Invitational 10: 2005-2006. Game over! before 624

[bluesoul]

...so what's wrong with stating that DGB, assuming both conditions are met, may have hampered the town's efforts?

Are you kwayzeee?

All I said, on top of page 2, and I paraphrase myself, was "OMG could it be that Sarcastro has found scum on page 1?" - then I expressed a humorous intent to vote MBL, but mostly,

I reminded the players that he had 4 votes and 7 were needed to vote. I also added as a joke that I wasn't going to vote yet, to pin down MBL's buddies.

How this has been misconstrued as "hampering the town's efforts" is causing me to bang my head against the wall until it bleeds.

Emphasis mine. Odd that you didn't make either point until this long after the original post.

VOTE COUNT NUMBER FOUR

MBL: 2

(Sarc, EK)

Bluesoul: 2

(MBL, DGB)

DGB: 2

(bluesoul, PJ)

Elvis_Knits 2

(patrick, Ether)

sarc: 1

(OGML)

not voting: 2

(Elias, IH)

[MrBuddyLee]

I'm not intentionally misconstruing your words. There's a 30% chance that you're scum, and a 20% chance that you're scum telling the truth about your intentions there, and a 10% chance that you're scum who I caught in a slip-up and now you're lying about it to cover your ass.

So no, I'm not "intentionally misconstruing". I'm covering all the possibilities from my perspective.

[bluesoul]

A 30% chance I'm scum, eh? So you know there's a 30/70 ratio? How would you know that if you were not part of the informed minority?

Either explain yourself, right now, or stand similarly exposed as scum (and hypocrite).

[chamber]

I'm not intentionally misconstruing your words. There's a 30% chance that you're scum, and a 20% chance that you're scum telling the truth about your intentions there, and a 10% chance that you're scum who I caught in a slip-up and now you're lying about it to cover your ass.

So no, I'm not "intentionally misconstruing". I'm covering all the possibilities from my perspective.

If you intend to use math at least support it, pulling numbers out of your ass that you have no way of supporting isn't cool.

[petroleumjelly]

1.)

In fact at the moment my favorite scum candidates happen to be (1) PJ for defending me with explanations as clever as they were long, then voting me without a word of explanation and then providing a "reason" as gratuitous as the ones he was condemning others for, then (2) elvis for buying into it. Caveat: I'm not sure how likely it would be for two scums to both go after a townie, one after the other. Thus I will refrain from voting either for now.

Bluesouls seems to jump from extremes of helpfulness to historical records of kraplogick.

vote: bluesoul

Come again? If you think either EK or myself are scum, why would you then vote Bluesoul without pointing to an in-game reason?

2.)

I'm just plain not understanding Patrick's response to chamber in Post 87. I've read it about five times. I've deleted about three sets of questions about this, so I think I'll just ask for you to reword this response, please.

3.)

I'm fine with all EK's "catch-up" posts. MBL seems to think there is a problem with Post 93, but I can see what Elvis is aiming at; MBL had snipped the portion of Bluesoul's post which essentially explained what Bluesoul meant by "three players". I personally don't think MBL did it purposefully (as I explained earlier), though. It's too early and too obvious.

[elvis_knits]

I still think my conclusion was just as logical or more so than the standard conclusion, and I defintiely didn't intentionally misconstrue:

Following on last post, the way MBL misunderstood bluesoul doesn't seem reasonable to me.

He only quotes bluesoul partially, since that is the only way it is possible to misunderstand him.

I smell something amiss in the way he only partially quotes bluesoul.

Patrick, now that you have forced me to pay more attention to this game I am realizing how much I don't like MBL.

I'm going back to him.

unvote; vote MrBuddyLee

Here's bluesoul's full post:

I'd rather see posts from those that haven't made it into the game yet, elias, IH, and chamber. Nice reference to nailing MBL's scumbuddies, I'm sure that helped us fight the good fight since we've got three players that get to stare that right in the face as they think about their posts.

facepalm: DGB

It doesn't say "think about their

first

posts". Therefore, the obvious conclusion to draw, regardless of bluesoul's first sentence, is that he is talking about the three people who would benefit from thinking about their posts in the context of "MBLscum in trouble"--that is, the three scum. It just doesn't ring true. I don't see proportionality in the concern here.

But the point is you snipped bluesoul's post. You deleted the one sentence that explains who the three people are. This crucial part of info was not even in a different paragraph. It was directly before the portion you quoted, and directly connected.

Why did you snip the quote?

If your conclusion is still valid whether or not you snipped the post, why did you choose to snip?

[DrippingGoofball]

...so what's wrong with stating that DGB, assuming both conditions are met, may have hampered the town's efforts?

Are you kwayzeee?

All I said, on top of page 2, and I paraphrase myself, was "OMG could it be that Sarcastro has found scum on page 1?" - then I expressed a humorous intent to vote MBL, but mostly,

I reminded the players that he had 4 votes and 7 were needed to vote. I also added as a joke that I wasn't going to vote yet, to pin down MBL's buddies.

How this has been misconstrued as "hampering the town's efforts" is causing me to bang my head against the wall until it bleeds.

Emphasis mine. Odd that you didn't make either point until this long after the original post.

I did make that point, in my

THIRD

post of the game, not only that, but in the post immediately following the post about MBL:

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 19#1152419

Once again you are misrepresenting people.

[DrippingGoofball]

Come again? If you think either EK or myself are scum, why would you then vote Bluesoul without pointing to an in-game reason?

I did point to an in-game reason right next to my vote. He alternates between helpfulness and kraplogick/misrepresentations. So far you are guilty only of misrepresentation.

[elvis_knits]

OMG

Sarcastro is the Master.

He has caught scum on Day 1, as evidenced by MBL's smarmy squirming.

Twelve players, seven to lynch, he has four votes already. I'm tempted to put him at five but not until we've had more discussion to help us nail his buddies.

I don't think this is "hampering the town's efforts."

She didn't really add anything to the discussion though, even though she says she wants more discussion.

[bluesoul]

...so what's wrong with stating that DGB, assuming both conditions are met, may have hampered the town's efforts?

Are you kwayzeee?

All I said, on top of page 2, and I paraphrase myself, was "OMG could it be that Sarcastro has found scum on page 1?" - then I expressed a humorous intent to vote MBL, but mostly,

I reminded the players that he had 4 votes and 7 were needed to vote. I also added as a joke that I wasn't going to vote yet, to pin down MBL's buddies.

How this has been misconstrued as "hampering the town's efforts" is causing me to bang my head against the wall until it bleeds.

Emphasis mine. Odd that you didn't make either point until this long after the original post.

I did make that point, in my

THIRD

post of the game, not only that, but in the post immediately following the post about MBL:

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 19#1152419

Once again you are misrepresenting people.

Yes, I read that, and I didn't like it then either; defending yourself with a post that singlehandedly led to two votes on you for scummy play seems odd. If I'm misrepresenting, it's not people, it's misrepresenting you, because you're not making

any

sense, and somehow most of the town is fine with that. You expressed interest in voting him to 5 on post 27, and it's not until post 97 that we first hear "oh, I was only joking, I wouldn't really do it"? Then you have the nerve to accuse me of misrepresenting you.

a.) X has four votes, just so you guys know and don't quicklynch.
b.) X has four votes, and I'm thinking about putting him at 5 votes.

One of those is a "reminder of how many players were needed for a lynch, and how many votes had already been cast for MBL" (76), and one is what you did instead. I'm misrepresenting you? Really?

Talk sense or don't talk. Show me my alleged "kraplogick" (sic).

PS, "Are you kwayzeee?" doesn't fly with me. It's not cute, and doesn't make me want to unvote you any more.

[IH]

Day One MBL bandwagons traditionally gain traction. Apparently I'm a fun target. Apparently you're unaware of this.

And I don't want a competing bandwagon just yet because I'm interested to see how this one plays out.

I like MBL bandwagons (ever since the end of my first game)

both posts 28 AND 29 look weird and reachy to me. Bluesoul actually pointed out something and made it even more obvious, but I doubt that anyone would try to intentionally warn scum buddies on who to avoid, especially in THIS type of game. I mean, we're all seemingly competent players, are we not? (don't answer that) Bluesoul seemed to assume the DGB had made a mistake in doing so, while MBL seemed to assume that Bluesoul had an alterior motive.

In other words BS automatically gave someone the benefit of the doubt, while MBL automatically brought up suspicion.

At the time, Sarc looked sketchiest to me out of {e_k, Sarc, PJ, Patrick}. pb[I'm rethinking my comment about {DGB, Sarc, bluesoul} as scumteam,[/b] however, as it's unlikely they'd be this cohesive and unsubtle early in the game. They're the three who've done the oddest things thus far, though, so the question is, which one is being not just odd but anti-town.

So was Bluesoul warning himself?

igmeoy:MBL

Igmeoy:MBL

in case you couldn't tell, that means I've got BOTH my eyes on you.

Someone correct me if anything I've said is wrong as I was trying to read this quickly.

***

PJ and I seem to have taken the same problem and had different stances on it. I personally didn't think that Bluesoul was seriously implying that DGB was stifling things on purpose, mostly from the added, "Facepalm:DGB" added onto the end.

If anything I'd assume that indicated a connection between DGB and Bluesoul, as a warning from Bluesoul to not close down leads.

PJ- After all of those large posts I also think it's slightly strange that you instantly switch your vote to DGB for her buttering three people up. Was your vote just not that deep (as I felt it was implied), or do you consider that a much larger scumtell than what you had found?

***EDIT BEFORE POSTING:Post 94 made it clear as to what PJ was talking about, but I left it in struck out because it may still be relevant to other parts.

FoS:Bluesoul

after his clarification.

I'm withholding my vote currently, as I know that votes have been flying around, and that there is probably quite a wagon on MBL/Bluesoul.

I'd also like to apologize to everyone, EXCEPT FOR the mod, since there is no mod communication, for not being able to post until today. Thanks for waiting.

[petroleumjelly]

PJ- After all of those large posts I also think it's slightly strange that you instantly switch your vote to DGB for her buttering three people up. Was your vote just not that deep (as I felt it was implied), or do you consider that a much larger scumtell than what you had found?

A pitcher doesn't just throw fastballs. Gotta mix it up.

[OhGodMyLife]

Looking back, the Sarc-Bluesoul connection is really much more one sided than it first appeared. Sarc is the one making it look like a connection. Am I the only person who thinks this makes bluesoul more likely to be town?

Patrick and Ether are both raising my hackles a bit in this game.

And there are actually two early examples of MBL pseudo supporting me early on for no good reason that are setting off alarm bells for me. I've already noted my disturbance with him grouping me and ether as probable town when I don't think I had made any substantial contributions yet, and then there is this, which I'm noticing again now, from his first post.

OGML also avoids the MBL wagon and hits Sarc with an

appropriate

vote.

Bolded for emphasis: how was my vote "appropriate"? I voted him for being lazy.

On contemplation, I'd rather hear this from OGML than from PJ:

I don't see how they're comparable at all.

Explain to me how they're comparable.

Explain to me how they're

not

comparable? I'm not sure how you ever thought there was any great difference between them. And why the interest in hearing it from me instead of PJ?

[Ether]

I have nothing against Elvis's posts 90-93, but I still think her contradiction is a despicable evil abhorrent indicator of her guilt, so, yeah. Why hasn't anyone but Patrick ever so much as commented on this?

Sarc was still voting MBL, who he'd implied OGML was scum

with

. (Also, his post felt tongue-in-cheek.) DGB, too, outright said that she thought MBL was scum and she just didn't want to vote him yet. Bluesoul's remark was inconsistent with his view of MBL.

I don't see how they're comparable at all.

I found your sheeping on PJ's question scummier than his question, but the thought of PJscum still intimidates me. I considered this dilemma and decided it would nonetheless be more productive to ask you.

Now please answer me, OhGodMyLife.

[elvis_knits]

Ether, did you read this? If so, why do you still have a problem with the question I asked Patrick?

In more recent news,

unvote; vote: elvis_knits

for her non-sequitur stupid question in 68, which she'd already previously attacked as a stupid question in 15, and is directed toward the person who'd foreshadowed suspicion on her since her last post. Not much else she's done, either. We should kill her.

As for 15, at the time I didn't think any explanation was possible or pertenent for Patrick's vote. MBL has said repeatedly that he thinks Patrick had other motivations, and I don't think he was merely talking about some grudge from another game, so that's why I asked in 68 -- to see if there actually was something.

Not understanding why my behavior there is scummy.

[MrBuddyLee]

I badly want to vote Elias_the_thief and have a wagon waiting for him upon his return. His effort this weekend is utter fail, particularly considering he's only posting on weekends.

However, there's nothing to gain between now and Friday by voting him, so let's ignore him for a few days and THEN pounce.

[bluesoul]

I badly want to vote Elias_the_thief and have a wagon waiting for him upon his return. His effort this weekend is utter fail, particularly considering he's only posting on weekends.

However, there's nothing to gain between now and Friday by voting him, so let's ignore him for a few days and THEN pounce.

Speaking of ignoring, explain your "30% scum" line from post 101.

[MrBuddyLee]

IH, you igmeoy'ed me and FOSed bluesoul and that's about it. You found #28 and #29 weird, but totally missed my point in 29. The point was: "If bluesoul thinks I am scum, he would not think there are three MORE scum who have been alerted--it would only be two." (There is a differing opinion about what bluesoul intended, and there's a 90% chance he meant something other than what I interpreted, but you should still understand MY post in order to better assess the situation.)

I'm tempted to put him at five but not until we've had more discussion to help us nail his buddies.

Nice reference to nailing MBL's scumbuddies, I'm sure that helped us fight the good fight since we've got three players that get to stare that right in the face as they think about their posts.

Honestly, bluesoul's "concern" there is a little weird, which slightly lowers the chance he's being sincere about who the "three players" he was worried about are. I do find it odd that he'd be worried about all three of {IH, chamber, elias}--especially if he really thinks MBL is scum.

=========================================

There is weak hay being made about my "30%" remark:

I'm not intentionally misconstruing your words. There's a 30% chance that you're scum, and a 20% chance that you're scum telling the truth about your intentions there, and a 10% chance that you're scum who I caught in a slip-up and now you're lying about it to cover your ass.

I am dealing with generalities here. Obviously I can't peg the exact likelihood that someone is making an honest mistake or lying. I am estimating, which is something I do all the time to try and figure out how aggressively to attack something. There's no sense in pushing something repeatedly if there's only a 5% chance it's a reality. I did the rough math, figured there's a 10% chance bluesoul is lying scum on this topic, and decided it wasn't worth pressing beyond what we've already covered.

If you intend to use math at least support it, pulling numbers out of your ass that you have no way of supporting isn't cool.

Speaking of ignoring, explain your "30% scum" line from post 101.

A 30% chance I'm scum, eh? So you know there's a 30/70 ratio? How would you know that if you were not part of the informed minority? Either explain yourself, right now, or stand similarly exposed as scum.

If there are 3 scum, that's 27% of you. 4 scum = 37% of you. I don't really see any other number of scum as likely in an invitational, which will likely be a pretty standard/bland setup. Do you really think my assumption is most likely explained by inside information on the setup, bluesoul? Or are you just making hay? I think we're past the point where statements like Sarc's and DGB's early "we've caught scum" are amusing.

[bluesoul]

There is weak hay being made about my "30%" remark:

I'm not intentionally misconstruing your words. There's a 30% chance that you're scum, and a 20% chance that you're scum telling the truth about your intentions there, and a 10% chance that you're scum who I caught in a slip-up and now you're lying about it to cover your ass.

I am dealing with generalities here. Obviously I can't peg the exact likelihood that someone is making an honest mistake or lying. I am estimating, which is something I do all the time to try and figure out how aggressively to attack something. There's no sense in pushing something repeatedly if there's only a 5% chance it's a reality.

I did the rough math, figured there's a 10% chance bluesoul is lying scum on this topic

, and decided it wasn't worth pressing beyond what we've already covered.

If you intend to use math at least support it, pulling numbers out of your ass that you have no way of supporting isn't cool.

Speaking of ignoring, explain your "30% scum" line from post 101.

A 30% chance I'm scum, eh? So you know there's a 30/70 ratio? How would you know that if you were not part of the informed minority? Either explain yourself, right now, or stand similarly exposed as scum.

If there are 3 scum, that's 27% of you. 4 scum = 37% of you. I don't really see any other number of scum as likely in an invitational, which will likely be a pretty standard/bland setup. Do you really think my assumption is most likely explained by inside information on the setup, bluesoul? Or are you just making hay? I think we're past the point where statements like Sarc's and DGB's early "we've caught scum" are amusing.

Really? Let's see the math then. I want to see how your concrete 10% gets support from concrete facts. You're appealing to logic where none exists. Why is it 10 percent? Why not 5 percent? Or 20? You call it a generality or an estimation now but that's not the tone you gave originally. Shall I read it back to you?

There's a 30% chance that you're scum, and a 20% chance that you're scum telling the truth about your intentions there, and a 10% chance that you're scum who I caught in a slip-up and now you're lying about it to cover your ass.

Now, I have no choice but to believe that you came up with 30% due to inside information while you maintain that I, through inside information, came up with three scum players and not the three players I mentioned in the previous sentence you conveniently omitted in your attack.

Unvote, vote MBL

[MrBuddyLee]

Sarc, are you

trying

to pretend there's a connection between you and bluesoul?

This post bothers me for a few reasons:
1) They could be masons, but you're discounting that possibility, or else you wouldn't draw attention to it.
2) They could be scumpartners, but you're discounting that possibility by saying it's "pretending".
3) This question doesn't focus on the relevant aspect of the matter--"WHY" would Sarc "pretend"? Which points to a lack of true curiosity about alignment on your part.

I will say that I saw you make sloppy statements in the California Trilogy game, and you were town who simply wasn't thinking through his posts all the way. Walking the fine line between alerting you-scum to your missteps and coaching you as town, I'll just leave it at that.

I think we can safely remove {OGML, bluesoul, Sarc} as a possible scum trio based on recent interactions.

[MrBuddyLee]

Now, I have no choice but to believe that you came up with 30% due to inside information while you maintain that I, through inside information, came up with three scum players and not the three players I mentioned in the previous sentence you conveniently omitted in your attack.

Unvote, vote MBL

If you're town, you're burying yourself here. It's a commonly-held tenet that 33% of players in any game are scum. The only real possibilities in this game are that 25% or 33% are scum (27% or 37% of the non-MBL players). It's actually a mathematical impossibility that exactly 30% of the players in this game are scum.

And I didn't say you had inside information that there were exactly three scum players--I said that if anything, you have inside information that

I'm not scum

and therefore there are threeish non-MBL players who are scum.

Is bluesoul stretching as town or as scum? Why would town press this issue? Why would scum go out on a limb on something so utterly irrelevant?

[bluesoul]

And I didn't say you had inside information that there were exactly three scum players--I said that if anything, you have inside information that

I'm not scum

and therefore there are threeish non-MBL players who are scum.

Which, by necessity, would make me scum. How else would I know you were not scum. Again you appeal to logic that isn't there.

[Patrick]

2.) I'm just plain not understanding Patrick's response to chamber in Post 87. I've read it about five times. I've deleted about three sets of questions about this, so I think I'll just ask for you to reword this response, please.

I suppose it wasn't that clear. Chamber accused me of overemphasising my thought process, and I assume he's referring to my Post 60, where I talk about how I tried to read bluesoul. My response to chamber in Post 87 explains why I was emphasising how I reached my conclusion. (I still think bluesoul's comment is being overanalysed, and I find his assertion that he was being hypothetical to be believable).

DGB: I don't get the timing of your bluesoul vote. The bit you quoted and called kwayzeee was something bluesoul had said more than once already, and he was only repeating it as part of defending himself. Why the hypereaction only now?

bluesoul: How could MBL have slipped up and revealed inside information that there are 30% scum in the game, when that percentage is impossible? You ignored that when responding to him, but that seems to be the basis for your vote.

[bluesoul]

Yes, it's crazy isn't it? My vote and his vote make just as much sense.

On a more serious note, he is still trying to clear himself through bona fide nonsense. I want to hear his explanation regarding 121.

[MrBuddyLee]

That was the point of my post, bluesoul.. I thought I noticed a subtlety in your wording that indicated you might be scum:

* You know I'm not scum
* You are pretending not to be scum
* You slip and say there are three other players besides me that are scum, when if I'm actually scum, you should have only been worried about

two

others, not three
* Therefore, your "pretending" got you in trouble

Again, I'm not saying this is actually what happened. I'm saying it's a possibility. And it's weird that you're putting all your eggs in this counterattack when it's such a weak one. Are you really, really sold on the idea that I'm scum at this point?