Newbie 835: Game Over

[Webz]

/confirm.

Hey guys. Looking forward to it.

[Webz]

That's what's so fun about mafia though. You vote someone and then judge their reaction. Then you contact your buddies and try to get whatever the hell is going on in the game.

vote: Double A

You say something about the advantages of voting, but you don't have a vote that stands.

Note: This is semi-random.

[Webz]

Clarification: You didn't post that in day 1, but you have posted in day.

[Webz]

I don't have a vote that stands yet either. Does that make me scummy? Also, I re-rolled on random.org, and you came up.

Vote: Webz

No, but you didn't say that outright... And now you aren't scummy!

[Webz]

Guys, Random.org is not helping our town win this game! It is really not the best way to go. If you think someone is scummy, even slightly, at the start, then vote for them rather than go completely random. The RVS is really quite boring and uneeded.

[Webz]

People's random voting is just joke voting more then anything. From what I've watched before, joke voting's pretty common at the start of day one.

My point, exactly. It has no purpose. It is actually anti-town. We want as much time for day 1 to make a lynch of a real mafia, with sufficient evidence. Evidence is not what happens in the RVS, right?

[Webz]

Vote: Double A

(and

FoS:

Kirby)

Scum tend to hide behind random votes, either with a randomizer or dice roll, because they are too scared to commit to a vote and stand by it, especially during the RVS.

I disagree completely with those here that say the RVS is pointless. If it was pointless, than all the experienced players wouldn't continue to do so in every other game I've played here.

The RVS isn't completely useless, as I said. I take that back. In fact, if you lynch a scum, you can go back and see what they said in the RVS, as they are almost 0% likely to vote for their scumbuddies. So, you can potentially clear someone as town with this information.

And @ everyone: Jokes are allowed! But try to be as serious as possible with votes, as any vote can be the vote that makes a townie get lynched.

[Webz]

@ kirb: How are we meant to "clear" the IC? We only have 1/2 chance of having a cop, and even if we do, I would prefer if they investigated someone who was acting scummy. We don't have forever, you know. Also, even if the cop has cleared the IC, then we don't want him saying it. That'll just get the cop nightkilled.

Oh, and guys:

FOS: YamiJoey

. None of his posts seem to be townie posts. Scum will often not post scum posts, but they won't often post pro-town ones. He's had a complete 180 turn in opinion to AA, but for no real reason. His FoS on me is for being too pro-town. While I respect that I shouldn't be cleared as town yet, as no one else is, why am I too pro town? How is this scummy?

Also, no one vote for AA (though I still have the case on him). He's at L-2 already, so someone could hammer him at L-1 and hide behind the fact that it's the first day of their first game.

Also, a little more clarification on my opinion to the RVS. To sum it up:
Posting votes that are completely random, or on someone you have a grudge against, is not pro-town. The early stage is by no means irrelevant.

[Webz]

Is there a way to view all of one person's posts in a thread? The forum I watched a mafia game on recently had that feature, and it was really usefull for trying to read people. On that forum, it was a little '?' a ways under there avatar.

I think that it's part of the now disabled search function, if was ever there at all. Which I'm not sure of.

[Webz]

I also get vibes from kirbyoshi. Enough to do this:

Unvote: Double A

Vote: Kirbyoshi

He's had the same real fault as AA (random voting, though I seem to feel he would have voted for me if he didn't random) who I still see as a little scummy, but probably just used to a less serious :seriousface: atmosphere.

Kirb also seems to be posting an awful lot of posts that don't count for anything. I get the feeling he is lurking while he's posting. Other than that, I'm getting the same read as you: Trying to mess people around while keeping the votes of him. This seems like a bad scum technique, if he's scum, but it definitely isn't helping town.

Can you please clarify what you said about clearing the IC?

The other person who seems scummy is YamiJoey. I don't think he's scum, but he isn't helping town. He seems to be inexperienced and unread, but please answer Devotress's question, so we get more help from you.

[Webz]

Yeah, but the people who did it after those initial two did it as a result of the first two. One of them even did a "random vote" in jest, making fun of the whole thing.

YJ, this is enough of a reason for me to clear that vote as not suspicious. I'm not trying to pressure you into thinking anything, but this is enough for me.

It's at the bottom where it says "Displays post from previous:" and then has a boxes that say [All Posts (v)] by [All users (v)] [Oldest First (v)] Go is not implemented yet.

Thanks a lot man.

I'm assuming that you still see AA as the most scummy, since you still have your vote on him. Is this true?

Okay, giving my run down on people so far:

Kirbyoshi:

I'm pretty sure when Thok says "as soon as he confirms," he means "as soon as he confirms."

Vote: Humble Poirot

My first time using random.org, ever.

Then:

I don't have a vote that stands yet either. Does that make me scummy? Also, I re-rolled on random.org, and you came up.

Vote: Webz

I don't think this is random, like OP has said. You're probably making harmless fun though, but you still are doing nothing to help town.

Then just self-vote (because you're gonna change it anyway) or reroll. Random votes are a good way to get discussion going.

Never self-vote (as town). Even just saying this gives me mafia vibes. The best way to get a bandwagon is to pressure people into it by seeing where the votes are. A self-vote helps no one, at least if they're town. Random votes hardly ever get discussion going. It's the single vote that isn't completely random that actually gets the ball rolling.

So then, are you denying it's a scumtell? To me, although some things can't be called "scumtells" per se, scum will probably have the same attitude from game to game, and therefore do some of the same things. Not going to vote purely on meta, but I will FoS: YamiJoey.

Oh yeah, and Unvote: Webz because apparently, like AA said, joking is illegal in a game.

You do realise that the person who the original comment was directed at was ME, not YJ? So you are giving no hard evidence before your FOS? Sloppiness is not what we want here.

Haha, joking about not joking. Haha. Have fun, man...

I'd be careful saying this kind of stuff,a tleast until the IC is cleared. ICs are just as likely to be scum as the rest of us.

The IC is bound to pretty much answer either way. This is, in a way, sparking mistrust and denying us information. Whether this is a subtle scum push or a red herring, I am not quite sure.

Are you trying to shut me up? Afraid I'll out you as scum?

I have a lot that I don't like about this post. You have nothing of evidence against HP, but you still call him out as scum, and try to spark an unneeded rivalry. Please, no. Indeed, your post before was, if anything, not against HP for asking the question, but against believing 100% what the IC says. This is the post where the "brawl" between you and HP starts, and it is completely pointless and based on what I see as a scummy conclusion to his reply.

I don't think I was spoiling the purpose of your question at all; I didn't answer for "OP the IC", nor did my comment keep him from answering any question posed to him.

I'd let people answer before I comment on questions not posed to myself.

Thank you.

I still think this part of the post is meant to stifle me. It's not working, but it's worth noting that it seems like "Hercules" is trying to stop me from speaking my mind when I want to. Any thoughts from anyone else?

Mod Edit: Fixing quote tags

No, you weren't trying to answer the question. You were doing the opposite, trying to invalidate the answer, and null the question.

And no, you shouldn't take this as a personal attack. The fact that you took ADVICE in a purely townie way as a threat is the scummiest thing that you've done so far. The "any thoughts from anyone else" is asking for a wagon, which will not come, and showing that your logic is not sound.

Ok, I was going off of my experience in a newbie game on another site where a vet gave advice to the SK to claim, and then the person who pointed out that that's NOT what the SK is supposed to do was labeled as scummy. While there is no SK in this game, and I don't think OP would tell scum to claim, I thought the same basic principles could apply to this game. Apparently the ICs here are bound to follow the guidelines in the "Being a Good IC" article. Makes for a better game, imo

It's good that you think that he will be a fair IC. So why your original comment about this. Also, this post could plant seeds of doubt against who could be our most helpful and experienced townie. I'm not sure if this really is a tell, but it's definitely a push in the scum direction.

So, what you're saying is that once a question is posed, no one is supposed to post anything pertaining to that subject until the question is answered?

Yes and no. Don't try and give the possible scum a good basis for a good answer. (Though this is clearly not the case here, as it is a question to the IC. I mean, the fact that you can give him an answer, not that he can't be scum.)

I don't want you to answer for others before they even post.

I wasn't answering for him, I was simply commenting on your question, and giving you some advice that I thought was good. You don't have to follow it if you don't want to.

Yes, the first part was right. You were giving advice, but it doesn't seem to me to be good advice. And he DOES need to follow. We need as many people with as comprehensive as possible knowledge about what words were flung and why, that way we are not stumped when a valuable player is nightkilled.

Why don't you say so instead of just saying "it's worth noting" without explaining what conclusion you may get...?

Because I'm not 100% sure it's scummy, but it may be a secondary reason for a vote, if it comes to that.

Now YOU'RE interpreting your action of saying "don't necessarily regard the answer to this question" as an attack, though a spineless one, on the asker? I think you were getting blinded, at this point, to what was going on and only looking at HP and the noose. Not a good thing.

Why do you feel the need to ask for someone elses opinion of what you read? in general?

Because I know that if everyone disagrees with me, I'm probably wrong. Also, I asked for OTHER people's thoughts, not yours. I'd appreciate it if you didn't answer questions that aren't addressed to you, thanks. (c wut ah did thar?)

This isn't a good line of thinking. Say what you think, even if it sounds "scummy", be firm of what you think, and if you're cut down by someone who has more experience than you because your argument is invalid, you've learnt. That's what these games are about, afterall. Also, he's adressing your whole post, and not answering the question, but asking about the asking (which is similar to what you did to him before.)

Because this took so long, I'll submit it now, so I can dig around while people can read what I've said.

[Webz]

I need to go to bed. But before I do, I'll give a less detailed analysis of the other people.

HP: You did misunderstand Kirb as "answering your question" when it is pretty clear he didn't. I'm still think what he said was in no was pro-town, but you have misinterpreted here. Other than that, you haven't slipped up anywhere and seem pro-town to me.

Devotress: You seem like a very nice person. But enough sucking up... Your posts haven't really amounted to anything, until the last one. I think you still have a vote on someone (?), and to me, you have posted enough of a reason to vote kirb. Why didn't you? The last post seems pro town, as it sparks discussion which is clearly bad for scum.

OP: You seem like a busy OP that wants to help us learn while having a life and playing in other mafia games. No scum vibes so far.

AA: You haven't posted anything that amounts to anything for the town. The closest you got was this:

I said that in a game before and I got lynched

This doesn't seem to show your opinion at all. Being afraid to commit while still subtly pushing, or trying to stop people doing something, seems scummy. But I do get the "let's just have fun" vibe here. Please clarify your thoughts/

YJ: You seem to do the opposite of tunneling. Why were you so quick to discard your two cases? And why did they lack any substantial evidence? Also, why go against the IC when he is the third voter on the single case back then where evidence is present? There is a weak tell that the third voter is likely to be scum, but he was making a vote that hammered home the idea not to just attack people randomly, which seems to me like what a town IC would do. Also, as I stated before, his explanation was completely valid. Please either say whether you still have the case against him or not.

yabbaguy and fallen angel get slight - points for in no way helping the town up to this point.

[Webz]

EBWOP

OP: You seem like a busy

IC

that wants to help us learn while having a life and playing in other mafia games. No scum vibes so far.

[Webz]

@Webz-37: Then again, remember someone or something has to get discussion going at the outset. If everyone waits for someone to make the first scummy move, the game doesn't start.

Despite this, the game has started in relatively few posts.

@Webz-71: Scum might agree to be distancing in this case. (distancing = scum accusing each other to prevent each other from being affiliated together). You're gonna get yourself messed up in WIFOM loops if you think about that too hard. (Sorry, can't access my GIFs from school.)

Okay. I take what I said back, slightly. In a newbie game, however, people aren't necessarily going to know this though.

@Webz-78: If you think Kirby has a legitimate weakness, why are you voting him for it?

Because, despite the fact that he has a weakness (which I also see in YJ), he is the one who has acted as though he didn't and was, IMO, trying to punch above his weight. I'm not in favour of a lynch yet, but I think that with more pressure he will either crack as scum or be more clearly town.

I see both YJ and Kirby with the same light. They're new to the game, and can't do everything pro-town. They both suffer from an overwhelming lack of proof in their cases. Please guys, fix this up.

@ Thok

: Devotress has her vote on Kirbyoshi.

Also, I agree that I'm focusing too much on Kirby, in my posts. However, this doesn't really reflect my actual suspicions. I think it just looks that way because he's the one that I really wanted questions answered from, and the post-by post analysis of only him was because I thought doing it on anyone else would be fruitless.

AA and YJ still have my suspicions. YJ simply because he needs to still prove to the town that he's pro-town after the few early (and not so early) scummy posts. AA because he hasn't even tried to contribute yet, and his early posts give me the same bad vibes.

I think there are two camps that I'm getting scummy vibes from.

1) Weak people posting things that aren't pro-town: YJ and Kirby
2) People laying subtle hints and not taking anything too seriously: AA and Kirby.

Note that the fact that Kirby fits into both categories makes the scummy vibes come across strong. I think he may actually WANT an early small wagon on him, before it moves away and he can act as if he's cleared. Also, I don't see that it is too easy to actually fit into both of these categories while being pro-town.

Also, tiny little scumtells: Devotress saying she'll random vote because that's what the "cool kids" are doing. This seems like you're hiding under the cover of the first two random votes as to not look suspicious. However, no biggie.

yabbaguy - Saying that he'll immerse himself, after making no cases that haven't been made before. This fits in the "actually having a life" boat though. Dang.

HP: You seem to be slightly defensive, as town. You don't need to be, as no one is close to lynching you. Though, I thoroughly think this is just your personality.

FA: Post something..... RAAARGH. Also, waiting until just after yabba posted before you posted seems to be a manufactured excuse for lurking in the "He was too!" sense.

YJ: Your case on op. You seem to be holding on tightl to tiny scraps of "evidence".

The reason I FoS'd op was because of the very little input made by them, and the fact that he picked up on two people who I don't see as having much different from the rest of the Town at that point. There was very little that caused them to really stand out as Scum, so I got suspicious of this behaviour.

I disagree here. Those two were the only really standout scummy people back then, and he was posting his approval of this case.

I'd also like to put to you, that the

best

Mafia strategy, is to make accusitions that make sense. Even if they're also other Scum. Although, in a game with two Mafia, that might not be true, so this might need to be ignored. However, op could easily get away with staying in the game for a while, simply because newer players would be inclined to keep experienced players in the game to help them out.

I don't think scum wants to make too solid a case against their scumbuddies, especially in such a small game.

I personally have my eye on op also. And, like you, know that his scumtells will be more subtle than the rest of ours. But what he did seemed pro-town, and I definitely don't interpret it as scummy. Wait until he actually shows a subtle scumtell.

OP: Seems like you don't want to get your feet wet. I completely disagree with the case against you, but if you don't post anything sufficient, then my opinion will change.

Also:

Say what you think, even if it sounds "scummy", be firm of what you think,

This game is a perfect example of why you SHOULDN'T do that. I said what I thought, and was firm about it, and got like 3 or 4 votes placed on me because of it.

I should note that if you think something that makes no sense, and has little evidence, and sounds scummy, and saying it won't help the town, then this is an exception to the rule.

Also, if Kirby is scum, I fully expect him to lay back and not make any groundbreaking claims or jests from now on or at least until the blame has cleared from around him.

The "soft push" from YJ against you has been noted.

[Webz]

Before, when I said that HP was being a bit defensive, I didn't quite notice the extent.

He's acting kind of edgy THEREFORE HE MUST BE SCUM

How serious do you consider this statement to be? How useful?

I don't have a vote that stands yet either. Does that make me scummy? Also, I re-rolled on random.org, and you came up.

Vote: Webz

if you felt that you had enough to respond and vote webz... why the need to say that webz "casually" came up in random.org?

I said that in a game before and I got lynched

...
What do you mean? Is that a threat to webz or what? (

Poirot gasps

)

And everything said to Kirby about your question (though you managed to keep yourself together a lot better than him).

And:

As for giving out town or scum reads... I'd say that I have some preliminary reads:
Scum read on AA and a town read on YamiJoey. But it's not definite and relies a great deal on my instincts plus some things that have called my attention. I need to reread everyone's posts and get some more input before I can convince myself that I'm right about someone. Besides, fallen angel has not posted yet.

The townie read here.

These defenses seem to be there to buy favour. None of the people in question really needed to answer in order to clear their townie status, and you haven't given much information or proof anywhere. To help town, please pinpoint exactly what isn't scummy. If you're going to defend yourself, or someone else (which is best left for them, as then they can't just reword what you said or hide behind a better debater) please reason.

To clarify, I'm not saying that you're scum for doing this. There is no evidence for that. But improving in this area will help town.

Disclaimer: Not all of the mentioned posts are necessarily defending anyone. Though they are along that line of thinking.

You do have it in you to offer sound defence, so do so more often:

I have to agree that Webz does look a tad scummy for being almost

too

pro-Town

EXCUUUUUSE MEEE???

So... being too pro-town means someone is scummy? I don't understand...

oh... I knew I had read this somewhere...

Too Townie

Yours is a logical fallacy.

I'd like your opinions about it after you read the article. Does it change something? What? Why?

[Webz]

Right I just have to address this personally.

Firstly, I am no newbie. I've been in way to many games to not know how the games work. Which brings me to my second point: by randomly voting I opened up the discussion for the game. Without random votes (my opinion has changed since that game) we'd just stare at each other until it was N1. And lastly if I was mafia or a SK I'd have waited until someone else randomly voted and then jumped on him about it.

You might not be a newbie, as far as experience is concerned. But you seem to not be "experienced" when it comes to serious playskill. Your arguments are baseless and lack evidence, compared to the other possible arguments. Please don't take things said about you in the game personally. Like this post.

Your case on YJ seems a bit off, too. I'm in no way clearing him of being mafia, but the single thing you're voting him for is attacking you, then changing his opinion. I agree that this wasn't a wise thing to do and is a small scumtell. However, he has done many other things similarly - inexperienced things that don't help the town. You seem defensive in the fact that you single out his attack on you. Almost as if you're trying to make an example of him, and make people fear voting you.

I challenge you to go over EVERYTHING that YJ has posted, and say what is standout scummy over the other suspects, and unlikely to be just because of a lack of experience.

Also, you claiming that your random vote started discussion (in a good way) is flawed. The discussion is a result of you posting an unhelpful random vote and several other scummy posts after that. If you're town, we really don't want you to post things that don't help town. Lynching a townie is NOT what we want to do.

L-1 is someone having one less vote than required to lynch. Here's the list of common abbreviations

Well anyway I'm not sure about mafiascum but almost every game I've played on Total War Center, Totalwar.org, and (now for a limited time only) Civ Fanatics Center, communication outside the game about the game is allowed for all players. And I have friends on those sites, so obviously we get together and try to figure out what the hell's going on.

I'm pretty sure this is totally NOT tolerated.

Also, the let's

just

have fun isn't helping town too much. The "lets have fun but catch scum at the same time and actually win" strategy is, IMO, much better.

Also We don't suck!

Well, actually, they do, a bit.

[Webz]

Your case on YJ seems a bit off, too. I'm in no way clearing him of being mafia, but the single thing you're voting him for is attacking you, then changing his opinion. I agree that this wasn't a wise thing to do and is a small scumtell. However, he has done many other things similarly - inexperienced things that don't help the town. You seem defensive in the fact that you single out his attack on you. Almost as if you're trying to make an example of him, and make people fear voting you.

No not at all. You are completely over analyzing my posts.

If your posts can be "over analyzed" then I would question not me, but the post in the first place. Please use the most relevant evidence, and make your posts transparent and obvious. I'm not saying that you're scum, just subtle things like that can really help scum to win.

Also, in general, the other games on the sites you posted didn't have much going on in them, which shows in your style. Most likely because you can talk freely there...

[Webz]

EBWOP: Expand that final point:

What did Devotress do that AA or Kirbyoshi didn't? What makes it OK for op to call those two out, but not Devotress? What makes you pick this point out now?

They're both asking for information reasons, and asking to help me over other games. ('Mafia Theory', I suppose you could call it.)

YJ

No, you're not quite getting it. I noted some tiny scumtells that generally hadn't been noted. op was as guilty as devotress for following trends, but devotress followed a more anti-town trend (actually random voting, rather than supporting a case.) I was just trying to pick up on things that hadn't been noted before.

The crime that Kirb and AA committed was starting a trend. When Devotress saw 2 people doing one thing, she assumed that that was the norm, and followed suit. This is just as anti-town as the first two, but is less scummy. (Because it can easily be interpreted as her acting on what she's seen). What makes me pick it out now? Because I realised that I had been picking on some people too much, and letting some people completely off my scum radar. Mostly, this is due to time (even I don't have all the time in the world, despite having posted a few quite large posts here ). My time will end up being a bit more scarce than now in the next 2 weeks (exams ).

So: Thok: V/LA from now until the 15th

. I'll probably post as much as the less active players here do, but I shouldn't.

[Webz]

@ YJ:Also, what makes it NOT okay for op to call kirby and AA scummy for random votes, when it is okay for me and HP? He didn't post much of an explanation for his votes, but this is most likely because he wants us to learn some things simply (which is not helped by walls of text), and thought that the logic of HP and I was enough to merit his vote (and FOS).

[Webz]

If we're ever going to stop taking what happened in the RVS as evidence, then you, YJ, being one of the four people under fire for what they posted there, should not initiate it. Neither should Kirb, AA or Devotress, naturally.

On the Devotress case, I think she's his behind people in more than one occasion. The other one being when she had more than enough evidence to vote for Kirb, but didn't until I made a detailed post about his actions and could probably be the one to cop the blame had he been mislynched, despite her actually starting the case. This seems like a little scummy, to me.

When will FalenAngel finally post something sufficient? This lurking is NOT helping town.

No, you're not quite getting it. I noted some tiny scumtells that generally hadn't been noted. op was as guilty as devotress for following trends, but devotress followed a more anti-town trend (actually random voting, rather than supporting a case.) I was just trying to pick up on things that hadn't been noted before.

Almost a 'lesser of two evils' approach? (Well; the other way around.)

Yes. Devotress was by far the lesser evil.

Also, what makes it NOT okay for op to call kirby and AA scummy for random votes, when it is okay for me and HP

The timing of your votes. It is just as scummy, I'm not saying that you should vote in a certain order or anything, it's just that the way op did it made me notice it more. If I were paying more attention, I'd've seen that you'd both put votes down on these people and made that connection; but I didn't and I feel that's due to inexperience. I think I'm right in assuming that I've come under suspicion on this game a fair bit because I'm not making connections, and that is causing people to assume I am trying to single people out. You've stated this yourself;

Yeah. My vote was in the RVS, and was as close to a random vote as possible while bringing in a little evidence. The reason I still have AA as my second most suspicious person (and kept my vote on him for a while) is because the rest of his posts didn't stop being scummy.

However, I disagree that my vote and HP's votes on AA were scummy. To have enough reason to vote, you need to have evidence which directly mirrors the amount of total evidence available on everyone (so early on, you don't need much evidence, while later on you need quite a lot) . My first vote had a weak backing, but there was nothing hardly to base anything on. HP's vote was considerably explained. Where me and you differ is that I think that OP's vote was also explained in enough detail. In fact, your case on op, to me, seems mush more spineless than his vote, especially when scaled to all the evidence we have now.

They both

[Kirbyoshi and YamiJoey]

suffer from an overwhelming lack of proof in their cases. Please guys, fix this up.

I don't think this is the actual quote I was looking for, but it is to the same effect. I have noticed this, and I am attempting to make myself more aware of what's going on in the game and post in a less laxidazical manner. In the same post;

You're doing it, too. . Though, there isn't much to go by as you only have a case on one person. Kirb has laid off his aggressive nature, as per:

Also, if Kirby is scum, I fully expect him to lay back and not make any groundbreaking claims or jests from now on or at least until the blame has cleared from around him.

Scumtell?

Because, despite the fact that he

[Kirbyoshi]

has a weakness (which I also see in YJ), he is the one who has acted as though he didn't and was, IMO, trying to punch above his weight

Kirbyoshi: I'm giving reasoning as to why I would think what I think. This was people might stop suspecting me, and start listening to what I'm saying. As I've said; I could be wrong, but if I don't follow up the small suspicions I have and just hope someone comes out and says "I AM MAFIA!" and everyone else misses it and I have to pick up on that; we'll get no-where. I'm just trying to pressure people into a situation where I can find the truth. OP's lower post habbit makes that difficult, but it is definitely working/has worked on you, and alongside that other people have become more involved because of how you responded.

You're giving reasoning for your thought processes generally. What you don't give enough on is evidence. There isn't enough evidence on the op case, so I would not FOS him, myself. (Or suspect him any more than I'm suspecting, say, Devotress, who is in no way my top scum contender) . There's plenty of time before the day ends.

Are you willing to lay off his case at least until he posts again

? Though I'd be careful to keep what evidence you have.

Also, you seem to be tunnel visioning (only focusing on one "pet" case, for an extended period of time). What do you think about the other people? (Yes, please post a player by player analysis)

All this treats you as one entity, all of your posts. You are getting better at reasoning and becoming more pro-town as you post more.

1) I'm defending myself too much here, and not getting enough analysis done.
2) Can we get off of the RVS discussion. It's over now.
3) What input did AA's most recent posts give? As far as I can tell it boils down to "I'm not that bad at this game"/"I've played before.", Unvoting and FoSing me, advertising a few sites, and making excuses for anything he might've done wrong. I am always suspicious of "I am tired."/"Don't feel too good" posts; as they're just what I'd expect for a Mafia member to say so that if someone catches them out they could possibly come back with "I did say I was tired. Sorry." I try to stray away from this, but when someone starts raving about how they 'are no newbie' as well, it makes me think they're not all that great at the game they're playing.

YJ

1) Yes and no. You're defending yourself too much from a scum perspective. And you aren't actually getting anything done, really.
2)No. I said that above. (in this post)
3)AA is not helping our town, is laying out an excuse, and is making us try our best not to look for scumtells in his posts. I don't like that one bit, either. But this is what happens at his other sites. There is barely any content in the posts. Check for yourself.

And:

Uh, from what I've seen, it is the norm. RVS starts discussion, which is always good, unlike what this post seems to indicate:

An actual random vote that says in the post that it has been randomized doesn't help town. A random vote that doesn't, may. Yes, the RVS starts discussion. But don't get too confused between (completely) random votes, and the RVS. There's a thread somewhere, in mafia discussion, about this. The answer is a resounding no for "dice voting", which is essentially the same thing.

Also, kirby has been very silent on being the person with the most votes (tied with AA, but I fully expect that to change when HP and op post again.) Kirby, what do you have to say for yourself? Or do you need more pressure? (Disclaimer: Don't claim unless you're very close to being lynched)

[Webz]

So you're saying that if you random-vote me I'm going to react to it? That's ridiculous. If that worked then so would "Are you Mafia?" to every player.

YJ

Yes. This is right. But it's kind of ironic that this, along with other conversation, got us out of the RVS. The RVS stage isn't completely pointless, but completely random posts are.

I have to agree that Webz does look a tad scummy for being almost

too

pro-Town, but TBH Double A's point is just the same, only it's using a method I don't like. You're almost saying he's Mafia, just because it's possible.

FoS: Webz
FoS: Double A

How were you agreeing with anyone when you were the first one to put it out there?

Come on, this is hypocritcal. You say that AAs post is scummy, because its using a method you don't like. Then you use a logical facally to back up your argument. This is what you have to hide.

I understand what the article is saying, (and thus; you) but there is the idea behind it. Trying to force themselves into being seen as Town rather than letting people simply assume it. Which is bad Mafia behaviour, if you ask me.

I understand that by keeping my position on this I'm looking scummy, but lets face it; this post can only reinforce anyone's suspicions unless I had other evidence as to why Webz would be Scum, which I don't as it is about the only thing that has happened so far.

I did also argue against my own point in that post, so it's clear that I did understand I had a flawed argument, but a pair of FoS' that had

]some

basis was better than random.org, isn't it?

YJ

Then this. You're DEFENDING your use of a logical fallacy. This is the flawed logic that you're maintaining:

Webz is acting very town.
Perfect scum act very town.
Webz is scum.

This is a different logical fallacy: Correlation Implies Causation (CIC)

Maybe read all of these: Logical Fallacies (everyone should)

I don't like your last argument. A scummy misleading post is worse than no post.

Whilst I feel that Kirbyoshi has been fairly aggressive, I don't feel him to be directly scummy. The deflection on top of that does seem a little off.

I'd like to take it upon myself to FOS: orangepenguin. Multiple people have made the "Random" vote, yet OP has decided to pick out Double A (almost bandwaggoning in that respect) and create a focus on Kirbyoshi, who, as far as I can tell, was already under a little suspicion from players. Granted, he could actually be scum, but I feel this post was a little too easy for a Mafia player to make. The use of 'Advice' which ended up being 'There is no advice' threw me a little, too. OP basically said "You find scum simply by looking at the thread and finding scum."

If I had a Cop role, I'd be flipping a coin between Kirbyoshi and orangepenguin right now.

Also; just read post 62 by Kirbyoshi: I think that what HP was trying to get across, was that some questions needed to be answered by the suspected people only. Anyone else answering would allow the question to be avoided.

The more I look at this post, the less I like it. You're practically clearing kirb in your book, and later saying that he is acting as scummy as op, who you make a case against. In the SAME POST, you cop direct.

And your case on op, as has been mentioned, is simply down to the post being "too easy for mafia to make." A red herring if I ever saw one.

"And why did they lack any substantial evidence?"

Misreading on my part, and because there's simply no evidence against the people I suggested. However, I am happy to see that people are still responding to these original accusitions, as it is giving a lot of insight into people's thought track. (Unless you're all doing what I'm doing and keeping a fair wack of it to yourself, just in case.)

You seem to be attacking people, then finding evidence, than the other way round. This is rarely helpful to town at all. Possibly, if someone is completely flying under the radar late, then you could do this. But not so early.

And please post everything you think in regards to cases (and hopefully, generally. Why should you have anything, at all, to hide?

The reason I FoS'd op was because of the very little input made by them, and the fact that he picked up on two people who I don't see as having much different from the rest of the Town at that point. There was very little that caused them to really stand out as Scum, so I got suspicious of this behaviour.

I'd also like to put to you, that the

best

Mafia strategy, is to make accusitions that make sense. Even if they're also other Scum. Although, in a game with two Mafia, that might not be true, so this might need to be ignored. However, op could easily get away with staying in the game for a while, simply because newer players would be inclined to keep experienced players in the game to help them out.

I will always retain suspicion of players who have that "Experienced" flag next to their name. If new players are scum, they'll make mistakes here and there. If experienced players are scum, they'll make mistakes and then won't do it again.

They displayed the only real scumtells up to that point (apart from yourself, possibly). I think that that's pretty clear.

The best

town

strategy is also to make accusations that make sense, and you've not done that yet. (Your only case is on op, and it is, IMO, very weak).

And yes, experienced people will show less scumtells. This is no reason to attack them for nothing, however. And they're not going to make no mistakes as scum. Because that's a mistake in itself.

That's what you "DON'T" have to hide. It is fairly substantial.

[Webz]

Webz-81: I feel some of the points put forward were unfounded. 'Never self vote. This gives me bad vibes.' Made me wearey of this post. It was almost as if Webz was trying to ensure a lynch on KY, even if I so feel KY is suspicious, this is a little too forceful. Also; KY pointed out that the IC could be Mafia, and Webz shot him down. It is a perfectly viable point, which shouldn't be overlooked at all.

You're misunderstanding my point:

Never self-vote (as town). Even just saying this gives me mafia vibes.

The best way to get a bandwagon is to pressure people into it by seeing where the votes are

. A self-vote helps no one, at least if they're town.

The "bad vibes" were coming from him suggesting a bad idea, not justification as why it is a bad idea. If you need clarification:
Never self vote as town. If you're town, the last thing you want is your own lynch,because it hinders the town. Self voting makes it more likely that you'll get linched. It can also, if you self-hammer, take suspicion away from people who would otherwise hammer you for no good reason.

I am in no way in favour of a lynch on Kirb or tunnelling him until the end of the day for what he did. But what he did was scummy, and it deserves to be recognised as such. Sorry if you don't share my opinion, but I think that kirby's attitude back there was disastrously anti-town, and what I said was justified. He needs to seriously start to make some town posts.

Webz-78: Vote switch was fair-do's, but I would like to know how far up or down your list AA is after this.

He's a very, very close second. Probably pretty much tied. The only reason I'm not changing my vote is that it would put him on a dangerous L-1, prone to a hammer. And I have no reason to think he is scum over Kirby, who has had a massive personality change since the case on him.

However, if AA doesn't post seriously regarding the case on him and actually post something substantual, then I'm not afraid to put him on L-1. If he continues on and on, then I'm not afraid to hammer. However, I think we should keep up discussion and not rush to end the day (at the moment, I'd prefer to end this day naturally, as opposed to a hammer.)

Also, I've found out something very interesting:

I looked over 100 finished newbie mafia games. The likelihood of lynching scum on day one is 16%, as 16 of those 100 lynched mafia day 1. A random lynch is 22.2 % likely to lynch scum. Although I'm not up for a random lynch just yet, I'm just putting that forward. If we lynch the textbook scum then we're likely to hit a town.

And, @ Devotress: Yes. There is a third person scum rule. the idea behind it is that the third person cops none of the blame, at least compared to the first, second or last, when it comes to lynching. When it comes to random voting, its an anti-town thing that mafia probably want to happen. Being the third here often goes blameless, also. Though I don't think that this on its own is reason enough even to FOS you. I would rather have a case against everyone that has showed a scumtell than a case against a single person at one time though.

Also, for your thing on Kirby, I agree that it puts a more serious tone to actually vote for somebody than to say "who's most scummy? I think ____ is." However, you should take some initiative for yourself, and be sure of what you say, when its pro-town. The fact that you had a vote-worthy case against Kirby but didn't vote seems a tiny bit scummy as you didn't seem to see things from a town perspective. Simply because people can overlook posts, but votes are harder to overlook, and people will pay more attention to posts if they have a vote. This makes that post possibly a plug for "you're not posting much pro-town" "look here" "oh" kind of discussions.

And yeah, considering that I have got an English exam Monday, and I hate English and will have to try hard not to fail, I am posting quite a bit.

[Webz]

Oh fine go ahead and lynch me because I'm a bad player...

I'm also here to learn (because my play style obviously sucks).

Right I'm gonna take a shot at this...

I don't think Kirb is scum. The only thing that I can tell he did "bad" was a random vote, and I'm not about to check in the next 30 minuets. He doesn't send off a scum vibe, and my gut's usually right about this kind of thing.

I'll study some more english before I answer yabba's question, but for now.

Unvote: Kirbyoshi

Vote: Double A

This is not a townie reply. It is not a very serious reply to a very serious question.

Double A, why shouldn't we lynch you?

And yes, L-1. But I'll see to it personally that anyone who hammers will get lynched. Please do not, because if you're town, you're going down, and that won't help us at all.

[Webz]

I looked over 100 finished newbie mafia games. The likelihood of lynching scum on day one is 16%, as 16 of those 100 lynched mafia day 1. A random lynch is 22.2 % likely to lynch scum. Although I'm not up for a random lynch just yet, I'm just putting that forward. If we lynch the textbook scum then we're likely to hit a town.

This is flawed mathematics. You're taking an experimental data set (your Newb game research) and comparing it to actual mathematical data (the 22% oddswise). There are several factors that influence the former, such as newbie inexperience, setup variation, dependence on who is wagonned and claims or not, etc. etc. etc.

Even if I were to believe it true, I don't know how this would accomplish anything in terms of playstyle. This feels like a Too Scummy fallacy.

PS: Go study your English before you reply.

I've decided not to do it here. Whether it's a playstyle that can actually help scum catching (and spark relevant discussion for cases later) is a different debate completely to whether it should be used in a newbie game. To that, I'd most definitely say no. Probably a mini normal. Providing those games show the same trend, of course.

And I've managed to get quite a few quotes in the bag!

[Webz]

HP, that sucks. . Anyway, any possible reason why? Kirby's little fight with him? But that seems too obvious. But then, maybe that's what they wanted us to think. But that sends us into WIFOM loops. Anyway, I still think it would be a bad move on Kirby's part.

Okay,

vote:YamiJoey

Do I really need to give a reason? He hammered a townie (well, he hammered, regardless) without good enough reason and much, much before we wanted the game day to end. I'm not gonna buy a newb argument, as I didn't in AA's case, though he probably could have put something decent together in another TWO WEEKS. Oh, and he definitely should have read the thread. Read this:

And yes, L-1. But I'll see to it personally that anyone who hammers will get lynched. Please do not, because if you're town, you're going down, and that won't help us at all.

I really don't want to have to do this, YJ. But we don't have much choice.

Oh, and today, please don't hammer until a week before the deadline, unless it is pretty much universally accepted that we want them to go down and we want them to go down right at that second. Which is unlikely. And don't hammer at all without a very good reason.

[Webz]

I really don't want to have to do this, YJ. But we don't have much choice.

ie. Unless it's YamiJoey? Yeah; I get that.

Well, if it comes down to no discussion because we know that no one's going to unvote etc, and you'll die. I don't want you to be lynched if you're a townie. But really, we don't have much of a choice. Also, getting angry is something scum do, often. I'm not going to dwell on this, because if I was you, I'd be pissed off too. If I was town or scum.

There's pretty much no defense here. What I'm being put up for is there for everyone to see, and was a mistake on my part.

No, you can't discount what's been done. You can, however, make a stronger case against someone else, but good luck with that.

Anyway, you said before about keeping thoughts to yourself before. There's no reason not to voice them now.

What were they?

Anyway; here's what I have to say about a few people:

Fallen Angel:

Been inactive and it was left late until the deadline was closed. Could be a sign.

Kirbyoshi:

The most scummy of anyone on the thread. If my oppinion still counted; there'd be questions going to him.

Webz:

Fairly Townie. Close to being straight up confirmed.

Fallen Angel probably just isn't here.

Thok: I think we need a prod on FallenAngel

Kirb seems scummy to me, but it's the kind of scummy that any scum with 1/10th of a brain could easily avoid. However, scum normally only show one scumtell that's pretty huge that they overlooked before posting. Case and point: Exalt in newb 818, assuming that there's a doc when all is known by the town is that there's a cop.

That's what I see now, in you.

And YJ, can you answer me this: Did you read my post? About NOT lynching AA.

And HP said something about expecting the lynch. Is there anything that would suggest that scum would deliberately want to lynch him? Possibly to frame Kirby. Or was he just scared? I knew that I didn't want to get lynched last night. [/i]

[Webz]

Yeah; I got that post in the Night and realised that today was going to be painful after it.

Before you hammer, you should read the whole day. Oh well.

I know that this won't prove me as a Townie; but if I were Mafia; I'd've hit Webz last night. I know that people will just say "Yeah; but if you're Mafia you're not going to tell us the truth in anything", but w/e.

I think scum didn't want to lynch me

because

I'm the obvious choice. That leaves no room for nightkill reasoning speculation against other people, and if we have a doc, it was probably quite likely that I would be protected. Not to sound big-headed or anything. . However, tonight they're not necessarily going to do a similar thing.

On Kirbyoshi; the only person I actually think is Mafia on here right now:

He starts in the scummy way of 'random voting' for a player who voted for him.

He FoS' me for no reason. (He did explain later, but at the time there was none.)

Exagerating on how many votes he had. I think this might've been a way to make people calm down on him in case there was an "accidental lynch" sort of situation, where people were so blinded by wanting to lynch someone; they made the evidence fit themselves. (Don't know myself if this is Townie/Scummy, but it raises questions for sure.)

The fact that he 'called me out' on 'helping Mafia'. IMO giving out what Mafia would/should be doing helps the Town more than Mafia. Mafia can night-talk, so they can keep things a secret.

Random voting is not a strong scumtell. As is pretty obvious by the fact that AA flipped town.

And what do you think about kirb vs HP? Is this a scumtell? I know you did in the quote below, but not that adequately. Do you think that testing HP was the only reason for this?

Having a case for anything they think is a scumtell is not a scumtell. Though being self-defensive can be. You're defending yourself here though, too.

I know I'm under suspicion; so anything that I say about him pushing me as scum won't seem like a scum thing, but he was pushing it all through yesterday. It was like he was looking for someone (Webs, HP, then me) to exploit and then when he got to me it was successful. He also took back his 'Threat to vote HP' and made sure it was known. Even before HP was killed that was hella-scummy to me.

HP being killed does make it a little obvious, but it could very well be a double bluff on Kirbyoshi's part. He does seem like he knows what he's talking about, even just a tad.

A very interesting point. Kirby did seem as if he was pushing to find a weak person through not very serious. This is very interesting, as he seems to only step up his case on you after seeing that you're not acting that strongly. However, you did the same thing, or it could have been seen as the same thing, with your weak FOSs at me and AA. You didn't, however, have as much success as he had. Though you did throw a lot of the evidence away when you made that hammer, so Kirb wasn't actually responsible for starting the case against you.

@ people with the most experience: What's your experience with such WIFOMs? Would newbs take such a risk of being guessed correctly very often? Or does this essentially clear kirby? Or is it a null-tell either way? (I'm not asking anyone personally, because a single scummy response could knock town.)

I also think that HP may have been lynched for playing as if he's a cop. Not strongly, but slightly. I believe his strong defensive positions might have been interpreted as such. More than anyone else, I think. Though, obviously, he wasn't.

Also, I would like to see if we can get a consensus not to post who we think is acting the towniest. We want as much room for error in the scumteam as possible. If you're going to say that you think someone's town, then do it by more subtle means or group people together, etc.

Also, we shouldn't be using only day 1 evidence to lynch people. This could leave scum, if they're, say, Yabba, Devotress, Me or Fallen Angel, in a great position to sit back while the people who acted strange in day 1 get lynched one by one.

[Webz]

I also see eye to eye with you on the Kirby thing. But is he just a less helpful and maybe a less likeable mafia player in general, or actually scummy? I'm undecided. And do we really want YJ to slip under the radar for his hammer that was so disastrously anti-town.

We've already got a vanilla claim from YJ, which means we're not putting a power role (or its uncovering) at risk one bit. Though I do think that we've got an AA 2.0 here, because their mistakes and experience that isn't that relevant in this kind of game is pretty much the same. If he's scum though, he could be easily playing the AA card, which is kind of ironic (seeing as he hammered) though still possible. I think that YJ is town, though, myself.

[Webz]

Guys, no reason to put him at L-1. FOS: Kirby for putting him at L-1. L-1 guys, not L-2. We need only 4 to lynch, and we had a massive 3 on the wagon. We want this day to last 3 weeks, most likely. Our day one was much

So, just to stop any shenanigans:

unvote:YamiJoey

The reason that AA was at L-1 in the first place was to put very real pressure on him, because he hadn't responded to an L-2 in any real way. The wagon was for pressure, as none on it wanted him to get lynched. YJ thought differenly though, obviously. I DIDN'T WANT HIS LYNCH. HE WASN'T EVEN MY #1 SCUM TARGET.

Let's have a look at the numbers here:

If the person we lynch is scum, and someone gets nightkilled: We have 4 town and 1 scum. Easily possible to win as town.
If the person we lynch is town, and someone gets nightkilled: We have 3 town and 2 scum. Extremely likely scum win, as quicklynching is very, very dangerous.

So we shouldn't lynch YJ just because he acted anti town. If people think he acted scummy enough to merit a lynch, then we can lynch him, but we have to be EXTREMELY CAREFUL.

I'm still willing for a YJ lynch, however. As is Devotress, obviously, and Kirby. He'll get lynched at the end of the three weeks unless we have a really good case on anyone else because that hammer was very suspicious.

[Webz]

I do agree that putting AA at L-1 was a little scummy and bad play in a newbie game. I probably would do it with more experienced people, because the newb excuse would be irrelevant. But anyway, if AA had responded properly to the L-2, then it wouldn't have been necessary.

Yeah, kirby is showing a LOT of subtle scumtells. I don't know if there's enough there to merit a lynch, but he's the one that has consistently scummy. However, this would be so bad scum play that I'm really not sure if I want to really suspect him too much for it.

EBWOP: Also; I know Mafia theory, and am not acting like a n00b. I'm new to

not having any powers

, so having to get information purely on posts is proving difficult to me.

There's your vanilla claim. Unless, of course, it's a goon claim.

Okay, I'm putting a new kind of vision on. Behavioral analysis. I'll post my own behavioral analysis ASAP, but what do other people think about people, especially kirby and YJ, under behavioral analysis?

[Webz]

Kirby's actions in light of the article(s)

Universal tells are the traditional slip-ups that have been identified over years of playing and study. They are activities where the most common explanation of the tell is that the player is scum, and there is a reliable, proven correlation between the behavior and mafia players. A short list of some of the more common examples could include:

-Malicious OMGUS attacks in response to pressure.

This seems like Kirby vs HP (town) in a nutshell.

-Overaggression in voting patterns.

Yes. Putting YJ at L-1 for no reason. And being agressive to me, HP and YJ day one.

-Atypical patterns of participation, such as posting only enough to avoid scrutiny, or avoiding certain critical discussions within the town and commenting only on tangential issues.

He did lay off from his aggression when it was pointed out, and didn't go into describing his innocence at all.

-Waffling and taking both sides of an issue.

Not much, but:

This: I think going against YJ but discounting the STRONGEST piece of evidence in order to maintain your universal right to hammer and be a newb is suspicious.

I'm honestly kind of disappointed that I'm coming under fire for being the first one to be suspicious of YJ. My vote was the only one on him yesterDay. I think I said before, the hammer is probably not just a newbie mistake. So, just like yesterDay, but with at least some support now...

-Lying.

L-2 sign for L-1. Then saying he thought that there were eight people.

-Poor, unpersuasive, or faked vote rationales.

His case on me and HP wasn't backed enough, IMO. His case on YJ was okay, however.

-Unusual timing of a claim, or role information.

No. We haven't had a claim.

Emotional tells: Fighting for the sake of fighting. Scumhunting the wrong way round. He has kept himself together, however, which is a townie tell.

[Webz]

This seems like Kirby vs HP (town) in a nutshell.

How is it OMGUS if I start the discussion?

It might not be defined quite as OMGUS, but attacking with practically no evidence is pretty much OMGUS. And starting the discussion is a good thing. Starting the discussion by putting yourself in the scumlight isn't a good thing. That's part of what killed AA.

being agressive to me, HP and YJ day one.

I don't recall being overly aggressive toward you. Maybe some post numbers would help?

More of a poke, but I'm not discounting it, by any means.

I don't have a vote that stands yet either. Does that make me scummy? Also, I re-rolled on random.org, and you came up.

Vote: Webz

discounting the STRONGEST piece of evidence in order to maintain your universal right to hammer and be a newb is suspicious.

Don't understand this. Could you please go into more detail so I can explain it?

Sure. If you use a piece of evidence, you're advocating that piece of evidence's use against people. Like yourself. However, if you discount one's use, you're saying that you think that it isn't a scumtell, and in turn, you're making it less likely to be used against you. So, you could argue that you want to be allowed to hammer and play the newb card.

L-2 sign for L-1. Then saying he thought that there were eight people.

I honestly had a brain fart and thought there were 8 alive. But I'm not surprised that you find it suspicious, as it's quite similar to my case against YJ.

It's a mistruth, but it really isn't a problem unless you repeatedly don't tell the truth. It's not putting you in a LAL lynch, by any means.

I see YJ more scummy than kirb right at the moment, but I think that it's quite likely that none of them are scum.

[Webz]

I honestly had a brain fart and thought there were 8 alive. But I'm not surprised that you find it suspicious, as it's quite similar to my case against YJ.

I know you are talking to webz, but, for the record my vote on you wasn't a "let's all lynch kirby vote" so much as a "this is where my suspicions lie" kind of vote.

Wait... What? He's talking about suspicions, and then you come along and say, "Wait, Kirby, I'm not talking about a lynch, I'm talking about suspicion." But that's what he was saying. It seems that you're only seeing what you want to see, which looks borderline scummy.

But it may just be clarification that you don't see it more suspicious than he does in retrospect.

And I just noticed, is meant to be laughing. It doesn't look like laughing to me. Anyway...

[Webz]

Yes, I claimed vanilla.

Even though it isn't a scum move, telling everyone you're vanilla isn't very pro town if you're actually vanilla. It gives the scum one less target in there hunt for power roles.

I'll let it slide here though, because we would have forced him to claim today, anyway. He did, however, say it in a time and place that made it take some of the blame for him from the hammer.

[Webz]

@ YJ: The mafia had no idea if there was a doc. If there was, he most probably was protecting me. They also knew that if they voted HP off, it would seem to frame both me and Kirby, because I'm not dead, and Kirby got at HP's throat for barely anything and it was never resolved. However, they could be a bit surer about people's roles tonight if they see lots of vanilla. This doesn't mean they'll nightkill me (maybe even because you brought this up). I think you underestimate the ability of mafia to manipulate the town. Do you really think that I was a better mafia target last night? What about Yabba? He seemed very townie yesterday, more so than HP. You're saying that it would have been correct play to lynch me, but I think that they cared more about getting a pro-town player down than a specific one, and risking not night-killing.

It seems an awful lot like you're going back to your Too Townie argument.

Kirby: And yes, no one wants you to hammer. But if we let it slide in YJ's case partly because you think that it is a null tell, then you're not very likely to be lynched.

Please tell me where my logic is wrong. Don't just quote the last point and say you don't think that the conclusion is right. Because, if I'm wrong, then the logic has to be wrong somewhere. It's like retorting to a post full of scumtells that comes up with the conclusion "You're scum" by saying "I'm not scum." It's not valid, because if you're town, then you should have a townie excuse to each of the points.

If you use a piece of evidence, you're advocating that piece of evidence's use against people. Like yourself. However, if you discount one's use, you're saying that you think that it isn't a scumtell, and in turn, you're making it less likely to be used against you. So, you could argue that you want to be allowed to hammer and play the newb card.

I don't think I ever left that as an option for me. In fact, if I hammer without reason, I fully expect every other player to jump on me, simply based on that fact.

That doesn't mean that it's a bad play as mafia. YJ hammered, everyone jumped on him. Is he certain to get lynched? No.

[Webz]

But if we let it slide in YJ's case partly because you think that it is a null tell, then you're not very likely to be lynched.

I never said I thought it was a null-tell. In fact, quite the opposite, it's my main reason for voting for YJ. I'd like a quote of where I said it was a nulltell, because to my knowledge, I never did.

Doh. I missed a "not".

I feel like an idiot.

Okay, your case on YJ today is fine. So no scumtells there.

[Webz]

Who do people think is the most scummy at the moment?
I think YamiJoey, because his hammer was so scummy.

Also, I'm uncomfortable with kirby having more votes than him. Just to not misrepresent the town's feelings on the issue, because he is under the spotlight more than kirb, and they both are much more than anyone else (I'm not saying that this is a good thing. It's probably bad.)

vote:YamiJoey

[Webz]

It seems an awful lot like you're going back to your Too Townie argument.

Not true. I'm simply trying to establish why you're not dead, and I do understand your point about not wanting to simply miss the Night Hit because Mafia were greedy, but I will stress to the rest of the Town that this should not be overlooked, and I hope you can understand that.

I doubt that many people here, if they were mafia, would have nightkilled me. Anyway, just because I was acting townie (to you, at least) doesn't mean that the mafia would think that think the same thing. What if my single living case that was alive on after AA was lynched was wrong *gasp*? Maybe Kirby is town, and mafia are gunning for a quick Kirby lynch. This is further backed by the fact that they lynched HP, who Kirby fought with, leading to suspicion against Kirby. There are countless reasons why they could not want to lynch me, and some are right in your face.

Simply, if you discount EVERYTHING else apart from the possibility that we have a doc, then the likeliness that I was doc protected last night, if I am as obvious a target as you paint, would probably be closer to 40% than 30%. 50% likely no doc, and they could be protecting a different person, obviously.

I simply don't see the obviousness of my lynch. And since not lynching me automatically puts me in the spotlight, it makes it an even less obvious lynch.

I'm not saying that it should be overlooked. I'm just saying that it's a null-tell if I ever saw one, because saying "I think that on night one there was a 50/50 chance of him getting lynched, but he didn't" leads nowhere. Also, it is something that I have no control over. However, I'm using my own fine-toothed comb, so go ahead.

As a new Mafia player, I'd be trying to ensure my own survival rather than play for a good late game (That's what I did on my first game, probably second, too.)

I don't get your last part. I assume you mean "mafia" as in scum, rather than the game. Because if you're talking about the game, I don't care about my own survival. I care about a town victory. If you mean scum, you're saying the payoff for "acting" very townie is not having a good mafia lategame, right? Why? I don't get it.

But in a hypothetical situation, if you were mafia, would you have nightkilled me? Why?

If you were mafia, YJ, then you could have set this up. It seems that you might be both the mafia that set this up, and the townie that's pulling it off. It just seems much too easy to do, and it draws attention from yourself as the main suspect right at the moment.

[Webz]

Some people seem to be confusing lynching and NK-ing. No one can be lynched at Night. It would make it easier (for me at least) to make the distinction if the correct terminology is used. Thanks .

Doh. That was me. I mixed up nking and lynching in the post, then I previewed and thought "I said lynch instead of nightkill". So replaced them. Well, most of them.

@Webz: Are you outright averse to having Kirby lynched today? Do you think he's scum?

I think that out of YJ and Kirby, I would, at this point in time, go for a YJ lynch. There are too many scumtells in this game. . But I think that although Kirby seems more like a more experienced scum, YJ should not be overlooked because of that hammer. Most likely, I won't vote for kirby today without a quite good reason. If other people want him lynched, I'm not gonna chainsaw or anything. He's definitely second likeliest to be scum, to me.

If this is in regards to my "Am I now at L-1?" post, then I'll explain further:

If I am L-1, the Mafia could hammer me. They then go 3-2 for the next turn. Turn after it'll (probably) be 2-1. (I'm obviously ignoring Doc roles, because that's impossible.) I think that cutting it that fine is asking to lose the game.

It wasn't, actually. It was about AA. Which is why it is about post 181.

But yes, I don't think that the "am I at L-1?" post meant anything either way. I can see how you got confused, because your votes have gone, today: 1,2,3,2,1,2. It's not too easy to keep track of.

No one wants anyone at the moment to be at L-1. But yes, mafia killing someone scummy in order to make a lylo situation on day 4 is very possible. Which COULD, if played properly, result in a 2/3rds chance of mafia winning. That's not what we want. And what's impossible? Having a doc (because even mafia wouldn't know that)? Or working out the probabilities if we have a doc?

And, at YJ, how strong do you think that this not being nightkilled "tell" is? Would you vote for me? FoS me? How high am I up your scumdar because of this? (Specifically, higher or lower than OP? Because the tell you got on his back seems equally a red herring to me.)

[Webz]

TownIE

What does this mean? I don't think it's just an accident, seeing as your other capitalizations haven't been random.

@yabbaguy: I really don't think that behavioral tell thing will hold water. It has some truth, but there's really no telling what a player's reason ofr a post is, unless it's really obvious, or you're really good.

Okay, let's try behavioral analysis of this post.

First, what is the effect of the post. It is likely to decrease the chances of a kirby lynch, because he discounts the tell on him. It is also showing us that he does not think scetchy tells are tells at all, which is likely to result in a YJ lynch if caught on by town. Why? Because he is the only person with decent evidence against him. However, in the SAME POST, he unvotes YJ, so this is not likely to be a motive. However, discounting this tell is probably not beneficial to the town, as similarly strong/weak tells are probably, en mass, enough for a lynch in anyone's book.

Now, the motivation. As a primary motive I see survival. I don't see this post being meant to give the town sound advice for handling cases, because I don't see sound evidence for handling cases.

Emotion. He's calm and collected. He's not the jokey kirby that fought with HP in day 1. He wants to be heard.

I think that yabba's analysis was relevant.

[Webz]

I think that yabba's analysis was relevant.

That bit was serious.

But yes, maybe I should have put sarcasm tags on it. :rolleyes:.

So, you say townIE when I'd say townish. Thanks.

[Webz]

@ PP:It has been gone over before: Too Townie is not a scumtell. It is a shown logical fallacy.

To sum up what I think about people:

Purple Princess: Many of your arguments seem to lack depth.

#1: You're treating Devotress as town because you can't get a total read on her, while you're treating Yabba as sceptical scum because you can't get a read on him, when he has contributed MORE to scumhunting than Devotress. This seems like double standards, which is not townie in the slightest.

#2: You're assuming that YJ's main objective is to stay alive. It is not a townie's main aim to stay alive, but to scumhunt. You seem to think that YJ should focus more on defending himself than finding a more scummy person, which is very, very scummy. Because scum only want to stay alive.

#3: Using the Too Townie fallacy.

Kirby: People are calling you scattershot, however, this is not a bad thing. There shouldn't be anyone who is acting scummy off your scumdar. What I don't like is that you disagree with yourself and take turns on your cases. You should never discount a scumtell that hasn't been proven wrong. You have a strong enough case on YJ to vote, easily, and he hasn't posted anything groundbreakingly townie since you voted. I see no reason for the unvote. Having a vote on someone doesn't mean you can't be suspicious of anyone else.

YJ: You are playing too much defense. You've given your excuses for what has happened. Any more will be irrelevant, so scumhunt instead.

Yabba: You SEEM town to me. There's nothing to say otherwise.

op: I still don't think that you're scum. But can you say what you think about everyone so far?

Devotress: I do think that you have never, really, done anything that DIDN'T go with the existing flow of the game. You did post #76 asking everyone who they thought was scummy, but you didn't put any more pressure on Kirby than he already had.

Seeing as you seem to be for either a Kirby or YJ lynch, who, of the remaining people (not Kirb or YJ) do you see as the scummiest?

ALSO: People, who do you favour for a lynch, out of Kirbyoshi and YamiJoey?

Kirby-Yabbaguy, Devotress, Yamijoey
YamiJoey- Webz, (Kirby), (op)

People in ()s I'm not sure of. PP, I have no idea.

[Webz]

People being lenient and unsure of saying something about another person is a scumtell, whether they're a scumpair or not. PP treated Kirby in an odd manner, leading us to put suspicion on her. Not you, Kirby.

This situation is: Kirby is suspicious in the game, PP treats Kirby weirdly and takes both sides of an issue.
The result is: PP seems more scummy and Kirby seems as scummy as before.

What benefit do scum have by claiming two people are a scum pair, compared to just normal false scum hunting on individuals?

If they really need either to be lynched and do not really care if they get lynched the following day because that leads to a positive position for the scum. Like, let me see, today.

Because of what has just recently happened:

FoS: purple princess
FoS: Kirbyoshi

Not because I think you're a scumpair, but because you've both been scummy. My vote on YJ stands, but possibly not for long.

[Webz]

If they really need either to be lynched and do not really care if they get lynched the following day because that leads to a positive position for the scum

EBWOP, To clarify: If the scum really needs either of the double townie "scumpair" to be lynched, and doesn't care if they themselves get lyched the following day because it leads to a position positive for the scum. If that were to happen today, then we would end up on a 2:1 lylo on day 4, most likely, a positive position for scum.

However, I do not think that Yabba is doing this. If he was, though, it would be to draw suspicion away from YJ.

[Webz]

I still don't get it though. Kirby was acting like the specific act of calling calling out a suspected pairing was scummy, beyond the act of just calling out people seperately. So I am still confused as to why it is more scummy for them to say "Kirby and PP are scum buddies" Then it is, for example, for me to say "Kirby and Yami both seem scummy to me", which wasn't getting called out by kirby.

If the link was strong enough, and the town wasn't smart, then it could be used to override cases which might actually have more to go on (Read:YamiJoey) because of such weird connections. However, I think that a case which deals with a possible scumpair should only go against someone that did the suspicious action than was on the receiving end, at least until the person that acted suspiciously flips mafia. Because we don't want to be tricked by a scum gambit.

[Webz]

I didn't say I didn't get a total read on Devtress, I said that there was nothing to suspect me of her being scum right now, but couldn't get a read on Yabbaguy, so I will need to keep lokking. I don't see any double standards there myself.

There is nothing to suspect either of them to be scum really. If you show me that Devotress has shown more townie tells, then I might be able to see eye to eye with you. But to me, it doesn't look like that at all.

I also think that if he is town, he really isn't much use for us if he is dead, considering he would have been hammered for such a newbie move.

He can't help us if he's dead. He can't help us if he's alive and only defending himself. Therefore he should scumhunt.

@ PP:It has been gone over before: Too Townie is not a scumtell. It is a shown logical fallacy.

#3: Using the Too Townie fallacy.

Why do you feel the need to post the same thing twice? Am I right? sometimes scum may try a little harder to look more town, is this what you are doing?

I thought of removing one before I posted. But I decided against it because the first was saying that doing it is wrong, and the second was listing your scumtells.

And please read the article before you reply next time. The people who will try hardest to act town, are scum. The people who actually act towniest are town, because acting town when you are scum is a lot easier to say than do. So no, you're not right.

VOTE Webz

you seem to be a bit bothered than you should be that I fos you.

I am not bothered that you are on my case. I am bothered that you are using false logic and showing scumtells.

Like: Voting aggressively.

@Webz-232: I highly doubt it's a planned gambit, not so much as a slip.

I agree. But I think that if we react stupidly to this slip, it leaves us open to such a gambit.

And @ YJ: I see Yabba as the most trustworthy. I see Devotress as the most townie.

[Webz]

I've noticed something. Kirby's attack on Yabba for talking about scumpairs has been treated suspicious. But not in the right way. It was, as far as I can see, just thought to be an attack on Yabba. But what it really is is a chainsaw defense, because it pulls PP out of the spotlight for acting suspiciously. This much more relevant, however, if PP or Kirby flip scum. However, they have defended each other, although not in a "Mutaul Chainsaw Defence" way, so I think it is relevant now. (The article says this can be a null tell, but I think that in this case it isn't, because of the scumpair discussion)

So,

unvote:YamiJoey

He is not nearly as scummy as kirb/PP

@ Kirby: These are serious questions.
1) What age are you?
2) What is your favourite subject at school/where do you work?
3) What is your favourite band?
4) What is your favourite TV show?

I'll post why after you reply.

[Webz]

@ Yabba: I'm taking into acount skill as well as townieness. Trustworthyness is not townieness, but a combination of townieness and good use of the townieness. Towny people can stuff up, if you trust them. Trustworthy people aren't likely to.

So, for instance, I'd be more comfortable with Yabba hammering someone than Devotress, but also more comfortable with his lynch. Right at this point, though. It is subject to a lot of change.

And at the questions, I was testing your maturity level. You got a moderately mature to quite mature rating on all of them. I'm not sure if there is anything in particular that this says, but it's interesting to know. It lets me see your posts in the right light (newbie mistakes rather than childish mistakes, if you were to make a mistake etc. etc.).

And a much more important question: What do you think about Princess?

[Webz]

1) What age are you? 16
2) What is your favourite subject at school/where do you work? French, probably. It just seems like it might be actually be some use in life.
3) What is your favourite band? Blindspott. They're a Kiwi band (ie from NZ, where I live.) Kind of Nu Metal. Other than that, Rise Against.
4) What is your favourite TV show? I don't watch TV, since I don't have one. But Flight of the Concords is cool.

And Kirby, please pinpoint it. Town works on facts and evidence to win games.

[Webz]

He can't help us if he's dead. He can't help us if he's alive and only defending himself. Therefore he should scumhunt.

Which I have said so, but you keep missing this out for some reason.

I am going on the general gist of the first post you posted. But if you want me to drop it, I will. It's not important in the slightest.

I thought of removing one before I posted. But I decided against it because the first was saying that doing it is wrong, and the second was listing your scumtells

Well if you thought about removing one of them you can understand why I thought you had posted the same thing twice. I guess YamiJoey gave you your answer for that in post 238 which was lucky for you.

I would have rather that he hadn't, but my reasons were the same. Looking my post, it is obvious.

@Princess-235: (I'm not gonna use PP, that sounds weird to say out loud) Laughing

I don't think scum would have slipped up so much

This means nothing. Why should the mafia be any better?

Your case on Webz is also full of holes. Do you really think his posts are completely pointless? Do you think he's "trying too hard"?

I just don't beleive that scum would make such a reckless move, surley the object of there game is to stay alive to win. When day two had started mostly everyone was ready to lynch him, which doesn't really look good if he is scum does it? one scum down, one to go, I think we would be looking at a town win. I just belive that scum would be trying their hardest to steer votes away from them.

It is obvious if you look at the posts that YJ is at least acting as if he thinks that his vote doesn't matter nearly as much as it did. So this seems irrelevant.

I think that Webz is a very active player, but his posts just seem to waffle on without much really to say, I still beleive he has something to hide and yes I think he is trying a little to hard

Discussion is good for town. I don't put anything irrelevant in my posts, I just make sure I go into detail so "can you clarify this" posts needn't be made.

And Devotress: I think that's a null tell. Really, there was nothing much to discuss about FA.

[Webz]

I just don't beleive that scum would make such a reckless move, surley the object of there game is to stay alive to win.

I know this has been responded to many a time, but calculated recklessness is a townie tell. That MAY have been what YJ thought he was doing.

And what do you think is the difference?

@ Yabba: I'm taking into acount skill as well as townieness. Trustworthyness is not townieness, but a combination of townieness and good use of the townieness. Towny people can stuff up, if you trust them. Trustworthy people aren't likely to.

So, for instance, I'd be more comfortable with Yabba hammering someone than Devotress, but also more comfortable with his lynch. Right at this point, though. It is subject to a lot of change.

And I both was and wasn't the first to suspect PP of being scum. I was the first to point out the scumtells, but I didn't FoS her then, because I wasn't sure of her being town or scum. Yabba then FoSed her, and when the "scumpair" thing was pointed out, and Kirby posted some weird posts, I FoSed both PP and Kirby. So, in short, you're both wrong and right. But you're wrong that I was the one who put "mass suspicion" on her (which is ironic as no-one has a vote on her.) The tell that has had people on her case was her treatment of Kirb, which Yabba pointed out.

Also, I'd be careful about that FoS. It's an "If PP is scum, and her scumbuddy wanted to distance themselves after that post, and Webz was the one doing that, then he's scum!!!!! DIE SUM!!!!11!!!." Sorry, but this is very, very dodgy grounding.

[Webz]

And I both was and wasn't the first to suspect PP of being scum.

This looks like you're "taking both sides of an issue," which is what you "accused" PP of doing, did you not?

Like I said, pure speculation, but not something to just slip through a scum-filter.

You're taking this out of context. I thought the post was suspicious, but didn't think she was scum.

The reason that I have "changed" might be because I actually think that PP probably is scum, rather than the scummiest. It might be because I started playing another mafia game. It might be because I read quite a few games and found out that I wasn't quite doing it right. It's not conscious.

Also, if I was you, with that "dangerously close to FoSing you" comment, I would have said "If PP flips scum, then Webz looks scummy" because that makes more sense. The base of that almost-FoS was PP being scum, afterall. Sorry for being a bit sarcastic before. I should stop.

[Webz]

The first "It" is referring to the reason why I might have changed. It is not saying that playing another game made me think you were scum, but playing another could have made me change.

And for what I wasn't doing right, the best mafia player I know acts completely differently to how I do. Everything he does is done to provoke reaction. I haven't been doing this, so I haven't been playing optimally.

[Webz]

HP, that sucks. . Anyway, any possible reason why? Kirby's little fight with him? But that seems too obvious. But then, maybe that's what they wanted us to think. But that sends us into WIFOM loops. Anyway, I still think it would be a bad move on Kirby's part.

Ooooh,

unvote, Vote: Webz

. Sounds a lot like Scum gloating, which newbie scum tend to do Day 2.

The point of this post was to make use of the only actually sound evidence we had: HP got lynched. Kirby was likely not the person that did it, so I pointed that out. If I was scum I would not have wanted Kirby to be partially cleared this way.

Also, YJ, please back off me. If you want to agree with my points, then go ahead. If you think that I'm not scummy, say so. Don't do this, though:

I am going to back Webz up on this, as I have recently been looking over more Mafia games and articles, and it does affect how you play when you weren't doing it right in the first place.

This was unneeded. You had already stated this and it hadn't been argued. I don't know why you want to be connected to me or buy favour.

[Webz]

The point of this post was to make use of the only actually sound evidence we had: HP got lynched. Kirby was likely not the person that did it, so I pointed that out. If I was scum I would not have wanted Kirby to be partially cleared this way.

But that is all WIFOM. We don't know what your relationship with kirby is (scum scum, scum town, town scum) anyways. It doesn't clear Kirby, even if it was "obvious".

I don't get people backing completely off WIFOM. This particular WIFOM looks as if it is more likely that Kirby would not lynch HP. However, if you want the town to not touch WIFOM situations, then say so. I'll be willing to oblige.

And you forgot town-town.

[Webz]

Okay, my Devotess = town, is kind of wearing out. Recently you seem to be "thorwing" things out there and seeing what sticks without actually commiting to anything. This seems a little scummy to me. It is as if you are frightend to comment on stuff just incase people question you or even vote for you, kind of like you are trying to go under the radar without drawing any suspiscions towards yourself.

I still have my suspiscions about Webz, but right now I think Devotess is looking scummier.

VOTE Devotess

This has been her problem all along. It is as if she wants to sway the town, but not actually leave a paper trail of votes, which 2 main things spring to mind: The fact that she said once that she was more suspicious of YJ but kept her vote on Kirby, and the time she had a large case on Kirby, enough to merit a vote, easily, but didn't.

And I don't care if it seems scummy, but will we, as town, look into any WIFOMs or not? I'm assuming not.

And have to say it's the scummiest thing I've seen from webz yet. I still think he's town, but figured it was worth pointing out since I noticed it.
Townies should stand up for there point, it seems kind of like you're trying to appease him so he doesn't go after you anymore.

This is not an answer to the question, which would have been pro-town, but a spread of suspicions that could just as likely be scummy.

But trying to appease him? I'm not quite sure that that makes any sense. I don't think that op would see that post as stand-out pro-town (I'm not saying scummy), so I have no idea how it would appease him.

FoS: Devotress

Still no vote.

[Webz]

quote]
This is not an answer to the question, which would have been pro-town, but a spread of suspicions that could just as likely be scummy.

But trying to appease him? I'm not quite sure that that makes any sense. I don't think that op would see that post as stand-out pro-town (I'm not saying scummy), so I have no idea how it would appease him.

It wasn't really a question asked of me.
You really don't see how this could be appeasing? OP thinks your wifoming could be suspicious in some way, and rather than defend it you backed off it and basically said 'i'll stop if you want'

I can't try to decipher WIFOM at all if people will only think that it is irrelevant, or simply scummy, so it is a waste of time. I said that I'd be happy to oblige because, if I wasn't going to be listened to, I'd be stupid not to. I didn't defend it because I didn't know whether it was a viable tool or not.

Also, Devotress, it would be best both for you and the town if you said that you'll commit more in the future. Yes, you have reasons for not commiting so much, yes, they could be valid, but overall you seem like the person who wants the least of the blame. You're not scummy to me, but you could help the town more by being more sound with your suspicions.

[Webz]

OP has a vote on me, so I'm not sure if you're completely right there.

I do agree, however, that PP is muddying the waters on both of her and Kirby's cases, which is not a good thing. However, the discussion that is being made by PP is good for a skilled town, one that can see through the mix up and find the real scummiest player. Obviously, discussion is, in general, good, but the ability to mix up everyone's suspicions is clearly a scum tactic.

So, people, look through the evidence yourself before voting, and keep off dodgy wagons. If we do, then this discussion is good for town. If we don't, it may not be, as we can't afford to mislynch today.

However, more than PP's suspicions, which I see as valid, I don't like it AT ALL how Kirby is starting to blend in with the background. He hasn't posted real content for a long time, and it's been 20+ posts since he even posted. With him being the one under main suspicion, I see this as scummy. If he weren't at L-2, I'd most probably vote.

[Webz]

@ YJ: I never said that you were focusing too much on PP, and not Kirby. I would rarely vote for the person that wasn't the most suspicious to me, though. And lurking is never pro-town. I would want a very good excuse before passing it off as anything but scummy, especially in Kirby's case, where he is benefiting from the absence.

[Webz]

Sorry for taking the game seriously, Double A.

[Webz]

Kirby: Why were you away for three days?
This is where we need the good explanation.

It seems like Kirby is right now only posting as much as he has to. Posting that FoS on PP was needed to a) not be prodded/replaced and b) not come under suspicion from the town or have to explain your point of view on her.

Can you give us a more full explanation, Kirby, on what you think of PP?

[Webz]

I think Devot and Webz are scum buddies.

Congratulations on your epiphany. Care to state your reasons?

And Kirby, I see you more clearly now. Did you see her at all scummy before she posted the post that you FoSed her about? Exactly how scummy?

[Webz]

And Kirby, I see you more clearly now. Did you see her at all scummy before she posted the post that you FoSed her about? Exactly how scummy?

Before that post, she was about as scummy as I thought FA was for lurking for so long, meaning she was in the top half of my scumlist, but not in my sights yet. Like I said, I guess I'm just slower than everyone else about her.

I don't like that last sentence. Overall, I think that your alibi for becoming more suspicious of PP over time is fine. But that last sentence seems very sheepish to me.

[Webz]

It wasn't an epiphany, I was thinking that when I first listed my suspicions about both of you. I wasn't sure if I made that clear or not, so now I have.

Maybe it's clear, but it is equally meaningless now, as no one else has said they see it, and you haven't elaborated.

Yabba, I also dislike that PP post (325). I think that maybe she meant to say the opposite, that it's good that he's coming out of the background, but either way it is a very, very fishy post. I don't like it at all.

[Webz]

PBPA, on general gist of posts by Purple Princess.

Okay my brain is hurting after reading all of that!

That was a really stupid mistake from YamiJoey to hammer Double A wih such a long time untill deadline, I feel that we may have missed out on valuable information on other players and giving scum an easy time with ending the day early and letting them get their first night kill in.

Right now I do belive that it was a total mistake on YamiJoey's part for hammering so early, surley no scum would hammer so quickly? especially knowing that they would have to have a pretty good defence to get themselves out of being lynched on day two.

Sometimes I think people can focus on one thing which seems to over-shadow all other questions allowing scum to get another "free pass" into day three.

I am still trying t digest the whole of this game, wil re-read and post when I can.

This is the first post where she is waffling, but it can be seen from both sides. She says she sees YJ as dramatically anti-town, yet still town.

Also, she questions the suspicion of the hammer, when it was made extremely clear by me and yabba that it would not be acceptable, but doesn't argue from the point of "YJ didn't see the posts" and "YJ didn't know the full consequences of his actions."

]

YamiJoey

What a stupid, stupid move you made on hammering Double A, especially when we were quite away from deadline, we may have missed out on vital information on who may be scum instead of getting rid of town, I agree that you should be lynched just for this silly move, but with this being a small game we cannot afford to run the risk of loosing more town right now. I think you should make yourself incredibly usefull on finding who is actually scum in this game just to try and save you own arse right now.

Kirbyoshi

seems jumpy, voting all over the place early on in this game, could be nothing, could also be a scum tell.

Webz

I kind of have to agree that he looks a bit 'too townie' right now, his posts seem far too long, but they don't really have much point to them.

FOS Webz

Here, you seem to be toing and froing aswell on YJ's lynch. Also, you go at me without much of a reason. Also, waffling and unsure of yourself when it comes to Kirby.

I just don't beleive that scum would make such a reckless move, surley the object of there game is to stay alive to win. When day two had started mostly everyone was ready to lynch him, which doesn't really look good if he is scum does it? one scum down, one to go, I think we would be looking at a town win. I just belive that scum would be trying their hardest to steer votes away from them.

Too much WIFOM. This is not valid, especially assuming YJ didn't know the full consequences.

The reason that I have "changed" might be because I actually think that PP probably is scum, rather than the scummiest. It might be because I started playing another mafia game. It might be because I read quite a few games and found out that I wasn't quite doing it right. It's not conscious.

Okay so you reasons for thinking I am scum are because you have started playing another mafia game? how does that make sense? or help town in anyway? Could you elaborate on what you wern't doing right? That statement kind of hints to me that you may not be as good as you thought you were at hiding your scum role.

Misinterpretation. It may be real misinterpretation, it may be interpreting from a scummy mindset.
Also, being quite aggressive.

@ YamiJoey, I am unsure why you feel he need to agree with evrything Webz either says in response to peoples posts or reply to things which have been directed towards him. I know this is going to sound a little OMGUS as most of this is directed at me, but I can handle that if it means we get progression in this game.
Webz was applying some pressure towards you ealier on in this game and now his attention is directed towards other people it seems to me like you are trying to almost hide behind him without going un-noticed as that would be active lurking, but there just seems to be something that doesn't sit right with you imo.

FOS YamiJoey

Okay, my Devotess = town, is kind of wearing out. Recently you seem to be "thorwing" things out there and seeing what sticks without actually commiting to anything. This seems a little scummy to me. It is as if you are frightend to comment on stuff just incase people question you or even vote for you, kind of like you are trying to go under the radar without drawing any suspiscions towards yourself.

I still have my suspiscions about Webz, but right now I think Devotess is looking scummier.

VOTE Devotess

Two aggressive posts in a row. This is where it looks like you were muddying the water, because you were seemingly going from person to person and pressing their buttons. Throwing things out, but in a more aggressive way than Devotress.

@ Devotress, Thanks for noticing that I had replaced FA, shame that it took me voting for you to start though, but god to see that you are commiting yourself to what you post instead of, "hmmm it could be nothing, but I thought I would mention......"

Hypocrisy, and aggression again.

@ kirbyoshi, nice to see you trying to blend into the background now that there is a bit less pressure being put on you. I know this could be seen as OMGUS as you are now pointing the susspision towards me, but saying that you must just be a bit slower than everyone else is a bit of a poor answer to me.

Again, I don't think that this is how you meant it to read, but it is still scummy and overly defensive by offense. Normally people wouldn't consider a post like this to be an attack, yet you mention that it could be seen as an OMGUS, so it seems you are more interested in getting someone (who isn't you) lynched than actually helping the town.

Overall, the aggression and waffling stand out to me as reccuring scumtells.

vote: purple princess

[Webz]

1

It's not a good thing, well not a very town thing to do anyway.

You said it's a nice thing to see, yet you think it's anti-town?

2

Of course there is, the attention has been drawn away from you, and with agreeing with everyone else people will find other things to vote on in time.

Attention may have been drawn away from me, but I am still tied for the lead in votes. By my estimation, that means no pressure has been taken off of me.

3

Just for the record I only posted that it looked omgus, because if I hadn't someone would surely point out that it was.

A town player would wait and see if someone calls it OMGUS. If they don't, then good for you, since they don't find you scummy.

1) Because the post was meant to say the opposite thing, I think. PP, is this true?

2) Not true at all. You are now off the main scum list of me and YJ, and you are not necessarily the most likely to be lynched now. The pressure is, obviously, still there, but not as much.

3) This is fine. I, of course, would rather that you hadn't, but it was probably >1/2 likely that someone would say it was an OMGUS. There is such a thing as time and effort, kirby

V/LA

: From in 24 hours for 3 days and a half.

Also, in a week and a bit, I'll have to be replaced, I think. I'll be away for 9 days. Sorry. Starting the saturday in just more than a week.

[Webz]

Sorry, YJ. I kind of assumed it because of your absence/vote, but I do remember that you said that Kirby was more scummy. But still, your attention has probably (subconsciously?) been brought away partly, because you have the case and the general attention on PP. We can't lynch both.

I think that Princess is most scummy at the moment. The confessing to scumtells is one thing, the lack of defence is another, but arrogantly saying that she's not going to stop being scummy is really, really bad for the town.

[Webz]

Sorry guys about the replacement. My computer died on me, and I went away for longer than expected afterwards.

Good job scum!