Mini 792 - Tofu Mafia. Game over!

[Adel]

I'm not going to vote for Artem unless someone presents a solid case. Pseudo-random day 1 witch hunt seems to be the current cause of his wagon.

[caf19]

Votecount

Herodotus (2): Elmo, populartajo
springlullaby (1): Zorblag
Adel (1): Vi
populartajo (1): Ectomancer
Artem (5): Herodotus, SpyreX, springlullaby, Korts, Porkens
SpyreX (1): Adel
Porkens (1): Artem

Not voting

[springlullaby]

I'm not going to vote for Artem unless someone presents a solid case. Pseudo-random day 1 witch hunt seems to be the current cause of his wagon.

This is not acceptable. There has been a lot being said about Artem, with people voting for him for a myriad of reasons.

Do delineate clearly which reason you find to be 'pseudo-random' and why.

[springlullaby]

@Spring:

If Porkens is a "jerk" does that make him town or scum? My statement says that being a "jerk" of that nature IS a towntell considering. I can't decide if you're saying he's null or what from your statement.

I think the principal quality required from Porkens to make his comment is to be a jerk regardless of alignment, so yes it means that I think it is null.

I also wonder why you think it is a towntell because I think that in face of uncertainty and baring being a jerk town is actually a lot more likely to be at least tactful over the matter.

______________________

Artem, assessment of everyone in the game please. I can't place your Porkens vote.

________________

Porkens, do reply to my post addressing you.

[Adel]

here ya go:

I agree with the Artem vote.

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).

This passage is entirely weird and I think artificial: the fact that the motive by which he is putting me at townish is because I have not contributed is mind boggling, I believe that the furthermost any honest townie can read into a meta back-ed absence is giving a nulltell.

The meta is also off. I contributed much more unprompted in both games we were in.

Then consider the second part of the post which is basically an encouragement for people to 'push a case' on me while having no part of it and having me at 'townish'.

I'm surprised this hasn't raised more red flags because it is quite the scummy.

I also think his defence face Spyrex's case is not good, it is overly exasperated at some point, and make emotional 'I'm intimidated' appeal at other. And his vote on Spyrex is also nebulous. I don't get it.

Unvote Vote Artem

The meta is also off. I contributed much more unprompted in both games we were in.

I don't think the meta was off when I made that post. Yes, now that you've avoided posting content for pages, the meta is off, but who's to say you didn't do it on purpose so that you can make this argument?

I was kinda waiting you around the corner on this one, and you sort of exceed expectations.
1. Your meta was off at the time of your post for the simple reason that my absence which you read as town was caused by VLA, as was mentioned in thread before your post. I think this should have nullified any read in the mind of a honest townie since no purpose can be read into my absence under these circumstances. Agree/disagree?
2. So, you think 'I threw off' my meta for the purpose of...framing you? Are you serious? Lol. I think that's quite the scummy counter here.

I also think his defence face Spyrex's case is not good, it is overly exasperated at some point, and make emotional 'I'm intimidated' appeal at other.

The only place I've said "I'm intimidated with the cast" was when I was explaining to Vi why my posts are concise and unsure. Can you please quote where I used "I'm intimidated" appeal in my defense against SpyreX?

Well, this is actually true. What struck me was the dissonance between you making such a post alluding at being intimidated with overtone of shyness, of 'relative newbie card', and your later defence face Spyrex in which you did not read intimidated at all.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Right now I like my Artem vote.
Zorblag is looking scummy because his case on me is a lot of words, weak reasoning, and warped arguments. The strangeness about his relation to Artem's in the post supposedly addressing my guiltiness may be relevant later.

I need to reread everyone else.

are there some critical posts of your's that I somehow missed? Right now all I see is blather: I do not see a coherent case against Artem.

I'm not going to vote for Artem unless someone presents a solid case. Pseudo-random day 1 witch hunt seems to be the current cause of his wagon.

This is not acceptable. There has been a lot being said about Artem, with people voting for him for a myriad of reasons.

Do delineate clearly which reason you find to be 'pseudo-random' and why.

your case seems to be pseudo-random, and typical of those voting for Artem.

I'm throwing the "bullshit" flag. Your case against him, judging exclusively from your words, does not convince.

Telling me that my objection is "not acceptable" is noteworthy, and lends support to my suspicion that the wagon against him is just a witch hunt.

[springlullaby]

Adel, what is the purpose of your last post? You have quoted me. Yes, then what?

What do you fail to understand in my asking you to clarify the reasons why you think the argument made against Artem are 'pseudo-random'?

If you throw the 'bullshit flag', that is ok, but I'm going to ask you why again.

Plus, I did not say that your objection was not acceptable. Ofc, you are welcome to your opinion ^_^ But if you are going to make the statement that you find a wagon which may lead to a lynch to be objectionable, I want to know why. Do you need me to elaborate the reasons for that?

Now explain why my comment 'lends support' to your thinking that the wagon against him is a 'witch hunt' because I fail to reconnect the dots.

[springlullaby]

Clarification, that emoticon was sarcastic. Saying this because it comes across as suggesting friendliness of tone, not my intent.

[Adel]

refine you argument into something clear and concise please... otherwise I'll continue to consider your case to be pseudo-random bullshit. "pseudo-random bullshit" is my default category for all day 1 cases, until something prompts me to recategorize them into a more substantial category.

[Elmo]

Ecto! :'( I hope you recover swiftly.

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.

Spring and Zorblag are distancing, badly.

oo

Troll's 229 seems awfully careful not to interpret anything other than lack of contribution as scummy.

Hey look, it's a goodposting. Now I think about it, that's part of what bothers me. Troll, you realise we need to pick someone to lynch today, yea?

Spring, why does Adel's mere lack of support get more attention than me shouting that Artem is town?

you're way too stubborn to be town (especially in this group)

The bullshit, it hurts so much. And aren't you just as stubborn, anyway?

Are you saying that I originally meant it the way you're saying and am now lying about what it means? Your interpretation of it is absolutely nonsensical, and now you're just stubbornly refusing to face fact. No, it is not open to interpretation. It means exactly what I said it means.{...} Not only are you being scummy, you've now moved into "blatantly and intentionally obnoxious". Your attacks on me are pure bullshit. You better have a bloody good claim, because I'd consider lynching you as a confirmed innocent right now. Please die.

Are we detecting a pattern yet, hmm? This is a bad reason for a vote; would you do more than note the possibility of a town-town fight any time soon? "Bandwagon fishing" is a ridiculous tell, on the face of it; he's stated he thinks SpyreX is scum, why would he not want to get other people voting him? You know, the exact thing I did with you in relation to Herod and you didn't suspect me for, yes?

@Adel: My pseudo-random bullshit with Herod is of the highest quality. Would you like a free sample? Also.. how did such a meta analysis thingygummy help in e.g. Open 83? I can't find anything comparable.

[Adel]

@Elmo, not right now, thank you. I'm gonna stick with Sprex. In open 83 it helped with determining that forbiddanlight, Skruffs and Erg0 and Shy Guy (Guardian alt) were all town. I'm being more open about my process here since I don't expect to live long in this game and I want other town players to learn how to use meta to capture scum without cluing the scum in first. If you dig into my posts there you will undoubtibly find evidence of my method. IIRC it was especially important for figuring forbiddenlight out, and how to disarm Shy Guy who replaced in and immediately gunned for me.

[Adel]

Spring, why does Adel's mere lack of support get more attention than me shouting that Artem is town?

*ahem* did you miss that she was trying to get me to argue

why

I thought the wagon was pseudo-random bullshit? She doesn't seem to want to actually argue why she supports the wagon.

[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.

[Artem]

@SL:

Here's my list of most scummy to least scummy.

Porkens-

After the whole joke ordeal, Porkens has not been contributing much of original content. He had a few posts consisting basically of "Such and such makes me shake my head", "Such and such makes my gut clench". Any kind of scum-hunting that comes from him has been a reiteration of somebody else's thoughts:

-In 209, he is not happy with me not wanting to vote Hero, yet doing so. Point has been previously covered by Hero.
-In 209, mentions Spring's "MOD: scum can communicate?" question. Ok, he was first to mention this. I'll give him that.
-In 226, puts more screws on Adel for promising content. Point has been previously covered by numerous players.
-In 226, identifies Spring as posting nothing but "will re-read" content. Calling out lurkers is hardly original.
-In 226, says that I have not voted or unvoted on my own. Point has been previously covered by SpyreX.
-In 243, asks SL to provide content assuming the mod question has been answered affirmatively. The point has been previously covered by Troll.
-In 259, calls Tajo fence-sitting. Original point.
-In 259, asks me what good the wagon are if they don't end up in a lynch. This is immediately after I explain to Vi what wagons accomplish. The only thing he's doing here is fanning the flame from SpyreX.

Him saying that I don't vote or unvote on my own is a little hypocritical giving that all he's doing is echoing others' sentiments from the sidelines.

His vote on me feels like "Eh. Everybody's voting him. I might as well." and also borders on OMGUS.

Porkens, what point did I miss?

------------------------------------------------------------------

Tajo and, to a lesser extent, Korts.

Basically active lurkers.

Tajo's 246, which is his biggest "catch up" post basically has the same stuff as Porkens's earlier play: plenty of opinions, very minimal scum-hunting.

Korts is not much better. His posts are full paragraphs instead of one-liners and are sprinkled with some game theory. Other than that, it's mostly opinions. For example, in the post where he votes me, I can't find a single question/point to address in an attempt to defend myself.

Opinions are nice and all but they don't progress the game. Scum-hunting is done via questions, either implicit or explicit. Both players are lacking in that aspect.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hero-

Gained a few scummy points with his latest "I'm parking a vote on you. So what? Shouldn't you be happy since you like wagons. Your behavior is inconsistent" post. Went to lurking after the whole ordeal with me. Next to zero scum-hunting.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SpyreX-

While I still maintain that he's refusing to see the town motivation behind my actions, the fact that his vote is the only one backed by detailed reasons buys him some townie points.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Spring-

Good posts and attempts at scum-hunting, but several things seem off.
-Still hasn't replied to the question: assume the mod answered yes, what are the connections that you're seeing between players? The further the answer is delayed, the more inclined I am to think that there was no such notice and the question was for show;
-"Lol, scummy" reaction to one of my points. The cynics in some players are wondering if Ecto is pulling a gambit. Why is it so much more ridiculous of me to wonder if you purposely avoided to post to make my meta read on you off? Is it not a valid thing to wonder, especially since you've never warned us about your V/LA?

-----------------------------------------------------------------

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.

[SpyreX]

You just wrote, and I can't believe this:

Here is the list of people I find scummy: The people voting me + a lurker.

I'd still love Adel to explain how MY vote is "a witch hunt" considering even if you disagree I have actual reasons for my vote. And yes, I'm singling myself out because this mystery business has ended with an unexplained vote on me.

[Adel]

You just wrote, and I can't believe this:

Here is the list of people I find scummy: The people voting me + a lurker.

I'd still love Adel to explain how MY vote is "a witch hunt" considering even if you disagree I have actual reasons for my vote. And yes, I'm singling myself out because this mystery business has ended with an unexplained vote on me.

dude, you are not at lynch -2. This isn't "Why should you vote for him" time, it is "why should he be at -2 without clear and concise cases" time -- and so far you are not helping.

I see a bullshit wagon on a (relatively) weaker player, and a bunch of blather excusing it.

I do not want him to claim, and I do not want anyone else to vote for him right now. I want to clear and concise arguments, or GTFO his wagon.

[Korts]

Porken's, Tajo's, and Korts's posts fall under this, in my opinion.

BULLshit. And relating to your later accusation that there is nothing to reply to in my last post-- I accuse you of hypocrisy, wagon fishing and inconsistent voting. Nothing my ass.

Also note that I addressed issues with multiple players; this game is not all about you.

Will post more as I read more extensively.

[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

.

[Korts]

spring rubs me slightly as town just based on the long line of multi-posting, even if it's defensive bar the Artem case.

Are we detecting a pattern yet, hmm? This is a bad reason for a vote; would you do more than note the possibility of a town-town fight any time soon? "Bandwagon fishing" is a ridiculous tell, on the face of it; he's stated he thinks SpyreX is scum, why would he not want to get other people voting him? You know, the exact thing I did with you in relation to Herod and you didn't suspect me for, yes?

Let me explain the "wagon fishing". Artem anticipated a vote on SpyreX from me based on a comment that I intended to follow up on some point of discussion with him from earlier, without factoring in that that comment had come before a lot of the actually important pieces of information. I understand that if he believes SpyreX to be scum, he is going to look for support--but he practically invites my vote specifically, without the context of the comment he references.

I find Artem's Porkens case lacking, but better than his SpyreX one.

[SpyreX]

dude, you are not at lynch -2. This isn't "Why should you vote for him" time, it is "why should he be at -2 without clear and concise cases" time -- and so far you are not helping.

I see a bullshit wagon on a (relatively) weaker player, and a bunch of blather excusing it.

I do not want him to claim, and I do not want anyone else to vote for him right now. I want to clear and concise arguments, or GTFO his wagon.

If you really need me to detail and resummarize why I think he's scum, fine. I'll get that too you again and cover the same ground again.

My case has been, sans the fact its been stretched and pulled many times, the same "clear and concise" case it was when I laid down my vote:

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.

There's been more since. However, that basis stands.

Further, if you think this wagon is such bullshit, why not pull the rabbit out finally and explain this vote on me.

And, weaker player or strong player, the coincidental fact that his list of suspects is every person voting for him + a lurker vote IS noteworthy and IS going to stand out.

[Adel]

And, weaker player or strong player, the coincidental fact that his list of suspects is every person voting for him + a lurker vote IS noteworthy and IS going to stand out.

are you claiming that that is a player-specific scumtell or a universal scumtell?

[SpyreX]

I'm saying that the "everyone voting for me + lurker" vote, when taken as part of this larger game, is scummy. Player-specific would require some kind of meta, which I dont have nor care to use, and universals don't exist.

So, instead it is a "circumstantial" (for lack of better word) scumtell.

[springlullaby]

Spring, why does Adel's mere lack of support get more attention than me shouting that Artem is town?

*ahem* did you miss that she was trying to get me to argue

why

I thought the wagon was pseudo-random bullshit? She doesn't seem to want to actually argue why she supports the wagon.

@Elmo. The difference between you and Adel is that you have presented argument on why you think Artem is a bad wagon. I think these arguments are a plausible townie stance, thought I don't agree with them. Especially the townie/townie fight. I think people are giving too much credit to that emotional display because 1)'exasperated townie' is actually an easy role to slip in as scum 2)it does not make sense for town to be pissed off at someone they think is scum the way Artem has been.

@Adel. Is there an accusation somewhere in there? To comment on what you are saying, I have already argued why I support the wagon, it is you who are refusing to argue why you do not support it.

Plus, I totally don't get the motivation behind what you are doing here. You say Artem's wagon is bad but you offer neither criticism nor analysis, or even a new direction to take. So yeah, what are you doing exactly?
______________________________________

Good posts and attempts at scum-hunting, but several things seem off.
1-Still hasn't replied to the question: assume the mod answered yes, what are the connections that you're seeing between players? The further the answer is delayed, the more inclined I am to think that there was no such notice and the question was for show;
2-"Lol, scummy" reaction to one of my points. The cynics in some players are wondering if Ecto is pulling a gambit. Why is it so much more ridiculous of me to wonder if you purposely avoided to post to make my meta read on you off? Is it not a valid thing to wonder, especially since you've never warned us about your V/LA?

1- Factually false, see reply to Porkens.
2- The reason your suggestion is 'lol scummy' is as follow: you are proposing that I, as scum, threw off my meta in the interest of framing you - this is stretching and amounts to conspiracy theory. Tell me, were I scum, what interest do I have not to play to my town meta which garnered a town read from you?

-------------------

I like the present state of affairs and my vote remains. I'm however looking forward to Porkens and zorblag's contribution.

[Porkens]

Artem:

I was far more intersted in the idea of "bandwagons are good because they give pressure and promote discussion" combined with the statement "I have no intention of lynching the guy who's wagon I am on." I think my question to you was similar to, but separate from, what SpyreX was asking/talking about. The point that I don't think you got was that it wasn't necessarily an attack. As far as I believe; wagons are only useful if they have the potential to end in lynches.

Adel:

It would be a great time soon to reveal what you've learned from our responses to your survey and why you origionaly voted for SpyreX. As for Artem having a 'crap' case on him; I get plenty of negative vibes and a general over-defensive feel from him. To me, it's obvious that he'd be a decent day 1 lynch. I'm supprised that you've been so vocaly opposed to it. I'm personally not going to put together an in-one-place case; if someone wants to do that it would be fine, but ultimatly unneccesary imo.

Herod's unvote is rediculous, and I can't believe he jumped off the wagon at L-2 to prevent a too-early claim. There ya' go. This is the strongest negative point against Herod I've seen all game.

[Adel]

unvote, vote: Porkens

I guess I'll have to return to Spryx later.

[Vi]

Keep in mind we're past the inquisition. They're questions because questions catch the eye.

I'm not wasting time convincing scum they are scum.

Let me clarify, then. This looks like you're trapping Artem so there's literally nothing he can do right; "heads I win, tails you lose".

-----

The way I'm reading springlullaby 263-265, it can be condensed to "Disregard what most people consider as scumtells, as I have no ulterior motives". Seriously?

It is interesting to me that the reasons you uses to justify reading Porkens and I being from different alignment are arguments that I personally would find to be in favour of there being possible distancing. Early non-game related name dropping + barely justified and lasting vote.

I do agree with this, though.

Firstly this is technically false, Artem gave me a town read.

Could you clarify this for me?

Nice recitation of standard theory.

I didn't think of it as standard theory before, but nonetheless. Are you above standard theory?

What are your arguments in favour of my not just being VLA, and too busy to write my catch up post the two days afterwards?

Who's to say this isn't true? After your vigorous denial of wrongdoing to the point where you seem to be suggesting that you CAN'T feasibly be considered scummy for what you did, that doesn't seem like an issue any more.

-----

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?

To that end, I agree with Elmo

sarian2

.

-----

My vote on Troll is outdated. His stance on early game seems an integral part of his playstyle, even if it is borderline anti-town. I'll be watching you closely though.

unvote

Is Troll less scummy, then?

Artem's vote being put down as a "frustration vote" seems a bit of a reach to me; note that the vote came in 220 and the expression of frustration only in 223,

Wait, what? I've been putting Artem down as frustrated Town up until now. Reading it again... You seem right. The post before it seemed like it was at terms with Herodotus as well. Artem?

Elmo 230 effectively calling SpyreX/Artem a town-town debate. Noted.

Noted... how?

-----

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)?
Also, what of SpyreX's quote block?

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.

I'm being more open about my process here since

I don't expect to live long in this game

Why not?

-----

[@Korts 269:]

Other than that, it's mostly opinions. For example, in the post where he votes me, I can't find a single question/point to address in an attempt to defend myself.

I disagree entirely.

WAGON FISHING ALERT

MAN YOUR STATIONS

THIS IS NOT A DRILL

And aren't you just as stubborn, anyway?

Both of these look like good candidates for defenses/responses... if there's anything to defend.

Could you precisely define "scumhunting" for me?

-----

I'm interested in seeing Troll's responses to s-lullaby and especially Korts.