Mafia of Revelations ~ Game Over!

[Albert B. Rampage]

Vote VP Baltar or Auro

[Llamarble]

There you go. And no, that type of observation about VP Baltar is not inferable from current play.

You will not like any vote of mine - either it will be a difficult read and thus comfortable, or an easy read who you find towny, or an "easy read that's scummy" (to you) that's, again, comfortable for me.

See: you're fitting my play to a scum agenda, without actually solving my play. You're adding the "what would I do" lens to every action of mine.

Scum also tend to complain that "your reasons for voting me are bad or inconsistent or biased" rather than bringing the righteousness, trying to find someone better, etc.
I think people usually call that 'caught for wrong reasons' or something along those lines.
It happens because taking apart a logical argument comes from a place of honesty and construction even when you're scum.
(this is also why scum like to make posts like Agar's, but I think it's particularly when it comes to their own wagons that scum are more likely to say "this is inconsistent because of A B C" while town have at least a sprinkling of "this literally cannot be correct because I'm town, you fool!")

[Llamarble]

And ABR you want "Activity overview" for sorting by activity.
It's near the bottom right of the screen under the page numbers, for me.

[Auro]

@Marble Man:

I've posted multiple townreads and a few scumreads.

Do they constitute "real effort" - why/why not? If your reasoning is that I am scum (glad you admit the confirmation bias, btw ) and therefore that effort cannot be real effort, then what are you looking for anyway?

[xRECKONERx]

How do I sort the activity in this game by player? Didn't there used to be a report?

activity overview, bottom corner of the page

the main rub is whether blair is righteously angry as town and thinks she has caught scumBuck (which, @Blair, i'd love to hear more about what you think SB's scum motivations are)

I've already answered this.

I don't believe Starbuck's plan was to lynch me. I believe Starbuck plucked something out of context that she felt she could plausibly scumread to push a vanity wagon.

She could do that as town, I guess, but I sort of assumed a higher level of play in this game. The thought process behind it for me is that if you are genuinely scumhunting, you would take the time to read my actual IAAU vote post before voting for me based on an easily corrected misinterpretation.

I wasn't supplying a grand, phase-long conspiratorial motive for it - just that she was trying to jump into the thread and look like she was genuinely scumhunting without actually exerting the effort.

hmm okay, fair.

i think i'm sympathetic towards latching onto something that pings you and running with it. i tend to play like a dog who's found a bone and won't let go unless that one thing is proven wrong or a bigger, juicier bone comes along? idk ive just been there.

so the scum motivation is basically not efforting enough, and you think town would be more likely to effort? is that it?

[Auro]

There's town and scum motivation for showing someone why their reasoning is decently obviously faulty. If it were something subtle, id probably award more townpoints since turning a blind eye to more quiet towntells that people arent picking up is something i do all the time as scum. But i felt like Blair confscumming Starbuck for not picking up on her exact reasoning for voting username was a big stretch to begin with and a lot of people could see the issue. Correct me if im wrong i suppose

I think you are wrong here. Considering Blair's vote for IIAU also contained the reasoning for it, it could indeed be perceived as lazy play by Starbuck - which is valid grounds to call someone scum on especially when they frame it as a "policy". Starbucks' doubling down on the read (even while admitting that that part was a mistaken read) could indeed be seen as scummy for lack of re-evaluation by Blair, no?

@Blair: Do you not think that Starbuck actually just read 338 and interpreted it as you pushing IIAU for 2 posts? It's not a bad-faith vote, since if she read your original reasoning she probably wouldn't call it "policy" at all, it's likelier that she was basing it off that. Do you think laziness is that much of a scum indicator? I've often seen a lot of town miss a lot of things.

[Auro]

i suppose being coy adds nothing. i received a piece of game information in my role PM. i was also told that the mafia were aware that i know a piece of information about the game. i assume that will put a target on my head.

Why don't you just reveal it?

Bringing this back up: Do mafia know this information, or just that you're informed?

[xRECKONERx]

They JUST know that I know *something*. They don't know what exactly I know.

[Auro]

Then why would they kill you N1?
Hmm this is a nice puzzle.

[xRECKONERx]

I assume the potential infinite possibilities of what I *could* know makes me dangerous to them.

[Albert B. Rampage]

I also suspect UT. I don't like his "i dont know how to read this game" post or any of his other contributions.

[Llamarble]

That and the setup guarantees all individuals with revelations are town except one.
It's not innocent children because fakeclaims can exist, but they could become very difficult to lynch once the scum revelation-keeper has flipped.

[Albert B. Rampage]

VP/UT/auro

[Albert B. Rampage]

no gimmicks here just skill

[Auro]

That and the setup guarantees all individuals with revelations are town except one.
It's not innocent children because fakeclaims can exist, but they could become very difficult to lynch once the scum revelation-keeper has flipped.

Any number of scum can claim that, though. You don't know the total number of revelations.

[Auro]

I also suspect UT. I don't like his "i dont know how to read this game" post or any of his other contributions.

I lightly townread UT.

[Albert B. Rampage]

Green Crayons (L-6) ~ CantLynchAPuppy, xRECKONERx, AGar
Starbuck (L-6) ~ Green Crayons, Kmd4390, Blair

Change your votes from these shitty wagons

[Blair]

so the scum motivation is basically not efforting enough, and you think town would be more likely to effort? is that it?

Basically. As in "I feel like I need to go post something soon so I don't look like I'm lurking. Ooh, this looks bad, let's vote here" when town would at least take the time to scroll up and read my vote post first to check their theory against it.

It definitely doesn't hold water as a serious push to mislynch someone, because in that case scum definitely WOULD make sure the logic was at least sound, but it fits pretty well as "I need to look like I'm looking for scum here, but I'm actually not."

@Blair: Do you not think that Starbuck actually just read 338 and interpreted it as you pushing IIAU for 2 posts? It's not a bad-faith vote, since if she read your original reasoning she probably wouldn't call it "policy" at all, it's likelier that she was basing it off that. Do you think laziness is that much of a scum indicator? I've often seen a lot of town miss a lot of things.

I definitely believe she just read my naked quote of Porkens and assumed I was echoing that.

I do not believe that town!Starbuck would vote me for that without scrolling up to look for my vote post first, though. I mean, this is really key here:

If she only read my naked quote, how did she even have the proper context to know I was voting for or pushing IAAU in the first place?

[Auro]

I do not believe that town!Starbuck would vote me for that without scrolling up to look for my vote post first, though. I mean, this is really key here: If she only read my naked quote, how did she even have the proper context to know I was voting for or pushing IAAU in the first place?

How many town have you known to actually scroll up and read everything to gain the total truth of context, though, Blair?

That naked quote, plus the fact that it is often common for town to push someone with 2 posts provides more than enough context already. I doubt anyone actually doubts such a conclusion given the existing context fits perfectly. Yes, she had an inaccurate context read - but it was still a valid one.

[Llamarble]

That and the setup guarantees all individuals with revelations are town except one.
It's not innocent children because fakeclaims can exist, but they could become very difficult to lynch once the scum revelation-keeper has flipped.

Any number of scum can claim that, though. You don't know the total number of revelations.

Well, unless somebody does, and that's one of the first revelations I'd think of giving out were I Vi.

[Llamarble]

Green Crayons (L-6) ~ CantLynchAPuppy, xRECKONERx, AGar
Starbuck (L-6) ~ Green Crayons, Kmd4390, Blair

Change your votes from these shitty wagons

I still think Crayons wagon is pretty good. Possibly better than VPB

[Albert B. Rampage]

CantLynchAPuppy, xRECKONERx, AGar, Green Crayons, Kmd4390, Blair

Hey guys you're probably voting town so let's stop this malarkey and coalesce on scum

[Auro]

Well, unless somebody does, and that's one of the first revelations I'd think of giving out were I Vi.

Ah, true.

Is there a reason you're ignoring 553? Can you summarize the case on Green Crayons which does not involve associations with me?

[Llamarble]

I do not believe that town!Starbuck would vote me for that without scrolling up to look for my vote post first, though. I mean, this is really key here: If she only read my naked quote, how did she even have the proper context to know I was voting for or pushing IAAU in the first place?

Seriously?

Explain to me gc vs iamuser

and use quotes

Yeah, I need this, but just about IAUN.

At this point she gets people are voting IAAU and presumably who is.

IAUN has dos posts

Now she sees why (though confused), and doesn't like it.

[Blair]

I do not believe that town!Starbuck would vote me for that without scrolling up to look for my vote post first, though. I mean, this is really key here: If she only read my naked quote, how did she even have the proper context to know I was voting for or pushing IAAU in the first place?

How many town have you known to actually scroll up and read everything to gain the total truth of context, though, Blair?

That naked quote, plus the fact that it is often common for town to push someone with 2 posts provides more than enough context already. I doubt anyone actually doubts such a conclusion given the existing context fits perfectly. Yes, she had an inaccurate context read - but it was still a valid one.

"Total truth of context?" Pretty rare.

But I think most townies who believe "She appears to be voting for IAAU on policy" would also think "Let's check her original reason for voting."

To not do so suggests a real lack of interest in whether or not your argument has merit.