Lay of Leithian Mafia: Game Over!

[Kmd4390]

Elaborate please.

Sorry, confidential.

This isn't a good way to play. "OMG I'm getting all these reactions" isn't a reason not to expand on why Sens would be a good policy lynch.

I think Kmd is misrepresenting SF's point here. SF claimed that failure to random vote is a net scumtell. He didn't approach the policy lynch issue. Also, if there's a bizarre policy lynch anywhere, it's the one on SF. Namely, his playstyle's been perfectly acceptable in the games I've played with him.

Ok, what is the correct term for lynching an anti-town player over a scummy player if it's not a policy lynch?

kmd post84: what in that quote made you vote xvart?

1) Seems to have placed a serious vote based on the "scum claim"
2) classic OMGUS FoS attached with the "something out of nothing" line

Starbuck used similar rhetoric as town ("Bella's Mom") D1 in Twilight IIRC. D1 lynch.

Actually, if you mean the Zwet wagon in that game, I'm pretty sure Starbuck supported that. (Wow, didn't realize how much of that Mod/playerlist group was in this game)

Because they know that town is going to realize that no scum in their right mind would do it, so the player who does it must be town. So you do it for town points.

Kmd4390:

Same questions as I posed to farside: in your opinion, Escoulta is guaranteed town the rest of the game since that "no scum in their right mind would do it"? If Escoulta later acts scummy on other merits you would dismiss it because he couldn't possibly be scum? What if we do lynch Escoulta and he flips scum?

I think I missed the part where Esco is confirmed town.

You should probably FoS more of the people voting you though. I think you missed a couple.

Also, appealing to Page number is bad. Especially when you placed a vote on "claimed scum" on Page 1.

both Sens and KMD the way they play each game more often than not reveals their role. They react differently to the exact same thing depending on their alignment that game.

I disagree. My playstyle is more affected by playerlist/game interest/mood/recent games/etc than by alignment, and DEFINITELY role. I usually ignore my role until night unless I have a day-time role.

--------------------

Sens, you are mistaken. I told you back in the day that I have one ridiculously accurate meta tell on you (which I kick myself for missing in Big Brother Mafia)

-------------------

Anon!
I agree with most of those, but methinks Elvis isn't in this game.

lol, that would explain why she was lurking.

I lol'd.

------------------

xvart, stop misrepping me. I'm scum and don't want people to realize you've figured out my entire scum team's plot to make you look as bad as possible by piling every single one of our votes on you.

------------------

Spy, lmao @ scum breadcrumb.

------------------

Jack's comment is more dumb than scummy.

-----------------

Scumlist:
xvart
Iec
Elmo
Zito
possibly Sens, Socio, CKD

Vote Count 07: Lynch

Starbuck - 1 - PaltryExcuse
Drippereth - 3 - J-Scope, Cyberbob, xvart
Steam Powered Shovel - 1 - Starbuck
SensFan - 2 - Steam-Powered Shovel, curiouskarmadog
FeFiFoFum - 1 - Jack
Starbuck - 1 - Cobalt
xvart -

8

- Elmocrates, Budja, Drippereth, Kmd4390, farside22, ooba, FeFiFoFum, Anon
Anon - 1 - Elscouta
MehPlusRawr - 1 - Papa Zito
xofelf - 1 - SensFan
Jack - 3 - SpyreX, Iecerint, SocioPath

Not Voting (2): MehPlusRawr, xofelf

With 25 players alive it'll take 13 to lynch and 13 to no-Lynch.

There are no players in the

Halls of Mandos

, so right now there are no

Revive

or

Destroy

counts.

[Papa Zito]

Elaborate please.

Sorry, confidential.

This isn't a good way to play. "OMG I'm getting all these reactions" isn't a reason not to expand on why Sens would be a good policy lynch.

The Sens vote had nothing to do with reactions. Confidential = private.

Also, happy birthday.

[PaltryExcuse]

Semi V/LA until Easter's over aka Tuesday April 6th.

[Cobalt]

unvote vote kmd

[J-Scope]

MehPlusRawr has confirmed but not posted on the site since Thursday. Not worth a vote now.

-------------------
I'm interested to hear what xofelf has to say about SensFan calling BS on her meta on him. She acknowledged its been a long time since she's played with him, but still claims to know Sens' meta pretty well.

-------------------
@Steam powered shovel: no one looks scummy yet to you? not even people pushing wagons you don't think are productive?

-------------------
I want to know why Jack decided it was a good time to talk about breadcrumbing. Its distracting from other topics that were just starting to get good attention (xofelf's meta claim, a new wave of xvart votes and defense), which is a bit suspicious coming from someone who hasn't been scumhunting.

unvote;
Vote: Jack

Hey Elmocrates, would you like an avy of that cat but maybe wearing a greek beard?

[Cyberbob]

Sorry about the posting gap, Easter weekend is a busy one for me.

I'll post something more substantial tomorrow (too tired to focus on very many things atm) but I do want to just look at this:

I'm scum and don't want people to realize you've figured out my entire scum team's plot to make you look as bad as possible by piling every single one of our votes on you.

And say lol? I don't even know how to react to this because

nobody

is dumb enough to say this unsarcastically; but on the other hand you aren't showing any objective signs of actually being sarcastic.

[Cobalt]

unvote vote cyberbob

[J-Scope]

@Elmocrates:

[Elmocrates]

I feel wiser already.

Scum alerting the town to the presence of a breadcrumb is a bad idea because it might tip off any protective roles that didn't see it. It would be much better as scum to just sit on that information. This Jack wagon is unremarkable.

Then again, the exchange Jack and Spyrex had made me do a double take: Jackscum

Conspiracy theory: The breadcrumb doesn't exist.

Conspiracy theory #2: [redacted]

Iecerint's wagon hop is giving me the heebie jeebies.

-crates

[Drippereth]

Papa Zito is scum. Can we lynch him? He's not even pretending to be a townie.

unvote, vote: Papa Zito

[Iecerint]

Perceived "poor scumplay" doesn't make it townplay. especially when there's no meta defense to justify it. I think nicemeta players are more likely to do that kind of thing as scum than as town.

By Elmo's logic, cops should claim D1, because protective roles will be able to find them, anyway.

[Elmocrates]

Perceived "poor

scumplay

townplay" doesn't make it

townplay

scumplay. especially when there's no meta defense to justify it. I think nicemeta players are more likely to do that kind of thing as scum than as town.

By Elmo's logic, cops should claim D1, because protective roles will be able to find them, anyway.

Fixed.

nicemeta?

Thats a horrible misrepresentation of what I said, btw.

Please tell me Iecerint, why

would

Jackscum make that comment?

[Elmocrates]

This is Socrates, btw.

[curiouskarmadog]

Updating from page 2 my random vote. Typing as reading.

All hydras please sign…no hydra excuses excepted.

FoS: Farside and Kmd

for giving someone an unrestricted free pass to towndom on page five.

xvart.

uuuhhh, is that what they did?

Caught up and there wasn’t much to update…I understand the wagon on xvart, I don’t understand those who don’t understand the wagon. Going to get rid of this policy/random vote on Sens (but dont pull your usual lurking/not reading the game BS).

Unvote.

Vote Elscouta.

Why are you attacking someone for joining a bandwagon. Why is it scummy Day 1? Why was it worth commenting on when so many have already joined the wagon (which I approve of fyi). Do you still like you Anon vote? Why? If you had to put a % on Xvart being town versus scum..what would it be?

[Iecerint]

You are asking the wrong question. The question is not "Why would scum do this" but rather "Which would do this: town or scum? How does that ratio compare to background probabilities?" Extrapolating "why would scum do this" to its logical conclusion rewards poor play. In reality, poor play is what catches scum.

scumJack might do it to:
1. Engender precisely this situation. (2SCUM4SCUM~!)
2. Observe reaction of perceived crumb'd.
3. Alert buddies to existence of perceived crumb to work on exposing whomever.

townJack might do it because:
1. He wants to give Jack an anti-town meta because he thinks anti-town play is fun. (Unlikely; Jack appears to be the primary account.)
2. He's really proud of himself for having found the Cop crumb, and he can't keep his mouth shut. (Which sort of begs the question of why he's hunting for Cop crumbs, anyway.)

So the conclusion is that the behavior is more likely to come from scumJack than townJack. I agree that it is poor scumplay, which is why I waited a little before voting him. I thought he was going somewhere with the SX exchange.

My counterexample was a fine extrapolation of what you said IMO. Your argument (in different words) was that cops being exposed is OK because then the protective roles will know about them. Very minimal introspection will indicate that this is mistaken.

[Iecerint]

EBWOP: "Nicemeta" means "normal meta" (e.g. players who aren't DeathNote, zwet, etc).

[Iecerint]

EBWOPx2: Oh, I see what you meant. It is true that claiming is different from scum exposing. But it's still not true that scum have no motivation to prod at perceived crumbs. This issue came up in an ongoing game, so it's on my mind.

[Elmocrates]

First, I forgot to do something very important: Thanks for the avatar, Jah!

Second: I literally hate everything about post 189. First paragraph is a pile of nonsense. How exactly do you go about answering the question "Which would do this: town or scum?" without asking the first question? I go LOL at "In reality, poor play is what catches scum." Please back up this statement with some kind of justification.

scumJack might do it to:
1. Engender precisely this situation. (2SCUM4SCUM~!)
2. Observe reaction of perceived crumb'd.
3. Alert buddies to existence of perceived crumb to work on exposing whomever.

1) yea, a wagon on Jack. Everything is going as planned!
2) This is straight up nonsensical.
3) As I said, no reason to do that publicly. He could wait until night and tell his buddies then.

townJack might do it because:
1. He wants to give Jack an anti-town meta because he thinks anti-town play is fun. (Unlikely; Jack appears to be the primary account.)
2. He's really proud of himself for having found the Cop crumb, and he can't keep his mouth shut. (Which sort of begs the question of why he's hunting for Cop crumbs, anyway.)

Or 3) Its exactly what it looks like and he saw a cop crumb and posted that in annoyance.

So the conclusion is that the behavior is more likely to come from scumJack than townJack. I agree that it is poor scumplay, which is why I waited a little before voting him. I thought he was going somewhere with the SX exchange.

How exactly did you come to that conclusion? 3 > 2? You didn't even bother to ask yourself which of those reasons are more likely than each other?

My counterexample was a fine extrapolation of what you said IMO. Your argument (in different words) was that cops being exposed is OK because then the protective roles will know about them. Very minimal introspection will indicate that this is mistaken.

That is not what I said AT ALL. If the scum already know person X is a power role, then making a big deal about it can only serve to alert pro-town power roles. How the hell do you extend that to mean "Power roles should immediately claim"?

preview edit: I see you corrected yourself in 191.

-crates

[Iecerint]

My point is that if the only question is "Would scum do this?", you systematically ignore scum who play "poorly." It is relatively straightforward for scum to appear town using that heuristic -- "be scummy"! My heuristic is better because it does not permit that. (Meta is a third piece of the puzzle, but it's irrelevant for nicemetaJack AFAIK.)

I don't understand. You don't think poor play catches scum? (To clarify, that's poor play on the part of the scum obvs. As stated above, it's relevant because your heuristic explains away poor scumplay.) Assuming you didn't just misparse my sentence, what kind of play do you think catches them? O.o

1. Look at where his rhetoric went as soon as SX called him out.
2. I would be frazzled if someone made fun of my crumb.
3. Confirmation ftw. I'll elaborate on this after the ongoing game ends.

Your (3) for townJack's reasons is the same as my (2). I don't think either of townJack's reasons are plausible (relative to scumJack's) for the reasons I give in the parentheses. You quoted them.

[Elmocrates]

There is a difference between scum having a poorly thought out reason to do something and scum having no reason to do something at all.

One of my largest frustrations with the game of mafia is that I get the distinct impression that lynches (especially early ones) are almost entirely correlated with a players "skill", rather than their alignment. This phenomena is easiest to see with players like Deathnote or CSL or Zwet, who will almost always without fail be lynched at some point over the course of the game regardless of what their role is. I believe it was theFonz that once said something along the lines of "the side with the most Village Idiots loses". I feel this problem is caused by mentalities like yours, which conflates poor play as indicative of being scum.

Anyway this is more of a discussion for after the game.

Also, I am not arguing that Jack's post is a town tell or anything of the sort. I am arguing that it is a null-tell, and I don't feel you have sufficiently justified why Jack's behavior is more likely to come from scum.

People don't have to be hunting for crumbs to see them. That addresses your parentheses.

I am now leaning town on Iece. I am not ready to trust him with my first born child yet, though.

[Iecerint]

There is a difference between scum having a poorly thought out reason to do something and scum having no reason to do something at all.

That is vacuously true, but has nothing to do with the situation at hand IMO.

One of my largest frustrations with the game of mafia is that I get the distinct impression that lynches (especially early ones) are almost entirely correlated with a players "skill", rather than their alignment. This phenomena is easiest to see with players like Deathnote or CSL or Zwet, who will almost always without fail be lynched at some point over the course of the game regardless of what their role is. I believe it was theFonz that once said something along the lines of "the side with the most Village Idiots loses".

I agree with you 100%, but, again, that has nothing to do with the situation at hand AFAIK. My only other experience with Jack is ongoing. If you have reason to believe that that sort of thing is typical townJack play, please let me know.

[Elmocrates]

There is a difference between scum having a poorly thought out reason to do something and scum having no reason to do something at all.

That is vacuously true, but has nothing to do with the situation at hand IMO.

One of my largest frustrations with the game of mafia is that I get the distinct impression that lynches (especially early ones) are almost entirely correlated with a players "skill", rather than their alignment. This phenomena is easiest to see with players like Deathnote or CSL or Zwet, who will almost always without fail be lynched at some point over the course of the game regardless of what their role is. I believe it was theFonz that once said something along the lines of "the side with the most Village Idiots loses".

I agree with you 100%, but, again, that has nothing to do with the situation at hand AFAIK. My only other experience with Jack is ongoing. If you have reason to believe that that sort of thing is typical townJack play, please let me know.

Sure it does. I feel you are defaulting to placing more weight to the dumb scum reasons to do something than the dumb town reasons to do it. That is to say, you are quicker to assume an anti-town motivation to poor play than a pro-town one, which is exactly the thing I am complaining about.

[Elmocrates]

-crates

[Iecerint]

Jack is welcome to come and explain his pro-town motivation for lampshading the perceived cop crumb. All he's done so far is refuse to answer that precise question and allude to a 2SCUM4SCUM interpretation of his behavior.

My perception is that Jack is not dumb, so I don't think cross-supplying "but it's zwet!"-type arguments to this situation makes any sense.

[Iecerint]

My perception is that Jack

is not dumb

does not have an anti-town meta

, so I don't think cross-supplying "but it's zwet!"-type arguments to this situation makes any sense.

Fixed. Was using your adjective. Not that I think Jack is dumb.