/in-Vitational Game 4 (Game Over!)

[charter]

Well charter, your reason was not very good in the first place, was it? That is what BAB was trying to say here.

I am up to date. I don't buy the BAB wagon anymore.

The main reason I'm suspicious of BAB is his manner of leaving of the Xyl wagon to join the Elvis one.

[Herodotus]

@KMD: No.

Willing to hop to Yos. I like Claus' post, and I had Yos on my short list.

Could you tell us what question you're answering here? So far you've ":nod:"ed to KMD and said "No" to him, but without his asking you any questions.

[elvis_knits]

In the meanwhile, Elvis, would you make a list of the 4 most scum-looking players for you?

Well I am still trying to decide what I think about the kmd stuff. I am trying to understand how I could miss a joke that everyone seems to think is obvious. Just out of curiousity, did you think kmd's response about "4 scum plus a traitor" was a joke too? Was I the only one who didn't get this? And why did nobody bring this up for like 5-6 pages? Why didn't anyone give their reason for voting me as something like "elvis taking kmd's joke too seriously" or "elvis misrepping an obvious joke by kmd." Nobody said that...

But besides that whole business, I have noticed somethings that I think are scummy whether or not kmd is scum.

---

Herodotus

seems weasely to me. I made one post on him already, 169. My basic question in that post is WHY he thinks I am not sincere, and why he chooses to think me a liar when he explicitly states evidence to the contrary (like meta).

In 171 he says the slip is a null-tell to him, and basically that's why he doesn't believe I could be confident. Then in 214 he agress that he thought kmd was making a joke, and that was the real reason he didn't believe my attack was serious. Why didn't he tell me that in 171? That was a perfect opportunity to explain.

Here are the posts I'm talking about:

Elvis seems to want us to believe that she believes in it, but I'm not sure whether she does.

What is your evidence for thinking I'm a liar? You seem to be saying "We can't be sure she's telling the truth, so I'm going to assume she's a liar."

So by meta, Elvis is more aggressive when town. That doesn't mean she wouldn't fake it as scum.

So what makes you think I'm faking it? What is the point of meta if you're going to discount it?

Herodotus seems to be able to SEE that there is reason to believe I am town, but he's choosing to think that I am scum for reasons I can't see.

@Elvis: I don't understand why you would be so confident about your case on KMD. I considered the "slip" to be a null-tell, and expected others would see that as well. You took it as a basis for a case in a situation where I would expect you not to seriously consider it one. That looks a bit like you're just trying to appear aggressive rather than seeking something that is genuinely scummy.

So I'm not assuming that you're lying; the issue is more that I don't understand why you would really believe what you're saying. And that is more suspicious than the other issues that have been raised.

No offense intended, Elvis, but I thought it was clear that KMD was joking around... which is why I doubted the sincerity of your case on him.

---

I agree

BAB

is suspicious. Primarily because it seems like he let kmd goad him into voting me. He decides to HOS me, then kmd asks him to vote me and BAB does it. BAB says he decided independently, but that's WIFOM. It sure LOOKS like kmd influenced BAB.

Also, let's not forget that BAB was serious when saying he thought there were exactly four scum in the game. Whether or not kmd was serious, BAB was serious. BAB says he miscounted from the sample scum pm... but still.

I have another small point. Not sure what it means, but I thought it was strange when BAB argued with me when I said that BAB and XYL were probably not scum buddies since he random voted and then pushed the xyl wagon. It is more BAB's plea to wagon xyl that seemed un-scum-buddyish to me. But why does he even have a problem with this? Why does he want to argue that they could indeed be scum buddies?

---

iamausername

has made three game posts, two of them were first post/random votes. The third is this:

iamausername, what do you think of self-voting?

I think it's a very silly thing to do in almost all situations.

We NEED to avoid fluff.

It would be nice.
What was the purpose of posting this sentence:

I have my own theories about what roles may be in this game but I've learned that setup speculation this early is pretty useless.

?

---

ITP I am not voting for Xyl.

What I mind in this post is that he's not scum hunting at all. He's encouraging alex to setup speculate, and stating he is staying off xyl wagon. Neither of those are at all helpful, and he's failing to really comment on anyone. He doesn't say

why

he's not voting xyl. He doesn't seem to be looking at any better place to put his vote other than his RVS vote. He's just staying completely out of all arguments, and I don't see him looking curiously at anyone. I see no evidence that he's looking for scum.

[mith]

Vote Count:

11 to lynch.

BridgesAndBaloons: 7 (charter, ekiM, inHimshallibe, Ojanen, roflcopter, SerialClergyman, Thesp)
elvis_knits: 4 (BridgesAndBaloons, Claus, Kmd4390, zu_Faul)
ekiM: 2 (populartajo, VP Baltar)
alexhans: 1 (iamausername)
Claus: 1 (alexhans)
Kmd4390: 1 (elvis_knits)
Ojanen: 1 (Xylthixlm)
Shabba: 1 (Yosarian2)
Yosarian2: 1 (Shabba)

Not Voting: 1 (Herodotus)

[Herodotus]

@KMD: No.

Willing to hop to Yos. I like Claus' post, and I had Yos on my short list.

Could you tell us what question you're answering here? So far you've ":nod:"ed to KMD and said "No" to him, but without his asking you any questions.

I should clarify that when you nodded, it was more or less clear what you meant. Here it is not.

@Elvis: I'd rather not speak for KMD. But more importantly, "telling you" didn't seem like a high priority, as it was a distinct topic. Reality was that you were running with your argument against KMD, and it looked suspicious. Not even because it was reaching, but because your tone, especially your all-caps sentence, looked like your real goal was to convince people that you believed your argument as opposed to convincing people that it was correct. I stated that at the time. If it is now clear, I'm ready to drop the issue.

[Shabba]

I add Shabba to my list of suspects for that post because #1 is scummy as hell and because she asks for four people's opinions on wagons but has given no opinion on anyone herself.

I thought #1 was valid. *shrug*
I have guesses about some players, but I didn't feel like I had enough justification other than "i'm feeling scummy vibes", which to me, wasn't enough to point fingers or change my vote.

[charter]

Well, since you (Shabba) don't want to commit to anything, what do you think of BAB? What do you think of Elvis? Who is your top suspect currently and why?

[charter]

And also, why is your vote still on Yos from the RVS?

[Yosarian2]

@KMD: No.

Willing to hop to Yos. I like Claus' post, and I had Yos on my short list.

You know, I've been waiting for you to explain this for several pages now, inhim.

[Yosarian2]

I'd like to hear more from yos. I mean, much more. He has managed not to comment on the 4 big wagon cases and all the collateral accusations, at the same time keeping a serious-but-not-pushing vote on a lurker.

Sitting in the background: This is what I have seen Yos-scum do in the games I have played with him, and what I have seen Yos-town not do the games I've read him in.

:eyebrow:

I didn't comment on the Elvis/KMD stuff quite delibaratly, claus. Why do you think that's a scum move?

[BridgesAndBaloons]

I was about to unvote E_k because she wasn't joining the wagon on me (something I'd expect scum to do and they could do it easily), but then in her most recent post she mentioned I was scummy which is a way of subtly joining the wagon without having to make the obvious vote.

I'm not saying that her suspecting me is necessarily scummy, because town would do that too, but if she continued to stay off my wagon I would have considered that towny and unvoted.

Still keeping my vote on E_k

I have another small point. Not sure what it means, but I thought it was strange when BAB argued with me when I said that BAB and XYL were probably not scum buddies since he random voted and then pushed the xyl wagon. It is more BAB's plea to wagon xyl that seemed un-scum-buddyish to me. But why does he even have a problem with this? Why does he want to argue that they could indeed be scum buddies?

I attack against bad logic because it creates an atmosphere where it's harder for scum to hide their insincere comments. Does that make sense? Even if someone is saying "Bab is town for [FAULTY LOGIC] " I will call them out on their bad logic.

231 and 232 make me think Charter is town.

[elvis_knits]

@Elvis: I'd rather not speak for KMD. But more importantly, "telling you" didn't seem like a high priority, as it was a distinct topic. Reality was that you were running with your argument against KMD, and it looked suspicious. Not even because it was reaching, but because your tone, especially

your all-caps sentence, looked like your real goal was to convince people that you believed your argument as opposed to convincing people that it was correct.

I stated that at the time. If it is now clear, I'm ready to drop the issue.

Does the bolded part mean that you thought I was trying to look like I believed what I was saying but that I didn't actually care about convincing anyone?

How is something like that quantifiable?

And why would anyone, scum or town do that? Not care about persuading people your argument is right? What's the payoff form me to do that? It seems like a huge waste of my time.

---

Yos, why were you purposely not commenting on me/kmd?

[BridgesAndBaloons]

I'm not sure it's necessarily scummy, but it's questionable that you try and further Xyl's wagon

while

unvoting.

I just want to reiterate the fact that you're voting me for something that's not "necessarily scummy, but it's questionable."

Now, if you thought I was scum because of my vote on E_K, that's a completely different story. That'd actually be something I could defend myself against. But there's no way for me to defend against "odd" "questionable" behavior. I just don't understand the wagon on me. I think Thesp is the only one who might have a good reason, and he's still withholding it.

Not even a good strawman, I gave multiple reasons I thought you were suspicious. To try and pretend like this is the only one isn't going to fool many people.

I'm not pretending, I don't know what those other reasons.

And also, the reason I attacked was your main reason:

Well charter, your reason was not very good in the first place, was it? That is what BAB was trying to say here.

I am up to date. I don't buy the BAB wagon anymore.

The main reason I'm suspicious of BAB is his manner of leaving of the Xyl wagon to join the Elvis one

.

Also, the Elvis wagon didn't exist until I switched my vote. I was the second vote on Elvis.

So,

how is it a straw man if I was attacking your main reason to vote me?

What are your other reasons for voting me? Please restate them if you have already explained them. Am I misinterpreting your argument? I don't mean to do that, so please correct me if I'm misinterpreting.

[roflcopter]

scum would want to refute dichotomies along the lines of "if x is scum then y is town" where x, the scum, is clearly going to be the first one dead. it makes it damn near impossible to ever mislynch player y.

and i absolutely follow and agree with the logic that bridges and xyl are not scum together.

elvis, you should vote for bridges

[elvis_knits]

BAB, I still don't think there is anything faulty in my logic about you and xyl. I know scum buss each other, but I don't think they buss eachother very seriously if they don't have to. It's not 100%, but I think it's a good general rule. I think people overestimate bussing. A scum team is much more effective if they stick together rather than tear each other apart trying to look town -- especially since we are hip to bussing at this point.

Unless you're trying to tell me that you random voted your scum buddy xyl and then got caught on him when a wagon started, so you had to fake that you wanted the wagon to grow? Is that what you're telling me? I mean, why do you want to argue this?

I attack against bad logic because it creates an atmosphere where it's harder for scum to hide their insincere comments.

My logic isn't bad though. You have to follow the lowest common denominator approach, IMO. If two people are trying very hard to lynch one another, I assume they're not scum buddies. Unless one was forced into it because 1)someone else originated the attack and it's so serious that one of them is going down; or 2)one was under attack for another reason and it's distancing. Otherwise, I see no reason for scum buddies to really try hard to lynch the other.

Furthermore, I think it creates a bad atmosphere to do what you did, to assume every attack could be bussing. Because then you can't clear any townies for finding scum. You get into a backwards mindset where you think that the town's greatest asset is bussing and is therefore scum. That hurts the town my creating a paranoid environment.

[Yosarian2]

Yos, why were you purposely not commenting on me/kmd?

I didn't think your attack on him was especally convincing (I mentioned that breiefly, I believe), but I don't have enough a read on him to defend him at this point, and letting the wagon happen would probably provide more information. About the only valid point made is that the way he defended himself against your accusation was a little odd; he went into a whole long thing about why one would assume there are X scum in the game, which was strange since he really didn't seem to be assuming that in the first place.

That being said, I'm also not too impressed by the attack against you; B&B isn't entierly incorrect that it seems like you overstreached a bit in your attack against KMD, but not to a great degree; you seem a little iffy in some ways, but I don't really think the attack-against-you-for-attacking-KMD really makes sense either.

Anyway, I think we've got a heck of a lot more information then we would have if I had just stepped in right away and said "No, Elvis, you're misinterpreting KMD here". It was much more informative for me to sit back and wait, and see how he defended himself instead, and to see who took sides for him and against him.

[elvis_knits]

elvis, you should vote for bridges

I want to iron out my problems with kmd though. Did you catch the sarcasm from him? And why did nobody mention it to me sooner. Apparently zu_faul noticed it, and I don't think English is his first language...

Although I like how bridges is determined to see my actions as scum either way, whether I vote for him or not:

I was about to unvote E_k because she wasn't joining the wagon on me (something I'd expect scum to do and they could do it easily), but then in her most recent post she mentioned I was scummy which is a way of subtly joining the wagon without having to make the obvious vote.

I'm not saying that her suspecting me is necessarily scummy, because town would do that too, but if she continued to stay off my wagon I would have considered that towny and unvoted.

BAB is like, "elvis not voting me would be townish except she's fueling the wagon by finding me suspicious. I mean, suspecting me doesn't make her scum, but her continuing to stay off my wagon is just as scummy as voting me."

[roflcopter]

i thought that 4 scum plus a traitor comment was very probably sarcasm, but not the initial assumption of there being 4 scum. it looked like sarcasm being used as a deflection so he didn't have to actually get into the fact that he had slipped up. i still think he's scum.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

My logic isn't bad though. You have to follow the lowest common denominator approach, IMO. If two people are trying very hard to lynch one another, I assume they're not scum buddies.

Wait. Do you think day 1 vote before page 5 constitutes me "trying very hard to lynch one another?"

Do you

really

think that?

Furthermore, I think it creates a bad atmosphere to do what you did, to assume every attack could be bussing. Because then you can't clear any townies for finding scum. You get into a backwards mindset where you think that the town's greatest asset is bussing and is therefore scum. That hurts the town my creating a paranoid environment.

What are you even saying here? I don't understand this it all.

[roflcopter]

hey look, its the appeal to page number, my favorite terrible scum argument!

lynch bridges now please

[BridgesAndBaloons]

Although I like how bridges is determined to see my actions as scum either way, whether I vote for him or not:

This is a blatant

Lie

I was about to unvote E_k because she wasn't joining the wagon on me (something I'd expect scum to do and they could do it easily), but then in her most recent post she mentioned I was scummy which is a way of subtly joining the wagon without having to make the obvious vote.

I'm not saying that her suspecting me is necessarily scummy, because town would do that too, but

if she continued to stay off my wagon I would have considered that towny and unvoted

.

BAB is like, "elvis not voting me would be townish except she's fueling the wagon by finding me suspicious. I mean, suspecting me doesn't make her scum, but her continuing to stay off my wagon is just as scummy as voting me."

You are misinterpreting what I'm saying, and you're doing it so horrendously I'm having a hard time seeing this as an honest mistake. You are not staying off of my wagon, you made it very clearly you thought I was scummy. Forget semantics for a second and just listen to what I'm saying: if you had not said I was suspicious that would have been a town thing to do*.

Please read the bolded statement. Here, I'll quote it for you again
"if she continued to stay off my wagon I would have considered that towny and unvoted"

you did not do this. You added on to the wagon by saying I was suspicious. If you had not said I was suspicious, I would have thought you were town, but now that you DID vote for me, it's a null-tell.

Let me put this in other terms, these are my thoughts, I could be wrong.
POSSIBLE ACTIONS TAKEN BY ELVIS

• Vote for Bridges
  Would have done this as town or as scum
  
  
• Said Bridges is suspicious but no vote
  would have done this as town or as scum
  
  
• Say Bridges is town or neutral
  only would have done this as town

*The reason I say this is because as scum she would obviously want to discredit the person attacking her and shift the flow onto anybody else. As town she wouldn't necessarily want to discredit the attacker, but she'd be looking for the true scum, not just subtly adding onto a wagon.

[Yosarian2]

My logic isn't bad though. You have to follow the lowest common denominator approach, IMO. If two people are trying very hard to lynch one another, I assume they're not scum buddies.

Wait. Do you think day 1 vote before page 5 constitutes me "trying very hard to lynch one another?"

Do you

really

think that?

...why are you trying to argue agains the "bridges and xyl probably aren't scum together" argument here? I don't understand what you'e trying to accomplish, bridges.

[charter]

So, how is it a straw man if I was attacking your main reason to vote me?

My main reason for finding you suspicious was how you had this complex way of jumping off Xyl to go on Elvis, not the mere fact you did it. It looked like you did it just because Kmd pressured you. You can say you did have the revelation, but there's no way for us to verify that.

Other things I find questionable (but not sure if it makes you someone's scumbuddy) was the unvote of Xyl but saying his wagon will continue without you, and your original vote for Xyl where you gave no reason, then after people cited post 66 as scummy, you just agreed with them. Once again, no way to verify if your vote was a random vote then you copied other's reasons underneath it or if it was there all along.

What are your other reasons for voting me? Please restate them if you have already explained them. Am I misinterpreting your argument? I don't mean to do that, so please correct me if I'm misinterpreting.

I think the rest of this was a difference in theory between us, I wouldn't have sat back and taken seven serious votes and not questioned why I was being voted, but it seems you would.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

hey look, its the appeal to page number, my favorite terrible scum argument!

lynch bridges now please

Could you show me a single example of a good, correct argument made in a large game before page 5?

Before you waste your time looking through hundreds of games let me just tell you: it never happens. I didn't have a big case on Xyl, I was "drumming it up." and I knew it wouldn't get him lynched.

Just like I know E_k won't get lynched because she was making this "big attack on KMD for a slip that didn't exist." Because there needs to be more reason to lynch someone in a game than something simple like that.

[elvis_knits]

It was not merely that you voted him on page "x." This is the post that made me think you and xyl are prob not scum buddies:

Ooo, my first time ever as the first bandwagon of the game (I think). I'm honored.

Don't try to laugh this off. Post 66 is genuinely scummy, and this is a legitimate wagon.

More XYL votes

please.

---

Furthermore, I think it creates a bad atmosphere to do what you did, to assume every attack could be bussing. Because then you can't clear any townies for finding scum. You get into a backwards mindset where you think that the town's greatest asset is bussing and is therefore scum. That hurts the town my creating a paranoid environment.

What are you even saying here? I don't understand this it all.

Not sure how to make this clearer, let's suppose Player A attacks Player B, and they try to get each other lynched. If we lynch Player B and he's scum, we should assum Player A is probably town (unless Player A did not initiate the attack on Player B, or Player A was already under suspicion). This is going to work in the town's favor almost all the time, since it encourages good scum hunting and semi-confirms good players. Townies know who they can trust, and scum can get in real trouble if they get too many players that they need to NK since they also need to be looking for power roles and killing people who are suspicious of them. All in all, this is all good for the town.

If however, you lynch Player B and he flips scum, and then you accuse Player A of bussing, you are screwing yourself hardcore. You are not only lynching a town player and a good one who has already lynched you scum, but you are creating a paranoid environment where other players can't trust each other, and where nobody can find scum without being accused of bussing.