Nevermind. I just realized I he's quoting Squinty in the post I linked, not storyteller. He addresses storyteller, but quotes Squinty's "Why don't I have a fancy hat" post.




The whole back and forth there is still strange to me, but I can see why Garren used Squinty in the example.

Huh, when put that way, it does seem like a bad thing. Oh well, you'll just be surprised / amused when it's all said and done.

~SE++

Well I was hoping there would be more interaction between PopPa* and Nik. Looks like that's a no go though. So I'll say my piece on what they have exchanged.

For the most part I have to side with PopPa here. In contrast to Neo's view of Nik being a scum hunter, I find that he's been aggressively accusatory and slightly slanderous in the name of scum hunting instead. For the most part he has just been picking on easy targets. When opposition has come up we've seen two reactions from him so far. The first is the method he took with me, simply ignoring the discourse of others and flatly refusing to engage in discourse when directly asked to. The second is the slanderous route he took with PopPa. Nik replies to PopPa arguing with the notion that SE's actions give a lean towards alignment with, "True enough, save we don't know that he can't know anyone's alignment. Unless of course, you do know he can't." PopPa points out that the first part of this quote adds nothing of value and is a red flag of what they refer to as "Active Lurking" (trying to look active and helpful when really doing nothing much at all). But the second part is also a red flag as mudslinging, or to say the attempt of making somebody look scummy or discreditable with no solid evidence.

Neither of these things are done with town's best interest at heart. Town has no reason to try and discredit a player, especially this early in the game. Given Nik has alluded to the importance of discourse, simply ignoring venues he doesn't feel like talking about is a bit of a contradictory step in it's own right. To me these give Nik the appearance of somebody who is trying to look town, rather than someone who is actually town.

*Popular Pariah, I will be using this abbreviated name henceforth.

I was more or less making a joking response. I didn't think he was really fishing. I find your response about your power being useless to be rather irritating, though, since you've bitten some bait anyway.


In future, I'll try to avoid casting suspicions on suspicious behavior. Or not..


Please, jump in soon. We've already used up over half of D1.


I forgot that mafia isn't a game where you are expected to be active at least every 48 hours. Oh wait...


Pressure voting is more a tool to make people who aren't talking enough talk more. Probably should be applied to the more lurking members at some point. As for not voting early, we have used up over half the day already. It's hardly early. Not saying vote for the sake of voting, but waiting until the deadline to vote is something I do question. It allows you to vote without allowing time for people to consider your vote. Based on the available evidence, would you please tell us who you would vote right now if you didn't hold to these beliefs?


Or my WIFOM is better than yours. I really don't get why being active and inquisitive leads you to believe I am town.


Are you going to say anything useful for the rest of the day or just make idle commentary?



And you aren't voting me because?

We can continue to discuss the matter of leashing or not leashing Squinty, but it seems we disagree on a matter that won't change from such discussion. Mainly, I hold that leashing Squinty is bad because he might be town while you hold that leashing him is good because he is an unknown. I am awarding the higher relevance to the fact he might be town while you hold that him being unknown is more crucial. I don't see how throwing our views at each other on this is going to change our minds. It will largely just turn into a case of "No I'm right." I've known myself to carry an argument beyond useful bounds in the past, so I don't see a point continuing it since I have a good understanding of your point of view regarding the strategy and I think I've presented mine as well, if not quite as eloquently.

As for the second issue, you are separating what is one statement into two parts. The entire statement is meant as an attack on Pariah to force him to answer. I find his reaction to be very overdefensive in the form of an aggressive attack on my statement to try to distract from the fact that I was pointing out his slip up and requesting him to answer. Unfortunately, I rarely consider how my discourse with a single player may be viewed by the rest of the town, so perhaps it is slightly slanderous to suggest he is scum on something that may or may not be a slip up. Still, that reaction to my attack is downright strange. Trying to take my statement out of context while not even addressing the main point of it all and then vanishing before we can really start talking about it?

Also, are you really going to try and accuse me of active lurking based on half a statement?

So, atm, I believe s_e's nk ability claim. Alignment-wise, the timing seems too early/fast for it to be mafia trying anything bold and I doubt they would try anything like that without giving themselves time to plan at least. This is also pretty dangerous for 3rd-party roles since they are usually a 1-man army unless it is a cult. Any more experienced players care to share Day-1 claim stories?

It is also my guess that since his last vigilante role didn't go so well (as my memories served), he figured he might as well claim his role and get feedback/advice from other players. And hopefully, player interaction with s_e can be another angle to look at (assuming he lives past this day). Also, maid + knives + time-manipulation powers. Still, that doesn't mean I am not gonna observe s_e any further.


For the point about powers corresponding to the character, I think it is possible. After all, Scarlet did flavor the game around Touhou. More or less, he would have tied bits and parcels from Touhou into the game setup. However, I am not gonna put much weightage on it and definitely not with one's alignment.




Btw, @Garren: Three people's power?


As for reads, nothing much. SeTiny and HW are kinda quiet. I didn't see much of Zinger either and like people have already pointed out, is MUSKA even aware of this?

Niklor is surely active and I can see his points. From his posts, his arguments about s_e came across to me like he assumes s_e is town which he reflects on his own read. I would give him a town lean but pardon me if past experiences taught me to be more suspicious of the talkative ones instead. Pariah and numbers seems to be on the same camp of leash s_e as if he is mafia or at the very least non-town. Still, good points, I can see it. Question I ask myself is possible ulterior motives for wanting to 'leash' s_e or how it would actually go. Like how easier or harder it would be for the mafia to 'control' s_e's nk.

Personally, I would prefer for s_e to go about deciding his own targets but with feedback and discussion, meaning, he ultimately decides on the target on his own. Which is also what Garren suggested somewhere?

On Garren, he comes across as an excited town wanting to contribute.

On Storyteller, I am drawing a blank.

Btw, is the deadline counted by forum time?

False edit: People posted. I am not gonna edit. Read through it later in the day etc.

@Niklor
I didn't say it was a bad thing.
You gotta admit, it's hard not to notice the only person voting you.

It's more that I desire for Squinty to be town and want to plan strategy for dealing with at this point on that desire. Personally, planning a strategy for him being non=town goes like this. Lynch, lynch, lynch, so I only really worry that we are potentially going to plan for the possibility of him being any alignment, which either limits him as town or allowing him some action despite the wiser course to lynch if we suspect he isn't.


True enough, though I try to avoid placing undue suspicions on someone just for voting me. It seems to often lead to tunneling in my case. Of course, I believe I may have misinterpreted your people you notice and people you suspect.

edit: people you notice as people you suspect.

In what alternate mafia universe thread did I say to leash squinty? I advocated for him not using his ability, but ultimately leaving it to his own devices. That's not at all leashing.

As for my "slip-up" Niklor, you can see it as a slip-up if you want. There really isn't much else I can say with regards to it.

As for determining a strategy assuming SE is Town, I completely agree with that post. Some discourse is definitely in order and, while there is no correct method of what to do, the alternative is always lynch.

Garren perhaps should word his statements more. Either he is mafia, or he assumes SE is telling the truth. If that is the case, then Garren is in a network with someone, knowing those two player's roles, and assumes SE's to be true. Slightly suspicious on Garren, but I don't know his mafia experience enough to say.

*edit: more should be "more accurately"

What is this suppose to mean?



Yes half the day and nearly a fourth of the players haven't participated, while a few more have only barely participated. Plenty of information to make a decision.



I try to make it clear who is my top choice for a lynch, even if I don't type VOTE PLAYER A.



If the day was ending I would be voting Garren.

Because I very rarely vote for people before they've had a chance to offer a defense for the allegations made against them.



The point in my questioning you was not to change your opinion, nor for you to change mine. The point was to see if you would deviate from what you want to do. To see if you were really a "team player" as they say, rather than somebody simply pushing his own agenda. By asking you to reason from a stance that wasn't the one you wanted to take, I put you in a position to allow yourself to look through different eyes, as a team player would attempt to do. Somebody pushing their own agenda, however, would stubbornly stick to their agenda, ignoring alternate view points. Which is what you did. This is where I became suspicious of your behavior.



I find your answer here very interesting. What I presented from you was in response to PopPa's third post of the game, none of which was addressed at you. So clearly you're trying to justify your slanderous statements with his response to your slanderous statements. Seems like perfectly functioning logic. The matter of the situation is that rather than simply ask PopPa a straightforward question, you decided to create a hostile situation by slanderizing him, which sets you up perfectly for him being "over defensive". As for your accusation of slip, let's break that down. PopPa said essentially that leaving SE unleashed was of greater benefit because we get to see his reasoning on who he killed and why and made an offhand comment about not knowing their alignment. To which you said he wouldn't, unless he did. But when you think about it, whatever SE's alignment is, he won't know what the alignment is of the person he killed, as the only way he could is if he was mafia killing other mafia. If he's mafia I'm sure he has a fairly good estimation of what their alignment will be, but he doesn't know for sure. So what I'm seeing is that you latched on a statement that is going to be true 99% of the time, and seized it as an opportunity to mudsling against PopPa, instead of asking him to just clarify. To which your defense is sidestepping the issue to slanderize the player even further, ya?

That wasn't quite was he was referring to with my alleged slip. I'll break it down for you.


Niklor is referring to the bolded portion as a slip. As it currently reads, it shows that I have some knowledge or some sort of confirmation that SE is not town, which can only occur if we are scum teammates, cult buddies, or some other sort of anti-town situation.

What I actually meant is that SE is by no means assumed town, which yields an entirely different interpretation.

He is somewhat justified in his claiming it is a slip-up, as it appears to be so if you exclude mistyping from the equation.

Well, by the time you made this reply, I have. What is still stopping you?



I don't see how I ignored you points of view. As I said, I understand them and disagree. Are you saying because I didn't other up my very own reasoning in written form that you believe I didn't ponder your point? Because that makes sense as an argument. Saying I'm ignoring you it stretching things quite a bit, though.



First, how was PopPa's third post not addressed at me? That was the post he attacked me in. I don't understand that point at all.

As for the trying to justify slander post-slander: I didn't think about it. I freely admit in hindsight my statement might be an attack on his character and seen such by other players. But, again, when I am generally responding to other players, the only thing I am considering is that player. I may have unintentionally slandered him, and I will freely say so, but that doesn't mean his reaction to the slander is justified.

I'm sorry, but he didn't react to me slandering him. He said nothing about it in his post. He reacted to me saying my first point regarding my opinion on a wasted role was irrelevant and misleading. Then, he agrees he spoke poorly, but acts like I didn't come out and suggest he is scum. Instead, he goes and attacks half of my statement claiming it is non-content. And then he follows that with a vote. He overreacted to one part of what I said and mostly ignored my attack on him.

I don't see how I am further slandering him. He did overreact. He did ignore the attack on his slip. That is not slander.

I didn't really ignore it. I just said it wasn't a slip and didn't engage in further discourse. That isn't ignoring it, but it isn't emboldening it either.


And I never voted for you. It appears that I voted for you, but you can ask Scarlett. I Actually did not bold my vote, thus it is not a vote. I do that trick a lot to see how people react.

Why wasn't that your response from the start, though? Why go on a full assault over me attacking what I call a slip?



Actually the part I am claiming is the slip up is "He can't know anyone's alignment, so..." I probably should have made that clear earlier. Saying Squinty is by no means town just read as saying we shouldn't confirm him as town. But the part about how he can't know anyone's alignment seemed an unusual wording, so I'm pursuing it as a slip. Yes, if you are scum you can't know with a certainty he doesn't know anyone's alignment, but you can be reasonably sure he at least isn't scum.

I was wondering about that seeing as your first response wasn't a correction regarding your vote. Just hadn't quite gotten around to it.

My mistake, same post wrong line.

As for why that wasn't my response from the start, that doesn't actually matter. I'm allowed to make attacks like that without having to conform to your expectations.

You have the freedom to make such attacks and I have the freedom to question the validity behind them.