Micro 279: Uncommon Mafia - OVER

[Aegor]

Wazzup!

@Mod: Could you include the latest VC in the OP?

@Bert: Although Wake88 is no longer with us, and you must deal with a less electrifying (haha) substitute, I would appreciate responses to his questions anyway.

@BBob: I am obviously not able to glean telepathically Wake's motivations for posting that he was in one MS game as Scum, but what about his explanation was scummy to you? God forbid someone provide information freely in a transparent manner.

@Alduskkel: Same caveat as Bicephalous; being ingratiating is now scummy? Have standards of charity and etiquette really sunk that low? Granted, buddying should be scrutinized, but buddying should under almost no circumstances be a primary reason for voting someone; rather, it should confirm a suspicion that is formed on other grounds.

VOTE: DLA

@Klick: I hope that I am easier to read that Wake88, but do let me know. I hope that you sent my regards to Donovan Hock.

[Aegor]

Yes.

[Aegor]

@Mod: Thanks!

[Aegor]

VOTE: DLA

Would you like to elaborate?

Not yet. It is more fun this way.

[Aegor]

Because he'll explain it later, I find it suspect you cut that out.

I cut it out because I wasn't particularly interested in DLA's reaction to that part of Aegor's statement. I was interested in his reaction to the second part of it.

And for some reason you didn't bring up how I said him not explaining the vote was "okay."

The vote isn't directed at you; I found DLA's reaction interesting from the standpoint of him being the person who is being voted. My immediate reaction upon seeing that post from DLA was "hm, he'd probably be more adamant about wanting to know why he's being voted if he were town." I actually didn't realize that Aegor had implicitly said that he'd explain it later.

So your read on DLA (and me, for that matter) has not changed?

[Aegor]

Why should it have?

The question is flawed -- I only asked because implosion suggested that his read changed due to reasons that he later found baseless. I was simply confirming that this was the case.


@implosion: thanks.

[Aegor]

Interesting.

Bert:

@Bert: Although Wake88 is no longer with us, and you must deal with a less electrifying (haha) substitute, I would appreciate responses to his questions anyway.

[Aegor]

Bert, a good place to start would be the questions that I have asked you twice now to answer.

[Aegor]

Still here. Considering voting Bert for scummy inactivity and active lurking.

[Aegor]

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Bert

[Aegor]

why did you vote DLA

I found posts 46 and 70 to be major stretches. But mainly I wanted to test reactions to an unexplained vote. People took it calmly, so it was a fail.

[Aegor]

Me too.

[Aegor]

Honestly, I feel like we are losing steam big time. We only have four days until deadline so we need to get moving anyway. Let us decide between Alduskkel and Bert unless someone has an interesting new case to present.

[Aegor]

I don't really like Aegor or Bert's most recent posts. Aegor seems to want to frame it as either me or Bert...

Realistically, it is either you or Bert, or some other person with a case built on him/her. It was just a pragmatic statement. I hate bandwagons that start late since they tend to produce weaker reads and reveal less info about voting patterns than early and slow wagons.

[Aegor]

As a matter of fact, I do. Here are my reads so far:

Implosion:

His defensiveness is off-putting and borderline suspicious, but his posts after he disengaged from DLA have been good. Null-town.

DLA:

Focus on implosion was annoying. Subsequent posts have been null until his latest on Klick, which I like. I want to hear DLA's thoughts on people other than implosion and Klick.

Klick:

Scummy. Post 54 and 56 appeal to his "gut," which is always a weak reason. Lurk, lurk, lurk, then a scummy vote on implosion in post 165 was unjustified and his vote on Ald was even worse. Especially because he claimed a Bob/Ald pairing without reconciling that with Bob's push for Ald's lynch.

AoS: Klick

.

Bob:

Little info except for reads in post 179. Want to hear more from him, especially about why Ald is apparently so scummy. Null.

PhD:

I like the few substantial posts that he has made. Town-ish.

yessiree:

Scummy lurking. Still waiting to hear about the one scum he has found.

[Aegor]

I don't recall Bob doing anything related to this, first of all -- although I could be wrong.

This is ancient, but I never responded. Bob accused Wake of something similar.

Secondly, there's a difference between "polite" and "ingratiating." Also buddying is totally a scumtell, especially when one seems to be doing it to everyone.

I think we have different thresholds for what constitutes buddying.

[Aegor]

Still waiting to hear about the one scum he has found.

Why do you refer to the one scum he has found as "one scum," when it is clear he meant me as his sole scumread?

Because he voted you in post 28 and has not justified or explained his vote in any way. Even if he meant you, I want an explanation of the statement. He has not even confirmed that it is you.

[Aegor]

I just need one post to catch scum, and I've already found one this game

Who?

u

Whoops. Reading his ISO involves a huge loss of context, evidently.

The rest of my statements still stand.

[Aegor]

what can i say

l2dealwithit

Believe me, I will deal with it in the appropriate manner.

[Aegor]

And I don't like it when someone tries to say that there are only two options

And I do not like cherry picking or straw men. I never said there are only two options.

and I know at least one of the options is bad and there is a reasonable chance the other one is, too.

Then I look forward to your kick-ass case on a third suspect, as was suggested in my post that contained what you erroneously reduced to a false dichotomy.

Also what is an AoS? Aegor of Suspicion?

Arm of Suspicion. Sometimes the hand is just not enough.

Well, yes, clearly, you are saying that Bob accused Wake of something similar. What I wanted to know was where this occurred.

Posts 47 and 81.

And how does that affect your read on me?

In no way.

[Aegor]

Bob isn't accusing Wake of buddying in those posts, I don't think.

I agree. I lump "offering free information is scummy" with "being ingratiating is scummy" together in my mind, since they both just seem like rejections of common sense to me. But then again, I am not swayed by ingratiation or willingness to cooperate, so maybe they are less significant to me than to others.

[Aegor]

Uh...okay. I guess we are nearing deadline, so it would make sense for Klick to claim in order to give us time to act accordingly. So claim. I am fine hammering, if no one else wants to.

[Aegor]

Looking forward to it.

[Aegor]

Our deadline is in ~36 hours. You have until the countdown reaches 1 day exactly or I will hammer anyway.

[Aegor]

This game is ten pages. An extension would be completely useless.

@Mod: Please no extension that lasts longer than a day.

I am still hammering in ~11 hours, regardless of extension. If someone else on the bandwagon wants to prevent a lynch, unvote before then.

[Aegor]

Can't tell if Klick and/or Aegor are scum... would scum avoid claiming/would scum actually request publicly that the deadline NOT be extended significantly? I mean, in Klick's case, if he's scum, then, barring an especially unusual role (unusual even for a game with "uncommon" roles) he should be doing everything to avoid getting lynched Day 1, scum usually don't have the numbers to sustain that in a Micro.

Exactly. So avoid claiming to avoid a counterclaim/proof of falseclaim, and then ask for an extension, hoping that the wagon will lose steam or shift focus.

[Aegor]

I wouldn't think scum would avoid claiming, though. That seems like it would decrease their chances of survival.

That depends on falseclaim competence. I have no meta on Klick in that regard, though, so perhaps someone else can shed some light on it.

Given the choice between claiming and death, how could town justify not claiming, unless they are irresponsibility building some larger meta, thereby sacrificing the individual game?

[Aegor]

Forgot that DLA was replaced. Once Mac posts his thoughts on Day 1, I will hammer. But that better be soon.

[Aegor]

In that case, VOTE: Klick.

[Aegor]

I'm somewhat inclined to think that the way Klick is refusing to claim is townish.

OMG. So people are actually falling for this.

[Aegor]

In that case, VOTE: Klick.

Sooo you waited for my thoughts only to ignore them?

I fail to see anything in your post that requires my response. Would you like me to vote myself? If not, then what did I ignore?

I would be willing to lynch any of Klick/Bert/Bob today. But you are correct, I should have just hammered last night.

[Aegor]

@Mod: Klick has 3 votes, not 4.

[Aegor]

Still a day to go. We don't have to compromise.

I am not so sure about that.

Realistically, it is either you or Bert, or some other person with a case built on him/her. It was just a pragmatic statement.

I hate bandwagons that start late since they tend to produce weaker reads and reveal less info about voting patterns than early and slow wagons.

So, Mac, grace us with your damning case against me, so that others may see the light in the last rays of daylight. Or is your entire argument that my reads on Day 1 in an 11-page game do not have sufficient conviction behind them? If so, guilty as charged.

[Aegor]

[Aegor]

WHY IS KLICK NOT DEAD YET?

[Aegor]

Maybe if you explained what the hell your reason even was, other than "he used gut and lurked, then voted implosion based on his gut reads" back three pages ago,

This is not even my wagon. Notice my ordinal position on it. The case has been made by others. You are not even my top lynch for today, for the reasons I have mentioned several times.

You didn't even say you thought me not claiming was scummy, you just kinda started it with a deadline lynch and then turned it into tunneling on me.

This wagon is not ideal precisely because of the deadline. And I think it is pretty clear from my posts 246 and 251 how I feel about not claiming.

[Aegor]

I assume you still refuse to claim.

[Aegor]

Correct. I'm not claiming.

Why not?

[Aegor]

GL Town.

I am Vanilla. I hope you exercise better judgment tomorrow than today.

[Aegor]

By the way, everyone who voted me can suck it when I flip:

I hate bandwagons that start late since

they tend to produce weaker reads and reveal less info about voting patterns

than early and slow wagons

they tend to produce weaker reads and reveal less info about voting patterns

weaker reads and reveal less info about voting patterns

GOING WITH

GUT

...I'll probably certainly wind up

changing my mind...

VOTE: Aegor

I do not know who is scum

and don't have much at the moment to say...

Vote: Aegor

Would still prefer a Bert wagon. Please lynch him tomorrow.


I just...can't...even...

[Aegor]

i strongly disagree that those posts from me and Bert say less about alignment than typical votes.

also, if you are town, don't take it so hard. it's day one. reads are very very much in flux.

I wish I had a Dayvig just so I could have the orgasmic satisfaction of annihilating you.

[Aegor]

[quote="In post 292, Klick"][/quote]

The irony.

[Aegor]

Wow. Fail. But the irony remains.

[Aegor]

Oh but you see, it's different because there's actually less than 24 hours left in the day this time. You've also claimed VT.

The peripeteia is obvious; the timing and the claim are just incidental.

[Aegor]

I'm saying that, in terms of what I argued against you hammering for originally, my intent to hammer is valid compared to yours. I thought you were trying to set up to make me appear to be a hypocrite.

No, I was simply pointing out the irony of having the power to hammer you and choosing not to, only for you to have the same choice one day later. For the record, your intent to hammer is absolutely no more valid than mine, even in comparison. Our alignment is only revealed after our death, so from my POV, your justification is zilch.

Now I know always to hammer when I get the chance.

[Aegor]

I think Aegor is fake claiming, but I can't say why.

So you are literally worse than useless, because you cannot even justify your terrible decisions. Or you are scum.

[Aegor]

VOTE: Bert

Why is it better?

Also, Aegor, your role pm says vanilla town?

No, it does not.

[Aegor]

I can NOT believe you all just turned around and lynched Bert at the last second instead of Aegor.

I can NOT believe that a wagon on Klick formed. And then a wagon on me formed. And then a wagon on Bert formed, which is exactly what I wanted days and pages ago. So...that was a total waste.

Anyway, if someone wants to vig me, go ahead. I am VT, so the downside is practically nonexistent if you are already entertaining the possibility I am scum.

[Aegor]

How was it a "total waste"?

Prove me wrong by pointing out what salient information was definitively gained that justified the opportunity cost of forcing people to make actual cases against other players.

[Aegor]

Are you saying Day 1 was a total waste or that all the rapid wagons were a total waste?

The second:

I hate bandwagons that start late since they tend to produce weaker reads and reveal less info about voting patterns than early and slow wagons

[Aegor]

I dunno, if you flip scum later then that will say a lot about the people on the Bert wagon.

So, you agree with me -- it was a total waste of time.

[Aegor]

If you're practically Vanilla but not called as such then why didn't you claim your real role name?

Relevance?

[Aegor]

The vanilla name is publicly listed in the first post.

[Aegor]

So...what now?

[Aegor]

[quote="In post 336,

The vanilla name is publicly listed in the first post.

That's a sample PM. It's not exactly the same as a VT.[/quote]

Thanks for your anti-town move.

[Aegor]

VOTE: Alduskkel

[Aegor]

That sucks. This may be the strangest death I have ever had in a game. Go town.

[Aegor]

Mod Edit: Mod encouraged meanness towards other players removed.