Open 50: The New C9 - Abandoned!

[somestrangeflea]

/is still here

Will post substance once replacements arrive.

Promise.

[Oman]

/is back.

[TylerJ]

Now post something of content please.

Mod, we need a deadline please

[Justin Playfair]

Hi, all.

As promised, the results of my reading. What will follow in subsequent posts is a lot of reading, and I apologize, but I wanted to do as thorough a job as possible. In the interest of not being lynched outright for annoying everyone I will start by posting just my top two suspects, but I have prepared similar studies on every player and will be happy to post them on request, just so you know I looked at everyone before I made my decisions. And I think these are the two longest, so subsequent ones will probably be less painful.

Anyway, here's some content. I present them in my order of suspicion from reading the thread to this point and I have included a list below in that order. One caveat. I do not include three players on the list: Timmers2001/Fonzie, AlyG and ManaSpryte, though I have written (pleasingly short) breakdowns of the few posts they have made. There simply isn't enough from any of them for me to form any confident opinion. And there are three further players on the list, LoudmouthLee, Aimee and White who I have included but do not have enough content on to be really confident in their placement.

That said, here is the list: 1. TylerJ 2. Shteven 3. Laptop Gun 4. Oman 5. Sammich
6. somestrangeflea 7. LoudmouthLee 8.Ooba 9. Aimee 10. White 11. Opposed Force 12. JordanA24 13. curiouskarmadog

[Justin Playfair]

First, TylerJ.

TylerJ votes quickly on Jordan and holds onto the idea that Jordan was too defensive for a bit. After a lot of content light posts starts looking in Oman’s direction, and never really looks away. TylerJ votes for Oman.

By the way, I feel I must state here that I find no evidence that TylerJ is a nutter.

I’m bothered by the way TylerJ goes after SomeStrangeFlea for not scumhunting. Why? Well because TylerJ’s sole contribution to scumhunting to this point was getting in a scuffle with Oman, in this period the easiest target to get into a scuffle with in the game. And TylerJ’s content to post ratio is easily the lowest in the game, and there’s been plenty of competition. Seriously, isolate TylerJ’s posts. Drops the look at SSF after making only the most obligatory feint. Soon TylerJ’s giving advice to Laptop Gun to stop tunneling on SomeStrangeFlea and…

if you want to find scum, you have to look at everyone.

TylerJ has glared at Oman for nearly the entire game. One time he blinked and when his eyes opened again SomeStrangeFlea was standing in front of him. TylerJ looked away as quickly as he could to find Oman.

Then comes post 265, where I find a lot not to like:

Hmm, OF, I will have to read your analysis a few times through, as it seems to be one run on sentence and hard to understand.

to LaptopGun, I guess you'll just have to find out if I am naturally forceful (ie. opinionated?) or not.

TylerJ- Goes along with voting Jordan with the tone in the early stages in the game. Casts suspicous on Oman for being to careless in bandwagons and sees him trying to throw attention off him. Gets a null tell on White's statement about "short post=townies" and says that if such discussion on things like this were to continue then people would become too focused and miss lynching scum. Counter-reacts to Oman accusing him of past actions such as stating "He's trying to get people to ignore him" Several inrevelant posts later he posts "We should wait until more evidence for or on Oman comes up." It seems like he really wants to push suspision on Oman or want people to make a strong case on him when the evidence arrives. Then he proclaims SSF as scum after evidence is given and after SSF makes a defense he says in that defense he scumhunted and takes back the statement of SSF being scum back and says he's just trying to be humurous. Vote:TylerJ Getting a strong scummy vibe from him.

I think Oman is suspicious, thats quite plain to me. Think of it what you will. When I posted the 'lets wait for more post' it was because I didn't think we had enough clear evidence on him. The reason why I voted for SSF was because of his lack of scumhuting. When he scumhunted he nullified my reason for voting. If he conjoured up a scum hunt to ward off my suspicion, then I reach a dilemma. My best guess provided by the actual evidence he posted was that he wasn't just trying to point fingers and through suspicion but truly was scum hunting. Yet, I am aware that I should still keep a close eye on him.

As far as me posting about trying to be humorous, it wasn't in regards to my thoughts about ssf.

And another thing. I attempt to actually contribute. If I make a Contentless post, it isn't because I want to stay hidden and wishy-washy. Sometimes when I do post something that I think has value, others don't think it does. These cases are purely accidental. Other times I will post contentless one liners because I either am trying to crack a joke or letting people know I am hear but can't find anything of note that I haven't already posted about.

I hope I explained myself clearly.

Also, here is something purely analytical. If I was really trying to push for people to vote for Oman, I would still have my vote on him. If you don't think that is true, that's your own specualtion and I can't argue with that.

Here are some things in particular:

TylerJ disparages Opposed Force’s analysis before commenting on the section that applies to him. Says he’ll have to read it a few times to understandit, because of it’s poor construction. Guess he’d already read the section about him that few times. And since TylerJ never, not unto this day, commented on anything else in Opposed Force’s analysis, either he got seriously behind on his reading or it was just a way to minimize the valid points Opposed Force had raised.

TylerJ makes a lot of his post about his little bout of pitty-pat with SomeStrangeFlea, but the episode was so minor, TylerJ has tried to point so much attention to it as a resolved event, and even advised LapTop Gunner to stop tunneling on SomeStrangeFlea that the whole episode looks more suspicious as distancing from SSF or distracting from his tunneling on Oman than anything else.

TylerJ, by posting that “If I make a Contentless post, it isn't because I want to stay hidden and wishy-washy.” suggests that he understands there might be a case made for him seeming unsure, and yet when Oman accused him of this TylerJ demanded evidence and then accused Oman of being scum for not providing it. Actually, in TylerJ’s defense, I don’t see that much evidence of him being wishy-washy or unsure. Just of him posting lots and lots of stuff, none of it seeming to hunt scum except for sometimes Oman.

And worst of all this, which is a defense that makes TylerJ look more guilty. Sorry to repeat the quote but it deserves to stand out:

Also, here is something purely analytical. If I was really trying to push for people to vote for Oman, I would still have my vote on him. If you don't think that is true, that's your own specualtion and I can't argue with that.

TylerJ, if you have only cast serious suspicion on one player and continue to insist you are suspicious of him, to the exclusion of all else, who are we going to believe, you or our lying eyes?

Oh, plus that one other thing. Little thing, really. When TylerJ posted this he was still voting for Oman. He FOS’ed SomeStrangeFlea for that little two step he did with him.

I mean the vote count was right there on the same page. And there was never a post TylerJ made where he unvoted Oman or voted SSF. Maybe that’s just a great big mistake, but normally people who are much interested in scumhunting know where their vote is. What moves this out of the just an innocent mistake range for me is that Opposed Force directly asks TylerJ to tell him in what post TylerJ took his vote off Oman, and TylerJ never responds. Now the only real defenses possible here are that:
a. TylerJ doesn't really read the thread, and only someone who really suspiciously doesn't care about hunting scum wouldn't even care enough to read.
b. TylerJ realized at the point OF asked the question that he hadn't taken his vote off Oman and decided to brazen his way through.
c. TylerJ knew all along where his vote was and just posted what he did because he thought he could bluff his way through.

If there's a D that excuses the original misstatement, the refusal to answer OF's direct question on the subject, TylerJ bringing up the subject of the vote yet again in a post we'll see later, that in the rereads TylerJ promised to do he never discovered this mistake, and his not even mentioning it as an OMG when he finally did move his vote to Loudmouth Lee much later, I'd be glad to hear it.

What follows are a lot of posts with almost no content at all. TylerJ joins in on the discussion of Sammich in only the most cursory fashion, complains about the lack of content, mildly defends against a mild attack by Jordan, but hasn’t found time at this slow pace to reread the thread. When he’s finally asked, in response to one of his comments on the lack of scumhunting, who he finds most suspicious, TylerJ promises to do a reread. Can anyone guess who he finds most suspicious? Here’s post 407:

Uhhh, why I took my vote off of Oman is unclear to me.

At the beginning he made a scummy bandwagon and seemed to care less about it. Also, he was really hysterical on pg 7 about people metaing. I think it is because he is scum in those games to, so if he turns up scum, he doesn't want others to see that and then vote him here. There are other reasons to, but I just got done with a reread and my brain is mush.

Don’t worry, TylerJ, you hadn’t taken your vote off Oman at all. By the way, much as in responding to the other parts of OF’s analysis, TylerJ never got around to telling us those other reasons.

There’s not much after this. A little more sparring with Oman, a bit of agreeing with Jordan, a more or less reset vote on LoudMouthLee.

So a lot of empty posts. Some are brotherly advice, some are comments on others not doing what he isn’t doing, some are just adorably cute. But the only person TylerJ has thrown a real punch at is Oman, and he even tried to disavow that when it was called in question by Opposed Force (tried so hard that he told Opposed Force he wasn’t voting for Oman when he was and never responded to OF when OF asked him in what post he took the vote off), so the sum total of TylerJ has been a very large number of words, a terribly scummy response to the one time someone came seriously sniffing, and no help to town.

Tyler, as far as I’m concerned you seem the dirtiest person here. I think if you can’t explain that post to Opposed Force, your almost absolute lack of scum hunting, your strange interchange with SSF where you dropped your “suspicions” of him after he made a “scumhunting” post which consisted of purely defensive responses, and your refusal to respond to OF when he asked in what post you took your vote off Oman, you’re getting my vote.

[Justin Playfair]

And now Shteven:

Early on this gives me something to wonder about. It’s from post 31:

As far as vigging goes, you may have a significantly higher chance to hit town, but hitting mafia is worth more. I'm not saying I'd recommend night one kills, but saying that you're more likely to hit town than mafia isn't the whole story.

What is the whole story, Shteven? Because I’m hoping it’s more than “hitting mafia is worth more”. Why? Because the logical extension of that would be that random lynching wouldn’t be completely bad either, because if you happened to lynch scum that would be worth more too. If you can explain your thinking here more completely I would be grateful. It wasn’t your tone that worried me in this post. It was your logic.

Shteven does a lot of “NotHunting”. Conciliatory, noncommittal, posting words that leave the thread in the same place it started. It makes it seem like he’s contributing, but there’s little of value to be gained. Do it sometimes and that’s fine. Do it as much as Shteven’s doing it and it makes me think you’re trying to show you’re in the game and active but don’t want to put yourself on the line. Post 33 is a good example of this:

I don't believe I've ever played with LML before (He's usually modding my games) but I suppose just from knowing him this kind of get-started-sprinting makes a lot of sense for him. I don't think it's much of a tell - in either direction.

So, maybe LML’s likely to be aggressive right as the game starts, and Shteven’s never played a game with him, but LML has modded games Shteven’s been in, and maybe it’s not so suspicious but who really knows. Have that argument with yourself Shteven. Then post your conclusions, and support them with the reasoning that got you there. Very little in life lies at precisely the 50 yard line.

More of the same in post 60, including a bit of defensive self-revelation about being defensive. Won’t post it all, but I’ll post the part that bothers me most (in response to an attack on Shteven’s tone by Aimee). You’ll see why Shteven’s meta-game defense here bothers me as we continue:

As far as being overdefensive, I'll go on the record right now as a very defensive player. If someone says something about me, I believe it merits a response. . I don't expect anyone to read a 100+ page and still growing game, but if you want to see my play style, I was just lynched in mafia 64 and was a (now) proven townie who defended himself constantly. Right from day one I got into extensive arguments with Glork.

Fortunately for those who don't want to read 100+ pages, White, LML, and manaspryte were all in that game so just ask them.

Post 65 we get a safe vote on Oman for bandwagoning. But then a lot more pretty empty words. Shteven critiques the Jordan wagon, not for merit but because it’s at five and…

The confidence you need to join a wagon already past halfway is a bit too steep for at this point.

Confidence in what? Jordan’s guilt? That the bandwagon might go to lynch with your vote on it? Shteven seems to be voting Oman with cause, not just for some faint hope at putting pressure on him. And then Shteven comments again on the number of votes on each. Why would it even matter at this point? Five votes away, four votes away, neither were dangerously close to being lynched.

Two more nearly completely contentless chatty posts follow, and then this one, which just flat out bothers me. First there is a very long recapping of the vote history. One might think studying the thread so closely would have given Shteven some insights, but he follows the recap with this:

Commentary: The Jordan wagon, based on LML's claim that jordan's post about the SK revealed that jordan is the SK, has stalled. People haven't left it yet and may still succeed, but later votes have tended towards Oman with some other scattered targets. It may be too early to successfully lynch, or perhaps he's hidden well enough. He's also reflexively voted LML.

Oman's case is based on his admitted band wagoning. I voted for this, but in looking back, it seems like Jordan may be the better choice. I will consider this, I'm not moving my vote just yet, but also wanted to point out this post:

Hmmm…why would Jordan be the better choice? Oh, maybe it’s this, from later in the same post:

I'm a bit curious what LML is trying to pull off here. He's already started the largest bandwagon so far, getting five votes for attacking one post (the response vote may also have helped fuel the wagon). He's now trying to start a brand new wagon? Granted wagons shift frequently at the start of the game, but it seems like LML may be trying to throw out anything that will stick at this point. What have I done that you think I deserve more suspicion than Jordan, who you've already claimed is the SK?

I'm aware that I may be playing into Aimee's concerns here, but I think it would be doing the town a disservice to be silent.

Now to me this seems to be Shteven saying that Jordan (read anyone) would be a better choice than Shteven. And although Shteven actually comes up with a valid reason for being suspicious of LML he is instead suggesting that maybe it would have been a better idea for him to join “the largest bandwagon so far”, the one that LML started on Jordan. I also just hate that last line. Shteven later makes use of Oman making a silly claim as to how he doesn’t care if he dies if it helps the town, but there’s not a penny’s weight of difference between that and what Shteven does at the end of this post. Very noble. If there’s one thing that consistently makes me suspicious of someone it is hypocrisy.

Then here comes post 143:

Metagame defenses make me nervous, but I can't help realizing they're useful. People do play differently; but I'm really not interested in reading 2-3 games from player's past just to figure out how to play this game.

I do my best to avoid being scummy each game and I think you should too. Other than a few people saying I'm too defensive I think I do a pretty good job, we'll see

Early wagons at -2 are pressure. early wagons at -1 are a bad idea. You don't know who would be willing to hammer.

I’m not even going to comment on that well-discussed middle sentence, but the first part of this post seems a little odd considering the meta-defense Shteven used in post 60. Shteven, do meta-defenses make you nervous only when someone other than you are using them? Like claims of noble sacrifice on behalf of the town?

And post 145:

Oy...I forgot to include the whole point. Wagoning for pressure is fine, I imagine that was LML's main point in attacking jordan. But if you outright tell the person it's just pressure, then there is no pressure. And that's just distracting. It's a good time to be voting Oman...

Okay, let’s trace Shteven’s logic of wagons. A wagon that would still have been three votes away from lynch if he added his vote was too steep for him. A wagon at -2 seems like pressure. And if you tell the person it’s just pressure there isn’t any pressure. And there’s more about this later. Hey, I paid off when I promised there was more about meta-gaming, right?

And I’m glad it was a good time for voting Oman, since you never shared your thoughts on why it might be a good idea to switch your vote to Jordan.

Post 173 mildly defends Ooba. Post 177 gives a little advice to Sammich and Ooba, and includes some defense about the middle section of his post 143. Then comes post 185, in which Shteven criticizes Oman for making a content free post. Won’t quote this post here but Shteven once again uses a meta-argument and then comes dangerously close to losing an argument with himself about what kind of player is most likely to be nightkilled.

Shteven votes Sammich for okay reasons but in a later post makes sure Sammich doesn’t think it’s personal and points out Sammich doesn’t have anything to worry about because it’s only one vote. Shteven’s post 201 looks good though, politely but firmly pushing Sammich to give him information. Shteven’s post 230, asking some questions of LML, is okay too(I see this: “Are you happy with the results of Jordan's wagon or do we need to take it all the way to lynch?” as a question asked to LML which may well have been more to gain information about LML than to continue to try to push that wagon). Post 250 is fine. In Post 259 Shteven chides Sammich for being content free. Shteven takes his vote off Sammich, saying it has done it’s job and in Post 259 Shteven announces that his reading of LaptopGun and SomeStrangeFlea resulted in nothing. No explanation, but I guess it was good to get the update.

Then Sammich posts his overview, which includes Shteven seeming like the doctor (which just makes sense which is non in so, so many ways) and Shteven makes this horrible post in response (286):

3) Claiming I'm a doctor is where you went wrong. There's no reason for a town player to do this. It's either a horrible gaffe, or you're trying to signal who needs to be killed. I certainly hope it's not an innocent mistake, because this is day 1 and this evidence will be enough for my vote.

Vote: Sammich

Votes have been coming in pretty fast, so while I have a chance, I'd like to conduct a poll, for everyone: Should we delay a lynch if sammich gets to -1 or -2, or is this enough day 1 posting? My last game went into 40+ pages on day 1 and that was a bit...headache inducing

I agree with CuriousKarmaDog about how opportunistic this post looks but will add a point CKD didn’t. Shteven, who lectured Oman about telling someone the bandwagon placed on them is just for pressure, now proposes “a poll” on the same subject. Then he continues by suggesting that maybe it’s time to lynch Sammich because there’s been enough day one posting. See, told you there would be more on Shteven’s theories of bandwagoning. Plus, and I really can’t help but say this, those votes you cast to lynch someone…they’re a poll. When someone gets enough votes in this “poll” they get lynched. This is such a bad bit from Shteven on just every level that I’m surprised it didn’t get him a far more substantial poll of his own.

Shteven’s defense in 297 is deflecting in that it skirts completely the issue of how opportunistic Shteven was being. After a defense in 305 against other things, Shteven continues to push for a Sammich lynch in 306, including this bit of distancing just to be safe.

Seriously, this lack of response doesn't make him that much more likely to be mafia. And I am rather afraid we'll be mislynching town...he's just not giving me much to work with, to let him off the hook.

Shteven continues to push on Sammich, even going so far in post 321 to call out to lurkers who haven’t posted since Sammich “made his post”. CuriousKarmaDog calls him for deflection.

Called on it Shteven says it was to spur discussion and to get away from tunneling on Sammich. Which would be fine, except the call was linked to Sammich. How? Like this:

Sammich's post was last tuesday 3:46 forum time. Since then (four days) the following players have not posted ONCE:

This isn’t a post to get people to stop talking about Sammich. This is a post to point people who might not have read the Sammich post to it. If it isn’t, why does this all immediately follow?

Shteven criticizes the continued discussion of Sammich and then posts, almost immediately, that he still wants to lynch Sammich. Shteven then uses Sammich doing a “bump” to go after Sammich again. Shteven doesn’t talk about anything other than Sammich until he finally gets tired of CuriousKarmaDog going after him over his scummy post 286.

In post 360 Shteven misquotes an old post of CuriousKarmaDog in order to try to cast suspicion on him. OMGUS for absolutely sure, but also another attempt at a misdirect. Shteven then posts a whole list of old posts that need to be looked at again, just to prove he wasn’t looking back trying to find some dirt to throw at CKD, ending it, of course, with Sammich. When CKD pins Shteven on the misquote (the accusation based on this got its own post, not just part of a list) Shteven apologizes and even makes a list of suspects that doesn’t include CKD, which has the very safe to be suspicious of Sammich and Oman at the top.

Shteven changes his vote to Oman after Oman suggests lynching a lurker.

I don’t like much of what I’ve seen from Shteven so far. Is being hypocritically inconsistent in his own favor on the subjects of meta-gaming and bandwagons and being sanctimonious about how the town comes first worth a vote? Probably not. Is the low content and refusal to commit on almost anything worth a vote? Probably not. Is the no explanation reason, raised under pressure and abandoned right after, for reconsidering his position on voting Jordan worth a vote? Taking a clumsy pot shot at CuriousKarmaDog and then making an even clumsier attempt to cover it with a list of similar “overlooked” posts which he never bothered to follow up on or build into a case? Probably not. But put it all together and combine it with that horrible post 286 and…yeah, I’m getting real close.

[Khelvaster]

I just wanted to thank Justin tremendously for contributing to this game and keeping it alive.

[Shteven]

Well I must say I am most certainly impressed with the length of this post about me Some responses. All quotes Justin, non-quotes me.

P.S. Just finished writing this...my god I'm sorry for the length! Quote blocks make it clearer, but it suffers the wall-of-text problem...

And now Shteven:

Early on this gives me something to wonder about. It’s from post 31:

As far as vigging goes, you may have a significantly higher chance to hit town, but hitting mafia is worth more. I'm not saying I'd recommend night one kills, but saying that you're more likely to hit town than mafia isn't the whole story.

What is the whole story, Shteven? Because I’m hoping it’s more than “hitting mafia is worth more”. Why? Because the logical extension of that would be that random lynching wouldn’t be completely bad either, because if you happened to lynch scum that would be worth more too. If you can explain your thinking here more completely I would be grateful. It wasn’t your tone that worried me in this post. It was your logic.

In a balanced game, the two teams should start at the same level of power. Let's assume a simplistic setup of 12 players, 3 of which are mafia. A mafia member is therefore worth 3 times as much as a townie is. However, you're 3 times more likely to hit a townie than a mafia member, so this cancels out. The above is only a rough approximation; obviously if you're a vig there's one less townie around. If there's power roles (which there probably are, you're a vig after all) then you have a lot more risk, etc. There's a lot that could vary, but I do hold that in a -balanced- setup, the move should be more or less neutral. Most games you'll go down slightly, some games you'll get a significant lead. I don't recommend it, as power roles will skew it, and it's also against the spirit of mafia to a degree. Kills should be selected from information instead of randomly. It is this reason why your extension of this principle to random lynches is wrong, and possibly misleading. There is information after day 1. I did not say it; ask me questions if you don't follow, but do not put words in my mouth. You are stretching to build a case.

Shteven does a lot of “NotHunting”. Conciliatory, noncommittal, posting words that leave the thread in the same place it started. It makes it seem like he’s contributing, but there’s little of value to be gained. Do it sometimes and that’s fine. Do it as much as Shteven’s doing it and it makes me think you’re trying to show you’re in the game and active but don’t want to put yourself on the line. Post 33 is a good example of this:

I don't believe I've ever played with LML before (He's usually modding my games) but I suppose just from knowing him this kind of get-started-sprinting makes a lot of sense for him. I don't think it's much of a tell - in either direction.

So, maybe LML’s likely to be aggressive right as the game starts, and Shteven’s never played a game with him, but LML has modded games Shteven’s been in, and maybe it’s not so suspicious but who really knows. Have that argument with yourself Shteven. Then post your conclusions, and support them with the reasoning that got you there. Very little in life lies at precisely the 50 yard line.

You have a valid point that my post didn't advance the thread very much. However, I did already post my conclusions, so I'm not sure what else I could say about it. People who don't know him may think it's an overly aggressive move, I felt it was normal coming from him. It's a small point, but I thought it was useful. This is based mostly on our games of poker, where he often bets heavily and "controls" the table, but in a methodical manner.

More of the same in post 60, including a bit of defensive self-revelation about being defensive. Won’t post it all, but I’ll post the part that bothers me most (in response to an attack on Shteven’s tone by Aimee). You’ll see why Shteven’s meta-game defense here bothers me as we continue:

As far as being overdefensive, I'll go on the record right now as a very defensive player. If someone says something about me, I believe it merits a response. . I don't expect anyone to read a 100+ page and still growing game, but if you want to see my play style, I was just lynched in mafia 64 and was a (now) proven townie who defended himself constantly. Right from day one I got into extensive arguments with Glork.

Fortunately for those who don't want to read 100+ pages, White, LML, and manaspryte were all in that game so just ask them.

Post 65 we get a safe vote on Oman for bandwagoning. But then a lot more pretty empty words. Shteven critiques the Jordan wagon, not for merit but because it’s at five and…

The confidence you need to join a wagon already past halfway is a bit too steep for at this point.

Confidence in what? Jordan’s guilt? That the bandwagon might go to lynch with your vote on it? Shteven seems to be voting Oman with cause, not just for some faint hope at putting pressure on him. And then Shteven comments again on the number of votes on each. Why would it even matter at this point? Five votes away, four votes away, neither were dangerously close to being lynched.

The number of votes a wagon has when you join it directly affects the meaning of your vote. If you are the first person to vote someone, it is an informative vote - "Hey, this person did something scummy, everyone pay attention and tell me if you think I found something." Second and third votes are agreeing with this, to give it greater visibility. When you get to around halfway lynch (a game of this size, votes 4/5/6) you're saying that the candidate is scum and worth lynching. Final votes imply greater certainty, that you are convinced the person is the best choice, unless the person otherwise stated that they had some other preference but can't get a majority behind it.

These shades of meaning are all implied and may not be universal, but it's how I think of my votes. It does not require as much certainty to put the first vote on someone to draw attention to something they did as it does to put the 5th vote on someone and try to sell them as the lynch for the day. Scanning the thread again I was third on Oman after the initial random votes. Certainly not the first, but I do hold there's a difference. Pointing out that someone off to the side should be getting more attention vs advancing the leading bandwagon. One tries to shorten the day, the other tries to encourage further discussion. I was not (and am not) certain enough on Jordan to want to shorten the day.

Two more nearly completely contentless chatty posts follow, and then this one, which just flat out bothers me. First there is a very long recapping of the vote history. One might think studying the thread so closely would have given Shteven some insights, but he follows the recap with this:

Commentary: The Jordan wagon, based on LML's claim that jordan's post about the SK revealed that jordan is the SK, has stalled. People haven't left it yet and may still succeed, but later votes have tended towards Oman with some other scattered targets. It may be too early to successfully lynch, or perhaps he's hidden well enough. He's also reflexively voted LML.

Oman's case is based on his admitted band wagoning. I voted for this, but in looking back, it seems like Jordan may be the better choice. I will consider this, I'm not moving my vote just yet, but also wanted to point out this post:

Hmmm…why would Jordan be the better choice? Oh, maybe it’s this, from later in the same post:

I'm a bit curious what LML is trying to pull off here. He's already started the largest bandwagon so far, getting five votes for attacking one post (the response vote may also have helped fuel the wagon). He's now trying to start a brand new wagon? Granted wagons shift frequently at the start of the game, but it seems like LML may be trying to throw out anything that will stick at this point. What have I done that you think I deserve more suspicion than Jordan, who you've already claimed is the SK?

I'm aware that I may be playing into Aimee's concerns here, but I think it would be doing the town a disservice to be silent.

Now to me this seems to be Shteven saying that Jordan (read anyone) would be a better choice than Shteven. And although Shteven actually comes up with a valid reason for being suspicious of LML he is instead suggesting that maybe it would have been a better idea for him to join “the largest bandwagon so far”, the one that LML started on Jordan. I also just hate that last line. Shteven later makes use of Oman making a silly claim as to how he doesn’t care if he dies if it helps the town, but there’s not a penny’s weight of difference between that and what Shteven does at the end of this post. Very noble. If there’s one thing that consistently makes me suspicious of someone it is hypocrisy.

This is probably your best point, it was a bit hypocritical. I didn't really think about it at the time; what I meant with my line was that I was repeating the behavior that Aimee felt was scummy. I felt it was worth it to try to get more from LML; and thought I should mention that because of my general policy to not appear scummy. I was contradicting that; so I wanted to explictly mention it. In doing so, I was a bit too grandiose and fell into the trap I blamed Oman for. It should be noted that the "I don't care if I die for the town" is still far more dramatic than "I may seem scummy posting this but it's for a good cause (information)". When I posted this orginally, I did not go so far as to connect my post with Oman's, just that I didn't want it to look like I was willfully being scummy with no reason.

Then here comes post 143:

Metagame defenses make me nervous, but I can't help realizing they're useful. People do play differently; but I'm really not interested in reading 2-3 games from player's past just to figure out how to play this game.

I do my best to avoid being scummy each game and I think you should too. Other than a few people saying I'm too defensive I think I do a pretty good job, we'll see

Early wagons at -2 are pressure. early wagons at -1 are a bad idea. You don't know who would be willing to hammer.

I’m not even going to comment on that well-discussed middle sentence,

Sorry to interrupt, but this itself is scummy. You've commented EXTENSIVELY on all my posts, but can't touch this part? You want it to appear worse than it is? Ever heard the term FUD? (if not, try http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear%2C_un ... _and_doubt)

but the first part of this post seems a little odd considering the meta-defense Shteven used in post 60. Shteven, do meta-defenses make you nervous only when someone other than you are using them? Like claims of noble sacrifice on behalf of the town?

Not sure what you're getting at here. Yes, I dislike meta-game defenses as a rule, but I realize they're useful and won't go away. I don't know how noble sacrifices on behalf of town qualifies as a meta-game defense unless the person linked to some other game showing it as one. It's not related; it's just an easy-to-fake post which scum can use to plead their case. In general, I don't like people who try to look angelic; it's probably scum playing their role a bit too forcefully.

And post 145:

Oy...I forgot to include the whole point. Wagoning for pressure is fine, I imagine that was LML's main point in attacking jordan. But if you outright tell the person it's just pressure, then there is no pressure. And that's just distracting. It's a good time to be voting Oman...

Okay, let’s trace Shteven’s logic of wagons. A wagon that would still have been three votes away from lynch if he added his vote was too steep for him. A wagon at -2 seems like pressure. And if you tell the person it’s just pressure there isn’t any pressure. And there’s more about this later. Hey, I paid off when I promised there was more about meta-gaming, right?

I don't like your paragraph construction here. Several completely seperate thoughts come one after the other; I don't attribute this to malice, but it's misrepresenting what I said/believe. I'll quote what you said about me with quotes instead of quotation blocks:

"A wagon that would still have been three votes away from lynch if he added his vote was too steep for him."

Yes, joining a wagon already past halfway changes what the next votes on it means. See above; basically if you vote him at that point you are saying you have confidence that he is scum and would be comfortable lynching him that day. Early votes are more informational; later votes imply certainty.

"A wagon at -2 seems like pressure."

This one was taken out of context, and I don't like how it was lined up with the previous sentence. When I said that a wagon at -2 is pressure I meant that a wagon at -2 is ENOUGH to put significant pressure on a person. There isn't a need to go to -1; and I advise against it, because anyone can hammer it for potentially bad reasons. Being at -3 is pressure; being at -4 is pressure (when it's 9 to lynch). Just slightly less so. The point I was making was that putting someone at -1 is a serious move and not something you should do if the purpose of your vote is only to pressure them. You'd better be confident the person deserves it.

And finally, yes, telling a person you're only voting them for pressure does reduce the pressure and therefore defeat the purpose of your vote.

"And there’s more about this later. Hey, I paid off when I promised there was more about meta-gaming, right?"

Actually no, I'm not following you here. A talk about wagon size vs pressure is game theoretic, not meta-gaming.

And I’m glad it was a good time for voting Oman, since you never shared your thoughts on why it might be a good idea to switch your vote to Jordan.

Perhaps I never shared my thoughts on why it would be a good idea to vote for Jordan

because I never voted for Jordan

? Just a thought.

Post 173 mildly defends Ooba. Post 177 gives a little advice to Sammich and Ooba, and includes some defense about the middle section of his post 143. Then comes post 185, in which Shteven criticizes Oman for making a content free post. Won’t quote this post here but Shteven once again uses a meta-argument and then comes dangerously close to losing an argument with himself about what kind of player is most likely to be nightkilled.

Sorry to argue semantics...but it's not possible to lose an argument with yourself. The other-me would have won.

Shteven votes Sammich for okay reasons but in a later post makes sure Sammich doesn’t think it’s personal and points out Sammich doesn’t have anything to worry about because it’s only one vote.

Wow, sounds pretty consistent with the view that the first vote is more informative than certain, right?

Shteven’s post 201 looks good though, politely but firmly pushing Sammich to give him information.

Yep, this was pretty much the goal...

Shteven’s post 230, asking some questions of LML, is okay too(I see this: “Are you happy with the results of Jordan's wagon or do we need to take it all the way to lynch?” as a question asked to LML which may well have been more to gain information about LML than to continue to try to push that wagon).

Why, it's almost like you're on fire now. Pity LML isn't playing anymore, or it may have worked.

Post 250 is fine. In Post 259 Shteven chides Sammich for being content free. Shteven takes his vote off Sammich, saying it has done it’s job and in Post 259 Shteven announces that his reading of LaptopGun and SomeStrangeFlea resulted in nothing. No explanation, but I guess it was good to get the update.

Then Sammich posts his overview, which includes Shteven seeming like the doctor (which just makes sense which is non in so, so many ways) and Shteven makes this horrible post in response (286):

3) Claiming I'm a doctor is where you went wrong. There's no reason for a town player to do this. It's either a horrible gaffe, or you're trying to signal who needs to be killed. I certainly hope it's not an innocent mistake, because this is day 1 and this evidence will be enough for my vote.

Vote: Sammich

Votes have been coming in pretty fast, so while I have a chance, I'd like to conduct a poll, for everyone: Should we delay a lynch if sammich gets to -1 or -2, or is this enough day 1 posting? My last game went into 40+ pages on day 1 and that was a bit...headache inducing

I agree with CuriousKarmaDog about how opportunistic this post looks but will add a point CKD didn’t. Shteven, who lectured Oman about telling someone the bandwagon placed on them is just for pressure, now proposes “a poll” on the same subject. Then he continues by suggesting that maybe it’s time to lynch Sammich because there’s been enough day one posting. See, told you there would be more on Shteven’s theories of bandwagoning. Plus, and I really can’t help but say this, those votes you cast to lynch someone…they’re a poll. When someone gets enough votes in this “poll” they get lynched. This is such a bad bit from Shteven on just every level that I’m surprised it didn’t get him a far more substantial poll of his own.

You're probably right that there wasn't a need to hold a secondary opinion poll. I've been in games were day 1 went over 40 pages, so when I saw a lot of votes coming in I was afraid that more would follow at the same rate (when they generally taper off somewhat, except in the most extreme cases) and wanted to voice my concerns ahead of time. Probably a waste, but I don't think it shows malice on my behalf. Over cautious, yes.

Shteven’s defense in 297 is deflecting in that it skirts completely the issue of how opportunistic Shteven was being. After a defense in 305 against other things, Shteven continues to push for a Sammich lynch in 306, including this bit of distancing just to be safe.

My post in 297 was a response to CKD's concerns. I did address them; I simply didn't echo the word opportunistic. My previous list of 3 points was not intended to be "3 reasons sammich is scummy" but simply "I think these 3 things related to sammich are interesting." Point 3 was why I voted for him, not 1 or 2. If there's something else you think I should have responded to, let me know. As you can probably tell by now, I try to be complete in my responses And as a footnote, CKD was correct in that by this point I was willing to shorten the day, I felt Sammich was a good lynch candidate.

Seriously, this lack of response doesn't make him that much more likely to be mafia. And I am rather afraid we'll be mislynching town...he's just not giving me much to work with, to let him off the hook.

Shteven continues to push on Sammich, even going so far in post 321 to call out to lurkers who haven’t posted since Sammich “made his post”. CuriousKarmaDog calls him for deflection.

Called on it Shteven says it was to spur discussion and to get away from tunneling on Sammich. Which would be fine, except the call was linked to Sammich. How? Like this:

Sammich's post was last tuesday 3:46 forum time. Since then (four days) the following players have not posted ONCE:

This isn’t a post to get people to stop talking about Sammich. This is a post to point people who might not have read the Sammich post to it. If it isn’t, why does this all immediately follow?

My goal was not to get people to stop talking about Sammich. My goal was to get the same 3 people to stop talking about Sammich, and get a wider range of opinions. I would say that a player outing power roles without provocation is a pretty major daytime event, and certainly merits discussion by all of the players. Certainly, they're welcome to talk about any player, but Sammich held my main interest at the time, and yes, I'd like to hear more people talk about him. Maybe some of them would even vote for him. Sounds like a game of mafia to me

Shteven criticizes the continued discussion of Sammich and then posts, almost immediately, that he still wants to lynch Sammich. Shteven then uses Sammich doing a “bump” to go after Sammich again. Shteven doesn’t talk about anything other than Sammich until he finally gets tired of CuriousKarmaDog going after him over his scummy post 286.

Allow me to answer your above question: I continued to post about Sammich because I felt Sammich was scummy and wanted to lynch him. Would you propose I talk about Jordan in order to get Sammich lynched instead? That one's rhetorical, btw.

In post 360 Shteven misquotes an old post of CuriousKarmaDog in order to try to cast suspicion on him. OMGUS for absolutely sure, but also another attempt at a misdirect. Shteven then posts a whole list of old posts that need to be looked at again, just to prove he wasn’t looking back trying to find some dirt to throw at CKD, ending it, of course, with Sammich. When CKD pins Shteven on the misquote (the accusation based on this got its own post, not just part of a list) Shteven apologizes and even makes a list of suspects that doesn’t include CKD, which has the very safe to be suspicious of Sammich and Oman at the top.

I'm kind of confused at all the things you're accusing me of here. Given: I did in fact misquote CKD, due to skimming the thread on a reread. You then attribute an malicious intention behind this, and call it an "OMGUS for absolutely sure" even though CKD had been voting for me several pages (4 pages) at this point and I never expressed any concerns about the vote itself. He's actually voting me for our different reads of Sammich; he feels the attempt to out me as a doctor was a newbie town mistake, I feel it's scummy. It's certainly questionable if such a blatant mistake would really be a scum tactic, so I don't hold this against him. I could certainly be wrong. But I think it gives Sammich a better than random chance at being scum, and his utter unwillingness to even talk about it is another red flag. I feel if it's a newbie mistake, he should have posted some embarassed note and apologized, and then left it at that. Had he done so, I wouldn't be voting him now. He's continued to be evasive - he seems to hopes it will go away. So I'm trying my best to ensure it doesn't go away.

Shteven changes his vote to Oman after Oman suggests lynching a lurker.

I don’t like much of what I’ve seen from Shteven so far. Is being hypocritically inconsistent in his own favor on the subjects of meta-gaming and bandwagons and being sanctimonious about how the town comes first worth a vote? Probably not. Is the low content and refusal to commit on almost anything worth a vote? Probably not. Is the no explanation reason, raised under pressure and abandoned right after, for reconsidering his position on voting Jordan worth a vote? Taking a clumsy pot shot at CuriousKarmaDog and then making an even clumsier attempt to cover it with a list of similar “overlooked” posts which he never bothered to follow up on or build into a case? Probably not. But put it all together and combine it with that horrible post 286 and…yeah, I’m getting real close.

Wow. Nearly everything here just seems wrong. First, how was I hypocritical on meta-gaming? You never quite showed the two differing stances. My stance is clear: It's of limited credibility because you're never going to read three old games to verify one post here (at least I wouldn't) but can be useful to the person and is somewhat unavoidable. That is nuanced and feel free to call it wishy-washy, but it's not hypocritical.

I don't feel I've been "low content" but I suppose that's your call. However, you spent a fair amount of your post blasting me for calling for more attention on Sammich, calling attention to lurkers for the supposedly express purpose of getting them to talk about sammich, etc. How the hell can you then say I've refused to commit to anything? I've been one of the most committed players here, imho. Maybe I should reread the thread after the delays, but I seem to recall trying to get sammich lynched for some time now.

My position on Jordan was not a position. I mentioned him in a comment. I never voted for him; I did not have a stance to abandon. I'm not sure what pressure you think I was under to comment on him; no one attacked me for it, I was merely mentioning him because he was a leading wagon and I tend to share my opinions on those. I didn't feel it was a quality wagon.

The shot at CKD was a mistake. I would hope that people will check the timestamp with my longer post that was right after it to see that I was in fact rereading the thread and posting whatever I could find. I did not check the point against CKD carefully enough. I suppose if you don't buy the first apology, this one may not change your mind, though.

In short, I think most of your points are wrong or misguided. You have a valid point about my comment "I think it would be doing the town a disservice to be silent" but I can't find much else here that's useful. While in a post this long (your post, I mean) there's bound to be a few things that seem scummy, overall, you seem fine to me. I still have to read your Tyler post, I figured I'd start with mine.

In good news, I'd still take Sammich over you by a longshot!

[curiouskarmadog]

Justin Playfair = good posting..

made me want to reread somethings.

IS LML getting replaced?!?

Is there a deadline

?

[somestrangeflea]

V/LA til' Friday. =(

[TylerJ]

First, TylerJ.

TylerJ votes quickly on Jordan and holds onto the idea that Jordan was too defensive for a bit. After a lot of content light posts starts looking in Oman’s direction, and never really looks away. TylerJ votes for Oman.

Honestly, you mentioned several times that I didn't take my vote off of oman, and that someone mentioned it and I never replied in an attempt to hold my bluff. Honestly, I actually thought I had taken my vote off of him. As far as the contentless posts, I asked oman to provide some examples and he never did. I begin to wonder by what judgement you say that. I know I did make a few, but that was because I was on the computer for a good length of time and just wanted to post something.

I’m bothered by the way TylerJ goes after SomeStrangeFlea for not scumhunting. Why? Well because TylerJ’s sole contribution to scumhunting to this point was getting in a scuffle with Oman, in this period the easiest target to get into a scuffle with in the game. And TylerJ’s content to post ratio is easily the lowest in the game, and there’s been plenty of competition. Seriously, isolate TylerJ’s posts. Drops the look at SSF after making only the most obligatory feint. Soon TylerJ’s giving advice to Laptop Gun to stop tunneling on SomeStrangeFlea and…

Okay, so maybe I was narrowminded in my scumhunting and was a hypocrite for telling LML the same thing. I fail to remember anybody calling me on it until now. And if someone did, I would have tried to change. I didn't realize the mistake I was making until you mentioned it. But I fail to realize the scuminess in this, I only see bad play. I already mention the content proble above. I have actually tried to post content, but sometimes I didn't have anything to post so came up with something anyway.

TylerJ has glared at Oman for nearly the entire game. One time he blinked and when his eyes opened again SomeStrangeFlea was standing in front of him. TylerJ looked away as quickly as he could to find Oman.

Call me a bad scumhunter, but he is the only one that I am really suspicious of. Whoever scum is, they are playing pretty well and escape my notice. Is there a sin in that?

TylerJ disparages Opposed Force’s analysis before commenting on the section that applies to him. Says he’ll have to read it a few times to understandit, because of it’s poor construction. Guess he’d already read the section about him that few times. And since TylerJ never, not unto this day, commented on anything else in Opposed Force’s analysis, either he got seriously behind on his reading or it was just a way to minimize the valid points Opposed Force had raised.

I totally forgot about the post! And OF's post was confusing because he only a subject noun once. Get your head out of the clouds and stop conjuring up things that aren't true. I'll contribute a defense from that post in a bit.

TylerJ makes a lot of his post about his little bout of pitty-pat with SomeStrangeFlea, but the episode was so minor,

TylerJ has tried to point so much attention to it as a resolved event

, and even advised LapTop Gunner to stop tunneling on SomeStrangeFlea that the whole episode looks more suspicious as distancing from SSF or distracting from his tunneling on Oman than anything else.

Bolded to emphazise.

Where did you come up with that? I realize I was hypocritical to point out LG's tunnelvision, but I wasn't saying that to cover up anything. I just thought that his evidence was weak and was just waisting time.

TylerJ, by posting that “If I make a Contentless post, it isn't because I want to stay hidden and wishy-washy.” suggests that he understands there might be a case made for him seeming unsure, and yet when Oman accused him of this TylerJ demanded evidence and then accused Oman of being scum for not providing it. Actually, in TylerJ’s defense, I don’t see that much evidence of him being wishy-washy or unsure. Just of him posting lots and lots of stuff, none of it seeming to hunt scum except for sometimes Oman.

So I wasn't wish-washy, but I asked for a case of contentless posts from him because I only found two at the time. That isn't a whole lot of a case. Perhaps There are more now, but at that time, he didn't have any case. Like I said I have tried to scum hunt, but just haven't found a whole lot. Especially with the rate of this game.

Oh, plus that one other thing. Little thing, really. When TylerJ posted this he was still voting for Oman. He FOS’ed SomeStrangeFlea for that little two step he did with him.

Hey, I thought that I had dropped my vote plain and simple. Also, I thought that ssf was suspicious for a short while, it wsn't that I joked about. It was the = sign stuff that I joked about. Seriously, it is rediculous how many times this is brought up.

I mean the vote count was right there on the same page. And there was never a post TylerJ made where he unvoted Oman or voted SSF. Maybe that’s just a great big mistake, but normally people who are much interested in scumhunting know where their vote is. What moves this out of the just an innocent mistake range for me is that Opposed Force directly asks TylerJ to tell him in what post TylerJ took his vote off Oman, and TylerJ never responds. Now the only real defenses possible here are that:
a. TylerJ doesn't really read the thread, and only someone who really suspiciously doesn't care about hunting scum wouldn't even care enough to read.
b. TylerJ realized at the point OF asked the question that he hadn't taken his vote off Oman and decided to brazen his way through.
c. TylerJ knew all along where his vote was and just posted what he did because he thought he could bluff his way through.

I made a mistake. I thought I took it off! Your little pathetic logic has your head in the clouds and you can't see that. I didn't see OF's post, and your craplogic about that doesn't hold either. I do pay attention to the game and I do read throughly, The problem is I missed that part. I'll keep it at that, because if I continue, I might say something else I will regret.



What follows are a lot of posts with almost no content at all. TylerJ joins in on the discussion of Sammich in only the most cursory fashion, complains about the lack of content, mildly defends against a mild attack by Jordan, but hasn’t found time at this slow pace to reread the thread. When he’s finally asked, in response to one of his comments on the lack of scumhunting, who he finds most suspicious, TylerJ promises to do a reread. Can anyone guess who he finds most suspicious? Here’s post 407:

Uhhh, why I took my vote off of Oman is unclear to me.

At the beginning he made a scummy bandwagon and seemed to care less about it. Also, he was really hysterical on pg 7 about people metaing. I think it is because he is scum in those games to, so if he turns up scum, he doesn't want others to see that and then vote him here. There are other reasons to, but I just got done with a reread and my brain is mush.

Don’t worry, TylerJ, you hadn’t taken your vote off Oman at all. By the way, much as in responding to the other parts of OF’s analysis, TylerJ never got around to telling us those other reasons.

I forgot to read it again.

You say that I make a lot of contentless posts. Crap, I try posting something of content, but I can't find a lot to say!

[The Fonz]

Gaaargh! I'm so outta whack with this game, will have to do ANOTHER full re-read i think. Nothing that's happened recently has convinced me to support a shteven or Oman lynch, i don't think. This Tyler thing may be promising, i'll take a look in isolation.

[TylerJ]

How 'bout not isolating. The more you take things out of context, the easier it is too misconstrue something. (ie what's already happened).

[Aimee]

Still here. Back tomorrow.

[LaptopGun]

Welcome Justin. Like the analysis. I have t to say that yeah its pretty odd Tyler has been a bit cavalier with his actions. Oh, I think if I wasnt sick or stuck in finals hell I may be able to do better, but here goes. Do you think he is hiding something to prevent us from following his logic or do you think he's hiding that he is a non-pro town guy?

Let me play devil's advocate for a sec here. One thing that scares me about recaps is the danger that the writer, the one analysing someone, misunderstands what was going on. The poster, the one being analyised, really doesn't remember what they were trying to do. This coud be misconstrued. I am not criticisng you at all, but as a result that the poster could look suspicious. The poster would have a bit of an argument.

[Justin Playfair]

TylerJ,

What I said, specifically, is that you have engaged in no real scum hunting at any point in this game. You followed Oman, a safe target, and looked nowhere else.

I said that your exchange with somestrangeflea was more remarkable for the absolute lack of content you provided (four posts…five posts if you include the one where you corrected sumhunting to scumhunting). The posts included the following elements:

@ssf: At least his last post was scumhunting, you aren't scumhunting. COnsequently, it is scummy.

ssf=scum

why don't you at least scum hunt. And for once, defend instead of using equals signs all the time.

and you you have sumhunted how many times?

Insert here the correction of sum to scum.

And then, after somestrangeflea makes a response in which the extent of his scumhunting was to respond defensively to things Laptop Gun had posted about him, with the implication that just maybe that made LTG scummy, you wrap up your case with:

Thmx. You scumhunted. That is what I wanted. As far as the ssf=scum, I was just trying to be humorous. I am suspicious of you because you weren't scumhunting until I mentioned it. I still am.

That looks pretty pro forma to me. Now maybe you didn’t really read somestrangeflea’s post, either. I don’t know. But it was an awfully curious little baby fight of an exchange, and it certainly doesn’t look sincere compared to your behavior toward Oman. You pointing out to LTG afterward that he shouldn’t tunnel on SSF makes it more so. That’s what I’m talking about. I mean, you hounded Oman mercilessly for not providing evidence for something you now suggest was true.

Hmmm…

I totally forgot about the post! And OF's post was confusing because he only a subject noun once. Get your head out of the clouds and stop conjuring up things that aren't true. I'll contribute a defense from that post in a bit.

Well, you did say you would have to read Opposed Force’s post a few times to understand it because of the way it was written. You did then defend yourself against what Opposed Force had written about you. You have never commented on any other section of it. So either you never read the rest of Opposed Force’s post the few times it was going to take you to comment on it, or you never intended to comment on the other parts at all and this was just a way to diminish his argument by maligning the style in which it was written.

One answer suggests a scummy defense tactic. The other contributes to my suspicion that you are in not interested in scum hunting. So what precisely about this did I conjure up?

Now, at the point Oman first suggested you were being wishy-washy you had made 18 posts. Of these 6 had no game content whatsoever, and this is giving you credit for posts like:

that is what I thought.

your early game post about the likelihood of a vig hitting the right target and what you claimed was your random phase vote on Jordan. Of the remainder 8 involved Oman, and although I won’t repost them all unless you persist, several of them were also lacking in useful content. Here is the post not covered in the above:

True, but the guilty are usually more defensive than others.

About Jordan, in response to Sammich saying that being defensive was not a scum tell.

Now there is some limited content on other matters in those eight posts involving Oman. Here’s some:

Whites post about short post=/=townie is, in my opinion is a nulltell, if we continue to go off on such a tangent, we might become to focused and miss scum. Not saying that white isn't scum either, I wouldn't know.

Sammich is kind of suspicious too with voting for no reason. Even more so by the fact that he still hasn't given one.

This one, by the way, is interesting itself. Because you did this in the same post where you defended yourself against Jordan for not having commented on something Sammich had done.

Tyler's post afterwards also unsettled me, he could have pressed Sammich to explain his suspicions instead of making a contentless post about it.

This looks even less like one of the tiny bits of non-Oman scumhunting you’ve done and even more like just more defensive posting. Oh, and by the way, though I agree with Jordan that it was a pretty content free post, I counted it as one of your posts with content, because it at least in some way related to what was going on in the game. Here it is:

I agree Jordan, i'm not seeing the reason behind ooba.

So no, Oman didn’t make the case. But yes, even at that time you were sorely lacking in content, and had almost zero content not related to Oman.

As for this:

I made a mistake. I thought I took it off! Your little pathetic logic has your head in the clouds and you can't see that. I didn't see OF's post, and your craplogic about that doesn't hold either. I do pay attention to the game and I do read throughly, The problem is I missed that part. I'll keep it at that, because if I continue, I might say something else I will regret.

All right. You forgot that your vote was still on Oman, the only person you had hunted in the game. You responded to Opposed Force by pointing out that your vote would still be on Oman if you were interested in seeing him lynched. You missed the post where Opposed Force asked you in what post you took your vote off Oman. And you do read thoroughly. You missed that part.

Could you point out precisely where my “craplogic” doesn’t hold? I guess my head is so far into the clouds that I’m still not seeing it.

[TylerJ]

TylerJ,

What I said, specifically, is that you have engaged in no real scum hunting at any point in this game. You followed Oman, a safe target, and looked nowhere else.

I said that your exchange with somestrangeflea was more remarkable for the absolute lack of content you provided (four posts…five posts if you include the one where you corrected sumhunting to scumhunting). The posts included the following elements:

@ssf: At least his last post was scumhunting, you aren't scumhunting. COnsequently, it is scummy.

ssf=scum

this was the one that was a joke. Just to let you all know.

why don't you at least scum hunt. And for once, defend instead of using equals signs all the time.

this was the one that was a joke. Just to let you all know.

and you you have sumhunted how many times?

This one too, although to a lesser degree.
Insert here the correction of sum to scum.

And then, after somestrangeflea makes a response in which the extent of his scumhunting was to respond defensively to things Laptop Gun had posted about him, with the implication that just maybe that made LTG scummy, you wrap up your case with:

Thmx. You scumhunted. That is what I wanted. As far as the ssf=scum, I was just trying to be humorous. I am suspicious of you because you weren't scumhunting until I mentioned it. I still am.

That looks pretty pro forma to me. Now maybe you didn’t really read somestrangeflea’s post, either. I don’t know. But it was an awfully curious little baby fight of an exchange, and it certainly doesn’t look sincere compared to your behavior toward Oman. You pointing out to LTG afterward that he shouldn’t tunnel on SSF makes it more so. That’s what I’m talking about. I mean, you hounded Oman mercilessly for not providing evidence for something you now suggest was true.

Hmmm…

I totally forgot about the post! And OF's post was confusing because he only a subject noun once. Get your head out of the clouds and stop conjuring up things that aren't true. I'll contribute a defense from that post in a bit.

Well, you did say you would have to read Opposed Force’s post a few times to understand it because of the way it was written. You did then defend yourself against what Opposed Force had written about you. You have never commented on any other section of it. So either you never read the rest of Opposed Force’s post the few times it was going to take you to comment on it, or you never intended to comment on the other parts at all and this was just a way to diminish his argument by maligning the style in which it was written.

One answer suggests a scummy defense tactic. The other contributes to my suspicion that you are in not interested in scum hunting. So what precisely about this did I conjure up?

Now, at the point Oman first suggested you were being wishy-washy you had made 18 posts. Of these 6 had no game content whatsoever, and this is giving you credit for posts like:

that is what I thought.

your early game post about the likelihood of a vig hitting the right target and what you claimed was your random phase vote on Jordan. Of the remainder 8 involved Oman, and although I won’t repost them all unless you persist, several of them were also lacking in useful content. Here is the post not covered in the above:

True, but the guilty are usually more defensive than others.

About Jordan, in response to Sammich saying that being defensive was not a scum tell.

Now there is some limited content on other matters in those eight posts involving Oman. Here’s some:

Whites post about short post=/=townie is, in my opinion is a nulltell, if we continue to go off on such a tangent, we might become to focused and miss scum. Not saying that white isn't scum either, I wouldn't know.

Sammich is kind of suspicious too with voting for no reason. Even more so by the fact that he still hasn't given one.

This one, by the way, is interesting itself. Because you did this in the same post where you defended yourself against Jordan for not having commented on something Sammich had done.

Tyler's post afterwards also unsettled me, he could have pressed Sammich to explain his suspicions instead of making a contentless post about it.

This looks even less like one of the tiny bits of non-Oman scumhunting you’ve done and even more like just more defensive posting. Oh, and by the way, though I agree with Jordan that it was a pretty content free post, I counted it as one of your posts with content, because it at least in some way related to what was going on in the game. Here it is:

I agree Jordan, i'm not seeing the reason behind ooba.

So no, Oman didn’t make the case. But yes, even at that time you were sorely lacking in content, and had almost zero content not related to Oman.

As for this:

I made a mistake. I thought I took it off! Your little pathetic logic has your head in the clouds and you can't see that. I didn't see OF's post, and your craplogic about that doesn't hold either. I do pay attention to the game and I do read throughly, The problem is I missed that part. I'll keep it at that, because if I continue, I might say something else I will regret.

All right. You forgot that your vote was still on Oman, the only person you had hunted in the game. You responded to Opposed Force by pointing out that your vote would still be on Oman if you were interested in seeing him lynched. You missed the post where Opposed Force asked you in what post you took your vote off Oman. And you do read thoroughly. You missed that part.

Could you point out precisely where my “craplogic” doesn’t hold? I guess my head is so far into the clouds that I’m still not seeing it.

Most of what you consider as contentless posts are posts with one sentence. Other than the joking posts, I was just adding my two cents in. And really in those posts there wasn't a whole lot in them because I hadn't had a whole lot to say. Most of those posts were made to just say I was around, I wasn't lurking, but I couldn't find a whole lot to say, other than what I did say. Make sense. I would consider them to be content posts because they related to the game. You wouldn't because you say that a lot of it wasn't beneficial. So in reality, we are using different standards to judge. Seeing through your eyes, I agree with you. But as a defence I will repeat what I already said. Most of those posts were my attempt to conribute something, but at the time I couldn't find a whole lot to say.



Now as I said before, I will say again. I went after Oman with so much focus because I can't find anyone else to be scummy. Plain and simple.

As to the case about SSF. Well, let me say this: Some stuff, as LG said, I am not sure why I did. And I realized before I made those posts that some of them were going to seem scummy. In example, my reaction to him scumhinting honestly was weird even to me, I don't know why I responded the way I did.

Your right I wasn't that sincere about SSF, because I didn't find him nearly as scummy as I did Oman. As far as telling LTG to stop tunneling, it had nothing to do with SSF, I just wanted help him broaden his vision. Of course now I see the hypocrisy of it. That isn't to say that I don't find Oman scummy anymore either. And I didn't hound SSF again because I didn't find him as scummy. And I never said that Oman's case was true. I realize that I made small posts with almost nothing to say, but that wasn't because I wanted to actively lurk-wich is the implication- I just didn't know what to say.

Now as to the LTG post, I don't care what you say. I am being honest, and if you cant accept that, it is your problem, because if I continue with this I will end up saying some pretty harsh things that I will regret. You provided an either or scenario as to why I didn't reply. NIETHER of them fit the actual scenerio. THAT is what I consider craplogic. You ASSUME that one HAS TO fit, but neither do. I forgot about the post, and when I did rereads I did a mixture of scanning and And partial rereads. Both aren't complete rereads. Thinking of it though, I remember doing one reread in which I read the post. But it was a while ago and the case was forgotten. So I figured other people didn't think of it as a strong case-hence no one bringing it up again- So I didn't waste my time defending against something no one cared about. Seeing as you care though, I am caught second guessing myself.

I already explained my contentless posts. I will reiderate though. NOW I humbly say I agree with the evidence. Although when you said 'contentless' I pictured things that had nothing to do with the game at all, hence the disagreement. But these posts weren't made as an active-lurking scum. They were made as a bored towny with little to say.

[Justin Playfair]

Shteven, thank you for answering my post. I’m sorry about the length, and I understand some things may have confused you because of that. So permit me to clarify.

First, though, in the case of your first point. No, I am not stretching. Because when you say “it isn’t the whole story” you are in fact saying that somehow the vig killing a random townsperson on night 0 with no information isn’t just a terrible move. Now please explain how this would be different than the entire town randomly determining a lynch before any discussion on day one. In saying that the town would have more information after discussion you don’t prove that this is different. The vig would also have more information then. Which is why your point doesn’t ring true at all. If you wouldn’t approve a die enforced random lynch before discussion you also can’t approve of the vig killing with absolutely no information. If you want to try explaining this again, please do.

Let’s go on to the point about meta-gaming. And I’ll put them back to back here, to avoid confusion. This is you, Shteven, in post 60, responding to what was only a very small amount of pressure:

As far as being overdefensive, I'll go on the record right now as a very defensive player. If someone says something about me, I believe it merits a response. . I don't expect anyone to read a 100+ page and still growing game, but if you want to see my play style, I was just lynched in mafia 64 and was a (now) proven townie who defended himself constantly. Right from day one I got into extensive arguments with Glork.

Fortunately for those who don't want to read 100+ pages, White, LML, and manaspryte were all in that game so just ask them.

This is you, Shteven, in post 143:

Metagame defenses make me nervous, but I can't help realizing they're useful. People do play differently; but I'm really not interested in reading 2-3 games from player's past just to figure out how to play this game.

Now you also use meta a couple of other times, but this is the clearest…let’s say contrast. And so I ask you again, Shteven, are you only nervous about meta-game defenses when someone else is using them?

All right. Let’s move on to bandwagoning.

You say that Jordan’s wagon was too steep for you. Your vote would have put him at L-2

When asked about your theory on bandwagons you say:

Early wagons at -2 are pressure.

Now this is a small contradiction, but I don’t think much of it either. If not for the much more huge contradiction I detail in what follows I wouldn’t have even posted it.

But this:

But if you outright tell the person it's just pressure, then there is no pressure. And that's just distracting.

Which you posted to Oman, followed by this:

I'd like to conduct a poll, for everyone: Should we delay a lynch if sammich gets to -1 or -2,

Is just insane. Now this post has much bigger things wrong with it than just this, but you’re proposing that the whole town tell Sammich that the bandwagon on him is just for pressure. Now you can play whatever games you like with this, say it wasn’t about pressure, it was about delaying for discussion, but the end result is even more damaging. No one who is told they are getting voted on just to put pressure on them really believes that. But any player assured by a poll of everyone in town that there should be a delay in lynching them if they get to -1 or -2 knows that there isn’t a player in town who will want the attention putting that last vote on them will get them. The people who are already convinced to that level that they’re guilty are already voting for them.

You were also confused about the Jordan pressure comment I made. Well the only time you brought up that:

Oman's case is based on his admitted band wagoning. I voted for this, but in looking back, it seems like Jordan may be the better choice.

was in the very same post where you said this:

What have I done that you think I deserve more suspicion than Jordan, who you've already claimed is the SK?

Are you still having a hard time seeing why this is scummy? And are you still having a hard time understanding why you never bringing up anything more about it after the pressure you were under from LML was gone seems a tad suspicious?

By the way, my not commenting on this, which you described as a scummy tactic on my part, was because it had already been discussed. Which I said.

I do my best to avoid being scummy each game and I think you should too. Other than a few people saying I'm too defensive I think I do a pretty good job, we'll see

Now about Sammich, and I will make it very clear. When you tell him it’s only one vote. When you tell him it’s not personal. Quotes like this:

Seriously, this lack of response doesn't make him that much more likely to be mafia. And I am rather afraid we'll be mislynching town...he's just not giving me much to work with, to let him off the hook.

And certainly your “poll” might be interpreted as pushing a Sammich lynch while at the same time you were disowning it. Oh, and you were awfully sweet about your response on your post calling for more comments from those who hadn’t posted. So let’s quote that in context, okay?

I also find it especially odd that Sammich's post seems to have stopped all other debate. Doesn't anyone else have something to say?

Sammich's post was last tuesday 3:46 forum time. Since then (four days) the following players have not posted ONCE:

Now you say you were inviting them to post on Sammich. But in that first line you pretty clearly say “Sammich's post seems to have stopped all other debate.”. So if you weren't interested in talking about Jordan, because you were suspicious of Sammich, what would that other discussion have been?

And then you immediately post this:

I'm trying to avoid having tunnel vision and letting other players slide by. You're welcome to keep asking sammich repeatedly why he thinks I'm a power role (seriously I have no idea what a doctor tell would even look like) but when you get another "=\", I'm not going to call that productive dialog

So this argues that, in fact, you were trying to pose as though you were interested in going other places. Glad you’ve already answered my first post like this:

Allow me to answer your above question: I continued to post about Sammich because I felt Sammich was scummy and wanted to lynch him. Would you propose I talk about Jordan in order to get Sammich lynched instead?

Okay, you said that was a rhetorical question when you asked it. So why were you saying then that you wanted "other discussion" and that you wanted to avoid "tunneling" when (and thanks for confirming in your post above) you were tunneling on Sammich?

Wouldn’t you have wanted other players to keep talking about him, too?

Oh that’s right, you did. You said that in your first response to me, too:

My goal was not to get people to stop talking about Sammich. My goal was to get the same 3 people to stop talking about Sammich, and get a wider range of opinions.

And further:

Certainly, they're welcome to talk about any player, but Sammich held my main interest at the time, and yes, I'd like to hear more people talk about him.

Really, except for the sneaky little bit pointing out where Sammich's post was, those posts above don't appear to be saying that at all. But yes, I knew it was what you were doing, and thank you for confirming it. Makes those posts just awful curious, though.

There are a couple other bits we can go back to in your defense, but this has probably gone on long enough. I think I’ve put things close enough together now that you can see them. Thank you for any responses.

[Justin Playfair]

Thank you, TylerJ. You've given me some things to consider as I read again.

[TylerJ]

Thank you, TylerJ. You've given me some things to consider as I read again.

Honestly, thanks. If you think I am scummy or not, I am still thankful. When people at least consider peoples defenses, it makes this game a lot easier for the person giving the defense. No one likes to feel That they waisted their time typing up something that no one is going to consider. Kinda like talkind to a wall. So for at least doing that much I thank you greatly.

[TylerJ]

I'm really tired and don't want to do the defense of LTG's post right now. Note that I am not wanting to just let people forget about it, (because I don't think that will happen) I've just typed too much already and I'm too tired to do anymore.

I'll try to do it tommorow. Monday at the latest.

[TylerJ]

Opposed Force wrote:
TylerJ- Goes along with voting Jordan with the tone in the early stages in the game. Casts suspicous on Oman for being to careless in bandwagons and sees him trying to throw attention off him. Gets a null tell on White's statement about "short post=townies" and says that if such discussion on things like this were to continue then people would become too focused and miss lynching scum. Counter-reacts to Oman accusing him of past actions such as stating "He's trying to get people to ignore him" Several inrevelant posts later he posts "We should wait until more evidence for or on Oman comes up." It seems like he really wants to push suspision on Oman or want people to make a strong case on him when the evidence arrives. Then he proclaims SSF as scum after evidence is given and after SSF makes a defense he says in that defense he scumhunted and takes back the statement of SSF being scum back and says he's just trying to be humurous. Vote:TylerJ Getting a strong scummy vibe from him.

1) I never cornered Oman in an attempt to get peoples eyes off of me. This is heresay, but so is the contrary.

2) The White post about with all of the equals signs seemed like a waste of time. Who wants to argue about equations? And in the argument it seemed that the reason for the argument was made was because of misunderstandings. So they were arguing about what White meant instead of if they thought he was scum. At least that's what I remember... I saw it as void discussion. And when we argue about something so pointless we could easily find someone to be scummy when they are not. That's all.

3) When Oman posted that he was voting on a non-consequential bandwagon (Maybe not those same words, but...), then I am left to wonder why he is bandwagoning for bandwagon's sake and why he needs to state the obvious. Maybe I am wrong in my analysis, but my answer is that he hopes his vote will be relelevant, but that he hopes people will disregard his influential vote because he implies that his vote wasn't influential. Does that make sense? It's hard to describe really. I guess it seemed he was just trying to use reverse psychology by bringing up the point himself.

4) At the time when I posted the 'let's just wait...' I didn't think he was scummy enough for a wagon. I thought he was a little suspicious, but not too much. So I figured, let us wait until we could get a little more info on him. It had nothing to do with me trying to push for more fabricated evidence. Trust me, I don't think that complex.

5) About SSF again. I think I gave the defense already. Some stuff I did that was just stupid, and even to me it doesn't make sense. One post in particular (can't remember which one) was made when I had totally forgotten that I had thought SSF was scummy. I had been gone for a day and came back without doing a quick two-page reread to get my bearings. Something like that... Another thing is that I made a few jokes in the exchange. Trust me, if it was any weirder, I myself would have thought that someone slipped something in my drink. I find this topic annoying to talk about because I don't know why I did some things I did. and everything compiled together makes no sense to me.

5) Now about that TylerJ having a scummy vibe and voting for him, logically... J/K I'll stop there.

So there is the defense. I decided to do it now instead of waiting.

[The Fonz]

How 'bout not isolating. The more you take things out of context, the easier it is too misconstrue something. (ie what's already happened).

I strongly disagree. Things become apparent when you look through in isolation that you may miss in the context of a 40-page general re-read. That's why you need to do both. Sounds like someone doesn't like being examined too closely.

[Khelvaster]

Hey guys, since I replacement modd'd, could someone tell me who the really bad lurkers are who need replacing?

[ooba]

I can't understand the wall of text without a re-read .. Doing that now ..