Mini 836: Commie Mafia (Game Over)

[Cyberbob]

To expand on the word careful, I mean careful that anything he attacks he is unquestionably right on. By that I mean there's almost no gut read, almost no sweeping declarations, almost no theory that can be argued with. His point always start at a minor scummy sentence and regularly stay there, never becoming something even mildly controversial.

Counterpoint: my position on the initial wagon. Even in its "second form" (describing it as having changed is completely bogus, as it actually didn't - but whatever) it was both a sweeping declaration and a gut read.

[Cyberbob]

Being "wishy-washy" is in no way playing it safe as you run the risk of

both

sides of the argument attacking you - which did happen with CoCo and mathcam both questioning my read of the situation.

[Hoopla]

Hoopla, what makes you say they are well founded? Just an odd phrase to use for day one reads ( I hate day one).

To expand on the word careful, I mean careful that anything he attacks he is unquestionably right on. By that I mean there's almost no gut read, almost no sweeping declarations, almost no theory that can be argued with. His point always start at a minor scummy sentence and regularly stay there, never becoming something even mildly controversial.

I don't find myself feeling that his efforts are genuinely concerned whether the person BEHIND the comment he is attacking is scum, rather just being concerned that the comment is scummy.

Does that explain it better?

Logical and not dependant on unknown information.


And that does explain it better, but I don't think he's flying under the radar as much as you think. Vaya/Col/Peabody (and probably others) are also guilty of the lack of sweeping declarations - I don't understand that point.

SC, what do you think about Peabody and Col.Cathart?

I also want to know SC's thoughts on this.

[SerialClergyman]

This is possibly true. I'll go through my thoughs more thoroughly on those people after I get a bit of times.

Cyberbob - your stance on the inital argument WOULD be a good argument in your favour had you stuck with your town read, but it eventually boiled down to 'the entire thing is a nulltell, which is barely better than not commenting on it at all. If you'd said the four participating are likely to be town - that'd be taking a stance. Saying it's taught you nothing about anyone isn't.

Will post in the next day or two with a more thorough read over peabody and col.

[Cyberbob]

Cyberbob - your stance on the inital argument WOULD be a good argument in your favour had you stuck with your town read, but it eventually boiled down to 'the entire thing is a nulltell, which is barely better than not commenting on it at all. If you'd said the four participating are likely to be town - that'd be taking a stance. Saying it's taught you nothing about anyone isn't.

I also expressed a frustration at my inability to effectively put into words what I meant. "Null tell" was the closest term I could come up with, but saying that it taught me nothing about anyone is incorrect. You'll note that mathcam suggested that I was using "null tell" too broadly; I agreed with him. I still do.

[SerialClergyman]

M'okay - could you give me an idea of what it did teach you about the people involved?

[Cyberbob]

M'okay - could you give me an idea of what it did teach you about the people involved?

Well, I thought CoCo came out of it looking a bit "off" due to his being a bit emotional for early Day 1 (this was before the his-usual-playstyle discussion), and there was also a question mark hanging over his handling of SensFan.

Based on that, I thought mathcam and charter came out of it looking "good" because of their having questioned the aforementioned inconsistency with regard to SensFan. Vaya was a bit of a nothing.

(Neither of the points against CoCo became scumtells in my mind until I questioned him and found his response to the former lacking. His response to the latter was a good one however.)

When I said "null tell" the idea I was trying to get across was that I didn't think either side of the discussion was "right" or "wrong". It all came off as a bunch of people getting really caught up in trying to score points against each other and making accusations willy-nilly rather than trying to have an actual debate. I've seen both scum and townies get involved in such arguments, so I was not prepared to declare anyone "town" or "scum".



OK, here's something odd I noticed while reading back over those posts that I'd like to clear up. How do you reconcile these two posts by you as Harumafuji with your current stance of the case against him being totally unfounded? You appear to be agreeing with it there - am I reading this correctly?

[Talitha]

Cam's arguments and research on CoCo got me waivering. Also the fact that looking back he defends Peabody rather strongly while attacking most others.

CoCo, you said a while back that you don't feel like Peabody is scum. Please explain your reasons.

Peabody, what are your opinions about CoCo?

[Col.Cathart]

So far, I like SC's play. He sure bringed a lot to the table either in discussion, and after his post, I'll certainly look again at Cyberbob's posts, though I didn't found anything suspicious in there. But maybe I was looking from the wrong angle.

I'm also interested in hearing SC opinion about me. I'm ready to defend myself.

Lastly, CoCo's reaction to Mathcam's post about his other games was certainly... Interesting. Very aggressive even for a CoCo. I think, he may hit a bullseye here, but I need to read other CoCo's game to say that for sure.

[Peabody]

Hey guys, I'm gonna read up on what I missed. I got school. Sorry guys. I'll post tomorrow at the latest.

[mathcam]

Lastly, CoCo's reaction to Mathcam's post about his other games was certainly... Interesting. Very aggressive even for a CoCo.

I agree. I'd like to hear his follow-up thoughts. His anger seemed genuine, though whether it comes from a sense of moral outrage or a sense that I had unfairly discovered he was scum, I don't know.

I think I need to weigh in on some of the other discussions. At this point, most of my feelings seem to correlate pretty well with how much I agree with what they're saying. (I certainly concede that this is not a particularly good way of deciding scumminess, but it's hard to separate the two sometimes, especially on day one).

Other than ones already enunciated, I don't have much in the way of a defense of this ordering. The only really new thing is SensFan at the bottom of the list -- I don't care about his lurking, but what he's chosen to focus on since he's back has felt off. Also, as another meta, I'm trying to assess if it's more or less likely that Haru was scum given that a) He decided to play the way he did, and b) He decided to disappear and be replaced. My feeling is that if anything (and it might not be anything), it would be in the pro-town category.

Would probably resist lynching: Hoopla, SerialClergyman, le Chat
Would not be too upset about lynching: Cathart, CyberBob, Talitha
Would be fine with being lynched: Vaya, Peabody
Would pick to be lynched: CoCo, charter, SensFan

[mathcam]

I'll certainly look again at Cyberbob's posts, though I didn't found anything suspicious in there. But maybe I was looking from the wrong angle.

As a side note, the last sentence struck me as a little forced and thus a little scummy. Not sure I can put my finger on why though. Hmm.

Cam

[SensFan]

cam, can you give me something to defend against, maybe? I mean, it just feels like you added my name to your lynch-list without giving me anything I can defend agaist.

Other than that, I agree with about half of your list, disagreeing with the rest.

[CoCo]

Okay. Regarding Mathcam.

Unvote

. I probably should have made an

FOS: Mathcam

instead of going to a vote. I definitely think Charter is still the scummier of the two.

Vote Charter

.
The thing is, when I said to read my current and previous games, I did so to demonstrate my playstyle. The fact you used an ongoing game, then say I've been playing it differently is utter crap. I can't defend against it until that game is complete. Furthermore, you can't show specific examples either. So, just coming in and saying, "I read another game you're playing and you play differently in that one." is inherently unfair meta. Hypothetically, I could even scum in that other game. Using an ongoing game against me is scummy.

I really don't like Sensfan saying Haru's posts were legible. I know I'm not in the minority by thinking the opposite is true. I'm surprised no one caught that.

Concerning Peabody. I said I didn't think his RVS vote was scummy. Honestly, I'm going for a neutral read until I have time to research.

[charter]

Okay. Regarding Mathcam.

Unvote

. I probably should have made an

FOS: Mathcam

instead of going to a vote. I definitely think Charter is still the scummier of the two.

Vote Charter

.

Why are you making this a dichotomy? Why are you even voting me?

[CoCo]

I'm voting for you because I think you're scum.

[SensFan]

Vote: CoCo

Link me to this 807 game you're referring, then explain what in that game gives you the right to act anti-Town here and expect us to let you live.

[charter]

I'm voting for you because I think you're scum.

No way!...

Why

do you think I'm scum?

[CoCo]

http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11658

There's Mafia 807. I was town-cop and harrassed several times over ignoring questions, using OMGUS, etc, etc.

Sens, how were Haru's posts legible?

Charter, I'll be back in a bit with my reasons as to why you're scum. I was gone for two days and I'm catching up with my other games (and not just on this site).

[CoCo]

Charter, all anyone has to do is take a look at your vote history. You've switched votes around more than anyone.

1. You jumped on the Hoopla bandwagon.

2. You voted me because I failed to question you or Sensfan.

3. You vote Peabody over his late RVS vote.

4. You vote Cathart during a strong wagon.

It appears they are all opportunistic votes to lynch someone, anyone. Your hands are pratically wrapped around straws at this point and I have no problems rejoining the wagon on you.

[charter]

Charter, all anyone has to do is take a look at your vote history. You've switched votes around more than anyone.

Heh, just as I thought, terrible reasons.

1. You jumped on the Hoopla bandwagon.

And? Why is that scummy? I'll preempt the inevitable 'trying to get a quicklynch' BS argument by pointing out I unvoted Hoopla less than two hours after I voted. Bandwagons are protown.

2. You voted me because I failed to question you or Sensfan.

Correct, and you're still scummy for that. My vote was totally justified.

3. You vote Peabody over his late RVS vote.

Please point out where I gave this reason when I voted Peabody, because you're inventing it.

4. You vote Cathart during a strong wagon.

What does this even mean? If it means that I vote Cathart because others are and I'm just jumping on the wagon, then this is once again, completely false. When I voted him, I was the only one voting for him.

It appears they are all opportunistic votes to lynch someone, anyone. Your hands are pratically wrapped around straws at this point and I have no problems rejoining the wagon on you.

What you really meant to say when you listed reasons was "charter, your votes have been very pro town". Your claim that I've been opportunistically voting is BS as well.

To the rest of the town.

I'm sure everyone agrees that Coco is being incredibly dense and unhelpful. Normally we would policy lynch someone like this, but seeing as that's a poor idea in this game (many actively scummy people more deserving of a lynch), I propose that we just ignore everything he says until he shapes up. Cold Shoulder. 100%.

[charter]

Okay. Regarding Mathcam.

Unvote

. I probably should have made an

FOS: Mathcam

instead of going to a vote. I definitely think Charter is still the scummier of the two.

Vote Charter

.

Why are you making this a dichotomy?

[CoCo]

Explain what you mean by dichotomy.

[Vaya]

I'm back now and I've caught up. I will be more active from now on.

Right now, my biggest suspect is Peabody. I don't really agree that his "random vote" was scummy, but his behavior still bothers me. He seems to just comment occasionally on things and asks a few questions here and there, but he never really follows up on them much. It feels like he's just talking to make it look like he's contributing. His analysis of Talitha is especially bad, what point is there making a post like that on someone who you're getting a null read on? Again, it feels like he was just trying to look like he's contributing.

Vote:Peabody

Mathcam, I read through your posts, but I don't get why you're voting charter. It comes off as weird to me that you're voting him when you say you said you would prefer a CoCo lynch. Could you explain your vote to me?

[CoCo]

I think for now, that Peabody's vote was a simple mistake, not a real scum-tell. His jumpiness to vote others IS quite suspicious though.

Why are you defending Peabody? If Peabody comes up scum, you're the first to go.

unvote, vote Peabody

As for why I suspect Col Cathart and Peabody.
Col Cathart spends his first three posts waiting for others to do stuff instead of doing it himself. Not strong pro town posts. He unvotes his RVS vote but I see no intention of looking for another place to put his vote.

I think for now, that Peabody's vote was a simple mistake, not a real scum-tell. His jumpiness to vote others IS quite suspicious though.

This is really scummy. He is explaining away Peabody's vote and trying to say it isn't a scum tell.

Post 6 is more waiting around.

So I'm pretty much suspicious of him because he isn't really looking in to people, just making comments from the sidelines. His list of suspects is pretty convenient as well. Even more is him saying Peabody's answers don't make sense, but does he question Peabody on this discrepancy? No..

Lastly: Do you still really think I'm a scumbuddy with Peabody, because I didn't jump to his throat, when everyone else did? As someone else stated before, that's pretty ridiculous. Not to mention, that it was a perfect ground for bussing, so that kind of action for scum makes no sense to me...

I'm not really sure how to explain this well, but this is a poor way of defending yourself, and this is more of giving me the impression that Peabody is town and Col Cathart is not.

Peabody, his initial vote was fishy, as has been pointed out.
His vote on to me was pretty weak, and it's still there. He's not questioning me on anything about it either.

Upon writing all this, I find Col Cathart much scummier, so

unvote, vote Col Cathart

[/quote]

Classic example of your vote hopping. You've done this plenty of times. Explaining why you made each individual vote does not deter from the fact you've seemingly tried to make a case on several players, reversed stances, and generally give off a scummy vibe to me.