Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[notquitethere]

Too many players to keep track of. Corrected list, downgrading IcyTea:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

All Player's Current Cases and Their Reasons

FallacyofUrist - 4maskwolf (low content voting), heydude6 (random vote?),

IcyTea31 - Jim Groovester (random vote with more reasons added later), Toaster ('scum slip')

Luckyowl - Nirur Torir (hasn't answered questions yet), NJW200 (for buddying IcyTea hard), Juicebox (bizarre playstyle), TricMagic (inconsistent logic - 4th vote on the wagon!)

Toaster - IcyTea31 (not having a town mindset), FallacyofUrist (random vote),

ToonyMan - dolores (disengaged style)

TricMagic - Leafsnail (posting from a scum mindset), ToonyMan and Vector (for persuing a 3rd party wincon)

Juicebox - Luckyowl (writing a wall of text is scummy?)

Nirur - notquitethere (low pressure pressure vote)


===

Quick Summary of How Bullshit These Cases Are In order of Most to Least

1 - Cases Of Dubious Substance

LuckyOwl, Leafsnail, Toaster, Jim Groovester, IcyTea31

2 - Low Effort Pressure & Random Voters Who Still Need To Form A Case

NQT, Heydude6, Nirur Torir, FallacyofUrist

3 - Cases That Don't Actually Hunt Mafia

Toonyman, Vector (third party hunting isn't necessarily bad but it is something that's very easy for scum to do productively while seeming active)

4- Cases Which Might Go Somewhere

NJW200, Juicebox, 4maskwolf, TricMagic, dolores


So right now I'm thinking, lynch out of #1 pile, and expand the pile to include any of #2 that don't come up with anything good. Review #3 on later days, and reassess #4 as and when new developments arise.

[Nirur Torir]

Unvote.
I'm not getting an answer, the purpose of the vote, but at least Owl's doing more now. Good enough.
Gut said inexperienced townish with a strange play style. After their newest posts, I'm even more confused, but don't think they're the most lynchable person right now.

Nirur, thanks for replacing in. Who is scum?

I'm trying to work up the will for a more detailed re-read.

If I had to vote now, I'm really suspicious of Tric's "If Tea wasn't scum, they'd trust me with the hat that would make me a doctor. Also I can get badges to disable kills." claims, especially followed by their jump to bandwagoning Owl.
I don't want to vote now, in case of vote manipulation shenanigans causing an early hammer.

[Luckyowl]

I won't say my action on TricMagic does. But I'll tell you my action on IcyTea31 does once I get some clarification on it from Webadict.

[Luckyowl]

The reason I won't say what my ability will do on TricMagic is so the Mafia don't get any information on what I'm capable of. TricMagic can even confirm the action once it gets through.

[TricMagic]

Fair enough on that.

[Vector]

PFP. NQT, hard to believe that your “might go somewhere” list largely consists of the bandwagon on LuckyO, who screams noob *something*. Given your comment directly afterwards, do I correctly understand that you prefer LO for the D1 lynch?

I will add a couple of things.

1., given what I have seen so far I am not sure there is a traditional scumteam. There are a lot of players acting nuts and it is hard for me to believe that people would not be bellowing at them for this in scumchat. I know this is WIFOM, but still: there is a surprisingly large number of people with bizarre and uncoordinated anti-town behavior. Maybe the scumteam is small?

2. The point re third parties is taken and very suitable, but lynching an apparent third party is better than mislynching town D1. I would prefer to lynch scum, obviously, but pressuring until we get a 3rd-party claim is still pretty good IMHO.

3. Of the vets, I.e. people whose meta I know, Leafsnail’s ducking to the side is very consistent with his scum play (but again: Christmas). I should do a reread when I get home from groceries; I’d like to post my current observations.

[notquitethere]

For me, towniness of cases is more about the reasons and the circumstances of the votes than whether they're actually right. Town are wrong more times than not. As such, I don't particularly favour a Lucky Owl lynch. Their recent openness about targeting people (which happened after I did my read through) is especially a bold move that I don't really peg as scum. I'm waiting to see what people do.

Additional reflection: I also don't really think Tric's case on Owl is strong, but Tric has been wielding their vote actively, which I tend to read as pretty town-sided.

3rd party vote on d1 is OK, not ideal as less informative, but OK. And it's not a trick that can be repeated.


Nirur, that's pretty nonsense reason not to vote. 9 votes is hammer. I think the biggest wagon is three votes. Get real.

[Nirur Torir]

Nirur, that's pretty nonsense reason not to vote. 9 votes is hammer. I think the biggest wagon is three votes. Get real.

With this far to go I don't think it important to have a vote down for the sake of it, but feel free to write me in on the Tric bandwagon with (afraid to vote) if it makes you happy.

[Leafsnail]

I don't really get the question? This kinda makes me feel that way, but in the game no, I've never had that happen to me before. Besides that 'Everyone Scum' game after it ended, but that's mostly cause my playstyle was completely wrong because of it.

Ok, I guess I will try again. You immediately bought an item from the shop without providing any reason for doing so. You then, without anyone having challenged you over it, provided an explanation for why you did so. To me that seems self-conscious in a way I wouldn't expect a town player to be. I'd like to hear about why you felt the need to make the second clarifying post.

[Leafsnail]

Re: ICT's "slip":

I have knowledge town doesn't have.

This is phrased weirdly but I think given the context of his previous post it's pretty clear that he meant knowledge the town as a whole doesn't have. He went on to clarify what he meant.

Out of the people who moved on this I found Vector's posts rubbed me the wrong way.

As far as the slip goes, I've seen this kind of thing both reveal the scumteam and offer an excuse for scum to bandwagon. If we lynched ICT today, and I were alive in a couple of days, I expect that I would examine anyone with a last-minute bandwagon over the slip later.

This in particular strikes me as pretty weaselly, especially given that Vector supports Jim's case in the previous paragraph. It's strangely noncommittal - not settling on whether the scumslip is real, and leaving open the door to go after other people who do believe it's real (while leaving in the bandwagon as a caveat). This feels like a pretty calculated response to what should be a straightfoward question.

[heydude6]

Toaster

Heydude:  Just so we're absolutely 100% crystal clear with no room for other interpretation, variation, or change of claim later, you got your message about being contracted at this point in the game, and not earlier in the day?  I want absolute confirmation on this.

No, I received it at this point, shorty after your big post, but before your follow-up question to Jim.

I spelled it out pretty clearly the first time I said it:

In other words, someone just maliciously targeted me with a day action. It was at 10:02:06 pm, which is 1 minute and 2 seconds after Toaster's post. I think I must have been doing too good of job as town then.

Why are you so sure scum hit you with that ability and not a townie who monumentally distrusts you?

Read monumentally as momentarily for a second.

Do you really think these two posts have anything excessively scummy in them? Especially when you compare it to someone like Fallacy and Iceytea?

It was quite a powerful ability. If it weren't for the "Leave a Comment" loophole, they would have crippled me and thus the town's first night at the very least. Whoever used this ability was pretty damn confident that it wouldn't be wasted and hurt their own team. That kind of confidence would only come from someone who is scum.


Iceytea, it was a pretty good response. I thought most of your points were good, so I only responded to the bits that I felt needed further commentary.

Spoiler: More Iceytea (click to show/hide)

If I did decide this was the best way to get rid of Iceytea, why did I use a method where successfully defending myself sheds no light on the guilt of Iceytea since his outburst could easily be rationalized as the mafia targeting him in order to make me look bad?

Because I received my message around the same time you said you did, meaning your message couldn't have affected the action. Or if we're both town, it would require scum to spend two separate actions. And a single player generally doesn't perform more than one action per phase, and if they do, not the same action.

After looking at it hard enough, I see your point, but when I did my defense I didn't lean into that all. !scum me wouldn't have brought up the possibility of you being separately targeted, which is what I think you realized and why you ultimately unvoted me.

to provoke a reaction from the scum who sent it.

What sort of reaction were you expecting?

A post calling out my PM as fake. I was hoping it would have been from someone besides you. I guess Delores technically did as well, but they didn't call out a fake bit, but instead a real bit that had the same meaning as in the unmodified PM. I'm pretty sure they weren't the one who sent the PM at least. Maybe it's a WIFOM, but my gut says that they aren't trying a gambit.

It sure is strange that their immediate instinct is to assume I sent it when doing so would put !scumHeydude in a lot of unnecessary danger.

That's because abilities that can kill generally don't double-target. That I was targeted reduces the odds of another claim being true. Combine that with naming me specifically in the post, before town!you could have known I was targeted.

True, I didn't know you were targeted when I made my post. It really does seem to have been a coincidence, but I don't think it's the unlikeliest one. Out of all the people here, you have the biggest spotlight on you so it's not too surprising that the attacker and I both thought of using you in our plans in some way or another. I am surprised I was chosen as a second target for the double-target though. Maybe they saw me as a weak player who wouldn't react to it well, which I guess they were right about.

What can I say except that you're wrong? I still have a copy of the original infringing post since I sent it to web to have it judged after-the-fact. I compared the two again for you and can say that the meaning is the same.

Much of the meaning, yes, but the original post mentioned my name thrice, while the new version only does so twice. Specifically, the third part of the ability was different.

I checked my saved copy again. I only see your name twice in that one too. I don't know what else to tell you. What do you mean by the third part of the ability being different? The part about revealing my role pm in the main thread?

Unfortunately, though I did get a mafia reaction eventually (which I am proud of), it wasn't through a post but through an anonymous day action, leaving you as the only person to attack me and be read.

Saying once more because it's important: this didn't happen. I received my PM before you made that post, and only a couple minutes after time you said you received it.

Indeed, it's a real shame.

In my response to your next question below, I mentioned that it seems like you got a contract, but if that's the case, I recommend you to pay it off so we can have a proper discussion.

How do you know whether or not I've already done so? Why is a proper discussion contingent on it?

Because I thought there was something about your contract that was preventing you from speaking about the details of your contract. I thought you may have gotten a slightly different contract.

I still find it strange that two contracts have been sent though. Usually you can only use an ability once per phase, but I wouldn't put it past the mafia to coordinate something funky.

I'm more concerned that it seems to be a double-targeting killing ability. I think the sender is more likely an SK than mafia, actually.

Flavourwise, it doesn't seem like the kind of ability that would be double-target. I'm pretty sure that the double-target part was the result of some other ability or even an item. As a result, I have doubts about them working alone.

Hey TricMagic! Do one of your hats allow someone to use an ability twice?

[TricMagic]

I don't really get the question? This kinda makes me feel that way, but in the game no, I've never had that happen to me before. Besides that 'Everyone Scum' game after it ended, but that's mostly cause my playstyle was completely wrong because of it.

Ok, I guess I will try again. You immediately bought an item from the shop without providing any reason for doing so. You then, without anyone having challenged you over it, provided an explanation for why you did so. To me that seems self-conscious in a way I wouldn't expect a town player to be. I'd like to hear about why you felt the need to make the second clarifying post.

In this case, being open. However! That is simply because I could be. On it's own, this badge is of little use to me. With the right hat or badge, it becomes useful. And unlike the rest, I do get regular income of 100 pons. I don't have much reason to put the 1-Hit Hero badge in circulation. The Hookshot badge negates random, redirect, and tracking, which kinda makes my own hat a bit pointless.

The best three badges for everyone depending on ability. No Bonk which negates any kill action you make once, Hover that prevents you from using abilities that would end up killing you, and Compass. There is another called Projectile Badge, but extra night actions don't mean much to me.
Granted, you'd need to trust my descriptions of things. I'm mostly hoping no one kills me by this point. LO's targeting of me is the kind of thing I was hoping to avoid. Hopefully it's fine.

Right now Icytea has a useful hat of mine I would like back, by lynch or by gift. 2/3 odds are very good.


Nin. I mostly want my hats so my actions are at full power. I can use up to 3 Hats per night. 2/3s of the unknown would improve my survival tremendously. As is if I don't have them by end of the day I'm going to reveal their abilities, which almost guarantees my death. They should know what they do, so if they are keeping one of them it's kinda scummy and easy to see.


Nin heydude.

None of my hats give use of two abilities at once, that's the Projectile Badge. And they're all Night Hats anyway, I checked.

[FallacyofUrist]

NQT:

FoU

I recall from previous games that you do a lot of voting analysis based on past days. Stuff like seeing who a scum player voted for after their death and comparing that to their posts, or reviewing cases made by dead town. How useful do you think that'll be this game?

Given how chaotic role powers are going to be, looking at who voted who is likely to be much more useful information than trying to untangle the night game. Do you disagree?

You do have a point there. Well, more precisely, it's more likely to be reliable. If I hypothetically have some investigative power, it can be blocked, redirected, misled, stolen, or shidazzled, but Wuba's said himself that post editing will never be a thing. None of these fancy powers are going to mess with the votecount record, and due to being reliable it's also useful. That said, the votecount record can't act like an investigative ability. I'm not going to learn the truth about Tricmagic's hat nonsense from the votecount record.

I'd ask you for your current suspicions, but from the looks of things you're still working on that, and I don't want to be a hypocrite.


LuckyOwl:

FOU: It was obvious bait to get a conversation going.  Which is such a townie vet thing to do. It's sort of his play style that I picked up from BP3. So I know he's definitely townie.

Matey. That don't jive. All it takes is scum!Tea deciding 'hey I'm gonna do this as a gambit to make people think I'm town' and your argument gets you a false read.

The most reliable reads are based on multitudes of evidence, not one single point.

You taste more like new town, though, so I'll give you a pass for today. No fries for you.

Toony:

Are you absolutely sure? I assume you're referring to Beetlejuice here. Beelzebub is not exactly the same as Beetlejuice. I will say his name only twice to be safe.

I might actually try the 'say three times' thing to see if it's real or not. Could be fun.

Torir-iel:

And you didn't even answer it. I want to know how you'll know how to use your abilities, in this case by finding the "something like a mayor" to protect, when you're relying on the night game and gambits. But by now you've answered it well enough I think: People who draw your ire by attacking you get hit with soggy fries.

Yes! Exactly! Well. Not quite.

'People who draw my ire' is correct. 'By attacking me' is not. If anything, attacking me is a good thing, because it means they're paying attention. People who draw my ire by acting as what I see as scummy will receive soggy useless very bad fries.

[TricMagic]

I halfway get the feeling FoU would love the 1-Hit Badge. To give with their fries before sending them to the afterlife behind the walls.

[FallacyofUrist]

Ay, Tric.

Actually. TricMagic.

It's not that I think you're scum (though I may later update my position) and it'll be a while before the day ends so I have some leeway to move my vote around. But I think I want more information on your votes, and a vote on you for the moment might help with that.

Why're you voting for LuckyOwl right now, and why were you voting for IcyTea before then?

Jim Groovester, ToonyMan, 4maskwolf, I also have my eyes on y'all.