Karma Mafia (Game Over!)

[Patrick]

Votecount

NickF227 (1) -- Seraphim
Albert B. Rampage (2) -- NickF227, curiouskarmadog
Sando (5) -- Albert B. Rampage, Amished, Jahudo, dybeck, RichardGHP
Ojanen (1) -- farside22

Not voting: Ojanen, Javert, Sando, Faraday, boberz, Espeonage
15 alive, 8 to lynch.

Deadline: 16th of May

[Espeonage]

I like case Seraphim made

Vote: Nick

Non-conventional yet still clearly shows how Nick's actions are scummy. I see the case and agree with it.

[Amished]

Yup. Esp is also scum, Nick is town.

[Albert B. Rampage]

Where's Javert and what does he have to say?

[Anon]

morons

[Sando]

ABR, seriously? You quoted why I voted Pom, no other lynch was possible, mainly due to the insistence of people like you that the lynch go ahead. It's pretty much impossible to look at other people when people refuse to do anything but lynch 1 person. I never believed the claim, but thought it was in towns best interest to leave her alive. When no other lynch was possible and it was clear that no scumhunting was going to be done with Pom alive, that benefit to town was eroded until I thought it in the best interest of town to get the lynch done with then. I also made it pretty clear that Pom would have to die at some point, I merely brought that forward.

You can claim that prolonging days is universally bad, but you know that it's not true. You also know that having a day focussed purely on 1 person is also bad, yet you did that yesterday quite happily.

Farside, Ojanen when engaged in the game has a fairly different scum game than town game by D2/D3. Bussing/distancing from a partner is something that Ojanen is extremely good at though, I would dread ever trying to link Ojanen to a partner, she attacks extremely convincingly and is perfectly willing to bus. I feel pretty confident in calling Ojanen town at this point though. And yes, this comes from meta, I know her scum-play better than most having played in a hydra with her She's also played in a fair few games with a good friend of mine who's games I tend to read.

Really? You campaigned tirelessly for the death of a power-role "because it would give us information", actively supressing discussion on any other topic, and this is the best you got from it?

to:

OK let's see where this one goes.

unvote, vote: Sando

So Dybeck, you initially thought it was a pretty weak case, and despite noone actually adding anything to ABRs case, you've changed your mind and want to see 'where it goes'? Righto.

Sigh

Unvote; Vote: Sando

IoA and wishy-washy voting seal the deal.

I honestly can't believe we're getting into an end-game with play like this. Blatant opportunistic BWing on someone who's attacked them fairly consistently, and consistently falling back on being a 'bad player' to defend any scummy actions.

I think my read on CKD was wrong yesterday and merely motivated by anger. I think Nick's attack on ABR is pretty opportunistically attacking the person who pushed a townie lynch. Seems like it's simply an easy attack to make on someone because they made a bad call and got a townie lynch, rather than actually motivated by scumhunting.

The first quote in point 6 from Sera is particularly telling combined with the almost gloating that he didn't lynch a townie.

Vote: Nick

Farside is now confirmed correct?

[Javert]

Where's Javert and what does he have to say?

Javert is still in the process of rereading after seeing the latest flips, and I am sure he will have something to say when he is finished.

[RichardGHP]

Sigh

Unvote; Vote: Sando

IoA and wishy-washy voting seal the deal.

I honestly can't believe we're getting into an end-game with play like this. Blatant opportunistic BWing on someone who's attacked them fairly consistently, and consistently falling back on being a 'bad player' to defend any scummy actions.

etc etc

[Ojanen]

Hi guys, sorry for not being here yet. I'm abroad and iffy on access until Thursday, but I should be able to read and post today a bit later.

[Javert]

I have decided the problem with rereading games is that they get longer every time you do it...

Long post alert.

Vote: Sando

FoS: NickF227

FoS: Seraphim

I was originally going to vote NickF227 and FoS Seraphim with this post, but with all the hubbub about Sando I decided to read over his posts in isolation. I can see him as scum, and particularly as scum with bv310.

1.)

In my reread, I did not initially really remember anything from Sando when I was not expressly focusing on him. My suspicion is largely based on a single paragraph and its progeny, though:

Dybecks claim that the BV case is wishy-washy etc is

classic attempt at derailing.

No reasoning is provided, it's all generalisations and no content, and all seemingly aimed at simply throwing a spanner in the wagon. Followed by the wishy-washy responses to questioning and the desperate leap onto the Esp wagon. I'm not sure how Dybeck got away without that being raised really...

Sando was not voting for bv310. Sando was voting for RichardGHP. Yet reading this paragraph, I certainly get the impression that Sando thinks (i.e. knows) bv310 is scum and is taking this opportunity to connect dybeck to bv310. What is telling is that Sando does not actually take a stance on bv310's alignment, while at the same time he is saying the wagon is being derailed. This is scummy. The more I reread it, the more is looks like Sando is a scum-partner to bv310.

He later expands in Post 512, where he votes dybeck because he “cannot think of a town reason” for dybeck “trying to undermine wagons.” I have good vibes from dybeck's response, and I think that fairly sums up what I think about Sando's post. “Scare words” is a pretty accurate summation of what I see in Sando's comments about wagons being “derailed.”

The smoking gun for me is that at the end of Day One, Sando makes Post 788 where he now claims people are trying to "derail" the RichardGHP wagon.

Here's the curious thing about that post. According to Sando,

because

the RichardGHP wagon was being derailed, we should have lynched RichardGHP, since then the “game would be in the bag” because of the information we would get. But when Sando talked about the bv310 wagon being derailed, he just voted for dybeck, the main “derailer.” I smell a standard being adversely applied to RichardGHP (lynch him because he is being derailed), and not being applied to bv310. (vote for the derailer).

2.)

NickF227 was another player whose posts were easy to skate over. I still stand by my comments about NickF227 from Post 953 in that NickF227 is a difficult player for me to get a read on, but reading over the game I did catch a couple other things I did not like. I am now leaning towards NickF227 being scum.

First, there was the “since it is so SCUMMY to vote for Richard...” comment while unvoting RichardGHP and voting for bv310. I can definitely see that as scum sulking about feeling like they have to vote for their partner. I do understand that NickF227's vote, if you look at the vote counts and nothing else, was the vote that changed the "lead wagon," but I hink that if you read that portion of the game in context, the momentum was going back towards bv310 even without NickF227's vote. There was a good number of players who were increasingly of the opinion that the RichardGHP wagon was not the right place to be, and a number of players actively pushing the bv310 lynch.

Second, as Pomegranate pointed out, NickF227 basically used the “but X is lurking, too!” defense in Post 1075.. I am really starting to think this scumtell is getting more reliable (and I think bv310 was guilty of this exact same tell in Post 589). It strikes me as sulking.

Finally, NickF227 has made a couple self-WIFOM comments I am not caring for:

But, I did give bv's vote the lead and all, and he did turn out to be mafia...soo..... Yeah.....If I was mafia, wouldn't I have waited until people actually jumped off the Richard bandwagon and bv was close to being lynched?

Can I just tell you, one thing?

Wouldn't I have hammered or at least voted for Pom if I was scum? And thne just say 'Oops she was so scummy and everyone else was doing it?'

Nope, I didn't vote for her cuz I didn't think she was that scummy.

And I was right.

That's so scummy <3

I especially dislike this second quote since the last thing NickF227 had said about Pomegranate was Post 1159. NickF227 thought that Pomegranate was lying about her claim, but that Pomegranate might have been a Cop? I do not even understand this post. NickF227 also suggests there are “other people” who are more scummy than Pomegranate, but the only person she mentions Day Two (and Day Three, in fact) is Albert B. Rampage.

3.)

I am still not completely comfortable with Seraphim. Obviously, his shining moment is the fact that he pushed the bv310 wagon. But as I have mentioned before, I just cannot bring myself to agree with a good deal of his reasoning, and I have not been particularly pleased with many of his explanations to various questions.

I think the best way to express my feelings are just to analyze what I think of Seraphim's main cases throughout the game:

Seraphim on bv310

->

a.)

The fact that bv310 “changed his mind” about RichardGHP is not really a scumtell, in my opinion. Even now that I know bv310 was scum, I read his posts and I don't think his changes of opinion on RichardGHP were scummy. I really have to wonder if Seraphim's case was a symptom of Stoofer's “everything my partner does is scummy!” theorem;
->

b.)

How quickly players became bv310's partners is just a bit disconcerting (a good example being Post 734).

Seraphim on boberz

->

a.)

Wrongly characterizing boberz's 640 as IIoA while seemingly dismissing the post out of hand, followed by:
->

b.)

Compressing PBPA as being equivalent to IIoA, while taking the untenable position that all PBPA's are scummy, followed by:
->

c.)

Not considering the difference between scummy versus antitown in the context of PBPAs when he is clearly willing to consider the difference by his characterization of RichardGHP as a VI (i.e. not helping us, but not scummy). I will note that Seraphim has said he will try to be better with such distinctions in Post 749, so I suppose I will have to wait and see; also
->

d.)

I disagree that “boberz is because he tried to derail the bv310 wagon” (Post 749 again). When Seraphim made that post,

bv310 had not flipped

. And even with bv310 flipping scum, the chances of boberz-scum trying to make such a last-ditch defense like that at the end of Day One seems seems remote to me.

Overall, I do not think that Seraphim really

believed

his case on boberz, but was instead just making a case against boberz. I am not at all surprised that Seraphim has since backed off boberz.

Seraphim's latest on RichardGHP

->

a.)

I simply do not understand how Seraphim thinks RichardGHP is “probably town,” and yet he wants to lynch RichardGHP; and worse:
->

b.)

I think Seraphim flatly contradicted himself when he later said he “does not want to lynch RichardGHP” when in two separate posts before that statement, he expressly said he

wanted

to lynch RichardGHP.

Seraphim on Pomegranate

->

a.)

Ironically, I actually do not have problems with Seraphim's posting against Pomegranate. It feels like I should on principle, but I still think the case against Pomegranate was actually a fairly well thought-out case.

I think somebody else pointed this out, but it really just hit me on my read-through: I am really not liking the wording of “if we assume I'm town” of Post 490.

I do not think my points on Seraphim are merely evidence of a “difference of opinion” spurred by different theories on scumhunting. Seraphim has taken some positions that I just am not seeing the support for. I know very well how to be a devil's advocate and see things from other players point of view, but I am finding it challenging for (i) “all PBPA's are scummy,” (ii) “I want to lynch X but I don't want to lynch X,” and (iii) “X is not an easy target, but they are an easy wagon.”

Question

: Unrelated to the above, Seraphim, who is the Andrew you referenced in Post 197?

[dybeck]

Really? You campaigned tirelessly for the death of a power-role "because it would give us information", actively supressing discussion on any other topic, and this is the best you got from it?

to:

OK let's see where this one goes.

unvote, vote: Sando

So Dybeck, you initially thought it was a pretty weak case, and despite noone actually adding anything to ABRs case, you've changed your mind and want to see 'where it goes'? Righto.

Let me make this very clear. I DID NOT "initially think it was a pretty weak case."

I think you're scum. I think you're scum and should be lynched. My problem with ABR's post is NOT that there is no case against you. There IS a case against you. My problem is that, if you recall, I had already fingered you as scum yesterday, and that lynching Pom unnecessarily hasn't added anything to the case against you.

So my problem is that we've lost a PR for no reason. For the avoidance of doubt, I will be VERY happy with your lynch, as I would have been yesterday.

Thanks for misrepresenting my post, though. I hope that I've now made myself clear, yes? So why don't you be a good boy and answer the points made against you instead of trying to shine the spotlight elsewhere?

[Sando]

So you suspected me from yesterday, yet decided Faraday was a better vote for you? Till what? What changed?

Javert, I addressed the point regarding Richard at the time. I also did not advocate that Richard should be the lynch to put the game 'in the bag', I was pointing out that peoples faulty logic, if followed to it's inevitable conclusion would do that. I was pointing out that the people who thought that Richard was scum-pushed never actually persued that. They apparently thought that they'd narrowed scum down to less than 50% of the players, yet didn't actively pursue that? That's BS.

[Espeonage]

Yup. Esp is also scum, Nick is town.

You're wrong on both counts. Even if I were scum, how would that clear Nick?

[dybeck]

So you suspected me from yesterday, yet decided Faraday was a better vote for you? Till what? What changed?

What's changed NOW is that you are failing to address any points put to you, and desperately trying to turn the attention elsewhere. Want to try again?

[Seraphim]

I don't have time to post much else, but Javert, I have no idea who the fuck Andrew is. I'm trying to wrack my brains. I think it may be Richard but I have NO idea what I was thinking there.

[curiouskarmadog]

I think my read on CKD was wrong yesterday and merely motivated by anger.

would this have been any different if my vote was on you? I still think your actions were/are scummy and have no problem joining this wagon in the face of a no lynch....however, right now, I feel like ABR is scummier.

[farside22]

Seeing those voting Nick I get the impression he is the scapegoat of the day.

In other news I'm in need of a read. Hoping today to do something about that.

[boberz]

First ever prod I do apologise everyone.

Still need to go back and work out what I had on Dybeck. He has improved today however and is actually pressing for weak points in Sando for example.

[Javert]

First ever prod I do apologise everyone.

Still need to go back and work out what I had on Dybeck. He has improved today however and is actually pressing for weak points in Sando for example.

As far as I recall, dybeck was pressing on Sando yesterday, too. What is different about him today?

[Sando]

So you suspected me from yesterday, yet decided Faraday was a better vote for you? Till what? What changed?

What's changed NOW is that you are failing to address any points put to you, and desperately trying to turn the attention elsewhere. Want to try again?

You haven't even put any points to me, merely made some generalised comments. ABR has made some points, I've answered them and pointed to previous answers. Javert has made some, I've answered them as well, not to mention that you made this accusation for the first time before he posted them.

What questions am I avoiding?

[Albert B. Rampage]

lol ^^^

[Sando]

So you suspected me from yesterday, yet decided Faraday was a better vote for you? Till what? What changed?

What's changed NOW is that you are failing to address any points put to you, and desperately trying to turn the attention elsewhere. Want to try again?

Pretty sure you also changed your vote before I'd even posted today. Accusing me of avoiding questions seems like a bit of a stretch.

[curiouskarmadog]

Sando, if you agreed with my thoughts yesterday about the hider, why did you vote to lynch him anyway?

[curiouskarmadog]

lol ^^^

lol^^^

[Sando]

Sando, if you agreed with my thoughts yesterday about the hider, why did you vote to lynch him anyway?

I thought it would be in the best interest of town to leave the claimed hider alive and scumhunt elsewhere. Since there was too much resistance from people like ABR to even looking at anyone else yesterday, I changed my view to it being in the best interest of the town to lynch the claimed hider, a claim I didn't believe, and get on with proper scumhunting today. It wasn't ideal, but I thought it in towns interest to move on.