Micro 553: ETL's Double Day Unlimited (Game Over)

[Rob14]

Confirm. will have a go at reading this tomorrow if I have time. Who should I be voting?

UNVOTE:

[Rob14]

UNVOTE:

You'd think I know how voting tags work after three years on-site.

[Rob14]

I literally forgot about this game a few seconds after I replaced in. I'm going to read through this tomorrow night and start contributing. Very sorry for the delay! I'm normally not a lurker.

[Rob14]

MAJOR WALL INCOMING!

[Rob14]

I've read up, and here is my stream of conciousness while reading. I don't edit this at all, so you'll see reads changing several times, etc, I'm sure. I'm not placing any votes in this post because if I vote and unvote like 20 times, ETL will literally murder me. I'll vote in a later post.

36: The first two pages are just sexual tension between Tere and Radiant. Good lord.

40, 41, 42: You're all terrible at the multiple vote mechanic.

45: FoS on Wicked for this. He tries to push Kublai for putting people at L-1 carelessly. He doesn't bother pushing the two that voted literally everyone, just as carelessly. Wicked then responds to the problem of too many votes being out and too many people being close to lynch by bringing

even more people

close to lynch. Come on now, that's either really dumb as town or trying to reach an accidental quick-lynch without being obvious as scum. You changed the gamestate to four people at L-1 or L-2 by post #45.

50: Oh, wait, I lied. He changed the gamestate to FIVE players at L-1 or L-2. smh

56: ... but another contender enters the ring. Kublai goes after the people who voted BEFORE his vote for being non-informative. If he actually cared about this, why not vote them back when he placed his three votes? Remember ... those three naked non-informative votes? His pressure on them is extremely hypocritical. This sounds like an attempt to throw suspicion on someone else when he's worried he's about to face suspicion.

60: Rookie mistake allowing Vote: All. Literally worst mod ever. Just kidding, obviously; voting mechanics in double day are hard to manage.

76: FYI, Kaboose reads like newb town that doesn't understand how voting is a tool to scum-hunt. I don't see any indication they're scum over newb town thus far.

89: Like, what is RC even doing here? He goes after Kublai for not considering them town, then gets annoyed when Kublai explains why he doesn't think RC is town? Uh ... what?

93: Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand ... blacklisted. I'm going to disregard RC's blow-up. I don't know what was going on with him, but it appears he just can't play with anyone trying to be even somewhat serious. Maybe try other sites?

101: Lesson to any newbs. Once you request replacement, you're out of the game, so stop talking.

107: Oh, RC is back now. Nevermind, not blacklisted. Just scum. It's way more likely that he was scum maneuvering with this whole blow up than town who seriously can't handle a basic and non-problematic interaction with an extremely polite user.

110: Kublai actually said my case better than I did in this post. He gets some town points for this.

111: And Kaboose is unimpeachable town now.

112: And TTH's post here is very town as well.

113: You don't know what a chainsaw is, one. And two, this is scum trying to discredit votes on them. RC is almost definitely where I'm going to vote.

116: WHAT! Fucking goddamn it. I can understand why my predecessor was banned. Fucking troll. Kaboose was obvtown. Kublai should have seen that, with his experience, although I can buy him being distracted from his vote due to the RC saga. The others I don't know experience levels of. But my slot's vote is terrible.... Probably trying to tank this game based on the info for his ban.

153: This reaction to the lynch stands out to me. Why is Wicked not at all reacting to it? It just seems ... weird. Don't know what scum motivation there would be to not reaction though. No town motivation comes to mind either.

170: The first response in 170 almost certainly comes from town. Kublai looked much better after the start of game. I can't see scum just backing down on their main case for no reason.

221: ProHawk hasn't actually contributed all game. This is a useless post.

232: ProHawk definitely knows better than this. Scum isn't automatically on a quick-lynch. There is significant scum motivation to be off a quick-lynch since it invites scrutiny. Not to mention that there's only one slot really responsible for the lynch, and that's my slot (Lhix). The rest can't know he would quick-hammer.

247: This vote is obvious OMGUS, but I still think TTH is town. I'm not convinced of his rationale on Con, by any means. Con seems vaguely like newb town imo.

250: Hey, got to my replace in!

262: Note to self that Antihero replaced Kublai. I think this slot's town so far from Kublai's posts.

268: And this just makes Anti more town. Solid case, and I was already getting suspicious of ProHawk. This wagon should indeed be a thing.

275: A double bump for VC? Bad form.

287: I feel bad for ETL having to replace everyone ;(

290:

@Papa Zito:

Rationale for Wicked-town? I'm not really seeing it.

292: And for Con as well. I have no idea your basis for this naked vote.

299: Horrible answer from Anti. Still a town read, but Jesus Christ.

301: Wicked defended himself with "I always talk serious" earlier this game, and now he's using "You're serious" to attack Kublai, who is no longer in the game to provide the same defense. Wicked has been on site long enough to know Kublai talks serious. This is a horrible post, and it's scum motivated.

317: RC, after the initial blow-up, went fully under-the-radar. No contributions, no nothing. Popped into thread every once in a while to make a minor comment and prod dodge. Could easily be scum floating by.

321: Conveniently, ProHawk goes for the main wagon. No surprise here.

[Rob14]

So here's my reads list:

Town: Anti, TTH
Weak town: Con, Zito
Scum pool: Wicked, RC, and most importantly, ProHawk

VOTE: ProHawk

His slot is definitely scum.

[Rob14]

Why does it matter that your wagon is counter to a bad wagon? Address your wagon on its merits, not on the fact that another one existed first. You're better than that.

[Rob14]

299: Horrible answer from Anti. Still a town read, but Jesus Christ.

no, it was a stupid question.

unless proven otherwise, "timing" on voting is usually informationless garbage that's peddled from the basis that ppl will vote someone they're not townreading AT THE EXACT FUCKING MOMENT THEY'RE DOING IT GODDAMNIT.

Or he could have been asking why you voted player X over player Y, which is how I read it (and how I believe any sane person would). That's absolutely a valid question.

[Rob14]

Yeah, well my uncle killed himself and I just got back from the funeral so I'm not really sorry for not being town carry no. 1 nor in the best emotional state this game.

I'm sorry for your loss.

[Rob14]

Unvote: ConManMick

Starting to think that I might've been wrong about this.

More tomorrow...

That post again ...

Unvote: ConManMick

Starting to think that the momentum is shifting and my reads are no longer popular.

More tomorrow...

[Rob14]

Unvote: ConManMick

Starting to think that I might've been wrong about this.

More tomorrow...

That post again ...

Unvote: ConManMick

Starting to think that the momentum is shifting and my reads are no longer popular.

More tomorrow...

That post again ...

[Rob14]

Rob kill the elitism bs. You know I'm not that good at this game. Exponentially less when I'm lazy phone posting

Not being elitist. I actually think you're good at this game, based on past games we've been in together. Which are quite numerous, here and on skype.

[Rob14]

what the fuck are you talking about?

Nvm, momentarily forgot about unlimited votes, as I did when I wrote that note. My bad.

I was thinking he was questioning why you were not voting him (i.e. why had someone else drawn your vote over him earlier). That's a valid question, but with unlimited votes, you're right that it doesn't really make sense.

[Rob14]

I'm not convinced by that case for Wicked-town. That's the type of thing that nine times out of ten does

not

result in a mislynch, but whoever points it out first gets brownie points. In that situation as scum, I'd point out the L-1.

[Rob14]

I mean what's better - one quick mislynch or being seen as town? As scum, I'd always choose seeming town and let the mislynches follow.

[Rob14]

I mean what's better - one quick mislynch or being seen as town? As scum, I'd always choose seeming town and let the mislynches follow.

In a game this size, "one quick mislynch" is really beneficial for the bad guys. Which is why I've got some major misgivings about your slot.

also given the fact he's got a wagon going the "town cred" argument falls apart

I obviously can't defend my predecessor's actions, but I don't think they should be considered by people judging my alignment. He's been banned as a troll account. He directly stated on the wiki here that he is a "liar and troll", and that he deliberately lied and acted against wincon in games. I imagine that's what went on here. He was tanking the game for the "fun" of it.

[Rob14]

And keep in mind that town has lots of lynches in this game. One quick lynch in a normal 9p is a lot more important than one quick lynch in a double day 9p. Scum have to survive, at a minimum, four lynches to win. Going after one quick lynch at the expense of being in a more risky position with at least three lynches to go is practically suicide.

I don't think that wagon is indicative of anything much. I'm not treating those on/off it any differently, and I suggest others do the same. Looking only at the four players that were on the wagon pre-hammer is ignoring half the player list that could just as easily be scum. I'm just not convinced by the logic that we should only look there for now.

[Rob14]

That's my playstyle. You can verify that I'm sarcastic in all games if you'd like. It's all over my meta, including my one recent game. I believe I did something extremely similar as town in my recent game as well.

[Rob14]

Hmm, took a look and I didn't do the quote thing in my recent game. Must be remembering a debate in GD or the Speakeasy somewhere.

ISOing Con in a minute to make my case that he's town.

[Rob14]

So first, the vote all thing. He stood by it. I don't see why scum wouldn't claim a rookie mistake in an unfamiliar setup and back down here when pressured. Instead, he sticks with it to the end. Say he's scum for a second. The lynch doesn't go through; then he's gained nothing. The lynch does go through; then eyes are on him for his voting strategy. I don't agree with his voting strategy, but I see no scum motivation here, and his voting pattern is a significant portion (the only one?) of why people are voting him. So to those voting Con: Where's the scum motivation? If you're voting him for another reason, explain it to me, because it got lost somewhere along the way.

I like your recent play.
With regards to tere, it occurs to me that neither myself nor Kaboose ever answered this:

Kaboose and ConManMick, why have you chosen to make everyone else hated?

At the time I did it because RVS shenanigans. I began unvoting players based on whether or not I thought they could be scum, and left the other votes (a total of four, I believe) because I figured those players could go either way.

And for that matter, what's not convincing about that? You may not agree with it, but I see it as having town motivation. He's working by process of elimination.

239 comes from town. I think TTH is also town, but Con is right to question him on a "joke" comment from page 3 when we were out of RVS obviously. Overall, I think Con is town, or at least don't see reason to believe he's scum that occurred prior to his wagon.

I did notice some more recent stuff I'm confused by, though.

@Con - can you explain your naked vote on ProHawk? What is your current read on TTH, who you wordlessly unvoted?

And what the heck is going on in this? What was your goal/motivation in posting that?

but we have prohawk here who knows conman's going to flip scum

Does he now? And when I don't, will ProHawk be exonerated? How will your reads change from there?

[Rob14]

what the hell does that quote thing even mean

Taking a quote and altering it to demonstrate my thoughts on the poster's motivations. I don't believe Wicked is sincere in backtracking. I think he was questioning how safe his reads were. It's a rhetorical device I employ every so often, and I do it as town and scum.

[Rob14]

So essentially your entire townread on him is built on the assumption that the rest of us are scumreading him for the vote all strategy.

Correct me if I'm wrong here.

Completely wrong. I'm disagreeing with the votes on him and pressure on him for his vote all strategy, but I've provided multiple posts of his where I see town motivation. I don't see scum motivation in anything he's done.

[Rob14]

You're trying to equate the behavior of Con/Kaboose with Kublai, when their behaviors were, actually, noticeably different in my opinion. At the time, I thought Kublai's vote was slightly more likely to be coming from scum because he put two players at L-1 without announcing. Sure, it was ridiculous of Kaboose and Con to vote for everyone, but this didn't strike me as suspicious - and it wasn't nearly as careless because they didn't even put anyone at L-1 (they also didn't know that Kublai would cast L-1 votes). You've made it clear that Con's "vote: all" didn't bother you, so why does it have to bother me? Later in your catchup post, you admit that Lhix was the only person to blame for the quick hammer and the previous votes wouldn't have known that he would do that - so why can't I follow that same philosophy here and ignore Con/Kab?

You can think whatever you want. I only care that you're consistent, since inconsistencies tend to come from scum who aren't genuinely scumhunting. I do not believe you were consistent in your application of a scumhunting strategy to Con/Kaboose vs Kublai. Am I wrong?

I considered this too, but then I looked at the times. You think he'd let his replacement request stand for six whole hours before ending the charade if it was all just a scum maneuver?

Does it make the maneuver more convincingly town to you? If so, why would scum

not

do it? Note the time stamp; he requested replacement over six hours of night time where the mod is unlikely to seek replacement and potential replacements are unlikely to be around, even if the mod is. He entered the request just before 2am and lifted a tiny bit after 7:30am. That's not risky in terms of replacing out, if that's your concern.

You should note that Lhix is the first person I voted. I didn't acknowledge the quick hammer because I saw no benefit to reacting to it. It annoyed me and I think it was very harmful, but complaining about it does no good after the fact. Furthermore, Lhix didn't appear open to receiving instruction for his bad move.

This is a valid point. Fair enough.

You didn't know about the quick hammer when you first replaced in?

Nope. I offered to be ETL's replacement-on-call because she asked me to be in the game itself. I could not yet commit to being in the game, as I'm in the process of applying to grad schools, but I decided to /in to replace hoping that the replacement wouldn't be needed until later in the game. That maybe was a bad idea, because I still have large time commitments at the moment. But anyway, back on point, I hadn't been reading along and was not aware that my slot was a troll.

I must have misunderstood your vote on Kublai, then, because it sounded like his speaking style is what you were taking issue with. Care to explain it more? You absolutely did defend yourself with "this is how I always talk" in #175, responding to the claim that your speaking was overly formal.

This is a decent defense. Now show the same dedication to scum-hunting ... what's your current reads? Where do you think we should be lynching today?

[Rob14]

So essentially your entire townread on him is built on the assumption that the rest of us are scumreading him for the vote all strategy.

Correct me if I'm wrong here.

Completely wrong. I'm disagreeing with the votes on him and pressure on him for his vote all strategy, but I've provided multiple posts of his where I see town motivation. I don't see scum motivation in anything he's done.

This post from Zito is bothering me, actually. Could you explain how you came away with that interpretation from what I wrote? Maybe this is instinctive OMGUS, but surely this is an attempt to strawman. I have a hard time believing you genuinely read my entire post and only came away with an understanding of the first couple lines.

[Rob14]

1) The last two lines you included address town motivation, which you're glossing over.

2) Volume of text =/= impact on read. The last paragraph directly address town motivation and so is more important to my read than not being convinced by the arguments against him (which is the entire first block). The reason the first block is so large is that it takes a bit of writing to show how one works through motivations, which is apparently needed because other people have failed to do so.

3) Point out where, prior to my post, people gave convincing reasons to vote Con not based on his voting strategy. If it exists, I missed it.

4) Your previous post:

So essentially your entire townread on him is built on the assumption that the rest of us are scumreading him for the vote all strategy.

Correct me if I'm wrong here.

This attempts to characterize what I'm doing as addressing arguments against Con, not developing a read on him. That's just blatantly incorrect. I looked at the arguments against Con to determine whether I think the relevant posts from Con come from scum. I concluded they do not. That's different than only considering the arguments against Con and not actually trying to read him, which is akin to an accusation of bussing or white-knighting.

[Rob14]

We have two days until deadline. There's still time to explore options, but not to start a wagon from scratch. I'll be generous and say that {Con, ProHawk, Wicked} are all viable options to consider (even though Wicked is hovering on the bubble of viable), but none of {TTH, Zito} is happening. Zito might happen Day 2. I need to re-read his slot, which I should have time to do over the night phase. I'm torn between his recent posts re: myself being misguided scum-hunting or attempts to strawman me, and I think I need to step back and look at what his slot has done toward

other

people to cut down on my bias there. I don't think I'm seeing straw-men due to unintentional OMGUS, but it's a possibility.

[Rob14]

Eh, I'm pretty sure either both scum are on CMM already or you're the last scum.

I don't know about both, but certainly at least one, I suspect. I'm a pretty safe wagon to be caught on if I am lynched, from the looks of things.

RC: I would suspect scum of being on Con's wagon.

Con: My wagon is soooooooooooo safe.

not alignment indicative, but pretty lol

[Rob14]

We have two days until deadline. There's still time to explore options, but not to start a wagon from scratch. I'll be generous and say that {Con, ProHawk, Wicked} are all viable options to consider (even though Wicked is hovering on the bubble of viable), but none of {TTH, Zito} is happening. Zito might happen Day 2. I need to re-read his slot, which I should have time to do over the night phase. I'm torn between his recent posts re: myself being misguided scum-hunting or attempts to strawman me, and I think I need to step back and look at what his slot has done toward

other

people to cut down on my bias there. I don't think I'm seeing straw-men due to unintentional OMGUS, but it's a possibility.

I meant to say this post is @RC.

[Rob14]

Pretty much this ^

[Rob14]

Surely you can give rationale for your strong scum read on Anti before re-reading him? Why do you need to read to find reasons if he's already strong scum? Or are you re-reading for another reason?

[Rob14]

Surely you can give rationale for your strong scum read on Anti before re-reading him?

I already

did

give my rationale for that read. I literally just gave an in-depth explanation on this page.

Why do you need to read to find reasons if he's already strong scum?

While he is my strongest scum read, I never said he was a

strong

scum read.

And I've already answered this question too. Kublai's posts gave me a bad feeling, so I wanted to check his meta to see if I got that same bad feeling from some of his previous games. If this is how he always posts, then I would unvote. If this is a legitimate scum tell for him, then it would be nice to have that knowledge - my scum read would strengthen.

I need to reread Antihero because I am voting him for his predecessor's play but haven't seen anything particularly telling from him on my initial read through.


Is there a problem here? Just because I'm scum reading someone now, that doesn't mean I'm going to stop making an effort to figure out their alignment.

Sorry, having trouble keeping track of who replaced into who's slot. I wasn't connecting your discussion of Kublai with Anti.

Wicked can move into my town column. His reads are backed up with actual scum-hunting, even if I don't agree with it.

[Rob14]

Rob, why do you consider Wicked a viable wagon?

Literally only current number of votes and past number of votes. There are a substantial number of people who are currently or have considered Wicked-scum to be a thing, as evidence by vote counts, so it's not implausible that a lynch could occur on that slot within 2 days. That's as opposed to slots that have had little to no pressure on them this day. I don't consider it viable for us to fully form, discuss, and push a lynch on a slot that hasn't been the subject of much pressure/discussion so far.

Having said that, I would not vote for Wicked today. I didn't like what I saw in my catch-up, but I've liked what I've seen since then. I tend to prioritize my gut and reads that develop through interaction over catch-up reads.

[Rob14]

EBWOP: as

evidenced

by vote counts

[Rob14]

If you mean popularity as in how popular the idea X is scum is, that's literally how every lynch is decided in every game of mafia ever. It's the basic lynch mechanic - a majority vote.

If you're claiming that people are voting based on a popularity contest rather than reads, that's silly. I'm generally abrasive and annoying. I'd have way more votes under that scenario.

Of the following two scenarios, which is more likely to find scum? Which is more likely to have us miss something or make a mistake?

1) Lynch among people who have been discussed thoroughly.
2) Quick-lynch among people who haven't been discussed thoroughly.

If you can bring up an option outside of what I consider viable and discuss thoroughly in 44 hours, be my guest. I just don't want to rush into a lynch on someone I believe I can get a better and more complete read on were they to remain in the game. Zito definitely falls into that category. I might be able to go for an RC lynch, but I think he falls into that category as well since he's been dealing with real-life stuff lately and hasn't been around as much. TTH and Anti seem town to me, but Anti falls into the category of wanting to see more as well. And that leaves the three people who have been the subject of attention so far this lynch phase: Wicked, Con, and you.

[Rob14]

My pool only exists because we have two days to deadline. I don't consider anyone off the table for future days. I probably would have more people on the table if I had read through earlier and we had more time to discuss, as well, which is on me.

[Rob14]

VOTE: RC for reasons I've said earlier. Anti, you should revote ProHawk as well though, to avoid the potential for a no lynch. With 8 hours left, it's optimal to vote all scum reads to ensure a lynch within your scum pool.

[Rob14]

Again, I recommend looking at RC's fake blow-up. He "replaces out" over nothing at 1am or so, then comes back at 8am and announces he's staying in the game. There was zero risk of being replaced between 1am and 8am. The mod wouldn't be online, and even if she was, there's no way she'd be able to confirm a replacement in those hours. It was a very low-risk play for scum, and it was designed to remove pressure. It worked.

[Rob14]

I've been sick this week, and I haven't read anything since day start. I'll get to it all tomorrow, probably, provided I'm feeling better.

Between sickness and a trip this weekend, I'll be:

V/LA until Sunday

I'll still try to produce something tomorrow, like I said, though.

[Rob14]

Turns out there isn't much to read.

RC and Zito, both of you need to explain in detail your read on Con. I'm not getting it

at all

, and neither of you bothered to explain how your thinking goes beyond the "he voted all the people" logic of early day 1.

VOTE: RC, for the stuff I mentioned in my catch-up yesterday mostly, plus his awful read/lack of reasoning on Con. Zito still doesn't sit right with me as well. I'm going {RC, Zito} as scum team.

[Rob14]

Zito, explain how it points to me when TTH was town reading me. I don't know what anti's reasons are, but I 100% think you piled on as one more way to fake your reads. You are NOT being genuine.

[Rob14]

1. My CMM vote was unexplained, not terrible.

Skimming through Zito's ISO, I think the above quote highlights his entire play so far. He hasn't explained anything. He's shown no evidence of developing reads. He's been asking lots of questions, even some very good questions, but he doesn't do anything with the answers. He's not trying to use any information he gathers to push lynches. He's not engaging in a dialogue.

It reads like fake scum-hunting to me. Decent scum knows to ask questions and be engaged, but decent town would do that

and then use the information they gain to find scum

. I'm not seeing that at all in his ISO.

[Rob14]

VOTE: Zito

I've rapidly talked myself into this. Zito's flown under the radar so far because he's blatantly trying to do so. That's far more likely to be scum than town.

[Rob14]

@RC - If I say yes, can I lynch you and then not follow through with the rest? I'd be up with that.

[Rob14]

And thank god someone else is seeing through Zito's bullshit.

[Rob14]

Although if you read the fine print on your "Free town points for pressure on Zito" coupon, you'll see that it requires you to actually place a vote.

[Rob14]

Just to make sure I understand, that list is mostly by PoE, right? If not, I'd like your rationale for Con. Been waiting on that from literally anyone for a while now. >.>

[Rob14]

Zito, you're saying the same thing as Wicked but coming to a crazy conclusion. The usefulness of meta to determine who is town and scum directly is questionable. I'd lean on the "not useful" side of that argument. That's not what is being argued here, though.

If Con exhibits trait X in this game and also exhibited trait X in his last five town games, then you can't say Con is scum because he exhibits trait X. History would prove you wrong on that point, because in fact Can

has

exhibited Trait X systematically as town. Does that mean he must be town? No. But it does mean he can't be scum

because of trait X

. That is the argument Wicked is making, and it's an undeniably useful purpose for meta. No-one can dispute that the argument that "X therefore scum" is contradicted by confirmed instances of "X and town". It's an application of basic logic.

And this is

not

a pointless theory discussion. It's an example of you shooting down information that contradicts the rationale for your reads. You're finding rationales to fit your reads, not fitting your reads to what's happening in game. That's like "How to Tell Someone is Scum 101". Can we

please

vote here instead of RC? I'm not against an RC lynch, but this is the sure thing. This is rapidly approaching 100% certainty with each scummy post.

[Rob14]

Actually,

UNVOTE: RC

Not against going back to RC in Day 2, Lynch 2. In fact, I probably will, since he's probably the other scum. But Zito is the scummiest scum that ever scummed and needs the rope.

[Rob14]

The

real

tell here is the way Rob's waiting for Wicked to commit before he does so himself.

HA. I committed in #537, before Wicked even entered the thread today with any commentary today.

[Rob14]

If I systematically shoot down meta in my town games, then my shooting meta down here is not scummy. How's that base logic.

There's meta and then there's basic logic. This isn't arguable. You're not scummy for disagreeing with meta. You're scummy for ignoring evidence that your read is objectively incorrect.

If you ignore the evidence systematically in your town games, then yes, that would make you not scummy for it. It would also make you shit at the game. I do not believe you're shit at the game.

[Rob14]

Do you care to explain a single read? Provide any content whatsoever? Anything?

[Rob14]

Care to explain why?

Oh, wait. I forgot the entire scum team has a post restriction against that in this game.

Your last post with the word "Zito" in it was 490, where you said you had a scumread on him but didn't like the wagon for some reason. Now he's obvtown? What?

[Rob14]

Anti, yeah, I'm going to vote my stronger scum read 100% of the time. I'm entirely unapologetic about that. Help me lynch Zito today and then I'll do RC, also today.

[Rob14]

Rob, there is much more interest in lynching RC today... You should re-vote for him...

Your un-vote looks pretty bad.

I'll revote if it becomes necessary due to deadline, but I'm happy to take heat if it means even a single person looks at Zito more critically. He's scum, and I stand behind that.

Rob, there is much more interest in lynching RC today... You should re-vote for him...

Your un-vote looks pretty bad.

AND you haven't let up on your rc scumread
AND the other person your voting isn't voting rc

You're going to need to convince me it's optimal

NOT

to pursue my best scumread if you want me to revote RC. Where do you stand on Zito? Will you vote him in the next lynch phase if I compromise on my lesser read now?

[Rob14]

Like, I'm tired of being the one who compromises in other games and then has my scum reads survive until they win. That happened a lot prior to my return, and it got annoying. Why do I have to be the one to compromise when I believe Zito is the best option, and it's not near deadline? I'd rather use the full two weeks and either convince you Zito is scum or at least get you closer to that realization so you're willing to off him in Day 2, Lynch 2.

[Rob14]

Convince me he's town and someone else is scum. I really don't see that happening, unless you plan to claim scum. I'm fairly convinced of me {Zito, RC} scum theory. I have town reads on everyone else.

[Rob14]

me --> my

[Rob14]

I didn't understand what Zito was arguing until he posted in this game day. My 558 is a direct response to his spoiler in 555, which is the first place he clearly communicated his point, at least that I saw. Looking back, the only instance of him hinting at taking that position is a frowning smilie face, and I certainly didn't realize the stance he was taking based on just that.

Also worth noting my push on Zito began in 537/538 with the fact that he hasn't contributed anything this game, not just 558. Not to mention the many times I was concerned with his BS strawman arguments toward me in Day 1.

[Rob14]

More opportunistic bullshit from Zito, but whatever, you guys can just lynch me. Maybe you'll listen to me after the flip. I'm happy to 1v2 against the scumteam of Zito and RC.

[Rob14]

Zito put more words into that joke than he has into explaining any of his reads this game. That's why you should all be voting him. That's why he's a sure thing.

[Rob14]

Yeah, this is pretty much where I check out of the game.

Zito's scum, I've told you all why, and it's pretty much on you to not be idiots. I'm not going to stay very engaged if all I get is blank stares and my scum read taking pot shots at me without being held accountable for their complete lack of content.

This game is frustrating.

[Rob14]

RC, town must both find scum and get scum lynched in order to win. It's the only way to achieve wincon. In order to get someone lynched, you must explain your reads so others are persuaded.

I don't equate activity to alignment at all. But if you spend time consistently in the thread and do not seek to both form reads and persuade others of those reads, that shows that you aren't playing to the town wincon. This leaves two options.

1) Such a player is scum.
2) Such a player is town but not playing to their wincon, which violates site rules.
3) Such a player is town and an idiot, and doesn't realize that they must persuade in order to get their scum reads lynched. They're not playing against wincon intentionally, just unintentionally.

In response to the last two:

2) I do not consider this, as site rules are clear on not playing to wincon. If I cannot assume town plays to wincon, scum hunting is impossible.
3) This is very possible generally, but I do not believe you or Zito are idiots.

That leaves 1. Find a fault in my logic and I'll sheep you onto whoever you want.

[Rob14]

Like, how do you expect Anti to be lynched if you don't persuade others and no-one agrees merely by looking at Anti's play? Do you think a wagon will just magically appear if you keep making offhand quips like the above?

[Rob14]

I'm not asking for a case. I'm asking for a single contribution. Let's try this. Say why each of your scum reads is scum in 10 words or less. That's all I'm asking for!

[Rob14]

Zito, I noted in 377 that Lhix was banned as a troll account. Are you not reading my posts or opportunistically ignoring them?

Re: RC's case on Anti. That actually does give me some pause, and I have to look more at it. I wouldn't vote Anti without a CMM scum-flip, since the rationale for scum-Anti relies on scum-CMM. I don't think either player is scummy independently. But it does warrant looking at when I have more time.

See how when you communicate a bit you can get results?

Btw, I have two finals in the next 48 hours, so my time will be very limited.

V/LA until Friday

, but I'll still try to pop in at least a couple times.

[Rob14]

Again, I am 100% not asking for a case. I understand some people don't wall-post. Even what RC provided is more than I want. I want a rationale. It can be 5-10 words.

If you're seriously using "your reaction is funny" as a shield against the argument that there isn't any rhyme or reason to your reads, then I have no comment on that. The rest of the town should be able to see how weak that defense is. If they can't, then there's no hope no matter what I do.

[Rob14]

Do you think that scum is likely to tell town who is scumreading them that they're provoking them because their reaction is funny?

Someone who's entire defense is "lol don't care"? When the entire rest of town is buying that defense? Yes. Anything else is inconsistent, and one vote isn't a concern if the entire rest of the playerlist isn't buying it.

[Rob14]

Your response was basically he wasn't trolling in this game. But he was banned for trolling in an ongoing game. The ban contradicts what you're saying entirely.

Re:RC. I deliberately have used that strategy as scum myself, especially in my first few scum games. People interpret a panicked reaction to attacks as scummy, so it's the obvious strategy to not react at all to attacks.

[Rob14]

In Blitz 1, Titus also deliberately flustered SW, who can be hotheaded, to throw them off their game. Titus was scum. Honestly not sure if that's what's happening here, but I consider it possible.

[Rob14]

^ That's why I don't think Con is scum and so am hesitant toward using relational tells that only work if Con is scum.

[Rob14]

1) He was banned for being a troll account. That suggests systemic behavior. You're claiming he chose this one game arbitrarily and didn't troll. I do know something you don't. I know I'm town and therefore know he was trolling from that as well. But the ban alone and the derp hammer clearly shows he systemically trolled, including in this game.

2) RC said scum never behave like you have and said I couldn't produce examples of scum behaving that way. I produced examples. Not saying you're scum because of the other game; I'm disproving the statement that scum never display the attitude toward those pushing them that you have. This is a meta argument, so I'm sure you'll dismiss it with no good rationale, but hopefully RC will reconsider his opinions on how your casual attitude predicts alignment.

And Wicked, I'm going to need more than that. Why that team? I get your RC read. Still not convinced on Con as individually scummy (I.e. Setting aside RC's relational tell from Anti to Con)

[Rob14]

Don't know why you're acting like you're a definite lynch Con. You're not.

I'll vote RC if it means no Con lynch. He continues to trend toward strong town for me and no-one has persuaded me otherwise.

[Rob14]

The reasons you provided for Anti are all relational to Con, though, unless I misunderstood.

I can almost guarantee you won't successfully convince me on Wicked so let's focus on Anti. I'm willing to have a dialogue. But I'll need something that makes Anti independently scummy.

[Rob14]

VOTE: RC

I'm not going down until I convince you all that Zito is fucking scum.

[Rob14]

Like seriously, the only one even considering it is Con, and he's going to get lynched too. What the flying fuck.

[Rob14]

That's actually weird. I don't know who second scum is anymore, but at least I can

VOTE: Zito

As for second:

Wicked: I thought he was bad early, but he's been like the towniest town that ever town'ed lately, so he's the only one I'd consider off the table
Con: I've got mostly gut town on him, and haven't hear arguments against. Possible but unlikely.
Anti: I guess by PoE? I've been null on him lately. Need to go look to see if there are relational tells between him and Zito.

[Rob14]

I'd like to remind everyone we're in lylo with unlimited votes.

Rob doesn't care about this cuz he's scum tho.

???

I've already made clear my position that you're scum. Nothing's going to change that, so I placed my vote on you.

As for RC, he was a scum read of mine. I've already said that. It's been a constant since I replaced in. Why on earth would it be optimal for me to let myself get lynched over him without convincing anyone to look your scummy way?

I said earlier for someone to explain why it's optimal for me to lynch RC instead of Zito, my larger scum read. I was at L-1 and it was looking either I or A lesser scum read for me was getting the rope. In that situation, self-preservation was optimal, and I stand by my vote.

And what does unlimited votes have to do with anything? I placed one.

[Rob14]

A friendly message from your mod:

I'm going through something personal right now that came up, and I may not be around much to post VCs and stuff for the next few days and possibly through the weekend. Antihero and/or Rob13 - please feel free to bug me by text if the game needs something. I can usually get online relatively quickly to handle anything major, like flips or prods. I just need to take care of some stuff IRL. Thanks ♥

I hope things go okay. <3

[Rob14]

If you think that was a lolhammer, you're an idiot, to be blunt.

1) I hammered a slot I was scumreading.
2) This setup does not require claims (7 VTs, 2 goons - WONDER WHAT PEOPLE WILL CLAIM?!?!?)
3) I was at L-1. It's extremely suboptimal for me to be lynched as town while the rest of town is completely ignoring the person I think is scum. Especially considering the other L-1 slot was a scumread of mine.
4) We had been debating RC for days. This is not a case where someone got run up quickly and hammered, like with Kaboose. This was a case where there was exhaustive debate with no new information in multiple real-life days with regard to that wagon.

Like, I don't even know what you're getting at by trying to say that was a random hammer. It very clearly was not.

[Rob14]

Don't think so? I just realized there were any L-1's when Anti pointed them out and I voted the scum one. I wasn't really paying attention to VCs other than people voting Zito.

[Rob14]

Oh fuck, Zito was L-1 too. I didn't even realize that, so I guess I wasn't paying as close attention to people voting Zito as I thought.

With that in hindsight, I may have played that differently. I was just going off of Anti's post.

[Rob14]

If no-one hammers me, that confirms an Anti, Zito team to me, since if either were town, someone would be quick hammered.

[Rob14]

No, I'm saying I didn't pay attention to VCs enough. That's on me.

What's your narrative for why I would shy off a wagon on town? That makes no sense.

[Rob14]

because you knew it would flip town and you didn't want to be around...?

i mean... not that complicated or out there.

1) I don't shy away from being on town wagons as scum. Read my meta for confirmation.

2) And then I reversed course and decided to quickhammer, which makes me the center of attention? That's hardly compatible with a narrative of wanting to stay in the background and not be on a town wagon if I were scum.

[Rob14]

PLUS

who would want tth dead?

Unvote: ConManMick

Starting to think that I might've been wrong about this.

More tomorrow...

That post again ...

Unvote: ConManMick

Starting to think that the momentum is shifting and my reads are no longer popular.

More tomorrow...

That post again ...

I was townreading your slot mostly because I thought there was no way scum could be as all over the place and bad as Lhix was, but stuff like this makes me think I went wrong somewhere and you're just scum.

oh yeah...

IT'S YOU

That's not even a scumread. It's null at most.

The funny thing is, Zito quoted that post earlier too. He didn't bother to quote the following, though, which is just as indicative of TTH starting to consider Zito.

TTH, what do you think about Antihero right now? What is your track record for reading him?

Admittedly not much, but I do have a pretty extensive history with him in a hydra and I'm pretty familiar with how he thinks as both alignments. I think it's overwhelmingly more likely he's town here because of the confidence you seem to dislike. As scum, he likes to spin his wheels a lot more on inconsequential things and stay out of the way as much as possible. As town he tries to make waves and make things go his way. For him to be scum here he would have to be breaking a lot of meta in a short time frame and I don't think it's likely he's capable of it (no offense, Anti).

I

might

now be seeing why people don't like Zito. >:S

[Rob14]

1) I don't shy away from being on town wagons as scum. Read my meta for confirmation.

oh joy, self meta

2) And then I reversed course and decided to quickhammer, which makes me the center of attention? That's hardly compatible with a narrative of wanting to stay in the background and not be on a town wagon if I were scum.

well you said it yourself. it was either you or him at that point, right?

Or Zito, which I missed. As town, what's optimal - get lynched or lynch a scum read? The fact you're harping on that borders on absurdity. Scum has a strong self-preservation motive, but town has a self-preservation motive as well. There was no gain to my lynch, because players in the game were clearly indicating they didn't give a flying fuck about my reads or anything. Town wasn't going to look at anything again after my death, they would have just lynched RC anyway, probably. And then probably Con, who's almost certainly town.

And self-meta is entirely valid in pointing out null tells. This isn't a matter of interpretation or manipulation. If you claim "X --> scum" and I point out an instance of "X and town", then your implication has been proven false. That's basic rules of logic. What I'm NOT saying is "X --> town". That

would

be self-meta, would be open to manipulation, and should be ignored if anyone does it.

Basically, pointing out your own meta to indicate that something is a null tell for you is absolutely valid, and I'm really tired of people not understanding that. And if you'd like to see me argue this like a half dozen other times as both alignments, check my meta. See what I did there?

[Rob14]

Both Zito and Anti, on the remote chance either of you are town, look at the RC wagon.

How would I have been the one who got attention off of that if it had resulted in a mislynch? I fairly quietly placed a vote beginning of day and left it there until I unvoted. If I had kept pushing Zito and left my vote on, no attention would have come my way at all. I took a course of action that actively brought attention onto me because I had a better scum read. It was the difference between lean scum and strong scum; RC was lean scum, Zito was strong scum.

The people who would have been characterized as pushing the RC wagon were Anti and

possibly

Wicked. Anti was the one actively pushing for it. If I had left my vote there, the lynch would have eventually gone through uneventfully and I could have floated by. What's my motivation for trying to change the wagon as scum?

To everyone else (Con/Wicked):

Note how Anti's logic from yesterday and today lined up lynches. Anti yesterday seemed to push the idea that I was scum with RC because of the unvote. I can kind of see how that argument works; I unvoted RC when wagon was gaining momentum to save my partner. But when RC flipped town, he didn't drop his read at all or re-evaluate. He just wordlessly put a vote back on me. Now I'm apparently scum because I was exiting the vote to avoid being on a wagon that lynched town, even though, as I detail above, I wouldn't have been the one in the spotlight for that lynch.

A townie would have reevaluated the read when the rationale behind it broke down. They wouldn't have searched for a new rationale to fit the existing read. Fitting a rationale to a read rather than a read to your rationales is one of the strongest indicators of scum. It indicates you're hunting lynches, not scum.

I've already detailed yesterday how Zito is obv-scum. Anti is looking more and more like his partner. More, because I'm not dead yet, I have to assume that Anti and Zito are the scum. Otherwise, someone would have hammered me by now. Please do not recklessly throw this game. At least take a look at the possibility of a {Zito, Anti} team before placing a vote and engage with that possibility. I can't guarantee I'll be hugely helpful in that respect, since this game has frustrated the hell out of me, but I'll try if you have any questions.

[Rob14]

VOTE: Anti

If Anti isn't scum, town has already lost because Con or Wicked will hammer me, so might as well place my vote there as well.

[Rob14]

Anti, you're saying I would hop off the wagon as scum and not as town. I'm pointing out that I regularly throw my vote around and hop on and off wagons in all states as town, and I regularly tunnel as scum. Yes, I'm aware of my tunneling meta as scum, and I'm not saying "no tunnel --> not scum", but I am saying that your logic of "hopping off wagon --> scum" is seriously flawed because I hop off wagons in all game states as town all the time. My philosophy, which you'll here me state repeatedly in other games because people regularly question me on this, is that my vote is my only weapon so I should use it.

[Rob14]

The possible manipulation of a meta is to match up your scum game to your town meta. But if I did that manipulation with the "X" you're claiming, that means that X is a null tell by definition, since I've matched it to what I would normally do as town. Do you see what I mean here? I feel like I'm not communicating well, but this is a basic point of my opinion of theory with respect to meta that I think is very important to understand in order to understand my argument.

[Rob14]

Example:

Player makes spam posts as town on a regular basis.
Player joins a game and make spam posts.
Others claim Player is scum because he's derailing the game with spam posts.
But Player makes spam posts as town on a regular basis. Even if he is attempting to derail with spam posts, this is indistinguishable from his town meta, and therefore cannot be used as a scum tell.

That's my point. Hopefully that's at least somewhat clear, either to you, or at least others.

[Rob14]

Yes, I did bring meta in! Self-meta to prove a scum-tell is regularly used in your town meta can be brought in at any point.

I brought meta in to show that your argument that I'm scummy because of X isn't true because I've been town and done X several times.

You're either not understanding or being deliberately obtuse. We can discuss the theory post-game when you don't think I'm making this argument due to some agenda. I make this argument repeatedly as both alignments, though, because it follows rules of basic logic.

[Rob14]

Basically, my point is that you can use self-meta to argue that a certain thing is a

null tell

, but using it to argue a certain thing is a

town tell

is open to manipulation. If you have actually done something in town games and are aware of it, you could add it to your scum games, but you would also do it as town. If you do that thing as both town and scum, it is by definition, a null tell.

[Rob14]

I'm using the word "tell" to mean "evidence that someone is a particular alignment".

I've brought that in as evidence as both town and scum. Go check my meta.

OH WAIT

[Rob14]

Town has just as much motive to stay alive as scum in LyLo, and so the attempts to paint my self-meta as a survival interest fall very flat. Yes, I'm attempting to survive. If I don't, town loses.

[Rob14]

Town has just as much motive to stay alive as scum in LyLo, and so the attempts to paint my self-meta as a survival interest fall very flat. Yes, I'm attempting to survive. If I don't, town loses.

[Rob14]

Functionally? Absolutely. If you had lynched me, you would have lynched RC and Con next. No Zito, we still lose.

[Rob14]

Nope, I'm sure I do have town and scum tells. But if you're going to bring up aspects of my playstyle as "tells", then I'm going to shoot them down every fucking time.

[Rob14]

whatever. i can only take so much sleaze.

i'm going to bed.

I'm trying to engage with you and save the game. You don't agree? Fine, whatever. I hope Con or Wicked does. But at least don't insult me personally, asshole.

[Rob14]

I've dropped a vote on Anti because if he's town, it wouldn't matter. Con or Wicked would hammer me as soon as they post and win. I won't know for sure Anti is scum unless both Con and Wicked post in-thread and don't hammer me, and until then, I'm keeping all options open and trying to convince Anti to unvote.

You remain sure scum to me, and I haven't been arguing with you at all. I do answer questions asked by scum because others may also want the answers, but I've done nothing to persuade you or engaged you in any dialogue. It would be pointless.

[Rob14]

UNVOTE: Anti

[Rob14]

Zito, don't know what you're implying. I said I voted Anti because the game was already lost if he was town. I'm no longer at L-1, so the game is no longer lost if he's town. Ergo, I unvoted. It's exactly what I've indicated I would do for the past page.

[Rob14]

Good catch on Con being online. That confirms the Anti-PZ team to me at least since both of you didn't hammer me.

VOTE: Anti

[Rob14]

<3

[Rob14]

I was right about meta! That has nothing to do with my alignment one way or the other. Y'all need to learn basic logic.

Arguing self-meta to prove a null tell is perfectly valid. Arguing self-meta to prove a town tell is invalid and scummy. The difference is important.

[Rob14]

I'm not confirming my alignment one way or the other btw, until ETL gets here. She doesn't like people ruining endgame. Everyone played a good game, I think.

[Rob14]

I think Zito and I played this very well. We sniped at each other early after we both replaced in and without coordination, and that led us into an all-out brawl in Day 2. I think I might have bussed a tad more than Zito expected me to (lol), but I thought it was the best play given how likely it was that one of us would have to be lynched. In the end, we didn't end up needing either of us lynched, but if one of us had flipped there were no relational tells whatsoever. I really can't think of a scenario where town would have lynched both me and Zito consecutively.

[Rob14]

Town played very well too, by the way. In particular, Wicked, Anti, and TTH all played solid games (with Anti losing some points for the nonsense meta argument).

[Rob14]

Well, it was only available in Night 1 for both of us, so we could only coordinate then. We didn't have daytalk.

[Rob14]

With the exception of having to coach someone who's bad, scum coordination tends to come off as obvious, so I try to keep it to a minimum anyway. Zito's not bad, so not much coordination needed.

[Rob14]

Thank you for the game ETL!

[Rob14]

The funny thing is, I didn't filter my replace in post whatsoever. Any scum tells there were just me analyzing the game.

Beware of classic scum tells. They're generally all complete shit.

[Rob14]

No, I did not. That would be against site rules (or against the spirit of the rules). But I didn't think about being scum at all while writing it, and I didn't filter anything whatsoever through the "it would be easier if my read was X because scum" line of thought. Unless you're claiming I'm being scummy unconsciously, there were no actual "scum tells" in there. I didn't apply strategy in any way while writing that post. I sat down and critically analyzed the game just as I would as town.

[Rob14]

Ah. It's a hallmark of my play that I tunnel excessively. It's something that I'm trying to work on, but I sound overly certain as both alignments. Probably more so as scum than town, but I've been trying to match my town play to my scum play lately to correct that. Once I think I'm right, I go after people. My Zito push is probably not even my most aggressive on-site.

[Rob14]

Meta argument here if you care to join: http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=64662

[Rob14]

because you knew it would flip town and you didn't want to be around...?

i mean... not that complicated or out there.

1) I don't shy away from being on town wagons as scum. Read my meta for confirmation.

2) And then I reversed course and decided to quickhammer, which makes me the center of attention? That's hardly compatible with a narrative of wanting to stay in the background and not be on a town wagon if I were scum.

By the way, my (1) in that post was a horrible application of self-meta. I had to stand by it, though, to avoid being inconsistent. This was an honest mistake and not something I did intentionally.

This was more of the variety of Anti claiming "X ---> scum" and me responding with "not X --> scum". But "not X --> scum" does not mean "X -/-> scum". That was the self-meta of the bullshit variety.

There were other instances of self-meta I stand by, though.

[Rob14]

Oh, as a side note, I'd love to have literally anyone from this game (including the mod) be a part of my upcoming mini theme. This playerlist rocked. Pre-ins available if anyone's interested.

http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?p=7474973