Mini 692: Boost Mafia (Game Over!)

[Xtoxm]

PA after my exams.

[TDC]

You already have claimed..

[Xtoxm]

No, I haven't.

[Incognito]

I'm a double voter. I have a second, secret vote that I PM to elmo in order to use. From the wording of my boost PM, I believe that once I use this vote, I will not retain the power into the following days. If there are no objections, I'd like to use this today in order to confirm myself. I'd also like to get it out of the way, because it could potentially be devastatingly swingy in a LYLO situation, and I don't want the pressure should it come to that.

Yeh what he said basically.

You haven't?

[Xtoxm]

That's just the boost, guess it's a partial claim.

[Huntress]

Are you saying there's something else besides the double-vote?

[Xtoxm]

Fos Huntress

[TDC]

What for?

sthar8's claim does not look like a partial claim at all. It even says his roles is named "double voter".
And you "guess" it's a partial claim? You should know whether it is.

vote: Xtoxm

.

I demand a full role claim and answers to the questions you declined answering until you claim.

[Raging Rabbit]

Xtoxm is looking like a prime lynch right now, almost as much as Iceman.

[Xtoxm]

Whatever...

[Raging Rabbit]

Why did you FOS Huntress?

[vollkan]

46: I agree with this post by TDC.
56: Skillit votes shtar8 for answering questions addressed to other people. Not only does he fail to explain why this is scummy, but the first example he gives doesn't involve responding to a question addressed at anyone in particular - and the second is on a theory debate (where there is no need for people to have restraint in answering for others). (+2)
59: Oddly unargumentative response from shtar8...
60: I think RR makes a legit point abotu shtar8 possibly being scum panicking, but to vote him for it is unduly speculative; ditto with simply claiming that he doubts that shtar8 wasn't aware he was addressing questions for others (My guess would be that he didn't notice it because he wasn't doing it). (+1)
62: Shtar8 touches on this point here, by saying he wasn't aware that they weren't for him
69: fuzzy doesn't really post anything of substance on any of the real issues, addressing only electra's play and theory.
77: RR doesnt explain what was panicky or scummy about sthar8's post. (+1)
85: I don't have any problems with this post by Incog
86: skill maintains it was jokey. I've already given my view on this
102: Another "I will post soon" from crazy...
117: . What I find odd is that he basically repeats his earlier points here to justify a vote. The fact that this comes after fl casts an FoS for SL makes the timing seem rather opportunistic, as if he is now confident that he can wagon SL and have support. Basically, incog, I would like to know why you didn't FoS/Vote SL in 98, when your reasons there weren't any different to those from this post. One problem I do have is with the attack on SL's "8 out of 10" argument. She's basically making a theory argument, and spinning it like a statistical claim is a cheap way of ignoring the point she is making about scum wanting to kep things open. Also, I think Incog too readily dismisses SL's the point about reserving judgment. Incog did say that he prefers to ask questions and get gut reads, which suggests not making position-claims along the way. (+2)
137: Incog now demands statistics from SL when she was making a theory point. If somebody says "scum do X more than town", odds are they mean to make an intuitive claim which is not inconsistent with observations. That is to say, people make such claims based on what they think would occur, and assess the veracity of those claims in light of experience - rather than tallying up games and reaching positions. The point SL is making is that incog is playing in a way which allows him to go by without disclosing his position. The "I have protown reasons for not disclosing" point is one I always find difficulty with. This is a game of incomplete information and, as such, saying "I have reasons which I can't disclose" is basically asking everybody else to give you, potential scum, the benefit of the doubt. In some cases, there are good reasons for not disclosing, but your reasoning has to get revealed at some point (lest it simply serve as an excuse for not posting details), and I will look for that as I continue reading.

2) Green Crayons (replacing Mana_Ku who replaced Skillit) - 55
3) Raging Rabbit - 52
5) TDC - 50
6) Huntress (replacing Crazy) - 51
7) Incognito - 52
8) eldarad - 50
9) Xtoxm (replacing sthar8) - 50
12) icemanE (replacing RandomGem who replaced fuzzylightning) - 50

[Xtoxm]

If you're gonna just lynch me, i'll not bother reading.

Let me know.

[Patrick]

Day 2, Vote Count #5 - Lynching

icemanE (2) <- Raging Rabbit, Green Crayons
Huntress <- Xtoxm
Xtoxm (2) <- Incognito, TDC
Raging Rabbit <- eldarad
eldarad <- Huntress

Not voting: Vollkan, icemanE.

Boost Count
eldarad (2) <- TDC, Xtoxm
TDC <- Raging Rabbit
Raging Rabbit <- Incognito
Vollkan <- Green Crayons

With 9 alive, you lynch/boost at 5. And since we've been here almost a month, I'm giving you guys a long deadline for February the 2nd. The time of day will be given nearer the time.

[Incognito]

Xtoxm, just continue reading. A lot of people didn't find sthar8 suspicious, so I don't see why you'd feel like you're on the brink of being lynched. I'd really like to see a Player Analysis from you, so I'd appreciate your continued read. Thanks.

[eldarad]

Xtoxm, I don't really see why TDC is voting you. I'm not seeing a contradiction between sthar's position and yours regarding the claim. Although there is some ambiguity about your claim that I would like you to explain in due course.
Please keep reading, I'd like to hear your thoughts. Also note that you can't be hammered until we boost the second person Today.

Raging Rabbit, why do you think Xtoxm is looking like a prime lynch target right now?
I'm also intrigued to hear how you reached a "gut" read on Electra without considering whether her claim was genuine or not.

[icemanE]

Just waiting on that pbpa...

[Raging Rabbit]

Raging Rabbit, why do you think Xtoxm is looking like a prime lynch target right now?

'Cause sthar was real scummy himself, and xtoxm fucked up his already shady looking claim.

I'm also intrigued to hear how you reached a "gut" read on Electra without considering whether her claim was genuine or not.

It's an intriguing move, I know, but I actually considered the parts where she posted

without

claiming. Also her first post still strongly reads town.

Just waiting on that pbpa...

You replaced way earlier than xtoxm and said close to nothing, how about doing an analysis yourself? Loving where my vote is.

[Xtoxm]

No, Sthar was very townly. You are quite scummy tho...

[Huntress]

How is he more scummy than Sthar?

[icemanE]

You replaced way earlier than xtoxm and said close to nothing, how about doing an analysis yourself?

Hmm I think I already said why I don't like doing PBPA's - and I don't particularly like other people doing them, either, but I'm not going to lecture someone on how to play.

[Raging Rabbit]

I didn't ask for a pbpa, just, well, anything. Thoughts on the game and stuff.

[Incognito]

Unvote
Vote: icemanE

I still think sthar8/Xtoxm stands a strong chance of being scum, but I think an icemanE-lynch might be even more likely to hit scum than an Xtoxm-lynch. I should have more time to elaborate on my reads of everyone this coming weekend.

[Xtoxm]

Vig a PR if you really want. I still fail to see how anyone can see Sthar as scum.

[Raging Rabbit]

Vig a PR if you really want. I still fail to see how anyone can see Sthar as scum.

Dude, your claim is a one-shot double voter. Vigging a "PR" isn't scaring anyone.

I fail to see what you expect to achieve by stating how very obvtown the guy you replaced was.