave]

How often do scum actively defend their scumbuddies?
(hint: 1 in 100 times)

This is leading you straight down the path of WIFOM.

"Scum rarely defend their scumbuddies!"
"Scum know that scum rarely defend their scumbuddies, so this is perfect!"
"Scum know that people know that scum know..."

Just look at their posts for what they are. Do you think they offered up a fair characterization of my posts, or no? Do you think it's odd that they would jump in so quickly to another's defense? Those are the questions you should be asking.

[DeltaWave]

Your logic is impeccable. I'm scum if I'm lurking, but if I post a case, I'm still scum.

Where are you getting this? I made the lurking statement to get reactions from people, I just said that its too soon in the game to find someone lurking. You're really panicking aren't you?

You wish I was panicking. The only people you've managed to convince are those with a vested interest in defending redtail.

I decided to vote you for your bullshit case, which you don't even defend here because its so bad.

The rest of the redpanda distancing isn't worthy of a response. Feel good about this vote. Delta's panicking in the posts that follow are too good.

It's interesting how you get hyper-aggressive when redtail is under suspicion. The big mistake you made was jumping so quick to redtail's defense. If you waited a little while, it wouldn't have looked so suspicious!

[DeltaWave]

Your arguments against me suck. I'll address them more when i get home, unless scum has succeeded in their quicklynch.

[DeltaWave]

I went back and found that I had actually addressed most of the arguments against my post, although redtail found the answers inadequate for obvious reasons.

If anyone has any specific criticisms of my argument, I'd be glad to address them. Reading the thread over, it seems that the arguments against me have very little to do with my argument, but rather other factors like timing. I'll run through them:

(1)

Dank claimed that I create this case just to divert attention away from myself

(Post 73) - Apparently Dank thinks that I'm coming up with this because dank accused me of being a lurker. Wrong for two reasons. One, I was on this train of thought even before dank accused me of being a lurker. I indicated my general agreement with RedPanda in Post 51 - Dank didn't accuse me of being a lurker until Post 68. My argument actually started

before

I was called a lurker, not after. The timeline doesn't match up one bit.

Second reason: Even dank admitted in Post 68 "By now, we have pages of information though." I don't see how my analysis is scummy at that point because I had plenty to go on.

(2)

Dank calling me a lurker somehow elicited a scummy reaction from me

(Post 73) - Nope. Dank said that I was lurking RVS. I wasn't aware the game actually started. So I said:

"I wasn't "lurking through rvs", I was unaware that the game even started. The moment that I realized the game began, I made my first declaring my presence and affirming that I would go back and read the thread."

How is that scummy? It's a simple statement of fact.

(3)

My case is "Bullshit"

(Post 73) - Dank claims that my post is bullshit despite not actually criticizing the argument. Dank will talk about everything but the substance of my argument, why is that?

(4)

My compliment of RedPanda's scumhunting is "weird"

(Post 73) - Once again, dank is contradictory.

I explained this; I stated that I liked reaction testing. (Post 72)
Dank calls that weird... (Post 73)
But in that same post, says "I was looking for reactions" (Post 73)

So let me get this right. Dank employs reaction testing as a scumhunting tool. As does RedPanda. But when I say that I like reaction testing, Dank calls that weird. Once again, dank's argument is contradictory.

(5)

Redtail's Post 74

- This can go either way. Redtail

admits that he's more interested in how he was suspected

, which is the core of my argument. However he claims it's to build a better defense. Interesting response, but he did confirm the core of my argument.

(6)

NabNab's Post 78

- All he says is that my argument is "reaching" and, apparently, reacting negatively to someone's opinion penalizes the town for participating. lol. I'm sure you can see the problems with that. We should never criticize anyone lest we penalize them from responding blah blah blah

(7)

Charter's Post 90

- He thinks I'm "defensive" for answering a question. this is the question I quoted in italics earlier.

I challenge you, can anyone point out what was defensive about my response?

Anyway that looks like all of it. I pretty much decimated the arguments against me. Hopefully those of you who are town will see what I mean.

[DeltaWave]

Post 79

Wow the redtail defender team is out in force today. None of you posted walls like these until right now; looks like I hit a nerve on the scumteam! One vote sends the whole scumteam into full on damage control. Nice.

Town, seriously, vote redtail. Then when redtail flips scum, go after Team Redtail and we win, game over.

Post 81

You don't see anything suspicious about redtail, dank and nabnab teaming up like this? How often do townies buddy up so fast?

I'm not even kidding. Mark my words; redtail will flip scum. My argument is airtight. Dank and nab had to misrepresent my argument to defend their scumbuddy. Anyone who gives my argument an honest consideration can see that. We can wrap this game up in three nights if we lynch redtail, then dank, then nabnab. Game over, perfect town win.

And you want me to believe you're town?

Your case was total bullshit. You think because redtail hesitated at agreeing that he isn't "special", he's clearly scum. He also didn't say he wasn't scum, which of course you should do if you're ever accused. You have yet to say you're not scum yourself, so you must be scum too. Using that as a reason was just laughable.

There's a difference between gauging a reaction from someone answering a silly irrelevant question, and someone reacting to a case on them with actual content. The above posts show your reaction, which is pure and simple panic from caught scum. If you want to gauge reaction, tell me why the above posts are a town reaction to being accused.

I don't want anyone to hammer until we hear from everyone who hasn't weighed in yet. That includes you Shinki. I don't like that you stuck your vote on the major bandwagon and still have yet to contribute anything.

Hey, you said it yourself - you don't like how Shinki stuck her vote onto the bandwagon without contributing. The problem is, enough people are mindlessly jumping on my bandwagon to the point where they can't

all

be scum. That means that townies are just playing follow the leader. Even if I'm wrong and you aren't scum dank, it's not a good sign for the town if townies are willing to line up and vote as soon as a popular bandwagon comes along. What I'm saying is that people need to think for themselves before jumping on.

[DeltaWave]

Delta, Dank's comment wasn't a question directed towards you. But you felt the need to defend against the comment. That's scummy. Dank's comment was not even worthy acknowledging, but it looks very suspicious that you deny lurking, and then proceed to make a bad case against the person who said you were lurking. Whether you were lurking or not is completely irrelevant. You got worked up over what you perceived to be a threat, but was really nothing at all.

Fact Check: I did not make a case against dank originally. My case was solely about Redtail and I started to see a connection between dank and redtail when he jumped to her defense.

Additionally: I corrected a simple mistake of fact. Like I said, what is scummy about that? Where is the evidence that I got "worked up"?

[DeltaWave]

Hey, you said it yourself - you don't like how Shinki stuck her vote onto the bandwagon without contributing. The problem is, enough people are mindlessly jumping on my bandwagon to the point where they can't all be scum. That means that townies are just playing follow the leader. Even if I'm wrong and you aren't scum dank, it's not a good sign for the town if townies are willing to line up and vote as soon as a popular bandwagon comes along. What I'm saying is that people need to think for themselves before jumping on.

You avoided everything I said prior to the last sentence of my post why?

You keep making useless, conclusory statements. Saying my response was "pure panic", although I've asked

several times

for you to show exactly what part of my argument indicated that. Simply calling my argument bullshit doesn't work. Respond to specific things I said or don't respond at all. Repeating the word "bullshit" in each post you make doesn't add up to a legitimate argument.

I've also explained everything else before.

You criticize suspecting someone for an irrelevant question; well, isn't that what RVS/RQS is for? To generate pressure and see what happens? I can't believe you'd ignore this.

As for the rest, I've covered it elsewhere.

[DeltaWave]

@Delta: Maybe you see every case against you as laughably bad because you insist on making strawmen of all of them. I have to say this may be the first time I've seen a strawman so boldly executed that it involves both "lol," AND "blah blah blah." Even the parts that aren't completely dismissive don't reflect what I said at all.

What do you think is an unfair characterization of your argument? Point it out, don't just assert it.

Firstly, your argument

is

reaching. It depends on a superficial connection between redtail's behavior and your idea of how liars act. Redtail said "Even if that were true," and under certain circumstances, a liar might say the same thing. The problem is that the circumstances under which redtail said it were completely different than those for your hypothetical liar. Redtail wasn't being accused of anything other than a lack of desire to be special, so there was no accusation to be evasive of, no accusation to deny. Without this accusation, the logical chain linking "redtail" to "liar" is missing an important link. Soldiering on with the case despite this logical lapse is known, among other things, as reaching because it ignores inconvenient facts in a desperate grab for the desired conclusion. I almost would have chocked this one up to a mistake in reading the game, an accidental insertion of an accusation that never really happened, but your stubborn refusal to reevaluate your position has led me to believe that you are truly committed to this deception.

Wow, what a shock -- I'm trying to match up people's responses to how I think liars act! How controversial in a game of Mafia.

I know that redtail wasn't accused of anything except an irrelevant inquiry regarding their favorite role. Aren't you aware that RVS/RQS is designed to elicit pressure responses from people, even if the subject matter is irrelevant? The question doesnt have to be relevant for the response to be relevant.

Secondly, my issue isn't with "reacting negatively to someone's opinion," it's with reacting negatively to a player who confronts their accuser on the level of argument and rebuttal (as opposed to that of OMGUS and flat denials). Explaining or defending oneself when questioned is

not

inherently scummy behavior, and woe betide the town that becomes convinced it is.

Are you reading the same game I am? Redtail didn't confront me until after dank and you did. I dealt with redtail's defenders before I dealt with redtail. What I find scummy about the response was that my accusation on redtail generated a disproportionately aggressive response from you and dank. Everyone throws accusations around, but as soon as redtail gets accused, two people jump to her defense

immediately

. You have to admit that this is suspicious. It's like I hit the Scum Panic Button or something by voting for redtail.

Nab if you are indeed town then you can appreciate how suspicious that looks to a third party.

Plus, you are misrepresenting my argument. I never said that the simple act of explaining one's self is scummy. I gave many, many more reasons for it and you are dismissing them all.

-----

Long story short, it looks like I'm no longer at L-1 but if getting lynched is what it takes for you people to take my arguments seriously then so be it. I win with the town whether I'm alive or dead so whatever. Because if you do decide to lynch me, the first thing you'll do after you see my flip is to say "holy shit, we just lynched a townie, why did we do that?" then you'll go back and look at my posts in a new light.

This idea that I made up the argument against redtail is BS. Dank wants to say that it's because he called me a lurker and I wanted to distract from that, but I was breadcrumbing this before he even accused me of that. I had no pressure at all, and the fact that shinki wasn't lynched for not suspecting anyone proves that I

could

have just flown under the radar. It wouldn't make sense for scum to do what I did, even if scum wanted to play off of WIFOM. I'm not going to win any townpoints by coming out of the gate swinging, but that's what I did because my win condition requires me to eliminate scum. So I'm going to make arguments, and you might not like them, and maybe you're scum for that or maybe you're not - but the point is, I'm going to fulfil my wincon no matter what. If I think I've got scum, I'm going to present my argument and push for it.

Anyway, I'm a reasonable person and I will admit that I may have gotten tunnelvision on redtail there. I might have gotten swept up in the fighting. I am interested in hearing more about this vig claim. I still maintain my suspicions on redtail but I want to avoid getting tunnelled. (I've gotten tunnel vision in other games before and it ended up screwing me up.)

[DeltaWave]

I will admit that there's a certain weakness to my argument. I'm not so completely tunnelled that I can't objectively assess my own argument. The weakness is that we all know what redtail did objectively, but there is dispute as to what it means. I claim that it's a scumtell, redtail claims it was just a defense to an absurd question. I would love to respond to your arguments in Post 74 redtail, but I can't confirm what you really think. All I can say is, "to my knowledge, your reaction was very similar to the reaction of a guilty person."

It seems that a majority of people don't agree. I'm sure that there are scum on my wagon though. Maybe it's dank, and maybe nab and redtail are innocent. Hell if I know. But it looks like my argument was generally not adopted so that's strong evidence that perhaps my argument is just too personal to my own roster of scumtells that others don't find it convincing. This means that I have to consider the possibility that I'm incorrect, which I'm doing right now. You

all

can't be scum and I'm not going to be arrogant enough to assume that you're all idiots.

I still have a FOS on you redtail, but consider my argument withdrawn... for now. I'm not backing down entirely but clearly the consensus is that it's not correct and there's nothing more I can say to argue for it. I've already given my argument, it's been rejected, and I refuse to put myself in a situation where I tunnel so hard on one player that I miss everything else. I've been in that situation before and it's not fun. If you are scum redtail, it will come out eventually and I will be the first to point it out, so don't think you are off the hook with me by any means.

UNVOTE: Redtail

[DeltaWave]

It's not in the town's best interest to question parama or his claim right now. The appropriate way to deal with it is probably to reserve all your thoughts on the situation until tomorrow. Everyone please do the same.

Is this a joke?

[DeltaWave]

This is my list of things I find suspect right now. I'm not including Redtail or dank on this list right now because I'm looking to avoid tunneling. Their absence from this list doesn't mean I'm not watching them closely.

(1) Para's vig claim. There is no town reason to claim vig on D1. This is especially odd because para is not under any pressure to roleclaim.
(2) Hermano's bizarre request that we do not investigate the aforementioned vig claim. The town needs more information, not less.
(3) Shinki's unexplained vote on my bandwagon. For the record, I am suspicious of

all

bandwagon votes that amount to "oh look a bandwagon, imma jump on" without much reasoning. I put this one at the end because it's the one I am the least suspicious of.

[DeltaWave]

You idiots think I'm seriously claiming vig?

Everyone who even THOUGHT for a second that I was telling the truth needs to replace out and go play a newbie game instead. Thanks in advance.

I'll read stuff later, but this is just TOO silly.

Screwing around is not earning you townpoints here.

[DeltaWave]

Did my claim read as serious to you?
Who are you to accuse me, scum?

You sound like you don't give a shit about the game, or you're scum, or both. Either way I'd be happy seeing you lynched.

[DeltaWave]

Parama, quit screwing around. If you continue to screw around then I will vote you for purely policy reasons. I can't tell if you are scum looking to throw up a smokescreen or if you are town having some kind of epileptic fit. Either way you need to cut the crap.

My suspect list is pretty much unchanged. I'm not sure if dank is just opportunistic scum or an overeager townie but I'm leaning toward #1. I'm pretty sure RedPanda is town.

[DeltaWave]

Why aren't you voting me if i'm scum?

'

I said that I wasn't sure whether you were scum or an overeager townie. The jury is still out on that for me. I am watching you very closely right now.

I'm not sure if dank is just opportunistic scum or an overeager townie but I'm leaning toward #1. I'm pretty sure RedPanda is town.

What do you mean by opportunistic here?

I'm referring to dank's reasons for initially suspecting me. Dank stated early on that I was lurking RVS. When I corrected this factual error (by stating that I was unaware the game started), he took that as being "defensive" and since then has latched onto me, claiming he's caught scum. That's not the only reason he cited, but that's what got the ball rolling and ever since then he's been tunneling on me pretty intensely. It's absurd to say that my response was defensive; so the only options in my head are that he's scum who thought he found a way to start a bandwagon on a townie, or he's an overeager townie who is looking too hard for scumtells and finding them everywhere he looks. I'm leaning toward #1 because I asked him to be more specific about which part of my statement was defensive, but he hasn't done so.

There's an old saying, if you look for something hard enough you will find it. You can decide to take any response as "defensive" if you want to see it that way, even if it's just pointing out a simple fact.

On a possibly related note: what do you think of HermanoBro?

Very suspicious. His "wait and see" approach was highly suspect, and it looked like he was protecting Parama because I can't see any reason for town to claim vig on D1... then he turns around and suspects Parama as soon as Parama started his freakout. It sounds to me like Hermano could be scum who tried to protect his buddy Parama initially, but then bussed him as soon as he realized that Parama was acting like a psycho and would probably end up getting policy lynched.

I'm against lynching Parama for policy reasons, if only because I believe there is actually scummy behavior going on (DeltaWave and Hermano).

If Parama will clean up his act then that's one thing. But if Parama continues the way he's posting then he should be lynched. If you really dont care about the game Parama just replace out.

[DeltaWave]

Of course you're not sure, but aren't I your #1 suspect (and have been for pages now)? You could vote me to put some pressure on me, or at least get the attention going my way, but you haven't used your vote since you gave up on your useless redtail case. What exactly are you waiting for to cast that vote of yours?

What makes you think that you are (or were) my #1 suspect? In my last post I was suspicious of Parama, Hermano and Shinki.

Whatever, I'll admit that I might have been wrong about redtail. Like I said before, nobody saw what I thought I saw and you all can't be scum, so maybe I was wrong. I've taken a break from tunneling redtail to look at other people.

[DeltaWave]

YOU'RE NOTICING MY POSTS NOW

WHY SHOULD I STOP?

If you don't care about the game then get out of here. Whether that's you replacing out you being lynched, either works for me. Don't waste everyone's time.

VOTE: Parama

[DeltaWave]

Similarly, I've always thought that lynching players just to be rid of them is terribly anti-town play, but this is what Delta has just proposed.

If a player refuses to treat the game seriously, rages at everyone, posts in all caps all the time and thinks it's a good idea to make claims as a joke, then they are putting up a major smokescreen that could be just as easily concealing scum as it is town. There's no way to get a good read on someone if they're acting in an absolutely insane way. This makes Parama too much of a wildcard. If he continues to act this way,

there is no realistic way to determine his guilt or innocence

aside from a cop investigation.

It's simple. If Parama is town but acting like a psycho for his own amusement, then he can only be a hinder to scumhunting and not a help. If Parama is scum trying to conceal his allegiance by acting bizarrely, then that's a good lynch. He's so far anti-town that he hurts us no matter what his flip is -- but of course, Parama can completely change that if he wants to.

But like I said, if Parama starts taking the game seriously I will withdraw my vote. All he needs to do is shape up. This matter is entirely in Parama's hands: I'm not going to let a player act erratically then decide I he is immune to lynching on account of his crazy behavior.

[DeltaWave]

Parama, I still don't like your attitude but you have ceased your anti-town behavior, so...

UNVOTE: Parama

[DeltaWave]

I agree with Dank's latest post. I also feel that Hermano is changing his stance regarding parama's actions. At first it was 'don't discuss his claim'. Then he voted Parama for faking the claim. Now he's saying he just voted Parama to pressure him.

This is the perfect summary as to why Hermano is scummy. I have no problem whatsoever with opinion change, as long as it's supported by consistent and rational reasons. In fact, I think the ability to admit that one line of reasoning was incorrect is an important for a good player. For example I will freely admit that my case against redtail wasn't the best, and I pulled my vote accordingly because I'm looking for scum and if my initial reasons were wrong then continuing to vote for that person is not beneficial to the town. However, when someone flip-flops between contradictory positions with no adequate reasoning, I'm suspicious. I still have my eye on redtail and dank but Hermano has eclipsed them in scumminess.

VOTE: Hermano

[DeltaWave]

How did he flip flop between contradictory positions with no adequate reasoning? If you're going to jump on the bandwagon, i'd like you to explain this in depth.

It's contradictory to divert attention away from the claim, then direct a vote based on the claim. Also, the idea of generating pressure conflicts with the first reason to vote.

Now, if Hermano had adequate justification for changing his opinion, then I wouldn't have seen it as a problem. Opinions change and people shouldn't be locked into the very first thing they say or do, but to turn around and act in a fashion completely incongruent with their stated opinion is suspect.

I voted for Parama because of his anti-town behavior, but he stopped acting that way so I rescinded my vote. Much of the push against Parama was for the same reason. I think that Hermano tried to capitalize on that push and got left holding the bag when those with legitimate reasons to vote Parama left the bandwagon because parama was cooperating. Now it's all about damage control.

[DeltaWave]

Deltawave is scum because of his crappy case, his scummy reaction, and his voting pattern. Why aren't you ignoring and crying about parama, redtail, charter and others who share my opinion?

You are getting some serious tunnel vision here. This all started when you claimed I was scummy for pointing out that I was wasn't lurking RVS (as you had claimed) because I was unaware the game had started. Ever since then you have let confirmation bias take over and you see everything I do as scummy. You will find a way to make everything I do sound bad, so I suggest that if you are town you should step back and objectively re-assess your case. You are so deep in confirmation bias that you can't see a foot in front of you. If you are scum, then you deserve a congratulations, because you have assembled quite a fan club.

I've discussed my allegedly "scummy" reaction before, but I have admitted and I am admitting right now that perhaps my case on redtail wasn't the strongest. I thought I saw something which may not have been there, and I probably got a little too excited when I thought that I found a scumtell. I also admit that I was a bit aggressive in defending my argument, because I truly believed I hit the jackpot and revealed scum early on in the game. If you want to lynch me for that, whatever man. We all know town never gets tunnel vision and makes a bad argument, right? You need to step back and look at what you are arguing. That's what I did.

Anyway, I don't get your complaints with my voting pattern. Yeah I voted for redtail, but I rescinded that vote when I reassessed my argument. My vote on Parama was just to get him to quit acting erratically, which he did. My vote right now on Hermano is legit and if this bandwagon continues to its logical conclusion, I think you'll find that my reasons for voting him are justified. I'm pretty confident that he'll flip scum (as confident as I can be on D1.)

[DeltaWave]

Ok, Hermano's response to Parama's questions has left a good impression on me. He has laid out an internally consistent perspective on scumhunting that, what's more, matches up with his actions so far this game.

Are there any key points he made that have convinced you of this? Because I came to a different conclusion so I want your take on it.

[DeltaWave]

@Delta: I'm mainly looking at the perspective of play he lays out in his answers to 2 and 3. It de-emphasizes the role of discussion and, even more, the role of argument in townie play. To Hermano, townies are individual agents who are expected to gather information and form convictions independent of the rest of the town. They should share their thoughts if asked, but they shouldn't volunteer analysis apropos of nothing. This is meant to reduce knowledge scum have of the townie thought process and their influence in same. Moving to his response in 8, this de-emphasis on discussion comes along with a de-emphasis on traditional, discussion-based scumtells. The implication of this is that Hermano has far less faith in D1 lynches and doesn't see the point in D1 analysis. Not only is this philosophy of play internally consistent, it matches up with aspects of Hermano's play in the early game (where I felt his play was scummiest). This applies especially to his decision not to comment on your wagon, despite asking others to do so (this is where the categorical imperative starts to rear its head), and his original position that the best approach to Parama's claim was to wait until the night brought more solid information.

That actually makes sense. Thanks for explaining.

UNVOTE: Hermano

while I figure this out...

[DeltaWave]

Wow nice misrep vijay. What's your angle here?

Ah fuck. I had a post which took ages on my phone to make and I lost it. Anyway, here is what it.boils down to:

Initially, Delta makes a case based on redtails jumpy response to redpanda's questions regarding VT as a favourite role. Personally, I posted that I also found redtails response jumpy and voted for him(her?). However, Delta reached and tried to make an entire case based on that. When this was pointed out to him by dank and NabNab, he quickly accuses them of being redtails scumbuddies and says that "(his) case is airtight". Subsequently, a wagon forms on him because of this line of reasoning.

After Delta gets put at L-1 by Shinki, his "airtight" case seems to have lost steam and developed some holes. Holes that were pointed out by dank, nab and redtail, but delta refused to acknowledge until he was brought to the brink of being lynched. He quickly jumps on Parama's fake-jokeclaim and votes for him under the pretence that non-serious players should be lynched. Once again, I did the same thing, so this probably isn't the best part of the case. However, when he retracts his vote, he quickly places it on the next wagon to materialize, which is Hermano.

I'll be honest, I'm not exactly the most experienced player, and under Parama's definition, I am a noob. However, Delta's play stinks of scum who frantically reacted to an almost Lynch by retracting a case he considered to be "airtight" and quickly hopping onto the next available wagon.

@charter: I know you have Delta as a townread but you do realise he unvoted Hermano, right?

VOTE: Deltawave

Aside from this, I have suspicions on Hermano and Shinki. I had the reasons in the post I lost. I'll try to type it up again in a bit.

(1) Yeah, I went back on my argument when I saw that there wasn't much to it. You want to see that as scummy, fine, but good town players don't stick religiously to their first argument if they see that it's flawed. I like your logic here, it's scummy that I stuck to my argument but also scummy that I rescinded it when I saw that it was incorrect. (At least, that's the impression I'm getting from your post.)

(2) Fact check: I did not "quickly jump" on Parama's claim. I told Parama specifically to cut out the anti-town behavior or I would vote for him. He responded with another all-caps, irrelevant post. So I voted for him. And I pulled the vote when he ceased being anti-town. This is entirely incongruent with your description of my actions. (Link)

(3) Fact check: I did not "quickly place" my next vote on the soonest wagon. Several pages of discussion went by before I did.

(4) You admit that you voted for the same people after I voted for them. Yet you are going to criticize me for making those votes. Seriously, what universe are you living in, that this reasoning makes sense?

Your reasons here are completely incoherent. So what, your theory is that I jumped on Parama because I'm scum and wanted to lynch him? HERP DERP

I voted him because he was acting crazy and I removed his vote when he stopped.

YEAH SOUNDS LIKE I'M REALLY PUSHING FOR A MISLYNCH THERE. And what next, you think I jumped on Hermano for the same reason, as scum to push a mislynch? Yeah, make a lot of sense that I would pull my vote after hearing an adequate defense of his actions. YOUR THEORY IS ILLOGICAL.

What is your angle here vijay? You say: "Delta's play stinks of scum who frantically reacted to an almost Lynch by retracting a case he considered to be "airtight" and quickly hopping onto the next available wagon." NOPE. If I was going to do that, then I wouldn't have TOLD PARAMA I WOULD REMOVE THE VOTE IF HE STARTED PARTICIPATING... and then REMOVE THE VOTE AS PER MY EARLIER STATEMENT. What you're saying makes no sense.

Vijay, I'm going to ISO your posts because I have a hard time believing that a townie could make this kind of case. Your argument boils down to, "He voted for everyone I did, so he must be scum!" WTF, seriously. Do you even know how scummy this looks? Not to mention all your factual errors.

[DeltaWave]

Vijay, in reading your post I get the impression that you have good intentions but you are simply incorrect.

Um let me correct that Delta. First of all, I voted for redtail before you did. You had the same line of reasoning I did yet tried to extend it as far as a full case meriting a lynch. That was scummy.

Unless you are voting just to put pressure on someone, whenever you vote for someone, you are saying that they deserve a lynch.

Next, you rescinded your airtight case ONLY when placed at L-1, when the points that invalidated the case were raised almost directly after your post in the first place. That is scummy.

No, that's not scummy. It got to the point where even if all the scum were on my bandwagon, town had to be also and if my argument was that bad then yeah I had to rescind it.

Thirdly, I conceded that you voting for Parama was not a strong point in my case against you. As a matter of fact, I can safely ignore that part. However, the vibe I got from your posts still seems to be a scummy one, because of the first two points. Along with that, I didn't vote for HermanoBro, so point 4 only really applies to Parama. Point 1 I have refuted above, point 2 I have conceded. Now tell me when you say "lots of discussion", you are obviously referring to you parrotting charter and dank in post 274 (iso #25) which coincidentally comes after post 242 (iso #24) where you unvoted parama am I right?

Your argument is weak because it doesn't make sense. There's no coherent argument here. However, your argument style indicates to me that you are probably town and you think you've got some things, so you want to jump on that. Is this correct?

[DeltaWave]

Yeah I think I'm right. My vote for redtail was to put pressure. I don't know about the second point. I found it scummy but I guess that's a valid explanation for it. Lastly my argument in the last point is that you voted for hermano directly after unvoting parama. Furthermore, your reason was that charter summed it up perfectly. Charter provided a summation of dank's case, so you parrotted them both which is why I said you jumped on the bandwagon.

Vijay, once again you are being inconsistent.

You think that it's scummy that I would use dank's reasoning to vote for Hermano. That's not a scumtell, but whatever. The implication is that Hermano is town and that I would be looking to mislynch. But you also suspect Hermano, which indicates that you think he might be guilty. So which is it? You can't have it both ways. On top of all that, I removed my vote from Hermano when Nab's argument introduced enough doubt for me to reconsider, so I don't know how that fits into your perception of events.

[DeltaWave]

No, no, no, no. It's not that hermano is or isn't scummy. Parrotting is scummy Delta. Using other people's thinking to make it look like you're helping without contributing.

Um thanks Hiraki I doubt I'm good at it though.

Agreeing with someone is neither here nor there. If someone said exactly what I was thinking already, I'm not going to repeat it all. There's no point in running over the same ground.

Vijay, in post 223, you said that I read as town who tunneled too hard. That's a correct assessment, but what made you change your mind? You thought my case against redtail was a tunneling mistake, but now you think it's a scumtell. That's a pretty big 180.

I'm not voting for you right now because I get this strong gut feeling that you are town who is just a bit off course right now. However I am going to keep investigating you.

[DeltaWave]

EBWOP: Elaboration - Don't get me wrong, I think agreement is definitely something to be looked at once some roles are confirmed. But simply saying "This person agreed with that one" is not a scumtell.

[DeltaWave]

Yet, if he us suspicious of these things, why would he do the same thing himself? That point caused me to evaluate his overall scumminess to be far more than that of Hermano and Shinki at the moment.

Vijay, I'm starting to question my gut reaction that you are town because it seems like you're doing everything in your power to manufacture a case here.

Shinki jumped on my bandwagon without any reasoning; I found that suspicious.

I voted for Hermano... I provided reasons in post 274. The reasons were similar to charter's, which is why I said I agreed with him, but I still provided reasoning of my own above and beyond what Shinki did.

It looks like you are trying everything to form a case here.

[DeltaWave]

I am not trying to manufacture a case against you. I'm only trying to explain why I have my gut tells me that you are scummy. Funnily enough the case I am presenting is similar to the one initially raised, except for my last point. Yet you haven't raised those points before.

You have a confirmation bias problem, you've already concluded that I'm scummy now you're going back after the fact to find reasons for it. That's pure circular logic right there. At this point I'm trying to decide if you are just town who has gone off the rails or if you are scum who has decided that you want me to be today's mislynch and you'll manufacture as many bad cases as required to get there.

[DeltaWave]

EBWOP: Vijay, your case is also undermined by the fact that you have voted for more people than anyone else in the game thus far. (I think.) This indicates that you're testing the waters with each vote, looking to see if you'll get a bite (and a mislynch) with every new target you pick.

[DeltaWave]

@Parama: Innocent people can behave scummily, so I'm trying to determine if vijay is just town who tunnelled a bit too hard or scum. Right now I'm leaning toward the former, but this isn't a clean bill of health for vijay. I'm not going to let my guard down.

@Hermano: Did you seriously just shift into full-on self-preservation/opportunist mode? Yeah, hopping on the next largest bandwagon with one line of reasoning when you are under heavy scrutiny is definitely "satisfying." I guess you'll be happy with any lynch as long as it's on town. charter, I am sorry for ever doubting you. <3

VOTE: Hermano

[DeltaWave]

Hmmm. That's interesting. Parama you seem to think you can determine the scumteam, what about Delta-Hermano-Shinki? Does that look like a possibility to you? In accordance with my reads, that would suggest a bus by Delta, but for some reason I'm not sure. I don't know if its because I don't know if scum would bus d1 (newbieness) or if its because of just the vibe I'm getting.. however buddying up to charter by delta noted.

@ Dank: you asked what was different about my case on Delta. What do you think about my response? Is it "forced"? I think they are pretty valid.

@ Delta: it isn't like that. I read your posts, I get weird vibes. I reread and try to see why that is the case. Good misrepping and discrediting me though.

I don't see where I've misrepped you. I have discredited your argument, though. You thought it was contradictory that I would suspect Shinki for hopping on a bandwagon with little reasoning, and that I agreed with dank when I placed a vote. The problem was, Shinki posted a very short (I think it was one line-ish) reason why she was voting, and I posted three paragraphs. That's totally different; simply because I thought another person's reasoning was good, doesn't mean I'm mindlessly bandwagon hopping. I'm trying to figure out if you are intentionally looking to build a manufactured case here, or if you are just misguided.

It's not looking good for you vijay. You can't ignore my entire argument, dismissing with a simple "Good misrepping" and then call it a day. I'm not interested in convincing you of my innocence; there's a fairly good chance that you might be scum and you know my alignment anyway. What I'm interested in are your reactions. And your reactions are getting more and more suspicious with each post. You keep building bad case upon bad case. Why is that?

Here is where I have a conflict. My head says you are scum vijay, but my gut says you are town who is tunnelling like mad and missing a lot of details. That's the only reason why I'm not voting you right now. On the other hand, Hermano is more blatant in his scumminess and I'm pretty confident putting a vote on him because of his hardcore self-preservation antics right now. On my scumdar, you are #2 Vijay because of the way you've been acting, so don't think for a second that I've stopped examining what you're doing just because I find someone else to be scummier right now. And for sure, if Hermano flips scum, I'm coming right for you vijay first thing tomorrow.

[DeltaWave]

The general impression I get from JoNo's posts is that he wants to lynch somebody just to lynch, then survive as long as possible. I'm bothered by that. However it sounds more like SK behavior than mafia behavior. Although I won't rule out Hermano-JoNo-???? as a team.

[DeltaWave]

And why wouldn't we want to lynch an SK?

Huh? I said that he sounds more like SK than scum. I never said that we shouldn't lynch him. I have no idea how you could have gotten that from what I wrote.

[DeltaWave]

the implication there, delta, is that you didn't seem to entertain the idea of lynching the sk. but in fact, there are plenty of good reason not to lynch an sk over scum. the main one being that an sk has no teammates, therefore no connections will be made. secondary is that sk has no teammates, and so once they are found out, there is no reason to lynch them until mafia is cut down to a manageable size. so you probably should have said something about that. but you didn't. you just entertained the idea of lynching someone. hermano(lead wagon), or jono(nice alternate wagon.).

So let me get this right.

I didn't seem to entertain the idea of lynching the SK, according to you.

Then at the end of your paragraph, you say that I was entertaining the idea of lynching JoNo. Who I think is the SK.

You serious?

[DeltaWave]

as a heart attack.

redtail thought you implied you would not entertain the idea of lynching the sk. then you implied he may be scum with hermano, meaning you are entertaining the idea of lynching him as scum. either way, you are what you eat.

charter: ok.

unvote, vote hermano

There are no implications. What I said was that I find JoNo scummy and I think he could be the SK. But I'm not ruling out that he's just a plain old mafioso. There's no hidden message between the lines there.

[DeltaWave]

hence the word "implied". it doesn't matter what you "meant" or what you "actually said." your words are only how they are interpreted. nothing more. please vote hermano.

It's not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself.

My vote is already on Hermano.

[DeltaWave]

Maybe I'm too noob, what do you mean by chain lynching exactly? I'm not looking for a Vijay lynch, at least not today.

[DeltaWave]

Exactly. A chain lynch is where you say. "I propose we lynch Player Ω, and when (or if) he flips town/scum, it's then obvious that we should lynch Player Φ the next day." It's overconfidence to be sure and a not-so-subtle method of intimidation (especially useful for preventing any concerned townies from speaking up about the wagon."

That was more like thinking out loud on my part, but I can see why it would be detrimental.

[DeltaWave]

Its not detrimental. Everyone should explain their chain lynching theories. How does it "intimidate" anyone? If anything it forces scum to work harder to avoid having their buddies in anyones chain...

Now that I think about it, even when I've successfully nailed scum, my chain-lynch candidates were not as reliable and it's led me down the wrong path on a few occasions. I'm still relatively new so I'm still feeling that out.

[DeltaWave]

I'm assuming that the chain lynching comments cone from my comments about who I believe the scumteam is? If that is the case I'm sorry.

@ Delta: I said misrepping because you made out like I convinced you were scummy and only searched for evidence to prove it. And this is the point where are arguments meet. You said Shinki posted a one-liner to vote you. However, I do not take "i agree with your case" to be a valid enough reason. Maybe its just me, but if you want to vote for somebody seriously, contribute to the case and make some justification. Not doing that is where I believe your scumminess lies because I don't see how it helps us as town.

Are you aware of post #274?

[DeltaWave]

Yes. I quoted it. I'm sorry but i'll say it again, I don't like the fact that the focal point of your vote is somebody else's reasoning. It does not sit well with me. Sorry.

That's the thing, you can find examples of people agreeing with other people in this game with even less reasoning but you're not interested in that. It sounds like you've decided you're going to point the finger at me and you'll find any reason to do it. What makes you vote me instead of hermano? Hermano is obvscum and the argument against me is crap. All things considered, I find your lack of a vote on Hermano suspect. This is what I was getting at earlier (with the chain-lynching logic), that you're still on me in an attempt to save your buddy. It's the only way I can rationalize your behavior.

[DeltaWave]

Vijay, I have been scumhunting. In the course of the day, I've spent a lot of time examining you, redtail, dank, charter and hermano.

With that said, I would be happy to lay out my case against Hermano. I'm about as confident as you can be on day one that he's scum and he should swing today.

Hermano first became a blip on my scumdar when he claimed that we shouldn't investigate Parama's vig claim. I don't know if this is idiosyncratic to me, but I find discussion to always be pro-town and alarm bells go off when someone tries to discourage discussion. Usually it's implicit discouragement of discussion, but in this case, he comes right out and says we shouldn't discuss it. I don't want to go into a wall of text about theory, but as the uninformed majority, we need to get as much information as possible to defeat the informed minority. Therefore any attempt to impede the collection of information works in favor of the informed minority (mafia.)

Then, Hermano turns around and votes Parama for his claim. Now I'm confused, but alarm bells are going off left and right. I can speculate about motives all day, but it's clear to me that Hermano realized his first action was scummy as hell so he did an about-face and jumped at the action on the other extreme end; vote for Parama due to his fake claim. I voted for Parama too, but because Parama was goofing off and not taking it seriously.

Of course, when he was examined for acting so scummy, he blew up at dank in Post #230 in a rant complete with all-caps, bold text, underlined text, and personal attacks directed at everyone in the game generally. Again, this comes to what I said earlier. He wants to discourage discussion, not encourage it. The underlying message here is "Don't investigate me; you'll regret it!" while implying that everyone who votes for him needs to think more. He then makes the fairly ludicrous claim that dank is a newb in Post #232, which is hilarious because dank has been on this site for years and the case against Hermano is strong. It sounds like he wants to pull every trick to get people to focus elsewhere; appeals to emotion, personal attacks, obfuscating arguments, an appeal to his alleged experience at mafia. Post #258 was pure OMGUS self-preservation, and naturally he hopped on the 2nd largest bandwagon (myself) in hopes to give himself one last chance at surviving the day.

Combine that with Hermano's generally unhelpful complaints about how we're all idiots, and I think you've got scum who is overcompensating in a really twitchy way. Nab's discussion of theory regarding Hermano's posts made me question my vote, but I eventually came back to it because Hermano's scumminess is undeniable. Basically he's been coming out with dazzling displays of twitchy aggression, generic arguments, and evasion but he's contributed very little to real discussion except -- at every turn -- to try to discourage it.

I think this is more than enough to vote for Hermano D1, and I'd like to finally be in a game where we take out scum on day one. This is a slam-dunk. Unless he's stoned out of his mind, town would not act this way.

[DeltaWave]

You might have said it before, I don't know. Good post though, I didn't pick up on that particular scumtell. The case against Hermano has been pretty well fleshed out, and I think the lack of a deadline is the only reason why Hermano isn't dead right now.

[DeltaWave]

if we eliminate a SK we eliminate an entire anti-town faction and reduce the number of kills at night.
Wouldn't voting SK be a better option for D1, then? <_____<
Then again we also have no evidence of a SK existing, which is why I'm not gonna vote Delta today on the off chance that he's SK.
JoNo can still die a happy death ^^

I'm reasonably certain that Hermano is scum. I'm not as certain that JoNo is scum, but he's still suspicious. I'm not sure whether JoNo is SK or Mafia, though. I'm entertaining the idea that he is SK; that doesn't mean I'm dead certain that's what he is. (Of course, there may not be an SK at all.) All I can tell at this point -- and especially on D1 -- is that Hermano ought to die.

'cause you aren't voting him? <_____<

Not voting him right now, but I'm open to a vote tomorrow. There's a difference between saying, "I want to lynch someone who is more likely scum" and "I don't want to lynch at all."

And this is what they mean by chain lynching :V

Delta plays the newb card in 428! Brilliance! That doesn't work in a mini normal! Play more newbie games! <___________<

Yeah, I've been in six games on here (3 current, 3 completed) and this is the first time I've heard the term. It's also not on the wiki as far as I can tell.

[DeltaWave]

dank, I'm not finding much of a clear case on delta, skimming your posts. I agree his case on redtail seemed wack(the one thing I remembered already), but is there anything else you wanted me to comment on?

His reactions to my questioning on the pages following convinced me pretty well, and his voting pattern is basically the whip cream and cherry on the scumdae.

Yeah, when you said I was lurking RVS and I corrected you, you took that as being "defensive." Ever since then, you thought you got me on something, so you want to see everything as suspicious. I hope I'm the target of a cop investigation tonight so that we can get this crap out of the way.

Anyway, dank, why are you not on board with the Hermano lynch? The case on Hermano is practically open and shut.

[DeltaWave]

two vigmason factions, to counteract the two SKs, right?

Anyway, dank, why are you not on board with the Hermano lynch? The case on Hermano is practically open and shut.

wat?

Nevermind, I thought you weren't voting Hermano for some reason.

[DeltaWave]

Hiraki why u no vote hermano?????

[DeltaWave]

oh lawd

[DeltaWave]

Just two votes until Hermano eats rope.

btw I don't believe Hermano's kinda sorta maybe joking WHO KNOWS roleclaim

[DeltaWave]

Hammering makes me feel good about myself.

[DeltaWave]

Spoiler Alert: Hermano half-jokingly claimed cop earlier so that he could see if anyone would react to counter-claim it. Since nobody popped up with the "OMG I'M A COP" response, he will now affirmatively claim cop as he will feel more secure about doing it on the off chance that this setup does not contain a cop. And of course, this lets his scumbuddies figure out who the cop is if there is one.

(Feel free to thank me after this plays out as I have described)

[DeltaWave]

EBWOP: Clarification - Hermano knows he's toast so he's going to claim some kind of power role. Actually, it's slightly more likely that he would claim Doc than Cop under these circumstances.

[DeltaWave]

I am the cop, but I was joking around to be an asshole in response to Parama's sarcasm.


And delta, have you ever played cop before? I would never counterclaim this early just to get someone who's going to be suspected if they survive anyway. I would either investigate him or try to find his partners. If you would out yourself then I don't think you understand the power the cop has. Scum would always fakeclaim cop if it was that easy to out them.

And if I were scum, I would have gone after Jono full force, not delayed my death briefly by claiming. There was really only one reason for me to claim, and it's so the town doesn't waste it's lynch.

I've never played cop before, but your reasoning makes sense. The last paragraph is a bit WIFOM-y, but it's logical.

I'm still going to scrutinize you in case you are full of BS. But for now...

UNVOTE: Hermano
VOTE: JoNo

[DeltaWave]

P.S., there was more influencing my decision than Hermano's post. I forgot about the references to "having more information tomorrow" (as nab pointed out), which in retrospect makes a lot sense considering the situation.

Preview Edit: Dank, quit derping.

[DeltaWave]

The following exchange gives me a strong scumread on Hiraki:

Hey Parama.

Hermano isn't scum.

So don't hammer.

K thanks.

i c wut u did thar.

But you're still wrong.

Feel free to make mistakes though.

It helps.

Don't explain why I'm wrong. That would make way too much sense and be way too useful.

Don't explain why I'm wrong. That would make way too much sense and be way too useful.

As you wish.

This is a tactic commonly employed by scum when they see that a lynch on a townie is inevitable or at least highly likely. The goal is to leave the impression that the scum doing this must be town, because presumably they would have been onboard with a mislynch.

There is one key distinguishing characteristic between town defending town and scum defending town for townpoints. This characteristic is the strength of the argument. Scum who want to pull this trick do not want to be too specific; after all, they don't want to

actually

stop the lynch, they just want to

appear

to be against it. So scum won't give too many reasons that the target is innocent, lest people start changing their votes. In this case, Hiraki just claimed it without any support, even when charter pressed him for some.

The way I see it is this: there are two options... Option A: Hiraki was town defending someone he sincerely believes to be town. Option B: Hiraki is scum looking to get townpoints by defending a townie who was a dead man walking. If Option A was true, then Hiraki would have had an actual reason for believing that he was town. If Hiraki was damn sure that he was town,

why would Hiraki offer up a meager defense that only consists of a bland assertion

? Doesn't add up. All the evidence fits with Option B. Therefore:

VOTE: Hiraki

[DeltaWave]

EBWOP: I don't think I was all that clear in my first paragraph. I'm talking about scum defending a dead-to-rights townie to gain townpoints.

[DeltaWave]

I was thinking a little bit more about my case on Hiraki and I saw another element of it that I think is compelling.

Look at the interaction between Hiraki and Charter; particularly that last exchange of posts that I quoted in 528. Charter (sarcastically) asks for Hiraki to provide support for Hiraki's town read on Hermano. ("Don't explain why I'm wrong. That would make way too much sense and be way too useful.") To which Hiraki replies, "As you wish", and provides not a single argument as to substantiate their read. I think that, through the magic of logic, Hiraki's scumminess is proven by this exchange.

Hiraki was apparently so sure of Hermano's town alignment that he could declare affirmatively that Hermano was town. There was apparently no doubt in Hiraki's mind, as evidenced by the quotes: "Hermano isn't scum." and "You're still wrong." It's not "Hermano might not be scum", it's "Hermano isn't scum." That's a pretty strong opinion to have. So why would a townsperson, who is so absolutely sure that the town is heading for a mislynch, not provide a single logical argument against the lynch? It's not logical.

I'm rehashing this because of the "As you wish" retort, given by Hiraki to Charter. Hiraki certainly had the opportunity to elaborate on his position, but chose not to. In fact, Hiraki took the opportunity to

get out of explaining

instead of providing a case for Hermano's townieness. I can't wrap my mind around why a townie would do that. If a townsperson is so certain that the lynch target is town, why would they not share the information that led to this townread? Merely saying "He's town, don't lynch him" is not an argument and we all know it. That's not going to change anyone's mind.

I just can't imagine a world where Hiraki is town, who honestly was sure that Hermano was town, saw that Hermano was at serious risk of being lynched, but didn't care one bit to provide evidence to back up that townread. Can you imagine a scenario in which town would think, "I'm sure that a townie is about to get mislynched, but I'm not going to make any serious effort at keeping that townie alive." If Hiraki was town, he would be playing

against

(or at least, in complete disregard of) his wincon. But if Hiraki was scum, everything would fit. Hiraki would be sure that Hermano is scum because Hiraki knows who is scum and who isn't. Hiraki would be incentivized to oppose the lynch for townpoints, but wouldn't be too specific because they don't actually want the lynch to be stopped. There's just no way Hiraki can be town in my eyes. I'm open to hearing cases about other people, but I think Hiraki is caught red-handed here.

Pretend we're in court and you're on the jury, and you've got two sides. Which is more likely?

Prosecution

: Hiraki is scum. Hiraki knew that Hermano would flip town, so Hiraki provides a weak defense of Hermano consisting only of a bare assertion that Hermano is definitely town. This is because Hiraki wants to appear town, but doesn't want to actually stop the lynch. This is evidenced by the fact that Hiraki actively declined to provide evidence that Hermano was town even when asked directly for it.

Defense

: Hiraki is town. Hiraki was apparently 100% sure that Hermano was town, but

jumped at the chance

to get out of explaining why. Even though they were so sure a mislynch was about to happen, they decided it was better to just let a townie die than explain why that townie is innocent. Instead of taking five minutes to outline their reasons behind their read, it was better to let the scum get a mislynch and therefore weaken the town.

There's no way I can accept the second argument as true. The evidence just doesn't add up. To believe Hiraki is town is to believe that a townie would, in good faith, believe firmly that a lynch target is town but not care enough to provide a single reason why in order to save that townie's life. It's just beyond comprehension for me. I can't imagine that town would act so contrary to their wincon.

[DeltaWave]

If I'm a little wordy, it's because I'm sure I've got scum in my sights. I've never been this sure on a read before, and I want to make everyone aware of why Hiraki is scum. I'm so damn sure that Hiraki is scum, I'm 110% convinced and I think I scored a real slam dunk here.

[DeltaWave]

Nab mentioned it in his post, but this was something I came up with independently as well. No doubt others saw it too and have yet to post about it.

The case against Hiraki is badass. I showed how (albeit in a really wordy way) that Hiraki can't be anything other than scum. Boom!

[DeltaWave]

@Parama - What do you think of the case against Hiraki?

[DeltaWave]

ITT Delta takes 11 paragraphs to repeat what I said with 3 sentences. I think I have a good point on Hiraki, but I'm not liking Delta's zealotry in taking it up. It feels like he's trying to distract me from my top suspect (him) by taking up another case I've shown interest in. Although, this is at least the second time he's blown another player's point completely out of proportion (the first would be Vijay's vote on redtail), so maybe this is just his method of faux-scumhunting.

Are there any flaws in my case?

[DeltaWave]

I think Hiraki only has two votes on them, so we're at L-3 I think, not close to a hammer.

[DeltaWave]

Has Hiraki actually posted anything yet? I would consider voting him if we don't get more Parama votes soon. I will dig some more up on Parama.

Hiraki posted some lame responses that can't even be considered a defense. I think he knows that he's dead to rights.

[DeltaWave]

If Hiraki "always plays like this" (e.g. scummy and uncooperative) then that's hardly a defense. That's actually a great shield for scum to hide behind. Players eventually become aware of their own meta and use it to their advantage, which is why you can't rely on it to clear (or implicate) someone.

Also kdowns are you serious? Did you seriously roleclaim at L-5?

[DeltaWave]

@Panda - Under what policy?

[DeltaWave]

If Hiraki "always plays like this" (e.g. scummy and uncooperative) then that's hardly a defense. That's actually a great shield for scum to hide behind. Players eventually become aware of their own meta and use it to their advantage, which is why you can't rely on it to clear (or implicate) someone.

Also kdowns are you serious? Did you seriously roleclaim at L-5?

@Panda - Under what policy?

Youve answered it yourself.

I'm all up in Hiraki's grill because of his actions during the Hermano wagon, specifically the interactions between him and charter. Hiraki's meta is not a part of my case whatsoever.

[DeltaWave]

Hiraki's meta is not a part of my case whatsoever.

Have you ever thought that it might be the main problem?

Of course not though, Delta is a far superior player than I! What am I saying!

It's like we should policy lynch Vezok because no one likes his play!

Are you trying to use your meta as a defense against my allegations?

[DeltaWave]

Hiraki's meta is not a part of my case whatsoever.

Have you ever thought that it might be the main problem?

Of course not though, Delta is a far superior player than I! What am I saying!

It's like we should policy lynch Vezok because no one likes his play!

Are you trying to use your meta as a defense against my allegations?

no fucking shit sherlock

I wanted to make sure. Because meta defense is scummy as hell so I figured it would be better if you dug your own grave and jumped in it, instead of me digging it for you and then pushing you in.

[DeltaWave]

Mod

, I think Vijay is voting Parama.

This is true. Also charter, why do you think Parama is scummier than Hiraki?

[DeltaWave]

Delta's early D1 play struck me again, especially the quick transition from believing his dank-redtail case to not is conveniently timed (ie, right when he would be lynched). Votes Parama for policy reasons. Switched to Hermano right as the town piled on Hermano. That vote looks bad to me now; it's an easy vote on a popular wagon with a reasoning that justifies Delta's own prior actions. What throws a wrench in it is that I don't think he would've unvoted when he did. The winds weren't particularly changing at that time, so if he was scum he would've likely kept his vote on Hermano. The SK thing. Then he jumps back on Hermano. Jumps to JoNo as we shift to JoNo (which, really, everybody else did too). However, Parama points out Delta's cop-claim contradiction nicely, and Delta only shifts as the population shifts.

Re: Day 2 -- it is nicely pointed out that your case against Hiraki resembles your case against me: one point blown into an absurdly long post. This point is better that yesterdays, but the point still stands. And you didn't even originate this one.

Nice misrep, I'm going to have to do a re-read and scrutinize your posts more intensely because this screams SCUM to me. No townie could be this far off base.

I'll point out your lies in the following list:

(1) I voted Parama because I didn't feel like he was taking the game seriously. I unvoted him in post 242, when he started taking the game seriously. Specifically, I said: "Parama, I still don't like your attitude but you have ceased your anti-town behavior" and then unvoted him.

But hmm, you specifically leave that event out of your case.

Hmm, interesting, why would town need to selectively ignore certain posts to build a case? Instead, you make it sound like I went straight from a Parama vote to a Hermano vote, which I didn't.

(2) I voted for Hermano in Post #274, citing the fact that he changed his stance on the Parama claim situation. This is something I criticized all the way back in Post #156.

Yet, you leave that out, so that you can make it sound like I was just hopping on the bandwagon.

Again, why would a townie need to selectively leave out information like that?

(3) I shifted because nobody counter-claimed and because Hermano had supposedly breadcrumbed it (as I explained in Post #527.) Again,

why is that missing from your case?

I see two options here: you are either town with insane tunnel vision, or you are scum who thinks I'm the best mislynch target (for bonus points, I've got a badass case against your scumpartner Hiraki so you want to take me out.)

Either way your case is full of holes. Explain to me why the Hiraki case isn't valid. Go on, try.

[DeltaWave]

I will be seriously disappointed if anyone gives Hiraki a townpass for having a meta that supposedly excuses him from providing reasons for what he does. The bottom line is, Hiraki tried to back Hermano because Hiraki is scum and knew that Hermano would flip town. Town can justify what they do, but Hiraki can't. And when the pressure's on, the only defense is "Herp derp I just do everything arbitrarily anyway so you can't criticize my actions!" That's BS. If you accept that reasoning, you are basically making Hiraki immune to criticism. That's doubly insane because he's acting like textbook scum and throwing a meta defense on top of that.

[DeltaWave]

Nice misrep, I'm going to have to do a re-read and scrutinize your posts more intensely because this screams SCUM to me. No townie could be this far off base.

Actually, I think yesterday showcases how quite far off base townies can be

Thanks to your misrep here, I'm wondering if maybe my case against you was weak but the ultimate conclusion of the case (e.g. that you are scum) is true.

(1) I voted Parama because I didn't feel like he was taking the game seriously.

That means you voted Parama for policy reasons. I wasn't misrepping. You were part of a whole group of people voting Parama for policy reasons. It was fashionable at the time. Of course you unvoted as Parama stopped thrashing around; that's when unvoting Parama became fashionable.[/quote]

I just literally laughed out loud.

I unvoted Parama because it was fashionable???

I voted Parama in 213.
JoNo voted Parama in 218.
Vijay voted Parama in 223.
Votecount was Parama with four votes in 239.
I unvoted Parama in 242.
Everyone else unvotes after me.

I was the first person to unvote Parama.

Just caught you in a lie. Try to worm out of that one. You are so much scum.

Again, I don't think you're scummy because you voted Hermano. Lot's of people voted Hermano. I started the frakking wagon on Hermano. And rereading Day 1 again, I still think he looked insanely scummy. I think your scummy because of the

timing

of your vote on Hermano. I think it's part of a pattern.

Yeah, just ignore my reasons for doing everything. Makes it easier to build a bad case that way.

(3) I shifted because nobody counter-claimed and because Hermano had supposedly breadcrumbed it (as I explained in Post #527.) Again,

why is that missing from your case?

But you predicted that as part of your pattern. When you described what scum-hermano was doing by breadcrumbing, you said he was probing for a counterclaim and creating an easily-go-backable breadcrumb. I don't understand why you recanted on that.

I see two options here: you are either town with insane tunnel vision, or you are scum who thinks I'm the best mislynch target (for bonus points, I've got a badass case against your scumpartner Hiraki so you want to take me out.)

If I was looking for an easy wagon, I wouldn't be voting you.[/quote]

I explained why I reconsidered my position on Hermano. I explained that a while ago, I even cited to the post.

At this point, I'm sure you are Hiraki's scumbuddy.

I caught in you a huge lie. You claim that I only unvoted Parama when it was fashionable, but I was the first to unvote! Plus, I asked you to point out where my Hiraki case is faulty, and you failed to even try. You are so caught right now.

[DeltaWave]

Eh I screwed up the quote tags in that post but it's clear what I was saying.

[DeltaWave]

Hiraki declared that he agreed with Charter regarding Parama's scumminess. In fact, Hiraki stated that Charter's case is "exactly my thoughts." (Post #671)
Then Hiraki decides to do an about-face, for no apparent reason, and vote Charter. (Post #711)

Theory: Hiraki is trying to act randomly/erratically in order to throw us off the trail on Day Three. Say one thing, vote the complete opposite way, and then their day actions will be useless in determining who their scumpartner is, after Hiraki flips scum. That's a smart plan, actually. Declare that Charter's case is "exactly" what Hiraki is thinking, then vote Charter.

I mean honestly what kind of BS move is this that Hiraki is pulling

[DeltaWave]

I thought that the "ending" referred to the part where he was calling Parama an idiot, since the entire case (even without the bolded part) was an argument for Parama's guilt. Either way, it's not relevant. Hiraki what are your reasons for voting for Charter? Why did you agree strongly with Charter and then decide to vote for him?

[DeltaWave]

This is like the Twilight Zone. Hiraki joins and leaves wagons with

no reasoning provided

, uses his meta to defend that behavior, and acts like typical scum regarding the hermano lynch but for some reason that's not enough to get him killed. This is like the bizarro world of mafia where townpoints are awarded for providing less reasoning, not more.

[DeltaWave]

@Parama - What don't you find compelling about the case against Hiraki? I asked you this earlier but I don't think you responded.

[DeltaWave]

Redtail,

Now that you've explained yourself, my ragemeter has gone down slightly. You are still dead wrong though.

@DeltaWave

I admit that "fashionable" was a poor choice of words. I should've used "easy." You voted Parama when he was going nuts, thus it was easy to want to lynch him. You unvoted Parama after he made a reasonable argument against Hermano, so your argument no longer applied, so it was easy to unvote him.

You make it sound like I

wanted

to lynch Parama. I didn't; I told Parama that I would vote him if he wasn't taking the game seriously. He responded flippantly, so I voted him. When he stopped acting flippantly, I took back my vote, just as I had indicated I would. The reality of this situation is completely different from what you have described.

I think you're fundamentally misunderstanding what my approach was. I said that I would reread day one and do some vote analysis. I was looking for voting patterns. I was ignoring what people said and focusing on how they acted. When I looked at you, I found a scummy voting pattern. That's what I was trying to articulate. That jumbled mess in my voting post: those were my notes during this process.

Voting patterns are literally meaningless unless you are also looking at the reasons for voting. Surely you can imagine a situation where someone can have a perfectly justified vote, but if it's made at just the right time, it can look scummy in isolation. That's why the reasons are extremely important. Incidentally, this is why I'm pursuing Hiraki so hard.

I think the key words in that sentence are "didn't care." To me, Hiraki looks like Parama did during his Mel Gibson phase yesterday: he just doesn't care. Or certainly doesn't care enough to put effort into it. Maybe that's his meta, maybe not. It's certainly anti-town.

To be honest, I'm okay with a Hiraki lynch. But it feels very easy to me.

And I assure you: if I was Hiraki's scumbuddy, I would be bussing him like **** right now. Guy does not look good.

Hiraki needs to get a cookie for his scumplay because he's so scummy that it almost seems too easy. He's acted this way all game and if he doesn't get lynched today, he's going to continue to coast along with this "Yeah, I act pretty much arbitrarily but that's okay because it's in my meta" attitude.

Seriously, what is going on here... we're in a game where we have a player... who has acted significantly scummy on a prior day because he pulled off a fairly common scum trick... who is now acting arbitrarily and

actively saying he won't explain his own actions

... while employing a meta defense... and he's not dead. How is this scenario even playing out? Am I dreaming or something?? In any reasonable world, everyone would be tearing him to shreds. If Hiraki survives to LyLo somehow, it will drive me out of my mind.

[DeltaWave]

We're fairly far from consensus so I am going to pose some questions to bring us all back to reality:

(1) If you think Hiraki is town, why?
(2) If you think Hiraki could be guilty but you are not currently voting for him, why do you think he's

less

likely to be scum than any of your other suspects?

@Parama - This is the third time I've asked, but what do you think of my case on Hiraki? Don't just say "he's town", tell me your opinion on it.

[DeltaWave]

Read My case first delta.

You mean your case against Vijay? I feel town from both of you so I'm not sure what to think of that, I'll have to go back and think about it some more.

[DeltaWave]

Delta/Dank, you guys are voting Hiraki. Do you think Parama could be scum too? We need to consolidate votes.

I very much don't like how Redpanda refused to give his take on Parama, and has completely ignored Parama today, but he has enough time to make a dozen posts. Smells very much like scumbuddies.

I will have to analyze the Parama vs. Charter battle closely. Hiraki is scum, so my one-track mind is righteous here, but I'll have to go back and see what I missed.

[DeltaWave]

I decided to look at the charter vs parama battle as I promised in my last set of posts. Here are my conclusions:

Parama lost some major townpoints with Post #736 (declaring that Hiraki is town without saying why) and subsequent posts along those same lines. Dank pointed out that kdowns and hiraki are basically doing the same thing, but Parama has latched onto kdowns but not Hiraki. This is Parama eagerly jumped to Hiraki's defense in 714 when I was running hard on Hiraki. Hiraki and Parama definitely seem linked in some way and that doesn't bode well for Parama, due to Hiraki's scumminess.

There is still an argument against Charter though and Parama sums it up in 624. However I think the argument against charter is much weaker than the argument against parama. Charter was inconsistent in his "what to do if JoNo is really the cop", but times change and new evidence gets introduced so I'm not convinced this is a scumtell. Charter heavily suspected some people who flipped town, but so did I (and most of us) so I'm not persuaded by that. Townies are frequently wrong so absent something determinative, that's null. Now that I'm thinking about it, the case against Charter really sucks.

The case against Parama is certainly compelling. Is Parama scummier than Hiraki? Dunno. It could be that Parama is actively scummier while Hiraki is just inscrutable because of his meta. I have to think about this for a while. Is Hiraki's meta actually like this?

[DeltaWave]

EBWOP: I see Hiraki posted more against charter, will have to analyze.

[DeltaWave]

Yes, because Hiraki is confirmed scum and therefore my associations with him make me scummier.

Wait, that's not how logic works.

The only way someone becomes "confirmed" is through an investigative report or a flip. You're not going to worm your way out of this by raising the standard of proof to impossible levels.

[DeltaWave]

Yes, because Hiraki is confirmed scum and therefore my associations with him make me scummier.

Wait, that's not how logic works.

The only way someone becomes "confirmed" is through an investigative report or a flip. You're not going to worm your way out of this by raising the standard of proof to impossible levels.

PSSSST

YOU DID THAT ALREADY SHERLOCK

You consistently make these unhelpful, distracting posts designed to derail scumhunting and this is what makes me keep my vote on you. There seems to be a proportional relationship between how much scumhunting is going on and the frequency of your unhelpful posts. Everyone on the Parama wagon should be voting for Hiraki right now.

[DeltaWave]

If we lynch Hiraki and he flips town, will you vote Parama? Because I won't switch if you guys won't vote Parama tomorrow if Hiraki somehow town.

I can't make any promises as to what I'll do tomorrow, but Parama is my #2 read so a vote on him tomorrow is not-unlikely, regardless of the Hiraki flip.

[DeltaWave]

I'll vote Hiraki tomorrow if we lynch Parama and by some miracle is town.

Will you still vote Hiraki if/when Parama flips scum? (I see both as scummy, so I'm generally agreeable to this idea, but I have to have an assurance that Hiraki will die.)

[DeltaWave]

@Charter - I am inclined to accept that deal, but with Vijay's vote, the Hiraki wagon has outpaced the Parama wagon so it makes more sense that you change your vote to Hiraki. You can come over to this wagon knowing that I will be all up in Parama's grill tomorrow, if that makes you more inclined to come over here.

This is better in the long run, since Hiraki is scummy but also is an active anti-scumhunter. Parama is scummy but doesn't try the same blocking/distraction techniques as Hiraki, so it will be easier to sort through shit.

[DeltaWave]

Delta why do you think I'm scum?

I described it in Post 817.

[DeltaWave]

VIJAY HELP LYNCH CHARTER
NOT HIRAKI
HIRAKI = TOWN
CHARTER = SCUM

See, I could be convinced if you actually gave a reason. How the hell is Hiraki's play town? Charter is null atm so how is he scum? Maybe if you stopped giving statements and start giving reasons..

Hiraki's play is not town at all, that's the thing. Yesterday Hiraki buddied up to Hermano for no apparent reason, merely declaring that Hermano was town when it was clear that Hermano was on the chopping block. (Yes, he didn't get lynched, but that's not the point. It seems like his lynch was inevitable.) This was clearly just for townpoints. It's not just that Hiraki didn't have a reason, but when charter pressed Hiraki for a reason, Hiraki actively declined to give him one. And then Hiraki tried to defend this behavior by referencing his meta, like that gives him an excuse to just do whatever he wants without ever providing reasons for it. And of course, Hiraki's response to scumhunting are these ALL-CAPS derail posts that Parama seems to be channeling here.

[DeltaWave]

EBWOP: *seemed like his lynch. I need to proof read before I click submit.

[DeltaWave]

Wow, not just "the majority" but literally everything that you say about me being scum completely hinges on Hiraki being scum.

Cool misrep bro, but obviously inaccurate.

Here's one quote from my case: "Parama lost some major townpoints with Post #736 (declaring that Hiraki is town without saying why) and subsequent posts along those same lines. Dank pointed out that kdowns and hiraki are basically doing the same thing, but Parama has latched onto kdowns but not Hiraki."

(1) You cozying up to Hiraki is scummy whether Hiraki is scum or not. Scum often cozy up to town. This is also why I suspect Hiraki to an extent.
(2) You didn't like kdowns and his arbitrariness but you wouldn't hold Hiraki to the same standard. This is logically contradictory, and it has nothing to do with Hiraki being scum or town.

You still refuse to critically analyze Hiraki. Hiraki is scummier than you are, but you are definitely suspect.

[DeltaWave]

1. Because I can read players, unlike you.
2. I already said kdowns and hiraki are posting much different from each other.

So you concede that you were absolutely incorrect when you misrepped that "everything" I say about you being scum "completely hinges on Hiraki being scum"? Don't think I'm going to somehow forget about your misrep if you just ignore the subsequent discussion of it. I'm watching you closely and I won't let a single scumtell slip by.

As for your response -

(1) It's going to take a lot more than that to build a persuasive case. "Just trust me!" doesn't work in mafia.
(2) I don't see that at all and I haven't seen any evidence to point toward that.

[DeltaWave]

Well your logic is kinda ridiculous tbh.
part of your case on hiraki is my associations with him make him scummier? and part of your case on me is that hiraki's associations with me make me scummier? hmm, I wonder where the logical fallacy lies there.
do you see that hiraki is ACTUALLY TRYING and ACTUALLY SCUMHUNTING unlike a certain kdowns? I do; you're just not trying to look.

I agree with Parama that Hiraki and kdowns are acting fundamentally differently. Hiraki may be obfuscating, but he has certainly said more in his two walls. He still hasn't explained why he thought Hermano was town.

Delta: I understand what you are saying. Really. I'm not blind to Hiraki's actions. But I would be far more suspicious if Hiraki had attempted to look like he was making an actual argument against a Hermano lynch. Instead, he just baldly says "Hermano is town." He's coming off like he just doesn't care. I see that as null. You disagree. Fine.

VC 1.9

HermanoBro

(4)-

dank,

charter, DeltaWave, vijay2vasandani
DeltaWave (3)- NabakovNabakov, Hiraki,

HermanoBro

JoNo246

(3)- Parama, redtail896,

don_johnson

Parama (1)-

kdowns

don_johnson

(1)- RedPanda

Not Voting:

JoNo246

It takes 7 to lynch or No Lynch.

VC 1.10

HermanoBro

(6)-

dank

, charter, DeltaWave, vijay2vasandani,

JoNo246

,

don_johnson

DeltaWave (3)- NabakovNabakov, Hiraki,

HermanoBro

JoNo246

(3)- Parama, redtail896,

kdowns

don_johnson

(1)- RedPanda

It takes 7 to lynch or No Lynch.

VC 1.12

JoNo246

(7)- Parama, redtail896,

kdowns

, RedPanda, DeltaWave,

don_johnson

, charter
DeltaWave (4)- NabakovNabakov, Hiraki,

HermanoBro

,

dank

HermanoBro

(1)-

JoNo246

Not Voting:
vijay2vasandani

Green is confirmed town. Blue is my a strong town read on my part.

I want you to look really hard at these votecounts. For the record Delta, I actually think this is the biggest reason I might switch to Hiraki. Looking at 1.12, I find it hard to believe that all 3 scum are on the wagon. That leaves NabNab and Hiraki.

I don't know. Maybe I've been wasting my time staring at these votecounts, but I can't help but stare at the sight of two strong town wagons, and two townies jump to bring Hermano to L-1. It suggests to me that scum were happy with their wagon distribution, leading me to believe that they were relatively even.

[DeltaWave]

Disregard that above post, I tried to do multiquote and failed miserably.

[DeltaWave]

OK, seeing as how I can't multiquote without screwing it up somehow, I won't do that.

@Parama - Why do you continue to evade? I asked, do you concede that you misrepped me? I'm not going to let you get out of this.

@Redtail - From what I can tell, we have a different set of town-reads, so I'm not sure what I should be picking up from those patterns.

By the way, as a matter of policy, I don't like to mention who I read as strong town. Sometimes I do (like when discussing a possible lynch), but for the most part, I think it's a bad idea because it gives scum a clue as to who to keep alive. It also doesn't help the town. Town votes for lynching, so town is concerned with who is the most scummy, not who is the most town. In short, freely giving town reads will aid the scum in their planning while providing no utility for the town. Of course, giving town reads is OK in certain cases but I would strongly caution against dropping them freely (in case you are wrong about your townread and scum use that against you.) With that said, I'm not sure the vote counts say much anyway.

All things considered, I really think that Hiraki is topping the charts for scumminess, with Parama in a close second.

[DeltaWave]

1.9 to 1.10:

JoNo (Town) goes from Not Voting to Hermano
KDowns goes from Parama to JoNo
Don Johnson goes from JoNo to Hermano

Everyone else stays the same.

I'm sure scum was absolutely ecstatic at the 1.10 votecount. The only wagons were on Hermano, myself, JoNo and Don. Hermano/JoNo/Don are confirmed town and I know that I'm town, so at the time, scum were at no risk at all.

But, I don't see this analysis giving me any data about who to suspect.

[DeltaWave]

That said, Hiraki has not deviated in his behavior one bit, and included another ridiculous wallpost. Honestly, I was waiting for him to start scumhunting more like we wanted him to after the pressure mounted, but I actually like that he's stuck with his play in the face of pressure. Said play is awful and Hiraki's post are annoying to read since he has this superiority complex that's kind of stupid on an online mafia forum, but he hasn't wavered one bit. I don't think scum would be as bold as he's being.

Why

wouldn't

scum be so bold? Apparently, it's a great strategy to put doubt into people's minds. The sentiment that Hiraki is so scummy that he might not be scum has been echoed by several people already. Very effective scumplay if you ask me.

I'm bothered by charter and Delta's exchange about interchanging Parama and Hiraki, regardless of what either one of them will flip. You have to admit, alot of the Parama case does rest on Hiraki. That whole part was strange, and i'd like to reread it tomorrow once I have more time.

I'm going to preemptively clarify this so it doesn't get misrepped later. I've had to deal with enough of that from Parama so I'm going to nip this in the bud right now.

(1) As I told charter, I make no promises as to who I will vote the next day. I can only promise to investigate someone heavily.

(2) I'm comfortable with either a Hiraki or Parama lynch so they are interchangeable to me. Obviously I would prefer a hiraki lynch but either is fine.

[DeltaWave]

Im sure of this now- Parama - town. hiraki - town dank - town dw - town.

unvote

Vote Charter

Delta. I think your a smart guy. But why can't you just think and read everything without Your tunnel vision for once?

Why do you think charter is scum? The case against charter seems weak to me.

[DeltaWave]

I'm going to do some re-reading because something seems weird about this whole situation and I might be missing something.

[DeltaWave]

I'm going to do some re-reading because something seems weird about this whole situation and I might be missing something.

LOL

These kind of responses are why my vote still stays on you. You take every opportunity to derail legitimate discussion about the game. I still can't believe you haven't been lynched yet.

[DeltaWave]

@Parama - What's with you and misrepping? I never backed down on my reads. My vote remains on Hiraki. I'm going back and re-reading to confirm that my reads are accurate. Why does more analysis equal something bad, hmmmm?

Also, are you going to admit that you misrepped me earlier? You keep dodging this issue. I wonder why...

@Hiraki - You are seriously the most anti-town player in this game. Almost every post you make has nothing to do with scumhunting and everything to do with derailment. That's why I'm keeping my vote on you and it's going to take a lot for me to move it.

[DeltaWave]

You are seriously the most anti-town player in this game. Almost every post you make has nothing to do with scumhunting and everything to do with derailment. That's why I'm keeping my vote on you and it's going to take a lot for me to move it.

Remember yesterday when NabNab wrote that defense of Hermano that basically boiled down to "his playstyle is very anti-town, but that doesn't mean scum"? That's basically how I feel right now.

You have a point here, but I think that Hermano and Hiraki are fundamentally different in their anti-townness. But like I said, I need to go back and do some re-reading. I might not get around to that until Monday due to various things that are making me busy.

[DeltaWave]

Delta's case is essentially Hiraki is scum => Parama is scum (and I'll go along with that.

nope

Actually, most of my case centered on the buddying that's going on between Parama & Hiraki as well as Parama defending Hiraki without supporting evidence. I also brought up the whole Parama/Kdowns thing.

None

of this is dependent on Hiraki's alignment; these can be scum-tells whether Hiraki is town or scum. Check Post #840.

This is the same misrep that Parama made a few pages ago.

Anyway, I'm not done with my re-read but I'm trying to figure out to what degree I might be tunneling on Paraki (or is it Harama?) based on their anti-town behavior. Redtail (or maybe it was RedPanda) pointed out that I might be tunneling too heavily on Paraki, so I'm trying to sort out of what percentage of my case is just them being annoying/abrasive and how much is scumtell. The more I think about it, the more unlikely it is that scum would openly support each other this way, because if Parama flipped scum then Hiraki would be dead soon after and vice versa. Charter scored some scumpoints with his behavior during the Hermano wagon, but on the other hand, Parama shamelessly did some misrepping of my argument so this is starting to break my brain.

[DeltaWave]

Just thinking out loud, this would lead me more in the direction of a Parama vote instead of Hiraki. I'll report back with more findings when I finish.

[DeltaWave]

Just thinking out loud, this would lead me more in the direction of a Parama vote instead of Hiraki.

LOL

With thought-out and helpful posts like these, how can anyone think you're scum?

[DeltaWave]

Charter is now at L-2

[DeltaWave]

@Delta: I guess you're referring to 840?
Your point (1) in that post is bogus. Scum often defend town; town often defends town. You haven't done any work in showing this is a case of the former and not the latter.
I also think Hiraki and kdowns are more different than you're giving them credit for. There's a reason why I called a scumtell on Hiraki's spam but relegated kdowns to a null tell and VI status. Parama obviously got way different reads than I did, and I'd certainly like to see him explain them in more detail, but that's beside your point (2), which hinges on the two being identical.

Whether you're conditioning on Hiraki being town or conditioning on Hiraki being scum, you're still conditioning your read of Parama on Hiraki's alignment. Not only is that some bald opportunism; any statistician will tell you that it's no way to reach a conclusion. You're so far from posting any independent scumtells on Parama that you've started referring to him as a kind of hybrid player with Hiraki. I don't buy it.

My point is that I'm not basing Hiraki read on Parama or vice versa.

I get what you're saying about defending possibly being null. That's why I'm reassessing what I'm doing here.

[DeltaWave]

Oh delta your scum aren't you. I feel ashamed of myself.

Nope. Just can't make up my mind on who I want to see dead: Parama or Hiraki. I wish I could kill them both simultaneously but I'll have to settle on one.

[DeltaWave]

Sure.

All this business about Parama defending Hiraki can be thrown out the window; there is still an excellent case vs. Parama regarding his various misreps of my position. I consider misreps to be a huge scumtell and he's done it several times and refuses to admit it.

[DeltaWave]

UNVOTE:
NabNab: Who do you want to lynch
Delta: Convince me to lynch Parama if there's such an excellent case.

It comes down to the misreps. Parama wouldn't need to twist my words if he was town. He kept insisting that my case against Hiraki was one of those joint-case deals (where one person's guilt is based on another), but that's not what I was saying at all. I confronted him directly about the misrep and he dodged it. He continued to dodge it every time I brought it up. I can give you post #s if you want but it's all on the last few pages.

Thoughts on other people:

I absolutely hate Hiraki's posting style but whatever. People think it's town or something, which I don't understand at all.

Charter is somewhat suspicious for reasons I explained earlier, but all things considered, Parama seems scummier to me. I just can't get past those misreps.

[DeltaWave]

Dw. Don't you think Parama will get lynched if charter flips town?

Also lets Talk about votes here.

If parama was scum. And me and hiraki were town. Then Scum outside the wagon Would have hammered charter by now.
If Parama was scum And me and hiraki were scum. then You have easy pickings next three days.

Either everyone voting for charter are scum or charter is scum. Please decide.

You make a compelling argument.

Here's my unofficial VC:

charter (4) - Hiraki, Parama, RedPanda, vijay2vasandani (L-2)
Hiraki (2) - DeltaWave, charter
vijay2vasandani (1) - dank
Parama (1) - kdowns

Not Voting (2) - NabakovNabakov, redtail

In a Mini, I think we can expect 2 or 3 scum. My strongest town and strongest scum reads happen to be on the same wagon, which is what's confusing me here. But, you are right, I think that if scum were not on the wagon then they would want to hammer charter. If scum -are- on the wagon, they will be obvious for tomorrow.

I think your logic is sound, Panda.

UNVOTE: Hiraki
VOTE: Charter

L-1.

[DeltaWave]

Ok According to that scenario

Charter is town. Parama is scum. me and hiraki are town.

Parama's scum teamates hammer charter.

Next day everybody votes parama and he flips scum.
Next day You think People like dw and vijay would Vote for hiraki or the people who hammered charter.
Looks like hiraki gets the votes.

I wouldn't mindlessly vote Hiraki or Parama tomorrow if Charter flips town. That would be too obvious. If charter is really town, then scum must have a firm boner right now, knowing that people are going to rape Parama tomorrow. I wouldn't give them the satisfaction of making that happen. I might end up voting Parama or Hiraki, but not without some serious thought put into it.

[DeltaWave]

Well, in my last post, my hypothetical assumed that both charter and parama are town. (I didn't mention the parama thing, but I thought it was implied.) So, I have considered situations in which Parama is not scum.

But, I don't think it would necessarily hurt the scum to take charter out because there is still significant suspicion of charter amongst almost everybody. Even if all the scum in the game were down charter's throat, there would still be plenty of townies who are also doing so and the scum could hide in the masses, so to speak.

[DeltaWave]

If both charter and parama are town. Then we lost already.

I disagree.

[DeltaWave]

If both charter and parama are town. Then we lost already.

I disagree.

do you actually see them actually believing they're both town.

I think the chances of them both being town is extremely low. Nearly nil. But, there's no way I can know that for sure, so just in case they are both town, I don't intend on acting rashly tomorrow.

[DeltaWave]

I can easily concoct scenarios in which they are both town.

In fact, my personal pick for scumteam doesn't necessarily have either.

I can't say it's impossible, it just seems... unlikely.

[DeltaWave]

Dank, you're one of the people I'm going to be looking at tomorrow.

There's much more to my case than you described. I didn't accept Panda's argument wholesale, I added to it with my own ideas. That's a misrep right there.

It sounds like what RedPanda said shook you up. The timing of your vote is very interesting.

[DeltaWave]

Delta: c'mon. You agreed with Panda's analysis. You accepted both basic assumptions that I described. You even said, and I quote "I think your logic is sound, Panda." You definitely accepted his argument. And you just quasi-OMGUS'ed dank.

VOTE: DeltaWave

So because I think that his logic is sound, I'm copying his case exactly, despite presenting several posts elaborating on the argument? Weak.

Also Dank: Rofl. How about you address my argument? I made several posts as well; you're going after only Panda's post like I never added anything to it. How about you honestly examine this for once.

[DeltaWave]

but dank, you see, charter is scum.
I mean yeah Delta is bussing, but charter is still scum.

I don't know what charter is, but Delta doing that is either scum bussing for an extremely pathetic reason, or scum jumping on a bandwagon of a townie for an extremely stupid reason. I can't believe Delta is town after that ridiculous sequence of posts.

I can't believe

you

are town after your ridiculous vote against me.

You voted for me because you think Panda had bad logic. For one, that makes little sense. But on top of that, you are ignoring all the arguments I made and attacking Panda's as if Panda's arguments were mine. Why would town do that? I can't think of a single reason.

[DeltaWave]

Yes, I agree with the fundamentals of the argument. But the fundamentals of the argument are not bogus. Charter's lynch will give me a lot of valuable information regarding Paraki and will solve the confusion I've been expressing over the last five or so pages.

I'm a little skeptical here. If you take issue with Panda's logic, it would make sense to suspect Panda. But, you suspect me for agreeing with Panda. Interesting. Perhaps we have a redtail/dank scumteam at play here? I'll have to go back and look at their interactions to see what's going on. It would make sense that they would work together to divert a charter lynch if the team is charter/dank/redtail. Actually, that makes sense. Panda said that now would be the time for scum to bus. So they'll do the opposite; try to divert the lynch elsewhere. I'll research this, but I think I may have struck gold.

[DeltaWave]

Then we lost. Because Both of them are convinced The other is scum.

That is not "addressing the scenario.'' That is ignoring the scenario. You aren't actually considering the possibility that both are town: merely saying that it shouldn't come under consideration.

Delta: I (and I think dank) suspect you because you opportunistically took Red's crappy case and used it as an excuse to jump on a charter wagon, putting it at L-1. That's scummy behavior.

If dank and I were a scumteam, why on earth would we be this obvious? Also: you already put this theory forward early day one, remember?

Preview Edit: Thank you panda, that's what I was looking for under all that. Again: I disagree with regards to how scum would react to charter's wagon (see previous posts on the matter). BTW: Deltawave has acted exactly as scum would under your scenario. Do you find that suspicious?

Did I really call out a dank/redtail/charter scumteam at some point earlier in the game? I don't recall, but that would be cool if I did because it makes me more confident right now.

If by some chance you are town, then you need to take off your blinders and look at this whole situation. I've expressed a great deal of doubt about this whole Charter/Hiraki/Parama thing. I've expressed suspicions of all three over the course of this Day, long before RP made his case. I suspected charter less, of course, but he was always on my list of suspects. With the distribution of voting, I find it hard to believe that everyone I suspect can all be on the same scumteam. RP's case made me realize that a charterlynch will probably provide the information I need to sort this out, while simultaneously knocking off someone that has been on my suspect list all day. You seem to think it was just a "herp derp I'mma hop on" vote but that's BS.

[DeltaWave]

@DeltaWave: If charter flips town, what does that tell you about Parama?

Also: you didn't predict dank/redtail/charter. You predicted dank/redtail/nabnab. It was early D1 when you tunneled me.

Ah, yes, I remember that tunnel. Good times.

When I say that the flip will give me info, it's not just the flip itself. It's the circumstances surrounding the flip, before and after. The flip is just a piece in a larger puzzle.

Preview Edit: Dank, there you go with your assumptions. You need to read what I say

carefully

. I suspected all three of them for different reasons. For example, I thought Hiraki was very anti-town but their only explicit scum action was the Hermano interaction, which is not the strongest piece of evidence. On the other hand, Parama had a few more explicit tells (like misrepping my case) but didn't have that same distraction mindset that Hiraki has. If you think at any time I was thinking "Oh, Hiraki is 98% scum and Parama is 97% scum and charter is 92% scum" then you're wrong. Scumminess can't always be ranked in pure numbers, and it sounds to me like you're glossing over 99% of what I say to make it sound bad.

[DeltaWave]

The fact is, you said in the post before charter that you suspect him less than the other two. After Panda's post, you say lynching charter will help you decide between the other two. That's not a good reason to lynch someone you suspect less.

Those three (Charter, Hiraki, Parama) have been floating around my top three for a while now. This whole dank/redtail stuff is making me question that, but my long-time suspects have been Hiraki, Parama, Charter. I tried to kill Hiraki. Didn't work. I tried to kill Parama. Didn't work. The only one left is charter, and I'm not willing to cast a vote on anyone else. As long as I kill someone that I suspect of being scum, I'm fine.

[DeltaWave]

Why would RedPanda's argument make you switch to charter so quickly?

Like I said, I'm fine with anyone that I suspect dying. At the same time, I want to reduce the chance of a mislynch. While you might take issue with RedPanda's logic, I'm not saying it's a home-run; I'm saying that it pushes the utility of a charter lynch into the acceptable range. That is, the risk of this turning out badly is now outweighed by the utility of this lynch. (Utility includes both the possibility of killing scum and the investigative value of the lynch.) Combined with the apparent impossibility of a Hiraki and a Parama lynch.... I'm okay with this.

Preview Edit: @Parama - I don't exclude people from suspicion for any reason. So yes, I can suspect you and charter. But then again, I am constantly evaluating the situation.

[DeltaWave]

Nab... Lol. Let me get this right.

Hiraki dodges your questions and posts without answering them. This doesn't seem to concern you much.
Deltawave votes for someone on his suspect list... Must spring into action!!

I figured that the person to cast the L-1 vote on charter would get some heat for doing so. Naturally the L-1 and the hammer vote will come under fire, so this was a burden I was willing to take on. But shit, these arguments are weak. I've been consistent in my suspect list, tried to kill 2 of them and failed, now I want to try #3 and RP's argument convinced me of the positive utility of such a lynch information-wise. I get that you have to give the third degree to the L-1 guy, but srsly.

[DeltaWave]

Of course you will end up voting for me, charter. My wagon going through is your only chance for survival.

If you guys want to see opportunism, just look at charter. The minute he sees an out, he rushes for it. He didn't voice any suspicion of me when my vote was on Hiraki, but now that it's on him, I'm now certainly scum in his eyes. He's really likin this Deltawagon because its his last hope of survival. To top it off, he apparently decided that i am scum but hasnt voted yet pending a "reread", as if that gives it any credibility.

Thank you, charter, for eliminating any doubts I had about you. You are scum and you just made a giant slip.

[DeltaWave]

Explain to me how what I did was any different from what you did.

You joking?

1. I didn't need to vote you to save myself. In fact, I knew that being the L-1 vote would bring heat. You voted for purely self-pres reasons.
2. I had you on my suspect list and spend the last however-many pages wrestling with the question of whther you are scum or not. On the other hand, you had no problem with me all day until you see that I've got a few votes on me.

You are so busted man.

PEdit: dank - nope. Read this case and tell me that charter isnt scum.

[DeltaWave]

This is EXACTLY like the bussing me and twisted did in Tempermental <.<

No idea what you're referring to, but it would be illogical for me to be bussing charter. if i was scum, why would I cast the L-1 vote? Nobody was voting for me at the time, I could have easily shut my mouth and coasted by. But I cast the L-1 vote, which always invites scrutiny.

I had some doubts about charter's scumminess, but those doubts are now gone. Charter seemed to like me very much, until I voted for him of course. He did a complete 180 out of self preservation and now he's busted.

[DeltaWave]

\Charter seemed to like me very much, until I voted for him of course. He did a complete 180 out of self preservation and now he's busted.

You've done that with me and dank multiple times. Just saying.

Show me one time where I was at L-1, unvoted my prime suspect, and hopped on the next-largest wagon despite not expressing any suspicion of that person in a long time. Do you honestly think that charter's actions here are totally legit?

[DeltaWave]

Hahah. Charter, you are at L-1 and you think you aren't at risk of being lynched? Yeah right! You expect us to believe that?

Also, nice misrep on those posts. You took them out of context; I was talking about the case specifically made by Parama. It looks like you conveniently edited that out. Why would you need to present only part of what i say, hmm? Is it because my full posts dont say what you want them to say?

With every post, you give more and more scumtells. First you make this unbelievable claim that you are at L-1 but not at risk fo a lynch. Then you show only parts of my posts, out of context, to back up your ridiculous attempt at a last minute save. So much scum.

[DeltaWave]

So let me get this straight. You've been very suspicious of me the whole game, yet you continually downplay the value of cases made against me, but after RedPanda makes an absurd argument (read: coaching his buddy) and multiple people point out the gaping logical fallacies of his argument, all the cases against me are magically golden and all of a sudden I'm the most obvious scum ever?

Just want to make sure I have your story straight.

Oh charter, your lies aren't helping your case.

I never said that me thinking you're scum now somehow validates arguments against you that I've rejected. Where did I say that I was going to retroactively support a case I previously rejected?

Also, you are obvscum due to your reaction to being L-1. You immediately hopped on my bandwagon because it's #2. That's why you're fighting so hard for this, because you will flip scum if one more person votes for you.

[DeltaWave]

Because charter wanted to gain townpoints by saying that he'll do it after a "re-read." Yet he seems pretty damn certain, huh? I guess he thought that just hopping on the bandwagon would look a bit too scummy. It's better tactically to argue fo the lynch but not vote until more people have joined the bandwagon, so he can look better after I flip town.

Pedit: finally, your OMGUS self preservation vote is cast.

[DeltaWave]

Ahh well scum will likely take this opportunity to quicklynch, lol. Congrats on the mislynch

[DeltaWave]

Lol Delta.

Charter's scummy for not voting you.

Charter's scummy for voting you.

Timing is everything.

[DeltaWave]

Finally I'm on a legit computer and not my phone.

Anyway. Charter's been under my suspicion in all day. I tried to lynch my two other suspects (Parama/Hiraki) today, and failed. So I moved on to my third candidate. It's weird that this is considered scummy. Hopefully you all will re-examine charter's actions after I flip town.

Charter, on the other hand, is scummy as hell. He seemed to have no suspicions about me whatsoever today... until I voted for him, of course. Then he immediately changed his vote from his top suspect to me, as I was the #2 lynch at the time so it makes sense as a self-pres move. If you can't see how scummy that is, then I feel bad for you.

[DeltaWave]

Delta, the thing is that while you may have suspected Charter along with Parama and Hiraki, nobody else knew it. Your comments on how weak the cases were against charter shows us that you didn't really suspect him. Furthermore I skimmed your ISO and saw no inkling of this #3 suspicion on him. Thus this makes your jump even more so suspicious. Your defense doesn't really help because you just seem to say that everybody seems to go around misrepping you.

Aside from that, two things. One, I don't like how charter only votes for Delta when Parama and Dank point it out. It's almost as if Charter doesn't want to be called out for OMGUSing but once given the green light, goes forward with it. Secondly if Delta flips town I'm pretty convinced Charter is scum. The thing that scares is a weird double bluff in which to shake off accusations about bussing, charter reverses Delta's bus on him. Just a thought.

Delta, I think you should claim. This is an intent to hammer.

Vanilla Townie.

I've been analyzing charter all day. Just because I rejected an individual case on charter doesn't mean I absolved charter of all guilty. Even if I believed someone was completely and totally guilty, if someone made a bad case against them, I'd reject that case. It's an extreme example, but if someone decided to post "Hiraki is guilty because I don't like their avatar", I might agree with the conclusion but not the case. I said on Saturday or Sunday that I'd go back and re-assess the situation, which I did. I don't see a problem with that.

RedPanda pointed out a great scumslip in Post #1028, actually. Charter "can guarantee" that Parama is scum, then in the same post he says he'll "probably go on Delta." So he decides to vote for the guy he

might

suspect over the guy he can

guarantee

is scum? Does it sound like he's voting for the guy he thinks is scum, or that he's voting for the wagon that's going to save his ass? If you want to talk about inconsistency, there you go. It's surprising that people can accuse me of inconsistency when I voted charter after openly thinking about charter all day, and then charter turns around and says that he can

guarantee

that Parama is scum, but he's going to vote for the guy he didn't suspect all day.

[DeltaWave]

EBWOP: *of all guilt

[DeltaWave]

I've been analyzing charter all day. Just because I rejected an individual case on charter doesn't mean I absolved charter of all guilty. Even if I believed someone was completely and totally guilty, if someone made a bad case against them, I'd reject that case. It's an extreme example, but if someone decided to post "Hiraki is guilty because I don't like their avatar", I might agree with the conclusion but not the case. I said on Saturday or Sunday that I'd go back and re-assess the situation, which I did. I don't see a problem with that.

Except you didn't disagree with the case. In post 935 you expressly said, "I think your logic is sound, Panda." You agreed with the fundamentals of the case, not just the conclusion.

I'm not referring to RP's case, I'm referring to a case parama made somewhere in the 800s

@Vijay - I'll find you some quotes.

[DeltaWave]

RedPanda hit the nail on the head with his list of events. It's certainly odd that Charter thinks Parama is certainly scum, Parama thinks charter is certainly scum, but they're both voting for me.

@Vijay - Although I didn't explicitly state it at the time, I started really critically analysing charter in 864. (I rejected one case against him, but I was looking for more info regarding his scumminess before I changed my vote.) I started talking about changing my vote in 867. At that point charter was at L-3. I hadn't finished my re-read at that point, but I talked about Charter scoring scumpoints in 916 based on my partial re-read. Charter was still L-3 at the time. I said I couldn't decide who I wanted to take out more, Hiraki or Parama, in post #923, so I decided to vote for my third suspect - Charter, in 935.

It sounds the more zealous people on my wagon want to characterize my actions as just hopping on the charter bandwagon, when I had been considering charter for quite some time and as you can see, was thinking it over from 864 - 935, and I was considering it even before that. (Even though I might not share every detail of my thought process.)

[DeltaWave]

Holy hell I just noticed
If Delta flips town, RedPanda is confirmed scum.

This makes me think that you know I'll flip town, so you're trying to set up another mislynch for tomorrow.

[DeltaWave]

Holy hell I just noticed
If Delta flips town, RedPanda is confirmed scum.

You can't flip town.

Ahhhh, I see what happened. You started out planning tomorrow's mislynch in 1044, but you got too eager and I called you out on it. Then you switch from "if Delta flips town" to "Delta can't flip town" just five posts later. A little twitchy there, huh?

I'm starting to see a pattern here. You kept asserting that you and charter can't both be scum. You've said this a few times, I think, and I can get post numbers if anyone wants them. I found it odd that you would emphasize that. That's point #1. Then you hop off the charter wagon with little reasoning, despite being apparently certain that charter is scum. Point #2. Then charter also decides to vote me, even though he thinks

you

are confirmed scum. Point #3. Now you start planning the next day's mislynch in 1044 with the hypothetical that "if Delta flips town..." when you know I will flip town. Point #4. I call you on it, and just five posts later you take it back and say there's no way I can flip scum.

Add it all together and what do you get? Parama was claiming that only one of the two (Charter and Parama) could be scum because he was bussing his buddy. He thought Charter was going to get lynched, so he wanted to repeat this idea that only one of the two could be scum, so he could claim that he was confirmed town tomorrow. But when he saw an opening (my L-1 vote), Charter decided to vote for me even though charter hasn't suspected me all day and was calling Parama confirmed scum (a townie wouldn't say that Parama was absolutely scum but then vote for Delta). Parama follows suit, voting for me even though Parama said that charter was definitely scum (same here, a townie would want to vote for the "guaranteed" scum). Then when Parama started to plan tomorrow's mislynch in 1044, I called him out on it, he got twitchy and in 1049 decided to take back what he said just a few posts before.

UNVOTE: Charter
VOTE: Parama

[DeltaWave]

EBWOP: In my paragraph starting with "Add it all together", I got the order of events slightly messed up. It went: 1) Charter saying he was going to vote me, 2) Parama voting me, 3) Charter voting me. The paragraph kind of gave off the impression that charter voted first, which isn't the case.

[DeltaWave]

Delta, you should vote back onto Charter so that there would be a chance that Charter can get hammered.

Well, as per my analysis in 1050, both are scum so I'm comfortable with either a Charter lynch or a Parama lynch. I agree, I should go back to Charter. I got a little excited in 1050 with my "HAHA GOTCHA" on Parama but overall, it is better to have a charter lynch than a parama lynch because it seems like most people are on charter anyway.

UNVOTE: Charter[/vote]
VOTE: Charter

L-1

[DeltaWave]

Lord I screwed up that vote. It should be

UNVOTE:Parama

VOTE: Charter

.

[DeltaWave]

Delta: why on earth, given your proposed situation, would you unvote charter?

I was too excited by Parama's scumslip. Once I simmered down, I went back to charter.

[DeltaWave]

@Redtail - What more proof do you need that Charter/Parama is a scumteam? I think the whole "Charter thinks Parama is confirmed scum, but votes Deltawave. Parama thinks Charter is confirmed scum, but votes DeltaWave" should be sufficient. But that entire argument I made in 1050 proves, pretty conclusively, that we have a charter/parama scumteam here.

[DeltaWave]

Delta's 1050 and 1054, wow.

Hey dank, give me a post of substance. Can you, with a straight face, tell me that there isn't something incredibly fishy going on with Charter calling Parama certainly scum, but voting me, and Parama calling charter certainly scum, but voting me? If you can't, then you need to be on this side of the fence.

[DeltaWave]

Parama's vote was the hammer vote.

My unofficial VC:

DeltaWave (4) - dank, redtail896, NabakovNabakov, charter
charter (6) - Hiraki, RedPanda, vijay2vasandani, kdowns, DeltaWave, Parama

[DeltaWave]

VOTE: Deltawave

I still find him switching to Charter too opportunistic. Are we at LyLo?

There are two problems with that vijay.

(1) I said I'd be fine with either a charter or parama lynch, so switching my vote to charter is not opportunistic.
(2) You've been vote hopping all game so you shouldn't talk.

I don't like the idea of a No Lynch. But if there is an investigative role, and we do a No Lynch, then they better investigate me.

Going to read back a bit and put together some cases.

[DeltaWave]

@Hiraki - Is there anything more convincing about RT?
@RT - What do you think about Hiraki voting you?

[DeltaWave]

I was referring to you saying Charter was your third suspicion with no evidence of you having that line of reasoning before this.

I made it clear that I was considering him... I don't make it a habit of shouting from the rooftops every time I think someone might be scum, but it was clear that I had been scrutinizing him.

@Parama - What's your rationale for a no lynch?

[DeltaWave]

And delta Out of all us Who do you think are scum. i want the whole team not just one person.

I'm thinking about that. Like I promised yesterday, I'm being cautious because we might be in MyLo. The fact that Parama assumes everyone will be all over him like white on rice, plus the No Lynch stuff, makes me suspect him because that sounds to me like he wants to have one more night phase to better effect a mislynch tomorrow (kill off someone who is against him, or kill off someone who would support his favored mislynch target. Makes sense, Parama was kdowns' primary target (Post #879)) Plus, if you go back and look at Parama's actions yesterday with the knowledge that charter was town, it becomes clear. Many people here, including myself, were wondering why Parama kept doing seemingly contradictory things. For example, Posts 1009 and 1010 have Parama entertaining the notion that charter is down (despite what he said before) and voting DW but then saying "Nah" and not rescinding his vote. So he voted, immediately pulled back his argument, but kept his vote. The only way this makes sense is if he knew that charter and I were both town, so he was fine with either wagon. It didn't matter how strongly he claimed that charter was scum; as soon as the suspicion started flying away from the charter wagon and to the delta wagon, there he was.

There are also quite a few logical contradictions. At one point, I said I was going to re-read to be sure of what I was doing. Parama called that a "silly excuse" to back down on my reads (Post #871) but the Parama backed down on his read with literally no explanation as I described above. You can go back and read through Parama's posts and see all the times when he said one thing, and then very shortly after, did another. Seems obvious that he's scum. As for his buddy? Maybe Redtail. I don't think Redtail and Parama have ever gotten into a conflict this game (maybe near the beginning, I can't remember) but in recent history, Parama and Redtail have been on the same page but rarely interacted. Hiraki and Parama have agreed but there was conversation between the two, I get the impression that Parama and Redtail are intentionally distancing themselves from each other.

I'm interested to hear opinions on this. Like I said earlier, it's MyLo and I want to win this so I'm not going to start throwing votes around. I'd especially like to hear from RP and Vijay as you two are my highest town-reads.

[DeltaWave]

...so he was fine with either wagon. It didn't matter how strongly he claimed that charter was scum; as soon as the suspicion started flying away from the charter wagon and to the delta wagon, there he was.

Doesn't this

exactly

explain what you did with charter and parama too?

Nope. I had charter on my radar. I tried to lynch Parama first. Didn't work. Tried to lynch Hiraki next. Didn't work. So I moved on to my third and last suspect. What's the problem with that?

[DeltaWave]

Okay. Parama tried to lynch charter first. Didn't work. So he moved on his second suspect in DeltaWave. How is that different?

Parama had charter at L-1 and there was significant suspicion of him. I had Hiraki and Parama at like... L-4 and I had little support. The two situations are entirely different. It actually didn't work in my case. In his case, he just decided to take the opportunity when it suited him. To him, it didn't matter because he knew that charter and I are both town -- who are both under suspicion -- so we'd be equally good as a mislynch. If I got lynched instead of charter yesterday, you'd be having this exact same discussion with charter instead of me.

[DeltaWave]

@redtail - I'm unaware of the benefits of a no lynch. I've never been in a game in which we even attempted no lynch so I don't know if it's a good strategy or not.

Also, RT, what I'm saying is that charter and I were the two top suspects yesterday and we were both town. Whichever one of us survived, we'd have to end up defending our choices like I'm doing now. My point is that tunnel vision is not a good idea.

[DeltaWave]

RP, what do you think of No Lynch?

[DeltaWave]

I'm not no lynching.

I know Parama is going to die tonight.

Really?

[DeltaWave]

Yeah(lol Hiraki has hidden information where he knows that parama is going to die. must be scum)

Not what I was implying.

[DeltaWave]

Well are you saying I'm dying and nobody else is dying?
'Cause honestly I'm all for that considering this game's the equivalent of mafia hell anyways.

Lynch Delta tomorrow guys~
And listen to everything Hiraki says.

What I'm saying is that Parama is going to survive and he's going to kill whoever he thinks will be best to get a mislynch on me.

Think about it. Coming into Day Three, we all knew that Parama would go after me. But he pushed for a no lynch instead of lynching me. What's the benefit of lynching me Day Four instead of Day Three if it's going to happen anyway? It's just a better setup for a mislynch if he can take another townie out.

[DeltaWave]

At the end of Day Two, Parama said: "Delta dies tomorrow." (1061)

At the start of Day Three, Parama wants a No Lynch.

At the end of Day Three, Parama says "Lynch Delta tomorrow."

I don't buy this stuff about "stats favor the town in LyLo more than MyLo" and No Lynch is better for the town and all that. You claim that it gives us better odds, but that's crap, because you've wanted a Delta lynch since the end of the day on Day Two. The only difference is that we'll be down one townie and therefore you will make it easier to mislynch. This is why I think there are two scum. You can't pull off a mislynch right now, so you're going to knock off people who might be skeptical of a Delta lynch tomorrow. I can't see any other option. If you were town, and you honestly thought it would help to No Lynch, then it doesn't make sense that you'd keep up this "lynch Delta" mantra. If you really thought I was scum, you'd want me lynched today, not tomorrow. But a No Lynch gives you a chance to stack the town in your favor.

[DeltaWave]

I don't buy this stuff about "stats favor the town in LyLo more than MyLo" and No Lynch is better for the town and all that.

I don't think I had to read any more past that line.

Seriously? Have you tried thinking?

I mean this is mind boggling to me that you won't accept common knowledge that can be easily proven.

Read the whole post. I don't buy Parama's intentions for a No Lynch. If he's going to push for my lynch tomorrow, why not push for my lynch today? The outcome will be the same. The only difference would be that in Day Four, there will be one less townie to oppose my mislynch.

[DeltaWave]

Or that it would take 4 townies to lynch you as scum instead of 5 today?
And that a 3/8ths chance is smaller than a 3/7ths chance? <____<

It sounds like you're admitting that this was all just an attempt to make it easier to lynch me. Not as an attempt to narrow down the suspect pool or give town a better chance of catching scum, you just want to facilitate your lynch.

[DeltaWave]

I'm not against No Lynches at MyLo. But it sounds like this No Lynch is just a ploy to reduce the number of townies as to make a Delta lynch easier. Look at today for example. Only RT and Vijay voted for me. If there are three scum, all you need is to get one townie (Vijay) to vote for me and game over.

[DeltaWave]

I'm not against no lynch @ mylo

in principle

. Under these circumstances, it's pretty transparent.

[DeltaWave]

Massclaim is fine with me

VT

[DeltaWave]

It sounds to me like NabNab is likely to be RB as a role, whether that's scum RB or town RB. I've played RB in a very similar way before. The breadcrumbing in the first post is also a factor that leads me to this.

[DeltaWave]

Actually, deciding not to roleblock and using nab as the killer because they knew they could play it off may be an option, especially because after a vig and cop gone, they might have thought no more PRs existed.

This would never happen, I can't even imagine that a roleblocker would waste a block.

[DeltaWave]

Delta So I'm faking my report on NabNab?

I'm just thinking out loud at this point. I've had a town read on you since forever and this situation is throwing me into a loop. I agree with you that Redtail is scummy. Vijay is also scummy but not as much as RT.

[DeltaWave]

Tracked Don_johsnon because i believed he was scum.
Tracked NabNab because i believed he was scum because of his buddying and his passive observations of the game.

I want to get the timeline straight. You're saying you tracked Nab to kdowns on N2. Why didn't you mention this in Day Three?

[DeltaWave]

This is a hard one for me.

[DeltaWave]

Give us more than that, Delta. What are the factors you're considering in your decision? Everyone should at least post their thought process as I did in my last post, so that we can get some sort of dialogue going about it. It only helps scum if we sit around here and no one posts anything because we have a tough decision on our hands.

Here are both options and reasons for believing either. I find the two fairly equally weighted and the third is just a possibility.

Option A: RedPanda town, NabNab scum
- I've had a townread on RedPanda for a long time, since early in the game
- I suspect redtail as well, and to a lesser extent vijay, so i could buy RT/VV/NN as a possible scumteam
- RP's questions at the end of yesterday could indicate he is town (see below for other interpretation)

Option B: RedPanda scum, NabNab town
- Nab has a consistent story and playstyle (breadcrumbed it early, play consistent with town RB) and his choices make sense
- RP's questions at the end of the day could be as RP described, but could also have been scum looking for NK info
- RP seems kind of twitchy/nervous about the situation (could just be excitement)

Option C: RedPanda scum, NabNab scum
- This is the proposition you suggested dank and it's a possibility. A really ballsy gambit.
- There's no real evidence to suggest this, so I wouldn't advocate a "lynch either of them" strategy, but it's something to think about.

[DeltaWave]

Deltawave. i understand Dank questioning me. i understand hiraki questioning me. I don't understand You questioning my alignment.

You do realize I just Shifted the lynch from you to NabNab. If I was scum. What possible reason could i have to switch from you to nabnab?

I've got to be thorough and consider all possibilities dude. There's no room for mistakes at this point.

[DeltaWave]

Due to Thursday being a United States holiday I will not be issuing official prods until Saturday. Until that point I will still issue prods as needed, but they will not become official untill Saturday the 26th

Good, because I might eat so much stuffing that I pass out for a day or two.

[DeltaWave]

The fact that I've had a strong townread on RP since early in the game, and the fact that the RT/VV/NN scumteam is incredibly compelling, means that I'll probably end up voting for NabNab as well but I want to sleep on it first just to be sure. RP makes a good point, RT came right out of the gate today with a vote on me looking for a Delta mislynch, if RP was scum then he would have supported that vote not derailed it.

[DeltaWave]

Now that I've slept on it, I'm personally convinced that NabNab is scum, because if RedPanda was actually the scum, then RedPanda would have encouraged my lynch. A mislynch on me would have been so easy today, as Redtail was aware (which is why he came out with a Delta vote right out of the gate.) There is literally

no reason

for RP to do what he did if he was scum.

VOTE: NabNab

[DeltaWave]

The question is, do you believe RP to be scum or is NabNab scum?

[DeltaWave]

I don't know anything about game balance, but keep in mind that the vig and the tracker are shot-limited.

[DeltaWave]

I still think Nab is scummy as hell but for the sake of discussion I'm going to unvote him.

UNVOTE: NabNab

I still want to see him swing today though.

[DeltaWave]

I don't see much value in guessing the setup because any number of things could be going on that makes this balanced. Like I said, I've never tried making or balancing a game, but I could imagine setups where an RP Watcher

or

Nab Town RB would be relatively fair.

As far as I'm concerned, the issue is which claim is more believable. They're mutually exclusive. I've had a town read on RP for the vast majority of the game so I'm more inclined to see RP's claim as legit. Also, this may not be convincing to you but I know I'm a VT, so RP coming in and claiming is not something scum would do. Nab has a consistent story and breadcrumb but to me, that doesn't outweigh what RP has going for him.

[DeltaWave]

Dank: NabNab and RT seem like they were distancing to me. Those two have always been slightly suspicious, RT more than Nab.

[DeltaWave]

VOTE: RedPanda

[DeltaWave]

Everyday I'm mislynchin

[DeltaWave]

My claim was fake btw. I'm just a VT

this was an epic move man

[DeltaWave]

I bussed Delta like no other this game, and we actually had a wonderful trail from Delta to Panda lined up to cash in, but Panda's claim completely caught me by surprise and messed that up a bit. The plan was always to sacrifice Delta and cash in on Panda at the end.

Go back and read Delta and Panda's interactions, especially Delta's towards Panda. Its pretty humorous, a actually.

Pre-Edit: Props on that Panda, very well done.

Yeah, I made it a point from the very start of the game to shamelessly sheep Panda in everything he did.

[DeltaWave]

And see all the scum WERE prepared to bus the hell out of Delta, so

My original plan had me dying on D3 and using my RP trail or Vijay trail for a mislynch on the subsequent day.

[DeltaWave]

When you first claimed Tracker, RP, I was so glad you didn't track me because I sent in the NK every night.

[DeltaWave]

The first two days were awesome. I love the hyperbussing that went on with Dank vs. myself early on.

[DeltaWave]

Yeah :3 , funny how it (along with the vijay/panda trails) was never even needed.

At least it was fun setting down those trails.

This is mostly in reference to how I agreed with everything Panda said always, and I would change my vote to match Panda's at all times. Also, when VV suggested I was scum, I would insist he was town while I would simultaneously blow up at dank.

[DeltaWave]

This was a great game, I had a whole lot of fun.

[DeltaWave]

Interesting. I'd like to see panda's response.

I'm still stuck at work (was supposed to get out at 6, but looking more like 8 right now -_-), but i'd like to do a read up of both PR claims then. Been trying to peek at the boards, but boss has yelled at me twice now. I'll try to post after 8.

Anyone notice how this is very much unlike any of my other posts? :3

This is me trying to re-coordinate our quicklynch time from 6:00 to 8:00, since almost everyone had claimed, and I was hoping Hiraki would jump back on redtail. Nab/Delta, did you get the message?

I thought that's what you might have been getting at, but I didn't want to risk it. I figured I'd just stick to the "two" code.