Mini 1752: Back to December (Game Over)

[Aj The Epic]

VOTE: Elyse

Happy belated new years.

[Aj The Epic]

VOTE: Alchemist

I feel like for your next post you'll declare there to be no scum in this game. You waited until MattP told you his plan was more or less flawed to address Elyse's post which came before you started talking to Mattp. You more or less stamped out any chance of a wagon from occurring even though the first wagon is the best way to get out of RVS or anything resembling it. More importantly, nothing you asked or gained affected anything to do with Elyse's reason for voting (thinking Matt used a NK and then NK analysis to frame llama). I know it's odd to use an argument "Oh you don't have a scumread on page 2" but your nonchalant and unassuming attitude thus far bothers me.

[Aj The Epic]

None of the things he posted are even inherently scummy. The only legitimate argument for alchemist-scum is that he's trying to hard to look busy, but that could just be his nature. Everything Aj listed isn't alignment indicative.

Nothing individually has to be inherently scummy, but that's not to say that in total what he did was odd for town. Why not address Elyse first if there's no reasonable response you'd make that would anything he'd say to Elyse? The only way your response to Alchemist would affect Elyse's "you are framing Llama" vote is if you openly admitted to doing so. And the question of 'do you have any logic to back this up' is a stacked question meant to derail all chances of that wagon happening. Of course no one can manage to have the logic for a wagon this early, especially with Llamas not even posting. No initial wagon has sound logic, and he should know that.

Here's the thing: if alchemist is town, 11 explains what you're trying to do in full. The questions that could be asked is "Why not x person for the kill?" or Elyse's response of "You're framing". Either of these questions help draw the game out of RVS because now there's a counter accusation. Even a vote for llama in that situation is a better response unless he legitimately does not feel comfortable with your vote, in which case he should be voting for you. His question of "do you have any logic" is just counterproductive to your stated intention: Bringing the game out of rvs.

[Aj The Epic]

You think he's scummy because he didn't appreciate the routes presented to get us out of RVS? Him engaging me about that concern technically begins moving us out of RVS. And even so, it's so not a big deal if we leave RVS on page one or page 3, you're acting like it's so scummy if someone is counterproductive and you're not even considering the thing we are talking about here is a silly wagon that gets us out of RVS. He wasn't being unproductive about something like setup or NK spec, or something actually that important

My general first objective in a game is to get out of RVS as soon as possible, not as policy but because I dislike RVS. I understand that it was a stupid wagon, but the entire premise from your end would be the wagon is justified for the responses you get. Alchemist took the route of asking questions that were counterproductive and that to me is an issue because I see no reason for why he wanted to be that way or what town-Alchemist gains by asking these questions. And our priorities must be out of sync because I really don't consider setup spec that important, and your 'silly RVS wagon' WAS based on NK spec.

I felt like finishing my interaction with Matt before addressing Elyse's post. Deal with it. Matt gave what I thought was a serious reason for his vote, as I can see a person believing that, and I wanted him to back it up.

My line of thinking was that for Llama to have been the likely enough goto NK that his survival meant he's scum, that would have to mean

A) Most or all of the playerlist knows Llama as a strong Town player.
B) Scum would have reason to believe that a Town Llama with that kind of reputation wouldn't be getting doc protection.

I was waiting for Matt to explain how his logic held up, and then I'd be able to better determine if it would be feasible given A and B.

I was trying to learn his thought process to try and read him. For things somewhat related to our interaction, I concluded he was Town. Now if you think my attempt at getting a read on another player is counterproductive, then you better tell me what you consider productive for a Town player.

This player list is good enough to skip RVS, right?

I think his entire intention was summed up right here, well before you started asking him questions.

But my question to you then is do you see A or B as a reasonable reason to start a wagon or enough for suspicion of Llama to be scum? Neither of these options in my eyes are enough to show Llama has any more chance of anyone else to be scum simply out of Wifom and the arguments aren't a real reason. I get the feeling, however, that you assume either A or B COULD suggest Llama as scum. But on the next page, you stated that anyone agreeing with the wagon would be possible scum.

I think I'm done with Matt for now. I want to address this post:

Orrrrrrrrr

You specifically didn't kill Llama so you could use that excuse to vote him

VOTE: MattP

Elyse, scum trying to frame someone with the NK usually aren't going to push the logic themselves. They wait for Town to pick up on it and then agree with the Townie who says it. If I thought anyone was trying to frame Llama, I'd probably wait to see who agreed with the first one to post the logic.

GIVEN YOUR PREMISE, aren't you saying that there are conditions for you to agree with that wagon?

However, the first issue here is your premise doesn't include yourself: You state you're trying to learn Matt's thought process, suggesting you haven't played with him or at least not much. Then isn't the first question null and void (have you played with everyone on this list)? Did you think anything of the RVS statement?

[Aj The Epic]

I think if it could be shown that A and B were reasonably possible, then I could see the case for Llama scum. When he said "good enough to skip RVS" it made me think his vote wasn't RVS. And you need to stop twisting my words around - I asked how many he had played with before, not have you played with everyone before. If he had played with a vast majority of the playerlist it would have lended more credibility to assumption A.

Forgive me for construing that, then. This still doesn't answer my question about the contradiction between your response to Elyse and the conditions that you would accept it possible Llama could be scum.

[Aj The Epic]

Like the Rask vote a little more than Elyse since he is being a bit more coy in using the "overdefensive" false tell and is misusing OMGUS to seemingly try to force a vote. That and he didn't answer my first question about the odd timing of his vote.

No one has voted Rask, or are you just saying that it's the better of the two to go after?

^Slightly odd, but I can kinda see that coming from Town.

Self-meta is pretty common town or scum. It's more a player-dependent thing on whether or not they do it.

I feel like scum-elyse is a shade-thrower over an active accuser. I think her post was more just wrong/lack of knowledge as opposed to scum.

VOTE: TkoE

The entire post just doesn't mesh well. Mostly what Matt has already stated, but the last line is a huge issue. "I don't like what I'm reading" isn't good enough, needs to have a reason and example behind it other than "yeah all of it p.much sucks".

[Aj The Epic]

I'm not too happy with the Elyse wagon thus far. I had thought it just spurred up but the votes have been sitting there all game (besides CKD). On the wagon, Supreme Overlord is the primary offender of 'your vote is seriously outdated'. While I understand a bit of where PetroleumJelly is coming from, I read the first post basically tone deaf and didn't see it as condescending. Certainly wouldn't make sense considering VTs have no way to block NKs anyways.

CKD's vote:

Scum tend to be more defensive because they have something to hide.

bullshit. that is also like saying over reacting is scummy. which is also bullshit.

vote Elyse.

I have seen scum use this way too many times to push bad wagons OR meaningless reason to get on/stay on a wagon. there is no way you really believe this. have you ever seen town be "too defensive"? the whole term itself is subjective.

this is your first scum.

Just doesn't sit well. First off, there is truth there: NEW scum tend to be more defensive. People who are bad at scum tend to be more defensive. If you get caught lying easily, it's definitely a trend. In total, I think it's a flimsy-at-best reason to vote Elyse. CKD picked a difference in theory as the baseline for a vote. Yeah he's correct, but I still don't see it warranting this response.

Supreme is still the worst offender of overstaying a questionable/early vote with no future support to that in his iso. Two sentences towards Elyse on 'have you been scumhunting at all; and not pressing any farther doesn't constitute. Probably scum, given his weak stances all around. To see this as the primary wagon thus far is a bit egregious, since it's creeping along for no real reason outside Jelly's trend spotting.

[Aj The Epic]

I think it was explained well enough in my last post: I was referring to Elyse stating that scum are over-defensive.

[Aj The Epic]

I think it was a bad vote. While it will help in a future case, I'm not going to say you're scum because of it,

[Aj The Epic]

You should've pressed it as false logic as opposed to voting outright.

[Aj The Epic]

Elyse, what benefit do I gain from buddying you? You'd be the easiest lynch to dump on if I was scum because frankly buddying you wouldn't really get me that far.

[Aj The Epic]

I think it's perfectly valid to ask that question, even if you think it's wifom. I'm not going to pretend that I can't see the risk/reward of scum in this situation. If as scum a situation doesn't benefit me, I don't take it. And I wouldn't be taking up an unfavorable position to my own wincon and the current town's perspective for something as small an 'advantage' as wifom. I think my post attacking Elyse's wagon says more than what you expect the stereotypical response to be.

[Aj The Epic]

Defending town as scum is a very good move though. Im not above trying to defend town early as scum if the case is bad, especially if you can just turn it around on who is attacking them if its a town driven wagon.

And yet I keep my vote on someone unrelated to it as opposed to attacking and hold that CKD's vote was bad, not him himself.

However, I try to actively derail bad wagons. If you wanted me to give you meta, my last 3? Maybe four. town games have started with me heavily defending a townie. In 2 they still got lynched, though in both we turned the correct lynch the next day. One was a multi-lynch no-flip game and I sought out two scum d1 and got one lynched after the townie one died for what honestly was the worst case of VI ever.

But what you seem to agree with me, though, is that Elyse is town. In your post, you state specifically that you aren't above defending town as scum. You suggest I'm buddying Elyse, not defending a scum partner. So I feel that in this, your opinion as well would be that the Elyse wagon is not worth it or bad. And thus the entire point of what I did.

[Aj The Epic]

I don't buy that at all, to be honest. Considering I was responding to this:

As far as AJ goes, I could see him as scum. A lot of his responses seem stilted and awkward to me and he could be buddying me.

It is perfectly warranted to try and show that line of thought is not correct.

Is stated my reason in 97 for the second. I didn't think pursuing alchemist was the right path to take so I dropped it.

[Aj The Epic]

Defensive? I doubt you realize what that word means because it applies to nothing in that post. I'm pointing out why my actions are valid and that I do this all the time.

Me analyzing thing from a scum perspective as town?
http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.ph ... 7#p7349887
http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.ph ... 3#p7376693

This is why I don't understand the bullshit of 'Oh looking at things from a scum perspective is bullshit." No, that's 100% how I think in games so I can find what a scum would do.


Rask's vote is also bad. Just sitting one in there to be a part of a wagon. In the comfortable slot right in the middle and hoping it becomes popular enough that no one will notice him. In fact, his iso only has neutral or positive things to say about me. His sudden change for no reason could very easily be coming from scum.

[Aj The Epic]

When Alchemist addresses Elyse: Mostly flow. On page 2, you do have to nitpick a bit, but it made no sense to have to get a full answer from Matt on something unrelated before responding to Elyse. I think he was trying to determine whether or not he wanted a wagon on Mattp and thus waited until after he got the answer to determine he didn't. However, I still think the proper way would've been to address Elyse first or during the conversation with Matt.

It isn't the only way, but the quickest way. There was no reason to expose it when it could've given good information.

I can't explain a lot with Elyse because the games I have with her are ongoing. The meta reads were done in these games to check what her scum play was like. Throwing shade is suggesting someone is guilty but doing so in an obscure manner without acting on it.

Wrong/not scum: This is from the theory post "scum are defensive". As stated by CKD, it isn't true. However, just because Elyse is wrong in this doesn't make her scum nor does it justify a vote. I think Elyse is transparent enough a player to read and think she's town if not solely because reason 1. The more direct she is in her statements, the more likely she is to be town.

Because CKD is voting solely because of difference in theory, which while Elyse is incorrect, is not going to affect the state of the game. I felt alchemist's proceedings were against the benefit of the town by asking questions that didn't accelerate drawing the game out of RVS. To me, these two situations are not similar simply due to the implications behind either one. Elyse being wrong about how scum act may influence her vote, but alchemist's proceeding affected the state of the game.



The difference between then/now is information. When I find someone else I believe is scum, it will look a lot like the case on Alchemist but probably more logic. It's fairly predictable that the more sure you are someone is scum, the more 'set in stone' your style becomes. Was a bit of it feigned? Sure. But I wanted to push it as hard as I could because I thought I had something. Right now, I don't so I'm waiting until I see something I want to pursue. That's really all there is to it.

And to the last point, my last post showed two games where I did the exact thing I did with Elyse.

[Aj The Epic]

The wagon speed in concurrence with AJ's posts seems natural. I don't think any of the jumps were such except maybe Rask.

You and Matt are scummy individually and have ties, so yes that's 1-2-3 scum. I'm just that good.

There are two, as I will get to. PJ and Rask both have bad votes. As for wagon speed, over real life days I'd say it was natural. However via content/pages in here, it certainly isn't. Remember that I had 2 votes on me last page. Then, with a few hour separation:

Unvote: Elyse

Vote: Aj The Epic

VOTE: AJ L-3

Both of these votes are terrible. As I explained earlier, Rask's vote is obviously bad considering:

You still didn't really answer why you decided to vote there instead of your previous vote (or even why you voted Alch). Something changed and I want to know what actually changed.

Because first vote was pure RVS whereas this was partially-serious after what AJ said, which seemed like the first thing of some substance up to that point in the game. If you look at the game before the post previous to that vote (30) there was just a pretty silly exchange between Elyse and Matt which I didn't see as that serious at the time (17,18,20).

Context being his second post voted for Alchemist, where he states that the first substantive exchange of posts occurred. Essentially, this post signals he agrees with me since he also voted with me initially.

Maybe I'm giving AJ too much credit but I thought he exaggerated on purpose to try to bring the game out of RVS.

And in his next post, votes for one of the people voting for me.

Then suddenly wants the wagon on me? It's a very obvious jump in logic that exists here.

VOTE: Raskolnikov

I also already explained why I disliked the Elyse wagon, which PJ was apart of.

While I understand a bit of where PetroleumJelly is coming from, I read the first post basically tone deaf and didn't see it as condescending. Certainly wouldn't make sense considering VTs have no way to block NKs anyways.

So here's the thing: There is multiple ways you can interpret this:

2.) Since I did not like Elyse's first post ("Poor Marquis"), I decided to check up on her use of the phrase "poor [player]" in case it was a thing she often says when players die. It is not, unless she varies her phrasing. I found two other instances, though:

~ a.) Mini #1584, Elyse is Werewolf, taunting protown player in endgame ("Poor Aneninen").
~ b.) Mini #1596, Elyse is Mafia, taunting protown player in midgame ("Poor thing, sorry you got caught").

I would guess Elyse has a habit of taunting / antagonizing players as scum (and here, it could be a "nyah-nyah, I killed you"). If anything, I like her first post less after looking into it.

However, considering her vote on me, I'd say stretching would be a consistent pattern. At first, her vote in 13 seems RVS enough but this justification as opposed to looking at the six posts Elyse made inbetween isn't right. To say PJ has no case on me would be an understatement because the only thing even directed towards me was answered prior.

Both these two are exhibiting scum habits.

Now onto SO. Generally I don't like people waiting to L-1 to start defending them if they're going to do it. It's generally in the area of WK material. However, considering he was prodded there's not much to do with that. Also, his reasons are agreeable so I'd consider him as town. I disagree with both his Elyse and Matt reads.

[Aj The Epic]

Doctor. N1 Protected MattP

I also felt the question about Mattp was rhetorical.

And for fuck sake, I already explained I do that all the time.

[Aj The Epic]

Correction: N0

[Aj The Epic]

I still like my AJ vote. In addition to what was brought up earlier, his "what do I gain from buddying you" question was bad. Scum buddy Town a lot, and he knows the obvious benefits to scum buddying a Townie. To suggest there was no benefit to that seems like playing innocent to me.

Here's the thing: Elyse is not someone I trust to be moved by people defending her anyways. She's obviously paranoid but more importantly would've been a very easy wagon to take. Considering those two factors, I DON'T see any benefit to buddying her regardless of town or scum.

[Aj The Epic]

Having just checked: 3 games, with an additional 1 where he replaced in and out and I'm not sure we ever overlapped. Most recently, he replaced in to a game where our scum team was doing awful and actually made a case on someone who was for-sure to die and nearly escaped death. I ended u[ replacing out because I was doing awfully (dragging the team down :/) and I felt overloaded.

[Aj The Epic]

At L-1 and nearly be lynched? Lol.

Also then if you had expressed concerns, why not take the time to SAY something? Or could you at least form what about them bothers you in more specifics? Meta isn't scummy at all. Nor is any of it really complicated. Yes it deals with WIFOM but welcome to mafia.

[Aj The Epic]

It doesn't make sense to taunt a VT for dying when they can't stop it and have had nothing to do with the game on N0.

Why not bring up this initially? And why do you think that the issue of pointing out "buddying" over "defending" is irrelevant? I was proving to Llama that even (s)he (think it's he) was considering Elyse town in their own language.

Have you caught up?

[Aj The Epic]

To PJ's last post, not Mattp.

[Aj The Epic]

I don't really care if you find my claim compelling.

As I stated in my larger post before claiming, I don't like the WK'ing that comes through right as someone is about to be lynched. If it's bad, stop it early. I don't see how waiting for a wagon to develop to become some foregone conclusion only then to defend it is town. I took the correct action by attacking it early. What I find ironic is that your entire post here is basically playing off the fact that you wanted Elyse lynched by saying there's no problem of Elyse being 'town' (wtf is this?) but rather my defending her when YOU WERE VOTING HER for what I think is largely an asinine reason.

[Aj The Epic]

I'm sorry I can't give you a claim that isn't my role. You're beating a dead horse: I'm going to die tonight so you might as well not waste your time after getting caught up over something I do all the time.

[Aj The Epic]

You realize the purpose of that is to still die but have drawn a counter claim whereas I'm the SOLE DOCTOR who's not going to draw a counter claim.

[Aj The Epic]

No. Most scum games I try to claim as truthfully as I can to not give myself up for free. The one fake claim I had in 2014 cost me when I had bussed off a teammate and got bitten for a fake claim that didn't add up well.

[Aj The Epic]

The first one is from 2013 on one of my first games on site. The second was an honest answer: I had just gotten into the game off a replacement and was asked to claim. My predecessor had hinted at being the cop for whatever reason.

[Aj The Epic]

Town: MattP, Supreme, Llama, Elyse
Town Lean: Ocean Wind
Null: Alchemist, TKoE, CKD
Scum: Rask, PJ

I've explained Elyse, Supreme, Rask and PJ. I think CKD might be town even though I believe his vote for Elyse was a bit of an overreaction. Ocean's posts have been good thus far, but I'm a bit worried with how many questions there are to the actual added statements and assertions.

[Aj The Epic]

Explain your Llama townread. All you said about Supreme was "Generally I don't like people waiting to L-1 to start defending them if they're going to do it. It's generally in the area of WK material. However, considering he was prodded there's not much to do with that. Also, his reasons are agreeable so I'd consider him as town. I disagree with both his Elyse and Matt reads." What exactly made you townread him here?

How did Alchemist move to null?

Is your petroleumjelly scumread mostly based on the unexplained hop on to your wagon or is there something else?

Llama read is almost solely off of voting for rask and catching him for scum before he made the questionable votes on my wagon.

As for Alchemist: A.) RVS or early cases are generally something I don't hold too strongly. I don't like that he essentially sheeped everyone else as an on to maintain his vote, and I feel his 'thinking out loud' post on Elyse is a whole lot of words that together are sentences that are sure to mean something but just don't. The post was a really long and drawn out way of calling Elyse null. Essentially, there's nothing inherently scum in his posts but I don't really like him for town right now.

PJ's two votes, Elyse and mine, are bad in the context of each other.

[Aj The Epic]

I don't think scum her has a reason to play any WIFOM related to the situation at this point, and I can see Town making some of the points she's made,

so for now I think she's Town

. Elyse scum only makes sense to me if Matt is also scum, which I don't think is the case.

I consider the bolded to be a null claim because you're only saying town, but suggesting your read can go anywhere. Yes I see the next sentence and it's definitely the most precise line of the post, and I don't mind that logic if entertained with the idea that elyse scum + SO scum could be a possibility via bus. But the 'subject to change' part immediately makes me read it as null.

[Aj The Epic]

PJ, in post 182 I was stating that given the circumstances (he was inactive while the wagon ran up and not purposefully waiting), my concern for that wasn't worth it. Therefore, I took his post at face value instead. Disagreeing with reads isn't something indicative in alignment (I actually prefer people to have non-conforming reads at least somewhere) unless the read is superbly bad.

[Aj The Epic]

@AJ - Did you ever breadcrumb anything? How many members of this player list do you have any experience with?

I never crumb any role I have unless it's something akin to a hider. It's a fucking disaster to crumb doctor, too.

1.)

I find it interesting that Aj The Epic was originally content to only harp on Raskolnikov's unexplained vote instead of mine in Post #169, but after questioned by Elyse he doubles back and calls my vote "terrible."

This brings me back to a point I have already made. Unexplained votes are not bad.

I find it

exceedingly

hard to believe that Aj the Epic and Supreme Overlord think that the second vote on a player without immediate reasoning given is "terrible" / "not much better [than] hella bad."

My vote was obviously to push things in a new direction and to possibly grab a reaction, as well as moving my vote to my current best guess for scum. Not accompanying every vote with a reason is useful and not uncommon. I can hardly be the only player who employs a strategy of holding back on reasoning for effect. In fact, I had already done as much with my Elyse vote that I only later explained and pursued.

2.)

I also feel like Supreme Overlord and particularly Alchemist21 mentioned my unexplained Aj The Epic more out of necessity and to avoid looking like they were focusing overly much on Raskolnikov's vote, especially in light of Elyse's question.

3.)

I find it mildly curious Aj The Epic claims to have a scumread on me given his stated how-does-this-make-sense-as-scum-philosophy (i.e., "why bother buddying Elyse?").

Specifically, why would I bother posting my reasons for voting

after

Aj The Epic had already claimed Doctor and continue to attack him? I should in theory be content with outing a power role I can safely kill and quietly moving my vote elsewhere. I had all sorts of ways to back myself out of the wagon that I had not even really argued for up to that point. This is only a minor point, since if he is Town I certainly understand the urge to scumread your most vocal detractor.

~

Now:

4.)

Alchemist21, why did you delay asking me why I voted for Aj The Epic?

5.)

Alchmist21, what do you think of Supreme Overlord?

6.)

Alchemist21:

I'm interested why you think it's scummy that I believe his claim if you would have also unvoted, since believing his claim is the only reason to unvote.

Believing a claim is hardly the only reason to unvote for somebody. In this case in particular -- especially immediately after Aj The Epic claimed -- the best reason to unvote as Town would be the

threat

that you

might

be lynching a power role.

Going from your stance in Post #183 ("I still like my AJ vote" while Aj The Epic was at L-1) to

immediately

"believing his claim" in Post #191 makes it seem like you were interested in justifying keeping your vote in order to get a claim (or potentially a lynch).

I disagree with the 'my vote was obviously to push things'. No it wasn't? If it was, why did the vote remain in the same place for so long without you drawing anything from it? You voted RVS, gave your reasons for some meta derived argument and let it sit there. And I explained the reason I changed my view on it: In the context of your vote on me, I see both votes from your slot are lacking any real reason. 'Reason-less votes aren't bad' isn't an excuse. Reasonless votes should be explained with solid reasons. Again, in RVS the vote for Elyse is fine, even if the reasons are... subpar. However, it stuck for so long for no reason.

As for 'why would scum do that' logic, pushing a lynch through on a doc would be seriously helpful to the scum team to have the opportunity to NK someone who was a threat to them during the day. And most people wouldn't suspect the person pushing that lynch because scum would 'play safe'.

[Aj The Epic]

So you're caught up with one post when I have 30+? At this point, I don't think you need a gut read so much as you can give more detail. Like I've explained and given examples that this is something I do in town games so I really don't get how the fuck everyone got hung up over it. Frankly, you're beating a horse that needed to be buried weeks ago.

[Aj The Epic]

Why would you crumb doctor? It's all around a stupid move in any sense. Doctors should try to remain as hidden as possible under any circumstance.

It's easy: I know mattP better than everyone else in this game outside CKD. Might not be saying much, but this is my first game with the majority of the game.

Your vote is bad for this reason because your going off the assumption that I SHOULD and WOULD crumb it. Crumbing a protective role is fucking ridiculous.

[Aj The Epic]

Skimmed some posts which I'll get to later.

Aj The Epic - You say in a game where you are town that it's not necessary to explain all votes:

I don't feel it necessary to explain all votes. Silverwolf should know that we don't necessary have to explain votes either. Obviously reaction votes generally use little reason, and other instances (sheeping/pressure, gut reads) don't require it either.

In this instance, I WAS looking for a reaction. I do think he's my best bet at scum right now simply due to low content and his content post (130) being highly counter-intuitive to what I see.

His two reads (Silver!town and purple!scum) are in slight disagreement with my own. I feel Purple's early post shows a looseness and ease with the game that beginner scum aren't going to show. Silver/myself/bastion have all been talking a lot of theory. We're NOT going to lie about theory. No one does this in any game because it's provable and written. We're simply teaching. I don't necessarily disagree with the read, I think the reasoning is weak.

Lastly, the reaction was kinda shot but the one thing I noted on gbiddle was it drew a post even without necessarily needing to. For both votes on him, HTZ has responded promptly. Which may seem okay/normal but bothering with every vote shows too much concern for the status of them on him.

Your view in this game in order to support your scumreads on petroleumjelly and to some extent Raskolnikov has been that unexplained votes are in general bad.

In the context of your vote on me, I see both votes from your slot are lacking any real reason. 'Reason-less votes aren't bad' isn't an excuse. Reasonless votes should be explained with solid reasons. Again, in RVS the vote for Elyse is fine, even if the reasons are... subpar. However, it stuck for so long for no reason.

Elaborate more on your priniciples about reasonless votes here. Why are they a problem here when in a different game, you seemed fine with them?

You quoted my exact reason in the first: Reaction test. We stalled out and I wanted to get a response. There was no need for a reaction test given the context of a lot of votes already on me and a explanation-less vote prior.

[Aj The Epic]

@Ocean: That was 2am for me, so my posts were really short and not very informative. Not what's needed here.

So I apparently need to do work to get AJ lynched despite that glowing neon scum sign. Fine then.

Just doesn't sit well. First off, there is truth there: NEW scum tend to be more defensive. People who are bad at scum tend to be more defensive. If you get caught lying easily, it's definitely a trend. In total, I think it's a flimsy-at-best reason to vote Elyse. CKD picked a difference in theory as the baseline for a vote. Yeah he's correct, but I still don't see it warranting this response.

This is defending for the sake of defending, and it actually contradicts itself. Overdefensive is a dumb tell, its a playstyle tell, its not an alignment tell. The same people usually will either be hyper observant to people calling them scum, or simply not care. AJ goes off on a rant about how certain people are "more defensive" but then seems to say that a difference in theory doesn't really count as a tell, while calling CKD scummy for voting Elyse for a difference in theory opinion.

Also there is a difference between a theory in difference and what my views on "over defensive" and what I think CKDs are. Its not a theory difference to me, I see calling someone over defensive or saying they are overreacting as a scumtell because its an indefensible attack that is highly subjective.

I think it was a bad vote. While it will help in a future case, I'm not going to say you're scum because

This REALLY bugs me. I don't really think in terms of "I can use this down the road" as town, more of "that's somewhat scummy". As scum, I absolutely am noting things that I can use down the road from all players, so I can position myself accordingly.

Elyse, what benefit do I gain from buddying you? You'd be the easiest lynch to dump on if I was scum because frankly buddying you wouldn't really get me that far.

This one also really bugs me as a response to Elyse saying that he is buddying up. The natural reaction to someone saying that you are buddying to me is saying "because I think you are town and trying to stop your lynch" instead of trying to argue a WIFOM point about how it would or would not benefit him as a specific alignment.

That is all still true. His response to Elyse saying his is buddying up isn't justifying why he is doing it as town, but why he isn't doing it as scum.

Additionally his response to getting put at L-1 is more to attack those who are voting him just in a single post (PJ and Rask) instead of trying to get players to unvote him. That type of a reaction seems far more desperate as its trying to forcibly change things with more of an OMGUS type attack instead of trying to prove that you are town.

No. Most scum games I try to claim as truthfully as I can to not give myself up for free. The one fake claim I had in 2014 cost me when I had bussed off a teammate and got bitten for a fake claim that didn't add up well.

So does this mean that you think the correct claim from scum who is at L-1 and another player expresses intent to hammer is to claim VT?

You quoted my exact reason in the first: Reaction test. We stalled out and I wanted to get a response. There was no need for a reaction test given the context of a lot of votes already on me and a explanation-less vote prior.

So you called PJ and Rask scum for voting you even before they had a chance to say if they were placing reaction/pressure votes because you thought it wasn't a spot that people would do that?

Most of the approaches from AJ in this game are not really from a viewpoint of town, but have a tone of "how people view me" and "what I benefit from" in them. His reads are pretty much based who is posting with not enough content instead of actual scumtells. Since the TKoE vote early he sheeped Matt on, they have just been attacking players who are voting them for what they see as the weakest reasons. Such as the pushes on Rask and PJ. Even then he is not getting much past beyond "the votes are bad" as the reason that players are scum. Just for fun go back and only iso AJ, then try and find the case on Rask, its pretty difficult.

Side note when making this post I saw something that I want to put Elyse at about 100% town for. Not wanting to say what, but seriously, she is town for that one.

"Called CKD scummy"? This is bullshit. Why are you trying to twist what I've said when in that post I didn't even mention his alignment and never stated anything about CKD being scum outside "would look back to that"?

You even quoted the closest I got to saying he's scum and I stated I'm not determining his alignment off of it. So WHERE did you get that bullshit?

Your first sentence of the next point makes no sense. Your next part makes no sense for how someone TOWN would react at L-1. That's a lot of 'playstyle choices' and you don't justify it very well.

On scum claims, if I'm given a scum power role, I generally claim something that is similar to that powerrole (JOAT was a recent one for me, where I changed an ability out for a pure cop). That's what I mean by claiming as truthfully as possible. This entire conversation just isn't applicable though. I claimed truthfully, and you seem oddly interested in not letting night settle it.

This last part is trash because "attacking those who pushed me" constitutes nearly half the town. What, are they off-limits? There was no need for me to believe that Rask and PJ had 'reaction test' votes, nor did either state they were. I had been posting actively and had already fallen under 'pressure' earlier. And then you just ignore more posts by me to misconstrue what I said about Rask specifically.

As town, why the hell do you have to go so far to lie about what I've said so far? There are a lot of lies in your post, specifically on my position with CKD and around Rask/PJ.

VOTE: Llamafluff

1.)

Aj The Epic, please respond:

PJ, in post 182 I was stating that given the circumstances (he was inactive while the wagon ran up and not purposefully waiting), my concern for that wasn't worth it.

Why does the fact that Supreme Overlord was prodded indicate he was

not

purposefully waiting or lurking? Lurkers get prodded all the time. This seems like a very generous reading for Supreme Overlord that you do not seem to extend to other players.

2.)

Also (and LlamaFluff already basically asked this), what do you mean by this post?

No. Most scum games I try to claim as truthfully as I can to not give myself up for free. The one fake claim I had in 2014 cost me when I had bussed off a teammate and got bitten for a fake claim that didn't add up well.

How do scum "claim truthfully"?

3.)

TKoE, I cannot determine how serious you are with your claimed suspicion of Supreme Overlord. Is it stemming from your previous knowledge of his play? Do you actually think he was trying to "twist" your words?

4.)

LlamaFluff, what do you think of TKoE?

I don't know if SO would lurk that long just to wait. I don't like to do it because it's still a game and playing a lurk style is a shit way to play the game. Therefore, I generally give people the benefit of the doubt on lurking if it's only one time or so. Life happens and there's nothing I can solidly say to demonstrate that there aren't extracurricular reasons.

So as I said to Llama: I form my role to be as close to the town counterpart as I can. It's easier to prove later on and you can't trip yourself up lying so easily.

[Aj The Epic]

You respond very passionately to Llamafluff calling his points "bullshit" and in general using strong language. So, if mafia was bullshitting a case on you that caused this type of passionate response, wouldn't you immediately respond to it rather than deciding "what's happening in Back to December? Oh, scum made a case on me. I'm going to sleep and will address this tomorrow." That doesn't feel right considering how you responded to it.

Because I didn't read the game until this morning. I didn't feel like getting worked up before bed.

[Aj The Epic]

The scum team is probably in Raskolnikov and Llama. Llama can't even come back and tell me WHY he lied and Rask is just looking to clear me out.

[Aj The Epic]

I read my other games because A.) They're newer and B.) aren't bothering me like this game is. There's no inconsistency.

[Aj The Epic]

Remember that AJ has still refused to say what he would have claimed as vanilla mafia? That's because that is what happened and he knows the answer is "do exactly what I did here because otherwise I get lynched"

The issue here is I don't think I've ever had to claim as plain vanilla mafia. The last time I played it should've been back in Espinoage's pokémon (silph) mafia? and the scum team clean swept with no claims, I believe. But you assuming that this answer changes anything is ridiculous as it's terribly irrelevant. There's NOTHING to be gained by theory-crafting on this bullshit.

What would I do? It depends on the case, given claims and foreseen balance of power. Obviously if town already has flipped cop/doc/tracker or a good deal of power roles, you have to claim VT to have a chance. I don't know what I would do if nothing had been revealed and I had to take a claim.

[Aj The Epic]

My target was OceanWinds, for what should be obvious reasons.

Rask, what? My question on your role claim (excluding the fact that it probably contradicts my own) is how this is played out. My thing is, I don't believe you forgot your role (and this isn't alignment indicative, which was what drove me nuts for a while). You stated multiple times after my wagon that you'd still be wanting to lynch me. Asked specifically if it was weird for a doctor/protective role NOT to counterclaim in 286. If you have a protective role this feels more like a soft than anything else.

Which today if you were going to claim such, as scum or as town, you would probably state "I wanted to see you get lynched without revealing my role". If we're to believe what you have stated, you've gone basically a full week and a half without remembering this? It feels like a lie due to the contradiction that exists here with 286. More importantly, calling it a 'big play' and waiting to just out it feels weird from a town perspective. I'm guessing (if your EST) you went to sleep between the times, but the four people posting here are all not geared for my lynch.

It makes more sense from a scum perspective: The lynch isn't going as planned and suddenly you're getting wagoned. You honestly didn't pay attention to your own soft and this was something conjured this morning instead of paying attention to the opportunity you had to tie it to 286. Therefore, the claim looks shaky in the context of what you said yesterday because you didn't want to take this step in the first place.

That along with a protective role contradicting my own puts us in a situation where we are almost certainly unable to coexist in the town..

VOTE: Rask

[Aj The Epic]

Rask needs to be the return lynch if I'm lynched here. His claim doesn't add up, even without mine in the picture.

[Aj The Epic]

Except if he knew his role, he'd state today that he didn't want to out himself.

[Aj The Epic]

I expected a third, too. Was a bit burnt out from my last scum game and made a fuckton more mistakes than I should've. I'm pretty disappointed with this game.

[Aj The Epic]

Can we see the mafia private topic?

A.) It's not worth seeing (barely a page) and B.) I try to hide my bad play so it's not expected of me. Sorry.