Newbie 922: Day 3

[BridgesAndBaloons]

@RayFrost and Panacea answering the question about LYLO directed at Lawls:

You realize you're telling the scum exactly who not to nightkill.

Votecount
Lawls - 4 (Elementary Fermion, Cojin, Acosmist, havingfitz)
Acosmist - 1 (Lawls)
Cojin - 1 (RayFrost)

Not Voting - 2 (Panacea, Nachomamma8)

With 9 alive, it's 5 to lynch

[RayFrost]

@RayFrost and Panacea answering the question about LYLO directed at Lawls:

You realize you're telling the scum exactly who not to nightkill.

Huh?

I hadn't considered that.

Sorry ^.^"

[BridgesAndBaloons]

I dislike the disclaimer in the first part of this, especially considering he didn't keep the promise

That was actually him failing to quote

me

. The reason I didn't repost it was because I thought it came out coherent. However most of my post became moot when I realized how much IndependentJohn had been (and was still) lurking.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

I find cojin slightly scummier since his attack on lawls was opportunistic (lawls has been a focus), and I have played with both of them as town with lawls actually being more pro-town this game and cojin being less pro-town.

This is just a post for me to clarify the game.

Cojin and Lawls have both been lurking . . . and RayFrost considers Cojin scummier of the two.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

BaB isn't posting enough for me to get a read on him.

Agreed. Why hasn't anyone attacked

me

for lurking?

Top two suspects are BaB and RayFrost.

^This is an interesting sentence.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

So. . . despite Acosmist's research regarding Panacea's chatty nature, I still find it highly suspicious. Feeling guilty? Why not bury the board with loads and loads of nothing. Good luck to the town finding a kernel of evidence among the chaff. Same goes for RayFrost. I am sure it is just a playing "style" or some such, but it is suspicios. In fact, I would not be surprised if these "styles" are cultivated for exactly that reason, and after many games, when the suspicious activity has been used for innocent goles and guilty ones alike, people wouldn't be so sure.

But, as this is my first game on MafiaScum (hello you two other MS n00bs in this "newbie game"), I find the overwhelming posting of feeble-at-best theories to be, well, scummy.

Elementary Fermion:

were you referring to anyone in particular in the previous sentence about theories?

However, in an attempt not to extend this day even further, I am not going to change my vote. I voted once with firm conviction and I am standing by it. I am not going to be a 2d or 3d vote on someone and ignite a marathon of "EF is jumping on bandwagons defend yoruself scummy &c."

Conclusion, lots of unnecessary posts looks suspicious to me, and when there has been so little action so far, most posts are unnecessary.

^Actually this post turned out to have very little content.

So, since demanding questions of others is where it's at:
1.) Cojin - how does it feel to be at L-2 (assuming that I am correct)?
2.) havingafitz - if Cojin is indeed the second vote on Lawls, and Acosmist the third, do you still view Cojin and Lawls with the same suspicion? Remember:

You (Lawls) are staying involved at a low level and not contributing much. You have made one post with a lot of content of debatable value and very very little else. I would not bet on you and Cojin both being scum but I do think at least one of you are.

Please explain why or why not your suspicions change.

yay some questions... maybe now he'll follow up with some opinions?

Can everyone give their top two suspects...especially those who haven't got a vote out yet? It's obvious for a few of you (ie those who have voted) but for others not so much.

My top choice is still Lawls, which is why I still have my vote on him. I random-voted for him, and the ensuing discussion, mostly by Acosmist and RayFrost, has persuaded me to keep it.

As for my second choice, it is a tie between. . . Acosmist and RayFrost. The sudden hostility is. . . odd. You were both doing what you were doing, and then doing it with anger. Actually, I would go with RayFrost as Acosmist has been constantly scumhunting and RayFrost as started providing gems like:

So... town reads is beneficial.

Town hunting is as useful as scumhunting.

So yeah.

You saying it isn't finding scum would be an inaccurate statement.

This is I feel not at all an accurate representation of what Acosmist was saying, though he defended himself well--making any attempt for me to do so redundant. But, the misdirection combined with the sudden attitude shift is setting off alarms for me.

Yay, some oppinions! Albeit, entirely unrelated to his questions.


So... EF: Has posted very little content, has expressed that day 1 is kind of useless, did not respond to my post about why day 1 was not useless. Random voted for lawls and is keeping it based on others' arguments of his lurkerhood. Has mentioned other people but never me.

[havingfitz]

I would say my top 2 scum are laws and well thats all i got,

as far as the pancea sparked my radar on how quickly she jumped wagons, so i guess she is a small blip and the closest thing i got.

I am also willing to put lawls at l-1 by tommorow depending on what people think

Unvote Lawls, Vote Cojin

Why? Because I only have one vote. (I really wish I had two to give)

Also because you are basing your potential vote on "what people think,"

and

BECAUSE YOU ALREADY HAVE YOUR $%^%$ VOTE ON LAWLS!!!!!!

Way to pay attention. <shakes head>

[havingfitz]

BaB isn't posting enough for me to get a read on him.

Agreed. Why hasn't anyone attacked

me

for lurking?

Top two suspects are BaB and RayFrost.

^This is an interesting sentence.

This thread is dead. Fock.

I for one am not 'attacking' you for lurking because compared to the two professional lurkers in here you are an uberposter. With your recent quadruple post (WTF?) your post count is better than many and your content seems lucid (whther it is good content is up in the air). Why is Nacho's sentence above interesting? How about answering my question on suspects?

EF is probably the next in lurkishness to Lawls and Cojin.

Where did Pan go? Someone check Ray's basement.

[Acosmist]

I will attempt to start each post with a Nachomamma8 Executive Summary, so the general outline of my thoughts and conclusions can be read easily. Also, with one exception, my quote policy has been not to add a name if the next quote is from the same source as the previous one. I may have added names that this policy would make superfluous, and I know that, last post, I failed to add necessary attribution in a couple instances. My bad.

Executive summary of this post: I am happy with my vote on Lawls. Panacea holds the key to a number of things, especially RayFrost. We need her posting. Cojin isn't as scummy as havingfitz thinks. RayFrost's lies, damned lies, and statistics bothered me. I have a question about EF at the very bottom I'd like everyone to answer.

The long version of this post:

Dead on content? Huh?

I'm basing that mostly on his pointed comments about Lawls.

Cojin ISO (questions to Cojin in bold):
ISO 0 - Unvotes, gives IC credentials, asks Panacea a good question about her freaking out over the early L-3 votes.

Good post by Cojin, as you recognize.

ISO 1 - Freaks out himself over Pan being put at L-3

<--so why was it enough of an issue to question Pan about it?

That's completely unfair. Cojin's first post is calling Panacea out for an inconsistency in her early posting - she didn't want to place a second vote on someone, so, when she realized she had, she switched to another person...who already had a vote on him. Cojin never said L-3 wasn't a big deal.

ISO 2 - Admits to being bad IC, urges discussion, tells others (sans Pan) to flop to a different L-3 and asks why Pan should go.

He made a grammatical error - he meant "Everybody, besides her flop, why do you think we should lynch her?" He explains that in the next post.

ISO 3 - Apologizes for grammer fail. Tries to explain his ISO 2 post and makes these two [sarcasm]excellent comments:[/sarcasm]

• "overall its quite a good thing to have her at l-2 at this stage"
  <---If L-3 is so bad....why are you a proponent of an early L-2?
  
  
  
  "her lack of panic makes me feel she is comfortable that she wont be quicklynched (as she may be scum and thus a quicklynch at l-2 impossible)"
  <--so are you saying you think Pan is scum? BTW...your vote is on your fellow lurker.

His thoughts are a bit muddled here, I agree. I think Cojin should answer these questions. There are non-scummy possible reasons, though, so I wouldn't jump all over him for that...yet.

ISO 4 - Explains ISO 3 post and says he is going to go get an avatar.

Yep, contentless and a broken promise to boot. I expect that avatar to be pretty awesome when it finally comes.

ISO 5 - Answers question (says he prefers being town) and gives his interpretation of Lawls timezone excuse post...and then votes Lawls for active lurking.

Lawls has been lurking, and Cojin was on him early for it. Point: Cojin.

ISO 6 - Makes this observation re: me,

"What i dont understand is how he blatently ignored how much lawls was lurking yet attacked him for less."

which I later show to be completely inaccurate.

Yep, that post was inaccurate. No way to defend that.

ISO 7 - Answers question re: his opinion of Acosmist and Lawls.

Continues to press Lawls.

ISO 8 - Asks something about his momma and makes a completely gibberish coment on metas.

"Nachomamma", get it?

Gibberish? He's saying that a person can't defend his behavior in a game by calling back to his town meta, as awareness of one's town meta means one is aware enough to fake it. I agree his grammar is unfortunate (here and in pretty much every post), but his point is valid and relevant to the discussion.

ISO 9 - Apologizes for his play (I think), elaborates on his Lawls opinion (more gibberish) and asks RF why he (RF) think Cojin is scum (amongst an odd secretary/batman joke).

That's not gibberish. At all. He's elaborating on his Lawls opinion and bringing up valid points. I don't like the direction your criticism is taking, dismissing Cojin's valid points as "gibberish."

RayFrost brought up the context of that joke.

I think Lawls is scummier at the moment...but I really don't see anything redeeming about Cojin's game unless you consider his initial questions to Panacea enough to consider the reast of his posts dead-on

He provided non-trivial help in defusing the Panacea situation, and he's been on Lawls consistently. His game's been a bit uneven, but I don't see him in the same scuminess class as Lawls.

Can everyone give their top two suspects?

Lawls - voting him, would be pleased as punch to lynch him

RayFrost - I need Panacea's thoughts on him before I make a more definitive judgment; well below Lawls in my scumdar but higher than anyone else

There are really only 2 problems I have with the TownPan case. 1) You cleared her mostly based on either past experiences with her (which we have to take your word for)

Panacea's history is a matter of public record, and at least one person has actually checked that record and found it generally to point to her towniness.

or based on the weakness of a case so early in the game

The case was as weak as all very early cases are. It was useful because Panacea's reaction to it, stated before I had done any meta-analysis (before her history was even at issue, actually), was perfectly consistent with her historical town behavior.

2) You offered no new suspects as replacements. You haven't even voted anyone this whole game; you've only unvoted. You've been far more aggressive in derailing a wagon than you have creating one, and everyone knows it's easier for scum to defend than attack...

This is fair enough and feeds into the clarification I am eagerly awaiting from Panacea...

As for my second choice, it is a tie between. . . Acosmist and RayFrost. The sudden hostility is. . . odd. You were both doing what you were doing, and then doing it with anger.

RayFrost was wrong on the Internet and I couldn't let it stand. I am going to try to take fifteen minutes before posting when I get that worked up. It also bothers me that Panacea is now busy when her opinions are vital to the resolution of this RayFrost business.

I am also willing to put lawls at l-1 by tommorow depending on what people think

People have said this but, uh: 1. your vote is on him, 2. if that's not a bandwagon justification, what is it? I honestly want to know; I'm not going to jump to the conclusion that you meant that as scumliciously as it sounded.

Where did Pan go? Someone check Ray's basement.

Epic win.

Regarding Elementary Fermion: he's lurking, to be sure. Do people see that lurking as scummy or just as a bad habit to be discouraged with pressure? I want thoughts on paper about this.

I don't see the scumtastic motivation for his behavior and thus will have simply to say, yeah, I wish he'd post more.

[Cojin]

Oh wow I forgot about my vote on lawls, Well so basicly he was sitting at l-1 for quite a while with no hammer and no ask for a claim?

[havingfitz]

My comments in bold:

Cojin isn't as scummy as havingfitz thinks.

He may very well be town…but his play so far has him right up there with Lawls in my opinion. It’s just as accurate a statement to say, “Cojin is scummier than Acosmist thinks.”

The long version of this post:

Dead on content? Huh?

I'm basing that mostly on his pointed comments about Lawls.

Cojin ISO (questions to Cojin in bold):
ISO 0 - Good post by Cojin, as you recognize.

Even the blind pig finds an occasional acorn.

ISO 1 - Freaks out himself over Pan being put at L-3

<--so why was it enough of an issue to question Pan about it?

That's completely unfair. Cojin's first post is calling Panacea out for an inconsistency in her early posting - she didn't want to place a second vote on someone, so, when she realized she had, she switched to another person...who already had a vote on him. Cojin never said L-3 wasn't a big deal.

I disagree…Pan was freaking a bit at putting someone at L-3, tried to make amends and oops, put someone else at L-3. Despite his shocked next post lamenting Pan being put at L-3 herself (which was inaccurate as she was actually at L-2 and exhibited his lack of game awareness)…he never felt the need to display L-3 shock over Lawls or EF being put at L-3 by Pan. Instead he questions her on why EF at L-3 is an issue and Lawls isn’t (but according to Pan…both her L-3’s were inadvertent [and therefore IMO equivalent to each other])

ISO 2 - He made a grammatical error - he meant "Everybody, besides her flop, why do you think we should lynch her?" He explains that in the next post.

Using his “muddled” thoughts?

ISO 3 - His thoughts are a bit muddled here, I agree. I think Cojin should answer these questions. There are non-scummy possible reasons, though, so I wouldn't jump all over him for that...yet.

Muddled = gibberish IMO. Cojin brings out the pessimist in me.

ISO 4 - Yep, contentless and a broken promise to boot. I expect that avatar to be pretty awesome when it finally comes.

Agreed

ISO 5 - Lawls has been lurking, and Cojin was on him early for it. Point: Cojin.

Uh…ok

ISO 6 - Yep, that post was inaccurate. No way to defend that.

Point removed: Cojin

ISO 7 - Continues to press Lawls.

Press Lawls? He answered a question...there was no pressing IMO…just reiterating what he had already said.

ISO 8 - "Nachomamma", get it?

Ahhhhh…I see…

; Gibberish? He's saying that a person can't defend his behavior in a game by calling back to his town meta, as awareness of one's town meta means one is aware enough to fake it. I agree his grammar is unfortunate (here and in pretty much every post), but his point is valid and relevant to the discussion.

Grammar matters…your explanation makes sense…his is just babbling IMO.

ISO 9 - That's not gibberish. At all. He's elaborating on his Lawls opinion and bringing up valid points. I don't like the direction your criticism is taking, dismissing Cojin's valid points as "gibberish."

The direction I’m taking is pretty clear…Cojin’s posts are lacking IMO and he is not playing attention to the game…which he has demonstrated numerous times.

Regarding Elementary Fermion: he's lurking, to be sure. Do people see that lurking as scummy or just as a bad habit to be discouraged with pressure? I want thoughts on paper about this.

He is a bit lurky but I can excuse lurking a bit if the posts when they are made make sense. I need to look at EF’s posts a bit closer but he would not be someone I would focus on today. Cojin and Lawls are today’s focus for me.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

Why is Nacho's sentence above interesting? How about answering my question on suspects?

EF is probably the next in lurkishness to Lawls and Cojin.

Where did Pan go? Someone check Ray's basement.

'
hahaha.


I do quadruple posts rather than super long posts, as I personally feel that they are more palatable. It helps make posts understandable when each post has a specific focus.

Nacho's sentence is interesting because he suspected two people, Rayfrost and Me, who I don't remember him voicing suspicion on before. We're also two people that little suspicion has been cast on

in

-thread.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

Regarding Elementary Fermion: he's lurking, to be sure. Do people see that lurking as scummy or just as a bad habit to be discouraged with pressure? I want thoughts on paper about this.

He's another pretty bad lurker, and while it does appear mostly habit, I get a slight sense that he doesn't care who is lynched... more so than disinterested town would feel. So yeah, lurker leaning-anti town.

[havingfitz]

How about answering my question on suspects?

<crickets>

?

[BridgesAndBaloons]

How about answering my question on suspects?

<crickets>

?

EF, Cojin.

Also Rayfrost maybe.

[havingfitz]

How about answering my question on suspects?

<crickets>

?

EF, Cojin.

Also Rayfrost maybe.

Thanks.

Are your suspicions on EF and Cojin based on lurking or what they've said when they do post?

[BridgesAndBaloons]

Lawls:

answer this

Lawls, are you waiting for something? When do you think you will become more active? Or will you stay this passive the whole game? Yes you have made votes, but not of them very [strongly].

[BridgesAndBaloons]

@havingfitz, mostly lurking. To be honest I do not have a very strong grapple of this game, I'll be honest. However, I'm basing it on HOW they lurked and what was in their posts. You'll notice I'm not voting for Lawls (although my ideas my change depending on his response to the above question). I will not say why I'm not voting Lawls as it might tell him how to respond to my question to appease me.


Also, I have ran out of time for the day. I misplanned and thought I had more time to go over this game. Will be makign my deadline vote soon.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

EEBWOP: GAHHHHHHHHH I MISREAD THE DEADLINE


Okay f*** I have another deadlined game and now I don't have time left for that...

[Nachomamma8]

Sorry, I didn't know the # of votes on cojin, so I didn't vote him.

But the Cojin case didn't arrive until waaay after you killed the Pan wagon, and you didn't really do a whole lot to offer any substitute suspects before then.

Nacho's sentence is interesting because he suspected two people, Rayfrost and Me, who I don't remember him voicing suspicion on before. We're also two people that little suspicion has been cast on in-thread.

Read closer. My first post stated that I was going to focus on 4 people for Day 1 (Ray, you, Pan, and Lawls). My suspicion of Ray has definitely been stated in thread (ISO 0, 1, 3), and my suspicion of you is due to a process of elimination.

@Acosmist: I'm not sure you understand me when I say the TownPan case. I'm referring to Ray's specific case in ISO 5, not the case for Pan being town in general.

Do people see that lurking as scummy or just as a bad habit to be discouraged with pressure?

Depends on the type of lurking. EF's doesn't bother me at all because he's posting consistently, and he's posting content when he posts (usually). Later in the game, my mind may change about that but I hope that when there is more to talk about, he'll have more to say.

[RayFrost]

Nacho, in case you didn't know, I'm slow to get my ro' to go.

[Elementary Fermion]

Regarding Elementary Fermion: he's lurking, to be sure. Do people see that lurking as scummy or just as a bad habit to be discouraged with pressure? I want thoughts on paper about this.

He's another pretty bad lurker, and while it does appear mostly habit, I get a slight sense that he doesn't care who is lynched... more so than disinterested town would feel. So yeah, lurker leaning-anti town.

I would prefer for scum to be lynched, actually.

When I have nothing to contribute, I would prefer not to post, unlike. . . people in this game, I guess. I do check in to see if there is anything worth responding to, and if so, I do. If that makes me a lurker, discourage away. Or lynch me so I can quit caring; of course I am obviously town (right RayFrost? [post 157]) so that wouldn't be the best move, but I still think we will end up winning.

Why did you change your vote, havingfitz? I brought up Cojin's invisible vote on Lawls days ago, and no one cared at the time. (That may actually have been content I contributed to the game, but, you know, the "lurking" thing gets in the way of people paying attention I guess?). You mention how you think Lawls is scummy, we get close to a majority, and then suddenly a change of heart? Could you be a little clearer on your reasons for me please?

[Panacea]

Back, responding to prod. Post to follow. Sorry for my absence.

[Panacea]

Again, I'm sorry. After posting so little before due to vacation time, my laptop started having connectivity issues. It's in the shop now, and my friend is letting me use his laptop for the week til mine's out of the shop. Anyway, I'm back at uni now.

Havingfitz: Post #185: Nice catch on Lawls's discrepancies.

Tally the number of people he's cleared or semi-cleared as town in this game versus the number of people he's pointed out as scum.

Then tell me what that means to you.

You and Ray debated this to death enough shortly thereafter, so I feel it unnecessary to re-visit. I do, however, agree with Ray about how mentioning that someone is leaning town isn't clearing them, and it's a mite extreme to accuse him of doing so.

unvote, FoS: cojin

because I'm way too lazy to check the vote count

Calling someone out post-Panacea...hm....thoughts, Ms. Panacea?

You mean it

isn't

obvious that I was going "WATCH ME ATTEMPT TO PERFECTLY MATCH THE META THAT PANACEA PUT FORTH IN SUCH AN OBVIOUS AND DELIBERATE FASHION THAT IT IS RIDICULOUS" in those posts?

Oh, guys, come on. I'm not a total imbecile! I saved a couple of Ray's other scumtells for later. So far this was my first intensive meta, and I don't really think I like the practice much. But I can guess enough to know that inclusion of

all

of my observations can easily result in a meta-match. Give me some credit, guys.

What I noticed was that RayFrost wasn't calling out scum at all. So, the negation of the consequent is true. Modus tollens, RayFrost is not town.

But maybe I wasn't clear enough. I said he tends to

locate

scum early on, but he does it pretty privately (remember, entertaining everyone while he figures it out?). But nowhere did I say he finds scum in a handful of posts and calls them out the instant he does so. Better?

Panacea has a skewed judgment of you because she's played with you, and she's magnifying the importance of your particular play patterns in those games. I'm not as concerned that you haven't been calling out scum, because I don't expect that from town RayFrost. I am slightly bothered by the fact that you've been clearing so many people, because that's an easy thing for scum to do, with their insider knowledge.

Panacea, time to offer your thoughts on this.

My judgment though isn't based solely on our previous play; I did spend quite a bit of time meta-ing the hell out of him. I feel that he is Town in this game. That's subject to change, of course. But your request that I meta him and report my findings

opened up the door

to calling him out for a meta-match (this, by the way, is part of the reason I'm developing a low opinion of meta). So Acosmist, I'm curious. You asked my findings. What were yours?

There are really only 2 problems I have with the TownPan case. 1) You cleared her mostly based on either past experiences with her (which we have to take your word for), or based on the weakness of a case so early in the game

Actually, you don't have to "take his word for" it. You could meta me, y'know. Seems to be a dangerous fad in this game, but we know at least one person has.

[Whoa, Acosmist totally said the same thing later, almost verbatim!!]

[And then Nacho explains. Ah, well, better leave it for the record.]

As for my second choice, it is a tie between. . . Acosmist and RayFrost. The sudden hostility is. . . odd. You were both doing what you were doing, and then doing it with anger

I concur here. I also perceived this as town-on-town. I know you both had good points, but while the argument became the center of the game, I think the beating of the dead horse threw us a bit off track.

That was just an example of a possible meta and wasn't intended to be taken literally. I still haven't meta'd you and I can't determine exactly what it is yet. Also, very interesting that you consider English Major = no spelling errors. I know that math teachers make just as many, if not more, careless errors, than other people.

Ah, my apologies; I did indeed take it literally. And very well; I feel that the fact that my primary study is that of the English language does in fact prevent me to a degree from submitting spelling, transitional, syntactical, applied, grammatical, systematic, and/or coherence errors, or otherwise disjointed sentences.

Panacea holds the key to a number of things, especially RayFrost. We need her posting.

Please let me know of anything at all that I missed?

t also bothers me that Panacea is now busy when her opinions are vital to the resolution of this RayFrost business.

Shall I include the number for the DTV help desk? Honestly, though. You meta'd me. Town OR scum, you have to know I'd have at least told y'all I would be back if I could get online at all.

I do quadruple posts rather than super long posts, as I personally feel that they are more palatable. It helps make posts understandable when each post has a specific focus.

I really like this. I might incorporate this, but I think Acosmist would have a stroke.

Eureka!!! The end!! I did mostly responses to questions directed at me in my absence. I'll provide more analysis tomorrow. Also, lemme check the vote real quick...

[Lawls]

Lawls:

answer this

Lawls, are you waiting for something? When do you think you will become more active? Or will you stay this passive the whole game? Yes you have made votes, but not of them very [strongly].

iirc I already answered that question, so you can go back and look for it. Sorry for the inactivity guys had a very busy weekend.