Mini 956: The Quayside (Game Over)

[popsofctown]

http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... &&start=25

Scum got restless during RVS in my very first newbie game. Is that enough for you to believe I'm not making it up as I go along?

I don't have a wiki, so it's hard for me to pull links, usually google gives me enough for "lemme read one where you're town"

[Patrick]

I can read 10 as a joke, though it wasn't obvious at the time.

@NabNab, which qualifications about his suspicions of me do you dislike? I've fairly often seen players say that they're worried their read of someone might be coloured by OMGUS.

[Goatrevolt]

But that's what started this. You made the second post of the game, and you've claimed that the vote in that post wasn't random. All you would have had to go on at that point was pops' bad joke. Additionally, the post you're getting on his case about now can also be read entirely as a bad joke. The "I don't know if he's scum" part is essential to set up the "but he beats his wife" part. The joke, as a continuation of the "do you still beat your wife?" method of identifying a loaded question, emphasizes the absurdity of basing a vote on anything other than a scum read. By extension, it accuses Goatrevolt's loaded question and vote of being absurd. It is thus more akin to Ecto's paraphrase of SC than it is to pops' later qualifications about Patrick-suspicion, which I certainly do find to be suspicious.

You're missing the point. You're putting undue emphasis on why I initially went after pops and ignoring any of my later reasons. Do you tend to go back to page 1 reasoning on day 3 and say "well that's what started this?"

THE QUALIFIER IS PART OF THE JOKE. Geez. Is this going to be another brickwall game? I don't think I can handle another brickwall game. I really don't.

I already explained how that clause is integral to the joke. That might also be why it, durhur, isn't separated by something like a period or semicolon.

Relax.

The clause isn't integral to the joke. The clause is integral to saving face in the off chance people don't realize it's a joke.

Unvote
Vote SerialClergyman
FoS: NabakovNabakov

[popsofctown]

TBH i can see the "joke plus qualifier" of what i said, but they are reading it wrong, (wrong inflection or something), and it ticks me off when people use blinders.

[NabakovNabakov]

You're missing the point. You're putting undue emphasis on why I initially went after pops and ignoring any of my later reasons. Do you tend to go back to page 1 reasoning on day 3 and say "well that's what started this?"

Well, my last post dealt with the bad comedian and the two instances of qualification. You're right to say I haven't mentioned the note about him leaving your wagon. The self-conscious comment is more general and tied in with the bad comedian point, and I'm dealing with other parts of the Patrick section myself.

You're acting like I'm attempting to take apart your case piece by piece. Am I not allowed to say: "I'd like to pursue this point, but I don't like that point."?

@NabNab, which qualifications about his suspicions of me do you dislike? I've fairly often seen players say that they're worried their read of someone might be coloured by OMGUS.

My main problem with the post was the inconsistency in only identifying you as the player "pointing the most baseless fingers." Your random vote hadn't been very content-rich, but neither had Jahudo's or Elmo's. Why single you out? Now that I think about it, that could be an effect of OMGUS, but then why pop up to say "Hey guys, I thought I had a read, but it turned out I didn't."?


Hm... maybe the whole thing wasn't as bad as my initial reaction.

[Incognito]

In response to Goat:

I'm not certain about his alignment, I'm just going after what I find most suspicious.

The following two quotes looked like certainty to me:

Because he's scum.

On a more serious note, I think pops is scum. My vote wasn't random.

The second quote continued on with a case on pops.

Specifically what do you find bothersome about it? If not malicious, then what do you dislike?

Well, it was page 2 of a thread that's been open for less than a real life day. While I agree that some of popsofctown's behavior has been questionable, I can in no way state right now with any amount of confidence that I think he's scum. And I can't recall a time that I've ever been able to do so this early in any game that I've been in. So that's what I didn't like about it. I think I understood what you were doing there though, so I didn't find it malicious - it was something I wanted to keep an eye on.

@popsofctown:

So I did miss the word "scummy" in there. Apologies for that.

[popsofctown]

Goatrevolt ninjaed me earlier.


And he's being dumb. I will hit you. With a billy club. Turn your confirmation bias off for more than 3 seconds and read the post again.


Do you see the difference between, "Voting Goatrevolt because he beats his wife. [that must mean he's scum]" and "Voting Goatrevolt, not because I think he's scum, but as punishment for domestic violence".

[Goatrevolt]

Nab: Do you think OMGUS is a scum tell?

You're acting like I'm attempting to take apart your case piece by piece. Am I not allowed to say: "I'd like to pursue this point, but I don't like that point."?

No, that's fine. I just found it odd that you picked off the weakest part of my case and said it was bad but ignored the bulk, while pursuing the same player yourself for entirely different reasons.

@Incog: I've caught scum on the first few pages before, and I think there's a lot to be learned from early game interactions, but I'm fully aware of the strength of my arguments against pops. I think I learned a lot more being aggressive and surefooted about it than I would have pussyfooting around.

@Pops: What is that last post in response to?

[NabakovNabakov]

Nab: Do you think OMGUS is a scum tell?

More fallacy than scumtell. If we're talking OMGUS as an unconscious response to a threat (as we are in this situation), marking a person who is attacking you as scum is more indicative of a townie mindset. If it's a conscious tactic where you're essentially driving your own chainsaw defense, then it's a mild scumtell.

surefooted

lol

[McGriddle]

Well, I have played a game before in which pops was a high PR, and I was also town, and from my experience, pops was a huge leader in that game, and posted a lot of good content. Something I see lacking in here. I think it wise to look into that, meaning, I don't know neccesarilly if he is scum, but he could either be scum or vanilla townie, I can't see him as a PR.

[McGriddle]

A question for all; if you were scum, how would we tell?

I <3 bussing.

Other than that, I don't really know, apparantly I am a bad scum though so this being an experienced game, you would probably know by the end of the day whether I was scum or not lol.

Is that part of your playstyle that you mention in Post 22? I don't think I've played with you before.

Also, your post count seems to indicate you're not a newbie so why would you put down your play?

Oh and, I always play pretty terribly, but when I am scum it tends to be even worse. I don't think you have either. I am putting myself down because I don't know if I am very good.

[Ectomancer]

Goat, the way you left the wagon looked to be as a result of Pops frustration response. I can see why you might back off pressing someone until they break. You said you know the strength of your arguments. Could you break it down for posterity? Thanks.

[Ectomancer]

Well, I have played a game before in which pops was a high PR, and I was also town, and from my experience, pops was a huge leader in that game, and posted a lot of good content. Something I see lacking in here. I think it wise to look into that, meaning, I don't know neccesarilly if he is scum, but he could either be scum or vanilla townie, I can't see him as a PR.

Well at least your buddies know your opinion there after you get lynched today and can't deliver it in your QT

[Incognito]

I don't know neccesarilly if he is scum, but he could either be scum or vanilla townie, I can't see him as a PR.

Seriously? Do you think it's wise to speculate about possible power roles so openly?

[SerialClergyman]

Incog, do you think McGriddle's PR comment is scummy, or just bad?

I don't see anything wrong with goat's attacks or choice of words.

I vaugely like that pops didn't answer iamausername's question, I don't know that scum would be ballsy enough to not go with the group on that. Not sure about appealing to confirmation bias in post 56 though, to someone no longer voting him.

Allow me to introduce myself. I am not easily deflected, nor am I likely to take any advice that is not my own.
I have only a narrow band of leniency for a lack of clarity. You'll want to pick yours up. I also have a narrow band of leniency for making excuses for yourself before there is even a cause to have an excuse.

'this is who I am, now YOU change' Zzz.

Oh and, I always play pretty terribly, but when I am scum it tends to be even worse. I don't think you have either. I am putting myself down because I don't know if I am very good.

Don't like this.

Nab has earned my vote via this:

RL D1 of D1 of an invitational (basically) is a tough crowd, and

while I have reasons for looking at pops,

it's not because he's a bad comedian.

People who say 'backup reasons I will not express' ping my scumdar.

[NabakovNabakov]

Nab has earned my vote via this:

RL D1 of D1 of an invitational (basically) is a tough crowd, and

while I have reasons for looking at pops,

it's not because he's a bad comedian.

People who say 'backup reasons I will not express' ping my scumdar.

Umm... they're not a secret. I was interested in why pops was giving undue attention to Patrick as opposed to Elmo or Jahudo, who all had equally low content-levels in their random votes, thus the prodding about Elmo in the very same post your quoted. I didn't want to lay my case completely on the line at that moment, because I was concerned about tainting pops' response about Elmo, but I've been very straightforward about my thinking since then.

[Hoopla]

Day 1, Vote Count #3

With twelve alive, it takes

7

votes to lynch. Deadline is schedueled for 7:00AM GMT, April 26th <Countdown>.

Goatrevolt

-

3

(Patrick, popsofctown, Elmo)

SerialClergyman

-

3

(Jahudo, McGriddle, Goatrevolt)

popsofctown

-

1

(Ectomancer)

iamausername

-

1

(SerialClergyman)

Elmo

-

1

(Incognito)

RedCoyote

-

1

(iamausername)

Ectomancer

-

1

(NabakovNabakov)

Not voting

-

1

(RedCoyote)

[popsofctown]

@Pops: What is that last post in response to?

52

[RedCoyote]

On a more serious note, I think pops is scum. My vote wasn't random. Something about his first post rubbed me the wrong way. I felt like he was trying too hard to appear casual/joking and it came off as forced. Then he tried to joke when I called him scum, but it felt forced again, and hell, he didn't deny it.

I've heard worse justifications. I don't necessarily think you're scummy for this, but I don't really understand it. Why would scum need to appear "casual/joking"? I mean, I get the idea that you want to blend in, but do you mean like scum have a harder time appearing as though they're jovial and carefree?

Maybe it's just because I don't get this from pops' opening post at all. I don't think it's forced, and even if I thought that, I don't know if I would immediately jump to the conclusion that pops was scum. Not only do you do that, but you also immediately attempt to box him in. If anything, I see

your

aggression as over-the-top.

This is coming from someone who usually sees aggression as a positive, too.

Anyways, I'm taking Incog's position on this one, and I'm also liking you and him calling out SC:

SerialClergyman's post 35 stuck out to me too because it didn't really address some of the major things that have been brought up on this page. SC, any other thoughts on anyone else so far aside from me?

Agreed 100%. He read and responded to the portion of my post directed at him in 4 minutes time. That suggests he was "camping" the thread. If he was just checking in from the last time he had posted, he would have had to read like 10 posts from his last post and also type up a response to mine which would probably take longer than 4 minutes, and that's if he timed it perfectly too.

The part that bothers me most is that he didn't react at all to my 3 paragraphs on pops, only picking out the part that pertained to him and responding to it. Then 7 minutes later I asked him about his thoughts on pops and no further response.

This I can get behind, not as much for him "not bringing up any other thoughts on anyone else", but because, as Goat says, he clarifies his vote with three paragraphs in a clear, reasonable way. Goat no doubt wants some honest feedback on his vote, and he's essentially saying, "Look, my pops vote is serious, dammit".

I don't get how SC missed that, unless he just flat out ignored it.

---

Well at least your buddies know your opinion there after you get lynched today and can't deliver it in your QT

I look forward to McGriddle answering Incog and me.

---

I don't see anything wrong with goat's attacks or choice of words.

Explain, please.

Nab has earned my vote

Did you forget to vote or was this just a figure of speech?

[Goatrevolt]

Goat, the way you left the wagon looked to be as a result of Pops frustration response. I can see why you might back off pressing someone until they break. You said you know the strength of your arguments. Could you break it down for posterity? Thanks.

Yeah, it was somewhat based on his frustrated responses. I also think I got about as much out of that as was possible and I think SC is more likely scum right now so I made the swap.

I knew that my arguments weren't as strong as I was pushing them or making them out to be. I did legitimately find everything I brought up against pops suspicious, but I was pushing it as a stronger case than it really was. For page 1 day 1, I felt this was better than what I normally go on.

What are your current thoughts on SC and pops?

[Goatrevolt]

I don't see anything wrong with goat's attacks or choice of words.

My attacks and choice of words are saying that you are scum. No thoughts on what I have said about you and no answer to my question about your stance on pops?

[SerialClergyman]

Incog points out that I ignored some major material. Goat quotes and expands on that point. RedCoyote quotes THAT and expands on THAT point. I bet there's scum in those three, and even further I would guess it's Red. The original point was nowhere near strong or unusual enough to get this kind of reaction.

To answer the charge - I read Goat's case on pops and didn't feel the need to comment. While Goat checked the time was 4 minutes after his post, he didn't check that that time in Sydney would have been about 3:30am, and that was my last post before going to bed, which explains it's brevity. But even then, I would have commented if I felt I had something to add, I just didn't.

To comment as much as possible - I'm not swayed by your case, Goat. There's not much evidence there and I don't see anythign inspirational in your gut read. As I mentioned later, I don't find your choice of words scummy, as Incognito did. (that's your explanation requested above, red.)

I did indeed forget to vote, but now I'm musing about sending it Red's way. In fact, lets get that done.

vote RedCoyote

[SerialClergyman]

My attacks and choice of words are saying that you are scum.

Yes they are, but I think Incognito's attack on you was unreasonable. You're wrong about me, unconvincing about pops and your self-assured language isn't a scumtell.

[RedCoyote]

I don't see anything wrong with goat's attacks or choice of words.

You're wrong about me, unconvincing about pops and your self-assured language isn't a scumtell.

Hmmm...

[Goatrevolt]

@Pops: Ok, I'm less confused now. I had no clue you were talking about me. 56 is a response to 52 and 53 is a response to 51. I see your point, although I don't get why you continue to be so pissed when I'm not even voting you anymore.

On a more serious note, I think pops is scum. My vote wasn't random. Something about his first post rubbed me the wrong way. I felt like he was trying too hard to appear casual/joking and it came off as forced. Then he tried to joke when I called him scum, but it felt forced again, and hell, he didn't deny it.

I've heard worse justifications. I don't necessarily think you're scummy for this, but I don't really understand it. Why would scum need to appear "casual/joking"? I mean, I get the idea that you want to blend in, but do you mean like scum have a harder time appearing as though they're jovial and carefree?

Maybe it's just because I don't get this from pops' opening post at all. I don't think it's forced, and even if I thought that, I don't know if I would immediately jump to the conclusion that pops was scum. Not only do you do that, but you also immediately attempt to box him in. If anything, I see

your

aggression as over-the-top.

This is coming from someone who usually sees aggression as a positive, too.

I love how you say you've heard worse justification to preface 3 paragraphs talking about how bad you think my justifications are. It has nothing to do with scum needing to appear anything. Scum could do what Elmo did and plop a vote with nothing else, or they could do what Patrick did and plop a question and a vote or they could do what pops did with jokes and a vote. They don't really "need" to do any of those things.

The point is that I felt like pops was trying too hard to look like he was making natural jokes. His post (and then subsequent posts) just came off as fake sounding to me. It's not that he needed to make jokes to blend in, it's that he was making jokes and they didn't feel like confident, natural posts.

I'm really failing to see why what I did was problematic in any way. You wouldn't jump to the conclusion he was immediately scum and "box him in" but does that mean it was wrong for me to do so? How did I box him in, what does that mean, why is it a bad thing, was my over-the-top aggression anti-town, and if yes, then why?

Nab has earned my vote

Did you forget to vote or was this just a figure of speech?

I agree it's weird he didn't vote, although I'm wondering why you haven't voted either.