Mini 930:Morning People Mafia (Game Over!)

[chauchaudotcom]

Bah. Reasoning is tech.

Vote: Nobody Special

cuz he's back.

[SpyreX]

Hmmm what?

The first post refers to SSSS, not Deer.

Woo, then I went retarded. Fair enough.

I'll be blunt about it, Spyrex. If you actually believed this nonsense, that we should ignore voting patterns and wagons until tomorrow, then you wouldn't be on me. You should be voting NS. Or Nikanor. Or even Sociopath. I know you suspect Nikanor, and you definitely suspect NS. If you are so certain that the SSSS wagon was a pure as you think it was (and if it wasn't pure then you'd have no reason to argue with me), then NS should be a slam dunk. Right?

But you're not voting NS, and that's what makes all of this a facade. Rest assured if I was a Vig I would've put a bullet in your head days ago.

Believe what nonsense?

I think there was a spread on that wagon. I've said that over and over.

I wasn't the one who tried to spin 'look at the two town deaths that weren't on the wagon' like something bigger than it is - one of them, of course, was the person wagoned. Which leaves a single point which could damn well be for a bevy of other reasons versus "protecting the seething scum on the wagon".

I would vote you in a second if I thought any player besides you, me, and Dragonfly was bothering to read all of your spin for the nonsense it is. That said, and I love how you completely ignored this, jbern is a very worthy wagon as well.

I mean, go read Nikanor's post 439 if you think I'm joking. "I'm just too busy so... you are both neutral! <3" As I said, I'm realistic. I think you realize this too, the situation we're in. We're both going back and forth, on a different level from the rest of the town, and that's almost always a recipe for indifference. The conclusion is neither of us will be lynched, although there's nothing I'd want more than the scumSpyrex from Morning People Mafia trophy on my wall.

Pretty sure Chau has commented. Pretty sure that isn't an absolution from even trying at this point.

Will I have to give up and vote NS? Probably.

Does that mean I'm sure not going to try to get this done.

----

I'm REALLY stoked with Socio not taking his crazy pills today.

[RedCoyote]

Dragonfly didn't move up per se, you moved down...

Okay, that's fair.

---

Survey says:

Vote: Sucrose

At this point, I can live with that.

---

Reasoning is tech.

What does this mean? I've heard it before.

---

Believe what nonsense?

I think there was a spread on that wagon. I've said that over and over.

Alright, whatever. I guess what our argument boils down to here then is by what basis you would rather lynch on.

Players who subjectively were "nothing" posters in D1 (I still don't like this word, because I know NS and Deer both, although not frequent posters, were making posts at the end of D1), or by objectively looking to which players were a part of the SSSS wagon, coupled with that subjective analysis of their specific play.

I wasn't the one who tried to spin 'look at the two town deaths that weren't on the wagon' like something bigger than it is - one of them, of course, was the person wagoned. Which leaves a single point which could damn well be for a bevy of other reasons versus "protecting the seething scum on the wagon".

It's a valid point, statistically. You've got a group of 3 and a group of 6. As we're both part of that group of six, it necessarily lends itself to be more advantageous to look to it a bit more, as opposed to the group of 3, which, to top it off, was much more disorganized to begin with.

---

Mod, could you please prod Dragonfly?

[chauchaudotcom]

What does this mean? I've heard it before.

It means give a reasoning with your vote or die. Something I shamelessly stole from Frost.

Players who subjectively were "nothing" posters in D1 (I still don't like this word, because I know NS and Deer both, although not frequent posters, were making posts at the end of D1), or by objectively looking to which players were a part of the SSSS wagon, coupled with that subjective analysis of their specific play.

Are you seriously arguing that NS actually contributed something day 1?

It's a valid point, statistically. You've got a group of 3 and a group of 6. As we're both part of that group of six, it necessarily lends itself to be more advantageous to look to it a bit more, as opposed to the group of 3, which, to top it off, was much more disorganized to begin with.

Yes but that's true of most d1 wagons. To argue that scum purposely nked a player simply be cause they were off the wagon to is going into a load of wifom that will ultimately come to a null tell. Whether or not fitz was on the wagon, he was a good choice for an nk.

Red, to be clear, is your whole case against Spy based mainly off wf's actions right?

[Nikanor]

I like the way SocioPath busses Sucrose.
Keep up the good work, Socio!
Anyway, why did you vote for Sucrose? Do you just agree with everything I've said, or do you have something to add?

[SocioPath]

I've thought Sucrose to be scum since her postings regarding rzhang.
Who was totally town, and was one of the few rational people early on in the game.

Also havingfitz was totally on my scumlist because of his massive amounts of non-committals.

FA was totally scum, and I would vote for him if he was in this game, but now that he is not, I know better.

Water Foul was totally scum, but I'd rather keep SpyreX around for changing his role PMs around for something less than scum.

RC is way too verbose when all he needs to say is "I replaced into a scum slot."

NS is essentially not NS and is VS because of that.


But to answer your question, Nik, it has nothing to do with your stance on Sucrose.
In fact, its more of the opposite, I feel you are more town because of your stances on Sucrose.

As far as my stances on other people: YOU SHALL NEVER KNOW.

[SpyreX]

It's a valid point, statistically. You've got a group of 3 and a group of 6. As we're both part of that group of six, it necessarily lends itself to be more advantageous to look to it a bit more, as opposed to the group of 3, which, to top it off, was much more disorganized to begin with.

I guess its a matter of: do you think there is scum in that grouping of three? I do. I'm fairly confident about it.

Do I think there is scum in the wagon? Probably. Not concentrated scum but one for sure.

However, considering I'm pretty sure at least a 1/3 in one versus a 1/6 it makes more sense.

Water Foul was totally scum, but I'd rather keep SpyreX around for changing his role PMs around for something less than scum.

Confused.

[SocioPath]

Water Foul was totally scum, but I'd rather keep SpyreX around for changing his role PMs around for something less than scum.

Confused.

Water Foul had a scum role PM.
You got a different role PM.

[SpyreX]

:O

Now that dynamic would be truly awesom

[Sucrose]

Unvote

The more I think about it, the more I just don't buy Peanutman and Jbernier both being town, and at this point I'm convinced neither of them were bussing.

I've thought Sucrose to be scum since her postings regarding rzhang.
Who was totally town, and was one of the few rational people early on in the game.

Really?

[SpyreX]

Wait...

Socio is voting for Sucrose who he says is town?
RC, who also has Sucrose as #2 town, is fine with this vote?

GOD

[Sucrose]

To answer Red's questions:

What do you want me to explain?

Why you think it's likely the SSSS wagon has 1 scum rather than more.

Mostly because of the players on it, and because as Spyrex said, scum love to let the town lynch itself.

Why we should delibrately ignore the SSSS wagon. Why it's not advantageous to the town to capitalize on it.

I never said anything like this.

I am well aware the theory that NS is scum contradicts the theory that Peanutman is scum.

I think the issue Nikanor brought up was that you were pushing peanutman, and one of your main points for doing so was this,

Conclusion: Peanut seems more interested in what does or does not go with the flow of the town than if SSSS or Rzhang are actually scum, and it strikes me as wrong. I'll make an accusation that in the two posts I've quoted, Peanut is making a show of making obvious "pro-town" moves, while not actually doing much at all. He also

looks like

he's drawing attention away from SSSS and onto Nobody Special,

yet he doesn't make much of a case against Nobody Special at all

.

(Emphasis added).

So you calling NS out as scum, abruptly switching from your past idea that peanutman was partly suspicious for drawing attention onto NS without really building a case, seems contradictory.

Yeah, my own realization that Peanut

probably

wasn't bussing NS weakens my case in that post a bit, but the main gist of it was that Peanut was trying to look townish while not really doing much. If Peanut/Socio is scum, it wouldn't really matter if it SSSS or NS got mislynched, as long as there was a mislynch.

There's no real reason to unvote now though, NS isn't in any immediate danger.

Well you can't change what has happened, but you seem very much to be playing the field here. It's almost like you're just throwing arbitrary suspicions out there.

Let me ask you this, because I don't know the answer off the top of my head. If I went back through your posts in isolation, would I find you pressuring NS either earlier today or on D1?

No, you wouldn't, because he was more or less a neutral read D1, then started making multiple iffy posts D2. I've attacked the people I think are scummy. If they're neutral to you (I can't imagine seeing Peanut/Socio, NS, or JBern as townish) that's fine, but they're not random to me.

[RedCoyote]

Are you seriously arguing that NS actually contributed something day 1?

Spyrex is the one trying to differentiate "nothing" and "lurking", not me.

Red, to be clear, is your whole case against Spy based mainly off wf's actions right?

wf, his voting of SSSS relative to everyone else on the wagon, his position that we cannot use the SSSS wagon to scumhunt, and his voting of me one the one hand, all the while predicting that the scum avoided the SSSS wagon. Those four things make a scum cocktail, I think.

---

However, considering I'm pretty sure at least a 1/3 in one versus a 1/6 it makes more sense.

That's the thing though, it's likely not going to be 1/3 versus 1/6. It's likely going to be, from both our perspectives, 2/5 versus 1/3.

If I go even further, and I take out a townie player based on my reads, then I could make it 2/4.

Socio is voting for Sucrose who he says is town?
RC, who also has Sucrose as #2 town, is fine with this vote?

Like Nikanor, Sucrose has really kind of taken a nose dive in my townreads with her last couple of posts. I absolutely hate this post.

Don't just read the replies I give to you, read the things I have had to say to Nikanor and Sucrose over the past few days.

It's weird, but I like to ask questions, read over answers, and then change my perspective on the game based on those things. I call this strange process scumhunting.

---

Mostly because of the players on it, and because as Spyrex said, scum love to let the town lynch itself.

Ugh. This seems so backwards to me. You, Spyrex, and chau all think this then? That the SSSS wagon was this pure bastion of townies. Surely no one had any untoward motivations for lynching SSSS, and surely no one took advantage of his poor posts to get a townie lynch to go through.

[SSSS' post 303] feels right. I don't like that.

that post feeling right isn't enough push for me to think this is a bad lynch, as of now.

No, of course these are the honest misgivings of a townie fraught with indecision. Of course these aren't in any way manipulative or artificial.

Seriously though, my point is less about Spyrex and more about the wagon as a whole. Scum are always actively trying to misdirect the town. Sometimes they do so by lurking, sure, but I think you'll find that most times it is by preying on the greater town's honest but incorrect suspicions. I really do think it's naive to say that SSSS was so scummy that the wagon had to be all town or all town and one scum.

I never said anything like this.

It's what you're implying when you say we shouldn't focus on it. You should be able to defend your position; I'd like you to argue with me or concede the point.

If they're neutral to you (I can't imagine seeing Peanut/Socio, NS, or JBern as townish) that's fine, but they're not random to me.

They certainly aren't neutral to me (look where my vote is), but are you telling me you're basically willing to lynch any of those three who gains a majority of support? Do you like Socio's opening posts? Do you think there is anything to the fact that his first vote was on you? Why aren't you asking these questions, especially when (I thought) peanut was your biggest suspect?

[SpyreX]

Busted.

wf, his voting of SSSS relative to everyone else on the wagon, his position that we cannot use the SSSS wagon to scumhunt, and his voting of me one the one hand,

all the while predicting that the scum avoided the SSSS wagon.

Those four things make a scum cocktail, I think.

Show it.

Cite me saying there was no scum on that wagon.

If you do it I'll lay down and be lynched.

[RedCoyote]

No, you made it clear that you think there is definitely one scum on SSSS, but I'm saying that you predicted the scum avoided the SSSS wagon (except, of course, for me/Deer). This position just isn't reasonable to me, and I've said it time and again.

With time as a factor and SSSS being "a good wagon"

if I were scum

(OHH SNAP)

I'd stay off it

. Doubly so because conventional attitudes would be there were two scum on the wagon.

(emphasis added)

If I were scum and thought I could wait a wagon out for town to do the dirty work without painting a target on myself for it I'd do it every damn time.

Here above you're saying that if you were scum you would've pushed the SSSS wagon from the sidelines. It isn't reasonable to say that you think scum were off the wagon and then vote me anyways.

[SpyreX]

If I were scum I'd stay off that wagon. Yes.
If I were scum and thought I could wait a wagon out I would. Yes.

Nowhere did I say scum avoided that wagon.
In fact, more than once I have said just the opposite.
We've argued about this enough that wasn't accidentally misreading my stance.

[RedCoyote]

Do I think there is scum in the wagon? Probably. Not concentrated scum but one for sure.

Nowhere did I say scum avoided that wagon.
In fact, more than once I have said just the opposite.

You're so full of it.

"There's no concentration of scum on that wagon. There was probably one, but that's it!"
then
"Nowhere did I say scum avoided the wagon. In fact, I've said just the opposite: They loved the wagon! They were all over it!"

The opposite of avoiding the wagon is attaching yourself to it, Spyrex.

Unvote; vote: SpyreX

If no one wants jbern then we should go for the mastermind himself.

[SpyreX]

We're back here and its all good.

Same deal as before. So, go for it. Glad to finally see the vote.

[SpyreX]

Deadline is in three days.

I've spent about all the energy I care to with Red.

Weigh in. Everyone.

If I end up getting los ropos, do NOT forget what I said today. I'll strangle you all from the grave.

[sykedoc]

Mod has a life, Wasn't here recently. Prod check in the morning

[Sucrose]

Ugh. This seems so backwards to me. You, Spyrex, and chau all think this then? That the SSSS wagon was this pure bastion of townies. Surely no one had any untoward motivations for lynching SSSS, and surely no one took advantage of his poor posts to get a townie lynch to go through.

No, there's almost certainly at least one scum on the SSSS wagon. All I'm saying is that when I'm scum, I like to avoid the mislynch wagon. The players on the lynching wagon are always scrutinized. Letting a townie be lynched and then lynching a town player on the wagon is a great double mislynch for scum.

Lynching a player on the wagon because you're sure there's always multiple scum on a mislynch wagon seems like a bad strategy to me. (I realize this sounds like self-preservation, but I really do believe it)

For the record I think this whole debate is pointless and going in circles.

If they're neutral to you (I can't imagine seeing Peanut/Socio, NS, or JBern as townish) that's fine, but they're not random to me.

They certainly aren't neutral to me (look where my vote is), but are you telling me you're basically willing to lynch any of those three who gains a majority of support? Do you like Socio's opening posts? Do you think there is anything to the fact that his first vote was on you? Why aren't you asking these questions, especially when (I thought) peanut was your biggest suspect?

Did you miss my post where I just unvoted NS because I didn't like the odds?

[Sucrose]

Vote: Sociopath

[chauchaudotcom]

Ugh. This seems so backwards to me. You, Spyrex, and chau all think this then? That the SSSS wagon was this pure bastion of townies. Surely no one had any untoward motivations for lynching SSSS, and surely no one took advantage of his poor posts to get a townie lynch to go through.

Uh. What? I thought we all agreed that it was a 1-1 split. Meaning there is probably one scum on the wagon and one off it.

The opposite of avoiding the wagon is attaching yourself to it, Spyrex.

Unvote; vote: SpyreX

What? v_v zomg. How does this make him scum? I actually think you're reading far too much into his wording because his overall stance on the wagon split has been pretty damn clear from the beginning.

For the record I think this whole debate is pointless and going in circles.

This. It does not help us catch scum. AT ALL.

Vote: Sociopath

asflkajsflks words cannot express my feelings right now. v_v.........


DAMMIT WHERE IS EVERYONE?!

[RedCoyote]

Letting a townie be lynched and then lynching a town player on the wagon is a great double mislynch for scum.

The trick is to not lynch the town player.

Did you miss my post where I just unvoted NS because I didn't like the odds?

...so you don't want to lynch NS now?

I'm just trying to get you to take a stand, Sucrose. All players should have some sort of position that they can be held accountable for.

---

I thought we all agreed that it was a 1-1 split. Meaning there is probably one scum on the wagon and one off it.

I don't buy the idea that there is a 1:1 split, and I don't know where that idea came from. I've been clear from the getgo that I don't buy onto that. I think the town should assume there are three scum and play it like that. I always try to come at mafia games from a worst case scenario point of view.

If I assume that, then I would say there are two scum between Spyrex, Dragonfly, jbern, and Sucrose.

I actually think you're reading far too much into his wording because his overall stance on the wagon split has been pretty damn clear from the beginning.

Be honest. You don't see a contradiction in what he just said?

[chauchaudotcom]

I don't buy the idea that there is a 1:1 split, and I don't know where that idea came from. I've been clear from the getgo that I don't buy onto that. I think the town should assume there are three scum and play it like that. I always try to come at mafia games from a worst case scenario point of view.

If I assume that, then I would say there are two scum between Spyrex, Dragonfly, jbern, and Sucrose.

Yes, and it has been clear from the get go that we (the three you were talking about) do believe this. You were claiming that we believed there was no scum on the wagon, which is not the case. We simply disagree with your stance that there is no split.

As for the 1:1 split all it meant was that there is at least one scum who always tries to stay off the wagon. Even if it's a 1:2 split or a 2:1 split the main concept is that it is highly likely at the least one scum is on the wagon and one scum is off the wagon.

Be honest. You don't see a contradiction in what he just said?

Scumhunting 101. Contradictions do not equate scummy. That being said, I don't see it as a contradiction because you have to take into the account the context in which those statements were made.

The first was made when addressing the question of there being more then one scum on the wagon. The second was made when addressing the question of there being no scum on one wagon. In BOTH statements he maintains the consistency of claiming that there is at least ONE scum on the wagon (aka a split).

What I gather is the buildup of confirmation bias, on both sides, from this argument.