Mini 1493: Lucky's <insert cool name here> game (GAME OVER)

[NicCage]

You won't explain your reasoning and expressed interest in only the two biggest wagons.

Yeah Albert where's this vote coming from. It's a little too stale for it to just be a pressure vote

[Albert B. Rampage]

There are a number of objectionable behaviors I've mentally noted during the course of this game:

NicCage's off-putting vote on Squigly.
SD parking his vote on Wake.
Squigly flaking under pressure.
3 other lurkers who gave us no information at all today.
Archaebob's wishy washy approach to lurkers.

Out of all of these, I'll pick and choose the most popular to sheep. The lack of activity is what's hurting us the most, so if it were up to me I'd venture a lynch on one of the lurkers and try to hit scum before they are replaced with someone more dangerous who we don't have any history on.

[NicCage]

Do you see a scum motivation behind my squilly vote, or does it just give you a bad feeling?
Do you consider squilly to be a lurker as well?

There's something about you I don't like. Scum-wise, not personality-wise.

[Wake1]

...

A lot of fancy vote-changing...

[SalmonellaDreams]

Albert B. Rampage makes good points, so he's prob town.

Antihero is townish.

aptil is null leaning town.

archaebob is definitely town. Makes good points, etc.

I didn't really like Radiant Cowbell, but Banksys seems fairly town.

Hodge doesn't have much content at all. Null leaning town.

I'm not sure if jackofspades is genuinely unable to post, or purposely lurking, so null.

I don't know why, but I just ISO'd Lucky.

Same deal with Naomi as it was with jack.

Nic Cage is scummy, but not enough for me to switch.

Squilly is scummy for disappearing when pressured.

After ISO'ing what's ace and seeing what's been said about him, I'd say he's the next scummiest player after Wake.

Wake is obvscum, but Albert is right. Parking my vote is probably useless because it seems like he won't be lynched today, no matter how scummy I find him.

So with that...

VOTE: aceofspades

[theaceofspades]

You won't explain your reasoning and expressed interest in only the two biggest wagons.

Yeah Albert where's this vote coming from. It's a little too stale for it to just be a pressure vote

i fairly certain i've explained my reasoning. if you could link to the posts you don't understand I might be able to help you

[NicCage]

You, nic should have know the answer to your question, behaving like a rabid porcupine is not time well spent.

Is this the only reason you think/thought I was scummy?

[Banksys Flareon]

Interesting.

@archaebob: You said you wanted NicCage at L-2, which I can only assume was for a purpose. You felt strongly enough about this to vote him, and then unvote when he reached L-1. With my unvote he goes back down to L-3. Now, NicCage certainly hasn't done anything in the interim period, so I fully expected you to vote him again and to "demonstrate your resolve." So resolve this for me. What was the purpose in voting Nic, and why doesn't it apply now?

[theaceofspades]

primarily yes. It just seemed unnecessary to me, like you were fishing. poking the troll so to speak.

you also seem to be ALL fluff. I haven't seen anything helpful from you (and I literally just ISO'd you, like seconds ago) it's all just demanding cases and reads from other people without providing any yourself.

also every comment directed at you has been aggressively counter-targeted, buzz-saw-esque.

[NicCage]

You should go back and reread that situation, I certainly wasn't antagonizing anyone, I just wanted something explained to me. I'm pretty sure I've hinted at and stated a couple reads.

[theaceofspades]

@ nic
not necessarily from wake from others as well, aptil comes to mind most easily

[NicCage]

I only meant how I was early in the game.
Yes I'm being aggressive towards those who suspect me, especially those who have given bad reasons. My wagon has gotten large enough that I'm sure at least one scum is on or has expressed a desire to get on it, and the entire thing is frivolous enough that I think by forcing people to explain their reasoning I might reveal some dishonesty.

[hodge]

archaebob why has your vote changed so rapidly recently? It hasn't really stayed in place anywhere long enough to put any sort of pressure on people.

[Albert B. Rampage]

archaebob why has your vote changed so rapidly recently? It hasn't really stayed in place anywhere long enough to put any sort of pressure on people.

He's probing for weakness.


@NicCage

I will answer you shortly.

[Antihero]

OK, hodge I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt, but this is the last time

HODGE

Earlier, a few pages ago, you said this:

I contemplated voting for Wake however on the off chance Wake is telling the truth i'd rather not go after a PR without greater proof regardless how annoying. We can wait and see if Wake has anything going till the next day phase imo and we should be in a better position to tell then.

Do you still believe that Wake's claim was a scum gambit? Would you be willing to lynch him today?

this is a big deal to me (not archaebob's vote changing; that's not a scumtell)

also, why is your vote on squilly?

[Antihero]

Out of all of these, I'll pick and choose the most popular to sheep. The lack of activity is what's hurting us the most, so if it were up to me I'd venture a lynch on one of the lurkers and try to hit scum before they are replaced with someone more dangerous who we don't have any history on.

I....

don't understand this...

[hodge]

OK, hodge I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt, but this is the last time

HODGE

Earlier, a few pages ago, you said this:

I contemplated voting for Wake however on the off chance Wake is telling the truth i'd rather not go after a PR without greater proof regardless how annoying. We can wait and see if Wake has anything going till the next day phase imo and we should be in a better position to tell then.

Do you still believe that Wake's claim was a scum gambit? Would you be willing to lynch him today?

this is a big deal to me (not archaebob's vote changing; that's not a scumtell)

also, why is your vote on squilly?

Sorry I missed this, tbh i'm not sure either way, I just don't feel strongly enough to say yes to vote if it could result in the lynch of a PR at this stage.

I was hoping a few votes on Squilly may encourage some activity.

[Lucky2u]

seeking replacement for jackofspades for failure to respond after prod.

Also, Squilly was prodded.

[archaebob]

Interesting.

@archaebob: You said you wanted NicCage at L-2, which I can only assume was for a purpose. You felt strongly enough about this to vote him, and then unvote when he reached L-1. With my unvote he goes back down to L-3. Now, NicCage certainly hasn't done anything in the interim period, so I fully expected you to vote him again and to "demonstrate your resolve." So resolve this for me. What was the purpose in voting Nic, and why doesn't it apply now?

I got what I needed from Nic when he started going after ace. I maintained the wagon until I got what I needed from the people who were on it.

archaebob why has your vote changed so rapidly recently? It hasn't really stayed in place anywhere long enough to put any sort of pressure on people.

Disagree.

He's probing for weakness.

Why would you take it upon yourself to say this?

Out of all of these, I'll pick and choose the most popular to sheep. The lack of activity is what's hurting us the most, so if it were up to me I'd venture a lynch on one of the lurkers and try to hit scum before they are replaced with someone more dangerous who we don't have any history on.

...

Let me get this straight. You're suggesting that we expend a lynch on a player that we don't know anything about, because any one of these lurkers

might

be scum, and if we

don't

take this precautionary measure, the lurker who we don't know anything about

could

be replaced by someone more dangerous who will then magically steamroll over us while we cower helplessly?

Ever had a poorly skilled scum win a game because of a lurkerhunt? I have.

Ace case coming.

[aptil]

I got what I needed from Nic when he started going after ace. I maintained the wagon until I got what I needed from the people who were on it.


Ace case coming.

The way Nic went after ace is the same way he has been posting the whole game,i do not see much of a difference.So what did you get from it?


Looking forward to your Ace case.

[Lucky2u]

seeking replacements for Naomi-Tan and Squilly now as well.

[Albert B. Rampage]

Do you see a scum motivation behind my squilly vote, or does it just give you a bad feeling?
Do you consider squilly to be a lurker as well?

Your Squigly vote surprised me because it was a deliberate change of course from the Wake bandwagon who was just starting to get some traction. In a stroke, you changed the leading wagon from Wake to Squigly. Your empty vote immediately followed RadiantCowbells' reaction. Considering it was the start of the day, and the town's objective is to generate discussion, you did not give Squigly the chance to defend himself against any accusation or elaborate his point of view.

TL;DR The timing and context of your vote is off-putting.

Nic Cage is scummy, but not enough for me to switch.

What do you find scummy about NicCage? Which points against him did you agree with? Do you have any original points against him?

He's probing for weakness.

Why would you take it upon yourself to say this?

Teaching.

...

Let me get this straight. You're suggesting that we expend a lynch on a player that we don't know anything about, because any one of these lurkers

might

be scum, and if we

don't

take this precautionary measure, the lurker who we don't know anything about

could

be replaced by someone more dangerous who will then magically steamroll over us while we cower helplessly?

There are too many unknown variables that will make the endgame more difficult for us. If Wake is what he says he is and is left alive long enough to reveal his results, his understanding of the relationships and dynamics between players will be the key to our victory. With 30% of the town missing in action, his actions will be tantamount to a shot in the dark.

If Wake is scum, he will be lynched soon enough, and then where do we go from there? It will be hard enough to get bandwagons going with this many inactives. Scum replacements get a clean slate and have the distinct advantage of hindsight to select their strategy after everything has already happened. To be honest, at the level of play in this game, I'm confident enough that we can catch the active scum.

[archaebob]

The Ace of Darkness

As I sense most of us understand here, good scumhunting resists being formalized into “tells.” Each player has a unique personality and way of interfacing with this game; consequently, each scum slips in a slightly different way. Keeping this in mind, what follows is not an attempt to point out incontrovertible facts which “prove” that ace is scum. Rather, it is a narrative of ace’s behavior and corresponding thought process which bespeaks participation in the informed minority. As he defends himself, look not for logical consistency; scum always has it. Instead, try and reconcile everything he has done with the emotional fabric of a town player. Ultimately, you have to trust your intuition. It is the most powerful calculator in the universe.

The game starts, Wake is being a dumbass, lots of yelling, blah blah blah. We come to this post.

wake. you don't read as scum to me. but you are seriously being a jerkwad right now. "not here to make friends" neither am I. but I am still able to be civil.

Being a jerk isn't good scumhunting.

I'm almost willing to lynch you

because I see your behaivor as detrimental to the town, even if you aren't scum.

As it is. You still don't smell like scum to me

, just asshole town.

Unless I get a scumread from someone else, I'm willing to lynch you

at deadline, just because you're what bob called you.

so please cool it, or else.

As ace will likely try to point out, there’s nothing inherently inconsistent about his reasoning. Wake’s behavior was indeed detrimental to the town, and I’ve myself made the case in various outlets that policy lynching the extremely unhelpful is sometimes necessary. What bothers me here is the wording, and the energy. “I’m almost willing to lynch you.” Who announces stuff like that? Well, really heady and overcautious players sometimes do, but we know that ace isn’t one of those. He answered “intuition” to my RQS question, and his sharp, unproofread, not infrequently sarcastic writing doesn’t draw up the image of someone who habitually builds geometric armor around themselves before acting. No, this is someone who is unconsciously giving themselves options ahead of time. Watch how he feels compelled to softly weave every contingency into the thread. It’s redundant; overexplained. “But I won’t lynch you at deadline if I get a scumread from someone else! That might happen! If I start to say I suspect someone else and I don’t still want to lynch you I’m not being inconsistent!” He senses internally that his reasoning is fabricated, and is shoring it up with tiny, unnecessary precautions. Where’s the teeth? He’s justifying himself to town-Wake instead of imposing himself to a faceless player who has thus far acted bizarrely. I suggest to you that this is because he already knows the roles.

ah screw it.

the PR hinting rubs me the wrong way

VOTE: wake

The recklessness of this post sharpens the disconnect between the post we discussed above and his actual personality. “Ah screw it. Here’s a pseudo-plausible reason for just going for it. I’m gonna just go for it.” In a different setting a post

like

this could be a town tell. This one doesn't feel confident though. Here, when I try to combine this post with the one immediately before it into a continuous stream of emotional and intellectual activity, I can only see it as calculated. If he had noticed the PR hinting before, then why did he go to such great lengths to tell Wake that he thought he was town? He spent a lot of time making this fine distinction between wanting someone lynched for being anti-town and wanting someone lynched for being scum (which he adamantly insisted was NOT his reason for wanting Wake lynched). If the PR hinting rubbed him the wrong way, wouldn’t there have been a little more bite before? His attitude doesn't gel when you try to connect the dots.

In Mafia, my gameplay is simple. In a way I'm like a mirror. If you're going to be a jerk, be disrespectful, or be a sarcastic ass, I'll make life an unholy living Hell for you. Why? Because this is a game and I come here in part for entertainment.

In truth I'm one of the calmest, most calculated, and most deliberate players in Mafia. That's not always good when playing as a Townie, because there's a lot of thought going on behind the curtains.

EDIT: Aceofspades, i suggest you look at what started this. If you won't, then I can't help you.

started "this"? what this are you referring to?

your dickness?

or your unnecessary PR hints. cause it's the latter that I'm voting for. The other stuff is personal and not related to my vote.

(well maybe a little)

I have no clue why you have such a superiority complex. And right now.

I've seriously decided I don't care if you're scum or not. you're just so unhelpful that I would much rather you be gone.

Again, there’s nothing wrong with these on the surface. But why bring it up? It’s just off center somehow in tone and intent.

I disagree with bob's case on me.

my opinion on wake has changed several times. simple as that. The point mainly being. I don't really don't want to vote him because he doesn't read like scum. But being distracting hurts the town a great deal, in that it gives scum more opportunity to lurk. so i'm willing to lynch him for distracting behavior unless it stops. especially since I don't have a strong scum read on anybody.

I don't like the squilly wagon. because the only bad stuff in his posts is that they are so few. which is just as likely to be an honest mistake as it is to be scummy.

Nic Cage is the only slightly scummy person that I see as of now. i'm of the opinion that he and wake both came out badly from the whole paranoia thing. i'd be willing to vote him assuming that wake makes a very convincing claim.

aptil, salmonella, and anti hero all read town to me. all else are null.

hodge and squilly are in extreme need of posts. though hodge said he'd post sometime today i believe.

assuming wake claims one of two roles i'd be very sure he is scum we'll see

P-edit. ninjad by a buttload of posts. okay PR claim......i'll accept that. a claim of VT or doctor i would have been suspicious to me.

Alright, who was the third person Al was asking me about... Wake?

Yeah, Wake's town. A gambit like that coming from scum? I don't believe that.

you're probably right having seen the claim. especially since I know I did something similar to wake's "ruse" a long time ago.

so i'll say this then

@wake. i'm okay with what you do pending the results of it. i'm a bit put out with your method. but oh well.
UNVOTE: wake

i wanna hear from nic before I vote him though.

Do you think Wake is scummy for those PR hints or not? Yeah you say your opinion has changed, but it hasn’t changed very organically. I also don’t find your later explanation of why Nic came out badly from that exchange very satisfactory. And I feel like I'm watching you calculate almost everything you write. For example, why would you bring up that wake's claim might cause you to suspect him if it's one of two roles? Aren't you worried at all that Wake might notice that and think more carefully about his choice? If I was town and I knew that there was a role Wake could claim that would be extremely suspect to me, I would want to keep my mouth shut and see if he fell into the trap. I'd be excited to spring it on him when he overstepped. But no. Instead you went with "here's a little preview for why I might suddenly start to suspect Wake again if he does this one narrowly defined thing we'll see." We'll see? I think we have, and a lot more than you'd like us to.

------------

That should do for now. Please nobody try to respond to this if your name isn’t theaceofspades. If you want to critique my case for using bad logic you’re welcome to scumhunt me later. Right now we need the full extent of his reaction and defense.

[archaebob]

@ Al -

Maybe. It still seems like it would be a shot in the dark, especially with three lurkers. What if the first lynch hits town? And the second? We have all the scumhunting talent we're going to have right now. Are we going to hold off until we're three NKs deep before we start going after the more active scum?

In any case it's kind of a moot point now, cause it looks like they're being replaced. Personally, I'm excited to hear from them. I think apathy is killing the town right now more than anything else.

[archaebob]

@ ace -

If you are town:

As you prepare your response, I recommend honesty. Grueling, self-effacing, ego-obliterating honesty. Reach into the most vulnerable and exposed truth of why you've behaved as you have done this game and lay it out for us. The untainted truth will guide your word choice and your content in a million tiny, indescribable ways that will read to us as town. If you really think about it, this form of communicating is the one tactic that scum CAN'T use. They

have

to calculate, because if they didn't they'd reveal themselves. Anything you do which is overtly designed to persuade us will read as calculated because it will be, thereby shielding your inner town essence from us, and making us less likely to escape from our confirmation bias.

If you are scum

: Good luck trying to pretend that you've fully embraced the above recommendation. I recommend challenging it on theoretical grounds, and providing a more traditional, combative defense. It won't fool me, but who knows, maybe the rest of the town will go for it.