Print

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

[Scripten]

Ah, there we go. I wish you guys would have reacted a little faster.

One sec, analyzing wagon.

[4maskwolf]

Remember that due to extension, day does not end for another 24 hours.  Please use your time wisely.

[Scripten]

Okay, so far we've had a number of different reactions that I'll be responding to. First, Caz himself. A few points follow.

Caz:
Scum Points
- More than ready to put a vote down for "stupid actions" despite townreading me as evidenced here
- The comment about "not caring if it looks like OMGUS" feels like trying to build a wagon on an outed PR through appeals to emotion
- Has not yet posted reads on other players or responded in a pro-town informative way yet, despite me asking several times
Town Points
- His reaction does feel like town angry for being killed, though this could also be attributed to anger in general

TolyK:

First, replies, then analysis.

Spoiler: "Replies to TolyK" (click to show/hide)

- that was nowhere near day end

I had to give time for people to react and for reads to be put out there. Consider that, if we had not extended, the day would now be over. This point is moot.

- you did not cite ANY reason for the killing

Actually, go back and read my posts. I've been scumreading Caz all game, if you haven't noticed. This point is moot.

- you weren't voting for him (were you? I think not)

Voting for him would have been redundant and useless. He would have been able to figure out that this was a reaction test if I had voted him. This point is moot.

How can Scum sniff out power roles quickly? If you're a dayvig, HOW can they know who you are via observing at night? Or, how do you know they have an investigative role?

Oh, I don't know... maybe the lookout mechanic? There's also a high likelihood that scum have investigative roles, since this is a PR-heavy setup. It would be unbalanced for town to have a lot of power roles and scum not to.

Alright, we have 13 players. Considering normal rules, that's three or maybe four mafia. In terms of power balance, at least, since this is not quite a normal game (by the description).
Chance of you hitting scum D1: 3.5/12
Chance of scum hitting you N1: 1/9.5
Chance of you hitting scum, assuming worst case (two town deaths): 3.5/10~1/3

This is actually good analysis, and is a bit of a townslip, or at least a non-third party slip. It's assuming that we have no serial killers or other anti-town third parties and that there are only two scum. (If my math is correct.) However, keep in mind that night kills are not just a roll of the dice. Scum choose their targets, so considering myself a high-value target is more reasonable than examining statistics on the night kill.

Actually, a tl;dr for this would be "you want to use your vigkill, so you use it right now otherwise you might not have the chance", which is horrible town logic and mediocre scum logic as well. You come off as either a day-SK or a mafia member where the mafia daykills instead of nk's. Or just a really selfish vigilante.

But now we're on the second post where you mention an SK. That's a little inconsistent. You seem to be arguing that I'm "horrible town" more than that I'm scum or anti-town here, yet you still feel happy to lay down a vote. Why are you not worried about lynching town?

PR= power role? What if you just shot one? Also, people get the second flip EXCEPT YOU POSTED IT BEFORE PEOPLE COULD GET TO TALK TO HIM without any change in perception (it's like talking with a dying cancer or AIDS patient).

Actually, I specifically asked him, several times, to give reads, which he has not done despite giving him time to do so. You're acting as if my alleged action cut off discussion, when it explicitely did not. (Seriously, go back and read the post with the "dayvig" in it. I encourage discussion.) Also, yes, PR=rower role.

Also, if you were all about efficiency, then why not kill at day end, where there are already formed reads and you know who is scummiest in your eyes.

So... you have a problem with me killing too early and with me killing too late? Seems a little like a catch-22, doesn't it? Caz hadn't posted his reads and still hasn't, despite the "dayvig" being in the late-middle of the day. (I didn't post it at the beginning of the day, and you saying so is a subtle but noted misrepresentation.)

You seem to be going in the "WOW" factor, also "no scum would be that stupid", as evidenced by the first linked post (dayvig announcement) and by my three posts here (sorry 'bout that).

So, vote for Scripten.

I'm not sure what you are saying here. It could go two ways: 1) You believe that no scum would be this stupid and are voting town or 2) You think that I am scum... drawing attention to myself intentionally... so that I can take a refuge in audacity... despite being fairly townread and having no votes on me...?

Strange. I will be very excited to see how you choose to respond to this.

Technically, shooting D1 isn't really that stupid, but shooting at the beginning of the day (rather, not right at the end) is definitely.

Hmm... interesting presentation here. This is true, but I didn't post the "dayvig" at the beginning of the day. The end of the day is suboptimal because it gives no time before the lynch for discussion, so I wonder why you keep saying this. Also, does "stupid"=scum to you? Because you seem much more concerned about arguing that I'm stupid than you are about arguing that I'm scum.

Scum Points
- Inconsistent with hypothetical situations, using only the most convenient situations where it suits arguments rather than taking the situation and analyzing it
- Makes several allusions that he is voting "stupid town" rather than scum; some of these appear to be unintentional (IE scumslips)
- Subtly misrepresenting me on a few points, namely revolving around encouraging reads, discussion, and using the dayvig action at various points in the day
Town Points
- Wants a reason and motivation for actions, though the accusation holds no weight, it does have pro-town motivation inherently
- Uses statistical analysis relatively accurately, which is town-motivated unless it wholly replaces scumhunting, which it has not

Mastahcheese:

Spoiler: "Replies to Mastahcheese" (click to show/hide)

"The faster I murder people, the faster we get information!"
You realize that the reason a flip helps is because it allows you to go back over what that person said, with more context.
If you kill someone before any real scumhunting happens, then it is horribly ineffective, because then knowing their flip doesn't help, because you have nothing to hold it to.

Have you also noticed that Caz still hasn't posted reads yet? All he's done is push that I'm scum for "shooting" him.

And the total bullshit of "well, now we get information from their reads! By the way, can you post your reads because I was over eager to murder your ass?" is laughable at best. Yeah, of course their reads won't be biased after that.

Technically, a player about to die won't have to worry about scum killing them in the night and, if they are town-sided, they should be giving their most honest, accurate reads for the rest of the town to look at. Does it make them biased? Perhaps, depending on the player. That said, a team player should be responding in a pro-town manner, as death does not mean a loss when you are town.

That said, I'm happy about this post as it reinforces my town read on you. It feels much more town-sided than scum-sided in tone.

Honestly, I view trigger-happy vigilantes the same way I view serial killers. So even if you do turn out to be town-sided, I still don't think I'd be upset. You're dangerous either way, and too happy for that.

Less happy about this one, though. I don't like that you are okay with lynching town. Let's say I was a one-shot dayvig. My power would have been spent here, so you're essentially throwing away a lynch on town and giving the scumteam extra time for the sake of a kneejerk reaction. That's not particularly pro-town.

Scum Points
- A little too excited to waste a lynch on "bad town" for me, YMMV
Town Points
- First reply was concise and reasonable, without inconsistencies or logical flaws
- Tone has seemed to come from a town-side mindset, though the second post is a bit of a kneejerk reaction

Review:

- Caz has not come out of this looking too good to me. He has not posted reads or responded in a way that I would expect town to, save for the anger (which could happen with any alignment) in his posts.

- TolyK is wavering a bit. On the one hand, certain parts of his posts feel town, but many points do not have strong foundations and he fits hypothetical situations to be convenient toward his points rather than letting these points come from the situation. Gaining some points on my scum-meter for this reaction.

- My town read on Mastahcheese has mostly been reinforced by his reaction. The only thing giving me pause is that he stated that he is willing to lynch town if he sees them as dangerous, though he presents this openly, which is town-sided, as opposed to the sneaky, easily-backpedaled way TolyK did.


In case it's not obvious, this was a reaction test.

Now, have at it.

[TheDarkStar]

I'm confused. It seems now that Scripten tried to daykill, but no action resulted. At the time, it seemed like a day rolecop result. What was that post intended to be?

[Scripten]

I'm confused. It seems now that Scripten tried to daykill, but no action resulted. At the time, it seemed like a day rolecop result. What was that post intended to be?

A dayvig is a daytime vigilante. That is, a town-sided killing role that shoots its target during the day rather than at night. What I did was create a post that faked a dayvig shot on Caz to garner reactions, which I've analyzed above.

I'm hoping to get more from a couple of players as they desperately backpedal.

[Teneb]

Scripten, do you remember one of the biggest scum-tells around? I think it was called "lying". Ever heard of that? Furthermore, your entire case on Caz is based around your lie and her reactions to it. I'd say being unwilling to cooperate with whomever fired a daykill (fake as it was) at you is entirely reasonable. That covers both her vote on you and not giving you the reads you asked for, no? As for your third point, could you point out where she is appealing to emotion?

I still think Vivalas is scum or anti-town, mind you. Just that this is a much bigger load of crap than anything that has come out of Vivalas (who still hasn't answered some of my questions!)

Also Caz is a she, if you didn't notice from my post.

[TolyK]

Ah, there we go. I wish you guys would have reacted a little faster.

One sec, analyzing wagon.

So.

I was right after all.

Daykilling without any reason is remarkably dumb, which is why I doubt there's an actual daykill.

PPE:

TolyK:

First, replies, then analysis.

- that was nowhere near day end

I had to give time for people to react and for reads to be put out there. Consider that, if we had not extended, the day would now be over. This point is moot.

- you did not cite ANY reason for the killing

Actually, go back and read my posts. I've been scumreading Caz all game, if you haven't noticed. This point is moot.

I didn't notice, specifically because you mentioned NOTHING of it in the dayvig post.
Also, pardon my time miscalculation, as I had literally JUST started playing the game around 24 hours before.

- you weren't voting for him (were you? I think not)

Voting for him would have been redundant and useless. He would have been able to figure out that this was a reaction test if I had voted him. This point is moot.

Well, not if you had presented it correctly. Whatever, moot is moot.

How can Scum sniff out power roles quickly? If you're a dayvig, HOW can they know who you are via observing at night? Or, how do you know they have an investigative role?

Oh, I don't know... maybe the lookout mechanic? There's also a high likelihood that scum have investigative roles, since this is a PR-heavy setup. It would be unbalanced for town to have a lot of power roles and scum not to.

Quite a bit of speculation. Rolecop is one of many power roles scum can have, so I don't see how it's more likely than a roleblocker or even mechanics-specific role.

Alright, we have 13 players. Considering normal rules, that's three or maybe four mafia. In terms of power balance, at least, since this is not quite a normal game (by the description).
Chance of you hitting scum D1: 3.5/12
Chance of scum hitting you N1: 1/9.5
Chance of you hitting scum, assuming worst case (two town deaths): 3.5/10~1/3

This is actually good analysis, and is a bit of a townslip, or at least a non-third party slip. It's assuming that we have no serial killers or other anti-town third parties and that there are only two scum. (If my math is correct.) However, keep in mind that night kills are not just a roll of the dice. Scum choose their targets, so considering myself a high-value target is more reasonable than examining statistics on the night kill.

Uh. I said... 3 or 4 mafia...
Scum choose their targets, yes, but how would they know you were a dayvig without first investigating you, if you didn't shoot the first day?
You can't be more valuable to be killed just because you've got an undetected gun in your pocket...
And statistics don't work if you don't know the situation, so assumptions.

Actually, a tl;dr for this would be "you want to use your vigkill, so you use it right now otherwise you might not have the chance", which is horrible town logic and mediocre scum logic as well. You come off as either a day-SK or a mafia member where the mafia daykills instead of nk's. Or just a really selfish vigilante.

But now we're on the second post where you mention an SK. That's a little inconsistent. You seem to be arguing that I'm "horrible town" more than that I'm scum or anti-town here, yet you still feel happy to lay down a vote. Why are you not worried about lynching town?

Uh, where did I say you're town in here?
I said that this logic would be horrible were you town. Which is why I said that you are most likely NOT town.
If you were town, I'd prefer to lynch you than any other townie specifically for the reason that you can kill people, and are doing it without thinking (thus you could very negatively affect the outcome). So... lynching you in ANY case is better than a random lynch.

Inconsistent? I don't think so.

PR= power role? What if you just shot one? Also, people get the second flip EXCEPT YOU POSTED IT BEFORE PEOPLE COULD GET TO TALK TO HIM without any change in perception (it's like talking with a dying cancer or AIDS patient).

Actually, I specifically asked him, several times, to give reads, which he has not done despite giving him time to do so. You're acting as if my alleged action cut off discussion, when it explicitely did not. (Seriously, go back and read the post with the "dayvig" in it. I encourage discussion.) Also, yes, PR=rower role.

Your action cut off "pure" discussion, i.e. where people didn't know one of the participants was going to die. ("Change in perception").
What I mean is, if you wanted to get genuine discussion to analyze after he was dead, it would've been wasted as people's perception of the situation changes after they know that he's about to die! Especially scum buddies, who will probably go bus him if that happens! See the problem?

Also, if you were all about efficiency, then why not kill at day end, where there are already formed reads and you know who is scummiest in your eyes.

So... you have a problem with me killing too early and with me killing too late? Seems a little like a catch-22, doesn't it? Caz hadn't posted his reads and still hasn't, despite the "dayvig" being in the late-middle of the day. (I didn't post it at the beginning of the day, and you saying so is a subtle but noted misrepresentation.)

@bottom: see above.
Nope. Where did I have a problem with killing too late? Please specifically quote it. I do not remember saying ANYTHING like that, but feel free to prove me wrong.

You seem to be going in the "WOW" factor, also "no scum would be that stupid", as evidenced by the first linked post (dayvig announcement) and by my three posts here (sorry 'bout that).

So, vote for Scripten.

I'm not sure what you are saying here. It could go two ways: 1) You believe that no scum would be this stupid and are voting town or 2) You think that I am scum... drawing attention to myself intentionally... so that I can take a refuge in audacity... despite being fairly townread and having no votes on me...?

Strange. I will be very excited to see how you choose to respond to this.

Very excited, indeed.
"WOW": He did a vigkill D1, then said "discuss this", must be part of a big show.
"no scum would be that stupid": to out themselves as daykilling vigilante who missed, then suspicion is lifted from you, yes. Especially being "townread" and having no votes on you, you can even get away with never having suspicion on you.

Technically, shooting D1 isn't really that stupid, but shooting at the beginning of the day (rather, not right at the end) is definitely.

Hmm... interesting presentation here. This is true, but I didn't post the "dayvig" at the beginning of the day. The end of the day is suboptimal because it gives no time before the lynch for discussion, so I wonder why you keep saying this. Also, does "stupid"=scum to you? Because you seem much more concerned about arguing that I'm stupid than you are about arguing that I'm scum.

I'm saying (since you're likely not actually stupid):
  it would be stupid for town to do that
  you're likely not actually stupid
=> ergo, you're not town
+ we lynch non-town
=> ergo, we lynch you
QED.

Sorry again for "beginning of day".
For more information why "end of day", please contact Jim Groovester.

(More seriously, though, your post was near the end, which actually does null some of my points).

Scum Points
- Inconsistent with hypothetical situations, using only the most convenient situations where it suits arguments rather than taking the situation and analyzing it
- Makes several allusions that he is voting "stupid town" rather than scum; some of these appear to be unintentional (IE scumslips)
- Subtly misrepresenting me on a few points, namely revolving around encouraging reads, discussion, and using the dayvig action at various points in the day
Town Points
- Wants a reason and motivation for actions, though the accusation holds no weight, it does have pro-town motivation inherently
- Uses statistical analysis relatively accurately, which is town-motivated unless it wholly replaces scumhunting, which it has not

Eh, whatever. I can't really comment on analysis of myself from someone who I was voting to lynch, can I?
I mean, I can, but what's the use?

I'm hoping to get more from a couple of players as they desperately backpedal.

Why would you even say that? It's like trying to explain that you're still doing stuff, while simultaniously nullifying it.
"We will be bombing your positions at 12 o'clock at 0200 hours" and then actually doing it.


As a plus, we won't actually be lynching a vigilante. I'm guessing my vote stays on for now?

[flabort]

So Scripten, you're saying you're a damned liar?
Might I remind you that A) I don't swear lightly, and B) "Lynch all liars" is a thing on many mafia oriented sites?
Also, if you admit to not having a kill, then why aren't you now voting your suspect?

I'm not changing my vote.

Can you explain the scum motivation you apparently see behind my actions, Flabort, as you now see fit to vote me? Do you want to see me lynched today, then?

Well, let's see. A scum or SK would seek to eliminate as many players as they can as fast as they can, without giving those players time to explain themselves and without being caught killing the most town person. Caz isn't the most town, but neither is he the least, by a long shot. It looked to me, before your 'analysis', like you were trying to heap pressure onto him, after he'd already accepted that he was dead; from his perspective if he was going to die, then there was no reason to cooperate with his killer. I don't see any reason to cooperate with a killer, either, especially if they're going to badger their victim.
Yes, even before you said it was a 'reaction test' I wanted to see you hanged.

After your analysis, my opinion of you only goes down.
Your analysis of Caz: He also indicated there where your 'evidence' is that he did not understand what you were doing; while the word 'vig' indicates a kill, Caz is somewhat inexperienced and can be excused for not knowing that. Also keep in mind that out of his other four choices in that collumn were his top two scum picks, himself, and a mostly absent player, which made you the last man standing as far as picks went. Your evidence is circumstantial at best.
This also feels like tunneling, like you are LOOKING for points to make him look bad. For example, his not answering your call for reads: As far as he's concerned, he may as well be dead by your hands, why would he cooperate with you?
Your analysis of TolyK: I object to your second "scum point"! He's saying that if you are town, which seems unlikely, then you are very stupid boneheaded town that is better removed from the court than left sabotaging it from within.
Furthermore, Objection! There is nothing to misrepresent here. You tried to use a daykill on someone who may have otherwise contributed to the town on the second day. Furthermore, you now claim NOT to be able to daykill, and that this was all a reaction test; reaction test is another way of saying "I'm backpedaling as fast as I can", at least in the case of lying stupid town, lying SKs, or lying scum. A good towny would not need to LIE to form a reaction test.
You seem to have a balance of scum points and town points on TolyK. Is this so that you don't seem suspicious when he dies later tonight and the lookout sees you visiting him?
Your analysis of Mastahcheese: Clearly the town's favorite right now, and the least scummy player. You already knew this when you posted your 'analysis' because the vote count was just before your post. So in order to not make waves, fit in, and possibly buddy Cheese, you read him as mostly town. And seriously, if someone is more harmful to the town as town then the scum are, then seeing them die early game when a few town deaths are acceptable and not completely fatal to the town wincon is perfectly fine to my books.


TheDarkStar Scripten tried to daykill Caz. Only once people started voting him he admitted that it was a lie and tried to spin it as trying to get some other players to scumslip; namely Caz and TolyK. He's backpedaling pretty hard himself with the quote "I'm hoping to get more from a couple of players as they desperately backpedal". I'm interested in seeing his reaction to my analysis of his analysis, and seeing his flip.

[mastahcheese]

Yeah, I think my vote's going to stay where it is.

I can appreciate a good scum trap, but pretending to daykill someone, and then asking for reads and crap afterwards?

I just...

TolyK did a better job explaining the "change in perception" bit than I could.

I don't even right now.

[Scripten]

Deathsword:

Scripten, do you remember one of the biggest scum-tells around? I think it was called "lying". Ever heard of that? Furthermore, your entire case on Caz is based around your lie and her reactions to it.

It's called a reaction test. Also, your checkbox usage of scumtells is absolutely suboptimal town play. Explain to me the scum motivation for me to do what I just did. Explain why I, a player with no votes, very little suspicion cast my way, and a decent amount of sway with the town, would perform something this visible and risky if I was scum.

Caz did not know that my reaction test was a reaction test. That would make moot the entire process of trying to scumhunt. As for the "Lynch all liars" mantra that you're using, you are being very simplistic in your understanding of the concept. In a newbie game, claiming doctor or cop as vanilla town is a suboptimal play, because that causes the actual role to counterclaim. However, this setup is wholly different and you're ignoring the consequences of the game's mechanics. This is a closed setup where people do not know what roles there are and thus counterclaims are not likely during the early parts of the game.

I understand the implications of my actions. You don't seem to, and this worries me.

I'd say being unwilling to cooperate with whomever fired a daykill (fake as it was) at you is entirely reasonable. That covers both her vote on you and not giving you the reads you asked for, no? As for your third point, could you point out where she is appealing to emotion?

I wouldn't. It just doesn't make sense to avoid doing something pro-town just because someone who might be scum said it would be a good idea. Think about the logical implications of what you're saying.

As for her appeals to emotion, consider the way she's acted angry and upset at me. These are possible town tells, but she could also be scum working to make people feel sorry for her. After all, you're defending her avoidance of posting reads and other anti-town behavior. Look at your play from an objective viewpoint and get back to me.

I still think Vivalas is scum or anti-town, mind you. Just that this is a much bigger load of crap than anything that has come out of Vivalas (who still hasn't answered some of my questions!)

Also Caz is a she, if you didn't notice from my post.

So you think I pushed a wagon on Vivalas, then suddenly changed my mind at the last second to try to get Caz lynched? I just don't understand the way you're working here. Did you actually read my analysis and replies or are you just kneejerk reacting because you're upset at my reaction test?

Apologies for the mistaken pronouns, Caz. I try to check when I can, but I'm not always thorough.

[flabort]

It's called a reaction test.

Reaction tests can be done without a STUPID lie.

[Deus Asmoth]

Scripten, surely you were expecting this kind of backlash from your actions? You're not a jester, are you?

flabort, the 'e' comes before the 'u'.

[Scripten]

TolyK:

I didn't notice, specifically because you mentioned NOTHING of it in the dayvig post.
Also, pardon my time miscalculation, as I had literally JUST started playing the game around 24 hours before.

Were you just ignoring the rest of the game? I mean, my post wasn't exactly made in a vacuum.

Quite a bit of speculation. Rolecop is one of many power roles scum can have, so I don't see how it's more likely than a roleblocker or even mechanics-specific role.

There's any number of things that could happen. I don't claim omniscience, just speculation. I don't understand how this makes my play scummy, however. Can you explain?

Uh. I said... 3 or 4 mafia...
Scum choose their targets, yes, but how would they know you were a dayvig without first investigating you, if you didn't shoot the first day?
You can't be more valuable to be killed just because you've got an undetected gun in your pocket...
And statistics don't work if you don't know the situation, so assumptions.

Fair enough. That said, I was townreading you for the analysis. I consider it more of a town point with that additional explanation.

Uh, where did I say you're town in here?
I said that this logic would be horrible were you town. Which is why I said that you are most likely NOT town.
If you were town, I'd prefer to lynch you than any other townie specifically for the reason that you can kill people, and are doing it without thinking (thus you could very negatively affect the outcome). So... lynching you in ANY case is better than a random lynch.

Inconsistent? I don't think so.

I see. So this is a policy lynch, then? Do you policy lynch town power roles?

Your action cut off "pure" discussion, i.e. where people didn't know one of the participants was going to die. ("Change in perception").
What I mean is, if you wanted to get genuine discussion to analyze after he was dead, it would've been wasted as people's perception of the situation changes after they know that he's about to die! Especially scum buddies, who will probably go bus him if that happens! See the problem?

But that is exactly it! Her scumbuddies would start bussing her very quickly, you're right. That's actually a town point in her favor, though it does not exclude her from being a third party. Under normal circumstances, you cannot get these reactions, and can you deny that this has not generated a lot of content chock full of analysis. Honestly, I'm alright with being today's lynch if I have to be so that people can use my analysis to scumhunt later. That said, I will not stop scumhunting or playing until the lynch hits.

@bottom: see above.
Nope. Where did I have a problem with killing too late? Please specifically quote it. I do not remember saying ANYTHING like that, but feel free to prove me wrong.

You said that I should be leaving time for discussion, so dayvigging too late in the day would be suboptimal. I actually agree with this.

Very excited, indeed.
"WOW": He did a vigkill D1, then said "discuss this", must be part of a big show.
"no scum would be that stupid": to out themselves as daykilling vigilante who missed, then suspicion is lifted from you, yes. Especially being "townread" and having no votes on you, you can even get away with never having suspicion on you.

But I didn't miss. I specifically discussed with 4maskwolf how I would approach this situation, since my power is a little more specific than just a dayvig. You seem to think that I'm utterly surprised that I'm being scumread here. (I'm not.)

I'm saying (since you're likely not actually stupid):
  it would be stupid for town to do that
  you're likely not actually stupid
=> ergo, you're not town
+ we lynch non-town
=> ergo, we lynch you
QED.

So what you're saying is that for an actual dayvig action, I would be stupid town or scum. For a reaction test I'm stupid scum only, however?

I don't follow your logic here.

Eh, whatever. I can't really comment on analysis of myself from someone who I was voting to lynch, can I?
I mean, I can, but what's the use?

Well, for one thing, when I flip town, people will be looking back at my posts to analyze what I said about you. It would be prudent to respond as any alignment.

Why would you even say that? It's like trying to explain that you're still doing stuff, while simultaniously nullifying it.
"We will be bombing your positions at 12 o'clock at 0200 hours" and then actually doing it.

To put people off balance and to state that I'm on the offensive side of this interaction. Being put on the defensive makes scum nervous in any situation, and that makes them more likely to slip up. The more aware the are that I'm aware of that, the more effective my scumhunting will be.

As a plus, we won't actually be lynching a vigilante. I'm guessing my vote stays on for now?

Why do you say this? Exactly what would be accomplished if I claimed right now and/or used my power?

Seems like egging me on to shoot for real.

[Scripten]

Might I remind you that A) I don't swear lightly, and B) "Lynch all liars" is a thing on many mafia oriented sites?
Also, if you admit to not having a kill, then why aren't you now voting your suspect?

I already covered "Lynch all liars" and explained why it is inapplicable here. I also never admitted to not having a kill.

Well, let's see. A scum or SK would seek to eliminate as many players as they can as fast as they can, without giving those players time to explain themselves and without being caught killing the most town person. Caz isn't the most town, but neither is he the least, by a long shot. It looked to me, before your 'analysis', like you were trying to heap pressure onto him, after he'd already accepted that he was dead; from his perspective if he was going to die, then there was no reason to cooperate with his killer. I don't see any reason to cooperate with a killer, either, especially if they're going to badger their victim.

This courtroom roleplay stuff is getting a little old. TOWN PLAYERS WIN WITH THE TOWN. They are not murder victims in the sense of the game and you pushing that is making a case from false pretenses.

That is, playing in a way that is not pro-town is playing against your wincon, to an extent. I would expect a competent player to understand that and respond by doing as much as possible to help their team so that they can win. I see Caz as a competent player and would expect her to play toward her wincon if she was town.

Your analysis of Caz: He also indicated there where your 'evidence' is that he did not understand what you were doing; while the word 'vig' indicates a kill, Caz is somewhat inexperienced and can be excused for not knowing that. Also keep in mind that out of his other four choices in that collumn were his top two scum picks, himself, and a mostly absent player, which made you the last man standing as far as picks went. Your evidence is circumstantial at best.
This also feels like tunneling, like you are LOOKING for points to make him look bad. For example, his not answering your call for reads: As far as he's concerned, he may as well be dead by your hands, why would he cooperate with you?

I dunno, the whole "Excuse me?" post kinda indicates that she knew what was going on. Also, Caz is not a newbie, is she? I did not get that impression from the context of the game.

Your analysis of TolyK: I object to your second "scum point"! He's saying that if you are town, which seems unlikely, then you are very stupid boneheaded town that is better removed from the court than left sabotaging it from within.

Thank you for insulting and berating me several times this game. It makes me feel very good and makes the game very pleasant.[/sarcasm]

Furthermore, Objection! There is nothing to misrepresent here. You tried to use a daykill on someone who may have otherwise contributed to the town on the second day. Furthermore, you now claim NOT to be able to daykill, and that this was all a reaction test; reaction test is another way of saying "I'm backpedaling as fast as I can", at least in the case of lying stupid town, lying SKs, or lying scum. A good towny would not need to LIE to form a reaction test.

Again with the insults. You know, it's unnecessary and frankly makes me want to not play the game when you constantly call me stupid. I don't really appreciate it.

Actually, I've been planning this test for a long while now. I never said that I did not have a daykill. And even TolyK admits to misrepresentation and apologized for it, which I took as a town reaction. This all has helped me work out my reads on other players, but you seem content with just insulting me.

Can you give an example of a reaction test that doesn't revolve around a temporary state of misinformation.

You seem to have a balance of scum points and town points on TolyK. Is this so that you don't seem suspicious when he dies later tonight and the lookout sees you visiting him?

Presumptuous.

Your analysis of Mastahcheese: Clearly the town's favorite right now, and the least scummy player. You already knew this when you posted your 'analysis' because the vote count was just before your post. So in order to not make waves, fit in, and possibly buddy Cheese, you read him as mostly town. And seriously, if someone is more harmful to the town as town then the scum are, then seeing them die early game when a few town deaths are acceptable and not completely fatal to the town wincon is perfectly fine to my books.

Have you not been reading the game? I pushed for Mastahcheese to be the lookout and have been townreading him all damn game. Ffs, it's like you're not even looking at posts at all and are just fishing for things to point out.

Also, all this "It's okay for town to be lynched if they don't fit my narrow view of a good townie" is the most anti-town bullcrap I have ever seen in a mafia game, ever. I have yet to see anyone give a reasonable explanation for how my actions constitute scum, but I've provided evidence for how my actions have helped my scumhunting and created interactions that will be beneficial to town.

[flabort]

Can you give an example of a reaction test that doesn't revolve around a temporary state of misinformation.

Sure I can.