Mini 532: Yaw's Split Open Mafia: (Game over)

[Thanatos]

So that's what's been going on here...

What Quickben did was a newbie mistake, no doubt. What I don't know if is if it was Newbie Scum or Town. His answer will decide that for me.

However, following this, I think he deserved our collective eyes on him.

Oh, and if I havn't said so before, I'm in finals week till the 20th. After that I'll be making sweet sweet love to this and all my other games.

[kabenon007]

I just threw up in my mouth a little bit...

[bird1111]

Vote Count:
Off the Mark (4): Panzerjager, Phate, Thantos, SensFan
QuickBen (4): kabenon007, Zhao, Off the Mark, Holy
kabenon007 (1): DrunkenPiper
Panzerjager (1): Korlash

Not Voting (2): QuickBen, Jex

[Korlash]

I see. Pro-town players don’t make stupid mistakes. We might as well eliminate all players that haven’t made stupid mistakes and catch scum in a neat little package. Game over.

I like the attitude... You do know if you ever attack someone for anythign that could be called a mistake your a hypocrite right? be careful with your sarcasm bud. One of these days it will bite you in the butt.

BTW, that is a dodge... so now your suspicious for what Holy said, and your scummy for dodging it... nice combo...

Oh, and if I havn't said so before, I'm in finals week till the 20th. After that I'll be making sweet sweet love to this and all my other games.

I just threw up in my mouth a little bit...

Lolz... This game is accepting and experimental like that, but you better not tell that to your other games. They may get mad and throw your stuff out the bedroom window and then stab you in the eye with a broken champaign bottle. >.X Trust me.. i know things like this...

[PJ.]

Look, gamblers fallacy doesn't make sense here. I know we don't have 3 unpowered scum, but I'm saying we do have at least one. My reason for wanted him lynched is because he was like "oh there's a wagon, i can jump on cause i said that guy's name" The guy is a newb, anyone could have called him scummy and turned the tide the guy's way, he has been acting scummy the entire game cause he is new. The "newbie scum improperly bussing his buddy" was just covering my own ass, because I could be wrong, he could just be newbie scum. I like to give the benefit of doubt towards new players, forgive me for this sin. BTW, Korlash, third and forth are the best the most scum positions on a wagon, you should read up on that again.

[Korlash]

BTW, Korlash, third and forth are the best the most scum positions on a wagon, you should read up on that again.

Yes, and if I remember correctly 3rd is more likely then 4th. Something about %s. 15% v. 10% I don't know. All I know is that the 3rd had a bigger number next to it.

And yeah... Still does not make up for the fact you presented not only a BS case, but a false BS case.

I know we don't have 3 unpowered scum, but I'm saying we do have at least one.

Contradicting to your earlier "What are the chances we even have 3 unpowered town" statement. By claiming it is unlikely to have 3 unpowered town, you are logically saying it is more likely we have 3 unpowered scum. you cannot have it both ways.

Also, thanks to the laws of probability, you are most likely right. But be prepared for the worst, all powered scum. The phrase "We do have at least one" instead of "It is most likely there is at least one" leads me to believe you have first hand knowledge of the scum's roles. Thus, your scum yourself.

The guy is a newb, anyone could have called him scummy and turned the tide the guy's way, he has been acting scummy the entire game cause he is new.

Being new does not excuse scummy behavior. End of story. If he does not know how to play he should go do a newbie game. Sorry.

[Phate]

Is it just me, or does anyone else find Korlash more and more scummy as time goes on? He hasn't connected himself with anyone really, but he's throwing out suspicions of everyone left and right, he's purposefully oblivious to the fact that newbies play differently than more experienced players (and thus what's scummy for a newbie is different than what's scummy for an experienced player), and his logic sucks, as is evidenced in the last post.

If I had a gun to my head, I'd say "what the fuck? Why are you holding a gun to my head?" But if someone wanted my to guess Korlash's alignment, I'd say he was the SK.

[bird1111]

Prodded Jex

[Holy]

I accuse Holy of all these logical fallacies. He’s one scummy player.
• Attack the Person (ad hominem)
• Appeal to Emotion
• Argument from Repetition (ad nauseam)
• Circular Reasoning (begging the question)
• Appeal to Authority
• Guilt by Association
• Straw Man (mischaracterization)
• Correlation Implies Causation (cum hoc ergo propter hoc)
• Red Herring (distraction technique)
• Appeal to Probability
• Argument from Fallacy
•

Loaded Question (fallacy of many questions)

• Gambler's Fallacy (Monty Hall problem)
• No True Scotsman (stereotypes)
• Burden of Proof (proof of a negative)
• WIFOM (Wine In Front of Me)
o Too Townie (A Subset of WIFOM Illogic)

Wow...!
Look who's talking?! Please filter your own posts for these (bolds).

Did you noticed my earlier accusations to you? You did phail twice, but the second time was quite huge for me (that was in the middle of the plan discussion if I'm not mistaken), you seems didn't really thought for the town sake, and you accused Sensfan about the plan wrongly. If you really concerned for the town, you won't make that such a mistake!

I see. Pro-town players don’t make stupid mistakes. We might as well eliminate all players that haven’t made stupid mistakes and catch scum in a neat little package. Game over.

Yeah, we're not free from mistakes. I'm not stressing about the mistake but there's such a plan thrown in front of us, and you didn't seem followed the process well, which is bad.
Btw, with that long kind of list that I'm scummy, why didn't you just vote me anyway, sigh...

[Jex]

Sorry guys...I'm just not able to keep up with this game anymore with everything going on. I dread asking for a replacement because this will be my first time. Much apologies.

[bird1111]

Looking for a Jex replacement.

[Korlash]

@ Holy: I believe he was just being a sarcastic ass. Or that is how I took it. I would be very interested in seeing him actually try to pass any of those off.

Now we get to phate... *laughs* I wish i was the Sk. Never been one before.

Now let me look at your comments...

He hasn't connected himself with anyone really, but he's throwing out suspicions of everyone left and right,

So in other words I am operating under the assumption I do not know anyone else's roles. And I'm scum hunting... ok... So your calling me town then? Thanks!

he's purposefully oblivious to the fact that newbies play differently than more experienced players (and thus what's scummy for a newbie is different than what's scummy for an experienced player),

Sorry, newbie card only applies in newbie games. Last time I checked this is not the Road to Rome thread. I will not be dumb enough to let someone "Less experienced" then the others get away with stupid stuff because "They are new and too dumb to go play a newbie game."

And no. scummy = scummy. Um, some scummy things can be chalked up to newbie mistakes over in the newbie games, yes. But anything at all suspicious needs to be prodded, poked, and photoshopped into discussion.

and his logic sucks, as is evidenced in the last post.

Well I am the master of Krap Logick you know... So theres no way you can point this onto me as anything what-so-ever. Especially when you cite no examples.

So yeah... Panzer and Phate... I'm liking Panzer a bit more simple for the lack of posting... a lurking scum vs. a semi-lurking scum obviously goes to the lurker.

[Phate]

Sorry, newbie card only applies in newbie games. Last time I checked this is not the Road to Rome thread. I will not be dumb enough to let someone "Less experienced" then the others get away with stupid stuff because "They are new and too dumb to go play a newbie game."

And no. scummy = scummy. Um, some scummy things can be chalked up to newbie mistakes over in the newbie games, yes. But anything at all suspicious needs to be prodded, poked, and photoshopped into discussion.

We're not here to lynch scummy players, where "scummy" means "your opinion of the way experienced players act when they're scum." We're here to lynch scum. Different people act in different ways when they're scum. Primarily forum players tend to act more logical as scum and more emotional as town. Primarily chat or IRC players tend to reverse that. More experienced players tend to make more gambits and act more confidently as scum. Unfortunately, they tend to do this as town, too. New players, as scum, tend to have a strong sense of "I want to live!" make simple mistakes, or go too far trying to avoid them and end up looking suspicious anyway. Unfortunately, they tend to do that as town, too. Furthermore, what's a mistake or a slip or a scumtell for an experienced player is often a nulltell for a newbie, and vice-versa.

And it doesn't stop there. Some players break the mold completely, and each player has their own quirks. Compare your own style with Jdodge's or Quag's, or Adel's or Adele's, or BBM's or BM's , or MoS's or SSF's. None of these players are particularly new, and they're all experienced with forum play. And yet their playstyles differ vastly.

A good scumhunter doesn't live by the Jeeptells, or make their own definition of what's always scummy no matter what and follow it to the letter. A good scumhunter recognises first the things that usually mean scum, and as he gets better at it, makes his definitions more specific. He might note a very telling scumtell that only applies to newer players, for example. Or a phrase, that, when uttered by a player who plays primarily in chat games, almost invariably means they're town. And his definition of scummy becomes more diverse.

And it goes deeper than that, too. A good scumhunter draws on prior experience with any given player. If a person's playstyle changes dramatically it usually (of course, there are always exceptions) means they know something they didn't last game. This is called the "meta", short for "metagame". It literally means "after the game".

Saying "scummy=scummy" is not good scumhunting.

So in other words I am operating under the assumption I do not know anyone else's roles. And I'm scum hunting... ok... So your calling me town then? Thanks!

Korlash, have you heard of spaghetti-slinging? That's where you accuse a lot of people of a lot of different things and generally portray yourself as a town-leading crusader, hoping one of the suspicions sticks in the mind of the rest of the town. That way, no matter who they decide to go with, you can say "I suspected them all along!" It's a tactic characterised by lots of FoSing and vote hopping, or sometimes simply by having a new main suspect every page. This is what I'm accusing you of. It's not a protown tell.

Contradicting to your earlier "What are the chances we even have 3 unpowered town" statement. By claiming it is unlikely to have 3 unpowered town, you are logically saying it is more likely we have 3 unpowered scum. you cannot have it both ways.

Also, thanks to the laws of probability, you are most likely right. But be prepared for the worst, all powered scum. The phrase "We do have at least one" instead of "It is most likely there is at least one" leads me to believe you have first hand knowledge of the scum's roles. Thus, your scum yourself.

You wanted an example? This is Krap Logick(tm).

[Korlash]

Saying "scummy=scummy" is not good scumhunting.

Don't think I'm ignoring all that advice here. Know I read it and know where your coming from. I simply decided nto to quote it all to keep this post semi-short.

However, know that the way I scum hunt is pretty simple. Someone does something I deem "suspicious" and so I jump at them. Newbie or not. Their reaction is all part how I deem affiliations.

take yours for example. You come at me first sentence with "we're not here to lynch scummy players, yadda yadda yadda, here to lynch scum." I take that as you implying I think we should lynch anyone who is scummy. This is untrue.

However, to find scum, you need to push scummy players. *duh* If not, you will have a very hard time finding said scum.

As for Null-tells I think that is crap. Nothing is ever a null-tell. In fact I have a hard time actually finding any type of "tells" town or scum as there is no law saying only one affiliation will ever do anything one way. I admit there are a couple of... lee-ways we can grant new players. But I will not refuse to press major issues just because of experience.

Korlash, have you heard of spaghetti-slinging? That's where you accuse a lot of people of a lot of different things and generally portray yourself as a town-leading crusader, hoping one of the suspicions sticks in the mind of the rest of the town. That way, no matter who they decide to go with, you can say "I suspected them all along!" It's a tactic characterised by lots of FoSing and vote hopping, or sometimes simply by having a new main suspect every page. This is what I'm accusing you of. It's not a protown tell.

Well I have not been vote hopping. I believe I have only voted two people all game. As for FoS's I do tend to use them sparingly. So accuse all you want that won't stick. As for a new main suspect... I would be hard pressed to be able to call any single person in this game my "main suspect" as I have more or less been pressuring everyone at once. The only "main suspects" here would be yourself, and to a lesser extent Panzer.

You said "Different people act differently when they are scum." While this "Spaghetti-slinging" may in fact be some type of super cool scum plan, I see constant suspicion of everyone, pressing each person's case as hard as you can, and questioning everyone's movements a good way to weed out strong cases, kill weak cases, and keep BS and mis-interpretations to a minimum.

As for suspecting "everyone" I have pretty much made my feelings on you clear all game. While at the same time staying pretty moot on both QB and OTM. Saying both are scummy/suspicious yes, adding to discussion yes, but not taking a stand on either. I can admit that. I can see how you would come to think this "spaghetti" case can apply to me. But to each his own I suppose.

You wanted an example? This is Krap Logick(tm).

First you cannot (tm) my title. It has been copyrighted, trademarked, and logoed to stand with and for Korlash Inc. only.

Secondly, I see it as a "logical" folly. Panzer said he finds it unlikely to have 3 unpowered town, meaning it is more likely we have 2. 5-3=2. Logically, if we only have 2 unpowered town, then the other 3 must be in the scum group. (Including Sk) so 3 out of the 4 "scum" are unpowered. This is what Panzer implied.

He then goes to say he does not think that all three scum are unpowered, but at least one is. Well... 3 unpowered, 3 scum 1 Sk. means at least 2 MUST be unpowered.

So either he believes there is only 1 unpowered scum, meaning at least 3 unpowered town, or he believes it is more likely more scum are unpowered.

All of this would be meaningless (Even to me I'm afraid) had he not used his first statement to respond someone else's case.

And yes, all this is crap logic. I have been wrong with my crap logic case before, and I have been right a few times too. Not saying this little tid-bit here proves Panzer is scum, far from it actually. The only real scummy thing I have seen him do is not contribute and ride a bandwagon. but as I said before I like to pressure everyone with everything.

[Korlash]

Oops, did a little mistake in my own crap case. Bad Korlash.

So either he believes there is only 1 unpowered scum, meaning at least 3 unpowered town, or he believes it is more likely more scum are unpowered.

is wrong.

Panzer actually said He "knows there is not 3 unpowered scum" not he believes there is only one. My mistake I rememebered incorrectly.

So change the above quote to:

So first he says it is unlikely to have three unpowered town, thus there must be at least 3 unpowered scum. Then he says that he "Knows there is not 3 unpowered scum" implying at least 3 unpowered town.

In short, a contradiction. Small, not really meaning anything. But his response (And other's it seems) are very interesting. I'm liking this battle of wits game we are playing here Mr. "I have to look so pro-town." It is a shame you only have a 40 card deck! ha ha ha... Leave it to Korlash for obscure MTG references... ^^

[Phate]

40-card decks are better than 60-card decks. More consistency.

[bird1111]

mikeburnfire replaces Jex.

[Korlash]

Yeah nice dodge... >.> Phate is scum...

[PJ.]

I don't know what to think about this.

[Korlash]

><

Gee... i would never have guessed. thank you so much for sharing that post. I mean it's not like I would like you to participate or anything... >.> [/sarcasm]

And just so they don;t get the pleasure of rubbing my face in this worthless post, welcome mikeburnfire. Glad to know you and thanks for replacing...

Seriously... Other opinions required. Is the lack of content from Panzer troubling to anyone else? How about Phate? Ideas about him.

What's new with OTM?

And things against/for me, anyone up on that? Info on this spaghetti thing would not hurt.

Just more activity please...

Useful

activity... *Looks at Panzer*

[kabenon007]

Well, it is no surprise that QuickBen is hardcore lurking atm. I really want some posts from him, explaining his actions. If nothing new happens, I will be moving my vote. I just have to think of to where...

[Phate]

What exactly did I dodge, Korlash? I made some accusations, you defended. If I like, I can leave the matter right there. Not a dodge at all, because there was nothing to dodge.

Although, to tell the truth, I don't think your defense was good enough, and I'll renew the attack sometime when I'm not half-asleep.

[Korlash]

No, you false accused me of something, and left it there after I explained. Only proving you know what BS it is. If you actually believed it you would have said something about my "Defense" even if all it was was "I don't think your defense was good enough."

And woot. You said to tell the truth. Spin-off of "In all honesty." I heard from a reliable source that saying this is a scum tell. I won;t even try to press it until I have proof. So I am very interested to know if you do, in fact, come up scum. If so there may be something to it. To be honest, I think it's crap. But being ol' Krap Logick Korlash I have to say something about it.

I'll renew the attack sometime when I'm not half-asleep.

Really? Don't you mean, "I'll renew that attack once I find some more false BS to accuse you of."?

[Phate]

Actually, what I meant was:

What exactly did I dodge, Korlash? I made some accusations, you defended. If I like, I can leave the matter right there. Not a dodge at all, because there was nothing to dodge.

Although, to tell the truth, I don't think your defense was good enough, and I'll renew the attack sometime when I'm not half-asleep.

[Korlash]

Right... Cause that so contributes to the game.