Open 188 - Tweed Mafia - Over!

[yabbaguy]

...but I suck at remembering to add watched topics.

Tisk tisk - DTM

[yabbaguy]

I'm fairly positive I originally coined the acronym RQS in a MD thread and I createdthe wiki article, but I also think RQS is dumb. So, firing back with a question:

KittyMo: What's the whole point of this method? It's a concept, and it beats RVS, but it's also poorly executed.

Here comes your answer:

yabbaguy: Do you support policy lynches?

Policy-only FTL. However, scummy lynches that are also utility lynches (lynching the annoying anti-town, e.g.) are favorable to me.

And there's your answer. Question #2: Now what?

[yabbaguy]

See, I thought you had a purpose of some convoluted sort. I thought you were operating under the belief that somehow the responses were going to get us somewhere, hence "now what?"

So, if "nothing" is the answer... well yeah... it kinda failed.

[yabbaguy]

Since I apparently fail so much, what better plan would you like to grace us with?

Starting discussion by ridiculing questionable stances.

Done.

[yabbaguy]

OMG hit the wrong option... wanted to hit "no, unvote shouldn't be mandatory." Ugh.

No worries, I'll count your yes as a no then when deciding the fate of the unvote - DTMaster

[yabbaguy]

Do something stupid.

X

That's stupid.

[yabbaguy]

Experimenting with a notetaking system... I think it's working beautifully already. Click "@" to go to the post in question. Here's what came out as scummy, questionable, or notable.

@Coug-37: Voting a random vote for seriousness is opportunistic inherently.

@Coug-61: This is poor reasoning for a vote as well. Why scummy?

@Farside-66: This debate really hadn't blossomed at this point, not sure why we're going after it now.

Nika is bang on at 74 when he cites overconfidence at the outset as a scumtell. Scum have all the answers, so this puzzle is incredibly simple for them already.

XScorp has incredibly poor judgment to be going on anti-town sprees such as what he did around this time. This serves absolutely no purpose, as almost anybody who hops on your wagon after an anti-town spree can be claimed to have a reason. It really doesn't weed out opportunistic scum, and in this case, you don't even have a reason at all (107). So now I think he's suspicious for being anti-town, but I feel cheated. Scorpion, you need to stop.

@Lowell-87: Why are we trying to instigate bandwagons so early on?

Zach-89 is questionable opportunism, especially considering ambiguity (genuine) was present on Lowell's end.

@Farside-102: You've lost me on the reasoning for the vote. It seems like something about hypocrisy, but I'm not entirely sure.

Coug's weird voting rationale and lines of questioning that just don't feel helpful towards scumhunting have my attention initially.

Vote: StrangerCoug

[yabbaguy]

@DTMaster

: Votecount?

In the making - DTM

[yabbaguy]

This feels like meta discussion all over again... even there, I'm not sold on the "swapping to town meta" argument. Yeah, it's Nik trying to "appear" town, but ultimately, I think everyone wants to do that, alignments aside. Nothing notably scummy about it.

[yabbaguy]

@Coug-115: Glad to hear you're feeling better.

Problem on the first one is that by being opportunistic, it kinda feels like edgy scum ready to pounce on anything plausible. That's kind of the vibe I've been getting, but maybe that's how you got pegged as some kinda robot by iamausername (right?), by just taking every scumtell out of context. Can't tell.

Stalling discussion, meh, I think part of it is that she's trying a hypocrisy check, IMO.

@XScr-116: Because we're smarter than that. We know that when somebody's being blatantly anti-town early, you don't wagon them, you ask them to stop.

Speaking of... I'd say a lot of your points on Kitty are more anti-town points, not scummy points.

[yabbaguy]

Do you believe that the people who act most anti-town are less/equally likely to be scum than others?

Not the point here, of course anti-town can easily become scummy. It's just that anti-town alone does not make a scum case. I'd like to know where some of your points actually constitute *scummy* behavior.

---

Unvote

Gonna opt to lay back for a bit and watch stuff unfold. Coug's still shaky, but I'm gonna go the path of inhibiting my vote until it's needed. I'm nowhere near wanting to lynch yet.

[yabbaguy]

Curious that you've shown no interest in suave in that case...

This is true, but a questionable remark because it also serves to selfishly deflect suspicion.

Zach has racked up a lot of questionability so far in my notes:

-the weird vote on Kitty, saying "start some discussion"
-the abrasiveness, conveyed in post 19 (a real minus, I don't think it was fully explained why you weren't cooperating)
-questionable opportunism at 89 asking for an answer to his own question
-now the deflection to Suave

Any reason I shouldn't find any of the above questionable/scummy?

Brosius, LoLa (Locke Lamora), and Jason are lurking to me. Without enough activity, I can't read the entire game as well. Jason hasn't said a damn thing all game, no less.

[yabbaguy]

LoLa's the only nonvoter. I'm listed both there and Coug's wagon.

[yabbaguy]

Submitted way sooner than I wanted...

-Nik: this is really it.

Curious that you've shown no interest in suave in that case...

-Zach, I'll get to your points later. Felt like doing a 6 AM post... which I usually shouldn't.

[yabbaguy]

Questionability, often anti-town or speculative tells, can be done by other town or scum. I've racked up questionable points on most-to-all players in the game, so really they're not so much inherent scummy points as... points that can become scummy later.

Huh? So it's scummy that I pointed out that while he was attacking me he was completely ignoring at least one other player who was doing the same thing? That's what you call being selective.

It may be scummy, but the problem I have here is that suspicion deflection can also be construed as scummy. Seeing as they offset, I pegged it interesting.

"Weird vote" was more a random vote. I'm questionable for nitpicking at that.

I found the questions she was asking to be scummy. Her question to me specifically.

Right, I had forgotten this. I mean, the problem is that RQS also has that as one of its flaws, as some questions are pointless towards other players, others a little too hard-hitting. You can't really take it too much to heart. Point taken, though.

So wanting an answer to a question I asked earlier is scummy, but the person who avoided answering the question in the first place is not?

Questionable, again. The timing is what irked me, seeing as you kind of opportunistically pounced. Calling it scummy is a real stretch... but it just felt odd for whatever reason. Prob. just overreacting, might be because of a prior experience I had in O160, where scum BloodCovenent twisted an active lurking case out of a point not addressed to him or me. The situation here doesn't really parallel though, I'll admit... so I'm prob. overreacting.

I think that's an interesting window on how dangerously carefree I can be when notetaking. I gotta watch that.

---

Don't wait for a prod that's not gonna come in a few days, folks. Let's keep moving.

[yabbaguy]

@Coug-150: What's the reason you view Suave as a more ideal vote? What's inhibiting you from voting now?

Understanding the meta argument a bit more now though, and Nikanor probing this inconsistency definitely drives the argument out the window.

@Nikanor et al: Do you think Suave is scummy for trying to start this meta attack? Despite thinking the argument was poor to begin with, I personally am uncertain on the whole issue of scumminess. However, I don't really feel this was terribly scum opportunism at work at the moment... but I may be wrong here, so I want to see where you all stand.

[yabbaguy]

Hey you, reader of this thread! If you are reading this, you are either very bored right now looking at random Mafia games and should probably be finding other things to do, or you are lurking in this game.

In either event, sitting here and looking at the thread with a stupid look on your face is probably not going to accomplish much. I advise you remedy that situation now.

[yabbaguy]

Continue please, XSCR. You are still lurking.

[yabbaguy]

(Heh. Weirdly used one of the shorthand player symbols from my notes in a post. That's also how I came up with LoLa.)

[yabbaguy]

EBWO3P:

if you're curious how I abbreviated your name-

Unofficial

votecount (with the player ticker symbols)

Code: Select all

SUAV- (NIKA, FARS, LOWL, COUG)
KITY- (ZACH, XSCR)
ZACH- (JASN)
NIKA- (SUAV)
COUG- (KITY)
LOWL- (BROS)

NONVOTING: LOLA, YABB

and without:

MrSuave 4- (Nikanor, Farside, Lowell, StrangerCoug)
Kitty 2- (Zachrulez, XScorpion)
Zachrulez 1- (jasonT1981)
Nikanor 1- (MrSuave)
StrangerCoug 1- (KittyMo)
Lowell 1- (Scott Brosius)

Nonvoting: Locke Lamora, yabbaguy

Anyways...

[yabbaguy]

Vote: farside22

This is difficult, I will admit. I have a feeling that one of the invisibles (Scott and Jason) is scum, considering how the others' scumminess doesn't bowl me over.

Farside has been doing scumhunting that has been absolutely useless. The basis of her scumhunting has mostly been the debate between Suave and Nikanor, and ends up with the conclusion that Suave is scummy simply because he didn't think through his meta case. I think Suave was ridiculously wrong, but calling it scummy seems jumpy to me.

Other problems:
-asks everyone "how would you get out of the RVS?" Mafia discussion is nice, but there's a forum for that. We've got a game to play, and this derails town discussion, which is scummy.
-vote on Nikanor felt out of place
-She said "Meta is overrated," yet, again, she focused on it extensively. No less concluding with a vote based on what she had witnessed in that argument. Scumhunting contrary to stated beliefs is scummy, because scumhunting is town. Scum just "scumhunt" depending on what's convenient and will not get them killed. If it means opportunistically ditching your lurker beliefs and going after the helpless sap (Sorry Suave), then by golly, that's a great idea.

Suave hasn't done anything terribly scummy, to me... even though he's awfully tied up in the debate. To me, that's poor scumhunting, but still feels pro-town.

[yabbaguy]

what question?

Suave, this can't be anything other than dodging.

Farside- Okay, I'll buy into the meta-oriented discussion point, esp considering the attempts to join into other discussion are present. I don't buy into the voting rationale though, you called it a backtracking issue before. I think that and "misrepresentation" are two separate problems.

And again, why would you ask a theory question in-game that accomplishes nothing? This is exactly the reason why RQS fails as a mechanism to begin the game.

[yabbaguy]

Town players usually don't initiate attacks on me except when I am scum.

[yabbaguy]

@farside- You asked "what's the best way to get out of RVS?" To me, that just doesn't serve any purpose to the game, and is just a pointless theory question that doesn't allow anyone to act scummy. Scum can nicely cover their buddies like that, allowing them a safe means of participation without making them look bad.

@XScorpion- Regardless of whatever acronym one opts to use from the alphabet soup of possibilities, the point is that the motive behind posting something like that is that you want us to falsely correlate "Scorpion is town, and since anyone going after him is often scum, and Kitty is, Kitty is likely scum."

Doesn't matter what you want to call it, hell, call it the BBQ fallacy if you want. It's a fallacy, and it's bad logic. And you look like scum using it.

By your policy, I now have gained scumpoints in your book. And yet I think this logic is completely sound and pro-town. So you just can't generalize like that.

[yabbaguy]

And yabbaguy racks up his first major blunder of the game... *headdesk*

[yabbaguy]

(simul w/ Lowell)

[yabbaguy]

@farside-225: That just sounds ridiculously too convoluted to be true. Whatever "information" you're planning on getting out of that sounds too deep to possibly be an effective strategy.

@all: I thought my farside vote was going to cause some heart rates to jump. I have caught scum, and I am telling you all, and if you agree with me, you gotta actually lynch her! Not at deadline, we've all blown it now.

But this has to actually happen, or at least be recognized as an attempt to find scum! We have to kill all the scum! Where the hell is everyone's mind at?

---

Zach is the only one I can possibly support a lynch on of all active wagons, he at least has the *possibility* of flipping red. I will not stand for Suave or Lowell being lynched right now, while their play is questionable, they don't ping scummy at all, and with two cops operating (albeit with reliability issues and obstacles), I would not be livid if No Lynch occurs. I think a wagon is a slightly better weapon than cops, ultimately, so let's at least try to give it a go.

Unvote, Vote: Zachrulez

Again though, it should be farside. I *am* ticked that I have to settle for a complacency vote on someone who I'm nowhere near as sure about.

[yabbaguy]

When the hell does bad play or lurking in themselves = scummy? Lowell wagon STILL makes no sense to me.

Zach has actually committed scumtells such self-deflection and abrasiveness. They're so much weaker compared to farside's which actually make sense, and others which I'm picking up on, such as nhammen, who has scum reads on all the prominent wagons for reasons that don't actually seem like they're describing scummy behavior so much as trivial discrepancies.

Third pick, eh, XScorpion. Not a fan of the WIFOM spewing overall, and while he mistakenly said two scum were in this game, I think that could be WIFOM warfare as well. Could be nhammen's distance, indeed.

Zach is more a fourth choice.

I would not be livid if No Lynch occurred. I think town is horrifically off in their judgment, and I don't think we even lose any mislynches. We have LyLo instead of MyLo if we NL'd and then whiffed on the next two lynches. But any alive cops will have one more investigation in that case.

There's absolutely no statistical downside. Take the NL now or D3. If it means more time to think about this instead of haphazardly running into a brick wall, I'd rather take it now.

Unvote, Vote: No Lynch

[yabbaguy]

Yabbaguy mango'd N1. I love it.

Go kick some ass, town.

[yabbaguy]

Suave, you're not going to get my sympathy here. You're the most rubbish player I've seen, it takes you ages to recognize a question is being asked of you, and you went after Nikanor for nothing but stupid meta. Even if you're so sure you've got scum, you still have to prove that you are actually looking at everyone else! You basically tunnelvisioned the whole game, luckily on scum, but nobody believed you for good reason.

XScorpion- Deliberate anti-town is nothing more than truly anti-town. If this doesn't cut out of your play, you only serve to confuse town.

Jazzmyn- As cop, you simply CANNOT be the most pro-town player in the game and textwall as insightfully as you did, or you'll draw a kill way too soon. But thanks for recognizing the farside-scum.

Nhammen's lynch was deserved- and I thought his reasoning for hopping on all the leading wagons when he replaced in was shoddy. Pwnman didn't help the situation, and I thought for sure he was going to flip red.

Lowell's lynch- deserved. You CANNOT as vanilla lurk to the extent you did. If that was a ploy to fake a powerrole, I wouldn't advise the lurking route, that just attracted too much attention. I was under a strong impression the lurking was a coptell, which was why I was adamantly defending you D1, and my jaw dropped when the VT flip came.

I had a hunch LoLa was active lurking to a scummy extent, but I didn't mention it as much as I thought I had. Shame, really. I wasn't following Starbuck much either, but then again, my obligation had long since passed. Even isoing her now, she doesn't do much to incur suspicious activity. Nikanor played it well, too, but you can't help but look good when all the cases on you came straight out of the dumpster.

Mod- Thanks for the flavor, no thanks for the intermittent activity. You've gotta post votecounts and update that first post much more frequently than you did in this game. My advice is to take the clutter out of the first post, it looks like you didn't want to go through the grudge of formatting everything correctly when you posted the deaths in plain text in the OP. Perhaps taking the text area formatting is a start?

A shame the game played out the way it did. But this endgame is a good indicator of why you simply cannot be a lazy or anti-town scumhunter, it muddies the waters to the point where scum can bring through figures shadier than themselves and then escape alive.

[yabbaguy]

Tailor = ?

[yabbaguy]

Except you got extinguished endgame.

*losing horns*

[yabbaguy]

Interesting! I thought LoLa being lurky was scummy- yet you told him to go backwards anyway!

Yeah, this was definitely one of those games where I was just about as non-scummy as I could get, so I'm glad everyone's gut was not thinking me. And yeah, I'm with you guys on thinking Lowell was cop, but good for you for keeping him as a mislynch instead.

[yabbaguy]

Mod died twice? /:|

Game logged in the YGDB now. Check out the sig link.