In post 159, Save The Dragons wrote:
In post 20, Sotty7 wrote:
Vote: Glork
I can't believe he hasn't caught any scum yet. Clearly one of them.
In post 24, CrashTextDummie wrote:Good things invariably happen when Glork gets waggoned.
Vote: Glork
If you want the town to win, vote Glork.
1. joke
2. joke
3. joke
4. joke
5. seems disinterested. I'm not sure why he thinks Seol is scum at this point in the game, but it seems like he's jumping on Glork as a lark.
6. i dunno what weasel mafia is supposed to mean.
Unless it's more like
1. joke
2. joke
3. serious belief that 21 posts into the game glork is the best wagon
4. joke
etc...
Perhaps I don't take much credence from the RVS. I'm not seeing it. I really kind of expected this kind of behavior, especially early day 1. And even if I did, any one of those 6 people could hide behind "oh haha day1 rvs funtimes string up glork yay happyfun." Thus scum or town could be on that wagon, I can't tell.
In post 156, MafiaSSK wrote:
But a real nail in his coffin? Is his most recent post and the complete and utter buddying that goes on with CTD:
What does he have to gain by buddying with CTD, if they are both scum?
Yeah, sure all of that behavior might be expected during Day 1, but it's the way that the behavior is implemented that I think is actually really telling. It's when scum is least prepared to put on whatever face they will. It's when you get to see the basis of the playstyle that they'll carry over. Did you not see this in my post? Do you disagree with my analysis?
As for CTD-CES, often times in games without daytalk it is beneficial for a scum to remark on their partner's posts and let them know in a discreet way if they are in support or against the direction that they are going in. True, that could be said for most anyone who agrees with a post, but I feel like this one was special because it came from literally no where. CES had never spoken about chamber before.
But fine, even if you do think that CTD is town, than that buddying is still beneficial. It still allows for CES to switch to Chamber on a whim in potentially dangerous situations. CES should be giving his own reasoning, especially if something is supposed to be "that obvious".
Regardless of either side, I do believe it is an association tell between the two.
In post 160, petroleumjelly wrote:
2.)
Still think MafiaSSK is the likeliest player to be scum.
In post 67, MafiaSSK wrote:People will deviate from the wagon, that's fine.
I just don't like the way Tigris did it...
I do not believe that MafiaSSK believes this. As CrashTextDummie has noted, it feels like he is trying to legitimize what was, in reality, a lighthearted vote for pressure purposes. And MafiaSSK has essentially said as much in
Post 124.
Additionally,
Post 156 is filled with over-the-top language ("damning," "insane tunnel vision," "utterly convinced," "real nail in the coffin"). MafiaSSK feels like he is overstating himself for his self image (appearing helpful, competent, decisive, what have you). For those concerned with the overuse of rhetoric / hyperbole, this post is a prime example.
I do actually believe in that reason for the Tigris vote. In addition to it as well being a light-hearted more pressure-oriented vote.
And sure, I did use a lot of hyperbole. But, so what? How does that matter?
In post 162, Seol wrote:On MafiaSSK:
In post 67, MafiaSSK wrote:Way to misrep in that second quote, not at all what I was talking about. People do break off from wagons all the time, but when they do, it's because someone has done a legitimately scummy thing that you know you'll be able to gain information from. When you do as Tigris did and just start a complete other RVS wagon, while it still has the potential to gain information, you should be going for the larger wagon because that already has the steam building up behind it.
And yeah, large wagons do need to threaten a lynch in order to garner an actual reaction from the lynchee. It is just that typical of a move. But even if it doesn't reach that mass, you can still gain information on other players based on the order that they vote and the value of the reasons that they vote.
OK, so I read your intentions correctly: you're in favour of getting an arbitrary wagon to the point where it threatens a lynch (in the absence of something better), and once an arbitrary wagon starts it should be favoured over other arbitrary wagons.
In post 115, undo wrote:MafiaSSK's wagon is solely based on his post 45, which doesn't look right to me either -- it seems to be advocating unanimism and discouraging a simultaneous search for multiple targets, something I strongly disagree with, especially in this stage of the game -- but for now I don't see more there than a polemic theoretical opinion.
Yep, this is a big part of it.
In post 67, MafiaSSK wrote:So I'll ask a seemingly useless question right back at you as you did to Tigris: Why is my (mostly theory based) opinion on bandwagons scummy enough to warrant a vote?
Because it favours scum. Either you're wrong or you're scum (with an inclusive or), and in a game full of experienced players, I give less credence to being wrong.
In post 156, MafiaSSK wrote:But it's that last line especially that is almost an appeal to the populace that I think we can see as the foundation for CTD's play. For if you look in his third post there are even examples of this where he does a straight up Appeal to Authority:
In post 128, CrashTextDummie wrote:I agree with PJ's thoughts on MafiaSSK. It's a similar tell to the one I caught UT with in the last Oldy, though it's not as strong here.
In that same post and his next post only minutes afterwards, he shifted from his own unique vote on Chamber, to copying PJ and voting me instead to "add pressure". Seems more like an appeal than anything else and something to look out for.
That's not an appeal to authority: that would be following someone on the basis of who they are. That's agreeing with someone else's arguments. That's what arguments are for.
The arguments against CES are super,
super
stretching: he hasn't said nearly enough to read in that level of intent, and taking what he has said at face value is just disingenuous.
That's bad, but particularly so in that the theme of 156 is "this is why pushing RVS wagons is good: look at all the info we can get from it" - but that info is nonsense. It feels like artificial suspicion, like he's decided he needs to attack the people who were late on the wagon and then, given that, constructed reasons to suspect them.
Still happy with the vote.
Yes, you are correct about my theory think on wagons. But only in RVS, where the original context of this theory came from.. When there's already a large wagon, that one should be preferred over creating a random or other wagon. Information can be gained from these wagons to a large extent as I was able to show with my previous post's analysis.
Even in deadline lynches though we can see the same thing happen. When lynches have to be rushed people tag along at last minute and their previous interactions with that person and with that wagon lead to analysis that benefits town. Because wagons matter because they give fruitful analysis and the larger they are, the more interactions there are.
But could you explain how that favors scum? I'm not really seeing it. The only way that I can see it maybe favoring scum is that there is essentially a monopoly on wagons where one leads and no one else really has to think about who placed their vote where. Except they do. You still have to escape RVS at some point and that's usually because someone's done something scummy in it, that can counter the wagon and truly start the game. Feel free to explain how I'm wrong though. I'm more than willing to listen to you.
And in regards to CES, why should I not take his posts at face value? Or be able to analyze them for what they say? Where is the bright line drawn where I can analyze posts at their own value? 6 posts? 500+ word posts?
But even if you do feel that my very real "artificial suspicions" on CES were bad, I don't see how you can actually think of them as scummy. I am creating these interactions with each of these players. I am giving my opinions. I am creating active discussion within the town that wouldn't have happened otherwise.
I could maybe see why you find it to be scummy though. It could be overreaching, me trying to stretch my own logic so that I can place a vote on him down. But I don't see why I would have a need to overreach at the moment. CES is in no danger of being lynched. No one is in danger of being lynched, so it's not like he would be a counterwagon or anything. I just don't see why I would have to do this if I didn't believe in what I wrote.
Call me "SSK, or "ssk". Mafia is my father.
