Newbie #1185 (Game Over!)

[Tierce]

Hi folks. New to mafiascum and forum mafia, though I've played face-to-face and over IRC ages ago. I've never played on a game with a third-party (nor jailkeeper, for that matter), and like to play mafia and town equally.

Dancer, geek, dumpster diver/shovel monkey in training. I'm on GMT and tend to nightowlism when life isn't frantically waving at me for attention. Another note: English is not my first language. This shouldn't be a problem, but if I write something that doesn't make sense or is otherwise confusing,

I'm obvious scum

feel free to ask for clarification.

With that said, VOTE: fathom42, due to a certain answer to life, the universe and everything.

[Tierce]

fathom42's immediate NO-YOU! vote on me and his obviously fake interest on Sampson's experience make clear he is scum. :P (And Sampson: IGMEOY, scum-partner who has already spilled the beans to fathom42 before Day 1.) I stand by my very serious vote.

[Tierce]

I'm joking. Of course I'm interested!

[Tierce]

I can be serious if you prefer. My interest is to lynch scum quickly and thoroughly, so wouldn't want to act in a way that may prevent that.

Bandwagoning, in my opinion, is a good tool for getting scum stressed and making mistakes. Of course, since this is over forum, they have time to review, ponder and only then submit posts. It depends on the level of experience and the current mood of the target; a newbie townie can get as stressed or more as any scum.

Elaborating a bit more: I'm a strong subscriber to Sturgeon's Law. Even though we have all the written record and people can slip, it's relatively rare for scum to get caught in their own net unless town can prove through hard facts (flips, cops, etc.) that someone is guilty. Readers can interpret things incorrectly. In my experience, WIFOM usually plays out in favor of the mafia, since they have most of the answers and the bulk of the town is limited to scumhunt guesswork.

And while I was writing all that, soad summarized it quite nicely. Unless there's some serious slip day 1, we're going to have to suffer a possible/probable NK before doing anything actually effective.

HOWEVER.

Day 1 discussion may not be important on day 1, but its analysis may be important for day 2 and subsequent days.

[Tierce]

@fathom

- To answer your question about your interactions with Tierce. You're probably right that it's been the most "meaningful" thing to happen so far, but really that's just because it's been the first real interaction between any of us that doesn't involve theory discussion or the random "how much have you played" type stuff. That said, I'm not totally sure what to make of Tierce's post 15. He's obviously poking at fathom for a couple, likely insignificant things, but there is one quote that I'm not really sure what he's talking about...

@Tierce

Can you elaborate on what you mean with the following quote?

And Sampson: IGMEOY, scum-partner who has already spilled the beans to fathom42 before Day 1.

She, not he, please.

I was poking at Sampson too. fathom was asking for info from Sampson, I was implying he already knew it (via pre-gamestart mafia quicktopic). As in, implying in RVS that fathom and Sampson are both scum.

[Tierce]

I'm not trying to stifle discussion, if you want to discuss be my guest. I'll happily participate in any discussion if only for the fact that I like to discuss things. Interrogate me till your heart's content if that's what it takes for you to think I'm not scum.

@Shiidaji I'm taking day 1's posts with a grain of salt until I see what happens day 2. Later days I might come back and reanalyze, but for now I'm refraining from attacking/defending anyone based on day 1's posts alone. If you think that's not being serious then I guess I'm not being serious.

Your seriousness is not the point, I think. Day 1 discussion provides information. Information helps the town. This information may not be usable on Day 1 (it rarely is to any effect), but the game continues after Day 1 ends. We're going to need that information, so it's better to be proactive than reactive. That's why proactive talk is considered town. Yes, sure, we're going to have to sift through a lot of useless stuff and through mafia misdirection, but we are not able to tell which is which beforehand, so we're better off putting out as much conversation/discussion as the town believes useful as possible. If we don't have much from you, we can't read you and town risks making fatal errors.

Ergo

, not talking during Day 1 is often considered scummy.

tl;dr: We're going to need your Day 1 input on later days, so out with it. :P

[Tierce]

I'm not sure if I have a different definition of "bandwagoning" from the fathom/Tierce, but the way you both seem to be referring to it is simply piling votes onto someone and seeing how they react. While I suppose it might be accurate to call that "bandwagonning", I would advise everyone to have at least some reason behind their vote when they place it. Joining a wagon "just because" is generally pretty scummy.

That's not even scummy, it's plain idiotic. (And we need a smart town if we expect to win.) That's why I didn't touch that point. The actual point of smart wagons is to put pressure on the player you think is scum. Pressuring someone you're getting town reads on is, the majority of the time, a loss of time, of focus and a very bad plan that only helps mafia. If you have a scummy read on someone, nail the bastard scum! Don't poke at the poor VTs who are struggling to make sense of it all--make investigations, make cases, present your evidence and convince others to join you. That's the kind of pressure you want to create through a wagon. Listen to others' cases, too. Wishy-washy voting isn't necessarily scummy: a good townie knows when to stop, reanalyze the facts and recognize they were wrong.

Ahhh, I see what you mean then tierce. What do you consider to be proactive talk?

See above. Yes, Day 1 is speculation mostly, but that does not mean you cannot question/be convinced of someone's scummy/townie nature. Make questions. Answer them. Poke, prod. You want to know your fellow townies and get a feel for who is town. And, more importantly, you have to do the reverse: show us why YOU are town. I can't teach you how to do that.

...I'm quite the vocal windbag.

[Tierce]

I was poking at Sampson too. fathom was asking for info from Sampson, I was implying he already knew it (via pre-gamestart mafia quicktopic). As in, implying in RVS that fathom and Sampson are both scum.

@Tierce, just to clarify, does this mean you really think Sampson and fathom are scummy? When you say implying in RVS, do you mean you're just reaction fishing?

Reaction fishing. I'd like to point out, though, that having to clarify this kind of thing defeats the purpose. I have no way of actually knowing who is scum so far, but scum can get nervous at accusations. Not if I have to explain my every wild accusation, though. It's not relevant right now, but please, take care in later days.

For example, let's say (purely hypothetically) there's a cop in the game. Cop gets a guilty Night 1, but chooses to put pressure on scum Day 2 before/instead of claiming. We need to analyze the consequences of forcing the cop to claim before asking the reason behind the accusations. At least let the accused react first, since we get more information that way. Otherwise we're ruining the potential for pressure and possibly maiming town.

Asking for clarifications is fine. We just have to be sure about timing and consequences.

[Tierce]

Forgot a point in my example: Forcing a cop to claim before they are ready may be a bad town move. The cop can 1) tell the truth and have to change their whole plan 2) delay / lurk, which sounds really fishy, and 3) lie. And frankly, Lynch All Liars. The only decent option this hypothetical cop has is to tell the truth immediately, and their plans have just been upended because some townie got trigger-happy with the questions. Or, alternatively, that scum posed the inconvenient question.

Since I believe people

tend

to play as intelligently as they can, I assume scum to be the ones at fault for ill-timed questions. If I don't have a scummier read, the ill-timed questioner gets my FOS (and, of course, I take the poor revealed cops's suspicion under consideration). [And all the crazy WIFOM permutations of this, too.]

</hypothetical case>

[Tierce]

Tierce, you're under suspicion as the rest of us are, you're not going to be able to make wild accusations in the hope you'll get a reaction without someone asking you to back it up. Right now you're as scummy to me as everyone else so of course I'm going to want some clarification from you on your statements. Add to this that fathom and I presumed you were joking and Workdawg was confused by your claims, and you yourself seemed to be admitting to reaction fishing, I didn't think it would hurt to get a little clarity on your position.

I'm worried by the fact you'd prefer to suppress questions in the hope that game mechanics will prevail. Also, your hypothetical example ignores the fact that the cop could, 4) use his knowledge of who scum was and support his claim with evidence from scums play, as any townie scumhunting would normally but with the added benefit of certainty.

All of this, as well as Cav's post, is perfectly valid. I'm just trying to point out a danger in what

is

necessary questioning. I am all for interrogation, as long as one is aware of the consequences, as I said above. I want questions! Questions and answers give information. I only worry about timing and thoughtfulness behind questions. Each case is different and so the whole thing cannot be subject to a thorough analysis.

Back to my example and why I didn't include your point 4): Sometimes, the cop prefers to say they have a guilty and not elaborate on who it is (revealed or unrevealed cop possible here). With luck, mafia panics and claims a Power Role--and he gets a second scummy if the wrong one claims. See where I'm getting here? The cop has to weigh all these options. Often, an inquiring player will not pause to realize why their question may be convenient or inconvenient.

As it stands, I've made my point in this subject and will move along, acknowledging that anyone is right in making questions and debunking accusations as long as they do so intelligently.


@Sampson: The former and the former alone. Thinking of the second as valid makes my brain hurt. Anyone who makes an accusation is expected to be able to put a decent justification behind it.

[Tierce]

Discouraging people from asking for clarification is only going to make it easier for scum to hide their intentions.

See above, my reply to Sampson and what I mean by 'clarification'. I don't want to discourage questions, just asking people to think a bit before making off-handed questions with no real consideration behind them. That is all.

I feel like there would be a very fine line between "thoughtful consideration of a question" and "I don't want to answer that so I'm going to imply you shouldn't ask."

Which is not to say that's what you're doing here; only speculating that it could cause problems later as people become hesitant to question neighbors and scum stays under the radar.

Ultimately, the questioner decides to make/not make the question, regardless of implied wording. If it's too fine a line, just ask the question. Better to have things out in the open than breed more paranoia.


@Shiidaji: Fair point; I was just giving final clarification (haha) on what I meant.


With all that said, since I don't want to leave this here since I figure we're well off RVS territory and have no scum read on him so far, UNVOTE: fathom42. It is a nice life, universe and everything. Serious voting will wait until I start narrowing my eyes at people.

And now I'm doing as Cav. 4 am has snuck up on me. Later.

[Tierce]

@ Everyone, please start voting, we'll get nowhere fast here.

I want to point out that we don't need to lynch

anyone

fast. If you're not talking about a lynch, what/where do we need to get fast? Discussion? That doesn't require Day 1 voting two days in. Seems to me you're hurrying a bit toward a lynch. Why? We want to lynch scum, and there's nothing wrong if we lynch them ten minutes before the deadline as long as we get it right.

Not having input from inte is rather crippling. Of the rest, the one I'm wondering the most about is haycorn. It's true, the last two pages have little about the game, but people were willing to talk in any case--haycorn apparently isn't. It may be a matter of playstyle, but it's one that is not helping the town.

@Mod: V/LA until tomorrow evening. I'm in the middle of midterm season and it's Roman legionnaires all the way down.

[Tierce]

Theory discussion doesn't get town anywhere. There are other threads for such things

, it generates a ton of 'fluff' that is irksome to sift through while all you get that is relevant to the game is... nil.

You post this, and then several hours later embark on a theory discussion? Not looking very townie there, Shii.

[Tierce]

VOTE: inte

There won't be any chillin' in the back. If you're town, we need your contribute. That behavior is as scummy as could be. We don't know

anything at all

about you.

@Shii, I acknowledge your questions. I don't have time to go through an answer right now; will do so in 24 hours when I don't have school looming over me.

[Tierce]

...good grief.

inte, your refusal to say anything of any substance is anti-town behavior. Lurking is often considered mafia behavior. One-liners with no substance are often considered mafia behavior. With good reason, since we cannot read you thoroughly and you are resorting to snipy remarks. This is a game. The town makes a social effort to root out the mafia.

Social

. Nothing you've done so far resembles any kind of the teamwork and brainstorming town needs to win the game.

In three posts, you've managed to paint yourself more scum than anything else I've seen in this thread so far. I stand by my vote on you, since you won't explain a thing when prompted to.

And now, bed. Midterm and Shii/SOAD analysis tomorrow.

[Tierce]

Wow, do I have a long post coming.

For me, day 1 is just discussion and feeling out other players, too early for scumhunting.

False.

This is me being nice.

This was not necessary.

And since apparently you're still in your little RVS world, this implies you've yet to find anyone even remotely suspicious, correct?

As was this.

There are no scumtells day 1. Scum is found with a combination of facts and reactions, not reactions alone. You have no idea how I react when I am town. You have no idea how I react when I am scum. If you cannot understand this, I question your grasp on this game.

1. There ARE scumtells Day 1.
2. Facts and reactions is true, but people slip and make mistakes. Scum slips and makes mistakes and that can be spotted.
3. The whole 'I question your grasp' and your read on Shii was unnecessary too.

The whole exchange was painful to read. This is a game, folks. More than that, it is a Newbie game. We're here to learn. There is mafia and there is town, but we're all playing together and trying to have fun. The anger and questioning each other's skills does not help the game and

does not help town

. Please understand that.

Sorry! My computer blew up and so I have been on my cell this weekend. This is not conducive to thoughtful analysis. I promise to post something well thought out and insightful when I get my new computer set up tonight.

I apologize for my playstyle not helping the town. I do tend to be an observer by nature, but I can see where this would be a problem. As I said, when I am at home tonight and can read more than two lines at a time, I will post something just as suspicious and accusatory as everyone else's posts. I am completely willing to talk-- I just can't find what to say at the moment.

Thanks for posting this, and for your later analysis, even though it was somewhat brief (see my review below).

That wasn't just theory discussion. Do you have anything useful to contribute at all?
What impression does SOAD give you after our exchange?

There you go, this post should have my opinion on it. On both him and you, because obviously you're both subject to scrutiny.

i think fathom's flip flop attitude contributes nothing on day one. him pointing out that my post was an OMGUS and forgetting that he himself did one is an attitude of someone trying to shift blame and comfort others. i think tierce is kind-hearted, but could very well be an allied maf. no meaningful opinion on him.

1. Flip flop? Do you expect him to place a random vote and stick with it even though he has no real reason to yet? Changing votes is not a scummy behavior as long as you have valid reasons for it, and "you figured out my alias" isn't quite a valid reason to stick by a vote when someone else is displaying scummier behavior.
2. Me being kind-hearted or not is completely irrelevant to the game. I could be the bitchiest bitch that ever bitched and still be town.
3. I'm female.

All I see here is theory argument and fighting about who plays the game better. At first, SOAD's "no" post really stood out to me. I'm not sure what the point of posting such a rude response would be other than to keep the debate going and raise the level of hostility, which to my inexperienced eyes seems scummy. Upon what has to be my fifth re-read (yes, I really was keeping up with the post on my phone) I think I can see where that anger was coming from, as Shii was definitely attacking SOAD's skill as a player, but by the same token, SOAD questioned all our skills first.

I suppose at this point I would be most inclined to VOTE: VOTE: syndromeofadown. Sorry.

What is your reasoning behind this vote? The 'no' post? I think the conversation just devolved into an anger argument, and SOAD stopped (badly, true), instead of continuing to argue pointlessly with the same arguments. Furthermore, don't be sorry! If you're voting on someone, it should be because you think they are mafia. Don't be sorry to lynch them bastards.

I believe he's referring to my vote on Tierce, actually.

How come a RVS vote on the very first page count as an OMGUS? I didn't raise a fuss, and so far fathom42 seems town to me.

i agree lurking is scummy, but when you have no input because its day one, i find it hard to make a conversation. i could very well be a cop also, and fellow town are outing me, but then again you risk me being scum. being that it is day one and the only assumption you could of made on my alignment is based on what i've said/not said seems like a random shot in the dark. i might bandwagon if the opportunity arises though.

i also am not completely new to mafia, i've played it a few times on another forum and plenty of times on sc2. i do realize that this forum is more serious and the social aspect is more heavily scrutinized. stay thirsty my friends.

1. We have no input and you say it's hard to make conversation? What would happen if we all took that stance? It may be hard, but we

need

to generate information. You, and everyone, need to create that input you say you don't have.
2. What has your hypothetical cop nature have to do with anything? Do you assume cops lurk by default? How are we outing you?
3. The only assumption we could make of your alignment comes from what you say. So get talking and convince us you're not scum, natch. ;) Being silent is a very very way to slip by the radar, which help mafia, not town.
4. We could not know your mafia play-status. Go back and read everyone's introductions; in comparison, this is the first we hear about your own experience.

"Town: 1-3
Scum: 3-0"

Who else thinks it might be a good idea to lynch Workdawg just because he might turn out to be dangerous as scum? I know it's metagaming, but he hasn't lost once as scum, but he's lost 3 times as Town. With all else being neutral it might be a good idea to just get rid of the guy who has the highest chances of being dangerous later on?

VOTE: Workdawg

inb4 people call me wishy washy for changing my vote. I know somebody's going to think by voting shii and unvoting I'm trying to distance without bussing, but trust me I'm not. LOL

1. See above about wishy-washy. BUT I'm making a caveat here. Town does not need to worry about changing votes. Your "eee don't think I'm scummy" reaction to your own vote change is somewhat suspicious.
2. Trust you? We'll see about that.
3. As for Workdawg,

what?

That reasoning makes no sense. He is more experienced than us, so most likely he'll have more games as mafia and more games as town than us. Have you gone through all of his games and seen exactly what happened in each one? He has 2/9 chance of being scum here, like any of us. How does the result of other games influence this one? We're different people and the setup/roles may not even be the same.

Personally, I think the Shii/SOAD thing was scummy from both sides. I don't approve of either of them resorting to personal attacks (i.e. "I question your grasp on this game," Shii's sarcasm, etc.). Either one of them could be baiting the other, trying to get them to post something reactionary.

Maybe they are both scum and have prearranged their argument so we never suspect they are in cahoots. Or is that too WIFOM?

We can't know one way or the other. Personally, I do not take any conclusion regarding their alignment from that argument.

[Tierce]

Being silent is a very very way to slip by the radar, which help mafia, not town.

English, I can speak it, I swear. That should read: "Being silent is a very very good way to slip by the radar, which helps mafia, not town."

Also, on fathom's attitude, I missed something. He voted Samson after voting me. I still see a valid reason there, too, and a stronger one behind his switch to inte.

fathom42: You mean Workdawg voted for SOAD, I suppose? He's not voting for Sampson; his vote has been on syndrome since the beginning of the game.

[Tierce]

@Tierce My reasoning was that I saw the "No" post as an attempt to provoke hostility. While I can understand your read on his reaction, I felt like he was intentionally trying to further the fight.

I am aware we can't know what soad and shii are up to. I just had the thought and wanted to share it so I wouldn't be so lurky.

Alright, I got it. We have different views; for the moment, SOAD does not read as scummy to me as inte does. We'll see how things progress.


Workdawg's record

does

tell us something--not about his own gameplay, but how not to do it as a town. Let's hope we don't learn that lesson the hard way and do things sensibly instead.

[Tierce]

VOTE: tierce

couple things to say.


1) you can't false an opinion

2) anything is necessary (he might be maf trying to cloud judgement)

2) it kind of is scummy behavior to point out someone elses flaws when you have made the same mistake. i think its only to misdirect attention.
3) when i meant kind hearted, i meant purposely trying to sniff out scum behavior with prodding, but whatever
4) him and his are non gendered terms on the internet. i don't assume anyone is male or female. i actually assume everyone is transgendered. it really shouldn't be relevant if you're guy gal or other though.

5) its omgus because it was in response to you voting him. from my limited time using the terminology, isn't that what it means?
6) i just told you my mafia play status, and never claimed that you had previous knowledge. you told me to contribute

1. Sure. But there can be valid scumhunting Day 1. That's what I'm talking about.
2. What mistake? If I've made one, please let me know. I point out flaws where I see them so that people take notice and improve their skills, and I'd rather they did the same with me. Isn't that one of the points of social gaming (and a Newbie game to boot)?
4. I was just noting it because my gender is listed and I'd prefer if you used the appropriate pronoun, is all.
6. I know you didn't claim it; you don't have to be so defensive. I was explaining why we were free to assume anything about you, since we had no data.

[Tierce]

VOTE: tierce

2) it kind of is scummy behavior to point out someone elses flaws when you have made the same mistake. i think its only to misdirect attention.

What, are you talking about fathom42, or about me? Please be specific.

[Tierce]

fathom42. i was refering to him pointing out my OMGUS

Then it begs the question: If you think

his

action is scummy, why have you voted on

me

?

[Tierce]

Ugh, my intuition is really telling me a certain player is scum, but I don't want to put the spotlight on them just yet. For three reasons: one, I would come off hypocritical after all my speeches about day 1; two, my intuition could be wrong and I feel I should wait for when I have a better case against them, and three, I want to keep scum in the dark, make them second guess themselves and look for changes in behavior after posting this. I honestly don't know if I should even be posting this since it goes against every strategy I decided on coming into the game, but for now

Unvote

PS, what do you guys think the setup is? For now I'm feeling 2 mafia, 6 town, and a power role (doctor if I had to guess)

*laughs* You know, that used to be my playstyle, questioning everything and waiting on my suspicions before voicing them, and at times making statements like this.

Why did I stop? One too many times being lynched as town. >_< WIFOM, understandably, plays too much with town's patience. While I enjoy your apparently-cheerful outlook (this is a game, after all), beware town wrath. (Or cherish it, if you're scum; and then go and die an horrible death you bastard. *shakefist*)

I have no idea what the setup is. There are 12 possible combinations and I'm having enough trouble as it is trying to discern who's scum to bother overmuch with power roles just yet.

there is no explicit confirmation that tierce is a he or she, nor do i care because it is irrelevant. i can refer to people as "it" if that makes you feel better, but really were here to play mafia. ill use him. i apologize if i offend, i don't mean to.

Since when do you need any kind of confirmation? I've told you. It's on my profile. Please do me the kindness of referring to me by my chosen pronoun. "He" may be a gender-neutral pronoun, but I'm asking you not to use it to refer to me as a definite gender has been clarified.

[Tierce]

In my opinion, appeals to emotion aren't scumtells. Shii says that mafia tends to play with their heart; I disagree. Emotional mafia

may

slip more easily (after all, they are the ones with things to hide) if riled, but they always have the option to sit back and think their posts through. Emotional, rapid posts tend to read town to me. Town doesn't need to worry so much what other players think.

That's why I'm partial to SOAD being town. It could be a gambit, but it'd be a painfully obvious one. The setup inquiry was a bit off, but it still does not convince me.


On the other hand, we have Shii.

Notice what I just did here, I basically provided an entire conversation, between two players, and now the other players can scrutinize and do with us as they will.

[To me:]
What impression does SOAD give you after our exchange?

@Haycorn

What about SOAD feels scummy to you?

@Everyone else

- Do you find Haycorn's jump on the SOAD wagon scummy? Which of the two feels scummier?

@ Fathom

What do you make of Inte's recent posts?

@Workdawg

When you 'gather your thoughts', can you give me what you've got on Haycorn, Soad, and Inte? Kthnxbbs.

Posts filled with questions to others, about others. This lets Shii slip quite comfortably under the radar. Further, the whole "what

I

did" on the first quote, and the later admission that there was intentional riling of SOAD's emotional levels, seems more than a bit odd to me. It feels like Shii is/wants control of the game and what answers and reactions pop up. Who has enough information to do so? Scum. Notice how the only actual read we have from Shii is SOAD, but it's accompanied by questions about haycorn and inte.


I'm not saying we should let up on SOAD; at the moment, my read on him is rather flimsy. But ignoring Shii may be a bad plan.


Still, my vote stays on inte until we get decent information from him. I still want to know the reasons behind his votes on fathom and me.

[Tierce]

you can call me whatever as long as people can figure out who you're referring to. but i guess ill refer to tierce as her because it bothers her so much.

Thank you. Now please answer the questions that were asked of you.

You've mis-read, it seems.
I said that "The stronger a reaction is, the more a person plays with his heart." Not "Mafia play with their heart." It's obvious that Mafia can sit back and think about it a bit. Your opinion on scumreading is yours.

Your logic is a bit faulty, since you're accusing me of slipping under the radar and yet you're also saying that I'm attempting to control the game.

My questioning is playstyle-based.

Yup, I've mis-read. You could technically do both (controlling and slipping under the radar), but I'll concede that point. It's too early in the game for me to push at vague notions.

What are your currents reads, aside from SOAD?


inte makes me antsy, because his behavior is flagrantly scummy. Maybe too much so, but from here on it just devolves into WIFOM, so until further clarification, my vote stays.

[Tierce]

@Mod: Can we get a prod on fathom and SOAD? I know it's an holiday weekend in the US, but in any case...

As for the rest, come on, folks, no posts in two days, no notices? You've had too much turkey, surely. Let's keep this moving.

@haycorn

:
Thank you, that's appreciated. I'd like to redirect the compliment to my high-school teachers, but the actual blame can be pinned on the authors of my endless reading list.

When it comes to Shii and being an SE, we have this:

Despite appearances, there is no official authority in the SE position. Since they have been on the site for a while, they can aid players who are new to the site like an IC would; but unlike ICs they are under no obligation to do so.

Thus I wouldn't put much stock on it influencing play style.

@Shii

:
Another thing: You said my wall had nothing but fluff in it. Anything you'd like to know from me I haven't made known yet?

[Tierce]

I've been drawing all morning, so my brain is all measurements and boulders. While I wouldn't discard SOAD's points offhand, they still read as "hello look at me I'm a distraction from the pressure on me". Try defending yourself before attacking others. We want to hear about you too.

Ugh, my intuition is really telling me a certain player is scum, but I don't want to put the spotlight on them just yet. For three reasons: one, I would come off hypocritical after all my speeches about day 1; two, my intuition could be wrong and I feel I should wait for when I have a better case against them, and three, I want to keep scum in the dark, make them second guess themselves and look for changes in behavior after posting this. I honestly don't know if I should even be posting this since it goes against every strategy I decided on coming into the game, but for now

Unvote

The more I think about it, the more this post seems like a placeholder for whoever SOAD thought to attack desperately when it became needed. It doesn't strike me as an eager newbie mistake, but as a planned act.


On his post about haycorn, it reads to me as if SOAD is trying to distract us from himself. While we shouldn't disregard his points, I have a few things to mention about them:

She admits she hasn't contributed anything, and admits she hasn't been helping the town, and then blames it on her computer blowing up. I do not believe her computer blew up, but whether it has or not, just because she admits to not being helpful to the town doesn't make it any less of a problem.

So, you'd believe in Cav's (and countless others') internet issues, but because you think someone is scum they can't have them anymore? Everyone has RL to deal with. On that account, imo they're innocent till proven guilty.

First paragraph says a whole lot of nothing, just summarizing what happened. Then out of the blue attacks inte. You'll notice this doesn't match up with the rest of her posting style. It seems to me that she freaked out after people noticed she wasn't analyzing anything and just decided to attack the two most scummy-looking players so everyone would take the pressure off of her.

1. I summarised it too. It helps me put my thoughts in order, and I prefer to post it instead of keeping it to myself because sometimes I mis-read/misunderstand things and this way others can point out my mistakes. Shii thinks my own wall just fluff. Do you think that was a scummy action from me?
2. Or she noticed and decided to act more pro-town because she's actually town and learning. Your argument is weak.

Phrasing a question as a "maybe" because she knows it's not true?

This early in the game, only mafia have facts and certainties. I don't see anything wrong with that 'maybe'. One thing are language scumslips, but it seems to me you're grasping at straws.

Whew everyone forgot about me and my little red wagon, lets continue posting about things totally unrelated to the game. You know, so it doesn't come across as lurking.

Dude, we'd only forget about it if we were dumb. People aren't posting, it's called a bump post.


More thoughts later, I have building reconstitutions to go back to.

[Tierce]

Sorry to see you go, Cav. Hope you get access again soon, and I'll see you around.

Ahahaha hi BB. Didn't even need a nudge from me. (I was following a game of his that had just ended and we exchanged a few PMs about it.) Nice to see you around.

SOAD is definitely up there, if only for the lack of strong reads from anyone else. Will have to decide on wether he's newbtown or scum eventually, but I'm pretty happy with where my vote stands right now.

Workdawg is the player I'd like to say I've a townread on, but then I'd be lying. I'm not usually partial to meta, but he usually has a bigger voice in his towngames. Subject to change when he gets back on MS. Otherwise, his posts and analyses are null and fluffy.

Don't understand Inte from his ISO but I don't think he's scum. Feels like a mislynch waiting to happen.

Gut scumread on Haycorn and Fathom, latter needs to post more, considering the activity in early D1. Haycorn/SOAD exchange feel like Town vs. Scum.

Would you say the inactivity in-game is due to lurkscum wanting the town to rip itself apart?

Who is scummier, Haycorn or SOAD? (Assuming latter.)

Much better! Glad to see this from you.

Workdawg: While the "ICs tend to be scum" thing is a myth (they have the same random chance of being mafia as anyone else), their experience and teaching attitude tends to make them more successful scum than most. However, I don't really have anything to go on with him, waiting for more posts.

inte: I'm uncertain on him too, but I don't feel like changing my vote around until we hear more from the rest of the game (and definitely from him) since there's no risk of a quicklynch right now.

You say gut scumread on haycorn, consider SOAD the scummiest of the lot, and classify haycorn/SOAD exchange as town vs. scum? I'm missing something here.

Agreed, needs more fathom, insecure there too.

I'd say the current activity is due to Thanksgiving and most players still trying to get comfortable. At most, we get two lurkscum, so all the rest of the lurkers are town. There are currently more inactive players than two, thus killing that hypothesis. Plus, scum knows that lurking is considered scummy, so...

I think SOAD is scummier. On the one hand, I don't know if haycorn is being friendly just because she's friendly or if this is a start of a buddying attempt on me. (I'm all for natural friendliness, but I bite if you try to incriminate me by association, haycorn.) On the other hand, wow, SOAD. I keep rereading that wall and it's still OH LOOK A DISTRACTION and nothing of real substance.

[Tierce]

Above exchange doesn't feel town vs. town.
asdfghj I miss double-vote Mafia.
Haycorn didn't show any aggression or support for the SOAD wagon until SOAD voted for her. Why?

Not true:

I suppose at this point I would be most inclined to VOTE: VOTE: syndromeofadown. Sorry.

You said the exchange felt scum vs. town before. Why the need to reiterate this?

It's half and half. Don't have a playstyle set in stone yet but I like the one I have right now.

Thing is, having to poke you for information is a bit awkward. Until your posts today, you were tunneling on SOAD.

I think that Tierce and Shii have been directing most of the flow of the game, which I find interesting. I'm not sure whether this is a purposeful maneuvering for control or just an attempt at helpfulness, but I will be watching what they have to say.

Scrutiny = good. That's all I can really say about that paragraph, since I'm in it and gameplay speaks louder than any explanations for my actions so far.

[Tierce]

I just realized I have another thing to say. I really dislike lynching first day because of how little information we have. I find it easier to read scum from the reasons why someone was killed rather than mishaps in their rhetoric.

Besides the mechanics BB already posted, while nightkills can be studied by town, we have to do so carefully. It's all a big ball of WIFOM. It's easier to unravel the patterns behind lynches, because we can see who voted who and why, who instigated what, etc.

[Tierce]

I wasn't counting the vote itself. She passively voted without any sort of follow-up or push on SOAD.

Got it.
Her continued justification for it was that hostility/aggression feels scummy. See post #82, etc. for more on that.

[Tierce]

#159 is a scum post.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: haycorn

Also, quick question, if you suddenly turned into a DayCop(A cop who can check someone's alignment during the day) who would you check right now and why?

haycorn. Townies know they will eventually die, there's no such thing as a 'perfect victory' for town. In other words, see her very very weird last sentence.

[Tierce]

haycorn: Leave thoughts on everyone's playstyle and writing abilities to after the end of the game, please. This filler thing needs to stop.

Bed first, replies later.

[Tierce]

fathom42
his deflection "playstyle" really irks me more than anything. his first post that actually had any content in it was #91. the rest were just questions, or stating things that are obvious. he hasn't even posted anything since. if you guys were bandwagoning me for lurking until page 3, what does it say about fathom who only deflected attention, when went undercover for almost 4 pages.

fathom did mention his activity would decrease a little after joining the game, and then, as with you, turkeys attacked. If today was any indicator, activity is picking up again. The thing is, you were expressing an intention of lurking. He went on unannounced holidays, as did you, but you were the one with questions pending.

This is a great read on who one should check as a cop; could be potentially useless this game but it might help you out in the future. To summarize the article though, "Cops should investigate competent players who are not obviously Town or obviously scum".

Great article, thank you. And with the article read, I'd investigate either Shii or fathom.

haycorn. Townies know they will eventually die, there's no such thing as a 'perfect victory' for town. In other words, see her very very weird last sentence.

@Tierce, when did I say anything about a "perfect victory"? What does what you said have anything at all to do with what I said?

Investigating someone who's voting you just (and being blatantly loud about it, at that) because they did so doesn't help town. It's a scummy choice.

I am a bit wary of placing her at L-1 before Sampson, Work, Fathom and Inte get in and post their stances, but I'll be re-reading and will place a vote on Haycorn late today if I find myself leaning her over SOAD.

Bad idea. With people returning from holidays, there may be tired, idiot votes from people who don't realize they are hammering. State your intentions, but don't place a vote just yet if it comes to it.

Analysis to come, wanted to reply to these first.

[Tierce]

I see logic flaws in both SOAD and haycorn, but after sleeping on the subject, one looks town, the other scum.

I thought I made my points very clear, but I realize a wall of text is hard to read through. My main reasons are: 1) Fluffiness, we've already been through this. 2) Passiveness in voting. Voting me is fine, but the way she did it without trying to prod me or feel anyone out first, even asking forgiveness, makes it seem like she just wanted to quietly jump on the bandwagon. 3) She seems to be more preoccupied with self-preservation than finding scum, for example:

SOAD, because I would want to know if he has an agenda against me or just really believes I'm scum.

When asked to give her opinion on an issue, the reasoning she gives is never "because I want to know who is scum!" or "because I want a better read on player X" but "because I want to know who's out to get me" or "I want to appear less scummy".

As for "try defending yourself first before attacking others" What do you mean by this? If I missed a question against me, feel free to point it out, but what you're implying is that everyone should have a clean slate before accusing anyone of anything. Just because people think I'm scum I'm no longer allowed to voice my opinion? I have a feeling this is more of a miscommunication, though, which is why I want you to clarify.

More my fault than yours, there. I first read your post as an all-out attack on haycorn without looking on why the very same post gives me a read on you. It seemed an OMGUS at the time, not anymore. I agree with you, especially on 3); if you read above, you'll see that precedes my vote on her.

By the way, your reasoning there reads much better than it did on your other post. It's not so much conciseness that matters: it's directness.

[Tierce]

^Just to clarify, you think SOAD is town and haycorn scum, correct?

My bad. That's correct.

[Tierce]

ISOing haycorn.

49. Filler.
63. "I will post something just as suspicious and accusatory as everyone else's posts." Didn't like that then, don't like it now.
82. More filler + SOAD shows agression = SOAD is scum.
96. "so I wouldn't be so lurky." Not scumhunting.
107. This does not pertain to the game nor did it have to do with her.
116. Keeps justifying SOAD's vote on the same reason. Doesn't look for more. More filler.
119. Still the same reason.
136. Bump post + filler. This kind of stuff waits till endgame.
140. "Plenty of people were just throwing votes at the wall." "It was just one vote." This kind of downplaying the importance of her votes and a possible lynch rubs me the wrong way. "I wanted to try to show that I was willing [to talk]." Why would you even write that. More filler. Finally, some analysis, 140 posts in.
159. Bad logic = scum. Then filler, and she's aware of it. "I guess that what is traditionally done is to say "Wait, I'm writing a big post now!" and then go come up with a claim for why someone is scum." Chooses an investigation target because he's voting her.
162. The ISO post. She's not trying to scumhunt, she's doing it for posting sake. More filler.
165-172. Three posts going around "SOAD tries to make himself look like a superior player so we won't suspect him" and little else.


When you start putting it all together, the things that seemed minor in the beginning just keep piling up.

Curious detail: She says aggression is scummy to her. Look how her behavior changed toward SOAD and how bitter she is on the issue of his vote on her.

[Tierce]

Huh.

UNVOTE:

Will get to this properly tonight after college.

[Tierce]

Wherefore art thou, fathom?

haycorn 162 - I actually rather like the analysis of SOAD here. The comments about SOAD putting himself "above accusation" do seem to ring true to me. I'll have to look into this further. I'm not as convinced as BB about SOAD yet... that might change by the time I'm caught up though.

Tierce 163 - Tierce seems to have had an opposite reaction to 162 here. I don't feel like 162 was out of line. haycorn's analysis of SOAD's playstyle is very relevant to the game and it concerns me that Tierce seems to be trying to brush it off. The comment about writing abilities I do agree with though.

There were two mentions about playstyle on haycorn's post. I thought one was relevant, the other wasn't. Should have clarified it then, so let me do so now:
Relevant:

Early in the thread, and he's already setting himself up as the arbiter of playstyle. It's actually a great trick, and I take my hat off to him. If you come out as that confident in yourself as a player, there's often a natural response to go along with it and to see opinions as valid simply because they are stated in a way that sounds so rational. "Don't take it so seriously," he says. He knows what he's doing. Of course we should listen to him and assume that all of his claims and opinions are well reasoned.

Irrelevant:

SOAD, the more I read from you, the more impressed I am by your play. You've come in guns blazing, so sure of yourself and so quick to make sure that nobody but nobody can accuse you of being scum without being mocked. I just wish that I thought you were using your powers for town, not for evil.

The post has some content that is actual analysis, (an aside: "an eye towards making a case against someone who hasn't made a case against me"? What is this if not scummy weirdness?) but it also has filler, and the paragraph just above struck me as a repetition of the kind of buddying/friendly filler she was using. We don't need to know she's impressed or wishing for something.

That's it. I like that she noticed SOAD's playstyle, but we don't need her 'ooh-ing' and 'aah-ing' in awe before the game ends.

[Tierce]

at the time, i thought posts #34 and #62 sort of contradict. she at firsts is in favor of bandwagoning for information, but then tries to quell shiidaji's post #52 calling for people to put pressure on. i found it very confusing.

I missed replying to this.

On #62 I was pointing out that we don't need to

lynch

fast, which was I read Shii wanted from #52. Lynching is different from bandwagons+pressure, though one comes from the other. Does this make my line of thought clearer?

[Tierce]

@Tierce- I said that I'd tried to make a case against someone who hadn't accused me because I didn't want my analysis to be not taken seriously because it was read as an OMGUS. That was pretty much a failure. As for the comment about being impressed with his playstyle, that was me getting overdramatic. I tend to be verbose in my writing-- I'll try to rein it in from now on.

You do have a tendency for snarkiness when riled. It does not help your case when you accuse someone else of scumminess due to perceived hostility.

You don't have to make a case, you have to scumhunt. Cases are made against people you are convinced are scum, to show to others why they are scum. Don't randomly make cases. If you are convinced someone on a wagon is scum, call them out. Odds are there will be scum on large wagons, so don't fear an accusation of OMGUS; a reasoned vote isn't an OMGUS.

I'm stuck. Going to review my reads and reread the game.

[Tierce]

Please, not that game again. ._.

In addition, if there is a Doc, don't try to out-WIFOM the mafia either ("it's obvious she'll be protected, so mafia won't bother wasting a kill attempt on her, so I'll protect someone else"). A doctor who tries that kind of gambit tends to fail it.

[Tierce]

Spoiler: Voting patterns

BBmolla - haycorn ^[2nd],

unvote by JK claim

,

fathom42

fathom42 - Tierce ^RVS,OMGUS, Sampson,

inte

haycorn -

SOAD

^{[3rd, now 2nd]}
inte - fathom ^OMGUS, Tierce,

unvote

Sampson - Cav ^RVS,

unvote

^[V/LA]
Shiidaji - haycorn ^RVS,

SOAD

^{[2nd, now 1st]}
syndromeofadown - Shiidaji ^RVS,OMGUS, Workdawg,

unvote

,

haycorn

Tierce - fathom ^RVS,

unvote

, inte ^[2nd], haycorn ^[3rd],

unvote by JK claim

Workdawg - SOAD,

unvote

^{[# voting position]}

Current vote if any.

Unvotes

marked when there's significant time or events between them and a new vote.
YMMV on OMGUS.
Didn't count Cav's RVS vote.

I have jumpy votes in a scummy bandwagon position.

SOAD, who are your scum reads?

[Tierce]

@Tierce- You said "I have jumpy votes in a scummy bandwagon position." Do you mean "people are voting for me in a scummy, bandwagony sort of order" or do you mean "My analysis is that people are voting in scummy, bandwagony sorts of orders?" Am I totally misreading?

Oi, not at all. Talking about my own votes on others.

[Tierce]

I have this game saved, still have to format it, will put it up when I'm done; might take a while.

[Tierce]

I think sampson and fathom are scum

vote: fathom

I'm gonna do you one better and say two people who are not in the game are scum:

VOTE: LostGirlChan
VOTE: vijay2vasandani

[Tierce]

I think sampson and fathom are scum

vote: fathom

I'm gonna do you one better and say two people who are not in the game are scum:

VOTE: LostGirlChan
VOTE: vijay2vasandani

And you should all totally sheep me because I'm conftown.

[Tierce]

On the bright side this was probably the last really good newbie game I played, once I started ICing things started going downhill.

The question is,

what

games did you IC?

Jedi mind tricks, y'all.

[Tierce]

Archived version of this game

Let me know if you spot errors in the file.


Quick summary: Town won by D2.

fathom42/LostGirlChan, mafia goon, lynched D1

BBmolla, Townie, killed N1

Sampson/vijay2vasandani, mafia rolecop, lynched D2