Mini 865 -- Evil Eyes (Over)

[EriktheRed]

Hey guys, I'm alive. I'll start catching up tomorrow.

[EriktheRed]

Sorry, yesterday was an unexpectedly busy day.

I wholeheartedly endorse Nuwen's 378, and think a random lynch is not a pro-town idea in the long run.

Alright, I'm gonna start reading up now.

[EriktheRed]

Okay. I knocked out the first two hundred posts of this topic and everything from my replacement point on, and will get to the rest tomorrow or Monday.

I don't like the Suave wagon from what I've seen so far. I'm really getting a newbtown vibe here, despite what others like Hoopla say about him. If he was scum in that last game where you dealt him the newbtown card, then he'd still be newbtown now if he hasn't been town before. But I have no knowledge of Suave's meta, so it's entirely possible that he has played as town before.

Basically, the three people that stuck out to me the most thus far are Hoopla, Zazie, and Tubby.

I really don't like Toro's [Zazie's] RVS self-vote, for the reason that it denies the town information in the long run (as opposed to everything Nuwen said in post 60. [voting against wincon]; I agree those are worthless reasons). Additionally, he posted almost no content in his six posts here, but since there were only six I don't think that's really enough to go on. I'll look at Zazie when I get to his entrance, and see if I still feel the same way.

Hoopla's response when asked if she's scum is, "I am not scum." Lies are very frequently told without contractions, in an attempt to subconsciously strengthen the lie and make it more believable. It's similar in concept to the "increased emoticon use" scumtell that has been discussed. Contrast this with Suave's answer in post 176 to Hoopla's same question. "I'm not." More likely to be truthful. And I really don't like the "let's random lynch" suggestion from after I replaced in.

I've given Tubby a VERY cursory skim in iso after some things I noticed in my read that got my attention, and he seems to just active lurk a ton. I don't like his use of the too townie fallacy around the 14th post in isolation. And then, his post 10, where he says "fine, reck, I'll follow" and votes for Geek [me]. Blatant, opportunistic scum hopping on a wagon. As for the things that made me go iso him to begin with, in his very first post he implies that the playerlist intimidates him. Why would a pro-town role feel intimidated by the quality of the town? Personally, I see it as more of a relief than a cause for alarm, and so that makes me think Tubby is afraid of the town's collective skill level potentially costing him the game; I think he's scum. I also saw his latest post, where he tries to justify his scumminess as "being himself". I actually laughed at that.

Unvote; Vote: Tubby

Anyway, I still have another half of the topic to wade through, so this is all subject to change. I just wanted to get my opinions from thus far out into the field, and didn't see any benefit to waiting.

[EriktheRed]

Okay. I knocked out the first two hundred posts of this topic and everything from my replacement point on, and will get to the rest tomorrow or Monday.

I don't like the Suave wagon from what I've seen so far. I'm really getting a newbtown vibe here, despite what others like Hoopla say about him. If he was scum in that last game where you dealt him the newbtown card, then he'd still be newbtown now if he hasn't been town before. But I have no knowledge of Suave's meta, so it's entirely possible that he has played as town before.

Basically, the three people that stuck out to me the most thus far are Hoopla, Zazie, and Tubby.

I really don't like Toro's [Zazie's] RVS self-vote, for the reason that it denies the town information in the long run (as opposed to everything Nuwen said in post 60. [voting against wincon]; I agree those are worthless reasons). Additionally, he posted almost no content in his six posts here, but since there were only six I don't think that's really enough to go on. I'll look at Zazie when I get to his entrance, and see if I still feel the same way.

Hoopla's response when asked if she's scum is, "I am not scum." Lies are very frequently told without contractions, in an attempt to subconsciously strengthen the lie and make it more believable. It's similar in concept to the "increased emoticon use" scumtell that has been discussed. Contrast this with Suave's answer in post 176 to Hoopla's same question. "I'm not." More likely to be truthful. And I really don't like the "let's random lynch" suggestion from after I replaced in.

I've given Tubby a VERY cursory skim in iso after some things I noticed in my read that got my attention, and he seems to just active lurk a ton. I don't like his use of the too townie fallacy around the 14th post in isolation. And then, his post 10, where he says "fine, reck, I'll follow" and votes for Geek [me]. Blatant, opportunistic scum hopping on a wagon. As for the things that made me go iso him to begin with, in his very first post he implies that the playerlist intimidates him. Why would a pro-town role feel intimidated by the quality of the town? Personally, I see it as more of a relief than a cause for alarm, and so that makes me think Tubby is afraid of the town's collective skill level potentially costing him the game; I think he's scum. I also saw his latest post, where he tries to justify his scumminess as "being himself". I actually laughed at that.

Unvote; Vote: Tubby

Anyway, I still have another half of the topic to wade through, so this is all subject to change. I just wanted to get my opinions from thus far out into the field, and didn't see any benefit to waiting.

[EriktheRed]

Oh. Guess I didn't lose connection while submitting that post, after all. Damn you, Firefox!

Mod: Please delete one of those posts, and this one, too.

[EriktheRed]

Alas, I haven't had time to finish the thread yet due to computer problems. I'm just after Zazie's insanity, and all I have to say is: holy shit.

And then, his post 10, where he says "fine, reck, I'll follow" and votes for Geek [me]. Blatant, opportunistic scum hopping on a wagon.

Do you think that a scum would be that obvious/conspicuous about wagon-hopping?

Not good scum, no. But I don't think a townie would have that sort of anti-town motivation, regardless of his skill level, so I'm just left with the idea of bad scum doing it.

I'm not liking how Nuwen's twisted what Adel said in that MD topic to suit her ends. Adel said that gut is in fact quite valid if the player is experienced and that by asking someone to explain it by building a case you mess that up. But Nuwen said that Crypto should build a case to confirm his gut read, and then told him to read that thread as evidence.

Torqez' play is diminishing my admittedly style-based scumreads of Toro and Zazie. I'll need to see more from him, though.

Regarding Geek "freaking the hell out," I think I, and anyone else, would question someone who calls a player I think is scummy as definitively town on why they came to that conclusion, too. Username, do you have anything against me aside from that one post of Geek's, not including the typical newbie game-overloading-and-replacing and fear-of-getting-lynched nulltells?

I also don't like how Reck is setting up a chain lynch like that with his little chant thing. Seems like a good way to get two free mislynches, if we assume he's scum and Tubby/Suave are not.

[EriktheRed]

Do you really read it as a proposal for a chain lynch?

Not a proposal so much as the planting of the idea of "one or the other", which generally precedes such proposals.

[EriktheRed]

It's almost too blatant to be a scum move. Idk.

This isn't the first time he's done something blatant like this. See here, where he hops onto a wagon just because you say to. This is the EXACT same behavior as last time, even after I criticized him for it and he reacted to that criticism. I don't think town would knowingly do something this... blatantly scummy. Hell, I used the same word in my post 2 in iso / first big post. There's no other term. I don't understand why he hasn't been lynched yet.

The fact that he's followed Reckoner both times piques my interest. It's like he's scum following along with the more leading scum, whilst the leader tries to make it stop happening. Idk here, either.

[EriktheRed]

@Symbol: So, you're calling for a chain lynch on what you see as the entire scumteam despite not having a shred of evidence to believe they're connected? Seriously? That's worse than Reck's attempt.

[EriktheRed]

This part.

Hoopla/Nuwen/Tubby is the play.

Do you really not see how "Hoopla and Nuwen and Tubby" is not the most obvious way to interpret something written with shorthand for the word "and"?

[EriktheRed]

Scratch the second "not", eheh.

[EriktheRed]

This is getting into semantics, and so, I'm content to call it miscommunication and drop it as a strike against you.

[EriktheRed]

Drop it as a strike against me? Gosh, I'm ever so grateful for your mercy, sire.

Yeah, as opposed to continuing to think you're scummy for it. I don't believe that idiom is particularly egotistical, but I'm sorry if I came across that way.

About your question, yes, JVW's definitely abusing meta to make a case. It's quite possible Suave plays that like regardless of alignment, and I still see him as prob-newbtown.

Erik, can you explain why you think people who set up chain lynches are scummy?

It's asking to deprive the town of the chance to use the information gained from each lynch. If we lynch, say, Tubby, we should obviously think a while on D2 instead of just going with some uninformed D1 proposal (it's less scummy on later days, albeit not too much). And the typical counter-argument is, "of course we'll use the information, you're strawmanning me". But if you plan to use the information in the first place to be pro-town, there's no pro-town reason to suggest an anti-town chain lynch; hence, I see it as scummy. This is especially so in Reckoner's case, with the "either/or" mentality that tends to lead to tunneling.

[EriktheRed]

I still don't buy the Suave wagon, at all. I'm considering the Julien one, though. I'll isoread him and see if I feel he's scummier than Tubby, but the idea of anyone being scummier than Tubby is simply ridiculous.

Suave, claiming for no reason is absolutely stupid. While I agree with Symbol and find it a towntell, you're just trying to claim for the sake of claiming now, which is kind of making me paranoid about being wrong about you.

---

Hi, haaaaave you met Post #211? Specifically the final paragraph? I totally agree that it would have been perfectly reasonable for someone to question my town read on Reck.

Well, first up, I disagree that geek replacing out when she did was either a) a result of game-overloading, or b) a null-tell. It was quite clearly a direct response to the fact that she was coming under heavy suspicion, and I think that is definitely more likely to be a scum reaction. Where newbscum will think "Oh god, they've caught me, I might as well give up", I'd expect newbtown to think more along the lines of "Why are they suspecting

me

? What's wrong with these people?" and probably go off on an angry tirade about it, not to run away scared.

I would consider an angry PBPA about considering a scummy player town as a tirade, myself. But newbies tend to think that being lynched is tantamount to losing the game and a horrible thing regardless of their alignment. I'm not saying that Geek didn't do anything scummy, but if a newbtownie is coming under fire for legitimate reasons I don't think it's unreasonable to believe he'd be scared off. That said, I can also see now how you came to your own conclusion.

There's also that whole bit with attacking Nuwen but refusing to actually admit that she was attacking Nuwen that was the reason I voted geek in the first place. There's nothing that you yourself have done as yet that's screaming out as scummy, but there's equally nothing that makes me think you are town.

I really can't see where Geek openly denied attacking Nuwen or even ignored a question in the second quote in your explanation post; you said Geek "is clearly insinuating that Nuwen's questioning Suave's age is scummy, but refuses to actually say so outright", while it looks more to me like he's just asking for clarification. The only really clear thing is that Geek had no idea why that would be helpful in weeding out noise in reads on Suave.

[EriktheRed]

Wow. I don't even know where to start with this. The whole idea behind a claim is that we don't lynch a vital power role. Shutting Suave up is a terrible idea if he is in fact town and if he is in fact a power role.

Or we just don't lynch him...? Then a claim is a pretty stupid idea, which is my point. Unless you'd LIKE scum to NK a power role?

[EriktheRed]

EBWOP: I forgot to reiterate how I think Suave is newbtown.

[EriktheRed]

I agree that he should claim if at L-1. But he was saying he'd do it

regardless

once we get closer to deadline, which is what I had the problem with.

[EriktheRed]

@Symbol: Regarding our "should Suave claim at deadline" bit, I just noticed that in this ruleset he won't be lynched without a full majority/hammer. Do you agree that with this clarification he shouldn't claim when he is not in danger of being lynched?

Unvote; Vote: julienvonwolfe

Did my isoread, don't like it, don't like how he's defending Hoopla in the last post 522, don't like how his case on Suave doesn't have any merit ("Oh, he's attacking the person I'm defending, ergo he is scum").

[EriktheRed]

# A non-majority vote count results in a "no lynch" occurring.
# With vote counts posted regularly, everyone should know when the majority has been reached.
# Once a majority vote occurs, the game is in twilight until I post the death scene and night begins. The lynchee may not post during twilight.

Yep. L-1 with someone's explicit (or scum's silent) intent to hammer would probably still be a good idea.

[EriktheRed]

nope and i don't have to. he has done enough to warrant a lynch

You do recognize the blatant hypocrisy in this post, right?

[EriktheRed]

Nope, I do mean hypocrisy, since saying "he has done scummy things" plus saying "I have no reasons to lynch him" (implying there's no way to) contradicts each other. Hypocrisy.

Irony wouldn't be scummy.

[EriktheRed]

Symbol, it has been two hours between your posts. I'm assuming you noticed that I responded in another game and decided I was lurking, but I had already typed out two-thirds of my response to this less-pressing game when my quadmates decided to go to dinner early. Two hours is not lurking.

Anyway, yes, to a small degree. Scummier than Suave, in the sense that Suave has given off more towntells than Geek did while maybe about the same amount of scumtells, if you'd like a comparison of my stances. That said, many of the scumtells that comprised his wagon reeked of newb-town behavior to me, even ignoring the fact that I know his alignment to be town. There are legitimate scum candidates around, such as tubby or Julien.

Torqez' point about Suave's ancient RVS vote is something I hadn't noticed at all, and I'm very interested in Suave's answer.

[EriktheRed]

I'm sorry, Julien, I did miss this post. I was soon going to ask why you hadn't commented on my vote, too.

don't like how he's defending Hoopla in the last post 522, don't like how his case on Suave doesn't have any merit ("Oh, he's attacking the person I'm defending, ergo he is scum").

You, sir, need a good slap over the head. Kindly note the timeline of events:

Starting point: Mr Suave's stupid Hoopla case. I responded to it quite early, though I think Suave ignored me.

I was just persuing Hoopla because her town play seemed VERY different from the game I played with her previously.

I see similarities between her play there and here. Who else do you think is suspicious, now?

You're implying that the fact that you can see similarities (which is really an exaggeration, since you've only pointed out ONE similarity -- more on this after the jump) means Suave can't see differences. And then you ask an unrelated question asking for a scumlist. I don't see how this post is calling Suave's case stupid.

Later on, in 502, ML asks me to recap my Suave case. In 519 I mention Suave's BS case on Hoopla. Suave proceeds to repeat said BS case. In 522, I rebut it by showing how she played in a manner that could be considered similar to this game.

How do you read that as a defense of Hoopla over and above the purpose it serves as a means of attacking Mr. Suave?

By calling the case against Hoopla BS without doing any real work to show HOW it's BS. In 522, you showed one single piece of meta information from that game to refute Suave's entire case. But you can find any single piece of information between two games of any player and be able to mash it in place to suit your needs, as long as you're willing to ignore all the information to the contrary. You need more than just one single event to make a meta case. Suave has more than one event, he has patterns of behavior, an entirely different playstyle. It's not a perfect case, but it's definitely less BS than what you're trying to use to dismiss it.

[EriktheRed]

Well, to be fair, I didn't call it stupid. If Mr. Suave truly believed what he was saying, though, why didn't he try to argue his case?

See 528. "Starting point: Mr Suave's stupid Hoopla case." You did call it stupid in that post, while referring me to the post I quoted above as proof, proof I didn't understand and still don't. But I can see how I might be misconstruing things here. As for your question, newbtown.

Later on, in 502, ML asks me to recap my Suave case. In 519 I mention Suave's BS case on Hoopla. Suave proceeds to repeat said BS case. In 522, I rebut it by showing how she played in a manner that could be considered similar to this game.

How do you read that as a defense of Hoopla over and above the purpose it serves as a means of attacking Mr. Suave?

By calling the case against Hoopla BS without doing any real work to show HOW it's BS. In 522, you showed one single piece of meta information from that game to refute Suave's entire case. But you can find any single piece of information between two games of any player and be able to mash it in place to suit your needs, as long as you're willing to ignore all the information to the contrary. You need more than just one single event to make a meta case. Suave has more than one event, he has patterns of behavior, an entirely different playstyle. It's not a perfect case, but it's definitely less BS than what you're trying to use to dismiss it.

Erik, way to shift the boundaries! Now you're completely on Mr. Suave's side, supporting his case, and putting the burden of proof on me to prove that Hoopla's play is the same - why isn't it upon Mr. Suave to show that it is different, since he's the one trying to use it as an attack on her?

I put on you only the burden of doing at least as much as Suave did to counteract his case, instead of just waving your hands. It was up to Mr. Suave; he pointed out specifics (not specific quotes, but specific points). You just said "similarities". That's the difference; I didn't call for a huej post like this, or anything other than elaboration of your counterpoint.

Not to mention that you didn't seem to register my post as an attack on Mr. Suave's argument in your initial post:

Did my isoread, don't like it, don't like how he's defending Hoopla in the last post 522, don't like how his case on Suave doesn't have any merit ("Oh, he's attacking the person I'm defending, ergo he is scum").

Yet in reading your reply to my post explaining the intent of my post regarding Hoopla, you would never guess that you had missed the whole point of the argument in your previous post - it was not a chainsaw defense at all. Back to your original read: why didn't you like my defense of Hoopla?

Because I find Hoopla scummy, and that vague defense inadequate. I guess I did misinterpret that first post.

Now, regarding your huge WoT:

You have all sorts of color-coding with no explanation of what it means, and I get the feeling that understanding that is crucial to seeing your point. You also quoted a bunch of posts with almost no analysis. I do not see the similarities you're talking about. Are you saying that, for example, "proposing a random lynch" and "advocating a point system" comprise a similarity or a difference? I see it more as a difference. Could you do a bit of analysis, draw some parallels alongside the quotewall to demonstrate your conclusions instead of presenting the quotes alone? Or, if you did do that inside the quotes through your color scheme (which I find more likely than the no-analysis bit), could you explain that?

[EriktheRed]

But he's hardly a newb now. He's new, but he's won a game.

As scum. You're still newbtown if you've never played town before and have absolutely no idea what you're doing, regardless of your number of scum games. You'll just be more experienced at mafia as a whole, not being pro-town.

Why are you still voting me, then? For that matter, why are you defending Suave so tenaciously?

I'm still voting you because I'd like to see you lynched. I'm not defending Suave; I'm defending his case against a player I find scummy from an inadequate defense.

Or at least it was an inadequate defense.

Thanks, Hoop, for explaining the colors. I was seriously giving myself a headache trying to make sense of it, and it had never occurred to me that you would have done it yourself because typically colors are disallowed.

I also can't shake the feeling that this new wagon on Reck is nothing but a distraction. I don't know how to explain it, though.

[EriktheRed]

The entire reason I defended Suave is that he was so fucking obviously a town power role. Why else would he be so eager to claim? I couldn't very well say, "Well, I don't think we should lynch Suave because I think he's a power role" without, y'know, outing him to the scum as a probable PR. And since I was confident Suave is town, and not confident Julien is town, and know that deadline no-lynches are bad, Julien is by definition the more pro-town place to put my vote between the two.

Symbol, why did you vote for Suave? You previously stated that you thought he was pro-town, and seemed to have the same train of thought as I did regarding the power role. Did you just want him to claim? It seems that way when you add to that your entire argument with me in favor of his claiming.

Agreed with Username's no-counterclaim request.

[EriktheRed]

I thought he was hard to read and more likely to be town than scum due to his claim anxiety, but he obviously likes to play the newbie/VI card so I wasn't terribly sure

Yeah, I got "I think he's pro-town" out of your 503, "I took Suave's willingness to claim as a (newb) town tell", but I can see now how you weren't actually implying that concusion. Let's wait until we get results from night before we decide whether your theory is worthless. If Suave is vigged for fake-claiming, unlikely as it may be to me, I think you'd be onto something.

[EriktheRed]

I mean this, sorry for not explaining more.

I voted because I was rereading Nuwen's iso. and two or three of her posts made me think that (a) Nuwen and Suave were scum buddies, (b) Nuwen was expecting Suave to be lynched, and (c) was planning to use it to incriminate Mike and/or Reck and/or MacavityLock. I saved a draft of my post to my comp; I can post it if you want, but if Suave is to be believed then you can throw that theory out the window.

You said that your theory of Nuwen/Suave scumbuddies is invalid if we believe Suave's claim, but I'm just advocating we wait until we see what happens to him tonight instead of making the assumption today when we have less information. I said "onto something" meaning if Suave flips scum by the real vig's killing him, the interactions you found will be useful.

[EriktheRed]

That makes sense; you're right. In that case, you should post it now so we can refer back to it later if anything comes up to make us doubt his claim later.

[EriktheRed]

HAHA I was right! I told you guys Hoopla scum was on the money! =D
POW I shot her >=D

Great, kid. Don't get cocky.

And yes, I'm gonna get my reread on shortly, too.

[EriktheRed]

Well, I think the people who come out of Hoopla's scum flip the worst are Erik and Nuwen (now Looker). Given Day 1 play as well, Vote: Erik.

Can you substantiate this? Right now I can see only how I was adamantly against the confirmed scum for the entirety of my presence in the game, and don't see how you see that as scummy.

[EriktheRed]

I vote for whomever I want to lynch most, and I thought I was pretty clear that I thought Tubby was far scummier than Hoopla. I don't vote for one player when I'd rather lynch someone else.

And of course the case was crappy. It was D1, and I'd only read a third of the game.

[EriktheRed]

The quality of my case has no bearing on my stance toward the player. I'm sorry.

[EriktheRed]

So, let me get this straight. You're voting for the guy that has dropped power role tells throughout the entirety of the game, claimed Vig, and then shot scum overnight? That's just not good pro-town play at all.

I would vote you for that, but I'm not sure how the votes are currently laid out. There are two definitely, plus one uncounted vote by Username toward Nuwen, and another poorly tagged one by Reckoner. So if those two fix theirs (or if the mod decides to count them for some reason), you'll be at L-1, and I'd rather not lynch anyone within less than twenty-four hours of daybreak.

Also, Crypto is Symbol's main account. He accidentally posted here with the wrong one. You are Nuwen, but people have been voting for Nuwen even after you replaced her, and that's technically incorrect. And the mod isn't counting votes for Nuwen, apparently.

[EriktheRed]

Vote: Tubby

I'd rather lynch scum than be in Lylo.

[EriktheRed]

I'm a vanilla townie.

Lock, go.

[EriktheRed]

I personally think we might have a Tubby/Symbol scumteam. I perceived his reluctance to actually vote Tubby as a means of distancing but not actually bussing. He wouldn't bus his partner since a mislynch on Lock could win him the game. If Tubby/Symbol weren't the scumteam, Symbol would have probably stayed on Tubby because one of two scenarios would take place: 1. Tubby-town, Symbol-scum, which would mean Symbol would just hop onto the Tubby wagon and not vote Lock, or 2. Tubby-scum, Symbol-town, which would again have no merit for voting Lock over Tubby.

I don't see any way Tubby is not scum, however. If he's really town, he's the worst player I've ever had the misfortune to play with (and I've played with some bad ones).

The massclaim was hilarious.