Mini 1159 - Powerrox93's Mini Normal I (Game Over)

[Jase]

Just vote me stefan, since you believe I'm scum. Don't worry about what others think of you - when you find scum, you vote for them. Don't hesitate - that's scummy, as you've already stated. But it goes beyond that. Scum tend to show caution more than town.

That looks like scum pushing to end the day before more discussion happens. Let's wait until we're ready for the day to end before putting someone at L-1 maybe?

The lack of defense from L is pretty irritating, and anti town as well. What gives?

[-L-]

Oh really, jase? I'm scum for telling Stefan to put his money where his mouth is? To vote ME?

Your logic is erroneous, lol. I'm scum because I'm pushing my own lynch?

This is why I have no interest; things like this.

[-L-]

I have been defending myself, jase. Where do you see a 'lack'? Pose the issues I have not defended against. No one has brought legitate things to the table vs me.

[redtail896]

First three pages. At this point I was voting [L], and thought that SC and Jase were suspicious. Imaginality had started off higher on my scumlist but dropped down after a few posts. GroupThink seems to have only contributed a random bandwagon vote by this stage, I'll pay more attention to that slot this readthrough than I did originally. Next few pages of reread and response to any comments on this post to arrive within 24 hours barring catastrophe.

Why? Why were you voting L? Why were you suspicious of SC and Jase?

I'm harping on this because your latest post feels like exactly what I'm accusing you of. It's almost entirely summary and unrelated stuff; there's very little real analysis. You give us a couple of reads but no real reasoning behind them.

Simple question: why is your top scum prospect your top scum prospect?

Ninjaedit: Reading over your most recent post before hitting submit, I came across this line:

Imaginality's response to reactionfish is bad, looks at two not great arguments for people being suspicious pokes a couple of holes in them then agrees with them and votes for one.

Clearly this made you suspicious of Imaginality. Why did that change?

[Zdenek]

I was busier today than I expected, and will post tomorrow.

[Jase]

Oh really, jase? I'm scum for telling Stefan to put his money where his mouth is? To vote ME?

Your logic is erroneous, lol. I'm scum because I'm pushing my own lynch?

I have been defending myself, jase. Where do you see a 'lack'? Pose the issues I have not defended against. No one has brought legitate things to the table vs me.

First bit: You're scum for a number of good reasons that have already been said. You pushing stefan to put you at L-1 looks exactly scum giving up and looking to get into self hammer range. Anyways who needs a vote when you give a nice placeholder like "I'm not voting because I don't want to put you at L-1"?

Second bit: So you ARE pushing for your own lynch? That's sure not a thing town would do. Seriously NOBODY put her at L-1 unless discussion is stagnating. Right now we've got TO doing a thing and prox to hear from so especially not now.

Third bit: You haven't adequately defended against the point about how you made up a point in your SC case. At first you say "I did it for a reaction" and then later you say "I didn't fabricate my case". You also haven't responded to why your theory disagreement is a valid point towards anything ever at all in any way. That's just stuff that I said. I encourage others to jump in with their own points that are undefended if they exist.

[-L-]

I am not giving up - nor am I pushing for my own lynch.

Rather, I was telling stefan to put his money where his mouth is and not just point fingers. His past few posts have cast suspicion on me without acting. I spelled my intentions out - how did you misinterpret them? That was my point about your ill use of logic.

I was being honest when I said I was testing surprise carcinogen. I did not fabricate my case. I've never once contradicted myself, yet you're making it look like I did, to the casual reader who isn't actually reading what you're writing.

Sorry, I didn't understand your use of english in this sentence: "You also haven't responded to why your theory disagreement is a valid point towards anything ever at all in any way." Please clarify?

I agree, others should also point out if I have not addressed any issues - but because you were the one to claim that I have not covered all issues, I expect you to fully support your statement.

[Prox]

Hi, Prox here. I finished reading the thread through last night, but experience has taught me not to make posts when I'm that tired that late; I tend to say things day-Prox wouldn't.

Still, reading was focused more on completion and getting the general feel than analyzation. I'll make another post within an hour or two about that.

For now, my general impressions which are sure to provoke a confirmation bias:

...Eh. Bad idea. But yeah. Hour or two. The commitment will ensure completion.

[Powerrox93]

C-Worl replaces andrew94

VC in just a moment

[Powerrox93]

Votecount 1.15

Updated as of post #233

[L] (4) - tarsonisocelot, Zdenek, crazypianist1116, Jase
StefanB (4) - imaginality, Me=Weird, C-Worl, Prox
tarsonisocelot (3) - yabbaguy, redtail896, [L]

Not voting (2) - StefanB, Uncle Pain

If there's a mistake let me know.
13 Alive == 7 to Lynch && 7 to No-Lynch

[L]

will be lynched at deadline if votes doesn't change

V/LA

Uncle Pain: May 6 - 8
Powerrox93: May 12 - 15. Back-up mod Empking will look over the game while I'm away

Deadline

May 14 06:00 CEST

[redtail896]

Uncle Pain: Is there a particular reason you don't have a vote down?

[C-Worl]

Hey skimmed the thread but basically.

Unvote; Vote: [L]

Seems like the most likely scum based on the game so far. I may switch votes after a full catch up.

[Jase]

Unvote

[Jase]

Oh...I miscounted the votes. I'm pretty amazing like that.

[redtail896]

Oh...I miscounted the votes. I'm pretty amazing like that.

It happens.

@C-Worl: can you give us a more specific reason?

[C-Worl]

Not really, till I get done reading. Just getting lots of scum vibes from him.

[C-Worl]

Then I'm going to give Jase a warning for this post.

Yes, I picked you alone, COMPLETELY AT RANDOM to pester for ignoring me and (by extension) the largest wagon that's happened so far. I OBVIOUSLY did this because I am scum and I (for some fucking reason) believe that if you actually say what you think about my wagon that you'll be branded as my scumbuddy and speed lynched the day after my own INEVITABLE lynch.

THAT IS WHAT IS HAPPENING HERE.

Really though, I asked the same thing from everyone who hasn't commented on me or the wagon against me. There's four people in total who've been ignoring me and I somewhat doubt we're looking at that many scum in a game this size. So obviously ignoring me wasn't a huge scum tell. Of course then YOU throw out some bullshit about how I must be an idiot for calling you (not anyone else, just you) out on that or something. What's worse you THEN go on to give no information WHEN SPECIFICALLY ASKED. I'm thinking that IS a pretty substantial scumtell.
Now then, are you gonna say something about my wagon or do you still think it's some sort of nefarious trap?

Now then (sigh) post 78, L and Imaginality (I think) called SC out for telling me (when I asked if he was being sarcastic) that I should take him at face value. And while it doesn't seem to make a lot of sense for that to be scummy out of that context, IN context it's a laughable thing to try and throw in someones face. Does that clear up the meaning of that post somewhat?

That post could count as violation of rule 17:

Claiming to be scum and to be someone's scummate, real or faked, is prohibited. This will get you modkilled!

But because the first part in Jase's post above wasn't a true claim

, I'm only gonna give Jase a warning this time.
If you wanna discuss this warning further, take it to PM

Now continue

Is this a mod confirm that Jase is town? Sorry, it caught me off guard.

[Jase]

This is a placeholder for the post I was writing. I've suddenly been called away.

[Prox]

Well today seems (deceptively?) simple. Ocelot is the most scummy. VOTE: ocelot.

My post got deled...demotivated. Retype later. Sorry. But check out ocelot iso.

[crazypianist1116]

And I'm back. I just read through the past 4 pages, and I have to say, I really enjoy this game. There's a lot of good discussion, and it's not devolving into to mindless yelling unlike some other games I've been in.

---

I really can't believe [L] hasn't been lynched yet. Has anyone seen her voting patterns? I'll make it simple: [L] jumps off the TO wagon after andrew unvotes TO. She then proceeds to jump on StefanB's wagon for a "serious scumslip." Then she flops back to TO.
Scumslips are generally extremely strong evidence for a player's scuminness. To jump off the Stefan wagon and onto TO with little evidence makes no sense whatsoever given her thinking StefanB is so obviously scum. Can we get a lynch here please?

With that being said, StefanB's "slip" was honestly not a slip at all. He was being attacked by many people, and as such it's impossible that only scum were attacking him. Just by sheer numbers 4 people were voting him and others were suspicious, so "many" of them had to be town.

Tarsonisocelot has also jumped onto my scumlist. Post #219 was completely Information instead of Analysis (IIoA). I have not read her in iso, but I'm going to take everyone else for granted in saying that she's been contributing little, and as such 219 has not helped her case at all.

Yabba vs. Uncle Pain looks town vs. town. They're both defending opinions well.

Redtail's entrance was nice but I kind of feel like the opinions were sheeped from everyone else. I also felt that TO was targeted a lot more than [L], yet pretty much the same case he made for TO could have been made for [L]. Posts since then have been nice.

Zdenek is leaving me not so pleased but I guess we'll see what comes of that.

StefanB, could you use a line break only when you're trying to introduce new ideas? Keep thoughts with similar meanings within the same paragraph rather than hitting return after every sentence.

[Jase]

I am not giving up - nor am I pushing for my own lynch.

Rather, I was telling stefan to put his money where his mouth is and not just point fingers. His past few posts have cast suspicion on me without acting. I spelled my intentions out - how did you misinterpret them? That was my point about your ill use of logic.

I was being honest when I said I was testing surprise carcinogen. I did not fabricate my case. I've never once contradicted myself, yet you're making it look like I did, to the casual reader who isn't actually reading what you're writing.

Sorry, I didn't understand your use of english in this sentence: "You also haven't responded to why your theory disagreement is a valid point towards anything ever at all in any way." Please clarify?

I agree, others should also point out if I have not addressed any issues - but because you were the one to claim that I have not covered all issues, I expect you to fully support your statement.

First bit: Ok vote tomfoolery aside...One of the main points in the case against you has been general low content lurkyness, which hasn't changed so far. Sort of gives the impression that you aren't trying. As for the second part of the first bit, yeah, I see that now <.<

Second bit: Not quite sure what you mean when you say you spelled your intentions out.

Third bit: I have a difficult time believing that was honest. So I'll ask you, what sort of reaction where you expecting, and what did the reaction you got tell you? Anyways, your "case" consisted of at most two points if I'm reading it right, and one of those was later revealed to be a "test". Also, are you accusing me of intentionally misrepresenting you?

Fourth bit: I was talking about the other point in your case, the one that wasn't made up. It based on an argument about weather or not a townie would be concerned with being taken seriously (or something like that). I said this about it "

The other point in your case was a completely pointless theory disagreement. It's pointless for a number of reasons. People who disagree with you aren't necessarily wrong, being wrong is not a scum tell in and of itself, and again the whole theory discussion was sparked by something that didn't really apply to the theory argument at all (please don't ask me to explain this a third time).

I suppose the most straight forward way to put this is to say that it looks like you were trying to create a wagon out of nothingness (and as had been said the one you did this too was under suspicion at the time which seems opportunistic).

Fifth bit: You also still have not said

What Points of the Case Against Me Were Invalid and Why

. You keep saying the same sort of thing when asked. I'm asking for specifics here. I'm not looking for more "None of it made any sense" I want to know what didn't make sense.

[Uncle Pain]

@Mod: Do I see it correctly that Votecounts 1.13 and 1.14 contain a mistake? StefanB never voted [L]. This seems corrected in Votecount 1.15.

Just got confused during some rereading.

Scumslips are generally extremely strong evidence for a player's scuminness. To jump off the Stefan wagon and onto TO with little evidence makes no sense whatsoever given her thinking StefanB is so obviously scum. Can we get a lynch here please?

QFT!

Yes. I'm not a fan of giving the scum something to work with.

Okay, so you don’t want to be very townie (contributing much to the game, eager scumhunting, convincing others you’re town, in short:

being pro-town

) because you fear that could be seen scummy. This is WIFOM reasoning at its best and you know that. The only thing I’m not sure about is whether I should call your stance anti-town or pro-scum. Either way, you’re at L-3 and it seems you do need some more motivation. VOTE: [L]

redtail896

:

As soon as

Mist7676

Prox enlightens us with some of his thoughts, I will rethink my reads and put my vote.

I don’t like to procrastinate my decision but I’m curious what Prox and C-Worl have to say. They put their votes on the table but I’d like to see how they back them up. After all, Mist7676’s posts left me a bit confused, which is why I wanted to investigate her further but now she flaked… I’ll see how Prox does.

My current main suspects so far in no order:

• tarsonisocelot
  ’s lack of real game contribution also leaves me with a scummy gut feeling. I’d like to read the rest of her recap analysis, maybe something in her argumentation will eventually make sense. Until then, she’s on my scummy list.
  
• My take on
  [L]
  ’s retroactive justification of the reaction test is still screaming “lies!”: it’s just too convenient (no indication beforehand whatsoever, easy way to get rid of a lie), it didn’t fit the situation (discussion was already going on, no need for odd attempts to spark another one), it was tunnelling on Surprise_Carcinogen (for no obvious reason) and most of all, it was not just a provocative statement but an outright lie. She has been confusingly non-defensive since, taking a lynch quite easy. Anti-town behaviour is anti-town. Since I assume some higher level of expertise here compared to the newbie games I’ve had so far, I consider anti-town scum more likely than anti-town town, hence I find her scummy. And even if she may flip town, I wouldn’t be too unhappy with a lynch (and no, I don’t like policy lynches in general but one has to draw a line somewhere).
  
• Sad to see there have already been three players in the
  GroupThink/Mist7676/Prox
  slot during one Day. Interestingly, both the first two were not obvtown at all: GroupThink had his non-explained vote well after RVS, Mist7676 had her tunnelling on StefanB and the support for a self-vote. None of these two could give me some reasonable explanation so I still suspect the slot. I will however not vote Prox until I see some play from him.

I removed yabbaguy from this list because I tend to feel rather neutral about his actual game contents. While I really

really

dislike his town leader approach to this game, that’s an attitude thing and, more importantly, a null scumtell.
I also removed StefanB from the list because I feel a strong town vibe from his recent posts where he actively defends himself against any cases.

[tarsonisocelot]

First three pages. At this point I was voting [L], and thought that SC and Jase were suspicious. Imaginality had started off higher on my scumlist but dropped down after a few posts. GroupThink seems to have only contributed a random bandwagon vote by this stage, I'll pay more attention to that slot this readthrough than I did originally. Next few pages of reread and response to any comments on this post to arrive within 24 hours barring catastrophe.

Why? Why were you voting L? Why were you suspicious of SC and Jase?

I'm harping on this because your latest post feels like exactly what I'm accusing you of. It's almost entirely summary and unrelated stuff; there's very little real analysis. You give us a couple of reads but no real reasoning behind them.

Simple question: why is your top scum prospect your top scum prospect?

Ninjaedit: Reading over your most recent post before hitting submit, I came across this line:

Imaginality's response to reactionfish is bad, looks at two not great arguments for people being suspicious pokes a couple of holes in them then agrees with them and votes for one.

Clearly this made you suspicious of Imaginality. Why did that change?

About to reread the next few pages. Got interrupted by falling asleep at my desk.
At endof page 3, my vote on [L] was still there from RVS because they hadn't done anything particularly townie. They had five posts of which one corrected the bracketing of their random vote and another contained only an emoticon, of the two with any attempt at content one pointed out that Jase's late RV was weird and the other sheeped Imaginality & andrews reason for voting me. I did not feel the need to change my vote yet as I hadn't seen anyone I was sure deserved it more than [L] or gotten some kind of supertownie vibe from them, current suspicions of them will appear further through the reread. Jase was being suspicious, as stated in my readthrough, but there were others already trying to get more out of him and I wasn't yet sure whether they were just being scummily weird or being actually scummy. My hope was that other better players would get more from them before I chose to change votes or not, which did happen. SC was mainly on the list because of their lurkiness plus being overly defensive about being accused of lurkiness. It wasn't a strong read, but this was page 3.

I thought that imaginality initially responded badly to the reactionfish, but the second post was less so. The Jase vote was justified at the time for the "call out scum, then vote a random instead" weirdness. There wasn't much content from them, but they did attempt to give reasons for their votes. Mostly here it was that others, particularly Jase, had done more suspicious things so I'd stopped thinking much about imaginality. I won't be evaluating every player at every point, but I will attempt to do so for the end of the reread because the main thing I might overlook is non-active lurking.

This read through will focus mostly on listing the things I think possibly notable, along with some small amount of comments on why. The mentions of tangents are there so people like Jase know that I am not ignoring those posts, but deliberately disregarding them as irrelevant. I do not feel I am good enough at distinguishing useful information from useless, so I'm erring on the side of more information. Later, when I have a full reread done I'll try to refine my reads more. If you spot anything that seems off or you think that I should look more at something specific then say so, I'm better at checking for specific links and so on than D1 stuff. Next post will contain 4-6/7 depending on length.

[Powerrox93]

Is this a mod confirm that Jase is town? Sorry, it caught me off guard.

No, this doesn't confirm anything. I would give any player that warning regardless of alignment or player.
And if you (or any one else for that part) wanna discuss the warning with me, take it to PM.

[imaginality]

Back, and caught up!

Update on StefanB

I found some of Stefan's recent posts still point to being scum. The contrast between attacking people on his wagon (e.g. Mist in 152 and Me=Weird in 162) and his 'I know that many townies belive I am scum' comment is more significant than the comment by itself. 193 has an odd contradiction where it seems he's claiming both that he lurks and that he starts discussions early on on Day 1s. And 202's "Well what exactly would the votes on Jase help town, he would have four not three. What does a vote on someone who will quit the game probably help" is a poor point, as well as the way he misrepresents my case against him as being mainly about scumpartners. ("But because nobody has said this to imaginality: Don't be sure of scumpair on day one before the flip.
Okay that we[re] imaginalitys good argument right?") My iso 5-7 give my reasons for suspecting StefanB, none of which were about scumpairs. (At the end of iso7, I said that I suspected

andrew94

for that reason, but I didn't use it as an extra point in my StefanB case.) In 223, I like that StefanB didn't put [L] at L-1 yet - that actually seemed pro-town... except that the final line pointing out how 'ultrascummy' of him it was not to vote throws that into question by linking the reason for not voting with "I know all hate this but I will be bussy with defending myself, so yes..." rather than it just being about not wanting the day to end yet.

Probably the best point in his favour is the way andrew94 and Mist7676 both hopped on his wagon opportunistically, though as I said earlier I could see that as scum bussing almost as much as scum wagoning town, so it's not a very strong argument against StefanB being scum.

Overall, there's plenty still niggling at me about StefanB and, while I can see there are newbie-tells and communication confusion muddying the waters, if you remove those null tells what's left still looks more scum than town.

Others

C-Worl(andrew94) - jumping on [L] wagon with minimal reasoning isn't a good start. I gave some reasons to suspect andrew94 previously. I'll withhold judgment on C-Worl until the 'full catch-up' but I do want to ask this:

@C-Worl: why vote if not fully caught up? Are you sure just from your skim that you'd be happy with an [L] lynch if that happened before you'd fully caught up?

[L] - crazypianist (217 and 244) makes good points against [L], as does Jase (206, 210, and 225) and Zdenek (128 and 154). 224 from [L], aside from Jase's point, is also an unfair response to StefanB's lack of vote as it completely ignores the not-wanting-the-day-to-end possible reason for not voting. I don't feel quite sure enough to switch my vote to [L] yet, but I'm certainly not opposed to an [L] lynch at this point.

@[L], in 172 why did you say you "Currently, I had to remove my vote to see how [tarsonisocelot] behaves"?

@yabbaguy, is your reason for backing off on [L] only that tarsonisocelet is attacking [L] and is scummier?)

Prox(Mist(GroupThink)) - I didn't like the way Mist7676 joined the StefanB wagon in 143. And avoiding commenting on [L] and SurpriseCarcinogen in his reads, then delaying (and avoiding) answering Uncle Pain's question about them, is suspicious in my eyes. Sign of scum wanting to see how the town's opinion lies before answering? Prox's first post doesn't inspire me with any greater confidence.

Actually, you know what,

Unvote; vote: Prox

I want to see where this goes. I think there's already enough reason to apply a vote here.

@Prox: What about tarsonisocelot's iso don't you like? Who else would you support a lynch of?

redtail896 - post 188 read well to me, and I agreed with Surprise Carcinogen's reads. redtail896's, too. Since replacing in, he seems to be actively scumhunting. Leaning town here.

tarsonisocelot - is the case against her that she's been fluff-posting? I don't see it. Early on, I guess, but from say iso 10 onwards she's been giving some good content. E.g:

iso 11 - good pressure on [L] for unvoting
iso 12 - yabba and Jase read
iso 13 - questions StefanB
iso 14 - more [L] pressure
iso 15 - okay this was IIoA, I'll grant
iso 16 - explains stuff

I'm not that much of a fan of the 're-read in parts' approach she's taking right now, but I don't think the wagon on her is justified.

Anyone not commented on above I read as town. In particular Me=Weird, crazypianist1116, Jase, and Uncle Pain. yabbaguy and Zdenek I'm less sure of (yabbaguy for overstating the tarsonisocelot case), but also leaning town on.