Print

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

[Captain Ford]

Oh, this part was chilling in another tab.

Tiruin: What are you voting Tolyk for?

NQT: How would you have used that ability if you were scum?

[RangerCado]

Thank the Magic penguin for extension, and i forgot to vote for it because i'm not very lucid when tired. Lets see if i can get through this then prep for the tests i have tomorrow. Lets start with my suspicious friend, Zrk.

Zrk: I believe there are policy lynches that work in specific situations. If someone where to claim say doctor on Day 1, that would be a reason to lynch if they persisted with the idea. Obviously stupid role-claims are not Pro-Town. (i won't put NQT in this as we all probably have atleast 2 abilities and judging from his posts he has another 2 or more.) I'm going to trust Meta for this day atleast on you, unless your behaviour changes from the norm to something i find as or even more scummy.

NQT: ...I really hope you picked wisely with Lovers because if both end up dead and town, your kinda screwed.

Captain + Tiruin: Although trusting Meta may be a bad idea, and jumpy, I am going to do it for Day 1 only to try and get different tells from Zrk. If the only thing i can get from him is similar reactions to previous, then i'll probably have to find a different way of finding out his scumminess. (or lack thereof)

Although I still don't trust Zrk, his attitude has improved a bit. I still would like to find a different scum tell on him so i'm not just trusting the Meta is wrong, but if the attitude returns i will be most likely going for a lynch on him.

Since i still have one more class to get through, i'll answer more questions if i have time after school.

My current reads if anyone asked:
Captain: Nuetral read
Zrk: lean scum read
UI: lean scum read
Tiruin: Town read
Hapah: Incomplete
Toaster: Incomplete
Vector: Incomplete
NQT: Nuetral lean scum read
Deathsword: Incomplete
Griff: Town read
TWS: Nuetral read
The Soldier: Incomplete

Any questions i missed, bear with me i'm gonna answer them later. I just need to do some school catch-up. ciao
Tolyk: Nuetral lean town read

[Griffionday]

Zrk2

But this post seems out of character. Buddying, maybe?

I'm flattered, but I'm afraid that answer doesn't help me. Which is probably the fault of the question so unvote

Not my finest post I'll admit.  In my defense that was about 24 hours into the game and I was just exiting RVS.  So I was still very new to the game and less comfortable pressing things.

If I die the town is guaranteed to lose a player. Besides, if people are trying to find my faults then they can't look for the actual scum.

Okay, very nearly to the same page here.  From your point of view; yes, town is guaranteed to lose a player, and if we're focusing on you that means that; yes we're not focused on the actual scum.  The thing is; however, the attention is not purely negative.  Gaining a rock-solid town read on someone is invaluable in that you can rely on that player to not purposely being feeding you unhelpful WIFOM (Ford I'm looking at you), and their targets are ones that you'll have a better idea of the reason behind the vote.  Likewise having a solid town read means your votes carry more weight (notice the swing that I seem to have caused against you) and means you'll have a better chance of keeping scum from slipping through your fingers.  It also means that bussers will tag along to your votes (Deathsword: start explaining), so you can find people to read that way as well.

Why does your philosophy seem to exclude the value of the town read and treats it instead like a read that only comes as non-scum?

Your case on Ranger as expressed here

Spoiler: Post you quoted (click to show/hide)

RangerCado:

As for the RVS period, it really is just to see if someone slips up at the start. we really have no evidence and a no lynch at the start could be much more beneficial then an actual lynch today. more on that after school.

This has been mentioned previously, but a lynch does a whole lot more than just kill someone. It reveals their alignment so everyone can reflect on their case in light of that, and people can take a look at the cases presented against them. In short it gives people a whole lot more information than the none they had previously had. Without a lynch the mafia just gets a free kill and the town spins their wheels for a whole day. Why would you want to give the mafia a free kill? Have something against the town? Planning something? Why?

Tiruin- I have read many games showing vector as scum and playing very well. Just pointing out facts but can't make any real claims until she speaks.

That is a good compliment.

As for the RVS period, it really is just to see if someone slips up at the start. we really have no evidence and a no lynch at the start could be much more beneficial then an actual lynch today. more on that after school.

Why are you assuming all of these?

I am assuming these due to the chances of lynching a town are much higher on day one, and i have rarely seen a mafia lynched on day one unless they made a slip-up. A no lynch allows anyone who can investigate to go off on their suspicions and see if their confirmed and any deaths could potentially give us useful intel.

These points show that a no lynch also can give us an extra day due to no death on day 1, depending on how the nights go.

It may yield the town an extra day to debate, but it also wastes that first day, as  discussed previously, and two deaths give more than double the information that one death does, because they build on each other. Furthermore by your logic town should never lynch until LYLO because it will give them more time to discuss. Unfortunately one has to eventually grow a pair, stand by what you said, and watch the carnage as the kills pile up and the truth comes tumbling out. Sometimes you're wrong, but you have to trust your abilities and go for it. Mafia is no place for the faint of heart.

Also, i think for now i'll vote No Lynch as i still believe it to be the best course for now.

You sure were determined to deprive the town of a lynch, weren't you?

True, but i don't like the risk of lowering the towns numbers if we mislynch.

Having more people around is always nice, but the town has been known to pick scum on the first day occasionally, and even other than that the D1 lynch tends to be based on the quality of scumhunting rather than anything else. Thus even if a townie is hit D1 it is almost always a relatively useless one and so the town loses relatively little.

I thought a No lynch would help as we may have many Night based roles, both helpful and harmful, that everyone may get more information from rather than mislynching a townie.

Or maybe you're trying to fly under the radar and want to avoid the possible blowback from voting to lynch a townie. Either way you need to make a decision. You are either scum trying to ruin the lynch or a totally ineffective townie, and I think lynching either on D1 is tolerable.

I have true suspicions of him (to me anyway) as he has avoided a couple questions from others. he may just not have seen them (as i sometimes do) but his statement here:(see above for reasons related to DS logic)  leads me to believe he's rolefishing. The way its worded just makes it seem that way so, Zrk why are you appearing to role fish? if this isn't your intention, could you rephrase what you said?
 sorry for not quoting how you suggested Tiruin, but posting on this thing is terrible. in a week a should have a better way to do this when i don't have access to a computer.
 I'll be back 10 am tomorrow. ciao!

I have explains time and again what I meant by my post and you simply cannot fathom it. Now you are trying to turn something you misunderstood into me rolefishing. I was not. Your case is bad and you put no effort into presenting it. Weak. Scummy. Like you are trying to stay below notice. Too bad.

Speak now or die.

Is an excellent example of how your defence looks from the other side.

I'm not saying you don't have a case on Ranger; he very well could be scum.  Please update your case on Ranger, and poke him about new things if you feel the need to keep him as your target.

Ford:

For example; your reads say that you fin Hapah to be lurky scum.  Okay get him to show that to everyone else.

Flaw: He can't do that if Hapah doesn't post.

This is true but he hadn't even done this:

Hapah, TheWetSheep, Deathsword and The Soldier: You each have less than 10 posts in this thread. That is unacceptable. Who are your scumpicks? Also, please restate your case for the person you are currently voting for.

Right now, he's coming off to me as putting in strong effort and genuinely seems to be doing his best.

Biggest thing is that he's investigated people without being prompted to. He's taken initiative, and he's got strong convictions. It's hard to argue that that's scum behavior.

I agree, but that's hardly exclusive to the town either.  Unless all of the current scum are among the lurkers, there has to be at least one case of that in this game.  Which is why it's not useless to hunt amongst the active players.  My point though was that you seemed to have decided to not poke him to ascertain your read while you were poking all the other active players, which comes off as defending.  Especially as you tend to repeat "Oh, he's hitting my scumdar, but I'm just going to leave it at that."

My problem with this is that most of your arguments feel like they could be applied to Ranger just as well purely in the context of this game; but you treat Ranger with much more direct suspicion than Zrk2.  I understand the meta means we have an easier read of Zrk2, and Ranger is only in this game, so we can't purely apply the say benefit of doubt here.  Part of the reason Ranger is starting to hit my scumdar again is that he improved greatly for a period and seems to be relapsing now, which is how I imagine instruction through the mafia-chat would look.  I was attempting to get more concrete examples when I was looking through the beginner mafia chats; but sadly didn't turn up any specific pattern, I may take the time to look again if people think it would be interesting to see.  I unfortunately haven't had time to start a new pressure thread on Ranger, so my current read on him is currently neutral, leaning town from my read Friday-Saturday.

I do want to know why, in the context of this thread, you are treating Ranger and Zrk2 so differently.  If the reason is based on the meta argument you posed earlier, why do you seem to not be directly poking Zrk2 and relying on a soft glove approach, and why do you see this as giving us a more accurate read than under pressure would?  I know you already said he produces scum tells when he's pressed, but wouldn't he be able to hide them better if he weren't?

[Captain Ford]

Spoiler: Spoilered for Bigness (click to show/hide)

Right now, he's coming off to me as putting in strong effort and genuinely seems to be doing his best.

Biggest thing is that he's investigated people without being prompted to. He's taken initiative, and he's got strong convictions. It's hard to argue that that's scum behavior.

I agree, but that's hardly exclusive to the town either.  Unless all of the current scum are among the lurkers, there has to be at least one case of that in this game.  Which is why it's not useless to hunt amongst the active players.  My point though was that you seemed to have decided to not poke him to ascertain your read while you were poking all the other active players, which comes off as defending.  Especially as you tend to repeat "Oh, he's hitting my scumdar, but I'm just going to leave it at that."

My problem with this is that most of your arguments feel like they could be applied to Ranger just as well purely in the context of this game; but you treat Ranger with much more direct suspicion than Zrk2.  I understand the meta means we have an easier read of Zrk2, and Ranger is only in this game, so we can't purely apply the say benefit of doubt here.  Part of the reason Ranger is starting to hit my scumdar again is that he improved greatly for a period and seems to be relapsing now, which is how I imagine instruction through the mafia-chat would look.  I was attempting to get more concrete examples when I was looking through the beginner mafia chats; but sadly didn't turn up any specific pattern, I may take the time to look again if people think it would be interesting to see.  I unfortunately haven't had time to start a new pressure thread on Ranger, so my current read on him is currently neutral, leaning town from my read Friday-Saturday.

I do want to know why, in the context of this thread, you are treating Ranger and Zrk2 so differently.  If the reason is based on the meta argument you posed earlier, why do you seem to not be directly poking Zrk2 and relying on a soft glove approach, and why do you see this as giving us a more accurate read than under pressure would?  I know you already said he produces scum tells when he's pressed, but wouldn't he be able to hide them better if he weren't?

Hoo boy.

I'm treating Ranger and Zrk2 different because they're different. Hard to put it any other way. Zrk, for whatever reason, is stubborn and resistant to change. Ranger is actively changing and his opinions and methods have changed visibly through the course of the game.

I've exerted pressure on both them. I've only voted one of them because I don't see any benefit to voting Zrk, but I got an interesting reaction out of Ranger when I voted him. I've left my vote on him because I'm still trying to decide what to make of it.

I don't see why you need to invoke scumchat to explain the changes in his behavior. From what I can see, everything can be derived from things going on in the thread, as well as late-day-one burnout.

...

...and after reviewing it, I can clearly see his changed his vote because I asked him who he thought was worth lynching. Unvote.

[Griffionday]

PFP
Ford:

I don't see why you need to invoke scumchat to explain the changes in his behavior. From what I can see, everything can be derived from things going on in the thread, as well as late-day-one burnout.

I want to see if by studying the effects of scum chat on beginners I can get a clearer idea of tells related to that, if any exist.

[RangerCado]

PFP
Ford:

I don't see why you need to invoke scumchat to explain the changes in his behavior. From what I can see, everything can be derived from things going on in the thread, as well as late-day-one burnout.

I want to see if by studying the effects of scum chat on beginners I can get a clearer idea of tells related to that, if any exist.

Griff: This almost sounds like something you'd say in scumchat... anyone else see that?

[Zrk2]

Zrk2: I was saying my point about the quicktopic wasn't all that strong.

And other corroborating evidence to convince you of what?

I think you misread what I posted. I meant I would need corroborating evidence to convince me that he was scum.

Zrk: I believe there are policy lynches that work in specific situations. If someone where to claim say doctor on Day 1, that would be a reason to lynch if they persisted with the idea. Obviously stupid role-claims are not Pro-Town. (i won't put NQT in this as we all probably have atleast 2 abilities and judging from his posts he has another 2 or more.) I'm going to trust Meta for this day atleast on you, unless your behaviour changes from the norm to something i find as or even more scummy.

Okay. Are there any other policy lynches you endorse? What do you consider to be my meta?

PFP
Ford:

I don't see why you need to invoke scumchat to explain the changes in his behavior. From what I can see, everything can be derived from things going on in the thread, as well as late-day-one burnout.

I want to see if by studying the effects of scum chat on beginners I can get a clearer idea of tells related to that, if any exist.

Griff: This almost sounds like something you'd say in scumchat... anyone else see that?

Just sounds like a theoretical to me.

I have a lighter day tomorrow so I'll update my case on Ranger then.

[TheWetSheep]

Since there seems to be some confusion about the abbreviation of my name, I'll clear it up: I'm fine with anything, but my preferred one would be "Sheep".

Hapah, TheWetSheep, Deathsword and The Soldier: You each have less than 10 posts in this thread. That is unacceptable. Who are your scumpicks? Also, please restate your case for the person you are currently voting for.

Yeah, sorry for not posting much. I've been feeling really tired for the last week or so. Anyway, my reads:

Note about reads: These are those who I have reads on. I don't have time right now to get good reads on everyone, so if someone isn't there consider them about neutral.

notquitethere: Leaning Town. I'm inclined to believe his claim, because I think I know his meta better than anyone else's, and it seems like something he would do. Also, if scum, why would he claim his power instead of firing it off secretly?
Urist Imiknorris: Doesn't do much.
Vector: Hasn't done a whole lot in a while, but when she contributes she contributes a lot, maybe Town
Tiruin: Leaning scum, see below.
The Soldier: Hasn't posted in forever. Didn't see anything suspicious in his posts, but from what I've seen of him he usually looks like this.
Griffonday: Town. For his first, game, I'm impressed. He posts a lot, pressures people, and answers questions well.
Zrk2: Scummy, but if Ford's right, that's mostly his meta. Advocates policy lynching, which I think is a bad idea. Also, is backing off on his read of Ranger when gets voted for it(more on this below).
RangerCado:


Zrk2:
You were suspicious of Ranger because he backed off of his opinion on no-lynches because he was being voted for it. Why are you doing the same thing now, with your reasoning on Ranger?

You told me to restate my reasoning for who I'm voting. If you don't know why I'm voting you, you need to pay more attention, but for your convenience, a sample:

Zrk2: Is lurking no longer a cause for suspicion? Because UI only has 4 posts up till now, and a few others haven't posted much either.

Zrk2:

I thought a No lynch would help as we may have many Night based roles, both helpful and harmful, that everyone may get more information from rather than mislynching a townie.

Or maybe you're trying to fly under the radar and want to avoid the possible blowback from voting to lynch a townie. Either way you need to make a decision. You are either scum trying to ruin the lynch or a totally ineffective townie, and I think lynching either on D1 is tolerable.

This seems a bit rough for someone who's playing their first game. You seem to discount the ability for Ranger to see that a D1 lynch is better. In fact, almost all of your reasoning for your vote on him is for having a different idea. Do you see votes as a good way to pressure new players into learning? From your wording, this seems more like a lynch vote than a pressure vote.

Votes can serve multiple purposes.

That's a vague, unhelpful statement that doesn't really answer my question.

It's also true. Did you read my post? This isn't primarily a pressure vote. This is a you are scum vote. However, if someone scummier comes along I will move my vote.

I never said it wasn't true. Anyway, as I said before, this seems you're voting for him because he had a different opinion. I could see it being a pressure vote, but as a lynch vote it looks scummy. You accuse him of trying to fly under the radar, but fail to keep in mind that it's his first game.

I'm usually not very forceful

Why not get people worked up?

Are you acting out of character for yourself here, or is it something else?

Ranger: I echo Tiruin's sentiments. Calm down, you're tied with two other people. Oh, actually, I just broke that tie. Don't give up.

Tolyk:

Wow. I guess after typing my answer to the first part, I just forgot there was more. Sorry, TolyK:
I would use it on the person I found most scummy. I like to be sure before I lynch.

Hm, WetSheep, what if the person who you thought was most scummy was already being lynched big-time (by a large margin)? And would you use a role-inspect to see whether somebody is telling the truth (for example, NQT's bold post)?

For the first question, I'd probably inspect one of the most competent players, preferably one who I had a gut scummy feeling on. For the second, if it was one-shot probably not, since I like to conserve things, but if it wasn't then yes.

UI: Is there a reason you're not posting much?

Tiruin:

PFP

Zrk

Scumpicks:
1. RangerCado, as explained above.
2. Hapah, for lurking.
3. TheWetSheep, also for lurking.

So lurking is the only other scummy thing you've seen so far?

I can hardly place everyone on my scumpicks list so I listed the biggest offenders.

So more than half of the offenders are lurkers. Explain why are they more suspicious than anyone else, and explain why lurking is a big offense in this context?

TolyK: Get in here and post!

You call Zrk out on being suspicious primarily of lurkers, but your vote is on a lurker yourself? Explain this. In fact, the LurkerTracker says this is your second vote, and your first was an RVS vote, also on TolyK. Do you have nothing else to offer?

And..... that's all I have time for.

[notquitethere]

Ford

NQT: How would you have used that ability if you were scum? 

If I was scum I'd have kept me gob shut and given it to two town right at the end of day one, a minute before a mislynch, and then killed one of them in the night- this is also probably what my scumbuddies would council doing also, though I suppose one of them could have convinced me to save it until later on in the game or use some ploy to place the daykill blame on someone else (maybe falsely set someone up as arsonist).

RangerCado

NQT: ...I really hope you picked wisely with Lovers because if both end up dead and town, your kinda screwed.

It's interesting that you say "you're" rather "we're": if I didn't pick wisely then there are big repurcussions for team town and myself by extension. But if I'm kinda screwed and you're not kinda screwed then you're not town. So are you potentially kinda screwed or not, RangerCado?

Tiruin

It is understandable, and likely obvious. But you know, nothing hurts giving reads. Just that. Two people, out of a variable audience. How can people discern their reads just like that? Deriving from such, your reads are specific when you're talking about a general mass of people. Like, 14 people, really.

I think I get what you're saying. It's in Town's benefit to work together, but I'm wary of giving too much away about who I might have given my powers to. I'll compromise and give my reads at the beginning of Day 2, unless Day 1 drags on even longer.

When you said "die", that means by anyway possible? Lynch/Kill-styled action?
Phase...if someone dies at night, the other dies at day. If at day, then at night. When in the phase does the death happen? At the start, or at the end of the phase?

Yes, and I'm not sure.

Toaster

Re Chat:  Honestly, I'm not sure what to make of your motivations.  You need to work on your salesmanship- you come off as scummy in the way you present it, but I get the feeling it's more based on derp than genuine ill intent.  I'm not saying I think you're town- I'm saying I think you're a derp.

Uh, thanks, I guess? You're the only one that's made this particular reproach and given the largish chance you're not town I'm going to take your assessment here with a pinch of salt. I've done everything in my power to explain my motivations clearly and concisely. What else would you like to know?

TolyK

5: Everyone has tricks up their sleeves. -.- And this part doesn't really matter any ways, why'd you put it here? To make it more belivable?

Possibly it was extraneous: I was trying to be exhaustive in my answers as I knew I'd be getting lots of questions regardless.

Anyone Else, if I've missed your question it wasn't deliberate and I will happily reply if you point it out. There's a lot of noise to tune through here.

[Hapah]

Man, I have no idea how I'm going to catch up. This is depressing. ~__~

[RangerCado]

NQT:i meant that if both were town you'd probably be lynched. I didn't say anything about town or not though if they're both town then we're all screwed and you get lynched (potentially). If one or both of them was scum however, then it was a good gambit... I just thought of something. If one is scum, and someone kills his/her townie lover in the night by accident, then in the Day, that player gets us to lynch them even though their a dead man. Although i may be over thinking this.

[Griffionday]

Okay, seen as we have until Wed I think I'm going to take the night to sit back and re-read the thread.  This hopefully will give the players we need to post so we have more to analyze enough time to get up to speed and active again.

I'll be off and on, so if anyone has any questions for me or things they'd like me to go into more detail about my thoughts on, please do ask.

[Hapah]

I've got two hours, a pot of coffee, and Michael Bolton just made me lol. Let's do this.

(Reading now)

[Griffionday]

I've got two hours, a pot of coffee, and Michael Bolton just made me lol. Let's do this.

(Reading now)

There will be a quiz.

[Tiruin]

Just woke up...having a bad morning...Don't want to explain. Just hinting that it's pain causing it. :S Excuse me being grumpy.

Zrk2:

Besides, if people are trying to find my faults then they can't look for the actual scum.

Ok, read that nice post. Thanks for summarizing.

...But here, you're going along the line of confusing again :/ Yeah, I can see where you're coming at, but if people do the above, then they can also get a read on you -- town or scum, declaiming this along with "town will lose a player" if you get lynched goes along the line of losing confidence in you if people have a vague read on you, because you seem to be crying out your fate and stuff...

Now, I'm still wondering why you can't summarize your case on Ranger. Yes, you quoted the post in full -- but this sounds like or relates to the application of the fallacy of (shifting the) Burden of proof: "I need not prove my claim, you must prove it is false." due to the lack of summary...You could

Code: [Select]

[list][/list] and all, or just Poke-link at Ranger.

Sheep/Ford (on voting TolyK)

You call Zrk out on being suspicious primarily of lurkers, but your vote is on a lurker yourself? Explain this. In fact, the LurkerTracker says this is your second vote, and your first was an RVS vote, also on TolyK. Do you have nothing else to offer?

When you mean nothing else to offer, do you mean by my votes? Have you only used the LurkerTracker (and by that, I mean chasing my vote) as a conducive tool to come up with your reads? Because you've missed...blatantly everything else I've offered. Meaning that I can sense you're skimming, unless you can clarify what you mean by "offer".

Leaning scum, why? Because of how my vote goes? Expound please, because that's only 1 of your 2 suspects; going by votes is pretty impractical at this point because I'd like to point you to look it over again, and if I may use your own logic -- you've only 9 posts. And that you somehow forgot your read on Ranger.

TolyK is a man of lesser words than most, and I'm poking at him. Despite the lurkertracker saying he has more posts than others -- I'm still poking at him because he has the tendency to be too open-minded, giving off both town/scum/vague tells as well as using a lot of...unconventional analogy(?) or in other words has a different style of posting/logic. Different in the way that I'm [variably] confused about his alignment everytime I play with him. Glad to see he replied.

Though of all the people, I'm curious -- why me?

TolyK

It confirms that you actually read through everything, which (in my eyes) lowers your chances of being scum.

So in your statement that was to me -- addressing UI as an experiment, your conclusion was...this? How does reading lower the 'chances' of UI being scum? How does it pertain to chance anyway?

Zrk2 seems the most scummy now, though as Ford said (and Griff noted) it's "him acting in character". Possible link? I only have the gut feeling and general association, since I haven't read many of his posts in-depth and those I have don't really seem wrong to me. Might vote for.
I don't honestly know about Ranger, he's really mixed for me. Probably won't vote.
NQT is really strange. I can't find a flaw in his logic, and haven't yet seen how it would help scum EXCEPT if he did two townies.
If two people die soon from being linked, and they're town, NQT'll probably be a good lynch. But for now, I want to see where this gets us. Probably won't vote.

Recap? Meh, doesn't seem like I want to vote for anyone quite yet. Still got that "don't want to mislynch" stuff, probably.

Granted, details and your time is understandable. However, "don't seem that you like to want to vote for anyone" + "mislynch stuff" isn't. You can vote anyone, anyone that irks your suspicion-meter. Like what I'm doing to you.

And a mislynch? That means you're subtly poking at the vote leaders, right? Because I can't see anyother way of you concluding a mislynch and then not pertaining it to them even after what you said. Clarify. Please. Doesn't seem like you've much of an inclination to press your vote though, because you're being vague with that vote, but not of its use except in stating a mislynch. Is there any case on your suspects which validate them for a mislynch?

The reasoning is fallible.

What's the sole purpose of you not voting? Why aren't you pressuring anyone?

NQT

I think I get what you're saying. It's in Town's benefit to work together, but I'm wary of giving too much away about who I might have given my powers to. I'll compromise and give my reads at the beginning of Day 2, unless Day 1 drags on even longer.

...So there's a difference between now, an amount of time in D1 (which may or may not include people posting more), and D2.

What.

What difference does that make?!

Yes, and I'm not sure.

You didn't even bother to ask?

NQT:i meant that if both were town you'd probably be lynched. I didn't say anything about town or not though if they're both town then we're all screwed and you get lynched (potentially). If one or both of them was scum however, then it was a good gambit... I just thought of something. If one is scum, and someone kills his/her townie lover in the night by accident, then in the Day, that player gets us to lynch them even though their a dead man. Although i may be over thinking this.

You are overthinking this. @_@

Anyway, good 'gambit'? What's the gambit there? Also, in the later parts, if one is scum and their townie lover dies, they will also die in the next phase -- unknown when as NQT seemingly forgot to ask. Why would that killer lynch that person? I mean, it could work given the case of him/her being suspicious before, or if NQT is alive and claims whoever he acted upon...but why?

I've got two hours, a pot of coffee, and Michael Bolton just made me lol. Let's do this.

(Reading now)

Try warm milk. It works
Griff/Ford - I've linked where your conversation continued. @Ford: You've voted Ranger/Zrk because they're...mainly different? To find out their playstyles and primarily because of that? Or was your vote on them because you found something scummy?

PFP
Ford:

I don't see why you need to invoke scumchat to explain the changes in his behavior. From what I can see, everything can be derived from things going on in the thread, as well as late-day-one burnout.

I want to see if by studying the effects of scum chat on beginners I can get a clearer idea of tells related to that, if any exist.

...You're treading the meta line again. Previous scumchat things have little to no use in the current game. While people may still retain their modus of communication from previous games, its variably very darn hard to correlate something done in an incognito channel and in a mainthread...

Also, what invoke scumchat? I don't see Griffy invoking scumchat anywhere in that post above yours.