Suicide Squad Mafia, Game Over: Number the Dead

[AndrewRogue]

First and foremost, I'm inclined to take ANYTHING Meeple said at the end with a grain of salt. While it looks like a wall of pro-townie analysis... ultimately, he was still masquerading as town as well. So... I'm not inclined to view his parting commentary as pro-town. He has absolutely not investment in giving town a helping hand on the way out. A dead townie at least still wins if town wins. A dead third party survivor has nothing left to do but achieve a moral victory through causing the loss of whichever side they feel the most bitterness towards.

This doesn't mean that what he said shouldn't be looked at (he doesn't know alignment any better than us) at all, but it shouldn't be taken with a pro-townie slant.

Snow... margh. I gave him the pass yesterday based on game logic, but his recent posts really aren't confidence inspiring. He theorizes along fairly questionable lines (OK/Delta as killers without listed kill abilities) and then jumps at a very vulnerable individual. His attacks have been... flighty? He's been jumping at whoever presents themselves with shocking ferocity, and has been falling into some of the normal traps of lashing back at detractors, etc. I also do not like that, despite your power not working, you have yet to clarify who you actually targetted. I would like to hear as well, even if it didn't work.

Laggy... you know, to be frank. I've been uncomfortable with you all game, but I've never had any actual reason to be. Now that day three has arrived though, I think I'm starting to see some actual evidence for that bad feeling I've been getting. You are very subtly trying to get town to think along dangerous lines, and then, as you are called out on it, shifting your stance so it looks like an earnest mistake or just an off-handed comment. For example, your initial acceptance as Meeple as being in a pro-townie position, despite a lot of evidence that would point to the contrary (see: him being third party, him lying about being third party, the general nature of his power role). Hell, you even call him a confirmed townie, which is a pretty large stretch by any definition of the terminology. Then you backtrack as soon as NEB calls you out on it. I really have a hard time believing you are falling into a trap of protown-ish third parties when Meeple was pretty obviously not one in any apparent manner.

There are other little nags. For example, way back you made an off-handed remark about powers that bothered me, positing that there are many abilities that townies get that probably should not be exercised when conversing to Bardiche. Town really should use the weapons it has at its disposal, and such a contrary statement (especially without more specifics) looks like its intended to be the kind of thing that gets other players with strong roles to maybe, maybe hold back. Which is a problem. While townie powers can backfire thanks to lack of alignment knowledge, it also prevents town from making killing strokes (role blocking scum powers/kills, vigs, etc).

Thirdly, you make a curious comment about night kills and softly encourage anyone with knowledge of a failed kill to step forward. While there are safe manners to do it (getting hit and surviving because of intervention from an unknown party), the pairing it without a comment about role madness and such really does feel like a very soft encouragement for individuals who shouldn't be speaking up here (BP, Docs, etc) to talk.  Again, I might just be overreading, but... this feels clumsy from you?

##Vote: Laggy

Talk to me a bit if you could? Just about the things I've brought up.

Excal: You're falling back into a lurky mode which, well, I obviously can't blame you with circumstances. THe problem is, looking back... you've had a pretty vague position all game. A quick glance back gives me... very little. You jumped on the obvious candidates and have vaguely pointed fingers around. While you have a decent number of posts and text... it doesn't add up to a lot of content. I'd encourage you to post more, but... well. Real life problems. Talk when you get back!

Shale: Need more obviously, but good to see you are around.

Still have a couple people to deal with, obviously, but I'd like to hear a bit from Laggy at the moment.

[Jo'ou Ranbu]

I also do not like that, despite your power not working, you have yet to clarify who you actually targetted. I would like to hear as well, even if it didn't work.

Let me clarify once again: when I say that I have a chance of not being able to roleblock, it means I can't even -target- anyone to roleblock. It's not a chance for my roleblocking to fail, it's a chance of not being able to perform a night action at all. I hope this is clear, now.

[Laggy]

Laggy... you know, to be frank. I've been uncomfortable with you all game, but I've never had any actual reason to be. Now that day three has arrived though, I think I'm starting to see some actual evidence for that bad feeling I've been getting. You are very subtly trying to get town to think along dangerous lines, and then, as you are called out on it, shifting your stance so it looks like an earnest mistake or just an off-handed comment. For example, your initial acceptance as Meeple as being in a pro-townie position, despite a lot of evidence that would point to the contrary (see: him being third party, him lying about being third party, the general nature of his power role). Hell, you even call him a confirmed townie, which is a pretty large stretch by any definition of the terminology. Then you backtrack as soon as NEB calls you out on it. I really have a hard time believing you are falling into a trap of protown-ish third parties when Meeple was pretty obviously not one in any apparent manner.

Considering that NEB and I went consistently back and forth on this (and the fact that I STILL don't think that just automatically assuming Meeple was out to misinform town in his parting post is firm and hard fact, although as a result of several things - one of which I brought up myself, the fact that he still claimed townie at the very end) I really don't have anything new to add to it. I stand by my view that, while it's the safe route to assume all third-party members will do everything to throw town (and scum) off, it's, again, NOT written in stone that they will always do so (hell, if I recall, Survivor just has to survive to the end of the game to win!). And past games have plenty of clear evidence in this regard.

I have retracted saying that Meeple is anything remotely close to confirmed town, but I still have issues just saying to blind yourself to anything he said and to what honestly looked like an effort to leave some last word input, whether it's true or not.

There are other little nags. For example, way back you made an off-handed remark about powers that bothered me, positing that there are many abilities that townies get that probably should not be exercised when conversing to Bardiche. Town really should use the weapons it has at its disposal, and such a contrary statement (especially without more specifics) looks like its intended to be the kind of thing that gets other players with strong roles to maybe, maybe hold back. Which is a problem. While townie powers can backfire thanks to lack of alignment knowledge, it also prevents town from making killing strokes (role blocking scum powers/kills, vigs, etc).

First off, Bardiche's role and how volatile it can be/could get is obvious and I seriously doubt you're going to find people thinking otherwise. Secondly, the specific examples I gave (I could be recalling this wrong, I don't have my original post in front of me) were vigs, governors, etc. which, yes, as a matter of fact, I DO believe should be used with discretion. Such discretion is almost inherently obvious in all of the roles. Bardiche had repeatedly demonstrated in his posts that he apparently did NOT believe in such discretion at least at first; see Rat and the myriad of posts where he basically said look at me, I have a power role, I should use it! This kind of reaction set off alarms in my head and I used other examples to make the hazards of such a mindset clear. To twist it and say that I'm telling the rest of town not to use their roles and ignore how it was pointed directly to Bardiche's attitude... I dunno, man, it really feels like you're reaching for straws there. "Be careful" is a scumtell, now?

Thirdly, you make a curious comment about night kills and softly encourage anyone with knowledge of a failed kill to step forward. While there are safe manners to do it (getting hit and surviving because of intervention from an unknown party), the pairing it without a comment about role madness and such really does feel like a very soft encouragement for individuals who shouldn't be speaking up here (BP, Docs, etc) to talk.  Again, I might just be overreading, but... this feels clumsy from you?

I would like to see the exact quote and context of where you claim I say that I encourage people to step forward. If anything, I recall speculating about which party was behind it and why (with an added self-disclaimer that such speculation was probably pointless) and then, after Rat said that he didn't believe that such discussion was at all productive, I dropped it. I do not remember, at all, asking or even alluding to an explanation (quite the contrary). I am hardly alone in this case, as well; QR concurred on my initial kneejerk that it was scum inflicted due to the lack of information the kill provided.

I'll look silly for a moment and even admit that I'm surprised I haven't drawn a lot of scrutiny up to now and can see perfectly why you feel uncomfortable with me, but when you're okay with Snow doing that massive meltdown and screwup after the (very justified) case built on him enough to swing away from him on Day 2... and then gun for me because I'm willing to back up, acknowledge when my thoughts are flawed and correct them, while explaining my initial reasoning behind them? That just smacks me of oddness.

[Taishyr]

...Okay.

For the sake of my own mental health and to attempt to keep something else going, I am looking for a replacement. If none can be found, I will take the modkill; I have a few people I will ask for the replacement first, and after that, well, if none is found, I will post requesting the modkill. This is not unknown by the mods.

I entered this game solely on Ciato's behalf, since she needed to bow out due to RL pressures. Didn't check who was playing, didn't anticipate this sort of a reaction because frankly previous games have never been like this. I had figured it would not be that much of an issue to sub in, but I guess I thought wrong, eh?

This being said, Cor. I owe you an apology. I took your statement near the beginning of day 3 in the worst possible light and got quite rude over it. I still see what I read then, now; however, it's possible that it was more incredulous and less scorn. Since the Internet is a lousy vehicle of communication for such things, I'm willing to accept the misread is likely on my end.

Jesus fucking Christ! How the hell did this come to pass? "Oh, that ploy never works. Those who try it are always quickly lynched and end up town!"

Yeah, better update that scoreboard, there, cause JR just pulled a fast one and ESCAPED HIS RIGHTFUL LYNCHING.

Okay. Okay. I can't get tunnel vision, I can't get tunnel vision, I have to at least look at other people in case they are FAR SCUMMIER than the SCUMMY JR.

First, though, thoughts on Meeple's flip. Well, then. I recall musing that one of the Meeple/Shale pair flipping as scum would be informative. With Meeple's flip, I can at least now dismiss such a link as accidental. And what irony, too. While I was blasting the more passive and feel-good players for playing like survivors and not as town, I had no idea we had an actual survivor in our midst.

You have also managed to bitch that we didn't lynch him (oh so obvious!) last game day (because it was so clear that he is {according to you} scum that clearly no one else could have had a case)! And you rant, despite putting forth the case after that day is over, and pretty much saying beforehand "I feel this is suspicious and I doubt this is feasible!"

Right. Um. Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah. Right or not that pisses me off to no end, as it's pretty much the same blatant level of dismissal of everyone else's abilities and analysis that would have lead people to the conclusion they reached (Meeple).

Your statement, my response. I hope that clears that up. Again, apologies, but I hope the reason for my vitriol is at least slightly clearer.

My only other comment is that Carthrat's actions this game remind me distinctly of Touhou Mafia, but metagaming is hardly always accurate. This was what occurred to me when I was on my walk to Tiananmen, however, and I felt it notable enough to point out. I'll try to post at least once more with comments before the replacement/modkill.

[Shale]

I got home from work at about 1:15 AM EDT. That should give you an idea of the day I've had.

I don't think re-evaluating one's original opinion and shifting from it after a guaranteed town presents a theory isn't all that scummish.

This sums up the problem with Bardiche's play in late day 2 rather nicely. Just because confirmed town says something doesn't make it right, or even valid. We know the argument is being made in good faith but that doesn't excuse accepting it uncritically! This is no different from reacting to a mislynch by going into the archives, picking apart the victim's posts, and treating them as unassailable (what was the phrase Alex used before? Holy Word Of Dead Townies?) just because we know they weren't lying through their teeth. You still have to examine it and see if the evidence supports it, instead of using "well, a townie said it" as a reason to substitute his thinking for your own. Basically echoing Carthrat's last comment of the day, but it's true. You're conflating trusting the person and trusting his judgment. And while you do move away from saying "trust Tom!", you still follow that logic, viz.

I grouped the two of them together because QR said, explicitly, that we should narrow down the list of suspects and... IDK, but to me, Corwin really seems to be sniping people and being generally rather aggressive in play. Being aggressive is a good way of shifting points on people that make some ambiguous statements, thus clearing the stage for aggression on a few choice targets and allowing QR to close the train by getting the town to eventually zone in on two. Obviously you can disagree with this, but that's why I put the link between the two of them.

First off, your chain of logic that starts with aggressive play and ends up with narrowing down the field to a predetermined target is...uh, funky. It's a possible outcome of the style, yes, but one of many. More fundamentally, though, at some point you have to get down to lynching, which necessarily involves narrowing down the list of suspects. This is the motivation behind moves like Ashdla's on Day 1 - "I think X is scummier than Y, but X just isn't a viable target anymore so I'm throwing my weight against Y." Yeah, it would be better if everyone discussed everyone else at all times, but it's just not pragmatically possible and seems a very arbitrary reason to make cases on people.

[Laggy]

EDIT: Okay, I think I found the quote in question you picked out.

For them to pass up on a nightkill (unless someone got hit last night and survived, obviously correct me, I forgot that this may in fact BE role madness despite mod lies blarg arghle) and then assume our MYSTERY KILLER acted...

Okay, I see what you mean by trying to speculate being a little meaningless. Still think it's worth thinkin' scum was behind this, more likely, than not.

And once again, this are serious Mafia attacks. Ifffff you saw that as subtle way to draw out someone to claim/explain, uh yeah, I got nothin'. I thought that came across fairly clearly as a joke, moreso when my second line basically says it's pointless to pursue. >_>

(Back to original post)

Well, one good thing came out from being called on; might as well try to collect my thoughts and bring them up to date with the thread.

First off, Shale. Glad to see you're back and trying to contribute, although I'm sure I don't need to repeat the mantra of "you better provide content, you were gone a freaking long time and it's hard to read you outside of massive lurkerdom".

Snow... I really don't need to repeat the case on him at this point. Corwin could very damn well be perfectly right and Snow's just milking this for all its worth, and Snow's explanations so far have been somewhat spotty at best; plus the fact that he seems to have barely paid close attention to the game is alarming. Still, though, it just seems to be such honestly bad play that I have trouble getting over my gut screaming that Snow is such a ridiculously easy target and what he's done has not exactly been out of character for him (that's getting metagamey though, which makes me even more reluctant to pursue that train of thought further).

Suffice to say that I would agree to a lynch on him if it boils down to that but am not really approving of sending him straight to the gallows right here right now, and would instead rather look at other cases more thoroughly for the time being. (This, however, does not mean we should drag the goddamn day over the rocks like we did on Day 2. That was ridiculous.)

Bardiche, however, now bothers me. A lot. First off, I'm now convinced that, indeed, mod lied and the game not being some form of role madness can be heartily 'lol'd' out of the window (so screw "too many third parties", it can happen). I STILL think Bardiche is playing cautiously to the point of looking scummy by never willing to jump strongly on cases (or start them for that matter). The fact that he himself acknowledges this and fails to change is further cause for worry.

Hell, if anything, for all that Andy is calling me out for supposedly subtly nudging town to inaction (I guess?), Bard is basically admitting that said inaction or at least extreme worry about taking strong action is fine. To boot, he has barely any sort of vote record (yeah yeah I know I and others told him not to vote but he said he'd at least follow this up with FoS, which he hasn't to any appreciable degree.) He still has not really posted anything that wasn't directly defensive or vague attacks on minor points (on QR/Corwin in particular) that he quickly drops and says he expects people not to ever really follow up on even if he died. Uh. Okay.

Also, he's promised to post something of substance in his last post and hasn't. Think that's where my vote will go for now.

##Unvote: Shale
##Vote: Bardiche

Ninja'd by Shale, who apparenty has some thoughts of Bardiche himself.

[Carthrat]

I was wrong about Jo'ou attacking Andrew, yes, apologies. That was something I hit Meeple for, got mixed up.

Nonetheless, that wasn't the only thing, and there is yet more. I find it utterly hilarious that Jo'ou complains that Corwin is pushing for his lynch too hard when the man deliberately went through other suspects at the start of the day. Frankly, saying "He's TRYING TOO HARD" is a pretty terrible defence, and the e-penis crap is moving right past terrible and into the bounds of laughable. At this point, the only real reason not to lynch Jo'ou that's been presented is that.. he's playing so badly, it's somehow wrapped around back into townie play. I can't buy this, ever.

This 'we're getting trapped in tunnel vision' sentimentality, I feel it is ridiculous simply because we're, um, not quicklynching Jo'ou, and it's hardly the only place discussion has gone, even at the very start of the day. I can only see that as weird panicmongering, although QR voted for Jo'ou too, which is weird. Frankly, I think it's strange that Cor got all theatric about avoiding early today, too.

<->

I can't see Andrew going after Laggy for anything but minor things. I feel that *most* roles that are actually useful are very common sense about how to use them effectively and aren't going to be deflected by some offhand comment like that, and nor would anyone realistically expect that to happen. Thus I don't get your angle here.

<->

As for Bardiche... no, I've got to say, being openly confident in your cases is better than anything. The more I can trust someone to stick to their word and have thought things through the first time around, the better. The confusion he claims to evidence is, to me, just a way of backing away from the game and trying to get away without contributing overmuch.

I don't really like what he says about being concerned with image. It's true that you need to watch yourself and not do really dumb things that scream 'scum here' (whether you are or not), but that's not done by being timid in general. :/

[Excal]

Alright, water heater issue is mostly dealt with now.  Unfortunatly, still don't have time to scour everything to make a deep in-depth post.  I have read everything over, and I agree with Corwin that not only is there something that looks fishy about the early pile on on Shale today, but that of the three who were a part of that, Snow looks the worse.  His reasoning for his use of his power doesn't feel quite right with his choice of roleblock target vs. who he's claimed to be suspicious of also looks fairly bad.

No real time to comment on anyone else as my thoughts on them are less defined, but I will leave you with a vote to cement the one concrete opinion I have at present.

##Vote: Joe Rambo

[Sierra]

Current votecount:

Bardiche (1): Laggy
Laggy (1): AndrewRogue
Shale (0): Laggy, Jo'ou Ranbu, Carthrat
JR (4): Corwin, Carthrat, QuietRain, Excal

With twelve alive, it takes seven to lynch.

[Dark Holy Elf]

Posting to apologise for not posting yesterday; got intimidated by the hueg wall of texts and did not feel like wading through them. Have since been doing some catchup this morning, and I'll contribute once I return from work in a few hours.

[Jo'ou Ranbu]

Mrf. Okay, I'm not going to try to defend myself. I think my fate is sealed as of now and I think it's fine by now. If nothing else, the flip will prove that I at least wasn't lying through my teeth.

Now, as for Bard, I don't think I have anything else to say about him that wasn't said better by other people. The concerns on him feel pretty justified, if nothing else, although I still feel he's more likely to be third-party than outright scum. I also wonder if he was targetted by anyone during the night, but that's pointless speculation. He's been eerily silent as well.

Now, for Andrew... um. I think it is worth to consider that he not only attacked Laggy for very minor points, but he twisted Laggy's words into meaning something he wants them to mean instead of what he said. This set off my alarms because that kind of meaning mangling is dangerously close to deliberately lying. Being put off by Laggy for not attracting suspicion at all is one thing and fairly justifiable from a paranoid point of view (although I'm guessing this is just what good play is all about: managing to be productive without setting off alarms. Which, of course, could hide scum, see Yakko in FFT Mafia and El Cid in Brawl Mafia, they were excellent at concealing their true intentions), but was it really necessary to twist his words around into something he didn't say? And then, there's the fact that he's accusing Laggy of leading town into inaction when we have... Bardiche going into the inaction train. I dunno, this feels like a deliberate, malicious sniping action with poor timing and it's highly suspicious.

[Corwin]

Was too busy at work, today, to even catch up fully (and how sad is that, there are like ten posts or something total in twenty-four hours). And then for some reason I couldn't connect to the forum while continuing to receive post confirmations by email.

Anyway, just a note here to say I'm still alive, and will post with actual thoughts within a few hours.

[Bardiche]

Notice beforehand: I'm in a somewhat bad mood, apologize if I come off as rude.


Hrm, I guess I should've specified that meaning to post something of substance later on doesn't necessarily mean "later on today" but could well mean "tomorrow when I feel like it". I'm going to ignore the accusations against me for now and proceed with posting my review of the past day etc. I'll address those accusations later, for as much that I have anything to say to them. HINT: It won't be much.

----------->

So first and foremost, I'm going to start talking about someone who's been mostly ignored this entire game. Lurking at its best, everyone failed to recognize this individual promised content several times without providing any. When he does, the content is... Pretty small.
I'm talking of Excal, of course.
That's the first post on Day 2 that has actual content, though it lacks the promise of "looking back at Day 1" and tunnel visions into Snow. This is the next post containing some content.

Then for a few pages, there's nothing, followed by this beautiful response:

Blargleargleargleargle...

I don't know whether to be more upset by the fact that there's so many posts to wade through, or that with all the time I've been away there's been so few.  Head hurts, somewhat groggy, and trying to get thoughts together, but I will get something substantive for you guys before I go to sleep tonight.

One thing I can comment on right now though is my agreement with QR.  We need to start focussing on lynching soon.  The day feels like it's miring, and focussing on getting a lynch down is just what we need to revitalise the arguments and draw in those people who haven't seen fit to speak.  That said, QR, I'm thinking Andy may be a worthwhile addition to the list of folks to consider.  I'll give more concrete reasoning why in my next post.

Now here's something interesting. Two things, rather.

1) The day feels like it's miring, and focussing on getting a lynch down is just what we need to revitalise the arguments and draw in those people who haven't seen fit to speak.

What an amusing thing to say for someone whose only contributed two posts all day to cases, and then moves on to agree with QR that, "Hey, we should start focusing and draw in the people who haven't yet spoken!" even though he knows damn well he belongs to that category of people.

2) He promises to provide more concrete reasoning in his next post. He does not. Instead, promises us content the next day. Sure fine!

That's all dandy but if you look at the next page following that, he really doesn't provide concrete reasoning, and actually backs off the Andrew case.

His next post here talks of giving his thoughts into a "hopeful Day 2 end game", even though his presence was negligable during the start and middle of the day.

This is worrying because scum typically like to pad numbers and a sense of being here by posting frequently to start, and then hoping to coast on that.  However, part of that is to avoid having to get involved in exchanges where their faulty logic can be exposed.  In Shale's case, whenever he does post, he usually comes along with some decently detailed thoughts and attempts to be helpful.

I can't help but read IRONY in this because that's exactly what he's been doing. The one time he really arguments for a case, Excal just has to pad on what others have said since he comes late to the entire day.

The next post he makes is right over here, where he just blends into the conversation. Nothing about the previous day. Nothing about the discussion at hand aside from, "Don't lynch QR, she's been useful to town".

And now his latest gem of a post is to lynch Jo'ou based on "his usage of power doesn't feel right" with the promise he'll post more concrete thoughts later. Well gee, you promised the same with Andrew. Sure thing, I'll believe you this time.

Except, you know. Not.

##FoS: Excal for this reasoning. Being generally lurkish while pretending to be here, every so often posting some excuse for not delivering while never really delivering information that hasn't been said before. Skillfully remained under everyone's radar.

----------->

Further suspicions will come later, not feeling it at the moment and I want to respond to the accusations against me before my battery runs out.

----------->

Okay, so the idea that I'm a third party: Obviously I'll deny that, but you can have fun and continue speculating about it if you want. I reeeeaaally don't care, because frankly I don't believe I have anything I can say that will make you go all ZWHOAMG BARDICHE IS ON OUR SIDE! I gave out my role, it's up to you whether or not a Multivoter works for himself, for town or for scum. HINT: It's the second one.

Now, as far as it goes that I want to come off as town and am careful with what I say. Well, that's just my paranoia about getting lynched for all the wrong reasons speaking, and clearly that paranoia is working against me and making me more suspicious. I can only argue that what speaks in my advantage is the fact that I haven't tried to hide this and that I haven't further had much reservations towards speaking out other than, "Hey, I don't have shit on QR, and I don't think there's any merit in pursuing a QR Lynch when most seem to agree we need to narrow choices".

About my "inaction" as some call it. (Hi Jo'ou) Well, yeah, it takes time reading through the thread, surprise surprise. Likewise, it takes time writing this wall of text, and I also happen to have some other interests that don't really coincide with Mafia. I find it amusing people are racking up suspicions on me based on my current post being somewhat delayed because I went to bed and just found some time to sit down and give this a good ol' write down. See my above arguments about who is a much more worrying case of lurking and pretending to be here.

Now, Laggy. Hi.

"Be careful" is a scumtell, now?

Next post:

I STILL think Bardiche is playing cautiously to the point of looking scummy by never willing to jump strongly on cases (or start them for that matter).

Yeah, something doesn't connect. Uses the same argument he uses in his own defense to incriminate me.

says he expects people not to ever really follow up on even if he died.

What. I think I said I threw out the QR possibility in case I die and people backtrack my posts. Or maybe I meant to and didn't post it for whatever reason, since many times I've composed a post without submitting it.

And then Shale assumes I took EvilTom's words at face value with no reservations of my own and immediately jumping on his words. Uh, yeah, okay, except that I just reviewed QR's posts based on Tom's theory, and had withdrawn support for a Meeple train before that.

Seriously people, I feel your case on me is extremely shoddy and doesn't connect. "Hey, Bard is being careful." "Hey, Bard, like some others that I am conveniently not naming hasn't voted much in Day 2." and "Hey, Bard has a Multivoter role, I can't believe that's town" don't add up to "Hey, Bard is scum and should be lynched."

Hell, even if I was a TP, then there's no reason to lynch me because I think you should be gunning for scum at this point to avoid a scumwin because of a lack of townies. I stand by my earlier statement that I am pro-town, and not ITP. If I missed any arguments for why I am scum, feel free to point me to them in your next posts.

[Laggy]

Now, Laggy. Hi.

"Be careful" is a scumtell, now?

Next post:

I STILL think Bardiche is playing cautiously to the point of looking scummy by never willing to jump strongly on cases (or start them for that matter).

Yeah, something doesn't connect. Uses the same argument he uses in his own defense to incriminate me.

Context, it is your friend. Or maybe not, apparently.

There is such a thing as playing cautiously and playing ridiculously paranoid about your own image. There is also a (big) difference between "caution on using your role's powers since it is obviously double-edged" and "caution about making posts or any arguments whatsoever". They are very different things and the fact that you missed something as obvious as that bothers the heck out of me as your defense.

What. I think I said I threw out the QR possibility in case I die and people backtrack my posts. Or maybe I meant to and didn't post it for whatever reason, since many times I've composed a post without submitting it.

Re-read your exact line. Yeah, misread it, thought you were implying that no one would look at it after you died (you were actually saying no one would look at it now and would later after you died). My bad.

Regardless, I really recommend not using your mood as an excuse to have a blithering tone. If you don't feel like posting because of it then say so and (actually post) later on when you are more coherent rather than giving yourself another backup reason to excuse this or that. It's perfectly possible and not even all that hard to defend yourself without having to treat everyone like an idiot for even considering the oh-so improbability that you are not town! That's the game, saying you are fed up because you have to defend yourself, uh, yeah. That's not going to go far.

[Laggy]

Reading Bardiche's reply more closely (yeah, I have a bad habit of posting my immediate thoughts first and then being more thorough in a followup post right away.) I am not really at all convinced by your reply. Your response to your questionable alignment is "well yeah, I said everything, deal", which while I can understand the sentiment, doesn't actually add anything to your defense one way or the other (you still look viable for TP, comes with the role). Your reply to your overparanoia is that you've been lynched for wrong reasons in the past - problem with that is that technically happens to every townie ever who got lynched could use that (again, part of the game) and you've been told a lot this game to drop with the paranoia-ness and well-maybe-x-is-scum-but-I'm-afraid-to-push-it. I wasn't actually even attacking so much your behavior in that aspect but the fact that you've apparently made no real effort to change it despite full of Day 1 and 2 posts advising you do so. And finally, your defense against your lack of voting record is "well other people haven't been doing it either!". No, no that's not a defense at all. Other people will/do get flak for it too; it doesn't excuse you, specifically after you had agreed to FoS assertively to give yourself a record, and you didn't.

Anyhow, in reply to Bardiche's actual presented case on Excal, which is a nice change of pace.

I feel that it does have plenty of valid points in that Excal's escaped the radar seemingly the entire game and just popped in enough for some votes. However, I also know that he's had valid real life reasons to not be present, so I take both with a grain of salt. (The fact that you, Bardiche, yourself use this reason, aka "I have other stuff aside Mafia, can't spend all my time reading and posting" lends weight to that.) I don't disagree that he, like Shale, should ramp up on the effort to produce some original content when he gets the opportunity to do so, and as is he looks questionable.

Speaking of people escaping radar, I don't think we've heard from Strago for a while, either. Two early posts near start of Day 3 and nothing else. Nudge, etc.

[Bardiche]

I was actually trying not to make my mood affect the game. But I did, so my bad.

I'm actually not that fed up with defending myself because I don't think you really had much on me until now. Which is perfectly plausible because I did offer damn little to the discussion on Day 2. However, others have contributed equally little, and accusing me of "voting too little" is a bit silly because others haven't voted that much either.
Now, I understand the point behind "construing cases" etc when voting, and I admit my FoSes were just, "Hey, that guy's acting suspicious, but I can't put my finger on it" for Meeple, and for Shale was because he was lurking. EDIT: I don't recall saying I'd FoS assertively, but only FoS if I would otherwise place a vote on someone. I'm not that aggressive a player that I toss out a lot of votes in a day.
This doesn't excuse me, at all, but I don't think it looks terribly bad given that the conversation quickly narrowed on two, three people and never really left much open for other interpretation other than looking where someone went wrong in argumentation.

Well, we can only do that afterwards, so now's the only time we can. Or the next day. Whatever.

That said, I am still reading posts, but am going from person to person now. Yes, I will post more than just Excal, because if it's Day 3 and only Excal pops up weird to me, there's something horribly wrong.

//More edits:
Okay, Laggy. Um, I can always provide a theory on how my role works in favor of Town, but yeah, I can't dispel much thoughts about how I can be a Third Party role without making a full, complete and utterly complete role- and nameclaim. Even then, there's always the issue with that I already provided the most important details regarding my role.

Yeah, I can understand that somehow racking up x amount of posts is a win condition for me. On the other hand I can see it as a good town weapon if I were actually an individual that people believed in, at which point I could overpower any scum objections to lynches. If we end up with equal numbers town and scum, normally we lose. I'm somehow thinking that if I am alive by then, and manage to skew the odds in town favor in that we have more vote power than scum and can outvote scum... Yeah, that we'll manage to stick around still. That is a theory, I have nothing precise on it.


Anyhow, my case on Excal is not that there are other things beside Mafia and that he's 'neglected' Mafia. My point is that he promised, various times, to provide content while failing to do so, and has generally acted as if he's not one of the lurkers with "Yeah, people that haven't spoken up yet need to do so".

[Laggy]

Yeah, I can understand that somehow racking up x amount of posts is a win condition for me. On the other hand I can see it as a good town weapon if I were actually an individual that people believed in, at which point I could overpower any scum objections to lynches. If we end up with equal numbers town and scum, normally we lose. I'm somehow thinking that if I am alive by then, and manage to skew the odds in town favor in that we have more vote power than scum and can outvote scum... Yeah, that we'll manage to stick around still. That is a theory, I have nothing precise on it.

This is all true if you assume that it is indeed a town weapon, yes. That would be the main stickling point - there's no guarantee on that, so you're going to not be surprised when people voice some reluctance to letting you empower it. One thing does bother me: you did not reveal the role's mechanics until Day 2 when you could demonstrate it and explained that it grew on every successful lynch (correct me if I'm misremembering here). If you already aware of how it operated on Day 1, then, you simply did not call attention to it and knowingly got on the lynch knowing that it'd increase your vote weight; yes, you sort of explain this later by your assumption that "roles are meant to be used", and you probably didn't expect others to disagree and have a lashback against you increasing your vote weight, but it obscures it a lot more whether you were innocuous town or stealthy third party.

Anyhow, my case on Excal is not that there are other things beside Mafia and that he's 'neglected' Mafia. My point is that he promised, various times, to provide content while failing to do so, and has generally acted as if he's not one of the lurkers with "Yeah, people that haven't spoken up yet need to do so".

Nor was I trying to paint it that way, as I started off saying you had valid points about his content; I was simply voicing that he's had valid reasons to look like a lurker, as far as I can tell, unlike say Shale who kinda disappeared without a word 'till now. I am very much in agreement that what he's posted seems strikingly sideline-ish and not all that good on original content.

[Corwin]

JR:
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25339#msg25339

Well, he talks about how he'll refute my case. I... guess he tries, but I wasn't too convinced even before the massive e-penis part.

JR is also mistaken on the purpose of responding. I cannot lynch alone, so even if I am not convinced, other people might be if he presents viable counter-arguments. I'm not seeing any unvotes, so I figure I'm not the only one who's not buying his defense.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25341#msg25341

But I'm not willing to give up the fight anymore.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25434#msg25434
One vote for JR later, merely the fourth out of seven necessary, and when Laggy actually votes Bardiche and not JR:

Mrf. Okay, I'm not going to try to defend myself. I think my fate is sealed as of now and I think it's fine by now.

Now, it's true that 4 votes are more threatening than 3 votes. But, uh, what's up with such a sudden change of heart? And it totally looks familiar, so I get the feeling JR's trying to do what worked the day before. Please don't let him get away with it twice, guys.


QR:
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25368#msg25368
First, my post to you was totally not long, certainly not by my standards. Just needed to point that out. On quoting people, I... don't actually know how to edit in the name. I just manually type the quote/unquote bbcode. I also have no idea how to make certain words linkable to avoid dumping all the long links amidst the text. If anyone knows how to do either of those, let me know.

I'm not sure where you're getting that I am saying your poking at me is *gaspevil*.

I didn't say that. If, by chance, my words could have been construed to mean that (please back it up with quote, if so), then it was not what I meant. What I said was that other players jumped at me when I named you as someone I would look at. To have such a reaction to another player whom they had no right to trust filled me with instant suspicion for reasons I hope are obvious.

C - I am not disputing the fact that Snow looks the scummiest so far (hence my vote), but as he has as much as admitted that he's not going to be able to change anyone's mind with his sudden loss of suicidal tendancies, where exactly is the harm in not Quick Lynching him and instead opening up discussion?  We're barely a day into the new Day and it's a little early for KILLLLLLL HIIIIIM.  Right now the only ones that helps is scum who get to have a day phase where we don't get much new input but they get to go ahead and make another kill.

I think Rat said it best, so yeah, go read the first section of his post on this (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25427#msg25427).

Anyway, JR's flip will surely implicate further scum. Depending on what exactly he lied about, it could cast a shadow on some of the players here. By catching one of the scum red-handed, we'll get the whole team by association. Plus, suffer scum to live, etc, he already evaded it once.

1 - If I'm reading your analysis of my Day 1 views on Tom correctly, you don't find anything hideously scummy there so I don't thing there's anything to respond to in that regard.

5 - Why would I look forward to Tom's post?  Because while I don't think he's any more or less likely to be right than anyone else, he is the ONLY one of you bunch whose words I can trust are exactly what he thinks.  He may be wrong, but he has NO reason to lie or mislead.  I weigh what he says with my own anaylsis and thoughts, but I do like having a voice that gives an honest thought.  Everyone here pushes for a lynch off an agenda.  For some, that agenda is to help town, for some it's to survive and for others it's to kill the townies.  I have no way of knowing who has what agenda except Tom here.  Doesn't mean I believe his anaylsis more than others, just means I believe he means what he says.

These two should really go together. While yes, you were less instrumental in Tom's lynch than I remembered (but still key enough), you expressed a view that you don't trust him, that he lies, etc. All in all, a pretty low opinion of his mafia skills and truthfulness. Now, I can see how him being a zombie with one post per day could change some people's minds about that, but I just don't see you do it. You truly think Tom has no agenda? Tom, who is famous for his OMGUS implosions? For all I know Tom could now suddenly see me as scummy for saying all this, and you're looking forward to more of that? I just have a hard time buying this.

I'm... as satisfied as I can be with your acknowledgment of 2 and explanation for 4, though, and I suppose 3 could've been a misreading of mine. I'm willing to accept that, barring evidence to the contrary.


DHE:
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25431#msg25431

An essential oneliner to apologize for not posting. Ie lurking. This is not the first time and 'oh noez walls of text' is not an excuse (especially with no Meeple posts to wade through). Even saying 'Corwin is mean and posts a lot, I'll comment on other people and ignore him for the next year' would have looked better to me because then you would at least be participating and getting out there and letting us see your thoughts and stuff.

I am slowly growing more and more suspicious of you.

And since people are apparently using my post sizes as excuses for lurking/not reading them, I'll endeavor to spread out my opinions across several posts. Laggy/Andrew/Bardiche post will happen tonight/early tomorrow my time. (And I forgot about Strago until Laggy's latest post called him out, so yes, suspicion there; dispel it with delicious participation.)

[Laggy]

On quoting people, I... don't actually know how to edit in the name. I just manually type the quote/unquote bbcode. I also have no idea how to make certain words linkable to avoid dumping all the long links amidst the text. If anyone knows how to do either of those, let me know.

It's quote="name" on the first tag, with the brackets obviously.

Anyhow. Bardiche's last response comes off much better to me in terms of defending himself (honestly, the response and attempting to pry him to build a case of his own were things I was really looking for), and I cannot help but agree more and more that Snow's resignation only makes me want to get the lynch on him done and over with. I don't think I need to rehash everything Corwin et al's said about why he's scummy and largely agree with it all, the only thing having really stayed my hand is aforementioned gut bad-townie-play feeling, but like it's been said, that can't be an excuse forever.

##Unvote: Bardiche
##Vote: Jo'ou Ranbu

This puts him at -2 to hammer, if I am not mistaken.

[Bardiche]

First off, well, I appreciate the trust, Laggy. Still, no intent from me to drop the hammer.

Moving on with further of the promised analysis.

-------->

One thing confuses me, but it's WIFOM. Why didn't scum kill Jo'ou? Either Jo'ou is scum, or they expected to get Jo'ou lynched today, because a roleblocker could be darn annoying to scum (that is, if Jo'ou pegs the right person). Right now, I do agree he looks pretty darn bad, especially given that I can't understand the roleblock of Carthrat. I mean... Yeah, what? You nary had any suspicion of Rat at all (or at least, hardly made it known), and instead of roleblocking someone suspicious that could work in league with scum, you aim for the Rat.

Doesn't connect.

-------->

I just realize Excal's defending QR in this post. Meeple ramped up suspicion, for me, by doing a similar thing for Shale. Where, upon re-read, he was more-so attacking the logic behind a Shale train, and less defending someone's particular actions. On the other hand, Excal has no such reservations and flat out says calling out QR for narrowing is a bad thing because it's been our choice all along. Definitely no reason to lynch by itself, but coupled with my earlier case, I think everyone should give Excal a very good look.

------->

Corwin's pretty zealous. Ignoring him for now because I can't get a clear read out of it, although I am skewed to "questionable townie" at best. Either he's just the sort of person that has natural charismatic leadership, or he's scum taking the reins from town and leading everyone on his lynch trains. Interesting to note is that he seems rather adamant about leading our trains.

------->

Meeple's analysis... Tossing it out of the window for now. I have no reason to believe he is pro-town. If I was a survivor, I'd try to get just about anyone lynched, and preferably not build strong cases on scum. I'd bet on the off chance that scum would try not to get rid of someone that's hardly got a read on 'em.

------->

the Elf: His Day 3 contributions are worthless. Arguing Meeple isn't necessarily pro-town (a sentiment I agree with)... Seconding Rat's suspicions about me. Well, that's cool, but seconding someone else's opinion is silly unless you're aware of their alignment. So far, hasn't yet made an actual stand against someone.

Going against chronology here.

Day 2, naturally I'm not too fond of the mockery with the ;_; ;_;, but eh. That's by no means something scummy. Here says he has a couple of people to review himself, but doesn't do any of that. In the next posts, he's been mostly passive. Defending himself, making a few remarks about Andrew off the side, post mainly centered about a defense towards Corwin...

This has some questionable content, in that he says Andrew is his third lynch target... But he hasn't really read Andrew's posts since his post before that one. Yeah, not really paying attention there, are we? Doesn't help that the post I quoted above has him dropping all suspicion of Andrew, apparently. Of interesting note is the last paragraph, where he's not comfortable with a Meeple lynch. Later on, on this day, he expresses dislike for defending against a dead third party; Consequently, doesn't do so, only pulls Meeple's support of town in question.

Hm, odd. In this summary post, Elf doesn't really express much concern for Andrew. And I'm... I'm not seeing how he could suddenly grow to 3rd on the lynch list. Something doesn't add up here. Moreover, Meeple looks the worst so far he says... But later says he isn't too confident in a Meeple lynch. Scum trying to add credibility because he knows it won't be scum we'll lynch?

Yes, I just checked. Between the summary and his post saying Andrew is third on the list... He hasn't expressed much concern for Andrew before. There were far more scummier people than Andrew at that moment.

Actually, re-reading everything again... The entire summary post is basically, "Hey, everyone looks good and has plus points. Well, except Meeple. You're tagged!" and later on "Yeah, I'm not comfortable with Meeple's lynch".

##UNFoS: Excal, ##FoS: Elfboy. Excal's suspicious, but I certainly want to see just what he has to say to this. This stuff doesn't add up... At all.

-------->

[Jo'ou Ranbu]

Scum probably didn't kill me because my actions would certainly be good enough general smokescreening for another day to keep people from pegging actual scum and letting them advance the score towards their goal. Seems simple enough for me.

And alright, I guess I'll just put the cards on the table one last time. I said before I didn't mind getting lynched anymore, and that's because I mostly achieved what I was setting to do ever since day 2 ended: get at least one of the zealous players to sink the foot into the mud (particularly Corwin, because goddamn that kind of zeal screams "scum" to me). I'll be frank and blunt: I know my own alignment, well damned enough to know that Corwin will end up having to do a lot of explaining once my flip turns out, and I can't stress enough how much he deserves it. And, as for me blocking Rat instead of 'diche, I think it's safe enough to say that I went by pure gut. No real logic involved, just "gut" from the way he played so far and how often his current style sets off my radar for being great scum behavior here. I'm metagaming horribly? Yes, I am. But honestly metagaming says much more in the DL than trying to follow cold hard logic, since most of us (me included) are horribly transparent. Same reason why I decided to take advantage of Corwin's wondrous zeal. Terrible strategy in hindsight, I'm sure I'll realize, but I botched things for my side so horribly I might as well go all out in a ridiculous blaze.

Not to mention that, at this point, suffering me to live will only make things worse, yes? The wonder on whether I'm town or scum can't stay up forever, and I'd rather just end things right here and right now. I want town to win, not to end up perfected by scum because I still set off all kinds of radars, although, at this point, we're probably going to end up in LYLO and hilarity will ensue.

Also, a last little reminder: please take a good, hard look at Andrew, 'kay? I can't believe how easily his Laggy baiting is slipping past the radar, and I'd take a nice, long look on the people overlooking it as well. That probably sums up my thoughts.

[Jo'ou Ranbu]

Just to drive the point home:

##VOTE: AndrewRogue

Because, while Corwin's attitude sets me off on levels I can't even begin to fathom (and Rat doesn't really look much better, and feels like working in tandem with Cor), Andrew's Laggy snippet throws me off even more.

[AndrewRogue]

Laggy: To run down you post point by point...

1. I didn't advocate ignoring his statements either. My main issue is that you originally assumed a stance that did, indeed, assume a shockingly positive view on Meeple when it seemed fairly obvious that he definitely should not be considered in a pro-town stance, and tried to push it. It seems really off to me that you'd start off on such a strange foot.

2. The exact quotes are indeed...

Bardiche - as for your anonyvote power... first off, no, as a matter of fact, not every role has to be exercised and its power used, especially double-edged ones like anonyvoting.

One of the most important things to realize about all of those roles is that they all have the choice not to exercise their power, and often times this is the wise thing to do.

(In reference, indeed, to Vigs/Governors/Nonny Voters)[/quote]

I really am not trying to twist your words here. There is obviously some good advice in there. But, at the same time, there is enough discouragement in there to... concern me? It could well just be a difference in game theory (I tend to feel that, unless there is a good reason not to, powers should be used). "Be careful" can indeed be a scum tell when caution and hesitation lets the other side get the upper hand.

3. You did indeed get the quote I was referring to (specifically the parenthetical section). That being humor doesn't really fix any of my ill-ease with that particular line, since, in this case, someone taking the joke seriously could be pretty disasterous. I still have problems seeing the parenthetical as being part of the joke, so, yeah.

4. To clarify for the umpteenth time, my movement on Snow on Day 2 was based ENTIRELY on game theory. Given his melt down, I worked out a theory and ran with it, because I really am tired of lynching town thanks to those melt downs. To sum up: we've only caught town with those self-pity meltdowns, to my recollection there has never been a case where scum tried that sort of ploy, we've always lynched in response to that sort of self-pity meltdown. As such, I saw it (and, admittedly, still see it to some degree) as highly unlikely that Snow was scum.

My main issue is, honestly yes, nitpicky and possibly just a result of reading too deeply. What I'm seeing is a very subtle undertone to your posts that is encouraging certain lines of thinking or certain actions that could easily go to the wrong places.

Snow: I did indeed attack Laggy for minor points... which is something I admitted to. Furthermore, I find it hard to call what I'm doing "twisting his words," given I pretty fairly represented his actual posts. They are nitpicky, yes, but that doesn't invalidate them. Furthermore... uh. I... didn't attack Laggy because he wasn't suspicious. I'm also... not really happy with your claim that I'm baiting Laggy, nor am I very happy with that vote of yours.

For the moment... ##Unvote: Laggy. Some of what you said did indeed clear up a bit (for example, I realized one of the more blatent problems I had was based on a personal misreading). I'm not really convinced, but I don't feel I'm ready to really press the case on you at this point.

[Sierra]

Current votecount:

AndrewRogue (1): Jo'ou Ranbu
Bardiche (0): Laggy
Laggy (0): AndrewRogue
Shale (0): Laggy, Jo'ou Ranbu, Carthrat
JR (5): Corwin, Carthrat, QuietRain, Excal, Laggy

With twelve alive, it takes seven to lynch.

[Laggy]

Andrew, my kneejerk reaction to all of that, honestly, is that you're trying paint me as some sort of subliminal covert operative who sends thought waves to people in the way I phrase things. Now, I know scum can easily gain on being subtle, but don't you think that's... just ridiculously too subtle? To the point that no one has read what you've read, and when you do bring it up, the kneejerk reaction from both Rat and Snow is that they're minor points? I don't really take that well, and it is my belief that you're drawing a lot of what you feel ticks you the wrong way as to provide some sort of seemingly objective reason to back up your innate discomfort with me, which I would hazard more or less stems from how I've drawn little fire so far. Far from trying to be subtle, I tend to be as straightforward as possible in what I'm trying to say, and while I have no issue clarifying or explaining my words further, I can't really say a lot to what you're accusing me of besides "Yeah, your gut says I look scummy somehow, here are some words that if you read really deeply into them could possibly carry generic anti-town sentiment". That just feels reaaaally stretching it.