Mini 837 - Stratego Mafia! (Game Over!)

[charter]

Vote Count

Gorrad - 2 (Sajin, WeyounsLastClone)

ElectricBadger - 3 (ortolan, dramonic, Synx)

dramonic - 2 (Vaya, Hoopla)
AlmasterGM - 1 (Kast)
Kast - 1 (ElectricBadger)

Not Voting

Debonair Danny DiPietro
AlmasterGM
Gorrad


With 12 alive, it takes 7 to lynch!


Deadline is September 12, midnight.

[Kast]

@EB-
-Consistency please. You claim that if Gorrad is a townie who made a breadcrumb of a PR and publicly drew attention to it, then you claim that a doctor would protect him. You also claim that scum would try to kill him. This is a win for town.

If you are assuming that only one group would target him, then you are being inconsistent.

Your argument about Gorrad as a scum PGO is a straw man.

-Current situation is not what you are assuming. Gorrad has not breadcrumbed a PR. Gorrad has directly claimed to be not Bomb/Flag/Spy.

-Applying your crap-logic to yourself; you have claimed to be a PR and further claimed that your role makes you believe everyone is a PR; townies wouldn't do this; you are not a townie.

Ignoring that crap logic, you made a completely unprompted claim that, if you are town, helps scum with their night targeting and assessment about the game setup.

-Your penchant for throwing out mafia jargon that you don't understand is not an example of other people acting without knowledge. It is an example of your own ignorance and only serves to create confusion.

-Context is important. I agreed with you that what Gorrad did (claiming non Bomb/Flag/Spy) is not equivalent to breadcrumbing. I then explained why you calling Gorrad scummy for the "breadcrumb" makes no sense. How about addressing arguments made instead of hiding behind jargon you don't understand?

-The AlmasterGM vote is going nowhere. I am fine with an EB lynch/pressure to claim. I don't mean to indicate that I am any less suspicious of AlmasterGM (though all are free to take this as they wish).

Unvote, Vote: EB

@Hoopla-

I believe you are misunderstanding or misrepresenting dramonic's post 47 and he seems incapable of calling you out on it.

-I think this pretty clearly answers your question. I see no evidence that Dramonic made any posts that successfully clarified his position which you were misrepresenting. If you disagree, then please show those posts.

-Agreed that unwillingness to vote out of fear of a D1 quicklynch is silly. That is not the entire content of dramonic's post.

To be clear, are you expressing discontent with a player waiting until more than 3 pages of discussion before placing a vote?

@Setup Discussion/Synx-
-I think it is silly to cut off one of the town's tools out of fear that scum may misuse it. If we follow that line of thought, we should stop voting and stop discussion. Setup discussion can be very helpful. It can also be dangerous. It's not that hard to tell the difference.

-Please point out the hypocrisy. My posts regarding setup discussion have been completely in line with each other and with my behavior in all other games on site (both as scum and town). Setup discussion is helpful. Setup discussion at the expense of other scumhunting is anti-town.

@Tentative language-
Null tell. Scum are often afraid to be direct in attacking townies because they know the townie will flip and they will look worse in the eyes of many players as a result. They can also be direct at times because they have more information. It's much more a matter of personal playstyle than affiliation (possibly useful with good meta on the specific player).

@Sajin-

-Bombs not being actual pieces seems like a vastly inferior game.

-I am assuming that the setup information you are claiming is that your role PM does NOT include any reference to your piece facing off against other pieces. We need to be careful here; if this is what you wanted to share, then your post includes the kind of setup information that can be dangerous and can easily help scum fish for townies who may be capable of facing off.

This is NOT contradictory with anything Gorrad posted*. He did not post anything that indicates his role PM has a mention of facing off. He only posted that his role PM includes both a name and a number AND that the number is consistent with a game where the Marshall is number 10.

I can see a more applicable case which would be that your role PM has no number (or a combination of no number AND no reference to facing off), however this would only be valid if you were claiming to be a piece that is normally numbered but does not have a number (mod has already publicly clarified that this is not the case).

*-ex. You could easily have asked the mod if he is using a game where bombs hindered movement without being a bomb, without being a miner, and without having any mention of a movement mechanic in your role PM.

-Gorrad is one of the players saying setup speculation is bad. Read more carefully.

-Agreed that claiming "I am not one of the following" is usually not helpful. I question your decision in claiming you are not a player who can face off.

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

I disagree with WLC’s assertion that scum inherently post with more confidence and more certainty that town. I’ve seen players of both alignment post in both fashion, it’s far more based on personality then it is on alignment.

Sajin’s post does nothing for me and his biggest point is based around claiming that Gorrad’s PM/role is different from his own. However, without knowing Sajin’s role that knowledge isn’t really useful to an outsider.

[ElectricBadger]

-Consistency please. You claim that if Gorrad is a townie who made a breadcrumb of a PR and publicly drew attention to it, then you claim that a doctor would protect him. You also claim that scum would try to kill him. This is a win for town.

No it's not, and this is a ridiculous assertion. Otherwise cops would always claim. Again with the accusations that make you sound even scummier.

-Current situation is not what you are assuming. Gorrad has not breadcrumbed a PR. Gorrad has directly claimed to be not Bomb/Flag/Spy.

Hyup. My assumption of the meaning of 'breadcrumb' was wrong; we've been over that. So far every claim that I'm scum goes back to that. You validated my definition yourself, though, so it's kind of strange to keep listing the conclusions I made with that definition as scum tells.

I'm still not thrilled with Gorrad's limited claim, but the worst of my suspicions have been withdrawn.

-Applying your crap-logic to yourself; you have claimed to be a PR and further claimed that your role makes you believe everyone is a PR; townies wouldn't do this; you are not a townie.

Ignoring that crap logic, you made a completely unprompted claim that, if you are town, helps scum with their night targeting and assessment about the game setup.

I did what now? When did I claim a PR? If you saw a tell for one, why would you point it out?

-Your penchant for throwing out mafia jargon that you don't understand is not an example of other people acting without knowledge. It is an example of your own ignorance and only serves to create confusion.

I don't understand all the definitions of the terms used here, no. Is that a scum tell?

-Context is important. I agreed with you that what Gorrad did (claiming non Bomb/Flag/Spy) is not equivalent to breadcrumbing. I then explained why you calling Gorrad scummy for the "breadcrumb" makes no sense. How about addressing arguments made instead of hiding behind jargon you don't understand?

What argument have I not addressed? I'm responding copiously to your posts, I would think.

The overall argument, to my understanding, is that I am scummy for accusing Gorrad of claiming a power role; my response is that my understanding of a breadcrumb is a clue left by a power role, aka someone who can determine without error who is guilty or not (a cop, a doc who learns of a successful save, etc) to be found in case they are NK'd. You can counter my logic

taking into account my understanding of the term

, which no one has; or you can accuse me of faking my ignorance, which no one has. Not sure how saying my conclusions based on another definition are wrong really contributes to finding scum.

[AlmasterGM]

It has been 72 hours. All of you are scummy that were probing others for setup speculation while scum could daytalk. There are likely more people on that list that discussed possible setup then scum likely present in the game so the list likely has both foolish town and information gathering scum on it. But I am confident at least some scum resides on said list.

I am confused as to why it is scummy to speculate while scum can daytalk. Obviously, since the scum are able to communicate with eachother, they will have better responses and comments during this phase, but this effects any conversation about anything. Why is it uniquely bad to discuss speculation during the first 72 hours? Also, why did this comment need to wait 72 hours for you to post it? I don't see at all how you only being used to the electronic version of Stratego was such sensitive information that it needed to wait that time.

[Sajin]

1- I did not say I was limited to the electronic version, only that I preferred it and have more experience with it. No one else had commented about the electronic version. Nor have I commented on how any of the board game options and strategies may have to do with how it would translate to a mafia game.

2- I view scum daytalk as a huge advantage for when they can do it. It helps scum plan an attack better. I would rather keep any familiarness with any aspect of the game out of the thread during that time. Is it preferable to have 3 days to discuss or more valuable to keep scum from being able to talk about relationships/setup before absolutely necessary?


@Kast- Gorrad speculated plenty already even though he says he is against it. I can and will still call him out for it. Do I need to quote the specific lines here for you? I can, but I would perfer to leave it generic (as what I consider speculation may or may not be a tell into my own role)

Oh and bombs not being pieces on the board added a whole new level of strategy. Not less. Restricting movement in a defensive position makes a part of that defense useless, strategy wise (harder to fake where bomb location is). Also the double no reveal aspect of the electronic version definitely added more options. I for one in a general sense think more options (that are balanced) allows for more strategy. To each his own though.


Breadcrumbs can come from any role. I find both sides of the the "he insinuated this" argument stupid. How about we hear it from the horses mouth instead of arguing over what he did or did not do.

[Kast]

@EB-
-YOU said cops and docs will target a breadcrumbed PR. YOU said scum will NK a breadcrumbed PR. If things go according to how you claim, then it is good for a single townie PR to claim. I say your assumptions are BS (which you apparently agree with).

How does pointing out that your argument is crap show that I am scummy? Are you suggesting that townies should accept crap-logic?

-You are correct that you did not claim a PR. That was my mistake (mixing you up with another player in another game, though it's up to you to believe that or not). Feel free to ignore that point.

-You have posted multiple crap-logic cases, repeatedly take statements out of context, and repeatedly present inconsistent arguments. All of these are scummy tools which you have employed to try and push wagons without providing any reasons why the specific target is actually scummy, Now you are just OMGUSing and still not trying to find scum.

@Sajin-
-It sounds like you then would prefer for no discussion at all until the daytalking period was over. Is this accurate?

-Actually, that was another mistake on my part. You are correct that Gorrad has speculated in this game. I was mixing this game up with another game.

-I agree that no reveal provides a more strategic game (although to clarify, do scouts reveal the enemy, and are pieces revealed on capture?). I find having more constraints such as multiple immobile bombs allows and requires much more strategy to play around. Allowing your own pieces to freely move over/through bombs removes the double edged nature of the bomb.

[Synx]

Please point out the hypocrisy. My posts regarding setup discussion have been completely in line with each other and with my behavior in all other games on site (both as scum and town).

Setup discussion is helpful. Setup discussion at the expense of other scumhunting is anti-town.

I have a problem with the bolded statement. Setup discussion on day one is never NOT at the expense of other scumhunting, and therefore it is always anti-town. Setup discussion, in my opinion, is only helpful late game when we have seen flips and know how the game mechanics work.

this is a ridiculous assertion.

I did what now? When did I claim a PR? If you saw a tell for one, why would you point it out?

I don't understand all the definitions of the terms used here, no

What argument have I not addressed?

You have literally responded to almost every question/point with a question and a serious lack of content. ElectricBadger, this question is for you. Do you agree or disagree with this statement: "Scumhunting day one is pointless because there is no evidence to go on" ?

[dramonic]

If I may pronounce myself on this issue, it's not like there is currently all that much to scumhunt n. We have Gorrad and his very odd claim (which I still believe is scummy) and EB who's just getting progressively scummier. It's not scumhunting at this point, it's repeating the case over and over again. The real hunt begins after we have deaths, so I can udnerstand the setup speculating.

[ElectricBadger]

-YOU said cops and docs will target a breadcrumbed PR. YOU said scum will NK a breadcrumbed PR. If things go according to how you claim, then it is good for a single townie PR to claim. I say your assumptions are BS (which you apparently agree with).

Do I honestly need to explain the flaws in this argument? Yes, a self-declared PR is more likely to be the target of all of these. No, that's not a good thing. If you need more help on this sort of WIFOM situation, read the wiki.

How does pointing out that your argument is crap show that I am scummy? Are you suggesting that townies should accept crap-logic?

Nope. My initial argument was wrong - and you pointed out that I had a different definition for breadcrumbs than Gorrad. That's fine - that's appreciated, actually, as I don't want to accuse players based on a misunderstanding. But you keep pushing that my conclusions based on that understanding are scum tells - arguments like the first quote here. Trying very very hard to make scum appear where it isn't is very scummy.

-You have posted multiple crap-logic cases, repeatedly take statements out of context, and repeatedly present inconsistent arguments. All of these are scummy tools which you have employed to try and push wagons without providing any reasons why the specific target is actually scummy, Now you are just OMGUSing and still not trying to find scum.

Inconsistent is your buzzword, isn't it? And wrong; I've been very consistent. You just disagree with my logic, which you seem not to understand.

I am amazed that in 10 posts I've managed to push multiple wagons then move to not trying to find scum at all. And yeah - my first couple posts were light on hard evidence; not really shocking for the first couple pages of a game, where the goal is largely just to get people talking. As for OMGUS, yes; but scum is where scum is, and so far you're the worst. Not a good time to hunt around for scum when it keeps arriving on my doorstep demanding a response.

[ElectricBadger]

You have literally responded to almost every question/point with a question and a serious lack of content.

I've answered every question I could, actually - the two questions above are for:

1) Stating I did something I didn't do, which Kast clarified as a mistake on his part. Not sure what other response would be suitable to being told I claimed a PR when I hadn't. Since there's nothing to base his comment on, I'm inclined to see it as an honest mistake.

2) Asking for clarification on a vague statement that was grossly in error and should have been backed up by evidence. And btw, was requesting a solid question to give an answer to - in the face of your claim of lack of content. You may not agree with me, but content is not my weakness.

As for the statements you quoted:

1) Also contained an example why it was a ridiculous assertion. Also common knowledge: I don't think there's a good purpose to arguing theory about why D1 cop or doc claims are foolish.

2) Is about as plain a response as I can make: told I was getting terms wrong, I agreed that I don't know them all and have tried to decrease my use of lingo since. Not really much else to say on the point.

ElectricBadger, this question is for you. Do you agree or disagree with this statement: "Scumhunting day one is pointless because there is no evidence to go on" ?

No, obviously. Scum hunting day one requires questions and interaction to create the evidence to go on.

So your poor choice of examples aside (which read like you skimmed my posts and abridged them to match your accusation), yes, I do ask lots of questions. When people are wrong, I ask them to cite evidence. Town usually point out something I missed or back off because they realize they were wrong; scum usually just keep stating their argument without evidence, because they knew already there was none. Question for you: Do you feel asking responses of other players helps town or scum more?

[AlmasterGM]

2- I view scum daytalk as a huge advantage for when they can do it. It helps scum plan an attack better. I would rather keep any familiarness with any aspect of the game out of the thread during that time. Is it preferable to have 3 days to discuss or more valuable to keep scum from being able to talk about relationships/setup before absolutely necessary?

You're not answering my question. I understand that the scum daytalking is a powerful tool for them. However, this applies to ANY AND ALL discussion that takes place during those 3 days, not just setup speculation and what kinds of stratego you have played exclusively. What makes those two things so special that they have to wait? Or is it your opinion that we should just say nothing at all for the first three days?

[WeyounsLastClone]

Synx, don't you think set-up discussion could be useful in that scum might slip? Or later when things have happened people can look back and see who might have had more information already on day 1?

Also on the theory of day one I think that scumhunting day one isn't pointless, but it is more difficult because there isn't any evidence yet to go on (only perceived evidence).

[Kast]

@Synx-
Strongly disagree. Players can both scum hunt and discuss setup. The two actions are not mutually exclusive, and we have plenty of counter-examples within this game alone that disprove your claim.

@EB-
You are wrong and continue to falsely attribute your own crap-logic argument to me. This is scummy.

KAST POSITION:
-Cops and docs do NOT necessarily target breadcrumbed PR.
-Mafia does NOT necessarily target breadcrumbed PR.
-Gorrad did not breadcrumb a PR.

EB POSITION:
-Cops and docs AUTOMATICALLY target breadcrumbed PR.
-Mafia AUTOMATICALLY targets breadcrumbed PR.
-Gorrad breadcrumbed a PR.
--If Gorrad is scum, then he will be targetted by cops and docs and will kill them because he is a bomb.
--If Gorrad is a townie, then he will be targetted by mafia but NOT by cops and docs.

EB's position is inconsistent and based on terrible assumptions that he agrees are terrible. He also appears to be incapable of comprehending that Kast showing that EB's argument is bad is not equivalent to Kast believing EB's bad argument.

Trying very very hard to make scum appear where it isn't is very scummy.

This describes exactly why I find you scummy. You keep trying to call things scummy that are not. In doing this, you make use of scummy tactics (crap-logic, inconsistency, out of context quoting).

I am amazed that in 10 posts I've managed to push multiple wagons then move to not trying to find scum at all. And yeah - my first couple posts were light on hard evidence; not really shocking for the first couple pages of a game, where the goal is largely just to get people talking. As for OMGUS, yes; but scum is where scum is, and so far you're the worst. Not a good time to hunt around for scum when it keeps arriving on my doorstep demanding a response.

Pushing a wagon does not equal trying to find scum. Pushing multiple wagons with no reasoning shows that you are just trying to push for anything that sticks and go with it. Very scummy.

Your justification for your vote fails to show any intent to find scum. A player who keeps demanding responses from you and calls you suspicious is not inherently doing anything scummy. You have failed to even attempt filling in that gap.

1) Also contained an example why it was a ridiculous assertion. Also common knowledge: I don't think there's a good purpose to arguing theory about why D1 cop or doc claims are foolish.

This is not what we are discussing. You are setting up a straw man when you claim this is what we are discussing.

-Agreed that we can scumhunt on D1 even when there is little evidence. Asking questions is good and pressing your suspects to answer questions is a great way to help determine if they are scum. You don't seem interested in doing that. You seem much more interested in getting people to not suspect you and getting people to look anywhere but you. When I didn't leave you alone after you backpedalled, you switched tactics and started OMGUSing. You still don't show interest in scumhunting.

[charter]

Prodding Gorrad and Vaya.

[ElectricBadger]

EB POSITION:
-Cops and docs AUTOMATICALLY target breadcrumbed PR.
-Mafia AUTOMATICALLY targets breadcrumbed PR.
-Gorrad breadcrumbed a PR.
--If Gorrad is scum, then he will be targetted by cops and docs and will kill them because he is a bomb.
--If Gorrad is a townie, then he will be targetted by mafia but NOT by cops and docs.

My actual comment (interesting that no one else is citing it verbatim):

I'm reading this as bombs=mafia, and Gorrad is one: this sort of claim is sure to draw a cop investigation or doctor protection and get our power roles killed off.

You're really insisting my possible situation states neither our PRs nor scum have any free will in their choice? I don't see it. And where do I say PRs wouldn't target townie-Gorrad? I just say it wouldn't end well, which is why cops don't normally claim day 1.

-Agreed that we can scumhunt on D1 even when there is little evidence. Asking questions is good and pressing your suspects to answer questions is a great way to help determine if they are scum. You don't seem interested in doing that.

I've been interacting with you, Gorrad, Ortolan, Sajin and Synx. For five pages into the game I don't think that's half bad, personally, and I only have so much time to post here.

It may not seem like it to you, but I'm very much scum hunting. I think seeing who jumps on my bandwagon with unoriginal and badly substantiated evidence is the best tell I can find. It's more than likely to be used to lynch scum over my dead corpse, but it's very possible that's the best contribution I can give to town this game.

[Kast]

this sort of claim

is sure to

draw a cop investigation or doctor protection

You assume it will happen. This is a bogus assumption.

Inconsistently, you assume that a townie breadcrumbing a PR will ONLY draw mafia. If you assumed that it would draw a doctor protection, then it would be a good result for town. If any investigative PRs strongly believed your bogus assumption, then the best strategy for them is to claim D1; this is exactly the breaking strategy that resulted in switching newbie games to C9.

My point does not require that you used the word automatically. You state clearly that you think that would happen. If you want to get nitpicky, your wording is that cops and docs will target him without any uncertainty.

You don't say mafia would definitely target him as town, however you say he has made himself a target for them, provides no benefit at all to the town, and potentially creates confusion. The first of those effects inconsistently ignores your other claim that docs will target him. The second also ignores the benefit of a cop and doc targetting the same player; one guaranteed living confirmable townie. Certainly his claim resulted in confusion, so perhaps you have a point there, except that the primary source of that confusion is your own misunderstanding (or deliberate misrepresentation) of his claim.

-Good that you are interacting. How is singing praises for yourself helpful to the town?

Also, interacting with other players is not equivalent to scumhunting. If that is what you meant to imply, then try again please.

[ElectricBadger]

Inconsistently, you assume that a townie breadcrumbing a PR will ONLY draw mafia.

Again you fail to cite such a comment as requested, because none exists.

If you assumed that it would draw a doctor protection, then it would be a good result for town.

Nope. My experience with early cop claims (well, early obvious tell, haven't played with any cop that claimed D1 yet, don't expect to either) and a doctor is that scum ignore the cop, hunt around and kill the doc, then kill the cop next round. They may miss a kill if they take a chance at the cop or the doc takes a risk, but they'll hone right in on the power roles: linking known PR's is much easier, just as linking scum is once one is known. PR's dead early in the game is a bad thing.

Also, you're assuming there MUST be a doctor. I didn't really want to go into setup discussion, but I'll note there's no piece that even vaguely corresponds to a protector/doctor, so there's not any assurance we have one. The scout is almost certainly a cop, though.

If you think a D1 cop claim is good for town, why do you think our cop isn't claiming? Do you think they should?

My point does not require that you used the word automatically. You state clearly that you think that would happen. If you want to get nitpicky, your wording is that cops and docs will target him without any uncertainty.

If I wanted to get nitpicky, I would say "this sort of claim is sure to draw a cop investigation or doctor protection" (quotes ftw!). I don't think a speculative read has as much certainty to it as you keep insisting, but okay. Yes, I think that if someone claimed a PR and survived throughout most/all of the game, they would be targetted by another PR at some point. I think that would happen. Is that such a huge leap of the imagination, or a certain scum tell? Were I a cop who wasn't thinking about the possibility of a scum-bomb, it would likely be my first investigation, so I knew whether to trust their information and effectively double my own investigations.

Ultimately, I think this conversation is stupid. We're arguing our opinions of what would happen in a theoretical game that isn't this one. Feel free to have the last word, but I'm done talking about it. There's no tell; your accusations are misleading and unfounded; and your insistence on pushing something so minor without evidence and in the face of rationality is duly noted. If you want to vote me because I think a vague D1 PR claim is scummy, go ahead. I don't think I'm going to convince you because I don't think you really care: you're scum trying to get a lynch, and your scumbuddies and nervous town are willing to jump on a bandwagon that isn't them.

Also, interacting with other players is not equivalent to scumhunting.

What, pray tell, fits your personal definition of scum hunting? Ignoring five players' questions to talk about an unrelated topic? I started to investigate Gorrad to see what would come out; you did, unexpectedly, so I've turned my attention to that. I'm actually not very impressed with your scum hunting either; you're just repeating the same misinformation over and over until someone believes you while ignoring my response.

[ortolan]

At least one

of the players not voting currently is guaranteed to be scum.

ElectricBadger actually is quite reasonable at defending himself. But this is a trait one holds independently of their alignment. I'm about 50/50 on him being scum atm. I don't like him pulling the "resigned" persona saying "my only contribution may very well be calling out the scum on my wagon"; then in his last post just reiterating that Kast is scum without trying to analyse the other players voting him- he just says "your scumbuddies and nervous town are willing to jump on a bandwagon that isn't them." Still, I'm about 50/50.

I'm very curious as to why Kast seems so certain of ElectricBadger's alignment. He is literally insistent he is scum constantly and I don't think there's any basis to be tunneled on him quite that hard. Kast how certain are you that EB will flip scum when lynched?

I must also make the point that I can't distinguish Kast's play from any of the previous games I've been in with him, in all of which he was scum.

I'm also pretty neutral on both Gorrad and Hoops from other games I've played with them.

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

Breadcrumbs can come from any role. I find both sides of the the "he insinuated this" argument stupid. How about we hear it from the horses mouth instead of arguing over what he did or did not do.

I think this still refers to Gorrad and I find it a bit odd you went from "Gorrad is scum lynch the hell out of him" because of his comment to "let's wait and see what he says". It looks to me like you've moved strongly away from your previous statement.

At least one

of the players not voting currently is guaranteed to be scum.

You may be right since I can't speak towards the other players in this camp, but if this is the sole basis of your reasoning then I find it off-target. My hypothesis is that scum are more likely to behave even in the most basic ways such as post count and votes cast nearer to the middle. The outliers; those, for example, not voting or who have voted several (four or more times) are more likely to be town. This sort of analysis is usually more helpful earlier in the game as the game goes along there's a regression towards the mean for everyone and as days pass the dynamics shift in different ways.

[ElectricBadger]

At least one

of the players not voting currently is guaranteed to be scum.

Gauranteed is a very bold statement; please explain your theory.

I don't like him pulling the "resigned" persona saying "my only contribution may very well be calling out the scum on my wagon"; then in his last post just reiterating that Kast is scum without trying to analyse the other players voting him- he just says "your scumbuddies and nervous town are willing to jump on a bandwagon that isn't them."

Oh no, not resigned at all; much the opposite: I still think I have potential to do a lot for town. But dying early doesn't have to mean failing. And yes, iso'ing each person involved in the wagon is very much on my to-do list before the end of the day; one reason I decided to cease the theoretical he-said-she-said and move on to doing more productive things with my time.

[WeyounsLastClone]

@Kast, you seem to be going against EB a lot, but do you have other suspicions? Please don't make this thread in a Kast vs. EB thread.

@EB, what do you have the most problems with: that Gorrad breadcrumbed, that Gorrad pointed out that he breadcrumbed, or that he said he wasn't flag, bomb, or spy?

[ElectricBadger]

@EB, what do you have the most problems with: that Gorrad breadcrumbed, that Gorrad pointed out that he breadcrumbed, or that he said he wasn't flag, bomb, or spy?

Now I understand what Gorrad meant by Breadcrumb, it doesn't bother me much (tho I don't see it as useful).

I dislike the anti-claim, for the same reason I dislike unprompted townie claims - it narrows down the field for the scum to hone in on PRs. And if we do have a flag, I suspect we want to protect it.

[Kast]

@Ort-
I think EB is less likely scum than AlmasterGM, but I am confidant enough in his scumminess that I think his lynch is acceptable for today.

@EB-
Again, you read out of context. You directly state that the purpose of breadcrumbing is to avoid becoming a target, but that Gorrad's action (which you claimed was breadcrumbing a PR) failed to do this. This is an indirect statement that Gorrad's action will draw mafia actions.

You say this is bad, which is inconsistent with your claim that docs will protect Gorrad if he breadcrumbs a PR.

I agree that it is not a sure thing that a doctor will protect Gorrad. You are continuing your straw man arguments when claiming that I think otherwise.

-I am not advocating that cops should claim D1. Your inconsistent claims that you made while attacking Gorrad include assumptions that advocate cops claiming on D1. I have called you on this and you are trying to confuse the issue.

-You made a crap logic case on Gorrad and when players called you on it you tried to backpedal and changed your story to appease the town. I called you on this and after your appeasement didn't work, you OMGUSed me.

You were not investigating Gorrad. Your new story, that you "investigate[d] Gorrad to see what would come out" is a classic scum defense for pursuing scummy, crap-logic driven cases.

@WLC-
-I try to respond to anything that I think needs a response. I've discussed other players as well as EB; EB is receiving more attention at the moment since he is responding in a very scummy manner.

[Hoopla]

@Hoopla-

I believe you are misunderstanding or misrepresenting dramonic's post 47 and he seems incapable of calling you out on it.

-I think this pretty clearly answers your question. I see no evidence that Dramonic made any posts that successfully clarified his position which you were misrepresenting. If you disagree, then please show those posts.

Dramonic only said that in 47 after he was voted for by Vaya in the previous post. But I think I did misunderstand his post initially, so I want to readdress something here;

I'm not a fan of quick early-wagons and I don't have a decent case (since I can't find scum before post 13 of a game). I'm not going to vote without at least the latter <<

I find it odd you'd make this statement when your wagon only had two votes on it. Why didn't you express similar concern for the two vote wagon on Gorrad? What was the purpose for stating you don't like early bandwagons?

because people were voting me for not voting Gorrad.

I see now dramonic was referencing Gorrad's wagon, but he only referenced Gorrad's wagon once he started getting votes (which is perhaps where the confusion lay). Dramonic has been in enough games to know the nature of the RVS and beyond - I truly don't understand why he would be worried about two votes, on either Gorrad or himself.

Also, you don't need to respond to everything in all your posts, it just makes me less likely to read them.

At least one

of the players not voting currently is guaranteed to be scum.

Stupid logic. Maybe going by pure chance it's feasible, but unless you're going to back this up with something substancial, it's an airy quote.