NY 178: MASQUERADE -- GAME OVER

[AxleGreaser]

@Fonz
I dont think there are implied questions you are asking me unanswered. If there are just ask, I am up to just chasing scummiest reads until at least one scum flips.

[The Fonz]

OK. I'm UTD.

Thorwagon still bad. Goodmorning has not 'decimated' my reasoning - LOL - just posted wrong and inadequate game theory responses. Flubber's still number one. He has to be, because he's done nothing of value since I voted him.

I still have my problems with Axle, but digging out that Garmr contradiction looks like it could be scumhunting. Tier is hovering somewhere near the list - 3112-4 betrays a lack of town motive. I disliked Iz's LOATP, but the rest of that ISO is decent, although kinda safe. Thor - can you explain the Izaraiel vote? I'm kind of feeling based on PoE that either Shiro or Iz is likely to be scum in that hood.

[The Fonz]

and not a thing scum would have insider knowledge of).

There is one way scum!Garmr would

I feel like his a sk because he feels the need to announce the fact his two shot bullet proof to discourage who ever is shooting from shooting him again.

If there were 3 shots last night and scum shot Boon, then shooting him again makes sense and is a slip.

Either that or its fsck up like Thor and the Shiro vote change saga, ooops no it didn't.

What is not obvious is reason to have assumed hed been shot once already as per the above.

, I hate Tier attacking Garmr over this - SK is both a reasonably obvious thing for town to consider from a VI player making that specific claim

That's a lot of weight to put on the word 'again.' I don't personally like 'Slip' arguments. I find they're from scum more often than on scum. It seems to me more likely Garmr was assuming that Boon would be told if he were shot once, not that garmr is scum who wants to wave a big 'I'm scum' flag.

[Thor665]

Again, why all this for someone you're mildly in support of?

You do realize that I was "mildly in support of" his lynch - right?
You are basically noting that I attacked someone I did not town read and supported the idea of lynching and then acting like that's weird.

[TierShift]

Going by the provided quote - why do you think he'd replace out as either alignment? One he has 'mastered' and the other he is working 'to master'.
Giving up is literally the opposite of both of those.

Right, that's true. I think he could get fed up as either alignment.

Why are you asking this?

[AxleGreaser]

and not a thing scum would have insider knowledge of).

There is one way scum!Garmr would

I feel like his a sk because he feels the need to announce the fact his two shot bullet proof to discourage who ever is shooting from shooting him again.

If there were 3 shots last night and scum shot Boon, then shooting him again makes sense and is a slip.

Either that or its fsck up like Thor and the Shiro vote change saga, ooops no it didn't.

What is not obvious is reason to have assumed hed been shot once already as per the above.

, I hate Tier attacking Garmr over this - SK is both a reasonably obvious thing for town to consider from a VI player making that specific claim

That's a lot of weight to put on the word 'again.' I don't personally like 'Slip' arguments. I find they're from scum more often than on scum. It seems to me more likely Garmr was assuming that Boon would be told if he were shot once, not that garmr is scum who wants to wave a big 'I'm scum' flag.

No need to be assuming what notifications Garmr says he thinks (as I asked just after the "shoot again" statement)

@Anyone
Odd question. If a two shot BP gets shot, does he get notified on this forum?

Depends on the mod I think.

I don't like putting a lot of weight in slips either, for similar reasons
However to interpret someone reading too much into it (when lots of townies I have seen do read lots into slips)
so you can hate tier over doing that, can you scum read it.

Its one thing to assume boon would be told if he was shot, but its another to assume he was shot at all.

also and separately.
You can "hate" Tier for that but does it add evidence that makes him scummy?

[AxleGreaser]

just read back my stuttering stuttering in the last post.
I think I am too tired gnight all. (actually good morning)

[Thor665]

Going by the provided quote - why do you think he'd replace out as either alignment? One he has 'mastered' and the other he is working 'to master'.
Giving up is literally the opposite of both of those.

Right, that's true. I think he could get fed up as either alignment.

Why are you asking this?

Because actually I think it's pretty clear he was town alignment with that replace out so I'm not sure why you're being guarded in your read on it.

[Scripten]

...because I was scum and figured no one would look and that Shiro would forget that he hadn't voted me and everyone would accept what i said as absolute fact.

What is your real reason for asking a question like this?

You've done it twice now, and only, as far as I've noticed, when concerning Shiro. It's not entirely unthinkable that a player reading through the game might see you mention something false and internalize it.

[Thor665]

[goodmorning]

GM's annoying but town. Play makes perfect sense from the perspective of a somewhat poor town player who is trying and has a slightly inflated view of her own abilities.

eyyyyy what's your excuse then?

My play makes sense from the perspective of a good town player, obviously.

lolk

1. No, he doesn't. I went through and pointed out that none of his reads (other than Pere) is any more justified than "I liked his gut reads on 4 people."

"I don't like his read" =/= He doesn't have reads. And you can't just go 'Except for that one really strong read, which he pursued with tenacity.' Today we know who his top suspect is, too.

No, my point is that none of his reads were at all justified. It's almost as if he was trying to keep up a pretense of scumhunting.

2. Yeahhhhh I don't know what universe you play Mafia in but I find tunneling to be mildly scummy. As Scum, it's a lot easier to push one person and not comment on the rest so that you can "change your mind" whenever it's convenient. I mean, Town tunnel too, and I've certainly done it, but it's not something that makes Scum's lives harder.

Yeeeaaaah I don't know what universe you play mafia in, but town who think they have found scum should push that case strongly until such time as the player doesn't look scummy any more or someone else looks scummier. Thor's top suspect was the leading wagon for most of yesterday. He has no reason to waste time talking about other wagons, except in so far as how they were inferior to the PerVwagon. It would in fact have been antitown to do so.

It's antiTown not to scumhunt, and when you're using your tunnel as an excuse not to scumhunt there's a problem. I never said he needed to comment on other wagons, only on other people.

3. Effort is most certainly not indicative of alignment. Thor posts ridiculous numbers of posts no matter what.

Effort is most certainly indicative of alignment, that's just obviously true. Also, by 'effort' I don't mean number of posts (Which is somewhat related to alignment, but only relatively, and often confounded). I'm not saying 'He's town because he's posting a lot.' I'm saying he's town because he appears emotionally invested in what he's saying, and playing proactively.

So as Scum, he wouldn't be as emotionally invested in winning as he would as Town? As Scum, he wouldn't try to play as proactively as Town? As Scum, he wouldn't try to look Town?

4. It's really easy to say "come on guys, deadline is coming, let's consolidate" especially when them not consolidating means you lose a mislynch.

Not sure what this is relevant to. People are blaming Thor because no-one else pushed a wagon with anything like the effectiveness he did.[/quote]
You were saying that Thor was frustrated about people's lack of trying and that somehow makes him Town. This is me saying it doesn't.

Some of his actions don't seem to make sense coming from a BP. Like the whole thing where he was trying to lynch Izariael and said something about Iz fishing for towncred by not killing Boon which I don't remember clearly because it hurt my brain.

That doesn't make sense, but it doesn't make specifically little sense for a BP to say, because Iz didn't know which power role Boon was hinting.

He specifically mentioned it in the context of him being dead, which he wouldn't be as a BP. Also there's no way Boon could know for certain that anyone didn't try to kill him last night.

[Thor665]

No, my point is that none of his reads were at all justified. It's almost as if he was trying to keep up a pretense of scumhunting.

This either shows utter lack of awareness of how I play the game, or intentional lying.

[reinoe]

Again, why all this for someone you're mildly in support of?

You do realize that I was "mildly in support of" his lynch - right?
You are basically noting that I attacked someone I did not town read and supported the idea of lynching and then acting like that's weird.

It's bad wording. I tend to do that in the morning. I still didn't get the impression that your read on Izariel was sincere.

[Thor665]

It's bad wording. I tend to do that in the morning. I still didn't get the impression that your read on Izariel was sincere.

Why do you have that feeling since I just dismantled your entire presented list of reasoning - is it gut, or is there other evidence now that my meaning has been clarified?

[Thor665]

I mean, you called it "gross" so I'll admit I expect more than gut.

[reinoe]

It's bad wording. I tend to do that in the morning. I still didn't get the impression that your read on Izariel was sincere.

Why do you have that feeling since I just dismantled your entire presented list of reasoning - is it gut, or is there other evidence now that my meaning has been clarified?

Hey phone posting. Thor is scum.

He "dismantled" the part that was a typo and literally ignored everything else.

[Flubbernugget]

Thor what are you trying to showcase on your wagon?

[davesaz]

Who do you currently think is scum?

Who are you asking?

That was directed toward Thor, who had just posted, but could be answered by anyone.

[Nero Cain]

I'd pl this slot. His case on PV yesterday was all sorts of horrible.

@Nero

This looks rather a lot like you are claiming scum. Are you claiming scum?

You say today on D2, "His(Thors) case on PV yesterday was all sorts of horrible."

Please show me where on D1 you pointed out that all sorts of horrible?

I dont remember you doing that, and i just I looked and i didnt see you do that.

If it was all sorts of horrible, where were you ?

Well, since we are ignoring the fact that I didn't vote PV which should tell you that I didn't like the PV case....

here I state that Thors PV case doesn't sway me.

though if it makes you feel better I'd pl you too.

We can deal with boon or axle tomorrow

if you flip town I'll think about it.

1.Why is it so weird to want opinions on a scumread?

2.Anyway your associative act falls apart now that muffin flipped town.

1. I'm not a scumread.
2. Yes it does but it doesn't stop me from thinking that he's scum.

Why should I think Flubber is town?

Guys, Muffin was town. Let's not ignore the implications of that. The things he was pointing out had 100% motivation. His stuff on Thor seems true.

Muffin being town=//=being right

[Thor665]

He "dismantled" the part that was a typo and literally ignored everything else.

It wasn't a typo however, because you drew conclusions from it. The other points you list are based off the idea that it's weird I pushed him because I slightly townread him.
Except I never slightly townread him - so why are any of the other points issues?

Thor what are you trying to showcase on your wagon?

You found a bunch of names highlighted in green, including Muffin, while others are in black, including the person I'm voting, to be confusing as to my point?
I must be making another quantity vs. quality commentary - I'm so hard to understand and I never realized it.

[davesaz]

Guys, Muffin was town. Let's not ignore the implications of that. The things he was pointing out had 100% motivation. His stuff on Thor seems true.

Muffin being town=//=being right

Thor is repeatedly trying to catch others in misinterpretations of ambiguous things that he says. Then, when he does "catch" someone misinterpreting, Thor misrepresents that as intentional and scummy, when his own intentional ambiguity / opaque posting is causing the misunderstanding in the first place. Then, once he has his fish on a line, he steadfastly refuses to clear up the situation by explaining what he meant. He even goes to the extreme of extending the argument by introducing more unclear points as bait for further misunderstanding. I don't see town motivation in acting this way.

[Thor665]

@Dave - so you're saying when i said the following I was being intentionally ambiguous?

You did take forever to say anything of worth - and then voted Pere out of the blue with no justification despite making a wall on Anen. That feels wonky to me.

@Muffin - no, actually, there isn't a misrep there. Look at how many thoughts were posted about Anen. Then look at the same for Pere. Then look at the vote. That reads legit to you?

Those seem...pretty direct and clear as statements.
The only reason it got weird was Muffin decided to compare the number of times a name was mentioned as opposed to...y'know, paying attention to what I said, which was "thoughts about" which, oddly enough, later when it was demanded I "prove" it (the fug?) I was able to by quoting all the conversations about each player and showing a rough 3 to 1 ratio. Meaning...yeah, he posted more thoughts about Anen then he did for Pere, and then voted in an odd way.

That is not me being ambiguous. It is Muffin being obtuse.
It is you being obtuse.
My statement was perfectly clear unless you're trying to make it ambiguous.

[Aegor]

I apologize for this late and much-requested votecount! Please forgive me; I should be able to be more timely in the future.

Votecount 2.7

[7]

Thor665:

goodmorning, TierShift, Izariael, reinoe, Flubbernugget, davesaz, Garmr
[4]

Garmr:

Scripten, AxleGreaser, Slandaar, Shiro
[2]

Flubbernugget:

Nero Cain, The Fonz
[1]

Boonskiies:

T S O
[1]

Izariael:

Thor665
[1]

reinoe:

Boonskiies

[1]

Not Voting:

beastcharizard

With 17 alive, it takes 9 to lynch.

Day 2 deadline:

(expired on 2014-11-19 18:27:52)

Mod Notes

Searching for replacements for T S O and Garmr

[Thor665]

Stop dicking around with me.

I made a statement about amount.

You translated that to "number of times a name is mentioned"

Which - c'mon, dude, are you serious? No - tthat is obvious bull-hookey on your part.

Then, when I point that out - you shift to "percentage of posts...but I'll just count posts where the name is mentioned and pay no attention to the amount that each is actually discussed"

Again - what the heck? Why are you playing word games? You know that's not what I meant and are dicking around.

When I call you on THAT we go into this game where you claim I changed the goalposts to "quality".
Except I never did.

And here's where I voted him.
I never cited him as being wrong - as is even shown here I was talking to him about what I meant, but I presented a belief he was being intentionally obtuse and I found that to be scummy.

I talked with him being wrong through three iterations before having an issue with it as scummy.
And none of his iterations make any sense to what I said.

[Izariael]

And here's where I voted him.
I never cited him as being wrong - as is even shown here I was talking to him about what I meant, but I presented a belief he was being intentionally obtuse and I found that to be scummy.

I talked with him being wrong through three iterations before having an issue with it as scummy.
And none of his iterations make any sense to what I said.

And yet, not once did you present your statement as it was supposedly intended until afterward. You had every possible opportunity during your interaction with Muffin to display the information your post was referring to, but failed to do so in favor of saying "no, you're wrong, but I'm not going to show why until you provide proof for your side of it"

As an on-looker, Muffin's attempts to provide the information against your argument were valid. I don't think he was horrendously misconstruing your statements, and in fact I think his interpretations were sensible.

You

should have clarified right from the get-go rather than allow the situation to devolve into petty semantics and stalling. Your actions here were completely counter-productive and relied on slamming down what you say was nothing more than "word games" when simply clarifying the statement could have curbed the whole thing.