Mini 720 - SPQR Mafia {Game Over}

[El Destructo]

I didn't like the entire discussion about whether Coriolanus was an alt. I thought it was mostly useless so far as outing scum goes. Because of this, I found anyone saying it was useful or "interesting" iffy because none of them, besides Glork, actually explained how it might be useful or of interest to the town. For lack of an explanation, I considered their posts on the topic to be little besides noise and so anti-town.

Yos seems to sum up his thoughts on the discussion here:

Again, it dosn't matter that much, although it is useful information for the town to have I think. I'm just wondering why you're reacting so strongly here.

There is absolutely nothing pro-town in this post so far as I'm concerned. He says "it doesn't matter that much" even though he was one of the players asking Cor about his knowledge of the playerlist. He then says that it's useful info for the town. I still cannot see how anyone could see the results of that discussion, whatever they were, as useful to the town. The last sentence is pure noise - I wondered about Cor's reaction too, but I couldn't see a reason to believe his behaviour was more likely to be a result of being scum, so I pretty much dropped it. The fact that Yos notes it but doesn't elaborate about why it's even worth mentioning comes across like a false contribution to scum-hunting.

At least Yosarian admitted that this probably wasn't the most productive subject.

Actually, no, I don't think that. The subject of "is Corio an alt or not", isn't all that relevent; but Corio's answers, his response, really seem strange to me here, and I think his posting here might be a very productive subject.

This, his next post, is another example of exactly the same behaviour: Corio's answers

might

be a very productive subject. Zero elaboration. Noise.

Besides that, he's pretty much completely flipped on how useful the topic is in one post.

(I just noticed my mug was still full of tea. I love that. I felt like sharing this moment with someone.)

I have no idea what Yos is trying to achieve with this. It seems like he's trying to argue Coro into admitting he is an alt, which I don't think has any relevance to whether he's scum or not.

[1]Well...it's a useful thing to know, and especally if he says whose alt he is I suspect I'll have a much easier time reading him, for meta reasons and such (there are a few players from which I wouldn't find this kind of over-reaction to be a scum tell, for example.)

[2]But, mostly, I just think it's odd the way he's reacting. I think his initial "why isn't Glork dead yet" post was really odd, and I'm trying to figure out what he's thinking right now. I care less about if he is an alt then about why he's reacting this way to Glork speculating he's an alt; , the overly hostile reaction to what looks to me to be logical speculation on Glork's part seems kind of scummy to me.

1. This is inconsistent with his earlier comment about it not being important whether Corio is an alt.

2. Is more of the same stuff that leaves me asking, "so why is it scummy again?"

Incog asks Yos the question I had been asking:

Yosarian2 and dahill1, do you find Coriolanus's reaction to be scummy-interesting or some other type of interesting?

Well, that's what I'm trying to figure out. My natural reaction is to be suspicious of someone who reacts like that, although as Ether pointed out there are other possible reasons for it.

Since Yos has said this is his natural reaction, I expect that he should be able to provide examples.

Also, a lot depends on if I'm dealing with an experenced mafia player or a true newbie; reactions are different. Glork asked him that question earlier of if he'd played on a different forum, and he hasn't answered it yet.

Eh, minor point, but Corio mentioned playing on Conquer Club. How much is Yos reading and how much is he going with the flow?

Why have neither of you gone forward and actually voted for him as of yet?

(shrug) Haven't decided yet if his play is scummy or not, I suppose.

But! -

the overly hostile reaction to what looks to me to be logical speculation on Glork's part seems kind of scummy to me.

Considering how much he's been implying Corio's reaction is scummier than it's not, I would have expected that he'd have a more solid stance by this point.

In Post 151 Yos gets REALLY OMGUSy towards EA and basically goes, "NO U!" I think it was Patrick or Ether who later said that there was nothing wrong with EA criticising the quality of Yos' contributions even if EA himself hadn't quantitatively posted more. Consider what I've posted so far about Yos' false and noisy contributions to the game. EA voted Yos for his "contributions", and I 'got' what he meant. (See EA's Post 158)

Yos unvotes Incognito in 154 because he's getting "pro-town vibes". I feel this is important to note. I took it as evidence for Yos being scum because I did not at all get a pro-town vibe from Incog, and was even leaning scum on him based on what had happened so far. Elmo found it odd too for the same reasons except that his read of Incog was much more neutral at the time. Considering our reads of Incog and the fact that Yos had shown little to no interest in Incog's play, this unvote didn't make much sense to us at all.

I have to go, so I'll leave it there for now. I really really REALLY didn't like Yos' role in the Xtoxm lynch so I'll cover most of that next time unless Elmo gets to it first. Both of us thought the Xtoxm wagon was horrible but I think we might have slightly different opinions on how telling this was for Yos.

des

[OhGodMyLife]

Vote Count:

6 to lynch.

dahill1: 3 (charter, Tuberkulos, Coriolanus)
El Destructo: 2 (Incognito, Glork)
Yosarian2: 2 (Erratus Apathos, El Destructo)
Erratus Apathos: 1 (Yosarian2)

Not Voting: 2 (dahill1, Assmaster)

[Erratus Apathos]

Erratus Apathos, can you explain your thought process as to how you suddenly arrived at town reads on Glork and dahill1?

I'm not going to right now.

Any reason why?

Explaining why would be self-defeating.

Yeah, and? Am I supposed to infer that you can't be scum because you post more than I do? The fact that you were involved in the scum hunt yesterday doesn't change the fact that you weren't today.

Again, where the hell do you get the idea I wasn't looking for scum today?

From the horse's mouth:

Yos, why haven't you posted any scumhunting/votes recently?

Meh. I'm trying to figure stuff out, but I'll admit, Xtoxm flipping town really threw me for a loop. Nearly everything I had thought I had figured out on day 1 is gone, and I feel like I'm totally starting from scatch again.

When Coriolanus asked you why you hadn't scumhunted, you explained why you didn't. You wouldn't be explaining why you didn't scumhunt if you did.

And, no, I'm not suggesting that, although it certanly is a point in my favor.

Yeah, you are suggesting that. Your vote for me was pretty much just "I posted more than you, so you're scum".

And why would it be a point in your favor? Unless OGML weighted town roles towards frequent posters, post rate means dick.

"take advantage of Glork's logic-less vote"? What in the hell does that mean?

I mean that you know that if Glork is attacking someone, even if he's not using logic yet, their odds of survival tend to go way down, and you tried to take advantage of that.

So Glork can single-handedly get you lynched without ever explaining why you're a good lynch. That's amazing, does he also win Connect Four in three moves and stare down books until they give him the information he wants? Either way, my reason for voting you is different from Glork's (by virtue of the fact that I've actually provided a reason) and I'm still voting you even after Glork switched to Destructo. There is precisely zero basis to assume that I'm voting you because Glork voted you. You're clearly just making shit up here. Die scum.

As Incog pointed out, if you were really suspicious of Glork, and he voted someone using zero logic, it dosn't make sense for you to go ahead and vote that same person without questoning his vote at all.

Except I voted for you

after

I stopped being suspicious of Glork.

Um, no. Ad hominem would be "You are wrong because you're stupid'. What I did was say "You're not making any sense. Also, you haven't made any sense at all this game, so you're probably scum." That's not what "ad hom" means.

And no, my defense against your day 1 craplogic attack wasn't ad hom, at all.

Ad hominem means

all

attacks against the arguer rather than the argument, not just the inflammatory kind. Wiki ftw. Your defense against me has

always

rested on me having no grounds to attack you, rather than on actually disputing the claims made in the attack.

More to the point, why aren't more people voting Erratus Apathos? He is so obv scum if you just read his posts, that I can't understand why more people aren't voting him.

When you say "More to the point" you're supposed to follow it up with an actual point.

[Coriolanus]

okay, i read through the glork/incog argument. it's obnoxious, and i don't think either has a convincing case. if i had to side with someone, though, it would be glork, because it did seem like des was making shit up re: the meta games.

if dahill were to do *anything* at this point separate from defend/flail, i'd consider moving my vote. but he hasn't done anything today, which is consistent with yesterday. i don't know of any side he's taken recently that demonstrates a bit of individuality. he's been the epitome of a waffler in this game.

des' case on yos is strong and is much better than yos' case on EA, which is hypocritical.

[Assmaster]

I've literally only just picked up the prod, and though I'm still within the limits of it it's a bit cheeky. If the mods got someone lined up to replace me or just generally wants to do it I don't mind. Give me an hour to read what's been going on.

[Assmaster]

Glork is correct and the meta points against El Destructo. He seems a little more sincere and annoyed than I'd like though. I don't think his case against is very good, but you don't make a case against Yos with what you know to be a bad case, especially when no-one was specifically asking you to unless you believe in its quality, independent of your alignment. I don't like Charters tone and I like EA's tone.

[Coriolanus]

He seems a little more sincere

what

[Coriolanus]

i don't understand how you can seem too sincere.

[Assmaster]

The assumption is that scum wouldn't come across as sincere, so that is a point against him being scum, to me.

Also the first sentence should be 'I agree with Glork and the meta points against El Destructo'

[Incognito]

destructor, I suppose this is pending?:

Please point to where specifically you used meta in my game. I couldn't remember off-hand, I just finished scouring your posts, and I couldn't find any indication that you used the same type of meta that you're using here within that game.

There not much else for me to say on this topic and I think you were really missing the point of what I was doing as well, which is curious.

I didn't miss the point at all. You spotted something in Elmo's play in this particular game (his defending of dahill1) that you felt was very similar to something that you spotted in his scum play within Weasels Mafia (his defense of Thanatos). You then asked for specific examples of where he may have defended players as town to see if Glork's defending of other players might be a reliable scum-tell for Glork. While you're correct that the two Newbie Game references that I mentioned are rather old and your view

may

have changed since that period of time, I also pointed out your opinion in two Mafia Discussion topics that are both relatively recent, which leads me to believe that this particular view on meta that you held in those Newbie Games might still be a view that you yourself hold. I'm just trying to rationalize how someone who could mention the following as his view on personal tells in an MD topic can then try to use something similar to this against another player in this particular game:

The biggest issue for me is that I don't think tells based on meta are that reliable. I figure that there's no reason a player can't change their playstyle either subtly or dramatically and so the actual manner in which they provide content isn't very revealing.

Perhaps your view really did change from that particular time period, but I'm sure you could see why your change in stance on the actual worth of meta might catch my attention in this particular game.

What do you think it means that Elmo and I would have different reads of the same players?

I don't really know. Like I said, it was something that only mildly interested me. I didn't think it was definitely scummy since I could think of countless examples where pro-town players' views can differ from one anothers' when reading a thread for the first time upon replacing in, but the fact that I know that you and Elmo seem to be fairly like-minded individuals (I'm thinking of your's and Elmo's stances on players in AoaDA where the only time you seemed to disagree with one another was on the topic of Kairyuu/TCS) it was something that I felt was worth questioning about.

Incog: Hi. Why're you focussing on Des? I feel left out ._.

Elmo

I was under the impression that you were still having computer issues, and I felt like destructor might have taken primary lead of the "El Destructo" account since it seems like his views of the game are spilling out the most as of recent. Have those issues been sorted out? Are your's and destructor's notes and feelings of the game beginning to match one another's?

I'd like to see Yosarian2's response to El Destructo's case before commenting on it myself.

[Incognito]

EBWOP:

You spotted something in Elmo's play in this particular game (his defending of dahill1) that you felt was very similar to something that you spotted in his scum play within Weasels Mafia (his defense of Thanatos).

That of course should be "Glork's* play in this particular game".

See, Elmo? Even though I'm not directing content towards you, you're still on my mind. <3

[Yosarian2]

I didn't like the entire discussion about whether Coriolanus was an alt. I thought it was mostly useless so far as outing scum goes. Because of this, I found anyone saying it was useful or "interesting" iffy because none of them, besides Glork, actually explained how it might be useful or of interest to the town. For lack of an explanation, I considered their posts on the topic to be little besides noise and so anti-town.

You read people based on how they react to stuff in thread. That's how the game works. And it's pro-town to get game-realated conversation going, for that reason.

In this case, it got the process started of getting a read on Corio, on how he reacts, on how he thinks, ect. In taking his reactions there, (and in getting reactions there by delibratly incresing the pressure on him over the issue), and comparing them to what he said later, I got kind of a feel for him and for how he reacts, which is why I ended up with a weak pro-town vibe from him. I was interested to see if his over-reaction was indicitive of him being scummy or not, and after getting a better read on him, I decided it wasn't. It's also why I'm a little confused about Glork; I don't understand why he started with the exact same information, and came to a concluson Corio was scum at the same moment I came to the conclusion he problably wasn't.

Yos seems to sum up his thoughts on the discussion here:

Again, it dosn't matter that much, although it is useful information for the town to have I think. I'm just wondering why you're reacting so strongly here.

There is absolutely nothing pro-town in this post so far as I'm concerned. He says "it doesn't matter that much" even though he was one of the players asking Cor about his knowledge of the playerlist. He then says that it's useful info for the town. I still cannot see how anyone could see the results of that discussion, whatever they were, as useful to the town. The last sentence is pure noise - I wondered about Cor's reaction too, but I couldn't see a reason to believe his behaviour was more likely to be a result of being scum, so I pretty much dropped it. The fact that Yos notes it but doesn't elaborate about why it's even worth mentioning comes across like a false contribution to scum-hunting.

No, I didn't elaborate on exactally what it means, because I didn't know yet. But his reactions, when I was able to compare then to his reactions to actual scumhunting later, are useful to me in helping to figure out his alignment. Getting game related conversation going ASAP is a pro-town thing to do, because it lets you start to get a feel for the other people in the game.

Your last sentance against dosn't make any sense; it's the same garbage attack EA made at the time. Why would you attack me for "pretending to scumhunt" at a point in the game when almost no one else is doing anything yet?

At least Yosarian admitted that this probably wasn't the most productive subject.

Actually, no, I don't think that. The subject of "is Corio an alt or not", isn't all that relevent; but Corio's answers, his response, really seem strange to me here, and I think his posting here might be a very productive subject.

This, his next post, is another example of exactly the same behaviour: Corio's answers

might

be a very productive subject. Zero elaboration. Noise.

Well, yeah. What kind of elaboration would you expect? I certanly didn't know yet what I would end up getting out of Corio's answers. I just wanted to understand why he was reacting the way he was.

Besides that, he's pretty much completely flipped on how useful the topic is in one post.

Well, because it was. At the very least, it was significantly more useful then anything else I could possibly have been doing at the time. I'm not sure why you don't get that.

I have no idea what Yos is trying to achieve with this. It seems like he's trying to argue Coro into admitting he is an alt, which I don't think has any relevance to whether he's scum or not.

[1]Well...it's a useful thing to know, and especally if he says whose alt he is I suspect I'll have a much easier time reading him, for meta reasons and such (there are a few players from which I wouldn't find this kind of over-reaction to be a scum tell, for example.)

[2]But, mostly, I just think it's odd the way he's reacting. I think his initial "why isn't Glork dead yet" post was really odd, and I'm trying to figure out what he's thinking right now. I care less about if he is an alt then about why he's reacting this way to Glork speculating he's an alt; , the overly hostile reaction to what looks to me to be logical speculation on Glork's part seems kind of scummy to me.

1. This is inconsistent with his earlier comment about it not being important whether Corio is an alt.

(shrug) Finding out who's alt he is is useful, yes. However, at the point when I made the earlier comments, I was much more interested in putting pressure on him to get him to explain why he was reacting like that, if he could.

2. Is more of the same stuff that leaves me asking, "so why is it scummy again?"

Right. In this case, I don't think it is now, and you'll notice I never actually said it was.

Incog asks Yos the question I had been asking:

Yosarian2 and dahill1, do you find Coriolanus's reaction to be scummy-interesting or some other type of interesting?

Well, that's what I'm trying to figure out. My natural reaction is to be suspicious of someone who reacts like that, although as Ether pointed out there are other possible reasons for it.

Since Yos has said this is his natural reaction, I expect that he should be able to provide examples.

Provide examples of what? Of my natural tendency being to assume that people who lose their temper for bad reasons, who over-react to stuff, are scum? Sure, I can find examples of that, if you want me to. It's not always true, certanly, but that's generally my first instint when seeing something like that. Do you want me to go find examples of that?

Also, a lot depends on if I'm dealing with an experenced mafia player or a true newbie; reactions are different. Glork asked him that question earlier of if he'd played on a different forum, and he hasn't answered it yet.

Eh, minor point, but Corio mentioned playing on Conquer Club. How much is Yos reading and how much is he going with the flow?

Yeah, I corrected this almost right afterwards. I usually respond to posts as I read them, rather then read the whole thread and then go back and answer posts, so when I responded to the post above I hadn't read that post yet.

Why have neither of you gone forward and actually voted for him as of yet?

(shrug) Haven't decided yet if his play is scummy or not, I suppose.

But! -

the overly hostile reaction to what looks to me to be logical speculation on Glork's part seems kind of scummy to me.

Considering how much he's been implying Corio's reaction is scummier than it's not, I would have expected that he'd have a more solid stance by this point.

Why would you expect me to have a "solid stance" that early in the day? Do Corio's early first few posts, on their own, give you a "solid stance' about his alignment?

In Post 151 Yos gets REALLY OMGUSy towards EA and basically goes, "NO U!"

No, that's not what I was saying, and I explained that multiple times. It's absurd to be attacking me for my useful contributions at a time in the game when he, and almost everyone else, isn't doing anything useful yet. If he could argue that my posts were somehow anti-town, were somehow hurting the town, then it would make sense; but of course he couldn't, and neither can you, because they weren't. The most he (or you) could say would be that you don't think it was all that useful, or that you don't understand why it is useful. Again, compare it to anything else I could have done at that point in the game, when almost everyone else was still in the random phase; how is my posting not more useful then that?

Yos unvotes Incognito in 154 because he's getting "pro-town vibes". I feel this is important to note. I took it as evidence for Yos being scum because I did not at all get a pro-town vibe from Incog, and was even leaning scum on him based on what had happened so far.

Really? You're going to have to explain that to me, because that dosn't make any sense.

I will mention that, at the meet last summer, I played about a billion games of 5 player vengefull face to face mafia with Incog, so perhaps I have a better read of him. But still, at that point, he looked rather pro- town. Nothing especally strong, nothing I'd bet the bank on, but enough so I didn't want to be voting him anymore.

Elmo found it odd too for the same reasons except that his read of Incog was much more neutral at the time. Considering our reads of Incog and the fact that Yos had shown little to no interest in Incog's play, this unvote didn't make much sense to us at all.

Why would I "show interest" in someone's play if I didn't think they were acting scummy? What kind of interet do you expect me to show?

I have to go, so I'll leave it there for now. I really really REALLY didn't like Yos' role in the Xtoxm lynch so I'll cover most of that next time unless Elmo gets to it first. Both of us thought the Xtoxm wagon was horrible but I think we might have slightly different opinions on how telling this was for Yos.

Are you serious? I can't imagine anyone thinking Xtoxm was town by the time he got lynched. Or did you already know that when you read through day 1? Either way, I'd do the exact same thing again. (shrug)

[Yosarian2]

Again, where the hell do you get the idea I wasn't looking for scum today?

From the horse's mouth:

Yos, why haven't you posted any scumhunting/votes recently?

Meh. I'm trying to figure stuff out, but I'll admit, Xtoxm flipping town really threw me for a loop. Nearly everything I had thought I had figured out on day 1 is gone, and I feel like I'm totally starting from scatch again.

When Coriolanus asked you why you hadn't scumhunted, you explained why you didn't. You wouldn't be explaining why you didn't scumhunt if you did.

No, I was explaining why I hadn't voted yet on day 2. I certanly had been scumhunting. In fact, I've found at least one scum, you, so I think I'm doing pretty good.

And, no, I'm not suggesting that, although it certanly is a point in my favor.

Yeah, you are suggesting that. Your vote for me was pretty much just "I posted more than you, so you're scum".

No, I never said that. I wasn't voting for you because of how much you were posting, I was voting for you because of the quality of your posts.

And why would it be a point in your favor? Unless OGML weighted town roles towards frequent posters, post rate means dick.

Because scum tend to lurk more, and say less, then town. Because it's more dangerous for them to post, while town have more motivation to post since it's the only way they can win. Duh. It's not a strong tell or anything, of course.

"take advantage of Glork's logic-less vote"? What in the hell does that mean?

I mean that you know that if Glork is attacking someone, even if he's not using logic yet, their odds of survival tend to go way down, and you tried to take advantage of that.

So Glork can single-handedly get you lynched without ever explaining why you're a good lynch.

No, I didn't say "without explaining himself", because I'm sure he will. I was just pointing out that Glork is one of the best people in the game in the skill of getting the person he's attacking lynched, and I'm sure you knew that and were taking advantage of the fact.

That's amazing, does he also win Connect Four in three moves and stare down books until they give him the information he wants? Either way, my reason for voting you is different from Glork's (by virtue of the fact that I've actually provided a reason) and I'm still voting you even after Glork switched to Destructo. There is precisely zero basis to assume that I'm voting you because Glork voted you. You're clearly just making shit up here. Die scum.

Bullshit. The reason for you vote was completle bullshit, and I'm sure you know that. You were just looking for an excuse to join the wagon when it looked good (IE: after Glork voted me), and now you can't get off it without looking worse.

As Incog pointed out, if you were really suspicious of Glork, and he voted someone using zero logic, it dosn't make sense for you to go ahead and vote that same person without questoning his vote at all.

Except I voted for you

after

I stopped being suspicious of Glork.

Right. Of course, you never mentioned that until you were called on it.

Um, no. Ad hominem would be "You are wrong because you're stupid'. What I did was say "You're not making any sense. Also, you haven't made any sense at all this game, so you're probably scum." That's not what "ad hom" means.

And no, my defense against your day 1 craplogic attack wasn't ad hom, at all.

Ad hominem means

all

attacks against the arguer rather than the argument, not just the inflammatory kind. Wiki ftw. Your defense against me has

always

rested on me having no grounds to attack you, rather than on actually disputing the claims made in the attack.

Um...no.

My defense against you is that your attack on me is complete and utter bullshit. I certanly been scumhunting, and have been doing a much better job of it then you have this game, so your attack against me is just false.

My attack agaist you is that your attacks on everyone is complete and utter bullshit, and that I'm sure you already know that, since you're clearly scum who's just trying to find excuses to attack people so it looks like you're scumhunting.

More to the point, why aren't more people voting Erratus Apathos? He is so obv scum if you just read his posts, that I can't understand why more people aren't voting him.

When you say "More to the point" you're supposed to follow it up with an actual point.

I did. The point is, I want to know why you haven't been lynched yet. Are people just not reading this guy's posts, or what?

[Incognito]

Quick post. El Destructo, what do you think of Pathetric's 136?

[Erratus Apathos]

When Coriolanus asked you why you hadn't scumhunted, you explained why you didn't. You wouldn't be explaining why you didn't scumhunt if you did.

No, I was explaining why I hadn't voted yet on day 2. I certanly had been scumhunting. In fact, I've found at least one scum, you, so I think I'm doing pretty good.

Okay, so Coriolanus asked you why you hadn't scumhunted, and rather than correct him, you just ignored that part of the question. That makes it apparent that you didn't give a rat's ass about Coriolanus saying you didn't scumhunt, since he wasn't attacking you for it. Of course, now that I'm attacking you for it, you do care.

Also, nice false chronology there - you "found" me

after

Coriolanus and I said you hadn't been scumhunting, so using it to show that you had been is just bullshit.

No, I never said that. I wasn't voting for you because of how much you were posting, I was voting for you because of the quality of your posts.

Really? I couldn't tell:

It's pretty clear to me that he's not interested in scum hunting.

Hah. You wish I wasn't interested in scum hunting.

I'd like you to make a list of people who have done more scum hunting this game then I have. (Hint: you're not on the list.)

Also, it's scummy as hell that, when the only attack you've made at all today was a vote on Glork, you suddenly turn around and take advantage of Glork's logic-less vote on me without questioning it. Especally considering how insistent you've been on voting for Glork, compared to the general shittyness of your case against him.

You're doing the same bullshit you tried day 1, again, when you complained about my contributions while you hadn't done anything yet. I'm posting and actually doing stuff, and you're really not; this is only your third post of the month, and the first two were complete garbage, as I pointed out about your Glork case at the time; and yet you again act like I'm the one who's not scumhunting, just because I haven't voted yet today?

Vote: Erratus Apathos

The only thing here that even sounds like you're voting me for the quality of my posts is when you called two of my posts garbage. And that was just an aside to the fact that I hadn't posted much.

Because scum tend to lurk more, and say less, then town. Because it's more dangerous for them to post, while town have more motivation to post since it's the only way they can win. Duh. It's not a strong tell or anything, of course.

Well of course it's a tell if someone tactically lurks, that wasn't what I was talking about. We're both posting at about our normal rates (well, I'm assuming you are anyways) so how is it a tell that your normal rate is higher than mine?

The answer is, of course, that it's not.

No, I didn't say "without explaining himself", because I'm sure he will. I was just pointing out that Glork is one of the best people in the game in the skill of getting the person he's attacking lynched, and I'm sure you knew that and were taking advantage of the fact.

What makes you so sure I knew that? Because, well, I didn't.

Bullshit. The reason for you vote was completle bullshit, and I'm sure you know that. You were just looking for an excuse to join the wagon when it looked good (IE: after Glork voted me), and now you can't get off it without looking worse.

Like hell I can't. I spent the better part of yesterday attacking Rally Vincent, and I said earlier today that I'm still suspicious of him. I could easily have joined Glork in voting El Destructo. But I didn't, nor did I join him on Pathetric, Xtoxm, nor Coriolanus. I only joined him on you, and even that is obviously just a coincidence. Your attempt to paint me as a sheep who just mindlessly follows Glork around is poorly-thatched scum-brand bullshit.

Right. Of course, you never mentioned that until you were called on it.

No, it's right there in 468. I changed my mind on Glork in the first half, and voted you in the second.

Um...no.

My defense against you is that your attack on me is complete and utter bullshit. I certanly been scumhunting, and have been doing a much better job of it then you have this game, so your attack against me is just false.

You did a much better job scumhunting than me? I guess you're right, if I was honestly scumhunting I probably would have caught Xtoxm like you did.

My attack agaist you is that your attacks on everyone is complete and utter bullshit, and that I'm sure you already know that, since you're clearly scum who's just trying to find excuses to attack people so it looks like you're scumhunting.

Could you translate that into something that makes sense? Or is it

supposed

to just be a jumbled mess of "You are obvscum because you're trying to look town since everything you say is scummy whereas you know that you're scum seeing as how you're taking advantage of Glork's vote due to your attack on me being bad in light of the fact that you are obvscum"?

More to the point, why aren't more people voting Erratus Apathos? He is so obv scum if you just read his posts, that I can't understand why more people aren't voting him.

When you say "More to the point" you're supposed to follow it up with an actual point.

I did. The point is, I want to know why you haven't been lynched yet. Are people just not reading this guy's posts, or what?

That's right, Yos. People aren't reading my posts.

[Erratus Apathos]

Also I feel compelled to remind everyone that deadline is the 21st.

[Coriolanus]

You did a much better job scumhunting than me? I guess you're right, if I was honestly scumhunting I probably would have caught Xtoxm like you did.

This is a great point. Yos is completely wrong in being self-righteous here. You would think being painfully incorrect would be a humbling enough experience, but he's just shrugged it off without even considering how he set back the town.

[dahill1]

back
post soonish

[El Destructo]

Have those issues been sorted out? Are your's and destructor's notes and feelings of the game beginning to match one another's?

The computer is dead as in dead, I'm stuck stealing time from an infinitely slower computer with a tiny screen until I finish the relatively slow process of building a replacement. I think me and Des' reads are pretty close to each other now, though, which is nice.

I have to go, so I'll leave it there for now. I really really REALLY didn't like Yos' role in the Xtoxm lynch so I'll cover most of that next time unless Elmo gets to it first.

Yeah, I do have time to drop in for this, though.

Probably the first thing both me and Des seemed to pick up on was "wow, that Xtoxm wagon was bad". And it's not merely hindsight, that seems to have been the opinion at the time:

Half the people contributing to my lynch don't fully believe in it, and you know it.

Welcome to Day One of a deadlined game...

so I'm pretty curious how this wagon built in the first place. In retrospect, it seems to have gone pretty well for the scum; the focus was on him quickly and stayed on him pretty consistantly, limiting interactions between other people. And I'm usually interested to work backwards from the result of a lynch, and see who pushed it, and why - most mafia games are decided on lynches, after all. I think it's unarguable than Yos is front and center in Xtoxm's lynch. And the argument post-reveal seems to be "Hey, don't blame me! Blame Xtoxm for making the wagon on him so salicious.. I mean didn't you see that guy, he was so anti-town I just

had

to lynch him!" but reading back, I noticed the oddest thing. No-one else seems to be rabid, in fact no-one else is really that interested, it's only Yosarian who seems to be going just

crazy

over this one guy. Then this catches my eye:

And yet, I cut you slack for this because I know you have a policy of lynching claimed vanillas on day 1, but I think the post where you voted Xtoxm reaches to try and make him look bad.

so I'm thinking it actually goes way beyond just jumping onto something easy, he's actually pressing the townie lynch by making mountains out of molehills. I mean, if you read Yos' posts alone, you'd think Xtoxm was public enemy number one, enough that he joked about him flipping town being a mod error. If you go back and look at what Xtoxm actually did, there's a huge gulf between there and Yosarian's behaviour towards him.. you'd figure he insulted his mother or something instead of self-voting for all the heat Yos attacks him with. And Yos never looks elsewhere for the whole of day 1 until Xtoxm is dead, except to yell at EA when he's required to.

His reasons seem to be:
# He claimed vanilla for no reason which "is incredibly anti-town". If he's scum, claiming vanilla doesn't hurt the town at all, so that's predicated on him being town, which is ridiculous if you're trying to lynch him. Hey, look! He even said that!

Yos is scummy because his post is directed at someone he either knows or believes to be town, he expresses annoyance at the fact i'm town and claimed my role, rather than finding me suspicious for it (which later changes to once he realises his mistake).

this is an explanation of his earlier post:

Yuck...xtoxm claimed vanillia? WTF? Xtoxm, what the heck are you doing this game? So far you've self-voted and claimed vanillia on day 1 with no reasoning very early. Do I need to explain how anti-town either of those actions are?

Sounds like someone knows i'm town.

and Yos later falls over himself, trying to explain how claiming vanilla can possibly be a scumtell. Apparently "scum want to claim vanilla and town don't", this is despite the vast number of townies who do claim vanilla when they get near lynch. You can argue all you want about keeping power roles hidden, the fact is, it's not a scumtell, and

it's only anti-town if a real townie claims vanilla

, so by deduction, Yos must have thought Xtoxm was a real vanilla townie at the time he said that.
# "Multiple OMGUS attacks", which translated really means "he suspected Yos and Glork after they attacked him". The attack against Yos, as I have just shown, has a valid basis; it is not scummy to attack someone with a valid reason, regardless of who they are voting for. He attacked Glork for what he saw as an opportunistic vote, which seems valid to me, and indeed Patetheric thought it was reminicent of the GlorkScum featured in Space Monkey. And his later attack against Glork only came right before he was about to be lynched, so it makes no sense to use that as a reason to suspect him.
# "The people i'm calling scummy are all voting me..." which as he said later was limited to concerning Glork and Yos, is a reasonable comment in my view - if you suspect two people are scum together and they both have this odd habit of voting together, it's a good idea to point that out. And given he's stated valid reasons for suspicion of both, it seems fine to me.
# He said "Yos knows I'm town". Apparently this comment is "incredibly illogical and scummy", for no stated reason. I have explained why I believe he said this, and why it makes sense, and indeed he explained it later. And he said multiple times that he'd already explained himself.
# "Before Glork hammered him, he actually admittted he was delibratly evading my questions" which I just cannot find, the cloest thing is that he did say that "I made it clear I had no intention of answering him", which is the next point:
# He refused to answer questions. Okay, that's pretty irritating, but I have difficulty actually finding any questions where he really didn't answer them. It's possible I missed them, but the only thing I can find where Yos asserts Xtoxm didn't answer it was the reference to Yos knowing he was town, which he did answer multiple times, as I said above. I don't understand how that's compatible with the quote, but that makes it surely a very weak tell at best.

(I actually did say to him that he could either answer my questions or die. I'll admit I didn't really expect him to die rather then answer my question, but that's the risk you take when you pressure someone...)

Okay, wait, you were taking the risk of pressuring him? But I thought you just said he acted incrediably scummy - if you're telling the truth, you wouldn't be talking about a 'risk' because you'd just want him plain dead. And actually this talk of a risk is all the worse for the sheer lack of hestitation or cautiousness exhibited in pushing Xtoxm, a player well known to be poor at defending himself as town.

I should make clear, since lots of people seem to be misunderstanding this, that I'm not actually pushing for an instant speedlynch of Xtoxm or whatever; I mean, the game is only, what, 5 days old? We do need to put pressure on him until he starts making sense, though, and I find it frustrating that so many people are making it so hard for me to do that by everyone in the game suddenly jumping to his defense here.

And at the point he posted this, how many of the his stated reasons were already present? The vanilla claim, the alleged OMGUS, and so on? You betcha: all of them apart from what Xtoxm said right before being lynched, which logically Yos cannot have used as a reason to lynch him.

So basically what you're left with, after an examination of his stated reasons, is not a damn lot. And sometimes a majority of the town are well and truely sucked into thinking someone must be mafia, and it's harder to find who was pushing it for their own gain later, but I really see no reason why that's remotely true here, and I'm actually surprised that no-one seems to have done any real analysis of Xtoxm's lynch. Occasionally towns tear themselves apart, but vastly more frequently scum have a hand in their downfall, and Yos has his fingerprints all over Xtoxm's corpse as far as I'm concerned.

I mean, there are basically two options:
1) Xtoxm's behaviour, as a genuine vanilla townie, was so amazingly bad that Yos's near-bloodlust and subsequent sorry weakass reasons are justified
2) Yosarian is scum

and Xtoxm's actual behaviour simply does not support #1. Hence, Yosarian is my preferred lynch for today.

Elmo

[Coriolanus]

Prod Tuber

dahill1: 3 (charter, Tuberkulos, Coriolanus)
El Destructo: 2 (Incognito, Glork)
Yosarian2: 2 (Erratus Apathos, El Destructo)
Erratus Apathos: 1 (Yosarian2)

Not Voting: 2 (dahill1, Assmaster)

the two non voters should vote.

everyone else needs to provide a back-up plan.

mine is yosarian. failing that wagon, i'd join EA's before destructo's.

[OhGodMyLife]

Tuberkulos has been prodded.

[dahill1]

really don't have time to do a thorough reread due to stillers and finals
i do realize that it's nearing deadline so i will put a vote out

concerning elmo/des' opinion on the alt discussion at the begininng, i don't get how determining if he had a main account was useless. in this case, sim accidentally outed himself but it ended up helping players reading him better.

anyways,

vote yosarian

i don't see his case on EA and it is mainly translating into OMGUS in my eyes.

[El Destructo]

destructor, I suppose this is pending?:

Please point to where specifically you used meta in my game. I couldn't remember off-hand, I just finished scouring your posts, and I couldn't find any indication that you used the same type of meta that you're using here within that game.

I thought I tried to use the scumtell I got off Cerebus3 from Newbie 530 on Kai but I can't find it anywhere. The closest I can come to it is this:

By acknowledging Glot's opinions, Kai's revealing that he believes/knows Glot is town. You don't acknowledge the opinion a player you think is scum has of your own arguments.

Not a great example. I can't prove it (unless I mentioned it somewhere in the thread) but I did do some reading of some of Kai's other games to see if he played the same as well.

If you really have issues with me using meta, in Crackers I openly referred SensFan's play as similar play he'd made as scum in Mini 570 and BM's play as his from Nice Shot Mafia and noted both as reasons to suspect or vote each.

There not much else for me to say on this topic and I think you were really missing the point of what I was doing as well, which is curious.

I didn't miss the point at all. You spotted something in Elmo's play in this particular game (his defending of dahill1) that you felt was very similar to something that you spotted in his scum play within Weasels Mafia (his defense of Thanatos). You then asked for specific examples of where he may have defended players as town to see if Glork's defending of other players might be a reliable scum-tell for Glork.

I'm sure you got that, but he fact that you didn't actually comment on how valid my points on Glork's meta were but instead decided to interrogate me on my

use

of meta, regardless of its application in this game, is what I found noteable.

Perhaps your view really did change from that particular time period, but I'm sure you could see why your change in stance on the actual worth of meta might catch my attention in this particular game.

I can see how you'd pick up on it given how adamant I have been about it in the past. But I've provided two examples of me metagaming from my most recently completed game (Crackers) where I was town. That pretty much completely deals with your whole issue.

I'd like to see Yosarian2's response to El Destructo's case before commenting on it myself.

What are your thoughts?

[El Destructo]

^ that was me too


I suppose I should respond to Yos.

He's coming up with explanations for his play at the start of the game that I don't find hugely convincing. The main point he's not addressing is that he didn't explain it at the time, so it was still noise, so far as I'm concerned. I still don't see why he'd even begin to think that Corio's reactions could be evidence of him being scum, which is one of my biggest beefs against him regarding this.

I think Pathetric, EA and Corio have pointed out how Yos' argument that he was scum-hunting or that we can't criticise him for not doing so when others weren't is a weak one. Specifically in relation to the Corio-alt thing, Corio was doing what a townie should - defending himself. From memory, Assmaster and Pathetric also reacted most pro-town because they noted early that it was a unproductive topic. While that's not obviously scum-hunting, it's definitely a contribution to the scum-hunt in reducing the amount of noise in the thread. On the otherhand, we had players like Glork, Yos, dahill and (I think to an extent) Incog seeming to perpetuate the discussion.

Bascially, I see a pro-town player being less likely to get involved in the discussion while scum would be more likely to latch onto it to appear to be involved and contribution.

Why would you expect me to have a "solid stance" that early in the day? Do Corio's early first few posts, on their own, give you a "solid stance' about his alignment?

No, but the point I made is that given your interest in the topic, you really should have been able to show us more than the vagueness you exhibited.

Regarding my read of Incog at the time of your unvote. I haven't played a heap of IRL Mafia, but when I have my play has been completely different. Not sure that playstyles carry over form forums to face to face play. Also, I've played a lot of forum mafia with Incog on and off ms. Not sure how many forum games you've played with him, but I'd guess I've played more.

I haven't really elaborated on my read of Incog mostly because I haven't had time/the deadline. I certainly didn't see him as notably town and neither did Elmo.

Quick post. El Destructo, what do you think of Pathetric's 136?

I'm not sure if there something specific you're asking about. Is there?

des

[El Destructo]

There's this too.

Yos tells Pathetric that Glork would be suspicious if he didn't think Xtoxm was scum.

Frankly, Patrick/Ether, I'd agree with you about Glork being suspicious, except I don't think Glork is likely to be scum with Xtoxm, and Xtoxm is looking far more suspicious ATM.

Yos doesn't support this stance very convincingly in Day 2 after Xtoxm flips town.

I guess the biggest thing I found odd was his whole attack on you yesterday. That never really made much sense to me; he had several posts attacking you, some of them quite long, but the only point he actually made against you that made any sense at all to me was the "if he's scum we'll take care of him tommorow" comment, and that hardly seems enough.

Glork is a good enough player that his scum-play dosn't diverge much from his town-play; so even though about 70% of his play yesterday is what I would expect from him as town, including the Xtoxm hammer, the other 30% makes me nervous; more so then if it was someone else.

I say it's not very convincing because he made a special note that Glork is being suspicious, even when he admits that he didn't think Glork and Xtoxm could be scum together... and he was apparently convinced beyond reasonable doubt of Xtoxm being scum. So to go ahead and call Glork scummy in the face of this is actually a very meaningful statement.

Yos asks Glork to explain his vote on him in 456. Glork says he "might" have reasons for it. Yos' reaction is to ask Glork for more clarity on his vote in 461. He never follows this up on this until after Elmo asked him about Glork in 564, which is like 5 days later. For someone who had implied to have good cause to suspect Glork in Day 1, this is very unusual play.

des