Open 192: SCIENCE Mafia, Finished

[mykonian]

I won´t be here, just like everyone should be away.

[mykonian]

For tonight

[mykonian]

WIIIIIIHAAAAAA

Finally, after so much waiting, someone who understands!

*calms down*

Yes mister, it is UA

This probably means you are town, so I won't vote you. Now that leaves 5 people, with 2 scum there, and 3 of those are already voted. Now if I was scum, I would wait with doing something, which leaves 2 people: Cat and Malpa. I haven't seen Cat around for some time, so that could have other reasons. My

vote

should be on:

Malpa

[mykonian]

On the other hand, Lylo is less dangerous as it is in other setups, as there is a chance we'll enter it with the masons alive: good.

It is practically worthless and scummy to look for connections (distancing etc.) as you'll just as easily find the masons, and we don't want to help scum.

[mykonian]

assuming that the first thing you think off is often correct, we should not have long days. That would only make second, third etc wagons making it to the lynch, which is not good for town. Short days are more accurate, and put more pressure on Scum's daygame, giving the same if not more information in less time.

IMO short days show a good working town.

[mykonian]

assuming that the first thing you think off is often correct, we should not have long days. That would only make second, third etc wagons making it to the lynch, which is not good for town. Short days are more accurate, and put more pressure on Scum's daygame, giving the same if not more information in less time.

IMO short days show a good working town.

...if we nail scum in those short days.

Not only then. Mislynching a townie in a fast game makes that scum had less time to position themselves well. If the game was so fast people couldn't play careful (riskfree) anymore, we would find scum more often. As scum are exactly the people that want to play carefully, to blend in.

Long day's tend to confuse the town, as information gets smeared out over much more posts and time, and harder to understand.

[mykonian]

assuming that the first thing you think off is often correct, we should not have long days. That would only make second, third etc wagons making it to the lynch, which is not good for town. Short days are more accurate, and put more pressure on Scum's daygame, giving the same if not more information in less time.

IMO short days show a good working town.

...if we nail scum in those short days.

Not only then. Mislynching a townie in a fast game makes that scum had less time to position themselves well. If the game was so fast people couldn't play careful (riskfree) anymore, we would find scum more often. As scum are exactly the people that want to play carefully, to blend in.

Long day's tend to confuse the town, as information gets smeared out over much more posts and time, and harder to understand.

But there is less wagon info to go on for the next day, as well as other info.

I think you haven't really understood what I have been saying. The wagon forming the lynch has been formed differently (faster, and more serious since everybody knows it could very well be the lynch already), that the information you get is worth more.

And SC, that is pretty much it. My own experience as scum is that I like long day's. Just give scum enough time to influence your reads and you are losing.

[mykonian]

Myk, I get what you mean, but I agree to disagree.

I couldn't find that in your post

BTW, what are your scumtells, Pom?

[mykonian]

I agree with SC, that was my first feeling too.

L-1

Vote SaintKerrigan

Not a jokevote, if someone thinks that.

[mykonian]

Well, that was the first use of that vote.

I am very much disappointed in this town, where the reason "I would be disturbed if the lynch was on town" is a reason to unvote and

do nothing afterwards

. Seriously, I warned you 3 posts ahead that I would be doing this, and still the first reaction you have is: "Did he really do that?" followed by a reflexive "unvote".

I would be ok with SC questioning me, I would be ok, with him voting me, I would be ok with him leaving his vote, or moving it to someone completely different for whatever reason, but this is no town behaviour. SC uses his unvote to

seem

towny, as in "see how good I am, I am trying to avoid a mislynch!", while his objective should be to find scum. This is even more obvious seen that my vote actually didn't go through.

Who is more disturbing, the person eager to lynch, or the person that only unvotes, doing no scumhunting at all afterwards?

unvote vote Strangercoug

[mykonian]

and wait a minute:

myk votes StK
StK votes myk
StK asks the rest of the town what they think of it.

I don't like this at all. Since it is obvious from the start that the rest of the game disagreed with my ideas about a day, and seen the site meta, the answer on the question what you think about it is probably the same as SC's (disturbing). You might even find it scummy (though I wouldn't know why). The fact that StK doesn't argue for votes for me, but in stead uses something that is like a rhetorical question sounds like manipulation of the town to me.

StK: why did you ask that question, if it wasn't to argue for my lynch?

[mykonian]

@ Mykonian: Because I wanted the town's opinion on what you did. How is asking the town a question manipulating the town?

Next question: what answer do you expect, and by how many of the players would you expect that answer (excluding you and me)

I stated that I found this question near-rhetorical, do you agree?

[mykonian]

Answer my question first, please.

I find your question to be near-rhetorical (meaning you are not interested in the answer, but rather want to say a thing)

I hope this is the last time you want to hear that answer.

Now mine please

[mykonian]

and why are you having a problem with answering questions? Even if I did forget to answer something, you have nothing to hide, right?

I think you are hiding something

unvote vote SaintKerrigan

[mykonian]

and why are you having a problem with answering questions? Even if I did forget to answer something, you have nothing to hide, right?

I think you are hiding something

unvote vote SaintKerrigan

This is your third vote in 13 posts. You look like votehopping scum.

Unvote; Vote: Mykonian

.

Tell me, why would scum votehop?

Esspecially when I have told everyone that I have the intention to have a fastpaced game?

[mykonian]

I was asking a serious, non-rhetorical question, that I expect you to answer: Why is asking the town a question manipulating the town? I am rather interested in the answer to this, and your continual dodging of the question is making me suspicious of you.

As for the answers to your questions:

#1: I don't know how other people are going to answer. That was the point of asking the question. I wanted to see how people felt about what you did.

#2: I didn't intend for it to be a rhetorical question. I intended it to be a question that people gave an answer to, thus allowing me to see what people thought on the matter.

at the first: We misunderstood each other: I found you manipulating the town, by asking the question what people thought about it, since that question seems to have, with this site meta, only one answer from the town, which is disturbing or scummy. Therefore, you seem to be arguing for my lynch rather then asking a serious question.

You easily avoid this with #1, when you state the obvious "I ask a question because I don't yet know". For the situation of putting someone at L-1 on page 3 I think this is

not the truth

For this reason, where you are avoiding the question by saying: "I didn't expect anything", I'll keep my vote on you.

So yes, I know that is not a normal accepted thing to do, but on the other hand, it is not scummy. It is a very quick escalation of the situation, it is maybe even opportunistic (in the way that I was waiting for a moment to make the game serious very quickly), but your argument against Mr made little sense and showed the same opportunism, grabbing the first thing you could get.

[mykonian]

BTW, pom:

I would like an answer on the question what your scumtells are.

Futher, voting density: (votes/posts)

pome 2/7
myko 3/13

if my maths are right, 3/13 is less then 2/7. So your argument is even more wrong. I still like to know why changing your vote often (or percieved often) is scummy, though.

[mykonian]

everything in blue is defensive. If you don't think I am scum, feel free to skip or scan them.

good, pome, how often were those votes on popular wagons? once.

So, sure, following wagons is scummy, but that was not what I did, right?

And on that question, I'm sorry, but I meant it as "what are your own scumtells when playing scum?"

@SC: about the unvote, I had expected you to continue with a vote, or at least a FoS after you already observed. You didn't seem to interprete the situation, or searching for scum. I like people following their unvote with scumhunting to find a new lynch-candidate

I have not had the idea that I dodged a question. The question asked to me multiple times was why I thought SK was manipulating. I have answered the same amount of times, in hopefully clear wording that I thought his question to about what people though of my action to be not so much a question, but a way to get the subject there.

And what really gets me mad is that you somewhat imply that I don't take my vote seriously. I thought I was the one that has argued to make those votes serious as soon as possible, and you were the ones that disagreed. I use my vote to express my suspicions, sure, but is that scummily hopping or showing your stances.

Because don't you worry, I have been serious about all (but the random) votes. The difference in how convincing those votes are is in the reasoning. Further, I think there has barely been someone that commented on my case on you (what a shame), so panic it wasn't there. And my vote returned to SK, so the panic hypothesis is out of the window, I think.

So people, seriously, I have no three votes for voting 4 times, putting someone at L-1, and accusing 2 people and arguing for shorter day's within 3 pages. BUT, all but the L-1 vote have been very well reasoned, and there has been no attacks on that. The question why a lot of voting meant I am scum was answered that it could very well be antitown, if I wasn't serious about them: I think my reasoning with the votes shows differently.

Mind if I have a few questions for you? (and people not yet here, feel free to answer later)

what did you think of:

StK's answer that he didn't know what to expect from his question what everybody thought about my L-1 vote?
SC's unvote without anything else
Mr's post which only answered a question, after which he went out again.
Pome's voting density argument

[mykonian]

Myko, I will respond to your post hopefully later tonight. It requires a lot of rereading and analyzing. But as I definitely don't want you hammered,

Unvote

.

Take your time, It'll probably be 18 hours before I read it.

[mykonian]

18 hours past and the mod made just as many posts as the rest of the game...

For anyone that will come here, could you answer the 4 questions at the end of my post 63.

[mykonian]

Main Entry: op·por·tun·ism
Pronunciation: \-ˈtü-ˌni-zəm, -ˈtyü-\
Function: noun
Date: 1870

: the art, policy, or practice of taking advantage of opportunities or circumstances often with little regard for principles or consequences

Meh, now I see the definition, I am not too sure anymore.

What you did was taking advantage of a move by Mr that wasn't scummy, but was a good opportunity to vote. So the main goal could barely be to find scum in Mr, and was more likely to stir up discussion.

[mykonian]

wait. I never called you scummy for taking that opportunity to vote Mr, right? I just said that it was not more then that, grasping the opportunity, and that my vote on you was a more extreme version of that. Mr's statement was a good opportunity to vote since he said something that was doubtful.

mod, can we have prods on Cat and Malpa?

[mykonian]

hello cat, same question for you, why is votehopping scummy?

Further, that 3 of my 4 votes are withing pomes 2 votes is also a symptome of me just posting more, and posting more cases. Which is incredibly scummy, isn't it?

On the other hand, I can see why you would like to attack some symptoms of someone being actively busy attacking people, making cases, and putting pressure on them. Because nothing of them is something you do.


and to SK, the vote that is now in place is there because I think you are scum. Mostly because of your hesitance to answer questions (you answer first), your not expecting anything out of your question (you can always try to think what others would say, but you avoided the issue completely). Both seemed to me like you were avoiding/hiding something.

[mykonian]

In a game where the mafia have day-talk, they usually have real time strategies that would be risky in a normal game, but becomes easy to do when we can tell our partner what to say. The relation between SK and mykonian seems like one of those. They really do something, but not too much, lightly attack each other when necessary. I would bet that they have day-talk.

hello

...

bye.

BTW, maybe we are already past this, but how many people are up for a policy lynch? I have no idea if Malpa is scum, but even if he isn't, this way he is plain antitown.

Lets put my vote with my words:

unvote vote malpa

[mykonian]

yep. Because it is not based on anything. It is pure omgus. His theory sucks, in my opinion. And since this is all we got after a joke vote, while there is enough to talk about, I have absolutely no trouble to say that Malpa is playing antitown.

To say that there is a scumpair is usually problematic, and it works better, esspecially early in the game, to look at individual scummines. If someone, on page four says: "they could very well be scum that day talk, because it was risky to bring StK to L-1" then there is no way he could actually make that likely, since it could just be (and was) a towny doing it on someone else, knowing that the "risk" of a quicklynch was neglectible.

Plain and simple, all malpa did, was bringing a conspiracy theory into the game. It is based on nothing, it could more easily be explained by normal gameplay, but he has to take the complicated and less likely explanation that it were two scum interacting.

Now I ask you, why would town choose to use (and state) the explanation that is less likely to be the truth? I think town doesn't, or town shouldn't, and my vote reflects that.

[mykonian]

If malpa is town

and if he is scum, we still have a mislynch and only 1 scum to go.
if he is town, and we let him live, he will just attack random people because he thinks they daytalked, and then we lose because scum will cleverly lynch the townies using his vote.

Great, isn't it?

[mykonian]

mykonian: posting more doesn't mean you are making cases. Also, votehopping is scummy because it means you are fickle with your vote and you will put it wherever, with little or no reasoning.

you are completely right if you say it doesn't. However, my vote on SC, and on StK were followed or started by a case. The last one on Malpa again has been logically explained why it is good to vote/lynch the guy.

To say that I put it here and there without good reasoning is something that happened only on StK, the first time, when I voted him for picking on something insignificant from Mr. But saying that all my votes have been with little or no reasoning is a simple lie.

Sure, everybody agrees that moving your vote without any reasoning is scummy and antitown. SC stated that, just as pom, and you here. But that was not what I have been doing. I have accompanied all the recent votes (3, on StK, SC, and Malpa) with why I did it, from what points this was, and how this makes that person voteworthy.

[mykonian]

you pointed it out very well pom. Townies play inperfect, and I also attack townies and vote them. I move on quickly, because on page 4

I don't yet know

. I am convinced the cases I made are sound, and that they conclude the other player must be scum, but logic is so hard to apply to people.

In short, the fact that I vote a lot shows I know a little.

You seem to be scared I am trying to make bandwagons. For that to happen, wouldn't I have to concentrate on one player? Wouldn't it be a better idea not to attack practically the whole town? You seem to be scared I am organizing mislynches.

If multiple cases and votes is what makes you scared, is calming down and wait a moment the thing I should do?

@SC, Start of discussion, I thought. There is little use in policy lynching good players :/

[mykonian]

cat, see malpa's posts please. He is antitown. But however you see it, town would not come up with such arguments at this time in the game.

StK. From experience with those two players, I am afraid that is a thing they both have to work on (as in, it is a known thing for them).

Regardless from that, SC's reluctance to talk about is scummy. VI's don't get a free pass, though scum like to have them in the game. SC's "end of discussion" is a way of defending Malpa. (doesn't matter if malpa is scum or not).

We do still miss Mr :/

[mykonian]

Cat, your argument was that I votehopped and that that was scummy.

Your reasoning why it was scummy was that it was scummy to move your vote around with little reason.

Since I reasoned my votes pretty well, if I may say so, this argument doesn't come close to "good"

[mykonian]

Regardless from that, SC's reluctance to talk about is scummy. VI's don't get a free pass, though scum like to have them in the game. SC's "end of discussion" is a way of defending Malpa. (doesn't matter if malpa is scum or not).

Says the person flailing like mad. I don't care if malpascp bumbles through this game like a three-year-old that does not understand the consequences of his actions; we are not lynching him as I do not see a legitimate case on him.

Uhm, why would town come up with the day-talking argument? TBH, I hadn't noticed, while it was the first thing that was on Malpa's mind. Then he comes up with a conspiracy theory. It all could have been done much easier by assuming any combination of roles to get this interaction.

And why are you so eager to defend him? This feels a lot like buddying to me.

FoS SC

@pom. How can I be convince on page 4 or earlier?

Further, also as town, unvoting in such a situation is best. If nobody agrees with you on the lynch a vote there is "wasted". This is mostly while coming to the conclusion of the day.

[mykonian]

And why are you so eager to defend him? This feels a lot like buddying to me.

FoS SC

You know why I'm so eager to defend malpascp? I'm his day mason. Your rolefishing has disabled you from being saved. Goodbye.

SC... you don't claim the only powerrole we have this easily. Further, if I see someone defend another without reason, that could just be as easily buddying. I have never asked for a claim of whatever, so I was not rolefishing here, but trying to find scum.

However, from my point of view, this is going on:

Malpa/SC (masons, most likely)
Stk now wolframnhart: Town
Pome neutral leaning town.

This leaves only cat and Mr for me.

unvote

btw.

[mykonian]

@pom. How can I be convince on page 4 or earlier?

Well, I don't expect you to vote unless you're convinced, especially when it takes only 4 to lynch.

since we could quicklynch? That never happens. To use your votes for clarity and for pressure is not antitown, and far from scummy.

[mykonian]

Ok, with 3 out of my townie list on me, I don't believe I have a chance.

just take this with you for the next day: Wolf is town. That should help in Lylo

[mykonian]

Hello all! Happy to help out and replace into a game here.

I have a question(s) from my read through.

SK, Malp claimed he believed you and Myo to be scum, yet you claim Malp to be your day mason. Was this even a serious claim? It would seem odd for your apparent day mason to even remotely link you to being a scum.

You confuse strangercough and Saintkerrigan

[mykonian]

I think it has no use. The more I do, the more people are weary I am doing something behind their backs. I am voted by one for being votehoppy, by someone who thinks I was rolefishing, and lastly by one who thinks I organized via daytalking the L-1 of StK.

If I were to vote now, people would just put that in the same list as the rest, and think I was just trying to divert attention. While the new information that Malpa and SC are likely the masons was the thing that made me say it.

Maybe it'll save me: This isn't the first time day one went this way, where it seems I am pushing too hard, afterwards. This is the reason behind my sig, as it is often that people won't listen to my reasonings and believe I am trying to convince them of something untrue (that there is a conspiracy). I think it is because I argue in a wrong way, but if I had found that out, it wouldn't happen anymore

[mykonian]

SC would never do it as town.

Scum would lose after a counterclaim.

which means that a fakeclaim is not going to happen.

[mykonian]

fakeclaim mason.

[mykonian]

I have seen a town fakeclaim jailkeeper in an open setup, so it happens.

but SC wouldn't do it, so that is not an option. Why would you ask?

[mykonian]

I have made an early case on him, true, I thought him scum. It seems better to me that I won't give reasonings why he is town, but when reflecting, I saw from the reactions to my cases that he was likely town.

[mykonian]

Pom, I don't think you can explain it well, since the other two players are on me for different reasons.

I think I can do it objectively:

You vote me for votehopping, and this is scummy because that means I don't value my vote, and could mean that my reasonings aren't good enough.

Malpa votes me because of his theory that I daytalked with StK to organize the weird L-1 vote.

SC votes me because he thinks I wanted to force the masons to claim. He thinks I should have gotten the obvious link between them as town.




and my defenses:

First is not true, I believe in my reasonings, but love to use my vote for pressure and clarity. Having one vote limits me in showing who I all think scummy.

Second is simply untrue, and much easier explained by me starting very aggressive (seen the talking about short/long day's before etc.) The vote could be explained as a normal interaction from that. No daytalking would be needed.

The third is partially my mistake, but I saw the defensiveness of SC for Malpa not as an interaction between masons (since malpa wasn't close to a lynch, desperate mason actions were not needed), and I expected the masons to try to be hidden. So I saw the weird move from SC (the defensiveness) as a possible buddying attempt from a scum player when a towny came under attack.

[mykonian]

what a terrible reason for a vote, scumo. You were only 3 posts into the game, just over half an hour. You are plain lying.

and for if there may be any use the confirmation of my role: believe what I said.

[mykonian]

yes, it was. Cat or Pome is the second mafia member, but I honestly can never get a good read on them. Flare should be the first.

[mykonian]

aaaaand there is someone trying to get out of this by playing the newby.

not going to work. Esspecially since he already avoids saying that he thought I was scum. He says everyone did. But he knows they were wrong.

[mykonian]

lynching him tomorrow is a lot less painful.

[mykonian]

that still leaves two clear townies in malpa and wolf. Since Flare is basically clear mafia, our odds should be around 50% to win this game.

[mykonian]

aren't you voting for him too?

=failed attempt to shift guilt to a confirmed towny.

no flare, you are responsible for your own actions, and you have showed us here again that the only thing you are really concerned about is staying alive yourself.

[mykonian]

Flare continues to blame others for his action.

Not protown. Certainly not. Town doesn't want to get away with bad actions, as blaming others ruins the town. Scum does do everything to escape lynches, of course.

[mykonian]

ani, the solution is simple

make a votecount (hint, someone has been lynched)

[mykonian]

Stranger, I tell you one thing. The thing I am so sure of I am actually posting it three times...

and you still think I'm manipulating you?

Seriously, Pom's kill should have sealed the game. With the masons and wolf in the majority, you could just have lynched the rest.

I would be up for the next game, but please please don't lynch me based on meta. Because I won't play as I did here. Someway, having these intentions set off the gut-alarms by about 75% of the players.