Thanks for the link I somehow missed that.

As for JMich he is hard to read for me, his play is pretty consistent whether scum or town and I find it hard to get a solid read on him.

Thanks guys :)
No dice this time :P

I couldn't agree more. I think cristi had it 100% right that Bookwyrm is basically almost confirmed town (I know there are edge cases where he might not be, but I'm happy to discount those as unlikely) and if we no lynch again then the exorcist will have to remove Bookwyrm.
The extra spectre votes give us an edge that makes it more difficult for mafia to control the lynch.

My main problem is that there are a number of possible candidates... and I'm not sure which one to vote for.

drealmer's push for no lynch puts him out there. No lynch is usually pretty bad for both town and scum, but slightly worse for town (so pushing for it is scummy). However in this game it's barely bad for scum at all, they don't need to just kill town willie nillie, they only need to kill specific town (the power roles) so missing out killing a townie with a mislynch isn't so bad.

Your behaviour has put you on the list, the whole 'changing up my meta' line is scummy as hell and usually a cover.

HijacK is surprisingly quiet and non combative and that's ringing warning bells...

And there's the newbs who I'm not getting any read on due to a lack of previous info and general lurkiness...

Unvote (in case I need to unvote Dess vote)

Vote HijacK

While the other two have done more overtly scummy... I find that lurking is more suspicious, particularly when it matches my expectations of HijacK as scum.

I'd guess there are 3 scum. There might be 2, but no more than 4. The symmetry loving part of me also thinks 3 would be the perfect number: each side has 3 lives.

I've seen you tunnel hard before, so that aspect didn't really surprise me at all. I've been at the end of your tunnel at least twice, and town both times. ;)

I'm inclined to agree with Trent on this. a4plz may not have contributed much, but she's certainly put more out than babark has. Remember the Day 1 posts about outing all the town power roles? Babark has basically made no ripples at all.

All: Be advised that spectre votes are reset at the beginning of each Day, just like every other player. So if I vote for someone Today, I could vote for someone different Tomorrow. I just can't change my vote on a given Day after I've cast it on that Day.

...you might be more on top of this spectre thing than I am.

I second this motion. Hypocritically, I'm simultaneously going to opt out. Spiritual reasons, you understand.

Drealmer, I'd like to hear your impression of Dessimu's play.

I think the main thing you and wyrm (and possibly others) are missing with this is that at their core they are all still just "IF...then" statements. I'm not just assuming he is scum and looking for proof to support the decision. What I'm doing is a logical way of forming a theory and then checking the theory to see if it is sound. A sound theory doesn't need to be True, it just needs to hold up logically, and so that is the first thing to check. With this game it's an obvious element that the Truth can't be discerned by simply logic-ing out theories (because of lies and deception, obviously), and so that is not what I'm trying to do. I'm simply looking at things in a certain light to see IF, in that light, they COULD be seen as logical/sensible/sound. I did all that with full awareness that the Truth could still be that he is Good, and never intended to make it like I was proving he was Evil. Simply IF he is Evil, THEN these things make sense in that light. It works exactly the same way if I hold it in the opposite light. I could have just as easily and accurately phrased it "IF he is Good...THEN 'this this this and this' statements don't make logical sense to have been said."

One of the least things I want to do is defend HijacK or jump in the middle of people focusing on him (I don't want to do his job for him and I certainly don't want to regain the focus on myself!), BUT, I have to say that outright declaring "town-hijack behaves this way, not this way" is a huge fallacy and a wrong way to decide anything about anyone because you're just making generalizations and assumptions based on those generalizations. This is why meta-analysis should only ever be PART of the assessment of a player's behavior, and never the leading factor for analysis (yes, it can be the impetus for deeper scrutiny and analysis of a player, but should never be the basis for deciding something. JMich in Vitek's last game is a perfect example of why this can cause a problem.)

@HSL, when you said "I've not seen anything that could change my mind" can you clarify: change your mind from what to what? Do you mean you're pretty sure he's Evil and nothing has changed your mind about that yet, or what did you mean exactly?

Interesting how now HSL and trent are both focused on HijacK. I wonder if the scum-chat will read "if we can't get drealmer's wagon going again on D2, HijacK is the 2nd choice, we can exploit his lurking, slight changes in meta, and try to make him look bad, probably get CSPVG on our side easily and maybe a few others to make it roll easily."

You don't find it significant that trent's stance has always been (to my knowledge) NO no-lynch EVER? To my awareness he's never ever conceded to the possibility of no-lynch being a viable option under any circumstance.

I don't see the issue here. There had been nothing of note between those 2 posts. How does the distance between the posts have any relevance?

What and where? I never thought he voted me because of the Friends thing, it was obviously related to my no-lynch discussion, but he still never actually laid out any reasoning, only "no lynch bad, drealmer want no lynch, lynch drealmer!" he doesn't actually tell us why he thinks no-lynch is bad ("no lynch helps scum" --- HOW/WHY?! just stating such doesn't make it true or help others see why he thinks it is true, and is not a valid argument in my eyes.)

Again, no, it's not a valid argument if there are no reasons or explanations given to the position.
Again, I was pushing the DISCUSSION of no-lynch. Voting it actually got more people to take me seriously, furthered the discussion, and allowed me to further evaluate reactions to the idea of no-lynch. I found no-lynch to POSSIBLY BE a viable town strategy yesterday, and explained why I thought so, but ultimately I wanted to lynch trent, not go no-lynch. Of course I'm happy it went no-lynch as opposed to my lynch, and I can't be faulted for that. AGAIN, if anyone wants to take issue with the no-lynch result yesterday, talk to the 7 other people who weren't on the only active wagon, they were all fine with no-lynch too.

You are mis-representing what I said here. I never said wanting to know the info from flips is terrible. Not even close. I simply said that that information wasn't so dire that we should just kill someone to have the information sooner rather than later (especially since I was already quite sure that there would be no information given.)

Apparently so considering you weren't the only one who took it that way. To be clear the basic formulation of this position is "if you aren't willing to listen to and consider what another player is saying, then that is not very pro-town."
We should all be listening to each other's thoughts and positions and giving them consideration. Teamwork and group effort and all of that. It's the essence of the game, and to blindly disregard something someone says goes against that (is anti-town.) Is that clearer? I hope?

Basic misunderstanding here. It's not the result of the suppressed vote-count that is scummy, it's the hostility and inability to simply not read my vote-counts and move on from it, making the fact that I'm simply doing it an issue (causing an issue where there need not be one, imo) - to me him going about it this way he is trying to cause contention and distraction but make it seem as if I am the one causing the distraction (by pretending to be distracted and confused by it, which I simply don't buy, because they were just fucking vote counts and he and others could simply disregard them.)

Certainly not inherently scummy, just a note to consider and keep in mind IF he is Evil...then this COULD BE what it is.

Yes of course, but the significance of it here is that it COULD HAVE BEEN a last ditch effort to cause a reaction from me that would convince others to push me to lynch.

I myself was surprised how strongly I felt when I got to the end of what I was doing. When I started off I didn't think it'd end up that way. I didn't find it all to be "pretty tenuous" (obviously, hence the vote.) If you want to talk about tenuous things, there are plenty more going on all over this game (pretty standard, certainly) - like simply voting someone because they are discussing (or even pushing, if you see it that way) no-lynch, or deciding someone is scum simply based on meta.

Note: THANK YOU SO MUCH CSPVG for going multi-quote. It looks lovely on you!

okay, that is where I'm caught up to now (#558)

onward to more!

Bump, for great justice. Also, so he can see and answer my question.

@drealmer, who is wrong once again, I have most certainly stated in the past that a no lynch can be a viable option under the right circumstances. JMich is the one who convinced me of this I believe in flubs milk game. Anything else you would like to say and get wrong?

Ummm, no I'm not. For my first few games I was, until I realized that he frequently pings scum to me when he's town and so I've simply switched to saying "well you're pinging scummy to me but no more than usual so this means probably nothing", except in this game where I've found/felt more than the standard pings I get from him.

That's not what I found contradictory. I obviously shouldn't be making hasty posts without full explanations (it was more a passing through post), as multiple people seem to have took this to be what I meant (though I'm not sure how, because that would be a stupid position to hold.) I'll try to explain and elaborate on what I meant, but I want to get caught up first. And no, I'm not displeased at all with the attention HijacK is getting. LET HIM HAVE IT! He needs to get his ass in gear, as I've already said.
It was a mis-quote of me.

I understand how the game works. I've explained both my general position on no-lynch and why I think it was (maybe still is? but I've got enough players that I'm comfortable voting at this point that I don't see wanting no-lynch in the future. Remember that D1 I ultimately didn't want no-lynch either, I wanted to lynch trent. Of course I prefer no-lynch to my own lynch) viable in this setup, if you want me to link or elaborate more, I'm glad to, but I think we simply hold different fundamental views on the no-lynch mechanic.

In this game, the benefit to the no-lynch on D1 is simple. It seemed I was the only wagon that might go to lynch. I am town. So instead of 2 dead townies at the start of D2, we only have 1 dead townie. This benefit exists in every single mafia game (of course with the obvious caveats) - in this setup I think the benefit is compounded, not because it directly benefits town to no-lynch, but because it doesn't benefit scum in narrowing the pool of targest making it easier for them to hit PRs, and because it doesn't benefit scum, it's better for town. Make sense (not being snarky, actually checking to make sure it makes sense.)

Did you just WIFOM trent for him? Maybe he knows others would have a hard time believing he'd make that move as scum and so did it for exactly that reason? I don't need more reasons to find trent scummy, so I'm not pushing this, just pointing it out.

I had a very similar thought very early on, that perhaps the reason he is acting the way he is is because he doesn't like his scum-team (not anything personal about the players) because he got grouped with 2 newcomers, making his job that much more difficult (I've heard it's hard to be scum if you're new, unless you're Dessimu.) He could have started the game with a general frustration, figured his best bet was to go after the easy D1 target (me!), and having failed at that, be pretty damn irked.

I honestly hope that if 2 (or even 3) noobs rolled scum that agent would have re-rolled the entire 13 players as to not disadvantage the scum team. In a 3-scum game, I personally think only 1/3 should ever be new, otherwise they are just wayyy too disadvantaged, and I imagine would be absolutely no-fun for the veteran.

That's all you've got for us?!


Hey that's what I do!

I haven't done a re-read yet, still have to do cristi and dess, and dess will be last. But "impression" is that Dess is town. Some things pinged a little scummy and off his meta was the main reasoning and given that he's been scum a few times that weakens the meta-reasoning even more (to almost negligible.) D2 he seemed MUCH more town than D1, and I think is (was) very possibly just getting his stride as a townie. Also, his play is pretty damn good, in my view. Add to that adalia who is seeming more townie to me than any previous game I've seen him in, and dess/adalia is now no my "leaning town" list (which has all of 2 people on it. Well 3 if you count wyrm, but I'm comfortable saying he's confirmed town.)

Thanks for the correction, I'll take your word for it for now. Can you answer my question as to why it was not viable on this D1, given the setup? I detailed why I thought it might be, and would like your response to that position.

I really don't like how you keep telling me I'm wrong. I am fully aware that I could be wrong, and you saying so does nothing for me but make you look defensive and make me think that perhaps I'm onto something. Are you able to tell me objectively how you would read/react/respond to someone if they did what you are claiming to have done with your meta?

I'm still seeing HSL and trent kind of being buddy-ish, now in regards to Hijack and JMich (not completely unwarranted, certainly, but nothing as damning for either JMich or HijacK as it seems they are making it out to be.) If they are scum-buddies I see a likelihood of scum-chat N1 having elements of "if we can't get drealmer's wagon going again on D2, who should we try to get going? HijacK, because he's lurking a lot, a couple people have expressed suspicion/disgruntled-ness with him, and we can probably get them to join us in making him a suspect and make his wagon roll. Of course JMich is always a good option too, so that is the 3rd option after drealmer and hijack, we should maybe push a little at all 3 to see which wagon has more potential as the day goes on."

@drealmer as I told you on Day 1 and it still stands right now, we have no idea what info if any is given on a lynch and the only way we will know is when we lynch someone.

If you don't like being told you're wrong then I suggest you stop posting wrong information.

As much as you want to keep trying to lump me and HSL together as a scum team I have to tell you that once again you are wrong. I don't know anyone's alignment but mine, but I do think HSL is town in how he's been playing so far. I can't say the same for you and I can only assume you like being wrong as often as you are.

If you find trentonlf more scummy, what would his push for HijacK's lynch mean, or at least indicate?




Let me see if I got this right.

IF he's Evil, this and this and this support that he is Evil.
IF he's Good, this and this and this support that he is... Evil.

Sorry, you may want to think that you're only going through just "IF...then" statements, but you don't really, because you never really try to objectively see things under a different light.


Thank you for the advice, I try hard to follow it each and every game.

And since it's good advice, you might want to follow it yourself?


If you can manage to take your eyes away from trentonlf for a moment, I suggest you read the very last part of my post #565.
You're free to still not find anything scummy about HijacK, I just hope that if that's the case it's not because your all time favourite suspects are also his top suspects.


That almost sounds like "two potential townies could agree on someone, but if it's those two it can only be because they're scum(my).

Anyway, what's even more interesting is that what you took away from my post #551 (I assume that you read it to the end, or not?) is that I'm focused on HijacK.

Equally interesting is that you suggest that I pushed for your lynch... oh right, I forgot; only reason I didn't actually do it is because I'm a terrible Evil after Good-cred.


Of course you can be faulted. If you're Mafia.

and this is important information for us to have why?

Holy crap, man! I don't think you could have been more mis-representative of EVERYthing I've said without it come out as blatantly obvious (and even now, it's not so subtle, I think.) I've been on the fence about you and had you leaning town, but, WOW, this is exactly how I know you to be when you're scum. A slight suggestion that you might be Evil and BAM BAM BAM, defensive and attacking and word-twisty galore from you! It seems to me that I must have struck a chord of correctness in that post of mine.

Did you even read the OP? What if the info given on a lynch is someone is town or mafia, would that not be helpful info? We have no way of knowing what info is given or not. If no info at all is given that's what the coroner is for, but last night he sat doing nothing since there was no lynch.

Did you read your post before posting it? Your failed logic hurts my head. OF COURSE seeing if someone is town or mafia is helpful, that's not the issue at hand. The issue at hand is that you are posing a lynch is helpful to see IF alignment is shown or not, not WHICH alignment is shown, but IF IT IS AT ALL. How is knowing IF there are alignments shown helpful? (the only way I see it as being helpful is IF you are scum!)

How likely do you find it to be that there will be any alignment information on flips anyway? Especially now that we've been made aware of the spectre mechanic. I find it nearly impossible that alignment will be shown on a flip, and I don't need a lynch just for proof of that.

What was that advice of yours again about meta and judgement?