Whose Tit is Tat? (Mirco 24) : Game Over

[frog]

Vote: N

to complete Maestro's buddy triangle

[frog]

frog! I miss 1228!

Also Fancy-Pants, voting N is my line. Don't steal it.

[frog]

What I was saying was, in fact, a half and half mixture of accusing you of early bandwagonning and a joke about the theme of this game.

[frog]

Not much, to be honest. NumberQ's vote is pure RVS. Pieceofpecan's vote looks pro-town to me. Fancy-Pants' brushes me up the wrong way.

[frog]

Wait, are you actually serious about not liking someone voting the same as you?

No, of course not, I'm fine with others voting the same person as me. But as I said, I think his vote post was a bit suspect.

[frog]

FancyPants's vote on me seems like a legitimate RV to me. I don't see anything opportunistic about it any more than numberQ's vote on fancypants or peacanpie's vote on Maestro.

VOTE: ShadedMelee
Wakey wakey!

Do you think numberQ's vote on fancy-pants was opportunistic? How about Pieceofpecanpie's vote on Maestro? If yes/no, why?

[frog]

I feel like I just read a game with ShadedMelee in it. Weird.

@frog: I don't know if that's what he's inferring exactly...but I'll let him clarify because I'm not N.
Also @periodNQ: why you post and no RV?

Possibly because he's not in the game?

P-edit: will respond to fancy-pants later, have to go for now.

[frog]

How do you distinguish pro-town/suspect votes from RVS ones this early in the game? I don't think anyone's vote has been particularly suspicious. Calling votes "opportunistic votes" this early in the game also seems a bit ambitious to me. At the same time, this is a small game, and it only takes 5 to lynch. I don't think 2 votes on someone in RVS is any cause for concern though.

Look at NumberQ's vote. Clearly joking and sarky. RVS.
Look at pieceofpecanpie's vote. It doesn't look like a random vote to me (and it certainly provoked Maestro, see the post after). Pro-town in the way that he wanted to minimise confusion.
Both are fine.

Now look at Fancy-Pant's vote. It is clearly meant to be an RVS vote, but the accusation of misreading is serious. It's an unhealthy mix of serious and random, yet it doesn't seek to get a response from N at all. It isn't pro-town enough for something that's half serious.
Just because it is early days doesn't mean we can't distinguish serious play from RVS.

Speaking of RVS, let's get out of it.

Vote: fancy-pants

[frog]

Yes, you did, which is why his vote is half serious. See #58.
Out of interest, who am I the alt of?

[frog]

Salamance20

I'm actually not his alt I like this avatar, though for simplicity's sake I'll change it.

[frog]

Yeah, my vote on Fancy was a complete joke. But if it makes everyone happy:

UNVOTE:

Also I'm not an alt of N or periodNQ or anyone.
--
Anyway, frog is pretty scummy. Like Fancy said, he draws pretty arbitrary lines regarding what is serious and what isn't. Also, how is misreading, especially in this context, scummy at all? And another also, what exactly is so "unhealthy" about mixing seriousness and randomness? People don't always vote 100% randomly in RVS, sometimes they (myself included) like to have some guidance to their pseudo-random vote.

VOTE: frog

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't most things in mafia pretty arbitrary? As I remarked earlier, Fancy's vote 'brushed me up the wrong way'; it should have been apparent that it was my

opinion

from the start. I had a go at explaining why in #58, but I don't seem to have done a good job.

@ Tochica, I haven't yet seen anything else that warrants a vote. I compared the three votes as I was asked what I thought of the other wagoning players.

[frog]

Frog, I feel like you can see an extra post none of the rest of us can see. Do you usually play like this? I understand you don't want to back down from this scum-read now, because you're in too deep, but if you're town you need to stop tunnelling.

It should make a fair amount of sense if you read my ISO. If not, meh. There are bigger fish to fry. Namely:

Yeah, my vote on Fancy was a complete joke.

And then:

Uhh yes, it was semi-guided. Did you not read the post that had the vote in it?

Just four posts later.

Unvote, Vote: NumberQ

[frog]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't most things in mafia pretty arbitrary? As I remarked earlier, Fancy's vote 'brushed me up the wrong way'; it should have been apparent that it was my

opinion

from the start. I had a go at explaining why in #58, but I don't seem to have done a good job.

Yes, there are some things that are arbitrary. Your reasoning for finding my vote suspect is fine, but the fact that you tried to objectively compare it to other votes to make it look scummy is odd.

@Tochica: I think you're trying to read too much into the votes. We're not completely out of RVS yet. There has been a lot of non-RVS discussion going on, which is a step in the right direction, but most of the votes are still all over the place for random reasons.

I don't see why, considering you asked me to in post 41.

@N, I have only the limited understanding that I garnered from Newbie games. If there's an elephant in the room that I'm missing, please state it.

[frog]

@N: Just because it didn't work in #1255 doesn't mean it doesn't work as a scumtell. You may have noticed that 1255 was an especially bad game for everyone involved. You can ask Maestro about this too. Just because a scumtell fails sometimes doesn't mean it is unreliable, otherwise scumtells wouldn't exist, plain and simple.
Also you can hardly say that NumberQ's posts are making sense at all, especially his recent ones. They're just plain awful.

@NumberQ, see #58; I tried to explain why there, but there is some gut in the business, as I mentioned earlier. Twice, in fact. This has all been said before.

Now that's all cleared, what does everyone think about giving a list of reads?

[frog]

@N: Just because it didn't work in #1255 doesn't mean it doesn't work as a scumtell. You may have noticed that 1255 was an especially bad game for everyone involved. You can ask Maestro about this too. Just because a scumtell fails sometimes doesn't mean it is unreliable, otherwise scumtells wouldn't exist, plain and simple.

Can you provide me an example or two of where it has worked?

For wagoning, see 1228 where I was scum and was the first to wagon, Micro 1 where bv310 was scum. Any more you want? Those are two I've played in/read recently where it has happened.
As for RVS gut, in newbie 1255 I voted alex aragao/uctriton for what I saw as a scummy RVS vote and he turned out to be scum.

@Maestro, I didn't mean it personally. I just mean for all 7 town players it was an awful game. UberNinja's play was the worst. Yours was fine.

[frog]

Prod dodging post. I like the way things are going though. More substantial things will be said tomorrow.

[frog]

Agent Ireland, your post worries me. Why are you giving in so easily? Your post reads as very defeatist.

In other news, ShadedMelee really needs to catch up and post some content.

[frog]

Thanks for replacing in, Psyche. This game needs activity.
@Agent Ireland, please answer the question. Why the defeatism? And before you looked at Pecan's ISO again, why did you want to vote for him?

[frog]

Thanks for replacing in, Psyche. This game needs activity.
@Agent Ireland, please answer the question. Why the defeatism? And before you looked at Pecan's ISO again, why did you want to vote for him?

Because I know that if I'm lynched, a town player is lost. I have no reason to fight back because I truly have nothing to worry about. I'm going to focus on finding scum.

As for Pecan, I don't exactly know why I found him scummy. For that instant, I just did.

Don't have a reason anymore.

Calling bullshit:

actually, I did another iso on you and I don't want to vote for you anymore.

You didn't find him scummy for just an instant, it took reading his ISO for you to change your mind. Mind explaining this? With no AtE this time, please.

[frog]

"As for Pecan, I don't exactly know why I found him scummy. For that instant, I just did. Don't have a reason anymore."

You didn't find him scummy for just an instant, it took reading his ISO for you to change your mind. Mind explaining this?

10/10 for not answering the question. You're getting my vote once the next vote count is posted.

[frog]

You're getting my vote once the next vote count is posted.

That's a pretty weak reason for not laying down a vote. The last votecount was on the last page, and the only thing that's changed since then was my vote.

Here, I make it easier for you:
UNVOTE: Agent Ireland
Now it's exactly the same as the last page.

(Oh man, if I didn't see a vote this is going to look pretty embarrassing.)

No it isn't. I know he had a few votes on him and I don't want a quickhammer early. If what you say was true and it was L-2, then I sure as hell don't want to push it up to L-1 this early. Since last vote count we've had some discussion and replacement. I think that's enough to warrant a wait. You could just as easily criticise Psyche for not knowing when deadline is.

@Psyche, you're a bit late to the party on that one. How is 'backtracking through equivocation' a scummy thing when I'd already answered the question?

[frog]

You could just as easily criticise Psyche for not knowing when deadline is.

Pretty sure I did the same thing when Psyche asked an easily-answerable question.

Maybe I might have come across a bit harder on you, but you've been here all game and have been making lots of outlandish statements.

Actually you didn't. What do you think of Psyche's allegation against you in #153?

[frog]

Vote: Agent Ireland

[frog]

Frog - scum, hopped on an easy wagon. Someone looks scummy, he jumps on, everyone is focusing on him not me.

So, let me get this straight; I'm scummy for hopping on your wagon after you claimed a role that wasn't even in the game?

That said, there's something that we're all missing. He's claimed town backup cop and there hasn't been a counter claim.

Unvote

We know for a fact that there is a town backup cop, and there hasn't been a counter-claim. It is in our best interests to believe him, even if he is scummy as hell and his play has been awful. At the moment, he's conftown, even if he's worthless scummy conftown.

AI, you are seriously the worst player I've ever met, defeatist, arrogant, and useless, and this is my first game outside The Road to Rome.

FoS@ N for claiming intent to hammer.

[frog]

If you look at my #154, you'll see I told him I wasn't voting because I didn't want a quicklynch this early in the game. The moment I vote and A_I's placed at L-1, he claims intent to hammer. Pretty scummy.
Don't think you're not under suspicion either, especially since you neglected this game for the last two days.

[frog]

The part where, in the last two real time days, you posted on several other games that you're a part of but not this one. I have no problem with any dimished activity from you in the future, but it was odd seeing your name pop up in Newbie and Micro games, yet not this one.

[frog]

Are you serious right now frog? I claimed intent to hammer because AI had claimed a scum role.

First of all, he didn't claim a scum role. He claimed a role that isn't in the game. Secondly, I am serious. You claiming intent to hammer and giving him one chance to reply (which you said you probably wouldn't listen to anyway) was incredibly scummy. Especially as I'd only just said that quickhammers are bad.

[frog]

Wow. Just wow. This is a whole lot of reaching.

He did claim a scum role. Back-up jailkeeper

is a scum role.

When he posted it, I thought he hadn't realised this was an open game and was claiming his role with "town" tacked on the front. Seeing as you claim I said I would hammer no matter what, let's take a look at my intent-to-hammer post:

I am willing to give an (admittedly small) out, so I'm not going to say that I will unconditionally hammer him. But in all honesty I'm more likely to hammer than not.

Oh, look at that! I say pretty clearly "I'm willing to give an out". I didn't say what that out would be, because then AI would obviously be able to use it. Can you guess what my hypothetical out was? Go on; it's easy. Okay, I'll tell you: he made a mistake and claimed the wrong back-up role and then didn't get counterclaimed. Guess what! That's what happened! So I didn't hammer! Fancy that, frog; fancy that.

VOTE: frog I'm sick of you pissing around calling people out for the stupid fucking things as though they're the biggest scum-tell ever. Should we make a list of all the stupid things you've said? Yes, let's!

• voting for the same person as me in RVS is scummy
  
• joke votes can't have context
  
• someone used this scumtell on me when I was town; I'm going to use it to find scum
  
• you're scummy for wanting to hammer a wagon I'd just voted for
  
• Maestro's computer broke down; he must be scum

No, no, reread his post. He claimed TOWN BACKUP JAILKEEPER. This role does not exist. This is not the same as claiming scum as you would have us believe.

Let's look at your post, shall we?

I am willing

to give an (admittedly small) out,

so I'm not going to say that I will unconditionally hammer him.

But in all honesty I'm more likely to hammer than not

.

Oh, look at that! You said pretty clearly that's you'd only give a small out and that you were more likely to hammer. Not only this, but this post came before A_I had even had the chance to respond to two new votes on him, let alone a threat to hammer after his next post! Furthermore I posted on

very same page

that the reason I didn't vote was because I didn't want a quickhammer. And what do you do the moment someone's at L-1? Offer to quickhammer several days before Day 1 ends. Great play, N.

Mind refrained from biased statements such as 'fucking stupid'? Because your intent to hammer post was the fucking stupidest thing so far this game.

Great job wordtwisting by the way. Let's go through the links in order: the first link doesn't actually have anything to do with your point, the second one deals with NumberQ and not about joke votes having no contexts, the third point is actually countered by

the very post you quote

, the fourth is dealt with in this post, and the last one is, again, proved false by the post you quote. Who's doing a lot of reaching now?

Oh, and nice OMGUS, by the way.

Vote: N

[frog]

Great job wordtwisting by the way. Let's go through the links in order: the first link doesn't actually have anything to do with your point, the second one deals with NumberQ and not about joke votes having no contexts, the third point is actually countered by

the very post you quote

, the fourth is dealt with in this post, and the last one is, again, proved false by the post you quote. Who's doing a lot of reaching now?

Oh, really? Can you tell me what the first link is about then? Why did you go ape-shit crazy at Fancy if not because he voted for the same person as you? The one about numberq I talked about in an earlier post and seeing as you dropped it after that I thought you might have read it. I disagree that the third one is countered, but that's difference of opinion on how useful you're being. The fourth "is dealt with in this post"? Bullshit; sure you're talking about it, but it's not dealing with shit. And how is the last one proved false by that post?

1: The first link is about me trying to explain any reasoning behind my accusation of Fancy-Pants. It has nothing to do with what you label it: 'voting the same person in RVS is scummy'.
2: Literally has nothing to do with joke votes having no context. Glad to see you agree with me.
3:

Just because a scumtell fails sometimes doesn't mean it is unreliable, otherwise scumtells wouldn't exist, plain and simple.

From the post that you quote. Plain and simple.
4: You may have noticed that part of my above post dealt with why you're scummy for claiming intent to hammer? No? Guess you haven't actually read my post then. I'll quote it for you:

Oh, look at that! You said pretty clearly that's you'd only give a small out and that you were more likely to hammer. Not only this, but this post came before A_I had even had the chance to respond to two new votes on him, let alone a threat to hammer after his next post! Furthermore I posted on very same page that the reason I didn't vote was because I didn't want a quickhammer. And what do you do the moment someone's at L-1? Offer to quickhammer several days before Day 1 ends. Great play, N.

Not dealing with shit, eh?
5: You accuse me of saying Maestro is scum for his computer breaking. The post you quote has the following words in it:

The part where, in the

last two real time days

, you posted on several other games that you're a part of but not this one.

I have no problem with any dimished activity from you in the future,

but it was odd seeing your name pop up in Newbie and Micro games, yet not this one.

That's how it is proved wrong. Good enough for you?

Oh, and about the OMGUS? Yeah, I called you out on your awful intent to claim post long before you voted. Your post, which includes links which

don't have a single valid point

, only confirmed my suspicions. Just because you went batshit, realised I had a good point, and threw out a chainsaw defence doesn't make

my

vote an OMGUS.

[frog]

Frog, if you want to repeat yourself, that's up to you; but I'm not going answer the same question over and over.

One thing I want to check, though: do you still think numberQ/Psyche is scummy? If you do, I'm willing to let that point slide; obviously you do believe that bandwagoning in RVS is scummy. But if you don't then we have just proved that it's not a very good scum-tell and you should probably stop using it.

I thought numberQ was scummy, but since Psyche replaced in I've had a town-read on the slot, especially where he unvotes to prevent an early A_I hammer.
@Pieceofpecanpie: I don't think his conclusions are valid. Obviously I have nothing wrong with the question. A lot has happened since RVS and it doesn't disprove a good scumtell. I find it particularly distressing that he's trying to force me into a scumread on Psyche.
You shoudn't vote me because I've been scumhunting all game, I've been active, and I didn't want an early quickhammer. After A_I's claim I tried to defuse the situation and move on so we wouldn't make the mistake of lynching a power role. N, on the other hand, has offered little throughout the game, came close to hammering a power role, and I have completely disproved his case on me. Whilst you may consider my early game play odd, I was trying to provoke discussion and move us out of RVS, and I achieved both things.

@Above post: that's where my OMGUS accusation comes from. 'Other people' here means 'N' (I haven't critised anyone on the wagon, only him for his intent to hammer), so, in other words, 'If Frog hadn't called me scummy I wouldn't have thought anything of it'. here is also a simpler reason for my unvote: I don't want to lynch a Power Role.

@Popp: what do you think of N following his intent to hammer post?

[frog]

It is not a stupid scumtell, and I've disproved all 5 of your links above.

Re-iterating, the reason I find you scummy is because you claimed intent to hammer. It was a stupid time to claim intent because A_I hadn't yet seen the 2 new votes on him and telling him he's getting lynched after his next post was throwing caution to the wind; we were lucky Psyche unvoted. The fact that it was only a few posts after those two new votes doesn't work well in your favour, it just proves how eager you were to hammer. I never said anything about votes; I'm saying claiming intent to hammer in the manner you did was incredibly scummy.

[frog]

So you think I'm scum for pushing my own argument? What do you think of N's 5 linked points?

[frog]

N's was scummier than Maestro's as I'd literally just told him I didn't want a quickhammer. Maestro's I didn't like either but he had a lot of catching up to do and later apologised. Psyche's actions I don't agree with; I don't think we should lycnh A_I without a CC, but I can see where he's coming from.

[frog]

On the flip side, I can see where N's coming from with some of his suspicion on you. AI's play has been so shockingly bad and seemingly scummy so that it would be incredibly hard - and opportunistic - to seek scum in his wagon. It's also been mentioned previously that from the way you write it seems like you're privy to an extra post (ie. information) the rest of us aren't. What's with that? Again this is conjecture, it could just be you're a bit keener than some and at least making an effort.

You've got it backwards; it is incredibly opportunistic to write this all off as a mistake with no bearings on who is scum and who isn't. I think it is a bit opportunistic for N who seems to me to be using it as a 'get out of jail free' card.

That's a part of my meta that I'm seeking to remove. I'm sorry if it has caused too much trouble.
Also, anyone else think now is a good time to post reads?

[frog]

N's was scummier than Maestro's as I'd literally just told him I didn't want a quickhammer. Maestro's I didn't like either but he had a lot of catching up to do and later apologised. Psyche's actions I don't agree with; I don't think we should lycnh A_I without a CC, but I can see where he's coming from.

[frog]

*claps* thanks for replacing in, Ankamius.

[frog]

Well, since you seem to be set on lynching me, I'd best tell you why that's a bad idea.
I'm the Town Jailkeeper.

[frog]

Yes, of course.

[frog]

Oh well, 1 for 1 at least.
Sorry to my partner for my poor play. Best of luck all.

(Maestro, consider this as your revenge for 1228)

[frog]

Sorry for being awful, popp.

Any tips on how to improve?