Open 441 - Chosen Mafia (OVER)

[Mortontfrh]

Vote Count 1.04

With 9 players alive it takes 5 to lynch.

Paschendale (4): Eidolon, Rapidcanyon, Mcstab, Whiskers

Realgodfather (3): Greywing, Om of the Nom, Paschendale

Not Voting: crypto, Realgodfather

Deadline is in (expired on 2012-09-01 17:14:00)

[Whiskers]

Of course, if this wagon ends up town, I'll use one of my vig-shots on rgf.

[Whiskers]

Eidolon: please address this.

@ Om. What? Your whole case on him is reliant on someone else being scum.

@Rapidcanyon. ??? You just said yourself claims don't matter cause we all will claim VT. I explained the rest to you. RVS to get discussion going, behavior is the most important and i can read you well. Why do you ask me a question with a precursor that you already know the answer to?

How is it an associative tell? If it's about the RGF case, then it doesn't rely on anyone flipping scum, if it's my Rapid 'case' (if you can call it that) then it isn't even a case to begin with and it's just a gut feeling.

[Eidolon]

post 27 & 28.

he's calling RGf mafia because of rgf's reaction to rc.

he's essentially saying that rgf is mafia because he's buddies with rc, and noticed his buddy slipping.

So.. his basis for voting rgf is that rc is scum.

[Whiskers]

What about 37?

[Greywing]

Rapid makes a really good case on Pasch, but I'm wary of the speed of this wagon. It just seems a little too easy.

@Pasch: Why did you vote RGF over McStab when your read post suggested that you believed that the latter was more likely scum?

[rapidcanyon]

I agree with Greywing. I am a little surprised at how quickly people voted. I'd like to at least hear from Pasch before we lynch.

[Eidolon]

What about 37?

Hmmm. Eh, it just seems a bit fabricated to me. making up a case as you go along sort of thing.

I mean, I see the point that Om is trying to make, but that's really more indicative of playstyle than affiliation. It seems just as plausible that rgf could have that reaction as a townie or as scum.

And since the initial vote was based off of someone else being scum, i don't really buy the wagon.

[Whiskers]

Alright.

Unless Pasch is lynched and flips chosen, I have a townread on you and rapid. I'm leaning scum on RGF and, interestingly enough, Om. And obviously Pasch, but I'm giving some reads on the chance that Pasch doesn't flip mafia-- and as quickly as the wagon grew, there's a chance of that.

At the same time,

I think the wagon grew pretty naturally, it was like, everypony on the RGF wagon hopped onto Pasch.

Not sure where I came up with that. A look at the votes shows that it isn't true. Still, I think analysing this wagon, if it's town, will be a trove. And, if he's scum, we'll have lynched scum.

I'd bet that if Pasch is scum, RGF is town, and maybe even the other way around.

Before someone jumps on me for it, that looks like I'm either calling RGF town (right after I called him scum) or that I think Pasch will flip town. That's not the case, more like: Pasch's scumflip would be information, in my mind, that would give townpoints to RGF, even though he looks a bit scummy now.

[Paschendale]

Wait, what now?

Rapidcanyon goes off half cocked because he doesn't like what I said about him? He's throwing a big tantrum, because I disagreed with his comments. I don't like when people rely on labeling things WIFOM, and I mentioned that he did that. I must be scum! Calling something WIFOM only serves one purpose, and that's to cut off a discussion before it happens. WIFOM's are not some tangled knot. They're just hypotheticals that can have multiple outcomes, and each one ought to be commented on. One can either address a discussion, or freak out and label it something bad so we won't have to talk about it.

I pointed out that he was saying that he disagrees with the deductive process we use here on MS, which is perfectly fine for a new player here who's used to something different. But then he starts using that process just fine. That's inconsistency. But he doesn't feel like he's inconsistent, so I must be scum! It's a "classic scumtell" to "misrepresent his posts". I didn't misrepresent anything. I disagree with you!

Oh, and my reads are "fluffy" and I'm trying to buddy up to people for saying some people are town... even though I began my list by explicitly saying I wasn't going to give any null reads. But I didn't give null reads, so I must be scum!

And, of course, my "read" on McStab. It was a comment about his meta. Meta alone is a stupid reason to lynch anyone. Mostly, I was exaggerating the read as a joke. McStab usually posts more. He's not this time. Does that mean he's scum? Who knows! But it's worth pointing out. I gave reads and went with the best read I had.

Last but not least... that I didn't post much this weekend. I had company. I expected to be around more than I ended up being, so I didn't go V/LA. Turns out I was really tired last night and didn't check in. Clearly, I must be scum for needing to sleep sometimes. Not posting for a day is hardly lurking.

@Eidolon: I wasn't even reading the thread until I put together that post. I was busy with my family that was in town. They left around 1. I posted in several of the games I'm in after that. I had no idea of what I was going to find when I showed up. If you want to look at my posts on the site, you won't see any posts between my Whiskers vote and my reply to you. I simply wasn't here.

@Whiskers: I posted a reads list because I had missed several pages of comments, and wanted to summarize my thoughts, rather than writing a GIANT wall of text, quoting fifteen or twenty other posts. You've seen me write huge walls before. That's kinda how I roll. But people don't generally like that, and I try to keep it under control. This is a wall, but the one I was putting together while writing my 62 was much larger. I thought that a list of reads would be a more efficient method for saying what I wanted to say without writing a giant essay. Kinda like what I'm doing now.

This case on me is extra strength ridiculous.

[Eidolon]

I understand being busy but the easy pop-in vote mixed with the over-justification of why you were mia mixed with the so-called making up for it by offering up a weak reads list seems very shady, imo.

Please show me where RC discredited the deductive process of ms and then inconsistently used that process.

[rapidcanyon]

Pasch's response is very unconvincing. He never attempts to point out flaws in my logic even allowing for latitude that he might be frustrated that he is at L-1. His response only attempts to discredit me by calling my case a "tantrum."

He says that I disagree with deductive reasoning and that it is okay to disagree. However, I never disagreed with deductive reasoning. My initial posts were simply questions as to

how

random voting is done on mafiascum. I was looking forward to seeing how others use it and then use it myself. I mentioned that I am more used to analyzing character and role claims to find scum and am not used to deductive reasoning. Not used to =/= disagree with.

Essentially I am saying this:
a) I am not used to deductive reasoning, I am new to it.
b) Here is some deductive reasoning.

Pasch twists this to mean:
a) Rapidcanyon

disagrees

with deductive reasoning
b) Rapidcanyon is using deductive reasoning - he must be scum!

Pasch also doesn't address the core of my argument about his fluff posts - that he posted nothing of substance. He is merely equivocating on his reads about Eidolon and Greywing saying "nothing unusual" or "later posts contained criticism."

Pasch also didn't address my biggest point which is that he initially made a non-serious/neutral post and only came back much later to vote on the person who had the most votes while also FOSsing a person who was previously FOSsed. There is no doubt that Pasch wanted a lynch on RealGF since he put him at L-1.

Coming to the other people who are voting for Pasch, there are 3 other people on the Paschendale wagon besides me and McStab is the only one I find even remotely suspicious due to not providing any reasoning for his vote. I get a general town read on Eidolon since she accused Paschendale before I made a case against him. Whisker's analysis also seems very well-thought out and considers multiple possibilities and how they would benefit next. He also didn't take the bait and say "let's lynch Pasch, if he flips town, lynch rapid" or the same in a more subtle way. Also, I figured if Pasch was town, scum would at least try to defend him to get town cred especially since he is an experienced player. I am basing this off of my previous experience playing mafia where it is almost SOP for scum to defend the most persuasive townies to get them on their side.

Nothing about his response seems honest or convincing. He continues to misrepresent my posts and says that we "disagree" about whether deductive reasoning is a good tool. That is not even the issue at hand. Firstly, we don't disagree - I think behavioral analysis is great. Secondly, I didn't vote for him because he favors deductive reasoning and I disagree with that. He addresses a point not even made in the case against him - possibly because it is easy to rebut.

At this point, I recommend proceeding with the lynch and hammer Pasch.

[Paschendale]

Anyone else concerned about how buddy buddy Eidolon and Rapidcanyon have been this whole time?

[Whiskers]

I am. that's why, if you flip chosen, I will be marginally suspicious of Eilo and only vaguely suspicious (and only if Eilo flips scum) of rapidcanyon.

[Whiskers]

Wait, what now?

Rapidcanyon goes off half cocked because he doesn't like what I said about him? He's throwing a big tantrum, because I disagreed with his comments. I don't like when people rely on labeling things WIFOM, and I mentioned that he did that. I must be scum! Calling something WIFOM only serves one purpose, and that's to cut off a discussion before it happens. WIFOM's are not some tangled knot. They're just hypotheticals that can have multiple outcomes, and each one ought to be commented on. One can either address a discussion, or freak out and label it something bad so we won't have to talk about it.

What is there to talk about? He was accused of doing something a townie would do because "scum would do it to look protown." That is exactly WIFOM. You may not like people shouting "WIFOM!" to save themselves but that's all this was. It wasn't "He was scummy, he must be scum," it was "He was towny, he must be scum." It doesn't make any sense. The attacker was using wifom in a weak attack. You can't defend this.

...saying that he disagrees with the deductive process...
...he starts using that process just fine. That's inconsistency...

Dealt with-- conclusion, it is a misrep. Provide evidence that he "disagreed with the deductive process," then we'll talk.

On fluffreads

I

have dealt with this. Your reads were only as strong as they could be at that stage in the game, but why give reads at that point at all? Because you had a huge wallpost instead? Uh... it's like, three pages into the game. What on earth could you have put in a wallpost? weakread, fillerfillerfillerfiller, weakread?

McStab

Okay, you made it look like you were about to RVS vote McStab. You gave a few weakscumreads, but announced him to be Scum! Do you not have a read on him? He's right though, you voted the big wagon. If you flip scum, should we take "Scum!" with no vote to be distancing?

low activity

Uh, so? This wasn't part of the attack. I don't think anypony even said you were lurking.

@Whiskers: I posted a reads list because I had missed several pages of comments, and wanted to summarize my thoughts, rather than writing a GIANT wall of text, quoting fifteen or twenty other posts. You've seen me write huge walls before. That's kinda how I roll. But people don't generally like that, and I try to keep it under control. This is a wall, but the one I was putting together while writing my 62 was much larger. I thought that a list of reads would be a more efficient method for saying what I wanted to say without writing a giant essay. Kinda like what I'm doing now.

Right, I mentioned this above: You expect me to believe that, when the only reads you can give us are "weak," "leaning," "slightly," and "kinda," that the alternative was a huge textwall even bigger than this one? I... I frankly don't buy it.

To recap: show us where rapidcanyon was "disagreeing with the deductive process" (or however you phrased it).

[Om of the Nom]

The last game you were in with me you buddied a scum, got yourself day-killed, mislynched a townie and outed another player as just a VT, because you hadn't used critical thinking and relied on your gut. Another one I was in you essentially used your gut to get half the confirmed townreads quicklynched. Please, refrain from giving us your "superspecial awesome" gut reads.

I buddy anyone I feel is town, Whiskers is just pretty good at scum, that mislynch was because he

fakeclaimed Mason

while I was a real Mason, which is actually the wrong thing to do on his end.
Also I don't exactly remember which game you're talking about in the second one.

Paschendale is now totes scum, not because of the case on him but because of his reaction. Rapid is town.

[rapidcanyon]

@ Om of the Nom, then hammer him...

[Om of the Nom]

No I can't, because I'm scum that is worried that I will get huge flak tomorrow if I end the day early and he flips town.
In all seriousness, I'm actually too nervous to hammer for once :P

[rapidcanyon]

LOL. Everyone has had a chance to post except Crypto who will likely be replaced (and probably won't be active at all). Pasch had a chance to respond. He responded with unsubstantiated rebuttals which were based on him misrepresenting my position about deductive reasoning.

If you need further evidence to convince you:

RGF: Seems to be tunneling a little, but then I agree with his criticism on Om. Gut alone is not how this game is done. But I don't think Om is actually doing that, based on our previous encounter.

His post 40 gives me pause, though.

The point of RVS is not to shove it aside and ignore it. The point is that it is NOT truly random. Scum have an agenda, even on their first post. There's always something to learn. (Kinda scummy)

(Emphasis mine)

So, Pasch agrees with realGF in general but disagrees with his post 40 and that is apparently why Pasch voted realGF.

Let's look at the part of post 40 where real GF accuses me.

Real GF, why do you think I am mafia?

It's a very rough read. The attempt to generate discussion over meaningless phases of the game like RVS is a move that scum often makes. A common belief in mafia games is that (talkative and content-filled) is towny, but if you push this too early on it looks completely ungenuine.

So Pasch is

defending

realGF's accusation on me.

Why does Pasch then vote for Real GF? The only answer I can think of is that he is scum and hopped onto the biggest wagon while also FOSsing the other person that was FOSsed before he logged on. This of course makes perfect sense as scum. It makes no sense as town because if he was defending realGF's use of WIFOM on me, he never would have voted realGF but would have tried to derail his lynchwagon. If he disagreed with realGF, he wouldn't have FOSsed me.

[Om of the Nom]

Eh, no point in waiting anyway.
VOTE: Paschendale

[Paschendale]

Wow... killed off of one innocuous post. This is literally the dumbest lynch I have ever seen in my life. I guarantee you, 100%, scum are on my wagon. Best of luck finding them.

[Om of the Nom]

If you're curious on why exactly my gut called you scum because of your reaction, it's because it felt to me like you were treating the case on you as a complete joke, which to me is basically a slightly more subtle version of discrediting.

[Paschendale]

IT WAS A JOKE. It was an overblown temper tantrum. I made a few casual observations, ready for some serious discussion to start. Canyon took offense at something I said, and flipped out. He screamed "misrep!" over and over, while tearing into a few sentences. Remember, casual observations. RC's 44 is all about how he's used to a different style of play. His incredulity in 16 showed how he didn't understand how we play here. But then, shortly after 44, he's playing exactly like we'd expect someone to. I commented on this because you guys had been talking about it. I basically said "yeah, that's kind of weird." But apparently under the volume of RC's shrieking, everyone forgot about what they had been saying about him a page earlier. Eidolon talked about it in 32. RGF talked about it in 40. And over the fact that I used the word "discredit." That is, disagree with and suggest inferiority of. Maybe I inferred the second part, but the fact remains is that you all just quicklynched a townie for saying "huh, that's odd" about one person and then voting for someone else who looked scummier. Oh no, and I made a little comment about McStab's meta and tried to prod him a little. Clearly only scum do that!

There was never a case on me. Just one person getting offended because I slighted his ego, and he used the magic word "misrep". He "misrep'd" everything I said, but because I didn't use that word, I must be wrong? How stupid is that, to kill someone over a buzzword? You want proof of this misrep'ing? Every conclusion he reached in 93 is made up. NONE of it is actually in what I said. All I did was point out a couple of things that looked odd. Nothing else. I gave some slight leans. I didn't even actually accuse anyone of being scum. I voted for the person I thought was most suspicious. Yeah, it brought him to L-1. What should I have done instead, not voted? Gee, not voting is really quickly attacked for being a scumtell. I guess suspecting people who are the popular targets is a catch-22 that gets you killed no matter what, especially if you bruise an egomaniac.

There was never a real case on me. One loud voice rallied the scum together to get me killed. I'll bet I do flip chosen. Either way, I promise you there's scum on my wagon. It was 100% taking opportunity of volume over substance.

[Om of the Nom]

Don't worry, if you flip Chosen I will rally a wagon on Rapid.
If you flip normal VT I will just take you into huge consideration when it comes to forming another read on Rapid.

[Whiskers]

If he flips chosen, I'm going after Eilo first. She started the wagon with very little reason and stayed on. Considering the stuff like, "I can read RC like a book," if Pasch flips chosen, I'd think it's more likely to be something like, Eilo is directing RapidC to wagon on that player.