Mini 1370: Possessed Pastors in a Paranoid Parish: Who Won?!

[IceGuy]

7110

[IceGuy]

VOTE: MagnaofIllusion

I like this wagon.

[IceGuy]

*Disclaimer*
I am RVSing AP

I don't like that.

VOTE: seilkops

[IceGuy]

Why were you so weary of that?

[IceGuy]

@IceGuy: "weary" meant to be "wary"? cause if not, your question seems.... self-answering.

Obviously.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Zyrkonium

[IceGuy]

If MoI is scum I'll tell you soon enough. You'll just have to listen to me and lynch him instead of me.

[IceGuy]

Forgot this game. Will be catching up now.

[IceGuy]

AngryPidgeon's reads seem convenient, both the early Zyrc scum read and the sellkops (wagon was dying down) and Tierce (safe town read) town reads. Same goes for sellkops' reads, except for the "solid town" read on AngryPidgeon.

Eidolon is town.

I don't get the case on Quilford, "fairly certain" and "kind of confident" don't read like a contradiction.

rapidcanyon is my top suspect for reasons outlined in others' posts. VOTE: rapidcanyon

[IceGuy]

I did a quick check and Iceguy's vote puts rapid at

L-1

.

I have him at L-2.

To my mind "kind of confident" isn't very confident at all. I think "kind of" is a much strong weasel word than "fairly"; fairly is just covering your back.

Even if you think my original suspicion was poorly founded then I think Quil's refusal to pinpoint how suspicious of MOI for me, makes it clear that he's less certain that my attack is unfounded (since he genuinely doesn't have any suspicion of MOI at all; on account of MOI not being on the scum team with him.)

Actually, not answering inane questions ("give a number between 0 and 100" is one) is a slight towntell, if anything.

[IceGuy]

I have him at L-2.

MOD post at Post 150 lists him at 4 votes.
AngryP votes Rapid at Post 193. (5)
You vote him at Post 213. (6)

That should be L-1 unless I missed an unvote from either Amrun, Seil or Tierce (which I just checked and don’t see any).

Didn't think of him when I saw "RC" being voted.

[IceGuy]

UNVOTE:
VOTE: AngryPidgeon

Do you agree or disagree with my solid town read on AP? Otherwise, I don't understand what you're saying.

Obviously disagree.

Of course I read Tierce as town, because she's been acting town. Would you have liked it more if I put her down as scum? "Safe town read" makes literally no reason. Especially considering you have not said a single thing about Tierce.

A "safe town read" is a player like Tierce or Amrun who generally appears town, at least early in the game. This means a scum player can easily read them town and buddy them without getting too much heat for an unfounded town read. This is especially obvious when the read happens early in the game, after just a few posts.

That does not mean every town read on one of them is a convenient town read, but when several convenient reads (town reads on safe town players, town reads on dying wagons, scum reads on easy lynches, scum reads on players with a wagon on them) are bundled it makes for a good scumtell.

So Ice. I'd like to know. How do you feel about Tierce? Don't forget, you can't put her down as town. Much too safe!

See above - I can put her down as town and so can you. Nice misrep.

(I have her as null, by the way, otherwise I would've mentioned her).

All I'm hearing from you is that you forgot about this game, and then some useless/scummy pointing out on reads.
Why are you trying to throw suspicion on my reads, and for crappy reasons?

Explain how my reasons are crappy.

rapidcanyon is my top suspect for reasons outlined in others' posts.

Yeah, ok. Way to show initiative.

IceGuy is

my

top suspect for reasons outlined in my own post, complete with my own thoughts and reasoning.

VOTE: IceGuy
I wanna see more posting from you. Anyone else down to vote him?

And another low-effort read.

[IceGuy]

So are you saying that Seil’s other reads support this scumtell? If so who falls in your other “categories” showing Seil’s reads were manufactured. If not why are you pointing out his Tierce read as ‘safe’?

As said above, yes. The only read that doesn't fit is his AP townread. Other than that, there's an Eidolon and a rapidcanyon scumread (both players who were under heavy fire) and a weak Hiraki and Amrun townread (both players that are safe, though Amrun is moreso than Hiraki).

[IceGuy]

Dislike IceGuy's post. Feels more like IIoA.

Do you know what IIoA means?

ICeguy, do you think Seil is scum? What about Amrun and MoI?

I've already given all reads.

[IceGuy]

If I haven't given a read it means I currently don't have a read, or am conflicted.

[IceGuy]

I put Tierce and Amrun down as town, because I think they are town. I'm not going to go against what my reasoning says about them, just to appease you and look edgy or to make my reads look town.

And I don't believe you, because they didn't actually do any townie things when you first formulated that read.

How do I misrep you?

By claiming a town read on a safe town read is automatically scummy.

That is so blatantly hypocritical of you, I'm surprised God himself didn't strike you down.
Get it? It's funny because this game flavor is religion orientated. Hah. Fuck I'm good.

So, what was I supposed to do in your opinion?

[IceGuy]

@Iceguy

– why is it that 241 has a vote for Angry but all of the content is defending yourself from Seil? The only mention of AngryP in your ISO previous was Post 213.

Where do you see a problem with that?

[IceGuy]

I don't like his vote on AP as a defense tactic.

Why do you claim my vote on AP is a "defense tactic"?

[IceGuy]

Iceguy votes for Seilkops in post 26 saying that he doesn't like the disclaimer that it was an RVS vote. I don't buy this reasoning and don't find it scummy that someone made a disclaimer that their vote was an RVS vote. There is no reason why town wouldn't or shouldn't clarify that their vote was RVS. It simply makes it more clear for everyone involved.

Why do you disagree RVS disclaimers are sign of scum trying to fend off attacks based on the vote before they happen?
Why didn't you disclaim your RVS vote - after all, you did have to explain it later?

The fact that IceGuy 27 and Eidolon 28 FOS Seilkops for a perfectly unscummy thing makes me suspicious of both of them. MagnaofIllusion 32 also says that the fact that Seilkops had to go out of his way to say it was suspect.

Why does this make you suspicious of me and Eidolon, but not of MoI?

AngryPigeon votes IceGuy based on his gut. While he doesn't give any reasoning, reading through the exchange gave me the same suspect - Iceguy, so I'll agree with Angry on this one making him one of my town reads.

So a town read for you is a player you agree on a scum read with?

Zyrconium jumps on AP and asks about the phrasing of the word "gut." It seems irrelevant to finding scum. Rather than asking reasons why AP's gut was saying IceGuy was scum, he asks why the word gut needed to be made explicit. Sort of misses the point of the game. Slight scum read on Zyrc.

To ask a question similar to above, a scum read for you is a player you disagree on a town read with?

However, I FOS all 3 of Magna, Iceguy and Eidolon, as opposed to just Eidolon.

This is a retroactive misrep. You don't even mention me or MoI, you only keep bashing Eidolon.

Empking 79 merely tries to cast suspicion on Angry after Seilkops unvoted. It was a lazy suspicion. Town are often more frustrated than scum which is what Seilkops was obviously referring to. Scum read on Empking at this point.

And this shows you didn't bother to meta Empking.

[IceGuy]

How do you know Eidolon is town?

I don't, for sure. It's a town read, not conftown.

Also, Iceguy calls out Seilkops for giving Tierce a town read by claiming that she hadn't done anything to look town by that point. But she was in fact trying hard to figure out whether I was scum enough to wait on the mod. So, I think Seilkop's read wasn't really off.

You think that's not an incredibly easily fakeable tell?

@ Iceguy: it was defensive because you used it as a response to being called out.

No, it was a switch from the first suspect to the second suspect after the first suspect claimed something that was good enough to save him.

Oh. I saw Amrun's crappy view on my IceGuy case.

The case on IceGuy is poor because it is based on "lack of activity" and "lack of reasoning," which is just crap and also means nothing especially when it comes to IceGuy. He plays pretty close to his chest. But more importantly, seilkops didn't seem to even TRY to ascribe scum motivation to this.

I don't

ride his dick like you do

know him at all, but "lack of activity" and "lack of reasoning" seem plenty scummy to me. Scum motivation is...
IceGuy is scum who tried hard to stay under radar.

Why do you think I failed? And why the "strange" choice of words regarding Amrun and me?

[IceGuy]

I clarified later that my vote was an RVS vote. Seilkops clarified in his vote itself. Both instances were to make the reasons clearer for people to understand.

If you would join a new game right now, would you disclaim your RVS votes?

The fact that you would consider it a scum tell is scummy.

Why is it scummy?

Not always 100%. For instance, I think Tierce is town but disagree with her scum read (me!) but in general, if someone suspects the same person as me, they are either town or bussing. More likely town. This is assuming that my initial scumreads are correct and the people I have a scumread on are actually scum. I have no reason to not assume this since I wouldn't make the read if I didn't believe them to be scum.

This is bad and you should feel bad.

Read my list of scum reads. I explained about MoI above. I am not "bashing" Eidolon. I am leaning scum because she pressured Seilkops and her choice of games that she pulled up but on the flip side she was the only one defending me.

I don't care what you wrote later trying to justify yourself. I'm interested in what you did right after that happened, and you continued to attack Eidolon while ignoring me and MoI.

I didn't meta anyone. Tierce and Quilford meta'd MoI. If you have any meta on Empking that you think will help, provide it.

Use the search function to find literally any game he's played in the last few months.

How and why?

I don't explain town reads unless absolutely necessary.

I suppose. But I have never seen scum try it before.

That also says absolutely nothing considering Tierce's playstyle.

[IceGuy]

The fact that you consider it a scumtell is scummy because scum often fabricate scumtells to make townies look guilty. The fact that you took a perfectly innocent post and tried to make it look scummy.

Why do you claim that's a "fabricated scumtell"?

Right after that happenned, I wasn't reading the game closely. I was more involved with another game and while in this one, I was busy defending myself. I FOSsed Eidolon for a completely different reason so it was not applicable to you and MOI.

The point is that you completely "forgot" about the RVS-explanation scumtell until you could use it to vote me.

Not explaining reads isn't helpful. If you explain your reasoning behind it and generate discussion, it is far more helpful.

Not for townreads.

[IceGuy]

It is fabricated because you took something that was not scummy and tried to make it look scummy.

Why do you think it's not scummy?

I voted you because you jumped on the most convenient wagon (me) for "reasons other have mentioned." Reading through the RVS thing makes my suspicion stronger and encouraged me to keep my vote where it was.

You were on Eidolon's wagon and now you are on my wagon. Why aren't you voting yourself?

[IceGuy]

@ Iceguy, I already explained everything and you are still asking the same questions. W/e, this will be the last time I explain the same thing over again.

- Giving a disclaimer on an RVS vote helps make things clearer. There is just as much town motivation to do it as scum motivation. Besides, the burden of proof is on you to prove that it is scummy and so far you haven't fulfilled it.

So far, all you've said is "it's not a scumtell because I don't believe it's a scumtell".

And you know just as well as I do that there is no such thing as a "proof" in Mafia (except for mod information in non-bastard games).

- You voted me for "reasons other's gave." reasons to which I had already responded to.

So just restating those reasons is okay, but referring to them is not?

[IceGuy]

@Iceguy

– is RapidCanyon still a scum read for you?

Yes, but the claim makes him not want to lynch me right now.

Actually this strikes me as downright odd. You in the past as Town have railed about ‘fabricated scum-tells’ yourself. Why are you pointlessly asking stupid, repeating questions (but why?) when you yourself don't justify your stances a good portion of the time?

The difference is that being extremely cautious of possible attacks is a scumtell.

[IceGuy]

Empking, Hiraki: What do you think of Tierce?

[IceGuy]

Iceguys's reaction to the votes on him makes me more certain about him being scum.

What would have been a town reaction to the votes on me?

[IceGuy]

Mod, please delete "Yup you are scum" from that post

. That's a quote from someone else I think. My whole post got rearranged by my keyboard burning out and then rearranging and deleting a ton of stuff. Always fun!

@Mod, please DON'T do this. This could become relevant later.

[IceGuy]

@ Iceguy, a townie reaction to the votes on you would definitely depend on the person. Each townie reacts differently.

So you're saying my reaction could just as well have been a townie reaction.

Your reaction seemed scummy because you made little effort to explain yourself or why you found Seilkops scummy instead focusing on pointless questions like "why is it not a scumtell?" I already explained to you why there is town motivation for giving a disclaimer - clarity. It is you who have never explained why you think there would only be scum motivation for giving a disclaimer.

This is a lie.

The difference is that being extremely cautious of possible attacks is a scumtell.

[IceGuy]

I am a fairly active player. If it seems as though Iceguy isn't going to get lynched, I can still switch my vote when the deadline comes or at least a few hours before deadline. My scumread on Iceguy is stronger mainly for how he reacted to the votes on him as well as poor justification for his initial vote on Seilkops. He has yet to show why having a disclaimer is necessarily scum, nor does he seem interested in proving it rather pushing the burden of proof on me to show why it isn't scummy.

Your reason for voting me is a big pile of fluff. I've explained why it's scummy, you haven't explained why it's not. You have also not shown that how I reacted to the votes on me is scummy in any way, you just claimed it with no justification.

[IceGuy]

He claimed bodyguard and is not going to be lynched today. As I've said, that's enough out of that slot for me for now

Tierce needs to die. She is the most likely to flip scum out of everyone here.

I did not "misrep" her. Shes shunning me off and trying to ignore me. Also the above quote is hilarious. Why did she continue to push him after the claim and the wagon busted then?

PLEASE TO BE VOTING TIERCE NOW. SHES SCUM

Are you people sure you don't want to follow me on AngryPidgeon?

[IceGuy]

Subtle defending/buddying of Tierce noted.

More like, "Not-so-subtle attacking of main scumread AngryPidgeon for once again posting something that's very unlikely to come from town noted."

[IceGuy]

Gosh this Tierce wagon is lonely.

That's because it's stupid.

[IceGuy]

As a deadline lynch, I'd vote for Maemuki first and Amrun second, but I'm not really confident in either one being scum.

[IceGuy]

I will not be voting Maemuki even as a compromise.

Assume it is exactly one minute before the deadline and Maemuki is the only player on L-1. What do you do?

[IceGuy]

Quilford lurks as scum. He’s admitted it in this very thread in an early exchange with me where he said “Oh MoI if I was scum I’d be power-lurking”. And now he’s power-lurking. Case in point ... no Quilford content since my comment.

I actually checked his meta. He power-lurks as scum and as town.

[IceGuy]

AP: I asked you a question. Answer it.

[IceGuy]

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Maemuki

The lesser evil of the two.

[IceGuy]

My top scumread saying my vote is bad. I can live with that.

[IceGuy]

Either way, you are scum for asking me why I was using double standards.

This is probably one of the stupidest sentences ever written in a game of Mafia.

[IceGuy]

Quilford, when was your last scum game?

[IceGuy]

I dislike activity as a reason to lynch someone. Its really not a good tell. At all. You should all feel bad for thinking it is.

It might not be in general, but it definitely is for most newbies and some other players who have a consistent meta.

[IceGuy]

That's not a quote from me.

[IceGuy]

Who thought it would be a good idea to start new wagons a few hours before deadline?

[IceGuy]

27 is jumping on Seil for something not actually scummy. IceGuy is wagoning Seil up right after RVS just for showing signs of being a nervous player. This makes Seil really framable and IceGuy really scummy for 27.

This is just your claim. You've never actually shown why it's not scummy. Overwaryness of possible attacks is a scumtell.

Why were you so weary of that?

Asking a question that makes Seil look bad regardless of how he answers it.

Wrong.

If MoI is scum I'll tell you soon enough. You'll just have to listen to me and lynch him

instead of me.

Last bit concerns me a little bit. Not sure why IceGuy is talking about his super MoI scumdar just to segway into talking about himself getting lynched. IceGuy doesn't even have a single vote on him at the time so the bolded concerns me. Hes linking himself with MoI.

That was a joke since a similar situation (MoI's scum, I'm town, we both push each other, I get lynched, town loses) happened twice and once recently (Words With Scum).

AngryPidgeon's reads seem convenient, both the early Zyrc scum read and the sellkops (wagon was dying down) and Tierce (safe town read) town reads.

Same goes for sellkops' reads, except for the "solid town" read on AngryPidgeon.

Eidolon is town.

I don't get the case on Quilford, "fairly certain" and "kind of confident" don't read like a contradiction.

rapidcanyon is my top suspect for reasons outlined in others' posts. VOTE: rapidcanyon

His catchup post here is a very easy and unprovable case on me.

Really hes just saying he has a gut read on me

but is avoiding using that term to look like hes scum hunting. Then he criticizes Seilkops for the same logic.

Don't you see the contradiction yourself?

Makes ANOTHER unsupported statement about Eidolon town.

As said several times, I don't explain town reads.

Then he sheeps onto the RC wagon despite only having given reasons for me and Seil being scum.

That's a lie, I said I'm voting RC for reasons outlined by other players. Was I supposed to copy&paste what they said?

the next day in post 241 he votes me without providing any reason whatsoever and instead responds to choice quotes (of Seil's / RC's posts I think).

Again a lie, I provided reasons in #213 you actually quoted yourself right above that.

Called out on his Eidolon town read. ICeGuy responds with this. Still no justification and he isn't even willing to call it a gut read.

See above.

To ask a question similar to above, a scum read for you is a player you disagree on a town read with?

This is hilarious because IceGuy keeps saying that any town-read on me is certainly not a convenient read (because IceGuy is sure I am scum).[/quote]

Again a lie. You're not a convenient town read not because I think you're scum, you're not a convenient town read because you're not a player who has a reputation in this regard, like Amrun and Tierce do.

So he is also basing his opinion of other players off of how their reads align with his. Even if in a different manner.

Completely unsupported accusation. I was calling you out on your forming of town and scum reads.

His following quote walls don't really provide any useful content. Hes just stirring crap up with RC/Eid/Seilkops and asking pointless questions. Hes trying to look like an overzealous and annoyed townie, but its fake.

I was defending myself.

Then his vote is parked on me for a solid week. He barely even acknowledges my existence in that week.

Nothing relevant happening.

1. Asked me a question I had already pretty clearly answered.

I wanted to make it clear. A lot of players said "I'm not voting X" but would be willing to deadline-hammer if it's the only way to stop a no-lynch.

2. Got upset when I didn't answer it.

Obviously.

3. Failed to follow up on it at all after I gave him a snooty answer. I mean really? He had NOTHING to say about it after demanding I respond?

Why should I? I got my answer and drew my conclusions from that.

Trying to look like a townie laden with confirmation bias here.

What?

IceGuy isn't so dumb as to actually believe this is a reason to think Maemuki is prob-scum. Doesn't even remotely care to see if there is a me/Maemuki connection either to back up this statement.

My top scum read says my vote is bad, and I was stating that fact. What about that requires any connections to be drawn?

And yes, my top scum read doing ridiculous intellectual pirouettes just trying to prevent Maemuki from getting lynched allows me to draw alignment tells especially when one of them has flipped.

TL;DR: IceGuy is not providing reasoning for his scum reads and is sheeping onto other cases instead. He is trying to look town by QQing and walling up the thread with Seil/RC. He is not actually scum hunting, but is asking trivial questions and squabbling with townies to look like hes doing something.

tl;dr: Your case is completely fake and a last-minute attempt to get a townie lynched who figured you out.

[IceGuy]

IceGuys defense is worthy of votes.

It was obviously good enough you couldn't handwave it away and decided to try a generality instead.

[IceGuy]

Also, IceGuy. I wouldn't mind a claim from you.

Fuck off, rolefishing scum. I'm not claiming.