Mini 1483: Finagling of Flitter Hills

[sthar8]

/confirm

[sthar8]

VOTE: FeelIt

For tender words over a corpse.

[sthar8]

Ooh I like this idea. Incoming shortly.

[sthar8]

Have any of you played together before?
How many games have you played on this site?
What is your win ratio?
Why shouldn't I lynch you?

I played a game with FeelIt recently. It's still ongoing.

This will be game nine on mafiascum. Seven of those were about five years ago, I'm just starting to get back into things. I play offline regularly.

Four wins, two losses, one game uncompleted, one game ongoing. I don't track my record elsewhere, because I mainly play with kids.

Because I win way more than I lose, and it's statistically likely that we're both town, so you should want me alive and contributing.

[sthar8]

VOTE: kcda

Serious vote.

[sthar8]

The second one.

[sthar8]

We are official out of RQ&VS. Any non-serious posts from this point on will be taken as scummy. Please start posting seriously.

VOTE: sthar8

Fine, be scummy then. When you decide to tell me why you voted them then I will gladly change my vote, but until then my vote is on you and I wouldn't mind lynching you.

Quite.

My vote is lonely. And charizard/ paper's votes shouldnt be left unsupervised.

You did put logic into your vote though so at least you aren't scummy right now.

There is logic behind my vote.

[sthar8]

Show me the logic. Maybe I am searching the wrong thread because there sure isn't any logic of your vote in this one.

Supervise my vote please. Whatever that means.

Didn't say it was in thread, only that it exists.

And your vote is bound to get up to no good with paper's, so it needs other votes to keep it in line. Duh.

[sthar8]

anyone around?

I'm here.

When I first voted sthar8 it was more to get him to realize that what he was doing was not very town.

How?

You can't just vote people, and refuse to give some sort of reason for it.

Nonsense. Can and did. Unless you're trying to hurt KCDA's feelings by implying that he's not "people."

I am curious to hear about this logic he is keeping from us.

No

him keeping anything hidden is suspicious to me.

Why?

[sthar8]

Also, since it's served it's purpose:

Unvote

Time for another

VOTE: Bastecharizord[/bold]

[sthar8]

ALL OF THE RED FLAGS

[sthar8]

I've got some ideas. I'm waiting for more from charizard and paper before I make them public. I'd like to see smudger's intro as well, but I'm not going to wait for it.

In the meantime, feel free to talk more about me. That's protown.

[sthar8]

^ I endorse this message

[sthar8]

sthar8 do you have any solid reads?

Mashed potatoes. But it's early days yet, and the information we're getting now is invaluable. 1/3 of the conditions for me posting a read list have been met. In the meantime, you should vote for me or charizard.

but you need to refresh my memory. was I in this fire and ice? and what happened?

Some say the world ended. Twice.

[sthar8]

Do you know what the word "invaluable" means?

[sthar8]

If you are, please stop.

mmmmm No. The conditions have not been met. Shouldn't be too long now.

We need to scum hunt.

Well, I agree that

you

need to start scumhunting.

I am also worried that either beast or charizard is scum.

It's one or the other, can't be both of them.

There is more I want to post, but first I must drive home from work and get down on a cheeseburger in the most disgusting manner possible. Continue discussing me and/or visualizing my activities until then.

[sthar8]

The joke isn't funny if you point it out, Feel It.

[sthar8]

No I'm pretty sure he did it on accident. It's just me.

[sthar8]

That burger was truly wonderful.

You still didn't give us valuable information though.

Then you're not paying attention. Don't worry, I'll spell it all out soon enough.

And I am ever talking more to appease you.

This pleases me. More!

For the record. My vote is serious and I intend to keep it here until someone does something more worthy of my vote.

Yes, we know. You seem awfully concerned that everyone is aware that you're in super-serious mode now. Why is that?

Don, you look scummy to me btw.

Assuming you are actually serious are you going to state why or just sit there looking scummy?

More questions:
1) Why do you think I'm voting for you?
2) Do you think one of us is the best lynch today?
3) How do you feel about meta?

FOS: Bestchairlizard

[sthar8]

People should give out more reads. That would make things more organised and let others know clearly what's happening now.

@ TSO and notreally- Homework: make a list of all the players in the game (including yourself.) Give your impressions of each player so far. Extra credit if you rank your scumreads at the top.

Can you spell it out a little sooner? I am not always the brightest person.

No.

Related: This game needs more paper.

I keep reiterating the fact that I am serious because some people don't seem to be doing thing seriously. We are past the RVS stage and would like people to act like it.

To whom are you referring? What conclusions are you drawing from their actions?

1) RVS, still
2) As of right now probably you. I doubt it will stay that way since we still have about 13 days to go.
3) Meta is a good way to see how someone plays but it isn't always reliable. Personally I only have 1 game on sight that i played through the whole thing. If you need more information on how I play feel free to ask, i can give you games from another site.

More questions please. I quite enjoy answering them.

1) Nope
2) Why?
3) No, thank you.

I've

got all the meta I need right now. Plus, anything you present on your own behalf is tainted.

More questions:
1) What is your favorite food?
2) In what country do you reside?
3) Did you receive a scum pm for this game?
4) Who are your top 3 scum reads?
5) Why do you think DJ is scummy? (I asked this earlier but you missed it)
6) Why is it ok for you to call DJ scummy without posting reasons, but it's scummy when I do the same to kcda?

[sthar8]

To be fair, he asked for them...

[sthar8]

3a)I have like 1 game on here so glad you call that a good meta check. I was going to show you a scum game and not just a town game but as you wish I won't tell you this information.

5)I did miss it and i apologize. I don't like how he is posting and the way he is responding to people. They aren't good to be quite honest.
6)I was just posting that so they would know that I was on to them and I was seeing if anyone would ask why i did it. You picked up on it which is good for you but probably because you noticed your scum partner was also thought to be scummy.

3a) I have read more than one game from you. Thank you for assuming I'm stupid instead of thorough.

5) Be specific, please. What don't you like? Why isn't it good?
6) So you had a protown motivation for not posting your reasoning?

sthar: I hate to say this, but sthar is the most scummmy one right now. Most of his posts don't make any sense, which is why he needs to be more serious.

Sthar, I think you're the one that should give out reads. Seriously, I've read your posts a couple times and I still don't get what you want to say. What are your thoughts on everyone here?

How is being unserious(?) scummy?

We've been over this. I want paper to answer my questions, then we'll discuss my reads. In fact, I'll promise a PBPA of myself explaining the motives for everything I've done in this game to go along with it. Until then, I'll keep on being a c**t.

Actually, there's opportunity here. Can everyone be a darling and comment on my play in their next post? You totally get townpoints for doing so.

[sthar8]

There's a link to pokemon-online in your completed game. So, neither of those. So...

How has anything I've done so far been consistent with a scum win condition? You're pushing really hard for logic and reasoning from other players, but all you can offer yourself is unsupported assertion.

[sthar8]

Aww, your strawman is wearing people clothes. Are you upset that your huge deduction was garbage or can you just not think of anything relevant to say?

p-edit: Big of you to admit it. That bodes well.

[sthar8]

How has anything I've done so far been consistent with a scum win condition?

You don't have to be a scum to be lynched. If you've done things that're scummy enough, other players may make a policy lynch.

I remember the last time I played, my behaviour was just like yours. I got lynched even though I was town.

Sthar, please don't be a c**t.

Except, I haven't actually done anything scummy yet. Annoying, yes. But not scummy. And since I've conditionally promised to rectify my behavior, the only way I get policy lynched is if you are all absolutely terrible at this. I don't believe you are. So we can afford to wait for paper to post before I explain my motivations.

Of course, its possible that scum could quicklynch me, but I'd accept that as an easy win. I'm happy to trade 1 for 1 with scum; they can't do it nearly as often as we can.

[sthar8]

Sthar seems scum for asking really, really stupid questions which have no relevance and are just white noise.

Like what?

[sthar8]

Promised posts incoming. I'm a little short on time this afternoon but I'll get as much up as I can, then finish off tonight.

[sthar8]

All right guys. As promised, this is an explanation of everything I've done in game so far, along with the conclusions I've drawn.

Especially because of the PBPA part, this is going to be a really long post. I'll mitigate somewhat with spoilers, but I apologize in advance for the walls.

Spoiler: Self-PBPA, through post 93

So, my plan here started with meta. in post 18 charizard mentioned that he's played a game with TSO before. I really like multiple metas because it saves a bunch of work and gives relevant interactions between the playstyles of the two players involved, so I looked it up. In the game that they shared, a discussion of charizard's meta came up. I followed the links to the other game, and found that charizard plays very similarly as town and scum. He appears to like doing the "super protown" thing as scum, which might make him very hard to read. I did notice a potential tell (that I can't out right now, sorry) that required me to get a baseline on char's emotional state this game before it would be useful. To that end, I determined that I needed to annoy charizard fairly early this game. Specifically, from his meta he appears to dislike things he doesn't understand or can't reason out explicitly, so I picked that tone for my early posts.

FeelIt has seen me employ that particular tactic in a different way before, but I noticed an opportunity for extra value.

The second thing I was worried about involved the rules in this particular game. Specifically, I wanted to test the rules for voting. Toomai's ruleset is a little vague on what counts as a vote, which of course is information that I needed ASAP. I could have pm'd Toomai or posted in the thread asking for clarification, but the subtleties of the rule could be used in a trap later in the game and I didn't want to risk the ability to use the rule against scum. Plus, it was easy to test while working on the other pieces of the gambit.

Third, as of post 58 the game was very quiet. We hadn't gained much information from RVS and I was ready for a wagon to analyze. While I will maintain that I didn't do anything scummy during the course of this gambit, several others have pointed out that town are often willing to lynch players they don't understand even without any overt anti-town behavior. Frankly, it's also easier for me to analyze a wagon on myself, since the sure knowledge that I am pro-town in motivation eliminates a significant portion of the variables.

So, I decided to a) place an abbreviated vote to test whether it would count b) give no explanation for my vote to annoy beast and c) ride the no explanation wagon until I had enough votes for proper analysis. I chose kcda for reasons I'll get into in my reads list, and the result was post 58.

Post 60 was also pursuant to the above. And a little bit of celebration that I'd gotten beast's interest in my vote and therefore wouldn't have to find something else to bug him with.

Post 72 was mostly taunting charizard, along with a joking call for more votes on my wagon (because I wanted more votes on my wagon) and a hint that I had a plan, for anybody who was paying attention.

Post 76 was more of the same. Breadcrumbing a strategy while pushing charizard.

Post 82 was refusal to cooperate, with some hints to town and a joke. Paper, the brevity necessary for the tactic may have made my questions unclear. I was actually asking, "Why is what I am doing not very town?" and "Why is keeping things hidden suspicious?" Ideally, Paper would have answered these questions before I gave up the gambit. I don't think town would have tolerated that though. I'd still like the answers if possible. I intended the questions to make town players strongly consider my motivations.

My third bit in that post was a semantic joke coupled with a horse laugh. The beginning is the equivalent of the English teacher in highschool who wouldn't let you go to the restroom until you said "May I" instead of "Can I" and the second part notes that his word choice invalidates his argument unless we change the definition of another term.

In 83, I realized that we'd had a votecount. I unvoted so that if my new vote didn't count I wouldn't lose track of it, and I revoted both to poke charizard and to test Toomai's tolerance for broken tags and misspellings. If that vote hadn't counted I would have tried just a misspelling.

85, 87, and 89 are all encouragement for players on my wagon. I wanted more votes

Post 93 FeelIt questioned me, which suggests that he was picking up on the hints regarding my motivations. I responded that my reads were not solid yet but that I felt the information was important, and gave an assurance that I would start playing normally at some point. Then end of that post is a reference to the poem by Robert Frost that shares titles with the game kcda and don were discussing.

And that's all I've got time for right now. I'll finish up my posts, present my conclusions, and post my reads list later tonight. I'm also happy to answer any questions that are posed.

Also
UNVOTE:

[sthar8]

Personally, I like just playing naturally instead of using plans. That's just my style, though.

I always have a plan, though it doesn't require this level of theatrics normally. But I just got out of a game where nobody would generate any content on day 1. We had an insane amount of complaining and thumb-sitting and if I had to endure that in this game I'd likely go mad and eat my neighbor's dog or something.

@Mod- I figured you just meant that we'd have to look at the count to see if the vote went through, thus the testing. Your system works better, though, because it makes it easier to check for errors in the count. More work for you, but we appreciate it.

Alright, Part 2 of the

Sthar8ayana

:

Spoiler: Epic Poetry

Post 95 is poking beast. He asked for questions, so I gave him one that should be mildly embarrassing.

Post 99 is more refusal, a chastisement of Titus for not scumhunting, and a joke at Titus' expense.

Posts 101 and 103 are pointing out to FeelIt that I was poking fun at Titus.

In post 104 I'm giving charizard more of the questions he wanted. The three questions are, in order, 1. intended to help me get an accurate picture of charizards reactions to my vote, 2. intended to get the rest of the town thinking about charizard's and my motives, and 3. a suggestion that people should look into meta. Anybody who looks at my meta will realize that my behavior is extremely aberrant, suggesting that I have a different reason for my behavior than alignment. I also point out beast's hypocrisy regarding unexplained FOS

111 starts with the homework metaphor for TSO and notreally. Both had recently made prod avoidance posts and I find that making a list of impressions is a good way to get back into a game. Plus, more information for town to analyze. TSO, the extra credit thing was a) to extend the metaphor and b) because I wasn't sure you'd have any scumreads at all, given your posting.
Also in 111, more questions for beast. Some of these are jokes (obviously) and the others are pushing the hypocrisy point.

In post 118 I'm poking beast more, both throwing his unwarranted assumptions back at him and pushing on the hypocrisy point. I also point out again that there's still no case on me, and promise this post. I also ask for opinions on my play, mostly so I can look at the motivations of people who actually are not on my wagon.

Post 120 I embarrass beast a little more, then challenge him to actually present a case on me.

Post 123 is both overt and backhanded poking of beast. I'm doing this so much because I'm finally getting the reactions I want out of him. His tone in his next few posts comes across as beleaguered, as though he thinks everyone is picking on him. Which is pretty fair.

In post 128 I assuage some of notreally's concerns about my play. This is a major break for me, but we were getting so close to the point that I'd be explaining everything anyway. Also, with the number of hints I'd dropped as to my motivations it was unlikely that I'd get anything more useful out of my bandwagon at that point anyway.

And the results:

Spoiler: Objectives Completed

Objective 1- Provoke a reaction from beast to make reading him later in the game easier

Accomplished. Sorry man, nothing personal.

Objective 2- Test the votecount rules for potential gambits.

Accomplished. Misspellings, abbreviations, and broken tags all function. Mod is clear as to what counts and what does not. Fakevote gambits not possible.

Objective 3- Generate content by inciting a wagon on myself. Analyze to catch scum.

Accomplished. See player list for results.
Here's what you can expect from me going forward:
1. Detailed analysis and discourse. If reasonably prompted for explanation, I will provide it.
2. Reads. I'm not going to promise to publish all of my reads, but when I'm pushing for a lynch you will certainly know it.
3. Logic and rhetoric.
4. I will not promise to stop the tangential jokes and references. If these bother you, the proper complaint procedure is to handwrite a Letter of Complaint, get it notarized, and then consume it. Your stomach fairies will bring your complaint to my attention, and I will subsequently ignore it.

Finally, a list of reads and reactions on all the players in the game:

Spoiler: Dramatis Personae

First, the lurkers:
Smudger- "I totally promise to be active guys!" We have seen

nothing

from him yet. Likely will get replaced if this continues.

yessirree- Concerned about his ability to use fuckwords. Laments lack of posting, while not posting much himself. Promises to be more active, does not deliver. If he keeps posting promises and avoiding prods, I'd be happy to see him lynched or killed N1.

don_johnson- Says he wants to contribute, but puts the responsibility for making him do so on others. Voted my wagon at KCDA's insistence, without understanding the reason. Overly concerned with the spelling of his name.

Titus- Demonstrates understanding of the thread, does not commit to a position. Calls NRG out for the same behavior.

@Titus

- Actually it was beast and myself who had asked notreally for his reads. TSO said that notreally asking for others' reads gave him a "bad feeling."

runnerman- Almost no posting, but what he does give us demonstrates insight. He's asked a couple of good questions. I'd like to see more activity.

@runnerman

- Why does acting odd make me an OK lynch?

Paperscraps- Asking questions is good. Having only three real posts by page 7 is not. At the risk of devolving into theory, I'd still like to see the answers to the questions I posed.

Active Posters (Active being a relative term):

Feel It- One of the very few players actively examining my motivations. This is not surprising, as he would have marked the difference in my play. His play is consistent with my experience, which is quite meaningless as I do not know his alignment in that other game.

notreallygood- Questioning my motivations. Cooperative. Seems concerned with scumhunting. I believe he wants to "save me" from being a VI, which is productive.

Elyse- Welcome to the game. Good post. I disagree with much of it, but it's solid reasoning. Keep doing that.
A couple points-

(I'm calling you star from now on)

That's fine. My username was assigned to me by the Airforce almost 20 years ago, and I've been using it since. It's the first two letters of my first name, the first three of my last name, and a numerical indicator that happens to have some significance to me.

Why do you FoS him here if you meant to vote him before?

Two reasons: As I noted before, I was provoking emotional reactions and beast appears to dislike things he cannot explain. Also, I had come up with that misspelling of his name in case I needed to test the voting system any further and I didn't want to waste it

sthar8- Fuck this guy. He's giving me a headache.

And what's most importantly, my current scumlist, from weakest to strongest read:

beastcharizard- Just on the scummy side of neutral. I'm not going to push him much today unless he gives me some really good tells because he's active and I think I'll be able to read him later.
Here's what bugs me about his play, from weakest to strongest:
1. Directing town. Pushing everyone to answer his questions and ask more of him, promising that he'd unvote me if I presented logic, announcing the end of rvs and stating that further jokes are now scummy, coaching other players to contribute. Basically, charizard wants to be leading the town and so is attempting to manipulate others' behavior with his posts. This is a very, very weak scumtell, particularly because

I do that shit all the time

regardless of my alignment. The difference is, of course, that I know why

I'd

be doing that.
2. He seems overly concerned at his image. Noting that he's serious, noting that he's "giving out information," offering to present meta on himself, insisting that he's been doing most of the scumhunting. Charizard looks concerned with being perceived as town, as opposed to actually playing a town game. He might just be self-conscious and I get the impression that he likes to see himself on "townie" lists regardless of alignment, but it's still worrying.
3. His hypocrisy regarding don. Attacking me for not providing reasoning, then having no reasoning on don later suggests that he was looking for a plausible reason to attack me instead of attacking me for something he found scummy.
4. This post sets off all of my scumbells. I appreciate the joke, but he ignored a direct question (that he still hasn't answered) to make it. Given beast's play so far, especially how concerned he's been with questions and answers, I see no protown reason from his perspective to ignoring my request for a case on me. It looks like he thought I'd be an easy lynch, and if he could avoid giving any reasoning for voting me he could pass it off as policy or blame someone else for pushing it on day 2.

T S O- I have no idea what TSO is doing this game. A lot of little one liners are not conducive to either scumhunting or conveying your motivations.
Weakest to strongest again:
1. Coaching Charizard here and here. Especially the first post, because he's helping someone make a case on a person

he's expressed no suspicion of

. Related, his attacks on me could be indicative if charizard were to flip scum. He attacks me for "noise posting" (to be fair, that's totally true, but he doesn't say how it's scummy) on the only posts with relevant questions that might pertain to charizard's alignment.
2. Mudslinging. He's expressed suspicion of {notreally, sthar8, kcda, possibly yessiree} without voting for any of them. His RVS vote is still active, despite having 14 more posts of discussion (?). He refuses to give his own list of suspicions, but criticizes notreally on the quantity of his reads. It appears that TSO is looking for an easy wagon but doesn't want to actually be seen on one.
3. I don't know what kind of manipulation TSO is afraid of, but having 15 posts with

no actual reads

is scummy as shit. Town should generally be more concerned with their information being available in thread and actually catching scum. You do need more than just your vote, which means you'll have to convince others to share your opinion. Additionally, shouldn't you be able to mitigate any manipulation based on your reads simply by being aware that you're susceptible to it? It looks like TSO has priorities other than scumhunting right now, which is anti-town.

Kcdaspot- I don't know if my suspicions on kcda are actually the strongest, but I do think he's the best lynch right now.
Here's why I voted him originally (these are super weak but I felt they were enough for my purposes on page 3):
1. He jumped in during a semi-serious discussion but made sure to get his random vote in.
2. He then found a bad excuse to make his random vote serious, without having to post that.
3. He next post was joking and without content, giving him an out should his vote be questioned.

Here's why I'll be voting him in a moment:
1. He was the third vote on my wagon and I don't think he's aware of the jeep tells.
2. He talked don into voting me using a game that (as far as I can tell) is irrelevant (though a fun read). This looks like buddying to me.
3. After voting for me with no reasoning and convincing don to do the same he just... vanished. Lurking is a particularly insidious scumtactic because it prevents the other players from getting a read on you. It looks to me like kcda tried to set up a day1 mislynch and then disappeared hoping that the town would finish it off for him. That way he can come back in and claim to have been joking/pressure voting/not ready to lynch when I flip town the next day.

I think a scumlurker is a great lynch day 1, especially since my other suspects seem content to keep dropping tells. I certainly don't want to let him lurk his way to a later day when he can be much more damaging. Barring prods or replacement, I'm very happy with my vote on KCDA today.

As I said above, I'm going to
VOTE: kcda

Questions? Comments?

[sthar8]

Same question.

[sthar8]

You're being dense. Let's expound.

You- "Do you know what coaching is? Because that's not coaching."

Me- "Wow, that's a really great question. For those following along at home, TSO is insulting my intelligence and asserting that I'm using words I don't understand, while implying that because I have no idea what I'm talking about, my argument must be invalid. To answer: Yes thank you, I am aware of the definition of the term coaching. I still believe it applies here, although nothing is certain since only

you

know your motivations and your monosyllabic posts are making it hard for me to follow along with your intent, as I've previously noted. Since

my

reasoning appears solid to me and

you

haven't presented any evidence or argument to the contrary, I'd like to question

your

understanding of the term. Additionally, the fallacious nature of your defense suggests weakly that you actually

have no defense

for my argument and are, in fact, scum"

Clear?

[sthar8]

I get the feeling you

really

wanted to post that.

Why do you get that feeling? More importantly, how is that relevant?

I asked you why you posted "Same question." to me asking how that was coaching, because that statement had and still has no relevance.

No, you asked "Do you know what 'coaching' means?" not "How is that coaching?" I responded with "Do

you

know what coaching means?" Because I

do

, and if you

don't

that's relevant to the argument. Try to keep up.

If you're accusing me of coaching, you have to provide the proof and the argument.

You're adorable.
1. I know what burden of proof means.
2. I presented evidence. I believe that evidence meets the required burden, and you are not qualified to assert that it doesn't.
3. Therefore, the accusation here is that my evidence is somehow faulty. Which means that the burden is on

you

to prove that.

So now you've got the

rand

explaining how antecedents work to TSO

out of the way, explain how those two posts are coaching.

Fixed.

I don't need to explain anything to you. Obviously.

But, I'm happy to clarify my position for the town.

If Johnston is scum, you telling him he's scum isn't going to change his role PM. Tell

us

why he's scum. You're not going to get him lynched by explaining your case to him.

In this post, TSO advises beast that he should present a case on don to the town. A townie does not know the alignment of the other players in the game. TSO has not even

suggested

that he finds don suspicious. But, he's advising charizard,

whose alignment he should not know

on how to better present a case against someone

he does not find suspicious

. If he thinks don is scum, then why not make the case himself? Why does TSO trust charizard?

Possibilites:
TSO is town with no reads, and wants charizard to present a case to help him get back into the game. But why would TSO trust that charizard is not scum?

TSO is scum, and wants charizard-town to push a case on a townie. That makes charizard look bad and hopefully results in a mislynch. This one fits.

TSO and charizard are scum, and TSO thinks that charizard's unsupported suspicions on don are likely to draw their own suspicions (they have). He warns charizard that if he's going to make a case, he should make a real case. This one also fits.

You're fueling a useless argument. Why?

I freely admit that this one's harder to read because of TSO's characteristic simplicity. By my reading, this post, directed at charizard, suggests that his argument with me is pointless, and that there's no reason to get don involved. This comes from the same page on which TSO suggests that me asking him for reads "felt forced" and that I appear to be scum for my "white noise" posts. So why is TSO trying to get charizard to back off? If I'm so scummy, you would think that he'd be happy for someone to push my wagon to a lynch.

Possibilities-
TSO is town, and is expressing suspicion of charizard for continuing to argue with me. This is unsupported by anything else in TSO's posts, but it does bring his potential list of expressed suspicions up to 5/13 players.
TSO is scum, and thinks I will be lynched today. He wants to be able to point back at that post to show that he was not driving my wagon and felt charizard was suspicious for doing so. This fits.
TSO and charizard are scum, and TSO doesn't think my wagon is going to go through. He doesn't want his partner getting stuck in with a townie and making himself a potential target for night actions, as we're certainly drawing a lot of attention. This is a bit of a stretch, but it fits too.

@ Everyone- Also note how TSO only wants to argue

what I characterized as the weakest tell against him.

[sthar8]

@ Elyse- I was never in the Airforce. Both of my parents were, and during the Gulf War they were both given TDYs in the Middle East (which is apparently against the rules now.) Bureaucracy being what it is, they arranged for me to stay with friends on base and the Commander issued me a military e-mail so I could contact them. He impressed on my young mind that forgetting my login info would be a danger to national security, so I've been using it since.

You spend so long pushing Beast to gauge reaction etc for future use and yet you place TSO and KCDA ahead of him in your scum reads (...) but why?

The point of pushing beast wasn't that I thought he was scum at the start, it was to give me a baseline reaction to measure against later. I do think he's scummy now, but the evidence against TSO and KCDA is much stronger.

Did you have another question for me? I feel like I'm missing one.

@beast- What did I do that was scummy?

@ Everyone expressing suspicion of Titus: Who all has Titus in their top 3 scumreads? Those of you voting him can consider this answered.

@ Everyone, I promise this is the last broadside I'm trading with TSO on this topic. I honestly can't tell if he's being obstinate (scummy) or if his reading comprehension is shit (VI/null.)

Spoiler: Avast! A response to TSO

It's important because that rant had absolutely no application or relevance to what you were talking about. It's important because I get the feeling you had that pre-typed and couldn't fit it into your previous post and you thought it would look impressive, so you stuffed it in, and went balls-to-the-wall aggressive.

-It is relevant, despite your naked assertion otherwise. It clarifies the sentiments I was expressing in the previous post that you did not understand.
-How is my aggression relevant?
-So your grand theory here is that I saw your post, typed all of 165, found that it "didn't fit" into my two word long 163 (for some reason), cut it out, and saved it so that I could slam it out in response to your next? All in the two minutes between 162 and 163? How? And more importantly, why?

Let me explain why your condescension and snarky bullshit doesn't add up. I asked you "Do you know what coaching means?". In reply, you answered "Same question." The statement "Same question" can mean multiple things. It can mean what you thought it meant, it can mean your statement has no relevance and my question stays the same, etc. etc. It's in no way a one-meaning question. So, knowing that instead of saying something like "I could ask you the same question", you purposely posted a post which was far harder to understand, we need to ask ourselves why you posted it. It's not the quickest thing to post, mentally speaking, because it's definitely not the first thing which would come into your mind when looking at my question. It's not the most helpful thing either. I can only think that you posted that because

your intention was to mislead.

There is no other reason.

-Most importantly, and assuming your theory regarding my grand conspiracy is true, what do I gain from all this? You say I'm trying to mislead you, but to what end?
-It is true that I technically could have meant "meaningless gibberish" by "Same question." But it is much more reasonable to assume that instead I intended the rational, sane, relevant meaning instead. When someone gives you directions and says "Go left" do you turn left or do you assume that they mean "embrace liberal teachings and realize that the path to your destination has been in your heart all along?"
-How are you qualified to tell me what the first thing that would come into my head would be?

Let's detach for a second, while we're at it. Why on Earth would

I ask you did you know what coaching was if I didn't know what it was?

What an idiotic explanation. There is no way you could even consider me doing that logically. So your explanation doesn't add up either. What a surprise.

That's a great question. You've done quite a few illogical things so far this game and shown a marked tendency to use terms that you don't fully understand. The answer I've come up with is that I think you're scum trying to bullshit your way through the day.

1. That's nice to know.
2. At that stage, you had no evidence presented. Not a little. None. You had a vague statement which needed reading into. That's not an accusation. Are you sure you know what burden of proof means?
3. Therefore, the accusation is that you never presented evidence. The burden of proof is still on ...you.

-I presented evidence that was both primary and documentary. It has already been considered and accepted by at least one of the triers, so it's existence is beyond debate. You are free to question it's sufficiency, which I note that you have not done.
-When you make an unsupported assertion (i.e. "you have presented no evidence," "There are other reasonable meanings for 'same question,'" "post 165 is not relevant to the discussion," et cetera) the burden is on you to present evidence. In all of these cases, you have not done so. Why are you holding me to different evidentiary standards than yourself?

Your statement is both false and egocentric. But could I expect anything more?

Ad hominem. And my statement was perfectly true. I'm not presenting an argument to

you

, I'm presenting it to the

town

. Therefore, I don't have to care whether

you

understand it, as you are not a trier of fact. If you understood the concept of burden of proof, you would already know that.

Are telling lies a hallmark of your play?

Not really. I'm not going to ISO myself to check, but I don't believe I've told a lie at all this game. Is proof by assertion a hallmark of yours? Because this is just another example adding to the boatload you've already committed.

I've gone over all your accusations and refuted them all.

Liar. Post numbers or links. "Ignoring" my arguments is not the same as "refuting" them

I hope I've illustrated here how Sthar's argument against me is riddled with lies and inconsistencies. His whole argument is essentially based on a) me apparently coaching BC, which I'll address later, and b) him being sarcastic.

You're misrepresenting my argument by reducing it to only the weakest third. You have not illustrated a single lie, excepting your own. And you've showcased quite a few inconsistencies in your play, but none in mine.

Homework for TSO: Define the following terms
Relevant
Coaching
Antecedent
Burden of Proof
Trier of Fact
Assertion
Evidence
Refute

TSO is being really, really defensive for what was basically an FOS. Putting him in my top 3 but not voting for him got me a wall and a wikipedia quote plus attacks on my credibility, my intelligence, and my semantics. He's reduced my arguments, ignored my arguments and called me a liar, but not once has he actually offered a supported argument against anything I've said. Fascinating. Looks like scum who wants the argument to go away and to discredit the arguer, but cannot think of a way to actually refute the claims.

[sthar8]

Why did the airforce come up? It's totally irrelevant to the game and a big AtE.

I was in a game on mafiascum some years ago in which another player repeatedly confused my name with someone else's, almost leading to a wagon at one point. I presented a brief history of my username in order to attach significance to the letters and numbers. That cleared up the problem. Elyse appeared to be having trouble with my name in this game, so I did the same thing.

[sthar8]

Can you not quote ISOs into the thread please? There has to be a way to make your point without punishing the rest of us.

[sthar8]

This post is WIFOM if I understand what it is.

I read it more as him pointing out that I could be WIFOM-ing. I mean, I'm not, but that's the problem with WIFOM; it can't be indicative either way.

@ Sthar8: Everything since the start of the game has been scummy to me.

See, you keep saying that. That's three times that I've asked you that question. Twice you gave vague nonspecific answers and once you ignored it completely. Coming from a logical and vocal player like you it's tingling my scumdar.

I understand want to gauge my reaction but don't understand how you picked me out of everyone else.

I checked your meta and found something that you seem to be aware of already: you

always

read like town. If you are town, then that's cool. If not, it makes you very dangerous. I noticed a potential behavioral tell in your meta, but it required me to have a baseline on your emotional state in case I need to compare later. Take it as a compliment; I'm being extra wary of a player who is skilled at hiding his alignment.

I know it isn't my place but TSO is kind of mean when he plays from my experience so what he is doing is null to me.

Hostile

is the word I used in my notes. I get what you mean, but I'm more concerned with his methodology than his tone. Though I will admit to amusement at how poorly he takes it when some of the venom goes back his way.

Finally, why am I scummy to you?

It's all in 161 under the third spoiler. Minor stuff, but the accumulation makes you stand out enough to net the third spot in the top 3.

My scum reads are in order in my post where I voted Elyse.

Noted and thanks. Is your read on Elyse conditional on your read on runner?

@TSO, have you not considered that Sthar is winding you up to gauge your reactions

Let me be explicit: I am not attempting to provoke TSO, nor am I angry with him. I am responding in kind, and actively choosing not to escalate. The vitriol that he obviously takes offense at is precisely mirrored by the "abuse" that he's hurling my direction. If he had taken charizard's tack and engaged in rational discourse, that is what he'd receive in turn.

I'm not replying to that pile of abusive shit. I know his playstyle is to act like a dick to gauge reactions but seriously, I refuse out of principle to touch it with a barge pole.

Ad misericordiam. And your "principle" is a double standard. Are you going to respond to me with anything that's

not

a relevance fallacy?

Seriously, I can keep a civil tongue if you can.

@KCDA where you at?

[sthar8]

@ Charizard- So your read on runner is conditional upon your read on Elyse? That is to say, if Elyse didn't look scummy to you then runner would be null or less scummy? That's fair. I don't agree, and I personally don't have a lot of success looking for teams on day 1, but it's fair.

You should also know that if something crazy stupid happens I will blow a lid about how dumb it is and probably reveal myself. That is what I did in my scum game on PO as you should know.

That was what gave me the idea for how to provoke you. It isn't the tell I was referring to, but it was a good way to get a baseline on you for this game. To be fair, what happened in that game would make a lot of people pop their tops. You just happen to be a little more susceptible to that kind of thing. The cop claim was just terrible all around.

"So you had a protown motivation for not posting your reasoning? " (...) Aww, your strawman is wearing people clothes. I meant to ask, what does that mean? All i could think of was Wizard of Oz."

The first one was not intended to cast suspicion on you, but to hint that if you had protown motives for not broadcasting your reasoning, maybe I did as well. You had stated that not providing your reasoning is scummy, which is not always true.

The second bit was me pointing out that you had presented a Strawman Argument in lieu of a real one in response to my question. The metaphor is: as your strawman argument was presented as a real argument, so would an actual straw man present as a real man if it were dressed like one.


@ Everyone I have never played in a game this small with four scum. I had to look it up, but multiball is explicitly normal. That means it is possible (though very unlikely) to have five scum in the game without screwing the balance.

[sthar8]

*Yawn*

Ad Hom.

Serious question TSO, mostly unrelated to your previous post: Are you 15?

Smudger, I'll get to you a little later.

Not really seeing Elyse and runner as a team.

[sthar8]

Ad misericordiam

Guys, I think that TSO is in his teens. All kids are different, but that probably means he's psychologically unequipped for distinguishing attacks on his arguments from attacks on himself. This makes the defensiveness and the martyr syndrome personality tells rather than alignment ones. Also, he will have trouble distinguishing other people as independent entities for a few years yet, so the double standard thing is null.

My bad, I should have picked up on that a lot sooner.

@TSO- I formally and completely apologize for everything I've said that offends you, without exception. I was operating under a mistaken mindset, and I certainly don't want to negatively affect your enjoyment of the game.

It doesn't invalidate the mudslinging thing, or refusing to have any reads, or even the coaching, so he's still on my list.

Speaking of:

KCDA- limited access is one thing, but its getting silly. We need to see some input from you.

In other news, I could see runner or Elyse as scum separately, but not together. In my experience scum distance early wayyyyy more often than they link. FeelIt, I agree that there's info to be gained on teams this early, but its usually better saved until later in the game.

p-edit:
@ runnerman- I know, right?

[sthar8]

Any thoughts?

It's OK to be LA, especially if you let us know. But saying "I'll post later" and then never following through is super scummy.

[sthar8]

Unless we're playing multiball, yeah. It's either scum/town or town/town.

[sthar8]

I'd prefer to say that I'm a pragmatist. Does this mean you're back in the game?

[sthar8]

I certainly laughed at it, although it's nice of you to admit that.

A note before we get back to the matters at hand: What would you have done if I had gone with the "I'm not talking to you, you're being rude" tactic after 205? I would bet bills with a z that you would have scented blood and attacked harder.

In general, ad mis is best played for an audience, as an aggressive arguer will take it as a sign of weakness. If I had been more concerned with winning the argument than making my point, I could have effectively badgered you out of the game. That's bad for you regardless of your alignment.

Now back to our regular programming: Can you let us in on your actual, current suspicions? I'm not OK with you skating by FOSing everyone in the game anymore.

[sthar8]

Now back to our regular programming: Can you let us in on your actual, current suspicions? I'm not OK with you skating by FOSing everyone in the game anymore.

VOTE: TSO

Does anybody have anything on Elyse that's actually indicative of alignment either way? Cause I'm not seeing it.

I do like lurker wagons on day 1, especially on fence-sitting active lurkers. I think runner is probably the wrong target though, because he already promised to change his play around a bit.

@runner- Some playstyles are quieter than others, but it's protown to keep a general list of suspicions in thread for later reference.

@Elyse- Where is your townread on KCDA coming from? I get good vibes from his tone, but his actions are making me nervous.

@Don- Well, let's see. First the earth cooled. And then the dinosaurs came, but they got too big and fat, so they all died and they turned into oil. And then the Arabs came and they bought Mercedes Benzes. And Prince Charles started wearing all of Lady Di's clothes. I couldn't believe it.

Then I wasted a bunch of time outing TSO as a teenager and explaining jokes to charizard. Meanwhile, KCDA's only posting when directly instructed and communicating only in dogthoughts, a few of us spent time contemplating what the scumteam could look like if our mafia is absolutely terrible, and somebody was asking Elyse to go quotemining, which is likely why she blew up at you. Reads in general seem to be really weak, but we're generating a lot of interaction that will be useful later. Off the top of my head, I have no idea who Smudger, TSO, NRG, runner, or

you

want to lynch today, and that makes me feel like there are ants in my brain.

All in all, pretty good day 1 shit.

P-edit- I'm not really the follow-the-leader type, but I promise to give serious consideration to whatever you suggest. No promises, but you certainly aren't on my scumlist right now. Would you mind ranking your list once you're all caught up?

[sthar8]

Dude, you're fired. That's from Airplane 2.

Also, I think runner promised that before you voted him? I'll check in a minute.

[sthar8]

No, you're right. It was after you voted him. I was thinking about 202 where he first suggested that he'd change his play.

And the Airplane scene is here. First scene, runs to 0:44.

[sthar8]

@ Titus- If it had been before he came under serious suspicion it would be less likely that he's changing to suit you and more likely that he's doing it to find scum, which is relevant. As it is, it means you have a good point.

If you're sold on runner then make a case. His lack of reads is making me a little meth-twitchy, so I'll read it seriously. I just think that since his posting has already changed markedly he likely doesn't need votes to keep him from relapse, and his story is plausible enough to make me think there are better lynches.

Also, you know chainsaw's not indicative without a flip, right?

In any case, I don't think paper was chainsawing. He just doesn't possess the subtlety necessary to try shifting yes back to you with his vote (no offense paper). I

am

curious about that vote switch though. @ paper- can you comment please?

Runner could have been chainsawing the other way, but I doubt it given the fact that beast's "FOS" was based on an easy null tell. Hard defending there would indicate that he's panicky. I haven't seen any evidence that this is the case.

Actually, I just realized that runner's story is verifiable.

@runner- can you link a game from your usual meta please?

[sthar8]

Guys I just voted the same person as

sthar8

. Make sure to draw ten different conclusions from this.

I'll start:
1. Paper just barned my vote :. he is a classy, handsome gentleman and a good kisser.

I brought this up in my latest post. I don't get it all. I thought chainsawing was voting against the grain to seem town. Like say player A is being lynched, you vote player B because you know player A will flip town to seem town yourself?

Chainsaw Defense (TS version) Although that is a clever name for what you are describing.

These foses seem a bit bland and elementary to me. I mean the things they are doing are scummy on a basic level, but you have to look for motivations and if scum are likely to be so obvious day 1.

QFT.

[sthar8]

The T S O lynch feels like a policy lynch which I am not ok with. TSO might actually be useful in reading later on in the game. I do not and will not support a TSO lynch unless someone gives me a none policy reason.

Not a policy lynch

. I've presented evidence for my reads on TSO, no one has refuted a single point. TSO is obviously not a VI, so he's probably scum.

Seriously, he's like the best example of all the anti-town behaviors anyone else is exhibiting all rolled into one player. He has fewer reads, he's active lurking, he's lazier, he won't answer questions directed at him. His "boredom" is likely indicative of a desire to get to the night phase ASAP. He's overly concerned with his own appearance, and not scumhunting. His random vote is still in place on page 15. He's spot on his scum meta.

I don't know what else you guys want from a day 1 wagon. I put TSO's odds of flipping scum at about 70%, plus he's uncooperative so we're not losing anything from later days.

[sthar8]

Also happy birthday don?

@TSO- if you insist on acting like a caricature, I'm going to start treating you like one.

[sthar8]

Sthar, how do you know my scum meta? Is anti-town the same as scummy?

I don't think I ever actually fully addressed your case. I'll have a look at it later.

And I am quaking in my boots at the thought of being treated like, like, like A CARICATURE! ;__;

1. You... you're joking right? Obviously I'm a psychic.
2. Not conclusively, but the correlation is strong. Do you have a point?
3. You never even partially addressed it.
4. Don't cry TSO. It will all be ok. Why don't you have a warm glass of milk and lie down? (Are you sure? Because last time I directed your own behavior back at you, you got all huffy and offended.)

1. Are you sure he isn't getting tired of playing this game?
2. Why 70%?
[...]
At least it's better than mine, eh?

1. That would mean something iff he had ever put any effort into the game at all.
2. It's arbitrary and based on my general experiences, and it accounts for the possibility that TSO is being lazy and contrary because of some other factor. I find that accumulation of weak tells pans out 6 times out of 10, accumulation of strong behavioral tells
(with someone like TSO) 7 times out of 10. You get the idea.
3. I know this was a joke, but it's actually considerably worse than yours. Also 10 pages later and only after three people voted for him. So... yeah.

@ Grimgroove- Welcome!

@Elyse- Don't get too excited, you still might be crazy.
TSO said that NRG asking for reads gave him a "bad feeling," and agreed with Titus that NRG's reads were bad. If this is the standard by which we find his reads, then he was scumreading yessiree, kcda, NRG, me, and possibly beast. By page 6.

P-edit crossposting with grim. Will answer shortly.

[sthar8]

That's fine TSO, it wouldn't be productive anyway. How about you take a look at the rest of the case?

Be aware that if you continue with the ad homs and other fallacies, I may demand the same consideration at some point.

I'm writing up a response to Grim right now, I'll get to your latest after that.

[sthar8]

That is demonstrably untrue. I've not "started" anything with you other than my argument that you are scum, and in fact the majority of my posts contain no ad hominem fallacies.

It is consistent with my read of you that you'd have trouble distinguishing ad hominem attacks committed by yourself, while having no problem recognizing those directed against you.

[sthar8]

*¨Why, in the scheme of things, was it important for sthar to wait for Paperscraps in particular? I never saw and still don't see the significance of Paperscraps in this scheme. In post 111 Paperscraps is brought up as a related note, and shortly after he becomes the one unmet condition in order for sthar to divulge his plans.

I had posed two questions to paper ("how is what I am doing anti-town?" and "why is it suspicious to keep things hidden?") that I was hoping he'd address before my confession. I read his post 80 as either town playing by applying general principles to the game, or scum faking the same. If he (or indeed anyone else reading) were the first, thinking about the questions should have challenged that application and made them look at my motives. Scum, of course, have no incentive to read that deeply and would bullshit something to justify their presence on an easy wagon. I hoped to use paper's responses to ascertain his alignment, but explaining myself first would have revealed that as a trap if he were scum. Of course, he misunderstood the questions, making that whole bit null for him. I don't really like highlighting my townreads, but a couple of them are based off similar reactions to my play.

In post 111, I was waiting for an emotional reaction from charizard and paper's answers. That's why paper was related to charizard asking me for an explanation. In 115 it looked like I was starting to get to charizard, so paper became the only outstanding condition.

* This question is a bit less relevant now since sthar himself admitted to that part of the argument against TSO being the weakest, but I found the way he called out TSO for coaching beastcharizard not up to par with the rest of his material. First of all, it is an associative tell that we can only use once either of them flips. Second, I don't think the point he makes in 170 is very convincing when it comes to town TSO not asking beastcharizard to make a case against don_johnson. I could see that happenv ery easily. I myself often ask people to provide cases against the people they consider scummy,b ecause it allows me to catch two flies in one go: assess the accuser and the accused. Of course, it is Always better to present your own case, but I don't see the big deal of this "coaching"-business.

This is certainly the weakest point against TSO, because there are protown reasons for fishing out a case. I just don't see them here, in either TSO's tone or his other content. Some points though:
1. Coaching isn't associative, it's behavioral. Scum coach scum to subtly protect each other, and scum coach town as a form of buddying. The point is that in order to coach like TSO was doing, you have to be certain of the other player's alignment. Being certain of alignment is a scumtell.
2. This is one I'm always on the lookout for because it's usually the best way to catch

me

as scum. I tend to arrogantly assume that I know better than my scumbuddies, and try to fix their play (Anybody want to argue that TSO isn't arrogant?). I find it especially indicative when the coach doesn't otherwise interact with the person they are coaching (not that TSO has had any significant interaction with anybody but me). It almost lost me the game in AoaDA because I kept trying to rescue my partners, and we had a daychat!

As evident from my earlier comments on Kcda, I also don't agree with sthar's views on that guy. I find it a bit of an anti-climax to see his elaborate plan result in a vote on someone who looks to me as a harmless lurker. But like I said, that's just my gut talking.

My read on KCDA is evolving, and I initially proposed him as today's lynch because I didn't think that would happen. I see a lot of good in his posts, but I'm really put off by two things. First, his "vote and vanish" pattern is really, really, scummy. Second, for a bit there we could summon him like a genie just by addressing him in thread, which didn't quite jive with his "always LA" bit. I think he's going to wind up replacing out anyway, so I'm trying not to waste time on it.

Paperscraps
Didn't like how he started with that joke about everyone self-voting and him hammering. It made him come off as a newbie which he is clearly not.

Why do you think that? I was under the impression that he's a raw newbie to the site, and a lot of his behaviors seem to confirm that he's familiar with the basics of the game but not the meta here.

[sthar8]

1. So you don't know my scum meta, and you made up some lies to suit your point.
2. The correlation really isn't that strong at all. Many players will do anti-town things such as out themselves as a PR in their first post. It's not scummy to do, it's just anti-town. My point is that your argument is that I'm lazy, etc. etc. which is probably true enough. But you still haven't said why I'm scummy, which makes it seem like you're trying to pull a policy lynch.
3. Did you forget about #225?
4. Please, when you do it it's not really funny. That's what living in the army will do to you, I guess.

1. This is the second time itt that I've mentioned meta-ing someone, they've asked "How did you meta me?" I've answered jokingly and they've responded with "Obviously you are a liar making things up!" I don't know what response you want to that question.

How do you meta someone? It's painfully obvious. I clicked "view posts by this user," then read like 8 of your games. Why would anyone ever fake that? It's easy and verifiable.

2. Anti-town play falls into two categories: Scum play xor town playing poorly (stupid play, for short). All scum play is anti-town, but not all stupid play is anti-town.
:. Anti-town play is more likely to be scum than stupid, given no other factors.

Plus, I don't think you're a VI. And, you ignoring my presented reasoning on why your play is more likely scum than town does not make them any less real or valid.

3. The... post in which yessiree argued with Elyse about runner? I had, actually, yes. How is it relevant?

4. I disagree. But then again, I don't generally find it funny when you do it, but that's not stopping

you

is it? The difference is that I'm not going to have a tantrum over anything you say to me.

P-edit:

oh god you actually weren't able to see them, were you?

that's pretty horrible.

do you need me to point them out to you?

Oh no, I'm perfectly aware of several attacks I made against you. The point is that

you

are likely unaware of the ones from your side that precipitated most every fallacy I've committed this game. Again, I was using your behavior as a guide, unaware that you couldn't see that you apply a double standard to what you're willing to say to others vs what you will accept in reply.

Also, you said that there's an ad hom in every post I've made, when in fact it has been only a few in a couple posts directed at you.

[sthar8]

Obviously.

And 4 actually made me laugh. Good job.

I've got to go do things, be back later to get the rest of that.

[sthar8]

Good lord FeelIt, we already have one of those. I don't think we need another.

If it slows down a little at work I'll get to the rest today. 13 hour workday, so might not happen.

[sthar8]

Sorry guys, I've had some personal issues in meatworld. I'll catch up tonight, but I'm not going to promise sobriety.

[sthar8]

In 213 you refer to a case on Kcda that is much stronger than the other cases you have, but when referring back to 161 I feel this is untrue. What did you feel was so strong about that case? All I really see in that case, I'm sorry to say, is OMGUS, as it pertains his vote on you, and him trying to convince Don to also vote you. Just add a bit of lurking to that and you have a case, true enough, but I don't feel it's a strong case, and defintely not stronger than what you had on the others.

Do you know what active lurking is? Or the jeep tells? In my experience, they are

much

more indicative than the many questionable motivations comprising what I had on charizard. Added to that, kcda was simply a stronger lynch, because I think I can read charizard and TSO seems willing to keep dropping hints as to his alignment. The cases on those two only get better, while kcda lurking means the case would be the same on day 3 as on day 1.

Feels like too strong of a push on someone he's been calling a teenager, and I fear his judgement may be a bit clouded.

TSO's age is irrelevant to his alignment.

But the push rubs me the wrong way, because only earlier sthar agreed to his interactions with him only amounting to a read on what kind of person TSO could be, but less on what his alignment is. I also don't like that last sentence, as that comes down to a policy lynch.

TSO's mindset invalidates

less than half

of my arguments in favor of his being scum. His posting style not being indicative of scum is not the same thing as it being indicative of him being not-scum, and I'm honestly baffled at how this concept seems to be hard to grasp. I say "TSO's attitude is not indicative of his alignment, so lets talk about the other tells," and the response is "Lynching TSO based on his attitude is a policy lynch!" You can assume I know that that part of my argument doesn't work,

since I pointed it out in the first place.

But why does TSO get a pass on all the scummy shit he's done just because he's pissed off?

I think sthar should push more on beastcharizard again. I get the feeling sthar8 is feeling a bit guilty/bad for the way he played beastcharizard, and is now giving him too much slack as a result.

I do not feel guilt. The whole point of "playing" charizard was to make him easier to read. I've explained this before, but I think he'll consequently be the easiest of the three to read come tomorrow, so I'm not pushing him hard today. I'm going to reread to make sure, as of now I'd be fine compromising on his lynch today if that's what we're doing.

Effective through post 459. I'll post again in the morning.

[sthar8]

This brings me up to date on my last post. I'll post again for the new stuff in a minute.

If he's a newbie concerning meta here, I don't know, and I don't find particularly relevant. But the way he arranges his reads lists for example, even the mere format of them, hints at experience with the game of mafia.

It's relevant because the way day 1 is handled on this site differs significantly from some other sites and meatworld games. His joke actually makes sense if failure to reach consensus resulted in a plurality lynch, which I have seen in some rulesets but never here. If that were his experience, he would not be playing dumb, just unfamiliar with how things work here. I was just curious because a couple of my notes on him reference his inexperience on the site, and I wanted to know if I'd missed something.

Also, beast, using they when referring to one person is grammatically incorrect, so just use him if you don't know the gender.

Singular "they" has been proposed (and is often used) as a grammatically correct pronoun when referring to a person of indeterminate gender. I think it's called the epicene they when used like that, but I can't be bothered to look it up. The confusion is arising here because charizard is not noting his antecedents, which would solve the whole issue.

I have yet to see that plan bare any fruit btw.

Because we are hunting Mafia, not Homosexuals.

for those of you who missed that joke, beast wrote "bare" (meaning uncover) instead of bear (meaning produce). I think my gambit uncovered some mafia, but not fruit (slang meaning: homosexual).

[sthar8]

Yes. But I don't think that this is what Kcda is doing. Active lurking is a strategy where the perpetrator is 1. keeping up with the topic, 2. trying to look active, 3. stay under the radar. Of course, more often than not, this actually puts you on the radar. Do you feel Kcda's behavior shows that he's trying to stay under the radar?

At the time, I did. I believed I had sufficiently explained that in the post where I voted him. I'm not so sure now.

I just looked them up and assume you're referring to those: http://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?tit ... ding_Mafia. I don't see which ones Kcda is guilty of. Possible the wagon-tell? But that's it right? The "jeep tells" sounds very convincing, but only if several of them apply.

Yes, those. If you didn't know what they were, it would have been more productive to ask than to simply ignore their impact on the case. In my experience, Jeep tells are generally indicative so long as the player is unaware of them. I saw more than one of those in kcda's behavior when I voted him.

Fair point, that's why I'm hoping Kcda will change his stance towards this game. But I don't need to tell you town lurks as well, depsite what jeep or anyone else is saying. Kcda's lynch feels too random to me, I'm sorry. There's something, I'll grant you that, but not enough, and not more than on other players.

It

was

more than on the other players when it was proposed. Given developments since, I'd agree that there are better cases. Though I will point out that I've heard "town lurks too" in defense of scum more times than I can count. Obviously town lurks too. But only scum gain advantage from it, and nullifying that advantage is protown.
You said that my case on kcda was "just OMGUS and lurking," I've pointed out that there was more to it than that and further discussion on the matter will not be protown.

Obviously. Claiming I believe it is is insulting.

Feels like too strong of a push on someone he's been calling a teenager,

This implies that the reason the push is too strong is because of TSO's age. What was the intent?

But you said yourself in 267 that his defensiveness is due to him being in his teens.

I also say that that makes it a null tell, and I'm confused as to why we're still discussing it, since that was the last time I mentioned it. Yet somehow you (collective, not singular) are ignoring all of the other things I've said in order to bring it up, and I cannot fathom why.

You then later on proceed to say which arguments still hold up against him despite this finding: "mudslinging thing, or refusing to have any reads, or even the coaching". I never believed in the coaching-argument in the first place to be honest, but like you said, that was the weak point of your argument. Yet, if you realize it's weak, why insist on it?

-It's good to see that you actually see my other points. This is the first time that someone other than myself has acknowledged anything but the nulls and the coaching thing.
- You realize that I've only discussed his coaching in direct response to someone asking questions about it, right? I don't see how I'm "insisting."
- If you're asking why I don't drop the coaching thing altogether: Because I still find it indicative, and I'm not tailoring my arguments to your personal opinion. You're allowed to disagree with me, but that doesn't mean I have to change my side.

I grant you the other points. Don't take this as me defending TSO, as I've said myself in my overview, I too, see reasons to find him scummy.

Then let's lynch him! How do you feel about TSO doing all the things others are getting scumread for, but somehow managing to not draw any fire for it?

I think the decision for today should be this: TSO or beastcharizard.At least that's my personal conviction, both people have decent cases against them I think.

I can get behind this, obviously. I'd prefer TSO because I think he's more able to avoid attention on later days than charizard is. I also think there is a chance (though slim) that charizard's play is the result of him just legitimately enjoying being seen as a town leader, regardless of alignment.

Also TSO's last was a massive misrepresentation.

[sthar8]

It's easy to fake, but it's also consistent with his play. In any case, he's not the lynch today.

@ Grim- In my experience it's not that unusual. Between fakeclaims and the fact that PRs often drop behavioral scumtells, I think I've seen the first day 1 L-1 claim power about half the time.

@Charizard- Assuming you survive the night, your first post of each day will be a claim of who you targeted, your result, and

why

. Choose your targets yourself, but be extra careful about being protown. If you are a tracker, we should talk about what you did wrong in postgame.

@Titus- that's a

really

bad idea.

I'll rework my reads tonight, but I'm still happy with my vote.

[sthar8]

It's a warning that you're not in a position to play games with your investigations. It's my standard deal with iffy cop claims, to remind you that bluffs, lies, and gambits involving your role are now enough to make you swing immediately. There's less potential for shenanigans as a tracker, but it's still a good sentiment to have in mind.

[sthar8]

We had a meatworld game about nine months ago where a townie claimed cop at L-3 on the first day. He then proceeded to accurately call consecutive guilties on all three scum, resulting in a game with no mislynches. There was no cop in the setup, which the townie did not know. When he flipped his card and we questioned how he found scum so easily, he admitted to choosing players at random.

It was really cool, but there were about a thousand ways it could have fallen apart.

[sthar8]

I don't do anything normal. The worst thing that happens is the scum shoot me. If they let me live, or I am healed, I can tell whether beast is telling the truth. If, in the rare event, y'all lynch me, you'll have confirmed resolution as to beast's tracker claim.

Are you high? This is a

really stupid idea

and even talking about it is

incredibly anti-town.

Shut up and scumhunt already.

[sthar8]

Not lynching titus. Still happy with TSO. I'll reread NRG next.

[sthar8]

TF is this. Why is this not dead yet?

@ Titus- SERIOUSLY SHUT UP ABOUT THAT IDEA IT'S BAD AND ANTI-TOWN. THERE IS A MASSIVE FLAW IN YOUR LOGIC AND WE CANT DISCUSS IT WITHOUT HANDING THE SCUM INFORMATION. DO YOU ACTUALLY SEE WHAT I POST IF I DO IT IN CAPS? ALSO HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT RUNNER'S CLAIM?

I don't like NRG's claim specifically for the reasons Elyse pointed out, but he's also not the play today.

Kcda still sits in the #2 spot, but his replacement could easily turn that around. We'll see, but as of now he's not the play.

runner made a couple of posts that really bother me recently. He's on the scummy side of null and I'd probably compromise on his lynch if y'all wouldn't rather lynch TheScummyOne.

[sthar8]

He ignores anything I've posted, including my vote on runnerman, and uses a filler post to try to push the lynch. Weak.

Why would I respond to your scummy-as-hell vote on runner? I'm already voting for you. It's not like I can vote for you

more

. Also, it's harder to find a TSO post

with

content than without, so if you're accusing me of cherry picking then maybe you shouldn't drive straight to the orchard when you pick me up at Home Depot. Silky.

I'd like to give whoever replaces in a chance to catch up before the night phase out of courtesy. But after that I can probably live with runner.

I'll be V/LA until Tuesday night.

I'm going on vacation and I have no idea where, but if there's internets on the way I'll attempt to check in. Feel free to lynch TSO while I'm gone.

[sthar8]

Why is it scummy? You do this so much; call something scummy and give no reason why it's scummy. I've said the whole game I think runnerman is scum. So I voted him.

Yup. The thousands of words I've posted in this game are all me

not

explaining anything.

What's the point of this? Some of the players in the game are capable of understanding my point. If they don't get it right away they'll ask questions. Some of the players are in hardcore barning mode, so they don't need the reasons anyway. You're just trying to bait out another long mind-numbing argument in which you ignore 3/4 of what I write and put up walls consisting solely of bare, unsupported assertions. I'm not interested in your attempts to make an argument by word count, nor will I engage invincible ignorance.

[sthar8]

Warning, wall incoming.

Also, where the hell is sthar???

At work. My V/LA ended late yesterday, and I had to fix my car this morning. My Wednesday shift is usually 12-11 and there was too much to catch up on both here and there for me to get a quick post in between projects. Apologies.

tl;dr you don't want to put up a case. I'm glad we straightened that out.

Obviously you didn't read, because my point is that I've already put up a case. Talk about "misrepping."

Many tyrants and crooks throughout history have been open in the way they communicate, does that mean what they are saying is the truth and to be believed? good to know though that you have your eye on him.

^Badposting. IGMEOY

It is the way he plays, I think I have played with him now in 3 games, I in fact pulled him up for something similar in my first game IIRC, I was wrong. Right now Feel It is playing in a way that I am 70% sure is the way he plays when Town, but I could be wrong again.

I'm getting that read too, but my sample size isn't large enough for it to indicate anything but "hard to read." Since

some

people couldn't just shut up about Titus, I guess it's ok to say that if I had the role she's softclaiming, I'd consider FeelIt as a target tonight.

I actually agree with this sentiment, and have noticed since the TSO/Sthar soap opera went quite Sthar stopped being part of the game, only to resurface and get it on again with TSO... Sthar why? do you not feel that TSO has actually started to play the game? the Don/Titus affair has been going on long enough, and now Don has admitted to tunnelling on Titus, do you not think you should do the same here with TSO, or do you get some childish pleasure out of winding him up? there is scum hunting then there is baiting, all I see now is baiting.

Loaded question presenting a false dichotomy. How did you read this far into the game and still think that a fallacy coupled with a connotative appeal to emotion would have any hope of manipulating me?

I've been less active for the same reason you think I've stopped being part of the game: you (and others) aren't reading my fucking posts. Frankly, I've had more important uses for my limited time and dwindling energy than cooking up an argument that you're not going to bother looking at anyway.

TSO hasn't been angry at me in a while; that's obvious. He's playing the ad misericordiam for all it's worth, and you're buying into it.

Why would one of us be guaranteed to flip scum? It's a) a fallacy and b) setting up lynches for the next day. Do not like.

Agreed, regardless of who you're talking about.

I will handle one of the people who try to sit on that fence Grim.

Seriously, the more you talk about it the less effective your theoretical role is. Stoppit.

TSO:

Post 25 where TSO votes Don is my first town read. The second that happened I knew TSO was town this game. That is something I expect from town TSO.
Post 109 TSO says I need to give reasons. Very town move and mindset.
Soon the sthar/TSO thing starts so it is best for everyone if I skip those.
Post 360, he posted a list of reads. A counter argument here is that earlier he did say he didn't like lists like this in 134.
Post 628, this seems town motivated. Wanting real cases for lynches.
Post 766, I agree with this post so it looks town to me.
Defending himself from Grimgroove was pretty good. I felt his argueing was town.
Finally, my gut screams town for TSO. I would like to think I know him as scum and I don't think he is scummy.

Random note:
781 TSO says he has thought runnerman was scum all day which isn't true. In post 631 he says Runnerman is eh.

Most of us know what confirmation bias is, you don't need to provide an example.

A BUNCH OF ROLEFISHING

STOP TALKING ABOUT THIS.

I am sceptical of any claim during D1 as it smacks of desperation IMO. Unless you are fast approaching lynch and your PR is strong then I see no reason to claim. Of the 3, if you push me the one I am most doubtful of is Beast's, I think that a tracker claim is probably a safe beat as a fake claim as the odds are slightly better against a counter claim than that of Doc or Cop for example.

Vanillaiser, Fruit Vendor or Visitor, Vote Thief or Politician are some that I can think of.

1. Stop talking about that.
2. One of those is explicitly non-normal and the other two are extremely borderline. Try to keep your suggestions sane and relevant?

I had forgot he was playing.....

Oh my bad. Next time I go on vacation I'll make sure to clear it with you first.

@ Elyse- Why are you

not

voting for runner?

@ Grim- Birthday?

[sthar8]

Sorry, I missed one:

If Feel It is scum and you don't hammer it implements you to being scum.

Wait what?

[sthar8]

sthar: i'm not rolefishing, just reacting to whats happening around me. if you read the game you will see that titus started softclaiming under zero pressure, and they claimed in order to help "confirm" beast. you know, the beast whose claim they say they believe. the only reason I have continued to talk about it is because I think titus is scum and grim was crying about "oh we should be discussing more!" you know, the same grim that sat on his hands and did nothing the whole time he was saying that. but whatevz.

Thank you for implying that I'm not reading the game. That's nice.

If

you

were reading

my

posts, you'd see that I've told Titus it was stupid to be softclaiming or discussing the softclaim

three times.

If you know Titus' alignment for sure, just say it now and you can be the lynch for today. Otherwise, every single word spent discussing this, including this paragraph, is extremely anti-town. I'd be happy to talk about this later, but for right now I don't know how to be more explicit.

@ Elyse- That's what I thought, thanks. I just didn't want to make the move and then have you jump in with some logic as to why runner can't be scum.

Honestly, I have both runner and feelit just on the scummy side of null. I don't think either has better than a 55% chance of flipping scum, and I'm not really comfortable with either wagon. My top two townreads are split between the wagons, as are my top two scumreads. But NRG is V/LA and runner's not going to be posting, so it's up to me to break the tie.

Runner and Feelit have both given up on the game, but Feelit may be talked back into playing. We're already waiting on another replacement and there's no way you guys are going to see sense on my preferred wagon of the day.

@ Everyone

I'm going to vote for runner. If you intend to hammer, please announce it in thread then wait 24 hours. In that interval, I'm going to post one last case on TSO and everyone should have an opportunity to get in whatever thoughts they have before the night phase. If anybody else actually wants to lynch scum today, they can move to TSO and we'll get that wagon going instead.

Vote: Runnerman

[sthar8]

What?

[sthar8]

Yes. Target, results, reasoning.

[sthar8]

Things I believe about TSO that are relevant to his play but not his alignment:

Spoiler:

A. He's a kid. He may or may not be legally allowed to drive, but he is almost certainly not allowed to vote.
B. His arguing skills are undeveloped. He consistently uses terms with little or no understanding of their definition, he gets distracted by tangential issues and semantics. He's more concerned with winning the argument than making his point.
C. He's smart. When it suits him, he makes a few very good points. Additional reading of him reveals that he is perfectly capable of scumhunting and that he recognizes fallacy when he sees it, even if he doesn't know the proper name.

I will not be arguing these with anyone, especially TSO. If you don't agree, I don't care. If you assert that any of these is the reason I want TSO lynched, then you're stupid.


Reasons that TSO is likely scum:

1. He's not scumhunting. He's following along with others' cases.
-His vote for runner came after FeelIt, Paper, Titus, Elyse and Beast had expressed suspicion of runner.
-His vote for NRG came after Grim, FeelIt, Paper, and Elyse had already voted for NRG
-He voted Paper, then unvoted without a case. Of course, only after Elyse and Don expressed suspicion of paper.
-His attack on don came after FeelIt, Paper, Smudger, and NRG had criticized the same post.
Not once has TSO led the push against anyone. Not once has TSO presented a case against these people as scum. He promised cases on paper and NRG, but they never materialized. TSO doesn't need to expend any effort finding scum because he is scum and he knows who his partners are. He's just floating along while the town picks their lynch. Despite having never presented a case, he's FOS'd almost every player in the game to keep his options open. He's twice admitted to not actively reading the thread.

2. He's looking for an easy lynch
-See above.
-Despite his failure to hunt scum, he insists that others present real cases.
Notice that all of the attacks TSO has committed himself to share something. He won't vote someone unless multiple other players are already voting or FOSing that person. He's not looking to lynch scum, he's looking to lynch quickly. And since he's not presenting any cases, he can't be blamed if one of these lynches hits a townie.

3. Active Lurking
-He'll comment on people's activity.
-He'll argue subjective interpretation
-In his ISO you'll find him defining terms, discussing semantics, and avoiding prods among other effectively empty posts.
TSO may not be contributing anything of worth, but he's also not getting prodded. Whenever he isn't aggressively defending himself or following along with someone else's wagon, he has an empty post or two to throw down. He has the time to generate some content, but as scum he lacks the inclination.

4. Manipulative language
-In 972 he horse laughs my argument by misrepresenting my discussion with Smudger. This ignores the actual assertion that he's using ad mis as an AtE to keep people from seriously considering my case against him.
-In 860/861 he implies that everyone should know that he doesn't support a FeelIt lynch, despite his previous two mentions of FeelIt's alignment being that he "didn't like the jump on the charizard wagon" and that he was "possible scum"
-In 846 he misrepresents Grim's attack on him, asserting that since he "proved" that FeelIt's vote was scummier (subjective anyway), Grim was wrong about TSO being scum. What Grim actually said was that TSO's vote on runner was scummy, and that it

might

be the scummiest.
-In 795 he frames my refusal to argue with him as bait for another argument.
- In 793 he asserts that he's called runner scummy the whole game. But his only mentions of runner before his vote are a criticism of a post and TSO's classification of runner's alignment as "eh," which as far as I can tell isn't a word for "scum." Runner hasn't ever been in TSO's suspect list.
-In 452 he claims that I'm trying to start an argument with him, three pages after I ignored his question designed to provoke an argument about something irrelevant.
-I'm sure you can find more, this is a pervasive pattern.
TSO is using word choice to characterize himself as a victim on defense, and to change the facts to fit his ideal circumstances. He keeps asserting things that have no basis in reality and just assuming that nobody is fact checking him. The single most frustrating thing about this game so far is that most everyone appears to be taking what he says at face value. Town has no need to warp facts, TSO is simply concerned with how he's being perceived. This is a major scumtell.

I'm very tired after a long day and I'm putting this post up without proofreading as thoroughly as I normally do. If anything is incomprehensible, please point it out and I'll correct it.

If anyone (other than TSO) has questions, I'd be happy to answer them.

What do you say guys? How about we lynch TSO instead?

[sthar8]

Holy shit Huntress still plays this game? Rad!

Welcome Bowser.

TSO, if that wasn't intentional please never admit it. You're great. Seriously, it's too bad you're scum, because you're also one of my top 3 favorite players in this game.

I'm happy to let the replacements catch up, but there's no reason now for me not to
VOTE: TSO

[sthar8]

unvote

no quickhammers please. I'll put mine back as soon as Huntress is caught up, unless you guys would like me to hammer. It is my case after all.

[sthar8]

Yeah, I understood that. That wasn't for you.

[sthar8]

Let me have the hammer, guys. I'll do it as soon as Huntress gives the OK. My vote should be on the wagon I started.

[sthar8]

Titus, please do not claim until beast and NRG have posted results. After that, if anyone would like to discuss the role speculation stuff from yesterday it should be safe to do so now. Once our night actions have been claimed, I'll put up my top 3.

p-edit crossposting. Thank you, titus.

[sthar8]

[sthar8]

Ummm what?

crossposting again: what Elyse said

[sthar8]

Let's wait on nightkill spec until our actions have all been claimed.

[sthar8]

Except that the fakehammer was nonindicative and being too sure of a player's alignment is the opposite of a town tell. Your posting on this page is scummy as shit.

[sthar8]

Ugh, Grim was a terrible track beast. He was pretty much confirmed town.

@ FeelIt- No, actually, it wasn't. Because 1. There was no evidence that he didn't know it was a fakehammer and 2. Scum would

never

claim town in twilight for WIFOM. Right?

So you think I'm scum who singlehandedly pushed TSO to lynch

twice

yesterday then pulled my vote at the last minute in order to further some plan? Who would fall for that? And more importantly, what would I gain from it? Nevermind the fact that the deadline came at what is for me the early morning of the first day of my weekend, how was that scummy?

You reacted to the nightkills and informed everyone that you are confirmed town when the available evidence doesn't support any such conclusion, not to mention seriously twisted grim's posts to support your conclusions. I'm tempted to vote you but the last two lynches I've pushed on people who seemed to be actively harming towns hit incompetent players instead of malicious ones.

@NRG- Where you at?

[sthar8]

Awesome, that saved me a bunch of brainpower. Titus, do you want to claim? You're basically out already and claiming your action will clear up confusion for some players *cough FeelIt*cough

[sthar8]

Seriously, all of this information is already in thread.

[sthar8]

Ok. I can live with that.

[sthar8]

Beast can you answer Titus so she can claim? I'd like to get the actions sorted before the speculation gets sillier than it already is.

[sthar8]

Honestly, that was the most transparent vig softclaim Titus could have made short of making a "words that rhyme with my power role" list. The only doubt was whether she'd claim bulletproof or 1-shot. And the kill was basically claimed before the day ended. So now you all understand why I've been treating speculation as to why don was killed like loud farts in a quiet room.

Of course, if we'd gone along with her plan in thread the scum could have just avoided it and rendered the whole thing into WIFOM.

Troofs:
FeelIt is 90% confirmed town and unlynchable today.
Titus is unlynchable today.
NRG is unlynchable today.
90% chance that scum do not have a roleblocker.

From my perspective, that narrows the pool to {beast, paper, smudger, Elyse, Bowser, huntress}

I'd prefer not to lynch beast today. I think he is probable scum, but forcing him to claim another result tomorrow is not bad for the town. Also, it is consistent with his play that he would screw up his investigation (no offense if you're town, beast, you've obviously never played a tracker before), so there exists a slight possibility that we'd be dumping ourselves into Lylo for no gain.

Assuming beast is scum, that leaves a probable two scum players in {paper, smudger, Elyse, Bowser, huntress}. Obviously, from each of those players' perspectives my name will replace theirs in that pool. We lynch out of that pool and NRG gets another investigation tonight. Wherever the scum kill, that shrinks the pool. We have a good shot of winning this one on math alone.

Is my reasoning broken anywhere?

I'll reread those five tomorrow to decide which I'd like to lynch. My gut right now is that smudger would be a good lynch and paper would not, but that could change drastically in the next 24 hours.

[sthar8]

Necromancy is a shitty reason for a lynch, especially necromancy on someone like don. If you think Bowser's the play, tell me why.

[sthar8]

Are you reading the thread?

[sthar8]

No massclaim please. There's a very good reason why. That may be viable tomorrow.

[sthar8]

Feel it is unlikely to be scum unless nrg is too, and I can't really see scum linking themselves together like that.

The way I read it, pretty much the only way FeelIt is scum is if he's a gf.

Although I'd like to know why Feel it was saying that both kills were from scum.

VI?

[sthar8]

I am right in saying [...] Feel It may not have a gun, does not mean he is town, NGR maybe not be who he purports to be,

Everyone understands this. They also understand that it is

very unlikely

that both NRG and FeelIt are scum together, and that this means there is at least one, possibly two more scum in a rapidly narrowing pool. They're not 100% off the hook, but I'd rather look at a pool with a certainty that there is scum inside it than not. When we catch some scum, then we can reevaluate our "nearly confirmeds" to see if they fit as partners.

Aside: I did not "allude" to there being a chance that Feelit is scum; I explicitly stated it. He is almost certainly not a serial killer, and from what we know of the setup a mafia doc would essentially be a gf with a different name anyway.

I would also like to comment on the discussion surrounding Sthar and his tunnelling of TSO. IMO, you did tunnel him and were repetitive in your attacks and votes for him

(1)

, yes you pulled your vote when he got close to lynch

(2)

, and you yourself point this out [...]

you would gain a lot to be honest, you would gain the simple thing you seemed to have gained, the believe by many that you are town

(3)

. and the fact that the lynch on TSO took place while you were sleeping, is really not of any consequence as you had achieved what you set out to do and requested to do

(4)

...

1. How is that scummy?
2. I did so because I thought that TSO might self-hammer to keep Huntress's reads out of the thread. She could then be nightkilled without ever getting a chance to contribute. This happened to me in a game very recently, so it's been on my mind. I wish I had put my vote back, and I intended to but you all got distracted by don and feelit's silliness and I missed my window. Honestly, I'm glad grim was active to keep you all on track.
3. How does that make me look town? At all?
4. I did achieve TSO's lynch, and I'm glad I did. His play was intensely anti-town, and all available information indicated that he was playing for a different win condition. Did he turn out to be scum? No, he was just playing significantly below his potential. I was wrong about his motivations, which happens sometimes. Would I lynch him again if I had it to do over? You bet your ass. He was the play, given the information that we had.
5. So if I'm scum, then who do you think my partners are?

@ Everyone- How do you guys feel about Smudger? His end of yesterday posting was pinging my scumdar, and now he's trying to broaden the lynch pool.

I'm still rereading the suspect list and I've got a funeral to attend tomorrow, so don't expect much from me until monday.

[sthar8]

Frequently, yes. Especially if they aren't allowed to kill.

[sthar8]

Frequently, yes. Especially if they aren't allowed to kill.

Do you have any examples of this? As it's not something I've come across before.

Ummm apparently not
This is likely consequent of me not having played in quite a while. I believe I was remembering a discussion on which roles could kill in Ramen (godfathers in large games usually couldn't kill at the time, the wiki no longer appears to reference this) and some meatworld games which are not particularly helpful.

Just replace every reference to godfather I made with "investigation immune." I'm sure there's a role that does the same thing to gunsmiths, and if a godfather would be normal with a cop, then doing the same thing to a gunsmith is certainly balanced.

@Bowser- You still playing?

@Paper- where you at?

@Smudger- do you think I'm scum?

[sthar8]

Look at that, just like magic.

Let's see if I can do it again.

SUMMON: BOWSER

p-edit: guys I think I'm a wizard. I will refuse to answer unless I am addressed as THE SUMMONER from now on. Caps included.

[sthar8]

@ Smudger- How do you feel about lynching Elyse?

I have more but I want to hear the answer to this first.

[sthar8]

Apologies, guys. This weekend is the prerelease for the new Magic set, which means I'm working 34 hours in three days. Usually these things are slow enough that I can still post, but it's been uncharacteristically rough this weekend. I'll catch up tomorrow.

[sthar8]

Waiting on NRG. Plan appears to be working.

[sthar8]

I absolutely want to vote Smudger, but will wait for a votecount. I'm not thrilled with the end of day chatter yesterday, and in my mind it leaves beast not completely confirmed. I'm totally willing to play follow the cop for now, though.

[sthar8]

Elyse, he did.

My lingering paranoia aside, Beast is probably town.

Our lynch today is Smudger.

That means our investigation pool is {me, Elyse, huntress, paper}

Please do not announce who you are going to investigate in thread.

I believe that a town win from this point is inevitable. We may require a massclaim tomorrow, but this one's pretty much solved.

@Titus- Your play this game has been

incredibly

risky, but it appears to be paying off. Kudos.

It doesn't matter, but my current scumlist is:

Huntress- Based on associatives from bowser and smudger. If you're the scum, you basically replaced into an unwinnable situation, which sucks.

Paper- Based on how well Titus's claim gambits are working.

Elyse- Has an element of association with smudger, but if she bussed Bowser it was very aggressively.

[sthar8]

Has anyone not checked in? And does anyone have anything else that we need to talk about before the day ends?

[sthar8]

If smudger is implying that he's vengeful, I'd be happy to hammer him. If he's right, we lose two members of the suspect pool, and narrow it down even further.

Of course, he's caught scum attempting a last ditch bluff, so I won't die anyway

If I were to die tonight, obviously you guys would finish with the suspect pool. If by some black magic that doesn't win the game for town, then either Beast is a very lucky liar or Titus is a serial killer playing an insanely long con. I don't believe either of those things to be true, but it's important to have in thread regardless.

[sthar8]

2. I have made 2 claims and the only person who has picked the last claim up is Sthar. But one thing is puzzling, Sthar is generally very good at reading the game and commenting, so much so, most if not all town believe him town. If so then why has he missed the fact I have contradicted myself and claimed twice? Why is he not riding me hard like he did others on D1?

[...] You may also see that Stjar is definitely beginning to skip through the thread. This is a classic scum trait, remain active to begin with then slow up on input and as "certain" wagons develop push them in the right direction.

2. I didn't miss it, it just doesn't matter. Like I said, caught scum flailing. If it looks like you're not going to die today, I'll push until you get lynched. Until then, not wasting the time.

Other bit: Yup. It's solved, so there's not much analysis needed.

Not-smudgers- We don't need to be looking for #3 right now. If NRG is somehow wrong about smudger (which is doubtful considering how scummy he has been for the last two days), then we need that information to find the remaining scum. Which means its time to lynch the caught-scum we have, rather than let him talk you into lynching a claimed power role. What possible thing do you think you're going to find to indicate that smudger is not the best lynch?

If I'm scum, you guys will catch me out tomorrow, or tonight if I hammer vengeful-smudger. He should be willing to make that trade, and he isn't. Let's just lynch him already.

I guess it's technically possible that we are witnessing the worst mafia rb or rd who has completely screwed up their role up till now, but that is incredibly unlikely. As Titus said, most of us should already know all the roles anyway. All the hints are in the thread.

[sthar8]

Hell yes

[sthar8]

Three times now. Explicitly.

[sthar8]

The result COULD be wrong due to certain PRs, despite the unlikeliness. Are you guys sure that Smudger is to be the lynch today?

Yes, I'm certain. What power roles would give you a wrong result that could be in this setup? How can we test that without killing smudger? And what roles would explain how horribly scummy smudger's been for the last 2.5 days?

Always prepare for the worst, sthar. Always prepare for the worst.

No, I totally am. See post 1326. But even if we lynch innocent, bulletproof vengeful smudger, he kills me because he thinks I'm scum. Then you guys know that scum is in {Elyse, paper, huntress} and they can't nk because it'll catch them. If we stick to what we were doing yesterday, we have an insanely forgiving margin for error, and the raw numbers say that town wins.

If it doesn't matter whether I'm the hammer I'll
VOTE: Smudger

somebody kill him.

If you want me to be the hammer in case of supersaint, I'm still happy to do it.

[sthar8]

Which means our pool is now {me, huntress, paper} looking for probably one scum with seven alive? Yup, still looks good to me.

The confirmed town, in descending order of confirm strength:
Elyse, Beast, Titus, Feelit.

VOTE: Huntress

Titus, do you have any actions to claim?

[sthar8]

If it looks good to you you'll be equally happy to start with yourself, I guess.

Vote: Sthar

I agree with the order of your confirmed list but I'm a bit concerned about leaving Feelit to get to lylo with the last of the lynch pool (if we don't find the last scum before then and assuming Beast and Elyse won't make it that far either). It just looks a bit too easy and the last couple of weeks he's been playing like he doesn't have to put the effort in.

Yeah, sure. I'd be fine with me today. I think the confirmed towns are smart enough to see the plan through to it's conclusion. Plus when I flip, my unwavering confidence in my plan coupled with a final warning that the scum will attempt to convince them to deviate will become a gospel truth instead of the sound advice that it is right now.

Honestly, I think we've all been phoning it in a little for the last two day phases. The game is effectively won, and there's no point to putting in the extra work for analysis that can only confirm what we already know.

That said, I've been thinking, and I need to revise that list. Titus and Feelit need to swap spots. The kill on NRG was more instructive than I originally credited. Accounting for that, if there's scum outside the lynch pool (which I do not believe) there is a 95% chance it's sk-Titus.

Of course, that's likely moot because your post basically confirms that you are the last scum. As bad as paper's post was (seriously? adding Titus back into the lynch pool?) you just committed to the two best scum tactics remaining, in the same post. You probably should have picked one over the other and waited until tomorrow to try to open up the lynch pool, but I don't think even that would have saved you. I can't fault you for trying, and you're certainly a good player. You just got trapped in a borderline unwinnable situation with a team that wasn't on your level.

By the way, it's probably time to say I'm not a joat at all. I was faking to try and get shot. It got us one additional investigation but it seems the scums have called my bluff.

Obviously, but I don't think you should have called it quits just yet. Given the silly amount of success you have had, I would have claimed that I'd used the heal on the wrong investigator and that I'd be using my own one-shot investigation tonight to guarantee caught scum tomorrow. I mean, we win anyway, but why not play for all the beans?

My last question to you was intended to suggest that course of action.

@beast- We're at a point now where it's ok to discuss your day 1 play. I think your main problem came in two areas:
1. You were attempting to be a town leader. This is not something you should be doing with an investigative role. It will either put you into the spotlight and force your claim, or you will look like an attractive nightkill, neither of which you want. You spent a lot of time trying to make others see you as town, which again attracts attention. The ideal investigative role will scumhunt just hard enough to stay off the radar, then present a shitload of confirmed info all at once. If you do that, then it doesn't matter how everyone else thinks of you because what you tell them is testable.
2. You mistook "weird" for "scummy" day 1, which is excusable from anybody EXCEPT an investigative role. As a cop-like, your scum reads should be on legitimately scummy players and your town reads on the towniest. Remember that your role has a mechanism for testing weird, unexplained, and null players. If they're hard to read, they make good investigations which makes them a waste of your time during the day phase.

Basically, your normal playstyle didn't work well with the goals of your role. Rather than alter your play to fit your goals, you tried to do both at once which came off as forced and artificial to those of us who were legitimately scumhunting.

The random question thing was a nice touch. Its a really obvious coptell, but only in hindsight which is the best kind of coptell.

@ everybody- I'm ready to end the day when y'all are. I've said my bit and I'm pretty sure we've got this one.

[sthar8]

I agree about the kills thing, and it's my major hangup there. But Feelit also doesn't fit with the NKA. Somebody's not playing efficiently, and I think it's more likely that Titus would attempt a long con than Feelit would kill the pr that can't incriminate him over the one that can. Either way the last scum being one of you, me, or paper solves most of those issues, making it the most likely by a long shot.

I've noticed the infrequency of docs since my return. I think I would have killed either Titus or NRG as scum. I'm quite interested to see the scumlogic behind the grim kill. In any case I don't believe you were behind that kill. I think that one came from one of your partners.

[sthar8]

What are you looking for? It is almost impossible for us to not win from here. Hammer time!

[sthar8]

I think confusing paper will just make his confusion obvious. He's missed much of the subtlety in this game anyway.

1358 has me pretty convinced on huntress, but we've got enough room for error. If you want to take a stab at paper then go for it. If you think he's the lynch today, let me know and I'll drop the hammer.

If you're wrong about that and I'm right, we lynch huntress tomorrow. No big loss.

[sthar8]

^ Funny.

[sthar8]

EBWOP if you remind me in post (or tomorrow, if you're scum) I'll explain why huntress' claim was correct from scum. I'm not going to do it right now because while you being mafia is not probable, it is possible.

[sthar8]

Naw, huntress has just been at this for a long time. She's crafty. Plus, there's a math factor.

[sthar8]

Oh yeah, I guess that explains it. Huntress wasn't involved in the bad kills. More later.

[sthar8]

Yeah excellent game. My first game after my return was filled with examples of atrocious play, and I was considering leaving the site again until you guys proved that there are still good players here. I would play with any of you again, gladly.

I have a lengthy post game post typed, but I forgot to submit it last night and I won't be on my home computer again for three days. Apologies!

[sthar8]

Notes-

TSO was playing well below his potential, which is why I wanted him lynched. I thought he might be playing a shit game to disguise scum-laziness, turns out it was just regular laziness. If I had it to do again, I'd still lynch him but I'd argue with

him

about it less and with everyone else about it more.

Grim- I think you did better than you think you did. I look forward to playing with you again.

Bowser and Huntress- Tough luck that you guys got screwed by the people you replaced. I think you had to basically out yourselves just to stay alive. You did save the game from being dreadfully boring, though, and I appreciate it greatly. Huntress, it was just as much a pleasure as I remember

Smudger- If you hadn't tried to manipulate me, I might never have cottoned on to you. Also, you should have recognized that there was no way I'd

ever

get lynched over the TSO thing, and the post where you tried to make that an option was almost a confession. Your day 1 was phenomenal, and you might have made it to endgame if you had just kept your head down a little longer.

Don- Your approach is unorthodox, but I think it could be a lot of fun. I will note, however, that you had all three scum in your "town bloc"

Titus- I've said before how crazy risky that was, but congratulations! That was skillfully done. You were super lucky that I wasn't scum and that there wasn't a mafia roleblocker, though. Fun fact: the day you claimed JOAT I was considering a fake doc claim on the faith that you could solve the setup a day faster if I got shot. The only thing that stopped me was the possibility that there might be a real doc who would misunderstand my purpose and counter. Hope to team up with you again!

Elyse- I don't think I've ever disagreed with someone so much and still read that person as intelligent town. I'll be happy anytime we get to play on a team, because I think you see all the stuff I don't.

Paper- That was a great first game on MS. In my experience, games on this site are a little more subtle and strategic than games elsewhere. You'll get the hang of it; you're certainly smart enough.
As promised- Huntress couldn't claim a PR on the last day. If she were counterclaimed, we had enough lynches left to test both claims. And even if she weren't, her claim would be the weakest just because the others had been given time to prove their townieness with night actions. Her only hope was to put me back on the list of suspicions and then open the lynch pool to include FeelIt or Titus. If she had claimed a PR, I would have seriously considered counterclaiming just to get her killed.

FeelIt- Keep on doing what you're doing, but please always be town in games with me. You as scum would make for a headache.

NRG- Excellent picks. You and Titus won this game. Thanks

Beast- Good job with your later play. Remember also that is is a Really Bad Thing for the scum to know who the PRs are targeting at night. I'd be happy to play with you again.