Mini Normal 1375 - Over

[Elias_the_thief]

VOTE: scooby

Have the Scooby-doo song stuck in my head now.

What do you have against a bunch of kids and a dog solving mysteries?

[/b]Vote: ValiliaRei[/b]

[Elias_the_thief]

Whoops.

Vote: ValiliaRei

[Elias_the_thief]

I'm confused (and a noobie)... why would anyone buddy with anyone unless they were scum-buddies?

My read of it was that nadroj was accusing me of buddying, I assumed with him but couldn't figure out why he'd do that (on my assumption that buddies = scum). By doing so he would have,

by implication said that he and I were both scum

. I couldn't work out why anyone would openly do that — out themselves as scum... hence my voting for him as he was, by my read, trying to make me look scummy and

simultaneously deflecting attention from himself

.

These statements seem to be at odds. How was he deflecting attention from himself if he was implying his own guilt?

[Elias_the_thief]

CO2, if you are backtracking on what you previously thought then is there a reason your vote is still on nadroj?

What defines backtracking for you, and do you think it has a negative connotation? I'm just curious because normally for me to consider something a backtrack, the initial point has to be pretty set in stone, whereas CO2's entire initial post had a pretty tentative feel. It seems odd to me that you would choose to label the series of posts as a backtrack, and not CO2 trying to figure out what exactly buddying is in the first place.

[Elias_the_thief]

I don't really see either nadroj's post #9 or CO2's post #14 as buddying. I thought the posts were similar in that they made the same kind of joke. So when nadroj voted for CO2 for doing the same thing nadroj did the same thing a few posts before, I found that suspicious. My vote is intended to put pressure.

What I wanted to see CO2 answer was the point brought up by Elias_the_thief in post #22.

The question was answered pretty well in 25 I thought.

I don't believe the interaction between nadroj and CO2 is anything significant, it just seems like early d1 silliness.

unvote

Vote: Hoopla

Suck it kingdom, I do what I want.

[Elias_the_thief]

vote: nadroj

Sonething off about his buddying accusation

fos: hoopla

I know we've only got a couple pages of thread to analyze, but this feels really lazy. Hoopla is, with no other way to put it, Hoopla. He's known for doing crazy things, and you've been around this site for a while. And my buddying accusation was admittedly "slightly better than random." This post feels like you are either trying to make it into a more serious attack than it actually was, or were just going through the posts and finding whatever to throw into a post, so that you could post while putting in minimal effort (the FoS of Hoopla leads me to believe the latter).

This post set off some bells. I think it seems like a bit of an overreaction, but at this point I can't decide if its knee-jerk omgus or just overly explaining your vote logic. I do agree that Robb's post was lazy, but then again, there's not enough content to really go into detail.

I'd also like to point out that I've "been around the site for a while", but I have no clue about Hoopla's supposed craziness or inactivity. I voted him simply because I was told not to, and because large wagons generally get the game out of the random stage.

Also don't like this post from McStab. My comments are in bold.

Sorry if I'm not dripping with enthusiasm at a game in Page Three barely out of RVS as opposed to other games that are in LyLo or thirty pages in.

Hoopla's not being helpful, but I feel as though that'll change.

I'm interested in seeing carbondioxide's answers. However, I do wonder how nadroj's post #9 is less likely potential buddying than carbondioxide's post #14.

UNVOTE: scooby
VOTE: nadroj15

^^^The rationale for this vote is: Nadroj is buddying, let's put the first vote on him.

I would have to disagree. Correct me if wrong Val, but it seemed to me you were dismissing nadroj's attack on carbondioxide by pointing out that nadroj's post was in a very similar vein to carbons. In which case, buddying is not the rationale at all.

I don't really see either nadroj's post #9 or CO2's post #14 as buddying. I thought the posts were similar in that they made the same kind of joke. So when nadroj voted for CO2 for doing the same thing nadroj did the same thing a few posts before, I found that suspicious. My vote is intended to put pressure.

What I wanted to see CO2 answer was the point brought up by Elias_the_thief in post #22.

^^But when pressed on it there was NO buddying all of a sudden, but rather a vote against nadroj merely for hypocrisy. But another apparent reason is "I wanted to put pressure".

I think this is consistent with my interpretation.

He also wanted to see CO2 Answer Elias's question; so presumably the pressure was supposed to be on him. But instead the vote went on nadroj.

This is an interesting point, but its worth noting that the question had already been answered.

Something is amiss here, and someone is backtracking on their story.

Plus the vote on Hoopla is shameless sheeping/bandwagoning.

Is there something inherently wrong with sheeping/bandwagoning at this stage of the game?

LOL, what?

Apparently I'm getting criticized for being a crazy and/or unhelpful player three pages into a game.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Hoopla

Oh.

Actually, I simply voted you because kingdom told me it would be unproductive to do so (which is clearly untrue). Don't be a poop about it.

[Elias_the_thief]

I love when scum gives up day 1, never seen it done this quickly though.

Vote: hoopla

this puts hoopla at L-1 btw

Um....yeah....
UNVOTE: Hoopla
Why exactly are you viewing the self vote as a declaration of guilt? I missed a link in your logic train bro.

[Elias_the_thief]

Are you shitting me? Self votes should never be done as town. I've learned the hard way on this one, but town should never self vote. I've seen town do it, including myself. In the end they all catch shit for it and they are usually done by noobs, VIs, or just crappy players. I'm going out on a limb here but I assume the list mod isn't a noob, VI, or a bad player(considering in another game someone referred to her in a positive light).

That leaves scum. If she is town, she is playing against her win con.

This is terrible logic. Read your own words: "I've seen town do it, including myself". That right there is enough reason to not take it as a declaration of guilt. It may be scummy, or anti-town, but that's really far off from scum outing themselves. Additionally, a town-aligned player shouldn't be concerned with "catching shit". In fact, catching shit early is a great way to get the game moving, and I've seen self-votes employed by good and bad players, scum and town alike, for this purpose.

"I love when scum gives up day 1, never seen it done this quickly though."
"I've seen town do it, including myself"
You're definitely not adding up here. When you compound this with the laziness in post 47, it seems like you're just itching for the easiest lynch.

VOTE: Robbnva
Until you explain why something you have done yourself AS TOWN (and seen done as town) is reason for Hoopla scum, you've scored the lead role on my scumlist.

[Elias_the_thief]

@Robb

yes I have self voted in the past, after that I was told by quite a few people in some not so nice PMs that what I did was stupid. When I self voted I felt like nobody was listening to me and I had no other option. I felt with myself out of the picture, town would be able to focus and win.

and guess what?

Town won and I learned my lesson. I also recall a time before I rage quit, when I was only on the site for 2 months when I also self voted out of frustration because I was being run up and nobody was listening to me. I got lynched and shortly after that I PM'd my good buddy who is an experienced list mod on the site to ask what the big deal was and he summed it up that basically town's job is to lynch scum. So if you are voting yourself and you aren't town you aren't trying to lynch scum. It's sort of an admission of guilt (paraphrasing because i don't have that PM in my box anymore, I mean it was almost 2 years ago)

Nice appeals to authority there, but you miss my point entirely. I'm not at all arguing that self-voting is a good strategy. I'm arguing that it can

sometimes

be put to use in a protown fashion. For instance, the self-vote has caused the only real point of discussion we have here. And it sounds like taking yourself out of that game ended up helping town too. Your vote can be used to catch scum in a variety of ways.

the situation here is nothing even remotely close to the same thing. Hoopla comes in and votes without posting anything, gets prodded and comes back provides no game related content and than self votes.

no to mention Hoopla herself has said Self voting is wrong, so she knows that town should never self vote. yet here she is self voting...

Again, I'm not saying its a good move to self-vote. And Hoopla is not near the top of my town list. But you claim it automatically makes her scum, when you know for an absolute fact that town-aligned players will sometimes self-vote. If you know for a fact that players will self-vote as town, how can you possibly consider it a valid scum tell? As Kingdom brought up, its just as much anti-scum as it is anti-town, if not more.

---

@Kingdom

Am I the only person to interpret Hoopla's post as "People are calling me crazy? I guess I'll prove them right." I can't claim to say why she did that, but I still see it as completely null.

No, at this point that's how I've interpreted it as well. Its hard to say anything else about her motives until she comes back and explains them.

Elias, that post was in no way directed at you. Why so quick to defend yourself pass the blame to me? At the same time you insinuate that the post was more than null, so what did you get out of it?

I wasn't trying to defend myself or pass the blame. My goal was to show Hoopla that I wasn't voting because she was crazy/unhelpful, but for the sake of a wagon. Although, your comment was a legitimate part of why I voted Hoopla. I don't think there's such a thing as an unproductive wagon. When someone is discouraging others from joining a wagon, subsequently joining it will almost always cause some actual discussion.

About self voting, yes it is incredibly anti-town but it is also even more incredibly anti-scum. Hoopla does know better, which makes it even more clear she is just being sarcastic. If you still think you can get any sort of read from that, I'd like to hear your reasoning.

Nah, as I said, I'm just waiting to hear more from her.

Elias, do you find that being wrong is a scumtell, and if so how? That seems to be your entire case on both Robbnva and McStab.

Well first, let's not throw the word case around lightly. I pointed out flaws in McStab's logic and I'm waiting for a response. My point about Robb is not that he's wrong. Its that he KNOWS protown players sometimes self-vote, while simultaneously believing that a self-vote from Hoopla = definite scum. As I said in my initial post, it reads as if he just jumped on what he thought was an easy lynch.

[Elias_the_thief]

Nice appeals to authority there, but you miss my point entirely. I'm not at all arguing that self-voting is a good strategy. I'm arguing that it can sometimes be put to use in a protown fashion. For instance, the self-vote has caused the only real point of discussion we have here. And it sounds like taking yourself out of that game ended up helping town too. Your vote can be used to catch scum in a variety of ways.

That certainly wasn't an appeal to authority, it is pulling from my own personal experiences, which is all I have to go on. Pro Tip - using buzz words like "appeal to whatever" are often unnecessary and scummy itself. Why do you act like there was nothing else to talk about anyway? Carbon's growing wagon or the fact that Nardoj decided to defend Hoopla before hoopla could even defend herself were things people could talk about.

"I got lynched and shortly after that I PM'd my good buddy who is an experienced list mod on the site to ask what the big deal was and he summed it up that basically town's job is to lynch scum" is an appeal to authority. You claim that since experienced peers on the site have said that self-voting is bad, it must be. Also, those aren't buzz words, they're called logical fallacies. Yes, its so scummy to reference a logical fallacy in a game of logical argumentation Please refrain from giving condescending protips if you don't have a clue what you're talking about. And while its true that there were other things that could have been talked about, the self-vote has pretty definitively jump-started this game, and way better/quicker than either option you mentioned would've.

Again, I'm not saying its a good move to self-vote. And Hoopla is not near the top of my town list. But you claim it automatically makes her scum, when you know for an absolute fact that town-aligned players will sometimes self-vote. If you know for a fact that players will self-vote as town, how can you possibly consider it a valid scum tell? As Kingdom brought up, its just as much anti-scum as it is anti-town, if not more.

If no self respecting town player would ever self vote, if the person who just self voted has previously said that self voting is bad, and than that person self votes yes that pretty much means that she is probably scum. And yes, I did say town will self-vote but why did you cut out the entire portion of what I said? I said n00bs, VIs, and bad players will do this as town. I also said I don't consider Hoopla to be a N00b, a VI, or a bad player. People who are generally accepted as "good" players I don't think would ever self vote because self voting is anti-town.

No self-respecting player would ever self-vote? That's just false dude. Plain and simple. So is saying self-voting is anti-town. Nothing is ever that black and white, and so much depends on context. Further, I didn't cut out what you said. I quoted the entire post at the beginning of mine, and then later put two excerpts side by side to show how they contradicted each other.

now on to some other things you said in your post.

I wasn't trying to defend myself or pass the blame. My goal was to show Hoopla that I wasn't voting because she was crazy/unhelpful, but for the sake of a wagon.

I disagree with this, when a mom walks in and catches her son with his hand in the cookie jar, the knee jerk reaction is to say "it wasn't me" or "tommy made me do it" That is exactly what you did. Hoopla shows up and you immediately want to deflect attention from the fact that you contributed to her wagon. Your excuse of "I voted because kingdom told me it would be productive" is a cop out imo.

Except for the fact that I said "Suck it Kingdom" when I initially voted (it was only the third on the wagon) and never tried to be sneaky about my role in that bandwagon. I mean, look at the post you quoted. I said "I voted for the sake of the wagon" right in it. Come on dude, are you even reading?

My point about Robb is not that he's wrong. Its that he KNOWS protown players sometimes self-vote, while simultaneously believing that a self-vote from Hoopla = definite scum.

again you take my words out of context...

I don't believe I did actually. You said, quite explicitly, that you'd seen town-aligned players self vote. You also said, quite explicitly, that Hoopla's self-vote was scum giving up. That being said, it seems your vote is more a product of seeing in only black and white than anything else.

UNVOTE: Robb

[Elias_the_thief]

Just dropping by to say that my next real post will be postponed until my Stravinsky paper is finished. Should be either late tonight or early tomorrow afternoon if I'm lazy.

[Elias_the_thief]

Eh, I have surprisingly little to say about the last few pages. We need more input from the inactive. Or some more replacements. Perhaps an additional vote will ensure McStab actually comes back and posts. I'm still waiting to hear an answer to:

Spoiler: McStab

Also don't like this post from McStab. My comments are in bold.

Sorry if I'm not dripping with enthusiasm at a game in Page Three barely out of RVS as opposed to other games that are in LyLo or thirty pages in.

Hoopla's not being helpful, but I feel as though that'll change.

I'm interested in seeing carbondioxide's answers. However, I do wonder how nadroj's post #9 is less likely potential buddying than carbondioxide's post #14.

UNVOTE: scooby
VOTE: nadroj15

^^^The rationale for this vote is: Nadroj is buddying, let's put the first vote on him.

I would have to disagree. Correct me if wrong Val, but it seemed to me you were dismissing nadroj's attack on carbondioxide by pointing out that nadroj's post was in a very similar vein to carbons. In which case, buddying is not the rationale at all.

I don't really see either nadroj's post #9 or CO2's post #14 as buddying. I thought the posts were similar in that they made the same kind of joke. So when nadroj voted for CO2 for doing the same thing nadroj did the same thing a few posts before, I found that suspicious. My vote is intended to put pressure.

What I wanted to see CO2 answer was the point brought up by Elias_the_thief in post #22.

^^But when pressed on it there was NO buddying all of a sudden, but rather a vote against nadroj merely for hypocrisy. But another apparent reason is "I wanted to put pressure".

I think this is consistent with my interpretation.

He also wanted to see CO2 Answer Elias's question; so presumably the pressure was supposed to be on him. But instead the vote went on nadroj.

This is an interesting point, but its worth noting that the question had already been answered.

Something is amiss here, and someone is backtracking on their story.

Plus the vote on Hoopla is shameless sheeping/bandwagoning.

Is there something inherently wrong with sheeping/bandwagoning at this stage of the game?

Mainly just the last point though, the others have been well covered.
Well, hop to it then
VOTE: McStab

[Elias_the_thief]

I like how multiple people have referred to my "Suck it Kingdom" post as if it had any real meaning. I was acknowledging that he said not to vote Hoopla, in a humorous way. Chill your tits guys.

[Elias_the_thief]

Ranmaru:

Your formatting caused me some grief so I numbered things as they appeared.

1)

(Post 30) Starbuckles response seemed to imply to me that she didn't really think too much about calling it backtracking when she initially posted. My impression at first was that she was artificially trying to make CO2 look guiltier than he was, but I don't think that's the case after her response.

2)

(Post 40) I mentioned this in my last post because its annoying me. It was just meant to be funny. How is "Suck it!" not immediately reognizable as humorous?

3)

(Post 59) I don't really think I had much of a basis to vote McStab at that point. I pointed out two misinterpretations that were made, and asked a question about theory. There wasn't anything in the post that I could truly label as a tell, so why place a vote there? Its also worth pointing out that I didn't vote anyone in this post, and voted Robb, due to his headlong charge against Hoopla's self-vote, several posts later.

---

BT:

Special mention goes to Elias's connection to McStab, disliking without a vote in #59. This goes unmentioned when he votes Robbnva a few posts later, like it wasn't in consideration at all when choosing his vote.

Elias, do you find that being wrong is a scumtell, and if so how? That seems to be your entire case on both Robbnva and McStab.

Well first, let's not throw the word case around lightly. I pointed out flaws in McStab's logic and I'm waiting for a response. My point about Robb is not that he's wrong. Its that he KNOWS protown players sometimes self-vote, while simultaneously believing that a self-vote from Hoopla = definite scum. As I said in my initial post, it reads as if he just jumped on what he thought was an easy lynch.

Kingdom calls his comment on McStab a case and Elias hurries to explain that it's simply pointing out logic flaws. Doesn't that mean you didn't have "a case" on Robbnva either?

I never claimed to have a case on Robb. In this post I refer to my posts against Robb as "my point". I had nothing specific that made me think McStab was scum. I suppose you could refer to what I had on Robb as a case, but I personally never would. He just seemed eager for an easy lynch, which seemed a whole lot more damning than misinterpreting a post.

[Elias_the_thief]

I never claimed to have a case on Robb. In this post I refer to my posts against Robb as "my point". I had nothing specific that made me think McStab was scum. I suppose you could refer to what I had on Robb as a case, but I personally never would. He just seemed eager for an easy lynch, which seemed a whole lot more damning than misinterpreting a post.

Were you not accusing Robb of being absolute with the scum self-hammer notion? That sounds like attacking his logic to me. I don't recall your point being "eager for an easy lynch" back then.

See the end of post 74. I also refer to his play as lazy earlier in the game. How are attacking his logic and thinking he's eager for an easy lynch mutually exclusive? My point was that he thought he could get an easy lynch based off of the self-vote, which was consistent with his lazy play earlier. His logic being so shitty was just icing on the cake.

[Elias_the_thief]

Sorry guys, schools got me in a bind. Should be able to catch up on Thursday

[Elias_the_thief]

Still getting my shit rocked by school.

unvote

is in order though. Demon Core wagon seems unfounded. More tomorrow when this paper/quiz combo are taken care of.

[Elias_the_thief]

Well shucks guys, I'm sorry I haven't been as active as I should've been. To be honest the chancing of me posting detailed analysis of the last 5 pages is pretty slim, because its Friday and its fucking beautiful out. That being said, here are my thoughts in particular order:

I don't see Starbuckles' "both scum" post as a slip. Mainly because I've made similar assumptions in my own posts as town. I think the amount of scum you

believe

are in the game will often come out without much thought. I don't think the number is coming from scum knowledge.

I like BT's play the most so far. I don't like his insistence on the scumslip, but what are ya gonna do. Ranmaru and Scumhunter seem pretty town as well.

I find is interesting that carbon is reluctant to vote mcstab despite being a primary suspect. Otherwise seems mostly town.

Scooby seems like classic scooby. Aggressive and tunnel-visiony. Null on him. Can't get a good read on Kingdom or cartogropher.

I think BT's case on McStab is the most convincing yet. That being said, I'm not willing to lynch a a one-shot PR today. If his result sucks we can potentially lynch him tomorrow when we there's nothing to lose.

Don't really like dunhamganger. He's giving me heebie jeebies for some reason.

Null on Hoopla. Wouldn't be too opposed to lynching her in a day or two if she remains mostly unhelpful.

I don't really think there's much behind this Starbuckles wagon, but I guess its the best we've got under the circumstances. Anyhoo, let's hear that claim, then.

[Elias_the_thief]

I don't see Starbuckles' "both scum" post as a slip. Mainly because I've made similar assumptions in my own posts as town. I think the amount of scum you

believe

are in the game will often come out without much thought. I don't think the number is coming from scum knowledge.

In that case she would've come clean with it. Not pretend it didn't happen. That reaction is pretty incriminating imo. I also see nothing from her play to suggest that this wagon is wrong. What do you think of her play, slip aside?

I admit she took a long time to provide an answer, and thats pretty sketch. But I just don't think that was a slip. Her posts, besides the large gaps in between, seem pretty solid to me.

[Elias_the_thief]

No, if she in fact subconsciously assumed 2-scum as town, she would have just said it instead of going "no, I was assuming AT LEAST two scum, it's not a slip" and avoiding it altogether. I'm really having a hard time seeing this as anything but scum trying to avoid the issue.

I don't think she avoided the issue at all. Her answer was satisfactory to me. And I think mafia caught in a slip would've simply claimed they were used to having 2 scum in there games. The "at least two" part seems like an unnecessary and counterproductive detail that scum wouldn't have added just for fun. It makes me feel better about the supposed slip, not worse.

[Elias_the_thief]

Eh, scratch that, she definitely avoided it a little, it took her several posts to respond.

[Elias_the_thief]

Apologies guys I'll post tomorrow afternoon.

[Elias_the_thief]

@Hoopla: Ranmaru isn't even close to scummy in my book. I don't think PoE is really an effective tool until later in the game. Do you have reasons beyond the wagon analysis? Also, what about my post seems insincere?


I'm still pretty sure McStab is a scumbag. BT had more than a couple good points in his back and forth. The NK, while I don't like to look too much into NK's, was pretty obvious one for McStab scum, and his claim is easily fakeable. Would be down for McStab wagon.

For now I'm more interested in Dunham though. This obsessive tunneling on Scumhunter is a) unproductive b) a way to avoid the bulk of the game and c) plain ol' dishonest. Like, look at 426. Who thinks like that? I mean we literally just watched a "slip" turn out to be nothing. What are you getting at? I understand Robb's ragequit is a town tell, but I mean...he could've just been pissed off, regardless of alignment. I don't like the arrogance that Dunham projects from post to post. Makes me think that he's all too happy to be given that benefit of the doubt from Robb's slot.
VOTE: Dunham

[Elias_the_thief]

Elias, if you are pretty sure McStab is a scumbag, why are you joining the wagon he is starting? Do you think he is bussing?

If I was THAT sure he was a scumbag, I'd be voting him. I generally like to wait for flipped scum before basing my votes on who started which wagons. But I mean, there is the fact that Dunham has expressed suspicion of McStab several times in the past few pages for a variety of reasons and refrained from voting him. Instead he lead a crusade against scumhunter. And then voted for Ranmaru based on a much less than he's expressed towards McStab.

@Hoopla: Ranmaru isn't even close to scummy in my book. I don't think PoE is really an effective tool until later in the game. Do you have reasons beyond the wagon analysis? Also, what about my post seems insincere?

I found his vote to be lacking, which in and of itself isn't a crime given how close we were to deadline, but I dislike his subsequent follow-up posts eagerly talking up Starbuckles slip, when Ranmaru had made little to no mention of Starbuckles until that point - seemed like he was trying to justify a vote with something other than a deadline-anyone-but-me vote, when that reasoning could have sufficed. I think scum tend to rationalise and justify their votes more than town.

Do you think he is town then? What for?

I think that his contribution has been pretty consistent and genuine. I feel that the "slip" was probably the best thing we had to go on for a day 1 lynch. I didn't even think it was a slip but I was down to hammer in absence of anything else, just to move the game along. Considering my line of thinking at the time, I just don't see what you do in his deadline play.

As for your post - I don't like the fence-sitty vibe of it around deadline. Addresses a lot of things, but doesn't really go beyond the surface with anything you bring up. Just looks like the sort of filler scum make. As I said at the end of my wall-post, I'll be making an analysis of you/Kingdom/scooby soon, so I'll talk in more detail then.

I would classify that post as lazy rmore than anything else. I gave a pretty good idea of where I stood on every player, besides those that I remained null on. I posted the bare bones because it was a beautiful sunny Friday and sometimes I'd rather be out playing guitar on the quad than posting detailed comments on several pages of a mafia game.

[Elias_the_thief]

Vote:Ranmaru

Long story short, sheeping Hoopla.

If there's a long story, please elaborate. What convinced you? What do you think now that Hoopla's backed off?

It just seems really weird that he'd respond to me like that, and I can't see him doing it as scum. I think I probably took a cavalier approach to my interpretation of the deadline play - I made bold assertions about Ranmaru's motivations to which he's provided decent counterpoints. The rest of his numbered points I won't respond to as they're largely differences in scumhunting/townhunting methods, but I will mention that voting the least townie player on a D1 mislynch isn't a bad tactic.

Glad you see what I see. Ranmaru's hella town. Why the kingdom vote though?

She tries to prove why Mcstab is town due to his claim only, and not his play.

His claim is part of his play, and I tend to find this to be more reliable than behavioural tells.

If he's smart enough to know why fakeclaiming a role as scum is sensible upon being wagoned D1, then he's smart enough to claim something with actual upside that would give way better odds of survival. The only way he's scum is if his exact role is 1-Shot Mafia Tracker, which I just cannot see in this setup.

Unless of course he claimed 1-shot because he knew it would seem impractical and potentially keep him alive a few days. Or perhaps he's just not that sensible. Pointing out the infeasibility of one possible motivation for claiming 1-shot as scum is no where near enough to call them town. Not to mention the fact that we don't know anything near the full setup at this point.

fos hoopla

This seems fencesitty to me on both Robb and Hoopla. Elias throws out a general feeling "This post sets off some bells" but then she really waivers around what gives her a bad feeling and states that it's either a "knee-jerk omgus or just overly explaining vote logic", but she doesn't explain why those are scummy.

If my post seems fencesitty its probably because I didn't feel very strongly about either of the tells I brought up. It was pretty early game and I mainly made that post to start some dialog.

I really disagree with Robb's entire philosophy apparently, because I think that the textbook scum tells which he had been looking for are superficial and much easier for town to do by accident than for scum to do because scum is often more cautious. However, things like appealing to emotion, authority, numbers are really important to me because I think they show people who's intent is to manipulate information/emotions rather than provide solid reasoning for their scum reads. Furthermore, I only think that Robb was willing to dismiss appeals to authority, numbers etc because he was specifically being called out for using those in a scummy manner.

Good posting here.

This is a really watered down, toned down post...really there are a few town reads but the scum reads are really lacking and the remnants of scum reads are poorly substantiated. Furthermore, the attitude behind this seems so nonchalant towards finding scum and seems to be perfectly fine with not lynching scum yesterDay and with not taking part in an attempt to find scum.

I've addressed this before. It was beautiful out. I was being lazy, yes. McStab's wagon died instantly when he claimed. The wagon that replaced his was one based on a "slip" tell that I disagreed with, but I wasn't going to refrain from hammering if it came down to it.

Ok. From now on, I want everyone who prod dodges to say when exactly they will post a catch up. No "Will post in a bit". For example, "Will post tonight" "Within the hour" "In a few days", so that we know when to expect a post from you. I want everyone to do this.

Oh, interesting. The pot calling the kettle black in the name of appearing pro-town? Why is this guy still alive?

Do you ever like, scum hunt? Or are you just all one-liners? And seeing as you read July's catchup post, do you have anything to say about his vote for you?

[Elias_the_thief]

I don't really think there's much behind this Starbuckles wagon, but I guess its the best we've got under the circumstances. Anyhoo, let's hear that claim, then.

Nice misrepresentation Kingdom. I'm pretty sure in the above post I was defending him and also agreeing to lynch him in absence of anything better. How am I reversing my earlier comments?

[Elias_the_thief]

Yeah...Dunham doesn't look so bad when Mcstab is making posts like 551.

unvote: Dunham

vote: McStab

[Elias_the_thief]

Prod dodge. I have bronchitis. I support Mcstab lynch, would also do Dunham lynch. Not really sure what the case against Kingdom is.

[Elias_the_thief]

This is dumb.

I won't be here when deadline hits, so I'm just gonna change now. We can't afford to no-lynch - honestly, any lynch is better than no-lynch, even though I don't agree with this one. But in the event McStab flips town, we can at least solidify Scumhunter being town and also pull back influence tomorrow from the numpties leading this wagon today.

VOTE: McStab

Sorry friend.

Hrm. I seem to remember you giving McStab a pass for most of the day for almost no reason...now where was that...

She tries to prove why Mcstab is town due to his claim only, and not his play.

His claim is part of his play, and I tend to find this to be more reliable than behavioural tells.

If he's smart enough to know why fakeclaiming a role as scum is sensible upon being wagoned D1, then he's smart enough to claim something with actual upside that would give way better odds of survival. The only way he's scum is if his exact role is 1-Shot Mafia Tracker, which I just cannot see in this setup.

Unless of course he claimed 1-shot because he knew it would seem impractical and potentially keep him alive a few days. Or perhaps he's just not that sensible. Pointing out the infeasibility of one possible motivation for claiming 1-shot as scum is no where near enough to call them town. Not to mention the fact that we don't know anything near the full setup at this point.

fos hoopla

If the setup is 2:10, 1-Shot Tracker makes perfect sense as a town role. From what I've seen of scum fakeclaims D1, they always tend to be full roles like Cop, Tracker, Doctor, Jailkeeper, etc. It's only a level above that with seasoned players in tune with site meta that attempt to go for creative claims (or even the VT gambit), but generally, these players are savvy enough to not be wagoned early anyway.

Tucking it all away under the uncertainty rug is lame - I think we have a reasonable idea of McStab's level of competence, or at least I do, and I'll bet my shoes on McStab not being smart enough to realise the impracticality of claiming the role, in turn making him look town. It's likelier that that is actually his role.

Honestly the way you were clearing him seems very...unnatural. Its not like you to rely on such a wifomy thing to determine alignment. Its almost like you wanted an excuse to tuck him away and steer the game in a different direction.
VOTE: Hoopla

[Elias_the_thief]

I meant in this game silly.

[Elias_the_thief]

How did you establish your baseline for how I normally am within a single game? The fact I did that this game kind of implies that's how I normally play (if you're only looking at this game).

My baseline is every other read you've had this game. For whom else did you propose one possible scum motivation for an action, determine it unlikely, and use that as the basis of an irreversible town read? Because it seems you did that for only one player, which is, if you don't mind me saying, an abnormality. Its just interesting that said player happens to be scum.

[Elias_the_thief]

My point isn't really the singularity of the event, its just the complete inability to include very, very real possibilities when determining the motivation behind a potential fakeclaim. It doesn't seem like you (this game you, mind you) to just be like 'Nope, its not possible that McStab would be thinking on a higher level, better look elsewhere'. I'm sure clearing people is your thing or whatever, but I'm just not convinced that this was a genuine mistake.

[Elias_the_thief]

I honestly don't know what you're accusing me of - I believe I said there was an outside of him being scum, but it was unlikely. Regardless, I am doing the same with Scumhunter now, and I'm tempted to think of Ranmaru in a similar light now. If this is my "thing" then why are you treating this as a special case?

How is using info from a flip to deduce someone's alignment the same as using complete conjecture to deduce someone's alignment?

I also don't see the number of scum as a very strong argument for or against you being scum. There are at least two, so that seems to leave room for you.

[Elias_the_thief]

I honestly don't know what you're accusing me of - I believe I said there was an outside of him being scum, but it was unlikely. Regardless, I am doing the same with Scumhunter now, and I'm tempted to think of Ranmaru in a similar light now. If this is my "thing" then why are you treating this as a special case?

How is using info from a flip to deduce someone's alignment the same as using complete conjecture to deduce someone's alignment?

?

So I'm after Carbon?

[Elias_the_thief]

I'm a VT.

I'm not too swayed by the Dunham case. I think the Hoopla connection is stronger, and there's no way I'm considering lynching a claimed Nurse until tomorrow.

[Elias_the_thief]

Or you could go back and red what I've said, maybe even answering my follow up question that you've ignored twice. Ranmaru also has some good literature on the subject that you could probably check out.

[Elias_the_thief]

Snake is the wrong lynch. There's no way I'm throwing away a perfectly valid connection case because the connection is too strong to be true, or whatever. Hoopla's the lynch today

[Elias_the_thief]

Elias, do you really think that scumHoopla would flat out tell us D1 that we were facing two scum and that McStab was actually a 1-shot tracker regardless of alignment and actually be telling the truth about all of it?

Without the doctor flip everything about Hoopla's speculation made perfect sense from a town point of view. On D2 I realize my stated reasons for thinking McStab's role was more likely a scum one were mostly just too many PR's have claimed/flipped compared to the number of revealed roles at the time. Seeing as at most there was one other PR, that reasoning was clearly wrong even though the conclusion was correct, so someone more experienced in the subject would probably be able to see through this faulty logic. There wasn't anyone else using the setup to determine McStab's alignment, so she just assumed that the best reasoning put forward was the correct one, which was her own. TownHoopla's thought process makes sense, but scumHoopla's does not make sense at all.

Aside from the setup speculation, what connection is there?

Wait, that paragraph was just a pile of nonsense, try again. What point exactly are you trying to make?

I think scumHoopla needed some actual contribution in order to remain out of consideration for lynch. Setup speculation is easy to make, as scum or town, and is therefore the most viable thing to do in the absence of reads (ie as scum). But the setup spec was not really why Hoopla cleared McStab, it was purely a guess about the level that ScumStab would be operating on. This really makes no sense as TownHoopla. Complete conjecture, after several paragraphs of logical setup spec? This play makes perfect sense as scum if she didn't expect McStab to be lynched when he was, which I don't think she did.

[Elias_the_thief]

Seriously? We're going to settle for a lurker lynch on day three? This is pathetic

[Elias_the_thief]

I think its utterly ridiculous that neither Hoopla or Scumhunter were serious considerations for the lynch yesterday. I mean, I admit calling Snake a lurker lynch was a bit of an exaggeration, but seriously people. Since when can two players with strong connections to a flipped scum BOTH make it through a day no problem? In conclusion, I'm gonna do a reread this weekend but I believe the only course of action is lynching either Hoopla or Scumhunter. Preferably Hoopla, because he's scum and all.

[Elias_the_thief]

Lol at ranmaru calling me ignorant. My post ill come tomorrow, I have a lot of shit to make up for school today.

[Elias_the_thief]

So um, unless anyone in this game is a java expert who can magically finish my lab for me in the next 20 minutes, I won't really be able to post until tomorrow.

[Elias_the_thief]

About halfway through my reread/Hoopla case. I have class now but will return to it and finish tonight. Again, sorry for the delay but academia comes first.

[Elias_the_thief]

Things I don't like about Hoopla/Why I think the connection is worth consideration:

Spoiler:

1. Post 262/263. I think the reasons Hoopla gives to jump off the wagon are quite frankly bullshit, and overexplained. He acknowledges his reasoning for leaving the wagon is a bit premature, but jumps off regardless because he found it likely that scum was pushing the wagon. He also cites the unlikelihood of scum bussing day 1 to support his point, but doesn't acknowledge the much more realistic possibility of distancing. It seems odd to me that a player who pays pretty close attention to detail would completely ignore this scenario. In 263, as if realizing the faults of 262, continues to back up his vote change by comparing his wagon's progress to McStab's. But the wagon's were for completely different reasons, and its not a fair comparison in the least. I don't think Hoopla could miss that obvious truth unless he did so intentionally. Additionally, saying that McStab's wagon had plateau'd was pretty false; McStab had to claim to prevent his lynch.

2. His inactivity, especially around deadlines. I think that 447 is an attempt to redeem himself as a productive member of the town, but I'm not convinced. It is mostly setup speculation and wagon analysis, which is in my experience the easiest type of contribution to safely make as scum. Its also of note that he promises analysis of myself and two other players and never makes that analysis. This reinforces my belief that he was contributing in appearance only and didn't really care about finding scum all that much.

3. 492 seems contrived. "Your vote, like you say, is little more than a deadline vote - the fact you talked about her after you placed a vote doesn't change that and sort of waters down your contradiction, which seems to be the catalyst for your suspicion of me. My post was created over the course of a couple of hours, without any real overarching plans when I started writing - I'd be surprised if I didn't make some logical errors or contradictions at some point." This once again makes me believe that Hoopla is apathetic to his scumhunting. How can you possibly base a vote off of a post that you expect to contain logical errors and contradictions?

4. His attempts to clear McStab based on his claim. I'm not willing to disregard this because he's too experienced to so clearly connect himself. This is a similar line of thinking to his initial decision to clear McStab. You can't assume the level that a player is operating, and I'm not willing to completely disregard this connection because of his experience. It is entirely possible that he didn't expect McStab to be lynched when he was, and made the posts under that assumption. And its not that far-fetched that he would make that connection super clear in order to get the exact response that he has from the town; complete disregard of the connection. I'm not saying that's necessarily the case, but I am saying that too scummy to be scum is a stupid argument and a stupid reason to not lynch Hoopla.

5. On page 22 Hoopla is asked again to make the analysis he promised. After responding to several points made in the post that ARENT that, Ranmaru reminds him of the point and Hoopla says he's sure he will get to it, but at the same time says it would "merely be refining within the group of players I'm already settled upon lynching" but at this point has never clearly stated who he is settled on lynching. He then goes on to say the game doesn't need another wall post but thats a poor excuse. Firstly, thats why god invented spoiler tags, and secondly, this line of thought did not prevent him from making a massive post on the next day that continues to avoid his promised analysis.

6. McStab hammer is a really bad post. It honestly makes no sense when he had so recently listed him as someone he didn't want to lynch. It seems like a last ditch effort to dismiss his connection with McStab when it became clear that he was the lynch.

I'll admit its not a fool proof case, and I've never been a stellar scumhunter (my town record is something like 2-8). But I feel that Hoopla's play throughout hasn't been genuine; when he's needed to contribute, he's relied almost solely on setup spec. When he's promised to actually analize players, he danced around the subject and made excuses. And the manner of his McStab hammer makes me really uncomfortable. I don't think the connection is too good to be true. The point about his result on Scumhunter is just not really that great. For one, he was actually a tracker and therefore the safest play for him was to post his actual results. For two, it functions as a pretty convenient cover for the blatant connection between Hoopla-McStab. The fact that Hoopla points to this as a stronger connection than his own strikes me as pretty shifty.

=====================================================================

Scumhunter, I only mention you in my first post of the day in order to stress how utterly ridiculous the Snake lynch was in the face of much better options. I've had a town read on you and Ranmaru for a while now. I'm not sure who I would put next on my scumlist, were Hoopla to flip town. I'm gonna read again and look more closely at Kingdom and CO2, who I have pretty fuzzy reads on. And of course I'll look at Ranmaru and yourself as well. This is also why I haven't plopped down my vote yet; I thought Hoopla was scum yesterday and I think he's scum today, but now that we're so close to LYLO I want to solidify ALL my reads before I actually commit to a lynch.

[Elias_the_thief]

To win this sort of setup as scum, it's highly likely one of you or your partner needs to win in a 3p lylo, which essentially means you need to appear townier than a significant chunk of the game. There is no incentive to link myself to McStab so heavily, when to win this setup as scum, I need to do the opposite and appear really town in relation to my partner (in the event one of us dies).

I guess I hadn't really thought of the 3p LYLO...that's actually a pretty good point.

I've sucked as town this game, but that is mostly due to lack of interest. My scum game never flounders - in fact, it is something I pride myself on. I hope you realise I wouldn't be this retarded to link myself to my buddy in such a novice way. Sure, you can dismiss it as wifom, but you should really think to yourself what incentive I have as scum to do that, when I am perfectly capable of bussing on D1 for easy town credit. How on earth do you think my actions come anywhere near being smart as scum? Essentially, do you think I'm dumb enough to make myself that obvious as scum?

I'm the same way when it comes to scum play verse town play, but at the same time I think that the possibility of high risk high reward is a real one. Although thinking about the 3 player LYLO certainly has made me doubt myself a little bit. But look, I'm not saying you're the only person I'm willing to lynch. I'm saying I don't really have any leads and you're the most likely candidate at this point. I've been similarly disinterested in this game and I haven't solidified most of my reads yet as I intend to.

Even though Elias has posted now, I still have absolutely no read on him. It seems to me that all he's done all game was provide null content. While I still have no reason to call him scum, I don't have a reason to think he is town either, and this is worrying to me...It still could be Ranmaru, but right now I don't want to lynch anyone else.

Wait...you don't want to lynch anyone, except for the person you have no read on? When we are likely one day away from LYLO?
I also don't think its fair to say I didn't vote McStab when there as a real chance of him being lynched...my vote was already on him.

[Elias_the_thief]

Second reread almost complete. Post and vote coming tonight.

[Elias_the_thief]

Ranmaru

- My town read, upon looking back, was in large part based on the fact that his stances have pretty much mirrored mine for most of the game. Additionally, I think that coming in that hard out of the gate against McStab is an unlikely scum move, especially since his attacks read genuine to me. I don't think there's much to the traitor argument, however. He's also been a bit jumpy today, but I think that could be explained by the sheer lack of activity on the part of most of this game's players (sorry guys, I know I'm part of this problem, but I'm working on it).

ScumHunter/Bork

- I already had a town read from Scumhunter. Looking back, its really not all that well founded. I think his reaction to Dunham's aggression is protown. I also think that the track makes sense given the soft-claim, and the fact that BT was far and away the towniest and most active player. SH's replace-out post strikes me as town...there is likely one scum left and I don't think a scum on his way out would go out of his way to post analysis like that. Not a fool proof point, but its a point in his favor. I don't want to lynch Scumhunter today, but my town read is a lot less clear than I remember it.

Kingdom

- I previously considered Kingdom and Carbon about equal in terms of scumminess. They both were major parts of the push for a snake lynch, and neither of them for very good reasons. I don't like his vote on me, nor his switch to Ranmaru. If all of your reads right now are Town, except on null, then town thing to do would be to reevaluate your reads, not hope that the one you can't read is scum just by pure chance. I mean, he's been pointing to me as someone to consider for most of the game, but always because he can't get a real read. Why the hell not? I have well documented behavior on more than one wagon, and I've chimed in on most of main issues of the game, as well as having pretty clear lynch intentions. Not to mention he claims 'no reason' to see me as town despite my consistent support for the McStab lynch and refusal to join the shitty Snake lynch. Also, you say you have a reason to think Scumhunter is town. What is that again?

Carbon

- My main read on carbon is that he is not a very good scumhunter. He seems to nitpick, and really likes the ideas of 'slips' even though they failed thus far, and are honestly just not a good tell in general. Not to mention he's been seiously stretching for a lot of them, as Ranmaru pointed out. That being said, the Carbon case really isn't convincing....I keep getting this feeling that he's town and just really really unsure of how to find scum. This recent back and forth with Ranmaru makes me feel better about him; he's raised some good points, but mostly ones that defeat Ranmaru's, and none that I can get behind that implicate anyone as scum. I don't think he has much of a case on Ranmaru. Also, being very unhelpful by not revealing reads.

Hoopla

- I believe I've documented my Hoopla suspicion pretty well. The point he raises about the 3p LYLO is a good point, but I'm still not willing to rule him out. Depending on who else is in said LYLO, he could still come out on top in that situation.

So basically, I'm not lynching Ranmaru or Bork today. I would still be most in favor of the Hoopla lynch. If Hoopla's not in the cards then its gotta be Kingdom.

Vote: Hoopla

[Elias_the_thief]

First thing I want to set straight, Snake was not a lurker lynch. I personally still agree with everything I said in relation to it, even if it did end up being wrong. I'm not going to quote all of it now because it has little relevance anymore, but Elias and Ranmaru calling it a travesty that never should have happened are flat out lying.

False, that lynch was complete shit. Your case was 665, its basically PoE, and the reasoning amounts to Ranmaru seems town but don't know why, and can't read Elias or Hoopla, so vote Snake. Oh yeah, and the part where you accuse Scooby of lying about your vote being on McStab day 1 (and by the way, despite your repeated claims otherwise, your vote was on McStab day 1, as of post 35). You need to go back and read your own posts because there is some serious revisionist history going on here.

Elias, you really haven't done anything all game. Yes you stated your positions on things, but always from the point of view as a bystander. I haven't noticed anything that would make more sense as any particular alignment. You distanced yourself from all of the major wagons in the game except the McStab one, which voted him when he was under minimal pressure and then vanished until after the lynch. You can't really be given any credit for that.

How does one state things as a bystander?
How does one do anything but distance themselves from a wagon they disagree with?
What else do you expect me to do once my vote is down and he essentially stops posting? Spam the thread with "OMG MCSTABS SCUM GUIZE" posts?

I don't post all that much or all that often and I've certainly lurked, but I don't understand how you can say you can't read me unless you choose not to. Do you think its a coincidence that ONLY YOU can't get a read on me?

My reason for not joining the Scumhunter lynch was because scum are not going to claim a track innocent on their partner, and the rest of the case was connections to me which I know are inaccurate. Yeah, him voting me after I voted McStab was bad, but it doesn't seem out of place from what I'd come to expect from him.

Well that's pretty damn WIFOM.

[Elias_the_thief]

This is just my case on Scooby/Snake. Hoopla and Carbon had their share of points as well, which I'll quote if you need me to, but ISOing isn't that hard....

All Snake did at this point is defend himself by saying the case I presented that Ranmaru quoted was WIFOM, dismissing the rest of it as OMGUS (which it may have been to some extent, but that was far from the whole case) and not giving any reads of his own. Even if the case on him beforehand was as bad as you are claiming it was, his responses alone made the lynch worthwhile.

Actually, his responses made me believe he was disinterested and uninvolved with the game. He was before the case was posted, and I didn't see much change. I don't think any of his response can be called scummy, just unsatisfactory. If you already thought he was scum I suppose this would support your preexisting opinion, but otherwise its not all that damning. I don't think the extra three posts you quoted amount to much of anything, definitely not a case. I still see you pushing a lurker lynch with some weak pretenses, then using his lack of involvement to seal the deal.

You stated your positions on the wagons, but didn't fight for them. You just let them happen. If you actually believed in what you were saying, you would have attempted to make other people see it as well.

Actually, I defended Starbuckles in three separate posts, and I made two separate posts denouncing the Snake lynch, but I wasn't about to change the minsd of three different people. I was trying very hard to convince people to vote Hoopla instead. While this isn't directly fighting for Snake's life, it was attempting to get town to go in a different direction. And to put things in perspective, I really haven't been posting all that much all game. I believe my posts against those wagons are significant.

McStab did not stop posting. It's not like he was the only possible lynch candidate either, there were still a lot of people who were on the fence or were voting me instead. There was still a very real possibility that he wasn't getting lynched that day, so until the hammer was thrown, there were still things to say.

He didn't stop posting completely but he was posting much less. I don't see why you think I should've continued to make posts on the subject when I had already decided who I wanted lynched, and stated why. I'm not into writing big cases as so many players in this game seem to be. The biggest post I made was my recent case on Hoopla, which was essentially demanded of me.

Who is this everyone else who has given a read on you again? Pretty much the only alignment tell I've seen mentioned about you was that you were on McStab's wagon, which I've already said I disagree with. Actually make this a question to everyone. If everyone can give a read on Elias, even without reasons until tomorrow for everyone except Ranmaru, I'll back off.

You said yourself, and it is pretty clear in his posting, that Ranmaru considers me town. Hoopla has stated that he trusts me (i.e. I'm town) despite my vote for him. Scumhunter said he believed me to be likely scum before he replaced out. You and Carbon (who's on his second on site game) are the only ones who don't seem to have an opinion.

I would vote Kingdom at deadline if it becomes clear that we aren't lynching Hoopla. I don't like the possibility of facing LYLO tomorrow with both Scumhunter's slot and Hoopla's still alive.

[Elias_the_thief]

I definitely didn't think my case on Snake was weak, and all you did to show you disagreed was just state that you thought Snake was a bad lynch. It doesn't matter how many times you said it if in doing so you made no effort to back these statements up.

I would've if there had been a case to refute. Refuting the case was as easy as saying "that's wrong". Even now you only summoned up three posts to represent your "case" and not a single one was worth a vote, let alone a lynch.

If you didn't think you would be able to change anyone's mind, then why did you even bother posting your stance on Hoopla, or more generally why are you here? Isn't that the purpose of playing mafia? Unless since yesterday you were planning on getting Hoopla lynched today, then part of getting people to see why your suspect is scummier then theirs is saying why they are wrong.

I didn't think I could deter people from the lynch by refuting the case because there was really nothing there. How am I supposed to refute nothing if not by saying that the lynch is bad/ essentially a lurker lynch? I presented a much better alternative, and stated that there was nothing behind the Snake lynch. I was under a lot of pressure from school, and it was a lot easier to advocate my suspect then to try and defend Snake, who clearly had no interest in playing even if I managed to derail the lynch. You seem to expect me to be superman, defending Snake from attacks from three different players, while simultaneously advocating my own suspect's lynch, all the while dealing with my school work, illness, and various extra-curricular obligations.

I suppose you did to defend Starbuckles, but that just leaves me wondering why you didn't even bother defending Snake all the more.

Because when I was defending Starbuckles, my number one suspect had just claimed tracker, making his lynch an impossibility, so it didn't involve doing two different things at once. Additionally, the bulk of the Starbuckles case was his slip, something tangible and refutable, whereas Snake's was fluff on top of more fluff with some conjecture for flavor.

On day 2, you did almost exactly as much to lynch McStab as you did to save Snake. Early on you said a few things and then immediately downplayed them, and later on you resorted to contentless posts.

A) Did you consider the fact that halfway through Day 2 I had bronchitus and almost stopped posting entirely?
B) How does this affect your interpretation of my contentless posts?
C) Where the hell did I downplay my own points?

[Elias_the_thief]

As far as 221 is concerned: it wasn't a case, and I clarified as such, as a part of a larger post that addressed everything that had been recently said to/about me. I also clarify that I wouldn't call my points against Robb a case and his slot turned out to be a nurse. What exactly makes my clarification of McStab "jumpy" and my clarification of Robb not?

I can't really speak for McStab's actions. I don't believe this one post trumps the much better established connections to Scumhunter and Hoopla

Day 2: That is by no means downplaying my points, its explaining that suspecting McStab is no reason to not vote Dunham. I said I was pretty sure that he was scum, then clarified that I wasn't absolutely certain, which is why I was fine putting my vote on someone he suspected. There's no reason to restrict your suspects based on the opinion of a suspect unless they're already flipped scum...

In regards to 544: You mean after you blatantly misrepresented me? My position on Starbuckles was completely clear, and you'd just ISO'd me. So yeah. Pretty weak point there.

In regards to 612: he wasn't the only one who mentioned suspicion of a kingdom-Elias scum team. In fact, it came directly after two posts discussing just that possibility. Convenient how you missed that.

[Elias_the_thief]

Ok. I wanted to respond to Kingdom's post but I guess I'll do it tomorrow, assuming I'm still alive.

Unvote, vote KingdomAces

[Elias_the_thief]

Statistically speaking, the smartest play is a no lynch. Why would we want to make a choice out of 4 at LYLO when we could be doing it at 3 with that much less chance of mislynching for the loss?

[Elias_the_thief]

Statistically speaking, the smartest play is a no lynch. Why would we want to make a choice out of 4 at LYLO when we could be doing it at 3 with that much less chance of mislynching for the loss?

Of course, but we aren't going to without some discussion. For example, why did you wait until 1 minute to vote after deadline? Are you some sort of indy? Spit it out. You have been tunneling HARD on Hoopla for some reason. Are you not allowed to be on a lynch? Why HAVEN'T you been on a lynch THIS WHOLE DAMN GAME. Tell me.

I vote precisely when I arrived back at my room after jazz combo. My schedule doesn't always line up with mafia games. Also, I've voted for lynches that I thought were good and not for ones that are bad. I've reread (twice) and still think Hoopla is the last scum. There has been nothing in the past few pages to change that, seeing as she's effectively dropped out of the game.

Also, you know my suspects, and why. They haven't changed with Bork's death.

[Elias_the_thief]

It seems to me that discussing today helps scum set up the perfect situation for themselves tomorrow more than it seems to be helping us right now.

vote: no lynch

[Elias_the_thief]

Y'see, I must've missed the part where I agreed to you being in charge and dictating who does what and when. You want to know my "picks"? ISO me. I've been pretty clear about who I suspect lately.

I'm aware that, mathematically there's no reason to lynch today but I'm finding this game so exasperating I'm tempted to go for a 'f**k it lynch' - as my fellow Townies seem SO apathetic about whether we win or not its making me feel like an idiot for giving so much of a damn.

How are you simultaneously complaining about town being apathetic and about someone trying to take charge?

As I said, I'm pretty sure discussion today helps scum more than town, so I'm actually not being apathetic; quite the opposite. Attempting a "f**k it lynch" is possibly the dumbest thing we could do right now, so why don't we just no lynch and get to tomorrow when we can have a "game winning" lynch instead?

Also, not sure what Ranmaru thinks he's going to accomplish by placing that vote. No one is going to place a second vote when it creates the potential for a game ending hammer (if Hoopla's town). Even the strongest supporter of a Hoopla lynch (myself) wouldn't place that vote today so I don't think there's any real pressure. Nor do I think Hoopla cares enough to even address the question

[Elias_the_thief]

Toasting in epic bread. Not much to say, still want a no lynch.

[Elias_the_thief]

Why do you think its Hoopla exactly? I agree but I don't remember you ever expressing suspicion of Hoopla until now.

[Elias_the_thief]

It does give me pause that I'm still alive with Hoopla if Hoopla is scum...I don't make any sense to bring along to the final three. At the same time, the only reason I haven't focused on Hoopla lynch earlier is the argument that he couldn't survive 3p LYLO. If I didn't lynch Hoopla and lost I would never forgive myself.

Carbon: It makes me feel better that you've been willing to lynch Hoopla for a while, but I want to know more of why. You never list a particularly strong reason, and you haven't seemed all that interested in actually getting Hoopla lynched (despite her place on your "lynch list") until you arrived in this situation with me and her.

[Elias_the_thief]

Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

VOTE: Hoopla

[Elias_the_thief]

Well I'm legitimately surprised I was able to ride my McStab bus all the way to the end. That bus was SLOPPY, but I guess I'm not complaining. Everyone came off pretty bad on that lynch. Other than that my strategy was stay townier than Hoopla and make calculated NK's.

Kudos to BT for being almost spot on in his early day suspects. I'm glad no one noticed you died shortly after implicating both McStab and I.

[Elias_the_thief]

... I'm legitimately surprised. Elias was a shady figure for most of the game, but D1-D2 looked pretty incriminating for Hoopla.
CO2 was obvtown from page 1.

I think once I got back into the game I seemed pretty town, but I admit my play through D2-D3 was pretty sketch. I would've lynched me.

[Elias_the_thief]

http://www.quicktopic.com/48/H/NwGqRfqNy48
Pretty boring, honestly