I haven’t said much since I (correctly! I might add) decided that MHaye was likely scum after his PI slip two Days ago. Excuuuuuse me for taking some time to read over now that, as I said, all the obvious stuff (to me) is out of the way.
I went back and looked at the voting records. I was looking for a few things–one, people who hid in the detritus (that is, people who have rarely been on a lynch vote) and two, people whose actions with regard to MHaye and macey could be construed as trying to save them. There’s not a whole lot there that hasn’t already been said, but I think my primary suspicion from the pattern is going to cause me to vote Mr. Special Ed. The reason I feel this way is that he voted in such a way on Day 5 as to save **MHaye **from the lynch, and then when **MHaye **was inevitable today he and MHaye voted for each other. That looks an awful lot like **MHaye **knowing he was going to go down (and/or miscounting the **Hockey **vote so that he thought he was out of saving-himself range) and voting for a fellow scum in such a way so that Special Ed gets a free “If I was scum why’d I hammer on **MHaye **and get counter-voted for it” card.
In other news, I’m still against a mass claim because I think we’ve seen with **BlaM **and **MHaye **that town is still perfectly capable of finding scum/pfk without the express help of concealed power roles. Not to mention, as said before, a mass claim is nigh-worthless in a closed setup–we don’t know what to expect so we have little context for evaluating the truth value of claims, especially since Story is being cryptic about powers in much of his death color. In addition, I don’t believe that our mystery blocker (if they exist at all) should reveal, even if they are certain they blocked a killing scum and can identify said scum, until they are satisfied that said scum is last. Keeping a blocking power hidden and active, especially if they’re good enough to have had even one success, is significantly better for us than a single non-game-winning scum at this juncture. We still have at least a few Days. Due to this train of logic, I’m putting a mighty FoS on Almost Human who’s been, as far as my recollections go, one who keeps bringing up a mass claim favorably.
My last paragraph is in the wrong order, the FOS for AH should be before the discussion of the blocker reveal (which was brought up by JSexton).
To expand on that a bit, at most I think we would have four-five scum left, which is effectively 5-6 given the half-dead thing and proportion of deaths who are half-dead (giving an initial split 18 town, 7 scum, 2 pfk). If it’s five, we have four mislynches left, disregarding any potential vigilante action (which I think we can do since if we do have a vig they’re playing it cool and smart). That’s four nights in which our potential roleblocker can potentially earn us further mislynches by continuing to be savvy, and I don’t think the trade for one scum is necessarily worth it until another Day or two have passed.
5 Scum left! I hope not. And if there are 5 Scum left out of 14 players that means we’ve ony 2 mislynches unless Scum are kind enough to not NightKill anyone for us or we’re lucky enough to prevent it.
I think 5 Scum is a very high estimate in any case. I’m wagering 3 Scum left fully alive at most, and more likely just 2. In a 27 person set up, with at least 2 PFK, 5 seems like an abundance of Scum especially with them having a role blocker and an investigator.
Also, as to my voting record. It is what is it. I did vote to lynch Macey. I know I hesitated on the MHaye lynch. I had my reasons for voting Hal. I stated them. I was wrong. I had switched briefly to MHaye the Day Hal was lynched because I thought the confirmed were trying to coordinate a lynch to prevent a Scum-induced Chaos. That plan failed miserably.
If you think there’s something to my voting record, fine. That’s something I can’t change. I do think we have scummier options out there.
I’ll try to a serious re-read, but I do want to qualify that if I’m not on for a few days, it’s not because I’m lurking. It’s because I have a medical issue that I need to attend to.
You really confused me there, Zeriel, I’ve put in some corrections in bold:
(On preview, like special ed said).
14 total alive, 2 kills Day/Night, two scum alive:
D7: 12/2.6, D8: 10/2.6, D9: 8/2.6, D10: 6/2.6, D11: 4/2.6 (LyLo)
If it really is a role blocker (less likely than a doctor imo) that found scum, why risk losing that information? Even if a scum false claims and he tells us to lynch town, we get one scum and still have three mislynches left.
And Brewha: you never unvoted Nanook, so your vote for amrussell doesn’t count.
And for the amrussell voters who partly based it of my earlier list, I made another one assuming scum didn’t protect MHaye Day Six, it’s here, just before Story posted Day Seven.
I’ve only reread the amrussell/JSexton post from last Day/Night (and the posts quoted). I haven’t really found a crack in amrussells case, though JSexton made another defense post.
What does PBPA for? Point Based Player Analysis?
A point related to this quote JSexton didn’t clarify which amrussell mentioned: JSexton suggested a macey voter analysis, but didn’t do it himself and Hawkeyeop was already busy doing it.
However, the full post does indicate he hadn’t read up completely yet.
This is why I shouldn’t type right before lunch. Let me redo that entire thing.
Y’know what, I take it back. First of all, I miscounted some things. and second of all, I was using Rapier’s player list above and thought there were 15 alive.
I think my point stands, though, that we have a potential for some good blocks left (and this is assuming it’s a blocker and not a doc).
I see it as a choice between our power roles doing our (scum-finding) work for us with a lucky hit on a kill-block (again, even assuming we have a blocker) or us continuing to trust our (potential) unseen benefactor. If any townie powers have good information, they can choose when to let it out there.
Special Ed, I’m not sold on your being scum, but you do have a curious set of circumstances that I don’t trust. So it goes.
I looked over amrussell…a bit…it took forever. Uuhhh…he is the most analytical player evar other than BalM…no offense, my mind just doesn’t process this game that way. So I didn’t learn much. Um…he’s definitely been helpful, if nothing else. And I personally think that moving votes/suspicion a lot is not particularly scummy, since opinions of scumminess can change on a phrase, or word, or claim, or even an indefinite article, and I’m not so sure we want to lock ourselves in through suspicion. He has done a few suspicious things, but not enough to jump on the case. No, I’ll stick with my vote on almost human for now.
I’m not sure if I got this right… The votes on **Almost Human **is based on the vote for JSexton (a weak case) and the suggestion that we have a vig?
I’ don’t really know what to think of Almost Human right now - but I’m not sure I feel the scummy-vibe you do.
Are we still on the voting as a block-thing? Because then we might need to look elsewhere toDay…
I really would like to stay with you - but it might be time to part
Something about them, eh? It’s a little difficult to defend against that without a bit more detail, but it does sound enough like an argument to keep suspicion on me. Don’t just keep the plate spinning, make a proper case.
Hockey Monkey: In one post, I listed people who I thought deserved a second look, hopefully by some other keen townies rather than me all by myself. In the next post, I made my vote. I kept that separate so that it would stand out and it would be clear that this was the person I found most suspicious. Obviously, I just confused people instead. As to the substance of the vote, I can think of one other player who missed some but not all votes, kept a low and innocuous profile and yet wasn’t a full-on lurker. As MHaye turned out to be scum, I’m not embarrassed by my reasoning at all, just irked that I picked the wrong target.
You say that I “outed” Hockey Monkey, which could be taken to imply that it was a deliberate action on my part (and ignores the role Almost Human played). If you are implying that not only am I scum, but that I knew Hockey Monkey was a mason, I’d love to hear the scum motivation for forcing a mason claim rather than just killing her off.
There are two things at play here. The first is the time-difference. In the beginning of the game, people’s response to me would be followed by several pages of new discussion and events. It struck me that going back to something said over 50 posts ago would be more of a distraction than a step forward. (For example, after I made my case against you, the whole Blam issue exploded. Better for me to post my opinion on that than to drag the discussion back into the past.) Secondly and more importantly, I think I have a slightly different perspective on making cases than you or perhaps than most people. I view it as much more akin to an adversarial legal technique. I make my case; you defend. It’s up to other people to judge. It shouldn’t mean a damn thing if I decide that you feel town. Everyone else should be judging on the merits, not waiting for me to pronounce my opinion.
In any case, if in the course of moving on with the conversation, I take my vote off somebody, it doesn’t mean that I no longer think they’re scummy. For example, my vote is currently on JSexton. Earlier, it was on brewha. I still suspect brewha. But there’s more than one scum out there, so I’m trying to keep as many people as possible under scrutiny.
Clearly I should follow up on at least one aspect of that. Here’s why I’m still suspicious of brewha:
Reaching barely begins to describe it. Allow me to quote from the evergreen colour:
(Incredulous bolding, italicising and underlining are mine) How you could think that I or anybody else was the disembodied hand is beyond me. This really smacks of someone trying to build bricks without straw.
In the very post you direct people to, I quote not only myself but two other people who comment on how the case against me is a strong one, or on how I was clearly arguing more forcefully than others. It beggars belief that you can quote that post and then say “no-one ever really acknowledged [Hawkeye’s case against me].” *Clearly *people did. It’s right there.
This case smacks of you trying to build a case against me and using whatever comes to hand whether it makes sense or not. It’s either delayed action OMGUS or you’re trying hard to get me lynched but don’t have any real evidence.
You say you’re playing with a toned down style. That seems fair enough. But like I said, and here we segue into point two, you reverted to form for Blam. By contrast, here’s the entirety of your strong attack against macey:
It’s a vote. It’s a confident vote. But four lines is not a strong attack, especially when you’re the sixth vote. Rewriting your own posting history in the hopes that others will take you at your word is a definite scum tell.
It strikes me that based on this you weren’t really saying anything. Telling people how they ought to go about hunting scum is easy; getting your hands dirty is harder. And you’ve been offering a lot more advice than you’ve been hunting scum. But the original point is that after making some clear Day One posts about not thinking “scum would never do that”, you tried to call me out for being prepared to consider that two different actions could have scum motivation. It’s not consistent.
How does one decide to “start” a wagon? At the point you make the first vote, you have no idea if it’s going to be a wagon or not. First you pointed out that somebody who started a wagon like macey’s would have no chance to get off, then you smear me for suggesting that brewha’s early **macey vote may not be exculpatory for exactly that reason.
Caution is all very well and good. But you said twice that you would review Total Lost, and you never did. Which makes this look less like pro-town caution and more like scum sowing doubt and confusion.
That was part of it, but the rest was really just laziness. No excuse.
I already addresed this. With Blam, it took convincing to get people to see what I was seeing. With Macey, there were plenty of people in agreement, and no persuasion was required. You’re correct that it wasn’t nearly as aggressive an attack as Blam’s, but ask yourself: why would it be, given that the votes were piling on just fine?
I guess I’ve tried to be coach this game instead of quarterback. Unsurprisingly, I’m in trouble for that too.
My frustration is building rapidly.
The problem I had with that behavior is related to the accusation of flinging poo. I felt like you were trying to look at any given person’s behavior and cast it in the worst possible light. Townies look for the truth, while scum are looking for reasons for a mislynch. Like I said before, there was a disingenuous feel to much of your analysis.
By casting a non-throwaway vote?
sigh Yes, that’s a possible explanation. I’ve never said that brewha is hard town for that vote. What I have said, consistently, was that I read the attack as genuine and that it had enough behind it that it was extremely likely to lead to at least a claim, if not a lynch. Brewha is good enough to know that, at the time he made that attack, where it was going to go.
I wasn’t inclined to do it until we knew Cookies alignment. Once she came up town (and both SKs were known), there didn’t seem much point. Is there still a slight chance of a non-deadite mafioso? Yes. Is it worth a massive review? Nope.
At Total Lost’s request, I went backed and found all the scummy things Almost Human has done, in my opinion. Here they are.
Advocates an Alpha Beta claim, because it wouldn’t do much harm. Except…if she were a power role she’d know how much harm it would do. And I would expect a townsperson to be more cautious in revealing such information.
Now, see, this is weird. Why would AH caution against revealing power-role AlphaBeta status when she called for an AlphaBeta claim earlier? Perhaps she already knows. Perhaps the scum, having no AlphaBeta status, suspected the power roles had none either, and thus wanted to push all the vanillas claiming for easy pickings on power roles.
This is a very hesitant, cautious defense of Macey. The scum would know that macey is pretty much dead by this point. But I’d expect at least some sort of effort to save him, simply because they might get an unexpected curveball. That’s exactly what this looks like–a defense that is weak, and subject to change–something that doesn’t particularly link, but it does plant the idea of confusion. It also has an element of “what the hell are you doing”, which I imagine the scum were saying to him.
This always seems to be a common sentiment for scum: ‘Nobody’s acting scummy! Woe is me.’ That way, they can pointedly ignore scummy behaivor from their scum-mates without awkward questions, and later jump on the first badly worded townie statement they see with the excuse, ‘There wasn’t anything else!’
This case is made of straw and playing cards. The first half is based on the idea that Hawkeyeop has been making a contingency plan on what happens the next time he is scum, and one of his scum buddies bites it very publicly. The second is based on her own theory, which has absolutly no supporting evidence except the Day 2 Color. Such a case would be useful to discredit someone who fingered a scum, no?
This digression may look innocent, but consider that one of the main reasons Chuc got lynched is because JSexton and MHaye (!) ran with her Man-Flu induced theory. It’s easy to set out some random reason for suspecting someone, then have someone else use it to push the lynch. No doubt a misguided townie will help shoulder the burden, who will promptly get the blame after it goes to hell. Look at what happened to JSexton.
Textbook smudge. Probably a contingency plan in case NAF didn’t end up dying.
Yup, look who’s under the gun now–JSexton, the guppy in the Chuc hand-off I talked about earlier. Her case seems to be, again, filled with air. JSexton…attacked a PFK. A lot. A scum would have no reason not to, so clearly he must be scum. Not only that, she made the claim that it was “obvious he was PFK” when she herself admitted to being unsure and that she probably would have taken her vote off if she had posted during that lynch.
Here, she has taken the case that lynching a Serial killer was a mislynch because a vig could have gotten him. Horrendous logic, since we don’t know if there’s a serial killer, or if he would have targeted BlaM. Perhaps she was fishing for a vig claim?
I have had my suspicions for a while, especially based on Almost Human’s motivation for continually bringing up a meaningless “me too” vote on my part as a reason to lynch me. The cases others have made have reinforced this conclusion.
**
Unvote if I currently have a vote on someone else, (but I don’t think I do)**
That’s a pretty decent case you got there Ped. Good job. I’m not going to vote that way, for now at least, because I want to highlight someone else that I think is scum.
Natlaw has been bugging me for a couple Days now, and I couldn’t quite put my finger on why. His last 2 vote analysis finally made me realize the answer. First some information, then an explanation.
Within two days of each other, he posts two seperate vote analysis. The first one he posts puts himself and amrussell at the top, and me and Ed at the bottom. Then the second one, later in the same Night with no real information added in the meantime, he posts an entirely different one. Suddenly the people that were near the bottom, me and Ed, are at the top, and the people at the top, Natlaw and amrussell, have dropped down. Besides showing that vote analysis can be made to say anything you want it to if you change the parameters around, it strikes me as a situation where his scum buddies were telling him to redo it, since it outted the wrong people and/or cleared people they wanted as lynch targets.
This leads into my explanation. Nat has been riding my ass off and on for several Days now, and I finally remembered what it reminded me of. The first, and so far only, game I’ve been scum in was Cecilvania. In that game, at Lylo, I was able to drive a mislynch of Hal. I did that by riding his ass for several Days straight. I drove it into people’s heads over and over that he was scum, and in the end tthey believed me and lynched him. I realize now that what I did in the beginning of the game, by not being around, actually was more damaging for what it did for scum than what it did to town. By that I mean, I gave scum an easy target. Set one scum up to be all over me, and ride it for a while, and eventually you can get town to lynch me. This is what I think Natlaw is doing. Sure, he hasn’t ended up with a vote on me at the end of the Day yet, but that isn’t strictly necessary. Little things, like “misremembering” what I said and stating the exact oppposite, changing the parameters of a vote analysis so that I look like the scummiest of the scummy, etc. Keep it up, and people start buying into what you say.
