Mini 1830 - Game Over

[CCC]

VOTE: eagersnake

A cold-blooded reptile seems a good RVS target.

Now I know you must be asking "what's the point of this excise"?

I'm guessing you mean "exercise"? I hope it works out for you!

...I might just steal it in future games if it does.

[CCC]

Newbie games have nine players, two of whom are Mafia. Here we have eleven players.

Three mafia sounds about right to me.

[CCC]

@Grendel Sure. I will give it a try.

Wonderful.

So do you have any prior experience with anybody on the roster?

How do you feel about VictorDeAngelo and CCC?

To turn your question around, I do not have any prior experience with eagerSnake. Nor, for that matter, with anyone else on the roster.

If you like, I can point you to the two newbie games I played in, so you can see how I play. In summary, I know how to do probability calculations, but tend to rely too heavily on them (and at times I forget that other people do not speak math like I do). On day one, reads are too imprecise for my mathematical approach to be of all that much help; and while I can math like anything, my ability to actually read people is poor.

That's pretty much me in a nutshell. Would anyone else like to briefly introduce themselves?

[CCC]

Three mafia sounds about right to me.

let me guess, you're one, right?

VOTE: CCC

No, actually I'm not.

[CCC]

Actually CCC I've seen both Frozen landscapes, and Wake's role madness. Though my focus when spectating both those games wasn't you, I do recall you struggling with wordiness. And you praising Boring a whole lot.

Boring did play a brilliant game. I know I will be far more suspicious of her in any future games; she's going to find it a lot harder to fool me twice.

[CCC]

I'm getting slight scumtwitches from a few players. Not enough to seriously consider any of them as likely scum yet, but the needles on my scum detectors are twitching slightly.

First is Gamma Emerald, for his post #39:

Do we know how many scum we're looking for?

11 players I'm assuming there's a few possibilities here...

3 teamed mafia, 8 town
2 teamed mafia, 1 3rd party (not cult), 8 town
2 teams of 2 mafia, 7 town

I'm betting 3 Mafia, 8 town or 3 mafia, 7 town, and one 3P.

He was right later - that

does

look scummish. He's keeping the size of the mafia team constant between his guesses, instead of keeping the total number of scum constant. This may mean nothing, or it may imply that he has actual knowledge of the size of the scumteam.

It's a bit thin, but it's got my attention.

The second one who's making me nervous is The_Jester; he seems to be doing quite a lot of dodging questions and discouraging speculation in this thread.

The third one pinging my scumdar is VictorDeAngelo, for his habit of not explaining his scumreads until he wants to move to a different target.

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

Since my vote is on none of the above, I think I should move it onto one of the above. Therefore:

VOTE: The Jester

[CCC]

Could you show me where Jester is dodging questions? I actually read him as town..

I asked first so don't you turn this on me and make me answer for you.

That's the best example.

Yes, it's incredibly minor. The only reason I'm even considering him is because I don't have any scumreads better than incredibly minor.

[CCC]

My experience so far suggests that the entirety of day one is going to be pretty much nullness. I've never been on a game on this site where a Mafia player was lynched on the first day, so I'd be surprised if anyone has anything even approaching a decent read on the first day.

[CCC]

@CCC

- Can you give some other examples of Jester dodging questions?

I've taken a look over his ISO and I can't. Partially because of that, but mainly because of his thorough explanation here, I am going to

UNVOTE: The_Jester.

He hasn't convinced me that he's town, but he has convinced me that he's done nothing worth reading as scummish.

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

In my previous post, I suggested that VictorDeAngelo and Gamma Emerald were pinging as very slightly scum. To that list I will now add GreenNope and Square World; the first for being completely absent, and the second for providing extremely short posts with no reasons for his votes. From these four, I will elect to park my vote (for the moment) on:

VOTE: Square World

[CCC]

I would say CCC.
I didnt like the statement about math. He is already making excuses for pushing on town day 1.

As evidence, I present to you a completed, former game in which I played Town. And in which I mathed it up quite a bit. (I'm trying to tone it down).

There's been nothing worth applying math to in this game, yet. I have insufficient input to get anything meaningful out. I can make assumptions about setup and end up with ten near-identical percentage chances for each or the rest of you to be mafia, but that tells no-one anything useful.

[CCC]

To that list I will now add GreenNope [...] for being completely absent

GN had been absent site-wide since before the game started. How is that scummy?

Site-wide? Really? I thought it was just this game.

Lurking for a significant partof day one could be for any number of reasons, but one possible reason is to try to avoid being read. It's not much of a reason, but there honestly isn't much of a reason to vote for

anyone

right now.

[CCC]

@SquareWorld I'd like to see some reads from you.

SquareWorld: So would I.

[CCC]

Snake stop posting.

Why? He's got a good point. The insinuation is there, and asking for more clarification on that point is perfectly reasonable. (I'd rather like to see the answer to Snake's question myself).

[CCC]

Do you ever read other games? There are garnteed to be games were scum was hung D1 for legitimate reasons.

I haven't seen any where scum was hung D1. I expect to find that, of newbie games (with two scum out of nine players), less than two in nine games have scum lynched on day one. (If the lynches were random, it would be two in nine, but by and large scum will usually try to get town lynched, and on day one I expect that to skew the ratio against Town).

I guess I am pessimistic about day one. Later days, when there's some decent info to work with, I consider far more useful.

[CCC]

In my previous post, I suggested that VictorDeAngelo and Gamma Emerald were pinging as very slightly scum. To that list I will now add GreenNope and Square World; the first for being completely absent, and the second for providing extremely short posts with no reasons for his votes. From these four, I will elect to park my vote (for the moment) on:

VOTE: Square World

How much scummier is Box World compared to Pokémon Remake Emerald, and Old Man Victor?

Also, stop self-metaing at the drop of a hat.

Insignificantly scummier. I have no significant reads at all.

Also, what do you mean by "self-metaing"?

[CCC]

I guess I am pessimistic about day one. Later days, when there's some decent info to work with, I consider far more useful.

It happens:

http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=53&t=60961

Yeek.Day one is something like 40 pages.

I'm sure there's more. That said games aren't won on day 1. What's important on day 1 is getting that everyone contributes to that all important first lynch. It doesn't have to be well informed (as town's don't have a lot of info) but it in itself provides info in later days.

Oh, quite. Don't get me wrong - day one provides a lot of useful and important information for future days, and I really shouldn't minimise that. I don't think much of the day one

lynch

, but day one

info

can make the game. So, yes, discussion on day one is important.

If we get a scumflip today that's great. But if we get a townflip, oh well. You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs.

It's a bit unpleasant for the broken egg, though.

[CCC]

CCC

- I mentioned the part about him being consistent on scumteam size as well, but here’s the interesting part: he attacked me for my comments about it. Got anything to say for yourself, bud?

What you did was suggest that there were either three mafia, or three mafia and a serial killer. This carries the weak implication that you knew there were three mafia, but weren't sure about the SK. It's a terribly weak case, but I have no even halfway decent cases.

What I did was suggest there might be three scum. I didn't suggest any other scenarios. I don't think this carries the same implications.

[CCC]

Also, what do you mean by "self-metaing"?

In the post right after 121 you referenced how you math in other games. And I think you did it a couple other times this game to. By "it" I mean you have said, "Well I do that all the time so its not AI" in response to accusations. I don't like that because it doesn't refute the argument so much as it lampshades it. Lamp shading a problem doesn't make it go away. Saying you do something as either alignment doesn't make you town.

...let me rephrase that then. I wasn't trying to say "Well I do that all the time so its not AI". I was trying to say "Well, that's how I play as Town".

I don't have a good idea of how I play as scum yet. All of the completed games I've been in, I've been Town.

[CCC]

I think your post was worse because you ONLY stated that there was likely 3 mafia, without branching out into other bits of speculation. And I never said it HAD to be a Serial Killer. A Lyncher or Survivor would be perfectly fine.

No, I said three

scum

. That could be three mafia (and likely is), or it could be two mafia and a serial killer.

Your original post (and now this post supports that) look like you know there's three mafia, and are speculating about what else there might be.

[CCC]

Well in my last game with Grendel, it was the same for him. I don't think Grendel is scum this time, but I DEFINITELY think you are.

Believe it or not, this fits my Town meta too. Every game I've ever been Town in, I got lynched day one.

(This may be why I think so little of day one lynches).

[CCC]

Believe it or not, this fits my Town meta too. Every game I've ever been Town in, I got lynched day one.

(This may be why I think so little of day one lynches).

Say what now? You don't think much of Day 1 lynches? Well I do. You can't throw simply rule out the Day 1 lynch, that's crazy.

Day one

interactions

are important, because that sets the stage for scumhunting on later days. And I can see a good argument to

have

the day one lynch, just for the small chance of it actually hitting scum. I just think that is a

small

chance.

[CCC]

I think your post was worse because you ONLY stated that there was likely 3 mafia, without branching out into other bits of speculation. And I never said it HAD to be a Serial Killer. A Lyncher or Survivor would be perfectly fine.

No, I said three

scum

. That could be three mafia (and likely is), or it could be two mafia and a serial killer.

Your original post (and now this post supports that) look like you know there's three mafia, and are speculating about what else there might be.

Well I'm sorry for misinterpreting your post. And I pretty much know there are 3 mafia, because it's a 11 person game. Having a Serial Killer is like having an Independent Vigilante who has to eliminate everyone, not just the mafia. I also assume that because I don't want to have to worry about thinking we're safe to mislynch and then whoops, one extra mafia then I thought, we lose! I chose the logical maximum to account for that.

Others have suggested things like two teams of two mafia, or two mafia and a SK. You seem suspiciously certain of the three

mafia

, especially considering that you're a good deal less certain of the total number of scum over all factions.

[CCC]

What do reads list have to do with conflict?

Conflict causes people to talk and interact. From these interactions, reads can be formed, and refined.

Yeek.Day one is something like 40 pages.

Yeah, well I've had longer day 1s. Personally I prefer more shorter/more direct day ones.

Longer ones will give you more to work with, and give scum more chance of somehow slipping up...

It's a bit unpleasant for the broken egg, though.

Yeah, I've never liked being lynched early either, but that's part the game and you get a cool dead chat where you can complain about the people who lynched while waiting for a new game.

Yeah, it's part of the game. Personally, I'd rather like to explore one of the

other

parts of the game this time round.

Believe it or not, this fits my Town meta too. Every game I've ever been Town in, I got lynched day one.

(This may be why I think so little of day one lynches).

So if we don't lynch you today, that means your scum right?

You would certainly be able to make an excellent statistical argument to that effect.

[CCC]

Do you like/dislike anything else in 102?

I generally dont like when ppl say "there are 1-2 scum in this group of people" when the group they are talking about is exactly 50% of the players (self not included)
Which in return means he also thinks there are 1-2 scum in the other group.

@RhazhBashu: would you mind answering my question in 92

In this game, assuming the existence of three scum, the odds of a randomly selected group of five people (if a single known Town player is removed from consideration) containing zero scum is 16.807%. This is the same as the odds of the randomly selected group containing three scum.

Thus, the odds of five randomly selected players (after putting aside one known Town player) containing either exactly one or exactly two scum is 66.386%.

If there are two or four scum, these numbers change somewhat.

But Grendel didn't just say that in 102. He took his five players, and he

ranked us

in order of perceived scumminess. He didn't just say "one or two of these five people are scum". He said "of these five people, this is how scummy I think they are, and this is why."

[CCC]

If I have an ulterior motive I'm not going to admit to it. If I'm lazy I'm not going to admit that either.

Why not?

Do you really want me to explain it. Because if you do, it's probably going to sound quite patronising and not actually lead us anywhere towards catching scum.

This is the second time you've tried to shut down a line of questioning, the first being here.

I'm not sure if this is just how you play, or if it should be taken as indicative of a desire to shut down questioning more completely. But either way, I thinkit makes you look more likely scum than Square World, so...

VOTE: VictorDeAngelo

Conflict causes people to talk and interact. From these interactions, reads can be formed, and refined.

I think you got cause effect the wrong way around here. The quote here was a response to the idea that readlists create the conflict.

I think you and I are reading gerryoat's original post very differently.

It looks to me like he is saying that conflict causes reads (and thus readlists), and was thus asking Grendel why he was interested in creating conflict after he (Grendel) had already produced a readlist... so the cause->effect link was always from conflict to reads, not vice versa.

On another topic, can anyone actually point to a forum mafia game that has been solved mathematically. I've heard a lot of talk about probability/randomness etc from people, and I wonder if there's something I should be reading.

I can't. Math is a tool, and one that looks like it should be fairly useful once I have decent data to put into it (i.e. after day one).

[CCC]

Newbie games have nine players, two of whom are Mafia. Here we have eleven players.

Three mafia sounds about right to me.

CCC, you said MAFIA here, not SCUM.

Huh. You're right. So I did.

I misremembered my own words. I apologise for the oversight.

[CCC]

@SquareWorld I'd like to see some reads from you.

tip: i vote the first non-townread post above mine

if that's not clear enough, we can play popcorn reads

I don't know how popcorn reads work. Would playing it get some useful reads out of you?

[CCC]

This is the second time you've tried to shut down a line of questioning, the first being here.

I'm not sure if this is just how you play, or if it should be taken as indicative of a desire to shut down questioning more completely. But either way, I thinkit makes you look more likely scum than Square World, so...

VOTE: VictorDeAngelo

Wait. So you are scum reading Victor for halting discussion when Gerry basically did the same thing with posts 93 and 109 when he was talking crap about early game reads.

Why does one ping you but not the other?

Victor is shutting down questions aimed specifically at himself. Not only is he not answering them, but he's making statements intended to disparage eagersnake for having asked them in the first place. Not to suggest that snake is scum; but rather to suggest that snake is an idiot.

Gerryoats' posts said nothing about

discussion

. Rather, he disparaged the idea of anyone forming an early scumread - suggesting that he has no problem with discussion that might lead to a later scumread, he just doesn't see he anyone can possibly have enough information to form a firm scumread yet. So he's not shutting down discussion, just marking early scumreads as 'suspicious' and to suggest that those who make them might be scum.

Victor's statements are thus pinging me as potential scum, while Gerry's are neutral at worst.

[CCC]

The first thing about CCC I want to address is his overt doubt casting on himself. Lower confedance, and second guessing are to be expected on D1, but CCC announces it before all his early scum reads. To the point it is no longer resembling town paranoia, but a fear of commitment.

I'm trying to signal that if anyone can present what I consider an actual decent case that someone is scum, and I can't refute it, then I'll switch my vote to that case.

CCC was scum reading Gamma longer then Square. So his square scum read getting brought to the forefront is a little odd. I think it must have been a pressure vote.

It was

supposed

to get Square to post more, yes. Didn't work.

But what is so weird is that CCC

is super cautions with his scum reads

. So I'm trying to figure out why CCC appears not afraid of contradicting himself, but worried about his reads being wrong.

I've been disparaging

everyone's

day one scumreads, not just my own.

Here he voted Victor. Once again missing Gamma. Maybe I'm paying more attention to this because I'm scum reading Gamma. AFAIK, CCC never withdrew his suspions of Gamma, had a town read on me and I was dogging Gamma in the last few days. So why didn't CCC show any interest in Gamma lynch?

Eh, Victor and Gamma are pretty much equally scummy in my eyes (i.e. more than most, but still not very). But at the time when I posted that, Victor had been the most recent ping on my scumdar.

Nonetheless, if it makes you feel better:

VOTE: Gamma Emerald

I could vote for either Gamma or Victor equally right now (and I've previously given reasons why both look marginally scummy). Square World and

GreenNope

Huntress need to post more so there's some decent data on them.

[CCC]

Hi there!

Will read up and post later today.

Hi there, Huntress! Would be glad to have your thoughts. Your slot has made no posts so far, so it would be good to get some data on your slot.

[CCC]

@CCC what's your opinion on RhazhBash?

Null all the way, so far.

He hasn't done much, but he is at least posting occasionally. He is giving reads and reasons - not great reasons, but they're there - and answering questions. I don't like post 139, but I think that's more irritability on his part than scummishness.

So, yeah. Not lurking, no scumsigns that I can see, no townsigns that I can see. Therefore null.

[CCC]

If you don't think I'm pushing Rhazh you should check my vote.

Is your vote the only thing you're doing to push RhazhBash?

To clarify I still have snake as a lean scum read.

So noted.

[CCC]

Is your vote the only thing you're doing to push RhazhBash?

Pretty much, yes. This question seems to imply I'm not doing enough, so I'll ask this. Given how little Rhazh is posting what else do you think I should be doing at this point in the game?

I understand that asking him questions and trying to engage with him is an important part of the process.

[CCC]

I am getting townvibes from Square World.

How? What has he done that's at all townish?

[CCC]

Wait, never mind, eagerSnake already asked that, and here is the reply:

@Victor What exactly has Square World done that was inherently townie?

If you must know, I liked his response to the second question in 250.

The "response to the second question" in question being:

And on another note why not a direct response to 229. Should I infer Gerry and Manual are your only scumreads?

calm down, i dont get a read on everyone within 2 days

Ummmmm... this is a clear null statement to me. How is this possibly Townish?

[CCC]

In his last game he had a scum or town read on every player in the game, 1 day after gamestart. This post is 2nd day after gamestart.

Hmmmmmmmmm. Poking through those links, I notice that Square World didn't explain his reads there, either. Sure, he had them, but he maintained his habit of short, near-useless posts.

Looking at

this

game, he's claimed that real life prevented him from paying as much attention to this game as he otherwise might have. I'm temporarily willing to give him enough benefit of the doubt to assume this is true for the moment. (Which would leave him mostly null so far).

Today

, however, he's clearly got time to spend on the game, so I'll expect to see his more complete reads list fairly soon.

[CCC]

Now my vote on Manuel is serious. He looks more like he's pushing on low hanging fruit than hunting scum. There's a lot indicative of the type of player Snake is in the thread, but not his alignment IMO.

I get more bad feels from this post than anything eager has done though.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: RhazhBash

And to pre-empt the next question:
No, I'm explaining further at this time.

Victor: You posted this quite a while back and, as far as I can see, you have never yet explained further. Have I missed something? If not, then would you like to explain further now?

[CCC]

Posting your honest opinions of things only helps the town. Partly because it helps us not misread you, partly because we can check for changes in opinion, and partly so we can check for people who are avoiding expressing concrete suspicions. The only other side of this is when town hides their thoughts because they have the ulterior motive of gauging a reaction. This is sometimes useful, but should be retroactively explained.

I would like to take this opportunity to thoroughly agree with this paragraph.

[CCC]

@Gren

I fos RhazhBash , hence the vote. I think you have had townie lines like i've explained. I don't see the rush in making reads when we aren't even 10 pages in yet. But, I'd be confident lynching RhazhBash the most right now

lol

VOTE: gerryoat

isn't the quote auto-explainable there?

No.

Are you scumreading him because you think his avatar is annoying? Are you scumreading him because you're townreading Rhazhbash? Are you scumreading him because you disapprove in principle of fingers of suspicion? Are you scumreading him because he thinks Grendel is Town? Are you scumreading him because he uses @ signs in his posts?

[CCC]

he's being opportunistic

Opportunism is the conscious policy and practice of taking advantage of circumstances – with little regard for principles, or with what the consequences are for others. Opportunist actions are expedient actions guided primarily by self-interested motives. The term can be applied to individual humans and living organisms, groups, organizations, styles, behaviours, and trends.

Okay,

how

is he being opportunistic?

[CCC]

i can post my opinions, but not explain them like the quote from 287

I like the readslist that you quoted in 287. Thoroughly explained, lots of detail. It has everything. Just a pity it's neither yours nor applicable to the game.

But just a list of who you think is or is not scum would be a good start.

[CCC]

Here's my current list, for example:

1. gerryoat - Null leaning Townish - hasn't stood out, but has been quietly scumhunting
2. Gamma Emerald - Null leaning scummish - more sure of the size of the mafia team than the total number of scum
3. Grendel - Null leaning strongly Town - doing a hefty share of scumhunting
4. RhazhBash - Near complete null, leaning weakly scummish - needs to do more scumhunting
5. CCC - Town all the way
6. Square World - Null leaning scummish - needs to explain himself a little more
7.

GreenNope

Huntress - Null for now - needs to post something
8. Manuel87 - Null leaning slightly scummish - don't think he's made a non-RVS vote yet (could be just cautious)
9. The_Jester - Null leaning very slightly scummish
10. eagerSnake - Townish. He's really making a lot of good points and asking a lot of right questions
11. VictorDeAngelo - Null leaning scummish. I don't like how he's shutting down certain questions, and I don't like his inexplicable Townread on Square World.

[CCC]

I am getting townvibes from Square World.

How? What has he done that's at all townish?

It's responses are somewhat impulsive. In my experience that comes from town more than scum. Scum need time to calculate their posts whereas town do not.

Huh. I'm surprised. This is actually a reasonable reason.

I don't agree that it makes him Town, but I do see how a Town player might think this.

In addition to what was said above, I like the way in which Square wasn't rattled here. It didn't seem to want to rush or force a read like scum would. This answer in fact would be likely to be unpopular. So ask yourself this, who is more likely to post in such a way; town or scum?

I do think that scum trying to maintain flexibility in reads might want to be slow to commit to a reads list; but again, I can see how a Town player might have this opinion.

Now my vote on Manuel is serious. He looks more like he's pushing on low hanging fruit than hunting scum. There's a lot indicative of the type of player Snake is in the thread, but not his alignment IMO.

I get more bad feels from this post than anything eager has done though.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: RhazhBash

And to pre-empt the next question:
No, I'm explaining further at this time.

Victor: You posted this quite a while back and, as far as I can see, you have never yet explained further. Have I missed something? If not, then would you like to explain further now?

Nope, I don't think I explained this further. I'll say this in case it wasn't obvious; the quoted post was the reason I voted Rhazh. Rereading Manuel post's prior this should tell you why I got so many bad feels.

Okay, I'm going to tell you the same thing I've been telling Square World - just because it's obvious to you doesn't mean it's obvious to me. Elaborate, please?

[CCC]

Okay, I'm going to tell you the same thing I've been telling Square World - just because it's obvious to you doesn't mean it's obvious to me. Elaborate, please?

Quick question, did you reread Manuel's early posts?

Yes, and I can see why Rhazh was scumreading him for them.

[CCC]

Wow, that surprises me.

I do not see how Rhahz's vote was reasonable there at all. For starters there's too few posts of Manuel or anyone to form that conclusion (He had 5 posts at the time). I would explain further but I really want why you think it was reasonable. Which posts of Manuel's do you think show him pushing on low hanging fruit?

Yes, now look at what those five posts were. The first was an RVS vote and approval of Grendel's idea. He then spent two posts describing the benefits of Grendel's strategy, one post speculating on the setup, only one post actually questioning another player ("Can you explain why you think this can be scum?") and then one post complaining about being asked the same thing twice by two separate players without actually answering said question.

That's one post fairly weakly scumhunting and four posts doing other stuff. I think it's too few posts to draw a firm conclusion, myself, but I can easily see a Town player thinking that's a sign of someone deliberately

avoiding

scumhunting.

[CCC]

Good. Now take what you said there and reread Rhahz's reason for voting. Here I'll quote it for you.

Now my vote on Manuel is serious.

He looks more like he's pushing on low hanging fruit than hunting scum.

There's a lot indicative of the type of player Snake is in the thread, but not his alignment IMO.

I even added some helpful bold on the sentence that made me vote him.

Well, I'm not sure about the low hanging fruit part, but Manuel really

wasn't

doing much scumhunting before that post.

[CCC]

Well, I'm not sure about the low hanging fruit part, but Manuel really

wasn't

doing much scumhunting before that post.

From my point of view i did more scumhunting then at least 6 other players in the game at that point.

For the purposes of reading you, it no longer matters how much scumhunting you had done at that point. It's better to consider how much scumhunting you've done

altogether

, which is an entirely different question.

[CCC]

Ok, we're nearly there. Two things:

1) It's post 90. There's often not a lot of scumhunting from anyone in any game at this point.

I agree with you. But I can easily see a Town player disagreeing.

2) The low handing fruit part is entirely unfounded. There's no evidence of either snake or Gerry being low hanging fruit, and it's a stretch to think Manuel could have formed that this early. And that's if we were being incredible generous describing one or both of posts 84 could be considered as pushing (I don't think they are and I'm somewhat skeptical that a town player would form that conclusion).

Yeah... I wouldn't count either of those posts as 'pushing', either. But if they are, then anyone who could conceivably be pushed so early in the game would be low hanging fruit, surely?

All in all, the sentence doesn't line up with what's happened in the game. Instead it sounds like a nice set of buzzwords for why someone could be scum. And a disingenuous reason for voting is an idication of ____.

Possible completions include:

1) Lack of sleep
2) Poor communication abilities
3) Poor reasoning abilities
4) Typos
5) ...

Alright, I get that the completion you're

looking

for is Mafia. And it can be. Or it can be a sign of over-eagerness, or of a village idiot, or, or, or...

I just think that one comment is a frightfully thin thing to hang an entire scum case on.

[CCC]

1.

No. Being pushed in the early game does not imply your low hanging fruit. And if it did then Rhazh vote becomes a player didn't do a lot of scumhunting and he pushed some players. So despite your best efforts, you really can't defend this.

Hmmm. Yeah, you're right. It does become more than a little hypocritical.

2.

Sure, technically anything scummy could explained away any number of ways. Perhaps he was tired and completely misunderstood the gamestate. Perhaps he didn't the communication skills to say what he meant so instead he said something different. Maybe he simply misspelt.... no sorry it's too late for me to even find an implausible finish to that sentence.

I don't see any value in continuing this discussion further. You seem to willing ignore your own analyse of the posts (since you state repeatedly that you agree with my assessment of Manuel posts), and instead inexplicable willing to give Rhahz the benefit of the doubt that he must have read them differently, and subsequently it's plausible this all came a townie place even if no one will explain precisely how.

Mainly I was playing devil's advocate, to test the strength of your case. Much to my surprise - because I honestly didn't expect this when I started this discussion - you actually

do

have a case. (It's not a great case, but that early in the game, I don't really expect more).

And, moreover, the fact that you not only have a case but could defend it so thoroughly earns you quite a few Townpoints in my book. You're by no means my strongest Townread, but I also no longer think you're a good day one vote.

[CCC]

Vote: CCC

Might I ask why?

[CCC]

Okay. I'd like to hear what CCC has to say though.

After a little introspection, I found that I had higher confidence in the idea of three scum

total

(who I thought were probably mafia) than in the idea of three

mafia

specifically. Yet your posting showed that you had more confidence in the idea of a team of three mafia than in the total number of scum.

One possible reason for the difference might be that you have some external knowledge of the size of the scumteam; and the easiest way for that to be true is if you are on said team. Therefore, it nudged your slot slightly scumwards.

[CCC]

Welcome, House!

[CCC]

Day 1 lynch identified.

VOTE: CCC

Last time we were in a game together, you also led a wagon on me. You were utterly convinced I was scum, and then it turned out that I wasn't.

This is part of the reason why I think day one reads are terrible. They're informative, for later days, but they're not accurate.

So instead of vote the player that you implicitly feel the most suspicion for (hence, mentioning first), you vote your second suspect.

Scumdar ping.

Eh, they were pretty much equal. At that point, I could have picked any of the three (and, indeed, my vote is currently resting on the person I mentioned first there).

My experience so far suggests that the entirety of day one is going to be pretty much nullness. I've never been on a game on this site where a Mafia player was lynched on the first day, so I'd be surprised if anyone has anything even approaching a decent read on the first day.

Breeding apathy. Lots of scum motive for that.

Scumdar ping.

I was trying for scepticism, not apathy.

Scumreading someone that hasn't even posted? How is that even vaguely town?

Opportunistic vote, jumping on his playstyle instead of alignment indicative content.

Scumdar ping.

I was trying to encourage him to post. Didn't work.

Yes, yes... discourage town. Breed that apathy!

Scumdar ping.

You know that

every single time

I've ever been Town I got lynched on day one, right? How is this supposed to impress me as to the accuracy of day one lynches?

THIS is what not taking stances looks like.

He appears to be trying to read people, but his "insignificant" reads can change with minimal explanation.

Unlike Square, who is posting reads without going into detail why, CCC is prefacing his reads with an excuse to drop them.

Scumdar ping.

As I mentioned previously, I'm trying to signal that I'd be willing to follow along with anyone that can present a halfway decent case on someone.

(At this point, though, I'd like to modify that slightly - every strongly worded day one case I've seen from you has been against Town. I very much don't trust your day one reads).

Brilliant! You make an excuse for your scummy play to discourage others from lynching you because you're not experienced scum so you're trying to play up your newness.

Sorry bro, nice lesson from boring but she ruined that for you.

Scumdar ping.

It's not an excuse for scummy play. It's a request to pay attention and be sure of your case.

Conflict causes people to talk and interact. From these interactions, reads can be formed, and refined.

No. No. No.

Town fighting town is EXACTLY what scum wants.

If town is busy bickering with each other, scum has plenty of noise to hide in.

HUGE scumdar ping.

So........ are you honestly trying to say that Town should strive to avoid any and all arguments? Then how does anyone develop their scumreads?

Here's my current list, for example:

1. gerryoat - Null leaning Townish - hasn't stood out, but has been quietly scumhunting
2. Gamma Emerald - Null leaning scummish - more sure of the size of the mafia team than the total number of scum
3. Grendel - Null leaning strongly Town - doing a hefty share of scumhunting
4. RhazhBash - Near complete null, leaning weakly scummish - needs to do more scumhunting
5. CCC - Town all the way
6. Square World - Null leaning scummish - needs to explain himself a little more
7.

GreenNope

Huntress - Null for now - needs to post something
8. Manuel87 - Null leaning slightly scummish - don't think he's made a non-RVS vote yet (could be just cautious)
9. The_Jester - Null leaning very slightly scummish
10. eagerSnake - Townish. He's really making a lot of good points and asking a lot of right questions
11. VictorDeAngelo - Null leaning scummish. I don't like how he's shutting down certain questions, and I don't like his inexplicable Townread on Square World.

2 reads that doesn't have null in them. The one that isn't his own is appended with an "ish", which he can use to justify flipping with minimal explanation.

Scumdar ping.

[/spoiler]

Yeah, funny thing, being continually lynched day one every time I'm town has the effect of breeding a certain cynicism about day one reads. Including my own.

[CCC]

I have the day two lynch identified as well when CCC flips red.

Hint: If I have my way, his name will be a misnomer

Do you have your day two lynch identified for when I flip green?

[CCC]

Might I ask why?

I'll explain tomorrow as I haven't had a chance to do it today.

Very well. I'll look forward to it.

[CCC]

When I was an IC in the newbie queue, I did something that I never noticed any other IC's doing... I gave scum advice.

For Scum

:
1. The number one rule of scum is "be town". You want to blend in as well as possible, so try not to do things that draw attention to your alignment.
2. Apathy is your friend. The less town cares about the game, the less they care about finding you. Cultivate ways to subtly breed apathy.
3. Town dissonance is your ally. The more town bickers amongst themselves, the less focused they are on finding you. Learn the art of doubtcasting and instigating.

3a. The above statement is not to be construed as a suggestion to personally attack or insult players. Such behavior can get you banned from the games, and even the site.

4. Information should be a one way street. The more information you can gather, and the more you can prevent town from gathering information, the better off you are.

If you actually

READ

my case, you will notice that CCC does all of these.

My history suggests that I fail miserably at number (1), even when I am Town. I'm not doing (2), and I appear to be a victim of (3). As to (4), I'm trying to provide as much information about myself as I can, and answering any and all questions posed to me, so I fail to see how I'm supposed to be falling foul of that one.

[CCC]

House on a scale of 1-100% how likely is CCC to be scum?

In the last game I played with House, he was calling me "confirmed scum" on day one. He took his vote off before the lynch, but even without that his wagon powered all the way through.

It turned out both House and I were Town that game.

[CCC]

I guess I just feel empathy for him. I will feel bad if he turns out to be town.

He's pulling a boring.

I honestly don't believe I could pull that off.

[CCC]

I should note that House is aggressively defensive about his case on CCC.

If CCC flips town and I die he should be looked at with impunity.

In all fairness, the last game I played with House, this is

exactly

how he acted as Town. Aggressive mislynch wagon and all.

I don't know what his scumgame is like, but this looks

exactly

like Town House.

[CCC]

CCC: How can a read rationally be "Null leaning Strongly Town"?

That's a step stronger than "Null leaning Town" but a step weaker than "Slightly Townish".

[CCC]

Funny ol' world, innit?

What you're neglecting to mention is that in that game, my case against you was utter crap. This case, however, is rock solid.

Yeah, last time you said your case was rock solid, too. I've noticed that once you've decided on a scumread, you tend to push it very aggressively, with a lot of hyperbole.

Eh, they were pretty much equal. At that point, I could have picked any of the three (and, indeed, my vote is currently resting on the person I mentioned first there).

But why wasn't it there when you made the post? That's the point. You felt that player was worth mentioning above all others... but not worth voting..

Because, as I said, they were pretty much equal. It didn't matter which of them I put my vote on.

I was trying for scepticism, not apathy.

You were breeding apathy

in others

with your nihilistic outlook.

Would you prefer me to be dishonest about my outlook?

I was trying to encourage him to post. Didn't work.

How are you going to encourage someone that isn't posting (and by inference, unlikely to be reading) by casting a vote on them?

Sorry bro, not buying that.

If he was reading but lurking, it might have drawn him out.

You know that

every single time

I've ever been Town I got lynched on day one, right? How is this supposed to impress me as to the accuracy of day one lynches?

It's an easy AtE to make as scum. Should I be impressed? My read on your slot has zero to do with other games. Your meta is meaningless. Your scum motive is shining like a beacon in the night.

I do believe you that your read has zero to do with other games. I've seen you make this exact same mistake before.

As I mentioned previously, I'm trying to signal that I'd be willing to follow along with anyone that can present a halfway decent case on someone.

(At this point, though, I'd like to modify that slightly - every strongly worded day one case I've seen from you has been against Town. I very much don't trust your day one reads).

lol... didn't see this shade coming. [/sarcasm]

I do think you're leaning in the direction of Town, for what that's worth. I just don't think your reads are worth much.

It's not an excuse for scummy play. It's a request to pay attention and be sure of your case.

I am! Aren't you proud?

And yet you're pushing for a mislynch again. This is why I don't trust your day one reads.

So........ are you honestly trying to say that Town should strive to avoid any and all arguments? Then how does anyone develop their scumreads?

Yep! That's exactly what I'm saying!

Arguing and fighting among each other is not how Town finds scum. Interrogation and investigation are.

Fighting only serves to bloat the game thread up with useless content that make later ISO reading a royal PITA.

Huh. I guess that's a matter of different styles, then. I try to encourage posting, in the hopes of seeing something that later becomes useful in building a case, and I see conflict as a way to boost posting.

Yeah, funny thing, being continually lynched day one every time I'm town has the effect of breeding a certain cynicism about day one reads. Including my own.

Moar AtE prz. What does that have to do with what you're responding to?

My reads are mostly at or near null because

I don't trust day one reads

. Mine or anyone else's.

[CCC]

If Grendel was doing a good amount of scum hunting, why the null bit in his read at all?

EBWOP, phone posting.

Scum can scumhunt, too.

Grendel was my second-top Townread at the time (and I still think he's Town), but, as stated previously, I don't trust day one reads much.

[CCC]

House on a scale of 1-100% how likely is CCC to be scum?

In the last game I played with House, he was calling me "confirmed scum" on day one. He took his vote off before the lynch, but even without that his wagon powered all the way through.

It turned out both House and I were Town that game.

Untrue.

http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=67031

This is the game in question, is it not?

I did not use the word "confirmed" until d2, after you were dead, and I was referring to confirmed town.

Am I wrong?

My apologies, the

exact

words you used were "caught scum" (post #342).

[CCC]

After all that, I would like to add that the interaction between Gamma and Huntress looks suspicious, with Gamma defending Huntress for little to no reason and Huntress trying to push Gamma away. Not sure if Gamma is protecting a scumbuddy or white-knighting, but either way it's another scumward nudge for Gamma in my book.

I'm quite happy with my vote where it is.

[CCC]

Yeah, last time you said your case was rock solid, too. I've noticed that once you've decided on a scumread, you tend to push it very aggressively, with a lot of hyperbole.

What hyperbole have I used?

Do share.

Some examples:

Do you find Huntress suspicious?

She's a possible. CCC is a certainty.

Obvscum needs rope.

We at less than five days to deadline. We need to consolidate.

Funny ol' world, innit?

What you're neglecting to mention is that in that game, my case against you was utter crap. This case, however, is rock solid.

[CCC]

Would you prefer me to be dishonest about my outlook?

If that's your outlook, I'd prefer you not sign up for new games and instead offer to replace in.

There's no shortage of need for replacements, and you can hit the ground running.

Win/Win

I want to actually

survive

a day one as Town sometime.

[CCC]

If he was reading but lurking, it might have drawn him out.

Why would it draw him out? If he's lurking as scum, failing to respond to the vote would only undermine you.

Do you think past the action you're taking?

Admittedly, that was a bad idea.

[CCC]

Huh. I guess that's a matter of different styles, then. I try to encourage posting, in the hopes of seeing something that later becomes useful in building a case, and I see conflict as a way to boost posting.

Wrong. Encouraging conflict is not a playstyle issue. Playstyle issues are informative of the player's individual activity. This is a theory issue, as it affects the game overall.

Town conflict is a haven for scum, because it allows them to hide with minimal effort while town slapfights each other.

Town-town conflict (which is what I believe you and I are having) is a haven for scum. But scum-town conflicts should result in scumtells and thus lead to correct lynches.

[CCC]

And how are those posts hyperbole?

Presenting a case as if the target was utterly confirmed scum with no place to hide when I know that the target is Town.

This is also the same sort of language as you used to push your case in Arctic Mafia.

[CCC]

Regardless of your opinion of my case against you, I got you to take a firmer stance on your two top town reads, which will mean I'll be expecting an explanation if they suddenly vanish.

...strange, that. My stance on Grendel hasn't changed significantly.

In fact, have an updated readslist:

1. gerryoat - Null leaning Townish - no change
2. Gamma Emerald - Null leaning strongly scummish - suspicious interaction with Huntress
3. Grendel - Null leaning strongly Town - no change
4. House - Null leaning strongly Town - his reads are rubbish, but I've seen him play exactly like this as Town before
5. CCC - Town all the way
6. Square World - Null leaning scummish - needs to explain himself a little more
7. Huntress - Null leaning very slightly Town - subject to rapid scumwards change if she doesn't explain herself a bit more soonish
8. Manuel87 - Null leaning slightly scummish - don't think he's made a non-RVS vote yet (could be just cautious)
9. The_Jester - Null leaning very slightly scummish - been very quiet lately
10. eagerSnake - Townish. He's really making a lot of good points and asking a lot of right questions
11. VictorDeAngelo - Null leaning slightly scummish. He's explained his scumread on Rhazh, and while it's a poor case, I now think a lot of my doubt on him is due to us thinking in very different ways.

[CCC]

Huh. I guess that's a matter of different styles, then. I try to encourage posting, in the hopes of seeing something that later becomes useful in building a case, and I see conflict as a way to boost posting.

Wrong. Encouraging conflict is not a playstyle issue. Playstyle issues are informative of the player's individual activity. This is a theory issue, as it affects the game overall.

Town conflict is a haven for scum, because it allows them to hide with minimal effort while town slapfights each other.

Town-town conflict (which is what I believe you and I are having) is a haven for scum. But scum-town conflicts should result in scumtells and thus lead to correct lynches.

Town should not desire conflict with town. That's the crux of the point. If one townie is townreading another, slapfighting is counterproductive and instigating or encouraging it is scummy af.

I don't desire conflict with Town. I desire conflict with Mafia.

[CCC]

And how are those posts hyperbole?

Presenting a case as if the target was utterly confirmed scum with no place to hide when I know that the target is Town.

This is also the same sort of language as you used to push your case in Arctic Mafia.

Again accusing me of pushing you as confirmed scum when I have not used that language.

Twisting in the wind, CCC.

How is calling me a "certainty" and "obvscum" and describing your case as "rock solid" any less than "confirmed scum"?

[CCC]

Then you should bone up on mafia theory and stop making assumptions that your bad theory is simply a playstyle.

That would go a long way to improving your survivability, regardless of your alignment.

That's what I'm here for. To learn.

[CCC]

...strange, that. My stance on Grendel hasn't changed significantly.

I don't see how your unchanged read on him from the past is relevant to my assertion that I'll be expecting an explanation for any future changes.

It was relevant to the assertion that I'd somehow taken a firmer stance.

[CCC]

And how are those posts hyperbole?

Presenting a case as if the target was utterly confirmed scum with no place to hide when I know that the target is Town.

This is also the same sort of language as you used to push your case in Arctic Mafia.

Again accusing me of pushing you as confirmed scum when I have not used that language.

Twisting in the wind, CCC.

How is calling me a "certainty" and "obvscum" and describing your case as "rock solid" any less than "confirmed scum"?

Because "confirmed" is a very specific word that is used to refer to literal, mod-confirmed status. Throwing it around the way you are, THAT is hyperbole.

Then I have been using the word "confirmed" incorrectly, because I have been using it as a synonym for "obvious". I shall try to avoid that in future posts.

[CCC]

Then you should bone up on mafia theory and stop making assumptions that your bad theory is simply a playstyle.

That would go a long way to improving your survivability, regardless of your alignment.

That's what I'm here for. To learn.

Allow me to clarify... you should bone up on mafia theory outside of games.

As a starting point, I'd recommend going to the wiki and typing in mastin on the search bar, then going down the list of results because she has created a ton of good theory tutorials. Many of them are dated, but they still cover many fundamentals that are relevant today, as well.

I'll look into that, thank you.

[CCC]

...strange, that. My stance on Grendel hasn't changed significantly.

I don't see how your unchanged read on him from the past is relevant to my assertion that I'll be expecting an explanation for any future changes.

It was relevant to the assertion that I'd somehow taken a firmer stance.

Ah, but you did.

You "confirmed" that Grendel and eager are your two top townreads. Before that "confirmation", we could only speculate due to the vagary of your readslist.

...I thought I was being clear.

Fair enough, then. My readslist, in order from Towniest to Scummiest:


CCC - Town all the way
eagerSnake - Townish. He's really making a lot of good points and asking a lot of right questions
Grendel - Null leaning strongly Town - no change
House - Null leaning strongly Town - his reads are rubbish, but I've seen him play exactly like this as Town before. (Approximately equal with Grendel)
gerryoat - Null leaning Townish - no change
Huntress - Null leaning very slightly Town - subject to rapid scumwards change if she doesn't explain herself a bit more soonish
The_Jester - Null leaning very slightly scummish - been very quiet lately
Manuel87 - Null leaning slightly scummish - don't think he's made a non-RVS vote yet (could be just cautious)
Square World - Null leaning slightly scummish - needs to explain himself a little more
VictorDeAngelo - Null leaning slightly scummish. He's explained his scumread on Rhazh, and while it's a poor case, I now think a lot of my doubt on him is due to us thinking in very different ways.
Gamma Emerald - Null leaning strongly scummish - suspicious interaction with Huntress

[CCC]

You're going to need to lose the timidity if you don't want to be mislynch bait. Yes, it's d1. Yes, everybody's reads are going to suck. But here's the thing... EVERYBODY ALSO KNOWS THIS!

Here's how I am interpreting your reads:

eagerSnake - Strong town
Grendel - Town
House - Town

gerryoat - town lean (or null-town)
Huntress - Null (that you are on the fence makes me doubt the town lean until that issue is cleared up)
The_Jester - Null (or null-scum, but it seems pretty slight)

Manuel87 - scum lean (or null-scum)
Square World - scum lean (or null-scum)
VictorDeAngelo - scum lean (or null-scum)

Gamma Emerald - Scum

Well, it's the right order, but implying a certainty that's just not there.

Yep, I know that's not the reads you've assigned them, but that's how those vague reads you are giving come across to me (NOW). The fact that I have to beat you about the head and shoulders with a case to get clarity on those reads does a lot to make me scumread you.

My initial impression of your reads list was:

eagerSnake - Town

Grendel - null-town

House - null
gerryoat - null
Huntress - null
The_Jester - null
Manuel87 - null
Square World - null
VictorDeAngelo - null
Gamma Emerald - null

Can you see how this looks like a deliberate attempt to deprive town of information and refusal to take a stance?

Okay, yeah, I can see your point. I'd put in the slight leans specifically to try to avoid that, but maybe I should have handled it a little differently.

I strongly encourage you to step up and own your reads. They won't be 100% accurate, nobody's will be... but providing clear explanations for those reads will inform everyone as to your thought processes.

Sort of like what I'm doing here. Do you better understand why I suspect you? Can you see how vagary draws suspicion from others?

Do you see why information is important for town not only to gather, but also share?

I've been trying to share what little information I had. If there's anything unclear, or that you think I'm not communicating properly, feel free to ask about it...

As for, as you put it, stepping up and owning my reads, I intend to do that the moment I get a read that I have any sort of reasonable confidence in. (I don't expect that to happen day one, but you never know, it might)

[CCC]

CCC: Leaning slight Scum here. Most of Houses arguments were true but looking at each of them individually they seem rather minor and most of them can be explained with a lot of self doubt which he showed right from the start. Also his discussion with House felt better towards the end.

Why? Because he's booking it up and sounds receptive to input?

If anything, it makes me suspect him more because I already directed him to the wiki and gave him advice in our previous game together.

His unwillingness to change his play just tells me that he has a vested interest in playing the noob.

I had read a lot of advice on the wiki. I hadn't read the Mastin articles specifically.

(Now I have. His advice comes down to (1) vote (2) draw attention to and interact with people you think are scum (3) once you're 80% certain someone is scum, present a case on them. In this game, then, that works out to that I should be interacting more with Gamma Emerald to firm up my read)

[CCC]

don't want to lynch Grendel, House, CCC, eagerSnake and VictorDeAngelo

anyone else just call me and i'll join

Guy voting eagersnake doesn't want to lynch eagersnake. Worse, he also doesn't want to push a wagon but will join any going on about half the game. Any towniness I saw on Square just dissipated.

...this is an excellent point. Square, do you have any explanation for this behaviour?

[CCC]

I dont know about your previous game together can you link me to it? If i find the time i will try to read a little bit into it.

Here you go: Arctic Mafia

[CCC]

Also Offtopic: i tried to kilck the "Get to know House." link but it said i am not authorised to read this Forum

Idk why, it works fine for me.

I, too, am not authorised to read that forum.

[CCC]

Main reasons for my scumread on CCC are as follows:

Post 50: When Grendel asked eager about him, CCC made sure he got his own oar in first showing that not only did he want to steer the discussion his way, but also that he wasn't interested in hearing how eager responded, which suggested to me that he already knew eager's alignment.

The question of whether eager has prior experience with me is equivalent to whether I have prior experience with eager, is it not?

95: I didn't like his reasons for his suspicions here. The first, on Gamma, was just taking advantage of Gamma's own comment and calling him scummy for something that really wasn't - it was just a guess at the setup - and the second, on Jester, didn't hold true, as CCC later admitted.

Yes, I'm not good at reading people. I know.

121: How can you have a scum read on someone who's completely absent?

I suspected deliberate lurking.

I do think that scum trying to maintain flexibility in reads might want to be slow to commit to a reads list; but again, I can see how a Town player might have this opinion.

This reply to Victor re: Square was written immediately after CCC had posted his own readlist (which was not exactly a shining example of commitment to reads) and gives me a similar impression to the above, that he made the list because he thought it would make him look town. The list itself gives more of a scum vibe than a town one.

That was my genuine readslist. If I'm going to be posting a list of reads as Town, I want it to be genuine.

[CCC]

Oh it looks like he only has one other game. I was hoping for a larger sample size. :/

Yeah, I haven't been in many games. If anyone else wants to see my other game, here's a link

[CCC]

Gamma: What are your reads at the moment? I don't think you've yet given a complete list.

[CCC]

The question of whether eager has prior experience with me is equivalent to whether I have prior experience with eager, is it not?

The point is that Grendel asked for eager's opinion on it, not yours, and your post looked like an attempt to pre-empt that.

That wasn't my intention, but in hindsight I can see how it might have looked that way.

I suspected deliberate lurking.

Lurkers actually post occasionally. GreenNope hadn't even been logged in since before role PMs were sent out.

A point which I was unaware of at the time of my post. When it was pointed out, shortly afterwards, I stopped scumreading GreenNope for it (and by the time you replaced in, my reading of the slot was a flat null)

That was my genuine readslist. If I'm going to be posting a list of reads as Town, I want it to be genuine.

But you look like you're trying to appear "as Town", rather than actually being town. It's like you wanted to make the point about scum trying to maintain flexibility in reads being slow to commit to a reads list, but you needed to do your own reads list first so that you would be able to say that without people applying it to you too.

So, you're suggesting that I read Victor's post, decided to make that point in reply, decided on a (presumably false?) readslist, and typed up that readslist post - all within two minutes?

I'm simply not that fast.

[CCC]

Manuel: Has been asking good questions that I don't feel scum would ask.

Have you noticed that he only ever voted for one person, including in RVS? As if he'd decided before the day started who to vote for...

Eager: Some of his recent posts have felt really off to me.

Can you give an example?

[CCC]

So to finish up I'd like to hear your hypothetical scum team.

Manuel is throwing suspicion on Square, but not voting or FOS'ing. That makes me suspect a Manuel/Square scum team is a possibility.

VOTE: Square World

Eurgh. This is backwards.

There are two people here. Manuel and Square. If Manuel is Town, then of course there is no Manuel/Square scum team. If Manuel is scum, he might be deliberately associating himself with an innocent Townie, to try to push a future mislynch.

In short, if the reason that you think Square is scummy is because Manuel said something that makes you suspect a Manuel/Square scum team, then you must logically have a higher probability of Manuel being scum than of Square being scum. Therefore, voting for Square is... questionable at best.

[CCC]

About Manuel: Didn't he JUST vote eager?

You are right; I had not read up to that point yet at the time of my post (I tend to post as I catch up)

[CCC]

Knowing you take the mathematics approach to the game I think this should help you. I was going to make a flowchart of the votes but haven't gotten around to it.

Spoiler: List of all votes

gerryoat - (130) RhazhBash
Gamma Emerald - (5) Grendel; (159) CCC; (267) Square World; (468) CCC
Grendel - (103) Gamma Emerald
RhazhBash/House - (4) The_Jester; (27) Manuel87; (353) Gamma Emerald; (442) CCC
CCC - (13) eagerSnake; (95) The_Jester; (121) Square World; (201) VictorDeAngelo; (225) Gamma Emerald
Square World - (51) CCC; (119) Manuel87; (236) gerryoat; (263) eagerSnake
GreenNope/Huntress - (345) CCC
Manuel87 - (17) The_Jester; (314) The_Jester; (613) eagerSnake
The_Jester - (14) Grendel
eagerSnake - (59) Gamma Emerald; (99) VictorDeAngelo; (242) Square World; (331) RhazhBash/House; (449) GreenNope/Huntress; (600) Square World; (614) Manuel87
VictorDeAngelo - (12) eagerSnake; (90) RhazhBash/House; (273) eagerSnake; (319) RhazhBash/House

Thank you, that will come in useful later.

[CCC]

So, you're suggesting that I read Victor's post, decided to make that point in reply, decided on a (presumably false?) readslist, and typed up that readslist post - all within two minutes?

I'm simply not that fast.

Ah, you're right, I missed the timing of those posts. My bad.

No worries. Timing's an easy thing to miss.

[CCC]

...okay, having had a look at Manuel and eagerSnake's interactions over the last page or so, I think that eagerSnake's case against Manuel is better than the case I had against Gamma. Therefore:

VOTE: Manuel87

[CCC]

...okay, having had a look at Manuel and eagerSnake's interactions over the last page or so, I think that eagerSnake's case against Manuel is better than the case I had against Gamma. Therefore:

VOTE: Manuel87

And what case would that be exactly?

Manuel is throwing suspicion on Square, but not voting or FOS'ing. That makes me suspect a Manuel/Square scum team is a possibility.

VOTE: Square World

You doubtcasted me by saying I "don't know an answer" to why you would cast shade on your partner, even though that question is apparently WIFOM, as I stated.

You've left yourself open to voting them later for town-credit, while at the same time chainsaw-defending him, and also fence-sitting the slot.

Why would i throw shade on my buddy in that situation?

So you could say exactly this?

If Square's town: You would cast-shade on Square if he's town because that leaves yourself open to lynching him if you have to. You would chainsaw-defend him to buddy him because if you don't have to be a part of lynching him you could say "I was defending him."

If Square's scum: You would also cast-shade on Square if he's your buddy because that leaves yourself open to lynching him if you have to for town-credit. You would chainsaw-defend him to keep him from being lynched.

Also, I notice that Manuel seems to re-actively post only when someone mentions him, instead of pro-actively posting. Nearly 1/3 of his posts in this game are on this page, after I pointed out his association with Square. I'd say at least 2/3 of his posts if not more are similarly reactive. So I ask:

How much does he seem to care about finding scum?
How much does he seem to care about not getting lynched?
My answers are "barely if at all" and "quite a lot", respectively.

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

In summary: Your interaction with Square World looks a little scummy. Your eagerness to leap to your own defense, compared with your low scumhunting activity throughout the game, suggest that you're not really all that interested in doing any actual scumhunting yourself, beyon the minimum to look Townish.

It's not by any means definitive, but it's the best case I've yet seen this game.

[CCC]

I read some of 1727. CCC’s play there isn’t as much like his play here as I thought it’d be. He had the awkward interactions I was expecting, but he mathed a lot harder there and referenced a lot more mafia theory behind his votes and reasoning. He maintained more of a voice there too imo. I don’t see as much of that here. He doesn’t seem nearly as interested in catching scum. Typically players that use analytical means of finding scum make it apparent that their really into the game even if their methods are questionable. CCC hasn’t done much statistical break downs on players this game like he had in 1727. Many of his posts this game are him defending himself, and while he had some early game passive scum hunting going on he hasn’t been hunting lately. The best he has done was dropping an occasional reads list. I’m bothered that CCC referenced Arctic, which is a lot more reflective of this game here then 1727, 1727 showed me that CCC, sans his speech, isn’t a bad player.

So CCC referencing the lesser of his two games first and foremost as what to meta him by, and the other as an afterthought is… not what I was hoping to find. I was really wanting CCC to be town, but I’m not nearly as good for town!CCC as I was prior to reading more into his games.

1727 taught me, firstly, that the error bars on information day one are so large as to make most calculations unreliable. I was also told that mathing it up to that degree apparently made me look scummy, and that was why I was lynched day one in that game... now you're telling me that

not

mathing it up

also

looks scummy?

So, yes, I've been deliberately toning down the day one math analysis since 1727.

[CCC]

Why do you guys always post so much when I'm gone, and when I'm here, nothing gets posted. Alright I'm gonna do a reads list from towniest to scummiest

Town
Grendel
eagersnake
House
GammaEmerald
Manuel
The_Jester
CCC
VictorDeAngelo
Huntress
SquareWorld

VOTE: SquareWorld

I find it surprising that Gamma is so high in your list, and that Huntress is so low. Could I ask you to explain your reads on them a little further?

[CCC]

Professor eager with his impressive seven game history is more interested in picking an argument with me and making a suitcase on town than doing anything that's actually productive.

I'm fine with him dying today.

I think that this is a case of Town vs. Town, personally. I haven't seen either of you present any serious arguments that the other is scum.

[CCC]

VOTE: Square World

@CCC, alas, it looks like we're lynching the lesser of the two evils today.

My top two scumreads right now are Manuel and Gamma. I'd far rather lynch within those two if at all possible.

[CCC]

Just because two players argue doesn't mean it's town v town

Ever hear of scum theater? For all you know, we could both be scum.

Help me bus my buddy.

You're asking me to vote for my top townread, on the unsupported word of someone who, though I think he's probably Town, has so far entirely failed to convince me that he's any good at identifying scum on day one?

I don't think that's going to happen. Unless you have some incredibly strong evidence that you're sitting on?

[CCC]

In summary: Your interaction with Square World looks a little scummy. Your eagerness to leap to your own defense, compared with your low scumhunting activity throughout the game, suggest that you're not really all that interested in doing any actual scumhunting yourself, beyon the minimum to look Townish.

It's not by any means definitive, but it's the best case I've yet seen this game.

I have answered all of those you should read the last few pages again i think.

So i should have accepted his false accusations? Cant do.

Your responses look like you're more interested in getting Eager lynched than in actually addressing his points, though.

[CCC]

Why do you guys always post so much when I'm gone, and when I'm here, nothing gets posted. Alright I'm gonna do a reads list from towniest to scummiest

Town
Grendel
eagersnake
House
GammaEmerald
Manuel
The_Jester
CCC
VictorDeAngelo
Huntress
SquareWorld

I'd say after house, things start to get more null, but I have to say that I just liked his posting so far, that's the best I can explain. I mostly just do a top 3 and bottom 3, and focus on them. You manuel jester and gamma are all lumped together in terms of nullness, but I liked his posting especially in the beginning better. In terms of Huntress it seems to me they have been coasting? I haven't seen much from them at all, and when I have, it isn't anything I can say that I agree with much. I'll try to iso her after this post.

...okay, so your reads are more like:

Town
Grendel
eagersnake
House

Null: Everyone else (no particular order)

Scum:
VictorDeAngelo
Huntress
SquareWorld

Okay, I can see how that makes sense so far as Gamma goes. Huntress, I think you're being a bit unfair to - she arrived late, into a slot that had said nothing, and had a lot of catching up to do, so I can see why she hasn't said all that much (mind you, House replaced in even later, and he's probably said the most of anyone in this thread...)

[CCC]

Also what are the votes at right now? I think eager might be close to L-1. And I think Square should be L-2 or 3 right?

By my count, Eager and Square World have three votes each, and no-one else has more than one.

[CCC]

I don't think that's going to happen. Unless you have some incredibly strong evidence that you're sitting on?

Totally.

Alright, then. Can you show it to us?

[CCC]

Remember, he was

100% sure

that CCC was scum, and nothing was going to change his mind. I would be very surprised if he doesn't bring the CCC case

back up

on D2. It's called setting up MLs.

Yeeeeaaaahhhhh... House seems to be of the opinion that if he has a tiny scumread on someone, he needs to push it as if it's written in stone. But then he moves off the wagon and never mentions it again because now someone else is "obvscum".

[CCC]

page 3 question
why is gamma being scumread?

Because he seems strangely sure of the size of the scumteam.

[CCC]

My read on eager is mainly a gut read but I'll try to pin it down a bit.

Eager's posting felt off from his very first post. Most people who want to do something other than rvs to start discussion just do it. Eager made a point of drawing the players attention to what he was doing.

What he was doing, in this case, was a lack of action rather than an action. Had he not pointed it out, there would have been no discussion of it.

He was too quick to call Gamma town in 70, especially in view of his statement that he starts with the assumption that everyone is guilty until proved innocent.

Hmmm. That does seem suspicious.

His vote on Square in 600 was for an extremely flimsy reason. It was also for something that Manuel did, not Square. He's throwing the words "doubtcasting" and "WIFOM" around far too much and adding distracting stuff like 697.

Vote: eagerSnake

Yeah, 600 is pretty terrible. I still think he looks Townish on balance, but you put forth some good points.

[CCC]

Eager's posting felt off from his very first post. Most people who want to do something other than rvs to start discussion just do it. Eager made a point of drawing the players attention to what he was doing.

I did "just do it." Not sure what you are getting at here. Trying to bring up RVS on page 30+ to build a case? I have plenty of content, and that is the best you have? You're reaching, far. Trying to make the evidence fit the

gut

bias.

She replaced in late, and couldn't discuss it when it happened.

He was too quick to call Gamma town in 70, especially in view of his statement that he starts with the assumption that everyone is guilty until proved innocent.

Gamma had dropped down on my list of people I wanted to kill, thanks to his openness to discuss the suspicion I had on him without cracking or getting frustrated.

Hmmm. I see.

[CCC]

page 28 question
k, gerryoat is more towny here, but who orders towniest to scummiest?

I can think of at least three people in this thread who have done so.

[CCC]

i'd say scum is in huntress, the_jester and victor, though maybe i accidentally excluded one scum from this list

what do you think there?

My top two scumreads right now are Manuel and Gamma. Huntress I've got on the townier side, Jester pretty near null, and Victor slightly on the scummy side, but not as much as Gamma or Manuel.

[CCC]

Well we are running out of time. Nobody is interested in Gamma.

My top scum read, Gamma, being on Manuel is giving me pause.

I think Eager is town.

Square is not a good lynch either.

UNVOTE:

I'd be willing to vote either Manuel or Gamma at this point. Though I don't think a Gamma vote will lead to a lynch, and we're nearing end of day.

[CCC]

But why would he bus when he could just have voted for eagle or left his vote on square?

Assuming they're both scum, he could be willing to vote on a scumbuddy when it's not necessary to gain a lot of towncred.

[CCC]

All of his reads are contridiictions. He states manuel is town yet votes him here. He says I'm prob town but says he could consider voting me. He says his biggest scumreads are huntress, jester, victor, yet doesn't push on any of them, and instead goes on the opposite wagon.

Am I insane or am I the only one seeing this??

He changes reads frequently, and for little reason. You're right, that does look scummy; though it could also be a sign of having no idea who to vote for.

[CCC]

The current deadline is 2 days, 20 hours, 51 minutes.

Votes need to consolidate.

I'm not moving off eager, so either join the wagon or lynch without me.

I'm not voting for my top townread, so I guess the lynch will have to happen either without you or without me.

[CCC]

Manuel is at L-1 in case you haven't noticed.

When he flips town, you and Gamma need to be lynched for being the scum on the wagon.

Then Victor needs to be lynched for being scum off the wagon.

Victor has more experience with my town game than CCV and he's voting me although EVEN CCC recognizes my town play? That's hysterically obvious.

To be fair, I haven't actually seen your scum game. I don't know how hard they are to tell apart.

[CCC]

If I'm dead, please avenge my death by powerlynching House. Don't let him talk his way out of it. It's pretty obvious he's scum here.

He tunnels heavily on innocent Townies as Town, though.

[CCC]

Why are you predisposed to be hostile towards me? Because it furthers your SCUM AGENDA?

Calm down, Eager. You're becoming irrational.

[CCC]

Now i would like to hear why people are voting me because as of now the reasons i see are as follows.
...
CCC: Finnaly some pressure off me yeah we should totaly lynch Manuel

Because nobody else in the game looks scummier than you right now. (Gamma Emerald and Square World are close, mind you). You appear to be deliberately misinterpreting anything anyone says about you; you're quick to come to your own defense but slow to hunt scum (though you're perfectly happy to accuse anyone who attacks you); and you've told us that you wouldn't lynch someone if their style of play looked scummy.

[CCC]

BUT, I plead to my fellow towns, please lynch square, do I have to quote all the contradictions again? I don't get why people can't see that.

Square is one of my top three scumreads. I wouldn't be totally averse to a Square lynch.

Having said that, he's also the lowest of my top three scumreads right now. Most of his contradictions come from his having re-evaluated the thread from the beginning, and his reads changed over that time.

[CCC]

What he was doing, in this case, was a lack of action rather than an action. Had he not pointed it out, there would have been no discussion of it.

I disagree. Posting without voting can be a good way to start discussion (I've sometimes done that myself), but my point there was that rather than waiting to see who reacted, he presented himself as one who was Doing Something. Meaning, he gave me the impression he was trying to

look

townie rather than actually being townie.

...I don't see how this would be scummy, though. It simply leads to a different sort of discussion.

[CCC]

@ CCC:

I know you had a slight early suspicion of Manuel, but your recent comments on him seem to be more based on eager's posts about him rather than Manuel's own posts.

I've got some comment's on eager's case on Manuel but I've run out of time for now.

It's more about Manuel's

replies

to Eager's posts at the moment, really.

[CCC]

wait what happened to your CCC read, house?

House's "rock solid" "obvscum" cases tend to suddenly vanish without warning or explanation. I think he just massively talks up minor scumleans.

[CCC]

How am I refusing to work with you?

Do a combined ISO of eager and Gamma... Tell me whether you see the blatant scum theater or not please.

...I've taken a look over Gamma/Eager. There's a couple of iffy things in there; but nothing that looks significant enough to change the order of my reads.

[CCC]

Wow, it took me openly second guessing myself for people to admit that Gamma isn't widely town read. You guys had me feeling like I was seeing things that weren't there.

Is there enough support for a Gamma lynch to push it through today?

UNVOTE:

Gamma's my second-top scumread. I'd be willing to vote for him, though I still think Manuel is scummier.

[CCC]

Calm down, Eager. You're becoming irrational.

I was dealing with someone who is being irrational. That sort of behavior is, well, toxic.

But letting it get at you is no good for anybody.

[CCC]

Who are your other 3?

Also to the people wanting Gamma today, can you give me your cases on Gamma?

My top three scumreads are Manuel, Gamma, and Square.

[CCC]

He isn't in my preferred lynch pile. If you want me to help lynch him, I want a persuasive case.

After doing the Iso on him plus Eager i realized he was following Eagers vote almost every time while scumreading him without giving any convincing reason.

..I saw Gamma follow Eager's vote once onto Square World, and once onto Manuel. Am I missing something?

[CCC]

Wait, Eager actually

was

scum? I'm quite surprised. I'm going to have to rethink all my reads in light of this.

[CCC]

He isn't in my preferred lynch pile. If you want me to help lynch him, I want a persuasive case.

After doing the Iso on him plus Eager i realized he was following Eagers vote almost every time while scumreading him without giving any convincing reason.

..I saw Gamma follow Eager's vote once onto Square World, and once onto Manuel. Am I missing something?

Doesn't matter, Gamma isn't eager's buddy.

Yeah, Gamma's vote on Eager is a pretty strong argument. So is Grendel's. And Eager's push on Manuel suggests Manuel is probably Town as well. I'm not quite sure what to make of Square's counterclaim...

[CCC]

The reason d1 lynches land on town so often is because people mindlessly look for the obvscum "tells", which is stupid because scum will be at their most vigilant in the early game.

My case on eager is far more indicative of scum motive than the contrived shit Manuel was getting run up for.

...I should clearly have paid more attention when Eager voted Square based on "he might be on a team with Manuel". I mean, I noticed the oddity, but I should have scumread him for it a bit more.

[CCC]

I 100% guarantee a scum win.

Scum are known to lie. I don't believe you.

[CCC]

Okay, so:

Eagersnake was Mafia.
Square World wasn't.

How does this change things?

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

Eagersnake

voted for: Gamma Emerald (then jumped off his wagon really quickly)
VictorDeAngelo (debating whether to vote him or Rhazh-now-House)
(At this point, Eager started the exchanging-reads game with Grendel. He asked Grendel to pay special attention to: VictorDeAngelo, CCC, and Manuel87. In turn, at Grendel's request, he provided reads on VictorDeAngelo, gerryoat, and RhazhBash.)

Square World

RhazhBash
Huntress

Square World

(based on Manuel's posts)
Manuel

Square World

House

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

Square World

voted for:
CCC
Manuel87
gerryoat

eagerSnake

Manuel87

eagerSnake

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

eager voted for a lot of players. The players Eager never voted for, aside from himself, are:

CCC
The_Jester
gerryoat
Grendel

The players who voted for eager's lynch are:

House
Huntress
Manuel87

Square World

Gamma Emerald
Grendel

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

This makes Gamma, Manuel, Huntress and House far likelier to be Town than any of my day one reads; eager voted for all of them, and all of them collaborated on his lynch. Manuel, I think, is the most likely Town of them all; eager pushed him very close to a lynch, and really risked the possibility of a lynch happening before he, eager, could withdraw his vote.

[CCC]

I agree that with eager's flip Manuel is likely town, given how hard snake pushed that wagon. I also believe House is likely town as well based on interactions with snake. However I don't get why your so keen is essentially townclear anyone who was both voted for and was voted by eager. Did scum not vote scum is either of your previous games? Are you not familiar with bussing?

I am familiar with bussing, yes. I'm not townclearing those four people I mentioned; I'm just getting a stronger Townread off them than any of the reads I had on day one. (In counterpoint, I'm thinking that the other four players - that is, The_Jester, gerryoat, VictorDeAngelo and Grendel - are probably the right place to start looking for scum).

Also, why are you concerned with SquareWorld's voting pattern?

Mainly because he's the only player (other than myself) that I know to be definitely Town. Therefore, his votes were (presumably) for people he honestly thought were scum. He may have been wrong, but I can trust that he wasn't being

deceptive

.

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

After some consideration, I'm thinking I should order the current players (based on current impressions) from Towniest to Mafiaest like so:

CCC
Manuel87
House
Huntress
Gamma Emerald
Grendel
VictorDeAngelo
The_Jester and gerry_oat (there is little to distinguish these two from each other)

[CCC]

To be clear, Gamma... you hopping off eager's wagon is what renewed my suspicion of you. It was a clear distancing attempt after being called out on your scum theater with him.

You getting back on the wagon

after a counterclaim

does not make you town.

VOTE: Gamma

These are some excellent points. Also, eager's vote on Gamma was his first (RVS) vote, and he then

very quickly

decided that Gamma was Town after all... which conflicts with his "everyone's-scum-until-proved-Town" stance, because there really wasn't much to base that judgement on yet. So, of all eager's votes, that seems the most likely one to be bussing.

After some consideration, I'm thinking I should order the current players (based on current impressions) from Towniest to Mafiaest like so:

CCC
Manuel87
House
Huntress
Gamma Emerald
Grendel
VictorDeAngelo
The_Jester and gerry_oat (there is little to distinguish these two from each other)

This reads list is trash and I'm coming for your head next.

And you'll probably get my head, too. My continual Townread of Eager yesterday must make me look horribly suspicious.

[CCC]

When he said your reasoning against CCC was bad without reading your case.

Eurgh. That

does

make me look bad.

[CCC]

And you'll probably get my head, too. My continual Townread of Eager yesterday must make me look horribly suspicious.

You're not the only one that townread eager.

Want to try again?

It doesn't really matter why you think I'm Mafia. Because the reason I quoted above, combined with your success in outing eagerSnake on day one, is probably enough reason for people to agree with your read and push my wagon all the way.

At which point you'll find out that you're wrong, because I am Town. But you're stubborn enough that I don't think I can persuade you of that.

I do, however, think that - after going through other people's day one Gamma reads, and after noting how Eager's votes on Gamma (and Gamma's after-the-counterclaim vote on Eager) look more like bussing than genuine voting, and considering that you

were

actually right about Eager - I do think I put Gamma too high in my recent list.

So I think that the last two Mafia can probably be found in {Gamma Emerald, The_Jester, gerry_oat}. I'd rather like to hear from each of these people before deciding where to put my vote (and preferably from everyone else too)... but, at the moment, I'd definitely prefer to put my vote inside that set.

[CCC]

VOTE: victor

Unless victor explains how me having the same tr and sr as him makes me mafia, I'm lynching him today.

Why Victor? I'm also scumreading you.

[CCC]

At which point you'll find out that you're wrong, because I am Town. But you're stubborn enough that I don't think I can persuade you of that.

It's this kind of shading that makes me hesitant to change my read, because you are well aware that my reads do change,

Let me rephrase that.

Since I am one of the people that you think is scum, I don't think you'll trust anything I say enough for me to be able to persuade you that I'm not scum.

It doesn't really matter why you think I'm Mafia.

And that's straight up bullshit.

Town should be demanding reasons so they can refute them.

Not a fan of AtE.

Honestly, I can't even refute the reason I came up with. And you think you have a better reason than that? Surely that means I have even less chance of refuting it.

[CCC]

So I think that the last two Mafia can probably be found in {Gamma Emerald, The_Jester, gerry_oat}. I'd rather like to hear from each of these people before deciding where to put my vote (and preferably from everyone else too)... but, at the moment, I'd definitely prefer to put my vote inside that set.

if you are that certain the last two scum are in those three players then you could just get one lynched each day and win. hypothecally you should have no qualms with voting in that bracket, even if you mislynch today, you've found the last two scum lordz yeah?

So vote Gamma.

...you have a good point.

VOTE: Gamma Emerald

Vote reasons include but are not limited to: eager's vote yesterday looks too quickly withdrawn, as if it might have been bussing; Gamma's vote on eager came only after a counterclaim; Gamma did seem to follow eager's vote once or twice yesterday.

(Inspecting their cases in the cold light of morning, the main thing I have against The_Jester and gerryoat is that I don't have any significant towntells on them yet; but I have at least some small reason to think that everyone else is Town. But Gamma has a few things that actually point to being scum).

[CCC]

Try to defend yourself. You sound like caught scum now.

Who, me?

I suppose I do. Given how much I was townreading eager on day one, if I didn't know I was Town I'd probably suspect me, too.

I'm Town. I was wrong about eager. I don't really know what to add to that.

[CCC]

@CCC: I voted Eager, unvoted when Eager claimed, then voted Eager again when I realized Square CCed. As for voting with him, my votes we mostly independent. If you can point out a time where I steeped Eager, please do.

See here:

Yeah, I'm still scumreading CCC, but Square has been very bad recently
VOTE: Square World

Given how widely Manuel was being scumread, I'm less sure that this one should count:

Well I'm feeling better about Square now, so:
VOTE: Manuel87

[CCC]

Try to defend yourself. You sound like caught scum now.

Who, me?

I suppose I do. Given how much I was townreading eager on day one, if I didn't know I was Town I'd probably suspect me, too.

I'm Town. I was wrong about eager. I don't really know what to add to that.

Town can have bad reads. What you need to do is prove how Eager pretty much whiteknighting you doesn't implicate you. If you can prove that you'll be a whole lot better in my eyes.

Eager knows I'm Town. I'm cautious on my reads, but I've got him as my top Townread and I've been refusing to vote him on those grounds. I'm also more easily swayed by his words than the words of most other players.

This is a Town player that Scum wants to keep around. As long as Eager lives, he can try to steer my vote towards other Townies - and he has reason to believe that I'm unlikely to vote for him. And if Eager dies, then his whiteknighting makes me look scummy as anything, giving a strong push towards a mislynch.

[CCC]

@CCC: I see. I just figured he had a good point about Manuel. I do not deny I sheeped him there.

What about Square World?

[CCC]

@CCC: I see. I just figured he had a good point about Manuel. I do not deny I sheeped him there.

What about Square World?

What about him?

@CCC: I voted Eager, unvoted when Eager claimed, then voted Eager again when I realized Square CCed. As for voting with him, my votes we mostly independent. If you can point out a time where I steeped Eager, please do.

See here:

Yeah, I'm still scumreading CCC, but Square has been very bad recently
VOTE: Square World

[CCC]

Eager knows I'm Town. I'm cautious on my reads, but I've got him as my top Townread and I've been refusing to vote him on those grounds. I'm also more easily swayed by his words than the words of most other players.

This is a Town player that Scum wants to keep around. As long as Eager lives, he can try to steer my vote towards other Townies - and he has reason to believe that I'm unlikely to vote for him. And if Eager dies, then his whiteknighting makes me look scummy as anything, giving a strong push towards a mislynch.

That's okay CCC, I still scumread you over your own actions instead of some other person's.

I hope that gives you some consolation, at least.

Not really, no.

But the fact that I have now survived to day two as Town does give me some consolation. It means I've already accomplished my personal goal for this game.

[CCC]

CCC, I'm still not seeing any reads from you.

Please provide an updated readslist. Kthx!

From Town to Scum:

CCC- Towniest of the Town
Manuel - The hard push against him by eagerSnake yesterday makes me think he's highly likely Town.
House - His hard and successful push on eager yesterday is a strong reason to read him as Town.
Huntress - Both voted for and was voted for by the one known scum. No other serious factors affecting this read.
Grendel - He was not voted for by the one known scum, and his hammer on eager was only after the counterclaim, but his reads make a lot of sense and he's doing a fair amount of scumhunting. (Not so much yet on day two, though, but there's plenty of time left).
VictorDeAngelo - eager drew special attention to him in his game of exchanging reads with Grendel, and he was eager's first non-RVS vote. On the flip side, he presents a scummish demeanour and was not on eager's wagon at the end of day one.
The_Jester and gerryoat - Neither voted for nor were voted for by eager. No reason to townread either.
Gamma Emerald - Neither eager's vote on him nor his vote on eager are good reasons to townread him, as they were both done in such a way as to suggest a possibility of bussing. Also has been looking scummy since day one. Also on occasion followed eager's reads with little explanation, despite professing to scumread eager.

[CCC]

Honestly, I can't even refute the reason I came up with. And you think you have a better reason than that? Surely that means I have even less chance of refuting it.

How can you possibly know if you don't ask?

Your disinterest in my case against you feels like caught scum dreading the gallows that will inevitably befall him once the prosecution rests.

You are making a case for scum!CCC by avoiding mine.

If you think that actually

presenting

your case will increase the probability of catching scum, then you should do so. Whether I ask for it or not.

[CCC]

What did you just...what.
Tell me why I should still townread you, House.

I'm pretty sure that he's saying he thinks you're scum.

[CCC]

Gamma Emerald - Neither eager's vote on him nor his vote on eager are good reasons to townread him, as they were both done in such a way as to suggest a possibility of bussing.

Also has been looking scummy since day one.

Also on occasion followed eager's reads with little explanation, despite professing to scumread eager.

Where was this opinion d1?

How did he look scummy d1?

Explain clearly, please.

First started scumreading him here:

I'm getting slight scumtwitches from a few players. Not enough to seriously consider any of them as likely scum yet, but the needles on my scum detectors are twitching slightly.

First is Gamma Emerald, for his post #39:

Do we know how many scum we're looking for?

11 players I'm assuming there's a few possibilities here...

3 teamed mafia, 8 town
2 teamed mafia, 1 3rd party (not cult), 8 town
2 teams of 2 mafia, 7 town

I'm betting 3 Mafia, 8 town or 3 mafia, 7 town, and one 3P.

He was right later - that

does

look scummish. He's keeping the size of the mafia team constant between his guesses, instead of keeping the total number of scum constant. This may mean nothing, or it may imply that he has actual knowledge of the size of the scumteam.

It's a bit thin, but it's got my attention.

The second one who's making me nervous is The_Jester; he seems to be doing quite a lot of dodging questions and discouraging speculation in this thread.

The third one pinging my scumdar is VictorDeAngelo, for his habit of not explaining his scumreads until he wants to move to a different target.

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

Since my vote is on none of the above, I think I should move it onto one of the above. Therefore:

VOTE: The Jester

First voted for him here:

The first thing about CCC I want to address is his overt doubt casting on himself. Lower confedance, and second guessing are to be expected on D1, but CCC announces it before all his early scum reads. To the point it is no longer resembling town paranoia, but a fear of commitment.

I'm trying to signal that if anyone can present what I consider an actual decent case that someone is scum, and I can't refute it, then I'll switch my vote to that case.

CCC was scum reading Gamma longer then Square. So his square scum read getting brought to the forefront is a little odd. I think it must have been a pressure vote.

It was

supposed

to get Square to post more, yes. Didn't work.

But what is so weird is that CCC

is super cautions with his scum reads

. So I'm trying to figure out why CCC appears not afraid of contradicting himself, but worried about his reads being wrong.

I've been disparaging

everyone's

day one scumreads, not just my own.

Here he voted Victor. Once again missing Gamma. Maybe I'm paying more attention to this because I'm scum reading Gamma. AFAIK, CCC never withdrew his suspions of Gamma, had a town read on me and I was dogging Gamma in the last few days. So why didn't CCC show any interest in Gamma lynch?

Eh, Victor and Gamma are pretty much equally scummy in my eyes (i.e. more than most, but still not very). But at the time when I posted that, Victor had been the most recent ping on my scumdar.

Nonetheless, if it makes you feel better:

VOTE: Gamma Emerald

I could vote for either Gamma or Victor equally right now (and I've previously given reasons why both look marginally scummy). Square World and

GreenNope

Huntress need to post more so there's some decent data on them.

He was at the bottom of my readslist here:

...strange, that. My stance on Grendel hasn't changed significantly.

I don't see how your unchanged read on him from the past is relevant to my assertion that I'll be expecting an explanation for any future changes.

It was relevant to the assertion that I'd somehow taken a firmer stance.

Ah, but you did.

You "confirmed" that Grendel and eager are your two top townreads. Before that "confirmation", we could only speculate due to the vagary of your readslist.

...I thought I was being clear.

Fair enough, then. My readslist, in order from Towniest to Scummiest:


CCC - Town all the way
eagerSnake - Townish. He's really making a lot of good points and asking a lot of right questions
Grendel - Null leaning strongly Town - no change
House - Null leaning strongly Town - his reads are rubbish, but I've seen him play exactly like this as Town before. (Approximately equal with Grendel)
gerryoat - Null leaning Townish - no change
Huntress - Null leaning very slightly Town - subject to rapid scumwards change if she doesn't explain herself a bit more soonish
The_Jester - Null leaning very slightly scummish - been very quiet lately
Manuel87 - Null leaning slightly scummish - don't think he's made a non-RVS vote yet (could be just cautious)
Square World - Null leaning slightly scummish - needs to explain himself a little more
VictorDeAngelo - Null leaning slightly scummish. He's explained his scumread on Rhazh, and while it's a poor case, I now think a lot of my doubt on him is due to us thinking in very different ways.
Gamma Emerald - Null leaning strongly scummish - suspicious interaction with Huntress

...and I was willing to vote Gamma right up until the end of the day:

Well we are running out of time. Nobody is interested in Gamma.

My top scum read, Gamma, being on Manuel is giving me pause.

I think Eager is town.

Square is not a good lynch either.

UNVOTE:

I'd be willing to vote either Manuel or Gamma at this point. Though I don't think a Gamma vote will lead to a lynch, and we're nearing end of day.

Wow, it took me openly second guessing myself for people to admit that Gamma isn't widely town read. You guys had me feeling like I was seeing things that weren't there.

Is there enough support for a Gamma lynch to push it through today?

UNVOTE:

Gamma's my second-top scumread. I'd be willing to vote for him, though I still think Manuel is scummier.

[CCC]

@CCC: How did Gamma's interaction with Huntress look scummy to you?

Mainly the way that he leaps to her defence from here onwards. I can see absolutely no reason for it - he's not giving any new information, he's leaping to assumptions, he doesn't ask her any questions, even Huntress questions that last bit...

[CCC]

GAMMA!

IN ORDER TO MISLYNCH TOWN, I HAVE TO STRONGARM A LYNCH ON MY OWN TEAM WHEN HE HAD NO PRESSURE WHATSOEVER.

THIS IS WHAT YOU ARE ASKING PEOPLE TO BELIEVE.

Gamma, if House were Town, he would have let the Manuel mislynch go through. Then he would have

used it

to push through his lynch on eager on day two. He still gets all the towncred,

plus

there's less townies around to do anything about it.

[CCC]

To which I retort: boring

That's very complimentary, but I'm pretty sure I couldn't pull that off even if I was trying.

[CCC]

Also, did no one catch the fact

I challenged the confirmed town?

Do you really think scum!me would do that?

Under the circumstances? Yes. I think it would be a low-success strategy executed in the face of overwhelming opposition that are unlikely to be defeated by anything approaching a conventional strategy.

[CCC]

Gamma are you mafia this game? Be honest with me.

Welcome back!

On this thing I do agree with Gamma: it would be good to see your reads for this game.

[CCC]

I can't be sure cuz I can't investigate. I'm feeling CCC or Victor though.

Where did the Victor scumread REALLY come from? Don't point at your failed reaction test. That post was reachy and bad.

Also, where did your suspicion of me go?

The scumread came from a re-ISO, which is how I almost always re-evaluate my reads. I still find some of your posts suspicious, but I'm giving you a pass. Half botd, half trusting your play.

What's "botd"?

[CCC]

What's "botd"?

I googled it when he posted that, lol.

Benefit of the doubt would be my guess.

That makes sense, thanks.

[CCC]

Everyone, remember when you were so convinced Manuel was scum and I was saying he was town and to lynch this other guy instead?

Remember what happened?

Let's do that again.

Gamma is town. Lynch Victor instead.

Earlier you said that you know Gamma is scum. What happened to your scumread on him?

[CCC]

Humans are a learning species.

Once Victor flips scum, you too will see the light.

I could see Victor and Gamma being scumbuddies. Or Jester and Gamma.

[CCC]

Gamma is town. Period.

Why?

I'm not moving my vote just on your bare say-so. I need to have a good enough reason to shift my vote.

[CCC]

@CCC

Hey are you doing anymore math stuff? I like reading that sort of thing!

I need input figures to start with in order to do math stuff. I can give you the probability that a certain set of votes is random or not, but in this game

everything

is clearly non-random, so that doesn't help much. And I'm not confident enough in my own scumreads to assign firm numbers to them - the error bars are just too big.

If I have the probability that person X would take action Y as scum, the probability that he would do that same action as Town, and the prior probability of being scum, or good estimates of all the preceding numbers, then I can show exactly what the probability of him being scum after taking into account that action is. Prior probabilities I can estimate (if we assume two remaining scum, out of nine players, then 22.22% is a good guess for prior probability), but the others are harder.

[CCC]

So, consider for example: yesterday House pushed a lynch on Eager. If we assume three scum out of eleven, then that's a 3/11 chance at start of day of being scum.

Let's assume that House's scumreads are completely random as Town. Then he'd have a 3/11 chance of aiming his wagon at scum.

Now, what are the chances that he would bus Eager, under those conditions, as scum? My intuition say remote. Let's assume that he's a really reckless scum player, and peg that at 10%.

So, what are the odds, then, of House being scum, giving his pushing the wagon on eager?

It works out to (0.1)*(3/11)/[(0.1)*(3/11)+(3/11)*(8/11)], or about 12%.

Now, of course, he actually had a reason to scumread eager - so his wagon was better than random, and he's probably nowhere near that reckless a scum player, meaning his actual odds of being scum are even lower than 12%.

[CCC]

CCC that is arbitrary as fuck.

It's less arbitrary than it might look. But, more to the point, it tells you nothing

new

. House is already being - very widely - townread.

[CCC]

I'm sorry, I'm obviously an idiot.

Explain to me why the doc needs to out themselves?

It certainly makes more sense to me for the doc to anonymously protect House, relying on the protection of said anonymity for himself.

If there even is a doc.

(And House does look a lot like tonight's kill, and will look more so if Victor flips red, so he makes a good protection target)

[CCC]

You have a claimed PR, and the bodyguard doesn't protect. Not buying it.

It makes perfect sense to me.

[CCC]

no way we have a Watcher/Bodyguard combo here.

Why not?

[CCC]

VOTE: Victor

The enigmatic and silent Jester speaks again!

Early hammer? Attempting to cut off Town discussion prematurely, perhaps?

[CCC]

Did you meta me?

Ohhh, now this sounds like a scum claim.

Who reacts to being scum read by wondering if they were just meta'd lol?!

I had a town game where I challenged the town PR Day 2. MY challenge of House IS my town play.

Loudly and repeatedly pointing it out is making you look like a cartoon character, with a sign saying "I Am Not A Spy".

[CCC]

Playstyle difference.

Know what my playstyle is?

So you never lost a game?

Not since I changed my playstyle.

When did you change your playstyle?

[CCC]

CCC that is arbitrary as fuck.

It's less arbitrary than it might look. But, more to the point, it tells you nothing

new

. House is already being - very widely - townread.

Bullshit.

I'm a scum lord.

...most people in this game are still townreading you after the eager lynch. Except perhaps Gamma, who seems to be more variable.

[CCC]

no way we have a Watcher/Bodyguard combo here.

Why not?

Because investigative + protective + support makes no sense!

/s

Why not? It could be balanced out with scum roles as necessary.

[CCC]

VOTE: Gamma

Say goodnight, Gracie.

As much as I still think Gamma's scum, I'm not sure it's the best idea to rush to a lynch

too

quickly today. It seems quite possible that we would have another scum hiding here, and it might be a good idea to take the time to try to figure out who it is.

[CCC]

Also WHY DIDN'T VICTOR WATCH THE CLAIMED PR???

That has much to do with why his claim wasn't believed.

Square was the obvious nk target, but he watched ME?

Who can blame anyone for scumreading that?

It seems not unreasonable to expect that the guy who pushed a lynch through on scum on night one would end up killed...

[CCC]

You were the town leader: Square was an awkwardly claimed PR. I can see the logic in trying to kill you.

Experienced players wouldn't.

Scum kill claimed PR because they know the claim isn't coming from a scum mindset. Especially when that claimed PR is a counter that lynches one of their members.

It's not rocket surgery.

Does this mean that we can assume that at least one scum is not an experienced player?

Who here is experienced?

[CCC]

Well anyway, that night 2 kill disadvantages me more than anyone else. Grendel has scumread me this entire game. That kill would implicate me beyond belief. Problem is: he scumread me since Day 1. If I was worried about his read, I wouldn't have let him survive one night! So there's no reason for me to kill him now and not Night 1.
PEdit: I voted before the claim.

Yeah, and pointing it out isn't going to help your case much.

[CCC]

Well anyway, that night 2 kill disadvantages me more than anyone else. Grendel has scumread me this entire game. That kill would implicate me beyond belief. Problem is: he scumread me since Day 1. If I was worried about his read, I wouldn't have let him survive one night! So there's no reason for me to kill him now and not Night 1.
PEdit: I voted before the claim.

Hello. This is basically a scumclaim.

VOTE: Gamma

Hey, the silent and enigmatic Jester speaks again!

Alright, Jester, we know you think Gamma is scum. What are your thoughts on other players? Do you think you could maybe provide us a short readslist?

[CCC]

@CCC why do you think I am scum?

For the same reasons that I thought you were scum yesterday, mostly.

Trying to put a vote on House yesterday was perhaps not the

towniest

course of action, though it wasn't all too scummy since there was never more than one vote on him; but then loudly parading it up and down as the Towniest thing ever did make you look like you were trying to overcompensate for something - like actually

being

scum. And then, of course, a very Townish Town player who had been suspicious of you all along dies overnight... that

could

easily have been scum-you hoping to silence him and WIFOM out of any suspicion. Ooooorrrrrrr it could have been scum trying to frame you, I guess, so it's not definitive, but you're still looking pretty scummy...

And I haven't actually voted yet, today. I'm trying to encourage the day to last a bit longer, so we have more to work with tracking down future scum.

[CCC]

No it's not. I want explanation, unless you two got a scum pt.

I had a look at the second link in House's signature. It explained Gamma's comments.

Not that it confirms anything...

[CCC]

Jester could do with some vote love, CCC.

He lurked through hardcore the first couple days, only showing up to hammer.

Yeah, he's on the scummier side of my readslist. Not quite as scummy as Gamma, but close.

[CCC]

I'm 100% sure there's scum between Gamma and House.

Alright, that's two scumreads. Could you perhaps provide the rest of your reads?

[CCC]

I've been looking back through Gamma's ISO. He voted for:

Day 1:

Grendel

(RVS)
(Unvote)
CCC

Square World

CCC

Square World

Manuel87
(Unvote)

EagerSnake

(Unvote on Eager's claim)

Square World

Eager

(on Square's counterclaim)

Day 2:
CCC
(Unvote)
House
CCC

Victor

CCC

Victor

Day 3:
TheJester

[CCC]

I'll read all this again and post my thoughts tomorrow cause I wanna relax after work and my head hurts already. Something's seriously wrong with this game.

Alright, I can certainly understand that, but I want to

see

your thoughts tomorrow. You're doing a lot of lurking here. And why the sudden hammer on Victor yesterday?

[CCC]

I don't imagine scum would have easily bussed scum on day two, not after having lost their first team member on day one. This implies that, if Gamma flips red, then the remaining scum is probably in {Huntress The_Jester Manuel87 gerryoat}. Manuel87 was eager's preferred lynch day one, and was on Gamma day two, so (continuing on the assumption that scum was unlikely to bus scum on day two) he doesn't seem a good choice. Which would put the third scum in {Huntress The_Jester gerryoat}.

Hmmmm. This line of thought hasn't exactly been wonderfully enlightening, those were my three top scumreads after Gamma in any case.

[CCC]

I was drunk and I knew I had to post something or I'd get replaced. Popped the site, glanced over Victor's blue-pm stuff and my drunk-self decided he's 100% sure scum and it's a good idea to vote him. I didn't even know how many votes he already had on him. Hell, I haven't even followed the game cause I was at work 24/7 last week and I had like 40 pages to read up. I should've replaced out but I do it so often I'd feel like shit. Not that I'm super happy about the current situation now.

Drunk voting seems a surprisingly convenient excuse for potentially-scummy behaviour, to me.

[CCC]

In no circumstances ever does Gamma predict me flipping my read after I've been hardcore scumreading him since d1.

Yeah, this is a pretty strong argument. Anyone

else

might have left you alive specifically in order to get a mislynch on Gamma...

[CCC]

Actually: Gerry Huntress Manuel Jester CCC I suggest you all do color coded reads too.

In order from Town to Scummiest:

CCC

Manuel

House

Gerryoat

Gamma

Huntress

The_Jester

Further notes: Gamma and Jester are unlikely to be both scum. Huntress and Gamma are unlikely to be both scum. I therefore suspect the current scumteam are probably Huntress and The_Jester, with the option of Gerryoat accompanying them or replacing one of them.

My read on Huntress has changed recently. I will go into why in my next post.

[CCC]

I think the remaining scum are between CCC, House and Gamma, and that there's been some hard bussing going on.

This when Jester is being fairly widely scumread.

Of the three people mentioned by Huntress here, one (myself) I know for certain sure is Town. One is very probably Town; that is House. And then there's Gamma. There are good reasons to scumread Gamma, but House has recently made a very good case for the idea that Gamma is Town.

Consider the possibility that Gamma is Town. If this is true, then Huntress just proposed a scumlist of three (out of seven) players who would all be Town. The odds of three

random

players including

zero

scum (assuming two remaining scum) are (5/7)*(4/6)*(3/5) = 2/7.

Yet a scum player has a strong incentive to suggest a scumlist that consists only of Town players. Let's say that a scum player has an 80% chance of producing an entirely-Town list of reads.

The prior probability of Huntress being scum (still assuming two remaining scum) is 2/6. Then the odds of Huntress being scum from this single piece of evidence (assuming that Gamma is Town) increase to over 50%.

[CCC]

For reference:

Quick reads, town to scum (now in color):

House, Manuel,

Gerry

CCC, Huntress,

Jester

Manuel87
Gamma Emerald
CCC

gerryoat

Huntress
The_Jester

House
Huntress

Gerry
CCC

Gamma
The_Jester

House

Manuel

CCC

Huntress

Jester

gamma

CCC

Manuel

House

Gerryoat

Gamma

Huntress

The_Jester

[CCC]

@CCC why can't Jester and Gamma both be scum. Also why can't Huntress and Gamma both be scum.

- Jester and Gamma - their vote for each other at the start of the day doesn't look like scum vs scum to me

- Huntress and Gamma - my case for Huntress being scum only works if Gamma is Town. if Gamma is scum, my case falls apart.

[CCC]

At any rate, I think we should lynch Jester today since his scum read is pretty much universal and sort which of Gamma/Huntress is their buddy tomorrow.

Why not wait for his replacement? Maybe he can provide better content?

I'm in favour of waiting for the replacement. More data is good.

[CCC]

Because investigative + protective + support makes no sense!

/s

Why not? It could be balanced out with scum roles as necessary.

/s denotes sarcasm

Ah, I see. Thanks.

[CCC]

This when Jester is being fairly widely scumread.
Of the three people mentioned by Huntress here, one (myself) I know for certain sure is Town. One is very probably Town; that is House. And then there's Gamma. There are good reasons to scumread Gamma, but House has recently made a very good case for the idea that Gamma is Town.
Consider the possibility that Gamma is Town. If this is true, then Huntress just proposed a scumlist of three (out of seven) players who would all be Town. The odds of three

random

players including

zero

scum (assuming two remaining scum) are (5/7)*(4/6)*(3/5) = 2/7.
Yet a scum player has a strong incentive to suggest a scumlist that consists only of Town players. Let's say that a scum player has an 80% chance of producing an entirely-Town list of reads.
The prior probability of Huntress being scum (still assuming two remaining scum) is 2/6. Then the odds of Huntress being scum from this single piece of evidence (assuming that Gamma is Town) increase to over 50%.

I am more suspicious of CCC right now.
Yesterday Gamma was his scumread and today he considers him town in his calculation but still has him as a scumlean.
Yesterday Huntress was his 3rd highest townread and today after she got some scumreads on her she dropped into one of his mainscumreads for twisted math reasoning.
You can easily twist math the way you want it to be and thats what he is doing here.

I have read into Gammas first game a little and VI could make sense for him but i still need to read the other games to see how he developed his playstyle.

My calculation was intended to show that,

if

Gamma is Town,

then

Huntress is scum. I'm giving the "Gamma Is Town" hypothesis a good look because I think that House has a good point; leaving House alive looks a lot like trying to end up getting Gamma lynched, which suggests that it might be a mislynch.

[CCC]

So, the way I see it, there are a few players who could be scum:

Gamma, Huntress, gerryoat, and The_Jester

But not all of these make sense as scumteams. Jester/Gamma feels like a poor team, as they were voting each other. Huntress/Gamma feels like a poor team, for reasons previously mentioned.

So, if there are exactly two more scum, then it seems likely that those two are:

Gamma/gerryoat
Huntress/The_Jester
Huntress/gerryoat
The_Jester/gerryoat

If Gamma is scum, then it's hard to see why House is still around today. Any other team would leave him to push a mislynch on Gamma.

The_Jester had a suspicious hammer, and a suspiciously convenient excuse for scummy play, but much of his behaviour could easily be more Village Idiot (and overworked) than Mafia.

So, I'm thinking there's a good chance that Huntress is one of the Mafia players. She did step into the game and almost immediately leap to a suspiciously convenient scumread, which she's then sat on and pushed ever since. Gerryoat is a strong possibility for the third, but The_Jester might still slip into there...

I believe I will therefore:

VOTE: Huntress

[CCC]

The only suspicions I had against Rhaz were from posts 29 and 89, mainly the latter. I'm still baffled by the fuss House made over my not voting him when I finished my original catch up. From the rest of Day one I did get the feeling that he wasn't quite so interested in lynching CCC as he made out to be, but that's a bit subjective.

Yeah, House does tend to talk up his cases a lot. But he did that in the last game I played with him too, and he was Town there, so that's not alignment indicative by any means.

[CCC]

What if the scum townreads me?

Ummmm... scum don't need to read. Scum

know

. And they

want

Town lynched.

[CCC]

I'm going with Huntress and gerryoat.

VOTE: Huntress

L-1, I think?

So out of 6 players, you're going with those two, putting one of them at L-1, and your highest scumread so far is now obvtown because they were at L-1 for 5 seconds and were not hammered.

While I don't know everything that goes on in House's head, it seems reasonable to point out that House was already starting to townread Gamma after he (House) wasn't killed last night.

[CCC]

I get a hammer on scum making someone town, but a first vote? Especially right after night is over, seems like your average distancing technique. Not saying I find it suspicious, just think it's kind of a stretch to clear someone just because they voted scum.

I voted on Saturday 8 Oct. Day 3 started on Monday 3 Oct. (I took a while to vote because I didn't want the day to end early).

Huntress was my first vote of the day, but I wouldn't call it "right after night is over".

[CCC]

CCCs case is bad there is nothing about why Huntress is scum only why others could possibly maybe not be scum.

...

I would like to hear the reasosns why people are voting Huntress right now.

That part of my case is earlier, in post 1735:

I think the remaining scum are between CCC, House and Gamma, and that there's been some hard bussing going on.

This when Jester is being fairly widely scumread.

Of the three people mentioned by Huntress here, one (myself) I know for certain sure is Town. One is very probably Town; that is House. And then there's Gamma. There are good reasons to scumread Gamma, but House has recently made a very good case for the idea that Gamma is Town.

Consider the possibility that Gamma is Town. If this is true, then Huntress just proposed a scumlist of three (out of seven) players who would all be Town. The odds of three

random

players including

zero

scum (assuming two remaining scum) are (5/7)*(4/6)*(3/5) = 2/7.

Yet a scum player has a strong incentive to suggest a scumlist that consists only of Town players. Let's say that a scum player has an 80% chance of producing an entirely-Town list of reads.

The prior probability of Huntress being scum (still assuming two remaining scum) is 2/6. Then the odds of Huntress being scum from this single piece of evidence (assuming that Gamma is Town) increase to over 50%.

I can go into more detail about the calculations, but basically, if Gamma is Town then Huntress is probably scum. And House being alive does strongly suggest that Gamma is Town.

[CCC]

Actually, I don't need to. If this flips town, then that will do everything. If this flips maf, then I will admit I was wrong, and tip my hat to you.

At this point, if Huntress flips Town, I will need to re-evaluate

all

my reads.

[CCC]

I'm giving the "Gamma Is Town" hypothesis a good look because I think that House has a good point; leaving House alive looks a lot like trying to end up getting Gamma lynched, which suggests that it might be a mislynch.

If both were town, which do you think scum would consider more of a threat: House or Gamma?

Of those two? House would have been the bigger long-term threat. Gamma would have been little to no threat (due to being mislynch bait).

I don't see the relevance.

She did step into the game and almost immediately leap to a suspiciously convenient scumread, which she's then sat on and pushed ever since.

What was "suspiciously convenient" about my initial reads (four of them, not one as you claim here)? "Almost immediately" is inaccurate too.

Your first two posts can be summarised as "Hi, catching up". Your third post was a bunch of questions to eager, square, victor and gerry. Your fourth post was a vote on me, on the basis of zero direct interaction and (apparently) because I was so scummy talking to others. That's almost immediate - second substantive post.

And I never said all your scumreads were suspiciously convenient. But your vote was.

And your latest readslist consisted of me, House, and Gamma. House makes way more sense as Town than Scum, and I think he's got a good point about him not dying overnight suggesting that Gamma is likely Town. And I know I'm Town. This is a very suspicious readslist, because the odds of picking three players out of seven, with an estimated two scum, and getting

no

scum are only two in seven. (If you were Town, moreover, you'd be picking three players out of

six

- there's only a one in five chance of that leading to a scumfree list. And that's the odds if you pick

randomly

. If I assume you have even the vaguest competence at recognising scum, your odds of getting it that badly wrong drop even further).

[CCC]

JoaT flipped.
Watcher flipped.
Bodyguard claimed. Not cc'ed.

Almost all my posts since your claim have raised a question about your claim, which I guess is the real reason you're attacking me.

I'm a bullet-proof townie

and although it's not a direct counterclaim, I don't see us having four town PRs in an eleven player game, especially where three of them have a chance of preventing a kill (Square claimed a block).

Bodyguard only transfers a kill, doesn't prevent one.

You may well be right about there not being four Town PRs in an eleven player game; if so, then the fakeclaim is either you or House (Square and Victor being confirmed by their flips).

And, honestly, right now, House is looking a

lot

Townier than you. Hence, I don't believe your claim. My vote will stay where it is for the moment.

[CCC]

Also there's at least 3 town PRs. We should assume there's at least one for scum.
Did Square claim his abilities? Can't find it.

Square counterclaimed Eager's roleblocker claim. Aside from that, he didn't claim his abilities.

[CCC]

VOTE: House

Don't see the point of there being a BP and a BG. I think House is fake in the two.

Why do you say

House

is the fake one?