Mini 1096 - Seinfeld Mafia (Game Over)

[The Fonz]

Hey guys. I'm in the middle of catching up elsewhere, so normally would wait til tomorrow for this, but I see we have a guy at L-1, so I guess it has to be now. Can someone surmise the respective Raj and Magna cases?

[The Fonz]

OK, so yeah, the Magna wagon is beyond retarded. Guys, you don't claim as town unless your lynch is absolutely inevitable, and that's L-1 'claim or die' territory, not 'Oh I know, I'll put this guy to L-1 then he'll have to claim' territory. LMP's actions make it look like he actually wants a claim for its own sake, not because he thinks Magna is scummy enough to die- hell, he even said 'Magna is not the lynch today' earlier. What suspicion he has of Magna seems to be entirely on the basis of ties to UT and a UT case that, in itself, blows.

The Raj case in itself isn't great, and there's certainly nothing there to justify putting him to L-1 this early. I don't like his attempt to stake out the moral high ground with the townie claim, and I also feel the claim itself was premature, so he's a better lynch than MOI, but

Vote: LynchMePls

is better than either, imho.

[The Fonz]

Wow, Fonz boils the magna wagon down to "magna didn't claim when at L-1" which I'm fairly certain is not a reason anyone is voting him, and ignores all the other reasons people are voting him.

Oh no?

Katsuki random voted. Mac voted based on his secret scumtell that later turns out to be meta that he still won't share.

I know who needs wagoning. It's Magna! VOTE: Magna

now this is a wagon I can get behind.

unvote LMP, vote Magnaface

UT makes a vote which looks very much to fall into the wagoning for the sake of wagoning/pressure vote class. Not scummy in itself, but very much an early game thing, that doesn't appear to have anything else behind it.

Then your own vote, which you describe as a 'blind leap of faith' in other words, sheeping on Mac.

After that,

LYNCH LYNCH LYNCH LYNCH!

Unvote
Vote: Magna

Here's a nice change of pace for you Magna, you can be lynched D1 instead of NK'ed N1!

A vote about which you actually had to enquire whether it was a joke. RVS level of reasoning for an L-2 vote. But no, I clearly don't have an actual reason to find LMP scummy.

and in light of MoI's quick defense of Katsuki i'll

unvote
vote: MoI

lets see some pressure.

OK, this is a reason. It's a bad one, but we'll take what we can get. Though note 'Let's apply some pressure' argument at L-2. I think he was pretty clearly already under pressure, wasn't he?

Peanutman voted based on two things: he thought LMP and MoI looked like they were distancing, and he didn't like Magna's case on UT. I'm not going to dwell on my predecessor for obvious reasons, make of it what you will. Suffice to say, I don't agree.

Then LMP, having unvoted to go to UT, jumps back on the wagon WITH THE SPECIFIC DECLARED INTENT TO FORCE A CLAIM. So yeah, are you still sure no-one voted on that basis?

In so far as people have attempted to justify the wagon, the one recurring thing seems to be that LMP's vote is so bad it has to be distancing. Surely that's an argument for lynching, y'know, LMP? When someone votes someone else in a manner that looks terrible, I don't tend to assume that it's the one who's the target of the shit vote who deserves lynching because of it.

Katsuki's point that both LMP and MoI are calling UT each other's scumbuddies is interesting, and might be a valid scum connection if they were both using that to get UT lynched, but uh, they're not. LMP is using UT as an excuse to push Magna right up into claim range, and that says UT-LMP to me more than it does LMP-Magna.

Your accusation that MoI asking people to say who the scummiest lurker is somehow equates to insisting that there is exactly one scum there is untrue, fallacious, and scummy. Then you called Magna's reaction an 'extreme overreaction,' on the basis that 34 was clearly a joke. Well, 34 doesn't look like a joke to me, and I don't think it's remotely protown to put someone to L-2 on the basis of a jokevote even if so. It looks more like scum jumping a wagon to me.

So no, I don't see any reason that comes close to justifying having put Magna to lynch -1, and I'm entirely justifying in calling the wagon retarded.

and ignores all the other reasons people are voting him. Then he completely ignores the extreme scummatude of BV.

'I have X as a top suspect, Y doesn't have X as a suspect, therefore I now suspect Y.' Yeah, that's not in any way stupid. Oh noes.

Then he votes LMP saying that he's a better wagon than Raj (which is true) but doesn't say why at all.

This is pretty much a blatant lie. What part of 'Looks lie he's trying to force a claim for its own sake' do you not understand? Here's a question for ya, which alignment wagons because they want to lynch scum, and which one wants to force as many claims as possible?

Gonna have to reread peanutman after this.

'Oh look, Fonz is attacking the scummy wagon I'm on, I know, I'm going to look at his predecessor's actions which I totes didn't suspect at the time and invent a reason to find them suspicious!'

[The Fonz]

LMP, explain please.

[The Fonz]

Yeah, you see the thing to me is, charter's undoubtedly scummy, but he's scummy in pretty much exactly the same ways you are, only not quite as much. So for you to turn on him feels... off.

[The Fonz]

Well, to put it another way... that post you flagged up as scummy, he defended the Magna wagon and said I was strawmanning it by calling it built on utter shit. Don't get me wrong,

I

think it's utter shit, but if you agree with me, then WHY. THE. FUCK. were you on it in the first place? If you believe the wagon was decent, then what was it that was scummy about Charter's post?

Actually, same question to Charter. You said LMP was a better wagon than Raj. Why? His play has been very similar to yours.

[The Fonz]

Funny, because I'm pretty sure most of the scummy people were on Magna. Your 'reasons' were things that happened after you'd already voted, for the most part, hence the initial vote was a sheep which you justified retroactively (also, I actually commented on your stated reasons, so... yeah).

[The Fonz]

MacLock, how can he defend himself if you don't say why you're voting him?

[The Fonz]

Vote: LMP

for all the same reasons I was voting him yesterday.

[The Fonz]

The hypocrisy of Peanut's slot calling me out for wanting MOI's claim, when peanut made THIS POST is hilarious. peanut/The Fonz is scum.

This argument is ridiculous, and the fact that's you've got me as suspect no1 because of it... well, I can't see any reason to do this other than a hamfisted attempt to discredit your attacker.

It's not hypocritical for me to think differently to my predecessor at all because I'm a different person. Do you always call people hypocrites when they take a different stance on something to the player they're replacing, or just when they also happen to spot how scummy you are?

Not to mention, even then, there's a world of difference between thinking players should generally claim at L-1, and

putting someone at L-1 solely to try to extract a claim.

The former I don't agree with, but is a reasonably common game theory position. The latter is a gigantic scumtell.

Your Tally point seems pretty good on the face of it though. I'm gonna go have a look for myself there, because she's kinda been under my radar, and if what you said is true, then it could be a good lead.

[The Fonz]

Well, I can accept the breadcrumb, but I don't think it proves anything about alignment.

[The Fonz]

Where the hell do you get 'I believe the claim' from? I accept that he breadcrumbed Jacopo Peterman, that doesn't mean he actually IS Jacopo Peterman. Hint: scum don't usually claim their own name.

[The Fonz]

Presumably you did think it would go at least some way toward making you look town, or why do it? I think it's a mildly protown sign, because it is

possible

the scum don't have safeclaims, or have fewer safeclaims than members. It just isn't close to being conclusive, and I don't think it balances out ridiculously scummy play and a VT claim.

Preview edit: Yeah, maybe it would have been clearer had I said 'acknowledge' rather than 'accept.'

[The Fonz]

For the sake of comparison, how many scum would you guess at there having been on the Raj wagon day one? How about the MOI wagon? (I know that these aren't apples to apples comparisons, but I would still find the answer instructive).

[The Fonz]

Hey Tally, mind explaining why you're willing to sit on LMP to L-1, but unvote after a freaking vanilla townie claim?

[The Fonz]

@LMP: I don't see Tally's justification as being a particularly plausible town thought process, but what gives me pause is the question of your alignment and Kat's. If she's scum and you're town and Kats is scum, she's jumping off a town wagon very likely to succeed to bus. That doesn't make any sense. If she's scum and you and Kats are both town, it's not as jaw-droppingly stupid, but it still doesn't make a ton of sense. Scum who have town at L-1, you would have thought, would be happy enough to allow the momentum of the lynch to carry it through, and she'd be able to push Kats tomorrow. If you're her buddy and Kat's town, then there was opportunity for her to switch wagons earlier than she did.

Not much time at the moment ...

Just wanted to point out how fascinating (in a hmmm am I seeing scummy Inconsistency?) I am finding that Tal is catching all kinds of hell for her vote of Kats yet Charter has received not a peep.

Both hopped onto the wagon (which I heartily approve of, more people should) with a quick post after having previously expressed suspicion about Kats.

Yet only one is under fire.

Tally was on Raj, on LMP, and now on Kats. That's a lot of following popular wagons. Though tbh, I have them 2 and 3 in scumminess. (I'm really not sure what to make of Kats, she's probably flying under my radar a bit).

[The Fonz]

The Fonz,

Why is my justification not particularly plausible (in your opinion)? You've never run someone up to L-1 then unvoted to give yourself time to think about whether you want to follow through with the lynch? You've never seen town do it?

No to both.

@The Fonz: I see no reason scum Tal wouldn't unvote me and vote Katsuki-scum or Katsuki-town.

Really? Wow.

[The Fonz]

Yup, really.

You MIGHT be able to argue for the town-town move. It doesn't strike me as that likely, but it's possible. But I can't see why scum Tally would jump off a town LMP to bus there. It just doesn't make any sense.

[The Fonz]

OK, taken the time to do Kat-centred read. I kind of get a genuine scumhunting vibe early on. Definitely some scum points for being on the abominably bad MOI wagon, though Kat's participation here doesn't look nearly as bad as charter's or LMP's. To wit, while I don't think the 'Both pushing UT while saying he's scum with the other' argument is

good,

it's the sort of thing I could picture a town player finding significant.

This is amusing:

Whaddya know, I saw bv post earlier today, yet he is avoiding this game like the plague.

Then the most questionable thing is probably the hammer and comments after it, but I'm not quite sure how it would actually benefit scum to act like that. It seems to me like the town explanation would be pretty straightforward, but the scum one quite convoluted, and in that situation the player is more often than not town. There's enough there that Kat isn't obvtown by any stretch of the imagination, but I think he's a -far- worse lynch than LMP.

[The Fonz]

Tally was on Raj, on LMP, and now on Kats. That's a lot of following popular wagons. Though tbh, I have them 2 and 3 in scumminess. (I'm really not sure what to make of Kats, she's probably flying under my radar a bit).

So she’s on wagons that you generally find scummy or null but that is a scum-tell for you? Generally don’t you find players who follow wagons onto players you find scummy to be more likely to Town, if you are?

One player I find very scummy, but the other two I don't think are great wagons. Raj's wagon was just less obviously horrible than yours. Essentially, I find evidence of independent thought to be townish, and its absence to be scummy, and Tally just looks like a sheep.

I must confess, looking through her ISO and seeing her voting Raj with 'he could be scum' as her sole justification, it didn't occur to me it was the first vote on the wagon: what with the flimsy 'he could be scum' justification, it looked like piling on to me. Perils of iso I guess. She certainly didn't look like she was expending any effort trying to convince people that Raj was scum.

Her vote on Kat was unexplained and later justified as 'pressure,' but do you really unvote someone who's supposedly your top suspect at L-1 and put a rival wagon only one vote behind for 'pressure?' And if you are voting for pressure, why remove the pressure vote before the pressured player has actually done anything? Why say you don't pay any attention to claims:

Re: current bandwagon. My motto (stolen from mith) is "lynch or lynch not, there is no claim". I.e. In the decision to lynch, the claim shouldn't matter.

And yet unvote immediately following a claim (and she posted twice between the L-1 vote and the claim, so she had the opportunity to unvote prior to claim if she really just wanted more time) and even worse, assert that the manner in which he claimed (mixing up Peterman and Peterson) instinctively makes her think him more likely town (and no, pointing out that you're being hypocritical doesn't change the fact).

You have also been consistently voting for LMP. Why don’t you have him as your number 1 on the scumminess scale? Who is your number 1 scum suspect then?

I haven't a clue what you're talking about, I do have LMP as number one, and obviously so.

[The Fonz]

Tally was on Raj, on LMP, and now on Kats. That's a lot of following popular wagons. Though tbh, I have them 2 and 3 in scumminess. (I'm really not sure what to make of Kats, she's probably flying under my radar a bit).

I read this statement as saying the following –

You found ( from the pool of Raj, LMP and Kats ) that Kats is a null read and Raj / LMP were 2 and 3 in terms of scumminess. Thus my questions. If I’m not reading that correctly feel free to correct me.

Removing the quote of you asking why people were attacking Tally's vote and not Chamber's takes this completely out of context. You asked a general question about Tally and charter, and in response I explained why Tally's Kat vote seemed scummier than Charter's (she has been pushing popular wagons) but that in fact they (ie, Tally and charter) were my number two and three scummiest, behind LMP who was obviously number one.

[The Fonz]

Dah, I wrote chamber when I meant charter. Again. (This was even worse when they were in the same game )

[The Fonz]

Kat, that's your second straight 'Will catch up later' post.

[The Fonz]

How do I make this clearer.

STOP ACTIVE LURKING by posting to say you'll post, and just get on with the reading.

[The Fonz]

@Tal re 359 – What in the heck is that? Kats gets to L-1 and you immediately jump right back to LMP?

I prefer LMP. Especially after the reaction to my unvote. Especially after Macavity voted for Katsuki.

I'm finding it really weird to get jumped on each time I move my vote.

The way you moved your vote implies you weren't serious about it.

post of the game and my first content post. I was on vacation when the game started for a few days. I can't remember last time I played a mini, I don't really know any people in this game except for Raj & UT. Raj was scummier than UT. Have some CONTEXT.

WTF? So you're only allowed to vote for people you've played with before or something?

I've already answered this.

I wasn't around and stuff had happened that i wanted to think about.

I hate not having my vote on someone and Katsuki was a good place for it. Any pressure that might have been in my vote was nullified by you guys attacking me over the vote.[/quote]

Right, and this was me saying I don't believe you, I don't find that particularly plausible as a genuine town thought process.

[The Fonz]

Do you find it easier catching scum or getting town reads from players you've played with before, or ones you don't know?
I guess I really should've put "He knows why..." as my reason instead of the totally outrageous "He could be scum" that I went with. Ah well.

Strawman. Whether or not it's easier to read players you've played with before, you should still be TRYING to read the others as well. Your justification was 'It's early, he's on my scummish list' for unstated reasons. Then you keep it on all the way to lynch with the scummy 'he never gave me a reason to change' excuse that charter pointed out, and saying 'he appears obsessed with how he looks,' by which of course you mean- he was defending himself.

[The Fonz]

Kat- please explain how you think your playstyle is beneficial to the town.

[The Fonz]

It might not be 'comfortable,' but if you're town, having the power over which one lives and dies is a good thing. Grow a pair.

[The Fonz]

I'd like to point out that I'm not particularly interested in lynching Kat today whether or not LMP's town or just pulling megawifom. LMP's accusation that Kat was not scumhunting is simply untrue. He made a scumbuddy case on MoI/LMP based on their actions in thread (both calling UT each other's buddies) and his opinion that MoI was ignoring meta evidence knowledge he had about Katsuki's play. IMO, Kat had about as good a reason as anyone to be on the crappy Magwagon.

If LMP's town, not sure what that says about charter/tally. If LMP flips town, charter's the scummiest-looking one on the scummy magwagon from day one, on the other hand his BS attack on me for criticising the Magwagon would have less scummy motive if LMP's not his partner- could still see doing it to defend self, but it's less a pressing need than if both he/LMP were scum. OTOH, the removal of the possibility of LMP-scum takes away one of the main things giving me pause on Talitha.

[The Fonz]

Vote: Tally

Like people to at least take some notice of the fact that Katsuki is taking positions, scumhunting and making stands, even if his reasoning IS very noobish.

[The Fonz]

LMP's accusation that Kat was not scumhunting is simply untrue. He made a scumbuddy case on MoI/LMP based on their actions in thread (both calling UT each other's buddies) and his opinion that MoI was ignoring meta evidence knowledge he had about Katsuki's play.

1. Where is the case you speak of having seen Katsuki make?

Jahudo already pointed this out, so I'm not sure why I have to restate this:

A)

i)

I do not get all the shenanigans going about with UT's list. It basically consisted of the first four names that appeared in this game (MOI, myself, charter via MOI vote, and LMP via discussion).

Players who have attack said list and hung on: LMP

- Ooo look at rajr hop onto MOI wagon in #51. Bus more.
- Rajr #60 is weak.
- #69:

ii)

Cute, both MOI and LMP are calling UT each other's scumbuddy.
Continuation on this point, both are throwing a shitload of smokescreens at each other as of the most recent page.
- LMP is being unusually evasive thus far.
- LMP #81 shows how he is further analyzing what was a random list from UT. Both he and MOI are paying FAR too much attention to it.

iii)

- Talitha's entrance is VERY underwhelming. Takes rather weak stances, and ends with soft vote on rajr. HMM.

i)

Here Kat is saying UT's list is not scummy, and those attacking it are suspicious, esp. LMP

ii)

Points out a connection between you and LMP

iii)

Points out one of the scummy things about Tally

Katsuki trying to downplay UT's list is fascinating.

iv)

You know what else is fascinating? Both your votes being on UT, and both claiming that UT lynch will reveal info about the other.

iv)

Kat elaborates on his 'MOI and LMP are bussing' meme. Like I said, I drew a different conclusion from these interactions: that it looked more like LMP was really trying to get you lynched for basically nothing. But that doesn't mean Katsuki's argument is invalid.

Now note at this point, I'm not saying Katsuki's case is

good.

There's obviously a ton of confirmation bias etc in there, but that doesn't make it 'not scumhunting.'

v)

and MOI, yes, I was most definately scum-avoiding this thread.
Did you honestly expect to get a meaningful answer out of that useless question (and fake pressuring)?

v)

Basically, he's saying: asking someone if they're deliberately avoiding the thread, which is pretty much something only scum would do, is not likely to produce any useful reactions, since the only possible answer from anyone is 'no.' Therefore, he's accusing you of fake scumhunting. Which is not entirely unreasonable.

vi)

This post told me all I needed to know about MOI alignment, and it also did not give me good vibes about my hammer.

Essentially, this is a post town-MOI would NEVER make. If my gut is 100% in finding non-town fate, I'm sure it's just as accurate with you.

vi)

Gut, sure, but gut is scumhunting.

2. How is his opinion that I’m ignoring meta-evidence valid at all when the meta we share shows him being tagged as scum by me?

I'd like a clarification from Kat on this. As far as I can make out, Kat is alleging that you are attacking him for types of behaviour you know full well are typical of him as town. I see later on that you are basically claiming that most of your meta on him is a scum game.

If this is true, it makes Kat's argument significantly weaker, though: is the behaviour you're attacking him for here also present in the mod-abandoned town game you mentioned? He also mentioned that you've modded a game he was in: I presume he was town there?

Like people to at least take some notice of the fact that Katsuki is taking positions, scumhunting and making stands, even if his reasoning IS very noobish.

Nice of you to attempt to play the newb card for Kats. He clearly isn’t new.

Nice strawman. 'His reasoning is noobish' is not 'he's a new player' it's 'his reasoning is on the kind of basic, shallow/omgussy/confirmation bias etc level associated with newer players.' This is the exact argument ABR used in Hell on Earth as scum, incidentally, when I attacked him correctly for attempting to push a wagon on a similar kind of player (had been playing for a while, sucked at mafia, but was trying so not a VI).

I hate the newbie card more than anyone on m'scum. But people need to learn the difference between justifying scummy behaviour on the grounds that the player is new, and pointing out that a newer/bad player is not, in fact, all that scummy.

I’ll dispute your incorrect assertion that he is doing any scum-hunting at all.

I'll dispute your utterly untrue assertion that he isn't.


Now let's talk hammer again. Can you explain precisely what scum has to gain there from that kind of statement? The simplest explanation to me seems to be that he hammered, then you made, in his view, a very scummy post, so he regretted the hammer because he felt that the post you made in twilight made you more likely scum than Raj.

Your interpretation seems to be that he was scum trying to distance himself from his own hammer, that somehow this showed that he knew Raj was town, and was unaware that sharing this would implicate him (now who's calling Kat noobish?) This is a much more convoluted explanation than the first one, and worst, you're acting like it's for sure the case that this is the true reason behind it.

[The Fonz]

Jahudo already pointed this out, so I'm not sure why I have to restate this:

Because you have said repeatedly that you find Katsuki to be scum-hunting. Regardless of what Jahudo says I want to see your reasons for thinking so. I thought that was clear by my specific request.

i) Here Kat is saying UT's list is not scummy, and those attacking it are suspicious, esp. LMP

ii) Points out a connection between you and LMP

iii) Points out one of the scummy things about Tally

i) So he is scum-hunting by saying that LMP is scummy for attacking / drawing attention to Untrod’s list, which UT has stated specifically (and I also think was Obv) was a tool to get discussion going. I don’t think it is a non-Townie thought process to question Untrod as LMP did. So I don’t see any significant scum-hunting in this statement.

Basically, your argument here is 'I disagree, therefore it isn't scumhunting.'

ii) That’s not scum-hunting but an observation that shows ZERO scum thought process. No explanation as to why both of us suspecting Untrod early on and suspecting the other for differing reasons means we are buddies.

Is it not obvious why both attacking another player whilst claiming said player was scum with the other could seem scummy? He's saying you are scum together, and trying to distance each other while pushing a mislynch. Jesus.

iii) Not a single thing said here about Tally being scummy. Just that she was underwhelming. Thus this is the same exact soft type of stance he accuses Tally of.

This is another thing I hate. So pointing out something scummy isn't scumhunting unless you put 'And I think this is scummy?' That sentence clearly conveys suspicion of Tally.

At various points, he's been scummy because he gave reasons you thought were bad, because he voted without reasons, and because he gave reasons without voting. Basically, it seems like the only thing you wouldn't find scummy is giving a reason you actually think is good.

iv) Kat elaborates on his 'MOI and LMP are bussing' meme. Like I said, I drew a different conclusion from these interactions: that it looked more like LMP was really trying to get you lynched for basically nothing. But that doesn't mean Katsuki's argument is invalid.

Now note at this point, I'm not saying Katsuki's case is good. There's obviously a ton of confirmation bias etc in there, but that doesn't make it 'not scumhunting.'

So the ‘case’ here is that we both suspect UT and think the other may be linked to him, and his logical conclusion is that LMP and I are bussing each other and not UT? Makes zero sense.

His argument was that you were both voting UT, whilst saying he was the other's scumbuddy. It does make sense. Even if it doesn't to you, you're again pushing 'I disagree with you, therefore you're scum.'

I disagree with your conclusion. His case is deeply flawed. Which is a sign, to me, of faked scum-hunting from scum.

And I utterly disagree with this assertion. A flawed case is nonetheless a case. The quality of logic involved in a case is usually a function of the reasoning abilities of the player, not his alignment. Bad logic is only scummy if you can make the case that the player should have known his logic was bad. You are making the specific case that he is not scumhunting. This is not true.

v) Basically, he's saying: asking someone if they're deliberately avoiding the thread, which is pretty much something only scum would do, is not likely to produce any useful reactions, since the only possible answer from anyone is 'no.' Therefore, he's accusing you of fake scumhunting. Which is not entirely unreasonable.

The whole purpose of the question about avoiding the thread is not the answer. It’s to continue to point out that Katsuki continued to duck pressure.

And his accusation that I’m ‘fake-scumhunting’ is reasonable, but my repeated assertions of the same thing about him aren’t valid? When I say he isn’t scum-hunting that’s exactly what I mean … he’s not doing real scum-hunting.

Who said anything about their validity? The very existence of the arguments is evidence of scumhunting. For the record, as of right now I'm of the mind that you're both wrong. Also, there's a massive difference between someone's scumhunting being fake, and it being nonexistent.

vi) Gut, sure, but gut is scumhunting.

Not if he can’t articulate, after the fact, why it is scummy. He, when questioned about that post later was unable to say ANYTHING about why it was scummy.

Totally untrue. A gut vote is a gut vote. It'd be nice if he could work out what specific thing was giving him the bad feeling, but not being able to do so doesn't mean the feeling didn't exist. Shitty Vollkan argument.

If this is true, it makes Kat's argument significantly weaker, though: is the behaviour you're attacking him for here also present in the mod-abandoned town game you mentioned? He also mentioned that you've modded a game he was in: I presume he was town there?

In the game I co-modded he was scum for the record.

In the mod abandoned game he certainly did not lurk out pressure. When he, as a one-shot Vig, came under fire for a bad claim he fought back tooth and nail. A far cry from his behavior here.

Link please.

Nice strawman. 'His reasoning is noobish' is not 'he's a new player' it's 'his reasoning is on the kind of basic, shallow/omgussy/confirmation bias etc level associated with newer players.' This is the exact argument ABR used in Hell on Earth as scum, incidentally, when I attacked him correctly for attempting to push a wagon on a similar kind of player (had been playing for a while, sucked at mafia, but was trying so not a VI).

I do not equal ABR. Attempting to link his behavior as scum to me is at best flawed and potentially scummy.

'I've seen scum use that argument' is entirely valid. You attempted to nitpick my description of Katsuki as newbish, which he clearly is, by pointing that he's not new, which I never said he was.

Your nit-picking about the specific definition about your meaning of noobish does not a single thing to abate my observation. You are attempting to explain away Katsuki’s behavior as typical of a VI style player. That’s a completely invalid assertion. Katsuki is clearly not a VI. I’m attacking Katsuki for what I feel is scummy behavior, no matter how you and Jahudo have tried to portray said behavior as from a VI style player.

Distinction between bad player and VI, please. Bad players fail logic, but they try to find scum and give opinions etc. VIs do not really play the game. I am saying that Katsuki is a weak player. I think this is an entirely fair characterisation. If you have evidence of Kat using brilliant logic as town somewhere, please provide it.

I hate the newbie card more than anyone on m'scum. But people need to learn the difference between justifying scummy behaviour on the grounds that the player is new, and pointing out that a newer/bad player is not, in fact, all that scummy.

Katsuki is not a new player so why you make this grand theory statement is puzzling.

Note the use of 'new/bad.' It isn't me who's the nitpicker here. Really, his quality of play is a red herring: I'm arguing the things you're calling him out for are things I don't think are scummy. He's tunnelling, suffering confirmation bias, and isn't brilliant at explaining himself. These aren't scumtells imho.

Your interpretation seems to be that he was scum trying to distance himself from his own hammer, that somehow this showed that he knew Raj was town, and was unaware that sharing this would implicate him (now who's calling Kat noobish?) This is a much more convoluted explanation than the first one, and worst, you're acting like it's for sure the case that this is the true reason behind it.

Yes, that’s my intpretation. Mafia is not a game of absolutes. We make our own judgements about players actions and motivations. But you clearly know this.

What I'm saying is that your explanation is incredibly far-fetched, and looks like evidence of 'I've decided Katsuki's scum, and here's what that would have meant if he's scum' rather than 'I think this is actually the most plausible explanation for what happened.'

Is it worse that you are acting like it’s for sure your interpretation is the true reason behind it?

I'm acting like mine is more likely, because, you know, yours is totally irrational and seems to have 'Katsuki is scum' as one of its premises. IF he were scum THEN he might have been trying to do THIS based on having THIS mindset... it's the sort of thing Quagmire terms a 'house of cards.' When I scumhunt, I look at actions and try to see if the town motivation is more plausible than the scum one. Here, it is. Tally's behaviour by contrast seems to make more sense from a scum perspective.

Finally a question for you

– now that LMP has flipped Town what does this new information change about your previous assumptions regarding interactions others had with him?

By removing what I was taking as a strong LMP-scum possibility, Tally's wagoning looks even worse. I'd quite like to know whether she actually suspects Katsuki or not when she gets back.

As noted, I'm not sure what difference it makes re: Charter. It removes the chainsaw possibility, but it also leaves charter as the scummiest-looking remaining player on a very scummy-looking wagon. I know peanut's not scum, I'd be kind of surprised if Katsuki is scum, that only leaves charter and MacLock. At least one of these I think is scum, and I'm more sure on charter.

I think it basically guarantees that Tally and Kats are not scum together. Since I think Tally is really scummy, that's another point in Kat's favour.

In the somewhat unlikely event of Kat-scum, I would say there's a pretty strong UT-Kat connection there.

[The Fonz]

Ah, I see Talitha's voted Kat. That's both scummy, and not particularly surprising.

[The Fonz]

OK, I'm back from my V/LA.

I'm kinda meh on the massclaim. It's the normal thing, but, y'know, we've gone three nights without a kill, so it's reasonably likely the scum don't have a kill. That drastically reduces the available information, since there's not going to be any trackings to kills etc, and a cop would probably be broken since it would make no-lynch to victory a viable strategy. If scum have safeclaims (and Katsuki indicated yesterday that Kdub has a history of using them) it probably won't nail us a scum.

The biggest benefit is probably time: if we can confirm a player or two, that avoids the possibility of a deadline rush after a convincing claim, I suppose. Ah, ambivalence.

We also need to discuss whether all these re-reads people are doing should be posted before or after claims. If before, then it allows scum to tailor their claims to people's suspicions- if after, to tailor their suspicions to claims. What do people think is the lesser evil?

[The Fonz]

@Magna: That there isn't yet a deadline doesn't mean there isn't ever going to be one.

in a 8-4 set-up their is NO WAY the scum could possibly have a Nightkill considering the make-up of Town we know at this juncture is scummy. I'm serious about this. Even with 4 Goons having normal Nightkills would mean Town would have to be almost exclusively PRs. Yet we've already lynched 3 VTs.

I don't know how you can be so confident that's its the other way. What I know comes from my background here. A) scum are supposed to have a faction kill in every mafia game and B) I ran an 8:4 setup with scum nightkill. Its supposed to happen like that and it can happen.

Right, but three straight nights without kills suggests it isn't happening, as does three straight VT flips.

The fact that you tried to play off the loss possibilities of a mislynch tonight is scummy.

I gave my opinion as an opinion, complete with uncertainties where I looked for the best possible scenario because I'm trying to figure out what I don't know for a fact. But you gave your rebuttal as a statement that you already figured it out and know how to proceed without any open discussion. So you are the one who looks like they know what would happen if we mislynch, which is something only scum would know.

YOU'RE SCUM FOR DISAGREEING WITH ME ON GAME THEORY! NO, YOU'RE SCUM FOR DISAGREEING WITH

ME!

If you are talking about me not putting a warning label on my opinions, then you would sound ridiculous to me. My opinion is that we better be able to lynch scum today, based on what we know, or we deserve to lose as town and I would gladly accept that loss. I know that if we are able to redeem ourselves a little today, and survive to tomorrow, we should not be back to the worst case scenario with all our power roles out there and vulnerable. I would rather have the momentum moving forward, find scum connections and lynch right again.

You're both basically accusing each other of having inside knowledge for being firm in your beliefs and stating them with some degree of hyperbole.

That said, Jahudo, if the scum DO have a kill, and have somehow been stopped three times, that implies nearly every town player is a PR. That would imply that the scum have to make a large number of fake power claims, and the more power claims they make, the more likely they are to fuck up one or more, not to mention the possibility of this web of town night actions confirming a player or two.

[The Fonz]

Nice IIOA post there Tally.

[The Fonz]

Right, so we've got five major wagons, four on dead town, one on a player of unknown alignment, to analyse. I'm counting the two Katsuki wagons as separate entities.

Magna wagon:

Katsuki,

MacavityLock, charter,

rajrhcpfreak,

peanutman aka Moi

LynchMePls

Rajrhcpfreak

wagon: Talitha, Haschel Cedricson, MagnaofIllusion, Kmd4390, Untrod Tripod, bv310 aka Jahudo,

Katsuki

LynchMePls

wagon - The Fonz,

Katsuki,

Jahudo, Talitha, Kmd4390, Untrod Tripod

Katsuki

day two wagon: MagnaofIllusion, LynchMePls, charter, MacavityLock, Haschel Cedricson

Katsuki

day three wagon: MagnaofIllusion, MacavityLock, Untrod Tripod, charter, Talitha, Haschel Cedricson


From my perspective, there can only have been a maximum of two scum on the Magna wagon. That means there has to be AT LEAST two scum on Rajr. I don't for a second think there were no scum on Magna, because six-man townwagons in a game with only eight town players is virtually unheard of. In that very unlikely event, Magna would almost certainly have to be scum himself. Nonetheless, I'm going to effectively discount that possibility for now. That means that there is a maximum of three scum on Raj. From which I conclude Tally, plus at least one and no more than two of the following group: Haschel, UT, BV/Jahudo, and possibly Magna. I have a pretty solid townread on Kmd.

One, other, or both of MacLock and Charter are scum. Charter is definitely the individually scummier of the two. Given the overall crappiness of the wagon, I really don't think MOI is scum if both are. If only one is, that means that 3 out of 4 scum were pushing Rajr over MOI, and that kind of suggests deliberate counterwagon.

So:

I'm pretty confident KMD is town.

Most likey Scumgroup is therefore imo: Tally, charter, precisely one out of the Magna/MacLock pair, 1/3 of Haschel, UT, Jahudo.

Tally has been on every successful wagon so far.

Along with Tally, the only other player to support the LMP wagon followed by the Kat wagon was Untrod Tripod.

[The Fonz]

That means that there is a maximum of three scum on Raj. From which I conclude Tally, plus at least one and no more than two of the following group: Haschel, UT, BV/Jahudo, and possibly Magna.

...

Tally has been on every successful wagon so far.

UT was also on all 3 successful wagons. Why give him more of a pass then Tally?

Because I didn't think he was. My first draft of that post actually contained the word 'only-' (I lost it when my net went down trying to post, and re-wrote from memory). I was saying that tally struck me as the only player to have done that when I looked through to try to work out how many wagons each player was on. Hence me pointing out that UT was the only other player on LMP and Kat. Checking, you are of course correct, with the accompanying corollary that it makes UT look very scummy as well (guess I need to re-read HOW he jumped those wagons).

I see Jahudo's point against mass-claim, don't agree with it, also don't think it's

that

scummy.

Basically my point. 'Let's do everything in our power to lynch right at LyLo' vs 'It's little benefit to lynch right at lylo if we destroy our chances of lynching correctly after that' is an argument between two positions that have certain amounts of logic behind them.

Please, if you're town, please don't buy the argument that if you're on all of the successful wagons you must be scum. For a start what is it about a "successful" wagon that makes the vote more scummy than on an unsuccessful wagon?

That we know the target was town. You haven't really opposed a popular wagon all game. The closest you got was with the MOI wagon when you said he was 'dunno' but you thought LMP was scummier. I have no idea who your town 'reads' are.

This word is being thrown around by scum to try and add oomph to their case, but it is irrelevant. Secondly, what decent scum would make sure they are voting for all of the townie wagons. I know, I know it's the dreaded acronym that I despise, but seriously.

You yourself said you were playing badly. Why do we have to assume this is possible as town, but not as scum? And yes, it is that acronym, and in the kind of position when scum seem to have most motive to use it as well.

How hard is it to vote away from one of the townie wagons to make yourself look OK later. ONLY SCUM have the information to be able to do this. I've been scum in many many games and I'd be surprised if you can find one where I'm on 3 townie wagons in a row. Scum 101, seriously.

I've seen decent scum be blatantly scummy and defend it with the 'I'm better than this' WIFOM before. And I was on three straight town lynches in my last scum game. Not buying it.

[The Fonz]

When we massclaim, we need to avoid commenting on anyone's claim until all are in. Agreed?

[The Fonz]

UT, yes of course we want to start the roleclaiming now. *headdesk* Fullclaim, please.

[The Fonz]

David Puddy, VT. Charter.

[The Fonz]

Something isn't adding up here. There are no other counters, so either we've got a scumgroup who know a ton about Seinfeld AND got very lucky, or scum got fakeclaims and Newman wasn't one. In which case, why on Earth would you claim Newman as scum? It basically guarantees a counterclaim. I smell weird gambit, though what exactly I haven't a clue.

[The Fonz]

Vote: Untrod Tripod

this should clear a few things up.

You claimed you had a "night" ability in a game with no nights. Funny that you can bother to understand the difference now that someone called you on a false claim. Lying is scummy. End of story. Unless you can prove anything, you've made the scummy claim here.

Do you believe that Haschel as scum would have been unaware of there being no nights, though?

If scum have fakeclaims, it doesn't make sense not to use them. The only possibilities I can come up with are:
1) one of the fakeclaims was such a minor character that no one would believe it, so haschelscum chose newman and was countered by jahudotown
2) hascheltown claimed his role a jahudoscum countered a bad claim to get a mislynch
3) haschelscum and jahudoscum decided to claim the same character to "confirm" one of them and ride to endgame.

1 is possible, but it just seems like a poor play on haschel's part. 2 makes sense considering 4 scum with 9 players left. 3 seems too pointless right now with scum having a numbers advantage.

I actually think a jahudo lynch sounds better than one on haschel.

1) Requires Haschscum to knowingly choose the rolename that, imho, was most certain to be counterclaimed.
2) I was expecting this to happen if Hasch was town, actually, once UT blurted out 'Hey I want to lynch this guy.' Which is, of course, why I tried to insist on no-one commenting until all claims were in in the first place.
3) Makes most sense, I think, if they were expecting one of them to be lynched today anyway.

I am assuming that one of the Newmans is lying. Two town with same role name would be bastard moddery, and I doubt they are both lying - a Seinfeld game without Newman is unlikely IMO.

Mods often give scum fakeclaims of differing strengths- for instance, one really good one, a mediocre one and a pretty obscure one, for instance. I wrote a Shrek setup that never got played that had Fiona as a safeclaim, for instance.

In which case, why on Earth would you claim Newman as scum? It basically guarantees a counterclaim. I smell weird gambit, though what exactly I haven't a clue.

Gambit from who, HC or me?

At the time I wrote, I was pretty sure of at least Haschel, and possibly you or MoI in on it as well. I find it hard to see MoI as scum, to be honest. If he were, he could easily have gone 'Oh yeah I saw Jahudo' and basically confirm himself. This actually leads me to think that, if you're not scum, charter has to be. Why? Well, why the hell would the mod give the town three confirmable abilities and nothing to the scum?

If I already knew I could confirm my role power with UT, then it means I am either scum with him or I am a tracker like I say. If I was scum why would I connect myself to a buddy? Why would I try and force a "one or the other" situation with HC?

Scum tracker.
Or, imagine you're scum without a tracking power. What's the optimal play today? Wait a while, then claim to have seen UT. That said, the fact that you posted in between him saying he'd do it and the time he claimed it actually happened, and he didn't, works in your favor.

I need to think about scenarios in which 1) makes sense. Because that's the only one where it makes sense to lynch Haschel.

[The Fonz]

Fonz is trying to find a reason to vote haschel and is voting untrod. Obvjahudobuddy.

Erm, hello? The point of the vote was to prove I can't vote. Why wouldn't I 'vote' Untrod, when if he's telling the truth it can't affect him? Are you paying any attention at all? I could have self-voted, it would have achieved the same thing.

[The Fonz]

2) hascheltown claimed his role a jahudoscum countered a bad claim to get a mislynch

How are you separating bad from scum in this case?

Scum is Option 3.

I mean how can you or anyone besides myself tell Haschel gave a bad claim and not a scum fake claim?

You seem to be missing the point. There are three options here. Hasch is scum, you're scum, you're both scum.

Option 1 is the Haschel is scum fakeclaiming, you're town legitimately counterclaiming option.
Option two is the Haschel is town and you fakeclaimed opportunistically scenario.
Option three is the double scum option where you counterclaimed your buddy.

So option two states 'Haschel's claim is bad' because in the scenario (the only one of the three) where he's town, that's what it is.

Really, we can ignore option three today, because in that case, lynching either one is win. The question here is: is one or two more likely?

[The Fonz]

Looking at the claimed roles –

If we assume the only Non-Town PR claim is either Jahudo or Haschel we have the following set-up.

1 Neighborizor (1 shot?)
1 Vote Manipulator
1 Watcher
1 Weak Cop or 1 Weak Tracker
4 VT

I'm not sure I'm willing to buy your assumption, at least in the Haschel-scum setup. Assume Jahudo is truthful. Four confirmable town roles. If Haschel is scum, one of the others is scum too, almost certainly. If Jahudo's a scum tracker, then maybe I can buy four town PR. On the other hand, if Jahudo is scum, bear in mind charter's 'confirmation' comes from Jahudo.

against

4 Scum.

Roleblocker pretty much has to be there if you're genuine, no? If Hasch is truthful, you were RBed day one. If Jahudo is (or even if he's scum with the tracking ability) then you must be blocked right now. Therefore, MOItown implies RB.

Is this balanced from either standpoint (Town Cop or Town Tracker)? I’m not inclined to try to calculate any EV for the setup.

I'd say the Jahudotown version is unbalanced in favor of town, as noted. Although charter is still as scummy as F***, so it's not like it's impossible Jahudo is the truthteller here.

Scum have a pretty strong numerical base (33% at the start of the game).
Scum ostensibly have no Nightkill at all or simply one that is only triggered under certain circumstances.
We don’t know whether scum has Daytalk or not.

Worth noting I've never seen a nightless game without scum daytalk. I think the main thing in balancing a game is mislynches to win, and four is quite a generous number to town, though I take your point about scum having the starting numbers. The inability to remove town who are onto them counterbalances that, though, as well as allowing the town more mislynches.

One of my finest achievements on site was winning a 6:3:3 vanilla nightless game as scum. We had to get through six straight lynches (well, five and a modkill) without losing a single member to win that game.

4 unified scum in a Mini is VERY strong, especially given the win rates for the standard 3 player scum team. Not having a Nightkill, on the other hand weakens the team.

I'd say the lack of nightkill is more valuable to the town than the extra member to scum, easily. I'm not sure what relevance this is to the specific Q at hand, though.

[The Fonz]

My bad, forgot about that. The fact that you claim to see the point on Jahudo, but still want to find a way to make the case on Haschel work still stands though.

Are you trying to suggest that it's somehow obvious that it's Jahudo or both rather than Hasch? As far as I can see, this is a pretty damn tricky call, and I want to be meticulous in considering all possibilities. What the hell is wrong with that?

[The Fonz]

Charter, I thought id made it clear that there was more to the fonz thing than the vote, but looking back at my post I guess I didn't.

Fonz, I just can't see any situation where haschel is scum with a fakeclaim given to him, who allowed a town jahudo to counterclaim him. I don't see that at all. Jahudo is scum in every theory I can come up with.

vote jahudo

It's always possible in a WIFOM situation like this, I guess, that scum would pull the WIFOM, banking on precisely this reaction from one or more town players. If Haschel is merely a goon, they might have thought it worth the gamble.

In my experience, when a claim revolves around a dead or scum roleblocker happening to have conveniently roleblocked a specific person on a given day, it's usually a lie. Actually, this is kinda important.

Magna, when did you put in your watch on D1?

[The Fonz]

Jahudo, you counter-claiming there as scum makes perfect sense. There are good arguments in your favor, but 'Scum couldn't possibly have deliberately counterclaimed a townie who another (presumably, given ability) town player had just declared intention to vote for' isn't one of them.

And I'd say it was pretty damn nailed on there was going to be a Newman if Hasch is lying. I mean, of all the secondary Seinfeld characters, Newman is THE one you'd have to assume would be in the game. Helen Seinfeld, Frank Costanza... there are better fakeclaims available to scum. In the scenario where he's scum, it IS absolutely necessary to explain why Hasch would WANT to be counterclaimed. That's the problem with your claim. The roleblock thing is the problem with his.

[The Fonz]

In my experience, when a claim revolves around a dead or scum roleblocker happening to have conveniently roleblocked a specific person on a given day, it's usually a lie. Actually, this is kinda important. Magna, when did you put in your watch on D1?

I’m not sure where you are going here but I thought I was clear about this when I posted my claim –

I sent in my choice in the immediately upon getting my role PM so it was active all Day long.

So you did. Haschel, please tell me at precisely what point you attempted to investigate LynchMePls.

[The Fonz]

About four minutes after I made this post.

Meh. OK. I was kind of thinking that to work, the scum roleblock would have to be submitted before the action it's blocking. Thinking about it, it's probably more likely that it prevents investigative results even when the investigation is submitted before the roleblock, provided the action that would be seen happens after the block.

So it's perfectly possible scum saw the Crazy Joe crumb, and immediately roleblocked MOI.

[The Fonz]

Yeah, that was fairly obvious.

On the UT subject, not unless we lynch the roleblocker today. And possibly not even then, depending on how the scum WC is worded.

[The Fonz]

GOT WIFOM?

[The Fonz]

According to most studies, people's number one fear is public speaking. Number two is death. Death is number two! Does that sound right? This means to the average person, if you go to a funeral, you're better off in the casket than doing the eulogy.

[The Fonz]

My early game was complete crap. I hate when people in game blame outside factors for their play, but in my case that was the problem. I would have felt like such a hypocrite though whining about it in game. First I was doing finals, and then I went on vacation and just didn't have time for the game. When I got back from vacation, I attempted to climb back into the game with my massive catchup, and nailed 2 scum in it, but nobody would listen because I'd been so... well awful early on. I'm guessing that's why I suddenly picked up a lot of traction from the scum.

I don't think you ever 'suddenly picked up a lot of traction from scum.' Certainly I know, I first went after you because, when I replaced in I saw a game with a crappy Raj wagon and an even freakin' worse sheepy 'secret scumtell' wagon on Magna. So I did what I'd do as town, and attacked the scummiest looking player on the scummiest looking wagon. The broad idea I had was to allow town to lynch Raj or Magna without my help, go after you for as long as it took to get you lynched, and then switch to attacking Charter. You 'nailing scum' didn't come into it.

Raj, dude, you suck. The list was pretty clearly not serious, you were told as such repeatedly, and you kept hammering away. 'OMG MY WAGON IS FULL OF SCUM' is never helpful. In fact given that it needed 7/12 to lynch and there were two scum on your wagon, there was actually a higher concentration of scum off it than on. You never tried to differentiate between town and scum on it, you just used broad-brush omgus. If town had listened to you Day 2, they'd probably have lynched Katsuki which wouldn't have been any better.

Love how you think Magna is a moron for being on you but you fail to acknowledge that you being on him was equally wrong. Imho, he had more reasonable basis for behaving as he did than you did.

Re: the gambit, there were a few factors. We felt that two power role claims would probably be necessary. The guys were leaning towards using the fakeclaim given (Kenny Bania) and claiming vengeful or SS. My thought was that this would basically be suicidal, and if we were going to let Haschel get lynched, we might as well have him go down pulling a gambit and counterclaim a town PR. Especially, as Tally says, because we felt if we played 'normally' she was dead. We were originally leaning towards an MOI counterclaim, but thankfully, we didn't get the chance (we never caught the breadcrumb). We were trying to get Haschel as late as we could in the claim order.

When he had to go with two town remaining, I proposed three options: the Newman/weak cop route he ended up going with, claiming Frank Costanza (so that he'd later be able to imply his flavor suggested his wife wasn't in the game) or the safe Kenny, SS claim. Thankfully, he went with Newman. At first, it looked like the gambit would crash and burn, but it worked, I think, due to a few factors:

1) That gambit was, to my knowledge, unprecedented in MS.net history. I'm pretty sure I've seen scum claim an obvious name to draw out a powerrole before, but never in LyLo/massclaim with the intent of getting the actual power role lynched. It's not surprising no-one was expecting it.

2) The Harry Potter precedent. Although I'd read the end of that game, I wasn't thinking about it, still less aware that the player responsible (and his scumbuddy!) was actually in this game, but it worked beautifully for us.

3) Jahudo's reaction. His attempt to insinuate that Haschel was claiming to have cop flavor was craplogic. Haschel, as with everyone else in the massclaim, hadn't claimed flavor at all. He also kinda tried to pull 'I'd never do this as scum!' type wifom. It's quite similar to how I won Mafia en Francais as scum- the town player made lots of overblown, unfair and factually inaccurate arguments, and I all I had to do was point these out. As town, if you want to win a 1v1, it really helps to stay calm and ensure that your arguments are fair and correct. He who misrepresents, exaggerates or uses hyperbole the most tends to lose.

4) The attempt to 'confirm' the power roles. Being able to confirm that MOI was being roleblocked was a Godsend.

[The Fonz]

Oh and scum quicktopic is here. Enjoy.

[The Fonz]

The flip side of so many scum is you're statistically more likely to manage to get a wagon on scum early, and then scum is put in a really awkward position where it has to bus etc. It just so happens in this game there was no serious wagon on scum until day four.

Honestly, I think if the setup was played more (and I've nommed vanilla 8:4 for the open queue with this in mind) these kind of games will tend to either end up in a scum sweep, or a town win, because if town can get that first scum lynch, they've then got a ton of mislynches in which to find the scum. I mean, seriously, we had three mislynches, none of which required all the scum votes, and we were still left relying on one of the biggest gambits in the history of the site to win the game. As I said, if we hadn't gambitted, we may very well have actually lost this game from LyLo.

[The Fonz]

I think it may actually be balanced, with the caveat that 'balanced' means 'a ton more town-friendly than 90% of MS.net games at the moment.'

[The Fonz]

That's kinda like Treestump, when scum only gets to kill when a scum is lynched.