Mini 1021: Battousai's Mountaintnous Mountain Mafia (Over)

[PranaDevil]

-Opportunistic voting
-Inconsistent views
-Lack of scum hunting
-Citing evidence against people when you don't read it
-Scum oversight

1 - Bollocks and I've stated why earlier on (I note you refuse to admit that)

2 - Bollocks again, and I've stated why earlier

3 - Got hung up on wendy, fair point (planned to scum hunt yesterday, wound up with killer headache, wasn't about to make myself worse just to appease you, so sorry).

4 - Get to this in a second Mr. misrep

5 - Ah yes... the "can't be proven either way" one, cleverly done.

Now, that second spoiler, the Dalt crap. I do like how you take an early game post, and mix them in with DAY TWO posts to make it sound scummier, well done that man, blatant misrepping here.

The first bit was early in the game, the "evidence" I was citing was what Fitz brought up.

Now read carefully here, I DID NOT read it because I DID NOT THINK IT WAS NEEDED.

I took it at face value of "Dalt has played here before", there's a link showing he's been on the site before, I thus felt whoever posted it would have checked it beyond "yep, Dalt's name is in there". Turns out that wasn't the case, and so I changed my views as soon as somebody pointed this out.

HOW THE HELL IS THAT SCUMMY?!

How is it scummy to acknowledge you were wrong and argue AGAINST the policy lynch on someone? (This goes to Llama as well btw)

I do love how I'm being made out to be scummy... for doing something pro-town.

3rd Spoiler tag... not really "that" interesting unless you are just trying to divert people to focus on "things that aren't scummy" but you are insinuating that they are. (Remember people that someone will repeat something over and over again to try and make others believe them, that's ALL Lat has been doing). Yes, hopping 3rd or 4th on a wagon would be scummy, but that also only works if you did it KNOWINGLY. I didn't care where I was on the wagon because I felt wendy was scum. You are now suggesting that anyone who's 3rd or 4th on a wagon is insta-scum. That's pretty shit reasoning.

4th Spoiler - I'd already made clear by now that the "All for a Xite lynch" post was made EARLY in the game, and "overtly scummy" bit was after I'd focused on wendy more than everyone else.

I'd say that, Lat ,you are giving a "brief rundown" but completely ignoring any defences given deliberately to try and make me the "easy lynch" for the day. Giving a one sided view rather than being pro-town and listing both sides of the debate is rather poor town play in my eyes. Town should be looking at everyone as possible scum, you are tunnelling quite severely, and are desperately trying to get everyone on my wagon.

Now... Llama, that Korashk vote. May I point out that I also said "Korashk is saying more by not saying anything at all after he was called out on that point"?

That's not just "he's lurking, vote him" but "He's gone suspiciously quiet after he was called out". I'd have figured you would have seen the difference in that, though I can understand you getting all jumpy about it as it's your player slot.

[Nightwolf]

A few more quick comments/questions before I start my day (main post to come later):

@ LF:

I did not know who CA wanted to lynch.

Wolf seemed to express some interest to lynch TW over xite to cause a lynch.

If I voted no lynch, it left the worst possible option (TW lynch) as a high possibility given how few people were interested in a no lynch. That is why I said right before deadline, as it would not allow anyone to get a vote in preventing a no lynch. By voting for xite when I did, it ensured that my prefered lynch would occur if a lynch did happen.

Could you specify what you are referring to here with the underlined?

@ Lat:

First off, I'm very disappointed in all you. I was hoping we would be able to get more pressure on Prana and get his partner to bus him

but now he's gets to hide behind a oh the walls were long so I didn't read them disguise.

And who said this exactly? I don't recall seeing anyone make that claim.

Also, "citing evidence without reading it" is complete BS. In fact the following could have been written by me (of course this is as I was reading to catch up when I replaced in, but even if I was in the game at the time I highly doubt it would have changed anything):

Now read carefully here, I DID NOT read it because I DID NOT THINK IT WAS NEEDED.

I took it at face value of "Dalt has played here before", there's a link showing he's been on the site before, I thus felt whoever posted it would have checked it beyond "yep, Dalt's name is in there". Turns out that wasn't the case, and so I changed my views as soon as somebody pointed this out.

I will not comment on the other points until later today when I've read the wall-o-thon in full.

On LmL:

To clarify, I have actually been getting a slight gut scum read on LmL for a little while now, it was just that his last couple posts made the feeling much stronger. Anyway, I looked at a couple potential reasons for this from his last couple posts and they don't really hold up after further investigation, so
UNVOTE: . New vote to come next post.

@ LmL:

Nexus,

I more meant that I found you were posting not as much content, not number of posts

. I actually, again, find your reaction overdefensive..

Please say what you mean in the future. As it stood, it was a false accusation, and therefore deserved to be defended against.

[PranaDevil]

Now, I said I wanted to pick up on someone who seemed scummy, and I've not liked his predecessor either, soooo... We'll begin with the original spot in that slot... Korashk.

ISO 1 & 2

It's been gone over a few times, but he states he doesn't wish to random vote, then random votes.

ISO 3

Posts the vote count because he likes the information readily available... I read that more as "wanting to make it seem like you're posting lots when you're actually posting nothing of use". Mod should be posting the vote counts, not the players. Feel free to keep a regular tally in notepad.

ISO 7

Votes me for not believing my reasons, fair enough. But then admits that he's not very good until one flip has happened. I doubt most are great until one flip has happened, but why point it out? Also note the further use of posting a needless vote count.

ISO 9

States Just over an hour isn't a short time frame (it's a bloody short time frame), then states the reason he didn't originally random vote is because his Satellite internet ran out and couldn't access the RNG... but yet could access this site? Also what's wrong with rolling two dice? Surely with only 11 people to pick from (you wouldn't pick yourself) 2 dice does the job just as well if you really desperately need to random vote.

ISO 10

Suggests that random voting and asking the person to respond is more than a random vote... what is anyone meant to say in response to an actual random vote? "Erm, you're voting for me randomly" is about all I could muster up for that one. At least ask them something.

After this he basically just vanishes completely and we get LlamaFluff replacing him, so moving onto ISO on Llama.

ISO 1

Good opening, gets information early, I'll admit I like that entry to the game.

Up to ISO 8 spends a lot of time focused on CA, considering CA's play and arguments, this is good.

ISO 8

CA maybe although I am still wondering how much of this is my "always scum" read of him acting up again.

Hold up. Haven't you been making a decent argument against him, and now you're suddenly saying "but I could be wrong". Do you think he's scum or not? Why the sudden back peddaling?

ISO 11

On being asked about the vote currently on CA, and if it's best placed there:

Not quite sure, I am probably going to move it to Xite pretty soon. TW is a strong town read, leads votes, and deadline appears to be approaching. CA is still very scummy though, I would be happy with a lynch of Xite or CA.

Why not move to Xite anyway if you feel Xite is more likely scum? (As I'm getting from the "probably going to move it to Xite pretty soon" line).

Also says:

I want to at least lay out a few key points as to why xite is scum before I vote her

This is important.

ISO 12

Due to an extreme lack of posting time over this weekend (yes I realize when deadline is but it cant be avoided) I am going to leave my vote on CA

This is exceptionally relevant.

ISO 13

Will of course vote xite to not have TW get lynched.

Didn't you just say you would only vote Xite after laying out key points? Now you're saying you would vote Xite just to prevent a wendy lynch?

ISO 14

Havent read since my last post but a skim shows lack of sudden CA wagon

vote xite

So only voting Xite after giving views on her... to voting Xite to prevent a wendy lynch, that's the reason thus far (despite the fact the lynches were tied and he hadn't followed the thread).

ISO 15

This is Day 2 now, and there's this:

I did debate setting my alarm for right before deadline and unvoting to force no lynch though.

But... the rules state that whoever hit the most votes first would be lynched regardless... so not only does that not hold water, but you forced Xite to be lynched by doing it.

ISO 16 - 18

Doesn't say a great deal more fluff posting than anything, but the last line in 18 stands out to me:

CA I now slightly lead town again. Im skitzo like that.

What?! You've been claiming he's scum ALL game, stating you wanted him lynched more than anyone else all Day 1, how in the hell are you backing down on that now? He's not said anything for god-knows how long (okay I could check the ISO of him to find exact times, but that's not relevant). How is he town? How has your read changed so drastically from Definite Scum to Likely Town?

ISO 21

Targets me in regards to... the Dalt stuff and my voting Korashk? I could have understood if he had mentioned something about the Xite stuff as even I admit that was shitty play on my behalf, but the Dalt stuff and Korashk stuff (which feels stuffed in there to fluff the post out)... that's half hearted scum hunting at best.

As I said earlier I feel Lat may well be town (but that last post by him makes me curious I admit, however that could be because it's directed at me, and I don't want to get hung up into tons of OMGUS type voting since, after my initial read of him I got a town feel for his posting, even if his Day 2 stuff is focused wrong). So my vote is going to be leaving Lat and going where it should be.

unvote; vote: LlamaFluff

[Battousai]

Vote Count:

iamausername

-2- LoudmouthLee, havingfitz

PranaDevil

-2- Lateralus22, Llamafluff

Llamafluff

-2- Leech, PranaDevil

Leech

-1- iamausername

Not Voting:

ConfidAnon, Nexus, Nightwolf

With 10 alive, it takes 6 to lynch (before Sep 8th)!

[Leech]

Why are you acting like I have no idea what I was talking about? Here let me bold it so it just might sink in: I put him at L-1. It was a "if a lynch did happen" scenario as my vote did not cause the lynch..

Your vote caused the lynch, because that that point it would have required two votes on Wendy to prevent Xite from being lynched at that time. Had you unvoted, Xite would still have been lynched. This is the giant hole in your story that you are continously overlooking.

My statement about thinking about unvoting to force a no lynch is completely valid because xite was at L-1. I could have unvoted to force a no-lynch due to the fact that when I voted, it was not a hammer, just a failsafe to prevent a TW lynch.

No you couldn't have, which is my entire point. Your vote put Xite in the position where he had the highest amount of votes in the game. In the event of a tie the person who achieved the highest amount of votes, first, is the lynch for the day. Your vote, even in the event of a tie, resulted in Xite being lynched in any event other than two Wendy votes. Your story doesn't make sense, as it's not even a possible strategy in this game. Therefore your statement about thinking about unvoting to force a no lynch is completely invalid.

[LlamaFluff]

To clarify a bit between class and lab here...

I voted Xite when I did largely to prevent a lynch of TW. Read through my posts near the end of day one, and you will see more then once that I called TW as town. Xite was a fairly scummy player, whos lynch I was happy with, and compared to a TW lynch, was the hands down choice for my vote.

If the day was longer, no, I would not have voted xite when I did as I still had not laid out much of a case on her.

I did not realize the rules on no lynch, thinking it was the same as my ruleset (highest vote getter lynched, incase of tie no one lynched), and said that I would have unvoted to get a no lynch to happen. I was looking for a way to force no lynch and thought that I had found one.

But the main fact remains the following, and I will say it again

***I did not want TW lynched. That is why I voted for Xite at the time I did. It was a move to protect a town read and lynch a scum read that happened when it did due to deadline. If I did know about the no lynch rule, I still would have voted Xite when I did to make sure my town read lived***

Will post more after labs and when I finish other assignments.

[Lateralus22]

And who said this exactly? I don't recall seeing anyone make that claim.

Also, "citing evidence without reading it" is complete BS. In fact the following could have been written by me (of course this is as I was reading to catch up when I replaced in, but even if I was in the game at the time I highly doubt it would have changed anything):

Nexus is a good example of what the heck is going on. Of course he didn't exactly state he's hiding under a disguise nor do I think this is exactly scummy of him, but now seeing how more than he are like wtf are Lat and Prana arguing about scum can hide under that disguise.

I also don't know what to make of the Lat/Prana exchange. I'll give it a reread later and see if it actually makes any sense, or if they're just arguing over and over about nothing.

eh this reply kinda comes off as fit saying he didn't read the whole debate, if this is true or not please tell me. simply trying to support the what is lat is prana arguing about theory

PS…the Lat Prana exchange was ridiculous. Never have I seen so much wall between two people. Could someone provide a synopsis since I lost focus about halfway through the second wall?

I don't think the claim is bs at all. Of course I completely disagree with Prana's def of when the evidence is out so I guess we're here now.

Prana

Regarding your replies to every point, while you think my accusations are crap I think your defense is.

It annoys me that what I accuse you being scummy you reply with an explanation that gives you off as anti town. Mainly the "Oh I didn't read the thread"

Two examples of this

Now read carefully here, I DID NOT read it because I DID NOT THINK IT WAS NEEDED.

Yes, hopping 3rd or 4th on a wagon would be scummy, but that also only works if you did it KNOWINGLY.

Lets all not read and know the vote counts cuz thats how cool we are. I mentioned the 3/4 vote thing because you said a vote at 3/4 vote would be opportunistic. When I ask you about the situation to determine better if it's opportunistic or not you say you don't remember.

that being said the whole oh no that iz misrep I completely disagree and think that I've represented you perfectly fine. It's almost as if you expect scum to confess about scummy things they did right when it's pointed out. (NO THIS IS NOT A MISREP THIS IS THE IMPRESSION I GET FROM READING YOUR POSTS LOL)

now that we are all qq lats so mean and tunneling is there any random member of the thread you like me to investigate even if I don't think they're scum?

I'll look at your llama case a bit more closely later on.

Oh in the my opportunistic voting spoiler the second quote is mine not Prana's, but I don't think anyone should have a problem with that.

[Nexus]

Having read PranaDevil's case on Llamafluff, he makes some good points. I still don't buy his reasoning for voting Xite, particularly after being on the CA wagon anyway. I still believe that whilst town, tw's play was a lot scummier/anti town than Xite's, so there's no way I'm going to agree that the Xite wagon was better than the tw wagon. The fact that his vote tipped the scales for the Xite lynch makes me suspicious anyway.

His sudden decision to stop supporting a lynch on CA is very strange. I mean, I want to wait until I get more off of him, but based on the Korashk stuff, and his recent play, I'm strongly suspicious of Llamafluff.

I think the Lat/Prana exchange was town v town, and from what I can tell, a lot of it is just a circular argument. Although, Lateralus does seem really angry that Prana's defending himself, which I don't even know why hes getting so annoyed. Surely Prana defending himself is a good thing, would you rather, if he was town, he rolled over and let you lynch him?

Now fitz. He comes in, votes iamausername, says he's suspicious of me and iam for "gut and IIoA", but he doesn't actually give any examples, but votes instead. Uh. Could you give us some actual reasoning, please?

[LlamaFluff]

I still don't buy his reasoning for voting Xite, particularly after being on the CA wagon anyway.

Why is that bad? CA and Xite were nice and neutraly towards eachother, so I do not know what you are trying to imply about that interaction.

I still believe that whilst town, tw's play was a lot scummier/anti town than Xite's, so there's no way I'm going to agree that the Xite wagon was better than the tw wagon. The fact that his vote tipped the scales for the Xite lynch makes me suspicious anyway.

TW read fairly heavily town. If I think that someone is town, I am going to defend them directly and indirectly. It would be like me calling you scum here for voting Xite when his play was a lot scummier then TWs, a completely subjective accusation.

His sudden decision to stop supporting a lynch on CA is very strange.

Why is second guessing my scum read bad?

[havingfitz]

Monkey butt

[Nightwolf]

@ Mod: At the time of the last vote count, Prana was voting Llama and I was Not Voting.

On the Lat/Prana exchange:

Wow. Could the two of you repeat yourselves 5 more times before I respond please? Seriously though, that exchange wasted a huge chuck of time to read for a whole bunch of nothing. I think each side made about 1-2 good arguments through the whole thing (not counting repeating themselves). As it stands, I do not find Lat's case very convincing, and if I were to make one against Prana the focus and presentation would be a bit different. Going into much more detail on the matter would be pretty long and tedious, and since that is not my main concern right now, I am not going to bother. I will add one thing to the end of the conversation for now though:
@ Lat: This is a perfect example of misrep right here:

It annoys me that what I accuse you being scummy you reply with an explanation that gives you off as anti town. Mainly the

"Oh I didn't read the thread"

Two examples of this

Now read carefully here, I DID NOT read it because I DID NOT THINK IT WAS NEEDED.

That quote from Prana is talking about the link fitz posted to show that dalt had "played" here before. That is not part of this thread and is in no way an example showing that he did not read this one.

@ LlamaFluff:

Please respond to this:

@ LF:

I did not know who CA wanted to lynch.

Wolf seemed to express some interest to lynch TW over xite to cause a lynch.

If I voted no lynch, it left the worst possible option (TW lynch) as a high possibility given how few people were interested in a no lynch. That is why I said right before deadline, as it would not allow anyone to get a vote in preventing a no lynch. By voting for xite when I did, it ensured that my prefered lynch would occur if a lynch did happen.

Could you specify what you are referring to here with the underlined?

And this time I'll add something extra: VOTE: LlamaFluff.

[LoudmouthLee]

Okay, have a few minutes... post incoming.

[LoudmouthLee]

I believe that the Lat/Prana discussion is a very dense read of two townies completely going at each other. Unless something drastically changes, I won't be voting for either of them today.

Well, I still say that we should no lynch. TW proved how it is the correct move to make in this setup, logic and math back it up. People are just conditioned to be way against no lynching at all costs, even when an exception to the rule occurs like this game. I would be very happy with a no lynch today. The conditions are still ok for one, although theoretically it should have occured seven posts into the game.

That's absolutely ridiculous. The math that you're speaking of talks about random lynches without any sort of knowledge. I don't even think you know the math that you're speaking about. It makes me wonder what you're trying to get out of this.

I am pretty sure that Wolf, Lat and now fitz are town. IAU still probably but gut is making me wonder there, as I think the TW kill is either a move from a highly experienced or newbie scum team. I can see a few reasons that TW would be the correct kill for scum.

This type of NK speculation is always very detrimental to town. You're pigeonholing the scum team in one way or the other, and that type of thinking leads townies to their demise. With that,

Vote: Llamafluff

. This would put LF at L-2. IAU still makes me a bit uncomfortable with his actions today, and I will be keeping a bigtime eye on him, too. Continuing...

TW read fairly heavily town. If I think that someone is town, I am going to defend them directly and indirectly. It would be like me calling you scum here for voting Xite when his play was a lot scummier then TWs, a completely subjective accusation.

In a mountainous setup, the only way you're going to have that air-tight of a read in order to defend them to the grave is if you have knowledge of roles (read: Scum). In a regular game, you can get cop vibes, and results can easily give people real reasons to defend someone to the grave. If you were a townie, you woudn't have that read. I know that *I* wouldn't defend anyone to the grave as you are stating.

You've misrepresented you reason for "hammering". You jumped to a NL today, To me, your last few posts have screamed scum.

[LlamaFluff]

@Wolf - These two made it not out of the question for you to vote TW, although still unlikely. At a tied wagon I was on edge for finding anything that would have caused a shift

Preview Edit: Oh great, a double replacement now as well. I can't say that the thought that it might just be best to lynch wendy('s slot) now didn't cross my mind as soon as I read that. /goes on to reread.

I'm torn. At least more so then I was earlier this morning when I made my other posts. But now that I've cooled down a bit (just reading overly angry posts tends to get me to a similar level of anger for some reason), my calmer mind is telling me to stick with Xite.

Going to see what else I can get through here, have to go to lecture in 10 minutes.

[Nightwolf]

I am pretty sure that Wolf, Lat and now fitz are town. IAU still probably but gut is making me wonder there, as I think the TW kill is either a move from a highly experienced or newbie scum team. I can see a few reasons that TW would be the correct kill for scum.

This type of NK speculation is always very detrimental to town. You're pigeonholing the scum team in one way or the other, and that type of thinking leads townies to their demise. With that,

Vote: Llamafluff

. This would put LF at L-2. IAU still makes me a bit uncomfortable with his actions today, and I will be keeping a bigtime eye on him, too.

And what makes that any different from this?

I'm gonna bold this for effect.

My scumsenses tell me that both mafia members were on the Xite wagon.

Looking at this game, I think that the TW kill was to throw the scent off of the Xite wagon, since "both wagons were equally wrong."

[LlamaFluff]

Well, I still say that we should no lynch. TW proved how it is the correct move to make in this setup, logic and math back it up. People are just conditioned to be way against no lynching at all costs, even when an exception to the rule occurs like this game. I would be very happy with a no lynch today. The conditions are still ok for one, although theoretically it should have occured seven posts into the game.

That's absolutely ridiculous. The math that you're speaking of talks about random lynches without any sort of knowledge. I don't even think you know the math that you're speaking about. It makes me wonder what you're trying to get out of this.

There is some thread in MD that proves that 9:2 is better then 10:2. I will try and find it tonight.

The risk of holding off no lynch is that as the game goes on, there may be more or less town reads by players. In a situation where there is someone that is an obvious town read, no lynch dooms them. In a situation where that is not the case, a no lynch really does not kill off the obviously town player. Everyone is just afraid to do it outside of a mylo situation because it has been beaten into them again and again in closed games.

Why should we not no lynch?

I am pretty sure that Wolf, Lat and now fitz are town. IAU still probably but gut is making me wonder there, as I think the TW kill is either a move from a highly experienced or newbie scum team. I can see a few reasons that TW would be the correct kill for scum.

This type of NK speculation is always very detrimental to town. You're pigeonholing the scum team in one way or the other, and that type of thinking leads townies to their demise.

*shrug*

This NK comes from someone who knows exactly what they are doing or has no clue what they are doing.

TW read fairly heavily town. If I think that someone is town, I am going to defend them directly and indirectly. It would be like me calling you scum here for voting Xite when his play was a lot scummier then TWs, a completely subjective accusation.

In a mountainous setup, the only way you're going to have that air-tight of a read in order to defend them to the grave is if you have knowledge of roles (read: Scum). In a regular game, you can get cop vibes, and results can easily give people real reasons to defend someone to the grave. If you were a townie, you woudn't have that read. I know that *I* wouldn't defend anyone to the grave as you are stating.

I always defend my town reads. If I think that someone is town, everyone is going to know about it if they are in danger of being lynched because there is no reason to let someone who you think is town get lynched. I thought TW was town, and I was not the only one who had that read. My town reads are generally very accurate when they get to the point that I had one on TW, and I will defend the player to the grave when I get that convinced of their townie-ness.

Is your arguement here that I defended my town read strongly so I have to be scum given that is was impossible for town to get a town read on TW?

You've misrepresented you reason for "hammering". You jumped to a NL today, To me, your last few posts have screamed scum.

I did not realize the no lynch rule, but if I did, I still would have voted at the point that I did. Also still no one has managed to prove why a no lynch is bad apart from "it just is".

[Nightwolf]

That last post was @ LmL. LF's post snuck in without me noticing. Response upcoming in an hour or two.

[PranaDevil]

Llama, I'll make this quick (I think I did more than enough lynch/No Lynch discussion day 1 to go on about it tons here too).

As long as we No Lynch prior to MyLo (and a few players have expressed a willingness to do so, but on the day before MyLo, not before, not after) it gives us an advantage. The actual advantage comes from the odd numbered town as opposed to the even numbered town. Not how early you do it.

That being said, if we do it on the day before MyLo then we have to do it quick and fast so scum have no additional info that day phase.

Also, while I'm here, LmL said:

I believe that the Lat/Prana discussion is a very dense read of two townies completely going at each other. Unless something drastically changes, I won't be voting for either of them today.

If you notice recently I've agreed the same, I don't feel Lat is scum, I honestly wanted to think him as scum so I went and did an ISO of him (hence why my ISO of Llama was later than I wanted it to be), however it turned out that I couldn't really find anything scummy in Lat's play Day 1. He was playing a pretty solid town game, and the only negative I can bring up on Day 2 is his attacking of me, and that's solely because I know I'm town and he's been tunnelling, but that, in itself, isn't a tell for me. I just want him to start looking at other cases and seeing what he can see of others without the thoughts of "Prana is obv. scum" in his head.

[Leech]

Everyone is just afraid to do it outside of a mylo situation because it has been beaten into them again and again in closed games.

If you were paying attention, you'd realize that we're not talking about No-Lynching in MyLo. We are talking about no lynching in the phase before MyLo. I've said before that I don't like no lynching, in practice, because it feels like resigning to not even attempt to lynch scum in that phase. However, I can see how in this specific setup it would be beneficial if we were approaching a MyLo situation. If we mislynch again I will No Lynch the day before MyLo as that would be more beneficial to the town. Today, I think it's best that we try to lynch scum.

Why should we not no lynch?

Ironically, I think you said it best earlier:

On no lynch - I actually like it for right now, but am against it in practice for a key reason. It will make an amazingly massive ammount of noise. People will split on it, some people will try to use it as a tell (which it is not as it can be argued as good and bad) but it will be used as a tell, which will create more noise, and just get in the way of scumhunting.

This is one of my major problems with you. You continue to push for something that you have clearly expressed would be bad for the town. You posted extremely valid reasons why it would be a bad move, as it gets in the way of scumhunting, yet you push for it anyway. Your own reasoning against it outweighs your reason for pushing it, but you continue to do so anyway. The fact is, the majority of the people have stated that the best time for a No-Lynch would be the day before MyLo. If we come to that consensus then it should happen at the immediate start of that phase, which would prevent the negative aspects that you have described above. The fact that you continue to push for it, even now, is only participating in the "massive amount of noise" you described earlier which is in all reality getting in the way of scumhunting. Considering you rationally explained that, and believe it, you are intentionally getting in the way of scumhunting.

[LoudmouthLee]

I am pretty sure that Wolf, Lat and now fitz are town. IAU still probably but gut is making me wonder there, as I think the TW kill is either a move from a highly experienced or newbie scum team. I can see a few reasons that TW would be the correct kill for scum.

This type of NK speculation is always very detrimental to town. You're pigeonholing the scum team in one way or the other, and that type of thinking leads townies to their demise. With that,

Vote: Llamafluff

. This would put LF at L-2. IAU still makes me a bit uncomfortable with his actions today, and I will be keeping a bigtime eye on him, too.

And what makes that any different from this?

I'm gonna bold this for effect.

My scumsenses tell me that both mafia members were on the Xite wagon.

Looking at this game, I think that the TW kill was to throw the scent off of the Xite wagon, since "both wagons were equally wrong."

This question is completely fair. I substantiated my statement with rationale... and a whole lot of WIFOM. My statement was more an encapsulation of the Xite lynch rather than the TW nightkill. I felt that the scum would rather see Xite hang that TW hang. The fact that TW was a nightkill made me feel stronger about that.

Mod, speaking of the TW nightkill, Since TW was replaced by inHim, and TW flipped town, why doesn't inHim take the CA role? It's not like TW had any role information that inHim was made privy to.

[LlamaFluff]

Why should we not no lynch?

Ironically, I think you said it best earlier:

On no lynch - I actually like it for right now, but am against it in practice for a key reason. It will make an amazingly massive ammount of noise. People will split on it, some people will try to use it as a tell (which it is not as it can be argued as good and bad) but it will be used as a tell, which will create more noise, and just get in the way of scumhunting.

This is one of my major problems with you. You continue to push for something that you have clearly expressed would be bad for the town. You posted extremely valid reasons why it would be a bad move, as it gets in the way of scumhunting, yet you push for it anyway. Your own reasoning against it outweighs your reason for pushing it, but you continue to do so anyway. The fact is, the majority of the people have stated that the best time for a No-Lynch would be the day before MyLo. If we come to that consensus then it should happen at the immediate start of that phase, which would prevent the negative aspects that you have described above. The fact that you continue to push for it, even now, is only participating in the "massive amount of noise" you described earlier which is in all reality getting in the way of scumhunting. Considering you rationally explained that, and believe it, you are intentionally getting in the way of scumhunting.

This is why I am getting really flustered over this whole thing. It is textbook theory that no lynch on day one is the best possible move for the town. If no lynch does not happen, it is best to do it ASAP. This is not one of those things that is "its theory" things, but proveable with simple calculations. So logic says to no lynch, instead, people are against it, and that is where the whole noise thing comes into play and where I start to get annoyed as people are refusing to make the right move.

On the flip side to what I said about noise making it bad, the biggest drawback about waiting being bad is scum have a much better handle on the gamestate. This means that a kill usually is someone who is regarded as highly pro-town, which dillutes some of the reasoning to have a no lynch.

I do realize that I am contridicting myself at this point given that it is a situation where there is a best move and a "best" move, but I just want to keep pushing the point with the hope that people realize that there is a better move.

Out of pure curiosity, why are you advocating Mylo-1 instead of mylo no lynch?

[Battousai]

Sotty7 replaces ConfidAnon!

Concerning the inHim/TW slot, I can go more into this in postgame if desired.

[iamausername]

I'm gonna bold this for effect.

My scumsenses tell me that both mafia members were on the Xite wagon.

Looking at this game, I think that the TW kill was to throw the scent off of the Xite wagon, since "both wagons were equally wrong."

I am pretty sure that Wolf, Lat and now fitz are town. IAU still probably but gut is making me wonder there, as I think the TW kill is either a move from a highly experienced or newbie scum team. I can see a few reasons that TW would be the correct kill for scum.

This type of NK speculation is always very detrimental to town. You're pigeonholing the scum team in one way or the other, and that type of thinking leads townies to their demise. With that,

Vote: Llamafluff

. This would put LF at L-2.

Literally the scummiest thing I have ever seen.

Vote: LoudmouthLee

[LoudmouthLee]

How about you read my response, IAm.

[iamausername]

I have.

That is an explanation for why your NK speculation is OK, while Llama's is not. Now, what makes Llama's NK speculation worse than when I did it, or when Nexus did it, or when Leech did it?

Can you cite any examples of previous games were you have seen people say they are likely night kills? Can you demonstrate that you have seen this come proportionally more from scum than town?

Why is scumLlama more likely to push for No Lynch in this situation than townLlama?