Mini #1004 - Popularity Mafia (Over)

[LlamaFluff]

Vote Count

Tasky (4) - Friend, PranaDevil, vollkan, Andrius
Xite91 (1) - NicoBolas
Sando (1) - Tasky
Andrius (1) - seraphim
vollkan (1) - Scott Brosius
Friend (1) - Xite91

Not Voting (3) - Max, TheLonging, sando

[Sando]

For me saying "nice try" feels scummy...

So now you're claiming it's a gut feel on your end? You actually said this at the time:

scum usually wants to point out that they just avoided something they feel is a trap...

Now you're just contradicting yourself, you had a reason, that scum wants to point out something, and now it's gut. Guts a great thing isn't it? You don't have to justify it, you don't get called out on it later.

How did I threaten you? I

removed

my vote specifically to give you some breathing room to claim. I did not want a quick-hammer to come in, especially as I believe there had been 3 votes on you since the last count, and it would be fairly easy for scum to come along and hammer then claim they didn't realise it was the hammer.

You need to claim because a lot of people find you scummy and have demonstrated this by putting you at L-1. Your arguments have been weak, and I personally know that a claim done correctly could sway my vote. If you continue to be obstinate in this, my vote will return without a claim.

[Sando]

Oh, you weren't at L-1, I missed NicoBolas unvoting you in the middle of his paragraph it seems.

Vote: Tasky

[vollkan]

I think we should agree on some pre-fixed order for neighborizing, otherwise scum could avouid having to talk too much more easily...
there should really be a good reason not to hold too such a pre-fixed order...
IMO, the everyone-targets-the-person-right-under-them-in-popularity-way is a good one, since it can not be influenced by scum...

Definitely not.

Yes, it makes it slightly easier for scum. But it also prevents town from targeting where they think they can have the most impact.

I don't agree with this... giving everyone free choice let's scum more room to dodge discussion... and you are forgetting that scum could be hiding in the crowd during day and not let you spot them, so that you never even think about talking to them at night... but since by the mentioned method everybody has to talk to somebody, that's just not possible...
if you think somebody is scum, you say it in the thread and then by the method there are usually two neighbors who can do the interrogation... it is highly unlikely that both are scum, so that at least on interrogation will be done by a townie... and if your reasons for thinking someone was scum were good, that townie will understand them and do a good interrogation

If a player thinks somebody is scum, they can individually target them. If a player thinks somebody is town, they can target them and possibly reveal useful information.

And if scum keep targeting each other, my proposal to force people to give their reasons will quickly expose that.

The small cost of having scum talk to each other under my method is greatly outweighed by the benefit of giving the entire town free choice. Whereas, your method basically removes any ability for it to be used strategically by town in ways that they might not want to publicly reveal.

Here is my opinion on outline of proposed actions towards neighbouring:

1. Enforced "You must pick this person" - Opposed
I as the most popular person and an adequate scum hunter feels that I should be allowed to pick whoever I wish. Say I felt like picking a scummy person to pick at some argument then I want to be able to do that. Say I want a townie to argue with I want that possibility too.
2. Explaining Choices of Masonships - Support
I feel that this is necessary. Scum cannot hide behind their actions saying "I had to". Only ranks 11/12 have no choice of who to pair with and that means that everyone else's choice can be analysed.
3. Claiming Tonight's choices in advance - Opposed
Do I really need to explain why? It would give scum information going into night one that the town would only use day 2.


Seriously. This conversation needs to be finished pretty quick. It's evident people will have different abilities however as this is the most powerful tool town power (I guess) we have to use we should make sure we don't forget the more important one. Lynching.

Completely agree with this.

Xites wall-o-text seems like scum desperation.

Explain this.

Those bolded times? That's all the times he responded to my case by saying, oh you're wrong but in your terms mostly, or your case is null or such and such. Dismissing it as nothing... Just seems like an interesting reaction to me, and it seems to make the rest of you think the same way

What is the point of this? He has been explaining why he thinks your case is crap; in which case I'm happy for him to say that he thinks your case is crap.

[NicolBolas]

@sando, i read thru your posts and it seems that you are attacking Tasky for his williningness to jump on an "easy target" and nothing else. Is this true? I want to see more reasons why you dont like Tasky.

@Tasky I read thru your posts and it is interesting how you are reacting to Sando's admittedly weak attack. Instead of proceeding with logic, you accuse him of being scum because he pointed fingers at you. Do you have any better reasons than just that Sando attacked you?

A very interesting exchange between the two. If i had to choose one to vote, I would choose Tasky, but i'm still waiting on xite....

[Tasky]

For me saying "nice try" feels scummy...

So now you're claiming it's a gut feel on your end? You actually said this at the time:

scum usually wants to point out that they just avoided something they feel is a trap...

Now you're just contradicting yourself, you had a reason, that scum wants to point out something, and now it's gut. Guts a great thing isn't it? You don't have to justify it, you don't get called out on it later.

I always said it was gut:

this is just gut

, but the "nice try though"-thing really feels scummy... scum usually wants to point out that they just avoided something they feel is a trap...

I see my including of the gut argument as a deliberately weak argument (although I didn't include it whit that in mind, thinking about it, I'm happy I did)...
the big difference in discussion between a townie and scum, is that scum want's to get information, and will agree with the "opponent" if they say something right... for a townie, it's not about winning the argument, it's about discovering the other's alignment...
scum on the other side, want to score points and want to win arguments... the way you attacked my "gut-feeling" argument, which in fact is (by far) the weakest of my arguments you are looking for a quick win over my arguments... the problem with that is that you do as if nullifying that argument will kill the whole case, while you still have to attack the other, the strong arguments...
if you were really interested in what I am saying, you would discuss more the major points (the one about you looking for reasons to copy other people votes without looking like copying)... instead, what did you do? you went for the weak argument, the one that wouldn't stand a chance alone if you really had a way to nullify the other arguments... and why? to make me look stupid, to score points in our discussion..
and that is a scum-tell, since townies don't want other people to look stupid, they want to find out their alignment...... (actually I had enough scum-tells, but now I'm even more sure)

How did I threaten you? I

removed

my vote specifically to give you some breathing room to claim. I did not want a quick-hammer to come in, especially as I believe there had been 3 votes on you since the last count, and it would be fairly easy for scum to come along and hammer then claim they didn't realise it was the hammer.

this seems a threat to me:

Pretty sure Andrius put you at L-1, Trasky needs to claim. Vote goes back on if the next Trasky post isn't a claim.

Sando, you are blatantly trying to make up inexistent contradictions, you manipulate what I say by quoting only partially and all that just so you don't have to admit your attack was wrong in the first place...

_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_

@Tasky I read thru your posts and it is interesting how you are reacting to Sando's admittedly weak attack. Instead of proceeding with logic, you accuse him of being scum because he pointed fingers at you. Do you have any better reasons than just that Sando attacked you?

I think this has to be considered logic:

Tasky and Xite are both obvious targets today. I feel more strongly about Tasky, Xite is a pretty easy target for some of his posts I feel, and Tasky has taken advantage of this:

so you really think depriving us of the only weapon we have against scum, discussion, will be good for town?

Not much, but he's taking the opportunity to throw out attacks without actually calling someone scummy, FOS/Voting them etc.

how exactly do you make the equation ["take advantage of someone" = "asking someone a question"] ?

Xites wall-o-text seems like scum desperation.

wowowo... if everybody who likes to post wall-o-text was scum, we'd have to lynch almost everybody on MafiaScum...

putting those two things together it looks to me like Sando came here, saw the case against me and Xite and wants to join it... but he doesn't want to look like he is just blindly following the others, so he looks for some (rather poor) excuses to do so...
this looks very much like scum trying to get on a bandwagon...

therefore UNVOTE:
VOTE: Sando

as I already said, the OMGUS argument is invalid here... a lot of people happen to have a vote on me, if I were to attack only those who don't, because otherwise it would be OMGUS, I couldn't scum-hunt at all

_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_

@vollkan: ok, for me it's no big deal on which neighborizing strategy to use... as long as everybody has to publicly tell who they targeted last night... that way scum has no way to avoid night-discussion...

[Friend]

UNVOTE: Tasky
VOTE: xite91

This is too soon for claiming. While I still think Tasky is the scummiest, we need to talk more. Sando seems a little too aggressive.

[Friend]

Oh, should have explained the xite vote - he's my second suspect, mostly for the extremely poor case he laid out on me + pushing said case after I explained why it was poor.

[Sando]

Saying something is gut then giving a non-gut reason doesn't seem like gut to me.

Nicol, no, that's not the only reason, but it was new and I wanted to bring it up. His vote on me is fairly OMGUS. And Tasky, voting someone for attacking you is OMGUS, pointing out that a lot of people doesn't diminish from this. Attacking people for things other than voting you would be avoiding OMGUS.

Self-voting is blatantly scummy, as previously said.

Refusing to claim and claiming that I'm threatening him, is obviously a complete distortion of what's happening.

The attempt at wagoning Volkan was silly and pointless, and IIoA was silly, and points to a tendency to play according to the wiki. It's the same as attacking Xite as an easy target to appear pro-town. Scum tend to want to do things on D1 that looks so pro-town that everyone thinks they're town. My general rule is that the first person to accuse someone of role-fishing is scum, because it's so obviously anti-town to role-fish, that anyone accusing someone of role-fishing is

obviously

town (sarcasm there btw). Same applies with things like IIoA, it's a classic tell so accusing people of it is an easy way to get town-points.

He's trying to portray his attack on Xite as required because he was saying anti-town things and noone was bringing them up, yet Volkan had already brought Xite to heel:

+2. Noob scum throwing out a fishing line to see if there is support for an utterly insane idea.

[Sando]

This is too soon for claiming. While I still think Tasky is the scummiest, we need to talk more. Sando seems a little too aggressive.

Aggresive is bad now?

When is not 'too soon' for claiming?

[Andrius]

This is too soon for claiming. While I still think Tasky is the scummiest, we need to talk more. Sando seems a little too aggressive.

Technically, had Sando voted Tasky (which he was willing to do) Tasky would have been at L-2, which is acceptable claiming ground.

Aggresive is not bad. Its a playstyle.

[Friend]

Aggressiveness is not bad, but I think Sando is being a little overagressive. Scum is usually more aggressive than town.

8 pages in is too soon to be seriously considering a lynch, IMO.

[Friend]

Although, now reading back, apparently this is Sando's meta. Forget I said anything about the aggressiveness.

[Xite91]

Xite, get a grip. Your case

is

weak. It can be forgiven, however, as Friend shouldn't shrug it off just because it's a weak case. It isn't well formulated and in the first few pages I don't feel that friend should have said that he thinks people are town. Though that's not enough to lynch someone.

Questions to All

- Do you feel that The Player

one

above you on the ranking list is scum?
- If you had to choose now who would you lynch?
- Who do you think is most town at this time?

I would like evidence and from these 11 posts I will determine who I feel is town and scum.

Teehee, youre funny
First, I admitted that my original case was weak, but it's getting stronger, at least in my mind.
And that post with all the quotes showing how friend was fighting back was to show that he really wasn't saying anything, mostly get your facts/definitions straight, or oh you're wrong. And IIRC it wasn't only me he did it to. (I think it was t{r}asky )
Part of my problem is that I haven't really seen him actively scumhunt, just state fallacies in non-game breaking points.
Do me a favor, go ISO him, see what I mean. He doesn't seem pro town to me at all...


1) This is gonna sound crazy and I know i'm gonna get some sort of shit for this, but aside from the self vote (albeit somewhat obvious joking i hate self voters) and bandwagoning for the sake of it, I don't see tasky as too scummy. I more see jumpy townies as jumpy and scummy scum as trying to push an easy lynch.
2) Friend or else my vote would probably not be on him
3) I dunno, everyone's iffy in this game. I'd probably say seraphim or thelonging because I haven't seen much of them yet. (ME! lulz, softclaiming townie, that's really cute, also seems a little noobish TBH)

@Xite- I saw the same thing that friend did. What i see in the bolded parts is friend not getting your case against friend, then you are now using that against friend. I do not like this. Friend is not dismissing your case as nothing IMO, it is your case that is weak. I am not sure what you mean by "easy targets much?". What i saw was Tasky and Sando attacking each other. It just struck me oddly. About the neighborzing thing, my concern is not in night three, but night two. Hypothetically, if scum knew the plan for neighborzing, they would be able to eliminate both of an single person's neighbors, rendering that person worthless in discussing what happened during the night. Also, a preset plan prevents the town to scumhunt during the night.

2) I would lynch xite. I feel that his case on friend is useless, and when attacked for it, he seems to be panicking a little. Pulls out crap reasoning, really.

First, Uhm, if it was a free choice, scum could just pair up with scum (if you're going with the idea that scum want to avoid townies like the plague)
Second, if someone died and we all were targeting the person below us, the only way anyone would not be talking to someone would be if they killed the second or second to last person on the list, assuming there's not some odd thing where I

can

pair with the top dog. So I don't see much of a problem considering scum will probably go for townier players first night rather than anything else.

Now about my case on Friend, I never panicked, I simply tried to make it a little clearer to see why I think he's scum, but you guys seem to have your head so far up your asses cuz I posted a simple suggestion that could get a simple yes or no answer and be done with it. Push past that and see that hey, maybe I am making a good point.
And it wasn't that he didn't get it most of the time it was more like he was avoiding it.

First, other than the wagon on one and the extreme suspicion on the other, how are we obvious targets?

and

First, easy targets much?

So I'm silly for suggesting that you and Trasky are easy targets for being the top 2 suspects, not to mention the reasons for being the top 2 suspects, but you feel the need to attack NicolBolas for bringing up 'easy targets'? Hypocritical much?

First one, i was just curious how we were easy targets.
Second one, everyone was so adamant that we were such easy targets, it seemed like he

was

making an "easy" attack at that point.

Oh, should have explained the xite vote - he's my second suspect, mostly for the extremely poor case he laid out on me + pushing said case after I explained why it was poor.

Oh, I'm sorry, don't recall you saying why, just recall you saying it was and shrugging it off.

unvote

just kidding.
But I might if you show me these posts

[Max]

3: Me, obviously, anyone not saying this is scum? Probably Max or NicolBolas, Max is controlling conversation at this stage and while I find that townie, I'm also very wary of it. NicolBolas has basically been adding good content, and has been fairly non-scummy, but isn't as contributing as some others.

If I'm not leading the conversation I don't work well. You remember that. I was right with my scum leads but, well, as I hadn't led the convo therefore I was doomed by the leading scum mofos.

Oh, dudes. Notice how all of a sudden this game isn't about the mechanics. *bows* Right, I'm going to read through people's responses and wrap this mother up.

[Max]

As people haven't finished I've Saved what I've got but won't post my three main suspicions until I feel it is fair to do so.

[TheLonging]

OK so I will reread these 8 pages and write down notes in Notepad, but what are the main details I should concern myself with? It's hard to keep up with 2 games I'm in, and work on the other 2 since I was on V/LA.

[NicolBolas]

Tasky and Sando's arugement,
Tasky in general,
Xite's weak case on friend

[LlamaFluff]

Scott Brosius has requested replacement. Please stand by for a new student.

[Friend]

Xite, please read me in ISO. I'm on my iPod now so it's really hard to quote, I've addressed why your case is so poor, not just ignoring it, like you said. I addressed each instance of "buddying" one-by-one. You seemed to have missed it.

[LlamaFluff]

"Pay Attention" cries the professor, smacking the desk of a dozing Scott Brosius. As he wakes up, you realize he looks a little bit different. Oh well, back to studies

VasudeVa replaces Scott Brosius

[vollkan]

I see my including of the gut argument as a deliberately weak argument (although I didn't include it whit that in mind, thinking about it, I'm happy I did)...
the big difference in discussion between a townie and scum, is that scum want's to get information, and will agree with the "opponent" if they say something right... for a townie, it's not about winning the argument, it's about discovering the other's alignment...
scum on the other side, want to score points and want to win arguments... the way you attacked my "gut-feeling" argument, which in fact is (by far) the weakest of my arguments you are looking for a quick win over my arguments... the problem with that is that you do as if nullifying that argument will kill the whole case, while you still have to attack the other, the strong arguments...
if you were really interested in what I am saying, you would discuss more the major points (the one about you looking for reasons to copy other people votes without looking like copying)... instead, what did you do? you went for the weak argument, the one that wouldn't stand a chance alone if you really had a way to nullify the other arguments... and why? to make me look stupid, to score points in our discussion..
and that is a scum-tell, since townies don't want other people to look stupid, they want to find out their alignment...... (actually I had enough scum-tells, but now I'm even more sure)

To clarify the extent of your case against xite, could you please list your non-gut points briefly? Reason being is that, if it is true he only singled out a weak argument to attack, that is a valid scumtell; but the sheer size of your exchange with him means that each individual point isn't clear.

Sando seems a little too aggressive.

Aggressiveness is not bad, but I think Sando is being a little overagressive. Scum is usually more aggressive than town.

+2

Aggression is NOT a scumtell and accusing Sando of being "overaggressive" is just throwing around an empty smear label that discredits him despite not actually relating to any flaw in his argument. Aggression is entirely a playstyle thing.

First, I admitted that my original case was weak, but it's getting stronger, at least in my mind.

Why is it getting stronger?

[VasudeVa]

Hey, I'm the new guy. Welcome me. (Hi Andy~).

Be reading and posting thoughts soon.

[Friend]

Hey Vasude, welcome to school.

@vollkan: I addressed that in a later post, essentially taking back what I said about Sando. I realize his aggressiveness is a style and a big fat nulltell.

[Andrius]

Hey, I'm the new guy. Welcome me. (Hi Andy~).

Be reading and posting thoughts soon.

OMG ITS VAS. 8D
I promise I won't D1 lynch you (without good reason) k?