Mini 792 - Tofu Mafia. Game over!

[Elmo]

Executive summary: {SpyreX, Tajo, Porkens, Vi} are townish, {Spring, Herodotus, sort-of-Zorblag} are scummy, WAGON/KILL HERODOTUS PLZ K THX.

Right. I did draft a post the other day, but decided not to post it, which is probably a good thing because it's incoherent. My head's a bit clearer now; I don't like posting for the sake of posting, but I think it's better than staying quiet. Feel free to skip this if it's too long!

Okay, first of all, SpyreX not wanting a 36 day 1 means he's really likely town; scum love slow-paced games and I seriously doubt SpyreX would fake that; I can barely see anyone faking that, it's the kind of thing you just wouldn't think of.

Porken's satire feels genuine. He seems fine otherwise, so I'd go with mildly townish, albeit he hasn't done a great deal; but that's true of almost everyone, really. I don't get the wagon on him.

...this is starting to feel like you're just kicking up sand for the fun of it. The worst part of all this is that it's taking focus away from the problem with Tajo's late "random" vote, and, for what it's worth,

the wagon on me

.

I also feel this is something scum are unlikely to say. 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".

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.

Oddly, I also dislike her conclusion that Ecto is townish, there. It seems too easy. I'm not opposed to the conclusion, but I had a similar thought and then checked myself because it seems unlikely to be a big tell for Ecto; he says himself it's probably null. At least without indication to the contrary, I don't think there's a big enough deviation between alignments for that behaviour, and I wouldn't trust it much if at all, but it's a straightforward enough observation for scum to make to try and appear like they're doing stuff.

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.

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.

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. Tajo's vote was actually the exact sort of thing I was looking for, especially the fact he explicitly agreed with me rather than simply voting; when someone acts like that, they're generally thinking along similar lines in a way that's very hard to fake as scum, for some reason. There's a decent possibility that he's buddying up to me, but I'd say it's less likely than him being genuine. Zorblag poking me for reasons

would

be townish, because scum rarely pay that much attention or have interest; but he did it as a matter of policy, so I'm inclined to think it null. I agree with Vi about the "formulaic" nature of his play, actually, I was expecting something different from TownTroll. I guess it's a similar dislike of overly-conservative play... town's gotta get in there.

Troll will at this time Vote: Elmo as Troll would very much like to see more than just the one vote from him in terms of participation.

Why "very much"?

I quite like Vi so far. There's some similarities in our observations that seem townish to me, similar to Tajo.. not liking SpyreX's argument in 24 rings a bell.
I can say that Tajo's play so far is not inconsistent with TownTajo, and he either did agree with me or was faking agreeing with me with his vote.
I guess I am mostly trying to find reasons to back up my gut feelings, but I'd be happy with killing Herod or maybe Spring right now. Zorblag seems "off" but not dayvigworthy, yet. A lot of other people seem town; I'm not sure if that's good or bad, yet
I am postphoning judgement on Adel until The Reveal. I'm curious what the meta will say on me, but I suspect that'll remain a mystery. Definitely a good point against Herod.

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.

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!

Artem seems fine to me, and I approve of the Herod vote. I am liable to go back and defend him against SpyreX; a whole bunch of those things you've listed strike me as pro-town. I may do more on that this evening.

p.s. I dislike long posts, but my usual style is to make many short posts, so these catchup ones get condensed. I will try to spam the thread up with oneliners hereafter

[SpyreX]

I'm interested in what you have to say about Artem.

Maybe I'm misreading something or it was the cloud of noise hiding Herod - because I'm just not seeing it in front of me.

Also, if this is what we get when you're feeling better.. good. I approve

[caf19]

A quick question before posting my thoughts,

MOD:

were scum allowed to talk before the game?

I've decided I'll keep the answer to this question to myself.

[Elmo]

• Bandwagoning is a Good Thing, especially early on day 1. Artem has only been on the Porkens wagon before moving onto Herodutos, and gave solid reasons for both, in my view. I disagree that either were spurious, but even if they were, virtually
  all
  early bandwagons are somewhat spurious, because it's early and we have little solid information. As to "sniping", I think I understand what you mean, but I don't see where he's done it.
  
• This is pro-town. Generating content is pro-town. Bandwagons generate content. I don't follow?
  
• He did not say his reads may arbitrarily change at any given point. He said that he is less experienced and should rationally feel less confident about reading more experienced players, which is true. You'd expect someone playing correctly to be less certain relative to the skill of the players in question. Now, it's possible he could exploit this if he were scum, but that's true of things like voting; it doesn't make it inherently scummy.
  I'm slightly biased here because one of my bugbears is people being too certain too quickly and then never backing out of it.
  
• I think I would be fine metagaming someone on the basis of one observation; people change, but not dramatically. He said there was a big difference in the level of aggression; it follows that he should be asking
  how likely
  it was that Herod's playstyle evolved vs. how likely it is that Herod is scum here. I would point out that Artem does not claim to draw a strong conclusion from it, merely "more likely than random", which is probably true on that basis alone.

[Artem]

Someone who has been there to snipe and jump on some spurious bandwagons.
Someone who unapologetically wanted a bandwagon for "generating content".
Someone who gave a rather lengthy post explaining in detail why at any given point his reads can change. In selfsame post also gave a page 7 "feeler" list of some townies (but of course not the entire game).
Someone who is justifying this latest move with meta. Sigh. Further, with a sample set of 1. Double Sigh.
Someone who agrees that said meta is weak, apologizes and then votes.

-The only bandwagon that was spurious was Porkens, but as I said: I wanted a bandwagon on him, I didn't think he deserved to be lynched;
-I fail to see how that is scummy; Bandwagons = good;
-I said it was the contrast of people with their meta. :-/
-And yes, I agree that a vote based purely on meta is not worthwhile (like I said at least twice already. Double sigh.) Hero wanted a vote, so I thought I'd bring up the other problems that I had with him, since he was so anxious to have a case against him.
-L2SARCASM (I "apologized" because Herodotus wanted me to behave in a certain way and I wouldn't)

[Artem]

Oh, and hey, ever plan on replying to:

Not that I think you're scum, yet. But by god its leaning that way.

O.o

Is this a slap on the wrist? "Keep it up Ecto, and you'll end up on my scum list"?

?

[SpyreX]

Bandwagoning is a Good Thing, especially early on day 1. Artem has only been on the Porkens wagon before moving onto Herodutos, and gave solid reasons for both, in my view. I disagree that either were spurious, but even if they were, virtually all early bandwagons are somewhat spurious, because it's early and we have little solid information. As to "sniping", I think I understand what you mean, but I don't see where he's done it.

I think we're going to have to disagree, and in strong terms.

Bandwagoning, especially shameless bandwagoning, is not a good thing. By nullifying the responsibility of the vote you create a scenario where the end results are going to be detrimental far more often than they are useful.

1.) You're either going to push someone on minimal grounds to claim, to then turn around and do it again (this is a scum wet dream on day 1 and I've seen it happen which makes me all the more sad).
2.) You've eliminated the analysis of the votes that led to it to a degree - when someone can go "Hay, bandwagoning for information hoo" it can easily be parroted.
3.) You're going to cause someone to "crack" under bandwagon pressure and get lynched. Now, this doesn't seem like a bad thing except for the fact town tend to do this as often as scum (if not more)... which leads directly to a quick mislynch (much like a policy lynch) with minimal information garnered from it.

Oddly enough, I'd say shameless bandwagoning has the MOST negative effects early in the game - its much, much easier for scum to get away with.

And, now of course, why would I push so hard on Artem for this:

Of course the fact that you didn't go through with it makes you the guinea pig that we're riding on and not spring, so I'm not too heart-broken. Do you deserve to be lynched for your lack of vote (or lack of "sticking" to a vote, if you prefer) for spring? No. Do you deserve to have a wagon formed on you for the purposes of content generation? Heck yea. (though it seems that there are other candidates for competing wagons emerging)

Voting for "content generation"? Check.
Saying they shouldn't be lynched? Check.
Not saying or even insinuating they are scum? Check.

Thats enough checks.

Now, on a related note. Sniping.

These are normally one or two line "quips" that often are an alley-oop for a wagon... if others take it on first. Its a feeler of types and a scummy one at that.

Ecto, the number 36 is not arbitrary and the fact that you haven't picked up on it tells me that Spyrex is paying more attention to the game (by reading every single post) than you:

Porkens, given the cast of this game, I think we're all familiar with the cliche motions of Day 1. But it is these motions that typically generate content. As such, a third vote on spring would have been useful, even if it did lead to the typical scenario described by your self-dialogue.

Is this a slap on the wrist? "Keep it up Ecto, and you'll end up on my scum list"?

This is pro-town. Generating content is pro-town. Bandwagons generate content. I don't follow?

I addressed part of it. As for the other.

Useful

content is pro-town. A myriad of things can be done that generate minimal or useless content. I contend that "bandwagons" do not inherently generate useful content (and can often generate far greater negative results).

He did not say his reads may arbitrarily change at any given point. He said that he is less experienced and should rationally feel less confident about reading more experienced players, which is true. You'd expect someone playing correctly to be less certain relative to the skill of the players in question. Now, it's possible he could exploit this if he were scum, but that's true of things like voting; it doesn't make it inherently scummy.
I'm slightly biased here because one of my bugbears is people being too certain too quickly and then never backing out of it.

Its the fact it is there. Written out for the world to see.

A good townie isn't going to be set in stone. As information is presented reads should, and will, change. Telling people "my reads change" is a duh at best...and, of course, there is definitely reasons a scum would go in essence:

"I'm going to totally bus my buddy but if it doesn't bite I am going to "change my read" and feel that he is town."

Stating the obvious things a good town just

does

IS scummy to me.

I think I would be fine metagaming someone on the basis of one observation; people change, but not dramatically. He said there was a big difference in the level of aggression; it follows that he should be asking how likely it was that Herod's playstyle evolved vs. how likely it is that Herod is scum here. I would point out that Artem does not claim to draw a strong conclusion from it, merely "more likely than random", which is probably true on that basis alone.

This is partially bias, but.. meta is retarded and overused in general.

Meta

could

be used to bolster a case, but it should not be a key component of one. "You're playing differently" is a weak maneuver and designed by nature to just shrug off a mislynch.

So, yes, ANY time someone is getting votes (or being defended from said votes by meta) it catches my eye.

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.

Oh, and hey, ever plan on replying to:

Your other bullet points are addressed in more detail above, but this.

What do you

really

expect me to say?

No its not a slap on the wrist. Its what it is "This behavior is moving towards being scummy in nature. IF YOU ARE TOWN, perhaps you should think about it and perhaps not make yourself a target of suspicion. P.S. if you are scum keep it up.'

What in the name of everything would a "slap on the wrist" be? If I thought he was scum he'd have a vote. As it is, due to the exchanges (and subsequent disappearance) it is suspicious.

But, I'm content with my vote.

[Elmo]

I'm reluctant to get into a theory debate; the point is that voting him for bandwagoning is voting him for something he'd very likely do as town. Ditto metagaming. Perhaps you genuinely consider it anti-town, but him doing it doesn't make him more likely to be mafia.

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.

What pattern?

In terms of changing reads, he did not generically say "my reads change"; he detailed a specific pattern of not having strong reads. Why would he be more likely to do that if he were scum?

[SpyreX]

Say "I dont have strong reads and they will most likely change?" as scum? Hell yes he would.

It follows the "too timid" sniping I've seen and jumping when momentum (or the potential thereof) is present. See Porkens, the snipe on Ecto and now this.

[Elmo]

Why would he be

more likely

to do that if he were scum?

He would do it if he were scum. But he would do it if he were town. I think he'd do it either way. So voting him for that is a bad idea, because it's useless in figuring out his alignment. That's my point.

[Artem]

*shrug* I've always been pro-wagon as town and I've always seen plenty of good content come out of it. I don't know where you're getting this more-harm-than-good from.

A good townie isn't going to be set in stone. As information is presented reads should, and will, change. Telling people "my reads change" is a duh at best...and, of course, there is definitely reasons a scum would go in essence:

Read the post-game of Open 123 (or better yet, the whole game) if you think it's a "duh".

Meta could be used to bolster a case, but it should not be a key component of one.

On what basis did you single out meta to be the key component of my vote when I've presented reasons?

"This behavior is moving towards being scummy in nature. IF YOU ARE TOWN, perhaps you should think about it and perhaps not make yourself a target of suspicion. P.S. if you are scum keep it up.'

The problem is that Ecto's argument was not scummy. Not only that, even Porkens said that he can see where Ecto is coming from (while disagreeing with him). By threatening Ecto with putting him on your scum list, you're discouraging Ecto from pursuing the point and getting even more reactions and response from Porkens.

[Artem]

Say "I dont have strong reads and they will most likely change?" as scum? Hell yes he would.

Try "I'm reluctant to let go of my reads, so I'm trying harder to let them change".

[Artem]

I've recently learned that my biggest pitfall in scum-hunting is getting a strong townie-tell from somebody and then being reluctant of letting it go (which occasionally ends up nipping me in the butt), so I'm trying harder to re-evaluate those who I'm getting townie vibes from.

Just so you don't bastardize my words even further.

[SpyreX]

He would do it if he were scum. But he would do it if he were town. I think he'd do it either way. So voting him for that is a bad idea, because it's useless in figuring out his alignment. That's my point.

Individually any of the things I've seen -may- make a useless conjecture. Together they form a pattern. One I don't like. That's my point.

The problem is that Ecto's argument was not scummy. Not only that, even Porkens said that he can see where Ecto is coming from (while disagreeing with him). By threatening Ecto with putting him on your scum list, you're discouraging Ecto from pursuing the point and getting even more reactions and response from Porkens.

Again, once wasn't scummy. Twice is either "trying too hard" or "scum leaping from the rafters".

On what basis did you single out meta to be the key component of my vote when I've presented reasons?

Hmm, gee, lets see.

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?

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.

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

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.

2) You seem to be buddying up to Adel:

Is it scummy for me to not mention a newbie game, which I don't feel I contributed much to (and where I was town-aligned)? You got NKd on the first night because of your stellar play. I get NKd on the first night routinely simply because I'm an IC.

If it's not scummy for me to not mention that game, then what's the point of saying "they count"? Adel is trying to fabricate a feeling that not providing a full list of requested information is somehow scummy and I think you're blindly following that feeling without really understanding why.

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).

0.) Meta

1.) A general "town shouldn't do this" when in context.. well

2.) A general statement that is then two paragraphs of meta.

3.) Bandwagoning is a great scum tactic. You said this. YOU SAID THIS ARGGGHHH.

So, yea, just looked at your case again. Happier with my vote now.

[Artem]

3.) Bandwagoning is a great scum tactic. You said this. YOU SAID THIS ARGGGHHH.

Scum can't get a wagon going by themselves because there's no enough of them. 2-3 scum are not going to put anybody at L-2. They need townies to help them. Why would we help them when it's just a scum tactic? Because it generates content.

Wagon generate content AND they are a tactic that scum employ (which is why they generate content; if it wasn't their tactic, we would get no content).

Freaking hell, I can't believe I have to spell it out.

[Elmo]

Individually any of the things I've seen -may- make a useless conjecture. Together they form a pattern. One I don't like. That's my point.

Well, individually I've said why I don't think they're good tells; none of them are more scummy when combined with each other, and if none of them are scummy individually, then it's not one person doing lots of scummy things. I don't see a pattern - what do you mean?

Freaking hell, I can't believe I have to spell it out.

Hey - you're both town, yeah? Stop it, this'll just make things worse. Miscommunication is a staple of mafia.

[SpyreX]

Scum can't get a wagon going by themselves because there's no enough of them. 2-3 scum are not going to put anybody at L-2. They need townies to help them. Why would we help them when it's just a scum tactic? Because it generates content.

Wagon generate content AND they are a tactic that scum employ (which is why they generate content; if it wasn't their tactic, we would get no content).

Freaking hell, I can't believe I have to spell it out.

Yes, you have to spell it out to me. I don't understand. For, alas, I am unmatched.

But, lets dissect the above some.

You're saying that a wagon generates content because scum join it? Does this mean said wagon is on town?

Thus, is the "content" your generating some form of "there is scum on this wagon." when that is in no way proved?

However, that is moot. I like, nay love, cognitive dissonance. Its one of my favorite tells.

Saying "bandwagons are a great scum tactic" AND being pro-wagoning as town would be one of those.

[SpyreX]

Well, individually I've said why I don't think they're good tells; none of them are more scummy when combined with each other, and if none of them are scummy individually, then it's not one person doing lots of scummy things. I don't see a pattern - what do you mean?

When each has, to me, scum motivation and there is more than one it forms a pattern of "actions undergone that have scum motivation consistently."

Thats good enough for me. If you don't see it, thats cool. Gimme a nice clean detail on Herod (because I can't see it and I know thats partially because Artem is on it) so if I look at it from your aspect maybe something'll click - although I doubt it.

Hey - you're both town, yeah? Stop it, this'll just make things worse. Miscommunication is a staple of mafia.

I know when people say what they dont, etc. I hold umbrage to this being simple miscommunication though.

[Artem]

You're saying that a wagon generates content because scum join it? Does this mean said wagon is on town?

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.

Thus, is the "content" your generating some form of "there is scum on this wagon." when that is in no way proved?

Not true. Wagons can be analyzed in retrospect.

Address post 186 please. Also, you missed the point of arguments 2) and 3) against Herodotus. So I can see how you picked out meta to be the "key" arguments of my case. Try again plox.

[Elmo]

When each has, to me, scum motivation and there is more than one it forms a pattern of "actions undergone that have scum motivation consistently."

The problem is not that he doesn't have a motive to do those things as scum. The problem is that he has an equal or greater motive to do those things as town. Do you disagree that if he were town, he would probably be using metagaming?

I hold umbrage to this being simple miscommunication though.

(shrug) He felt there was some, evidently. I don't think it's purely that. I just don't want things to become heated.

[Elmo]

This is partially bias, but.. meta is retarded and

overused in general

.

Unless I'm mistaken, you've said that it's overused by townies, here. Perhaps it's bad and wrong, but nonetheless all the people using it were really, genuinely doing their best to find scum, and lynching them would have been a mistake. I don't see why that doesn't apply in isolation to Artem using metagaming here.

If Artem were scum, maybe he'd lie about metagaming and he would appear to be using meta here.
If Artem were town, he'd use metagaming and he would appear to be using meta here.
If you take the first one alone, then he looks suspicious. But if the second one is true, then actually, it's not. So, internally, when you're thinking about people, it's important to disprove the second one as well as try and prove the first.

[SpyreX]

Meta's being used to bolster and attempt to make a weak vote appear to be something that it isn't. Thats what I dont like.

And I missed those two little posts in not checking for posts while I was typing. It doesn't really change anything in my mind though.

[Artem]

Meta's being used to bolster and attempt to make a weak vote appear to be something that it isn't. Thats what I dont like.

I'm using other arguments to make a vote stronger than it would have been had it been based solely on meta.

That

is what I'm doing.

And I missed those two little posts in not checking for posts while I was typing. It doesn't really change anything in my mind though.

Well, then you can keep your vote that is based on me liking wagons, the twisting of my words and the misunderstanding of my points against Herodotus.

[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.

[Artem]

Hero, my biggest problem is this:

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?

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

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.

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

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.