Mini 392: Jungle Republic - Game over!

[Thestatusquo]

That is not my argument. My argument is not that we cant know my allignment at this juncture. This is because all you are going off of is a nul tell. This is important because if you can't tell my alignment from what I did, then there is no reason to vote me for it. My argument was never that I am concretely not scum, my argument is that this particular thing does not make me scum or town, so you shouldn't be using it to base a vote off of it, and there is nothing else to implicate me as scum right now, so at this juncture, THERE IS NO REASON TO THINK I'M SCUM.

Stop straw manning me, and actually read the argument.

[Thestatusquo]

Remove the not in the second sentance, for clarity.

[Zindaras]

Yo. It's been two days, the weekend, since I posted. Hardly requiring a "pressure vote" :roll" Geez.

How could I have known you were away for the weekend. I want quick responses to my posts, to prevent scum from putting off responding until they make up a better argument.

Unvote

.

The fact that Shadowlurker was town does not make him right. He not only used faulty reasoning, but defended it.

So, even though he was town, he was totally wrong and you were totally right?

Simply put: particular strategies exist that are more beneficial to scum than for townies. Lurking is a good example. A lurking player does not necessitate they are scum; lurking is neither a towntell or a scumtell. However, we (players as a whole) tend to pressure vote and even sometime lynch lurkers. The idea is that players that use such strategies (as Shadowlurker did by twisting a WIFOM argument) should be lynched because such a strategy is more beneficial to scum using it.

His strategy was not more beneficial to scum. He made sure he was in the spotlights, and that usually isn't a good place for scum to be.

I'm not going to provide my thoughts on every player in the game. That's silly.

Not silly. Extremely useful. I've done it before, to great effect.

Zindaras: Making demands

Well, if you want to sit around and hope everyone posts without anything to make them, you're naive.

and claiming that bad logic is all right if made by a townie.

No. I'm claiming that bad logic is no reason to lynch a townie.

Vote: LyingBrian

I find his behaviour Day 1 scummy, and his insistence that SL deserved to be lynched even scummier. And I very, very much dislike the way he's been responding to my posts. He apparently doesn't want to give his opinions on other players because he's rebellious, which is an absolutely ridiculous argument.

[friday-13th]

friday-13th: for applying his logic to players selectively. Which partially implicates Nai.

wel can you explain this to me how i have done this.cause im not sure what you mean here.

[Kelly Chen]

Vote Count

2 - Thestatusquo (LyingBrian, germy)
2 - LyingBrian (Nai, Zindaras)
1 - KingPin (sprontalic)

not voting: Thestatusquo, KingPin, Cadre, friday-13th, Lucresia

With 10 alive it is 6 to lynch!

Deadline Jan 1.

Prodded: Cadre.

[germy]

wel can you explain this to me how i have done this.cause im not sure what you mean here.

It's just a small suspicion leftover from the beginning of Day 1. Unfortunately, partially due to the mafiascum crash, there was little discussion besides the random-vote phase, LyingBrian's and my argument, and the Shadowlurker debacle. But it has stayed on my radar.

Shadowlurker is indeed somewhat suspicious for jumping so quickly and easily.

However, this is the random-vote-silly-phase that has no meaning whether one is scum or town. And friday-13th is pretty much doing the same thing that he is accusing Shadowlurker of: "jump around votes with little information." In addition, friday-13th did not point out Nai, who did more or less the same thing.

[Thestatusquo]

That is not my argument. My argument is not that we cant know my allignment at this juncture. This is because all you are going off of is a nul tell. This is important because if you can't tell my alignment from what I did, then there is no reason to vote me for it. My argument was never that I am concretely not scum, my argument is that this particular thing does not make me scum or town, so you shouldn't be using it to base a vote off of it, and there is nothing else to implicate me as scum right now, so at this juncture, THERE IS NO REASON TO THINK I'M SCUM.

Stop straw manning me, and actually read the argument.

You're not off the hook till you respond to this, and until you do, your vote is without reasoning.

[germy]

I don't care if I'm off your hook or not. I've already explained my reasoning. I'm not "straw manning" you. We're not going to agree.

It's a nul tell for me, since I would do it as both scum and town.

I might be scum, yes, but voting off of something like that makes no sense for two reasons:

1) I've already explained how I would do it both town and scum, but if you don't buy that
2) It is much less likely a scum would do that then town, because scum wants to avoid that kind of pressure. Come on now, I'm an experienced player; do you really think I'd have 'opportunistic voting' as one of my scum tells?

You say that you would hammer whether you were town or scum. Fine. It might or might not be a null-tell. It doesn't matter.

You are using metagame reasoning to defend yourself,

instead of reasoning based on this particular game.

It is far easier for scum to hide behind this veneer in order to excuse their scummy actions.

Then, you say if we don't believe you, than scum would never do something so obvious. Fine. It might or might not be a null-tell. It doesn't matter.

You are using WIFOM reasoning to defend yourself,

instead of reasoning based on this particular game.

It is far easier for scum to hide behind this veneer in order to excuse their scummy actions.

Your actions regarding the "hammer" have been only mildly suspicious. I understand other players questioning your actions.

But the fact you are relying on faulty reasoning to defend yourself is why I am voting for you.

Wow you're dumb. Really really dumb.

[Nai]

do you mind explaining why? you said yourself in post #185 that you agree w/ my point, so i'm not sure why you think i'm scummy...

Whoa whoa whoa whoa! Where did I say I agreed with your point? This is post 185 in its entirety.

I've heard that argument before, usually phrased as "This is how I always play, so it's not scummy."

The argument is a complete fallacy. Sure, you can do it on both sides of the coin. But on THIS side, you nailed a townie.

And that comment was in reference to post 184 by TSQ:

i already said, Nai. I do it on both sides of the coin, so it can't be a tell.

I believe this statement to be a complete fallacy. If your playstle is scummy, no matter how you play it, if you play it when you're scum, it's a tell. Playing with a scummy style is metagaming so you're good as scum and town, and I don't trust it.

So where was I agreeing with you, LyingBrian? I don't see you responding to that post in any way. You MIGHT be talking about Shadowlurker. As I had said before, I had only caught up after the day ended, and didn't read very in depth, just caught the relative gist of it. Which was Shadowlurker arguing about playstyle. However, you and I have a very different road on this argument:

I

am not voting for TSQ on the ground of 'scummy playstle'. I'm voting for YOU on the grounds that I believe you are scum for completely driving a bandwagon. True, you were only one vote on that wagon. HOWEVER, you were also providing all the argument, it seemed, being the only one arguing against Shadowlurker while everyone else piled on. And since Shadowlurker ended up town, that makes me think YOU are scum. In an open game, with only one doc, plowing up the road that fast just seems too scummy.

Chamber was abducted. Why?

I'm not sure on this either. I'd wager that the scum realized that most of the players, currently, are helping them rather than hurting them. They really had nothing to lose by killing him, since he couldn't be one of them, and he could be either of the other two groups. The fact that he was a lurker and wasn't helping them finish off the other two groups might play a part.

friday-13th: for applying his logic to players selectively. Which partially implicates Nai.

Can you explain how this implicates me?

That is not my argument. My argument is not that we cant know my allignment at this juncture. This is because all you are going off of is a nul tell. This is important because if you can't tell my alignment from what I did, then there is no reason to vote me for it. My argument was never that I am concretely not scum, my argument is that this particular thing does not make me scum or town, so you shouldn't be using it to base a vote off of it, and there is nothing else to implicate me as scum right now, so at this juncture, THERE IS NO REASON TO THINK I'M SCUM.

Stop straw manning me, and actually read the argument.

You see, this is just another fallacy. We CAN use what you did to worry at your alignment. We CAN because it's a SCUM move, no matter what YOU do in general. SCUM are the ones that don't want the town to get info. The more info the town has, the better informed decisions they can make, which leads to better lynches, which is exactly what the scum doesn't want.

As such, by quick-lynching Shadowlurker before she was allowed to at least claim, you have not only denied the town information (under the pretext of "Shadowlurker must be quick lynched

sometimes

". Care to explain the exact eventualities on which this quick lynch is required?), you have also quick lynched a townie, which is FURTHER detrimental to the town. Case in point, these are scum tells regardless of if you do them all the time, and you're scummy for it.

I'm not going to quote Germy's entire post 207. I want to say that I agree with the reasoning here. You can easily hide behind metagaming. I can easily say that you can't label me as scum for any action I take because I, in general, play differently in every game as I get more experience. But that's not a good argument, since is basically says that there's no way you can pin something on me, which is entirely incorrect. The way you play in your game is what should be focused on, not how you played previously.

[germy]

*claps*

Thank you, Nai!

And what I meant by "partially implicates Nai" -

It's incredibly tenuous and just a small connection. But friday-13th applied his logic implying scumminess of one player (Shadowlurker) but did not apply that same logic to another (you). The fact that he didn't apply it to you (Nai) further implies that if friday-13th is scum, you might be as well.

I do recognize that your vote was different from Shadowlurker's at the time, at the beginning of Yesterday. But friday-13th's logic (not mine) should have applied equally to both of you. Since it didn't, it was a little suspicious to me.

[Thestatusquo]

You know what, fuck this you're all dumb. If I didn't really not want to fuck over Kellys game, I'd ask to be replaced, because your ability to understand arguments seems to be about nil.

[KingPin]

Thestatusquo:
I think I have a pretty good understanding of the argument, and arguments in general. So, I am going to ask a simple question that will shed some light on the situation.

1. Why, in this particular game, did you feel the need to "hammer" SL?
- Please do not refer to actions of SL from chat mafia.
- Please do not refer to your actions from any other game.

I believe it is the job of the others playing the game to judge your level of scum based on other games that you have played. It is our job to determine if your actions in this game are scummy. I personally believe that being the last one on a bandwagon that leads to a lynch, especially when it is done in the fashion that you have done it, is a scum tell.

~The TSQ Argument~
What you are doing is this:
I do this no matter what.
If I am scum, If I am town, I do this.
I did this, therefore you cannot tell my alignment based on what I did.

So, tell us why you did this, in this game.

[Kelly Chen]

Cadre has asked to be replaced. I'm on it.

[Zindaras]

friday-13th: for applying his logic to players selectively. Which partially implicates Nai.

wel can you explain this to me how i have done this.cause im not sure what you mean here.

Good to see you're at least reading the thread, even if you're not taking the trouble of actually adding something to the discussion. Who do you think is scum? Mind voting?

You say that you would hammer whether you were town or scum. Fine. It might or might not be a null-tell. It doesn't matter.

You are using metagame reasoning to defend yourself,

instead of reasoning based on this particular game.

It is far easier for scum to hide behind this veneer in order to excuse their scummy actions.

Then, you say if we don't believe you, than scum would never do something so obvious. Fine. It might or might not be a null-tell. It doesn't matter.

You are using WIFOM reasoning to defend yourself,

instead of reasoning based on this particular game.

It is far easier for scum to hide behind this veneer in order to excuse their scummy actions.

Your actions regarding the "hammer" have been only mildly suspicious. I understand other players questioning your actions.

But the fact you are relying on faulty reasoning to defend yourself is why I am voting for you.

This argument reminds me so much of the ShadowLurker argument it's not funny anymore. How do you expect Glork to defend himself when he does something extremely wacky Day One?

I play with a guy (MT_Gunn, for those of you who may be interested) who makes a point out of claiming Day One, every game. Most of the time, it's something wacky too. He's claimed scum, SK, pretty much everything. Following your logic, we should lynch him every game for acting scummy.

Chamber was abducted. Why?

I'm not sure on this either. I'd wager that the scum realized that most of the players, currently, are helping them rather than hurting them. They really had nothing to lose by killing him, since he couldn't be one of them, and he could be either of the other two groups. The fact that he was a lurker and wasn't helping them finish off the other two groups might play a part.

Actually, my guess was that the Commies thought he was the Seer. The Commies really can't afford losing even one of their number. I'd say the Seer is their prime target.

[Thestatusquo]

There is no reason specific to this game that I did it. Jathan must always be quicklynched because thats how things are. This relates directly to scum chat, so I don't see how I can answer that question while still divorcing the two.

[Thestatusquo]

I also think I can make a statement that will clear things up: There are no universal scum tells.

There are no things that 'scum always do and town never do' as you all seem to think. Individual players have scum tells that they repeat, which is why meta gaming is a superior strategy.

Why are there no universal scum tells? Well, 2 reasons.

1) Because each players plays certain roles in different ways...There is not a manual saying people must play scum in such and such a way and town in such and such a way.

Example, when I am SK, I DON'T KILL till end game. I play almost as if I were a completely town vigilante, and then BOOM I start devestating the town in end game. Is this normal? No. Does it make my day time play completely different then what you'd expect from a sk? Yes. The implication of this is that if certain people play roles in different ways, then there can't be a list of concrete 'scum tells'

2) You say they are scum tells if they benefit the scum more than town. THIS IS WRONG. This whole d2 proves my point. If scum could get away with hammering d1 eith no reason, then they would do it all the time, but the fact is they can't. It draws WAAAAAY too much attention to them, so much as to make a more powerful disincentive to do it. This is not wifom, I am just pointing out that scum tells are actually things scum would not do because it makes people think they're scum.

[Zindaras]

I have some universal scum tells I use personally, actually. Of course, I don't make them public, because that'd be pretty silly. They're just things that make me go reread a thread for a specific player's posts. They're pretty damn effective, too.

By the way, TSQ, your guilty scumtell on Rasta seemed pretty universal...

[Thestatusquo]

Yes, Zin. Noobs are much more likely to make 'the big bad everyone knows' scum tells than experienced players are. With experienced players, you have to meta game them in order to figure them out. I need to check out a few of your games.

[Zindaras]

Meh, go ahead. I don't think you'll get a lot from it, though. I make a point of being unreadable.

I want the people who aren't voting right now (Cadre, KingPin, Lucresia, Friday-13th) to vote/contribute.

Also, why aren't you voting, TSQ? Just wondering here...

[Thestatusquo]

Because I'm wondering which one of the three people going after me is opportunistic scum, and which two are just dumb town. I think I have king pin pegged as town, so it's either Nai or Lying brian who will be recieving my vote.

[Kelly Chen]

Yosarian2 replaces Cadre.

Thanks!

[Yosarian2]

Yup, I'm here, will post once I read.

[Yosarian2]

I'm pretty suspicious of lying brian, and have been since basically his very first post.

I don't like the logic he used in the SL bandwagon at all; he basically made one real point against him, SL countered it pretty completly, and then Lying Brian just kept pushing the bandwagon without any good reasons at all. Just didn't look like a pro-town way to act.

Also, let me explain why Brian's first post bothered me so much.

vote: sprontalic - Post #42 - what is your reasoning behind your vote for Cadre?

FOS: KingPin - Post #23 - if you're suspicious of Shadowlurker, why not vote for him, especially this early in the game?

FOS: Cadre - Post #39 - for saying random voting is stupid, it's a proven, useful tool for getting the game, and more specifically, discussion started...

IGMEOY: Lucresia - Post #43 - sounds like she's playing the part of a townie w/o revealing any thoughts

IGMEOY: ShadowLurker - Post #21, #27 - for trying to start 2 early bandwagons w/ no information or reasoning besides bandwagonning


the above are my basic thoughts about the game so far...

Why would you vote for sprontalic because he voted for Cade (the person I replaced) in post 42, and in the very same post mention that you're suspicious of Cade for something he did in post 39? If Cade did something you considered to be suspicious in post 39, then surely voting for him 3 posts later is hardly a scum tell, right?

The reason for your FOS of Cade was very weak; a lot of people think random voting is overdone, not good for the game, and not a good pro-town tactic. There have been long and detailed discussion on the mafia discussion forum on that subject. But that's not really relevent; you apparently thought it was worth an FOS, and in that same post you attacked someone else for FOSing but not voting; so if spontic also saw something you believed worthy of an FOS, why would voting that way be scummy?

I realize it was early in the game, and normally I wouldn't have any trouble with doing almost anything to start conversation or put pressure that early in the game, but it seems really bizzare for you to vote for spontic, demand that he explain his vote on Cade, and then a few lines later explain why you thought Cade was suspicious. I can't imagine what you could have been trying to accomplish there if you're town, but I could imagine you making a "let me attack everyone in the game at once with craplogic" post like that as scum, either to just try to spread suspicion around and/or to distance yourself from a scum partner without putting them in any real danger.

vote:lying brian

[Kelly Chen]

Vote Count

3 - LyingBrian (Nai, Zindaras, Yosarian2)
2 - Thestatusquo (LyingBrian, germy)
1 - KingPin (sprontalic)

not voting: Thestatusquo, KingPin, friday-13th, Lucresia

With 10 alive it is 6 to lynch!

Deadline Jan 1. That is a limited amount of time to interrogate each other. You need a majority.

Thursday morning

I will prod everyone whose last post was earlier than Monday.

[Thestatusquo]

I am going to re read tonight and decide if I am voting for Nai or lying brian.