Mini Normal 1692 – A Crack In Time? – Game Over

[zakk]

Scumbuddy? Or just scum trying to be affable to formidable town?

Either way, RC looks a lot worse

[OhGodMyLife]

Thor will either be able to shoot tonight, or he won't, and if he does he'll be basically conftown. We're not lynching him today. The continued negging of thor is scummy.

[zakk]

Negging?

[OhGodMyLife]

Diminutive version of the word negative, verbed.

To verb - using a noun as a verb

[OhGodMyLife]

Well, in this case its an adjective being verbed I guess but you get the point

[OhGodMyLife]

Another way of saying throwing shade, I didn't want to be totally repetitive but you (and others) are repeatedly doing the same thing.

[Thor665]

I wouldn't class 1578 and 1579 as bad play, considering the posts were made a minute apart. That is too short a span of time to reevaluate your opinion on a wagon, especially since he was apparently so tired he voted the completely wrong person, and as far as I see it was assuredly calculated to a degree.

He assessed the wrong vote, only by his own admission was it even a 'wrong' vote, and he explained why he made it and nowehere in that explanation did he claim that he reevaluated anything at all.
So what are you talking about?
I'll agree that method looks sloppy and like bad play - but I really fail to understand the scum angle of "I'll fake voting someone due to tiredness, then admit it, in order to...what, avoid analysis of my vote?" It seems like the opposite of that - and, frankly, he could have just reaction voted you and left it at that with even less ability to question his thoughts then what he did. So what is the scum plan here? What is the fakery? I don't get it.

Tunnelling someone for absolutely no reason is not a town mindset.

I find that incorrect. I know that I tunnel people as town all the time, and I know for a fact that other players do also. Surely you have seen this happen, it happens a lot - I am willing to bet that if I looked at some of the dead town players I could also find tunnels. Are you serious in this belief?

I don't know exactly why scum would do it either

Yes...that does appear to be an issue...with your case.

but I'd say it's more likely they would, because scum plans and motivations are always more complex than town ones.
Why is tunneling "more complex" than not tunneling?

I wanted more votes for reactions.

Yeesh.

If you want to reaction hunt someone you should be able to, y'know, describe a case against them.
Otherwise you're telling me that on Day 3 you have no read at all on the slot - which is kind of scary.

[Thor665]

I am impressed by how strong OGML's town read on me is.
Clearly he has no doubt in me at all.

[OhGodMyLife]

I didn't think pointy's claim seemed like a gambit at the time, and I don't think it's worth wondering about until we see what happens tonight. And scummy people keep trying to make you look scummy, which does the opposite for me.

[OhGodMyLife]

And if they lynch you you can't shoot me tonight, which is really what needs to happen.

[Thor665]

Why do I need to shoot you?

[OhGodMyLife]

Otherwise I'll be mislynched, and also I don't want to read all 80 pages of this game ever. Various people keep referring to how I look a lot like I was trying to save klingon and coach klingon. I've explained this to some extent but pretty much agree that I look terribly scummy and shouldn't be alive to the endgame. I'd rather get nk'd than live to be mislynched and give scum another night cycle. I was asking pointy to shoot me last night because I was sure I'd be lynched today, but he held fire. If I don't get lynched today it is best if I get shot tonight.

[Ricastle]

Why are you ignoring key parts of what I'm saying.

RC erased the quote source in 1578, but he was quoting OGML. That was undoubtedly his intended vote. He proceeded to reevaluate his stance on the wagon within a minute while apparently being extraordinarily tired. I don't know what the scum motivation is for it because I don't have access to their PT, but surely you agree that the timing there is at least a little suspicious?

Of course town tunnel; I tunnel all the time. It's extremely common. But town tunnelling

for no reason

is not. It's wholly unnatural to tunnel somebody based off of nothing - which is what RC has confirmed they were doing multiple times now - not to mention on Day 3!

Tunnelling is not more complex but I don't see how you got that from my statement. On average I see the game of Mafia from the scum side as more gambit and manipulation-oriented, so there's a much wider range of strange plays I could feasibly see scum doing over town. That's why I won't count actions like this out just because their motive cannot be directly discerned - if figuring out intentions and strategies was that black-and-white, town would win every time.

[FakedBlogger]

VOTE: zakk

[RadiantCowbells]

If you want to reaction hunt someone you should be able to, y'know, describe a case against them.
Otherwise you're telling me that on Day 3 you have no read at all on the slot - which is kind of scary.

I can, but given the amount of softing the slot has been doing and the fact that it isn't really a scumread, I think it's better to just let things lie.

Now, NJ I think is ridiculously scummy, as well as OGML. Those are my two favoured lynches.

[Thor665]

Otherwise I'll be mislynched, and also I don't want to read all 80 pages of this game ever. Various people keep referring to how I look a lot like I was trying to save klingon and coach klingon. I've explained this to some extent but pretty much agree that I look terribly scummy and shouldn't be alive to the endgame. I'd rather get nk'd than live to be mislynched and give scum another night cycle. I was asking pointy to shoot me last night because I was sure I'd be lynched today, but he held fire. If I don't get lynched today it is best if I get shot tonight.

Meh - okay, I'll kill you.
Or you can replace out instead of playing so terribly as to be requesting death as though that is pro-town - your choice. But if you stay I'll shoot you. That's fair.
If you're town I'll blacklist you afterwards, but I will admit I find sacrifice plays to be the epitome of anti-wincon play, and personally think they, and self hammers, should be penalized in town players.
If you're scum I like the attempt at the bluff, and applaud the false bravado move - but I'm not town reading it at all.

RC erased the quote source in 1578, but he was quoting OGML. That was undoubtedly his intended vote. He proceeded to reevaluate his stance on the wagon within a minute while apparently being extraordinarily tired.

That's not what he claimed went down. I will agree he probably meant to vote OGML - he even said as much, so he agrees with you on that also.

I don't know what the scum motivation is for it because I don't have access to their PT, but surely you agree that the timing there is at least a little suspicious?

I do not - what was suspicious about the timing?

Of course town tunnel; I tunnel all the time. It's extremely common. But town tunnelling

for no reason

is not. It's wholly unnatural to tunnel somebody based off of nothing - which is what RC has confirmed they were doing multiple times now - not to mention on Day 3!

I will agree that this is bad play - I disagree that it is something town do not do.

Tunnelling is not more complex but I don't see how you got that from my statement.

You said scum were more complex than town, and that's why you read it as a scum action - I figured that meant his actions (tunneling) were what you were calling more complex. That's why I got to that understanding of your statement.

On average I see the game of Mafia from the scum side as more gambit and manipulation-oriented, so there's a much wider range of strange plays I could feasibly see scum doing over town. That's why I won't count actions like this out just because their motive cannot be directly discerned - if figuring out intentions and strategies was that black-and-white, town would win every time.

Conversely I do hunt based off a concept of motivation - and pointing at an action and saying "I cannot understand this play - ergo it is one based in manipulation, and therefore is more likely scummy due to lack of ability to grok it!" does not actually thrill me as a basis for a case for someone to be scum.
It's why I think your case is "bad play" - because, oddly enough, that actually explains what went down pretty easily with no deeper Machiavellian motives to it.
Doesn't make the slot town, I'll agree - but neither does your case make them scum.

[Thor665]

If you want to reaction hunt someone you should be able to, y'know, describe a case against them.
Otherwise you're telling me that on Day 3 you have no read at all on the slot - which is kind of scary.

I can, but given the amount of softing the slot has been doing and the fact that it isn't really a scumread, I think it's better to just let things lie.

Why are you trying to pressure a slot that you think is softing and also isn't a scumread - what was your end goal? Because what I'm getting is 'force a claim' which is...kind of, the opposite of what you should do to a non-scum read you think is softing.

Please explain yourself.

Now, NJ I think is ridiculously scummy, as well as OGML. Those are my two favoured lynches.

I lean town on NJ - what's your case on him? If this is another pressure play I will be sad.

I'm stating intent to shoot OGML to death - so you should probably vote elsewhere unless your argument is that I'm scum and he's my buddy, or I am town and there's a roleblocking/protective scum role.

[RadiantCowbells]

If you want to reaction hunt someone you should be able to, y'know, describe a case against them.
Otherwise you're telling me that on Day 3 you have no read at all on the slot - which is kind of scary.

This implies that having a read on the slot entails being able and willing to provide a case on them, and that providing a case is a required prerequisite for garnering useful reactions.

Case making in general is a lot of reverse engineering or processes that come naturally and trying to recreate it to display to others never works as well as it did the first time.

I'll, like, point out scummy things that people do, but making a coherent case requires a great deal of effort on my part to produce a subpar recreation of my thought processes that gets mostly ignored as a wall of text anyway.


Also, @Ricastle you realize that's entirely a circular argument?

I'm scummy because scum can do anything and my stuff isn't really tells one way or the other even though they should be read as leaning town so I'm scum as a result.

for no reason

I had my reasons. Pretty good ones, in fact. Unfortunate that you can't say the same.

Hint- neither tunnelling (which I wasn't doing at all, evidenced by the change of vote and my discussion of other wagons while voting you) nor lynching town (which at least some other townies were involved in) are scumtells.

pedit:

Why are you trying to pressure a slot that you think is softing and also isn't a scumread - what was your end goal? Because what I'm getting is 'force a claim' which is...kind of, the opposite of what you should do to a non-scum read you think is softing.

Notice that I'm not voting the slot anymore. The softing started as a result to pressure.

The reason I kept the vote up as long as I did was that he seemed way too touchy about being voted.

I lean town on NJ - what's your case on him? If this is another pressure play I will be sad.

My case is that he's passive and lurky as fuck and doesn't seem to care where the lynch goes, plus he was heavily scumread by Slandaar whose reads I trust.

Meh - okay, I'll kill you.

Please.

[FakedBlogger]

E. I am not voting him specifically for the fact that he voted pointy, it has more to do with the fact that he didn't even attempt to try and convince people to vote kling nor did he try to convince people to not lynch boon. Let's go to the tape shall we? These "conclusive arguments" that naked claims he made were posts 1107, 1109, 1111, and 1116. So from Naked's POV boon should be town and kling should be scum right? can we agree on that since "conclusive" means pretty much 100% or dam close to it right?

so Naked's posts after 1116

1122 - talks about how hider+doc would work. (this imo doesn't seem like he is convinced one way or the other who is legit but again I am biased)
1123 - says we should lynch kling or me (I argue that if he has conclusive evidence that kling is scum, why would he throw my name into the mix where he doesn't have conclusive evidence for me?)
1126 - yells at ricastle to read. imo this would have been a good time for him to speak out against a boon lynch and re-state his arguments instead of just telling ricastle to read
1129 - this is where he quotes his posts but he doesn't say that this makes boon legit and kling scum, he leaves it there for people to make the determination on their own. I feel that if he thought these posts were conclusive enough he would have made more of an attempt to save boon, I know I would have if I was in that position.
1130 - votes klingon but doesn't add any commentary. Nothing about how his conclusive evidence, nothing about how kling's role is the fake one, nothing about boon is probably town. Just a vote
1133: shortly after slandaar says "bagel or NJ" naked votes Bagel - I will save you my opinion on this move, you guys are free to make your own assessment. Still nothing about Boon being the legit claim over kling. Still no attempt to save boon whatsoever
1135 - tells RC to stfu after being called scum
1146 - has an issue with rc wanting to lynch boon for "bad reasoning" and he wants to NOT lynch boon because of "reasonable reasons" (note day 1 he called them "reasonable" but day 3 he is calling then "conclusive")
1148 - responds to RC instead of trying to save boon or lynch kling or do anything useful
1171 - appeals to zak to vote kling or bagel and the only defense of boon at this time is he doesn't think boon would be stupid to claim a 2nd non normal, hardly a convincing argument...
1191 - this is where boon asks kling why he didn't go after kling - if he was town reading boon I don't see why he would ask this. This just puts more doubt on boon, not less
1194 - he gets the answer to his question from bagel but he doesn't seem like he is totally convinced. I mean when I type hmm I don't type that when I am convinced of something, I type it more when I am still kind of skeptical or I want to think about it some more. I can't speak for how others do it or interpret it. Still no defense of boon at this point, no attempts to get people to vote anyone else besides boon (shortly before this post a vc was posted where bagel had 1 less vote than boon. If naked was convinced boon was telling the truth and deadline was almost near you would have thought he would be pushing harder for bagel at least)
1202 - says ricastle needs rope. no attempt to lynch bagel and no attempt to save boon. why? is he content with either wagon going through?
1227 - he says that boon's claim fits his trolling style and says this could be boon's way of "fucking with us". Clearly he isn't convinced of boon's role or even alignment does he?
If he did why would he cast more doubt on him so close to deadline? why wouldn't he be trying to save boon and lynch bagel?
1265 - responds to RC instead of trying to stop a boon lynch when it's so close to deadline...
1348 - votes boon. yes I realize deadline was about to hit but there was no additional commentary from him and he doesn't post again until the next day phase. Idk if he were town I would think he would have at least stuck around and tried to get some info from boon or something. Some people think that scum disappear during twilight on mislynches, I can't say that is reliable enough to use as a reason to lynch somebody but just strikes me odd.

so after all of that if he honestly felt boon was town (which he certainly didn't from my pov ) than yes he should have stuck on klingon and pushed harder, or at the very least pushed harder for bagel since he was the counter wagon.

The last time I checked not being sure of someone's alignment was a towntell. So that was a total waste of time, puffing up a towntell for it to look like a scumtell, I doubt town would do it, waste their time like that.

[FakedBlogger]

I'll catch up later today, shame naked or RC haven't been lynched yet though.

As useless as always

I'm sorry but this was completely uncalled for regardless of your alignment. Stop being rude.

You're saying it's a shame I haven't been lynched. I'm saying that's a useless statement, and you made a bunch of those, true or false?

[Thor665]

This implies that having a read on the slot entails being able and willing to provide a case on them, and that providing a case is a required prerequisite for garnering useful reactions.

I would argue that having a case against someone to have them respond to *is* a prerequisite of reaction hunting unless you think town and scum respond differently to being voted with no reasoning...do they? If so, clue me in. But as far as I can tell dismissal and insults are the general response in that regard (also, inability to build a wagon due to a stumbling block of 'why?' having trouble being answered).

Case making in general is a lot of reverse engineering or processes that come naturally and trying to recreate it to display to others never works as well as it did the first time.

In that case - I would be willing to accept that 'reason to suspect someone' is different than 'case'.
But other than that, my point holds.

I'll, like, point out scummy things that people do, but making a coherent case requires a great deal of effort on my part to produce a subpar recreation of my thought processes that gets mostly ignored as a wall of text anyway.

I asked you for scummy things and got nothing, so I think you have issue with pointing out scummy things in addition to writing them up in a pretty wall.
I'm openly on record that a good case is 1-2 sentences.

Notice that I'm not voting the slot anymore. The softing started as a result to pressure.

The reason I kept the vote up as long as I did was that he seemed way too touchy about being voted.

You would not expect touchiness from being voted for no reason from town? Or, some lesser degree of touchiness?

My case is that he's passive and lurky as Smurf and doesn't seem to care where the lynch goes, plus he was heavily scumread by Slandaar whose reads I trust.

He seems anything *but* passive as regards Woody (who is on record as not even wanting to talk to him anymore because he feels so pressured) so...feels like at least one of you has to be wrong. Or do you mean passive to everyone else besides Woody?

Why would not caring about who gets lynched be a scumtell? Arguably wouldn't that be an SK or town tell? I mean, you can argue it as poor play, I suppose (and I'm not sure I'd disagree, though I think you're wrong in suggesting he doesn't seem to care) but I fail to see how that would be a scum plan. Unless he was bad at playing scum.

[Thor665]

I'll catch up later today, shame naked or RC haven't been lynched yet though.

As useless as always

I'm sorry but this was completely uncalled for regardless of your alignment. Stop being rude.

You're saying it's a shame I haven't been lynched. I'm saying that's a useless statement, and you made a bunch of those, true or false?

Could you two please stop?
You're having this debate to show who is "right" not to show who is scum.
Save it for MD or post game, or PMs or something - if you're town we're trying to find scum, not players you disagree with.

[FakedBlogger]

C. I am not voting naked for posting insignificant stuff and trolling. I have provided a plethora of reasons for why he is scum. They started day 1 with elusive and I provided more this day phase as well.

And all of them were bullshit, like the one I just mentioned.

You took 2 things that even you recognized aren't scummy by themselves, and combined them plus a sidenote so it makes them look scummy. I put RC to L-1 and I also complained about the lack of reasons to vote me, therefore I must be hypocrite scum. Lah di dah.

Also, I should jump from a bridge if I'm town. Nice. I told him it was a mistake.. an understandable one.. to call what he said about his experience a lie but it's soooo irrelevant from his point especially after I admitted it but he goes on and on and on about it. From my point of view however it was a reaction test to see if he would go for it and attack it and nag on it and ghosthump it while my main arguments stand: town doesn't switch to vote a claimed PR didn't arouse suspicion until he got a huge ass wagon to accumulate due to some fanatic drive with a meta argument to back it up (

oh and Wood doesn't care too much for meta .. so how the fuck did he sheep the meta case anyway?

, right to avoid a no lynch..) skip reading the thread that happened to contain good arguments to suggest he's on the wrong track and goes posting an obscene amount of fluff 2 hours before a lynch and then claim he was avoiding a no-lynch. That's a scumtell imo, because town would go.. 'ok dude you just said I lied about my experience, joke's on you.. now I'm going to roll up my sleeves and refute your main arguemnts in a huge ass post ' (didn't happen, instead) but he just says it over and over to make his case on me look vaguely consistent.

Anyway, we can lynch zakk, fuck it. I've said all I needed to say and if I die my fellow townies better lynch Wood.

[Ricastle]

That's not what he claimed went down. I will agree he probably meant to vote OGML - he even said as much, so he agrees with you on that also.

What went down? Him being tired? Because these were his exact words:

I even voted the wrong person, so fucking tired. 0 sleep last night.

I do not - what was suspicious about the timing?

Post Post #1578 (ISO) » Mon Jul 20, 2015

11:39 pm

Post Post #1579 (ISO) » Mon Jul 20, 2015

11:40 pm

Within which he, in a state of tiredness such that he votes a completely different person than intended, analyzes the OGML wagon and reverses his stance on it.

I will agree that this is bad play - I disagree that it is something town do not do.

Then we'll have to agree to disagree here. Such a play is illogical and ridiculous to the extreme for town, and I don't think RC is an idiot really. Besides, I'd expect that even an idiot would admit they were being an idiot if it came down to it. Tunnelling someone with no explanation before or after just does not look right to me.

Conversely I do hunt based off a concept of motivation - and pointing at an action and saying "I cannot understand this play - ergo it is one based in manipulation, and therefore is more likely scummy due to lack of ability to grok it!" does not actually thrill me as a basis for a case for someone to be scum.
It's why I think your case is "bad play" - because, oddly enough, that actually explains what went down pretty easily with no deeper Machiavellian motives to it.
Doesn't make the slot town, I'll agree - but neither does your case make them scum.

Fair enough. I still think it could go either way at the very least, however, because just like you can't assume strange play is scum play you can't assume what appears to be bad play is town play, either. I shan't be moving my vote, so we'll just have to see.

[Ricastle]

I'm scummy because scum can do anything and my stuff isn't really tells one way or the other even though they should be read as leaning town so I'm scum as a result.

I personally think the action was scummy. I'm merely compromising.

Also, you should really stop telling me to townread you because that's only making me dislike you further.

I had my reasons. Pretty good ones, in fact. Unfortunate that you can't say the same.

Then I'd love to hear them. What were they, and why did you drop them? What changed your mind in the reread?