Print

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

[notquitethere]

Flabort

I guess I can get lynched and killed if it will tell you the truth about who's who and what's what.
Cheeetar is the SK. Nerjin is Scum with a night kill and a once-per-day vote reset, plus the one-shot daykill. Jack A T is his scumbuddy. Scripten is either a third scum or another third party.

Hold on a moment, how can you make such bold pronouncements? Where are you pulling these hyper-precise claims from? Not from your three claimed powers, that's for sure. Speak quick, you're at L-1 by my count.

TolyK

I do think I know who isn't scum.

Please enlighten us!

Varee
You've not done a damn thing all game besides flailing a bit and chatting about houses. Make a case!

MBP, yeah I get the fact you're replacing in and Jiokuy didn't even post, but your grace period is now up. Make a case!

Wolf, your play always sets off alarm bells for me but it's doing it double. Your Day 1 play was soft balls, soft balls everywhere. Like here where you drop a nascent case on Cheetah for another RVS question vote. Who's the worst player in the game right now?

Everyone not voting Flabort: What do you think of the arguments for lynching Flabort?  Why do you believe a different target would be a better choice?

He's probably a spent force, power-wise, but he's also incredibly sketchy. I wouldn't be sad to see him go, but I'd rather get rid of players that are trying to coast along.

I believe that Cheeetar and Flabort are both scum

So you think Flabort colluded with Cheetah in scum chat to put him at L-1 so he could then do the hammering. It's possible.

Jack, your playing fine. Do I have any outstanding questions from you?

Imp, you can be thorough when you want to be but who are you going to vote today?

Cheetah, your first case was nonsense and your play has continued to be self-serving since. Give us a reason not to hang you now.

Ironyowl, your flying just below the radar, with a damn narrow focus. I don't trust you. Tell me one thing that's happening in this game that I should be paying attention to.

Nerjin, behind your Presidential bluster you've been light on cases of substance. What do you think of the players that have received less attention like Irony, Imp, MPB?

Silthuri, by my count you made one case on Day 1 and have done bugger all of use today. Unless I'm missing something? Please point out a recent contribution you've made that brings us closer to lynching scum.

Toaster, does your gut still say Flabort like it did yesterday?

Persus13, Scripten, I don't have anything to say to you two right now. Do you have anything to say to me?

[Nerjin]

Nerjin, behind your Presidential bluster you've been light on cases of substance. What do you think of the players that have received less attention like Irony, Imp, MPB?

Silthuri, by my count you made one case on Day 1 and have done bugger all of use today. Unless I'm missing something? Please point out a recent contribution you've made that brings us closer to lynching scum.

Light on... Are you... Have you READ my posts? I've been making post after post discussing [logically mind you] why Flabort is scum. As for those three? I don't have a read on them.

I'd like to ask what contributions YOU'VE made to finding scum though since you apparently believe yourself to have done such an excellent job.

I've been overwhelmed with a lot of other things. Now CYOM2 has ended, I'm going to give this more focus, starting with tonight... I've survived until Day 2 which means *rolls up sleeves in real life* time for some analysis.

I don't see a case here. I see no analysis. I see a bunch of lame duck questions where you just sorta lob stuff at the wall to see what sticks. You've said, time and again, that you want to 'kill people who are coasting along'. That's fine and good. EXCEPT FOR THE FACT THAT THERE ARE PEOPLE ACTING LIKE SCUM ALREADY!!!

Should we just not lynch suspicious people, who are actively posting suspicious things, in favor of the people who aren't posting at all? That seems rather like coasting by to me.

Oh wait... You said that's something you're against!

Maybe make a case as for why we should ignore players like Flabort and instead focus on people who aren't posting anything one way or the other.

[4maskwolf]

This is getting ridiculous. Flabort is OMGUS-y scum and I'm becoming more and more certain that 4mask is his scumbuddy. (Can you summarize your suspicions? The thread is really long and my time is limited lately. Would be appreciative.)

Lolz if I was his scumbuddy my vote would be solidly stuck on him.  You were in the last game I was scum, you saw what I did to my scumbuddies.

My suspicions of who?

Wolf, your play always sets off alarm bells for me but it's doing it double. Your Day 1 play was soft balls, soft balls everywhere. Like here where you drop a nascent case on Cheetah for another RVS question vote. Who's the worst player in the game right now?

Everyone not voting Flabort: What do you think of the arguments for lynching Flabort?  Why do you believe a different target would be a better choice?

He's probably a spent force, power-wise, but he's also incredibly sketchy. I wouldn't be sad to see him go, but I'd rather get rid of players that are trying to coast along.

I believe that Cheeetar and Flabort are both scum

So you think Flabort colluded with Cheetah in scum chat to put him at L-1 so he could then do the hammering. It's possible.

Well, obviously I'm the worst player.  I always am.  But other than me... worst as in poor play or worst as in not doing anything worth a damn.  Because I have two different answers, depending.

When I say scum, I mean "anti-town".  I'm pretty sure the two of them are NOT on the same team, or at least not knowingly.  Flabort's play reminds me a little bit of Imperial Guardsmen's play in Supernatural 7, when he freaked out as sk and flailed wildly.  My best guess is he is anti-town without backup.

[flabort]

Imp At the time of my first attempt to vote-ato, I thought I would have one vote on each. The same was my belief for my second attempt, after Wuba PMed me to explain the ability a bit more. However, I hadn't really used the full potential of the ability, so Wuba PMed me again to explain more, and I STILL did not realize it's full potential, and voted 8 times each for those two.
I'm fairly certain Wuba only let me change the votes because he was letting me slide and he had just clarified it to me by PM. He didn't say anything about actually being able to change it at will.

It may be clear to you how I had complete control over the situation, but I did not understand that I did at the time. It's fairly evident that I felt fear from two votes, because nobody else had gathered any after Nerjin reset the votes yet. I am a rather short-sighted person, using only the tools I perceive at the times I perceive them. I could not see the rest of the 48 hours going any better then the previous hours had, causing me to panic.

I don't see the rest of the game going well if you continue to lynch me.

Nerjin So if what I thought your case was is not your case, then what on earth is your case? Because if it's not my doublestandards and setting up the loaded guns, then I don't see what you're saying. To me, your denial of me being correct on that sounds like scum.
Also, that was NOT how much effort I was putting in; that is how much effort I was SHOWING.

Flabort

I guess I can get lynched and killed if it will tell you the truth about who's who and what's what.
Cheeetar is the SK. Nerjin is Scum with a night kill and a once-per-day vote reset, plus the one-shot daykill. Jack A T is his scumbuddy. Scripten is either a third scum or another third party.

Hold on a moment, how can you make such bold pronouncements? Where are you pulling these hyper-precise claims from? Not from your three claimed powers, that's for sure. Speak quick, you're at L-1 by my count.

Observation of the individuals, responses to tests (such as my name-calling), their reactions to events (Nerjin's subtle reaction to the daykill cinched the belief that it's his), vote analysis. More background work then abilities or question asking. Subtly manipulating one person to ignore another and looking at their reaction when this person is brought back into their perception.
Basically, giving everyone enough potatoes to bury themselves with and watching what they do with them.
PPE: For example Nerjin's post about how he has a null read on the three people you mentioned. I had manipulated him into ignoring most of the crowd in favor of tunnel visioning on me. Now that you bring them up, he dismisses them as nothing; he doesn't care about spreading out his scum-hunting, he doesn't care about those three. He feels that they are inconsequential to his goal as scum.
Or 4mask's post in reply to Scripten, or more specifically Scripten's post that 4mask is replying to. It shows that 4mask is at large falsely suspect by Scripten, who is also tunnel-visioning, but on less of a scale, in order to further his own goals. Showing that Scripten is possibly a survivor, watcher, or lyncher, if he isn't aligned with Nerjin.

[notquitethere]

Nerjin

Light on... Are you... Have you READ my posts? I've been making post after post discussing [logically mind you] why Flabort is scum. As for those three? I don't have a read on them.

Yeah, what I'm saying is you've been very tunnely. Now you'll be super vindicated if Flabort does flip scum, but if he doesn't you'll have wasted two days ignoring everyone else.

I'd like to ask what contributions YOU'VE made to finding scum though since you apparently believe yourself to have done such an excellent job.

Quite the contrary, I admitted I'd not been giving this game my full focus. I've still managed to develop a few lines of suspicion. I gave Tiruin's claim a good grilling and I'm beginning to get back on track again.

I don't see a case here. I see no analysis. I see a bunch of lame duck questions where you just sorta lob stuff at the wall to see what sticks. You've said, time and again, that you want to 'kill people who are coasting along'. That's fine and good. EXCEPT FOR THE FACT THAT THERE ARE PEOPLE ACTING LIKE SCUM ALREADY!!!

Should we just not lynch suspicious people, who are actively posting suspicious things, in favor of the people who aren't posting at all? That seems rather like coasting by to me.

Flabort's at L-1, I'm not going to hammer him right now. So I'm questioning him. I'm developing cases, sure my cases are mostly such-and-such a player is not really contributing but being unable to form suspicions and place votes outside of RVS is the big scum tell. I've looked over a lot of games to ascertain this. But I'm glad you're getting riled up. Says good things about your engagement. You've got a lot of investment in this.

Maybe make a case as for why we should ignore players like Flabort and instead focus on people who aren't posting anything one way or the other.

It's more that, I don't want to focus solely on Flabort. Manipulating the attention of the town is how scum survive until the mid to late game with very little scrutiny. Also, I believe Flabort's power claims, so killing him would net me less info than someone else.

Tiruin, now that you've acquainted yourself with what happened, what's your take on Flaborts Day 1 behaviour?

Wolf, yeah that's not a bad comparison. But look, Cheetah is most likely not scum. He's got the most posts in the whole game. He makes cases. He came off badly at the end of Day 1, but you can't really think he's coming off worst in either sense, right?

Flabort, I'd like to see that vote analysis if it really exists. Are you taking notes? Without providing evidence for these claims (linked posts etc.) I can only conclude you're pulling them out of thin air to make you seem more observant than you have been. If you have been taking notes, give us a screenshot of your spreadsheet.

[Cheeetar]

Nerjin I for one am stunned that my president has not consulted with his script writer prior to posting- these heavily uncensored and realistic dialogues with the people are scaring me.

I guess I can get lynched and killed if it will tell you the truth about who's who and what's what.
Cheeetar is the SK. Nerjin is Scum with a night kill and a once-per-day vote reset, plus the one-shot daykill. Jack A T is his scumbuddy. Scripten is either a third scum or another third party.

Excellent! Now we know who everyone is- we confirm that you're telling the truth by lynching you, and we can then lynch and vig the third parties and scum. Flabort should be happy to be lynched in this circumstance, right?
Would you agree, Irony Owl?

Lolz if I was his scumbuddy my vote would be solidly stuck on him.  You were in the last game I was scum, you saw what I did to my scumbuddies.

Appealing to your own meta from a game in which you lost and people were angry about your bussing? I'm not falling for it, 4maskwolf.

Spoiler: Imp (click to show/hide)

Cheeetar:

Also: huzzah for no night deaths! We're doing something right.

When you typed this, did you have -any- consideration or concern for arsonist, conversion, or other negative things that may have happened in place of a N1 kill, or was 'no kill=good, pro-Town play' the only thing you considered?

Pretty much. If it is the case that the scum's goals were accomplished during night 1, I will of course look back on my happiness as stupid- but I don't know. That news has yet to arrive- I think we may have actually had a pretty good night 1!

Cheeetar:

Cheeetar, if another player had made the choice you did at the end of D1, what questions would you want to ask that player?  Do you consider 'acting to save oneself' to be appropriate for every player under every condition of high pressure/immediate threat of death?

Not for every circumstance, but if a townie is given a choice between themselves dying and somebody else who they don't really know anything about yet dying, the townie should probably pick the other dude. Is this a controversial view?

I bolded the question you failed to answer.

In addition to still wanting it answered, I also want an explanation of why you completely ignored that question when you answered me.

You ask in turn 'Is this a controversial view', and you ask it while you are engaged in a debate with multiple people discussing views very counter to what you expressed.  So I say that the answer is clearly yes.  So clearly, I also ask you in turn, why did you ask me if it was a controversial view?

Oh, jeeze. Okay, I would probably ask them how they thought of the person they hammered, and if they had any faith in somebody saving them with a day power. I was at the time considering waiting for a day power myself, but... I was posting from my tablet at uni and had not that long a time to decide before somebody else would notice they could hammer me.

I asked you if it was a controversial view because I didn't see as much suspicion as was being projected on me by Flabort and Irony Owl in my actions- I thought you were similarly inclined, so I was asking if I was really that bad at Mafia that I didn't know how suspicious my move was viewed by everyone.

Spoiler: 4maskwolf (click to show/hide)

Everyone voting Flabort: What are your points against him?  What alignment do you believe him to be?

4mask, do you understand how people could see these kind of questions as filler, given that people have been posting their reasons for voting against him? A recap:
1) Scummy day 1
2) Used an immensely powered one-shot day 1 to OMGUS
3) Terrible reasoning for it
4) Didn't hammer because he wanted somebody else to be seen as responsible for the kill (although he claimed to be certain they were both scum, so why wouldn't he want responsibility?)

I think his alignment is anti-town. Beyond that, I'm not sure. Irony Owl was chainsawing pretty hard- possible scum? Don't know.

Spoiler: notquitethere (click to show/hide)

Cheetah, your first case was nonsense and your play has continued to be self-serving since. Give us a reason not to hang you now.

Because I'm a nice guy once you get to know me.
I've been scumhunting and I've fingered one. I'm going to follow this lynch through on him. My first case provoked discussion, and my play was self-serving in one specific instance which you yourself said you didn't believe was particularly suspicious.

[webadict]

Hopefully this is right. If not, let me know.

Vote Count
------------------------
4maskwolf -
Cheeetar - 4maskwolf, IronyOwl,
flabort - Cheeetar, Nerjin, Persus13, Scripten, Tiruin,
Imp -
IronyOwl -
Jack A T -
Mysteriousbluepuppet -
Nerjin - flabort,
notquitethere -
Persus13 -
Scripten - Toaster,
Silthuri -
Tiruin -
Toaster -
TolyK -
Varee - notquitethere,

Not Voting - Imp, Mysteriousbluepuppet, Silthuri, TolyK, Varee, Jack A T,

9 To Hammer. Day ends Monday 7 PMish CST.

[notquitethere]

Yeah, my count was off. Jack was voting Flabort yesterday but hasn't done so today. Why no votes, Jack?

[Persus13]

Yeah, my count was off. Jack was voting Flabort yesterday but hasn't done so today. Why no votes, Jack?

As was TolyK. So I'd like him to answer the same question.

[IronyOwl]

Cheeetar:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Urgh. I'm not gonna quote all of that.

Because there's a lot of it or because you prefer addressing vaguely interpreted gists rather than the actual content?

"I should be happy to be lynched because then people would lynch the person who lynched me"
No, I'm not going to plan to be lynched to prove that I was right.

That wasn't the question, nor was it the situation.

First of all, you weren't right. You didn't suspect Shakerag at all. flabort's the one who was correct in this case.

Secondly, the question wasn't "wouldn't you get yourself lynched to prove to town that your suspicions were correct." It was "wouldn't you get yourself lynched if doing so outed scum you were not aware of."

Third, the actual question was how you could be glad flabort had outed himself in setting you up, but wouldn't have felt it worthwhile to out scum by letting them hammer you. You failed to address... well, either of those scenarios, but also the actual question of how they intersect.

"I am scum because I voted to lynch somebody rather than die myself."
No. I had no way of knowing what alignment he was, and spoiler alert: turned out to not be townie.

Right, there's exactly the problem. You had no way of knowing what their alignment was. You didn't suspect them. It is a spoiler to mention that they weren't town.

You've displayed nothing but the most contemptible, cowardly, self-preserving terror, both in actual actions and hypothetical responses. I even went so far as to ask if you'd intentionally mislynch a townie because they suspected you, and you brushed past it to carry on about how you had no choice.

So apparently the answer is yes, you would intentionally mislynch a townie if they suspected you, simply because you don't want to die yourself. You're not scum because you "voted to lynch somebody rather than die yourself." You're scum because you have no regard whatsoever for your supposed faction, and instead nothing but unadulterated intention to personally survive at any cost.

"You want me to believe you! Aha! I've caught you!"
Errr... I want you to at least consider my points. You're tunneling a bit much here.

And flabort was just voting who he felt was scum! Clearly he did nothing wrong.

You responded to my asking flabort for clarification about this own role by pre-emptively reminding me that he could lie about it and asking me to consider your assumptions instead. That's not asking me to consider your words in a reasonable manner. That's more of the blind panic that's convinced me that there's no chance in hell you're town.

Not that you really have "points," mind. You have a self-serving set of assumptions that you'd like me to believe because they're convenient for you. For the record, I do believe flabort, and now webadict, in stating that said assumptions are incorrect.

I guess I can get lynched and killed if it will tell you the truth about who's who and what's what.
Cheeetar is the SK. Nerjin is Scum with a night kill and a once-per-day vote reset, plus the one-shot daykill. Jack A T is his scumbuddy. Scripten is either a third scum or another third party.

Excellent! Now we know who everyone is- we confirm that you're telling the truth by lynching you, and we can then lynch and vig the third parties and scum. Flabort should be happy to be lynched in this circumstance, right?
Would you agree, Irony Owl?

If doing so gave us meaningful insights into several other players' behaviors, and not just information about whether he was benign or telling the truth about his multi-revives, then absolutely.

KAAAAAAAAAAAAAAW:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Seeing as you see Flabort as equally suspicious for creating the situation- why do you view my reaction as more scummy than him setting it up?

He had the good sense to set it up but not actually fire. If he'd panicked all the way, he could have just hammered a target, any target, all on his own.

Which he would have done anyways if people decided not to vote for the two people he pointed the gun at. "Well I KNOW [person] is a communist so HAMMER VOTE! You'll see". You seem to think that if we hadn't played his game he would have left the votes as they were.

Turns out I was incorrect on that, yes; if he'd known he could, he would have just unilaterally murdered the both of them and been done with it.

That still doesn't excuse Cheeetar's behavior in dealing with the situation, though. The setup looked... unreasonable but negotiable, shall we say?

So a townie should be eager to die because then the people who voted him would be suspicious...? I reject that. I'm not a jester- I have no desire to be lynched. If me being lynched aids the town later, huzzah, but I'm not planning for it to happen.

A townie should be eager to die if the only way to kill him is either the town's will or something scum have to reveal themselves to do.

Except that it wasn't the town's will. It was merely flabort's will. Don't pretend that Flabort is some great patriot for flip-flopping on the issue. As I already said, it was Flabort's will that one of the two die.

If we'd discussed it and eventually decided to hammer one or the other, that would have been town's will. If we'd discussed it and decided to all band together and hammer someone else, that would have been town's will. If someone had jumped in like a vulture, rather than a NOBLE AMERICAN EAGLE, and hammered, that would have pointed to them being scum.

The scenario set up by flabort wasn't final, and therefore not unilateral. Cheeetar made it both (or at least bilateral) to save his own skin.

Okay, I'm not gonna roleplay this one either.

Why suddenly dropping the act? Getting serious? Getting nervous?

flabort:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

It didn't really filter through my brain what there being an SK-ally meant until I was thinking about how an SK-ally would work. I saw the flip, but my thought at the time was "huh, impossible alignment, included just to annoy shakerag because wuba is frustrated with the role".

Mm. Possible, but why did you consider SK-Ally to be an "impossible" role?

OK, fine, my given reasons for voting him are a bit of a double standard. But I notice you're voting him and finding him suspicious too.
So we both want to live and used that as our justification for yesterday. We still suspect each other and find each other to be scummy.

So why should people believe you over him?

flabort: Did your one-shot target two or up to two targets? What would have happened if you applied an uneven number of votes to each, or tried to vote additional targets?

I would interpret it as up to two targets.
With an uneven number of votes, it would imply suspicion of one over the other. I chose not to, so it's a moot point.
If I had tried to vote additional targets, I guess it would have failed, or would have not counted the additional targets.

But your stated reason for not hammering them both was thinking it would result in a nolynch. If there was nothing you know of stopping you, why not just hammer one of them instead?

Let me think of a way to best answer that then.
But how can you pretend to hate communism so much when you're the head of Russia?
But seriously, how can you be so blind to the truth? Drop your "president" act and tell me exactly what you think of each player right now, how they can or could relate to me or Cheeetar, and what the results tell you.
I guess I can get lynched and killed if it will tell you the truth about who's who and what's what.
Cheeetar is the SK. Nerjin is Scum with a night kill and a once-per-day vote reset, plus the one-shot daykill. Jack A T is his scumbuddy. Scripten is either a third scum or another third party.
Your case on me is that I am a big fat hypocrite, and that I am not genuinely scum hunting. Tell me if this is accurate, and then tell me I haven't been hunting for scum.

Didn't you just say you thought Nerjin was misguided town?

TolyK:

I missed this.

Imp, TolyK, CAPTAIN EAGLES, Varee: If you were in Cheeetar or Shakerag's position yesterday, would you have hammered the other choice as quickly as you could have? If you'd gotten on before either of them, would you have immediately hammered whichever one of them you liked or trusted least? Why?

Actually, it isn't prisoners dilemma in that both players could call each other in, not was it a simultaneous game. (this is in response to Imp's post as well). It's a sequential game of inequality, all of us are players and only two would be punished completely. Thus, hammering is the only option in this scenario.

What? How does that follow?


4mask:

Everyone not voting Flabort: What do you think of the arguments for lynching Flabort?  Why do you believe a different target would be a better choice?

I think they're pretty solid in general, though I strongly disagree with the "everything Cheeetar did is flabort's fault because he had absolutely no choice" line of reasoning. It also loosely feels like there's something more bold about flabort's panicking than Cheeetar's, which pushes my own suspicions closer to Cheeetar.

I think Cheeetar's the better lynch because he's been openly and unabashedly self-serving to a much greater degree. To some extent that's probably just because he's opened his mouth more, but he's displayed absolutely zero shame or remorse for what he did, and tried to justify it retroactively with the fact that Shakerag wasn't town. flabort at least acknowledges that what he did was panicky and desperate and probably not a great idea at least in the long run, and gets the actual points for correctly guessing at least one of his targets.

Which I mean, I feel like I could almost make a whole separate point about. flabort hasn't gone particularly overboard in saying "BOOYAH I WAS RIGHT ALL ALONG SUCK IT BITCHES RIGHT MOVE RIGHT MOVE AWWWWWWWW YEAAAAAAAAAAH!" Cheeetar clearly has; every time he opens his mouth, he can't help but gloat over how fortunate we are to have killed an SK Ally and/or how right he was to quicklynch because Shak wasn't town and therefore would have done the same. Even ignoring the rather obvious issue of knowing that what he did wasn't townlike because he knows nontown would have been more likely to do it, he's reveling in something he had absolutely no intentional hand in, whereas the person who actually pinpointed scum seems to know it wasn't a great move he can use as an omnishield against any and all suspicion.

On the other hand, of course, flabort's talk of being functionally invincible doesn't sit well with me.


NQT:

Ironyowl, your flying just below the radar, with a damn narrow focus. I don't trust you. Tell me one thing that's happening in this game that I should be paying attention to.

You seem to have covered all the ones I know of. Cheeetar's being incredibly self-serving, flabort's crashing and burning, Varee's being useless and I haven't had a chance to go back and see how normal that is...

Conversely, thank you for reminding me that Silthuri exists.

Spoiler: On The Nature of Cowardice (click to show/hide)

I want to say that, in Cheetah's position, I'd probably have done the exact same thing. When you're hammer-tied and you don't know the alignment of the person you're tied with, hammering them is probably the right move regardless of your alignment.

Personally, I'm viewing Cheeetar's actions at the end of D1 as a null tell. I know that I would likely do the same in his place, no matter what alignment I was. We should instead be lynching Flabort.

I agree with this sentiment.  I can't blame Cheeetar for what he did (though he had no way of knowing the outcome, so he gets zero credit for hammering a dangerous third party), because Flabort put them both in a sticky situation.

Actually, it isn't prisoners dilemma in that both players could call each other in, not was it a simultaneous game. (this is in response to Imp's post as well). It's a sequential game of inequality, all of us are players and only two would be punished completely. Thus, hammering is the only option in this scenario.

However, causing this scenario to happen is very scummy. As I already said, and so did others.
Re-voting Flabort if I don't find anything end noteworthy.

I was online and watching at the time.  I did not hammer, though I also had no idea if a hammer was actually possible until after Cheeetar had hammered (I did not know if flabort's votes had a measure or not, I was not sure what was going on.  My last refresh before the hammer was before wubba posted the votecount showing the 8 votes on each).  Had I seen the votecount, I would not have hammered.

If I had been picked to be one of the targets of the prisoner's dilema, I'm not sure what I would have done on the spot.  I've never seen a situation like this before; I did not view it 'one or both of those players is about to be killed' until it happened; I've little previous experience with hammers.  This has been a great chance to think about it and decide.  I think I would have been quite calm and discussing matters as I understood them - I didn't really understand hammer at that point.

Now that I -know- that Cheeetar would instantly kill if in a situation where he could instantly die, if I were balanced against Cheeetar, this is what I would do:

If I did not have a highly useful night ability, I would attempt to discuss and wait, and probably try to talk flabort into changing the situation to allow more discussion and less risk of instant death, reminding that he can always change it back when the talking is done.

If I had a highly useful night ability, one that I believed the use of would tremendously benefit Town, and it was -Cheeetar- I was balanced against (I know I have no time in that case, for Cheeetar will instantly vote me the first moment he is aware of the choice, it for sure is a race measured in seconds), I would try to kill Cheeetar and save my use of the night ability.  I would use it and pray I lived long enough into the night for it to take affect; when day came if I was still alive I would fullclaim, explain my reasoning, accept and agree that my actions were absolutely suspicious, and spend that day scumhunting.  Maybe I could help uncover useful clues for my team; for sure I would put a ton of effort into doing so and into clearing the mud I'd added to the water by my actions.

So I seem to be in the minority here (I think Jack backed me up as well, but didn't notice it in this pass), but Imp encapsulates my reasoning on this rather well.

[flabort]

Sorry, have to do chores so not enough time to do this post all at once; that's why it's late.

Hmmm... so I'm not at T-1 like suspected, but T-4. That's some nice subtle manipulation yourself, there, NQT. A bit of a lie, too, but it could be a mistake.

flabort:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

It didn't really filter through my brain what there being an SK-ally meant until I was thinking about how an SK-ally would work. I saw the flip, but my thought at the time was "huh, impossible alignment, included just to annoy shakerag because wuba is frustrated with the role".

Mm. Possible, but why did you consider SK-Ally to be an "impossible" role?

OK, fine, my given reasons for voting him are a bit of a double standard. But I notice you're voting him and finding him suspicious too.
So we both want to live and used that as our justification for yesterday. We still suspect each other and find each other to be scummy.

So why should people believe you over him?

flabort: Did your one-shot target two or up to two targets? What would have happened if you applied an uneven number of votes to each, or tried to vote additional targets?

I would interpret it as up to two targets.
With an uneven number of votes, it would imply suspicion of one over the other. I chose not to, so it's a moot point.
If I had tried to vote additional targets, I guess it would have failed, or would have not counted the additional targets.

But your stated reason for not hammering them both was thinking it would result in a nolynch. If there was nothing you know of stopping you, why not just hammer one of them instead?

Let me think of a way to best answer that then.
But how can you pretend to hate communism so much when you're the head of Russia?
But seriously, how can you be so blind to the truth? Drop your "president" act and tell me exactly what you think of each player right now, how they can or could relate to me or Cheeetar, and what the results tell you.
I guess I can get lynched and killed if it will tell you the truth about who's who and what's what.
Cheeetar is the SK. Nerjin is Scum with a night kill and a once-per-day vote reset, plus the one-shot daykill. Jack A T is his scumbuddy. Scripten is either a third scum or another third party.
Your case on me is that I am a big fat hypocrite, and that I am not genuinely scum hunting. Tell me if this is accurate, and then tell me I haven't been hunting for scum.

Didn't you just say you thought Nerjin was misguided town?

Because I thought the win-con on a SK-ally was impossible to fulfill, forgetting that it's possible after death.

I guess they shouldn't except that I've put more thought into my actions today.

Because I didn't know for sure at the time, just largely suspected, and I didn't want to be wrong and pick the wrong one. It's like choosing between Door 1 and Door 2, when one of three doors has a flood of acid behind it; you don't pick door three, because you've been told what's behind it is worth less then the other two already. Anyways, where the metaphor breaks and trying to fix it doesn't matter, I didn't know for sure at the time if I'd get it wrong, and didn't know I could pick both.

Then I compiled my notes and did a vote analysis. And knew that I was wrong about him being a misguided towny.

NotQuiteThere: I didn't keep them on the computer, and I lack a scanner at the moment, but I can copy a cleaned up summary of the analyisis (started a bit too late I admit) to this spoiler for you:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Cheetar: First vote is on Tiruin, for reason of it being the best choice. Really trying to get her hammered ASAP. Gets voted back by Tiruin in response. Gets my vote for his plan too. Also attracts 4mask's vote. Backs off and unvotes in favor of Jiokuy, which is an easy target because Jiokuy is often absent for extended periods of time. Is unvoted by Tiruin with a PFP. Votes me for voting Shakerag. Voted by Silthuri for "No. Just no," for bullshit.
Votes at daykill: Made 3 votes, voted by 4 players
Is first voted by me. OMGUS back to me. Gets 8 votes from me, votes Shakerag in knee-jerk response.
Day2: Voted by Persus for knee-jerk response. Votes Nerjin for trying to save Shakerag. Gets voted by 4mask for same as persus, but ppe unvote. Voted by Irony for appearing to have an untownlike wincon. Voted by me. Changes vote from Nerjin to me. Voted by Wolf again.
Day 2 votes: Made 2 votes. Voted by 5 players.

Nerjin: First threatens 4mask for pointless reasons, but doesn't vote. Goes after the easy 4mask vote when 4mask is defeatist. Voted by Silthuri for obscuring information. Voted by 4mask for his earlier threats.
Votes at daykill: Made 1 votes, voted by 2 players
Votes me first, for not believing me; responses indicate it's his fault the daykill happened, though.
Day2: Gets voted by Cheetar. Votes me for being selfish, hypocritical, for casting off suspicion. Voted by me for being scum.
Day 2 votes: Made 1 votes. Voted by 1 players.

Scripten: First Random votes Tiruin for same reasons as Shakerag. Gets voted by 4mask for rolefishing. Unvotes when he gets caught up, votes TolyK for gut feelings.
Votes at daykill: Made 2 votes, voted by 1 players
Day2: Votes me for the easy vote. Voted by Toaster for this vote, for bandwagoning, for dropping his cases.
Day 2 votes: Made 1 votes. Voted by 1 players.

Jack A T: First vote is on 4mask, for his vote on Cheetar. Changes from 4mask to Persus for persus's vote. Unvotes for honesty from persus. Votes me for lack of content and lack of information gathering.
Votes at daykill: Made 3 votes, voted by 0 players
Day2: Nothing.
Day 2 votes: Made 0 votes. Voted by 0 players.

Shakerag: First random votes Tiruin, tags on claim of miller being fake; later flip reveals this is to throw suspicion off himself. Is then voted by Persus for pre-game banter and basically a totally random vote. Moves vote from Tiruin to Persus (in response) for a weak case. Unvotes when nothing happens. Changes vote to me for asking questions, and asks "the question". I OMGUS.
Votes at daykill: Made 3 votes, voted by 2 players
Gets 8x votes from me, gets vote from Cheeetar for the hammer.



Myself: First vote is Cheeetar, for his dumb plan. Gets voted by 4mask for off-topic. Gets voted for lack of discernable content by Jack. Change vote to imp; given reason RVS, really to attract Cheeetar's attention and get a rise from him. Change vote to Varee for not trying to scum hunt. Get voted by TolyK for Potato. Gets voted by Shakerag with "the question". Change vote to Shakerag for the question. I get Cheeetar's vote for that. Voted by Persus for trying to survive.
Votes at daykill: Made 4 votes, voted by 6 players
Votes Cheetar first. Gets voted by Nerjin for someone else's shenanigans. Gets OMGUS from Cheetar.
One-shot vote-atos, 8x votes each on Cheetar and shakerag.
Day2: Votes Cheetar. Voted by Cheetar. Voted by Nerjin for being a "communist". Voted by Persus for being a better lynch then Cheeeeeetar. Easy voted by Scripten. Gets voted by Tiruin for mutual missunderstanding. Vote on Nerjin when I create these notes that I'm copying, drop list of who is scum.
Day 2 votes: Made 2 votes. Voted by 5 players.


4mask: First random voted by Tiruin. Votes Scripten in response for rolefishing. Changes vote to Cheeetar later for his silliness with Miller claims, and FoS's Tiruin. Gets voted by Jack for his own vote. Gets random voted by NQT. Voted by Persus for etiquette. Changes own vote from cheetar to me for off-topic conversation. Unvotes because it's not really a worthy vote. Immediately voted by Nerjin for defeatism. Votes Nerjin back for his threats.
Votes at daykill: Made 4 votes, voted by 5 players
Day2: Votes Cheeetar, ppe unvotes. Votes Cheeetar again for being defensive, gut feeling.
Day 2 votes: Made 2 votes. Voted by 0 players.

Imp: First gets voted by me, to get a rise from Cheeetar. Votes Varee for the same reason Irony did.
Votes at daykill: Made 1 votes, voted by 1 players
Day2: Nothing!
Day 2 votes: Made 0 votes. Voted by 0 players.

Irony: Votes Silthuri at random. Changes vote to Varee for planning to lie.
Votes at daykill: Made 2 votes, voted by 0 players
Day2: Votes Cheeeeetar for having a non-town wincon, or suspicion of such.
Day 2 votes: Made 1 votes. Voted by 0 players.

Jiokuy/MBP: Gets an easy vote from Cheetar.
Votes at daykill: Made 0 votes, voted by 1 players
Day2: Nothing!
Day 2 votes: Made 0 votes. Voted by 0 players.

NQT: First vote is on Persus, very pointed test of faith. FoS tiruin for role related stuff. Changes vote to Tiruin from Persus for multiple reasons; most are pointless, and now void. Unvotes Tiruin and votes 4mask with a bit of randomness and a bit of wariness. RVS's TolyK. Changes to Varee for being lazy.
Votes at daykill: Made 5 votes, voted by 0 players
Day2: Voted by Tiruin for █████████████? Votes Toaster for being yet to place a vote. Votes Varee for not doing a damn thing.
Day 2 votes: Made 2 votes. Voted by 1 players.

Persus: First vote is on Shakerag for basically random reasons. FoS shakerag. Is voted by NQT for not bandwagoning; implication is that they are both testing eachother. Changes vote from Shakerag to 4mask for etiquette. Gets voted by Jack for that vote. Voted by Shakerag for no reason. Votes me for my claim of being able to survive it.
Votes at daykill: Made 3 votes, voted by 3 players
Day2: Votes Cheetar for hammer. FoS me for the same. Votes me for Cheeetar being a null tell.
Day 2 votes: Made 2 votes. Voted by 0 players.

Silthuri: Gets voted by Irony, completely random. First own vote is on Nerjin for roleplaying so that information can't be analized. Unvotes later with no new vote. Soon votes Cheeetar for his "crap".
Votes at daykill: Made 2 votes, voted by 1 players
Day2:Nothing!
Day 2 votes: Made 0 votes. Voted by 0 players.

Tiruin: First random votes 4mask. Is voted by shakerag, seems random but is to throw suspicion around. Then gets Scripten's vote for same reason. Gets voted by Cheeetar in order to hurry the hammer; doesn't come. Changes vote from 4mask to Cheeetar for his plan. Later, unvotes to read.
Votes at daykill: Made 2 votes, voted by 3 players
Day2: Votes NQT for reasons that I cannot decipher. Unvotes when NQT replies. Votes for me for being confused and confusing.
Day 2 votes: Made 2 votes. Voted by 0 players.

Toaster: No votes by the time the daykill comes.
Votes at daykill: Made 0 votes, voted by 0 players
Day2: Voted by NQT for not voting. Votes Scripten for dropping his cases and bandwagoning.
Day 2 votes: Made 1 votes. Voted by 1 players.

TolyK: First attracts NQT's vote for RVS. Gets voted by Scripten for gut reasons. Votes me for seeding my role (But potato! It's funny and fun! Nerjin was doing it!).
Votes at daykill: Made 1 votes, voted by 2 players
Day2:Nothing!
Day 2 votes: Made 0 votes. Voted by 0 players.

Varee: Gets voted by Irony for intending to lie. Gets voted by Imp for same reasons. Voted by me for not hunting. Gets voted by NQT for poor engagement.
Votes at daykill: Made 0 votes, voted by 4 players
Day2: Voted by NQT for chatting about nothing and not doing anything.
Day 2 votes: Made 0 votes. Voted by 1 players.

((I have to note that communism, in it's pure form, is for the good of all, and capitalism is for the good of the individual; Nerjin is just disguising this fact with 'MERICA; Not saying I am scum like he's trying to imply, just saying that communism was designed the way the town faction is supposed to work))

[Nerjin]

[[Not a game related post but I actually like the idea of communism. It's pretty neat as an idea. It's just for the Roleplay. If you like Communism that's actually super interesting and I'm more than willing to discuss it as a system of government via PM if you like. Unless you're just sniping at me. In which case Blah...]]

[notquitethere]

Flabort

Hmmm... so I'm not at T-1 like suspected, but T-4. That's some nice subtle manipulation yourself, there, NQT. A bit of a lie, too, but it could be a mistake.

Honest mistake. You had eight votes on you according to the lurker tracker, and I'd already discounted Shakerag's. Turned out a few more of them were from Day 1.

NotQuiteThere: I didn't keep them on the computer, and I lack a scanner at the moment, but I can copy a cleaned up summary of the analyisis (started a bit too late I admit) to this spoiler for you:

Thanks! It's good to see you've put in the work. I can guarantee that some of your conclusions will be false, but at least they're not coming out of nowhere. So, by your own analysis, Nerjin is hardly the scummiest player. He's tunnelling you sure, but is your vote anything other than an OMGUS?

[Imp]

Posting from work, barely have time to try and follow posts, not really respond yet.  I'm aware I have a few questions waiting, but they're not very short answer ones, so they can wait for after work.

Wanted more detail about this, notquitethere:

I can guarantee that some of your conclusions will be false, but at least they're not coming out of nowhere.

Do you mean false as in his reasoning was genuine, but conclusions inaccurate, or false as in you think he's making up his conclusions and lying about what he claims to think?

[Cheeetar]

Spoiler: Irony Owl (click to show/hide)

Cheeetar:

Urgh. I'm not gonna quote all of that.

Because there's a lot of it or because you prefer addressing vaguely interpreted gists rather than the actual content?

No, because going through the effort of cutting all that up into understandable and easily read comments & responses would give me a headache.

"I should be happy to be lynched because then people would lynch the person who lynched me"
No, I'm not going to plan to be lynched to prove that I was right.

That wasn't the question, nor was it the situation.

First of all, you weren't right. You didn't suspect Shakerag at all. flabort's the one who was correct in this case.

Secondly, the question wasn't "wouldn't you get yourself lynched to prove to town that your suspicions were correct." It was "wouldn't you get yourself lynched if doing so outed scum you were not aware of."

Third, the actual question was how you could be glad flabort had outed himself in setting you up, but wouldn't have felt it worthwhile to out scum by letting them hammer you. You failed to address... well, either of those scenarios, but also the actual question of how they intersect.

I'm not planning on getting lynched. No. Fuck that- that's stupid. I have nothing against people lynching scum who hammer me, but I'm not going to go about acting such that that happens. That you think I'm scummy for wanting to keep playing this game (rather than let Shakerag, who I didn't know the alignment of) is not okay.

You've displayed nothing but the most contemptible, cowardly, self-preserving terror

Rude.

"I am scum because I voted to lynch somebody rather than die myself."
No. I had no way of knowing what alignment he was, and spoiler alert: turned out to not be townie.

Right, there's exactly the problem. You had no way of knowing what their alignment was. You didn't suspect them. It is a spoiler to mention that they weren't town.

You've displayed nothing but the most contemptible, cowardly, self-preserving terror, both in actual actions and hypothetical responses. I even went so far as to ask if you'd intentionally mislynch a townie because they suspected you, and you brushed past it to carry on about how you had no choice.

So apparently the answer is yes, you would intentionally mislynch a townie if they suspected you, simply because you don't want to die yourself. You're not scum because you "voted to lynch somebody rather than die yourself." You're scum because you have no regard whatsoever for your supposed faction, and instead nothing but unadulterated intention to personally survive at any cost.

Sorry? Where did you get that conclusion from?

"You want me to believe you! Aha! I've caught you!"
Errr... I want you to at least consider my points. You're tunneling a bit much here.

And flabort was just voting who he felt was scum! Clearly he did nothing wrong.

You responded to my asking flabort for clarification about this own role by pre-emptively reminding me that he could lie about it and asking me to consider your assumptions instead. That's not asking me to consider your words in a reasonable manner. That's more of the blind panic that's convinced me that there's no chance in hell you're town.

Not that you really have "points," mind. You have a self-serving set of assumptions that you'd like me to believe because they're convenient for you. For the record, I do believe flabort, and now webadict, in stating that said assumptions are incorrect.

I'm not sure you're really responding to what I said with half of the stuff you have here.
If Webadict really has confirmed whatever the hell it is you were saying about Flabort's abilities (he could've lynched two people with it, iirc, which was not what you were saying initially,) congratulations- I assumed something incorrectly about a power that Flabort himself didn't know how to use.

I guess I can get lynched and killed if it will tell you the truth about who's who and what's what.
Cheeetar is the SK. Nerjin is Scum with a night kill and a once-per-day vote reset, plus the one-shot daykill. Jack A T is his scumbuddy. Scripten is either a third scum or another third party.

Excellent! Now we know who everyone is- we confirm that you're telling the truth by lynching you, and we can then lynch and vig the third parties and scum. Flabort should be happy to be lynched in this circumstance, right?
Would you agree, Irony Owl?

If doing so gave us meaningful insights into several other players' behaviors, and not just information about whether he was benign or telling the truth about his multi-revives, then absolutely.

Yep, sure, just completely change your tune as soon as your scumbuddy comes into the question. I should jump at the ability to be lynched by the combined efforts of precisely two people, but for a now confirmed townie to die having listed people he was certain as scum and third party? No, no, that's stupid, that wouldn't help town at all!

I think Cheeetar's the better lynch because he's been openly and unabashedly self-serving to a much greater degree. To some extent that's probably just because he's opened his mouth more, but he's displayed absolutely zero shame or remorse for what he did, and tried to justify it retroactively with the fact that Shakerag wasn't town. flabort at least acknowledges that what he did was panicky and desperate and probably not a great idea at least in the long run, and gets the actual points for correctly guessing at least one of his targets.

Which I mean, I feel like I could almost make a whole separate point about. flabort hasn't gone particularly overboard in saying "BOOYAH I WAS RIGHT ALL ALONG SUCK IT BITCHES RIGHT MOVE RIGHT MOVE AWWWWWWWW YEAAAAAAAAAAH!" Cheeetar clearly has; every time he opens his mouth, he can't help but gloat over how fortunate we are to have killed an SK Ally and/or how right he was to quicklynch because Shak wasn't town and therefore would have done the same. Even ignoring the rather obvious issue of knowing that what he did wasn't townlike because he knows nontown would have been more likely to do it, he's reveling in something he had absolutely no intentional hand in, whereas the person who actually pinpointed scum seems to know it wasn't a great move he can use as an omnishield against any and all suspicion.

On the other hand, of course, flabort's talk of being functionally invincible doesn't sit well with me.

Bleh. Being happy that anti-town are dead? Scum! Lynch him! Jesus, sorry for not being depressed about your loss. I don't appreciate your hyperbole at all, by the way- that's not what I've been doing and you clearly know that because you are a rational human being.

Nice save by putting the tiny bits of suspicion on Flabort, though! That way people won't think you wanted him to survive when he flips anti-town.

If you're just going to keep attacking my character rather than what I've done (or continually misrepresent what happened), we're done, Irony Owl. You're not going to convince me to stop voting for Flabort, whatever strange reason it is you don't want him to be lynched I do not care about- he's scum, or at least anti-town.