Doctor Who Mafia

[redbaron]

My impression of you has generally been a lot of wagon-starting but surprisingly not voting the person you most suspect (Pmj) till you've started a bunch of other stuff.

And I'm now calling for everyone to vote Pmj? What's the problem exactly?

People's reactions to particular wagons are actually important and it's important that people aren't scared to create wagons in a plurality game, because it's just awful to have to panic-mode a lynch right before deadline.

 

[redbaron]

Like I don't know if something is maybe getting lost in translation here, but this is a plurality lynch and not majority. Which means that at the absolute end of the deadline, the most voted player is lynched.

In majority lynch, you have to reach a certain threshold or there's no lynch. In plurality lynch, sometimes votes just stay spread out for an entire day cycle and make it really, really hard to analyse who wanted what wagons. You can often end up with like 4-5 players at risk of being lynched because the votes are spread so thin, then the scum can easily pick and choose whoever they want lynched or force a no-lynch because they have 2 united players.

This game as well even has DAY-TALK on top of plurality lynch, so this occurring is VERY, VERY likely as the scum can easily plan out a vote hop whenever they want. Plurality with mafia day-talk is absurdly difficult to deal with if the town is poorly organized. In majority lynch it's not as much of an issue, because the scum-team alone can never cause a lynch.

Now #VotePmj

 

[redbaron]

And just to point it out, because of day-talk it's really easy for scum to pick and choose whether they vote together or vote separate. The best way to beat scum in plurality lynch is to get as many votes as possible onto someone who quite a few people can agree has a good chance of being scum. This makes it very hard for them to be flip-floppy about things if they do catch scum, because if you DO catch scum and get a wagon on them, their scumpartner either busses for towncredit or they avoid it to try to get someone else lynched.

Plurality lynches are often played wrong by towns because they allow scum too much wriggle room. You get shitty No Lynch results or you get scum easily hopping from one wagon to the next. The problem with this is that you often end up with say a 3-way tie and then it's hard to tell if the person switching is scum switching to town or town trying to prevent a No Lynch or whatever the fk is going on.

Plus you get multiple people who are just voting to save their own skin, which is something people do as either alignment. It's just really fucking messy and difficult to decipher who did what and why they did it. Ergo, we wagon the shit out of someone we can agree is playing scummy.

I'm willing to compromise in Plurality setups - that's why I'm fine with voting Happy. It might be that people don't scumread my strongest scumread enough to vote them, that's fine. I can compromise to a 2nd or 3rd best option to keep wagons strong. I absolutely do not want multiple weak wagons going, that's a scum buffet in a plurality voting setup.

 

[PmjPmj]

Pmj literally said he's voting me because I'm wagoning on an innocent. Think about that wording: how does he know john is innocent? It's a scumclaim/scumslip. Town players don't call innocence on non-posters, they're suspicious af. Scum move #1.

I hadn’t even given that a second thought. It’s clear that my usual ‘IDGAF’ attitude ruled supreme at the start of the game. I think you’re clutching at straws pretty hard with that one; my comment was entirely off the cuff, and simply made ‘for the lulz’ - much like most initial posts are.

Also, Pmj voted me for 'bants m8' and then directed an FoS at two other players - but look where his vote still is. He's never actually expressed suspicion of me as scum, but he keeps the vote there. Town tend to vote who they think is scum. Scum move #2

By your own logic, you too are scummy. You hopped around creating / facilitating various bandwagons, yet didn’t vote for me (your alleged ‘number one scum’) until much later in the day. Rather than make a solid case and stick to it, you cleverly cast suspicion over others too. Now that you’ve apparently won some people over, you’re a strong advocate of my lynching - and have a backup plan for when I inevitably flip green/you off.

My vote remains on you because, ultimately, you are my number one suspect. I find you to be erratic. Your accusations are akin to throwing shit at a wall and seeing what sticks. It’s very sloppy, and I don’t much like it.

You of all people know that it is my way to hang back and observe for a while before I eventually come out swinging. This hasn’t been an issue in the past. Why is it an issue now? If I claim that it’s down to inexperience and a lack of confidence in asserting views sans data, you’ll no doubt attack that argument - the truth - with some acronym or other. You might be getting good at Mafia, but you’re a shit psychologist.

Pmj says that lack of time =/= scummy necessarily. Happy then makes a post about lack of time and Pmj instantly FoS' him (but of course keeps his banter vote on me, instead of voting someone he actually finds suspicious and then they have a little meaningless discourse that says nothing, and looks like scum distancing one another from my POV. Scum move #5.

The FOS on Happy was actually me poking a little bit of fun at him. This is what I tend to do. I find that poking someone gently tends to reveal a thing or two. Again, this is my usual play style. It may not be optimal, but… I’m trying?

You accuse me of trivialising things, but I’m at least posting and helping to generate content. It isn’t like I’m sitting back and twiddling my thumbs (although I was somewhat absent last night - apologies; I got hit with unexpected work). I’m always far more interested in day 2, where patterns typically begin to reveal themselves (to me). I don’t have the luxury of experience, and I’m still learning what to look for in the early stages of a game. Like it or not, this isn’t something you can ascribe to some acronym / scum defence. It’s just the truth.

Vote Pmj

#MakeTownGreatAgain

Or not, because #townmaynotwinforonce

Your erratic behaviour and overtly ‘pro-town’ gameplay in fact makes me more suspicious of you. You have played some good scum games in the past, so I know you're a canny fucker.

It also seems reasonable to me that a scum would hide behind pro-town mantras etc. to make themselves flag up green in the eyes of others. Isn't your "Optimal town play" also optimal scum play? I think there's a fine line, no?

Also, I find it interesting to note that you have exclusively targeted the weaker and more inexperienced players here. You seem to be hunting for the sickly gazelle here, RB.

Looking for an easy bus?

At the time of writing, you’re 32 posts ahead of the second most prolific poster - me.

Shitposting to drown us, RB?

Nah, fuck off mate. My vote is staying on you. You’re quite clearly baiting the newbies into creating various busses. Note how the more experienced or reasoned players aren’t taking you on. Your tactics are obviously questionable to them, too.

You’ve even spoken about how mafia can easily jump around / kill someone off without colluding and without much effort, yet YOU have been instrumental in setting these various wagons up. You have actively contributed to create a scenario which is detrimental to town. You then make some weak ass case about me which few people believe (certainly not enough for a lynch - at this rate) and now seem to be tunnelling me. When I inevitably flip green, you can say "Whoops! My bad everyone!" and switch to someone like Cheese. Rinse and repeat.

I implore people to look at the bigger picture here. We’re being taken for a ride. RB has pretty much single-handedly ensured that the mafia have multiple targets to choose at the end of the day for an easy lynch, and we’ll have very little to go on because it'll be nigh on impossible to discern the mafia votes from the panic votes. How is this even remotely optimal for town?

It would be foolish to follow his reasoning at this rate. I sincerely believe RB is a mafia.

Clever, RB. Credit where it’s due and all that.

 

[Happy]

Just finished workies Gonna nip off and grab some takeout din-dins and then get stuck in. Back soon xx

 

[redbaron]

I hadn’t even given that a second thought. It’s clear that my usual ‘IDGAF’ attitude ruled supreme at the start of the game. I think you’re clutching at straws pretty hard with that one; my comment was entirely off the cuff, and simply made ‘for the lulz’ - much like most initial posts are.

Most initial posts are made to get a handle on how and why people say certain things. Also you're contradicting yourself here because you said you make that post as a joke and off the cuff - yet you're putting me as your #1 scumread. What's with that anyway?

By your own logic, you too are scummy. You hopped around creating / facilitating various bandwagons, yet didn’t vote for me (your alleged ‘number one scum’) until much later in the day. Rather than make a solid case and stick to it, you cleverly cast suspicion over others too. Now that you’ve apparently won some people over, you’re a strong advocate of my lynching - and have a backup plan for when I inevitably flip green/you off.

My vote remains on you because, ultimately, you are my number one suspect. I find you to be erratic. Your accusations are akin to throwing shit at a wall and seeing what sticks. It’s very sloppy, and I don’t much like it.

Nah, not even close. I stated way back in my first few posts that you were scum and I wanted you dead by end of day, but I wanted to see who took to the john wagon as well. People's responses to the strategy I push and me calling it optimal town strategy are a useful gauge to see people's alignment. Latte's responses indicate he's town, smithcommajohn as well. Minuend is town and Cheese is annoying because he's not actually reading my posts properly, but their concerns are town from my POV.

Helvete tacking onto my wagon without explaining his own scumread or providing original thoughts gets him scumpoints, but I'm not worried about that until you flip.

I've got at least 4 fairly strong townreads, which means the lynch pool comes from 4 other players for me. It's an added bonus that the lynchpool I want has 2-3 people being scumlords at the same time.

Also, me having 4 strong townreads completely ruins your idea that I'm "trying to see what sticks". The difference between you and me here is that I'm creating a townblock while simultaneously trying to find scum. I'm seeing who looks likely scum target, while simultaneously seeing who looks likely town.

You of all people know that it is my way to hang back and observe for a while before I eventually come out swinging. This hasn’t been an issue in the past. Why is it an issue now? If I claim that it’s down to inexperience and a lack of confidence in asserting views sans data, you’ll no doubt attack that argument - the truth - with some acronym or other. You might be getting good at Mafia, but you’re a shit psychologist.

My read on you has nothing to do with what I 'expect' from you anyway and everything to do with the way you've played this particular game, but since you mention it you actually aren't playing much like your previous town games.

To be sure, the arrogant swagger is almost completely gone. Statements like, "welcome to the tunnel " and replaced by, "I sincerely believe RB is a mafia".

I probably wouldn't even bring that up if you didn't yourself because I generally make a point of keeping my reads related to the game I'm in and I don't find 2 games to be a good way to get a handle on someone's meta, but since you're trying to use it as a defence I'm going to counter it.

And tbh the fact that your go-to defence is meta-related when my entire case was related to this specific game? Scum move #6.

Your erratic behaviour and overtly ‘pro-town’ gameplay in fact makes me more suspicious of you. You have played some good scum games in the past, so I know you're a canny fucker.

It also seems reasonable to me that a scum would hide behind pro-town mantras etc. to make themselves flag up green in the eyes of others. Isn't your "Optimal town play" also optimal scum play? I think there's a fine line, no?

Also, I find it interesting to note that you have exclusively targeted the weaker and more inexperienced players here. You seem to be hunting for the sickly gazelle here, RB.

Looking for an easy bus?

At the time of writing, you’re 32 posts ahead of the second most prolific poster - me.

Shitposting to drown us, RB?

Nah, fuck off mate. My vote is staying on you. You’re quite clearly baiting the newbies into creating various busses. Note how the more experienced or reasoned players aren’t taking you on. Your tactics are obviously questionable to them, too.

You’ve even spoken about how mafia can easily jump around / kill someone off without colluding and without much effort, yet YOU have been instrumental in setting these various wagons up. You have actively contributed to create a scenario which is detrimental to town. You then make some weak ass case about me which few people believe (certainly not enough for a lynch - at this rate) and now seem to be tunnelling me. When I inevitably flip green, you can say "Whoops! My bad everyone!" and switch to someone like Cheese. Rinse and repeat.

There's nothing erratic about it.

> get on my john wagon, it's optimal strategy right now
> Pmj is the end of day lynch though
> Happy chainsaw defends Pmj
> vote Pmj or Happy, doesn't really matter
> Pmj is biggest scumread, so kill him first

Also what do you mean I'm targeting the inexperienced and weaker players? My top scumreads are Pmj/Happy/Helvete. Experience has zero to do with it.

Plus Cheese isn't the one I'd be switching to if you flipped green

Not to mention that flipping to someone who was part of a town wagon is something any player would do regardless of alignment. Like if I was town and called a lynch on town, then I'd obviously suspect others on the wagon as being scum.

How is it scummy to think someone who was part of lynching town, is scummy? That point makes zero sense because obviously if I'm town and we lynch you and you flip town, the place I'd first look for scum would be on this wagon.

 

[redbaron]

Also you're going to have to do better than complain I'm being mean and you're trying hard to be good. Newb scum players get by on that one very commonly. Yellow recently gave an experienced town a real good spanking by playing the, "don't shoot me, I'm new and confused!" card all the way from start to finish.

Scum move #7.

 

[PmjPmj]

Also you're going to have to do better than complain I'm being mean and you're trying hard to be good. Newb scum players get by on that one very commonly. Yellow recently gave an experienced town a real good spanking by playing the, "don't shoot me, I'm new and confused!" card all the way from start to finish.

Scum move #7.

Being mean? I'm simply stating a fact. I actually complemented you on being a canny fucker. Don't try to paint me as playing the victim card here. Facts, m8. Jezzus Krist.

I'll get back to you in a bit. Legit RL stuff. Just wanted to comment on that.

(fanny).

 

[redbaron]

Oh god is this gonna turn into some super long multi-quote battle?

 

[Minuend]

Could this be a cheese - pmj thing?

Cheese is making cases, but I remain unconvinced of the weight of the arguments. To me it could as easily be trying to find things to use while being scum. He's not "clearing" me as town as others are, either. Why do I come off as a fairly strong town to others, but not cheese? Is it just so he can throw suspicious on me later? So he leaves it open?

Note he's not reading pmj as scum, which doesn't necessarily mean anything in itself, but if we vote pmj and he flips red, cheese is bumped up on my suspicion meter (I don't know what the fuck a suspicion meter is but I have it ok ??)

And pmj's response to RB. Is this an preemptive move to clear cheese if he goes down? Because we wouldn't think he'd say cheese if it was cheese after seeing pmj flip red, right? It's something I could imagine cheese and pmj discuss in daychat to try to meta in there so cheese would have an easier time to clear himself later.

You have actively contributed to create a scenario which is detrimental to town. You then make some weak ass case about me which few people believe (certainly not enough for a lynch - at this rate) and now seem to be tunnelling me. When I inevitably flip green, you can say "Whoops! My bad everyone!" and switch to someone like Cheese. Rinse and repeat.

Spoiler

Please note the defensiveness I was talking about in Happy had nothing to do with timing or absence. It was that he basically started this game by saying, "Guys, don't be suspicious of me because of this very-flawed-bit-of-reasoning/BS." THAT is the defensiveness I'm talking about.

Yeah, I was talking about the concept of preemptive defense, not absence. Absence was an example of how you were thinking ahead

---

I looked over some of the previous posts again, and I agree Happy's post haven't been saying much. And reading it all over again, this came kinda out of "nowhere"

I get the feeling PmjPmj and Rook are working together as Daleks.

Idk. I'm on hold on Happy.

---

One of the worries I have is that so far is that we "coincidentally" have targeted those who were most active in the beginning, while once again those who has a time zone or didn't post much initially once again flies under the radar. If they are scum with a good town game, then they're nice and comfy where they are. Like Latte has 5 posts? Not even minimum with less than 24 hours left. I'm not saying he seems suspicious, only that he is nice and comfy no-suspicion-low-post situation. I have a null read on Latte as of now.

But let's not get distracted from the current mess. 1 day remaining.

-----

I haven't really read a good case against RB, but at the same time, if RB is scum it's worrisome he manages to sway the wagontrain so easily.

At this point I'd be willing to lynch pmj and if he flips green RB is obvious target for suspicion day 2. It's shit if we lynch a power role, but weighing that against what we potentially learn from lynching pmj ... . A no lynch is off the table in a game set up like this?

RB's opinions and method also makes sense to me as pro-town. But there's also the chance he's taking advantage of the dominating newbieness and manages to control everyone by being assertive and convincing. We'll see, I guess

/vote pmj

VOTE smithcommajohn

We can take a hit. Only Daleks should be willing to risk a mislynch.

VOTE COUNT[/B]
​

Smithcommajohn (1) - Smithcommajohn

lol

I'm.... actually buying this.. for now...

 

[Minuend]

A no lynch is off the table in a game set up like this?

I mean as in whether it's strategic unwisely, not as in whether it's against the rules. Because I read it's not against the rules

 

[redbaron]

As far as I'm concerned these games right now are good for people to get used to the game and see why it's enjoyable. While the following doesn't mean that much when my alignment is still unknown, but I'd never try to a win a game like this by duping inexperienced players with lies about strategy or whatever. It's a pointless thing that I'd be doing just to squeeze out a single win (as people would then instantly adapt to it), but I wouldn't get any sense of accomplishment from tricking newbs in this way and it's likely to demotivate people.

So no, it's not a legit thing to scumread me on. It's a shitty thing to do so if that's the basis of a scumread on me, it's wrong. It's just short-term gratification type playstyle that I don't engage in, nor do I think I even need to engage in it to be effective in this game.

I also think that longterm it just makes you worse since you're basically only winning via a crutch and manipulating people, as opposed to getting better at playing the game itself.

 

[redbaron]

@minuend, talk to me about Latte. Can you point out specific posts you dislike?

 

[redbaron]

Just finished workies Gonna nip off and grab some takeout din-dins and then get stuck in. Back soon xx

*waiting intensifies*

 

[redbaron]

I mean as in whether it's strategic unwisely, not as in whether it's against the rules. Because I read it's not against the rules

There's times where a No Lynch is okay. In a situation where it's Mislynch and Lose, it's a viable tactic to have a No Lynch vote: this means that if you have a power role, they can get another investigation potentially.

Or you might have a Doctor who gets lucky and protects the NK target.

If the NK goes through, town is still alive except the lynch pool is smaller. Say the game is 1scum 3town. In this situation, simply by voting anybody not themselves, the town players have a 33% chance of hitting scum.

If 1 player dies to NK and makes it 1v2, then simply by not voting for themselves, town players have a 50% chance of hitting scum.

So it's sometimes good to No Lynch if you just can't get a good read on anybody and you'd just be making a 'blind' vote without any sort of certainty. By lessening the lynch pool or by tracking who gets NK'd, you might gain some more clarity and if not: you've got better chance of hitting scum by sheer dumb luck as well.

 

[Happy]

Just read the thread. About to start replying - first post will be a multi-quote extravaganza. Apologies in advance.

 

[cheese]

RB
This is posted more for the rest of Town so my thoughts are transparent:

Spoiler

Previous formatting in my earlier reply may have been confusing because I was on phone, but I didn't misread your posts.

Why are you voting Happy instead of your 100% scum read?

...I'm not?

Yeah, you're not *now*. You're voting Pmj, *now*. I know that. I wasn't talking about right now but a previous post.

Why are you voting Happy instead of your 100% scum read in this post:

If I was a dayvig I'd literaly shoot Pmj right now, I was 100% serious about him being scum.

Cheese's vote on Happy is actually good. Happy's made a few lengthy posts and said basically nothing of value to the town. He's also chainsaw defending Pmj. I'm saying Pmj is very scum and should be lynched, Happy starts scumreading me and discrediting me.

There's also a big difference between how you're pressuring me and what Happy's doing right now Minu, that's why you're not the person chainsaw defending Pmj right now.

People should be voting Pmj or Happy at this point.

/Vote Happy

Then I wrote this (better strung together now):

"This was the post I was referring to. 100% serious, would actually shoot him now if you could, but you voted Happy? Why? Why are you voting Happy instead of your 100% scum read? The incongruity of your extreme certainty on Pmj and then your Happy vote, in the same post, struck me."

I then quoted one of Pmj's supposed scum tells, according to you:

Also, Pmj voted me for 'bants m8' and then directed an FoS at two other players - but look where his vote still is. He's never actually expressed suspicion of me as scum, but he keeps the vote there. Town tend to vote who they think is scum. Scum move #2

to point out you were doing something similar. You're not voting who you think is (most likely) scum, but someone who you think:

Happy should realistically be null to anyone not seeing his chainsaw defense.

ie, someone that Town probably shouldn't be lynching for any reason other than yours (iirc, only Helv buys the "Happy's chainsaw-defending Pmj" argument).

Then, despite Happy being in the lead for lynching with 3 votes (one of which was yours), john gave the first vote to Pmj and you then switched as well.

Why is this? Your voting seemed erratic to me. You said you wanted Pmj dead from the outset but weren't voting him to start with, despite you claiming Town votes who they think are scum.

I saw plausible answers in your other posts but preferred you answer me directly (rather than me making assumptions for you).

However, as Pmj's now made more or less the same points as I have and you've responded somewhat convincingly, I'm laying off this for now. I need to get to other players.

And I'd like to clear up the facts in my paragraph from earlier, as promised:

Spoiler

TOWN, PLEASE TAKE WITH A PINCH OF SALT (based on memory not firm facts):
Wagon-hopping in particular I'll have to get to later cos I'm on my phone and can't easily check your vote history. From memory though you voted John off the bat then started pressuring people to do the same for no reason. Then you voted me, Happy, Pmj and possibly more. I think you've voted more than any other player though I'll confirm this later (and quote this paragraph for any corrections). My impression of you has generally been a lot of wagon-starting but surprisingly not voting the person you most suspect (Pmj) till you've started a bunch of other stuff.

Here is RB's vote history:
John (following Rook), and lots of pressure for others to join with no reason given. [Helv votes John then unvotes.]
Cheese, after Happy votes me. Your reason is clumpiness.
Happy, after I vote Happy. Your reason is his argument about being subbed in. This is also at the end of a post about being 100% certain of ScumPmj. You also failed to respond to Min's pressure on you to clarify who you'd vote for if you had to right now: Helv, Pmj or Rook. You said you'd shoot him if you could, but that's not an option. Instead, you voted Happy.[Helv votes Happy next.]
Pmj, after smith votes him. [Helv votes Pmj next.]

At 4 this is more votes than any other player at the time, and much more than almost all players. Next is Helv with 3 - he switched his vote to yours on all but me - then Rook with 2. Everyone else sits at 1.

Lastly, town strategy:

Spoiler

Your "optimal town strategy" is also pretty good for scum. You've created a bunch of wagons scum can use to pick off other players easily when whoever is lynched today most likely flips green. You have little belief in intpf's Town abilities, and you believe you'll be NK'd soon. So how is creating this kind of confusion useful for a Town which isn't experienced enough to analyse the patterns in this chaos properly when you, the main player capable of analysing vote patterns and making good reads, are going to be killed soon?

Please explain again how this strategy of multiple strong wagons by strongly encouraging people to vote with little reason, producing multiple "suspects" (the voters) in later lynches, is any more indicative of town strategy than scum strategy for an inexperienced town, let alone more *useful* for town rather than scum.

This is a real request, not snark; I want clarification. Like we've said to Sinny: it doesn't matter if you're right if you can't explain it to everyone else. Because everyone else needs to see it for it to work. Even if we're all idiots and this is intuitive to you and other experienced players, it needs to be explained for a shot at all of us pulling together and winning.

It looks like a lot of chaos atm.

---Hang on, looks like you've just responded to a similar line of questioning. You're trying to teach us proper strategy regardless of if we win?

As far as I'm concerned these games right now are good for people to get used to the game and see why it's enjoyable. While the following doesn't mean that much when my alignment is still unknown, but I'd never try to a win a game like this by duping inexperienced players with lies about strategy or whatever. It's a pointless thing that I'd be doing just to squeeze out a single win (as people would then instantly adapt to it), but I wouldn't get any sense of accomplishment from tricking newbs in this way and it's likely to demotivate people.

So no, it's not a legit thing to scumread me on. It's a shitty thing to do so if that's the basis of a scumread on me, it's wrong. It's just short-term gratification type playstyle that I don't engage in, nor do I think I even need to engage in it to be effective in this game.

I also think that longterm it just makes you worse since you're basically only winning via a crutch and manipulating people, as opposed to getting better at playing the game itself.

Still want an answer though.

RB's a slight town-leaning read for me atm.

-----------

I'll be getting to the other players next.

 

[cheese]

To clarify, I only want an answer on the last spoiler (town strategy and whether yours is actually helpful for us).

 

[Minuend]

Thanks for the clarification regarding no lynch

Spoiler

As far as I'm concerned these games right now are good for people to get used to the game and see why it's enjoyable. While the following doesn't mean that much when my alignment is still unknown, but I'd never try to a win a game like this by duping inexperienced players with lies about strategy or whatever. It's a pointless thing that I'd be doing just to squeeze out a single win (as people would then instantly adapt to it), but I wouldn't get any sense of accomplishment from tricking newbs in this way and it's likely to demotivate people.

So no, it's not a legit thing to scumread me on. It's a shitty thing to do so if that's the basis of a scumread on me, it's wrong. It's just short-term gratification type playstyle that I don't engage in, nor do I think I even need to engage in it to be effective in this game.

I also think that longterm it just makes you worse since you're basically only winning via a crutch and manipulating people, as opposed to getting better at playing the game itself.

That's going to psychologically rape all the newbies if you turn out to be scum lol



(Hid it because so large quote)

As for Latte's first post he said Helvete's attitude changed based on worry... ~7 hours into the game. Even if helvete was scum, why would he be worried 7 hours into the game?? I was wondering whether Helvete would make that point himself. I don't want to speculate in Latte's intentions, because they might be pro-town and I don't want to ruin his plan if so.

Other than that, I think Latte isn't helping town enough at this point, clarifying the pmj thing. It would be helpful if Latte put his reasoning abilities to work and told us whether he'd be willing to vote pmj as well and why/ not. Right now he's just explained what some things might come off as, which could be helpful combined with an analysis of behavior up to this point. But right now, to me, it's more like someone stating facts when is being asked an opinion.

"What do you think of Paris?"
"Paris is the capital of France"

 

[redbaron]

Your "optimal town strategy" is also pretty good for scum. You've created a bunch of wagons scum can use to pick off other players easily when whoever is lynched today most likely flips green. You have little belief in intpf's Town abilities, and you believe you'll be NK'd soon. So how is creating this kind of confusion useful for a Town which isn't experienced enough to analyse the patterns in this chaos properly when you, the main player capable of analysing vote patterns and making good reads, are going to be killed soon?

It's not really good for scum and it creates a lot less confusion, actually. I'm not asking for multiple wagons like you seem to think, I'm making an effort to get as many people on 1-2 wagons. That's why I wanted to make votes 'clumpy' - more people on less wagons.

That said, I want to make sure I vote and try to lynch my scumreads moreso than have 'clumpy' votes. And the ideal goal is obviously to get clumpy votes on my scumreads.

I picked John because Rook was already on it and I had no read on him at all due to him not posting. That means there's a 75% chance I'm picking a town target to juxtapose with my strongest scumread in Pmj.

What I wanted to see was who got on the John wagon. I wanted to see it really gain momentum and see how many votes would go onto this opportunistic wagon on a likely Town player. Then I wanted to see what happens when I push a case for my strongest scumread and try to get people onto THAT wagon. Thing is, if I hit scum and those scum are on the John wagon? That John wagon becomes VERY hard to derail unless someone busses. I'm likely to see chainsaw defence from the scumpartner if I've hit scum.

Other telling things can happen if I've hit a Town vs. Town situation. Both wagons might just end up competing, scum might start to townread one or both of them even when one of them is totally doomed (dat towncred) and so on and so forth.

This is what naturally happens in a majority lynch game - but it doesn't necessarily happen in a plurality lynch game. I'm explaining all this now btw, because the strategy I wanted to happen never happened so there's no need to hide it.

But the point is, by creating a lot of pressure on multiple slots - you also create pressure on the scum. They're forced to act, to make decisions and to then defend the reasoning for those decisions. They can be pulled apart and their motivations and ideas can be analyzed. If everyone followed the strategy, we would have FORCED scum to come out of the woodwork.

The strategy has holes if scum see it coming, but they're still forced to interact. Also by picking a player that hadn't interacted yet, I was (attempting) to create a lot of pressure on that player that FORCES them to respond. We can then infer their likely alignment from those responses, that's how the game works.

Please explain again how this strategy of multiple strong wagons by strongly encouraging people to vote with little reason, producing multiple "suspects" (the voters) in later lynches, is any more indicative of town strategy than scum strategy for an inexperienced town, let alone more *useful* for town rather than scum.

I think I've outlined above why this is good for town.

Scum strategy in plurality is often to meander about and to create lots of small little wagons competing, as opposed to drawing lots of attention via big wagons.

The scum won't _necessarily_ play this strategy, but say they did: they've just been countered. I can't know if that's their strategy or not, but I'm pre-empting and cutting off one of their options (or trying to anyway).

I wouldn't suggest this strategy as scum in a game like this, because it'd involve me falsely posturing as some experienced town beacon and then if I go on to win the game, everyone just thinks I'm a dickhead/I lied to them.

Moreover I'd get no pleasure from resorting to such a tactic as scum and this is after all, a game at the end of the day. I'd consider it a failure if I were to fake a good town strategy as scum, to beat a bunch of inexperienced players who presumably want to learn the game.

 

[cheese]

Min,
I haven't strongly town-read you because a) I didn't have time to look through your stuff fully, and b) your arguments are very vague "what if" scenarios. They're not really things that can be tested or clarified easily, but they *are* useful for leading town down paranoid rabbit trails of while ignoring larger patterns.

I could just as well ask why you don't town-read me if RB thinks we're both town.

Ftr, I don't see you as scum. At worst, you're null, but I'm definitely leaning town on you. The vague paranoia combined with your newness to the game, along with your stream-of-consciousness writing come across very much like someone thinking through possible ramifications of various players' behaviour for the first time, rather than actively trying to mislead.

Could this be a cheese - pmj thing?

Cheese is making cases, but I remain unconvinced of the weight of the arguments. To me it could as easily be trying to find things to use while being scum. He's not "clearing" me as town as others are, either. Why do I come off as a fairly strong town to others, but not cheese? Is it just so he can throw suspicious on me later? So he leaves it open?

It's not so I can throw suspicion on you later. I also haven't "cleared" a bunch of others who I haven't fully read. I mentioned you in passing - should've made this clearer. RB and Happy have taken most of my attention so far - the others have just been general impressions, which I intend to solidify by going through their filters.

Note he's not reading pmj as scum, which doesn't necessarily mean anything in itself, but if we vote pmj and he flips red, cheese is bumped up on my suspicion meter (I don't know what the fuck a suspicion meter is but I have it ok ??)

And pmj's response to RB. Is this an preemptive move to clear cheese if he goes down? Because we wouldn't think he'd say cheese if it was cheese after seeing pmj flip red, right? It's something I could imagine cheese and pmj discuss in daychat to try to meta in there so cheese would have an easier time to clear himself later.

Like meta-framing? Assuming town has the assumption that scum wouldn't so obviously defend their scumbuddy in public, then acting on Town's assumption by publicly scum-buddying anyway would clear me because I could claim to be framed?

This is an interesting thought, but not one I can defend against, because there's no way I can prove or disprove it, or give it greater or smaller probability till I analyse everything fully.

---

Now on to my actual read on you:
Town:
You thought at the beginning we should pressure more than one person
Discounted non-players' motivations (dismissed Happy's argument)
Paranoid about another player's (RB) compliment and staying firm on your vote of them
Tried to pin RB's votes down
Wanted to sort out Pmj-Helv-Rook confusion (I agree, this is important)
Noticed Rook backing off

Dalek:
Vague accusations useful for sowing doubt. But tbh, this is probably a good thing if it comes to players who haven't received much attention yet (like me).

In short, much more pro-town play than Daleky play imo.

 

[cheese]

Thanks RB, that's a good answer and mostly what I was looking for.

 

[Minuend]

Just to clarify; I didn't mean you should strong town read me, only that it was odd everyone was "clearing" me for now while you expressed doubts based on something I had to go back and read but I can't find where you said it. Did I confuse your post with someone elses? Or did I misread completely it being early morning?

 

[Minuend]

Yeah, I can't find it. Sorry, I must've brainderped or something

 

[cheese]

It happens

 

[Happy]

I'll begin on the defense, then move on to other thoughts in subsequent posts this evening (maybe)

Responses to each post will be colour-referenced, with white being just general text. Colour coding of each response will relate only to the quote above it.

Don't try and read tone from the colours, I'm going with ROYGBIV because rainbows. I will not be casting any votes in this post, so don't think too hard on the blue...

Happy and RB are scum. Called it.

Also Helvete. Also possibly pmj. Also maybe Rook, if I feel like it.

No but seriously, what the fuck is up with Happy's defense of himself? He subbed in for someone else so it must've been a boring role and therefore not scum? WHAT THE FUCK kind of defense is that? I'm with Min here, I'm not going to accept any kind of bullshit psychy speculations into an *external* person's motivations as any sort of 'evidence' IN GAME. And he *opens* with that, which comes across incredibly defensive.

Latte's points about Helv were interesting to ponder, and I am getting a funny vibe about Helv atm. But nothing is as convincing so far as Happy's weirdass opener.

Explain yourself.

Vote Happy

That said, I'm going to bed too. I left this far too late. I'll be back on tomorrow though.

Called wrong

Actually, it wasnt a defence. I was hoping to get a dialogue going to see how people would react. Turns out that it lost people's trust in me. I'd like to point out though, that it IS evidence. At that point in the game it was the only EVENT that had taken place. Its the only FACT in the pool of speculation. It was never a defence, nor did I claim it to be. Perceiving it as a defence is the first flaw in your reasoning. I don't know why Sinny bailed, but she did and I took her place. That is evidence. How you interpret it is entirely up to you.

If I was a dayvig I'd literaly shoot Pmj right now, I was 100% serious about him being scum.

Cheese's vote on Happy is actually good. Happy's made a few lengthy posts and said basically nothing of value to the town. He's also chainsaw defending Pmj. I'm saying Pmj is very scum and should be lynched, Happy starts scumreading me and discrediting me.

There's also a big difference between how you're pressuring me and what Happy's doing right now Minu, that's why you're not the person chainsaw defending Pmj right now.

People should be voting Pmj or Happy at this point.

/Vote Happy

And that's a problem how? It was early in the game and there's barely anything to go from at that point. I didn't SAY anything, but I made vague speculations, which got conversation rolling, which is what I intended to do. Only, I didn't intend for it to become votes against me. I was quite shocked (read: bemused) when I discovered that.

No. I wasn't chainsaw defending anyone. If I was, it's pretty pathetic chainsaw defending and I should be ashamed. No, I saw abstract patterns in the way Rook/PMJ talked to each other, and then in the way RB/PMJ talked to each other. I had a suspicion, I voiced it.

I'll admit, I'm much less convinced of my suspicion now, but I'm not willing to discount it yet.

I explained why I retracted my vote which is different to how pmj questioned you about why you rand voted john (which would make strat apparent to daleks). Whilst I see why this is pretty scummy behaviour it also occurs to me that it could easily be poor town play lacking understanding why things are done rather than actually doing them.
These are things that I myself are just coming to understand (as I've not really bothered reading wiki's and just learnt from playing, I know I'm super lazy). Basically whilst now I definitely see why the behaviour is fishy I want to see more before I can be sure that's definitely scum.

I am not aware of any patterns you may have noticed between pmj and I but I have a pretty strange schedule within my own time zone and I have no idea about pmj's but I don't see how seeing patterns or overlap would be suspicious or indicate we're a scum team. By this logic you could pair either one of us with anyone you notice to be online at the same time, which would allow for a great many possibilities. Just so you know I usually work in the evenings and alternate between sleeping at night or at day before work, so I usually either get up for work and stay up after or use my time during the mornings.

[INSERT HAPPY QUOTE HERE - cbf going back and doing it properly]

This post however is absolutely awful reasoning. People leave because they have things more serious to attend to than a game and this isn't alignment indicative. There has already been a game where both scum had to swap out because they had genuine reasons not to play, not because of alignment.

Presenting this as to why it would be more unlikely for you to be scum and then making some fluff posts and telling others to just continue discussion is ridiculous so for now...

Vote Happy

lol ditto. we don't need no strategy guide. we're grown men. [insert grown man sounds in the hope someone believes it]

It's not reasoning, it's a suggestion. For all I know, Sinny might have had some IRL shit to do. But please acknowledge that it was (probably too late now) worth a discussion, because it is literally the only concrete fact in this game so far. It's worth speculation...

How is any of that ridiculous? As far as I can see, those are all valid things to do, and I really can't see any reason that substantiates a vote.

Just a few notes:

@John: Right now the best path is to determine who is Dalek.
Cooperation, questioning and analysis of player actions/behaviors is key in this aspect.

It would be prudent to study the entire game, instead of focusing solely on those who point fingers at oneself, regardless of the manner in which they do so.

Usually I would class someone who focuses solely on their attackers as very suspect, but I assume you are completely new to this, so this kind of behavior can be expected from someone new.

Therefore the current problem with such behavior is that it does not contribute to the collective purging of Daleks.

So: Who thus far seem the most sincere to you in attempting to determine the identity of Daleks?
Who's actions and behavior breeds suspicion in your mind?

Answering these questions, and asking questions of your own, are the stepping stones to fostering useful collaboration and detecting Daleks..

***Re: Happy- I do not find his 'subbed in' defense a definite indication of Dalekism as others have. It's not a faultless statement, but in itself it may be an effort to establish a solid base of certainty within the village.

I would never absolve someone who use the 'subbed in so role boring' argument, but they have not come under fire before posting that, I would at least expect a Dalek to use such a defense once they come under fire, not from the very start when no one has even pegged them as suspicious.

If happy is a Dalek, this has been a very erroneous move on their part. Studying their further play is a better way to see whether it was a Dalek blunder or a flimsy attempt at establishing a modicum of certainty for other villagers.

@Redbaron:

Your reasoning for the Happy vote makes no sense to me.

I do no see instances of Happy chainsaw defending PMJ, in fact Happy seemed to have pegged PMJ/Rook as the likeliest Daleks, following PMJ's FOS.

While Happy's reasoning Re: that does not make sense to me, your analysis of him defending PMJ seems incorrect, so i have to wonder whether your Happy vote is not simply to enter onto the Cheese/Minu wagon.

In lue of this, redbaron seems more suspicious to me, although I would value their input on this.

This was pretty much my logic in making those statements. I never expected absolution.

I think RB's basis for the chainsaw defending was that I suspected PMJ in both claims, but having thrown other names into the mix, indicated a potential link to PMJ (who, for the record, I no longer have substantial suspicions of). In my opinion, this is a half-baked attempt at pattern recognition (or I've just misread it - I don't really care too much about it either way).

Happy is following Pmj's FoS, while throwing shade at me and saying I'm suspicious. Don't really care which one we kill now.

We're not conspiring against you, if that's what you think. Besides, I threw suspicion at 3 players. You may not have realised this, but you're not the centre of attention. I don't see how me including you in a group of 3 suspects early in the game makes me most worthy of lynching. Seems scummy.

Also @smithcommajohn

If people don't switch to this Pmj wagon, we switch to Happy. He has 2 votes and if the people voting Happy or me won't get on Pmj, we get on Happy. Also I'm Vanilla Town and if this comes down to No Lynch or myself, I'll self-vote so the town can get info. That's a really shit situation to be in but as Vanilla Town I'd rather info die than have No Lynch - especially since I'm a likely NK target anyway.

Based on what? Because there's already votes on me and you want to convince people to do what's easy instead of what's right? Nonsense.

You do this every game. How do you even expect anyone to believe it.

Reinforcing it doesn't make it any better. It's really suspicious. Do you not even see it? (sorry, its not a personal attack, this has just been irking me for a while)

I hadn’t even given that a second thought. It’s clear that my usual ‘IDGAF’ attitude ruled supreme at the start of the game. I think you’re clutching at straws pretty hard with that one; my comment was entirely off the cuff, and simply made ‘for the lulz’ - much like most initial posts are.



By your own logic, you too are scummy. You hopped around creating / facilitating various bandwagons, yet didn’t vote for me (your alleged ‘number one scum’) until much later in the day. Rather than make a solid case and stick to it, you cleverly cast suspicion over others too. Now that you’ve apparently won some people over, you’re a strong advocate of my lynching - and have a backup plan for when I inevitably flip green/you off.

My vote remains on you because, ultimately, you are my number one suspect. I find you to be erratic. Your accusations are akin to throwing shit at a wall and seeing what sticks. It’s very sloppy, and I don’t much like it.

You of all people know that it is my way to hang back and observe for a while before I eventually come out swinging. This hasn’t been an issue in the past. Why is it an issue now? If I claim that it’s down to inexperience and a lack of confidence in asserting views sans data, you’ll no doubt attack that argument - the truth - with some acronym or other. You might be getting good at Mafia, but you’re a shit psychologist.



The FOS on Happy was actually me poking a little bit of fun at him. This is what I tend to do. I find that poking someone gently tends to reveal a thing or two. Again, this is my usual play style. It may not be optimal, but… I’m trying?

You accuse me of trivialising things, but I’m at least posting and helping to generate content. It isn’t like I’m sitting back and twiddling my thumbs (although I was somewhat absent last night - apologies; I got hit with unexpected work). I’m always far more interested in day 2, where patterns typically begin to reveal themselves (to me). I don’t have the luxury of experience, and I’m still learning what to look for in the early stages of a game. Like it or not, this isn’t something you can ascribe to some acronym / scum defence. It’s just the truth.





Or not, because #townmaynotwinforonce

Your erratic behaviour and overtly ‘pro-town’ gameplay in fact makes me more suspicious of you. You have played some good scum games in the past, so I know you're a canny fucker.

It also seems reasonable to me that a scum would hide behind pro-town mantras etc. to make themselves flag up green in the eyes of others. Isn't your "Optimal town play" also optimal scum play? I think there's a fine line, no?

Also, I find it interesting to note that you have exclusively targeted the weaker and more inexperienced players here. You seem to be hunting for the sickly gazelle here, RB.

Looking for an easy bus?

At the time of writing, you’re 32 posts ahead of the second most prolific poster - me.

Shitposting to drown us, RB?

Nah, fuck off mate. My vote is staying on you. You’re quite clearly baiting the newbies into creating various busses. Note how the more experienced or reasoned players aren’t taking you on. Your tactics are obviously questionable to them, too.

You’ve even spoken about how mafia can easily jump around / kill someone off without colluding and without much effort, yet YOU have been instrumental in setting these various wagons up. You have actively contributed to create a scenario which is detrimental to town. You then make some weak ass case about me which few people believe (certainly not enough for a lynch - at this rate) and now seem to be tunnelling me. When I inevitably flip green, you can say "Whoops! My bad everyone!" and switch to someone like Cheese. Rinse and repeat.

I implore people to look at the bigger picture here. We’re being taken for a ride. RB has pretty much single-handedly ensured that the mafia have multiple targets to choose at the end of the day for an easy lynch, and we’ll have very little to go on because it'll be nigh on impossible to discern the mafia votes from the panic votes. How is this even remotely optimal for town?

It would be foolish to follow his reasoning at this rate. I sincerely believe RB is a mafia.

Clever, RB. Credit where it’s due and all that.

I figured thats what it was. I was happy to play along. Didn't expect it to actually become a thing though lol

I'm over this post and can't be bothered proofreading it. Please forgive any erroneous colour-coding.

 

[Minuend]

It happens

Your post is still appreciated, though, and more posts usually help getting to the bottom of things so don't consider it a waste of time. (Sorry again ..._...)

But enough about that, let's continue

I need to eat breakfast, will be back

 

[redbaron]

And that's a problem how? It was early in the game and there's barely anything to go from at that point. I didn't SAY anything, but I made vague speculations, which got conversation rolling, which is what I intended to do. Only, I didn't intend for it to become votes against me. I was quite shocked (read: bemused) when I discovered that.

You really don't see how it's a problem that you make a bunch of lengthy posts and none of them contain pro-town content? To boot, that next long post is just defense and guarded explanation.

Thing is, after making a number of long posts you'd usually get something indicative of alignment. Some hint that a player is trying to figure out the game, manipulate people or something. A player making decent amount of contribution with a total lack of that, is reason enough to lynch someone.

About the only thing I've seen is you weakly contest my Pmj scumread and/or throw shade in the direction of a Pmj/RB scumteam. A Pmj/RB scumteam is like the most unlikely thing in the world right now. It's a conclusion that's so unintuitive/unreasonable that it makes me think you know Pmj's going to flip red and you're playing it off as though you're not his buddy.

 

[redbaron]

Happy, what's your opinion on Pmj's case on me? I want to know what alignment you think each player in the game is. A simple list of player names and "Town/Scum/Null" will do fine.

 

[Yellow]

Yellow is my color. Dont use it.

 

[Happy]

You really don't see how it's a problem that you make a bunch of lengthy posts and none of them contain pro-town content? To boot, that next long post is just defense and guarded explanation.

Thing is, after making a number of long posts you'd usually get something indicative of alignment. Some hint that a player is trying to figure out the game, manipulate people or something. A player making decent amount of contribution with a total lack of that, is reason enough to lynch someone.

About the only thing I've seen is you weakly contest my Pmj scumread and/or throw shade in the direction of a Pmj/RB scumteam. A Pmj/RB scumteam is like the most unlikely thing in the world right now. It's a conclusion that's so unintuitive/unreasonable that it makes me think you know Pmj's going to flip red and you're playing it off as though you're not his buddy.

Sure, i'll pay no pro-town content. However, there is also no anti-town content to build a case on either. TBH I don't really feel much alignment to town, and probably wont until day 2 - I don't see this as an issue. I'm playing for my own interests, which at the moment are survival to day 2.

Sure, if you want to play it that way, lynch away - lets see how it bodes for your perfect town strategy. I've addressed every accusation made against me, and abstained from making accusations for the most part because I haven't made any solid decisions on why I should make a move. Classic ENTP behaviour.

That's false. I haven't contested your PMJ scumread. Also, I 'threw shade' in the direction of two possible alliances, which were PMJ/RB and PMJ/Rook. I'm not playing with some anti-RB agenda, nor am I honing in on you, but you're beginning to give me pretty good reason to with your inconsistent claims.

This is a pretty flimsy claim, seeing as how the reasoning behind it was false to begin with. Please try again later.

Up next is my response to your subsequent post.

 

[redbaron]

Sure, i'll pay no pro-town content. However, there is also no anti-town content to build a case on either.

............

 

[Happy]

Happy, what's your opinion on Pmj's case on me? I want to know what alignment you think each player in the game is. A simple list of player names and "Town/Scum/Null" will do fine.

I will give this to you, because you asked reasonably, but I don't have any Town or Scum reads as yet, so I will order it by level of suspicion I have for that player.

I'm beginning to like this colour coding thing (I'm foruming on a PC and not my phone for the first time in like, forever) so my colours are as follows:
HIGHLY SUSPICIOUS
MODERATELY SUSPICIOUS
INSIGNIFICANTLY SUSPICIOUS

Rook
Redbaron
Helvete
Cheese
Smithcommajohn
Happy
Minuend
Latte
PMJPMJ

 

[redbaron]

Why are Helvete + Rook town?

Why's Latte scum?

Why's Pmj scum?

How do you even see Pmj + RB scumteam as remotely likely?

 

[redbaron]

Also lol @ a player doing literally nothing alignment indicative and not having any reads of town or scum at this point of the game.

Fucking scummiest thing I've ever heard. If Happy is alive beyond Day 2 this is the worst game ever played.

 

[Happy]

Why are Helvete + Rook town?

Why's Latte scum?

Why's Pmj scum?

How do you even see Pmj + RB scumteam as remotely likely?

Helvete was a difficult decision. I decided to give him the benefit of the doubt for the time being.

Rook has provided consistent reasoning that I largely agree with, and is not making any real suspicious comments.

Latte is flying too far under the radar for my liking.

PMJ is completely androgynous (incorrect word, but i'll use it anyway) to me at the moment. I can't pin down anything. I need to watch to see how it plays out.

I named 4 suspicious players, not 2. I don't care who's teaming up just yet. I haven't built enough of a 'big picture' to see such strong connections.

 

[Happy]

Also lol @ a player doing literally nothing alignment indicative and not having any reads of town or scum at this point of the game.

Fucking scummiest thing I've ever heard. If Happy is alive beyond Day 2 this is the worst game ever played.

Or I'm just standing at the edge of the shitfight, waiting for the most opportune time to join in.

 

[redbaron]

So who would you be lynching if you had to do it right now?

 

[redbaron]

Or I'm just standing at the edge of the shitfight, waiting for the most opportune time to join in.

Oh so being scum. Gotcha.

 

[redbaron]

Could you also point out the posts that you think are meant to be a shitfight? As far as I can tell there's really nothing in this game so far that would be construed as that.

 

[Happy]

So who would you be lynching if you had to do it right now?

You really want to know? Okay, here it is:

Vote redbaron

Oh so being scum. Gotcha.

You just don't let up do you? When will you realise I'm not going to play into your poorly laid trap?

inb4: scummiest thing I've ever seen, you're a shit town, i cant believe how bad town is, blah, blah, blah...

 

[Happy]

Past my bedtime again. Goodnight.

I will check the thread tomorrow at lunch and finalise voting.

 

[redbaron]

You just don't let up do you? When will you realise I'm not going to play into your poorly laid trap?

....

 

[redbaron]

Like just...I can't even.

 

[redbaron]

"I'm not chainsaw defending Pmj, but I think RB is scum and I have no reads on anyone else"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g20_8-TPyTQ

 

[redbaron]

Anyway I'm going to bed. Just remember to:

#VotePmj2016

 

[cheese]

Seems all the aussies are going to bed - I am too. I've been writing up a post but the time got away from me. It's only Day 1; I'd rather finish it in the morning. I'll be up early, hopefully.

 

[Minuend]

Sure, i'll pay no pro-town content. However, there is also no anti-town content to build a case on either. TBH I don't really feel much alignment to town, and probably wont until day 2 - I don't see this as an issue. I'm playing for my own interests, which at the moment are survival to day 2.

Idk, I've come to see this a team play thing. If I go down, fine, as long as it helps town win. Me surviving day 1 isn't important if my team is better helped with me dying. Maybe in some cases me dying for town would be the thing that helped us win in the long run.

I'd think prioritizing town victory and identifying scummy behavior is more important than own survival. I'm unsure what to make of your approach.

Like meta-framing? Assuming town has the assumption that scum wouldn't so obviously defend their scumbuddy in public, then acting on Town's assumption by publicly scum-buddying anyway would clear me because I could claim to be framed?

This is an interesting thought, but not one I can defend against, because there's no way I can prove or disprove it, or give it greater or smaller probability till I analyse everything fully.

It's not something I'd make a final judgement on, no, or be the main thing to arouse suspicion in the first place. Just a curious detail that probably would be noted at some point or another. I guess maybe I was biased as I already had some suspicion toward you while writing my post, then I saw that detail popping up in my face from pmj's post. It was just a very quirky coincidence. And Minu is a sucker for quirky coincidences (yeah, I capitalized my own name fuck it).

your arguments are very vague "what if" scenarios. They're not really things that can be tested or clarified easily, but they *are* useful for leading town down paranoid rabbit trails of while ignoring larger patterns.

Yeah, I'm probably not on point regarding my observations and what I notice/ focus on. But I hope other townies will stop me if I go too far in the wrong direction or zone in on the very wrong thing.

----

Before day 1 is up, I'd like to hear more input from Latte and Helvete if you could find the time ~

 

[Rook]

If it comes to a choice between Happy and redbaron, rb is more likely a Dalek.

Their accusations of Happy chainsaw defending Pmj are erroneous, their explanations of it unsubstantiated.

For this reason I urge PMJ wagoners to consider the validity of their case, and not blindly follow wherever rb is pointing.

I'm not sure where I stand on PMJ atm, the first game I played with them they also felt scummy through and through but they were town all along. Helvete and rb still the most suspicious for me, would like to hear from Helvete as Minu mentioned.

Will need to study PMJ and others who I have at neutral.

Minu still seems solid.

 

[Rook]

Ok. PMJ analysis:

Spoiler

Before post #64: Not much of direct consequence

[

10/10.

Why should we trust you, Rook? All you've done is set up a bullshit bandwagon.

What is your experience, etc? I seem to remember (somehow) that you're a fairly experienced player, but I can't be certain.

What purpose does a bandwagon so early on serve? It seems to me a far better tictac to apply pressure to as many people as you can... although this being said, RB took it and ran with it. You are merely the originator.

Hmm. Interesting. Too obvious, or...

*strokes chin*

I suspect a link between yourself and RB. I will be watching the both of you very closely.

I would expect someone who played before to understand the significance of a random voting stage.
It is to set up circumstances were players are drawn out, so that conversation can start. the John vote was obviously a dud vote, I mean, 'John Cheese'

So this post may be a spoor Dalek framing, or an attempt to pressure two players who are part of a dud vote and wagon.
I note that PMj does not incclude Helvete here, who also voted(but unvoted) John.
........
#68 and 70: Goofing off
..........
#74:

Clutching at straws much? If you look more closely, I've applied more pressure to people than anyone else right now. The point in bandwaggoning an inactive player is.... ?

Rather than wait for him to come online and make a case, why not start pressuring others to see what spills out?

Shit tactic is shit; watched Rook is watched.

Already handled this post.

Starts with lie regarding pressure, pressure only applied to rook and minimally to rb at this point.

Made a mistake re:Rook voting, I took this as an attack by dalek or attempt at town applying pressure(Minu says this lessens pressure on PMJ, or is a backing off, rather it is a frank statement: PMJ's blunder does not directly indicate him as Dalek, therefore no point in assuming it definitely is)

#79 Admission of error, not a pressuring post. Handles Helv/Pmj patterns in an off-handed manner instead of offensive defense. Non-indicative for now.

#84 further conciliatory admission of error.Soft defense.

#107 of note when considering pmj rb interactions. Not solely a defense, but an explanation of rb vote and suspicion.
......

Again, please elaborate further.

In the past you have found me hard to read - what makes you so sure now? Apart from adjusting my meta to be a little more cautious due to always incorrectly tunnelling the wrong person, I can't see anything that would make you assume I'm scum.

If you're waiting for me to say "Oh pwetty pweese, I'm town!" ... that isn't going to happen. It's baseless, and fucking irritating.

Explain yourself. Right now, you're just wasting my damn time.

Why does rb decry PMJ as scum but vote PMJ? PMJ only asks this later, would expect him to ask it here after quoting rb.

Ok, I'll go on with this later.

Few notes:

@RB: I've noticed that Helvete followed your every vote thus far. RB votes john, happy, pmj, Helvete mirrors.

So... I doubt Dalek would be so blatant in their co-opertion, esp. considering day chat.

How do you view this behavior from Helvete?

My opinions: Helvete, as Dalek, mirrors RB to throw shade on RB once Helvete is lynched.

While not completely discounting RB/Helv team, I find it unlikely that Helv Dalek would mirror rb Dalke like this, it's just poor Dalek play in that case.

@Helvete: Explain why your votes follow the votes of redbaron.


*Conversely, this makes me far more suspicious of Helvete, giving rb more benefit of doubt until Helv's behavior is understood.