Mini-Normal 1713: Mystery Mansion Mafia (GAME OVER)

[All Alone]

confirm

[All Alone]

VOTE: Akarin

[All Alone]

Ay. I like that pun. UNVOTE: Accountant.

VOTE: absta101 for having numbers in his name, the worst thing. This RVS vote is staying here I think.

piiiiiiiiiing

VOTE: Davsto

[All Alone]

VOTE: Expedience

Expedience doesn't seem interested in analyzing anyone else's alignment. All three of their "serious" posts so far exist only to call something a null-tell:

@Expedience

Slandaar is practically confirmed Town, no scum would pull such an obscene gambit.

Why wouldn't he do it as scum?

Wanderer stated that Slandaar plays like this as town so he could just be acting 'consistently'. I don't see the risk/gambit in what he did.

My comment wasn't intended seriously, if that didn't come across properly. I don't think Slandaar's post was alignment indicative at all, and it's hardly an "obscene gambit" in any case.

I like where this is going.

Also making a mental note for 68.

What exactly do you like about it? Especially considering Davsto appeared to be confused with his vote?

Wanderer couldn't have known that Davsto was confused with his vote when he made this comment, for the record.

That was a mistype. It should be "where town claimed town", which means that since scum would know you played in games where town claimed town, they would be incentivized to claim town to seem town themselves.

I'd say this is a

very

weak argument, since SilverWolf didn't say that she believed this to be a Town tell before Slandaar made his comment. It would require scum to both read the games that she mentioned, and also require SilverWolf noticing and mentioning it. If SilverWolf and Slandaar were both scum, I really don't think they'd be this blatant.

Nevertheless, I don't think Town are any more likely to claim Town during RVS / RQS than scum.

I doubt a townie would be this interested in null-ifying discussion, so to speak. Town wants to figure out everyone else's alignments. Scum wants to stop town from figuring out everyone else's alignments. Expedience seems more interested in stopping everyone else from analyzing other players than doing any actual analysis.

[All Alone]

The first and third of these posts were concerning the same topic (so hardly separate instances), and the second was pointing out a relevant mistake.

There's a difference between discussing null-tells and "null-ifying discussion". Firstly, discussing null-tells is not necessarily "null-ifying discussion". "Null-ifying discussion" implies that I am somehow preventing discussion, while I am in fact doing the opposite. By decrying invalid arguments, I prevent poor and irrelevant discussion and allow good discussion to sprout in its place. I'm not stopping everyone else from analyzing other players, but myself contributing to that analysis.

The only remotely valid aspect to your accusation is your implication that my posts display some degree of scepticism, but I would say that this is hardly alignment indicative.

I have my own thoughts on All Alone's vote on Expedience, but before I share them(and share them I will) I'm going to wait for Expedience's reaction to it first. Expedience, what are your thoughts on All Alone's vote on you?

His argument could only be described as laughably feeble. If a dozen or so posts later I was still behaving in the same way, perhaps I might be able to take this accusation seriously. Accusing someone based on what they

haven't said

during a game's early stages is ridiculous.

this post is faker than bigfoot and the loch ness monster defeating milli vanilli for the wwe tag team championship

[All Alone]

prod dodge

[All Alone]

@All Alone: What's fake in 177? (Pointing to your 178)

That post (and actually a whole lot of Expedience's posts, but especially that one) have this air of what I'll call devious defensiveness. Townies will

generally

defend themselves by simply explaining what their true intentions were. It's the natural reaction most people have to being wrongly accused, and it's usually the best defense against a wrong accusation as well. Expedience's defensiveness, on the other hand, looks like they're going way out of their way to cast whatever they're doing in the absolute best possible light. For instance:

By decrying invalid arguments, I prevent poor and irrelevant discussion and allow good discussion to sprout in its place. I'm not stopping everyone else from analyzing other players, but myself contributing to that analysis.

Which is a pretty big stretch of a reason for calling something a null tell. Generally when townies call something a null tell, it's because that's their opinion and they wanted to share that opinion, simple as that, and an explanation from that player would reflect that simplicity. Expedience's explanation is because they're some kind of Grand Master Architect of Logic and Reason or something. I seriously doubt Expedience started out this game calling everything null with the intention of ensuring good analysis and discussion. I think they decided after the fact to come up with a town motive for their actions, and having to come up with a town motive after the fact implies that they didn't have a town motive in the first place. Ergo, Expedience is scum.

[All Alone]

Voting is basically a formality which I generally prefer to use to lynch another player rather than being representative of my suspicions. This is because I believe it can lead to bias in the reads of other players (e.g. they read a player differently if they see that there's already a wagon on them). While giving an opinion alone has a similar effect, it is to a lesser degree because of the black-and-white symbolism of a vote (it's either on someone or off them)..

This is another example of what I'm talking about. Expedience says they prefer to vote to lynch, because votes can lead to bias. I looked at Expedience's town play in Newbie 1631 and they almost always had a vote out the whole game, which doesn't lead a whole lot of credence to their claim here. And at one point in that game, Expedience explicitly explains that they had a vote out on someone they didn't intend to lynch:

Well, the main reasoning behind my vote for pisskop was to provoke a reaction given that Bella wasn't here. I honestly considered Bella more scummy than pisskop, because of how PC's slip during the RVS actually involved him voting for pisskop. But since Bella said she was away for a while I thought it would be better to place pressure on pisskop.

I really, really, really don't believe that Expedience genuinely changed their entire voting strategy sometime between that game and this one. I think it's another after-the-fact defense.

[All Alone]

VOTE: grayfoxxxx

[All Alone]

Stating intent to hammer on Expedience

I'm backing up the intent.

VOTE: Davsto
That hammer was horrible, man.

VOTE: Wanderer-nl

[All Alone]

But then Expedience posted a lot and scum would minimize associations so

when I saw those posts by Expedience I was ready to unvote

, only to realize the thread was locked because Davsto hammered 2 freaking minutes after Expedience's claim.

You wasn't voting for him so you couldn't have unvoted and stopped the hammer. I mean, you stated intent to hammer yourself, you only do that if you aren't already voting the person.

Also, your reason for calling him town is weak. I don't see how Expedience posting a lot when he was L-1 is enough to turn your scum read of him into a town read. You stated intent to hammer because you were afraid Davsto wouldn't hammer. That's how strong your scum read of Expedience was.

Wait. I really did that? Bah I suck. I wasn't voting Exp and as such I could never have unvoted him.

And no, that's how strong my scumread on Davsto was.

...you sheeped Davsto because of how strong your scumread on him was?

[All Alone]

I'm a bit worried about All Alone. They were kind of a single-issue campaigner Yesterday on Expedience and posts Today have been much, much thinner.

All Alone, do you still think GrayFox is scum? Do you find anyone's participation in the Expedience lynch suspicious? Why do you think that Slandaar died?

I only voted GrayFox because of davsto's soft. Other than that I had nothing against him, and I read his frustration with the subsequent attacks on him as town motivated.

I really don't see any meaningful tells one way or the other out of the Expedience wagon.

Hell if I know why Slandaar died, try asking someone with access to the scum topic.

I'm done repeating myself. Also there are a lot of inconsistencies by now in my iso so I agree I need to be lynched. It's ok, I'm a vt so go ahead.

I actually think this reaction is probably genuine, and I don't think scum would be likely to just give up like this.

Additionally, I can get behind a Performer lynch. He's been off my radar this whole game, and looking at his ISO he comes off like his primary goal is staying off everyone's radar. Of particular note is the fact that his vote for Wanderer is literally his first nonrandom vote this whole game, in 496. That's 500 posts into the game and Performer casts his first serious vote. And during those 500 posts, he really doesn't seem to be bothered by his lack of scumreads. He's not poking any bears, he's not trying any analysis, and he doesn't show any of the signs of frustration that a lost townie usually has. He just makes a lot of posts that are fluffy enough to not draw attention. He never gives any read on Expedience, which is usually indicative of scum who wants to stay off the mislynch, but definitely wants it to go through.

VOTE: Performer

[All Alone]

Hold on there. What are you talking about, not showing signs of frustration? I'm as bothered by scummy behavior like Grayfoxxxx's inconsistency, as much as any warmhearted townie can be! Did an ISO on him and nothing more to be said about that hasn't been said before by SW or anyone else, regarding Grayfoxxxx.

You don't really seem all that bothered by Grayfox. During the early part of this day, numerous players were aggressively questioning him, trying to tooth-pull reads out of him, and/or trying to wagon him. I don't see that from you. I see you meekly raising a few non-issues such as his reference to a "VT mafia", before eventually putting your vote down on the Wanderer wagon. I have serious doubts that you're genuinely as bothered by Grayfox as you're indicating.

[All Alone]

I only voted GrayFox because of davsto's soft. Other than that I had nothing against him, and I read his frustration with the subsequent attacks on him as town motivated.

What do you think of his continued failure to deliver on promises of reads? "Twenty-four hours, tops" was several hours ago.

I doubt it's alignment indicative. I've never seen anyone get this apathetic as only one alignment.

Do you think that people trying to work out why Slandaar was killed are wasting their time? Do you think that I'm scummy for asking you about it? What do you think of my slot? In fact, I don't think that I have much of an idea of what you think of more than about four people in this game.

D2 NKA is absolutely a waste of time. There will always be townies who appear to benefit from the first NK. Let me know when there's a pattern of one or more players benefitting across several NKs, maybe then I'll bite.

I really don't care about your slot at the moment.

[All Alone]

His last post claimed to put up some analysis by Monday and it hasn't been here. What do you want me to do, randomly start bawling my eyes out like the imaginary rains coming to California? I'm as twisted about him as anyone else.

I don't expect you to bawl. My point here is that I haven't seen you do much of anything about Grayfox today. There was a huge wagon on him when davsto softed, and even when davsto's result turned out to be nothing, several players kept pushing the wagon anyways by bringing up other concerns they had with Grayfox.

You didn't touch that wagon with a ten foot pole.

And then when the very first Grayfox counterwagon popped up, you were incredibly quick to jump on it. That's unlikely behaviour from a townie with a legitimate scumread on Grayfox.

Townies who "appear to benefit from the first NK." Enlighten me on that.

Look at literally any completed game on this site, I guarantee you the player who was killed N1 will have suspected at least one townie. That townie appears to benefit from the NK, even though they didn't do it.

[All Alone]

I endorse hammer

[All Alone]

VOTE: MarioManiac4

[All Alone]

VT here.

I agree that Mario/Absta is the most likely scumteam here. None of the kills seem to be on players who suspected Grayfox, which is something I would definitely expect at some point if he was scum given how popular a scumread he's been this game. It's really unlikely that Grayfox is scum and hasn't shot a single townie who's suspected him. Especially with the Octopus kill coming after a "if Performer flips scum then Mario is scum" post, which suggests scum are willing to kill townies who suspect them. I don't think a Mario/Grayfox team would've killed Octopus N2, when Grayfox would've needed the help much more than Mario would've. Mario/Absta making that kill is a lot more sensible.

[All Alone]

I'm okay with a hammer whenever town is ready.

[All Alone]

VOTE: absta101

[All Alone]

Yay!

Good game everyone! Thanks for modding frag