In post 1956, Cheetory6 wrote:Hi Kagami I asked you things.
Here's a summarized rundown if it makes it easier:
i) Why would you think that Transcend voting someone who wasn't around at all would look better on him? Wouldn't it look like he was doing nothing?
ii) Was wanting to policy lynch seriously factoring a lot into your stance on him in the earlygame? Do have any kind of history of advocating for policy lynching?
iii)
Kagami wrote:I would have to feel a little better about kmd before going that route.
"What exactly did KMD have to do with Spiff at this point?
You weren't voting him and he wasn't voting Spiff?
Also don't really understand why you felt bad about KMD here at this point. (assuming I'm reading this post correctly)"
i) I don't remember the context of this. Transcend looked towny enough early game; I especially didn't think that the "mulch reaction test" and the thought behind it was likely to be generated by scum.
ii) A "policy lynch" isn't just one thing, it means lots of different things, and really just exists as a term to be used to discredit a lynch that is proposed for reasons that aren't "content" driven. So here's a little tangent for you:
Towns on mafiascum lose for a reason, despite a "balanced" game being typically defined as one where town will win half the time if they act completely randomly. Why does this happen when there's so much amazing evidence that they should be picking up and using to perform much better than chance? The answer is that most people wildly overestimate the strength of their "reads" and are quite happy to forget about those instances where they're wrong. The evidence people gather is meaningful, but on the level of +/- a few percent.
If there's a player on mafiascum who can name a player each day as scum and be correct 50% of the time without the assistance of PRs or claims, that player would be the God of mafia, and town would win almost every game that they just listen to him and supplement his/her reads with power roles.
So that brings us back to this game. If Ether had started the game by flipping a coin and telling us "If I got heads, I made Mulch scum, but if I got tails, I made him town," then Mulch is a terrific lynch, especially in a 3-15 game where chance is only 20%. I would happily advocate it all day long in the absence of really, really compelling evidence to the contrary. I don't care about this stupid "scum can hide behind that so easily, so being competent is super scummy" line.
Now, Ether didn't quite do that, but the magic of team mafia did. In the absence of any posting, Mulch was a really, really good lynch, and putting the label of "policy" on it is just a discredit for what was almost a no-brainer. Now 2000 posts later, there remains absolutely no even modestly compelling reason not to think Mulch is scum, and a laundry list of reasons to think he is (which will be requested and then when produced will be given the "cases are scummy" treatment much like 1280 was).
iii) Early on Spiffeh made some interesting points against kmd that I quite liked. Seemed pretty unlikely that he would do that with a scumbuddy who was otherwise swimming along fine, which means that leaning more scummily on kmd comes with a more towny lean on spiff.
![:]](./images/smilies/icon_smiling.png "Cheerful Smile"){kind=icon}