Well I knew this was coming. I have no idea what ploy agent was trying. I had in mind he was going to be a jester or something because I can’t figure out why he did what he did. I’m not scum nor have I been scum at any point this game. If I was scum I can assure you I would have just gone with what agent was saying because of the attention I knew this would bring, but I had no intention of letting a lie like that pass. If we have some sort of investigative role I sure hope they checked me out to see that I’m not scum so we can actually move on to finding who is.

Edit to above post 255: (as he still was scum and would've known who was town/who changed alignments to town[if any])

================================

Well if it's any consolation I believe you....but of course if we had an investigative role to back that up(while keeping themselves safe as well while doing so) it would help even more.

That reads a bit like role-fishing. Like a call to a hypothetical cop to start breadcrumbing, so that you can catch him.

And as SPF explained to you, it wouldn't make sense for agent to 'throw shade' on trent by sacrificing himself. A 1 for 1 trade is beneficial for Town, after all.


Basically I agree with ZFR's theory and SPF's exposition on that. We have 2 scenarios:

1) trent = Town. In that case, trent would have had no choice but to call out agent's lie. Because liars have to be treated as scum. But agent would have lied in a way that he knew would lead to his lynch. Either immediately or the day after. Because even if he had convinced us to lynch trent, he would automatically have been next after trent's lynch.

2) trent = Scum. In that case he had the choice how to react to agent's revelation. Either play along or distance himself by antagonizing him, hoping to get a clear 'Town pass' once agent is lynched and flipped scum. Agent's motivation is also easier to understand in this case. It was a gamble. An attempt at seeming honest and therefore towny. "Hey, I was a bad-guy, but we got re-rolled." and he hoped that trent would play along. But trent chose the other path.

So, trent's reaction makes sense in both cases, no matter whether he is Town or Scum. But agent's action doesn't make sense at all if trent is Town and always was Town. Therefore I see it as more likely that trent is scum and that we are dealing here with a failed gambit on agent's part.

vote trentonlf

Call it what you will, but notice the part in parenthesis....of course they should not expose themselves to scum, but any info they can drop on verifying scum/clearing town would likely be worth the risk/part of their "job"(else why have a silent/non helpful investigative role?).

And I said agent could've thrown shade on trent by claiming they were/are scum to get them lynched...that is also a possibility as well.

For now, I restate that we should analyze the votes and ZFR's posts/replies to such for now as the most prudent course of action.

While I believe Trent is scum, I don't want his wagon to build too fast. More discussion gives a better chance that the third scum will reveal themselves. Therefore I won't vote for him yet.
I'm not sure that's possible. If someone did investigate Trent, it would be better for them to convince the town with arguments rather than claiming.

1st bit: Good idea, there.

2nd bit: This is what I meant......any investigative role should somehow try to get us to lynch any scum they find while remaining hidden from the eyes of scum....as long as they do their job and get scum lynched and convince others to do so then i'm happy.

Usually investigative roles stay silent until they have a positive hit. Breadcrumbing can be read by scum just as well as by town. So 'dropping hints' as you suggest is very dangerous to investigative PRs. But once an investigative role finds scum, they usually claim and report their finding. Unless they can push the scum they found to lynch without revealing themselves. Some try that first and only claim when it doesn't work without the claim.

Good points, agreed 100%.
==================

Maybe Agent was hoping we'd lynch trent first(and thus lose a town) and was willing to risk himself being lost from the scum team?

What I just posted above this bit......maybe agent was willing to take one for the team if they could take out a town in the process?

You should probably check your working, your maths doesn't make sense.

How would it be worth losing 1/3 of the scum team in order to get a townie lynched (1/9 assuming no third-parties)? The only time that would make the slightest bit of sense is if there were two town power roles that the scum had identified as huge threats and they wanted to take them out at the same time (one lynch, one nightkill). That doesn't sound likely on D1.

You're really grasping at straws here.

As to the last bit: Maybe...but I am on a roll with finally picking and voting for someone who is scum(compared to other games where I was also town) and I don't wanna jinx it. I also don't want to lynch fellow town by mistake based on not much(from my pov) evidence.

(Plus I admit I am a tiny bit biased on this, seeing as I want him to remain in the game for a bit so he can have some more "fun" to take his mind off of his IRL issues)

If someone can prove him scum(or convince me enough), though, I might be willing to vote him as well regardless.

This had been addressed several times already. It doesn't make sense. The best agent could have hoped for, if trent is Town, was that both him and trent get lynched. That's a 1 for 1 trade which is bad for scum. Agent is experienced, so he knows that. It looks quite weird that you cling to this theory even after it has been explained to you several times that it doesn't make sense.

Maybe it is just stubbornness or maybe it is your out-of-game reason to want trent to stay in the game. The latter is laudable, but still bad play for Town, if trent is Scum. The former would just be bad play. But maybe you are the third scum (or became the third scum after dedo dropped out) and are panicking a bit because you see the danger of losing two scum-buddies in two consecutive nights. Perhaps your stubborness or regard for trent's RL situation are only a cover for your real goal of defending your scumbuddy.

In any case I think we need to lynch trent today. His flip will give us more information than anybody else's at this point. He is looking scummy and several other players are now linked to him. If he flips scum, that makes you look very bad. Should he flip Town, that would exonerate you a bit and make SPF and me look a bit bad, since we seem to be the main drivers of the trent train.

Spot on. This is exactly why I didnt want to rush through the lynch straight away, and take a little more time to see people's reactions. We've now got a highly likely scum in trent, and a couple of other potential accomplices based on their resolute defence, despite the obvious evidence to the contrary.

There's obviously the chance that someone is bussing their scum buddy again, but at the moment I'm inclined to agree that people defending trent are the most likely suspects.

Is there anyone who hasn't posted yet today?

Call it a gut feeling, but I am hesitant to lynch trent due to what I see as not enough evidence(combined with the aforementioned out of game reasons you list below this bit)

It's a bit of both things, I think: Stubbornness and the IRL stuff...plus also add a dash of not wanting to lynch town by accident(which I have done on occasion in earlier games).

You make a good point here, about getting info from the lynch. If the votes get high enough I might possibly be willing to vote as well if need be.

And as for me being suspect next if he flips scum: Eh, it happens to me a lot in these games, even when(as now) when I am town.....to me it is more of an inevitability(I don't think I ever lasted until the "end" of a game, due to my play style) that I have come to terms with over the past few games.

Korotan I think?