A Gentleman's Game of Guile, Subterfuge, and Intrigue (Fin)

[inHimshallibe]

vote: Sir V. Piraka

[lord_hur]

I was not encouraged to vote for Twistedspoon, Esq. until what I perceived to be his ultimate pratfall, which was the whole backtracking of vernacular regarding Information Instead of Analysis.

Yes, that is exactly what I do not understand. The activity you describe, while obviously contemptible, was terrible play for both gentlemen and imposters. Just in the assembly you hosted a week ago, I caught several persons in blatant lies and backtracking, yet they were, except for one, actually innocent. I sure know how infuriating it is (I would personally punch square in the face anyone who lies when innocent, for whatever reason), but such attitude cannot be used, in my opinion, as main cause for a good case. It is a hint about stupidity, much less about alignment.

[lord_hur]

Well, I must say I am a trifle embarrassed to have overlooked these two posts.

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 1#p2989171
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 3#p2989293

Hoppster: what, exactly, changed?

I must admit you lost me there. What did you see in these minutes?

Great Scot!

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 6#p2989226

Sir Hoppster takes away his banter with Twistedspoon, Esq. to focus on a policy execution of Sir V. Piraka, and then in his next post decides that's not such a grand idea after all, instead claiming his initial vote on Twistedspoon, Esq. was indeed a better one?

I admit, with the speculation rampant on the Night Killings and this possible link between Sirs Hoppster and V. Piraka, it may be time for our Texan gentleman to... well, to be polite... "eat lead."

Well, I am positively burning to comment, but I will refrain till Sir V. Piraka does.

[inHimshallibe]

I was not encouraged to vote for Twistedspoon, Esq. until what I perceived to be his ultimate pratfall, which was the whole backtracking of vernacular regarding Information Instead of Analysis.

Yes, that is exactly what I do not understand. The activity you describe, while obviously contemptible, was terrible play for both gentlemen and imposters. Just in the assembly you hosted a week ago, I caught several persons in blatant lies and backtracking, yet they were, except for one, actually innocent. I sure know how infuriating it is (I would personally punch square in the face anyone who lies when innocent, for whatever reason), but such attitude cannot be used, in my opinion, as main cause for a good case. It is a hint about stupidity, much less about alignment.

It is clear that it was Twistedspoon, Esq.'s hubris and not his villainy that was revealed after all that, indeed. It was a failure to locate which was the correct interpretation, and again, my patience had worn thin.

As for your burning ears, do you think I'm going about the Hoppster/v. Piraka situation backwards? I find there to be enough evidence to push Sir V. Piraka, though I guess if that's enough for him, it is also enough to relieve us of Sir Hoppster, as well. Ah, logic.

[lord_hur]

As for your burning ears, do you think I'm going about the Hoppster/v. Piraka situation backwards? I find there to be enough evidence to push Sir V. Piraka, though I guess if that's enough for him, it is also enough to relieve us of Sir Hoppster, as well. Ah, logic.

Alright, I will explain myself now, then. I understood the ballot changing you quoted as a (very ill-concieved) trap for Sir Twistedspoon. That Sir V. Piraka's name appeared was, as I see it, purely fortuitous.

I find the amount of credit you seem to place in my opinion quite surprising. A suspecting gentleman would be concerned for what could be viewed as alignment knowledge.

[inHimshallibe]

As for your burning ears, do you think I'm going about the Hoppster/v. Piraka situation backwards? I find there to be enough evidence to push Sir V. Piraka, though I guess if that's enough for him, it is also enough to relieve us of Sir Hoppster, as well. Ah, logic.

Alright, I will explain myself now, then. I understood the ballot changing you quoted as a (very ill-concieved) trap for Sir Twistedspoon. That Sir V. Piraka's name appeared was, as I see it, purely fortuitous.

This may indeed be the very reason it did not garner more attention in the first place. Quite quite.

I find the amount of credit you seem to place in my opinion quite surprising. A suspecting gentleman would be concerned for what could be viewed as alignment knowledge.

You're the only other gent up at this hour; it'd be quite rude to just ignore you.

[vezokpiraka]

vote: Sir V. Piraka

So let me get this. An unknown (as in role) person voted me , but then switched to TS.

The only way I can explain what you are saying is by thinking that hoppster is scum.

Wouldn't it make more sense to vote for hoppster?

unvote
vote

Sir

hoppster

Everything you said made me believe you are scum with hoppster and you forgot that we don't know hopster is scum.

[inHimshallibe]

vote: Sir V. Piraka

So let me get this. An unknown (as in role) person voted me , but then switched to TS.

The only way I can explain what you are saying is by thinking that hoppster is scum.

Wouldn't it make more sense to vote for hoppster?

unvote
vote hoppster

Everything you said made me believe you are scum with hoppster and you forgot that we don't know hopster is scum.

Emphasis mine.

Yes, I went over the bold in a previous point, and since Lord Hur has demonstrated this alleged "trap" I have no more reasoning than the Nightkill analysis.

unvote

I am still quite wary to vote Sir Hoppster. Everything he posted throughout the First Day seemed of an overzealous Gentleman, and I said as much time and again.

[inHimshallibe]

Ha! I didn't include the bold tags, but you all probably get the gist.

[lord_hur]

vote: Sir V. Piraka

So let me get this. An unknown (as in role) person voted me , but then switched to TS.

The only way I can explain what you are saying is by thinking that hoppster is scum.

Wouldn't it make more sense to vote for hoppster?

unvote
vote hoppster

Everything you said made me believe you are scum with hoppster and you forgot that we don't know hopster is scum.

Either you have cast the wrong ballot, or I do not follow you at all. Surely you meant to designate Sir inHimshallibe as a potential rapscallion?

Sir inHimshallibe, while I understand your reason for not voting Sir Hoppster, I am sure someone as esteemable as you has another suspect. Surely this was not the best you can do.

[vezokpiraka]

vote: Sir V. Piraka

So let me get this. An unknown (as in role) person voted me , but then switched to TS.

The only way I can explain what you are saying is by thinking that hoppster is scum.

Wouldn't it make more sense to vote for hoppster?

unvote
vote hoppster

Everything you said made me believe you are scum with hoppster and you forgot that we don't know hopster is scum.

Either you have cast the wrong ballot, or I do not follow you at all. Surely you meant to designate Sir inHimshallibe as a potential rapscallion?

Sir inHimshallibe, while I understand your reason for not voting Sir Hoppster, I am sure someone as esteemable as you has another suspect. Surely this was not the best you can do.

I think inhim is scum together with hop. i think lynching hopster is the better way to go. I don't know how much that makes sense but for me it makes.

[lord_hur]

Hmm, I do see some points corroborating your analysis.

Sir inHimshallibe, what are the "link" and the "speculation" you spoke about in message #449? And if my frowning is not hint enough, I urge you to be frank and straightforward.

[inHimshallibe]

Hmm, I do see some points corroborating your analysis.

Sir inHimshallibe, what are the "link" and the "speculation" you spoke about in message #449? And if my frowning is not hint enough, I urge you to be frank and straightforward.

The link between Sir Hoppster and Sir V. Piraka involved that series of posts I referred to. Sir Hoppster jumps from his random vote to Sir V. Piraka, citing possible policy lynch implications. Without another mention of the policy ballot, he switches back to Twistedspoon, Esq. and begins the long argument against Twistedspoon, Esq. we were faced with on the First Day. IF Sir V. Piraka were to be scum, I would finally entertain the notion of evicting Sir Hoppster.

The murder speculation mostly developed from myself, but both victims had cast wayward eyes toward Sir V. Piraka.

[lord_hur]

Thank you. Last question : do you see any argument to refute Sir V. Piraka's assertion about an eventual ungentlemanly relation between you and Sir Hoppster?

[inHimshallibe]

Thank you. Last question : do you see any argument to refute Sir V. Piraka's assertion about an eventual ungentlemanly relation between you and Sir Hoppster?

Neither of us are scum? I suppose I had covered that one already.

You are one for further explanation, though, so:
If Sir Hoppster is a villain, I will have hitched my cart to the wrong horse, it would seem. To link me to Sir Hoppster is to create me a victim of my conviction.

[Hoppster]

Spoiler: Response to lord_hur

1. If you're indeed a rogue, the fact that your side would have done both kills would be a distinct possibility, yes. I don't know enough about the mechanics yet. Are you suggesting you do?
2. Odd deaths to you. I've never, ever seen discussion about scum motivations profit anyone else than scum.
3. You got me for a second. And then, I noticed that in your message #57, you say that you asked for town games finished by Sir Twistedspoon to check if he always OMGUSed at town. That asking happened in your messages #43 and #45, so well before your summary in #51, and of course your #54. Thus, I think you're lying when you said you did not pick up on his alleged OMGUS vote until then.
4. Villains' desire to mislynch sometimes lead to stated reasons that are of lesser quality. I must trust my own judgement to assess these reasons, and it tells me that the reasons you used are indicative rather of bad play than anything else (I can detail why if you so wish).
5. So, when someone claims VT, then immediately thereafter claims miller, it does not give you the slightest doubt about his alignment? I sincerely hope we meet again, and that I'll be scum.

And no, I'm not fully convinced that you're scum, because your struggle with Twistedspoon looked very much like usual town-on-town fight at the start, but I stated my opinion anyway because as only scum are sure about alignment, waiting till certainty would invariably lead to no-voting. Also, saying i'll remove my vote if convinced is just saying I'm rational and not prone to tunnelling.

1. I do believe you to be rolefishing here, my good lord_hur.


2. So does this make me scum?


3. There were two parts to his idiocy: a) the fact that he was solely OMGUSing me; b) the fact that he thought I was scum yet did not provide a case.

They so happen to be interlinked in this scenario because he thought I was scum because I was attacking him.

I'll explain my thinking PBP:

Here, it is quite clear that as I realise Twistedspoon is town, the first 'LOLWTF' point to come to my head is the absence of a case.

It is when he then answers that it was because he thought I was obvious enough not to need a case (and this reason is quite blatantly OMGUS) that I then bring up the OMGUS section.

Yes I had wanted to check his meta about the OMGUS, but as confusing as this may seem, it was not to see whether his meta ruled out OMGUS as a scum-tell, but to see if it suggested it as a town-tell. His logic for attacking me seemed to suggest that he would do that all town games, but he didn't.


4. A post-mortem examination of Twistedspoon I would say is useless, given that we now know he is town.


5. "I sincerely hope... that I'll be scum [next time we meet]"

ICUWHUTUDIDTHAR

Nice try.

Also, well done at taking things out of context. I have neither said that I bought the miller claim nor that I didn't. You have argued both ways that I did and I didn't. When actually, I regarded it as null to his alignment.

Spoiler: Response to DemonHybrid

ISO TS.

I'd like you to explain to me whether or not you feel the following posts of his were information-hunting posts or not:

7, 10, 15, 19, 20, 25, 29

We'll start off with these posts at the moment. Why did you believe they were fake, if so? You want me to answer whether I "honestly believe" that he was information hunting.

Yeah, the argument could have been made saying "Well, he's only creating questions to make it seem like he's scumhunting", but looking at these questions, they fit both tow nand scum motivation and that point is just a complete null. I don't think your justification of lynching him was sincere.

#7: No.

#10: In context of the rest of his posts that immediately, this is likely just RVS fluff ("hurr this guy scum") rather than an attempt to move out of RVS.

#15: Sheeping...

#19: No, it's a response to my questions

#20: No... still a response to my questions...

#25: Looks heavily feigned given that he hasn't been pressing anybody else; soft-buddying as well to somebody with a town-read on him.

#29: Don't know which bit you're talking about, but no for all of it. imaginality corrected himself with an EBWOP, and Twistedspoon admits to pursuing non-reasoned gut over reason.

But tell me, DH, what possible use do you think comes from analysing Twistedspoon's ISO for information hunting post-flip when we all now know he is town? You say my justification was not sincere - is this scummy?

Spoiler: Response to inHim

Well, I must say I am a trifle embarrassed to have overlooked these two posts.

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 1#p2989171
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 3#p2989293

Hoppster: what, exactly, changed?

The first post was more one to get out of RVS, plus I also saw some actual merit in a Policy Lynch. Not enough to overrule this though: http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 3#p2989293 (post where I explained why I changed vote). It was not a trap in any shape or form, as lord_hur has speculated. Twistedspoon just set off my scumdar.

vezok, you may want to read what I posted above.

[inHimshallibe]

Apart from Sir Hoppster, I lean that Sir Imaginality is a gentlemen, and then below that our more vocal replacements.

Sir Hoppster

Sir Feysal
Sir Imaginality

Lord Hur
Sir Toasty

the rest - this group is far too large.

Given that my ballot cast for Sir V. Piraka was poorly formed, I will take a fresh look at this last group. Sirs Cookiebringer and K. Paca I feel we have particular interest in picking through their limited contributions.

[ToastyToast]

vote: Sir V. Piraka

So let me get this. An unknown (as in role) person voted me , but then switched to TS.
The only way I can explain what you are saying is by thinking that hoppster is scum.
Wouldn't it make more sense to vote for hoppster?

its because inHim-Hoppster-lord_hur is the scum team

[Reya Cookiebringer]

Sir Cookiebringer, I could not help noticing this is your first game here. Do you have previous experience about this? Do you have any ballot to cast, or any suspicion to voice? I would very much like to hear more of you, as it is necessary for us to assess your belonging in this fine company. And also so we can find the culprits and exit this mansion alive.

No experience on site. I have a good amount on another site. I have replaced in once also. It was a large specialty but still. I am having a hard time finding stuff to comment about. Vezok is not playing very much like he did when I played with him. He seems to be more erratic and weird. Could just be different meta, and also Hoppster's reaction to TS saying he was town, when he could have been just lying just to mess with people.

[Wraith]

kpaca is being replaced.

[Feysal]

Sorry about the lack of posts today - I had a large theme start yesterday, and it started off with a flood of posts I'm trying to keep up with. I'll be catching up here come tomorrow.

[lord_hur]

Thank you. Last question : do you see any argument to refute Sir V. Piraka's assertion about an eventual ungentlemanly relation between you and Sir Hoppster?

Neither of us are scum? I suppose I had covered that one already.

You are one for further explanation, though, so:
If Sir Hoppster is a villain, I will have hitched my cart to the wrong horse, it would seem. To link me to Sir Hoppster is to create me a victim of my conviction.

Alright. Your answers have quite soothed the doubts I have about you. I fear I am always wary when playing with gentlemen of very high experience. They are often very hard to unmask.

[lord_hur]

Spoiler: Response to lord_hur

1. If you're indeed a rogue, the fact that your side would have done both kills would be a distinct possibility, yes. I don't know enough about the mechanics yet. Are you suggesting you do?
2. Odd deaths to you. I've never, ever seen discussion about scum motivations profit anyone else than scum.
3. You got me for a second. And then, I noticed that in your message #57, you say that you asked for town games finished by Sir Twistedspoon to check if he always OMGUSed at town. That asking happened in your messages #43 and #45, so well before your summary in #51, and of course your #54. Thus, I think you're lying when you said you did not pick up on his alleged OMGUS vote until then.
4. Villains' desire to mislynch sometimes lead to stated reasons that are of lesser quality. I must trust my own judgement to assess these reasons, and it tells me that the reasons you used are indicative rather of bad play than anything else (I can detail why if you so wish).
5. So, when someone claims VT, then immediately thereafter claims miller, it does not give you the slightest doubt about his alignment? I sincerely hope we meet again, and that I'll be scum.

And no, I'm not fully convinced that you're scum, because your struggle with Twistedspoon looked very much like usual town-on-town fight at the start, but I stated my opinion anyway because as only scum are sure about alignment, waiting till certainty would invariably lead to no-voting. Also, saying i'll remove my vote if convinced is just saying I'm rational and not prone to tunnelling.

1. I do believe you to be rolefishing here, my good lord_hur.


2. So does this make me scum?


3. There were two parts to his idiocy: a) the fact that he was solely OMGUSing me; b) the fact that he thought I was scum yet did not provide a case.

They so happen to be interlinked in this scenario because he thought I was scum because I was attacking him.

I'll explain my thinking PBP:

Here, it is quite clear that as I realise Twistedspoon is town, the first 'LOLWTF' point to come to my head is the absence of a case.

It is when he then answers that it was because he thought I was obvious enough not to need a case (and this reason is quite blatantly OMGUS) that I then bring up the OMGUS section.

Yes I had wanted to check his meta about the OMGUS, but as confusing as this may seem, it was not to see whether his meta ruled out OMGUS as a scum-tell, but to see if it suggested it as a town-tell. His logic for attacking me seemed to suggest that he would do that all town games, but he didn't.


4. A post-mortem examination of Twistedspoon I would say is useless, given that we now know he is town.


5. "I sincerely hope... that I'll be scum [next time we meet]"

ICUWHUTUDIDTHAR

Nice try.

Also, well done at taking things out of context. I have neither said that I bought the miller claim nor that I didn't. You have argued both ways that I did and I didn't. When actually, I regarded it as null to his alignment.

I do not wish to answer points 1,2, 4 and 5 lest we get caught in a neverending circle, and I find no value in them. The first even gave me a mild chuckle. I accept the explanation you put forth in #3, though.

[Wraith]

AurorusVox replaces kpaca. Despite AV having replaced out before game started, he was not informed of hs role at the time and therefore has no more gme knowledge than any other replacement.

[AurorusVox]

Greetings gentlemen, and most humble apologies for my earlier tardiness.

I had been keeping my eye trained on the proceedings here via telescope for roughly one half of the soiree. As it stands, I will be checking the past ten pages of minutes as recorded herein, before offering my insight into the happenings and goings on.

I will try to accomplish this as soon as possible, gentlemen, but may not be able to do so until tomorrow or the following day. If there are any pressing matters that you would like to bring to my attention, please do so, and I will give it due consideration.

Yours sincerely,
~A. Vox, pHD