Cyclic Experimentation Set x02 - [Game Over]

[SlySly]

On the outset the following players fall into my ‘Likely Lurker or VI” pool who I will not hesitate to vote for at a deadline if we need a lynch and they show no signs of playing in a more Pro-Town manner – EC, SlySly, Fourseen.

They have either proven to lurk as scum, lurk and provide no content regardless of alignment, or play in a manner that is borders on ‘Playing against Wincondition’.

Just because the scumchat club says you are playing anti-town, doesn't mean you are. I've been strung up incorrectly so many times by scumchatters when I was right and they were wrong, I've lost count.

----------

It doesn't demand any claiming at the present so it is okay to tentatively agree while we gametheory in private.

It doesn't demand any claiming at the present so it is okay to tentatively agree

while we gametheory in private.

Please explain what you mean by the bolded.

Crypto:

I read MoI's plan from x01, and I liked it a lot, and would like to go with it this game, at least for now.

MoI: Gametheory in private as in, by yourself, in your head, in notepad, or whatever you use, theory about the game. We aren't about to clog the thread up with pages of people fleshing out ideas. If you have a good idea after working on it solo, post it, but if I posted everything I thought about in regards to gametheory, you'd be mad.

This seems like a slip, then a cover up while answering the asker after an unrelated quote.

--------

MoI's plan sounds safe for the town and better to me than implosion's. Implosion's plan, to me, seems to assume that this game is going to be just like the x1. I have played in many sequel games and the mechanics have always changed greatly forcing the need for a different strategy than what did or would have won the first one.

---------

As for personality, generally I am abrasive in game and out. I took a break after Fate ruined the last few games I played in and I hope to return as a kinder, gentler abrasion.

[SlySly]

You seriously think I was saying "MoI, lets gametheory in our scum QT"?...

I never inferred MoI was in your scum QT. Is that a nice try at dragging him into it or is that an attempt to clear him by association through name inclusion while suggesting absurdity?

VOTE: Junpei

[SlySly]

Okay sly... uh.. so my mentioning MoI is what made me worthy of a vote?

No, your slip is what made you worthy of a vote, it was your response that confirmed for me that it was a slip.

[SlySly]

it's amazing, the way dropping capitalization and minimizing punctuation can change the tone of your posts

Is this a new method you've adopted just for this game?

------------

so you've established that i move quickly and unpredictably. why are you voting me? do you actually think i am mafia or is this a policy-type vote? if you think i am mafia, then what do you think is the secret scum agenda driving my play?

I like to know why you voted Magna, for starts.

that was one of the weaker attempts at dodging questions i've seen in my time here.

Agreed, ML, ing.

-----------

http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 9#p3542099
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 7#p3542117

There are my reasons for voting warriormode.

Neither of the links you provided mention warriormode. Did you get your links wrong?

[SlySly]

Read the context of the links Sly, they are very relevant to warriormode.

When clicking the link crypto provided, I missed the context due to the lack of a specific warrior mention. I can see how crypto is giving his reasoning on warrior now.

Also, why did you feel the need to +1 a post from page 3?

Are you saying that a post that is x pages back should be dismissed and no longer mentioned? What's the value of x to you?

I read through the thread once, now I am reading through iso's. The +1 jumped out at me during a crypto iso that I missed on the initial pass. I'm sure I'll have more, I've got a lot of iso's yet to complete.

------------

@crypto, on punctuation and captilization,

Gotcha.

[SlySly]

2. My observation is based on your scum play in Plum’s LOTR Mafia.

Then wtf are you talking about? I was on a terrible team and still had a chance to win had the mod not screwed us in the night. I played to win and I didn't lurk. Let's see you overcome zwet and arudeboy. Who were you in that game? gandalf?

MoI's plan sounds safe for the town and better to me than implosion's. Implosion's plan, to me, seems to assume that this game is going to be just like the x1. I have played in many sequel games and the mechanics have always changed greatly forcing the need for a different strategy than what did or would have won the first one.

I also don’t like this at all. It demonstrates that SlySly doesn’t have an understanding of what he commenting on.

1. My plan is exactly the same plan I proposed in X01. No variation.
2. Implosion’s plan is basically mine except he adds claiming of Powers which I think we don’t need at this juncture.

I haven't read x01, nor do I plan to. Implosion's plan was presented as a plan that worked in x01 and also seemed to not take into account that scum are able to pass powers amongst themselves in this game.

[SlySly]

Then wtf are you talking about? I was on a terrible team and still had a chance to win had the mod not screwed us in the night. I played to win and I didn't lurk. Let's see you overcome zwet and arudeboy. Who were you in that game? gandalf?

I was part of the MemoriaEsponia Hydra. Yes, you did lurk pretty strong and I identified you as likely scum Day 1. We can review the Dead QT for support for that if you wish.

Not sure what your playing to win comment means. I said I saw you lurk as scum in LOTR Mafia. That's why you are on the list, not for listed VI element.

I see you don't address the scum-chat angle at all. Again, why bring that up?

I assumed you were putting me in the VI slot as scumchatters often do.

I haven't read x01, nor do I plan to. Implosion's plan was presented as a plan that worked in x01 and also seemed to not take into account that scum are able to pass powers amongst themselves in this game.

Your response is pretty weak here. Scum still die if they pass between themselves.

Again, why do you differentiate between our plans as one being effective because it is different from X01 when both are the same plan as X01, minus the initial Power claiming in Implosions?

I didn't realize your plan was from x01. I don't recall you presenting it that way. I'm at work and don't have time to dig back through at the moment. I will go back and look at implosion's plan when I get home and see why that exclusion bothered me.

[SlySly]

Strategy notes

Last game, our general strategy was to pass abilities between people and clear people by having them pass abilities to scum. If two people passed an ability between each other, and one flipped scum, the other was cleared. We had 4 people cleared by the end of the game, and it wasn't hard to finish it off. Obviously, the poison mechanic is intended to make that less efficient.

MOI, this is the part that bothered me. Since it appears to have worked so well in the first game, I seriously doubt the mod would run a sequel that would be so easily broken by the same methodology.

--------

So,

IF

there are no abilities that can stop the poison, then people who have passed abilities to scum or have had abilities passed to them from scum are "cleared." However, there are a few reasons that they might not be:

1: there might be some kind of ability which can explicitly stop the poison kill. If this is the case, and the ability has no beneficial aspect, then that person should claim either today or tomorrow. We can deal with it by dumping it on someone scummy and nuking them out of orbit. or lynching also works. It's also theoretically possible that the scum have some kind of poison kill though, so yeah.
2: there might be some normal protective ability (like a doctor) that happens to protect against the poison kill.

If anyone has a doctor ability, then they should ask the mod if that ability will protect against the poison kill.

They shouldn't claim, for obvious reasons. They can claim later.
3: the scum have an ability which directly combats the poison, for example, a factional one-shot free pass-between-each-other ability to prevent us from clearing people. I wouldn't be surprised if something like this is in the game after the strategy we wound up using last time, and there's no way to detect it, so people who pass abilities to scum or get them are probably just going to be somewhat townier, as opposed to being clear.

Illustration of why passing plan may not clear people like it did the first game according to implosion:

function wifom(){
if(nopoisonblockingame)
{
if(passedabilitytoscum || receivedabilityfromscum)
{
recipentorpasser = cleared;
}
else(doc)
{
if(canblockpoison)
{
doc = shhhfornow;
}
else
{
doc = askmodifcanblockpoison + shhhfornow;
}
}
else(scumhasposionblock)
{
if(factionaloneshotfreepassbetween)
{
implosion = notsurprisedatpowerinclusion;
power = undetectable;
passersorreceiverstoorfromscum = somewhattownier => !cleared;
}
}
}
else
{
switch PoisonBlockPowerWIFOM :
case scumpower then
if(scumhaspoisonblock)
{
return "so yeah";
break;
}
else
{
return ???
break;
}
case townpower then
if(abilityisworthless)
{
dumponscummy;
recipent = vigorlynch;
return assumevigorlynchsuccessful;
break;
}
else
{
return ???;
break;
}
end
}
else
{
return ???
}
return wifom;
}

Compiler results: fatal error FY2944752: unexpected crap logic wifom overflow; execution terminated.

------------

This isn't a plan, this is a wifom maze with multiple dead ends and disconnected flow leading to town confusion.

------------

Tomorrow after work and WS game 7, I will try to sit down and finish my iso's and review the current wagons to see if I agree with them or think they are being driven by scum. The posting has been way too much to keep up with easily during a very busy product delivery week of work. The weekend should help me get good and caught up.

[SlySly]

SlySly calling Junpei out for a "slip" is fine and all but not followed up by a vote is scummy.

He responded, I voted. In my very next post.

ISO #1, post 158

[SlySly]

Hi DGB!

[SlySly]

Hello SlySly

Page 14, and no one is voting you?

You must be scum!

I've just been busy at work and haven't had enough time to dig in. I'm sure once I get caught up and get my thoughts posted, my usual self will emerge!

[SlySly]

(I believe in last game scum had daytalk? If so, you would expect one of his buddies to at least tell him something good to say)

ML tells FC to check their scum daytalk for a pointer.

------------

Crypto was the kind of person that got my hackles to rise and made me want to vote him just because he made me annoyed and mad.

This is a common epic fail mindset on this site.

-------------

Their are about 14 people needed to achieve a lynch. With 11 people on the wagon, why would (as scum) distance myself against it as their would be less then 10% chance that people would focus on me if Fourseen flipped town?

What's up with the fuzzy math. It takes 13 to lynch. According to the vote post, your unvote left 8 on the wagon.

[SlySly]

ML tells FC to check their scum daytalk for a pointer.

I don't quite know what to make of this statement.

For this entire day, you've been sitting on the wagon that I was leading on warriormode. Basically, you agree with me that warrior is scum, and forseen is not.

And now you all of a sudden you call me out for defending forseen? And you try to fabricate something that is so banally stupid (first, assuming scum have daytalk, second scum A [me] posted in the scum quicktopic, and then felt it necessary to post in thread to point this out to my hypothetical scumbuddy)to call me scum? You make three separate illogical leaps to advance your point. This is circular scummy logic.

You've basically followed my reads all day here and then tried to take a swipe at the hand that feeds you.

And the rest of the post was equally as bad. Informing the game that it take 13 instead of 14 to lynch. Takes for the valuable input champ.

You obviously have me confused with someone else. Back up these bolded claims by quoting me. I'll wait.

----------

Correction, slysly is not projectmatt. Shit. hmmmm

I see you realized your error, disregard previous request.

[SlySly]

Their are about 14 people needed to achieve a lynch.

Informing the game that it take 13 instead of 14 to lynch.

I wasn't informing, I was pointing out Bunny's scummy behaviour. If this instance had been where the votes were closer to the needed lynch count, I would have moved my vote.

For instance, set it up with Bunny's "14 to lynch" inference and follow it up with, "Hey, were at 12 votes (L-2), someone put the pressure on and let's get a claim."

------

It was very kind of you to go out of your way to chainsaw defend Bunny.

[SlySly]

I know this is not concrete at all, but in my experience I have found scum who are skating by are very quick to be reading and responding to the thread when they are attacked, but not really otherwise. slysly had been pretty lethargically posting until I made an incorrect statement about him, and then was quick to come in and point out how I was wrong. I think I saw it reference once as 'scum damage control'. It doesn't create a read, but it certainly enforces it.

I have been very busy at work. We were supposed to deliver a site today, but the power outage in the northeast delayed it until tomorrow. You can go look at the site yourself, if it's not the Stars Wars themed site yet, check back tomorrow and you'll see the new one. LEGO Build Together

This is the first night since this game has started that I have actually had time to sit down and read without being extremely crunched for time. I have to do the mobile part of the site this week, so I may time crunched again for the next week but I will do my very best to keep up.

[SlySly]

Not to mention, I made valid points against slysly, and he totally ignored it in favor of a non sequitur, accusing me of chainsawing bunny and clarifying how many it is to lynch. No response at all to my points. This looks like he thought

"oh darn, some good points. I'll not respond at all and hope it doesn't gain ground".

I will be interesting to see if slysly accuses you of chainsaw defending as well.

No, you falsely accused me of BS. Then you said, oops, I meant projectmatt. There were no points to address, what you accused me of was 100% false.

[SlySly]

I had an entire area post, at the end of the previous page. Not sure what you're talking about here. Post 424

I missed this post. I think I mistook it for a long quote because of the border.

1.

So this makes two time you've accused people of 'daytalking' in their scum quicktopic. I've found scum are more likely than town to accuse others of having inside information, when they, in fact, have the inside information. (Iecerint in dynasty warriors mafia on multiple scum teams, and several others) You've also accused the following four players of being scum together, me, Magna, Junpei, and forseencircumstances, which seems utterly ridiculous.

I've spotted what looked like 2 possible scum slips. I pointed them out.

This is twice now that you have attacked me with a blatant lie.

Please quote what I said that you interpreted as me saying Magna is scum and is your scumbuddy.

---------------

A lot of his posts already are empty filler. The following is a list of his entire posting history, with posts I consider to be active lurking.
1. accuses someone of a slip, and then says pro-town plans are pro-town
2. wildmassguessing on scum daytalking QT
3. you slipped!
4. inquires if someone got their links wrong, and then accuses someone of fishing (both baseless again)
7. "i'm not a vi!!!!"
8. nonsense
9. fluff "i voted for X!"
10. fluff
11. fluff "i'll catch up soon!"

Your list is the fluff you accuse me of. What you call fluff was a conversation I was having with MoI. As for the rest...

Not only was it a slip, it was followed by an attempted cover up. That is why my vote is where it is and why it hasn't moved as of yet.

I misunderstood something and I thought it was scummy. I asked for clarification. The response brought clarity that I had misunderstood and there was no scumminess involved.

I have been working a ton. I'm still busy working, but the difference now is, I got caught up reading last night so it makes it easier now to contribute to the game. If I get too busy at work for a night or two and another 10 pages explode like it has twice in this game already, I'm sure it will again take a little time to get caught back up, again.

I tried to be really really generous here too. Out of all his posts, only 4 actually try and figure out someone's alignment, or ask questions, or do anything other than be absolutely useless. This is a pretty common scum tactic.

You don't know me very well yet. I don't subscribe to the same mafia theory and methodologies that so many others around here have adopted as their proper. I have my own ways and they are not the norm. Just because you dismiss something, doesn't make it "absolutely useless". Dismissing usefulness is a pretty common scum tactic.

And, he has been riding his vote on Junpei all day, but has kept the same justification of "he slipped in that he said he had scum daytalk", and has not really tried to rustle the waters of this game at all. He isn't really interested in lynching junpei either, considering he hasn't mentioned him seriously for about eight posts. In fact, his vote looks like a typical plunk it down and let it ride.

I'm all the way down with lynching Junpei. He scum slipped, attempted to cover it up, followed up with an attack the accuser, and then rode off into the sunset like it never happened. Nothing else has jumped out at me as more scummy yet, other than maybe your lying attacks on me.

That was actually pretty informative. I can't really form a cohesive town mindset from his posts at all. However, his isolation exhibits the trademarks of scum. Lazy vote. Contenless posts, accusations of slips, nonsense, outrageous accusations. Not backing anything up.

I believe slysly is scum

Yet, your vote remains on nopointactingup.

How about a summarization of your case against nopointactingup? It must be strong since you didn't move your vote after making this post against me.

[SlySly]

DP, do you have an ode for Junpei or ML?

[SlySly]

Quickly, magna your question :

ML tells FC to check their scum daytalk for a pointer.

States I am scum with forseen.

No, your slip is what made you worthy of a vote, it was your response that confirmed for me that it was a slip.

This seems like a slip, then a cover up while answering the asker after an unrelated quote.

Last two in reference to Junpei 'slipping' about telling Magna to check their scum quicktopic

It looks like you called Junpei and MoI scum together, and me and forseen scum together, and ergo, all of use are scum together, slysly.

Nice try. Junpei and ML are determined to drag you into their scum QT, MoI.

You seriously think I was saying "MoI, lets gametheory in our scum QT"?...

I never inferred MoI was in your scum QT.

I'll gladly support an ML wagon.

[SlySly]

Then what did you mean by those statements? How am I dragging MoI into any scum quicktopic?

Read closely, then listen...

I include Junpei's slip (Post 17). I include MoI asking Junpei about it(Post 53). Then I include where Junpei scummily answered MoI; directly after an unrelated quote (Post 143). That is a scum coverup by answering what he has been called out on in a way that doesn't bring attention to what he was initially called out on.

No where in any of this, or anywhere else for that matter, do I infer that MoI is scum.

It doesn't demand any claiming at the present so it is okay to tentatively agree while we gametheory in private.

It doesn't demand any claiming at the present so it is okay to tentatively agree

while we gametheory in private.

Please explain what you mean by the bolded.

Crypto:

I read MoI's plan from x01, and I liked it a lot, and would like to go with it this game, at least for now.

MoI: Gametheory in private as in, by yourself, in your head, in notepad, or whatever you use, theory about the game. We aren't about to clog the thread up with pages of people fleshing out ideas. If you have a good idea after working on it solo, post it, but if I posted everything I thought about in regards to gametheory, you'd be mad.

This seems like a slip, then a cover up while answering the asker after an unrelated quote.

After this, both you and Junpei both tried to twist this into a misrep of me by claiming I had stated that MoI was scum and a scumbuddy of y'alls.

You seriously think I was saying "MoI, lets gametheory in our scum QT"?...

You've also accused the following four players of being scum together, me, Magna, Junpei, and forseencircumstances, which seems utterly ridiculous.

It looks like you called Junpei and MoI scum together, and me and forseen scum together, and ergo, all of use are scum together, slysly.

I acknowledge your backpedal by changing your blatant lie*, misrep accusation into "It looks like".

--

* - 2nd of the game against me.

[SlySly]

I'm just clearing out the lies and pointing out the liars. No bananas.

[SlySly]

EBWOP: liar(s)

[SlySly]

Oh, I remember why I thought that you were grouping me with MoI:

My quote says "we can agree", which is directly in respect to MoI's plan. Ergo, agreeing with MoI, the pronoun 'we' now stands for MoI and I, making the implication that I told MoI to talk to me in a scum QT about gametheory in your eyes.

Actually, your statement was directed at implosion making the pronoun "we" stand for you and implosion.

Implosion, I read MoI's plan from x01, and I liked it a lot, and would like to go with it this game, at least for now. It doesn't demand any claiming at the present so it is okay to tentatively agree while we gametheory in private.

pedit: liars

[SlySly]

I haven't directly stated that.

However, I believe that was my first thought when I read that post during my initial read through. Time for an implosion iso.

Having read your post several times now, you claimed your "we" meant MoI. I initially read the "we" as meaing you and implosion, but it could also be interpreted as you saying it was okay to tentatively agree with implosion about MoI's plan while you gametheoried in private with an undefined "we".

[SlySly]

I don't remember scum having daytalk last game.

Memory refresher

[SlySly]

ML said that I “amuse”.
friend building tactic that scum use?

I have seen him do it times 2 or 3.
but there are much summier people here, you agree?

With the 2 or 3 times, are you referring to only this game? If you're referencing other games, was he scum when he did this?

As for Jun, he appears to like to stir
looking for scum, I infer.

He looks town to me at this point.
But this is day one, up in this joint.

Everytime I have attempted moving Jun to my town list, he has done something else to keep me suspicious. His recent supersized post to MoI is the most recent example of such an event.

[SlySly]

implosion, are you still on the nopoint wagon just to see where it goes?

[SlySly]

Not a fan of the sonnet style posting...

This very well could be, just my opinion
But text without prose, might not be an option

I doubt that this flavor very much matters
More important this day is that scum blood gets splattered

--------

Why Stringer over Junpei?

[SlySly]

I claim day vigilante

...I figured I should claim now so we can figure out effectively two lynches in the next 3-6 days.

The lurker bushes are always a good place to find scum.

i.e.
EtherealCookie
springlullaby
warriormode
whispersilk
Sinestro
FourseenCircumstance
Bunnylover

[SlySly]

If nobody is going to give me a good reason otherwise, I'm still killing nopoint. I'll give people ~6 hours or so from this post.

I think the discussion arising from your claim has just about ran its course. Assuming you have made your final decision, I'm not sure waiting longer is going to bring additional benefit to the town. I'm not against a nopoint hit, but I still think you should hit one of the lurkers I pointed out before, preferably one of the ones that surfaced after your claim as that confirms they were actively lurking. The unsurfaced could be scum smart enough not to surface or they could just be absent and headed for replacement. A 6 hour wait is fine, but I think it's time to see your shot and a flip so we can focus on a proper lynch discussion without vig distraction.

-----------

DGB I have meta on your slot, sorry. I know you're scum.

I HAVE META ON CRYPTO

You've brought this up twice and asked for the vig to target DGB, yet it's never been worthy of your vote. What gives?

--------------

@DrunkenPiper: The last game had a scumteam of six.

The OP of x01 shows a count of five for the scumteam. Is it wrong?

[SlySly]

The OP of x01 shows a count of five for the scumteam. Is it wrong?

You are forgetting DGB there who was Serial Killer, which is scum.

I agree that SK is not town, but I don't agree that the SK is part of the scumteam.

[SlySly]

It's an irrelevant semantic distinction. There were 6 total scum in the last game. Scum is a generic term covering Mafia and Serial Killer factions.

That will be hard to determine now that you've answered a question aimed at RC. He said scumteam, that is not a generic term that includes an SK. I wanted to determine if he made a mistake or was purposely being misleading.

[SlySly]

Do you think there would be any potential gain for him as scum to be 'deceptive' about the number of Mafia members in a game he played as a member of the Mafia and is easily publicly accessable? What possibly could that gain be?

First question, I can easily see scum saying something untrue hoping for a lazy town that won't go dig up the truth.

Question 2, I don't know. That's why I brought it up.

When I spot what could be a lie, I inquire. The response helps me determine if it is a lie. If a lie is determined, then I move into motive. Lying is not pro-town.

[SlySly]

4 posts.
101 words.
0% pro-town contribution.
Admitted lurker.
Convenient V\LA to extend just past the deadline.

VOTE: whispersilk is who we should lynch.

[SlySly]

Sly, I doubt you are going to get much support with a wagon on someone who is V/LA.

I know the mindset around here. The problem is, the scum do too. Convenient V/LA's are convenient, warriormode is in the midst of one now, too. That's why I preferred you target a lurker. Spilled milk now.

I have no plans to hold my vote on whisper if it will result in a NL. I'm reading through the latest post explosion to determine which candidate I most support for today's lynch.

[SlySly]

First off slysly remarking on another lurker classic.

Get with me in 4 years and we can discuss how many lurker scum you have ran across during that stretch.

-------------

vote furclow

I think that RC might be more scummy (I need to look at more people to be honest) but Furclow claimed for NO REASON other than to make his claim not look bad later on.

Paraphrase: "I'll pick the wagon over the scumminess."

--------------

I find it ironic that we've got maybe technically four days left to deadline, and MoIs jumped on a short wagon (mine) after posting how obviously scummy Stringer is the entire day.

Yes, ignore the developments in thread (such as Stringer’s claim that we absolutely should not lynch / kill based on the role) and try to say that I’m abandoning my read to just attack you out of the blue. Ignore I’ve been questioning you and calling your behavior suspect since you replaced it.

This is a misrep on Ghostlin's part.

Even after stating, "Stinger's claim means he absolutely shouldn't be shot or lynched, unfortunately" MoI later votes Stringer, though later in the same post he moves his vote back to Ghostlin.

------------------

Not even considering Furclow's extremely scummy multi-post to move the game to the next page...

Furclow has twice claimed he has meta on DGB's slot.
He asked the vig to kill DGB.
DGB wants Furclow dead.

I would like this supposed DGBslot meta brought out for discussion before the night falls and Furclow gets NK'd by a DGBscum team.

[SlySly]

Even after stating, "Stinger's claim means he absolutely shouldn't be shot or lynched, unfortunately" MoI later votes Stringer, though later in the same post he moves his vote back to Ghostlin.

This should have read...

Even after stating, "Stinger's claim means he absolutely shouldn't be shot or lynched, unfortunately" MoI later votes Stringer, though later in the same post he moves his vote to Ghostlin.

----------

There is an MoI sheepfest in progress!

There is still a little time for discussion today. Lack of reasoning is not pro-town and is very mislynch friendly.

[SlySly]

Yeah but this wagon has a good chance of hitting scum.

Why do you think there's a good chance Ghostlin's scum?

[SlySly]

DGB, votes are louder than words.

UNVOTE: whispersilk

Peregrine too.

-------------

@Furclow

- you've twice ignored my request for you to elaborate on the topic the following is addressing.

Furclow has twice claimed he has meta on DGB's slot.
He asked the vig to kill DGB.
DGB wants Furclow dead.

I would like this supposed DGBslot meta brought out for discussion before the night falls and Furclow gets NK'd by a DGBscum team.

VOTE: Furclow in anticipation of a third ignore.

------

@MOD

Can we get a vote count? thx!

[SlySly]

I switched from Furclow to Ghostlin becasue the case presented by MoI had the

best content

in it of any case so far.

Elaborate, if you will, on the "best content" that moved you to switch your vote to Ghostlin. In your own words, please briefly summarize on the parts of that content that make you think Ghostlin is scum.

[SlySly]

I switched from Furclow to Ghostlin becasue the case presented by MoI had the

best content

in it of any case so far.

Elaborate, if you will, on the "best content" that moved you to switch your vote to Ghostlin. In your own words, please briefly summarize on the parts of that content that make you think Ghostlin is scum.

The point in Ghostlin claiming that he didn't have a power, which would mean that he is claiming that he is VT without straight out coming and saying he was VT seemed like he was trying to make it look like it wasn't going to be one of those "oh he is VT so that is a safe lynch vote" why would You disguise it with the fancy wording of you didn't come into the game with a power instead of saying you are a VT? It could be possible that he has other conditions that grants him powers as he progressees like a survivor like trait this is where I am drawing my suspicion.

Thanks for clearing that up.

[SlySly]

Ghostlin's wagon has a much stronger case

Could you please briefly summarize this case?

[SlySly]

Sly, got a question for you, and I may be dead before you can answer, but I'd like you to answer for the record: You are checking to make sure the people who are saying MoI's case against me is great actually understand what MoI's case is, right?

Yes, comprehension of stated case is pro-town. I think the current support of your wagon is basically, "MoI wrote a big wall, since deadline is near, sounds good to me, vote: Ghostlin".

[SlySly]

"Cognitive Dissonance" and "scum because he had a lot of scum reads" are two of the low hanging fruit that have been successfully over-harvested and exploited in this game. There hasn't been even one good example given of the first and the second is just absurd. 25 people in this game. How many scum do you "scum because he had a lot of scum reads" people think are in this game? 1?

Practically the entire Ghostlin wagon is popularity jump.

I have ISO'd over Ghostlin and Workdawg. The one thing I found scummy, MoI quickly pointed out was a misunderstanding on my part. MoI's case on Ghostlin is not convincing at all. Anyone other than MoI that cares to differ, please provide quotes of the compelling evidence against Ghostlin that makes Ghostlin likely scum.

You guys have bought MoI's snake oil and are headed straight for a mislynch.

[SlySly]

That all depends on how others play. I don't want my vote on Furc but he has 3x ignored my request for him to elaborate on a topic he introduced.

[SlySly]

SlySly, Crypto actually did something that makes me less sure of my original read in a specific vote he placed.
Why are you even beating that drum?

You made it sound as though you possessed valuable info for the town. This statement confirms that you don't.

--------

You looked town for a second when you pulled your vote off of Ghostlin and declared after isoing Ghostlin/Workdawg it is your belief that the slot is not scum.

Scummy survivalist mode took over in your very next post by placing your vote back on Ghostlin.

---------

Tell me something Furc, being down a townie already due to the vig shot, in your opinion, what's more harmful to the town right now: a NL, or a mislynch?

[SlySly]

I did not pass an ability.

---------

Pmatt, do you realize that I didn't dayvig whisper? Whisper was not the only uber lurker I was in support of lynching yesterday.

---------

I passed my "anti-town" ability to DGB last night, but she did not die with it apparently.

Convenient cover story claiming to have passed your anti-town ability to your NK.

VOTE: Toogeloo

[SlySly]

Honestly, I don't think you're scum mostly because everything last night wants me to believe you're scum, along with SB's ability going to the Void and DGB's flip.

Elaborate on why Stringer’s ability going to the Void somehow incriminates me.

I believe SB's ability went to the Inactivity Zone, not the Void.

The abilities currently in the Inactivity Zone are the ones that have been publicly announced upon a player's death. The abilities currently in the Void are not public knowledge.

Stringer Bell

was in possession of the

Minimize (Hider)

ability.

[SlySly]

Great. Who is scum SlySly? I seem to recall you were anti-Ghostlin scum and Pro-Furc scum yesterday. What are your current opinions?

Actually, it was more like I felt that Ghostlin was being run up without reason which made me feel like it was a scum driven mislynch. Of the 2 wagons, Furc was far more questionable with his pressureless claim and his repeated ignoring of questions directed at him.

Obviously, I'm not a fan of Toog.

With the constant exchange, I also get the feeling that either you or Ghostlin is scum. It could just be the butting of heads between two town VS's (opposite of VI, village smarties) but I'm not at a point where I'm positive that is the case.

[SlySly]

The position of a given player with respect to a wagon alone is close to meaningless.

I'm not sure I agree with this and I realize you didn't completely dismiss wagon position. I think scum are going to be quicker to jump on a mislynch after it builds steam than a townie. For example, review the Ghostlin wagon from yesterday. If Ghostlin ultimately flips town, I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that there was scum amongst all those reasonless votes that piled on when it was approaching the deadline. If Ghostlin ultimately flips scum, I'm gonna go out on another limb and say that if there was scum on the wagon trying to gain townie points, they were among the first to jump off the wagon as the lynch began looking more like a reality.

-------------

I mean, i really doubt that every stringerbuddy was in the position with respect to the stringer wagon that you elaborated on, for example.

MoI likes to stay, or appear to stay, busy throwing things out and seeing what sticks. He made his lists and compared his lists. He didn't review the actual timing of events when summarizing his analysis, he was either gut shotting or scummily creating a heading and throwing some names under it. For instance, in the following post, MoI has included me in a list where I do not match the heading. I never voted SB and my vote on Junpei was early in the game and my suspicions of Junpei were day long, not a "tight time" reactionary push, like he has implied by including me in this list. I haven't looked back to see if the others in MoI's list fit the heading.

Players who either abandoned Stringer or pushed NoPoint / Junpei when things were tight (and thus are Temiati suspects)

– RedCoyote, SlySly, Spring, diddin, Ghostlin, MagisterLudi, Toog, Implosion

---------

The point of talking about 7 for 7 is that you're trying to derive authority from having been right about a read on stringer. Having been right about stringer does not give you more authority than anyone else to declare who stringer's scumbuddies are.

Possibilities:
1. MoI threw a gut shot out and it stuck, but is glad to take the praise for his luck
2. He was 'over the top' bussing SB
3. MoI is a master scum hunter, just ask him

MoI is a good player and should be listened to. All townies should turn on their scumdars and weigh each player on the same scale, even the good ones because they can be scum too. Blind sheeping of good players is a practice that will result in you being driven to a loss by scum if your kind is the majority of the town.

[SlySly]

There is no smear as far as I can see

His implication was that I did a specific thing at a specific time in a specific way and it just isn't true.

[SlySly]

MoI likes to stay, or appear to stay, busy throwing things out and seeing what sticks. He made his lists and compared his lists. He didn't review the actual timing of events when summarizing his analysis, he was either gut shotting or scummily creating a heading and throwing some names under it. For instance, in the following post, MoI has included me in a list where I do not match the heading. I never voted SB and my vote on Junpei was early in the game and my suspicions of Junpei were day long, not a "tight time" reactionary push, like he has implied by including me in this list. I haven't looked back to see if the others in MoI's list fit the heading.

You actually do match the heading very well. You never voted for SB and sat your vote on Junpei (who I have a solid Town read on). You were one of the constants on the opposing wagons to Stringer when the pressure was on him. That’s certainly pushing Junpei when things were tight, regardless of when your suspicion on him first germinated.

Do you disagree?

I do disagree that I fit your heading. I didn't start pushing a Junpei lynch when things got tight, and that is not what your list infers. My support for a Junpei lynch yesterday is very similar to my support for a Toogeloo lynch today. I stated my reason, voted, and nothing came up to make me change my stance, just like today with Toogeloo.

[SlySly]

A guilty beats out a read. Sinestro scum flip has me looking at ML.

UNVOTE: Toogeloo

VOTE: Sinestro

[SlySly]

We are 3rd party. We win with town once we establish a wincon, im surprised that we killed the hider, but it is entirely possible i suppose. We will use our ability in the towns favour as

all we really want to do is survive

. Eventually we will ACTUALLY be on your side, just not yet:p

From the signup thread...

Game Information:

• 25 Players.
  
• This is a
  Closed
  Setup.
  
• Continued use of the "Cyclic" Mechanic featured in Cyclic Experimentation Set x01. Each Phase you may use your abilities and then you must pass them on to other players of your choosing. So make sure you are confident in your town reads!
  
• No
  Cult / Jesters /
  Survivors
  / Alignment Alterations.

Die scum.

[SlySly]

We are 3rd party. We win with town once we establish a wincon, im surprised that we killed the hider, but it is entirely possible i suppose. We will use our ability in the towns favour as all we really want to do is survive. Eventually

we will

ACTUALLY

be on your side, just not yet

:p

From the signup thread...

Game Information:

• 25 Players.
  
• This is a
  Closed
  Setup.
  
• Continued use of the "Cyclic" Mechanic featured in Cyclic Experimentation Set x01. Each Phase you may use your abilities and then you must pass them on to other players of your choosing. So make sure you are confident in your town reads!
  
• No
  Cult / Jesters / Survivors /
  Alignment Alterations
  .

Die scum.

[SlySly]

Toogeloo’s Post 1462 actually makes me think he has inside information. No reason before Sinestro’s claim (which until his flip should be taken with a grain of salt anyway in case he’s Mafia looking to ride a leashed SK claim for a few days) to think that Warrior’s claim meant that Sinestro must be 3rd party. Could easily be two scum teams (and Sinestro’s claim doesn’t eliminate this possibility). If we only have one Mafia faction this is a slip and Toog needs rope.

Agreed.

SB flipped Temiati not Daevori. I find it very unlikely that Sinestro is going to flip The Asxtori. If he doesn't, we know he's not 3rd party and Toog and ML will both need rope.

[SlySly]

Wait, what? Why would I need to be lynched at all under any circumstances regarding what happened here?

Your initial reluctance to support the lynch of a guilty lead me to iso you looking for a connection to Sinestro. You completely avoided discussing him all game other than giving him a reasonless town pass in your summary post.

However, Peregrine has stepped up and passed you on my suspect list. Anyone supporting a leashing of Sinestro is scummy to me. After a mislynch, 2 misvig's and 2 NK's, it is a no brainer to lynch an outted non-Eruci Sinestro. I don't see the town benefit in chancing another mislynch and leaving Sinestro alive to possibly kill more townies. I also don't believe Sinestro is 3rd party, it's already confirmed he is a liar and more than willing to gambit.

Stringer flipped Termiati. Therefore, scum team is Termiati. Why would I think any differently? And where is Daevori ever mentioned anywhere?

Why would the flavor of the scum team change from game 1 (Daevori) and the flavor of the 3rd party remain the same (The Asxtori)? It makes no sense to me. If the setup is the same as game one, which I highly doubt, SB would have flipped Daevori. I get the sense that Sinestro has borrowed 3rd party flavor from game one attempting to prolong his life and to keep his scum buddies hidden and unsuspected for as long as possible. When Sinestro flips as not The Asxtori, it will be obvious he isn't 3rd party and it will be curtains for you Toog.

[SlySly]

I do disagree that I fit your heading. I didn't start pushing a Junpei lynch when things got tight, and that is not what your list infers. My support for a Junpei lynch yesterday is very similar to my support for a Toogeloo lynch today. I stated my reason, voted, and nothing came up to make me change my stance, just like today with Toogeloo.

This is semantic quibbling. You are trying to shift the focus away from the facts by arguing about minor and inconsequential issues.

You say that you started pushing the Junpei wagon before Stringer was under fire. That doesn’t matter in the scheme of why I find your positioning suspicious. You continued to vote (and ostensibly support) the Junpei wagon all during the time when Stringer was a counterwagon and under fire. That’s behavior I expect from a possible partner.

It's only semantics because you seem to be changing the context of the root issue...

Players who either abandoned Stringer or pushed NoPoint / Junpei when things were tight

Obviously, I never abandoned the SB wagon so you can cross me off this list for that.

I did support the Junpei wagon with my vote, but I think you are really stretching to say I actively pushed it, especially when things were "tight". You've worded your list heading in vague enough terms, "pushed" and "tight", to leave the door open for arguing semantics on terms that are not strictly measurable because the reader and writer could definitely be working with varying definitions of the chosen terms. Using the way I define "pushed" - an obvious, visible and confident (usually repeated/reinforced) action, and "tight" - when NP/Junpei were actually nearing the required votes for a lynch, I don't belong on your list. When you change the context of those terms is when it becomes semantics and you are no longer arguing the root issue.

Now, if you have quotes of me during times you define as "tight" for NP/Junpei where I was making obvious visible actions, maybe evening reinforcing my stances, to get NP/Junpei lynched, by all means, feel free to quote me. If not, you could just as easily say, "Well, you may not fit there, but you fit under this _________ heading then." Either would cut through any semantics debating.

-----------

FTR, Junpei is still not on my cleared list but there now are far bigger fish that have come forward to be fried than their was during the time of my exclusive suspicion on Junpei.

[SlySly]

Seeing it laid out – do you suggest you aren’t reinforcing your opinion / stance that Junpei was scum who needed to be lynched over Stringer during that period?

It is an extreme reach to fit me under the heading in question. You have completely dumped the context of what I was saying in much of your list. For instance, in your last point, I was asking DP to convince me that SB was a better lynch than Junpei.

[SlySly]

EBWOP: DP = RC

[SlySly]

How were those posts not in context when you were directly interacting with Junpei and saying he was scum for multiple reasons?

Again - are you explictly saying those posts don't show you directly indicating our vote on Junpei was valid and supporting it?

I will get into the first part after work, I don't have time to address them individually atm.

The second part, I'm saying those posts, IMO, don't show a push as the heading suggests.

[SlySly]

Post 478 - Asking Drunken Piper if his opinions on Junpei or MagisterLudi.
Post 513 - Suggesting that Junpei and ML are trying to ‘link’ me to them via some slip, suggestion you would wagon MagisterLudi
Post 534 - Explaining how Junpei slipped regarding Junpei being Mafia with a QT.
Post 536, Post 537 – Fluff responses.
Post 539 – Suggesting Junpei would be scum with Implosion for the slip.
Post 541 - Suggestion you should ISO Implosion related to the slip you claim on Junpei.
Post 543 – Reference to Daytalk from Cyclical X01
Post 623 – Response to DrunkenPiper that you don’t see Junpei as Town and he continues to make moves that you see as scummy.
Post 630 – Question to implosion about his NoPoint vote.
Post 632 – Fluffy response to RedCoyote on Drunken’s posting style, ask the following question “Why Stringer over Junpei?”

478 - I had a solid town read on DP. I asked if he had an opinion on ML and Junpei. Not a push for a Junpei lynch.
513 - This is a ML post. However, I know which post you are referring to and suggesting I would support an ML lynch is not a push for a Junpei lynch.
534 - In this post, I am not pushing a Junpei lynch, I am explaining my stance from post 17 to a seemingly braindead ML.
536 & 537 - If you read the context of these two posts, I am backing off of Junpei and leaning more towards a lying ML. Not fluff and not a push for a Junpei lynch.
539 - This is a discussion post between Junpei and I clarifying a poorly worded post of his that lead to confusion. This is not a push for a Junpei lynch.
541 - Continued discussion with Junpei. How would me iso'ing Implosion be a push for a Junpei lynch? Obviously it wouldn't.
543 - Implosion suggested there was no daytalk for scum in game 1. I reminded him there was. Not a push for a Junpei lynch.
623 - DP answered my 478, this post is my response to his response. I stated what I thought about Junpei, which was, paraphrased, "i've been trying to move junpei to my town list but every time I try, he does something to keep himself off of it." This is the truth and is hardly a push for his lynch.
630 - I asked implosion if his vote was still on nopoint for his initial reasoning. Nothing in this post is even related to Junpei so once again, not a push for a Junpei lynch.

I've already addressed 632.

Seeing it all laid out here just reaffirms, I do NOT belong under the heading where you placed me.

[SlySly]

Oh, so what you are saying is that you really were backing more and more away from your position that Junpei was scum while letting your vote sit there while the Stringer / Junpei / NoPoint competing wagons were well underway. Noted.

That's not quite what I am saying, entertaining twist though. Thx!

The thought that Junpei may not be a liar lasted for the duration of the 2 sequential posts of mine that you called fluff. In the post immediately following, Junpei reaffirms he is a liar. My pedit in the next post confirms I have retained my original position that Junpei is a liar. As I've already stated, I still haven't put Junpei in my town list.

I was in favor of a Junpei lynch during the time of SB and NP lynching/vigging wagons. By the time it became obvious to me that the Junpei lynch was a worthless D1 cause, NP was dead and the reasonless (with the exception of you) Ghostlin wagon was well underway.

[SlySly]

Lurkerscum probability gauge of the living - highest to lowest

Post Count : Player
16: bunnylover
18: etheralcookie
21: warriormode
27: springlullaby
33: sinestro
36: diddin/chkflip 8/28
36: fourseencircumstance
37: projectmatt
49: red coyote
51: wazzatron/IAI 24/27 *
53: implosion/pops 46/7
53: peregrinev
64: slysly
66: kdub
79: toogeloo
115: magister ludi
120: workdawg/ghostlin 9/111
158: magnaofillusion
197: junpei

* IAI has more than doubled slot post count since recent replacement, wazzatron just recently would have been far higher on this list if not for IAI's contributions

[SlySly]

So SlySly - why shouldn't that last post be considered IIoA? You give us a list of freely available information and do absolutely no analysis or suggesting who is mostly likely lurkerscum in your opinion.

I made a list for my own observing and I chose to share it. I'm not going to debate it being labelled IIoA. This is a compilation that provides the town with information worth considering.

The gauge makes its own suggestions.

Sinestro is today's lynch and his position on this list is not surprising, towards the top. Anyone above RC's 49 qualifies as potential lurkerscum to me.