Mini 391 - Fairytale Mafia, Game Over

[Seol]

Oh, there's an actual roll-dice option on the server? Hunh. When did this place get so fancy?

We've had dice tags for about two years now.

I'm sure you are, Mr. Ripley. But some are not so impressed with flashy word things.

If I don't speak monosyllabically, my style will be noted over the substance. Noted for future reference.

Big words, Seoul. Counting with clapping, I get 27 syllables.

I am NOT the capital of South Korea.

Hey guys, forgive me for being English, sheesh!

FOS:Rathyr

for trying to create a bandwagon so early on.
Its always a supicious trate.

You're English? I suppose you'd have to be to have spelling that bad.

Would you have FOS'd Rathyr if he'd placed that third vote on somone other than yourself?

divestment of accountability.

Well I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm impressed.

Honestly, this is like 1/1000th of a mafia tell, trying to buddy up to somebody, but I see nothing worse out there on the board right now.

FOS: Ripley

Juicy. OK, let's break this down:

Honestly,

Bad start. Starting anything with "Honestly" is a tell that you are

not

being honest.

this is like 1/1000th of a mafia tell,

Disclaiming your own position is also a tell. Here, you are not disclaiming it completely, but effectively doing so by playing it down to the point of irrelevance.

trying to buddy up to somebody,

You're kidding, right? Buddying-up is all about implied

trust

, not flattery. That was banter.

but I see nothing worse out there on the board right now.

You don't? You don't think it's worth remarking on the third vote for Dodgy, or his OMGUS FOS response? You don't see anything in my comments on bird111

which you quoted?

But that's not the point, it's very early in day 1, you don't expect to see anything of real merit. Stating that you don't is again a vibe of trying too hard.

FOS: Ripley

If you see nothing worse, why didn't you vote for him?

Interesting little to-and-fro follows this too:

Don't you know that being suitably alarmed is 999/1000th of a scum tell? This just isn't your game.

Unvote, Vote: LuckayLuck

for aparently seeing nothing else more suspicious. One should look harder, then.

My vote on Green Crayons is no longer random. I'm now voting him for accusing me of something ridiculous. Everybody was laying low, no sign of mafia anymore, I made a suggestion that I saw nobody as being mafia-ish so I pointed out a small thing. Now, he's voting for me because apparently there was something bigger.

You honestly think there's something more suspicious? What was it before what I quoted?

At this point I would disagree with GreenCrayons. Being suitably alarmed is

not

a scum tell. Being inappropriately alarmed, however,

is

. LL is being inappropriately alarmed. The point isn't just about not seeing anything suspicious, it's about

saying

that you're not seeing anything suspicious. It's almost as if you're trying too hard to establish that you don't have a clue who the scum are.

In other news, I think that Echo419 demonstrated a 1/100th townie tell. CONTRARY to what you think actually GC. I think the more posts that happens, the clearer a pitcure and story is painted for townie observation.

There's no such thing as a "townie tell". Tells are what happen when someone is less than perfect at keeping private information or motivations hidden. Townies don't hide.

Reading ahead, seems IH and GC agree with me. Yay us!

Now, this

is

interesting:

Granted, now I'm curious as to why you think Echo's post made him a bit more on the town side for you. His comment "Seems like they're jumping on each other for small reasons." seems like he's reaching for something to post simply so he can post something, which is what I've done a few times while scum. Granted, it's not much and is a pretty weak suspicion point (more or less just giving me a nudge to scruitinize his posts a bit more), but it's there nonetheless. I'm curious as to why he was moved in the opposite direction in your opinion.

It's page 1 on a day 2 start. You also just seemed to contradict yourself. He's reaching for something to post, and posts a small suspicion. You say you do that as scum. You then say that's not much, and is still a weak suspicion.

From my reading, not at all. The point isn't about posting small suspicions, it's about reaching for something so he's got something to post. GreenCrayons isn't finding it difficult to find things to post and state opinions. I'd list it as a minor misunderstanding/misrep.

HOWEVER....

Unless I misunderstood you.

You give GC an opportunity to respond and clarify. GC doesn't take it, despite having made a couple of relatively in-depth posts. He continues his conversation with LL, and ignores an attack which is accusing him of something genuinely scummy and earned him a vote. Avoiding/ignoring solid attacks is a useful tell.

See, as a townie, I want more pages of "spam" to be able to find mafia. The way it was put, the very nonchalant "I was hoping for three pages of spam" thing very minorly says "hey, I'm a townie trying to figure things out."

What do you mean by "spam" here? How does moving from "spam" to discussion make it harder to find mafia?

At this moment in time, I think that Echo is the most townish of all of you, which isn't saying much. It's a small hunch, the way he worded the 'wish-for-spam' thing. I'm somebody who actually really likes delving into townie tells, and I believe that Echo expressed one.

How do we know you're not a scumbuddy bolstering a partner early?

...

FOS: IH

---
(author's note: I have thought about how to respond to this for a long time, and this post is the well thought out and deliberate response.)

Considering that this all started with the post where you suggested Ripley was buddying up to me, it seems like a) your behaviour is much more like buddying-up than Ripley's was (note the implied trusat) and b) you're not in the best position to criticise people suggesting that you're buddying up. Smacks a little of hypocrisy.

In other news, I think that Echo419 demonstrated a 1/100th townie tell. CONTRARY to what you think actually GC. I think the more posts that happens, the clearer a pitcure and story is painted for townie observation.

the "CONTRARY to what you think actually GC" could have applied to the first or last sentence. When originally reading through, I mistakingly applied it to the third sentence rather than the first, which you apparently were meaning for it to reference. Therefore, I thought you were saing contrary to what I believe, more posts are a good thing. Yay, confusion, etc., etc.

I don't buy this. It's totally clear to me that the "CONTRARY to what you think actually GC" applies to the first sentence, and GC's clearly got a good grasp of English. Feels to me like GC was looking for something to argue with LL about.

Rather, I meant this to say "Just because he says that he hopes there is more spam in no way equates him to a townie "tell"

in my opinion,

which I agre with IH in their nonexistance." Don't want to get overzealous in my convictions, after all.

Now this seems totally unnecessary and just a little over-defensive - of

course

it was your opinion. Back to the whole point about disclaiming your own position.

In summation, both GC and LL look scummy to a degree, and they're the two who have posted the most.

vote: LuckayLuck

because he's by far the worse of the two, GC's tells have been fewer and more subtle (and therefore possible misreads) but they still earn him an

FOS: GreenCrayons

.

[Rathyr]

Different games means different players, which means different ways of interacting. I'm curious if you find "aggressive" to be a bad/suspicious, or are simply stating an obvservation to let others believe that :aggressive" should be interpreted in the negative.

Aggressiveness is good at times, bad at others.

Why don't you tell me whether or not your aggressiveness is good?

[Green Crayons]

Hunh, my "go to first new posts" link totally skipped IH's last post on page two.

It's page 1 on a day 2 start.

Page 2 day 1 start?

You also just seemed to contradict yourself. He's reaching for something to post, and posts a small suspicion. You say you do that as scum. You then say that's not much, and is still a weak suspicion.

If you just explained how I'm contradicting myself, I need you to spell it out for me in more simple terms. Just because something I have done (note: a few times; not as in a hard and fast rule) before as scum doesn't mean that everyone does it, merely that it is something that I personally know that scum have done before (since I have been scum that has done it). Likewise, just because

I

did it doesn't mean that every scum will do it, or that if it is done it would necessarily be done by scum. How is that not an inherently weak suspicion?

Aggressiveness is good at times, bad at others.

Why don't you tell me whether or not your aggressiveness is good?

I would like to think that my play style, whatever it may be from game to game or even from day to day, is ultimately beneficial to the town. However, what you are doing right here is fishing for comments and opinions, because it appears that you are noncommittal until someone gives something blantantly obvious as suspicious and which will give you a free-ride on a bandwagon. It's also seen in your previous post, which is why I called attention to it.

Unvote: LuckayLuck, Vote: Rathyr

.

We've had dice tags for about two years now.

Crazy.

Being suitably alarmed is not a scum tell.

That was sarcasm in my post. Hence the "999/1000th" comment, as simple math would add up to 1000/1000th of a scum tell, ie: he must be scum. Obviously, I didn't vote him because it was sarcasm/a stupid joke. The whole post was.

Avoiding/ignoring solid attacks is a useful tell.

See beginning of post. Also, if there's one thing that

is

constant in all of my games, is that I love arguing. It's a personal flaw, as you can ask any of my friends (well, you can't seeing as how you don't know them, but whatever; it's the principle). I love arguing, even if I don't believe the side that I'm on, just because I like it - it probably stems from a desire to have everyone at least see my point of view. Therefore, I will argue and respond to points regardless of my alignment, I can promise you. If I ever miss anything that needs to be addressed, point it out to me and you can be sure that I'll get to it. But feel free to chalk up suspicious points under my name.

Now this seems totally unnecessary and just a little over-defensive - of course it was your opinion. Back to the whole point about disclaiming your own position.

Making a point, it's what I was attempting to do. Obviously there's a division of thought between Luckay and myself, be it from confusion, misunderstanding, different play styles or whathaveyou. Regardless, I don't feel like putting a further division between Luckay and myself by out and out claiming that what he thinks is completely wrong; after all, it is merely opinion. Maybe there are town tells. However, the only thing accomplished by saying that "oh, what you think is wrong and what I think is right" when arguing about an opinion is an instinctive rift based off of difference of opinions. I didn't feel like being a cause of a greater rift between Luck and myself when he may very well see something that I missed, or I might catch something that he failed to see - which, if we're needlessly at each other's throats, could be dismissed since it's coming from an "absolutely wrong" opinion/perspective.

[IH]

If you just explained how I'm contradicting myself, I need you to spell it out for me in more simple terms. Just because something I have done (note: a few times; not as in a hard and fast rule) before as scum doesn't mean that everyone does it, merely that it is something that I personally know that scum have done before (since I have been scum that has done it). Likewise, just because I did it doesn't mean that every scum will do it, or that if it is done it would necessarily be done by scum. How is that not an inherently weak suspicion?

You said he was accusing someone on a weak suspicion, which could be suspicious.
You then say that this in itself is a weak suspicion.
Therefore, wouldn't you just have called yourself suspicious?

[Green Crayons]

You said he was accusing someone on a weak suspicion, which could be suspicious.

No I didn't. I said he was simply making a comment to make it look like he was adding to the conversation. The comment of his that I quoted specifically said that he didn't find anything about us suspicious. There was no accusation, no suspicion on his behalf.

[IH]

Granted, now I'm curious as to why you think Echo's post made him a bit more on the town side for you. His comment "Seems like they're jumping on each other for small reasons." seems like he's reaching for something to post simply so he can post something, which is what I've done a few times while scum. Granted, it's not much and is a pretty weak suspicion point (more or less just giving me a nudge to scruitinize his posts a bit more), but it's there nonetheless. I'm curious as to why he was moved in the opposite direction in your opinion.

It seems like you're reaching for something to post about there, like Echo, so you would look more suspicious in your own eyes. Its small, but it's there nonetheless?

[Echo419]

I always try to post, even if I have nothing significant to say, to maintain a presence in the game.
It appears to me that LL and GC are still attacking each other for relatively small reasons. Punctuation, who said what and what they meant by it, etc. It isn't those reasons in themselves, just that they don't have much backing. I suspect big fights from small reasons.
Sorry Seol. Wrong name.

[LuckayLuck]

Seol, that's a really good analysis of what happened if I were to look at it from the outside. Amazing what one can do with "3 pages of spam" [disclaimer: this is what I meant as "spam" - 3 pages of pointing fingers around at small things to reveal intentions and such].

Honestly, I throw up the word honestly at the beginning of the sentence way too often, and I think I only do it as townie upon quick reflection. Obviously, you're not going to believe me here but I'll be eliminating that townie tell about myself in future games. Thanks.

Disclaiming your own position is also a tell. Here, you are not disclaiming it completely, but effectively doing so by playing it down to the point of irrelevance.

My default game is one of complete disclaimature. I get all the information I have out on the board, unless I think I can use it to my advantage later on by tripping somebody up. I was telling the truth - I didn't think anybody else was more guilty than that statement. And in saying that, I was fishing for responses. Somebody has to fire the first gunshot, I chose to do so, it's my style. I usually start off with a controversial claim such as "I think this guy is townie" (with Echo) or "I think this guy is mafia" (with Ripley). And it worked, here we are into the land of discussion. Great!

You don't think it's worth remarking on the third vote for Dodgy, or his OMGUS FOS response? You don't see anything in my comments on bird111 which you quoted? But that's not the point, it's very early in day 1, you don't expect to see anything of real merit. Stating that you don't is again a vibe of trying too hard.

I don't believe third votes on a bandwagon on a game of this size are telling (in fact, I think that too many townies jump on that and get a townie lynched). I certainly don't think that using a random dice generator to generate a random vote is divestment of accoutnibility, it's a random vote. I don't think that saying OMGUS FOS is a tell to each side, I actually sort of think it's townie because it's a glaring neon capital letter OMGUS OMGUS LOOK AT ME I'M TYPING OMGUS AND DRAWING ATTENTION TO MYSELF FOR NO APPARENT REASON. Call that a 1/100th townie tell. Anyways, my game has been extremely straightforward thus far; attacking the 1/1000th scum tell with a FOS. I don't bother switching my vote for people on a 1/1000th scum tell.


Oh, and good post Seol. You're moderately townie in my books.

[jl2704]

Vote: Dodgy

For having that scary avatar mask-y thing-y

[jl2704]

Actually,

Unvote: Dodgy

I'm still digesting the previous posts.

[Ripley]

I'm struggling to get into this game at present. There's an argument seems to have been going on for a while about "reaching to make a post" and "Weak suspicion" and for some reason my eyes just glaze over every time I come to it, like a paragraph in a book you know you really ought to read and understand but somehow you can't get to the end of the first sentence.

I believe townies as well as scum may start off a game trying to find a reason to post just to post something. And that in most games, the first person to break the string of random and joke votes and witty one-liners by expressing some suspicion is likely only to have found something very, very small (most people don't, unlike LuckayLuck, even provide the size in fractional form, but whatever...) because there's simply not going to be anything bigger most of the time. And inevitably Player 2 comes along and jumps on Player 1 for exaggerating something tiny. Happened to me in my first two games, where I got accused of making "elephant out of fly" and "a mountain out of a molehill" respectively. But somebody has to be willing to do it or the game would never get moving.

Now Seol in particular has managed to find a huge amount to say about posts that to me just said "nothing much going on yet". I don't have this hi-tech scum detection apparatus. It's quite possible I'll see things in these early posts later on, with more information and context, than I do now.

I disagree with Seol about GC deliberately misunderstanding this:

In other news, I think that Echo419 demonstrated a 1/100th townie tell. CONTRARY to what you think actually GC. I think the more posts that happens, the clearer a pitcure and story is painted for townie observation.

I think that "CONTRARY to what you think actually GC." does not feel like a sentence, and so one instinctively looks to attach it with a comma to what went before or what comes after, and as one is reading forward that's the natural direction to go. Especially with the word following being "I", and therefore still capitalised after a comma, the natural place to mentally substitute the comma for a full stop is there, rather than before CONTRARY. Not saying you'd do this consciously at all, but this could easily lead you to the reading GC gave it.

Is there really no such thing as a townie tell? Are there not power role tells, which by extension would be townie tells?

Leaving my vote on LuckayLuck for the moment. I like the elegance of "Honestly" being a dishonesty tell, and IRL people who say "Frankly", which is

almost

the same thing, irritate me beyond reason.

[IH]

Is there really no such thing as a townie tell? Are there not power role tells, which by extension would be townie tells?

If there were, scum would be mimicing them to the point they would become scum tells.

Also, I don't personally think anyone's suspicious for posting something early with a "weak suspicious point" but I was showing GC the error in his logic.

[Dodgy]

Firstly

Unvote

Right, having read all and being an old man at this game, I noticed two things that alarm me.
1) GC wrote

seems like he's reaching for something to post simply so he can post something, which is what I've done a few times while scum.

This can be true but it can also apply to someone that has a mere vanilla town role that doesn't have the enthusiasm of a player with a night choice role.

2) I am always in two minds when a player that hasn't posted much, suddenly gives us all a break down/ run down of the game so far. More often than not, I have found that this type of post is there to sway the town that they are on the towns side, as subconsciously, when you read such a post, you feel it helpful, therefor catorgarising that player as town (Seol).
And to answer your question honestly Seol, yes, if I had spotted it but as it were on me and I obviously noted it, definately yes.
At this point, I have to

Vote: Seol

[Green Crayons]

Also, I don't personally think anyone's suspicious for posting something early with a "weak suspicious point" but I was showing GC the error in his logic.

Which you have yet to do.

It seems like you're reaching for something to post about there, like Echo, so you would look more suspicious in your own eyes. Its small, but it's there nonetheless?

What Echo's statement did (along with bird's, which didn't escape my notice) was, was simply say "Hey, look guys! I'm here, I'm not a lurker; ie: I'm a productive townie!" To me, that looks suspicious; apparently, to Luck, it looks good. Regardless, all it did was add no substance, it did nothing productive in and of itself. In other words, it was reaching to simply post something.

On the other than, the part of my post that you quoted ("Granted, now I'm curious as to why you think Echo's post...." onwards) actually was productive, as it was explaining to Luck as to why I thought Echo was a bit suspicious, and at the same time I was hoping and inviting him to explain why he thought otherwise. Moreover, it was showing that something good came from my sarcastic vote on Luck, in the sense that it was able to give me some sort of read on another player. Ultimately, I don't see how you're comparing the two as "reaching to post something," as I can see a clear distinction between the two.

Additionally, I didn't fail to notice the fact that, in seeing that your breakdown of my contradiction being based off of a flat out wrong assertion (that I said that he was accusing someone), you ignored the false statements on your behalf that I pointed out and quietly shifted the "contradiction" to a different basis. Now, instead of him having accused someone on a weak suspicion and myself accusing him on a weak suspicion (which is what you originally said it was), you're saying that he put forth a pointless post and that I did the same (see above as to where this argument doesn't hold weight).

Is there really no such thing as a townie tell? Are there not power role tells, which by extension would be townie tells?

I differeniate townies and power town roles, so when someone says a "townie" tell, I'm assuming they're referring to something simply a pro-aligned player would do. While players can attempt to tip off everyone as to their power role, a "tell" or sorts, it just doesn't really... work. Nor does it make sense - a good aligned player is just as likely to pick it up as a evil aligned player. If you're going to allude to your role, you might as well just go out and say it.


jl2704 - Why did you go from a random vote to no voting to "digest" posts in four minutes? Did you not see all the posts prior to your vote?

[jl2704]

I didn't notice the 3rd page +P

[LuckayLuck]

Unvote

Vote IH

IH, you need to believe more in the power of the townie tell. Also, this particular statement really hit me as...strange. As odd. I've got warning bells flashing in my head.

You said he was accusing someone on a weak suspicion, which could be suspicious.
You then say that this in itself is a weak suspicion.
Therefore, wouldn't you just have called yourself suspicious?

It's such a circular argument which really goes nowhere. And if you come back and call me suspicious for calling your argument suspicious...


Also, this may or may not seem crazy to you, but I am going to now make a weird statement (believe me, this is well thought out and may or may not be used for a greater purpose). For the rest of day1, (barring something ridiculous, of course), I am going to assume that Green Crayons and Seol are townies.

[IH]

What Echo's statement did (along with bird's, which didn't escape my notice) was, was simply say "Hey, look guys! I'm here, I'm not a lurker; ie: I'm a productive townie!" To me, that looks suspicious; apparently, to Luck, it looks good. Regardless, all it did was add no substance, it did nothing productive in and of itself. In other words, it was reaching to simply post something

How many of those posts on page 2 have substance? Are they all suspicious?

Also, responding to the rest of that post, you admitted that it was a weak suspicion.

I took it as you were using circular reasoning. He had posted something small, and you had, in turn, posted something small. Is yours supposed to make you look even MORE townie because you pointed out something slightly suspicious?

I wasn't accusing you of anything, I was just saying how flawed a statement that was.

Now, IMO, it seems like you're trying to turn a page 2 post with no substance into a something majorly suspicious. That is something I will accuse you of.

unvote, vote:Green Crayons

Double L, your vote holds no sway over me.

Unvote
Vote IH

IH, you need to believe more in the power of the townie tell. Also, this particular statement really hit me as...strange. As odd. I've got warning bells flashing in my head

I don't believe in the power of a townie tell. I still say there is no such thing as a true town tell that someone can do at the beginning of a game, and you can have a safe assumption that someone is town. I'd be more likely to believe that Scum would use "townie" tells to make their partner look more innocent, and avoid being grilled.

You said he was accusing someone on a weak suspicion, which could be suspicious.
You then say that this in itself is a weak suspicion.
Therefore, wouldn't you just have called yourself suspicious?

It's such a circular argument which really goes nowhere. And if you come back and call me suspicious for calling your argument suspicious...


Also, this may or may not seem crazy to you, but I am going to now make a weird statement (believe me, this is well thought out and may or may not be used for a greater purpose). For the rest of day1, (barring something ridiculous, of course), I am going to assume that Green Crayons and Seol are townies.

1.That looks like a circular argument, because that's how I interpreted Green Crayons post.

In other words, that's how it looked to me, and thats the whole reason I brought it up.

2.

FoS:LuckayLuck

never assume automatically that someone is town or scum. You need to look at everyone objectively. Even if you are protown, you could be choosing someone to look on as a townie, who is scum, and completely ignore them.

That's like what Dodgy said in post 68.

[Green Crayons]

How many of those posts on page 2 have substance? Are they all suspicious?

There's a point where the random chatter ceases to become random and all the posts start having a function. When something started to happen, ie: Luck and I starting to point fingers at one another, that's when I start paying more attention to posts. Also, when posts start respecting actual events in the game, I pay heed. Echo's post was referring to actual in-game conflict (me vs. Luck). A lot of page two stuff was fluff. I can't help it if you can't see the difference, but seeing as how I give you more credit than being a complete dolt, I'm starting to come to the conclusion that you're forcing blinders on yourself if you're honestly asking such insipid questions.

I took it as you were using circular reasoning. He had posted something small, and you had, in turn, posted something small.

No, he had posted something

useless

that was independent of conversation while being presented as adding to the discussion without actually doing so. I, in a conversation with Luck, was explaining what good I thought was coming from my sarcastic vote; it wasn't a statement with the objective of simply being put out there (which he was doing), it was part of an attachment to a larger conversation.

It would be circular logic if

You said he was accusing someone on a weak suspicion, which could be suspicious.
You then say that this in itself is a weak suspicion.
Therefore, wouldn't you just have called yourself suspicious?

was true. But, as I have stated and repeated, your first accusation is totally and completely false. Not true. A lie. I never said that, nor did I ever imply it. You're poorly shifted argument of "well, you both posted small things" also holds no weight because Echo's post and mine aren't in the same catagory - read above, though it's simple repetition of things I said in my previous post, so I'm thinking you'll ignore the point again.

Is yours supposed to make you look even MORE townie because you pointed out something slightly suspicious?

No, my comment, as I have explained repeatedly, was explaining to Luck why I thought Echo was a bit suspicious, and was hoping he would explain to me why he thought Echo was a bit townish for the exact same behavior. It's not supposed to make me look like anything, it's supposed to explain what judgment I was gathering from other players' posts. Why are you trying so hard to paint my actions in a light that is contrary to how I have explained them already without addressing my explinations?

I wasn't accusing you of anything, I was just saying how flawed a statement that was.

You weren't accusing me of anything, so you felt the need to vote me? I thought the point of a vote, assuming it isn't random, is because you are suspicious of a person. A vote is the nonverbal accusation of suspicion.

...And it wasn't a flawed statement.

Now, IMO, it seems like you're trying to turn a page 2 post with no substance into a something majorly suspicious. That is something I will accuse you of.

You're kidding me, right? "Majorly suspicious?" Have I voted Echo? Have I even FoSed him? It was a passing comment that I was hoping to shed some light for Luck/others as to what I saw going on with another player. The only thing since that comment that I have been discussing is how totally skewed you're perspective is. I'm not making my suspicion of Echo into anything more than a minimal suspicion; what is occuring, however, is your steady rise under the "most suspicious" list, ranked neck and neck with rathyr at this point due to your arguments completely devoid of sound reasoning. Oh, and the fact that you have yet to address your lie and quiet shift in argument.

The only reason at this point that you don't have my vote is because I can't decide if you'd make such horrible arguments if you were scum - I usually tend to think them as attempting to play it safe, ie: raythr's actions.

[Green Crayons]

I wasn't accusing you of anything, I was just saying how flawed a statement that was.

You weren't accusing me of anything, so you felt the need to vote me? I thought the point of a vote, assuming it isn't random, is because you are suspicious of a person. A vote is the nonverbal accusation of suspicion.

Note: This is in reference to the vote made by IH against myself in post 49, on the bottom of page two - not IH's post two above this one.

[LuckayLuck]

2.

FoS:LuckayLuck

never assume automatically that someone is town or scum. You need to look at everyone objectively. Even if you are protown, you could be choosing someone to look on as a townie, who is scum, and completely ignore them.

I find it funny that we're having the same argument across two games that we're both in. If it bothers you that much, you can take my words to mean "I believe that Green Crayons and Seol are slightly townie." However, trust me that there is method to my madness. I don't have any finished games yet to point at as examples, but you might be surprised at just how objective my methodolgy turns out to be. Watch for future developments!

[chaotic_diablo]

Vote Count

IH (2) : yellowbounder, LuckayLuck
Rathyr (3) : bird111, Echo419, Green Crayons
Dodgy (2) : wolfsbane, Rathyr
Green Crayons (1) : IH
LuckayLuck (2) : Ripley, Seol
Seol (1) : Dodgy

Not Voting: jl2704

I will be checking for activity. Anyone who seemingly disappear for 2-4 days will receive a prod.

[wolfsbane]

Firstly

Unvote

Right, having read all and being an old man at this game, I noticed two things that alarm me.
1) GC wrote

seems like he's reaching for something to post simply so he can post something, which is what I've done a few times while scum.

This can be true but it can also apply to someone that has a mere vanilla town role that doesn't have the enthusiasm of a player with a night choice role.

2) I am always in two minds when a player that hasn't posted much, suddenly gives us all a break down/ run down of the game so far. More often than not, I have found that this type of post is there to sway the town that they are on the towns side, as subconsciously, when you read such a post, you feel it helpful, therefor catorgarising that player as town (Seol).
And to answer your question honestly Seol, yes, if I had spotted it but as it were on me and I obviously noted it, definately yes.
At this point, I have to

Vote: Seol

I know this is from way back, but you still haven't answered the allegations about your strange FOS on Rathyr which myself, Seol and maybe others have pointed out. It was a small point, but you avoided it and now jump back in and slap a vote on Seol for a post which you say "seems" helpful. Is it helpful or not and why?

Green Crayon's recent vote switch to Rathyr seems out of place. GC says Rathyr was fishing for opinions, but it looked more to me like he was poking GC a bit to see what kind of reaction he would get. The reaction didn't look too good.

[Seol]

Being suitably alarmed is not a scum tell.

That was sarcasm in my post. Hence the "999/1000th" comment, as simple math would add up to 1000/1000th of a scum tell, ie: he must be scum. Obviously, I didn't vote him because it was sarcasm/a stupid joke. The whole post was.

Interesting you felt the need to say it, when you consider that in context:

Being suitably alarmed is

not

a scum tell. Being inappropriately alarmed, however,

is.

LL is being inappropriately alarmed.

I thought it was fairly clear the first comment was being flip, leading up to the serious point. Not sure what that means, I might come back to it later.

See beginning of post.

Your excuse is convenient... but plausible. Reserving judgment on that one.

Also, if there's one thing that is constant in all of my games, is that I love arguing. It's a personal flaw, as you can ask any of my friends (well, you can't seeing as how you don't know them, but whatever; it's the principle).

I can tell.

I love arguing,

even if I don't believe the side that I'm on

, just because I like it - it probably stems from a desire to have everyone at least see my point of view. Therefore, I will argue and respond to points

regardless of my alignment

, I can promise you.

That's twice you seem to draw attention to the fact you'd be playing this way as scum in as many sentences.

If I ever miss anything that needs to be addressed, point it out to me and you can be sure that I'll get to it.

Oh, I will do. However in this case it wasn't that the point needed to be addressed so much as that you neglected to address it that I found noteworthy. Of course, you have your explanation.

But feel free to chalk up suspicious points under my name.

"Go ahead, find me suspicious" comments always ring alarm bells with me. Not in an "ok, I was wrong, fair enough" but "you're wrong, this is why, but go ahead and find me suspicious if you like". If I'm wrong, then I

shouldn't

be finding you suspicious - saying it's OK to find you suspicious for the behaviour is tacitly acknowledging it

was

suspicious.

Making a point, it's what I was attempting to do. Obviously there's a division of thought between Luckay and myself, be it from confusion, misunderstanding, different play styles or whathaveyou. Regardless, I don't feel like putting a further division between Luckay and myself by out and out claiming that what he thinks is completely wrong; after all, it is merely opinion. Maybe there are town tells.

There aren't. There are power-role tells, sure, but there's no such thing as a townie tell, because of what a tell

is

. Townies have nothing

to

tell. There's pro-town behaviour... but everyone plays (or tries to play) pro-town as much as possible.

However, the only thing accomplished by saying that "oh, what you think is wrong and what I think is right" when arguing about an opinion is an instinctive rift based off of difference of opinions. I didn't feel like being a cause of a greater rift between Luck and myself when he may very well see something that I missed, or I might catch something that he failed to see - which, if we're needlessly at each other's throats, could be dismissed since it's coming from an "absolutely wrong" opinion/perspective.

It was quite clearly a matter of interpretation, not fact. The vast majority of day 1 is. That you felt the need to draw attention to it indicates that you lack confidence in your own position.

I always try to post, even if I have nothing significant to say, to maintain a presence in the game.
It appears to me that LL and GC are still attacking each other for relatively small reasons. Punctuation, who said what and what they meant by it, etc. It isn't those reasons in themselves, just that they don't have much backing. I suspect big fights from small reasons.
Sorry Seol. Wrong name.

So... you read my post, but you still have no opinions whatsoever? You have to work hard to be that noncommittal!

Seol, that's a really good analysis of what happened if I were to look at it from the outside.

Another example of "go ahead, find me suspicious"! Good stuff.

Amazing what one can do with "3 pages of spam" [disclaimer: this is what I meant as "spam" - 3 pages of pointing fingers around at small things to reveal intentions and such].

OK, I think you'll find most people wouldn't categorise that as "spam", but there you go.

Honestly, I throw up the word honestly at the beginning of the sentence way too often, and I think I only do it as townie upon quick reflection. Obviously, you're not going to believe me here but I'll be eliminating that townie tell about myself in future games. Thanks.

Obviously I'm not going to believe you? Not if you tell me not to.

My default game is one of complete disclaimature. I get all the information I have out on the board, unless I think I can use it to my advantage later on by tripping somebody up. I was telling the truth - I didn't think anybody else was more guilty than that statement. And in saying that, I was fishing for responses. Somebody has to fire the first gunshot, I chose to do so, it's my style. I usually start off with a controversial claim such as "I think this guy is townie" (with Echo) or "I think this guy is mafia" (with Ripley). And it worked, here we are into the land of discussion. Great!

Are you confusing disclaimature (distancing yourself from your own position) with disclosure (stating everything you're thinking)? Disclosure isn't scummy, although it's sometimes inadvisable (eg "Hey guys I think Meme's the doc!"), but disclaimature is a different kettle of fish.

If you're saying the disclaimature was part of the disclosure, then my point stands.

I don't believe third votes on a bandwagon on a game of this size are telling (in fact, I think that too many townies jump on that and get a townie lynched). I certainly don't think that using a random dice generator to generate a random vote is divestment of accoutnibility, it's a random vote. I don't think that saying OMGUS FOS is a tell to each side, I actually sort of think it's townie because it's a glaring neon capital letter OMGUS OMGUS LOOK AT ME I'M TYPING OMGUS AND DRAWING ATTENTION TO MYSELF FOR NO APPARENT REASON. Call that a 1/100th townie tell.

Dodgy didn't use OMGUS, that was my characterisation of the FOS. Typing OMGUS actually counteracts the OMGUS status of a vote/FOS because, as you so elegantly put it, it draws attention to it. My point was stuff had happened, accusations had been made, and you weren't commenting on it. If you didn't think it had merit, you could have said so.

Anyways, my game has been extremely straightforward thus far; attacking the 1/1000th scum tell with a FOS. I don't bother switching my vote for people on a 1/1000th scum tell.

That's fair, though.

Oh, and good post Seol. You're moderately townie in my books.

Considering that this all started with the post where you suggested Ripley was buddying up to me, it seems like a) your behaviour is much more like buddying-up than Ripley's was (note the implied trusat) and b) you're not in the best position to criticise people suggesting that you're buddying up. Smacks a little of hypocrisy.

You didn't respond to this point. Seems like a good time to remind you of it.

I think that "CONTRARY to what you think actually GC." does not feel like a sentence, and so one instinctively looks to attach it with a comma to what went before or what comes after, and as one is reading forward that's the natural direction to go. Especially with the word following being "I", and therefore still capitalised after a comma, the natural place to mentally substitute the comma for a full stop is there, rather than before CONTRARY. Not saying you'd do this consciously at all, but this could easily lead you to the reading GC gave it.

Mmm, perhaps. It still doesn't seem like a natural or plausible read to me, but I suppose if you think it makes sense to read it that way it's more likely that GC did too.

Is there really no such thing as a townie tell? Are there not power role tells, which by extension would be townie tells?

There are power role tells, but there aren't generic "pro-town" tells.

If there were, scum would be mimicing them to the point they would become scum tells.

That's why a lot of the key cop/doc tells are also scum tells. Scum also use them to hunt power roles.

2) I am always in two minds when a player that hasn't posted much, suddenly gives us all a break down/ run down of the game so far. More often than not, I have found that this type of post is there to sway the town that they are on the towns side, as subconsciously, when you read such a post, you feel it helpful, therefor catorgarising that player as town (Seol).

Have you ever played with me before? Or read one of my games? Get used to the "big post".

And to answer your question

honestly

Seol, yes, if I had spotted it but as it were on me and I obviously noted it, definately yes.

Were you considering answering it dishonestly?

Also, this may or may not seem crazy to you, but I am going to now make a weird statement (believe me, this is well thought out and may or may not be used for a greater purpose). For the rest of day1, (barring something ridiculous, of course), I am going to assume that Green Crayons and Seol are townies.

Why?

I find it funny that we're having the same argument across two games that we're both in. If it bothers you that much, you can take my words to mean "I believe that Green Crayons and Seol are slightly townie."

There's a

world

of difference between "assuming [we're] town" and "believing [we're] slightly townie".

However, trust me that there is method to my madness. I don't have any finished games yet to point at as examples, but you might be surprised at just how objective my methodolgy turns out to be. Watch for future developments!

There may be madness in your method. If you're going to take a position, especially one which looks highly unjustified, and then say you have a justification,

give

that justification. Otherwise, all you're going to succeed in doing is attracting attacks - and whilst this does occasionally seem like a good tactic, trust me, it isn't.

[LuckayLuck]

Oh, and good post Seol. You're moderately townie in my books.

Considering that this all started with the post where you suggested Ripley was buddying up to me, it seems like a) your behaviour is much more like buddying-up than Ripley's was (note the implied trusat) and b) you're not in the best position to criticise people suggesting that you're buddying up. Smacks a little of hypocrisy.

You didn't respond to this point. Seems like a good time to remind you of it.

I play drastically differently from other people, as you're soon going to find out. When I buddy up, it means that I've found you to be townieish enough under whatever crazy criteria I have and I am looking to form an open masonry with you. Let me expand on this...

I find it funny that we're having the same argument across two games that we're both in. If it bothers you that much, you can take my words to mean "I believe that Green Crayons and Seol are slightly townie."

There's a

world

of difference between "assuming [we're] town" and "believing [we're] slightly townie".

That world of difference is non-existant the way I'm going to play. I am going to state my plan very clearly right now: I think that you are a townie. I will now treat you as a mason and assume that you are a townie. Now then Seol, now that I'm treating you as a mason, let me give you my views about GC:

Hey, you're trying to find scum / townie tells too! Cool! However, everything you've quoted about GC - it's not scum tell. It's townie tell. Really. I'm not going to tell you exactly what that townie is, because then people can fools me, but re-read it and think in your head "is this what a townie says?" and your answer will hopefully be yes.

GreenCrayons, I am extending my masonry offer to you as well.

Seol and GreenCrayons, if we can form a three-way-masonry here, we are going to be golden since you two are both pretty active posters which have given off townieish vibes to me. We can death star the mafia!

[Seol]

Luckay, I've got a newsflash for you. You're not Pooky.

Are you playing to win, or to dick around?