Mini 1687: Refraction Mafia (WINNER!)

[Cthulhu Dreaming]

I voted Lapsa for acting anti-town and (I didn't say this at the time) to pressure him into being active and people started telling me that pressure votes are useless if you actually say they're for pressure. I didn't particularly care if he's ALWAYS anti-town because if that's how he acts 100% of the time,

he still has a 24% chance of being scum this game

AND I really don't want him to act that way this game.

I'm at a loss in coming up for a town!Mathdino motivation for making such a strong declarative statement regarding the chances of a random slot being scum.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Mathdino

Yo cthulhu let's talk about fractions.

What's 3/12 if you make a typo and put 4s instead of 5s?

Yo let's talk about uninformed majorities. How do you know there are three scum?

I can see making that assumption, but that's a pretty strong declaration if it's based on such an assumption.

[Cthulhu Dreaming]

What a towny mindset

Also disliking Lapsa more for the apparent misrep on CB.

judge for yourself, Chtulhu:

Spoiler: prevote

Plotinus:
I really don't like 48. Seems really noncommittal.
I mean he is one of two people you have played with and you don't feel comfortable giving a read.
What are we going to wait for day 5 to hear a read on all the people you haven't played with?

Spoiler: postvote

@CB re: 147 why is trying to move the game along and get out of RVS scummy? If he trying to move out of RVS and into the “pointless bickering about mafia theory” stage I’d agree with you but to me his post looked more like “let’s skip RVS and bickering about theory and move on to the let’s have serious reads now part here i’ll start”. Taking initiative is good.

Because it didn't feel like lets move the game foward allow me to apply pressure and get some reads from the reactions. It felt more like he was announcing he was going to end RVS and put out weak read to appear like he is moving the game forward.

You are right that I was saying fro99er’s towniness or lack there of would be obvious to everyone, not just me. You are understanding my words correctly. Now look for motivation behind my words and what wincon those words are benefitting. Hint: it’s the wincon that wants to reduce mislynches, not keep the mislynch pool as full as possible.

I still don't understand how you saying that had any effect on the game state.

You make a lot of pushes in this wall, against mathdino, me, lapsa, abuse, and zoro. I’m not really sure why you voted me at the end of it, because the parts directed at me didn’t seem stronger than the parts directed at anyone else. (huh, mathdino counted 6. now i’m wondering who i missed). Anyway, seconding the request for a readslist from you.

This is tentative as I have only skimmed the last couple of pages though. I will try to go through ISO tonight:
Town: Frogger, Texcat
Scum Lean: Math, Abuse
Scum: Plot, Zoro

CB: I didn’t like his push on me and it felt like a misrep. I think CB is lynchhunting not scum hunting. His pushes on other people seem like low hanging fruit.

Why are the people I pushed on low hanging fruit?

seems really noncommittal to me

I suppose I can see why you'd read it that way even if I don't. What I *do* find strange though, is that that's the only thing you choose to hang a read on.

[Mathdino]

I know I'm town, anyone reading my statement except Lapsa knows or "knows" they're town.

I know other stuff was said but that annoyed me most and am on phone so I'll get back to this.

Edit: Why would there not be 3 scum?

The point isn't even the number, just that Lapsa could still be scum if it's true he's unreadable.

Update: if i were to be on a wagon, itd be CB.

[Thor665]

This is a really good question so I'm gonna respond to this and go back to ignoring the you/Zoro combat.

I voted Frogger for being weird and striking me as non-genuine. I did a quick meta to make sure this wasn't his usual MO and voted him.

I voted Lapsa for acting anti-town and (I didn't say this at the time) to pressure him into being active and people started telling me that pressure votes are useless if you actually say they're for pressure. I didn't particularly care if he's ALWAYS anti-town because if that's how he acts 100% of the time, he still has a 24% chance of being scum this game AND I really don't want him to act that way this game.

Edit: DUDE GIVE UP AND GO DO SOMETHING ELSE

So you're saying you *did* research Lapsa?

[Mathdino]

No I'm just listening to what everyone says about him and altering conclusion based on that

I now don't think there's a special chance he's scum.

[Thor665]

Why?

Unvoting my top scumread to push a case on a guy that appears to be based around OMGUS as a reason, as far as I can grok.
Though I did gain a sudden surprise join from Cthulhu.

@Mathdino - why did you choose to meta Frogger but not Lapsa? That seems a very random choice to use meta research of playstyle on one, but not the other.

[Thor665]

Especially when the raised issue was playstyle.

[Thor665]

Both times.

[Mathdino]

On comp now.

Oh hey I've explained this before! Frogger read was based on him seeming not genuine. This is a read based on WRITING style, not PLAY style. Lapsa's playstyle is anti-town, and I don't particularly care whether his meta says he's always like that or only this game, because I want him to stop that. Original vote was (and still is) for unstated pressure.

I'll answer everything else in a sec.

Edit: Yeah that's where you're wrong. Frogger writing weirdly I don't have a problem with, I'm just going to misread him. Lapsa I have a problem with as a player.

[Lapsa]

I'm voting him so he gets off his ass. I'll unvote when he contributes.

Original vote was (and still is) for unstated pressure.

get off my lawn

[Mathdino]

Do you think doing something scummy, being called on it, and then saying "well, I've decided that my reasons were sound but agree with new evidence that I will change my read" qualifies as removing the scumtell that initially happened?

Like, say I go "Hey, I'mma Doc!"
Then someone goes "Counterclaim: I'mma Doc!"
Then I go "Lulz, that was a gambit, sorry!"

Does that remove any issue about me?

I don't see someone saying "this is scummy, and here's why!"
Being told "your reasons are bad and appear to be lies, and here's why."
And responding "my reasons are great though I don't want to debate this anymore, but his recent posts look good, so I'll scumhunt elsewhere"
Removes the possibility that the first part was an intentional lie and was scummy.
Why do you think it does?
And if you don't think this - what are you actually saying here?

I think it's him.
He apparently is just confused by me and has no issue with me claiming magical things that didn't hapen happened over and over.
That's why his defense is weird. I keep telling him he's making up stuff and he keeps repeating it back to me and never claims I'm reading anything wrong or making up things.
That's screwy.

No, of course it doesn't remove the issue. Trying to understand the point you're making...

Okay so what I think I'm understanding is that you think the fact that I'm avoiding admitting I was initially wrong makes it harder for people to claim that I made shit up about Frogger early on?

So I have 2 unusual and slightly annoying habits in my town game:

1. Townreading everyone or treating everyone like town who pushes me. I have this image that if I explain my actions clearly and explicitly enough that my being town will be obvious enough to people trying to read me, so I take being lynched as town as a miscommunication issue more than... idk what else you could blame a guy getting lynched on.
I mean I could shout at you that I'm town but that wouldn't help you read me nearly as much as telling you all the motives in what I do and who I am.
2. Not admitting past me was wrong getting me lynched. I had this argument in Friends and Enemies where people were questioning the fact that I thought wgeurts was rolefishing, early on, right? Later he flipped town and when I got called on it, I used a game that happened AFTER the flip to defend the fact that he does in fact rolefish as scum, and I was right to believe he would do that. Got me tunneled all day after being a universal townread and probably lost the game.
Call it self meta, I'd call it self-psychoanalysis, I think a lot of the time in mafia I try to defend myself as a player or as a person above defending my alignment. Consider though Thor, where's the threshold in admitting you were wrong?

Suppose Frogger's first post literally said he was scum and apathetic. Then suddenly he's a mod confirmed IC. Would I have been wrong to vote him initially? I did what I thought was best under the circumstances I was given. I can't promise you any more.

[Cthulhu Dreaming]

I know I'm town, anyone reading my statement except Lapsa knows or "knows" they're town.

I know other stuff was said but that annoyed me most and am on phone so I'll get back to this.

Edit: Why would there not be 3 scum?

Because in addition to 10:3 being a thing, 9:4, 9:3;1, and 9:2:2 are things as well. Focusing on the former has the appearance of you having knowledge of the makeup of the scum team. IOW, it has the appearance of a scumslip.

If you really are town, you might want to avoid assumptions like that in the future.

[Lapsa]

Kitty, scratch that - makes little sense. missed toolenduso part

[Mathdino]

His reads/thoughts are thought out but IMO still end up being pretty much backwards. Whoops. Cthulhu read's pretty much the only one I agree on until reevaluation.

can you clarify this?

Yes. I felt that all of your reads indicated a town mindset and way of thinking about the game. I just happened to disagree with literally 10/11 of your conclusions. I think Shinobi is playing fine but lean town, I think Zor is town, texcat is scumread, Thor is null, tool is town, okay CB I actually agree with too, BBT is null to light scumread, and we apparently both think Frogger is town but for very different reasons, reasons different enough for you to think that my reasons for townreading him are BS, as I understand?

Reevaluation means, ey, prob gonna reread the game after I stop answering everyone's questions and come up with new reads.

@Mathdino: My issue with Plotinus stemmed from the fact that he was talking about Lapsa's breadcrumb in regards to who would/wouldn't breadcrumb in that situation. The issue wasn't the breadcrumb itself, it was how he handled his scumread - he stated that he found that both factions could try to breadcrumb VT (Sure, I guess? Still a mediocre reason.) but then ran with the possibility that Lapsa was scum because of his breadcrumb instead of engaging him and trying to figure him out. Afaik plot hasn't done anything to try to engage Lapsa and the few recent posts (read: only one) he has regarding him indicate that he doesn't really care about his top scumread at all.

I find engaging Lapsa or attempting to engage him to be a lost cause. Ask Zoronos.

Mathdino:
15 and 18 seem forced and weak. It seems like he is trying to force the game out of RVS instead of just letting it occur naturally. Which I don't mind as much if he wasn't defensive over the read 25 and then strengthens the read in 42 when I didn't find Frogger that defensive at all.

Also in 42 he makes reference to not realizing Tool was just applying pressure. The fact that it is not the first thing on his mind in this early stage means he is not coming from as towny of a perspective.

Wait... what? Literally do not understand this at all.
(On a sidenote, as of now I've been up for 30 hours, can I get a break on everyone thinking I'm always total shit at reading comp? thx)

Ok from my prospective your actions there felt forced and i feel like the only time town forces reads like that is to get a reaction. The fact that when Tool brings up the wagon on you it took you a minute to realize that it was for pressure I induced that your push on Frogger was not for reactions therefore I did not see a town motivation for the push.

Nope, still don't know what you're talking about. Could you point out where in 42 you thought I said that?

I mean, all my votes are for pressure to some extent unless I outright say I'm going for the lynch.

I appreciate your thoughts on Zoro and I'm inclined to read you town for it, but what I'm getting iffy about is the fact that you've just cast suspicion on 6 players and seem to have no townreads. Could you just give a quick reads list so I know where you stand?

I pinged out 5 people: Lapsa, Math, Plot, Zoro, Abuse
After a quick glace at your ISO people you have pinged out: CB, Lapsa, Frogger, Abuse, Texcat
Seems comparable to me

Kind of where I am at right now I have only skimmed the last couple of pages though:
Town: Frogger, Texcat
Scum Lean: Math, Abuse
Scum: Plot, Zoro

I will say just based on some interaction between the people on my list there is for sure town in my scum reads right now since I don't see a lot of those people as scum partners. So I don't feel too confident about them right now.

I was also under the impression tool was pinging as well.

Difference is that you did that all at the same time, I've only ever had about 4 or fewer scumreads at a time. I mean, I'm currently townreading abuse and Frogger and I have no motivation to try to read Lapsa right now, so I'll say right now that I have 2 scumreads (CB, texcat), a policy vote, and a nullread that I'd be willing to vote to see what happens (BBT).

I feel as if you were setting yourself up to go with whichever wagon of those 6 took off fastest.

Edit: I swear to god if I'm lynched for this assumption again...
I've never been wrong in that assumption and I really don't see how it hurts anyone to make it since we don't actually have the ability to make strong associations between more than 2 players right now.

[Fro99er]

appears to be based around OMGUS as a reason

It's part of the reason. I felt it was also a surface read, and I can't exactly say Plot has been of the scumhunting nature. If you actually bothered to read my whole post, you see I made more of a case than OMGUS. I made the case that Plot claimed he was misrepped, when I didn't believe he was misrepped (Plot has since explained part of this), and I made the case he hadn't continued to Pursue his top two scumreads (Lapsa and CB). Lack of scumhunting, passiveness all play a role just as much (and even more so) than OMGUS.

Try reading my post again.

[Mathdino]

Was there something in particular that you wanted to ask me?

toolenduso: Good thoughts, seems genuine, I like as town for now.
Waiting on catchup post and broader thoughts from him.

Can you point to one of these posts? I don't recall seeing anything like a genuine, good thought.

Eh I think Lapsa looks kinda towny. It'd be a little counter-intuitive as scum to respond to this pressure by continuing to engage in the behavior that's led people to vote for you. He doesn't look like he's trying to convince people he's town.

This post in particular stood out as a good thought and actually changed my opinion on Lapsa. And no, nothing in particular, I just wanted your reads on all the rest of the people since you indicated that you skipped most of those pages because Thoronos was spamming up the thread. There were other people in there though that got buried, aka CB, Cthulhu, few others, can't remember all.

I actually missed that bit on Math.

Math, what qualifies as "genuine" and how does it give you insight in regards to someone's alignment?

What qualifies as genuine is what I think sounds genuine, aka the opposite of forced, tryhard, faking, lying, etc.
Scum forces things, tries to act town, fakes town, lies that they're not town. Town does not.
"Genuine" is my equivalent of "gut-town", but if you have any specific examples I can point out exactly why something sounds genuine.

[Thor665]

This is a read based on WRITING style, not PLAY style.

Can you define the difference? Because I don't see it.

Suppose Frogger's first post literally said he was scum and apathetic. Then suddenly he's a mod confirmed IC. Would I have been wrong to vote him initially? I did what I thought was best under the circumstances I was given. I can't promise you any more.

That does not mean that if you do something scummy that a subsequent reversal of the scummy action removes the prior scumminess.
Also, I don't care whether you admitted you were wrong or not except insomuch as Zorono keeps arguing that you did and I keep on pointing out that you didn't.
What I care about is that your initial stance was scummy and you are now claiming that because you later got a town read on Frogger it, in any way, changes that your initial stance was scummy.
It doesn't.

appears to be based around OMGUS as a reason

It's part of the reason. I felt it was also a surface read, and I can't exactly say Plot has been of the scumhunting nature. If you actually bothered to read my whole post, you see I made more of a case than OMGUS. I made the case that Plot claimed he was misrepped, when I didn't believe he was misrepped (Plot has since explained part of this), and I made the case he hadn't continued to Pursue his top two scumreads (Lapsa and CB). Lack of scumhunting, passiveness all play a role just as much (and even more so) than OMGUS.

Try reading my post again.

I am aware you made other attacks, I find them equally silly - are you seriously asking me to defend him point for point?
I can, but I see no money in it - your case feels really empty to me, my case does not, ergo: I dislike you leaving a solid case for an ephemeral case that can barely be explained.

[Mathdino]

Difference is that I'm not going to ask that anyone alter their writing style for this game, and I don't think any comprehensible writing style can be considered anti-town. I didn't vote him because I thought he was pushing an agenda, or because he was being anti-town, I voted him for weirding me out.
Lapsa I voted for being anti-town, thus I don't really care if he's usually anti-town, I want him to stop active lurking so I can read him.

And yeah I agree on the scumminess thing then. I don't recall saying that getting a townread on Frogger makes voting him less scummy (I don't remember ever commenting on the scumminess of my own actions?). I do recall repeating that I'm now townreading Frogger because I got super frustrated that people (Frogger) seemed to believe I still wanted to lynch Frogger based on his first post and subsequent defence. Sorta me saying "Yeah, it looks like bad reasoning with hindsight, but at the time it was actually good reasoning. That time has passed."

[texcat]

Eh I think Lapsa looks kinda towny. It'd be a little counter-intuitive as scum to respond to this pressure by continuing to engage in the behavior that's led people to vote for you. He doesn't look like he's trying to convince people he's town.

This post in particular stood out as a good thought and actually changed my opinion on Lapsa.

Lapsa I voted for being anti-town, thus I don't really care if he's usually anti-town, I want him to stop active lurking so I can read him.

I'm not really sure how your opinion changed, I disagree with Tool's conclusion, but OK, I could see how it might be considered a genuine, good thought. Though hardly enough for a town read in my book.

What did you make of these posts where Tool says there are scum on your wagon because you look scummy? If he thinks Lapsa is town, it might make sense for him to think scum is on Lapsa's wagon, but I can't understand why he threw you in there too.

Spoiler: Tool posts

I've had to break up my catching up reading today while doing other stuff so I can't remember all the points about Math atm but I remember thinking that some of them made sense.

I'm also thinking that between the wagons on Math and Lapsa there's probably scum somewhere. Want to start with Lapsa since I feel more like he's town.

Yes, I remember thinking that some of the points about Math looking scummy made sense. Which is not, incidentally, the same as saying "Math is scum."

Which is why it is still a good idea to consider the possibility of there being scum voting for Math.

[Lapsa]

been reloading sniper rifle for past 3-4 hours

so here's a contribution:

VOTE: Mathdino

you've been warned multiple times and I'm sick of shielding your shit

Thor, you have a sheep for the rest of Day1

Peter Piper dump a pile of peppers in your throat
Wit` an alien probe

[BlueBloodedToffee]

Sorry about my inactivity guys.

I have too many games on my plate right now and I'm doing my best to cope. The walls in this game are giving me no incentive to read either, so....yeah, low priority right now.

[Lapsa]

and please don't do 'will post tonight' fillers anymore. hate them

[BlueBloodedToffee]

You think I care what you want?

[Lapsa]

You think I care what you want?

I care about what I want

[Thor665]

Difference is that I'm not going to ask that anyone alter their writing style for this game, and I don't think any comprehensible writing style can be considered anti-town. I didn't vote him because I thought he was pushing an agenda, or because he was being anti-town, I voted him for weirding me out.
Lapsa I voted for being anti-town, thus I don't really care if he's usually anti-town, I want him to stop active lurking so I can read him.

So one guy posts in a weird way and you research him to see if it's normally weird, decide it isn't, and vote him.
The other guy posts in a weird way and you decide not to research him because he's just anti-town and it bugs you.

I *really* fail to follow this distinction.
Can you explain it any other way, or are we just agreeing to disagree that there's any difference at all except in how you reacted to them?

I mean, when one "happy" post causes a meta dive and multiple "pants on head" posts cause 'well, he must be anti-town always, vote, vote, vote" it doesn't jive with me.

And yeah I agree on the scumminess thing then. I don't recall saying that getting a townread on Frogger makes voting him less scummy (I don't remember ever commenting on the scumminess of my own actions?). I do recall repeating that I'm now townreading Frogger because I got super frustrated that people (Frogger) seemed to believe I still wanted to lynch Frogger based on his first post and subsequent defence. Sorta me saying "Yeah, it looks like bad reasoning with hindsight, but at the time it was actually good reasoning. That time has passed."

I was doing it due to this commentary;

WHY ARE WE HAVING THIS ARGUMENT. Every single time someone asks me about my Frogger read they end up being like OH WOW HIS REASONS ARE BULLSHIT, MUST BE SCUM, except I'm not still touting those arguments 9 pages into the game, I have updated reads. We're having a slapfight over a damn page 2 read in which 'scummy' just means 'more scummy in the less than 10 posts they've made than everyone else is'.

Which read to me as "past scum actions cannot be held against me if I've updated my reads."
If you accept that past scum actions can be held against you, then I have no further disagreement here.
If you think your past Frogger actions are somehow no longer scummy in light of your new stance (like Zoronos) then, yes, I have an issue.