Mafiascum.net

In post 2166, Dunnstral wrote:Nah I only realized it when I took a closer look at your roleblock target; you've been pr hunting it seems; Blair probably roleblocked the JK last night; she has an inkling on who it is already. Reminder that mafia rb takes precedence over town jailkeeper

I looked deeper into the iso of the predecessor of the player she roleblocked:

In post 1266, votato wrote:We aren't lynching Freddie. That was so clearly not scum play.

In post 1270, votato wrote:Freddie's play clearly came from noobtown. The timing of the claim does not come from scum. She was obviously confused after your role fishing.
Also, what have you learned from your gambit? You said you'd have the game solved, but here you are going for blood on an obvtown slot.
Doc/jk should probably breadcrumb their target from last night in case they die.

There could be a jailkeeper who locked up either the target or the mafia executing the kill

It looks to me that

Alartom

is the

Jailkeeper

and he jailkept

Blair

on night 1.

Remember how there was no night kill on night 1? That means that Blair was either the target of the kill, or the one doing the killing; do you guys really think a claimed vt slot that was flailing and under pressure would be targeted for the kill?

Here's more softing:

In post 1847, Aloratom wrote:I'm not so much for a Blair/Freddie hook today.

Notice the use of the word 'hook', aka hooker, aka a roleblocker

Alartom

, you're making a big mistake by not pushing

Blair

here - it should be

pretty clear

that she's scum from your point of view.

As for me outting my thoughts here:

scum already know

, as evidenced by Blair's targetting. You're better off outting today and claiming who you're going to jailkeep the next day. Blair is the roleblocker - lynch her and we've got tracker + jailkeeper - you announce your target, I'll check someone else, maf has to kill me, you've got a clear, then you can do that 1 more time for a 2nd clear, I think it turns into auto win if I can convince you to move to Blair today.

In post 2182, Blair wrote:@Nauci I notoriously hate this Newbie setup (I say as much every time it comes up) and I very publicly fumbled the setup analysis in that game you referenced. (Although my Day 1 wagon analysis was 100% accurate!)

So yes, you really did just witness me assessing the setup and trying to suss out which sub-setup we're in. I'm actually pretty proud of the fact that I was able to identify it based off of one fake claim with no flipped PRs.

As for your point that Dunn would know (if he weren't lying scum) about the Jailkeeper due to receiving no result, I guess so but scum could have no killed so you don't technically know that in that scenario.

More importantly, I think it's worth mentioning here that A) I was not operating from the mindset of actually believing Dunnstral in the first place and B) Dunnstral didn't even use this super obvious explanation himself when responding to that very question.

In post 2171, Nauci wrote:

In post 2119, Blair wrote:The fact that Dunn outright states he was gunning for me to claim before him and BM had already moved me up the list is interesting.

Interesting how? Isn't that NAI? Like, if Dunn isn't lying, that's exactly the order he'd want to catch you in a lie? A maneuver that you yourself are absolutely expert at? And BM would do that as scum but would also do that as town who scumreads you?

In post 2202, Nauci wrote:Would you like to link me to instances where you say that?

In post 2179, Battle Mage wrote:I'm just glad all the newbies are dead and don't have to bear witness to this. I expect I'll be back in full force once the claims start coming in, or tomorrow after we no-lynch. I'm not inclined to risk throwing away the game today for no benefit without full claims - that is not pro-town. The rest of the posting at this stage is pretty much fluff and doesn't help town, and I'm not going to waste my time trying to herd cats. This should be a really easy town-win, and at least some people are making a total meal of it, perhaps to inflate their own scumhunting ego? It doesn't have to be this hard. BM out.

In post 2204, Blair wrote:

In post 2202, Nauci wrote:Would you like to link me to instances where you say that?

Where I say what? That I hate this newbie setup?

In post 2186, Blair wrote:He's claiming I visited Aloratom (whom he believes is the Jailkeeper) so that no matter who was jailed N2 it can't break his claim (because Roleblocker resolves first).

Dunnstral is relying pretty heavily on the argument that I am scum and know who the Jailkeeper is.

So scum!Blair or scum!Dunnstral has found the Jailkeeper.

Now ask yourself: Why isn't the Jailkeeper dead? Scum!Blair gains nothing from keeping the Jailkeeper alive. Scum!Dunnstral on the other hand, can keep the Jailkeeper alive in order to corroborate his fake claim ("Wow, I am the Jailkeeper and I target Dunnstral N1 - that explains why he got no result!")

If I'm scum then I know that not killing the Jailkeeper leaves me facing two town power roles today. Sure I could roleblock one of them continuously but that's still two named townies in endgame.

Dunnstral is arguing that scum know who the Jailkeeper is. He's probably right (he knows who the Jailkeeper is) but out of the two of us, he's the only one with a conceivable scum motive to leave them alive.

In post 2207, Battle Mage wrote:

In post 2186, Blair wrote:He's claiming I visited Aloratom (whom he believes is the Jailkeeper) so that no matter who was jailed N2 it can't break his claim (because Roleblocker resolves first).

Dunnstral is relying pretty heavily on the argument that I am scum and know who the Jailkeeper is.

So scum!Blair or scum!Dunnstral has found the Jailkeeper.

Now ask yourself: Why isn't the Jailkeeper dead? Scum!Blair gains nothing from keeping the Jailkeeper alive. Scum!Dunnstral on the other hand, can keep the Jailkeeper alive in order to corroborate his fake claim ("Wow, I am the Jailkeeper and I target Dunnstral N1 - that explains why he got no result!")

If I'm scum then I know that not killing the Jailkeeper leaves me facing two town power roles today. Sure I could roleblock one of them continuously but that's still two named townies in endgame.

Dunnstral is arguing that scum know who the Jailkeeper is. He's probably right (he knows who the Jailkeeper is) but out of the two of us, he's the only one with a conceivable scum motive to leave them alive.

and you're completely sure we shouldn't be mass-claiming, yeah? to be perfectly honest, it's pretty obvious who is scum, but I'm not going to take any chances today until we have complete transparency of information.

VOTE: No Lynch

In post 2208, Nauci wrote:Or instances where you fumbled the setup analysis because I just can't see you doing that as town

In post 1260, Blair wrote:How embarrassing, it appears I have fatally misunderstood the setup.

Thst still leaves the question "What is the point of this line of questioning?"

In post 2205, Nauci wrote:

In post 2179, Battle Mage wrote:I'm just glad all the newbies are dead and don't have to bear witness to this. I expect I'll be back in full force once the claims start coming in, or tomorrow after we no-lynch. I'm not inclined to risk throwing away the game today for no benefit without full claims - that is not pro-town. The rest of the posting at this stage is pretty much fluff and doesn't help town, and I'm not going to waste my time trying to herd cats. This should be a really easy town-win, and at least some people are making a total meal of it, perhaps to inflate their own scumhunting ego? It doesn't have to be this hard. BM out.

What are you trying to say here?

That you're just... Not going to participate in the rest of today because we're not mass claiming? That you're not even going to try to push people to mass claim at all but that because that is not happening, you won't even bother to post any more, while enigmatically saying some fluff about knowing who scum are?

I mean, is this all hinged on thinking that something Mith said applied to a game with totally different circumstances to this one except for being in MYLO? You're just going to sit in that basket with all of your eggs and not share with the rest of the class what you think you know?

Blair wrote:

In post 2208, Nauci wrote:Or instances where you fumbled the setup analysis because I just can't see you doing that as town

The very Newbie you referenced earlier:

In post 1260, Blair wrote:How embarrassing, it appears I have fatally misunderstood the setup.

Thst still leaves the question "What is the point of this line of questioning?"

In post 2201, Nauci wrote:@Tuxedo: Dunnstral claimed that he received No Result on Night 1. This means that he was either jailed or roleblocked.

He then claims that he saw Blair visit Aloratom, who was not the night kill. This means Blair must either he the jailer or the Mafia Roleblocker.

Except he's speculating that Aloratom is the jailer, and that he jailed Blair on Night 1, so she could not have blocked him, and neither could Aloratom. This scenario is impossible if he saw Blair visit Aloratom last night OR if he received No Result on Night 1, so why would he be speculating about that at all if his claim was real?

In post 2212, Blair wrote:Now that we have a 1v1 between Dunnstral and myself we should be lynching today while town controls a greater share of the votes than we will after one more townie is killed.

Since it is optimal to lynch today, it is now optimal to mass claim.

So you should be happy. Instead you're voting to no lynch.

In post 2216, Tuxedo Mask wrote:

In post 2201, Nauci wrote:@Tuxedo: Dunnstral claimed that he received No Result on Night 1. This means that he was either jailed or roleblocked.

He then claims that he saw Blair visit Aloratom, who was not the night kill. This means Blair must either he the jailer or the Mafia Roleblocker.

Except he's speculating that Aloratom is the jailer, and that he jailed Blair on Night 1, so she could not have blocked him, and neither could Aloratom. This scenario is impossible if he saw Blair visit Aloratom last night OR if he received No Result on Night 1, so why would he be speculating about that at all if his claim was real?

That's what I thought, but I'd like to hear Dunn confirm it.

In post 2206, Nauci wrote:

In post 2204, Blair wrote:

In post 2202, Nauci wrote:Would you like to link me to instances where you say that?

Where I say what? That I hate this newbie setup?

Yeah

In post 17, Blair wrote:

In post 12, Isis wrote:I'm still a hard sell on "since mafiascum is 80% closed setups and 20% open setups, the right answer is to present newbies with an open setup in the top tenth of open setup complexity to get them ready."

This is why I miss 2of4.

Simple roles, easy to understand, nothing ever happens in 2of4 that makes you scratch your head and click back over to the setup description to figure out what's going on.

(I'm ostensibly not a newbie and I consistently find myself referring back to the setup description in utter confusion, as Skitter can attest to when she scumread me in our last game for misunderstanding the setup )

In post 2219, Battle Mage wrote:oh and by the way Blair - once we've massclaimed, I'm still probably no-lynching today. Just FYI.

In post 2186, Blair wrote:He's claiming I visited Aloratom (whom he believes is the Jailkeeper) so that no matter who was jailed N2 it can't break his claim (because Roleblocker resolves first).

Dunnstral is relying pretty heavily on the argument that I am scum and know who the Jailkeeper is.

So scum!Blair or scum!Dunnstral has found the Jailkeeper.

Now ask yourself: Why isn't the Jailkeeper dead? Scum!Blair gains nothing from keeping the Jailkeeper alive. Scum!Dunnstral on the other hand, can keep the Jailkeeper alive in order to corroborate his fake claim ("Wow, I am the Jailkeeper and I target Dunnstral N1 - that explains why he got no result!")

If I'm scum then I know that not killing the Jailkeeper leaves me facing two town power roles today. Sure I could roleblock one of them continuously but that's still two named townies in endgame.

Dunnstral is arguing that scum know who the Jailkeeper is. He's probably right (he knows who the Jailkeeper is) but out of the two of us, he's the only one with a conceivable scum motive to leave them alive.

In post 2189, Tuxedo Mask wrote:OKAY!
(Please correct where I am wrong)
If I believe Dunnstral, he is a tracker and believes Votato is the Jailkeep. This is what he says went down this game.
So night 1, Lilith tracked Fish and Votato Jailkept them. Resulting with no night kill, and Lilith getting no result. So either fish was stopped from killing or was the target.

Night 2 Dunn tracked Blair who visited Alortom. Meaning that since Alortom isn't dead Blair must be the Jailkeeper (which they would have claimed) or must be the rolestopper.

Dunn if this is your claim, just say yes. If not correct me.

In post 2201, Nauci wrote:

In post 2166, Dunnstral wrote:Nah I only realized it when I took a closer look at your roleblock target; you've been pr hunting it seems; Blair probably roleblocked the JK last night; she has an inkling on who it is already. Reminder that mafia rb takes precedence over town jailkeeper

I looked deeper into the iso of the predecessor of the player she roleblocked:

In post 1266, votato wrote:We aren't lynching Freddie. That was so clearly not scum play.

In post 1270, votato wrote:Freddie's play clearly came from noobtown. The timing of the claim does not come from scum. She was obviously confused after your role fishing.
Also, what have you learned from your gambit? You said you'd have the game solved, but here you are going for blood on an obvtown slot.
Doc/jk should probably breadcrumb their target from last night in case they die.

There could be a jailkeeper who locked up either the target or the mafia executing the kill

It looks to me that

Alartom

is the

Jailkeeper

and he jailkept

Blair

on night 1.

Remember how there was no night kill on night 1? That means that Blair was either the target of the kill, or the one doing the killing; do you guys really think a claimed vt slot that was flailing and under pressure would be targeted for the kill?

Here's more softing:

In post 1847, Aloratom wrote:I'm not so much for a Blair/Freddie hook today.

Notice the use of the word 'hook', aka hooker, aka a roleblocker

Alartom

, you're making a big mistake by not pushing

Blair

here - it should be

pretty clear

that she's scum from your point of view.

As for me outting my thoughts here:

scum already know

, as evidenced by Blair's targetting. You're better off outting today and claiming who you're going to jailkeep the next day. Blair is the roleblocker - lynch her and we've got tracker + jailkeeper - you announce your target, I'll check someone else, maf has to kill me, you've got a clear, then you can do that 1 more time for a 2nd clear, I think it turns into auto win if I can convince you to move to Blair today.

@Tuxedo: Dunnstral claimed that he received No Result on Night 1. This means that he was either jailed or roleblocked.

He then claims that he saw Blair visit Aloratom, who was not the night kill. This means Blair must either he the jailer or the Mafia Roleblocker.

Except he's speculating that Aloratom is the jailer, and that he jailed Blair on Night 1, so she could not have blocked him, and neither could Aloratom. This scenario is impossible if he saw Blair visit Aloratom last night OR if he received No Result on Night 1, so why would he be speculating about that at all if his claim was real?

In post 2, Elmo TeH AzN wrote:

Mafia Roleblocker

action takes precedence over a

Town Jailkeeper

action should that apply.