Cultafia: Game over

[Occult]

Ok, I have a problem with the exchange that took place between Mno and Blaze a few pages back.

Mno asks Blaze why he killed DGB. Mno later says that he's reasoning for believing that have 70% to do with something blaze posted, 25% his night actions and 5% gut. Now there is a couple problems with this. The only people that can kill are the Vig. and the SK. Now Mno seems to claim through this that he is a power role(he says he is certain that Blaze killed DGB).

sorry about the down time from me. Like i sad before i know that blaze killed DGB. i cannot say why i know, but i can with relative certainty. He said something before that confirmed my suspicions and information and deductions that i have now.

Now, if he was the Vig and he attacked blaze (and blaze didn't die) that
would make blaze a very possible cult leader or SK. But since being a vig has nothing to do with knowing who someone targeted i don't believe he is a vig.

If he was a Alarmist, he wouldn't have had a reason to attack blaze since there is no way of knowing who blaze targeted.

If he was the cop, he would've gotten a town result on blaze if he was an SK and a cult result if blaze had been recruited or already part of the cult (aka, cult leader), but since a cop has no reason to see if someone targeted anyone and since a cult leader would take a recruitment over a kill at this point in the game (this is supported by the fact that there was only one body) he would have no reason to believe that blaze killed DGB.

If he was a watcher, he would've have know that blaze was targeted, not that he targeted DGB and would not have attacked blaze for killing him.

If he was a tracker then he would've seen that Blaze targeted DGB and was likely the killer.

All of these are assuming if Mno is talking from a pro-town stand point.

Which means that Mno (if he's telling the truth) is a Tracker.

Which would also mean that IF mno is telling the truth then blaze lied about being a role blocker that blocked TSS. Which means that either Mno is lying, Blaze is lying or they are both lying.

Conclusions

1)Blaze lied, which means that there a good chance that he is a cult leader pulling a gambit (there is a chance of him being a cult recruit trying to cause confusion) or a stupid SK.
2)Mno Lied, which means that Mno is a Cult or SK (He sure as hell better not have lied as town)
3)They both lied, which is basically points 1 and 2, with one of them being SK or in different Cult factions.

Unvote

I take I pretty strong LAL stance. One of these two are our lynch for today.

[springlullaby]

Fos Springlullaby

for being anxious about a procedural way to find scum.

1. 'Procedural way to find scum', really? What I see is a 'how to avoid my suspicion if you are scum' guide and a series of preemptive self-justifications.

2. Tell me how is it beneficial to town to reveal said 'procedural way to find scum' in advance if one does indeed abide by it?

Volkan, I think your justification is poor; surely not ruining a game by theory debates is up to the player's attitude and has little to do with the player's belief.

[vollkan]

1. 'Procedural way to find scum', really? What I see is a 'how to avoid my suspicion if you are scum' guide and a series of preemptive self-justifications.

2. Tell me how is it beneficial to town to reveal said 'procedural way to find scum' in advance if one does indeed abide by it?

Two points:
1) It is a procedural method of scumhunting insofar as I have outlined a substantial (though not exhaustive) list of things that I find scummy/not scummy but which often give rise to controversy.
2) I acknowledge that it has a deterrent effect with respect to some things I identified. However, I considered that risk and decided it was negligible in practice. I don't want to outline how this works in full (I will if people insist) but if it does act as a deterrent it will narrow the range of acceptable behaviour and should, in fact, make things more difficult for scum by forcing them to argue on proper logical grounds, by way of making weaker grounds unacceptable.

Volkan, I think your justification is poor; surely not ruining a game by theory debates is up to the player's attitude and has little to do with the player's belief.

You'd think so, but it doesn't often play out like that for me. I've often encountered people who, in the process of attacking me for something they perceive as scummy, are actually attacking some theoretical aspect of my play. That means that, when I should be engaged in meaningful argument, things get sidetracked by the likes of, eg, criticism of my insistence that people supply reasons.

[Norinel]

Vote Count 10

Occult [3] (Blazerunner, the silent speaker, mnowax)
Blazerunner [1] (malthusis)
the silent speaker [1] (armlx)
mnowax [1] (Greggo)
Greggo [1] (NabakovNabakov)
vikingfan [1] (curiouskarmadog)
malthusis [1] (Yosarian2)
mypenguinkat [1] (vikingfan)
vollkan [1] (springlullaby)

Not Voting [4]: mypenguinkat, Occult, vollkan, stark

8 to lynch

[NabakovNabakov]

I think we just identified Vollkan's Rule 12.

From what I can tell, Occult's perspective is valid. What Blaze said he did N0 (block TSS) and what Mno said he did N0 (kill DGB) are obviously mutually exclusive, though there is a possibility that Mnowax was making an honest mistake by drawing a conlcusion farther than he should. On top of the fact that Blaze claimed recruit, something fishy is going on here.

@Mnowax: Do you still believe that Blaze killed DGB? If not, what changed your mind?

[vikingfan]

Yosarian, you're right...I was incorrectly assuming that any claim could quite possibly be a grounds for culting/murder, but that's not necessarily true, at least in the case of the SK.

Vollkan, here's my perspective (and this was before the mod posted that he was having technical difficulties). When the mod says that a player has been picking up his prods, but yet not posting, that appears scummy to me since it says that he has been available to post but yet does not want to do so. If the mod hadn't said that, I would have simply considered it grounds for replacement.

Occult's post is why I was thinking more and more that blaze just might be a cult leader, not a recruit...the only way the two claims can jibe is if blaze is a cult leader. I don't see option 2 as being possible, since that would not explain Blaze's actions. So it's either 1 or 3 for me. I'd like to hear from mnowax now. Oh, and

unvote penguin

since she's back now.

[armlx]

I trust mno's info less than Blaze, mainly because mno hasn't said anything real yet and has based his accusation on information he "can't tell us". Also, based on another ongoing game, I believe Mno has a tendency to lie. Not sure if its a scum or null tell yet, but it seems like this is common for him.

[Yosarian2]

and yet stark has yet to post in this game major fos.

So I take it this means you have completed a statistical survey which reveals that people who don't post are scum? I'd love to see the results if you have an excel chart or something.

Um, not to answer for him, but drawing attention to the fact that Stark hasn't posted yet is a helpful thing for Viking to do. I'd strongly encourage everyone to try and keep track of who's lurking, and to bring it to the town's attention like this.


'll mention here that I think that a large number of Volkan's rules are poor town stratagy. I don't see the need to get into a detailed stratagy debate just yet, at least not until he invokes one of his rules in a way I disagree with, but just for the record, these are the parts of his rules that seem pretty much completly wrong to me. And I will also note that, general rules or not, if he tries to invoke those rules in such a way as to harm the town I will consider it to be a scumtell; you're not getting an automatic meta-pass on stuff by just making a list of rules right now, Volkan.

I am exceptionally skeptical of "town tells". Recent experience in House afia has exacerbated this.

...

3)

Any player who justifies a vote/FoS/declaration of 'suspicion'/etc. on one of the following:

• a) 'Hunch';
  b) 'Gut';
  c) 'Feeling';
  d) 'Belief'; or
  e) Anything that has a meaning similar to those of the above

will receive a stern demand from me that they give objective reasons for their vote/FoS/declaration of 'suspicion'/etc. Should they fail to do so, my expectation is that the vote/FoS/declaration of 'suspicion'/etc. will be dropped. If not, then they can expect their % ranking to increase.

Pretty much just disagree with those completly. Especally on day 1, hunches are fine, and looking for town tells and figuing out who is town is just as important as figuring out who is scum. Sure, you'll be wrong sometimes, but that applies just as much to scum tells. (Of course, in a cult game, some people's alignments might change, so town tells might be less useful here then in other games, but that's a different issue)

4)

If you want to play in a chaotic fashion, that's fine. However, if I can't understand what you are doing I will demand an explanation and justification. If you don't provide me with one, your % ranking

will

increase.

I don't entirely disagree with you on this one, but, to hold you to the same standard you are demaning of others, I take it this means you have completed a statistical survey which reveals that people who act in a chaotic fashion are scum? I'd love to see the results if you have an excel chart or something.

5)

Any person who accuses another person of being scum for one of the following:

• a) Over-reaction;
  b) Lurking;

...
Can expect their % ranking to increase.

Disagree with those two completly. Lurking, especally, is a scumtell, and better yet, it's an even better cult leader tell in this situation.

[mnowax]

Due to his claim. I do not believe that he killed Dgb anymore. But i am 100% certain that we have a SK.

[mnowax]

Well, I have nothing else to talk about the accusations made over me. But feel free to keep them going for as long as you want, and I will keep responding to them for as long as I have arguments. I hope no one says "scum, youre deviating from your accusation" for what Im going to ask right now.

I was wondering about 2 things:

First, there was only one body tonight, and we have the SK and the vigilante. There are 3 and only 3 things that may have happened:

1)The vigilante didnt try to kill, and SK killed DrippingGoofbal
2)Both of them took a shot, but one of them was blocked, and the other killed Dripping
3)Both of them took a shot, but one of them hit a "tough" target (SK or a recruiter), and the other killed Dripping

I really dont know: Should the vig have tried to kill? I would like to hear everybody's opinion here. It is a guesswork, but can eventually get us anywhere.

The other thing: can TSS explain what is the "perfectly good reason for focusing on the armlx bandwagon rather than the mnowax one"? This is no accusation whatsoever, I already said he didnt NEED one, and depending what the reason is, he shouldnt even tell them. I can think of 3, but Id like to hear from him, since he mentioned it. But I wont take it as a scumtell if he doesnt explain, I can imagine town reasons for that too

Note the italicized. He makes sure that he lets us know that both a vig and a SK exists. This is not an open game, were not sure of the existence of the roles. How did he find out this information? No i am not a tracker. No i am not a watcher or alarmist. I am a Vig. I didn't kill last night because i wanted to make sure i had a kill for night one of this game. Therefore, There IS a SK in this game as well as me, and although there will be an attempt to kill me, i will finish off Blaze in the night. If i happen to get recruited, i will spout the name of my leader immediately, So if you don't want me around, you must kill me. I only say this because were getting close to lynch( i believe) and i want all my information out on the table before i die.

[Yosarian2]

For the love of God, mnowax, why did you just claim vig? Did you miss that entire early-game discussion about how pro-town power roles should not claim unless it's absolutly necessary? Especally since you have so little information to share; we already were assuming there's a SK. Why on Earth did you feel the need to claim?

Well, whatever. What's done is done. Just no one else claim today unless you're about to get lynched, ok? Please?

[armlx]

Yos: Between this and another on going game I am convinced Mno is either a compulsive liar or has no clue when claiming is appropriate and not punting the game.

[Yosarian2]

Yeah...honestly, that was why I pretty much tried to just ignore him when he first said "I know blaze killed DGB!!!", I kinda figured it was just mnowax being random. Still, just no one else follow in his footsteps here, claiming is bad, m'k?

[vikingfan]

Mnowax, if blaze is cult leader or SK, you won't finish him tonight because the first nightkill is immune. So you saying what you did doesn't help us at all (except insofar as we know that blaze is bad). Oh, and Yos, that was exactly my line of thinking regarding stark, although under no conditions do I want a lynch before everyone's given their thoughts.

At this point, I think it's worthwhile to consider what blaze really is- given his play, I'm thinking he might just possibly be a cult leader trying to keep himself alive longer under the 'keep recruits alive longer' line of thinking. What do you guys think?

[armlx]

I really don't like Vikingfan's last post. It sorta hits me as trying to con us into a plan of action by making us think we wanted to do it.

[vikingfan]

No, I simply want to consider what blaze is mostly likely to be NOW given what mnowax has just told us.

[NabakovNabakov]

So Mno's conclusion (that Blaze killed DGB) was drawn from pretty much nothing. Whoop-de-doo. He's either a stupid recruit or a stupid leader. Either way, he's getting vigged tonight and should be taken off the table for a lynch. If he dies, we'll know who he is, and if he doesn't, we know who to lynch.

[armlx]

K, now that I just reread a 60 pg game to replace into, I got to look back at this one, and I'm confident this is the right call.

Unvote, Vote Vikingfan

.

While TSS's statements probably lead mno to his actions and were a little too assertive, upon reread I think vikingfan statements have

A) felt temporally awkward aka just often enough to not be lurking.
B) pushed bad/easy wagons (kat and blaze)

My TSS vote was also based on a partial rules misunderstanding.

[Blazerunner]

Hey, I am just passing by to say I am busy, but intend to keep posting at this thread, as soon as I have time.

[mnowax]

you forget something. I am a vig, and if blaze was pulling a gambit as a leader, then he get s lynched tomorrow, because he wont die tonight if i vig him. Simple? thats the major reason why i claimed. I am not stupid, ya know. I do know what i am doing, however flawed the logic might be. I am only here to help the town, and once i use my vig powers, it'll be untill night three to use them. I almost certainly wont survive until then, so make my target good. I am favor of a blaze vigging, but if there is anyone else as an option, let me know.

[vollkan]

I think we just identified Vollkan's Rule 12.

Huh?

Vollkan, here's my perspective (and this was before the mod posted that he was having technical difficulties). When the mod says that a player has been picking up his prods, but yet not posting, that appears scummy to me since it says that he has been available to post but yet does not want to do so. If the mod hadn't said that, I would have simply considered it grounds for replacement.

Okay, but I have myself been in situations where I have not wanted to post as town, purely because my ideas are not solid and I don't want to make a crappy post that draws suspicion. Reading to the point of being able to post takes time, and it's reasonable that someone might not post.

Um, not to answer for him, but drawing attention to the fact that Stark hasn't posted yet is a helpful thing for Viking to do. I'd strongly encourage everyone to try and keep track of who's lurking, and to bring it to the town's attention like this.

Absolutely, I agree. Lurkers should be named and shamed. BUT, lurking is not a scumtell. It doesn't merit a FoS.

'll mention here that I think that a large number of Volkan's rules are poor town stratagy. I don't see the need to get into a detailed stratagy debate just yet, at least not until he invokes one of his rules in a way I disagree with, but just for the record, these are the parts of his rules that seem pretty much completly wrong to me. And I will also note that, general rules or not, if he tries to invoke those rules in such a way as to harm the town I will consider it to be a scumtell; you're not getting an automatic meta-pass on stuff by just making a list of rules right now, Volkan.

I don't want a pass. I just want to be clear about where I stand on things.

Pretty much just disagree with those completly. Especally on day 1, hunches are fine, and looking for town tells and figuing out who is town is just as important as figuring out who is scum. Sure, you'll be wrong sometimes, but that applies just as much to scum tells. (Of course, in a cult game, some people's alignments might change, so town tells might be less useful here then in other games, but that's a different issue)

When I get a hunch, I try and look for evidence to back it up. If none surfaces, I abandon it.

As for towntells, we will just have to agree to disagree. I find them much less reliable than scumtells.

4) If you want to play in a chaotic fashion, that's fine. However, if I can't understand what you are doing I will demand an explanation and justification. If you don't provide me with one, your % ranking will increase.

I don't entirely disagree with you on this one, but, to hold you to the same standard you are demaning of others, I take it this means you have completed a statistical survey which reveals that people who act in a chaotic fashion are scum? I'd love to see the results if you have an excel chart or something.

No, I don't have a chart.

If someone is going to play chaotically, they should have a reason for doing so if they are protown

Disagree with those two completly. Lurking, especally, is a scumtell, and better yet, it's an even better cult leader tell in this situation.

I've seen scum lurk. I've seen town lurk. I've wanted not to post as scum. I've wanted not to post as town. If I can identify strategic lurking, then some cause for suspicion may arise, but lurking in and of itself is a nulltell for me.

Note the italicized. He makes sure that he lets us know that both a vig and a SK exists. This is not an open game, were not sure of the existence of the roles. How did he find out this information? No i am not a tracker. No i am not a watcher or alarmist. I am a Vig. I didn't kill last night because i wanted to make sure i had a kill for night one of this game. Therefore, There IS a SK in this game as well as me, and although there will be an attempt to kill me, i will finish off Blaze in the night. If i happen to get recruited, i will spout the name of my leader immediately, So if you don't want me around, you must kill me. I only say this because were getting close to lynch( i believe) and i want all my information out on the table before i die.

If you are a vig, where did the "I know blaze killed DGB!" come from?

[Yosarian2]

Disagree with those two completly. Lurking, especally, is a scumtell, and better yet, it's an even better cult leader tell in this situation.

I've seen scum lurk. I've seen town lurk. I've wanted not to post as scum. I've wanted not to post as town. If I can identify strategic lurking, then some cause for suspicion may arise, but lurking in and of itself is a nulltell for me.

Well, I do tend to think lurking is always a scumtell, although of course like all scumtells it's not perfect. But like I said, I think it's even more crucial in this game, because the role that has the greatest motivation to stay in the background and not be noticed is the cult recruiter, which is also the role we most want to lynch. If we don't go after lurkers and semi-lurkers as a town, and I mean go after them agressivly and lynch them when it seems approperate, we could easily lose to a quet cult leader who lets his cult members do all his bandwagoning and attacking and such for him.

[springlullaby]

Yosarian, I'm not getting why claiming is bad, please re-explain it for me.

[vikingfan]

Vollkan, here's my perspective (and this was before the mod posted that he was having technical difficulties). When the mod says that a player has been picking up his prods, but yet not posting, that appears scummy to me since it says that he has been available to post but yet does not want to do so. If the mod hadn't said that, I would have simply considered it grounds for replacement.

Okay, but I have myself been in situations where I have not wanted to post as town, purely because my ideas are not solid and I don't want to make a crappy post that draws suspicion. Reading to the point of being able to post takes time, and it's reasonable that someone might not post.
[/quote]

To the point where they don't post AT ALL? that just seems more scummy than townish to me. Not even any thoughts on the game at all to this point...it certainly seems to merit the FOS that I gave.

And agreed 100% with Yos.

[armlx]

Yosarian, I'm not getting why claiming is bad, please re-explain it for me.

Because those that claim pro-town recruitable roles, especially power roles that don't harm the SK such as the cop, create massive WIFOMs as instead of dying and being death confirmed, they can become scum. Non-recruitable roles claiming simply lowers the target pool for the cult(s) to hit recruitables.

I'm pretty sure death via lynch is still < potential cult recruitment, but claiming outside of that scenario is not helping the town.