Mafia 913: Wickedestjr's Mafia - Game Over

[Jack]

Confirm.

[Jack]

Vote:Jack

[Jack]

Who wants to be investigated tonight?

[Jack]

One side stepping no comment, and one joking yes. Is there anyone who will admit to seriously wanting to be investigated?

[Jack]

Ok...follow up question to those who answered. If you are innocent, why would you want the cop to waste an investigation on you? Trying to prove you aren't scared makes sense for the mafia...

[Jack]

Ok...follow up question to those who answered. If you are innocent, why would you want the cop to waste an investigation on you? Trying to prove you aren't scared makes sense for the mafia...

Cop investigating town isn't a waste at all, your logic is quite flawed. And people a confirmed town means your arguments carry much more weight and forces the mafia to waste kills on VT's rather then power role hunting.

First of all that isn't logic, it's just a statement. Now, you propose three reasons why an innocent would want to be investigated:

1) it isn't a waste "at all"
2) your arguments carry more weight
3) the mafia will then have to kill you rather than try and kill a power role

There are many problems with these reasons.

1)

Investigations are opportunities. To waste an opportunity is to not make best use of it. Innocent results have some use to the cop, but she doesn't go around investigating people he thinks are innocent does she? When you say it isn't a waste at all, you imply that getting a guilty result is no better than getting an innocent result.

2)

Selfish reasoning, which innocent's should avoid. Also relies on two assumptions: a) it is known that you have been investigated and b) you have a clue what is going on. Even if those two are met, people are quite willing to discard the arguments of a known innocent if they disagree with them, godfather roles are always possible, and the claimed cop's arguments will hold more weight.

3)

Why exactly will they have to kill you? They might choose to knock off the known innocents in order to help themselves in endgame, but that again assumes that investigation results have been revealed. But that is in no way a comparable benefit to getting a guilty result on a mafioso and lynching them.


You do make one good point, unintentionally: a townie might not have thought things through when they asked to be investigated. But of course, that is why I asked what their reasons were.

[Jack]

[quote=Zhero]
That's pretty WIFOMy there.. seems like if they say yes they have something to prove, if they say no they have something to hide. [/quote]

Saying something is not a requirement.

[Jack]

My guess for the role setup:

1 godfather
2 goon

1 cop
1 doctor
1 roleblocker

Oh well, probably not. But I wouldn't be overly afraid of speculation-->the point I'm making.

unvote:Jack, vote:Sir Cyanide

For joke posting when there was some actual discussion, and then making a few big posts rehashing old material later once there was nothing new going on.

[Jack]

TQO, why don't you put your vote on Sir Cyanide?

[Jack]

and then making a few big posts rehashing old material later once there was nothing new going on.

There was 1 post between my post and the post I was addressing. Please upgrade your glasses or your cerebral cortex.

This has nothing to do with my comment.

[Jack]

To Jack: I haven't put a vote on SC because I don't believe his actions are being scummy at this point. Disrespectful? Rude? Inconsiderate? Childish? Yes to all of those. But I don't vote out of breaking the rules. But if he insists on being zero help to the town and rather attacking me on a consistent basis rather than doing some actual scum hunting then yes, he will warrant my vote.

It's early on, nothing wrong with throwing your vote out there. What is it now, a random vote?

[Jack]

Yes it does. You say I did [x], I point out I didn't do [x].

I said you did [x] and you pointed out that you didn't do [y]. I was mentioning the transition from "vote the broken forum software" type posts to the "this has already been said but I'll say it again at length" posts. Both are posting without participating, which is a mafia tell similar to lurking (not posting and not participating).

How many posts were between your post and the one you replied to is irrelevant.

[Jack]

Jack-I doubt you are the cop, and claiming that you are, so early in the game is scummy

Jack (again)-I do not see why you think that is the setup for this game.

I think you misread.

His method of getting conversation started allows him to call someone scummy for A. saying they would be investigated (saying its a waste), B. Saying they won't be investigated (something to hide), or C. Not saying anything (ignoring the question.)

It seems like a trap with no nonsuspicious action. The only people who would have reason to make someone else seem suspicious is mafia.

I haven't voted anyone for any of those things, and never claimed that A,B, or C was suspicious (in fact I implied that A and C were not necessarily suspicious). So how is it a trap?

You could say my vote for SIR ASPERGERS was related to C, but the vote was on account of the following switch up.

[Jack]

What posts did I make that had the purpose of finding pro town roles to kill? That is what role fishing is. How do you feel that I am hiding behind Sir cyanide?

As for the set up "conclusion"--

Oh well, probably not. But I wouldn't be overly afraid of speculation-->the point I'm making.

[Jack]

@Jack:[/b] What do you think of the reactions to your gambit?

It started discussion better than I thought. My top suspect is one of the people who responded but I'll sit and watch on that for a while.

[Jack]

@Jack, You should vote Quin, Iso him and read his posts revolving around your gambit.

They are interesting, but I'm not keen on voting since I've always had trouble distinguishing new player mafia from new player "says weird things" town.

[Jack]

That's an oddly specific guess. Any reasoning?

You haven't read the thread carefully...

[Jack]

[quote=Sir Cyanide]Yet he doesn’t jump in on the issue, but prefers to somewhat buddy up to TQO and actually encourage him to put his vote on me,[/quote]

I wanted to start a little pressure wagon.

[quote=Sir Cyanide]They cannot be considered good reasons from any imaginable point of view. Also, he did not defend me/clear up the confusion TQO was having. I find this weird.

...
However, after reading his ISO I came across this:

Spot on reasoning from Jack, basically what I was trying to explain TQO

Yet he doesn’t jump in on the issue, but prefers to somewhat buddy up to TQO and actually encourage him to put his vote on me, while I’m just trying to point out flawed game theory beliefs from TQO – something he should encourage if he was town. [/quote]

You find it weird that I didn't clear up the confusion TQO was having, when I had already made a post explaining it?

And my accusation of you "rehashing old posts" doesn't make sense? I noted that during the somewhat strange and unsure "gambit" stage you made joke posts, and then after it was less weird you came in all townie like offering an explanation even though it had already been given.

A question for you: why, when you saw that the second half of your post contradicted an earlier part, did you not remove the earlier part? It makes it seem like you are just putting together an argument instead of being sincere.

[Jack]

*reposted to make it easier to read, I keep forgetting the name needs quotes for some god forsaken reason*

Yet he doesn’t jump in on the issue, but prefers to somewhat buddy up to TQO and actually encourage him to put his vote on me,

I wanted to start a little pressure wagon.

They cannot be considered good reasons from any imaginable point of view. Also, he did not defend me/clear up the confusion TQO was having. I find this weird.

...
However, after reading his ISO I came across this:

Spot on reasoning from Jack, basically what I was trying to explain TQO

Yet he doesn’t jump in on the issue, but prefers to somewhat buddy up to TQO and actually encourage him to put his vote on me, while I’m just trying to point out flawed game theory beliefs from TQO – something he should encourage if he was town.

You find it weird that I didn't clear up the confusion TQO was having, when I had already made a post explaining it?

And my accusation of you "rehashing old posts" doesn't make sense? I noted that during the somewhat strange and unsure "gambit" stage you made joke posts, and then after it was less weird you came in all townie like offering an explanation even though it had already been given.

A question for you: why, when you saw that the second half of your post contradicted an earlier part, did you not remove the earlier part? It makes it seem like you are just putting together an argument instead of being sincere.

[Jack]

You find it weird that I didn't clear up the confusion TQO was having, when I had already made a post explaining it?

Yes, I find that very very fucking weird. When you explain something, your goal is to make the other person understand it. If the other person does not understand it, you will have to make him understand one way or another. Explaining something and then ignoring everyone who doesn't get it is anti-town, it creates confusion.

I'm fine with him having a mistaken impression. I'm more concerned with someone saying something suspicious than saying something incorrect. You think it is suspicious that I wouldn't repeat what I'd said earlier, when you were already discussing it with TQO? You implied that I made no effort to correct his assumption.

And my accusation of you "rehashing old posts" doesn't make sense?

It sure doesn't. Someone voices his stance on it ("I don't get it") 2 posts before my post addressing it which does not make it something 'old', whatever the fuck you might mean with that.

Do you think going over the game at day 2 to find out who is Mafia is 'old' too, because it started at day 1? No, things that are still going on are not 'old' in this context. If TQO doesn't get something and makes posts about it, it is not 'old' and me addressing it is not 'rehashing an old issue'.

I noted that during the somewhat strange and unsure "gambit" stage you made joke posts, and then after it was less weird you came in all townie like offering an explanation even though it had already been given.

That was a fucking gambit? Seemed more like joke-posting that was misinterpreted by 90% of all people here. The explanation I gave was an attempt to make TQO understand the issue, who still did not. I'm not sure what I dislike more, TQO crying about ethics/etiquette or your play style, but I do know what's more scummy.

But this is my point exactly. You are saying that rehashing and explaining the issue is pro town, but I don't have an issue with the rehashing. I was noting the

contrast

between rehashing and joke posting. It's a fairly basic assumption that mafia avoid posting in uncertain situations, instead posting when they feel secure. You can say that it's a weak argument if you want, I would probably post and point to the page number. It certainly isn't complete nonsense however, why would try and insist that it was?

[Jack]

I'm starting to notice that a lot of the thread lately is Jack vs. SIR CYANIDE. I'm not really decided on this: while it looks to me like I should have a read on Jack either way, I don't, and I'm leaning frustrated town on SIR CYANIDE.

It's hard to tell if someone is frustrated when they describe torrents of insults as "banter". He does object very strongly to my vote on him, but is dismissing a weak example of a basic tell as "complete nonsense" frustration? But I agree that the thread is a bit too focused right now.

I will continue watching my prime suspect, and see if quint does anything more distinctly "new player mafia".

[Jack]

I don't understand your question cyanide, what argument are you talking about?

He said that me first making a joke post and then a serious post is a 'basic tell'

No...that's wrong. Tell me why, when I accused you in what you obviously consider to be a bogus fashion, you choose to spend all your energy to arguing that the claim was "complete nonsense" rather than being curious about me? Is it your position that anyone who makes an argument you disagree with is mafia? Surely not.

[Jack]

His view that was distorted was the view that townies should want to be investigated. Him believing that does not harm the town. Why would I care more about him realizing that his argument had been invalid than in seeing what other people said about it and how he defended it?

Instead, you try to buddy up to him and encourage him to put his vote on me.

A few posts back I explained that and you said:

Fair enough.

[Jack]

What posts did I make that had the purpose of finding pro town roles to kill? That is what role fishing is. How do you feel that I am hiding behind Sir cyanide?

As for the set up "conclusion"--

Oh well, probably not. But I wouldn't be overly afraid of speculation-->the point I'm making.

@Jack: You didn't specifically role-fish, per se, however, your initial question led to subsequent fishing due to the speculation your question brings. Basically, your question breeded roletalk. And if you didn't rolefish, how did you come across your information of the set-up? I am a bit afraid of the role speculation as already you seem to have a feel of multiple roles in this game and I thought talk on it was cut off.
The hiding behind Cyan's raging is just speculation and gut feel.

I don't feel that speculation is as harmful as people make it out to be. I've seen many people accused of role fishing and they haven't turned out to be mafia at a rate greater than chance. It really only works on a tell when a newish player jumps on a hint and tries to find out if that person really has a role, and even then it isn't that solid since new players do lots of strange things. Certainly not in a normal game. In a heavily themed game it depends, speculation can be the towns savior or its downfall.

Basically the chance of a power role completely fudging it and revealing themselves is no greater than the chance of a mafioso fudging it and revealing themselves. And there's more mafia than cops. And for all you know, I am the cop

If anything, the roletalk that resulted from my comment gives us some insight into the quintastic one, which is a positive thing.

The role setup I proposed was just a vanilla setup, I wasn't actually proposing it. That was the point of the "probably not" and where I said I was just posting it to make the point that speculation wasn't really dangerous.

Now I know my big worry.

Which is what exactly?

[Jack]

@Cyan: Why is it his (Jack's) responsibility to make sure that your argument is clear?

It was not 'my' argument. TQO didn't understand something that had a general answer, not something that only I could argue about. Not to forget, Jack explained it as well, well before me. TQO still did not get it, so I tried re-explaining. Jack ignored it.

How many other people ignored it?

[Jack]

unvote:sir cyanide,vote:stranger coug

You didn't do an ISO read on me, but you are claiming to.

[Jack]

ebwop: I'm very suspicious of people who pretend like they are reading carefully and scumhunting, when they actually aren't. Mafia are always lazier about that.

[Jack]

unvote:sir cyanide,vote:stranger coug

You didn't do an ISO read on me, but you are claiming to.

If I didn't do an ISO read on you, I would not be getting on myself for missing it for so long. I consider making a mental note of something and not commenting on it until several pages later to be cheap unless you were V/LA or otherwise not in the thread. I've made quite a number of posts since the quote I made, if I'm not mistaken so I can't say I was V/LA or not in the thread.

TL;DR version: I call OMGUS.

Unvote: The Quintastic One

and demote to an

HoS
Vote: Jack

Is this you providing evidence for having done an ISO read on me? Very well.

I vote you, you vote me back and say

I'm the one

who voted OMGUS? I've had plenty of hos's and votes on me.

**********************************************

but what I found instead in an ISO read on you is something weirder on which I'm surprised I haven't commented: you predict the setup.
...
It's Day 1 and this is not a night start. Unless you're the mod's alt or you personally know the mod, any setup prediction at this point is absurd as we have zero evidence to back it up.

Now, quotes from an ISO read on me:

My guess for the role setup:

1 godfather
2 goon

1 cop
1 doctor
1 roleblocker

Oh well, probably not. But I wouldn't be overly afraid of speculation-->the point I'm making.

Now to be fair, many people misinterpreted this. In fact, it got mentioned repeatedly, to miss that before doing an ISO you would have to barely paying attention:

Jack-I doubt you are the cop, and claiming that you are, so early in the game is scummy

Jack (again)-I do not see why you think that is the setup for this game.

I think you misread.

What posts did I make that had the purpose of finding pro town roles to kill? That is what role fishing is. How do you feel that I am hiding behind Sir cyanide?

As for the set up "conclusion"--

Oh well, probably not. But I wouldn't be overly afraid of speculation-->the point I'm making.

That's an oddly specific guess. Any reasoning?

You haven't read the thread carefully...

The role setup I proposed was just a vanilla setup, I wasn't actually proposing it. That was the point of the "probably not" and where I said I was just posting it to make the point that speculation wasn't really dangerous.

And to miss it AFTER doing an ISO is implausible. You specifically stated that "you were surprised I hadn't commented on it". See above for my comments on it. You say several times that I "predicted the setup", it's very clear from these comments that I didn't.

So, you weren't reading the thread carefully to begin with, and you didn't do an ISO read. You skimmed through a couple of my posts to find something that you could act like you thought was suspicious.

[Jack]

I always thought that Jack was scum (look at my previous posts), I just did not want to risk the chance that he was cop. But now I'm willing to take that chance, for all we know there might not even be a cop.

The post where you voted my implied that you thought I was lazy mafia pretending to be scumhunting. Now you say that you've always thought I was scum, because of my "cop claim" I guess? Don't you remember how everyone was saying quintastic was really new for thinking that was a cop claim?

[Jack]

That I was looking for something specific in the ISO read is conceded and implied in my vote post, but I didn't find what I was looking for.

I said you weren't paying attention during the game, and didn't do an ISO reread. My claim was that you just ISO'd me, went through the first few posts until you could find something you could say was suspicious, and then quit your reading. I gave proof that you didn't read the rest of the ISO. But you made claims like "you never commented on this" and now "I didn't find what I was looking for" implies that you read the whole ISO.

Looking for a specific "scummy sounding" post in an ISO read, without doing due diligence, is scummy whether you conceded to it or not. I don't see where you conceded to it anyway:

unvote:sir cyanide,vote:stranger coug

You didn't do an ISO read on me, but you are claiming to.

If I didn't do an ISO read on you, I would not be getting on myself for missing it for so long. I consider making a mental note of something and not commenting on it until several pages later to be cheap unless you were V/LA or otherwise not in the thread. I've made quite a number of posts since the quote I made, if I'm not mistaken so I can't say I was V/LA or not in the thread.

TL;DR version: I call OMGUS.

Unvote: The Quintastic One

and demote to an

HoS
Vote: Jack

What this seems to say is that you wouldn't have commented on something from a few pages back unless you were V/LA. And that if you hadn't really done an ISO read you wouldn't be getting on yourself for missing that post.

I understand that you're not giving it serious support, but why the hell did you post a setup theory anyway?

Are you not reading the posts even now that I went through and picked them out for you?

Ironically, this is the best defense you could have given.

[Jack]

Then again, I shouldn't be surprised. A guy borderline claims cop of all roles and the town turns on him, so me claiming townie (I do have an ability but I don't think I should reveal it unless I'm actually in need of a true claim) shouldn't surprise me that people still think I'm scum. lol. What right do I have after all to think I could be cleared when the hypothetical town cop himself can't get away with an early claim? lol.

Pick me false early claiming cop-sir! lol.

It shouldn't surprise you...

[Jack]

That my first initial response, you should be smart enough to look back and see my reasonings as to why I was convinced later on.

So why don't you understand their response? I remember the post where you said you were convinced, it was after my 2nd post where I said something like "who seriously wants to be investigated?". If you didn't believe me after the first post, why don't you understand them not believing me after the 2nd post?

Unless of course you're encouraging me to believe you're no longer to be considered the cop, then you'd pretty much be the most scummy and worthy of my vote. To be honest, the fact that I still think you're a cop is pretty much your soul saving grace at this point.

If you didn't think I was the cop you would put me at lynch -1, is that what you're saying?

[Jack]

That my first initial response, you should be smart enough to look back and see my reasonings as to why I was convinced later on.

Unless of course you're encouraging me to believe you're no longer to be considered the cop, then you'd pretty much be the most scummy and worthy of my vote. To be honest, the fact that I still think you're a cop is pretty much your soul saving grace at this point.

WHAT? Why? You've never mentioned you find Jack scummy at any point.

I'm reading this as "I want to vote Jack because it looks like he can be lynched, but I'm stuck because I've been saying I think he's the cop".

[Jack]

Nice find TB...I think right now this thread needs TQO to come back.

[Jack]

I already said that I, not you, am the one that did not make a comment.

You're right, I did misread that part. You said "I'm surprised

I

haven't commented", which is a weird thing to say.

Oops—I think it was the post of mine before that. The first post where I talk about the setup speculation.

Which one is that?

If I were not reading, I would not have typed "I understand that you're not giving it serious support". Now answer me.

I have answered the question, before you even asked, I answered it when I first posted the speculation.

The role setup I proposed was just a vanilla setup, I wasn't actually proposing it. That was the point of the "probably not" and where I said

I was just posting it to make the point that speculation wasn't really dangerous.

I still think you didn't read the thread carefully or do much of an ISO read, but given TQO's latest posts and the fact that I myself misread one of the wackier things you said I'll

unvote:StrangerCoug

I could have sworn that he made a post that indicated that he seemed to know that there was a doc that would protect the cop tonight. Must have been someone else that said that.

That was TQO.

f you were a Mafia role cop, would you be led to believe that power roles exist on the town side also? I would.

This isn't a mountainous game, yes? I already said it was a vanilla setup.

[Jack]

TQO, you never answered this:

Unless of course you're encouraging me to believe you're no longer to be considered the cop, then you'd pretty much be the most scummy and worthy of my vote. To be honest, the fact that I still think you're a cop is pretty much your soul saving grace at this point.

Why do you suddenly think I'm the most scummy if I'm no longer to be considered the cop?

[Jack]

You know, I think I believe TQO.

[Jack]

Please note in the above post all he does is A) repeat things he has already said, B) Claim for god only knows what reason and C) Appeal to emotion.

He's playing antitown as all hell and he is refusing to scumhunt, instead all he does is place OMGUS (and he admits its OMGUS as well) votes.

I'm quite happy with where my vote is.

Vote:TheButtonmen

You just sound frustrated that the easy target isn't being lynched.

[Jack]

TQO-what Is the point of hinting at your role if it is "not so powerful", the town will either:

1.not believe you (goes with any power role)

2.not care, if it isn't so powerful then I doubt it will have any effect on the town unless it helps them in some way and based on the description you gave it doesn't.

But you could have a power that you haven't hinted about yet.

And sir cyanide-was that post pointed at me or TQO? And try to calm down

He essentially claimed a specific role already. This post seems like you could be trying to draw more information out of him.

[Jack]

Zang is starting to look pretty bad.

[Jack]

Huh, your going out of your way to be push and similtaniously distance yourself from the wagon, yet the only reason for that would be already knowing the outcome.

Tldr: This posts seems really scummy.

The only reason for you to think zang's post is scummy is if you think TQO is innocent, and yet you are voting him.

[Jack]

Can we please lynch thebuttonmen? He makes careless accusations and ignores all the replies to them in favor of pursuing an easy target (TQO).

[Jack]

fos:cruelty

For not voting.

StrangerCoug, "townie" is very often used to mean "town aligned".

[Jack]

TQO-your overview is informative but I do not see what the point of it was. Could you explain this?

Was it really just to show your thoughts of what's been going on while rereading?

If so why bother posting it (because it did just sound like a narrative of what's been happening throught the game)?

What do you mean by "just"?

[Jack]

wow tqo. That long post gives a huge insight to your thinking and shows that you weren't just randomly voting. Every decision had a good reason behind it.

unvote

I'd like to see the same from zang. Zang switched votes a ton early on and still hasn't given great reasons for it. He needs to make a post similar to tqo's to get himself off my suspect list.

vote: zang

I forgot to mention I'd support a Vivi57 wagon. Because she's useless.

If the buttonman turns up scum I'd put money on her being scum too. She's popping in just to throw poor votes on whoever is most likely to be lynched after tbm. Which is actually somewhat typical new mafia play.

[Jack]

Not much movement.

I think we should lynch TBM. As in, we need need 2 more votes.

[Jack]

Cruelty, TBM, and ViVi are the mafia, calling it now.

[Jack]

Something about TheButtonmen's pending lynch seems false, probably that I don't see a real case on him.

What feels off to me is Cruelties random jumping on board, ViVi's random passionate defense, and TBM's lackadaisical L-1 posting. I don't really know what to make of it besides lumping them together in the scum pile. I'll run on that for now.

[Jack]

Something about TheButtonmen's pending lynch seems false, probably that I don't see a real case on him.

What feels off to me is Cruelties random jumping on board, ViVi's random passionate defense, and TBM's lackadaisical L-1 posting.

Would you prefer panic, capital letters, appeals to emotion and lots of punctiation?

I'm not going to stop playing or change my mind because people are bandwagoning me, I still stand by the fact that there was too much role fishing, TQO has changed their story multiple times and that TQO lied. Thus I'm going to keep pushing for their lynch.

Why would I prefer that?

Scum are often more fatalistic.

ViVi's language: "ridiculous" "really consistent" "perfectly legitimate" is passionate. Which is odd because it seems like she just pops into the thread to defend you or vote for whoever is on the next biggest wagon besides you.

Was this a joke or are you serious? If serious... wha?

Why not?


Out of curiosity, how many people find Cruelty suspicious?

[Jack]

@AGar:

Chainsaw refrence? Also in-game ISO's work, you can't profile ISO though.

@Jack:

Hurray for ignoring everything I said and just making a random assertion! Do you even have a reason for voting me other then all the cool kids are? Your only stated reason is that I was trying to force an easy lynch which is a quite ironic statment considering I was leading in votes when you made it and switched to me.

I didn't ignore everything you said. I responded to everything but your statements about TQO.

I stated three reasons for voting you.

1) you sounded frustrated that the easy townie lynch wasn't going through. I have as mafia been quite frustrated when someone is acting really suspicious and they don't get lynched.

2) in ISO 40:

Huh, your going out of your way to be push and similtaniously distance yourself from the wagon, yet the only reason for that would be already knowing the outcome.

Tldr: This posts seems really scummy.

The only reason for you to think zang's post is scummy is if you think TQO is innocent, and yet you are voting him.

Your accusation of zang assumes that TQO is innocent (you are accusing zang of trying to get a townie lynched, but not wanting to be the one to drive the wagon because he knows TQO will turn up town). But you say you think TQO is guilty.

3) After I and a few other people accused you, you ignored it and went after TQO.

[Jack]

He's giving his opinion of scumminess. He said "I do not have good reason to believe".

If a cop claims to be sane and accuses someone of being guilty, and that person claims sane cop and accuses the first person of being guilty, it is logically possible that they are both town.

But it wouldn't make perfect sense, and someone making the assumption that they weren't both town wouldn't be failing at logic.

[Jack]

Vote:cruelty

His awkward joining of the wagon is scummier than zang's hammer.

StrangerCoug is working back up my list too.

[Jack]

Paltry was the most townie player yesterday. Can't conclude anything from his death, it was just a good choice.

Cruelty is my top pick, I shy away from zang because new players have the habit of being scummy, then really scummy, then ultra scummy, then very innocent looking.

[Jack]

Jack-basically, his biggest mistake was his cop claim, he had no reason for it and I don't think he ever did explain why he did do it.

Since it's moved beyond the useful now, I'll state the obvious: it was a bit of a joke to get some discussion started. I often do this. The random vote stage annoys me. I very carefully

didn't

claim cop btw. You can call it a soft claim, but what cop in their right mind soft claims page one? That isn't even wifom.

[Jack]

I would like to lynch cruelty. Not feeling the urge to do anything else, like argue or defend myself or look for other suspects.

[Jack]

I'm not interested in convincing anybody at the moment.

[Jack]

Yeh ok.

Vote: Jack

Why is this?

[Jack]

ok, I looked over todays comments and I think I see where this is heading. I was lynched for it as town in another game recently.

On mafiascum there is a set of rules that townies are supposed to play by. When they don't, they are being antitown and they get voted or lynched. As a matter of principle I disagree strongly with this. As townie you are free. Freedom is the quality possessed by a townie. The can look for scum with complete sincerity. They can say what they are thinking. Scum cannot.

Or at least that's how it should be. Instead as town, you have to constantly

fake

being a "mafiascum.net townie". Which is precisely what the mafia are trying to fake. So you have to fill the game with power roles to let the town catch the mafia. Because we handicap the town to a huge degree by demanding that the fake it.

If I as townie can't honestly say "I'm not interested in convincing anybody", then I have to LIE about it, give my reasons even though I don't want to (faking it), or just not say things like "stranger coug is climbing up my scum ladder" (A lie of omission).

Well, I was never big on playing that way, even though I have for the most part. I don't want to spoil the game for the town by getting myself lynched. But I've lost interest in it.

So don't take it as me trolling or "not helping". I'm not trying to be a pain, I'm just being sincere.

[Jack]

I can play that way just fine: "StrangeCoug moved up my scum list because I find his persistence in pushing the zang wagon fakey. He looks more like mafia setting himself up on a scummy-townie lynch then town actually looking for mafia".

So if I choose not to, do you think that makes me scummy?

There isn't any point in playing the game if all you do is act in a fake townie way and vote for people when they don't act in a fake townie win. And the argument in favor of it is self defeating, since voting people for being "anti town" is anti-town.

Why don't you get a gut feel for people and try and find mafia, rather than going off heuristics? It is better to be a man than a robot.

[Jack]

Jack, don't resign to being helpless. You make me want to consider putting you in a rope instead of the obvscum Zang and SIR CYANIDE.

Scummy comment. Zang is not obvscum, people always overpursue the guy who hammered a townie. Why would you consider lynching me based on my comment there?

[Jack]

To be clear, I'm going to go through the thread and hunt down some suspects. I'm going to be vague when my feelings are vague though for example.

I did an ISO read on coug, saw some scummy things that I remembered and some townie things that I didn't.

His interaction with TQO had a bit of weirdness too it, but I wasn't sure what to make of it exactly.

[Jack]

Or at least that's how it should be. Instead as town, you have to constantly fake being a "mafiascum.net townie". Which is precisely what the mafia are trying to fake. So you have to fill the game with power roles to let the town catch the mafia. Because we handicap the town to a huge degree by demanding that the fake it.

well you have to convince people that you are town, it does not matter if you are or not, that is how the game goes. And if you do not like it then do not play the game.

It would be 10x easier to find mafia if everyone posted their thoughts un-edited or revised, and just threw out the backs and forths stream of consciousness style. Much harder for the mafia to fake, anyone can fake the other stuff.

I also find the people who do that way easier to read as town. They are often obv town, but get lynched for it.

This is why the games are packed full of power roles. But perhaps this is more of a mafia discussion topic.

Anyway, I'll reread zang soon out of fairness to coug. I did find him scummy at one point. ->one more comment, you can see how much harder it would be for mafia to remember everything they said if it wasn't genuine and they had to write naturally rather than in prose?

[Jack]

OK, I did a skim reread on everyone but TQO. No cases just gut feels.

Zang probably is scum. I lost sight of him when I was going for tbm-vivi-cruelty. Cruelty is probably the other. I'm getting strong town reads from most of the rest, except for Coug and ConfidAnon. Fat tony seems fine but who knows.

Will go through more and figure who the best lynch is later.

[Jack]

@coug: yeah, that's why I mentioned fat tony

@zang: cause he posts a lot and I had a newb town read

[Jack]

A few people are mentioning Crueltyscum, whats the case there?

He came in near the end of day one with no vote, and a little bit that would let him go either way on TQO. Never said much about finding TBM suspicious, but jumped on his wagon very awkwardly (gut feel). Said it was a good lynch because nothing happens day 1 and a mislynch would give us tons of information. But today he hasn't posted a lot or used any of that information.

[Jack]

I do think TQO is ok. The rant thing was cause I just got lynched in another game because of silly "yeh ok" type votes.

The scummy thing I've done is waffle on zang, that looks bad if he flips mafia. But I had just moved him to townie mentally while I was going with tbm-vivi-cruelty and didn't check up on him again when tbm turned out town.

[Jack]

The town is fine. Cruelty is probably mafia and zang has a good chance too. It's only after that that it gets murky.

[Jack]

I would really like to lynch cruelty. Close to saying I won't vote for anyone else.

[Jack]

Zang - (4) - StrangerCoug, Vivi57, Fat_Tony, cruelty
Jack - (1) - Sir Cyanide

Any of you willing to vote cruelty?

[Jack]

I am

So why aren't you? And why are you willing to? You haven't mentioned Cruelty much until now..

It's pretty much zang or cruelty at this point. Probably going to be zang, unless our replacements think different.

[Jack]

Below the quick reply box you can select someone's name instead of "all users" and hit go.

[Jack]

zang and coug I can see being scum together. Don't agree about sir cyanide. But I considered switching from TBM to cruelty yesterday and didn't which I'm kicking myself over.

[Jack]

EBWOP - actually, no, what i typed originally was right. I take your point that scummy players don't tend to be NKed

sans

vig, but I intended to say what I said.

However, you've now given scum a new gambit, whereby they can NK cruelty and cast suspicion of a vig.

Congratulations, Coug, you just made my scumlist.

What the heck?

I'm actually dropping Coug from my scum list. He can be very scummy as town.

[Jack]

The only way you can give scum ideas is if you aren't scum.

But I dropped him off my list because of another game.

[Jack]

I'm feeling that zang will flip scum. His "congratulations on a mislynch well done" feels fakey, like he said it because he saw how TBM's was believed.

Jack, if Coug can be scummy as town, what would he look like as scum?

We enter null tell territory here.

[Jack]

If you think he's scum, he's probably the doctor... I guess.

Jack

. Your posthammer exchange in which you marked Coug as town is now looking very suspicious. You gave no real reason for your change of mind (other than "meta?"), and couldn't tell me what, if anything, would make you think scum on him.

I was scum in another game and got him lynched as a townie in lylo. He was very suspicious. When you have a gut scum feel on someone, them having a scummy meta nullifies it.

Jack trying to make himself valuable to the town by "correctly predicting" that Coug was town is dodgy as hell, and I already thought he was scummy, so this reinforces it.

Really? What a great plan that is. I didn't say he was town either, so...

Fat tony, can you explain your "cruelty and jack as mafia partners" theory to me?

Cruelty should be the lynch today.

[Jack]

But Jack - surely that should've set your suspicion on him to "null" rather than "town"?

Yesterday:

I'm actually dropping Coug from my scum list. He can be very scummy as town.

We enter null tell territory here.

[Jack]

I don't see a massclaim helping us. We have two neighbors, a doctor and a watcher down. I don't think it'll narrow down our choices that much.

[Jack]

Leafsnail who are your suspects now?

[Jack]

There's weirdly little to do this game. 7 alive, probably three scum, 4 town.I know I'm town. Jazzmyn replaced in and voted cruelty when she could have voted zang. That makes her town in my eyes. I've had a town read on Zhero all game.

That only leaves cruelty, fat_tony, vivi, and leafsnail. 3/4 are scum. I was going to put vivi in the town pile and post the other three as my scumlist but I read her in ISO and like it a lot less.

[Jack]

Did a little rereading.

million dollar question.

I'd love to say TQO but he's too scummy to be for real.

I think scum is somewhere in

vivi,

SC, jack and agar. Need to re-read day 1 though.

He has vivi as one of the scum.

With regards to Zang I keep changing my mind. On the one hand, yeah he's scummy, but on the other hand his scumminess is barely believable. The problem is (much like TQO) that I don't really have a bad gut vibe from him - I can see his posts coming from newb town with a genuine desire to help and a naive propensity to find the scummiest way he possibly can to contribute.

Having said that, I'll get behind a Zang lynch if the majority want, I'm not going to push his wagon because I'm honestly not completely sold on his guilt (intellectually I'm aware the evidence is stacking up but my head has been wrong lately).

Vivi, as others have said has been next to useless (8 posts, no real info whatsoever). The more I re-read your posts the less I like you, I note specifically your attack on the TBM wagon (Vivi iso 7) and the convenient mini-assault on Zang (iso posts 4-8). The lack of posting makes a read difficult but I get a bad gut vibe, so

vote: Vivi

.

Big discussion of how he is unsure about and TQO, he gives all the reasons about why it's hard to tell new players alignment. But when it comes to vivi there is no talk about new players--he's done an ISO and finds many things suspicious. Bad gut vibe. Evidence.

For those curious, I was

voting Vivi in order to try to provoke some activity out of her

, which seems to have worked for now, so

unvote, vote jack

. I think that ties 3 people at three votes.

Complete reversal--Now the vote on Vivi was just to provoke some activity out of her. He voted her in 516 and unvoted in 525, after one post.

Incidentally vivi you need to step up your game. You're not involved, you're basically repeating points others have made (the above is a good example, you're just rewording Tony) and you're posting about once every 3 days. I suspect you're probably newbscum trying to avoid making errors, but what you're doing is very, very close to active lurking.

Now all the things he found very scummy about her, he has changed to mildly chastising her for doing. Compare to his post above where he talks about his ISO of her.

This last quote is what prodded me to reread and look at their connection. The "newbscum" bit, when "newbtown" is what makes sense in context stands out for me, because I recently made a very similar scumslip in a game (now finished). I referred to several lurkers I'd called suspicious as "newbtown" lurkers.

Vivi's posts today look like weak distancing from cruelty.

[Jack]

It's not activity we need, it's just down to a few people who need to decide who they are voting for.

Vote:Cruelty

[Jack]

We aren't doing anything with the time. Cruelty was at l-1 yesterday, so it's not like the evidence isn't there.

[Jack]

Leaf, do you think Zhero is scum with cruelty?

[Jack]

This is why you are scum I think.

You talk about zero "scumslipping"; you think he is scum. But you are criticizing him for holding off his vote on cruelty (who you must then think is town, since you think he isn't bussing). But given that this is lylo, there's no real reason for him to hold off his vote if cruelty is town is there? They win if a townie is lynched, it doesn't matter how bad he looks.

[Jack]

Yes, jack, but if he does it in a scummy way, whichever townie is on his wagon (if there is one) will unvote. Thus he needs to know his vote is approved of before voting.

He could just say something like this:

After going back over the thread, I'm leaning towards Cruelty as my top suspect. His question (what the most important part of the game was) seemed to go nowhere, he talks about developing more information later with no followup, and, of course, his odd bandwagon hop.

Vote: Cruelty

Which is what he said yesterday. In a situation where it was quite likely that the vote would be looked back on if he was mafia and cruelty was town, as per your theory. It is really, really not difficult to vote someone you've suspected all along.

I'm having a similar problem here as I was with Jazz. You're saying he's your strongest read, which is fine for a freelynch. However, you haven't said that he's scum, or even that you think he's scum. You seem reluctant to commit either way.

This whole line of argument is silly and wrong:

Still think Cruelty is scum,

[Jack]

Well, I guess I know who to vig tonight.

[Jack]

Rough game. Vivi was the only one I suspected from that group. Sir Cyanide and Zhero seemed town to me.

Not ashamed of lynching cruelty though

[Jack]

BTW, I think Jack's point against Sir Cyanide on page 3 was a good one.

Sweet, I forgot about that. In the end I was stuck on cruelty though, and pegged zhero and jazzmyn as town because they were voting him over zang, and leaf as scum for supporting him. Ah well.

Keep in mind their power roles didn't really help them that much. Thoughts? Should I have added a vig to the setup? This is my first game modding so I am still figuring out how to setup games. Any suggestions for future games I moderate?

I thank you all for playing! It was very fun modding this game!

Masons instead of neighbors would have been nice I think. And maybe ditching the mafia jailkeeper, although it looks like they wasted that on me both nights.