Micro 438: Greatest Idea Mafia - Game Over

[guille2015]

Does the oneshot Dayvig end the day?

[guille2015]

I mean, the wayyou guys are talking means that it wont, but I want to make sure.

[guille2015]

I want to hear Trow's claim before Alch has his way with either Istott or Slimer. Then I want to say something that might clear up something that is worrying me.

[MrTrow]

I will admit I haven't actually read much of Trow's posting. It's dense and needs formatting.

As you wish. (the following is a neat 'point by point' list of questions)

• What is your issue with my formatting in my transcription of 'point by point listed events in chronological order'. in other words: what is your excuse for completely ignoring that one(219) (i'm perfectly willing to buy 'hard to read' on some other posts, but not that one)
  
  

• @Mod: If someone were to have the role Town Mason and there were no other Masons in the game, would they become IC or Chocolate Townie?

  Why did you ask this at that particular moment? (given how you ignore my posts, that can't be it)
  
  

• Cheers, that pretty much clears him from being group scum.

  I agree, but not for any reason you seem to believe. Care to explain how you come to this conclusion?
  
  

• Guille softed and then confirmed I was correct. He is a vig.

  Where is this confirmation? (the soft i can find, heck the discussion on the matter i can find but confirmation? I can find him practically denying it)
  
  

• If Trow doesn't shed any light on it, I'd say stott gives us more info.

  
  I hereby confirm i have no light to shed on the matter: there is no way i could have caused eyestott getting his cop-result despite slimers attempt to roleblock. I would like to know why you would want to 'lynch-for-info' over 'lynch the one who defended the one he (claims to have) caught lying'

[MrTrow]

@guille:

• why were
  you
  convinced a short (as in '3 non rvs-votes' short D1 would be helpful to town)? especially to the point you were willing to lynch someone you weren't convinced was scum
  
• any remarks on my breakdown of how the D1-quicklynch went down?
  
• why do you want Alch to 'have his way with either Istott or Slimer' before you clear something up? (this might just be a misread of your post, but that is what it says
  
• speaking of eye and slimer: do you have a preference?

@slimer:

• Short one: why are you so sure the 'liar you caught' isn't scum, especially with this buddy he would require already revealed

@eyestott

• given how you seem to be the only one remotely interested in actually defending the notion 'the D1-quicklynch could have been a genuine town-process', i'm looking forward to the 'not completely correct' aspects of my 219
  
• what is your reason (given your apparent believe you are dipoled with slimer) for not voting him?
  
• why (given how you popcorned to your top innocent for 'fast discussion') did you push the mass-claim at all and why DID you call for others to withhold their claims (direct consequence of popcorn)
  

• Look back. I never said that him breadcrumbing was a point against him. I said that my most recent experience was me fakecrumbing. I meant that breadcrumbing doesnt automatically make it so.

  
  Are you really trying to convince me this:

  Also, my last completed scum game had me fakebreadcrumbing flavour cop for the first two days.
  He's scum.
  I had no need to breadcrumb. Why did he?

  was not a point against him?
  
  

• As in, I was wrong, so I'm scum?

  No, as in, you were well aware your case was BS and pushed it anyway. For one: see the point above. For more, please answer my question about 219
  

• No, I'm saying: Okay, you can see a scum motivation for my actions. Do you see a town motivation?

  First, it is not my job to find a reason why what you did, might come from a town mindset. It is yours to present the town mindset which was actually behind it if someone presents a possible scum-explanation.
  Second: NO, i do not see a town motivation for a cop to claim when neither 'the cop himself is in no danger to get lynched' nor 'the
  fakeclaimer
  has a reasonable shot at escaping the lynch' nor 'the cop has any results to share'

[Espeonage]

Trow you reading bro?

Alch can shoot stott.

[MrTrow]

I'm reading.
And clearing up my involvement in the matter (none)
And asking (among others) the ones in front of the firing-squad to justify their actions
Your point?

[guille2015]

@guille:

why were you convinced a short (as in '3 non rvs-votes' short D1 would be helpful to town)? especially to the point you were willing to lynch someone you weren't convinced was scum
any remarks on my breakdown of how the D1-quicklynch went down?
why do you want Alch to 'have his way with either Istott or Slimer' before you clear something up? (this might just be a misread of your post, but that is what it says
speaking of eye and slimer: do you have a preference?

1) I wouldn't have lynched Diego, if I didn't think he was scum. "Also, my last completed scum game had me fakebreadcrumbing flavour cop for the first two days." quote from issot reminded me that just because he crumbed doesn't guaranty town, especially in this game.
2) I think it's accurate for the most part when I read it back then. Only thing I saw somewhat wrong is: "guille dismisses crumbs as newbie-useless" And I feel that you have a bit of a bias against me.
3) next post.
4) Slimer, but I agree that issott gives us more answers.

[guille2015]

Anyways, I can guarantee that Last night there were two killing parties. Werewolves and Something else (mafia likely). That may have changed if the werewolves were only one.

That said, I think that Issott should not be the daykill.

[guille2015]

Since I am leaving soon, I might not respond for a while. So before you guys ask, let me explain. I did not Kill Christmas, or better explained, my action did not result in Christmas's death. Had it been, Christmas would be a Treestump rather than dead. I did not explicitly confirm being a vig because I am not a vig (I'm a Bloodsucker), although I consider myself a vig as in the end results are the same.

So, the current plan by esp is good, and assumes that ESP and Alch are both town. It also assumes that one of Issott and slimer is town and the other is not. Am I correct in thinking this?

Daykill Slimer, and If town, we Lynch Issot, if scum we Lynch Trow or we can discuss it a bit more.

I treestump Trow, I should be Killed this night cause It would be hard for Scum to leave me alive.

Then If the original assumptions are right, then that Should give us the win.

[MrTrow]

@guille:

why were you convinced a short (as in '3 non rvs-votes' short D1 would be helpful to town)? especially to the point you were willing to lynch someone you weren't convinced was scum

1) I wouldn't have lynched Diego, if I didn't think he was scum. "Also, my last completed scum game had me fakebreadcrumbing flavour cop for the first two days." quote from issot reminded me that just because he crumbed doesn't guaranty town, especially in this game.

Ok, so i read more doubt in

I wasn't convinced that he was scum. I thought that all the time, Well maybe I wavered it a bit when I saw the Crumb. I wanted to wait for those that did not show up to post their remarks. But I was convinced that it would have been detrimental to the game if we waited. I don't think that Esp and Eyestott where wrong in thinking like that so I let it be.

Than was actually there. Ok i'm willing to buy that.
Still doesn't clear up why you were convinced such a short day would be helpful to town.

any remarks on my breakdown of how the D1-quicklynch went down?

2) I think it's accurate for the most part when I read it back then. Only thing I saw somewhat wrong is: "guille dismisses crumbs as newbie-useless" And I feel that you have a bit of a bias against me.

So you feel

• guille dismisses crumbs as newbie-useless
  
• espeonage calls diego's cop claim 'based on discussion on how good the cop actually is' (when calling for 'no investigation on me, protection over there')
  
• guille unvotes because of crumbs

Is not a correct representation of the posts linked?

As for the bias. I'm not really getting that one, especially if you consider my breakdown of D1
You are the only one actually involved in 'the quicklynch of a town cop' who WAS willing to consider he was town(newbie)
The only one who didn't post pure BS to make sure this lynch got through

i am still curious though: how are you so sure of esp?
as for eyestott and slimer: no, there is no guarantee at least 1 of them is town(they aren't in the same scumteam though)

[Espeonage]

I think killing stott is actually better. Because it gives more information as a whole which results in a better lylo if we end up on one.

[Espeonage]

As in dayvig stott.

[Alchemist21]

How much more info does stott's flip give than telling us slimer's alignment?

[guille2015]

So you feel

• guille dismisses crumbs as newbie-useless
  
• espeonage calls diego's cop claim 'based on discussion on how good the cop actually is' (when calling for 'no investigation on me, protection over there')
  
• guille unvotes because of crumbs

Is not a correct representation of the posts linked?


i am still curious though: how are you so sure of esp?
as for eyestott and slimer: no, there is no guarantee at least 1 of them is town(they aren't in the same scumteam though)

my post addresses Diego's previous post about having the cop target him. Has nothing to do with me dismissing his crumb.

As for Esp.Well, there is no guarantee that he is town, much less in this game, where the potential for there being lots of scum is high. and his admitted preference for picking SKs in the first Roll, however, his general play is overwelmingly town oriented and he knew I was a Vig Day 1 and did nothing about it. I am most inclined to think he is town.

[MrTrow]

How does disappearing after giving an order give us more than actually answering some damn questions?

Eyestott is more willing than slimer to answer questions.
I still expect slimer to answer 'why were you defending the liar, you yourself caught' (and yes i rate eyestotts willingness to answer questions HIGHER than than.

If we really are trying to maximize the information we have, may i suggest we go after one where we have all the information from he's ever willing to give us?

i hereby request the dayvig to target VOTE: espeonage

• Pushed the lynch of 'obv-newbie' for not knowing which is stronger (mason or cop)
  
• Claims to not have read the rules (convenient, as admitting to have read the rules would have been admitting the 'lynch-worthy wrong decision' diego had made, was in fact the right decision, also 'promoting shrug-based play')
  
• Argues diegos cop-claim was purely due to the discussion before about how powerful the cop is, when diego counters by pointing out he crumbed the role BEFORE the discussion, espeonage conveniently ignores this completely until guille unvotes because of it.
  
• After the unvote makes ignoring the post no longer a valid strategy tries (and apparently succeeds) to discredit the crumb by claiming crap like
  
  • I: difference between crumbing 'i AM the cop' and 'i WANT something from the cop': doesn't fit
    
  • C:
    could have been crumbed accidentally
    
    
  • OP: cop discussion was already going on (no it was not, all that was there was how there WAS a cop discarded(making it only a LESS likely claim to make) and no addition what so ever to the alleged discussion since the C
    Which was accidental
    )
  
  
• Tries to counter guille's decision to let diego live for now (but is wavering given the 'low probability of 2 cops in the game') by again overselling
  mason>> cop
  
  
• When it is pointed out diego is a newbie, he sells it as an argument why
  he should know (mason>>cop) because he is a newbie
  
  
• Responds to 'newbie question for advice' with 'advice to be a better scum' (trying to sell the idea he can't be town subliminally to us now?)
  
• Attempts to prevent and then discredit eyestott last minute tests
  
• D2: has yet to post any reason
  why
  he believes someone scum (other than numbers)
  
• Claims (1-shot pgo) completely unprovoked stated his D1 goal was to be become nk-target by becoming town-leader: there was nothing
  other than this claim
  why his plan couldn't still work, clarification for this has been asked, response: "I can't (be bothered) read(ing) your formatting"
  
• Somehow after pulling a 'draw the nightkill'-gambit as pgo in a night in which the deceased contained a killing faction, knows he wasn't targeted
  
• Responds to:
  'why did you consider discarding 'evangelistic townie' reason enough to tell others this was a scum-tell while 'still having to confirm what the role actually does' was your excuse for not voting yourself.
  with in order
  • I can't read that sentence, please rephrase (rephrased)
    
  • because i still had to confirm what the role actually does (confirming a part of the question, but dodging the issue entirely)
    
  • I can't (be bothered) read(ing) your formatting
  
  
• Responds to:
  Why don't you make your reads clear(specifically votes)
  with 'shrug', dancing around the accusation 'shrug-based-play is an anti-town tactic' ending in "I can't (be bothered) read(ing) your formatting"
  
• Asks the mod to confrim contents from a post he claims to never have read
  to be precise my accusation of 'mason>>cop is by the rules, incorrect', while asking that very question earlier (probably) would have saved diego and there was no reason other than the post he never read to ask it now
  
• Calls for a massclaim, which he was against before based on his own (unprovoked) claim (which miraculously turned the situation from eyestott cc'ed diego to 'half the town claimed already')
  
• After having been given a list of questions: explicitly listed against the "can't be bothered to read your formatting"-excuse refuses to answer by claiming i don't read (another empty shout-down)
  
• Having the last point (both the refusal to answer questions and the empty shoutdown) pointed out is countered by giving 'unmotivated dayvig-orders' only (again ignoring every question posed to him)

[MrTrow]

@guille:
How is esp's play town oriented?
How does the detail you survived asking him who to vig clear him? (it was effectively his extra kill)

[Alchemist21]

Trow makes some good points. At this point, I want to vig Slimer. If he flips Town, I'll vote eyestott. If he flips scum, I'll vote Esp.

[guille2015]

Day voting esp is incorrect. But Alch's suggestion is ideal. I approve of that. I can't see how Istott gives us more information than slimer.

[MrTrow]

Day voting esp is incorrect.

Explain please.
I admit others following my example to the point where (at this point slimer, or believing the plan(and slimer) eyestott) can self-preservation-hammer is a bad idea.
Does that make my vote bad though? (or to word properly, considering a proper resolution to the current(likely) dipole, would you consider voting esp?)

Further, i would like to see both slimer and eyestotts responses to outstanding questions before a shot is made.
And stand by my 'if you must shoot now, shoot esp'

[Alchemist21]

I'm waiting for their responses too.

[guille2015]

Sorry I meant Day vigging as that is what you implied with your vote Trow, I pressum. And I think killing Esp with the day Vig is incorrect as that would not yield as much information as killing issott or slimer.

[Espeonage]

I had some reasoning a pge or two ago, I can't remember it though.

[eyestott]

@eyestott

• 1: given how you seem to be the only one remotely interested in actually defending the notion 'the D1-quicklynch could have been a genuine town-process', i'm looking forward to the 'not completely correct' aspects of my 219
  
• 2: what is your reason (given your apparent believe you are dipoled with slimer) for not voting him?
  
• 3: why (given how you popcorned to your top innocent for 'fast discussion') did you push the mass-claim at all and why DID you call for others to withhold their claims (direct consequence of popcorn)
  
• 4:

  Look back. I never said that him breadcrumbing was a point against him. I said that my most recent experience was me fakecrumbing. I meant that breadcrumbing doesnt automatically make it so.

  
  Are you really trying to convince me this:

  Also, my last completed scum game had me fakebreadcrumbing flavour cop for the first two days.
  He's scum.
  I had no need to breadcrumb. Why did he?

  was not a point against him?
  
  5:

• As in, I was wrong, so I'm scum?

  No, as in, you were well aware your case was BS and pushed it anyway. For one: see the point above. For more, please answer my question about 219
  6:

• No, I'm saying: Okay, you can see a scum motivation for my actions. Do you see a town motivation?

  First, it is not my job to find a reason why what you did, might come from a town mindset. It is yours to present the town mindset which was actually behind it if someone presents a possible scum-explanation.
  Second: NO, i do not see a town motivation for a cop to claim when neither 'the cop himself is in no danger to get lynched' nor 'the
  fakeclaimer
  has a reasonable shot at escaping the lynch' nor 'the cop has any results to share'

1: Yeah, I will get to that. I have to go out to an interview to get my Tax File Number soon, but ill do that when I get back.
2: Because I dont have all the facts. I learnt my lesson from yesterday.
3: Ive pushed for a massclaim, because today could possibly be mylo. I thought that popcorning was the standard?
4: I'm not trying to convince you it wasn't, I'm just telling you. It wasnt a point in his favour, but it wasnt a point against him. It was irrelevant.
5: How am I well aware of that?
6: Huh, thats a good point. I really shouldnt have claimed. This isnt a scumclaim. I honestly did not think of not CCing, which is immensely stupid.

[eyestott]

the 'case' against diego(hey look, he just got promoted: no longer listed as 'goon'):

• this christmas votes diego (rvs). (his only vote the entire game)
  
• diego rvs-votes
  
• alchemist votes diego (rvs)
  
• espeonage votes diego (for wagon)
  
• eyestott claims he will 'rvs-sheep diego but not until he explains' (something that has already been explained, by eyestott himself no less) then asks us to forget this ever happened
  
• diego fails to check motivation of his unvote when placing a new vote, gets called
  Contrived
  for it. (empty addition of pressure i assume)
  
• guile puts diego at L-1, with a partial reveal demand because 'as esp pointed out crappy discard' (nope, didn't happen, did it?, guille explain(again i do see an explanation, but don't believe you could do worse)) and pulled a newbie, by staying in rvs for no reason
  
• espeonage adds pressure by pointing out the
  Contrived vote
  is on practically confirmed town (more of a newbie tell than a scum-tell if you ask me)
  
• espeonage and eyestott both consider 'not knowing the difference between cop and vanilla-cop' a
  lynch-worthy-offence
  
  
• eyestott makes his intent to hammer explicit (after already demanding a claim, which received a 'not within 24 hours please')
  
• diego claims having chosen cop over mason
  
• espeonage calls BS: having a strong role the second you need a claim, also cop was the wrong choice (again scum because newbie-mistake(that wasn't there but that's not the issue))
  
• espeonage calls 'cop wouldn't call cop-discard 'meh' '
  
• eyestott counterclaims and asks permission to hammer (which he instantly receives)
  
• Diego asks and receives(esp) explanation of the difference between vanilla/regular cop
  
• eyestott asks permission to hammer AGAIN (acknowledges having received the previous permission) from the very same person (again received instantly)
  
• diego reveals crumbs and calls eyestott to investigate him
  
• guille dismisses crumbs as newbie-useless
  
• espeonage calls diego's cop claim 'based on discussion on how good the cop actually is' (when calling for 'no investigation on me, protection over there')
  
• guille unvotes because of crumbs
  
• espeonage says: crumb? shrug, i don't buy it
  
• guille actually advocates against the diego-lynch
  
• espeonage claims one who doesn't think cops are such a big deal would have taken mason, which are super obviously awesome (which they aren't: awesome: debatable, obvious: absolutely not(by the rules practically guaranteed to be useless actually))
  
• guille actually cracks the case: diego is a newbie
  
• eyestott demands guilles vote on diego because poetry
  
• espeonage counters newbie argument with 'mason is listed everywhere as super obviously awesome, ESPECIALLY a newbie would pick this': espeonage please find me this 'no way a newbie would have missed this'-location which states mason>>cop, i can assure you, the rules state otherwise.
  
• eyestott claims 'the need to breadcrumb' is reason to convict:
  despite having started a discussion thread about this subject himself (thus knowing fully well, this not being obvious to newbies. The moment this game ends, this story goes to that thread)
  
• guille disagrees with mason>>cop but places his vote back regardless (later revealed because he was convinced super-short days are good: still waiting on the why of that one)
  
• guille calls for time to allow others to respond (receives instant no from both esp and eye)
  
• eyestott claims hammer, yet grands another 'time to post'
  
• diego requests tips for next game (genuine newbie stuff) receives(esp), nope you need to be hammered first(go read on how to fakeclaim)
  
• eyestott tests diego's role PM, diego passes
  
• eyestott pulls a vote-gambit (the detail it wouldn't work by rules is hardly relevant)
  
• eyestott HAMMERS diego for not lying(admitting he noticed the gambit)

If anyone sees a misrepresentation here, please point them out (if not please say so explicitly)

Where did I say that was lynchworthy?
I never said it was a reason to convict.
I didnt hammer him for not lying, I hammered him because I though he was scum.