Mini 788 - Fantasy Mafia [OVER]

[ZazieR]

EBWOP
Forgot this last time as well >.<

OP vs Empking is meh. One could very well be scum, I haven't been paying much attention to either player slot I must admit.

So what about your town-read you had on Empking at the start of the game?

[Shadow Knight]

Skipping to the end so I can weigh on this, then I'll go back and re-read Zazie vs. Orto.

OMGUS ****IS***** a scum tell. Is it a home run scum tell? No. Newbies do it a lot and so do marginal to bad mafia players. However, it is a scum tell in the fact that town players shouldn't assume that the person who builds a case on them must be scum. I'm all for someone defending against a case made on them and if they happen to present a counter attack that's founded on logic and reason and backed up with evidence then I'm more willing to to see the accused in a townie light. Its easy to say "Well I'm a townie, so if Pookie is attacking me he must be against the town." That's essentially OMGUS in a nutshell and its also craplogic, which is *another* scum tell. So yes, when I see OMGUS, I'll attack the player using it every time.

Back to catching up.

[Sudo_Nym]

I'm actually kinda offended by ortie. I know my theorizing isn't directly scumhunting, but I find it useful to gauge reactions; Ort's entire theory of my scumminess is entirely based on how useless he finds it to be.

So my question then becomes, why are you so sure that I don't learn anything off my theory opening, yet your "deliberately scummy whatever" is so useful? Is it simply because you do the one and not the other, or what?

[Kmd4390]

More or less. Her center was right, which makes me believe she was thinking along townie lines. As such, I give her the benefit of the doubt, and believe that her idea was a mistake, not a deliberate scum maneuver.

Ok, I really want to believe that I'm right and Star had scummy intentions in trying to out power roles, but your logic is just too good to argue against.

Unvote

ORLY? Check again.
And like I said, the only thing that's scummy about Kevin is that he wasn't his normal stubborn self regarding Andy.

Heh. You're

really

gonna be suspicious of me after the unvote above.

-----------

Now might be the time to look at lurkers. Most of the active players are giving me town reads.

OP,

First he jokevoted Starbuck with the Mean Girls quotes. Then:

Before I get into the loop, can we get a

vote count?

Wants a vote count before getting "into the loop".

Then:

vote Starbuck

LOL, I really hope you are voting her because she hasn't seen Mean Girls. If anything is worth a vote, that sure is.

*will get serious tomorrow*

Comments on Mean Girls again. Not a useful post. Says he'll post "tomorrow".

Next post is 4 days later:

Alright, I am getting caught up. I think it would be beneficial, probably day 2 or 3 (some time later on) if we did a mass flavor claim. Anyone agree? Disagree?

I will post sometime later on though.

Says he's catching up. Asks for the mass flavor claim which really doesn't seem like anything worth doing to me.

Again, says he'll post later.

3 days later, next post:

Vote: Empking

Bandwagoning.

Very weak vote.

It just seemed very opportunistic and he basically repeated what has already been said.

Then he comes back to explain the vote, which I still think is weak.

Vote Orangepenguin

I'd like to see some actual analysis from you ASAP.

[ortolan]

You are saying that he's scum based upon his normal playstyle. This has been stated, yet you still see it as a scumtell and refuse to check if it's true. So what is really the anti-town play in this case?

I don't care if it's his normal playstyle, getting sidetracked into discussions irrelevant to the game at hand gives us no opportunity to read his alignment and therefore is anti-town.

And seriously, why are scummies earned always used against the players who received them?

I'm not using it against him at all. I disagree with the way most people think they can use "meta" on this site, at least against players who aren't extremely new. I deliberately screw around with my meta as town/scum to make it totally unpredictable.

Uhm, with a post like this you should be able to find the answer to that.

I

hate

overreacting as a scum-tell in the way you've used it here. All I did was justify myself and question votes on me etc. which I always do as town and scum. I always dislike votes on me and am particularly allergic to scum voting me (or others) with crappy reasons and not being called into question for it.

The question was:
'Do you or do you not think that OMGUS is a scumtell?'
Which gives me the impression that you asked about OMGUS in general. So no, once again, I didn't dodge your question.
And yeah, if it was OMGUS, it would have been scummy in this case.

You would be a

fantastic

dodgeball player. You have again totally avoided the question. Was my vote in this instance, OMGUS or not? - You have again totally failed to answer my question.

Someone being "deliberately scummy"

(although I actually disagree with this characterisation itself)

is very rarely a good reason to lynch them.

The bolded part means that I did

not

agree that my actions were deliberately scummy.

Did I say that you did?

Well, you know, your whole rant about me using the "too scummy to be scummy fallacy" actually depends on me saying I was "being deliberately scummy",

which I wasn't

. Playing unconventionally in order to attract attention/gauge reactions is definitely

not

"playing deliberately scummy". I'm surprised I need to argue this point with you.

Order I can't say yet. And I'm not voting yet. Both for the same reason.

I predict you are scum and will thus find a way to vote for me within the next few posts, to divert the wagon from your buddy Andy.

EBWOP
Forgot this last time as well >.<

OP vs Empking is meh. One could very well be scum, I haven't been paying much attention to either player slot I must admit.

So what about your town-read you had on Empking at the start of the game?

It stands. Reading over his posts I would still lean town over him, also. However I know with both these players that letting them live through to the late-game without scrutiny can be very unwise. They are equally capable of lurking to end-game as both scum and town.

Shadow Knight your discussion of OMGUS in 276 is irrelevant and is only contributing to ZazieR's attempts to bog the game down in semantics. None of my votes in this game have been OMGUS.

So my question then becomes, why are you so sure that I don't learn anything off my theory opening, yet your "deliberately scummy whatever" is so useful? Is it simply because you do the one and not the other, or what?

*whistle whistle* no-one being deliberately scummy here, sorry. I have never seen theory discussion contribute meaningfully to a game, I have been in one which OP was in also where it made the game extremely large in post-size and entirely useless. Plus your musings on "hypocrisy" aren't really mafia theory anyway, as I already said. Plus I'm not at all impressed with the reads you've produced so far from "using this technique" which seem to consist solely of "ortolan is a good bandwagon", and "ortolan is overreacting", which is a most horrible scumtell.

ZazieR can you please provide a read of Andycya as previously requested, thankyou (this is the third request I've made I think).

[Goatrevolt]

EBWOP
Also, the quote in the above post from Star, was in response to this post:

Star, taking shots at "everyone" is me thinking I have the 3 scum found and going after those three players. How am I being insulting or defensive?

Goat, you (or anyone else here) probably won't face my real wrath. I've been warned by a List Mod recently, but the game is ongoing. XD

Star, I'd say we should probably stop discussing roles that could be in the game. There is no reason to speculate on anyone's roles just yet.

I see, I see what Goat didn't see and that's that Star missed a question.
So Star answer it, and Goat explain why you didn't comment on this.

Comment on what? That Star missed a question? Did Star respond to the rest of the post as well? Missing a question isn't scummy. Lying about it is.

The only argument mentioned in the post Goat votes Kevin I can agree with is:

Being on Andycyca for as long as he was without commenting on him at all is a definite scum tell.

But I'll get to this in my response to Kevin's last post.

Also, regarding this:

I also dislike his assertion that he missed my questions when he had answered the rest of my post. It's a dishonest answer, and he had no reason not to simply tell the truth as town.

What's the truth, according to you then?

That he simply chose not to answer them because they were the kind of questions that suggested his attack on me was misguided.

Also, three of the four mentioned arguments were already present before you voted. The only one absent that happened between the post before you voted and the post in which you voted, was the Star vote. So why did you only vote later?
Not to forget that you've also been very long on the Andy wagon, yet you didn't mention him after the post in which you voted and in the post you voted. So why do you attack him for something you did as well?
I'm interested to hear your elaboration about the 'no scumhunting' argument, as I think it's untrue.
Which leaves the Star vote. Why is it weak? Because Star is scummy, and depending on the responses to my post, she's one of the players who can get my vote. I'll reveal the others later.

I contemplated voting earlier. I held on to my Andy vote at the time simply because I still thought he was still scummier. Kmd's vote on Starbuck tipped the scale in his favor. It complemented his play up to that point in the game (questioning people on stuff that could be construed as scummy but really isn't) and then the vote was icing. She made a suggestion that would benefit scum more than town, but it was such a blatantly "scummy" statement that it's clearly just a sign of inexperience. The only way I could see her making that statement as scum comes from a completely different reason than KMD's. I could see her as scum making that statement only if she legitimately thought it was something that would help the town and she wanted to look town by suggesting townie things. However, it's just as easy to assume that she's town suggesting things that she thinks will help the town as well.

I did mention Andy while I was on his wagon. Numerous times in fact. You quote one such post in 216, actually. I defended my vote on Andycyca to Empking and Sudo_Nym, arguing why his hypocrisy was scummy.

My no scumhunting argument against Kmd is that I don't think he's actually looking for scum with his questioning. I think he's just looking for things that could be construed as suspicious so he can place his vote there. That also ties in to my point about him "missing" my questions. Did he miss those questions, or did he ignore them because they didn't fit his want to construe me as scummy?

Because you say Star is scummy it's automatically true?

This is scummy as hell. Now, Goat attacks Kevin as he thinks Kevin's lying about his reasong for not answering a question. Had Kevin gave the reason Goat expected, he probably would have been attacked by Goat for not wanting to answer a question.

Really? You think I'm scummy as hell because of how you think I "would" have acted? Please...

There are possible town motivations for why he could have not answered those questions. And likewise, it is "possible" he did miss those questions, but in a post where I only say 3 short paragraphs, and he immediately answered the 3rd such paragraph in the following post, I highly doubt that he didn't even see them at all.

Possible town motivation, exhibit 1: I saw them, but wasn't sure how to respond to them, so I just answered the rest of your post in the meantime.

Seems like Goat is looking for reasons to attack Kevin.

On what basis? I gave arguments to suggest that him lying about it is a more plausible explanation than that he simply "missed" it.

Wait. Does this mean you think it's a weak vote, because you see Star as in-experienced?

In the most simplest form, yes. I think it's a weak vote because I think Kmd didn't even consider the option that Starbuck's lack of experience was the driving factor behind her making that post. Again, this ties into my point that he's looking for things he can construe as scummy rather than things that actually point to scum. I think Kmd is smart enough to have considered the possibility that Starbuck's post was simply the result of inexperience, and not some grand scum scheme to learn town power roles by asking kindly in thread.

I disagree, as he's asked questions and has discussed what in his eyes should be discussed.

Asking questions is easy to do. Discussing stuff is easy to do. Neither of those mean he's town by any stretch. I'm more interested in what he's pursuing and where his questions are leading. So far I see him on Andycyca without actually pressuring him/addressing him at all. Then I see him attacking me and "missing" questions that coincidentally happen to be hard to answer if his intention is to construe me as scummy. Then I see him attack Starbuck and ignoring her experience as the most likely factor behind her "scummy" statement.

--------

The 3 scum "slip" is inconsequential. I always assume 3 scum in a 12 player game unless there is reason to believe otherwise.

So, I only need to check the discussion between Sudo and Bear, Goat and Kevin.

Anyway, at this moment I'm not liking Star and Goat.

And yet, all your questions are directed elsewhere.

Does nobody else think Kmd is scummy?

ORLY? Check again.
And like I said, the only thing that's scummy about Kevin is that he wasn't his normal stubborn self regarding Andy.

The irony is slapping me in the face.

Traps are bad, and also anti-town.

Really? On what basis? I think traps can be powerful town tools.

I think I have referred to it before in mafia in at least one game, I honestly cannot remember which. It may have been one in which I was mafia (just to insure myself) but it's just a common logical device. I referred to it more to illustrate the point to you than to use it as a form of argumentation. I bet if you asked everyone in Mafia Discussion (after the game obviously) they would say it is entirely valid. It's really no basis for suspicion like you seem to think it is.

I'll step in to say that I use that all the time. It's like a slap in the face to bad logic. Not only are you showing that their accusation is wrong, you are also showing that even if their accusation was right, it doesn't mean what they suggest it does.

[ZazieR]

Before I respond,

Vote Starbuck

Hi Star *waves*
I C U

[Starbuck]

I see you too!

*wave*

[ZazieR]

You are saying that he's scum based upon his normal playstyle. This has been stated, yet you still see it as a scumtell and refuse to check if it's true. So what is really the anti-town play in this case?

I don't care if it's his normal playstyle, getting sidetracked into discussions irrelevant to the game at hand gives us no opportunity to read his alignment and therefore is anti-town.

Playing anti-town is not a scumtell. Using anti-town play as reason to vote somebody is a scumtell though.
Also, didn't you play deliberately neutral according to you at the start of this game?

And seriously, why are scummies earned always used against the players who received them?

I'm not using it against him at all. I disagree with the way most people think they can use "meta" on this site, at least against players who aren't extremely new. I deliberately screw around with my meta as town/scum to make it totally unpredictable.

My point was about Sudo's playstyle, that he has used it as town. Which means that it's not a complete scumtell. Yet, you think it is. It is indeed possible that he uses this playstyle as scum. But because he has used it as town, it it more a nulltell than a scumtell. Do you agree, or not? And why?
And you did use it against him, as you added that meta is useless against someone with a scummie award.

Uhm, with a post like this you should be able to find the answer to that.

I

hate

overreacting as a scum-tell in the way you've used it here. All I did was justify myself and question votes on me etc. which I always do as town and scum. I always dislike votes on me and am particularly allergic to scum voting me (or others) with crappy reasons and not being called into question for it.

What overreaction? I gave a post in which Sudo has stated that he saw you as suspicious. Where's the overreaction?

The question was:
'Do you or do you not think that OMGUS is a scumtell?'
Which gives me the impression that you asked about OMGUS in general. So no, once again, I didn't dodge your question.
And yeah, if it was OMGUS, it would have been scummy in this case.

You would be a

fantastic

dodgeball player. You have again totally avoided the question. Was my vote in this instance, OMGUS or not? - You have again totally failed to answer my question.

No, you're question was:

Yet again you dodge the question. In this context, if my vote was OMGUS, was it a scumtell

And look, I did answer that. Once again, you state that I didn't answer something, while I clearly did.
Also, I did answer your question in above quote in the first post of our discussion:

When you made the vote, I can see why it could be seen as OMGUS as you didn't give any reason why. Later when you explained, I agree that it wasn't OMGUS.

Someone being "deliberately scummy"

(although I actually disagree with this characterisation itself)

is very rarely a good reason to lynch them.

The bolded part means that I did

not

agree that my actions were deliberately scummy.

Did I say that you did?

Well, you know, your whole rant about me using the "too scummy to be scummy fallacy" actually depends on me saying I was "being deliberately scummy",

which I wasn't

. Playing unconventionally in order to attract attention/gauge reactions is definitely

not

"playing deliberately scummy". I'm surprised I need to argue this point with you.

You were accused of acting deliberately scummy. Your defence was a fallacy.
And why are you surprised that you have to argue this with me?

Order I can't say yet. And I'm not voting yet. Both for the same reason.

I predict you are scum and will thus find a way to vote for me within the next few posts, to divert the wagon from your buddy Andy.

Or I think you are scummy, and I might vote you for this later?
Also, strange enough, the wagon on Andy is already diverted. So tell me why I as possible scumbuddy of possible scum Andy would do something which has already happened before I got in?

It stands. Reading over his posts I would still lean town over him, also. However I know with both these players that letting them live through to the late-game without scrutiny can be very unwise. They are equally capable of lurking to end-game as both scum and town.

Your point of the part behind the part saying you still think he's town?

ZazieR can you please provide a read of Andycya as previously requested, thankyou (this is the third request I've made I think).

I'm positive that I answered it the first time. Oh look, I did:

There were only two posts made by Andy that struck me as scummy. I've asked for clarification on one of them. After his response to that, there's only one post of his that's scummy to me. Which is post 24. He said that it was sarcasm, which is strange to me as he included in that post that your vote was a null tell.
Other than that, he's not scummy.

[ZazieR]

I see you too!

*wave*

Yay, what do you have to say about everything since I joined this game?

[Shadow Knight]

@Orto- have I voted you? Then you're probably not exhibiting anything I consider a scum tell at this point.

[ZazieR]

@Orto- have I voted you? Then you're probably not exhibiting anything I consider a scum tell at this point.

Your last vote:

unvote, vote ortolan

For the totally OMGUS vote on Sudo.

[ZazieR]

I'll get to Kevin's and Goat's responses tomorrow.

[Shadow Knight]

that's what I get for posting from work without my notes.

@Orto- Am I voting you? Then you're probably exhibiting something I consider a scum tell.

fixed.

[ortolan]

Playing anti-town is not a scumtell. Using anti-town play as reason to vote somebody is a scumtell though.

No it isn't.

And

I'm not even voting him.

Also, didn't you play deliberately neutral according to you at the start of this game?

No, unorthodox.

My point was about Sudo's playstyle, that he has used it as town. Which means that it's not a complete scumtell. Yet, you think it is. It is indeed possible that he uses this playstyle as scum. But because he has used it as town, it it more a nulltell than a scumtell. Do you agree, or not? And why?

I don't care about his meta, useless divergence is anti-town, especially when he's done little else to contribute meaningfully to the game.

And you did use it against him, as you added that meta is useless against someone with a scummie award.

No I'm afraid I didn't. I said it was useless and particularly so because he had a scummie award and is presumably half-decent. I doubt I'd have been bothered metaing him regardless.

What overreaction? I gave a post in which Sudo has stated that he saw you as suspicious. Where's the overreaction?

You have misunderstood. I am saying "overreacting" is definitely

not

a scum-tell.

No, you're question was:

Yet again you dodge the question. In this context, if my vote was OMGUS, was it a scumtell

And look, I did answer that. Once again, you state that I didn't answer something, while I clearly did.
Also, I did answer your question in above quote in the first post of our discussion:

When you made the vote, I can see why it could be seen as OMGUS as you didn't give any reason why. Later when you explained, I agree that it wasn't OMGUS.

No, you referred to a vague hypothetical and said "if your vote was OMGUS...." etc. The fact you've conceded it wasn't makes me wonder why you are labouring this point.

You were accused of acting deliberately scummy. Your defence was a fallacy.
And why are you surprised that you have to argue this with me?

This doesn't even deserve a response.

Or I think you are scummy, and I might vote you for this later?

That's what I was calling you out on it. I suspect you are biding your time in an attempt to appear less scummy.

Also, strange enough, the wagon on Andy is already diverted. So tell me why I as possible scumbuddy of possible scum Andy would do something which has already happened before I got in?

Huh?

Your point of the part behind the part saying you still think he's town?

Huh?

What was the purpose of your vote on Starbuck?

Shadow Knight is being typically useful and attentive. So many scummy people, so little time.

[Sudo_Nym]

Playing anti-town is not a scumtell. Using anti-town play as reason to vote somebody is a scumtell though.

No it isn't.

And

I'm not even voting him.

This, at least, is truth.

Also, didn't you play deliberately neutral according to you at the start of this game?

No, unorthodox.

And I could easily jump on you, saying that your "unorthodox" playstyle is anti-town. But apparantly, when you do something unorthodox, its okay, but I have to be punished for it.

My point was about Sudo's playstyle, that he has used it as town. Which means that it's not a complete scumtell. Yet, you think it is. It is indeed possible that he uses this playstyle as scum. But because he has used it as town, it it more a nulltell than a scumtell. Do you agree, or not? And why?

I don't care about his meta, useless divergence is anti-town, especially when he's done little else to contribute meaningfully to the game.

I believe I've contributed significantly; I did explain why I open the way that I do, and I believe that its been effective, as its lead to scumhunting. The fact that you don't like that the scumhunting is on you is your problem, not mine. I believe I have a good reason to suspect you, and I have explained why. So what makes you think I haven't contributed significantly? What would your attitude be if I had decided to press someone else?

And you did use it against him, as you added that meta is useless against someone with a scummie award.

No I'm afraid I didn't. I said it was useless and particularly so because he had a scummie award and is presumably half-decent. I doubt I'd have been bothered metaing him regardless.

While I agree that meta can be misleading, especially against any half-decent player, I don't agree that its useless. But this isn't a scummy point either way, so I'll let it go.

What overreaction? I gave a post in which Sudo has stated that he saw you as suspicious. Where's the overreaction?

You have misunderstood. I am saying "overreacting" is definitely

not

a scum-tell.

I have to disagree. Overreacting is a very important scumtell. It's not a guarantee, but then, nothing is. If overreacting isn't a scumtell, then what's the point of opening with a bandwagon at all? Perhaps we're hoping that somebody will make a freudian slip and out himself? No. We do it to see how they react. If we unilaterally outlaw judgement by certain reactions, then we're crippling ourselves needlessly.

You were accused of acting deliberately scummy. Your defence was a fallacy.
And why are you surprised that you have to argue this with me?

This doesn't even deserve a response.

I believe it does. You may not believe you were acting deliberately scummy, but that doesn't mean that others are wrong when they say you were. And simply deflecting it with "You're wrong because I say so" doesn't earn you any townie points.

Or I think you are scummy, and I might vote you for this later?

That's what I was calling you out on it. I suspect you are biding your time in an attempt to appear less scummy.

"Anyone who votes for me is scum." Very newbish.

[Goatrevolt]

Overreacting can be a scumtell, but the problem with it is that it's subjective to each individual player. What may be overreacting to you could simply be normal to someone else.

[Sudo_Nym]

Overreacting can be a scumtell, but the problem with it is that it's subjective to each individual player. What may be overreacting to you could simply be normal to someone else.

This I'll buy. And its completely reasonable to assume that Ortolan doesn't believe he was overreacting- the problem is, nobody ever believes that they personally are overreacting.

[Shadow Knight]

I agree with both of the above.

BTW- what does this mean?

"Shadow Knight is being typically useful and attentive. So many scummy people, so little time."

[Andycyca]

Party Weekend. Sorry guys, I'm catching up

[ortolan]

I am quite sure Sudo_Nym is scum after his last post.

He is trying to justify inherently anti-town play by saying "nah uh, you did it too".

He thinks "voting for someone for a good bandwagon" and "voting for someone for overreacting" are somehow goods scum-tells. This is the worst part. For me it has nothing to do with the fact his attack is directed at me, these are just truly horrible arguments. He also seems to be portraying "overreacting" as the cream of all scum-tells. "What do we gain from bandwagons unless it's seeing their targets overreact?" There are many many things you gain from bandwagons. Plus you saying "well the fact you deny overreacting doesn't mean it's not a scum-tell" doesn't hold water. The obligation is on you to provide a reason the person is overreacting compared to their normal play; or why it inherently looks like an overreaction. You have not done this. You have not done any scum-hunting, actually.

I will happily move my vote to Sudo_Nym to secure a lynch (although I'm not sure if that's a change from my previous attitude ).

I dislike that the most prominent posters are largely the ones giving me strong scummy reads.

Mod: please prod Starbuck, Mixologist, Empking, orangepenguin and TonyMontana; and could we have a votecount please?

[ortolan]

Actually never mind about Starbuck, I missed her post

[Sudo_Nym]

I am quite sure Sudo_Nym is scum after his last post.

He is trying to justify inherently anti-town play by saying "nah uh, you did it too".

Again, you misinterprete to your own benefit. My point is that my play isn't anti-town. And given the number of people who have agreed with me over you, I think I'm justified in that belief. I was trying to call attention to the fact that most people agree that your play is more anti-town than mine, yet you act completely oblivious. I'm assuming you're doing this because you can't refute it, so you're just hoping that it'll go away if you ignore it.

[ortolan]

that most people agree

3/4 of whom I suspect of having scummy motives, and the other whom I suspect has no clue. I'm impressed with your brazen wagoning with your scumbuddies though.

It's quite laughable that you should describe a gambit such as that I embarked on at the beginning of the game as anti-town, meaning it actively hurt the town. How exactly? Outed power-roles did it? Defended my scumbuddy did I? Attacked someone for no good reason did I? How did it hurt the town exactly? I will enjoy watching you squirm as you try to justify your presence on this most illegitimate bandwagon.

[orangepenguin]

I am sooooo behind on everything, and I have put this game on the backburner. Sorry! I know I keep making promises, but I shalllll.

unvote

for now.