Open 698: Stack the Deck (GAME OVER)

[IceGuy]

VOTE: SmoothBlue

OMGUS!

[IceGuy]

If I ever do roll scum in a game with you I'll have to make sure to pay you back for Micro 725.

I don't like this.

VOTE: Alchemist21

[IceGuy]

"The Traitor Mafia"
"If I Mafia Traitor" Look at capital lettered words

Except you conveniently left out that "Town" is capitalized as well.

[IceGuy]

Grapes is having too many reads too fast.

I agree with this as of post #38. If you have a read on somebody who has posted a total of three words, it's not going to be a useful read.

[IceGuy]

Not to literal you to death but at this point I don't have a read on anyone based on three words.

But I mean different strokes for different blokes; I don't enjoy sitting around until some arbitrary word count to happen on page 3 in order to stop censoring myself so that people don't immediately discredit me based on playstyle for giving thoughts as they come to me.

You made a list of people you consider town/null/scum. This list included people who've posted three words and people that aren't in the game. You posted things that look like they're useful to town, but aren't.

I also really don't like the way how you vote everybody who attacks you.

VOTE: grapes

On the other hand, I'm not completely convinced that grapes is scum; I have this nagging feeling scum is sitting amongst the lurkers and laughing at how we're attacking ourselves.

Alchemist is town. Realeo is probably town, at least I don't think he's bussing. Everybody else - that includes Chip Butty - needs to post non-RVS posts.

[IceGuy]

I also really don't like the way how you vote everybody who attacks you.

I can't tell if this is just a human-error or an scum misrepping given the fact the next thing is a vote.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here; I don't consider voting by itself scummy.

[IceGuy]

My point is that grapes is trying to look useful, but not actually being useful.

Providing reads and voting people you think you're scum are useful. Providing reads based on one three-word post and voting people because they attack you is not.

[IceGuy]

You said you want to retract your town lean, that implies you think he's scum now.

[IceGuy]

You vote Grapes for posting stuff that 'looks useful to Town but isn't', but how useful is a vote against someone followed by a disclaimer that you're not convinced they're scum?

I think it goes without saying you 'won't be convinced' at this early stage, but surely putting that in directly after your vote takes remove the pressurizing effect it may have had on the player, which is surely half the point of any vote at this stage of the game?

I don't see a point in lying about reads.

Uh, no? That implies I null him?

Okay. Can we agree that two times after somebody said he's something other than town, he responded with a vote on that person?

[IceGuy]

It's not a question of 'lying about reads', it's a question of the purpose of the vote.

The purpose of the vote is to make clear whom I consider the most scummy person in the game. An L-3 vote isn't a lot of "pressure".

And why did you ignore my question about your Alchemist Townread?

Because I missed it. Alchemist is town because he seems to be right and earnest about grapes' behavior.

[IceGuy]

UNVOTE:

Scum would be laying low right now, not doing what grapes is doing. While I don't agree with what grapes is saying and I consider a player who thinks they can solve the game on page 2 a show-off, it does not indicate alignment.

[IceGuy]

I really don't like Iceguy's start, his vote for Grapes or his subsequent unvote.

So basically, you've decided that you want to start a wagon on me, and then tried to find reasons for it.

[IceGuy]

Back from work, catching up.

I'm comfortable with this, maybe put me one slot higher in your next list?

I do not like how you try to persuade people to rate you townier. If you want people to consider you town, do something useful to town, don't just say you want to be considered town.

Uh, no. I've seen you coasting on the back of Grapes the whole game so far and have done little else.

Are you really just going to dismiss my entire post like that?

Yes, because you're saying that I'm scum based on things like that I'm unsure with my reads (on page 3 of all places), or that my reads change.

Now you have unvoted Grapes, who is your biggest scum read?

The whole peanut gallery of lurkers. ironstove, Assemblerotws, Duckworth/Riddleton. I'm not going to rank them because they're equally useless. UnaBombaH at least posts but I don't like what I'm seeing. Since there is a wagon on him by a player I consider towny, I'm going to vote him VOTE: UnaBombaH, and hereby express my intention to vote any of the other three if a wagon will form.

Considering he has done nothing else in this game though, wouldn't you agree it seems like he's trying to 'look useful without being so' which is exactly what he actually sumread Grapes for in the first place?

I've provided actual content, which grapes at that point hadn't.

VOTE: Realio

Overtheorising.

This is a bad vote and the justification in #174 is even worse.

I'm waiting for his vote to see if he actually meant it. Given how he read my post, I can no longer predict the sentiment of his text.

I'm not voting Luca. I don't consider him particularly scummy.

3. Cruising. Yes I've been cruising, because this game has been developing very slowly and boringly and i have two others i am way more engaged with.

I have a question. Why do you consider this game boring?

[IceGuy]

EBWOP:

Back from work, catching up.

I'm comfortable with this, maybe put me one slot higher in your next list?

I do not like how you try to persuade people to rate you townier. If you want people to consider you town, do something useful to town, don't just say you want to be considered town.

Are you really just going to dismiss my entire post like that?

Yes, because you're saying that I'm scum based on things like that I'm unsure with my reads (on page 3 of all places), or that my reads change.

Now you have unvoted Grapes, who is your biggest scum read?

The whole peanut gallery of lurkers. ironstove, Assemblerotws, Duckworth/Riddleton. I'm not going to rank them because they're equally useless. UnaBombaH at least posts but I don't like what I'm seeing. Since there is a wagon on him by a player I consider towny, I'm going to vote him VOTE: UnaBombaH, and hereby express my intention to vote any of the other three if a wagon will form.

Considering he has done nothing else in this game though, wouldn't you agree it seems like he's trying to 'look useful without being so' which is exactly what he actually sumread Grapes for in the first place?

I've provided actual content, which grapes at that point hadn't.

VOTE: Realio

Overtheorising.

This is a bad vote and the justification in #174 is even worse.

I'm waiting for his vote to see if he actually meant it. Given how he read my post, I can no longer predict the sentiment of his text.

I'm not voting Luca. I don't consider him particularly scummy.

3. Cruising. Yes I've been cruising, because this game has been developing very slowly and boringly and i have two others i am way more engaged with.

[/quote]

I have a question. Why do you consider this game boring?[/quote]

[IceGuy]

I don't like the reasons for this vote or the position he is conveying either - he's focusing on the lurkers who are the easy targets for the lynch. He doesn't care which of them is lynched and has made it clear he will switch to any of them if a wagon forms. Basically this just looks opportunistic to me.

Do you always get your #1 scumread lynched? Don't you see the point in compromising?

And yet ChipButty isn't someone you're considering for the lynch (based on your quote above)? You have genuine reasons to vote ChipButty so why just pick on the lurkers instead?

A bad justification is not necessarily a scummy justification. Also, why are you so intent on defending the lurkers who have literally contributed nothing to the game?

You said earlier that I had decided to start a wagon on you and was trying to find reasons - that implies a scum read to me, or do you think Town would have similar motivation?

As above: Town does bad things.

[IceGuy]

Do you always get your #1 scumread lynched? Don't you see the point in compromising?

Isn't it too early to compromise? I personally would only compromise during deadline or people are starting to tunnel.

I haven't changed my vote from UnaBombaH and I currently do not intend doing so (especially with his first "content" post, which is basically OMGUS). I still hope the UnaBombaH wagon goes through.

However, if the UnaBombaH wagon falls apart and there's a wagon on any of the other three (and they do not start being towny posters), I will immediately switch. I would also switch back if there's a UnaBombaH wagon after all and he doesn't suddenly start to become town.

Read list:

Town: Chip Butty/Alchemist/Realeo
Leaning town: Luca/CK/grapes
Neutral: Mulch/GNB
Leaning scum: ironstove/Duckworth
Scum: Assemble/UnaBombaH

[IceGuy]

Wait. What?

Why you never talk about this? Explain your scumread please. I personally forgot about assemble so can use some insight.

I just noticed I never talked about this. I had something typed up, but it apparently got lost while consolidating posts. His powerlurking puts him into the "leaning scum" category, what makes him more scummy than the rest is:

No, for three reasons:
1: I'm

Town

.
2: The Traitor already knows the identities of the

Mafia

members.
3: If I were

Mafia

, my first move would be to recruit the

Traitor

.

Comm and I were joking about a game we played together where I, as

scum

, tried to crumb to some of the other

scum

through judicious use of capitalization, got exposed by my buddy in what was, due to the mechanics of this particular game, the dumbest bus I have ever seen, tried to claim PGO on my buddy's advice in order to see if we could identify the real PGO from the reactions, and then got quicklynched by CommKnight (who happened to be the actual PGO).

In post 17, alignments/roles are capitalized, in post 155 they aren't. This could mean that there's more to post 17 than it meets the eye.

If I have a clear scumread then I will pursue that lynch until it's not longer reasonably possible, and only then look at compromising. What you're doing is just lining up a few easy targets to wagon at will and, as I said, it seems opportunistic to me.

So you're doing the same as I, but you're less honest about it.

I'm in no way defending the lurkers - I am questioning the motivation behind your current stance, that a lynch of any lurker will do. It's such an easy path of no resistance to go down, and it doesn't sit right with me. There would be no issue if you had at least attempted to interact with the lurkers and draw reads out of them, but to just brand them all 'useless' and say any of them can be lynched is at best anti-town, and at worst a very scummy thing to do.

How should I interact with people who just don't post?

[IceGuy]

I've only seen him say negative things about him so far, yet suddenly he's first name on his Townie list.

Nice misrep. The names aren't ordered, "first place on Townie list" is the same as "third place on Townie list".

Also, you do not seem to get the distinction between "X does things I disagree with" and "X is scum". Should I explain it again, perhaps more slowly?

[IceGuy]

You're doing nothing the same as I, IceGuy, and don't even try to pretend you are.

You said yourself you're willing to compromise when the deadline looms. I'm also willing to compromise, but I post about it. So, I'm doing the same, I'm just posting about it.

You could actually try to interact with them before writing them all off - have you tried?

So, I could write "Assemble: Say something". What next? Do you think a lurker will not stop lurking when faced with a lynch, but stop lurking when faced with a question?

Apparently IceGuy's last game was two years ago.

@IceGuy

Do you play in other mafia sites interim?

No.

I've only seen him say negative things about him so far, yet suddenly he's first name on his Townie list.

Nice misrep. The names aren't ordered, "first place on Townie list" is the same as "third place on Townie list".

Also, you do not seem to get the distinction between "X does things I disagree with" and "X is scum". Should I explain it again, perhaps more slowly?

Misrep? you're really stretching the term there. I'm aware the first name had the same value as the third, I was just stating it as a literal fact.

If you were stating it just as a literal fact, why didn't you leave it off? The fact is readily apparent in my post, so there's no need to repeat it - unless you're trying to draw attention to it, which you deny.

[IceGuy]

1) There's a difference in motivation behind someone who accepts compromise as a last resort and someone who is lining up the wagons of several different town members with 5 days until deadline.

If you have a #1 scumread and a #2 scumread who is close in scummyness, and there is a wagon on #2 but not on #1, what would you do?

2) There have been 'lurkers' who have popped in and out of the thread that you could have challenged if you genuinely wanted to get a read off of them. I think the key word here is 'try' - if you did this and had no success then I'd be a bit more sympathetic to your view on the lurkers.

As I said: What's the point.

3) Seriously, I'm not going to justify saying ChipButty was first on your Townie list when he was first on your Townie list. If you want to get sensitive over that then that's your prerogative but it feels a bit like you're deflecting away from the other issues.

Don't squirrel away. Why did you specifically mention it in your post?

And while you're at it, IceGuy, would you care to explain that Townread of ChipButty?

Honest, constructive posts mostly. Not particularly long, but straight to the point and devoid of fluff.

[IceGuy]

I don't know if this is too much to ask for IceGuy, but since IceGuy is not the type of guy who is thinking out loud,

I would like to request Iceguy to make CommKnight's style of read list + kinda detailed explanation.

Your assembrelowts explanation is at the right ball park.

I will post this but not today. Check back tomorrow at approximately the same time.

I mean, you only make two remarks about ChipButty and both of them are negative. Surely, it's not constructive.

As stated many times: Doing something wrong != being scum.

[IceGuy]

I tend to capitalize when I'm referring to a specific faction and not capitalize when just using the generic town/scum terminology. First time someone's found that scummy, though memorably not the first time I've had people calling me scum over capitalization. Not pulling a stunt like that again anytime soon...

Thanks for posting! Anything else to say?

The issue is that I am not sure what is your definition of constructive

Constructive in that context is: Contributes to the game with a town mindset, which involves a honest approach to discussion.

Iceguy why do you tr Chip?

Question has already been answered. I believe he does things wrong, but he comes from a towny position.

That's irrelevant as it neither applies to you nor me so far.

You've stated you're willing to compromise on lynching players who currently have zero votes.

Yes. If the person I want to lynch most doesn't get lynched, and any of the other would.

Why shouldn't I mention it in my post? It's factual, and I'm not going to waste my time justifying it to you.

As I said, you're squirreling away. This is not town behavior. In Mafia, you don't just state a fact.

Read list:

Assemblerowts

- Powerlurker. Only post that is not RVS or answers a question coming from RVS is a reply to my post. No reads, no content, and there's this strange capitalization. Even if he's not scum for some reason, town improves by getting rid of him.

Scum, will vote if wagon forms

Realeo

- Contributes constructively, uses meta to his advantage. A bit arrogant, but partly justified because he's mostly posting things that are true.

Town

Chip Butty

- Calls out UnaBombaH and Duckworth, people I consider to be in the scum/powerlurker category. Generally is not averse to starting wagons and often (not always) has good reasons for it.

Town

GameNBurger

- At first, he did contribute, however he's now firmly in lurker territory. #138 is a good post, if he'd kept up posting things like this, he'd be town. I believe he has RL issues, so I'm not going to sort him in the scum category.

Neutral

ironstove

- Completely useless player. No content at all which makes it hard to form reads.

Leaning scum or useless town, will probably vote if wagon forms

Luca Blight

- Changed my read because of his refusal to answer a simple question. In #304, he says Chip is "first name on [my] Townie list". In #308, I tell him that the order in the list has no significance, in #312 he says he was aware of it. Yet, he repeatedly claims that he "just posted a fact" and refuses to say why he posted it (#317, #337).

Leaning scum, will probably vote if wagon forms

DuckWorth

- Mostly lurker with a vote that reeks of OMGUS. Needs to post more and not just about Chip.

Leaning scum or useless town, will probably vote if wagon forms

Mulch

- SmoothBlue never posted outside of RVS and I simply can't read Mulch.

Neutral

Alchemist21

- Used to be the most constructive and interesting to read player in the game, however I feel he's been coasting recently, which changed my read. There's this nagging voice in my head that says he just tried to build up towncred, now got enough and plans to coast until a mislynch.

Leaning town

grapes

- Had a bad start but has evolved into a player that could post more but when he posts, is insightful and seems honest.

Leaning town

CommKnight

- See Alchemist. Was the first to post a comprehensive read list, but has contributed little since than.

Leaning town

UnaBombaH

- I believe I have already talked about this.

Scum, currently voting

[IceGuy]

and I simply can't read Mulch

Why?

You don't produce a lot of content, which makes reading you hard, but you produce enough content to not be a powerlurker. Your short, mostly reactive posts do add to the game, but do not allow me to form reads on you.

@IceGuy

Help me a little bit with your DuckWorth. You said that DuckWorth vote is OMGUSy and therefore scummy...

You're right; I got this mixed up. That makes him slightly townier, but not by a lot (his playstyle is still lazy and falls into the "useless town/leaning scum" category).

My readlist is pretty much IceGuys's readlist unless I say otherwise.

I would be open to lynching IceGuy, Assembrelowts, UnaBoombah (and maybe CB?). I don't think Assembrelowts would gain any traction so UNVOTE:

So you agree with my reads, but would lynch me? I do not see how this makes sense.

Re UnaBombaH:

I'm comfortable with this, maybe put me one slot higher in your next list?

Begging for town reads is not towny behavior, being useful to town and getting read as town is.

His first reads in #269 are lazy: he townreads a player pretty much everybody townreads, calls me scum for voting him (after two other people have also called me scum), and has a "slight townlean" on the guy that started the wagon on me. There's not a single original thought in that post except for "I was doing it ON PURPOSE!" which isn't really believable.

He then continues to post fluff until two hours ago, where he posts a read list. However, those reads are mostly useless. The three reads from before carry over, except that Chip Butty is now town instead of a "slight townlean", but the justification is the same. Five players are read "mainly on gut", two players are neutral as lurkers (which I understand, they really lurk). The Mulch read is useless fluff ("for the catch-up", yeah we know he caught up, but WHY?) and the Realeo read is the only useful read, except many have said essentially the same thing.

The read on me is based on posts from way back and basically parrots Luca a few days ago. Considering I'm his only scum read, I'd think he post something about my reads or the "first place on the townie list" thing, but he doesn't.

tl;dr: There is not a single original thought in any of his posts, but he keeps up appearances of contributing.

[IceGuy]

I'm pretty sure this is NAI. I mean, I think the smile gives away that he is saying that as a joke?

NAI?

Also, there are no jokes in Mafia, just as there are no facts. Every word can be analyzed.

No, you are not getting away with this bullshit.
You do not even read what I write about you if you say something like this.
I. DO. NOT. THINK. YOU. ARE. SCUM. FOR. VOTING. ME.
I think you are scum because of the "reasoning", or better yet, the lack of it.

You're writing several paragraphs regarding my reasoning and still say I'm scum because there is a lack of reasoning?

And you are the leading expert on the usefulness of them, eh?

Yes.

"Three reads carry over" - go figure. I read someone as such and such...and I'm being consistent?!?

You did not seem to incorporate any new information in the new reads despite there being a wealth of it.

"five players are read on gut" - worse than your "better lynch lurkers, so that I get more time fabricating reads"? I need time to solidify those reads, sure, but my gut has been right before.

Your gut has very likely also been wrong before. Gut reads at this point of the game are useless because we can't analyze them.

"Mulch for the catch-up" - you think it meant literally "for catching up"? It means that I liked his catch-up post. You know, the one where he had the spoiler titled "the catch up" or something like that..?

I know what you mean, but you didn't say why you liked the catch-up post, which would make it a useful read.

"many have said the same about Realeo" - Who? Where? If someone used the same exact words or reasonings, then good on them, because I think that is some smart reading.

Don't be deliberately obtuse - nobody used the same exact words and I never claimed that. It's just that pretty much everybody (including me) considers Realeo genuine, so your read does not add anything to the game. This wouldn't be a problem if this wouldn't hold for all your reads.

You find arguments against me from what everyone else posts, and then claim that I DO NOT HAVE ORIGINAL THOUGHTS?

I'm finding arguments against you based on what you post, not what everybody else posts, and what you post doesn't contain anything original.

---

Possible lynches:

Assemblerotws
ironstove
IceGuy
Duckworth
UnaBombaH

The whole peanut gallery of lurkers. ironstove, Assemblerotws, Duckworth/Riddleton. I'm not going to rank them because they're equally useless. UnaBombaH at least posts but I don't like what I'm seeing. Since there is a wagon on him by a player I consider towny, I'm going to vote him VOTE: UnaBombaH, and hereby express my intention to vote any of the other three if a wagon will form.

I don't like the reasons for this vote or the position he is conveying either - he's focusing on the lurkers who are the easy targets for the lynch. He doesn't care which of them is lynched and has made it clear he will switch to any of them if a wagon forms. Basically this just looks opportunistic to me.

Presented without comment.

[IceGuy]

@Iceguy

What do you think of this info?

I do not believe him that his behavior makes him town.

[IceGuy]

I don't even think he is saying that his behavior is making him town, IceGuy.

What else is he saying?

[IceGuy]

I don't know. On one hand I can see where he is coming from with each one; on the other hand, it's the sort of shallow, mechanical thinking that scum do a lot, with emphasis on people that are contributing and engaged. Town can be dumb and read people for this but scum can easily fake this too.

ISO ironstove or Assemblerowts and tell me whether you can form a better read.

I feel as if 427 may be coming from someone that has the perspective that Una is town. Specifically, the "your gut could be wrong" line is not something you would usually say to someone that you think is scum; you would say the "gut read" is bullshit. Another red flag is "agreeing" or "understanding" some of the points and yet still continuing to push with the same level of confidence.

Where in 427 do I agree with or understand some of Una's points?

For the sake of thought experiment and 502,

@Cb @Luca @UNh @ICeguy @GameNBurger

, so you have your own vote, who do you think is the scum partner? Keep in mind that it's possible that your partner is in the hard lurker bunch.

I do not believe it makes sense to speculate about scum partners without a flip. Let's talk again on D2.

I like GameNBurger's catch-up, by the way. I now have him leaning town.

[IceGuy]

Mulch, Realeo: What is your justification for voting me?

[IceGuy]

Not fully committing to a strong scumread.

That is what I meant: he says he is willing to vote any of the lurkers, so he has an easy escape if anyone scumreads him, for voting me.

Other people (such as Luca) have done the same thing and you sort them firmly into the "town" category. Why am I scum for it, and Luca is town for the same thing?

He has later tried to correct this by bringing more arguments to his case, but the problem is that he voted me first with a "for now"-mentality, and has since tried his harderst to find reasons to keep his vote on me.
He didn't organically arrive at scumreading me: he decided to scumread me the most out of "all the lurkers", and then has just grasped at reasons to stay on me.

No, the reason is that you produced more and more reasons you're scum.

I'm not sure if this is a loaded question or not.
I don't think his vote on ANYONE, even me, was/would've been scummy.
It was HOW and WHY he voted + how he has stuck to his vote, which pings me as scum.

So first you call me scum for willing to vote several people, and now you're calling me scum for sticking with my vote on you. It looks like it's you who is finding more arguments.

[IceGuy]

Other people (such as Luca) have done the same thing and you sort them firmly into the "town" category. Why am I scum for it, and Luca is town for the same thing?

Because the basis of his original vote on you wasn't based on lurkyness.

My vote on you was only partly based on lurkiness: The reason why I voted you out of all the lurkers was the little you posted was scummy.

Such as?

You haven't cased my "more and more" yet.
You waved it off earlier by saying that "you have already covered it".
Well you haven't.

If it's still the same reason of me playing a scummier start of D1, have you just discredited/bypassed all my later posts?

I have, in #405, and just now for what you posted recently.

Or is it the fact that you know that if I'm not lynched today, it is likely you?

Obviously, I'm trying to prevent a lynch on me. I know I'm town; I don't know you are. That you are also scummy is a bonus.

Because circumstances matter not?

I don't think you have reconsidered your read on me once.
And THAT reeks of scum to me too - you are afraid to let go of "scumreading" or scumreading me.
Which is it?

Why should I reconsider a scumread if you continue being scummy?

[IceGuy]

You think this is a scum post?

It's the towny thing to do, but scum also knows this and can easily fake it.

As said before, I'm open for a Duckworth lynch. His recent posts do not give me a reason I shouldn't be.

VOTE: Duckworth

Also willing to switch back.

[IceGuy]

Well, that settles it. Reads in case I get NK'd:

Town: Chip/grapes/GNB
Leaning town: Realeo/Alchemist
Neutral: Assemble
Leaning scum: Luca/Mulch/CB
Scum: Una
NEEDS TO FUCKING POST CONTENT: ironstove

[IceGuy]

Also Ice you forgot commknight

You're right, the CB under "leaning scum" should be a CK.

[IceGuy]

Also, for reference, LlamaFluff, if you ever decide to patch up this set, then I would suggest you

put a limit as how long Day Talk lasts

, so the quickhammer at the end doesn't happen.

No, I think that's fine; that's the advantage scum gets in return for the town PR. If a town player votes in MyLo or LyLo without deliberation, that's the town's problem.

Good game, everyone!