Mini 1830 - Game Over

[eagerSnake]

I stand by that quote, it was a push to get him to contribute, explain himself, and not play deliberately scummy. Like I said, scum do scummy things more often than town do scummy things. Thus scummy things are scummy, even if townies do them too. I scum-read him for his scummy behavior. I never "didn't care about his alignment," I pushed and pushed him to explain himself, he gave me no reason to town read him, so in my book he was still scum. That's a good twist on my words, though.

[Eggman]

Vote Count 1.08

Not Voting

: The_Jester, gerryoat

Gamma Emerald

: Grendel

House

: VictorDeAngelo

CCC

: Huntress, House, Gamma Emerald

eagerSnake

: Square World, Manuel87

Manuel87

: eagerSnake, CCC

Finger of Suspicion Count 1.00

Manuel87

: eagerSnake

Grendel

: Gamma Emerald

With 11 players alive, it takes

6

for a lynch.
The deadline for this day is (expired on 2016-09-26 18:00:00).

[Grendel]

I read some of 1727. CCC’s play there isn’t as much like his play here as I thought it’d be. He had the awkward interactions I was expecting, but he mathed a lot harder there and referenced a lot more mafia theory behind his votes and reasoning. He maintained more of a voice there too imo. I don’t see as much of that here. He doesn’t seem nearly as interested in catching scum. Typically players that use analytical means of finding scum make it apparent that their really into the game even if their methods are questionable. CCC hasn’t done much statistical break downs on players this game like he had in 1727. Many of his posts this game are him defending himself, and while he had some early game passive scum hunting going on he hasn’t been hunting lately. The best he has done was dropping an occasional reads list. I’m bothered that CCC referenced Arctic, which is a lot more reflective of this game here then 1727, 1727 showed me that CCC, sans his speech, isn’t a bad player.

So CCC referencing the lesser of his two games first and foremost as what to meta him by, and the other as an afterthought is… not what I was hoping to find. I was really wanting CCC to be town, but I’m not nearly as good for town!CCC as I was prior to reading more into his games.

[Gamma Emerald]

OMG THE FOS COUNT IS REAL
GRENDEL DO YOU SEE THIS

[Grendel]

I checked, and I didn't see an unanswered questions.

That wasn't what I was saying. I was saying that your responses were guarded. And that repeated guarded responses like yours are scummy.

Okay you're just going to throw shade and leave then.

FOS Grendel

How am I throwing shade by questioning your rhetoric?

Also why am I at the top of your town reads when you had a FoS me like three posts a before that?

[Grendel]

OMG THE FOS COUNT IS REAL
GRENDEL DO YOU SEE THIS

I'M TELLING KAIL YOU SINNER

[Grendel]

Hold on. I'll be back in a bit!

[Gamma Emerald]

Just because I find one thing suspicious doesn't mean I scumread you.

[eagerSnake]

- Square posts his vote
- You question him
- he refuses to answer and presents an argument against you
- you vote him for not explaining his vote and call his argument doubtcasting (you do that a lot instead of arguing about what was said)

What argument? "btw, your post by post analysis on rhazh sucks" That's not an argument. That's doubt-casting my read on RhazhBash. I could've just ignored that if I wanted to, but I wanted to know why he thought that, and why he was just saying that instead of explaining why it sucked.

- he explaines his argument
- you call it a missrep
- he explaines again

If you consider "simple, you aren't trying to discern his alignment" a real explanation. That's a misrep because

I know

I was trying to discern RhazhBash's alignment. He didn't even explain why he thought I wasn't trying to discern his alignment.

- he says he doesnt get a scumread on everyone in 2 days
- you push others a little to scumread Square
- he votes you

Which was a blatant lie that I checked on and called out.

I asked "@Victor What exactly has Square World done that was inherently townie?" Because, and other's agreed, he had an inexplicable town-read on him and I wanted him to explain it. How is that pushing others to scum-read Square?

you explain that you want to kill lurkers

I actually just explained that everyone starts off as scummy, equally. Yes, by that process lurking will not get you anywhere. Why do you want to defend lurkers and liars?

- you present a case thats summarised to: He didnt explain his reads, his argument against me is BS (it is not) and your metaread that in other games he had reads on everyone in 2 days (he stated that he was busy with real life)
- Gamma reads your case and votes him
- Square explains that you didnt mention how his playstyle is always like that (so far it seemed that was the reason you and Gamma voted him not the readlistargument)

His argument against me was BS because all he said was "you're not trying to discern alignment," when I clearly was. I didn't look enough into his meta to know he never explained things, nor would I care as I would never accept that defense anyway. I will never let anyone get away with not explaining things and acting scummy based on their meta.

I simply looked to see how quickly he gains reads, as that is what I was questioning. I found he was lying about how quickly he gains reads, so I brought it up. It's ridiculous that you would try to turn that around on me.

- you dont accept his defense and still want to lynch him while not caring about his alignement

Again the "not caring about his alignment" is not true. I wanted to figure out his alignment, that is why I was questioning him, that is why I wanted him to explain himself. If he refuses to answer questions, I take that as a sign that he has something to hide.

- you ask a silly question to try to get out of the situation. The answer is simple a policy lynch is more scummy
- again you argue about him playing scummy ("People who deliberately play in a way that is scummy hurts the town should be lynched for it, repeatedly, until they stop.")

You're talking about this post:

Which is more convenient: A self-proclaimed metagame that allows someone to get away with always being scummy, or a policy against it?

I never advocated a policy lynch. I did state my policy of not accepting his defense of "I never explain myself." That gives him ample opportunity to explain himself.

I still don't see how you find- not explaining oneself, and lying, to be pro-town. Or why you feel it necessary to chainsaw-defend the slot.

Yes Gamma voted him for the same reason of not liking his posts but he didnt push on Square with the argument it doesnt matter if he is scum or town we need to lynch him.

If someone is refusing to answer questions, and then states the reason for it is "I never explain myself" I think they are more likely scum than town. I never "didn't care about his alignment."

After arguing he reconsidered his read on Square and put him in Null while you still want to read him scum for him playing the way he always plays.

You mean I wanted to lynch the guy who still wasn't really explaining himself? You mean I still wanted him to explain himself? And... How does that make me scum?

If you like meta reads so much check mine and you will see i always play passively and when i have an argument with someone i post more.
So much for your brilliant case on me do you have more?

What makes you think I like meta reads so much? How much have I actually brought up someone's meta this game? Also nice attempt to get away with an "I always active lurk" meta, but I'm not buying that either.

You are missing the main problem that is you still pushing on him after you found out he plays the way he always does and dont care about his alignment.

You mean after I found out he was refusing to explain himself, and even worse, claiming an "I don't ever explain myself" meta, I was still pushing him? Again, how does that make me scum?

I wanted to push him to actually explain himself so I could get a read on him. You obviously don't need him to do this because you already know his alignment.

[eagerSnake]

All of your arguments are bogus.

[House]

Like I said, scum do scummy things more often than town do scummy things.

Bad assumption is bad.

[House]

Day 1 lynch identified.

VOTE: CCC

Spoiler: Vote Here or Explain Why Not

I'm getting slight scumtwitches from a few players. Not enough to seriously consider any of them as likely scum yet, but the needles on my scum detectors are twitching slightly.

First is Gamma Emerald, for his post #39:

Do we know how many scum we're looking for?

11 players I'm assuming there's a few possibilities here...

3 teamed mafia, 8 town
2 teamed mafia, 1 3rd party (not cult), 8 town
2 teams of 2 mafia, 7 town

I'm betting 3 Mafia, 8 town or 3 mafia, 7 town, and one 3P.

He was right later - that

does

look scummish. He's keeping the size of the mafia team constant between his guesses, instead of keeping the total number of scum constant. This may mean nothing, or it may imply that he has actual knowledge of the size of the scumteam.

It's a bit thin, but it's got my attention.

The second one who's making me nervous is The_Jester; he seems to be doing quite a lot of dodging questions and discouraging speculation in this thread.

The third one pinging my scumdar is VictorDeAngelo, for his habit of not explaining his scumreads until he wants to move to a different target.

--------------

Since my vote is on none of the above, I think I should move it onto one of the above. Therefore:

VOTE: The Jester

So instead of vote the player that you implicitly feel the most suspicion for (hence, mentioning first), you vote your second suspect.

Scumdar ping.

The person you actually voted, you didn't provide any examples of your allegations the way you did your first suspect (yet felt the need to vote the second anyway).

Scumdar ping.

My experience so far suggests that the entirety of day one is going to be pretty much nullness. I've never been on a game on this site where a Mafia player was lynched on the first day, so I'd be surprised if anyone has anything even approaching a decent read on the first day.

Breeding apathy. Lots of scum motive for that.

Scumdar ping.

--------------

In my previous post, I suggested that VictorDeAngelo and Gamma Emerald were pinging as very slightly scum. To that list I will now add GreenNope and Square World; the first for being completely absent, and the second for providing extremely short posts with no reasons for his votes. From these four, I will elect to park my vote (for the moment) on:

VOTE: Square World

Scumreading someone that hasn't even posted? How is that even vaguely town?

Opportunistic vote, jumping on his playstyle instead of alignment indicative content.

Scumdar ping.

Do you ever read other games? There are garnteed to be games were scum was hung D1 for legitimate reasons.

I haven't seen any where scum was hung D1. I expect to find that, of newbie games (with two scum out of nine players), less than two in nine games have scum lynched on day one. (If the lynches were random, it would be two in nine, but by and large scum will usually try to get town lynched, and on day one I expect that to skew the ratio against Town).

I guess I am pessimistic about day one. Later days, when there's some decent info to work with, I consider far more useful.

Yes, yes... discourage town. Breed that apathy!

Scumdar ping.

In my previous post, I suggested that VictorDeAngelo and Gamma Emerald were pinging as very slightly scum. To that list I will now add GreenNope and Square World; the first for being completely absent, and the second for providing extremely short posts with no reasons for his votes. From these four, I will elect to park my vote (for the moment) on:

VOTE: Square World

How much scummier is Box World compared to Pokémon Remake Emerald, and Old Man Victor?

Also, stop self-metaing at the drop of a hat.

Insignificantly scummier. I have no significant reads at all.

Also, what do you mean by "self-metaing"?

THIS is what not taking stances looks like.

He appears to be trying to read people, but his "insignificant" reads can change with minimal explanation.

Unlike Square, who is posting reads without going into detail why, CCC is prefacing his reads with an excuse to drop them.

Scumdar ping.

Well in my last game with Grendel, it was the same for him. I don't think Grendel is scum this time, but I DEFINITELY think you are.

Believe it or not, this fits my Town meta too. Every game I've ever been Town in, I got lynched day one.

(This may be why I think so little of day one lynches).

Brilliant! You make an excuse for your scummy play to discourage others from lynching you because you're not experienced scum so you're trying to play up your newness.

Sorry bro, nice lesson from boring but she ruined that for you.

Scumdar ping.

What do reads list have to do with conflict?

Conflict causes people to talk and interact. From these interactions, reads can be formed, and refined.

No. No. No.

Town fighting town is EXACTLY what scum wants.

If town is busy bickering with each other, scum has plenty of noise to hide in.

HUGE scumdar ping.

Here's my current list, for example:

1. gerryoat - Null leaning Townish - hasn't stood out, but has been quietly scumhunting
2. Gamma Emerald - Null leaning scummish - more sure of the size of the mafia team than the total number of scum
3. Grendel - Null leaning strongly Town - doing a hefty share of scumhunting
4. RhazhBash - Near complete null, leaning weakly scummish - needs to do more scumhunting
5. CCC - Town all the way
6. Square World - Null leaning scummish - needs to explain himself a little more
7.

GreenNope

Huntress - Null for now - needs to post something
8. Manuel87 - Null leaning slightly scummish - don't think he's made a non-RVS vote yet (could be just cautious)
9. The_Jester - Null leaning very slightly scummish
10. eagerSnake - Townish. He's really making a lot of good points and asking a lot of right questions
11. VictorDeAngelo - Null leaning scummish. I don't like how he's shutting down certain questions, and I don't like his inexplicable Townread on Square World.

2 reads that doesn't have null in them. The one that isn't his own is appended with an "ish", which he can use to justify flipping with minimal explanation.

Scumdar ping.

I'm reposting this every page until I get responses from everyone.

Responses thus far:

eagerSnake

: Lot of valid points (no vote)

Gamma Emerald

: Feels boxed in (vote)

CCC

: Nuh-uh! You were wrong before!

Manuel

: Makes sense if he is full of self-doubt

gerryoat

: liked CCC's responses

Keep them coming, please.

[eagerSnake]

Bad assumption is bad.

How is it a bad assumption?

[eagerSnake]

It's not even an assumption. It's a fact.

[House]

It's not even an assumption. It's a fact.

Just because you think something is true doesn't make it so.

If scum did more scummy shit that town, town would have a MUCH higher win percentage.

Between scum passing themselves off as town, and town not all confirming to some rigid playstyle (that scum could mimic anyway), actions mean precisely dick.

[House]

It's not even an assumption. It's a fact.

Just because you think something is true doesn't make it so.

If scum did more scummy shit than town, town would have a MUCH higher win percentage.

Between scum passing themselves off as town, and town not all conforming to some rigid playstyle (that scum could mimic anyway), actions mean precisely dick.

EBWOP

[House]

I'm Exhibit A of town that plays like scum.

I lolhammer.
I fake claim.
I naked vote.
I tunnel with derp reasoning.

According to your worthless theory, I'd have been lynched in every game I'm town, and lived in every game I was scum (where I don't do those things).

You need to sit back and stop preaching from in high like you have all the answers, because your read is garbage.

[eagerSnake]

Something gets to be considered "scummy" because, in general, it has been shown that it comes from scum, more often than town.

Else, if it was done by town more than scum, it would be townie.

Else if it is equally done by town and scum, it is NAI.

I'm not saying that doing something scummy makes you scum, I'm saying that scummy things are scummy because they are done by scum more often than town. How else would it get to be considered scummy in the first place?

For example: Is lying scummy? Yes. Because it has been shown that scum lie more often than town. However, doing so doesn't mean you are 100% definitely scum, just that you did something scummy. I have seen plenty of cases where town have lied (which is horribly bad in most cases), but more cases where scum have lied. Thus, lying is scummy, even if townies lie too.

[House]

Something gets to be considered "scummy" because, in general, it has been shown that it comes from scum, more often than town.

Else, if it was done by town more than scum, it would be townie.

Else if it is equally done by town and scum, it is NAI.

I'm not saying that doing something scummy makes you scum, I'm saying that scummy things are scummy because they are done by scum more often than town. How else would it get to be considered scummy in the first place?

For example: Is lying scummy? Yes. Because it has been shown that scum lie more often than town. However, doing so doesn't mean you are 100% definitely scum, just that you did something scummy. I have seen plenty of cases where town have lied (which is horribly bad in most cases), but more cases where scum have lied. Thus, lying is scummy, even if townies lie too.

And instead of attempting to discern the reason he's doing these so called "scummy" things (lol), you paint those actions as an excuse to lynch him on their own merits.

Between the two of you, I'd lynch you over Manuel without hesitation.

[eagerSnake]

And instead of attempting to discern the reason he's doing these so called "scummy" things (lol), you paint those actions as an excuse to lynch him on their own merits.

Between the two of you, I'd lynch you over Manuel without hesitation.

Then you're either a fool or scum. Or both.

[eagerSnake]

I'm Exhibit A of

town that plays like scum

a horrible player.

I lolhammer.
I fake claim.
I naked vote.
I tunnel with derp reasoning.

So you're Exhibit A of a horrible townie, awesome. [sarcasm] Glad to have you with us. [/sarcasm]

May I ask why you aren't doing these things in this game?

[eagerSnake]

I don't have a handle on Gerry yet, but I can get behind a Manuel and Gamma team (from individual reads, not associatives).

What happened to this?

[eagerSnake]

@Grendel: What is your read on Square?

In post 254, Manuel87 wrote:
I dont like how Square world playes but its not a reason to lynch him.


If Manuel flips red, I'll be rather interested in him.

Your thoughts mimic'd mine, what happened here?

[Grendel]

Spoiler:

Also, about my lower activity: I am currently in 4 games. Not as much time to spend here. I even said in the postgame I would be able to be super active in one game anymore.

I don't particularly like the look of your most recent posts either.

What were you going to do when you got caught up in our previous game? Because there you never did anything unique.
About being cop: I wanted to confuse the Mafia about me. It sure worked, you NEVER considered me as a PR.

Being in so many games explains your low activity here,

but why does it affect the lack of stances?

So what didn’t you particularly like? Saying you don’t like something is nice and all, but not explaining why doesn’t help you.

Yeah, you did some good wifom in that game.

I'm saying that you didn't do a special thing like you tried to do in this game. I understand I beat you to RQS, but STILL.

Gamma doesn't address me saying that he isn’t taking stances. Instead he opted to say that he is town reading me for my opening. Because I didn't open with RQS in the other game he played with me where I was scum. I should say that I subbed into that game as scum and there was already 20+ pages of content to read. Why would I open with RQS if I came into a game with lots of content? Why wouldn't I open a game as scum via unconventatal means?

Gamma's basis here for town reading me is weak given that the source he is working with doesn't say much about how I play as scum. And to town read me because I'm not matching up with that game is silly because I wouldn't repeat the same plays with the same person in back to back games. I'm self aware enough that meta reading me would be dangerous. Gamma doesn't know me well enough to make that call about my plays. He sounds he is in an informed position looking for an excuse to town read me in hopes I'd be deterred.

Spoiler:

I was not pinged, I was defending myself. I do townread you for it. I may throw together a reads list sometime today.

the part highlighted in blue in the above 108 sounds like he scum reads me. Then when I question him about it he says that I’m town. Idk about you guys but, “ I don’t like the look of your recent posts”, sounds a lot like a scum read in progress. 147 sounds like Gamma thought that it’d be smarter to town read me then scum read me.

Grendel

- As said before, he doesn’t do this as scum, but he’s only been scum once on both sites he plays on,

so I may be way off base here.

I’ll be willing to back out of this town read at a moment’s notice if it means I can lynch Grendel.

All his town reads are worded like he could back out of them with no trouble. Except for Gerry's which he actually did back out of.

I realized you had a point.

Gamma backs off his Gerry read with no fight, no questioning me, no questioning Gerry. When I ask him why he just says that he agrees and that’s it.

Spoiler:

Why would that make you vote him?

So Gamma... Why so concerned that Victor is voting RhahzBash?

Last time I checked you thought RhazhBash could be scum.

I'm curious specifically about why the part he bolded looked scummy.

His post 320 was bad, and Gamma's response doesn't actually answer the question. Gamma's response was to affirm the he, did indeed, ask Victor a question. What I wanted to know is why he is paying attention to Victor's vote and Gamma's response was to restate something that could be inferred, and doesn't actually answer me.

Really should have pushed that line of question further.

[Grendel]

@Grendel: What is your read on Square?

I missed this!

Square is null.