![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
And I'm going away for the weekend; will be gone for about 3 days, from Friday to Sunday. Should be back on Monday, though.
In post 65, VitaminR wrote:Unvote, Vote: LoudmouthLee
I'm not a fan of any of the MafiaSSK votes on this page. Feels like a bunch of strong players going for an easy target. I especially don't like LML's #62, which nicely sets up a potential switch to the MafiaSSK wagon while maintaining a push on Tigris. Seems like something scum might do to make sure that two wagons keep momentum.
As in: the response was in the abstract rather than talking about what the vote was concretely supposed to do in this game? Meh.In post 51, chamber wrote:Her words weren't actually meaningfully responding to the context of the question.
In post 81, chamber wrote:Discussing things with you seems like it would just annoy me, so I'm not going to, hence my first response being dismissive.
10 bucks says chamber is town. Green crayon is also looking vaguely pro-town here.In post 82, Green Crayons wrote:I look forward to a long and illustrious game of you ignoring my questions!
Hi.
In that one post, you hard-defended SSK and implicity attacked everyone on his bandwagon (saying it looked like a , and attacked people for being on the tigras wagon, and voted LML for being on the tigras wagon and FOS's SSK. Without naming names other then LML, you hinted at a suspicion for the "strong players pushing the SSK wagon" (which, at the time, probably meant Seol and PJ, since they had made the real cases against SSK). You also implied that you thought that both tigras and SSK were town, without really explaining why.
VitimanR's move is only "ballsy" because if SSK or Tigras flip scum eventually, he looks linked to them, and it creates a lot of confusion. My suggestion was that VitimanR's move would be a lot less risky if he already knew SSK's and Tigras's alignment.Wouldn't that 'balsiness' make VitaminR more probable to be town?
In post 246, undo wrote:May I recommend you to get some sleep then? Your acumen seems to be impairedYosarian2 wrote:Hey. I'm back. Half asleep, but back.
I'm getting some weird vibes off of Undo's posting so far this game. Kind of wishy-washy. Kisses up to everyone in first post, votes DGB "as homage". ? Says MafiaSSK's post #45 " doesn't look right", but then hedges that read, and doesn't vote. Takes off random vote on DGB without voting anyone else. Then later votes SSK. fos:Undo Posting and voting pattern so far looks overly cautious.
No, but seriously, you've just made a chronological list of some of my actions in this game. What's actually suspicious about them? The fact that I am excited to be playing this game (shame on you for dismissing my sincere first post as fawning!)? The fact that I don't vote when I don't find anything immediately voteworthy?
Not everyone plays the same way. I for one don't follow my gut. I don't go voting or fosing people without having minimally solid arguments to do it. If you take one action that I find dubious but not necessarily scummy, I'll take note of it for myself. If you keep on acting dubiously, I will have reasons to find you scummy and evidence to justify my read.
I've been asking questions to several players (some of which remain unresponded) to collect material, so to speak -- but until I form anything valid and concrete from that material, I keep my votes to myself.
I think VitR is somewhat suspicious. If we lynch him he does flip scum, then that would make LML look more town-ish to me. I'm not sure it would say much about Jelly or about Seol.I see what you mean. So considering you think VitR is scum, are you townreading LML, PJ, and Seol?
In post 210, Glork wrote:Incidentally, I am SUPER DUPER AMUSED that people are crying foul at MafiaSSK's "big wagons good" theory, whenat the time he referred to my wagon as "almighty" he jumped AWAY from it, thereby creating a greater spread of votes.
Like, this wagon is legit based on nothing SSK did to actually hurt the game, and just on his theory crafting.
Ok. How would you distinguish between "SSK is acting scummy" and "SSK has a very different view on mafia theory and scumhunting tactics then I do" here? I certainly agree that looking for association tells on day 1 between random people seems like a bizzare way to scumhunt, but I'm not really understanding the scum motivation here, or why you think that's more likely to come from scum then town.In post 258, undo wrote:Yosarian2 wrote: I voted for him because between one post and another, he kept on coming out with some hardly defensable conjectures (I'm mainly referring to his posts 156 and 173). When he said he thought CES's post 137 (and I invite you to read it again) was scumdiscreetlyshowing agreement with a scum partner, he really just seemed desperate to come up with any connection, any valid suspicion that could shake off the heat he had on him.
I know you replaced in late, but that was 2 days ago, and the thread is only 11 page long.In post 263, Natirasha wrote:I'm lurking.
LmL, can you explain what your stance was on Tigras was again? Was it a random vote, or was it an actual suspicion, and if so, why? I'm getting a little confused about what you're trying to say here.In post 282, LoudmouthLee wrote:So, to paraphrase you: You're voting me because I went along with two (wait, one and an FoS) weak wagons with less than 7 pages on D1, and when I find something that truly looks and smells scummy to me, I change my vote to that person?In post 281, VitaminR wrote:That's all you're going to respond to? I've already explained multiple times why I felt your move stood out in particular. You're just picking on my wording there.
When I voted StD, I had a grand total of 2 or 3 votes on me (You, DrippingGoofball- who will vote for me regardless of anything whatsoever due to history, and Albert- who also likes voting me as well) - Hardly a wagon. There was no real pressure (sorry!) for me to make a move. I did it because I'm actively scum hunting.
Are you implying that you think VitR and LML are scum together? That doesn't feel likely to me at this point.In post 288, Untrod Tripod wrote:and I'm not trying to back off my VitR or LML reads there. I still feel strongly about those.
You're still not really explaining your thought process here. What was it that Tigris did that, in your mind, was suspicious enough to warrant a FOS?In post 302, LoudmouthLee wrote: Yos, going back to the opening page, my first post was a dice roll (myself) and the second post was a re-roll. Tigris was the vote in RVS. I didn't move it to begin with because of Tigris's hop on MafiaSSK for being the third person to vote on a wagon, twice. I kept my vote on Tigris instead of moving it because (a) no one, at the moment, was more suspicious and (b) my vote was there already.
I know this may not make any sense, but my suspicion of Tigris would have not have warranted a vote at the time... but since my vote was already there, I kept it there. It would have warranted a FoS.
In post 265, Yosarian2 wrote:I know you replaced in late, but that was 2 days ago, and the thread is only 11 page long.In post 263, Natirasha wrote:I'm lurking.
I'm going to give you another 24 hours to read the thread and post something intelligent about it. If you haven't done so by then, I'm going to vote for you.
Not really. When someone has a meta of making short, declarative statements about who is town or scum without explaining, it can actually make them easier to read; you just have to look at the timing of the statements and figure out why they're making them at those moments and what they're trying to do. The key is to not try to look at the posts in isolation; it's to look at them in context.In post 325, Save The Dragons wrote:?In post 257, Yosarian2 wrote:DGB and Albert also feel like they're playing within their normal day 1 pro-town meta, leaning town on both of them.
Both of them have metas that take little effort to fake.
In post 343, LoudmouthLee wrote: [*]One of my favorite things to do is to find the village idiot and hunt scum off of the wagon. That used to be a really easy way to find scum. Also, when you have an outspoken "foot in mouth player" (such as myself and DGB), we become mafia fodder as well.
Not really. The timing is everything.In post 377, Save The Dragons wrote: Since scum know who the town are, doesn't it make it easier to say XXXXX is town when you're scum?
Maybe it's more a theory dispute then anything, but random votes are there both to generate pressure and because it's theoretically better to lynch someone at random then to lynch no one at all; you don't drop them for no reason, you drop it if you have somewhere better to put your vote, or maybe if you think the person you're voting for looks town.Save the Dragons wrote: Dropping a random vote without explaining why is suspicious? This entire section seems like a stretch.
Quite a few things.In post 386, Sotty7 wrote: What's the difference between STD and VitR?
I don't really get his UT vote, either. It also bugs me that both of LML's suspects (STD and UT) are people who were attacking him.LML's push on the wagon hopping just rubs me the wrong way completely, but I'm starting to think that it is just a playstyle difference with just how committed to it he is. I think if you're looking at wagoning you have to include reasoning otherwise you're only getting half the picture. The UT vote adds up considering, but I'm still not 100% buying it, just seems weak to me.
Basically. When you get rid of your random vote, it should generally be because there's someone else you'd rather vote for, or because you have some other concrete reason.I was about to bark at you some more, but I assume that you are suggesting that not voting anyone is scummier than unvoting a random vote.
Basically. When you get rid of your random vote, it should generally be because there's someone else you'd rather vote for, or because you have some other concrete reason.I was about to bark at you some more, but I assume that you are suggesting that not voting anyone is scummier than unvoting a random vote.
Eh. Like I said, your claim that Nat was an "opportunistic wagon" doesn't make much sense to me; there was never much chance of Nat being lynched. And your other argument looks pretty weak; UT just comes off as the "aggressive" playstyle, aggressively pushing wagons to get reactions and to speed up the game.In post 396, LoudmouthLee wrote:@Yos: did you just skim or completely miss this post and the subsequent discussion?Rationale:
[*]UT has been on 3 of the major bandwagons, the most out of any player (tied with StD)
[*]UT was also on the Nat wagon which looked incredibly opportunistic at the time.
Consistency is a scum tell.In post 399, LoudmouthLee wrote:Oh! That's cool, Yos! Find an inconsistency and call it protown? That's the weirdest thing you may have ever said.In post 381, Yosarian2 wrote:Oh, for the record, STD is town. So far, he's picked a fight with Seol, LML, me, and PJ, who are 4 people that are all absurdly good at getting people lynched, all in the first 13 pages of day 1, without any obvious benefit to him from picking all those fights. So either he's righteous town cloaked in the paladin-like armor of righteousness, or he's gone completely suicidal. No way a scum pretending to scumhunt would stick their neck out that far.
He even attacked me for attacking Undo for the same thing he attacked Undo for earlier this game, which is so completely inconsistent it must be a town tell.
I mentioned it in this post here:In post 412, Sotty7 wrote:You did? I missed it, can you point me back to the post or elaborate on why he's no longer as scummy to you.In post 387, Yosarian2 wrote:Quite a few things. I did just mention, though, that I'm less suspicious of VitR then I was several pages ago, and yeah, I suppose it's for a similar reason, although to a lesser extent.
VitimanR has been falling in my suspicion for a while. I originally voted him because I didn't like his attack on LML (the reasoning didn't make much sense to me at the time), but as the game has been going on, VitiminR has been looking steadily better, while LML has been looking worse and worse. Now, I'm just thinking that LML's scumhunting has just been off all game, and perhaps VitiminR just spotted that before I did (and perhaps didn't articulate it very well).In post 379, Yosarian2 wrote:In post 343, LoudmouthLee wrote: [*]One of my favorite things to do is to find the village idiot and hunt scum off of the wagon. That used to be a really easy way to find scum. Also, when you have an outspoken "foot in mouth player" (such as myself and DGB), we become mafia fodder as well.
Ugh. This one makes me cringe, especially since I remember LML as being especally hard to lynch most of the time. Is he really using the "I'm a village idiot so scum like to target me" defense here? His posts have felt off to me for much of the game, and this just feels like a scummy defense.
The biggest problem I have with his play so far, though, is that there's very little real scumhunting. Most of his posts seem to be him making excuses for not doing much proper scumhunting yet, which really bothers me, and feels both out of character and scummy. His attempts to have it both ways with Tigras still bothers me, but it wouldn't bother me so much if he was also scumhunting. The only other real scumhunting he did was his STD vote, but that also feels pretty weak to me; he doesn't really explain it, and he doesn't press it, or try to put pressure on STD, or try to get STD to answer any questions or anything.
VitimanR feels less suspicious to me now. Still wouldn't mind an Undo wagon.
For now,vote:loudmouthlee
That's part of it. Also, townies who are going back and re-reading the game multiple times, trying to look for scum in different ways, will usually end up contradicting themselves one way or the other, because they're trying different theories on for size and are looking at the game in different mindsets using different (and sometimes contradictory) types of scum-hunting theories. Scum, on the other hand, tend to be much more aware of all the positions they've taken all game, and tend to work to avoid any internal contradictions they might be called out on.In post 410, chamber wrote: There is always a trail of bread crumbs explaining all of their changes of thought. This trail of thought breadcrumbs should exist for townies, but townies don't always state everyone of their thoughts, it wont be explicit. This is what I think you and yos meant.
VitR's attack on LML doesn't look like distancing to me; if anything, he basically started the LML bandwagon, and pushed it aggressively even as it grew.In post 417, petroleumjelly wrote:5.)Yosarian2, why do you think LoudmouthLee and VitaminR are unlikely bedfellows?
No, it's because Nat had contributed absolutely nothing, and was strongly implying that he was going to continue to contribute nothing.In post 423, LoudmouthLee wrote: c) Here's a really great question for you, PJ (and Yos, and EVERYONE ELSE ON THE POLICY KICK), why Nat, and not any of the other players that hadn't moved their votes? Because Nat was being adversarial. Was stirring the pot. Was angering people.
I wish you would.d) Why not let everyone else do that? You guys can go after the lurker tells (I don't believe in them) and I look to actively scum hunt.
...In post 428, Glork wrote: Yos's switch from VitR to LML is particularly cringe-worthy and smells like scum trying to ride the tides to an easy lynch.Vote: Yosarian2
It's part of the same pattern. Like I said in my initial vote, both that vote and the STD vote feels equally bad; like he's just looking for an excuse to look like he's scumhunting, but isn't really interested in finding out anyone's alignment. Overall, I get the feeling he's much more interested in trying to explain and defend himself then in trying to find scum.In post 436, Glork wrote:Hey Yos, since you're here, what motivation do you see for scum-LML parking his vote on UT? Saying "this guy's votes are bad" and waiting for a response/reaction (which hasn't even come, I might note) seems pretty okay to me. Why is this such an issue for you?
Uh. What "games" am I playing? I thought I was being completely straightforward.In post 439, Porochaz wrote: Yos is playing games which I don't particularly like. I remember him as a straight forward chap as town.
So you're suspicious of me because I was stirring shit up and trying to create pressure and get reactions during a time when most of the rest of the town was still just random voting? That seems like a strange reaction on your part, especially for you to bring up now. Isn't trying to get reactions like what I was trying to do with vitR obviously helpful to the town at that stage of the game?In post 442, Porochaz wrote:In that you were asking VitR to guess the reason why you were voting him. My memory of you would be to be fairly "to the point" with your suspicions.
In post 445, Sotty7 wrote:I think you're crazy, but what do you expect LML's town posting style to be like?In post 440, Yosarian2 wrote:Tell me if I'm crazy, I haven't played in a while, but nothing in his posting this game feels like the town-LML posting I'm used to. It all just feels off.
My impression of LML's posting isn't that he "really stuck to his convictions". After all, he hasn't really done any follow up, or made any additional points against UT, or really tried to convince anyone else to vote him. It looks more to me like he made a vote based bad reasoning to create the illusion of scumhunting, and then spent a lot of time defending his actions after he was attacked for them.In post 500, Glork wrote: To be frank, if LML-scum were to make this kind of attack and really stick to his convictions when questioned about it, I'd expect UT to be scum. Earlier in the game, UT was suspicious of LML among others, but didn't really pursue the optino very heavily, which could be a possible distancing link. Coming out of the break, LML tried to show that he was putting forth the effort to vote for UT, and he defended his vote when people questioned his argument's validity. I could potentially see that coming from LML trying to put some distance between himself and a scumbuddy, so that if one of them eventually died, it would lower suspicion on the other one.
...
In my experience, at least for competent scum, scum tend to be very good at keeping their posts and their votes consistent, while town tend to be much more distractable and all over the place, because town are actually trying to hunt scum with incredibly limited information (so any little thing may send them off in a radically different direction), while scum are just pretending to do so, so they're less likely to change their minds.In post 539, undo wrote:Enjoy my second serving of loose notes. They mainly concern pp. 15-20, because I’m still catching up on the last couple of pages.
De YosarianI really can’t let this pass without making a comment. I hope you were being hyperbolic for rhetorical purposes, because otherwise that is a very dangerous aphorism. I mean, you could say "Consistency is not a town tell" or "Trying too hard to be consistent (vide MafiaSSK...) is a scum tell". But saying "consistency is a scum tell" is a gross simplification and also potentially misleading. Inconsistency (that is, the lack of coherence in one's reasoning and reaction patterns) is the primal indicator of a latent dishonesty. If your post history shows signs of core changes in your frame of thought, you undoubtedly are more likely to be scum.In post 401, Yosarian2 wrote:Consistency is a scum tell.
For the record, LML indicated a couple of times that he was actually suspicious of TigrisIn post 560, Bookitty wrote: Meanwhile, LML is going after StD and dropping his … I don’t know why he was voting Tigris if not just laziness from RVS. I don’t think he ever indicated he thought she was scum up til this point in the game.
In post 62, LoudmouthLee wrote: Tigris's 3rd vote "vote" seems to play on the old timer's emotions... it's a "tell" that we all know and have looked at before. Almost like trying to garner trust with the town. I like my vote where it is right now, and...
Later, he implied that his vote on Tigras was merely a RVS vote:In post 70, LoudmouthLee wrote:Am I not allowed to think two people seem scummy? If so, then I've been playing this game wrong for years.In post 65, VitaminR wrote:
...I'm not a fan of any of the MafiaSSK votes on this page. Feels like a bunch of strong players going for an easy target. I especially don't like LML's #62, which nicely sets up a potential switch to the MafiaSSK wagon while maintaining a push on Tigris. Seems like something scum might do to make sure that two wagons keep momentum.
When I questioned him about it, he basically tried to have it both ways.In post 278, LoudmouthLee wrote: I random voted Tigris via dice roll, and changed my vote to StD.
the whole exchange...made me uncomfortable. If he actually thought Tigris's initial posting was scummy, even if it was only slightly so, then it's weird for him to make basically excuses for keep his vote on Tigris like that. Is there really some line on page 5 where "X is scummy enough for a FOS, but you have to do Y to be scummy enough for a vote?In post 302, LoudmouthLee wrote: I know this may not make any sense, but my suspicion of Tigris would have not have warranted a vote at the time... but since my vote was already there, I kept it there. It would have warranted a FoS.
At this point, I'm mostly trying to get you to explain what you're thinking because I'm trying to get a read on you here.In post 571, Porochaz wrote:What interests me now, is you decided to make a thing out of it...
Well, what do you expect from me; consistency?In post 575, chamber wrote:Isn't this counter to your 'consistency is scummy' theory?In post 568, Yosarian2 wrote:the whole exchange...made me uncomfortable. If he actually thought Tigris's initial posting was scummy, even if it was only slightly so, then it's weird for him to make basically excuses for keep his vote on Tigris like that. Is there really some line on page 5 where "X is scummy enough for a FOS, but you have to do Y to be scummy enough for a vote?
What information do you think we get if we lynch BooKitty?In post 611, mathcam wrote: I'm still fine lynching BooKitty -- I agree with her that she's a good information lynch, and that we need to get the game moving. If we lose a VT, we lose a VT.
That's pretty vague. How would it be "pretty informative"? If BooKitty flips town, then who on her wagon would you say looks scummy to you?In post 625, mathcam wrote: Yos: Lynching anyone at this point will be pretty informative -- BooKitty might even be slightly higher than usual given her generous contributions to the discussion so far, and Seol's (to me uncharacteristic) behavior this game.
Considering how many people have expressed suspicion of him, and how strong the case against him is, it's been remarkably difficult to keep any momentum going on the LML wagon.In post 619, MrBuddyLee wrote:Also, a question to whoever: have any of the major wagons in this game felt like they experienced more or less resistance than they should have at the time, given the strength of the case and the strength of the cases on competing wagons? I have my thoughts, will be glad to share but don't want to taint the pool before anyone else has a chance to think about/answer this.
In post 634, mathcam wrote:I think this is related to the types of claims that no scum in his right mind would want attract the kind of attention that SSK did by repeatedly defending ill-advised theories. Do you think there's any significance to the fact that Seol disagreed with this stance? There was one post where he directly decided to weigh between whether SSK was scummy or wrong, and came down on the side of scummy. Realizing of course the conflict of interest of reading about my past self, I think this was odd, and my first inching of Seol in the scumminess direction.In post 632, Yosarian2 wrote:Looking back on the thread, it's also a little surprising by how strongly people were defending mafiaSSK, relative to the quality of his posting.
My first impression, reading that, was "townie trying to get their last words down in writing before they get lynched, without enough time to do a re-reading first". Why, what did you see?In post 645, chamber wrote:This is a pretty big scumtell for me, but at this point I'm so wrapped in confirmation bias, can someone else confirm that they see it?In post 643, Bookitty wrote:chamber - this is weak for me. I go back and forth on it; I haven't played with chamber that I remember and I can't get any handle on his playstyle. Some things looked really scummy to me but I can't actually recall them now (I'm sure it's in my PBPA, though, for later.)
I'm not sure what part of my post you're disagreeing with. A huge number of people have expressed suspicion on LML so far this game, and yet it's been remarkably hard to keep a wagon going on him despite that.In post 663, Shanba wrote:I don't like this post. The LML wagon hasn't had momentum because its bad, not because of some sinister scum plot, sorry. (There are, presumably, a lot of town left in a game like this. If a wagon isn't getting off the ground, then you're not just failing to convince scum, you're also failing to convince the townies. That's basically a truism.In post 632, Yosarian2 wrote:Considering how many people have expressed suspicion of him, and how strong the case against him is, it's been remarkably difficult to keep any momentum going on the LML wagon.In post 619, MrBuddyLee wrote:Also, a question to whoever: have any of the major wagons in this game felt like they experienced more or less resistance than they should have at the time, given the strength of the case and the strength of the cases on competing wagons? I have my thoughts, will be glad to share but don't want to taint the pool before anyone else has a chance to think about/answer this.
Looking back on the thread, it's also a little surprising by how strongly people were defending mafiaSSK, relative to the quality of his posting.
Eh. The thing is, if your buddy is being attacked, you're likely to express suspicion of him, maybe vote him for a bit, and then get off of him. Distancing without actually increasing odds of being lynched. Anyway, with 4 or 5 scum in a 22 person game, that's more then enough to subtly tilt the wagon towards town people.This kind of "oh x is hard to lynch" argument only makes sense to me in the context of a town that is flooded with aligned scum - a 3/7 or 2/5 type scenario.
This is a side note, but it's not really that hard to get to 50%. If 25% of the people in a game are scum, and then person X does something that you think scum are about twice as likely to do as town (say, a scum might do it 40% of his games while a town might do it 20% of his games), then that gives you a Bayesian possibility of about 50% that that person who did the scum tell is actually scum. (If 20% of the people in the game are scum, as may be more likely here, then need a slightly stronger tell to get up to 50%, but the idea is the same).In post 663, Shanba wrote: ((As a sidenote, mafia is a hard game and I don't think I would ever assign a >50% chance of being scum to anyone, like, ever. Beyond cop investigations or role information or whatnot.))
This is still correct.In post 681, Albert B. Rampage wrote:do not lynch bookitty
This is town DGB play. I have a pretty high degree of confidence in that.In post 691, CrashTextDummie wrote: It may not be good scum strategy to declare too many people town, but DGB has never conformed to to what is generally accepted as "good strategy" so your assessment of her play feels majorly off.
Mmm. Looking at his posts, CES is looking more then a little dodgy this game. All of his suspicions are just weird, and other then his focus on Seol and Bookitty, have seemed basically half-assed.
Eh. I don't think SSK was trying to have it both ways on Tigris; his initial vote felt a little jokey, but all of the rest of his posts on the subject were just him trying to explain why he was suspicious of Tigris. His reasoning was pretty bad, but I'm not sure if that's a scum tell from SSK.In post 748, CrashTextDummie wrote:Oh I see what you're getting at now, Sotty. It's a remarkably similar argument to the one I made against MafiaSSK. I disagree with Yos' conclusions here mainly because I think the quote from LML's #302 is a sufficiently reasonable explanation for what was going on. I'd be interested in hearing Yos' thoughts on MafiaSSK in light of this post though.In post 579, Yosarian2 wrote:Seriously, I wouldn't care if he random vote Tigris, and I wouldn't care if he voted Tigris because he thought Tigris was scummy. I also wouldn't care if he changed his mind. The way he's trying to have it both ways, though, feels scummy; it feels like he knew his Tigris vote was bad and was trying to distance himself from it, or else like he's trying to do a lot of tapdancing to make it look like his scumhunting was more honest then it actually was.
I've been saying that Bookitty was a bad lynch since even before the whole VT claim thing that other people are talking about. It just feels like if we lynch her, she'll probably flip town.There's a persistent chorus of "do not lynch Bookitty" that contains Glork, Yos, ABR, GreenCrayons, DGB and maybe others. There are at least 2 scum in that list regardless of BooKitty's flip.