Newbie game 806: Game over (the scums win)

[Johoohno]

Vote count

(7 players alive = 4 to lynch before deadline)

(1) HowardRoark - d3x

Not voting:

Dizzle, facebook, HowardRoark, sigma, Toledo88, Zachrulez

:arrow:

Deadline: 10 August (click this to see cowntdown)

[HowardRoark]

@Zachrulez: Being an IC, you should know that even players with town aligned roles can behave in a very scummy manner. Also, can you please respond to my burden-of-proof/fallacy/scummy question?

[Zachrulez]

Um what??

There's a wiki article on how that is a logical fallacy.

It's not an example of good play, that much is certain, but that's probably one of the primary reasons we have newbie games, is to teach people that it's a logical fallacy right?

And yes, I am well aware of the problem with scummy townies, but as you can see, we appear to be in a situation where you voted first and asked questions later. Now you seem to regret your vote, and it leaves me wondering why.

[Zachrulez]

Anyway, I was looking for this whole burden of proof thing, and I had trouble actually reading back and finding it. I presume what we are talking about is this:

If you're Town, I'm going after you for something you could be 100% legitimate on. I have my doubts about that but only you know for sure. it's your job to convince us.

It's no so much his job to prove that he is town, but rather your job to prove that he (or any other player) is scum. The burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused.

The position d3x is taking here is that he sees something that bothers him and it's legitimate behavior, it's that particular player's job to convince him that it is in fact legitimate. The key term here is convince over prove.

You can't prove anyone is scum anymore than you can prove you are town in a mafia game. (Generally anyway.)

[d3x]

...even players with town aligned roles can behave in a very scummy manner.

Here's my problem with this statement. You have not shown that I'm acting scummy. You dropped your case based on 'communication difficulties'. How can you now come out and say I'm being scummy? It's like you're trying to build another case against me without building a case.

On an earlier point, I was not misrepresenting you. You started your case against me with two points. The first one {whether in or out of context} was OMGUS. I'm sorry, but those are your words, not mine. I'm not changing the meaning by leaving the rest of the sentence off.

That'd

be misrepresenting you.

[sigma]

Hey folks -- haven't gotten a chance to read anything since about two hours after my last post. I'll check in later today with some thoughts.

[sigma]

And.... a post.

I actually like d3x's arguments in the game.

It is not bad to sheep for a bit and follow d3x.

Till now, D3x is a guy who gave good reasons of what he did and I might just follow him a bit until some more important and significant clues can be drawn (after a lynch).

d3x is imo giving nice contribution and I often feel I'm on a similar wavelength when readin his posts.

Buddying and more buddying. Lots and lots of it, in fact, from someone with 4 substantial posts (iso 2,3,5,6). facebook is still following d3x now by saying she suspects HR without adding anything new to the case against him. This worries me.

I actually like d3x's arguments in the game. He was attacked early about the random voting thingy but he did make some really good counter-arguments. And I like this post very much

I would be ok with a Bond lynch. He's been more active than his replacees, but has been acting a bit weird over this rand0m thing. Multiple times he's made statements about being ok with an almost assuredly mislynch of rand0m. His comments on a replacement seem like an afterthought, but he should know more than anyone {as he is a replacement} the availability of replacing out/in.

Also, Rash's exit seemed more Scum laden than rand0m's. It was more like we caught his hand in the cookie jar than frustrated Newb-Town.

My p129 sums up another pressure point that I felt was left untouched by him bailing. I find that move very scummy, indeed.

For what it's worth, I just noticed that in his p171 where he was detailing our chances of nailing Scum, Bond left himself into the equation. I don't like that. He says...

If we accept Somerandomguy as town, and we go for someone else, we have 2/8 shot of getting scum

...but with rand0m being Town and him knowing his own alignment as "Town", it'd be 2/7. Hmm...

I'm more focus on reading the post where d3x changed his vote to JamesBond as HR and Jbond were both his lynching picks. First I don't think they were playing the same cards at all. To me, Bond was more like a boring townie, while HR has been actively participating in the game.

These two posts contradict each other. In iso2, facebook singles out this post of d3x's as one she really likes. d3x's post (#177) is about Bond's scumminess. In iso5, she says Bond was acting like a bored townie. In iso6, she mentions d3x's post again:

d3x: You swapped initially to JB because you felt that you wouldn't manage a lynch on HR (so you had your sights on one of these two, I suppose) and decided that we would get more info from a lynch on JB because of your thoughts on the possibility of them being on the same team. You mention them playing similar cards, but JB was not particularly active up until that point and HR was providing much more substantial posts, whereas it took the looming guillotine to provoke JB into speaking.

@facebook: I feel like you're saying two things here:

1: d3x is a great contributor, and his p177 about Bond is a great post.

2: d3x is wrong about Bond being scummy.

Can you please explain the contradiction here? Am I missing something?

[facebook]

Buddying and more buddying. Lots and lots of it, in fact, from someone with 4 substantial posts (iso 2,3,5,6). facebook is still following d3x now by saying she suspects HR without adding anything new to the case against him. This worries me.

Why does it worry you? I thought HR was scummy yesterday, scummy enough to vote him and then not vote JB. Today HR has not done enough to make himself seem any less scummy imo. As I detailed in my last post, I think he is perhaps trying to WIFOM the iP kill. And while I have been following d3x, I am still being wary of him and watching what he does, so don't worry about that. I think HR and d3x are very much against eachother right now, and if I had to choose who I thought was Mafia, I would choose HR. That's that.

@facebook: I feel like you're saying two things here:

1: d3x is a great contributor, and his p177 about Bond is a great post.

2: d3x is wrong about Bond being scummy.

Point 2 is correct, no? Or at least, d3x was wrong about being scum, I didn't think he was particularly scummy but that's difference of opinion. d3x is imo a great contributor because I am able to see each point he is making. I don't disagree with

everything

though. I didn't see it being JB, or a JB/HR team. I've only been after HR myself. You are quick to point out my contradictions but you ignore that I have been after HR since yesterday and did disagree with the JB lynch.

Other people are too quiet atm, I wanna read their opinion on things. Still not sure about Toledo, but I think HR would be a good lynch.

[Zachrulez]

A few things I would like to note.

A re-read of d3x through day 1 to now gives me more of a pro-town feel than I had originally.

HR's reversal on d3x really bothers me. The timing of his unvote in the face of the questions being posed to him stinks.

Toledo interests me now as well. He is quick to point out how little interaction there is/was between me and Dizzle, while ignoring the fact that HR and himself do not seem very interested in each other either.

I'd like to see Facebook in the game a little more, but I generally don't have an issue with the way she's playing so far.

Sigma seems to have tunneled in on Facebook's player slot. This combined with his reaction to d3x bothers me a little. There may be something there, but I'm not sure.

A look at Dizzle saw him suspicious of d3x at first, and then progressing to suspicion of HR, and finally Bond on day 1. Nothing about the way he has played seems off to me at this point, but like facebook, I'd like to see him more engaged in the game.

Same for Toledo.

By far, my top suspect is HR so

Vote: HowardRoark

[sigma]

@Zach: Can you put on your IC hat and define tunneling for me? Basically, I understand it to be defined as: someone is convinced 1 person (or role) is scum and isn't paying attention to or interacting with anyone else. Personally, I don't think it applies to me here. I've been interacting with the other players this game day as well.

@facebook: The point about you voting for HR is one of those points that doesn't mean very much by itself. You're correct about you finding him scummy yesterday. It's more that HR happens to be the person d3x is voting for, and you've been buddying up to d3x. The vote could be part of that, that's all I'm trying to say. I agree that your suspecting HR didn't come out of nowhere.

[Zachrulez]

@Zach: Can you put on your IC hat and define tunneling for me? Basically, I understand it to be defined as: someone is convinced 1 person (or role) is scum and isn't paying attention to or interacting with anyone else. Personally, I don't think it applies to me here. I've been interacting with the other players this game day as well.

Your definition is correct.

Is Facebook your top suspect?

What do you think about HR?

Based on what I see of your play, and the way I've seen you attacking Somerandomguy, and his replacement Facebook, I just get the impression that you're tunneling on that player slot.

You did vote HR, but it was in the face of the deadline. Your focus otherwise has more or less been on Somerandomguy/facebook.

If I'm getting the wrong impression of your play I'm sorry, but I see what I see.

[d3x]

Mod

- Do we currently have a prod out on Toledo? Can we get one if not, please? He hasn't posted since last Friday. If I've missed a V/LA notice, then I'm sorry.

More of a substantial post coming in a bit...

[sigma]

Is Facebook your top suspect?

What do you think about HR?

Hate to be unoriginal, but HR is my top suspect. He's been incredibly erratic with his votes (his unvote, his vote on iP, etc.). Twice now he's voted d3x only to back off and say that his vote is better elsewhere. The second time especially, this seems to be more of a defense mechanism than anything else.

As you can tell, HR hasn't been the focus of my posting. That's because I'm using my mafia posting time to try (and fail, apparently) to get discussions started on other players. That's my explanation for my play today.

[d3x]

Alright, I was able to steal a bit of time {I'm currently at work}. I reread the case on rand0m and then looked into facebook's posts as promised.

My thoughts are that the rand0m case wasn't as strong as I remembered it. There was some minor contradictory play, but I think he was trying to accomodate with our requests of him. The problem was compounded by his apparent misunderstanding that we weren't looking for him to just post, but actually contribute.

In going over facebook's buddying and sheeping me; it leaves me nervous, but I think that's about all. The comments that she's not convinced of my alignment but then following my opinion and voting trends puts me off a bit. I may just be reading too much into it, though. Note she's FoSed HR, not voted him. I don't really see her play as being scummy ATM. I agree with Zach that we need to have some more content out of her. Specifically, I'd like to see more of her thoughts on items I'm not currently blasting.

I do however, agree with sigma. Specifically in regards to the contradiction between her Iso2 and Iso5.

@facebook- You said that you liked my p177 very much, but you disagree with the entire premise of it {not finding Rash/Bond scummy}. Can you reconcile these for me, please?

[Johoohno]

Replacement

Toledo88 is replaced by Toast (effective immediately). Thanks!

[Toast]

Hey everyone, I'm here for Toledo.
I've done Mafia forum games before, but I'm new to this site specifically, so bear with me, especially on a lot of the terminology.

I've read through the majority of this thread, but somehow keeping up with everyone's thoughts and opinions is a lot easier in real time rather than trying to catch up on 14 pages of material. Before I state my opinion on anything specifically, does anyone want to give me a quick summary of accusations, or at least links to accusatory posts that you think are important for me to be up-to-date on?

[d3x]

Welcome to the game {and the site} Toast! If no one has broken down the game by then, I'll try to get some kind of breakdown together for you later tonight after I get off of work. As a side note, this page should help you a lot with terminology.

[d3x]

Alright, let's see what my tired brain can put together.

Points of interest...

D2 opens. HR sets up a voting chart and lists posts to review from D1.
p269- sigma breaks down facebook's D1.
There is conversation back and forth over sigma's intentions.
p284- My thoughts on the failed bandwagon from D1.
p287- sigma's breaks down Toledo's D1.
p292- HR's case against me plus vote.
p294- My counter argument against HR plus vote.
Discussion back and forth over the cases.
p313- HR unvotes after multiple players question the validity of his case.
More discussion follows.
p331- sigma brings a case against facebook.
p333- Zach votes HR.
Shortly thereafter, you replaced in and we're up to speed. Obviously, more than that has happened in the 3 pages of D2, but those are the main cases {IMO} and votes. D1 you'll have to sort out yourself.

With this information and your full read of the game thus far, what are your thoughts/feelings on all of the players.

[HowardRoark]

@Zachrulez: (327) Most of what is listed in the logically fallacies category on the wiki are also considered scum tells. (i.e. appeal to emotion, appeal to authority, ad hom attacks, strawman, etc.)

A re-read of d3x through day 1 to now gives me more of a pro-town feel than I had originally.

HR's reversal on d3x really bothers me. The timing of his unvote in the face of the questions being posed to him stinks.

Yes, the timing was not optimal. That's why I said to take it as you like. If your views of d3x can change after a re-read, why can't mine?


@d3x: (329) By separating the sentence you have removed half of the point. It was not two separate points. It was the combination of those two actions that was important.

vote facebook

The closest thing you have done to hunting scum is following others. Mostly, you are actively lurking. You are still ignoring my questions.

@facebook: I want to see the results of your d3x vote change analysis. Also see my post 265 request to you.

Also, you mention that you are town (or some variation of that word) over a dozen times in you 2 content posts. Many on this site believe that overstating your town alignment is a sum tell. What do you think of that in regards to your actions?

[Toast]

Alright then.

d3x - So far, you've been talking a lot and being pretty aggressive, but I really can't find any flaws with your logic or any behavior that screams scum. For now, you're not particularly high on my scum list, but that will change with the slightest slip-up.

facebook - I completely agree with HR and sigma about you being a bit clingy to d3x, and I do agree that your logic regarding JB was a big fallible, but I can understand why you want to sheep d3x at the moment and I agree with it. Your inactivity doesn't really bother me at the moment - from your few posts I think I've understood you better than some of the other players. You're not very high on suspicion either right now.

On my slot as Toledo - yeah, after reading through what Toledo had said, I agree with d3x about how his case against JB was pretty weak. Now that I'm in and know he wasn't scum, I'm just going to guess he was either being lazy or didn't really know what to think - he probably just wanted to get going.

My current suspicions lie with HR. This accusation:

Hrmm. Feelings of dread rising. I've seen both Dizzle and Toledo come in and leave without posting. I don't believe either one is any other games.

Perhaps they were reading when then didn't have time post? (Point made: Dizzle posts to this extent while I am typing.) Even when I was the super busy lone man in my office, I was attempting to read the thread once per day. This is another subtle attempt to direct attention on others without truly making an accusation.

seems a bit shallow. I don't interpret what d3x said as "a sublte attempt to direct attention", I interpret this as an attempt to get Dizzle (and myself) to speak up a bit. You, however, seem to be doing just that - trying to direct attention at d3x, which makes sense, seeing how he was making some pretty valid points against you. I also believe you unvoted him in an attempt to get him to back off...

For now, I feel that you are probably just an overeager town-aligned player and I am done allowing our disagreements to flood the thread. The tunneling needs to cease.

At the moment, I'm a bit suspicious of Sigma, but only because I'm not completely sure I understand his reasons for defending HR. If you could clarify, I would really appreciate it.

Zach doesn't interest me particularly at the moment - I agree with his vote on HR, but I can't really think of much else to say.

I also agree with Dizzle in his opinion that d3x and HR probably aren't both scum. The day 1 vote was way too close to having HR gone, and I doubt they would have made that gambit on purpose.

Finally - I understand I'm being clingy to d3x right now, but right now I don't see a reason not to be. If anyone wishes to change my mind, go ahead.

For now,

Vote: HowardRoark

FomS: Sigma

[d3x]

I hate losing freaking posts!!!

Now then...

@Toast- You do realize you just put HR at L-1, right? Are you wanting an early lynch on him {12 days early to be precise}?

Also, I hadn't noticed sigma's 'defending' HR until you brought it up.

@sigma- If HR is your 'top suspect' then why are you making allowances for him?

this seems to be more of a defense mechanism than anything else

[Toast]

I guess I can't count. In truth, though, I wouldn't mind an early lynch, but I want to wait to hear more of Sigma and Dizzle.

Unvote: HowardRoark
FOS: HowardRoark

[Toast]

After a quick re-read of Sigma's iso, I

really

want to hear more of him. In sigma iso #34 and #39, he seems to be defending HR a bit, and in #41 it looks like he could be trying to pull attention away from him. At the same time, HR is his top suspect.

Sigma - could you state your opinion on HR as directly as possible for me?

[sigma]

OK, here's the full quote that has you guys interested.

Hate to be unoriginal, but HR is my top suspect. He's been incredibly erratic with his votes (his unvote, his vote on iP, etc.).Twice now he's voted d3x only to back off and say that his vote is better elsewhere. The second time especially, this seems to be more of a defense mechanism than anything else.

That last sentence is ambiguous. Here's the gist of what I was trying to say. When HR unvoted d3x, I thought there were at least two possible interpretations of that:

1)HR is a townie and has been convinced that d3x is town, or at least he's worried enough about other players that he doesn't think he should be voting d3x.

2)HR is scum or town and trying to get the town's focus and votes off of him by backing down on his (so far ineffective) attack -- in other words, a defensive ploy.

To me, his post and unvote read more like #2 than #1. I think this is scummy. That's what I was trying to say in iso 41; the post doesn't make sense otherwise. Sorry that wasn't more clear; the post was poorly written to be sure.

Sigma - could you state your opinion on HR as directly as possible for me?

HR has played scummy and is my top suspect at the moment.

In sigma iso #34 and #39, he seems to be defending HR a bit, and in #41 it looks like he could be trying to pull attention away from him. At the same time, HR is his top suspect.

We've addressed #41. Only one passage jumps out at me from iso #34, so Toast, let me know if there was something else about it that caught your eye. I think this is the relevant passage:

I find this very interesting. Aside from me not "pushing" anything {I gave an example and Zach and sigma were asking me what I was trying to say}, just above this quote you said that we should review the play made during the day and not focus on potential WIFOM created from NKs. So, I followed your *soap box* advise before you gave it and you find it scummy?

I introduced the idea for 2 reasons. 1- to question sigma on what I thought at the time to be a rather curious statement and 2- to further bring evidence to the table against you. I believe the concept is called scrutinizing voting patterns, or some such thing.

Both of these quotes reference HR finding d3x scummy for bringing up iP's death.

@d3x: This is probably beating a dead horse, but I want to let you know that I absolutely agree with HR about bringing iP's death into this. IMO, it's one big WIFOM that was originated by you. You've just said that the fact that HR atttacked a confirmed townie is evidence. Here's my problem with that: it's not escaping my attention that you went after a townie yesterday. Whether or not Bond was acting scummy, he was not scum. Bottom line, that means you failed, along with everyone else who lynched Bond. Being a townie means failing more often than not, but there's almost certainly at least 1 scum on that day 1 Bond lynch. My question to you, d3x: if HR has 'evidence' against him from his attacking a confirmed townie, doesn't the same point apply to you? My apologies if I'm making you reiterate anything.

Don't think this is 'defending' HR at all. HR had attacked d3x for bringing the nightkill of iP into discussion. I am stating here that I agree with HR's points on this and wanted clarification from d3x. Agreeing with an attack that HR made does not equal defending him.

Here is iso #39. This is the post where I asked facebook some questions about her buddying. If I'm defending HR in this post, I don't see it. Please explain exactly where you found evidence for your claim that I was "defending HR" in this post.

[d3x]

Yeah, I'm not too clear on how Iso39 = a defense of HR. It looks to me like an offense on facebook. Thank you for clearing up Iso41, sigma.

@all- I'll be logged in while at work most of today, but I don't know how much {if any} I'll be able to contribute. I also don't know if I'll have any access until I get back from V/LA. I'm sorry for the timing of this, but I'll see you all in a week! Unless you kill me before then.