Mini 701 - That's a Wrap! (Game Over)

[ortolan]

in having read six pages of posts i have probably the most quotes and notes on volkan. almost every single one gives me a neutral read.

I agree, all these posts and we get little read of the motivation behind them. He could have contributed as much to scum-hunting this game had he merely been lurking.

[SpyreX]

Oh yer Hehe I forgot I got caught in his trap. Noted that you buy the crap argument wholesale solely because it come from vollkan.

Or because multiple times he insinuated just that? And you still walked into it?

Look, I am pretty sold on you and OP being masons.

That doesn't change the fact one whit I think you're barking up the wrong tree.

[vollkan]

of course you would never gut vote, but when you came up with a case against mrfixij when there were already 2 persons on the him, nobody would have considered it weird, you said you would look him closely. If you hopped on the bandwagon while you had never been suspicious of mrfixij, we would look closely at your actions. So the scum part could still be.

Yes, but that's just it. As I said, coming from me a professed gut read would be given no credit and it would ultimately come back to an analysis of reasons. It wouldn't necessarily have been scummy for me to have swung to suspicion of ixfij but, as you say, I would be closely examined for doing so.

Vollkan-scum gains nothing from declaring a gut feeling. You know as well as I do how much ortolan would (did, as a matter of fact) start howling at the hint of gut - imagine if I had actuallly voted ixfij without substantial reasons.

And as town, why would you want to catch orto, and orto being town, couldn't it have been that other townies would also react on it, in a manner scummy in your eyes? What purpose had the trap if you actually knew it could catch town just as easily as scum? From the traps you have mentioned it is everytime obvious that a scum player did something very antitown. That is why the traps worked. Would a player that says: "vollkan detests gut, and now he uses it" and attacks you for it do something antitown? would it be scummy? What you are implying is that attacking you is scummy, because there seems to be no other reason.

I've really explained this already. The other traps involved getting people to do anti-town actions as a means of catching scum. This one was not directed at anything so blatant and, instead, my primary expectation was to demonstrate that Orto is tunneling me.

And yes, if anybody else had reacted like Orto then it would have brought them under suspicion from me. There was no contradiction in my post, and that should have been obvious to anybody who has been giving me the level of attention which is needed in this game.

Vollkan, the other traps you mentioned were well thought out. Why not this one?

It's not a question of this one being less "thought out". It's that this one had a different expectation in mind. You could say that the other traps were "offensive" traps - in that I was taking the initiative to set up a snare for scum whereas this one was most likely going to be (but not necessarily, because it might still have snared scum in potentia) a "defensive" trap.

if i may, though, i would like to know(and forgive me if this has been answered) why did you post your rules? it seems extremely counterproductive in the early going. you have basically given any one who wants it a "how to stay off of volkans scumdar" guide. in addition, if you are scum, you now have a way of justifying not picking out your partner(s). as this appears more useful to you as scum, i find this to be very anti town.

I've had this exact criticism before.

Basically, it comes down to the fact that, whilst I consider the things on the list scummy, I don't trust them as much as I do "logical scumtells" (the sort of analysis and debate I rely on). In other words, I think it is more beneficial for town that such conduct is prevented - because doing so provides less scope for anti-town actions and more scope for logical play.

didn't catch where volkan claims he was aware that the trap could catch town, so is that part true?

He said he thought it most likely that the trap would catch orto. Orto is town. Why wouldn't other towny's apart from orto also get trapped?

Yes and no. The trap was intended to catch people who were not reading me with any degree of consideration, and I expected Orto to fall into that category. Prejudiced attacks are both anti-town and scummy. Orto, whilst not likely scum, was nonetheless shown to be anti-town in his attacks. From anybody else, other than op, it would be scummy though.

Townies would only fall into it if they weren't playing as townies should. The same goes for any scumtell.

@Volk:

I can understand showing consistency, but ultimately we both know you're smart enough to be consistent regardless of your alignment. The meta has to end man, for all our sakes.

I know I can maintain consistency across alignments; it's something I strive for. The meta I have been citing is just to show that certain idiosyncracies in my play (trapping, self-voting, anti-gut stance) should not be seen as scummy.

Quote:
in having read six pages of posts i have probably the most quotes and notes on volkan. almost every single one gives me a neutral read.

I agree, all these posts and we get little read of the motivation behind them. He could have contributed as much to scum-hunting this game had he merely been lurking.

Orto, I've been defending myself against your attacks. I find it ridiculous that you would compare me to a lurker. My defences have given a wealth of material for analysis, and refuting bad attacks is just as important as launching new ones. Moreover, my criticism of players other than yourself

is

scumhunting - I have been adding new material. You don't agree with anything I say, fine but that's another matter, but that doesn't mean I am equivalent to a lurker in terms of contribution.

[mykonian]

What if you are scum vollkan. Orto would have been on the right track all the time, but here you got him trapped. You say he is prejudiced, and suddenly, we don't have to listen to orto when we don't like it, and we also don't have to listen to spring, because she is clearly not good enough to argue with you. You are doing a good job of defending yourself, by putting labels on your attackers.

[vollkan]

What if you are scum vollkan. Orto would have been on the right track all the time, but here you got him trapped. You say he is prejudiced, and suddenly, we don't have to listen to orto when we don't like it, and we also don't have to listen to spring, because she is clearly not good enough to argue with you. You are doing a good job of defending yourself, by putting labels on your attackers.

I haven't defended myself "by putting labels" on attackers.

I've shown that Orto is attacking me prejudicially. That by no means invalidates his arguments, but it does serve to undermine the instinctive tendency to trust him by virtue of his claim.

As for SL, I've never said anything like that you shouldn't listen to her or that she isn't good enough to argue against me. On the contrary, I've argued with her plenty.

[ortolan]

I've shown that Orto is attacking me prejudicially.

No.

Vote: vollkan

Congratulations, in your dogged persistence in arguing meritless cases you've ensured my vote isn't coming off you any time today. I fail to see how that's pro-town if you are townie, but well done nonetheless.

[vollkan]

What "meritless cases"?

[Rage]

Vote Count - Day 1

With 10 alive, 6 votes is majority.

don_johnson - 0 ()
orangepenguin - 0 ()
ortolan - 0 ()
mykonian - 1 (Ectomancer)

springlullaby - 3 (vollkan, Spyrex, mrfixij)

Ectomancer - 0 ()
vollkan - 2 (ortolan, springlullaby)
SpyreX - 0 ()
mrfixij - 1 (mykonian)
TDC - 1 (orangepenguin)

Not Voting - 2 (TDC,

Spoilum

don_johnson)

springlullaby is at L-3, 3 votes away from a lynch.

Ortolan was already voting Vollkan.

[mykonian]

I haven't defended myself "by putting labels" on attackers.

I've shown that Orto is attacking me prejudicially. That by no means invalidates his arguments, but it does serve to undermine the instinctive tendency to trust him by virtue of his claim.

As for SL, I've never said anything like that you shouldn't listen to her or that she isn't good enough to argue against me. On the contrary, I've argued with her plenty.

You have implied it by insulting orto, that was the most obvious one. There was no need to say it, and everything you say seems to be well thought over, so I take that as disqualifying your attackers.

[SpyreX]

Huzzah for adamant masons!

Well, as awesome as this is, we need to get moving. I'm getting really tempted to ask for a deadline.

[mykonian]

I'm here, get moving, so I can react. This way spring is the most likely to be lynched, followed by vollkan. Do you agree with this? I think nobody does. We got to get some consensus here. I know what happens when I was going to vote: ecto would call it a 360. But also I'm not tempted to do it. If you want a spring lynch, point out where she is scum. Then you get town moving.

Dismissing the case on vollkan is the wrong way. Allthough bad worded by orto and spring, vollkan's play is not perfect. Why not attack him on that?

And some people are quite gone also, that doesn't help us getting this moving.

[mrfixij]

I'm going to go back and read over vollkan's recent activity. The immense amounts of material that he puts forth and the limited time I have to read it makes it very difficult for me to analyze it critically. I'll give my thoughts on the case against him as I go. As it is, I'm inclined to restate what I said before. I don't find him inherently scummy yet. A re-read may change that.

[SpyreX]

I'll go read it again but I've been following along and I'm not biting the volkan lynch at all - SURPRISE!

I still see no reason to disbelieve ort / OP at this point.

I'm still not set on Ecto, although I have liked the more recent play.

The fact Myko said he wants to react to what others do bothers me, but I'm not convinced and defintiely not convinced over SL.

TDC really needs to give more words to this game by a magnitude of 10.

Fix is leanin' town by a small margin.

Whomever the other player is at this point I cant remember which says something.

SL still is scum.

[Ectomancer]

Did anyone do a summary post on the SL case? Mind doing another brief?

[don_johnson]

Whomever the other player is at this point I cant remember which says something.

this is funny. out of all my notes from the first six pages i have you at the top of my scum list with TDC and springlullaby.

i am not comfortable lynching volkan at this point, as wordy as his posts are, i have found very little scumminess among them.

spyrex:(directly from my notes)
post 52, my thoughts bolded

From an outsider not even concerned necessarily with what is being spoken but the how of it - ecto is very suspicious. My reads show both you and volk behaving neutrally (although on different sides of the argument) - echo is aggressive to the point that it sends up warning flares.

I do not agree with this

As an aside, I'd like to see the rest of the game become a bit more active. There's enough here that opinions on at least a few players could be made and huntin' can begin.

He isn’t hunting, just sitting back and pointing fingers after saying that it was an irrelevant argument so early in the game.

post 59 was basically spam. i find spam inherently scummy.

post 98

Again, I'll try more specifically:

Echo, what are your reason(s) for pushing on the self-vote so strongly?

It seems like ecto had dropped the case at this point, why does spyrex keep bringing it up? Ecto addresses this immediately. Then votes Spyrex.

post 108

So, yes, nice and simple. Ask me questions you want answered or points I've made you'd like clarification on.

Again, avoiding the spotlight. Pushing the conversation into the future.

post 111

My link to Volkan is that I find his play in response to his null self-vote to be pro-town thus far. We are not buddies. I am not going to follow him blindly. I dont need him to be my best friend.

I find the pushing scummy but I haven't made up my mind on echo yet

I haven't made a "case" on Ecto yet.

he is building a case.

Why deny it?
Seems to still be dodging accusations and questions.

what i have seen from you is avoidance of issues and a desire to move the game forward. perhaps you have contributed more later on, but i am still reading, however, your last few posts seem to be more of the same.

TDC:

P 73

seems like he’s just not paying attention

P 96

a few questions, but no real contribution.

P 478

ortolan: Well, there's one thing you can still tell us: Can you only talk at night, or all the time?

What good does this do? kind of scummy to try and find out more about someones role.

[/quote]

SL:

Self vote P 47

Later:

IMO self-vote is clearly antitown because random votes, beside the joke-ness, is meant to signify a willingness to catch scum. Self-vote however is an entirely selfish act, which give nothing about yourself and who you are willing to vote.

P 114

Actually you guys seem to think that I have voted Vollkan because 'I think self voting is inherently bad'. I don't like this because it is not the case.

Never gives case.

Earlier:

I think the answer to this is that the self-votes would serve no purpose because it really gives nothing to people to work on - or even less than random vote if you want - and that is why I think that in absolute self-votes are always bad and inherently anti-town, and should never be viewed otherwise.

Next I'll examine people post more closely and give my opinion.

What exactly have you been doing?

have to go to work. these are my top three. i would be comfortable with any of them at this point. please respond.

[SpyreX]

I'll do a summary on SL at some point - it is there a few pages back in my tl;dr section of the megapost though.

More pressing issues to attend to from the wildcard.

I can understand some of the issues, but I really take umbrage with the selective quoting.

From an outsider not even concerned necessarily with what is being spoken but the how of it - ecto is very suspicious. My reads show both you and volk behaving neutrally (although on different sides of the argument) - echo is aggressive to the point that it sends up warning flares.

I do not agree with this

As an aside, I'd like to see the rest of the game become a bit more active. There's enough here that opinions on at least a few players could be made and huntin' can begin.

He isn’t hunting, just sitting back and pointing fingers after saying that it was an irrelevant argument so early in the game.

That's Star Control 2, thank you very much.

As for leading away from the tangent - well, its not like we've got a whole lot to go on. However, the interplay between the three main heads of this theory hydra (you, volk, ecto) is worth of reading.

From an outsider not even concerned necessarily with what is being spoken but the how of it - ecto is very suspicious. My reads show both you and volk behaving neutrally (although on different sides of the argument) - echo is aggressive to the point that it sends up warning flares.

What can I make of this? Only time will tell. As it sits I'm thinking that there's not elaborate Gambit here and that a scum wouldn't be silly enough to bite so hard on a self-vote. However, it will definitely be watched - like it or not, I think all three of you have decided to dance in the spotlight for a while.

As an aside, I'd like to see the rest of the game become a bit more active. There's enough here that opinions on at least a few players could be made and huntin' can begin.

1.) Why / what do you not agree with about Ecto being aggressive. Further, since you've said I am a top suspect for being scum, what is scummy about this?
2.) Why did you omit what I have italicized as that shows my feelings on it - which, of course, is in direct contrast with your "he's not scumhunting" statement.

Again, I'll try more specifically:

Echo, what are your reason(s) for pushing on the self-vote so strongly?

It seems like ecto had dropped the case at this point, why does spyrex keep bringing it up? Ecto addresses this immediately. Then votes Spyrex.

I can see the method to Volk's madness. Its not just pure theory at this point.

Again, I'll try more specifically:

Echo, what are your reason(s) for pushing on the self-vote so strongly?

Again, why did you leave out what you did.

And, considering post 95 is a continuation of said discussion, how can you say that the case has been dropped?

Again, if I am scum, how is this scummy?

The brain-boggler:

So, yes, nice and simple. Ask me questions you want answered or points I've made you'd like clarification on.

Again, avoiding the spotlight. Pushing the conversation into the future.

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... &start=108 - ACTUAL 108

I was avoiding the spotlight? By answering the questions put forth?

And, again, why did you select the LAST LINE of that post and put it forward in such a manner?

Once again:

My link to Volkan is that I find his play in response to his null self-vote to be pro-town thus far. We are not buddies. I am not going to follow him blindly. I dont need him to be my best friend.

I find the pushing scummy but I haven't made up my mind on echo yet

I haven't made a "case" on Ecto yet. he is building a case.

Why deny it?
Seems to still be dodging accusations and questions.

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... &start=111 - ACTUAL 111

1.) You are implying these points are linked. They are not.
2.) I have not made a case on Ecto yet because as is apparent although I had issues I was not sure if I was convinced they were scum. Having not made != not going to make. It, in fact, means that I was not sure.
3.) What accusation and/or question have I dodged? Ever.

what i have seen from you is avoidance of issues and a desire to move the game forward. perhaps you have contributed more later on, but i am still reading, however, your last few posts seem to be more of the same.

1.) You need to give me examples of this avoidance of issues.
2.) You are bringing up "desire to move the game forward" as a scum tell. How and why?

I am not impressed. The selective quoting really bothers me. I need answers before I make a decision on the issue but seriously.

[vollkan]

I haven't defended myself "by putting labels" on attackers.

I've shown that Orto is attacking me prejudicially. That by no means invalidates his arguments, but it does serve to undermine the instinctive tendency to trust him by virtue of his claim.

As for SL, I've never said anything like that you shouldn't listen to her or that she isn't good enough to argue against me. On the contrary, I've argued with her plenty.

You have implied it by insulting orto, that was the most obvious one. There was no need to say it, and everything you say seems to be well thought over, so I take that as disqualifying your attackers.

You accused me of "we also don't have to listen to spring, because she is clearly not good enough to argue with you". I never said that and now you twisting it so that it is an implicit criticism arising from my attack on Orto.

As I have already said:

And the attacks aren't ad hominem fallacy. They just stem from my frustration at what is an unending torrent of silly arguments from Orto (and I am entitled to use the word 'silly', because thus far there hasn't been a single point that I haven't rebutted. He just keeps jumping from point to point.)

Allthough bad worded by orto and spring, vollkan's play is not perfect. Why not attack him on that?

Nobody's play is perfect. Orto's and SL's attacks are trash. There's a wide gulf between my play not being perfect and my play being on the level that Orto and SL have been suggesting.

2.) Why did you omit what I have italicized as that shows my feelings on it - which, of course, is in direct contrast with your "he's not scumhunting" statement.

I was avoiding the spotlight? By answering the questions put forth?

And, again, why did you select the LAST LINE of that post and put it forward in such a manner?

Good finds. A degree of error/inaccuracy is to be expected from replacers, but wholesale cherry-picking as we see here is not acceptable.

[don_johnson]

don't really agree with the remarks on my post. i will go back through spyrex's posts and more positively identify the things that stood out to me. i have 17 pages to read. as i am reading i am cutting and pasting things that seem to stand out of everyones posts. selective quoting to me is more efficient than quoting entire posts if most of what the post contains seems irrelevant. in order to expedite a more acceptable post for you i will focus on what stood out the most to me in spyrex's posts: his dodging of issues. yes he seems to be answering some questions, but he selectively avoids certain things. for instance, they addressed my post almost entirely. EXCEPT for my comment on his spam. why would that be? also, instead of selectively quoting i will reference each post by number.

[TDC]

There was a little snipe in this mess that stands out. What was it and why!

And.. what was it? I have no idea.

--

TDC:

P 73 seems like he’s just not paying attention

Not paying attention to

what

? I had asked a question and commented on the answer I received.

P 96 a few questions, but no real contribution.

The question to vollkan was mostly meta, yes. The complaint about myk's weak sl vote was a valid one, and I'd say a "contribution". The question towards mrfixij about SpyreX's post was motivated by mrfixij and whether he thought SpyreX was sucking up to vollkan was motivated by mrfixij's 76, in which he adopted vollkan's "sliding scale of scuminess".

Why did you, of all my posts, choose to point out this one?

P 478
[quote="TDC]
ortolan: Well, there's one thing you can still tell us: Can you only talk at night, or all the time?

What good does this do? kind of scummy to try and find out more about someones role.[/quote]
What bad does this do? Why is it scummy?

EXCEPT for my comment on his spam. why would that be?

post 59 was basically spam. i find spam inherently scummy.

In light of spam being such a scummy and important issue for you, what do you think of Ecto's 494? Surely that gives him away as obv-scum...

--

Still waiting for orangepenguin to tell us why he's voting me.

[TDC]

strike one "was motivated by mrfixij"

[don_johnson]

my apologies, i quoted again instead of referring to posts by number. i started to, but realized that was just pointless for me. perhaps we have different styles, but i scumhunt based on inconsistencies i see in posting patterns. i use a word curve technique, and look for recurring patterns, so snippet quoting is really the only way i know to present my points. also, i find overly worded posts and "quote walls" to be distracting. so I guess I am not as verbose as some of you, nor am I as experienced in this game. Having played it in person before, I find it an almost completely different beast via the internet. At a table, a scum tell can be a wry smile, sideways glance, or the classic “bullet eyes”. here, we basically start from nothing and try to build reasoning into why we think each other scum. Scumminess is not inherent in complete posts, therefore, quoting someone in full is often useless in proving a point. It is not spyrex’s posts that I find scummy. It is certain aspects of how he is playing this game. In my first read through he seems to deflect questions more than answer them. And when suspicions are raised he asks for more specific questions. If you have nothing to hide then why can’t you just address the suspicions. Underlying all of this(to me) is a desire to keep something hidden. That is what I find scummy so far. It could be his play style and I just have to get used to it. Also, when I said “top” of my scum list, I did by no means intend to put you as the frontrunner. In fact, you are all scum to me. Orto and op have claimed masons, so they earn the first reprieve. What I decided to do was offer up some virtual “third party” observations about the ebb and flow of the game. I looked back and thought about quoting some references for you, but my point(as I have said) is not about the general scumminess of spyrex, but of observations about the way he is posting. I am getting a lot of :

“let‘s move the game forward, I don‘t like your questions or your inferences“.

so here are my snippets. If you think this is cherry picking that’s fine. I prefer to think of it as cherry sorting. Separating the sweet from the sour, if you will.

I'd like, again, maybe some bulleted lists and perhaps even questions. A good chunk of this is stuff I've obviously done but even in your explanation I'm not seeing how they are scummy. So, yes, give me something I can actually refute?

Again, I'd like the list of what I've done thats scummy in a fashion I can respond to it.

Again, I'm -really- not sure why this is so hard to get out, but what above makes it scummy?

Well, wait a sec.

A difference in opinion doesn't bother me. However, do you find it scummy? If not, although I'm not in immediate danger of a lynch, why would you push it to the head of the pack?

Again, on all three of you voting for me, I'd like the concrete, simple explanations of why.

However, I'd still really like to see what it is I've done thats soo scummy.

Appeasement strategy? Please explain a bit more.

I see a lot of words again, however I see a severe absence of "X is scummy for Y" or even "X is scummy"

(to a claimed mason?)

How did this discussion "muddy the waters"? A statement like this needs backing.

“muddy the waters” is defining in and of itself.

What’s funny is that after all of this, spyrex begins making decent, insightful posts. He comes on strong pro town, and his posting on the lurkers and possible scenarios is actually well thought out and presented. My problem with that, is how sure he is of certain things on day 1. I lean towards scum because of this dodgy attitude, which as I have shown with my own posting that he exhibits. (I am referring to your dodding my spam question.) perhaps it is play style, perhaps something more. I brought all of this up because you said you didn’t even know who I was. After reading all you have to say on the lurkers, why did you forget about me? Were you just looking to get “someone” lynched?

[mykonian]

@vollkan

You called it, or them ridiculous in post 62 (isolated view).
And the part with conspiracy what you accuse Spring of. Her arguments boil down to consipiracy??? post 57 (isolated view).

I hope this proves the feeling I had about your posts.

[Ectomancer]

In light of spam being such a scummy and important issue for you, what do you think of Ecto's 494? Surely that gives him away as obv-scum...

Heheh, that was an expression of pure, unadulterated pain.

I must confess that I have considered putting Vollkan up for the lynch, but not because I think he is scummy. My analogy is of the reflectors you put in your car windows to block out the heat. Sure, its doing the job and is beneficial up there if the car is just sitting there, but if you are trying to drive around, you've got to remove the damn thing from your windshield or you'll never get anywhere, OR can't see where you are driving.
Or maybe he is that steady drizzle that turns into driving rain that keep you from being able to see through the windshield unless you turn on the wipers and wipe it away.

@Spyrex - Why do you think that a deadline would be beneficial?

[vollkan]

You called it, or them ridiculous in post 62 (isolated view).

Wrong.

I made my case, if I were better town I would do a nice summary in one post, but I'm not and you will have to go over from my original vote, and argument with Vollkan. At this point I can't imagine town Vollkan, all his votes and especially the one on me is so stiff, I don't think it's real. If someone want me to answer further something he brought up, I'll do.

This is ridiculous.

SL cast a vote for me based on vague, unfalsifiable assertions. I argued extensively with her and Orto and, frankly, I don't think they have a single leg to stand on.

For her now to say that people should just read over the debate is absurd given how long things ran for.

Read the whole post including what is responding to. SL digs her feet in and says "I've made my case, and I am not going to summarise so you'll all have to read up". That pisses me off and

is

ridiculous because, as I say, her reasons were trash and I refuted them - but because the debate is so long, it is "absurd" that people should have to read over.

It's simply false of you to say that I was calling "them" ridiculous when, in fact, I was referring to SL's refusal to summarise herself.

And the part with conspiracy what you accuse Spring of. Her arguments boil down to consipiracy??? post 57 (isolated view).

I've already explained this. Her arguments were conspiracy because they involved zeroing in on one narrative for my play without counter-weighing that narrative against competing narratives.

[springlullaby]

Ok, it's like this. From now on, I'm not even reading Vollkan's posts anymore.

I will wait till johnson catch up before posting one summary of why I think Vollkan is scum. Then everybody here is going to have to explain point by point why they are not voting Vollkan.