Newbie 1625: American Spring - Day 5 (DL - 08/31)

[fferyllt]

Vote Count 1.4

MEAN TWEETS

VeeGee

(1): notscience

HenryCabotLodge

(1): Thespio

Thespio

(1): Micc

Not Voting

(6): JoramvanVugt, VeeGee, stoz, HenryCabotLodge, StubbsKVM, Akuseru

With 9 alive, it takes 5 to lynch

Deadline: July 19, Midnight US Eastern Time.

Countdown: (expired on 2015-07-18 21:00:00)

Mod Notes:

-

[Micc]

Spoiler: Akuseru's Post 30

Mostly I want to know what pinged scummy in post 30 and why it was worthy of a vote?

HenryCabotLodge

Immidate vote for no reason indicates town at this point but does not clear them as town.
#30 makes me think they are more scum leaning, so I will be ok if we lynch him.

Where exactly in his post makes you think he might be scum?

He is justifying his random vote, when in truth there is no justification because its random, at the same time he is claiming he is bandwagon while he is actually the one who started the bandwagon. I find this scummy.

yeah....I'm not exacltly satisfied with that answer.

@Thespio: Why is HenryCabotLodge more likely to be scum because he tried to justify his random vote? Why do you think his post 30 was justification for his random vote as opposed to an answer to notscience's game theorey question? Are you trying to suggest that HenryCabotLodge said he was being bandwagoned?

It is natural to want your strongest scumread to be lynched, but we're not far out of the random vote stage and people have mostly posted only in vague generalities- like I've said, seems reckless to me and an early lynch without much to go on would be something I think scum would push for.

What makes it more likely to be scum gunning for an early mislynch than town agressivly pressuring in order to get a stronger read? Why is the scum motivation more likely than the town motivation?

---

RE to roleclaim discussion: Claims generally happen at L-1 (one vote from being lynched) on this site. Personally I don't have a problem with anyone pushing a wagon to get more votes and reach a claim even this early in the game. Without wagons its tough to get strong reads. Day 1 claims before L-1 are bad and shouldn't happen. I don't think thats what Jordamvanvugt was suggesting though.

[VeeGee]

I think I'll VOTE: NotScience for now

[Micc]

Why?

[notscience]

I can think of a 5 letter answer~

[Thespio]

Thoughts?

I'm not a newbie.

Does green mean "town" and is yellow "null"? On your read of Joram, you say: no reason to think scum. However, you give no reason for reading him town.

Other than that, I am amazed at how fast you develop reads.

Yellow is suspicious, red is bad, Green is nuetral.

Thanks, I think.

[Thespio]

Thoughts?

I'm not a newbie.

Does green mean "town" and is yellow "null"? On your read of Joram, you say: no reason to think scum. However, you give no reason for reading him town.

Other than that, I am amazed at how fast you develop reads.

Thespio-
Re: Veegee- Why would scum be stressed after 2 votes in RVS, the second of which everyone else jumps on? In fact, he had a very subdued 'yeah, what he said' comment after it. That looks rather stressed.

Nah, he didnt freak out, so it wont strike against him.

Re: Me- Sharing reasons for voting someone makes me scummy? And being defensive is null, it's a matter of playstyle. But, whatever.

This 'Playstyle' is anti-town, and also unproductive, so more scum then town.

re: Akuseru- Why do you keep calling it a random lynch? I've repeatedly stated my vote is serious. What about his play seems "genuinely town" and what makes you think hes only scum if veegee is scum?

I said if he is scum so is veegee, not the other way around, he jumped to veegee's safety immediately, he is also more cautious which is pro town.

Re Micc: "too calm?" He only has his generic IC intro and a promsie to catch up. I don't see how this can even be a thing.

Are you vouching for him? because i didnt call him scum, but his posts make me nervous, more gut feeling than anything, as I stated.

If you arent opposed to HenryCabotLodge then lynching him shouldnt be an issue.

more cautious is pro town? Doesn't scum tend to be more afraid of being lynched, and therefore more cautious?

Generally yea, but caution is only a sign of scum when they shift to it when under pressure.

[Thespio]

Spoiler: Akuseru's Post 30

Mostly I want to know what pinged scummy in post 30 and why it was worthy of a vote?

HenryCabotLodge

Immidate vote for no reason indicates town at this point but does not clear them as town.
#30 makes me think they are more scum leaning, so I will be ok if we lynch him.

Where exactly in his post makes you think he might be scum?

He is justifying his random vote, when in truth there is no justification because its random, at the same time he is claiming he is bandwagon while he is actually the one who started the bandwagon. I find this scummy.

yeah....I'm not exacltly satisfied with that answer.

@Thespio: Why is HenryCabotLodge more likely to be scum because he tried to justify his random vote? Why do you think his post 30 was justification for his random vote as opposed to an answer to notscience's game theorey question? Are you trying to suggest that HenryCabotLodge said he was being bandwagoned?

It is natural to want your strongest scumread to be lynched, but we're not far out of the random vote stage and people have mostly posted only in vague generalities- like I've said, seems reckless to me and an early lynch without much to go on would be something I think scum would push for.

What makes it more likely to be scum gunning for an early mislynch than town agressivly pressuring in order to get a stronger read? Why is the scum motivation more likely than the town motivation?

---

RE to roleclaim discussion: Claims generally happen at L-1 (one vote from being lynched) on this site. Personally I don't have a problem with anyone pushing a wagon to get more votes and reach a claim even this early in the game. Without wagons its tough to get strong reads. Day 1 claims before L-1 are bad and shouldn't happen. I don't think thats what Jordamvanvugt was suggesting though.

He seems to forget that he was the first to post a vote, if you notice he does it again on page 2, He is trying to shift the circumstances of his vote. Also, If you have an issue with me sharing my opinion about everyone then you are to sensitive to be playing a game. You still urk me though, Less based on post and more based on the spirit of your posts, you attack me for saying I see something as scummy, not only does this hurt town because we can no longer consider everyone opinions but it also pulls from towns interactions.

You what to know what pings scummy specifically?

The first part of his post in 30 justifies how we should just follow along with a random lynch, and the second half indicates that we shouldn't look at his post as though he is town or scum because they all play different.

Then in his post #63 he supports a bandwagon by saying:

A wagon with nothing to go on is different from one predicated one somebody building a case or whatever, but pressure is still pressure and it forces people to have opinions.

and yet bellow it recants and says:

I unvoted VeeGee because it's silly to have a random vote at this point

If cannot say in all honesty that he doesnt look scummy.

I agree that claims are not a D1 thing, But chances are all but 1-2 of us will say Vanilla townie, because the loadout on page one indicates that at most there can be 2 non-vanilla roles.

[Thespio]

Stoz

Spoiler:

Stoz is active and cautious which is good and what I expect from a Town member, He hasn't given any scum indicators away.

[Thespio]

It is natural to want your strongest scumread to be lynched, but we're not far out of the random vote stage and people have mostly posted only in vague generalities- like I've said, seems reckless to me and an early lynch without much to go on would be something I think scum would push for.

Its what you pushed for!

A wagon with nothing to go on is different from one predicated one somebody building a case or whatever, but pressure is still pressure and it forces people to have opinions

Then you post:

I see some flimsy reads and unhelpful theorizing on how scum play

after you theorize!

[Thespio]

And you did it post it then either?

Posted it later, I said I was dead because I left work, my spread sheet is at my work. Posted it here:

Stoz

Spoiler:

Stoz is active and cautious which is good and what I expect from a Town member, He hasn't given any scum indicators away.

[JoramvanVugt]

VOTE: HenryCabotLodge

Im voting for you.
You start the game by random voting a person that says hi but then later in the game you unvote and say a random lynch is stupid even though you are the one that started all of this.
It seems like your opinion changes with every post. first you want a random lynch then you talk about people starting a random bandwaggon even though you were the one to start it. idk you just seem to suspicious to me.
If you were playing in my last game on another forum you would already be dead by now. somebody would have daykilled you already

[Thespio]

I can think of a 5 letter answer~

Scum is 4 letters... what is are the 5 letters?

[HenryCabotLodge]

Thespio, please cite where I pushed for a random lynch. I placed a random vote, since it was the random voting stage of the game. If you're not familiar, that's when people cast random votes. This game is unusual in that it moved out of that stage very quickly. I did advocate early bandwagons, but never lynches. There's a difference between the two- a bandwagon does not always end in a lynch.

It is natural to want your strongest scumread to be lynched, but we're not far out of the random vote stage and people have mostly posted only in vague generalities- like I've said, seems reckless to me and an early lynch without much to go on would be something I think scum would push for.

Its what you pushed for!

A wagon with nothing to go on is different from one predicated one somebody building a case or whatever, but pressure is still pressure and it forces people to have opinions

Then you post:

I see some flimsy reads and unhelpful theorizing on how scum play

after you theorize!

So you have a problem with me giving a legitimate reason for having an early bandwagon? My "theorizing" was a direct response to another player asking me my opinion. It's different from the people who posted "I think scum will play like such and such" of their own accord. Don't draw an equivalence.

VOTE: HenryCabotLodge

Im voting for you.
You start the game by random voting a person that says hi but then later in the game you unvote and say a random lynch is stupid even though you are the one that started all of this.
It seems like your opinion changes with every post. first you want a random lynch then you talk about people starting a random bandwaggon even though you were the one to start it. idk you just seem to suspicious to me.
If you were playing in my last game on another forum you would already be dead by now. somebody would have daykilled you already

Yes I started a game by random voting in the random voting stage. If you're unfamiliar, that's the stage where we cast random votes. You must have had a town of clairvoyants if they would've lynched me on page 4. Though I doubt their abilities if they're swayed by your arguments.

It looks there's some confusion in what I wanted as far as the bandwagon. I did not want to lynch somewhere at random and I don't think anything I've said has indicated otherwise. My vote (which has been off for like 3 posts no2) was at random. I cast it in the random voting stage. If you're not familiar, that's where random votes are cast. In my (limited) experience, an early bandwagon on a player is a good way to get out of the random voting stage and spur real discussion and rarely, if ever, ends up in a lynch. A lynch based off a random vote bandwagon is stupid. Speaking of stupid, I found it interesting how JoramanVugt basically aped all of Thespio's arguments against me (with the edifying addition of "idk you just seem to suspicious to me"). Could be a possible connection there.

[Thespio]

Thespio, please cite where I pushed for a random lynch. I placed a random vote, since it was the random voting stage of the game. If you're not familiar, that's when people cast random votes. This game is unusual in that it moved out of that stage very quickly. I did advocate early bandwagons, but never lynches. There's a difference between the two- a bandwagon does not always end in a lynch.

It is natural to want your strongest scumread to be lynched, but we're not far out of the random vote stage and people have mostly posted only in vague generalities- like I've said, seems reckless to me and an early lynch without much to go on would be something I think scum would push for.

Its what you pushed for!

A wagon with nothing to go on is different from one predicated one somebody building a case or whatever, but pressure is still pressure and it forces people to have opinions

Then you post:

I see some flimsy reads and unhelpful theorizing on how scum play

after you theorize!

So you have a problem with me giving a legitimate reason for having an early bandwagon? My "theorizing" was a direct response to another player asking me my opinion. It's different from the people who posted "I think scum will play like such and such" of their own accord. Don't draw an equivalence.

Ok so I'll Start at the beginning:

1st - You Random vote:

Spoiler:

VOTE: VeeGee

I don't care for your tone.

2nd - You attempt to justify random bandwagons:

Spoiler:

I expect bandwagoning for its own sake to work because there are different reactions to a bandwagon that we can work through as a town. We can see who hops on opportunistically, we can see who opposes it, we can see who posts a thesis on the legitimacy of the bandwagon, etc.- the point is that bandwagoning is a viable, and beneficial, way to get out of RVS. I'm not sure how beneficial it is to meticulously dissect the very first post by a player in the game that amounts to nothing more than a simple greeting.

3rd - You tell us not to analyze behavior:

Spoiler:

I think everybody has different views as to what "townie", "neutral", and "scummy" play is. I don't think it does much good to get bogged down in semantics and personal definitions. I think the only thing that works in a game like this is finding logical inconsistencies and examining voting patterns. You can do any amount of intellectual gymnastics to make any person's play seem townie or scummy.

4th - You tell us bandwagons are good:

Spoiler:

A wagon with nothing to go on is different from one predicated one somebody building a case or whatever, but pressure is still pressure and it forces people to have opinions.

5th - You tell us Random Voting is bad and recant, thus closing your random bandwagon:

Spoiler:

I unvoted VeeGee because it's silly to have a random vote at this point

6th - You try to justify your actions 1-5

Spoiler:

See quote at top of this post

And on top of it all you tell us not to theorize and do it yourself, but its you so you claim its justified. Please make up your mind what you believe, overall the inconsistency seems scummy. You swap views super fast and this is anti-town.

Thus my vote will remain:

VOTE: HenryCabotLodge

[Thespio]

It looks there's some confusion in what I wanted as far as the bandwagon. I did not want to lynch somewhere at random and I don't think anything I've said has indicated otherwise. My vote (which has been off for like 3 posts no2) was at random. I cast it in the random voting stage. If you're not familiar, that's where random votes are cast. In my (limited) experience, an early bandwagon on a player is a good way to get out of the random voting stage and spur real discussion and rarely, if ever, ends up in a lynch. A lynch based off a random vote bandwagon is stupid. Speaking of stupid, I found it interesting how JoramanVugt basically aped all of Thespio's arguments against me (with the edifying addition of "idk you just seem to suspicious to me"). Could be a possible connection there.

Or someone else sees the logic behind my reads, you come across very scummy especially since you have nothing showing us you are town and even more saying you are inconsistent and support random bandwagons. Of course you dont like me im leading a charge against you! if you didnt it would be suspicious, although you deflecting still adds to the suspicion.

[StubbsKVM]

Veegee reads? anyone wanna actually post reads?

can you respond to 46 please?

[Thespio]

Generally yea, but caution is only a sign of scum when they shift to it when under pressure.

I did...

[StubbsKVM]

@Akuseru, what are your scum reads so far?

Don't really have any definite scum reads atm, tbh . I've been excusing (what I consider) a couple of scum slips as possible newbie behaviour. Hopefully, as they post more, I can make a better decision on where they lie (ie: Mafia or Just New).


I would also appreciate it if StubbsKVM would post more. I was kinda disappointed when, after a wait, you only posted some comments and disappeared again.


@VeeGee: You're lacking in presence, dear.

I was also disappointed that Thespio had completely ignored all of my points. This raises a few question marks... Care to comment on it, Thespio?

[StubbsKVM]

Thoughts?

I'm not a newbie.

Does green mean "town" and is yellow "null"? On your read of Joram, you say: no reason to think scum. However, you give no reason for reading him town.

Other than that, I am amazed at how fast you develop reads.

Yellow is suspicious, red is bad, Green is nuetral.

Thanks, I think.

which color is town?

[StubbsKVM]

Generally yea, but caution is only a sign of scum when they shift to it when under pressure.

I did...

you did. I am posting as I read through, so if I look back, I can see what I was thinking at that time.

Anyway, I think the case on Henry is a bit thin, but considering there is not much else going on, I suppose it's fine for now.

However, Joram makes some really questionable posts. I think he's not yet fully aware of this site's habits though, so I will play nice.

UNVOTE: notscience

im not gonna vote untill i see something thats really scummy/suspicious my vote on not science was because he voted on someone for no reason at all. but my vote should probably have been on HCL

vote tags fixed - f

Why have you not commented about anything HCL had done up to this post. Even in this post, you're mentioning your vote should have been on HCL, but you don't even say why.
Additionally, you unvote notscience. Why? Is it because of his posts, or because he wasn't "scummy enough to vote"?

After this post, you start discrediting HCL, but it still takes quite a long time before you effectively vote for him. Why didn't you switch your vote to him in this post?

[Thespio]

@Akuseru, what are your scum reads so far?

Don't really have any definite scum reads atm, tbh . I've been excusing (what I consider) a couple of scum slips as possible newbie behaviour. Hopefully, as they post more, I can make a better decision on where they lie (ie: Mafia or Just New).


I would also appreciate it if StubbsKVM would post more. I was kinda disappointed when, after a wait, you only posted some comments and disappeared again.


@VeeGee: You're lacking in presence, dear.

I was also disappointed that Thespio had completely ignored all of my points. This raises a few question marks... Care to comment on it, Thespio?

What points? you are attributing things to people being new? or the fact StubbsKVM hasn't been posting? Sorry if i missed something but i dont see anything explicitly aimed at me.

[Thespio]

Thoughts?

I'm not a newbie.

Does green mean "town" and is yellow "null"? On your read of Joram, you say: no reason to think scum. However, you give no reason for reading him town.

Other than that, I am amazed at how fast you develop reads.

Yellow is suspicious, red is bad, Green is nuetral.

Thanks, I think.

which color is town?

At this point there are no confirmed town, when we do I will change them to blue.

[Akuseru]

I'm having a hard time following your thought process, Thespio.

Correct me if I'm misunderstanding, but you believe scummy behaviour includes:

1. Not defending yourself

Spoiler:

Or someone else sees the logic behind my reads, you come across very scummy especially since you have nothing showing us you are town and even more saying you are inconsistent and support random bandwagons. Of course you dont like me im leading a charge against you!

if you didnt it would be suspicious

, although you deflecting still adds to the suspicion.

2. Defending yourself

Spoiler:

Or someone else sees the logic behind my reads, you come across very scummy especially since you have nothing showing us you are town and even more saying you are inconsistent and support random bandwagons. Of course you dont like me im leading a charge against you! if you didnt it would be suspicious,

although you deflecting still adds to the suspicion.

3. Switching to cautious behaviour

Spoiler:

Generally yea, but

caution is only a sign of scum when they shift to it when under pressure.

In other words, not matter what HenryCabotLodge says or does at this point, they'll just be piling on your suspicions?





Also, based on your reads earlier (again, correct me if I'm misunderstanding), neutral/non-scummy behaviour includes

1. Not directly responding to votes against you (ie: ignore them)

Spoiler:

VeeGee
Spoiler:
Is not Stressed under Random Lynch from first post. Soft claims Town…

2. Make a vote, but make sure you don't support it with a reason

Spoiler:

JoramvanVugt
Spoiler:
Not a very supported vote, I want an reason. #10, but no reason to think they are scum.

[Thespio]

I'm having a hard time following your thought process, Thespio.

Correct me if I'm misunderstanding, but you believe scummy behaviour includes:

1. Not defending yourself

Spoiler:

Or someone else sees the logic behind my reads, you come across very scummy especially since you have nothing showing us you are town and even more saying you are inconsistent and support random bandwagons. Of course you dont like me im leading a charge against you!

if you didnt it would be suspicious

, although you deflecting still adds to the suspicion.

2. Defending yourself

Spoiler:

Or someone else sees the logic behind my reads, you come across very scummy especially since you have nothing showing us you are town and even more saying you are inconsistent and support random bandwagons. Of course you dont like me im leading a charge against you! if you didnt it would be suspicious,

although you deflecting still adds to the suspicion.

3. Switching to cautious behaviour

Spoiler:

Generally yea, but

caution is only a sign of scum when they shift to it when under pressure.

In other words, not matter what HenryCabotLodge says or does at this point, they'll just be piling on your suspicions?





Also, based on your reads earlier (again, correct me if I'm misunderstanding), neutral/non-scummy behaviour includes

1. Not directly responding to votes against you (ie: ignore them)

Spoiler:

VeeGee
Spoiler:
Is not Stressed under Random Lynch from first post. Soft claims Town…

2. Make a vote, but make sure you don't support it with a reason

Spoiler:

JoramvanVugt
Spoiler:
Not a very supported vote, I want an reason. #10, but no reason to think they are scum.

1&2: in 1 im more saying: If you wanted us to lynch you it would be suspicious, But either way its not defending that seems scummy its why and how. If someone is paniced and begins trying to defend themselves and shift attention away from themselves then they seem scummy. People reacting calmly is fine and indicates discipline but we are in a newb lobby so i dont expect everyone to have this down.

3: this is an indicator, if someone is constantly swapping views then they are hurting town, and look scummy to me.

1.a) again he reacts to being lynched calmly, which usually indicated there isnt much to hide.

2.a) If you actually read what I said you would see im saying I want to know why they voted in #10, I never said they were scum because of it, in fact i said it didnt indicate they were scum.