Mini Normal 1963 - List Mod Mafia Game Over

[wavemode]

The only really telling thing here is that you recognize that everything I've done in this game matches my town meta to a tee, and completely goes against anything I've ever even conceived doing as scum, and you truly can not point to a single thing contrary. Your only response is "lel, your meta argument is perfect because that was your plan all along." Come off it, Seph.

[skitter30]

Fridays are kinda bad for me; I dunno if I'll have time to respond to everything today. If I don't, it'll def be tom night.

Wave, can you just address the following points for me while I'm gone:

1. If you're an investigative role, and don't know how to read TIAM (158), and would always be willing to policy him (996) .... why didn't you just check him n1? In this context, you're kinda going to have to justify checking implosion over TIAM here. Just calling implosion one of your hunch scumreads (1315) and checking him doesn't really square with your feelings for TIAM tbh.

Doing so could have forestalled this whole thing when he claimed rb.

(Like at least Chip had a reason for vigging Dany, even though it was kinda stupid, but his reason tracked with his claim).

Now that I think about it, there was *a lot* of discussion as to whether or not Two was lying. If you're an odd-night vc, couldn't you have just checked him last night to see if he was lying?

Like you were pushing a lynch on Serg/Seph, but the reason you gave is not so that you could check Two last night (like I don't remember this point coming up anywhere), but so that you would have a night to live so that you could verify

seph's VT claim

, and live to substantiate implosion's.

From the POV of a VC, like wouldn't you want to check the dude who you want to policy-lynch anyways, who claimed a kinda weird role under incriminating circumstances? Wouldn't Two have been the perfect target last night? And instead you wanted to check Seph? Like all the reasons you gave for the massclaim and lying through it is so that you could make sure Implosion and Seph weren't lying. You never mentioned wanting to make sure you and Two would live to today so that you could check him.

And telling someone to vig Two from the POV of a vanilla cop who can just check if he's lying is honestly kinda bizarre. (although tbf I can see why this point in particular might come from a town mindset in these circumstances)

2. Can you clarify the Lalendra vote, especially wrt to the points I raised in the post I made last night? And why you were null on Mulch.

Honestly #1 is kinda the sticking point. Like even disregarding everything I said last night if you think I'm being conspiracy-theory-level crazy, your play day3 just doesn't make much sense from the POV of a town vanilla cop.

[Nexus]

Votecount 4.4:

Sephiroth (1)

- wavemode

wavemode (1)

- Sephiroth

Not voting (4)

- Sergtacos, implosion, skitter30, Flubbernugget,

With 6 alive it takes 4 to lynch

Deadline is at 4pm GMT on Tuesday 26th December 2017 (expired on 2017-12-26 17:00:00)

[wavemode]

If you're an investigative role, and don't know how to read TIAM (158), and would always be willing to policy him (996) .... why didn't you just check him n1? In this context, you're kinda going to have to justify checking implosion over TIAM here. Just calling implosion one of your hunch scumreads (1315) and checking him doesn't really square with your feelings for TIAM tbh.

It doesn't? Could you explain what you mean by that? I mean, there were plenty of people I thought might be scum on day 1. TIAM was a possibility but I went with implosion instead, for the reasons I gave. Pretty sure at that time Serg and Lalendra were also two people I considered, but I decided on implosion. Yes, in hindsight a TIAM check would have helped us the most, but I'm no psychic.

Now that I think about it, there was *a lot* of discussion as to whether or not Two was lying. If you're an odd-night vc, couldn't you have just checked him last night to see if he was lying?

Like you were pushing a lynch on Serg/Seph, but the reason you gave is not so that you could check Two last night (like I don't remember this point coming up anywhere), but so that you would have a night to live so that you could verify seph's VT claim, and live to substantiate implosion's.

From the POV of a VC, like wouldn't you want to check the dude who you want to policy-lynch anyways, who claimed a kinda weird role under incriminating circumstances? Wouldn't Two have been the perfect target last night? And instead you wanted to check Seph? Like all the reasons you gave for the massclaim and lying through it is so that you could make sure Implosion and Seph weren't lying. You never mentioned wanting to make sure you and Two would live to today so that you could check him.

And telling someone to vig Two from the POV of a vanilla cop who can just check if he's lying is honestly kinda bizarre. (although tbf I can see why this point in particular might come from a town mindset in these circumstances)

This point's also perplexing to me because, again, I'm no psychic; so help me out if I'm missing something here. I agree that a TIAM check would have proved his claim wrong since he'd have come back Vanilla, but how could I have known that? Most of our talk was around the possibility that TIAM was a scum roleblocker - that's still Not Vanilla. So in my mind, my role wasn't really going to help us resolve the 1v1. In fact, by this point I was coming around to the idea of implosion being Mafia Goon, so I really didn't even consider the possibility that, even if TIAM was scum, he'd be a Goon whose claim I could prove wrong with my ability. I was pretty convinced he was going to flip roleblocker, which is why when you asked me yesterday who the other two scum were, I said seph/imp. At that time, I mentally had the scumteam as TIAM roleblocker (or, possibly Serg as something else), imp goon, and then I was going to check Seph and prove his VT claim to be false. And on the off chance Seph had come back Vanilla, I was still going to present that and say that imp and Seph are not both scum, since the scumteam probably don't have two goons.

2. Can you clarify the Lalendra vote, especially wrt to the points I raised in the post I made last night? And why you were null on Mulch.

Uh, if you're asking me why I voted Lalendra, it's because I thought she was scummy. I think earlier in the game I made a post about it but nobody really inquired further so I didn't expound much:

I partitioned the game. Most people are on two big wagons, and a few are elsewhere. Just as a matter of course, there is probably scum avoiding the wagons - I'm guessing Lalendra.

Just from a gamesolving perspective, Lalendra made sense as scum avoiding being on the major wagons. Then her reads were unclear and her tone was waffly day 2 and I think everyone could agree at that point she was a good lynch. I have never even made a point against Seph for pushing the Lalendra lynch since, most of the points he had been making against her, I could see too. (Seph on the other hand started attacking

me

for voting Lalendra the very next day... but I digress.)

As for Mulch, it was the same as with Wossi. I've seen Mulch day 1 lynched too many times to not start to see when he is just town self-destructing and not actually scum. The difference between them though that made me null on Mulch and townread Wossi is, is that Mulch is very self-aware of his meta and is capable of playing a certain way just to convince you he is town self-destructing. So I needed more content from him and wasn't willing to declare a definite townread just yet. I've been scum with Mulch and I've seen what he can do; townreading him out of hand would have been irresponsible.

[Sephiroth]

See, this is the difference between you and me, Seph. I actually know my role and that you're scum.

Is this some sort of thing where if you say it 10 times it becomes true?

I spent plenty of time yesterday casing you as scum (so I'm not sure why you're now saying I haven't...), but today all I present are the facts, which is that you claimed vanilla townie but I got a result of not vanilla on you.

'Casing' is a VERY generous way of describing your behavior towards me yesterday. Do you mean mentioning in two unrelated posts that I could be scum, then getting in a 1v1 with me over TIAM being scum and me thinking you're scum for defending him? You didn't start doing anything remotely close to casing me or arguing for me being scum until AFTER I accused you of being partners with TIAM. I'd also note that your arguments yesterday made no sense since you accused me of a chainsaw attack (which it was not, by definition) and then proceeded to say that TIAMs meta was a town tell when it was at best a null tell and more accurately a scum tell since his play here is very different than his quickhammer as town in the other game. Your defense of that point just reads like you didnt expect someone to actually pay attention to the details. I mean, 'theyre different games'? Come on dude. You know full well that meta relies on the differences in a way people play games. I can't believe you seriously tried to make that point. Plus, even if I were to concede that you were 'casing' me yesterday (I don't; you weren't), the fact remains that I was widely town read. The lack of easy mislynches remaining is what necessitates the gambit in the first place so this is a pretty important point.

Like, I know you aren't town so this is hard to wrap your head around

You keep saying this and things like it and I guess it makes you feel tough or something but I just want to point out that I've played many games of mafia and played both alignmements before. Regardless of my alignment here, its silly to keep saying this.

...but what sense would it actually make for me to point to one of your posts and go "hmm I don't like Seph's tone here, it's scummy" or some shit like that. What would it prove? What would it change, for me to start PbPA'ing you and get into a war of words as you try to pick apart my points? If I know for a fact that you're scum, that's all I need lol. Anything else is just gravy.

Part of being good town is convincing others you're right and you know that. Thats exactly why I responded to your claim as I did. You're acting like you can make your claim and ride off into the sunset when there isnt any independent reason for anyone to believe you. The game is on the line, and the best you can do is 'i have a guilty lol'?

"the move" lmao. You mean all of my play throughout this entire game? And by "the argument", you mean self-meta arguments that I literally did not mention until today after skitter started digging into them herself (and found, on her own, games where my play identically matches my play here), because I considered them irrelevant? (Because, as I say again, I know for a fact you're scum. My meta should have been irrelevant to that - ideally, all I should need to present are the facts.)/quote]
By move I mean fakeclaiming results on me and by argument I mean your last ditch effort to save yourself when it looks like you're going to be lynched. Are we supposed to be impressed that you saved your last card to play when you thought you were on your last chance? Regardless of when it happened, you're employing meta as a defense against your behavior being scum motivated and we've already established that the claim was premeditated so I don't think its at all unreasonable to think that your meta contradicting the move is something you've considered and planned to fall back on if necessary.

Also, "people know your meta" is a pretty funny comment because, who in this game even knows my meta?

I guess not that many, but you are known as a strong town player and YOU know about your meta and therefore know that your meta will support your argument regardless of who knows it.

The only really telling thing here is that you recognize that everything I've done in this game matches my town meta to a tee, and completely goes against anything I've ever even conceived doing as scum, and you truly can not point to a single thing contrary. Your only response is "lel, your meta argument is perfect because that was your plan all along."

All I'm acknowledging is your claim that you don't like to put yourself in stressful situations as scum. That whole business about matching your town meta to a tee or whatever is putting some serious words in my mouth, bruv.

(Seph on the other hand started attacking

me

for voting Lalendra the very next day... but I digress.)

Oh yes, I certainly attacked you purely for voting lalendra and that attack had zero to do with the context and timing of the vote. Are you just trying to throw in an as many subtle jabs/misreps as you can?

I DID NOT ASK TO BE INVESTIGATED, I SIMPLY SHOWED NO RELUCTANCE TO IT, HYPOTHETICALLY.

Like I said, it doesn't matter whether Chip is SK or not right now, so you should just pick someone to clear/incriminate.

Preferably me

but you already said you wouldn't so

Preferably me

You didn't 'show no reluctance', you stated that your preference was that you were investigated.

[Sephiroth]

I screwed up the quotes, sorry =/

[wavemode]

'Casing' is a VERY generous way of describing your behavior towards me yesterday. Do you mean mentioning in two unrelated posts that I could be scum, then getting in a 1v1 with me over TIAM being scum and me thinking you're scum for defending him? You didn't start doing anything remotely close to casing me or arguing for me being scum until AFTER I accused you of being partners with TIAM. I'd also note that your arguments yesterday made no sense since you accused me of a chainsaw attack (which it was not, by definition) and then proceeded to say that TIAMs meta was a town tell when it was at best a null tell and more accurately a scum tell since his play here is very different than his quickhammer as town in the other game. Your defense of that point just reads like you didnt expect someone to actually pay attention to the details. I mean, 'theyre different games'? Come on dude. You know full well that meta relies on the differences in a way people play games. I can't believe you seriously tried to make that point. Plus, even if I were to concede that you were 'casing' me yesterday (I don't; you weren't), the fact remains that I was widely town read. The lack of easy mislynches remaining is what necessitates the gambit in the first place so this is a pretty important point.

I mean, this whole paragraph sort of just focuses on defending yourself against points I made against you yesterday, in a completely different context, when I thought TIAM was town. Not sure why you're hard defending yourself against all of that now, even though nobody is trying to argue those things against you now

Part of being good town is convincing others you're right and you know that. Thats exactly why I responded to your claim as I did. You're acting like you can make your claim and ride off into the sunset when there isnt any independent reason for anyone to believe you. The game is on the line, and the best you can do is 'i have a guilty lol'?

Right, and making a bunch of tone points against you wouldn't have proved anything or convinced anyone. Despite what you keep trying to convince people, my play has indeed been entirely consistent with my role, and that should speak for itself. In contrast, if I were scum and knew that my play has been inconsistent, then I would be trying to tear you apart in other ways. So... what actually is your point here, besides further proving my point?

Oh yes, I certainly attacked you purely for voting lalendra and that attack had zero to do with the context and timing of the vote. Are you just trying to throw in an as many subtle jabs/misreps as you can?

That's funny, because you're actually misrepping what

I

said. Where exactly did I say that your attack of me had nothing to do with those things?

You didn't 'show no reluctance', you stated that your preference was that you were investigated.

...which shows no reluctance. So, thanks for agreeing with me? And I know no matter how many times I say this to you you will conveniently forget it the next time the topic comes back up, but for the umpteenth time, I said that rhetorically. You're conveniently missing the part where he already said he was not going to investigate me.

[Sephiroth]

I mean, this whole paragraph sort of just focuses on defending yourself against points I made against you yesterday, in a completely different context, when I thought TIAM was town. Not sure why you're hard defending yourself against all of that now, even though nobody is trying to argue those things against you now

I'm pointing out a) you never cased me and b) your arguments weren't sound to begin with. The fact that you're claiming to have cased me is what I'm negating. You basically just got mad when I said you were TIAMs partner and now thats 'casing' me. This is all to address the argument that you made, that you could've easily mislynched me instead of fakeclaiming. I was widely regarded as town and there was no way in hell what you were pushing previously could be even considered a case, let alone a convincing one.

Part of being good town is convincing others you're right and you know that. Thats exactly why I responded to your claim as I did. You're acting like you can make your claim and ride off into the sunset when there isnt any independent reason for anyone to believe you. The game is on the line, and the best you can do is 'i have a guilty lol'?

Right, and making a bunch of tone points against you wouldn't have proved anything or convinced anyone. Despite what you keep trying to convince people, my play has indeed been entirely consistent with my role, and that should speak for itself. In contrast, if I were scum and knew that my play has been inconsistent, then I would be trying to tear you apart in other ways. So... what actually is your point here, besides further proving my point?

I'm refuting your point that theres no reason to fake claim in this situation, as above. And asking to be investigated is not consistent with your role at all. I also think its extremely telling that you weren't willing to throw your weight behind a TIAM wagon but you were completely willing to ask for him to be vigged (a point I brought up WAY earlier but is now extra relevant)

Oh yes, I certainly attacked you purely for voting lalendra and that attack had zero to do with the context and timing of the vote. Are you just trying to throw in an as many subtle jabs/misreps as you can?

That's funny, because you're actually misrepping what

I

said. Where exactly did I say that your attack of me had nothing to do with those things?

Okay, yeah you offhandedly mentioned me attacking someone

for voting someone that I voted

, with no further context, and didn't think that would paint me as hypocritical. Saying I attacked you just because you voted Lalendra is false. I don't see any point in including this information sans context except to falsely portray me as inconsistent.

You didn't 'show no reluctance', you stated that your preference was that you were investigated.

...which shows no reluctance. So, thanks for agreeing with me? And I know no matter how many times I say this to you you will conveniently forget it the next time the topic comes back up, but for the umpteenth time, I said that rhetorically. You're conveniently missing the part where he already said he was not going to investigate me.

Theres a difference between showing no reluctance and showing no reluctance while simultaneously saying you prefer something. You're trying to act as if you HAD to say you preferred it in order to show no reluctance but thats just false. You consciously made a decision to, instead of just listing other people who would make good targets, say "PREFERABLY ME".

And I don't think I missed you saying it was rhetorical? As I previously mentioned I don't think a VC takes that risk when its already been said that they arent the target. I didn't respond the second time you brought it up since I'd already addressed that point. So now who is conveniently forgetting things?

A VC in that scenario just lists some names and moves on with their life, they don't ask to be investigated.

[Sephiroth]

I mean, this whole paragraph sort of just focuses on defending yourself against points I made against you yesterday, in a completely different context, when I thought TIAM was town. Not sure why you're hard defending yourself against all of that now, even though nobody is trying to argue those things against you now

I'm pointing out a) you never cased me and b) your arguments weren't sound to begin with. The fact that you're claiming to have cased me is what I'm negating. You basically just got mad when I said you were TIAMs partner and now thats 'casing' me. This is all to address the argument that you made, that you could've easily mislynched me instead of fakeclaiming. I was widely regarded as town and there was no way in hell what you were pushing previously could be even considered a case, let alone a convincing one.

Part of being good town is convincing others you're right and you know that. Thats exactly why I responded to your claim as I did. You're acting like you can make your claim and ride off into the sunset when there isnt any independent reason for anyone to believe you. The game is on the line, and the best you can do is 'i have a guilty lol'?

Right, and making a bunch of tone points against you wouldn't have proved anything or convinced anyone. Despite what you keep trying to convince people, my play has indeed been entirely consistent with my role, and that should speak for itself. In contrast, if I were scum and knew that my play has been inconsistent, then I would be trying to tear you apart in other ways. So... what actually is your point here, besides further proving my point?

I'm refuting your point that theres no reason to fake claim in this situation, as above. And asking to be investigated is not consistent with your role at all. I also think its extremely telling that you weren't willing to throw your weight behind a TIAM wagon but you were completely willing to ask for him to be vigged (a point I brought up WAY earlier but is now extra relevant)

Oh yes, I certainly attacked you purely for voting lalendra and that attack had zero to do with the context and timing of the vote. Are you just trying to throw in an as many subtle jabs/misreps as you can?

That's funny, because you're actually misrepping what

I

said. Where exactly did I say that your attack of me had nothing to do with those things?

Okay, yeah you offhandedly mentioned me attacking someone

for voting someone that I voted

, with no further context, and didn't think that would paint me as hypocritical. Saying I attacked you just because you voted Lalendra is false. I don't see any point in including this information sans context except to falsely portray me as inconsistent.

You didn't 'show no reluctance', you stated that your preference was that you were investigated.

...which shows no reluctance. So, thanks for agreeing with me? And I know no matter how many times I say this to you you will conveniently forget it the next time the topic comes back up, but for the umpteenth time, I said that rhetorically. You're conveniently missing the part where he already said he was not going to investigate me.

Theres a difference between showing no reluctance and showing no reluctance while simultaneously saying you prefer something. You're trying to act as if you HAD to say you preferred it in order to show no reluctance but thats just false. You consciously made a decision to, instead of just listing other people who would make good targets, say "PREFERABLY ME".

And I don't think I missed you saying it was rhetorical? As I previously mentioned I don't think a VC takes that risk when its already been said that they arent the target. I didn't respond the second time you brought it up since I'd already addressed that point. So now who is conveniently forgetting things?

A VC in that scenario just lists some names and moves on with their life, they don't ask to be investigated.

[wavemode]

And asking to be investigated is not consistent with your role at all.

Right, that's why I didn't.

Okay, yeah you offhandedly mentioned me attacking someone for voting someone that I voted, with no further context, and didn't think that would paint me as hypocritical.

If that's the point you think I was making against you there, sure roll with it. But I never said that.

I also think its extremely telling that you weren't willing to throw your weight behind a TIAM wagon but you were completely willing to ask for him to be vigged (a point I brought up WAY earlier but is now extra relevant)

The convenient memory loss returns lol. I already addressed this yesterday at length, but sure let's give it a go again. Now, try to put yourself in a town mindset Seph. If we lynched incorrectly yesterday, what would that mean? Well, it would mean that we would absolutely need to vig correctly, or else the game would be over. On the

other

hand, if we lynched

correctly

yesterday, it would mean the vig would have one shot to get wrong and the game would not be over. So, why in the name of sweet Pete would we not then use that shot on someone who is a huge lategame liability (he had just quickhammered Lalendra for fuck's sake) while there was still a possibility of him having fakeclaimed roleblocker? Okay, so there's always the possibility of a scum doctor - BUT WHAT WOULD THAT CHANGE? If there's a scum doctor, scum roleblocker, scum jailkeeper, you name it - it doesn't matter *who* we target with the vig shot, they will protect the person if they're scum!! Like, I find it hilarious that you keep making this point as though you simply don't understand good vig strategy, even though you've really been playing a lot longer than I have so you ought to have at least a basic grasp of it.

A VC in that scenario just lists some names and moves on with their life

Which would show implicit reluctance to it being me, which is a much bigger risk and you know it.

, they don't ask to be investigated.

Right, that's why I didn't.

[Sephiroth]

And asking to be investigated is not consistent with your role at all.

Right, that's why I didn't.

Butcha did.

The convenient memory loss returns lol. I already addressed this yesterday at length, but sure let's give it a go again. Now, try to put yourself in a town mindset Seph. If we lynched incorrectly yesterday, what would that mean? Well, it would mean that we would absolutely need to vig correctly, or else the game would be over. On the

other

hand, if we lynched

correctly

yesterday, it would mean the vig would have one shot to get wrong and the game would not be over. So, why in the name of sweet Pete would we not then use that shot on someone who is a huge lategame liability (he had just quickhammered Lalendra for fuck's sake) while there was still a possibility of him having fakeclaimed roleblocker? Okay, so there's always the possibility of a scum doctor - BUT WHAT WOULD THAT CHANGE? If there's a scum doctor, scum roleblocker, scum jailkeeper, you name it - it doesn't matter *who* we target with the vig shot, they will protect the person if they're scum!! Like, I find it hilarious that you keep making this point as though you simply don't understand good vig strategy, even though you've really been playing a lot longer than I have so you ought to have at least a basic grasp of it.

I'm sorry but going down a townie that late in the game without full knowledge of the setup or how many scum we had is completely stupid. Theres no way a player like you confidently decides we should purposefully go down a number when so much of the game is up in the air. The only way you confidently make this post is if you don't sincerely believe TIAM is town (ie you know hes scum and him being targetted by NK is much more valuable than being lynched).

Which would show implicit reluctance to it being me, which is a much bigger risk and you know it.

I'm sorry but thats dumb. Naming people you would like to be investigated in no way shows implicit reluctance to being investigated yourself. That argument only works if the default behavior is for townie to ask to be investigated in that scenario, which it is not.

, they don't ask to be investigated.

Right, that's why I didn't.

Butcha did tho.

[wavemode]

"nuh-uh" "yuh-huh" lmao

I'm sorry but going down a townie that late in the game without full knowledge of the setup or how many scum we had is completely stupid. Theres no way a player like you confidently decides we should purposefully go down a number when so much of the game is up in the air. The only way you confidently make this post is if you don't sincerely believe TIAM is town (ie you know hes scum and him being targetted by NK is much more valuable than being lynched).

What are you even writing here. We already knew there couldn't be more than 3 scum. After a correct lynch that goes down to no more than two. And, uh, are you forgetting we had just massclaimed? lol. Also, I really don't understand how you keep making these "I don't forget things" posts, yet we literally had this exact conversation yesterday and here you are making this same shitty argument. Here, I will recap:

Wave, do you or do you not believe TIAMs claim? I'm struggling to understand how you can believe TIAM is backup RB but simultaneously think its a good idea for the vig to shoot him if we hit scum today.

Then you're naive about good vig play. It's not about my personal feelings, it's about who most people want dead. Get rid of them at night so we don't have to debate about it

Like, you're actually just scum in this game, so I know you're probably being ignorant on purpose, but Seph, you do realize just vigging by one's own personal feelings, is how we got a Dany shot here? And how we got no TIAM shot? Like, in this very game we are playing right now, we have clear evidence of that being an

extremely

bad strategy. Yet still you argue this point like your life depends on it. Well, I suppose it does

[Flubbernugget]

viewtopic.php?p=9169439#p9169439

So here's that scum case I was talking about.

Several points:

-> You can't cross reference everything that's been stated because of the sheer volume of granular points
-> Those same granular points are easy to fake because a townie with confirmation bias can come to similar points looking at each individual detail from the perspective of the accused being scum.
-> Many points only make sense in a bubble (of course my read on wossi was flipping. He had a hard time playing to his inactivity. Can you think of another player that has this issue...?)

[Flubbernugget]

Also, saying "I guess I'll make a case on flubber since I need one to win" vs "I am thoroughly convinced by my own alignment and POE that flubber is scum" is extremely telling.

[Flubbernugget]

How do I "play to" odd night vanilla cop beyond catching people lying in massclaim

And I suppose remaining patient on implosion in the early game

-> don't have a high presence in the game

-> don't make bad crumbs

[Flubbernugget]

Also everyone's reads are so transparent atm that any night kill analysis should probably be dismissed as wifom.

[Sephiroth]

"nuh-uh" "yuh-huh" lmao

let's call it what it is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y

I'm sorry but going down a townie that late in the game without full knowledge of the setup or how many scum we had is completely stupid. Theres no way a player like you confidently decides we should purposefully go down a number when so much of the game is up in the air. The only way you confidently make this post is if you don't sincerely believe TIAM is town (ie you know hes scum and him being targetted by NK is much more valuable than being lynched).

What are you even writing here. We already knew there couldn't be more than 3 scum.

Maybe you knew that?

And, uh, are you forgetting we had just massclaimed? lol.

You mean the mass claim where two people faked their claim? I don't see how thats relevant to the number of scum remaining anyhow.

Like, you're actually just scum in this game, so I know you're probably being ignorant on purpose, but Seph, you do realize just vigging by one's own personal feelings, is how we got a Dany shot here? And how we got no TIAM shot? Like, in this very game we are playing right now, we have clear evidence of that being an

extremely

bad strategy. Yet still you argue this point like your life depends on it. Well, I suppose it does

I'm sorry I disagree with vigging someone you think is town. The choice to vig someone you suspect is a different thing entirely then choosing not to kill someone you feel is town so I'm not sure what your point is here.

[wavemode]

Seph, are you aware of the conditions under which town get endgamed in a Normal?

[Sephiroth]

Have you heard of multiball before?

[wavemode]

So you're saying that because of the possibility of multiball, we shouldn't vig someone widely scumread. Am I understanding your argument correctly?

[Sephiroth]

I'm saying that you should never be willing to vig someone that you feel strongly is town (strongly enough to defend balls to the wall) when you don't completely know the setup.

[wavemode]

Again with this "should never" even though evidence from this very game shows otherwise. Like, I'm wondering what you're even basing that logic on. Why don't you go read the disaster of Large Normal 206's vig (TIAM, as it happens, shooting our gunsmith) or the genius of 207 (me, shooting James Brafin even though I didn't really think he was scum, and I said so) then come back with your "should never" lmao. You shoot who the town wants dead, period. At best it happens to be scum and you're better off, and at worst you get rid of someone who's a liability anyway. There's certain people you don't want to carry into lylo regardless of their alignment.

Again, I really shouldn't need to explain such a basic concept to you of all people.

[implosion]

I feel like wave/seph's arguments at this point are almost entirely meaningless. I think speculation of the form "if wavemode is really a vanilla cop, why didn't he X" is also inherently not going to be that useful because it presumes that he'll have the thought process in question, and different people will view the same game differently from the same role.

Flubber responding to me by drawing a comparison with something he did once and then claiming that I'm doing the same thing is just asinine. Calling my case on him a collection of a lot of granular points is just an excuse to not respond to the very coarse main focus of why I think he's scum, which is his reads having no cohesion from moment to moment. 1388 is also asinine; "I would have phrased it this way" is completely meaningless. I do, in fact, need to convince skitter that Flubber is scum to win this game (assuming I'm correct).

[Flubbernugget]

It's only meaningless because it caught you sweetheart <3

Play better next time

[Flubbernugget]

comparison with something he did once and then claiming that I'm doing the same thing is just asinine

Why