Mini 1412: 0 Percent Flavor Mafia Finis

[-L-]

Confirm.

[-L-]

Hello all.

[-L-]

VOTE: Tochica

You are a starfish, what do you have to fear from a human destroyer?

I can stretch my destructive tendencies a bit wider to adapt, so Tochica should definitely fear.

Hello all.

No RVS? Any particular reason for this?

I do not play on mafiascum often, last I played it was not required. In fact - it shouldn't be.

[-L-]

I also concur with what Central stated, and when I read his statement it read as though he were speaking on game theory, as opposed to the present game. I would have said the same sooner or later in the game - inactive town are as good as scum in my eyes.

The only town who are worth something are those who participate and scum hunt. For a group who spends the majority of their game time uninformed - talking and observing aloud does wonders for the group.

Currently I suspect Fritz (I'll detail why soon, my thoughts are jumbled), and I cannot determine yet if Destroyer is a silly town who misunderstands mafia cues, or is scum making an effort to look town by pulling threads out of a well woven sweater. Nothing substantial about his suspicions thus far.

To all - the statement of mine that Human Destroyer called "defensive" - do you also observe it that way? I was under the impression I was making a statement, nothing more.

[-L-]

Feel free to vote me; I do not fear votes. I only fear wagons, my dear.

By asking why I did not vote during RVS, that implies that I did something incorrectly. Hence, my statement.

[-L-]

Hmm.

TCS, HD, and L all seem to be reacting townishly. I will keep my vote on theaceofspades.
@TCS: Did you mean town in the sense of the collective town, i.e. the whole playerset?
@L: Did you just not feel like RVS voting, or was there a particular reason?

I did not see a purpose in placing a meaningless vote that would be just removed once the ante rose. It has nothing to do with the way one feels - I believe. It just clutters up the data available.

I am in no way saying that RVS is useless - but others had placed RVS votes and I didn't see a point to placing my own.

[-L-]

This is the very reason I do not play here. I prefer the faster paced games as well. Just as an aside.

[-L-]

Unvote

@havingfitz - Isn't scumchat usually limited to either all the time or night only? If day has started I don't know how they could be "extending their chat."

With a join date of November 7, 2008 - why are you pretending you don't know that scum get to chat prior to the start of the day?

Vote: MonkeyMan576

Out of RVS - scum found.

If a person's join date works against them as evidence, it is silly. Base your accusation on the number of games a person has played - not on their join date. Flimsy.

[-L-]

The Mod posted the vote counts above, with Human Destroyer leading with 4 and Ace on 3. These are mainly just 'RVS' to get the all rolling, maybe except -L-'s vote against HavingFitz where she said "Currently I suspect Fritz (I'll detail why soon, my thoughts are jumbled),". Since HavingFitz only posted once since the game started and it was a vote vs L, the "jumbled thoughts" are probably the usual that "anyone who votes against me must be the enemy". That might not make it much more valuable or informative than any other random vote on day 1.

So then the one that is most interesting to me is Yates' vote against MonkeyMan, simply because he's claiming that it is not a random, but a vote with a clear motivation:

Unvote

@havingfitz - Isn't scumchat usually limited to either all the time or night only? If day has started I don't know how they could be "extending their chat."

With a join date of November 7, 2008 - why are you pretending you don't know that scum get to chat prior to the start of the day?

Vote: MonkeyMan576

Out of RVS - scum found.

That doesn't mean Yates is right, but it does mean it's something worth investigating.

If a person's join date works against them as evidence, it is silly. Base your accusation on the number of games a person has played - not on their join da

I can vouch for that since I made an account long before actually joining this game, but that isn't the case with MonkeyMan.

"MonkeyMan576 Profile http://forum.mafiascum.net/memberlist.p ... le&u=10332 Total posts: 3287 (0.07% of all posts / 2.15 posts per day)"

@ Yates how unlikely is it that he'd be unaware of the scumchat timing rules? @ Anyone - Are they always the same on here or do Mods sometimes make them use different chat rules?

Argh. I'm posting on my phone and it's a he ache to separate the quotes. I'll address you with separate paragraphs.

@Matt - I do not suspect Fitz for voting me, I suspect him for his two posts to start out the game. I did not pay attention to his RVS vote (it did not register). My thoughts are incoherent and still not solidified - in other words - all I have is a hunch. Once I see the game play out my thoughts will become clearer.

Regarding your analysis of Yates - who are you to make a statement like "that doesn't mean he is right"? That, in my eyes, is a scumslip. It is the scum taking a knowledgeable trip. So since it is worth investigating - you must have questions for Yates. What are they?

Different mods have different rules, although there exists a general consensus.

[-L-]

That evidence of Monkey's activity was not presented. Only hi join date was presented as a reason to find fault with him, and that was what I objected to. Everything everyone is pointing me to (such as his profile, past games with Monkey) are not things I would have known just by reading "I'm voting Monkey because of his join date".

One must present evidence as evidence - not something someone has to search for or ask for (in the case of past experience in playing with Monkey).

Am I wrong?

[-L-]

In re-reading, Monkey has elements in his post 37 that were not even being discussed. Derping it up, Slandaar? That is a stretch.

No on was discussing anything at that point, no one made mention of a chat, no one made mention of extending anything - what Monkey said just came out of the blue.

Why is that, Monkey?

[-L-]

I did - I didn't see any such mention...

[-L-]

Hmmm. The day started, Fitz posted once, then your weird post. I am not understanding the problem or the explanation you're giving for coming out of the blue with your statement.

Edit after addition: Ah, you are talking about pregame? That was what made me believe Fitz was scummy. And looking back - the first "two posts" that made me suspicious consist of pregame comments.

[-L-]

Look Monkey and L stop posting

Go and reread

MONKEY: Day started on page 2 where mod posts the VC: READ THE MODS POSTS ALSO.

Now, reread and post after.

I probably re-read games more than you do. Do not ceaselessly remind me to re-read. If I am asking a question it is because I genuinely do not see your point of view.

[-L-]

I even had to break down my re-read to get you guys to answer - please do not make me feed you Cheerios again just to get my questions answered.

[-L-]

Yates has tunnel vision and does not wish to modify his view at all. This is not a positive town attribute to have, and a ballsy one for scum to have.

[-L-]

This is not a positive town attribute to have, and a ballsy one for scum to have.

And you appear to be playing to your scum meta. We each have our crosses to bear.

I have played mafia too long to have a meta, my dear. I have only a few games on this site, and only one completed. So if you would like others to believe I am playing to my "meta", how about you support your statement with examples?

[-L-]

Why is he damned if he 'backpedals'; he took new information into account ie what he should do as town so where is the damning part? (there isn't one) if he were town he would not feel damned for changing his mind with the new information presented ergo he is scum.

Because there's honestly two case scenarios here:

1) I keep pushing: "His case is so weak and he's pushing it too much, he must be scum!"

2) I backpedal: "He backed down too easily, he must be scum!"

Therefore, yes, it is "damned if I do damned if I don't".

Also Monkey is so scummy right now; if he flips scum (which I think he will) I'd like to look into Slandaar more.

P-Edit: Except Yates is probably right.

The issue is not on whether you were correct about there being only two views on this backpedal. The issue lies in that being the only thing you see. A townie would have seen what he'd done as a mistake. A townie wouldn't have permutated all of the possible reactions to his backpedal.

Now you see what Slandaar was getting at?

And if Yates is wrong - how do we figure that into the equation?

[-L-]

FOS Monkey

[-L-]

So if you would like others to believe I am playing to my "meta", how about you support your statement with examples?

Just realized you may be posting from a phone and didn't see that I did.

http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=52&t=19374

That was the hypertext link from "scum meta."

That link takes me to the beginning of the thread. Does this site behave differently on a mobile?

[-L-]

You're just sad you don't have a real case and that your probable scum-buddy Monkey is flailing.

Who are you addressing?

[-L-]

@yates: Cos my diction, timing of posts, questions asked, and general method just FEEL town. I have got that knack.
At any rate, Slandaar, it is better to keep your town thoughts to yourself because it allows the scum to strategize who they will not target with their slander.

[-L-]

Who are you addressing?

I thought it was fairly obvious he was addressing Slandaar. Why so jumpy?

Jumpy? I was merely asking because it was not clear.

Why so sad? (Totally unrelated but that is how your 'jumpy' question struck me).

[-L-]

At any rate, Slandaar, it is better to keep your town thoughts to yourself because it allows the scum to strategize who they will not target with their slander.

This is perhaps the least Town post I have seen in some time.

The least town post of all my posts? Or of the entire thread?

And - if you don't mind sharing your belief on telling who you believe to be town - I'd love to hear it. "Is it a good idea to say who you believe to be town, and why?"

[-L-]

Totally unrelated but that is how your 'jumpy' question struck me

No it's totally related. I wanted to know why you are so "jumpy" because the message - to an impartial observer - was clearly directed towards Slandaar. The fact that you thought the post needed clarification? It looked like you were concerned the post was directed at you. That's paranoia. For someone with no pressure on them [yet] paranoia is pretty scummy this early in the game.

So we have a Monkey/L scum team so far. I wonder who else is going to out themselves.

PE:
@CS - the only "nonsense" is your characterization of my Monkey case as "nonsense."
@L - Your post is one of the scummiest posts I've seen ON SITE - not just in the thread. While I don't necessarily make my Town reads known unless needed, my scum reads are always put out there with reason. Anyone that doesn't do one of the two is not playing towards a Town win condition.
@Monkey - It's not a stretch. "Lynch all Lurkers" is absolutely a policy. The fact it isn't in a wiki doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I would point you towards the scene in "A Few Good Men" where Kaffee asks Cpl Barnes to point out the mess hall in the "Marine Outline for Recruit Training," but I thought that might be overkill.

On second thought...

Spoiler:

Capt. Ross: Corporal Barnes, I hold here the Marine Outline for Recruit Training. You're familiar with this book?
Cpl. Barnes: Yes, sir.
Capt. Ross: Have you read it?
Cpl. Barnes: Yes, sir.
Capt. Ross: Good. Would you turn to the chapter that deals with code reds, please?
Cpl. Barnes: Sir?
Capt. Ross: Just flip to the page of the book that discusses code reds.
Cpl. Barnes: Well, well, you see, sir code red is a term that we use, I mean, just down at Gitmo, I don't know if it's actually...
Capt. Ross: Ah, we're in luck then. Standard Operating Procedures, Rifle Security Company, Guantanamo Bay Cuba. Now I assume we'll find the term code red and its definition in that book. Am I correct?
Cpl. Barnes: No sir.
Capt. Ross: No? Corporal Barnes, I'm a Marine. Is there no book. No manual or pamphlet, no set of orders or regulations that lets me know that, as a Marine, one of my duties is to perform code reds?
Cpl. Barnes: No sir. No book, sir.
Capt. Ross: No further questions.
[as Ross walks back to his table Kaffee takes the book out of his hand]
Kaffee: Corporal, would you turn to the page in this book that says where the mess hall is, please.
Cpl. Barnes: Well, Lt. Kaffee, that's not in the book, sir.
Kaffee: You mean to say in all your time at Gitmo you've never had a meal?
Cpl. Barnes: No, sir. Three squares a day, sir.
Kaffee: I don't understand. How did you know where the mess hall was if it's not in this book?
Cpl. Barnes: Well, I guess I just followed the crowd at chow time, sir.
Kaffee: No more questions.

I never thought the question was directed at me. I will help you get into my head and the way I think, to prevent such mistakes in the future. Too many of them and I get irritated quickly.

When I play, especially as town, I strive for clarity. Posts that do not address anyone can mislead the next reader. So for the sake of clarity - I ask for conciseness. I play while looking out for the stupid townie. I want even the slowest, most uninterested person to follow along - because when crunch time arrives - I might be stuck with that person vs one scum.

I think ahead, and I think like a leader. I am not self protective - which is why I always get lynched or killed early. But I always bring out evidence to aid the town.

Paranoid? Get your idea of me correct. I am also very calm - I am not jumping down your throat. Think - Spock.

[-L-]

And Yates, you misread my quote if you think I am against sharing scum reads. Read slower, your comprehension is stuttering.

[-L-]

And Yates, you misread my quote if you think I am against sharing scum reads. Read slower, your comprehension is stuttering.

Is that the case? What part of "it is better to keep your town thoughts to yourself" did I misunderstand as being anti-Town?

Spoiler:

it is better to keep your town thoughts to yourself

For someone who claims to "strive for clarity," that certainly wasn't a very clear statement now was it?

Ok - I will reword since you misunderstood.

"Town-thoughts"

"Those you believe to be town"

I apologize for not being clear.

[-L-]

scum is always worried about coming off too hard or appearing frantic. Blood in the water. Scum doesn't ever want to look like they are worried.

This is based on what? I see that you have 61 posts so it's clearly not based on your experiences at MS.

You are the type of player who is quite like a wasp - squishy, and quick to anger. Very emotional. If I were scum and you were town I would just get you worked up in a tizzy and get you lynched. Keep calm. I know not everyone is the same or plays the same, but do try.

I have fewer than 300 posts - do you judge players' experience by their post counts? That's a faulty judgement.

[-L-]

VOTE: matt-shadowlord

His posts were fluffy at best, and he is the most likely opportunistic scum from my point of view.

[-L-]

Which makes me inclined to think Yates as Scum or tunneling townie.

Why can't I be 3rd party like an SK or Survivor?

You are the type of player who is quite like a wasp - squishy, and quick to anger. Very emotional.

It's possible. I guess you would have to know my meta to be sure. Unfortunately for your theory,

all of my posts have included objective analysis of facts, posts, and players that include links to irrefutable truths.

I would, in fact, challenge you to quote a single post of mine that supports this theory of "emotional" play and that demonstrates a read based on emotion over evidence.

I look forward to you meeting this challenge, L. Also, in order to avoid confusion in the future, please allow the subject of a question to answer any questions addressed to them on their own. Thank you in advance.

Emotional types always respond in this manner. While I will not point out individual posts that paint you as an emotional gentleman because it will only derail the game - I will say that only emotional types respond in this way. I will not allow a derail.

[-L-]

@ Yates it doesn't work. Which is why I'm voting for you. To keep it that way. Also. Monkey has nothing scum sounding. He sounds %100 town. So maybe he's the best scum ever. But I doubt it.

Blood_y_Entrails. It was pre-crash and I hadn't played recently anywhoo. So sorry. No meta here. YOu'll just have to pay attention.

@ everyone. I'm thinking an HD Yates scumteam now. What do y''all think?

Yates is possible, but I am leaning rabid tunnel town for him. Matt, HD, and Arc all look likely to me.

On average, how many scum per 13 man game? Three or two, correct?

[-L-]

Emotional types always respond in this manner.

Ah yes. The old strawman defense when unable to provide actual supporting context. Got it. Noted.

You are a man who has http://nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ bookmarked.

There is nothing to defend against. That is an offshoot topic that you took personal offense to [agains, proving my point] and sought retribution in seeking evidence.

[-L-]

@L - what do you make of theaceofspades' inability to provide a valid previous userid?

Also, thanks for the link. I didn't have that site bookmarked but it's worth being able to reference in the future for when you continue using logical fallacies.

I didn't ask you to "defend" anything. I simply asked you to provide objective evidence. The inability to do so would suggest that perhaps you are mistaken, wouldn't you agree?

I disagree. My conclusions about your emotionalism are correct, though you may deny them. You will not change that thought. Emotionalism is not bad - as you may be accustomed to be receiving on this site. It is merely my observation of your playstyle - and my admonition to those who might read your posts differently. It has nothing to do with you personally. It has no reason to be proven.

And have fun with that site.

[-L-]

Regarding theaceofspades inability to provide a proper userid - I am indifferent. It has no bearing on my view of his alignment. While it prevents searching out his meta, I am not a player who wastes time searching meta. Tiring, it is. So I do not have much to say. My id changed

, and I imagine that those will not show up as well.

@aceofspades - why doesn't your old id work when yates searches for it?

[-L-]

I do not discount any information gained for the town. In no way did I discount meta as a viable source of information.

I merely mentioned my own dislike for searching for meta.

[-L-]

I do not discount any information gained for the town. In no way did I discount meta as a viable source of information.

I merely mentioned my own dislike for searching for meta.

Again, as someone who professes to crave clarity, please be more clear in the future.

With my previous post in mind, do you see why I would be interested in understanding why Ace is unable/unwilling to provide the requested information? Also, do you think his inability/unwillingness makes him more Town/less Town/makes no difference?

What I said was clear. Your perception was faulty. Try not perceiving, read what written.

I do understand why you would be interested in understanding why Ace is unable/unwilling to provide the requested information. You did not previously ask me to comment on that - you asked me to comment on what I thought of ace's inability to provide a working id.

I addressed your last question previously.

Regarding theaceofspades inability to provide a proper userid - I am indifferent. It has no bearing on my view of his alignment. While it prevents searching out his meta, I am not a player who wastes time searching meta. Tiring, it is. So I do not have much to say. My id changed

, and I imagine that those will not show up as well.

@aceofspades - why doesn't your old id work when yates searches for it?

[-L-]

It is because the SK "need

to play as Town as possible in order to not be investigated" that they are anti-town. As far as the town is concerned - the SK ought to be lynched and eradicated. After all, the SK can thin the town numbers.

Now, when I get the SK role - most times I do not kill and play as town. When I catch a whiff of scum, I kill them. But I'm pro-town, always. ^.~ People tend to look on me favorbly when SK, as though I am a free vigilante.

But I completely agree with TAM - anti-town are all those who do not aid the town win condition.

[-L-]

When I catch a whiff of scum, I kill them. But I'm pro-town, always.

I agree with this and that's why I said SK needs to play as if they are Town.

However, that still isn't the point and you claim to be against tangential arguments.

I didn't understand you.

Scum wouldn't necessarily object to the idea they were tunnelling if confronted about it in such terms as I did.

And you think Town would act any different? Let's call a spade a spade. You made a fluff post about my alignment that pretended to be a contribution but that didn't actually state anything. At best, that post can be construed as fence sitting and that is not a position you want to be in.

Hmm.

[-L-]

I typed inside your quote thinking it would show properly.

"I didn't understand your bolded statement.

[-L-]

I'm still thinking a Human Destroyer and Yates scumteam.

and I'd like to repeat the question of. How many scum are there?
Here's what I'm thinking
13 players
about 60 percent of which should be town right?
so %60 of 13 is 8 (rounding)
so 5 possibles of scum
if there is another two towns or town character (doc cop Vig)
then there are three scum or 2 and a third party.
so that would be 10 town and 3 not? That seems more reasonable to me then 11 and 2.

so my guess is 3 scum.

Highly unlikely - game would be over by night two. Having modded many games in my career, two or three is more likely.

[-L-]

"I didn't understand your bolded statement.

Is this what you are looking for?

This of course is all moot as

I was simply making a jab at the fact you included me in 100% of the available alignment possibilities which is the same as not having a read at all.

No, it isn't. I am looking for an explanation of "against tangential arguments".

I do not see any tangential arguments. I also do not see any tangential arguments that I am usually against.

You claim you aren't a noob yet everything about your play suggests otherwise. Meta would help *ME* understand if you are scum, actually a noob, or if you are legitimately confused bad Town. Knowing how someone has responded to certain scenarios and situations in the past certainly isn't 100% effective but it *can* be a useful tool for evaluating your play and, by proxy, your alignment.

I disagree that his gameplay is noobish. His points and conclusions are those of a seasoned/half-seasoned player.

[-L-]

I apologize ace - I did not read your post entirely. I stopped when I read five scum, and posted.

[-L-]

Oh, you noticed he wasn't hunting? ^.~ He is defensive and attacks people's gameplay as though that is scum hunting. I was just waiting to see if he would calm down and actually get to hunting. Let's just wait and watch, shall we? It is always the best method.

Regarding Yates and your comment about "another mafia site and no clue how balance works" - you are treading in unknown waters with that comment. I have played mafia much longer than you have, and probably longer than you have been alive. I come from no mafia site - I visit many sites and as many forums I have been on - I start mafia games and teach the locals to play mafia. I look at people as fresh meat, and I tire of people when I know their metas. I can agree with your comment about not out-guessing the mod - but merely speculating is not outguessing. When one pursues an idea further than speculation - that is outguessing.

@yates, once again, I am wondering about your tangential arguments comment. Did I say I was against tangential arguments? If I remember correctly, you are referring to my avoidance of your derail into your personality. That is not tangential. But because you are interpreting it as tangential, you believe I am against tangential arguments. Your comment is incorrect.

[-L-]

So, am I correct in believing that HD's suspicion of Slandaar (and vote) is based on Slandaar's "defense' associative relation to Monkey? Does that suspicion not fall to pieces when he lacks suspicion of monkey? (Less suspicious)

FOS Human Destroyer

[-L-]

I didn't see it as stretching. He posted reasons (valid, I concurred though I did not speak my thoughts) and then voted.

If Slandaar thinks anything like me, which I suspect he does - he knew his suspicion was valid before he knew exactly why. It's like being myopic - you can identify the object but you have to examine it up close to really pinpoint the "why" and "how". This is how I work, at least. It is not the same as building the case afterward.

[-L-]

No - I suspect Matt more. You are a peanut who, if scum, will out your comrades. If town, eventually you will begin scum hunting instead of being defensive.

[-L-]

lol HD.

Yates how do you not read me town even for day 2 in said game?

Why are you suggesting there is something wrong with showing someone why they have no clue what the case on them is and trying to show someone else why the case is bad? Because I can see what is going on and so decide to sort the mess out I am associated with them?

I should have left Monkey having no clue and you making a case which is clearly wrong? Why would I do this as town exactly?

Precisely a town action, and what convinced me of Slandaar's innocence. Slandaar - back when Monkey and I got into a tiff - came in and tried to clear things up and attempted to bring clarity where confusion reigned. To me - this is the most subtle pro town move a person can make.

Now, if Slandaar is scum even after this - I do not fear being incorrect. No one is always correct in Mafia.

[-L-]

I'd suggest we try avoid personal insults

Is this directed at L?

Says the one who constantly berates players. Beachy one this is.

[-L-]

Matt

can you like

actually contribute thoughts about the game

and not useless fluff

plsthx

Oh you finally noticed? Votematt ^.^

His opportunistic vote for Monkey, his lack of input (as fluffy as a valentine bear), and what could be called active lurking at this stage of the game.

[-L-]

Absolutely. I am working on a list of names and thoughts to put beside them at the moment, it should take another 20 mins.

This should be entertaining. This is even worded scummy.

"Working on a list of names" - you don't have a couple of suspects? These are the words of a scum who will pick and choose his fights based on who he think he can get lynched. This is why I dislike town sharing their town reads - because if several people believe an individual is town, a scum will unwittingly attack that player - outing himself. Sharing town reads enables the scum to separate targets into safe/unsafe buckets. Which is what Matt is probably doing now. I bet two or three of his suspects will be lurker a, ignoring the active people.

"Thoughts to put beside them" - this is also worded scummy. It smacks of fabrication. I am rushing to post this before he posts his argument to see what he does.

"Another 20 minutes" - I don't believe for one minute Matt was working on such a list before HD asked for it.

[-L-]

Yates - are you serious? Who would take offense to being called a peanut in my view of who is scum and isn't? That's retarded - and you have failed in reading comprehension yet again. I laugh. Even HD just shrugged and thought - oh - I'm not that important to -L- right now.

After which HD chose to scum hunt on my vote target - which right now I do not mind at all. It's fleshing Matt out for the town.

[-L-]

I do wish someone would suspect me. I'm bored.

My thoughts are my own. What I say about outing town reads comes from my playstyle, and my experience. In this way, I am telling you what makes me pull off townplay when scum. Outing town reads only aids me.

So - I am sharing the warning to help - suit yourself and say "our way is better cos that's the way we do things 'round here!"

[-L-]

There is a difference between posting your reads on people, and saying who you believe is town.

[-L-]

Yates is town.
Slandaar is town.

Everyone who posts without opining on another player's scumminess in that post is anti-town.

L has 52 posts which contain 4 reads and 1 vote.

L scum claims here:

When I play, especially as town, I strive for clarity.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: -L-

Everyone, stop walling and start playing mafia.

Hmm. You sought very hard to make a case on me. You did not find any inconsistencies, any scum slips, or any lies to speak of. You compare the number of reads I have shared (who else has shared four? Certainly not Yates or Slandaar).

Qwints, what is your reason for saying Yates is obvtown? And Slandaar for that matter, since you used my reason for thinking he was obvtown.

You come in riding on a horse, but you are parroting others ideas.

[-L-]

After reading Monkey in isolation, I'm not getting scummy vibes from him. There was one point where he was like "hmmm, who to vote next? Oh - lurkers! That's a good idea!" which made me suspicious. But the glut of his posts sound town.

But looking at it from another tack, Monkey has only risen to defend himself or to validate arguments against him. Along with the above, this would make him more scummy.

[-L-]

@monkey - what makes Yates scummy as opposed to blinded and tunneling town?

[-L-]

My reason for remaining silent is because I am not confident in my hunches today. As the days go by, I gain more evidence and more confidence. Day 1 cannot have town posting reads every post.

My primary goal is to do the hunting and questioning poor arguments. I leave others to assimilate the information I have created, and create reads. I then assimilate reads and develop my own. This is how I play. I hunt primarily.

[-L-]

@the central scrutinizer - that is fair. I can't argue with that.

I will warn you though - I have played so long I have no meta. I actually behave the same in all roles. It's an art!

One must find evidence against me or lynch me for being the eternal unknown.

[-L-]

So is this L-5 or 4 for me?

[-L-]

I have a town read on Yates because there is a reckless quality about him. His tunneling feels more townish than scummy. The balls on this man, to believe all thoughts on monkey were planted by himself. Tsk.

[-L-]

May we see a vote tally? I'd like to peek at who voted Yates. And my own collection of votes. Teehee.

[-L-]

I've tried, nope.

I almost want to unvote Matt because his thoughts on Yates' case mirrored my own - and so now can we move on from Monkey for now? All of these pages dealt with him in some form or fashion.

Alduskkel - what is your opinion on the game thus far? What is your opinion of Slandaar?

[-L-]

Oo oo ! I know! Do me!

[-L-]

UNVOTE: matt-shadowlord

[-L-]

Oh joy!

So um... Where are the questions? Or did I earn a free hayride to the lynch?

[-L-]

Yes - has anyone tea my town play? It is much the same

[-L-]

*read

EBWOP

[-L-]

Before I am accused of OMGUS behavior - hear me out. I much prefer to fistfight with scum, and since no one ever bothers me, I tend to make myself into a little worm to have bites. Occasionally I gfet bites from town, but most times from scum. By putting people through my wringer, then the town can decide on the alignment of my target.

Current target? The Central Scrutinizer. The happy go lucky gentleman who pops in every now and again and makes posts to stay active.

Hours are rounded up. They offer nothing more than an idea of a person's typical pacing in a game - those geniuses out there who analyze that sort of thing now have the data. I have not analyzed The Central Scrutinizer closely before making this analysis; at this point, he rates as a null-scum on my radar, where

town [---------o------] scum

is my scumdar. Now! On to the good stuff!

/confirm

12 Jan 2013, 20:05

This post was 24 hours after the mod announced the game.

I apologize for the delay; I had a lot of chores to take care of today.

+1 minute

So, my question is - don't mafia games typically take 2 days to start? They have in my experience. I thought that this apology was unneccesary. And - in my experience, scum tend to apologize or excuse themselves. And was the chores explanation even neccessary? Seems a bit put upon - and excuse makers always trip my scumdar. Always.

"Sorry, I was in the bathroom." "Sorry, I have a busload of classes!" "Sorry, I'm posting from my phone and can't type."

I kind of like the aceofspades wagon as long as he's inactive. So for now, VOTE: theaceofspades

+15 hours

Oh...where should place my RVS vote? Hmmm - oh! This guy - aceofspades! As long as he isn't around, I'll be the second person on his wagon. I'm mentioning that he's not around cos when he comes back, I'll be a gentleman and remove my vote. Don't want to make him uncomfortable, you know?

There's everything to like about lynching people who don't contribute. Active town is good town, inactive town is bad town.

+7 minutes

You say this - but the game only started hours ago. This smacks of scum trying to say mafia truisms to sound town. Scum will do this - which is why one must analyze why a person spoke the truism. When truisms are spoken to explain votes - it is scummy. When truisms are spoken to set a townie straight, it can be townie or a seasoned scum player.

I just like RVS wagons.

Good scumhunting though giving me the answer to your question.

I kind of like the aceofspades wagon as long as he's inactive. So for now, VOTE: theaceofspades

This vote seems to be taking an opportunity in the fact that an inactive has an RVS wagon going to vote him for a non-RVS reason. This post alone, however, doesn't make me suspicious. This does:

There's everything to like about lynching people who don't contribute. Active town is good town, inactive town is bad town.

It looks like you have a couple of things going here:

a) You know he's going to flip town by the fact you say "inactive town" and nothing about "inactive scum".

b) You mention nothing about lynching scum, only lynching inactive town over active town.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: The Central Scrutinizer

I haven't played a game on this site in a while, but several years ago it was a considered valid Day 1 strategy to lynch inactive players, because either you lynch scum or you get rid of a player that is doing nothing to help find scum.

You could easily replace "town" in those phrases with "thread" or "discussion." It has nothing whatsoever to do with town/scum in my mind. It is in the best interests of the town as a faction for all players to post actively, scum or town, because that is the primary way of generating information that results in good lynches.

+30 minutes

I'm sorry guys - I haven't played in a while - here is my reason for trying to lynch inactive players. It's not because I'm scum or anything.

Another apology, I never like apologies. Another truism, for the purpose of defense. Scum points.

[Aside: I'm sorry, right now, my scumdar has TCS @ T[-------------o---]S. A bit difficult to see him otherwise, lol. I'll leave that to others.]

I think that Yates's accusation of Monkeyman in post #59 is nonsense. Monkeyman never made a single positive claim about whether scum can talk during QT, daytalk, night, whatever. He made no positive statement at all, but asked a question. He thought that day had started because there were posts with content, in which context havingfitz's comment about extending scum private chat time would have made no sense. So Yates's accusation was based on either a misread or malice.

In my limited experience scum is more likely to jump on wagons than to start them, so my question is, who jumped on this CLEARLY erroneous bandwagon? How did people react?

In post #65, -L- was skeptical.
In post #67 Matt-Shadowlord seemed confused but thought it might be a plausible line of inquiry.
In post #68, havingfitz voted for Monkeyman, claiming that Yates "beat him to it"
In post #71 Alduskkel voted for Monkeyman with no explanation
In post #74 Yates posts "evidence" that shows that Monkeyman definitely knows that scum can talk N0. But the fact remains that Monkeyman never claimed that such a thing was impossible.
In post #75 Matt-Shadowlord buys it and votes Monkeyman
In post #80, Human Destroyer jumps on the wagon with the comment "this is a good wagon"

On the next page, Yates seems to be suffering from extreme tunnelvision. I agree with -L-'s comment in #135 and its implication that this is more likely to be a townie trait than a scum trait.

In post #132, havingfitz unvotes Monkeyman without reason given.
In #140 TheActingMethod "doesn't get" the bandwagon

----

The one thing I'm really uncomfortable with here is that my number one suspect after first re-read was havingfitz, and I don't think scum would jump off the wagon at that point (unless Monkeyman were actually scum).

So I have two options: Monkey/Fitz scumteam, or Option 2. Option 2 is that Monkey is town and Alduskkel, Matt, or HD (but not all) are scum opportunistically hopping on wagons.

Monkey just doesn't read scum to me, especially after reading him in isolation in the game Yates posted. So I'm going to go with option 2. Of those three I am most comfortable with a HD vote. UNVOTE: theaceofspades VOTE: Human Destroyer

Other thoughts: Yates and L are probably town.

+27 hours

Now, here - branching off of the thought that TCS is scum - this looks like an early defense of Monkey. If town, he is berating Yates for a faulty argument. Suspects havingfitz [omg I just understood your name "having fits". slooooooow.].

Now if he is scum, he is setting Monkey and Fitz up as a scum team, simultaneously creating distance. If he is town, he is both berating Yates for a faulty argument against Monkey, and finding fault with Monkey [scratch that "if town" statement now, leaving for posterity]. He is still positing Monkey as town. Scummy all the way. Votes Human Destroyer for jumping on the Monkey wagon.

Now - if I recall - HD hasn't posted in a long while. After hearing my peanut statement about being my bait for scum, he dropped off the thread. Anyone else notice this? Just a thought.

Actually Lynch all Lurkers is considered a policy lynch

Probably the most common one I've seen other than Lynch all Liars

@TCS: How do you not think MonkeyMan is scum? Just look at the whole part where he unvotes me and waits about 5 posts before voting for a lurker, which he had stated intent to vote earlier. Not only that, he voted someone who had

just recently contributed

. Wouldn't his vote be better suited for someone that's, y'know, actually not contributing if that's his angle?

Monkey says a couple of things I don't like, but my first impression upon reading the game Yates posted was that he didn't come off as playing like he did in that game. I don't see him as totally innocent, though. However, I do see him as the target of the day's first major bandwagon and argument, and because I don't see that the argument Yates is making against him has any merit whatsoever, I am inclined to believe that at least one of the people who jumped on his wagon is opportunistic scum.

+2 hours

At the time, I recall reading "opportunistic scum" and went back to look at the vote rate and sequence, and considered current posts - and then voted Matt. At the time he seemed the most likely scum to me. Now he is null.

In this post, TCS admits that Monkey says things he doesn't like [hey! I'm in the same mind as you guys!] but that because Yates' argument is thin, he is apt to believe Monkey is null. Or, if town - because Yates' argument doesn't hold water, Monkey can't be pinned as anything yet.

I agree in part and dissent in part with Slandaar's last analysis. I don't think that scum is necessarily more self-conscious about looking bad. As a townie, I'm just as concerned about throwing off false scum-tells as not. I'd rather not be voted ever, at all, in any game. Therefore I'm not prepared to look at HD's concern for his appearance in #50 as a scum tell.

On the other hand, I share his disagreement with HD's conclusion that should MM flip scum, Slandaar falls under heavy suspicion. Based on Slandaar's posting, I don't think there's a good chance that if MM flips scum that Slandaar is also scum. Scum isn't often going to defend scum on day 1 in the face of a growing wagon. Rather, scum would buddy up with a townie under fire, making Slandaar a weak scum possibility in a universe where MM flips town. It would be a good play for potential Slandaar-scum, building him an ally if Monkey is not lynched and making him look better when Monkey flips town.

With that in mind I re-read Slandaar in isolation. Barring his last post I'm getting strong scum vibes from him. He voted HD during RVS and is sitting on the wagon. He hasn't done any real scumhunting and has posted mostly non-content. He even buddied up to monkey a little. He could be somewhat lazy town, but I see his behavior as scummy. Further, I would posit that if he flips scum, there is a high probability that he has been locked onto a scumpartner all along in order to play the long game.

Therefore, I will go with what I see as the superior information play. UNVOTE: Human Destroyer VOTE: Slandaar

+20 hours

I will admit bias - I am fairly confident of Slandaar's town status. So I view TCS' disagreement with Slandaar's sense as a defense of Monkey. Slandaar [slander?] was pointing out Yates' weaknesses.

If TCS is town, he made an analysis about confirmation bias with Slandaar/HD/Monkey. He genuinely believed Slandaar's reasoning was weak. But - I'm apt to disbelieve such foolishness.

If TCS is scum, in the same post he calls slandaar "weak scum possibility in a universe where Monkey flips town", "potential Slandaar scum", "strong scum vibes from [Slandaar]", VOTE SLANDAAR.

Inconsistent much? All in one post too! Can't get any better than that. I almost say we use TCS as bait instead of HD - cos he name drops like a mofo.

1. In post #90 you buddy up to Monkey by defending him.
2. You make a lot of definitive statements: "X is town"
3. You tunnel HD first and then make your case later
4. I disagree strongly with your read on Yates so I don't think that the HD/Yates distancing argument has much merit. Seems to me more like you're scum trying to sacrifice one of your comrades (a common play) and then maybe get a free Yates lynch tomorrow.

In many ways I like your case on HD, but you have overall seemed scummier and I think that lynching you before him gives us more information.

+2 hours

Reasons to vote Slandaar.

1. Buddy to monkey [so if town, believes monkey is town; if scum, paints monkey as town]
2. definitive statements are a personality thing. I speak definitively.
3. Incorrect - Slandaar did not tunnel HD [tunnel became the thread catchphrase after I accused Yates of tunneling, now he's using it against his vote target] and then vote HD.
4. He called Yates' arguments weak before, and then disagrees with Slandaar's same conjecture? Huh? O.o

Last post was RE: Slandaar, obviously.

+0 minutes

Blah.

That makes him a bad scumhunter; it doesn't make him scum.

+13 minutes

Says this of Yates. If town, he sees Yates as tunneling town, and his attacker as scum. Fits with his vote.

If scum - calls slandaar's argument weak against another player to make him look bad in the eyes of town.

I'm realizing how heavily my view of TCS is based on Slandaar, but I am trying to be balanced.

Something I forgot to emphasize in my posts RE:Slandaar. I

would

like to hear Yates and HD's respective opinions of one another, and I don't think I'm the only one.

+13 minutes

Good.

@TCS, in 42why'd you vote theaceofspades as inactive and not mention Matt, who also hadn't posted?

Because where voting/lynching inactives is the policy I'm attempting to vote in accordance with, joining a wagon on an inactive player makes more sense to me than being the only vote on an inactive player.

+9 hours

Early wagon vote gains more traction. Forgiven, for now.

qwints, can you share with me why you think Slandaar is town? I'm not reading that.

Also, if Slandaar is town, what effect if any of your opinion on HD?

+1 minute

Good.

If scum, he is watching a threat to the wagon he is creating.

UNVOTE: Slandaar
VOTE: -L-

+14 hours

I requested attention. I got it. /dances

He did drop Slandaar quite effortlessly, wouldn't you say?

After reading past threads -L- has been in, I am forced to agree with Yates that she reads more like her scum meta than not.

+2 minutes

I can't find Yates' post showing one thread of mine, in which my scum play was shown. Because TCS' thoughts are based on Yates' thoughts, that would mean he is feeding off of Yates, and can blame Yates upon my mislynch. After all - he was following someone else's idea.

I'd like to see qwints and alduskkel post more. Alduskkel is in a lot of games so it's possible he's just swamped. Which to me is a town read. If he was scum he'd be much more intent on this game. The lack of posting coupled with no scummy behavior to speak of gives me a town read. qwints has just not been posting. I actually forgot he was here to be honest.


All in all. Her'es my thoughts now as far as reads

Town
Monkey
Acting
Scrutinize
ace
L
alduskkel


Null and void where prohibited by law
angel
qwints
HD
acting method


Lean Scum
Slandaar. He's number one if Yates turns out to be town
matt

Scum
Yates

Honestly including yourself on your own list makes me think you're scum, mainly because when I was a new player I did precisely the same thing as scum.

This isn't enough but the Eye has gazed upon you, my friend, and it remembers.

+3 hours

ace putting his name somewhere in the middle of the list is what is suspicious, not actually putting himself on the list. This should be noted later, because people usually put themselves at the top of the list when town.

Bonus: I would jump in a volcano if I dropped this case and Monkey turned out to be scum later because I hate it when someone wins through sheer incompetence.

Confirmation bias status: confirmed.

+20 hours

blah.

P-Edit: That's less of confirmation bias and more of a preemptive "I told you so!" from what I can tell

I would say that Yates having that strong desire not to make "the wrong decision" by getting off the Monkey wagon indicates a high probability of confirmation bias in his reads.

I think that the Monkey-Yates counterwagons are a big ass waste of time. Yates is very probably town, so we should not lynch him. Further, lynching him gives us no information on anything. If he's scum, his death is good but it tells us little. If he's town, we lose a person who generates a lot of action. If we mislynch a couple of times and he's still around, we should look to Yates, but not yet. Monkey reads to me as possible scum, and I would lynch him on deadline. But I think he's a low information lynch.

We need a plausible third option that people can get behind, an option that gives us more information. That person will likely be someone who has contributed very little to scumhunting and seems content to allow us to lynch Monkey or Yates without either contributing to it, looking into other options, or seriously evaluating the posts of any others.

ISO re-read summaries:

-L-

: A little fluffy. Playing to "scum meta," based on Yates link. Moderate scum possibility.

Alduskkel

: Not a lot of posting... only on Monkey wagon. Wants to diffuse Monkeyman/Yates. Null.

ArcAngel9

: Not a lot of contribution, but shares her opinions on the scumminess/townieness of several people. Null.

havingfitz

: Monkeywagon to Yates wagon, not because he thinks Yates is scum, but basically because Yates annoys him. Longest post was all reactions to people, no hunting at all. Moderate scum possibility.

Human Destroyer

: Overall not much good analysis. Sticks to Monkey for a while but starts to look at others. Small scum possibility.

Matt-Shadowlord

: Agrees with Alduskkel on diffusing Monkey/Yates wagon. Says some slightly scummy stuff but actively hunting. Null.

Monkeyman576

: Not a lot of content. Spends most of game struggling with Yates. Small scum possibility.

Tochica/Qwints

: Seemed townie as Tochica. Not a lot of content from qwints yet but he says things that aren't dumb. Probably town.

Slandaar

: Reads seem to be polar opposites of mine. Makes some good points, actually seems to hunt. Probably some level of confirmation bias, but says scum possibility because of reads that don't seem to make sense.

The Acting Method

: Little to go on... not much hunting, Yates wagon. Small scum possibility.

theaceofspades

: On Yates wagon. Some hunting. Much of reads based on assumption Yates is mafia. Probably town.

Yates

: Town, or great scum. Tunneling Monkey. Terrible information lynch.

In summary, My vote will remain on -L- for the time being, because I think she's a decent information lynch and has a decent scum possibility, but I am also willing to

FoS: havingfitz

as a strong scum possibility and would get on his wagon.

Top three preferred wagons in order:
-L-
Fitz
HD

Ned more participation from:
The Acting Method
Alduskkel
ArcAngel9

Need to stop wagoning:
MonkeyMan
Yates

+2 hours

Can I post already? Now I'm scum more than his top two suspects, directly after requesting attention. Yawn.

I'll post more once I read what everyone has to say about my writeup.

[-L-]

So, Central Scrutinizer - a few questions.

1. What information would have Slandaar's lynch given the town? What thoughts were in your mind at the time?

[-L-]

P-Edit TCS makes some good points here. He might have just saved your ass Yates. But I'd like him to comment on the fact that he says it would be bad to lynch yates even if he is scum becasue it would tell us nothing. Am I missing something? Lynching scum is always a good thing, yes?

why should monkey care where the meta came from? He's not attacking you.

This makes me very much more extra sure you are scum. TCS. Please respond to my above question.

Initially, I don't think that Yates is scum. I think if he is scum he's making a pretty interesting play If he's still around in a couple of days I may have to reassess... he seems like a good player and thus maybe capable of such a gambit. However, on D1 I'm not willing to lynch him against my read on the basis that he's running a gambit.

On to your question. In the game of mafia lynching serves a twofold purpose -- one is to get rid of scum, and the other is to get information for subsequent lynches. Therefore, my ideal lynch candidate is a person that both has a high probability of being scum and gives me information about who his compatriots might be. If we had absolutely confirmed scum or a candidate that is vastly superior to all others, I would vote to lynch them even if they provided zero information that would help us in subsequent days. But we don't have that here. I don't see anyone who I would rate as being HIGHLY probable scum, only people that I think have a pretty good chance. And so I would support lynching one of them that would give us more information about the alignment of other players. Yates just doesn't do that. Despite posting a ton, he's basically been on Monkey the entire game and while he has posted regarding some other wagons, he hasn't done much and hasn't provided much real analysis. Even if he flips scum, which I think is low possibility, his flip tells us nothing. Was he bussing Monkey? Who did he speak to and who did he ignore? We might be able to puzzle some of these out from the walls that he's posted, but I would rather just lynch someone else because, as I said initially, I just don't buy him as scum.

I almost talked myself into a Monkey lynch earlier today simply because it would force Yates to shift his gaze to other targets, but that just wasn't a good enough reason for me to lynch Monkey unless we were having real trouble reaching a majority on a better lynch.

P-edit: I did read your town play in another game -L-, and you seemed much more into hunting and less into reacting to others. That was my impression.

P-edit 2: Wheaton's Law, Yates.

To add in a most recent post -

I see this as a definitive attempt to buddy yates.

I also see yates as solidly town because of the nuance about reading metas he caught on to - which I did as well. Hi yates, nice to have you on my team! Let's kick some arse >:D

[-L-]

Scumdar update on TCS:

T[-------------o-]S

[-L-]

In the end - I suspect a TCS/Monkey team.

[-L-]

-L-: qwints, The Central Scrutinizer, MonkeyMan576[L-4]

Current vote tally.

Qwints - after reading my analysis - do you still believe as you did before? What are your thoughts on TCS? What are your thoughts on Monkey, by association?

[-L-]

I've been meaning to ask - does 0 percent flavor mean the town PR's are 0 percent... meaning it's a bunch of townies vs killers? If so, a true mind game - this. I like.

[-L-]

What I've posted on TCS is not a case per se - they are observations.

[-L-]

After reading a game of havingfitz's [a friend linked me a game and I noticed havingfitz in the roster]; I noticed he is more of a wall poster when town. Now? He's scarce.

[-L-]

He lasted to the end... so I dunno what you mean by flip.

[-L-]

http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.ph ... er_sort=Go

[-L-]

Hi yates, nice to have you on my team!

I'm not on your team yet. As much as I'm accused of tunneling, you guys seem to be overlooking the fact that I have been critical of any evidence that seems nonsensical.

Also, I know why I pointed to that particular game. I find it highly unlikely many people actually looked at the meta. Also, pointing out your scum meta is meaningless without a town baseline.

That said, I have some problems with your TCS case:

1. In your first point regarding TCS's "apology," it seems pretty clearly to have been a response to the Fitz post that started my Monkey wagon.

Spoiler:

Matt-Shadowlord
The Central Scrutinizer
theaceofspades

^ WTF people....confirm already.

2. I believe he explained his RVS theory in post 413.

3.

So I view TCS' disagreement with Slandaar's sense as a defense of Monkey.

You know disagreeing with someone doesn't make them scum, right?

4.

Says this of Yates.

Actually, his 330 was in reference to Slandaar's case on HD - not me.

5.

After all - he was following someone else's idea.

Yeah. This is one of the main problems I have been having with Monkey. I don't like when people say "what he said." It allows for distancing. It doesn't make him scum but that ype of posting is scummy. This is really your only legit point in that post, ftr.

Serious question: did you decide TCS was scum THEN write this?

Your points are valid; thanks for the feedback. And, I did not see that "post already!" post.

As for the following points, regarding my incorrect designation of the source of arguments - my bad. That's what reading in isolation and then hopping to where the isopost sourced from.

And yes, I honestly had no opinion of TCS before writing this. I just went from post to post with my thoughts.

[-L-]

And you don't have to trust me, Yates, as being on your team.

It just means I trust YOU, and whatever you post.

[-L-]

The post by -L- against Central is a very interesting piece of investigation.

It has one thing against it - The fact it was after TCS put L at the top of a lynch list because 'This is my suspect because they are the most suspicious' is a lot more convincing than 'This is my suspect because they just accused me', but that doesn't change the fact she has compiled a hefty list of examples.

I simply dont have time to check them all now, but will do the first couple and can someone pitch in on assessing the rest please?

I never said he was my suspect, so before you build a case on me building an omgus case on TCS, stop.

I was posting my thoughts on TCS since he was the one building a case on me.

[-L-]

-L-,

I have to admit I love detailed analysis and yours makes me happy. But I have to point out a few scummy things you are doing right now:

1) You didn't really hunt your best until I posed you as a serious alternative to the major wagons of the game day. Then you walled.
2) With this large post you seem to have consciously deviated from the behavior you had been displaying thus far. Perhaps this is in response to Yates and I observing that you seemed to be conforming to your scum meta as suggested by previous games.
3) You are omgusing without omgusing. You are directing suspicion towards me without voting for me. If I'm so far up your scum meter, why not vote for me? Are you that self-conscious of being accused of omgus voting? Are you waiting for other people to vote first so that you can seem less responsible should I somehow end up being lynched?

So, Central Scrutinizer - a few questions.

1. What information would have Slandaar's lynch given the town? What thoughts were in your mind at the time?

With regards to information to be gained from a Slandaar lynch, I was looking primarily to Slandaar's buddying of Monkeyman, his multiple town reads, and his posts towards you and HD. I think that should Slandaar come up scum in such a situation, Monkey is basically confirmed town, fitz and ace are probably town, and we are forced to look at Ald/Yates/HD with greater scrutiny.

I must admit one of my reasons to see him lynched were selfish... I would get a sense of whether our reads are different because my attention is misplaced or because he is scum trying to throw out smoke bombs.

In the end - I suspect a TCS/Monkey team.

This doesn't incline me to change my vote, and indeed confirms that it shall remain. Pointing to your accuser and a popular target of the day's animosity looks scummy as all hell to me. You're trying to associate me with someone who has had a substantial wagon on them in an attempt to dirty me. I don't see what this is necessary if I'm so obviously scummy already.

As I have already said, I am not certain that Monkey is town. In fact he looks a little scummy. But I do not think that there is enough to go on and I believe that the Monkey/Yates brouhaha is being used by some of the actual scum in this game as an opportunity to skate by and post mostly reactionary material without having to fake scumhunting.

And you don't have to trust me, Yates, as being on your team.

It just means I trust YOU, and whatever you post.

Buddying much?

---

With regard to several of your observations about me switching votes: I don't like stagnation in the game, and I don't like not voting for someone at any given period of time. I re-read and re-evaluate every time I find that the game has jumped ahead of me by several pages. I think if you re-examine the timing of my posts you will find that to be the case.

And I apologize a lot. It is a(n arguable) failing of my character and not a tell either way. I was born to apologize. Sorry.

Hmm. Where shall I begin?

Thank you - it really wasn't detailed - but an analysis is what it was. You've got that right, at least. It was in no way a case. It was a peek into your gameplay, and my play by play take on your words. So:

1) I am not hunting yet. The game has yet to begin. This was my analysis of you. My take. I have presented my thoughts to the town - so they may make their own observations and maybe be inspired to question you and I. Your voting for me and showing why you were voting for me only opened me up - it was not my motivation. Think about a cat getting up and arching its back to stretch. Wailing? No, my dear.
2) I haven't deviated - I always play this way. At day start you have little to go on. I will not deny your observation - only your conclusion about what you see.
3) I can only omgus if I am making a case. Am I not allowed to share my thoughts with the town? Do my observations make you that upset? Why not correct me where correction is needed? It is suspicious that you seek to discredit me instead of correcting my errors.

I am not self conscious about omgus voting; I was not building a case leading up to the need to vote.
I am not waiting for other people to vote so I can hop on a wagon. You and I are up for discussion now - in front of the town. Monkey/Yates had their turn, now it is ours. Are you afraid of attention?

Thank you for what you expected of the Slandaar lynch.

In all honesty, I do not see you as an accuser. I see you as a person who voted for me when I asked for attention, who found reasons to suspect me after your vote. There is a difference, and I laugh.

You can call it buddying. As it stands now that is the only way anyone can see it (except for scum). But I personally trust Yates. If Yates or I die in the night, it is because the scum fear town solidifying.

I only verbally observed you switching votes one time; why the plural?

Apologetic people ...nvm. That's not nice of me.

I apologize for not separating the quotes - I use my mobile device as my main computer always (I have small hands). It is tedious to separate neatly.

[-L-]

@havingfitz: I also dislike day 1. It's like chewing on air.

[-L-]

What information will be gained for the town if I am lynched?

[-L-]

Since I give more information than lynching havingfitz.

Also - what information would havingfitz' lynch garner for the town?

[-L-]

What information will be gained for the town if I am lynched?

Since I give more information than lynching havingfitz.

Also - what information would havingfitz' lynch garner for the town?

You actually have opinions about some things and have expressed them. Fitz hasn't done a ton of that.

What are my opinions? I have shared very few. Please enlighten the town and show the opinions I have, and the information my lynch will yield.

Merely reiterating that my lynch will yield information is not town like or helpful.

[-L-]

Also - why am I the one asking all the questions?

Do you not have anything you wish to ask me, TCS?

Or is your case on me a farce, even to you?

[-L-]

Also - why am I the one asking all the questions?

Do you not have anything you wish to ask me, TCS?

Or is your case on me a farce, even to you?

You don't have to ask questions of people to scumhunt. You don't have to ask questions of people to make a case on them. Your style may be to try to pick at the edges of arguments with questions. My style is do do constant re-reads and evaluate how players react to different events, and when nothing is happening, try to generate new events, usually by voting.

Which leads me to wonder, why aren't you voting me? Is your case on me a farce, even to you?

Either you have the innocent belief that I'm scum and the desire to see me lynched, in which case you should be voting me, or you are just nervous scum, in which case you are sensitive to being seen as wagon-jumping and OMGUS voting. Your choice.

(See, I can employ the logical fallacy of false dichotomy, too.)

Must I repeat - for the umpteenth time that what I presented was not a case, but my general feel of you? My take on your posts thus far? There is still enough reasonable doubt because these are merely my feelings about you. I do not make judgements on feelings alone.

Everything I posted was not a farce - they are truly my thoughts. Would you disagree with that?

I never claimed you were scum. I said you were scummy. So your conclusions about me being nervous scum are unfounded, if that is the basis of your point.

Too? When did I?

[-L-]

What information will be gained for the town if I am lynched?

Since I give more information than lynching havingfitz.

Also - what information would havingfitz' lynch garner for the town?

You actually have opinions about some things and have expressed them. Fitz hasn't done a ton of that.

What are my opinions? I have shared very few. Please enlighten the town and show the opinions I have, and the information my lynch will yield.

Merely reiterating that my lynch will yield information is not town like or helpful.

You mention that you suspect fitz several times, but you never vote him. If you are scum he's an auto-lynch tomorrow.

You give a wishy-washy opinion of HD and mention him several times without building a case on him.

You are pretty ambivalent to the Yates/Monkey issue and are the first to point out that Yates's play is very likely indicative of town. You being scum makes a Yates gambit more likely.

There are three people right there who I suspect more if you flip scum. Yates is a bit attenuated, I'll give you that.

---

I thought of a question for you: How do you feel about townies who intentionally keep portions of their reads secret?

And if I flip town, what will your conclusions be then? It must be recorded for posterity.

Townies who intentionally keep reads secret are experienced. By having the disadvantage of all-knowing scum, more information regarding the sometimes accurate reads allows the scum to dance all around the town player with the reads.

There is a huge disadvantage, though, in that the townie who does not reveal their reads suffers from the lack of groupthink. In keeping their reads secret, the shortchange other townies who may have other information due to their role from making valid conclusions.

In a person's lifetime, they must decide which type of gameplay they will play most.

[-L-]

Typos galore. I blame my mobile.

[-L-]

Alduskkel - what are your thoughts about myself and TCS?

[-L-]

Also - why am I the one asking all the questions?

Do you not have anything you wish to ask me, TCS?

Or is your case on me a farce, even to you?

You don't have to ask questions of people to scumhunt. You don't have to ask questions of people to make a case on them. Your style may be to try to pick at the edges of arguments with questions. My style is do do constant re-reads and evaluate how players react to different events, and when nothing is happening, try to generate new events, usually by voting.

Which leads me to wonder, why aren't you voting me? Is your case on me a farce, even to you?

Either you have the innocent belief that I'm scum and the desire to see me lynched, in which case you should be voting me, or you are just nervous scum, in which case you are sensitive to being seen as wagon-jumping and OMGUS voting. Your choice.

(See, I can employ the logical fallacy of false dichotomy, too.)

Must I repeat - for the umpteenth time that what I presented was not a case, but my general feel of you? My take on your posts thus far? There is still enough reasonable doubt because these are merely my feelings about you. I do not make judgements on feelings alone.

Everything I posted was not a farce - they are truly my thoughts. Would you disagree with that?

I never claimed you were scum. I said you were scummy. So your conclusions about me being nervous scum are unfounded, if that is the basis of your point.

Too? When did I?

If you write a long post talking about how someone is acting scummy, you are making a case against them in the game of mafia. I think you are trying to cut too fine a distinction here.

"Also - why am I the one asking all the questions?

Do you not have anything you wish to ask me, TCS?

Or is your case on me a farce, even to you?"

Presents a false dichotomy -- either I have questions to ask you, or my case is a farce.

What information will be gained for the town if I am lynched?

Since I give more information than lynching havingfitz.

Also - what information would havingfitz' lynch garner for the town?

You actually have opinions about some things and have expressed them. Fitz hasn't done a ton of that.

What are my opinions? I have shared very few. Please enlighten the town and show the opinions I have, and the information my lynch will yield.

Merely reiterating that my lynch will yield information is not town like or helpful.

You mention that you suspect fitz several times, but you never vote him. If you are scum he's an auto-lynch tomorrow.

You give a wishy-washy opinion of HD and mention him several times without building a case on him.

You are pretty ambivalent to the Yates/Monkey issue and are the first to point out that Yates's play is very likely indicative of town. You being scum makes a Yates gambit more likely.

There are three people right there who I suspect more if you flip scum. Yates is a bit attenuated, I'll give you that.

---

I thought of a question for you: How do you feel about townies who intentionally keep portions of their reads secret?

And if I flip town, what will your conclusions be then? It must be recorded for posterity.

Townies who intentionally keep reads secret are experienced. By having the disadvantage of all-knowing scum, more information regarding the sometimes accurate reads allows the scum to dance all around the town player with the reads.

There is a huge disadvantage, though, in that the townie who does not reveal their reads suffers from the lack of groupthink. In keeping their reads secret, the shortchange other townies who may have other information due to their role from making valid conclusions.

In a person's lifetime, they must decide which type of gameplay they will play most.

I also forgot to mention that if you flip scum, qwints jumped off your wagon with little explanation as soon as I started voting for you.

If you flip town, I think it increases Monkeyman's chances of being scum. Other than that I can't say with certainty yet because not very many people seem to want you lynched.

Honestly I've only been on this wagon for a little while and I'm already bored of it. I want to sit back and hear what others think at this point.

@TCS

No - I honestly believe that town would have questions for scum. That is not a false dichotomy. Making a case without asking questions is slightly scummy in my opinion. Anyone can make cases on anyone - and the way to decipher scum cases from town cases is to look at the types of questions they ask, if any. When people make cases and do not ask questions, it is a policy of mine to find out why.

Regarding making a long post on someone - no - they are not always cases. Mine is a post analysis. Have you ever heard of a post analysis? It is an analysis without a theory attached. An analysis with a theory attached is a case.

[Although I included a theory of a TCS/Monkey scum team, it was an aside to the analysis and not the point of the analysis.]

You should be bored with my wagon. I'm looking town to you aren't I? It's ok, you can remove your vote without looking guilty. No guarantees though.

[-L-]

I shall also vote Matt, replacing my vote after some doubts were created by his input in the game. Now I'm trusting my initial suspicion.

VOTE: matt-shadowlord

[-L-]

No questions come to mind, fitz. But if you could let me know your thoughts on alduskkel?

[-L-]

The Mod posted the vote counts above, with Human Destroyer leading with 4 and Ace on 3. These are mainly just 'RVS' to get the all rolling, maybe except -L-'s vote against HavingFitz where she said "Currently I suspect Fritz (I'll detail why soon, my thoughts are jumbled),". Since HavingFitz only posted once since the game started and it was a vote vs L, the "jumbled thoughts" are probably the usual that "anyone who votes against me must be the enemy". That might not make it much more valuable or informative than any other random vote on day 1.

So then the one that is most interesting to me is Yates' vote against MonkeyMan, simply because he's claiming that it is not a random, but a vote with a clear motivation:

Unvote

@havingfitz - Isn't scumchat usually limited to either all the time or night only? If day has started I don't know how they could be "extending their chat."

With a join date of November 7, 2008 - why are you pretending you don't know that scum get to chat prior to the start of the day?

Vote: MonkeyMan576

Out of RVS - scum found.

That doesn't mean Yates is right, but it does mean it's something worth investigating.

If a person's join date works against them as evidence, it is silly. Base your accusation on the number of games a person has played - not on their join da

I can vouch for that since I made an account long before actually joining this game, but that isn't the case with MonkeyMan.

"MonkeyMan576 Profile http://forum.mafiascum.net/memberlist.p ... le&u=10332 Total posts: 3287 (0.07% of all posts / 2.15 posts per day)"

@ Yates how unlikely is it that he'd be unaware of the scumchat timing rules? @ Anyone - Are they always the same on here or do Mods sometimes make them use different chat rules?

Argh. I'm posting on my phone and it's a he ache to separate the quotes. I'll address you with separate paragraphs.

@Matt - I do not suspect Fitz for voting me, I suspect him for his two posts to start out the game. I did not pay attention to his RVS vote (it did not register). My thoughts are incoherent and still not solidified - in other words - all I have is a hunch. Once I see the game play out my thoughts will become clearer.

Regarding your analysis of Yates - who are you to make a statement like "that doesn't mean he is right"? That, in my eyes, is a scumslip. It is the scum taking a knowledgeable trip. So since it is worth investigating - you must have questions for Yates. What are they?

Different mods have different rules, although there exists a general consensus.

Here is the one time I posted any opinion of fitz.

[-L-]

It isn't.

A case is where you are sharing thoughts and proving a point.

What I did was share my thoughts as I read his posts in isolation. You can see the changes in thought I had, as well as the thoughts against those changes. There isn't any cohesion to my thoughts - because, well - they're just thoughts.

[-L-]

Oh hai gais!

[-L-]

I was with you until this:

I would not hesitate to lynch confirmed town if for some wild-ass reason it would provide the town with a ton of good information.

No bueno. You would likely get blacklisted for playing against your win condition - unless you are scum. Information lynches I get, lynching conf Town for information is a couple of steps too far.

I agree that lynching a confirmed town is not the best move for town, even if they have information attached to them. Having information attached to confirmed town makes them highly valuable. Lynching this drowning results in reducing the town population, advancing the scum wincon.

On the other hand, I believe that "strongly suspected town" with a lot of information attached to them ought to be lynched. Upon this townie's death, things become clearer, alignments become clearer, and town usually rides to a win once this townie dies.

There have been times as a townie when I made myself such a polarizing lynchpin. And by day 4, I volunteered to get lynched. And wouldn't you know the scum were against my lynch? Haha, so funny. Town can gambit as well.

[-L-]

Drowning = townie.

Mobile thinks it knows best.

[-L-]

Teehee.

[-L-]

Meant to quote monkey.

[-L-]

I have a question for you, MonkeyMan. I am trying not to obsess, but I haven't been satisfied with everyone not looking at alduskkel very closely. I would like to make him the flavor of the month.

What are your thoughts on alduskkel?

[-L-]

To town:

Because I revealed one of my town gambits, scum are aware and unsure if what I am doing is that.

So read opinions for (lack of opinion all around, wordiness without conviction, etc.) the normal stuff. And non-posting.

Lets see what happens.

[-L-]

In the beginning I was interested in him because he was lurking; later I was suspicious because he placed me as a townie along with two others; even later than that I was suspicious because he just quoted a prod dodge; and most recently I have been suspicious because I read one of his other games [though not in depth...didn't even catch his flip] that Matt posted, and he was far more active in that one.

The fact that he has not received any attention, and that my questions to the various people have gone unanswered [except yours] regarding alduskkel is a bit.... well... you know.

[-L-]

This is minor anyway.

Agreed. This is actually null. The order of vote->post or post->vote doesn't mean anything.

Why didn't you vote? is stronger worded,

Maybe, but again this is not indicative of alignment so much as playing style. If anything, he's at least trying to provoke conversation. So this point does not add scum points and might even add a partial Town point.

Immediately we get a 'hey I never said that! no need to be so defensive!'

Which is a true statement, actually. If the previous post is, as I suspect, a conversation prod then this is a legit response. Also, he is voting [albeit RVS] early in the game so the last part of this point is not valid.

you do not ask someone why they did something and give them the answer to it at the same time, it makes the question meaningless as shown

Are you saying Town doesn't post rhetorical questions? I'm fairly confident I;'d be able to find an example of you doing this as Town if push came to shove.

I mean does that read town? he didn't even press me on it, he accepted the answer I gave him

I read the eye roll emoticon as your response. That doesn't read as "acceptance." That reads as "you are being foolish/making foolish statements." I may be interjecting that because that is what *I* was thinking but again, you are misrepping at best which looks worse for you than the "evidence" you are presenting does for HD.

He is thinking too much about how he is perceived.

Why is he so worried about how he will be perceived when he has simply taken new information on board and changed his mind?

This is a legitimate point. I actually marked that for future reference as well. It's a little early to tell if that is Town paranoia or scum paranoia though. Speaking of paranoia...

Why is he associating me with Monkey?

Because you defended Monkey. Why are you so upset by this? Do you know Monkey will flip scum?

if I were scum why would I lie?

If you are Town, why didn't you just post this when you said you had a case on him?

Overall, this is not a good case, Slandaar.

As havingfitz says - this strongly appears to be a defense of HD. And the very things Yates offered as explanations for behavior - HD parroted later on to explain. I no longer trust Yates.

To follow, Yates':

"8) Rather than engage in a WIFOM argument, who would you investigate first me or someone like ArcAngel or TAM? More often than not, the loud driver of Day 1 is investigated/target N1. I guess I could go link some meta but I have a feeling you have been in enough games to know this is a general rule."

Seems to me that he is purposefully expecting to be scanned N1. If he has a Godfather-type role, this would confirm him as town. It would explain his loudness, but lack of content. The majority of Yates' posting has been nit picking over semantics, wording, game theory, meta, experience - and one target - MM. But little to no game content, or original thoughts on players to move the game forward.

If one were to get elaborate with this gambit - I would suspect it is a loud confrontation between two scum [Yates/MM] - who - after the town has exhausted themselves on the nonsense between them - ignores them for a few days. But even I find this far fetched.

[-L-]

UNVOTE: Matt-shadowlord

VOTE: yates

[-L-]

Is it just me, or should Yates' middle name be Adhom?

[-L-]

Matt shadowlord - I also agree that scum try to get away with that line. That also struck me as scummy. I just would like to see my case refuted by Yates, instead of all of his attacks. He seems to be two faced - getting his feelings hurt when people attack him, but constantly attacking others.

I dislike those types of people.

[-L-]

Of note, both Yates and arcangel are voting for monkey.

[-L-]

Also - Yates - when the game is over, and you see how many townies cs scum were saying your posts lacked content - understand it to be true. Take some time for self reflection, I'd garner you do not do much of that. If they are primarily scum who've said so - then you can ignore it.

[-L-]

No - I just said it sounded scummy. Heh.

In my experience - people who act confuzzled (and couple that as an excuse to not post) are typically scum players.

[-L-]

No, Yates. You did not post points.

You posted a bunch of "this is so stupid's".

[-L-]

Sans editorialization...

What's the difference between defending a player and analyzing a case?

There are different nuances to be examined. A lot goes into deciding whether to see a case as defense vs prosecution. That is the whole point of mafia, in my opinion. Trying to determine if a case is being made by scum, vs being made by town - being made in defense, or in prosecution. Each person has their own methods for determining why they think a case is one or the other.

I choose not to reveal my own methods - this is just how I see you.

it's scummy to be parroted or to be the parrot?

When player A deconstructs player B's case on Player C, and player C begins to use the player A's words to defend himself, there are two conclusions:

1) Player A is scum defending Player C, and silently telling Player C to improve his gameplay. Considering your personality, I would say this is likely.
2) Player A genuinely found fault with Player B's case, and Player C is using Player A's words to defend himself.

Considering your general lack of content and original ideas, and your personality - I'm opting for option 1.

You need to define "content" then

Content is "food for thought". Content is that which gives fuel to other townies trains of thoughts. When you hear the town saying you lack content - it is because you are posting a lot without encouragining their thought processes. This is a crime, because it bogs down the thread.

In addition, why would I be parroted if I wasn't introducing new information?

Explained above.

I don't know how to rephrase my last point as a question, tbh. I guess I'd need to know how you define content in order to start. Since you post a list of examples of content types I have posted only to follow that up with a statement about how I don't post original thoughts or content, can appreciate why your statement seems to contradict itself? [About the best I can do to rephrase as a question.]

Additionally I would like to know what you think of the following since you claim to be of the same mind:

Examples:
post 359
post 371 [on myself, granted, but it's clearly a disection of the case and not the player]
post 428
post 571
post 593
There haven't actually been many cases presented, tbh, but I'm fairly confident I've responded to ALL of them, which is the exact opposite of what you are accusing me of.

[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]

I have answered your questions. Can you please post each of those post #'s as a link? Then I will answer.

[-L-]

Yates, just because I did not say what you wanted me to say does not mean I did not answer your question.

I am lazy - what of it? You will not cause me to all of a sudden hop up and work hard. I do that enough IRL. This is how I relax.

[-L-]

[Links fixed]

You mean content like:
Creating cases?
Introducing new information?
Introducing meta?
Determining if someone is honestly unaware of a mechanic or faking it? post 186,post 192, and post 203
Fact checking?

The way to analyze for content is to view the posts that follow it. Posts that feed off of a post and lead in the same direction, or in a new direction based on the thoughts in the content post.

What I see in each of your cases is:

-people posting their own thoughts after yours, unrelated
-people posting separate cases, unrelated
-people berating your thoughts

My case stands.

But do you see how monkey posted his own thoughts and questions? I am sure they were rooted in what he has read recently - the question must have popped into his head. That points to content.

[-L-]

Yates, can you provide me links of people you have tunneled hard and determined they were town?

Why on earth would I do that?

It would show that you have objectivity to your tunneling.

[-L-]

Nonono Slandaar

Look at adduskel's activity in this game compared to his other games. Many scum like to hide when there's no immediate threat.

If he's "hiding" as qwints suggests

Why is he hiding from every single game

Is he scum in all of them?

Valid thought. How many games is alduskkel currently in?

[-L-]

HD, what is your take on my postulation that you parroted Yates' words in defense?

[-L-]

His point has some merit but it isn't the argument I made and I don't see why you linked me with it.

He felt you sheeped qwints' arguments against ald.

Arangel's been quiet, but she's been putting out reads that make sense. The confusion post seems quite genuine to me given both the voluminous posts as well as the reads she'd already posted so I've now got a town read on her.

Matt's earlier target on the other hand is scummy. Look at adduskel's activity in this game compared to his other games. Many scum like to hide when there's no immediate threat. He's done nothing since 419 where he attacks MM while still saying that Yates case is bad. That post needs to be remembered and re-analyzed once we get some flips.

Yates continues to get more town.

Both my L and Matt votes seem to have worked by forcing the players to actually generate useful content. Both of the votes were purely based on the fact that those players were generating very few opinions about other players despite very long posts. Mission accomplished.

UNVOTE: Matt-Shadowlord
VOTE: Alduskkel

I agree with an ald wagon he has been a scumread for a longtime.

[-L-]

FOS Matt again

@HD sorry lol. Just aiming for clarity. Didn't want another avalanche of posts related to that. /halo

[-L-]

So you are maintaining everyone you decide to tunnel is scum?

Do you have telepathic powers?

I do have telepathic powers. They are currently telling me that you and L are both lazy and nonreaders.

*snark* I believe I told you I was lazy. And - I do believe you are incorrect about reading. I just don't avaricious ly read meta like you do.

I personally distrust meta, since my own is not trustworthy.

[-L-]

I feel funny about Slandaar/Monkey votes on Yates.

UNVOTE: yates

[-L-]

I don't want this to be a lynch based on gameplay. I understand that Yates' tunneling and lack of input (by my standards) makes him look suspicious to some. But he has consistency on his side, like a zealot.

So I will dub him a zealous townie, and stick with my original read on him. I wavered because of thoughts posed by others - but Yates has addressed each of them satisfactorily in my opinion.

Now all we have to do is analyze his wagon - I suspect we will find at least 1 scum.

[-L-]

*pulls Yates off of the hook*

You're free!

[-L-]

He hasn't addressed the satisfactorily at all, ~L~. He said one time when he brought up someone in one or two posts he changed his read. I'm talking about the major tunneling that is the issue. That should be plainly obvious that this is still a major concern.

I suppose it is, but I am uncomfy with the two votes back to back.

[-L-]

Yates Adhom. There. I gave you a middle name.

[-L-]

Yates, what are your thoughts on each of the people voting you? Why do you believe they have their vote on you?

Include me in that number.

I am asking in the hope you will provide insight that I cannot see.

[-L-]

Yates, you single handedly swatted monkey's argument down by calling HIM useless. Ad hominem.

Second - defensive play IS alignment indicative. Scum play defensively, town - offensively. Simple.

VOTE: yates

[-L-]

I just read over the argument again - and my point still stands.

You essentially say that Monkeys argument does not exist and that means he is scum or useless. Or that his reading comprehension makes him scum or useless. It is ad hominem because instead of acknowledging what Monkey has said as a case, you choose to discredit him and berate him with put-downs.

If town, you are not fun to play with because being a gentleman gamer is far from what you are trying to do. If scum, you are floundering beautifully.

[-L-]

How is advising you to get your fake claim star aight an AtE?

Really? How?

[-L-]

A few of the points against Yates:


Fitz - @Yates...why are you focusing on what you perceive the experience levels (right or wrong) of the other players is (i.e. Tohica and ace)? Is that indicative of alignment or are you trying to undermine their credibility...or any other reason? Edit...I see -L- is asking the same thing.

Fitz - He's posted more than anyone but I'm not sure how productive he's been. It's like he's holding a not so pleasant mafia gameplay seminar while maintaining IMO a narrow focus on Monkey for a lone incident that on further consideration I don't agree with.

Slandaar - Yeah disband the monkey wagon lynch HD and Yates the two of them don't interact which is strange due to the number of posts they each have and then I will write out HD case later; Yates is scum for above post alone and other things but eh that post should be enough.


That's just off of a breif skimthrough.

*OMGUSing
*Tunneling
*Not listening/considering other opinions, scenarios
*Concerned about appearing town
*buddying

[-L-]

Yates, I work for a living. I had to set my mobile down.

Second, I was ignoring your request because it was pointless and petulant. I do not wish to see you self vote.

[-L-]

post 331
post 440

So you are alleging that I never responded to those cases in earnest [despite posting the post numbers of my responses to 440 in 809]?

And you are further claiming that my post post 754 is somehow an "Adhom" attack on posts that came between 423 and 314 posts prior?

Is this what you are claiming?

No - it is not. My claim was that you were attacking Monkey's person, rather than his argument.

[-L-]

Yates, are you suggesting you read me town after saying you never do?

I never

admitted

to reading you as Town this game. Don't get ahead of yourself.

what exactly had Monkey to gain by pretending he didn't know when day started?

I address this directly in post 491:

Are you saying that Monkey was Mafia pretending not to know the chat rules the Mafia would have to play by in order to make himself look less Mafia?

Yes. The "Town slip" gambit is actually something *I* used successfully as scum in Heroes of Comedy. Here's where Tammy almost caught me and summarizes nicely:

inte - this is the second time Yates has made a slip like that. I don't know what to make of it though. In the opening post of the day he said he still had Pap's as town, even though he was dead. So, saying we don't have a flip yet. erm...IDK...one of the things that always sets off alarm bells for me is when scum act like they don't know something. Scum feign ignorance about stuff all the time and people let them go for it.

She had no way of knowing just how right she was because:

scum goon yates Kill: Pappums Rat

That's right. I pretended I didn't realize Pappums Rat was dead and *I* was the one who killed him! If Tammy had stuck to her instincts and gotten a Yates lynch, she might have survived and Town likely would have won. There's a lesson to be learned there.

I included the link to Heroes of Comedy for your reading pleasure.

If you were really presenting evidence, you would show the actual scumslip, for comparison to Monkey's "scumslip" - not a reaction to your scumslip. When you first posted that post I ignored it for that reason.

[-L-]

You know what? Come to think of it, an L lynch would be just as helpful as a Monkey lynch.

UNVOTE: MonkeyMan576

VOTE: -L-

What information would you gain from a monkey lynch?

What information would you gain from an -L- lynch?

I want bulleted lists - so people can refer back in case my lynch goes off.

[-L-]

Yates will be auto lynched if I am.

[-L-]

I don't see feigning ignorance of how mafia QTs work as something a mafia would be likely to do.

SCUMTEAM CALL:
L, HF, and ArcAngel
VOTE: L

I want to see your case on me. Bulleted.

[-L-]

Yates will be auto lynched if I am.

At least I hope he will.

- high post count, little content (scummy)
- defensive and attackative (new word just for Yates)
- massive tunneling on what I now believe to be a townie
- lack of viable cases on any other individual
- a case built on something he already admitted could be null/town, yet his target is still guilty

[-L-]

Don't forget HD participated less after my peanut comment.

[-L-]

Point out my erroneous arguments - you did not have an issue with them until now.

Attackative is personal, offensive builds cases on people. You are not offensive, and defensive is scummy.

[-L-]

Bored.

[-L-]

Please answer my question Yates. What erroneous arguments have I made?

[-L-]

I like your argument, qwints, and I have nothing I can say to your analysis but that you are wrong. Just let me know when to claim.

[-L-]

What was going on in my head? I explained that already. I have a sliding scale. Yates - in his many actions - seemed town from one vantage point, but when I would look at it from a different vantage point he would look scummy as hell.

It is all about the view you take - people who can only see one view ... Well - tunnel.

[-L-]

And I disagree with the idea that I was egging Yates/Monkey - I was purely upset with Yates' gameplay. He is an asshole who gets his feelings hurt, always attacking others but acting like "don't...!" When he gets attacked in the same way. I'd cute the one time when someone made a personal attack on him, but I don't remember the wording. He dishes crap out, but can't eat it.

It was me being fed up with Yates, not egging him on. Read those words in that context and tell me if you see it.

[-L-]

Cute=cite
Ebwop

[-L-]

They are still people of interest. This is day 1. I often let people think I am not paying them any mind.

As for TCS specifically, I could not find any takers regarding my ideas. Most of them were attacked and so I decided to take a second look. To begin with - that post was my impressions on his PbPa. Prior to that I had no opinion on TCS. I could not vote entirely on a hunch.

Regarding HD, I still see him as bait.

[-L-]

Norikaz - I stated what I posted was not a case.

A case is an analysis with a theory attached.

Mine was merely an analysis. No point, just thoughts. It was posted so that town could take a look at TCS. A vote was not necessary at that point.

@TCS - you could have said upfront that you would not believe anything I'd say. Then you wouldn't have had to write that paragraph.

I am claiming power role. Like it?

[-L-]

Norikaz - I stated what I posted was not a case.

A case is an analysis with a theory attached.

Mine was merely an analysis. No point, just thoughts. It was posted so that town could take a look at TCS. A vote was not necessary at that point.

@TCS - you could have said upfront that you would not believe anything I'd say. Then you wouldn't have had to write that paragraph.

I am claiming power role. Like it?

You're claiming a role? Seriously? alreadY?

Hmmm, yeah.

[-L-]

Omgus, on my part?

[-L-]

Lets see what others think first.

[-L-]

Have I ever been inconsistent? Had any scum slips? Jumped a wagon?

[-L-]

Yates made the omgus vote, not me....

[-L-]

TCs, what are your thoughts? Do you like it?

[-L-]

Ok - now I feel better about TCS.

What do you think of ace?

[-L-]

Which two? I'll address them.

[-L-]

As for me - I saw my hunch as only a feeling - I was considering that I was reading too much into it. I had more reasonable doubt than certainty.

[-L-]

So why do you hold me in disbelief, TCS?

[-L-]

I apologize.

[-L-]

Sigh. So I am a maverick. So sue me.

[-L-]

You ought to use weights and balances when deciding alignments. If you think about it, I have far more on the town side than what you are seeing as scummy.

I play mafia with a role the same way I do as a townie. I'm not special - it is just an advantage for the town. Good ol detective work is where it's at.

[-L-]

VOTE: human destroyer

[-L-]

VOTE: human destroyer

^ Why?

Because what Slandaar said makes sense. Don't you agree?

[-L-]

I almost want to just get out of the game just to avoid Yates.

[-L-]

What?

[-L-]

Yes - what makes sense about Slandaar's presentation was how he pointed out how much HD focused on a Slandaar/Monkey scum team - and then in the same post where you unvote Slandaar, you claim that monkey is all of a sudden townish - and you vote for Slandaar.

That is why I voted you - that observation, plus my past suspicions of you.

[-L-]

I wasn't avoiding answering anything. I posted that after reading your post. You piss me off.

[-L-]

Unvote monkey* ebwop

[-L-]

Unvote me, HD - if that was all you voted me for.

[-L-]

Yates, early on you correctly attacked -L- for saying that town should not share their town reads, but you don't seem to have shared any of your own. Why not? and who do you think is most likely town right now?

[-L-] is in fact egging Yates/MM on and I don't get it.

I looked at -L-'s recent posts about Yates and Monkey and I see exactly what you're saying:

Spoiler: Egging on

L gets on the wagon because Yates attacked monkey again.

Yates, you single handedly swatted monkey's argument down by calling HIM useless. Ad hominem.

Second - defensive play IS alignment indicative. Scum play defensively, town - offensively. Simple.

VOTE: yates

This post is where it starts. Read the context and you'll see that Yates called monkey useless in addition to listing approximately a dozen different things monkey should have done if he were town. In addition, his "defensiveness" is simply a direct response to an attack from theaceofspades. Town answering and explaining attacks on them is not defensiveness while continuing to press their own cases is not scummy defensiveness.

Then look at how -L- needles Yates:

If town, you are not fun to play with because being a gentleman gamer is far from what you are trying to do. If scum, you are floundering beautifully.

I was ignoring your request because it was pointless and petulant.

Now, let's look at -L-'s voting history. After I pressured her, she made a case on ("analyzed") TheCentralScrutinizer, who was voting her at the time. Resulting in her concluding:

Scumdar update on TCS:

T[-------------o-]S

In the end - I suspect a TCS/Monkey team.

L then is the 3rd vote on Matt.

Spoiler: VC after 622

VC after 622

Yates: theaceofspades, havingfitz, The Acting Method [L-4]
MonkeyMan576: Yates, Alduskkel, ArcAngel9 [L-4]
-L-: , MonkeyMan576[L-4]
Matt-ShadowLord: Human Destroyer, qwints, -L- [L-4]
Human Destroyer: Slandaar [L-6]
HavingFitz:The Central Scrutinizer

Not Voting: Matt-ShadowLord,

L later is the 4th vote on Yates making him the leading wagon based on this post where she derides Yates for his tunneling among other things.

Spoiler: VC after 664

VC after 622

Yates: theaceofspades, havingfitz, The Acting Method, -L- [L-3]
MonkeyMan576: Yates, Alduskkel, ArcAngel9 [L-4]
Matt-ShadowLord: Human Destroyer, qwints,[L-5]
-L-:, MonkeyMan576[L-6]
Human Destroyer: Slandaar [L-6]
Alduskkel: Matt-ShadowLord [L-6]
Yates: The Central Scrutinizer [L-6]

But she then jumps off the wagon:

I don't want this to be a lynch based on gameplay. I understand that Yates' tunneling and lack of input (by my standards) makes him look suspicious to some. But he has consistency on his side, like a zealot.

So I will dub him a zealous townie, and stick with my original read on him.

And right back on:

Yates, you single handedly swatted monkey's argument down by calling HIM useless. Ad hominem.

Second - defensive play IS alignment indicative. Scum play defensively, town - offensively. Simple.

VOTE: yates

And I can't see how Yates's play changed from zealous townie to Ad Hom/Defensive scum in the course of those 40 or so posts.

UNVOTE: Alduskkel
VOTE: -L-

[-L-]

TCS - do you really see Yates' play right here as

offensive

? He's basically drawing a line in the sand about his play here. That said, Yates play is either town or incredibly gutsy scum. Yates isn't making any friends not is he keeping his options open - ask yourself how a scum Yates hopes to survive a MM-town flip. That's really the basis for me seeing Yates as town here - he's painted himself into a corner with his tunneling on Monkey. I suppose it could be a gambit, where Yates hopes to be conf-town with a Monkey-scum flip, but that's a very risky move D1 since Yates then has to explain a conf-town not getting nk'd.

Monkey's play looks to me like his freaked-out town play I've seen him mislynched for before. I'm really worried that we've got a town-town fight between Yates and MM that would be all too easy for scum into turn into two quick mislynches. I'm willing to bet more than one scum is egging this along.

[-L-]

Can people please get off my wagon? I can read in between the lines who does not suspect me as much anymore - and I'd rather not accidentally get lynched. HD won't move.

[-L-]

Because I'm looking at qwints and want others to look too.

[-L-]

I'm not posting anymore, your highness.

[-L-]

Unvote?

[-L-]

I am the Gunsmith. I am not the cause of excessive posts, I just tried to keep them relevant. I did my best to refute arguments that were poorly built.

I suspect ace, qwints, Yates, and HD. Alduskkel is somewhere there, but her post count makes me think she's forgotten this game.

[-L-]

I had no motivations.

[-L-]

In truth, I got fed up with you, an event in another game, another game going crazy, drama crazy people on another forum making my life hell, yet another ex calling to say "sorry" - I'm just tired and this is me "flailing".

I honestly don't give a crap.

[-L-]

Good night.

[-L-]

At least now my flip is worth something.

I am town.

Take a look at those who did not want to make an opinion on me, and then those who pushed my quicklynch..

[-L-]

You guys - I did not lie. My question was genuine. I was asking if because the title was 0 percent flavor - if we were power roles in name only. If only I'd had the chance to clear that up.