Mini 792 - Tofu Mafia. Game over!

[Herodotus]

/confirm

[Herodotus]

vote: Spring

There's something fishy about being 200% town...

[Herodotus]

Porkens:
Was the point of your quote block in 21, particularly your fos on Ectomancer, sincere?

[Herodotus]

unvote
vote: Spyrex

because day 1 has been going on long enough.

[Herodotus]

1. what games (with links) have you finished in the last 6 months?
2. what are your on-going games?
3. what is your personal definition of lurking?
4. of the players in this game, which players have you played with in the last six months?
5. what other names do you play mafia under here?
6. what other sites have you played at within the last six months?

1.
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10068
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10526
plus some marathon games

2.
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11252

3.
Posting only often enough to avoid prods would almost always qualify.
Averaging only X sentences per day that are relevant to the game would qualify as lurking for some value of X which probably depends on the game and the gamestate (though I'm not suggesting I would literally count.)
Making only meaningless statements about the game would often qualify as lurking.
If over a sustained period, I don't know another player's positions regarding the issues we're discussing, they're probably lurking.
Other characteristics of peoples' posting could also mean they were lurking. I can't think of a good complete definition.

4.
Porkens and Artem
again, not including marathon day games... which would add at least Spring and Populartajo

5.
If I was playing under a different username, I don't think I'd reveal that.

6.
None.

Adel, when you answer your own questions, please let us know why you asked question 3 in particular.

P.S. I love your vote on SpyreX

Why do you love it?

[Herodotus]

Why do we need a consensus opinion on what lurking is? If you formalize it, that will allow players to look for ways to fall outside the imperfect formal definition while still lurking in practice. If they're called on it, they can just point to the consensus definition to excuse themselves.
But even if you don't formalize it (and I assume that you don't intend to) I'd rather the scum not know that certain townies will let them get away with certain things.

Random stage. I always vote something that catches my attention. Herodotus 31 feels forced and 32 feels fabricated (notice the smiley) but it could prob be just a bad impression.

Calling it random stage voting (here and in 65) but giving a reason like that looks slightly inconsistent.
Yes, those posts were forced/fabricated in a sense. I saw Porkens random vote one player (two players, technically) and then FoS another. I wondered what was going on there. I placed the vote because it would be likely to make him consider moving his own -- I wanted to see whether he would, and if he did, where he'd move it. So I wasn't really suspicious of SpyreX, and in that sense the vote, while not random, was fabricated.

unvote

My conclusion? Not much information from it. He gave a reasonable excuse for writing the fos without meaning it.

Voting first and giving reasons later is

bad

.

Is it bad to vote and not give reasons? Or is giving reasons later for a previously unexplained vote bad?

[Herodotus]

You unvoted. Are you suspicious of anyone?

Not to any significant degree.

Short of some kind of "Porkens AND spring are scum and Porkens pulled the noobiest gambit trying to burn deflection away from a wagon that had no basis but somehow would get pushed to lynch in this setup because everyone else is sheeple" I do not get any scum (nor town) motivation for the joke.

I agree.

Vote: Adel

You may be planning to contribute a lot soon, but so far you have not. You're "aware of the search function" but stated that the reason you insisted on everyone posting their own games was that you would "have to do all of the work myself" otherwise. It's about 20 seconds of work per player, that way. Not much more than finding their list within the thread.

[Herodotus]

The reason I'm excusing Elmo (temporarily) is because Elmo warned us before the game that they might have to lurk due to RL factors. Otherwise, I might have voted Elmo in my last post.

[Herodotus]

@Adel:
If there is another player in this game who has posted as much as or less than the amount Elmo had posted as of my post 122, then I must not have noticed them at all. There may be people actively lurking, but I have not yet put any effort into evaluating that.
But I'd think if there was a lurker, they would be a decent person to vote (unless they were about to be replaced for their inactivity.)
If you're referring to another game I've played, specify the player, and I'll explain why I didn't vote them.

[Herodotus]

The reason I'm excusing Elmo (temporarily) is because Elmo warned us before the game that they might have to lurk due to RL factors. Otherwise, I might have voted Elmo in my last post.

ah, so if there was another player with activity as low as ecto's (or lower) you would not excuse that?

/

Akbar

(it's a TRAP!)

not very pro-town

I agree with that, but I also don't see any scum motivation for his saying what he said. It's too obvious to make me think he was buddying.

@Adel:
If there is another player in this game who has posted as much as or less than the amount Elmo had posted as of my post 122, then I must not have noticed them at all. There may be people actively lurking, but I have not yet put any effort into evaluating that.
But I'd think if there was a lurker, they would be a decent person to vote (unless they were about to be replaced for their inactivity.)
If you're referring to another game I've played, specify the player, and I'll explain why I didn't vote them.

look at springlullby.

I have. She said infinitely more in the first paragraph of her second post than Elmo had said up to that point. And in total, her one post stated more game-relevant analysis than either you or populartajo had written.

vote: Spring

There's something fishy about being 200% town...

this post is notable.

I don't see how, but I suppose it's not up to me to decide.

Vote: Adel

You may be planning to contribute a lot soon, but so far you have not. You're "aware of the search function" but stated that the reason you insisted on everyone posting their own games was that you would "have to do all of the work myself" otherwise. It's about 20 seconds of work per player, that way. Not much more than finding their list within the thread.

it takes less time to check the activity of other players than it does to build a database of their previous games which are current enough to base a meta read upon.

unvote, vote: Herodotus

most likely partner: springlullby
second most likely partner: Porkens

I'm not saying you haven't devoted time to this game. I'm pretty confident that you have. But you've stated very few opinions on the things that were going on while you were arguing with people over what I see as an irrelevant issue. Also, my vote on you was partly based on the contradiction I mentioned in that post.

[Herodotus]

@Porkens 107: You said you were waiting for Adel's explanations. Seeing as they haven't come, what is your opinion of Adel at the moment?

Sounds like you want a specific answer, not a candid one.
Also, this is a bit early.

Herod and Adel:

It was an obviously loaded question. I didn't give anything away (especially not to Herod). "Not pro-town?" I just shake my head at that statement.

Yes, I knew the question was a trap, but I think it would theoretically have been better to say this after I answered. It was certainly possible I'd give an answer that would lead to a scumtell. But that would be in your interests whether you're scum or town, so it doesn't mean much to me ATM. Only if we were scum together would it be in your best interests for me to be warned, but I know that's not the case, and if we had been, I don't think you'd warn me so blatantly.

I'm generating game-relevant information, she offered a couple of opinions on page 2. It stands out to me that she had a rapid random wagon on her on page 1 that dissolved so quickly.... and then you "didn't notice" that she was lurking worse than elmo.

Now you're saying something that's provably not true. They both had one post. Elmo's contained only a vote while spring's contained a handful of points plus a vote.
And by the way, why were you accusing Elmo of lurking if you thought Spring was "lurking worse"?

Vote: Adel

You may be planning to contribute a lot soon, but so far you have not.

You're "aware of the search function" but stated that the reason you insisted on everyone posting their own games was that you would "have to do all of the work myself" otherwise.

It's about 20 seconds of work per player, that way. Not much more than finding their list within the thread.

it takes less time to check the activity of other players than it does to build a database of their previous games which are current enough to base a meta read upon.

unvote, vote: Herodotus

most likely partner: springlullby
second most likely partner: Porkens

I'm not saying you haven't devoted time to this game. I'm pretty confident that you have. But you've stated very few opinions on the things that were going on while you were arguing with people over what I see as an irrelevant issue. Also, my vote on you was partly based on the contradiction I mentioned in that post.

I placed a section in bold. Does that section contain the contradiction you just referenced?
If so, I don't think you appreciate how time intensive it is to do what I do, or how I approach the psychological aspects of this game. There is informational utility in my approach of asking players to volunteer information. I plan on paying special attention to the games they "accidentally" left off of the lists, and the players they "forgot" to mention having played with before.

I have changed the bolding. Now, the part in bold is the contradiction, while the part in italics is the reason I see it as a contradiction.
As far as omissions are concerned, I'd expect they'd be more likely inadvertent. On a related note, is it acceptable to you that I didn't include my marathon games? I think others didn't include them either.
Don't misunderstand. I have a lot of respect for your approach to the game and the effort you put in. But when I say that you have not yet contributed, what I mean is that until your case on me, you had very few comments on the issues other players were discussing. The following is all I can see from reading you in isolation:

either that, or it is page 1 chainsaw defense.

says the person that unvoted SpyreX .

Not true, especially early in a day 1. There are numerous non-scummy reasons to place a vote without explicit reasoning.

did anyone else notice that he made a post on the site recently, just not in this game?

Who thinks he is lurking?

I see these as being pretty minimal in terms of expression of opinions and ideas. Everything else you'd said up to that point was about your questions and arguing with people whose answers were incomplete or dismissive. If they lead to something useful, that will be great. But you've skipped over the actual game that's been taking place in the meantime.

[Herodotus]

Crossage means I need to make another post.

try harder kid. a) what makes you think that he didn't? b) why ask that question instead of noting that there are at least two players making a smaller contribution than me while his vote remains upon me for "not contributing" and c) if you honestly feel like I am evading questions I gave you a very good opening to restate those questions you want answers to, yet you ask a highly trivial question.

Not directed at me, but...
(a) I did, in case it matters. That didn't bother me, since I was looking forward to whatever question was coming next.
(b) You seem nervous about my vote, which surprises me. And I never promised to always vote for whatever player said the least. I was originally responding to what you and Porkens said in 119-121.
(c) I have a question: do you find populartajo suspicious?

[Herodotus]

(yes, Adel, I left this game off my list because I don't think a newbie game where I get NKd the first night is worth mentioning):

In that case, I only have one previous game, and you and I haven't played together before... no, they count.

The point is that I'm doing the same sort of purposefully keeping players at null in this game because you're all ICs.

Hi!

Spring - is playing pretty much like she did in the other two games (where I knew her alignment to be town); and I still stand by my earlier point that the best way to get SL posting is to start pushing a case on her (and I don't really have the stamina or purpose to do it a third time).
...
Hero - is likely scum; He played very analytically and aggressively in our game together and I quickly (but correctly, mind you) nailed him as obv town. He's still being analytical here but the level of aggressiveness is quite a bit lower. Why?

"Likely scum"? That's pretty strong. If your argument is based purely on meta here, then wow. In your post you explain why your meta is different in this game, then you say someone else is "likely scum" because they're less aggressive in this game?
It sounds like you would have thought your vote would do some good on Spring -- and at the same time you're defusing any case that does get made against her by preemptively calling it pressure.
Your comment on Populartajo is not a good idea. In my opinion, you're hinting at information in another game.

Hero is the only one for whom my meta on them doesn't add up with their current playstyle. That sets off a red flag for me, but at the same time, he was a newbie in our common game and his playstyle may have shifted as he got more experienced. Hard to tell at the moment.

My playstyle has probably changed since my first game, but there are more significant issues that explain why I've been less aggressive. One is the "intimidation with the cast" that you claim, another is reduced ambition (I was rereading that game from page 1 every day because I was sure I'd be able to find the scum.) There are also the number of players and their playstyles (in our game, only you, Empking, and I were active, leaving 2 lurking scum and 4 lurking newbie townies.) So that game was crawling by comparison to this one.

As per my vote. I'm well aware that my pressure is small, but I'm also aware that Porkens is not at all worried about a wagon forming on him and none of the other players (other than Ecto) like the idea of piling up on Porkens. Interestingly enough, this crowd does not seem to be interested in piling up on anybody as the last votecount looks like a rainbow.

My interpretation of this paragraph is that you're voting Porkens because it's not going to make a difference... you say it won't pressure him and others won't join you.
You suggest that a case on Spring would make her active. I'd think that would give you a reason to at least vote for her, as pressure, even if you leave it up to someone else to make the case.

Heh, this game has a lot of "why aren't you voting Spring? That's suspicious."

You think I'm likely scum, but you're not voting me either? Doing so would have destabilized the rainbow you were worried about, too.

marathon games are very useful! Players play much more on reflex and out of habit in marathon games, and looking at them is invaluable.

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10790
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10798
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10826
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11005
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11044
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11047
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11092
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11101
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11054

So will you link us to your Epicmafia games, then?

[Herodotus]

Would "more likely scum than town" be better? Think of it as a gauge with the arrow pointing above 0. (where + is the scum side and - is the town side)

That makes the problem with your lack of vote more explicit. You know very well that a 50% chance of lynching scum on D1 is excellent, so you should not only be voting me, you should be trying to get me lynched. That you aren't means, at least, that you don't really believe I'm "more likely scum than town."

It sounds like you would have thought your vote would do some good on Spring -- and at the same time you're defusing any case that does get made against her by preemptively calling it pressure.

Calling something pressure does not diffuse the associated case. Here's an example.

If some other player was to make a case against her, you're painting that case as non-serious. Not a major issue, but not helpful.

I'm not voting for you because I don't think you deserve a vote based purely on meta. I'm not voting for spring because people (often myself included) tend to be less active over the weekend and I wanted to wait until Monday before piling up pressure.

Also, I'm not

worried

about the rainbow votecount. I noted it as an indication about players' reluctance to pile in on somebody, which I found interesting. It also means that I need to think carefully about my case before actually placing a vote if I'm going to convince anybody to follow me. I'm going to

Unvote

for now since everybody's nagging me about parking a vote on Porkens, which I don't think is really a problem.

It's definitely contrary to your behavior in our other game. And the point isn't only that you do have a vote on Porkens that you have described as meaningless, it's also that you aren't voting for me. You say I don't "deserve" a vote based on meta; but don't I "deserve" a vote based on your stated belief that it's more likely that I'm scum than that I'm town?

[Herodotus]

I'm sorry. You're saying that it's too strong for me to derive your scumminess based purely on the meta of your very first game. I happen to agree, but you seem to really want a vote.

I'd hate to disappoint.

Vote: Herodotus

No, my first and my last points were that you supposedly did exactly that, but didn't follow up by voting me.

And take responsibility for your vote -- don't place it because I "want" it, place it because you think I'm scum. So, now, why do you think I'm scum?

vote: Artem

[Herodotus]

This is funny: the last time I voted Artem, I forgot to

unvote

first, and I don't think I've forgotten since then.

vote: Artem

[Herodotus]

No, Artem, I disagree with what could be seen as an "honesty test" from Adel, since I don't think the scum are more likely to omit games. But IIRC Adel only said those games deserved more attention, not that the presence of omissions was necessarily scummy.
The rest of your post I'll address when I have more time.

[Herodotus]

I'm sorry that this post is so long. There are a lot of long posts to which to respond.

0) You're playing differently than your meta. Not only are you less aggressive, but you also seem more emotional and less cool-headed.

On the contrary, while I wasn't aggressive at first (and I gave some reasons contributing to that,) I've been heading in that direction. I'm aware of it, of course, but this point simply isn't a valid one. As far as emotion goes, I'm not taking the game personally. My emotions here are that I like the players, but I want to find and lynch whichever ones happened to be assigned the scum roles. I think you're finding me to be less cool-headed because I'm pursuing you.

So, by your logic, since the game is not crawling, you don't really have to do anything. Is there a reason your ambitions are reduced? Is there no scum to hunt in this game, or do you just have no reason to because you already know who they are?

Because the game is not crawling, I don't have to do overly dramatic/aggressive things to push it forward.
In that first game, I thought I should be able to find the scum if I read the game thoroughly and provoked people enough. Not only did I fail there, and in my next full-length game, but in this group, I expect that will be a lot harder. So I'm trying to scumhunt, but I'm less confident that I will succeed.

1) A townie shouldn't be asking for a vote. If you really are town, then all you're doing is distracting attention from the scum onto yourself.

I wasn't asking for your vote, I was pointing out that your lack of vote was inconsistent with the level of suspicion that you claimed.

2) You seem to be buddying up to Adel:

I don't see that. As far as I can tell, I'm one of only two people who have voiced suspicions of Adel. And I'm certainly not blindly following Adel; I was also one of only about two people to question the utility of having a consensus definition of lurking.
So am I both buddying and distancing? That makes no sense.

3) Piling up on somebody early in the game is a great scum tactic, because they can easily bring somebody up to L-2 or L-1 and argue their way out with "it's not dangerous", or "I'm doing it to get out of RVS". This is why early wagons generate good content. The fact that there was no such wagon means that the scum are either shy or inactive. Lurkers aside, you yourself said that you're intimidated by the cast. (me being the other person who's intimidated, but I'd argue that I was pro-wagon from the start of the game).

This comment seems irrelevant to providing reasons for your vote.

Also,

It's definitely contrary to your behavior in our other game. And the point isn't only that you do have a vote on Porkens that you have described as meaningless, it's also that you aren't voting for me. You say I don't "deserve" a vote based on meta; but don't I "deserve" a vote based on your stated belief that it's more likely that I'm scum than that I'm town?

Yes, I'm playing differently in this game. I don't have a bunch of newbie players that I'm trying to get to post. It seems that Troll is already fulfilling the activity police duty and I don't see much sense for me to vote hop like I did in our game together.

I'm playing differently in this game, too. I too don't have a bunch of newbie players I'm trying to get to post. But my difference in playstyle makes me more likely to be scum than to be town?
As far as parking your vote is concerned, that drew my attention. But there was also the fact that you essentially described reasons why your vote was accomplishing nothing.

Okay, first of all, SpyreX not wanting a 36 day 1 means he's really likely town; scum love slow-paced games

Long days ≠ slow pace.

Also note the difference in attitude between him and Herod, which is "Adel, this distracts from scumhunting" vs. "Adel you are an easy target let me vote you! vote: Adel".

How on earth is Adel an easy target? I'd expect that I'm the easiest target in this game. And please explain how what I said is in any way comparable to your characterization of what I said.

One thing I dislike about springlullaby's 42 is that she says "Spyrex comes off as weaker in the exchange". That seems to be implicitly polarising; Ecto is attacking Spyrex, so we should be supporting one against the other. The most common situation is that two people arguing are town, purely because most people are town, so I'd have expected her to consider that; scum have a motivation to play townies off against each other, which is what it looks more like.

I agree with the theory, but the last time I heard someone use the phrase SL used, they were town, so I don't see it as a significant scumtell.

My vote.. I disliked Herod's random vote on Spring, it didn't leave any avenue for interaction. If you compare it to Spyrex's vote, he's clearly looking to get a response from Vi, for example. That seems more like what a townie should be doing. Herod's vote avoids starting a wagon on anyone, it doesn't allow any kind of meaningful response, and it's based on something out-of-game, which doesn't allow for any attack on him in the future. It's a little hard to articulate, but it's basically a "stay out of the limelight" feeling that scum so often give off. If you contrast that to Ecto's attitude for example, there's a big difference.

It was the second post of the game.

And just because SL didn't respond doesn't mean my random vote didn't allow room for a response (I was thinking she could say something along the lines of "Hey, if I'm pro-town, then why are you voting me?") But most importantly,

it was the second post of the game.

If you want, I can copy+paste various second posts of other games and we can discuss how important they were.

32 is definitely bad. Continues the snipey snipey on a likely townie, but strawmans what he said. He did

not

say he wanted a short day 1, he said he wanted to avoid an overly long day 1. This subtly inflames the argument against him.

And then when I do wagon someone, that's somehow worse than the random vote where I didn't? Also, I've already explained that vote. I wanted to see how Porkens would react. I wasn't sniping at Spyrex, I was making a joke.

I guess my comments at Herod are somewhat ironic, given that I made a vote without giving reasoning; I did that because I wanted to see if anyone would jump in with me, or ask me for reasoning.

I thought it was either a random vote, or a response to my putting a fourth vote on Spyrex.

Again, I ask this question.

Do you believe any of what has been said so far

(outside answering your survey)

has been beneficial to finding scum?

I think this is a very strong towntell. Conflict of this nature pretty much always benefits the scum, since it's basically bickering and doesn't relate to alignment; Vi seems to understand this and it trying to reduce it. Scum would almost certainly sit back and eat popcorn; I think everyone has seen one of these situations before.

Compare:

I'm not saying you haven't devoted time to this game. I'm pretty confident that you have. But you've stated very few opinions on the things that were going on while you were arguing with people over what I see as an irrelevant issue.

My extremely limited meta on Korts indicates townish... he's certainly unlike his SK self, but maybe he's slicker as group scum. Dunno. I approve of the fact he had a bad gut feeling about Herod, since that's similar to me. Korts, comrade, join the Herod wagon for victory and good times!

I don't like this section. Is it buddying? Maybe.

I would point out that Artem does not claim to draw a strong conclusion from it, merely "more likely than random"

I'm not sure you read what Artem wrote... "more likely scum than town" is hugely different from "more likely than random."

Hero wanted a vote, so I thought I'd bring up the other problems that I had with him

Huh? I seem to recall I had to drag a case out of you...

@Spyrex: I don't think wagons are bad, as long as someone forming one has some idea of how it could be useful -- which they don't need to share.
And I agree that meta could be an excuse to use on a mislynch. Further, "you're playing differently" is just as likely to out a town PR as catch a scum. But there are better and more subtle things to find that could be useful.

Further, it might be a bit different if Artem was the first to pursue this avenue. He's not. So, meta-wagoning follows a pattern I've seen.

I don't understand this paragraph.

[Herodotus]

Yes, I doubt scum would let a wagon form on one of their own. Any good early game wagon will have at least one scum on them and the wagon will be on a townie, I'm fairly certain.

This assumption would suggest an easy formula for scum victory...

I got a red flag from your playstyle. I noted it. You said that I shouldn't be suspecting you to be scum based on that. I agreed that the level of suspicion does not warrant a vote. You seemed to disagree. I don't understand how you can both say that I should not have a high level of suspicion while saying that my level of suspicion should warrant a vote. Perhaps I came off with a stronger level suspicion than intended when writing words, but the lack of a vote (or even an FOS) should have given you a better idea of my level of suspicion, no?

You indicated you were estimating town/scum probabilities where the odds of my being scum were higher than the odds of my being town (and you said that twice.) I thought it was unreasonable to assign such a high probability based on my being less aggressive, but if you were going to do so, it was also unreasonable not to vote for me. Do you expect to ever get better than 50% odds of hitting scum on day 1?

Same difference, except the probabilities are normalized to sum up to 1 in the second case. There are only two alignments in this game (I hope). So if you're "more likely scum than random" then you're also "more likely scum than town", because there's no other option.

Those statements are only the same if (exactly) half of the players are scum. And that would not be a normal game.

This comment seems irrelevant to providing reasons for your vote.

Not irrelevant. My parked vote served one purpose: an invitation to join a bandwagon. No wagon formed. Don't you find it unusual that no wagon formed? I do because in pretty much every other game I've been in, there's an early wagon. I presented a theory behind that

Is your point that no wagon formed on Porkens because I was too intimidated to place a high-numbered vote on someone? Consider that (a) I had no problem placing a fourth vote on Spyrex, (b) I had already decided I didn't find Porkens suspicious, and (c) there were a lot of other people who could have joined the Porkens wagon but did not.

I seem to recall I had to drag a case out of you...

That's right. I wasn't going to share the problems because I was still watching, but you really wanted a case, so I figured I might as well bring them up.

First you made a radical assertion, then at the moment the (weak) basis for that assertion became false, you caved to my (aggressive) pressure and placed a vote that apparently no longer had any foundation.

[Herodotus]

"more likely scum than town" looks to me like it's clearly a statement about absolute probability. You're claiming it isn't?

[Herodotus]

First, Ecto, please get well. Your previous games have been inspirational to me, so I say as an admirer that I hope you have a swift and healthy recovery.

---

I agree with much of what Spring has said so far on this page.

On page 2, it's okay to vote someone for the same reason as someone else. But on page 3, it's also generally okay to vote someone for voting for the same reason as someone else. That both votes stayed for a while could be significant, though they both had reasons.

It could sometimes help the town to know whether the scum could chat pre-game, and as an attempt to look townie, I'd consider it too transparent, so I see this as a null-tell. If she considered it helpful to know, but didn't ask in the thread, her alternative was to ask the mod in a PM then report the answer in the thread, but we can all imagine how that would look... "Oh, hey, everyone, just thought you should know that the scum were(n't) allowed to talk before the game."
I do want to hear what SL had in mind (i.e. what interactions.) But also consider that some of the players may have enough experience with each other that they may only seem like they were talking pre-game.

Elmo is placing a lot of emphasis on early things. (Just an observation.)

- I think the conclusion to Adel's questionnaire thing is weak

My understanding is that Adel reads many of the other players' games to figure out what they do as town and what they do as scum, and compares that to what they're doing in this game. It takes a while, so we haven't seen any of the conclusions yet.

And the Spyrex vote is an interrogation. I kind of detect the first hints of 'refuge in complexity' in the mystery surrounding Adel's play and this warrant a

FOS

I don't see the interrogation aspect of the Spyrex vote. To the other part, yes (though my vote was for different reasons.)

I too found Ecto's play quite normal and reasonable.

I'll let Artem respond to most of what SL said about him before I comment. But it strikes me as odd that Artem is upset about a "bunk" case on him. I'd expect a townie to react differently, especially if he genuinely suspects Spyrex is scum, in which case it's part of Spyrex's job to make bunk cases. I'll have to check the section containing their back-and-forth again later.

[Herodotus]

How on earth is Adel an easy target? I'd expect that I'm the easiest target in this game.

? Explain this.

It was written in response to Elmo portraying my vote on Adel as

"Adel you are an easy target let me vote you! vote: Adel".

What you're asking about is part of something larger, and the rest (such as my actual reasons for voting Adel) is important, but here's what I mean:
I don't think Adel is an "easy target." If I were scum trying for a mislynch, Adel seems like a poor selection to target for that (assuming Adel is town.)
Adel would probably agree, judging by the bottom of this post.
The part about myself was unnecessary and irrelevant, but I meant that I'd imagine that if every player's ability to avoid being lynched when they're town could be measured, mine would be low compared to the other players here.

My point was only that Elmo was wrong about my vote for Adel.

[Herodotus]

Heros'106 is an interesting move. Why the vote on Adel when you said you didnt have any significant degree suspicions? Are you always that liberal with your votes??

Not always, but frequently. I'd accuse you of also being liberal with your votes, but you might mistake my point.

When you reread to write 246, I presume (since you remarked on Vi's related 101) you noticed my response to the first time you mentioned posts 31 and 32. So how does 32 qualify as a return to random if it was placed to serve a purpose?

[Herodotus]

2) As I said many times, Hero did not deserve a vote, but he was asking for one. It is part of my personality to do what I did (i.e., stick my tongue out and vote him). Since I voted him, I decided to bring up the other things I have been mulling over at the time. Adel's vote on Hero had nothing to do with anything, and I certainly wasn't going to pursue a Hero lynch with my vote/case.

...

Which brings up a question: Hero, why are you still voting me? You said your reasons are different. I would like to hear them, because I've explained to you how I can both see you as more scum than town and see you as not deserving a vote, which is what I understand your main reason for voting me is. Currently, it feels like you've parked your vote.

I think you've said this about seven separate times, so let me correct you again. I wasn't "asking for a vote," I was trying to say that I found it suspicious that you were not voting me, given what you had said.
I said my vote for Adel was "for different reasons." Is my vote parked on you? Sure, but given that I have a somewhat scummy read on you, I don't see that as a bad thing. You're at three votes, and you consider wagons to be pro-town, so you should be happy; again your response looks inconsistent with a town alignment.

[Herodotus]

it strikes me as odd that Artem is upset about a "bunk" case on him. I'd expect a townie to react differently, especially if he genuinely suspects Spyrex is scum, in which case it's part of Spyrex's job to make bunk cases.

His perception, then, would be that he's being blatantly lied about. The almost universal reaction to that is - understandably - outrage mixed with distress, sometimes tinged with blind aggression. So you would expect dead wrong. What reaction

would

you expect, I wonder? It'd require quite a twisted psyche to be happy or excited that someone was lying to your face, so it beggars belief What you are doing is taking the typical townie reaction and spinning it as scummy when it's obviously nothing of the sort.

What I would expect is that he'd be saying "you're making a bunk case! that's even more evidence that you're scum! Hey look, everyone, I found a scum, let's lynch him! More Spyrex votes please!" I think I would be happy and excited to have caught a scum, and seeing lies would make me more confident that I had done so. Instead of withdrawing, I'd usually want to engage them more so that they would show more tells and maybe they or their buddies would slip some information leading to other scum.
Though not everyone reacts in the same way.

[Herodotus]

I do not want him to claim, and I do not want anyone else to vote for him right now.

Agreed. Just to make it harder to force a too-early claim out of Artem,

unvote

He's still my top candidate, so

fos: Artem

.

[Herodotus]

You're at three votes, and you consider wagons to be pro-town, so you should be happy; again your response looks inconsistent with a town alignment.

I would have been fine with tacking on a sarcastic ^________^ where the semicolon is or something, but are you suggesting that Artem is scummy... for arguing against his own wagon? Are you serious?

That's a fair point. I was seeing Artem more as unhappy about the existence of the wagon on him than as arguing against the specific points. I really need to reread; I think there are some posts I've only read once so far.

I'm being more open about my process here since

I don't expect to live long in this game

Why not?

Are you serious? While Adel's statement may not have been a great idea, I don't see how your question (to which the answer is obvious) is helpful.

@ADel: You definitely have until the lynch, which probably won't be for at least a week, and while it's obviously possible, I wouldn't take it for granted that you'll be night killed.

[Herodotus]

I wrote these earlier and was going to include them with my previous post, but forgot:

"I'm parking a vote on you. So what? Shouldn't you be happy since you like wagons. Your behavior is inconsistent"

compare:
"

Sure, but given that I have a somewhat scummy read on you, I don't see that as a bad thing. You're at three votes,

and you consider wagons to be pro-town, so you should be happy; again your response looks inconsistent with a town alignment. " I do not like how you left out some critical parts of what I said.

@Porkens, Spring, Vi, and anyone else who may be familiar with him:
Is it normal for Spyrex (as town) to prefer a short day 1?
And to dislike meta?

[Herodotus]

Are you serious? While Adel's statement may not have been a great idea, I don't see how your question

(to which the answer is obvious)

is helpful.

Is it?

I wouldn't have asked if I thought the answer was obvious.

Yes.

I do not like how you left out some critical parts of what I said.

They're not that critical if they don't change my objection.

Not you, Artem. I was quoting his manipulative misquoting of me. Within the context, Post 302, the reference was clear, and he answered in post 306. (One point in favor of quote pyramids.)

-----

Right now all I see is blather: I do not see a coherent case against Artem.

refine you argument into something clear and concise please... otherwise I'll continue to consider your case to be pseudo-random bullshit.

So is your objection based on

substance

(i.e. instances where Artem has been understood to be scummy by his attackers) or on

style

(i.e. instances were Artem's attackers have not properly stated what they understand to be scummy)?

primarily wagon mechanics (

it ain't a bus

, and there isn't a scum-driven competing wagon) followed by substance (unconvincing) and then style.

I'm curious about why you think that.

[Herodotus]

@Adel:
I see; sorry, and please don't worry about it. I wasn't saying that Vi's question makes Vi scum. Maybe it wasn't worth bringing up.

For now, I can accept your appeal to experience in lieu of reasoning (though its validity would depend on your alignment.) If Artem isn't being bussed at all, then it is not as likely that he is scum.

@Vi:
You realize this sub-conversation just went:

Herodotus

: ABCDE

Artem

: You said "ADE", so you gained some scummy points.

Herodotus

: Not just "ADE", I said "

ABC

DE". You left out some critical parts.

Vi

: They're not that critical if they don't change my objection.

Herodotus

: I meant Artem.

Vi

: I know.
You can certainly speak for yourself when you decide what is critical within posts, but this gave a different feel than that. Again I'm not saying this looks scummy, it's just... weird.

@Artem:
I definitely don't see what's wrong with parking a vote on someone you find scummy. Is it just that I stopped making arguments against you? I do vote-hop when I find it more useful.

[Herodotus]

Is it normal for Spyrex (as town) to prefer a short day 1?

YOU ARE DOING IT AGAIN! He did not say he wanted a short day 1, he said he wanted to avoid an overly long day 1, which is pro-town.

Short means different things to different people. I should have said "relatively shorter," or something like that, but it was clear what I meant. Regardless, the correct answer to that first of two questions was "yes, when he is town, SpyreX prefers that day 1 be short(er than it is in most games.)" Meaning he is consistent with that in this game. Bringing that up hardly qualifies as misrepresentation or throwing mud.

And yeah, Herod's unvote is ridiculous, it's like he doesn't genuinely believe Artem is scum, unsurprisingly - no wonder Artem sees a huge difference between this and the aggressive townie he played with before. Maybe you should do something about that, y'know, with a rope?

I don't know whether Artem is scum; if I did, I'd be calling for his lynch if he was, or defending him if he wasn't. The only way I could already genuinely believe with any certainty that Artem is scum is if we were scum together.

Artem continues to be town and I will happily argue with anyone who asserts otherwise (is voting him) if they care to engage with me; providing reasoning would be good, it seems like most people on the wagon haven't given (m)any. It's just a wagon that's 'good enough' and not on me, without any real expectation of lynching scum.

That

is unacceptable.

I agree the second sentence may accurately describe some of the votes on Artem, but the last sentence would only be true later, for example if Artem were lynched or forced to claim. Short of that, votes are reversible and don't do any harm.
So, which people do you think want Artem lynched but don't expect that he is scum? Or more importantly, of those, who do you think has a scummy motivation?

@Herodotus: I'm quite aware of that. My objection is in DE, which is unabashedly poor reasoning for pushing an Artem lynch.

Well, being "inconsistent with a town alignment" alone would be a good reason. But it looks like his response wasn't necessarily inconsistent. Looking back, his question to me looks fairly rational, a departure from his earlier frustration. At first, I just read it as "stop voting for me," but that interpretation seems incorrect. So yes, a townie might be asking that question.

I want a rough stance from everyone on {Spring, Troll, Herod, Korts}.

I have some moderate suspicion of Zorblag based on his voting pattern (as a whole, and before considering 324.) For the others, I'm not going to give the scum information on my neutral/town reads.

[Herodotus]

For the others, I'm not going to give the scum information on my neutral/town reads.

I mean that for now, this concern is overriding.

[Herodotus]

For the others, I'm not going to give the scum information on my neutral/town reads.

Blather. If you don't have a sum read than you must have a town or neutral read.

Yes. One or the other.

[Herodotus]

vote: populartajo

Aside from the lurking, he is buddying up to Elmo, both with his vote and in his stated analysis. His first vote was random, but his second has been in place since page 2, so at the least, he should be feeding the parking meter. Finally, his antagonism toward Adel has been giving me vibes of disingenuousness since it started (which was why I asked Adel about him earlier.)

[Herodotus]

Heros'106 is an interesting move. Why the vote on Adel when you said you didnt have any significant degree suspicions? Are you always that liberal with your votes??

Not always, but frequently. I'd accuse you of also being liberal with your votes, but you might mistake my point.

Answer the questions.

Between 106 and 248, I already have, but to consolidate:
1.

Vote: Adel
You may be planning to contribute a lot soon, but so far you have not. You're "aware of the search function" but stated that the reason you insisted on everyone posting their own games was that you would "have to do all of the work myself" otherwise. It's about 20 seconds of work per player, that way. Not much more than finding their list within the thread.

Those were the reasons why I voted for Adel. I had some suspicions, just not anything huge.
2. Not always, but frequently.

When you reread to write 246, I presume (since you remarked on Vi's related 101) you noticed my response to the first time you mentioned posts 31 and 32. So how does 32 qualify as a return to random if it was placed to serve a purpose?

Thats exactly what I am asking. If 31 was used for a purpose then why 32 has a random vote in it?

The

non-random

vote in 32 would have been in 31 except I'd already clicked "Submit." It was designed to put pressure on Porkens. I explained this already, which is why I "presumed ... you noticed my response." If you want to question me further about this, at least read post 100 first.

But since you mentioned answering questions and random votes, I believe you still have some explaining to do about your own?

I do not want him to claim, and I do not want anyone else to vote for him right now.

Agreed. Just to make it harder to force a too-early claim out of Artem,

unvote

He's still my top candidate, so

fos: Artem

.

I hate this vote. And the fos even more. Seems like he is scared of Adel.

Do you only dislike my unvote because I'm agreeing with Adel?
If you were suspicious of a player, but not enough to lynch them or support a request for a claim, and they were at L-2, would you prefer to be voting them, or not? If not, how would you make it clear that you suspected the person?

As far as Adel is concerned, both of your comments looks like catch-22's. I refuse to let you set me against another player against my will.

I'm not saying you're buddying with Elmo because you think he is town, I'm saying it because you followed his vote and because you're conspicuously agreeing with everything he says.

[Herodotus]

@Elmo: You're not the only one reading Artem as (newb)Town. Artem's positions aren't entirely consistent with each other, but the overall display reads more inexperienced than scummy.

He may be less active, but Artem joined before several players in this game, including you.

But what I really want to know right now: Herodotus, your thoughts on Adel?

I can't see how a full answer would benefit anyone but the scum. I am not voting Adel, and don't find Adel to be the most scummy.

And has your opinion of Artem always been so reserved?

Do you mean, was I always as uncertain about him as I am now? No. Around pages 7-9, I would definitely have wanted Artem lynched.

[Herodotus]

He may be less active, but Artem joined before several players in this game, including you.

How does this change... anything?

You called Artem inexperienced. I was fact-checking that.

I can't see how a full answer would benefit anyone but the scum. I am not voting Adel, and don't find Adel to be the most scummy.

This is rapidly becoming your standby answer, and I find it to be what Adel would call "blather". It reads like an excuse not to give your opinions on people (or justify them), and each person I've seen use this excuse has been scum themselves.

Not true at all. I have said this twice, and both times were in reference to making a distinction between neutral and town reads. For what it's worth, the only times (in completed games) when I have read people declining to make this distinction, they were town.

[Herodotus]

Do you mean, was I always as uncertain about him as I am now? No. Around pages 7-9, I would definitely have wanted Artem lynched.

Which is strange, because outside some one-liners and a summary vote on tajo I'm pretty sure that since you unvoted Artem most of your criticism has been directed toward Artem.

Yes, but at least one of those criticisms was wrong. I saw a null/town-tell (his question about my vote) as a scum-tell, and realizing that error has made me more doubtful.

[Herodotus]

@PT
In 246, your comments seem to suggest a town reading on Adel and Spring, particularly what you said about 42 and 133. Then you have them as "Neutral slightly scum" because you don't have "obvtown feelings." Why such a standard? And why such a label?
It looks in that pair of posts like you consider everyone except me to be town. As a townie, that leads me to conclude that you aren't doing any potentially useful scumhunting.
Did you find anything Zorblag wrote worth commenting on?
For each of Spring, Adel, and Zorblag, suppose that they are scum. What do you see as the strategic goals they are trying to accomplish with what they have written so far?

To provide an example:
I see you, as scum, lurking to avoid saying too much, buddying with Elmo by agreeing with everything he says, and kissing up to the whole town by calling almost everyone town. Also, you've argued over a useless point apparently for the sake of arguing, which could be a poor form of distancing.

Have I answered your questions from 246? If so, when did I first give the answer each question, and what was my answer?
If not, please restate or at least bold any unanswered questions.

Why are you calling my vote in post 32 random, after I said it wasn't? Why would I claim to have a motive for placing a vote that was really random?

[Herodotus]

Actually, now that you're posting, and Hero

still

hasn't picked up an offensive weapon, I'd swap you two in ordering. So, I'd like to see Porkens, Hero and Korts lynched, in that order.

SpyreX, you (Tajo) and SL are just FOS-worthy at this point.

Um, Artem, I did pick up an offensive weapon. It was aimed at you, and I guess you didn't recognize it. This is somewhat understandable, as things look different from the front than from an angle.
Very different, sometimes.

And what is PT posting, anyways? Mostly recycled materials. He's said very little that's new.

[Herodotus]

Scumhunting: trying to find who the scum are, and gathering evidence that will support an argument against them.
The fact that you're focusing on someone who is town makes me feel that what you're doing will not be helpful to the town. From my POV, it is, therefore, not "potentially useful scumhunting." And I don't see you doing any scumhunting that could lead to a scum.

Other than the fact that Zorblag was going in an activity crusade, not. You think he is scum?

I'd put him as suspicious enough to mention, but he's not my biggest suspect.

For each of Spring, Adel, and Zorblag, suppose that they are scum. What do you see as the strategic goals they are trying to accomplish with what they have written so far?

What is the point of this question? Im far from thinking they are scum. Stop deflecting the attention.

The point was to find out who the scum might be. Stop deflecting the question.

Why are you calling my vote in post 32 random, after I said it wasn't? Why would I claim to have a motive for placing a vote that was really random?

My problem with your first two posts is that they feel fabricated and you have admitted that. Its weird enough for a first random vote when everyone was making jokes.

Answer the questions.
Also, is "fabrication" a scum-tell? And in what way was post 31 "fabricated?" Did I not really want to know about Porkens's suspicions?
It was not your first vote. Are you saying that your page 1 vote was not random?

My question is what do you think of Adel? And why doid you vote her?

I am not voting Adel, and don't find Adel to be the most scummy.

My current read on Adel is that Adel is not suspicious enough to warrant an FoS or vote. In some ways, I agree with Artem's 316, though I am relatively patient. I have already explained why I voted Adel: nonparticipation and a contradiction. Adel is now participating, even if he's being mysterious. I think viewing omissions to answers of the 5 questions as an honesty test to be weak, but it still mitigates the contradiction.
Now tell me why you are asking questions over and over when some of them were answered before the first time you asked.

I singled out your "case"

That wasn't exactly my case, though it was similar. It was an example of what I was looking for from you. In the question you deflected.

a) Im not freaking lurking. Dont you read what I post?

You are, and I have. As of when I voted you, I saw plenty of meaningless posts, and one double-post (ISO 25/26) with significant content. Given that I've discussed your double-post, and given your tendency to ask already-answered questions, I find your accusation ironic.
Your calling Elmo town was not my primary motivation for saying that you were buddying with him.

c) Im not calling almost everyone town. Please see above.

You just said:

Im far from thinking they are scum.

about the people who were supposedly your top three candidates beside myself. But more importantly, you were unwilling to comment on the hypothetical situation of any of them being scum. Either you find more than one person suspicious, or you don't. If the scummiest parts of your list have changed, tell us the amendments.

d)What useless point? What distancing? Please be more concise.

Twice, you have argued with Adel over things that were not relevant to finding the scum.

[Herodotus]

The fact that you're focusing on someone who is town makes me feel that what you're doing will not be helpful to the town. From my POV, it is, therefore, not "potentially useful scumhunting."

And why would I have to know this from my own POV?

I didn't say you did. I was only talking about my own feelings and my own POV.
But the fact is that if you're only interested in one person all day, and that person is town, then your play has not included useful scumhunting, whether you know it or not.

I'd put him as suspicious enough to mention, but he's not my biggest suspect.

Why do you think he is suspicious?

For the same reason I've already stated. I have not done a reread of him since then.

Also, is "fabrication" a scum-tell?

Yes, specially when its random stage and no one should be fabricating things. And when your next post is a "random" vote.

SMH
Did you miss the part where I asked why I'd make a random vote and have a substantial reason for that vote?

Why do you think my vote is random when I said myself that it wasn't?

I'm not sure we're using the same definition of "fabricating." Why should townies not be "fabricating" things, if it could lead to useful information? I'd like to know why you think that my plan (which I've already explained) was scummy.

Did I not really want to know about Porkens's suspicions?

You think he was being serious?

*headdesk*
Is this supposed to be a joke?
I asked him if he was being sincere

because I wanted to find out his answer.

If I already knew whether he was serious, then why on earth would I have asked?

Now tell me why you are asking questions over and over when some of them were answered before the first time you asked.

You did vote Adel. Do you think he is helping town?

I think it is more likely that he is trying to help the town than that he is not. I don't think his actions have yet produced a lot, but the same is true for anyone. As Artem can confirm, I don't mind apparently erratic, dramatic play.

But more importantly, you were unwilling to comment on the hypothetical situation of any of them being scum. Either you find more than one person suspicious, or you don't. If the scummiest parts of your list have changed, tell us the amendments.

It hasnt changed. I can comment on the hypothetical situation of any of them being scum. I wanted to find out why you wanted me to post that.

1. Adel isnt giving me townie vibes for his refusal to comment his votes and analyze things even when he promised to. Pretty obvious here.

2. Zorblag isnt giving me townie vibes because he voted people that were not active instead of scumhunting properly.

3. Spring agression, only when attacked, also for obvious reasons dont give me townie vibes but as I stated, Im starting to think that this is a nulltell coming from Spring.

In neither of these cases, my suspicions indicate obv scumminess which is the reason why they are neutral leaning scummy. This isnt so hard to understand.

So, will you be providing an answer to the question I actually asked?

I also hate his Artem unvote and posterior fos, scared of I dont know what.

Your decision not to answer my questions about that is noted.

Why do you hate that my suspicions of Adel have decreased? This is somwhat analogous to how I viewed Artem, I think. I tend to find someone suspicious, then if that person looks less scummy or someone else looks scummier, I move on. See my play day 1 in Moving Day Mafia. I think that shifting focus and/or votes during the day depending on what people say or do is a good idea when looking for the scum.

I am not tunneling oin Hero. I think he is scum and he should die.

I do not think "tunneling" means what you think it means.

"Neutral slightly scum" doesn't really look like "I consider these people Town".

His conclusions seemed to suggest he felt they were townish, just not obv-town.

@Herodotus saying tajo was arguing with Adel over trivialities - Could you point me to specifically where they are so there's no confusion?

His ISO 14-16 (though I do agree about not revealing alts,) 19-20, 29-30.
It was all 2-way, and a little of it involved you, too, but I don't currently have a scum read on you or Adel.

The fact that you're focusing on someone who is town makes me feel that what you're doing will not be helpful to the town. From my POV, it is, therefore, not "potentially useful scumhunting."

Imagine how I see your attempts to push Artem-probTown.
This also seems like a license to call people who accuse you scummy.

You are welcome to think that my pushing Artem was not useful scumhunting. If he turns out to be town, I will agree with you (though in that case, I would still want to believe that I helped to demonstrate his towniness via my pressure.) The difference is that I've considered more than one possibility. Also, I'm a little confused, since at one point you also seemed to be suspicious of Artem.

lol, when did I say that tajo was scum? I simply wanted him to pay more attention to this game, and give opportunistic scum a chance to wagon with me.

Like with Spyrex? Who was the scum who wagoned with you then?
Cue circular logic in 3, 2, 1...

[Herodotus]

I don't think

[Adel's]

actions have yet produced a lot, but the same is true for anyone.

What do you define as "produced a lot"?

Finding a definite scum, safely clearing some townies, establishing strong links, giving a lot of evidence, or similar things... basically anything that is probably a major contribution toward a town win. But to a moderate degree; it's only day one.

His ISO 14-16 (though I do agree about not revealing alts,) 19-20, 29-30.

Regarding the first two sets: Do you think those answers (and objections) were relevant to the questionnaire? Do you think the questionnaire is itself relevant?

29 and 30 seems like a cheap shot at best and a misrepresentation of what constitutes triviality at worst. The type of lurking Adel was accusing tajo of is a pretty blatant universal scumtell; protesting it hardly seems trivial.

I'm taking most of Adel's 5 questions at face value, and I know that the information Adel or someone else derives from them could be "relevant to finding the scum." I don't have much perspective on the validity of the objections since I found the questions easy to answer. But my impression of the arguing over the questions was that it was pointless, and therefore the motives for arguing were questionable.
On 29 and 30:
To me, those posts looked like a continuation of the earlier faux confrontation. It's easy enough to say "I'm having trouble catching up in this game because the posts are big. But like I said, I'll post some time tonight."
Do you think that he was not performing "the type of lurking Adel was accusing tajo of?" If you think he was, and if you consider the lurking PT was doing to be a blatant universal scumtell, does that mean you find him scummy? More to the point, what is your read on him?

Like with Spyrex? Who was the scum who wagoned with you then?
Cue circular logic in 3, 2, 1...

...how do you NOT have a scummy read on Adel?

I am disliking the pressure on this issue.
Are you saying here that I should think that Adel is scum because I predict he might use circular logic to bolster a weak argument?

I fail to see how this could be a genuine opinion that Ecto generated honestly.

I don't understand.

@Artem:
I don't think "fabricated" is a description of post 31, but assuming that word means "artificial," then it accurately describes post 32.
The point of those posts was to get a read on Porkens. He had left his random vote on Spyrex and made an FoS on another player. This got my attention. I asked whether the FoS was genuine (since it was in a quote box, I wasn't sure.) I also wanted to see what Porkens would do with his vote if he were to move it. To pressure Porkens into considering making a new, less-random vote, I added a fourth vote on Spyrex. So 32 was fabricated because my vote was neither random nor based on suspicion of Spyrex. But 31 was a pivotal question.
My post 100 described this plan.

[Herodotus]

And nobody's done any of this?

No. I see no obvscum, no 95% cleared townies, no 95% certain links...

Also, I can prove that you are online currently.

Are you referring to the post he made in another game?

[Herodotus]

I think a full analysis could be useful, but there are issues like nicknames:
For me, add 3 for "PT", 5 for "tajo" and 1 for "Tajo" meaning populartajo. And 6 for "SL" meaning springlullaby. There may be others, but I don't recall them.
Another issue is that we've used pronouns, too.

[Herodotus]

It's probably also worth noting that for a while, I was reluctant to use a gendered pronoun for Adel for obvious reasons. (The first time I did was on page 16.) This led to paragraphs like:

I don't think Adel is an "easy target." If I were scum trying for a mislynch, Adel seems like a poor selection to target for that (assuming Adel is town.)

That paragraph alone has two more "namedrops" than would be necessary with pronouns. If every pronoun I've used or quoted was counted for the player it referenced, I think you'd find at least Porkens, Korts, Artem, and SpyreX would be substantially higher.
Aside from that, a lot of the "namedrops" were either quote tags or within quoted or requoted text -- I've been asked about Adel a lot, including a couple of those tortured paragraphs.

An interesting comparison might be to take the ratio of
(namedrops of player X) / (postcount of player X)
Korts and Zorblag, for instance, have posted 12 and 13 times each. But maybe comparing different players' Namedrop counts would have the same or better normalizing effect.

[Herodotus]

EBWOP: that should be 13 and 14 times each, though it includes Zorblag's /confirm and Korts's greeting.

Also, "Troll" should add 2 to Zorblag from me.

Spyrex, I'm guessing you'll want to amend those counts to include more nicknames?

Somebody mentioned that you like long posts. When I first saw that, I thought that you like to post long posts, which has not been the case so far? Do you only like to read long posts, or was that somebody wrong (I should probably go back and find the quote)? Or what?

I believe you were looking for this post.

[Herodotus]

Do you be using some metric other than the max - min here (or perhaps ratio of max/min) or do you be looking at who has talked about Troll rather than who Troll has talked about? Or does Troll have those confused somehow? The way Troll be reading the data your statement there seems odd.

The chart itself is inverted.

Also, the data set does not include (or includes by some players but not by others) nicknames, as I mentioned in 431 and 434. I've done my own numbers and two others so far; if SpyreX's original counts were correct, these updates based on nicknames, prior to SpyreX 427, are also correct:

Herodotus Drop

Adel: 97
Artem 77
Ectomancer: 8
Elmo: 35
Korts: 4
populartajo:

28

Porkens: 30
Spring:

33

SpyreX: 31
Vi: 32
Zorblag:

8

Yours (

Zorblag

) has not changed.

Ectomancer Drop:

Adel: 29
Artem: 11
Elmo: 14
Hero: 10
Korts: 2
Tajo: 19
Porkens: 30
Spring: 21
SpyreX: 23
Vi: 14
Zorblag:

4

(which is

less

than SpyreX's number)

[Herodotus]

We've got Elmo picking out Hero's mention of 2 players from a field of daisies. Tunnelvision or impatience? Smells dirty.

I could see that as a town-tell. I think Elmo simply wants me to be scum.
In that regard, I'm going to disappoint him. I just hope it doesn't lead to a mislynch in LYLO (I'm guessing this is the current game-plan of the scum, assuming Elmo is town.)

Porkens Drop

no changes for nicknames

[Herodotus]

Herod: Why would you guess that as the plan?

If players A and B are both town, and player A had said player B needs to die, "PLZ K THX", then as scum, I'd try to keep both players A and B alive. As things stand right now, unless you're scum, then we have a problem, which is that you're liable to give the scum the extra vote on me they could use later, particularly in LYLO. Of course, the same could be said for a lot of people, but you're the one I'm most worried about, since PT is much more likely scum than you are.
Sorry if that was unclear the first time.

I have a question, for Vi and SpyreX especially:
What specifically do you believe to be the significance of my mentioning Adel's name a lot?

[Herodotus]

1.) You are both scum and you are, for some reason, connecting yourself subconciously.
2.) You are scum and are laying a groundwork for a later Adel lynch.
3.) You are both masons (which really means you're scum I swear).

1.) I would know better.
2.) My mentions of Adel probably do not support that.
3.) And this is the reason why I asked. Mentioning another player a lot but deciding they are not fos- or vote-worthy is probably a mason tell. Are Adel and I masons? There is no way I'm going to answer that.

But you are role-fishing.

unvote
vote: SpyreX

I'll have to re-check, but I think I'd also be equally inclined to lynch Vi.

[Herodotus]

@Elmo:
I just realized a mistake. I was assuming the game would necessarily reach a LYLO state; it may not.

[Herodotus]

Ecto makes a good point.

Herod, also, please detail exactly what happened to shift your opinion off Artem. And please explain why you're now voting SpyreX given that if one of of {SpyreX, Artem} is scum, then the other seems likelier town from the interactions.

I unvoted Artem so that he would not be forced to claim prematurely.
I changed my mind later, over time, about how suspicious I found him based on reconsidering what he said and other players being more suspicious.
I think I would agree that if one of them is scum, it is unlikely that the other is; I'm considering that a point in Artem's favor.

3.) The only town-town scenario where it would make sense to mention another player THAT MUCH is if you were, in fact, masons. Thats not role-fishing as much as common sense.

It wasn't role fishing for you to mention the idea of masons. It was role-fishing to push the issue of my mentioning Adel's name often. You found a possible pro-town role tell, and made a big deal of it.

1.) Why are you mentioning Adel so much?
2.) Why was your instinctive response to my bringing this up to try and downplay the numbers like its going to change anything?

1.) What you have is a sequence of individual events. I cannot fully answer why I created a pattern of which I was unaware; I can answer for specific instances, and I can also give you some broad, general factors that led to the pattern.
One reason I've put a lot of thought into things Adel has said is because I understand that he is probably the top scum-finder in this game. Consequently, if I decided he was town, I'd probably put a lot of trust in his analysis, and I wanted to see where his mysteriousness was going.
Two other reasons for the quantity of namedrops are that he has asked me several questions, and because I've been asked about him many times.
2.) I discussed nicknames in order to make your counts more accurate, and pronouns in order to provide more perspective on the effective precision of the counts.

[Herodotus]

If players A and B are both town, and player A had said player B needs to die, "PLZ K THX", then as scum, I'd try to keep both players A and B alive. As things stand right now, unless you're scum, then we have a problem, which is that you're liable to give the scum the extra vote on me they could use later, particularly in LYLO. Of course, the same could be said for a lot of people, but you're the one I'm most worried about, since PT is much more likely scum than you are.

Day 1 opinions will almost certainly change over the course of the game. Scum who's banking on them is not bright scum.

In that case, I have not been bright scum in past games.
But I find it hard to see how his opinion will shift from "die die die" to "I can risk the game on Herodotus not being scum" without a sanity-confirmed investigation and an already-dead godfather.
Anyways, that's my fear.

I unvoted Artem so that he would not be forced to claim prematurely.

I don't claim prematurely, unless I'm a miller / self-watcher or any other role that is inherent to my existence rather than action. In fact, I've spent a lot of energy in a lot of games arguing against Day 1 L-1 claims, because I think they are largely pointless.

Interesting. Could you link to any discussion you've made of this (in which you were town?)

Sure, you don't know that unless you've read the games I've been in, but if the sole reason for your unvote is a claim concern, then why have you not pursued any other points that you find suspicious against me? You're saying that over time you changed your mind about how suspicious I am, but you have not pushed a single point against me after your unvote/fos of me. How exactly is that "over time" and not "instantaneous"?

Vi seems to have the opposite criticism.
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 48#1693348

outside some one-liners and a summary vote on tajo I'm pretty sure that since you unvoted Artem most of your criticism has been directed toward Artem.

Artem, you simply haven't done anything that looks scummy to me since I unvoted you. Pushing a point against you for something that isn't scummy because of my earlier ideas would have been confirmation bias.

[Herodotus]

No, wait, I'm misreading, sorry. But similarly, I completely don't see how your "earlier ideas" are less valid now than they were then; but it's become less convenient to push them.

I was wrong about some points I was holding against Artem. It's that simple.

[Herodotus]

Well, then you unvoted me because you no longer found me suspicious, not because you didn't want a premature claim. Right?

Wrong. I decided I preferred to have more time to decide about you before someone came along, voted you, and asked for a claim.

Does that change the fact that this behavior is suspect? No.

I missed the part where you explained how using someone's name too many times made me a suspect. Frankly, I don't think you even believe that.

...
2.) I discussed nicknames in order to make your counts more accurate, and pronouns in order to provide more perspective on the effective precision of the counts.

...
2.) Yes, I said its a rough estimate. I have not the time nor inclination to do a full heads on positive / negative / null read on this mess. It was done for a single reason: to show how often in comparison you mention Adel.

This was in answer to your question (2) -- an explanation for why I brought those things up. You seem to be treating it as something new.

This, of course, precludes you being dead before then. Again, this bothers me (surprise) because as town why the hell would you assume you wouldn't be dead?

Do you think the scum are going to even consider NKing me?

What specific points were wrong, and why did you not realise you were wrong at the time? And what precisely caused you to change your mind?

1. He suggested there was a >50% chance I was scum, but didn't vote me.
^ Answered by his claim that he really meant "above random." At first, I simply didn't believe this revision, but in retrospect I see no actual scummy motivation for him to make his original statement and mean it as it was written.
2. When I argued that it was suspicious that he hadn't voted me, he did so, even though his only listed reason (lack of aggression) was no longer accurate.
^ Answered by his repeated statement that I was "asking for a vote." I was not, but Artem could have seen it that way.
3.

You're at three votes, and you consider wagons to be pro-town, so you should be happy; again your response looks inconsistent with a town alignment.

was wrong, as I admitted.

[Herodotus]

(Not that the above list is necessarily exhaustive, but I don't see a need to spend hours looking for incorrect points I've made.)

[Herodotus]

fos: SpryeX and Porkens

for real.

Hero: assuming that you are town, any final words? How do you thin is most responsible for your lynch? Who should we look most closely at tomorrow? Which of your posts should we pay special heed to tomorrow?

Well, I PMed caf a few hours ago to ask whether I could talk in twilight if I were lynched. He didn't answer, and there doesn't seem to be a rule against it.

Adel is town.
In this post:
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 74#1688274
I breadcrumbed doc pretty heavily (though I'm really a VT.) In 304 and 311, Adel picked up the breadcrumb, and indicated he was going to bus me (presumably to keep me from being NKed.) Not what a scum would do (which is to keep quiet and NK me.) I didn't really want him to do that, since I was aiming to be NKed, but wasn't sure how to say it wasn't what I wanted. So I just acknowledged that in 312 with the following sentences:
"I see; sorry, and please don't worry about it.
Maybe it wasn't worth bringing up.
For now, I can accept your appeal to experience in lieu of reasoning (though its validity would depend on your alignment.)"
and hoped that I could either claim convincingly or that the scum would kill me despite the wagon. I was slightly worried that Adel's bussing (and the possible need for me to claim) could lead to a real doc being outed either by a counterclaim (which would be a stupid move) or by obvious skepticism, so I wanted my breadcrumbing not to have to be followed up by a real claim.

Before you spend tomorrow insulting my plan, let me link you to Camn's evaluation of the idea:
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 82#1600082

So... that's one reason for my excess mentions of Adel.

Any questions for me?

Since I'm going to die, I suppose I can post my town reads.

So far, I have
Artem
Adel
as most likely town

Elmo
as somewhat townish

Vi
SpyreX
well, I was serious about the fishing accusation...

PT
also relatively scummy

Korts
Spring
Zorblag
as 'too quiet'

and no good read on Ecto

I haven't read the twilight postings in depth, but Porkens's hammer is also scummy just by virtue of coming out of the blue. No request for a claim, no warning. And that, when I was hinting that I might be a mason! I do not accept that he didn't know the VC.

So, this post is horribly written, but since twilight could end at any time, I'm posting it as-is.

[Herodotus]

@father of history- while I think that you were correct about that one thing you pointed out about Vi,

I don't think that your post

pointing out that what he was pointing out probably isn't pro-town,

probably also isn't pro-town

.

I assumed the double-negative was intentional.

[Herodotus]

I'm just gunna look stupid this game, I guess.

I see neither a breadcrumb nor Adel picking up on one.

An improper capital "D" -- probably the first spelling error I've made on the site outside of maybe marathon games
"Don't worry, you might not die" -- because you might be protected

So, I don't really know with 100% certainty that Adel was really responding to these as I thought he was, nor that his motivations weren't scum-based. It just seemed that way.
Also, I hope Adel doesn't mind my pointing this out; it works against his ostensible plan to look suspicious enough to avoid the NK. But if I didn't say something, it might have been for nothing.

[Herodotus]

So..."I think your post probably is pro-town?"

You guys have more points in Bluff than I do if that's really what the exchange means.

Or I am delusional...

Hmm. This is interesting. I'm not going to doubt that town claim since it would be a pointless move from you, so as a question to a confirmed town, Herodotus, why do you think Artem is town because I really think he is scum.

And you shouldn't. If I were scum, I'd be taking a major risk of leaving a trail to my scumbuddies.
Partly gut feeling. Also I might be overcompensating for earlier when I thought he was scum. Yeah, "most likely town" might be overdoing it. But like I said, he has done nothing scummy since I unvoted him, and some of my reasons for suspecting him were inconclusive. Adel's defense was also meaningful to me, considering my read on him. Artem's points on Porkens are also valid.

The rest of the players give me either a null or a townie read. If you want me to go into detail about any of them, let me know. Otherwise, I'm not planning on town-hunting.

I like this paragraph, too. I still feel that this:

and Hero

still

hasn't picked up an offensive weapon

was untrue, but *meh*.

[Herodotus]

I think attacking the data because of a point you are making utilizing that data is valid. I also am well aware of being able to create charts that can say what you want it to say. (Just pick the right chart/data set) That makes the "It was to do one thing and one thing only" statement up for debate as well.

Not to mention manipulating the data before it is gathered. I can see a scum telling their buddies to try to mention all players relatively equally so that this type of analysis would get a townie lynched.

[Herodotus]

How's that work though? If you ARE town (which I'm not buying until I see a flip) how could them normalizing change the fact your results are skewed.

Any set of data will contain anomalies. Sure, you wouldn't have known in advance which players would be skewed, but the presence of a player who is either skewed or curiously unskewed is likely, especially when you can (a) choose when to collect the data, and (b) suggest that your scumbuddies provoke a somewhat skewed player into becoming more skewed.

Please understand that I am NOT saying that you necessarily did this. It will be up to the survivors to make that call. I'm in the enviable position of getting to spew all my thoughts with no responsibility for judging whether they are correct.

[Herodotus]

Herod;

In that regard, I'm going to disappoint him. I just hope it doesn't lead to a mislynch in LYLO (I'm guessing this is the current game-plan of the scum, assuming Elmo is town.)

and

Do you think the scum are going to even consider NKing me?

This has been mentioned already but it warrents another: What?
AND an """rolefishing""" backpeddle in 477?

unvote, vote: herodotus

What does this even mean? What warrants a "what?" And I did not backpedal on the rolefishing issue.

[Herodotus]

I was following the game every few days after I died. Congrats to the scumteam. Vi probably would have had me fooled from day 2 until the endgame.