inbetweeners mafia Game Over - Bully for you!

[ThAdmiral]

Vote: xisiqomilir

Hard to spell

[ThAdmiral]

Question: am I the only furc fan around?
I like playing with him because he is readable for the most part.

Come on, Lanthir's too douchey to be scum.

This is probably true.

I don't even know who Furcolow is

@Peregrine, Zang and DLM

– why are you ignoring the righteous Furc wagon?

What makes it so righteous?

Gonna have to read up on furcolo...

I'm happy to provide you fine people some relevant meta:

Town-colo

Stars Aligned 3
Cold War Mafia
Cookie Thief Mafia

Scum-colo

Ohne Mafia <--- Top scumteam results in any MS game ever. Seriously if you don't read any of the others read this one (HINT: ZERO TOWN DEATHS BY GAME END)
New Designer Mafia

Trying way to hard to be helpful = scum.

vote: Xisiqomelir

edit: was already voting him. My rvs sense is stong.

Vote: xisiqomilir

Hard to spell

You have nothing else to comment on? Really?

Yeah, this guy is town. Way to righteous.

[ThAdmiral]

If you're trying to imply I don't like playing with him you're just wrong.

[ThAdmiral]

Trying way to hard to be helpful = scum.

So town shouldn't try to be helpful?

Trying

way too hard

to be helpful.

[ThAdmiral]

Oh, so you just happened to RVS scum at Post 32. Despite the fact that the post you are calling them scum for (Post 30) preceeds your ‘RVS’.

Hadn't read the game at this point. Came in, voted, left.

Scum to VI / Newb buddying engaged. Furc has draw ‘chuckle RVS votes’ for his reputation. What’s the easiest way to make sure you’ve got a likely sheep for the rest of the game? Defend a weak player as easily readable and then later read him as Town.

This would make sense if it were actually possible to predict/control furc. He is a wild force of nature and is more likely to think I'm scum for defending him than anything else (I'm pretty sure he did this in "cold war mafia" which xisq so kindly linked).
Also it would probably be more suspicious of me if it wasn't true and I hadn't expressed the same sentiment in previous games I've had with furc.

Yeah, this guy is town. Way to righteous.

Yet another example of Exhibit B – deflect suspicion from a Newb by using what is clearly not an alignment tell at all (Righteousness? Fluff city) to call him Town. Fonz is also guilty of this play (he's too douchy to be scum is moronic).

Ok so my plan in the game so far is to rally all the vi's/noobs and form some sort of army that will magically do what I want because I called them town once, or indicated I enjoy playing with them?
Am I following correctly so far?

Trying way too hard to be helpful.

Lulz.

Link me to all the completed games where I can see an example of you using this tell as Town to catch scum.

Also – link me to all your recent (as in the last year) Furc games.

Or don’t if you are scum and just want to roll over.

This is your case. If you want to trawl through my posting history to find evidence to support it then be my guest.
As far as me using the "too helpful" tell I would say it is a variant of the type of scum play where they think "better post a list of everyone in the game and my reads on them so it looks like I'm being super proactive".
It's actually sort of humorous that you accuse me of being scum for trying to get other players on side with me, whereas xisq is doing the same thing on a larger scale, yet he is not scum for it.

[ThAdmiral]

Trying way too hard to be helpful.

I still don't understand. Town shouldn't try to be as helpful as they can? I agree that scum do sometimes fake helping the town but I don't understand how you would distinguish that from town actually trying to help as much as they can, which any townie should do.

This game is about interpreting behaviour based on motivation.

That's a pretty neato case. Be cool if I'd made it.

Unvote; Vote: ThAdmiral

I'm pretty unimpressed by no comment on it otherwise. I mean yeah okay Fonz promised more, but Mr Ree, Zang? Why do you feel no need to comment on pretty much the first case of the game?

Pedit: Ok Fonz can go on that list too. And to answer, I guess great minds, eh? Why should I be so hipst3r as to not vote with other people? Not really sure that I or anyone else actually suspected Furc though, it's kinda difficult to read people before they post.

Sheeping and omgusing in same post. Goodposting.

[ThAdmiral]

Bookmarking this in my ISO for an LaL lynch tomorrow.

What are you trying to imply with the first line?

The first line isn't an implication at all, it's a clearly stated plan of action.

Why wait? If your case on me is so compelling maybe you'll convince a vig to kill me tonight (assuming furc gets lynched today because that's what's going to happen, right?)

[ThAdmiral]

VOTE: ThAdmiral
At first I thought he was just defending himself more than he was scumhunting. But then I saw he didn't want to provide his meta. I mean yeah, the amusing coincidence of ThAdmiral saying that being too helpful is scummy, and deliberately trying to be unhelpful, isn't lost on me. However, as stated, that's just amusing, not necessarily scummy.

One thing the bothered me is his "edit" to point out that his RVS vote was oh-so spot on. I can understand making an RVS mindlessly, and seeing it when you read through the thread to make your next post. But the "edit" seems to come from a point in time where ThAdmiral has already written the post and is looking back over his tracks to double-check everything. Completely more scum-driven than town-driven. Why wouldn't he catch what he said the first time he reads through before he makes the post? Why would he want to go back and look at his RVS in the time between typing his post and submitting it if it was just a mindless RVS? I do not have answers to these questions.

MoI also makes some decent points. Exhibit B I feel is the strongest point.

-KJ

My meta is there for anyone to see if they want to go through my game history.

"edit:" is a common form of syntax used here at mafiascum. not sure if you are aware of that or not.
(who are you a hydra of? Is kj killerjester?)

[ThAdmiral]

This game is about interpreting behaviour based on motivation.

I am aware of that. I am asking you what, specifically, Xis did to make you think that he is motivated to help the town because he is scum rather than because he is town.

I guess because no one had even asked for meta. He quoted a bunch of people saying "why furc" and then proceeded to give up a bunch of furc games. It was like he was looking for an opportunity to seem productive. And the "you fine people" thing; smacks of sucking up.
That's how it looked to me.

I really don't mind my vote on him for other reasons though. He's going with this whole faux-confident thing where he's all like "I've definitely caught scum, and they are

definitely

going to be lynched"/"I'm right about everything", but in reality it's largely bs. I really hate that style of play, it's so forced.
I still haven't decided whether he's a townie who's read ABR's "guide to mafia" and is trying to emulate it, or whether he's just faking it as scum, but either way I'm happy with my vote for now.

[ThAdmiral]

I treat lists of reads as a scumtell. Posting that you have a town read on X and a null read on Y is really not necessary if you are town because it should be clear from the content of your posts. Scum-town lists are a cheap way of looking to be getting content in, and scum do it so they can be all like "look at all my town-motivated

reads

".

I find that when someone hasn't posted in a while and then comes out with a list this is a scumtell. I believe in this situation scum often feel pressured to look like they have "done something useful" and, as you say, a list is an easy way to get content in.
Lists, however, are not a scumtell in and of themselves (especially if there is decent reasoning provided for why people are listed where they are) - they are fairly common here regardless of alignment.

Can you list where he's flipflopped on the furc wagon 5 times (or as many as you can find)?

Post 22 - Jarvis comments on joining the furc wagon but instead votes lanthir. A weak stance that could easily be dismissed later as it was just in RVS.
Post 49 - He says that he was never really suspicious of him.
Post 51 - Says that he hoped the wagon would achieve a lynch. A much stronger stance despite never voting for furc. Completely contradicts what he just said.
Post 74 - Now he says that he is not pushing the wagon and would not hammer but still wouldn't complain about a furc lynch.
Post 78 - After being called out, he says that he's not at all in favor of the lynch.

I'm actually impressed you found 5 as I assumed this was probably exaggeration or bluster.

I had a look over those posts and have some further questions for jarvis:

PV, did I pick right?

I'm assuming this is some sort of in-joke, but what did you mean by this?

Pedit: Ok Fonz can go on that list too. And to answer, I guess great minds, eh? Why should I be so hipst3r as to not vote with other people? Not really sure that I or anyone else actually suspected Furc though, it's kinda difficult to read people before they post.

A wagon.

Maybe even a lynch.

This is the most glaring inconsistency, especially given that they are 2 posts apart. Jarvis can you explain your thought process here?

I don't know. I'm not a great believer in policy lynching, and I wouldn't be the one to hammer or even push the wagon towards a lynch, but I wouldn't have too many complaints if it went through.

Why would you not have any complaints if you don't agree with it?

Let's not have any pretence here, it was Fonz who brought up this theoretical if-you-voted-Furc line. I am not currently for his lynch.

You say "currently". Does this mean you were at some point?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A Lynch before confirmation does nothing but potentially eliminate two townies.

This isn't true. While I don't think it is a good idea it could catch scum by random, but even then it wouldn't be as useful as lynching them after they've spoken since there won't be any relation tells to gain from it.

How many votes are on MoI? He is fuckin' scum this game. Sheeping, and sucking Sotty's dick.

He's definitely sucking sotty's dick (or "bits" as the case may be), but can you explain the sheeping?

[ThAdmiral]

I treat lists of reads as a scumtell. Posting that you have a town read on X and a null read on Y is really not necessary if you are town because it should be clear from the content of your posts. Scum-town lists are a cheap way of looking to be getting content in, and scum do it so they can be all like "look at all my town-motivated

reads

".

I find that when someone hasn't posted in a while and then comes out with a list this is a scumtell. I believe in this situation scum often feel pressured to look like they have "done something useful" and, as you say, a list is an easy way to get content in.
Lists, however, are not a scumtell in and of themselves (especially if there is decent reasoning provided for why people are listed where they are) - they are fairly common here regardless of alignment.

Can you list where he's flipflopped on the furc wagon 5 times (or as many as you can find)?

Post 22 - Jarvis comments on joining the furc wagon but instead votes lanthir. A weak stance that could easily be dismissed later as it was just in RVS.
Post 49 - He says that he was never really suspicious of him.
Post 51 - Says that he hoped the wagon would achieve a lynch. A much stronger stance despite never voting for furc. Completely contradicts what he just said.
Post 74 - Now he says that he is not pushing the wagon and would not hammer but still wouldn't complain about a furc lynch.
Post 78 - After being called out, he says that he's not at all in favor of the lynch.

I'm actually impressed you found 5 as I assumed this was probably exaggeration or bluster.

I had a look over those posts and have some further questions for jarvis:

PV, did I pick right?

I'm assuming this is some sort of in-joke, but what did you mean by this?

Pedit: Ok Fonz can go on that list too. And to answer, I guess great minds, eh? Why should I be so hipst3r as to not vote with other people? Not really sure that I or anyone else actually suspected Furc though, it's kinda difficult to read people before they post.

A wagon.

Maybe even a lynch.

This is the most glaring inconsistency, especially given that they are 2 posts apart. Jarvis can you explain your thought process here?

I don't know. I'm not a great believer in policy lynching, and I wouldn't be the one to hammer or even push the wagon towards a lynch, but I wouldn't have too many complaints if it went through.

Why would you not have any complaints if you don't agree with it?

Let's not have any pretence here, it was Fonz who brought up this theoretical if-you-voted-Furc line. I am not currently for his lynch.

You say "currently". Does this mean you were at some point?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A Lynch before confirmation does nothing but potentially eliminate two townies.

This isn't true. While I don't think it is a good idea it could catch scum by random, but even then it wouldn't be as useful as lynching them after they've spoken since there won't be any relation tells to gain from it.

How many votes are on MoI? He is fuckin' scum this game. Sheeping, and sucking Sotty's dick.

He's definitely sucking sotty's dick (or "bits" as the case may be), but can you explain the sheeping?

[ThAdmiral]

Also yates still hasn't posted.
I know for a fact that he is active elsewhere - I'm going to assume he hasn't picked up his role pm.

[ThAdmiral]

@ moi: I'm not going to quote pyramid reply to every one of your points because then you'll just reply in kind and the back and forth gets really tiring. I'll try to reply to each major point you brought up though, and furthermore I will try to be brief so this doesn't get out of hand and become a wall of text between us that no one else reads.

As far as me not providing meta for a "you're trying to hard"/"too helpful" example from myself from an earlier game I'm 100% sure I have used it before but frankly I have neither the time nor inclination to look through my history to find one. The example you brought up from saw mafia, in which I was meh about you trying to hard, doesn't really count because, lets face it, you

always

try to hard. You're trying to hard now, for instance.

As to your second point (me currying favour with weaker/noob players) it is flawed for a couple of reasons. Firstly I happen to think being unnecessarily abrasive, particularly to more experienced players like yourself, is indeed a towntell. It indicates a "I don't really care what you think about me" vibe which is more likely to come from town. Secondly I never even called furc town, just that I enjoy games with him.
Also yes I was town in coldwar mafia, we both were in fact.

I agree - currying favour is indeed a good strategy for scum. But I think this is simply a misinterpretation of my actions.
Furthermore if I am guilty of it by your standards, I stand by my sentiment that xisq is also guilty of it, as well as yourself (mainly in regards to sotty). I know you will say this is scummy because I am "deflecting" or whatever, but it is also undeniable.

I responded to zang with more detail at a later stage. Post 67.

As far as sheeping goes - it doesn't always have to be a scumtell, but in this instance I think it was. Jarvis' 49 did not read as genuine, and is a bad post overall. He says "the case is neat" but doesn't explain why, asks other people to comment on it (which reads as trying to get others to push forward any potential wagon), and then adds fonz to his "list" after he realises he voted him.

[ThAdmiral]

I'm assuming this is some sort of in-joke, but what did you mean by this?

I'm not really sure about that assumption. It's just a question - i.e. was my vote better than a Furc vote?

Why did you specifically ask pv?

This is the most glaring inconsistency, especially given that they are 2 posts apart. Jarvis can you explain your thought process here?

Not really an inconsistency. Don't need a scumread to lynch someone. Not that I was the only one heading that way, but refer back to previous thoughts about not being upset.

I think we will have to agree to disagree here as I would rather no-lynch than lynch someone I didn't have a scumread on. Although that is not a widely held belief (afaik) I would imagine most people would say you generally need a scumread to lynch someone.

@ xisq post 102

1) no
2) probably
3) because I don't like you, and would rather keep any interaction with you to a minimum

Actually I do have a question for you:
Are you now trying to squirm out of any responsibility for a pre-confirm furc wagon by saying it was all a joke?

This portion of the post contained a lengthy MOI rebuttal, but I've decided life's too short and deleted it.

Made me lol.

[ThAdmiral]

So what's going to happen is I keep saying no, maybe you decide to put votes on me, then I go "fine - here xxxx game, happy now" and you go "ok, I guess you were right" and then you take the votes off.

Why not save the time and avoid all the hassle?

I don't even get this line of argument. Lets say I hadn't used that argument before - does that make it an invalid argument on it's own merits? Do I have to have a precedence for each and every one of my arguments for them to be deemed acceptable (which brings up a fairly obvious logical quandry because there

has

to be a first time for everything).
This is all just hypothetical because, again, I'm sure I have used this argument/similar variants of it before - but it is food for thought.

[ThAdmiral]

I'm afraid its a matter of principle now.

[ThAdmiral]

I'm afraid its a matter of principle now.

If you are town, this is absolutely not a reason to get yourself lynched.

I disagree. This is a very beneficial precedent that I'm more than happy to set for myself.

One game where I'm lynched compared to a lifetime in which I don't have to provide self meta? I'll take that deal any day of the week and twice on tuesday!

[ThAdmiral]

@ zang: no, if I fold now I'm doomed to continue providing self meta ad infinitum, because people will know I buckle eventually.

The joke is moi actually did find an example of me using it in the past but "it was not clear" or some other such vagary.

[ThAdmiral]

So basically... I think this meta thing is likely overblown, but ThAd is being a bit of a dick about it.

In truth I am, but I genuinely don't like being pestered about my meta and I feel questions like "prove that you've used this argument before" are sort of rude, and more importantly ignore the actual point of the argument which should be judged on its own merits rather than whether the player happens to have used it before.
I explained my stance in 67 - I really should have been judged on that not on whether I've used it before. As you can see it's caused quite a distraction in this game (which I am partially responsible for, yes).

No, but I kind of think I get where MOI is coming from here? (First time for everything). Like, if you think something is a scumtell, then you should have used it at some point in the past, unless you've only recently decided it is scummy, in which case you'd be able to explain what caused that change in your thinking. If you're attacking something you've never before used as town, there's a decent likelihood you're just scum using the argument that comes to hand rather than because you believe in it.

Well...I agree, it is not entirely baseless, and if I was actually asked nicely rather than with the smarmy know-it-all way moi went about it and xisq followed up on

maaaaaybe

I actually would have been bothered to have a look in my past games. As sotty referenced I'm generally not like this. But fuck me moi and xisq are pushing my buttons this game.

Vig: Yates

I don't give a flying fuck if he is Town - that attitude just has to go. Hell I can't believe I have been forced to NOT use it on Furc by someone posting worse than he usually does ...

Peace out. Hope you enjoy the loss.

If this was real it would have been used on me so I doubt it's actually real.

[ThAdmiral]

Against my initial thoughts I think Jarvis is town[/curryingfavour]

I find it unlikely scum would admit to being happy to lynch someone who they didn't have a scumread on. Plus his frustration reads as genuine.

[ThAdmiral]

@ moi: I'm sure you do annoy scum, but you also frustrate the hell out of town when you crusade after them.

[ThAdmiral]

Well...I agree, it is not entirely baseless, and if I was actually asked nicely rather than with the smarmy know-it-all way moi went about it and xisq followed up on

maaaaaybe

I actually would have been bothered to have a look in my past games. As sotty referenced I'm generally not like this. But fuck me moi and xisq are pushing my buttons this game.

This is terrible and scummy and my voting is really staying now.

I'm gonna read this game some more tomorrow. Tired and I seem to be drowning a little in the back and forth. Day off tomorrow though, so yay.

Can you explain why?

This goes to everyone who thinks I'm "scum": why is stubborness a scumtell?

[ThAdmiral]

@ xisq: As I said it doesn't have to be rude to ask for meta, but certainly the way that you and moi did was.

I never said it was a great exertion. I said I wasn't going to do it because (I believe these were my exact words) "I have neither the time nor the inclination".

As far as the case in 151 - I feel like I've already responded most if not all of these, but again briefly so you don't pop a vein in your forehead:
1. I've definitely said this a million times: I wasn't buddying I was just giving my opinion.
2. I'm laughing off points that I find laughable.
3. I definitely already explained this as well. I did provide reasoning for what I thought was xisq's scum motivation, so this point is null.
4. There is no need for me to "push" xisq for interactions. He is doing plenty of talking for the both of us.
5. I have explained my actions and thought process in regards to everything I have done in this game. Jarvis didn't in that post, so once again the point is null.

And no I'm not going to claim MoI or Fonz were "trying to hard" because they actually had a reason to do the meta-searching they did - MoI solely to bolster his case without any intention to analyse, and Fonz to fairly assess whether the case on me actually had merit (surprise: it didn't).

What do you perceive to be genuine about it? Do you base this opinion on prior experience with Jarvis, or some other basis?

It reads genuine because it doesn't seem forced, over the top or false. It is based on my prior experience trying to read hundreds of newer players.

@DLM

: What is your answer to your own question?

Is that your pretentious way for asking about my scumreads? My vote speaks toward that end.

I don't at all see what was pretentious about it, but apparently I'm giving offense left and right in this game while being perfectly oblivious.

Dickheads generally are. Otherwise they probably wouldn't be dickheads.

[ThAdmiral]

If I think that something is scummy now, it's rather likely that I will still think that it is scummy one year from now.

Yes I agree. However if there is a Tell (in this case the "Trying Too Hard") that someone believes in that isn't very unusual (and "Trying Too Hard" is hardly a niche element) you would think that Town ThAd would have used it in a meaningful and successful fashion over the last year's worth of games. No evidence exists that he has. Thus one aspect of his play that I find scummy - that he is using 'Tells of Connivance' as opposed to honestly scum-hunting.

Hey moi can you link me to every game you've ever used the phrase "tells of connivance" in?
Both scum and town thanks.

[ThAdmiral]

And no I'm not going to claim MoI or Fonz were "trying to hard" because they actually had a reason to do the meta-searching they did -

MoI solely to bolster his case without any intention to analyse

, and Fonz to fairly assess whether the case on me actually had merit (surprise: it didn't).

Oh really? So in regards to the bolded -

Am I scum trying to mislynch you?
You are specifically trying to assert Post 151 is in no way analysis?

The annoying thing about you, MoI, is that you tend to do that as both town and scum. When you have someone in your sights you get blinkered.

Also not providing your meta??? That's like totally a scumtell bro!

ThAd, you have been off your game of late. You are about to get lynched here. You were shot in the face Town in another game. You aren't contributing in another. What's up?

Is it really they way you were asked or is it because it doesn't exist? I don't even necessarily think it's scummy to *think* you had used that in the past when you hadn't but since YOU brought it up, you really should post the proof or admit your mistake. You are kind of in a weird spot here where admitting your mistake this late in the game isn't going to help your cause. I realize you are trying to prove a point but the above post to MoI is childish and very dissimilar from your own situation.

You almost have me convinced to vote for you as well.

Fuck you yates. How was me getting shot by someone I'm convinced is either scum or an idiot my fault at all? That annoyed the fuck out of me because I was just starting to get in to that game - but that's an ongoing, no more talking about it.
I don't know what other game I'm not contributing in.

It REALLY was the way I was asked. Have you not read the game - fonz brought up my meta and showed I'd used it several times. Even MoI, although he tried his darndest to dismiss it, had to admit I'd used it at least once in the last year.

[ThAdmiral]

Even MoI, although he tried his darndest to dismiss it, had to admit I'd used it at least once in the last year.

Would you please show me where? I must have missed it in my review and MoI ISO.

Here:

Post 1901 – Judge for yourself on this post. It’s a one-liner where ThAd tells Castle Bravo (a GreyICE alt) he is trying way too hard. He does eventually vote for him but no further posts indicating this a scum-tell are to be had. CastleBravo was a Town Vengeful in this game.

Also I would argue this from the same post is actually another similar use, even though MoI brought it up for a different reason:

Look at Charlie rushing to please whiskers. "would you like me to do a point by point reply, sir", "is there anything else you need to be more comfortable, sir".

Also trying to gain points with dash by calling him confirmed town now. He's been obv town for a while bro.

That, particularly the first line, I believe falls under the category of me accusing someone of being "too helpful", and also is very similar to what I accused xisq of in this game when he called people "you fine sirs" when he provided the furc meta.

[ThAdmiral]

I never said it was a great exertion. I said I wasn't going to do it because (I believe these were my exact words) "I have neither the time nor the inclination".

So saying that it's takes too long and that you don't want too is diferent than saying it's a great exertion?

Yes. Great exertion ignores the "inclination" part which is at least half of it. And I wouldn't say it is "great" effort, which would be an exaggeration.

1. I've definitely said this a million times: I wasn't buddying I was just giving my opinion.

Regardless of how many times that you've said it, that does not make it true.

Yes but it doesn't make it untrue, and more to the point moi saying the opposite a million times doesn't make that true either.

[ThAdmiral]

Because it's not the stubbornness as such, it's more you saying that you would have done it but because MoI was a jerk you didn't. This is you once again turning the tables on the argument and forcing the blame and focus back on MoI. This is one big giant cop out. "This is all their fault!" detracting from the point against you.

Not true. I've admitted multiple times that I'm being a dick.

[ThAdmiral]

Yes. Great exertion ignores the "inclination" part which is at least half of it. And I wouldn't say it is "great" effort, which would be an exaggeration.

So then why not do it if it wasn't such a great effort? I don't understand why you didn't have the "inclination".

I have already explained this - because I was asked in an abrasive way I got stubborn and didn't feel like complying. This coupled with the fact that it would have taken some time, not heaps but certainly a bit, to do I said "fuck it" and decided not to do it.

Yes but it doesn't make it untrue, and more to the point moi saying the opposite a million times doesn't make that true either.

That's true but he isn't just saying it, he's backing it up with evidence.

He provided evidence that I agree currying favour is something scum do. But am I currying favour here?
I said lanth is probably town because he was being unnecessarily prickly. I thinks that's a town tell. Whether you agree or disagree is up to you.
I also said I enjoy playing with furc. This is also true, and not something I've made up.
If you look at my meta (lol!) you will find examples of me saying both of these things before meaning they are in line with my usual character.

His stance that I am trying to be nice to everyone and curry favour falls flat for a number of reasons:
1) why would I try to curry favour with some players, but then be openly hostile with others (eg. moi, xisq). Doesn't seem to fit in to the plan of me trying to get in people's good books.
2) I didn't even indicate that I thought furc was town, just that I enjoy playing with him. I'm literally bemused this was even brought up in the first place.
3) I know that moi keeps saying that it is scummy for me to mention this but xisq and moi are both guilty (imo

guiltier

!) of the exact same thing. This is much worse due to the fact that they are attacking me with this tell due to hypocrisy and cognitive dissonance.
Note that as far as I can remember moi/xisq have never refuted the point that they were trying to curry favour/buddy with people.

[ThAdmiral]

Because it's not the stubbornness as such, it's more you saying that you would have done it but because MoI was a jerk you didn't. This is you once again turning the tables on the argument and forcing the blame and focus back on MoI. This is one big giant cop out. "This is all their fault!" detracting from the point against you.

Not true. I've admitted multiple times that I'm being a dick.

So?

So: I'm not solely blaming MoI.
That being said I don't think it's

entirely

my fault either. As they say: "it takes two to tango".

[ThAdmiral]

@ dlm: can you tell me your current read on me. I know you are voting me but certainly in the earlier stages of the game you weren't convinced I was scum and were imploring me to look through my history and stop being belligerent (116, 118). As far as I can tell you only really seemed certain of me being scum after I said I still wasn't going to check my self-meta so that I would be able to set a precedent for myself.
Since then you have discussed other people and the xisq wagon as a whole. Do you still think I am scummy for being stubborn? What are your thoughts on MoI's other points?

@ sotty: At one stage you thought I was posting pretty good (this is early in the game after I explained my reason for voting xisq more thoroughly). You then voted me in 120 when I continued to refuse to give self-meta. You later stated, however, that you weren't sure what my stubbornness indicated (147). But you seemed to come to the conclusion that I am scum after I said moi and xisq asked me in an abrasive way (which you interpreted as me shifting the blame to them). Do you think it is fair, however, to say that it takes two to tango? Or do you think that I should accept full responsibility for the situation we have found ourselves in? Furthermore can you explain why it would be more town for me to do one thing or the other?

[ThAdmiral]

I have already explained this - because I was asked in an abrasive way I got stubborn and didn't feel like complying. This coupled with the fact that it would have taken some time, not heaps but certainly a bit, to do I said "fuck it" and decided not to do it.

What do you usually do when asked for meta?

I probably whine for a bit and then give it.

I think that ThAdmiral is scummy because of his refusal to post meta and for completely changing his position on Jarvis.

As to the first part of that you clarified your position here:

At least for me, I don't think that you are scummy because you can't provide meta for a scumread. I think it's scummy that you won't provide meta but insist that you have it.

Do you think from the meta brought up by MoI and Fonz indicates I have or haven't used that tell in the past/believe in that tell. Does this matter, or is the refusal itself the scummy part? If so, why?

As to the second part please explain why my flip on jarvis is scummy? Without wanting to go to far in to wifom here if I did want to try and get someone else lynched jarvis is probably the most obvious next option. Why do you think it was scummy of me that I decided that he read town to me, rather than continuing to pursue him as a suspect?

[ThAdmiral]

@ dlm:

1) Once again this is down to interpretation (and you and moi are interpreting wrong) but this will all come out in the wash. Tell me, however, do you think moi and xis were also guilty of it? If you do believe it as a tell, that is.

2) Yeah I think you were right when you said "laughing off points you find laughable". What I think you have to understand is the for this response (which is what MoI is talking about with this point):

It's actually sort of humorous that you accuse me of being scum for trying to get other players on side with me, whereas xisq is doing the same thing on a larger scale, yet he is not scum for it.

I was indeed refuting it by pointing out the inconsistency which MoI was using it, since xisq was doing it and wasn't called for it. And further MoI was even doing it himself (this is unquestionable). That I disagreed with it was implied.
And how, exactly, am I supposed to "refute" something based on interpretation anyway?

Seriously. Can someone answer me this? How am I supposed to refute the argument that I was "buddying" lanthir and furc other than saying "no, I'm not". Which I did say. Several times.

3. I explained my stance on Xisq here. How has everyone missed this even after I've told people about it many times now:

I guess because no one had even asked for meta. He quoted a bunch of people saying "why furc" and then proceeded to give up a bunch of furc games. It was like he was looking for an opportunity to seem productive. And the "you fine people" thing; smacks of sucking up.
That's how it looked to me.

I really don't mind my vote on him for other reasons though. He's going with this whole faux-confident thing where he's all like "I've definitely caught scum, and they are

definitely

going to be lynched"/"I'm right about everything", but in reality it's largely bs. I really hate that style of play, it's so forced.
I still haven't decided whether he's a townie who's read ABR's "guide to mafia" and is trying to emulate it, or whether he's just faking it as scum, but either way I'm happy with my vote for now.

4. Well I don't like xis. I just know that any argument with xisq is going to morph in to a huge wall-post deathmatch. I realise I am going to have to do that at some stage but I've been avoiding it.

5. Well you disagree with MoI here, so cool.

[ThAdmiral]

I will note, as Yates already has, that aside from the options of providing the link or not providing it, you also have the third option of retracting your assertion. Do you stand by it?

Yes, furthermore I believe that the examples brought up prove I have used it in the past. Do you agree or disagree?

Are you generally successful at reading newer players? What is your opinion of Lanthir and Mr_Ree?

I think I'm fairly good at reading newer players. I think lanthir is probably town, I'm not sure about ree.

Charming. Is this more or less rude than asking for evidence to support an assertion?

More rude. I'm not 100% sure why but you have gotten on my nerve in this game more than anyone else I remember in recent history on this site. I'm sure it is a combination of factors both in game and irl, but as a result I have been surly and crass in my responses to you and I apologise for that. It is clear to say that we have gotten off on the wrong foot but from now on I will cease being derisive of your character and only respond to the arguments you bring up, as any player should do in a game of mafia.

Once again, sorry for being a dick.

I think "you fine people" is really more like generic polite language (e.g. "ladies and gentlemen") than an attempt to buddy. In game terms it makes no statement about the quality of opinions or the possibility of alignments. I will not refute the point that it is non-neutral in tone.

I also think the sentiment that anyone who got on your furc wagon would be seen as town is a sort of buddying, but ok, agree to disagree.

I do have a question for you though: in the early parts of the game you referred to me a few times as "lying scum". Can you please explain what I was lying about?

[ThAdmiral]

@ sotty:

I reread the post where I thought you were saying this but I must have misread it as if you were talking about me in the last line, and not xisq which is clearly the case. My bad.

I guess because no one had even asked for meta. He quoted a bunch of people saying "why furc" and then proceeded to give up a bunch of furc games. It was like he was looking for an opportunity to seem productive. And the "you fine people" thing; smacks of sucking up.
That's how it looked to me.

Seemed more like a chance to let everyone know he is an alt of someone. I can understand where your vote is coming from though. It was kinda know-it-all-ish. Still don't find it scummy though, the rest of his posting has been pretty good in my opinion.

[ThAdmiral]

The refusal to provide meta itself is what I find scummy. You have made a claim but you refuse to back it up. It's as if I called you scum but never explained why I thought so. This is very scummy.

But you still haven't said why.
To break down what you just said here, you've said:
1. "The refusal to provide meta itself is what I find scummy." - a statement reiterating your position that

it is

scummy, without explanation of

why

it is scummy.
2. "You have made a claim but you refuse to back it up." - a statement of fact regarding

what

I did, without explanation of

why

it is scummy.
3. "It's as if I called you scum but never explained why I thought so." - an analogy describing

what

I did, without explanation of

why

it is scummy.
4. "This is very scummy." - the reiteration of you stance that

it is

scummy, without explanation.....I think you get the point.

Can you explain to me the scum motivation for what I did?

Originally, after I made my first case against Jarvis, you were supportive of it and similarly to Jarvis and the furc wagon, you were supportive of the wagon but never actually voted for him. At that moment, it would seem like you were scumhunting and later in the game, with Jarvis dead, you could point to those posts and say that you thought he was scummy.

Now, however, you just come out and say that you think he is town with little reasoning. I think that this is because you noticed how much support his wagon was getting and because of how you are generally, the town's biggest scum suspect, you realized how bad it would be to try and push a Jarvis lynch because as you just said, he would probably be the town's next lynch. If you were both scum, that would leave two scum dead by the end of day two.

There's a lot of speculation here. I understand that is what you do in a game of mafia.
Do you not concede, however, that the simplest explanation (which, as is often the case, is the correct one here) is that I just had a change of heart regarding jarvis?

[ThAdmiral]

@ dlm: You sound like someone who has already made his mind up. I get the feeling trying to rebut your points is going to be a waste of time for me, but I'll do it anyway.

1. Can you cite where you thought Xis and MoI were buddying newbs/VIs?

Ok, not necessarily newbs/vis. (does this make my point invalid, I'm going to guess you will say "yes")
MoI clearly buddied up to sotty in the early parts of the game (check posts 12 and 43). It could be also argued that he was buddying xisq by supporting his furc wagon so much.
In post 99 he also adds zang to his townlist after saying "I like Zang’s contributions to the game thusfar" without any extra explanation.

Xisq provided meta to lanthir, dlm and rees calling them "you fine people". There was also the implication that if you followed the furc wagon you would be seen as "town".
He also claimed that fonz was "playing like town in my eyes" (52) without any explanation why.

NOTE

: I don't think the buddying argument against me was founded. I don't think it is founded against moi and xisq either. But,

and this is the important part

, I do believe it is a contradiction to say that I was guilty of it and they weren't. Do you understand now?

What were you trying to achieve with the comment on Furc? I don't think being easily readable has any bearing on alignment, so why should it even factor in to whether the Furc wagon was good or bad? Or did you really believe Furc was being wagoned because the players didn't enjoy playing with him? On Lanthir, what does righteousness have to do with alignment?

Skipped a bit there about "tu quoque" etc. as it was quite a long quote, but I think this is the important part as it is actually something I can respond to.
What I was trying to achieve by my furc comment was to not get him lynched, because I believe he is readable. I don't think being readable has any bearing on alignment either, but I do think it has a bearing on, you know, being readable. I thought it would be a better idea to let him post than, you know, lynching him before he could post. That's what I was trying to achieve.
Trust me when I tell you - you can't buddy furc. He is unpredictable and will be just as likely to call you scum for buddying

himself

if you try to defend him/befriend him than "join forces" with you or whatever moi was suggesting was my plan.
I did believe furc was getting wagoned because people didn't enjoy playing with him. Did you think that wasn't the case?

"Righteousness", or what otherwise could be described as a smug sense of superiority, is a trait, I believe, far more likely to come from town than scum. In all of lanthir's posts up until the one I commented on he displayed this in various ways which I will show here at length:

Why not?

MoI, why wasn't I included in your asking for Furc wagoners list?

The "why not" was in response to a question of "why moi" as he voted moi in his first post. It indicates that he believes his choice is as good as any.
He then asks why he wasn't included on the list, once again indicating that he feels he deserves to be mentioned.

Moron

This is in response to moi calling him scum. I don't really think this one needs explaining.

You can't try to steer the town on Page 1. I don't know you, I don't know how good you are, but I don't know why people would follow you.

This is also in response to moi. He implies that he is better/knows more than moi as he is attempting to instruct moi.

I don't even know who Furcolow is, so I have no idea why you've got this deep-seated obsession with him. I have no experience on this site, so I voted for you because that's where my gut told me to go. Your responses and subsequent posts have made me quite confident that you are the right vote at the moment.

Here he shows strong conviction in his beliefs, which is further evidence of self-righteousness.

Vote: xisiqomilir

Hard to spell

You have nothing else to comment on? Really?

Here he makes a derisive comment on my rvs vote (it is fairly clear he doesn't really understand the rvs stage and takes my comment as a serious one), implying that it is a bad one and that I could and should do better.

All in all - tons of righteousness. I highly doubt it is faked as well.

3. The issue is Xis was going tunnel vision before Furc even posted. He can't argue that "I'm right about everything" because there was nothing to be right about. He was throwing himself into the spotlight for the sake of throwing himself into the spotlight. Why would scum want to do that?

Some scum like to lurk in the back, some like to lead from the front.
The furc wagon is a two way win for scum, really (assuming furc is town) - it succeeds and furc is lynched, it fails and "I was just testing for reactions" aka "being oh-so-proactive".
By the way -

@ xisq: what did the reactions tell you?

I think I missed that post.

4. Stop avoiding it.

I believe I have.

[ThAdmiral]

Just in case it gets missed in that large slab of text:

@ xisq

: you say you did the furc wagon as a reaction test. I've seen no evidence to corroborate this. Why haven't you mentioned your analysis of people's reactions if this indeed was the case?

[ThAdmiral]

As for the rest, sure it takes two to tango but I'm really not interested in fighting fair right now. With your initial reaction to MoI you seem to suggest that you do have this in your meta but refuse to provide it, why is this suddenly your sticking point? I was almost ready to remove my vote off you until you started whining about MoI basically asking in a way that annoyed you. You are really going to have to break that line of thought down for me because I just don't get it. To me, it looks like you got caught red handed and are just trying to deflect until someone else comes along and does something scummier.

People become defensive and stubborn when they feel someone has been rude to them. That's just human nature.
The complete reasons for me not getting self-meta are the following:
1) I genuinely don't like having to provide self-meta, and furthermore hate how MoI and people of his ilk ask for it and other burdensome requests at the drop of the hat like we all just live on mafiascum and don't need time for anything else. It seems to be something that has crept in to mafiascum more frequently in recent times, and the requests are getting more ridiculous as well - I swear I've seen people ask for things like "give me 5 examples of a game where you've used that day 1 to catch scum" on multiple occasions. I guess you could say reason "1.5" is a reaction (overreaction?) to this overarching trend that I have noticed.
2) I thought the way it was asked was rude, and therefore was less inclined to respond.
3) I don't have all that much time to play mafiascum these days. Certainly not as much as I used to (this game is basically taking up my entire free evening tonight - thanks guys! ).
4) I'm excited about the prospect of never having to provide self-meta again if I go through with this. This is a development that obviously came later, but it's a real bonus.

Is Yates' charactrtization of your play lately a correct one? What do you think about his stance on you?

I guess I have been more... lackluster in my games. Maybe it is the "less time" thing. Maybe it is the roles I've been getting. Maybe I happen to be in a mafia "form slump" at the moment, or maybe I've just been unlucky recently. Probably a combination of things.
He could be trying to get town points by sort-of defending me. I like how he's called me out on my play recently and I prefer to think he is town, but I don't know to be honest.

[ThAdmiral]

Can you explain to me the scum motivation for what I did?

ThAd, I've explained it, MOI's explained it, continuing to try to pretend it doesn't exist is tipping my opinion on you toward the scum side of the ledger.

PREMISES:

If it is true that you do not use this 'trying too hard' tell as town, that makes you very likely scum for using an argument you don't believe in.

If it is true that you do not use this argument as town, you will not be able to refer to your meta to rebut this argument.

THEREFORE:

If you are scum who does not use the argument as town and has been caught red-handed, I would expect you to play EXACTLY AS YOU HAVE IN THIS GAME.

This is

your

explanation. It is largely based around how you played as town in another game and how you assume you might play as scum in the same situation. First of all this is based on yourself and, this might come as some surprise, we are not the same person. Hence we may not react in exactly the same way. Secondly you are assuming that you would act completely the opposite as scum as you would as town - do you not think that you would indeed act the

same

way as scum to pretend to be town?
So as I said this is your explanation and, particularly because of the personal nature of how you came to your conclusion, I am interested in each other persons explanation.

MoI's reason was predicated on the theory that I had never used the tell before. As I've said I still think that what you and MoI brought up proves I have used the tell before, so I think his reason for thinking I'm scum is null.

[ThAdmiral]

Since the only example found shows you using it on Town per MoI's #122, I dispute that it's a functioning scumtell.

I refer you to fonz's post 148, in which he finds a few more.

It was that playing with Furcolow was something that anyone would like, regardless of the reason. Part of the "Furcolow is so bad for the game we should lynch him pre-confirmation" theme.

Lately, it's more because I cannot find all of the following to be true:

1) You are "100% sure" that you've used "trying way too hard to be helpful" as a scumtell
2) You refuse to support this assertion even by way of providing one example, even if it should lead to your lynch

I'm afraid its a matter of principle now.

If you are town, this is absolutely not a reason to get yourself lynched.

I disagree. This is a very beneficial precedent that I'm more than happy to set for myself.

One game where I'm lynched compared to a lifetime in which I don't have to provide self meta? I'll take that deal any day of the week and twice on tuesday!

3) You are Town

I think it is pretty weak that you would accuse me of the very serious felony of "lying" if it was only regarding my thoughts about furcolow. Firstly because it's wrong (I enjoyed my last few games with furc - off the top of my head "cold war mafia" and "troll mafia" or something like that). Secondly because it blows the situation out of proportion to make it seem like my statement was a "must-lynch" tell.
Also I don't like the fact that you only now explained why I was a liar.

As to your other points:
1) that may have been an exaggeration only because you can never be 100% sure of anything. How sure can you be without being able to produce any examples of the top of your head? Lets say 95% sure.
2) I'm deadly serious about not having to provide self meta on request in future.
3) Yeah, well that's just, like, your opinion man.

I state the most significant reactions here when addressing Jarvis...

Fair enough.

[ThAdmiral]

MoI's reason was predicated on the theory that I had never used the tell before. As I've said I still think that what you and MoI brought up proves I have used the tell before, so I think his reason for thinking I'm scum is null.

Um no. My reason is predicated on the fact that your so-called tell is laughably bullshit and the fact you can't actually show an indication that you have ever used it (despite saying "I have") succesfully is just icing on the cake.

But there is proof that I've used it.

[ThAdmiral]

Link me to you successfully doing so as Town. I'm still waiting for that. If you point to anything I or Fonz has provided once again my belief is not a single instance I have seen meets what I am looking for.

I'll do that when you link me to 5 games where you've caught scum who have decided not to fetch self-meta in the past year...

Actually don't since this topic has been ground into the dirt.

I prefer this though.

[ThAdmiral]

I know that there's a lot to talk about but I've been really busy this week. Hopefully will be able to get on tomorrow.

[ThAdmiral]

Was going to post but ran out of time. Later tonight fo sho.

[ThAdmiral]

Ok finally back. I'll respond to everything, but I like breaking it up when I'm talking to different people (I think this makes it easier to read), so expect quite a few posts in a row by me.

I'm sorry, I though that the scu motivation was rather obvious especially with the analogy. Like I said, you are making a claim but aren't providing any evidence to support this. The scum motivation is that, as scum, you thought that you didn't have any evidence to support it but you also thought that to admit that you were wrong about the tell and that you lied about being absolutely certain that you had the meta. You would have known that this would make you look scummy. So, you refused to provide it while still claiming that you were certain that you had it. You thought that by refusing to provide meta and that giving the explanation that this wad because it was "a matter of principle", you could avoid being caught in a lie and hopefully, convince the town that you were just town being a dick in order to prove Magna and Xis wrong.

If you were town, you first never would have claimed that you were 100% certain that you had meta for it and then, if you found out that you didn't, you would have just admitted that you were lying. This is because, as town, you would have known that telling the truth would have been most beneficial to the town and you would have done this because you would have nothing to fear if you were suspected for it because you would know that your actions were town motivated. This is not the case.

Well all I can say is we have to agree to disagree.
I know my own mind; I know, for example, that I have used the tell against people that haven't posted in a while and then have come in and posted a reads lists so they can look like they are doing something helpful for the town. I can't remember for the life of me where but I know I have.
I guess whether you think I'm scum comes down to whether you think I'm lying or not. If you do that's your stance and I won't be able to argue you out of it by saying "no, I'm not!".

I don't care about the simplest explanation. I care about the explanation that best makes sense based on what has been said in the thread. The facts that your "change of heart" was supported by little reasoning, was seemingly random and happened after more people have become suspicious of Jarvis all support my explanation especially with Jarvis already likely to be scum.

This relies on me being scum. Once again that is your opinion. But I will endeavour to explain my flip on jarvis in more detail (however I think "flip" is slightly incorrect, as I never had jarvis as a strong scumread but he was certainly someone that I was interested in questioning):
I questioned him about seeming contradictions, but based on his answers they weren't. To clarify I thought it was off that he said he would have been fine if furc had been lynched, but then said he didn't have a scumread on furc. For most people on this site this would be scummy, but I feel he was coming from a perspective that these two things aren't mutually exclusive (a perspective that I can only assume comes from wherever he played before). I have also had experience offsite and I know that there people were often lynched for "information" or if they were deemed "distracting" to the point of being a negative influence on the game (I'm not saying all off-site mafia places have these same perspective, just that different perspectives like these do exist).
Furthermore while I initially thought he was potentially scum for throwing his vote around early I actually viewed this as a town tell, especially coupled with posts like:

Zang is spinning so much shit out of a perfectly clear position. Sotty is staying remarkably close to the fence. MoI is cheering Zang on while avoiding the issue himself. ThAd is probably scum still. Fonz has done so little.

Which go out of their way to put so many people offside. I don't see scum saying this.
I don't see scum admitting they wanted to lynch someone who they didn't have a scumread on.

Plus, as I mentioned, his frustration read as genuine. This came across most in posts 129, 142, 218 etc.

This is your explanation. It is largely based around how you played as town in another game and how you assume you might play as scum in the same situation.

Where did he say this?

Here's what bothers me, though: I would expect a scum who has been caught red-handed using an argument he doesn't use as town to react in EXACTLY the way ThAd has here. It's like the suspect who, instead of providing an alibi, goes "ROBBERY? ME? How dare you accuse me of robbery! That's totally out of order, I'd never do a thing like that!" Reactive hostility, which relates to my point about Lanthir. If ThAd really doesn't normally use the tell, then this is pretty much his only option.

Compare this to how I reacted as town in Scummies to MOI making a similar line of enquiry (he was suggesting I don't lurkerhunt as town, which to anyone who knows anything about my meta is pretty much the most laughable suggestion possible):

Fonz

– In case you missed it – you didn’t discuss whether you had lurker hunted in the past as Town. If you can provide me links again that would be fantastic.

I will do this shortly. Shouldn't take too long, as proving I go after lurkers as town is kinda like proving the New York Yankees have quite a successful history. It's probably the best-known part of my meta.

I then provide the links shortly after that.

He later clarified his position though, so this is slightly old news.

Before making the claim that you were 100% sure, why didn't you check to make sure that you did have the meta?

Because that would require me trawling through my history, which, as I've already established, I didn't fancy doing.

[ThAdmiral]

@ThAd

: Is MOI scum? Why or why not? You haven't actually talked about anything other than the attacks on you for several pages. I have no idea what your reads are at this point.

If I had to say I would say no, because he is playing to his town meta which is to crusade. Although I think there is some skewing of the results going on (the ones from my meta that he found) I believe he believes what he is saying, and I have noticed that when he decides on something it is very difficult to change his mind.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fonz doesn't seem to find it a conclusive result, though,

Are you going to use that example (Kingmaker II) as your proof? petroleumjelly survived to win the game. Do you believe in the tell much more strongly now?

I feel that example, and others, such as the tv mafia one, show that there history of me using the tell, and as I mentioned in response to zang I know that I've used it before referring to people who have posted a reads list unprompted to seem proactive and helpful, but I can't remember when or where.
I'm not sure if I "believe in the tell more strongly now". I'm sure my belief fluctuates based on many factors including the circumstance and tone of any post in question that might harbour the tell.

Can we address my presumed motive for this "trying way too hard"? Were the three players I responded to going to read the provided meta, be horrified at Furcolow's standard of play, and then speedlynch him?

Maybe...
From the top of my head there are only a couple of people that I believe could be successfully speedwagoned based on their playstyle and furc is one of them.

I still think that pushing the early furc wagon is a win-win for you if you are scum as you either get the wagon through, or you claim it was just reaction testing. That being said I am coming round to believing it genuinely was reaction testing.

What is your latest opinion of Mr_Ree and Jarvis?

Check my posts to zang for my jarvis read (town).
Ree I am going to go in to more depth on later. He's someone that has been at the periphery of my vision for a while now and has been giving me bad gut feels.

[ThAdmiral]

unvote

I don't want to vote xisq any more. I will vote someone else after I've posted analysis on a few other players.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Was going to post but ran out of time. Later tonight fo sho.

Ironic (in scummy has hell) that he just happens to run out of time in this game where he’s already established that he wants to lurk out his wagon. Yet has time to post content in other games.

Seriously - Do I need to fake-claim a Daycop to get him lynched or what?]

There was way more to talk about in this game, so I saved it for last.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr Ree analysis:

Ree's weird interaction with xis is the first thing that sparked my interest. He says he plans to "read up on furcolo" (post 28), and also "Thanks xis I'll check it out." (31) after xis provides meta but then says "Pssshht. Yeah right, do you honestly think I have the time to read that whole list?" (34) and "So, just so we're aware, why do we want to lynch someone before they even confirm?" (46) regarding xisq's wagon on furc. Note: this was after both myself and lanthir had voted xisq for his activity regarding furc - as such it looks contradictory and opportunistic on ree's part.

If he's this easy to catch as scum, what are you so afraid of? I haven't been reading his town games yet but if he's as easy to read as some people suggest, I have no problem giving him the benefit of the doubt.

Or the very least, the benefit of posting.

These are fair comments by mr ree.

And why is that exactly?

What are your thoughts on Xis? A Lynch before confirmation does nothing but potentially eliminate two townies. I can almost see his reasoning now that furcolow has made him first post. For that matter, what are your thoughts on Jarvis? Zhang has brought up some good points. It sucks that he didn't link or quote the posts but he's making the effort which is more than I can say for you.

This is an interesting post as it comes up after he was voted by peregrine. He really seems to be trying to direct peregrine's attention elsewhere here.

As for Furc, I read some of his games of both alignments. I understand the distaste. Am I an expert on Furc? Hell no, nor would I want to be. Can I take a guess as to his alignment? Null leaning town. There are others that are higher on my list. I'm still a little suspicious of Xis but admittedly less so. I'm thinking scum lies somewhere between Jarvis and Thad but I'm leaning more Jarvis that Thad, although I did notice some connections between the two.

Here his suspicion slips off xisq and goes to me and particularly jarvis. I think it would be fair to say that this is an accurate representation of the general movement of opinion at the time, mainly seems to draw from stuff other people have already said, and once again comes off as somewhat opportunistic.\

We stand to gain the most information from Jarvis so my vote goes there. Twice this game he has stated that he would Lynch players regardless of alignment simply for distaste of the player. As new arguments come up I'm sure you'll develop a distaste towards more players.

vote Jarvis

As has been mentioned this is a bad post. Wanting to lynch for information is generally a poor/scummy move. His stance that jarvis is willing to vote people based on distaste for them and that jarvis could develop a distaste toward more players doesn't really have any bearing on jarvis alignment as it is evidence of jarvis playing sub-optimally but not scumilly.

Next up he posts his analysis of why he is voting jarvis. A lot of it doesn't read genuine as if he had truly thought jarvis was being so scummy at the time (particularly in reference to some of the earlier things jarvis did) it doesn't make sense that ree didn't bring it up at the time.
That being said he brings up enough reasoning to justify his vote on jarvis. From a neutral perspective his case is not based on nothing, but I do have different opinions about jarvis.

Overall there is some evidence to suggest a scum mindset. I would vote him, but I hope to find a better candidate.

Next I will look at dlm, who has also given me bad vibes.

[ThAdmiral]

Haven't finished my dlm analysis but I do know that I'd rather lynch him or rees than jarvis.

[ThAdmiral]

Dlm analysis:

Flips from thinking moi is scummy (20), to liking his play (58) with no real explanation provided.

Votes me in 58. The interesting thing to note is that he said me not providing my meta was "just amusing, not necessarily scummy", and the main thing he found suspicious was my "edit" of my post.

He implores me to browse through my finished games, and warns me "Acting belligerent earns you nothing but rope" (116), and also says "Being a pain in the ass really only hurts town" (118) which sounds more like someone asking someone they know is town-aligned to play more pro-town, than someone who is certain they are on scum.

Yet in 140, after I said I'd be happy to set a precedent of not having to supply meta, he says "I'm starting to see why people have blacklists. ThAd, want to tell us who your scumbuddies are?". I have only continued to not provide my meta, something that was "not necessarily scummy", but now it apparently is.

He reacts very prickly when xisq asks him to answer his own question he put to yates ("who is scum" 165), saying: ""Is that your pretentious way for asking about my scumreads?" (177). He implies he doesn't have any others than where his vote is, i.e. me. When pushed, however, he states that jarvis is the best alternative to me (179).

In post 200 he asks the open ended question "The Xis wagon feels extremely scum-driven. Anyone else get that feeling?", without any concrete opinion on who the scum may be. However he does ask questions of people on the wagon - asking them for further reads if they have been lurking, or to clarify their position on xisq. He also asks similar clarification questions of yates, furculow and jarvis but after they are answered doesn't seem to come to any conclusions based on their answers - as if he was just asking to look like he was being proactive, to look as if he was scumhunting.

Similarly with me he asks me a series of questions based on moi's case against me which I respond to. He responds in kind, and so far so good. But when I respond again he doesn't say anything in reply. As I mentioned at the time it did sound as though dlm had made up his mind about me - I felt that no matter what I said he would keep his vote on me, which he did for the most part.

Then suddenly in 361 he says "You guys do know that Jarvis is scum right?", and votes him in the subsequent post (364). I realise that this it was the nero cain, and it was his first post, but he provided no reasoning (when asked by peregrine he says "Post a case on Jarvis so I can defend my scumbuddy. There, I translated your scumspeak. Besides I have no time.", 367), and the killer jester head supports the vote, stating his earlier posted suspicions of jarvis. I think it is clear that jarvis was becoming the favoured lynch over myself at this point and thus the vote swap comes across as somewhat opportunistic.

------------------------------------------------------

Overall I think rees and dlm are good lynches, and I lean towards dlm.

vote: dlm

[ThAdmiral]

I know my own mind; I know, for example, that I have used the tell against people that haven't posted in a while and then have come in and posted a reads lists so they can look like they are doing something helpful for the town. I can't remember for the life of me where but I know I have.

You didn't have to provide meta though. If you explained this and also said that you didn't need meta in order to consider it to be a scum tell, I would have accepted that. You dug your own hole.

Ok. Mea culpa.

Regardless of whether it is scummy to want someone lynched who you don't think is scum, I think that it is scummy that he says this even though he previously said that he didn't really like policy lynches.

It's also scummy that he continued to think this with his vote on Xis and has basically done almost no scumhunting all game.

I agree that these things are "scummy" in the classical sense, but...this is tricky to put in to words...I feel he is being "scummy" but he is not actually

scum

. Do you get what I'm saying?

But you see town saying that?

Scum wouldn't easily admit it unless they knew that they couldn't come up with a good reason as to why he was voting otherwise.

I see a player saying that who has come from a different background and a different meta.

So instead you make up claims that you weren't sure you could easily support later?

Do you really want to go here again?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think jarvis' 382 points out some interesting things about ree's posting. It looks as if ree's is trying to have his cake and eat it too, by saying that he didn't mainly want to lynch jarvis for information, but that going after an information lynch is good for town.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

@ThAdmiral

: If lynching Jarvis is lynching town, can you pick scum from this pseudo-wagon?

Jarvis 6 - Zang,Mr_Ree,Amrun,Yates,Don't Lynch Me,Xisiqomelir

And, obvious corollary, how does your analysis change if Jarvis flips scum?

Dlm and ree would be my best bets. I'm finding you and zang hard to read and I believe yates and amrun are town.

If jarvis flips scum? I'd prefer to cross that bridge if and when we come to it. I think I'd be in trouble for one thing.

[ThAdmiral]

But come on now MoI, after not mentioning me for pages on end, you're really about to drop the ThAd lynch that you've worked so hard for to hammer me, without a word? Colour me unconvinced.

To be fair to moi he's said he thinks you're scum before. But mainly because he thinks we are scum together.

[ThAdmiral]

Oh yeah, and I'd be interested in ThAd's read on Furc in this game, for reasons I will elaborate on once he gives it.

Well he's playing to his scum meta so far, see politics mafia (scum) compared to cold war mafia (scum) for examples. In each game someone breaks down his meta and is right both times (feysal in politics, myself in cold war).
However for some reason I'm not 100% convinced he is scum, possibly because he didn't vote me (which I realise is bad logic).

[ThAdmiral]

*cold war mafia (town)

[ThAdmiral]

I'm still going dlm. As you say the fact that sotty was voting for him makes him even more of an appealing lynch. I think the meta at mafiascum has moved away from nightkill analysis to the extent that scum who are being pressured by people feel almost 100% free to kill those people without much fear of reprisal as someone will always say "nk analysis is full of wifom". While this is true for the most part, there is always some logic behind night-kills and that logic ususally stems from one of three things: "this person is playing like a pr", "this person is confrimed town/perceived as town and will be very hard to lynch" and "this person wants me dead".
Sotty more or less fills the second category, and was certainly in the third category.

vote: dlm

[ThAdmiral]

I just had a brief glance at furcs most recent finished games other than politics and cold war. It seems he might be *gasp* developing as a player. His meta, at least, isn't as easily catalogued perhaps.

For a test I looked at his iso and tried to guess his alignment before looking at his actual flip.

Mini 1262 was eaten by the tigers. Yates was in that game though.

@ yates

: what was furcs alignment? (my guess was town, mainly because of his miller claim and a few decent posts).
Stars aligned. Lots of decent posts. I guessed town, he was town.
DC universe mafia. I was in this one and know he was town, but based on meta I would also have guessed town - high post count.
Murder in the Louvre. This one caught me off guard. I guessed town based on his high post rate along with a few decent sized posts but he was in fact scum in this game.
Vedere le Viste. This was an odd one. He replaced in, claimed vt and then hammered very soon after. Then it gets a bit weird. It looks like he was sort of kicked out of the game based on players requests. Anyway I guessed scum because his posts were short and unhelpful and less frequent but it seems he was town in this game. He wasn't even in it for a full day though so it's arguable whether this one is applicable.
Phineas and Ferb. He was replaced day one after being kicked out of his house apparently. But based on his existing posts this was a hard one to pick. They weren't exactly one liners but they weren't large posts either. But I guessed town because the count was fairly frequent and he was indeed town.

So I was only correct in 2 out of the 4 games that I looked at (3 out of 5 if you include dc which I was in), but he did surprise me in Murder in the Louvre and Vedere le Viste, and Phineas and Ferb wasn't exactly like his normal town style.

[ThAdmiral]

That's not a bad vote, but why DLM and not Ree who she also suspected quite heavily?

Your recent Furc meta analysis seems to show that he in fact played similarly to what you categorized as his 'scum meta' in a town game, and what you categorized as his 'town meta' as scum. So do you still have confidence in your ability to read him?

As I mentioned his recent meta is not as clear cut which is why I'm not going to say he's definitely scum in this game, even though he is playing to his formerly typical scum meta.

Why dlm? I think there is more evidence to suggest he is scum based on his play yesterday (mainly the asking questions but not actually doing anything with the answers thing) compared to rees who is an ok lynch option but not a great one (I think a few points against him such as the "I'll read that"/"I'm not reading that!" regarding the furc meta provided by xisq and the "information lynch" reasoning for his vote on jarvis were somewhat overblown). Secondly sotty was voting dlm, not rees. Rees had a slew of other people voting him that would make more logical sense as night targets (such as yourself).

[ThAdmiral]

Read my post 422 on the last page.

[ThAdmiral]

Read my post 427 on this page.

[ThAdmiral]

@ dlm: how about reading properly before slagging me off. I said "a slew of other people

voting him

". If you have a look back at end of day 1 it shouldn't be too hard to figure out that I mean furc, Jarvis (now dead), peregrine and fonz. I believe fonz and sotty appeared more or less equally town at the end of day 1 so, yes, I think fonz would have made more sense if ree was scum. Peregrine probably wasn't perceived town as much as sorry, but he probably also makes more sense as an nk target for Rees.

This is somewhat moot, however, as I'm feeling more and more that Rees is not scum.

[ThAdmiral]

@ ree: I'll have another look at pere but I believe he's playing his usual style - lowish post count but decent content. He tends to stick to his reads once formed. I don't necessarily agree that tunneling is a scumtell, furthermore it is arguable whether he has indeed been tunneling you.

That being said I would like to see his updated read on you and anyone else he cares to provide his thoughts on.

[ThAdmiral]

Good morning.

VOTE: Amrun

This is almost entirely meta-based. Relevant games are 90s Cartoons Mafia and Ladies Night 2.

To pull a page out of the dlm playbook: could you elaborate?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

@ moi

: you are saying very similar things about amrun today as you said about jarvis yesterday, and just in case you forgot you were wrong then.

"You can thank yourself for being hammered via not looking like you have any Pro-Town intent to scum-hunt (as opposed to just pointing out those who suspect you as being scummy / wrong) if you are Town"

(403) sounds a lot like

"Amrun lurks as scum and I've already shown that I find her contributions to be more or less devoid of scum-hunting content"

(441) (Other than the lurking bit, but we can ignore that because it has no real basis in reality as her posting here corresponds with her posting elsewhere, ie. she may actually have just been busy).
They sound similar because they rely on the fallacy that scum always acts like scum, and town always acts like town. Have you really never seen a townperson not "scumhunt with protown intent" (to your high standards especially)? I think its an easy way to justify your vote, but not an effective way to actually catch scum.

I have also noticed a trend in your scumreads. Me, fonz, amrun, jarvis yesterday. If you can't spot it yet it's that we all disagreed with you. Jarvis is the most telling example because you didn't have a problem with him when he agreed with your case and voted me, but when he accused you of "cheering on" the likes of sotty and zang you started to think he was scum. If it doesn't indicated you are mafia, it certainly indicates that pride is playing a large part in your reads in this game.
Similarly your town reads also correspond to who agreed with you. In post 403 you say: "Sotty, Xis, Zang, and DLM can be Town in my eyes at this stage" despite not having mentioned dlm previously in the entire game. In fact that's more than pride, that's downright scummy of you. You are going to have to explain why you think dlm is town, and it better be good.

That’s an interesting take. Why do you think her choice of a impending deadline vote between DLM and Mr.Ree makes them her top suspects and not just “wagons that could happen”? She had her vote on ThAd the vast majority of Day 1 and only unvoted him when his wagon became non-viable.

While it is true that if I was scum sotty would have made sense as a good night kill choice, the above is a lie. Sotty unvoted me and moved to dlm in post 376. At the time I had 3 votes on my wagon and dlm had.... none. Dlm wagon more viable?

Furthermore his heavy meta basis for reading Furc as opposed to, say, actually parsing his posts in this game is pretty much an indication that he isn’t interested in actually finding Furc’s alignment but presenting posts that pretend he is.

From my experience it is very hard to determine furc's alignment by analysing his posts, whereas I've had good success at determining furc's alignment by analysing his posting amount, and his posting length.

[ThAdmiral]

@ zang: regarding furc I'm not confident enough to say he is scum even though he is playing to what I would typically describe as his scum meta. This is because his most recent games have not necessarily conformed to his usual meta, which could either indicate a blip on his usual behaviour or a change in his playstyle.

To your second point I agree that scum and town are motivated to act to benefit their alignment, however I don't think labelling someone's play as "lacking protown scumhunting" is an all that effective technique to catch mafia, as "scumhunting" is the most obvious and easy thing to fake as scum, and furthermore fits in to the scum mentality because "pretending to be protown" would be a benefit to their alignment.

[ThAdmiral]

Jarvis was clearly not my first choice for lynch yesterday.

That may be the case, but you did think he was scum (indicated by comments such as "Well now you’ve crossed the line into what I consider scum-land. Especially if ThAd flips scum", 408).

Your point here seems to be that I shouldn’t look at Pro-Scum play in finding scum and that’s frankly stupid.

This is not my point at all, but I'm not surprised that you'd try to subtly twist my words like this. I think you shouldn't look at

lack of pro-town play

(particularly how you define it) in finding scum. And yes there is a big difference between lack of "pro-town" play, and "pro-scum" play.

Let’s actually examine the bolded for accuracy …

Seems accurate to me.
I had disagreed with you by this stage by saying I liked furc and voting xisq who you were buddying at the time.
Fonz had disagreed with you well before 403.
Amrun disagreed with you in 314 before you started suspecting her (mainly because she was "defending" me, lol) in 324.
Jarvis I've already explained how you go from not having a problem with him, to having a problem with him after he disagrees with you.
Note: I'm not saying that you also didn't have cases on the people you suspected. I'm just saying you

decided

who to suspect based on whether they agreed with you or not, and then

made up

a case afterwards.

I'm not surprised that you are not willing to explain further why dlm is town, other than his reads matching yours, because I doubt you could without lying.

Btw have fun convincing people that the dlm wagon was more viable than mine. You may as well just concede this point unless you plan on wasting any more of your time.

Oh so now he is readable by “post amount” not post content itself. And you are back-pedaling from even that with your “Oh, I guess I can’t even read Furc by that” waffling.

I never said he was readable by post content, just that he was "readable". My "back-pedalling" is due to the fact that currently I'm not as confident on his meta due to his most recent games.
Am I scum with him MoI? Is that what you are suggesting?

@Everyone

– please take note of the fact that ThAd is more than willing to “spend the time” hunting through Furc’s meta but was unwilling to find instances of his use of the “tell” (which should have been very simple, it’s his own games history he should be familiar with it). More evidence he’s scum.

Yes. Note that no one asked me in an annoying way to go look at furc's recent games.
But please, do keep trying to push your fail-case from yesterday.

I had thought, until recently, that you may have been town but just way off your game. It is becoming more apparent that you are indeed scum.

[ThAdmiral]

@ xisq: Why not dlm out of interest?

I will

vote: Amrun

because MoI likes it and Fonz doesn't.

You called me out before, and now I'm calling you out.
Play better.

[ThAdmiral]

I don't think Don't Lynch Me and Mr_Ree are both scum.

I just reread this. So you think one of them could be?

[ThAdmiral]

@Thad - Also, why are you on DLM?

Pls read my post 392 on page 16.

(is anyone reading my posts in this game?)

[ThAdmiral]

To your second point I agree that scum and town are motivated to act to benefit their alignment, however I don't think labelling someone's play as "lacking protown scumhunting" is an all that effective technique to catch mafia, as "scumhunting" is the most obvious and easy thing to fake as scum, and furthermore fits in to the scum mentality because "pretending to be protown" would be a benefit to their alignment.

How can you catch scum without relying, at least partially, on analyzing their motivations?

You can't just dismiss a case because some people as town act that way, this is true with pretty much any scumtell. Some people may do it as town but more people do it as scum and it is motivated by scum behavior so it should be considered a scumtell.

I completely rely on analyzing people's motivations when deciding whether people are scum are not.

I don't think I was clear so I will rephrase: I don't think whether someone is "scumhunting" or not indicates their alignment. This is because both town

and

scum have motivation to "scumhunt" - town to catch scum, scum to appear town. I would suggest mafia members "scumhunt" just as much as town members do, or at least close enough to not make a significant difference.
It is possible, however, to determine if someone is faking it or not and I believe

this

is a good scumtell. For example I think dlm is faking it in this game, and I believe there's a good chance moi is faking it as well.

[ThAdmiral]

I suppose I wasn't exactly transparent at the time. I found myself coming to the same conclusions as MoI, and I mentioned the points of his case were decent. I also called him town. So if was unclear, yes the things I was talking about in that post were why I called him town.

Ok.

I believe I've gone over this.[/url] In #58 there was no real expectation for you to provide self meta, because you weren't making any claims about your own play. In your #112, you make the claim that you have indeed played that way before, and it was at that point my opinion towards your reluctance to provide self meta changed.

Ok. Did you believe at the time that I was lying? Do you still believe I am lying?
Do you think any of the examples brought up by moi or fonz were applicable? Do you still consider this an issue?

As far as being prickly, I recall you feeling similar about Xisq, stating "Dickheads generally are [oblivious to their own actions]. Otherwise they probably wouldn't be dickheads." If you thought I was responding in a prickly manner, I don't understand why you wait until it's time to make a case on me to bring it up.

As far as giving my opinion on Jarvis in #179 but not #177, it's simple. Xisq asked me to look at Jarvis in #178 and I did.

Well I had my own issues with xisq, but it seemed for the most part that you were fine with him until he asked you for reads (as you were by and large agreeing with his and moi's stance on me). Why the change of heart in regards to your manner with him?
What particularly struck me is that you asked yates for his reads, and have asked many others since, but when you were asked for your reads you went on the defensive. Was there any reason for that?

Wowwwwwwwwww. I get that my question is pretty open ended for anyone to respond to. But seriously guys? I promise I was clear about both my concrete opinion on the Xis wagon AND who the scum were on it.

And as for why it didn't seem like I came to any conclusions after questioning the rest of the players on the Xis wagon, it's because I didn't come to any conclusions after questioning the rest of the players on the Xis wagon. It happens.

It seems to have been happening a lot. You didn't come to any conclusions after asking people on the wagon questions, you didn't come to any conclusions when you asked zang to list jarvis' 5 flip-flops on the furc wagon in 81, you didn't come to any conclusions after asking yates to give his reads in 165, you didn't come to any conclusions after asking yates a series of questions from 205-209, you didn't follow up on any of the questions that I answered for you in 256.
You have a history in this game of asking a lot of questions, but coming to hardly any conclusions. Almost as if you don't care what the answers are.
This is the most damning aspect of my case against you, and if you are to convince me you are not scum, you will have to explain this behaviour.

I can't speak much for Nero Cain. He didn't seem to sit well with #22 where Jarvis asked if his vote was okay. If you want his opinion on the rest of Jarvis' play you'll have to ask him.

Can you please get nero cain in here, because he has some explaining to do.

[ThAdmiral]

I’m trying to decide what you are calling scummy about me compromising near deadline on a weaker secondary scum-read when my primary was not getting lynched. What exactly are you trying to suggest here ThAd?

That you are distancing yourself from a lynch on town. That you are lessening the responsibility of your involvement in that lynch.

Well so you think that a player who shows no play that is aimed at fulfilling a Town wincon shouldn’t be considered as possible scum.

I think it is a weak tell, yes. As I've explained I think scum are just as likely as town to scumhunt, and town is just as likely as scum to... not do that.

I also don't agree that jarvis was doing nothing to help fulfil a town wincon, but that's a separate issue.

Link to the post where I buddied Xis before Post 42 where you voted him. You can’t because I never even mentioned him to that point. Exhibit 1 that you are lying scum.

You were buddying xisq by joining his furc wagon and saying it was a "quality wagon" in 4, and also calling it "righteous" in 12 whilst also implying that anyone on the furc wagon was town.

I’ve already shown you direct links to my reasoning for suspecting people. You just making a broad, sweeping declaration as to my reasoning without showing how my links aren’t valid is just scummy rhetoric. And as the bolded shows – you already stipulate that I actually had cases.

As I said you do have cases on people. But I think it is coincidental that all your townreads are people that agree with you, and that all your scumreads happen to be people that disagree with you.
I suspect that you

decided to manufacture

cases on people that disagreed with you.

So you can’t read his posts for content to read him and you now ‘aren’t confident’ you can read his activity. Nice transition to saying you can’t make any sort of assessment of Furc.

I never said I could read his posts for content. That is you misunderstanding me, however this is partly my fault for being ambiguous.
I said "he is readable for the most part" in post 36 of this game. What you read was "I can analyse his posts and determine his alignment", what I meant was "I can analyse his

posting style

(in his case length and frequency) and determine his alignment".
I felt confident of that at the time as I have been in a number of games with furc and have read him correctly before. However after having done some research of furc's most recent games I am no longer as confident in my method of determining his alignment.

So your stance here is that you need to be asked in a manner you find appropriate to play in a way that is Pro-Town. Noted.

Pretty much.
In fact no one asked me at all to analyse furcs recent games, but I decided to do it anyway.

[ThAdmiral]

Am I scum with him MoI? Is that what you are suggesting?

No, I'm not. I'm asserting AGAIN that your play shows scum intent surrounding him. You buddied him right off the bat while not actually committing to a read on him (per your own posts). Now you are back-tracking from your "Oh, I can read him" stance. It's a nice next move in positioning yourself for the eventual move to go "Well, maybe I was wrong" and supporting his nice juicy lynch whenever you need it.

Again - I'm saying you are scum who buddied up to him who you knew was Town for startegic purposes. Like I have been saying since Page 2.

I could have easily said he is playing to his

accepted

scum meta (which he is), and justified a push on to him if I wanted. But I see what you mean in that I could be storing up a "lynch in a glass box" (break glass in case of emergency).

All I'll say is that if I ever do decide to lynch furc in this game, it won't be because of his meta.

Unlike you I'm not having to create scum-hunting ... I can actually hunt scum.

How's that going? Because I can tell you that you're 0 for 2 so far.

[ThAdmiral]

@ moi 485 - either amrun didn't do any scumhunting, or she did. You admit that she made a case on jarvis, end of.
You have a valid point that amrun didn't mention any suspicion on ree yesterday, and is now claiming that he was a secondary suspect, but your stance that amrun did no scumhunting is invalid.

[ThAdmiral]

I hammered Jarvis. I make no bones about that.

I feel like you are making a few...bones out of that. You have consistently said that he wasn't your first choice and that he was a compromise etc. But whatever, I'll drop this point.

This does prompt me to look at how you handled yourself around the Jarvis lynch.

Because this strikes me as “Teehee I knew Jarvis was a mislynch and now I can attack people for being on it” posting

. Will need to review Day 1 from you.

No doubt you'll construe it that way and not "hey guys I think he is probably town", which is what it was.

Scum in a Mini game can’t honestly scum-hunt (unless it is one of those games with 2-2 teams or a Serial Killer) and

the difference is in assessing if their efforts look honest

. Town aren’t just as likely not to scum-hunt as scum (extreme VIs like Furc aside) and it’s silly to pretend not.

See this I agree with. I think analysing whether someone is being genuine or not is a good way to determine alignment, but I don't think analysing whether they have "scumhunted" or not is a good way to determine alignment.

And the second line is indeed more evidence IMO that you are using the deadline lynch for further mislynch purposes as scum. Because I don’t recall you doing anything at all to really push against his lynch. Yet now you are saying “I thought he was working to a Town wincon” after the fact.

Oh you've already started on that whole "construing" thing. No surprises there.
I said a few times that I didn't think he was scum (I clarify this the most in 365) and also that I felt dlm and ree were better lynches (389). I also made cases on ree (370) and dlm (392).

Only an image can properly parse this absurdity …

And yet I'm scum for buddying furc when I said I enjoy playing with him? What you are suggesting is far more absurd.
Anyway nice dodge of having to answer a valid point.

I’ve bolded the weasel-wording to show that this is simply mudslinging on your part. And the fact that Sotty and I didn’t see eye to eye on issues Day 1 (for example I had a DLM Town read and she did not per her late Day vote) blows up you “all your Town reads agreed with you” as scummy. You are clearly only bringing up issues that support your scummy arguments and ignoring things that show it to be false.

It's not mudslinging. It's the conclusion I've come to after analysing your reads.
And as for sotty? Maybe that's why you decided to kill her.

So again – 100% of your ability to read him was meta and you are mid-process of backing away from that.

Yes. Not mid-process. I've backed up all the way.

How are you going to read Furc now ThAd? You’ve already more or less claimed you aren’t going to be able to parse his posting.

I don't know how I'm going to read him. It's going to be tricky.

Well given that you saying your Town is alignment Neutral (derp, scum do that also) what you are saying here is “You haven’t lynched scum”. Well congratulations – neither have you. So much for the moral high ground pot-shot there Tex.

Wasn't shooting for the moral high ground, just at your ego.

[ThAdmiral]

What would you like me to explain, Dezi?

Why was jarvis "scum", as you suggested in 361?

Ok but how does this relate to Jarvis and Amrun lacking at scumhunting? Town and scum are both likely to try and scumhunt but this is only because they both have the motivation to do that. Only scum have the motivation to not scumhunt.

I disagree because I don't think anyone has the motivation to not scumhunt (or "scumhunt"). I think that when you see someone who isn't scumhunting they are either town being inactive/coasting or scum being inactive/coasting.
Aside from this do you think amrun and jarvis weren't scumhunting day 1?

[ThAdmiral]

I'd be more interested in whether you still believe you have used it as a reliable scumtell before, having seen the evidence of your self meta.

I still feel confident that I have.

Defensive? What about it felt defensive?

I called it pretentious because it felt pretentious. Instead of simply asking who my scumreads were, the way it was worded sounded to me like "Hey, spare us all a moment and practice what you preach." I thought there were less demeaning ways of asking that question.

It's not so much the "pretentious" bit as much as the "My vote speaks toward that end. If I notice something else I promise you'll be the first to know, and if if there is something in particular that you feels needs my attention I trust you'll speak up" bit. Basically you're saying "I don't have any other reads", but instead of saying that you phrase it like a challenge, or as if you are pre-empting any claims that because you don't have any other reads you are scummy.

Is it just the question:conclusion ratio that feels off to you? I have a history of asking lots of questions in many, many of my games. It's part of my process.

It's more than this I think. You have come to conclusions but, from memory, I don't think any have been formed based on questions you've asked. And I don't think your stance has ever changed despite asking questions. It's like you have your opinions, and you have your questions (which usually help form opinions), but they never interact.
You also seem to just drop things that you yourself have brought up. For example you say that the xisq wagon was probably scum-driven. Jarvis was on it and was town - that leaves myself, lanthir, furc and ree. Who were the scum driving it?

Are there any particular instance(s) where you feel I am 100% able to draw a conclusion, but have not done so? Maybe that could help me understand why this aspect is so damning for your case on me.

Yes. I feel you could have come to a conclusion about jarvis after your question to zang in 81. After he provided 5 examples of jarvis flip-flopping you didn't follow up, and only in 179 after being directly asked by xisq about jarvis did you form an opinion of him that didn't really have anything to do with what you asked zang about.
I would have expected you to have formed an opinion on yates after asking him a number of questions in 165, 205, 206 and 209. You just asked him a bunch of questions and then dropped it.
I expected our back and forth to continue after I answered your questions in 256. More to the point you were voting me through the majority of day 1 and I currently don't even know what your read on me is.

[ThAdmiral]

You have an ego regardless of your alignment moi.

I'm not even going to bother continuing to argue with you as you just keep dodging the questions that are uncomfortable to answer, cropping my responses to suit whatever witty comeback you have planned, and misinterpreting (purposefully) what I am saying.

[ThAdmiral]

I'm not even going to bother continuing to argue with you as you just keep dodging the questions that are uncomfortable to answer, cropping my responses to suit whatever witty comeback you have planned, and misinterpreting (purposefully) what I am saying.

Rather than just giving up, can you show how he has done this?

He's dodged a few things:
- I called him out about the fact that he said amrun hadn't done any scumhunting, and then admitted amrun had done some scumhunting and he hasn't replied to that.
- He avoided following up on his argument that I didn't try to persuade people not to lynch jarvis after I showed that I did indeed try to persuade people not to lynch jarvis.
- Rather than responding to my valid point about him buddying xisq he posts an image instead, and then further avoids it by going back to his old accusation of me buddying furc (he also cropped my full response here to suit his needs).
- He deliberately misinterprets me saying "whatever, I'll drop this point" as me admitting my point was invalid.

And then he has the brass to say

I'm

flinging out crap to avoid answering for

my

scummy play. The irony.

As to the whole "sotty disagreed with me, so that invalidates your entire argument" - a) sotty only disagreed with him late in the day after MoI had already buddied him hard so it would have been too suss to flip his read on sotty, b) one swallow doesn't make a summer, c) once again this is probably another reason moi killed him last night.

[ThAdmiral]

clever plan to agree with moi orange. It's your best bet for getting him not to vote you.

[ThAdmiral]

Also everyone note – despite the fact he’s now calling me scum he makes NO move to actually vote me. Nope, like a classic scum-bag his vote sits limply on DLM who he is making minimum and weak efforts at pushing. He’s happy to just park a vote, fluff the thread occasionally and play defense from my overwhelming avalanche of evidence he’s scum.

The best part is that MoI is indeed voting me and not being a hypocrite.[/sarcasm]
Despite the fact I'm "obvious scum", and "could not be more scummy".

LIE, and easily proven one at that.

Really? Because in that post you linked you say (regarding amrun):
"You make case on Jarvis and call him scum"
So who's lying again?

- He avoided following up on his argument that I didn't try to persuade people not to lynch jarvis after I showed that I did indeed try to persuade people not to lynch jarvis.

Cognitive Dissonance from scum HOOOOO!

I’m scum for not following up on a point for a few days. But ThAd was Town for repeatedly dodging providing his claimed self meta (

which he NEVER ACTUALLY DID AND CAN’T SINCE HE’S PROVEN TO BE LYING ABOUT THE “TRY TO HARD TELL

”) and that comes from Town.

Note he doesn't address the point here, which isn't surprising.
In any case I wasn't

dodging

providing my self meta, I just flat out

refused

to do it. If MoI flat out refused to follow up on his own arguments that would be one thing, but when they are proven to be wrong he just conveniently forgets he ever brought them up rather than admitting he was wrong or that he just made it up.

Lulz. You had no valid point to respond to. I have a long standing hatred of Derpulow. Clear as Day. Powerlynching him in RVS would do my heart good. So your point I was buddying is clearly absurd. As further pointed out by the fact that you didn't even mention this 'Page 1 buddying' until I had you under heavy fire. Aka scum-mudslinging.

And for everyone else reading along - I was buddying Xis by doing so …. But ThAd wasn’t buddying Furc by defending him. More cognitive dissonance from scum.

You clearly were buddying, and any reasonable person looking at it would agree, so I don't feel the need to argue this point any further.
But please point out where I was defending furc? (I feel like we've already gone through this but feel free to keep going back to your early day 1 points against me if you feel you must).

It was not a misrep. I once again proved that your points were scummy and crap. You tried to extricate yourself again in a way that didn’t admit you were caught (which you were) but that you ‘didn’t want to argue anymore’. It’s classic “Scum caught with his tail between his legs” play.

Well it was a misrep, since you misrepresented what I actually meant. That's, like, the exact definition of the term "misrep".
You didn't prove shit, I just didn't feel the need to continue on with a point that I felt was minor when there were other things you were clearly guilty of.

Lulz more scummy crap from ThAd. I killed Sotty (who I had a solid, unwavering Town read on) because it would be too hard to change my position on her. Despite the fact we both read each other (correctly) as Town. Another classic example of scum trying to use bad Nightkill WIFOM.

Yeah, scum often kill the people they see as the strongest townreads. But it wasn't the only reason you killed her - you also wanted to get her off your partner dlm's back.
Understandable. Without her driving force the dlm wagon is flagging, so overall a pretty smart move.

[ThAdmiral]

@ Everyone:

I want everyone who actually thinks MoI is town to read his posts. Yes, all of them. Not just the ones that he posts directly to you.
I know it's difficult because there is a lot of bullshit to wade through, but I implore you to do it and then tell me that he is still a townread afterwards.

[ThAdmiral]

clever plan to agree with moi orange. It's your best bet for getting him not to vote you.

From these posts, I assume you had the slot as town. Is that opinion changing?

It's more of a shot at moi really.

I actually think attacking me is a town move as it is not a smart idea for scum to attack a person who is not on your wagon and who is more or less defending you, so my townread on the slot stands. But I am rolling my eyes at the fact that he thinks moi is town and I'm scum. It's disappointing more than anything else.

[ThAdmiral]

Aside from harming my will to live, what is this supposed to achieve? What are we supposed to be looking for? Or, in short, why is there ANY reason to believe this is scum MOI and not regular old smug, insufferable, terrible town MOI? How about you make a case, and see if people agree with you? Your case on DLM was pretty decent, if you think MOI's scum you should be able to articulate it similarly. My problem here is that MOI's attacks on you haven't substantially changed, but your interpretation of them has. If he believed them at the start, and you seem to believe he did, there's no reason whatsoever to think he doesn't believe them now. Delayed OMGUS is scummy.

It's the amount of obvious stuff he refuses to budge on, the twisting of words, and other factors such as his town and scumreads and his ignoring points. I know he's annoying as town but surely not this malicious.
See that's the genius of moi - it doesn't matter if he's being scummy no one wants to read his posts because he spews out so much stuff.

MrRee

- any reason I should not vote you right now?

Well for one thing the mini you posted had 12 players, not 13, in it.

Fonz nailed it quite right – your response to my case on you has changed with no ostensible reasoning other than “Scum irritated that MoI isn’t letting go”.

See above.

Should I go so far as to say that I expect your response will be a “Move the Goalposts” attempt where you want to argue whether “no significant scum-hunting” technically means she wasn’t scum-hunting? That's what scum love to do - argue semantics.

What the actual fuck?
I just can't understand how you can write this and believe what you are saying unless you are outright lying.
YOU are moving the goalposts! Your

own

goalposts, that

you

put up originally!
You said amrun showed no scumhunting. 0. Nada.
You then show she

did

scumhunt.
It doesn't matter if it wasn't "significant".
This is all your own words, how can you argue against it with a straight face?

Lulz. Nothing has been proven to be wrong at all. Once again – you stating it has without providing links and explaining just means you are hoping I will not follow-up when I get a chance. Yet you making statements and refusing to back them up is not scummy at all. COGNITIVE DISSONANCE AWAY!!!!

Post 533 - there's your link
- I've categorically proven you lied about amrun
- You still haven't responded to the fact that I did actually argue against the jarvis lynch

I do appreciate the Straw-man where you assert I’ve tried to ‘forget I brought it up’. Link to that please!

I said "conveniently forgot", such as the jarvis point you still haven't responded to.

So you are just going to pretend I haven’t whipped you on the point, stand on your point, and hope everyone just accepts you crap? Lulz.

Question: am I the only furc fan around?
I like playing with him because he is readable for the most part.

No way you were defending Furc and saying a policy lynch on him was a bad idea because he’s readable (oh wait … you completely back-tracked on that now) and you like playing with him. No way you were trying to say a policy lynch was unwarranted and buddying him (I like Furc) there

But I do enjoy playing with furc. It would have been a lie for me to say otherwise.
Ok, so I indicated a rvs policy lynch on a furc who hadn't posted yet was a bad idea. Are you really going with the line of argument that this was buddying?

In this response – ThAd suggests everyone should know that he ‘meant’, not the plain meaning of what was actually written. Scumtastic!

I proved your argument was crap. You can’t refute it other than going “NO U!!!!” like you are right here. Just accept your beating like a man ThAd.

Oh, you're funny MoI.
You didn't interpret the plain meaning though, you interpreted the meaning that suited you best and cast me in the worst light. Which wasn't the meaning at all, and once again I'm confident any reasonable person would agree.

The bolded is the funniest thing I’ve seen in a long, long time. Scum do that

ALL THE TIME

. They never kill threats to them.

DERP

.

This is why I know you are scum ThAd. You aren’t this stupid as Town.

It actually fits in perfectly with my explanation - you were killing off a strong townread AND someone who was a threat to your team because they were on to dlm. So by your own definition this makes perfect sense.

[ThAdmiral]

And of the ones I haven't answered, ThAd yesterday was better than ThAd today. While I enjoy a good MoI fight, at some point you have to continue playing the game anyway. I'd like to hear ThAd on other players, not just MoI.

Other players like ree, dlm and amrun's slot (now orange)?

[ThAdmiral]

ree:

I'm feeling more and more that Rees is not scum.

dlm:

Why dlm? I think there is more evidence to suggest he is scum based on his play yesterday (mainly the asking questions but not actually doing anything with the answers thing)

Note - I'm currently asking him questions which he hasn't answered yet.

amrun/orange:

I actually think attacking me is a town move as it is not a smart idea for scum to attack a person who is not on your wagon and who is more or less defending you, so my townread on the slot stands.

Xisq and zang I have no clear read on.

[ThAdmiral]

Number one, I don't find ThAdmiral's explanation of his behaviour re: MOI particularly convincing.

in regards to what?

[ThAdmiral]

@ moi - in 499 you said: "And the second line is indeed more evidence IMO that you are using the deadline lynch for further mislynch purposes as scum. Because I don’t recall you doing anything at all to really push against his lynch. Yet now you are saying “I thought he was working to a Town wincon” after the fact." This is the thing you didn't follow up about after I proved it wrong.

more later, on phone.

[ThAdmiral]

@ moi: you may not realise this but 12 and 13 are different numbers.
Thus why would ree be expected to know the scum numbers in a 13 player game given that he's only played in 12 player games?

[ThAdmiral]

@ moi: Im sorry I should have realised that when you said "amrun made a case", aka the primary form of scumhunting, I was supposed to interpret that as "amrun did 0 scumhunting".

My bad.

[ThAdmiral]

I like the peregrine case. Count me in as a "happy to lynch him" member.

[ThAdmiral]

@ peregrine: ree's case against you is best summarised by this fragment:

By riding my vote through the day, you managed to avoid the Thad wagon, the Xis wagon, and the Jarvis wagon. All in all, you were not at all helpful in day 1. You failed to push or defend anyone. Your read list listed everyone you have played before as town, actually, it listed pretty much everyone as town.

Additionally to this:
- your reasoning for voting ree is and was crap (therefore not justifying the level of tunneling)
- aside from avoiding the thad, xis and jarvis wagons you hardly discussed these wagons at all. Yet today you state that the jarvis was a "crap lynch" (420). Note this was after you didn't even have jarvis in your "town" pile, rather in your "seem to be scumhunting, making cases, etc." pile which is more null than anything else (as of your most recent list post at the time, in 349).

[ThAdmiral]

@Whoever asked- Yes, Amrun would have been playing to her scum meta had she lurked and posted. She wasn't posting at all, and it wasn't just this game. For that reason, her entire stint was null.

Agree with Fonz about Furc, seems his scum play.

Vote: Furc

Evidence time!

Game day	Players alive	Total posts	Furcolow posts	Relative frequency	Alignment
Stars Aligned III D1	28	1701	258	4.25	TOWN
The Children of Húrin Mafia D1	22	832	123	3.25	SELF
Cold War Mafia D1	24	1176	130	2.65	TOWN
Ohne Mafia D1	12	828	107	1.55	SCUM
Cookie Thief Mafia D1	12	444	53	1.43	TOWN
The Children of Húrin Mafia D2	20	568	30	1.06	SCUM
Mafia Holographica D1	12	654	32	0.59	SCUM

Furcolow currently has 26 posts out of 640 in a 13 player game.

You just stole this from Feysal in politics mafia. Including the formatting.

Anyway I already went through this in 423, including some of his much more recent games and his behaviour is

atypical

in them, indicating he may not be scum in this game.

[ThAdmiral]

ThAd deliberately doing going against whatever MOI wants at a given moment.

Can you provide examples?

@ThAdmiral

: You accept Ree's case on Peregrine, but today he mostly sat with you on DLM. Are they scum together?

I don't know. I'm not trying to be difficult, I just don't know. I'm terrible at doing the whole "this is the scumteam" thing.

@ peregrine:

So I'm scummy for not voting you, Xis, or Jarvis day 1?

Don't do that thing where you ignore the second part of the point - i.e. that you also failed to comment on these wagons for the most part.

My day1 reason for voting Ree was not crap, although it was all day1 based.
And seeing how you reached the same conclusion, it's fascinating how you think this adds any value.

I'll admit that I had a weak scum-read on ree based on day 1, and that only today I have changed my mind - but that doesn't mean I agree that he was scummy enough to warrant the amount of focus you've been giving him. Your initial case was undeniably weak; based on misinterpretations (the "thanks I'll read that xis"/"I'm not reading that"), weak poe ("because everyone else is more town", 349), and bizarre sentiment ("it was obvious by 19 that Lanthir was probably town. Yet you voted him anyway", 103).
You haven't really done anything to support the case today other than argue with ree, and regardless any new points you bring up would be moot since you were already "convinced" ree was scum at the beginning of this day.

[ThAdmiral]

Yes. Your point? Do you read Furc as Scum or Town?

My point is that your point against ThAd relies on Furc being town. However, you seem to indicate that you don't think that furc is town.

Don't worry, Moi always finds a way to retcon his inconsitencies - at least he has so far this game.
But note how he didn't answer this even though he has posted three times since your post, and he clearly read your post because he quoted it.

2) I am not Amrun. Amrun replaced out because she was busy or just wasn't enjoying this game. I find the fact that you accuse her of replacing out in order to pull some underhanded trick is

extremely disrespectful

to her, and in turn makes me lose some respect for you as a player. I think you should apologize to her.

You will learn not to be surprised when MoI says whatever he can to score a "point" against another player.

------------------------------------------------//------------------------------------------------

The bolded is the part where you fail. Because you didn’t prove anything to me.

I think you're forgetting the original reason this whole jarvis debate was brought up - you, in 499, accused me of calling jarvis town

after the fact

. You said I was trying to use his mislynch as fuel for further mislynches by pretending I had a townread on him, without having a townread on him the day before.
The FACT is I did have a town read on him, as proven.
I'm not surprised you are trying to focus this on the part of your post where you say I didn't do "anything at all to really push against his lynch", because you love setting your own terms, interpretations, and goalposts at leisure.
But even that claim is flimsy. I did what any reasonable townsperson would have done when someone they believe is probably town is getting lynched:
- I stated that I thought he was town (numerous times)
- I provided alternative lynch options
Ok, I didn't clamour "everyone voting jarvis is scum" or "how can people be pushing this retarded jarvis wagon?", but the fact is I

did

oppose jarvis' lynch, and

did

try and get people to vote someone else.

Oh by the way you say my case against DLM "just sat there after I made it" (paraphrased). If you're suggesting I didn't follow up on it perhaps that's because

10 posts later you voted to lynch jarvis

.

NOTE:

between my post and your lynch vote only four other people had a chance to post.
Jarvis himself.
Sotty, who agreed that dlm was scummy.
Zang, who agreed that my case on dlm was good.
Fonz, who also agreed that dlm was a good lynch.

Isn't that interesting that just when people were starting to turn their attention towards dlm you end the day.

[ThAdmiral]

That's a completely untrue picture of what was going on. Attention was turning AWAY from DLM. My post between yours and MOI's was telling Sotty that Ree was a better vote than DLM at that stage. Sotty's was agreeing with this notion and asking for a votecount. Zang's didn't mention DLM at all and criticised Jarvis.

It is completely untrue to say that attention was turning away from him.
Sotty indeed did agree with the case on dlm, and was voting dlm (and had been slightly before my case)
Zang did mention the case on dlm. He said, to dlm: "You aren't going to respond to what sotty said to you? You should also respond to ThAd, who actually makes a good case against you." Although he was voting jarvis at the time that shows at least some indication he might have been interesting in changing to a dlm vote.
Admittedly you did say to sotty that the ree wagon was more viable, but you also did agree that the dlm wagon was good.

There was 4 days till deadline at the time, so it wasn't like we needed to lynch there and then, and apart from the people mentioned no one even had a chance to get on and comment. I think moi cut short any chance of a dlm lynch when there was clear signs that it could have gone ahead.

You consistently had Mr. Ree on the scum side of the ledger when MOI was attacking the Ree wagon. AS SOON AS MOI STARTS SHOWING INTEREST IN THE WAGON, you start defending Ree.

If I'm doing that it is unconsciously. I haven't had a chance to go back and look at that to see if it's valid (running out of time right now), but I will hopefully do so later today.
But do you think I have no legitimate reasons for my change of stance on ree, and that I am just making my position up to oppose MoI?

Also, ThAd: Your whole rationale for not lynching Furc straight out the gate was that he is readable, and his meta showed that. You then turned around today and said that because he'd been playing counter-meta lately, you couldn't rely on that. The outstanding question, then, is: How the hell DO YOU intend to read Furc?

I don't know. I don't often go in with a gameplan of how I'm going to read people in a game.
I do know I don't trust my usual meta argument against furc right now.

[ThAdmiral]

I don't want the day to end without me replying to moi's most recent post.

I'd also prefer to give furv every chance to.claim.

[ThAdmiral]

See this is why I get aggrevated with you. ThAd flip-flopped his story around (first I was scum buddying Sotty and killed her because she was a hard lynch as obv-Town,

then it morphed to “Scum often kill players that have Town reads on them” which is moronicly stupid

, then it morphed to “you killed her because you are a DLM partner”)

What. the. actual. fuck?
Where did I say this, MoI?
I said scum kill people they view strongly as town (bottom of 553), because they would obviously be the hardest people to lynch. That's the closest thing to what you're suggesting I said, but that is MILES away from it in reality.

You, as I demonstrated, limply called him Town...

What do you mean "limply called him town"??? Either I call someone town or I don't and, history lesson,

I called Jarvis town

.

Multiple fucking times

. How is that "limply"? I didn't sit on the fence, I didn't say he was town conditionally, I didn't say "I think he

might

be town". Can you actually define your terms for once rather than using them as little escape holes you can slime out of when you get challenged?

I'm not letting this one go as easily as others that you've slipped by succesfully.

Prove to me that I was

limp

in my stance on jarvis

. You accused me of it, so prove it.
Here's the case against in full:

Against my initial thoughts I think Jarvis is town[/curryingfavour]

I find it unlikely scum would admit to being happy to lynch someone who they didn't have a scumread on. Plus his frustration reads as genuine.

What do you perceive to be genuine about it? Do you base this opinion on prior experience with Jarvis, or some other basis?

It reads genuine because it doesn't seem forced, over the top or false. It is based on my prior experience trying to read hundreds of newer players.

I will endeavour to explain my flip on jarvis in more detail (however I think "flip" is slightly incorrect, as I never had jarvis as a strong scumread but he was certainly someone that I was interested in questioning):
I questioned him about seeming contradictions, but based on his answers they weren't. To clarify I thought it was off that he said he would have been fine if furc had been lynched, but then said he didn't have a scumread on furc. For most people on this site this would be scummy, but I feel he was coming from a perspective that these two things aren't mutually exclusive (a perspective that I can only assume comes from wherever he played before). I have also had experience offsite and I know that there people were often lynched for "information" or if they were deemed "distracting" to the point of being a negative influence on the game (I'm not saying all off-site mafia places have these same perspective, just that different perspectives like these do exist).
Furthermore while I initially thought he was potentially scum for throwing his vote around early I actually viewed this as a town tell, especially coupled with posts like:

Zang is spinning so much shit out of a perfectly clear position. Sotty is staying remarkably close to the fence. MoI is cheering Zang on while avoiding the issue himself. ThAd is probably scum still. Fonz has done so little.

Which go out of their way to put so many people offside. I don't see scum saying this.
I don't see scum admitting they wanted to lynch someone who they didn't have a scumread on.

Plus, as I mentioned, his frustration read as genuine. This came across most in posts 129, 142, 218 etc.

What is your latest opinion of Mr_Ree and Jarvis?

Check my posts to zang for my jarvis read (town).

Haven't finished my dlm analysis but I do know that I'd rather lynch him or rees than jarvis.

-----------------------------------------------//-----------------------------------------------

...and provided weak cases

I provided

one

case that was only arguably weak (and certainly stronger than some of the dross that had been spooned out by the likes of, oh, you for example), and a case on dlm that was agreed upon to be a good case by the likes of sotty and zang, and possibly more if people had a chance to comment on it (aka not a weak case at all).

(one of which you admitted in the case was such and the other, as you stipulate in this very post,

came just before deadline so as to be more busywork than actually looking for scum

)

No seriously go fuck yourself MoI.
I mean jesus christ. Jesus. Fucking. Christ. JESUS. FUCKING. CHRIST MAN! HOW CAN YOU EVEN PRETEND TO BE SERIOUS WHEN YOU SPOUT SHIT LIKE THIS?!
YOU ended the day.
There were 4 days left until deadline.
That is PLENTY of time to discuss cases and potentially decide on a different lynch.
But no, I wasn't trying to avoid the lynch of a town and lynch someone else I thought was scum. I was just making "busywork rather than actually looking for scum". I mean I wasn't acting protown like MoI by HAMMERING TOWN, ENDING THE DAY, and STOPPING ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION!
Go fuck yourself.

but did nothing to discourage effectively discourage the lynch.

Then today starts and you being mining the Jarvis lynch trying to attack people on the mislynch which is classic scum behavior

.

Surprise, surprise - more bullshit from MoI.

Before the jarvis lynch went through xisq specifically asked me the following:

@ThAdmiral

: If lynching Jarvis is lynching town, can you pick scum from this pseudo-wagon?

Jarvis 6 - Zang,Mr_Ree,Amrun,Yates,Don't Lynch Me,Xisiqomelir

And I responded:

Dlm and ree would be my best bets. I'm finding you and zang hard to read and I believe yates and amrun are town.

What changed from then until today?
Did I change any of those reads to "mine" the Jarvis mislynch? No!
IN FACT I even went against my previous ree suspicion and changed him to a TOWN READ!
The only person I added was YOU, MoI. And I can tell you for sure that it is for far more than just because you were on the Jarvis wagon.

So once again - you accused me of doing it - show me how I've "mined the jarvis lynch", in a display of "classic scum behaviour".

I clearly did not claim you didn’t have a Town read on Jarvis day 1 and then pretending you did. So once again you are lying and actually going back to see what people wrote proves that.

I think it takes a

very

narrow reading of this...

And the second line is indeed more evidence IMO that you are using the deadline lynch for further mislynch purposes as scum. Because I don’t recall you doing anything at all to really push against his lynch.

Yet now you are saying “I thought he was working to a Town wincon” after the fact.

...particularly the bolded, to suggest that you didn't imply that I didn't have a town read on jarvis.

Lying scum is lying scum.

Well that's one thing we agree on.

vote: MoI

He is probably scum with DLM but I might as well vote for the one I want to see dead more.

[ThAdmiral]

@ThAd- yes it is, however it is static information and not game specific.

I'm a bit unsure as to what exactly this refers to.

[ThAdmiral]

Mudsling.

And that's so lazy and evasive of you.

[ThAdmiral]

just blindly follow Moi? he's fucking lying because I'm vanilla town.

whatever just lynch him when I flip town. please.

[ThAdmiral]

I'm will McKenzie, my role has some description about my character. I'm the briefcase wanker, my mouth gets me into trouble etc.

I don't believe no ones even asked "what information?".

[ThAdmiral]

Alright just got home and I need to try to put a halt to the bullshit.

Notice no vote for my as 'supposed' liar.

Scum. Hammer it.

Why would you even feel the need to bring up minor shots like this at me if you're so sure I'm scum.
This isn't even a point. My first priority right now is trying to stop myself getting lynched. Step two is getting you lynched, I'll get to that.

I don't believe no ones even asked "what information?".

What's it matter? It's a 1v1. It's just not worth it for scum to throw away half their remaining members for one mislynch. If MOI's information is inconclusive and he's making too much of it, that's on his head. But I don't have any reason based on MOI's conduct to think he believes his info is anything less than 100%.

IT MATTERS because I know he is lying, and if he doesn't reveal his information today he'll make up some bullshit tomorrow and be like "oh whoops, I musta misinterpreted it, derp!".

Unless you PROMISE to lynch him when I flip I'm not going to go down without him providing this "information" he has on me.

But I am taking great satisfaction that I’ve been right and now I get to prove it without tons of bullshit defense coming from him.

The beauty is that you've been wrong (lying) about literally everything in this game (apart from sotty being town). You didn't even have furc pegged as scum, you gutter-sniping slimebag.

Meh, I'm not about to argue with a guilty. Get the rope.

He didn't claim a guilty though, just "information". Until he says what that is don't be a fucking sheep.

[ThAdmiral]

@ moi: was it too hard for you to argue against the points I raised against you yesterday?
Lazy? Or you're just a bad player? Which one, MoI?
Am I really that much better than you that you think I'm such a threat you have to lie to get me killed? Wow, I never thought I'd see the day.

How about this, MoI - you claim your "information" in your next post, or you have claimed scum. Deal? Deal. Good.

vote: moi

(^^ there you go, MoI)

[ThAdmiral]

Anyone have anything to say before I hammer this dude?

PEdit: Okay a list of reads first

Yes, fucking don't hammer me.

reads:
moi is scum, that much is clear.
dlm is probably other scum, but if I'm wrong it will be someone I think is town like fonz (I'm not saying I think he is scum, just that if dlm isn't it's probably one of the players that looks really town)

Other than that I think ao is town,
mr ree is town,
zang is town,

I guess the rest are town as well, but I don't have as strong reads on them.

[ThAdmiral]

Honestly don't lynch me until he provides information, because he is lying.

[ThAdmiral]

Seriously you're all fucking retarded if you don't get the information out of moi before lynching me.

[ThAdmiral]

Why are you so happy to blindly follow his bs? He's not even hinted at what the information is, and if it so clearly indicated me as scum why wouldn't he have said it first thing of the day?

[ThAdmiral]

I don't want to prepare the last scum to know what to fakeclaim against MoI's investigations. Not sure it's a big deal, but we don't really gain anything from MoI fullclaiming, so I'd prefer he didn't.

-KJ

We do because he's fucking lying

[ThAdmiral]

I love it when everything gets wrapped up like this. Good Game everyone

I'd like to get confirmation from MOI that he is cop and got a guilty on Thad. If so, you know your target Xis, Protect MOI.

If he was a cop he would have just said it rather than this "information" crap.

I still think we should lynch ThAd. The

only

thing MoI should claim is that he could not have received his information from targetting a VT. I will not advocate for MoI claiming unless he is the last to go in a break-open-the-game massclaim. We still have a 3rd scum to catch.

If you give him wiggle room he will spout some crap tomorrow like "oh, whoops, I thought he was scum for sures! Guess I was wrong, sorry guise!"

Force him to make a stance on what his "information" is so that he can't slime out of it tomorrow like he's been doing with everything he's been saying this entire game.
If it's a "guilty", that's great because you'll know for 100% sure that he's lying tomorrow.

It's probably going to be something like a roleblock though, or something else that he's going to suggest "heavily implies" I'm scum or some shit, and then he'll admit he's wrong tomorrow and you'll wish you made him claim today.

[ThAdmiral]

No, anyone who listens to this piece of scum gets lynched next.

Please stop with the hissy fit. You had it right the first time.

Unless you PROMISE to lynch him when I flip [town] I'm not going to go down without him providing this "information" he has on me.

If MoI is lying about his information on you, he dies. No questions asked.

-KJ

This option should be good enough for ANY town. 1 for 1 is pretty damn par for the course, should it come to that. I do not think there's a possibility they're both town. MoI should be able to comprehend the implications of mistaking inconclusive evidence for 100% scum, because he isn't some fucking 4 year old. And that's good enough for me.

-KJ

So you think I should just lie down and take it like a bitch?
Nuh-uh.

Oh and if anybody doesn't see the elephant in the room, there's incredible dissonance between ThAd suggesting that strategy to begin with, and now demanding more information for his final scumbuddy to use. But the dissonance seems to be icing on the cake at this point.

-KJ

I think the elephant in the room is "why are you so willing to believe MoI, when it's his word versus mine?".
That's the elephant in the room.

[ThAdmiral]

I think it's unlikely that there would be an x-shot jk and a doc in the same game, but it's not an open and shut case.

Let me just do some math...

10 alive, lynch me today (I accept this is going to happen) - 9 alive (2 scum, 7 town)
scum kills a town (probably you) - 8 alive (2 scum, 6 town) - moi lynched tomorrow - 7 alive (1 scum, 6 town)
scum kills another town - 6 alive (1 scum, 5 town)

So essentially after me and moi die you will have 2 lynches to win the game.
If you want to lynch the questionable claim of ao I guess there is a back up just in case that is wrong, so I suppose that is an ok plan.

[ThAdmiral]

I still think moi should claim his information though.

[ThAdmiral]

I'm really interested in how you play this tomorrow moi.

it's cold comfort to know you couldn't outargue me and had to resort to this, but at least that is some comfort.

[ThAdmiral]

once again I'm town. see you in endgame moi. hopefully town win and I can rub this in.

[ThAdmiral]

Well I'm annoyed with MoI as I'm sure everyone else is, but credit to the winning scumteam. My reads were pretty far off all game.

Fonz knows my secret weakness which is that when you defend/buddy me I will think you are town 100% of the time. He also used this to good effect in politics mafia.

[ThAdmiral]

@ ree: guess its not such a secret any more!
don't worry about thanking me for the defence, hopefully you will return the favor one day when I'm scum

@ fonz: good analysis of moi. only recently I derived great pleasure from using his self-belief against the town when I was scum. let him drive the train against a bunch of town then killed him when he started to cotton on. don't get my wrong, I know we were at each others throats all game but I still think he's a great player and I have a lot of respect for him. If he is taking a break from playing its not the worst idea. He has been weaker than his usual self of late, from what I've seen, so I think he can come back strong with a fresh outlook.

[ThAdmiral]

oh and I totally forgot to thank the mod. @ Jason: I guess I'm just used to you hosting games that play out smoothly and without incident! seriously, keep up the good work, and if you have any games upcoming pre-in me.