Mini 873 Plainview Game Over

[archaebob]

do mini-normals usually have un-sane cops?

[archaebob]

This thread needs a healthy sprinkling of Phaerie dust.

This.

[Sanjay]

Bippity boppity boo.

[MordyS]

I believe Peanutman's claim. I think the risk of claiming a PR with one member of a scumteam already dead is too high for average scum to try (too much chance of a counter-claim). I don't think that tells us anything about his sanity (so AlmasterGM could still be scum), but at this point I'm willing to admit I was wrong -- Peanutman probably isn't scum. The good news is that if AlmasterGM *is* scum, he can't kill Peanutman tonight or it'll become clear that he was faking his doctor role. If he isn't scum, we'll still get one more night of investigation and hopefully it'll help clear someone / help establish his type of sanity.

Anyway, taking those two off the table, the two other super possible lynches for today are archaebob + Cruelty. I trust Papa Zito's opinion after the Muffin lynch, which could be a good heuristic for a Cruelty lynch, but the presence of AlmasterGM + foilist13 (scum/mistake makers) dissuades me. I could be down with an archaebob lynch, tho. His recent material has me a little flummoxed, and his protest against the Muffin lynch actually isn't a bad recent to lynch him. He's at least bad at reading players (thus he protested so vigorously) if not scum himself. Also, I'm guessing at least one scum player WASN'T on the lynch. That leaves Gammagooey, Peanutman, Archaebob, and cruelty. I'm not lynching Peanutman today for above stated reasons -- so it's between Gammagooey, Archaebob + cruelty in my eyes. Archaebob has risen the most red flags for me (tho before the day ends I'm gonna read Gammagooey in iso again).

Thus:

Vote: Archaebob

[MordyS]

EBWOP: bad reason* to lynch him

Also, I want to echo whoever said that if you're a doctor/cop, you should counterclaim. Killing a second scum, even at the cost of outing a PR, would put town in an amazing position.

[archaebob]

MordyS, there was something extremely scummy about that last post. And it's not OMGUS.

[Sanjay]

Where?

[Gammagooey]

Unless there's a counterclaim I think peanut is probably telling the truth.

unvote

Peanut did you make any breadcrumbs to support your claim?

[foilist13]

@MordyS - I really am not liking the casual way you voted Archaebob. You didn't specify any reasons, except that he has raised "red flags" and that he protested the Sociopath lynch yesterday. I think that his protest was consistent with his earlier play. I haven't ever seen Archaebob do things casually, and he requires ample reason to do anything. I can see that he didn't see nearly as much reason to lynch Sociopath as me or AGM, so I am not inclined to think he is scum.

I still like the Cruelty lynch, and if we buy what Peanut is saying, I think that his is best by far.

[archaebob]

The good news is that if AlmasterGM *is* scum, he can't kill Peanutman tonight or it'll become clear that he was faking his doctor role. If he isn't scum, we'll still get one more night of investigation and hopefully it'll help clear someone / help establish his type of sanity.

I don't at all understand what you are saying here. Can you please walk me through the logic?

I trust Papa Zito's opinion after the Muffin lynch, which could be a good heuristic for a Cruelty lynch, but the presence of AlmasterGM + foilist13 (scum/mistake makers) dissuades me.

Why do you trust Papa Zito's opinion more than you would normally, and why do the presence of AGM and foilist dissuade you?

I could be down with an archaebob lynch, tho. His recent material has me a little flummoxed, and his protest against the Muffin lynch actually isn't a bad recent to lynch him. He's at least bad at reading players (thus he protested so vigorously) if not scum himself.

How is my protesting against a quick-bandwagon on someone who I didn't think was a smart move for the town to lynch a good reason? I

still

don't think that was a smart move. It was lucky that that wagon hit scum at all, and had Socio flipped town, we wouldn't have gotten any information whatsoever.

You go read the thread, Mordy. My resisting that wagon was utterly consistent with my play, and I have no doubt I'd be under quite a bit more heat had I suddenly just hopped over to the big wagon like everyone else.

Also, I'm guessing at least one scum player WASN'T on the lynch. That leaves Gammagooey, Peanutman, Archaebob, and cruelty.

What are you basing this guess off of?

Archaebob has risen the most red flags for me.

Oh, and why is this exactly?

[archaebob]

EBWOP: Lol, that middle quote is still MordyS, not PZ. I got confused.

[Sanjay]

You go read the thread, Mordy. My resisting that wagon was utterly consistent with my play, and I have no doubt I'd be under quite a bit more heat had I suddenly just hopped over to the big wagon like everyone else.

How come you get to use WIFOM to defend yourself but I don't?

[MordyS]

I don't at all understand what you are saying here. Can you please walk me through the logic?

Happily. If AlmasterGM is scum, and Peanutman dies tonight, then that means he didn't protect him. Why wouldn't the doctor protect the cop? Epso facto, the doc is lying. Therefore the cop can't be killed tonight if AlmasterGM is scum. If AlmasterGM is town, then he protects Peanutman, and likely dies himself (I assume, if he's town, that scum left him alive because there was a lot of scrutiny on him), which means the cop stays alive for at least one more night. Does that make sense?

Why do you trust Papa Zito's opinion more than you would normally, and why do the presence of AGM and foilist dissuade you?

Papa Zito was right about Muffin. Effective scum-hunting goes a long way in my book. AGM + foilist13 are either scum (a reason to distrust them), or have displayed poor playing this game. Both are good reasons to be skeptical of their scum-hunting. I'm using a heuristic to try and figure out who might have a good read on who the scum are -- this was simply me demonstrating it in short-hand.

How is my protesting against a quick-bandwagon on someone who I didn't think was a smart move for the town to lynch a good reason? I still don't think that was a smart move. It was lucky that that wagon hit scum at all, and had Socio flipped town, we wouldn't have gotten any information whatsoever.

You go read the thread, Mordy. My resisting that wagon was utterly consistent with my play, and I have no doubt I'd be under quite a bit more heat had I suddenly just hopped over to the big wagon like everyone else.

I really am not liking the casual way you voted Archaebob. You didn't specify any reasons, except that he has raised "red flags" and that he protested the Sociopath lynch yesterday. I think that his protest was consistent with his earlier play. I haven't ever seen Archaebob do things casually, and he requires ample reason to do anything.

Yes, it was consistent. But he also protested a wagon on scum that lynched scum. It's unfortunate if he turns out to be town that was just trying to do the best thing, but he still protested a scum wagon. SpyreX (our martyred townie) said as much: If Muffin flips scum, it's time to look at archaebob again. I was hesitant to do so before because I thought I had stronger scum reads on Peanutman. In the absence of that read, though, it's time for me to acknowledge that he was absolutely correct. Whether it's internally justifiable or not, you still protested a scum lynch. That's something to take a second look at.

What are you basing this guess off of?

The speed of which the wagon formed plus the predominance of other wagons during the day. If I were scum, I'd hold off the wagon in the hope that I could get one of the other candidates lynched instead. I think it's reasonable to think that if there are two scum (presumably aligned, but I really don't know), even if one got on the wagon in time, it's unlikely that two of them lynched their partner. Especially since two people staying off the wagon and on a different wagon could've theoretically forced a different lynch. It's a probability play, but I think it's cool.

Oh, and why is this exactly?

Read above. Also read my response to your "I'm starting over" post which raised all kinds of red flags for me. Actually, now I'm wondering; What if foilist13 + archaebob are scum partners? Archaebob defended foilist13 on Day One and foilist13 just came to his rescue today. Idle speculation, but would actually totally diminish the town-tell that archaebob gave on Day One.

I still like the Cruelty lynch, and if we buy what Peanut is saying, I think that his is best by far.

Do you not believe it? If not, why not?

MordyS, there was something extremely scummy about that last post. And it's not OMGUS.

I'm all ears, scummy dude.

[MordyS]

Archaebob, can you explain this exchange between you and Muffin?

Comment on what, specifically? The exchange between you and foilist? Please clarify or link/quote/whatever.

I agree that foilist appears to be reading/replying selectively and the fact that he is continuing is raising my eyebrows, to say the least.

I also agree though, that your approach has been less than diplomatic.

@ Muffin - have I been particularly undiplomatic in this game?

I mean, y'all from 846 have a very specific idea of what kind of player I am, though the truth is I've been trying out different metas for all of my games. I don't think I've been notably abrasive in this game so far, except perhaps in direct response to foilist.

No, I don't think you've been particularly abrasive or undiplomatic. Certainly more cooperative than 846, but then again I have a high threshold for that sort of thing.

Why did Muffin change his mind between the first post (you're less than diplomatic) and the third (you haven't been particularly abrasive or undiplomatic)? All that happened in the middle is you asked him if he believed what he just said. Rereading his early conversations with you, it sounds a lot like what you accused Chinaman + Muffin of doing: Having minor inconsequential tiffs to distance yourselves. Except even worse, since as far as I can tell, the only vote either of you placed on each other was Muffin on you in RVS. And because it seems like the moment Muffin accuses you of something, you complain about the attack without defending yourself... AND THEN HE AGREES WITH YOU AND DROPS THE CASE. <--- Important part capitalized. Can you explain this?

[MordyS]

EBWOP: Sorry for the flooding of messages but one more thing I think I should mention: I'm assuming that either 1) Scum don't have a roleblocker or, 2) AlmasterGM-scum can't claim he's been roleblocked tomorrow since he didn't claim he was roleblocked last night, and presumably, if scum had a roleblocker, they would have blocked the exposed doctor. (Which would eliminate the possibility of a successful protect, not to mention would make AlmasterGM look even scummier if he claimed being roleblocked.)

[AlmasterGM]

EBWOP: Sorry for the flooding of messages but one more thing I think I should mention: I'm assuming that either 1) Scum don't have a roleblocker or, 2) AlmasterGM-scum can't claim he's been roleblocked tomorrow since he didn't claim he was roleblocked last night, and presumably, if scum had a roleblocker, they would have blocked the exposed doctor. (Which would eliminate the possibility of a successful protect, not to mention would make AlmasterGM look even scummier if he claimed being roleblocked.)

I was just about to say this. While I will most certainly protect Peanutman tonight, this does not ensure his safety. I'm hoping, however, that the presence of a Godfather means the scumteam has no additional power roles (especially seeing as it doesn't appear that the town has a Vig, unless they chose not to kill last night, which would be a weird move).

[Sanjay]

I don't think doctors are usually told when they are roleblocked, MordyS. Had AlmasterGM claimed to protect SpyreX we would know something, but since he didn't, we certainly can't rule out a roleblocker.

If both these claims are real, the mafia likely have some ability to stop a follow the cop strategy.

[MordyS]

Are they not told? On IRC they're always told whether they're blocked or not. Is this something the mod could let us know about?

[Sanjay]

AlmasterGM, ask the mod for some role clarification.

[Sanjay]

OH JEEZ.

DON'T POST THE RESPONSE TO US THOUGH FOR THE LOVE OF GOD.

Pretty sure paraphrasing is fine but you might want to check that too.

[AlmasterGM]

PM sent. I don't get how the answer is going to help us, though.

[Sanjay]

Can't hurt!

[MordyS]

Hopefully he'll answer in the thread. Anyway, here's how it helps us: If you can be roleblocked without getting a message about it, then they can roleblock you tomorrow night and kill the cop (assuming there's a roleblocker). This is important to analyzing tonight's actions. If you do get a message when you're blocked, that means they didn't roleblock you last night, which suggests to me that either they don't have a roleblocker, or you're lying about being doctor. If however you're normally not informed, we can't make those conclusions.

[AlmasterGM]

Hopefully he'll answer in the thread. Anyway, here's how it helps us: If you can be roleblocked without getting a message about it, then they can roleblock you tomorrow night and kill the cop (assuming there's a roleblocker). This is important to analyzing tonight's actions. If you do get a message when you're blocked, that means they didn't roleblock you last night, which suggests to me that either they don't have a roleblocker, or you're lying about being doctor. If however you're normally not informed, we can't make those conclusions.

Gotcha, good point. However, someone else should really PM the mod as well, because if I'm scum, I can just lie about the answer he gives. I'll say right now that I received no PM last night.

That being said, I think we are being shortsighted right now. All we are talking about is who we want to lynch today. We also need to talk about who we want Peanutman to investigate. Here's a list of potential targets. In my opinion, we are looking for someone who meets the following criteria:

a) Isn't strongly connected to today's lynch. We want to maximize the spread of information we receive.
b) Isn't too pro-town. Town flips are much less useful than scumflips. Also, we want to increase the length of the scum NK list (which usually contains pro-town players and cleared players - investigating a pro-town player gives them a 2 for 1).
c) Isn't too scummy. They are probably going to by lynched soon anyway.

This rules out:

AlmasterGM - already investigated.
Peanutman - claimed cop.
Papa Zito - townish.
MordyS - townish.
cruelty - scummy / lynch today.
archaebob - closely connected to cruelty.

Leaving us with:

Gammagooey - Good pick.
PhaerieM - Hesitant to waste this here because she was early on the SP wagon.
Sanjay - Good pick.
foilist13 - Too controversial / discussed player - since practically everyone said something about this guy, there's too many connections for us to analyze or get anything out of a town flip.

I'm going to suggest Sanjay. He's good at defending himself, so trying to take him down via casing would be difficult. A scum flip would make this unnecessary. A town flip would give us more information on archaebob. I could also see Gammagooey as a decent investigation.

Thoughts?

P.S. - Voting wise, I still like cruelty.

[Sanjay]

Oh damn, I forgot I was good at defending myself.

Vote: Sanjay