Mini 1390: Game Over

[Tommy]

VOTE: Abaddon

A baddwagod! I'b sorry, I have a cold.

[Tommy]

Lynching Radelle first either way

Why?

You just admitted that what he did was dumb, but not scummy.

No he didn't.

UNVOTE: Abaddon
VOTE: Parama

No scum vibes from the Cheery Dog/Abaddon argument. Good questions from toxictaipan and Radelle. Well, except:

you're either scum or an idiot.

So which is he? Idiot or scum? Why can't he be both? This conclusion doesn't make sense.

This appears to be some sort of logical pedantry about and/or vs either/or. I can't see what Radelle hopes to get out of it.

[Tommy]

Cheery Dog, please consider toxictaipan's final question.

[Tommy]

That's still not exactly what he asked.

Would

Abaddon have got away with deliberately not voting if you hadn't called him on it? It matters that you ask yourself this because it affects your theory that Abaddon's behaviour was deliberate.

[Tommy]

@Parama

Cheery Dog didn't say 'dumb but not scummy'. He just said 'dumb'. You put words in his mouth.

Frankly, though, I'm willing to kill you just for refusing to defend your vote.

Another question: is post 47 meant to imply a contradiction in toxictaipan's position? If so, please spell it out.

@all

I've been leaning scum on Cheery Dog because his flimsy case on Abaddon looks artificial. But this admission of potential fault has a townie feel:

Confusion, though that may actually have been caused by me.

Other news: liking Slandaar so far.

[Tommy]

JasonWazza, what do you make of the argument between Abaddon and Cheery Dog? What about the one between me and Parama? Do you think toxictaipan's contributions have been helpful? And Slandaar's?

[Tommy]

@Tommy: Why ask me all these questions but not question anyone else that has been posting in the game?

Because your first post gave me a spooky feeling. Appropriate for the time of year, maybe, but worth looking into. You had over two pages of great stuff to comment on, but you chose to stick to a single player. It was what a lazy scum would do if he wanted only a token excuse to park his vote. Having said that, your response to my questions went some way towards making up for it.

Speaking of people who've left stuff out: TheTrollie, what do you think of Parama and JasonWazza?

I like Tommy right now

<3

Also, quick question – what timezones are people in?

GMT.

[Tommy]

Which, at present, does not include you. It's very easy to make a statement, then sit in judgment as others make your case for you.

I'm calling your bluff. I disagree with your premise, and want you to prove it.

Get some people to back you up and I'll consider it. I know what I'm looking for in the mean time.

Radelle's already backed him up. I hereby back him up too. If you think it'll help to wait for other people's reactions, I'll hold my council for a bit, but the results of the exercise had better justify all this distraction. I can't see anything wrong with Sable Tip's post.

Because your first post gave me a spooky feeling.

This just feels like you're trying to cleverly not say scummy.

I thought it would be fun to include a Hallowe'en reference. I did find his post scummy.

How did his responses make it up for you?

He committed to a position on each of the players I mentioned. Also I'm inclined to believe the excuse he offered in post 59.

What is your current read on Jason now?

I reckon he's a lazy townie. I agree with Abaddon that his case on you is bunk, but I can imagine he might not have anything better to go on.

[Tommy]

Also, it allows us to get a rough idea on when people will be able to read questions or points directed at them and when they'll be able to respond - such as why I am only now responding to your post of 18 hours ago.

Defensive - plus one scum point.

[Tommy]

Meh. Sable Tip's post suggests vague D1 suspicions about people. That's not enough confidence to draw conclusions about the alignment of their targets.

FOS Deltabacon. Dodged a prod with a contentless post, implying that content would be provided in the time it takes to read the thread. Must be a slow reader.

[Tommy]

What do you think of Deltabacon now that he has provided some content?

Much better thanks. I now read him as town.

JacobSavage has had a worrying start, though. JacobSavage, is this your first game? That's not meant to be a dig: it's just that it might help me to account for the difficulty you're having making any analysis.

[Tommy]

JacobSavage, I recommend the 'display posts by user' option at the bottom of the page. It would be quicker than trying to get a read of everyone at once with your spreadsheet. Look at someone's posts one by one. For each post, ask yourself 'Does this post make sense if the player is town? Does it make sense if they're scum?' Then summarise your thoughts and let us know.

It's also fine to agree with things that people have already said. Better to say which bits are most convincing and which bits aren't, but the town should act like a crowd - there's no requirement to stay original at all costs.

Now, I forgot a tasty rasher of Deltabacon from earlier: Sable Tip, can you explain what 'little tiff' referred to?

[Tommy]

Tommy's Case on Parama

(1) He votes and pushes lynches without giving any reasons:

^Scum #1.

unvote, vote: Radelle

2 more to go. Who are your buddies, Radelle?

Lynching Radelle first either way

A town player should be sharing his thinking so that the whole team can consider it - both because he wants to persuade them and because he needs them to check it for him. A scum player needs to avoid getting pinned down. If you check out the context of these posts, you'll see that they appear close to Abaddon's attack on Radelle despite never explicitly endorsing that attack, which does give reasons. So if Parama is challenged later, he has options - he can decide to say it should be obvious he agreed with Abaddon's case, or he can deny the association if necessary and claim some other explanation for voting ought to have been obvious.

(2) He puts words in people's mouths:

So I'm an idiot for calling you out for doing something idiotic like leaving your vote in rvs while attacking someone?

You just admitted that what he did was dumb, but not scummy.

What Cheery Dog says here is subtly different from what Parama says he says. There is no town motivation to muddy the water in this way. As scum, Parama's purpose could be to defend Abaddon (if Abaddon is his scum-buddy) or to smear Cheery Dog as an early part of a mislynch campaign.

(3) He refuses to answer questions.

To pick just one example from my many options here, here's how he enlightened me when I asked why he wanted to lynch Radelle:

'cause he's scum.

It's in the interest of the town to share information; it's in the interest of scum to stay opaque.

(4) He accuses his challengers of stupidity:

don't expect me to spell things out that should be COMPLETELY OBVIOUS to anyone with a brain

This has two purposes: to discredit his attacker, and to put other people off asking questions. Note that this second purpose is particularly insidious because it doesn't only affect people questioning him - it changes the whole mood of the town to one where people are afraid to share their ideas. Ideal for scum.

(5) He doesn't scum-hunt.

Of his twelve posts to date, I would say only post 48 contains meaningful analysis - and even then it's meagre. Scum don't need to scum-hunt because they know who the scum are.

(6) He's lying low.

He hasn't posted for three days. This can often work as a scum tactic if you want to avoid taking heat - someone else is bound to do something scummy and then the attention will shift to them. Don't let him get away with it!

[Tommy]

Parama - Plenty of room for a replacement to redeem. This is a mostly null slot, honestly, given Parama's track record.

Could you briefly address the six points of my case, saying for each one how you came to decide that it wasn't a scum-tell?

[Tommy]

JacobSavage, you've had the 24 hours you wanted. I hope you post some content before the weekend.

[Tommy]

JacobSavage, good work on the spreadsheet. Please summarise your reads in thread when you have time. Also, are you sure your vote is where you want it to be? Your note about my Parama case calls it 'very thorough' and implies that I made five good points and one null one.

Abaddon, please link to a game where Parama smears his challengers and evades questions as town. As for 'lurking', you lump a lot of stuff under that category. Voting and pushing lynches without explanation are certainly not lurking, because to do them Parama had to post. Also, posting without content twelve times out of thirteen - so-called 'active lurking' - is a better scum tell than true lurking because there are never RL reasons for it.

Slandaar, does your case on Abaddon consist solely of post 17?

I think Abaddon and Radelle are town, and that Radelle is caught up in an angry OMGUS campaign. I could have sworn I caught Radelle sheeping me a while back, and I don't think he/she would do that as scum. But I didn't make a note and I can't find it now, so we'll have to call my position on Radelle a gut read. At deadline, I'd rather kill Radelle than nobody.

TheTrollie, glad you survived the storm. Looking forward to seeing some reasons for your reads.

Slandaar and toxictaipan, what do you think of my case on Parama?

[Tommy]

I don't know who all asked him what, or how many times he posted afterward (and I don't care to look right now), but I think most questions that went unanswered were probably due to his lack of presence rather than intentionally dodging them.

Apart from RVS, I count three times that he explicitly refused to answer a direct question.

Point 5: It's arguable that he's looking for contradictions and trying to scum hunt, even if not as much as he should be. Post 47 is another post to consider.

Well, but that was another smear. Your posts looked contradictory at first glance, but weren't. If he'd tried to articulate his suspicion, the flaw would have become clear. I called him on it, but he refused to explain. He just left it there as a trap, hoping people would sheep.

The main problem is he wasn't here to post anything, and now he's been replaced. You're trying to attack someone who basically wasn't even there.

I think thirteen posts is enough to see the pattern: a deliberate attempt to minimise his own content and disrupt the town.

[Tommy]

TheTrollie seems town. I quite like Deltabacon's case on Cheery Dog.

[Tommy]

Welcome, _Sherlock_. What caused your bad feelings about Radelle?

[Tommy]

If you'd like me to address something specific in order for me to give a direct opinion, I could do that.

Please have a look at Radelle's posts for evidence that Radelle is scum, then present it in thread. If you can't find any evidence, move onto one of your other scum reads.

I'm also not in the mood to go and actually check or make cases.

This is unacceptable. If you're town, please start playing to your win condition.

You're already assuming that your BW and case on Parama won't fly

I'm afraid I am starting to feel that way. There's been a distinct lack of enthusiasm.

but you seem more sure that the badonwagon on me will.

No, not really. It might.

Who are some other scum reads?

I don't have any other strong scum reads. I'm flip-flopping on you a bit - toxictaipan is right that your vote came out of nowhere, and I'm uncomfortable about clearing you on the basis of a vague memory of you having sheeped me. I'd be happy with a lynch on Cheery Dog or Idiotking because they haven't given us enough substance. _Sherlock_ might end up in that category too, but we'll give him a chance. I might be persuaded to vote for Sable Tip.

[Tommy]

Slandaar, I still don't know what your case is on Abaddon.

[Tommy]

So Abaddon should have awarded Parama a town read for agreeing with him about Radelle?

[Tommy]

absta101's case on Abaddon is guff. He wanted to choose one of the two leading bandwagons apart from his own, so he plumped for this one and then tried to construct a reason.

Slandaar, would it be fair to say you have no strong scum reads at the moment?

JacobSavage, why is absta101 the only player not discussed in your reads list?

You'd be happy with a lynch on Cheery Dog or IdiotKing because they haven't given us enough substance. What are your thoughts about the substance they've already given?

Thoughts on Jacob.

Cheery Dog: in post 110, he gives a couple of reads; in post 206, he asks a useful question. What do I think of these two gobbets? They're fine.

Idiotking: post 108 contains good analysis; post 111 is a good question.

JacobSavage: _Sherlock_ defends him well, but Cheery Dog is right to challenge him (JacobSavage) about putting his thumb in the scale when Parama was replaced. On a replacement, of course the playstyle will change - but the alignment won't.

[Tommy]

What suggested I wanted to choose one of the two leading bandwagons?
Why am I not town who genuinely finds Abbadon scummy?

Mainly because Parama wasn't town, but partly because your case is obviously confected. As Abaddon has pointed out, when another player supports one in a scummy way, the correct response is to call them on it.

[Tommy]

1. How can your attack be based "mainly" on my "alignment"?

It isn't. It's based mainly on Parama's play.

2. What suggested I wanted to choose one of the two leading waggons?

The fact that your case looks artificial.

[Tommy]

Looks like it's time to admit defeat on my absta101 campaign for now. For the record, he's still my strongest scum read.

UNVOTE: absta101

Guess my lynch choices are currently Radelle, Abaddon or TheTrollie. I have strong town reads on Abaddon and TheTrollie, so I'll hop on the big wagon.

VOTE: Radelle

Maybe we'll get lucky.

[Tommy]

Not liking the campaign against TheTrollie at all. I'd happily lynch Deltabacon for quoting Trollie out of context and for what I think might be a case of deliberately goading him.

Probably won't be able to post for about 48 hours from now - sorry.

[Tommy]

Mod, thanks for your flexibility.

I quoted him out of context?

Yeah. Sure, it was hilarious when he said he'd never called Cheery Dog town and then Cheery Dog dug up that early post. But that post was from RVS. Then quite a bit later Cheery Dog was on his scum list. This was discussed at the time and TheTrollie addressed people's queries on the subject, but you act as though you've just triumphantly found new and damning evidence:

scum pile:
Idiotking
Tommy
Jason Wazza

Cheery Dog

Radelle

He's a steaming pile of inconsistancies, and he is scum.

It's true that he voted Radelle without giving a reason though. I'm glad Idiotking called him on that.

Kwll, can you just give us anything you've got so far?

Idiotking, what were the results of your several-hours investigation yesterday?

[Tommy]

TheTrollie, I find the following convincing. What do you think?

Here's why Jacob is town. Everyone is posting their reads and contributing to the thread. Then, suddenly, Jacob comes along in Post #91 and basically says that he has no reads, and that he needs to create a spreadsheet for this game. I really doubt that he's bold enough to do this and expect to get away with it as scum. I also doubt that this is due to bad scum play - in that case, he would likely be attacking someone. Therefore, he must be town who genuinely lost in this game - understandable, as that is how I felt about this game at first. He also makes a spreadsheet that looks like it had some serious time and effort put into it. Again, if he's too lazy to fake reads as scum, he's not going to be making some badass spreadsheet. That's why Jacob was and is at the top of my town list. I expect there to be some nice reactions to his play here, though.

---

Good work on your megapost, Idiotking. I'll answer a couple of the points about me.

why is Trollie town

Because his posting is high in substance and full of attempts to move the conversation away from distraction.

As of this post we're still about 6 days away from the deadline, there's still plenty of time to make cases for people that we think are scummiest.

Done that.

---

Kwll hasn't realised that Parama and absta101 are the same slot. So Kwll and absta101 aren't buddies.

[Tommy]

TheTrollie: yes, I read _Sherlock_'s point as he intended it the first time round - the point about the spreadsheet. He also pointed out that JacobSavage entered the game with an explicit lack of direction. JacobSavage could have launched in with an easy attack on someone, but instead he was open about having no reads and appealed for help.

[Tommy]

absta101, what do you think of Deltabacon?

[Tommy]

Why?

[Tommy]

Kwll, you don't have a vote on anyone.

[Tommy]

In truth, I would probably be making a case on absta if I had more time to make one.

My name is Tommy and I would endorse this wagon.

Failing that, I'll work with what I have: I've just ISOed Radelle, Sable Tip and kwll. I'd be happy with either Kinetic or kwll for the lynch, but I prefer Kinetic. The overall tone of Radelle's posts is of someone not hunting for the scum but spoiling for a fight. Sable Tip and kwll are both null to me. I see the point that much of kwll's thinking is plagiarised, but I think that's just as likely to come from inexperienced, less competent town as it is to come from lazy scum.

I like some of TheTrollie's points on Abaddon. I hadn't noticed 'failed to bold my vote', which was a dishonest attempt to rewrite the past. It wasn't that Abaddon tried but failed to vote in post 17 - he just didn't vote.

If I had voted Radelle, everyone would have yelled, "OMGUS!"

This is a bad reason for town not to vote someone. It's a good reason for scum not to vote someone.

[Tommy]

if someone has the time to make an absta case I'd hear it.

Given your arguments about Cheery Dog, I expect you can see how bad post 200 looks as a reason for a vote. 'We play to win,' he says. 'If you think someone is attacking "in the right direction" you wouldn't defend your suspect regardless of how bad the attack was.'

Then there's this exchange:

absta101, what do you think of Deltabacon?

Town.

Why?

Mainly due to his voting pattern. He doesn't jump on large waggons.

Sorry, I was mistaken. He's a null read.

I think he had no read whatsoever on Deltabacon but, despite that, he decided to plump for 'Town' without thinking. When I challenged this, it fell apart immediately. Maybe Deltabacon is his partner.

[Tommy]

VOTE: absta101

Go go flashwagon!

[Tommy]

I did have a town read on Delta

Really? But I thought saying that was a mistake, and that actually you had a null read.

[Tommy]

Why are you so eager based on Parama's early play to have this going?

It's a combination of Parama's play and absta101's play.

If you regarded absta as an entirely different player, what would your read of him be?

Leaning scum.

[Tommy]

Giving vote suggestions to your lynch candidate is really odd. Did you forget TheTrollie is supposed to be scum according to your position?

[Tommy]

We know the Mafia have night talk and don't have day talk. There's a sample Goon role PM in post 2.

[Tommy]

If we wind up no-lynching then I am going after everyone not on one of the major wagons.

QFT. Slandaar, JacobSavage, toxictaipan, Kinetic: stop hedging and pick a team.

[Tommy]

Tommy I have read the Mods other game....he does NOT post all roles or everything in the samples...So I am curious to your statement on how You KNOW that mafia cant day talk?

What? You're suggesting that the actual Goon PM might differ from the sample Goon PM?

[Tommy]

You've misunderstood how sample PMs work, kwll. The sample in that game was for the Goon role, not the Roleblocker role.

The actual Goon PM wasn't identical to the sample, but the differences didn't change the setup and nhammen apologised after the game for not having made them identical. Conclusion: even if absta101 had implied that day-talk was possible in our game, it wouldn't have been a scum-slip.

Other things to note from the earlier game:

• nhammen explicitly hinted in his rules post that he was using an unusual set-up: 'Do not expect all aspects of the site meta to be followed in my game design.' Turned out he had two doctors. We've been given no such warning, which makes such shenanigans less likely here.
  
• Josh Lyman's role PM showed that his team-mate was 'CallMeLiam
  Sweep
  '. In our game, I think we can conclude that if someone replaces into a Mafia role, they can see everyone who's been in their team-mate's slot. I'm now confident that asbta101 isn't buddies with kwll because of the fact that kwll didn't know about the Parama/absta101 replacement. If absta101 flips scum, I'll have a very strong town-read on kwll.

[Tommy]

I believe I need to apologize to you for the misunderstanding. Sorry about that!

No problem.

What do you think of my read on the trollie and absta post I made?

You mean 535? _Sherlock_ is right that it's anti-town to draw attention to soft-claims, but absta101 is right that it isn't really a scum-tell. It is slightly scummy that absta101 hasn't since been able to explain why he did it, but then I guess he's had quite a bit of explaining to do. Then we get on to absta101's response to _Sherlock_ in post 503. You're right that this wasn't a scum-tell and TheTrollie was wrong. I guess if I had an overall scummy view of TheTrollie, then his accusation in post 518 would count against him, but since I feel he's town I read it more like over-excitedness. He saw absta101 suggesting switching to QT, and made the wrong assumption that that implied switching to QT there and then - as opposed to waiting for night. Anyway, none of that matters much for now, because of this:

Im a fucking 1-shot Vig.

Dammit, Slandaar.

Everybody off the Trollie wagon now

.

The biggest scum-tell you've dropped all game, absta101, is that you posted several times between the claim and your unvote. It's also scummier than anything Parama did.

I'd rather TheTrollie didn't use his shot tonight.

[Tommy]

Why are you blaming me Tommy and for what exactly?

It was a bit harsh. Sorry. I was kind of hoping we'd only need one person to claim, but given the situation I guess that was unrealistic.

How about you explain why my case is wrong and why absta is town. If you can successfully do that before deadline and there's a reasonable chance of people switching, MAYBE I'll wagon Abaddon.

Seconded. Now that we have an extension, this is possible. I have an open mind. But you'd need to show me why

my

absta101 case is wrong as well (posts 456, 513 and 576). And my Parama one (post 115).

Preview edit: looks like this post now forms part of my absta101 case too. There's no way his last post came from town - if he was town, he would have a guarantee that his own lynch would hinder his team. He should be campaigning hard for his biggest scum read, not giving up.

[Tommy]

I do not think either of your cases are good. If you have a point you think is amazing, show me it and I will explain why I think its not, but I am not Abstas Lawyer.

Good luck with your wagon.

I think I'll leave my vote where it is for the moment.

I now think Cheery Dog's Parama vote was distancing. We saw Cheery Dog happily accept in post 521 that he had no case on TheTrollie, but he's been entirely uninterested in moving his vote. Now he's fine with voting for a claimed power role. I predict a Cheery-absta team, and would equally happily lynch either of them.

[Tommy]

Ready for hammer.

[Tommy]

Good game everyone. Don't think I played my best here, but I guess a N1 scum-kill is a kind of accolade for a VT. I went too easily from annoyance at Abaddon's playstyle to a naive join-the-dots case on him, as was pointed out at the time. I was surprised when absta101 flipped town.

I found Thor especially impressive. TheTrollie didn't play a perfect game, but I can definitely learn from him too.