Mini 885 - Boom, Game Gutshot/Abandoned by Mod!

[Civil Scum]

In other words, it's only anti-scum if he is indeed outing his teammates

[Aranfan]

In other words, it's only anti-scum if he is indeed outing his teammates

Isn't that just another reason to lynch him? Also, what part of reading at a remove has inclined you to not engage in a policy lynch you otherwise would have?

[Civil Scum]

Probably, yes. But if you're meaning to use that against me, skip it.

Chibo said that scvm was behaving anti-scum. I clarified.

I thought I'd explained it already, but here you go. I think scvm may be a townie, and I've come into the game finding it very odd that so few people are supporting the policy lynch. I think there's a greater chance that the scum have been in and out and dancing and circling around the debacle than there is of scvm being scum. Which is why I'd prefer a different lynch. The 'keep-scvm-alive movement' thing for example...Damn, I'm sure I covered this already. And obviously, I've been removed from scvm's annoyance and the length of anybody else's frustrations.

Why do YOU seem oblivious to accusations that have been made against you?

[Civil Scum]

It's just you and hito left on the wagon right?

[Civil Scum]

Alright, I apologize for overposting. By my computer a lot, and used to 9 person games. This pace of not having a post from half of the players in two days isn't quite my speed.

I realize it can't be both sides of the scvm deal the way I'm looking at it, or totally one side etc, and I can't be sure which is which until people on either end start to die.

unvote

vote: hitorogoshi

I'm not throwing brosius completely out of the window, but a major piece of people's case against him looks equally bad for hito.

Who: 1) Admitted to being behind in reading the game in the same post that he started pushing for the scvm policy lynch.

2) Has pursued the policy lynch and its attendant arguments in lieu of all other scum-hunting efforts.

3) Was too comfortable letting Brosius tail him around for the better part of brosius' time in the game

4) Who has only taken one position on anything the entire game.
'Just because other people are taking the RVS too seriously doesn't mean I have to'

5) Scummiest----> Arguing against anyone "pro-scvm", but never thinking it scummy of any of them.

I'm thinking that aran-hito is a distinct possibility. And I'm not aversed to an aranfan lynch first.

[A_Squirrel]

I realize it can't be both sides of the scvm deal the way I'm looking at it, or totally one side etc, and I can't be sure which is which until people on either end start to die.

unvote

vote: hitorogoshi

I'm not throwing brosius completely out of the window, but a major piece of people's case against him looks equally bad for hito.

Who: 1) Admitted to being behind in reading the game in the same post that he started pushing for the scvm policy lynch.

2) Has pursued the policy lynch and its attendant arguments in lieu of all other scum-hunting efforts.

3) Was too comfortable letting Brosius tail him around for the better part of brosius' time in the game

4) Who has only taken one position on anything the entire game.
'Just because other people are taking the RVS too seriously doesn't mean I have to'

5) Scummiest----> Arguing against anyone "pro-scvm", but never thinking it scummy of any of them.

Dont forget he also joined the bs dichotomy questioning of seregil.

Also, welcome to our replacements. Good luck and have fun.

[hitogoroshi]

Alright hito, but how is that any different from when someone gets replaced?
Isn't that exactly what you do?
Regardless of if you think the person they were replacing was scummy or not?
Which isn't even the case here, scvm's alignment does come down to a lot of WIFOM.

To be honest if 5cvm request replacement and I was mod I would just modkill the slot right then and there. I'm saying that if 5cvm had a 'change of heart', I wouldn't care because he's already done so much to spite the town that a townie could have turned back from.

If someone else replaced into that slot, I suppose I wouldn't lynch them immediately, but they would have to produce a lot of content, fast.

You've made some good arguments for lynching scvm, but I feel it's all you've been doing now.

Because it's the only thing the town should be doing.

Who are you suspicious of, FOR BEING SCUM?

Hmm. The followers, mostly. ISO squirrel, or confid/tommy. Not really much there but fluff. Squirrel in particular asks a lot of questions but doesn't actually post much analysis or anything. This is a pretty significant scumtell in my book. Brosius to a lesser degree - I've given the mitigating factors for him above. (To be fair these should apply to confid, but he was gone for so so long I am loath to give him any sort of pass. It'll be pretty dependent on what Tommy says.)

Given the circumstances, yes I would give scvm a chance at that point.
Would you tell scvm's replacement, 'Sorry, appreciate that you are going to try and play, but the person you replaced was being a complete jack ass, so sorry, you got's to go!' ?

You are taking the hypothetical too far. I'm saying I wouldn't buy a reversal on 5cvm, and this doesn't really apply to that. I would totally say, 'Sorry, appreciate that you are going to try and play, but

you were

being a complete jack ass, so sorry, you got's to go!' ?

Alright, I apologize for overposting. By my computer a lot, and used to 9 person games. This pace of not having a post from half of the players in two days isn't quite my speed.

I realize it can't be both sides of the scvm deal the way I'm looking at it, or totally one side etc, and I can't be sure which is which until people on either end start to die.

unvote

vote: hitorogoshi

I'm not throwing brosius completely out of the window, but a major piece of people's case against him looks equally bad for hito.

Who: 1) Admitted to being behind in reading the game in the same post that he started pushing for the scvm policy lynch.

I said that I HAD been behind. It's a guarantee that if I post, I've read every post in the thread. I will never ever make a post while I have not read posts in the topic.

2) Has pursued the policy lynch and its attendant arguments in lieu of all other scum-hunting efforts.

Yep. I give my reasoning for such in ISO 11, ISO 13, ISO 16, ISO 21, ISO 28, and ISO 38. Among others. If you want to call this a scumtell you have to tell me a.) why we should keep an anti-town player alive (and you have repeatedly shown you understand how anti-town 5cvm is) and b.) when you think we should lynch 5cvm.

3) Was too comfortable letting Brosius tail him around for the better part of brosius' time in the game

And for the record I can totally understand where Scott is coming from. He just replaced in, it's kind of disorienting, and here is a player who needs to be lynched - it's an easy move to take, and it's what I would do in his situation regardless of role. It's hard to be certain about your scum reads replacing in d1, but it's pretty easy to understand the justification for a policy lynch, so while hopping on the policy wagon is an easy move for scum it's also a justified move for town.

Are you seriously saying that I should have stopped lynching the player I most believed should be lynched because someone else agreed with me?? It's easy enough to bring the point up against Brosius if he were to continue to blindly follow me/someone else D2 (and for the record, he hasn't even done it for the length of D1); there's absolutely no reason to prioritize that over a 5cvm lynch.

4) Who has only taken one position on anything the entire game.
'Just because other people are taking the RVS too seriously doesn't mean I have to'

You seem to have missed that position that, '5cvm is anti-town and must be lynched d1. Anything else is moronic.' You know, that position that has been the entire focus of my playstyle because it is literally the only optimal move for town regardless of 5cvm's alignment?

5) Scummiest----> Arguing against anyone "pro-scvm", but never thinking it scummy of any of them.

What the hell? Dude:

a.) Whether or not an interaction with 5cvm is scummy largely depends on his alignment, and
b.) 5cvm needs to be lynched first.

What is the point of what-if-ing now? There is a D2, y'know. Though I will probably package my sentiments right before the lynch in case I get nk'ed.


Okay, I am going to say this one more time. The only defense I have seen of 5cvm (besides humble's cryptic 'I CAN MAKE HIM PLAY' like some sort of helen keller and buttons bizzare line of inquiry that 5cvm is acting in the towns best interests) is that he is a townie, but that is not a defense. If 5cvm is scum, the optimal play is to lynch him d1. If 5cvm is town, the optimal play is to lynch him d1. Either prove his actions are actually helpful to the town (as button intends?), or lynch him. Saying 'this sequence of events means he is probably town' is rubbish - he is anti-town, I don't care whether or not he has a good reason to be. He IS.

[Boxman]

Someone asked for a vote count, so....

Vote Count 10 of Day 1

5cvm (3) - hitogoroshi, Tommy, Aranfan
Evilgorrilaz (3) - Humble Poirot, Scott Brosius, xvart
Aranfan (2) - TheButtonmen, ChiboSempai
hitogoroshi (1) - Civil Scum
xvart (1) - 5cvm

Not Voting (2) - A_Squirrel, Evilgorrilaz

[Tommy]

I haven't finished my readthrough yet, but I'm getting sleepy, so here are my thoughts on the first eleven pages.

Scvm is acting in as pro-town a way as the other active players. I think his strategy is this: at first, post without any content at all; then, when you start getting a read on people, draw the town's attention to scummy behaviour. This happens from post 216 onwards. It's not active scum-hunting, it's infuriating that he won't answer questions, but he's nevertheless making a positive contribution. I distrust the people behind the policy-lynch campaign, but also the people behind the free-pass-for-the-day campaign.

unvote

Aranfan is the scummiest-looking player from what I've read so far. He seems to agree with whoever posted most recently. I think that's a sign of someone who isn't bothering to scum-hunt because he doesn't need to. He was an outspoken member of both the dodgy campaigns I've mentioned. And as other people have noted, lynching the lurker "so as to save the mod trouble" is an awful suggestion.

I found myself agreeing with TheButtonmen a lot. If he isn't town, his scum strategy is to be helpful to the town.

Don't have enough information about rite. I'll keep reading to see whether Scott Brosius makes more of a contribution.

[Evilgorrilaz]

limited acces untila after christmas

[Tommy]

What is this ISO that people talk about? Is there a tool I haven't found for showing all the posts from a particular player? Because that would be handy. Can't find anything in the FAQ or the wiki.

[hitogoroshi]

Right below the "preview/submit" buttons, you can change who's posts are displayed.

Also:

Scvm is acting in as pro-town a way as the other active players. I think his strategy is this: at first, post without any content at all; then, when you start getting a read on people, draw the town's attention to scummy behaviour. This happens from post 216 onwards. It's not active scum-hunting, it's infuriating that he won't answer questions, but he's nevertheless making a positive contribution.

It's my understanding that, except for once saying Aran and Brosius are 'behaving badly', he's been going for the same three people since his first post as scum (well, he's calling me the informed SK). Unless I'm missing something...?

[Civil Scum]

You are taking the hypothetical too far

I don't think so. His "alter ego" Milkshake is a competent player. And if he said he was going to play seriously, and then actually made good on that promise, I would say it is basically the same thing as a replacement.

[quote="hito"
I said that I HAD been behind. It's a guarantee that if I post, I've read every post in the thread. I will never ever make a post while I have not read posts in the topic
[/quote]
You'll forgive me if I don't take anyone's guarantee at face value. Like, 'I guarantee that I know that scvm wouldn't be behaving like this if he were scum.'
-Humble

[quote="hito]
Are you seriously saying that I should have stopped lynching the player I most believed should be lynched because someone else agreed with me??
[/quote]
This is absolutely not what I meant or said.

besides humble's cryptic 'I CAN MAKE HIM PLAY' like some sort of helen keller

lmao

It becomes a scumtell for reason 5. You never pursue anyone for disagreeing with the policy lynch.

Because it's the only thing the town should be doing

EXACTLY! This is it! But you obviously forgot you should have felt this way during some of the arguing. But it never occurs to you and you never find anyone scummy for arguing that he shouldn't be killed. You completely goofed.


Can we get a prod on scvm?
Humble poirot?

He seems to agree with whoever posted most recently. I think that's a sign of someone who isn't bothering to scum-hunt because he doesn't need to.

Seems to agree with or only mention recent posts. This is a good point.

[hitogoroshi]

But you obviously forgot you should have felt this way during some of the arguing. But it never occurs to you and you never find anyone scummy for arguing that he shouldn't be killed. You completely goofed.

Civil, I'm trying to wrap my head around your argument. So pursuing a policy lynch on an anti-town player is scummy...because I don't suspect everyone not doing it of being scum?

...

I don't know about you, but I am mature enough to realize that, hey, not everyone disagreeing with me is scum! I'll freely admit that it kind of feels like bashing my head against the wall and I'm incredibly irritated that it is taking so much effort to lynch the worst mafia player I've ever seen (well, second worst, even with his claiming scum he still doesn't top one certain player) and get on to the real game without this weight. But is it a scum tell to not be on the policy wagon? Of course not. When I know the 5cvm flip I'll be more willing to try to draw inferences about peoples reactions.

Here is something more important. You clearly, clearly understand why 5cvm needs to be lynched. And now you have gone so far as to point out that you agree with me on one crucial point - that 5cvm is so anti-town there are no good reasons for not voting him. You're calling me scummy for not taking the next step and saying that people not voting him are scum. I disagree, because I think many players here don't understand exactly what makes a policy lynch tick. I don't think those people are scum because of that reason. But you - you apparently do understand why 5cvm must be lynched, and so this defense does not apply to you. So, no more of this cutesy 'I think he's town' garbage - why are you

really

not voting 5cvm?

[Humble Poirot]

I'm here... I've just had my last college exam of the year... I've read a few posts and I'm quite interested in the new people and their opinions.

I've written some stuff but need to make a tidy post and review some aspects of this game...

[Civil Scum]

because I don't suspect everyone not doing it of being scum?

No, again you are twisting the argument, making them outrageous. You and xvart have a habit of doing this. It is slightly annoying. It didn't look like you suspected ANYONE.

So you are suggesting that everyone not voting for scvm just doesn't understand what policy lynching is?

So, no more of this cutesy 'I think he's town' garbage - why are you really not voting 5cvm?

Great. So NOW you're going to use the whole thing on me

[Civil Scum]

B-b-b-b-buh-buh-but m-m-m-my-my mama said-my-my-my mama-my mama said [stutter/stutter...inflate and exagerate an argument so I can pretend to defeat it] aka- a type of strawmanning.

Were you going to come and stutter, or did u just disappear suddenly?

[Civil Scum]

Also, you seem inclined to believe that scvm flipping scum somehow allows a scum-link to be made to his "protectors".

Care to explain this? Because unless I'm missing something a lot of the case against gorillaz relied on scvm being town. Yet you'll be willing to infer people's alignment afterwards, and you're on record thinking that scvm is scum and that's why he's being defended or not lynched.

It looks bad from either perspective. Scum could just as easily be not voting for a townie as they could be not voting for a teammate. Which is why, in this situation, which way you're leaning on that dpends on your impression of scvm.

Or take it like this, 'enough with the meanie garbage - why do you say you feel scvm is scum?' Now that's a really stupid question, isn't it?

And my last post should have had this after it:

[xvart]

No, again you are twisting the argument, making them outrageous. You and xvart have a habit of doing this. It is slightly annoying.

Jigga-what? When/where have I done this and how come I haven't been called out on it yet?

xvart.

[Civil Scum]

So basically you are for lynching anyone?

Sorry, this was it. I took this as a lowly-weak-attack on myself. Addressed it when I signed my post Xfart. Didn't appreciate it very much, that's why that slipped in there.

Really in reference to hito, who's case is coming together nicely I think.

I have a tendency to be overly-defensive, confrontational, over-aggressive, loud, and abrasive whenever I play this game. If that is offensive to your "palette", I'd hope you don't let it affect your considerations of any merit a case of mine might have. I don't think hito himself is considering calling my case weak at this point. Though I guess I'll see. He probably just went VLA for Christmas.

Err, anyways, Is that the only thing you intend to mention?

[hitogoroshi]

Dude, it was 12:40am here when you posted. I didn't go V/LA, I just went to

bed

. Suddenly I get the feeling you're just going for me because I'm the only one who's active enough to actually function on your hyper posting level. Take a friggin chill pill, man.

So you are suggesting that everyone not voting for scvm just doesn't understand what policy lynching is?

A combination of that, generalized waffle, and that human instinct that an obvious move is probably wrong. (Something tells me that if 5cvm was half as anti-town as he is now, he'd be lynched - but this is so grotesque that people are reacting oddly.)

Great. So NOW you're going to use the whole thing on me.

Well, you understand policy lynching and you know the obvious move is right. So yes, I am using the 'whole thing' on you. Answer this question you ignored.

If you want to call this a scumtell you have to tell me a.) why we should keep an anti-town player alive (and you have repeatedly shown you understand how anti-town 5cvm is) and b.) when you think we should lynch 5cvm.

Also, you seem inclined to believe that scvm flipping scum somehow allows a scum-link to be made to his "protectors".

What the hell? No I don't. Me not thinking that is what you're calling the scummiest thing about pushing a policy lynch.

I think that his scum buddies are not voting for him, but NO one is voting for him. I never said that his active defenders are scum; only that someone who got on the 5cvm wagon and later off has a good chance of being scum if 5cvm is scum. (To be fair I offered that in the other direction as well - the wagon pattern suggesting that 5cvm could be scum - but that's not so important. I don't really care if 5cvm is scum, that's kinda just me speculating and noting my drift from my 5cvm-weak town read at the start.)

Or take it like this, 'enough with the meanie garbage - why do you say you feel scvm is scum?' Now that's a really stupid question, isn't it?

It's not a stupid question. It's a simple question, with a simple answer - I don't care whether or not he's scum, and I only really feel he's scum because his wagon is empty now and I'd expect scum to want to either bus him or mislynch him - and the fact that the wagon has magically dissipated suggests to me it was the first and the scum are now standing dumbfounded that 5cvm is alive.

And for the record calling a question stupid by analogy isn't nearly the same thing as answering it. You are not voting 5cvm. Why not?

[ChiboSempai]

Out or curiosity, is there a deadline? This day has gone on for over a month so far and everyone's really just going around in circles.

[ChiboSempai]

Also, I understand that he just said VLA, but I feel that EvilGorrilaz is being a little too quiet really, look at his latests posts and how spread apart they are with little to no content.

[Tommy]

Right below the "preview/submit" buttons

Oh yeah. Thanks. Was that true last time I played as well? What does ISO stand for?

It's my understanding that, except for once saying Aran and Brosius are 'behaving badly', he's been going for the same three people since his first post as scum (well, he's calling me the informed SK). Unless I'm missing something...?

I'll try to summarise everything he's done right. Note that I still haven't finished my readthrough, though - I've just reached the start of page 15. Post 216 implies that your 215 is intended to pull something. I think that could be true. 220 draws people's attention to a useful piece of evidence against xvart. 254 points out a scummy move by my predecessor. 306 criticises xvart for 301 (I agree, although unlike 5cvm I don't think it's a scum-tell). 311 warns against assuming triers are townies - not just theory, but relevant to Humble Poirot's strategy in this game. 315 puts the case for team-hunting, which is also germane.

[Civil Scum]

If the other half of the players in the game regularly posted relevant content (like they're supposed to), that would probably curb my activity to a reasonable level. Talking over me works irl.

If you want to call this a scumtell you have to tell me a.) why we should keep an anti-town player alive (and you have repeatedly shown you understand how anti-town 5cvm is) and b.) when you think we should lynch 5cvm.

I explained, quite well if I may say so, why it's a scumtell. I did miss these questions. Frankly, I assumed the rest of the paragraph was about those posts and that argument, which Frankly, I've heard enough of. Actually, I've already kind of answered these two.

Alright, allow "protectors" to also include those unwilling to lynch him after he's been claiming scum.

And you did state that you felt scvm was scum and that's why he wasn't dying, and that once he was dead you would then start inferring. But at that point, you're already compeltely operating on inferences about scvm's alignment. A dilemma certainly.

Tommy again showing up with some good work. I tried to explain to you hito why it feels like hitting your head against a wall, or why maybe some of the players are resisting you on this. You're still after it like it's a 100% policy lynch, and it isn't 100% a policy lynch situation anymore. Maybe it was at first. When he first started claiming scum, why didn't EVERYONE go after him. It's still very TROUBLING to me seeing that you never did/still haven't come up with anything remotely solid on any other player.

As far as you still not taking any position other than this lynch, I also didn't like how you commented that you 'liked my style' after my first post, but didn't say if you had any initial impression of my alignment. Which isn't absolutely neccesary or even expected. But after my read through, it struck me a little like pandering. Maybe that's not the right word, but without definition, example, and possibly in hopes of recruiting me to your policy lynch crusade.

In answering the rest of your post,

I think that his scum buddies are not voting for him

what makes you so goddamn sure that scvm is scum? If you can PLAINLY see he's anti-town, if he is a townie isn't it just as reasonable to believe the scum wouldn't want him dead in that circumstance either. Or that they can get credit for defending him. Or that leaving him around is a huge distraction, or that...insert reason here.

The answer is primarily, like yours was, 'personal read'. The difference is, your personal read is the only thing you're operating on anymore, unreasonably I think -> total lack of willingness to grant scvm any leeway or any chance at redemption. You've taken this personal read, which is most of what your struggle is based off of now, and built your entire game off of it. At the same time, you've given an alarmingly small amount of thought to the actual logical implications of this basis and the scumminess of every other player, or any other player's actions. You rarely comment on them, you don't go out of your way to find them, you just keep banging your head against the wall. I told you first why it wasn't working like you thought it should, and then I told you why it's so scummy the way you've done it.

Scvm hasn't posted in like 5 days. I'd almost prefer a replacement at this point. Although I am interested to hear scvm's attitude when/if he returns. I'm fairly comfortable with a slot I have a read on being replaced. Probably so is any other townie feeling that way. Like you said, not EVERYONE who is not for the lynch can be scum.

If scvm is a townie, there's no longer any sense wasting that "slot", as you kept calling it. Although, if he were actually scum, then he'd be getting away with murder if we kept him alive. And personally, if he flipped scum, I think you'd look just as bad as anyone not voting for him.