Open 279 - Rusty Guillotine Mafia - Game Over!

[LuckayLuck]

Summary of how I stand:

Scum

Antitown (by a lot)
Jarti

Unknowns:

Simenon, Concission, RedCoyote, Zoraster, Percy
Ythill
Shadow Dancer
AlmasterGM
crypto
VPBaltar
Fate

Town

[crypto]

Unvote: Vote: Antitown.

With the caveat that I've still got one eye FIXED on AGM.

Some of the things VPB's said seem shifty.

[Jarti]

luck your conclusion based on how the antitown & agm wagons is awfully selective; you try to use the agm wagon as reason to re-wagon antitown and ignore the other wagons that have occurred in this game that got about as far as the antitown wagon originally did

why so

[Ythill]

Holy eyebleed, Luck.

I'm tired and that is a lot of text to wade through. Putting it off until tomorrow.

[RedCoyote]

I'm not really interested in defenses at this juncture. One of the reasons I'm so effective at finding the scumz after replacing in is that I get to weigh behavioral tells without arguing about them. I'd rather not lose to a convincing liar.

But I'm interested, and so should every other town-aligned player. You understand that, don't you?

---

SD's post 353 is good. He calls out a number of people and is trying to start some good conversations. If SD follows up on this, he'll have earned some serious points from me.

---

I never said claim, did I?

This sounds like doubletalk. I don't like your string of posts here at all, zora. I mean, they really, really leave a sour taste in my mouth. I didn't have much trouble with you pressuring AGM, but I feel like you're really squirming after VPB and crypto pressured you a bit. I mean, I get what you're saying. You're looking for reactions. The only reason I'm not prepared to just buy that at face value is that AGM is lurking. So, it's not like we're gauging how AGM is reacting to getting an increasing number of votes. Whether he logs on to see L-1 or logs on to see L-1 and a casual zora hammer threat makes little difference as far as I'm concerned.

---

JAgm doesn't need to claim, kjust post

Same to you.

---

Somewhat. But why does it matter when my main point is his insincere attitude?

It matters a lot. It means that (as this whole thing got started) I don't know for certain if you are joking about his attitude or not. The RVS is typically reserved for a lot of silliness. Frankly, Concission, I think it's you who is being insincere.

---

I don't know what to make of this. It's a nonsensical interpretation of my post. How does "x flew under the radar" become "please don't look at me"?

Your voting and reads are all completely based on how what you think will make you look the most townie rather than actual scumreads coming from a town-aligned player. Everything you say feels completely manufactured.

As I said, I erred with Ythill (context which you have conveniently ignored)

Well, seeing as how I'm the one who's most hard up for you to respond, you'd think you'd call my attention to this.

---

Are you perhaps on mafSepia?

I'm using Sepia and I see no issue with the VCs. Lucky me, I guess.

---

I cannot find any response of yours to Baltar adressing that. And if I'm not mistaken your attack on Ythill was not about his tone.

This

. I looked as well, and I couldn't easily find it.

---

AGM, in your post 411, could you explain your issue with LL, especially in regards to what he had to say about D1? I don't quite understand the disconnect, but it feels like this is an important point you're making.

I will now take your questions, criticisms, and praises.

Why's your vote still on VPB after all that?

---

I don't game mainly on mafiascum. I've played with different groups. Claiming when you are a confirmable role

as late as possible

is the standard. Why?

Generally the town doesn't want to give away the little information they have over the scum until they absolutely have to. However, this game provies somewhat of an exception to the rule in that the scum have a Role Cop. This significantly increases their odds of finding the PRs before they get a chance to claim.

---

Unvote

;

vote: Antitown

I think this man is bad news. I think LL and SD have both done a little more to make them seem more townie. Fate and crypto are both probably town, and they think this is a good lynch. All in all, Sim is probably the only one worse than Antitown at this point, so I'd be satisfied with this lynch.

[LuckayLuck]

@Jarti:

how did you get from here:

okay I've

skimmed

selectively looked at the ISOs of anyone who stuck out

read now

and I see we haven't lynched

LuckayLuck

scum yet, let's fix that VOTE: LuckayLuck

Sweet, luck today, alamaster tomorrow and then it's easy mode imo.

luck's 'good man' in his first post is generally the type of buddybuddy language that's been buggin me since the beginning

but the 'you must be the scumbuddy of who i'm attacking to vote me' is too much lol

to offering me refreshments and music:

wagons rock VOTE: red coyote

luck this wagon comes complete with heated seats, cool drinks, and if you stay on until we get some worthwhile information from it ythill will serenade you even

seriously, these are your first four posts in the game.
how?

[Ythill]

Why are you deleting the context from my post?

I expect people can remember it for at least a few minutes. My point: yes, VPB was wrong to make that accusation in the early game and now you are too. I don't think it's indicative of your alignment.

I will comment again on how landslide wagon occurred on AlimasterGM but specifically not on Antitown. Maybe because the scum felt okay to vote Alimaster, but not Antitown.

The people voting AGM who were not on Anti's largest wagon were: crypto, Jarti, RedCoyote, and myself. Luck has two as town and one as null. Cognitive dissonance.

Also noting the following series of events: Luck is making posts of moderate length (check iso). AGM comes under pressure and then posts a WoT that gains him town cred. Luck then posts a similar attempt.

But I'm interested, and so should every other town-aligned player. You understand that, don't you?

I'll keep my own council on how to play. If VPB is town, it will show in what he does, not what he says.

I hope that neither Fate nor crypto is a PR.

[LuckayLuck]

Also noting the following series of events: Luck is making posts of moderate length (check iso). AGM comes under pressure and then posts a WoT that gains him town cred. Luck then posts a similar attempt.

Your argument is weakened by me immediately posting a wall of text before I saw that AGM would get town cred. It clearly wasn't a "Aha! Everyone's calling AGM a townie now! I should do the same thing."

[hitogoroshi]

***

Vote Count #14

VP Baltar:

Concission, AlmasterGM, Percy, Antitown, Ythill (L-3)

Antitown:

LuckayLuck, Fate, crypto, RedCoyote

AlmasterGM:

crypto

, Jarti, Simenon,

Fate

,

RedCoyote

, Shadow Dancer

Shadow Dancer:

zoraster

Ythill:

VP Baltar

Not voting:

No one.

On guillotine:

No one.

Deadline is on Feburary 27th, 2011, at 11:00 PM central time.

With 14 alive, it takes 8 to end the day immediately.

With no new votes until deadline, VP Baltar will be placed on guillotine.

Vi Style Activity Checker (and a hearty hello to anyone quoting me):
AlmasterGM (0) l Antitown (0) l Concission (1) l crypto (0) l Fate (0) l Jarti (0) l LuckayLuck (0) l Percy (0) l RedCoyote (0) l Shadow Dancer (0) l Simenon (1) l VP Baltar (1) l Ythill (0) l zoraster (1)

***

[Ythill]

As promised, a summary of the points I have against Luck.

• #27: Already mentioned these: buddying to the aggressors, touting his own work ethic, chaining alignments way too early.
  
• #96: Ad populum. Plus, is Luck looking for roles rather than alignments?
  
• #171: Luck is sheeping some pretty weak points. Adds another ad populum appeal.
  
• #172: Already mentioned this: cognitive dissonance in that a player with Luck's stated views should suspect me.
  
• #175+ (page 8): Luck's activity increases under mild pressure.
  
• #204-205: His tone demonstrates that he is reacting emotionally to the pressure but he does not show typical town reactions of questioning his attacker's alignment, accuracy, or intelligence.
  
• #268: Indicated this by giving him an oscar: pressure has faded on Luck but he is still intent on gaining town cred, to the tune of posting a pro-self propaganda speech.
  
• #274: Excessive buddying.
  
• #323: A sheepy populist lean. Terribad.
  
• #423: Slippery defenses vs. AGM. He strawmans the "maybe town" point to be about is choice of words when it is actually about his failure to get a read on a dynamic player (who is probably his scumbuddy, btw). Also treats the "you can't lynch me" question as being about his "friendly" playstyle when it is clearly about the fact that a particular post lacked townie motivation.
  
• #423-425: Already mentioned these: uncharacteristic WoT follows someone using a WoT to gain cred, plus cognitive dissonance in that his conclusions do not follow one of his major points.

As an aside... I've found it very entertaining reading Luck's pleas about his title and playstyle. He acts as if being interested in playing this as a team game sets him apart and should therefore grant him leeway as a misunderstood townie. Luck is obviously unaware of my meta as a bloc player. What's most interesting about this is his stance on claim-timing. It was specifically my tendency to look for a mutual town-read voting group that inspired the early-claim plan. Luck says he plays like I do, but he came to the opposite conclusion. My theory is that he really does play like that, that he understood all along the advantage that the town stands to gain, and that he made the poor choice of arguing a site myth (claims should always come late) in spite of his own admitted beliefs, supporting a stance that -considering those same beliefs- clearly indicates his alignment.

[Ythill]

It clearly wasn't a "Aha! Everyone's calling AGM a townie now! I should do the same thing."

Fate (who you've been concerned about) had unvoted. I (your most outspoken attacker) had posted my favorable opinion of his WoT.

This is why arguing is pointless.

[VP Baltar]

Spoiler: Responses to people from earlier in the week

You seem to think everyone's on your wagon's scum?

That's not even remotely true. So far, the only two people that have voted me that I have said seriously have a chance of being scum are you and Ythill.

I am fully capable of being wrong and, even if I'm right, there's more than one scumbag. Weren't you the guy lambasting me for being in a hurry to lynch him not long ago?

It's pretty irrelevant what I was 'lambasting' you about earlier. The point is that you're not being consistent with your words of who is scum and who is not.

Maybe we just play differently, but once I have a strong scum read, I'm not letting go until that person is dead.

Aren't you supposed to be pretending you think I'm scum?

This does not make any sense and is a pretty pitiful attempt to paint me as changing my read on you. Explaining what I would do as town is me essentially using shorthand for: 'you're not doing something I expect a right thinking townie would do given your reads.'

Isn't this a blatant misrep? The quote says Ythill is talking about timetables, but then the analysis says he was saying, "NEED TO LYNCH NOW" … which he said wasn't what he meant, right?

You're saying my quote was referencing Ythill as talking about timetables? I'm confused. Ythill was making a statement that I don't think was in accordance with his claimed desire to gather info. You can choose to accept his explanation or not. I think it was perfectly legitimate to pressure over, AND I also think you're ridiculous if you believe otherwise.

Luck is still getting scummier by the post.

Please explain. I felt his trying to clear jarti of suspicion sounded very town like and completely unnecessary if he was scum.

D1 Lurkerscum lynches aren't very motivating.

So here you are saying that you agree with crypto that AGM is scum, but you don't want to lynch him cause he's the lurker scum. Also, that wasn't really the reason for voting him.

Does anyone else find Re' Coyo's tone/attitude kinda whack?

What do you mean by whack? RC is coming across to me as a pile of words without saying a ton that goes anywhere. I'm not sure if that's how he plays as town or not, since my experience with him is pretty limited.


zoraster stuff from around post 361 still kind of rubs me the wrong way...though it is also hard for me to believe that zoraster scum would post something so lazy at that point, regardless of AGM's alignment. Idk, still a bunch of weirdness in there that I haven't sorted out.

IMO, a vote is a tool. I can use it to lynch someone but that is far from the extent of its usefulness. If I'm alive beyond D3, a lot of the stuff I've been doing here is going to start making more sense. That's when you're going to see me being more focused and intent on getting my top suspects lynched. Until then... well... lynch me or don't. Your view of my alignment is really kinda beside the point.

Sigh. If you really believe this is good playing policy, then whatever. Voting like this is terrible and distracting at best. I still say you're being somewhat scummy in your play, but if this is all some D3 setup then I'm arguing theory with you and not alignments, which is equally useless. I will try to get some meta of you sometime in the near future, but I'm going to take your word on this for the moment (mostly because I've already spent enough time on this post and don't feel like metaing at the moment).

Unvote

@Crypto:
I see your AGM case and agree mostly with it. I've seen scum did what AGM did to me before. However, your e point I think is a reach.

Do you think all the rest of his points are valid though? Do you think AGM is scum? I see you say you're willing to vote him, so I'm presuming yes, but it's always good to have things on record.

I'll get to Concession when I've got time (tomorrow)

This was posted Friday...I'd like to hear it soon if at all possible.

NULL
<snip>
VP Baltar (Although I did think he was scum earlier, I'm putting him up here because there are people who are a lot scummier, and my ability to actually read him is limited)

I don't get this. You spent a good part of your post mentioning me, why you think I'm scummy and that people who think I'm town aren't doing enough to explain those reads....and then you say that you can't really read me. At least have the balls to call me scum if that's the way you want to go.

Why are you deleting the context from my post? Contextually, VPB said "concession is making mountains out of molehills." I said, "If anyone is doing that, it's you." Your question makes no sense given this back and forth.

I think what he's saying is that it was like 10 pages ago, find something more relevant to talk about. Which I agree with. I find it silly that people see a giant post and are calling you town for it because your previous effort was so bad. I think you should be talking about things that are much more relevant to the current state of the game.

Jarti: Mixed reactions. Reasons why I think he's scum:

Wait...weren't you calling him town not that long ago? *Reads some more* OK, so you are saying that now you think Jarti is scum because he backed down on his scum read of you after you defended him? Is that correct?

Some of the things VPB's said seem shifty.

...ok?

luck your conclusion based on how the antitown & agm wagons is awfully selective; you try to use the agm wagon as reason to re-wagon antitown and ignore the other wagons that have occurred in this game that got about as far as the antitown wagon originally did

why so

Oh, now you're back on LL pressure since he called you out on backing off? heh, maybe he has a point.

TL;DR

Well, this isn't a tl;dr in the proper sense because I'm not summing all that up. However, I will give my general reads at this point:

Scummy (in no particular order):
AGM
Simenon
Concission
Antitown

Null, but still kinda scummy:
Jarti
zoraster
Ythill

General null:
Shadow Dancer
Fate
Percy

Town:
crypto
LuckayLuck
Red Coyote


We have a lot of people floundering in the middle here and I don't like it. There are a lot of words in this thread and not much of it is saying anything in my opinion. People don't have a lot of conviction about what they are doing and are letting people slide.

Vote: Simenon

Time to pony up or die partner. I feel nothing of conviction from you all game and I'm not sure why. You keep appearing on people's scum lists, and yet people rarely vote you.

Additionally, I want to see what Antitown has to say when his V/LA ends tomorrow, but if it's not any better that what he's given so far this game, I think he's a great lynch and would certainly be willing to come over there. I put him in along with Concission and AGM for people that are coasting on my wagon and not actually scum hunting at all. None of these people are making legit arguments against me, and yet the clutch the wagon hoping against hope that I'll get lynched by default at deadline. Not gonna happen scumzors, so you best try harder.

My apologies for the super post. I'll try not to get behind next week so I don't have to make one like this again.

[Percy]

Still v. sick, sorry everyone. I will post within 24 hours!

[Simenon]

sorry, weekend was packed
To people saying my posts are "insincere" or "manufactured" (or vbp's particularly ridiculous insistence I need to "pony up"): show me an insincere argument that I didn't later account for. Concission I'm getting to and AGM I suggested before it was cool.

If you really think I'm scum then you sure to hell are being very indifferent about it.

That's valid. I resent being asked for a "top three." It doesn't suit my personality. I like focussing on one candidate and switching to the next at liberty.
Concission: I get the feeling she's scanning for small points in posts that she can quote and either safely agree with or disagree with without applying any pressure. The questions at the end of her fifth post are easy pickings: "Why are you making promises instead of just doing it?" is especially bad: the only answers to that question are either: "I don't feel like it" or "I'm scum, and don't want to." That would be okay as a question, except that she never mentioned RC before then.

Your reasoning is very hard not to laugh at. You intend to ask a specific person what their opinions of the Set-Up are then brand that person as town for stating their opinions of the Set-Up? What would you think scum would do, ignore you? Then you go on to call people who are scum-hunting scum because they didn't reply to your question specified to only Crypto. To me that sounds silly and fabricated on a whim.

1st sentence is hyperbole. 2nd sentence misrepresents VBP's argument. The last sentence *really* misrepresents his argument.
I don't like "QFT" as a post, especially since it's hard to see what she's quoting for truth.

I expect a bright individual such as yourself to understand it's implication. You asking such question is like you asking me if I have an investigation against you that can prove that you are 100% scum. It's my deduction, and based on your response first feigning ignorance, then attacking those who's expressed suspicion of you makes me think you are caught scum.

This isn't actually a response to VBP's quote as far as I can tell.
Also, her "saddened" comment was only somewhat tongue-in-cheek? Does that mean she wants us to believe she was actually somewhat saddened that vbp only asked crypto (I agree with RC here)? Also, "But why does it matter when my main point is his insincere attitude?" is a nice dodge.

Shadow: My argument was that Ythill's "discuss" was scummy, since it seemed at the time to want to throw away the previous four pages for no good reason. I don't really think that's what Ythill meant anymore. Tone. And you're right, I guess I didn't mention that before.

I haven't gotten through AGM's post yet, when I do I'll see if I want to unvote.

[Simenon]

Also VPB did you seriously just use the word "scumzors"?

[Ythill]

The point is that you're not being consistent with your words of who is scum and who is not.

Bullshit. My reads have developed consistently with the evidence.

Please explain.

I already did. What you quoted was prompted by #323. Now look two posts above yours.

[Fate]

In light of recent events I've decided I won't be posting more than two lines until Lylo. I realize I've been doing this for awhile, but I wanted to let you know that's intentional from now on.

[Ythill]

Thank you.

[LuckayLuck]

Ythill, you've made one of the best arguments against me that I've seen when I'm actually town.
That said, let me address your arguments against me, of which I consider to be of three main categories.

1) "I think LuckayLuck is scum for buddying up with players."

• #27: Already mentioned these: buddying to the aggressors, touting his own work ethic, chaining alignments way too early.
  
• #96: Ad populum. Plus, is Luck looking for roles rather than alignments?
  
• #171: Luck is sheeping some pretty weak points. Adds another ad populum appeal.
  
• #274: Excessive buddying.
  
• #323: A sheepy populist lean. Terribad.

There's not much I can say on this one. I've made the same argument for Jarti, which you've noticed. He was attacking me. Then, I stated "maybe Jarti's a townie." Then, Jarti decided perhaps he wanted to treat me to coffee instead.

In one sentence or less to explain though: I consider playing mafia with a respectful and friendly point of view to be an effective way of both getting your points across and understanding others more.

[*]#204-205: His tone demonstrates that he is reacting emotionally to the pressure but he does not show typical town reactions of questioning his attacker's alignment, accuracy, or intelligence.

That's a good one. I chuckled. Emotion is something I look for too in a townie. When someone's under pressure - that's when they display their true colors.

Thinking back quickly, I

have

(once?) questioned my attacker's alignment on voting me, and I have several times attempted to convince players voting me that they are inaccurate. I don't think it's respectful to say "You must be scum for attacking me...// You're so dumb for attacking me, you'll be revealed as a sham when I reveal as townie"...etc.

2) "I think LuckayLuck's beliefs on having the power roles not claim is scummy in a variety of manners."

[*]#172: Already mentioned this: cognitive dissonance in that a player with Luck's stated views should suspect me.

What's most interesting about this is his stance on claim-timing. It was specifically my tendency to look for a mutual town-read voting group that inspired the early-claim plan. Luck says he plays like I do, but he came to the opposite conclusion. My theory is that he really does play like that, that he understood all along the advantage that the town stands to gain, and that he made the poor choice of arguing a site myth (claims should always come late) in spite of his own admitted beliefs, supporting a stance that -considering those same beliefs- clearly indicates his alignment.

There's an easy explanation for this one. I would love to know who some 100% clear townies are earlier so I can follow their ideas more trustingly and form blocs. But

despite

that I think that it is more negative to have the roles reveal, it outweighs the benefits.

To oversimplify things in an example - it would be lovely if everyone knew who a cop was - you'd be able to bounce ideas off the player who had the most information in the game. Unfortunately, he would then die and that would be bad for the town. So too, is it to a much lesser extent, with the spirit and the vigilante.

As for not saying "You're Scum! You're role-fishing!" - I didn't say that precisely because it wasn't a clear cut strategy. Even though I still disagree with you on strategy, I don't think it's tooooo terrible.

3) "LuckayLuck is trying to not get lynched."

[*]#175+ (page 8): Luck's activity increases under mild pressure.
[*]#268: Indicated this by giving him an oscar: pressure has faded on Luck but he is still intent on gaining town cred, to the tune of posting a pro-self propaganda speech.
[*]#423: Slippery defenses vs. AGM. He strawmans the "maybe town" point to be about is choice of words when it is actually about his failure to get a read on a dynamic player (who is probably his scumbuddy, btw). Also treats the "you can't lynch me" question as being about his "friendly" playstyle when it is clearly about the fact that a particular post lacked townie motivation.
[*]#423-425: Already mentioned these: uncharacteristic WoT follows someone using a WoT to gain cred, plus cognitive dissonance in that his conclusions do not follow one of his major points.[/list]

As an aside... I've found it very entertaining reading Luck's pleas about his title and playstyle. He acts as if being interested in playing this as a team game sets him apart and should therefore grant him leeway as a misunderstood townie. Luck is obviously unaware of my meta as a bloc player.

Guilty as charged. I don't like getting lynched. I am aware that it is usually scum that fight harder on not getting lynched; are you perhaps treating me as a newcomer a bit much? Coming up with the idea of: "Why is LuckayLuck trying so hard to not get lynched as a townie? It's only scum that really lets down their team when they get lynched." That might be misrepresenting your beliefs or just setting them to an extreme, but it is my own belief that any player who gets lynched does their team a disservice. I agree with you that mafia try harder to not get lynched. I, however, am a player who simply tries not to get lynched.

Also, I don't like being thought of as scum because then my ideas aren't as readily accepted. As an example, I don't think I'm going to get lynched today. I have zero votes. I am aware that there are several players in the game who likely would not vote me. However, I'm still putting significant effort into making you, one player in a game, Ythill, not suspect me as much. Why? Because I am increasingly thinking that you are town.

It does come as a revelation to me that you're a bloc player. You too will understand that as a bloc player, not having suspicion on you is a necessity in order to...bloc together.

[LuckayLuck]

@YThill:

[LuckayLuck]

There's so much buddying in this game I might be getting sick.

@crypto:

[Antitown]

Apologies to all, but I will most likely have to replace out. A few things happened, and I do not know how much time I will have to dedicate to mafia for the near future.

Before replacing out though, I would like to clarify my Fate read. Originally, when I called him scum, I called him out for coasting. Then, during that interaction I had with Fate, I thought he was sending messages to me that he was coasting PR, hence my unvote. However, I have a feeling that I misinterpreted what he was saying. I thought Fate was distancing from my sudden unvote by making a show of me unvoting, but evidently he "thought" I was scum for unvoting.

All in all, Fate is most likely scum.

If I were to list two more scum, I would most likely say Luckay and one of the lurkers.
VP could be scum, but I don't think that scum would be simply all those who attacked me.

Good luck town.

[hitogoroshi]

***

Antitown has requested replacement. Searching for one now.

Vote Count #15

VP Baltar:

Concission, AlmasterGM, Percy, Antitown, Ythill (L-3)

Antitown:

LuckayLuck, Fate, crypto, RedCoyote

AlmasterGM:

Jarti, Simenon, Shadow Dancer

Shadow Dancer:

zoraster

Simenon:

VP Baltar

Ythill:

VP Baltar

Not voting:

No one.

On guillotine:

No one.

Deadline is on Feburary 27th, 2011, at 11:00 PM central time.

With 14 alive, it takes 8 to end the day immediately.

With no new votes until deadline, VP Baltar will be placed on guillotine.

Vi Style Activity Checker (and a hearty hello to anyone quoting me):
AlmasterGM (0) l Antitown (0) l Concission (1) l crypto (0) l Fate (0) l Jarti (0) l LuckayLuck (0) l Percy (0) l RedCoyote (0) l Shadow Dancer (0) l Simenon (0) l VP Baltar (1) l Ythill (0) l zoraster (1)

***

[hitogoroshi]

GLaDOS replaces Antitown. Thanks, GLaDOS!

[GLaDOS]

Hello, friends.

I am replacing Antitown. I will begin processing the game in three, two...