Mini 845 - The Amish Village (Game Over)

[magnus_orion]

YEAH I'm TOWN! Finally! I can't express how refreshing this is.

vote: Kairyuu

We have yet to be the same alignment in a game.
Therefore, you must be scum

[magnus_orion]

@artem: are you scum?

[magnus_orion]

unvote, vote: artem

artem is scum with kairyuu

[magnus_orion]

not at the moment, no

@kai: actual opinion on red dye, go!

[magnus_orion]

okay.

artem's was the first psudo-serious seeming post. Therefore, artem is scum
Red dye voted artem, giving town vibes
Kairyuu votes red dye giving scum vibes by voting town.

[magnus_orion]

ebwop: I want everyone's opinion on the above. I want agreement or disagreement, not sidestepping.

[magnus_orion]

EEbwopbwop: that refers to my post, no red dye's

[magnus_orion]

That's the point, yes.

[magnus_orion]

While right now I have scum vibes from artem, they are of course based on a single post, and therefore unreliable. I'd like to have further imput from artem to test my read vigorously. Therefore, sidetracking the conversation into a subconversation, while keeping my vote where I think it should be, of course, allows me to get reads on a larger pool of players at once, including artem. There's a method to my madness. This has the side-benefit of ending the RVS, or as you adequately put it, stopping people from being able to "continue having so much fun!"

[magnus_orion]

@red dye: I see.
Fair enough.
I'm rather confident that based on your posting frequency, I'll have a rather more well defined read on you soon anyway.

@Kairyuu: I take it thats a sentiment of disagreement, and not a sidestep? Care for elaboration?

[magnus_orion]

ebwop: To clarify: by elaboration, of course, I'm assuming that you are disagreeing, and am asking on what grounds you disagree.

[magnus_orion]

Do you even have to ask? You're posting an opinion that calls me scum based on horrid reasoning, and asking my opinion of it. Is it not blatantly obvious that I would bias towards disagreement?

That you would disagree is predictable, town or scum. "Denial is the most predictable of all human reactions"
I rather more concerned about which points of the reasoning you consider horrid.

[magnus_orion]

Okay, I'm getting a pretty strong town read on red dye so far, if only because he/she (?) is thinking along similar lines as me.

Kairyuu is posing interesting reactions.

1. The first approach to ending the RVS is more likely to be made my town than scum, though it could be made by either.

2. One who would attempt to extend the RVS by opposing said approach is more likely scum than town.

3. One who would call out said opposition as scummy is more likely town than scum.

Alright, so running on the assumption of who you are talking about, since its rather unclear.

Okay since they flow in order.
In reference to 1, how was artem's post an attempt to End the RVS? There was no predictable responses to that post which could lead to an end of trivial joking and such, and it seems like it was a psudo serious RVS post, as opposed to a more light hearted one. The air of seriousness makes me suspect artem has an agenda, while townies should just be sort of enjoying themselves at this point.

[magnus_orion]

Let me side step that question with my own.

Why do you consider my reasoning serious enough to defend as far as you have, as opposed to dismissing it as the obvious (in fact, stated) attempt to end the RVS that it is?

[magnus_orion]

no, he/she has said things that indicate similar lines of thought by bringing up things I was trying to lead the conversation towd before I brought them up.

[magnus_orion]

also, if you want to play that game, I agreed with red dye's vote first.

[magnus_orion]

Why do you consider my reasoning serious enough to defend as far as you have, as opposed to dismissing it as the obvious (in fact, stated) attempt to end the RVS that it is?

Because I agree that we should get out of RVS and dismissing your (BS) attacks will simply get us back to square one.

Dismissing my attacks would give me a more town read on you. With reads I would not be back at square one.

BTW, I no longer want people to comment on what I said earlier, but rather conversations going on right now. That is the most expedient way to get accurate reads in this situation

[magnus_orion]

@red dye, he/she takes longer to type, and I don't like to refer to people as "it" could I get a pronoun clarification?

Votecount 1-2
le Chat (1): Claus
Claus (1): Artem
Artem (2): Red_Dye; Magnus_Orion
Magnus_Orion (1): Herodotus
Red_Dye (1): Kairyuu

[magnus_orion]

no, he/she has said things that indicate similar lines of thought by bringing up things I was trying to lead the conversation towd before I brought them up.

If by similar lines of thought you mean "Vote Artem!! Fast, before he responds!!! Go go go!!!!!!!111!!!one", then I'd have to disagree. Red_dye has said nothing about my very first post, which, in my understanding, is what your attack on me is all about.

Why do you care more what he thinks then what I think? Now I'm a little jealous.

Because I'm getting a townie read on him. I'll show you why:

You don't think that yea-ing everything a

townie

says can be a scum ploy? In my experience, agreeing with townies can and is often used as a form of scum buddying.

Note the bolded part. This was supposed to appeal to Magnus's point of view. Because he simply took my post at face value, I think that it's indicative of him indeed being pro-town. I think that had he been a scum, the fact that I called him a townie would stand out to him and he would most likely respond with "How do you know I'm a townie".

Actually its more of the questions red dye has been asking, some of which I've been trying to abiguosly lead into. Red Dye is being much more direct than I am, but pushing at similar points (or in that most recent question, a point I considered pushing but decided not to)

Why do you think I'm a towny?

Actually the fact that you did something like that is worth townie points. I'll have to remember that sort of thing. Though its rather descrete... I like being overt and unavoidable.

[magnus_orion]

Do you even have to ask? You're posting an opinion that calls me scum based on horrid reasoning, and asking my opinion of it. Is it not blatantly obvious that I would bias towards disagreement?

Obviously you aren't going to admit to being scum, but how about explaining your feelings towards your scum partner?

Magnus, can you explain why being the first to make a semi-serious post is indicative of being scum? Furthermore, can you explain why that's indicative of

me

being scum?

My first post was semi-serious in the last two games, both as town and as scum.

Why do you care more what he thinks then what I think? Now I'm a little jealous.

These are the most prominent ones that come to mind, I assume you mistakenly wrote that in as a red dye quote.

I was trying to lead kairyuu into discussing his feelings on you, Red Dye asked directly, and that stuck out to me. It was reinforced when you asked about my vote and ignored red dye's. I considered asking about that, but decided not to. Red dye posted on it.

[magnus_orion]

I don't need to give a reason with a vote when I make it.

While from an internal viewpoint, this may make sense, from an external standpoint, its more beneficial if you do give reasons. The only reason being is scum tend to find it harder to play if they give overt opinions and clear stances early on.

[magnus_orion]

so long as you can justify the reason later, that's acceptable.

[magnus_orion]

I'd like to hear what red dye thinks about me thinking we are thinking along similar lines.

[magnus_orion]

woah, wait what?
to clarify, are you saying you can't be bothered to read 3 pages of posting?

[magnus_orion]

Alright, I'm tired of waiting for a response from claus, and have a question for Kairyuu:
Why do these things make you think Red Dye is scum?

[magnus_orion]

I don't see what you're getting at.
If you don't think I should post responses when I have something to say, then that stifles discussion. I'm not going to radically alter a playstyle that's worked for me tremendously effectively in the past and hasn't let me down yet.

[magnus_orion]

Don't worry, I have a tendency to die N1 anyway.

Votecount 1-3
le Chat (1): Claus
Claus (1): Artem
Artem (2): Red_Dye; Magnus_Orion
Magnus_Orion (1): Herodotus
Red_Dye (1): Kairyuu

[magnus_orion]

Where the hell did I say that? Of course I read those 3 pages of spam. That's why I complained about it. If you will take my suggestion, restrict yourself to 4 posts a day, and make an effort to post relevant opinions and responses in each post. That will reduce the amount of noise in the thread and make it easier for everybody to participate.

Also, you posted so much, and yet did not answer my simple question. Which two posts are the most relevant to your case?

That's nice, I'll keep doing what I think works though, its not like I'm new to this. However, my posting is slowing, if only because I have no reason to continue to post quickly.

Also, I have a town read on artem at the moment, just didn't bother to move my vote. There's no one scummy enough to move it too (yet).

[magnus_orion]

Because he made a manouver that tried to get a read on me.
My reads are very fluid though, I'm one who changes my mind on things based on single posts.

I don't move my vote because I don't have anywhere to put it, and always want it somewhere for day 1. Because of my posting frequency, which you have already observed, if the wagon on artem moves rapidly toward a lynch, I will comment on that, and unless I've changed my mind, unvote.

@le chat: are you saying that you decline to comment on things until you see something that you think is scummy?

[magnus_orion]

Vote: magnus_orion

.

?

[magnus_orion]

I'm not so sure Artem was even pseudo-serious about that, but pseudo-serious-seeming works. Do you consider that a scumtell? (Since you later ask for direct opinions, I think it's a null-tell.)
If Artem is town, would that reverse your reads on Red Dye and/or Kairyuu?
It looks like Kairyuu made you change from [not caring to explain at the moment] to [okay] in one post by [insisting]. Noteworthy, but not a particularly strong tell. Unless one of you flips scum, in which case, I'd be a little more suspicious of the other.

You may have noticed that I asked for something in that post, and kairyuu gave it to me. Hence, I no longer had a reason for hiding my "reasoning"

Artem had made one sentence in his defense, after you asked people for comments on your 3 points -- doesn't really look overly defensive, if that's what you mean.
I don't like part about no longer wanting people to comment on what you wrote earlier. It's not clear that you're necessarily saying "please ignore what I wrote before," but it gives me a feeling as if you were.

Certain comments I made defeated the purpose of people commenting. If they commented after I made those comments, I would no longer be able to get reads. You're free to continue making comments if you like, I'm just no longer actively encouraging (which is not to say I'm discouraging it, any comments are welcome)

I find this suspicious too, not so much for the reason Nuwen does, but more because you seem timid about voting some other person.

No not timid. I just don't want to have my vote not on anyone this early yet.
Why do you think I seem timid?

Given your posting frequency, why do you want to always have your vote on someone throughout day 1? And the way you refer to changing your mind looks a little like a plan on your part.

Maybe "always" was too strong a word. I don't want to not being voting anyone just yet. Also, I can link to games where I've been town to show my erractic playstyle is normal for me. I'm just not so sure of myself when I make a statement that new information won't over ride it.

[magnus_orion]

@magnus_orion (and a little Kairyuu) re 21: was this for real? I don't follow the logic that the first pseudo-serious seeming post is scum. I can see how you make the dominoes fall after that, but that initial assumption is weak.

No 21, was not "for real" in the normal meaning of the word.
21 was, however, "for real" in that I made it serious. Therefore, it made most votes after that point "for real" which is what is important.

[magnus_orion]

You definitely don't seem timid in general, just with your vote. I don't understand why you would at this moment be voting someone you say you have a town read on, so I suspect your motive might be based on a scum alignment.

Elaborate on what that motive might be?

[magnus_orion]

I don't know.
I suppose you intend to explain it later; if and when you do, I will evaluate your reason.

So, in other words, you merely suspect that my motivation is scummy.

Your line of thought is
1. Magnus's action is unusual
2. I shall assume Magnus has an alternate motivation for his strange action
3. I shall assume that this motivation is scummy, even though I haven't a clue what this assumed motivation is.

In other words, "I shall call something unusual scummy."

I don't think townies think that way. So I don't think you're town. I think you're just picking something you find unusual and declaring it scummy to try to push a wagon on me. (and yes, I did have an alternate motivation, though not one having to do with a scum alignment, my motivation was to look for someone to do something like this, so I'd have a real suspect)

I think herodotus is scum

unvote
vote: herodotus

[magnus_orion]

@Magnus
It's absolutely normal for a townie to comment on something odd about someone's behavior. I may not understand your possible motives, but I do know that what you did is not typical town play, so I suspect it to some degree.

I agree, it is very normal for a townie to comment on something odd about someone's behavior. Its not so typical for them to assume the motivation behind odd play is scummy. In fact, I believe you commented earlier that you had a town read on red dye, even though you thought red dye's play was strange, is that correct?
So, you hold the opinion that neither mine nor red dye's play was typical, but, you decide that in my case atypical play is scummy, but in Red Dye's case, its merely strange (and gives a slightly townish vibe)? Why this apparent distinction?

[magnus_orion]

@VP:

I don't know.
I suppose you intend to explain it later; if and when you do, I will evaluate your reason.

So, in other words, you merely suspect that my motivation is scummy.

Your line of thought is
1. Magnus's action is unusual
2. I shall assume Magnus has an alternate motivation for his strange action
3. I shall assume that this motivation is scummy, even though I haven't a clue what this assumed motivation is.

In other words, "I shall call something unusual scummy."

I don't think townies think that way. So I don't think you're town. I think you're just picking something you find unusual and declaring it scummy to try to push a wagon on me. (and yes, I did have an alternate motivation, though not one having to do with a scum alignment, my motivation was to look for someone to do something like this, so I'd have a real suspect)

I think herodotus is scum

unvote
vote: herodotus

I consider fishing for reactions the most important thing on day 1. So in my case, yes, I'd don't believe I'd being doing all I can to help the town if I don't have my vote on. In general, though, no, I don't consider it an anti-town action.

[magnus_orion]

I do not support a red dye lynch at this point.
I also support more interaction from players.
I also support 20-40 page day 1s, so any lynching prior I consider premature unless there are very special circumstances.

[magnus_orion]

Rosso, I will take it that you enjoy hammering people. If this is incorrect, feel free to let me know.
If it is correct, however, I'd like you to answer the following: Are you willing to hammer people other than red dye at this point, and if so, who?

[magnus_orion]

Rosso, I will take it that you enjoy hammering people. If this is incorrect, feel free to let me know.
If it is correct, however, I'd like you to answer the following: Are you willing to hammer people other than red dye at this point, and if so, who?

I take it that you have the fingers to go click and figure this out for yourself.

If you find the answer to be true, then yeah, but You'll have to ask nicer than that for me to tell who.

I'm afriad my fingers or lack thereof has nothing to do with impeding you from answering the question. Also, given your response to my previous statement, you believe that someone must take on the responsibliity of personally verifying an assumption about someone else, so I'm afraid that leaves you with the job of discovering if I have fingers or not. However, regardless, I'd like to know your reason from withholding this information regarding who you are willing to hammer from me, and by consequence, the town, and if that reason is pro town or not. Obviously withholding information for the sake of doing so does nothing to advance the town's win condition, and could be precieved by some as being detrimental to it.

[magnus_orion]

what's not really true?

[magnus_orion]

That im not acting pro town.

dipshiht

?
I never said you weren't acting pro-town. As of yet I don't have an opinion concerning that.
I said the action of actively hiding information from the town

for the sake of doing so

was anti-town. Or does this mean that you acknowledge the underlined portion of the previous statement as your motivation in the actions the statement was referring to?

[magnus_orion]

This is not good. Rosso may not be helpful, but I'm not sure if he's town or scum. I don't like this whole lynching based on reasons irrespective of alignment.

[magnus_orion]

What are your biggest problems with that post Rosso?

Do me a favor, and stop asking me my tells. When its necessary that I share something, I will.

Okay. Rosso Carne, how do you figure out the alignment of someone who refuses to take positions on things?

[magnus_orion]

And how do you figure out the alignment of someone who claims to have positions, but refuses to divulge them?

Also, why should one who claims they have positions that aren't being divulged be treated differently than one who has no positions?

[magnus_orion]

Oh I agree its up to the questioner to figure out. But that's what I want to ask: how

you

would go about doing so?

Mod Votecount 1-8

Artem (1): Red_Dye
Magnus_Orion (2): Herodotus; Claus
Red_Dye (1): Kairyuu
Herodotus (1): magnus_orion
MiteyMouse (3): VP Baltar; le Chat; Artem
Rosso Carne (3): Albert B. Rampage; Nuwen; MiteyMouse

Not voting (1): Rosso_Carne

[magnus_orion]

Mod: Nuwen is voting two people in the vote count

I don't like rosso's take on the game so far, but I can't decide if it makes him scum or not. In all likelyhood he's just being difficult for its own sake, which makes his playstlye rather poor, since it does not help the town as whole.
I'm curious on who thinks roso is scum, and who just is irritated by his play, however, if people who are voting rosso are willing to say.

[magnus_orion]

Scratch that. new plan:
I want everyone to state their exact feelings on rosso ie, how scummy he is, whether he should be lynched or not, and if so, whether its because he's scum or he's annoying. I want everyone to answer, no exceptions (save rosso) My feelings are in the previous post.

[magnus_orion]

So, what do other people think of Le Chat? Magnus?

Are you asking what I think?
I think he hasn't answered my question on rosso, and I think that I might be able to get a better read on him based on his answer.
I'd like to refrain from commenting on things til everyone has commented on rosso.

[magnus_orion]

@red_dye: and your opinion on rosso's play in THIS game is?

[magnus_orion]

I'll make that one easy, int hat I dont beleive I've played with anyone here.

If im wrong feel free to correct me.

ABR?

[magnus_orion]

And you don't want to lynch him at this point then?

[magnus_orion]

MM is likely town.

[magnus_orion]

hmmmm...
Well... that vote count is interesting...
two wagons with three votes each on them.

Yeah... I still think herodotus is scum.
kairyuu's opinion on rosso would be appreciated.

[magnus_orion]

He was rather delayed in unvoting me. His reason was that my answer satisfied him. However, the amount of time that passed between my answer and his unvote was considerable, and he posted several times in that interval. Yet my answer suddenly satisfies him. I'd bet that this is because he noticed that my wagon had begun lagging and decided to abandon it.
Also, his next vote is on miteymouse. Based on what he says when he unvotes me, its highly likely he was already planning on switching to MM once he waited a little. The reasons he gives when he does vote MM are very limited.


Now, Claus, why are you satisfied by lynching these three, especially given that you don't seem particularly convinced any of them are scum?
Also can you clarify what you mean by the words "best alternatives for lynching"?
It sounds like you are weighing the likely-hood that people will agree to lynch certain people, as if you aren't concerned with the scumminess of the lynch so much as concerned with whether people will be willing to lynch.

I'd like herodotus's opinion on Claus now.

[magnus_orion]

I'm going to assume you believe those to be mutually exclusive or something along those lines?
He didn't move his vote. He unvoted. My wagon wasn't hurtling toward a lynch at the time either.

[magnus_orion]

I apologize for double posting

Heh sorry about that. I'm just not getting very inspired by this game at the moment and that leads me to a more passive tone. Red Dye and MM are still reasonable lynches, but I'm undecided if I should let go of Le Chat or not.

I'll re-read Herotodus and Chat more carefully.

As if you aren't concerned with the scumminess of the lynch so much as concerned with whether people will be willing to lynch.

Why can't I be concerned with both? Of course I'm interested in knowing who wants to lynch who - the largest part of my scumhunting in later days comes from comparing people's positions on wagons and card flips.

That's fine, could you qualify your case about what is scummy about chamber for me, then?

[magnus_orion]

I apologize for ACTUALLY double posting

yes, I do know kairyuu in real life.

[magnus_orion]

Why is it interesting now, but wasn't when we had 3-vote MM vs. Rosso?

because I didn't notice

In my opinion, unvoting late is still preferable to keeping your vote on somebody because you have nowhere to move it. Yet, you somehow have it reversed. Why's that?

I believe I explained the differences involved.

Quote Tags fixed. We Amish are handy to have around >_>

[magnus_orion]

damn quotes

[magnus_orion]

herodotus's response doesn't feel like scum...
Alright, fine

unvote

But upon a bit of game review and recent activities,

vote: claus

this has very little grounding as of yet, but claus has vote hoped a bit and I'm starting to get scummy vibes from him.

Could claus please help me alleviate my paranoia by stating opinions in regards to nuwen?

[magnus_orion]

I'm pretty sure magnus is flexing under the pressure. I also don't think much of him trying to chain people together without seeing a flip. I generally find that scummy behavior on Day 1.

*raises eyebrow*
why do you find that scummy behavior? That's how I've had most of my success on day 1.

[magnus_orion]

Its been my opinion that I have been successful in doing so.
I am also of the belief that I am not in charge of the lynch, nor do I pretend to be. The town's majority chooses who to lynch, and the town is playing rather poorly if they use their votes to lynch just to check one player's reads. (ignoring roles like cops, of course)

[magnus_orion]

And that was a weak reply to the argument I am making. We only get one lynch a day. Why not lynch the player you think is scummiest rather than someone you see as related to them? And, as I said before, without an alignment flip you have no way of telling if you are correct or not. Regardless of your opinion on its efficacy.

Oh yes, I was talking about past games, where my feelings on day 1 were confirmed in the following days, long after i had been killed on night 1. Of course I can't know I'm correct until someone flips. I'm talking about my own statistical evidence supporting my bias, which could be a large coincidence. I can't know I'm right until the flip, but that doesn't mean I cannot be right, or be confident I'm right.

And who said I was planning on lynching someone because I link them to a scummier player? Of course the scummiest player (what defines scummy being up for debate) should be lynched. However, that doesn't mean that I don't think that if I can link several players together that it ups their collective scumminess dramatically.

So, are you going to argue with my playstyle, explain why you think its scummy, or search for scum? One of the later 2 is preferable, as the first does nothing to attempt to accomplish the town's win-condition.

[magnus_orion]

It

was

Hero and Claus, but Hero eliminated my suspicions of him. However, my imagined link between the two of them had caused me to further investigate Claus, and I saw reason to vote him independently, if that makes sense. Its very little, but its the only reasonable thing I have at the moment to go on, and I intend to follow it through and interrogate.
So, to repeat myself, I'd like to hear Claus's opinion on Nuwen.

[magnus_orion]

Theory note: sper helpful people like that sometimes give off scum vibes since they are JUST SO HELPFUL and it seems like they know the setup. he scumminess comes from this idea, they know the setup becsue they are scum themselves

I assume you're meaning for this to be applicable to the context of this game in relation to claus? I mean you aren't saying this meaninglessly, right? Do you believe I should have reason from claus's posts to think that he knows the setup?

[magnus_orion]

-_-
There's no reason for you to blatantly ignore that question.

[magnus_orion]

I'm here, but I'm waiting on claus to post to see what he has to say.

[magnus_orion]

oh, we are approaching deadline?
Rayfrost is clearly town at this point, the wagon picked up speed relatively quickly, far too quickly for a scum wagon.
I recommend an alternate wagon...

[magnus_orion]

1) Ray is currently only at L-3. I don't consider that a fast moving wagon.

2) I and others have been poking and prodding that wagon since very early in the game. It was certainly not a recent development.

3) Ray has done nothing to indicate he is town.

4) If you think the wagon is bad, then why are you not actively trying to start a better wagon?

Comfortable with my vote and encourage others to join.

regarding bolded: So you have no reason to think he's scum, other than his lack of you thinking him town? Or am I understanding your priorities wrong when explaining a wagon to someone? It appears you're addressing why my comment is bad rather than why your wagon is good.

Regarding underlined: which amounts to more concerned about who is lynched than who is scum.

unvote
vote: vp balter

[magnus_orion]

VP's response to me, regardless of my opinion of Rayfrost, makes me more confident he's scum. He didn't restate the reasons, and was quick to try to establish the invalidity of my attack on his wagon.


Not only that, but his interests are served in discouraging thinking people being wagoned are town, because he implicity called me scum for disagreeing with rayfrost's scumminess, despite his opinion earlier:

I'm pretty sure magnus is flexing under the pressure. I also don't think much of him trying to chain people together without seeing a flip. I generally find that scummy behavior on Day 1.

Which clashes horribly with:

Regarding the underlined: you coming in and saying "X wagon is bad, we should start a new one before deadline" and giving no indication as to what the alternative wagon you'd like is shows that you have a vested interest in seeing ray not lynched. That makes me even more confident in the wagon.

Clearly selective opinion changing is at work. While I do have a vested interest in seeing ray not lynched, its because I think he's town. Him being MORE confident in the wagon suggests that he thinks it makes ray scummier that I don't want him lynched, which means he's linking me to ray. On day 1. Which he has said he feels is a scummy action.

Regarding rayfrost, right now, I don't see any reason to conclude rayfrost is scum. Neither his nor miteymouse's posts were especially scummy and i don't remember rayfrost pinging my scumdar either.

VP on the otherhand, just became suspect #1.

[magnus_orion]

1) Ray is currently only at L-3. I don't consider that a fast moving wagon.

2) I and others have been poking and prodding that wagon since very early in the game. It was certainly not a recent development.

Jeez, jeez...
Wasn't it you who said I should be reading the game?

I never claimed it was recent... You pulled that out of your hat to make your counterargument... I called MM town a while back didn't I? I never stated my reasons then... did I?

obviously wagons that build quickly don't necessarily move into the dangerous numbers quickly. L-2, L-1, and the hammer vote are the ones that attract the most attention. People are more hesitant about voting those.

See, the problem is that you were drawing connections between people that were tenious at best and calling them scumbuddies. However, you are now actively calling Ray town based on god knows what reasoning other than you "don't see any reason to conclude he is scum". Do you find the other people on the wagon scummy, or just me because I called you on a shady looking post? Speaking of which.....

Quick to call out it as omgus? yep, you're scum. Your opinions on me have nothing to do with my opinion on you.

So you think MM hoping onto popular wagons for bad reasons, doing no scum hunting and trying to cop out of any sort of general participation D1 is not scummy? Also, how could ray have pinged your scumdar when he hasn't contributed anything of substance as of yet?

Your last question there is EXCELLENT! BRAVO, BRAVO!
In light of this question, why are you voting him?
We are out to lynch scum, are we not?

[magnus_orion]

His predecessor acted considerably scummy and then he proceeded to lurk his ass off while I know he was posting in at least one other game. That is plenty of reason to be voting him, is it not?

No

Well, MM picked up 3 or 4 votes over 3 pages after people had been talking about her since pretty much the start of the game. The fastest moving section of the wagon was when Kairyuu and I voted on the same page. That's not exactly lightning pace.

Also, if you are so taken aback by speed wagons, why did you say nothing about Nuwen's wagon on page 13? That moved much quicker, but I didn't hear any objections from you then.

I don't understand what point you are trying to make when you are talking about hammers in that post.

I didn't feel so inclined to comment on the nuwen wagon, but you talk as if its the only thing I care about. Clearly, I care about more than that, but it seems my vote has significantly rattled you into focusing on elements of my play that distress you.
Once again, your reactions to my arguments are not indicative of town.

Yes, I know, how about you answer it instead of sarcastically deflecting. How can you assess a player town who hasn't made any contribution to the game?

So wait, you want me to vote someone who hasn't been scummy? I think the fact that he's attracted attention even though he hasn't been scummy is reason enough to think he's town.

I assume your reason was her saying she was copping out on actively participating. What do you think of her analysis provided in that same post? Townish? Scummy?

Oh, so you assume that something gave me a town read on someone? Why's that? Was there reason to think this so-called "scummy person" town? Clearly you thought so since you assumed my reason.

His analysis doesn't particularly strike me as townish or scummy.

[magnus_orion]

@magnus-why do you believe your vote has "rattled" me? I see no such thing. You are making horribad arguments and I'm pointing out why that is so. I'm happy to have a debate with you because, frankly, this game needs some good activity so people start getting involved.

I'm glad to make you happy to debate with me. My reasoning may not be able to convince anyone, but it doesn't change my confidence in being right. Fact of the matter is that most of my reasoning is based on prior experience and my own feelings about reactions and interactions of people. My confidence comes from prior success in this regard. I cannot convey this sort of thing into logical well-reasoned arguments that will make everyone go, "I agree". But guess what? That isn't my goal here, is it? Unlike scum, my primary motivation is not getting people to agree with me, its finding the scum. Getting people to agree is secondary at best.

Well, let's see, the reason you said the ray wagon was bad was because it was moving too quickly. Not only did I prove that false, but I pointed out a prior incident of a fast wagon that you had nothing to say about. Had you said something like: "the ray wagon is bad because MM made some noob town mistakes in my opinion", then I couldn't argue with you about that. Here is what you said in case you forgot:

You're under some false impressions, such as your "proof", and pointing to a fast wagon that I said nothing about is completely irrelevant. Fact of the matter is that, if you must know, nuwen struck me as scummy at the time, contradicting views and all. However, the fact that wagon built up quickly in spite of this does not necessarily outweigh it. HOWEVER MM's wagon built up quickly around nothing. That's where the difference lies. As you say, where are these reads coming from?

Yes, I try to see both town and scum motivations for actions and assess which I believe is more likely the case. You think that is a bad way to do that? You saw no scum motivation whatsoever in the actions of MM? What is scummy about this scumhunting technique?

Nothing is scummy about it, but just because doing something as scum may be more beneficial doesn't mean that the person doing it is scum. I think that unless someone does something I consider to be from a scum point of view to be a probable reaction to something, I don't really plan on reading too much. Which is why I find you scummy.

So where is your town read coming from if that is the only thing he was really contributed and you don't have an opinion on it either way?

Its not his actions, its people's actions in relation to him.

See, you seem to be not understanding this question at all. You called Ray town. I asked how you can assess him as such when he had not made a contribution. Let me try asking this another way, do you think it is scummy for a player to active lurk when they replace into a role that is under significant suspicion?

I believe active lurking is the act of posting without posting content.
I believe that doing it for an extended period of time is a scumtell.
Any other form of lurking is not a good tell, things come up in real life, laziness sets in, etc. etc. So long as there is content to post, participation is still present. However, active lurking is effectively acknowledging the game, taking the time to post, but not posting anything of value. The only motivation for this is avoidance of the issues, and that is scummy.

[magnus_orion]

Unlike scum, my primary motivation is not getting people to agree with me, its finding the scum. Getting people to agree is secondary at best.

This is more of a theory debate like the one I was having earlier, but lynching scum should be your primary objective shouldn't it? If you allegedly are finding them, but aren't getting them lynched, then I don't see how that is useful at all.

Regardless, that point is neither here nor there.

You're under some false impressions, such as your "proof", and pointing to a fast wagon that I said nothing about is completely irrelevant. Fact of the matter is that, if you must know, nuwen struck me as scummy at the time, contradicting views and all. However, the fact that wagon built up quickly in spite of this does not necessarily outweigh it. HOWEVER MM's wagon built up quickly around nothing. That's where the difference lies. As you say, where are these reads coming from?

Actually, I see my attack on Nuwen's "contradicting views" as quite similar to this point against you. You categorically stated that Ray could not be scum because the wagon moved too fast. But the fast moving on wagon on Nuwen did nothing for you. Nuwen wanted to policy lynch Rosso, but said a similar push toward MM was bad. You see the correlation here?

Now maybe you actually did just have a town read on MM and that is the grand excuse card for you, but in my opinion she did have scummy actions in the game that warranted a wagon on her. This is clearly where our opinions are divergent if you are actually town.

just because doing something as scum may be more beneficial doesn't mean that the person doing it is scum. I think that unless someone does something I consider to be from a scum point of view to be a probable reaction to something, I don't really plan on reading too much. Which is why I find you scummy.

See, this is what is ridiculous about your whole argument. It basically amounts to "if you don't agree with me, you must be scum!". I don't see why any town player would approach the game in such a way.

In the MM case, she had a certain set of actions which may or may not have been scum motivated. I see them as more likely than not coming from scum. You interpret them as coming from town. You decide this makes me scum, I guess. Ok, no problem, but that brings me back to my earlier question, which I don't believe you answered at all: what do you think of the other people on the wagon? Do you think they are scum too? If so, who and why?

I believe active lurking is the act of posting without posting content.

It is indeed. Let me give you some examples:

gah, busy in other games, will get my reread and post out today, Japan time, but it is going to take a while.

I promise to post something real today when I get back from the dentist >.<

sorry for not having posted content.

My next post will be a LoS even though I never really get anything of value out of them (to defend myself with), I at least get my reads out.

I'm tired so this is a botched together list of initial reads, nothing clear yet (need to iso everybody before I can give a full in depth one)

scummy

nobody, due to my knowing some meta on the otherwise potentially scummy people (chamber / rosso)

neutral

everybody but the ones in the town list

townish

claus & hero seem to be logical enough.

yeah, I'll post more in depth next time, I need sleep though.

Finally yesterday, which is nearly 10 days after replacing, he started giving a bit of substance, but you get what I'm saying. Do you or do you not consider those posts active lurking ?

I think in many of your points you're heavily twisting my words.

You're under some false impressions, such as your "proof", and pointing to a fast wagon that I said nothing about is completely irrelevant. Fact of the matter is that, if you must know, nuwen struck me as scummy at the time, contradicting views and all. However, the fact that wagon built up quickly in spite of this does not necessarily outweigh it. HOWEVER MM's wagon built up quickly around nothing. That's where the difference lies. As you say, where are these reads coming from?

Actually, I see my attack on Nuwen's "contradicting views" as quite similar to this point against you. You categorically stated that Ray could not be scum because the wagon moved too fast. But the fast moving on wagon on Nuwen did nothing for you. Nuwen wanted to policy lynch Rosso, but said a similar push toward MM was bad. You see the correlation here?

Really? Where did I state he "Could not be scum"? I didn't say it was impossible. I said that he was "clearly town" which may have been a bit strong, but I think he's town. You're forcing the interpretation to mean that I meant that I was ABSOLUTELY CONVINCED he was 100% town, which is a ridiculous assumption that I wouldn't expect someone to make, otherwise I would have chosen my words with more care.

just because doing something as scum may be more beneficial doesn't mean that the person doing it is scum. I think that unless someone does something I consider to be from a scum point of view to be a probable reaction to something, I don't really plan on reading too much. Which is why I find you scummy.

See, this is what is ridiculous about your whole argument. It basically amounts to "if you don't agree with me, you must be scum!". I don't see why any town player would approach the game in such a way.

In the MM case, she had a certain set of actions which may or may not have been scum motivated. I see them as more likely than not coming from scum. You interpret them as coming from town. You decide this makes me scum, I guess. Ok, no problem, but that brings me back to my earlier question, which I don't believe you answered at all: what do you think of the other people on the wagon? Do you think they are scum too? If so, who and why?

No.
If people disagree with me, that does not amount to a scum tell. I agree that that is an utterly ridiculous stance to take in a game. (that being said, if someone took that stance, I wouldn't think them scum so much as a poor player, as I wouldn't expect scum or town to go about the game that way)

What I'm saying in the quote (I admit it was rather unclear) is that, if I think about a statement, I believe that the reaction scum have to it may be different from the reaction town has to it. There is no dichotomy in this, but simply style of response, word choice, and the like.
Disagreeing with my interpretation of a situation is not the qualifier for me thinking someone scum. It has nothing to do with their stance on an issue in relation to mine, its more of how they go about taking the stance.

After all, in my view, I'm pro-town, so using your logic, ray should be scum to me then, right?

Finally yesterday, which is nearly 10 days after replacing, he started giving a bit of substance, but you get what I'm saying. Do you or do you not consider those posts active lurking ?

Taken alone, yes, they are indicative of active lurking, however, taken in the context of him being a replacement, I'm more inclined towards giving leeway. Now that he's posted serious content, I'm no longer under any such inclination, and if this sort of thing were to continue, then my stance would take a rather dramatic change.

[magnus_orion]

@VP Baltar, magnus: Has RayFrost's posting changed your suspicions of that playerslot?

This bothers me:

the first is a joke, and I find the fact I didn't really see any worthwhile reasoning and that he found artem scummy based off of the poor reasoning given (despite him seeming like an individual that'd post reasonably and logically =/) gives off the feel that he should be in there.

@magnus: Please take the time to lay out exactly why VP Baltar is your number one suspect, with evidence.

I don't have evidence, just gut and questions. This game is moving too slowly, and I can't seem to focus on it. You saying that you think I'm being lazy is a pretty good assessment, I can't seem to focus and figure out this game.

I'm going to take a step back and reanalyze this game. In particular, I'm going to see what happens if I look at it from a VP scum angle, a Rayfrost scum angle, and a Hero scum angle.

[magnus_orion]

While I'm doing that...

Chamber please state opinions concerning Rosso.
Chamber please explain about kairyuu.

Also, please address the following:

Any apparent contradictions come from the difference between my alts and my playstyles. Once my alt was outed as me I gradually slipped back to being myself.

If you ever see me give an explanation I'm probably scum.

I never explain my reasons for voting as a general meta. I could explain why and might at some point, but in short I do it

because

I feel its best for the town. Knowing that I do so all the time should be enough to consider it a null tell.

[magnus_orion]

you specifically mean votes?
Okay
Why does rosso seem town?

[magnus_orion]

I apologize. I have an exam coming up, and I won't have a lot of time for this sort of thing... at the end of the week I should get my normal amount of free time back, though.

[magnus_orion]

I've been having trouble with motivating myself to post, which is probably why rayfrost doesn't seem especially scummy tome. Still, I do agree with some of the things said about the reads not seeming real.

However, if rayfrost is scum, fishy is definitely scum. The whole way that fishy''s argument of my scumminess played out is definitely says opportunistic scum trying to take advantage of someone looking bad. Besides, fishy is well acquainted with my lack of ability to convince others. I don't like how his conclusions leave out his prior experiences with me...
Plus, if I were scum in a situation where one of my scum partners was to be lynched, which isn't an experience I'm unfamiliar with, my primary objective is not saving my scum partner, its making a towny look like my scumpartner's scumpartner. I'd look too scummy defending my own scum partner.


The number of people I've played with in the past in this game is increasing as the game goes on. Huh.

[magnus_orion]

now rayfrost, if you are scum, you seem the type who would defend your scum partner.

The second paragraph is not meant to be a defense, its meant to be a description of my inclination as scum, with an implicit premise that others have similar inclinations, and wifom is a horrible argument dismissal anyway.

[magnus_orion]

However, if rayfrost is scum, fishy is definitely scum. The whole way that fishy''s argument of my scumminess played out is definitely says opportunistic scum trying to take advantage of someone looking bad. Besides, fishy is well acquainted with my lack of ability to convince others. I don't like how his conclusions leave out his prior experiences with me...
Plus, if I were scum in a situation where one of my scum partners was to be lynched, which isn't an experience I'm unfamiliar with, my primary objective is not saving my scum partner, its making a towny look like my scumpartner's scumpartner. I'd look too scummy defending my own scum partner.

My meta on you does suggest you aren't always the best at convincing people. However, I think you are very wrong about Ray, and my meta of you doesn't suggest that you habitually are very wrong as town (am I forgetting a game, or have we just played together in that one where I was a lateish scum replacement?). Bad cases/defenses that benefit the scum are still scummy. The second paragraph is a gross generalisation. How you would act towards you scumpartner depends hugely on how certain their lynch is, how important their role is, and the general game state.

ok, that works, fishy isn't as scummy as before.
however, I disagree that bad cases/ defenses that benefit scum are scummy. Mostly because that was the crux of the argument I used to get a towny lynched in US Election mafia.

[magnus_orion]

not that this is worth much at this point, but

unvote vote: le chat

I rather dislike mostly everything he's posted on this page, and it makes me suspicious. He's basically taking a position that rayfrost is scummy, his motivation is to avoid fence sitting (alarm bells), and his reasons are left for the most part vague and unstated.
I'll admit that some of what ray has posted have left me very inclined to drop the town read on ray (though nothing has really convinced me he's scum, either), but I believe that le chat's vote, or more specifically, what he's done around that vote, DO warrant attention here.

[magnus_orion]

ebwop: "this page" refers of course to page 20.

[magnus_orion]

The lack of a RayFrost lynch is bothering me. I have nothing left to say on the subject. He's scum, plain and simple. Can someone finish the job already so that we can stop rehashing the same tired points?

why do I feel like your involvement in this game is disturbingly limited? Its not necessarily scummy as it is mildly irritating.

[magnus_orion]

yep. Le chat is definitely scum.

i explicitly mentioned fence sitting because it is something that i have gotten a consensus out of all my completed and active games that it is what i need to work on.

basically, you agree with me that ray frost is scummy, but you dont agree with the manner by which i posted what i did. at the end of the Day, this does appear to me like if you are scum, and ray frost ends up town, then you are agreeing with the ray frost lynch while lining up your next lynch, on me, by saying my reasoning wasnt good. follow?

i still support the ray frost lynch. i am also currently in atlanta and have court in the morning and then midterm week from hell so i might not be able to post between now and when deadline hits.

Yes, I happen to follow. I happen to follow your reasoning well enough to know that it is based off the idea that you are voting a towny. In which case, it is not I, but you who are lining up lynches by calling me scummy. Further, I've disagreed with this lynch, so how am I lining up lynches?
And your reasoning is important. I don't give a care at all about what your actual position is relative to my mine.

[magnus_orion]

that come back makes me fully behind a le chat lynch btw.

[magnus_orion]

Magnus, our (your?) wagon appears to be destined to be a sideshow. With ray not prepared to post I'm ok with a hammer, do you mind?

I'm always against hammering people I'm not sure are scum. It is of course too late now. The flip should be insightful, at least.

[magnus_orion]

okay, now the suspense is killing me.

[magnus_orion]

vote: le chat

Rayfrost came up town. This puts everyone on the rayfrost wagon under suspicion. No silly wifom tricks are likely to be pulled in such a scenario, because, while possible, it is more likely scum will want to do what they can to make a town lynch more likely, and that includes pushing the town lynch. I've never actually seen a scum gambit to not push a likely town lynch.
I think we should focus first on Le Chat, whose vote was "to avoid fence sitting", scummy motivations for voting a towny if anything is.

[magnus_orion]

@magnus: are you saying you are confident that every scum voted Ray?

Am I saying that I believe at least 2 scum were on the wagon? yes.
Am I saying that I'm "confident" at least 2 scum were on the wagon? no
Am I saying that I believe every scum was on the wagon? not quite
Am I saying that I'm "confident" at least 2 scum were on the wagon? no

[magnus_orion]

er... ebwop:
Am I saying that I'm "confident" every scum was on the wagon? no

[magnus_orion]

I don't think magnus is saying that everyone voting Ray was scum or that all of the scum voted Ray, just that it adds suspicion to people on that wagon, which is probably fair enough to say.

Imo, Kairyuu and le chat look like the people who did the most "coasting" on the wagon.

I'd like to hear Kai's assessment of the game now that we have had a lynch and a night, since he said that would boost his involvement.

Sorry, Kai's behaving like kai-town, insofar as I can tell atm. Which is why I can't call his lack of participation scummy to entice him to post more. Which is aggravating.

[magnus_orion]

My read has less to do with how much he's been posting and more to do with how he goes about making his points. If he's scum he usually goes out of his way to persuade people, but if he's town he may try to persuade, but isn't usually very persistent in it, and often simply decides things and jumps to conclusion, a trait I've taken advantage of multiple times as scum (heh heh heh). His conviction on rayfrost and chamber being scum gave me a town read on him because he didn't go out of his way to try to convince other people to agree with him. He explained once and then just insisted that his conclusion was correct from thereafter unless asked to explain again or further.

That said, if he is town, then its sort of disappointing, since our streak of being opposite alignments will have been broken, although I guess we could replace "has never been the same alignment" to "has almost never been the same alignment"

Btw, I didn't say this before, but I throughly enjoyed SC's real-estate comment, and am sigging it.

[magnus_orion]

I dunno, but he doesn't seem to be attempting to fake it or he'd be posting more, in my opinion, cause it would hold his attention more.

[magnus_orion]

You say there were two scum on the wagon, and you think le Chat is one of them. Kairyuu's not the other one (apparently), so any ideas?

Le chat is scum. We should lynch le chat.
I'm not sure as to who his scum buddies are.

Actually, in concern to you, who replaced claus, you opened with an attack on someone flying under the radar, specifically herodotus, which I would declare as a town tell, except that you don't push this suspicion in the rest of the post. In fact, looking back, it seems part of a sort of carpet criticism on a lot of players that is more apparent now that I read it. In the conclusion of your replace-in post, you slide in and suspect the three unpopular targets (rayfrost, chamber, and rosso) and vote one of them.

Also of note, is that you'd rather address who

else

I suspect, rather than comment on whom I suspect.
In fact, any time le chat came up in that post, it was related to suspecting someone else or ceasing suspicions.
In regards to these

Fos: percy

Its not strong, but that last post you made just felt off.


However, herodotus's recent post also raises alarm bells.
in particular, openly trying to discourage suspecting that scum were on the day1 wagon. Also, I said it yesterday, but rayfrost's wagon built up originally over nothing, and very little substantiated the wagon afterwards. That wagon was pushed by scum, and I have no reason to think otherwise. Since I said this at the start of the day, if I am correct, the scum should be trying to call into doubt this.


In particular, if doubts are not continued to be expressed by a larger group of the town, a convenient little group is forming trying to call my wagon theory into doubt, which aligns perfectly with how I would perceive the scum to act at this point if my thinking is correct.

[magnus_orion]

not quite. You see what I said was the people who would challenge me in this are scum if, and only if, its a small group that challenges me in this. The fact that I said something shouldn't make townies more or less inclined to disagree or agree with me, because as a group they control whether or not I consider disagreeing with me (in this regard) a scumtell. Scum on the other hand, don't get a choice, since no matter what they do, cannot convince me because they cannot form a majority. If this makes them inclined to not disagree with me, then they'd be forced to agree with me, which puts them at risk in the first place. In other words, it should eliminate scum from interfering and trying to change opinions on my original comment. Of course, I'm doing this all under the premise that my initial supposition is correct.

[magnus_orion]

k, so like, what happened to the posting?

[magnus_orion]

dammit.
Kairyuu is town, people.
More votes on le chat.

I honestly don't care what le chat has to say at this point, he's scum.
1. His vote on a person was to avoid "fencesitting"
2. He further reasons that if the person he is voting comes up town, someones else is scum, and accuses that person of setting up lynches...
3. The person turns out to actually be a towny.
The reasoning in 2 is only likely if he already knew that the person would be town. And the only way he could know that is if he was scum. This is further substantiated by his lack of conviction while voting the person.
My thoughts on overall group movements are irrelevant to le chat's scumminess, rather they're more related to my own methods of trying to find his scum partners. I'm not asking anyone else to understand or agree with me on those points, just on lynching le chat.

[magnus_orion]

Magus would you consider the scum strategy in deathnote mafia to be a blame the townies that voted for a townie wagon or not? I would.

MAGNUS

There's an n.

Missed this.
If you're referring to my play in that game, I honestly didn't know who my scum partners (save vi) were until I died (by the hand of some would be scum partners, as it turns out).
I figured we would lose, and didn't seriously keep up with the game after that (though I read bits and pieces). It looked to me like we were screwed, so I figured town would mop up in a few days. I'm rather surprised we came out with a win, but I'd pin it more on xyl's trick more than anything else.

(Being an uninformed minority sucks.)

[magnus_orion]

Iamusername, who are your scum partners?

[magnus_orion]

sajin, could you state your opinion on le chat?

[magnus_orion]

*takes brake from obnoxiously long java code to check mafiascum.... *

@Magnus- Specific questions please. le_chat was talkative and made odd questions about fence sitting.

seriously? like, wow, I'm inclined to believe you're his scum partner from this alone....
I asked for your opinion on le chat...
implicitly where does he sit on a town to scum slider for you? Also, explain the reasons for your answer.
*returns to coding*

[magnus_orion]

so....
Right now, I'm thinking iamausername and sajin are happy-happy scum buddies that need to be hung in a particularly violent, groupthink driven frenzy.

[magnus_orion]

I personally know him, and have read games with him as scum, but never played in a game with him as scum. His playstyle changes frequently, but he has more of a tendency to pursue convincing people as scum and jumping to conclusions as town. I also feel that he'd be more inclined to post as scum, because it would hold his attention better, but his amount of laziness with respect to mafia changes dramatically over time, so there's no way I can back this up. I don't feel like finding links related to the first bit right now, because I'm not totally free on time atm, though I'll try to do it at some point.

On a scale of 1 to 10, I'm a 9 on kairyuu being town.

[magnus_orion]

ebwop: to give that number some perspective, I was a 7 - 6.75 on rayfrost being town.

[magnus_orion]

Iamausername's careful misreping of fishy more or less confirms my suspicions.

[magnus_orion]

thought about it. Kairyuu is correct. Best play for a pro-town roleblocker is to claim. A successful nightkill roleblock is effectively a scum cop result, and, as such, there is no guarantee that a hypothetical roleblocker would live to give us this information each subsequent day, and therefore is better off giving it to us now.

[magnus_orion]

Out of curiosity, why assume blocker over doc or hider or some other protective role?

Right, only in the case of a hypothetical roleblocker should they claim. Like if I were a doctor, I'd say this so they'd not kill me and if I weren't a doctor I'd still say this to confuse them.

[magnus_orion]

It is perfectly possible that we have both a roleblocker and a doctor, for example, and that the doctor is the one who stopped the kill last night, while the roleblocker actually blocked a town player. If that is the case, having the roleblocker claim and lynching his target would be a disaster.

possible? yes.
likely? no.

[magnus_orion]

@hero: I actually applaud Iam, its really well done.
However, its so well knit together, that it can't possibly be an accidental misunderstanding, making me much more sure that Iam is scum.

Yes, I think that at first glance, the case is rather compelling.
However, I was more critical of it because of my suspicions of Iam. I was going to post explaining the misrepresentations that appear upon further examination, but fishy got to it first (his post showed up in the topic review when I hit the "reply" button)

Now to address your question,
I think the wagon resulted from people not critically reading the case for flaws, none which are obviously apparent. I believe Iam misrepped fishy, and I believe that VP and SC fell for it.

[magnus_orion]

Are you saying that you didn't find anything in the post not already covered by Fishy, and that you buy Fishy's defence 100%?

no, I am not saying that, nor do I think I ever believe anything in mafia 100%. That'd be unhealthy

I'm saying that fishy addressed what I had been planning to address when I hit the reply button after reading the post.

[magnus_orion]

I really don't see how such a well-disguised misrep could not be an intentional misrep.
I still say this confirms iam to be scum.

[magnus_orion]

Iam looks town. My meta of le chat shows at least his playstyle is constant, although I don't know his alignment in either game for sure. But when Iam came in he looked exactly as I'd expected, and his acceptance of the criticisms of his case and willingness to change his mind after discussion is 100% town.

But, what is your opinion on his fishy case?


(not feeling terribly great right now, I didn't read everything up to this point, just this page)

[magnus_orion]

You seem to have rather confused reads SC.
Before I was almost sure you were one of the townies, but...

Well, your position on Iam is, well, practically contradictory. You say you think he's exactly as town as you expected, implying he meets a town meta you have of him. But you also say you've also never played with him as scum, calling into question the very read you're putting forward. He could play like his town play as scum, but you seem to ignore this possibility. One-sided metas are only good when they are not being met, not when they are.

For example, if you know a person behaves a certain way as scum, and he's NOT behaving that way, its a fair bet he's town.
But if you know someone behaves a certain way as scum, and he is behaving that way, unless you know he behaves differently as town, you can't really draw meta conclusions.

However, even though you, by your own admission, have never played with Iam as scum, you still feel you can draw a town read. And I think you'd have mentioned any additional meta research. You don't do that sort of thing and then fail to mention it.

FOS: SC

, because I had a town read on him earlier and I'm more confident in an Iam lynch.

Also,
@Iam: Give me a good reason to stop tunneling on you and I'll drop my case like a hot potato. I'm more than willing to change my mind. But first I need a reason to do so. I've seen very little reason from you.

Also, I think fishy is town, but he's pretty good at fooling me as scum, so I'm hesitant to call him obv-town, discounting that (one-sided!!) meta, I would.

[magnus_orion]

when did changing your mind become a scumtell?

The meta you presented seemed to be your ONLY evidence for your switch.
But your meta information was insufficient to draw a conclusion. How is this changing your mind? Or is this question meant to be totally unrelated?

[magnus_orion]

I don't need new evidence to change my mind. That's where the whole changing mind part comes in.

It is (by the very definition of reasonable) unreasonable to change your opinion on a subject without acquiring new evidence.
In fact, it suggests outside selectivity.
:\

[magnus_orion]

Further insight counts as additional evidence.
That said, that doesn't particularly apply to meta, now does it?
You still have insufficient evidence relying on the meta information alone that you have to draw a town conclusion. Perhaps if you left something unstated out of how you reached this conclusion? But this appears to not be present. Since I assume you are reasonable, your selectivity must be due to outside influences. Its a simple deduction, really.

And you do have that right. It doesn't also ensure you reasonable when using it, though.

[magnus_orion]

But before that playerslot was scum for you. Which is also evidence. So how was evidence than only just barely defaults to town overthrow your scum read?

[magnus_orion]

I think that that's not so much a suggestion as a normal trend in most mafia games. *shrug*
I thought it sort of went without saying that scum were among that group, not necessarily all the scum, though.

[magnus_orion]

magnus - if you essentially think I'm not saying anything revolutionary, you wouldn't be voting iamausername. According to my theory he's very unlikly to be scum. Are you still confident about his scumminess?

I don't think its revolutionary, and I think you're putting too much weight on it.
I think Iam hasn't dissuaded me from his scumminess.

[magnus_orion]

This game is in desperate need of more substantial contribution from people who are not named SC, Fishy, Ojanen, or VP Baltar. I know we're the quintessential sitcom foursome, but actual participation from others would be appreciated.

unvote, Vote: IAMAUSERNAME

:arrow: Because le chat was scummy
:arrow: Because IAM is not blisteringly pro-town
:arrow: Because, holistically speaking, the wagon has not been building up quickly, despite its apparent validity, and ease of agreement, else I think I'd have more nay-sayers, suggesting scum are less than satisfied with supporting the wagon.
:arrow: Because lynching with it in mind to gain information more than to lynch scum is bad play
:arrow: Because Iam attempted to push a case based on misrepresentation of carefully worded statements
:arrow: Because despite the last point, the wagon STILL didn't build quickly, suggesting scum are a bit more than less than satisfied with the wagon, in fact, I'd say that with an point against IAM like that and still not getting support, scum don't want this wagon to happen at all.
Until this is even somewhat acknowledged/addressed, what greater possible contribution do you expect from me? I'm practically convinced I've found scum, and I want them lynched.
Its true, serial has been somewhat disquieting, but if he isn't partners with IAM, then in my opinion its all been null, and lynching serial would be less than optimal. Also, I did at one point have a town read on rosso/serial, though it seems to have faded, and I don't think any actions he's taken him implicate him if IAM is not scum.

@Sc- Iam's post claiming he's town doesn't exactly fall under my list of things that he could do to make me reverse my position on him. This list is of course private, and will not be disclosed.

[magnus_orion]

rosso/serial

rosso/sajin?
artem/serial?

Do you think Sajin is likely town? Other?

...
too many replacements...
I was frustrated by rosso so I meta'd him, its hard to tell but I think he was town...
I did think that serial had replaced him though...
Sajin really hasn't made an impression on me.

[magnus_orion]

Sorry, but the fact that no-one likes your arguments doesn't mean it's because you're launching them at scum. If IAAUN is scum, then there is n-1 scum not on your wagon, but 12-(n+1) townies who also disagree. Can you clarify what you mean here?

its simple
scum motive = want to lynch townie
So if there is a reasonable argument on the table that they can use to reasonably make a townie look bad, they're more likely to use it then not. However, despite my accusation of misrepresentation going unchallenged, and therefore being a reasonable argument to take, no one has taken it up. With townies, this is more understandable, there may be some hesitations or vagueness. But with scum, a buzz word like misrepresentation going unchallenged is a free ticket to a towny lynch. But we don't see the wagon on IAM gaining strength, despite this. It suggests that scum don't want to take the free ticket to lynch this person, which suggests this person is not a towny. So it suggests IAM is scum.

Also, non-participation =/= disagreement, why are you equating the two? If people have problems with my arguments, they should openly declare them.

[magnus_orion]

Percy, I can't tell if your position is general hubris or actual scumminess.

How do you know my playstyle isn't working? I've made one testable prediction, that Ray would flip town. Everything else is yet to be bourne out, and I still have high hopes.

In fact, just about the only negative thing you could show is that I'm getting a high amount of suspicion - something which is bad for both alignments, but more so for scum.

But aside from that - the major thurst of your post seems to be pushing for my lynch due to my playstyle AND THEN BLAMING ME FOR THAT.

You tell me that you don't like my meta reasons, or mafia theory reasons. You tell me you don't like me defending people or 'buddying up to townies' (which begs a question on its own.) You tell me that you're tunnelled on me due to my playstyle.

In short, I hear a hell of a lot of reasons why you're on my wagon, NONE of which indicate me actually being scum over just having a playstyle you think is flawed/ineffective and all of which are nonetheless used as justification for your vote. It's MY fault that you don't like my playstyle, don't understand my methods, that you're tunnelled on me and were I to be lynched, it will be MY fault that you've lynched another townie.

And what good reason have you shown, either in game or meta game or mafia theory, to explain why a) my playstyle is so ineffective, b) my theory in this particular game is incorrect or c) even if either were the case, I'm scum?

Absolutely zero.

In the meantime, you've earned my vote.

vote Percy

Ojanen, chamber, iam, magnus - thoughts on Percy when you get a chance.

to be perfectly honest I was considering it after that post...

Obviously not. Not that it should, of course. But I honestly don't believe that this list actually exists. I don't think there is anything I can do that will convince you I am town today. If we lynched Hero and he flipped scum, maybe the possibility would occur to you, but without anyone else's alignment being revealed, it is not going to happen. I can live with that, but it would certainly be more helpful if you'd at least consider looking elsewhere.

So you think I'm lying?

[magnus_orion]

@Serial: Iam wasn't in the second link. But le chat was. And you were not scum in the second link either.
Perhaps you linked to the wrong game. Regardless, I iso'd le chat in that game.
Le chat seemed more aggressive and more concerned about "easy targets".
(a control-f on the word "easy" in this game returns two results about how certain players were trying to easily avoid being noticed, while in the other game it returns seven results from non-quoted posts, and every single one is talking about opportunistic attacking)

Certainly, his "fence sitting" post is a deep contrast to his play there.

However, other than that, the play did seem similar.
But the absence of concern for "easy targets" bothers me.
In fact he seems to go after "easy targets" in this game, such as MM and red_dye who were generally unpopular at the time.
I suppose he didn't attack rosso, but MM certainly struck me as someone who was an easy target all throughout day 1.
And of course, MM was replaced by RayFrost, who Le Chat decided to vote to avoid fence sitting.
I don't know, his concern over people being opportunistically attacked in this game just seemed... lacking in this game.

[magnus_orion]

Iam, whats your feelings on percy, and why.
Percy, can you elaborate on your town read, and why are you trying this defending thing if you are so sure its scummy? You didn't act like we had convinced you that defending wasn't scummy...

1. Sure, le Chat was scummy, but as I asked before - what makes you think le Chat was scum apart from the "avoiding fence sitting" comment?
2. Not "blisteringly"? Does that mean he's "somewhat" pro-town, just not amazingly so?
3. This is reaching WIFOM. "Despite its apparent validity"? Also, as I've said before, there are 11 players in this game. IAAUN isn't interested in joining in on his own case, so that leaves 10 players. In order to give this point any credence at all, you need to not only assume that the case is "good", but that the scum are also the only ones paying attention and are so influential that everyone is following them.
4. Exactly what are you accusing IAAUN of here? This is very unclear.
5. I disagree. I think it is always good to construct cases and get people to defend themselves. The way he presented the case, Fishy's response and then his backing down read strong pro-town for both of them.
6. How is this different from 2?

1. ... besides the recent meta information and the fact that he assumed that I was trying to string lynches together when I supposedly went after rayfrost (do to him misreading), implying he thought rayfrost was town when voting him... nothing.
2. I mean to say his play hasn't convinced me that he isn't scum. If he was able to play extremely pro-town, I may overlook everything else.
3. I do assume the case is at least reasonable to agree with. My assumption rests on the fact that it has not been dismissed convincingly, by Iam or otherwise.
Scum try to take advantage of towny mistakes, and will be quick to accuse on slips or really scummy moves, or moves that can be reasonably called scummy without looking scummy on ones own. If you accept that, the fact that Iam was not wagoned on this case, and isn't included among a lot of players top suspects indicates that nobody has an agenda to get Iam lynched, suggesting Iam is not town, since scum have an agenda to get any town lynched, and doing so while holding opinions that it is reasonable to believe townies would hold is the best way to do so without gaining suspicion.
4. Nothing. Just disagreeing with other lynches being proposed, because I feel some are more, "if we lynch this person, people's alignments will be more obvious"
5. How is backpedaling when your case successfully discounted a town-tell? I don't think its a scum-tell, since I do it often, but a town-tell seems to be the exact opposite of the generally held opinion, and I don't see any grounds for thinking that it is.
6. Because 3 referred chronologically to le chat's day 1 scumminess, which its possible scum would think is too weak to push, but 6 refers to Iam's misrep on fishy, which I feel it is much more reasonable for a person to push while still appearing pro-town, so the lack of support for it at the time it happened suggest that scum don't see pushing an Iam lynch to be a beneficial move. I'm sure you'd agree joining an Iam wagon on the grounds of misrepresentation wouldn't be unreasonable for a townie to do, even if you disagree about the misrepresentation point. So long as you agree on that, scum shouldn't find it difficult to justify pushing an Iam wagon, and so, Iam should be an easy town lynch to push, but that's provided Iam is town. Since this pushing is not happening, it suggests Iam is scum.

Given all the evidence together, I feel that enough Iam scumminess is present to reasonably conclude Iam is scum.

"If you're town, then why aren't scum trying to lynch you, huh??" is not a case I can defend against (Or really, a case at all).

which is of course one of the benefits of holistic analysis. Scum can't avoid making certain actions or attempt to explain away certain actions to discount it. Its an unavoidable tell.

The only way to change my mind about it is to use other means to successfully convince me of your towniness, by means other than discounting my case.

telling you what to do to do that sort of defeats the entire purpose, because that would be a step - by - step "get out of suspicions free" card.

[magnus_orion]

Where is this happening? I don't think I've seen anyone in this game suggesting that a particular player would be a good lynch for any reason other than that player being probable scum.

I didn't say that. I said "I feel"
This was referring to the serial wagon. I don't think serial's been sufficiently scummy to justify his lynch, but I did think he's been interesting enough that information could be revealed from his lynch.

[magnus_orion]

@magnus: Why are IAAUN's and SC's alignments linked?

in so much as if IAAUN is town, I don't think that there can be a significant argument for SC scum. The only significant tell I can see is his flakiness on the Iam/le chat wagon and willingness to follow Iam. In fact, I don't think a single tell that isn't related to Iam in some way has been made on SC. If I'm mistaken, please let me know.

[magnus_orion]

Of course, come to think of it, with the aggressive pursuit, if SC is town, Percy's probably scum.

[magnus_orion]

@Ojanen: You are right to point out that the general flow of le Chat scummy -> IAAUN town is how I saw it as well, but it's a matter of extremes. I was certainly more supportive of a RayFrost lynch than a le Chat lynch, for example, and I thought the case that SC presented at the last minute was very unconvincing. When he didn't continue with the scumhunting on le Chat the next day, I found that hard to fathom; when he declared that IAAUN had "solved the game" for him, I found that just as inexplicable.

@magnus_orion: Here and here and here and here and here are links to posts that contain arguments that I have forwarded that have nothing to do with IAAUN/le Chat. It's true that SC's interaction with le Chat/IAAUN is part of the case, but it is nowhere near the entirety, and I don't see how SC's flaking on the case and subsequent buddying precludes the possibility of SC scum, IAAUN town.

I would like elaboration on the post of yours that SC quoted as well. This is the second time you've tried to link SC's alignment to someone else's, and I don't like this latest attempt any more than the last. It appears as though you're trying to push an IAAUN lynch for information still - if he's town, then SC is town, then I'm scum, so let's lynch him and see what happens! This is scummy play, independent of SC's alignment.

FoS: magnus_orion

.

wow, can you misrep me any more?
I mean seriously.

There's a big difference between saying that if someone isn't scum than the arguments against someone don't hold as strong and saying that if someone isn't scum then someone else isn't scum either.

More later, busy

[magnus_orion]

sorry, for not mentioning this earlier, since everyone seemed to get upset over it, my feelings on percy in relation to sc are purely gut, I don't think I can seriously back them up. I don't intend to act on them until I can.
*Shrug*

In relation to Percy's criticisms...

sorry, I clicked the links (btw, Why

did

you link them, considering your tendency to quote things up until now? This action strikes me as odd) and quite a bit seemed directly related to IAm. The only one that I'll give you is evasiveness, but like I said, the bulk of the argument revolves around his interactions with IAm.

I don't know if this is what you intended, but it certainly doesn't seem to contribute as evidence toward the point you were trying to make...

[magnus_orion]

well, looking back, I guess you have used links before, i just never really took especial notice.

Still it is the first time you used them as a reply, rather than in order to respond to them...

The greater point of them not really supporting your point still stands.

[magnus_orion]

Let's go through them slowly.

The first has three separate arguments that are independent of le Chat/IAAUN's alignment.
The second deals with problems I had with his playstyle, as well as the rolefishing point I made. Again, no IAAUN alignment interaction.
The third deals with his interactions with Sajin, more evasiveness and his distracting playstyle.
The fourth does have some IAAUN interaction discussion, but mostly deals with his evasiveness, buddying, D1 events and his lack of scumhunting D2.
The fifth represents an inconsistency in his voting justification, and though he explained it I think it remains quite scummy. It involves a quote of IAAUN's, but the argument itself is independent of his alignment.

So did you actually read what I wrote? Because it sure doesn't look like it from here.

I think that so long as it involving an interaction, it is to some extent alignment dependent on the interaction, directly or not. Motivation is what is important, not the action itself.



Also, kai replacing out of a game where I was that likely to defend him, if he was scum, is highly unlikely. I stand decidedly opposed to any form of a deathsauce lynch.

[magnus_orion]

Also, @Deathsauce: myself and chamber remain of the original players.

[magnus_orion]

ugh

...

so is this you conceding the point?

[magnus_orion]

@Deathsauce

: Please clarify your vote on IAAUN.

I think that so long as it involving an interaction, it is to some extent alignment dependent on the interaction, directly or not. Motivation is what is important, not the action itself.

You've come a long way from:

in so much as if IAAUN is town, I don't think that there can be a significant argument for SC scum.

...and, like I said, most of the arguments I gave don't go into IAAUN interaction, no matter how vaguely you insist they do.

kai replacing out of a game where I was that likely to defend him, if he was scum, is highly unlikely.

RL meta = complete bullshit.

Top 3 scum-reads at this point are:

Percy/Claus

You have a scumread on Claus? Interesting. I thought Claus read pretty townie to me (unlike other poor sods I've had to replace), and I can't remember anyone making any substantive arguments against him. Elaborate.

vote: Ojanen

This latest vote of hers on DDP reeks of flailing

Flailing? I'd say that out of all the players in this game, Ojanen has the biggest town cred. Why would she flail?

It's interesting that neither VP Baltar nor DeathSauce have brought substantive cases against each other, and DeathSauce voting Ojanen now actually feels more like flailing than an honest attempt to scumhunt. Cases, please.

@Fishythefish, @SerialClergyman: Please elaborate on your vote; I think I know why IAAUN is voting the way he is, but some clarification of your reads is needed.

@Mod: Can we get a prod (or better yet, a replacement!) for chamber?

see, here's where I'm confused. Are you trying to figure out people's alignments, or are you just attempting to smash down everything that isn't conforming to what you put forward?

I'd be rather unhappy with a deathsauce lynch. I've explained MY reasons. Whether or not you agree with me is a non-issue toward how I feel about the subject.

Also, I don't think the two quotes are rather different. Perhaps you've fine tuned the clarifications a bit, but they certainly aren't a long ways apart.

[magnus_orion]

Why are we about to lynch deathsauce for just replacing in if we weren't about to lynch kai?
We barely gave him time to post content.

[magnus_orion]

I'm disapointed. I didn't see one reason mentioned to lynch deathsauce. At all. Not one. No one said anything!

[magnus_orion]

Oh wait, not conforming to pro-town behaviors. Which as I've said numerous times in numerous games, is not a scumtell.

[magnus_orion]

so... serial was a pro-town jailkeeper.

that changes things.

unvote
vote: Percy

I finally remembered what struck me as off about your response to SC's post. You were eager to attack serial for his comment about no kill.

[magnus_orion]

I would like to know why you think this makes me scum, magnus.

because all your attacks thus far have been on things you feel are pro-town to attack, and don't seem to have a purpose other than attempting to attack people. I don't think you're trying to find out people's alignments. In other words, you're interested in the lynch, not the scumhunting. Which is scummy.

Its textbook that if someone congratulates a doctor, they're scummy, which meant you could attack for it, so you did. Its also rather telling when you leave more than half the town as possible suspects, so you don't have to contradict a towntell later.

[magnus_orion]

Ojanen's play is freaking me out. She looks like she's either REALLY town or REALLY scum. I know that seems ridiculous given they aren't really on a continuum, but usually my opinion of Ojanen is starting neutral and working more and more pro-town.

^ Ojanen was SC's target on N1.

You really think flushing that information out was the best play?

DDD is pro-town because of this post.

[magnus_orion]

I'm forced to take back my comment about DDD due to his follow up post. I had assumed it was because he thought scum didn't already have the information (obviously implying he wasn't scum), but he had a different reason.

[magnus_orion]

Yes, because all the lynches based on amount of content thus far have worked so well.

I'd like to hear Iam on DDD.

[magnus_orion]

I'm sort of forced to, to interpret anything about this situation, now aren't I?
All you've given us to go on is zach is scum because hero was weak (whatever that means).

[magnus_orion]

EBWOP: and then applied holistic reasoning from there, but the way you did requires that he be scummy before you applied such reasoning.

[magnus_orion]

if you're looking for a "case" or some sort of meaningful discussion you are obviously unaware of who i am. let's try something different:

hows about

you

tell

me

why you

don't

want to lynch zachrulez?

because the last two times we lynched people without a reason they were town.
So hows about you tell me why we should?

Why? Dont you think if Iam had something to say about DDD he would say it? This seems a bit like pot stirring to me, so I'd like to hear your reasons for wanting to hear his opinion of DDD.

Asking people's opinions on other people is how I've always done things. Strange you object to it now. I shouldn't have to explain why I ask questions before I get answers unless they threaten the town somehow.

[magnus_orion]

because the last two times we lynched people without a reason they were town.

funny how you say "we". you consciously avoided both wagons. in fact, "you" haven't lynched anyone.

So hows about you tell me why we should?

because he is scum. you are avoiding the question i asked

you

. let's try a different way:

why do you think he's not scum?

by "we" I refer to the town as a collective, irrespective of the choices I, personally, made to contribute to the collective's choice.
I don't think he's scum because I have no reason to think he's scum (or to believe you when you say he is), like I just said. I am not avoiding the question.

[magnus_orion]

Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:25 pm

The first time I offered to replace in this game (back on page 22 or so) I was dead certain that le chat was scum. Given the rest of the re-read, I see no reason to change my perception.

vote:iamausername

Yeah, that seems like a pretty good reason.

Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2009 11:28 am

I am

Vanilla Town

. Unvote me now.

Well, those two things don't fit together!

This one'll do.

Unvote, Vote: DeathSauce

Iam, I apologize for pestering you, but I couldn't help but notice how out of character this was for you. Whenever there was a gap of a few days, you would post a lengthy post addressing several issues that had come up during your absence. A quick iso and post time comparisons is enough for anybody to conclude this.

Now I realize that you

would've hammered literally anyone who was at L-1,

since

this day went on far too long.

However, I find it odd that you felt that you needed to take initiative to hammer, setting it as a higher priority to commenting on whatever was going on in those last two posts that I quoted at the begining.

Now lets put those posts in context.
You had one other post on the 18th of November: Another one liner

Oh and if you're going to vote me then you need to go all out VPB, Mafia of Order, style to get the

mis

lynch because we really don't have time for people to sit around and hope someone comes around to the fifth strongest bandwagon. So either really get to work trying to lynch me or get on an actual wagon.

This is true, Oj. How would you feel about a Zach lynch?

Your previous post was 4 days before, on the 14th.

This is so your presence during this period is recorded accurately. During this period of a rather sparse amount of content on your part we have addressing the situations, the deathsauce wagon built up. (In fact, deathsauce had his first post THE VERY DAY that your sparse posting began: the 14th of November.) Now then, perhaps I'm reading to much into this, but the following facts appear relevant:
=> We have almost no content from you during the period in which deathsauce was involved in this game
=> We have very little to nothing ammounting to an opinion on deathsauce from you prior to your hammer
=> Your hammer comes with little comment on anything other than the claim of the lynchee.


It seems to me, that you just watched this wagon build and tacked on your hammer without so much as expressing any support prior. Almost as if you merely waited til the opportunity presented itself, while meandering around a bit, and then laid down your vote at the appropriate time.

There certainly was no lack of content for you to comment on, a quick glance over the previous pages should convince anyone of that, but you didn't even comment on any of that, despite your doing so earlier, when the comments addressed you and your cases directly.

I'd just like some explanation for this oddity of behavior is all, considering your prior vote justifications were lengthy and in-depth, and your analysis of relevant points very content encompassing. I of course, still want your opinion of DDD as well.

[magnus_orion]

magnus has been consciously avoiding bandwagons on townies and is expecting a pass by siting continuity of play to avoid persecution for not being on this(zach) scum wagon.

lawl, I'm just awesome at knowing who NOT to lynch. I really am town
Right now zach only falls into that category, not because I think he's town, but I have no reason at all to think he's scum.
At least, not from you.


Still waiting for an answer from Iam to my questions.

[magnus_orion]

Right now zach only falls into that category, not because I think he's town, but I have no reason at all to think he's scum.
At least, not from you.

please clarify this. if none from me, what reasons

do

you have to think zach is scum?

Iam posted a case, so I have reasons from him, for example.
Whether I think those reasons are convincing is another matter.
Now that I have answered this question for you, could you answer what reasons you have to think zach is scum?
Or do you intend to carry this out ad nauseum?

[magnus_orion]

magnus: already answered here:

hero was weak as hell and zach seems content at L-2.

nobody's jumped on quick. i wasn't even aware of the current votecount when i jumped on, so the fact that he's seeing little pressure points to him being scum and scum possibly already bussing him. attention should be paid to anyone lurking through this next bit, but zach should be lynched for sure.

ojanen: fishy feels around 75%. outside chance iam is bussing, but i don't think so. regardless, zach should be lynched first. we're down a jailkeeper. we still have power which means another night nets more results. lynch the obvscum and see what goes down.

yeah, when you say weak as hell... could you, idk, elaborate?

[magnus_orion]

if you are town then you should be happy i'm voting for the person you think is scum.

This bothers me.

of particular note is the vote which carried out of the rvs. very nonsensical.

magnus(a random vote which was held over from the rvs and left on until magnus answered questions satisfactorily),

The third quote strikes me as you trying to justify your suspicion on me despite evidence against it, ie. you are pushing a position, not scumhunting. Its possible I'm reading too far into this, but I seem to recall him clarifying and stating the vote was "no longer random" which flies in the face of the second and third quotes, if my understanding of them is correct.

FOS: Don_Johnson

[magnus_orion]

The third quote strikes me as you trying to justify your suspicion on me despite evidence against it, ie. you are pushing a position, not scumhunting. Its possible I'm reading too far into this, but I seem to recall him clarifying and stating the vote was "no longer random" which flies in the face of the second and third quotes, if my understanding of them is correct.

you are reading to far into this. this has nothing to do with you. it is an explanation of some of the things which stuck out to me. stating a vote "is no longer random" is exactly what "carrying it out of the rvs" means. its not a necessary scumtell(townies do it too) but its a very easy way to not make yourself suspicious. not sure why you are being defensive here. if you don't think zach is scum then you shouldn't be worried about being implicated as his partner. like i said, this has nothing to do with you but you seem worried that it does. how do you feel about the rest of the information i presented?

He didn't merely carry it out of the RVS. He actually made a case on me. Stated reasons. As if he had been voting someone else, unvoted and voted me. You called it nonsensical. It made perfect sense to me.

The rest of your information seems to be randomly picked quotes from who knows what context that I don't feel inclined at the moment to look up.

This does have to do with me, but not in the fashion you're implying. I'm trying to find scum, and will analyze in any way I can to test my theories and attempt to identify the mafia. I could care less for you suspecting me, even if zach does turn out to be scum. I'm not trying to be defensive, but if your implications meant the reasoning I thought they meant, I'd probably be voting you right now. However, looking back, I think it may be broader than I first read into it.

I'm also slightly put off since you aren't meeting my town or scum meta for you.

[magnus_orion]

I believe zach

also, with this information giving us some more reads to deal with, I'm more confident with Iam scum

unvote
vote: Iam

[magnus_orion]

great, so one of them is lying. Percy seems to want to wait, so I won't hammer, and I'd like to hear from zach.

unvote

[magnus_orion]

I don't have any thoughts atm. I've been pretty busy, and since I was wrong on Iam, I have nothing.
*shrug*
I have exams coming up... so yeah, don't expect much.

[magnus_orion]

Good to know you value this game above college. I don't.

[magnus_orion]

alright, though its 2:53 am, I've reread the game to page 12, noticed that when I thought hero was scum, I linked to claus, I do believe my reasoning at that point was much better than my muddled thoughts now, which is why I prefer day 1s. I have no case, other than I trust my day 1 connections.

unvote
vote: Percy

Make of it what you will...

Also, since IAM thought VP was scum, I did an iso on VP, since I thought he seemed town, and came across this post:

I think I'm just going to do a PBPA of Hero since he doesn't have a ton of posts and it might be informative to me confirming or disproving my gut feelings about him:

1- random vote
2-decently long post and seems to be generating some good discussion in the early going. He also advises people to cut down on the early game noise, which seems pro-town to me. Focuses largely on Kairyuu, Red Dye and Magnus.
3-Questioning over magnus not voting...seems normal enough and maybe something I would ask about as an early item to get the game moving
4-responding to magnus after he is asked what he believes Magnus' scummy motivation may have been for withholding his vote. This is a good question by magnus.
5-This post looks bad to me because hero can't actually explain why he found magnus scummy for not voting. He sticks by the "it was odd behavior" argument, which I don't really like at all. It reads to me like his previous posting in the matter was just to look busy and wasn't actually meant to be expounded upon. He calls out MM and Rosso for lurking here, which is good.
6-Magnus points out that Hero also found Red Dye's early behavior atypical, but then called him town. Hero's response in this post:

@Magnus
The difference is that Red Dye gave me a gut read of town.

Can you explain this to me Hero? What about Red Dye's play at that point gave you a gut read of town?

7-Subtly prods MM again to ask her who she would vote for. This triggers her 'teehee, let's extend the RVS' business'.
8-Questions Artem on meta grounds after Artem reiterates that he thinks Magnus is town. I don't know what Artem's past meta is, so I can't really speak to this too much.
9-Explaining a point to Kairyuu...not much here
10-personal matters
11-At this point there are three leading wagons: MM, RedDye, and Rosso. Hero says he'd lynch Rosso, attacks MM and says he's ready to reassess Red Dye. He also unvotes his previous top suspect, Magnus, here and says he's satisfied with his response. As was pointed out earlier, him finally saying he's ok with magnus' response well after he responded is weird. I also think it is a little weird that he says he has to reread Red Dye (as if he wasn't sure of any kind of read on him) when he had questioned him at least a little bit before. I would think he would have been assessing his read from those previous questions.

12-elaborates on his Red Dye suspicions, gives a mild opinion of le Chat saying that he'd to see some reactions from him. I dont' have any problems with this post.
13-Votes MM here. Not sure what triggered this exactly, probably unvoting and wanting to find a new target. His reasons for voting her are 1) he believes she is exaggerating bad play on day 1 (though he admits at least some truth to this) 2) doesn't like her saying she doesn't find rosso scummy but votes him anyhow. These are fine enough reasons, though they aren't exactly original.
14-bit of clarification of 13
15-says le Chat's most recent post gives him town vibes and tries to get Red Day to clarify his playstyle. I have no problem with either of these things, but I think this is part of the reason I felt he was following a bit, since these are both things I previously said.
16-Explains his read on Claus at that point as "opaque", but says he has a couple things that make him 10% more town than neutral. He also explains why his vote on MM was so short. No real problem with this post.
17-Asks for clarification on a point I was pursuing with Magnus, which le Chat provides before I can reply.
18-MM asks for replacement after the heat gets on her significantly. I pipe in and say she's probably scum. Hero quotes me and agrees in this post. He adds this:

A quick skim of her other games makes her play here still more suspect.

What games did you look at, hero?

19-22 This is where the strange questioning over Artem saying L-3 in his post began. I still didn't understand the line of inquiry.
23- After Artem has answered, Hero says that Artem not noticing my unvote means we are less likely to be scum together. I still find this method of scum hunting odd. Did you see a potential connection between us, Hero?

24-Asks Artem if he is looking to get onto the Fishy (Nuwen) wagon now that Ray's (MM) wagon is at L-2 given that his previous reason for voting MM was "competing wagons". Artem responds:

Not to the Fish wagon, but yes, I am. I want to see what Ray has to say first though.

I actually find this strange now that I'm looking closer at it. Why would you be looking to move your vote now just because the person is at L-2? Artem, did you find MM scummy when you voted or was it purely for wagoning purposes?

25-Hero calls Artem's response "reasonable". I disagree with that assessment clearly. Can you elaborate on this assessment Hero?
26-Game hit a dead spot. hero tries to prod it along with some questions/comments. pro-town.

27- After he disappears for a bit while I get into it with magnus/rayfrost, he comes back and agrees with Oj that fast wagons aren't always on town members. Questions some of Ray's reads with logical arguments. These are original thoughts as far as I recall. Look pro-town to me.
28-Responding to Percy.
29-defends why he finds le Chat's post 260 townish
30-continues with questioning of chamer.

---

Ok, this took me awhile to write up, so I'm not going to take the time to copy edit it. If there are typos and stuff in there, sorry. Hope it's not too confusing.

My overall feeling of herodotus is slightly better after doing this reread. There are a few things in there that are questionable, but nothing that makes me go "OMG SCUM!!!!". Now that the game is rolling again, I'd like him to comment a bit more frequently, as he felt much more active toward the beginning of the game.

Makes it hard for me to believe VP is a zach-partner. Doing a PBPA doesn't look like distancing to me.

[magnus_orion]

*sigh*
I'm well aware that most likely won't be able to convince anyone, after that show don made out of linking me to zach, but I would like to attempt to find the scum before I'm lynched. With that in mind, I'd like to know who fishy would have voted if not me.

[magnus_orion]

should be 2 scum left out of seven. we can still afford a mislynch, no? maybe we should be taking out the obvious zach defenders today.

thoughts?

Who are these obvious zach defenders and why are you talking about the acceptability of a mislynch? While certainly it seems like we can mislynch and not lose immediately it seems rash to have that as a guiding principle of our lynch today.

vp baltar and magnus were the "obvious" zach defenders yesterday. there is nothing wrong with speculation on the math involved in this game. if we are fairly certain that at least one of magnus/vp is scum then it is perfectly acceptable strategy to lynch them both if town has a mislynch available.

ddd: farther up the suspect list you climb.

In my experience people who defend scum against the accusation of "obvscum" with no substantiation are generally an equal distribution among alignments. I'm always against unsubstantiated cases, regardless of my alignment, so using this to paint me of a defender is a dirty trick that I'm surprised you'd use, considering you're conf-town. Maybe you're just suffering from confirmation bias?

[magnus_orion]

not meant to be dirty. could be suffering from confirm bias, but the zach lynch was in no way inevitable when i jumped on it, so its not like you were "sticking your neck out" at that point. are you going to argue the fact that you were an "obvious" zach defender? i hope not.

None of this addresses my point, at all.

My point is that you had no stated case. You made no substantial arguments. Now you criticize me for disagreeing with you. Mafia is a game about doubt. Why the hell am I expected to not question you when you tell me to accept something at face value without evidence? I asked for a case, and substantiated why my request was reasonable with a fact.How is this scummy?
You just requested a case from me against percy. Why the hell should I answer your request when you never answered mine, and in fact, made me out to be scum because of it? Did it ever cross your mind that I might've been trying to get a read on you at that time? That I wasn't necessarily defending zach, so much as trying to figure out if your reasons for wanting to lynch him had any merit at all, obviously defaulting to "we shouldn't lynch" if they lacked such merit? The reason for such merit to be necessary being the last few lynches we had without such merit were town.

1153 is weak sauce. vp's pbpa of herod is noncommital. very easily could be scum partner work. nothing in there suggests otherwise. simply posting quote walls isn't going to help your case. explain why percy is scum, please.

I'M NOT MAKING A CASE WHY THE TOWN SHOULDN'T LYNCH VP! I'm stating a reason, why I, personally, don't believe he's a partner of zach. Frankly, I believe that scum wouldn't put that much effort into analyzing a scum partner's play. I don't care whether or not you accept my reasons, or agree with them. I'm explaining my position on the issue, nothing more. Why do you insist on turning that into defense?


I explained my reasons why I think percy is scum earlier, whether or not you accept them is your own business at this point. If I feel I have compelling evidence, I'll post a case to try to convince people. I don't think so at this point and time.

[magnus_orion]

no, me being upset is because you've repeatedly misrepresented me, and I know you're town, so this is just bad play from you. Now, could you respond to the points in the post, or are you just going to throw confirmation bias at me?

[magnus_orion]

Alright don, here's why I'm upset:

If I feel I have compelling evidence, I'll post a case to try to convince people. I don't think so at this point and time.

humor me with your percy case.

I had just got through explaining I didn't have a case. You're request implicitly claims that I have a case (even though I don't), and thus, once I don't present one, I'm being "uncooperative", even though there's no real way for me to cooperate (save bs-ing a case together). This sort of thing (of which this isn't the only instance of) just irks me.

I have personal reasons, which I did explain earlier, and if thats what you want, I can present, but they are by no means the sort of thing you'd accept since they're along the lines of post 1153, which you rejected outright (once again while claiming I was pushing a position, rather than explaining one).

I'd like to hear percy's opinions on everyone in general, btw, and VP and fishy on percy...

[magnus_orion]

@fishy: When I ask for opinions on one player to another specifically, it means I suspect a link. I think I had a firmer grasp on who was scum at that stage in the game. Its just a gut feeling in that regard, so I guess what I'm saying is my gut is telling me to defer to my earlier gut reads.
*Shrug* I never really made an argument for the connection.

Also, fishy, darn you, you're too good at making me believe you're town, I'm not sure what to think about you.

[magnus_orion]

I agree with VP

unvote

, only to keep him actually off L-1.
This is from no change in opinion on percy himself.

[magnus_orion]

gonna re-iso VP, Ojanen's post makes me want to reconsider...

Also, would like opinions from DDD on VP...
also, I don't think percy is scum after that post

unvote

[magnus_orion]

Alright, I've been analyzing this game from multiple angles, making sure to keep particular track of who's who (something I've been having trouble with). I've drawn some conclusions.
First off:
Zachrulez attack on ojanen, followed by the fake claim with the ojanen no result leads me to think zach was aiming for the following:
mislynch on ojanen, and then excuse himself with the no result.
This makes me believe heavily that ojanen is town.
I know myself to be town, and don is confirmed.
DDD is probably not scum, since he (or his slot) was attacked several times by hero/zach.

This leaves us with three people:
VP
Percy
Fishy

fishy had a lot of "my gut says hero is scum" and actually attacks hero a few times, but I'm afraid of fishy because he's really good at making me think he's town....

Fishy says (percy, magnus, VP ((in that order)))
VP says (DDD, percy, magnus)
Percy says (DDD primarily) (didn't see a clear list for percy, might've missed one)


percy says

I said I thought it was unlikely before in my Post 1107, but now I'm not so sure. I don't see how starting an easily refutable case against a scumbuddy is not a valid distancing tactic.

referencing this statement from his linked post

I'm still interested in DDD, as I don't think his play is matching up with what I saw of him as town in the previous game I played with him. However, I've looked over the Sajin/Herodotus interaction from earlier and I think it's unlikely that they're scum together.

What strikes me about this most is percy's desire for consistency. He's going out of his way to find a previous statement he made, and excuse himself of it. This strikes me as odd. I think this excuse is occurring because he's found a plausible target (I admit, DDD's opinion on Ojanen is disconcerting) and is trying to force his previous opinions to better conform to it.
I'm (once again) most confident in a percy lynch

vote: percy

[magnus_orion]

so, no opinion on my post then?
disappointing.
I wanted to hear your thoughts.

[magnus_orion]

so, no opinion on my post then?
disappointing.
I wanted to hear your thoughts.

I think your Ojanen theory is interesting, but Zach's attack wasn't with any strength so that doesn't sell me on it and I'm far from convinced that his play was somehow a setup to mislynch Oj.

And your Percy point is interesting in an actual useful sort of way. It does seem more than a little stilted to go back through your own quotes to bring something up to make sure you achieve internal consistency so you can push ahead with your case anyways. It seems like concerns about internal consistency would be much more scum driven than town driven.

Mod: Vote Count plz

In reference to my point about Oj, the idea is that when I fake claim, I tend to try to make it out so that I can benefit from several of the ways it could resolve, which seems to me to be the standard approach to doing it.
With that in mind, although Zach ended up forcing the cop to claim, if there was no cop, the way he claimed provided an out for an Oj mislynch. That's the only reason I would guess he would claim he was jailkept.


@Fishy: I don't know, its just, if it wasn't for the person you replaced and POE, I know I would've assumed you town in that game.

[magnus_orion]

assuming vp batlar scum at this stage implies percy scum, as he would have no reason to unvote a town that could be a potential mislynch to prevent him from being lynched.

assuming percy town, however, makes VP's unvote a bad move for scum.
so percy town implies vp town

These refer only to this situation only, with no other evidence.

herodotus's attacks on sajin were quite aggressive and frequent. I think its safe to take DDD as town.

The attitude toward the reaction to the cop claim from VP is short sighted. It could be that he didn't read throughly or it could be that he went for the easiest target. Either way its a null tell.

I think a vp-percy scum team makes the most sense, but something just feels off, and I can't put my finger on what. This post was generated by writing my thoughts down in an attempt to do just that, but I still can't identify what's bugging me.

[magnus_orion]

*blinks*
what case?
I wonder weather DDD is still your top pick for scum as you said, seeing as how you switched your vote the way you did.

[magnus_orion]

for someone who cares so much about consistancy, it seems you didn't excuse your inconsistancy throughout that post, though, did you?

[magnus_orion]

yes, it was quite bold of me to attack my buddy for the vast majority of day 1, wasn't it? [/sarcasm]

Of course we seem to be abandoning interactions as tells, since you're also convinced that DDD could be scum despite how hard Hero attempted to get rosso/sajin/DDD lynched. Rosso made his slot an easy target, and hero went for it, hoping for a mislynch, that's the way it looks to me.

I'm not scum, and both your attacks are rather contrived.

Nice try with the vague misrep

I have no idea what you mean. You stated that its normal for you to go back through your posts to make sure your views stay consistent. Its like notes, you said.
Doesn't it make sense that you'd also go through the body of the post itself and make sure it stays consistent as well? Why then, do your opinions change mid-post without warning? I think this is a perfectly reasonable question that deserves an answer.

Personally, I'd rather you full claim (not that I expect it to happen), in terms of balance, a jailkeeper + a sanity confirmed cop + another role is pretty interesting.

Now what's been bothering me more lately has been his on-again, off-again approach to my wagon. He seems to forget previous points against me, votes me for weak reasons, declares me town and unvotes me, before jumping back on my wagon. Currently my #2.

In my experience, scum are more convinced of their cases going into late game than town. Town have a tendency to be more indecisive, since if the person they're voting is lynched, they have no guarantee as to if the lynch will work in their favor. Indecisiveness is certainly not a scumtell, in any event.

It also seems quite opportunistic to attack me based on my attitude toward fishy when you have no idea what I'm talking about.

@Fishy: I went back and read over your contributions to that game. You're right, it didn't take long. I seem to have had a slightly distorted memory of that game after all, so I think its safe to call you town, which just reinforces my current feelings on this game.

In terms of magnus, I dismissed him as a possibility out of hand at the start of the day because I felt it was too obvious of buddying coming from him. I have seen magnus play in other games and I think he's a good player, so I wouldn't expect such blatant buddying from him but I guess that is WIFOM to a large degree. What has struck me as odd today is that people have been attacking me about buddying with Zach, and yet magnus has largely flown under the radar for this other than some attacks early on...particularly when fishy actually posted a well reason post here and magnus' response was:

*sigh*
I'm well aware that most likely won't be able to convince anyone, after that show don made out of linking me to zach, but I would like to attempt to find the scum before I'm lynched. With that in mind, I'd like to know who fishy would have voted if not me.

Don really didn't seem to let me fly under the radar. Far as I can tell, he's still convinced I'm scum.
And as for the quote you posted, I feel I have found who the scum are.

[magnus_orion]

I'll hammer if fishy doesn't

[magnus_orion]

I don't believe the claim either.

[magnus_orion]

k
*shrug*

unvote
vote: VP

obviously, I'm town.

[magnus_orion]

now that I've seen the setup, I'm surprised town won.

[magnus_orion]

frankly, I feel like I screwed up in my play this game...
In hindsight, herodotus-scum made a lot of sense, but I was too convinced of iam scum to notice at the time, since hero-iam didn't make sense.

all in all, this was a fun game, and I felt a lot better once I went and worked through who was who (though I didn't live long after).

many thanks to amished for modding.