Open 577: Hope Plus One! (GAME OVER - SCUM WIN)

[acryon]

Confirmed!

[acryon]

Yeah I'm having some serious deja vu right now.

[acryon]

VOTE: BMWS
For being BMWS

Sigh, you don't vote people just for who they are. You're supposed to scumhunt and vote whoever you think is scum. What's the point of playing forum mafia if you're just going to vote for ludicrous reasons.

He was in RVS.

This was after it was established that we had already left RVS. But either way, it was clearly done by Constantine in some form of jest.

Key points and my thoughts:
-Town blocs - Terrible
-BMWS townslip - Agreed, but I wouldn't carry it for more than a day or two at most
-Mathdino's defense against the "townslip" - Disagree, but I understand where he's coming from and think we need to be sure that seeing the townslip != totally writing off the slot as town
-Cane + Able's Hard Defense of the Townslip - A little much. Holding onto this so tightly will cause long-term damage to town, so you can hold onto it, but with skepticism as always
-Policy lynches - Terrible
-Associative tell from Math re: BMWS & C+A - I actually agree, although again,

no one

should be holding onto these or other types of reads this early on for the entire game. I hope we don't have to even say this, but people are seeming to treat each other like their reads in the first few pages are etched in stone.

[acryon]

Can I ask how Aneninen's post determines anything on his alignment?

It doesn't. I would guess the votes were more for reaction than for believing he was actually scum. Asking to be in the town bloc was no good, as was everything related to the idea of a town bloc, but stupid/bad != scum.

[acryon]

Pastro looks pretty bad for sure in his first few posts. Stating the obvious to look town, comments about how town is supposed to act and scumhunt, sheeping Mathdino's vote; he's got it all here. His first few posts look like the title chapters to a book titled "Scum's Guide to Trying to Look like Town."

Let's hear some more from him.

VOTE: Pastro

[acryon]

Hmmm, I'm unsure if him being a terrible person lines up with him being a terrible mafia player which is in-line with what he did this game, or if he was just a troll.

[acryon]

p-edit: noticed the ban info, this makes it more likely he is aware of what RVS is, hence more likely he is mafia, voting on a player that isn't even there to reply though is not my style, I'll leave it on BMWS for now.

His ban actually makes him look really really scummy, because the way he was posting elsewhere on the site and the character it showed seems, to me, to line up perfectly with his posts being mafia this game. This sucks, because that's not how I like to win games, but I think it's actually really likely he is scum.

[acryon]

My defense of the town slip was for two days, as I previously stated.

And that's also a time frame that you appear to consider reasonable.

So... how are we in disagreement?

I don't think we are; I was more speaking generally for the sake of people on both sides. Although to be honest, I think I initially glossed over your mention of only abstaining from BMWS lynch consideration today and tomorrow.

[acryon]

Generally not at all, but something tells me there is a higher chance a person with 10 posts on this site would show consistent character throughout those 10 than others with much more. It's hard to articulate exactly what I am trying to say regarding it, but if you look at his posts this game, and his character outside, it becomes pretty clear this is a person coming in who is bad at mafia. His posts this game are indicative of scum who is bad at mafia.

[acryon]

I hate meta more than almost anyone, and I'm fine leaving him alone for now, but he is probably scum. Call it gut, but he is probably scum.

[acryon]

A couple people have asked me for reads, so here they are:
notreallygood - Only one post to go off of, but I definitely get a town-vibe from it, especially the part requesting more info from Mathdino on BMWS.

Newbie - The confusion about what a town bloc is and then saying they want to join it once it gets going really sounds like newb/confused-town to me.

Gravity - Probably my biggest town-read. His posts have been really on-point, and I agree with his reasoning behind it.

CultivationTheory - Not much to go off of, but ultimately null. His 132 certainly didn't scream town to me, but it didn't seem particularly scummy either.

copper223 - I don't like the vote on BMWS, and jumping on that seems a little opportunistic, so this is my first real scum-vibe. The reads-list all seemed pretty legitimate otherwise.

Cane + Able - Never played with a hydra before, and honestly I hate the idea behind hydras in general, as it just makes things more confusing IMO. As an extension of that, I'm not sure how I'm reading the slot. Pointing out the town-slip from BMWS is pro-town unless they are a team. I am always naturally suspicion of those that seem to try and make everyone play their ideal form of mafia and adhere by its rules, which is a vibe I'm getting from C+A. Seems very confident Mathdino is scum in 101, which I think is off. This slot is leaning scum to me.

Aneninen - Not much of anything here. The first few posts can go either way. Null.

Mathdino - Goes after Constantine out of emotion, which seems town to me. I don't agree with some of his lines of play, but I think he's town.

blindmewithscience - Town for now because of the town-slip and subsequent questioning about why it was a townslip.

Pastro - Already stated my thoughts here. The replacement is really going to tell the tale, but I imagine they are going to play really safe to counteract Pastro's bad start. My idea based on the outside posts is extremely loose and unpopular, and I get that, but it's ultimately a gut-read and it's pretty strong in this case.

texcat - Not much here, but 135 is a little weird. It sounds like empty scum-hunting to me to be honest. Says he wants to hear more from Aneninen, but half the town has posted <=5 times, so it's odd that he chose to call out Aneninen. Lean-scum.

St Constantine the Hermit - I hate his play and the stupid arguing, but I think he's misguided town.

[acryon]

Alright, never mind, acryon's town, good. Questions for acryon:

1. Can you explain what the deal with Pastro and his getting banned and how that's relevant is? Also, the fact that you're predicting his replacement's play is going to nullify it, you know that.
2. Do you not like the vote on BMWS because you're townreading him for the townslip, or otherwise?
3. On C+A, I think it's generally agreeable that since BMWS (AFAIK) isn't exactly a conniving Machiavelli, his slip is very good proof that he's not scum with C+A. So wouldn't that make pointing out a possible townslip indeed pro-town? (on a sidenote, I think I'm going to be fairly good at reading BMWS this game, considering I know the guy and his style of speech/writing)
4. Can't agree on texcat, very reminiscent of newbtown. It looks like she just didn't want to participate or analyse the bickering between me, C+A, and Constantine. Other than us 3, there wasn't really that much content.

1. I think I've already explained it the best I could. Basically, read my initial reasons for not liking Pastro. Then, when I looked through his other posts on this site, I got a very strong gut feeling that he was doing exactly what I thought he was, and the character of those other posts fit with what I was feeling. I'm not telling anyone to jump on it; I'm just explaining how I feel about Pastro.
2. The townslip.
3. Yes and I admitted that it was pro-town. That being said, to be good scum you need to do some pro-town things sometimes.
4. I can definitely see where you're coming from there. It was only 1 post, so it was going to be a pretty loose read either way.

Will do wake
You know, I often get this feeling scum jump up on the slightest mistakes.
Acyron and that other guy jumping on and saying I'm wrong, look like they're seeking cheap town cred.

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that town-blocs are bad.


@copper: I didn't mention the vote/unvote from BMWS because it was wholly null to me.

Most of the reads I posted were of course very early, so there shouldn't be a ton of weight put on them, nor my conclusions just yet. They have been very useful for creating discussion though, which is what I was hoping for.

Generally not at all, but something tells me there is a higher chance a person with 10 posts on this site would show consistent character throughout those 10 than others with much more. It's hard to articulate exactly what I am trying to say regarding it, but if you look at his posts this game, and his character outside, it becomes pretty clear this is a person coming in who is bad at mafia. His posts this game are indicative of scum who is bad at mafia.

He might just be bad period, including bad town.

Besides, isn't it against some rule to use outside factors to claim someone's alignment?

Feels like you are in inappropriate territory and you need to stop.

-House

No. Why would that be inappropriate? Unless he mentioned elsewhere something about the game, which he certainly didn't.

acryon, I hate shit logic and will attack it at every turn.

More on this later.

-House

There is a difference between attacking bad logic (which I encourage and agree with), and trying to manipulate the town by trying to force it into your mold of play, and I think you're closer to the latter than the former.

[acryon]

Here is a list of times already where C+B has tried (in some form) to tell everyone how they need to play the game. And there were more in the block near the end, but I got tired.

Scum tends to pay attention to pre/early game happenings for scheming and reputation building purposes.

Town doesn't have much to do pre-game and may miss out on details.

A bit early for associative tells.

-House

Never too early for townslip because those are often done in a single derp post.

Associative tells develop over time. Everyone will be interacting in interesting ways until we feel each other out.

BMWS isn't being lynched today, and quite likely not tomorrow unless he derps pretty hard.

-House

Manipulating a player's playstyle to fuel drama and trying to fabricate associative tells on the first page of the first day is pretty blatant scum play.

VOTE: Mathdino

Discussion of ongoing games is not game content. It should be taken directly to the game or list mods.

Accusations of rule breaking should be made via PM to the mods

to avoid this very scenario

.

Cease discussing ongoing games

now

.

No. Outside actions are not alignment indicative.

-House (past three C&A posts)

Besides, isn't it against some rule to use outside factors to claim someone's alignment?

Feels like you are in inappropriate territory and you need to stop.

-House

And for that last post, I'll just point you to a post you should be plenty familiar with:

Accusations of rule breaking should be made via PM to the mods to avoid this very scenario.

[acryon]

As I said way back on page 1. Shit logic that reeks of fake scum hunting.

And that part was bad logic. And I agree with you for attacking that part, but that's not what I was talking about.

Besides, isn't it

against some rule

to use outside factors to claim someone's alignment?

Feels like you are in inappropriate territory and you need to stop.

-House

And for that last post, I'll just point you to a post you should be plenty familiar with:

Accusations of rule breaking should be made via PM to the mods to avoid this very scenario.

I know you feel smart & all for thinking you got me being a hypocrite, but there's a difference between impropriety and

rule breaking.

Sorry for taking the wind out of your sails, though.

Went ahead and bolded them for you to make it easier.

Here is a list of times already where C+B has tried (in some form) to tell everyone how they need to play the game. And there were more in the block near the end, but I got tired.

It's called communication. Specifically, it's called sharing your thought processes.

In the MafiaScum game I play, information sharing is beneficial to town.

I don't know what kind of MafiaScum game you play if you think it's bad to collaborate.

Again, there is a difference between communication, collaboration, and what you're doing. Telling everyone how they need to play isn't sharing information and it certainly isn't collaborating. It's actually kind of the opposite.

[acryon]

No. Why would that be inappropriate? Unless he mentioned elsewhere something about the game, which he certainly didn't.

It's inappropriate because actions outside the game are irrelevant to the game. Unless he is directly addressing the happenings of the game, anything he says elsewhere means nothing about his alignment here.

Reading his activity outside the game thread as scummy in relation to this game when "outside the game" doesn't even exist in this little corner of the site for the purposes of the game is terribad.

You have no idea what may be happening in his little world. Whatever it is, it is not related to whether his role pm has red or green text.

If you want to PL the slot because a player got themselves banned, that's on you... but at least have the cojones to admit it's a PL.

-House

I did not read his outside action as scummy, because non-game content can't be scummy. But the personal character that that existed within the other posts supported the personal character I already saw acting as the scum in this game. There exist types of people just like their exist types of scum. When I viewed him as the type of scum he is initially, I saw it being played by a specific type of person. This was supported when his ban was stated and I looked at his outside posts. Obviously I can't and won't try to convince anyone to follow

my

gut-read. And that's fine if you don't like meta; I don't generally, but I shared it anyway. And nice try saying I was going for a PL when I was voting him before he even got banned. Come on, at least try here.

[acryon]

I have nothing against him as a person, and hold nothing against him because he got banned. His outside actions just so happened to fit the picture I saw in my head of the person playing scum, making me feel better about my read.

[acryon]

p-edit: noticed the ban info, this makes it more likely he is aware of what RVS is, hence more likely he is mafia, voting on a player that isn't even there to reply though is not my style, I'll leave it on BMWS for now.

His ban actually makes him look really really scummy, because the way he was posting elsewhere on the site and the character it showed seems, to me, to line up perfectly with his posts being mafia this game. This sucks, because that's not how I like to win games, but I think it's actually really likely he is scum.

^ This... is what I was addressing.

Yes, and this makes me think you didn't actually read it. If you just read "His ban actually makes him look really really scummy", then I would totally see where you are coming from. But that's not where it ended.

[acryon]

Done wall bashing. Lynch him if you think earning a ban is worthy of a scum read.

Again, that is not why he is scum. This is why he is likely scum:

Pastro looks pretty bad for sure in his first few posts. Stating the obvious to look town, comments about how town is supposed to act and scumhunt, sheeping Mathdino's vote; he's got it all here. His first few posts look like the title chapters to a book titled "Scum's Guide to Trying to Look like Town."

Coupled with my gut feeling that I have gone over ad nauseam, I think it is very likely.

And I am fine holding off on that for now, since it makes much more sense to target the scum we can actually interact with.

Speaking of which

UNVOTE:
So you can stop pretending I'm on some "Pastro is scum no matter what and nothing else matters" train.

[acryon]

acryon, you're flipping back and forth on my reads list. Did you just unvote just to make one of C+A's points invalid? What was the purpose of that?

No, not at all. I actually thought I had already unvoted, because there is clearly never going to be the traction for a Pastro lynch, as I recognized the controversial nature of my read in the first place. The level at which the vote being left there is bad is compounded by the fact that we can't question someone who isn't here.

[acryon]

Aneninien and Acryon, would you be so willing to provide me with examples of your town and scum games? I find you two difficult to read so would like examples of your previous games. Pretty please?

It might just be easier for you to check my wiki. I've got links to all of my completed and ongoing games on there

[acryon]

Arguments

1. You suspected Pastro for his following of Math with the exact same reasoning he used, but I'd like you to know that their motives were different.

For Pastro: In 119, He dismissed BMWS' reason of voting Constantine because "that's not a legitimate reason", and in the subsequent post he said the same thing to Constantine, but he had no idea that both of those were joke votes, considering that he wrote in a serious tone. This suggests that he was actually serious when he posted.

For Math: In 55, he asked a rhetorical question and used a very playful word (Ninja'd), so it's highly probable that he was just joking around when he posted.

So it isn't scummy for Pastro to use the same reasons as Math's, as their intentions were different.

2. A number of people happen to have the same opinions. For example, most of us agree that town blocks are unnecessary because people will be grouped together as the game goes on, and policy lynches are ill-advised. So, are we also scummy because of having the same reasons as one another's?

Maybe I am misunderstanding you here, but I would come to the opposite conclusion. Doesn't the fact that Mathdino may have been joking and Pastro followed it make Pastro look worse? Like he was jumping on something that he thought was legitimate to appear town, but he just screwed up and jumped on a non-serious case?

As for your point 2, I think there is a big difference between opinions on a player and their actions within the context of this game, and opinions on general mafia game play.

[acryon]

Does it really matter if RTR is a hydra/alt or not?

Some people care a lot about meta. It also does help to know what kind of experience people have playing the game due to certain behavior that can be written off as newbie. Although relying too much on either is generally bad.

[acryon]

Does it really matter if RTR is a hydra/alt or not?

Some people care a lot about meta. It also does help to know what kind of experience people have playing the game due to certain behavior that can be written off as newbie. Although relying too much on either is generally bad.

What do

you

feel about my behaviour, in light of knowing my account is an alt?

I don't really think anything about it. It was pretty clear that you were most likely an alt, especially since one of your first lines was "St. Constantine the Hermit looks like a very new player to Mafiascum." I think putting specific play-styles as scum or town is bad, so it's best to focus on the content. In terms of my read on you, you appear to be genuinely scum-hunting (197 and the latter half of 237, specifically). The only thing that makes me feel uncertain is that large portions of your ISO are discussing what is and isn't a scum-tell/general comments about the game of mafia. There's nothing wrong with it if it is accompanied by a healthy chunk of content specific to this game. I think you are perhaps a little too far in the general game theory side right now, but certainly not enough to warrant a scum-read.

[acryon]

@Constantine: Who was advocating a PL on Newbie?

[acryon]

@Acyron - Many people, including me, complained about inactivity.
Lynching based on inactivity is a policy lynch in principal, since activity isn't an actual scum tell.

I know that, but I was wondering who actually thought it was scummy. I guess it is copper.

It's not a PL if she is active onsite and lurking here, that's a possible scumtell for me. Now is she the best lynch town can come up with today? I hope not.

It is definitely not a scumtell, especially not on Day 1.

[acryon]

It's going to be one of those games, is it?
Well, fuck you all. You're obviously not all capable of civil and lighthearted gameplay.
Seriously, you all act like mafia nazis. This is a game I play to make friends and have fun.
Does the word "Game" get lost on all of you?

/Replacing out. See me when MD and other dipshit dominating players are gone.

I don't think this is necessary. I do think it isn't fair to just say that Constantine is a troll and should be written off as a non-player, because he actually

is

contributing, more than a good chunk of the players in this game actually.

Constantine seems to be connected with controversy, but that doesn't mean he is necessarily a troll, and it doesn't mean he is scum.

[acryon]

@Everyone:

Let's be civil. If you're town, let's be civil and scum-hunt, not hunt after people we don't like and push them out of the game. If you're scum, be civil and let us lynch you.

[acryon]

@Everyone:

Let's be civil. If you're town, let's be civil and scum-hunt, not hunt after people we don't like and push them out of the game.

If you're scum, be civil and let us lynch you.

If only it were that simple.

But I'd be remiss to not include it in the off-chance that we have some unusually-compliant scum

[acryon]

Re-reading everything from the weekend. Will have my comments soon.

[acryon]

308 from Copper sounds very town to me, and the explanation makes a lot of sense.

Some have already said this, but no one should be reading 273 from me as alignment-based. The spirit of it is alignment-neutral and the town-comments at the end are correct from my stand-point, but should be a null to everyone else that doesn’t know my alignment.

I think at least one of the people who jumped on the strawman that Pastro’s ban was alignment-indicative are scum. This includes Can + Able and Anen.

The most recent post from Idiotking gives me town-vibes. Specifically, his avoidance of the aforementioned unreasonably popular strawman is town, as well as his general sentiments being very on-point IMO.

The thing that sticks out to me in GGG’s catch-up post is the labeling of C+A as “leaning-town” due to to “mostly gut.” The slot has posted significantly more than any other person, so it is interesting that there were no posts of note that seems to lean one way or the other, but rather the posts as a whole only gave a “lean-town due to gut” read.

Ok, now I see the reasoning in 334 and am even more confused than before you said anything. That reason is terrible. How is that alignment-indicative? The fact that C+A accepted the explanation is even more confusing. That seems really bad and out-of-character for C+A. Generally, when someone is asking someone else why they are town-reading them, it is for two reasons: 1) The person is town and believe the other may be scum throwing out town-reads without real reasoning or 2) The person is scum and is trying to give extra strength to public town-reads on them. I would believe it was 1), but then C+A followed the terrible answer up with “ok, sounds good, you’re town.”

This is easy:
VOTE: Cane + Able

While I have you C + A, could you explain how 334 was a good explanation at all?

[acryon]

@acryon:
On 273, I'll be honest with you, I'm going to read things how I see them and you don't get to tell me how I should be reading posts because everything that's not a reaction test I 'should' be reading as null or town from you.

273 has nothing to do with reading people.

On Pastro's ban, yeah, C+A already pointed out how that argument sucks and points to you just as much as it does to them. Regardless, I don't see someone awaiting replacement after banning as an easy target for scum to latch on to, so I'm not seeing the argument there.

This is the issue. You and C + A both clearly misunderstood what I was saying. C + A and Anen both accused me of saying that the ban was alignment indicative. I did not do this, and any claim I made that the ban was alignment indicative was A) dependent on other moving parts, including my initial read on him, and B) rooted in the individual posts that got him the ban. Both X + A tried to fight against the idea that the ban was alignment indicative, which is not something I even said. Meet the strawman.

On 334 and C+A, while the post may not have been convincing to you, I don't see how that of all of 3G's reads is alignment indicative independent of C+A's flip, and I for one have other things to question than 334.
So basically you're scumreading C+A for accepting someone with a (in your opinion) poorly reasoned townread on them as town. But this is predicated on the idea that C+A

should

be thinking a certain thing or reading a certain way, which kind of harkens back to my first point in that we're all going to read things differently. Don't vote people for being wrong.

Apparently no one is reading this thread, because if you think that is the only reason I am voting for C + A, then you clearly haven't read my previous posts. I'm sorry but that townread was objectively terrible. If someone wants to explain to me how it wasn't, please do, because the only response I got from C + A on the matter was "gut read", which is not a reason for whether an explanation makes sense or not.

[acryon]

You talked about 273 in your last post, that's what I was referencing.

Well in regards to that, I was more expressing my intent behind it, in that it was more extra-game.

And here's the crux of the issue again. "Objectively terrible". Not sure if I need to get Descartes to bash you over the head, but there is no 'objectively terrible'. Townhunting is a valid towntell and terrible math can sometimes be a towntell because scum don't like to make mistakes. And I'm saying this while scumreading the guy who made 334.
While that may not be the sole reason that you're voting for him, it is what made you vote him and that is how you presented it. If you'd like to expand on your other reasons, by all means make a mini-case. As it is it looks like you're scumreading him for agreeing with a post that you think is bad that isn't really as bad as you think.

Cane + Able - Never played with a hydra before, and honestly I hate the idea behind hydras in general, as it just makes things more confusing IMO. As an extension of that, I'm not sure how I'm reading the slot. Pointing out the town-slip from BMWS is pro-town unless they are a team. I am always naturally suspicion of those that seem to try and make everyone play their ideal form of mafia and adhere by its rules, which is a vibe I'm getting from C+A. Seems very confident Mathdino is scum in 101, which I think is off. This slot is leaning scum to me.

Add the strawman and the acceptance of the crappy explanation and we've got ourselves a vote. And townhunting is not a big enough reason for giving someone a town-read, as any decent scum are going to portray some townhunting.

[acryon]

I don't get the Cain and Able vote by Acryon. It's a very weak case, in my opinion. I'm confused how you find that so convincing as to confidently throw a "that's so easy" vote out on that slot. I'm slightly suspicious of your behaviour.

I would argue that a vote with confidence is better than one without in nearly every case. A vote with apprehension applies less pressure, implies lesser accountability, and is less likely to promote discussion than one with confidence.

[acryon]

I don't get the Cain and Able vote by Acryon. It's a very weak case, in my opinion. I'm confused how you find that so convincing as to confidently throw a "that's so easy" vote out on that slot. I'm slightly suspicious of your behaviour.

I would argue that a vote with confidence is better than one without in nearly every case. A vote with apprehension applies less pressure, implies lesser accountability, and is less likely to promote discussion than one with confidence.

That's not what I'm saying. I'm asking you to justify your crap case, not try and spin some dodgy angle about how a 'confident vote' is better.

One more chance, Acryon.

You can quit with the one more chance crap. You can dislike my case, and that's fine, but it's, as you stated, your opinion. I'm sorry that you are confused on the case or think it's bad, but I'm trying to find scum, not please Rudolph the Reindeer, so I think I'm fine. Even in its premature stages, I think it is a better case than those I've seen on others, so I'm sticking with it for now.

[acryon]

What kind of Strawman are you talking about?

I have already explained this. You and C+A both made posts that seemed to imply I made a statement to the effect of "Pastro's ban is scummy", which is, at best, grossly misrepresented by leaving out all of the qualifiers.

I would argue that a vote with confidence is better than one without in nearly every case. A vote with apprehension applies less pressure, implies lesser accountability, and is less likely to promote discussion than one with confidence.

Whoa what?

So you just argued that your own action was objectively townish? The fact that you're applying this to yourself nullifies the entire argument.

FoS: acryon

Absolutely not. This is a meta-statement. Votes with confidence are more effective for scum in a similar way.

He might need to steal your username, but I can't see him as scum because of it.

Since you're so keen on rules:

3. Do not personally insult anyone you are playing with.

Let's play nice, shall we?


To sum up my vote on C+A since no one is acknowledging I ever said anything other than the recent point:
-The slot has posted a lot about how mafia needs to be played and other meta-arguments (see 162), which is, in my experience, more often than not indicative of manipulative scum.
-Create's Strawman #1 on Mathdino in 101.
-Create's Strawman #2 on me, regarding Pastro's ban. Continued to try and push it and misrepresent me despite my reiteration multiple times that I did not say what he was trying to make it look like I did.
-Only scum gains when people are misrepresented, and C+A misrepresented both Mathdino and myself on separate occasions.
-C+A proclaimed themselves as a slot that likes to call out crappy arguments. This persona seemed to continue when GGG called them town for no reason, but then the response came which was extremely weak, and C+A simply accepted it. I then asked how the explanation was good at all, and they replied "gut." Which, 1) is not an answer to whether something is a good explanation or not, and 2) seems to reject the persona of a player that pushes people to make better arguments and tears down weak ones.

Sorry Rudolph, I know you were really hoping I was going to make up some excuse to jump off of this, but I have reasons for my vote being here, and I believe they are better than the reasons for keeping it elsewhere.

[acryon]

Going back through Arcy. I don't know what to make of this post. I don't really agree that this is telling people how to play? Arcy can you reiterate why this is scummy again.

The gist is that 1) by making the kind of statements they did, they take a natural controlling role in the game, which makes it very easy to drive lynches, and 2) by being the person that dictates what the town view as scummy, it's easy to simply act in a way that runs contrary to this view.

And I get if you don't agree. I have called players out doing the same things in previous games and the town didn't listen to me, so I get it. These players do tend to turn out being scum though. I would just rather catch them before they manipulate the town into multiple mis-lynches.

[acryon]

Going back through Arcy. I don't know what to make of this post. I don't really agree that this is telling people how to play? Arcy can you reiterate why this is scummy again.

The gist is that 1) by making the kind of statements they did, they take a natural controlling role in the game, which makes it very easy to drive lynches, and 2) by being the person that dictates what the town view as scummy, it's easy to simply act in a way that runs contrary to this view.

And I get if you don't agree. I have called players out doing the same things in previous games and the town didn't listen to me, so I get it. These players do tend to turn out being scum though. I would just rather catch them before they manipulate the town into multiple mis-lynches.

Since you brought up previous play do you have any specific instances where this type of behaviour flipped scum.

The vast majority of my play history is offline, so I don't have much to link you in that regard, but Victor in Crossroads Mafia in my Wiki is a more subtle example of this.

[acryon]

I disagree that c/a posting is a anything like Victor in the other game. I am not seeing it. It feels like you are shoehorning one of your scum tells onto him.

Like I said, it's fine if you don't believe me, but I think that the characteristics being portrayed by C+A are much more indicative of scum than some of the other things being identified as alignment-indicative. I'm not doing this to promote any agenda other than one to lynch scum. I don't care about being right; I just feel that I am in this case and that C+A is scum.

[acryon]

Starting to question the motivation behind your tunneling, acryon.

It's looking less derpy & more scummy every time you ignore simple logic in favor of insisting on your own flawed perspective.

Scum reads don't bother me, but bad ones that are held up as gospel do.

1) What is the simple logic you're referring to that I'm ignoring?
2) How is my perspective flawed other than the fact that it is partially gut?

Every scum-read is backed up on some level by a gut-read, and mine is no different. I'm not proclaiming it as gospel any more than any other scum-read. My gut coupled with your actions and my experience seem to indicate it is likely, however.

[acryon]

Starting to question the motivation behind your tunneling, acryon.

And tunneling seems like a bit of a misevaluation. All of my posts recently have just been answering the questions/issue raised by others about my feelings on you.

[acryon]

Nobody is controlling anybody here, least of all me.

This is total WIFOM, and I can't believe you're even saying this. If it was abundantly clear that you were controlling people, it wouldn't be a very good scum strategy now would it?

Being outspoken isn't scummy. Using something as personality driven as that as a scum tell is why people don't listen to you.

Of course it's not inherently scummy. But I think there is a difference between being outspoken and attempting to be manipulative. Maybe it's based in a lot of gut and personal experience, but I think you're doing the latter.

Also, just because I have opinions and voice them does not mean I speak for everybody.

Again, the validity of this statement is entirely dependent on your alignment, and is thus, irrelevant. The whole point of manipulation is making people feel like they have a voice, but really it is your voice. Am I really having to spell this out for you like you have

never

experienced manipulative scum before? I find this very hard to believe.

[acryon]

Just to add some fuel to the fire, I can't be the only one that finds it interesting that someone who has very clearly played a good bit of mafia seems bewildered by the idea of manipulative scum. This also ties in with the playing dumb in response to GGG's argument. Town have no reason to play dumb. You can call

this

tunneling, and it is.

[acryon]

@Acryon
The point I can sympathize with is the misrepping, I thought about it as well when discussing lurkers with the House head of the hydra:
- Why did he misrep you and call you town after doing so?
- Did you check his playstyle before concluding he had misrepped you?

- Because scum removing credibility from town (specifically those that seem to be on to them) is just as important, if not more-so in certain cases, as pushing lynches on town.
- No, because it's the specific way in which they were doing it combined with the misrepresentation and actions that seemed to not line up with their proclaimed MO that makes them very likely scum to me. Playstyle alone is never alignment indicative, and that has never been my argument. But the way in which it is being done in this game, put together with the actions that are alignment indicative, makes the play feel scum-motivated.

The point about scum trying to establish a "protocol for scumhunting" for town I find pretty bad, I understand hiding proper scumhunting and actively lurking behind theory discussion, but why would scum piss other players off by telling them how they are supposed to play? I don't see that as manipulative in the slightest, it's quite the opposite and more akin to a bully approach, which isn't going to make you any friends, so I find it an unlikely strategy for scum.

I find quite the opposite to be true. In many games, it is very easy for someone to control the game (town or scum) by telling people how to play the game. This obviously doesn't work quite as well in games with a hard-headed town, but it can, and does, happen and work. You can believe it is incorrect, but it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

[acryon]

The gist is that 1) by making the kind of statements they did, they take a natural controlling role in the game, which makes it very easy to drive lynches, and 2) by being the person that dictates what the town view as scummy, it's easy to simply act in a way that runs contrary to this view.

Erm, excuse me, the Vote Count doesn't really show that they would be able to control anyone here...

I don't recall ever indicating that I thought it was working particularly well. In, fact, I explicitly stated the possibility of the opposite:

This obviously doesn't work quite as well in games with a hard-headed town

Nobody is controlling anybody here, least of all me.

This is total WIFOM, and I can't believe you're even saying this. If it was abundantly clear that you were controlling people, it wouldn't be a very good scum strategy now would it?

It

is

a good scum-strategy but I've seen townies misreading the setup tunnelling another townie for Days... too many times...
Do you have other scumreads too?

________

Either there are not too many interesting things right now or I've skimmed over something important.

I still have a

very mild

scum-read on texcat, but it's not even worth discussing at this point.

And I'm not even saying that my C+A case is incredible, but given the relative wasteland that is this game, I think it is by far the best one given the scenario.

[acryon]

I joined in September. If you consider a few games "a good bit", idk what to tell ya, bro.

- House

This is why I think hydras are stupid. Wake has played a lot more than that, so I think my claim is still reasonable. The whole point of a hydra is to treat it like one slot, yes? So unless you sign up as separate people, I am not going to analyze you separately.

@Acryon
C+A and House in particular has behaved liked this with both players townreading and scumreading him, so I find it likely this is more indicative of a general tendency in his play rather than scum design to throw doubt on the other players, moreover since I believe individual player tendencies are usually more revealing than abstract concepts on how mafia does or does not play, I checked him out and found this kind of dogmatic approach pretty typical for him and not really alignment indicative. See for instance Newbie 1539, which is full of similar examples. Tell me what you think of it.

I certainly agree that the same sort of MO seems to exist there, but I still don't like it here in the context of the misrepresentations. I also don't tend to put much stock in player meta, so I'm even more likely to trust my gut over their meta in this case.

[acryon]

That was needlessly harsh, but I don't like the idea of you using the information of one of you to try and disprove one of my statements as if you are a single player.

[acryon]

Considering what you are criticizing is my play, not Wake's, then yes, the amount of experience I (don't) have that you say I do is salient to the point.

Throwing away facts that don't suit the read you want to have doesn't make them any less relevant. It does beg me to read you as scum, though. It's like you have a vested interest in wanting me dead. There is no investigation in this exchange.

That's not what was happening here. You are the one that is writing off parts of my case as "oh, that's just me, so our slot isn't scummy." I can't believe people aren't seeing this.

acryon, give me a reason not to vote you. I'm running out and need to restock.

I'm town, pretty obviously. But it also seems a bit moot to negotiate with scum don't you think?

This is why I think hydras are stupid. Wake has played a lot more than that, so I think my claim is still reasonable. The whole point of a hydra is to treat it like one slot, yes? So unless you sign up as separate people, I am not going to analyze you separately.

Yeah this tunneling is out of hand at this point. I think the weaknesses in your suspicions are showing through, acryon.

UNVOTE: 3G
VOTE: acryon

You're criticising everything House has done, I don't think anyone's criticised Wake's play (he signs his posts FYI). And everything you're criticising is fairly typical of House from what I read of him.

Again, this is

so

stupid. I'm not treating them like separate players, because they are

one

slot. Wholly, I believe the play has been scummy. Perhaps it's mostly House's part that's playing scummy, but then again he has posted far more than the other half, so that doesn't change anything.

Oh nice... throw out a shitty case on me and leave it to stew over the weekend.

Right, because I didn't first vote you a solid week ago... How many times can someone mis-represent people before this town recognizes them as scum?

Several more posts talking about how my case is weak

I admitted my case wasn't extremely strong, although it's actually gotten stronger since I left, but I still think it is by far the best case out there.

Acryon's attack on GGG was solely based on C+A and the fact that because he had more posts, he shouldn't be read as null or be read as gut town/scum.

Misrepresented completely. This is not even close to what I said.

No problem! Here is what the case says, in bitesize chunks:

-Acryon does awkward vote on you with little to no reasoning
-Acryon admits his own case is crap, justifies his vote on you with some rubbish about 'confident votes are better', blatantly ignores criticism about his case
-Later gets defensive, switching from -- to a degree -- admitting his case was bad to a more passive 'It's not the worst case out there' stance.

I

never

said my case was bad. I, multiple times, have addressed that it isn't extremely strong, but given the total lack of other cases in this town, it is by far the best.

@Acryon
I've checked your finished games, your play is very different in this one, in Minimenace you actually did not vote day 1 for instance and in the other two you flip-flopped a lot.

I've seen no evidence of you tunneling on other players and I think your case on C+A is pretty bad, so you are possibly scum here for building your case as you go, without caring much about evidence brought against it.

VOTE: Acryon

This is

L-2

, since we have had few vote counts, I thought I should add it.

Checking my games is stupid, and this is why meta is generally terrible. My play changes completely based on the town and the game, not my alignment, as any good player's should. Trying to force the same play-style onto every game doesn't work, because every town is different.

We are probably going to end up losing this game, because 90% of this town is sheep that follow people doing blatantly scummy misrepresentation, but whatever.

I'm town macho doctor

. And now I get NK'd tonight anyway, but this probably isn't a town I would want to continue with anyway. For the love of all that is good, at least look closely at C+A and Rudolph when I die. One of them is scum, and the other is either scum or terrible sheep town.

[acryon]

My case may not be the greatest (bad, terrible, whatever), but having a case that people don't agree with isn't scummy. Misrepresenting people to make them look like they are doing things they aren't is. Let's think about that.

[acryon]

UNVOTE:
For today I'm assuming this claim is genuine.

@Acryon
The reason why I read it as scummy is because you ignored or dismissed anything that did not suit your belief of C+A being scum, I think that if you are a PR as seems likely, knowing you could not be lynched influenced your play and made you appear overconfident. I will review Rudi and C+A.

And I

get

why people were skeptical of certain parts of my case (the town-leading specifically), but I feel that the misrepresentation on multiple occasions was and is too blatant to back off of, which is why I didn't, and I won't until someone becomes scummier than C+A. I actually hate that the last several days turned into a back and forth of me pushing my case and people pushing me, because it was ultimately bad for us, but I still think C+A is by far the best lynch candidate today based on the aforementioned misrepresenting. No one else seemed to have a good idea of who to lynch, so I don't think it's that bad of me to continue to push a lynch I am reasonably confident in.

[acryon]

Guys, okay, no analysis, but some setup stuff.

Can't we just play Follow The Cop now? Hear me out.

1. Cop claims.
2. Tell acryon to protect cop. If cop dies anyway, acryon is scum.
3. acryon dies.
4. Remaining doctor just protects cop every night.
5. ???
6. PROFIT

I actually think this is the optimal play.

[acryon]

The only issue is that it assumes that you're telling the truth with your claim. Did you breadcrumb at all?

Edit: Oh damn never mind. SORRY FORGOT SETUP

No, I didn't crumb. And I didn't realize that happened to the cop. I only read my role, so I figured it would say it there. But I suppose it is set up that way to avoid this scenario.

[acryon]

Guys, okay, no analysis, but some setup stuff.

Can't we just play Follow The Cop now? Hear me out.

1. Cop claims.
2. Tell acryon to protect cop. If cop dies anyway, acryon is scum.
3. acryon dies.
4. Remaining doctor just protects cop every night.
5. ???
6. PROFIT

Cop becomes macho if doctor dies. Acrynon protects cop, 2nd doc protects Acry follow the cop works though.

Yeah, neither of the docs can be protected.

[acryon]

Shit, completely misread the role. Somehow I had in my head that Macho meant they both couldn't protect the same target. Really newb of me.

That's ok. Both Math and myself misread the cop role. Just glad nobody else had to claim.

[acryon]

Put your votes back on Acryon. He's not town for the claim.

Sure, a fakeclaim is possible, but you don't lynch a person D1 that has just claimed. I'm most likely going to die tonight anyway (unless they leave me alive to try and make you guys lynch me tomorrow). Your inane pushing on my wagon is just as bad, if not worse, than what you perceive my C+A push to be.

[acryon]

You've heavily implied it. If you agreed with your case, you would have defended it in the earlier post instead of justifying that 'confident votes are better'. The fact that you're trying to defend an unrelated issue tells me you can't defend the main problem at hand -- taht is, your bad case.

You said "I'm confused how you find that so convincing as to confidently throw a "that's so easy" vote out on that slot."

I said "I would argue that a vote with confidence is better than one without in nearly every case. A vote with apprehension applies less pressure, implies lesser accountability, and is less likely to promote discussion than one with confidence."

I already had defended the case itself, so I chose to address the part about voting with confidence. I was speaking on votes in general, since I already had defended my case. Somehow you then applied this to my case, and attached some non-existent implied admittance of weakness in the case itself. If you had cared to read, you would have seen where I already defended it in 371 and 373.

[acryon]

My statement about confidence was never dodging some question about the strength/weakness of my case, and that you took it as such is your fault.

[acryon]

If you agreed with your case, you would have defended it in the earlier post instead of justifying that 'confident votes are better'.

Like I did...actually before the post you're talking about.

[acryon]

Don't buy it at all.

You all should check out Open 574 (Stack The Deck). Texcat claimed cop. Everyone immediately jumped off the wagon. Turns out he was scum after all. Moral of the story is that a claim doesn't mean that the person's confirmed town.

Obviously it doesn't mean I'm confirmed town. But it means you don't lynch me today, especially because if I am telling the truth, you lynched one PR and weakened another one all on D1.

[acryon]

Rudy is being very anti-town, but I'm not sure I'm convinced it's actually scummy.

Everyone is saying the case is terrible, etc. So Mathdino, specifically, can you answer me why I am wrong about C+A misrepresenting players multiple times?

[acryon]

But it means you don't lynch me today, especially because if I am telling the truth, you lynched one PR and weakened another one all on D1.

That same argument could be applied to any day in the game (provided there hasn't been a doc flip yet). We need to draw the line.

Except later on, the docs could double-claim and out me if I were lying, and it wouldn't be nearly as bad for us as it is now.

[acryon]

Rudy. Dude. If anyone claims or flips doc at any point in this game and someone CC's, acryon can die. It's pretty damn simple, unless you think LyLo is gonna be 2 docs and acryon deciding what to do.

acryon, what you call misrepping I call tunneling and miscommunicating.

What about this is tunneling or miscommunicating?
-Create's Strawman #1 on Mathdino in 101.
-Create's Strawman #2 on me, regarding Pastro's ban. Continued to try and push it and misrepresent me despite my reiteration multiple times that I did not say what he was trying to make it look like I did.
-Only scum gains when people are misrepresented, and C+A misrepresented both Mathdino and myself on separate occasions.

Oh nice... throw out a shitty case on me and leave it to stew over the weekend.

Right, because I didn't first vote you a solid week ago... How many times can someone mis-represent people before this town recognizes them as scum?

How could this one specifically be a miscommunication or tunneling? I clearly had my vote and case on him for 5 DAYS before leaving for the weekend.

[acryon]

And C+A responded to my case the first day I voted A WEEK AGO, and then tries to say "Oh nice... throw out a shitty case on me and leave it to stew over the weekend." Nobody likes a case on them, but town has no reason to lie about the case to make it look bad.

[acryon]

101 isn't scummy IMO. It's bad but it's not scummy and it makes a certain amount of sense from a town perspective. If something pings at that stage in the game and you're an aggressive player, usually results in tunneling.

On Pastro, meh. Like I said, I skimmed that discussion because I didn't really understand what you were trying to say so I can see C+A misinterpreting.

Given that you're town, that last point is actually pretty good, but not because of misrep. Calling a case shitty is not misrep, it's just arguing; 'shitty' is pretty subjective. From your standpoint you never write shitty cases. It's the sarcasm and the fact that the mudslinging doesn't match the reads that gets to me.

That said, that's not enough to overpower my current townread on C+A and the rest of your case doesn't hold enough ground for me to switch. I like my Rudy vote.

This is a pretty serious accusation to be written off:

Manipulating a player's playstyle to fuel drama and trying to fabricate associative tells on the first page of the first day is pretty blatant scum play.

Not only it is a pretty serious accusation to be written off, but doesn't it seem like quite a claim for town to make on someone that early in the game?

[acryon]

And C+A responded to my case the first day I voted A WEEK AGO, and then tries to say "Oh nice... throw out a shitty case on me and leave it to stew over the weekend." Nobody likes a case on them, but town has no reason to lie about the case to make it look bad.

What you did Friday looked exactly to me as I said it did.

Sure you voted me before that, but your posts were rather meh about it until you decided to make a case and take off for a few days.

Don't post shit like that before your weekly sabbatical if you don't want people reading you as scum for "shit & split".

This is ridiculous.

Monday - voted you
Tuesday - continued to defend my vote on you
Wednesday - summed up vote on you again with some more details
Thursday - stated the case again for GGG
Friday - Posted a number of times again concerning it

"shit & spit" definitely seem like an odd way to describe 5 days of consistent case-pushing. If I was meh about it before Friday, I'm not sure I would have talked about it 4 days in a row before then.

[acryon]

Not only it is a pretty serious accusation to be written off, but doesn't it seem like quite a claim for town to make on someone that early in the game?

It seems like exactly the claim a slightly annoying super aggressive player would make that early in the game.

I still don't believe that is the case, but I can buy your reason for feeling that way.

[acryon]

And C+A responded to my case the first day I voted A WEEK AGO, and then tries to say "Oh nice... throw out a shitty case on me and leave it to stew over the weekend." Nobody likes a case on them, but town has no reason to lie about the case to make it look bad.

What you did Friday looked exactly to me as I said it did.

Sure you voted me before that, but your posts were rather meh about it until you decided to make a case and take off for a few days.

Don't post shit like that before your weekly sabbatical if you don't want people reading you as scum for "shit & split".

This is ridiculous.

Monday - voted you
Tuesday - continued to defend my vote on you
Wednesday - summed up vote on you again with some more details
Thursday - stated the case again for GGG
Friday - Posted a number of times again concerning it

"shit & spit" definitely seem like an odd way to describe 5 days of consistent case-pushing. If I was meh about it before Friday, I'm not sure I would have talked about it 4 days in a row before then.

I didn't say you were meh about it, I said your posts were meh.

See? You misrep too, I'm just not a whiny bitch about it.

Can you define "meh" in this context then? Because something isn't adding up. They were "meh" as in they didn't bother you (which they clearly did before Friday; you just waited until I said I was leaving to say something like this about it) or they were "meh" as in they were weak (which Friday wouldn't have changed)?

[acryon]

You said, "but your posts were rather meh about it

until you decided to make a case

and take off for a few days." So you think I didn't make a case before Friday? That's interesting. Because 553 and the thread itself say differently.

[acryon]

I'm not name-calling; I'm not calling people "bitch" or telling them their cases are "shitty"; I'm just looking for the truth here. You can dislike my case, but you can't destroy my arguments based on ad hominem. You have to use some real arguments. I can't be the only one interested in that.

[acryon]

Pointless posting: Ad hominem follows the argument of "You are [x], therefore your argument is invalid." He's not calling your argument invalid based on the assumption that you're a 'whiny bitch', he's saying you're that based on saying your argument is invalid.
Calling a case shitty is not ad hominem nor is it an attack to the character. It's just calling a case shitty.

That said, House really does need to cut the crap with his personal attacks.

Actually, several of his posts have been attacking me and not my argument. His reasons for disliking my case and his answers to my questions aren't good enough, so he is supplementing it with ad hominem. Are you implying that his defamation of my character and credibility does not damage my case on him? Because it pretty clearly does.

[acryon]

No, it just makes him look like a jackass.

Attacking you and not your argument is not ad hominem, it's just being a jackass. Unless he's explicitly said that your case is bad BECAUSE you're an idiot, it's not ad hominem. What he's saying is you're an idiot because your case is bad, which is A. very different, B. pointless, and C. jackassery.

Don't vote people for playstyle.

How many times do I need to express the other pieces of my argument until people get that I'm not voting based on playstyle.
1) His playstyle seems manipulative - not inherently scummy
2) He likes to personally attack people - not inherently scummy, but a good way to avoid real discussion
3) He has misrepresented multiple times, the most clear of which was his recent comments about my posting my case before leaving when I had literally discussed it every day for 5 days straight.

I'm just not going to post again for a bit. I'll probably just be NK'd tonight and that will be fine, but this game (at least today) is a giant waste of my time.

[acryon]

There are 2 other scum and I'm not feeling a C+A lynch today. Who else is scum?

You're the closest we've got to a confirmed town, you noping the hell out of this thread because people don't believe your one (1) scumread is not helpful.

Why am I the only person capable of scum-hunting? Are we really at the point in this game where I think C+A is almost definitely scum and everyone else either thought I was scum because of my case on C+A and had no other reads, or just had no scum-reads in general? Apparently every person in this game is only capable of sheeping the case on me or tearing down my case but not doing any scum-hunting of their own. I was hoping this town could actually do something while I was gone on the weekend, but I just came back to more inane votes on me. Hopefully me noping out for now can give the town something else to talk about and someone else can actually start scum-hunting.

[acryon]

There's probably scum in {Rudy, 3G}. Thoughts?

I think that is very likely. I could see either one being a partner to C+A. I initially thought C+A/3G was more likely than C+A/Rudy, although I think both are plausible. That being said, the way C+A was being a jerk to GGG and the way GGG responded felt genuine, which would imply they are opposite alignment, but I can't say for sure whether I believe that interaction for now. Without a C+A lynch first, I would feel a lot more comfortable with a Rudy lynch over 3G. Without a C+A flip, I think they have close to an equal chance of being scum, but I think Rudy is far more harmful to the town.

I also don't think it's unreasonable of me to be annoyed and standoffish at the notion of "ok, we don't like that scum option, what else ya got?" when no one else is offering anything. I'm not the only player in this game, and even if I only had 1 developed scum-read, it would be better than the apparent 0 pretty much everyone else seems to have. I was gone for over 2 days, and somehow nothing new came of that time away other than more votes on me. I wish it didn't bother me, but that's frustrating.

[acryon]

VOTE: NRG

Just in case we have a deadline today voting an inactive at least moves the game along and reduces the number of replacements. Would suggest scum in the interests of moving the game along kill one of the inactive townies. Then tmw we can only need two replacements and we keep going.

Something tells me scum aren't interesting in helping out the town by killing an inactive.

[acryon]

Since it's actually possible that literally the entire scum-team is replaced-out/inactive, this seems like a good opportunity for everyone to do some town-hunting until the town stabilizes.

[acryon]

Sigh. I hate compromise wagons, but I'll join this one.

Vote: GGG

You seemed pretty dead-set on one/both of Mathdino/Notreallygood as scum before the tunnel on me. Why would you not return to that after my claim and instead jump on a lurker? Have your reads on either of them changed dramatically since then. If so, how and why?

[acryon]

Actually, I think it may be a good exercise to get the town moving again to remind people where they stood before jumping on my wagon:
Anen -GGG
Math - GGG
Copper - BMWS
GGG - Anen
C+A - Mathdino

But I specifically want to hear from Rudy

[acryon]

Sigh. I hate compromise wagons, but I'll join this one.

Vote: GGG

You seemed pretty dead-set on one/both of Mathdino/Notreallygood as scum before the tunnel on me. Why would you not return to that after my claim and instead jump on a lurker? Have your reads on either of them changed dramatically since then. If so, how and why?

Current Scumsuspects are GGG + you + NRG/MathDino. You should be able to infer that from my ISO.

Actually, I searched for what you said on GGG, and you never seemed to imply any suspicion of him. Not only that, but you went so far as to defend GGG's post from my accusations:
"Acryon first starts off with a lean-scum read on GGG because he wrote off someone's play as 'mostly gut', which is a perfectly natural thing to do D1. I don't see any harm in writing a player's posts as 'gut town/scum' in this stage of the game."

So I fail to see where, at any point, you were suspecting GGG. Your ISO would certainly point to me as the #1 lynch, then MD/NRG as the second lynch. GGG doesn't naturally enter that list until those three are worked out.

[acryon]

I'm not particurly fond of GGG either. He walks in with a reads post stating everyone is either null or scum for arbituary reasons. Why bother making a reads post if you're just going to say half the slots are just 'null, meh', or that someone is town or scum based on 'mostly gut'? Beyond that, I don't like his posts since: most posts afterwards have been defending his scumreads or nullreads.

Did Acryon intentionally leave this out in his "read" through my ISO?

Regarding that situation, the GGG post from me regarding post count was only

after

GGG defended the read saying it was mostly gut, which seemed odd that there was nothing of note given how much content C+A has put out. It wasn't about his initial read; it was about the follow-up reasoning behind it.

I'll be honest; I didn't pay close attention to that post, because it was just regurgitating what Mathdino/Anen/Copper already said in one form or another, so I apologize for not referencing it, but I still don't buy the vote on him now. Nevermind the fact that having 4 people in your viable scum list at this point is a little ridiculous, you then vote for your #4 in that list. I can't be the only one nervous at the idea of a townie who is ok with lynching any one of FOUR people (only 1 of which is lurking) in a given day.

[acryon]

In-short: Do you have a reason other than that one post which was just re-stating what others said for suspecting GGG enough to lynch him?

[acryon]

Yay for deadline extension.

This is why the GGG vote from Rudy seems especially curious. We have time, so why would you fall to your 4th suspicion and compromise, especially while acting like you were forced into it.

[acryon]

Sure, it's a compromise. The deadline freeze only is so until replacements are found.

Well of course, but I highly doubt we would get replacements and immediately go to night phase, so something tells me we have a couple days. If you have a good case for Mathdino or NRG, I think you should make it. It, to me, looks like you are instead jumping on an easy wagon that clearly has a following, rather than taking the time to actually push the people you're more confident in. Not only that, but the manner in which you jumped onto the GGG wagon would mostly absolve you of any responsibility if he flipped town. Maybe you're just being lazy town, and that's not scummy, but I would still ask you to make your case for Mathdino/NRG.

[acryon]

Yay for deadline extension.

This is why the GGG vote from Rudy seems especially curious. We have time, so why would you fall to your 4th suspicion and compromise, especially while acting like you were forced into it.

I'm starting to come around to your way of thinking.

Rudolph has also been WK'ing the fuck out of me. Surprised you didn't call him on that.

VOTE: Rudolph

Well, to be fair I think there's a decent chance you're scum, so it didn't look exactly like WK'ing to me, but if you are town, then it most definitely is.

That being said, I like this vote, and you've convinced me to put my money where my mind is.

VOTE: Rudolph

[acryon]

I've been playing this game for like, two months. I have a hard time trying to pin down what is a town or scum tell because I see players from both alignments doing both and it gets confusing.

That is why I asked Wake to hydra with me, to teach me more about how to spot scum and clear town reads.

Unfortunately, he has r/l things limiting his availability and I am left playing solo until his schedule clears up a bit, so yeah I can kinda see why I might look scummy.

I'd be lying if I said you weren't making me change my mind a little bit on you. Come on C+A, just be scum and let me kill you.

[acryon]

^^ scum slip?

Are you referring to my post?

[acryon]

What is your case on me? Seems odd to do a naked vote after the deadline was extended. I am your #2 read behind Acry or #3 behind Matt as well?

You are actually his 4th after Me, Mathdino, NRG.

[acryon]

Hey TTH. Your raven looks even more menacing than before.

[acryon]

It's supposed to be seasonal. You know, with snow and all.

Fits perfectly. Also liked the kind of content you put in for our last game, so I'm interested to hear your reads

[acryon]

the above post is really good. Definitely want to see Wake's response.

Was just about to post this. I knew I would like you coming into this game TTH On-point.

[acryon]

However, the way he's doing it leaves him very open to backlash, especially the way he was tunneling me for fairly minute details.

Although wouldn't the fact that I was the sole person to go after him, and that I endured much resistance in doing so indicate that the opposite is true?

[acryon]

I could say the same thing about the fact that his misrepping of me served little purpose considering pretty much no one agreed with him in the first place.

Well not exactly, because subtle misrepresentation is a proven way for scum to drive mis-lynches.

[acryon]

I could say the same thing about the fact that his misrepping of me served little purpose considering pretty much no one agreed with him in the first place.

Well not exactly, because subtle misrepresentation is a proven way for scum to drive mis-lynches.

And overaggressiveness is a proven way to get yourself lynched.

Eh, I don't know that the two are on equal footing, at least in my experience. Obviously the data doesn't really exists to properly compare how often the two achieve the particular outcomes, so we will have to agree to disagree on that point I think.

[acryon]

Aggressive defence of who? C+A?

Definitely see why you may have issues with me this game. I need a perceived townsperson to talk to if there's no one already confirmed. Wisdom was it in 575 (yes I know I was wrong) and C+A is it this game. I will say that I'm much more confident in this read than the Wisdom one.

I just want to echo what TTH was saying. Don't treat anyone unconfirmed like they are confirmed, because that is exactly what scum is hoping you will do with them.

Maybe this is just the problem with hydra in general and why I don't care for them, but it seems silly that we are discussing them like two separate players. If that is how they are treated, how is it any different than having two players that are the same alignment?

[acryon]

It's exactly the same thing, haha. The only difference is they share a vote and know each other to be the same alignment.

The existence of hydras makes zero sense to me, but I digress. A question that truly affects us: If Wake were to just never show up again, does that big post of his just get completely ignored? Seems crappy. It's like an inactive player that can never be replaced.

[acryon]

Hoping to hear from My Milked Eek today. He's the only replacement we haven't really heard from yet, and especially given the cloudy nature of the game-state, the fresh perspective is incredibly useful.

[acryon]

Is the OP correct on the replacements?

- Wake

No. There were three recent replacements that can be seen in the mod's (I believe) last post.

[acryon]

Out of curiosity, who here read my 484 regarding Aneninen? I've been told by various people that that method of reading people is nicely organized and focused.

I liked it generally speaking, but I think it is best to just do it on people of interest (i.e. your biggest scum read that you think we need to lynch, or a big wagon that you disagree with). Doing it on everyone makes it a lot less impacting. Another problem that can arise is a lot of confirmation bias, which I have fallen into plenty, which is why I think it's best to drop them on us at helpful times instead of when you might otherwise.

[acryon]

For reference, the current people of interest would probably be GGG and Rudolph.

[acryon]

VOTE: Rudy
No, but you're scum for trying to lynch a claimed PR (which would make the cop macho if he's telling the truth).

Has scum ever tried to lynch a power role after a claim? I've seen town who are com biased do it because they are so sure on their read but never scum, it's too obv scum.

I definitely get what you're saying here, but I could still see a lynch going through on a PR that claimed D1. Because D1 claims are impossible to prove without a double CC in this case, it would be very easy for me as scum to claim the role, and float on it for a few days until a CC happened or I could prove I saved someone, which would 1) need some great luck if decided privately or 2) just be avoided by scum/WIFOM/etc. While I don't personally think Rudy pushing me after my claim was scummy, I don't think it gives him town-points because I don't think scum would never do it.

[acryon]

i'm looking at these words on the screen but i'm not able to read them

has anything actually interesting happened in the first 30 pages that i should know or can i just like sheep things for the time being

or do we not have a consolidated wagon yet

Looking through the VC's can tell you a bit, and for the record I was driven to L-2 and then claimed macho doctor between VC 1.8 and 1.9. Since then, there has been a general split between GGG and Rudy for most likely to be scum.

[acryon]

I would like to add that one of the key points of my arguments that continues to be overlooked is C+A misrepresentation. This has been written off my Math mostly as just miscommunication, but it's a little disingenuous to say my case was entirely playstyle-related. You can look at my ISO to see that it was more than that.

[acryon]

i'm looking at these words on the screen but i'm not able to read them

has anything actually interesting happened in the first 30 pages that i should know or can i just like sheep things for the time being

or do we not have a consolidated wagon yet

Looking through the VC's can tell you a bit, and for the record I was driven to L-2 and then claimed macho doctor between VC 1.8 and 1.9. Since then, there has been a general split between GGG and Rudy for most likely to be scum.

so i think cane + able is scum because i have no idea how any competent player could scumread you

unless you think there's actually merit in the case

The only thing I understand being skeptical of were the points I made re: C+A's seemingly manipulative play, which could be written off as playstyle, and I get that. Why people were scum-reading me for it and the rest of my case? I have no clue. The wagon was absolutely terrible and I called it out as such in the post where I claimed.

[acryon]

Doc in this game is a role that can't be CC'd. What you did just gave me an inkling of worrying that you/acryon were scum together. That said, currently townreading your behaviour this page, so it's good.

I'm scumreading Rudy and GGG. Rudy for continuing to try to lynch acryon after he claimed (and being the primary pusher of his wagon), and GGG for reasons that I'm gonna have to write a mini case on later because that'll take at least 10-15 mins.

Why is Rudy scummy for being the primary pusher of my wagon? Although I do think he is scum, that's not a reason why he is scum, because 1) there were 5 others on the wagon, including you, and 2) town lead wagons on town.

[acryon]

acryon your posts and your opinions since i've entered the game seem muted

I feel like I already put my cases out there on Rudy/C+A pretty emphatically prior to the replacements coming in. At this point, I feel I've done plenty of talking and I'd rather sit back and comment where necessary as opposed to continue pushing what people know I feel strongly about. There hasn't been a response from Rudy yet since the real start of his wagon, and I imagine once that comes I'll have a bit more to chime in on as well.

[acryon]

direct me to some posts

C+A: 149, 364, 393, 547, 553, 564 There are many other posts that answer questions asked by others and corrections, but those three provide the gist.
Pastro/Rudy: 131, 584, 588 600, 602

[acryon]

Cop needs to claim.

Second doc protects cop, acryon doesn't protect. We play follow the cop.

Doesn't work, because cop becomes macho. If I die, then cop just dies the following night.

[acryon]

Ahh.

Huh.

Yeah Mathdino/myself thought the same thing earlier until someone pointed out that the cop becomes macho when one doc dies, so it doesn't work.

[acryon]

I would be correct in thinking a majority of people scumread me for my push on Acryon, yes? I've already shown one recent game in which scum managed to fakeclaim and get away with it. There are loads more. I appreciate that you are all hesistant to follow through with this, but remember that a claim doesn't excuse someone's incredibly scummy play till now.

Maybe my gut is wrong here, but I don't buy the doc claim from Acryon. There are 2 macho docs, remember, so he isn't confirmed at all.

For what it's worth, I don't scum-read you for your push on me (although it is foolish and wrong).

[acryon]

Rudy your pronoun is listed as "they". Are you a hydra?

I learn town on Acryon for play, although his meekness is certainly nagging me in the back of my mind

Look over my case on C+A and the other posts leading up to and including my claim, and I think you may have less questions regarding my "meekness".

[acryon]

Acryon have you played with hydrae before

Nope.

[acryon]

I can give you a few tips on dealing with hydrae.

At least how I deal with hydrae is I pick one head I feel comfortable reading and I completely ignore trying to read the other, bearing in mind the possible influence the second head might have on the "main"s posts. I then just treat the slot solely by my read of the "main" head.

It's a strategy that has worked well for me in the past

That makes sense.

[acryon]

and I think you may have less questions regarding my "meekness".

you aren't pushing me towards places of interest and reads and I'm wondering why

I gave you posts concerning my views on my primary scum-reads, C+A and Rudy. What are you looking for exactly, because I'd be happy to point you there or re-state something that wasn't clear.

[acryon]

What about his play leans town to you?

frustration, transparent thought process, level head wrt the vitriol c+a has been shitting out, case on C+A is like all right when you consider the fact he's new to hydrae

pedit: pushing is an act of proactiveness

Even if we throw out everything related to playstyle based on the (non-critical) premise that C+A is experienced, the misrepresentations alone are enough to warrant a scum-read on C+A from me.

Regarding being proactive, I did that quite a bit in past days, on both C+A and Rudy, and it got me to the point of being lynched because I was pushing something people didn't like. It's not that I am going to back down entirely because people don't like it, but I now know my audience. Maybe the C+A case has to wait a day to catch on, and maybe it needs to develop a little more, but it becomes clear when the ground isn't fertile for what you think needs to grow.

I'm not the type of player to tell replacements how they should vote or how they should think. Their fresh perspective is one of the absolute best things for town, and I'd rather not muddy that, especially in the first couple days. Your unadulterated reads are some of the most valuable things we can get, so I'm not going to beat you over the head with my reads, because I'd rather see what you got from your fresh view.

[acryon]

my fresh view is c+a is scum

you are not voting c+a and instead sitting your vote on rudolph which to me seems like getting into a staring contest against a brick wall

head before the ass, so why aren't you reigniting this wagon?

Oh, well if that is the question it is pretty simple. That's probably my fault and I intended to make it clear I would be willing to vote either Rudy or C+A today. I don't believe that the time exists for enough of the town to be readied to make the jump onto C+A. And I'm not excited about the idea of letting off of the Rudy vote before he really chimes in more on what's going on.

[acryon]

Maybe we can get some updated reads to see where people are at, but last I checked, there was no way a C+A lynch would every happen today.

[acryon]

Maybe we can get some updated reads to see where people are at, but last I checked, there was no way a C+A lynch would every happen today.

ok so this rings very off to me because there's 5 days left and i have no idea why you're trying to play the diplomacy game especially since replacements shake up gamestate by their very nature and i'm playing along with you as hard as i can and you are not taking my olive branch and i don't know why

hmmmm.

I'm not at all. No offense, but if you actually read through the thread when I presented my case on C+A, there was incredibly strong resistance to basically every part of the case, so C+A would have to do something particularly egregious to get people to change their minds.

Imagine a cop coming up to you as a child and saying you broke the law, and when you respond, "I'm six", he replies "well your uncle that you see once a year knows better!"

It's bullshit.

While I agree that part of my premise for that part of the argument may have been flawed, this seems like an absurd way to describe what a hydra actually is.

Acryon – until someone says coo-coo, you're not a Doc-coo, I believe his tweet-tweet, not lynching him this space and time. (Proven town until someone prooves the opposite.)

That's a bad idea. I don't advocate two people CCing to prove he's a fake; I advocate lynching him to prove he's a fake. Play thus far doesn't show he's a doc, it shows he's scum.

I also would never advocate two people CCing if I were fake-claiming, but lynching me to prove I'm fake is so dumb. Not only does it kill a PR if I'm telling the truth, but it weakens our other PRs. Too much damage if you're wrong (hint: you are). The case on me is frankly terrible, and no where near strong enough to outweigh the negatives of possibly lynching one PR and weakening another.

Some reads:
Orcinus - He is going about it the complete wrong way, but I believe he was just trying to rule out action from House as non-alignment indicative, which makes complete sense. Those still weren't issues I had, so my read will stay where it is on C+A. Lean-town.

I need to hear more from Texcat, specifically in relation to this:

I, of course, did notice C+A asking me numerous questions. I can tell you what I was thinking at the time, but will wait to hear from Wake.

Can you follow-up please.

It's also awkward that you would mention lynch all lurkers when you have posted less than anyone in this game by far. Which means you can;t possibly believe it to be a scum-tell, because if you are town, you just invalidated that idea for yourself. Makes me question whether you actually believe those to be scum-tells or not, and if you don't, why did you mention them?

[acryon]

Lol I'm sure you always have 3 scumreads D1.

@All
Can we lynch this guy? I was about to post the same as C+A about wanting out if he continued but I like a lot of players here so I'd rather get rid of the problem, or maybe he is playing like this to be disruptive as mafia, one can only hope and that would at least make sense somewhat.

VOTE: Orcinus

I fear that this town is latching onto an Orcinus lynch because they don't like his playstyle or way of talking to people. I don't particularly either, but he isn't scum for it. Let's call it what it is; this is primarily a policy wagon.

[acryon]

Some people are abrasive/rude/insensitive/whatever, but it's not alignment-indicative.

[acryon]

I agree, but I also think there is a good chance that he is scum. He is not scum hunting. He is jumping on bandwagons randomly and opportunistically.

He has voted twice. Once for C+A who had 0 votes, and then on you, which could be categorized as jumping on randomly.

You were the 3rd vote on Orcinus in 5 posts.

And the two of you said almost the exact same thing of each other's wagons (that is, basically nothing).

Sure

VOTE: texcat

And yeah, I can get on this wagon,
VOTE: Orcinus

[acryon]

Also, is this:

My first game on this site was Wake's NY177 which just recently finished (with House winning as scum at LYLO). I assumed that Wake's questions to me were his way of gently helping a new player along.

An answer to this:

I need to hear more from Texcat, specifically in relation to this:

I, of course, did notice C+A asking me numerous questions. I can tell you what I was thinking at the time, but will wait to hear from Wake.

Can you follow-up please.

[acryon]

Actually, he has voted 3 times. And while I didn't comment in the post where I voted, I had previously commented on Orc's scum hunting, or lack of scum hunting.

Well I still wouldn't say the Rudy vote qualifies as random, and it was his first vote of the game, so I looked at it as more of a base vote.

Also,

policy lynches are anti-town.

Let's lynch scum please.

[acryon]

It's a pretty accurate description of this particular hydra, if you've been paying attention at all. Not blaming Wake, he has much more important things to deal with. I'm blaming you for leveraging his experience against me when he simply hadn't been participating.

- House

Can we stop acting like a flawed perception of your experience was somehow the crux of my case?

Refer to 393 and explain how those points are based on experience?

[acryon]

@Acryon
Stop calling it a policy lynch when it is not.

Uhhh, C+A admitted it

was

a policy lynch.

[acryon]

If he was abrasive alone that would not warrant a vote, but do you want to even compare his entry posts to Boo and TTH? Who looks more town to you? He wasted 3 pages and 1 day creating havoc close to the deadline, this is a fact, did he do it soley cause he has an axe to grind with House and is naturally abrasive, or is it scum play? I do not know and the way you just absolve him is bad WIFOM from you, I see no better lynch at the time based on empirical facts and not on playstile.

Boo and TTH both look more town than Orc, but I still don't think Orc is scum.

Instead of giving reads his starting posts screm: who do we (mis)lynch, he actually asked us who he should sheep on, by the questions he asked later and the follow the cop plan he proposed it is evident he did not even read the thread, now tell me which alignment does this look more like to you?

Yeah, because town are never lazy...

[acryon]

Lol, if he claimed scum will you say: because town is never dumb, and move on?

Of course not, but you're trying to say not reading the thread is alignment-indicative, and I disagree.

[acryon]

@Acryon
Rudi should be unlynchable for you given your treatment of Orcinus, why is it not the case?

Why?

[acryon]

@Acryon
Do you think that playing overall to your win-con is alignment indicative?

Of course it is, but town do stupid things, and so do scum. Although it sometimes is, doing stupid things isn't always scummy.

Regarding Rudi: You are taking the stance here that Orcinus is likely not mafia because he is to brazen about it, Rudi also was brazen asking us to lynch you despite your claim, why is one a probable town and the other a probable mafia, aside from OMGUS?

How is that my stance on Orcinus? And that's not the only reason I think Rudy is scum. Look in my ISO for more (both when I actually said it and when I repeated it for Orc).

[acryon]

For the record, I don't think Rudy pushing on me after my claim is the reason he is scum, because I think the action is more stupid than scummy.

[acryon]

It's a pretty accurate description of this particular hydra, if you've been paying attention at all. Not blaming Wake, he has much more important things to deal with. I'm blaming you for leveraging his experience against me when he simply hadn't been participating.

- House

Can we stop acting like a flawed perception of your experience was somehow the crux of my case?

Refer to 393 and explain how those points are based on experience?

That post is a pretty accurate description of my playstyle, as a cursory glance at any of my games (except my scum game, ironically enough) will confirm.

"-The slot has posted a lot about how mafia needs to be played and other meta-arguments (see 162), which is, in my experience, more often than not indicative of manipulative scum.
-Create's Strawman #1 on Mathdino in 101.
-Create's Strawman #2 on me, regarding Pastro's ban. Continued to try and push it and misrepresent me despite my reiteration multiple times that I did not say what he was trying to make it look like I did.
-Only scum gains when people are misrepresented, and C+A misrepresented both Mathdino and myself on separate occasions.
-C+A proclaimed themselves as a slot that likes to call out crappy arguments. This persona seemed to continue when GGG called them town for no reason, but then the response came which was extremely weak, and C+A simply accepted it. I then asked how the explanation was good at all, and they replied "gut." Which, 1) is not an answer to whether something is a good explanation or not, and 2) seems to reject the persona of a player that pushes people to make better arguments and tears down weak ones."

Of these, only the first one could possibly be written off as your playstyle. Feel free to write them off for other reasons, but playstyle is not a valid one, unless it is your "playstyle" to misrepresent/misunderstand and contradict your MO of calling our crappy arguments.

[acryon]

I like day phase, I have no interest in speeding up the claiming/lynching process.

Agreed.

[acryon]

I'll be V/LA until probably 12/15

. I will certainly try to get on at points and check in, but we're having our second baby on Monday, so I'll try to get on during lulls, but I can't make promises at this point. If it looks like I won't be able to get on at all, I will get on within a few days of Monday and ask for replacement. Apologies to the town in advance for not being around as much during this time.

[acryon]

Yeah if she doesn't show up this is kinda pointless I guess. I roleblocked her in Stack The Deck out of gut since she active lurked ALL OF D1, and then she pulled off an elaborate claim scenario that made me believe she was town. She was scum.

If she doesn't show up today with some good material, I'll vote her.

Hey acryon

, anything more to say before night phase? Would actually like everyone to check in just in case of NKs.

I suppose a last-minute reads-list couldn't hurt.

Rudy is scum.
C+A is probably scum.
TTH is town.
Copper is probably town.
GuyInFreezer is probably town.
GGG is maybe scum.
Texcat is null.
Mathdino is null.
Anen is maybe scum.
Bookitty is probably town.
IdiotKing is town.
MilkedEek is null.

[acryon]

I'll be around for a bit longer if you have questions on a read or two that I haven't spoken on as much.

[acryon]

Nah, nothing in particular, it's a pretty solid reads list, can agree with the majority of it.

Good luck with RL, acryon.

Thanks brother

[acryon]

Just checking in to say I will be devoting a good chunk of time to this in a few day when I actually have the time. Just don't want anyone to think I'm flaking.

[acryon]

Acryon, whom did you protect?

Just jumping on for a minute. I protected TTH.

[acryon]

So obviously not pleased with the outcome of our flip and the NK. I'm going to try to avoid walling here, but I can't make any promises. I'm also going to be going through posts from the lynch, so if I ask something or comment on something that is then repeated by someone else or cleared up later, I apologize.

Unsure of the snap-vote from TTH on copper, but at the same time, it looks like it kicked things off quite nicely.

Regarding NKA, I think Bookitty seemed to be a pretty strong player in general, so I think he seemed like a decent kill disregarding possible crumbing or specific pressure on scum.

@All
Because scum would really need to have a valid reason to kill Boo over Acryon if they didn't think she is the cop and he is one of the docs, despite what C+A said the optimal strategy for scum in this setup is to lynch a doc as soon as they find him because that makes decisions for the cop much harder, if he is not macho he outs as soon as he gets a guilty or D3 at the latest, he can rely on the macho docs to carry him for an extra day or two and the number of confirmed he gives town vs the chance of randomly getting sniped if he doesn't claim makes it worth it all the time.

As macho though, he dies the night he claims, this makes his decision much harder, it can lead to early claims or not claiming and hoping for that guilty and getting killed, it's not something I believe scum would lightly give up on.

I disagree here. I think the optimal play is leaving me alive. As long as I'm alive, there is going to be a question mark on me. That seems pretty good for scum.

The GGG math argument is silly. You don't catch scum with math (no reference to MathDino ).

Also to me that reads like a texcat confession.

vote:texcat

Nope.

Anen asking who I protected is fine. It's standard for claimed docs, and whatever I say is a null anyway, since scum and I would just play a mind-game with kill/protection, so it isn't of any help to scum. It obviously means I think TTH is town, but I would just say that in a reads-list anyway, so it doesn't matter that I did it by stating my save. That being said, the post from Anen is weird, specifically this "First of all, am I the only one who's surprised by the Nightkill? Have I missed something?" This just strikes me as contrived, and we already went over the NK, so I'm not sure why Anen brings it up again here, especially since clearly no one knows why it happened.

I'm more interested in math Dino now as he appears to me to be scum mad at getting accused for what he sees as his pet peeve, stupid logic and bad math. Rather than a townie defending himself

He did exactly this in the other game I played with him as town. I don't like meta, but this is playstyle, so you'll have to find another reason to scum-read him.

The GGG wagon being completely unopposed isn't a good sign.

I would normally agree, but with a VT dead, a PR dead, and another outed, a bus seems perfectly reasonable here. That being said, we have plenty of time, so let's not rush into this lynch. I won't be voting there at this point.

It's scummy to try to keep the wagon at L-1, not to get off of it. Copper's "let's wait" thing is unconvincing to me. Rather than "why the hell are we at L-1 already!?" as it should have been, he was outright OK with the lynch; he just wanted to pay lip service to giving people time to chime in. Math backing off (while still keeping GGG as a scumread) is townie to me; it's avoiding a quicklynch and examining why we headed for one. TTH examining my reads is townie. My problem with the post I quoted is not that I see TTH's argument as scummy; it's just ineffective if you point out what you're looking for. It's like voting someone to pressure them, but then saying your vote is only to add pressure and that you wouldn't be willing to lynch the person. It negates the point of doing it in the first place.

And I don't think I should have to point out how texcat's vote to put you back at L-1 is scummy.

I agree with this. GGG staying at L-1 makes no sense right now, although I'm still not sure I buy IK's "looking for reactions" reason for being the first person to put GGG at L-1.

[acryon]

@Acryon

I disagree here. I think the optimal play is leaving me alive. As long as I'm alive, there is going to be a question mark on me. That seems pretty good for scum.

This is plain wrong:
- If you get a save as doc you confirm a player, super valuable for town.
- If scum know you are doc, by killing you they are sure of medic dodging.
- If you get killed as doc the cop becomes macho and will die when he outs.

Compared to leaving a doc alive for WIFOM reasons I would make the kill in every game I played as scum.

Your argument just looks self serving, where is the pressure if that's what mafia is doing by the way? You lurked till now and the only one entertaining the possibility of you being scum, after you were nearly lynched yesterday I might add, is me and you aren't even my first scumread.

I had a legitimate reason for why I wasn't able to post; I wasn't lurking. You can choose to not believe me, and ultimately be wrong, or you can choose to work with me now that I am back and able to post reliably.

Also, you said my argument just looks self-serving, but then implied that it isn't necessary if I were scum because there's no pressure on me. This seems to imply you think I am scum making a bad play? Feel free to correct me on this if I'm wrong.

Regarding leaving me alive. I was one of the primary people pushing a case on Rudy. I think the likelihood that heat would come back to me after the flip would be more than enough for scum to leave me alive. What I don't get is your argument against it. Do you think I am scum, or do you think scum made a mistake? You are arguing against something that has deeper implications, but are for some reason avoiding making the statements that your argument is implicating.

[acryon]

@Acryon
What exactly am I hiding?

That's what I am trying to figure out.

I said the optimal kill if you are doc is to kill you, so if you are a doc then yes, scum made a mistake. You trying to sell it as scum being smart by leaving you alive is either faulty understanding of the setup if you are town, or what you have to say as scum. Regardless of the alignment it's a self serving statement which again either comes from confbias if you are town (and looking for a reason to justify being alive) or for obvious reasons if you are scum.

What I am looking for is for you to say whether you think it is more likely that scum made a mistake, or that I am scum. If you think it's the former, do you think it is reasonable to say that it is more likely that our scum aren't very experienced (considering your rock-solid belief that killing me was the optimal scum play)? To me, this is a type of question

you

should be asking. Your argument just seems to be arguing, but not really saying anything or really scum-hunting.

[acryon]

@Acryon
What exactly am I hiding?

That's what I am trying to figure out.

I said the optimal kill if you are doc is to kill you, so if you are a doc then yes, scum made a mistake. You trying to sell it as scum being smart by leaving you alive is either faulty understanding of the setup if you are town, or what you have to say as scum. Regardless of the alignment it's a self serving statement which again either comes from confbias if you are town (and looking for a reason to justify being alive) or for obvious reasons if you are scum.

What I am looking for is for you to say whether you think it is more likely that scum made a mistake, or that I am scum. If you think it's the former, do you think it is reasonable to say that it is more likely that our scum aren't very experienced (considering your rock-solid belief that killing me was the optimal scum play)? To me, this is a type of question

you

should be asking. Your argument just seems to be arguing, but not really saying anything or really scum-hunting.

What is your opinion on the NK?

People new day she is a strong player, but if she is a strong player, why wasn't she protected?

I can see protecting TTH over Boo, but we have two docs.

Do you think the kill came from inexperienced scum?

I think scum simply killed a strong player. I think this makes more sense than the alternatives (me, who they can leave alive for WIFOM, or someone that was pushing one of them, which could draw suspicion). I protected TTH because he is a strong player and most likely to me to be town, and it would be interesting to know who the other doc protected over Boo. Although it's always possible we both protected TTH. I don't think the kill is necessarily indicative of experience. If anything, I think it would come from scum with more experience than less, since I'm not sure super-new scum would go through the above thought process (although it isn't particularly deep, so it's very possible).

[acryon]

@Acryon
Such nonsence, my scumhunting today is plain to see and is not based on trying to WIFOM mafia behavior to guess how much experience (and what does that mean, experience is /= login date anyway) they have playing in the case that you are actually the doc, nor should it. I'd have more chances being correct randomly using a d11.

Question: are inexperienced or experienced scum more likely to make a NK mistake?

What you are doing is the equivalent of someone coming to you and saying you are hiding something because you did not post your optimal scumteam in the case that Boo was lynched because mafia found out she was the cop, why didn't you consider that case in your scumhunt?

There wasn't any apparent crumbing, which even you agreed to.

[acryon]

@Acryon

Question: are inexperienced or experienced scum more likely to make a NK mistake?

Very good scum players are less likely to make that NK, very new scum players are also unlikely, if you want a blind guess it could come from a decently experienced (and here I equate experience with ability) scumteam, something along the lines of more than 3 months but less than 2 year old players who have maybe played just a limited amount of setups.

Hey now. Even with you being extra conservative, that already sounds a little better than a D11, doesn't it?

here wasn't any apparent crumbing, which even you agreed to.

And? I have no crumb to go on to determine if you are doc or not but you are asking me why I'm not using your role in my scumhunt.

I'm not asking you why you're not using my role in your scum-hunt. But you should be taking everything into account, no? You can make decisions based on the likelihood of me being a doc vs being scum.

[acryon]

I'm not asking you why you're not using my role in your scum-hunt. But you should be taking everything into account, no? You can make decisions based on the likelihood of me being a doc vs being scum.

Not really, doing so just leads to mass WIFOM.

The best way to scumhunt I know of is concentrate on individuals, finding if their play favours town or mafia more, looking for inconsistencies or clear lies, unjustifed changes in or opportunistic reads, wagon hopping, showing sings of having too much information... . Once you have your first scum pegged you can go back and revisit the game looking for associative tell with a clearer understanding of what you are doing.

So are you just ignoring my existence, or treating me as some kind of strict-null? Your examination of every player is, in essence, "are the things this person is doing more likely to come from scum or town?" "If the player does X, then they are scum" just isn't a thing, so you are always working off of what is most likely given the events and information. That's not WIFOM; that's how the game works.

[acryon]

This kind of misrepping is getting anoying. What I'm doing is evaulating every single player and asking myself, is this guy more likely to be scum or mafia based on his play, in your case:

- I did not like your case on C+A pre claim and after going at him for the whole day yesterday today you seem to have forgotten about him, there was no mention of him in your catch up post, I find that more scum than town indicative.
- You claimed doc but survived the night, you are clearly the best kill, I find that more scum than town indicative

Sounds good. I am not trying to say you are saying something you aren't, which is why I am asking you questions, rather than presenting a case on you to the town about what you are saying.

You are trying to sell us the idea that leaving you alive was good scum play, ""

I am not the only person who believes this. What do you think about the idea from them?

Contrary to some (who do have a point actually) I am willing to use some associative tells without to moderate my reads, like my worry about the speed with which the GGG wagon took off, but to base my reads on associations without flops? That's plain retarded.

Also now that I think about it, wasn't it your scumtell (which I never noticed myself tbf.) that scum tries to control how other people scumhunt? Aren't you trying to push your view of how to play on me now mate?

My scum-read had to do with a pattern of manipulation (or proper foundation-building if you prefer to diplomacy), not one or two instances.

[acryon]

@Acryon

I am not the only person who believes this. What do you think about the idea from them?

It makes me worry because some of them have to be town, that's also why I thought it was better to give my own interpretation as well.

I can see some scumteams being influenced by C+A's WIFOM statement yesterday, as Dino said, Texcat didn't scumread you yesterday so keeping her read plus arguing it was a null factor rather than good scum play I don't find very scum indicative, Aneninen already demonstrated what I consider suboptimal play by asking you for your save so I can see him going for the WIFOM explanation as town or mafia, and I have had a town read on him for a while now, if you were to flip scum I'd consider him as a possible teammate of yours though.

If C+A is town, and killing me was the optimal play, what reason would scum have to follow town-C+A's statement rather than going with the optimal play, especially considering C+A got a good bit of traction on that statement? I think believing that the scumteam would believe and follow town-C+A's statement again seems to imply an inexperienced scumteam. Your line of thinking definitely seems to point to this. If I were you, I think it would be silly to not pursue that further.

[acryon]

I'll consider it if/when I know your alignment, for now I invite you to check IK's ISO if you are town.

I thought IK's intro was quite good. 390 doesn't sound scummy to me at all. He defended RDR here, even after saying he didn't like Pastro. It seems like it would be really easy for a player to say they didn't like Pastro and then also not like Rudolph. Coming from a townie that did exactly this, it seems like scum could/should have jumped on at that point. This all being said, I don't know that I buy his switch on Rudy in 1175. I never wanted to lynch Rudy because he still tried to push me after my claim. I believed then and still that it was not alignment-indicative, but IK using it as his reason to switch is a little soft.

Votes GGG in 1471 for the obviously terrible idea that Texcat confessed to being scum. Then switches to Texcat in 1505. This is definitely where things take a turn. The idea that he voted Texcat for keeping GGG at L-1 when he literally just did the same thing is off. The idea that "well him doing it was scummy. I did it because I wanted to see reactions" is ridiculous at best. Aside from that, 1505 to me shows that his vote should definitely be on Copper, but is instead on Texcat. Again in 1513, I find myself asking why his vote is on Tex and not copper?

Overall, I really am at a loss for what to think of all of this. This exchange and play seems so very different from the rest of his play this game. In the early part of the game, he seemed a lot more logical and reasonable. This recent play seems manic and confused.

@IdiotKing: Tell me why Texcat is more scummy than Copper, preferably using some quotes of yours to show you already thought this before my post.

[acryon]

My attempts at VCA are pretty dismal. But I tend to think that scum wants to stay off town wagons to the greatest extent possible. At the end of D1, it was pretty clear that Rudi was to be lynched. Bookitty and GIF both announced intent to hammer before Copper did hammer. This practically clears Copper to me.

How does this clear copper for you? If anything, it does the opposite since he could sort of hammer with impunity since there was already multiple intents-to-hammer looming. To be clear, I'm unsure of where I think copper lies, but this reasoning seems really bad.

[acryon]

My attempts at VCA are pretty dismal. But I tend to think that scum wants to stay off town wagons to the greatest extent possible. At the end of D1, it was pretty clear that Rudi was to be lynched. Bookitty and GIF both announced intent to hammer before Copper did hammer. This practically clears Copper to me.

How does this clear copper for you? If anything, it does the opposite since he could sort of hammer with impunity since there was already multiple intents-to-hammer looming. To be clear, I'm unsure of where I think copper lies, but this reasoning seems really bad.

And my thinking is that scum would stay away from hammering and let a townie do it. A scum

could

hammer but why would they? Why bother getting their hands dirty if they don't have to? I have no research to back this up, but it makes sense to me.

Despite the general idea that hammering is scummy(it's often anti-town if done prematurely, but town do plenty of things that might be anti-town), hammers tend to be, in my experience, more often than not carried out by town.

[acryon]

@Acryon
I agree, so why are you saying hammering there makes me more likely to be scum?

I'm not saying it makes you more likely to be scum. But I am saying it doesn't make you more likely to be town. I am arguing against the premise that you hammering makes you town because scum would have let the townies hammer. I disagree, because I think scum (especially those with experience) are a lot less afraid of hammering than people seem to think, because the scummy stigma that comes with hammering just doesn't really hold true.

[acryon]

@Acryon

Despite the general idea that hammering is scummy

This is why it's town indicative for me, even if you believe I would not be too worried about hammering as mafia (which I can stand behind), given the general belief that hammering is scummy, I would have no reason to do so when someone else said they were going to, if I had played with you multiple times and knew you and the rest of town believe that hammering is usually done by town then the null read or a reversed read would make sense.

As town I have a strong motivation to ensure we get a lynch in because getting a flip on a questionable player is

always

better than gifting our lynch to scum, where they can freely select who to kill and it will never be one of them, so that's why I hammered when I had to leave the office and saw we only had 2 hours left.

Yes, but if you are scum, then the same holds true. The town motivation is only true if you are town, so it's mostly irrelevant. It is completely null, because it's full of WIFOM. I thought the hammer was totally fine, and you are not the one I am putting on trial here. I think Texcat using the hammer from you as a major reason to town-read you is terrible, however.

[acryon]

I would like to add that you having no problems with it makes sense in that it appeals to you as a person and player, but I don't think you're looking at it critically, which seems out of character.

[acryon]

@Acryon
No if I am scum I have no reason to hammer when GIF, who is either my teammate and is going to hammer for me since he said so or town and has no reason to lie about hammering so is going to go ahead with it, will do it for me, so I get the same result.

The only case you can try to make is that I believe hammering there as scum would make me look more town, since you just said there is a general belief that hammering is scummy I find it hard to believe you have now decided this is the case based on WIFOM.

Tex stated she believes scum wants to avoid joining town wagons, I can see someone having that belief and based on that she thinks Copper is clear, I don't think that's an amazing read but I've definitely seen wierder ones including your idea that mafia tries to tell town how to scumhunt, but not in one or two instances but by building an overall framework beforehand...

What I am saying is that it is null. I think giving you town-credit for hammering there is reckless at best.

There is a "general belief" that hammering is scummy, like I said, but that doesn't mean it is a belief that actually guides people in their decision making. It is something people talk about, but how often is town pushing the person that hammered a townie? Seldom, if ever. My point is that the idea that hammering is done by scum is wrong, and I think people realize that which is why it doesn't guide their decision making as much as it should if they firmly believed it. Texcat giving you town-points for your hammer because scum wouldn't hammer because hammering is scummy and they don't want to look scummy, is itself rooted in the faulty assumption that hammering is scummy.

[acryon]

This whole thing is also pretty self-serving for you, which is why I was talking to and asked Texcat about it, not you.

[acryon]

@Acryon
That is such crap again, the fact is:

- there is a clear motivation for town to hammer, because I had no clue if the people who said they were going to hammer would actually go ahead with it and if that didn't happen, D1 would have been a shit-show for me.

Why would you have no clue whether they were going to actually go ahead with it or not? Two people expressed intent to hammer, so I don't see the town motivation there vs a situation where one or zero people expressed the intent. Can you point me to some games where multiple people expressed an intent to hammer and none of them did?

- there is none for scum other than questionable WIFOM that depends on me reading you and the rest of town as thinking you will read me more town if I hammer.

No game I have ever played in had a giant wagon led on the person that hammered except situations where it was a clear quick-hammer/troll-hammer with no prior intents expressed. Something tells me your experience hasn't been that much different than mine, so I don't think you would need to know that much about us to discern that information.

I have no problems with you calling it null if you want to but calling other people bad for going with the logical interpretation of the facts, especially given they state a belief which is understandable, is just bad from you. Go and check Texcat's games as town and see if she really believes that scum wants to stay off town wagons instead of calling her bad (and what do you mean by this, is she scum or wrong?) if you think she is making up reads.

I didn't call her bad. I called the reasoning bad, and I gave reasons for why it was bad. There's nothing wrong with that at all. To be clear, I think she is scummy for it, but again, this is a conversation I would have much rather had with her, but instead you decided to step in and WK, so it's essentially been nullified.

I never mentioned the hammer before so I fail to see how it is self serving to give my version, clearly the most relevant one, when you are discussing it, if anthing it's self serving of your Texcat interrogation to try and force me out of it.

It's self-serving because it is directly involving a town-read of you. Do I really need to explain the conflict of interest here?

[acryon]

Why would you have no clue whether they were going to actually go ahead with it or not? Two people expressed intent to hammer, so I don't see the town motivation there vs a situation where one or zero people expressed the intent. Can you point me to some games where multiple people expressed an intent to hammer and none of them did?

Because GIF, a player I still think has a decent shot at being scum, decided to take it upon himself to state he would hammer at the 3 hour mark (thus for all I know voiding Boo's prior commitment) and when I checked if he had actually done so I found he hadn't. I probably could find games but the above alone should be enough to tell you why I decided to hammer.

Actually, GIF said at 8:11 my time that he would hammer in 3 hours, which would be at 11:11 my time. You hammered at 10:36 my time, 2 hours and 25 minutes after GIF said he would hammer. So that idea and subsequent thought process is just plain not true.

No game I have ever played in had a giant wagon led on the person that hammered except situations where it was a clear quick-hammer/troll-hammer with no prior intents expressed. Something tells me your experience hasn't been that much different than mine, so I don't think you would need to know that much about us to discern that information.

This is BS, if I had to form an expectation, as mafia, and you asked me at the end of D1 I would have probably gone with: it's bad to hammer, because of what Dino said to GIF about tunnelling him for his d12 if it weren't provably random (which I still think is a shit read btw), if you are asking me now I'd probably say null, certainly not that it's a good idea as scum in both cases.

Something seems like BS here, but it isn't what I had to say. Also this entire part of the discussion is total hypothetical WIFOM, and this post from you appears to be the WIFOM climax.

It's self-serving because it is directly involving a town-read of you. Do I really need to explain the conflict of interest here?

Yes, you cannot talk about something that I did, giving bizarre interepretations, the first one definetely looked like you were saying it made me more scummy, and expect me not to give my pov., like in what world? I also did not interfere until Tex first clarified her read for you.

Again, I was talking to Texcat about the interpretation. Because it was all about mine and her interpretation's, not yours, because obviously your interpretation will serve whatever alignment you belong to. Also, I said "I'm unsure of where copper lies" in my post to Texcat, just to make it clear I wasn't saying you were scummy but was instead looking for answers from Tex. That rider was clearly added because I expected you to respond without it, but hoped it would deter you from doing so once I added it.

[acryon]

Actually, GIF said at 8:11 my time that he would hammer in 3 hours, which would be at 11:11 my time. You hammered at 10:36 my time, 2 hours and 25 minutes after GIF said he would hammer. So that idea and subsequent thought process is just plain not true.

I was at work and read 3 hours from the deadline, not 3 hours from his post, that's my bad, but the reason why I hammered stays the same. There would also be no reason for me to make this up as it is easily verifiable and I also mentioned it before in the thread:

- I hammered Rudi mainly because I will never NL D1 on principle, your case on him looked decent and he refused to tell me why he thought Tex was scum, it could have easily been GIF

if he hammered at the 3 hour mark as he said he would.

In that case, we

really

can't give you town-cred for the hammer, because your proclaimed town-motivation for doing so was actually based on incorrect information.

Something seems like BS here, but it isn't what I had to say. Also this entire part of the discussion is total hypothetical WIFOM, and this post from you appears to be the WIFOM climax.

You are asking me WIFOM questions and blaming me for WIFOM answers

I didn't ask you a question. I said that there

is

possible scum motivation to do it. You said there wasn't other than questionable WIFOM depending on how you read the town, which started the WIFOM discussion. I disagreed that it was simply WIFOM, because I don't think a town exists that hard-pushes anyone who hammers a townie. This is the fallacy I alluded to earlier.

[acryon]

@Acryon

In that case, we really can't give you town-cred for the hammer, because your proclaimed town-motivation for doing so was actually based on incorrect information.

This is another retarded or scummy statement. What is relevant to determine my alignment is the honesty of my motive, not the information I based it on (especially when the two information sets can be easily compared like in this case).

As an example, if you strongly believed every player starting with the letter A was mafia and you voted for them as town and only as town in every game, I would always call you town for doing so no matter how incorrect your initial information on said players are.

If anything it should make my motive more clear, if I had your information set my motive would have actually been

more

questionable because at that point I wouldn't really have had reason to worry about who was going to hammer.

But that isn't the reason he was giving you credit for it! The point wasn't that she gave you town-cred because your reasoning and response were genuine or that your motives were honest. She said that the fact that two other people had claimed intent and you still hammered "practically cleared you as town" because she believed that scum wouldn't get themselves involved in a wagon that they didn't need to get involved in. She didn't clear you because of your perceived intent as town. She cleared you because she didn't think the action matched what scum would do. These aren't the same thing. There are scummy things, there are towny things, and there are null things. This was a null thing, and I think claiming that it practically clears you as town is crazy.

I'd say this is the end of the discussion for me, unless someone else has questions, I'll come back to you tomorrow if I can/have to.

I agree, since the target of my initial and follow-up statement was Tex.

[acryon]

That's the thing. Your intent, actual or perceived, has nothing to do with whether the reason Tex gave for clearing you as town was good or not. It obviously has everything to do with whether you

are

town or not, but it doesn't have to do with whether Tex had a legit reason. That's why this was never an argument about your alignment.

[acryon]

@Acryon
Yes in this case the hammer is objectively null and if what Tex said is scummy or not boils down to: does Tex believe that scum want to stay away from wagons as much as possible?

I think it's unlikely scum makes a VCA based on that methodology, states that's what they are using and calls me town for it, unless they believe it to be a valid reason a priori, which I really don't think is the case, it's more likely it really is her personal belief and she may be right about it for all I know.

Still, I apologize for derailing some of it but I thought the discussion was slightly different.

And I will say that I did try to ensure that it was clear what I was asking for by adding the rider, but I can't say I don't understand the desire to jump in anyway. I was hoping to get a deeper look into her mindset from her, but no hard feelings either way. Unless you are scum, then piles of hard feelings.

[acryon]

I am with TTH on this. I think writing off the fact that 5 people were on both wagons is silly. There is almost definitely something there.

[acryon]

Was someone in this game a Thor alt? Am I missing something?

[acryon]

Thor was Rudolph the Reindeer.

Ah, ok. Very interesting. Even more interesting is that my comments about scum manipulating the game are based on games with Thor-scum, which I didn't see from Rudy. Rudy's hard-pushing does make a lot more sense now, however.

[acryon]

You'll have to excuse me if I half skimmed over most of the acryon/copper/TTH wall combat. Not really anything to say other than the hammer discussion is pretty useless (acryon, dude, you argued for a page on why something is completely null. WELL. DONE. I at least kept my argument on copper's play being null to one post, jeez).

To be fair, that certainly was not my intent. I started with a line of questioning toward Texcat to try and get some information, and it mutated into that as I had to explain where that line was coming from.

I do think IK is town though, it feels like one of these that's sooooooo scummy everyone vote type wagons.

Do you have a reason other than this? Or is it just total gut based on the feeling of the situation?

I'm also unsure, but that certainly looked like a scum-slip from GGG.

[acryon]

How familiar would you say you are with the jargon?

Acronyms are hit amd miss but intent to hammer os pretty clear after your first newb game.

Pretty sure he was asking about bussing.

[acryon]

I have no idea what to make of this discussion.

I mean hell, he outright said there must be 1-2 scum 'bussing' him.

But I'm bad at telling whether people are playing dumb.

Anyone else wanna weigh in on this?

Searching his post history, I see one time in another game where he mentioned "bussing" and it was in the context of Scum+Scum, so I'm inclined to think it

was

a scum-slip.

[acryon]

Can you quote the post, or is it the same one I posted? Because the one I did has him actually using it incorrectly in his first game.

@texcat: Yes. If he flips scum, his 3 partners were on his wagon.
Legit.

I didn't actually notice that part of your post. Yeah same one, and from the context I read, it had him referring to Scum+Scum.

@Texcat What??

[acryon]

@All
I'm not so sure, I'd lean more on it being a misuse of the term because he used bussing for scum choosing to vote no lynch which is kind of weird if you know the definition (distancing yourself from NL?). Dino did you check his alignment in the other game?

You're right. I misread the context. He's still alive in the other game, so nothing to talk about there.

Definitely seems a lot less like a scum-slip now, although Tex's weird defense of it in that recent post is now pinging me pretty hard.

[acryon]

I would like to clarify that it wasn't really defense, more of a comment, but it was still

very

off.

[acryon]

Sorry, I don't understand what's weird about it. If GGG is scum, he knows exactly how many scum are on his wagon. And my guess is that if he is scum, he would lie about the number. Just an observation.

Of course he does; that is obvious. The weird point comes with saying if he flips scum, there are probably either 3 or 0 scum on his wagon, which is such a weird thing to say. That's not even counting the fact that there are only 3 scum, not 4.

- TTH also delayed replying to posts here as in her other SK game, I do not think she did tha in our other game where she was town.

This seems wholly null to me. You could probably see a similar discrepancy in my games, but it's due to availability running alongside or counter the boosts in town activity.

[acryon]

I forgot to respond to copper:
@copper: I'm finding it difficult to believe TTH hasn't just backed herself into a corner of paranoia. The ideas she's been pushing today make total sense from a town-her perspective. Unless you can find me an instance in which TTH-scum has gone full paranoia on everyone and repeatedly slashed everything she thought she 'knew', I see nothing scummy about any of this.

I would like to add that I have the same feelings on this, most likely because the three of us all just played a game together, and her actions this game seem like a natural progression from there.

[acryon]

@GGG

Could we have a full reads-list from you?

[acryon]

TTH, due to copper's post.
You, you should Damn sure know. Just because it happened yesterday doesn't mean I forgot. I'm just waiting for you to slip up.
texcat, familiar with playstyle, reminds me of her other town games, and if you are town, that is good enough.

I don't think you and TTH are scum together.

I would also say that copper and TTH are definitely not scum together.

[acryon]

Do you not find it odd at all that he would make that statement (which implies a scum read on me) after town reading me up until that point, simply because I read him as null/scum?

I do, but I think the dialogue between you two is pretty important here, so I'm letting it play out.

[acryon]

I do think this exchange pointw to a fundamental issue, which is that your scum-hunting isn't apparent. You've participated a lot in discussions this game, but looking over your ISO, I don't actually see much pushing of scum. If someone can show me that this is just playstyle from C+A, then maybe I will put less consideration into it, but you don't actually appear to be scum-hunting, and if you are, you aren't really letting us in on it.

[acryon]

I do think this exchange pointw to a fundamental issue, which is that your scum-hunting isn't apparent. You've participated a lot in discussions this game, but looking over your ISO, I don't actually see much pushing of scum. If someone can show me that this is just playstyle from C+A, then maybe I will put less consideration into it, but you don't actually appear to be scum-hunting, and if you are, you aren't really letting us in on it.

I'm trying to figure out who is town and eliminating those I don't find consistent with town behavior as town reads.

That is hard to do when I can't really follow the conversation. Thus my uncertainty on TTH.

I'm solid on texcat town because of a game we played together.

You seem pretty town, but I am a little paranoid on why you are still alive considering you are a sitting duck as a macho doc.

Math, I still have doubts on due to D1, and today hasn't given me much opportunity to clarify that read because of the same problem I'm having reading TTH.

MME... is he in this game?

I got a town feel for copper yesterday, which again is where my ability to read those actually posting pretty much ended.

Part of my lack of posting is due to time constraints, the other part is due to frustration of not being able to follow the conversation.

I can understand this to an extent, but you should also understand that it looks like you aren't scum-hunting.

[acryon]

From tomorrow I hope to have more time. ^_^

I think you already know this, but I would like to remind you that you have posted approximately nothing in a week despite actually posting multiple times. Hopefully tomorrow you bring something that we can work with.

[acryon]

And I'm not saying that to be a jerk; I'm saying it because it makes you look like scum.

[acryon]

I'm not a "twenty questions" player, either. Check my history.

That's not alignment indicative, it's playstyle indicative.

It's not about being a "twenty questions" player; it's about scum-hunting. Do you not think general questioning is a critical part of exposing scum? Not putting pressure on scum is at best not helpful to town.

[acryon]

I think this may be worth noting:
Rudolph the Reindeer (7) - acryon, Idiotking,

Cain + Able

, GGG, texcat, TellTaleHeart,

copper223

GGG (5) -

copper223

,

Cain + Able

, Aneninen, Idiotking, texcat
Acryon (5) – Rudy, Mathdino, Aneninen,

copper223

, GGG,

Cain + Able

(before jumping off last-minute but willing to let the other half come back)

So either one of Copper/C+A is scum and hopping on all of the big wagons, or they are townies with a loooot of major scum-reads that just happen to be the most popular ones. Even if we wanted to say that this statement is a stretch (I'll accept that), at the very least it means I'm not putting much faith in the decision-making of two individuals that appear to jump on every popular wagon.

Vote Count 1.20
With 13 alive, it takes 7 to lynch

Rudolph the Reindeer (7) (L!)

- acryon,

Idiotking

, Cain + Able,

GGG

, texcat,

TellTaleHeart

, copper223

texcat (3)

- bookitty, Rudolph the Reindeer, Mathdino

GuyInFreezer (2)

- My Milked Eek, Aneninen

Vote Count 2.5
With 11 Alive, it is 6 to lynch.

Idiotking(3)

- copper223, Mathdino, Aneninen

texcat (3)

-

Idiotking

,

TellTaleHeart

,

GGG

GGG (2)

- Cain + Able, texcat

Not Voting (3)

- My Milked Eek, GuyInFreezer, Acryon

Look! Same 3 people on both wagons.

Herd mentality!

Only, these two vote counts are more damning than the two you used, because you're defending GGG on top of that.

Also, don't introduce a method of comparing vote counts and act surprised when people analyze it and critique it for logical inconsistencies.

Speaking of logical inconsistencies... Are you really trying to call out her comparison of a 7-wagon and a 5-wagon sharing 4 of the same members to a 7 wagon and a 3 wagon sharing 3 of the same? One of the major issues is that both the GGG wagon and the Rudy wagon were wagons that could easily go all the way. Comparing a wagon with 3 votes, of which there are fully

three

at the moment, with a wagon with 5 is a little disingenuous I think.

C+A is just looking so scum to me right now. I mean, this post:

Up to page 14, gonna give you my reads as I go along so it's not the monster of all monster posts.

Notable things

...

Idiotking

's

predecessor wanted a town bloc, then voted for

Mathdino

for shooting it down. No reason to vote for someone if you're town.

Cane & Abel

makes a big post telling people what to do & what's going to happen. Another gorilla beating their chest early in this game. But a post that long with no real scum hunting content? Red flag.

Cane & Abel

bump's

Gravity

's vote for townie

Pastro

& proclaims it as a good read, trying to steer town down that path? Buddying up to town as well there?

textcat

typed "I haven't seen much of anything that I have found scummy yet" I hate to see that kind of comment. Just not trying?

Rudolf

townreads three players far too early for my liking.

Nice to see the spelling of my name isn't the only thing you can't manage to get right.

Let's be condescending and insinuate that there are actual legitimate issues with the post, and instead focus on a fluff point. Sorry, but there is no town motivation to doing that.

Also, I regret to tell that GGG's vote pattern makes very little sense if he's scum. (I've just examined it.)

Break it down for us.

At this point I feel fairly confident saying there is 2 scum in Anen/C+A/copper. Someone help me figure out which two it is.

[acryon]

I'm reluctant to vote copper because he is at least bringing a lot of content, so if he is the one who is town, then I certainly don't want to off him. That being said, my previous post shows I don't quite trust his judgment at the moment anyway, so:
VOTE: Copper

[acryon]

I'm beginning to lose faith in acryon honestly. Over half his posts today have been responding to or talking about copper (check his ISO, i actually lol'd at this) and his comments on all major suspects boil down to "ehhh" as far as I can tell.

@acryon:

1. Your last comment on 3G was about the apparent 'scumslip' and since then you've ignored him. Thoughts on him?
2. Meanwhile your last comment on IK was a mini case that seemed kind of unsure. Thoughts on that now, also in light of TTH's case?
3. I might've skimmed this but I've seen nothing on texcat. Thoughts?
4. You're actually voting copper for being wrong?

1. It became clear that it wasn't a scum-slip, so I'm unsure for now. When I saw it, it really pinged, but it's null. I'm generally unsure on him at the moment. I'll say that I dislike the wagon on him.
2. I really liked his early play, and definitely didn't think Constantine was scum either. Some of this newer stuff seems quite bad, but It more of moved him from a town-read to a null. Where my read progresses from there depends on where his play progresses.
3. I was questioning texcat in the hopes of gleaning some intent for the copper town-read, but that sort of got bungled. I'm honestly unsure at the moment, but would say I'm still a bit suspicious. Far from the top of my scum-reads though.
4. No. I said he is either wrong or scum. I'm believing that he is possibly the latter, so I'm voting to see where this goes. I vote for different reasons, but it's always to move toward my win condition, which in this case is a town-win.

That being said, my previous post shows I don't quite trust his judgment at the moment anyway, so:

This statement is terrible.
A. Basically says "I'm voting you because my previous post proves that I don't trust him" which is a significant difference from a simple "I don't trust him".
B. Lack of trust in someone's judgment is very different from outright denial that they can be right. This is the difference between a naive cop and an insane cop. I don't trust either of their results, but I outright deny the results of the insane one. So explain that leap of logic and how it leads you to voting copper please (I assume you vote your top scumreads).
C. As aforementioned, voting someone for being wrong is dumb.

A. Again, wrong. That's not why I'm voting him.
B. Not why I'm voting him.
C. Not why I'm voting him.

Also you, like so many people in this thread, aren't analysing the context of votes and are very conveniently forgetting that

it was close to the deadline

and copper delivered the hammer as a result. I'm not gonna pull a texcat and start ranting about how it's townish to hammer when 2o ther people were willing but come on, his being on the wagon is absolutely irrelevant to this wagon discussion since he really didn't need to be for it to go through and he wasn't a major pusher of it.

I disagree. He was on the wagon, and whether we choose to believe him or not, there were two other people with intent to hammer including one with a timed promise. It seems very silly to completely absolve him of any involvement on the wagon.

Lastly, have you considered that perhaps wagons that certain players are on get popular as a result of said players pushing it?

I would say that, except the vote order even tells you that it was not the same people pushing each wagon.

I wish we were in a neighborhood and I could just tell you where my head is at right now, but there are certain things I can't state explicitly at the moment, or it ruins the effectiveness of my game.

[acryon]

@Acryon
I presented my reason for joining or starting every push I made, picking two random players with similar voting patterns (not the same as you conveniently left out my Orcinus and IK votes and my early BMWS scumresd) is pretty scummy of you.

The point isn't general voting patterns. It's being on all of the 3 of the wagons that were closing in on a lynch. You're allowed to critique my thoughts, but critique them properly. This isn't about strictly sheeping.

By the same token you should scumread Aneninen for sheeping me all game, or Ollie for doing the same since he joined, why then did you select Copper and C+A in particular?

The reason I selected you and C+A doesn't apply to anyone else. But for what it's worth, I am scumreading Anen, but for different reasons. And you have to pick one person to vote for at a time, so you're it right now. Also Ollie is town.

[acryon]

@Acryon
1. Every active player at the time was on your wagon, I at least took the time to check you out but either PR or scum it affected your play and made you flippant compared tp your normal baseline.

I disagree. There is actually a game where I did a very similar tunnel on a player and was lynched by the town as a townie. Unfortunately, I didn't have a PR to protect me that time, but the player I was pushing turned scum several days later. So it's odd that you would refer to me as having a "normal baseline" when I did almost the exact same push in another game.

2. Your reasoning on the Rudi wagon is a joke.

Are you referring to

my

reason for being on the Rudi wagon? If so, why wouldn't you say something about that when it happened and not right now?

3. I initiated the push on GGG, I had no clue he would almost be lynched, might as well call my vote on IK opprtunistic.

I didn't say it was opportunistic. Generally scum do some pushing and they also take some opportunities. If you're scum, you're clearly no the type of player to do purely one or the other.

Frankly none of this bears replying to.

Sorry.

[acryon]

So, GGG's votes.

(1) 323 – NRG (now GoofBall. Maybe meta?)
(2) 388 – Aneninen (? – maybe because I was scumreading him, see later)
(3) 509 – Acryon (L–1, unvotes 14 posts later)
(4) 569 – Aneninen (says that I'm misrepping TexCat, as far as I can remember I simply misread the chat before)
(5) 574 – NRG (because of deadline, voting an inactive, unvotes 16 posts later because NRG replaces out, as far as I can remember)
(6) 925 – TexCat (because she's active lurking, the vote sheeps BooKitty)
(7) 1288 – Rudolph (deadline is closing)
(8) 1419 – TexCat (back to her)
(9) 1437 – MathDino (because Dino has no real cases and he's WIFOMing)
(10) 1597 – TexCat (back to her, L–2, jumps off MathDino because of meta)
(11) 1889 – Copper (a long chat with him before, is it a developing read?)

Even if I don't agree many of his cases and votes, I don't see how would this pattern make sense for a scum. (1) was a catchup, might have been genuine, (2) and (4) were more-or-less vanity votes, (3) might have come from a real FoS, (5) doesn't make sense at all, (6) (8) and (10) might have been soft-bussing but only if he's scum with TexCat. (9) and (11) might have been a simple OMGUS, just as (2).
I think he's simply OMGUS-ing everyone who builds a case against him which is not a strong play but not essentially a scumplay.

If he were/is scum, he could have produced better votes and I bet that in the scumchat he would have been warned by one of his buddies.

Opinions?

The problem I see is that your argument really requires the bold to be the case. The issue with that is that 1) there is a no day-talk, and 2) Only 1-7 happened on D1, and one was jsut for deadline reasons and 2 of them were on the same people that were already voted. So basically only votes on 4 different players, which isn't that ridiculous that it would be notable I don't think. I doubt this would be a topic of the scum-thread.

[acryon]

Acryon: they could have warned him via Nightchat too. But, apart from that, how would this pattern make sense at all? Remember, he's been a major suspect for ages and instead of voting for any of the counter-wagons he's been "off-ing" with his vote many times.

"Make sense" in what way? I will agree that his voting pattern may not be consistent and thus, doesn't seem to prescribe to "typical" scum-play, but that doesn't mean it isn't coming from scum. This would require A) only one way of voting and pushing to be a viable scum option, and B) GGG to be informed of this.

If you think that his voting pattern this game hasn't been supporting the scum-agenda, what actions from whom, do you think, has supported the scum-agenda this game? To be more clear, since you have stated that GGG's pattern seems to not fit what you're thinking, presumable someone has fit it better to base your model on.

[acryon]

C+A is just looking so scum to me right now. I mean, this post:

Let's be condescending and insinuate that there are actual legitimate issues with the post, and instead focus on a fluff point. Sorry, but there is no town motivation to doing that.

You're just parroting the point I made. My post contained a scum read of a dead player & Mathdino also shot it down. So I don't think with that in mind it can be used with any great conviction against C+A.

If you read through the thread, you'll see that C+A and I have some history, so accusing me of parroting is a little loose. And how wrong you are one what points doesn't take away the fact that it was a post that didn't help town. It would be more helpful for town for C+A to point out what was

actually

wrong with the post, which he didn't, regardless of how wrong you actually may have been.

I'm reluctant to vote copper because he is at least bringing a lot of content, so if he is the one who is town, then I certainly don't want to off him. That being said, my previous post shows I don't quite trust his judgment at the moment anyway, so:
VOTE: Copper

So you have three suspects but you want to go for the one who is doing the most scum hunting out of the three? You've also said you don't want rid of him as he's bringing alot of content but you're still happy to vote for him essentially because you disagree with his reads. I'm not saying that scum hunting clears people but obviously the scum typically want to take the biggest town pests out & keep the apathetic players around so they have an easy ride.

This post seems to imply that the only purpose of a vote is to lynch someone. If that is your implication, then you are mistaken. There will most likely be a more opportune time to place my vote on one of the others at a different time, but I think it's most useful where it's at right now.

VOTE: Acryon

Ugh, and I had high hopes for you.

[acryon]

If C+A's win-con involved telling people they were wrong without an explanation, then sure, that post furthered that win-con. It also furthers a scum win-con by making you, and your sum-read of him, look unreliable. The only win-con it doesn't support is the one where we want to find and lynch scum.

[acryon]

i also feel like acryon's reads are downside upward

Don't do this. Explain what your problem is. This crap does nothing for town.

[acryon]

my problem consists of
1. aneninen scumread, blegh
2. fencesitting every single major wagon
3. your copper vote still makes absolutely 0 sense to me considering the post before it consisted of talking about how he could be town but that you don't trust his judgment. distrusting his judgment =/= distrusting his alignment. case and point: me on ollie this game.

Of course. Any player could be town. But some of them have to be scum right? So I figured I would start by putting some pressure on copper and seeing what happens. I'm not voting him simply because I don't trust his judgment. I find his judgment to be either genuine and wrong, or scummy, and both are worthy of questioning IMO. A vote doesn't mean I would kill him in this moment. How have I sat the fence on "every single major wagon"? Obviously hyperbole, but barring my inactivity in my absence, this still seems way off.

[acryon]

I'm sorry to break it to you but I don't crave your acceptance, especially if I have to agree with you to get it lol.

Yes, but I wanted you to know you let me down anyway, and hopefully you would feel bad about it.

I also don't care about your history with C+A. Your post came after mine & that's the relevant thing here, it looks like opportunism. Like you're just collecting points to fit your agenda.

I am collecting points to fit my agenda, which is to lynch scum. I would hope you are doing the same.

I see, so you have so much conviction in your vote that you're already preparing to move it to someone else, despite all this history you have with C+A?

Again, the concept of what voting can do in this game appears to be lost on you.

I didn't say he was scum. It was just two notable things. I voted for him because of his reaction & backed off when I gained more of an understanding of why he may have reacted like that. It could just be a personality thing anyway.

But it was obvious there was suspicion there. People this game are

very

weirdly defensive of C+A. It really makes me wonder what is going on. Although the same thing happened in a previous game in a similar scenario and I was lynched while being right. Sheep will be sheep I suppose.

[acryon]

@acryon: i'm questioning if you just have a miscommunication problem in your pre-coppervotepost
i asked you questions about 3G, texcat, and Idiotking to see where you stood on the issues plaguing the rest of us
you basically gave nonanswers for all of them

I didn't think I gave nonanswers. If you were looking for me to say they are precisely town or scum, then I suppose you could say that. My primary reason for feeling off on GGG was the no-debunked scum-slip. My suspicion on IdiotKing never got to the point of outweighing the slot's previous towniness. If it gets there, that read will change. Texcat is just kind of hard to read. I have obviously disagreed with content from her, but she's just not pinging me nearly as hard as others are right now. I saw the wagons on each of those three, and I didn't/don't particularly care for any of them. I don't really think the cases out there on any of the three are particularly good. I think the IdiotKing cases aren't properly taking into account the whole slot. The GGG case hinges on things that I personally don't find malicious, and haven't seen good arguments for why they are scum-motivated. Texcat's only current votes are from IdiotKing and GGG, and neither have given particularly exciting reasons to join.

[acryon]

I will admit looking back, it sort of seems like you were asking "Hey what do you think of these three people?" and I said "Null, null null." Unfortunately, that's kind of close to where I am at with each, maybe leaning one way or the other a bit, but it

is

a bit deeper than that.

[acryon]

lol I would say the affect of voting for someone to pressurize them is somewhat lessened by announcing what you're doing, & saying that you intend to move your vote in the future.

This is an interesting point. I wonder if I've heard it somewhere.

I wish we were in a neighborhood and I could just tell you where my head is at right now, but there are certain things I can't state explicitly at the moment, or it ruins the effectiveness of my game.

At a certain point, however, keeping quiet and people being suspicious about it derails town more than my discreetness helps town. It was not my goal to announce it, but when everyone is directly questioning my intentions, it kind of becomes clear no matter which way I answer, doesn't it?

I think you've cracked it acryon everyone else left is scum, & you're the only townie left alive! Or an alternative view is that you may be going after him for the wrong reasons & you've become so invested in him that you now can't see the wood for trees. You could be right about him though. I'll keep my eyes open.

Obviously I'm not saying that's the case, or I would have kept my vote there yesterday, and be voting him and hard-pushing him right now. Anything is possible. I'm just noting that I've been right before in this exact situation, which I think is certainly notable.

[acryon]

Most players in this game aren't known for their subtlety, myself included sometimes.

[acryon]

TTH didn't seem to mind, and the method was her creation, so IDGAF what your opinion is.

And I don't care that one person for some reason felt compelled to accept your poor response, but it still sucked, and I felt obligated to make that clear when no one else did.

Nice bit of confbias you have, there. I'm an ass as either alignment.

That's not the issue. The issue is that plays of that kind are at best bad-town, and very possibly by scum.

[acryon]

Is the sarcasm really lost on everyone here?

I'll say I didn't catch it, because you did kind of drop it after that. It looked like you were sort of accepting that you were wrong on it, especially given your paranoia about your own reads sometimes.

[acryon]

TTH didn't seem to mind, and the method was her creation, so IDGAF what your opinion is.

And I don't care that one person for some reason felt compelled to accept your poor response, but it still sucked

In your opinion?

I like to think my opinions are purely objective, but that's not the case for anyone.

Nice bit of confbias you have, there. I'm an ass as either alignment.

That's not the issue. The issue is that plays of that kind are at best bad-town, and very possibly by scum.

And town should care which of the two it is, instead of have your attitude of lynching me with "at best bad town" as reason.

Bad town is still town.

Of course I care which is which, and I think it's scum. That comment was me telling you that that kind of play is bad town, so if you are town, then play to your win-con better.

[acryon]

Trying to measure me by some townie formula will not yield accurate results, and some folks have picked up on that while you are clinging to "only stereotypical town deserves to live", which is the source of a lot of mislynches in my experience.

I don't think I ever said that only stereotypical town deserves to live. I do think that only town that supports the town's win-con deserves to live, because if your action is fighting against our win-con or supporting another, you are probably scum. Simply unhelpful town don't deserve to die. But players that appear to be unhelpful town are usually one of two things: bad town or scum. You don't deserve to die for being the former, but you do for being the latter. Saying "you can't read me. I'm not your typical town" doesn't mean your play doesn't look inherently scum-motivated or anti-town.

[acryon]

Trying to measure me by some townie formula will not yield accurate results, and some folks have picked up on that while you are clinging to "only stereotypical town deserves to live", which is the source of a lot of mislynches in my experience.

I don't think I ever said that only stereotypical town deserves to live. I do think that only town that supports the town's win-con deserves to live, because if your action is fighting against our win-con or supporting another, you are probably scum. Simply unhelpful town don't deserve to die. But players that appear to be unhelpful town are usually one of two things: bad town or scum. You don't deserve to die for being the former, but you do for being the latter. Saying "you can't read me. I'm not your typical town" doesn't mean your play doesn't look inherently scum-motivated or anti-town.

Anti-town != scum, and is very subjective to playstyle

Since you don't like it, it's anti-town.

I didn't say anti-town = scum. I probably wouldn't have said "scum-motivated

or

anti-town" if I believed that. And it isn't really subjective to playstyle actually. Questioning someone furthers the town's win-con by creating reactions and gathering information. Shooting down arguments as being simply wrong without any reasoning, and choosing to comment on the only wrong thing that isn't relevant to the game fights against the town's win-con by discouraging an individual to contribute by being condescending and stifling discussion by painting an entire argument based on one piece of it. Doing things that are anti-town doesn't make you scum just like having blood on your hands doesn't make you a murderer, but it certainly makes you wonder and ask some questions.

[acryon]

@Acryon
If we were going to lynch based on bad play you should be dead either way, I also recognize being completly objective is impossible but you are off the charts. I can't quote posts but what are you going on about when quoting yourself and your play not being effective?

When Mathdino was asking me about my vote, I said I wished I could speak to him privately, because I didn't want to put my intentions on the table because I thought my play was more effective at that point without doing so. Ollie tried to call me out saying I nullified my effectiveness by explaining, and I was pointing him to a page earlier where I already agreed with him.

I am not in favor of lynching anyone because they are playing badly. I am in favor of lynching people that don't appear to be playing to the town's win-con (scum). And if that isn't a viable criterion for lynching, then what is?

[acryon]

@Acryon
So if you are doc you screwed town being so scummy D1 you had to claim, if you are VT and fake claiming that's also mafia sided, only if you are scum does your claim actually help your alignment, based on your criteria you should vote yourself first and foremost.

Or shall we lynch TTH because she was wrong on Rudi?

I don't even know if C+A is playing anti-town at the moment, he lurked for a lot of D2 and that is certainly not pro town but if GGG is scum he is actually very strongly townsided, your accusations make less and less sense to me.

Obviously I didn't think I was being scummy. I was pushing a case on who I thought was scum, which is town-motivated and was working toward a town win-con. That people disagreed enough to think I was scum is certainly not something I expected (and beyond terrible, but that's all I'll say on that).

Being wrong is not scummy. Pushing someone that turns out to be town also doesn't make you scum, although it is a piece of evidence that can help put the puzzle together. Actively stopping discussion without giving proper reasons is, at best, anti-town, and most likely scummy.

Again, no. If GGG is scum, then C+A should be pushing him harder, or doing something to work toward the lynch. It's stupid to say a person is scum, drop a vote, and walk away. That's part of it, but the other part is working together with town to figure it out. This is a team game. Asking some more questions, asking what other people feel about him. Sitting by and making comments, but not actually progressing the town's win-con is not town-sided.