Mini 856 - Star Control: Zeta Sextantis - Over

[Plum]

/Guess who?

[Plum]

Vote:Kmd4390

- if you haven't been scum in every game we've played together besides Hydra games and that one of Tarhalindur's my memory's gone before its time. I'm getting sick of wondering whether I can read you or not and then you ending up being scum, so it's time for some frustration ventilation!

[Plum]

OMG I get to play with Plum! Yay!

Did I acquire a reputation? I'm flattered. But back at you - OMG, I get to play with someone nommed for the "Most Outstanding New Player" scummie! Woohoo!

[Plum]

Yeah, Kmd, your attack does just suck.

Yep. You're scum. I'm sure of it. Your defense of "OMG really?!? Me?!? Nooo" reinforces this.

That wasn't his reaction, ha-ha.

Also yes you're always scum, give or take. Outside of Hydra games, we've never both been playing in a game and both been Town. I'm Town now, so it would follow that you're scum. Theoretically. But your attack on Zito is crud, so.

@ Papa Zito - what games, out of curiosity?

[Plum]

Porkens, Excerin, does that patronizing tone look to you like

a) Scum trying to blow off a good and legit attack by ridiculing it (sarcasm, patronizing tone, what have you)

OR

b) Someone exhibiting a null-tell in pointing out that the case for a bandwagon is, in his personal and not unreasonable opinion, crud

???
Or, explain, Excedrin, why the sarcasm indicates scumhood. Porkens, random-vote-in-second-post, sarcasm, patronizing tone = scumhood explain the connection please thanks.

Rising - your argument against Excedrin is strawman city. Early game tells shouldn't be downplayed in importance (and yes, scum can and do worm their ways out of early game mistakes). Excedrin didn't say that if Zito came up with a good explanation for his actions it would

reinforce

his opinion, only that it would not necessarily decrease the likelyhood of Zito being scum based on his actions to that point. If my vote on Kmd were not better-than-random due to his actions I'd probably vote slightly-better-than-random-vote Rising now.

Keelie, I hear what you're saying. I generally avoid stuff like saying I'm Town and/or commenting on deaths at the start of a Day as any alignment simply because it's not worth the bother I'll get for that sort of thing as any alignment. I suppose I felt a little looser with that tendency than usual because it was the beginning of the game. I would say it's a personal nulltell - like slightly breaking out of my overall, town-scum-whatever meta in general - but consider it how you will.

[Plum]

ATM the scummiest thing about Zito is that you are defending him

Mayhap I have fallen prey to flattery. It's been known to happen. What with Kmd's early statements it's hard to gauge everyone's seriousness/how much everyone thinks whoever they're voting is scum.

[Plum]

Keelie, I hear what you're saying. I generally avoid stuff like saying I'm Town and/or commenting on deaths at the start of a Day as any alignment simply because it's not worth the bother I'll get for that sort of thing as any alignment. I suppose I felt a little looser with that tendency than usual because it was the beginning of the game. I would say it's a personal nulltell - like slightly breaking out of my overall, town-scum-whatever meta in general - but consider it how you will.

If you don't think it's worth the bother, why the change of heart? Isn't this the stage of the game when people often pick up on looser comments as a way of getting discussion started?

I suppose I was feeling whimsical. The Kmd-is-always-scum-when-I-play-with-him-except-... pattern is one that's hung around in the back of my mind for a while and it's never appropriate to bring it up except in the very early game, and previously I've missed enough of the very early game that the opportunity never arises. In this case the satisfaction value of getting to mention it (which would be there regardless of what alignment I am) early in the game vs. the risk/bother it would cost me (or the scumhunt overall) made it worth it to me.

Porkens: If Zito is scummy because I'm defending (ish) him, wouldn't it follow that I'm scummier than he? Nu?

Rising: well yes, the "reinforces" statement was a pretty big misrep. Furthermore it was clear from Excedrin's statements that he was talking about no traps - just stating that he would not necessarily let go of what he considered a strong early-game scumtell even if an explanation was given. Your statement

Setting up "screwed if you do, screwed if you don't"-traps isn't pro-town.

is fallacious, because it's not about being screwed whether one who makes an early-game scumtell explains it or not - it's about being "screwed" if one makes what he considers a strong early-game scumtell period. Not a trap but a reasonably-explained way of approaching scumtells in general.

I'll be off most of tomorrow. See y'all.

[Plum]

Rising &c. - I have better things to do with the limited amount of time I have in this game than spend a huge chunk of it analyzing and reanalyzing an argument that is almost purely theory-based when I realized that it's doubtful I can winnow any significant tells on anyone involved out of the chaff that is the argument itself. Is it possible that Rising is committing a scumtell in his theory arguments? Quite. Am I likely to get something conclusive enough to be useful out of it? Not in the long-term.

Not sure what to make of Plum's reaction. Yes, the original attack was weak. But Plum has been around long enough to know when someone is looking for a reaction. Hmm.

Not since last time you announced (just about) sure scumreads on page 3 with fairly little to base your surety on and flipped scum I don't know what to make of you (and yes, when on page four you announced in no uncertain terms that you wanted Pom lynched . . . Frankly, I've learned the hard way not to trust myself to trust you.

Sarcasm can be scummy in some cases, especially if it's used to dismiss a case against oneself. I'm not sure if I can justify anything beyond that.

Fair enough. I could ask how strong a scumtell you'd think it would be in this situation, but fair enough.

Plum, the sarcasm looks more like scum who is annoyed because they are being wagoned and aren't even playing that badly. I had this happen to myself recently. Jelly could tell you all about that game. :eyeroll:.

Also fair enough. In fact, I outright like that point. Disagree that Porkens' is prob-town; I'm reading null or possibly a slight town-tell (for some reason I feel pretty okay about his post 49).

Mod: could we get a "Not Voting" line at the bottom of each votecount pretty please? I find them very useful. Thanks.

Early bus never happens?

Early game distancing happens, certainly. Honestly, I hadn't considered that possibility -- I would think it unlikely that KMD-scum would attack Papa-scum right off the bat like that, personally.

Kmd-scum did that with his Godfather just the other week in a mini-Normal, for the record.

Kast's post Post 53 is too dense for me to get through well and he hasn't voted all game I think (> scumtell than not voting in first . Kise, why are you throwing around terms like "craplogic" and "strawman" and "misrepresenting" but unable to point to scum suspects or vote anyone you accuse of doing things which connote scumminess?

@Rising, 51-
-You

manufactured

a

"tell"

by creating a

straw man.

The terms used here that I bolded commonly connote scumminess of actions, but here, despite the fact that you believe Rising did that stuff you won't vote him? You use even stronger terms than I did - and I was voting my just-about-best lead at the time, Kmd. You also attack Dry-fit and whatnot. But why not vote?

Rising was at least voting for his early best bet, and even if I'm not sure his Rosso Carne, am I onto what you're onto?

And yeah, once I sorted it out Rising's reasoning for voting Dry-fit is pretty unimpressive. Hard to tell whether it's scummy or not, if, for example, Kmd would like to lay out what he sees there, I'm all ears.

Zito, your "opportunism" tell - in terms which I read as definitely serious:

Again, one of Porkens or Excedrin is very likely scum due to opportunistic voting.

well. In very early stages perceived opportunism - especially in a case like this, where I cant see either vote being obtusely opportunistic (Porkens reads give-or-take null on his vote from what I remember of playing with him and you could argue Excedrin's) the second two of three votes on a guy on Page 2 are not really indicative of anything all by their lonesome and you seem to try to make it out like it is.

Let's stir the pot a bit (though the pot-stirring is just a handy bonus)

Unvote; Vote: Kise

FOS: Zito

.

[Plum]

Kast: My deepest apologies; I had some sort of brainblock last night and realized I was thinking of you and referring to you as Kise for no reason I can discern. I must have forgotten to check over my post and make sure I didn't make an embarrassing mistake . Whether or not you be scum you deserve an attack and vote which calls you by your actual username.

Unvote; Vote: Kast

to put my vote back where I intended to have it. Now to address your response to my attack:

-To paraphrase your argument, you admit that I am scumhunting and have raised several valid points, however, you object to my failure to vote based on any of the things I have raised. Is this an accurate summary of your reason for voting "Kise"?

I'll vote when I'm ready to vote; either if I find a player I am willing to lynch or if I feel my vote would help to elicit a response/reaction.

-I don't think it helps to give scum lots of easy wagons to jump aboard. Voting for each and every potential tell just lets scum blend easier while pushing a mislynch without getting any heat for doing so.

I was more concerned with your willingness to throw around accusatory terms without showing clearly how scummy you think players are in relation to one another &c. Engaging in the game - or pretending too (lots of theory argument from you was part of what worried me) can be used as a scum tactic, and I have caught scum that way. It's a more reliable tell as the game wears on, however, so your case isn't egregious. Furthermore the way you put it makes me feel that this is a playstyle thing of yours and not, in your case in this case a tell much in wither direction. I disagree with you in theory terms, but I'll leave that for a different time. I continue to be frustrated, however, by the amount of time and dense verbage you're devoting to Rising. . . . You conclude that it's more likely he's Town and screwed up somewhere along the line but pend a good few long paragraphs afterwards hashing everything up clearly. I used to do that sometimes (I remember one specific case - and for the record I was a Townie there) but I would urge you to weigh the benefits against the downsides of continuing on that path in this game with things that you think do not indicate scumhood.

Unvote

^^Pending - could you link me to a game or two where you take this stance so I can confirm that this is a theory disagreement and not a scum excuse? Call it quality control. Thanks.

@Rosso Carne

- care to tell us what you did mean?

What I can make out through the dense discussion on who said and meant what when, I will say that Rising, Kmd made it clear that he was not

sure

Zito was scum, only that he continued to look

scummy

. Considering the way you attempt to use italics to prove your point when it's not the case and obviously so - and furthermore if you thought Kmd were sure that Zito was scum you'd have a much more pressing concern, that being if so, why was/is he not currently voting Zito?

Also #38 is a perfectly logical continuation of #33, I dunno what you're on - "Kmd, don't you think that it's a little early to convince others that you've found scum when you can't possibly be sure someone's scum and should instead be generating discussion, not pushing a final lynch target?"

Not since last time you announced (just about) sure scumreads on page 3 with fairly little to base your surety on and flipped scum I don't know what to make of you (and yes, when on page four you announced in no uncertain terms that you wanted Pom lynched . . . Frankly, I've learned the hard way not to trust myself to trust you.

It's my new early-game playstyle from either alignment. Like it?

Not in particular. Sorry to burst your bubble. What I was asking for was elaboration on your take on Rising's Dry-fit vote.

@Excedrin:

Yes this is not atypical Rosso Carne play as far as I can recall. I believe he only places hammer votes as any alignment. Possibly not ideal play but not indicative of scumhood.

Flavor postage is generally useful, as someone who's never played the game (I was a little faster than Kmd and realized it

was

a game, though, so).

Rising and Kast, insulting each other is

really

pointless and counterproductive, and arguing over who was worse doubly so. Rising seems to have made an effort ot end that and I say good riddance to bad rubbish.

Speaking of voting or not -

Again, who do you think is scum?

Again, one of Porkens or Excedrin is very likely scum due to opportunistic voting.

And no vote on them? The fact that he insists getting on his own bandwagon early was opportunistic and scummy (and that not doing so was a towntell) is pushing BS.

Vote: Papa Zito

[Plum]

-I'm not clear on what specifically you are looking for in my other games. I think I play fairly similarly as town or scum. It sounds like you want to see some examples of my town play to determine Kast-as-townie also engaged in the behavior that you dislike in my current play style?

Yes; thanks. From a cursory glance fair enough.

Plum, I think Rising realized he had a bad vote out and was looking for somewhere to put it and found Dry-fit.

Taking a look back at that . . .

Rereading stuff on evolution of Rising's positions, especially in the theory discussion. Sorry if this contains more info than analysis; I find it personally useful to type out the line of logic and it may come in handy for someone else, so here we are:

If you're saying that scum has to be proven by a case that includes multiple points, then I disagree.

For example, you have a reliable read based on meta that whenever a particular player does X, they're likely scum, then you observe that behavior on the first page.

Actually, I find that scum sometimes does something really obvious at the start of a game and then gradually appears more and more town as the game progresses because they explain away and fix their scummy behavior.

^^ Okay, that's the post Rising objects to. In context of the flow of conversation at that time, Excedrin was explaining to Sigma why he believed it's never too early to try to convince people you've found scum. He elaborates why early-game reads can be extremely significant in finding scum, which is very true (case-by-case basis, but true) and therefore that if one thinks one has found a strong scumtell, even in early stages, starting to convince people that the person who committed the scumtell is scum is entirely appropriate. Furthermore, he adds the last sentence, which comes to indicate further why early-game reads are extremely significant: scum can slip up early and eventually cover up and explain away their early scummy behavior, making an even stronger case for acting strongly on early-game scumtells.

First Rising calls it a trap; he used the word "reinforces" which was clearly misrepresentative of Excedrin's position. He also for the first time calls it a "trap". It clearly was not a trap of any sort; it was Excedrin's view of how to weight early-game scumtells and why not to downplay their importance. He calls the "trap" "not pro-town". But even misinterpreted, why does Rising vote Excedrin on what should be considered a theory disagreement not indicative of alignment? Why did he not at least try to determine whether this was a scummy, manufactured stance or one which Excedrin, regardless of alignment, stands by? He later, in response to me, actually calls it a tell. And implies that it's one of those fairly strong early-game tells we've been discussing.

vote: Excedrin

becuase I disagree.

He states explicitly that it's because he disagrees and later calls it a tell. So Rising, when did a disagreement with you on theory matters turn into an indication of alignment rather than, you know, a more overarching thing like

disagreeing with you on a theory matter

?

I'm trying to refrain, looking at Rising's posts in isolation, from writing another few paragraphs of frustrated rantings on how Rising is grossly misinterpreting, whether through error or malice, Excedrin's point. Must. Refrain.

[quote="Rising"I think it is a pretty good scumtell and I'd like to hear Excedrin explain himself so that I could get a better read on him.

^^Keeping an eye on that statement to see if anything materialized.

Yeah, and then Rising says that his beef with Excedrin is that he "

justified and over-explained

" his vote on Zito, which was clearly not his problem when he voted him (which was actually that he thought that Excedrin's "I find that scum sometimes does something really obvious at the start of a game and then gradually appears more and more town as the game progresses because they explain away and fix their scummy behavior" statement was what he considered the scumtell and the reason for his vote.

The thing I can see in Rising's favor is:

uot;]

it's about being "screwed" if one makes what he considers a strong early-game scumtell period.

If this was a case of a really

strong

scumtell - an actual "mistake" - then of course I would've been fine with it. "Ouch. You did something really bad there, buddy. There's just no way for you to talk yourself out of this mess, I'm sorry. You're definitely the lynch for today." Nothing wrong with that. But when all you've got is a person that didn't post a vote in his first post, and responded with a sarcasm when attacked for it, then it's a completely different issue. I don't think what you just wrote applies to this case - or anything that I've written (or at least what I meant by it)

at all

.

There's a huge difference between:
1. "Hmm... I've noticed scum do this before." - Perfectly reasonable for a pro-town scumhunter.
and
2. "Hmm... I've noticed scum do this before, and they always come up with a good explanation afterwards, managing to explain away and fix their scummy behavior. " - why did this person add that last part? That wasn't necessary for pointing out the scumtell. This sets off my alarm, because scum have a tendency to go ahead of themselves, like proposing chain lynches (another scumtell I believe in).

It's obviously not a

strong

scumtell by any means (not even for day 1) but I would still like to hear Excedrin comment on it.

Here he connects Rising's vote and statement back to Excedrin's actual Zito vote based on what Zito implied he considered a strong early-game scumtell. If he believed, as I'm stating to see is likely, that Excedrin, according to his statement would not let Zito go whether or not he gave a good explanation for his actions . . . he wasn't extremely clear about that in his previous posts:


Okay, so I'm sorta kinda feeling better about Rising's actions now. Next comes the something that made me not want to do this whole recap/analysis earlier because I didn't have the time or desire to see how hard it was to parse through Rising's vote in Dry-fit.

]

The reason I disliked his [Sigma's] vote

is because I don't believe Kmd was seriously trying to "convince other players

to vote your lynch target

" at all, and I don't see how his post could have possibly been interpreted that way.

O RLY? Because what Sigma said

when he voted

was "Don't you think it's a little early to start convincing players

that you've found scum?

" That is hardly a misinterpretation, since KMD said "Yep. You're scum. I'm sure of it."

Sigma didn't suggest that KMD was trying to convince other players to

vote his lynch target

until his

next

post, #38, so you're clearly not remembering things right. And if you thought this was such a misrepresentation, why didn't you

say

so in post #43? In post #43 you discussed a

completely different

(and quite silly) issue.

I think you're making this up in retrospect.

If there's anyone who's overexpaining here, it's you

Yeah, you've convinced me. My case against Excedrin was a bit too much of a stretch, I'm actually much happier with a vote on you.

Unvote.
Vote: Dry-fit

Because Sigma actually posted both clauses ("convince other players to vote your lynch target" and "convincing players that you've found scum?") before Dry-fit's comments and Sigma's actual posts make it pretty clear that he equates the two clauses. It's not in any way a case of Dry-fit "not remembering things right", it's a case of Dry-fit not liking the vote or the little bit that expounded upon the vote/reexplained it. Also Post #43

does

imply a misrepresentation of Sigma's part to Dry-fit's mind clearly indicated when Dry-fit stated his entirely different (from Sigma's) interpretation of Kmd's post and questions him with implications of Sigma-suspicion/incredulosity at Sigma's interpretation of said post.

Therefore the entire argument starts to look kinda fabricated. You know what I mean? It's quite possible that Rising felt pressured, after his logic regarding the Excedrin vote was shown to be severely lacking by multiple players, to come up with some other case to jump to and making up one which was even worse.

KMD was just instigating with his

first post

- that's true - but Sigma responded to a later post, where KMD said that he was

sure

that Papa was scum (and KMD

has not changed his opinion since then!

- he does it again in #71). That's how serious he is.

Not sure what to make of Plum's reaction. Yes, the original attack was weak. But Plum has been around long enough to know when someone is looking for a reaction. Hmm.

Clear implication that he was not

sure

that Zito was scum and that his vote was more to draw reactions than to vote someone he was certian, or near-certain, was scum. Post #71 indicates that Kmd continued - for reasons other than just his original attack - that Zito was scummy, but not that he was sure that Zito's scum.

I will say that Rising, Kmd made it clear that he was not sure Zito was scum

Which is what I meant. Also I meant "considering how you emphasize Kmd was sure that Zito's scum" when that's not the case. Again, if you believe(d) that Kmd thought that Zito was certain scum, what is/would have been your comment on the fact that he wasn't and isn't voting Zito?

Ok guys, TOO MANY WORDS. All of the megaposting should stop now. It is detrimental to the town's motivation and ability. I beg you to keep things concise and easy to follow.

unvote

You know, I wouldn't be TOO surprised to see the scum budding up right away. A town-plum shouldn't have defended Zito at all. I can't seem to let that go, despite all the other noise in the thread.

Vote: Plum

At first I twitched a good deal at Kmd because, as I said, I saw similar behavior very recently from Kmd scum. The other bits, where I questioned you and Excedrin, were to gauge how serious you were in your votes and if the reasons for your votes looked legitimate (not scum-motivated) or good (possibly indicative of scumhood in my mind). Along we the other stuff in the thread it got some attention from me especially since sarcasm without context does not, to me, a viable scumtell make. Excedrin's reason for considering Zito's sarcasm a scumtell looked legit and Kmd's looked good, or verging on - I thought it had some merit as an insight.

I wouldn't say react less. Just.. I don't think it bothers town as much as scum, so it doesn't distract them from scumhunting. TownZito is better than this. In Boost 2, he was actively scumhunting and recieved one of three boosts (mechanic where players vote to boost protown appearing players) for it. Here, he's managed to suspect two players on his wagon for their votes on him and that's it.

Yes. From what I've heard about Zito, he's a pretty decent player. Not the sort whose suspicions basically boil down to "OMGUS, and yes that's a legit scumtell because the early-stage votes are on me, a Townie". hat is lack of scumhunting or interest in scumhunting and that's a major effective scumtell in my book.

@Zito

: What do you think of Porkens, who has removed his vote from the wagon on you and is now voting for me?[/b]

Jelly, for goodness' sake SHOW UP. Though I dislike Sigma's willingness to turn and lynch lurkers at this point. I generally avoid policy lynches because I still find that going after actual scummy players is better for the Town.

@Locke

: Re: Zito pushing BS:

The fact that he insists getting on his own bandwagon early was opportunistic and scummy (and that not doing so was a towntell) is pushing BS.

Getting on an early bandwagon - page 2 - is not opportunistic and scummy, especially because at least one of the two gave what looks to me a legit reason for doing so, mostly because page 2 bandwagons that reach three players are not opportunistic. They're game-starting; as Porkens appeared to do it for reactions (nulltell, plenty of motivation as just about any alignment) and Excedrin indicated that it was a slight tell (appropriate for that stage of the game) which I believe to be okay (scum try to dismiss attacks on them as worthless and sarcasm can be used as a tool to dismiss attacks as worthless). It's unlikely to be truly opportunistic (pouncing on a case or wagon with the intent to exploit the opportunity for a lynch) at that stage of the game and it's nearly impossible to discern true opportunism from doing the best you can with the RVS one a Page-2, three-vote bandwagon.

But moreso: Townies mislynch and Townies suspect townies. A heckuva lot. The statement that because someone wasn't on a wagon that was on a Townie is itself a Towntell is completely fallacious.

I bet I could explain that with better wording if it wasn't 2 a.m. and I hadn't been working on this post for around and hour. Toss in Zito's lack of vote and more importantly general lack of real scumhunting (the above OMGUS-genus suspicions above + flavor info don't count as decent scumhunting, what with basically ignoring everything else, a related problem) in this game and I like Zito vote.

FOS: Rising

@Excedrin

: Further thoughts on Zito as he's progressed through the game thus far? New impressions? Reinforced impressions?

[Plum]

lol cross-post

Being able to move a race from "dunno" to "scum" would be muy bueno, you know.

Not muy bueno enough for me, thanks. Porkens implied that the scum might use the info to their benefit and suggested a scenario with the ramifications of whatever circumstances make him want to keep his mouth shut on that count. Rolefishing stops HERE.

[Plum]

Porkens implied that the scum might use the info to their benefit and suggested a scenario with the ramifications of whatever circumstances make him want to keep his mouth shut on that count.

Do you find his scenario at all credible?

Absolutely.

[Plum]

If Papa Zito is going to claim, does it make sense for him to claim his race only, ship only, or both? If he claims his own race only and it looks good, reduces suspicion etc, then is there any reason to reveal ship as well?

Zito's the one who has given us the list of which races are likely to be scum/third party and which are Town. I'd prefer some paraphrased flavor if/when he claims. So personal name, race, probably powers to, and I guess he can hold to ship info with the provision that it's quite likely I'd end up asking for it anyway.

Based on recent events, I think Porkens is town, so I'm willing to switch to Kast to prevent NL.

Whoa whoa whoa. Wait. First, why does the belief that Porkens is Town mean that his suspicions of Kast will bear fruit? Townies are very often

wrong

in their suspicions. What about Porkens or his suspicions of Kast makes you think that Kast is more likely than Zito to be scum? You also do realized that if one of your reasons here is "to prevent NL" you've just moved your vote from a wagon that had had 4/7 votes for lynch to one that now has 2/7 votes - or with Rosso's willingness 3/7 (and downgrading the Zito wagon to 3/7), making NL at least a little more likely to result.

And if your only reason from switching from Zito, whom you had at least a little case on, to Kast is simply because Porkens is voting Kast and you believe Porkens to be probtown.

HOS: Excedrin

Pending a reread of you I could see myself voting you if you'd actually be likely to garner 7 votes.

[Plum]

Catching up. All my other game responsibilities are in Night, so I'll be able to devote more time to this to keep it slipping out of my hands.

Lets put it this way, how many scum are on Papa Zito's wagon right now? I thought about that and decided that I'm much happier on the Kast wagon.

Are you trying to imply that it's likely that two or three out of {Plum, Kmd4390, Locke Lamora} are scum? Well, a quick read of you in iso shows that you've been fairly neutral towards Kmd, same with me, and also Locke, whereas for almost the whole game you've been on Zito for an early-game reason later reinforced by a meta read. Things don't line up here. I don't understand what reservations you have with a Zito lynch or how you developed said reservations mentioned in your Post #242.

Furthermore your only further explanation, after I disliked your given reason to switch to Kast ('I think Porkens is Town and Porkens is voting him') is saying that 'Kast is likely scum' which was preceded by the fact that you felt more comfortable on the Kast wagon once you considered 'how many scum' were on it.

That speaks volumes right there.

However, a cursory reading of your case on Kast leads me to believe it's pretty decent (MORE COMMENTARY ON THE ACTUAL CASE/DRY-FIT/KAST/&C. TO COME). The fact that it came after all that junk makes it somewhat less reassuring, however.

Zito's list in his Post #249 makes me a good deal less suspicious of him, in fact. It's decent scumhunting/analysis, and while I still dislike the relative lack of this earlier in the game (and the OMGUS-toned accusations towards Porkens and Excedrin earlier in the game) thisis good on a gut level. Unfortunately, as Kast says, the Locke Lamora vote was not an effort likely to bear fruit at the time.

@Plum-
-I get that you think Rising is scummy, however, consider that you may be letting that influence you and bias you to dismiss Rising's case against Dry-Fit.
-I have the impression that you may equate agreement with towniness. Consider if that is affecting your thoughts/analysis.
To be clear:
-You prefer a lynch of Excedrin, then Zito, then Rising.
-You are willing to vote others to secure a lynch rather than no lynch.

- There were pretty major flaws in Rising's original case on Dry-fit, but that's basically beside the point. To reread and analyze fully: I can understand both sides of the 'what did Kmd intend with his vote' thing - I originally thought it more serious than it was apparently intended myself (and I've explained why) so I see where Sigma's coming from. Dry-fit took it probably more in the spirit it was intended. Neither interpretation seems overtly scummy. If the idea that Kmd's vote/tone in the extreme early game were meant to draw reactions was firm in Dry-fit's mind I can understand why he might see Sigma's interpretations - which interpreted what he saw as a pro-town, nulltell act as a scumtell - as scummy. Frankly I don't see that as scummy. I don't see it particularly indicative, to my mind, of Dry-fit being scum. If you get a gut read on Dry-fit, good for you, I guess. Me, I'm mostly neutral (though I think he made a fair point about Sigma possibly rolefishing Porkens). His points against me seem to be clean of anything I'd consider scummy or misrepresentational. I don't understand your point about him potentially trying to put the blame on a Sigma mislynch he theoretically would orchestrate on you.

So with extra analysis I think I'm reading Dry-fit as well as I may. I find your disagreements on the count generally nulltells.

- ??? You think that when I say "I agree with what Player X said about X" I mean/feel that Player X is thus more likely to be Town/more Townie? I think in some cases it's legitimate reading of a Towntell (like I agree with what Player X said and that's good scumhunting, which is in my book a Towntell) and sometimes it's a mental fallacy (I agree with Player X on an issue in the game = he/she is more likely to be Town like me, which is a mental fallacy I fear slipping into and try to avoid. Sometimes I may fail. That's part of what I'm trying to improve at in Mafia now, confirmation bias, that kind of stuff).

- As of my latest post at the time you posted that, yes. Now? I hope to reread Locke Lamora now and I got a Town Vibe off Zito's Post #249, as I mentioned earlier.

- YES.

Rereading Locke Lamora:

First some questions he asked me to which I apparently did not respond:

Plum: two things. First of all, why is it not opportunistic for scum to vote for a townie who's clearly getting annoyed with the suspicion on him to the point that it makes him look scummy? Secondly, can you tell me where Zito said that NOT being on his wagon is a towntell, rather than being on his wagon is scummy?

1. Is it opportunistic? Yes. Is it discernible from a Townie voting for someone who looks a but scummy early? Not really. Insisting that it was likely that one of the two of them was likely to be scum because of "opportunistic voting" thus does not constitute decent scumhunting, which is hunting from legit scumtells. What Zito called Porkens and Excedrin out on was nulltell territory for that stage of the game and little better than OMGUS. Especially, as Excedrin pointed out, with little chance of Zito getting lynched purely for the reasons Kmd, Porkens, and Excedrin gave in their original votes for him.

2. Looking back, my recall was not perfectly accurate.

I wouldn't call them overly cautious. I'd call them observant enough to avoid a crap wagon.

The implication here isn't exactly that avoiding his wagon was a towntell; it was an 'observant-tell'. I disagree and the implication is untrue/unreliable in a way that goes hand-in-hand with what I discussed in point one. I still dislike it. What I said about him saying it was a towntell, however, is inaccurate and accidental.

More on Locke Lamora: Rereading he does a lot of early-game question-poking and not much translation into votes or concrete declarations of scumminess at all. I am now spending a lot of time trying to evaluate my gut feelings on Zito and Locka Lamora.

Having read Zito's meta, KMD's assertion that he usually scumhunts more seems accurate. I think Zito's reaction could well be that he's simply a frustrated townie annoyed by the argument against him and I'm still a little uncomfortable about the way KMD attacked Zito but not to the point where I want a KMD lynch.

My gut reads this as trying hard to look like he's being balanced/reasonable/&c. in the eventual switch to Zito but the combination of the "maybe this maybe that" bit feels like scum leaving room to swing whichever way is most beneficial. Plus I don't see how the Zito meta read would change his idea that Kmd contradicted himself about Zito's sarcasm being or not being scummy was itself a scumtell.

I might have voted Locke but with Sigma's vote change that wagon is not happening. Will look into it later.

THAT said I have recently gotten a he-is-town vibe from Zito. I have gotten a she-is-useless-and-possibly-scummy vibe from Jelly. Jelly is a better bet, to me, than Zito. As Zito said, without any reread or anything or contribution of any sort she's willing to off Zito.

Claim is claim.

Unvote; Vote: Keelie

[Plum]

Are you trying to imply that it's likely that two or three out of {Plum, Kmd4390, Locke Lamora} are scum? Well, a quick read of you in iso shows that you've been fairly neutral towards Kmd, same with me, and also Locke, whereas for almost the whole game you've been on Zito for an early-game reason later reinforced by a meta read. Things don't line up here. I don't understand what reservations you have with a Zito lynch or how you developed said reservations mentioned in your Post #242.

This is a reasonable point. I'd bet it's more like 1.37 not-town in that set. Maybe 2 if you don't mind the distinction between scum and not-town. How many do you think? If I said the line for not-town was 1.5, would you take over or under?

Have I expressed a neutral (or town, or scum) read of Plum, Kmd4390 or Locke Lamora anywhere?

I skimmed you in iso with Kmd, then Plum, then Locke in the search function so I could see each time you mentioned each of those three players and see whether you called them out as scummy or what. I saw nothing indicating a scum read on any. Stances on all three seemed basically neutral. I could look it up again and note it down but it would be a megapost that I think would be more counterproductive than actually useful at this point; if you really need it, ask. Tell me, did you have a neutral-or-so read on those three players? Why do you find that set of players likely to contain scum at a percentage greater than average (1/3 of them would be about %33.3, or around the max percentage of scum I see as plausible in this game)? Why did you think that wagon was so likely scum-driven?

What do you say to Keelie and the new-borne wagon on her?

[Plum]

So, policy lynchers, how likely is it that KeelieRavenWolf is scum?

At the time I had that whole gut read on Zito last night, more likely than Zito being scum so better vote. My suspect list would have been approximately as follows:

Excedrin
-
Locke Lamora
KeelieRavenWolf
-
Papa Zito
(Maybe Rising?)
-
Everyone else

Do I generally oppose policy lynches? Yes. Do I think Keelie has been Town-helpful? No. Has she committed at least minor scumtells? Yes. Was she more likely to be scum than Zito, my previous vote? I thought so.

Do I want some freaking clarity and/or consistency from my gut reads? YES. Am I getting it? I WISH. Am I reading Chosen v1.0 alongside this game to check Zito for consistency because I really can't think of a better plan of attacking this problem? YOU BETCHA.

Basically, I'm less convinced, after side-by-side reading that Zito's performance thus far is scummily-different by meta comparison. The lack of early scumhunting is still worrying . . . but the difference seems to be that the early Zito wagon in Chosen was not reinforced by the voters arguing that Zito had shown a scumtell of real relevence, whereas in this game - more by Excedrin than Porkens - some did argue that Zito had committed a scumtell of strength such that it was relelvent to the entire game.

Basically my read of Zito is not conclusively towards scum enough after #249 to warrant lynching him when the alternative is a lurker who hasn't helped the Town in any way, voted Zito

because

his lynch was most likely to go through.

Not certain I'm right on Zito but I think I'll take the chance.

What I'd REALLY like to do is lynch Excedrin.

My suspect list is consistent with what it was last night, see top of this post.

[Plum]

KEELIE: Your claim lacks a name and flavor bit. Please rectify that situation. Zito, if couldn't hurt to add flavor to your claim. Evaluation here is twitchy going.

[Plum]

Mmrnmhrm - Allied with Chenjesu; slave shielded after war

This combined with a nice, accurate-looking reference page I found for SCII would imply that first of all, yes, Mmrnmhrm should be Town and that Mmrnmhrm is not actually an unlikely claim. The page lists among its articles an article on Mmrnmhrm ship.

I need Porkens/someone else more familiar with SCII than I to help confirm this (or knock it down as the case may be).

[Plum]

KEELIE: Your claim lacks a name and flavor bit. Please rectify that situation. Zito, if couldn't hurt to add flavor to your claim. Evaluation here is twitchy going.

There isn't a lot. I was kicked from the Alliance for being reckless and insubordinate. Now I'm trying to get back in their good graces by helping defeat the Hierarchy here.

Why am I less than reassured by this?

[Plum]

Mmrnmhrm - Allied with Chenjesu; slave shielded after war

This combined with a nice, accurate-looking reference page I found for SCII would imply that first of all, yes, Mmrnmhrm should be Town and that Mmrnmhrm is not actually an unlikely claim. The page lists among its articles an article on Mmrnmhrm ship.

I need Porkens/someone else more familiar with SCII than I to help confirm this (or knock it down as the case may be).

They are definitely Alliance, yes. But I gave a reason why they shouldn't be here.

SC2 has two modes. One is the regular story mode where the events I've talked about take place. You never meet the Mmrnmhrm in this mode, they have no dialogue or race encounter animation. The other mode is Super Melee where you can just fight ship vs. ship. (This mode is fun because you get to use any ship you want) The Mmrnmhrm ship (and the Chenjesu one) is playable here.

Hm. Okay. Let me think on this.

[Plum]

Possible that I was a forgotten Mmrnmhrm? One that was merely overlooked for the merging process, now adrift in the universe as a pitiful, hopeless creature, bent on surviving to the best of my ability even thought there is no hope for my race.

Highly unlikely. The Mmrnmhrm were a mechanical race. They acted as one.

Also, there's plenty of hope for the Mmrnmhrm - the whole point of forming the Chmmr was to create a race capable of defeating the Ur-Quan (which they did).

Your goal sounds very 3rd party survivorish.

Yeah, not so much Alliance as survivor. That said, neither of the two claims we've gotten line straight up into "belonging to the Alliance".

It seems my goal as Mmrnmhrm is to survive through this war, to help end it.

Which? End it in any way possible/in any side's favor or what?

A huge difference between your analogy and your flavor is that Kirk wasn't kicked from the Federation or Starfleet.

His comparison that right over my head anyway.

Your pilot name does not appear in the Star Control II Super Melee Module Extended Reference Text (which includes lists of all ships/races/captains). Mine does, as does Zito's claimed name.

It's one letter off of a name listed in that reference page. Considering that, it's more likely to be a typo than anything.

[Plum]

Interesting. Is your flavor text "straight up into belonging to the Alliance?

It's straighter than being kicked out of the Alliance, as you claim to be. But I can see your claim with an Alliance wincon so fine.

She's had plenty of time to find it on Wikipedia or something. I also gave a big list in this thread of the races and their likely alignments. Funny hers turns out to be from the guaranteed alliance list, eh? I have no doubt that she doesn't know anything about the theme, which is why she screwed her claim up. She didn't know what "slave-shielded" means.

Except that she's had barely any time to post in the thread . But yes, taking a race from your list and looking up an appropriate name probably wouldn't take that much time.

It seems my goal as Mmrnmhrm is to survive through this war, to help end it.
It seems my character, Rrna-hrn, has one goal in existance: To survive through this, though I am certain I am hopeless.

It says I win when threats to the Alliance are gone. As such: Town.

The two don't really line up. Except as a Survivor-type role, which might also have bearing on the Mmrnmhrm-timeline discrepancy.

[Plum]

Mod seems on the ball, we may have very little twilight. Please prepare any final thoughts.

Look into Excedrin if I can't.

[Plum]

Kast, I thought Keelie was town, and was pretty sure of this because I assumed that knowing her IRL would make her easier for me to read. *Shrug*, she gets an ego boost for fooling me in her second game I guess.

I recognize this sort of cognitive bias; it happened when I played a game with my sister and such. I need to read this thread more slowly but may have to go out very soon. Sorry for not announcing a V/LA period.

More soon.

[Plum]

So tired . . .

Is apparently we have a whole bunch o' people claiming that they were on red-text ships. But rereading . . .

No, I didn't admit that, I'm saying that if I were scum, I'd be jettisoning a ship that was pretty useful. Obviously, the ship was useless to me.

Fair enough; read it the same way Zito did at first.

sigma's claim is believable to me, I have no doubt that 2 instances of town guys on bad guy ships is possible, because Rosso Carne is on a red ship.

Why does one - that you know of another on a red-text ship - indicate that multiple Townies-on-scumships are possible. But

Vote: Rosso Carne

. The read from yesterday on Excedrin still irritates me and I think later some suggest leaving Rosso to get modkilled and persuing a different lynch, which sounds like a nice two-birds-one-stone deal if we can get it.

Gut feeling Kmd is town.

Excedrin's interaction with Kast leads me to believe that they're both probably town. Plus claim about Rosso, o'course.

Dry-fit's claim sounds . . . probable. He's colored what he'd investigate as, not what he is, according to Mod-provided info, so. That's a fairly technical Miller. But it's unlikely that four Townies started out on red-text ships. I say leave Rosso to Modkill, hopefully. My reads on Sigma and Porkens are not as strongly-town as I'd really like but I'll deal if they're picked up. But I doubt even three Townies started out on red-text ships, including any possible Miller, so I want to lynch him first hopefully see about Porkens and sigma tomorrow if they haven't asphyxiated or anything.

I dislike Locke partly by process of elimination, partly on his last post of Day 1, but would rather lynch Dry-fit. I agree that he needs to fullclaim.

Unvote; Vote: Dry-fit

-There are probably at least 5 red ships. I have no idea if there are more than that. There are likely 3 mafia, and I would guess each of the mafia has a red ship.
-I think it unlikely that there is a 5 person mafia; I'd guess 2 of the 5 claimed red ships are probably not mafia.
-If Porkens' role requires or strongly inclines him to destroy his ship, then he would have incentive to claim before doing it so that he can minimize suspicion of why he had a red ship. As scum, the timing of his claim was ideal; dropping unrelated information that is personally useful but overall useless and distracting for the town right before deadline. So yes, I could see Porkens-scum claiming like he did.
Dry-fit claimed immediately after Excedrin revealed that he knew another player's ship color. I can easily see Dry-fit-scum deciding to claim prior to being potentially investigated and caught as hierarchy.

Mostly this.

[Plum]

I'm pretty sure that ending the day before deadlne would still result in a Rosso modkill should he not post before deadline because the same case occurred in Hard Nights in the City, a BaM game modded by SpyreX (the original BaM, I think, but not certain). Porkens, you were in that game; surely you recall.

[Plum]

Okay, here's what I suggest.

1. I think Rosso is highly likely to be scum.
2. I think Dry-Fit is also highly likely to be scum (Reason: he's the only one so far to claim an actual

character

from the game vs. one of the randomly generated names)

Town's optimal play here is to quicklynch Dry-Fit so that Rosso also gets killed. 2-for-1.

vote: Dry-Fit

Interesting point on #2 which downgrades my "Probable" read on his claim and further makes him the best lynch today. On Porkens and Sigma, I have a stronger Town read on Sigma because - call it WIFOM if you must - it would be an extraordinarily ballsy gambit as scum especially with a buddy dead. Arguments from either of the jettisoned that they should be picked up are basically null unless I missed something important; both Townies and scumbags would want, ideally, to avoid asphyxiation if possible. Neither of them are as good a lynch as Dry-fit.

We want Rosso dead dead dead so let's kill another bird with this stone. Which means uicklynch now plz.

[Plum]

-I am basically both a vig and a roleblocker(which refutes Kast's belief that I just want to avoid an investigation.)
-Any player in space who I rescue instantly dies.
-My flavor is that I betrayed my race because of a fetish for humans.
-My role does not specifically say I am a miller, but it is hinted at in the flavor.
-I did not make any action last night.

Yes, I still want you dead. Moreso now.

[Plum]

NICE. Brief thoughts on the game:

Nice setup, variables were done well. I'd like to see the system used in a large game, possibly with an emphasis on something other than subversive Millers/race assumptions.

I finally lived past Day 1 in a game modded by SpyreX! That's a first. Kmd-scum killed me, plasma'd my ship, the whole deal; why am I not at all surprised? You must've been pretty pleased that your one shot killed four players, including the Cop (who you'd auto-kill before he could investigate, but useful for further clearing Townies, something you definitely did not need happening what with Kast, players who were almost certainly Town based on placement on the Keelie wagon, &c).

My epic plan failed epically. Spy, can I share the Zito/Plum D2 QT? It was fun (though I had moments of exhaustion like the time I tried to use a ship ability and Spy had to remind me that I wasn't actually

on my ship

).

Kmd was scum in this game too, and my reluctance to be influenced by the pattern yet again influenced me against attacking him.

I never got to do an epic roleclaim as Syreen seductress

I discovered how much fun unconfirmed day-masonage/day-neighborage is. If you avoid unnecessary paranoia you can quite a lot. On Day 2 I pegged myself, Zito, Rising, Kast, Sigma, Excedrin mostly, as almost certainly Town (well, one neutral with a non-mututally exclusive wincon in the group).

[Plum]

Plum, that was beautiful, regardless of the fact that you got everyone killed

Dammit, it was

such

a great plan. If I hadn't been plasma'd the game would have basically broken.

Decker and Aelita Cutscene