Mini 692: Boost Mafia (Game Over!)

[eldarad]

Vote: eldarad

Sup?

My last two opening votes in games have landed on scum. Do you feel lucky?

rawr.

I'm fairly sure Patrick will have considered the impact of a massclaim when creating the setup, so I am sceptical of the claim that there is a game-breaking strategy.

Having said that, Electra gets bonus points for making such an early move.

Boost Electra

[eldarad]

Sthar8 you should post your idea on a fake myspace and make it a blog or something obscure so we know you had the theory now when we see it later and that you are not just retroactively creating the theory. just remind us to have you link us then to the page/blog post you can make now.

Or he could just PM Patrick with his thoughts, to be published post-game.

My proposed strategy is for us to just play normally, and then choose two people to boost after we find our lynch, based on how they played during the day.

I disagree - I think by doing this we are failing to use a additional information that this boost-voting mechanism provides us.

(meh, turns out RR has stole my thunder. I'll go ahead and say it anyway)

The boosting gives us another 2 wagons per Day to analyse. These

boostwagons

, if you will, are just as good at creating links between players as regular wagons are. Trying to shut this part of the game down right off the bat doesn't sit well with me.
Having said that, my gut reaction is that this was an oversight rather than scumminess on iLord's part.

"Scum can't gambit on the first page" is exactly what makes such gambits effective.

Fair enough. But also note that I was trying to start a boostwagon too.

I get what you're saying about your role, but it just seems weird and inelegant to include vanillas that don't know their boost power, and vanillas that do.

My hunch as to how the game is setup had some overlap with how Electra described it. And, as Electra said, for a scum to make that leap of faith about the existence or otherwise of boostable vanilla townies, or whatever, is pause for thought.

I think Skillit's "only 3 categories is illogical" theory feels like reaching. Particuarly as #27 is mostly a rationalisation of his previous comments, rather than an explanation of the original rationale.

vote Skillit

[eldarad]

We still get boostwagons - just after we have information to base it on. Like I said, unless you suspect you will get a day ability, there's no pro-town reason to boost before information.

I don't see how lynching before boosting gives us any more information - we won't learn the victim's alignment if we get a lynch majority before we've done the boosting thing. And we can't lynch Today without choosing two people to boost.
So I don't understand where you are going with this.

[eldarad]

I'm still not liking Skillit and haven't been satisfied with his posts since my vote.
I am particuarly bothered because his attack on Electra in post 21 - and it

was

an attack, no matter what he has said since - is later justified in post 27. But a lot of post 27 has obviously been thought of after post 21.
So post 27 isn't explaining the reason for the attack, it is creating reasons as to why the attack was valid

after the event

.

Skillit, do you have any thoughts on who is looking scummy so far? Why are you still voting for Crazy?

I retract my statement about skillit making a good point in his 'odd case', upon further review, the point he makes diverges from mine. However I do not see what he said so far as indicative of his alignment one way or another.

So...what point were you making? How is it different to Skillit's point?

A prod within the first 3 pages, wtf.

I was moderately surprised to see your name as the last poster in this thread as I didn't realise you were playing. So yeah, I think the prod was justified.

[eldarad]

I made only 3 posts so far, if you can't bother to read them, don't count on me to babysit you by repeating myself. If you think that my point doesn't diverge from Skillit's, you point out how it is the case.

In your second post you certainly appear to believe that you are agreeing with Skillit. In your third post, you retract that agreement. Since you hadn't added any content in between, the change must have been in your thought process - that had not been posted in-thread.
Either Skillit made a good point, or he didn't. Can you clarify your opinion on that please?

Again, do you read? Incognito's prod was not directed at me.

Fair enough. I still hadn't realised that you were playing, which suggests that you hadn't been posting enough up until then.

[eldarad]

i did this because i was specifically asked to do so. Incog was saying that my making a joke about Electra being like Mohinder i was immediately accepting something that i wasn't and i had to explain why it didn't mean what he was saying it did. and reading it, does it really look like an attack to you? really? i think its pretty clear that i wasnt being aggressive towards Electra at all. i was prolly too joke-y with her, but it was honestly just joke-y ness.

I got that you were being light-hearted. I never seriously thought that you were trying to start a bandwagon on Electra that would wrap up Day 1 inside two pages.
But I do feel that your "jokey" comment was a (weak) expression of suspicion and was backed up by the 'odd' theory that I still believe to be reaching.
By far the biggest reason for my vote was the retrospective reasoning that detailed a rationale for your vote that you hadn't actually thought of when you placed the vote in the first place.

But at the same time there is almost certainly at least one scum on my wagon.

I do agree with this, actually.

Skillet (5) <- Electra, sthar8, eldarad, TDC, Crazy

If I had to pluck a name out of the air as to which of those 5 were scum, I'd pick TDC. Based on an early gut read, nothing more. Although I do think you have a good point about s8's complete failure to acknowledge the Skillit wagon.

Skillit, do you have any thoughts on who is looking scummy so far? Why are you still voting for Crazy?

I'd still like an answer to this please. I note your comments on s8 and other people on your wagon. But are there other players pinging your scumdar? Is Crazy still the best place for your vote?

I'm getting more of a town read from spring in post 129, but have a few comments/questions on what she said that I'll reserve until after incog comes back and releases his next response novel. Please let it be in paperback

See, I didn't like post 129. But I agree that withholding comment until Incog can respond is a good idea.

[eldarad]

Skillit

- I didn't like, and still don't like, Skillit's attack on Electra early, based on such a flimsy base. Jokey or not. However, I do agree that one of the people on his wagon is probably scum.
Meh.

unvote

TDC

- I'm actually going to retract my 'gut read' since it has been replaced with an actual read, for want of a better word, and he seems more townie than not.

Crazy

- as much as I like people agreeing with me, I am surprised that springlullaby pulled Incog up for referring to my opinion, but completely ignored Crazy doing the same in a much more blatant way.
I also don't like the continued assumption that Electra's "information" will be a cop investigation.

vote Crazy

Incognito

- as far as I can tell, Incog is playing how Incog always plays. I note springlullaby's comment that Incog used my opinion on Electra's claim as validation got his own opinion and whilst I doubt that is the case, I am alive to the possibility.

springlullaby

- there is a lot in her case against Incog that I don't like:
- The implication that passive-aggressiveness is somehow scummy and/or less townie than the outright aggression that colour her own posts.
- The idea that asking questions where the purpose is not immediately clear is scummy.

You are saying here that you prefer reserving judment before commiting to anything, well let me tell you that I think 8 out of 10 persons who prefer to reserve judment are scum because 1)it is hader for them to form an opinion in the first place2)they want to keep all options open the longer possible, especially if they do not indicate their initail read at all, which is your case.

- Ignoring the invented statistic, the idea that reaching a quick, gut read is better than keeping an open mind and not forming any judgement for a while.
- The whole issue of whether Incog's questioning style is intrinsically scummy, as opposed to it just being the way he scumhunts/plays mafia.
- Consistently accusing Incog of trying to 'turn the point around' or whatever (when I can't see that happening) and a substitute for
- The "why are you asking scum questions since they're going to lie" thing is stupid, and sl's refusal to accept that once it was pointed out to her.
- Using "proactive" as if it is the same thing as "aggressive"

There's not enough there to support a vote on sl, particuarly as I can't tell whether the artificial aggression is all a show to hide her alignment, or just someone who uses a different persona to play mafia from her regular personality.

[eldarad]

Why are you unvoting?

So I can put my vote on Crazy.

Could you explain how this is indictive of scum alignment?

Maybe we should ask springlullaby how it is indicative of scum alignment in Incog, but not in Crazy?
Her repeated agreement with me without any additional input herself makes we wary. The overall lack of content (until her recent scumdar) also doesn't sit well with me.
I also think that, given springlullaby's avoidance of Crazy when she was scumhunting, it looks like there is some link between them - ie I think there is a possibility that they are scumbuddies.
Hence lynching Crazy will also give us a decent steer on sl's alignment.

So I take it that you agree with the other points?

Well I didn't say I agreed with the other points. So that would be a strong assumption to make.

[eldarad]

/post

I'm at least a page behind. I'll aim to make a decent post in the next 24-48 hours.

[eldarad]

You did point out the points you didn't agree with.

So you don't agree with the other points?

First of all, like I have said, weak points don't weaken the good points. You're scummy because of those good points.

Ah, I see what you're trying to get at now. I don't think I agree though - I don't think you can keep a running scorecard that just count the good points and then discard the poor points. Surely the poor points can indicate a lack of sincerity in the person making the case?

My problem with springlullaby's case on Incognito is that the entire basis seems...wrong. I also think that the aggression in sl's early posts was fake. As I said at the time, I don't know whether that is because her playstyle differs from her personality but if nothing else, it bothered me enough that I don't get the townie vibes that you seem to be getting.

Second of all, just read some of SL's recent posts after she started getting mad. Look at them and honestly tell me that those are coming from a scum mouth.

I don't think it was genuine 'mad.' (Although, reading #221, maybe I completely misread this...maybe I'm reading uncharacteristic anger, rather than fake anger.) I also don't accept that point that only townies get annoyed.

@sthar8: I could ask this to a bunch of people including myself, but you have stated you find Electra most town. What have you thought about Electra’s posting since we’ve gotten off the subject of her claim and the boosting? How has she contributed since then?

You have a point that Electra has kept a low profile since her initial entrance. Her last post where she says "early game is as boring for scum as it gets" is a bit worrying, isn't it, given her apparent boredom with the game...

Boost Jahudo

eldarad, I meant to ask you about this before, but is there any reason why you seem to have an order of lynching preference?

I don't really. I guess my problem is that Crazy was coming across to me as scummy whereas I still haven't figured out if my issue with sl is a playstyle/personality thing.
Although, having said that, I'm flip-flopping all over the place at the moment. I'll be much happier when we have some dead bodies to think about.

[quote="iLord", post 203"]It's actually really simple - someone brought up the point (I think it was Eldarad) that scumElectra would have to make quite the leap of faith in terms of set-up speculation. What benefit could the scum recieve when boosted to justify what would be a very gutsy and risky scum gambit.[/quote]
Fair enough, and I agree with this point, which I made back in post 32. However, this differs somewhat from what you said at the time:

I'm wary of Electra - what she's doing is way too easy of a scum gambit for me to trust.

You also voted for me in that post. When I came up with my 'leap of faith' thing to suggest that Electa probably isn't scum you completely ignored it. If you had changed your mind following my post 32, I would have expected you to mention it. Instead, posts 36 (in which you responded to other parts of my post 32), 39 and 41 fail to even acknowledge that I had discussed why I thought Electra was townie, and certainly don't indicate your agreement with what I said.
That makes me think that you didn't agree with it at the time and it is only now, when the majority of players have agreed with my logic, that you have chosen to voice agreement.

"letting her take all the heat"? Are you saying that I have not been vocal about my opinions and suspicions regarding Incognito? Are you saying only the player that formally pushes a quote-by-quote "case" against a player is under the spotlight?

But if you think Incog is scum, and that SL is missing points that indicate that Incog is scum, or else is presenting those points badly, it would make sense for you to intervene, wouldn't it?
As it is, you've been commentating from the sidelines, rather than pushing a case against Incog. In the first of the quotes in this post, you are asking me whether there are some of

springlullaby's points

that I agree with...there's no mention at all of any of your points...

unvote
vote iLord

I'm astonished that none of the four Crazy voters bothered to explain the case on him.

For me it was a mixture of buddying and lurking, I guess.
Also the assumption about Electra's "information" and the fact that SL completely ignored Crazy borrowing my opinion, but chewed Incog for doing it, which - at the time - suggested to me that there might be a SL-Crazy link.
I'm not convinced that is true anymore, but I am still a bit concerned about Crazy's lack of activity and her comparative lack of opinions...

[eldarad]

I need to post more than once every 2 pages...

Eldarad, think about it - how can poor points decrease the value of the good points!

Poor points can sometimes be used to show a scum-driven case, but most of the time, townies bring up poor points more (Doesn't mean that it's a town tell, though).

Precisely because the poor points can give insight into the motivation behind making the case - is it to scumhunt, or to get an easy mislynch?
The consequence of your suggestion is that if a player who has claimed to be scum made some "good points" we should take them seriously as the bad points (ie, they are confirmed scum) do not cancel out the good points...

You really don't think it's genuine? I get no such sentiment.

Only townies get annoyed if the person their pushing is destroying their case. Scum would react quite differently, namely continuing to push the crap points or to drop it all together. Only a townie would resort to insults.

I really don't think it is genuine.
I also really don't think you are in a position to make such definite, sweeping statements about all townies and all scum.

I am not convinced by iLord's idea that RR's "backing off" was due to iLords pressure AND is indicative of scum.

Eldarad, what do you think of me exactly? You been saying stuff like you think my being pissed off was fake, only I don't see you voting for me, so yes, what do you think exactly?

I've already said - I can't decide whether the fake-aggression is due to alignment or because you are playing the game differently to how the real-life springlullaby (as opposed to the mafiascum persona) would play it.

Contradiction in this game is a subjective term. I have strong doubts about your alignment, so taking everything you say at face value would be a severe mistake. Saying that everyone should the accept the "it's not a contradiction because I say so" statement is completely false.

OK, so I guess a better question is this:
Regardless of whether you agree with iLord's opinion, due you believe he sincerely holds that opinion (even if he is wrong)?

Hi Guardian.

I think more people need to say if they think Incog was playing the agitator on SL. I don't think so. The two posts she just referenced I don't think are so bad, or as bad as I've seen so maybe it's all perception.

No, I don't think Incog has provoked sl at all.
For the record, I'm not convinced that the anger in #275 is real. However, I don't think it is worth a vote in preference to iLord.

[eldarad]

eldarad and incognito are linked.

For what it's worth, I noticed this a while ago. I also realised when I read back that it isn't all one-way, in the sense that I have (inadvertently) created some linkage back to Incog. I'd rather you hadn't mentioned it, but meh.

I think maybe some of it is that we have a similar playstyle, and some is that we were both town in the most awesome endgame I've ever played in. I have not discarded the possibility that some of it is Incog buddying up to me.

[eldarad]

I'd rather you hadn't mentioned it, but meh.

Why?

If Incog is scum, and he is trying to buddy up to me, I'd rather he didn't realise that I had noticed. That way, he'd keep doing it - there would be a far stronger buddying case if it continued into Tomorrow.
As it is, I don't think you can say Incog is buddying up to me at the moment because of what I described before (similar playstyle, the recent game, and just agreeing on stuff).

I would like everyone to let the group know what they think about

Incognito's dismissive-ness of arguments against him in general
My recent points against Incognito
Incognito in general

I'm not really seeing the dismissiveness that you describe, just as I didn't see it when springlullaby was accusing Incog of a similar thing.

I don't find your recent points persuasive. Again, they are pretty similar to sl's in many ways to the extent that I am a bit surprised that you have adopted so many of the positions sl held.

I don't see Incog as scummy, but I was keeping an eye on the potential buddying link. That's pretty much gone out of the window now...
But yeah, overall I'm seeing Incog as town, but not safe enough to boost.

[eldarad]

Eldarad seems pro-town. Although, he immediatly boosts Electra, which should have been thought over in my opinion, he's trying to find scum. But I've got one question. You saw Skilit as scummy. Then he notes that there's probably one scum on his wagon. Hw come you agree with this as you saw him as scum?

Just because I boosted Electra early doesn't mean I didn't think it over...I just thought it over quickly
I'd also refer you back to my explanation that I gave to iLord way back in post 32:

Fair enough. But also note that I was trying to start a boostwagon too.

Skillit's wagon grew very quickly. My assessment was that,

even if Skillit is scum

it was very, very likely that at least one scum was on his wagon. Either:
1) Skillit was town and scum were on his wagon trying to push a townie mislynch, or
2) Skillit was scum and one of his scumbuddies had jumped on as bussing/distancing/going with the flow.

And what made you change your mind about TDC. You said your gut feeling changed due to an actual read. I want to know which comments gave you the feeling that he's townie as I don't trust when players say things like this.

Well then you've got a problem haven't you? Since you think I'm pro-town but you don't trust me.
How do you explain those two contradictory opinions?

Also, how come you see Electra and Jahudo good enough to boost, but not Incog?

I explained this in post 325.

[eldarad]

@eldarad:

You feel somewhat lurkier to me than you felt in the last game we were in together. Is something wrong? What's going on?

Nothing wrong, just very busy this last few weeks. And very busy this weekend. And very busy next week...
C'est la vie. I'm trying to keep up.

[eldarad]

Let me try to summarise the position here. Guardian, Incog, if you think I have misrepresented your position, keep your explanation to 6 lines or less - you've both posted enough on the subject that there is no need to repeat it again.

Incog thinks sl was scummy because she attacked Incog for stuff (reserving judgement, relying on other peoples' opinions) that she didn't attack others for. He also thinks that it is at least a possibility that sl replaced out because Incog mentioned that he had discovered a "sl is always aggressive as scum" meta.
Incog also thinks Guardian adopting many of sl's points is indicative of Guardian/sl being scum, and that Guardian's list of his thoughts on other players is very negative and/or leaves wiggle room to attack later.

~~~
Guardian thinks Incog is scummy because he has been dismissive (read: evasive) of attacks on him, and that he provoked sl into replacing out with his dismissiveness. Guardian also thinks that, having read the thread independently of sl, the fact that he agrees with many of sl's points suggests that they hold some weight.
Guardian also thinks that the timing of Incog's vote (immediately after Guardian replaced in) is odd.

~~~
I am deliberately not expressing a view until both Incog and Guardian have agreed that my summary is brief but essentially accurate.
In the meantime, someone should Boost Electra, and I will read the thread from the beginning

[eldarad]

@eldarad: That's not really the full extent of issues I have with Guardian/springlullaby

Right. The issues you have with Guardian are many and varied, and are all integral to the massive case you have laid out in the thread. Indeed, to summarise the case in a single, readable post would fail to do the case justice.

Or possibly most of your case is waffling and repetition, and that explains your reluctance to accept an abbreviated summary of the case as it shows how little there is, at it's core.

Think I'm wrong? Have a go at summarising the case in a few sentences, without all of the quotes etc to back it up. Just so everyone is clear exactly what it is you are saying.

I can't be bothered to rehash points that I've been repeatedly repeating

I suspect that this is somewhat nearer the truth than you meant to reveal. I think the 'repeatedly repeating' thing is pretty accurate - hence why I was able to boil your case down to 6 lines despite the pages and pages you have written.

[eldarad]

Eldarad - now that the summary thing has extorted any usefulness it might've had, what do you think of Incog/Guardian?

In a nutshell, I am unconvinced by both of them. In an either/or choice I would lynch Guardian over Incog, if it ever came to that. I expressed a similar sentiment (believing Incog over Guardian) a while ago and my opinion hasn't really changed since.
However, I don't think that's a healthy choice for the town to have to make.

I still find springlullaby's anger to be feigned rather than genuine, and for a while I have been trying to work out whether that was because of playing as a different persona to her real life personality, or whether it was a product of her alignment.

I'm now swaying towards sl's anger being faked as a way of manufacturing heat between herself and Incog. That would also explain why Guardian jumped in with all guns blazing and why Incog and Guardian have expended so much effort making their exchange drag on and on and on and on despite that fact that, when you get down to it, the case can be neatly summarised in, at most, 10 bullet points each - and probably 8 would be enough if you really tried.

~~~
I still find iLord scummy, and could see him as scum independently of my Guardian-Incog scumpair theory. Although I also think an iLord-Guardian-Incog scumteam is totally consistent with what I have seen so far.

#452 does nothing to alleviate my concerns, and I share the view of RR and Incog that his "reads" are objective summaries rather than his own opinions.
If I had to summarise the whole of #452 in one word, I would use "contrived"
The bit that, if anything, bothers me the most is how iLord unboosts

someone he thinks is town

in order to have the top two in his list as the ones he boosts.

The pieces of the iLord-Guardian-Incog scumpuzzle begin to come together when you see that iLord has - in his characteristic devoid-of-actual-opinion way - listed one of his scumbuddies as "town" and the other one as "scum".
Gosh, he's as cunning as a fox who has just won the Nobel prize for Cunning.

@eldarad: Why did you boost Jahudo in Post 234?

Accumulated towniness. And he was a 'safer' boost in my eyes that some of the more high profile posters.

~~~
Mana_Ku, sthar8, Electra: are you still happy with your vote on Huntress (Crazy)? What's your opinion on the Guardian/Incog cases now that you can read them in one handy post?

[eldarad]

Checking in.

Grr. I'm halfway through writing a post and iLord goes and adds more stuff to the thread...

[eldarad]

The bit that, if anything, bothers me the most is how iLord unboosts someone he thinks is town in order to have the top two in his list as the ones he boosts.

What?

If you think that Guardian is a townie then it doesn't make sense to unboost him in favour of another person who you also think is a townie, unless you are deliberately trying to (over)emphasise how you are carefully boosting only the two people right at the top of your townie list.
I don't understand why you would unboost someone that you believe to be town.

Accumulated towniness? Can you point out where he has read town at all? I'm getting no such sentiments.

Well, it's certainly true that Jahudo appears at the "scum" end of your list, but very little of your summary of him suggests that you find him scummy.
Post 501 doesn't look convincing, even less so once I read #504. And post 501 is, presumably, the basis of your vote. Although, from what you said at the start of #501, it was done after your vote in an attempt to justify it.
I do accept TDC's point and I am changing my boost vote to someone who has a fighting chance of getting a majority before the deadline (whenever it is set).

...only voting for Incognito, and then backing-up quickly when his point was proven incorrect.

How is backing off once you are proven wrong an indicator of scum?
I also find the non-confrontational angle of attack ironic given your approach to springlullaby-Incognito.

I don't recall you mentioning any great level of suspicion of me at any point during this game until now -- you've gone to some lengths to characterize my playstyle as "similar to yours" and mentioned that my play so far "seems town but not safe enough to boost" (I'm guessing because of some supposed buddying that you thought could have been present)".

Yeah. All this is a fairly accurate representation of what I said and what I meant. My read changed when the rate of posting between you and Guardian contrasted sharply with the absence of (new) content and I questioned why that might be so.

But now in your 474, you bring forward a hypothesis that suggests that not only could Guardian and I potentially be scum buddies but iLord could also be a possible third?

My main point was that I think Guardian and Incog are both scum - although I accept that I may be wrong with respect to one or both of them.
I could totally see iLord paired up with one of {Incog, Guardian}
Given that I've already said that I don't think the quantity of back-and-forth between Incog and Guardian is justified given the lack of progress they have made on any of their points suggests that they are posting to create an aura of antagonism between each other that isn't linked to the quality or size of their cases.

How do you factor in the fact that I've mentioned that I'd be perfectly fine with an iLord or Guardian lynch for quite some time now?

Distancing?
Saying you are "fine" with an iLord or Guardian lynch is somewhat different from following through and pushing for a lynch. And, despite the quantity of posts you have made in your discussion with Guardian there is a lack of progress that I think is an indicator that you are both scum. Having said that, I would be delighted to see you change your vote to iLord.

unboost (Jahudo)
boost sthar8

[eldarad]

I think this is more crap logic, Skillit makes sense and I don't see him as rationalizing.

He uses confusing language and I don't think he realized his ideas meshed together/flowed from one another, but eldarad either lied or had a VERY ungenerous read of Skillit in saying that the rationale in 27 was thought of after 21, and then voting him for it.

Skillit may make sense, but he thought about it after he placed his vote. And hence post 27 is rationalising his vote rather than providing a rationale for his vote.

Having thought

further

on this i now realize that there is no reason to believe that there is an odd number of potential categories

Italics are in the original post. The whole "odd" theory of 3 vs 4 categories was only thought of after the vote.

The two points you've identified are just the same point written out twice. Maybe you should keep reading.

~~~

That's horrible logic - I'm not sure of anyone's alignment - of course I am going to boost the two people who I feel have the highest probablity of being town.

To me, it looks like you unboosted Guardian - someone you believe to be town - in favour of boosting Electra.
I'm fairly sure I recall you saying that your ranking isn't as scientific as it looks, and that only the category (town, scum, in between) is meaningful. In which case I don't understand how you're now able to pinpoint with a reasonable level of precision that, not only are Electra and Guardian both town but that Electra is "more" town than Guardian and therefore more deserving of a boost.

You're completing ignoring my statements that my summary is just a summary to help me organize my thoughts. Why did you say that there was little in my summary that suggests I find him scummy?

I was operating under the reasonable assumption that the blocks of words next to the colourful words were there to explain to others what you are thinking (and why). With the possible beneficial side-effect of helping you organise your thoughts.
If you are saying that the paragraphs in #452 aren't explaining why you have classified people into town, scum, neutral, then I like that post even less.

I am - I found Jahudo scummy, and I was trying to find why, hence my case.

Isn't that kinda the wrong way round?

[eldarad]

Come on - you're just twisitng my words. My rankings are not as rigid as they appear, only around the center - the extremes at the ends are as defined as anyone elses.

I'm not twisting your words. If your order is not precise, but only the category is meaningful, then switching votes or boosts between people in the same category is pointless.

If you are saying that, actually, it is only the middle bit that is vague, and the town and scum categories are ranked in order then it makes sense to change boosts between them. That wasn't my understanding of your list.
Especially since your lists have different numbers of people labelled as town and scum. That initially suggested that you DID have a ranking throughout (ie, there would be a 5th most townie person who has been classified as 'neutral'), until you said otherwise.

I didn't explain why in my colored post - I stated what I found suspicious, and a general summary of their posts.

This is exactly the point I was making:

I was operating under the reasonable assumption that the blocks of words next to the colourful words were there to explain to others what you are thinking (and why).

If they aren't there to explain your reasoning for the town/neutral/scum, what ARE they there for?
Your answer - in #515 - is "to organise your thoughts" so actually, those paragraphs next to the colourful words are NOT justifying that person's inclusion in your list? Is that actually what you're saying?
That completely baffles me.

What are the possible beneficial side-effect of helping organize my thoughts? Are you serious?

Yes I'm serious. But I'm pretty sure you mis-read that paragraph.
I assumed that the text was posting your reasons which would, as a side-effect, help organise your thoughts.
It appears that you are saying that you didn't post any reasons for your reads in #452 - the text is just organising your thoughts.

So. Could you explain

why

(rather than just summarising your thoughts about) Guardian does not justify being boosted? Is there something specific about Electra that made her more boostable than Guardian that you didn't see before writing #452?

I never said it was - I'm pointing out how little he was attacking.

As I have stated multiple times, each case is different - you can't lump "scumtells" together.

Indeed. Yet, you did very little attacking of Incog, preferring instead to let sl do all the running.
To say that not doing any attacking is scummy - but that the instance where you personally didn't do any attacking (preferring instead to

avoid confrontation

by commentating of sl's attacks) isn't scummy - doesn't ring true.

~~~

Another thing I'm curious about is a few times now, you've mentioned that you feel like springlullaby's anger seemed feigned since you think she's been taking on a different persona when compared to her real life personality. Do you know springlullaby from outside of mafiascum or something? What have you been trying to get at there?

Missed this bit first time round.
No, I don't know springlullaby in real life, and I have never played a mafia game with her.
The aggressive tone in her posts towards you seemed like someone having to consciously think about how to post aggressively, unlike someone like, say, SensFan who is aggresive in a 'natural' way, if that makes sense.

That's either because:
she isn't really aggressive in real life, but chose to play online mafia in an aggressive way; or
she was playing aggressively as part of a scum-strategy; or
<some other thing I haven't thought of>

(basically, the fake-aggression is either due to playstyle or alignment)

Now, the scum-strategy idea suddenly makes a lot of sense when you factor in how Guardian picked up almost exactly where sl left off. Which, in turn, gave you an avenue to attack Guardian back.
Lots of heat produced, very little progress made either way.

[eldarad]

I've read up to the end of the thread but I've only got as far as responding up to #549.

~~~

Why would the only the catagory be meaningful? You mean that I magically found people in only three degrees of scumminess?

I assumed you classifed people as one of {town, neutral, scum} so yes, I completely expected you to put people into one of 3 categories.
So you're saying that you can magically name the 3 most townie players, but you can't name the 4th?

I'm explained this multiple times already - if you read my blocks, they have stuff like what's in a post, and whether or not I found them scummy. No where did I explain why, and I said as much - I told you guys to ask me so I could elaborate on why on points that you are interested in. I even repeated this to Incognito, and then to your "contrived" post.

I can't remember who it was, but someone said that you could have arranged your list in any order you wished, as the narrative on each player gave no clue as to how scummy (or not) they were. That's completely true and I have a problem with that.
I don't want an in-depth analysis of all your reads, but I would expect that when you posted your scumdar that there would be

reasons

in there.
Why did you decide to post a scumdar without any reasons at all? What did you hope to achieve?

The benefit is that we know what your stated opinions are at a certain point of time and information. This information would be valuable to analyze when you claim, for example.

What factors made you disapply this principle when posting your scumdar? Or is the principle specific to discussing claims? Do you not think it would have value when applied to people's scumdars?

I've been supporting an Electra boost since before my Guardian boost. The only reason I didn't boost Electra, which you would know if you bothered to read the post where I boosted Guardian, was because I didn't want to put her at a position where she might be accidentally boosted.

This was the answer I was expecting when I first asked the question. Why did it take you so long to say this?
Given that you had been waiting to boost Electra for some time, why wait until posting your scumdar to change your boost vote? What made #452 a better time to boosthammer Electra than any other post?

Did I avoid confronatation with Incognito at all? I've already how explained how my case would just be redundant

Yes I am strongly of the opinion that you avoided confrontation with Incog for quite a while, preferring instead to allow SL to do all the running.
You have also explained how you preferred to "shape" SL's case rather than present your own points. Which I found - and still find - significant since you then went on to ask people their opinion on

springlullaby's case

.

~~~

Perhaps Guardian picked up where SL left off to make it seem like two supposedly like-minded "pro-town" people came to similar conclusions about a person's alignment to therefore try and add weight to an unsubstantial case?

Yeah, I do see the irony of Guardian saying "well, SL and myself both independently think your scummy" when Guardian has a very strong incentive to find SL townie.
So, it may be that Guardian did that to add weight to the pre-existing case as you say. Or it may be that you're both scum and Guardian could not back down from SL's attack without diminishing the impact of the discussion you had already had with SL.

Even if scum had planned this beforehand, SL came into the game late, and so I don't think she would have really been a part of this discussion. Furthermore, Guardian would definitely have not been part of this discussion, and so I don't really see how this could be.

Scum could have a Quicktopic thread where they discussed their plans pre-game. A replacement wouldn't be able to talk to their scumbuddies, but they would be able to read what was talked about.

~~~

And his [

Sthar's

] current scramble to divert attention from Elderad back to me combined with his desire to supress discussion of my other top suspect obviously doesn't help.

Let us assume for a moment that you are correct and sthar is trying to keep the focus on you rather than me. Do you think it is scummy for players to speak out against wagons that they disagree with, or to push other wagons that they think have a better chance of lynching scum?

So do you think that both of Today's boosts (Electra and Sthar) are poor choices?

A brief summary of my reasons for voting Elderad:

1) His too-quick boost of Electra.

How was my boost of Electra too quick? (Rather than just "quick"?) Do you disagree with my "leap of faith" logic regarding Electra?
Do you think my boosting of Electra harmed the town? If so, how? If not, how is my boost scummy?

2) His pushing of the Skillet wagon, which already had two random votes on it before he added his, for reasons which look like making a mountain out of a molehill, the molehill being Skillet's joke and theory discussion.

Why are the presence of random votes significant?
Crazy pushed the Skillit wagon too, for virtually the same reasons as me. Why do you think that is?

What "continued assumption"? The only thing Crazy ever said about this was "The problem is... the information Electra gives us is not testable.

What if she claims an innocent on Player X?

How would you test that?" (post 151).

Bolded part of your quote...
Contrast with:

I don't have a role, so I'm vanilla, however my role PM says that if I'm boosted, I'll gain information about the town (reworded, of course).

I don’t know what kind of information I get, but I do hope it’s something cop-ish

So Crazy focussed on "I hope I'm cop-ish" rather than "I don’t know what kind of information I get."

So his only reasons for voting Crazy were that Springlullaby ignored him and Crazy's "assumption" about Electra's possible information. Definately very flimsy reasons for a vote.

You missed the most important part - the fact that Crazy agreed with EVERYTHING I said consistently up until post 166 when I turned around and voted for the person who had been blatantly sheeping off of my opinions.
Can you think of a pro-town reason why Crazy would do that? Do you think it is scummy for me to react to that behaviour in the way I did?
Why did you totally ignore this when you summarised my reasons for voting Crazy?

In addition, there was also the possible double-standards from sl that suggested possible sl-crazy linkage.
Do you think possible linkage is a good basis for a vote? If not why not?

But most of my reasons for voting Eldarad come from the past! And there has been suspicion on him right from the beginning so why are you suggesting there wasn't?

What do you mean by this? Who was suspicious of me right from the start?

[eldarad]

I'm still, like, a page behind in responding.

I also gave notice at my job today.

Yay?
~~~

Eldarad: You seem to have undergone a quite radical shift of opinion on Incog. Is there any cause for this apart from your scumteam theory?

Radical shifts of opinion are what I do...

When I asked Incog and Guardian to summarise their arguments in a small post, it was an attempt to get everyone back on track by allowing us all to deal with the key issues rather than pages and pages of text that didn't go anywhere.
My opinion changed when both Incog and Guardian were reluctant to have their argument condensed in such a way, and then I considered it odd that for all the posts that Guardian and Incog where making at each other, neither argument was progressing.

I can see how this could be a legitimate question to ask iLord if he had not demonstrated his opinion to boost Electra more than Guardian throughout the game.

See my recent response to iLord for my reasons. But also:

Oh, I get it now – you’re trying say the whole thing was a “trap” to see if I said that? :rolleyes:

They're your words not mine. I didn't call it - or intend it to be - a trap.
However, as you have already demonstrated, sometimes you change your opinion without announcing it in-thread so I wanted to pin you down on the reasons for the change

when you made the change

rather than leave you with wiggle-room on a later Day to say that your opinion at changed some time earlier in a similar way to when your opinion on Electra's claim changed some time after the reason you changed your mind was posted but some time before you announced it in-thread.

Here's the rub though. If you boosted Electra in order to boost-hammer her since we were nearing deadline, then that is a perfectly acceptable reason for boosting her even if she isn't the 2nd towniest on your list. There would be nothing wrong with unboosting Guardian - even if he was number 2 on your list - in favour of someone you reckon is town and can be boost-hammered.
But apparently that isn't the reason why you boost-hammered. That's fine too - and I'm pleased that we've managed to remove that element of ambiguity from your boost-vote.

At the time of #452, we had agreed that we were to start boosting now and that a deadline was imminent. It had little to do with posting my scumdar.

But you did both in the same post. If you're saying that the scumdar and the boost were unrelated then I suspect that is something that will come as a surprise to most other players.

Are you kidding me – Incognito and I started arguing almost literally the second I stated I was suspicious of him?

I wonder if I am the only person who

hasn't

gotten the sense that the iLord-Incog argument has been valuable, meaningful and centred on this game (rather than discussing whether anti-town motivation can diminish a good point, etc). Maybe. I doubt it though.

I missed out one of Jahudo's questions, and I want to answer it properly.

pps: eldarad is still scum, amirite?

How's your re-reading of my posts going? Last time you mentioned it you'd gotten as far as post 3.

[eldarad]

I've been trying to read the thread and then respond as far as I can, but it isn't working for me and I can't follow up or react to answers.

So, I'm still reading the thread but I don't expect to post until Saturday. Expect a sizeable post then.

[eldarad]

Back up to speed. Apologies for falling behind.

~~~

@eldarad, do you think iLord’s organized suspect list in post 452 conflicts with the comparative levels of suspicion within the summaries on each player in that same post?
Do you think the tells he gives can be quantified as more severe than others?

None of the town reads correspond to the summary for the players concerned.
The randomgem neutral read does not correspond to the "scummy" text - although I guess that the neutral read comes from a lack of content to analyse.

For the scum reads, particuarly Jahudo, there is some use of language where iLord doesn't like something, and we can infer from the name being in red that iLord doesn't like it because it is scummy. But we don't know

why

...
There are a lot of places where I can see iLord is using points as a basis for the scumread that, if explained, could and would be challenged by a "why is that scummy?" query that I doubt iLord could adequately answer.

The only indication that iLord read me as scum was:

Very scummy comment in response to MK in Post 389.

The rest of the commentary was neutral.

So I guess the point I'm making is that without giving the reasons why a post is scummy, saying that you don't like a post doesn't really cut much ice. And saying, for example, "no reasoning for non-gut reads" does not tell us whether iLord thinks this is scummy or not.

~~~

I'm getting a little tired of reiterating the explanation for my summaries. They are just a summary - an organizer. My reasoning follows after questions or cases.

So you're saying that you voted for Jahudo without posting any reasons, and that your reasoning will be provided if people ask.
Are you planning to post reasons for your vote on me? Is it - like Guardian's vote - based on a single post or did your read from #452 contribute to your decision. How so?

~~~

Before I start, I just want to disown Skillit's weird "illogical" argument against Electra that occupied the first few pages of his posts. It was dumb (to be frank), flawed and pointless.

Huntress

, how does this affect your opinion that my pushing of Skillit was scummy, given that GC -

who shares the same role PM as Skillit

- believes that Skillit's point was flawed and pointless?
Do you disagree with GC on this?

Why on earth should it bother him so much that iLord wanted to boost the two he feels most certain about? That's what I found odd.

My point is that I didn't think iLord genuinely felt that Electra was the 2nd most townie person, but had put her there to justify his decision to boost her. Particuarly since boost-hammering Electra as part of a consensus boost due to the looming deadline would have been a perfectly legitimate reason for changing his boost away from Guardian and on to Electra.

Not as such, but it can be when combined with other factors.

So, in this specific case, (ie, sthar trying to divert attention from the eldarad wagon) what other factors exist to make you believe that sthar is not town?

I wouldn't have chosen either of them; not Electra as she is one of my top suspects, nor Sthar for the reason I gave in post 538.

So if you had a second boost vote (you don't because you replaced in late, and then avoided expressing any positive opinions on other players for a while) who would you boost?

See my reply to Jahudo re: the boost in post 565. As for the leap of faith, I don't entirely disagree with it but I don't give it as much credence as you seem to be doing.

What part of the 'leap of faith' logic do you disagree with?
On what basis do you believe that my opinion on the leap of faith is not sincerely held?
Given that the majority of players agree with my 'leap of faith' logic, how can that possibly be used as part of a case that I am scum?

Because it seemed too quick. He boosted her in his very first post for making an early move but in his next post he said, "But also note that I was trying to start a boostwagon too.", from which I infered that this was originally partly a gambit.

What do you mean by my boost vote being (partly) a "gambit"?

In the same post he gives what is apparently his only reason for supporting Electra, "And, as Electra said, for a scum to make that leap of faith about the existence or otherwise of boostable vanilla townies, or whatever, is pause for thought."

Correct. I had two reasons for boosting Electra - the leap of faith and the attempted boostwagon.
I think the leap of faith is a sufficient reason alone for boosting Electra and a majority of players agree with me. So you need to explain not why I am wrong (I may be wrong, but that doesn't show I'm scummy as 6 other players made the same mistake) but why I am scummy for putting that argument forward whereas the other 6 players who didn't put the argument forward but who did agree with the argument are not scummy.

His only other comment on Electra is in post 234 where he says, "You have a point that Electra has kept a low profile since her initial entrance. Her last post where she says "early game is as boring for scum as it gets" is a bit worrying, isn't it, given her apparent boredom with the game...". But despite it being "a bit worrying", he is still content to leave his boost on her.

*Shrugs*
It is a bit worrying, but not worrying enough to unboost Electra. Especially since a number of players appeared to be bored with the game at that time.
In any case, I think the Electra boostwagon will have analysis value in the future.

It will only harm the town if she is scum. I just don't think the reasons you gave for thinking she is town were strong enough to keep your boost on her; particularly in view of your comment in post 234.

Maybe I will come back to this point once you've explained why you partly disagree with the 'leap of faith' idea.

I don't think that the random votes are significant; I was just noting that this wasn't a first or second vote on Skillet. I don't know why Crazy pushed that wagon, nor do I agree with the point he made with his vote which, however, was not the same point you made when you voted Skillet.

Massive QFT to everything that eldarad has said so far.

QFT to eldarad's #32.

Post 32 was where I voted for Skillit.
Why is the fact that there were votes already on Skillit significant? You seem to be trying to suggest that I picked Skillit that there was already a half-formed wagon on Skillit and that was why I decided to push him.
Is that an accurate assessment? How does that hold up now that you have accepted that the presence of pre-existing votes for Skillit isn't significant?

How can you use pushing the Skillit wagon as a scumtell against me whilst at the same time claiming that it isn't a scumtell against you/Crazy?

Also note that in the same post, in a response to TDC on the subject, Crazy says, "and I'd like to see Electra's clarification on that", which shows he didn't have a closed mind on the subject.

And yet Electra had often said that she wasn't a cop, and expressed concern that people were assuming she was, and yet Crazy then made an assumption that she was a cop.

Your statement that Crazy agreed with EVERYTHING you said consistently up until post 166 is blatantly false.

OK, so he agreed with everything up to post 79, and then made a point of repeating his complete agreement with post 32.
Now answer the original questions:

Can you think of a pro-town reason why Crazy would do that? Do you think it is scummy for me to react to that behaviour in the way I did?
Why did you totally ignore this when you summarised my reasons for voting Crazy?

If you saw double standards from sl that might have been a basis for a vote on her but why on Crazy? If player X seems to be buddying up to or ignoring player Y, which would you call more scummy, the one doing the buddying etc.? Or the one on the receiving end?

If there is linkage between two players then both players are linked. Combined with the massive sheeping Crazy had been doing on me, I thought my vote would be better on Crazy.

It was iLord who showed an early suspicion of you.

iLord showed brief, early suspicion of me. Indeed, it is a key part of iLord's defence that he changed his mind about my 'leap of faith' theory with regard to Electra's early claim.
Apart from that, there was no suspicion on me at all until recently - there was none at all when you first mentioned that you got a scum vibe from me way back in second post.

~~~

He massively QFTs eldarad, which makes me think he isn't scum with eldarad (scum tend not to be so easily identified with each other).

So, assuming an eldarad lynch is impossible, you would be willing to support a Huntress lynch as this would generate additional information for the town, correct?

~~~

That's not a prod - that's an attack. And I find it very suspicious that you are tying to change that.

Yeah, it's an attack. But it's an attack to pin you down on something.
You sound like you're aggrieved that you didn't know what I was trying to achieve . I have no problem with that.

So what if they were in the same post? I'm sure other players without a need to construe attacks against me will see that I've already mentioned that I was going to boost Electra before - it was simply time to boost her.

Maybe. Yet there was ambiguity there that we have managed to remove. Yay for us.

You start off saying that I avoided confrontation with Incognito, and now you've mutated your point to the fact that our discussion wasn't meaningful, no doubt implying that we were distancing.

I was specifically responding to your hyperbole about how you and Incog had been arguing for ages and that I obviously hadn't been reading the thread.
To clarify: I don't think you have had a long or meaningful argument with Incog about his alignment or yours.
I also think that you specifically avoided confrontation with Incog earlier by allowing sl to do all the work.

~~~

unvote
vote Huntress

[eldarad]

It doesn't affect my opinion at all. Why should it? It doesn't change what was said and done at the time, or throw any new light on it. I think GC may have been a bit harsh here but that's something to note when looking at Skillet/GC, which we're not doing here.

Because you are saying that my pushing of Skillit is scummy, yet someone who is guaranteed to share Skillit's alignment is saying the same thing.

I haven't said I believe he is not town. In fact, I still have him down as probable town but, as I said earlier, I still have a lingering doubt from my first impression of him.

But you actively avoided the sthar boostwagon. That doesn't sound like someone you think is probable town.

What part of the 'leap of faith' logic do you disagree with?

I just don't think it's as strong a town tell as you seem to.
<snip>
I never said I thought it wasn't

sincerely held

.

Just so everyone is clear:

And, as Electra said, for a scum to make that leap of faith about the existence or otherwise of boostable vanilla townies, or whatever, is pause for thought.

You are happy that my stated opinion as to why I boosted Electra is sincerely held?

I didn't use it in my case against you.

Lies.

A brief summary of my reasons for voting Elderad:

1) His too-quick boost of Electra.

Because it seemed too quick.

He boosted her in his very first post for making an early move but in his next post he said, "But also note that I was trying to start a boostwagon too.", from which I infered that this was originally partly a gambit.

In the same post he gives what is apparently his only reason for supporting Electra, "And, as Electra said, for a scum to make that leap of faith about the existence or otherwise of boostable vanilla townies, or whatever, is pause for thought."

His only other comment on Electra is in post 234 where he says, "You have a point that Electra has kept a low profile since her initial entrance. Her last post where she says "early game is as boring for scum as it gets" is a bit worrying, isn't it, given her apparent boredom with the game...". But despite it being "a bit worrying", he is still content to leave his boost on her.

This quote is your reasoning as to why (1) indicates that I am scum.

So my boost was too quick. I already explained my reasoning for the quick boost. That means that you do not think my reason (the leap of faith) is sufficient for a boostvote.
Yet you also accept that my opinion is sincerely held.
Explain how this is indicative of scum.

You also think I should have unboosted because of #234, so again I need to ask whether you believe whether I sincerely hold the opinion that Electra's claim is townie because of the leap of faith.
If you accept that I do hold that opinion sincerely then how can you make the judgement that the slight element of doubt that may have been introduced because of Electra's choice of words (about scum being bored when she herself was showing signs of boredom) outweighs the leap of faith?

I don't think 'bored players' or analysis value are sufficient reasons.

But you are also saying, as part of (1), that when I didn't unboost Electra because she appeared to be bored, that was scummy of me.
I'm explaining that Electra being bored is not an indicator that Electra is not town.
You appear to be disagreeing with me.

Where did I claim it wasn't a scum tell against Crazy?

Awesome.
Is Crazy a townie?

"Massive QFT to everything that eldarad has said so far" covers:
massclaim isn't a breaking strategy
boosting Electra
boostwagons can give info so let's use them right away
voting Skillit for reaching

Note that you are now using two of those things as reasons why I am scum. I don't get the impression from 151 that Crazy was

reducing

his agreement with me. I understand how you have a strong incentive to so do.

~~~
Incog's #642 is right. I did "check my facts" despite what iLord says, and at no point does iLord attack Incog or accuse him of being scum except in his list(s) where...there are no reasons.

~~~

First, I am not willing to assume that at this juncture. Second, I almost never assume that a lynch is impossible at any juncture except right before deadline, and third, I never lynch "to generate additional information for the town," that is a ridiculous reason for lynching people. I lynch "to lynch scum."

Sure. I think Huntress is scum.
You think that it is impossible for Huntress to be scum with me. Hence, if Huntress is lynched as scum then that sheds light on my alignment too. If Huntress is lynched as town then it doesn't say a lot, but I'm sure it will be of interest to you Tomorrow.

I would not support a Huntress lynch unless it was right next to deadline and it was not conceivable I could get a better lynch.

Good. If the time comes I will hold you to this.

[eldarad]

On the Jahudo lynch - I wouldn't support a Jahudo lynch in normal circumstances. If there was a choice between a Jahudo lynch and no lynch I would lynch Jahudo...
But given the current situation I don't see how that could happen (I'd have to unvote Huntress - who currently has more votes and, it seems, more suspicion - in order to vote Jahudo.). I much prefer lynching Huntress.

Incognito has asked me to claim. I'd rather avoid doing so unless absolutely necessary but if I will if I need to.

It's <48 hours before deadline. I don't see how you think waiting until you claim is going to help the town at all.

[eldarad]

No. I don't know whether it was or wasn't. We won't know that until your status is revealed.

I was asking for your OPINION.
Given that you are voting for me - and this is one of the 4 stated reasons you have given for your vote - I think it is reasonable that you tell the town whether YOU think I am lying about my reasons for boosting Electra.

Nice how you avoided answering the question that causes your case to unravel. By not answering you manage to respond to the rest of my post with "N/A"

Do you think - in your opinion - that my stated reason for boosting Electra is sincerely held?

Then you can answer all the questions that you ignored on the first attempt.

Yes, but townies sometimes do things that can be scum tells too.

Heh. So, given that you know that a townie can do that thing, explain how it is a scumtell against me.

~~~
I'll only be able to log on once more before deadline and I'm now even less willing than before to unvote Huntress. I'll see what the situation is when I log on next, but I really think Huntress is our best bet.

[eldarad]

I'm here.

Huntress' attitude towards Electra's claim is consistent with her role claim. There's so much I don't like about Huntress' play but...gah.

unvote
vote Jahudo

[eldarad]

I wanted to ask this yesterday but unfortunately, Elmo-mod locked the thread too quickly. How so?

Huntress had a problem with Electra's claim in that Electra referred to herself as a vanilla townie even though she was 'boostable'.
I thought Huntress' line of reasoning ("you either have a power or you don't") was consistent with her role claim, ie a power role.

Hmm. I wonder if the two kills mean we boosted scum.

Electra thought that that was a possibility too as I recall.

Although it was before I claimed, so it was probably a quite innocent question, but I think I'll be keeping quiet about whom I'm intending to boost in the future.

Probably

a

quite

innocent question?
What's with all the qualifiers here? Do you think it

wasn't

an innocent question? That I was somehow trying to find out who you planned to boost at Night

before I even knew you had the ability to boost

? Is that what you're suggesting?
Did you kill Guardian last Night?

~~~
Also, LA up until Christmas and a few days after.

[eldarad]

I'm not convinced that using the double-vote to "confirm" sthar is that useful, since it doesn't confirm his alignment, only that he is being truthful about the effect of the boost.
Having said that, on the use it or lose it principle, I have no problem with sthar using his second vote at any point he wishes.

I'm pretty happy with the info Electra has produced, particularly as one of the issues someone had with Electra's claim was that "information isn't testable" whereas the specific information that Electra has given is testable.
The fact that the information is testable is enough for me to not want to test it, if that makes sense.

[eldarad]

If the scum had a booster it would be a reasonable assumption for them to make that the town had one too, so the more info they could get about who people were willing to boost, the better.

I disagree. I don't think it is at all reasonable for the scum to assume that any power roles they have are also present in the town.
In fact, I would say the opposite. If the mafia received a Boost ability then they have received a power that is not much good to the mafia in and of itself, but is confirmable.
That is a fairly common thing to happen, and I wouldn't expect a mafia in that scenario to expect to see a similar pro-town Booster given the fact that the whole game revolves around the town having the ability to collectively boost people during the Day.

You asked me that question because I hadn't said who else I was willing to boost. In hindsight I can see a possible motive for it. Even if the scum don't have a booster of their own they might have guessed at the existence of one.

I asked you the question because you had avoided expressing an opinion on who you thought should be boosted - although you were vocal in criticising the current boost choice(s).

I was implying that they might want the information to help decide on a night kill, not a boost.

OK, I can see how scum would want to know who was thought to be pro-town by other townies in order to inform their kill choice. But they get that anyway - Elmo posts regular boost-vote counts.

I'm only half-way through thinking about Huntress' claim in the light of the Night-kills, but the idea that Huntress is scum with a confirmable ability is very persuasive.
~~~

Eldarad: how could we test electra's information reliably?

We could boost someone 3 times.
Now, I recognise that the presence of potential roles like, say, a roleblocker (boostblocker?) could distort this, as could us boosting a scum 3 times...as they would lie to confirm Electrascum's information.
But then if we boost someone else 3 times and they still have the power activated then we've just caught two scum.

So it is testable, even if it isn't easy. But that is good enough for me.

~~~
Incog's claimed vig-kill has a ring of truth about it. Even if he did kill a doc

boost Incog

[eldarad]

eldarad is looking much worse than I remembered. FZ is noncomital and not really scumhunting, and therefore scummy as well. Along with Jahudo they make a good possible scumteam.

What is FZ?

As for eldarad's post - the first part seems like rationalizing a predecided conclusion that Huntress is scummy

The first part is directly addressing Huntress' stated opinion as to why I might have asked her who she would have boosted.
Do you think Huntress has a point here or do you think she is on the wrong track?

You are correct that I have thought further about Huntress' claim. And, having switched my vote at the end of Day 1 away from Huntress in order to hammer Jahudo I think it is reasonable for me to do so.

The point I make about the Boost ability possibly being a useless but confirmable role for the mafia is a good one and you shouldn't dismiss it so easily. That isn't to say that Huntress is mafia, but it is one piece of the jigsaw.

As I said, there is a lot to think about Huntress' claim, not least because of the consequences of assuming Huntress is scum. There are a number of factors suggest that Huntress probably isn't mafia - for example:
- the existence of two wagons on scum at the end of Day 1 seems unlikely
- Huntress-scum would have had to boost and kill iLord; possible but wastes the key advantage of the Boost ability - ie being confirmable

There are more factors at play, which is why I said I need to think on it further.

the suggestion regarding Electra is terrible and likely playing straight into scum's hands

You seem to be saying that I am suggesting this [

boosting someone 3 times

] as a course of action that we should take. I am not.

The fact that the information is testable is enough for me to not want to test it, if that makes sense.

and the last part with the wink smiley just gives me the shivers.

Incog killed our doc. Do you not think that is worth mentioning, even if we do think he is a vig?

[eldarad]

This is also a potential good method of making sure already boosted scum are boosted again, so if eldarad turns scum I'll be looking at sthar and electra.

Right. I'm calling the scumteam of Jahudo + Iceman + either sthar or eldarad, more likely sthar.

In quote 1 you are saying that if I am scum then one of {sthar, Electra} are scum with me.
In quote 2 you are saying that either sthar or I are scum.
What changed?

But it still appears that you're using Huntress' power role claim as further reason to throw suspicion her way, which I dislike. Huntress being scum requires her to have claimed her role going head to head with her godfather's soft power claim, and also a scum booster makes little sense if she can just boost the same guy her team NK's. I think the claim definitely goes towards clearing her, and you trying to make it look the other way around is scummy.

A scum booster makes complete sense as it is a power that is not useful to the mafia, but can be used to confirm the person who has that power. Allowing the scum to kill the person they boost is fine too - at some point Huntress will have to come through and boost someone who survives the Night, or else we'll start asking questions, won't we?
I'm approaching this from the point of view that the benefit of being confirmed exceeds the drawback of boosting a townie. It may be that the mafia decided that this wasn't the case last Night.

So, in my opinion, Huntress' role claim makes it more likely she is mafia. There are other factors - such as the difference between Jahudo and Huntress' claims - that suggest that she probably isn't mafia.
Holding a different opinion to you isn't scummy.

It doesn't. Trying to test the 3rd-boost-is-useless thing enables the scum to just NK the guy the third time around, creating a WIFOM trap we have no way of solving. It is therefore not practical to test it, which shouldn't make you think it is true - electra-scum could have easily figured our optimal stragegy is not to try and test it, and therefore felt safe making it up.

I didn't say testing it was easy. But then, there is no rush - we may end up deciding to boost Incog three times during the game because we want him to get an extra vig bullet. Although, at the same time, I am under no illusions as to the life expectancy of our claimed vig.
If testing the providence of Electra's information becomes vital to the success of the town, then we do have a few fairly extreme options available to us, should we need them.

But at the heart of it all, if Electra is scum - and is therefore trying to minimise what she has to tell us, why tell us

two

things?

[eldarad]

This is an extreme case of WIFOM.

So?

And given that you've just expressed the opinion that Electra is town, presumably you agree with me.

[eldarad]

So any conclusion we try to draw from it is worthless.

I somewhat agree with your conclusion, most certainly not with your reasoning.

vote Raging Rabbit

If you think that Electra is town then you must have considered the key things about Electra's current position. That is:
- that her early claim is genuine, and
- her information is genuine.

If either of those two tests fail, then Electra must be scum.
Her early claim seems genuine (leap of faith, etc) but may not be, and the way we will be able to tell whether the claim is genuine over the long haul is by assessing the accuracy and provenence of the information Electra provides.
So, in deciding whether Electra is town or scum, you must have made an assessment of the information Electra has provided. For example:
- whether the information contradicts or confirms something in your role PM
- whether the information contradicts or confirms something you know about the game or the setup through some other means
- whether the type, amount and nature of the information tallies with your gut feeling as to what kind of information the mod might give to such a power role
- whether the mechanics of Electra's power confirms or contradicts the mechanics of other claimed power roles in the game

All of those things necessarily include an element of uncertainty. Some of them include elements of WIFOM. Yet you must have considered them all in some shape or form in order to arrive at a conclusion about Electra's probable alignment.

You have just disagreed with me because you think it is the right thing to say, not because you believe what you are saying to be true.

This is constructed to make something look suspicious that really isn't. Opinions change over time and one of the things that bugs me most is when people attempt to make a change of thinking into a scumtell. If it's something extraordinary, like if someone were to declare something a policy of their's and then violate it in their next post, that's one thing, but this isn't that.

Those two quotes were about 18 hours apart. I think it is reasonable to ask what changed between those two posts.

If I were to pick between RR being town and elderad being town at the moment, I'd be leaning RR as town. However, a crap case isn't a scumtell.

Why do you feel that it is necessary to pick between the two?

How do you figure that a scum booster would not be useful to the mafia? Do you think a scum booster would be unable to boost fellow scum? Or that scum can't be boosted?

I think the benefit of being confirmed by a townie would exceed the benefit of boosting a mafia teammate. I also think that boosting a mafia buddy would carry a rather large potential drawback of creating a link between them.
It may even be the case that Huntress-scum boosted her mafia buddy and claimed to have boosted iLord precisely because of this drawback.
I guess I also assumed that the town suffers when it boosts scum because it loses a power as much as because the scum gain a power.

[eldarad]

/post

Just checking in after the downtime.

[eldarad]

OK, so Iceman is acting weird...

I don't get why he is trying so hard to make the choice so black and white (me or RR). So I'll echo the questions of RR and Huntress...why? and why do you thing RR is town? Why do you think he is voting you?

What makes you think that RR's vote for you comes from a townie?

Yes, those are elements of WIFOM. Which is why I tried to relay on them as little as I could, and based my read (which I'm by no means sure of) mostly on gut, some of her attempts at scumhunting, and a solid town read from her first post.

But all of those elements are important, and you

must

have considered them as part of your read on Electra. You can pretend as much as you like, but calling my analysis as invalid due to WIFOM rings hollow - you're just denying reality because you think it is the right thing to say.

Voting me for this is possibly more far fetched than your "order of town reads" attack on iLord, and looks to me like a form of the recently discussed preemtive OMGUS.

Given that I had never heard of pre-emptive OMGUS until this game, perhaps you would be so good as to explain, in a reasonable amount of detail, what pre-emptive OMGUS is as applied to this particular situation, and how my vote fits into it.

[eldarad]

Just checking in. I see Huntress' vote, and also note her reason - "I haven't finished the re-read of Eldarad - that was originally promised some time in early December - but I'll vote anyway."

Hi vollkan.

[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.

[eldarad]

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.

I fail to see how you can reach an opinion on Electra/Vollkan without considering whether her claim is genuine. Surely that is the crucial issue - yet you are saying that you have got a gut town read on Electra

without considering her claim

.
Do you think your opinion on Electra's alignment will change if you reach the conclusion that her claim is fake?
If so, how can you have any confidence at all in your 'gut read'?
How can I - or any of us - take your stated read seriously if you have ignored such a crucial point?

Lynch all liars

yay. That's the third general "rule" (rule is poor choice of word, but can't think of a better one) you've trotted out without explaining how it applies in this specific case.
It sounds like you're using LAL as a justification for your vote (in addition to your stated view that the claim is scummy). Is that accurate?

~~~

I didn't like the way he was trying to deflect attention from Eldarad among other things and although an individual read of him made him look more town, my initial read of the whole thread, plus his later posts, make him seem more likely to be scum. He was/You are currently my second highest suspect.

Oh. So your opinion on sthar has changed? When did that happen?
Was there one particular point where your opinion changed, or has it been gradual? Why didn't you mention your change of opinion before now?

~~~
Xtoxm, are you reading the thread from the start? Are you planning to make some kind of analysis post?

~~~
Vollkan,
I boosted Jahudo because of - as I said to iLord - "accumulated townieness". It was also, to a much lesser extent, a gut reaction since I was pleased that someone was thinking critically about Electra's alignment even after the majority of the town had accepted Electra's claim at face value.

I think my reasons for voting iLord are pretty well documented in-thread, including the post where I originally voted iLord (#234).

I guess my problem is that Crazy was coming across to me as scummy whereas I still haven't figured out if my issue with sl is a playstyle/personality thing.

This was my response to a very similar point you raised regarding my vote on Crazy (rather than SL).

~~~

boost Vollkan

on the basis that I still believe Electra's claim to be genuine, and if it is not then we have another chance to spot any inconsistent "information" that Vollkan will have to invent overnight.

unvote
vote iceman

primarily because there is a lack of content, not just from iceman, but from all of the other players who have had that role. Possibly it suggests that there is something in the role PM that incentivises them to keep quiet?
Given that I don't appear to be gaining traction with my RR case, I much prefer an iceman lynch to a xtoxm lynch.

[eldarad]

Fuzzylightning seemed to have no problems posting content, and RandomGem had one decent length post (488) which had an interesting point at the end re: the value of a boost on him.

Fuzzylightning was not a prolific poster by any stretch of the imagination.
RandomGem, as you say, made

one

decent length post.

QFT. The role itself is both generally bad for the game and somewhat contradictory with the theme in particurlar. I highly doubt a mod like Patrick would put a role that encourages lurking in a game like this. Very inconsistent with Iceman's predecessors as well, who posted few long posts instead of (relatively) many short ones. I'd say we have two caught scum here.

I was not suggesting that they had a role that specifically encouraged them to not post. Rather, that their role incentivised them to not express too many (contraversial or otherwise) opinions.

Which two scum have we caught?

I expected you to call my vote omgus. Standard scum accusation.

I particuarly like how Raging Rabbit accused me of OMGUS for things

he hadn't said yet

.

I am much happier with Xtoxm's claim now that he has elaborated on it.

Xtoxm's claim does seem to make more sense now; but it doesn't necessarily mean that it's a pro-town role.

I agree, for what it's worth.
But it is worth mentioning that I think it is more likely that - in and of itself - a booster is more likely to be a scum than a double-voter.

Vollkan, I see that - as at #957 - Incog currently has the highest score on your ranking. Is this because you find him more scummy than most, or is it a function of Incog making more posts than other people?
Also, it seems like you are only looking for scum points (as you have not given anyone a -ve point yet). Is that an accurate assessment?

~~~
I actually found #954 quite interesting even though I had no knowledge of the context, lol.

[eldarad]

I agree, for what it's worth.
But it is worth mentioning that I think it is more likely that - in and of itself - a booster is more likely to be a scum than a double-voter.

What's this supposed to mean?

It was in response to Huntress' "I'm happier with sthar/Xtoxm's claim, but it could still be a scum role."
In my opinion, Huntress' claimed role is far more likely to be a scum role than your claimed role. Although, as I have already said, there are other factors that make me doubt that Huntress is scum.

[eldarad]

Forgot I even had it until I was asked to claim.

I kinda could believe that except that you replaced in about a day before Night 1.

[eldarad]

Posted:

Wed Dec 17, 2008 5:04 pm

Post subject: 692
I'm not going to have time for a full reread before tomorrow, but I read the first few pages and the last couple of pages. My main point in any game is that there must be a lynch on day one. I have read the points against Jahudo and Huntress and would rather see Huntress lynched today than Jahudo.
<snip>

Posted:

Wed Dec 17, 2008 9:39 pm

Post subject: 701
It is now night 1.

Not buying it, sorry.

[eldarad]

I didn't intend to imply that fuzzylightning/RandomGem/Iceman had a post restriction, but rather that they all felt that they were better off keeping quiet as a result of their role.
That could indeed be because they are a cop (although mafia and scum are other likely candidates).

However, iceman suggested in #916 that I was on the right track, but he also says in #1021 that he had forgot what role he had until he had been asked to claim...
So how could his role be affecting his posting rate prior to that?

I am not so sure as to who Ice's scumbuddy might be, although I note the effort RR has gone to in order to try to link Iceman with Xtoxm.

[eldarad]

Incog, what is the thought process behind your change of heart on Huntress?

There is so much I don't like about Huntress' play, and her claim, but I can't see how Huntress can be scum with Jahudo at the moment. I think lynching Huntress Today is premature.

Xtoxm, did you just say that you thought Huntress/Crazy was the scum's attempted mislynch on Day 1? How does that fit in with your decision to vote for Huntress?

[eldarad]

In #916, he bolded "something that incentivises them to keep quiet". I don't know what that actually suggests, but obviously it implies very strongly that he had knowledge of his own role at that point in time. Hmm.

My point exactly.

In other news, last night I googled 'rabbit pancake'
Crazy.

[eldarad]

I'm perfectly willing to switch my vote back to Eldarad if he's lynchable today. He's still my first choice.

We have two fairly major issues going on here that you have so far totally ignored, and I would like your input on.

What is your opinion on the potential contradiction between sthar's claim and Xtoxm's?
What do you think about the Iceman's reason for not using his cop ability? Do you think it is plausible for Iceman to have forgotten his role so soon after replacing in? Do you think Iceman's reason ("I forgot until I was asked to claim") is consistent with his implication earlier that he wasn't posting often because of his role?
Given that you were willing to hammer Iceman earlier why have you changed your mind now that we are so close to deadline?

I can't be bothered to ask you for your case on me again, it's obvious you haven't got one.
~~~

Do you think a scum, if in Huntress' D1 position, would have acted differently?

Surely the first question is whether it is possible for Huntress-scum to have been in that position at all on Day 1, given the number of votes the town controls.

Day 1, Vote Count #21

Day 1, Vote Count #21
Huntress (5) <- sthar8, Electra, eldarad, Green Crayons, Jahudo
Jahudo (5) <- Incognito, iLord, Guardian, TDC, Raging Rabbit
eldarad <- Huntress

Not voting: RandomGem.

You're suggesting that of the 9 votes controlled by townies, 8 or 9 (depending on whether Iceman is town or not) were voting for scum. That's possible, but I doubt we're owning the game as hard as you think.
I acknowledge that Huntress' reluctance to vote for who we now know is the GF doesn't cover her with glory, especially given the non-existent, though single-minded, nature of her case on me in support of her vote. But, as I have said already, I think we will be in a much better position Tomorrow to assess whether Huntress is scum or not.

[eldarad]

If you look, you'll see I said "My top picks for scum are RR and elderad, primarily because they're so "sure" that Xtoxm are scum."

But I said that Xtoxm was probably town. I've been arguing for that strongly since Xtoxm replaced in.

I agree that lying doesn't automatically make you scum. But there is a lot about your claim that makes absolutely no sense when compared to other things you have said.
Like "forgetting" to send in a Night choice when you have received your role less than 4 hours ago;
Like not posting for most of the Day and then jumping on a suggestion that maybe your role incentivises you not to post;
Like then claiming that you forgot about your role until asked to claim;
Like asking to be vigged Tonight because "it seems better than being mislynched".

1) As he replaced in just before the deadline I can see the point of not using the ability if he really did think it was only one-shot. Better to save it for when he could make an informed decision.
2) Not knowing him, it's impossible to say. There are too many factors that could have affected it.

1) That isn't why Iceman said he didn't send in a choice. He said that he forgot. Why are you making excuses for him?
2) Again, I asked for your opinion. What do you think?

[eldarad]

Checking in.

I do not object to a massclaim.
I am worried that Incog is getting a free-pass, and that he could be scum. The bit that worries me most is how he maneuvred himself into a position late Yesterday where "vigging" Huntress would be plausible for him, even though he had previously expressed very good reasons why she could not be scum.

I also note that Incog has been boost-hammered. At least 3 of those people must be townies if Incog is mafia. But for that fact, I would have voted for Incog in this post.

I am going to go back and look at the possibility/plausibility of TDC-scum.

[eldarad]

I also considered the idea that the scum fancy their chances with Incog as vig. But given the amount of power people are bigging up our vig as having, why is Incog still alive?

Why NK the "information" role rather than the vig?
I don't expect an answer to that question, but it's weighing on my mind.

[eldarad]

eldarad: You're seriously claiming that a vig is a more powerful role than an information role?

I'm suggesting that a vig is potentially more damaging to scum than Electra's information was - at least partly because scum could also benefit from the information.
As I said, I didn't expect an answer to my question in #1210 so I won't comment on the answers I have received, I just wanted people do know what was on my mind.

If you really think I'm scum, then vote for me or make a case against me. Do you think my play here looks or feels dissimilar from my play in Satin Doll?

I think your play is similar to Satin Doll, but that is neither here nor there. As it is, I am presented with a fait accompli that is actually very persuasive evidence of your towniness in its own right.
From my perspective, it is certain that at least one of the people boosting you is scum. In the - now likely - scenario of Incogtown I am now able to deduce that both scum boosted you. And do you know what? I like those odds.

2. This argument is about as good as "the guy the scum NK'd thought I was town!"

Huh. I actually think that pointing to a confirmed townie who held an opinion is good evidence of the sincerity of that position. But that's splitting hairs - I agree with #1224.

I read through TDC in isolation and don't see anything suspicious.
So I re-read the end of Day 1. sthar's #676 is potentially our smoking gun as he positions himself to vote Huntress in preference to the Jahudo wagon. But at the same time I agree with everything he says about Huntress.
Unfortunately, he didn't have time to respond to Huntress' claim on Day 1 (yeah, yeah, that's partly my fault for hammering).
I don't find Xtoxm to be scummy, although I am anxious about Incog's certainty on this point

I already said yesterday that you and Iceman were very scummy independently, first, and seemed connected, second.

Yesterday I was concerned that you were linking Iceman to Xtoxm. That theory only holds water now if you are scum with Xtoxm. And, to be honest, I don't find that to be any more likely than any other possible scumteam at the moment. But I don't like how you have just moved onto your next target (Xtoxm) when your first target (Iceman) flipped town. At least I had the decency to drop my Guardian-iLord-Incog scumteam theory once I was proven spectacularly wrong.
Independently of your attempted linking of Xtoxm to Iceman, I find your trait of saying "OMGUS!" "WIFOM!" "LAL!" as a way of shooting down others without expanding on it to be unhelpful to the point of being scummy.

For RR to be scum, he has to have voted for Jahudo over Huntress late Day 1 and that does require some soul-searching.

An Xtoxm-scum, on the other hand, is very much an IIoA scum. He'll comment on anything and everything except for the game itself and will very rarely express his thoughts on the players.

Yeah, but Incog, Xtoxm

hasn't read the whole thread.

That may be a better - or at least equally valid - explanation as to why Xtoxm's posts don't contain information (as opposed to analysis of what just happened).

After that meandering post, I'm very close to voting Raging Rabbit. I'm just going to read GC before committing.

[eldarad]

Haven't finished reading GC, but I've read enough, I think.

1. Xtoxm was my first target, then I moved to Iceman what it became clear he wasn't getting lynched.
2. Though I did see a link (likely buddying up, in hindsight), my case on Xtoxm is completely independent of Iceman being scum or not. I even said so yesterday.

Having re-read the start of Day 2 as part of my read on GC, I also saw you attempting to link sthar/Xtoxm with Electra and me, before you moved on to linking Xtoxm with Iceman.
It looks like a pattern to me, rather than two or three independent cases. I remember you saying that your case on Iceman is independent of your case on Xtoxm. The trouble is I don't really believe you...you've been working very hard to link other people - people who have turned out to be townies - to sthar/Xtoxm.

"OMGUS" is never a good defence in and of itself, when faced with an actual case, and I don't remeber ever using it either. I've yet to see an actual case on me, really. Xtoxm doesn't even pretend to think I'm scum, just that I "need to die", while you listed two things I did you didn't like but haven't really explained why that makes you think I'm scum.

Your use of OMGUS is the worst of the three things I mentioned. You even had the gall to shout "pre-emptive OMGUS" - saying that I was voting you in response to things that

you hadn't even said yet

.

WIFOM is linked to your assertion that you considered Electra's alignment

without

assessing whether her claim - in her first post - was genuine or not "because it is WIFOM". You must have considered it - but your reluctance to admit it suggests that you're trying to say what you think the town wants to hear.
My read on Electra wasn't entirely based on WIFOM but I recognised that I had to make a judgement one way or the other on her claim. I didn't shy away from that judgement.

LAL is just the third standard phrase you used that makes me think a pattern is emerging here. I can see Xtoxm's claim is different to sthar's but I can also see that sthar's claim is/was incomplete.

~~~
Basically, if Incog is town, I have a 50/50 chance of voting scum if I pick one of the 4 Incog-boosters to lynch. And if we lynch wrong, Incog still has the opportunity to vig one of the 3 remaining Incog-boosters.
If Incog is scum, we're pretty much screwed already.

vote Raging Rabbit

[eldarad]

Eld, if you think i'm town, boost me.

I don't think you're a safe boost. I think the best boost Today is me, as it happens, but I don't get to make that call.
Raging Rabbit is correct that if I am right about him being scum, he can only really be scum with you. I have not discounted that possibility, although I don't particuarly regard it, in a vacuum, of being more likely than any other possible scumpair. Although see below...

eldarad, I never got the impression that Raging Rabbit ever tried to link anyone with anyone. I always felt like the cases he pushed against people were completely independent of one another (for example, when he came after me and iLord pretty hard during Day 1, I never felt like he thought the two of us were a scum team -- just that we were independently scummy).

If anything, that adds weight to my argument - RR isn't linking people he thinks are scum to each other indiscriminately, he's only linking people to Xtoxm. It also shows how RR's defence "it's natural to try to find scumpartners for people you think are scum" doesn't hold water when applied to his approach to people who aren't sthar/Xtoxm.

For examples of RR linking sthar/Xtoxm to others, I would point to post 766 where the sthar-Iceman pair emerges (when finally modified by post 776. #764 attempts to link me to "sthar or Electra"
Most of Yesterday RR was working hard to link Iceman to Xtoxm, as I pointed out at the time.

I find this vote count interesting because the wagon on Skillit involved four (4) different players who are currently alive whose alignments are unknown
<snip>
What are your current thoughts on this? More specifically, who do you think of the remaining three people (I'm not including you for obvious reasons) the scums are?

Well my first reaction is to be very impressed at my own incitefulness way back in post 389. I still think it is true.
It's also consistent with my view that RR-Xtoxm as scum is plausible.

Thinking about it, I have failed to realise how few potential scumpairs are left:

RR-Xtoxm

: I'm prepared to gamble on this scumpair with our lynch Today. I can shift to Xtoxm in order to also cover the possible GC-Xtoxm pair (and, to a lesser extent, the TDC-Xtoxm pair).

GC-TDC

: I have re-read both of these players in isolation recently, and I just don't see anything scummy about either of them.

GC-Xtoxm

: huh. It does fit the "one of the Skillit wagoners is scum, even if Skillit is scum" mould. I guess it's possible.

TDC-Xtoxm

: which is not likely given the vote count you have just quoted. I don't see both scum jumping on Skillit's early Day 1 wagon.

To me, RR is the high-stakes lynch. If RR is scum, we automatically get his scumbuddy. A Xtoxm lynch covers more bases but by definition makes Tomorrow wide-open. On top of that, a Xtoxm lynch appears to have majority support if pushed, pending the massclaim.

Speaking of which, GC - you're up...

[eldarad]

I am a vanilla townie.

unvote

because I don't think GC's claim checks out but I'm going to give him an opportunity to elaborate.

Incog, I see your question and I'll answer it later.

[eldarad]

I also remember Huntress claiming "Booster" and not "Priest".

Huntress said that her role PM did not say her role, but contained flavour "of a spiritual nature"

@Incog's 1267: yeah.
My role PM is the same as the sample PM, and we're all assuming that it is the vanilla townies who don't get anything from being boosted per Electra's flavour. But we don't know that.
I also believe that it is far more important to ensure the boost is not given to scum Today.

Post-mass claim, I'm still of the view that my position is the correct one. We either boost GC - the only "new" claimed role but who I think we're all pretty much happy with lynching Today unless there's an awesome explanation forthcoming, or Xtoxm - who already has an extra vote that he hasn't used, or a vanilla townie.
So yeah, I'd boost me.

Since I *do* have to boost someone, I am fairly confident that GC-scum isn't buddies with Raging Rabbit. So I'd boost RR...but he's claimed vanilla too. So I still reckon I'm a better boost choice.

[eldarad]

Then in my replacement PM I was given, in quotation form, a PM to the mod from skillit about a double boost, and the mod said something along the lines of "You will get more specific information about choices from a target."

What do you interpret this to mean?
That is to say, given that it is not possible to boost someone twice in the same Day, how can someone be "double-boosted"?

[eldarad]

Here's an assingment for Incog, GC, eldarad and TDC - come a with a possible PM phrasing that's in any plausible for both sthar's and Xtoxm's claims.

I think you have completely missed the point.

Oh and eldarad's last post gave me an interesting idea. What do people think of making our next boost choice the same person we lynch?

I'm totally down with that.

The original role PM said that my power would grow with subsequential boosts. Skillit asked what would happen if he was boosted a second time. I coined this as a "double boost;" that is, boosted a second time.

Yeah...that isn't really what you meant though, is it?

boost Green Crayons
vote Green Crayons

Incog: I have no problem with GC's #649 - I read it when I was re-reading GC - and largely agree with his comments on Huntress, both in that post and in subsequent posts. I don't really have anything more to add in answer to your question...

[eldarad]

Well yeah...but...

But at the same time I agree with everything he says about Huntress.

I don't think voting for Huntress was itself scummy. I was looking for people who were voting for Jahudo and perhaps looking for an excuse to bail out.

[eldarad]

I fail to see how Green Crayons's claim could completely change eldarad's view on him from not seeing anything scummy about him after rereading him to actually switching his vote to him after laying out a case against Raging Rabbit and gunning for his blood since yesterday.

I think GC's claim is completely fake and he needs to be lynched. I got that impression from the initial claim, and GC's subsequent explanations have not assuaged me. That takes precedence over everything else. On top of that, my feeling is that GC-scum is mutually exclusive of RR-scum.

What? If someone is boosted twice, I would consider them to be "double boosted."

So if I vote RR on Day 2 and on Day 3, is he "double-voted"?
If someone was boosted on 2 Days, I would consider them to be "boosted twice"

I'm a psychic. If I'm boosted, I can determine if someone made a night choice by targetting them. If I'm double boosted, I can determine who that person's target was, if anyone.

I never claimed a role name, so I'm not sure where you're getting this from. I said that I'm a psychic.

Sounds like you are claiming to be "a psychic" and the rest of your claim is describing what that role is. It contrasts sharply with Huntress' claim - where she doesn't even name her role, and Incog's claim - where the mechanics of his role is instantly recognisable as a vig. Your claim is of a power that is - initially - unorthodox, but you have felt the need to give it a name.

I'm sorry if you didn't read post 2. But, you shouldn't assume I didn't read it either when I come up with jargon to describe game mechanics, and then base a vote off of that limited perception you're espousing.

I am well aware of post 2. But here's the thing...

Then in my replacement PM I was given, in quotation form, a PM to the mod from skillit about a double boost, and the mod said something along the lines of "You will get more specific information about choices from a target."

The original role PM said that my power would grow with subsequential boosts. Skillit asked what would happen if he was boosted a second time. I coined this as a "double boost;" that is, boosted a second time.

Skillit replaced out before Electra revealed that we could only be boosted twice. So why would Skillit specifically ask about if he was boosted a

second

time?
If your role PM suggests a boost this gives you information on what your targeted player does, and that subsequent boosts would make your action "more powerful" I see no reason why there is any need for the mod to elaborate on that the role PM had not contained that level of detail.

It just sounds to me that you're subtly altering your claim as you go along
I feel we are skating on thin ice regarding rule 11 - since I am well aware of post 1 too - but the point I am making is that, even before #1287, your claim is not consistent with the other claims we have had up till now. On top of that, the "jargon" that you used does not fit with what you are saying you meant - I think because originally you meant something else, or wanted to give yourself latitude to adapt the claim as needed.

~~~

Oh and eldarad's last post gave me an interesting idea. What do people think of making our next boost choice the same person we lynch?

On second thought, I think we should boost one of the vanillas Today - it will be useful to confirm that our assumption about Electra's information (ie, some people are unaffected by boosting) does indeed apply to the vanilla townies.

unboost (Green Crayons)

~~~
Oh, and we need to lynch one of the people who boosted Incog Today. This is non-negotiable. Anyone who opposes this plan of action needs to speak up now.

[eldarad]

To whom else should it apply? Mafia?

Maybe, or just the Godfather. Or maybe Huntress - who appears to have been a "pure" power role rather than a boostable one? I think we should check, since we have the opportunity.
For what its worth, I think Electra's info does indeed relate to vanillas - and it was one of the ways I believed Electra's info to be testable...I just didn't want to claim at that point.

If testing the providence of Electra's information becomes vital to the success of the town, then we do have a few fairly extreme options available to us, should we need them.

For example by boosting me, I confirm that I received no power, and then lynching me the following Day to prove my alignment.

Why are you phrasing this in such a convoluted way? The two people that haven't boosted him are Incognito himself (duh) and you.
So, really, what you're saying is that we need to lynch someone that isn't you.
Are you claiming that by not boosting Incognito, you've somehow confirmed yourself?

No, I don't think I am 'confirmed.' I think at the moment it is a numbers game.
From my point of view both scum must be on Incog's boostwagon (assuming Incog is town). Even if we mislynch, Incog can vig one of the boosters - and he'll have a choice between one townie and 2 scum.

I accept it's not as clear cut for you, but you can clear one of the boosters (yourself). So, do you think there are 2 scum boosting Incog Today?

~~~

If you trust Incog the obvious boost is me.

I trust Incog to be town. I don't trust him to be right...at least not all the time...

[eldarad]

It's not hard to see a hammer and a second boosted person happening pretty quickly. RR is MIA and TDC can easily quick vote and boost with the excuse that he'll be leaving on vacation pretty soon and doesn't want the day to linger on in his absence.

Agreed. Longer post coming soon.

unvote

[eldarad]

And no, I don't support boosting one of the vanillas today -- why take the risk when one of the vanillas could easily be scum who could gain some kind of power when boosted? We're in a LyLo situation where we really don't have a large margin of error to be fooling around with boosts on the vanilla claimants. Your suggestion to do so, eldarad, is extremely scummy.

You have me worried now, because you're doing what you did Yesterday - lining yourself up so that vigging me Tonight seems plausible. It's what you did right before vigging Huntress. And it makes me think that you are hedging your bets in case you see dawn Tomorrow, and then have to justify your actions.

So, let's do this right now. We aren't lynching Green Crayons until I'm done.
Some important things to lay down first.
1) I'm pretty sure you're town, although I am not 100% sold on this point.
2) I'm pretty sure you're positioning yourself to vig me, as I mentioned above. Regardless of your alignment, that is a bad thing. Hence the unvote.
2a) Eldarad lynches take weeks. I see no reason to give you a free pass to avoid all that hassle just because you're a vig...
3) Boosting a vanilla - and having no effect - will be useful as it very persuasive evidence that your vig kills are the result of your boost, rather than a permanent ability...like what a scum might have. As TDC said, it

proves

nothing but it will make me feel better. And for all we know, vanillas might have the most powerful boost abilities... (yeah, I know, they probably don't...)

We aren't in lylo since you are a town-aligned vig. Right? So we have a reasonable margin of error. Nobody is being complacent here.

Skillit's wagon grew very quickly. My assessment was that, even if Skillit is scum it was very, very likely that at least one scum was on his wagon. Either:
1) Skillit was town and scum were on his wagon trying to push a townie mislynch, or
2) Skillit was scum and one of his scumbuddies had jumped on as bussing/distancing/going with the flow.

You asked me whether I still believe this to be true. I do.
Do you believe it to be true? Did you always believe it to be true, or has your opinion on this point changed throughout the game?

What stuck out to me about this post was the way eldarad addressed the two people he was talking about in this post. "Xtoxm, I don't see why TDC is voting you." The wording just strikes me as odd. He doesn't address TDC directly, i.e. "TDC, I don't understand your vote on Xtoxm.". Instead he addresses Xtoxm almost like eldarad himself is viewing the whole thing as a third person and is attempting to plot two people against one another.

I addressed Xtoxm directly because I was trying to engage with Xtoxm. My post #890 was a direct response to:

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

Let me know.

This, and other posts by Xtoxm around that time, had a theme of someone who was resigned to being lynched due to either (a) a 'slip' or (b) a perception that there had been a slip regarding the sthar/Xtoxm claim.
Xtoxm wasn't emotionally invested in the game at this point, so Xtoxmscum would have happily just called it a day and given up...but no more or less so than Xtoxmtown.
I was telling Xtoxm that I didn't agree with TDC's vote and I wasn't going to follow it with my own vote.
I'm surprised that that is what you have an issue with.

What do you think about Raging Rabbit reaching an opinion on Electra's alignment without considering whether her claim was genuine? Does that have the ring of truth?
When you were considering Electra's alignment, did you consider whether her claim was genuine? If so, can you explain your thought process. If not, how did you reach an opinion?

This plotting of people against one another seems like a recurring theme in eldarad's play this game -- during Day 1 he even went so far as to label me/iLord/Guardian as a scum team despite the fact that we had been at each other's necks the whole day with very serious votes on one another. Looking back on it now, it seems to me like eldarad was trying to keep up the paranoia that three townies had with one another which could have been helpful for an eldarad-scum in future days.

OK, OK. I officially retract my Guardian-iLord-Incog scumteam theory...
How likely does that plan sound to you?
If I knowingly attempt to link three townies together, how much traction would that gain with the three townies concerned? Precisely zero, as all three townies would know it to be false, at least with regards to themselves. As a quick example, think about the level of suspicion you had towards Guardian and iLord before and after I drew the link of the three of you in a scumteam. Were you more or less suspicious of them after I made the suggestion? Or did it have no impact whatsoever?

So that leaves Green Crayons and eldarad, which I think is the scum team we're dealing with here. eldarad's recent vote only makes me feel even better about this -- his vote strongly looks like a bussing vote to me since it's based on such weak reasoning when he previously supposedly couldn't see GC as anything but town.

In what way is "I don't believe his claim" weak reasoning?
You earlier said that we were in lylo. If you believe that, do you think it is likely that eldaradscum would be bussing at this point? How do you explain eldaradscum's switch from gunning for RR - who you believe is town - to GC - who you believe is my scumbuddy?

Can I only be scum with GC? What are the consequences if GC flips town - am I still more likely than not to be scum?

Also his whole "at least one of the scums must be boosting Incog" theory seems really ridiculous to even bring up; obviously, eldarad, if you're town you should be thinking that. Like TDC pointed out, the only two people who didn't boost me were a) you and b) me (obviously I can't boost myself). Your need to bring this up just looks like a last minute weak attempt to push the idea that you're town.

I hate it when people assume that I am inept.
Yeah, the fact that there are 2 scum on your boostwagon is very significant - it's crucial for me to be thinking about it, and I need you to be thinking about it too because if we mislynch Today

you

get the second bite of the cherry. So I need you to be looking at your boostwagon for possible scum.

Outside of those votes I haven't seen much from either of the two that would suggest otherwise anyway -- Raging Rabbit strikes me as very tunnel-visioned at times but town nevertheless

Can you elaborate more on your town read of Raging Rabbit please.
You say that he is tunnel-visioned at times but he still gives you a town read. Would you say RR has been scumhunting? Has his scumhunting been confined to relatively few players in detail, or has he touched on all players as being potential scum during the course of the game?

What do you think about my reaction to Huntress' claim (post 699)? Do you agree with my stated opinion there? If not, do you think my opinion - further elaborated in post 712 following a question from you - is sincerely held?

[eldarad]

Part 1 of 2...

Interesting. When you were town in Satin Doll Showdown, I remember you being extremely self-sacrificing. Heck, it won us the game. Why the change here?

If GC's town and we exclude the RR-Xtoxm scum team, eld would actually need to be scum, so in this case I'd agree with him being vigged.

A different Day, a different game, I would totally take those odds. In this case though, I'm not prepared to take the risk because there's no backup plan if GC is town - I don't think GC is town, but my scumdar so far has been appalling - as we will lose before dawn.
Also, Incog, Satin Doll was something of an exception...I've never had a townie fake-claim SuperSaint the Day before lylo before. In that specific circumstance it made sense to sacrifice myself that Day in order to guarantee catching scum at lylo.
Also, read any and all of the games where I have been lynched.

You're pretty sure I'm town but yet you still place these two points side by side with one another?

Yeah. That's exactly what I did, and exactly what I meant.
This is the second complete U-turn you've made in order to create a justification for who you are planning to kill Tonight. I think your are far more likely than not to be town, but it worries me.
I also want to nail you down on what your opinions are.

Regardless of my alignment this a bad thing? If you're actually town and I'm scum, wouldn't it be a good thing for me to vig you? Why throw in the "regardless of your alignment" clause?

Funny. I was talking about from the town's point of view.

Right but what's to stop me from believing that if we lynch incorrectly today, the real scums either have some kind of roleblocker that might be able to stop me from shooting tonight or that they might be able to acquire some kind of roleblocking or un-nightkill ability when boosted? I find it odd how you seem to not even consider this.

I considered it and discarded it as unlikely.
If scum have a one-shot ability I would expect them to use it fairly early on the "use it or lose it" principal. They could, for example, have used it on Huntress - they may already have - or on our vig. Certainly I would expect the scum to target a boosted townie and I have seen no indication of a boosted townie being denied the effects of the boost.

I agree with the general sentiment that we should be trying to lynch scum rather than rely on your vig-kill, but I also see that you are looking to vig me Tonight, and I see no reason to treat that any differently than if you were looking to lynch me, especially since such an action could result in us losing the game...

[eldarad]

Early on I remember thinking that the wagon could have been somewhat telling, and I remember asking people to justify their own votes since I felt like the wagon moved from a simple random wagon to a more serious wagon but since that point, I've changed my stance on this. I don't think it's as telling as I initially thought it to be because of the boost mechanic that we have in this game. If Skillit/GC is scum, then any potential scum buddies who may have jumped on his wagon would have realized that he couldn't seriously be lynched until two separate boosts were reached. Therefore it probably wouldn't cause much harm to ride the wagon for a bit and slowly slide off of it when the Skillit-hate died down. If Skillit/GC is town, then the scum would have realized that the town would still have to boost two separate people so the chances could have been quite high at that point for the wagon to eventually dissipate and not lead to a mislynch like they thought it would.

Ah. So actually you agree with me (although for different reasons) that GC-scum is mutually exclusive of RR-scum, since if Skillit/GC is scum you would expect one one of his buddies to be on the wagon - and neither Jahudo or RR were.
So do you think that - in the event of GC-town - the scum avoided the Skillit wagon because there was no prospect of a mislynch?

Also keep in mind that Electra claimed to be a Vanilla who gained something when boosted. Since I was/am a power role, I had absolutely no clue whether Vanillas could have such a thing. So yeah, my read of her was based largely on her actions rather than determining the genuineness of her claim since I didn't have enough role-based information to do so. I could imagine Raging Rabbit feeling somewhat similarly especially if he's actually a vanilla like he claims to be. It's pretty apparent now that Electra thought she was a Vanilla but was sorely mistaken. I could certainly see a Raging Rabbit-Vanilla Town thinking "well, my role PM mentions nothing about something happening to me when boosted, so why does hers? I'll judge the rest of her actions to determine whether or not I believe her".

Right. And do you also see how - given that I had a vanilla role PM and my role gave no indication of being boostable -

I don't have a role, so I'm vanilla, however my role PM says that if I'm boosted, I'll gain information about the town (reworded, of course).

this would have required the scum to take a leap of faith about the existence or otherwise of boostable vanilla townies, or whatever.

More suspicious. I became convinced that maybe you were scum with one of them (namely springlullaby/Guardian since you refused to vote for her even though you kept saying that her anger looked fake and chose to vote Crazy instead) and that you were trying to link us so that you could push for a future mislynch on me if he flipped town. So yeah.

OK, so...would you say that your reasoning - that I made the iLord-Guardian-Incog link in order to make the three of you suspicious of each other - holds water given that it made you more suspicious of me? How does that theory fit in with the fact that the scum killed iLord that Night?

"Shit. The town's not buying GC's fake-claim. Time to bus him!"

My attitude towards GC's claim is not conditional on other people's attitudes to it.

I'm actually curious as to why your vote on him is so dependent on his claim. If he's scum, did you not consider the fact that maybe he and his scum buddy spent last night discussing possible fakeclaims in a potential LyLo situation? Do you think GC just messed up that fake-claim really badly here today?

I don't think GC's claim is consistent with Skillit's attitude towards Electra's claim. I also have a problem with the level of detail GC claims to have received about his role, particuarly when contrasted with the level of vagueness in GC's initial claim in post 1253.
I guess the far more relevant question is: "Do YOU believe GC's claim?"
How does your assessment of GC's claim impact on your assessment of his alignment?

See, I'm actually thinking that if you're scum with GC, you guys didn't really discuss much about fake-claims last night so that when he claimed to be a "psychic", you almost knee-jerkedly responded with a vote.

The only answer I have to that is to point to my response to GC's claim and note that it is not a knee jerk reaction.

Yes, I think he's been scum-hunting. Yes, I think he's touched on all players being potential scum during the course of the game except for maybe TDC, and... I can't really remember his thoughts about Skillit. Admittedly, I'll need to reread those.

Wow, so can you think of a reason why RR might wish to avoid antagonising two of the five remaining players in the game?
Actually, he hasn't gone after you for a while either...so what you're actually saying is that he's only really attacked me and Xtoxm, at least in the recent past. Are you still happy with your town-read of RR? Does that town-read hold true if GC flips town?

[eldarad]

Funnily enough, I dreamt about this game last night, and woke up with a strong urge to boost GC and lynch Xtoxm...

I also want Incog to fully justify why he wants to vig me, so that everyone can see his reasoning.

[eldarad]

That whole "the scum must be two of the Incog boosters, and hey, let's boost a vanilla today!" just reeks of scum.

How does it reek of scum? Which bit?
Do both parts individually reek of scum, or is it the combination that reeks of scum? HOW do they reek of scum?

How does "two of the Incog boosters are scum" differ from your stated position that the scum are amongst {people who aren't you and Incog}
What makes your opinion fine, but my opinion scummy?
I'd also like to hear how your opinion has changed since. What things have I done that make you think I am more scummy than before? How is GC less scummy?

Since you now think GC is town and you are voting for Xtoxm, I assume you approve of the plan - you know, the one that I dreamt - to boost GC and lynch Xtoxm.

[eldarad]

No, I support boosting and lynching Xtoxm or boosting and lynching you. There's no reason to take a risk with GC, and even if I was to decide I want to boost a claimed vanilla I'd push either TDC or myself over GC.

RR, Green Crayons has not claimed to be a vanilla - so my point is that if you think GC is probably town then it makes sense to boost him as he is the only remaining "power" available to the town.
I realise that you forgot/did not realise that GC has claimed. Does that information change your answer?

[eldarad]

Hmm, that does change things. We need to decide whether possibly granting GC an extra power if he's scum is worth the track he gains if he's telling the truth. I'd say it's a good move if we lynch right and a far too risky one if we mislynch, but we can't know that in advance.

Right. It will give us a pseudo-cop investigation as the only people with powers will be GC, Incog, and scum. So we'll either catch scum or confirm an innocent.
Having a confirmed innocent in lylo is a good thing, as you know.
Which is why I don't expect GC to last through the Night...but I also think it is useful to force the mafia's hand. If GC does survive the Night we're going to have WIFOM to cope with...but I'm happy to deal with that.

We're also able to distinguish between the mafia kill and the vig kill in the Night message, so if Incog vigs GC he'll have a lot to answer for.

So this is where your town-read on GC becomes important. Plus, if you really think that the scumteam is eldarad-Xtoxm then you have to lynch Xtoxm Today - since Incog is never going to vig Xtoxm but he is very likely to vig me. If Incog is alive at lylo do you think the town will be able to lynch Xtoxm-scum?

vote Xtoxm

Not boosting GC because Xtoxm has an additional vote and is therefore able to hammer GC once we reach a boost majority.

[eldarad]

I don't know how far you think you going to get without the confirmed townie's support.

What do you mean by that?

[eldarad]

whoa...it's like you answered my question before I asked it...

Seriosuly, Incog isn't gonna lynch me. So if I was scum, my "scumbuddy" just has not vote me, then we win at night.

Well then that may be a judgement call that Incog has to make immediately before deadline.
The bonus being that, if Incog does hammer at dealine in preference to no-lynch, and you flip scum, Incog will know who to vig.

[eldarad]

Am I just hallucinating or is the whole of 1339 really scummy?

Really? You think 1339 is scummy.
And you have no comment on 1340 or 1341 or or 1343 or 1344?

[eldarad]

Incog, GC is not a claimed vanilla.

[eldarad]

/post
I realise people are away at the moment. I don't have any such excuse...

Really, really dislike this vote for obvious reasons. I wish I was a dayvig right about now. Who do you think is Xtoxm's most likely buddy?

I can see Xtoxm as scum with anyone...which was part of my hesitation over lynching him Today - his lynch won't give us any steer on who his scumbuddy is. But if we ever want to lynch Xtoxm, it has to be Today.
I can also see a Xtoxm-Incog scumteam, by the way.

As for the other posts following that, what's wrong with them exactly?
I'm not asking if anything is wrong with them. I'm asking whether you have any comment on those posts? (posts 1340 or 1341 or or 1343 or 1344?)

Incog has basically said that he thinks the ground Xtox walks on becomes town just from osmosis. Not something a scum group readily does (plus there's that whole vig thing).

Yeah, I see that. But I also see that Incog has been pretty much cleared by most of the townies in the game, and so in that context Incog-scum could gamble that it's worth the risk.
Incog, can you confirm that you would hammer Xtoxm at deadline if not doing so would cause a no-lynch?

Also, Incog's fear of the existence of a roleblocker Today is inconsistent with his post Yesterday where he effectively justified his vigging of Huntress in advance (in #1164).
The irony is, I was fairly happy with the 'lynch whoever we boost' plan until I thought about it a bit more...and I saw how eager Incog was to deny the town a boost.

[eldarad]

Oops, missed quote tags in the second paragraph. It should read:

As for the other posts following that, what's wrong with them exactly?

I'm not asking if anything is wrong with them. I'm asking whether you have any comment on those posts? (posts 1340 or 1341 or or 1343 or 1344?)

[eldarad]

TDC, I can't see your question(s) to me. Is this it?

eldarad: I don't get your plan. Now that RR thinks GC is town (or does he?), do you think so, too? Because if you don't (and you did vote him previously, so you didn't), I don't see how it's a good idea to boost him at all. Worst case he gets a role block, we lynch town, he blocks Incognito and the game is over. Far too risky.

Maybe you meant something else. In any case, here's where I am:

1. I could see Xtoxm as scum with anyone. This doesn't necessarily mean that Xtoxm is scum...just that he probably is. He's the safe lynch Today. The fact that Incog
2. RR-scum is mutually exclusive of GC-scum, as the only way RR can be scum is if he is Xtoxm's scumbuddy.
3. GC could be scum, and my initial reaction to his claim was that he was definitely scum. I have reconsidered my position somewhat - I'm basically happier with the claim than I was. I also see a massive upside of boosting GC if he is town - see post 1339.
4. TDC probably isn't scum. Although I could see a Xtoxm-TDC scumpair I don't think it is likely. For the avoidance of doubt, I will not be supporting a TDC lynch Today.
5. My head says that Incog is town. But every fibre of my being is screaming that he could be scum. In particular, I am alarmed by his 180 on Huntress as a prelude to vigging a claimed power role who he had previously convincingly shown could not possibly be scum. I also don't like his implacable defence of Xtoxm, and his (over?)-enthusiasm for a plan that involves denying the town its - potentially - last boost.
If GC's claim is genuine then we get a pseudo-cop investigation that forces the scum's hand, whereas we have no idea whether GC-scum would get a RB, or even if it will matter (it won't if Incog targets a townie with his vig-kill), so I reckon the risk/reward works in our favour just fine.
It was blatantly obvious to me that Incog was intending to vig Huntress last Night due to his comments during the Day. This indicates to me that Incog was not concerned about a potential mafia-RB, which he should be as a vig with a finite number of bullets, even when not in lylo. So I don't like how this contrasts with Incog's attitude Today, where he aims to prevent a second boost on the basis of a threat he didn't even acknowledge as existing last Night.

~~~

It just seems like you're trying to coax Raging Rabbit into maintaining his vote on Xtoxm. Nowhere in that post do you even seem to consider who a hypo-Xtoxm-scum's buddy might be

I have considered Xtoxm's potential buddies, but yes - in that post I did not explore the issue. I also have no problem with your assertion that I was trying to persuade RR to vote Xtoxm.

instead you set yourself up as Xtoxm's buddy saying that RR's town read of GC is important and that he should keep his vote on Xtoxm because even if RR thinks the team is you/Xtoxm, he's better off lynching Xtoxm since I would never vote or vig Xtoxm even in LyLo? Wouldn't you know whether or not you're scum with Xtoxm? Why would a you-town agree to go along with such a strategy when it could potentially cost us the game?

Do you agree with the following two statements:
If Xtoxm is scum and both he and you survive to lylo, the town will lose.
So if the townies alive Today believe that you're hopelessly, irredeemably wrong and that Xtoxm is scum then the only way town can win is by lynching Xtoxm Today.

I do know whether or not I am scum with Xtoxm, but RR does not. So any attempts to persuade RR have to avoid the assumption that I am town, especially since he has just expressed the opinion that I could be scum.
In that context, the logic above (that if Xtoxm is scum, we must lynch him Today) can be accepted by everyone and the issue of my being vigged Tonight is out of my hands anyway.

[eldarad]

No that fails, scum buddy would just not bus me and take the confirmed win.

We already discussed this, and if your scumbuddy doesn't bus you then Incog will have to choose between lynching you and a no-lynch.

How so? I think RR-Xtoxm is very unlikely. Why can RR not possibly be scum without Xtoxm?

I think the only indication of RR-scum has been his attempts to link people - townies, as it turns out - to Xtoxm/sthar.
Option A is RR is a townie who has been, and continues to be, spectacularly wrong. Option B is RR is scum who is linking townies to his scumbuddy Xtoxm.
Both options are plausible, but if Option B is true then RR must be scum with Xtoxm, otherwise it makes no sense. Hence my very quick flip from RR to GC when I thought GC's claim was fake - if GC is scum then RR can't be.
Option C - that I have discarded - is that RR is scum and has spent the game linking townies with each other.

If Xtoxm is town (and that's the case that is really interesting because then we NEED the vig-kill), Incognito has a 50% chance of hitting scum. That's pretty good if you ask me and I'm certainly not going to just throw it away.

I agree that the vig-kill has a pretty good chance of catching scum if we mislynch. But that it out of our hands to a very large extent.

With two scum left GC's supposed ability would only be half accurate (it could've been the other scum), plus for the result to be usable you would need both Incognito and the scum to neither hit GC nor GC's (necessarily secret) target.

Right. Which effectively forces the scum to kill GC if he is town.
If GC is still alive at dawn Tomorrow then either GC is scum, or the mafia have taken a massive risk that he isn't going to end up confirming someone or targeting the killer. I think there is value in forcing the mafia's hand in that way.

~~~

Curious chop off of a sentence. Was there more to this?

lol, yeah I guess. I think I moved it down into point 5.

Only because Xtoxm has a double-voting ability, yes. Otherwise this is a false dilemma. I wouldn't just go into tomorrow saying "lulz, Xtoxm is STILL town, vote: other person". Considering the fact that you and me have been in an endgame together, you should know the amount of time and consideration I put into those scenarios.

So if Xtoxm is scum, we must kill him Today or Tonight. You won't vig him, so we have to lynch him. If we don't and he is scum we will not see dawn Tomorrow, even if we lynch/vig correctly Today, as his extra vote allows him to force a lynch by himself Tomorrow.

If Xtoxm is not scum, do you believe that the last scum would deliberately go into lylo with you and Xtoxm? Even if you think it is possible, do you see the advantage of robbing the mafia of that course of action?

~~~
Yeah, I will boost and lynch Xtoxm if that is the only deal on the table.

[eldarad]

I will boost-hammer Xtoxm if we are lynching him.
If Xtoxm has a double-vote he could already be voting for GC, in which case GC is already lynch-hammered and the only thing preventing the lynch is the lack of a boost.

So...
1) I am confused...
2) I won't boosthammer GC at this time as this could trigger a GC lynch due to Xtoxm's double vote.
3) My first preference is 'boost GC & lynch Xtoxm'. I recognise TDC's objection to this, and will take 'boost Xtoxm & lynch Xtoxm' as an alternative.

So TDC, is the alternative (boost and lynch Xtoxm) acceptable to you?

[eldarad]

boost xtoxm

[eldarad]

Man, we're on page 58...

My plan of action:
At the moment I am embracing the WIFOM in #1437.
Next I will re-read the early Skillet wagon with the benefit of hindsight to see how it looks now.
Then I will look at TDC's case on Raging Rabbit.
It is interesting to note that there is no equivalent case on TDC, apart from the one made by GC Yesterday. But I'll look at that anyway.
Then I'll have a think about the mafia's Night-kill choice in the context of what was said Yesterday.

[eldarad]

Someone definitely said something about RR. (erm...it may have been me, thinking about it...) So I'll see if I can find it, and then I'll read it.

RR, you said that you're still leaning towards me as scum but you also made it clear Yesterday that you thought that the two scum left were among {GC, Xtoxm, eldarad}. Does that still hold true, or is there room for doubt now? Could you see a Jahudo-Skillit/GC-TDC scumteam?

And we might as well get it out in the open now as someone is going to have to think about it sooner or later: do you think my push to boost GC Yesterday was me trying to boost my scumbuddy or am I just a misguided townie?
Does GC's actual role (Encryptor) alter or influence your opinion?

[eldarad]

Encryptor allows the mafia to daytalk - ie, to PM each other during the Day. (See, for example, the Encryptor role PM from PYP2)

I think this is reasonably significant as it means that boosting GC Yesterday would have been useless to the scum anyway. And knowing that boosting GC wouldn't have helped the scum puts a different light on TDC's total opposition to boosting GC - it's an easy way for TDC-scum to gain townie points with no downside as far as scum are concerned.

So could you have a go at answering the last question in #1447 now that you know what GC's role was?

[eldarad]

I assume that question is directed to RR, since I've already answered unter the assumption that the Encryptor would not be game-deciding.

I still think it would be worthwhile for you to answer, even if only to confirm that GC's role doesn't change your opinion.
I think that the fact GC's role would have been *useless* when boosted Yesterday is somewhat different to "not game-deciding." Do you not think so?

So you think my fear that GC could be a RB (or rather a RB-on-boost) was unwarranted?

I already expressed my view on that - I didn't think it was at all likely. But I also accept that such an opinion could be held sincerely.
That does not change the fact that GC's scumbuddy would have - literally - nothing to lose from opposing GC's boost.

And you think that Incog would've vigged GC regardless?

I don't understand this question?

[eldarad]

Just posting to say I'm here.
TDC, the answer to your question is fairly easy but I'll wait until I have more time and include it in a bigger post

[eldarad]

What negative implications would boosting a vanilla scum have had?

[eldarad]

Meh, I really haven't gotten very far. I read the Skillet wagon, and this is the climax:

Day 1, Vote Count #4 - Lynching

Skillet

(5) <-

Electra

,

sthar8

,

eldarad

,

TDC

,

Crazy

Way back on Day 1 I said that I felt the Skillet wagon had one scum on it, even if Skillet were scum himself. I still believe that. And that kinda leads me to TDC-scum...
The rest of the Skillet wagon doesn't tell me a lot, although with hindsight you can see how Skillet developed his "2 kinds of town, 2 kinds of scum" model that he used to try to discredit Electra's idea of what the game setup may look like.

#1437 doesn't tell us much, though I doubt that will come as a shock to you all.

Or rather you wanted to boost him so that, if he was pro-town, his ability could help the town.
That, too, only makes sense if he survives the night.

Well yeah. I made my position on that reasonably clear, I thought.
I didn't expect GC to survive the Night at all, precisely because his claimed ability - if true - could confirm an innocent, per post 1339.
You were right to point out the flaws, but the benefit wasn't in GC's boost, but in the way it forced the mafia's hand - they would have HAD to kill GC or risk an auto-loss when the town arrived at lylo with one or even two innocents.
If GC survived then he was almost certainly scum. There is scope for some

very

risky WIFOM play from the mafia - which is why I didn't elaborate further Yesterday.
The real benefit from boosting GC was that it forced the mafia into a situation where their choice for who to allow to survive to lylo was restricted if GC was town, and made our choice at lylo very easy if GC was scum...exactly because the scum's kill choice had been so restricted if GC had been town.

[eldarad]

Well, given that I didn't think that GC was scum, (b) wasn't such a bad option. I specifically warned against (a).
If there had been a situation where Incog had targeted GC-town but the mafia had not then thay would have been VERY alarming and would have called Incog's alignment into serious question in my mind.

With hindsight, GC would have flipped scum in that case - and so Incog would have been cleared. But we didn't know that at the time.

[eldarad]

I mean, no matter how you spin it, a plan that implies scum-GC surviving the day-night-cycle is a plan with a very real chance for the game ending that night.

I'm not arguing that I was right about GC - I clearly wasn't.
But between the lynch and the vig-kill, we needed to be right once. If we had got GC's scumbuddy in either, then GC would be alive Today and would have to be scum. That's no better or worse than the situation we were actually faced with.

I can't speculate on who Incog might have vigged. Even if you think you know, I don't think you do.

Anyway, at the moment I am thinking that TDC is the last scum.

[eldarad]

I'm here. I guess I don't feel particuarly incentivised to post when one-third of the players isn't here.

[eldarad]

Na na na na-na

SPACE PIRATES

na na na na na-na

SPACE PIRATES

na na na na-na

SPACE PIRATES

do do do-do-do do-do-do do

~~~

I assume the whole idea of the boost mechanic is that it mostly benefits the town but involves a risk factor of possibly boosting scum, and having a scum player gain no benefit from boosts goes against that concept.

Except that we know what GC's role was, and therefore we know that there was no benefit to the scum from boosting GC Yesterday. So given that we know - by looking at GC's role - that Yesterday there was no benefit to the scum from boosting GC, I would like you to express an opinion on its significance rather than repeating assumptions that are out of date because they are based on us

not

knowing GC's role.

For example, with hindsight, do you think it was significant that I was attempting to get GC boosted? Do you think it was significant that TDC was opposed to getting GC boosted?

Also, yeah - why did you think GC was town?
How come Xtoxm flipping town is such an earth-shattering event that you are now unable to express an opinion as to who is the last scum?
Do you have any thoughts as to why the scum kept you - or any of us - alive?

~~~

How so?
I mean other than that I made the right call on a plan that would've resulted in insta-loss if RR is scum.

Being right about who is scum and who is town doesn't clear you by any stretch of the imagination.
Being right with the benefit of hindsight isn't overly impressive either.

You are right that my plan was predicated on at least one of the town's kills hitting a scum. And I was willing to play for all the marbles and force the mafia's hand by making it essential for them to kill GC if GC was not mafia.
I'm cool with that.

[eldarad]

An encryptor gives the mafia a daytalking ability. Yesterday, the mafia knew that they were either going to go into lylo with one mafia left, or they were going to win. So securing daytalking for Today would not be a priority.

Err, Incog was obvtown...

Fair enough. I was just wondering whether you could see any potential scenario where the mafia would want Incog alive at endgame despite being confirmed?
I don't have an answer I prefer, I just want to see what you are thinking as you haven't said a lot Today.

At the end of Yesterday, TDC and I basically bypassed Incog by compromising on boosting & lynching Xtoxm. What are your thoughts on that?

[eldarad]

I was asking you whether it is the only thing you hold against me.

At the moment the first thing weighing against you is your presence on the early Skillet wagon at a point where I believe at least one of the wagoners is scum.
The second thing weighing against you is how you've skated through the game without being either very active or inactive, or getting into a big argument with anyone at any point. This contrasts sharply with the sudden massive increase in activity Today relative to the other Days.
The third thing weighing against you is how you took a stand against a GC boost at a time when a hypothetical scum bussing GC would have been able to do so at no cost to the scumteam.

Something of a wildcard is how you have boosted me at the start of each Day in the game. I don't think for a second that you did that way back on Day 1 as a means to setup this play in lylo...but I do notice that you never followed up that boost or argued in favour of boosting me other than placing your boost-vote itself. Which makes we question your motives slightly.

Encryptor could give them daytalking all the time, and some other benfit when boosted.

And what use is daytalking "all the time" if there is only one scum left alive?!
The point I am making is that GC's scumbuddy would not lose anything by opposing a GC-boost. Either both scum would survive and therefore win the game, or one scum would die so there would only be one scum left.

IIRC, Incog would've probably preferred your lynch over either of us, so it's possibly a point in your favor. It's a huge risk to leave a confrimed alive in endgame when you totally don't have to, though.

Well yeah, but it's a fairly big point in your favour. Incog wouldn't have lynched you Today, but he probably would have lynched me. So it doesn't make a lot of sense for you to kill Incog, even though he would be a confirmed innocent.

At this point I'm almost ready to vote for TDC.

[eldarad]

For what it's worth:
My post counts, by game day:
Day 1: 29 Duration: ~two months PPD: ~0.5
Day 2: 24 Duration: ~one and a half month PPD: ~0.5
Day 3: 33 Duration: ~one month PPD: ~1.1
Day 4 so far: 22 Duration: ~one month PPD: ~0.7

So there is no "massive increase" today at all, actually.

The average for Today has probably dropped somewhat as there was a gap where we were waiting for RR.
Coming out of the gates Today you posted far more frequently than your previous level of activity. It just makes me think that it is because this is the first time that your life depended on it.

vote TDC

[eldarad]

I mean really, that is what supposedly swung you around to voting me?

That I want to survive in endgame?

My point isn't that you want to survive, it is that

your motivation for posting

is your own survival. It suggests that on previous Days scumhunting wasn't sufficient motive for you to post frequently.

Also, I listed three (and a half) reasons why I thought you were scum. So pretending that I only listed one isn't that impressive. Particuarly when I even spelled out the priority that I gave to each of those reasons.

[eldarad]

I've got all your questions written down, but it's Friday night so I'll answer later.

[eldarad]

eld -
1. Reread your case against iLord. In hindsight, how convincing do you think it is?

My case was pretty narrow, and made complete sense. That is:

• iLord's "reads" looked contrived, as the commentary accompanying them did not support the read in any way.
  
• that moving Electra up to #2 spot immediately before boosting her (in favour of Guardian, who iLord believed was town anyway) was done to give the appearance of sincerity to the boost that was unnecessary and looked fake, especially when choosing to boost Electra because it was possible to get a boost-majority was a perfectly valid reason that iLord tried to actively avoid.
  
• subsequent to this, the revelation that iLord's commentary was not linked the reads at all - essentially meaning that iLord posted a scumdar - upon which his votes and boost-votes were based - without any reasoning whatsoever.

The majority of the subsequent discussion centred on a very small, specific piece of the second point in that list. Whether you agree with with my reasoning on that point or not, the other two points were never really opposed by iLord.

2. What led you to think Incog and Guardian were scum together?

It was when I tried to get them to summarise their arguments. I did that as an attempt to get everyone on track - as we were fast becoming spectators in a debate that didn't appear to be reaching a conclusion.
The consequences of that summarising attempt led me to two thoughts:
1) that there was very little actual content in the argument, despite the length and quantity of posts
2) both Guardian and Incog resisted any attempt to have their argument summarised.
It suggested to me that they were attempting to create an aura of antagonism between themselves that was out of all proportion to the quality and quantity of the arguments they were having.

3. What sort of "accumulated towniness" made you boost Jahudo? Can you think of anything specific that made you think he was town?

I couldn't answer that question at the time, and I'm afraid I still can't answer it now.

eld, what do you make of all the mutual attacks/bussing that's been going on between TDC and GC? For exmaple, this post:

Xtox has had shitty quarrels with RR, myself and Eld. Like, very-obviously-not-the-same-scum-group conversations. And not the scum trying out a distancing strategy type either. Incog has basically said that he thinks the ground Xtox walks on becomes town just from osmosis. Not something a scum group readily does (plus there's that whole vig thing). If Xtox flips scum, his only partner would be TDC.

I don't know why you people keep forgetting about him. He's still in this game!

Lynch TDC. Vig RR/me/Eld/Xtox (preferably not Eld - or me, for that matter). We will find ourselves in either a win or another probable LYLO situation.

I'm not sure how much of the post you quoted is intended to convey bussing. GC rules out three players as possible scumbuddies with Xtoxm. Well fine, but Xtoxm isn't scum - and GC knew that. So it isn't saying very much at all about TDC's alignment.
In terms of the exhortation - "TDC is still in this game!" - it has the ring of truth, as TDC has been skating quietly through the game...until Today.
That doesn't mean that GC and TDC can't be scumbuddies. And the point I have been making about the Encryptor is that TDC could oppose the boost of GC (read: distancing) at no cost to the scumteam. TDC opposing the boost of GC Yesterday is totally consistent with a GC-TDC scumteam. It certainly doesn't make it

less

likely.

eld - Since I appeared much more likely to vote for you than for TDC yesterday, why do you think TDC-scum chose to start today expressing a lean on me?

Well hey, you're the one who dislikes WIFOM, remember?
I'd say TDC thought he'd have more chance lynching you. Also, since TDC has boosted me every Day since the game began, he may have felt he wouldn't be able to justify attacking me straight out of the blocks Today. That kinda restricts his choice.

Well, the later he answers, the less time you have to take apart his answers before the deadline hits...

See, this is the first time all game TDC has attacked me, and it's just a cheap shot.
That's why he was leaning towards you first thing Today.

~~~

"Hey, we could mass claim and then boost a vanilla who doesn't know about his boosts (*cough* like me *cough*) and see whether it does anything to prove her claim!"

And yet that's rather similar to my "leap of faith" idea ("I'm a vanilla, and whilst I think I will get something if boosted I don't know for sure. So Electra-scum claiming to be a vanilla with detail of what her boost will give requires a leap of faith")

I really can't do anything about the backwardness of the formulation than tell you that I tried not to put the "I'm a useless vanilla"-cap on my head.

And yet I was able express support for Electra without saying "I am a vanilla and therefore I believe her." So I don't think you can dismiss RR's point so easily.

[eldarad]

I can't really bring a case on eldarad, so it's all up to you, RR.

At this point, where RR is confirmed town, you still "can't really bring a case" on me.
Post 1533 really is the first time you have made any kind of attack on me for the whole game.

Oh, let's see.. how did you support Electra on D2?

So your position is that I wasn't supporting Electra on Day 2?

[eldarad]

Good call
I'd be quite interested to hear your reasoning, even just a brief sentence or two.

Vote: eldarad

Sup?

My last two opening votes in games have landed on scum. Do you feel lucky?

Rawr.

[eldarad]

You really had me worried there during D3. Confused Remember that "eldarad feels natural" from Satin Doll? Well...

Yeah, that was possibly a mistake. I wasn't playing naturally on D3 - I was trying to pile on so much WIFOM that the mafia were robbed of the option of killing for WIFOM reasons. Maybe I should have focussed on being eld-town.
Also, I got it in my head that Incog-scum was a possibility because of your flip-flop on Huntress shortly before killing her.
The irony of GC flipping scum when I had picked apart his role claim...and then changed my mind completely...does not escape me.

Now that I think about it with a more clear head, I actually do remember that argument and remember that what I was saying made complete and total sense. I didn't understand how you took your position at all.

See, that's weird. Because you were basically defending my position, but at one point I found myself doubting your sincerity because even I didn't believe your logic made sense.

My scumdar was just awful this game, which I guess shows how well the scum played. But I am quite pleased that I was able to read what the mafia were doing, even if I didn't know who they were. Once we got to lylo it was actually quite an easy choice for me.

I'm also well impressed with how we managed to lynch Xtoxm, lol.