Micro 407: Jurassic Park Mafia - Game Over

[FinnLaw]

/Confirm.

Hey again to those I know.

[FinnLaw]

VOTE: Scripten

For stealing my vote and reason.

[FinnLaw]

All I know is that non-Herbivores must die.

More votes on the fleshchewer BBT.

And for the record, I have been in a micro on this site with a scumteam and a Serial Killer.

This post is the one I really dislike Scripten.

It's like 'Well, I'm town and I'm a herbivore, so everyone else needs to die'.

Yeah I don't really see this as an issue for me. Can you explain further why you didn't like that?

[FinnLaw]

Never mind Blueblood, the answers in your previous post. Missed it, my bad.

[FinnLaw]

Never mind Blueblood, the answers in your previous post. Missed it, my bad.

Are you finding Grib's posts to be alignment indicative?

No I'm null on the dietary choice as alignment indicative as it was put. For me I'm finding the whole discussion of this a distraction, it just created a little confusion. To me it did anyways.

[FinnLaw]

What's not really true? What you're saying here says nothing to contradict what I said about your play.

It actually does though, you tried yo imy like I was avoiding talking about the game by instead talking about setups. Thats obviously not true. I would even call it a outright lie.

You took my vote for WAY more than it initially was, then. I said, when I voted you:

Also, gimme some idea of where you stand on a few other players rather than just the game setup, please?

Up to that point, you had done nothing but talk game setup and make one comment about a couple of players that wasn't very committal at all. Tell me how that's a lie? The way you're reacting makes me feel like you're a lot more threatened by my vote than you should be.

To way in on the discussion, up to that point not much had really went on. He wasn't going to have any real reads at that point so it's fine if its none commital. It was early page 3, and most of page 1 was confirmation stuff. What were you expecting from him?

[FinnLaw]

Struggling a bit to get involved, we're 8 pages in and half of it was unnecessarily shit about setup that I found confusing, it wasn't needed and has distracted the thread.

Scripten I don't agree with the examples you provided to show Beck was super defensive in post #187. I think the posts you quoted to show what you perceived as Beck being 'super defensive' just weren't defensive. I agreed with what Beck was saying in those posts. I already said on this issue I don't know what you were expecting from him reads wise at that point. Your expectations were a bit unreasonable.

[FinnLaw]

Prod dodging sorry. I'll be more active over the weekend.

[FinnLaw]

Currently reading up, but its nearly 1 in the morning here so off to bed soon.

But first, while I have found Scripten slightly suspicious his lynch isn't going to happen today and shouldn't happen anymore. I agree with what's been said about his wagon since his soft-claim. Taking a risk on his lynch is unnecessary as it could potentially result in the lynch of a town power role when instead we can look elsewhere to try to the other scum. Come day 2 Scripten can prove he's town and if he doesn't then we lynch him.

UNVOTE: Scripten

[FinnLaw]

Sup beetle juice

What do you mean by this, that I left the wagon quick?

[FinnLaw]

I hate FinnLaw's 319 as it seems like just a repeat of what other people have said.

The reason it was a repeat of what other people were saying is because I agree with it. It was a shared and sensible reason as to why we should no longer be voting for Scripten.

Do you not agree that I should have un-voted. Would it not have been scummy to continue wanting a Scripten lynch day 1 with the risk it now entails?

[FinnLaw]

Hmm, okay, this post by Beck seems super town to me.

I'm cool with pressuring lurkers as long as we don't quicklynch them.

UNVOTE: Beck
VOTE: yung

While I agree that the little content Yungh0mo has contributed has been suspicious, first his RVS vote that included a reason and then his reply where he contradicted himself. You earlier said your 'cool with lynching lurkers as long as we don't quicklynch them' do you not think this just nearly happened had the mod not replaced him?

What gets me about the Yungh0mo near lynch is that what are the chances of catching scum from basically 2 posts?

[FinnLaw]

The same chance as catching scum with 1,000 posts.

He might be scum, it just seems like we would be getting lucky getting his lynch correct from 2 posts. Maybe I'm just not giving people enough credit ha.

[FinnLaw]

Basically what I mentioned before and the reason others voted him. His RVS vote wasn't really an random vote in that it contained a reason for the vote, i.e Scripten's aggressiveness. Yungh then responded saying his vote was random and he never had a reason to vote Scripten, he just said he didn't like his aggressiveness. To me this is him contradicting himself. Yungh not liking the agreessiveness was the reason for the vote, therefore it wasn't random imo.

[FinnLaw]

Reading up a bit, here's some people I'm suspicious of (sorry for the long posts):

Beck

- Early on in the game when he was being attacked by Scripten for being non-committal, I sided with Beck because I thought Scripten was being unreasonable in expecting further reads that early. Unlike some others I didn't find his reaction to Scripten coming across as too defensive initially. I also liked Beck's questioning of Scripten over the flavor situation which was 'why did Scripten find Grib's comment reasonable if Scripten's PM contradicted it.'

However, as the game goes on Beck is tunnelling Scripten a bit and I didn't like how Beck still wanted to go through with the Scripten lynch even after the soft claim. I get you might not believe his claim but if he doesn't have proof day 2 then we lynch him. It is anti town to want to go ahead with the Scripten lynch after his soft claim even if you think he is lying as we face the potential risk of losing a town PR, when we can instead lynch him day 2 if he is lying. I was suspicious that he still wanted to go through with the lynch and potentially risk losing a town PR and he still has his vote on Scripten.

It has nothing to do with the vote, it has everything to do with ignoring the obviously correct play. Refusal to claim is a scum claim.

Using fear of lynching a "possible" PR is also a scum claim

.

It is basically using fear of lynching a PR to avoid his lynch but we should be cautious of this risk. Anyways it is not him making us fear it and getting away freely. It is just simply being delayed. He says he has proof to clear his name, if he doesn't have this proof then we lynch him. He doesn't get away with it if he is scum, he just delays his lynch.

Oh ffs, town is.doomed

Go ahead and lynch me, town has no chance to win now

I also didn't like the above quote from Beck. It comes across slightly Ate. Maybe I'm getting it wrong, I don't have that much experience but that's how I read it.

VOTE: Beck

Scripten

- I have Scripten leaning scum. I have previously spoke of how I didn't like Scripten's early case on Beck. I thought he had unreasonable expectations of what he expected from Beck and thought his earlier vote and attack on Beck over the non-committal stuff was weak and him trying to push something as scummy when it wasn't.

While the flavour discussion was slightly confusing and one of the reasons I struggled to get involved, I didn't like Scripten's stance on the issue. As brought to light by others, I also didn't get why Scripten would find Grib's comments regarding flavor reasonable if it contradicted his own pm, surely it would make you a bit weary of it. But, Scripten has now soft-claimed, so he is on hold but hopefully he is being truthful about his claim come day 2.

Yungh0mo

- I've also recently spoke of finding Yungh suspicious but I'm not sure if things moved a little too fast on his wagon and someone was maybe being opportunistic.

I'm not sure whether both Beck and Scripten will both be scum and have just been bussing each other. Probably not, I think Scripten will probably have proof day 2. Still need to look into some other players but Null to slightly leaning town on Mathdino for his #235, it's a post I see coming from town not scum but now waiting for a response to a question I put to him. Null on Grib, beyond the flavor stuff I don't see much else of a case there. Leaning town on Insanity to, like the way she is questioning people.

[FinnLaw]

anti town to want to go ahead with the Scripten lynch after his soft claim even if you think he is lying.

100% wrong, thanks for playing

100% wrong is it. Bit closed minded arent you, I think someone has got tunnel vision.

It is anti town in the context of this game. We risk losing a potential PR. Its different from someone claiming whateva and you don't find out what role they actually have until they are lynched and they could go on to win, here we are just delaying his lynch if he has no proof. I don't like how your not interested in what this proof is.

[FinnLaw]

Usually they don't claim they have proof though. Yes scum might claim they are a town PR to avoid a lynch but they don't usually say I have proof come day 2. Because come day 2 they then have to reveal that proof, and then if they don't have that proof then that person will be lynched.

[FinnLaw]

We might not find two scum day 1. We might find one scum and Scripten might be telling the truth and is actually town.

[FinnLaw]

Your acting like Scripten is the only scum and his lynch is the only road to go down.

[FinnLaw]

You have more chance of a Grib wagon being successful than you do with a Scripten wagon right now.

[FinnLaw]

Open your eyes, a Scripten lynch day 1 isn't realistic. Your not voting Grib because no one else is but your also the only person voting Scripten.

[FinnLaw]

Sup beetle juice

Sup beetle juice

What do you mean by this, that I left the wagon quick?

Dont worry about it, its nothing

Either way my vote is wasted. Only other person I would be OK lynching is you

for beetlejuicing

, its a classic tell for active lurking.

No other lynch is acceptable imo

So there was something behind it then after you told me earlier its nothing. Can someone please explain to me what Beck means by this?

Also, your vote isn't wasted on Grib, people have previously voted him and he's not cleared like Scripten has been. Put the effort in and you might be to win people over on a Grib lynch, or make your case against me.

[FinnLaw]

Thanks for clarifying. Like I said earlier I was struggling to get involved in this game, it is easier for me to get involved and going if I'm answering a question directed at me. Now I'm back into the game.

[FinnLaw]

It's scummy to try and lynch a potential town PR.

No its not

What! I think your alone in that thought Beck.

[FinnLaw]

Well then you guys are a bunch of n00bs who are ignorant to the fact that SCUM HAVE TO LIE TO LIVE LONGER...

Hmmm hypocrisy maybe? Remember when you said this:

Don't criticize my play again, I consider it an insult and insulting my play is insulting me and thankfully we have a mod who has rules that strictly forbid this kind of thing.
Thank you

You know what I am a newbie so I don't mind. Just pointing out your hypocrisy.

Beck, I don't get why your being so close minded. If your town then we are a collective unit, you should listen to what the rest of the group has to say. A Scripten lynch isn't going to happen day 1 move on, help us find another scum member, if its not you.

[FinnLaw]

Not to mention he started being active after specifically being called out for being inactive

So should I have instead not got involved in the game? Scum if I do scum if I dont.

[FinnLaw]

Like I said I was struggling to get into the game. When I came back I read over the thread and after being away for a bit people have already said what your thinking. Am I not allowed to use other peoples arguments to help form the basis of mine. Sometimes there simply isn't anything else to say because someone else has already agreed with it.

[FinnLaw]

And actually when a person starts posting more after getting called out for their lack of posting, that is actually a really good reason to Lynch somebody

So then you would rather I didn't start posting? You would of found that scummy to.

[FinnLaw]

Why does my voting you, make me look scared?

[FinnLaw]

Why does my voting you, make me look scared?

Vote the person who called you out and using bad reasons, it does make you look scared.

I didn't say it was a strong read, but it was a scum read. While it may have been a weak read, what come at of it with your attitude is pretty suprising.

[FinnLaw]

But beck, you seem to be ignoring the possibility that he might actually be telling the truth and we could lynch a town PR if we went ahead with his lynch.

[FinnLaw]

Why does my voting you, make me look scared?

Vote the person who called you out and using bad reasons, it does make you look scared.

I didn't say it was a strong read, but it was a scum read. While it may have been a weak read, what come at of it with your attitude is pretty suprising.

My attitude comes off as a person who's been playing really well and making plenty of sense and who is being voted for trying to play properly.

Your playing a one man game, you are narrow minded to the opinions of other people. You should never be 100% certain in a game of mafia unless something is confirmed.

[FinnLaw]

But beck, you seem to be ignoring the possibility that he might actually be telling the truth and we could lynch a town PR if we went ahead with his lynch.

But see that is exactly the fear I'm talking about.

By refusing to claim he's using fear to give himself 1 extra day

Also his play hasn't been very protown. Seeking approval, not playing towards his Town meta, opportunist voting, limited scum hunting.

Not to mention I've already said I realize he isn't getting lynched.

I just don't really want to lynch anyone

else, I'm not stopping town from lynching someone else. Basically you all want me lynched for being stubborn.

I'm not going go stop being stubborn.

You will learn over time that scum lie to protect themselves and eventually you can't believe every PR claim. That will come with experience.

Yes, we are only giving him one extra day if he is scum. Your acting like if we don't lynch him today then we have already lost, there is more than one route to go down. You being stubborn is anti town. If you are town you are part of a team, start acting like it. Scripten lynch isn't the cards anymore. Stop spitting your dummy out and start helping us find the other scum.

[FinnLaw]

Well no I don't want it in that I believe thats the wrong vote. But at least its you moving your vote off of the potential town PR, if it moves to me for the time being so be it.

[FinnLaw]

Grib's eagerness to hammer is VERY scummy.

I disagree with this. IMO he was simply stating his intent to hammer. This lets everyone know the hammer is coming and if you have changed your mind then leave the wagon. It allows us collectively to agree whether to go ahead with the lynch.

[FinnLaw]

Finn, are you going to start providing some analysis on the game or are you planning on continuing to post about game mechanics/theories?

Yes I will do. I’ve been posting a lot on the go lately so haven’t had to time to sit down and analyse. Been real busy and I’ve just dropped out of another game because of the lack of free time I have.

I was just about to say that the mod shouldn't need to provide fakeclaims since alignment =/= diet, but

I checked my role PM again and I just noticed the flavour actually reasons out why I'm a townie carnivore, which is interesting.

Do you guys wanna do a mass flavourclaim?

I have a fleeting suspicion it may help us if it turns out there aren't fakeclaims, and I doubt scum will be able to out PRs with just dinosaur names.

My flavour provides a (semi) logical reason for why I'm a carnivore yet town.

I think it's possible the more, ah, antagonistic dinosaurs are going to be the scum. Maybe people could paraphrase or quote a bit of their flavour paragraph as well

(@mod: if that's not against the rules).

I'll count you in then.

If flavour reasons out why you’re a townie than that would be arguing flavour indicates your alignment? So why would PR’s or scum agree to do this? There not going to truthfully reveal this because is it not basically them saying look here it hints at my alignment? (I see the mod has now ruled this out.)

To me I just see this as you rolefishing, which I don't like.

Grib's eagerness to hammer is VERY scummy.

I disagree with this. IMO he was simply stating his intent to hammer. This lets everyone know the hammer is coming and if you have changed your mind then leave the wagon. It allows us collectively to agree whether to go ahead with the lynch.

Stop putting words in his mouth. That is not actually what he said, and intentions are everything

I disagree with you here, like I said it was IMO and that’s how I interpreted his intentions then and still do.

[FinnLaw]

DO I think Beck is scum now? Well, I thought I had made that obvious enough as well.

No, I do not think Beck is scum after his VT claim

.

I don't see his VT claim clearing him as scum. I would expect him to claim VT as scum in this situation as he risks being caught out if he tried to fake claim as a town PR. We already have a soft claim from Scripten and we dont know how many PR's there are so it would be risky for his to claim a PR given that Scripten already has. He faces the risk of getting caught out as he could claim a PR that scripten has proof to show that he actually has that role.

I'm posting from work right now, but should generally be more active from here on out over the weekend.

[FinnLaw]

Finnlaw:

When you say the VT claim doesn't clear Beck as scum, are you meaning that you're operating on the assumption that BBT is 100% clearing Beck for the remainder of the game or that his current read on Beck has swung back toward town?

The post wasn't referring to either, I was just a disagreement with BBT on Beck's claim. BBT now viewed Beck as town because he claimed VT. I was saying that I don't see Beck claiming VT as meaning he's town as I would expect him to claim VT if scum in this situation.

But, in general I view it as BBT's current read on Beck has swung to town. Nobody should be 100% certain on a read unless they have proof, eg through a PR etc.

[FinnLaw]

I know I'm campaigning for a meta defense on someone whose sig says to "Stop relying on meta," but I've played with BBT as town and on a scum team with him. When he's town, his reads are all over the place, swinging from town to scum all game. When he's scum, he's much less organic and a lot more consistent. He tunnels pretty hard in either case, including when he's an investigative role like cop. It's a playstyle thing. Granted, I may be wrong about his play in this particular game, as being aware of one's meta is the surest way to subvert it, but I don't think that the case on him is strong enough to justify his lynch
That said, the way Grib presents his case has cast some doubt on my scum read. It's a fairly well-made case, if not one I can get behind, and it seems to come from a town mindset.

BBT's voting and reads jumping about is something that jumped out to me reading over. I was finding it suspicious. But now you've spoken about how this is more in line with his town meta.

Originally, I did also like Grib's argument highlighting the hypocrisy, and then I did find his wishy washy voting and reads as suspicious and was starting to lean slightly scum but now taking what your saying into account I'll now view that part as more in line with town. I don't think he was tunnelling as Beck views it. If you want tunnelling look no further than Beck himself, that's tunnelling. So I right now I'm not sure on a BBT lynch.