NY 174: Oldy Mafia 2 (Game Over)

[DrippingGoofball]

Yosarian is town.

[CrashTextDummie]

DGB and farside town reads look particularly far-fetched.

What makes you say that? (I think he is right)

I don't see how you can get a town read on DGB from two page one votes and two town declarations (which is all she had done at that point). Same goes for farside's two posts. Why do you think they are town?

Straight up agreeing with the fact that he is just bandwagonning. But that's not the real point especially since it's RVS and #yolo. But it's that last line especially that is almost an appeal to the populace that I think we can see as the foundation for CTD's play.

I'm actually only half-joking when I say that wagoning Glork is good for the town. This is also my standard opening for games that feature Glork. I don't see how you can call this post the "foundation" for my play and calling it "damning" is a huge stretch.

For if you look in his third post there are even examples of this where he does a straight up Appeal to Authority:

As Seol pointed out, agreeing with another player is not an appeal to authority. I consider your arguments against me a OMGUS-tinged smear campaign.

3.) CrashTextDummie, I have not read the last Oldy game. Please explain how you "caught UT in that game." And then explain why you decided to bring it up.

UT placed an ambiguous bandwagon vote on me and when questioned about it couldn't make up his mind on whether he was joking, sarcastic or just bandwagoning. He also tried to retrofit his vote with reasoning. He was a lot more flustered about it than MafiaSSK is here, hence why I don't consider it as strong of a tell here. I brought it up because the town in that game was not very receptive to that tell and let the UT slot survive into Lylo despite him being obv-scum.

That's not an appeal to authority: that would be following someone on the basis of who they are. That's agreeing with someone else's arguments. That's what arguments are for.

While you are correct, I don't see why you would feel compelled to make arguments for me other than to attempt to buddy me. This point certainly doesn't feel integral to your reasoning for voting MafiaSSK.

I'll go a step further. CTD is on the NERVERLYNCH list. He's that town.

While I am flattered, I'm not quite sure how I've earned this distinction. Not that I expect it to stick for too long.

I love being town. Figuring stuff out is fun. Dissecting arguments, finding motivations, skewering liars, etc. It's a great time.

Have you actually done any of that?

I don't see where MafiaSSK disowned the legitimacy of his Tigris joke, and I think you're misapplying something MafiaSSK said about his choice to respond to Tigris's question with a theory position rather than his choice to vote Tigris. (Incidentally, it looks like PJ also conflated these two separate things in Post 160.)

Please respond. Best, GC.

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here (even with the edit). Please rephrase.

Really? Excusing your hardly logical reasoning with belief?

Just to make it clear, in your view, CES saying "I agree with CTD that chamber's alignment is fairly obvious at this point" right after CTD's posts (and even though CTD didn't make it clear he thought chamber was obvscum) is a discreet way of showing agreement to a scum partner.

Honestly, I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt about that RV-wagon theory, but you just keep on coming out with some outlandish reasonings I frankly wouldn't expect from an oldie.

I agree with the thrust of this argument. MafiaSSK clearly misread CES's statement and when this was pointed out to him, instead of admitting his mistake, he tried to spin his argument so that he could maintain the "associative tell" between us. This does not look like legitimate scumhunting to me.

Eh, the LML wagon is finally building up a little bit. I like to keep the pressure up at least until he actually contributes a little bit more.

How much is "a little bit more"? While trying to keep pressure on an undercontributing player is pro-town, the wording of this post indicates that LML doesn't have to do a whole lot more than just show up for you to move your vote, giving me the impression that you're keeping it there more for appearance than actual pressure.

I really hate this post (and the one after). I am not sure a lack of reasoning, especially from chamber is worthy of a vote. Particularly because I don't see a huge reason not to change at that point? 128 and 129 look very superficial, I don't see them as actual reasons for them being scum.

My issue with chamber has nothing to do with lack of reasoning. Please explain in more detail why you find those posts superficial. Apparently these are the only posts that stood out to you apart from MafiaSSK stuff in these first 12 pages. To call your scumhunting effort underwhelming would be an understatement.

[LoudmouthLee]

I'm here. Long post incoming...

[LoudmouthLee]

I need both of you to trust me. Right now, okay? Please just work with me here, and I promise I will explain everything later, okay?

'You’re an insane, degenerate piece of filth, and you deserve to die.'

...
Why did you feel the need to telegraph a potential vote change?

This mirrored my thinking exactly. I'm currently a fan of chamber's play, and have him pro-town.

Thank you for your answer. Now please answer who you think the "weak" players are in the game.

You are correct that I am not concerned with whether MafiaSSK is a "weak" player. I am concerned with lynching scum.

I refrained from doing so for a reason. I gave you the answer that was behind my reaction to the MafiaSSK wagon (strong at theory, with reputations = you, Seol, LML; not so = MafiaSSK, Tigris). I don't see how it's a useful exercise for me to say who I think isn't that good at mafia. (Not that I even really have particular people in mind.)

Okay, I gave an FOS to MafiaSSK, and I never voted him. If you would like to run a meta on me (which you're MORE than welcome to), I FoS everyone. Hell, I'd FoS my mother if she said something that I don't agree with. I also tend to confirm vote as well. I'm trying not to make broad, sweeping judgements yet because, well... we're just beginning D1. Here's what I can tell you about my play. I random voted Tigris via dice roll, and changed my vote to StD. I'm tried to scum-hunt with what I have at my disposal, but if you think you're going to catch scum THIS early with small "common" tells, you're sadly mistaken. This game will be trying. Completely.

With that being said, I feel somewhat uncomfortable with D1 players that constantly vote-hop looking for a bandwagon to start. I don't remember playing with Tripod, but he's being quite ridiculous with his votes. Possibly his meta, and when I have some time, it's something I'm willing to research.

Sotty thoughts on LML and petroleumjelly?

LML is probably scum, his early jump on both the early wagons was pretty weak and his movement away hasn't swayed my mind away from this. I'm looking to see what his post weekend posts have to say about the state of the game.

You're wrong here, Sotty. I can only go back to the fact that I made a grand total of two posts about MafiaSSK, and gave him an FOS. Please feel free to meta me.

Here's what I can say: I still like the Save the Dragons vote.

Clearly suspicious retaliatory Vote: Untrod Tripod

UNVOTE: whatever
VOTE: MafiaSSK

Unvote, Vote Seol

unvote, Vote: undo

undo: vote: undo, redo: vote: Seol

wait, that's not right.

Unvote: undo, Vote: Seol

Vote: LML

StD has tried to right the coattails of not 1, not 2, but *3* different wagons on day one without truly doing any sort of scumhunting at all. Although I would expect this from someone like AbR or DGB, StD's meta doesn't seem to corroborate this.

I'm really happy with my StD vote.

[VitaminR]

Okay, I gave an FOS to MafiaSSK, and I never voted him. If you would like to run a meta on me (which you're MORE than welcome to), I FoS everyone. Hell, I'd FoS my mother if she said something that I don't agree with. I also tend to confirm vote as well. I'm trying not to make broad, sweeping judgements yet because, well... we're just beginning D1. Here's what I can tell you about my play. I random voted Tigris via dice roll, and changed my vote to StD. I'm tried to scum-hunt with what I have at my disposal, but if you think you're going to catch scum THIS early with small "common" tells, you're sadly mistaken. This game will be trying. Completely.

I wasn't really talking about you as much there, but I get your point. I'm not so sure what you're responding to with the second part of this, though. I'm well aware of the fact that my impression of you so far could be entirely wrong-headed.

But, to be fair to myself, here's what I see:

You went along easily with two pretty weak wagons. I pressured you on it and you immediately back off the Tigris vote (I get that you're saying now that your Tigris vote was still sort of a random vote, but Post 62 and Post 70 didn't sound that way and you only started saying that after I pressured you).

Then you switch to an StD vote, based on one exchange with undo and some vote-hopping of his you illustrate, while ignoring the majority of the content he's posted. It doesn't exactly inspire confidence.

How much is "a little bit more"? While trying to keep pressure on an undercontributing player is pro-town, the wording of this post indicates that LML doesn't have to do a whole lot more than just show up for you to move your vote, giving me the impression that you're keeping it there more for appearance than actual pressure.

I didn't really mean it that way. If you've read any of my posts, you'll know I'm not voting LML to get him to contribute. I just meant that I'm hoping to get a better sense of him from his response to being under pressure while he catches up with the game.

[LoudmouthLee]

Okay, I gave an FOS to MafiaSSK, and I never voted him. If you would like to run a meta on me (which you're MORE than welcome to), I FoS everyone. Hell, I'd FoS my mother if she said something that I don't agree with. I also tend to confirm vote as well. I'm trying not to make broad, sweeping judgements yet because, well... we're just beginning D1. Here's what I can tell you about my play. I random voted Tigris via dice roll, and changed my vote to StD. I'm tried to scum-hunt with what I have at my disposal, but if you think you're going to catch scum THIS early with small "common" tells, you're sadly mistaken. This game will be trying. Completely.

I wasn't really talking about you as much there, but I get your point. I'm not so sure what you're responding to with the second part of this, though. I'm well aware of the fact that my impression of you so far could be entirely wrong-headed.

But, to be fair to myself, here's what I see:

You went along easily with two pretty weak wagons. I pressured you on it and you immediately back off the Tigris vote (I get that you're saying now that your Tigris vote was still sort of a random vote, but Post 62 and Post 70 didn't sound that way and you only started saying that after I pressured you).

Then you switch to an StD vote, based on one exchange with undo and some vote-hopping of his you illustrate, while ignoring the majority of the content he's posted. It doesn't exactly inspire confidence.

How much is "a little bit more"? While trying to keep pressure on an undercontributing player is pro-town, the wording of this post indicates that LML doesn't have to do a whole lot more than just show up for you to move your vote, giving me the impression that you're keeping it there more for appearance than actual pressure.

I didn't really mean it that way. If you've read any of my posts, you'll know I'm not voting LML to get him to contribute. I just meant that I'm hoping to get a better sense of him from his response to being under pressure while he catches up with the game.

To be completely fair again, a LOT of people went alone with two weak wagons. Hell, some of the people you've quite ignored have actually BEEN on 3 or 4 wagons thus far. Why have they earned a pass from you?

[VitaminR]

That's all you're going to respond to? I've already explained multiple times why I felt your move stood out in particular. You're just picking on my wording there.

[LoudmouthLee]

That's all you're going to respond to? I've already explained multiple times why I felt your move stood out in particular. You're just picking on my wording there.

So, to paraphrase you: You're voting me because I went along with two (wait, one and an FoS) weak wagons with less than 7 pages on D1, and when I find something that truly looks and smells scummy to me, I change my vote to that person?

When I voted StD, I had a grand total of 2 or 3 votes on me (You, DrippingGoofball- who will vote for me regardless of anything whatsoever due to history, and Albert- who also likes voting me as well) - Hardly a wagon. There was no real pressure (sorry!) for me to make a move. I did it because I'm actively scum hunting.

[Save The Dragons]

I refrained from doing so for a reason. I gave you the answer that was behind my reaction to the MafiaSSK wagon (strong at theory, with reputations = you, Seol, LML; not so = MafiaSSK, Tigris). I don't see how it's a useful exercise for me to say who I think isn't that good at mafia. (Not that I even really have particular people in mind.)

@ PJ:
I know that it might defeat the purpose of asking your question, but I'm really not sure what you hope to accomplish by having him target out "weak" vs. "strong" players.

I'm also super jealous that you haven't asked me a question yet.

This is insulting. If you don't want to read the game, please replace out. There are others who would be happy to take your slot.

Natirasha is a new-school player, that's just what they do. I guess he's going through culture shock here. Amirite Nati? ;D

Back in my day, as I was joining mafiascum.net and waving to one of the dinosaurs outside my window because dinosaurs ruled the earth (seriously. A lot of people don't know the Jurassic Park movies are actually documentaries) when we replaced in, we took the time to read the entire thread, even if it was tens of pages long. And our posts weren't just one liners, we were pretty monstrous about our verbosity. The first dozen pages of this game are pretty tame.

Go on. We'll wait for you.

I'm actually only half-joking when I say that wagoning Glork is good for the town.

Why half-joking?

I love being town. Figuring stuff out is fun. Dissecting arguments, finding motivations, skewering liars, etc. It's a great time.

Have you actually done any of that?

I think he has you there, UT.

[Glork]

We should policy lynch Natirasha and be done with it.




:3



:3




:3


(Content incoming Wednesday.)

[Save The Dragons]

StD has tried to right the coattails of not 1,

Hey, I was on that MafiaSSK bandwagon before it was cool, not on the coattails. And to continue this unfortunate hipster comparison, I jumped off when it became popular. Popular with scum! Ohhhhh!

not 2, but *3* different wagons on day one

You are right. I totally did not give any warning as to why I wanted to jump onto

Oh wait!

Post 113 kinda sorta basically definately spills my guts as to why I think that LML and Seol bandwagons are awesome. If there was a Green Crayons or Porrochaz wagon at the time, I'd have considered it. Did I write a scathing expose on all those people? No, you're right. I simply saw what I believe to be a tell and I've run with it. I suppose if you ignore the fact that I accused several people of a scumtell because I thought they were being scummy, I can understand how it may look like I'm just sitting here,

without truly doing any sort of scumhunting at all.

yeah, yeah, but...

unvote, Vote: undo

If you're going to pick up on any one thing in this discussion, that seems like a weird one.

I'm voting undo...for funzies? Because I secretly have a crush on undo and want to get his attention but don't know how? That arrow avatar is pretty dreamy...

I'll admit that statement I made wasn't exactly the most transparently clear of statements. And it's such a shame I never clarified what I meant.

Oh wait!

Post 113 kinda sorta basically definately spills my guts as to why I think undo's lack of commitment is suspicious.

Did...you...even read post 113?

Clearly not, because in your post storm of quoting me, (which for some reason includes my random vote and also seems to utterly miss any posts that have content in them) you missed this one:

I also kind of want to know how he feels about my rational for chasing after undo.

(the he is you).

Did...you...even read any of my posts?

Although I would expect this from someone like AbR or DGB, StD's meta doesn't seem to corroborate this.

Okay now I'm just curious. What is my meta?

What is the meta from how I played this game 5 and a half years ago? Damn, now I feel sad, I had to research how long I've been off of the site. I was...let's see...20. Wow. When I think of all the alcohol that's passed through me from that date to this, it's astounding. I've had a girlfriend and had that end, I visited 2 countries, have been a student at 5 different schools, had 3 jobs, wrote 5 novels, but, no...you're right. I'm sure I play exactly the same.

[Albert B. Rampage]

Kill LML

[Untrod Tripod]

In post 276, CrashTextDummie wrote:
In post 166, Untrod Tripod wrote:
I love being town. Figuring stuff out is fun. Dissecting arguments, finding motivations, skewering liars, etc. It's a great time.


Have you actually done any of that?


I think he has you there, UT.

eh.

a. the stuff I got off VitR was that.
b. I don't liveblog my reading. most of that happens internally.
c. you know gosh darn well that you can't really do a lot day 1 with real cases.

[Untrod Tripod]

and I'm not trying to back off my VitR or LML reads there. I still feel strongly about those.

[Yosarian2]

That's all you're going to respond to? I've already explained multiple times why I felt your move stood out in particular. You're just picking on my wording there.

So, to paraphrase you: You're voting me because I went along with two (wait, one and an FoS) weak wagons with less than 7 pages on D1, and when I find something that truly looks and smells scummy to me, I change my vote to that person?

When I voted StD, I had a grand total of 2 or 3 votes on me (You, DrippingGoofball- who will vote for me regardless of anything whatsoever due to history, and Albert- who also likes voting me as well) - Hardly a wagon. There was no real pressure (sorry!) for me to make a move. I did it because I'm actively scum hunting.

LmL, can you explain what your stance was on Tigras was again? Was it a random vote, or was it an actual suspicion, and if so, why? I'm getting a little confused about what you're trying to say here.

[Yosarian2]

and I'm not trying to back off my VitR or LML reads there. I still feel strongly about those.

Are you implying that you think VitR and LML are scum together? That doesn't feel likely to me at this point.

[Green Crayons]

@LoudmouthLee:

Back in Post 62 you FOSed MafiaSSK while maintaining your vote on Tigris. You defended your FOS suspicion of MafiaSSK in Post 70. But I didn't catch where you actually explained why you were suspicious of MafiaSSK (so much so, that you would have voted MafiaSSK if not for Tigris's invocation of the third-on-the-bandwagon tell).

Why were you suspicious of MafiaSSK, and does that suspicion still linger?

LML didn't directly respond to this. Instead, he posted:

Okay, I gave an FOS to MafiaSSK, and I never voted him. If you would like to run a meta on me (which you're MORE than welcome to), I FoS everyone. Hell, I'd FoS my mother if she said something that I don't agree with. I also tend to confirm vote as well. I'm trying not to make broad, sweeping judgements yet because, well... we're just beginning D1. Here's what I can tell you about my play. I random voted Tigris via dice roll, and changed my vote to StD. I'm tried to scum-hunt with what I have at my disposal, but if you think you're going to catch scum THIS early with small "common" tells, you're sadly mistaken. This game will be trying. Completely.

From that response completely downplaying his FOS of MafiaSSK, it looks like LML is saying that he never really had any articulable suspicion against MafiaSSK. He just really wanted to FOS him, but not because of any real scum reasons, but because _____. The first answer that my mind jumps to to fill in the blank is a scummy rationale.

LML, please respond (to either my original question, my subsequent point made in this post, or both).

[Porochaz]

I really hate this post (and the one after). I am not sure a lack of reasoning, especially from chamber is worthy of a vote. Particularly because I don't see a huge reason not to change at that point? 128 and 129 look very superficial, I don't see them as actual reasons for them being scum.

My issue with chamber has nothing to do with lack of reasoning. Please explain in more detail why you find those posts superficial. Apparently these are the only posts that stood out to you apart from MafiaSSK stuff in these first 12 pages. To call your scumhunting effort underwhelming would be an understatement.

I struggle to explain things like this. Like I know you explained why you thought it was scummy, but its more you gaining reasons from chambers wording rather than the thought process behind it. It seems too easy.

[Green Crayons]

CTD:

Rephrased:

- MafiaSSK said that (1) it "would make sense to blow it off with a joke" when referring to how he responded to Tigris -- that is, it would make sense to respond to Tigris with a joke rather than with his bandwagon theory -- but MafiakSSK (2) never disowned the legitimacy of his Tigris vote, and directed PJ to look at MafiaSSK's earlier posts where he justified his Tigris vote. (Post 124.)

- You conflated those two points to say that MafiaSSK de-legitimized his vote for Tigris by recognizing that

his vote

should have been kept on the joke level. (Post 129.) As stated above, MafiaSSK acknowledged that maybe he should have responded with a joke instead of a bandwagon theory, but MafiaSSK never said that his vote itself was a joke or not legitimate (which he apparently thought was aligned with his own bandwagon theory).

Do you disagree with what I believe to be your mistake in reading MafiaSSK's posts?

-----

@Sotty:

In contrast, Vitamin slandered the players themselves ("Feels like a bunch of strong players going for an easy target.") To me, this denotes a scum mentality: attacking the players, rather than the rationale for their votes, to get the attention on the who instead of the why. This leads to identity-based suspicion rather than suspicion based on players who pushed bad reasons to lynch people.

I explicitly stated that I agreed with VitR's conclusions. Does that change anything?

No. Or, rather, I should say that it does not change anything with respect to how I feel about Vitamin's post.

(1) One player simply stating "agree" with another player's post is information on the agreeing player, not the original post.
(2) Town players (which I currently have you as likely being) agree with scum positions as an inevitability of the game.
(3) Because you do not see much light between your post and Vitamin's post, I attribute your agreement with Vitamin's statement to confirmation bias.

[MrBuddyLee]

@CES, Albert, chamber and Natirasha

, what do you think of

MafiaSSK

?

@PJ, Poro, CTD and undo

, you have somewhat similar reasons for voting SSK. I haven't read the guy in other games yet--have you? I want to know whether these odd behaviors you've noted are scumtells of his, or as Sotty has alluded to, are hallmarks of his overall loose/"lynchable" play. If you believe that one or more of these behaviors are genuine tells for him in particular, please elaborate.

@PJ

, do you think Glorkscum would defend SSKscum as stridently as he has?

@STD

, your belief that MafiaSSK is town is the lynchpin of your worldview. Can you please explain why you're so certain he's town?

@UT

, please explain how you view VitR's attacks on LML.

@CTD

, you've placed the burden of profiency upon yourself by alluding to your genius in the last Oldy game. Can you please list MafiaSSK's scumpartners in the order you intend to lynch them?

Reasoning behind the votes on the three current wagons:

LMLwagon

--DGB(no stated reasoning), vitR(for lml's dual tigris-ssk suspicions/BoP), Albert(no stated reasoning), UT(gut), STD(because mafiaSSK is town)

SeolWagon

--sotty(seol's vote on SSK was insincere), shanba(for ssk vote), CES(none), chamber(rhetoric is scummy), Glork(for something unspecified about seol's mafiassk vote), natirasha(no stated reasoning)

SSKWagon

--Tigris(3rd vote on wagon), PJ(detects insincerity, inconsistency), Seol(ssk's bad logic on wagons), poro(bad wagonlogic and overanalyzing), CTD(for trying to legitimize tigrisvote, some omgus) and undo(for bad reasoning/overstating)



My opinions of those three players:

LML

: tigrisvote is early and soft, stdvote and staying on is meh, he doesnt really have any other suspicions, dropped his suspicion of SSK like a hot potato, describes SSKwagon as a "previous wagon" and doesn't move vote to SSK even though he just FOSed SSK 24 hrs earlier, words-to-scumhunting ratio thin. doesn't currently look like a pro-town powerhouse.

Seol

: doesnt really have any suspicions besides mafiassk, and that suspicion is for meh reasons. both his suspicions and the reasons for suspecting him are one dimensional.

SSK

: suspects vitR, CES, CTD, ABR. somewhat sloppy play that leaves him open to attack. Is it scummy? Things like overzealous nonsensical pursuit of CES+CTD buddypair, says Shanba's thinking the same as him when actually they're thinking opposites, hyperbole like "nail in the coffin"... evaluating this guy will require radar recalibration. appears to be the prototypical scumpartner to throw under a bus, so associations won't be as easy as one might think if he flips red.

Other players who relatively irk me and why:

undo

: so many words, so few suspicions. reasoning on ssk is over the top about ssk's over-the-topness.

poro/shanba

: lurky, single suspicion for the most part, pretty milquetoasty

natirasha

: the obvious

tigris

: mostly been dealing with her image, hesitance to express more than one suspicion is a problem

*drops mike*
*sweeps up rust*

I also don't really know what a glipglop is.

It’s raunchy slang for "Travlorkian". It’s like the N-Word and C-Word had a baby and it was raised by all the bad words for Jews.

[chamber]

I feel like I've gotten a lot better since I last played with most of you (perhaps untrue~) and because of that I'm trying not to hold MafiaSSK to my memory of him. With that said, if I were going only off my memory of his play, he would be the weakest player in this game. Beyond that, if he had done anything I found remarkable, I would have remarked on it.

[chamber]

Can you explain your motivation behind breaking down the wagons as you chose to?

[petroleumjelly]

I was not able to submit this post last night due to internet issues. I see that I have a few questions but I do not have time to answer them this morning and I will try to get to them after work tonight.

1.)

Why did you feel the need to telegraph a potential vote change?

I originally had switched my vote while writing my post, but as I pared it down I downgraded to a FoS. Albert B. Rampage's post was so outrageously out of place that I could see myself just switching my vote the next morning even without more content being added.

Given Albert B. Rampage was apparently just quoting something, the FoS is retracted.

2.)

In response to VitaminR's Post 249, my concern is that you are drawing a poor distinction between strong and weak players in an invitational game filled with players who have generally each been playing mafia for over five years. I do not plan on underestimating players.

Even assuming I

did

believe there are a few "weak" players in the game, then if a "weak" player is scum, pretty much the only way they are going to get lynched is if they are attacked by the other "strong" players.

But I take it you also think there are only a few "strong" players? Mind sharing who

those

are, if you are not willing to divulge who you think the "weak" players are?

3.)

As I have explained, my problem with MafiaSSK is

not

based on his theory. It is based on how he

got

to the theory. Namely, he did not want to back down from his Tigris vote and has tried to legitimize it as more than it was. I know a couple players (e.g., Green Crayons, Shanba) have tried to separate his theory from his vote, but MafiaSSK has intertwined to the two to the point of having to argue that Tigris was "legitimately scummy." The way he has worded and responded about his theory shows an entrenchment mentality and not a scumhunting or true explanatory mentality.

Since then, his vote on Cogito Ergo Sum looks like an attempt to

look

productive moreso than legitimate scumhunting; it looks like he picked a target and then tried to make his "case" look good by blowing up every instance of "Seol tunnel vision" reflects a scum mentality. This is why the overuse of rhetoric and hyperbole is concerning.

His "connection" between Cogito Ergo Sum and CrashTextDummie did not apply, and yet he has since defended it even after his mistake was pointed out to him. And now he has tried to justify his bad reasoning on Cogito Ergo Sum as not being scummy because it

generates discussion

. His play reads as post hoc justifications and

not

naturally born thought-processes.

I also do not like Post 193.

[undo]

I agree with the thrust of this argument. MafiaSSK clearly misread CES's statement and when this was pointed out to him, instead of admitting his mistake, he tried to spin his argument so that he could maintain the "associative tell" between us. This does not look like legitimate scumhunting to me.

Summed it well. Also, notice that it wasn't the first time MafiaSSK did it. As PJ pointed out earlier, SSK had already pushed his random-bandwagon theory so that he could justify his vote on Tigris. Now, as I said, it is excusable if it happens once, but insisting on the same hurtful behavior over and over again becomes gravely suspicious.

Back in my day, as I was joining mafiascum.net and waving to one of the dinosaurs outside my window because dinosaurs ruled the earth (seriously. A lot of people don't know the Jurassic Park movies are actually documentaries) when we replaced in, we took the time to read the entire thread, even if it was tens of pages long. And our posts weren't just one liners, we were pretty monstrous about our verbosity. The first dozen pages of this game are pretty tame.

I remember that, people still played like that when I joined, during the Cretacious. When I came back to the site, a few months ago, I was sadly surprised to realize that dinosaurs were all but extinct, and so was loquacity. I ignore at what exact moment the meta-eorite has fallen, but the truth is that it turned those mammal one-liners into the new rulers, and the remaining reptilians had to adapt to survive. Natirasha was the first to introduce me to this new reality after I returned, that's why I am now (affectionately!) taunting him.

@PJ, Poro, CTD and undo, you have somewhat similar reasons for voting SSK. I haven't read the guy in other games yet--have you? I want to know whether these odd behaviors you've noted are scumtells of his, or as Sotty has alluded to, are hallmarks of his overall loose/"lynchable" play. If you believe that one or more of these behaviors are genuine tells for him in particular, please elaborate.

I don't recall ever playing with MafiaSSK before.

undo: so many words, so few suspicions. reasoning on ssk is over the top about ssk's over-the-topness.

Do you measure towniness by quantity of suspicions? And how is my reasoning over-the-top?

@chamber:

Still expecting an answer to my question about ABR.

[chamber]

@chamber: Still expecting an answer to my question about ABR.

And that's rather silly of you.