Mini 1003 Mafia - Game Over

[nhammen]

/confirm

And votecount is interesting. I always prefer multiple bandwagons: I believe it helps me find scum. I will analyze after reread.

As of page 3: Just coming out of RVS. Still very little info. Tasky's antibandwagonerry is a newbtell. However, rapidly switching targets is a very newbscum thing to do.

[nhammen]

oh right!

UNVOTE: whoever im voting for

Will vote after reread.

[nhammen]

just so you can find in the game and make up a little for the information you owe us, how about answering this questions:
a) which role do you prefer to play (no esoteric roles please)? in particular, do you prefer being mafia or townie?
b) how would you characterize your playing-style?
c) if you were to cast an arbitrary vote, who would you vote for?
d) what do you think about bandwagons?
e) what do you think about RVS?

First to everyone (including Tasky) – please answer questions b,d, and e that Tasky posed.

b) I've never analyzed my own playing style, so... I just play. I have played 13 games on site, and they are all listed on my wiki page, so you can check them out if you want to analyze my play. But the most recent is still ongoing, so that one can't be used.
d) Very good for info. Seeing who was on, and who was not on, a bandwagon is very useful information.
e) Very little useful info is contained in RVS. I like to move out of it as soon as possible. Usually by trying to start a bandwagon to create more info.

[nhammen]

I think I'll come to the defense of Chi to the newbie card. Firstly, we're SCUMHUNTING. His mistakes scream more newb than scum. Attacking him would only rid him from the game and prove useless to the town in the long run.

This seems far too confident...

Secondly, I feel like you're acting quite scummy yourself. Taking it upon yourself to cement a pro-town position among us all, by actively posting.

Too pro-Town to be Town? Really? I thought everyone knew not to use that argument anymore.

In addition, your spreading of blame that almost nears contempt of other players seems to further this idea. In your posts you have attacked Chihuahua, Tripod, Tasky, Clockwork and erratically attacked RetroAudio. Then when we add to this my first part, Mafia know who their enemies are, a full on attack towards Chihuahua, who obviously acts more newb than scum seems suspicious.

He is using the bad logic = scum argument a bit much... But that in itself is not scummy. Because that is just bad logic.

Being called by parents to make dinner - will read more later...

[nhammen]

I think I'll come to the defense of Chi to the newbie card. Firstly, we're SCUMHUNTING. His mistakes scream more newb than scum. Attacking him would only rid him from the game and prove useless to the town in the long run.

You seem to be confused. Newbie is not a game alignment. Scum is. I don’t give any leeway to players outside of the Road to Rome for what you are calling “newb” play. The place for that is the Newbie cue. Once you venture from Newbie’s friendly confines I assume you are confident in your ability to play the game. Mistakes made are mistakes made and worthy of examination.

I’ll state it plainly once again … bad play is bad play. You may blindly believe that it can only be attributed to Newb Town play if you wish. I will not.

"Bad play" is also not an alignment either. If the bad play betrays an anti-Town alignment, this is an entirely different thing, but so far (post 106) you haven't shown that this is the case at all.

Tripod 119: is Tripod defending Tasky. Noted for future reference.

Youngminii 125: he says that newbie card is not a defense against scumtells, but has not specified what any scumtells were. Next post is a vote. I look back at ISO before this post and see one mention of his play "is either a scumtell or a newbie in action." Followed by "I don't think the newbie card should be able to be used." So in one post you say that it could be newbie play, and then after people attack him, you change your mind into newbie is not an excuse.

Tasky 128: Youngminii 129 says exactly what I think about this post.

Equinox 146/147: Good stuff. Looks Town. Your point about clockworkmelon active lurking is noted, although it looks like genuine lack of interest in the game to me. See his 134 where he mistakes retro for chihuahua. What lack of interest says about his alignment, I'm not sure. Maybe further reread will help more.

@Mindgamer - It may be effective scumhunting, but it is also effective in diverting attention from yourself. And he probably isn't the first to act really pro-town to shake off suspicions. Obviously pro-town is usually for the town, but Magna's type of pro-town pushing seems to be doing is spreading suspicions and attention elsewhere, diverting them from himself.

What I don't understand is how else MagnaofIllusion is supposed to do it. His attacks appear to me to be well-rounded, which is a good thing to do in Day 1 as it spreads attention across the player list and prevents tunneling. I also don't see how he is "diverting [attention and suspicions] from himself." Please explain that last part.

By focusing on others, he is able to change our perspective to focus on them. What I only have is a semi-hunch.

What about how else he was supposed to do it. I would like to see that as well.

As for the rest of your post, townies have no reason to fear scrutiny. They still win if they die, so they are free to accuse, vote, and defend as necessary. Why are you afraid of people criticizing you?

Townies have plenty of reason to fear scrutiny. For one, if you die, you can't play anymore. The other, more game related, would be that if a townie dies, it makes the odds better for the scum.

Goodposting

Now on page 7. The rest of the catchup shouldn't take too long. Current suspicions as of page 7: Lemon and Tasky.

[nhammen]

Tasky 163: I like how you immediately jump to the avoiding questions conclusion (as you did with retro earlier). Especially considering that you haven't really shown an example of him doing this. Although, this doesn't seem like something scum would do either. Seems more like straightforward paranoia.

Tasky 170: Again with the dodging accusation...

ACM 174: Good examples of Tasky switching his vote around a lot. Which means what? Do you think that this implies scum? If so, why?

Tasky 176: Defensive much?

chihuahua 183: so the person I was replacing thought that those two could possibly both be scum? How? What? Ugh... I'm glad this person is not in the game any longer. I really don't see this as bussing.

Post #135, very suspicious. Feigning idiocy, probably avoiding the question at hand.

Did you even look at the context of the post? You knew that it was post 135, so you had to look at something other than just the iso. Let me clear this up for you:
Event A) chihuahua does not answer the "Are you scum" question.
Event B) Tasky says "why don't you just say no?"
Event C) retro says "Because the question is basically stupid and nonsense."
Event D) ACM says to

retro

: "But it being "stupid nonsense" isn't what you used to avoid answering the question earlier:" and shows where

chihuahua

refused to answer the question. (Fail ACM. fail)
Event E) retro becomes confused by this and asks "answer what" which in context obviously means "avoid answering what question earlier".
Event F) You accuse retro of avoiding some question with his "answer what" statement in post 135. So, what question do you believe he was avoiding with post 135? Oh... darn, Lemon was replaced. It's still making up evidence out of thin air though.

[nhammen]

So are the other replacements done with their rereads because this is getting stagnant fast.

No, I got to the middle or so of page 9 yesterday, and I did not get a chance to do any reading today. Probably will be done tomorrow. I would read some now, but as tired as I am, I would probably zone out through something important.
Also, stagnant is probably due to half of the players in the game being replaced on D1. Tends to screw things up.

[nhammen]

Sorry about the two day absence. Bad me! Dealing with entering grad school (in a month) when I applied too late to get any fellowship makes for interesting times.

So upon a reread my biggest annoyance is the invoking of the n00b defense for Chi. I notice that it's mainly Lemon doing so, but I think youngminii's comments warrant some scrutiny on the matter as well. I also have some questions at the end.

snip

So I can only see a few reasons for using this defense. I think Lemon might be using it because he thinks that it might excuse his own poor play because if we excuse Chi for bad play due to his join date, we might excuse Lemon. No one in the town is excused from poor play. Poor play is anti-town. You trying to excuse poor play with the excuse that he's a n00b. Deflecting suspicion from a bad player is suspicious.

IGMEOY Lemon

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
I think it's worth noting that in youngminii said in post 110 that he was critical of Chi's play (he quoted RA's post (108)) to say that he had attacked Chi's playstyle and other people had jumped on the "but he's n00b!" thing.

So you like using poor play => scum as well, huh? However, I have to note that Lemon's continued defense of Chi is far too confident of Chi's alignment. But your strange consideration of the possible motivation for his actions is interesting. Couldn't think of something better? Also, youngminii's play is worth noting? What does that mean? Do you find something scummy about it? If someone flips a particular role, does this imply something about him? What are you trying to say?

I would also like to weigh in on the ACM debate: ACM, correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm getting the feeling that you don't like posting very much at a time. I don't really feel that this is scumtell, but I get the feeling that you feel that the less you post, the less people can pick apart. I'm getting a null read on him, but due to the fact that he seems to like quoting more than restating, I think we need more info from him before we can claim to have a good read on him.

Ummm... coaching much?

I don’t consider any play outside of the Road to Rome as newbie play. You venture outside those confines and play poorly you deserve to get lynched. Sink or swim. The Road to Rome is there for a reason. Even though I have plenty of experience playing elsewhere I didn’t play outside RtR until I felt certain I was well acclimated to MS. It may be harsh but it’s my standard.

Have you ever played with DeathNote? Lowell? MidnightSorrow? If so, what is you stance on these players? If a player is confirmed Town, but is playing badly, should he be lynched? If a player is highly likely to be Town, but is playing badly, does he deserve to be lynched? If player A is more likely to be Town than player B, but player A is playing worse than player B, which player should you lynch? In other words, where do you draw the line with this "standard" of yours?

1. Do you know what metagaming actually is? It’s using past performance of an individual player to determine whether they are Town or scum.

You are? I haven't seen you cite any meta anywhere. Although, I cut out the rest of this quote, because I agree tha Lemon's "case" was pretty awful, and your points against it were good.

You have spent the entire game defending someone and not scum-hunting. At this point I think you are scum who doesn’t have a clear idea how to ‘fake’ their scum-hunting. If anything your repeated and pointless defence of Chi leads me to believe you know he’s Town and want to reap the benefits if he is lynched.

I actually saw this in Lemon's play as well.

Not stopping my reread until I finish it today. I have hours of free time and i will use it.

[nhammen]

1. Do you know what metagaming actually is? It’s using past performance of an individual player to determine whether they are Town or scum.

You are? I haven't seen you cite any meta anywhere. Although, I cut out the rest of this quote, because I agree tha Lemon's "case" was pretty awful, and your points against it were good.

My bad! I thought that said "

I'm

using past performance..." So, just remove what I quoted. Null and void. Based on a misread word.

[nhammen]

Extremely sorry for the delay, I'm not really sure where to start. After a reread, I find my initial suspects to be no different from the main ones: AClockworkMelon, Tasky, and chihuahua0. I'd rather just jump in now, so if there's any specific ponderings you want to ask me about, I'll answer.

Ummm... Nice! A scumlist with no reasons! And the list just happens to match the popular opinion at the time! Scumdar pinged.

I guess I should've expected that as the first question.

AClockworkMelon:

What about aggressive voting rubs you the wrong way? This is only my first non-newb game, but I thought putting pressure on someone, perhaps through voting, was a good way to find scum.

The town works best if it's composed of coordinated, organized and rational members rather than a mob of individuals who change votes every time the wind blows.

Unless I am defining "aggressive voting" incorrectly, these two posts eem to have radically different statements, yet they are only 7 posts apart.

...I guess there really isn't much more I can find than that. He isn't really active lurking, but I like the point against him that if Equinox were truly looking for an easy lynch, chihuahua0 would have been an optimal target.

Tasky is definitely the votehopping. 7 votes so far, including the one on AWA, which I find useless. There is a difference between lurking and flaking. AWA didn't post but twice and didn't prodavoid, so I don't think AWA was lurking.

chihuahua0 is suspicious because of his newb behavior, which is tricky, because while it's forgiven in Newbie Games, it makes other types of games trickier. If I were to place a vote though, it would definitely be on hiim.

Well, on the one hand, these reasons aren't even as good as the cases that have been presented up to this point. On the other, you came back within 50 minutes, which means that you didn't have to spend time looking for a reason to suspect these players. So the "just appearing to line up with the Town" argument is very much weakened.

You have the most posts (which is kind of a null argument), but you also have attacked the most people, and very early for insignificant slights.

How is this scummy, Lemon?

It does not necessarily need to be, but I find it that we should not absolutely trust Magna. We have no good reason to.

Aaaand, now undermining the Town. And admitting that he's not really scumhunting. Love it.

Lemon

1. what is inherently protown play?
2. What is inherently antitown play?
3. Why is Magna antitown? What exactly scares you about active players?
4. When are you going to stop referencing the wiki page instead of using your own reasoning?

1. I don't necessarily feel there is inherently a guaranteed protown claim. Anything protown can similarly be imitated by a mafia.
2. Working against the town. Trying to create confusion and chaos. Lying is also mostly antitown.
3. He is not necessarily anti-town, I just don't trust him completely.
4. I've been using both, not one exclusively.

I wish this player were still here so I could ask about this apparent doublethink: he is undermining confidence in a player that is likely Town, and then posts number 2 there.

No one is saying you should overlook anybody. What we are saying is that it is considerably harder for scums too look "too townie", but it is very often that many town people looks townie. Thus, you should not dwell too much on the "too townie to be town argument".

In addition to this, getting rid of a very Townie appearing Town player in the early game is asking to lose, and a very Townie appearing scum player has a good chance of dropping tells as the game continues and is required to keep up the charade for longer and longer, and is thus easier to detect in the late game.

Right now I'm still seeing more fluffs and zero scum hunt from both ACM and Chi, my two strongest suspects. Equinox, Magma, Tasky and Untrod are currently earning town reads from me while the rest are null. Lemon currently reminds me of the first time I was scum in this site so I have a bad gut feeling about him as well ..

I agree on the Equinox and Magma townreads. I haven't been townhunting too much during my reread, but I have noticed these.

@Quoi: Apart from Chi whom everyone is on, do you have any other suspicion?

Goodposting!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If a player is confirmed Town, but is playing badly, should he be lynched?

If a player is highly likely to be Town, but is playing badly, does he deserve to be lynched?

If player A is more likely to be Town than player B, but player A is playing worse than player B, which player should you lynch?

In other words, where do you draw the line with this "standard" of yours?

Bold – How is the player confirmed?
Underlined – How do you define highly likely?
Italics – Again, how are you defining more likely?

I think my answer to the later part of your post will make any answer to this part moot, but I will provide an answer anyways, for the sake of clarity. By confirmed, I meant a role-based confirmation; for example, a Cop comes out and says that a player is innocent, and then dies, confirming his role. By highly likely, I meant if you felt a player had a very low chance of being scum. For example, he attacked a player that is scum in a one scumteam game in a way which is unlikely to be bussing. By more likely, I meant based on interactions with other known scum members one player is more likely connected than another.

I define my ‘standard’ by the in-game play of the player. If a player is playing in what I see as scummy I will pursue them. Bad play in the context of the original quote is synonymous with Scummy.

My question to you - Why post theoretical situations with ill-defined premises as support for your question as to what my ‘Standard’ is? Why didn’t you just flat out ask?

I didn't just flat out ask, because A) I find that standard that you use to be bad play, and B) I was trying to emphasize my point by providing clear instances in which a player is playing badly and should not be lynched. You say that "bad play in the context of the original quote is synonymous with Scummy." But it isn't. Many new players play badly as either alignment. It is not synonymous at all. Bad logic is not a scumtell. Currently, you are one of the most obviously pro-Town players in the game, and I am trying to work to improve your bad play. Because in almost every game, there are newbies, flakes, or VIs, and you should not just go after them for this behavior. Yes, I am firmly in the anti-policy lynch crowd.

[nhammen]

make up a sample post (very approximative, you can also explain what would be in it), which could be written by chihuahua0 and which satisfies following conditions:
a. It would make you vote for him if he posted it.
b. If another post was even slightly less scummy than that post, you would not vote chihuahua0 for it.

What a ridiculous request.

Agree completely.

look... assume we don't lynch chihuahua0 for his noob pass, even if did nothing but drop scum-tells so far...

Really? Because I haven't seen any mention of this. I have seen mention of bad play. But nobody seems to have shown how this bad play can be equated to being scum. In fact, after reading your ISO, you have in only one place shown any thought that chi's play was scummy: when he refused to answer the retarded question that everyone has concentrated on.

You could have just said that and not asked us to make a coaching sample post for scum to use...

I'm giving chihuahua0 the newbie pass only for as long as my tolerance permits. chihuahua0 is not unlynchable. At some point, either he's a huge liability or newbie scum. I'm giving him a huge leeway because some of the stuff he says feels more newbie to me than scummy -- which just points to null.

well... it was not really addressed to you... in fact it was especially for Lemon (and nopointactingup)...
the thing with the sample post does two things at once:
1. I know what the consider the limit of the noob pass
2. I see how they consider chihuahua0's play, what they expect him to do or not do... that can be a good tell later
basically my point is that I don't accept this noob pass, since I see no way it will stop...
and if anything chihuahua does just gets covered by that pass, we are never going to get a read on him that's somehow "accepted"

@magma: it's absolutely not theoretic... I want to know how far chihuahua's noob pass goes...
I'd really like Lemon and nopointactingup to answer my request...

So let me get this straight: Both Lemon and nopoint (why not list Equinox as well?) have been defending chi so hard that you think they couldn't possibly lynch chi. This means that you are saying that both of these players are either retarded Town or scum. And yet, you aren't voting for them, so you aren't calling them scum. So you are essentially insulting 2 players in this game, and then wondering why they wont respond. Interesting tactic...

And notice. Throughout this entire time that he is attacking chi's play, and trying to get people to vote chi, he himself is NOT voting chi. To me this looks like scum that wants to go for the easy target, but not look like they are going for the easy target. In fact, he has been pushing the chi case harder than the case he is currently voting for!

In fact, although I usually withhold my vote until a reread is finished, A) I have 1 page left, and B) this activity looks really scummy, so C) VOTE: Tasky

[nhammen]

Vote: Tasky

Your constant insistence on this is horrible. You are asking us to make a post that would coach scum,

perhaps you

, on how to not draw suspicion. This is, at best, a very anti-town request. I am not going to comply, and I will ask others to do the same.

Agree with the above.

I don't see the point of this so I will not do it. My position stands clearly in that I would lynch Chi if he's not being exponentially helpful soon. The reason why I am defending Chi right now is I think there are better place to find scums. Policy lynch is always my last resort.

And I have now reached the post that Magna just quoted. Later in this same post, he does vote chi. Very odd. Possibly scummy. But I also saw some towntells from nopoint, so I'm not sure.

@underlined: where exactly am I pushing a chihuahua0 lynch?

How about where you keep trying to convince people that "he has done nothing but make scummy posts" and that people have "let him go because he is a noob". Seems to me like you wish they weren't letting him go, which means you want him to be lynched. But you aren't voting him. We see through your cheap tactics...

And now I'm caught up.

[nhammen]

chihuahua0:

(NB: this is chihuahua0, not nhammen (since nhammen hasn't had a chance to do anything yet (besides, I want to talk about chihuahua0))) Oh boy. Here we go. There are all sorts of reasons to suspect Chi: the votes with no basis in any sort of logic, the nonsensical probabilities, her scumhunting methods, the supposed "relationship" between Tasky and ACM (which I don't see, and I don't see the benefit in pointing out at this stage), and the refusal to vote followed by a vote

in her very next post

(not to mention the hammer thing, the "this question is a test" thing, etc.) I don't think anybody here would question that she is suspicious. Rather, the question is whether she is simply being a newb, or is scum (or both).

The truly interesting thing about Chi is the fact that the game seems to have warped itself around her presence. An increasingly large part of the conversation is concerned with the Chi case and defenses/defenders of Chi. There are no neutral opinions of Chi, and many increasingly negative ones. As for myself, to use the increasingly common language, I've passed my threshold. If Chihuahua was still in the game, my vote would likely fall there. However, I'm willing to give nhammen a chance.

Verdict: Strongly Leaning Mafia

snip

Lemon:

(Not Espionage; see above) In all the talk about chihuahua0 being a newbie, I actually think we've seen much more newb town play from Lemon. Her instinct to distrust her town reads (and invoking the "Too Town" theory), her reliance on the wiki, her defense of Chihuahua at the expense of scumhunting, and her refusal to place a vote all scream "newb town" to me. She probably sees Chihuahua as in the same boat as her, and so is defending her for that reason. Actually, one war going on inside my head is how much of the logic I'm using to argue Lemon is newb town can be applied to Chihuahua (and vice-versa). I'll probably write up another post on this topic, but for now I'll say that it seems Chihuahua is more looking to vote with popular trends, while Lemon is just floundering a bit.

Verdict: Leaning Town

Is floundering less scummy than voting with popular trends? Why or why not?

Youngminii:

(again, not Shattered Viewpoint yet) Basically admits to letting others post most of the content early on, and seems to set herself up for not posting a lot of content. Voted Chihuahua, but never seemed to have a lot of reason why. If, as has been posited, the Chi wagon is scum motivated, she would be my pick (although she's not really motivating the wagon so much as hanging around it). Of course, if Chi was scum, then this is an early not-serious bussing attempt? I need to look at this interplay more, and we need more content here (c'mon SV) but for now,

Verdict: Slightly Leaning Mafia

Isn't not motivating but hanging around exactly what you would say that scum that join a wagon want to do? Because, to be honest, youngminii's play pings my scumdar. Not for any action the player has taken, but for everything the player has not done. Other players have been accused of active lurking, but I can't remember a single thing that youngminii has done this game. Maybe the replacement will do a better job, but youngminii's play is completely under the radar.

[nhammen]

I found this section hilariously funny. You see, youngminii was replaced by Shattered Viewpoint on July 14th, 1:49 PM. Since that time, Shattered Viewpoint has made 7 posts. I encourage everybody to read the ISO, but here is a summary:

Yeah, and it took me a while to catch up too, so I am giving the slot a little benefit of the doubt, for the time being. However, the slot is one of my top suspects, along with Tasky and Lemon's slot.

A townsperson would have been more likely to try and get some sort of explanation out for why he thought knowing everybody's voting threshold would be beneficial for the down; Tasky just said it was "his way of scumhunting" and hid behind that.

Actually his best description of his reasons is provided here:

I didn't say I want to lynch chihuahua0, I said that I want to know if the ones who use the noob pass are prefixed that chihuahua is not to be lynched since he is noob or if they allow limits to the noob card...

He was worried that we would never be willing to lynch him. BTW, some people consider this type of worry a scum tell. I haven't seen it catch scum yet, so I don't know, but I am very curious. I can easily understand it, because the Town has nothing to worry about if the majority of the Town is unwilling to lynch someone, but the Scum do have something to worry about.

If a player is confirmed Town, but is playing badly, should he be lynched? If a player is highly likely to be Town, but is playing badly, does he deserve to be lynched? If player A is more likely to be Town than player B, but player A is playing worse than player B, which player should you lynch? In other words, where do you draw the line with this "standard" of yours?

How is nhammen asking for Magna's standard on scummy play outside of Newbie Games any different from Tasky asking for everybody's standard on chihuahua's newb card? It isn't.

How is Tasky's asking for a stance scummy? In my opinion, that is one of the few arguments against him that is flat out bad. It was a dumb thing to ask because nobody would be able to give an answer, and he should have known this. But bad logic is not a scumtell. Now the concern over not lynching a slot, that can be considered scummy, as I outline above.

In addition, there is a difference: I asked him a yes or no question about specific cases. In the first of these cases the answer should have been obvious.

And votecount is interesting. I always prefer multiple bandwagons: I believe it helps me find scum.

He says this when there are only six more days until deadline and the game is inactive.

And? What does this mean? Was my post scummy? If so, why?

I don't see the point of this so I will not do it. My position stands clearly in that I would lynch Chi if he's not being exponentially helpful soon. The reason why I am defending Chi right now is I think there are better place to find scums. Policy lynch is always my last resort.

And I have now reached the post that Magna just quoted. Later in this same post, he does vote chi. Very odd. Possibly scummy. But I also saw some towntells from nopoint, so I'm not sure.

nhammen just randomly dismisses a case because he has seen some "town tells" that he fails to explain.

I'm sorry if I am not going to give scum a roadmap for how to appear Town.[/sarcasm] I tell everyone what scumtells I see, but I don't give out my Towntells unless they are obvious (or I think they should be).

So, Quoi, you say you think I am scummy, but you have provided absolutely no evidence of this. You have not once described how what you have quoted implies I am scum.

unvote Espeonage

I guess. I'm not convinced that Lemon wasn't scum, but I'll at least cool it on his replacement for the time being. I'm not sure how I feel about this Tasky bandwagon that's formed. I don't really get a scum reading from him, I just get an over-exuberant townie read on him. I felt, reading his posts, that he just thought the best way to catch scum is to get everyone to say as much as possible. I think that's a pretty reasonable thing to want to do. When the town said "I'm not sure why this particular exercize is helpful", he said "ah, fuck it, then" for that particular question and left it at that.

I'm just not convinced that he deserves to be at L-2 for that

. That's all.

Though I'm not one of Tasky's attacker, I'm not liking this post defending him.

And as much as he tries to deny it, this isn't the first time either.

[nhammen]

Holy Cow! 3 pages in 1 day! Catching up...

[nhammen]

I guess we're going to have to settle for an impasse here if you don't believe that's a scumtell.

I said that I can believe that worrying about someone that can't be lynched is a scumtell. But not a single player has cited this as evidence of Tasky-scum. What do you find scummy about Tasky's questioning?

What makes you think that Tasky's misstep was bad logic and not a scumslip? Hell, what makes any possible set of thinly disguised scum information probes distinct from bad logic?

Because scum has no reason to ask a question that is unanswerable, just as Town has no reason to. The tell there is that Tasky did this because he was worried about a player slot being unlynchable. But what he did is not in itself scummy, because it is equally stupid coming from either alignment.

Chevre wagon begins. At two votes, I don't really see much of an argument. But then again, chevre hasn't done enough in this game to get an argument other than "has been too quiet in this game".

I know you're not in the habit of explaining, Espeonage, but that vote really needs it.

Looking at you in isolation, you're sold on Tasky being scum. What's changed?

More goodposting from Equinox. I'd like to see his reasoning as well.

And now chevre OMGUSes. But not with a vote. chevre still doesn't find anyone suspicious enough for a vote.

I know you're not in the habit of explaining, Espeonage, but that vote really needs it.

Looking at you in isolation, you're sold on Tasky being scum. What's changed?

Nothing changed. There is more than one scum though.

and am I not allowed to agree with Tripod?

But you unvoted previous top suspect Tasky to vote chevre. What bumped chevre up to be more suspicious than Tasky?

Oh and look at Tripods case while pretending Tasky is confirmed scum.

Ohhhh okay! I thin I see what you are getting at here, but I would like to see you spell it out for us anyways. Instead of me saying "oh I think it is because of this", and then you saying "yeah thats exactly why".

Equinox:

You aren't defending Tasky. However, you are trying to derail what I feel to be a solid wagon on Tasky near deadline. It's very suspicious.

And I never said majority. I said plurality, as in, if I get more votes than Tasky before deadline, I'll be lynched.

See what I mean Equinox?
Now imagine that when they no nothing of why they are scum.

Ummm... maybe you aren't saying what I think you are saying??

At this point (top of page 17) I would not vote chevre, because his/her play is almost exactly how I played during my first two games. The only difference is that I didn't OMGUS. Now he has been here long enough that he should have a better playstyle, and if there was more time until deadline I would meta him to find out. But given that I have seen Town play in exactly this fashion, and have been Town that has played in exactly this fashion, I am going to refrain from voting at this point in time. Unless the next two pages that I have yet to read contain more evidence against him.

[nhammen]

EBWOP: refrain from voting chevre at this point

Obviously, I am still voting Tasky, and I still find young/SV to be scummy. My suspicion against Espeonage depends on his answers to his reasons for voting chevre. If his reasons are what I think, that betrays a pro-Town mindset.

[nhammen]

3) Not just scum,

newbscum

. He's relying on wikitells. I hate that. He's also caught up in over-analyzing and statistics. Classic newbscum tell. And, most importantly, he refuses to deny he's scum AND is waiting for a wagon to form so he can jump on it.

Earlier, the only mention of chi being scum was "I do believe chi could be Tasky's partner, though." So, you thought there were interaction between chi and Tasky that implied a scumpair. But here: no mention of any such interactions. So what was the reasoning behind the earlier comment. This whole post of yours was uninspiring, but everyone else has pointed out the flaws in the rest of it, so I don't need to point those out.

No, I don't think you guys take my meaning. What I'm saying is that my post 346 started a wagon on SV. Granted, it was never a very large wagon, but it was there. In doing so, I pulled a bit of attention (and at least 1 vote) away from Tasky. This is exactly what Chevre is accusing Equinox of doing, yet in his/her eyes, Equinox is scummy and I am not. I'm trying to understand why this double standard exists. Why are these two cases different?

Yes, chevre's attacks are definitely OMGUS, even if he/she refuses to admit it.

[nhammen]

Tasky is definitely the votehopping. 7 votes so far, including the one on AWA, which I find useless. There is a difference between lurking and flaking. AWA didn't post but twice and didn't prodavoid, so I don't think AWA was lurking.

Reason 2: Tasky is votehopping (We've only been talking about it for the whole game, dude. Way to recycle information.)

This is where she should have voted. Clears someone else in her mind while staying on Tasky simply by agreeing. I read this post as boardering on IioC

I don't understand the "clears someone else" comment.

Now this is getting sad. Still no vote? I am beginning to see some fairly poor and heavy distancing here, like what happens when a newb scum is given instructions on how to play and is trying to carry them out but not really doing well. The fact that Chevre appears to be noob and that Tasky is new to this style of Mafia also adds weight to my theory in the last sentence. And it just intensifies from here.

More of the same. Backs up that Tasky is scum. I would like to point out a little point of psychology here. As humans we like to tell the truth. it is a part of what makes us human. (Yes there are exceptions etc etc.) Now what I am seeing here also goes back to revealing poorly thought out scum tactics.

Serious confirmation bias in both of these parts, but OK.

Do you have something new to say on the matter, or are you just going to blatantly hop on the bandwagon? Speaking of all of this talk of scumtells, you know what's scummy? Blatant bandwagonning. I think you're just hoping to hop on this one and go with the stuff everyone else has posted. You haven't really presented any new or helpful material for the entire time you've been in this game, despite many opportunities we've given you to address very specific questions. All you've done is try to attack ACM and then lay some very easy recycled arguments on Tasky. It doesn't make you scum, but it sure makes you suspicious in my book.

What is worse is bandwagoning and not voting because you don't want to go a scum buddy down

vote Chevre

There you go. Mah case extension. Questions?

I honestly found your case quite feeble. The only evidence you submit is chevre attacking Tasky but not voting. This has been covered before. And Tasky was doing worse by attacking chi while voting for a completely different player. I honestly was expecting you to say something like: "If Tasky is scum, this looks like distancing, and if Tasky is Town, chevre's actions still look fairly scummy. chevre is more likely to be scum due to a combination of these." I highly disagree with that statement though, because I have seen play exactly like chevre's coming from Town far more times than I have seen it coming from scum.

Now, I know that the Tasky bandwagon is rolling. And, for many reasons already explained, I am also suspicious of Tasky, and would be perfectly satisfied if that was the lynch. But this is ridiculous. I will VOTE: Shattered Viewpoint

Your statement asserting that Tasky’s wagon is rolling (and thus viable) and that you find him suspicious and would be satisfied with his lynch followed by a vote for Shattered is noted.

Interesting. Hadn't noticed this.

The OMGUS nature of the statement aside there is a nugget worth keeping in mind here – the fact that Tasky’s wagon has effectively disintegrated with no active defense from Tasky will be worth review if Chevre is the lynch and does flip non-Mafia.

Agree. I still find both Tasky and SV to be far more scummy than chevre.

In any case, your meta is a mighty good cover for scum... so I can't lessen my suspicion of you until I know where you're going with it.

This is the exact reason why meta should be discarded in most cases, IMO. Giving players a pass to be actively scummy by letting them escape by saying “I always play this way” is bad Town play. If you (this is a generic you not Equinox, BTW) don’t want to be perceived as scummy don’t play in that manner.

You don't give them a pass. Instead you look deeper at their play. Nobody plays perfectly the same as Town and as Scum. There will be some differences. Even if their Town play is horrid.

Btw. If Chevre is scum Tasky is a likely buddy.

Really? Enlighten me oh master. I’d suggest rather that if Chevre is Town Tasky is more likely scum. If Chevre is scum the odds of Tasky being scum with her are slim.

Agree here too. In fact, if chevre is scum, then I would find Espeonage to be more scummy based on A) chevre's repeated statements that Espeonage is not one of the counter-wagon makers, B) Espeonage's absolute confidence that chevre is scum, and C) Espeonage's comments that chevre scum => Tasky scum, as though he is trying to set up tomorrow's lynch.

At that point the Tasky wagon was going nowhere and had no momentum. As I said there are 'always' more than one scum in a game.

How much momentum did he need? He had 5 votes an one point, IIRC. Even without another single vote as long as no-one else amassed more than 5 he was being lynched. We are very close to deadline. Unless you were suddenly convinced that Chevre was more scummy than Tasky logical play would be to keep your vote with the player you thought scummiest.

Yes. Agree.

I'm glad some people are going to note what Equinox and UT did. It appears to be a quick (and successful) derailment of the Tasky wagon by scum. Please take this into account later.

Espeonage's vote isn't as scummy now that he has properly explained it, but the hastiness and initial reasonlessness is still something to note. I would not recommend lynching Espeonage until after Tasky flips town.

A) Why do you keep lumping Equinox in there? It looked to me like he was just questioning you to get you to take a stance. He only joined the wagon after you OMGUSed everyone that even slightly attacked you.
B) How does this explanation clear Espeonage, but Equinox and UT's explanations not clear them? And you are still pushing for us to not lynch Espeonage.
C) You didn't say "if Tasky flips Town." You said "until after Tasky flips Town." Do you know how Tasky will flip?

[nhammen]

I have seen much debate about whether Town has to fear scrutiny, and I have to say that as Town I do sometimes try to avoid negative attention. Whether or not you fear scrutiny has to do with playstyle too. This is where meta comes in: does such and such player only try to avoid negative attention as scum, or do they do so regardless of alignment?

EBWOPreview: I see a hammer has been made. Well... not much to do here.

No it hasn't. Shattered Viewpoint was already voting for Chevre.

Why would you do that? Why would you ever ever do that? You wait for the "hammered" player's response before saying anything like that.

[nhammen]

nhammen, your response in 477 does not match the quote. Chevre is at L-1; no hammer has been made. redtail896 was pointing out my error. I guess the question can still be asked of Shattered Viewpoint; now I'm interested in the answer.

Yes, but chevre might have believed you when you stated that a hammer had been made. If not for redtail pointing out that it wasn't true. That's what I was trying to say.

[nhammen]

redtail. He should not have pointed out your error. If he had not, chevre might have believed your error, and then said something under the assumption that he had been hammered. Ideally, something like "go scum!"

[nhammen]

Ok now I understand that there is a large amount of confirmation bias here. In light of nhammens last little tib bit on me for the future this may look bad but I propose a derail of the chevre wagon and a move back to Tasky. i still think tasky is scum and should he not be my whole case on Chevre falls apart and I wouldn't ote for her again.

UNVOTE: Chevre
VOTE: Tasky

Calling it: whatever alignment chevre has, Espeonage has as well.

I showed that chevre scum heavily implies Espeonage scum. If they are both scum, Espeonage would not want chevre scum to be known. So, assuming chevre is scum, this action looks like Espeonage scum.

If chevre is Town and Espeonage scum, Espeonage would have wanted chevre to die because A) it kills a Town player and B) it shows that my hypothesis is wrong. Thus, this action definitely does not look like Espeonage scum. So, assuming that chevre is Town, this action looks like Espeonage town.

Espeonage: Hell no. We are hours away from deadline. If you're trying to force a No Lynch, I will rain fire balls on your scummy butt.

Oh don't worry. I will be around today. If a No Lynch would have happened, I would definitely vote chevre to prevent it.

[nhammen]

Bah! Go Town!

[nhammen]

I have a bias against Cops as well. But with 3 mafia in 12, powerful roles are needed. This setup is balanced but swingy.

[nhammen]

Also, why did scum decide to NK me? I figure with chi's play, I was still mislynchable.