Newbie 996 - Starting Small [Game Over]

kunkstar7 · Post Post #450 (ISO) » Fri Aug 27, 2010 5:01 pm

:: VoteCount 3x3 ::

moose200x (0) -
smargaret (0) -
Doubtful (1) -

smargaret

Parama (1) -

Doubtful

Cliquey (0) -

Not Voting (3) -

moose200x, Parama, Cliquey

With 5 Alive, it takes 3 to lynch.

Deadline - September 15, 2010 8:00PM EST.

moose200x · Post Post #451 (ISO) » Fri Aug 27, 2010 7:46 pm

smargaret wrote:Why? What changed?

Cliquey has not done anything this game and is the IC, why wouldn't maf take him out?

And yeah I know that's a bad reason but it makes sense.

Doubtful · Post Post #452 (ISO) » Sat Aug 28, 2010 3:59 am

Moose: Like, jim said to block you and nk 583 - so if you aren't the doc and there is a doc I have no idea why jim said that / why the other mafia would take a risk in risking a no-kill + inspection when they aren't sure of the doc.

As for Cliquey, what do you mean he hasn't done anything?

So what if he's the IC? Maybe mafia are trying to frame him? Complete WIFOM...

IC's do survive until the endgame quite a lot when they're town... by the way.

Cliquey's explanation to "not doing anything":

Cliquey wrote:
Spoiler: Uhm what?
Could everyone stop saying they suspect me because I'm the IC and I'm not acting in the way they're expecting me to act? I'm posting less than most of you, I'm posting less fluff than most of you, I don't navel-gaze about night actions. But I have made cases, I have voted, I have pointed out consistencies and inconsistencies. Of the 3 or 4 people who have said that they suspect me none of them have actually built a case, they base it solely on me being the IC. I'm no more nor no less likely to be mafia due to my experience. Please stop using it against me, I have yet to and never will say that I am innocent because I am the IC.

If you are going to try to accuse me, please provide a case rather than this vague accusation that keeps getting tossed my way;
Cliquey bothers me because Mist was killed
and the other assorted vagueries.

This is short because our mod is attentive and I'm afraid to get cutoff by the lynchlock

FYR.

moose200x · Post Post #453 (ISO) » Sat Aug 28, 2010 9:18 am

You don't find it odd that Cliquey wrote "Its also my job to win. I take one of these more seriously than other, but I will perform both to my fullest" and then barely play? It doesn't make sense.

ISO cliquey, they've done nothing to help town win. Yet they claim it's there "job to win". They haven't even posted day3.

smargaret · Post Post #454 (ISO) » Sat Aug 28, 2010 12:54 pm

Cliquey hasn't contributed much of anything since Day 1. He has posted Day 3 (claiming not doc and accusing me), and has ignored some of the questions I asked - specifically, about the votes on DMSIS Day 1.

I still think Doubtful is scummier, so I'm leaving my vote where it is. Nobody has had much to say today - we need to do something to spark discussion.

Parama · Post Post #455 (ISO) » Sat Aug 28, 2010 1:01 pm

ah god I've been busy recently, gonna reread and post some comments tonight hopefully. Sorry about lack of posting :/ I would've prodded myself if I was modding this <.<

moose200x · Post Post #456 (ISO) » Sat Aug 28, 2010 1:38 pm

Parama- I will vote for whoever you vote for. (is that a proxy? if yes then i proxy vote parama)

~A quick note, I will not allow a proxy vote to hammer. You must vote individually to hammer.

Cliquey · Post Post #457 (ISO) » Sat Aug 28, 2010 3:50 pm

Spoiler: moose

Spoiler: smargaret

I regrettably did overlook your questions. I'll answer all I can find here, if I miss any more, just point it out to me. Firstly, what much would you have me add D2, we had a cop claim and a cop counter. I put in my two cents for which one I believed and then held off votes as I was going to try and look at ramifications of the two candidates. The scum quicklynched to cut off talk. I contributed what I believed to be necessary and vital. Note that Parama and I are both acting just about the same, you guys are just overthinking at me due to the little label by my name, which has nothing to do with my possibility to be mafia.

DMSIS wagon:

kunkstar wrote: drmyshottyizsik (2) - Doubtful, Cliquey
drmyshottyizsik (3) - Doubtful, Cliquey, jimfinn
drmyshottyizsik (4) - Doubtful, Cliquey, jimfinn, Parama [L-1]
drmyshottyizsik (2) - jimfinn, Parama
drmyshottyizsik (1) - Parama
drmyshottyizsik (3) - Cliquey, Parama, moose200x
drmyshottyizsik (5) - Cliquey, Parama, moose200x, Doubtful, jimfinn [Lynched.]

I think my main issue was Parama's place on the wagon, he seemed to just sidle onto the wagon for little reason at all. Parama's own stated reason was that DMSIS was target hopping with little reason, then Parama himself hops the jim wagon to the very serious DMSIS wagon with little reason. As stated, and in retrospect, Doubtful's place is also pretty meh. Saying that two people are definite scum is a scum tactic, especially done like this. I personally love to make "net promises" as mafia. Saying a list of 3-4 names and promising that X of them are mafia, of course I know they're mafia. It seems like Doubtful could have done this with DMSIS and jim. Set a group of two and swear that both are mafia. With DMSIS, he can say "oops" and then with Jim dead, he can say... well I was half right. Its a nice way to bus and try and take a town down while bussing.

So summing, I didn't like the Parama and Doubtful positions on the wagon. I didn't like moose's "gambit" that he would hammer no matter what (of course, I unvoted), but moose is innocent, so while i didn't like and I would think is scummy, I can't here.

Actually didn't see another question of yours. But theres that answered.

Spoiler: Parama

Spoiler: jim

Parama · Post Post #458 (ISO) » Sat Aug 28, 2010 4:32 pm

Don't like how Doubtful just RVSes Cliquey... without any RVS reason. Maybe scared that any RVS reason would make him look bad?
Cliquey's vote proxy strikes me as town, especially considering the one the vote was proxied to is now confirmed town.
Bleh, noticing that everyone jim voted against is dead now. Well, except moose. Hard to take much from that x_x
chaodck really didn't say a damn thing did he. Ugh. His 1st post is RVS stuff and his 2nd (and last) post is promising content but not delivering on it.
118 by jim can't really be dismissed as WIFOM. I'd think he'd put his buddy either in town-zone or neutral, but that eliminates nobody now <.<
Don't see why Cliquey unvoted DMSIS an hour after declaring that the DMSIS wagon was good. L-1 issues maybe? Meh.
Doubtful moving from a DMSIS wagon can be taken two ways - townie changing suspicions honestly, or scum seeing that a wagon is going to crumble and attempting to start a new one and maybe come back to the old one later on in the game.
But the former seems more likely IMO. Meh.
Ok smargaret exists now...
arguments against Cliquey: lurking (+meta), use of spoiler tags
arguments against Doubtful: ...none, says he feels Doubtful is town.
The comparison to her currents reads - currently feels Doubtful is the remaining scum. What changed?
Oh yeah the line in 247 that Cliquey pointed out in 250 looks pretty bad on smarg too.
Oh my god, 256. That looks really bad looking back. Speaking for other players to try to push a lynch. Eek.
Don't like how jim was "following" Doubtful, either. But there IS a WIFOM element there :/
271 by smarg strikes me as true confusion, though it could be either town or scum confusion. But it doesn't sit well with me.
276 by smarg looks like backing out of giving content for a bad reason.
Smargaret says she will push a Doubtful wagon if DMSIS flips town... don't remember if this happened or not, something to look back on later.
321 by Cliquey - "hypothesis test" seems euphemistic to me. Really careful language, which is bugging me. Not sure what to make of it though.
348 by smarg - accuses Doubtful of bussing BEFORE we have a jim flip (he was obv, but STILL.) At least it IS consistent with what he said earlier, but consistency isn't everything - for example, being consistently scummy and wrong will not get people to think you're town.
356 by smarg - Are you telling us why you wouldn't kill him if you were mafia. Maybe, just maybe, you're scum and you just told us exactly why Cliquey survived the night?
368 by smarg - what exactly are you responding to here? I need an answer to this, because I'm thinking one of two things, one of which makes your post look bad, the other of which makes it look null.
373 by smarg - "Cliquey bothers me because Mist was killed. I'm not ready to eliminate him yet, but I'm more suspicious of Doubtful." - What are you trying to say here? I have no clue.
381 by Doubtful - No. Just no. That is EXTREME WIFOM TERRITORY. Combine that with your recent affinity for calling out everything WIFOM and we have a nice little contradiction there, good sir.
383 by smarg - it sounds like you know what the setup is, if you're assuming both a doc and a cop. Don't see any townie knowing the setup at that point. Unless, of course, you are the doctor. Which you have claimed you are not. Then again, nobody is, so that kinda discredits this.
401 by smarg - agree with the point made by the first two quotes, but the third quote response - "Very, very interesting." - is complete fluff. If you find something suspicious there, tell us what it is, and don't try to make everyone else look for suspicious things in a post that may or may not even exist.
403 by moose - I have noticed a lot of these things before, and I will admit that when you put them altogether, it could be seen as coaching while attempting to distance. However, I feel I myself am guilty of some similar actions (with good intentions, of course) so I'm not really sure it's lynchable material.
409 by smarg - trying to appear helpful without being such, reposting exactly what moose just said in an abridged form
414 - already responded to this in full
419 - this isn't really something that can be written off as WIFOM, as I said earlier... but it doesn't tell us that much regardless, in hindsight. Since everyone alive is in the townish or null zone.
Doubtful: There are things that can be dismissed as WIFOM, and things that seem like WIFOM but aren't if you write off everything as WIFOM, then you have nothing solid to go on and you'll never be able to find the truly scummy things. Pro-tip: Nothing is definite in mafia except for flips.
444 by smarg - pro-town sounding plan, but I do feel it gives smarg a back door - if Doubtful is lynched and flips town, smarg can try to argue "WAIT! I'm not scum, lynching me would cause us to lose - lynch <insert playername here>". And since the general consensus at the time of posting seemed to be towards a Doubtful lynch, this scenario had a very real possibility of playing out.
451 by moose - Devil's Advocate here, but: N1 - the IC could be left alive so people could make logical fallacies like the one you're presenting <_<. N2 - there was a cop claim alive, which is always priority #1 for mafia to kill and/or block. Figured that one would be kinda obvious.
454 by smarg - parroting moose, casting suspicion on as many players as possible - hey look, common scum tactics
456 by moose - I refuse. I do not like vote proxies. As confirmed town, you need your personal opinion to be the strongest. I cannot speak for you, nor do I wish to.
457 - Yo. Did you read this post? Kthx.

I should probably link the post references, but bleh, I'm lazy. Just read the thread from the beginning along with these notes to see what I'm talking about on each of these.

Anyways, the final consensus:
Smargaret is scum. Gutsy scum, yes, but scum nonetheless. Concerned with self-appearance, backs out of content on a moment's notice, seems to have inside information concerning alignments and the setup, parroting a confirmed townie to try and look helpful, and other minor things that I've already been over. This is just a nice tl;dr.

Doubtful COULD be scum, but half the case involves the posts that look like coaching. And I'm not sure if Doubtful really had bad intentions with those posts. The dismissal of many things as WIFOM while also bring up a major WIFOM argument himself is what bugs me the most. There's really a lot less there than there is against smargaret.

Cliquey seems town, partly due to the vote proxy onto the now-confirmed townie, and some good arguments for scumpicks. On a side note, I'm pretty sure the 3 other players have all accused Cliquey on the basis that "Oh Cliquey is an IC and isn't doing anything, MUST BE SCUM!" which I feel is weak logic.

So I guess it's time to put my money where my mouth is,

vote: smargaret

Let's end this. Today, preferably.

Parama · Post Post #459 (ISO) » Sat Aug 28, 2010 4:37 pm

If you guys want to ask me any questions, I'll be around for the next 10 minutes (if you can read through Pink Floyd - The Wall that fast <.<). Running a prod check in my game, then I'll be off for the night. I have homework that I should've started 2 hours ago and I want to have some of it done tonight at the very least. So... yeah.

smargaret · Post Post #460 (ISO) » Sat Aug 28, 2010 4:43 pm

Parama, I'm going to address your points, but it's going to take me more than 10 minutes.

moose200x · Post Post #461 (ISO) » Sat Aug 28, 2010 5:01 pm

vote: smargaret

smargaret · Post Post #462 (ISO) » Sat Aug 28, 2010 5:30 pm

Parama's case against me:

1. That my opinion of Doubtful has changed: We got more information, and I felt his behavior on the DMSIS lynch was scummy. Hence, I changed my position to reflect the new information. That doesn't seem too unreasonable to me.

2. That I don't want to look bad: I addressed this already. I want scum to get lynched, and I know I'm clear. Thus I don't want people to have a reason to go after me. I haven't been doing a very good job of that this game, and we can afford a mislynch now (since it's obvious that Doubtful is scum), so if it will make you feel better to lynch me along with him, go right ahead. But then lynch the real scum.

3. 256 was Doubtful. Just wanted to clarify that.

4. 271 is confusion about the mechanics of forum mafia.

5. Backing out of posting content: DMSIS had posted something (claiming RB) that would totally change my reads on jim and doubtful. I didn't want to post something about them based on inaccurate information, that could be dragged out of context. And I am pushing a Doubtful wagon - see where my vote is? There was the cop claim/counterclaim Day 2 before I logged on, and, as you said, obvscum was obvious, so jim got lynched Day 2. But now I'm pushing for Doubtful.

6. That I accused Doubtful of bussing scum before we knew jim was scum - well, yeah, he was obvious. Maybe I was tunneling a bit on Doubtful. But Johannes's claim was way, way more believable. Also, I'm a she, not a he.

7. Hypothesizing mafia actions: Yes, I'm saying why I wouldn't kill Cliquey if I were scum. It's the same reason I would kill Moose tonight, and Johannes last night. It's game theory - scum kills power roles and obvtown, and leaves the town players who look scummy alive to be lynched during the day. Although, it raises the question of why you (Parama) survived night 1, given that you were the towniest player that day.

8. I was replying to Moose asking me what I wanted to do Day 2. I either wanted to pressure you (because you hadn't - and haven't - been pressured) and it was obvious that one of the scum was in the set of {jim, Johannes}. I wanted to lynch one of them, but not after taking more time to look at you and everyone else, because we had time to do more scumhunting.

9. My translation of 373: I am suspicious of Cliquey because Mist died N1, and it seems like that is the sort of thing that would benefit Cliquey. However, I find Doubtful to be more suspicious than Cliquey, and I would rather examine him. Does that help?

10: That I apparently knew the setup: I assumed jim was being entirely truthful when he instructed his partner to block Moose, and thus, there's a RB, and thus, there's a doctor. I didn't want to take the chance that, say, you were the doctor and have you protect someone other than Johannes on the WIFOM that mafia wouldn't kill a cop because the doc would protect the cop.

11: The "Very, very interesting" - something struck me as "off" about that quote. I wasn't sure what (looking back, probably that he was trying to bus jim), but it struck me as off. Posting it and seeing if other people have the same reaction isn't reasonable?

12: Addressed in 411/412

13: 444/the mislynch plan: So lynch me today, and Doubtful tomorrow. I've made my case for why he's guilty, you can afford a mislynch, and then I don't have the backdoor. Seriously. I fully believe it's Doubtful. I'm town, but if the only way you're going to look at anyone else is to see how I flip, lynch me.

14: That I'm parroting Moose: Actually, I

corrected

Moose - I pointed out that Cliquey had, in fact, posted Day 3. I fail to see how that's parroting. And I left my main suspicions/my vote right where they were, with Doubtful.

Please point it out if I've missed anything. There's not too much more of an argument I can make, except to repeat everything I've said about Doubtful. But really, if you lynch me today and him tomorrow, I'll be happy.

smargaret · Post Post #463 (ISO) » Sat Aug 28, 2010 5:31 pm

way to let me defend myself Moose ...

moose200x · Post Post #464 (ISO) » Sat Aug 28, 2010 6:11 pm

smargaret wrote:way to let me defend myself Moose ...

Oh, was it hammer?

smargaret · Post Post #465 (ISO) » Sat Aug 28, 2010 6:45 pm

No, but I'd posted that I was working on a defense.

Parama · Post Post #466 (ISO) » Sun Aug 29, 2010 10:59 am

smargaret wrote:1. That my opinion of Doubtful has changed: We got more information, and I felt his behavior on the DMSIS lynch was scummy. Hence, I changed my position to reflect the new information. That doesn't seem too unreasonable to me.

Fair enough. Wasn't one of my major arguments, just something to note.

smargaret wrote:2. That I don't want to look bad: I addressed this already. I want scum to get lynched, and I know I'm clear. Thus I don't want people to have a reason to go after me. I haven't been doing a very good job of that this game, and we can afford a mislynch now (since it's obvious that Doubtful is scum), so if it will make you feel better to lynch me along with him, go right ahead. But then lynch the real scum.

...not sure what to make of this. I'm not feeling as sure about this now... but agh that might be what you're trying to do here which is why I can't change my read based on it. Stupid WIFOM.

smargaret wrote:3. 256 was Doubtful. Just wanted to clarify that.

Yes I know. I did not say it was you.
Figures that I'd forget to put a name for at least one post number though

smargaret wrote:4. 271 is confusion about the mechanics of forum mafia.

Crazy Parama notion = smargaret wanted to know if moose would be lynched the next day due to having 4 votes on him at the start of the day, knowing it was a mislynch.
But I decided that that's just kinda stupid hence null.

smargaret wrote:5. Backing out of posting content: DMSIS had posted something (claiming RB) that would totally change my reads on jim and doubtful. I didn't want to post something about them based on inaccurate information, that could be dragged out of context. And I am pushing a Doubtful wagon - see where my vote is? There was the cop claim/counterclaim Day 2 before I logged on, and, as you said, obvscum was obvious, so jim got lynched Day 2. But now I'm pushing for Doubtful.

Just because he claimed something doesn't mean he's telling the truth. You should have posted what you were going to post, on the basis of: "IF DMSIS flips town, THEN: <content>, OTHERWISE ignore this."

smargaret wrote:6. That I accused Doubtful of bussing scum before we knew jim was scum - well, yeah, he was obvious. Maybe I was tunneling a bit on Doubtful. But Johannes's claim was way, way more believable. Also, I'm a she, not a he.

I called you a he once? Bleh, I know you're a she <.<
Anyways, yes jim was obvious, but it bugs me that you were 100% sure on his alignment before he flipped, enough to throw a bussing accusation out.

smargaret wrote:7. Hypothesizing mafia actions: Yes, I'm saying why I wouldn't kill Cliquey if I were scum. It's the same reason I would kill Moose tonight, and Johannes last night. It's game theory - scum kills power roles and obvtown, and leaves the town players who look scummy alive to be lynched during the day. Although, it raises the question of why you (Parama) survived night 1, given that you were the towniest player that day.

Wow, thanks for injecting more WIFOM into my game.
Actually, I'm not sure what to make of this. It seems like appealing to me, but at the same time trying to deflect suspicion onto me with WIFOM.
I've never seen that before :/

smargaret wrote:8. I was replying to Moose asking me what I wanted to do Day 2. I either wanted to pressure you (because you hadn't - and haven't - been pressured) and it was obvious that one of the scum was in the set of {jim, Johannes}. I wanted to lynch one of them, but not after taking more time to look at you and everyone else, because we had time to do more scumhunting.

So you wanted to pressure me due to too town fallacy? Meh. Not sure what to make of that either :/

smargaret wrote:9. My translation of 373: I am suspicious of Cliquey because Mist died N1, and it seems like that is the sort of thing that would benefit Cliquey. However, I find Doubtful to be more suspicious than Cliquey, and I would rather examine him. Does that help?

Why would it benefit Cliquey to kill Black Mist N1?

smargaret wrote:10: That I apparently knew the setup: I assumed jim was being entirely truthful when he instructed his partner to block Moose, and thus, there's a RB, and thus, there's a doctor. I didn't want to take the chance that, say, you were the doctor and have you protect someone other than Johannes on the WIFOM that mafia wouldn't kill a cop because the doc would protect the cop.

Why would you assume a mafia is telling the truth, though?

smargaret wrote:11: The "Very, very interesting" - something struck me as "off" about that quote. I wasn't sure what (looking back, probably that he was trying to bus jim), but it struck me as off. Posting it and seeing if other people have the same reaction isn't reasonable?

I don't like it because it leaves people to try and find what's suspicious even if there's nothing there in the first place. And, "If you try hard enough, you can make anything into a scumtell" so...

smargaret wrote:12: Addressed in 411/412

Okay, but he didn't really have time to answer - it had only been 5 minutes.

smargaret wrote:13: 444/the mislynch plan: So lynch me today, and Doubtful tomorrow. I've made my case for why he's guilty, you can afford a mislynch, and then I don't have the backdoor. Seriously. I fully believe it's Doubtful. I'm town, but if the only way you're going to look at anyone else is to see how I flip, lynch me.

Again, I don't know what to make of this. All I do know is that it doesn't change my mind.

smargaret wrote:14: That I'm parroting Moose: Actually, I
corrected
Moose - I pointed out that Cliquey had, in fact, posted Day 3. I fail to see how that's parroting. And I left my main suspicions/my vote right where they were, with Doubtful.

You parroted the "not contributing much" part and correcting the mistake is a very minor thing.

smargaret · Post Post #467 (ISO) » Sun Aug 29, 2010 12:34 pm

5. I did go on to do that when Moose asked, just in an abridged form since I had already deleted my previous post.

8. I know you hate arguments based on meta, BUT - look at yours. You play as obvtown whether you're town or scum. In one of the scum games I read, you won precisely because nobody even guessed you might be scum. Now, I don't think that's the case this game, and I think that the remaining scum is Doubtful. That argument isn't strong enough to make alone, hence wanting to pressure you. It's not something I'm that interested in right now.

9. Cliquey benefits from Mist's death because Mist was one of the people suspicious of Cliquey. Of course, as he has pointed out, it could be a scum frame job, and Mist was suspicious of Jim Day 1 as well. So I guess it's null.

10. I don't know. IRL, I don't like lying much at all, and assuming people are truthful has kind of become reflexive. It was really more that we couldn't take the chance on the doc protecting someone else. Also, it's worth noting that I'm not the only person assuming there's a doc after Jim says that.

14. When I correct someone, I try to find somewhere they're right first. Like, "Well, you're correct that 2+2 is 4, but 4 is not less than three." So, "You're correct that Cliquey hasn't really been posting, but he has posted day 3."

kunkstar7 · Post Post #468 (ISO) » Sun Aug 29, 2010 6:23 pm

:: VoteCount 3x4 ::

moose200x (0) -
smargaret (2) -

Parama, moose200x

[L-1]
Doubtful (1) -

smargaret

Parama (1) -

Doubtful

Cliquey (0) -

Not Voting (1) -

Cliquey

With 5 Alive, it takes 3 to lynch.

Deadline - September 15, 2010 8:00PM EST.

Doubtful · Post Post #469 (ISO) » Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:47 am

smaragaret:

8. What do you mean by obvtown? The way I interpret it, obvtown means showing pro-town intentions no matter if you are town or scum, which is the whole point of the game.

You keep saying that you are suspicious of me, but you don't pressure me. How's that pro-town?

10. That's where considering all cases comes in. To me, it still seems like we were considering the possibility of a doc, rather than assuming, because the scum hinted towards there being one. That situation is now void because there's no doc though. In Day 2 we don't know anything about there being / not being a doc at all. smargaret just wanted to say that doc should protect cop no matter what if there's one.

Parama: 381: I was considering all cases - not throwing out an accusation against Johannes for claiming cop. 99.99% of the time Johannes would be cleared...

256: As I said, it wasn't a strong accusation, I was seeing who would follow up with it - and whoever did was scum. (They'd think that I will help them push a mislynch)

As for me forgetting to put a RVS reason? Oops.

smargaret · Post Post #470 (ISO) » Mon Aug 30, 2010 5:20 am

Obvtown = cleared by cop or leaving no scumtells, obviously town.

How exactly am I not pressuring you? I've made a case against you, I'm voting for you, I'm pushing for people to vote for you. I've been pressuring you since twilight Day 1. What more can I do?

As for your rebuttals,

256: And if you were scum, you could do exactly the same thing and then when a townie hammered, say the townie must be scum for hammering. I could see jim reading you trying to lead town to a mislynch as telling him to hammer - remember, this is day 1, scum hasn't had a night to discuss strategy yet.

Oops: Can still be a scumtell. In fact, I'd say that most scumtells are oopses.

I have to go back and look at 381, and make sure it's the post I think it is.

smargaret · Post Post #471 (ISO) » Mon Aug 30, 2010 5:36 am

381 reads like WIFOM trying to convince the (hypothetical) doctor to protect someone other than Johannes. What is pro-town about that? Yes, it's considering all possible cases, but why would we consider that during twilight?

Something that jumped out at me - you didn't want to send us into 3 player LyLo without any real suspicions because scum quickhammered the cop. We'd still have a day to get suspicious of each other, since day 3 we'd just lynch the quickhammerer.

Doubtful · Post Post #472 (ISO) » Mon Aug 30, 2010 5:58 am

smargaret:

#470: Scum can discuss strategy during pre-game, AFAIK.
256's point is: Townies won't hammer, it's a weak trap, but a trap nonetheless. I was hoping someone (particularly jim) would jump onto DMSIS as soon as I pushed to L-1 (because jim said he thought scumpair was DMSIS and moose)

I agree, forgetting to RV w/ a reason could be a scumtell. There's not exactly a way I can respond ot that.

Your case against me is basically interaction with jim, 256, and pushing jim (who was obvious as soon as there was a cop cc) to L-1.

#471: Because it gives us an idea of what happened if Johannes didn't die and also didn't claim roleblocked (in this case we can't 100% trust Johannes, though the scum could be risking this to create WIFOM)

Well... say X claims cop at L-1. One of the scum quickhammer X. Day 3 is obvious... kill the person that quickhammers X. It's basically like a 4-player MYLO, except instead of no-lynching we lynch the obv. scum. I mean, it's pretty hard for town to make the right decision in 3-player LYLO... even if there was a massclaim and it came down to two people. Whereas if we made the right decision it would be 4:1 town:scum.

Doubtful · Post Post #473 (ISO) » Mon Aug 30, 2010 6:01 am

Unvote

kunkstar7 · Post Post #474 (ISO) » Tue Aug 31, 2010 3:00 pm

~I will be unavailable till tomorrow evening due to moving into dorms. There are no prods currently needed, but activity should probably pick up.