Open 272 - Near-Vanilla (Over!)

[lord_hur]

Hello there.

I am replacing Chaotic Neutrality, effective immediately.

Unvote AntB

I absolutely don't see him as scum. His play is way too suicidal (in my eyes, suicidal play is pro-town). In particular, the way he didn't even check that he wasn't at L-1 looks townish to me. Of course, that may be me, but when I play as scum, I am way more attentive to my situation regarding votes than when I play as town.

Vote Archer

His vote on AntB stroke me as particularly bad. When I read it, it seemed like one of the worst cases of scum bussing that I've ever seen. This is my best lead for now.

[lord_hur]

Vote Archer

His vote on AntB stroke me as particularly bad. When I read it, it seemed like one of the worst cases of scum bussing that I've ever seen. This is my best lead for now.

So basically if Archer doesn't flip scum your entire case is built on crap then, right?

Sorry, it seems my long break from MS made me forgot the meaning of bussing. I just looked it up and it is not what I meant at all : as I said, I do not view AntB as scummy.

I meant Archer's flimsy reason for voting AntB made him look like scum jumping on a bandwagon for an easy lynch without getting too much attention.

[lord_hur]

RE: AntB
farside, I'm voting AntB because he doesn't believe anything he's saying.

Nacho, could you direct me to the samples of this behavior that led you to vote for AntB?

[lord_hur]

andrew94 and drmyshottyizsik, do you have precise reasons for keeping your votes on your respective targets?

[lord_hur]

lord_hur

• I don't think suicidal play is indicative of town; however, I agree with your sense of AntB being town. What's your opinion of sotS?

I don't like how he voted or unvoted on each of his posts, or how he focused only on the 2 that looked like the most easy lynches of the moment, or how he is announcing how he will change his vote without any reference to a reason. This doesn't look like serious scumhunting to me. He could genuinely be busy IRL, and it's actually terrible play both as scum and town, but that still gets him negative points in my book. He will have some explaining to do when he comes back.

Why do you think AntB is town?

[lord_hur]

vote: shotty

, and when i come on in the next couple days, I'll probably move to either nacho or antB. Still, shotty is near the top of my list.

1. How do you explain that drmyshottyizsik is NEAR the top of your list, while the other two names that you talk about have suddenly become "townish"? Who is at the top of your list, and why didn't you vote for him/her?
2. Why did you announce that you will switch your vote to someone you find townish?

Make that answer really good...

[lord_hur]

Another one who does not give reasons. Again I'll say, I think people who say things without reasons backing them up are looking for the input from other people first, for approval from the town. And that way you get to stay safe. People who give reasons are putting themself out there, risking themselves, since it is a lot more difficult to back off once you've laid out your entire case. So any reason you used the former, slightly scummy method?

I did give a reason, weak voting, which is in my opinion the best way to nail scum, as voting motivation is the main difference in behavior between town and scum. I admit that I did not develop enough, though.

Gah, really did not expect things to develop so quickly. I will make a proper effort to be more involved.

Archer, why are you giving all of these scum points, yet your vote continues to be on "the only one with a three letter name".

Because you had still not made an appearance at that stage. And when you finally did make an appearance you failed to answer my question, and you throw out questions everywhere, perhaps an attempt to find out who the town want to go after, and simply jump in with the crowd? Thats my feeling anyway.

Archer - Archer has added little to nothing of the convo. Why is AntB sticking to something scummy? Why keep a vote on a random vote at this point if you reread the game? As for the inactive comment well pot you are the kettle calling them out.

As I said, really didnt expect the game to pick up so fast. The AntB saga, I think the whole chainsaw thing is pushing it. Of course there are times when it has merit, but so early D1 I dont think so. The fact that he has refused to back down raises some flags. But at the same time, I know I wouldnt push that hard as scum. The random vote for Egg has now turned to a proper vote until I'm convinced someone else is more scummy, or that Egg is town.

And after all that more posts popped up, sigh. BUT!...

Players who shout their suspicions can be good for the town, but as there isn't that much shouting I kept quiet. Shouters get NKd if they get close to the mark and abused if not.

The last post from AntB has got bells ringing for me! Sounds like he is afraid to die, but as a townie, I dont care if I die as long as I have made my suspicions clear and the remaining townies can carry on... I actually think coupled with the rest thats reason enough for my vote

VOTE: AntB

In this post, you say your vote for Egg is now serious, yet you immediately, in the very same post, switch your vote to the wagon-of-the-day for a reason I absolutely disagree with. AntB has never looked to me like he was afraid to die. This vote looked exactly like what (bad) scum would do to score an easy lynch while not being the one hammering. Also, you used "I" in that unneeded explanation, as if you were town, which is a trick I used before as scum.

[lord_hur]

Lord_Hur!!!! God girl how long has it been since we played mafia together?

About one year and a half, I'd say. I just hope that this game doesn't involve any kind of bastard modding, as it was the reason for my long break from the site. This statement has been reread, and is not giving any indication on the eventual power(s) I might or might not have in this game.

I am very happy to play with you again! Of course, given the quality of your usual performances, I am expecting very high level of commitment and top-level scum-hunting from you : anything less than the best would obviously be an indication of you being scum!

[lord_hur]

RE: AntB
farside, I'm voting AntB because he doesn't believe anything he's saying.

Nacho, could you direct me to the samples of this behavior that led you to vote for AntB?

Please answer this. Also, give me and comment, even succintly, one of those "other posts from Archer that give you this feeling".

Hard to look up generalizations look like a trend in your reasoning...

[lord_hur]

1. I was indeed referring to Archer :

Unvote, Vote: Archer

lord_hur, I figured ALL of his posts give that feeling, especially when he's attacking a suspect in them.

I would like you to develop this. This is not specific enough in my opinion to judge if you actually are honest in your attack.

2. I fail to see what in these posts make you say that AntB does not believe what he says. That would require, in my mind, things like backtracking or contradicting.

[lord_hur]

You simply said it was the worst case of scum bussing you have ever seen (agreeing with andrew94 basically). You gave no reason why you actually thought it was bussing, and simply referred to my entire post all at once (again, looks liek you wanted others to do the thinking for you). Only later do you realise that bussing is an incorrect reason to vote for me, and then later again come up with other reasons.

As I've already said in 156, saying that I actually meant to use the term bussing is utter bullshit, as I clearly said in my very first post that I didn't view AntB as scummy. As the term "bussing" implies that both parties are scum, it is just impossible that I meant to use this term.

The only thing that bothers me is that I don't know yet how smart you are, and whether you did actually believe in that crap, or just wanted to OMGUS me and only found that as a reason you could use.

Also, you say : "Many people are suspicious of me", and "this may turn into OMGUS", this is too defensive in my opinion for proper pro-town play. If you're town, go ahead and stab people where it hurts damn it, who cares about a few votes on yourself! (of course, if you're scum, please die quickly thank you) I actually don't consider I've done a decent job at scum-hunting unless I've a least a couple people at my throat.

[lord_hur]

At the time, I was in the mentality that one of nacho or antb was scummy, and I would reread to find out which. I had seen the points about them and at the time they made sense, but I hadn't had all that much time to put into the game. So I said I would reread them. I didn't vote either because I wasn't sure which one was scummier, and i didn't think the two of them were scum together. so i dropped down to my next read, shotty.

1. This can be viewed as fencesitting as its best. And you did NOT say you would reread the thread back then, just that you would throw your vote around, as if reasons were not at the center of your thoughts at the moment, but you were rather just annoyed because you didn't know which lynch will be most promising and still wanted to appear as scum-hunting.

2. In my mind, you are also guilty of weak voting : you freely say that both were scummier at the time, yet you did not vote for any of them? You don't know which one is scummier of the two, so you vote for a THIRD, less scummy one? What kind of reasoning is that, seriously?

This does not alleviate any of my doubts concerning you. I like my vote on Archer so I'll not change it, but I wish I had a second one. IGMEOY.

[lord_hur]

@Nachomamma8 : I have duly read and evaluated your answers, but i will not comment them until AntB does.

The posts he's put about me not believing my vote seem to say to opposite IMO, in addition to lord_hurs' backtracking and contradictory comment, I provide my reasoning and stand by my guns throughout.

I do not like how he used my comment without a trace of doubt concerning my alignment, as if he knew I was town. Usually town say "I think he's right" or "that makes sense" in one form or another, and don't use unconfirmed people's words so freely.

[lord_hur]

Concerning the answers to my questions :

As to why AntB doesn't believe what he says, refer to #175. The first quote is him saying his scumdar was pinged quite badly, and that brokenscraps's case "failed". And yet, no vote. This shows that his scumdar wasn't pinged that badly, since when people find scum, they put a vote along with their suspicions.

AntB voted brokenscraps right after he answered, what's suspicious about waiting for a target's defense before casting a vote?

The second quote demonstrates AntB dancing around the answer to a question far more than he needed to. Farside said he was voting for a crap reason, and all he needed to do is answer "a scumslip isn't a crap answer". Again, shows he doesn't believe what he says because he's afraid to just come right out and say it.

The wording leaves much room for improvement, but this is exactly what I understood when I read AntB's post : he DOES say a scum slip is a valid reason to vote.

The third quote just bleeds of crap. It's drawing scumteams this early in the game that seem to stem from being voted, although he tries to hide it in creative ways.

I call complete bullshit on this as a reason for your voting, as this was posted by AntB AFTER your vote!

There are a few reasons as to why I'm voting Archer. For one, his entrance into the game was scummy; he did not comment on brokenscraps tell on me, and he still made an RVS vote despite everything happening around him. Reads as scum trying to fit in, but not quite sure how. Then, there's the hatred for lurkers when he himself was lurking, which is of course hypocritical. But, the main reason for my vote is his response to yours. Instead of defending himself and posting why he wasn't making bad votes, or even asking you to clarify, he says you provided "no reasons", says that people who don't provide reasons are typically scum, and then asks him why you decided to vote him in this scummy way. This is deflection, not defense, and I don't like it at all.

And there you do it again! I am asking for your reasons *at the time of your vote*, I don't give a rat's ass about a reread exploited in retrospect! You said, in the same post as your vote :

lord_hur, I figured ALL of his posts give that feeling, especially when he's attacking a suspect in them.

How the hell could "that feeling you get from ALL of his posts" have referred to deflection, when this is the first time he is faced with a real attack in this game, and on top of that it had nothing to do with what I was talking about?

I want to know whether you believed in your attacks, as it is what gives me an opinion about your being scum or not!

Unvote
Vote Nachomamma8

*L-2*

This vote is very unlikely to move until you give me a satisfactory explanation about your voting motivations. Of course, that doesn't mean Archer (and, to a lesser degree, smashbro_of_the_SSS) is off the hook.

[lord_hur]

I do not like how he used my comment without a trace of doubt concerning my alignment, as if he knew I was town. Usually town say "I think he's right" or "that makes sense" in one form or another, and don't use unconfirmed people's words so freely.

I believe it to be a neutral comment, true in many situations regardless of alignment. I would be more concerned with Nachos generic general agreement with your case on archer.

It may probably be viewed as such, but then why try to divert my attention? Also, I was the first to confront Nachomamma8 about that, thank you.

[lord_hur]

@Archer:

156, lord_hur you admit bussing was the wrong word, but why did you not question andrew over this (139)

Because I can't see how to exploit it right now, though I think it will be more useful in the next days, when one of the 3 parties flip.

If you mean this as an attack against me, you need to establish that this can be exploited, and that I'm likely to have deliberately ommitted to do so, judging by my other actions.


@Nachomamma8:

I call complete bullshit on this as a reason for your voting, as this was posted by AntB AFTER your vote!

You asked me for reasons why I was voting AntB. Obviously reasons for voting change as your vote sits on someone for a while and they do more scummy things.

No. This is what I asked:

Unvote, Vote: Archer

lord_hur, I figured ALL of his posts give that feeling, especially when he's attacking a suspect in them.

I would like you to develop this. This is not specific enough in my opinion to judge if you actually are honest in your attack.

And there you do it again! I am asking for your reasons *at the time of your vote*, I don't give a rat's ass about a reread exploited in retrospect! You said, in the same post as your vote :

At the time of the vote, I thought he was scum. And specifically for what, I don't remember. All I remember is that I thought he was scum.

How the hell could "that feeling you get from ALL of his posts" have referred to deflection, when this is the first time he is faced with a real attack in this game, and on top of that it had nothing to do with what I was talking about?

I was talking about AntB.

I actually facepalmed myself IRL. So you vote on a fuzzy feeling, because you can find reasons later? And then you vote another person without any reason, as you were actually attacking someone else entirely, and that someone is the one you were voting right before?

I really dont know what to do with this. On one hand, it has the simplicity of someone admitting the naked truth, which I don't remember seeing scum do, but on the other hand, scum are the ones voting lightly. If you're town, I hate you for this play.

In that meta farside22 posted (so you *can* play well, 2/3 scum nailed on your first analysis is very nice), you didn't give a single reason for a vote, and yet you were town, though it's a bit better in the meta you posted... Not really conclusive either.

I lol at you.

And why do you think something like that is more likely to come from scum than town?

This shows that the fact that admitting the emptiness of your votes would not come out as scummy was in your mind beforehand. You could very well have planned all of it. For this, I keep my vote on you for now.


@smashbro_of_the_SSS:

I mentioned this:

In the meantime, I'm not sure between Nacho and antB, I'll have to read through again. It seems pretty weird that Nacho called for a claim, because it really did seem to be rolefishing.

which isn't outright saying i'm going to read, but said I'll have to. anyway, i meant to say i would read though.

my reasoning for voting neither was because in the last game was in, we had a quick lynch a few pages in, on a townie. Both wagons had a decent amount of votes already, and even though I would trust these players more than in the other game, I didn't want to risk a quick death. But where did I say they were both scummy? I looked at my post, only saw that I said I wasn't sure between them.

Fair enough, I move you down a notch. That's what I was suspecting, but I wanted you to say it.

[lord_hur]

@farside22: can you link me some recent games of you playing as town?

I found scum has a hard time finding scum because they are scum and don't' want to rat out their scum partners. As town I know I'm suspicious of more people then not.

I really like this. I'll use it in future games.

Oh, and do you think I play as a jerk?


@DavidParker: how do you analyze Nachomamma8's answer on his voting motivations, regarding his possible scumminess? And what case would you do on Egg, in a few words?

[lord_hur]

However, I know I as town have done this even on one occasion when I got myself into a really scummy hole. I iso'd myself to try see what I could use to defend myself, even if I changed the meaning of my posts from their intended meanings at the time. However, nacho as a more experienced player I see less likely to do this, even if there is some town motive. The main thing I don't like about the nacho wagon is how long it's gone on for, especially since I haven't seen a solid case until you really came along; Farside seems to be making a bit of a stretch with his case and stuck in confirmation bias to me.

Holy shit, you do read my mind! Does this observation tell you anything about her alignment?

[lord_hur]

Here is the last game I played in before I took a break. I had to replace out do to RL issues

http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=53&t=14753

No I don't think you are a jerk but nacho for sure when I saw him as town act like a jerk to others

Alright. I remember you being much more aggressive and harsh as town, but in your previous game as town and the one before, you were about as nice as in this game.

Just to be clear in case people missed it here is my full reason's why Nacho is scum

1. He is active elsewhere on MS and ignores this game some days
2. He jumps from one vote to another on two separate people with little to no reason, although he claims both or scummy.
3. Every post I read doesn't not look or read as someone scum hunting. He post lots of arguments with players with no fleshed out reason's for his suspects.
4. His scum suspect list is weak. It has no real thought process or fleshed out aspects or comment amount other players then the 2 he has argued with all game.

meta reason:
He's not being a bully (IE: jerk) like he is when I saw him in another game and he was town.

Why stating your reasons for voting Nachomamma8 without anyone asking for them?

[lord_hur]

How is what you just described any different to say... Egg? Except Egg is far more guilty of it I feel with that one initial post where he just threw out 10 questions, and there isn't meta to support him like there is andrew.

I did that 2 times as town (in newbie games), so I don't really have anything against Egg (or on the other heavy lurkers) in term of alignment suspicion (of course, I hate their play like all of you, except scum of course).

Ok, so I reread andrew94's ISO (took about one minute) and the only scum-hunting I've seen is saying Nachomamma8 used a wall of text in his last game as scum. Nothing else worth mentioning except that strange bussing comment (I've always seen drawing unconditional scum relations day 1 as highly presomptuous and I never do it, but I've never noticed a link between this behavior and alignment). This guy is a lurker just as I remembered, and I have no reading of him.

And here comes the old debate, should town lynch lurkers? They're detrimential to town (if all players lurked, mafia would be a game of dice, and scum would always win), and therefore I hate their guts, so i'd say yes. I doubt it's really rational, though. Lynching a lurker gives no info to town, and let scum lead the game.

[lord_hur]

I'd like to propose a policy lynch of Bella.

Seconded. Sometimes, winning the game must be preceded by considerations of a higher nature.

[lord_hur]

Also, since she didn't introduce herself, she was known as DizzyIzzyB13 before, and is very far from being a newbie (just so we don't waste time with false assumptions).

[lord_hur]

And? I still want a policy lynch.

I was adding to her case. She's doubly guilty for having a perfectly decent identity before and still changing it, for trying to conceal this fact, and for not even having very young age as an excuse.

FOS for interpreting my post otherwise.

[lord_hur]

Sure, there's the absurdity of pushing for a policy lynch with no justification when I replaced in.

I'll avoid to insult you like you did with that sarcasm comment, and just say that it's a private joke.

So, you don't have any real lead on anyone? I know you've replaced recently, but we have a deadline coming...

[lord_hur]

I will try hard not to judge the dizzyizzy account.

Why would you do that? You've been pretty heavily on the meta side until now.

[lord_hur]

farside22 - farside's expreienced so, so you have to be alert to the possibility that she's just playing well, but given the way she's pushing along discussion and pressing for answers to questions she asks puts her as a solidish town player for now.

This, I agree with : farside22 was/is a great player, and will be a pain to nail is she's scum. I haven't done any meta between her play as scum and town yet, but I have the feeling that will be wasted time. I'm seeing minor scum tells in a lot of her posts, but on reread/explanation from her, I have to admit it's more paranoia than anything else.

Also, I don't like how everyone is so passive, except a few (farside22 and DavidParker). And no, smashbro_of_the_SSS, repeating what I've said two posts before in a menacing tone doesn't qualify, in my opinion.

[lord_hur]

@Battousai :

Why are you willing to switch to Bella?

Also, the fact that your post focuses nearly entirely on Nachomamma8 gives me the impression that you decided who you would vote for before looking for arguments. And don't say that you only gave your reasons for Nachomamma8 because it was an attack on him, because then why would there be this comment on farside22?

[lord_hur]

When you replace in and quickly call the leading lynch town, I find that scummy.

Ok, this point has some merit imho. I've indeed seen that happening.

1) I never said for sure, I said probable.

You did say "for sure".

2) If Nacho is town, Smashbro-scum wouldn't either go for the lynch of Nacho or distance from it.

I don't get this, sorry. Why would smashbro_of_the_SSS-scum not do as all scum do, that is to try to get town lynched?

2) My post is in reference to Nacho 2/4. That's not nearly entirely.

Oops, I should have reread instead of posting on an impression. Quick posting at work can be bad.

[lord_hur]

Vote: Nacho

as it will give me the alignment of Smashbro for sure

You did say "for sure".

2) If Nacho is town, Smashbro-scum wouldn't either go for the lynch of Nacho or distance from it.

I don't get this, sorry. Why would smashbro_of_the_SSS-scum not do as all scum do, that is to try to get town lynched?

Goals of scum: Lynch town, Survive. Go for the lynch, would be trying to get town lynched, distance from a lead wagon increases survival.[/quote]

So you're saying smashbro_of_the_SSS-scum would NOT do either, because if he jumps on the wagon, he sacrifices survival, and if he distances, he doesn't get town lynched?

PS : he's far from being at L-1...

[lord_hur]

I said smashbro-scum would do one of those.

No. You did say the contrary.

2) If Nacho is town, Smashbro-scum wouldn't either go for the lynch of Nacho or distance from it.

No need to double-check what you wrote, because you never make mistakes? Anyway, now this is consistent with what I understood the first time.

I think Batt has defend himself well.

This baffles me. Please explain how he defended himself so well that you changed your vote. I think he added very little to what he said in his first post (well, except contradictions).

[lord_hur]

Oops, must have been a mistake. I think I meant to write DavidParker, as that's the only one that I'm confident in would be scum based on the flip.

No, that's not right either.

Vote: Nacho

as it will give me the alignment of Smashbro for sure, and a scum read on DavidParker if Nacho is town

Original quote.

@Nachomamma8 : again, please explain why you find this scummy enough to warrant a vote.

[lord_hur]

I believe the term is WIFOM.

Indeed, this is WIFOM, which is a negative point for his argumentation. But I find WIFOM to be, on occasion, effective if :
1. the act is established as something scum would usually do if they didn't take scrutiny into account ;
2. the actor is not likely to have changed his or her action because of that scrutiny : usually, beginners, emotive or blunt/direct people ; the more calculating and smart the actor is, the less effective.
3. the slip is likely, due to the actor's focus on something else (an attack he or she is making, pressure put on him or her...) to go unnoticed by the actor.

I personally don't believe in this kind of arguments on people like DavidParker, farside22 or Battousai.

In this case, imho, I think it can be considered (as in, not totally out of line) for smashbro_of_the_SSS, but not for DavidParker.

[lord_hur]

Really this back and forth here I don't get. I read over and over and it's confusing the hell out of me.

Battousai made 2 contradictions : lynch giving him an indication "for sure" and then denying saying it (and then giving an unsatisfactory explanation), and saying "wouldn't" instead of "would" in another explanation.

What I don't get is why people conclude that Battousai is scummy because of the first.

[lord_hur]

Requesting replacement is null. Requesting replacement because you are hurting town, scummy. Maybe not a D2/D3 vote, but it's good enough for a D1 vote.

You really, really aren't good at explaining things : you just keep repeating the same thing, which is exactly what your (apparent) suspect said...

[lord_hur]

Requesting replacement is null.

Requesting replacement because you are hurting town, scummy

. Maybe not a D2/D3 vote, but it's good enough for a D1 vote.

You really, really aren't good at explaining things : you just keep repeating the same thing, which is exactly what your (apparent) suspect said...

She asked me if it is because he said "he is hurting town." I answered that that was scummy. If Farside isn't sufficently satisfied with my explaination she would say so, but she hasnt yet. I don't know why you posted this, except to attack me. If you want more information on it, then ask and I'll reference you to my post where I say:

249- In regards to Bella's spot: I see this as scum hurting his faction (1 bad scum is much more harmful than 1 bad town) more than town guilt. = probable scum

Which means, if you can't comprehend, that it is more likely for scum to replace for bad play than for town as scum bad play is more damaging.

- It was actually more understandable in your previous explanation, yes. Why then posting an explanation in every way inferior?

- I asked because I thought I understood back then (say what you will, it was still a jumble of words, and I found the reason I understood rather weak), but was interested in your answer to farside22, in order to be sure. And judging by farside22's reaction, what I said was on point.

- Nowhere did I imply anything about your alignment, how can you see this as an attack? That's pretty defensive of you (though I don't find it very scummy, it can be seen, as well as that veiled insult, as a reaction to my saying you don't explain things well).

[lord_hur]

I'm intentionally lurking at the moment, actually.

What's the reason for your intentionally lurking? (I'm not asking for a justification, just the actual reason).

[lord_hur]

@Nachomamma8 : again, please explain why you find this scummy enough to warrant a vote.

He can't keep his words straight.

I know that Batt doesn't flail this bad, ever.
I know as town, he doesn't rush his posts.
I also know that he's a gambiter at heart, like yours truly.
So, I thought: What reason would Batt have to make countless mistakes like that? Wait, isn't recklessness counted as a classic 'town tell'?

But you people don't think like me,

You're wrong, this is *exactly* what I am thinking about Battousai, except that I don't know him, so I was doing some meta to determine if it's rather town tell or manipulation.

I'm intentionally lurking at the moment, actually.

What's the reason for your intentionally lurking? (I'm not asking for a justification, just the actual reason).

I need an answer to this, please. Be as blunt as you can, even if you think it doesn't make you look pro-town.

[lord_hur]

I know that Batt doesn't flail this bad, ever.
I know as town, he doesn't rush his posts.
I also know that he's a gambiter at heart, like yours truly.
So, I thought: What reason would Batt have to make countless mistakes like that? Wait, isn't recklessness counted as a classic 'town tell'?

Actually, your recurrent lack of reasons for posting falls into this category too, and I can't really picture scum openly talking about their own ploys. Hmm, that post nets you some town points (if you're scum, great play).

Also, my predecessor was convinced of AntB being scum (in post 2 you linked), and he doesn't look like a stupid person.

An AntB reread is in order...

But keep your ISOs coming, otherwise I'll think you scumhunted just enough to get some votes off you...

[lord_hur]

AntB reread done, and I still see more town than scum tells.

Not going to develop on Nachomamma8's new arguments before AntB does.


On Battousai :

#3, http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... elect=8459

He does make one of these mistakes there, thought it's the only one I spotted. He's definitely,

extremely

manipulative, but he's got very high self esteem, so I don't really picture him looking stupid intentionally. It just wouldn't come to his mind, I think.

My thoughts on Lord_hur- He last post I responded to, he attacks me in it. He says I'm not explaining my reason well, when in fact, I wasn't explaining it to him but to Farside who didn't respond back to it at the time. I see it as an attack, as he says I didn't explain my reasoning well which he wouldn't know if it was sufficient until Farside responds. But overall, I see it as town latching onto who's in the spotlight, as his other posts seem like he is scumhunting.

I don't like this at all, though. His half-assed attack on me is very weak (I can't judge by myself is an explanation is insufficient, when it's not even an explanation, but a repost of an affirmation?), yet when I confront him with it, he doesn't answer, and downsizes it by adding that otherwise, I look town.

I see it as blending in, avoiding being "in the spotlight", in his own words. Which is exactly what he says he tries to avoid when he plays scum, here :

http://www.quicktopic.com/45/H/zv8uvwLW7Cai

I don't like being called out by lewarcher, even if he wasn't calling me scum. No spotlight, thanks.

Explain this, scum.

Unvote, vote Battousai.

[lord_hur]

Lord_Hur- Way to take it out of context... That post was taken from the scum qt, taken N3. At that time, both of my partners were quicklynched D2/D3 without me even being on to help defend nor attack them (to manipulate town). I was very vulnerable with being the last scum alive with 5 town. Of course I didn't want the spotlight put on me. That quote doesn't even say that I don't like it as scum, just that I didn't like it at that time.

"Of course"? No, laying low is not what every scum does when confronted with uneven odds, otherwise MS would be easy for town. Coming out all guns blazing would be a perfectly valide choice.

As I'm not able to read minds, QT is the best I can have about your thoughts as scum. That's why you were reluctant about posting this QT, if I remember well.

http://www.quicktopic.com/45/H/Xbq6g7vqr87

I suggest you staying more in the background. So far, no one has really called you on it and it is working.

You were in a very strong position in this game, and still advised the "lay low" strategy. And I've not seen you viewing favorably another strategy in all the meta I've read.

And I'm still suspicious about you for conveniently finding reasons to vote the only wagon.


@farside22 : IGMEOY for changing your vote on Battousai for reasons I no longer see as valid after reading some meat on Battousai.

Batt explain most of his reason's for his post well under pressure.
When asked about explain his reasoning to each question.

1. Battousai-scum is a criminal mastermind. He does not ever flinch under pressure. If you played with him that much, you should know that : it certainly didn't take me long to see it.
2. His explanations are about the worst I've ever seen (you seem to agree in your ISO #50). And I don't think not ignoring questions is enough to see someone as town.

[lord_hur]

Deadline is

tomorrow

. Wish I had time to catch up, but its not looking likely. We should get a deadline lynch together though. I'll be checking in once in a while to see if my vote is needed, but I don't expect to have more than maybe ten minutes at a time.

This cannot be considered as playing. My first loss as town was because of such a person that didn't play nearly enough to give any info, and I'd be really pissed to lose again this way. I wish I could vote him to get replaced.

[lord_hur]

Hmm, I don't see him babbling about (if I understand this well, english isn't my first language). Anyway.

Batt explain most of his reason's for his post well under pressure.

So, you list this as a reason for unvoting Battousai.

He is almost babbling about.

And then you post this. Looks a bit contradictory to me.

[lord_hur]

How is he not flinching.

IMHO, those mistakes do not mean anything. I would make a few too if I didn't reread my posts, and they could not be interpreted as a slip. So no, I never thought he was backtracking. I was just pointing them out to him so I could move on to more important things.

Flinching would be letting involuntarily out a reaction that would give a hint about his alignment. I have not seen him guilty of this in any of his recent games that I've read. The only mistake I've seen from him is thinking he could find a better "fake name" than the one the mod gave him (and failing miserably), and that does not qualify, since it's not involuntary.

[lord_hur]

It's mentioned in the last QT I've posted.

[lord_hur]

Lord_Hur- Where did it say I was hesitant in posting?

#33 in fine http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 9&start=25

Lord_Hur- Hmm... where have I not played low as scum? Ask Andrew about that. Last game I played with him I was very vocal D1 (gambit called for it) and I tried to get him lynched based on his playstyle. If being vocal, and trying to advocate a policy lynch on playstyle isn't putting myself in the spotlight, I don't know what is.

Hmmm, I've not come across it... I believe you, but I'd like to see it that made you stand out, or rather blend in an otherwise aggressive town.


@farside22

Now, this is what I'm going off of, others may want to double check this. I do not see support for a lynch on anyone who is being voted for except Nacho, myself, and possibly Bella. Now that everyone has seen this VC, I expect some kind of action to be made by anyone who isn't voting Nacho, myself, or Bella.

I've done this as scum, as a last attempt to look townish. It doesn't make it any more risky for him, since he's de facto in the lead, and we're at the deadline. So, null tell for me. I'm surprised that you derive a town feeling from it.

[lord_hur]

It bothers me a bit, though, that if Battousai is not scum, we'll get less info than with a Nachomamma8 lynch...

[lord_hur]

It bothers me a bit, though, that if Battousai is not scum, we'll get less info than with a Nachomamma8 lynch...

In what way?

There have been more interactions, in my opinion, between Nachomamma8 and the others, than between Battousai and the others, so a Nachomamma8 lynch would give a more interesting reread than a Battousai lynch.

[lord_hur]

Ah well... I really hope we get an small extension, but if we don't, I'm going to stay on Battousai. I'll try to wake up before the deadline, to switch my vote on Nachomamma8 if need be.

[lord_hur]

Wow, that does look good!

Alright, I'll end the day with a quick thought or two :

- farside22 : I do

[lord_hur]

Bleh, misclicked :

- farside22 : I still don't like how she switched her vote off Battousai near the end of the day, although she did say she would switch to Battousai. She hammered, but, if Battousai is indeed scum, that's all farside22-scum could do. So, null-tell.

- Nachomamma8 : rather townish (not very strong). I now view his lack of reasons for voting as rather town carelessness, and he's been much more active and town looking near the end of the day.

- Bella : rather useless in term of scumhunting, I'll have to meta her a bit to see if that's a trend as town or not.

[lord_hur]

unvote vote batt

although egg could be scum doing a 1-1 trade. (jk cant be nk'ed now cos doc just protects him)

Outting the JK still helps scum, since it makes it easier to identify the doc.

Oh yes, could you stop talking about PR not claimed yet? Thank you.

- Archer : I like his vote on Battousai (again, if he's actually scum), since before then, him and Nachomamma8 were equal in votes. I didn't see anything scummy since my vote on him. Lacks a bit of activity, but he's not the worst, by far.

- Egg : ok, if you're confirmed town, please be more active, because you'll be the only one we can blindly trust about telling the truth.

[lord_hur]

Okay, so...

Batt/AntB/Smash

Is our scumteam. Sound about right?

I don't know... I don't like DavidParker's handling of the vote, either. He cleared Battousai too fast imho.

[lord_hur]

I am not buying this. It's too obvious. Scum have received a big blow, and, imho, would go for a safe path. Were I scum, and if AntB is town (I still think there's more chance he is than average), I would NK Nachomamma8 to tackle AntB, his main opponent of D1.

This is a first thought. Time for a reread.

[lord_hur]

My first thought of day 2 is just that nacho was night-killed for being obvious town after the whole nacho vs ant saga, and then batts turning out to be scum. I think town are more likely to night kill based on who they think is seemingly obv-town, than who they can manipulate to make other people look bad (things just get too complicated/WIFOMy there, and really it just makes more sense to kill pro-town players).

I don't know, anyone on the wagon (and town) would have made a good target. That said, I think Nachomamma8 is the best player of the wagon (I don't count farside22 as on the wagon, as I've said earlier), so that may have been their motivation, if they have the same opinion.

But look at this :

Okay, so...

Batt/AntB/Smash

Is our scumteam. Sound about right?

Would you, as AntB-scum, in the situation scum are now, risk confirming someone who pointed you as most obvious scum in his last twilight post ?

By the way, DavidParker, what do you think of AntB now?

(Still rereading)

[lord_hur]

Would you, as AntB-scum, in the situation scum are now, risk confirming someone who pointed you as most obvious scum in his last twilight post ?

My thinking in those kind of situations is that if you leave the player alive they are almost guaranteed to continue the case againt you (ie nacho would keep pushing against AntB). Whereas if you kill Nacho, it goes from 90% chance of AntB lynch down to 50-60%. Plus you get rid of a strong/confirmed (most people had him down as a townie iirc) town player. And if AntB is town it keeps the chances of his lynch high enough that mafia can jump on the wagon with relative ease. Win/win/win if you are mafia imo. Doesnt make AntB scum though, a reread is in order

It's not true for all players (not for me, for example), but this is a very good point in this case. Nachomamma8 is indeed prone to tunnel-vision, and AntB-scum could have outed him because of this.

(reread done up to page 12)

[lord_hur]

Smash I just saw you down there where's your Batt vote?

Explain this.

Vote : smashbro_of_the_SSS

[lord_hur]

I'm surprised that this didn't come up earlier.

1. Why not bring it up on your own, then? You know town are supposed to be honest (well, unless gambitting), don't you?
2. Why did you log on to play another game, but not this one?

[lord_hur]

2) I just forgot that it was deadline that day, and so didn't look at it.

I call bullshit on this! You did not correct me when I said you were playing another game, and I know you were not, since you did not post anything at all at the time Nachomamma8 caught you!

[lord_hur]

3) Looker (jesse)

Damn it, why is it always people that I find most likely town who make town slips?

About AntB, yes I know my argument based on the NK isn't good (actually, they rarely are...), I said so when Archer objected to it. Problem is, I don't really have a read on this guy, so I'm trying unorthodox things. On reread, his walls of texts war with Nachomamma8 still look so much like many, many town fights that start early D1... There's this lack of interaction with Battousai, but it can also be explained by tunnel-vision. I don't remember him interacting with me much, for example.

I'd help lynch him if there's no other wagon that suits me, if you're all so sure and since he's not too far in my list (#4 on my draft), but I'm still unconvinced as of now.

Oh btw, what do you think about posting opinions on all the players? I used to do that in my previous games, but I thought it could help scum to plan a mislynch.

[lord_hur]

3) Looker (jesse) - Well.. Lurking/Stalling, and just a terrible impression I've got from this slot.

I forgot : he got an easy win as scum with this strategy (2 posts a week, with mostly one-liners in each) not too long ago. Makes me want to PL him. You can't really get an opinion on someone who plays like this (except that I hate his play, of course).

[lord_hur]

Oh man, that slip is a result of me being in too many games. Forgot who replaced who. That's as far as I'll go for excuses, nothing really to defend, it was a mistake.

I think that's the first time I get excuses from calling someone town. JesseSheffield was replaced by Battousai, and I don't picture any scum forgetting who is, or was in their team. So, sorry to tell you this, but you're town.

[lord_hur]

Hmm, I can't see why you shouldn't, as it doesn't help scum, and would be lost if they kill you next night (but wait for another opinion, I can miss things).

And please, please, PLEASE can you tell me why you play so little? It's driving me nuts. A confirmed town playing like this is such a waste, when you should be our best asset...

[lord_hur]

antb, i dont care.

vote antb

Every attempt at making sense of this post failed. Please explain.

[lord_hur]

antb, i dont care.

vote antb

Every attempt at making sense of this post failed. Please explain.

the 'i dont care' was talking to antb, who asked me why i had 9 posts in between voting him and justifying

Ok, so it's not even a reason for voting. Stop playing so anti-town, and justify your vote.

[lord_hur]

[*]Bella's response to andrew's answer is also off-putting...off-putting, exaggerated, and harsh. Her exploitation of the WIFOM induced by Nachomamma's final rundown is also off-putting...off-putting, opportunistic, and scummy. UNVOTE: VOTE: Bella[/list]

Strange, I didn't get anything bad from those posts. Seemed pretty logical to me (even if I only partially agree with her on the AntB argument). I thought her attack on andrew94 was perfectly fine, considering how he plays.


@smashbro_of_the_SSS : no verifiable argument, why am I not surprised... alright, my vote stays on you for now. It's not fixed though, as it's not provable that you're not just an absent-minded town (and it's compatible with your meta). IGMEOY. Prove me that you're town.

Oh yes, I don't like your AntB vote intention one bit. It's looking very opportunistic to me (especially as you said you were leaning town before), and I don't really see why what you quoted would look scummy. I get that you seem to think Battousai was avoiding to take a strance on AntB-scum, but he wasn't even threatened at that moment, so he could have safely thrown a few stabs at AntB-scum...

[lord_hur]

Andrew is scum, if not then kill me.

I hate posts like this :/

Why?

farside I'm trying to stand back a little so that I dont manufacture reasons like that game. Made me completely lose sight of actual scum and being so loud and attacking made things way too easy for scum. Well thats the lesson I learned at least. I find your case a bit reaching - making a meta call based on a single previous game.

You're wrong. If cases were not made, nobody would post anything and mafia would be a game of dice. Cases need to be made to obtain exploitable reactions. But if you have to "manufacture" a case, it's not a case. A case isn't a completely (or mostly) artificial construct. You get town points for this, though, as it's very consistent with some earlier posts from you.

[lord_hur]

@Egg : yes, there are nice things in this post. Thanks for participating.

Waiting for Archer's defense before I provide comments.

Also, who are you the alt of?

[lord_hur]

ANTB IS AT L-1 (just so nobody can play the "oops" card)

@AntB - spam attack that allowed you to post in several other games but not this one? Bit strange to say the least

@looker - you're on the fence wrt Egg? Sure, he may be a rather useless townie due to lack of, well, everything, but he did out scum when batt false RC'd. So how can you be unsure of him? Surely if Egg is lying then after the batt lynch the real real jailkeeper would've come forward so that we could likely lynch another scum?

• You're absolutely right; I didn't think of that. Thanks.

This pretty much confirms you as town to me. I find it hard to see scum thinking they could get away with pushing doubt on a JK claim after that claim lead to their buddy getting lynched.

I think your reasoning is flawed. While doing this on purpose as scum is indeed idiotic, there is no reason for town to do it either. It can only be explained by a mistake, and scum have about the same chance as town to make mistakes about roles, since they have no better knowledge than town about it.


@Egg :

I'm not as sure as you that Battousai was dead meat after I switched to him. They were still 3/3 before Archer voted him (so actually put him at a majority), and Battousai is a solid player, so expected to be well able to get himself out of his ditch. I find it quite risky and presomptuous for Archer-scum to buss a much more experienced ally with a very good record.

Also, I can picture town wanting to lynch someone, being stuck with 2 wagons he doesn't really like (explaining why he didn't talk about them before), having residual impressions about the two, rereading to refine these impressions, and voting on these impressions at deadline. Nothing bad there, except the absence of voting reason, and since he announced before you voted him that he (wrongly) stopped building cases, it's quite consistant.

These are the main reasons I'm rather leaning towards town for Archer right now. If you find they are unsound, let me know.

[lord_hur]

bella, in 580 you heavily contradict yourself. at the davidparker place you say 'town-town action', then you said antb is scum

Just because every example I've experienced has been town-on-town crime doesn't meanit's always teh case. In this game, there's more than enough of a case against AntB that the scum-possibility is left open.

"The possibility is left open"? You don't sound like you believe in your own case very much. What changed between when you voted him, and now?

[lord_hur]

I want to remind people in case AntBscum tries to fake claim what he said earlier in the game.

I will happily die (and even self hammer) if my flip will provide sufficient information, and even as scum if I feel it will throw the trail off my scumbuddies. However, my death now will provide nothing but a lot of "meh!"

Why the hell would you say this now, and not keep it carefully stashed away, to whip it at his face when/if he claims? I only see two logical answers to this :

1. You're scum, and didn't really think about the consequences, because you know AntB is not scum.
2. You're helping your scumbuddy AntB with his claim.

Refute this.

Unvote Vote : farside22

[lord_hur]

That's not a major part of my case against him, or really any part of it. andrew94's point was that my opinion of the type of AtE he engaged in was inconsistent with my opinion that AntB is scummy. The point you quoted explains why it is not necessarily an impediment to AntB being scum. It's never been part of my case against him, which you can find clearly stated earlier.

Explain your use of this smiley, please (and yes, it's important to me).

[lord_hur]

lord_hur - I dont quite get how you got to those two possibilities you listed (since I drew a much different conclusion). Please explain?

Well, I reread what I wrote, and I can't really add anything that would clarify it... The best I can do is reformulating : warning possible scum of a trap is inferior in every way to waiting for him to all in it, because the act of falling for it (that would be prevented by this warning) marks him as scum. I think scum is more likely to make such a mistake (the warning), because their goal is not to efficiently catch scum, but to appear to be scum-hunting, so they don't think as much about their plans. Or (but it's more far-fetched), it could be farside22-scum helping AntB-scum with his claim.

What conclusion did you draw? If you have a town-friendly explanation (or find a flaw in my reasoning, or think that it's stupid...), speak up.

[lord_hur]

@Looker : You seem very upset by me disturbing farside22's push against AntB. So, you want AntB dead (1) fast (2). And yet, you were not voting for him (3). Seems a bit contradictory, isn't it? Unless of course, AntB is town, and you're scum after a quick (2) mislynch (1), and don't want to be on the wagon (3).

[lord_hur]

@Lord: Would you rather have scum fake claim again and out another PR and someone forget that little blurb?
I personally would rather protect the PR. I almost thought about saying something like.
Unless AntB claims VT or scum he is 100% lying. After day 1's PR being outed I certainly don't want a doc outed do you?

Yes, being certain that AntB is scum would certainly outweigh risking to out the doc. That would, D4, leave 1 scum against 9 (!) town, 1 or 2 of which would be confirmed. And then, even if the doc is outed, doc/JK is still incredible : doc targets JK, JK flips a coin : heads he targets the doc, tails he targets someone else. This forces scum to either target doc or JK and have 1/2 chance of being ineffective, or target one of the others, leaving 2 confirmed town for a good, long time!

That's actually a better situation than what we have now by a landslide. Any scum managing to win that, with the amount of info we have D1/D2, deserves a scummy award, and I would bow to him/her in awe.

So yes, I was waiting for AntB-scum to bury himself in this ditch, and I consider your blowing it as alarmingly sub-optimal.

My play is not everyone's play, but I still expected much better from farside22-town.

Oh, I checked your time stamps, but I don't think it means much : I'm quite sure you never considered laying a trap for AntB, even if you're town.

[lord_hur]

My play is not everyone's play, but I still expected much better from farside22-town.

On reread, I think this expression can be interpreted as presomptuous. I meant to say that everybody plays his or her own way (which may or may not be mine), but that I think farside22-town would do better than this.

[lord_hur]

Sorry for the multiple posts.

That would, D4, leave 1 scum against 9 (!) town, 1 or 2 of which would be confirmed.

=That would, D3, leave 1 scum against 8 (!) town, 1 or 2 of which would be confirmed.

I didn't see that the mod's count on page 1 was off, and as to why I wrote D4, I have no idea except that it was very early in the morning.

[lord_hur]

• Neither of hur's assertions seemed valid to me.
  • farside wanting to ensure her top suspect is lynched no matter what isn't indicative of her being scum or AntB being town; it's indicative of her persistence and determination
  • Her posted reminder can in no way help him with a surviving fake claim because all she's doing is making sure we lynch him no matter what he claims. So, if anything, she's saying "Don't waste time trying to concoct a fake claim because we're just going to lynch you anyway", which is polite, not necessarily scummy.

---

• RE:lord_hur's speculation
  • The numbers kind of confused me so I'm just going to go by assertion.
    • I'm not upset, it's just that your allegations appeared to come from nowhere and I saw no reason why you made them, thusly making me suspicious. ("Do
      you
      think/know AntB to be town?" "Are you trying to set up a farside lynch/mislynch for tomorrow?" etc.)
    • Regardless of me wanting AntB dead or not, my voting for him would be a hammer and would end the day; I wasn't trying to rush anybody.
    • Being on wagons doesn't bother me, I'd just rather they be on people I think are scum. Voting just to get a majority doesn't interest me. (
      ESPECIALLY
      THIS FAR AWAY FROM DEADLINE, DUDE!!)

Answers to all of your points:

- Oh, because "making sure someone is lynched no matter what" is indicative of being town? It means you don't care about what might come up, because you're positively sure of someone's alignment. Must I remind you who are the ones who know everyone's alignment for sure?
- I said I think it's much more likely that farside22-scum is aiming for a mislynch than helping fellow scum.

- Yes, it's coming from nowhere. And? What was I supposed to do, wait for a week so the scumtell magically improves? This is my style, and I'm quite happy with it. I voted Battousai in strictly the same manner, and I don't remember you jumping on me for it. What's different now? You didn't want to be defending your buddy in case he got lynched, but you don't care so much now because you know AntB is town?
- Reread what you wrote. You jumped on me for interfering in a push at L-1, for god's sake. How can anyone perceive this as not wanting a quicklynch?
- Blanket statement. This doesn't explain that you want dead someone that you are not voting.

You do not provide any satisfying reason for voting me. I'm considering switching my vote, depending on farside22's answer to this :


@farside22: Your answer intrigues me. Can you give me one example, just one, of outing one PR being more hurtful to town than having 2 scum left instead of 1?

[lord_hur]

@farside22: Your answer intrigues me. Can you give me one example, just one, of outing one PR being more hurtful to town than having 2 scum left instead of 1?

Can I ask why this question assumes that you know for fact that AntB will flip town?

I'm completely confused. Outing the doc would only, ONLY happen if AntB claimed PR, and thus is scum. If AntB is town, he doesn't claim, and no one is outed. How can you derive from me asking this question, that I think, or even better, that I know that AntB is town?

So I ask one more time why do you believe so strongly that AntB will flip town?

I might be mistaken, but I don't remember this coming up earlier. Where do you get that I believe AntB to be town? I can't defend myself if I don't know this. My position has not changed since last time I've talked about it : AntB is slightly scummy to me, but would not be my first choice for a lynch.

I am protecting the PR's because one last time for clarity: IT IS A GUARANTEED TOWNIE THAT NO ONE CAN QUESTION!

Every town wants this, all other things being equal. But look at this my way: I have a poor reading on AntB, unlike you it seems. For me, knowing for sure that he is scum would be a huge boon. As I said earlier, it would put town in a very good position. Yes, there would be a loss. But this loss would not happen without one scum biting the dust. A great trade-off from my point of view, in my opinion.

- I said I think it's much more likely that farside22-scum is aiming for a mislynch than helping fellow scum.

What makes you come to this conclusion with my reminder to people to beware of a fake claim.

If you're scum, I can't picture your interactions with AntB as bussing. It's not at all linked to your reminder.

But the answer to this third quote made me realize something I didn't take into account. farside22-town honestly thinks that AntB is scum. So, establishing him as certain scum is not as attractive to farside22-town as it is for me, and maybe not worth outing a PR, depending on her experience. This invalidates my conclusion that her actions are much more likely to be dictated by scum intent than town intent.
The only logical consequence there can be is to :

Unvote

I'll have to think about the implications concerning my conclusions about Looker's vote.

[lord_hur]

I'm completely confused. Outing the doc would only, ONLY happen if AntB claimed PR, and thus is scum. If AntB is town, he doesn't claim, and no one is outed. How can you derive from me asking this question, that I think, or even better, that I know that AntB is town?

I think it's because I believed AntB to be scum and your turn around vote comes from the prospective of AntB town only.

You sounded very positive when you said this (even repeating it twice), and yet now it's "I think". This sounds inconsistent to me, and I don't like inconsistencies, especially in an attack/defense. It can mean you're scum flailing around or weak attacking.

Oh, and there is no "turn around vote". I liberally use votes for pressure, as I'm sure you've noticed. This doesn't mean in any way that smashbro_of_the_SSS('s replacement) has suddenly become townish to me.

[lord_hur]

I'm completely confused. Outing the doc would only, ONLY happen if AntB claimed PR, and thus is scum. If AntB is town, he doesn't claim, and no one is outed. How can you derive from me asking this question, that I think, or even better, that I know that AntB is town?

I think it's because I believed AntB to be scum and your turn around vote comes from the prospective of AntB town only.

You sounded very positive when you said this (even repeating it twice), and yet now it's "I think". This sounds inconsistent to me, and I don't like inconsistencies, especially in an attack/defense. It can mean you're scum flailing around or weak attacking.

You sounded certain that I was wrong with how I took your question. So it turns into an "I think".

- This sounds very, very off to me. Why would you take my reaction into account and let it alter your perception so radically, unless you knew that I am town? When you are uncertain about someone's alignment, only cold facts and reasoning should have this effect.
- Also, I suspect you are lying to me. "I think it's because..." clearly means that you never were positive about it.
- Finally, you said you "believed AntB to be scum". What's your position about AntB now?

[lord_hur]

As for you there is nothing scummy I found from your post or the person you replaced. I've had you listed as town and frankly nothing you stated so far has changed my views.
Finally I take into account that I like to fight with those I believe to be scum. Fighting town on town helps scum hide so I back down these days when it's a player who I believe is town.
Do I feel paranoid I could be wrong about you?
It crossed my mind that question and I came to the conclusion I'm will to take a slap in the face for being wrong when every instinct tells me your town.

Damn it. As much as I hate it when people rub me the right way, I can't deny that, objectively, I would view myself as townish were I in your place.
Also, you tend to occasionally phrase things imperfectly ("It crossed my mind that question"), which could explain my second and third point. Alright, points dismissed for now.

[lord_hur]

Farside is resurrecting old points on me as part of her case despite seeing me as town for a lot of time

after

those points came up and failing to challenge me at the time.

This is the only point of your argumentation that I find any value in, yet it is not precise enough. Can you link me these "old points", please?

[lord_hur]

[*]Where are you?
[*]UNVOTE: VOTE: brokenscraps[/list]

---

• RE:lord_hur...again
  • I didn't say "making sure someone is lynched no matter what" was townish; I said it was moreso determined and persistant than scummy.
  • You say "And?" as if you read nothing of what I posted but expect me to eyeball you every step of the way. I didn't care what you posted about Battousai because it wasn't directed at me, unlike the reasons I posted at/to you regarding why I found your move suspicious. ITT paranoid bullshit is bullshit.

- Well, you draw a fine line. So, you think it's exactly neutral? Fine, I can't argue with that, there are tons of arguments made by someone else that I never believed in. There's quite a difference between not believing in an argument, and establishing probable scum intent, though.
- Irrelevant. Both votes were identical in structure, and not directed at you in any way. Yet, you reacted to one, but not to the other. And given how close it was from the end of day 1, I have trouble believing that you would miss the first. My "And" means I carefully read several times what you've written, but still didn't find a single incriminating reason I could be voted for.
- And thanks for the great scum slip : who typically doesn't care about what's not directed at them? Scum of course.

Vote : Looker

The reasons I advance are:
- Weak voting : in my opinion, none of your arguments are valid ;
- Backing down without justification after a counter-attack (synergy with weak voting) ;
- Contradicting : you say you're voting me for interfering in a lynch, yet you were not voting the person ;
- Quick-lynching intent without a deadline in sight ;
- Letting out a scum slip : you said you didn't care about what's not directed at you, which makes for terrible, terrible scumhunting ;
- Viewing JesseSheffield as town for reason I find far-reaching ;
- Completely ignoring Battousai D1.

Also, your meta looks much, much worse as town than as scum. With all your vote hopping, I only noticed you voting for scum once, and even then, you said yourself it was basically a shot in the dark between 3 persons (the 2 others were town), and you self-hammered the post after (nice letting your townbuddies down). Even random voting would have netted much better results on average.

What was holding me back is I have trouble picturing any scum being this careless. Still, you are my best lead till smashbro_of_the_SSS gets replaced (maybe even then).

For future reference :

Looker scum :
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... lect=11001
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... lect=11001

Looker town :
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... lect=11001
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... lect=11001

[lord_hur]

@AntB: Both points are irrelevant to the question I asked. The first could not be brought up until you were in claiming range (and you just copy/pasted my own argument, which also has nothing to do with my question). And for the second, you OMGUS'ed her just now, so she could not bring it up earlier (and it was a very minor point for her).

Imho, if you're town, you're lynchbait, and you made it way too obvious for scum to know that you're VT. You soft-claimed (and claimed) way too easily. I'm rather of the opinion that VT should keep their role to their grave.

[lord_hur]

The claim was called, so I provided. Giving the impression of VT is always a good thing IMO as it deceives town or fools scum.

- Called? How do you know farside22 isn't scum fishing for roles? If Egg asked for it, I would consider it. Not from unconfirmed town.
- Giving the impression of VT is good when you play a PR, otherwise you should try to appear to be a PR to attract NKs (which is really hard, but rewarding). Take Nachomamma8 : I officially consider him an excellent player now. For two games in a row as VT, he nailed scum D1 AND managed to get NKed N1. This is the best you can do as VT.
- You should not deceive town, when playing town, unless you're a great player, which you are not (yet).

[lord_hur]

Bah, sorry about not posting, lots of work

Reading now.

[lord_hur]

Well, I didn't miss much...

I don't like farside22's attack on Archer : it's quite weak (I agree he's not enough on the offense, but that's still better than some others), and he has been playing like this for a while, so why bring it up now?

Oh, and thanks a lot for replacing, Magua.

[lord_hur]

LH: Did you not read his other game? He actually knows how to make cases and have POV's.

This game? http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... lect=14672

He was endgamed by the mafia without casting a single vote (post RVS). How do you call this having point of views?

Plus, I still don't believe a goon, on his first play as such, would bus D1 a much better and experienced player.

[lord_hur]

VOTE: Conspiracy Welcome to the game.

This made my day.

It's quite uncanny, your list is about the same as mine, except for Archer (reasons : see 711). I don't much like your reasons for me being town though, as I would play like this even if I were scum (well, I'd just think twice about it if one of them were a scum mate). After me saying I believe DavidParker to be town, and seeing that I'm the only town listed, the paranoïd part in me screams scum trying to buddy up.

[lord_hur]

He talked about in the game you linked his thoughts on who he believed town, had a scum suspect and actually scum hunted in the game. Do you really see him acting that way here?

I have a feeling Archer may have played elsewhere. There is more then just MS where people play mafia. How about we ask.

@Archer: Have you ever played mafia (RL or online) before finding your way to MS?

I stand corrected, he did make one case (I find it rather bad, but we all learn), and cast one vote in the entire game, which resulted in a mislynch (which isn't so bad, everyone does it). After that, he fell into the passive defensive mode we see now (which is Bad, with emphasis, as town and as scum). It's still consistant with what I'm seeing.


@Archer : Everyone is wrong at one point or another, so find a target, sink your teeth in it and vote (well, for a decent reason). Your passivity will contribute to your side's undoing if you persist. Oh, and cut the sarcastic remarks, they have no value to us and anger everyone.

[lord_hur]

As we have a deadline in sight, this is my current suspect list, that I would be happy to help lynch :
Looker
ConSpiracy (very close to Looker)
farside22
brokenscraps (significantly lower than the rest)

[lord_hur]

Holy... Now this is what I call a case! This is very, very welcome change from your predecessor. And I must say I agree with most of it. I especially like "farside's third scumsuspect" and "farside's Battousai mention" : I remember not liking these, because scum instinctively leave an exit trail when they say their mates are scummy (when I played as scum, I would have done it several times if I didn't fight against it), while town, on the contrary, attack head-on.

Also, with Magua and now you seemingly agreeing with me on the farside22 fake-claim busting case, I'm considering it as valid again. As everyone was against me on it, I thought I was on the wrong track (3 or 4 can be explained by scum+misguided town, but not all), but now, unless you're both scum (which I find very unlikely), it means it's not completely stupid.

Oh, and while we're at it, I was waiting to see if farside22, as I thought, would lose interest in AntB when she got his claim (if I said this earlier, she'd have used my attack on her as an excuse for being diverted). I think it's safe now to say that the answer is yes. And why would this happen? A claimed VT has less value to town than an unclaimed town, so if she were town, she'd push even more. While on the contrary, mislynching an unclaimed town, or getting another claim, is so much more tempting...

So yes, I think these are objectively good reasons to push farside22 at the first place of my ranking.

Unvote Vote : farside22

Mod : sorry to point this out after your terrific work at finding replacements, but Looked asked to be replaced too...

[lord_hur]

You're not the only town. Andrew is solidly town, and I'd bet money that both AntB and Bella are town as well.

True. Ok, you inherit DavidParker's obv-town to me status, as I can't spot a potential scum mate that I listed as scum and that you would list as town. The only discrepancy is the other way around.

Conspiracy: The case is impressively detailed, a lot more detailed than the notes I wrote up on Farside, but I *really* don't like Conspiracy coming in and tunneling Farside to the exclusion of everyone else. The case very much has a kitchen-sinkish feel to it, where everything, even stuff that's not really scummy, is getting thrown in to make it look better.

I thought that, but IMHO, tunnelling on farside22 is much less scummy because she's hardly threatened, and certainly not lynch-bait. I'd rather see scum going for lynch-bait in this dire situation (AntB, Archer, which are incidentally the ones farside22 have been voting) than a solid town player (which is left for NK). See, by comparison, Battousai who conveniently tunnelled on the lynch-of-the-day. Plus, I don't really expect someone who built a case this long to list his other suspects in the same session and in the same way. That would be the Wall that ends all Walls.

Which parts are artificial in your opinion?


@ConSpiracy : what are your other suspects (I only ask for main points, not the whole case, but do as you wish)?

[lord_hur]

@Egg: I still don't get why you exclude Looker from your list. I reread you, and you said you see many interactions between Battousai and Looker, but, rereading Looker's ISO, I can't find a single line directed to Battousai...

[lord_hur]

Battousai also only mentions Looker once, and just to say he has played with him before. Sorry about the double post.

[lord_hur]

@Egg : Also, who are you the alt of?

I wish I didn't know. I was disappointed.

How did you learn Egg's identity?

[lord_hur]

As a list mod I have to check players I don't know to make sure there not inning as someone already in the game. I have that power.

Ok, I was wondering since Egg didn't post anywhere else than in this game. So you learned about it as you were doing your mod's job for this game...

And good job, now I'm indeed wondering if those scumtells are not too numerous to be true... And I can't see any motivation for farside22-scum to vote a scum mate and immediately unvote him for a flimsy reason. Unless maybe you attacked him to look town, expecting him to defend himself well as usual so you could unvote. But yes, even then you'd have kept the vote longer on him...

[lord_hur]

Ok, I was wondering since Egg didn't post anywhere else than in this game. So you learned about it as you were doing your mod's job for this game...

I thought you would not correct me, lying scum! You could NOT have learned about his identity doing your job as a mod, because that would happen at the start of the game, and it's clear that you considered him a newbie till the end of D1! And why did you looked his identity up then? I never cared about it, because I'm not trying to outguess him, but you are, and, as a meta-game nut (don't even try to deny it), you thought knowing his identity would give you an extra edge, so you looked up him up N1!

[lord_hur]

Also and point of order to Consp who quoted my post. He missed my soft claim (which I did on purpose) which tells me since he received his PM just recently. He doesn't recognize a town PM.

1) Seriously I'm not allowed to vote for someone else in the game? Is that really what your bitching is about? I decide when I do a vote. It happened I explained why I voted when. If other people are talking and I want to get reads on people I find scummy I will vote on them. I will vote as many times as I damn will please,

because that's what I'm allowed and can only do

.

I am interested in ConSpiracy's answer to this, and would (respectfully) like no one else to comment on it till he does.

[lord_hur]

Oh, I just thought about something. Actually, knowing Egg's target can help us a bit. As there are 2 scums left, the kill action has a 50% chance to have been done by either. So, the person he JKed last night has a 50% less chance to be scum, because, if that person is scum, there is a 50% chance that his/her action was blocked. So, if he targetted one of today's suspects, I think he should speak up.

[lord_hur]

Also and point of order to Consp who quoted my post. He missed my soft claim (which I did on purpose) which tells me since he received his PM just recently. He doesn't recognize a town PM.

1) Seriously I'm not allowed to vote for someone else in the game? Is that really what your bitching is about? I decide when I do a vote. It happened I explained why I voted when. If other people are talking and I want to get reads on people I find scummy I will vote on them. I will vote as many times as I damn will please,

because that's what I'm allowed and can only do

.

I am interested in ConSpiracy's answer to this, and would (respectfully) like no one else to comment on it till he does.

Actually, never mind.

@AntB

: does farside22's soft claim look like the PM you received? (that way, it gives no extra info to scum, since he claimed VT)

[lord_hur]

Well, it seems farside22 forgot that the VT PM was posted by the mod at the start of the game (and it didn't hit me either, until now).

Open 272: Near-Vanilla

You are a Vanilla Townie. You have no abilities or actions. Please confirm in thread.

It doesn't look to me at all like what farside22 soft-claimed, as it doesn't mention that voting is the only thing VT can do. I doesn't mention vote at all, actually.

[lord_hur]

because if egg is aiming his jailkeep to protect, that post which someone said that the particular person has a 50% less chance of being mafia is false.

The motive for jailing is indifferent concerning its mechanism. There's no "jail to protect mode" vs "jail to prevent a kill mode", there's just jail. If there was 1 scum left, if someone is jailed and someone else is NKed, the jailed person is guaranteed town. Ok so far? Now, if there are 2 scums left, the kill can be done by either, so if the JK targets one of the scums, there is a 50% chance of having no NK. So, if there IS a NK, the JK probably didn't target scum : in other words, the jailed person is 50% less likely to be scum than the others.

[lord_hur]

It' has nothing to do with the PM, it's what most VT's know once they get their role PM.

It's you who brought that up here :

Also and point of order to Consp who quoted my post. He missed my soft claim (which I did on purpose) which tells me since he received his PM just recently. He doesn't recognize a town PM.

You vote him for not recognizing the town PM, and now you say I'm stupid for saying yours doesn't even look like it? How can you attack someone for not comparing your soft claim with the town PM, when it doesn't look at all like said PM?

I'm not dead set on lynching you, I just want to make sense of your accusations and your defense. I was serious when I said I see things in your favor, but I also can still see things incriminating you that remain unexplained (like why you looked up Egg's identity when you had no town reason to), and I don't understand your points. So yes, call me stupid all you want, I don't care. But please make me understand.

Also, for some reason, seeing you giving up on avoiding to be lynched makes me sad. Good players don't give up, whichever side they're on, and you're a good player.

[lord_hur]

[quote="farside22"]I have to reread Egg but I'm sure after the JK was outed any mafia scum player worth their salt would have looked to see if Egg suspected them and if so had the other mafia team player to the kill. There is no way I believe the 50% chance.
Seriously haven't you ever been scum? [quote]
This is WIFOM in its purest form and I'd hope Egg is smart enough to spot it and act accordingly, so I think my statistics hold. I have been scum 3 times, IIRC.

[lord_hur]

How is this WIFOM? Are you saying as scum when a PR has been outed you never looked to see who they accused to work out night kills among each other?

Yes, but the PR knows he's been outed, so he can alter his behavior based on this knowledge. And then scum can target the PR's target because he thinks the PR thinks he will change targets. Etc. This is WIFOM.
When I'm in this situation, I randomize my target in a selection of players, so my action cannot be predicted as much.

[lord_hur]

This is an immesnsely stupid argument and you should be ashamed for making it.

Whatever. It wasn't an argument against farside22, as I said earlier.

Also, I completely agree with farside22. I know Bella is of the over-emotional type, but going from mostly town to vote-worthy in 1 post? Well, I won't vote since I've had her as town, but still...

Ok. I'm going to

Unvote Vote : ConSpiracy

Reasons :
- vote/unvote of Battousai makes no sense for farside22-scum ;
- Battousai talked about bussing after she did this, and I don't believe in scum talking about their partner's strategy openly ;
- what little I know of farside22 makes me highly doubt that she would ever use her mod powers without a legitimate reason (please forgive me for considering it, farside22) ;
- Magua is obv-town to me, and I agree with him now that ConSpiracy is going over the top, repeating himself and throwing everything he can regardless of the scumhunting value ;
- there are too many arguments I don't believe in piling on her right now ;
- her last post is as town as can be, imho : I've done the exact same thing before, the only time I've ever self-destructed (in my defense, it was a game based on cults, and me being alive, because of my "powers" and recruitability, made me a threat to town).

[lord_hur]

@Lord_Hur.

You can't disagree with me that farside is going over the top to me, as well.

No, I can't. She's also guilty of it.

I have had 5 games before on this site and I have had this sort of `clash` once before. At that time I was also tunneling too much to get the other one lynched and that only worked against me. Oh well, next time I am going to have this game and the other one in mind to stop doing being over the top.

Did you get him/her lynched?

[lord_hur]

Nope. Eventually we found someone else who was nearly confirmed scum due to scumpairings. But my scumread on her did end the game, because I killed her instead of the real scum. (Yes, yes, she wasn't even scum...) It is a bit complicated, so I suggest skim it yourself, I replaced chkflip in day four: Open 270: Medical mafia

You know you weren't NKed because he saw a tunnelling newb he could manipulate, right? Geez, that would have cured me of tunnelling forever.

Anyway, no scumtell here.

[lord_hur]

So since Archer doesn't want to play ball question to Consp. Is there a reason you called Archer she? I'm just wondering because I notice that MS is mostly male oriented environment and Archer didn't correct you either.

He called me and brokenscraps (maybe others) "she" too. My guess is his mastery of english isn't perfect.

Would 4 vs 5 votes result in a lynch, or do we have to reach 6?

[lord_hur]

I loved the arguments with Farside and the convo's with Lord Hur. Good game town!

Which conversations with me did you enjoy? I mean, I've not exactly been pleasant (I rarely am at this game). I'm very sorry if you're honest, but from my point of view, this looks like an artificial last attempt to look town.
Anyway, if you're lynched and town, keep it up, your logical analysis will pay if you manage to not tunnel as much, and not use others' arguments as much (which is scummy, and risky because everyone can be scum). And actually, the advice is the same if you're scum.

[lord_hur]

I don't suppose there's any chance of a last minute wagon against, say, Looker on account of voting the all-but-confirmed jailkeeper, is there?

I might want to join in (for different reasons about Looker), but it's too risky imho.

[lord_hur]

Although, I still don't get why using someone else's arguments is bad, because rephrasing the arguments will accuse the writer of "following, but not pretending not to be".

Rephrasing isn't good either. I just think that using your own tells are much better, because good reasoning can perfectly be made by scum too (on perfectly valid reasons, everyone make mistakes). But the difference is, it always leads to town lynch. So, assuming that you're as good at scum-hunting than your team-mates, the average chance to lynch scum will always be lower if you adopt another's arguments.
For example, in this game : 9 town left, 2 scums, hypothesis : 50% scum lynch if an argument made by any town is followed (yes, I'm an optimist!).
Chance if you follow your own advice : 50%
Chance if you follow another's : 50% x 9/11 + 0% x 2/11 = 41%
So, I typically only use an argument if I see it before another points it out (unless, it's really damning).

[lord_hur]

Good job Magua, nice victory. I really can't believe we lost this.

I can't say the same about Looker, since in my opinion his "participation" is lurking at best, and about Battousai since he indeed wasn't in his best shape.

ConSpiracy, you were a pleasure to play with, and I hope we play together again.

The same goes for farside22, of course, and Nachomamma8, who was great (albeit short-lived).

Thank you everyone for playing.

I hope I wasn't too much of a pain to play with, and I thank the mod for, well, modding.

[lord_hur]

Oh and before I forget LH that was awesome how you sort of soft claimed a PR. I don't know if you did it on purpose, but when you asked AntB about my soft claim I had a feeling you would be dead next as the potential doctor.

It was definitely on purpose. I feared I was being too heavy handed, but it apparently worked. The plan was that Egg would spot it too, but...

Yes, it's really a shame about Looker, by the end of day 2 I was convinced that he was scum, but as I said Bella at the time, it was too late to switch, and nobody had answered favorably to my case on him. I was furious he got away too.

Oh by the way, who was Egg, since he said he won't use this account again?

[lord_hur]

Bella, do you realize you quicklynched in LYLO ? That's a very bad mistake, and Regfan is right to criticize you about it imho.

Oh, and I missed Looker's reply : yes I was NKed, but in doing so I did my job as VT. Also, smart, and if possible elegant, play will always be more important than victory for me. That's why I only play one game at a time (and only during periods during which I can spare enough time), and that I give it my best. It's a question of respect for those who play with me.