Lost Season 5 - Son of a bitch...

[Ironhead]

I can tell just from my role PM that the game mechanics are going to be pretty weird -- which will match Season 5 well (I was an avid watcher of

Lost

). Without revealing anything consequential about my role, my assumption from the information therein is that stopping the time skips will favor the town.

I am curious as to what assumptions everyone else makes about what their role PMs say and suggest that we share some of our assumptions -- those that

can

be shared, without giving scum any information that would be advantageous to them. I also think this could be a lucrative form of RQS -- scum may lie about what assumptions they draw from their role PM, but over time we may be able to catch them in the web of their own deception.

[Ironhead]

I am thoroughly enjoying this back-and-forth. My view on it:
VOTE: totallynotmafia

[Ironhead]

VOTE: LADY LAMDBADELTA, who I found much more troublesome in the discussion with Callandor than TNM; now that we are in the same timeline I can vote her.

I note that the scum do not get to kill with each time slip.

[Ironhead]

Here is an idea, the time split is a mafia powerole (because it can be manipulated to influence lynch, so I don't really see it as a town power), and we have to kill the person who has that power to stop the split.

What do you think?

Based on what I know from my role PM, I do not think this is the case. I think there is a random element that dictates the time slip, which would also comport with what actually happened on the show (the Frozen Donkey Wheel being jammed, etc).

@Ironhead. Why would you vote LLD while you voted TNM in the other time period, and the later basically agreed with LLD?

Because Callandor had seemed townish to me in that exchange, and therefore her accusers had seemed scummy by comparison. In our first time period, I could not vote LLD and had to settle for TNM; now that we are in the same time period, I can vote LLD.

[Ironhead]

Any ideas on how mafia achieve NKs? Would be nice to know so we know when to act to avoid NLs.

[Ironhead]

VOTE: PLUM

I agree that the frequent time flashes without kills will cripple our ability to catch scum. We want to avoid the functional equivalent of no-lynches. Plum doesn't have enough content yet to establish a firm scum read, but appears to be the best lynch candidate in the 2007 timeline as TNM's posting has been much more townish lately.

I don't like UK's brand of scumhunting at all. I understand that in some circles, recklessness and wanton lynches are applauded as town-tells, especially on Day 1, but I think that they do not actually help the town and in my experience is disproportionately the result of a scum trying to appear town (in other words, you substitute style for substance; who will question your scumhunting chops when you are pushing so hard for someone's lynch?). The lack of cohesive analysis from UK is a hallmark of poor or nonexistent scumhunting. Perceive this as OMGUS at your own risk; I note how quickly UK sacrificed her principles to jump from one lynch candidate to another, and was so adamant for a quicklynch that she initially bypassed the request for a claim (town-credit to ABR for interrupting the march to lynch with a request for claim).

Anyway, despite the join date Ironhead's relative level of experience with mafia isn't that much

Just to give you a reference point in judging me: I started playing Mafia and variations thereof in 2003, playing mostly in real life as internet Mafia communities were disjointed and small for a few years. I shifted from real life to internet Mafia around 2006. Joined this forum in 2008, played in a couple of games, but was unimpressed with the level of skill and culture of the community in general and stuck mostly with other sites. Gravitated back toward this site several months ago as the lifecycle of the other sites I frequented began to expire (as often happens -- the best players move on, younger players move in, the culture of the site slowly degrades). Found that the culture on this site had matured considerably (seems to be at the peak in the lifecycle), and also that the slower pace of games on this site fit my work schedule much better.

I've played in hundreds of games at other venues -- in real life and at other internet sites. If I were to criticize myself in terms of playing ability or playing style, I would say that I am over-experienced; my reaction to much of the behavior analysis and perceived reads is often that of gentle bemusement or exasperation, as the gem that a player may hold up and gloat over its beauty looks far more like an unpolished turd to me. If this makes me sound condescending, please feel free to lynch me just to get an arrogant prick out of the game. Feel free also to peruse my meta on this site to see what to expect from my playstyle.

[Ironhead]

Do you find UK scummy, or just a poor player then?

I don't have enough reason to consider her scum right now (soon, maybe; but not yet). I also wouldn't call her a poor player; perhaps unsophisticated, and I also find her untrustworthy. There is something about her gameplay that reads like a wiki tutorial on how to act like a town -- starting with unexplained town-reads (posts #231, 233, 236, 259, 263), following with a hard-charging campaign to lynch a particular player (posts #271, 272, 273, 276, 284, 287, 295, 302, and 311), and when pressured, resort to AtE -- specifically, anger (posts #329 until the present). I can't shake the feeling that I've seen this episode before.

[Ironhead]

Hi Ironhead! You still haven't given me anything to work with besides a bus on Plum, and several more attempts to discredit me ^-^.

And you haven't given me anything to work with besides AtE! Good thing we don't exist solely to provide each other with fodder for posting, eh comrade?

Now please explain post #391. It is tough to see how this does anything to help your win-condition, since to my eyes it is nothing but buddying. Does buddying support your win-condition? If so, how? If not, why did you write it?

[Ironhead]

@ironhead: what specifically about my recent posting has changed your mind from me being scum to town?

Your early interchange with Callandor was, as others have pointed out, dumb. I was inclined to think that you or LLD or both were being intentionally obtuse with that discussion. However, you improved significantly with post #173 and beyond. In particular, posts 173, 183, 213, and 288 show incisive critical analysis. I can see some depth to your train of thought; an aspect noticeably absent from some other players.

New time flash:

VOTE: PLUM

To reassert the vote I had before this time flash.

[Ironhead]

Ironhead was viewing the thread earlier too. Just fyi.

Yes, I was -- I opened up the forum as soon as I got home from work, but was quickly conscripted into service for household chores by my wife and I didn't get a chance to comment. I would like to read fully all of the posts that I missed from my last visit, and it takes a little while due to the empty chatter that permeates this game.

I think that at this point Plum ought to claim (

before

the hammer, UK); if another time flash occurs before Plum claims, we can reassert all necessary votes pretty quickly. Plum's claim notwithstanding, I think we ought to lynch at some point instead of waiting for the next time flash.

[Ironhead]

I don't want to give her the chance to stall to another flash, Ironhead. ESPECIALLY given that

you're

the one proposing we do this.

What's your concern of another flash? I think there are enough players who are on-board for a lynch that it won't take too much effort to gin up another wagon. I will preemptively concede the argument regarding a sense of urgency until we know what our deadline is regarding Jughead; but I don't think we know for certain that our deadline is tied to the number of time flashes (at least,

my

role PM doesn't indicate that). With due respect to urgency, I don't think we need to be overly hasty.

[Ironhead]

It appears that a lynch triggers a mafia NK. Is there anyone who interprets this differently?

[Ironhead]

Plum's scum flip lowers my opinion of UK a bit.

How so? I was much more suspicious of UK before Plum flipped scum. Since UK was an early supporter of the Plum lynch, I think it portrays her in a better light.

I figure there are two triggers like CYS. Time trigger (probably 10 to 14 days), and lynch trigger. I fully expected a kill after Plum's lynch. Further, I expect another kill before the end of this voteless phase. I doubt that TNM was the mafia kill unless it was an attempt to demotivate the town. In which case we shouldn't let it work.

Questions:

-What leads you to believe that there is a time trigger for mafia NK?
-Why do you assume someone else killed TNM, and what sort of killer do you think it is?

I need to ruminate I think. I still want Iron dead first.

Indeed -- from an objective POV, I can see how I appear more scummy in light of recent activity. Do me a favor though -- if you do bandwagon me, don't quickhammer me like Plum. I check this forum every day and can claim, defend myself, offer some final bits of information, etc. If you decide that I ought to be lynched, stop at L-1 until I respond.

Having said that, I am not scum. Carry on.

[Ironhead]

I agree with springlullaby. Gut-based argumentation is very unpersuasive; and when it does persuade others to jump on the bandwagon, there is little the accused can do to defend oneself. I espouse the idea that gut feelings ought to shape your suspicions, but logic must be used to close the deal. It is much more refreshing to read logical arguments (not necessarily walls); this stream-of-consciousness chatter is pretty dumb.

But, I never would have been able to build a logic-based case on Plum so quickly, so kudos to your gut-based scumhunting on that one.

[Ironhead]

Do we all agree Ironhead is scum?

I don't. I think you are scummy, though.

[Ironhead]

/claim John Locke

If I die, the time skips end. According to my role PM, this is the

only way

the time skips end. There may be other repercussions of my death (ominously mentioned, but not specified, in my role PM). The ramifications of my role may be altered in the future.

[Ironhead]

Blah blah blah he was fucking OBVIOUSLY a power role of some sort btw.

Not sure I would call it a power role, unless you define "power" as "not vanilla townie." There is nothing I can do or offer to the town, except stop time skips by dying.

So, you dying favours the town? Rather fatalistic viewpoint, no?

Yeah, the name of the role is "Sacrificial Time Stopper." The implication of the word "sacrificial" is that it helps the town.

Actually, Callandor, explain for me what the time skips have to do with Jughead. I don't know nor do I usually care about ~*~flavor~*~, but it seems important here.

In the show, the time skips ended when Locke turned the Frozen Donkey Wheel and was transported off the island

Spoiler: Season 6 plot twist

permanently.

His Role PM warns of BAD THINGS HAPPENING if the time skips stop.

No it doesn't. How did you infer that?

Ironhead

: Explain why you thought that stopping the time skips would be good for town, when your claim says that there will be repercussions, usually a word connotating bad things.

Time skips good for the town: implied by the word "sacrificial" in my role title. Repercussions are related to

my death

, not the end of time skips. In other words, my death causes (a) end of time skips; and (b) possible other repercussions. I suspect that the "other repercussions" simply entails another mafia NK, and nothing too game-changing.

[Ironhead]

I think spring is scum with either ABR or LLD.

Why? Why is spring scum, and why those two as scummates?

[Ironhead]

Ironhead, how do you stop the timeskips, and if your dying helps, should we not lynch him?

I stop time skips by dying; my death triggers the end of the time skips. If the town decides that I am value-added by dying, then I suppose you would want to lynch me. Under that premise, the trade-off is one less town-affiliated player and presumably the mafia get another NK.

The Jakalope: Can you please answer the questions I posed in #736?

[Ironhead]

Lynch ironhead.

You're so helpful.

@Darox: Between me and Jakalope, who would you rather lynch and why?

[Ironhead]

I see your approach to this game has not improved appreciably since the start. I was underwhelmed by your efforts to help the town then, and continue to be underwhelmed now. Perhaps my suspicions of your scumminess are wrong and you really are a town-affiliated player who is just lazy, and if so, perhaps this will motivate you to get in the game:

VOTE: DAROX

By my count, that's L-1. I recommend you claim before you get hammered. In fact, you don't even need to detail the mechanics of your role -- just the character from the TV show that you purport to be.

[Ironhead]

Don't worry Ironhead, that vote is definitely pressuring me, and it definitely hasn't lowered my opinion of you.

Good defense! This stunning riposte clearly demonstrates your towniness.

/sarcasm

I may be a bit old-fashioned, but I just don't understand laziness. I am inclined to believe that those who are (a) so lazy as to not actively participate in any substantial manner; AND (b) willing to put in the minimal effort necessary to announce that they are too lazy/busy/tired to actively participate in any substantial manner; are probably scum.

[Ironhead]

Damn. That's a lot of people in this thread, then.

No, it isn't. There is a difference between (for example) Dramonic's #379 (where he laments that "this game is not at the top of my to-do list," but still makes the effort to offer meaningful content), or jasonT1981's #401 (where he offers an excuse for past lack of activity); and posts that exist only to announce how the player is too lazy/busy/tired to post anything else.

Darox does it in post #771. Arguably, UK's #664 could also fall into this category (although she offers a modicum of substance in that post, and continued to be active immediately after it).

Incidentally, I think this behavior exists and is unfortunately common in other games, but it seems to me that the player who uses this attitude is disproportionately scum.

Elsa, I suspect that you did not do a re-read of the game to find "a lot of people in this thread" who subscribe to this behavior, and tried to simply write off my line of argumentation with a flippant generalization. If so, I contend that your response is anti-town. Why did you do it?

[Ironhead]

Elsa's #790 is pretty damning, in my eyes. Unless she can demonstrate how it could possibly be town-motivated, I will conclude that she is scum.

I also do not disapprove of an ABR lynch, as I think his play style thus far has been disadvantageous to town and therefore he is high-probability to be scum.

And those complicit in springlullaby's lynch are either stupid or scummy (probably more of the former than the latter). It was pretty clear that SL was town, especially after claiming a major character and seeing no counterclaims.

VOTE: ELSA VON SPIELBURG

[Ironhead]

Between LLD and UK, UK is clearly far scummier. I also categorically reject the idea of limiting ourselves to UK's pre-approved lynch pool. Even if you accept LLD's claim, Jason is still a viable lynch.

I'm not sure why LLD claimed or how she figures she'll survive the NK.

[Ironhead]

Clearly state your reads and who you feel should be in the lynch pool, Ironhead.

Now.

Everyone

should be in the "lynch pool" because

no one

is confirmed town. But ultimately, I think you are the scummiest, unless someone can build a stronger case on someone else.

If you are town, I think it would behoove you at this point to claim the character you were assigned. You do not need to claim the role. Also, please stop AtEing.

[Ironhead]

Wait, so we now have confirmed town claiming to have the exact same role PM as I had which piratically confirms me town yet you would still call me a viable lynch?

"Practically confirms me as town" does not make you confirmed-town. No one is confirmed town; therefore, anyone is a viable lynch.

@UK: Can you please refrain from AtE? It is unpersuasive and makes you appear scummier.

[Ironhead]

Because as it stands you're pretty well in the AtE territory yourself

If you truly think that (and aren't just employing an "I know you are but what am I?" defense) don't think you have a firm grasp of what an Appeal to Emotion is.

if you hadn't already claimed scum it'd make you scummier.

Why is it that when I claim a town role, you continue tunneling me and go so far as to absurdly accuse me of claiming scum, but when LLD claims a town role you immediately proclaim her to be confirmed-town?

You refuse to give me a series of events where she's NOT, nor have you refuted what I've uncovered about her role.

This is an interesting standard of proof. LLD claims and now the burden of proof is on the rest of the community to prove her wrong? I note that my accusers were not held to the same burden of proof when I claimed. How about this standard of proof: pending a counter-claim, we consider LLD

obv-town

(not conf-town). If she dies and flips cop, then we can consider Darox and ABR conf-town -- until then, they are obv-town, just like their guarantor.

As obv-town, they still ought to be at the list for consideration of lynch candidates. But they should also be treated with a modicum of skepticism, at least until they become confirmed.

What I'm

not

willing to accept is your sheer fucking BULLHEADEDNESS against the fact that LLD is a confirmed town cop, because you're fucking pouting because you're only one or two results away from being collusive lockdown'd.

Finally,

WHO THE FUCK IS SCUM?

I've asked you THREE FUCKING TIMES NOW. You've given NO fucking reason to NOT give reads, nor have you PROVIDED said reads. You claim I'm using AtE? AT LEAST I'M LIFTING A GOD DAMN FINGER TO SCUMHUNT, UNLIKE YOUR LAZY, SCUMMY ASS

You want me to stop using "AtE"? ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION.

This is an excellent example of why I think you are scum. I cannot fathom a reason why a townie would generate so much

rage

. You aren't engaging in argumentation here. You are talking at us, not with us -- it is the online equivalent of drowning out the competition through superior volume, generally a tactic used by those who do not have facts on their side.

But I can definitely see how this rage benefits you as scum -- again, if you don't have facts/logic/sound argumentation on your side then you can at least turn some heads with the ferocity of your rhetoric. I suspect that you are faking the funk with this AtE -- I have a tough time envisioning you sitting at your computer, angrily pounding on your keyboard with a purple face. You use AtE too much -- if you were truly getting this worked up every time, you would eventually desensitize yourself to rage stimuli. This isn't happening, which is an indictor that the rage is fake.

But before you get apoplectic again (or pretend to do so) let me answer your question: I currently think you are scum. My top two scum suspects up until LLD's claim were ABR and Darox, but I no longer trust my reads on them because of LLD's claim. While LLD is not conf-town, her claim is credible enough to confer obv-towniness on her, Darox, and ABR. I think remaining scum will likely be detected (or at least,

detectable

) based on how everyone reacts to this latest dynamic shift.

[Ironhead]

UK is town in my book.

Why do you think UK is town?

[Ironhead]

Maybe if you actually read my posts rather than saying I'm using "AtE" (something YOU have nowhere near a firm grasp of)

This is what I mean about the "I know you are but what am I?" defense. I do not wish this to devolve into a "you!/no, you!" exchange ("YOU don't have a firm grasp of AtE"/"No, YOU don't have a firm grasp of AtE!").

I would like to point out that reading your posts and saying you're using AtE are not mutually exclusive -- I can read your post AND say you are using AtE (obviously, the former led directly to the latter).

I've provided a VERY strong case for LLD being town. If you're not going to accept it, you need to counter it.

No, I don't. LLD staked a pretty good case for being town just by virtue of claiming; I concede that this moves her firmly to obv-town. Nothing that you provided in #875 pushes her from obv-town to conf-town. Why would I respond to your IIoA observations in #875?

Ironhead, you don't understand people or mafia whatsoever if you think that rage only comes from scum. I've never had the misfortune of playing with such an awful player that doesn't REALIZE how awful he is...

I have little tolerance for idiots.

"Ad hominem" is a term that gets overused, especially on the internet. But in this particular case, I think you have demonstrated pretty straightforward argumentum ad hominem -- your defense of my argument is to dismiss the arguer. Please address the argument, not the arguer.

[Ironhead]

I don't know why Ironhead is throwing so much mud at the cop.

It's not the cop whom I am challenging. It is UK.

In #866 LLD claims, and in #867 she challenges UK to call her a liar. In #868, UK does exactly that, then adds fuel on the fire in #870, 871, 873, and 874. In #875, UK does a 180 and decides that UK is confirmed town (a suspiciously quick change of opinion, one that does not seem supportable by the weak IIoA that UK provides as impetus).

The problem I see is that from the moment LLD claimed, she was never obv-scum (which UK portrayed her as up until #875); and (pending evidence confirming with 100% certainty that she is the cop) she is not confirmed-town. She has always been obv-town since the claim, yet UK never accepts this. She swings from one end of the spectrum to the other -- from undisputed scum to unquestionably conf-town. Both reads on an unverified cop claimant are unsupported by logic.

I accept LLD's claim at face value for now, and this makes her obv-town to me (although definitely not conf-town; I have played in games where scum claim cop, with the intent of drawing out the real cop. Since it is possible, LLD is not 100% confirmed). I don't know why this never made her obv-town to UK -- unless UK is scum. It appears to me that UK challenged LLD in posts #868-874 because she felt that she had to indict LLD's credibility; and then, realizing that this was a fight she could not possibly win, she decided to surrender and take LLD's side -- by listing her "lynch pool" of pre-approved candidates. It is funny, that I should still be on that list ("I'm going to push for an Ironhead lynch, his role be damned") when I did the exact same thing as LLD -- I claimed. Apparently, when I claim it is total bullshit, but when LLD claimed it makes her confirmed-town. I'm not sure if this dichotomy can be explained in a scenario where UK is town.

[Ironhead]

LLD's claim wasn't verifiable until I looked at her timestamps, something you've COMPLETELY ignored. Her role makes PERFECT SENSE with the way she's been acting.

So in #874 LLD was obv-scum; and in #875 she was confirmed-town. And your reason for deciding that she was confirmed town was... time stamps?

That's it?

It wouldn't be so incredible if you had indicated that she might be prob-town, or obv-town, based on her time stamps. But to go from obv-scum to

confirmed

town so quickly is absurd.

LLD claimed and you rejected it out of hand -- so clearly the claim did nothing to change your scum-read on her. The only thing that changed your scum-read (and made LLD

confirmed town

, according to you) is that her time-stamps do not contradict her claim.

[Ironhead]

the fact Iron's death stops the timeskips...
pseudo-vote: IH

dramonic, how do you suppose the end of time skips will help the town?

[Ironhead]

the fact Iron's death stops the timeskips...
pseudo-vote: IH

dramonic, how do you suppose the end of time skips will help the town?

I kinda just indicated the opposite <<

the fact Iron's death stops the timeskips...
pseudo-vote: IH

Does not compute. You "pseudo-vote" me because my death stops the time skips. Why would you want to stop the time skips unless it helps the town?

Also, how interesting that earlier you were saying that time skips being stopped would help the town but now you're suddenly reversing on that?

I am not "reversing on that." I believe that stopping time skips helps the town (because of the name of my role, "sacrificial" time stopper); but I don't know

how

. I don't know how time skips currently favor scum over town right now. But since dramonic is apparently willing to lynch someone he acknowledges as town* to do it, I imagine that he must have a compelling reason.

That's a fairly big change, I think. May I ask what possible scum role you think she has that would so neatly fit into her behavior AND her claim?

What exactly do you mean by "fairly big change"? I have said since her claim that LLD is obv-town. It's not like I went from casting her as obv-scum to casting her as conf-town --

that

would be a "fairly big change."

Also, watch for strawman fallacy in your argumentation. I do not think she has a scum role -- I take her claim at face value, as I've said. This makes her obv-town until we find objective evidence demonstrating that she speaks the truth.

UK, I invite you to engage in a lucid, non-fallacious argument demonstrating how LLD is confirmed-town and/or how I am obv-scum. And the rest of the town: I invite you to referee her argumentation, and call her out when she resorts to fallacy (AtE, strawman, etc).

*In #900, dramonic acknowledged as "fact" that my death stops the time skips; therefore, he accepted as "fact" my claim. Thus, he acknowledges that I am town. If he thought I was scum, he would have to reject my claim, which is the only evidence of my death ending the time skips.

[Ironhead]

the fact Iron's death stops the timeskips...
pseudo-vote: IH

dramonic, how do you suppose the end of time skips will help the town?

You know, if you take the full sentence instead of just the last part and modifying the punctuation so it appears I said what YOU want to hear

I did not modify the punctuation. Please retract that accusation.

I left off the first part of the sentence because it did not seem to support the second part: "I've yet to see a proof of IH's pro-townness" seemed to be an indication that you consider me possible scum. If you thought I was scum, then you necessarily did not believe my claim; if you didn't believe my claim, then you don't believe my death stops the time skips. I interpreted your statement to mean "I think Ironhead might be scum, but even if he is the sacrificial time stopper his death is still good for the town." That is why the first part of your statement was unnecessary.

I'm thinking your death will have a mass vanillaizer effect of sort (assuming all roles function like LLD's).
Which is definitely good for scum.
Which is why I think your role is antitown.
Which makes you likely scum.

Why do you figure my death will have a mass vanillaizer effect? The only thing that sets me apart from anyone else is my claim -- so it appears you are accepting the one part of my claim that is convenient to you (my death stops time skips) but rejecting the part about me being town. I'm confused as to how you imagine a scum making such a claim -- if I were scum, why claim "sacrificial time stopper"? Why claim at all? Why not do what UK is doing, and immediately use argumentum ad hominem whenever someone asks for a claim?

I guess what I'm saying is that you are grasping at straws here. Either my claim was false and you think I am scum; or my claim is true and you think lynching me to stop time skips is a good idea. Combining the two into a hybrid reason just doesn't make much sense. If you want me dead, or if you want me to stop challenging UK, or if you want the momentum shifted away from UK and onto me, there are much easier ways to do it -- ways that make sense, whether you are town-motivated or not.

[Ironhead]

You're seriously going to call us stupid because of a flavor claim?

Dear god talk about kettle black, Ironhead. Flavor spec is the most dumbassed pile of stupidity you can engage in. GOOD JOB.

Going to read 790 since I may have missed it.

This post got lost in the shuffle a bit because it preceded UK's knuckleheaded quickhammer on Elsa, but I would like to re-examine it.

What I had suggested is that UK, to clear any suspicion of her, ought to claim what character from the TV show she was assigned. She rejected it with an Appeal to Emotion, and then covered her tracks with a quickhammer. Hmmm.

I dismiss her AtE as a matter of logic. Flavor spec -- what she calls "the most dumbassed pile of stupidity you can engage in" -- is generally a bad idea, when the flavor is chosen by the player. What I mean is if the game called for us to all impersonate a character from the TV show, and we all chose the character ourselves, and overtly played that type. When this happens, you occasionally have someone wanting to lynch another because of the character they are impersonating -- "Ben Linus was a bad guy, so xxxx must be scum!" Etc.

But in this game, the character roles were distributed by the GM and are a secret to the rest of the community. Knowing someone's character doesn't break the game (like knowing someone's role) but is a reliable litmus test to see if someone is telling the truth. We can safely assume that no two players were assigned the same character -- no one else counterclaimed Jin, or Locke, for example. So when I invite UK to claim her character, she can reveal the character -- and demonstrate her towniness -- without revealing her role. If she is town, she has nothing to fear. If she is scum, she can either tell the truth -- and let the chips fall where they may, although if her assigned character is a "bad guy" we will probably assume she has a scum role -- or try to lie and claim another character, wherein she risks a counterclaim.

Again, if she is town she has nothing to lose. So why not demand this of her? It is like demanding a role-claim, but without the role.

[Ironhead]

If you are a sacrifice... a town sacrifice then that means it would benifit town, sacrificing something (you) to stop the timeskips

that indicates to me stopping them will help town.. hence the sacrifice part of the role.

Right -- that's what I concluded as well. I'm not sure I understand how dramonic concluded that I was scum, and stopping time skips helps scum.

[Ironhead]

Well, assuming you were scum, it'd be assumed you were lying about the good aspects.

You think so? You think scum would claim a non-scum role, and then give everyone a good reason to lynch that role anyway? I think you're treading WIFOM terrain now.

hey, you should be happy you'll get your wish to die tomorrow, ne :3?

When did I say it was my wish to die tomorrow? Please point it out or else admit to using a strawman argument.

My wish is to see scum die tomorrow. I am certain you are scum. I understand that you defend yourself from my accusation with ad hominem argumentation; but the cop claimant has also indicted you, and I think she will continue to pressure you (I doubt your buddying in #875 will endear you to her). Although this voteless phase has been dominated by our exchange, I think that when the rest of the community rejoins the discussion you will have some explaining to do -- I don't see this being a quicklynch.

[Ironhead]

A "good reason" is in the eye of the beholder. You still aren't dead, are you? In fact, everyone got off you for your claim, so it served its purpose, didn't it?

Which is why I observed that you were treading WIFOM terrain.

Also, you scum slipped. How do you know LLD isn't gonna die tonight :3?

I don't know that she isn't going to die. I noted that in #877 -- her claim was unprovoked and sure to attract a NK, so I assume there is something she knows that I don't.

But I wonder what you intend to imply as a scum-slip. If I were scum, how would I know that she was going to live?

By not targeting her?

What kind of idiot scum would not target the cop-claimant? Or are you trying to suggest that she is scum, and I am her scum partner? The only way I would know she is going to survive is if I was a bodyguard and planning to protect her. So are you accusing me of being the bodyguard? Please explain.

...

I see your list of players and their current reaction to our exchange, but I think you are seeing this dynamic two-dimensionally. LLD has been absent since accusing you of being scum, and her return to this discussion (assuming she survives NK) will influence the rest of the community. Furthermore, suspicion of me and suspicion of you are not mutually exclusive. I scoff at the idea that the balance of the community will accept your ranting as town-motivated. I may yet be lynched; but I expect that your shelf-life will expire thereafter (especially as you promised to "fucking eat a lynch" if I was town in post #349 -- I expect the town to hold you to this promise, and I think it will pay off).

[Ironhead]

Quick observation:

We currently have 8 alive. Assuming mafia NK tonight, we will have 7. If we mislynch tomorrow, we are down to six; and mafia NK again, to bring us to 5.

If we started with 3 mafia (a reasonable expectation with the starting population), we will be at MYLO after tomorrow if we mislynch. I offer this to put into perspective those that wish to lynch me because they believe my claim and it is worth lynching me to stop time skips. Lynch me because you believe me to be scum; please do not lynch me if you believe my claim, as it is clearly not worth the cost to the town.

[Ironhead]

Heehee, sure, I'll take that bet. I'll gladly be lynched if you're somehow town. Town will deserve the loss at that point.

Wow! You're pretty confident that I am scum, then. Can you please explain, for the benefit of the rest of the town, the case demonstrating that I am scum? A point-by-point proof, if you don't mind, so that everyone else can be just as confident as you are.

I ask this because I don't think a case has been demonstrated yet. As far as I can see, you're suspicious of me due to your supposed gut feeling -- a gut that has been unreliable lately, as Elsa can attest. Yet you are so confident! Why?

[Ironhead]

Oh, Ironhead, our entire conversation has been my case.

What, our conversation just now? But you said you would eat a lynch if I was town in

post #349

. What about our conversation before post #349 makes you so confident that I am scum?

Ironhead, you're pretty confident I am scum, then. Can you please explain, for the benefit of the rest of the town, the case demonstrating that I am scum?

Of course, it is incumbent upon me to do so -- lots of evidence to parse, we'll start with Day 1:

Point #1: The Day 1 lynch. At the start of Day 1 she did her best to misdirect the lynch onto Ironhead, and when that failed she tried to misdirect onto Elsa (see posts #273, 276, 293, 295, 299, 302). Elsa got to L-1 and UK appealed repeatedly for a hammer (see posts #304, 306, 308, and 311). Callandor disabuses the town of this mislynch, and as momentum picks up on a Plum lynch UK goes back to pushing for an Ironhead lynch (see posts #347 and 351). Interestingly, when dramonic switched his vote to UK and tried to demonstrate a case, UK immediately used a strident AtE to rebut (see posts #370, 373, 374, 376, 383, and 384). UK finally endorses a Plum lynch after a time flash left her in a different timeline -- she never actually votes Plum, although she does take credit for the lynch in post #653.

Bottom line: UK's actions show an intent to direct the lynch away from Plum and onto someone of her choosing, and when that failed, she tried to take credit for the Plum scum-lynch.

I will post the evidence in Day 2 later -- have to go to work now

[Ironhead]

I see nothing else worth responding to because your entire case assumes you're town, an assumption that would be foolish.

You are free to choose not to respond to the case against you. I posted it for the benefit of your peers, who sit in judgement of you. If you do decide to respond to the case, I encourage you to direct your response to them, not me.

Continuing on with Day 2:

Early in Day 1, UK lists Spring Lullaby as "obv town." She then never mentions any reads for SL for the rest of the day -- in fact, never mentions or addresses SL again, except to plead for a hammer. And very early on Day 2, she reinitiates her campaign to have Ironhead lynched -- and states that she is "not feeling weird about anyone else right now." Yet scarcely two hours later (in real-time), after Callandor announces a suspicion of SL, UK immediately concedes this wagon -- and then she immediately thereafter hedges her bet. This last post suggests that maybe she has second thoughts about SL being scum (she claims not to have a gut feeling of her being scum), but within another two hours (in real-time) UK claims to view SL in agreement with Callandor's view (who had directly accused SL of being scum) -- and thereafter starts the SL wagon. I also note with bemusement that UK included in her Day 2 ramblings a sharp indictment of confirmation bias -- it makes for an ironic read as we wait for UK to demonstrate her argument of why she thinks I am scum

The rest of Day 2 consists of UK showing more and more lust for an SL lynch -- whereas she was hedging her bets and casting doubt on SL's scumminess at the start of the day, by the end she calls SL obv scum. She never explained her obv-town read early on Day 1 and she never explained her switch to obv scum on Day 2. I see nothing in SL's posts that would explain this substantial shift in reads. I do, however, see that SL was an easy mislynch, and therefore convenient for scum to support.

Bottom line: UK tried to start a bandwagon on me, but quickly sacrificed her efforts on me to support the easy mislynch bandwagon of Spring Lullaby, a player she had called obvious town the previous day.

This will be a recurring theme when we look at Day 3 (which I will post tomorrow, as I am heading to work again this morning).

[Ironhead]

Ironhead:

I'd like to vote him. I really would. Posts like #853 trip alarm bells in my mind. I mean, that's a really awful reason to vote Elsa.

Is it really worse than this?

/me reads Elsa's ISO in general

/me facepalms

So, about being stubborn...

Unvote, Vote Elsa

I think I should just ignore logic and go with my gut, from now on, maybe. Because I mean, seriously, she's awful.

Bear in mind, this vote represented the quickhammer on Elsa. Mine merely pressured her to L-1.

This latest case against UK is riddled with holes too, it's 90% filler.

UncertainKitten:

Maybe personality bias is tipping the scale, but I think UK is 100% prime grade townie.

I would love to have you engage in this game by identifying the parts of the case on UK to which you object. This game will be won or lost by townies having enough latent skepticism to question both me and UK (and anyone else who is possible scum), applying critical analysis, and making a well-thought-out decision. I'm eagerly looking forward to your questions and pressure -- but please offer the same treatment to UK, and see if she can handle it. If you allow her to dismiss any attention toward her with fallacies, then she will. I will not treat your inquiries the way UK does, because I do not need to resort to AtE or ad hominem or strawman fallacies.

[Ironhead]

I already did.

I'm amazed no one pressed you on this. LLD asked you to concisely explain your case, and you link her to one of your recent rants wherein you state that "our entire conversation has been my case." My goodness, if this game was that easy why can't anyone say that about you? AtE, argumentum ad hominem, and strawman arguments really ought to stand as the entire case against you, right? But if I am going to make the effort to restate the case against you, to cite specific examples, and to demonstrate for the benefit of those who judge you that you are scum, could you make the same effort to prove that I am scum?

And, since you promised to "fucking eat a lynch" if I was town way back in post #349, could you restate your case using only evidence from posts #1 through 348? It just doesn't make sense if your entire case hinges upon our exchange in Day 4 when you have been tunneling me since Day 1.

While you're working on that, I will continue the case against you -- Day 3:

Spoiler: Wall of evidence

UK ultimately quick-hammered Elsa on Day 3, so it is instructive to go back and see the evolution of thought on her read of Elsa. Early on Day 1 she cites her as a scum-read, and campaigned vigorously for her lynch. After she claimed, UK backed off and conceded that she should not be lynched. She said on Day 2 that Elsa made her feel weird, but she trusted logic and "Callandor town" (which I interpret to mean she trusts Callandor's opinion under the assumption Callandor is town, an assumption that was confirmed by Call's death before the Elsa quickhammer). Okay, then, so thereafter Elsa is a neutral read. After the SL mislynch on Day 2, UK comes out of the gate quickly on Day 3, first pursuing an ABR lynch (and laying the blame for that potential mislynch at LLD's feet) and then testing the waters for an Elsa mislynch. Also, note the wording she uses. I'm suspicious of anyone who needs to seek the approval of others before campaigning for a lynch -- "Anyone feel the same?" she asks of an ABR lynch. If she was dedicated to her reads, she would not need to wait for others to green-light a case on ABR, she would pursue it immediately and

convince

others that her read is correct (much as I am doing now to demonstrate to a town that largely supports UK that she is scum).

Up until LLD changed her mind on ABR being scum (ostensibly related to her investigating ABR), UK campaigned for an ABR lynch. After LLD proscribed an ABR lynch (and sucked the momentum out of UK's campaign), UK responded that she was going to "rub it in her face" when Elsa flips town. Hmm, okay, so now Elsa is a town-read for UK. This she confirms herself, when LLD invites her to vote Elsa -- "I don't vote town reads," she declares. Twenty-one minutes later, she revises this read as being "more neutral if I'm being honest." Twenty-two minutes after that, I vote Elsa to put her at L-1; and five minutes later, UK quickhammers Elsa. How quickly she went from being adamantly against an Elsa lynch, to being the quickhammer vote on it!

Bottom line: UK tried to pursue the easiest mislynch, which appeared to be ABR; when LLD rendered this unlikely, she disparaged the case on Elsa until Elsa was at L-1, at which point she quickhammered for another easy mislynch.

There isn't enough evidence in Day 4 that I haven't already pointed out to justify a separate post, so I will add a few Day 4 observations here:

-When challenged by LLD, UK claims that she thought LLD was a cop. Um, really? If she thought LLD was a cop, why did she tell LLD that "Elsa is town mostly because I'm trying to push hard against you and your agenda because I disagree with it"? Or "I'm just gonna rub it in her face when ABR flips scum and Elsa flips town"? If UK truly thought LLD was cop, wouldn't she assume that LLD had some inside knowledge that UK didn't, and therefore wouldn't challenge LLD's reads like this? She had no way of knowing whether or not LLD had guilty or innocent investigations of ABR or Elsa.

-Immediately after UK says that she thought LLD was a cop, LLD claims cop. Then in the next post, UK calls bullshit. Why? LLD just confirmed her alleged cop read, right? The reason offered by UK is that she refuses to believe an ABR innocent result. This is an awful reason to disbelieve a cop claim. I am also fascinated by the way UK says "You have no guilty on me. It is entirely possible you are a town cop and I'm a vanilla townie." Is that something a townie would say? It certainly isn't something

I

would say, as I

know

, without having to announce it, that the cop doesn't have a guilty on me. It sounds like something scum would say when the cop called them scum without having a guilty result.

-And what the hell does

this

mean? "I invite you to check me tonight, LLD. If you get a guilty, please claim it and get my lynch over with."

If

you get a guilty?

If

? Why is there an

if

to it? Doesn't UK know in advance what a cop investigation of her would reveal? Here is how I would phrase it: "I invite you to check me out tonight and clear me." Because I

know

that the cop's investigation would return an innocent result.

That's all I've got from UK's past. After this early Day 4 series of posts, I jumped in and began challenging her, thereby inciting her AtEs and fallacious argumentation -- those stand for themselves for others to judge. I think it is incumbent upon UK to address the case on her I've demonstrated, but if she chooses to dismiss it with another logical fallacy it is up to the rest of the town to make her address it.

The prosecution rests.

[Ironhead]

-I didn't realize it at first. I know this is AMAZING to your rigid ones and zeros of "logic", but PEOPLE CHANGE THEIR MINDS and COME TO REALIZATIONS. This is more or less the post where I realized it, and should explain the "sudden" changes. The hammer was still bad, though accidental.

-HAAAAAAAAAAhahaha, oh, where to start with this point. Did it EVER occur to you, that maybe...JUST MAYBE, the word THOUGHT is past tense? Maybe? I thought she was a cop,

with a guilty on Elsa

. Since Elsa was innocent, suddenly she's not so coppy to me.

Huh? These two points contradict each other. Please explain why you voted Elsa. Was it because of the post you cite in the top bullet, where you claim to have re-read her ISO in less than a minute and suddenly found her scummy? Or was it because you thought LLD was a cop with a guilty on Elsa, as you claim in the bottom bullet?

[Ironhead]

-Hahaha, you've been reduced to semantics bullshit here (not like you weren't before). The reason I said "if" was because at the time I thought LLD was scum.

THEREFORE her results would be unreliable

. If she got a guilty (because she's making up her results), then I would LOVE to see her press it.

Nonsense -- you offered a dichotomy to LLD. The first option was if she got a guilty return, in which case you challenge her to announce and get your lynch over with. The second option was if she got an innocent return, in which case you challenge her to announce you guilty anyway ("If you get an innocent? Test your certainty. Claim the guilty anyway.").

So this second option covers the false guilty claim on you, as you cite in the excerpt above as your reason for listing the first option. So, what does the first option mean? In what scenario were you imagining would LLD get a guilty investigation return on you?

[Ironhead]

Anyway, you know what pisses me off about you, Ironhead? You act like you're some master of rhetoric and debate...

but your reasoning and debate technique is just as shoddy as anyone else I know. You have CONSTANTLY used fallacies and semantics argument to prove a completely inaccurate point

If I have, it would certainly help to clear your name if you could cite specific examples, and then identify exactly what fallacy it is. Here is a list of fallacies that you can use for reference.

[Ironhead]

@Ironhead 991: Sticking to what I said. This is a semantics argument and overall noise. I'm guessing I was covering it in both possibilities. Sometimes that's a thing I do.

Forgive my exasperated tone here -- your excuses are getting a little outlandish:

You're "guessing?" What, you're not sure? And if it is "a thing I do," can you please link us to a previous game with a similar redundancy (and wherein you were revealed to be town)?

[Ironhead]

Meta is dumb, much like the rest of your argumentation. And no, I'm not sure, that was what, like 4 days ago? Do you remember everything you thought 4 days ago? I'd call you a liar if you said yes.

-I'm not the one who used meta.

You're

the one who claimed redundancy is something you do; I merely asked you to prove it.

-I may not remember everything I thought four days ago, but I ought to be able to follow my own line of thought on a post -- especially if I expect others to follow my line of thought. I can go back to every single post I made in this game, re-read it, and explain exactly what my line of thought on it was. I can do this not because I have the ability to recall on demand exactly what was going through my head three weeks ago, but because the post itself will jog my memory and I can follow the logic of the post. And apparently you cannot do this for a post you made

four days ago

. If you cannot follow the line of thought in your own post, how do you expect anyone else to do so?

-I acknowledge the questions you posed in #994, but I thought the standard you espouse is not to answer questions from players you consider scum? That is what you seem to indicate in your posts #398, 899, and 910. Seems sort of hypocritical for you to expect me to answer your questions when you have dodged some of my questions because you claim to have a scum-read on me, right? In any event, the questions you ask are the sort of questions townies answer when they are about to be lynched. Since, to my dismay, this town seems insistent on lynching me and keeping you around, I imagine that I will be answering those questions soon enough -- but not on order form you right now.

-Speaking of hypocritical... I thought this was ironic. In post #271, you tell SL that there's no need to be a jerk, and that her post was totally uncalled for, because she was so uncouth as to say "LLD, I'm requesting you not to talk to me for the moment, thanks." UK is being hypersensitive to manners here. It appeared to me that SL demonstrated a most polite way of saying STFU -- she certainly wasn't being a jerk!

But, how does SL's polite demeanor compare to, say, shoving a morning star up someone's ass and saying they will enjoy it? Is that being a jerk? Is that uncalled for?

[Ironhead]

...say what?

You were quicklynched. If you are town, please use the time before GM posts your death scene to give us any last words, thoughts, observations, etc.

[Ironhead]

By process of elimination, it's either UK, TheJackalope or jason.

If we accept the premise that LLD is cop -- which seems fair given the lack of counterclaim; also if she were scum she certainly would have listed her partner as cleared, which she didn't -- then that leaves the three you mention (unless there is a Godfather, as Jakalope suggests, although I thought you guys put that idea to rest a while back). Of those three, I of course am convinced that UK is scum due to his sheer opportunism and ostensibly foolish mislynches ("ostensibly" because they were quite advantageous to him if he is scum).

However, I think all three should claim. That ought to help narrow it down, and if UK is town it gives her a chance to survive until victory. Jason already claimed Faraday as a VT. UK? Jakalope?

[Ironhead]

I of course am convinced that UK is scum due to his sheer opportunism and ostensibly foolish mislynches ("ostensibly" because they were quite advantageous to him if he is scum).

EBWOP: Replace the

his

,

him

, and

he

with feminine pronouns.

[Ironhead]

Ironhead, I suggest you reread the game with no confirmation bias against me. If you're going to be town, you're going to do it right. Consider everyone and come to a conclusion.

When this game ends, you and I are going to have a nice, long discussion on confirmation bias.

[Ironhead]

I'm honestly not planning on having a discussion with you at all. Your playstyle and my playstyle are exceptionally different, to the point we basically hate the way each other plays.

I don't hate the way you play. Do you really

hate

the way I play? It's only a game; don't let your soul seethe with hatred.

I feel your playstyle is worse than mine, but it's subjective, really. I just see that I've gotten more results this game then you.

How do you define "results"? Is it identifying scum, or getting others to vote the way you want them to? I note that you were part of getting a couple of townies mislynched; but when it mattered with Plum and dramonic, you were half-hearted at best and, being stuck in the other timeline when they were lynched, never voted them.

Assuming you are scum, I find your playstyle to be... well, a bit intimidating. For a long time there you had this town eating out of your hand, primed to mislynch me at the end of the game -- which is no mean feat. If things had gone just a little different -- if we had mislynched a townie instead of dramonic, or if LLD had been NK'd -- and this would have been a most successful conclusion for you.

If it turns out that I am wrong and you are town, I will apologize for misreading you; and I will note that this is why enthusiasm and aggression do not make up for careful deliberation of the facts. The difference between your playstyle and mine is this: any scum can fake enthusiasm and aggression -- it is much more difficult to fake facts and critical analysis thereof.

[Ironhead]

Wait. LLD, you haven't confirmed myself or Jason. Both of us, claim. Now.

Jason already claimed, way back on Day 1 -- Faraday, VT, remember?

Does someone want to claim credit for the day-vig?

[Ironhead]

EVERYONE CLAIM RIGHT NOW. THIS LIST:

IRONHEAD
ABR
DAROX

As previously stated: I am John Locke, Sacrificial Time Stopper.

[Ironhead]

Dayvig? Are you serious Ironhead?

1st NK: Friday, 5 Aug at 0832 Mountain time
2nd NK: Friday, 12 Aug at 0716 Mountain time

This death was on Friday, 19 Aug at

2008

Mountain time -- twelve hours later than usual, and we know GM was online at 1224 Mountain time. The impression I got was that the NK was blocked this morning, and this was the work of another killer -- especially considering the choice of target, as Jakalope was a top lynch candidate.

[Ironhead]

Yes ABR, in a town FULL OF VANILLA, the CLAIMED COP is the scum.

No, ABR/Ironhead both need to Enjoi Rope.

Why would we lynch two cleared players before lynching two uncleared players? UK is obviously the last scum -- shouldn't we lynch her?

[Ironhead]

So where are all the other vig kills?

I've never seen a game where vig is

required

to kill every day. Especially if it is a one-shot vig,he or she would want to use it when it is most advantageous to town.

If this wasn't a vig kill, why do you suppose scum targeted Jakalope and not LLD?
The only sensible answer is because LLD is scum; but then why didn't LLD list dramonic as cleared in her list of innocent results? If she had, we would have mislynched yesterday; scum would have NK'd; then she could have organized an easy mislynch of me, and NK'd to win.

Because LLD didn't list dramonic as cleared, LLD is unlikely to be scum. Because LLD is unlikely to be scum, Jakalope is an unlikely target for scum.

[Ironhead]

We're going to quicklynch ABR and Jason, and then if neuter of them flip scum, not lynch again until scum make a kill. By that point, I should be able to investigate UK (last non investigated).

I don't think there is any need for a sense of urgency or panic right now. We do not need to quicklynch two players before your next investigation -- especially not one you've already cleared. You can investigate one of the uncleared players while the other gets lynched.

If this doesn't reveal the final scum, we can then assume that either you are scum or we have a Godfather.

[Ironhead]

hmmm good point, but is it worth risking it?

No. THERE IS NO NEED TO PANIC. We can be deliberate about killing while you and UK are uncleared. If we wait for one of you to be investigated and the other to be lynched, town will win if one of you are the last scum. If one of you are not, then we assume that either LLD is scum or there is a Godfather, and THEN the bloodbath of lynches should begin.

If we go with LLD's plan of quicklynching two players, then scum will almost certainly win if neither of you are scum (as you demonstrated).

To summarize (assuming there is one scum and five town currently left):

SCENARIO A: Either UK or Jason is scum. The smart course of action is to lynch one, and wait to investigate the other; if we lynch the wrong one but the investigation reveals scum, we win. Under LLD's plan, we would still win IF one of these two is scum, but we also unnecessarily expose ourselves to the risk that they are not wrong and we give scum a chance to win.

SCENARIO B: LLD is scum. We continue with the smart course of action, lynching either UK or Jason (leaving 4 town / 1 scum). After this mislynch, LLD gets a NK as she pretends to wait for investigation results (3 town / 1 scum). LLD could then fake-claim the other as scum, in which case we would quicklynch this player (2 town / 1 scum) and then quicklynch LLD for victory when the player she identified as scum flips town; or she would claim that her investigation revealed town, thus leaving the remainder of town as "cleared" (3 town / 1 scum) and necessitating a couple of quicklynches -- see below.

SCENARIO C: There is a Godfather. After lynching either UK or Jason (leaving 4 town / 1 scum) and LLD investigating the other and revealing a town (and scum get a NK to bring us to 3 town / 1 scum), we necessarily must have a couple quicklynches.

QUICKLYNCHES: Yesterday we got in two lynches before the end of the week (when LLD allegedly investigates, and when mafia apparently NK). We must lynch quickly enough in this scenario to get in two kills before the NK -- because when we lynch, we have a chance of killing scum, whereas when scum kill, there is no chance of killing scum. If we control who dies, we sustain a chance of winning. If both quicklynches are incorrect, scum win (1 town / 1 scum).

[Ironhead]

Ironhead's scenarios don't appear to be missing anything, except the scenario where LLD dies before getting an investigation. What happens in that scenario, Ironhead?

Why would scum NK before she gets to announce her investigation result? This past Friday, she got her result in the morning and there was no kill until that night. Why would next Friday be any different?

If she does die before announcing her investigation result, we would assume either Scenario A or Scenario C, and proceed to quick lynching with 4 town / 1 scum -- meaning we should try to squeeze in three quicklynches before the next NK. And unfortunately for you, the uncleared player would have to be one of those quicklynches.

[Ironhead]

If I can, I'm going to

Vote: ABR

This lynch wins us the game. There are NO OTHER possible scums. NONE.

I acknowledge that you find ABR to be scummiest. However, I contend that it is best to go through with lynching/investigating the uncleared players, and then consider ABR (and anyone else) for quicklynches if necessary. As UK pointed out, we've got collusive lockdown if one of the uncleared players are scum.

I also note that you are a candidate for quicklynches as well, if we get to that point. Some may consider you possible scum, as I described in Scenario B above.

[Ironhead]

We ought to be having a time flash sometime today.

I urge the town to follow the odds -- smart lynch is one of the uncleared players. If we lynched ABR we would be taking an unnecessary risk.

[Ironhead]

UK, do YOU want ABR dead?

[Ironhead]

I am dismayed at this poor choice of lynch. I hope ABR is BSing us and really is scum, but I doubt it.

[Ironhead]

UK is scum.

Darox is my highest town read right now, but I suspect that he is going to lose this game on behalf of the town -- joining UK on an ABR mislynch, and then salivating over an Ironhead mislynch. UK did a good job of eliminating the intelligent townies, leaving us with guys like Darox -- in the infamous words of Han Solo, I've got a bad feeling about this.

[Ironhead]

No, seriously, I'm pretty much going to say that Ironhead has done a good job of avoiding lynch despite being suspected near constantly all game. It's uncanny.

Yes, uncanny, isn't it? On those days I didn't get lynched, we either (a) lynched a scum; or (b) allowed you to lead the town in mislynching a townie. At no point did we ever mislynch a townie while you protested that we should be lynching me instead. Perhaps instead of leading the lemmings off of the metaphorical cliff of the SL, Elsa, and ABR mislynches, you could have focused on me -- the player you claim to suspect. Perhaps the reason I haven't been lynched is because you always had the opportunity for a more convenient mislynch.

Rank opportunism is a pretty reliable indicator of scumminess.

[Ironhead]

so confused as to who is lynched now.

We have a few clear options here:

As there are presumably 4 town and 1 scum left, we get a maximum of three lynches left -- and far more likely we'll get two, as scum will get a NK. So one way of looking at it is, which two players do you find most likely to be scum? Bearing in mind that we've got two uncleared players (you and UK), a cop-claimant who may be lying (LLD), and possibly a godfather (me and Darox).

From this angle, I would contend that the two most likely to be scum are UK and you, simply by virtue of being uncleared; but since you will likely be investigated by LLD and potentially cleared, I would view the top two likely to be scum as UK and Darox (because I believe it more likely that Darox is a godfather than LLD is a false cop-claimant)(but the odds of either are miniscule compared to the odds that UK is scum, and I expect the game to end once we

finally

lynch UK).

But from an objective perspective, the highest probability of victory will come from lynching either you or UK now and having LLD investigate the other; if the one lynched flips town and LLD announces the other as town, then we must choose which of the survivors to lynch (bearing in mind that scum will probably get a NK and narrow the survivors down to three). Then it becomes a question of -- is it more likely that LLD is a false cop-claimant, or one of the other two survivors is a godfather?

Because I contend that you have ably demonstrated a modicum of towniness -- in contradistinction to UK, who continues to act in a most scum-biased manner and really has nothing to attest to towniness -- it behooves the town to lynch UK now and (if that doesn't win the game) investigate you. If the final three includes you, the other two can have some confidence that you are more likely to be town than UK would have been.

So to summarize a long answer to a short question: we lynch UK now. It is far and away the smartest choice.

[Ironhead]

You have got to be shitting me.

Remember back when we thought we had collusive lockdown? It only works if we eliminate the uncleared players first. I cannot believe you will allow UK to dance her way out collusive lockdown. You idiots wasted one of our remaining lynches on the cleared ABR, and now you want to waste another on the cleared Ironhead.

And LLD, what happened to your VCA which you alleged to confirm me as town?

UK has acted in the best interests of scum all game. She fought the scum lynches and enthusiastically supported the mislynches. She is the most obvious scum I have seen in a long time. You would lynch a cleared player instead of her? You deserve to lose this game.

VOTE: UNCERTAIN KITTEN

[Ironhead]

You are scum.

After this game, some of these idiots will congratulate you in wide-eyed wonder at how clever you were; and I will stare in disbelief, wondering how they could

ever

think you were town. Every other player in this game has something that speaks to towniness: Jason demonstrated some inside knowledge of the town PM; LLD's cop claim; my votes on Plum; and both me and Darox have LLD vouching for our towniness in investigation results. But you have done literally nothing to show that you might just possibly be town. Just by PoE, everyone ought to realize you are scum; and I cannot fathom just how they think you are town.

[Ironhead]

LLD & Darox, please switch your vote and teach this arrogant scum some humility.

EDIT: That's not ad hom -- it is Appeal to Emotion. Clearly logic doesn't work on some people -- although all of my previous posts that logically demonstrate that you are scum are still valid -- but if logic falls on deaf ears, I will try a different tact. My goal here is to lynch you and win the game, and it may not be pretty, but victory is victory.

[Ironhead]

Yes, Mrs. Strawman Misrep. That's exactly what I'm doing.

@Town: After UK arranges for my lynch (her fourth mislynch, with not a scum to show for it!) she will try to convince you to use your last lynch on Jason. You must not heed her. I guarantee you that she is scum -- this is nine years of Mafia experience talking, I promise you that in my experience I have never seen such an open-and-shut case (barring those outed by cop roles). Victory is still attainable but you must not let her weasel her way out with her guile.

@LLD and Darox: The doctrinally correct and mathematically correct course of action is still to lynch UK now, and I urge you to do so. If you are convinced I am the scummiest of those who have been cleared by the cop-claimant, then you are still free to lynch me after UK is lynched (hypothetically speaking; I promise you that UK is scum, so I expect game to end upon her lynch).

[Ironhead]

True; but is the time skip crippling us right now? Were you going to lynch Jason instead of UK is there were no time skip?

I think that ending the time skips would have made sense several days ago, before we were so close to LYLO. Now, with only two possible lynches before scum reaches parity, the time skips seem to scarcely matter -- the time skips only last two days before a reshuffling. Seems easier and smarter at this point to save the lynch of a known townie and if you are on the wrong side of the time skip, you can wait two days or try to convince those who are in that time skip to lynch your suspect.

[Ironhead]

So that Ironhead is at L-1, and when I get my investigation, I can post the result and decide what to do instantaneously.

If UK is town, I'll hammer Iron.

If UK is scum, I'll vote her putting her at L-1, and you can hammer her.

This is a reasonable plan.

If UK returns as town, I wouldn't be much help anyway -- anybody else could have a better idea as to who is scum, and my death

does

eliminate the time skip. Assuming the scum get a NK, that leaves the three survivors with one last chance at catching scum.

For those three in that scenario, please remember that LLD is a potential scum -- we still have no guarantee that she is the cop as she claims. The other two survivors could potentially be godfather, so please do not automatically assume Jason is the last scum.

[Ironhead]

Oh, also, if it wasn't clear I do agree to the plan.

Your agreement wasn't needed.

To answer your question: if LLD is killed before revealing her result, we will get two lynches if we act quickly; since a dead LLD will presumably reveal that she is the cop, the best two lynches would be you and then Jason (if lynching you doesn't end the game).

You may beg to differ; but certainly the aggregate of the top two lynches from all living players will include you. The only way for you to live is if LLD lives, so I expect LLD to survive and this whole situation to be merely academic in discussion.

[Ironhead]

I honestly don't regret the Ironhead lynch. He was generating noise and being useless to town in his tunneling on me. Would he have caught Darox if I got lynched? Maybe, but I'm not sure.

Probably not -- I may have deduced it was him by PoE, but that is because I could logically exclude myself. LLD and Jason had no such luxury and likely would have lynched me instead of Darox.

I was convinced you were scum -- I think I built a pretty strong case on D4, although apparently others disagreed. I also don't think that what I did constituted tunneling, as you didn't ping my scumdar until D4 (in contradistinction to you leveling accusations since early on D1). After we mixed it up on D4, there was really nothing you or I could do that wouldn't be construed by the other as scummy because of the way we were exchanging accusations. Ultimately, you and I were the victim of poor luck on your part -- you were involved in every single mislynch and neither of the scum lynches. The odds seemed so improbable that I shook off any behavioral cues that may have exonerated you.

@GM -- I don't quite understand the mechanics of the endgame. Both UK and LLD were endgamed? Which means neither were NK'd? It appeared to me as I was catching up on the thread that they had won -- they had quicklynched Darox before Jughead exploded and apparently before Darox sent in a NK. If Jughead had exploded, or if Darox had NK'd one of them and achieved parity, the result would have been a clearcut scum victory -- but that's not what we saw. Is there an unexplained mechanic behind this scum victory?

[Ironhead]

Look in the dead topic for further explanation, Ironhead. Basically, the voteless phase would've lasted until after Jughead exploded, so there was no way for town to lynch Darox before Jughead blew up.

edit: Plus, there was still the mafia nk, but apparently Darox wasn't around to send it in in time.

What I read in the Dead QT is that the GM had planned to end the voteless phases after the time skips ended, so unless town quicklynched Darox before he sent in a kill, scum would win. But the town DID manage to quicklynch Darox.

...

Eh, a re-read of the QT indicates why -- GM changed his mind.

Actually no, balance/mathematically-wise, they are voteless until the next kill, otherwise the Jughead countdown phase of the game would be IMPOSSIBLE for scum to win.

Not sure I agree with this justification -- it appears that scum had the overwhelming advantage here, as a mislynch (67% probability) would have won it, as would a NK -- if only he had posted his kill choice in the QT before falling asleep

Anyway, thanks for GMing Reck.

[Ironhead]

EBWOP: Ironhead, I try to be involved with every lynch, really, unless I have an incredibly strong town read on someone, which were sorely lacking this game, at least not on the right people. But, it was less poor luck and more poor play.

Now that I know you were town, I have no doubt you would have been hot on the bandwagon for the Plum and dramonic lynches. But you were stuck in the other timeline for those -- poor luck, says I.

[Ironhead]

That more than anything gave me the victory, I think.

With all the town on town violence, it didn't take much for you to portray yourself as the Voice of Reason.

[Ironhead]

I didn't think LLD was bad for the town. During the game, I thought she was totally bonkers for going after cleared players instead of UK and Jason; but ultimately she was right about the last scum being one of the investigated players -- she just chose the wrong ones to lynch.

Basically, had I died, town would have had less of a leader...though admittedly, that might have been better for them.

I agree with this. UK's "leadership" was bad for the town. She reminds me of a player I used to know at another site, with whom I had frequent disagreements regarding philosophy of the game. The way I saw it, every player is rational and will vote in his or her best interests. If you wish to influence the lynch, you must use logic to convince enough players that it is in their best interest to lynch your choice. But he saw it differently -- he would yell, scream, browbeat, insult, and cajole others until they switched their vote to his preferred candidate. It was the difference between power of persuasion and persuasion of power. Whether it works or not is moot; the point is, it was unpleasant to watch and endure, especially if you're the one who was irrationally chosen to be his target.