The Pisonian Conspiracy [Concluded]

[Winston Hughes]

I want more detail on why you think I am scum. Specific examples, preferably from the thread or from private chat, or anything really to justify this.

Talking to you in private, I ran into a big pile of metagamey excuses and WIFOM. Despite claiming to be convinced of my innocence, you refused to tell me your name in exchange for my own. In that context, voting for me now seems rather odd as well. For someone well known for his elite mafia-finding abilities, we haven't seen much of the good stuff from you here. When we talked, you did identify two potential supects, both of whom turned out to be (apparently) town power roles, one of whom doesn't seem interested in using that power, while the other (Autolycus) was killed after I warned you off voting for him. Finally, there is your oft-made statement that while you're lynch-bait as a townie, as scum you're much less likely to catch votes.

A slam dunk? Far from it. But I don't have anything better at this stage.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Talking to you in private, I ran into a big pile of metagamey excuses and WIFOM. Despite claiming to be convinced of my innocence, you refused to tell me your name in exchange for my own. In that context, voting for me now seems rather odd as well. For someone well known for his elite mafia-finding abilities, we haven't seen much of the good stuff from you here. When we talked, you did identify two potential supects, both of whom turned out to be (apparently) town power roles, one of whom doesn't seem interested in using that power, while the other (Autolycus) was killed after I warned you off voting for him. Finally, there is your oft-made statement that while you're lynch-bait as a townie, as scum you're much less likely to catch votes.

A slam dunk? Far from it. But I don't have anything better at this stage.

Well you're right on the far from it part.

My vote on you is because I don't really find your suspicion of me to be genuine. Just because I'm not going to reveal my role every game, as a chosen decision for several-games-strategy, and revealed it to someone else I trusted more than you, that doesn't make me scum.

You just cannot read me, that's all. It's nothing to be ashamed of. That's if your suspicion on me is genuine, and I don't think it is, frankly.

[Winston Hughes]

Well you're right on the far from it part.

My vote on you is because I don't really find your suspicion of me to be genuine. Just because I'm not going to reveal my role every game, as a chosen decision for several-games-strategy, and revealed it to someone else I trusted more than you, that doesn't make me scum.

You just cannot read me, that's all. It's nothing to be ashamed of. That's if your suspicion on me is genuine, and I don't think it is, frankly.

Riddled with scumminess. Again there's the metagaming "several-games strategy", which is reason enough to lynch someone in my book. And what's this about someone you trusted more than me? That someone had been one of your prime suspects only moments earlier. Also, you totally sidesteped the Autolycus issue and that of your sudden inability to spot scummy behaviour.

Perhaps I can't read you. But if your last statement is true, and you think I'm scum, then you can't read me either. The difference is that you've seen plenty to suggest that I'm innocent, while I've seen little to suggest the same about you.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Riddled with scumminess. Again there's the metagaming "several-games strategy", which is reason enough to lynch someone in my book. And what's this about someone you trusted more than me? That someone had been one of your prime suspects only moments earlier. Also, you totally sidesteped the Autolycus issue and that of your sudden inability to spot scummy behaviour.

Perhaps I can't read you. But if your last statement is true, and you think I'm scum, then you can't read me either. The difference is that you've seen plenty to suggest that I'm innocent, while I've seen little to suggest the same about you.

*shrug*

What have I seen to suggest your innocence? Nothing. I made a judgment call in my initial assessment of you. That assessment, like all my assessments, is amended every time you do something I find guilty.

Such as voting for me on reasons that sound good on paper, but are just excuses to lynch me, and are terrible at finding scum.

[Askthepizzaguy]

I'm sure the timing here is atrocious, and it will just convince Winston I am guilty, if he is in fact innocent. However, Warman is far more interested in this game than the previous several he's been in. Quick to respond, not-nonsense posts.

That's at least different from baseline. An explanation is warranted. While it's been observed (by me) that such behavior is not always a reliable indicator for scum (sometimes it just indicates more enthusiasm than usual), I don't believe I've observed Warman get excited over certain games or roles before. It's still off, for him.

unvote, vote: Warman

[Renata]

According to Wikipedia, Rufus (Renata) was


( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaius_Musonius_Rufus )

And he is listed as Exiled/Denigrated on the Pisonian Conspiracy page.

It means that the guilty parties may not be as obvious as looking on that page, so I would guess the Scum team to still be complete, and Beefy's claim (now Skooma) of Petronius, may be credible.

There are gaps in the logic here that really quite bother me.

1. My role is described as exiled on trumped up charges. In other words, not guilty. The role should NOT be mafia. So how do you get from there to,
2. The guilty parties might not be obvious. Hmm? So far not a single player killed by the mafia has had a role that according to the conspiracy is likely to be mafia. In other words, you've just drawn a conclusion that bears no relation to the evidence used to support it. (And used that unsupported conclusion to support Skooma's innocence despite his claimed name, might I add.)
3. You would "guess" the scum team to still be complete. Because the guilty parties might not be obvious. What? As I said above we haven't lynched anyone with an obvious scum name. The night deaths obviously aren't scum. The conclusion should be that IF the guilty parties are obvious, then the scum team is still complete. But you're arguing the exact opposite. The guilty parties might not be obvious (which in and of itself is unsupported), therefore the scum team is probably still complete. The road from your premise to your conclusion goes right over a cliff.

You're better than posting a bunch of word-salad when you're trying to draw conclusions, Romanic.

This whole post is a mess of non-logic. Not one of its conclusions is supported by the premise given. I suspect the three "conclusions" could be true (or not; regardless it's not important right now):
-- the guilty party's names are not necessarily obvious
-- Skooma is innocent
-- the scum team is still complete

but you sure didn't draw those conclusions the way you said you did. Either you already know the answers (in other words, you're scum) and are just slapping together a bunch of words to make yourself look useful; or you already know the answers (in other words, you're scum) and are manipulating the conclusions to promote your cause (in other words, Skooma is also scum*). I'm leaning the first at the moment, but that's not really important right now. What's important is if you didn't know the answers (in other words, if you were town), you'd never cobble together such a hackery as that.

I'm also dubious of Warman (for the reason Pizza states) and of Pizza (partially for Winston's reasons, partially instinct), but right now I'd prefer a lynch of Romanic.


*Actually this isn't the only possible cause-promotion Romanic could be involved in. He could be trying to cover for Lord of Lent or another lynched player having been mafia ("the scum team is still complete") or for the "bad" name of another non-Skooma conspirator.

[Askthepizzaguy]

First Warman, then Romanic, then Flexo, then Fry.

[Renata]

Jeepers, Pizza, you had a whole two minutes to absorb that comment of mine and post. Impressive speed of drawing conclusions that Romanic should be lynched.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Jeepers, Pizza, you had a whole two minutes to absorb that comment of mine and post. Impressive speed of drawing conclusions that Romanic should be lynched.

You're somehow impressed by my reading comprehension speed? It's usually my typing skills that do that.

My conclusion was that Warman should be lynched. Romanic I have as a suspect (think Clue, everyone is one unless I see their card) and I haven't crossed him off yet. I don't disagree with your premise regarding him, although I must say Romanic is not usually a sloppy mafioso. He did recently win the Simpsons Half Monty with basically no one guessing it was him.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Oh I've gone and stuck my foot in it now, haven't I.

Pizza must be guilty because Romanic will turn out to be so. I'm getting really good at this.

Why do I fail so epically at looking innocent when innocent. Winston is right, you should lynch me soon and get it over with. Heck, have special role over there whack me. It will kill two birds with one stone.

[Renata]

His arguments against Zack in that game had gaping holes in the their logic not too dissimilar to what's going on here. Nor can you really characterize it as sloppy if several people read over the post without apparently noticing it at all.

[Askthepizzaguy]

His arguments against Zack in that game had gaping holes in the their logic not too dissimilar to what's going on here. Nor can you really characterize it as sloppy if several people read over the post without apparently noticing it at all.

I am just taking comfort in the fact that I wasn't useless in other games. That's my saving grace here, because the more I talk, the more I'm making less sense and adding to my own scumminess rating.

Romanic is a bit harder to read, is the point I am trying to make. No offense to Warman, but I think he's sort of flinching here. Maybe you're right about Romanic, but I am more confident on the vote on Warman presently.

That said, I do not think your case is without merit. It's better than anything I have come up with on my own.

[Renata]

Yes yes we know you're scummy, you don't have to rub it in. Warman's rather high on my own suspect list; after breakfast I'll have to do a compare and contrast on the three of you and see what stands out.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Yes yes we know you're scummy, you don't have to rub it in. Warman's rather high on my own suspect list; after breakfast I'll have to do a compare and contrast on the three of you and see what stands out.

I could list reasons why I'm scummy and then do more things that are scummy, and post a picture of an extra-sexy version of Warman and explain that his sexiness is the reason I am voting for him. Would that help? Oh yes, we know what happens when pizza does that.....

I'm just going to embrace the scumminess at this point. It's all I can do.

[johnhughthom]

Vote: Roman

Wikipedia = scum.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Ah fudge it.

I am not on my game this game, and I am going to start embracing that too. Let's try shutting up and following, maybe that will work. Screw my judgment on this one.

unvote, vote: Romanic

+10 more scummypoints for pizza.

[Renata]

Dude, you did that yesterday on Lord of Lent.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Dude, you did that yesterday on Lord of Lent.

I can't win.

Winston is no good, Warman is fine but we'd rather lynch Romanic, and now switching to Romanic is also apparently scummy.

Fun fun fun.

[Chimpyang]

I'm going to go with Robbiecon's argument: Vote: JHT

[johnhughthom]

I'm going to go with Robbiecon's argument: Vote: JHT

There are quite a few arguments and you decide to tag along with the weakest. Interesting.

Tally:

jht: 2 (robbiecon, Chimp)
Pizza: 1 (Winston)
Secura: 1 (Ironhead)
Warman: 2 (Secura, Roman)
Roman: 2 (jht, Pizza)

[ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88]

Vote:JHT

Don't vote for me everyone. You be voting for the wrong person.

[johnhughthom]

Vote:JHT

Hah, just because I killed you in Animus.

[Chimpyang]

There are quite a few arguments and you decide to tag along with the weakest. Interesting.

Tally:

jht: 2 (robbiecon, Chimp)
Pizza: 1 (Winston)
Secura: 1 (Ironhead)
Warman: 2 (Secura, Roman)
Roman: 2 (jht, Pizza)

I'm still getting over my animus hangover...still trying to absorb the thread, the Romanic, Warman arguemnts are a huge wall of text to me atm.

[Romanic]

You're better than posting a bunch of word-salad when you're trying to draw conclusions, Romanic.

This whole post is a mess of non-logic. Not one of its conclusions is supported by the premise given. I suspect the three "conclusions" could be true (or not; regardless it's not important right now):
-- the guilty party's names are not necessarily obvious
-- Skooma is innocent
-- the scum team is still complete

But I love salad.

You've changed my conclusions though, I said Skooma's claim (well Beefy's ) may be credible, not that he was innocent. And the scum team being complete is also a guess, not an affirmation, based on the dead roles we've seen so far. And of course I didn't draw that 3rd conclusion from your death because I'm pretty sure you were Town, from dying at night.

You make a big deal of my post, but all I was really saying is that the historical roles, implicated in the Pisonian Conspiracy, will probably not be obvious.

[Chimpyang]

It's a close vote, I assume that the round ends at midnight GMT, so I'm going to unvote, there are a few people and suspects on 2, lets see which one cracks first.

[Renata]

But I love salad.

You've changed my conclusions though, I said Skooma's claim (well Beefy's ) may be credible, not that he was innocent. And the scum team being complete is also a guess, not an affirmation, based on the dead roles we've seen so far. And of course I didn't draw that 3rd conclusion from your death because I'm pretty sure you were Town, from dying at night.

You make a big deal of my post, but all I was really saying is that the historical roles, implicated in the Pisonian Conspiracy, will probably not be obvious.

Which would have been fine as an opinion, if you hadn't supported your contention with a bunch of marshmallow fluff. It's the fluff that I take exception to. It doesn't hold up the conclusions that you're trying to support on it.

And note that since I am dead and innocent, I get to exaggerate your conclusions ever so slightly in order to make my point. It doesn't alter the case against you, to point that out. "might" and "could be" are not inherently less scummy than "is".

[Renata]

It's a close vote, I assume that the round ends at midnight GMT, so I'm going to unvote, there are a few people and suspects on 2, lets see which one cracks first.

How about you decide which one you want to stake your claim to as being scummiest?

[Renata]

Winston, Atpg -- was Autolycus some form of investigatory role? There was his "now I'm cleared I can speak freely, lynch LoL" post, makes me wonder.

Warman is rubbing me all kinds of wrong given he posted only at night for the first two days of the game, but on day two he wound up tied for the lead. So did AtPG for that matter (and you'd think ATPG of all people could arrange not to wind up in that position). I'm not exactly sold yet on either of them, though.

[Romanic]

Winston, Atpg -- was Autolycus some form of investigatory role? There was his "now I'm cleared I can speak freely, lynch LoL" post, makes me wonder.

Warman is rubbing me all kinds of wrong given he posted only at night for the first two days of the game, but on day two he wound up tied for the lead. So did AtPG for that matter (and you'd think ATPG of all people could arrange not to wind up in that position). I'm not exactly sold yet on either of them, though.

The Day 2 tally (#113) was wrong: Ironhead voted JHT, not ATPG (see #114, CB is correcting it).

The final tally for Day 2 was

3 johnhughthom (Ironhead, Winston, *hidden vote*)
2 Lord of Lent (autolycus, Renata)
2 Warman (Romanic, Chimpyang)
1 autolycus (ATPG)
1 ATPG (JHT)
1 Beefy (robbiecon)
1 Renata (Lord of Lent)
---
5 not voting (Beefy/Skooma, Secura, Tiberious/JHT2, Warman, Yaropolk)

[Renata]

OK, forget the bit about ATPG, then. However, from the perspectives of JHT, LoL or Warman it would have appeared as if they were in danger of being lynched minus direct knowledge of the hidden vote. Meh, I suppose that vote could be a scum one, though. If so JHT would look really good, Warman really bad -- unless LoL was in fact scum.