Teleportation Mafia Universe ONE (MAFIA A WINS!)

[Fishythefish]

Day 1 Vote Count

CSL ( 1 ) Rhinox
DrippingGoofball ( 5 ) mykonian Albert B. Rampage popsofctown farside22 fishythefish
elvis_knits ( 0 )
evilsnail ( 0 )
farside22 ( 0 )
fishythefish ( 0 )
flareonage ( 0 )
gayle ( 0 )
Albert B. Rampage ( 2 ) Raskol elvis_knits
mykonian ( 3 ) flareonage plum DrippingGoofball
ojanen ( 0 )
plum ( 0 )
popsofctown ( 1 ) gayle
Raskol ( 2 ) evilsnail ojanen
Rhinox ( 0 )
Not Voting ( 1 ) CSL
Total Votes ( 15 )

With 15 alive, 8 needed to lynch.
Deadline: 2/8 11am

I like the DGB wagon best:
DGB on myk’s question is bad. If she finds the question, and responses, serious scumtells, why this, after the question and some responses:

Who do you suspect, DGB? Why are you not voting?

No one, that should answer both questions.

@ mykonian You're asking for my scumtells? How the heck should I know. I'm different in every game. Every game has a rhythm, and an atmosphere.

If the question and the answerers are scummy, why didn’t you suspect anyone?

After she does say that people who answered are scum (208), she fails to notice 2 of the 3 players who answered it (farside, me). farside immediately points this out (212). DGB ignores this for a long time, which seems very odd – she is now using it as a serious argument, so why on earth wouldn’t she look at the responses to the question until they were shoved in her face for a third time?

This inconsistent pushing of a scumtell doesn’t look like a serious attempt to work out who the scum are – more like a convenient reason for votes/suspicions.

I don’t like her accusation of an ABR/myk scumteam based on the latter’s wanting one of ABR/DGB teleported away. It’s very much against scum-with-ABR myk's interests to have ABR teleported away, so this makes little sense. Feels like she just wants to sling dirt at myk. Also produces a very bad argument for her initial vote – clearly not reading myk’s thoughts on CSL before voting him over them – this at a time when myk was under some pressure.

DGB’s timeline on myk:
- Jumps on wagon as fourth vote after Plum finds myk’s slip
- Moves off, briefly, to ABR
- Revotes with crappy reasoning
This last bit really feels like an attempt to push forward an otherwise faltering wagon.

unvote, vote: DGB

[mykonian]

I have once played with DGB in a large themed game. Don't remember much of it, so all I have said is mostly what I have heard or read elsewhere. She is known to play different. I don't know how effective. But that doesn't excuse her a bit for continiously searching scum in my posts. I don't think we have often agreed, DGB chooses everytime the opposite side of the argument, and then repeatedly calls me scum. I think on purpose.

I see a difference between: I play logically as scum and I miss scumtells of my partner when they are in danger are two different things IMO. Don't you? Further your reluctance to answer (and that is not a new point) was what I expected from scum. Farside, I don't think your and Fishy's answer where the same.

And you really didn't think I was going to analyze my own answer, right?

mod, can we have a votecount?

done

PS: farside, are you mad at me that I can't see you are town?

[farside22]

mod, can we have a votecount?

PS: farside, are you mad at me that I can't see you are town?

Why don't you see me as town?

[mykonian]

sorry, you misunderstand me.

I had the feeling the previous series of posts are because you think I am to stupid or scum to see you are town. TBH, after that answer (which had the positive being the first, the negative the reluctancy), the only thing that really stood out is your taking sides for ABR.

So I don't know what you are. Though the previous posts (see previous alinea) felt towny.

[farside22]

sorry, you misunderstand me.

I had the feeling the previous series of posts are because you think I am to stupid or scum to see you are town. TBH, after that answer (which had the positive being the first, the negative the reluctancy), the only thing that really stood out is your taking sides for ABR.

So I don't know what you are. Though the previous posts (see previous alinea) felt towny.

I think I want to cry.
Did you take sides with ABR at one point or did I misread something DGB stated about you?
I tore apart your views on how to tell you were scum and you didn't respond.
I don't agree that fishy is town.
ABR is and can be an UTR player. I see him come out more when he's town and has a valid case.
Right now I'm not impressed tbh but I can't shake my feeling of DGB and her play this game. Call it a cross roads.
Also I'm starting to feel that ABR could be just basing a lot of this on personal feeling over actually seeing DGB as scum.
Where as I see DGB being more all over the place then she typically is.

[Plum]

I had court again today . . . but my school's going on to the county semifinals so I should be back with a big reread tomorrow or Thursday night, will see what I can get done tonight. Sorry about the absence, again.

[popsofctown]

Plum's avvie is intriguing.

[evilsnail]

ABR and DGB seem to be engaged in some sort of personal battle here, which doesn't make it easier to judge their alignment.

That said, I'm starting to see the case on DGB much more than the case on ABR. I haven't really seen anything in ABR's play to worry me unduly. He wasn't contributing much early on, but there are plenty of people who play like that even as town. For DGB, I think the way she has pushed the scum tell issue is at least a tell. She's been inconsistent about it and the logic of it doesn't add up.

I still agree with my original assessment of elvis_knits. Her frustration seems quite genuine and I don't think the case on her was ever really solid. I think someone asked at some point why I think I her town. Well, she spotted the same Raskol tell I did and I've pretty much found myself agreeing with her reasoning throughout the thread (which is usually a good sign).

Here is my little scumlist atm:

DGB - I haven't really found myself agreeing with her much. Either she's scum or our gut feelings are totally different. In addition, the way she continues to read way too much into the scum tell question. This (and her inconsistency in it) is definitely a point against her.
Raskol - Still think he's scummy, but I thought the way he backed off elvis_knits was more likely to be a townie move.
Fishythefish - I don't know, getting a bad gut feeling from his posts. He was very wishy-washy about a supposed slip by myko at some point and his initial Gayle vote was a bit off. Mostly this is gut, though.

[Fishythefish]

Fishythefish - I don't know, getting a bad gut feeling from his posts. He was very wishy-washy about a supposed slip by myko at some point and his initial Gayle vote was a bit off. Mostly this is gut, though.

There are clearly two explanations for myk's slip - it was a scumslip or an alignment neutral slip. To entertain them both as possibilities isn't "wishy-washy". I stated my conclusion - that I view it as a decent point against myk - and I don't really see how I could have been more concrete.

What do you find off about my Gayle vote? I've got something to say on this when you've answered.

[elvis_knits]

Plum's avvie is intriguing.

Hello Mr. Active Lurker!

Please comment on your curious relationship with DGB. Farside made a good comment about you defending DGB and then switching to voting her when people called you on it.

Then when I said anything about wanting ABR dead, you said that I should stop trying to direct attention away from my scum buddy, DGB. It was a little bit the pot calling the kettle black, wouldn't you say, hm? I'm not convinced DGB is scum, but if she is, you are definitely her buddy. This odd interaction between the two of you, makes me more suspicious of DGB than I was before. You went from defending her, to cutting her loose and trying to connect her to me.

[elvis_knits]

fishy, this is your gayle vote, where you piggy-back onto a pops post that I don't even like.

And yeah,

unvote, vote: Gayle.

For reasons, see the excellent post 92.

Pops in

purple

red

let's keep purple for zoraster

Do you think the strategy discussion is delaying scumhunting? It can be quite the springboard.

Strategy discussion is better than no discussion. What exactly are you advocating here gayle? Because you sure haven't presented an alternate direction for the town.

I think that continuing discussing strategy is pointless. Seems to me that the teleporters will decide for themselves on what to do.

Without reading the thread? They can see every point that is brought up and make a better decision

You are right in that it is better than discussing nothing, but it feels like the game still hasn't begun because we haven't decided on a strategy. You say that it can be quite the springboard, but I think it will just lead to someone being accused as scum for liking one strategy over another.

Yaaaay! Slippery slope fallacy! FUN! Where's my sled, Hobbes?

I'm sure someone with say that is fine, but I'd rather not go down that route.

Hopefully someone will say it's okay to discuss something and accept the spine-chilling risk that someone, somewhere will form a fallacious argument against a player.

As for an alternative direction, I'd prefer if the strategy discussion hadn't interrupted the rvs.

......this is a joke right? This has to be a joke. As if the strategy discussion created a post restriction that cut off random vote posts anyway.

what are your scumtells when you are scum?

I've never been scum, so I wouldn't know.

I find many of pops comments to be talking down to be disingenuous. He is twisting gayle's words. She says she wished we had done the usual RVS and says she is suggesting "the strategy discussion created a post restriction that cut off random vote posts." That is a huge leap on pops part, to the point that he is putting words in her mouth. This is probably why people went batshit about gayle's rvs comment -- because pops blew it out of proportion.

And fishy calls this excellent and uses it as his reason to vote gayle. No matter how much I dislike pops post here, I dislike somebody calling it excellent even more. Because I give people a little more leeway in saying stupid stuff if it's their own idea -- we all have moments of being wrong. But to AGREE with somebody else's lame ideas is harder for me to believe. It also avoid responsibility for having their own reason -- they can blame it on the other guy and his stupid reasoning. I think it's a way to avoid blame.

[evilsnail]

There are clearly two explanations for myk's slip - it was a scumslip or an alignment neutral slip. To entertain them both as possibilities isn't "wishy-washy". I stated my conclusion - that I view it as a decent point against myk - and I don't really see how I could have been more concrete.

Logically then the conclusion should that it was a null tell. Instead, you appeared to entertain both options, as if giving yourself the option of drawing both conclusions (e.g. by at a later date going "on closer inspection, it seems more likely to be a scum slip").

What do you find off about my Gayle vote? I've got something to say on this when you've answered.

You seemed to vote her for wanting to cut off strategy discussion. Sure, this is hardly a pro-town strategy, but not one that is significantly more likely to be pushed by scum, IMO. So, this vote could have been scum trying to create suspicion where there needn't be any. As I said, though, most of this is a gut feeling.

[mykonian]

There are clearly two explanations for myk's slip - it was a scumslip or an alignment neutral slip. To entertain them both as possibilities isn't "wishy-washy". I stated my conclusion - that I view it as a decent point against myk - and I don't really see how I could have been more concrete.

Logically then the conclusion should that it was a null tell.

Instead, you appeared to entertain both options, as if giving yourself the option of drawing both conclusions (e.g. by at a later date going "on closer inspection, it seems more likely to be a scum slip").

No, that makes no sense. Nothing tells you both explanations are just as likely. If you analyse the situation, using both explanations, and you look at the likelyhood of these explanations, then you can truly say how effective an argument based on this situation is.

The goal of such a post is to make an opinion about a certain event, not to argue for a lynch. You'll get as an answer how likely someone is scum, after looking at arguments that are in favor and against that person, not a post that argues only in favor of one point.

To call this wishy-washy is easy: Didn't he use arguments from both sides? This is wrong, because you are neglecting the goal of the post, which is not to argue for a lynch, but to clear up a situation, making it orderly and then getting a conclusion from it. This conclusion may be used later in an argument to argue for a lynch.

I'll try to look up the english words for the different types of text.

[Fishythefish]

And fishy calls this excellent and uses it as his reason to vote gayle. No matter how much I dislike pops post here, I dislike somebody calling it excellent even more. Because I give people a little more leeway in saying stupid stuff if it's their own idea -- we all have moments of being wrong. But to AGREE with somebody else's lame ideas is harder for me to believe. It also avoid responsibility for having their own reason -- they can blame it on the other guy and his stupid reasoning. I think it's a way to avoid blame.

OK. I disagree with you that pops post was bad - Gayle's points against the strategy discussion were bad ones. I'd also remind when I made this vote - very early in the game and, contrary to what you said a little while ago, as the first vote in this bandwagon (not the fourth). I think that, at the time, there wasn't any better reason to vote for anyone.
The Gayle bandwagon sunk for a good reason - the action it was based on was early and not a brilliant scumtell, and Gayle hasn't looked like scum since then. But I don't think there's anything wrong with my part in it.

@snail: if someone does something that may be because they are scum, or may be for alignment neutral reasons, that isn't a null tell. Because it's more likely to come from scum than town.

[elvis_knits]

I would have a problem with you copycatting pops reason, even if I thought pops had a good reason. Why weren't you thinking for yourself?

[mykonian]

plea and consideration, google gives.

[Fishythefish]

I would have a problem with you copycatting pops reason, even if I thought pops had a good reason. Why weren't you thinking for yourself?

My post was about the 30th post of the game proper. pops's was about the 20th. I thought he had made the best point that was around in those posts, and made it well. Why shouldn't I use that as a reason to vote?

[Albert B. Rampage]

I wouldn't bother with anything elvis knits has to say, she's likely scumbuddy with dgb.

[evilsnail]

No, that makes no sense. Nothing tells you both explanations are just as likely. If you analyse the situation, using both explanations, and you look at the likelyhood of these explanations, then you can truly say how effective an argument based on this situation is.

Obviously it is linked to likelihood. I realise that. That's just a matter of logic. But there was no assessment of likelihood in his post. That leaves his conclusions open to manipulation. It doesn't matter how informative his post was. That very focus on information and listing arguments for both points of view without a clear assessment of the consequences is what makes it scummy.

[mykonian]

ok, we disagree.

[elvis_knits]

I would have a problem with you copycatting pops reason, even if I thought pops had a good reason. Why weren't you thinking for yourself?

My post was about the 30th post of the game proper. pops's was about the 20th. I thought he had made the best point that was around in those posts, and made it well. Why shouldn't I use that as a reason to vote?

It's just a lack of original thought that can indicate scum.

[elvis_knits]

I wouldn't bother with anything elvis knits has to say, she's likely scumbuddy with dgb.

Hush

[farside22]

@EK: What is your current view on DGB? Why did you chance your stance from maybe there is a link with pops and DGB to calling pops on that post I refered to?

[Gayle]

Taking a look at the DGB Wagon.
-Myko votes DGB for "fabricating evidence", after DGB attacks him.
-ABR votes DGB for meta reasons and then comes up with more reasons later.
-pops votes DGB for meta, after saying he prefers an Elvis lynch.

I can understand farside and fishy's votes, but not these three.

As annoying as DGB's play might be, I think she is town, as evidenced by her outright refusal to change the way she plays no matter how scummy anyone might find it.

I think we should lynch pops or abr. Pops because of this and this, and ABR because he is not doing anything but tunneling DGB. I have consulted my magic eight ball, and it confirms that I am right on both counts.

[elvis_knits]

@EK: What is your current view on DGB? Why did you chance your stance from maybe there is a link with pops and DGB to calling pops on that post I refered to?

It was the thing you brought up about pops treatment of dgb... first defending and then voting her when called on it. Remember I was like "maybe." That got me thinking and I didn't like when pops tried to say that I was dgb's scum buddy, or the way he is posting now without content (active lurking). The whole theory seems a lot more plausable to me.

I still do not buy into the meta reasons on dgb, or basically anything abr has said. But I have never liked her evilsnail vote and persistence in calling him scum. Her reasoning is he answered myko's question, and was too wordy or something? B.S. That seems like a horrible reason to think someone is scum.

One other thing is that throughout our posting yesterday (you, me, dgb, abr) I felt like I was making better defense posts for her than she was... which made me feel like maybe I shouldn't be making them. If she can't think of the correct arguments to fight for herself... maybe that's because she really is guilty.

Anyway... that's my thoughts on the issue.