Mini 873 Plainview Game Over

[foilist13]

Ok,

@Archaebob - As far as Peanut's giving me the benefit of the doubt, I posted arguments however poorly constructed to back up what I was saying. You chose not to discuss the content of your posts, rather only said that you were not worried about being lynched. It is not just about being lynched or not though. We need as much info about you as anyone else, and I think the trend you pointed out illustrates that. Peanut was trying to understand my logic, because he perceived that I had some kind of logic to support my posts. He seemed to perceive that you were not interested in posting a defense based on logic rather than position.

Now I am not defending Peanut here. Obviously I am acutely conscious of the accusation against him for defending me, and I don't wish to side myself with him and lead the town in to thinking that I or we are scum. I felt I needed to make that clear, since someone would inevitably jump on it. You have asked me to respond on your case and now I have, though I am still very aware of the potential wagon and suspicions on me.

[Gammagooey]

Archae, your case does seem pretty reliant on foilist being scum for it to hold true, in which case foil should be lynched first anyway. I look forward to seeing this, "MOAR" you speak of.

My read on peanut is based on his following statements:

I'm not just giving Foilist the benefit of the doubt, you have it as well. I'm not claiming you're scum, but my vote is on you because I still have my suspicions.

2) It's not my wagon. I am simply voting on someone I'm not convinced of and need more to satisfy my suspicion.

However, the key part of my statement that you quoted is the fact that it's not

my

wagon. There are certainly others who also have their suspicions on Bob.

The first one, i can and did see as justified because he was using it to defend his "benefit of the doubt" comment earlier.
The other two add nothing to the argument, and are basically meaningless in terms of what the town is trying to do.

The town should be figuring out who the scum is, focusing attention on the scum, lynching them, and defending the townspeople who are being attacked by the mafia.
Those last two statements do none of those things. They are completely unneccesary, and I'm still waiting on an explanation of how they help his argument or the town as a whole.

[Benmage]

Vote Count:
AlmasterGM (4) MordyS, Gammagooey, SpyreX, foilist13
foilist13 (2) lexprod, cruelty
Archaebob (3) afatchic, peanutman, AlmasterGM
peanutman (1) archaebob

Note Voting (2) Sanjay, Muffin

[peanutman]

*All quotes from Bob 370 unless stated otherwise

Peanut creates a totally original defense for foilist out of thin air, and hands it to him. I can tell he thought really hard about it. Worried by the hole that foilist seems determined to dig himself, peanutman jumps in with some leading questions in an attempt to show his partner the light. I want everybody to pay careful attention to this, as this might be the biggest solid slip of the game so far. In the face of a very scummy looking foilist, peanutman's response is not to question him with guarded suspicion, but to proactively make up a defense that had not at all been hinted at by foilist or anyone else in the thread. I consider this the scummiest move by anyone in the game right now.

I think it's an exaggeration to say I crafted an original defense out of thin air.

If I can accept that you wanted to keep your vote on Mordy, even after realizing your initial case was on Gamma, you state that you weren't compelled to change your vote. I can therefore assume you felt that Mordy was also scummy in some way. Is this true? If so, what about Mordy do/did you feel seemed scummy?

To me, his behaviour regarding his reaction to the vote, if you think about it, is something no normal scum-player would do. It's so ridiculous for a scum to put himself in that situation. With my question to him, I am simply stating that if he knows he wrongfully voted for Mordy and his vote is still there, does he find Mordy scummy? To say it's crafted out of thin air, you're really embellishing this one. His vote is on Mordy, I'm assuming he finds Mordy scum : out of thin air. Let's be honest, if we were both scum, it would be advantageous for me to bus or distance myself from this, not get closer. In fact, these examples of irrational behaviour are things that scum love to jump all over because it's easy to accuse.

The major thing I want to draw attention to in this case is the thought process he is using to form his ideas against me. The key word here is "assumption". Every point he makes in this case is something that he assumes to be true about me, as a result of some element of my posts.

Aren't your cases assuming that your arguments prove that your suspect is scum? This doesn't make any sense. Also, your defense on Foilist' case, as stated by a few people, revolves entirely around him being scum. More like an ad hominem defense.

What strikes me as very off is the extent to which he is willing to assume the worst about me from a very limited amount of evidence. And this is scummy to me because it contrasts extremely sharply with his attitude towards foilist.

The very limited amount of evidence is clearly subjective on your part. Just because you throw out many arguments doesn't mean they don't hold true to others. And, as I said, foilist action's seem more VI than scum. I'm not saying he's therefore obv-town but I wouldn't lynch him just on that. Scum are inherently sneaky, messing up who you're voting for and no addressing immediately is not sneaky at all. In my previous game, there was someone who played ultra-scummy the whole game and turned out to be town. The whole town was sure of him because of his reactions to the accusations on him, etc. For that reason, extremely bad play doesn't cry Scum to me. In fact, extremely bad play entices scum to call those people out on it and lynch them instead.

(Note: if anybody still needs me to defend against the points in this case, let me know. At the moment, I feel like I've adequately addressed them already in my response to AGM.)

One thing I would still like you to address is your pattern of voting or FOSing someone without any explanation at all (i.e. your post is simply the vote).

@Mordy

, you especially should be all over this, per your post 161:

No, you do have to justify every vote you make. Every single vote, when you make it, how you make it, and how long you leave it on.

Yeah ok. Fine. My playstyle at the point was to ask a lot of questions without revealing too much. And you consider this a scum-tell? As in...scummier than AGM or foilist? Seriously? I mean, hey, where's my benefit of the doubt?! Why aren't you giving me some secret code to help me defend myself, like you did for foilist?

I give the benefit of the doubt at first for a mistake here and there, but too many things just don't add up in my mind. If it was just one thing, I would take note of it and keep looking around, but I can't let all these things go unjustified.

Oh that's right. I'm not aligned with you. My bad.

I might have to agree with you on that slip.

Now, I vote for someone who has done all the things that foilist has done. Granted, I keep my reasons for this vote a little ambiguous at first, but they became pretty clear not too much later. My vote is completely justified, whether or not I took the time to explain it completely, and I keep a steady dialogue with my target, asking pointed questions, and showing the town what my issue is.

But that's just it. You keep your reasons to yourself at first, waiting for some reactions from others before explaining your vote. You are "craftily" playing this game. How is ambiguity in voting ever a good thing? At best, it's anti-town because a quick-read through these pages days later makes identifying your reasons for voting much harder.

You further "draw the conclusion" that I'm a likely candidate for scum as a result of this vote.

Correction, I draw the conclusion you are a likely candidate for scum not as a result of this vote but as a result of all the oddities and actions you have made this day. Don't pin my vote on just one of your actions.

The special treatment he is giving to foilist is pretty blatant. His vote is still on me, even though foilist hasn't responded with an explanation of his vote on Mordy. In fact, his vote STILL on me. Foilist NEVER answers peanutman with a response that would corroborate his theory. Naturally, this doesn't bother peanutman at all, and he never proactively mentions foilist again.

Listen, many people were targeting Foilist. So, I could either take part in the accusation-hurling, thereby blending in with the others (easy for scum to hide) or I could take these exchanges as fodder for my reads and pursue others who haven't been properly examined. You tell me which is more beneficial to town, adding myself to the heap or bringing new things to light.

And he wouldn't advocate a D1 lynch of foilist just yet. Mhmm. Interesting how he doesn't seem to mind keeping his vote on me later on in the game, when I'm put up to L-3. Interesting how deliberately, and how desperately peanutman tries to shift attention to someone other than foilist.

I don't want to advocate a D1 lynch of foilist. But of you, at this point, I would support it (hence my vote). My vote is still on you, even at L-3, because I feel you deserve it. And I'm desperately trying to avoid the town just looking at a select few. For one, with all your cries of watching out for lurkers, Spyrex has certainly slipped through the cracks. He is totally slipping by right now, posting accusations here and there but generally following along with you, Mordy and GG without having to do much of the leg work.

And he wouldn't advocate a D1 lynch of foilist just yet. Mhmm. Interesting how he doesn't seem to mind keeping his vote on me later on in the game, when I'm put up to L-3. Interesting how deliberately, and how desperately peanutman tries to shift attention to someone other than foilist.

Off the top of my head, I know I've raised suspicions on Mordy and Spyrex a few times (including this very post). If you read me in iso, you'll see I haven't exclusively targeted you and, to a lesser extent, Gooey.

The town should be figuring out who the scum is, focusing attention on the scum, lynching them, and defending the townspeople who are being attacked by the mafia.
Those last two statements do none of those things. They are completely unneccesary, and I'm still waiting on an explanation of how they help his argument or the town as a whole.

Gooey, I hope you aren't just directing this at me. Sure, I've made some statements that don't follow your ideal of what should be said. But many others have done much more (such as Pokemon discussions, Mordy being scared of Spyrex because he's such an awesome player). I am definitely not the main person you should addressing this to.
[/b]

[archaebob]

I'm going to

unvote

right now, because I don't actually want to lynch peanutman at this moment anyways, and I generally get the impression from that we can carry on quite well as civilized folk, without the need of threats. As long as he continues to answer questions diligently as he has done so far, I don't see any justification for starting a wagon on him.

I think it's an exaggeration to say I crafted an original defense out of thin air.

I don't think so. Let's take another look:

@ Foilist, regarding your voting behaviour. If I can accept that you wanted to keep your vote on Mordy, even after realizing your initial case was on Gamma, you state that you weren't compelled to change your vote.

I can therefore assume you felt that Mordy was also scummy in some way.

Is this true? If so, what about Mordy do/did you feel seemed scummy?

I've found nothing in the thread from foilist before this post that at all indicates or even hints at this being the case. You have decided completely on your own to come up with a semi-plausible explanation for foilist's actions.

To me, his behaviour regarding his reaction to the vote, if you think about it, is something no normal scum-player would do. It's so ridiculous for a scum to put himself in that situation. With my question to him, I am simply stating that if he knows he wrongfully voted for Mordy and his vote is still there, does he find Mordy scummy? To say it's crafted out of thin air, you're really embellishing this one. His vote is on Mordy, I'm assuming he finds Mordy scum : out of thin air. Let's be honest, if we were both scum, it would be advantageous for me to bus or distance myself from this, not get closer. In fact, these examples of irrational behaviour are things that scum love to jump all over because it's easy to accuse.

wifom wifom wifom wifom W I F O M

Any statement you could make regarding something that a scum player would supposedly "want" to do

immediately

becomes by its very nature something that a scum would have equal incentive to NOT do, precisely because it's what you'd expect. You might, for example, as a scum player, decide to neither distance yourself or bus foilist

because

you know it's something that a "scum would do".

Foilist has just as little reason to put himself into this position as a town player as he does as scum. I don't think he's gotten himself to where he is on purpose, I think he made a lot of mistakes which were unintentional. I still fail to see why you were so willing to interpret his actions in the towniest way they could be interpreted, and why you still persist in doing so.

One thing I would still like you to address is your pattern of voting or FOSing someone without any explanation at all (i.e. your post is simply the vote).

Reaction hunting. I never vote for no reason at all, but I sometimes withhold the reasoning for a few posts to see who reacts to the fact that I haven't explained my vote. If somebody calls me out on it and votes me for not having explained my vote, then that gives me some information about that player. Depending on the context, and how ambiguous I think my reasons actually were, I might think that they are a watchful, judicial, pro-town player, or a conniving scum. The reaction by itself isn't enough to form a theory, but that reaction in tandem with lots of other stuff can be.

I give the benefit of the doubt at first for a mistake here and there, but too many things just don't add up in my mind. If it was just one thing, I would take note of it and keep looking around, but I can't let all these things go unjustified.

So in your opinion, foilist has made less mistakes, and justified himself better, than I have? You think I have done more anti-town things without a good explanation than foilist?

But that's just it. You keep your reasons to yourself at first, waiting for some reactions from others before explaining your vote. You are "craftily" playing this game. How is ambiguity in voting ever a good thing? At best, it's anti-town because a quick-read through these pages days later makes identifying your reasons for voting much harder.

Ambiguity can be a good thing because it doesn't let the scum know what they are up against. If you come out all at once with all the inconsistencies you have noted in another player, that player might get a clue, get their act together, and come up with a decent excuse for the things you've found so far. If you just point out

some

of the inconsistencies, then the player might instead make up a bad excuse that further contradicts something else he's said that he doesn't realize has been noticed yet. By me keeping some of my thoughts concealed, I'm greatly increasing the chances of a scum slip. For example, when I told foilist that he wasn't reading the thread carefully, I didn't go in point by point and show him exactly what he had missed. Had I done this, he would have seen clearly the mistake he had made, and would have intelligently apologized, saying it was an accident, etc etc. Instead, I gave him the chance to reveal whether or not he was playing from a pro-town mindset. When he responded with belligerence, he was effectively affirming his commitment to what he had written so far, and was eliminating the backtracking defense he could have taken of seeming like a careful pro-town player who had just made a mistake. We now know that he is either dispassionate scum, or stubborn VI. My vote of him was not omgus in response to his belligerence, but my declaration of suspicion/desire to lynch him.

Correction, I draw the conclusion you are a likely candidate for scum not as a result of this vote but as a result of all the oddities and actions you have made this day. Don't pin my vote on just one of your actions.

Do you still think I'm more likely to be scum than foilist or AGM? If you knew that all three of us were town, would I be your preferred mislynch?

Listen, many people were targeting Foilist. So, I could either take part in the accusation-hurling, thereby blending in with the others (easy for scum to hide) or I could take these exchanges as fodder for my reads and pursue others who haven't been properly examined. You tell me which is more beneficial to town, adding myself to the heap or bringing new things to light.

This would be a fair defense if you had been consistent with this attitude. When the wagon was on foilist, you tried to redirect attention as much as you could to other players, namely me. But when the wagon was on me (and I had the same amount of votes as foilist did at the peak of his wagon), you continued to question me, and left your vote on. If your goal actually IS to discuss the players who aren't being discussed enough, why didn't you move your vote and your interrogation to someone else?

I don't want to advocate a D1 lynch of foilist. But of you, at this point, I would support it (hence my vote). My vote is still on you, even at L-3, because I feel you deserve it. And I'm desperately trying to avoid the town just looking at a select few. For one, with all your cries of watching out for lurkers, Spyrex has certainly slipped through the cracks. He is totally slipping by right now, posting accusations here and there but generally following along with you, Mordy and GG without having to do much of the leg work.

So, you wouldn't advocate a D1 lynch of foilist

at all

, but you wouldn't mind seeing the day end with my lynch right now. You say that you are "desperately trying to avoid the town just looking at a select few". Perhaps you've failed to notice that I have consistently addressed a greater variety of the players in this game than anybody else. Believe me, I've noticed Spyrex, he's not slipping anywhere. I just think it's productive for the town to keep the focus on one player at a time, and right now I'm choosing to aim that focus, to the best of my ability, at you.

[archaebob]

@ Spyrex and Cruelty -

I'm most interested in your thoughts right now. e

[cruelty]

Too many big posts, will catch up when I get home tonight/tomorrow depending on flights etc.

[Gammagooey]

The town should be figuring out who the scum is, focusing attention on the scum, lynching them, and defending the townspeople who are being attacked by the mafia.
Those last two statements do none of those things. They are completely unneccesary, and I'm still waiting on an explanation of how they help his argument or the town as a whole.

Gooey, I hope you aren't just directing this at me. Sure, I've made some statements that don't follow your ideal of what should be said. But many others have done much more (such as Pokemon discussions, Mordy being scared of Spyrex because he's such an awesome player). I am definitely not the main person you should addressing this to.

Yes, other people have made posts not necessarily helpful to the town, but in my eyes humor is a null-tell, and I enjoy getting a laugh out of things now and again.
What you seem to have missed is that i specifically asked you WHY you posted that in there. I didn't say this in my last post to see if you'd try and make it as part of your argument, but now that you've said that it's not in one of those categories-The only reason I can see you saying that is to

try and make yourself look better

. That, unlike humor, is NOT a null-tell.

[MordyS]

I should have said this earlier, but I'm V/LA till Monday.

[archaebob]

@ Sanjay - any thoughts?

[foilist13]

The thread seems to be dying.

Archaebob, why don't you post this "MOAR" now, since no one else seems to have anything to say.

[archaebob]

dude, i only posted this stuff today. chillax.

[foilist13]

Did I come off as pushy?

[Sanjay]

So just to be clear, now your explanation for those reasons is this:

The reasons I posted occurred me after the fact, but my mind was not on my vote, yes even after it was pointed out to me.

vs. the original explanation for those reasons:

@Anyone who is still unhappy about me leaving my vote on MordyS - I'll go in depth into what I was thinking so that you can stop asking me about this.

So to be perfectly clear, you were lying before when you said that those reasons where what you were really thinking.

[archaebob]

@ Sanjay - do you think that foilist's performance in 846 at all puts a damper on what can be submitted as evidence in his case?

[cruelty]

@archaebob, you asked for my thoughts - on anything specifically? I'm back home and will start to go over the thread in more depth over the next day or two, but if there's anything pressing then I'll definitely get it done tonight.

[archaebob]

@ cruelty -

I just want to know what you think of peanut.

[Benmage]

The thread seems to be dying.

Is alive and Well

PhaerieM replaces afatchic.

[cruelty]

Brief answer (I've just read through the bob/peanut exchange), tired.


I'm not at all convinced by you bob. I think that you've consciously adopted a policy of putting yourself right out there for everyone to see, and I'm not convinced your motivations are pure. I also think (as has been stated) that your case is shaky - it's virtually entirely dependent on foilist flipping scum. If that's the case, then there's very little point focusing on peanut - if we lynch foilist and he flips scum, suddenly your case becomes a LOT more valid.

I am not at all sure why you're pushing for a peanut lynch when a foilist lynch (and scum-flip) would boost your town creds immensely.

I should probably also note that I don't get a huge scum-vibe from peanut - I can see some of your points (not all), but I'm not positive that what you have is ironclad.

[archaebob]

@ cruelty -

thank you for the answer. In case you didn't notice, I specifically said that I wasn't actually pushing for a peanut lynch right now.

@ Spyrex and Muffin -

Where you at?

[PhaerieM]

Hi all I may not get the chance to finish reading up until tonight, hopefully I'll be able to post something more by then.

[PhaerieM]

Oh, and

UNVOTE

for now.

[archaebob]

@ everyone - In case I haven't made this clear yet, I'm not pushing for any lynches right now. The question of who is the best lynch should come at the very end of the day, after everything that has possibly been discussed before deadline has been gone over. Right now I'm posting my suspicions and my thoughts on every player in this thread that I think deserves scrutiny. I'm writing as if each case is a serious case, whether or not I currently think the player is actually scum. The reason I'm doing this is because I've seen scummy things from more players than I would expect there to be scum roles. A second reason is, if I can be totally truthful, I'm not exactly confident about my prospects of surviving the night. I'm therefore expressing everything that I've noticed about everyone, rather than holding on to it for Day 2. For example, the current case on peanut is not because I think we should lynch him today, it's because I want this case to be out there so that if we DO lynch foilist, and he DOES flip scum, you guys will have the evidence I think you need to indict Peanut, whether or not I'm still around for tomorrow.

Does that make sense to everyone?

[Muffin]

All right guys I think I need to ask for a replace because I'm just too busy right now IRL and I just can't keep up with this game.

Sorry.

@mod: please replace me

[Sanjay]

Shucks, Muffin. I replaced into this game to hang out with you!

Oh well. We'll always have /b/ mafia. Sorry real life's getting you down.