Can you please shorten your thoughts and split up your paragraphs better in the future? On why lynch someone with a paper trail - to get rid of a threat. In particular, if mafia wanted to get rid of me they would need to get rid of people who might side with me, especially someone who has already gotten close to mafia. The less allies I have, the easier it will be to paint me badly. The paper trail case is weak by itself. Just as I can use a paper trail as evidence, you can decry it. It ends up in a loop like this: 'They wouldn't do it because they know that I expect it.' 'They would do it because they know that I know that they know I expect it.' 'They wouldn't do it because they know that I know that they know that I know that they know that I expect it.' You made this exact same point earlier regarding my expectations in various scenarios. These lines of reasoning aren't used by themselves because of the loop. They're known as WIFOM arguments. I might have made that kill as a balance of probability if I were mafia. For that reason, my case on default exists as a culmination of a few factors—lack of contribution, backing off of cases without reason, waffling, and the paper trail—instead of just the one. The Fuk? was on my short list for pressuring today on the basis of their vote for Krowley by itself. Like with default, my case on him is based on a lot of small red flags things that add up quickly. Each of them has a counter (except for lying about quotes), but those counters begin to lose credibility as the red flags grow. Here's the list: Voted Krowley: After a soft lynch was reached, showing With almost a full day left before deadline, showing lack of consideration for other options Without so much as a one line comment, showing lack of conviction in the lynch Misspelled the name consistently, showing lack of conviction in the lynch Cased me on the basis that I am 'too town' Intentionally presented a fake quote, showing desire to paint someone as worse than they are, dishonesty Refused to admit wrongdoing, showing high priority of self-preservation Has contributed nothing in the way of actually investigating I might have been only slightly leaning scum without the lying, but he was well on his way to being a top read before he posted today. Lying is a scummy thing to do. He did it and has not apologized for it or tried to make it better. There is nothing petty about my case. On the quotes: I speak that way about all alignments when explaining what makes sense from their perspective, in particular with the phrase 'as {ALIGNMENT}'. You seem to be doing the opposite of what you set out to do: you're skimming the pro-town points and cherry picking the things that support your suspicion. I'm not sure where the idea that I was set on a Beau lynch came from. I pressed it, but above all I wanted other cases to crop up. I wanted info on other people. I wanted people to hunt. Hell, a lot of my pressuring on Beau specifically used my lynch target to rally people to hunt, warning them that if they didn't dig up more info the info I was using would remain the strongest case. It was in fact the strongest case. That's all there was to it. My message to TheWorldThatNeverWas decidedly not pressuring them to vote for Beau. I pushed them to make a case on the people they were already targeting. I outright pressed them to do it quickly, if they wished to overthrow the Beau lynch. Not because I wanted Beau dead, but because a counter-lynch would need all the time it could get to gain momentum over the Beau case. This is some really backward logic. Listing tells is what you should be doing. Preferably concisely, true, but let me restate what you're saying back to you: "I have proof that you're mafia, but I don't feel like presenting it." What? Uh. There is no other option. He did not copy and paste that message. He copy and pasted the others. He did intentionally fabricate it. There is no debate there. Whether he typo'd or not has no effect on the honesty of what he did. Let me say that again so you don't misunderstand: A typo in a fake post does not make it a real post. Given how uncareful he was in naming Krowley multiple times over, I don't think an appeal to 'he would be more careful' is going to cut it. Why would he be careful in one part of the post but not another? That's not true. The Fuk? explicitly wished to portray me as hyper-controlling as the primary basis of his case. Hence the fake quote, in which he claimed I said: "Lynch the people I say you should lynch." Not to mention his reply to the post you quoted, in which he definitively makes clear that that is the message he wanted to send. Not much room for interpretation. I didn't dodge the point about me being too town. I addressed it head-on in my first response to him. Simply put, it's ridiculous to go after someone for being 'too town'. Aside from the sheer paradox of it, there are several reasons why someone might want to appear extremely town that you guys have completely missed. If I am a BPV town, I have incentive to draw night kills to myself to save other townies. If I don't think anyone else is a good target, I can make myself a target to draw the Watcher's attention and thereby save myself from the mafia by getting them to dodge the Watcher and/or catch them if they shoot me anyway. But no, my being so much a townie means I'm clearly anti-town. That kind of reasoning is not only impossible to counter (because even more pro-town actions only strengthen it), it implies that being suspicious or anti-town is a better way to play town!
If it were a summary you should have presented it as such. There is no conceivable bonus to mudslinging if you are town. You're trying to make it seem like it doesn't matter instead of fessing up to the mistake. You're not trying to improve on the behavior. You're trying to protect yourself. Scum is a general term for anyone not aligned with town. Includes the Third Party Role, too. I also use the words 'anti-town' instead of 'pro-mafia'.[DOUBLEPOST=1408941879][/DOUBLEPOST]Forgot: One part of that wasn't clear. Who did you mean when you said I went after the weak link? Assuming you meant Beau, that was a coincidence. I prefer hard tells to gut tells as a rule. He made a mistake that looked pretty damn hard to me. If anyone had made that mistake, I'd have gone after them the same way. If anyone else had had much of a tell at all besides Beau, I'd have gone for them at the same time and he probably wouldn't have dropped out. Besides the logic side, I went out of my way to get him to contribute and clear his name and gave him advice on how to help town. It didn't work, but I tried.
Ah. In the absence of more serious content they can be mistaken for the serious content.
That's a horrible strategy. If I'm town, I can be wrong and you may end up killing two towns. If I'm mafia, you end up killing a town for sure. If you want to kill The Fuk?, do it because you see the points. I don't want people to tunnel on my target(s). Even if I'm right, letting the other mafia members idle is not smart. On to my other reads. Looking back, default is my secondary suspicion. He has only voted twice, once for me as a reaction to the Random Voting Stage, and once for Reno because they were inactive, a case they dropped when the replacement took over. They got no info from either case but dropped them all the same. Henceforth he has waffled back and forth between agreeing with one person and another. That's bad because as I've said already, sitting back and letting things unfold is completely unhelpful. At best, it... Wait, no. There is no upside. You don't get info. You don't influence the flow of the game. All you do is avoid drawing negative attention. At worst, it allows you to be led as a sheep to the slaughter, forcing you to agree with the cases of others. On top of that, Trigger was on their case and even voted for them. If they are mafia, this fact puts some pieces together to help explain why Trigger was killed instead of Beau or I. While Trigger was suspicious and not a huge threat, he was on to mafia. I might be alive partly because I defended default to Marushi, while Trigger was more logical as the game went on and had sided with me once already.
Please try to find your highest reads and go for them. You've become a distraction to multiple people twice already with your going-nowhere posts. If you want to help, do more than watch and agree. Having the appearance of activity does nothing; it's as bad as not posting at all but worse because self-preservation distract people. You would throw a bullshit one in there to get me lynched faster. Like I said earlier, it makes a lot of sense for you to kill someone unexpected and target the obvious ones in the day time. You have good incentive to do this as scum. By the same reasoning that you would have killed me as soon as possible with a night kill, you would also want to kill me as soon as possible during the day. Fake quotes that make me look bad qualify as ways to get me lynched faster. But I digress. You're dodging the point. What you wanted to portray is obvious. You wanted to portray me as hyper-controlling. The problem is you were dishonest in doing so. You outright lied when you had every reason to tell the truth. Town have no incentive to be dishonest. At best, you are trying to trick your teammates into voting for scum instead of being honest with them. That doesn't make sense even if you are 100% sure I am mafia. Reasons to do it as mafia? Check. Reasons to do it as town? No. Did you do it intentionally? Yes. Hell, you also have incentive to react exactly you are right now if you are called out on the false quote. Long story short, ##Vote: The Fuk?
Feel free to jump in, guys. What?, please reply next time you view the thread. I'd like to hear your thoughts on The Fuk? and default's actions.[DOUBLEPOST=1408934918][/DOUBLEPOST] Wait... You're saying you agree with me? Didn't expect that. One misunderstanding after another today.
What is that view, and why did you present it in response to that bit of my post?
Then what exactly are you defending? The only concrete mistake he made with Krowley today was messing up the name. The rest regards his vote itself, from Day 1. Red flags from yesterday aren't suddenly not red flags because he thinks better of them today. Mafia have 20/20 hindsight just like town.
Don't really care for it. Not worth adding an entire module for a tiny aesthetic change.
Makes sense and seems corect. Newer members with the same amount of points as older members are more notable.
I would excuse the mistake on the name if it were a standalone offense, but it's not. We had a soft lynch on Krowley. You could have said 'I agree with the lynch but don't want to hammer it' and not voted, or pressured someone else. If you know your top target is getting lynched, you could spend the rest of the day gathering intel. Instead you added to the wagon. For the entire first day you put forth absolutely no effort to hunt anyone. Your vote on Krowley was pure sheeping on other peoples' work. On top of that, you admit your vote was purely for the sake of self-preservation. All of this is reading as a scum tell. If that wasn't bad enough, I want to focus on the real issue. The most suspicious thing you did, by a long shot, was misquote me. I know that one wasn't a simple mistake because you got the other ones ad verbatim. No one else in the thread said anything remotely like the misquote. You had to intentionally type that one out on your own. You have a quote feature at your disposal. You went through the trouble of copy pasting three other posts, one of them far more lengthy. Using the multi-quote button would have far easier than copy pasting from the posts. You went out of your way to get that one wrong. In fact I suspect you avoided the quote feature specifically so that the misquote didn't stand out as much and you could get away with it easier if it were called out. Why would a town make a dishonest case?
You're arguing that he forgot who he voted for because he had time to analyze it?
You mistook my meaning; all of those are red flags against him.
On closer reading, you've made several mistakes. You repeatedly said the name Crowley, naming them as the person you voted for. You did in fact vote for Krowley, with the correct spelling, the first time. How did you forget your own vote? You misquoted me: "Don't sit back and watching. Lynch the people I say should be lynched." Not only did I not say this, I actively worked to get people to make cases instead of just agree or vote without comment. I wanted more info, not more votes. Side note, next time you want to slip a fake quote in with real ones, proofread it. Your vote for Krowley came well after the announcement that time was not running out, and after we had enough for a soft lynch. Why did you add to the wagon? What did you gain? You voted Krowley, taking us past a soft lynch, without comment or reason, under little to no pressure to do so. You then forgot who you voted for. Lot of red flags here.
The person I voted for was Krowley, not Crowley. Not only do I have several people who think I am or could be mafia already, but by the same logic that the mafia might want to avoid killing Beau, they might want to avoid killing me to avoid the eye of the town Watcher. This isn't vanilla mafia; the mafia can't go for the obvious kill. If I'm right about Beau, then my leadership so far as led us to soft lynches on no less than two town in one day's time. I'm active but clearly no threat yet. Let me get this right... You think I am mafia because I am too much of a help to town? On the other hand, mafia would have great incentive not to take the kill on anyone obvious, but instead paint their obvious targets as scum in the day. You can't Watch a lynch. Which strategy is safer? Killing me at night, or using the fact that I was not killed as proof of my scummy-ness?
I think he is town because mafia would never drop out, but your logic is faulty here. He isn't mafia, but mafia want us to think he is. -> Mafia don't shoot him. He is mafia. -> Mafia don't shoot him. Since we can't eliminate either possibility, mafia not shooting him doesn't prove anything. In other words, they made a good move.
If you had one you would have been told. Sorry, kid.
No. Trigger had no BPV. It would have flipped when he was killed.
Oh wow. You don't use it. It blocks an attempt on your life passively. You poor soul.
Trigger made no sense as a target. He was suspicious, appeared to have no role, and helped lead town toward mislynches. The ideal target would have been someone like Beau/Midnight Star, who is all but confirmed town. On other hand, that makes him a good target because he is not likely to be watched by the town Watcher or any other role. The question is, why him instead of someone else? Perhaps he got on someone's case and it made them nervous.
