Newbie 1070 - Game Over

[Quaroath]

Sorry i've been delinquent. Life sucks right now. Catching up asap, been even more delinquent in other games so gotta do those first.

[Alduskkel]

Vote Count

Ellyssa (1) - T-Bone
Stels (1) - Rain

Not Voting (5) - barefoot-fighter, Stels, Ellyssa, splitfarvle, Quaroath

With 7 alive it is 4 to lynch.

[T-Bone]

I'm back. You guys can breathe again.

[Ellyssa]

Welcome back!

@Mod

, sorries, but is there a rule for the time a replacement has to post into a game, please?

[Stels]

Vote: Stels

From #102 to #156, you pegged Jack to be scum then town, for no reason at all, which is easy for scum to do since they know who's town. What's more suspicious is that you've list him as town right after Ellyssa and I did.

Because he started to do pro-town things?

[Rain]

Would've been good to list them then rather than now.

[splitfarvle]

It's been a long day but my thoughts have been turning towards the game and I want to weigh in with hopefully a useful post.

I was surprised that Jack got the nightkill, as I was mostly neutral towards him and I expected someone like Ellyssa, for her imo town playing, or Rain or Stels, for their relative experience, to get killed instead. Hell, I even expected myself to get nightkilled before Jack since I turn up as town in a few player's analyses. (As a side-note, I'm seeing some wisdom in T-Bone's dislike of lists)

I know that more experienced players have counseled against reading too much into either Rain's hammer, or Jack's nightkill, but in honor of Jack I'm going to be stubborn and do it anyway:

I've seen the argument about the mafia not hammering quickly so early put forward by Stels in #231, but I'm of a mind to counter with a couple of things. Firstly, it's not convincing to me because there was some talk about ending the day since the game had slowed, and someone could easily point to this talk after hammering as an excuse, which I admit Rain did not do.

What Rain did do, however, brings me to my second thought about the Jack nightkill: in the Great No Lynch Saga of D1, I brought up something that caught my eye in #85. TL;DR it seemed like Rain was coaching Jack on how to appear as town, and it seemed like Jack was following direction. Before Jack flipped, Rain said this:

@splitvarvle
Yes, it does seem like coaching. However, that only becomes relevant if Jack flips scum. In my opinion, newbscums are much likelier to acquiesce to peer pressure, if only to please other people. Thus, I sincerely believe Jack Forman to be town, if newbtown.

If we're going to discuss planting seeds, I would like to point out that Rain not only links Jack's flip with his own, he also emphatically states that Jack is town.

[Nachomamma8]

Three people who I won't allow to be lynched today are Elyssa, Stels, and Quaorath. They are my three strongest town reads, and I'm fairly sure they are town. I don't approve of T-Bone's case on Elyssa, mainly because he's saying Elyssa framed him with the nightkilll and is too townie to be scum. From personal experience, I can mention that scum rarely are the first to point on their own framejobs; saying something like that draws attention, and scum would rather watch two townies battle it out than have to mislynch that townie themselves. I would like T-Bone to explain his other suspects, though. I feel this response might be tainted a little bit by OMGUS, so it'll be beneficial to see his cases on everyone else.

Right now, the person I want to see lynched is Rain.
The mistake in his ISO #7 reeks of scum pushing for an easy target; after all, how can reads be valid if he can't even keep his top scum suspect's names straight?
I also take issue with his hammer of muh; this was after the scumread, then leaning town read he had of them, with the reasoning given that "I don't see anything else happening and I'm getting bored". This is not the calibre of town play Rain normally plays, this is lazy scum play.
In addition, his case on Stels is remarkably terrible and doesn't hold any push behind it at all, which suggests that he's just sitting back and waiting for some opportune bandwagon to form.

[splitfarvle]

But every post you have made in this game has been concise and deliberate. I hazard to say you've been too careful to look scummy. So much that you look uber town. And that my friends is a dangerous thing. As a member of the town you should worry about making mistakes or looking scummy. Your goal isn't to survive, your goal is to nail scum. Meanwhile the mafia's goal is to survive.

Even though Ellyssa already addressed this, I want to emphasize that T-Bone seems to be accusing her of things that he's doing as well minus the uber-town part. Further, many of his posts on D1 are either contentless defenses about his posting frequency and posting style, tips about playing the game, or votes that go nowhere because there's no followup pressure.

After all that, I'm still not ready to vote because my first D2 vote was probably going to be for barefoot and I'd really like to hear from her replacement first. I'd also like to hear from Quaroath, personal issues permitting, since my town feeling for him has steadily degraded over the course of the game.

Preview edit: Welcome to the game, Nachomamma8! You have an uphill battle with me, but I'm glad to see more pressure on Rain.

[Quaroath]

@Splits post #238 on Rains Hammer I completely agree with this. Barefoot had two votes, I'd been vocal all D1 about suspecting her, and my vote wasn't one of the two... and you didn't think it was possible a wagon would form on barefoot?

@Rains #241, you don't think a 3 vote bandwagon, that might have have reached four would have been beneficial long term as a competing wagon to the muh wagon? This feels like information denial.

I feel an itch that the muh hammer wasn't because you were bored, it's because you didn't want a competing wagon to form because that could only help town.
VOTE: Rain

@Splits #256 WIFOM INCOMING

Going into N1 I expected one of two particular people to eat a bullet. Jack was one of them.

I'm surprised you are surprised Jack ate the NK, because everyone that mentioned his alignment pegged him as town. Thats a huge target

everyone

in the game painted on his back. Why would scum not kill the tagged as town guy?

@activity - Wife in hospital, partial lung collapse concurent with pneumonia. All is fine now but it has really disrupted my life.

[Ellyssa]

@Split and @Quaroath and lists: Yeah, I did half expect to not survive the night, for about the same reasons you all mention. That partly contributed to why I immediately brought the NK up to start D2. It links to the pro-list argument I made in that post to T-Bone - I disagree lists are bad in small/non-complex games, because I'd think that the Mafia would be able to pick out who the townies considered most townie anyway, since people are always declaring who they feel are most townie or obvtown. I got onto Quaroath's case a little bit for that in D1 when he singled me out in particular as obvtown in D1, but he wasn't the only one who did.

I feel lists are good because they make it so that people have to list their suspects too - Like, it draws negative attention to everyone in turn, from the players they suspect, so there's no hiding and coasting along by simply neutral-reading everyone, with no chance of offending anyone. It seems in many other games, everyone's been asked to put forth their town/scum lists and from that scum is caught when their play later on is noticed to be inconsistent with their reads. Though of course opinions change over time, too. But the earlier those lists go down, the harder for scum to hide and the more explanations they must make to get onto a lynchwagon, and easier for people to find contradictions on who others support vs their actual actions.

Which is why I strongly disliked muh's townhunting list, because it listed all his good, safe reads while leaving him options later on to say "oh I thought so and so was scum all the time" and weasel out of a situation that questions his voting pattern and motive. Ditto on why I now think T-Bone is scum, because his refusal to post a list early on coupled with his supposed suspicion of me in D1 (the "every post you have made in the game has been concise and deliberate" bit in #242), which magically wasn't mentioned until he got called out in D2, nor came with any examples that he should already have had and not have to take time to dig for since I was his prime suspect ("you have been the one person to stick out to me").. all that to me clearly shows signs of someone trying not to commit to reads unless they're safe or desperately needed, but instead stay on the fence until he either sees a prime opportunity to mislynch someone, or is attacked a little bit too close for comfort.

Plus Rain started the lists to jumpstart discussion to try to boost the level of activity, which T-Bone had been understandably complaining about too (lack of activity) at the time, but then went 180 degrees and flatly refused to participate in it. It's like he first says he likes short, quick games (implying lots of quick activity flow), but then doesn't want to post actual content that may out himself in the future. But of course everyone else should post more, so he can play judge and jury.

@Nacho #257: Welcome (redux)! I have a question for you from your opening post; why do you think Stels is town? I agree with you on the other two though, but Stels is currently lying neutral for me. Did anything stand out for you? In particular, you seem to have a playing history with him - is it something from that that is jumping out re: him as town? Or that your main suspect is pushing him and thus eliminates him as scum? [Also I have two ll's in my name, grr! ]

@Quaroath #259: Omg yuk. Condolences and glad she's doing better. Also, interesting case being built on Rain (by others too). Will be interested to hear any rebuttal. I admittedly haven't read much into him because I still have a town read on him from D1 carryover. I will have to reread (again) to see how his posts and actions hold up if read from a scummy light, as I hadn't personally seen much I could attack in his posts. Which is a bit weird, as even Quaroath, whom I read as town as well, I have seen a number of things to attack in his posts. But that's getting into that Too Townie territory from earlier again.

I am satisfied with Nacho's first post for now. It's obvious he did do a read, but did not fall into an interesting scumtell trap that I would have voted him for. (I prefer not to mention what it is, till after the game if desired or it's triggered, since it may still come up in the next couple posts -- no pressure ). Now that both him and T-Bone are around and have posted (briefly, at least) and T-Bone is in no danger of being lynched yet, I can put my money where my fingers are:
VOTE: T-Bone.

[T-Bone]

^^OMGUS!!!!!!!!

...

Ahem anyway.

I

[T-Bone]

Hmmm my reply is gone. That's weird...and sucks. Stupid quick reply box...

Sigh, I'll try again after work I suppose...

[Rain]

Even if there were a competing bandwagon, I'd still have voted for muh instead of barefoot.

While I agree that my case vs Stels isn't quite as convincing as I would have hoped, it is about the only thing that jumps to me right now.

I hope I'm not misquoting here.

This is not the calibre of town play Rain normally plays, this is lazy scum play.

You're using meta now? Of my whole 5 games?

Unless you have some ungodly explanation to why Stels is town, my vote stays.

[splitfarvle]

Even if there were a competing bandwagon, I'd still have voted for muh instead of barefoot.

It was more than just a vote, though. It was the hammer on muh, ending D1 about a week before the deadline and cutting off the developments of muh and barefoot both. Now muh is gone and barefoot has replaced out, and what we have left is your actions and reasons behind them. Were you bored enough with the game to ignore what was going on in it? A lot happened on the very page you posted your hammer on, did nothing strike you as worthy of waiting a bit?

[splitfarvle]

Game question to any/everybody: does it benefit the town to list who we think is town, or does it just give the scum ideas about who to target? Right now, I'm thinking it's better to focus on who we think is scummy.

Speaking of that, who are your (yes you!) scum picks at this point? I believe the scum are in this group: Rain, T-Bone, Nachomamma8

[T-Bone]

Christ I have a lot to type...again... But hey since I'm not using the quick reply box, maybe I'll toss in a few quotes since its the "town thing" to do.

Iiiincoming WoT! @T-Bone #242 Don't worry about answering this before you get back from the vacation. Enjoy it first! I mean you no harm, I just want to lynch you! I won't vote you before you get back and have a chance to reply to it at least, so there shouldn't be a quick lynch.

If this becomes relevant, this is my first game of Mafia ever, anywhere, though I have read a fair number (like 10) on Mafiascum. Now to my points.

Nope not relevant. You're not playing like a noob.

It seems to me you're using the Too Townie fallacy on me. I posted what I did as a straightforward analysis of the N1 and D1 flips, as what other new information IS there otherwise? Has anyone else come up with anything else? You have, but that was just about entirely OMGUS on my point because I shed light on you to begin the day, as it was either you or Rain from the connections I pointed out, and I had more of a scummy read on you at that point. And I do call it OMGUS because your second post reply (#232) fairly clearly indicated the upcoming accusation.

Right because you shed light on me with your seed planting, I can't vote for you now whether I intended to all along. For the record I intended to come after you from the get go. The amount of time I waited to do so was insignificant. I wanted to give everyone a chance to check in first.

Frankly, that's some heavy seed planting. I don't like it. There is no reason for a member of the town to plant seeds. There's a different between asking a question to provoke discussion, and seed planting. In #227 you said "well you had motive to kill him T-Bone." Now one could argue that you didn't intend to type it like that and try to rub it off as your first time playing.

I darn well intended to type it like that. I don't see why not. He was at odds with you near the end of the day, you can't deny that, and I'm not sure whether to classify your seemingly overly defensive post as pure OMGUS or a panicked attempt to get me off your wagon. Maybe you don't like it because it hits too close to home? Pointing out a connection I observed is seed-planting, now? You do realise that's how almost every game on the site is played, looking at vote patterns and relationships (or lack of) between players in the game?

You act as if I was the only one at odds with Jack during Day 1. I defended his no lynch. He was brought to L-1 at one point. By this reasoning, just about everyone had motive to kill him. Why didn't you bring up the 4 players that voted him? Rain, Quaroth, Stels, and Barefoot all had a vote on him at one point. Didn't they just have as much motive to kill him as I did?

So if every game is looking at voting patterns and relationships, why did you only single out me and Jack?

(I assume you mean too careful to

not

look scummy, and as a member of the town I

shouldn't

worry about making mistakes, else I'm not quite sure what you mean in the first paragraph of this quote, sorry.)

Yeah you got it. I have typing issues sometimes.

My goals in the game so far have been to point at who I find most scummy. I was wrong in muh flipping scum, as was everyone else on the lynchwagon, but I'm satisfied that the reasons we lynched him were solid at the time. Yes I have been somewhat deliberate, I feel that way lends itself to less misinterpretation. I've tried to explain the reason everytime I swap or do not swap votes, for one, so others could decide if I were right and come on board too, or as Stels did recently, overturn/reopen my thoughts on barefoot. Do you prefer a haphazard method with mostly short posts and dubious voting reasons like you've done so far (I'll come back to this) instead? And we shouldn't worry about being scummy? Why not? That causes mislynches, my friend! How did that work out for muh and his unafraid townie vote on barefoot? Earned him the hammer vote from Rain.

Eventhough I was on the muh lynch, I'm not satisfied with the results since he flipped town. I don't see why you should be satisfied with a mislynch. I'm more concerned with what went wrong so we don't mislynch again.

Lessee. My starting post on D2 was made about 12 hours after day broke. Let's say I didn't make the post, or made some irreverent, cute comment like you did. And let's say from that you didn't attack me back. Let's see what OTHER content there has been up to this point. We're like 65-70 hours into Day 2 now depending on when I finish this post. So nearly the 3 day prod thing.
- You: Two fluff posts early, and one IIOA post later on (about Jack being one less mislynch cause he was totally townie).

Other than this post you are currently reading, I generally don't make large posts. So I posted two "fluff" posts at the beginning of the day. And? I was harming what exactly? Was I derailing all the early Day 2 discussion?

Really? And you're voting me for being concise (and deliberate). Right. You yourself talked about the slow speed of the game in #230 . Not to mention that's the exact opposite of a typical scum playstyle of coasting under the radar. I agree with Jack and Stels, you've been fluffing your post count with inane one-liners and sarcastic comments and "hurry hurry so I can get to night" posts, except when you've been attacked like now. Whereas refusing to do townie things like post your list of reads when asked - you want to know why that isn't townie?
- If you are town, and had gotten NKed, we'd have gotten a lot less info from your death. Look at this discussion that's started from Jack's list.
- There's an opinion that says that helps scum figure out who's townie and who isn't and thus who to target. That's a fallacy in small, open, clearly-factioned games, they're not complex enough for such a thing.
-

It lets you waffle about and coast through D1, and then fall on whatever side of the fence you choose that is more convenient for you, in subsequent days, when it matters.

That's not the only reason I'm voting you. I never once claimed I had a surefire 1000% correct reason, or even a good one. I just have a reason to vote you. It's only ONE vote. It's not set in stone.

- Well I wasn't expecting to get nightkilled so I'm okay anyway.
- There's an opinion sure. I don't share it.
- Show me an example of me fence sitting. Is my vote on you 'fence-sitting?'

About my point about your dubious reads point earlier. You have two votes so far this game.
- One was on Stels for being second to vote (discounting Rain's RVS vote) on Jack. Flimsy reason as hell.
- You then follow it up with a vote on muh, though coincidentally you are the second vote on this townie's wagon this time. So it's not okay when others do it for whatever legit reason they have, but then I get OMGUSed when I attack you partly for being on this wagon, and pooling that with other circumstantial evidence to make my case?

- Never claimed it was a good reason. What may not be a good enough reason for you to vote was good enough for me. It's subjective.

And yes, it's OMGUS (at least the way I see it currently, lacking supposed evidence from other days, even though I haven't voted you yet. Reason I haven't is we're still waiting for barefoot's replacement to make a post. And you're away now.

Here's a question for you then. I'd like to hear why your vote was

not

OMGUS.

Because it isn't? As we see a post later, you're voting me now. Tell me why YOUR vote wasn't OMGUS?

Lastly, a good chunk of my opening D2 post, about your #211 quote, was directed to the last question thrown your way just before D1 ended, just to make sure it didn't get swept under the carpet, since it did not get answered then. Your logic works in more complex setups but totally breaks apart in this newbie game's open one, which was why you were called on it by more than one player. Plus no one HAD brought up claiming up till that point.

Wait, why is my philosophy on how to play important to the game in any shape or form? I'm not the IC player. I don't understand how it's relevant or why it's a part of your reasoning for voting.

Three people who I won't allow to be lynched today are Elyssa, Stels, and Quaorath. They are my three strongest town reads, and I'm fairly sure they are town. I don't approve of T-Bone's case on Elyssa, mainly because he's saying Elyssa framed him with the nightkilll and is too townie to be scum. From personal experience, I can mention that scum rarely are the first to point on their own framejobs; saying something like that draws attention, and scum would rather watch two townies battle it out than have to mislynch that townie themselves. I would like T-Bone to explain his other suspects, though. I feel this response might be tainted a little bit by OMGUS, so it'll be beneficial to see his cases on everyone else.

My other suspects? As in a list? I'm not going through this again. Clearly Ellyssa is my suspect, because that is where my vote is. Why would I have multiple suspects? There are only two scum in this game, and we can only lynch one at a time. Nothing else has happened to warrant me to change my vote. When and if that point happens, you'll know. IF I had a case against someone else, wouldn't I have made it by now and voted them instead?

I also like that you've already decided that 3 people aren't getting lynched. What if one of those people turn out to be scum? That's a pretty bold statement to make. Shouldn't you be open to all possibilities? You've already made it clear that you're gonna tunnel on Rain, Split, and myself. Thats some pretty narrow minded thinking.

Even though Ellyssa already addressed this, I want to emphasize that T-Bone seems to be accusing her of things that he's doing as well minus the uber-town part. Further, many of his posts on D1 are either contentless defenses about his posting frequency and posting style, tips about playing the game, or votes that go nowhere because there's no followup pressure.

Fair enough.

But here has been the post I have been waiting for.... Just one thing. If you intended to vote for me, why did it take you three posts of building a case on me to do so? We're you hoping that other people would say "yeah that T-Bone fellow might be worth lynching" before you cast your vote? Did you see that Nacho might be persuaded to vote me, so you felt more comfortable casting your vote? Yes I did wait to cast my vote to, but that's slightly different. Not everyone had checked in, and no one had even considered a vote on you until I did.

@Split and @Quaroath and lists: Yeah, I did half expect to not survive the night, for about the same reasons you all mention. That partly contributed to why I immediately brought the NK up to start D2. It links to the pro-list argument I made in that post to T-Bone - I disagree lists are bad in small/non-complex games, because I'd think that the Mafia would be able to pick out who the townies considered most townie anyway, since people are always declaring who they feel are most townie or obvtown. I got onto Quaroath's case a little bit for that in D1 when he singled me out in particular as obvtown in D1, but he wasn't the only one who did.

I feel lists are good because they make it so that people have to list their suspects too - Like, it draws negative attention to everyone in turn, from the players they suspect, so there's no hiding and coasting along by simply neutral-reading everyone, with no chance of offending anyone. It seems in many other games, everyone's been asked to put forth their town/scum lists and from that scum is caught when their play later on is noticed to be inconsistent with their reads. Though of course opinions change over time, too. But the earlier those lists go down, the harder for scum to hide and the more explanations they must make to get onto a lynchwagon, and easier for people to find contradictions on who others support vs their actual actions.

Back to the list thing again. Fine, you like lists and find them productive. More power to you. Why is that one of your selling points for your case against me?

Plus Rain started the lists to jumpstart discussion to try to boost the level of activity, which T-Bone had been understandably complaining about too (lack of activity) at the time, but then went 180 degrees and flatly refused to participate in it. It's like he first says he likes short, quick games (implying lots of quick activity flow), but then doesn't want to post actual content that may out himself in the future. But of course everyone else should post more, so he can play judge and jury.

Oh you mean that time where NO ONE HAD POSTED CAUSE THE DAY JUST STARTED?? How horrible of me to mention I'm going on vacation and I want to play a bit before that happens.

I am satisfied with Nacho's first post for now. It's obvious he did do a read, but did not fall into an interesting scumtell trap that I would have voted him for. (I prefer not to mention what it is, till after the game if desired or it's triggered, since it may still come up in the next couple posts -- no pressure ). Now that both him and T-Bone are around and have posted (briefly, at least) and T-Bone is in no danger of being lynched yet, I can put my money where my fingers are:
VOTE: T-Bone.

Wait, without making a massive post, what is your case on me? Because here is what I got, and you can let me know what I missed

- I don't like lists
- I made some weird and badly worded comment about mafia philosophy that not everyone liked
- Because I'm suspicious of you
- Because I think you were seed-planting and breadcrumbing my lynch, and you contend that you weren't
- Because I "OMGUSed" you, since you were breadcrumbing my lynch even though that's a bad reason for me to vote you
- Because I make one or two line posts commenting on a single thing?
- Because I don't post massively huge posts like this?

I really don't understand what I did wrong to warrant the vote.

I'm gonna lay it out simple for anyone who asks "why are you voting her T-Bone lol?". Yes I found Ellyssa's posts in Day 1 suspect. No that's not my end all be all reason for voting. It's just something I put out there.

What set me off was the seed-planting she did. "lol T-Bone you had motive to kill Jack". Yeah me and everyone else currently playing. So there that's my reason for the vote. I feel fairly good about it. And then of course breadcrumbing that she was gonna vote me, but denying she was doing so, only to reveal that my vote was an OMGUS of her not-actually-breadcrumbing, only to have something in her satisfied enough to finally cast a vote. Honestly? I'm just plain confused by all this.

Christ I'm not doing one of these again for along time. Too long of a post for my liking. I was tempted to pull a Quaroth and triple post, but I thought better of it.

NEW POSTS WHILE I WAS TYPING!

@Split - I don't think we need to get hung up on what everyone feels about mafia philosophy. Jack had a "scummy" and "incorrect" philosophy and he flipped town.

Who do I think is scum? Why our handy-dandy Mod has posted a vote count recently and its got my vote. I have another idea floating in my head, but for now its not relevant enough to what I'm doing.

[T-Bone]

If no one reads that, I won't be offended. Honest.

[Ellyssa]

Game question reply:

I think it depends on the game; to me in this case it really isn't complex enough that it matters. Open setup and a simple two faction thing, we know the numbers of each, though not the roles. So there are only two scum, and instead of knowing who is obvtown to target, the mafia can easily just target the people that are not on anyone's scum lists, since they're thus on everyone's town lists. Town lists would show the degree to which people think others were town, though.

But I feel list + vote analysis is the surest way to catch scum in subsequent days if everyone makes the list early on, since you get to find things like Rain's [url=http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 883199#249[/url] and see how the person explains it. I've read several games where Mafia get caught out because they name someone as strong town, then a couple days later vote them to be on the bandwagon with something like "I agree with X's analysis, I've been noticing your scum play since day 1" etc. So personally I like lists as a mafia hunting tool in general. Even if it gives them a bit of info, I don't think it gives them much in these open setups either. And because it's also one of the things we can revisit on a player that died during the night kill.

---

Scum picks:

T-bone is currently high on my scumdar for reasons stated earlier. I'm not sure if I post too much since no one else seems to agree!

I think there may be one in the Quaroath/Rain/Stels voting bloc too, just because they've been at each other since middle day 1, but concentrating on a different person each time, and effectively tying up votes in relation to trying to lynch anyone else. First Rain attacked Quaroath and Stels joined in while Quaroath attacked both of them back, then now Rain attacked Stels and Quaroath attacked Rain (joining on Split's points) and Stels hasn't weighed in on either of them due to RL assignments. I get the feeling one of them is instigating the other two a bit to keep the flames fanned, but I can't decide who, because both Rain and Quaroath have voted each other, as well as Stels (and even Jack) by now.

Nacho/barefoot has residual suspicion, but it's weaker than I felt middle of day 1, because I felt on a reread I did near the end of D1 that much of it was due to a slight language barrier, so she ended up fighting lots of words and phrasing instead. There were some valid points early on that were either newbtells or scumtells (though possibly both) that were pointed out, but she seemed to try to avoid them after. Nacho has only posted once and I did not get scum vibes from that.

---

Answering T-Bone separately.

[T-Bone]

*grabs popcorn*

[Ellyssa]

@T-Bone #266
Okay, I wrote up a really long post and am trying to cut it down because I just got to the end of your post and saw the massive post comment. I'm going to try. Believe me, this was longer! >< Maybe this will make it easier for others to follow too. This means some less important rebuttals got left out, however. If I miss any points in your post that you want me to address as well, please feel free to point out.

My case on you:
1. The

reaction

to my post, where you call it seed planting, is as suspicious to me as the actual action analysis. I tried to present the facts as I saw them, and my conclusions for them, opened up with questions to you, and then, as far as I can see, you became afraid and manufactured the case on me out of thin air after (see point 3 below). That isn't a breadcrumb, I flat out stated what I thought you were most suspicious from the analysis, and that was why I opened with a question on you from D1 again, asking why you had talked about claiming, as well as asking you who your reads were before anyone else had given theirs. My only other suspect had replaced out. If questioning is breadcrumbing future votes, I've probably done that to nearly everyone else this game. And so have many others. It's scumhunting, putting pressure on others.

2. I held out on my vote because I wanted to see Nacho's opening post. A replacing player's opening post can be very telling as to whether they are scum or town, especially when replacing into a scummy slot. He did not at all seem scummy, so earned back some townie points in my book that separated the two of you in my list. It's true you voted first, but I feel that was due to your OMGUS-like overreaction in #230 and #242, to my initial analysis. It's not that you're suspicious of me in and of itself. It's that you seemed to overreact by claiming I was your prime suspect for a large portion of D1 at first, besides evidence to the contrary (votes on others, no mention of this in D1) AND point 3 below. You're launching this as an "I knew it all along" attack but only when you were provoked, which sitting on the fence and not giving reads ALLOWED you to do.

3. You seem to be making unsubstantiated accusations, or keeping all the "evidence" to yourself, where you'll never be able to convince others to vote for me even if you truly believed that and had evidence. Even now, I don't see the requested examples of me being concise and deliberate in D1 and how that is remotely scummy. I requested them at the bottom of #246 in underlined text, and you ignored it. I shall repeat it here:

And now you say,

But every post you have made in this game has been concise and deliberate.

and

Even though I didn't say anything, you have been the one person to stick out to me Ellyssa. I didn't say anything till now, because I wanted you to post carefree and see what would happen. Your first post in Day 2 gave me the answers I was looking for.

This implies you have examples from D1.

Give me examples I can defend against. I can't defend against a "gut feeling" any more than Stels could randomly being second on a wagon.

4. It's not that you're not making massive posts etc. Split isn't, but his posts have been targetted scumhunting too. Rain has been too to a point. Muh wasn't either. A good portion (not all!) of your posts are a little on the sarcastic and flippant side, mocking people for not having reads on you and thus calling you lurking, or trying to rush town along but refusing to give information at every possible turn. It's anti-town even IF it's not scum. And your votes have been for undefendable general gut reasons with no proof shown.

5. You've been fence-sitting, or at least trying your best to stay neutral, an example being the lists. I've explained why in the italic waffle point in #246, as well as in #260. I also respond to this in the excerpts below, but nonetheless it's one of my reasons that together make the case, as it contains example quotes as requested. And not wanting to consider more than one suspect is ludicrous and stinks of wanting to only work on one mislynch at a time, since scum know who the mafia are and thus that everyone else is town and so want to concentrate their efforts on a mislynch one at a time. Plus it contradicts when you had two suspects (Stels and muh) earlier anyway.



Below are a couple other excerpts from my original written post that I wanted to keep but didn't squeeze in above.

---

Replying to this quote from the post:

You act as if I was the only one at odds with Jack during Day 1. I defended his no lynch. He was brought to L-1 at one point. By this reasoning, just about everyone had motive to kill him. Why didn't you bring up the 4 players that voted him? Rain, Quaroth, Stels, and Barefoot all had a vote on him at one point. Didn't they just have as much motive to kill him as I did?

So if every game is looking at voting patterns and relationships, why did you only single out me and Jack?

I singled out Jack because he left more info on his flip that muh did. I looked at his flip and his last post. He was never brought to L-1, actually, barefoot never voted him. Hell barefoot was the only one that supported him.
- Rain voted Jack in #30, unvoted in #65.
- Quaroath voted Jack in #47, unvoted in #76.
- Stels voted him in #55, unvoted in #154.
(And isn't it a weird coincidence they're all at each others' throats now after all being on Jack at the same time in the past?)

Plus Jack did not die due to lynch, so I think the votes on him were less relevant. What I meant by the motive was not who voted him, as I think they all had strong reads on him at the end. Instead it was #199 and #206 where HE attacked YOU as a preface to Night 1 that I am referring to with the motive thing. Two of his last three posts.

---

And this quote:

Show me an example of me fence sitting. Is my vote on you 'fence-sitting?'

Your vote on me is not an example of fence-sitting, but it is an example of getting off the fence on the side that suits your current predicament the most, after having sat on the fence through Day 1. Your fence sitting in Day 1 came right in the link in your quote, I shall repeat it here:

@ Rain, sorry I don't post lists. I don't believe they help. You may disagree and have X amount of reasons, so if you want to teach everyone else why posting lists is important, but I don't feel em, so I'll rarely post em.

That is fence sitting because you refuse to show your hand. Here's more:

Is my vote on Stels circumstantial? Kinda. If anyone actually read my post I debated between voting him and the person who voted behind him (name escapes me). Ultimately I went with Stels. Someone said, "well T-Bone is latching on to one scumtell", but isn't exactly what everyone was doing on Page 2? "Oh Jack voted No lynch, scumtell!" Now I realize since then the focus has shifted away from him, but still.

<snip>

So here's where I'm at. Stels hasn't convinced me to remove my vote from him.I'm not advocating that we end the Day right this very second. I'm saying this is the lynch I believe in at the moment. I won't join a Day 1 bandwagon for the sake of joining a bandwagon.

Obviously I didn't like Muh's "lets policy lynch" idea, so I pointed it out. However, I don't feel it's best to try to accuse multiple players at the same time. Ultimately we can only lynch one person (or none at all) today. I'll be comfortable with a Muh lynch if I decide he suddenly becomes a better choice.

It's interesting to see how people change their playstyle once people start putting pressure on them. I've been reading the posts. I don't have an opinion of Quaroth. Talking in circles doesn't seem all that scummy to me.

And finally Ellyssa since I guess I'm addressing your questions, I don't even recall what barefoot did that warranted him the votes he got.

Summary:
- I know my vote on Stels is weak, but I have no better read and refuse to commit to one.
- I won't put pressure on people for the sake of putting pressure on people.
- I don't like muh's idea but won't vote him at the moment, but oh, maybe if I decide the grass on his side is better, I'll vote him.
- I read Quaroath's posts but haven't decided if he's lynchable or not. But hey, even though I won't put pressure on people, I sure like seeing how they react to pressure. Maybe I'll find a safe bandwagon to hop on.
- I know barefoot has votes and Ellyssa's trying to convince me to vote her, but I don't want to bother reading up to find out why she has the votes even though she was one of the potential lynches. Interesting. Maybe this is the link between the two of you if you both are scum.

Anyway. That works as another example of fence-sitting, I think.

[Nachomamma8]

Even if there were a competing bandwagon, I'd still have voted for muh instead of barefoot.

But why?

While I agree that my case vs Stels isn't quite as convincing as I would have hoped, it is about the only thing that jumps to me right now.

Nothing jumps out from the Elyssa/T-Bone debate?

You're using meta now? Of my whole 5 games?

Yes. Of course, that isn't the majority of my case against you so you have nothing to worry about.

Unless you have some ungodly explanation to why Stels is town, my vote stays.

You shouldn't need some ungodly reason if you don't have much of a case.
I think that Stels is town because of how transparent he's been this game. As scum, he's a bit more reserved. He avoided the muh bandwagon yesterday, but didn't call muh town for cred after the lynch. He's also had some really good scumhunting this game (#9 and #12, especially), and nothing he has done has been remotely scummy.

I was somewhat hoping I could prod you into action with that last post of mine, but that failed miserable. Let's heat things up a little.

Unvote, Vote: Rain

[Nachomamma8]

My other suspects? As in a list? I'm not going through this again. Clearly Ellyssa is my suspect, because that is where my vote is. Why would I have multiple suspects? There are only two scum in this game, and we can only lynch one at a time. Nothing else has happened to warrant me to change my vote. When and if that point happens, you'll know. IF I had a case against someone else, wouldn't I have made it by now and voted them instead?

I also like that you've already decided that 3 people aren't getting lynched. What if one of those people turn out to be scum? That's a pretty bold statement to make. Shouldn't you be open to all possibilities? You've already made it clear that you're gonna tunnel on Rain, Split, and myself. Thats some pretty narrow minded thinking.

Yes, as in a list. As to why you need multiple suspects... what if your first suspect is wrong? Then your entire day is spent pushing the lynch of a townie, and then the next day you'll be mislynched for pushing that mislynch so far. Even if you're right, you'll just be NK'ed during the night, and then town will have nothing to go off of the following days, even though you've just demonstrated that you're an effective scumhunter. Having multiple suspects also makes you, as a townie, more transparent, meaning that it will make more sense to people when you make your switches from suspect to suspect, and you won't have to waste time explaining why you're switching.

And how is taking three people out of the lynch pool worse than attempting to make the lynch pool a grand total of one person? It's hypocritical to accuse someone of tunneling, considering the extent that you're tunneling right now.

[T-Bone]

I'm not tunneling. I am 100% willing to lynch whoever I think is scum. Right now that happens to be Ellyssa. But, you see, I have this handy ability to move my vote around. It's generally called 'unvoting'.

But, if you must know I am considering the Rain vote myself. But for now, I don't need to move my vote from where it is.

Since Ellyssa will use this short post as another part of her evidence, I'll get to your massive post(s) when I have more time then just a few minutes to glaze over the thread.

[Stels]

Spoiler: Click Me! -->

Would've been good to list them then rather than now.

Sorry, he diverted my attention when Quaroath started acting suspicious for me and after that started to actually be decisive.

It's been a long day but my thoughts have been turning towards the game and I want to weigh in with hopefully a useful post.

I was surprised that Jack got the nightkill, as I was mostly neutral towards him and I expected someone like Ellyssa, for her imo town playing, or Rain or Stels, for their relative experience, to get killed instead. Hell, I even expected myself to get nightkilled before Jack since I turn up as town in a few player's analyses. (As a side-note, I'm seeing some wisdom in T-Bone's dislike of lists)

Then again, they did get rid of one SE. Why not try to lynch the others like we did Day 1?

I've seen the argument about the mafia not hammering quickly so early put forward by Stels in #231, but I'm of a mind to counter with a couple of things. Firstly, it's not convincing to me because there was some talk about ending the day since the game had slowed, and someone could easily point to this talk after hammering as an excuse, which I admit Rain did not do.

Then again, it was referred to a single individual (barefoot-fighter). The talk about ending the day early is null and void, even though I didn't mention her, but if you look at the post above mine (232) then you'll see the light to this point you raise up.

@Nacho #257: Welcome (redux)! I have a question for you from your opening post; why do you think Stels is town? I agree with you on the other two though, but Stels is currently lying neutral for me. Did anything stand out for you? In particular, you seem to have a playing history with him - is it something from that that is jumping out re: him as town? Or that your main suspect is pushing him and thus eliminates him as scum? [Also I have two ll's in my name, grr! ]

Can't help but notice that Quaroath you view as town and agree with Nacho, but in the next post you contradict yourself entirely and put him in the scum-picks... Wishy-washy much?

I think that Stels is town because of how transparent he's been this game.

Sorry for being transparent >_> I am lazy after all.

I also like that you've already decided that 3 people aren't getting lynched. What if one of those people turn out to be scum? That's a pretty bold statement to make. Shouldn't you be open to all possibilities? You've already made it clear that you're gonna tunnel on Rain, Split, and myself. Thats some pretty narrow minded thinking.

Yes, as in a list. As to why you need multiple suspects... what if your first suspect is wrong? Then your entire day is spent pushing the lynch of a townie, and then the next day you'll be mislynched for pushing that mislynch so far. Even if you're right, you'll just be NK'ed during the night, and then town will have nothing to go off of the following days, even though you've just demonstrated that you're an effective scumhunter. Having multiple suspects also makes you, as a townie, more transparent, meaning that it will make more sense to people when you make your switches from suspect to suspect, and you won't have to waste time explaining why you're switching.[/quote]
Sorry Nacho, but this strikes me as coaching T-Bone :'(
VOTE: Nachomamma8