Mini Normal 1963 - List Mod Mafia Game Over

[wavemode]

You know I want to give a sarcastic response to all of this but. All of these points are incredibly deeply unconvincing. Saying "I townread him on meta" with zero additional context is about the least useful sentence that can be said in a game of mafia. And you're saying it in response to wicked's point that your other reasoning wasn't strong, as though "I townread him on meta" is a strong point. Like. no. If you think you have good reasons for townreading Wossi, explain them.

I can't talk about ongoing games

[Wickedestjr]

I townread Wossi on meta

That's impressive considering he has no completed scum games. And you should have been

upfront

about this instead of making it seem like you were town reading him for the "me too".

Wossi demonstrated an unusual amount of confidence in his skitter scum read on page two

...Where? And what is an "unusual amount of confidence" anyway? Pointing out something suspicious and placing a vote?

I quoted the "unusual amount of confidence" in the post that you originally voted me for. When he said "I was still excited by the fact that I just happened to random vote for scum" on page 2.

his behavior doesn't make sense if that confidence is genuine

Right I forgot about that new rule where you're only allowed to scumread one person at a time

Absolutely not. I never said anything along these lines.

[wavemode]

* he exhibits strong feelings about 'claiming scum' = 'scum' (a position that I think is unfounded), and hops on Flubber, but only after HEM and Sephiroth start a thing there

* I point out this is odd and ask why he had a delayed reaction to something he apparently feels strongly about

*he responds by saying that he was distracted by having been excited by voting scum (me) in RVS

Maybe I'm just slow but I see literally nothing AI here

Also, wasn't this over the course of, what, a few hours? It'd be one thing if he called Flubber scummy in October and voted him in December, but your definition of delayed reaction is a bit too stringent for real life. Not everything happens all at once in forum mafia

This case is the actual definition of reachy, btw. But it's the early game, most cases are bound to be reachy. Reachiness alone does not a scum make, as I explain farther down ⬇ You're focusing too much on the reachiness aspect and ignoring when I said he's parking his vote on an already forming wagon

, but fails to explain how or why I'm scummy

This is false btw. If you don't believe his reasons (he thought you were defensive and didn't like you starting a wagon) is one thing but to say he has no explanation is untrue

I fail to understand why this reasoning is a reachy explanation for a vote at thus point in the game, so I don't understand why you dislike wicked's vote. I can understand the argument that it's derivative, because I made the point several pages before he did, but I don't think it can be classified as 'reachy.

I partitioned the game. Most people are on two big wagons, and a few are elsewhere. Just as a matter of course, there is probably scum avoiding the wagons - I'm guessing Lalendra. Then there's people like Wicked, who didn't start the wagon but have decided to join it for one reason or another. There's likely scum in there as well. Now WickedJr, who said absolutely nothing to or about Wossi in the very early game, then was suddenly Mr. "hey i think this Wossi guy is horrible and I believe these other four people who coincidentally are already voting him are astute mafia players whom I agree with wholeheartedly. Let me draw up some reasons Wossi is a scumlord and slap my vote there too" is the worst among them in my view. (aka Mr. I'm going to do nothing for a long time then vote Wossi 90 minutes after Nexus posts a VC showing him to be at L-3. Was the vote based on Wossi's play? Or opportunism?)

This is obviously operating under the assumption that Wossi is town, which currently I am for a wide variety of reasons - some gut, some logical, some meta, and not the least of which is the speed of the growth of his wagon.

[skitter30]

Maybe I'm just slow but I see literally nothing AI here

Also, wasn't this over the course of, what, a few hours? It'd be one thing if he called Flubber scummy in October and voted him in December, but your definition of delayed reaction is a bit too stringent for real life. Not everything happens all at once in forum mafia

This case is the actual definition of reachy, btw. But it's the early game, most cases are bound to be reachy. Reachiness alone does not a scum make, as I explain farther down ⬇ You're focusing too much on the reachiness aspect and ignoring when I said he's parking his vote on an already forming wagon

According to Wossi, claiming scum means that Flubber is scum. I think if he actually believed this, he would have mentioned it and pushed it during the first possible oppurtunity. Instead, he waited until other people, like Sephiroth, made the push. It kinda looks like he waited for the push to become legitimized by other people and hopped on when it seemed like no one was objecting. His actions ('hopping on to the Flubber wagon only once other people made it a thing') don't match his stated beliefs ('claiming scum means that Flubber is scum'). His Flubber vote reeks of opportunism, which is scummy to me.

What I meant by 'delayed reaction' is not the fact that it happened an hour and a half later so much as he had the opportunity to react to something, failed to do so, and started pushing it once other people were pushing it too.

And I'm not arguing that reachy is scummy. I'm arguing that waiting for a wagon to form before opportunistically hopping on is scummy. (We're actually arguing the same thing here, just you're applying it to Wicked and I'm applying it to Wossi).

This is false btw. If you don't believe his reasons (he thought you were defensive and didn't like you starting a wagon) is one thing but to say he has no explanation is untrue

I didn't say he didn't have any explanations for why he thinks I'm scum. I'm saying that his stated reasons are bad in that they don't actually explain a scumlean. I wasn't defensive and he failed to show where he thought I was being defensive. I don't think that starting a wagon in RVS is AI. He gave reasons why he didn't like me, but they weren't credible because he hasn't actually backed them up (defensive), or weren't AI (starting a wagon). In fact, the 'defensive' thing just looks like he's throwing a accusation at me instead of actually talking with me or answering the question.

Now WickedJr, who said absolutely nothing to or about Wossi in the very early game, then was suddenly Mr. "hey i think this Wossi guy is horrible and I believe these other four people who coincidentally are already voting him are astute mafia players whom I agree with wholeheartedly. Let me draw up some reasons Wossi is a scumlord and slap my vote there too" is the worst among them in my view. (aka Mr. I'm going to do nothing for a long time then vote Wossi 90 minutes after Nexus posts a VC showing him to be at L-3. Was the vote based on Wossi's play? Or opportunism?)

This is obviously operating under the assumption that Wossi is town, which currently I am for a wide variety of reasons - some gut, some logical, some meta, and not the least of which is the speed of the growth of his wagon.

What makes Wicked's vote worse than Taco's? Tacos also said nothing to or about Flubber before his L-2 on the Flubber wagon, beyond asking Sephiroth to switch his vote from Flubber to HEM.

"hey i think this Wossi guy is horrible and I believe

these other four people who coincidentally are already voting him are astute mafia players whom I agree with wholeheartedly

. Let me draw up some reasons Wossi is a scumlord and slap my vote there too"

Bolded never happened. He didn't say that anywhere.

[iDanyboy]

Maybe I'm just slow but I see literally nothing AI here

but fails to explain how or why I'm scummy

This is false btw. If you don't believe his reasons (he thought you were defensive and didn't like you starting a wagon) is one thing but to say he has no explanation is untrue.

If you click this link you can see there interactions and I think it makes it a lot easier to see why I think his scummy. In his second post he says that skitter made a wagon without commenting on in, this is fishy because he is fence sitting by not calling him scum but calling him out for something. When skitter ask's him about this he calls him defensive. So instead of answering a reasonable question he attacks skitter for being defensive when he isn't, this is what it means when he says that he doesn't answer questions. He was asked why he made a comment without explaining it and he ignores it and instead attacks skitter. He doesn't answer him when he asks why he had a delayed reaction to voting flubber and he won't answer skitter question 'why do you think I'm scum'. Instead he just reaffirms that he think skitter is scum without explaining why.

[Sephiroth]

First off I don't like Seph's tone's tone about building the suspsence? idk sounds scum like if you ask me because like i thought it was an obvious joke or fake claim in my opinion and Seph is sounding like she's trying to make it sound bad by force, thats what i mean by sounding scum.

Then skitter posted asking why i did that, same thing. Scum buddy post or innocent post? Not sure, but to me seem like 75% scum buddy and 25% innocent but then I had been in a scum game with skitter when we were scum buddies she was a hard lurker so this is very different. Meh, the other way i guess.

If it was an obvious joke then you probably wouldn't have had 2 people directly ask for clarification, and several other people independently discuss whether it was a fake claim or not. I think it was pretty objectively NOT an obvious joke. And even if it were, you avoided a direct question when you had the chance to set the record straight. Why the hell did you think I was asking? Just for fun? You made the game state confusing then you refused to clarify the situation as the town questioned/speculated about what you meant. That to me is anti-town and worthy of a vote. Your little extra paragraph at the end is pretty suspect. You basically are speculating that because 2 (among a couple others) who were not clear about the sincerity of the claim are scum because...they weren't clear about your claim? Is it possible that just maybe, it was genuinely plausible that your actions were confusing and merited clarification? You're OMGUSing pretty hard over 1 vote...

Also, as I said, 1st and 2nd to claim town are probably town

This seems like some wildly unfounded conjecture to me. You've heard the term WIFOM, right?

First is incredibly reachy and the quote is taken out of context

Second is similarly reading too deep and drawing a conclusion from nothing

I disagree on the first quote but I agree that the second is reachy. As has been discussed, you could argue that 68 from tiam was also not scumhunting, but looking for an excuse to park a vote, with reachy reasoning. I think its even worse since tiam first discouraged the wagon and then hopped on for a manufactured and thin reason. What are your thoughts on tiam?

---

There are a lot of things happening right now and I'm at work so I'll cut this post here and post some more tonight.

[wavemode]

According to Wossi, claiming scum means that Flubber is scum. I think if he actually believed this, he would have mentioned it and pushed it during the first possible oppurtunity.

This is not necessarily true. As I said, this game is in the real world and the players are human. That he didn't jump on something the minute it was posted is not AI for me. And even if we consider it a bit sus, in the grand scheme of things does not make his vote any worse than the many others on the Flubber wagon.

I'm saying that his stated reasons are bad in that they don't actually explain a scumlean.

I can definitely see Wossi scumreading you for those reasons.

What makes Wicked's vote worse than Taco's? Tacos also said nothing to or about Flubber before his L-2 on the Flubber wagon, beyond asking Sephiroth to switch his vote from Flubber to HEM.

...all the reasons I've already given? It's not just that one thing

Bolded never happened. He didn't say that anywhere.

He said it right here:

Vote: Wossi

"I agree that Wossi is scum and support this wagon"

[Flubbernugget]

I feel bad for skitter constantly having to repeat themselves.

[wavemode]

What are your thoughts on tiam?

As in most games, I would happily lynch tiam, out of principle

As for whether he is scum or not, I have no idea

[iDanyboy]

1

(aka Mr. I'm going to do nothing for a long time then vote Wossi 90 minutes after Nexus posts a VC showing him to be at L-3. Was the vote based on Wossi's play? Or opportunism?)

2

This is obviously operating under the assumption that Wossi is town, which currently I am for a wide variety of reasons - some gut, some logical, some meta,

3

and not the least of which is the speed of the growth of his wagon.

1

, Why do you not apply the same logic to Wossi? His done the same thing but you called it reaching.

2

, What logical reasons do you have to think that lead to Wossi being town? And how can you have a meta read on Wossi when he has no completed scum games?

3

, The speed of a wagon has nothing to do with alignment, scum can get to L-2/1 just as easily as town can.

Would also like to know what you think of this.

If you click this link you can see there interactions and I think it makes it a lot easier to see why I think his scummy. In his second post he says that skitter made a wagon without commenting on in, this is fishy because he is fence sitting by not calling him scum but calling him out for something. When skitter ask's him about this he calls him defensive. So instead of answering a reasonable question he attacks skitter for being defensive when he isn't, this is what it means when he says that he doesn't answer questions. He was asked why he made a comment without explaining it and he ignores it and instead attacks skitter. He doesn't answer him when he asks why he had a delayed reaction to voting flubber and he won't answer skitter question 'why do you think I'm scum'. Instead he just reaffirms that he think skitter is scum without explaining why.

[Sergtacos]

Joking

K. I don't really like that you waited and built the suspense. Adding unnecessary confusion and uncertainty to the dialog is not pro-town. It also feasibly gives you time to see how the town is taking the claim before choosing whether you want to follow through or pull back. VOTE: sergtacos

I built suspense how? You asked me if i was joking or not then my next post was joking. I don't understand how I'm building suspense here. and the rest of it i don't understand. its the "follow through or pullback" part. english isn't my first language.

First off I don't like Seph's tone's tone about building the suspsence? idk sounds scum like if you ask me because like i thought it was an obvious joke or fake claim in my opinion and Seph is sounding like she's trying to make it sound bad by force, thats what i mean by sounding scum.

Then skitter posted asking why i did that, same thing. Scum buddy post or innocent post? Not sure, but to me seem like 75% scum buddy and 25% innocent but then I had been in a scum game with skitter when we were scum buddies she was a hard lurker so this is very different. Meh, the other way i guess.

If it was an obvious joke then you probably wouldn't have had 2 people directly ask for clarification, and several other people independently discuss whether it was a fake claim or not. I think it was pretty objectively NOT an obvious joke. And even if it were, you avoided a direct question when you had the chance to set the record straight. Why the hell did you think I was asking? Just for fun? You made the game state confusing then you refused to clarify the situation as the town questioned/speculated about what you meant. That to me is anti-town and worthy of a vote. Your little extra paragraph at the end is pretty suspect. You basically are speculating that because 2 (among a couple others) who were not clear about the sincerity of the claim are scum because...they weren't clear about your claim? Is it possible that just maybe, it was genuinely plausible that your actions were confusing and merited clarification? You're OMGUSing pretty hard over 1 vote...

In my perspective it was an obvious joke. So you can't really put that on me because its what I see. What direct question? Yeah I asked what is it to you? That I believed was an obvious joke but lmfao u got butt hurt over that? Not sure if you're town because of that or you're scum trying to get a wagon on me all because I made a joke lmao. And the rest i dont understand.

[TwoInAMillion]

I'm not liking Sergtacos pushing the claiming scum thing...

VOTE: SergtacosVOTE:

[TwoInAMillion]

VOTE: Sergtacos

[iDanyboy]

I'm not liking Sergtacos pushing the claiming scum thing...

He never...

[TwoInAMillion]

Sorry I mean seph, not serg.

VOTE: Sephiroth

[wavemode]

1, Why do you not apply the same logic to Wossi? His done the same thing but you called it reaching.

idk if I'm not understanding what you're saying or you're stretching what I said, but as far as I can tell Wossi did no such thing as I described

2, What logical reasons do you have to think that lead to Wossi being town?

All the things I've been describing? I don't see the scum motivation in Wossi's posts thus far.

3, The speed of a wagon has nothing to do with alignment, scum can get to L-2/1 just as easily as town can.

Just by virtue of random chance this isn't true

And it goes even beyond that. All the nonsense Wossi is accused of, scum tend to specifically try to avoid doing, especially in the very early game... to avoid this exact situation he is in now

[skitter30]

@wavemode:

I'm pretty sure we're just going to go around in circles so I think I'm going to drop it cuz I've already made my point. If you want me to continue to go line by line I can.

To summarize: I kinda feel like you're deflecting away from the wossi wagon, and I feel like the reasoning you're applying to wicked can be applied to nearly all the votes cast thus far. I don't per se like wicked's vote, and I don't per se dislike it. It just kinda is. However, imo it is not nearly the 'reachiest' or 'sketchiest' vote in the thread.

[iDanyboy]

idk if I'm not understanding what you're saying or you're stretching what I said, but as far as I can tell Wossi did no such thing as I described

This is what you said about Wickedestjr "(aka Mr. I'm going to do nothing for a long time then vote Wossi 90 minutes after Nexus posts a VC showing him to be at L-3."
This is exactly what Wossi did. He waited till Flubber got some votes and then hopped on with some thin reasoning.

All the things I've been describing? I don't see the scum motivation in Wossi's posts thus far.

You don't see scum motivation in calling skitter out but not calling it scummy so he can fence sit? Calling skitter defensive when he follows up on his comment? Call skitter scum and not explain why he thinks so when asked? Jumping onto a wagon only after two other players had voted? Not explaining why he didn't comment on it the first time? You have not said why these actions lead you to believe he was town?

Just by virtue of random chance this isn't true

How? If it's random chance his more likely to get voted by town then scum.

All the nonsense Wossi is accused of, scum tend to specifically try to avoid doing, especially in the very early game... to avoid this exact situation he is in now

You're saying Wossi wouldn't do something scummy because scum avoid being scummy?

[wavemode]

This is exactly what Wossi did.

No it isn't. Where is the VC. What are you talking about

You don't see scum motivation in calling skitter out but not calling it scummy so he can fence sit? Calling skitter defensive when he follows up on his comment? Call skitter scum and not explain why he thinks so when asked? Jumping onto a wagon only after two other players had voted? Not explaining why he didn't comment on it the first time?

Nope, not necessarily. You can disagree with me if you want but I think town do all of those things all the time, especially on page 2 of the game.

How? If it's random chance his more likely to get voted by town then scum.

I don't know how this refutes my point

You're saying Wossi wouldn't do something scummy because scum avoid being scummy?

I'd invite you to point to exactly where I said this or where you're getting this. You literally said, scum and town are just as likely to be put at L-1. All I said was, no, town are technically more likely, all things being random, when scum are trying to blend in. So what I pointed out before about wagon speed is a valid consideration, even if, in and of itself, it is not definitive proof of anything.

I feel like in general you have this habit of pointing to one thing and completely ignoring context. Like, for future reference, the next time you have a question for me along the lines of "So you think X just because Y" the answer is NO. I think X because of the ENTIRE, COMBINED CONTEXT of Y, Z, H, Q, and Theta, all occurring together within the same situation at the same time. Y just happens to be one particular aspect of it.

[implosion]

Not entirely sure yet what to make of all of this from wavemode. His honing in on wicked's vote is interesting, and I can see the line of reasoning, but don't agree that it's especially strong. His stated reasons for Wossi being town are all garbage. There are two new ones: first is the speed of the wagon, and as others have mentioned wagon speed is not useful. In particular it is meaningless when taken out of the context of the actual specific votes on the wagon for purposes of trying to determine the alignment of the person being wagoned. The only reason to think that a wagon on scum would grow more slowly is because scum would be less likely to join it, but that's flawed both because scum do sometimes vote each other even early and because it's entirely possible to have a wagon on scum composed entirely of town. And if the wagon is all town, then the speed at which it forms is basically meaningless. I am also curious what wavemode means by "random chance" meaning wagons on town are likely to form more quickly.

Second is this:

All the nonsense Wossi is accused of, scum tend to specifically try to avoid doing, especially in the very early game... to avoid this exact situation he is in now

which is just like the most basic kind of too scummy to be scum argument. I can actually see this line coming very easily from wavemode-town who is confbiasing himself on wossi and just viewing everything he's saying in the light of him being town. But saying "scum try to avoid doing the things he's been accused of" without getting into the specifics of any of the actual substantive points that have been made against Wossi is not a rebuttal. Some of the points that have been made against Wossi are not generic points like wavemode is making them out to be (for instance, my 2nd point in 73).

I also quite dislike that Wossi's rate of posting started out solid and has steadily fallen as his wagon has gained steam. I feel like he's scum trying to lurk through the worst of the wagon and hoping wavemode's arguments will disperse it. Of course this may just be real life but he posted 9 times in the first 24 hours, then got the 4th and 5th votes on his wagon, made one post that did not address anything related to his wagon which was over a day ago, and hasn't posted since.

[implosion]

All I said was, no, town are technically more likely, all things being random, when scum are trying to blend in. So what I pointed out before about wagon speed is a valid consideration, even if, in and of itself, it is not definitive proof of anything.

What?

Okay. If I'm interpreting this correctly, why should we lynch at all? Any given wagon that reaches l-1 at ANY speed is more likely to be on town than on scum. How do you draw a correlation between specifically *wagon speed* and how likely the wagon is to be on town?

[wavemode]

Not entirely sure yet what to make of all of this from wavemode. His honing in on wicked's vote is interesting, and I can see the line of reasoning, but don't agree that it's especially strong. His stated reasons for Wossi being town are all garbage. There are two new ones: first is the speed of the wagon, and as others have mentioned wagon speed is not useful. In particular it is meaningless when taken out of the context of the actual specific votes on the wagon for purposes of trying to determine the alignment of the person being wagoned. The only reason to think that a wagon on scum would grow more slowly is because scum would be less likely to join it, but that's flawed both because scum do sometimes vote each other even early and because it's entirely possible to have a wagon on scum composed entirely of town. And if the wagon is all town, then the speed at which it forms is basically meaningless. I am also curious what wavemode means by "random chance" meaning wagons on town are likely to form more quickly.

Second is this:

All the nonsense Wossi is accused of, scum tend to specifically try to avoid doing, especially in the very early game... to avoid this exact situation he is in now

which is just like the most basic kind of too scummy to be scum argument. I can actually see this line coming very easily from wavemode-town who is confbiasing himself on wossi and just viewing everything he's saying in the light of him being town. But saying "scum try to avoid doing the things he's been accused of" without getting into the specifics of any of the actual substantive points that have been made against Wossi is not a rebuttal. Some of the points that have been made against Wossi are not generic points like wavemode is making them out to be (for instance, my 2nd point in 73).

I also quite dislike that Wossi's rate of posting started out solid and has steadily fallen as his wagon has gained steam. I feel like he's scum trying to lurk through the worst of the wagon and hoping wavemode's arguments will disperse it. Of course this may just be real life but he posted 9 times in the first 24 hours, then got the 4th and 5th votes on his wagon, made one post that did not address anything related to his wagon which was over a day ago, and hasn't posted since.

Any given wagon is more likely to be on Town than Scum, just given random chance. Is that inaccurate? Wagon speed proves nothing - not sure why anyone is suggesting I think it does, it absolutely does not - but it also is not irrelevant. So I felt it worthy to mention, at least.

Like your last paragraph about Wossi activity. Completely valid points, all. But they prove nothing in and of themselves - as you say yourself, it could just be real life. But you are still considering it in your analysis, within the context of all the other information. I'm doing the exact same thing.

As I said, I have meta to go on but I can't talk about ongoing games. I'm trying to lay this out in the best way I can using in-game evidence. You disagree with my points, fine. I was asked to explain my townread of Wossi further and I have, ad nauseum. I don't like ignoring it when people ask me direct questions, even though I'm not the best at getting out exactly what my thought process is.

[wavemode]

All I said was, no, town are technically more likely, all things being random, when scum are trying to blend in. So what I pointed out before about wagon speed is a valid consideration, even if, in and of itself, it is not definitive proof of anything.

What?

Okay. If I'm interpreting this correctly, why should we lynch at all? Any given wagon that reaches l-1 at ANY speed is more likely to be on town than on scum. How do you draw a correlation between specifically *wagon speed* and how likely the wagon is to be on town?

As I said above, wagon speed proves nothing in and of itself and I never said it did. I just felt it worth mentioning within the context of everything else, that I didn't like how quickly the wagon formed.

[implosion]

Any given wagon is more likely to be on Town than Scum, just given random chance. Is that inaccurate?

No, but it's misleading. When talking about random chance in a mafia game, the baseline for comparison shouldn't be 50/50. It should be the probability that a randomly selected person is mafia. Although looking back at the discussion you were never actually making this as a point in its own right so it's irrelevant.

[skitter30]

Any given wagon is more likely to be on Town than Scum, just given random chance.

This is true. If we simulated a game and votes were placed at random on various players, a resulting wagon is more likely to be on town, since there are more town players.

However . . . we aren't placing votes randomly. We're basing votes by analyzing behavior and trying to determine if its scummy or not. If the playerlist agrees that person A is scummy, person A is more likely to have votes placed on them, than, say, person B who is relatively townread.

Your statement is irrelevant in the context of an actual game where votes are placed for non-random reasons.