I really don’t think Ed is scum.
I think what I will do is
Vote Pleonast
Chip’s gonna swing regardless of how I vote and the acronym is a lousy thing to hang a vote on.
You misunderstand me. I’m stating that a simple accusation of lying is not anti-town. I’m not going to argue against that. That doesn’t mean I agree with it, though.
My issue with you is your fishing demands and then your vote for me after I refused to be fished. That is anti-town and why I am voting for you.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
I am equally suspicious of Meeko, MHaye and peekercpa and will vote to lynch any of them. Since, ignoring my vote, peeker is in the lead among them, I switch my vote to them.
unvote
vote peekercpa
vote Meeko
vote MHaye
And just to remind others why I want to lynch each of them:
peekercpa, for anti-town post spamming;
Meeko, for fishing and for voting me for refusing to be fished; and
MHaye, for implicitly referring to out-of-thread communications.
So, I was thinking: With as big a bandwagon as there was on Plankton, I’d expect at least some Scum to want to be on that bandwagon, so as not to stand out. But when Scum join a bandwagon on one of their own, I would expect them to use either relatively weak arguments, or me-too previous arguments, since, while they want to get credit for the vote if their teammate swings, they also don’t actually want to convince anyone else to vote that way. With that in mind, I went through and looked at the history of why people were voting for Plankton:
372: I vote him for nonparticipation. Retracted in 542, once he’d started being more active.
576: He makes his post about 22 people trying to kill him. This is significant in many of the votes on him.
578: Telcontar votes him for broad-spectrum smudging. Incidentally, the folks he smudged are USCDiver, myself (Chronos), cucuy, peeker, ed, and the lurkers. As a new player, might he have been inclined to smudge mostly Town players? This might be a point in favor of those people.
596: Red Skeezix votes him because paranoia is a Scum/PFK tell, and because Scum like to incite LtL without actually voting. Incidentally, can anyone back up that paranoia really is a non-Town tell?
639: Hoopy votes him for opposing me revealing role-name. He also calls out ed for the same reason, but doesn’t vote him.
643: Oredigger votes him for throwing shit and hoping some sticks, though (unlike Telcontar), he doesn’t call out very many examples of smudging.
644: Pleonast votes him for wishy-washiness and paranoia
739: cucuy votes him for pointing out a lot but not committing
774: Chipacabra votes him because self-preservation is not a townie virtue
797: Nanook votes him for sticking too stubbornly on Pleonast
881: Plankton’s claim. At this point, he’s got a pretty solid eight votes, if I’m not miscounting.
Not much of note, I think, after this point: Several folks unvoted him to give his claim the benefit of the doubt, and everyone who voted him after this point did so based on the inconsistencies in his PM, as pointed out by Gadarene. This does credit to Gadarene, but I think is a null tell for everyone else who voted or unvoted him.
The one odd thing here is Wanderers: In 1097, he voted him for the claim being bad, but then in 1131 unvoted him to give him a chance to investigate. On the one hand, I can’t see a Townie reason to vote and then unvote him (as opposed to the other way around, like a couple of folks did) at this point. On the other hand, though, I also can’t see much Scum motivation, given that the unvote was a half an hour before the end of the Day, and so there was no realistic chance that he’d end up escaping the noose.
The votes before the claim, though, bear a closer look:
Hoopy’s vote looks a bit weak to me, since he could have gone with either Plankton or ed, and anyway a bad idea isn’t a Scum tell.
Oredigger’s stated reason for voting doesn’t really seem to correspond to what he’d been highlighting in that post, and is largely a me-too of Telcontar’s.
I’m not really sure what cucuy meant with his vote reason.
Chipacabra’s vote is for the paranoia, effectively a me-too of Pleonast and Red Skeezix.
Nanook’s vote is for a new reason, but it seems rather a weak reason to me.
Now, obviously, I don’t think that all of these people are Scum, since six people would be an absolutely huge Scum team, and besides I also think ed is Scum. But they might be worth looking at more.
I also considered doing a similar look at the current bandwagon on Chipacabra, but man, that took a long time. Maybe I’ll do it toMorrow: It’ll be more meaningful once we know Chip’s alignment, anyway.
I’ve decided, with some misgivings, that there’s enough of a case against Chipacabra to justify a vote.
Vote Chipacabra.
Firstly, I spent a little time verifying Hoopy’s claim that Chip made several posts attempting to save Suburban Plankton from the noose. That’s not (in itself) enough to convict, as it might also arise from a conviction that SP was Town, but there is no evidence that Chipacabra is so convinced; indeed the reverse is true since Chip maintained that SP could be one of SAHM whatever alignment Ed turned out to have.
Chip’s reasons for shifting his vote included something I would describe as risk management; that is, if we accept the two claims at face value, losing a Vanilla Townie loses less than a claimed Investigator (see [post=12816099]post 1024[/post].) That’s obviously correct, but ignores the largest single part of the case against SP at that point, to whit that his claimed PM was wildly out of sync with the vanilla role PM. The lack of addressing this major plank in the case when people were using it as grounds to revote, is somewhat suspicious. A Townie would have at least mentioned it, surely – if only to acknowledge its strength.
Then I came to [post=12816232]post 1032[/post], in which Chip gets self-contradictory in the space of a single paragraph.
Chip states that a possible motive for Ed-of-the-SAHMs to put the palantir-users out there is to help make a fellow-SAHM’s claim more credible, even though he’d just said that Ed is “too good of a player” to make an obvious attempt to rescue a fellow SAHM in trouble. So, if Special Ed was one of SAHM, he wouldn’t do what Chip claimed he did because he was one of SAHM. That’s trying to have your cake and eat it.
If Chip is one of SAHM, then Ed isn’t; there’s no point in one of SAHM throwing their weight around to change which of two other SAHM get lynched unless the one they’re trying to save is pivotal for SAHM. A vanilla Minion isn’t worth the risk. If, however, Chip flips AoL, then that says nothing about Special Ed.
Let’s play with some fire here. It might just be a single match from a match book, or it might be Fourth of July Fireworks.
Either way, my crayons need some help here.
Unvote All
**
Vote Peeker
Vote Pleonast
Vote Peeker
Vote Pleonast
Vote Peeker
**
Except, as we saw from Suburban, the scum PMs refer to them as Servants of Darkness. Why would you think that SAHM would be the acronym that scum would use to refer to each other on the scum board, rather than, say, SoD?
It was a double reverse slip!
You’re right, and Servants of Darkness is all over Mahaloth’s post 1 introducing the game.
SAHM seems to come from the Town PM.
So, MHaye was using a different term in the Scum thread in case he accidentally used it in the main thread.
and hoopy i understand about real life so if my comment was out of line then i sincerely apologize.
but just because you say it isn’t disjointed doesn’t make it not, either. apparantly we are going to have to agree to disagree.
and i tend to surmise that regardless of how chip flips i will be next on the block if i live through the Night. although i cant see how scum would target me for a kill since i think they would be smart enough to let town do their job for them the next Day.
i don’t know. it’s a ploy that has certain advantages initially for both teams. town won’t want to lynch a claimed power role (although we did a standout job with burb) and scum won’t necessarily want to fire that way in case he is a self protecting doc. but with a dead doc i can’t see how he lives through the Night if he is being truthful.
and we obviously play this game markedly differently so i can only comment on what i think, not what he is actually doing. and i am sure that pleo will spin this to be fishing, but meh, it’s not.
assuming that he is being truthful he’s smart enough that scum will most likely target him. now if he did anything last Night it would seem like the correct move would be to provide that information to town. i mean unless he is a dick and investigated telcontar in which case roll the dice and hope you live and get another investigation under your belt.
all i know is that although his play would not be what i would have done. and his reaction to other’s reactions is really funky. in conclusion i won’t be voting for him in the near future because i think it resolves itself in the next Day or so.
But how would Scum know if he’s being truthful or not? I mean, obviously they would know if he was Town, but beyond that he could be a vanilla hoping to be NKed, to protect the true power roles. That’s the WIFOM game he’s playing with Scum, if he’s Town.
You already know my opinion on it, because I stated it earlier toDay. I don’t necessarily think he’s vanilla, because if he’s forced to role claim he has to admit he was lying, which will most likely get him lynched. And the most likely power role for him to have been to try that gambit is dead (and if someone else is proven to be a Scotsman, then Pleo needs to die with a quickness). Another thing I don’t understand is the weird multi-voting. Yeah yeah yeah. We all get that you think it’s superior. However, you’re in a game that doesn’t have it, so can you just knock it the eff off unless your role requires it for some reason that nobody can see? It’s confusing and obnoxious, and this game has enough obnoxiousness without that. You too, Meeko–as a claimed vanilla, you have NO reason to be doing it.
actually drain i think multi voting is a farce (but at least i was voting for the same person :)). i was merely being a smart ass. i will not do it again.
and maybe this is a question for the mod but i will ask it to the general popluation at large, as well. if a scotsman is targeted for NK will they know that someone tried to kill them and now they are down to one life? additionally, would the targeter merely be told that their kill did not go through? i really don’t know the answer and maybe it is game specific rather than universal.
I’m not certain his reason to vote you as the 2nd place guy was all that weak - it’s pretty easy to characterize the handshake as scum motivated. You out **Chronos **with a weird “gotcha” game as well as possibly identify other town power roles… It’s not too hard to see scum intentions behind all that.
Hmmm. I think you’re just speaking off the cuff here (or maybe due to frustration over the course of this Day, which I agree with), but one could also read this as wanting **Chip **dead.
And the two roles thing. I don’t know what do to with that. Is it possible that **Mahaloth **screwed up and accidently sent you something meant for someone else, like you’ve alluded? Sure. Is there a far simpler reason why you might be in possession of two roles? Occam’s razor says yep. But (conveniently?) you can’t say any more about it.
Sorry, ed. I’m reluctantly thinking that right now, you look the scummiest of the lot.
Vote special ed.
I think that being Vanilla gives you all the reasons in the world to do anything and everything you can eke out.
In fact, if a Vanilla doesn’t get out there and scribble, I’m not sure their value.
I’ve seen more than one game with vanilla role verbiage similar to the following:
You have no powers beyond the right to participate in the daily vote,** and your god given wits. **
Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose. [And if a Vanilla means nothing…] Nothing don’t mean Nothing honey if it ain’t free.
Wow, I think I just pulled a Peeker.
well most of my video links do have some lotr content.
and yes, vanilla have to make their own way. sometimes pissing folks off in the process. and typically having to make decisions based on less than perfect information.
neta: and decisions really should read more along the line of decisions/conclusions/deductions/assumptions.
Well, I’m partial to the video, and it makes my point all the same.
I think I got the pissed off part down pat.
Quoth MHaye:
This is a good point, and if Chip flips Scum, I’ll reconsider my vote on special ed.
Apparently, no one else actually read MHaye’s stated reason for using “SAHM”, since this is something like the third player who’s asked a variant of this question. I believe his explanation for why he used the term. It’s how he used it that garners my suspicion.
Sorry, but I disagree. It’s my duty to lynch scum, so I am going to be loud about who I think needs to be lynched. I’m not sure why that’s confusing to you. I’m fairly explicit about why I want to lynch who I want to lynch.
As I understand it, your argument is that his use of the term without explanation implies that he had already explained it to someone else, correct? Which still leaves the question, why would a scummy MHaye have used the term on the Scum board? It’s just not the kind of thing the Scum bother talking about.