894 replies to this topic

[Falzis]

If sojo is killed and turns out scum, don't look at me, look at Martino. Martino was the one who said on D1 that it is VERY VERY IMPT and favors a lynch rather than a no lynch but when it came time to COMMIT to a vote, not even to vote sojo, it could have been a vote on anyone, Martino didn't vote.

First of all, the theory doesn't hold if KevinH is scum. He would never vote, no matter whether you guys were about to lynch a townie or his scum buddy.

Now that is just fishy. How sure are you that he would NEVER vote? That's a very strong word. Plus, it wouldn't be logical. If the choice came down to voting for a fellow scum or a townie, a scum would almost always (except in very very extreme circumstances of smart plays to fool the town) vote for the townie.

Your statement also implies that you think a scum would vote for a fellow scum (by saying that he would never vote no matter...). Scum wouldn't vote for fellow scum generally except in special circumstances such as the evidence too insurmountable for the accused scum and to hide as town. That could be what is happening right now so no free passes to people voting for sojourner.

Secondly, and more importantly, the case against Sojourner on D1 was weak at best. I am always greatly in favor of a lynch on D1, but I found the case to be so weak, that it would have just been a random lynch. That wouldn't help us, so I didn't vote. Assuming that he is town, do you really think that the scum would have come out and hammered him based on virtually nothing? I think that would have been a great way for them to get into trouble. Further, you assume that the mafia would be in favor of a lynch. While they would of course like to lynch a townie, I certainly don't think a no lynch is in the disadvantage of the scum. So again, it seems plausible to me that the scum just decided to lay low together with most townies.

First off, I want to repeat that you could have still voted. With 13 pages before D1 ended, you could have voted for someone aside from sojourner. See first paragraph above.

The point isn't whether the case was weak or not. The point is how close sojo was to being lynched, and didn't get lynched. No matter how weak the case, scum could always jump in and create reasons and then try to pass off the finger of suspicion to the other voters if the lynched person turned out to be townie.

Why is that? Because contrary to your rebuttal, mafia will always be generally assumed to favor a lynch. Mafia goal: kill all townies. Mafia tools: day lynch and night kills. This is the most basic and fundamental assumption - that if there is an opportunity to kill a townie, scum will take it.

But you are correct. A No Lynch is not in the disadvantage of the mafia. That is because they know there are veteran players here. The other basic and fundamental assumption - to avoid detection as long as possible - will lead them to not just not lynch on D1, but not vote altogether. And this is what happened on D1. A lot of people didn't vote, so a lot of people can't be traced for patterns.

So at the end of the day, the tl;dr of this is, after your post, there can only be two possible scenarios:

1. Sojourner is scum that's why scum didn't jump on him.

2. Sojourner is townie but scum didn't jump on him because they wanted to avoid detection.

Which is more convincing? The first one. Why? Because even if there are two fundamental assumptions, the first assumption will always take precedence and priority logically. That is, that the drive of the mafia to wipe out the town is greater than their drive to hide and avoid detection as long as possible.

But of course, the above will only hold true if the scum are novices or amateurs. Veteran scum could choose hiding as a higher priority than killing since they would still have NKs anyway and make it harder for the town to kill them off (due to lack of information). Plus, role fishing on D1 that there is/could be a cop in this game could have made them more cautious so they lied low.

But Occam's razor would tell us to accept the simplest explanation, the one with the least logical links to make a conclusion. And that would be that Sojo is scum that's why he wasn't lynched on D1. The second one just takes too many explanations.

VOTE COUNT
sojourner (6): Falzis, Narsis, Electric Mango, Kaziocore, Aquinas, Sir Jesus
Falzis (4): Martino, Theophilos, KevinH, sojourner

Not Voting (2): Nerau, partyin01

With 12 alive, 7 votes are needed to lynch.
4 needed to lynch at deadline.

- Sir Jesus is no longer V/LA. Glad you're OK!
- partyin01 and Nerau are being replaced. I really, really need to get onto this.
- Narsis will be replaced from June 29th.
- Falzis will be V/LA from July 1st - July 11th
- Deadline is MONDAY.

Edited by molestargazer, 27 June 2009 - 05:25 PM.

[Martino]

If sojo is killed and turns out scum, don't look at me, look at Martino. Martino was the one who said on D1 that it is VERY VERY IMPT and favors a lynch rather than a no lynch but when it came time to COMMIT to a vote, not even to vote sojo, it could have been a vote on anyone, Martino didn't vote.

Why would we even want to look at you if sojourner turns out to be scum? If sojourner is scum, it will pretty much clear you. You've been the one to lead the charge on him since D1.

Now that is just fishy. How sure are you that he would NEVER vote? That's a very strong word. Plus, it wouldn't be logical. If the choice came down to voting for a fellow scum or a townie, a scum would almost always (except in very very extreme circumstances of smart plays to fool the town) vote for the townie.

It's pretty much common knowledge on this board that KevinH won't vote D1. If he did, alarm bells would go off all over the place. So yeah, unless we have a scum confession, I am pretty sure that he would not vote. I don't know why you chose to attack me over the word never though.

Your statement also implies that you think a scum would vote for a fellow scum (by saying that he would never vote no matter...). Scum wouldn't vote for fellow scum generally except in special circumstances such as the evidence too insurmountable for the accused scum and to hide as town. That could be what is happening right now so no free passes to people voting for sojourner.

You're not making much sense here either. I said that KevinH wouldn't vote. Even when the town is about to lynch his scum buddy, then he still wouldn't vote to save him on D1. It would simply raise too much suspicion.

First off, I want to repeat that you could have still voted. With 13 pages before D1 ended, you could have voted for someone aside from sojourner. See first paragraph above.

Yes, I could have also voted on someone else without a case. Wouldn't have been any more help to the town though. A random vote is a random vote, no matter on who I cast it.

The point isn't whether the case was weak or not. The point is how close sojo was to being lynched, and didn't get lynched. No matter how weak the case, scum could always jump in and create reasons and then try to pass off the finger of suspicion to the other voters if the lynched person turned out to be townie.

I disagree. Yes, they could try to make up a reason and they could try to shift the suspicions to the other voters. But just because they could, doesn't mean that they will. I just don't think that they would risk exposure by bandwagoning on a very weak case, just to get a townie lynched on D1. Perhaps if there were two players with 3 votes each and one of them was scum. Then I could see the scum try to save their buddy. But with the alternative being a no lynch, which hurts the town, I don't think they would risk exposure.

Why is that? Because contrary to your rebuttal, mafia will always be generally assumed to favor a lynch. Mafia goal: kill all townies. Mafia tools: day lynch and night kills. This is the most basic and fundamental assumption - that if there is an opportunity to kill a townie, scum will take it.

That is way too simplistic. You're basically assuming that the mafia won't use any kind of a strategy but will just blindly go in for the kill whenever they can. Also, I've always seen the day lynch as a town tool to get rid of the mafia.

But you are correct. A No Lynch is not in the disadvantage of the mafia. That is because they know there are veteran players here. The other basic and fundamental assumption - to avoid detection as long as possible - will lead them to not just not lynch on D1, but not vote altogether. And this is what happened on D1. A lot of people didn't vote, so a lot of people can't be traced for patterns.

So at the end of the day, the tl;dr of this is, after your post, there can only be two possible scenarios:

1. Sojourner is scum that's why scum didn't jump on him.

2. Sojourner is townie but scum didn't jump on him because they wanted to avoid detection.

Which is more convincing? The first one. Why? Because even if there are two fundamental assumptions, the first assumption will always take precedence and priority logically. That is, that the drive of the mafia to wipe out the town is greater than their drive to hide and avoid detection as long as possible.

This isn't some movie where the bad guys are idiots. The mafia are just as intelligent as the rest of us. They aren't some bloodthirsty monsters who can't control their temper and have to go in for the kill whenever they have an opportunity. So I really don't think their drive to kill is greater than their drive to survive. In fact, a townie-scum tradeoff would be a terrible trade off from a mafia pov, so I would expect survival to be a higher priority than killing.

But of course, the above will only hold true if the scum are novices or amateurs. Veteran scum could choose hiding as a higher priority than killing since they would still have NKs anyway and make it harder for the town to kill them off (due to lack of information). Plus, role fishing on D1 that there is/could be a cop in this game could have made them more cautious so they lied low.

I don't even think it holds true for most novices. Even they should realize that they won't win this game if they don't survive.

But Occam's razor would tell us to accept the simplest explanation, the one with the least logical links to make a conclusion. And that would be that Sojo is scum that's why he wasn't lynched on D1. The second one just takes too many explanations.

I think both options are based on a single assumption:
1) Scum wants to kill everything in their sight
2) Scum wants to survive

I would say that the 2nd one is more realistic.

[Kaziocore]

Why are we assuming that there are 2 scums here?

The patient's eyes, previously dull and submissive, became alert. He looked up quickly, and reached through the small window in his cell door and quickly plucked a key from the Nurse's back pocket. He withdrew his arm quickly before she turned around to check the cell had locked itself. A quick tug at the door, and she was satisfied enough, hurrying off to deal with the other patients.

It looks like from here that there's only 1 scum here.

[Kaziocore]

It's been a day now and he has still not replied. Isn't that suspicious?

[Kaziocore]

FOS Kaziocore
If you think he is scum, you should say so. But I find putting some pressure on him a lousy reason for your vote. He had already been voted twice since his last post. That should have been more than enough pressure.

Okay... I think he's a scum.

[KevinH]

Why are we assuming that there are 2 scums here?

...

It looks like from here that there's only 1 scum here.

Hello everyone. I have returned.

My guess is 3 scum based on a typical setup.

[Narsis]

agree with Kevin. 3 scum and maybe an sk.

[Aquinas]

I think that puts him at lynch -1. Please, let's at least give him the opportunity to respond before we lynch him. While I would really like him to defend himself, I will say that I am not as impressed with the case against him as the rest of you seem to be.

First of all, the theory doesn't hold if KevinH is scum. He would never vote, no matter whether you guys were about to lynch a townie or his scum buddy. Secondly, and more importantly, the case against Sojourner on D1 was weak at best. I am always greatly in favor of a lynch on D1, but I found the case to be so weak, that it would have just been a random lynch. That wouldn't help us, so I didn't vote. Assuming that he is town, do you really think that the scum would have come out and hammered him based on virtually nothing? I think that would have been a great way for them to get into trouble. Further, you assume that the mafia would be in favor of a lynch. While they would of course like to lynch a townie, I certainly don't think a no lynch is in the disadvantage of the scum. So again, it seems plausible to me that the scum just decided to lay low together with most townies.

It really puzzles me that so many immediately voted for sojourner. I have become mighty suspicious of the last few people to jump aboard the bandwagon. It seems like you guys are not even willing to give him a chance to defend himself.

I am more than willing to give him a chance to defend himself. My record will show that I vote for a person based on the evidence at hand but, I will remove that vote if they prove to me they no longer deserve it. This is the case with KevinH on D1 and then again KevinH on D2. I think that is mostly because I find a few play style differences with him and I don't seem to click. Point is, I will be more than certain to remove my vote if Sojourner gives me reason to, but I'm not counting on it. Thus, far Sojourner has not been able to conjure a single argument that I can still recall. I can not think of a time when he has been able to build a credible point to hold himself or his convictions upon. The evidence as presented is the best we have so far. It is not impervious, I admit, but, at least it is a clear thought path. I think it should be my motivation to encourage this type of evidence rather than the shallow accusatory sort we have seen thus far. Further, I have voted for Sojourner not because of the bandwagon but because he has not changed one bit of his shakey conviction cases since the beginning. This has been the case where he has made a serious decision of launched an opinion without demonstrating clear thought. He has also not proven significant activity. The last person I want around is someone who will barely show up but, when he does, launch a vote at someone without clear and thoughtful explanation. I feel that that participation fits multiple scum tells, low activity, pushing for a vote, voting without clear evidence. These traits don't make for a person I want around.

[Martino]

Okay... I think he's a scum.

Could you at least explain why? I put a FOS on you for giving a false reason for your vote. It seemed like a great way for you to get on that bandwagon and then, if he turns out to be a townie, claim that you never intended to lynch him and that you only wanted to put some pressure on him. Like I said before, there was already enough pressure on him after the other votes.

[Falzis]

Why would we even want to look at you if sojourner turns out to be scum? If sojourner is scum, it will pretty much clear you. You've been the one to lead the charge on him since D1.

Yes if sojo turned out to be scum, that would pretty much clear me. But the point of the rhetoric was that if sojo turned out to be scum, for the town to look at you with suspicion because you were the one defending him.

[Martino]

Yes if sojo turned out to be scum, that would pretty much clear me. But the point of the rhetoric was that if sojo turned out to be scum, for the town to look at you with suspicion because you were the one defending him.

I am not claiming that he is not scum. In all honesty, he hasn't done much to help the town, so sure he could be scum. I just think that the case made against him depends on a few doubtful assumptions. Also, if you look at how easy it was for you to get the bandwagon going against him this time, then I think that invalidates most of your reasoning for voting him. Why would the scum help you lynch their buddy this time but not on D1? Especially considering that you already had 4 votes, so they could have easily voted for you instead of him and thus save him.

[Falzis]

But you're assuming that the people voting for sojo are scum. And you are assuming that the people voting for me currently aren't scum.

The fact that I've got 4 votes and not more right now means that most of the scum have already voted for me. I agree when you say scum can easily vote for me, because I am easy picking, I've stuck my head out, and I am a threat. It does make me wonder why not more people have voted for me.

Maybe it's because they have already voted! That's why I always insist that I believe that at least 2 people of the 4 voting for me are scum.

I could be wrong though. I never said my basis was full-proof, and neither any of the people who agree with me think my arguments are perfect. But mine is very logical and based on numbers, on permutations, and on possibilities. It just happens that sojo being a scum is the most likely possibility after the analysis.

If sojo turns out to be townie, then we would gain crucial information. That some people voting for sojo are scum (which this fact-finding should have happened on D1). And that some people voting for me are more likely to be town than scum.

But the fact is, I'm very comfortable with the people voting with me. I believe EM to be townie since he voted with me on D1 and according to the analysis, it makes him very very less likely to be scum. I have reasons to believe Sir Jesus and Aquinas to be likely townie (which I've already posted upon in the list). Narsis is still questionable especially more so Kaziocore. But if sojo is proven to be scum, then it makes them all less likely to be scum.

Furthermore, the fact that you, Theophilos, or KevinH haven't switched votes either means you truly believe me to be scum or you guys are scum who planned on cutting my head. The quick succession of posts voting for me just immediately after D2 by the three of you looks very suspicious to me.

We all have to lynch someone. That is the only way we can get hard evidence of who is scum and who is not when the lynched person's alignment is revealed to be either townie or scum. The fact that you are trying to delay sojourner's death or caution people from voting for him means you'd rather see me get lynched than him.

And that is very problematic. Because I know I am a townie and the only ones who know I am townie are the scum. Plus, you haven't forwarded any argument more convincing than mine. If you want my head, make a case to lynch me. Don't make a case to not lynch someone. After all, townspeople should be scum hunting, not defending.

But that is an unlikely possibility. My gut really tells me that sojourner is scum. Don't you find it funny that he hasn't even attempted to defend himself?

[Kaziocore]

Could you at least explain why? I put a FOS on you for giving a false reason for your vote. It seemed like a great way for you to get on that bandwagon and then, if he turns out to be a townie, claim that you never intended to lynch him and that you only wanted to put some pressure on him. Like I said before, there was already enough pressure on him after the other votes.

Well... I think junkahoolik was killed because of him. Junkahoolik FOS the first and then voted him the last and then said that he suspects sojourner for something. Well you can say that it would be obvious if he killed the one who voted for him but what if he thinks that it would be fine to kill him because he thinks that people will not suspect him because they would think that it would be too obvious for scums to do. Also he posts quite few.

[Narsis]

Well... I think junkahoolik was killed because of him. Junkahoolik FOS the first and then voted him the last and then said that he suspects sojourner for something. Well you can say that it would be obvious if he killed the one who voted for him but what if he thinks that it would be fine to kill him because he thinks that people will not suspect him because they would think that it would be too obvious for scums to do. Also he posts quite few.

ah the beauty of WIFOM.

[KevinH]

ah the beauty of WIFOM.

Sometimes it's poison, sometimes it's not.

Another point in favor of Sojourner's lynch would be that it would give information regarding Falzis and Electric Mango.

If Sojourner is scum, then those two would be cleared in my mind (they didn't have to try to lynch their scum-buddy on day 1).

If Sojourner is townie, then we can put even a bit more suspicion on those that wanted to lynch him on day 1.

Also (and I realize this is a really remote possibility) maybe Junkahoolic our cop actually did know something on day 1 and was voting based on that information.

On the other hand, if we lynch Falzis or Electric Mango and they turn up scum, then Sojourner is cleared in my mind.

[Aquinas]

If we can assume the scum want the more active players dead, which it seems many of us have, at least voting for Sojourner throws off their strategy. At the very least, we're making it tougher for them to get the ones they want. Sojourner out of the game, whether he is scum or not, will help us build some credible voting record evidence. Something we don't have now. As KevinH and Falzis have just pointed out, lynching Sojourner can help us clear names (a huge step) and at the very least get us going in a new direction. Either towards people who voted for Sojourner in the first place or D2 posting. I think its a point in both KevinH and Falzis' favor that they agree and have already dropped their grudges against each other. After being at each others throats I think its a good townie tell from both of them that they have moved on so quickly. I think lynching Sojourner is our best option because, its true that all the evidence so far works in reverse as well. Lynching others could clear or guide us with Sojourner still around. I would rather take the chance with Sojourner's life, do to his low activity and the fact he is not even able to defend himself or build another argument.

[Electric Mango]

I think lynching Sojo is the best thing for the town to do at this point.

There is a lot more evidence against Sojo than Falzis.

Sojo is not defending himself.

We will learn more from Sojo's death than Falzis'.

[Electric Mango]

agree with Kevin. 3 scum and maybe an sk.

I doubt there is a sk. If there was we would have seen 2 night kills instead of just one. It may be possible that the town has a vigilante though. Most vig's don't kill on Day1 because they don't know who's who yet.

[Narsis]

i realize that there was only one kill so an sk is a bit of a stretch. but who knows...(mole does )

[Electric Mango]

Who knows what Mole's sick and twisted:P brain thought up for this game. This is a mental hospital after all, maybe we DO have a SK but he's got a split personality and can only kill every other night. Kinda like Jekyl and Hyde. The possibilities are endless.