Green Poet

That checks out with his townreads, at least. Not necessarily. We need four more NL votes if we want to do that. Rereading Clarinets' ISO now.

Huh, it looks like I didn't see there was a vote on Tiny. My bad, I had thought it was just the other three.

We need three votes to be placed on Clarinets within the next two hours to avoid universal loss. No other lynch is viable right now, because we cannot expect seven people to get online and shift their vote to Dreamer/Mancer/Gaius within these two hours. Regardless of your alignment, you should be voting Clarinets now.

Yes, that's correct. I had very briefly mentioned him during D1, saying that his reads list had been sheepish and safely played, presenting reads similar to what the most popular opinion toward each player had been at the time: I also think that his current lack of a vote is noncontributory and makes his slot worth lynching over Mancer. Unvoting from a joke vote is fine, when it is immediately replaced with the expected serious vote. That didn't happen.

Oh, one more thing. I'm pretty convinced you're town at this point, but I'm also wondering why you're voting Sniper despite him more or less claiming an investigative. Is there something that made you particularly sure that at least one of the people voting Diego had to be scum? I understand the reasoning of elimination that led you to believe that Sniper was the one scum as opposed to the other four likely townies, just uncertain as to why there must be one scum. Do either of you have a serious vote to place, then? Modspec...?

Hmm, my first game was probably well after you'd stopped playing. In many of the previous NOC games I've played, people tended to announce whatever information they felt was safe to divulge at the start of each day phase, to try to help town piece together what had happened overnight. That process was what I was referring to, and in this game there's very little of that going on - the only thing role/action-related that had been talked about at the time of writing was of me, stating that I had failed my action. And since then, the only other role/action discussion today was from Sniper Knight, re: Mancer. What I was trying to say there was basically that, without any role/action information to go on, we're stuck voting people based on gut feeling or scummy posting, and can more quickly come to a shortage of discussion topics. It's not an ideal situation to be in. Moving on, I trust Sniper's claim about Mancer. If Sniper is scum, then for him to vouch for Mancer now would most likely be to stake the game on he and Mancer not being lynched nor killed for the rest of the game. There is insufficient reward for scum to take this risk. As we are only on D2, tailoring is out of the question, and so the only way that town!Sniper could be misleading us is... cop insanity? That's something I don't believe is in this game, given the kind of non-bastard rules we were presented with, and what I'm led to believe about mod message truthfulness given the context of my own role. Therefore, ##Unvote: Mancer ##Vote: Clarinets

Curious - is this a pressure vote to try and get answers from Corinthian's sub? Not necessarily. By not being seen on an easy wagon flipped town, scum avoids detection. If scum!Mancer felt assured that Diego could be lynched without his own vote, there was no reason to associate himself with Diego's lynch. Agree with these. Could you elaborate on what sort of similarities exactly you noticed about his play between Greatest Hits and this game? Which response are you referring to here? And do you have any questions for Tiny, given that you think you'll need to dig deeper in order to get a real case together? It'd help if we got input from Gilgamesh, Rapier, J, and Sniper. We have little to no information on the table regarding night actions, and because of that, this day is progressing like D1 was, just without Diego.

Defaulting to second priority scumread from yesterday. ##Vote: Mancer My action failed but still consumed a shot. If anyone could shed light on this, I'd appreciate it.

I'm sorry I had to be prodded. I'll be sure not to let you down again, Mits.

I have limited time today, as does everyone else, I'm sure. Let's make this happen. Dreamer, it appears that my questioning was in error. Ironically, I mistakenly believed Diego to never have used the word "mistake" - that's what led to the confusion. It's appreciated that you're examining this discrepancy, but as I don't understand the case (if there explicitly is one?) behind your vote, and we are nearing deadline, I'd suggest voting a scumread. Bal reads town to me. I know townreads are worth little right now so I won't elaborate on it; apologies to whomever it was that expressed distaste for townreads earlier. As fewer people will likely be able to see it the closer we are to deadline today, Diego should claim. If his is a role we should not be lynching, the three-vote gap between him and Mancer can only be superseded if many people see and believe whatever defense he may post. With the general inactivity from a good third of the playerlist thus far, and the assured inactivity that will stem from the holiday's events, we need as early a notice as is possible. It read like noncommittal filler to me, actually. Doesn't read like bussing since no one will be crediting Corinthian for a Diego lynch if the latter flips scum. My read on Corinthian is the same as my read on Clarinets' - he's expressing townreads on people who have been active, null reads on people who have been controversial, and a scumread on the then-and-now leading wagon. There's general sheepiness here that accomplishes little and is suggestive of noncommittal scum. After reading through Mancer's ISO and some of the cases on him that stood out to me, my thoughts are as follows: This is confusing; Mancer first implies in a disclaimer that his reason for switching from Gaius to Proto because the latter is likely to be active to answer Mancer's questions (which I don't see to be accompanied by explicit reasons as to why Proto could be/is scum), and not that his Gaius read has diminished. In such a case, why did Proto advance above Gaius in lynch priority? This is basically what I mean re:Mancer's vote. Reads like Mancer's backing off his Proto after being met with resistance. Feels defensive, self-preserving. "Given that your vote is on Diego, I'm more inclined to believe that you are not scum." I don't entirely buy this. Votes that are not retaliatory/"OMGUS-y" are not guaranteed to be town votes, but this is what Mancer implies, (paraphrased) "I don't think you're scum because you're not voting me. Only scum would vote me." No, it simply feels that Mancer is willing to look past those who are not contributing to the risk of his lynch. I disagree. It's a stretch to assume that this passing comment: aims to set up either a town or scum read on Mancer. If Gaius wants people to look past what faults your early case may have because it is underdeveloped, then he himself is giving away the right to go back and attack it later without appearing opportunistic and scummy. No, Gaius' statement does the exact opposite of what Mancer claims it does. Saying that "this statement is scummy because it doesn't inform me if I'm scummy or not" is grasping. I'm fine with a consolidation vote on Mancer, but Diego is higher on my lynch priority.

Diego has not yet been able to make a follow-up post for me to consider, so I'll be going over some other players of note. Izuhark After reading over his most recent two NOC ED1s, his Mafia Sucks Mafia and Ragnarok Online Mafia, it appears that he began MSM with a few sparse/possibly joking posts, even using the word "funny" in one post, as was noticeable in this game's ED1. He began ROM almost immediately on track to scumhunt, with no jokes or mentions of funniness. In MSM he was scum, and in ROM, a town JoaT, a role which he did not claim throughout his time playing the game (Shin subbed in for him and claimed it before his D3 mislynch). In this game, we have him claiming JoaT day one, unprompted, with joke votes. I would say that, if we were to consider only the small sample size of these two prior games, we would arrive at the conclusion that Izuhark is most definitely scum in this game, because he has been exhibiting behavior that has been either preceded in his scum game, or avoided in his town game. I am not voting Izuhark now, because (1) joking is not an example of inherently scum-motivated behavior, especially during ED1, and (2) I have not yet seen a response from Diego, so he remains my primary scum read. Having read Izuhark's scum game in MSM to some length, I'll continue to watch his play and see if his content ends up being consistent with that or not. Null slightly leaning scum until further elaborated. Mancer I said earlier that something felt off about Mancer's early reaction to Izuhark's responses, but I haven't been able to find or articulate what that is. I suppose it was a gut feeling and I don't have anything to corroborate it. I like Mancer's Gaius vote. The reasoning is solid and aims to consider scum!Gaius' play against town!Gauis' play. Trying to compare others' perspectives, and the general act of focusing on others rather than oneself, reads as town-motivated to me. There's also something constructive in his response to Proto: "Also, what part of my Gaius vote seems weird to you? Do you find it forced? Is the case weak?" This is town-motivated as well, as it welcomes scrutiny and only serves to bring himself and his cases into everyone else's viewpoint. It is counter-intuitive for scum to ask people to pick apart their cases, because sans bussing, those cases inherently contain flaws. Thus, Mancer is likely not scum, for he is risking exposing the faults in his cases at no tangible scum gain. Currently townreading Mancer. I'll take a look at the cases of the people voting Mancer shortly, as I have deliberately avoided doing so yet and would like to see if they impact my own read now. YOLOSWAG This post is entirely insubstantial. It offers no thought on the Gaius vote and instead asks for others' input on it. This begs the question of why he is not at least sheeping this case and voting Gaius, himself. Yoloswag's current vote is his RVS (I'm assuming this) vote on Mancer, which has not been retracted for any expressed reason. There's not enough content from him to discern whether this inactivity is scum-motivated or not, but the "Is this Gaius vote legitimate?" question seems scummy to me. At best, it sits as a passive post, and at worst, it invites others to scumhunt for him. Null leaning scum (more so than Izuhark). Dreamer This post seems to be a summary of the cases on Izuhark. While reading this, the particular choice of the word "mistake" jumped out at me - I thought it was an odd word to use since Diego never explicitly conceded that he had made a "mistake." For his early pushes against Izuhark to be considered a mistake, Izuhark would have to be confirmed or implied town, prompting Diego to back off the case and admit the mistake. But Diego simply said that he felt his actions had been rash, not wrong. It's a leap of assumption that I'm curious about. Dreamer, what exactly made you say that Diego made a "mistake"? What do you think constitutes this mistake? Those who've read my Diego case can probably guess where I'm hoping to go with this question, if the answer pans out in a particular way. Back to Dreamer herself - the summary post isn't very alignment-indicative to me, and I'm not entirely satisfied with how her next post puts a placeholder vote on Bal. Her indecision is understandable, as I remember hesitating to vote anyone when I had no scum reads in my earliest games for fear of guessing incorrectly, so I do not see this as scum-motivated. I also imagine that scum!Dreamer would have been advised by her scumbuddies to conjure up even a weak case on someone in order to appear contributory, as a basic beginners' rule. If Dreamer were more experienced, I'd say it'd be too gutsy to make content posts and yet claim to be too hesitant to vote, but this seems to be Dreamer's first game, so I can't say for sure if I would apply this line of thinking. Null, and I would like to see further posts, as well as an answer to my question.

I do not feel that Diego's unvote and newly remissive attitude is genuine. In short, it reads as though he was advised by scumbuddies to back off of the Izuhark issue. This is a demonstration of the initial self-confidence we saw from Diego. "I won't participate in RVS. My experience and policy tells me that we should not, and Izuhark is scum because he is frolicking in it. You should all believe the same." (paraphrased for argumentative effect.) Diego insists that his method is the optimal one for finding scum, and this insistence and headstrong approach is what makes me doubt the reasoning behind the unvote. A few reasons: (1) Every single player on the playerlist can be investigated to confirm whether or not they are town or scum. This is no Izuhark-specific reason to drop the issue. "We can investigate Izuhark to determine whether or not he is town or scum, therefore we should discontinue pressure on him in-thread now, as it will be sorted out during the night by investigatives." Ultimately, this is as an easy way to drop Izuhark's case, for no actually uniquely compelling reason. Hence, it becomes likely that Diego's motive for dropping the Izuhark case is the counsel of scumbuddies. (2) The post that this was excerpted from is entirely a defense. Diego does not proceed to replace his Izuhark vote with one on someone else. This is telling, because the premise of his defense is that Diego wishes to hunt a mafioso efficiently, outside of what others want or think. Where is the new vote, then? Why bother on defending yourself if you believe your actions and thought process was justifiable (and if you don't quite care about other's thoughts regardless), to the point that you do not offer a replacement case on a new primary scumspect? If Diego currently does not suspect Izuhark, then he has zero listed scum reads. This is not what I expect to see from someone who opens the game with what can be seen as the first serious vote and post, who insists on the focus and dedication of his scumhunting method. ##Vote: Great Lord Diego I'm also unsettled by Mancer's reactions to Izhuark's early responses, but that is something that is secondary to my Diego case, and I lack enough from Mancer to come to a conclusion as to what I think his reactions were motivated by.

It's not RCS. This response aims to dodge Mancer's easy question. A follow-up response wasn't prompted by anyone this time. These posts increase your presence in the thread while saying nothing. Agreed. Going to take a minute to read over Izuhark's previous early games to see if these types of openings are standard humor for him.

##Vote: King Gilgamesh H-how could you do this.

Could you tell us about why your location is listed as "The Matinée"? Also, which/how many languages do you speak?

I'm plainpoetry on Skype. Conspire with me \o/

##Vote: Snike

##Vote: BBM If my count is right, he should now be at L-2.

1) Favorite Tokyo Ghoul characters? 2) TG anime or manga? 3) Why don't you main Marth anymore in SSB4? 4) Reasons for siding Nohr? (looking at your member banner thing)

##Unvote ##Vote: Crysta

##Vote: scorri

not-guaranteed-to-be-correct votals Poly (1) - Excellen Shinori (2) - Proto, Elie Proto (1) - Shinori Euklyd (5) - SB, Crysta, GP, Mancer, Paper not unvoting, he's not close to the hammer threshold of 12

Sounds fair, I'll wait for that.

To rephrase: I'm not intending for Euklyd to be put in a 1v1 against anyone, or to out an actual cop. Whether or not he can provide logs is what I'm trying to see, nothing more.