i designed this setup in 2019 [game over]

[Gamma Emerald]

VOTE: Ranger

[Frogsterking]

If Titus and Imaginality are really masons then I want to look at players who disappeared and had their votes parked on a vanity wagon during the time period frog and imaginality were the leading wagons. The player who stands out to me the most for doing this is George? Maybe lycan?

If I take Titus claim at face value then I think the Ranger wagon is unwise because it seems like we can now deduce this is a game where Town organized itself into two competing town cores who have been trying to kill each other.

[Ranger]

I think it's pretty clear I'm claiming mason. To argue I am not is asinine and desperate.

That answers half; you are claiming mason explicitly.

I don't believe you're really a mason.

I believe you have a role tied to imaginality, and that role is a role that you feel is at least akin to a mason.

But I don't believe you're a

mason

mason. I don't believe your actual

role

is mason. I don't believe imaginality is confirmed town to you, and vice-versa.

If you say that's unreasonable, my counterargument is explicitly my familiarity with you, Titus. I know how you think and how you treat roles that aren't masons, as if they were masons. I believe you have a role like that. There are dozens of roles which could fit, which in your mind you would call masons, in spite of them not actually being masons. (For instance, a somewhat common example is a two-person role, with two players required for the power role.)

Any role which you have that would have you call imaginality a mason while he is not

literally

confirmed town to you, is a role I would believe you would have. You claiming mason while holding a role like that wouldn't be a fakeclaim in your eyes, and you'd have no fear of locking it in because it's not a lie.

You're certainly no mason though. And don't pretend you are; don't pretend I'm wrong. I'm right, you

know

I'm right, and I'm not letting you protect a scum player off of a role you earnestly believe makes them town which doesn't

actually

make them town.

[Titus]

I'm a mason. Period. I was mod told imaginality is town.

[Titus]

I also have a PT with them. We are masons.

[Ranger]

{Save The Dragons, HighPrincessErinys, Cat Scratch Fever, Frogsterking}
{Titus}
{Morning Tweet, Lycanfire}
{KittyTacky, tris, Elements}
{GeorgeBailey, Enchant, McMenno}
{kitten around}
{Vaxkiller, tapiocaphobe, Not_Mafia}
{Ythan}
{furtiveglance}
{Gamma Emerald, Quiet Owl}
{imaginality}

(Yes, Titus and imaginality on near-opposite sides. Titus wouldn't pull this maneuver with a scumbuddy, and I believe she's

almost

always town from it. So, Titus is nearly certainly town for the claim. imaginality is not because no matter what Titus

says

, she and imaginality are not

actually

masons and I feel imaginality is scum exploiting Titus's earnest belief their roles make him town.)

[Ranger]

I'm a mason. Period. I was mod told imaginality is town.

And I don't believe xyzzy put masons in this game. Period.

[Titus]

There is no exploiting. Imaginality is town. 0% chance. Not 99% nothing.

[Ranger]

I also have a PT with them. We are masons.

If so, is the PT open now?

When did it open?

What has been said from there?

(Yes these have purpose.)

[Titus]

I also have a PT with them. We are masons.

If so, is the PT open now?

When did it open?

What has been said from there?

(Yes these have purpose.)

Open at start.

I'm not telling you.

[Ranger]

Imaginality is town.

Yes, I get you believe that.

But you're not a mason, so it's not

actually

true.

I'm not letting a fakeclaim save scum from being eliminated.

I know what you

want

to do with the mason claim. It'd work if imaginality were town. But he

isn't

, so it won't.

[Ranger]

Open at start.

Yeah that's a lie. I have a topic and it did not open "at start".

[Gamma Emerald]

WHY is imaginality not town?

[Titus]

Open at start.

Yeah that's a lie. I have a topic and it did not open "at start".

My first post was Wednesday December 21st

[Titus]

About an hour after gamestart

[Ranger]

In my head, gamma-imagination-titus-quiet owl is a logical team solve.

[Ranger]

In my head, gamma-imagination-titus-quiet owl is a logical team solve.

Ignore this, accidentally hit submit, is part of a larger post.

[Ranger]

WHY is imaginality not town?

Well for a start:

My vote wasn't a response to the "town core" voting me

Talk about why you scum read imaginify then.

Vibes and tone

This, exactly. Vibes and tone. For more specifics,

The votes on me are lazy and/or scummy (likely a mix).

Some might be lazy but most aren't scummy, and their push isn't bad.

Your next paragraph is entirely disingenuous imo.

To quote the disingenuous paragraph:

I can understand why, "imaginality mixed up two players and is a bit noncommital so far" is nice easy justification for a vote so it's tempting for scum who don't have to lie to join the wagon. Helps that I'm low activity so not likely to push back as noisily as some players would. It's a wagon scum can hope might lead to a mislim that looks understandable and if it doesn't they don't look bad for being on it and pressuring me to play more.

I vibed with this:

VOTE: imaginality

Why?

He's scumreading you, but confused your post with someone else's. Absent any other stated reason for scumreading you, i think this carelessness is scummy. His HPE read was also a bit of a hedge.

The votes on me are lazy and/or scummy (likely a mix).

I can understand why, "imaginality mixed up two players and is a bit noncommital so far" is nice easy justification for a vote so it's tempting for scum who don't have to lie to join the wagon.

Helps that I'm low activity so not likely to push back as noisily as some players would. It's a wagon scum can hope might lead to a mislim that looks understandable and if it doesn't they don't look bad for being on it and pressuring me to play more.

I did this. It looks like you wanted to encourage a 1v1 between Frogs & Gamma and found the flimsiest reasons to do so - not even closely reading your scumread's posts & trying to piggyback off of my "scumread" on them when in fact I had the opposite read.

I agreed with this.

imaginality just feels rough and ingenuine

Oh so this game started... just had a skim so far...

feels scummy

Frogsterking seems to almost be trying to 1v1 vs Gamma. Seems risky if scum? Doesn't mean he's correct though. I want to know more about these meta reasons for scum reading Gamma.

feels like an observation scum would make instead of a genuine town observation
the second post isn't much better
my one fear is im picking up on tonal stuff that might just be playstyle and i'm not 100% convinced but for now i like my read and i'd love to see more pressure there.

I agree. I was thinking that scum!imaginality knows I'm right about scum!gamma so he plays the "I actually think Gamma could be scum here" card, followed by the "gee I'm not sure card" and the "oh yeah remember how csf said they could BOTH be scum" card etc.
Makes me think imaginality's scum flip will spew csf as town, or, if multiball, unaligned with Gamma and imaginality.

I agreed with this.

In my head, gamma-imagination-titus-quiet owl is a logical team solve.

I independently came to this same basic solve for similar reasons and agree with it; Gamma-imaginality-titus-quiet owl has a lot of protecting each other in ways unnatural.

The votes on me are lazy and/or scummy (likely a mix).

like how fucking easy is it for scum to come up with this bullshit

I thought the narrative "frog is scum who gave up on pushing Gamma and switched to me" was pretty level -1. It's pretty clear they switched to me because I'm the competing wagon. Had I not switched off of Gamma earlier then you can just as easily write "frog is scum who is pretending to death tunnel Gamma" as an excuse to bandwagon me. Without context why they think my read is disingenuous then it's just a lazy, clichè take followed by a naked vote. I'm glad it's a scum slot pushing this narrative rather than a town one.

I agreed with this, and imaginality's post was indeed scummy.

1) I dont like how they're drawing attention to the 1v1. I've mentioned the concept of "acceptable wagons" in past games. It's been a great scumtell for me when someone tries to magnify two people because it provides great protection to scum.
2) i still like frogster despite my concern about them. I don't like the wagon on them and don't think it's good for the game.

I vibed with this.

imaginality just feels rough and ingenuine

Oh so this game started... just had a skim so far...

feels scummy

Frogsterking seems to almost be trying to 1v1 vs Gamma. Seems risky if scum? Doesn't mean he's correct though. I want to know more about these meta reasons for scum reading Gamma.

feels like an observation scum would make instead of a genuine town observation
the second post isn't much better
my one fear is im picking up on tonal stuff that might just be playstyle and i'm not 100% convinced but for now i like my read and i'd love to see more pressure there.

I agreed with this.

The votes on me are lazy and/or scummy (likely a mix). I can understand why, "imaginality mixed up two players and is a bit noncommital so far" is nice easy justification for a vote so it's tempting for scum who don't have to lie to join the wagon. Helps that I'm low activity so not likely to push back as noisily as some players would. It's a wagon scum can hope might lead to a mislim that looks understandable and if it doesn't they don't look bad for being on it and pressuring me to play more.
For this reason I definitely think there are scum voting me.

i feel like most of the votes have nothing to do with this

This is accurate and is why imaginality was being disingenuous in that post.

The votes on me are lazy and/or scummy (likely a mix).

like how fucking easy is it for scum to come up with this bullshit

I agreed with this.

whereas imaginality is responding to arguments against them lazily

I agree with this, and the underlying implication of imaginality's hypocrisy.

Define lazily. I'm going to push you because you're straight up wrong. I'm going to figure out your issue StD and set you correctly.

how fucking easy is it to come and try to discredit the votes against you by calling them scummy
but like imaginality didn't even commit to who was scummy and who was just wrong
LAZY

I agree with this.

tris what do you think of imaginality's entrance

pretty weak tbh

These are my feelings on imaginality's entrance posts into the game.

I've laid out my reasons for being suspicious of imaginality.
Now answer me this: give a single reason beyond the claim for imaginality to be town.

[Frogsterking]

George

Spoiler:

VOTE: imaginality

{Save The Dragons}

How did you get this from StD's posts?

Gamma

Spoiler:

@furtive

what do you make of the current gamestate?

Quite chaotic. This is the largest game I've played in (from the start) and I think the usually underrated art of sheeping will be very important, otherwise Mafia could really run riot.

With this in mind,

VOTE: imaginality

What makes you choose to sheep Fenrir specifically?

Elements

Spoiler:

I think it's quite possible imaginify isn't that invested in the game atm and that's why their posts read the way they do

Potential TMI tells on imaginality

[Gamma Emerald]

I don’t really have good reasons to call imaginify town but I don’t think the reasons for the votes on him are that good either. Lazy/weak play is rather unimpressive as a reason since it feels like they just got off to a bad start that got capitalized on.
Aside from that a main focus is pushing a 1v1 of me vs. Frogsterking. I don’t really have an issue here except with you buying into that while having me all the way down in your reads. I don’t think you should be calling that a problem except if you think either a) me and Frog are both town or b) I would feel bold enough to go toe-to-toe with Frog as scum here and feel like I could come out relatively unscathed. Clearly you don’t believe a), so what about my play so far suggests b) to be true?
Lastly, the “disingenuous paragraph” may overgeneralize the votes but it captures a lot of what I feel like is wrong with the imaginify wagon. And I think the writing feels towny given how imprecise it is: scum would try to ensure clarity in that paragraph imo.

I guess the one thing that does stick out to me is the use of “noncommittal” as a thing people are calling their okay when that was used to refer to furtive iirc

[Quiet Owl]

I don’t really have good reasons to call imaginify town but I don’t think the reasons for the votes on him are that good either. Lazy/weak play is rather unimpressive as a reason since it feels like they just got off to a bad start that got capitalized on.
Aside from that a main focus is pushing a 1v1 of me vs. Frogsterking. I don’t really have an issue here except with you buying into that while having me all the way down in your reads. I don’t think you should be calling that a problem except if you think either a) me and Frog are both town or b) I would feel bold enough to go toe-to-toe with Frog as scum here and feel like I could come out relatively unscathed. Clearly you don’t believe a), so what about my play so far suggests b) to be true?
Lastly, the “disingenuous paragraph” may overgeneralize the votes but it captures a lot of what I feel like is wrong with the imaginify wagon. And I think the writing feels towny given how imprecise it is: scum would try to ensure clarity in that paragraph imo.

I guess the one thing that does stick out to me is the use of “noncommittal” as a thing people are calling their okay when that was used to refer to furtive iirc

THIS ^^^

we don't have a deadline. why are we rushing to eliminate someone when the case on them is this flimsy?

[Quiet Owl]

y'know what i think the imaginality wagon is downright suspicious.
VOTE: Ranger but also a reminder to future owl: remember cat scratch and lycanfire.

did a votecount: don't take it at face value, i've messed these up in the past.

5 players voting for imaginality (furtiveglance, Ranger, Lycanfire, tris, Elements, HighPrincessErinys)
4 players voting for Frogsterking (McMenno, Ythan, KittyTacky, imaginality)
3 players voting for Ranger (Titus, Gamma Emerald, Quiet Owl)
2 players voting for Elements (Save The Dragons, Cat Scratch Fever)
1 player voting for Not_Mafia (Not_Mafia)

6 players not voting (Vaxkiller, tapiocaphobe, kitten around, Enchant, Morning Tweet, Frogsterking)

with 23 votes, it takes 12 to eliminate.

[Frogsterking]

Lots of TMI from Gamma regarding imaginality:

Spoiler:

Define lazily. I'm going to push you because you're straight up wrong. I'm going to figure out your issue StD and set you correctly.

tf are you saying here

I'm saying StD is 100% wrong and trying. So I'm going to show him he's wrong and get him pointed in the right direction, even if I am not 100% sure where it is myself.

Why do you townread imaginality so hard? I feel like he’s suspicious but I don’t vibe with how the wagon on him formed.

I’m not gonna feel good about a wagon where people I suspect are frontloaded on it

I’m not gonna feel good about a wagon where people I suspect are frontloaded on it

Do you think imaginify is town?

At this point, yes. My initial reasoning to suspect them wasn’t ironclad, and the wagon on them happening so fast and in the way it did spooks me.

What I'm more curious about is whether or not Elements and Gamma are aligned after all:

Spoiler:

VOTE: titus
greetings

btw I like andree already, it seems town

VOTE: imaginify

I’d rather you vote me.

516 from me may have been some game losing analysis if not for Titus + imaginality's claim. I now think it's dangerous to assume that Gamma and Elements are unaligned.

__

@Titus

Is there any VCA reason to rule out Gamma-Elements-George are all group scum?

__

VOTE: George

This slots disappearance between 29 and 165 sits out the formation of my wagon as well as imaginality's wagon. I haven't checked what was going down when George disappeared again between 165 and 559, but my theory is that the leading wagons during that period of time were town, and George is scum who fell behind on the game and is too self-conscious to get in character now. During all of this time George had his vote parked on tris.

PEdit:

y'know what i think the imaginality wagon is downright suspicious.
VOTE: Ranger but also a reminder to future owl: remember cat scratch and lycanfire.

Is there a reason that you believe scum were motivated to get involved with the imaginality wagon rather than white knight them or lurk out while town kills itself?

[Titus]

It's too early to include or exclude anyone by VCA. No flips, a theory is fine but it's just that a weak theory. Mine would be just as weak as yours. I have my own speculations, but I'd love to hear the foundations for yours.

You plus ranger feels really solid given ranger's extreme whining/fabrication/ought to know better. I'm not ruling out gamma but his play has me leaning town.

[Frogsterking]

@all

I have three slots that need to be seriously considered as candidates for the D1 lim: Ythan, furtive and George.

VOTE: furtive

I'm switching my vote from George to furtive in order to (hopefully) consolidate with tris, who I want for the town core. I want to rewind things back to this moment:

Spoiler:

btw, i voted for furtiveglance because they said they wanted real time interaction and then disappeared.

---

is no one interested in voting furtive wif me?

@Quiet Owl

if you're looking for a scum who wagoned imaginality, can I suggest you take a serious look at furtiveglance?

4 players voting for Frogsterking (McMenno, Ythan, KittyTacky, imaginality)

Based on what I've been taught about "wagonomics", I should be anticipating that I have 1 scum who is still vote parked on my wagon. I think these four players can be narrowed down to just McMenno and Ythan. Comparing their isos, I think Ythan's iso is significantly worse than McMenno's.

Redirecting attention onto furtive and Ythan reveals the intriguing possibility that the spoiler quotes are scum theater:

Spoiler:

Isn't the Hunger Games just Battle Royale?

This viewpoint is ignorant of Suzanne Collins' masterful writing

That looks like a lot of words to justify a non committal vote.

It's one sentence to explain a committed vote

It's the entirety of your post. Is your response to split that hair?

My post was quite short, to explain moving my vote.

You then took issue with it.

And now we're talking about nothing.

What is your read on imaginality?

I'm not talking about nothing I'm talking about you overjustifying a non committal vote.

Imaginality is fine so far besides mixing up Gamma and I which in isolation whatever. Want to see more.

Non-comittal? My vote is as serious as most other votes for where we are in the game.

And yeah I could have just voted but that's not really my style

I'm not talking about nothing I'm talking about you overjustifying a non committal vote.

Imaginality is fine so far besides mixing up Gamma and I which in isolation whatever. Want to see more.

Non-comittal? My vote is as serious as most other votes for where we are in the game.

And yeah I could have just voted but that's not really my style

You put too much effort into telling us it was non committal that's the problem.

Non committal is a phrase you used which I never implied.

I implied it was based more on following a townread's vote than a scumread I have. That doesn't mean it's not committal.

I'm not talking about nothing I'm talking about you overjustifying a non committal vote.

Imaginality is fine so far besides mixing up Gamma and I which in isolation whatever. Want to see more.

Non-comittal? My vote is as serious as most other votes for where we are in the game.

And yeah I could have just voted but that's not really my style

You put too much effort into telling us it was non committal that's the problem.

Non committal is a phrase you used which I never implied.

I implied it was based more on following a townread's vote than a scumread I have. That doesn't mean it's not committal.

Implying it is actually what you did do, what you didn't do is say it explicitly.

I'm going to stop responding to you about this particular debate now.

336 by the way is another TMI tell regarding Imaginality, this time from Ythan. I think the mention of Gamma in 336 is conspicuous.