Mini 1474: Desperado's Revenge (Game Over)

[sthar8]

/confirm

[sthar8]

Vote: evilpacman18

for having a bit of the old in-out-in on the queue thread. I bet you met your scumpartner at the Korova, me droog?

The account dates in here are making me feel really old.

[sthar8]

Aaand since we're already generating content:

Unvote

@Cowbells- Please do not fakequote. Breaking the rules is really bad for the town.

@Theo- Does LAL really apply to a first post gambit? Also, can you elaborate on your reasoning for voting mnemonic in 23?

@N64- My terminology may be a little rusty. By RVS, are you referring to the random voting stage? If so, I gotta say I disagree with you on the policy. People taking random votes seriously generates some really interesting reactions, and I'm always for it.

@mnemonic- Do you have meta on RadiantCowbells?

[sthar8]

@Cowbells- That's about what I figured, but please RTFR before your next gambit. That could have been catastrophic.

I have something similar in my notes regarding mnemonic's 17, though I'm not ready to call it a tell until we've seen some more content from him.

Couple questions: Why was device's confirm scummy? Can you link the Lucky meta? Is the "sheep" thing jargon I don't know? If its not, please explain anyway.

[sthar8]

EBWOP:

No it's because he's new. I checked his confirmation post history because I thought the exact same thing.

Yeah that's about how I read it. He's either excited to be playing or excited to be scum. Null.

[sthar8]

I'm not implying he is town. I'm saying that

if

he is town, rulebreaking is a

really bad idea

.

For the record, I don't believe in outing town tells. They're meaningless if the player is aware of them, and outing them gives scum information on how to manipulate you. We can discuss them when they become relevant, but saying "X looks townie to me" is fairly useless at best and buddying scum at worst.

[sthar8]

OMG HE DOESNT WANT TO SAY WHO I THINKS IS TOWN HE IS HIDING SOMETHING lYNCH HIM. Nah, I'm JK.

But if you said "Breaking the rules is really bad" it wouldn't sound like you're calling him town, but you threw in that extra word, and I don't understand why.

It was a not-so-subtle reminder that if he is town, his actions should benefit the whole town. Remember this was just after someone had posted that Cowbells has self-hammered as doc in another game.

I'm not particularly worried about coaching scum to appear less scummy in this particular instance because the worst case scenarios are so dangerous to the town regardless of Cowbells' alignment.

I know my wording is a little manipulative, but frankly having a modkill affect the outcome of the game would be un-fun.

@jon- FOS for buddying!

@Cowbells- Thanks for the game number, I'm going to read up on it now.

@others I consulted with the mod before posting that. (I'm allowed to say that, right?) His response (paraphased) was that he'd rather I didn't but it doesn't break any rules because its based off of public information (the VT role card) it was fine.

Actually, it breaks this rule by my reading:

Pretending to break a rule is the same thing as breaking a rule.

But I have no problem with anything you did if the mod cleared it.

I also look forward to hearing more from mnemonicdevice, and everyone without real posts added so far.

[sthar8]

That would be bad play. It cuts off discussion and robs the town of information. Please don't.

Besides, not all L-1 wagons are intended to lynch. I've seen pressure wagons go to L-1, and I've seen more than one L-1 wagon

not

lead to a lynch.

I'm six pages into N1378 right now and it is intensely painful. I hope we can expect a higher standard of interaction here than was displayed by some of the players in that game.

[sthar8]

Still meta-ing in between fits of productivity at work. If the Magic players slow down on the questions, I'll get some more up today.

FOS: jon- Chilling with your wife, or just chilling your wife? You know who would keep their wife in a refrigerator? A serial killer!

[sthar8]

This is boring, let's pick it up pickitup pickitUUUPPPP

What are your scum reads right now sthar, flench, and pacman?

We'll get there tonight, I promise. The players are being needy.

[sthar8]

First off:

This is boring, let's pick it up pickitup pickitUUUPPPP

Our activity is falling off, (...) And don't flake out of the game, it's not a prod race.

^thank you, this is seriously fucking stale

Calm down kiddos. Thread's been open

two days

and we've already got 90-ish posts, despite it being a weekend for those of us on Earth. Hell, I worked 36 out of the last 48 hours. If I didn't have a coworker who took it upon himself to cover for me while I read mafia, I'd be way behind too. We're not even close to deadline, and we're getting good discussion in. I'll start pressuring lurkers Wednesday, after the guys who are busy on the weekend have had a chance to post. Possibly Tuesday night if my Scout meeting gets out early


Alright, now to business.

@JJ- after re-reading you, I've changed my mind. Show me yours, and I'll show you mine . I'll post my top 3 if you do.
Why did you pick that group of three to get suspicions from?

@N64- which posts (and posters, I guess) do you feel are "fluff posts?"

and theomancer is even willing to make sure he brings my questions back to me, just in case he's accusing of tunneling on the jester.

Can you clarify this? I'm not sure what it means.

@Theo- can you expand on how you feel about Cowbells?

@Radioactive Wolf- I look forward to hearing about that vote

@ RadiantCowbells- How about you play well instead? You're obviously capable of it.

It's not always optimal scum play to self-hammer. In fact, it's usually not. Plus, posted policy is extremely anti-town.

And if you're town, here are some things to consider before you make a petulant OMGUS self hammer:
1. Townies get voted to L-1 all the time. If you die, you can still win. It's in your best interest to let the rest of the town gather as much info from the lynch as possible.
2. Not all L-1 wagons end in a lynch. If you self-hammer, you're giving up on lynching scum before you have to. Examples: In the meta you referenced, on D2 lucky got voted to L-1 by the machinations of the ridiculously bad obvscum in that game (btw congrats on calling that game on day2, lucky). If he had self-hammered, the town would in all likelihood have missed on the Jason lynch. And in my ancient newbie here, we got to a day2 L-1 on an unhelpful townie. If he had self hammered, our cop wouldn't have been able to deliver a guilty on scum. Further, he shaped up his play on day3, and thanks to getting cop cleared, he won the game for us in LYLO. He actually said at one point:

But I'm also not a large enough asshole to hammer myself.

3. You know your alignment. The mod knows your alignment. If you're scum, your partner knows your alignment. If you are getting voted to L-1 as town, it's because someone who doesn't know your alignment is mistaken about it. It's obvious to you that they're wrong, but they aren't operating on the same information as you are. It doesn't make someone dumb to draw an incorrect conclusion from incomplete evidence.

Not comfortable with a vote on anybody yet, but we're getting there.

[sthar8]

Fair enough. Do you think Flench is scum, or are you voting him for pressure? I'd be interested to hear about his autovote thing as I'm not sure what to make of it.

I'm reading mnemonic, n64, and epm very carefully right now.

[sthar8]

I could see that as a legitimate conclusion from Cowbells' comments.

So do you think he's scum or anti-town? I've been leaning towards anti-town, thus my interactions with him. You had said his gambit looked scummy, and that town would have more analysis. He's posted a bit of that since then, and I was wondering how you felt about it.

Thank you for posting the sheeping link. I remember it as barning, and IIRC barning was pretty universally considered a scumtell back in the day. I find it suspicious at any rate.

I'm not sure what you're getting at with the quotes at the bottom of your last.

[sthar8]

@Lucky- I think in that game it was more about mastin trying to be an IC. He seems pretty serious about that. Your conclusion is sound though.

@Flench- I assumed the autovote was your RVS thing, and I certainly don't see it stifling discussion. But in the actual autovote post, you justified the vote as though it were serious. If it was a joke vote, why the justification? And if you were ready to serious vote, why the autovote thing? I don't like the ambiguity.

Also, I'll pose you the same question I asked Theo: do you believe RC is scum, or anti-town? And, of course, I look forward to your reads.

@N64-

I'm answering the questions with a response, not pasting people's quotes to explain why I think the questions are unnecessary.(Like some people)

I don't know what this sentence means. Can you clarify?
Also, I asked you two questions that I'd still like answered.

@RC We're past the point of this being useful. You and I will have words, when the timing is appropriate.

@JJ- I think you're entirely too ecumenical.

I'll explain theomoaners quotes at the bottom of 98 for him.

Do not

ever

do this. No matter how good you think your read is, you don't

know

theo's alignment. You may have protected him from a chance to incriminate himself, or at the very least robbed the town of his original thoughts in his own words. If he's scum, he may have been trying to insinuate that conclusion, and having it come from you instead of him gives him probable deniability if the idea were to lead to something. Town players should focus on playing town, not helping someone who might be scum to play

their

role.

I was pretty sure that was what he was getting at, but I wanted it to come from him, since there's no protown reason to beat around the bush with an idea like that. Obviously, in my notes I have marks next to you, feelit, pacman, and jon to revisit those remarks for tells once we know more about the setup. I assumed that was your reason for asking the question in the first place. But we don't have enough information yet (as far as I know) to merit beginning that discussion, so I wanted to know why theo was bringing it up.

[sthar8]

There will likely be more from me later, but I want to comment on the following now because it doesn't require any extra reading.

Sthar has already pointed ot that he is probably the most experienced player in this game so I would assume that he would be thinking that this would be a reasonably standard setup of 20%-25% mafia, or three person mafia team so why does he suggest to Cowbells that...

... If you're scum,

your partner knows your alignment

. ...

Singular

partner. It seems mighty suspicious to me.

... but I wanted it to come from him, since there's no protown reason to beat around the bush with an idea like that.

I chose to hold off, as I said earlier, because I really wanted to see Feel It's reaction, if there was one. If you and he, (or indeed anyone and he) are a scum team then I guess,from his play so far, he would be the weaker member and his reaction would provide the most information. Too late though now JJ has explained it.

A little context for my comment:
I've been playing mafia for 18 years. The vast majority of the games I've played or run have been in meatworld. When I was younger, we played once a month, but since I reached my majority (pun) I've played about twice a year in marathon sessions of 10-15 games. I play with a board game group consisting of six regulars and occasional significant others and my Scout troop of 9 boys aged 11-17. Because our games often involve children and inexperienced players, we tend to use simpler setups that finish quickly (although some of the older boys really like the dethy setup). Because of this, every game I've played in the last five years has included exactly two scum. Further, when I made that post I had just finished reading two Newbies (which of course contain two scum) and working a ridiculously long weekend, which may have affected my mindset.

I've completed six games on this site. Three of them were mini themes, which usually have something odd in the setup, including one with three scum and a serial killer that could turn another player to form a second scumgroup. One was a mini normal in which I was part of a two scum pair that had a third scum-aligned player who wasn't revealed until the end of the game. Based on my experiences here, I'm not even close to being ready to speculate on the setup

A note on experience:
The meta on this site is evolving constantly. This likely means that you are all more familiar with how games are played now than I am, so I might miss some jargon or common knowledge plays that have become popular since my hiatus. Also remember that while I've done this a lot, I'm still playing to win. That's why I'll try to explain logically anything I say rather than justify it with experience, and why I won't accept "oops lol im new" as an excuse for poor play.

And wrecking Theo's alleged gambit to get reactions from feelit is yet another example illustrating why you shouldn't answer for other players.

[sthar8]

I'm an alt.

And I'm a Libra.

^ is town

Why?

I wonder why no one has mentioned this yet.

Three people discussing it. Do you have something to add?

@n64- Mainly I didn't really understand your case on Theo. I'm not trying to badger you, your syntax just isn't clicking for me for some reason.

@device- Who do you currently suspect?

I'm not feel-ing (pun) the theo or Cowbell wagons. Both seem opportunistic to me, like they'd be easy to defend as mislynches on day 2.

Top of the list are EPM, n64, feelit/flench, and Desperado

Aaand its time for lurker pressure votes.

Vote: jon_h61

until we get that promised post!

[sthar8]

OK pacman. Go get some sleep, and come back when you can read. If you really need to, we can discuss why it's protown to encourage lurkers to contribute tomorrow.

[sthar8]

EBWOP:
Does "pressure vote" mean something different now or do you have no idea what you're talking about?

[sthar8]

I actually agree with the notion the sthar might be scum.

OK. Votes and case then? It's about time for a real wagon, and I wouldn't mind it being on me.


Things to do today:
1. Go for a run
2. Eat some lunch
3. Go to work (~12 hrs)
4. Teach basic mafia game theory to epm and jon (I've given up on RC)
5. Hopefully get some relevant discussion in?

In that order.

[sthar8]

EBWOP:
I suppose I should explain that I'm not unvoting jon. Its more of that "basic mafia theory" crap, but he's climbing the list. Top 3 are epm, jon, and n64, no particular order.

[sthar8]

Alright guys, we're gonna start with the theory and put up some arguments after.

It's not a pressure vote if you
1. Don't even list that person in your scumreads
2. Say it's a pressure vote
-_-

That's actually super anti-town. Hmm.

@ Sthar8 If you're gonna pressure me, a least make it sound like you're serious enough to want me lynched. If I don't think it's a serious vote I won't pay any attention to it, and it then becomes a stagnant vote not doing any good.

"pressure voting" is the stupidest

...and that throwaway "pressure vote" is just awful.

So that we're absolutely clear here, I am absolutely and unequivocally serious about pressuring lurkers to contribute. The logical conclusion to that is, in fact, that I will attempt to lynch a lurker day 1 if they cannot contribute anything real to the game. I was under the (apparently mistaken) impression that pressuring lurkers, even to lynch, was routine and fairly common knowledge, but I'll elaborate on the reasoning.

1. You accept that the goals of town and scum in mafia are different. Further, you accept that the difference in motivation causes a detectable difference in posts. If you do not accept these two things, then you believe mafia to be a game of pure chance, and no scumhunting would be valid at all.
2. One of the goals of scum is to minimize the differences between their posts and town posts.
3. The fewer posts scum makes, the less opportunities they have to drop tells.
4. Lurkers are not always scum

If you accept these, it becomes a logical strategy for scum to simply not post, or only post the bare minimum required by the rules of the game. Lurking scum gain the following benefits:
1. Not posting means you do not drop tells
2. Since town has plenty of non-strategic reasons to lurk (new, confused, LA, etc), lurking is not inherently a scumtell, though it is better play for a scum player than for town
3. Players will naturally focus on the more vocal, allowing lurker-scum to coast along with minimal effort.

Now this means on a meta level that it is conceivably optimal for all scum to lurk every game. This would lead to slower games with less activity and less interaction between the players, which is bad for the game as a whole.

The only way to counter this is to foster a meta in which it is not safe to lurk through a game. That means that towns have to be willing to lynch players who are not contributing or only contributing the minimum. Further, it makes good game sense to do so because:

1. Lurking is more beneficial to the scum win condition than the town one, making lurkers

slightly

more likely to be scum
2. Players who do contribute generate more information as time goes on, while there is very little information to be gained from letting a lurker live.
3. Players who lurk in the early game are likely to flake or cause difficult decisions in the endgame, to the benefit of scum.

For an example of lurker-scum, see DarlaBlueEyes' posts in Mini 619. She skated through the first two days with multiple "sorry guys I'll post later" posts, and likely would have lived to endgame if not for a countered role claim.

Another, far more interesting example is our own evilpacman18 in Mini 1364. Same deal, he skates through from day 1 with 22 posts including no real suspicions, a couple categorical dismissals of others' cases based on "town reads", and numerous promises to catch up and add content that are never delivered upon.

Particularly telling from that example is the following:

Lurking was going so well as an actual tactic too. Shame.

This was just after he was outed by an information role and just before he self-hammered to cut off discussion.

But you don't understand why it's protown to keep lurkers active, pacman?

[sthar8]

Chapter II, in which I respond to the "case" on myself.

It's not a pressure vote if you
1. Don't even list that person in your scumreads

The point of the pressure vote, as noted above, is to force a player who's lurking to be active, allowing everyone to

formulate reads on them.

Of course you can't tell if someone is scum just from lurking, but that doesn't mean they should get a free pass!

So I scroll up and I see 126 and I'm like hmm, that's really long I bet scum wouldn't make posts that long so early. I almost just didn't read it but then I did. IT'S ALL FLUFF! I'll get back to this...

126 is relevant to a discussion I was having with JJ and Theo. I'm explaining the mindset behind what they believe might be a scumslip on my part, which offers an alternative reasoning. Just because you're not involved in the conversation doesn't make it "fluff."

My first little red flag was 59, where he says he doesn't like outing town tells because of the info it gives scum. I appreciate that to a certain extent, I've been mad when people will say someone is town because in certain contexts it can seal the death of someone useful (this happened in my last game). It's hard to say whether this is consistent with sthar's meta because his last game was 5 years ago, but I do think that it's a bit FAR to say that as a rule, one doesn't approve of outing town tells. By this logic, he should be accusing people who do like to out their town tells, which is like everyone, but he hasn't even mentioned it since.

Wait. Why should I be accusing people of being scum for a playstyle difference? I think its

dumb

to out towntells. Townies do dumb things all the time, like mistaking playstyles for scumtells. It doesn't mean anything about their alignment.

And I did point out that I don't like broadcasting towntells because they're inconclusive and they give scum information. When you all decided to ignore that and keep posting them, should I have been jumping around every towntell in the thread with a sign that said "LOOK HERE, SCUM. POSSIBLY IMPORTANT INFO?" It's a whole lot safer to ignore them and hope the scum don't pick up on the important ones.

Another thing I'm noticing about him is just what he talks about. I'm just on page 3 and already most of his talk is about game theory, not actual scumhunting. He spends a bunch of time talking about how RC shouldn't be breaking the rules, but never mentions anything alignment related. He talks about good and bad play. He talks about meta. He asks people questions. He talks about game theory more.
What he never does is say "X post is <good/bad>, here's why, I'm leaning <alignment> on this player" or something along the lines of, you know, finding the mafia. It's the easiest way to fluff and look helpful.

First,

I don't broadcast town tells

. So you're never going to see me directly say "I'm leaning town on this player" unless they're in danger of being mislynched. Second, early day 1 is about generating content so you can analyze it. How do you do that, if not by asking questions and talking about meta? We've had a bad noise/signal ratio in this game so far, so are you really going to attack me for not having any reads

on page three

while you're

buddying up to

commenting favorably on someone who doesn't have any reads

on page six?

Do you really want me to drag up some meaningless crap based on rvs jokes? How the hell would that be pro-town?

He criticizes both of the leading wagons, even going so far as to say that they are

opportunistic

, but does not name any names or attempt to do wagon analysis beyond that point. Throwing out broad generalizations about wagons like this without giving specifics is a classic scum tactic (makes it look like they're "taking a stance" on something without, you know, really doing it).

Look, the leading two wagons are shit. You know it, I know it, a couple of people have commented on it. The cowbell wagon boils down to "Cowbell is playing badly!" which is a null tell, and Theo's mistaking Cowbell's bad play as a scumtell which I've already discussed with him. It would be incredibly easy for scum or bad town to leap onto either wagon, and there's not enough information right now to draw conclusions on anybody's actions regarding them. I'm not saying those posts won't be useful later; there's just not much to go on right now and neither wagon is based on evidence, just like neither is generating interesting reactions anymore. My wagon, however looks really promising right now, and it's always good d1 play to pressure lurkers. The stance I'm taking on that garbage is that there are more important things to spend my time on.

My wagon, however, is getting real results. I'll do a PBPA of my top three tomorrow, since their posting has actually gotten interesting.

@Everyone complaining about the game- QUIT YOUR BITCHING AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. You don't get to sit and whine about how nobody's generating interesting content if you can't be bothered to contribute. Answer questions. Ask questions. Vote for somebody. Pick on the lurkers. Whatever, just

do something

. It's not everybody else's job to keep you engaged.

[sthar8]

EBWOP:

Just noticed this:

I don't like to vote until I would be fine with that person being hammered right then and I wish more people felt the same.

You'd be fine ending the day right now? Doesn't that seem a little premature?


Also these:

mnemonic, you should consider replacing out.

he's a child.

Are incredibly dismissive and rude.

[sthar8]

Oh, I'm sorry. Did I offend your sensibilities, sthar?

Well, I'm offended by people not keeping up with the game that they signed up for. How do you like that?

My sensibilities? No. Basic human decency? Yeah, a bit.

You're losing your shit over nothing. We have a couple of folks V/LA, and as of the writing of this post the only person who hasn't posted in the last 48 hours already has 12 game posts in the 4 days this thread has been active. Saying the players aren't paying attention is a little silly.

And how is being a prick to mnemonic_device, who is actually making an effort to keep up, going to solve that situation? I think you owe him an apology.

If you want to do something about the active lurkers, maybe we should vote one up, to see if they perform better when under suspicion?

[sthar8]

PBPAs incoming.

Let's clear out some little stuff before I get them up:

The only thing you're saying in 181 is that I'm playing differently than my scum meta? Thank you?

Horse laugh. I'm saying that you bloody well know that lurking is a viable tactic for scum, since

you've used it yourself

. We're not done with the results of that meta, by the way.

(...) ESPECIALLY if you make it clear that you're not voting them because you consider them scum, which is also SUPER ANTI-TOWN because you're bringing someone who you don't think is scum closer to the lynch,

Did you even read my post? Lurking is a powerful tactic as scum

because it prevents other players from reading them

, which makes someone who is lurking more likely to be scum than town. Since lurking players don't drop as many tells over the course of the game, they are more dangerous scum in the endgame. Therefore, it is more protown to wagon lurking players than to let them coast. If they don't respond at all they are likely

inactive

, and should be prodded until replaced. If they respond when a couple votes are placed on them, you force them to drop tells and give reactions, which is protown. If they post but without adding anything substantive, then they might be active lurking, which is a scumtell and can lead a lurker wagon to a profitable lynch.

Lets engage in a little archaeomancy so you guys know that this isn't just coming out of my brain:

3. Lurking should mostly be punished by the other players - not automatically, as some metagame set-in-stone law, but simply because lurking usually benefits scum more, and the threat of lynching is often the only way to get lurkers to speak up (which helps the town as well). Often the players rely far too much on the Mod to take care of lurkers for them - and in the case of deliberate lurkers, the Mod shouldn't do anything anyway (unless of course there are posting requirements as part of the rules, like in VM2). I'm guilty of this myself, as I'll often put off a lynch on someone because they seem headed for a modkilling.

and

The first thing we have to do is fortify the metagame of lynch all lurkers. The town

does

benifit in the long run from this strategy. You cannot stop a strategy which is detremental to the game by rewarding the people who practice it. Lynch people who lurk.

Once people see that they will be lynched if they are lurking, they will stop lurking. Most of the people that lurk are in the

moderate

lurking category. These people will post more if encouraged.

As for your defense, well I'm not unvoting so there's that.

And thank God for it.

It's not frustrating that you and he are missing the point...

not...at...all...

._.

What point, exactly? Maybe you could be less frustrated if you explained rather than just bemoaning how misunderstood you are.

Justify the bolded statement, please.

Note: after lucky has had a chance to respond, I would like to expound on this.

Oh, and for the self-righteous people out there who think I'm being mean, I recommend this playing a game with any of these people: roflcopter, thestatusquo, Greyice, Fate, and Majiffy.

You will learn what it really means to be hostile...

Hey, I remember some of those people! And this quote is logically unsound! Wheee!

Alright, I'm at a little bit of a loss...

So, you already said that the wagons sucked and that they're really not well founded. And you further state that scum are likely to join them.

It would be incredibly easy for scum or bad town to leap onto either wagon, and there's not enough information right now to draw conclusions on anybody's actions regarding them.

Those two wagons will likely be worth revisiting on a later day, but we don't know enough right now to comment intelligently.

Could you enlighten me really fast- is a lurker someone who is not active, or someone who is present but not posting?
.

Inactive

players do not log in or post. They get prodded and then replaced, so we don't really need to worry about them. Also, I don't see any in this game.

Lurkers

are reading the thread and not contributing. They pick up prods and post when directly instructed to, and no more. There are many, many reasons to be lurking, but none of them are pro-town and a few are actively scummy. An

Active Lurker

is reading the thread and posting, but with the intent of adding no content so as to avoid dropping tells. They're harder to spot because they spend a lot of time buddying and deflecting attention, but active lurking is a scumtell.

Also, isn't saying "lurker pressure vote" basically nullifying the pressure?

[/quote] No, its a conditional. I'm telling jon that I'll stop pushing him and reminding everyone that he's not contributing and advocating a wagon on him (all of which are bad for lurkers) if he posts more. Of course, if he posts more content, he has a better chance of dropping tells, so it's a lose-lose for him if he's scum.

@ Sthar8 My two cents worth. I wasn't complaining about you "pressuring" lurkers. I was just letting you know that if you tell me it's a pressure vote, I'm not going to take it seriously. You'd get a lot better response if you left out the pressuring bit. It'd be more effective if you did something like this-

@ feelit I was looking over your ISO. I noticed that a lot of your posts were no, to low content. I didn't like post posts 27 and especially 180. 180 was at a time when people were complaining about lurking, and that was

all

you could come up with? I

really

think you're scum just trying to skate by. Your posts are essentially useless with vague reads and jokes. You haven't helped Town one bit and until I'm convinced differently...

That's all fine and good, but following your formula my post would have been "@ jon I was looking at what will eventually grow up to be your ISO. I noticed nothing, because there was nothing there. We're well into the game, and it's time you started contributing, so until you do..."

The point is, I was (and am) voting for you because you haven't contributed enough for a read to be formed

at all

. I was under the impression that the terms I was using were generally understood to convey the same information. Obviously, I was wrong and should have explained the whole damn thing to start with . I'd also argue that the response I got was pretty good, seeing as we have actual things to talk about now.

[sthar8]

Pacman! You're up first! Aren't you excited?!

italics

are my summary notes of Pacman's posts.

underlined

text is my commentary

7: confirm

50: responding to RC's focus on mnemonic with "that's a newb tell." Agrees with RC that the confirm post might have been a scumtell otherwise, but points to meta.

51: calls everyone idiots for considering that there could be a jester in the game

Obviously, there's no jester in the game.

52: Agrees with RC on Theo being scummy based on his vote of RC. Asks Theo if they've played together.

77: Answers JJ's question about the possible setup with "probably 3 scum"

Again, we don't have enough info for this to mean anything yet. But pacman was the first to suggest 3 scum

122: criticizes lucky for "suspicion" of RC and then a random vote 11 posts into real game. What lucky actually said was

Radiant... I'm not sure what the hell you are doing but you can't post your role PM and I'm pretty sure Jester's are not in the "normal" rule set anyway so why the hell are you even lying about being a jester? Also, long time no see! I've missed you Judas

then, equivocates over Theo, saying stream of consciousness is townie, but the post is also opportunistic. Calls RC obvtown. Asks mnemonic how old he is. Says that jon justifying lurking is a scumtell. Announces that everyone is looking in the wrong directions.

In this post, EPM is suspicious of lucky, theo, and jon. He also categorically announces that he believes everyone else's reads are wrong.

123: agrees with JJ that flench could be scum

And that brings the total of suspected players to four. With no reason why other than he agrees with JJ

125: tells everyone to stop voting so much, for the mod's sake.

After throwing suspicion on four players?

131: announces that tybalt is town

Without any stated reasoning, right after tybalt had unvoted him.

134: asks RW when they played together

right after RW announced that he suspects EPM.

137: justifies telling everyone to not vote so much with "I'm a conservative voter and I want you to be too. I only vote when I'm ready to hammer." Also: "everyone should rethink their reads because I disagree with votes on RC, feelit, and flench"

This is silly and anti-town. Why should town players hold their votes until they're convinced of a hammer? Without wagoning, where are you going to get the reactions that are so crucial on day 1? Distances from the wagons on RC, feelit, and flench. Telling everyone to reformulate their reads because you don't agree with them is arrogant at best and distracting at worst.

139: justifies read on tybalt with "stream posts are townie because scum have to think carefully about what they post"

Is it odd that EPM's only explained townread is something that he does himself? I believe I've already expressed the opinion that towntells are meaningless if the person is aware of them.

140: says tyb changing votes in his four posts is protown because scum "always try too hard for consistency"

Isn't this an extension of the "too townie" fallacy? I don't believe it's indicative of alignment either way, especially since the votes were reactions to changing impressions midway through a catchup

141: expresses suspicion on me for pressuring jon

We've been over this. In detail. But its worth noting that this comes right after I list EPM as my top suspect

142: announces that I must be scum. says my 126 is too long to be scum but then that it's all fluff. promises to come back to this.

never does. Looks like weak justification of OMGUS to me.

143: announces that theo and I are scum together. promises to get back to this.

When he gets back to it, he presents no evidence in favor, but asks for other people's opinions on a conversation that Theo and I had. His previous suspicions on theo were incredibly weak, but Theo was the only wagon he hadn't distanced from (RC and Feelit were the other two options). Suddenly he's convinced that theo's scum with me.

144: empty post

149: responds to theo, saying RC is town because he's too aggressive for scum. Feelit and flench could go either way. feelit is null, flench could be scum but is unconvincing. Agrees with jon re: my vote.

Too aggressive for scum is obviously fallacious. Ask RC and Lucky about JasonWazza for evidence. Equivocates on Feelit and Flench without taking a position.

150: likes how jon posts, but wishes he would deliver on promises so that pacman could believe he's townie

This reads to me as "Be less suspicious so that the person I'm attacking doesn't look like his case is good." YMMV. Why are we giving advice to unconfirmed players about how to appear more townie?

160: empty post

162: attempts to link theo to me after being attacked for posting nothing useful

Theo says something negative about EPM, so he's my obvpartner. Where's the evidence on this again?

166: examines my behavior. says he agrees with not outing towntells, but finds it scummy that i make it a rule. Says i should logically be accusing people who out town tells. Says its suspicious that on page three i'm talking game theory, encouraging good play over bad, and asking questions. because i havent outed any alignment tells, he believes i'm attempting to look helpful without scumhunting.

Note that the first "red flag" point is equivocation. He says he agrees to a point, but that I take not broadcasting towntells too far so he finds it scummy. In the post he's referencing, I say nothing about how far I'll take it, nor do I say that towntells are explicitly scummy. I do say that I'll discuss them if they become relevant. He doesn't say how discouraging bad play asking questions and discussing game theory is anti-town, he just suggests that I'm doing it instead of scumhunting. On page 3. For contrast, EPM's first real post is on page three, where he accuses the whole town of being idiots, says RC's tell on mnemonic is null, and asks questions to look into a theo wagon, which lead to nothing. If my page 3 scumhunting was poor, then he must be my scumpartner.

167: votes me

I find it interesting that as per EPM's stated policy, this is when he becomes comfortable with the idea of me getting hammered and the day ending.

173: tells mnemonic he should replace out

178: calls mnemonic a child

Which is pretty ironic if I guess EPM's age correctly

192: horse laughs and red herrings me

I think I've already addressed the garbage logic in this post.

I haven't done one of these in a good long while. If you have any questions please let me know.

I started out expecting to find EPM mudslinging (four suspicions in two consecutive posts?) and generally trying to avoid pushing any wagon (equivocation on Feelit and Flench) while still trying to look town. From the scum meta I read on him earlier, I expected to see EPM trying to pick easy lynches that he could later say he wasn't part of (Theo early, feelit and flench later), and to see a bunch of poorly reasoned "town" reads and agreement as buddying(tybalt, RW, RC, jon, JJ).

What I didn't expect to see, and am fascinated by, is the instant jumping on anyone who even mildly criticized him (me, theo, RW). EPM looks to me like he's more concerned with how he appears to others, both today and tomorrow after the lynch, than with actually doing anything protown. This is purely speculation, but EPM was outed as scum in that extracurricular reading by an investigative role. Maybe he's trying not to get investigated so he doesn't lose the same way again?

Anyway, I certainly like this one more than a lurker vote.

VOTE: evilpacman18

[sthar8]

EBWOP: I have a new housemate moving in tonight and that took longer than I thought it would. I'm gonna push the two shorter PBPAs till tomorrow. We have plenty of time before the deadline.

[sthar8]

Long day at work. I was going to do jon's posts tonight, but he actually posted today and shook everything all up. I'm still disentangling N64, and I have a 14 hour workday tomorrow.

Points from today:

@Sthar, I like your case on EPM, its the first properly presented one we have seen so far, but at this point EPM seems totally on his town meta (over concerned with how he is perceived, omgussy etc.) and I can't really buy scum being so rude (not sure if that's the word I mean) to to lurkers, especially if they're drawing town away from real scumhunting. We have now had two pages of what amounts to IIoA.
Unfortunately EPM is the closest I have to a town read at this point.

Can you link the town meta you're referring to? What if the lurkers aren't drawing us away from real scumhunting? Can you expand on the IIoA thing? I'm not sure I agree, but it's an interesting thought.

If you can divorce yourself from the fact that you want me lynched and so you'll take the support, I'd be interested in what you think of the other votes on me too.

Don't worry, we'll be going there.

@ Sthar8 You remind me a lot of Yosarian in Newbie 1223. He argued mechanics, theory, and play similarly. In the end I told him he'd won the argument, then hammered him for the win. Though being right in a discussion is good, it doesn't change anyone's alignment.

I remember Yos. And I am aware of your point.

DANA SHULPS, et al

Supernatural?

I do not have the energy to trade broadsides with JJ and pacman right now, but I'll address their stuff later.

Lucky- what RW said in 231

[sthar8]

Just got home from work. I'll catch up tomorrow.

[sthar8]

Posting now, it'll be up shortly.

[sthar8]

sthar, what do you think of lucky2u?

He's sheep, if I'm using the term correctly. I cannot currently determine if he just hasn't got anything or if he's trying to let townies be in the spotlight today to set up a good d2 for his scumteam. More information required.

saying "I don't think you're scum. I'm going to vote you, this is called 'pressure!' You better get posting!!!1" isn't scary.

Projecting? You're adding things that I didn't say. You'll forgive me if I don't take "Sometimes lurkers are scum. We don't do anything about it" seriously, especially considering the

bloody stellar

play of those making that unsupported assertion this game.

He didn’t say he doesn’t like that you don’t have reads, he said he didn’t like that you weren’t trying to get reads by scum hunting.

What he never does is say "X post is <good/bad>, here's why, I'm leaning <alignment> on this player"

or something along the lines of, you know, finding the mafia.

Emphasis mine.

I hate you. Walls. Suck. Oh my god, you don’t even say anything in it.

Sorry for generating content? That post is discussion with four different people. I'm not going to stop engaging anyone to appease your sense of aesthetics, especially in a game with so few people actually contributing. Besides, you don't read my posts anyway, so why should you care?

rather than, say, linking the post he is commenting on.

Sorry for assuming you know how to work an ISO?

@ Everyone- I'm reading a lot of people who are accepting assertions without even looking at the evidence, which is just bad play. Check your facts, especially if you're going to vote based on them.

I feel like I'm forgetting something. I'm certain that one of you will remind me.

I'm still happy with my vote.

[sthar8]

I'm not going to repeat myself after this.

Good. I'm tired of hearing your broken "logic" on it's broken record player. I've explained my reasoning, backed up with examples, citations, and clearly laid out logic, and all you can spout is the same old assertion. If you think its scummy that I'm willing to check activity levels and even lynch a lurker

who's not going to get replaced,

then just vote for me already. Otherwise, we can be done.

The point there was that JJ and pacman keep stating or implying that my vote on jon was bad

because I was voting for someone who I didn't think was scum

and I said

nothing of the sort

in the vote post. Additionally, I have

repeatedly

discussed why the opposite was true, but we somehow keep coming back to that point.

Oh, and you might not think people are reading your posts, but I am. If I hear any more from you about "human decency", (ever) you're going to get an earful from me.

A whole earful? Of what? I hope its not something sticky. I would hate to have a sticky ear.

In all seriousness, though, I apologize if I offended you. I intentionally provoked you in order to read a baseline reaction on a topic unrelated to your alignment. You are one of the most enjoyable players in the game so far, and it would be a shame to have you hung up on something so silly (and ironic.)

@ Sthar8 You address JJ frequently in your posts. You complain about his play, and attack his logic. BUT I get the feeling you're addressing Town. Do you think he's Town or scum?

Actually, I'm reading him just on the scummy side of neutral. He started off really well by asking tons of questions, but I'm unsettled by his impatience. He has a couple of unsupported reads that I don't like and I (obviously) disagree with almost every conclusion he's posted. I find his "waaaah too much to read" post incredibly dense, especially after all his complaining re: activity earlier. All of this could be indicative of things other than alignment, so I don't think he's worth pursuing today.

Thanks I guess? It's true that I am actively being a little sheep like in the early game. I am taking a wait and see attitude currently. I tend to do that day 1.

Right, and I've met a bunch of players who do that both online and in meatworld. I like that you're willing to admit it without being defensive, but it's not indicative of alignment without more information.

Still waiting for sthar's player-by-player

I don't do player-by-players. Do you mean my PBPA on n64? That would be the thing I forgot, thanks. Incoming shortly.

So instead of just complaining, track down scum. Then I'll allow you to bemoan how bad everyone is.

QFT. This does not only apply to EPM.

We're four days from deadline. It's time to pick. When the mod gets the VC up, I'll examine the top two wagons and figure out if I'd be willing to vote one.

[sthar8]

Disclaimer: a significant amount of this post will be me attempting to understand what n64 is saying. If I get anything confused, please correct me.

14: confirm

19: random self vote

21: asks for players not to take rvs seriously

40: wants everyone to give opinions on radiant's gambit. calls mnemonic's vote omgus. says theo is wrong about radiant.

92: thinks radiant caught theo with his gambit. I think n64 thought that theo asking for clarification on 40 is scummy? Also says there isn't much info to be gained from mnemonic at this point.

I agree regarding mnemonic.

100: clarifies some of the above. Says that theo hadn't given radiant a real case to respond to, but that theo had later given radiant an easy out with his post. Suggests that this might be coaching. Asks for JJ and feelit's opinions on radiant

I think that both things he's accusing theo of are weak tells, but aren't they contradictory?

117: Looks at feelit for undermining Radiant's rvs vote. Suggests that undermining the vote allows scum to ignore pressure. Attacks feelit for being vague on his reads. Suggests that feelit is concerned about how others view him.

Absolutely agree regarding assisting in the defense of another player. Not convinced that there was much pressure in the rvs vote to undermine.

121: V/LA notice

242: laments a second theory argument. says that people dismissing the early wagons should be attacking those who pushed them. says that's fence-sitting, and that he doesn't like the new wagons. asks if pacman or I is more self conscious, and if theo's town reads are serious.

I've noted my opinions on this already.

295: thinks town are now following through on scumminess. Thinks there should be more wagons. says lucky is sheep, flench is votehopping. calls theo town, but doesn't like his clarification posts. unvotes.

I agree with much of this.

I expected to find n64 tossing around suspicion with weak or unjustified reasoning, but reading his posts in order does wonders for the communication barrier. I think I agree with his theories if not his conclusions, and provided he keeps posting I don't think he'd be a good lynch target today.

[sthar8]

Oh shoot that one's my fault. I assumed PBPA was player-by-player analysis, not post-by-post analysis. That's fine then. I would still like opinions from sthar on lucky2u and I guess I do look forward to that N64 post.

No worries, I figured that was it. I also already posted my feelings on lucky in the beginning of 273. Again, no worries, because that post was mostly me arguing with JJ. I'm happy to answer any questions you have regarding lucky.

[sthar8]

I believe that was uncontrollable and sarcastic weeping.

[sthar8]

I don't like this post on many levels.

Tell me about it. Why aren't we lynching pacman again?

I agree with your points re: feelit vs flench, but I'm not sure I agree with the conclusion. Flench being more involved suggests to me that he's more likely to continue generating tells and information, while feelit is likely to coast along if we let him. Wouldn't the low info lynch be better on day 1?

This game is bad, nobody is committed.

Not really a fan of BWCS, even when you make the argument about yourself. First, we're not all as indifferent as you are. Second, do you know how we make a better game with more interesting content? You generate some goddamn content! It's not my job to entertain you.

I'm not particularly excited about Flynching, but I will move my vote there before deadline.

I'm fascinated by the halfhearted push on lucky. Analysis after dinner.

Waiting for AJ's intro stuff.

[sthar8]

I don't think you really want to push the JJ wagon...

[sthar8]

Although I was thinking the same for a bit.

[sthar8]

Outing town reads and town tells is actually massively beneficial for a lot of reasons

Those benefits are illusory and outweighed by the negatives. Obviously, this is both a theory discussion and my opinion. I'd be happy to discuss it further with you tomorrow or post-game.

@Everyone- STOP SELF VOTING. We have roughly 8 hours until the deadline. Unless you are preventing an imminent no lynch, you should avoid self voting as it gives no useful information to the town.

So, you prefer a choice not your primary?

Don't be silly. Compromises are bad, no lynch is worse.

Catching up but I want the mod to comment on this.

Why?

(4): This is partially meta based, I've seen EPM in a few games and as town he's a bigger 'personality' so to speak as in he's not afraid to state his thoughts of people and opinions without caring too much about the consequences. The whole "I don't like votes being placed on the lead wagons" isn't something I think he'd come out and state as scum while not having town reads on all of the players. Also him doing meta research to find out Devices confirmation voting thing being a null tell reads very town, mafia generally don't waste time doing meta research.

(5): I think JJ's "how many scum are usually in this setup" is natural which means no inside information which means it's a town-slip, I also think his frustration is genuine and can follow his thought process a lot. And weirdly enough I think AJ not realizing that he replaced into JJ's slot is a big town tell, as scum I think he'd instantly have looked at his predecessors and partners play and therefore not said that he FoS's that slot.

(4) That about fits with my read of EPM's meta. The issue I have is that in this game, all his "reads" and "pushes" appear to correlate to the players most suspicious or critical of him. That doesn't read like "without caring too much about the consequences" to me. Also, I read the "Don't vote unless you're ready to hammer" post as something he could point back to on day two after helping to reason out a mislynch to explain why he didn't vote for whatever wagon he wanted to push. Effectively, he could drive whatever wagon he wanted as scum, leave only town votes on the record, then if he gets called on it he has a plausible explanation.

(5)Not saying that AJ is scum, but that's a null-tell at best. Equally plausible is that AJ replaced in thinking he was tybalt-scum, sees that he's been criticized for having no opinions, and rushes out an easy case. A push on JJ would be easy to drop as his replacement started doing things differently, and equally easy to hound for behavioral tells that the replacement can neither fix nor explain. JJ is an incredibly easy scum-target right now.

Don't expect anything substantial from me today, but I will be reading along. I will vote to prevent a no-lynch before deadline, but I will not vote theo or lucky unless they are literally the only option. I do not understand the cases on them, and there is not enough time today to bring me around. I'll be happy to examine both of them tomorrow.

[sthar8]

Don't tell me what to do, pacman. You're not even my real dad.

[sthar8]

On one hand, I feel like extending the deadline will also extend the circle jerk of inactive posting and non-suspicions. Plus, we have a couple of players who basically promised to start playing for realsies tomorrow.

On the other, I'm a firm believer in longer days being good for the town.

I'll support an extension.

By my count that's six in favor. One more needed.

VOTE: Flench in the event of no extension. I'm looking over the lucky wagon now, but he's only got 3 votes.

My math makes this L-1. Claim if you're reading, Flench.

Multiple days of no lynch are bad. I can deal with one. We won a game in Kubli Khan's Xlbot game with a day 1 no lynch, sweeping out two mafia teams.

(...)

So, who's your ideal lynch? I refuse to help this Flench vote, so if you want to counter it real quick, I can help get a lynch in this 7 hours.

1. How big was that game? Multiple scumteams suggests large, which often have a larger margin for error.
2. How many night actions did it involve? Same deal.
3. Compromise wagons are bad because they often result in scum directing the lynch. Analysis can mitigate this a little. No Lynch means we gain no confirmed alignment information about the day 1 wagons, and we lose the player the scum find most threatening. In exchange, we get a night's worth of actions (assuming the scum don't nk a power role). Since I don't know anything about the setup, I'm much more comfortable with a compromise than a no lynch.

With the number of V/LA players right now, there's no way we're going to lynch someone who doesn't already have a wagon on them. If you really can work miracles, I'd love to see pacman dead. Added to the other things, modkill fishing is scummy as shit. Free NK anyone?

@ lucky- Bro, was joke, bro. In reference to:

seriously everyone not voting for either flench or lucky needs to vote in their next post.

[sthar8]

And that was a reference to the tracksuit mafia from the current run of Hawkeye. Should be read in heavy russian accent, bro.

[sthar8]

I really hope it does, Flench.

[sthar8]

Link? It sounds interesting, especially since I had to look up two of those roles. I'll reiterate that No Lynch is largely setup dependent, and since we don't know the setup I'd rather not have one. It's certainly not crippling, but it is something to avoid.

@Mod- Assuming I'm not bad at maths (not a safe assumption), when is our new deadline?

[sthar8]

Sorry guys. Very, very sick. Somewhat high on cough syrup. Sneezing so hard my nose is bleeding every 10 min or so. Will attempt to catch up before deadline, no promises. Dunno who i'm voting so

UNVOTE:

[sthar8]

sthar this isn't 2008, lurking isn't a scum tactic anymore.

Are you ready to believe that we have to punish lurkers now? That was completely terrible.

I had Flench pegged as the doctor, which usually also means scum. I really thought pacman would flip scum because his play was so harmful to the town. Completely called TIP.

[sthar8]

Except for tybalt, Flench and N64 who lurked through day 1.

[sthar8]

^ That.

[sthar8]

N64 almost got replaced for prod-dodging and tybalt got replaced with obvscum who had 24 total posts. Flench almost got lynched for inactivity day 1 and once his posting rate improved, he appeared scummy enough to get him killed. The town lurkers just prove that the behavior needs to be disincentivized for both alignments, which your suggestion of "lol i hope they replace" does not accomplish.

There's no point in arguing it with you, pacman, but your bad play effectively lost the game. The lurking town enabled it, but a good town leader could have won the game from your seat. You put in effectively no analysis, went whole days without generating content whilst bitching about how boring the game was, alienated the obvtown md to the point that his lylo vote on you was inevitable, and filled the thread with meaningless noise posts.

Basically, the scum weeded out all the town skill and left you in a predictable lylo of your own making.

@ Desperado- You did a great job as the mod. Scumteams should probably be in their pm, though.

@ N64- Were your day 1 incomprehensible posts intentional? Your scumchat and later posts are wayyy easier to read.