Mini 969 - Smalltown: Stardust Mafia (Game Over)

[ReaperCharlie]

More on Jack:

Having played with zang before I haven't seen anything to make me think he's scum.

I skim read that set of giant posts above. Will post again soon explaining why magna is scum.

This irks me for two reasons, the obvious one about Zang (doesn't think he's scummy, even though a lot of others seem to), and that he's about to explain soon why magna is scum.

But then only a few posts later he backtracks and says magna is probably town:

It's possible that magna is town and simply jumps on the rhetoric-train for no good reason.

@magna: it was inconsequential to whether the tracker should be motivated

And this one also strikes me as pretty devious. Read it and I'll tell you why:

Yes. I very much buy that that is how Zang was using the term town vs town.

This statement is clearly worded in a way that could be grossly misread as sarcasm; I think the post was intended to be suggestive of sarcasm, possibly so that he could backtrack either way about Zang later on, if he needed to in order to look innocent.

[Jack]

Have all of reapers cases been this bad?

[Faraday]

I thought it was pretty clear what Jack meant by that, but I'm sure he can answer for himself. Reading back to see if I managed to miss anything.

[Faraday]

I apologize if protecting my fellow Americans at my base overseas annoys some of you, but I didn't want to get shit about not being around over the weekend because I didn't post a V/LA.

You 'didn't get shit'. Your lack of content was irksome, there's no need to get all holier than thou. I couldn't care less why you're v/la, it's a part of the game but it doesn't make it more annoying when it happen. You're back now so it's all good.

[Faraday]

I don't believe I've ever seen Starbuck as scum, let me go check on that.

[charter]

Good find there RC. Jack, instead of strawmanning RC's case, how about you actually respond to it? Why did you think Faraday was probably town when he'd only made two posts since seeing his role PM?

Jack what do you think of Zang?
Zang what do you think of Jack?
When are either of you going to scumhunt?

Why aren't more people voting Jack?

[ooba]

..] Vote Count [..

Faraday (0)

Kdub (0)

MagnaOfIllusion (2)

- Jack, Kdub

havingfitz (0)

ReaperCharlie (4)

- totallynotmafia, MagnaOfIllusion, havingfitz, Starbuck

Starbuck (0)

totallynotmafia (0)

Zang (2)

- Faraday, peanutman

Jack (2)

- charter, ReaperCharlie

charter (0)

CallMeLiam (0)

peanutman (0)

Not voting (2)

- Zang, CallMeLiam

With 12 alive, 7 to lynch!

Kdub's V\LA noted.

Zang, CallmeLiam are being prodded.

[Zang]

Sorry,

I'm busy with real life issues.

I will go read and try to post something else soon.

[MagnaofIllusion]

Thought process: Do random stuff > get people to suspect you > get scum to hop on your bandwagon for thin reason > nail them for exactly that (among other things).

So you are specifically acting in a random fashion to bait scum to attack you. Erratic play, regardless of what level you are playing at, is going to attract attention of town players as well as scum. How, on Day 1 where information available is at it’s leanest, do you differentiate between town with founded suspicions and scum with thin reasons?

1. I wasn't originally trying to pull heat off Zang, per se

If I accept you at your word on this (and I will for the moment), then the following you posted is invalid –

WIFOM aside, what motivation (if I was scum) do you think I would have for

sticking my neck out to rip people off of a quickwagon on Zang

, and being willing to deal with the sh*tstorm that would inevitably follow? Whether or not Zang is scum, if I was scum, there is no good reason for that action.

If your original intention was not to pull off heat from Zang you can’t defend your actions and say “What motiviation would I have (as scum) to stop a quicklynch on Zang?”. You’ve just said that you didn’t have that motivation, that it was only an unintended side effect.

We got out of the fluff-RVS and I started contributing. Why do you think it's scummy to say that I started contributing?

Firstly there is no reason you can’t contribute in a non-fluff manner in RVS. Secondly you are missing the key reason I don’t like the change – it happened (IMO) as a direct result of criticism from other players (Charter and Kdub). It’s similar to a player who makes what is perceived as a poor vote and when called on it immediately unvotes instead of defending their position.

Why? You yourself said you believe peanutman is one of the most likely to be town, as it says below.
How is having a town read almost impossible? And you picked the same guys as me lol, well, except for Jack.

For someone concerned with misreps you’ve chosen to take an interesting interpretation of my list. I said peanut was on of those “I am most leaning towards being town”. I don’t have a solid town read on anyone. This is mostly a gut reaction which is based on playstyles. For me a more solid read comes from continued observation and the results of lynches / nightkills. That you say so quickly into day 1 “anyone who disagrees with peanut is Obvscum” makes little sense to me.

And not to seem too contentious, ( ) but you seem to be picking out Jack because he started the mini-wagon on you with his vote, and Mr.Bean and Starbuck due to inactivity alone.

I have my suspicions of Jack based on his relatively content free posting style and lack of followthrough with anything having to do with serious scum-hunting. As for fitz and starbuck my suspiciouns generally do revolve on their lack of activity. It’s hard to judge a player when they aren’t posting anything to analyze.

The passive-aggressive way in which you seem to be asserting that my initial suspicions aren’t valid is noted.

What are your opinions on Zang? Do you think he's backtracking? Do you think he's scum? I am personally beginning to see a pattern I don't like in Zang. That is where my attention is at the moment.

Zang is playing similar to what I’ve seen in the past so I don’t have immediate raised hackles regarding his ‘town versus town’ comment. I don’t see it as backtracking. I think, if anything, it’s a poor language choice which I have seen him repeatedly make in the past. That said I don’t put much stock in meta. If anything I’d like more content from him since most his posts are defense of the town versus town issue. Obviously if I was leaning to his being scum this early I’d have put him on my list, wouldn’t I?

Please, eludicate on this ‘pattern’ you are seeing.

RC is killing me with his wallposts and I don't feel up to reading that + rereading magna right now.

Reading isn’t a hardship, although I’m sure your response is part of you playing to your Meta. From this can I expect that your scum-hunting is going to manifest in your nightly “Vig” action?

So you admit to deflecting his questioning of you in order to spin it all back around on him?

Interesting.

Yes, it is interesting the way you attempt to frame my response in a negative manner. I’m not going to shy away from questioning the motives and content of someone’s attacks on me that I feel or frivolous or incorrect. So no, I am denying that I deflected his questions. I am admitting to questioning him in trying to determine his motivations.

I know some of my posts can be big, but they are concise. These college essay style postings need to stop, and when they do, I bet activity would pick up

As I said above reading isn’t a hardship.

Unvote
Vote: ReaperCharlie

I'm not liking the feeling that he's going out of his way to be distracting

Weren’t you just saying something about being opportunistic when you don’t provide examples for an accusation?

@Peanut / Fitz / Zang / Liam - More content please.

[ReaperCharlie]

How, on Day 1 where information available is at it’s leanest, do you differentiate between town with founded suspicions and scum with thin reasons?

Case by case basis. I will admit, it's not a popular tactic. Lots of people are afraid of being mislynched by overzealous townies, but I have found throughout my experience that Day 1 is one of the most likely places for scum to make a slip, and I play accordingly.

If your original intention was not to pull off heat from Zang you can’t defend your actions and say “What motiviation would I have (as scum) to stop a quicklynch on Zang?”. You’ve just said that you didn’t have that motivation, that it was only an unintended side effect.

Right. It wasn't my intention to deflect any heat from him, but it seemed to do that. Soon afterwards though it turned into a sh*tstorm and I was the one being attacked. Maybe that was smart, maybe it wasn't. We'll see.

you are missing the key reason I don’t like the change – it happened (IMO) as a direct result of criticism from other players (Charter and Kdub). It’s similar to a player who makes what is perceived as a poor vote and when called on it immediately unvotes instead of defending their position.

Yeah, I agree. It does look that way. But that's not really something I can defend against, I'll just have to let my play since then speak for itself.

Why? You yourself said you believe peanutman is one of the most likely to be town, as it says below.
How is having a town read almost impossible? And you picked the same guys as me lol, well, except for Jack.

For someone concerned with misreps you’ve chosen to take an interesting interpretation of my list. I said peanut was on of those “I am most leaning towards being town”. I don’t have a solid town read on anyone. This is mostly a gut reaction which is based on playstyles. For me a more solid read comes from continued observation and the results of lynches / nightkills. That you say so quickly into day 1 “anyone who disagrees with peanut is Obvscum” makes little sense to me.

I don't believe I misrepped you. The 'obvscum' comment was sorta a joke; I thought it was obvious, maybe not so much.

I have my suspicions of Jack based on his relatively content free posting style and lack of followthrough with anything having to do with serious scum-hunting. As for fitz and starbuck my suspiciouns generally do revolve on their lack of activity. It’s hard to judge a player when they aren’t posting anything to analyze.

Agreed.

The passive-aggressive way in which you seem to be asserting that my initial suspicions aren’t valid is noted.

I never said they weren't valid. I respect your opinion and everyone else's on who is or isn't scum. If I 'seem to be asserting' that view, let me assure you that I am not.

Zang is playing similar to what I’ve seen in the past so I don’t have immediate raised hackles regarding his ‘town versus town’ comment. I don’t see it as backtracking. I think, if anything, it’s a poor language choice which I have seen him repeatedly make in the past. That said I don’t put much stock in meta. If anything I’d like more content from him since most his posts are defense of the town versus town issue. Obviously if I was leaning to his being scum this early I’d have put him on my list, wouldn’t I?

I agree with you on most of this, except I've never played with Zang before. Any patterns I have seen I am basing only on this game.

Please, eludicate on this ‘pattern’ you are seeing.

I think I'll sit on that for a while yet. I want to see what he has to say about a few things first.



Also, I want Jack to respond to my case instead of strawmanning it.

[MagnaofIllusion]

[quote=Reaper]
Also, I want Jack to respond to my case instead of strawmanning it.
[/quote]

Really I don't see Jack as strawmanning your case. Strawmanning requires someone to actually take a piece of a case and attack it as invalid, incorrectly concluding that all other pieces are invalid also.

What he is doing is more the "Ostrich head in the sand" approach where he ignores it completely in hopes it goes away.

That said both methods are pretty bad responses.

[ReaperCharlie]

Also, I want Jack to respond to my case instead of strawmanning it.

Really I don't see Jack as strawmanning your case. Strawmanning requires someone to actually take a piece of a case and attack it as invalid, incorrectly concluding that all other pieces are invalid also.

What he is doing is more the "Ostrich head in the sand" approach where he ignores it completely in hopes it goes away.

That said both methods are pretty bad responses.

What do YOU think of my case against Jack?

[CallMeLiam]

vote: ReaperCharlie

I'll explain it more tomorrow afternoon when I get chance, but right now it's based off a combination of gut and a real dislike of his walls of text, both in terms of content and sheer volume of noise.

Also I really dislike it every time he gets snippy about people v\la

[Jack]

Reaper, I have a question for you.

[ReaperCharlie]

Shoot.

[Jack]

What was all that nonsense about?

[ReaperCharlie]

vote: ReaperCharlie

I'll explain it more tomorrow afternoon when I get chance, but right now it's based off a combination of gut and a real dislike of his walls of text, both in terms of content and sheer volume of noise.

Also I really dislike it every time he gets snippy about people v\la

Um... this is a case in point on why I dislike people going V/LA: You vote me, putting me at L-2, leaving an easy chance for scum to quick-hammer me if you don't come back tomorrow.

If you have time to come in and post that much, why don't you have time to read my case against Jack? Do you think it lacks merit? This is idiotic. The fact that I haven't been quicklynched already means that the scum (or at least some of them) are already on my wagon.

And f@#$ me for trying to make sense, and posting long posts with my thought process. Maybe I should just active lurk instead, like Jack has been doing.

I can't believe nobody is paying attention to Jack. He still hasn't answered my questions.

[ReaperCharlie]

What nonsense? Please answer my posts 224 and 225. I've posted them again here for easy reference.

I was just doing a re-read on Jack. I get good vibes from some of his posts, but then in

post 97

, he says something strange which I missed the first time, but which jumped out at me this time...

He says

Faraday is probably a townie

. Which is always odd at this early point in the game, admittedly I've done it myself. But it's especially odd because, at this point, Faraday's entire posting record ONLY INCLUDED the following:

if the PYP games are anything to go by I'll do shockingly bad in this draft.

nice playerlist btw. looking forward to this game, never played a smalltown before. the roles in the first post are really interesting too.

I'll be a tracker it's my favourite role.

If Mr Bean happens to pick tracker I'll take role absorber.

Meh your chances of surviving are increased but being vanilla in a game full of powerroles to me isn't that fun anyway. In a normal game it's different obviously.

Vote Jack.

He's scum.

He gets a hot blonde chick and I get a goat. Wow.

I don't think it's going to be very useful to direct actions for the first night. I think a mass action claim day 2 may be potentially useful though, but we should probably wait and see.

Faraday didn't post again until 111, which was well after Jack's 97.

Now, normally, I wouldn't say anything about this, because I did it myself (called peanutman town after only a very few posts). But I think the way I said it was key: I said "RC's Town List" which meant it was my opinion.

But what Jack said was "if Faraday is a townie, which he probably is" which has 3 conceivable (and likely measurable) effects:

1. due to the backwards way in which the sentence was constructed, players could easily not comprehend what they're reading. this in turn could subliminally direct their supposition about Faraday's alignment. I don't think that he thought of that, but it definitely works out this way in hindsight. (Not to mention, I've realized that this is why I missed it the first time).

2. the way he says it, he's not just trying to inform people that it's his own opinion, like I did with peanutman. He's just putting it right out there that Faraday is probably a townie. Not quite fact, but not quite his opinion. This looks scummy too.

3. One of Jack's 5 previous posts was a vote on him. I've seen numerous times that a townie (player X) has suspected scum (player Y), and then the scum somehow flip it around and say "player X is town because of such and such" and then all of a sudden like magic, X doesn't suspect Y nearly as much any longer. It's a clever trick for the following reason: if X is trying to scumhunt more because he feels the need to prove himself as a townie, he is looking for approval. He has a subconscious need to respect the opinion of everyone who calls him town, and then when a scum player calls him town, his opinion of that scummer automatically raises because he trusts that person's opinion about himself. Not the oldest trick in the book, but it's always been a good one, and works even on non-newbies.


Maybe I'm making a mountain out of a mole-hill. But I don't think so.

Vote: Jack

More on Jack:

Having played with zang before I haven't seen anything to make me think he's scum.

I skim read that set of giant posts above. Will post again soon explaining why magna is scum.

This irks me for two reasons, the obvious one about Zang (doesn't think he's scummy, even though a lot of others seem to), and that he's about to explain soon why magna is scum.

But then only a few posts later he backtracks and says magna is probably town:

It's possible that magna is town and simply jumps on the rhetoric-train for no good reason.

@magna: it was inconsequential to whether the tracker should be motivated

And this one also strikes me as pretty devious. Read it and I'll tell you why:

Yes. I very much buy that that is how Zang was using the term town vs town.

This statement is clearly worded in a way that could be grossly misread as sarcasm; I think the post was intended to be suggestive of sarcasm, possibly so that he could backtrack either way about Zang later on, if he needed to in order to look innocent.

I know you're online, so... any minute now would be fine.

[Jack]

You didn't answer my question.

And you don't know what active lurking is. Or strawmanning. Or you're just throwing them out there because they sound damning.

[charter]

DID ANYBODY EVEN SEE POST 225? I THINK IT'S A PRETTY GOOD FIND AND JACK HAS IGNORED IT ABOUT FIVE TIMES.

Maybe people will see it if I scream real loud.

Anyhow, Liam's return the game is extremely underwhelming. Joins the largest wagon and says virtually nothing. Going to need some more from you, Liam.

Jack saying that RC doesn't know what he is talking about is scummy to the max AND ANOTHER STRAWMAN. Jack absolutely did strawman RC's case when he asked RC if all his cases are that bad instead of responding to what RC said. Jack's defending himself by saying RC doesn't know what he's talking about, or RC's case is weak, INSTEAD OF DEFENDING AGAINST THE CASE!!!

I'm 100% sure Jack is scum. I'm going to be convincing the rest of you of this as well.

[Jack]

charter doesn't know what a strawman is either.

Reapers arguments are as bad as strawmen though I'll give you guys that. There are obvious benefits to leaving his case unanswered and I intend to take advantage of that.

[ReaperCharlie]

charter doesn't know what a strawman is either.

Reapers arguments are as bad as strawmen though I'll give you guys that. There are obvious benefits to leaving his case unanswered and I intend to take advantage of that.

What's bad about my argument? Answer it, and stop beating around the bush!

I implore you guys: Lynch Jack.

[Jack]

What's bad about my argument?

What is good about this:

But then only a few posts later he backtracks and says magna is

probably

town:

It's

possible

that magna is town and simply jumps on the rhetoric-train for no good reason.

[ReaperCharlie]

Because of the context. You had just posted a few posts earlier saying "Will post again soon why Magna is scum", and then you didn't. You still haven't. You just jumped onto the biggest wagon (mine) and started trying to find reasons to justify being on it. And now you're trying to deflect everything being asked of you in the name of 'obvious benefits to leaving it unanswered', which could only include a few things:

1. Hoping the day will end in a no-lynch if you stall long enough.
2. Hoping nobody will pay attention to me because my wagon is the biggest, and will continue with the votes on me, leaving you lost in the sauce.

Neither of those is pro-town. In fact, they are both ANTI-town. That is why I KNOW you're scum.

[charter]

Ummm, so I just looked at Jack's role. He's the CPR doc, which if he's scum is just going to be a second kill for them. His role combined with his scumminess means it's a really bad idea to let him live until tonight.