Tic-Tac-Toe Mafia - GAME END

[Raikaria]

OK, doing something that looks to me like scumhunting.

[Polaris]

"I Guess I Should Make a Vote Count Even Though There's Only One Vote" Vote Count:

ActionDan (1): Raikaria

Not Voting (6): ActionDan, Zakeri, Sky Paladin, Serela, Dr Rawr, Dormio
With 7 alive, it takes 4 to lynch.

There are about 54 hours remaining.

[Dr Rawr]

I'm at work on my 15min break but here's some quick thoughts.

##Vote:Zakeri

[Sky_Paladin]

Dan, what are your thoughts on Serela?

[WHMZakeri]

No matter how many times you say "I really wish Zakeri was here and talking" I can't do that until I'm awake and have read the game.

I'm having a hard time reading Dan. All of the notes I felt worth taking on him except for one is focusing on CF7 who didn't have a chance to post since before Dan showed up. I don't feel like it's Dan's fault that this happened though (That is, I don't think Dan is acute enough to use Timezones against people unless they mentioned going to sleep with less than 12 hours left in the day.)
I did agree with Raikaria's point that He had been completely disacknowledging Dormio as a wagon, but apparently Dan was really on the game with Dormio not actually being viable? There's a few things that add up, but nothing that points to a big reveal, so I'm kind of doubting the case against him here.

One thing, though, Can you tell me what you saw differently in CF7's Vote on Dormio changing into a Probably town versus, say, Sky's 129 post where he says he would policy lynch Serela for having a bad vote and tunnel on Dormio and then mentions that Dormio is probably scum for dragging out a bad case against Serela?

Raikaria is town. I think Serela is town, because his posting style so far is more in line with his cute derpy town posting only with less derp. I also think Dormio is town, given I don't agree with any of the cases he made on day one, though it's hard for me to judge his CF7 case fairly given I didn't see it until after CF7's flip.

I really feel like Sky is trying way too hard to play up the derp angle as a means of getting people to ignore him. The Drunk posting that pissed of Bard was the first step in doing so, which would set precedent for people being more lenient on the rest of his posts. This alone doesn't make him scum, but in conjunction with bad logic he put down in his other posts, i.e. the failed meta defense for Serela, and that fact that his 129 post alone has him flip flopping between Serela being a good vote and Dormio being scum for trying to vote him (Not to mention the flip flop after saying in post 78 that he couldn't hold Dormio accountable for not having anything else to talk about).

In general, I feel like Sky is most trying to avoid being held accountable, and I don't feel like his opinions clash with themselves naturally. From what he posted Day 2 so far, It does feel like he's sorted out what he wants to say about why Dormio might be scum, but I don't really buy into it, and I still feel like he didn't come to that knowledge naturally by means of translating Town gut feeling into finding the words for it.

##Vote: Sky_Paladin

Also, hedging bets on Rawr being other other one based on this feeling alone. Unless it's Dan of course.

[Polaris]

Dormio has requested V/LA for 12 hours.

Vote Count:

ActionDan (1): Raikaria
Zakeri (1): Dr Rawr
Sky Paladin (1): Zakeri

Not Voting (4): ActionDan, Sky Paladin, Serela, Dormio
With 7 alive, it takes 4 to lynch.

There are about 50 hours remaining.

[Dr Rawr]

tbh the vote on zakeri was kinda impulse. i hadnt read the game too close near the end and reading his posts from 91-95 made me think more like he was just faking town effort, sheeping, and looking over the case from bardiche could possibly be scum. its these little things that make me gut read him as scum.

And then there is this blatent lie. Dormio is the best chance you have of getting a lynch with who is left. Dormio has 2 votes. CF7 has 1.

false action dan was the best chance at getting lynched, follow up was sky paladin. nnr dormio and cf7 were all tied. raikaria do you have anything else besides the fact that actiondan started the cf7 wagon?

I did agree with Raikaria's point that He had been completely disacknowledging Dormio as a wagon, but apparently Dan was really on the game with Dormio not actually being viable? There's a few things that add up, but nothing that points to a big reveal, so I'm kind of doubting the case against him here.

Having abit of trouble trying to understand this. i saw you completely sheeping raikarias 83 but after that i start to get confused. are you saying with dan voting cf7 over dormio means they are potential scum buddies if either of them flipped scum?
i also dont feel like your sky paladin case is all that strong after reading the many fabulous cases sky has made before. i also think his 191 is pretty cool and i dont think scum would that kind of effort in.

serela seems to have stopped spewing out waffles from his mouth it seems, but whats coming out now is weirding me out. something about sandwiches and inb4s

would like to see raikaria reply after seeing the vote count right before actiondan voted cf7. unless im wrong and if so please point it out

dormio seems like a pretty cool guy, not to much interest in lynching him. would like to see his actual thoughts on who he thinks is scum and not him asking other people there thoughts. but i guess well see in 12 hours 

@actiondan yea i was actually pretty shocked replacing in as a townie. would like your thoughts on who you think is scum though, almost nobody seems to be voting or saying much about who they think theyre scum  :colbert:

[Serela]

I'd be sleeping instead of posting if I didn't think "someone is going to notice I posted in like 3 other threads just now and ignored mafia", but I just got home and it's 1am, so, no

Probably will want to lynch between Zak or SkyPal (as said in previous posts... kinda) but I don't have a reliable read on either and I need to seriously evaluate them tomorrow, thankfully I don't have work :D

Actually, peeking over DrRawr's post again... SkyPal's effort -is- a thing now that I remember it, but there's precedence for him putting in a lot of effort as scum, so I'm conflicted. 1am isn't the time for me to be making these decisions though, soooo. Actually now that I think about it harder I'd probably vote Zak still, yeah. Rawr are you up for a shitty Zak wagon with no clear justification so when he flips scum he's just like "what the fuck was I even supposed to do, they didn't even make a real case on me ;_;" and sustain motk town being bad even when winning

yeah no I should deffo be asleep right now

[WHMZakeri]

Somehow, reading the entire game has caused me to forget everything that's happened in the game.

If you're asking about the post I just made, it's sort of a flow of thought thing. I wanted to jump on Dan and vote him for the thing Raikaria pointed out about protecting Dormio, but the fact that there didn't seem to have been enough people to vote Dormio unless he self-hammered kind of defeats the point. Plus pushing that point forward would be making bad use of early scumpair theories.

When I sheeped Rai's 83, The main point was that I didn't like the way he pushed CF7, but it's not strong enough material to make for a good lynch, and it seems to be one of only two things I don't like about his play this game. I'll clarify the other thing I dislike later in the day phase, if you can't already guess from the question I asked him in my above post.

I'll make better posts tomorrow thanks to sleep-brain-think-stuff and how it works.

Cut by Serela: :/

[Dr Rawr]

but there's precedence for him putting in a lot of effort as scum

only effort i saw as scum was him trying to spew meta logic in an anon game.

[Dr Rawr]

so right now i dont really think raikaria or skypaladin are scum. even with sky paladins fabulous posts day 1 i find them not really that scummy just not really a good case. would not sheep him 10/10. raikaria because i feel like hes super obvious town and wouldnt lynch him.

tbh if i had any reason to vote serela is probably because of his super sheeping powers. 143 is probably the worst. im looking at the posts around it and i cant figure out why hes voting sky paladin but i think hes trying to sheep bard in some way

[Dr Rawr]

tbh i cant really see sky paladin as scum. for him to make that post and back track almost everything he has done this game sounds really unbelievable and i wouldnt expect town or scum to do it and since i cant see scum doing it hes probably town.

im also ready to eat my words at the end of this game.

[Raikaria]

false action dan was the best chance at getting lynched, follow up was sky paladin. nnr dormio and cf7 were all tied. raikaria do you have anything else besides the fact that actiondan started the cf7 wagon?

I have no explanation other than I'm a moron and got my lines muddled and thought the 2 people on Sky were on Dormio. Point still stands; CF7 was not the 'most viable' lynch. Sky was.

And I do have something else. The fact Actiondan said 3~4 times not to vote Dormio. As I said, Serela called him out on it as well. Also there's the reason I was voting Actiondan ED1; when he patted CF7 on the back for making an absolutely awful case about 'Dormio is lurking' before we were even off Page 1, and basically told him to run with it.

[Raikaria]

Also I am also of the opinion that lynching SkyPaladin is not a good idea today. I don't re's usually agree with Zakeri's case on Sky either. Sky's 'drunkposted' in other games. I don't think it's confusion-fu, and I don't think he's being the derp that much. Especially when you remember Dormio was being a blockhead towards him.

Dormio continues to be non-present; which is not helping much. But he's V/LA so what can ya do except bellyache about it.

No matter how many times you say "I really wish Zakeri was here and talking" I can't do that until I'm awake and have read the game.

You slept for 24 hours?

[Raikaria]

Gonna stay on Actiondan for the time being, still think he's my strongest scumread, although the more people talk about Zakeri the more my smile falls about him. I didn't much like his SkyPal case either.

[Dr Rawr]

And I do have something else. The fact Actiondan said 3~4 times not to vote Dormio. As I said, Serela called him out on it as well. Also there's the reason I was voting Actiondan ED1; when he patted CF7 on the back for making an absolutely awful case about 'Dormio is lurking' before we were even off Page 1, and basically told him to run with it.

im not really going to roll with what happened on page one unless dan claimed scu....

[Raikaria]

Technically it happened on Page 2.

[Sky_Paladin]

I was away all day with a copy of what I'd posted earlier, and tried to data crunch out something useful. 

Linked for huge. 

Page 1.
Page 2.
Page 3.

Analysis is good for day 1 only and I am aware it's just 'data'.  And data interpreted by me arbitrarily tried to turn into information so I'm not going to argue that IT MUST BE SO. 

Key results are:
Dan spent most of day 1 defending and inviting other players to attack other players, but made no cases of his own.  I recorded him defending nine times, specifically Dormio five times. 
Dormio didn't really do anything outside of pressuring myself or his cases on Serela and CF7, but he did make cases which puts him well ahead of a lot of other players. 
Zak did basically nothing, and only initiated pressure actions on NNR, Dan (who was also pressuring him), and Dormio.  He also defended Serela on two occasions.  Other than that he has no out going player interactions. 
Raikaria has good interactions with all players except Zakeri, who he's avoided on day 1, and while he did defend three players he only did so one time each, so there's no indication of buddying or misdirecting the lynch. 
Serela has a few odd things. 
1 - She called Dormio probably town and probably scum in the exact same sentence. 
2 - She defended NNR three times, once before anybody had even considered NNR. 
3 - She defended players eight times - 2x Dormio, 3x NNR, 1x Bard, 1x Dan, 1x Zak. 

I arbitrarily awarded players 2 points for making a case or attacking another players case (red action), 1 point for a post that applied pressure or 'did something' (blue action), and -1 point for defending or buddying other players.  I didn't include points for actions against players that were dead.  I removed myself from the analysis because I know I'm town and I was looking for scums, not trying to convince everybody.  I figured I'd trawl the data later, look for who I thought was scum, then work back to the posts numbers which I included on page 1 and make the appropriate case. 

The numbers are arbitrary, however, the net town worth;
Dan -1
Raikaria 5
Dormio 4
Zak 2
Serela 3
NNR 0

So if we were lynching based on 'town worth', I'd get rid of Dan, and then look at Zak or Serela. 

Odd stuff:
The only players excluding NNR who have had no interactions with each other (positive or negative) are Raikaria and Zakeri. 
Players who have mutual defences are Dan/Dormio (x1, with Dan defending Dormio an additional 4 times), Serela and Dan, and Serela and Zak. 

Actual scum hunting the good old fashioned way:

Serela's last three posts on day 1 that I considered exceptionally awful. 

143

I'm too tired to reread Dormio enough to re-evaluate but he's certainly improved over before (he'd do this if he was scum too but I don't have the brainpower to think about it right now

This is the Dormio is scum but not scum sentence. 

Okay actually no, re-looking over the part of SkyPal's post Bard just singled out is, yeah, just from that it's way better of a lynch than NNR or CF7.

(Serela will later clarify that she meant Dormio, not Bard). 

For context, the point that Dormio singled out is:

I would policy lynch Serela for being useless and also for tunneling Dormio most of the game.  The vote was the laziest and she has done nothing to improve her vote except argue with Dormio.

I think Dormio is bad for focusing largely only on Serela's vote, when he could (and should) have drilled CF7 and ActionDan for their shitvotes.  This inconsistency alarms me.

I get the feeling Serela's vote is more because I would policy lynch her for uselessness and tunneling than actually perceiving me as scummy. 

Please also note that my apology to Dormio, earlier, directly matches the reason I said that Dormio was bad, here.  That is to say, I think Dormio should have drilled CF7 and ActionDan as well as Serela. 

This ends with Serela voting for me, this was in response to my targeting Serela, not Dormio, so for her to stick to that vote for 'reasons as stated earlier' makes me believe she is acting with a scum self-interest. 

153
Let's look at that vote motivation some more. 

I thought Sky might suddenly turn into a viable wagon as a change of events, but if it doesn't then, yeah, I'm going to have to make my mind up about one of those three.

This is consistent with a scum Serela wagon hopping all over the place, as she has done all game...and pre-ceded by her 'inb4 wagon hopping' comment.  Sigh. 

It's probably bad that I don't even try to refute SkyPaladin anymore.

Discrediting other players arguments without actually addressing them in any way is scummy.  It's a handwave.  "Don't look at what this player is saying, they are an idiot." 

164

This being said I'm not relating it to the situation at hand at all, and wow we have like 40 minutes left so is a SkyPal lynch seriously possible or? We need to consolidate.

It's clear at this point that Serela wants Sky dead for non scum-hunting reasons. 
Who has Sky been applying pressure to? 
I want to say that Serela is defending a scum!Dormio because of the sweet sweet taste of justice, but I think it's just scum!Serela. 

I'm actually just going to dump a whole bunch of Serela quotes here because they look bad and I want other players to see them. 
50

tl;dr you're using this as an attack over me potentially doing something bad that I never actually did.

The specific situation was 'inb4 wagon jumping'.  Serela called Dormio out and said 'You should have waited until I had actually wagon jumped before voting and then you would have a case, but because you voted before I wagon jumped, there is no case'.  It's not a catch 22; if Dormio had never voted then Serela may never have wagon jumped.  Which is true.  However...Serela has been caught wagon jumping a couple of times now, so does that justify players voting her now? 

Same post;

It's literally only a minute notch above a total jokevote so I didn't really care and did it anyway.

So it is not actually a joke vote, then?

75

Seriously, it was a joke, because I've actually been doing that on purpose for a few games to make RVS stop

I was referencing stuff I've been doing in recent games and in one case have concrete evidence of having been blatantly self-awarely doing them in those games, is enough to null this argument >_>; (Then again, the one with evidence I was scum, but scum should have even less reason to care about ending rvs, not more)

Considering the fact that I've been consistently dominating town whenever I roll scum for the past long while

79

a lot of people have been saying we could lynch nnr, but I'm sorry, uh

Nobody had really been saying it.  I think one person (maybe me?) mentioned it because he was afk. 

I don't think this is enough to be able to declare someone lurking scummily and not just "oh well it was rvs and then I worked and slept (or vice versa)"

and... oh wow wait he hasn't posted since page 1? yeah I mean it would have been effortless for scum to make a comment on what was going on at any point of page 2

and bam, people start thinking about lynching NNR. 

That's the first of three defences of NNR, by the way. 

109

After what nnr said yeah I guess a lurker lynch on him wouldn't be that terrible (At this point of the game if you have 5 minutes you can probably make an educated post) but, I'd still rather go down that path d2 instead and lynch someone else today.

Pushing for a lynch but on day 2. 

***

Anyway I wrote quite a lot so I am going to stop here since this is day 1 analysis and it is now day 2. 

From my analysis/scum reading, I'd currently pick two out of Dan/Zak/Serela. 

[Raikaria]

My head hurts looking at graphs and reading the handwriting. I'd argue that I did a pretty direct attack on Actiondan, but w/e.

Yeah, me and Zakeri haven't been talking much, although Zak was happy to sheep me D1 so does that count as an 'interaction'? I'm pretty null on Zak overall right now. People have some valid points but there's nt really much which makes me swing either way decisively with my opinion on him right now. Except his case on Sky was pretty poor, as I mentioned before.

You do have good points on Serela which I would like to see how Serela responds to. Those I see as legitimate concerns, and yeah, that recent !scumSerela game he did wagonhop a fair bit.

I like how Dan's interaction graph is almost entirely green arrows of defense, with all of one red arrow [Serela] and my/Zakeri's pressure. Just shows how little scumhunting he did D1.

[Serela]

It's clear at this point that Serela wants Sky dead for non scum-hunting reasons. 

We had FOURTY MINUTES LEFT, iirc the other wagons (other than Dan who was and is townie) were still at like 1 vote each, and I still think the other wagons were really really meh. SkyPal's logic looked too strange so I interpreted it as "This seems more likely to come from scum than be a legitimate town thought" and voted on it. In retrospect, that's not very uncommon from SkyPal, but... I also still think the other wagons (e.g. CF7, NNR) were really, really meh.

The specific situation was 'inb4 wagon jumping'.  Serela called Dormio out and said 'You should have waited until I had actually wagon jumped before voting and then you would have a case, but because you voted before I wagon jumped, there is no case'.

Um no, that wasn't about wagon jumping, that was Dormio quoting the "do something stupid to end rvs" thing and saying I was going to use it as justification to do something scummy.

anyway I need to go do other things atm but I don't work today so I'll totally actually get around to scumhunting
You also mixed up quotes about jokevote and about the "do something stupid" being a joke to make it look like I was contradicting myself, when I was talking about completely different things.

Nobody had really been saying it.  I think one person (maybe me?) mentioned it because he was afk. 

I literally just got out of bed so I'm not checking this very hard right now, but if you were the only person who said it, then you must have said it a whole lot by then >_>; There's no way it had only been brought up once by then.

That's the first of three defences of NNR, by the way.

Are you implying this is scummy? What the hell. A nnr lynch would have been awful and I am nowhere near the only person who said it was a non-option.

Pushing for a lynch but on day 2. 

Uh, duh. If NNR had still done almost nothing D2 then of course we would have lynched him. That's the point where it'd go into scummy lurking.

[Serela]

anyway I need to go do other things atm but I don't work today so I'll totally actually get around to scumhunting
You also mixed up quotes about jokevote and about the "do something stupid" being a joke to make it look like I was contradicting myself, when I was talking about completely different things.

h...how did that first sentence in this quote end up there

I could have sworn that was the end of the post ;_;

it was supposed to be at the end

[Dormio Ergo Sum]

Howdy.
I think that, for my own sanity's sake, I'm going to ignore Sky Palladium's posts for the time being.
It's also past midnight but I'd just like to say that I'm not really liking Raikaria's more recent posts.
I'll post more once I get some sleep and stuff so see you guys then.

[ActionDan]

First I like Rawr.  He's masculine and his posts make me swoon.

Second taking the painstaking effort to read Sky's 191 (which I didn't read more than a passing glance because MY EYES) and the arguably way more traumatizing paper and pen version in 227 I disagree with about everything he concludes or otherwise even says.  Noteworthy from 227, I think his town worth system is flawed and a useless exercise.  I think his attack on Serela is flaccid.  And to answer the question he posed earlier to me: I think Serela is strong town.

This is an example of a telling excerpt concerning Serela: 

I get the feeling Serela's vote is more because I would policy lynch her for uselessness and tunneling than actually perceiving me as scummy. 

Please also note that my apology to Dormio, earlier, directly matches the reason I said that Dormio was bad, here.  That is to say, I think Dormio should have drilled CF7 and ActionDan as well as Serela. 

This ends with Serela voting for me, this was in response to my targeting Serela, not Dormio, so for her to stick to that vote for 'reasons as stated earlier' makes me believe she is acting with a scum self-interest. 

It's way more believable that Serela voted for you due to his stated reason of looking at Dormio's #139 and perceiving a contradiction in what Dormio highlighted in your post.  It's an absolute unsubstantiated opinion that you're using to conclude that Serela acted with any self-interest here.  (also I can't find anywhere where the "so for her to stick to that vote for 'reasons as stated earlier'" comes from.  Serela never said this after he voted you D1).

Concerning the 'I thought Sky might turn into a viable wagon,' that's in response to my post #152 which directly challenges the viability of your wagon D1.  It's like an addendum instead of what it looks like when you present it in juxtaposition with the above, which is an entirely different reason.  Of course your complaint is 'evidence for scum vote hopper' which is a complete non-issue.

The rest of your problems I'm not going over and apparently Serela is tackling some of them herself but they aren't concerning in the least.

In regard to your "data analysis," it's pretty laughable you'd assign point values to "attacks" "pressure" and "defense" with a point system of 2/1/-1, count up each, and add to get a total that means anything to you what-so-ever.  Firstly you have labeled a section "Scummy defends" which is obvious from your point value system but the key is why do you have defense as scummy?  Because it's not. at all.  Second at least for my case it seems the math is wrong since you have me as "pressuring" NNR and Zak once each but defending Dormio 5 times Serela once, so it should be 2-6 = -4 instead of -1.  Thrid, what makes you think scum wouldn't apply "attacks" or "pressure" or in equal measure as any townie, they have an agenda to mislynch people which necessitates both these things.  Forth, despite defending Dormio 5 times which apparently stunned you, the most crucial "defense" I have made was yours at the end of D1 which basically led to you not getting lynched.  Was it scummy of me to defend you?  You tell me.

Both posts are jokes imo.  One of the best indicators is the amalgamation of the RVS votes which indeed are trivial and a waste of space.  191 is mostly IIOA because the sidenotes are basically just quick sloppy compressions of posts in order to tabulate arrows and points for your "data analysis" which is complete crap.  The only thing that comes out of it is the Serela bit in 227 which I find unimpressive.  Nothing really about me or Zak despite stating that you're leaning Zak as scum and the cliffs notes in 191 don't stand for much since their purpose is limited to tabulation.

I'll go on about Zak/Raikaria in a different post this is getting quite long

[Raikaria]

It's also past midnight but I'd just like to say that I'm not really liking Raikaria's more recent posts.

I don't like my more recent posts.

I've seen nothing that makes me think someone is more scummy than what I think Actiondan is, and people being inactive dosen't help develop conversations and cases which could help my judgement.

Anyway, not got much time ATM so I'll get to checking timestamps and stuff like Serela's going on about tomorrow morning probobly.

[Raikaria]

I don't like my more recent posts.

To elaborate, my posts recently have been empty because nothing is happening so I'm just chasing my tail.

[Sky_Paladin]

Dan, I'm not really interested in who you think is town or how bad somebody's case may be.  I'm interested in who do you think is scum and why. 

I'll note that you don't disagree that you have been defending players, only that the nature of the defence is not scummy. 

Let's elucidate on why I think it is scummy. 

#1 - It's easy for players to defend each other.  It's harder to make a case.  Anybody can defend anybody at any time, but it's harder for scum to make a case than town because scum have to lie at some point.  Therefore, we value scum hunting and case analysis (and even case destruction)* over defending as towny effort. 

#2 - Related to part 1, defending other players does not progress a case towards finding scum.  It's a way to appear very busy and fake content.  It's actually a non content post. 

#3 - Defending another player is inherently anti-town as it promotes the idea that a specific player is valuable to another specific player.  The easiest reason for that is that they are scum buddies.  When we see players mutually defending each other (as you and Serela just did, when he stated you were town and continued to be so in his response to me), it's especially concerning. 

#4 - Players are capable of defending themselves.  If you do it for them, that player may not post at all, and we miss out a valuable chance to see their intent. 

#5 - Defending other players often makes the defended player like the defending player, so they feel less inclined to make cases or lynch that player in the future.  Scum know this and exploit it. 

#6 - Excessive defending is known as buddying, and is often a scum tactic to get the defended player lynched should the defender flip at some point, when town looks back on interactions earlier in the game. 

*The line between 'defending' and 'case dismantling' is pretty tough to define, because we do consider chainsaw defending as a scum tell.  It's up to individual players to make their own decisions and scum will want to portray it as innocent, whereas town will be looking for scumtraits.  Your defence of Serela, for example, is a chainsaw defend because you are attacking my analysis of the data but didn't challenge the data itself by going to the referenced posts and disproving a point or two. 

It's fine to defend yourself because town want to avoid being lynched as much as scum do.  So at worst, it's a null tell.  Simply defending yourself is actually the worst strategy, as it promotes town to randomly consolidate on some other person.  It's better to make a case on another player that is more scummy than you. 

[Sky_Paladin]

I haven't read the Rai/Dan wall in great detail and I have no time right now.  My feeling from the initial pass is that Raikaria is largely correct (although I note Dr Rawr pointed out some errors) and that two players independently came to roughly the same conclusion.  I will hold off on voting until I have some time to parse this properly/respond to Serela and Dan. 

[Sky_Paladin]

Oh, I almost forgot. 

Zakeri, were you role blocked?

[WHMZakeri]

I can't say one way or the other if I was roleblocked. I wasn't given a message, and I don't have a role that provides me with results. I do agree that if Bard roleblocked anyone it would have been me, though.

Actual post coming soon.

[Serela]

because we do consider chainsaw defending as a scum tell.

It's not, I don't, and if most people do they shouldn't. It's only scummy if the related people flip scum. Even the mafia wiki page on chainsaw says that, after further research, they realized it doesn't make it any more likely they're scum unless that's the case.

Defending people is not anti-town because you don't want your town reads lynched.

That people should defend themselves is true, but that doesn't mean other people shouldn't also defend them if they deem it necessary. It's usually via case dismantling regardless, and if the case is bad, it really shouldn't matter in most cases who dismantles it.

That it "makes a player seem busy" is true, but that still doesn't make the act inherently scummy. Sure, a scum CAN do it to provide content, but that doesn't make it's scummy if anyone does. It's also not quite the same as a non-content post (although it's not as pro-town as scumhunting, but it's not like you can't do both, regardless that I haven't today so far) because trying to guide the lynch away from people you don't think are scum should definitely be on town's agenda, because it's basically the exact same as your huge goal of getting players that you think are scummy, lynched.

It's better to make a case on another player that is more scummy than you. 

well it's best to do -both-, especially considering that often the reality is casing another player has already been done to the extent of the person's ability so you can't really do it any harder