Mini 1585: Muskoka Murder Mystery - Game Over

[don_johnson]

/confirmed

[don_johnson]

vote:boonskiess

seems like the most "forced" rvs atm.

misaka: glad to see you.

super Mario: have we played before? apologies if I can't remember.

reinoe: why do I know you? i feel like we recently played, but did not interact much.

[don_johnson]

why not?

[don_johnson]

Bert?

[don_johnson]

"no sane scum would claim miller in their OP"

why not? I ask cause I recall seeing it done at some point... curious for the thought process here.

[don_johnson]

I agree with reinoe here. though a miller gambit carries some risk, it is actually a great gambit for scum to run with because the wifom is priceless. generally I ignore miller claims and vote based on in game play. however, there are two things which bother me about this miller claim:

1: the lack of emotion involved. most miller claims I have seen are not so matter of fact. granted this is solely my opinion based on my experience, but I generally have seen miller claims phrased with expletives or "fml, I got miller" type statements.
2: the lack of follow-up by the miller himself.

[don_johnson]

start(Bert?): with two scum power roles running around, why are we lynching the goon?

[don_johnson]

dj and epm are horrible day 1 lynches.

does someone want to summarize the chevy wagon? granted, I am loosely following at this time, but I don't recall seeing a case. if you give me something to comment on, then I will comment on it. i can't remember the last time chevy posted. same for chaoslord.

chevre and chaos: let's talk.

I'm still on the "boonskiess or konowa are our best lynches today" mindset. i haven't seen much to change that.

[don_johnson]

anti: you should know better. you are misrepping my post. I'm not "waiting" for anything. I have no reason to look into chevre from my pov. it was brought to my attention that other players were asking for comments on the situation. I am responding to that request and asking for the "information" to be presented. why should I look independently into someone I don't suspect if the person asking me to do so can't produce a simple case?

trying to pigeonhole my willingness to lynch boon into my original reasoning is a bit shortsighted as well. a lot has happened since then. I see boon and konowa as polarizing figures. I think it is a perfectly acceptable strategy to lynch between the two on day 1. if someone else brings something up or if I see something else worth lynching, I will of course be willing to expand my options, but I was simply stating where my thought process was atm.

reinoe: the two scum pr's are listed in start's initial random post. my question to start was "why are we lynching the goon off your list when you have two scum pr's listed." there was no case presented with the vote and the rvs list was used as justification for the vote. hence, my response. I assume the rvs list was a joke. but if you're going to use such a list as reasoning for a vote, then your vote should make sense. which it didn't, because the vote was on the goon. I assume start has other reasons for the vote. but like I stated before, I don't see them. part of why I am asking for the case on chevre. the votes have piled up and I don't see a case. no one has laid it out, or if they have, I missed it.

so again: what's the case on chevre?

[don_johnson]

Antihero:

I don't want to argue the semantics of "misrep", but you have twice now tried to spin things I have said in a negative light. I will explain this more later when I have time and respond to the rest of your posting.. I will also address the "polarizing" comment. reading is overrated. meta me if you wish, but I read on an as needed or by desire basis. not as a matter of course. actions and voting patterns present much more concrete evidence than posting does. there are very few things outside of interactions with known scum that catch my eye in this game, and trying to spin a players posts in a negative light is tops on that list. its a subtle strategy and when done well, is hard to notice. but I have seen it before and I'm seeing it now. the polite thing to do in this situation is to link me to or paraphrase your case on chevre. I don't see any town motivation for avoiding the question and then hiding behind spin.

[don_johnson]

that's four times now. but whatevz. i'll do what I can. you have at least given me some focus which is really all I asked. as for my strategy: reading is overrated. I stand by it. my record is in my sig because I started keeping track long ago. but I am actually proud of it. especially considering that I was at one time 17-28 as town. getting all pissy because I approach the game differently than you will get us nowhere. you could have posted the info in 360 without the vitriole and soap box lecture. but I'm willing to put it in the past. I will look into chevre when I have the time.

as to "polarizing": my meaning here is that they were two players who didn't look like they could be scum partners, but that one of them could be scum. there is always a chance both are town, but between the shitty miller claim and the "newb" vibe blowing off of boon, I'd say it's not a "bad" plan to pressure the two and lynch between them for a day 1 play. I never said I wouldn't consider other options. it really annoys me when I give an opinion and people act like its set in stone. mafia is a dynamic game. it always changes. that said, I haven't seen much to make me think they are a bad lynch pool. I will better explain my feelings on a reread. and guess what. a reread might completely change my mind. that's kind of how the game works. so please don't get your panties in a bunch. mountains out of molehills is as anti-town as it gets.

talk later.

[don_johnson]

well, don and i are talking past each other at this point so i guess the only thing i can do is wait for that reread.

you may be waiting a while. but I think I see what you are talking about with chevre's long posts just based on 363.

Why ask me and chaoslord to "talk" when you're only loosely following the game,

and one of the people you can't remember posting posted less than a page ago

?

bolded is the irrelevant and extraneous part of this question. so basically, chevre's question to me is:

"why are you interested in trying to talk with people who have low post counts, and who have zero memorable interactions?"

its kind of a dumb question. don't you think, anti? why

wouldn't

I want to try and stimulate conversation with these players?

in regards to citing my record: I am not defending my playstyle. I am explaining that my playstyle works. comparing the use of my playstyle to my scum record makes no sense. i read as needed. this type of conversation should be reserved for a separate thread in all honesty. i could probably make a case that reading is the leading cause of mislynches. but i'll let that sink in.

seriously though. reading is done as needed. meta me if you have doubts, but going off half cocked and calling for my lynch because i spout a different approach is poor play. you shouldn't lynch people for philosophy. that's called policy lynching. i have been conservative with my vote. i haven't dodged any questions. and i am doing my best to get along. there is not much more you could ask of me.

i'll post more thoughts when i get time, but saying "well i guess i'll wait" is contrary to everything you just spouted at me, antihero. nothing i am doing is detrimental to the game state, so holding your own game up on account of me isn't going to help. the only thing it could do is build unnecessary pressure towards a mislynch at the moment.

And then he states that he will look at what I'm all about, which is sort of against this whole idea he's been?

^^ i am having trouble understanding what you mean here. can you explain? it sounds like you are trying to fault me for cooperating with antihero's request.

[don_johnson]

thank you for inaccurately paraphrasing my statement. I really don't see how discussing my philosophy benefits the game state. this isn't a popularity contest(although sometimes that exactly what day 1 becomes.)

start(bert?): apparently I have to "read" first. so you'll have to be patient.

[don_johnson]

Bert
EPM
Misaka
Guyett

^^ not interested in lynching any of these. if we wanted we could have a five player voting bloc. what do ya say?

Antihero, you're on the fringe. a little less complaining and a little more convincing would get you there.

lazy =/= scum.

[don_johnson]

its more a list of who I'm comfortable working with atm. anti is just a tad bit abrasive. also:

your scumplaining isn't a "good town question"

and neither is waiting for half the game to weigh in on the Chevre wagon (which...... you haven't done btdubs)

A) "why is epm scum?" is a good question because as I put forth earlier "lazy =/= scum".
B) this sounds hypocritical. he seems to be condemning epm for "waiting for half the game to weigh in on the chevre wagon," but atm, Anti's current strategy seems to be "waiting for half the game to weigh in on the chevre wagon." maybe I'm wrong, but that statement just reads strange to me. in any case, I would be ok getting anti into the bloc, but I sense that he would resist anyway. bloc voting is a good strategy which we could debate for hours, but anti's current "holier than thou" attitude tells me it is unlikely he would agree to the bloc. of course, we could all agree to let him choose the target today. that is, if you truly want to stand by your "obvtown" read.

never had kelpie. sounds interesting?

[don_johnson]

a voting bloc doesn't necessarily need to be all town. do you think epm and bert could be scum together? I'm not getting scum vibes from either. anti's issues seem playstyle based. at least given my familiarity with epm and bert. but even with a scum in the bloc, the strategy is effective as it limits a lynch pool. odds don't necessarily improve but the focus is a bit narrower and that can help with getting more defined reads on both the players in the bloc and the players outside. I have never seen the voting bloc strategy fail to net a town win. but that's me.

[don_johnson]

can I get kelpie in America?

[don_johnson]

I always love it when people try to lynch people who are lazy and honest. [/sarcasm]

there is literally very little scumhunting going on at all here. Anti-hero's response to my request is about the best post I can see over the last few pages. everyone else's scumhunting consists of "epm and don aren't reading, they must be scum". in other words, you "lazy" fuckers are trying to policy lynch instead of scumhunt.

vote: chevre

Konowa: how does 428 "lessen" chevre of being scum?

Antihero: your AtE seems out of place. that coupled with your previous spin attempts is unsettling. I'm giving you the pass now because your chevre case makes way more sense and from what I've read in the past couple pages, the case seems spot on. in any case, let's try and be civil. if I really offended you I apologize. you just seemed to be coming at me with the gloves up.

chevre: you seem to be trying to place me in a static box. you are trying to portray my playstyle as "not reading". which is a gross misinterpretation of what I said. you also ignored my mention of the statistics which was paramount to why I brought them up in the first place. I wasn't just "citing" my record, but showing how my game has improved recently. I have a good scum record because I'm good and lucky. I have a good town record because I'm an asset to town. trying to lynch me because you don't like my approach to the game is lazy and scummy. you haven't asked any pertinent questions of me or done any investigation. enjoy your noose.

[don_johnson]

I'm confused. we have chevre who is posting mini walls but not really saying anything definitive or offering value to the game. chevre also seems to be caught up in accusing others of not giving content when in reality, he isn't doing much himself. then we have epm, who is basically saying, "I'm not doing anything, so what?"

in my experience, honesty is better. so I don't get the epm wagon. and I can't understand why Anti bailed on the chevre wagon.

also, "blocs" whether labeled "town" or "voting" are not "scum strategy". nor are they scummy. if you don't buy into the strategy, that's fine, but don't blast a strategy which has proven successful time and time again. a bloc does not need to be all town to be successful. it certainly can't be all scum, but some scum in the bloc is okay. what a bloc does is force more cooperation and civility. two things which run against the grain of scum strategy. scum need to sow confusion, dissension, and paranoia in order to win games. blocs help eliminate or severely hamper scums ability to do so. in my experience, when people start calling the bloc strategy "scummy" and flat out refuse to acknowledge its merits, then those players are more likely to be scum. but whatevz. if you guys want to lynch the guy whose being honest over the guy whose blowin' smoke and hypocrisy up your arses, then by all means...

[don_johnson]

no. just talking about them is beneficial. scum generally resist. I don't link nor do I do peoples meta work for them. do you agree with the idea that scum need to sow paranoia, confusion, and dissension? or do you think scum win by letting people be organized? the best town wins I have ever seen is where players use civil discourse and cooperation. to me that's common sense and does not need to be backed up by meta and links.

[don_johnson]

call it a difference of opinion. mastin's looking at an "ideal". I'm looking at it pragmatically. I'm not choosing the bloc at random. I'm choosing who I think fits. just because player a and player b don't trust each other, doesn't mean that I can't trust them both and encourage them to work together instead of grating against each other and letting who I think may be scum just slip through the cracks. but whatevz. somehow epm is now at L-2. I think the chevre wagon is better and encourage you guys to leave epm alone.

[don_johnson]

^^ seriously? go ahead and lynch them both and you will see. I think its pretty self explanatory. I don't see how you can be oblivious to the difference between honesty and deception. one is saying "I'm lazy" but not contributing. the other is saying "I'm contributing, that guys lazy and therefore scum" but not contributing.

[don_johnson]

konowa: I will get to chevre. I do need to reread him as I'm not sold on him. I'm not sure you are following my meaning though. my issue with the epm wagon is less about chevre's posting but more when you place them side by side. anti's case against chevre was that chevre was posting a lot but not contributing a lot. epm is just being lazy. chevre seemed to be acting like he was contributing, while epm was being honest and transparent about his laziness. there are a lot of reasons why townies are lazy. there is very little reason for a townie to be lazy, but then deny it. but again, I want to take another look at chevre.

the bloc is getting off topic. an organic townbloc is not the same thing as a voting bloc. one is a strategy, one is just a chain of events or collection of ideas. I think the useful part of the conversation is over tbh. in my experience, the bloc is used to narrow down the day one lynch pool and discourage VI behavior. but whatevz. if we just want to "play" then that's fine.

[don_johnson]

misaka: if memory serves, the chevre died out as soon as I was jumping on. I didn't have an issue with chevre until anti brought it up. if you read the game, you would know where I was previously. it's kind of a dumb question. what you should be asking is: why did anti jump off the chevre wagon when he did? I'm starting to think anti/chevre might be a thing, but I think chevre is the lynch for today. I think epm will flip town so I'm not voting there. boon is doable but reads more like VI and the case on him seems to be the same as the case on epm. but whatevz.

[don_johnson]

don, then would you be up for anti lynch today?

Unvote

its not ideal. I think anti/chevre interaction is suspicious, but I think anti's original case on chevre makes sense. I'm just kind of waiting for anti to explain why they left the chevre wagon. but to answer the question simply, yes. I'd rather start with chevre, but I also need to take another look at chevre which I haven't had a chance to do. all of my opinions are based on a loose read of the first 15 pages and a slight bit closer read of the last 5 or so. I don't like the epm wagon, though, and the sudden boon wagon seems like a diversion.

anti: i already apologized. drop the emo and start making sense again. what happened to your chevre suspicion?

[don_johnson]

reinoe is a tough read. looking through the last game we played I remember having some of the same feelings about him as I do now. I'd say I'm on the fence there.

misaka: anti switching back to chevre? i could hurt my brain trying to explain it without the context of a flip. I'd rather get the lynch and sort out the wagon later. only thing throwing a wrench would be a chevre town flip, but that seems unlikely.

[don_johnson]

if you have more evidence why aren't you building a proper case?

^^ true dat. I'm all ears.

do we have a deadline?(thinking out loud here...)

[don_johnson]

3 days. I'm thinking we push chevre and get a claim. get that reinoe case on the books so we have an alternative. thoughts?

[don_johnson]

that's a dumb idea. we should be getting a claim. 3 days will fly by. if you don't want chevre lynched, then remove your vote.

[don_johnson]

lynch chevre. he claimed vanilla and we already have a soft claim on the table. no reason to run anyone else up today.

let the night happen.

[don_johnson]

I think chaos should be full claiming.

antihero was my biggest suspect going into night. if you go back you notice him abandoning the chevre wagon just when its getting solid. then he dances around it a bit. I'm not seeing the case on anen.

chaos: what did you do last summer... er night?

misaka: why do you think anti has drawn town?

bert: why are you speculating third party killer?

vote: antihero

starting here. please note my v/la.

[don_johnson]

you were on. you were the downright champion of the wagon. then you jumped off rather unceremoniously. I don't recall you working that hard for anything else except epm, who was basically being condemned for not doing stuff. you voted bert at one point. you never really addressed the chevre wagon again, until you vote him again with little to no explanation as to why you are voting him and/or dropping the epm case(you also spent some time grouping your other suspects as "scum with chevre"). then you unvoted him, stated his posting was town and that he'd probably not flip scum. then you acquiesced to the lynch due to a looming deadline and the appearance of the softclaim, BUT did nothing about it.

do you have a better way to describe your actions? cause to me, "dancing around the chevre wagon" sounds spot on. but whatevz.

also, why do you think the chevre wagon went to completion?

um... because he got lynched? because active players campaigned and voted for him. of which you did neither.

[don_johnson]

um... because he got lynched? because active players campaigned and voted for him. of which you did neither.

oh yes i did.

read the fakegod/me exchange yesterday.

that's

why the chevre wagon went to completion.

if you have something to post in response, then post it. referring vaguely to a part of the game isn't going to convince me. in my memory, you had little to nothing to do with the wagon's end other than chiming in and agreeing with ME.

epm: I'm not scum. that should become clear to you.

chaoslord: claim please.

bert: if there is a vig they should claim NOW. do you agree?

come one guys. we need to get on board the town co-op train at this time. start paying attention to the guy who was right all along. a chaos claim, a vig claim, a discussion on anti hero. these are the things that should be taking place.

[don_johnson]

anti: you have it backwards. you bussed when it didn't matter, and didn't bus when it did. but whatevz, you seem to be tossing out the AtE again. its kind of pathetic. what do you think of a chaos claim?

Broodking is a good vote if dj is town

just curious here, but why? I have a zero read on brood atm. mainly because I haven't read him.

@don do you really think now is a good time for a mass claim? I don't think things like that should happen unless someone has a guilty tbh

Yea @Don_Johnson I don't think it's a good idea to claim right now.

a) I didn't say mass claim
b) a vig should probably claim. late game vig claims end up in the "could be sk" wifom bucket and can end up being detrimental to town. and early claim establishes credibility. any vig worth his salt should realize this. if reinoe was your shot, you fucked up(though its not a bad shot it just didn't hit scum). even with a claim you most likely get at least one more if not two more shots off before scum plunks you. why wait? also, your claim draws heat off other more productvie town pr's.

but whatevz. if you guys don't want to listen to me. don't listen.

unvote, vote: chaos

guess we have to do this the old fashioned way.

[don_johnson]

There was only 1 death last night.

Why do you say there is a vig?

Vig really shouldn't claim until they get off a successful shot.

I didn't say there was a vig. bert was speculating.

unvote

that wasn't hard, now, was it? your target and results are somewhat convenient, but whatevz. we can move forward trusting each other barring a cc.

vote:antihero

you were not voting chevre. you were not pressuring chevre. you pushed chevre hard and early. then backed off and never really went back. you chimed in at the point when his lynch was inevitable. if you are not scum you are going to have to try harder to convince me. simply saying "well I lynched chevre" when you avoided the wagon at its most crucial moments is not going to cut it.

as noted earlier, I am in the midst of a v/la. I would like to see more discussion of antihero. if there is a cc out there for chaos, well then that's a slam dunk. if epm doesn't step things up, then this case might be going somewhere though. his uselessness is bordering on epic. still waiting on the brood case.

[don_johnson]

you left the wagon. twice. point me to this exchange that you feel "jumpstarted" the wagon. its a pretty simple question. just like the question I asked you yesterday that took you forever to answer.

p-edit: I didn't say you voted when it was inevitable. that's part of the point. YOU DIDN"T VOTE. being on a wagon that is at L-2 and then JUMPING OFF is the issue. you are either seriously having trouble grasping this concept or you are being deliberately obtuse. I don't take you for a fool, so I don't know why you are fighting me on this unless you are scum. a townie would own up to the fact that they acted suspiciously. your still trying to defend it rather than accepting it and doing something more proactive.

[don_johnson]

maybe there is little resistance to the wagon because misaka is scum.

[don_johnson]

Miller and tracker seems odd :/

yes.

even more odd that the tracker doesn't seem to be suspicious of the miller at all.

[don_johnson]

I want to vote misaka.

[don_johnson]

vote: misaka

oh dear. I've done it. please claim.

[don_johnson]

so what? mass claim? maybe tomorrow. if you think chaos is scum, then find his partner. you seem to be spending an awful lot of time speculating on things which that are not supported by evidence. i.e. third party killer, bp townie...

are you a vig?

[don_johnson]

I agree. that move reeked of desperation. if you are vig, shoot antihero regardless of the flip.

[don_johnson]

its pretty obvious. but if you can't see it I don't know what to tell you. I had plenty of opportunity to kill the chevre wagon, especially after antihero inexplicably dumped the case to pursue you and then waffled like an Egg-o until the lynch went through. but whatevz.

[don_johnson]

^^ "like"

[don_johnson]

sthar8: he who comes out voting in lylo is usually scum. to me that was the only real give away. otherwise guyett played a heck of a game.

epm: early game participation is something a lot of people look for unfortunately. they seem to ignore the information that's right in front of them. too bad for guys like us.