[Game Over] Open 743 - The Crown of Misery

[Auro]

Hmm, now why doesn't this seem genuine?

Which part, the vote on me or "this is a scumsided setup"?
If it's the latter, she did express the same to me while the game was still in sign-ups.

[Auro]

Setup is scumsided so of course I roll town

zzz

VOTE: Auro

You've not found it very difficult to townsort me in our previous (completed) games, so why the "RVS" vote on me?

[Auro]

VOTE: YvottaCat
More serious than random, [redacted].

[Auro]

I'm blaming you for talking me into joining this game and then having the audacity to let MDS roll me town.

Blame the RNGods, not me

[Auro]

Wanna sort this slot early, I know from experience I have difficulty gauging Auro's alignment properly.

Are you referring to the recent Dethy game?
Who else on this playerlist do you have completed games with?
How will an early wagon on me help you sort me?

[Auro]

@rb: You use "imo" a lot

@Leo: Hi! Hope you're more proactive this game.

@Egix: So you're finding the cynicism scummy -- I'm not particularly feeling she'd fake that as scum, although the tone does bother me slightly.

[Auro]

The game will begin when 10 players have confirmed their roles and all undead have chosen theirs.

At one point everyone but Inferno and Leo had confirmed (so there were 10+ confirmations), but the game wasn't open (so, scum hadn't chosen their roles yet). Could be one of those two is scum and that was the holdup. Doesn't prove anything, but I'd keep an eye on them.

Townlean on Persivul. I don't see this kind of post coming from scum. OTOH, Persivul, it's possible that role picking wasn't straightforward and scum might have taken time discussing things first

[Auro]

VOTE: Leodanny

[Auro]

@rb what power role would you choose as scum?

What was the purpose of this question?

[Auro]

Depends on which ones village got, otherwise Zombie

What would you choose? Why are you asking this?

[Auro]

wow probably roleblocker imo

Because you're "rb"?

[Auro]

Something_Smart, why have you not voted yet?

[Auro]

Hey Leo! You should place a vote somewhere, too.

[Auro]

Okay, Leodanny; Why do you think a vote on me is useful?
How does being good scum in a previous game affect it?

[Auro]

I don't usually feel like random voting, I don't think it's the votes that spark D1 discussion but just people talking to each other.

And I don't put down real votes often, especially early on. I find it leads to confbias as I'm asked to justify it, and I don't think most players are easier to read under pressure.

But we talk to each other based on the votes we make; does that not give enough reason to vote?
Define "real"? What do you think of the content produced so far?

[Auro]

@Bolded bit: I'm surprised that you think this, considering what she managed to get away with in Newbie 1893.

I'm not saying it's beyond scum!her. I'm saying I don't think she'd choose to fake that as scum, get what I mean?

[Auro]

I think Auro is townleaning with all the questioning ATM

You've seen my scumgames and I questioned a lot in them, why does questioning earn me a townlean here?

[Auro]

don't like the non-serious content by DVa (ex. her last post). Agree it feels LAMIST, wanna see a push there.

DVa's non-serious content actually comes more from town!DVa from my knowledge of her; so that's NAI at worst.

Lamees was referring to her serious content about "rolling town in a scumsided game" as LAMIST (correct me if I'm wrong), not the other posts.

[Auro]

VOTE: Lamees

wow trying so hard to be funny and relaxed like town but obvious scum imo

im so good at this game tbh wow

You didn't like DVa's earlier posts enough to have a vote on her; why start a new wagon now and break momentum?

Do you not get similar vibes from Dunnstral?

[Auro]

VOTE: Yvotta

Same question as above - why'd you break the momentum on my wagon, shifting it to a slot that hadn't even posted till then? Are you towning me?

[Auro]

RB's vote on DVa was not an RVS one.

Besides, some here believe that RVS wagon pressure actually elicits useful, perhaps sortable reactions; so I don't see any real reason to shift a vote from a null slot to a vanity slot which hasn't posted yet, as in DVa's case. Unless, of course, *she* thinks RVS wagons are useless (or is townreading me).

[Auro]

Tip for playing with me: you'll get way more mileage asking me for "thoughts on post X" than for "thoughts." I don't have time to write down all my thoughts and if I did they'd be all jumbled anyway.

For starters, I'd like to hear your thoughts on:
DVa's "ugh I rolled town in a scumsided setup" posts;
NotNova's and Lamees' attack on DVa citing LAMIST;

Do you think the former is AI? Do you think the latter could be scum motivated?

[Auro]

A new wagon in RVS isn't a "vanity slot" and I don't have to townread you to change votes to someone who isn't posting content yet.

To me, voting on a zero-content slot looks like a vanity vote, not that you started a new wagon.
So you believe the RVS wagon on me is meaningless, and the pressure of me getting closer to lunch range isn't useful?

[Auro]

This game is gonna be slightly easier, no Not_Mafias or Mohabs to break our heads over

[Auro]

I'm aware of notnova's misrep of DVA, he claimed that the "not serious" posts were lamist. But the actual lamist posts were DVAs first two posts.

He agreed with me though, so he can't possibly be scum.

Yep. The most charitable interpretation of his post would be "I dislike her non-serious posts, also I agree her posts look LAMIST" which is fine, but his phrasing is still a bit scummy.

[Auro]

wow so true imo

What is?

[Auro]

Leodanny (L-4)

: Persivul, Thor665, Auro

DVa (L-5)

: Egix96, NotNova

Auro (L-5)

: Dunnstral, Leodanny

rb (L-6)

: Lamees

Lamees (L-6)

: rb

NotNova (L-6)

: DVa

YyottaCat, Malakitty, Something_Smart

What's your case? Random wagon that is clearly scum driven.

That's an interesting statement, considering rb is the only vote on you. Why did you say that as though you were close to lunch range?

[Auro]

I find a non-proactive playstyle inherently questionable for helping town wincon.
You can be a scum lean now.

So playstyles which don't help town wincon auto-earn scumleans from you? Or do you mean you're "tossing" him into a scumlean pool and would sort from there?

I don't see how that helps you sort more accurately, can you explain? This applies to the townleans as well.

[Auro]

Even then, it's probably offset by the fact that scum want to avoid looking like they're trying to look like town, which under the same assumption town wouldn't care as much about.

I don't think scum overthink THAT much, because self-consciousness at one point becomes obvious.
Your logic could be applied to any tell, I feel - "Scum would avoid tell X, therefore X is a buzzword and BS tell". Would you agree?

[Auro]

Who's scum, Leodanny?

[Auro]

Leodanny ignored my earlier questions to him, and doesn't seem to be contributing anything of substance -- I'd be okay with a lunch there. He was pretty much a potato (No offense!) in my previous game with him too, so I'm trying to figure out how to sort.

Nova's misrep felt opportunistic, and I felt a mild pocketing attempt too -- Still waiting for clarifications there. I think NotNova is easier to sort, though, so I wouldn't want to lunch him today.

Dunnstral's post 25 I dislike a lot -- after two fluff posts, he places a "completely random vote" on *me*, when I already had two votes and my wagon was growing. I'm not seeing any real contributions from his other posts anyway, this is a slot I'd also be happy to lunch.

Who do you think is scum?

[Auro]

Herro y’all I’m going to be here later I skimmed and I see some familiar faces

I look forward to killing all of the scum for u

i townread mala

How?

[Auro]

Because they look like town to me so far

Wow. Is Dunnstral usually like this?

[Auro]

I do think Auro looks like scum this game though from their recent posting

I feel NN could do what you're talking about as town

Care to go into specifics?

[Auro]

VOTE: lamees

wow i've changed my mind on dva again

stop being hard to read imo

Any reads apart from DVa, Lam?

[Auro]

Auro is doing like a LOT more questions than he was like in one of our previous towngames where he was more assertive a bit early on, but that could in large part having to do with this list being... gnomic and oblique so far. So he does feel a touch more reactive here but I don't know I'd call him scum for it yet

I just finished a game where I locktowned scum who pocketed me and lost to them :$ doubly wary. (Although FWIW it was Not_Mafia )

[Auro]

Leodanny (L-4)

: Persivul, Thor665, Auro

DVa (L-5)

: Egix96, NotNova

Auro (L-5)

: Dunnstral, Leodanny

Lamees (L-6)

: rb

rb (L-6)

: Lamees

NotNova (L-6)

: DVa

YyottaCat, Malakitty, Something_Smart

I wasn't aware that Not_Mafia did anything in games

Read the game, Newbie 1900.
There was a wagon on me and I got to L-1, Not_Mafia didn't lolhammer; instead he called my wagon "blatantly scumdriven", then voted Flavor Leaf who was on it. Flavor unvoted and then Not_Mafia unvoted FL, saying "he doesn't risk destabilizing the wagon", and we all showered him with strong townreads.

Then he just coasted along to the win.

[Auro]

Nah, my expectations from the players I know in this list are pretty high, unlike Not_Mafia, so I wouldn't be locktowning them in the same way. I do think I can sort some of the familiar players here easily -- NotNova, Egix at least. Maybe you too

I did realize I tend to town players who townread me and whose posts I find myself agreeing with (like Ariane in 1900 and Cleric in 1899), so I am vulnerable to pockets.

[Auro]

Me, for my stunning insight and townie disposition

I'm pocketed, Dunnstral is locktown

[Auro]

I just finished a game where I locktowned scum

Why would you ever locktown anyone (aside from certain claims in certain setups)?

When someone plays so differently to their usual style? Maybe "locktown" is the wrong word, but almost all of us (FL, Performer, Me) towned him enough to never lynch him during the game.

[Auro]

Dunnstral's post 25 I dislike a lot -- after two fluff posts, he places a "completely random vote" on *me*, when I already had two votes and my wagon was growing.

And that's scummy rather than towny because...?

The phrasing, "completely random vote" when I was collecting votes and my wagon was growing quick, with no vote till then.

[Auro]

So you're standing by that your vote was "completely" random and had nothing to do with the gamestate or growing wagon on me at the time? O.o

[Auro]

Not for the vote, if you said "I'm joining the Auro wagon" and voted me, I would've been fine with it.

[Auro]

Even if you naked voted I'd prolly just think you're wagoning because there's a wagon -- specifically saying "completely random vote" to join my wagon seems off to me, sorry.

[Auro]

1. You really think he's so inept at scum that he'd try to disguise a purposeful vote by outright announcing it as a completely random vote?

2. Two votes /= collecting votes and my wagon was growing quick. Why the hyperbole?

Why does someone have to be inept for me to dislike something they did or said? Why would it be "inept" for Dunnstral to do that as scum?

Two votes on page 1 and I don't think it's a bad *page 1* conclusion to make that "Auro is getting wagoned".

[Auro]

"For X to do Y as scum would be inept; therefore he didn't do Y/isn't scummy for it" sounds like bad logic to me.

[Auro]

You'd be pushing me if I voted someone other than you too

There are other reasons beyond my dislike of that post because of which I'm fine just with a Dunnstral lunch today. Where did I "push you" specifically?

Earlier you were asking a player why they were "making a new wagon and breaking momentum" instead of voting you

Their vote was already on me and they broke that momentum, why is that an invalid question? Why does my asking that question imply I shouldn't dislike your post where you voted me?

[Auro]

I'm not really understanding the townleans on NotNova.

[Auro]

Yes, playstyles that don't help town wincon earn scum leans from me - it seems silly to do anything else, why would this confuse you as a stance?

It confuses me because that looks like a sub-optimal way to scumhunt -- some players have playstyles that feel anti-town or scummy in most of their games, so by doing this, you'd end up lynching them every game.
Don't you agree it's important to separate play from playstyle? If a player's doing something scummy, but did that in previous town games as well, we have to judge the player on other parameters. No?

[Auro]

It doesn't help me sort - it's supposed to help others sort me - I've already done sorting.

I was expecting an answer like this, cool.
If you're done sorting and your vote is still on Leo, I'm assuming you SR him? Who else do you think is scum?

[Auro]

Probably you could infer by me saying I scum leaned Dunnstral that I scum read him also.
Why are you asking me such an empty question considering I blatantly stated a second scum read? Are you just skimming and pretending to effort, or what?

When you said "I've already done sorting" I assumed you meant you sorted *after* the previous posts, and that meant your current sorts had information beyond the inferred scumlean on Dunnstral.

[Auro]

I agree it's important to separate play from playstyle. That said, if a player plays scummy, Day 1 is the optimal time to root them out since apparently you can't discern their alignment from play, no? Are you arguing we should not lynch scummy looking players Day 1? Clearly you're not, because that would be daft - so what is your suggestion of who we lynch Day 1? I submit it is best to lynch someone who looks scummy - and that can include playstyle. You're either right, and huzzah, or you're wrong and you get info. Both are preferable to lynching someone off an inherently bad case, which playstyle is not.

No, I'm saying adjust what "scummy" means to their playstyle, and look for players being scummy adjusted to their playstyle.

In the abscence of a good case, I'd be down to lynch a scummy player even if it's just playstyle -- but scumleaning them early just for that seems like it'd only lead to conf bias.

[Auro]

It could actually come from scum, but more for town points then anything else. I vaguely remember playing with Persivul, but I don’t remember which alignment way back when.

Isn't it a bit cheeky for scum? I mean, if he was scum, do you think they actually planned to open the game at that moment just to say this?

[Auro]

If I remember right Persi is a very ballsy player. So yes I think he’s a confident mafia player and I could see scum him opening with it

Ah, hmm. Okay.
Have you read any of Lamees' previous games?

[Auro]

You read me incorrectly - but even if you did read me correctly why are you asking for more reads when I'd offered a second already and had apparently decided not to share others if I had them?

Because if my read was correct, that information *could* have also been a revision on your prior read on Dunnstral, the only scumread that would still be persistent was Leo.
Your reads help us sort you, as you said -- so if something changed/got added from the previous post, asking you to post them would be useful.

Also, what would be my scum motivation in "looking like I'm efforting", considering I've actually efforted in my scum games, especially when I'm questioning why someone townleaned me for doing that?

[Auro]

List me all the games ever with a good case on Day 1.
I expect the number to be x<1
I'll wait.

I had a great case on scum!Volxen in my just-completed Newbie 1900 he was tunneled on me, I kept engaging him on that, showed how his vote shifts were inconsistent and dishonest. I'm actually curious -- I can link you to the posts, tell me why my case (even if correct) was not a "good" one?

[Auro]

I'm not down for a Lamees lynch. She's very easy mislynch bait, often looks scummy early in the game, and I think a deeper study of her scumgame can reveal potential scumtells of hers.

[Auro]

And she's actually posting content, unlike Leodanny/Yvottacat.

[Auro]

Agreed - but after I had already answered I was posting my reads to help people read me, you would then have to presume either I had forgotten my purpose in posting reads or was lying in my answer to have your question make sense.

I did recall some game I read earlier where you said you don't believe in posting reads lists; your phrasing "I've sorted already" without posting any other reads reminded me of that. Hence the reason I started off my question with "If you're done sorting". I didn't think too much into whether you were lying about it -- I think it's possible to do this as both alignments -- so I engaged on it.

Just because you efforted as scum in the past does not mean you always will - or are you claiming it does?
I'm not sure what your motivation for it is - but it appears fairly factual you're doing exactly that so now I'm exploring it. It does make more sense to me you'd do it as scum, and it ASSUREDLY makes more sense to me you'd try to cover it up as scum as opposed to admitting it.

I'm feeling more like these answers are deflections than responses. Meh, then again you do answer in questions a lot like I do.
Please delve deeper into that first response and my rebuttal - I feel like the answer to your alignment is there.

I effort as both alignments. I'm not covering up that I'm efforting, am I? O.o
I'm saying there's no special

scum motivation

for me to effort, when I know that efforting alone won't make me look any townier. So if you're going to evaluate my alignment based on that question, it shouldn't be for "trying to look like you're efforting". Agree?
Therefore, an accusation of me "trying to look like I'm efforting" shouldn't hold any weight.

You can post or link it.
I'm willing to bet my answer will be 'there's a difference between being right and being good'.
Day 1 lynches are, with few exceptions, educated guesses with very limited info. I submit it's impossible to have them be good - the only goal is to have them not be trash.

Spoiler:

Also, let me flip this on you, since you seem to be intent on sorting out my slot.

1. You asked me about FL's sheep, and I answered.
2. You asked me about my thoughts on Lion's case, and I responded saying that I think that may affect interactions.
3. You disagreed that I would voice my thoughts on a case the same regardless of alignment, and I explained that it was *my* belief, and it's not as relevant anyway WRT the content I'm producing overall.
4. You thought I was discarding Not_Mafia as a lynch altogether and only relying on investigatives; I clarified that suggesting that investigatives target him doesn't imply he's never a lynch option.
5. You asked me why I pointed out scummy Lamees plays but refused to vote for her, and I justified that.
6. You asked why I'm not trying to pressure Lamees, and I explained why.

Your vote's still on me, so I get a feeling you're either refusing to revise your stance on my slot, OR that you think my responses are insufficient. If it's the latter, feel free to engage me further on the relevant point(s).

7. You disputed my reasons for 4|5, I justified them.
8. You asked me about my thoughts on FL, and I answered.

Add the above to the list. Now, use these numbers and show me what exactly makes you scumread me that highly.
Calling out your engagement for not being honest is not me "throwing shade". You have had opportunity to start engaging honestly.

I've read Volxen's ISO, and it's funny how he never responded to WHY he shifted his vote from me to Flavor Leaf.

He talks about how scum!Flavor could have motivations in unvoting me, and concludes by saying: "The fact that you left Auro's wagon in favor of voting for me and presenting a case against me does not in and of itself clear you as town."

He said he voiced skepticism of Flavor way back in post 245. Even there, it's just skepticism and NOT a scumread. He simply says that if Flavor's town it makes sense, and if Flavor's scum it makes sense.

To summarise, from Volx's POV:
1. Flavor's reaction test can come from town or scum
2. Flavor's unvoting Auro can come from town or scum

And goes on to unvote me and vote Flavor. While maintaining that he's *highly* suspicious of me.

Therefore,
VOTE: Volxen

I'm aware of that timeline. I was already suspicious of him at the time that I voted for him, especially when he uses language like "a wagon is brewing on you", where he is talking as if my lynch today is a foregone conclusion before he even presented a "case" against me. His follow up with the VCA misrepresentation just further cemented my suspicions of his slot.

"A wagon is brewing on you" doesn't mean your lynch is a foregone conclusion.
It was perfectly reasonable, as he and I were ready to vote for you, and a couple of slots who were townreading me could've, as well.
(Ariane and Not_Maf both think my wagon was scum motivated)
I can't buy that that phrase alone made you more suspicious of ME, who you were "highly suspicious" of, where the rest of his actions could, in your words, "come from town or scum".

I changed my vote to him because that is where I currently want to apply pressure.

We're pretty close to the day end, so this doesn't even make sense. I was your top scumread, and anyone who votes at that time votes to lynch, not just to 'apply pressure'.

Why is lamees not being lynched?

Don't you think Volxen's a good lynch?
I mean he's been deeply tunneled on me throughout the game, didn't bother much to scumhunt elsewhere, loads of fluff-posts, unnatural vote progression to Flavor Leaf, etc.

I'm not townreading anyone on my wagon.
What you say is correct, BUT - your vote was still on me through the buildup to L-1, even when you found FL doing things that weren't pinging you right.
I also don't necessarily believe there was only one scum on my wagon. Lamees' "full responsibility" schtick might even be because she didn't want the other to be lynched for it.

I'm scumreading you for reasons independent of my VCA; VCA only supports it. You're not defending yourself from that case, just throwing more fluff my way. I've already stated why Flavor Leaf isn't my favorite lunch (whatevz) today, also Lamees I'm unsure of. Snowbeast is also an option for me, as I've stated -- you simply have a lot more scum equity anyway.

I'm open to revising my stance if you give a proper defence. So far, you haven't - just deflecting, as Flavor pointed out.

volxen (L-3)

: Flavor Leaf, Auro

Flavor Leaf (L-3)

: Ariane, volxen

Auro (L-4)

: snowbeast

Lamees (L-4)

: Not_Mafia

Ariane (L-4)

: YurikoJasmine

lionheart1492, Lamees

What you say is correct, BUT - your vote was still on me through the buildup to L-1, even when you found FL doing things that weren't pinging you right.

Isolated, this wouldn't count -- you would simply be pressuring me and I agree it got from L-4 to L-1 pretty fast.

But pressure became "lynch target" somewhere along that line, and when it came to L-1, you could *see* that the rest of my wagon wasn't exactly casing me all that strongly, you kept pushing there.

Chuck the whole wagon-motivation arguments, those are weak for town anyway since my alignment isn't known to town either way, as you point out. I've called you out on the FL vote change and lack of honest engagement, and the non-scumhunting that I'd expect town Volxen to do. Respond to those. Change my mind.

Sure, you could maybe read into the game if you've time for additional context, but the spoilered text should be enough. Of course I know the difference between "right" and "good", I had an argument with Lamees in postgame about that, too. If you think this case isn't "good", do tell me your definitions of it, because I think a lynch off this case is superior to someone whose playstyle is naturally scummy.

[Auro]

Meh, then again you do answer in questions a lot like I do.

Oh, I just think asking relevant questions as part of a rebuttal also makes it easier to reach to a conclusion / the root of the disagreement, so I naturally do this. If you think I'm deflecting somewhere specifically, tell.

[Auro]

I'll agree this might lead to players who play very poorly being lynched every game - hopefully it will teach them to not play poorly. I fail to see the issue.

<slow clap>

What's the problem with this?

[Auro]

Please delve deeper into that first response and my rebuttal - I feel like the answer to your alignment is there.

Also, interesting that you use the term "rebuttal" -- I simply asked a question based on an assumption I made and an inconsistency I felt, which wasn't AI -- I never made an argument that you were scum for it, so why was your response a "rebuttal"?

[Auro]

I did recall some game I read earlier where you said you don't believe in posting reads lists; your phrasing "I've sorted already" without posting any other reads reminded me of that. Hence the reason I started off my question with "If you're done sorting". I didn't think too much into whether you were lying about it -- I think it's possible to do this as both alignments -- so I engaged on it.

Also remember that my initial question was about you "tossing" people into pools based on their playstyle, and starting from there; something I felt then was different from actual "reads".
"I posted about my tossing people into pools so people could sort me"
"I'm done sorting now" (in a later post without mentioning any updated reads)
If you explicitly said you were *scumreading* Leo/Dunn earlier, instead of the "pool-tossing", I probably wouldn't have made the incorrect assumption when you said "I've already done sorting".

[Auro]

Okay. I thought the slow clap implied sarcasm.

[Auro]

1. You really think he's so inept at scum that he'd try to disguise a purposeful vote by outright announcing it as a completely random vote?

2. Two votes /= collecting votes and my wagon was growing quick. Why the hyperbole?

Why does someone have to be inept for me to dislike something they did or said? Why would it be "inept" for Dunnstral to do that as scum?

Two votes on page 1 and I don't think it's a bad *page 1* conclusion to make that "Auro is getting wagoned".

Waiting for your response on this, and the post after that.

Nope. There are people on this site who have adopted a scummy playstyle. If they stick with it long enough, then:
- they're difficult to sort.
- they're difficult to push. Too many people accept the

it's just a playstyle thing

excuse.

Fuck that. If you're town, you have a responsibility to show you're town.

Thing is, I don't think some "naturally scummy" players do it intentionally. town!Lamees, for example, actually believes everything she says, even if they look blatantly scummy.
I also don't think all "naturally scummy" players are very hard to sort, it might just take some more effort.
They may look "naturally scummy", but still have scumtells which can be identified.
It's possible their scumgames differ slightly from their scummy towngames.
It takes a little more effort to sort them correctly, but I think it's bad to lynch players who aren't doing it intentionally -- Lamees gets scumread and lynched early fairly often, but that hasn't stopped her from playing the same, has it?

[Auro]

Anyway, this is def not town malakitty.

Town malakitty was less aggressive with pushes and was more prone to sheep other players. (In the game we played together at least).

Then again I'm not really gonna call her scum just off meta/one previous game together

.

@Egix

[Auro]

FWIW, I see it as a progression of her thoughts, not necessarily a "blatant contradiction". That's Lamees for ya.

[Auro]

I'm rearraning this a little.

Why would it be "inept" for Dunnstral to do that as scum?

Because people doing a surface analysis will read it as being scummy.

Why does someone have to be inept for me to dislike something they did or said?

They don't. It's incorrect to try to generalize that comment to all situations.

Two votes on page 1 and I don't think it's a bad *page 1* conclusion to make that "Auro is getting wagoned".

I do. It's two fucking votes. Besides, if you're town, you should welcome a D1 wagon. It's a wagon on the only person whose alignment you actually know, so it generates better information for you than wagons on others.

1. And people doing a surface analysis are easy to defend against, and I doubt town would bandy together on a surface analysis.
2. Cool, then. So someone doesn't have to be inept for me to dislike something they did; this implies that it's possible I disliked what he said without actually believing he'd be inept for doing it as scum.
3. "I do" what? I do welcome D1 wagons -- where did I say I disliked the *wagon*? I disliked his phrasing of the vote, two different things.

[Auro]

Why do you say she's an easy mislynch when that isn't the case?

Look at how she got lynched in the D1/D2/D3 lynch games.
You don't have to be mislynched D1 every time to be called an "easy ML" -- Leodanny got lynched in ending 2v1 LyLo in my last game with him, yet he's easy lynchbait to my eyes.

[Auro]

1. And people doing a surface analysis are easy to defend against, and I doubt town would bandy together on a surface analysis.

You're admitting that you made a push that wasn't going to do anything.

2. Cool, then. So someone doesn't have to be inept for me to dislike something they did; this implies that it's possible I disliked what he said without actually believing he'd be inept for doing it as scum.

You can dislike whatever the fuck you want. Point is that, unless you think he's inept scum, it's not going to get you anywhere, as you admit above - such things are easy to defend against if the scum are any good at all.

3. "I do" what?

You said you don't think it's a bad conclusion. I do think it's a bad conclusion.

I do welcome D1 wagons -- where did I say I disliked the *wagon*? I disliked his phrasing of the vote, two different things.

136 gives me that impression - particularly the *me*.

1. You and Dunnstral keep saying I made a "push" -- No, I just said I'd be happy with a lynch there, quote me where I was "pushing" Dunn for that?
2. He could be lazy scum doing that and hiding behind his playstyle. Again, *I* can dislike whatever I want.
3. Well, disagree.
4. Again, this is dependent on me not believing (3). I don't mind wagons on me, though.

[Auro]

"I'm done sorting" was offered as an explicit answer to your question about how what I was doing would help me sort my town and scum reads.
To expand that to suggest you believed my answer was "I'm done sorting everyone/more people than I've offered sorts on" is a reeeeeeal stretch, yeah?
This looks wonky as a thought process.

"How does tossing people into pools based on playstyle help you?"
"Helps others sort me. I've already done sorting"
"Oh, so what are your sorts then?"

Do you really find this a huge stretch?

[Auro]

"The grass is blue."
You can rebut that without me even being involved in a game of Mafia. I challenged your stance, you offered a reason why you did what you did, I showed that it was illogical - that's a rebuttal.
What even is this question?

Ah, I thought you were referring to your initial response to my question as a "rebuttal", nevermind.

[Auro]

I'm saying you're not efforting and are trying to cover it up.
Address the presented attack, pointing out that you can effort as scum AND town is utterly meaningless to my presented issue. I'll agree - I think you can effort as town and scum, I still don't think you're being fully honest about your effort here.

My posts minus the "Cover-up question to Thor" don't seem like effort? Any parts you find dishonest?
Strictly speaking in a meta sense, NOT efforting wouldn't earn me scumreads because it's against my scum meta (and town meta, too, anyway); and I don't think I've been generating such bad content before that as to get scumread for that, so there's still no motivation for me to "look efforty".
Trying to look efforty isn't beneficial for me, anyway.

[Auro]

"I'm done sorting" was offered as an explicit answer to your question about how what I was doing would help me sort my town and scum reads.
To expand that to suggest you believed my answer was "I'm done sorting everyone/more people than I've offered sorts on" is a reeeeeeal stretch, yeah?
This looks wonky as a thought process.

"How does tossing people into pools based on playstyle help you?"
"Helps others sort me. I've already done sorting"
"Oh, so what are your sorts then?"

Do you really find this a huge stretch?

Anyway, sure, let's go down this and assume I made that stretch dishonestly.
What was my scum motivation in doing this?
Do you think I would've pushed you on the basis of "Hey look he said he had scumreads but only posted them when I asked, this is scum for sure!!"?
If I was scum and actually wanted to push you there, this means I didn't expect that you were going to correct me saying you meant you'd sorted by the time you made the first post, because if I did expect that, I wouldn't bother pushing on it in the first place.
So regardless of alignment, that question was genuine - do you agree?

[Auro]

Yes, I do find it a stretch.

There was no scum motivation in doing it.
There was evidence of not efforting - which is what I said, and I think there is scum motivation in not efforting.

Okay, so we've established that there was no scum motivation -> this implies my thought process WRT the post was genuine.
In the universe where I hadn't asked that question, would you call my play "not efforting"?
Because this is supporting evidence at best; so if you don't think I was "not efforting" apart from that, it's a weak attack.
If you do think I wasn't "efforting" in that universe, we can talk about that further.

[Auro]

And even then, you're attacking my thought process -- saying it wasn't dishonest, rather a lack of effort -- which is weak anyway, considering that I *asked* about it and didn't case you for it, implying that it's not necessary to deeply think about all the ways I could have misread what someone said.

[Auro]

Lamees (L-3)

: rb, Malakitty, YyottaCat, Persivul

Leodanny (L-4)

: Thor665, Auro, Egix96

rb (L-5)

: Lamees, Leodanny

DVa (L-6)

: NotNova

YyottaCat (L-6)

: Dunnstral

NotNova (L-6)

: DVa

Something_Smart

As already discussed - there is scum motivation in covering up your lack of effort by claiming you're efforting.
Hence, again, as I already flat out stated, why I'm exploring your thought process to see if it makes sense.
Why is this suddenly something you're forgetting?
I do think you weren't efforting, I am starting to think you're fake efforting and word spewing emptiness.

I think we're speaking about different things.
Let's start over -
Where did I "claim" I'm efforting?
You've already picked at my thought process about that question, to see if what makes sense?
So you're saying I'm not efforting *because* of that question, or as a whole?

[Auro]

That you're - halfway through the discussion - kind of trying a gear change makes me feel like you're worried I was coming too close to reality.

Gear change from what to what? Spell it out for me, please.
You were saying my thought process would be wonky for me to ask that question.
I rebutted saying there's no scum motivation to that thought process.
You agreed, and said it's evidence for lack of effort.
I said it's supporting evidence at best, unless you believe I wasn't putting in effort on a whole independent of that post anyway.

Where have I changed gears here, Thor?

[Auro]

Just because you efforted as scum in the past does not mean you always will - or are you claiming it does?
I'm not sure what your motivation for it is - but it appears fairly factual you're doing exactly that so now I'm exploring it. It does make more sense to me you'd do it as scum, and it ASSUREDLY makes more sense to me you'd try to cover it up as scum as opposed to admitting it.

I'm feeling more like these answers are deflections than responses. Meh, then again you do answer in questions a lot like I do.
Please delve deeper into that first response and my rebuttal - I feel like the answer to your alignment is there.

I effort as both alignments. I'm not covering up that I'm efforting, am I? O.o
I'm saying there's no special

scum motivation

for me to effort, when I know that efforting alone won't make me look any townier. So if you're going to evaluate my alignment based on that question, it shouldn't be for "trying to look like you're efforting". Agree?
Therefore, an accusation of me "trying to look like I'm efforting" shouldn't hold any weight.

Is this what you're referring to? I thought you were attacking me *for* "efforting", and I rebutted accordingly.

[Auro]

Every time I incorrectly interpret something you say, you seem to be calling me "gear-changing", "fake-efforting", "word-spewing".
Why don't you correct me and allow me to rebut the correct version of things, without attacking me for it?

[Auro]

1. Are you claiming you're not efforting?
2. In an ongoing process, yes. This is an empty question.
3. I'm saying it is evidence of not efforting, I would suggest it's as a whole, yes.

1. I think I am putting in adequate effort.
2. My question was about *what* making sense.
3. Then how come you townleaned me earlier to that question? Also, you'll have to show that every post of mine appart from that was fake-effort.

I'm not stepping out of the conversation, I'm happy to engage.

You did say I looked like I'm empty-word-spewing, gear-changing, fake-efforting. Your "corrections" have not been particularly helpful, then. If I'm that thick that you're repeatedly correcting and I can't see it, can anybody else actually clarify for me, perhaps?

Which part of the conversation did I hard drop? I thought I was constantly engaging you o.O

Are you just skimming and pretending to effort, or what?

Like, how do you read this and establish my attack on you as you efforting as opposed to not efforting?

Fake effort is still effort, and "efforting" could simply mean "posting a lot" which is a reasonable interpretation I've taken.

[Auro]

Thor, this conversation is becoming unnecessarily bloated -- just cut down to your attack, and explain it in clear terms to dense me, without saying "I've already said it earlier".

[Auro]

Are you guys really learning anything from this?

Still evaluating if Thor's attack on me is genuine.
He seems uncharitable towards any semantic misinterpretations I make, and I am getting confused by what he's saying, or least am continuing to interpret his posts wrong.
What do you think of our interaction?

[Auro]

"The grass is blue."
You can rebut that without me even being involved in a game of Mafia. I challenged your stance, you offered a reason why you did what you did, I showed that it was illogical - that's a rebuttal.
What even is this question?

Ah, I thought you were referring to your initial response to my question as a "rebuttal", nevermind.

[Auro]

I'm not sure what your motivation for it is - but it appears fairly factual you're doing exactly that so now I'm exploring it. It does make more sense to me you'd do it as scum, and it ASSUREDLY makes more sense to me you'd try to cover it up as scum as opposed to admitting it.

This is the attack? Cool.
So you think I'm fake efforting, even right now in the process of our engagement, cool.
And your attack on me is that you don't know what my motivation for efforting would be; but I would try to cover my non-efforting up as scum instead of admitting that I am not efforting. Correct? Gosh.

[Auro]

You asked for the case - I didn't expect you to agree with it.
My primary goal was to showcase that it was simple and clearly stated already.

Agreements or not aside, my paraphrasing of your case; is it correct?

[Auro]

i tried

too hard tbh

cop checks on both imo

How do you know a cop exists? Feels a bit like TMI.
If you're scum who knows cop exists, these posts make me think you have a framer as well.
If you didn't bother reading our exchange properly, why do you not think it could be TvT?

[Auro]

And your attack on me is that you can't see what town motivation my efforting would have, but see scum motivation; but I would try to cover my non-efforting up as scum instead of admitting that I am not efforting. Correct? Gosh.

Cool, so that's your attack. I think it's pretty convoluted and plays around with definitions and semantics.
Multiple people echoed what Persivul said even out of this game, about me arguing out of stubbornness. I'm still not able to judge the interaction properly. From games I've read, Thor makes these kind of pushes as town too.
If people actually *buy* what he said, I'll go into this further.

[Auro]

Yeah, that wasn't my question.

[Auro]

@Mod: V/LA till the weekend's over, taking a break.

[Auro]

@Pers, scum is informed about what PRs town has -- if scum knows there's no Angel, it's not as bad a fakeclaim.

I'll post here and there, and end my VLA early if I get my work done fast.

[Auro]

Now if it was a gambit, it would obviously be a planned one, not random.
We need to evaluate the effectiveness of fakeclaiming Angel early, and proceed from there.
If it's way too stupid to do (and right now I feel that) we could buy the claim, since we could lynch her later when there's a smaller pool, for a better chance of hitting scum anyway.

[Auro]

Or we could just kill it in the face.

If she's town, then we make better use of the vengekill by lynching her later, no? Correct me if I'm wrong. The slot shouldn't go to LyLo though I think

[Auro]

Lamees -- you could still be scum fakeclaiming, scum would simply not NK you to LyLo/MyLo -- and then there's no way of verifying your role at that point.

I think you're town, but Persivul seems correct here. The uncertainty probably implies you're better off lynched

[Auro]

VOTE: Lamees
Unless someone convinces me it's a bad idea to lynch Lamees today.
If Lam is scum, great.
If she's town and scum have a framer, they have to correctly guess her venge kill, so larger numbers works for us, and we don't deal with the WIFOM.

[Auro]

@Lamees no, idea being that lynching you allows you to use your vengekill, so it's not a complete waste. In LyLo it becomes useless, though I think.

Actually wait, in LyLo we can lynch Lamees and she venge kills the second consensus scumread. If she's scum, good, else, we still can hit scum.

UNVOTE:

Have to think through this further

[Auro]

Game Mechanics

If an angel is lynched, the smite resolves during twilight and before nightfall.
Ghosts cannot affect the outcome of smiting during the day.

Guys, this means we *can* use Lamees' day smite as a cop (barring immortals) since the ghost can't frame someone, right?

[Auro]

Hmm, yeah I'll get back properly after the weekend. A few current reads:

Was TRing Persivul, strengthened after his townslip.
NotNova's response is good; need more content to sort there though.
Lamees seems town, Angel is a pretty bad fakeclaim, but if it's a mechanically good lynch for the copping, we can do that D2/D3 with a smaller pool I guess.
rb looks like he's flailing scum at this point - if he is scum, his interaction with Lamees before and after the Angel claim is worth studying, since scum!rb would probably *not* want Lamees lynched.
DVa's style seems slightly different from my previous towngames with her, she seems a bit more laid back, but her posts look Towny

I actually agree with her sentiment about focusing on non-committal players over lynchbaity players who still post. DVa, why would Leodanny be a bad wagon compared to Mala?

[Auro]

Also notice rb seems to have stopped the whole "wow... imo" crap after Lamees' claim

[Auro]

Er, well, okay... that happened. I think I've seen enough.
UNVOTE:

VOTE: DVa

Does anyone know if she gets this tilted as town?

I think the argument between them stems from a fundamental disagreement on treatment of lurker slots and also frustration at each other's play. RB seems to have finally gotten... more serious, at least to my eyes, in this interaction. He was fine when you voted for him previously, so this means it's not the vote itself that riled him up -- his side of this interaction feels pretty genuine to me. I'm still bothered by his treatment of Lamees' slot post claim, but I don't think I want RB to be today's lynch.

DVa does get this "tilted" as town, yes. At least as far as my own knowledge of her goes, this interaction seems to be town indicative for her, and strengthens my previous townlean. I agree with her sentiment about lurker slots, and I would be pretty pissed myself if all these interactions so far have been TvT while scum lurks to a win.

I don't get why bristep and Mala are obvtown -- hasn't Malakittens been awarded "Most Cunning Manipulator" before? How can a couple "thoughtful" posts make her obvtown? It's pretty easy to come in once every couple days and make some towny-looking observations, this is a slot I would happy to have lynched. Bristep also hasn't made any significant contributions so far, and I think his push on DVa is bad, but I'll comment on that later.

We should stop getting at each other's heads for playstyle differences and fundamental disagreements, because those aren't going to get us anywhere WRT gamesolving. I think we ALL can agree that some slots have been unproductive and lurky, I say we should focus there instead of self-destructing and allowing scum to coast.

[Auro]

what do you mean?

DVa said i was voting people for talking, so i'm demonstrating what that actually looks like

This is petty. Let's please start solving.
Neither of you are going to be today's lynches, so let's not have that spiral.

If anyone thinks RB is scum after this interaction, feel free to go ahead and case him.
Likewise for DVa -- I'm *pretty* sure what she said comes from town!DVa and not scum!DVa, and I will NOT let a slot focusing on lurker slots get lynched, while lurks get away.

[Auro]

Oh and I forgot my vote didn't switch back to Leo when I unvoted RB, I think I'm happy on a Dunnstral wagon. I'll trust DVa's read on Leo for now, Dunn's ISO is absolutely underwhelming and not pro-town. I think Mala, while lurking now is due to IRL reasons, and do think she might get productive later, so that's a slot I'd prefer not lynched.

VOTE: Dunnstral

[Auro]

{Dunnstral > Malakitty|Bristep > Leodanny}

I think we should lynch in this.

[Auro]

I stand by it, going into detail would give you an argument to make against it. It's really for the rest of the players to decide whether what I said has merit or not.

That's the point of engagement -- you make a case/accusation, let the person offer a defense, and *then* the rest of town evaluates it.
From the rest of the town's perspective, you could be:

1. Scum pushing a case on her: We can perhaps figure that out if you both engage on it
2. Town pushing a weak case on her: That'll become clear once you engage on it; you might realize that and change your mind too
3. Town pushing a strong case on her: Her arguments aren't going to destroy the case, so her responses aren't a problem anyway; plus you get the rest of the town to follow you

In all cases, engagement with her about your case on her is beneficial to town in that it helps us evaluate the case *and* both of your alignments better. By saying "let town judge the merits of the case" without pushing, it does look like you're just throwing mud and seeing what sticks, without really taking responsibility for the push - so it's important that you do engage.

Do you agree?

[Auro]

Thanks for taking the time to explain the game to me mister, I'll sure make sure I'm a hundred percent better player now!

So here's the thing. I literally replaced in 24 hours ago, had 21 pages of posts to read through and there was still 8 DAYS left of the phase. I had a very early feeling about what I saw in recent posts so made my initial vote on DVa, who then went absolutely hyperactive practically ordering me to explain it. It's that uber-defensiveness to myself and then subsequently rb that sticks with me more. Not everyone will play the same way, rb obviously winds people up to get his reads, you and DVa are the 'explain yourself so we can defend/write dissertations' which can be as harmful to town as much as they can benefit.

DVa was perfectly reasonable asking you to explain it.

If someone cases me, I'd *want* to engage them on it, for two reasons - help evaluate the case better, and also figure out their motivations in making the case, and discover something about their alignment in the process, if it happens.

You actually acknowledge that rb "winds people up", and when DVa did get wound up, you're calling it "uber-defensive" and therefore scummy?

Why is "explain yourself and I'll defend" potentially harmful to town? I think making a case on someone, refusing to explain it or engage with them on it, and calling them scummy for being "defensive" when they call you out on it, scummy.

[Auro]

There's a difference between having a strong scum read and a case and placing an initial gut vote on someone. Everything you say (and DVa said earlier) only applies if she is town. If she's scum then forcing players to make a case when it's purely a gut read (and also add to that trying to get the town to try and read lurkers on D1) gives them ammunition to pick it apart and point towards said person's behaviour as scum (then badtown after the flip). It's a gut read, if it becomes a strong read with a case at that point I'll make a case. Until then, I'll play my way and I'll ask you to chill out.

I had a feeling it was more than a gut read since you mentioned "weird meta analysis" and something else which meant the case did hold some weight to you. Since my gut doesn't feel the same way about her, it's not a wagon I'd want to join, and I think "gut" isn't the greatest of reasons to wagon at this point when there's significant content. If you do make a case later, I look forward to reading it.

That said, sure, take your time and get into the game.

Are there any other slots pinging you ATM?

[Auro]

So you're voting a top poster instead of a lurker. WTF am I missing something?

Asking people to stop defending lurkers =/= voting for a scumread, why can't someone take an active stance against lurkers and *also* vote someone being scummy and frustrating? I don't get it.
I think DVa is a bad lynch, and her I think her wagon prolly has scum on it.

Thanks for taking the time to explain the game to me mister, I'll sure make sure I'm a hundred percent better player now!

I know, it's like Auro thinks we voted him king or something.

Eh, I don't care for that -- my motivation behind that post was to implore and figure out *why* he felt engaging on a case was a bad thing. He explained it was majorly an early gut read based on recent posts, and I think that's a satisfactory response. Feel free to disagree with me, but this is how I play.

[Auro]

It's not just that. See above - you declaring that certain people won't be the lynch. I really hate it when someone thinks they're in charge of the whole town.

Oh, I think you're reading that incorrectly -- I wasn't quite "declaring" that they wouldn't be the lynch.
I meant something along the lines of "You both don't look like you're today's lynch at this point; this is blowing out of control; please stop".

Obviously I'm not in control of the town, looking at how DVa's at L-2 already for what I think are meh reasons.

[Auro]

I think DVa is a bad lynch, and her I think her wagon prolly has scum on it.

DVa (L-2): NotNova, Egix96, Lamees, bristep123, Persivul

Who?

I didn't mean I'm scumreading anyone in particular.
Lamees is town IMO, so are you.
NotNova's earlier response was fine but I he's gone back to lurking. NotNova, Egix, bristep are all possibilities here IMO.

I meant something along the lines of "You both don't look like you're today's lynch at this point; this is blowing out of control; please stop".

At that point rb had top wagon and DVa was tied for second wagon. How did you conclude that neither looked like they'd be today's lynch?

You're justified in reading it the way you did; I'm not implying that you shouldn't have -- hence the clarification on my part.
With a lot of time remaining, it wasn't definite that one of them was going to be the lynch, and I felt they were acting as though they were locked in a 1v1 to the death.

[Auro]

It's not at all make them uninterested in helping you solve the game

thor/NN/mala

If you're town, exiting the game now is only going to attract more votes and get you ML'd, DVa.
Why are you suddenly scumreading Thor? Can you explain your town/scumreads?

[Auro]

exiting the game now

Oh nevermind, I think I misread.

[Auro]

I would usually unvote after this kind of tantrum since I don't get why this would come from scum, but after that game where I saw you as scum team I think anything is within your range. So anyone please feel free to hammer imo.

I'm agreeing with Lam here, I thought her frustrations were towny but the self-vote, WTH? Eww.
That's usually a scumtell and is *never* beneficial for town. DVa

knows

this.
I think if this is scum!DVa is doing it intentionally, she knows she's being lynched and wants the day to end quicker?

[Auro]

If I am scum, I am anti-spewing to avoid giving associative tells with my scumbuddies.

If I am town, statistically town has a higher rate of winning on a day 1 mislynch and there's no reason it shouldn't be me if I'm replacing out anyway.

Town statistically wins more on D1 MLs than D1 scum-lynches? That doesn't feel right at all, and it doesn't even make sense.
I'm not hammering you now. However, I do think you're scum because I'd never expect town!DVa to gamethrow. I'm wondering whether I should wait for your replacement just in case, since 7 days, or go ahead. I can't think of any town PR that's better lynched, either.

I think you should claim right now.

[Auro]

Haha, no ways, not letting you have that satisfaction.
You should've self-hammered when someone got you to L-1 instead if you wanted to stop the day early and stop us from finding associations.

I want to hear from the rest of town what they make of this.
Also need to check whether you have a meta of bussing partners early in the game, and study other associations with you. I think Bristep is town though, considering that you asked to replace out too.

[Auro]

Wait a minute.

@Mod: It is possible for two Angels to exist in this setup, right?

[Auro]

DVa, if you're Angel, it's possible Lamees can be an Angel too then, so you shouldn't smite her.
It's better you tell us who you're gonna target if you're an Angel trying to get lunched

[Auro]

DVa (L-2)

: NotNova, Lamees, bristep123, Persivul,
DVa

rb (L-5)

: Leodanny, Something_Smart

Dunnstral (L-5)

: Auro, rb

Leodanny (L-5)

: Thor665, Dunnstral

Lamees (L-6)

: Malakitty

Egix96

Egix, do you think scum!me and scum!DVa planned her self-vote?
Do you not think I would've hammered her for the towncred, if I was bussing her after the self-vote?

[Auro]

I don't see any benefit in planning to have her self-vote and then suddenly have me distance from her after townreading and defending that slot, do you?

A lot of fuss, over DVa self-voting, scumclaiming and open wolfing? What do you expect town!Auro to say in this situation? I mean if I didn't want to lose my scumbuddy DVa, I wouldn't have let her done the self-voting crap anyway.

VOTE: DarkLightA, L-2

[Auro]

Mala, do you not think my interactions with Lamees and treatment of her slot could be informed by prior games? In my most recent completed game with her, Newbie 1900, I treated her pretty much the same -- I said she makes scummy plays as town, and is a bad lynch -- she pushed a pretty bad wagon on me, and yet I didn't vote her a single time D1 IIRC. And I was town that game.

[Auro]

I didn't really much understand the DVa votes beyond "she was loud and garnering a lot of attention." I think it makes even less sense to vote that slot now that it's been replaced. (Looking at you Auro)

So her scumclaiming, self-voting and asking me to hammer her, this doesn't concern you at all? You think *this* play comes from town? I've seen DVa riled up before and was feeling that was towny till the self-vote -- that's bothering me a lot.

I'm liking DLA and it seems like we have a few similar thoughts - yeah, the Persivul townslip I mentioned was the daychat one. But just because what I think is a scumslot replaced out and I like the new one, I don't think I should discard my old read on it.


@DLA: Yay that you noticed the RB cop slip too. While it did feel TMI, I don't think it's *as* damning because in Newbie 1900, I was saying that one usually trolly slot was better dealt with investigatives, that led to a TMI push on me. I think RB's play progression seems a lot less agenda driven and more towny (the trolling around and then frustration at DVa's posts).

[Auro]

I think DVa might be zombie

No way a Zombie would try to get lynched with an Angel in play

[Auro]

It doesn't make sense from town or from scum. Those posts alone could have been faked emotion, but since she replaced out it proves it was real emotion-- which could come from either alignment.

I don't think replacing out necessarily implies true emotion, I think tactical replacements are against rules but then scumclaiming and asking to get lynched as town is gamethrowing, too. *Shrug*

I think there were some benefits as scum, baiting a hammer to end the day early if she thought she was going to be the lynch anyway. NK Lamees and make us lose the copping mechanism, maybe. If rb is town, makes all the more sense there.

[Auro]

yeah I get it meta reads. but she only has one completed scum game.

Also you are really good at implementing your town meta in your scum games.

A meta non-read. A bunch of towngames where she gets wrongly scumread means a higher propensity to get pushed just for her style.

You said I was white-knighting her and I pointed out that I've treat her this way as town; you then said I'm good at implementing town meta. I'm feeling a tinge of dishonesty here

[Auro]

Hmm she did do all that after requesting replacement though, not the other way around..

Meh
UNVOTE:

[Auro]

DVa did that stuff after asking to be replaced out though, do you think she was necessarily playing to any win-con?
Like I'm trying to understand why scum!DVa would strategically scum-claim and ask to be lynched *after* actually asking to replace out.

[Auro]

I think it's right to lynch Lamees or rb.

We're in a good spot unless they're both town. If they are both town, I still think it's better to hang Lamees first, but otherwise it's better to hang rb first.

VOTE: rb

if someone isn't the same as they were over 6 months (?) agp, they must be scum.

smart imo

I literally just said I can't read you at all.

I was starting to look back at the RB votes, and this^ does not strike me as towny at all.
Something_Smart seems to have placed his vote reasoned purely mechanically, since he doesn't scumread either Lam or RB explicitly. And this reasoning, too, I think is bad: It's been established Lam is a bad lynch today, and I don't follow how her scumread on RB means RB is a good option otherwise.

[Auro]

How does that interaction make him look like town?

I'll have to take a deeper look at his ISO later, but why I felt so:
RB didn't give me a great impression through the game until that point -- he was kinda trolling around and annoying people early game, and it looked to me like this "rile people up and make them look bad" was a strategy he was following and finding success in, with Lamees. His reaction to her claim was also bad too, AFAIR, and looked scummy. The slip made him look bad, too.

However, he expressed frustration and seriousness during his DVa exchange -- something I'm not able to fit as part of a scum agenda for him. Clearly DVa was attracting votes (even if for meh reasons) and he wasn't being scumread, so I fail to see why he would go to the extent of faking said frustration in that context. I don't think it's likely here that scum!RB gets frustrated genuinely especially considering his prior play.

Either he was scum playing with a strategy of riling people up and suddenly decided to backtrack in the case of DVa, or was town who was trolling around and got genuinely frustrated at DVa. The latter seems a lot simpler to me, and thus likelier.

Furthermore, it's also very unlikely for DVa vs RB to be SvS considering that was one of the factors that led to her replacing out, so if DVa's slot is scum, that effectively clears RB. On the other hand, if DVa's slot is town, it means DVa herself seemed to not scumread RB post interaction. This makes me incline more towards believing that RB is town.

[Auro]

Spoiler:

you seem to take something i say, then interpret it in the absolute worst way fucking possible for some reason. i'm trying to not smash my head on my desk over and over, by keeping in mind that you are, really fucking obvious scum right now, but it's hard

just because i think dunn can do stuff as town, doesn't mean i'm not aware he can do stuff as scum too. the problem is, he's not doing stuff _at all_ - nothing that he's doing is alignment indicative, he's just taking potshots about mechanics and unimportant stuff from the sideline. in fact if you have such a problem with dunn, why are YOU not voting him with me?

you're basically complaining about me voting dunnstral, when you agree he should have votes on him, but you're upset that i moved to your wagon instead. nothing that you're saying even looks town, because you don't really give a shit about reads it seems, you're just conveniently getting on current the biggest wagon in the game and pretending it's not OMGUS

WHERE THE FUCK DID I SAY I WAS VOTING YOU FOR ACTIVITY

wow, yes

the sole reason i voted you is because you posted, you're right

do you have basic comprehension or not?

fuck it

i'm just gonna smash my head against the wall until i'm too dazed to do anything but sleep at this point

VOTE: rb

lynch me please

yep, and when im lynched and flip town, you lynch DVa tomorrow

i'm not sitting here having arguments that make me self harm

you're obviously scum, probably with dunnstral.

no, i'd prefer you vote me so i can be out of this game

A few of his posts from that interaction, along with the self-vote which points to frustration.

[Auro]

I'll also take your silence as admitting my case lacks semantic/definition wordplay.

I'm not going to be pulled into this kind of an argument again -- I do think your case is convoluted, and I'll wait for anyone else to actually parse and push me there.

Seems like a better way than me "misinterpreting" your words, and trying to engage while you call it empty words and "fake efforting", sorry for that.

[Auro]

There is nothing convoluted in a case that is "I think you're faking effort, therefore are scum" that's a very simple and easy case.
There is also no definition wordplay at all.
Your defense is scummy here.

If it was this, I think I already have responded. You thought I was fake efforting because of that "Who's scum then" question I threw at you, and I explained my thought process behind it. You thought it's wonky, but I did show how it was genuine. I also asked you to show me how I'm "faking effort" independent of that question and our interaction after that, and you said it's silly to ask that. I also pointed out that it's my scum meta to effort hard, so I have nothing to really gain by faking effort instead of playing naturally.

I can't possibly "prove" that my effort is "real", and I'm not sure how you'd evaluate it off one question -- but again, I'm not interested in needlessly throwing pages upon pages on this right now. I will be, if any other player sees what you're seeing and doesn't think it's a weak case.

[Auro]

All o fthat felt about as real as him wow, imo stuff to me.
I guess if you read it as legit it reads town - but that feels like cart before the horse, no?
He's town cause it's real, but it's real because he's town?

If it felt as fake as the wow imo stuff to you, that's okay. It doesn't to me. IIRC he said that "kill me" stuff even before and that was tonally way different IMO.

I also don't see why he'd fake said frustration in that interaction *given* DVa was getting wagoned and no one was really scumreading him for it, as I noted.
I'm not saying it's real because he's town. It feels real, and therefore towny. The case where it's real and he's scum feels less likely than where it's real and he's town; therefore if if it's real he's likelier town.

[Auro]

You're now changing the goalposts and not supporting either how my case is convoluted or definition/semantic based.

I'll agree that you offered your reasoning behind why you asked a pointless question - please agree back that I disagreed with the logic of it, and you hardly "showed it was genuine" that's silly.

I agree you asked me to show how every post you made was faking effort and I called *that* silly.

I can agree you effort as scum. Please explain how that precludes you from ever not efforting - and also feel free to explain which alingment I should expect you to be if I detect shallow effort and scumhunting. Because if it's town you need to change how you play.

The case how you made it before, and your interactions on it.

I did say you found it wonky. If I *knew* what you meant, I wouldn't have bothered questioning as either alignment. I'm not lazy, as either alignment. Again, independent of that question, tell me where you think I was empty efforting.

It doesn't -- I disagree that my scumhunting is shallow and lacks effort. You're "detecting" wrong. I'm forming reads, making observations, engaging people, and I'm happy to continue with my methods and learn eventually what works for me.

[Auro]

Again, independent of that question, tell me where you think I was empty efforting.

I don't understand what you're asking me here.
It sounds like 'ignoring your evidence, explain your evidence' so I think I'm misunderstanding it - reword?

You think I'm faking effort.
Fine, you think my thought process behind that question is illogical, so that's one piece of evidence for ya. You think my engagement with you on that was fake effort, let's throw that in too.

Now, is there any other evidence you have where you feel like I'm faking effort?

[Auro]

Any other post/interaction*

[Auro]

As regards rb - he was the one getting more negative attention than DVa in that interaction. I see motivation to try to look town, and I think the way people often interpret frustration suggest that's a valid scum play to fake. Is it fake? Not sure. But I don't see it as slam dunk enough to want to call it town, that slot is pretty iffy in all other ways.

Was he getting scumread there? I see Egix telling him to "stop mucking around", no one really scumreading him on that basis.

Sure there's motivation to look town, but it seems highly weird for scum!RB to decide to start "looking town" at that point and drop the trolling.

I agree that judging whether it was fake or not is subjective. My judgment is that it's pretty probably legit -- and I've given reasons for that. I also agree that it's iffy in other ways, and can see why other slots would think he's scum.

[Auro]

Not as clearly defined.
I might toss in your reaction to DVa/rb as super shallow, but I'm not sure if I think you're faking that or not.
You bringing up the convoluted/definition thing is also very suspect to me as it's blatant hogwash - but that's a different tell.

Are you saying you're sloppy enough as scum you'd keep doing the same tell I'm attacking you over and my lack of ability to show it again then proves you're town?

IIRC I was seeing their exchange as TvT and that was my reaction till DVa's weird behaviour post asking to replace out, don't see anything wrong with that.

Yeah whether it was convoluted or not then I'll let other players judge. I'll ask them to look back at my paraphrasing of it, and the post I paraphrased too.

Oh not at all. If that question is your only defined instance of my shallow effort to you, and you're casing me just predicated on that, fayne. I'm calling it a weak case.

If my earlier engagement with you about that was fake effort, that already answers your question -- it does make me sloppy as scum to have done that after you "pointed it out".

[Auro]

Subject: Newbie 1889: Ice Cream (Game Over)

@thor: it keeps me motivated to play the game..

Wow - I'm sorry reading my posts is that painful to you.
Frankly though, if you're town aren't you basically game throwing right now and being a jerk to all your fellow town team by not bothering to read posts to help catch a scum member or figure out a town member?

I was reading over that game NotNova linked where you had multiple pages of TvT exchanges -- this was your reaction when someone refused to read your posts.

You seem like you don't care much that most people find your push bad, or aren't reading your posts. In fact, look at this:

wow can we cop check thor and auro just because i started reading their interactions and now i have depression imo

Good

Where has that sentiment disappeared this game?

[Auro]

What happened to your "hot take"?

[Auro]

That scum pool is really bad

Because you are included or are you town reading anyone in there?

That scum pool is really bad

Because it's too wide, or because you're in it?

pedit: dangit

That scum pool is really bad

Because you're included or because you disagree?

[Auro]

Leo I can see; RB also I can see.
Egix and I are in it becauses of our pushes on DLA's slot I reckon, since you thought I was town before that, and I understand.
You didn't mention Thor before -- can you explain your read there?

[Auro]

Also your townreads on Nova and Smart, how strong are they? Neither feel particularly towny to me.

[Auro]

Lamees, Egix and I all shared a similar perspective on DVa's slot -- Unless you think all three of us are scum here, I think it's not scummy to have pushed there, though?

[Auro]

What happened to your "hot take"?

It was a reaction test.

Reactions just from me or from the others as well?
I'm assuming you either towned or nulled me on my reaction, since I'm not in your scumpool.
What would you have expected scum!Auro to say in that situation? What did I say that you don't think comes from scum?

[Auro]

That's nice, I never said that everybody who pushed DVa was scum though so...

I meant on the basis of her post-replacement weirdness, since you thought I was town before that and threw me in your scumpool after that.
Unless there are other reasons.

[Auro]

Don't think it has, you don't show me ever agreeing that not reading is good - you do have me showing I'd be happy to see you (or me if you wish) get Copped
What's the attitude change there exactly?

I didn't say that attitude changed. I said it felt

absent

.
So you're happy for attracting an investigative onto one of us, uhuh cool.
I'm not liking that particularly, considering the possibility of both immortals and framers in this setup if there is a cop.

[Auro]

Meh, Leodanny's flip is going to be as useful as his slot currently is I feel, he was hella lynchbaity in 1898 too, I definitely wouldn't want to this slot to make it to MyLo/LyLo. I think it's fine to take our chances here *shrug*

Persivul, anyone else you're scumreading strongly?

What's your read on RB? Thor, you think RB's slot is iffy, don't you think that flip is better?

VOTE: Leodanny

[Auro]

And why so? I'm just reasoning my compromise, I did the same thing in Newbie 1900 and voted a non-contributing slot D1. Although that slot went inactive then and didn't claim he was the doctor.

I'm still waiting for Egix's answer on the reaction test thing -- his play so far has been a bit underwhelming, and that's also I wagon I'm currently fine with.

[Auro]

Compromise lynches?
Not interested in an RB wagon.
Your slot I wanted out but I really liked your post, and the wagon was not impressive before the replacement.
Thor, Dunn, Egix, S_S, bristep are all wagons I'd be fine with ATM but I don't think there's enough to actually case any of them.

Let's vote Egix?

[Auro]

Why not?

[Auro]

Has your read on RB changed? That's still a wagon you could push, right?

[Auro]

Way to vote Leo then suggest a new wagon an hour later.

Yeah as I said, Leo is a meh lynch, he doesn't respond to pressure as either alignment I think. I did want to have other wagons at the time of my vote, hence I asked you about your other scumreads, and Thor why he isn't pushing RB

[Auro]

Then you should be fine wagoning and getting more info to sort people, no?

[Auro]

Has your read on RB changed? That's still a wagon you could push, right?

Is that to me? Cause I haven't been on rb.

Nah it was to DLA

[Auro]

Don't think it has, you don't show me ever agreeing that not reading is good - you do have me showing I'd be happy to see you (or me if you wish) get Copped
What's the attitude change there exactly?

I didn't say that attitude changed. I said it felt

absent

.
So you're happy for attracting an investigative onto one of us, uhuh cool.
I'm not liking that particularly, considering the possibility of both immortals and framers in this setup if there is a cop.

Thor, I want to talk about this more - I think it's a horrendous idea to gate a cop check to one or two people, since if there's a cop it's almost guaranteed that we have a framer/GF or both.

Why were you happy at that suggestion?

[Auro]

No, Lam, that only applies if you're the NK. If you're lynched in the day you use your smite in twilight, and scum can't use ghost then -- so it's guaranteed that if you're hitting a town target they won't die. It's good for us, though, because that town then becomes somewhat confirmed (unless they happen to be an immortal).

If you're going to be lynched at some point, naming a target works better.
If you're killed in the night, you should pick another option.

[Auro]

No no, not if we establish that if you're killed at night, you *may or may not* target the player you named.
Whoever you name is ONLY if you're killed in the day.
This way, town wouldn't assume that player's the target if you're the NK, and also lessens the benefit of a ghost to scum.
Sounds good?

Persivul is my only strong-ish townread.
RB is a weaker townread for reasons I explained, not a fan of his posts though.

Regarding wanting players in LyLo, it's more a proficiency thing, not from a reads' aspect. Having a player who provides absolutely zero useful content in LyLo makes it impossible to sort them (Eg. Leodanny), whereas it's easier to sort someone who's reasonable (or expected to be).

What are your reads?

[Auro]

How on earth is Leodanny a town read?!

[Auro]

Leodanny (L-3)

: Thor665, Persivul, Auro, Dunnstral

rb (L-4)

: Leodanny, Something_Smart, DarkLightA

DarkLightA (L-5)

: Nako, bristep123

Persivul (L-6)

: Lamees

Dunnstral (L-6)

: rb

Egix96, Malakitty

I remember I was null to you after my first Thor exchange, what changed since then?

[Auro]

Why is he scum? I get the "not cotributing" part, but that isnt alignment indicative. I town read him because he isn't pushing for a scum wincon imo. Like you get players who troll around and don't contribute/lurk. But they still push aggressively for mislynches as scum (see notmafia in that game we played together) and kind of what rb was doing earlier this game. Leodanny isnt doing that.

viewtopic.php?f=50&t=77730

I was town in this game. 0verki11 was scum, who was a newbie, and was also playing really meh.
I reasoned, "Oh if he's scum he's not playing to any agenda! This looks like newbie town", and stubbornly refused to lynch him, even though night kills pointed to him.
Turns out he WAS scum just not playing to any win-con, with almost no presence/co-ordination with his scum buddy, and that threw me off.
So these kind of "newbie" players are totally capable of hiding behind that and coasting along, Lamees.

Pushing aggressively is a good thing, and it makes someone easier to sort. Hard-lurking and doing jack isn't. Especially when you know that said slot isn't going to produce any significantly AI content in the future as well.

[Auro]

Posts like 818 feel scummy.

Can see why you think "I don't want this player in LyLo" is scummy, but in my last scum game I did exactly that -- I took Leodanny to LyLo, the other guy just quick-voted Leodanny. This is also kinda why I was fine with Snowbeast as a lynch in Robocalypse, btw.

[Auro]

Look at malakitty's recent post. Keep in mind there were questions that was asked of her. What did she hop in and decide to comment on?

Fair point, I went and checked too, I see quite a lot of prodging.
I was thinking it's a bit mean to wagon her for content when she did say she was really busy IRL and would chime in later.
Adding her to my lynchpool for the day nonetheless.

[Auro]

I'd be interested if you could elaborate on this.

Well, I got a feeling you were a bit more passive and sideline-y, for example your initial Leo vote because of the wagon felt kinda lazy, and I was getting scummy pings from your "reaction test" as well. I'm satisfied by your response detailing the reaction test though, I'll re-evaluate your ISO.

The obv-townness from 1893 is kinda missing I feel, but in both my games with you I was scum so I admit there's definitely a bias here. I noticed you have one recently completed scumgame as well, I'll have a look at that too.

But if you think I'm scum and you don't want to give me any ideas, then that's fine too.

Lol, I actually think the whole "My thought process will give scum!you ideas" philosophy is bad.
I always believe it's best for everyone to be transparent.

[Auro]

VOTE: Malakitty

Agree with Lamees.

[Auro]

But if you think I'm scum and you don't want to give me any ideas, then that's fine too.

Wait,

hot take

- was that a reaction test too?

[Auro]

Actually there is a very specific reason why I included that sentence, but unfortunately I cannot detail it at this present time.

Hmm, I think I have a guess, correct me if I'm stepping in the wrong direction
If it is what I'm thinking I'll throw some town points your way.

[Auro]

I don't think it's better, and there's more support for Leodanny.
You town read him - why are you trying to redirect from a null/scum read of yours to a town read?

I do think RB is town -- however, I felt a possible inconsistency in your read on the slot versus your vote, so I called that out. Similar to how I'd question a case on a scumread if I felt it inconsistent, I can also question why someone isn't pushing a townread of mine if it looks potentially inconsistent with their previous sayings and clarify.

[Auro]

You say this like GFs aren't near constant issues with Cops in basically every game.
I'm happy with the Cop targeting.
I'm happy with the Cop targeting me or a top scumspect of mine.
If I opposed any part of that then I'd need to oppose the COp targeting anyone.
Do you fear Framer/GF so much you think the Cop shouldn't target? Unless your answer is 'yes' I fail to see your issue here.

No, I think the cop should be governed, or gated to one or two people. Rb saying "cop one of these two!" and you responding "yeah, I'm happy with a check on us!" seems like you're both encouraging the cop to check one of us, which means a framer has a much more informed target.
Also, major tinfoil here, but -- you could be the GF inviting a cop check, too. If that's the case and I'm framed, then win-win no matter who a cop checks.

Encouraging the cop to check someone (or two) is bad, IMO, and they should keep in mind the existence of framers and GFs when deciding who they target.

[Auro]

No, I think the cop should be governed, or gated to one or two people.

I *don't* think, sorry.

[Auro]

What inconsistency did you see from me to provoke this line of questioning?

Potential*
Your vote then vs the RB read.

[Auro]

Welcome to every closed game, and a fair swathe of Open games of Mafia ever made?
I responded with 'Good' not 'Oh yeah, Cop should totally only check one of the two of us'. Bit of a difference.

Still doesn't change that it looks like encouragement.

[Auro]

How do you know a cop exists? Feels a bit like TMI.

Why do you think scum would out like that???

By mistake? TMI-slips are possible in this game and are prolly easy to make for scum unintentionally; hence derive a good deal of legitimacy.

[Auro]

We're lynching rb. I've seen this happen too much and lost games as town because of it. Not letting it go. My vote is on rb for the entire game until one of us gets lynched.

To be honest, this post pinged me as TWTBAW but I'll keep an eye on Angel.

You should read Newbie 1900 if you get a chance. Most of the reasons she's pinging you - she did the same as town that game.

[Auro]

She was really damn sure Not_Mafia was obvscum very early D1; however the rest of us strong TR'd him. so that post is completely natural and expected from Lamees.

[Auro]

TBH, I checked DVa's games and her scum games felt she were more frustrated and in her town games, she was just having fun.
DVa can definitely be scum here, I'd like to ask Auro and Thor about her though.

I did note at some point that she felt more laid back than my previous games with her. She never has fun when she's getting wagoned by people pissing her off, though, as either alignment. I was kinda making a tonal judgment there compared to my play with scumbuddy!her in 1893, my only game where she was scum.

Her behavior post replacement was pretty bothering, but it was after she asked to replace out so prolly wasn't strategic, as Dunn pointed out.

[Auro]

The case on Mala

Looked back at Mala's ISO, and I think after her recent posts and what others have pointed out, there's enough to actually build a small case here.

1. Her treatment of Lamees' slot. She begins by suspecting Lamees in 222, I immediately ask her if she's had previous meta experience with Lamees. She says she lost to scum Lamees once. I point out that Lamees does what she's doing (including the extreme tunnelling) as town. There doesn't seem to be a response to that (apart from "this is pretty bad"), or a honest re-evaluation of Lam's slot. Lam even acknowledges that she was "super noob and doesn't know how town won" in 287. The re-evaluation doesn't even have had to read her as town necessarily -- just substantiate why this meta doesn't match her town meta compared to her scum meta, OR acknowledge that town!Lamees can do this and give us reasons to why she's a good lynch otherwise. With neither of these things, it makes her push suspect.

2. Mild fearmongering on my slot. After she called my meta-defense of Lamees "pretty bad" and implying I'm scum "white-knighting" Lamees, I tell her it's informed by personal history with Lamees, and bring up the relevant game in 699. Her response? She dismisses it as a slightly mis-reppy "meta read" (it's not really -- it's using meta to show why someone *isn't* necessarily scum for something they did), and then says I'm good at implementing my town meta in scum games. Now, what's the purpose of that last sentence? Again, this doesn't look like honest re-evaluation of a stance, just fearmongering.

3. Her townreads. Persivul seems to be townread in general, so that's there. While DVa was pushing Mala, DLA's never mentioned Mala once, so I think that's a safe townread. Something_Smart and rb both seem to townread her on weird reasons, rb in his usual style and also based off a pretty bad "reaction test" (which I'm getting sick of), and Something_Smart complimenting her on "solid play" which I don't really see. I admit none of us have great TRs -- but here, they do look a bit political and a tad bit pocket-y. Her lynch pool apart from Thor has the otherwise-biggest wagon (Leodanny), one tunneled slot (Lamees) who she wants to lynch through the claim, and another OMGUS-y slot (Dunnstral) who she never really commented on before 945. This is not a point that's scum-indicative in itself, but is consistent with Mala being scum.

4. The lurking. I think she's getting into the game now, but posts like 778 rub me the wrong way when they're like, the only posts of the day. Her activity patterns do seem to be more when she's being attacked *shrug*

This is not a solid case by any means, but I think I'm happier with a vote on her than Leodanny. If we're running out of time and have to consolidate, I wouldn't really mind switching to Leodanny and lynching him if necessary, although I still think his flip is meh.

[Auro]

So I was voting one scumread, and saw multiple people expressing interest in the wagon - I pushed on that interest and created a solid wagon on Leo instead of switching to rb who had a lot less wagon interest.

No, seriously, describe the inconsistency.

Me: *Asks question*
Thor: *Answers question*, "Why ask?"
Me: "Potential inconsistency"
Thor: "Where's the inconsistency?"
Me: "Potential*"
Thor: "Seriously, describe the inconsistency"

Is Thor *this* thick usually? The purpose of *asking* questions is to iron out potential inconsistencies and get to know someone's stance clearer. "Why Leo over RB" is a

perfectly

fine question, because Thor did admit RB was iffy although he voted Leo, and now he's had to describe his stance on why Leo. This incessant nitpicks are starting to annoy me. Perhaps he's doing this with the intention of making me back off from asking questions, which I won't, or to start huge wall-wars again which no one's going to read.

[Auro]

Will admit, but 778 was a prod dodge with zero intention of having content knowing I would have had time between Wednesday and Thursday to post.

Truth is 951 is to actually prove a point where you have to decide if the person is lurking for alignment reasons or if they are just legitimately busy and trying to stay active in the game and using as much of their free time as they can

I'll trust you on this, Mala, and I know it's in bad taste to push you there when you've re-iterated multiple times you're terribly busy -- I think it's good that you did admit 778 was a prod dodge, but it still did look like you were more active when someone was targeting you. I'm not saying you lurked *because* you're scum, but the pattern of activity is still a bit scummy.

Let's keep that point aside, can we talk about the other 3?

[Auro]

Gut is telling me one of thor and Auro are scum though. Thor is more likely of the two

Is this because of our exchanges, or an independent gut-read? Is it possible for you to explain the gut-read, or why you feel so?
Can we talk about the rest of my case?

[Auro]

Also Mala, Leo is in your lynch pool and there's a wagon there -- why aren't you voting anyone in it?

[Auro]

*In your lynch pool, I mean.

[Auro]

Okay, so the inconsistency was one not yet committed?
What's the future potential inconsistency you saw?
Maybe I am thick - but asking you to describe what you saw feels like a fairly simple and reasonable question if asking about an inconsistency that doesn't exist is fine why aren't my questions fine?

Yes, it was not one yet committed.

Potentially

, if I judged that your reasons for voting Leo were too weak to not justify pushing RB, a slot that you said you find scummy, I would've then concluded that your (weak) vote was inconsistent with your (strong) RB read.
The question was (functionally equivalent to) "why Leo over RB". Now, I repeat -- I ask questions to figure out someone's thought process, and make observations about where their actions seem inconsistent with their thought processes, and in this case, said action was the Leo vote, and the thought process, RB scumread.
I never said your answer to "why Leo over RB" was inconsistent or bad, I accepted it.
If you think it's an empty question, I would disagree -- it has achieved some purpose in that I got a better peek into your thought process regarding RB/Leo, which is a good thing, and also FMPOV, made you clearer on your stance on that to town as well.
No doubt it's a reasonable question, but when I said "potential" two times, your treating it as though I had painted some existing inconsistency was what I'm referring to.

[Auro]

Leodanny (L-3)

: Thor665, Persivul, rb, Egix96

Malakitty (L-4)

: Lamees, Auro, Dunnstral

rb (L-4)

: Leodanny, Something_Smart, DarkLightA

Egix96 (L-6)

: Nako

DarkLightA (L-6)

: bristep123

Malakitty

your (strong) RB read

Maybe stronger* is the right word here, since it's a comparitive.

[Auro]

Please walk me through your issue here -- I'm feeling like I'm not articulating myself with the proper language, is that the issue? Is there something in my question you see as scum motivated? O.o
Do you think I'm lying about my philosophy behind "ask people questions and iron out potential inconsistencies"? Maybe if I rephrase that to "ask questions and obtain stances to evaluate them better"?

Pedit: Yes, that was the question I asked. I asked you how come you thought lynching RB wasn't better than Leo. That's functionally equal to "Why Leo over RB, if you think it's iffy".

[Auro]

Except it's not gak. Let's take a walk down my thought process at the time.

1. Thor is voting and says he scumspects Leo.
2. Thor says he scumspects rb.
3. (Inferred) Thor says he scumspects Auro.
4. There's no info about the relative strength of (1) and (2), which I want to find out.
5. RB is at L-4 and Leo at L-5.
6. RB and Leo both look like viable pushes for Thor to make.
7. I can see why Thor isn't pushing for a *lynch* on me right now, looking at the wagons.
8. I want to hear Thor's stance on why he's going for Leo over RB.
9. If Thor's reasons for keeping his vote on Leo are weak: Lends him partial scum equity.
10. If Thor has a good justification for why Leo over RB: Great.
11. Also, the *obtained*, clear stance is easier to keep track of and to evaluate at a later point than an inferred one.

Wouldn't I have had to answer, "LOL, yeah, I never said it before but I totally suspect rb more and agree he's a massively better flip VOTE: "

Like, anything less than that and you have nothing, yeah?

Absolutely not. If your reasoning for the Leo vote was flimsy and not justified, I would most definitely have something.
Even otherwise -- now you wouldn't be able to say "Yeah I was suspecting both, Leo was stronger" when questioned about it at a later point, which is harder to form a read off of in retrospect. Now that your stance on (Leo > RB) is

defined

, it's more useful for me and the rest of town to make an evaluation. Hell, your justification for your Leo vote is still open to attacks.

"Inconsistency" need not necessarily imply a strict, formal logical inconsistency.

Strongish

read, but

weakish

push elsewhere =>

This is an inconsistency too

.
The

resolution

being that the reads are of equal strength, or the read on the push is stronger, or there are other reasons for the push.

Each

of these stances, when taken, can be picked apart.

[Auro]

which is one of my stated issues with your play this game

Go ahead and just case me, get others to see the great ThorLogic that I'm apparently flail-derping as I try to combat it.
You now have

two

instances of my "empty questions", both for which I've explained myself.
You're trying to convince ME that they're empty, and I disagree.
I'm not sure which other players read the exchanges, but I don't see anyone going "Lulz, wow Auro's play is so empty and useless, haha such a flail against Thor, he's MY top scumspect too!" -- Someone

please

parse through all that and explain to me from a non-Thor point of view. If my questioning is AS empty and useless as alleged, I'll introspect some and change my play. Cos right now I'm not seeing anything wrong.

[Auro]

Something_Smart. What do you make of mine and Thor's earlier and recent exchanges?

[Auro]

ALSO. Thor. Stop expecting *every* question to be an amazing, brilliant question that surefire narrows down on scum.
A question can be put forth for something as simple as wanting to know someone's stance or get clearer on it.
Lamees' questions about what role someone would take if they were scum -- they are empty questions as well. Why's your attitude different there?

Pedit:
Sure then, yeah I'm inviting the rest of the players to chime in on your case.

literally all I did was say 'no' to your question and you dropped it

I don't think it's better, and there's more support for Leodanny.

He's currently voting the biggest wagon that isn't him.
Before the wagon on him he was on the biggest wagon.
His vote isn't doing nothing.

This^ is you

explaining

your case on Leo. You're saying if I asked you why Leo over RB, I shouldn't be satisfied by this answer?

[Auro]

Also, just because I'm comfortable with that answer *now* doesn't mean I won't pick up on it later.
I can perfectly choose to focus elsewhere, and come back to this at a later point and scrutinize it further.
Someone else might look at that stance and attack it. I did say your explanation was still open to attacks.

[Auro]

This^ is you explaining your case on Leo. You're saying if I asked you why Leo over RB, I shouldn't be satisfied by this answer?

Hell, Lamees and Leo both questioned you on this explanation IIRC -- there you go, your response to my question did instigate an attack from Lamees and Leo.
So there was some positive utility in my asking you that question and your explaining it.

[Auro]

Minus Thor (who didn't post yet), all the other 3 from the Leo wagon is on the Dunn wagon now, interesting. Dunn is in my scumpool, but if Mala flips scum I think there's probably scum in here.

Scum!Leo having his vote on RB and sticking to it despite having been a big wagon also sounds unlikely, looks more like newbie!town than scum.

[Auro]

ITH: Dunnstral

[Auro]

Eh, no point in posting intent

VOTE: Dunnstral

[Auro]

Dunnstral

: Persivul, rb, Egix96, Malakitty, Creature,
Something_Smart, Auro

Malakitty (L-3)

: Lamees, Dunnstral, Nako, DarkLightA

rb (L-6)

: Leodanny

Leodanny (L-6)

: Thor665

wow but don't you want day1 to get to 50 pages first?

Thor ain't here
Tough goal

[Auro]

Why was it shitty?
I wanted a Mala lunch and it wasn't gonna go through with 8 hours remaining; I wasn't townreading Dunn, and he already claimed VT, and I preferred that to a no lynch...

[Auro]

The Leo/Dunn wagons are consistent with Mala being scum, Leo being her first counterwagon which wasn't gaining any traction, and then a quick wagon on Dunnstral. No one who voted Dunn was on Mala (with my exception)

Will have to look into associations from the wagon further.

[Auro]

Bad wagon tell me something new

SS I don't understand why you think I rile people up as scum

Who do you think we should take a look at next if you get lynched and flip town?

@Everyone: friendly reminder that we're getting close to the deadline.

Not worth speculating on

Rather I've given my reads so don't act like you're asking meaningful questions right now

@Creature

[Auro]

VOTE: Malakitty

UNVOTE:
Misread

Why?

[Auro]

pedit: Lemme guess, you thought he was a Witch right?

I thought he was scum at first glance with his name in red, lol.

[Auro]

Mafia knows theres a cop in the game. So either rb slipped, or auro and dla tried to force it into a slip.

Tinfoil. I mentioned it's a possible slip but isn't too damning, and townread RB inspite of it later. What was my scum agenda there?

[Auro]

No I am certain you and rb are opposite alignments

I mean if I'm scum trying to make RB look bad, I'd townread RB later and refuse to vote him?