Mini 648 - Shytown - [Game Over]

[darkdude]

Awesome, nightless.

Vote: imaginality

[darkdude]

This the random voting don't think too much.

If we all do exactly that then we'll be stuck on random voting forever.

[darkdude]

Nah! It only lasts for the first couple of pages to kind of break the ice.

And what is it that breaks the ice? Someone trying to see if there is more to someone's "Random" vote than it meets the eye. Certainly "nah, it's 0% scummy cause it's random vote" won't accomplish anything...

You argue that equality is bad for town, which is true, but you don't seem to acknowledge the reasoning behind the statement. If everyone does the same thing, then no one will appear more or less scummy, and we won't be able to have lynch candidates. The reason random voting can start a game is because they may or may not be completely random. If you dismiss this possibility then there is no longer a purpose for random voting.

Now, I do not think these specific early game accusations hold much weight, but they should not be brushed off just because they are made early in the game. I would like to see the points actually addressed instead of "oh it's just RANDOM".

I would like to know from Greasy why he considered Nudude's vote a bad one.

[darkdude]

,I didn't argue that point I agreed with the point.

Yes you did.

Thinking everyone is equal in Mafia is the enemy.

If you read before you post you would see that he called his own vote a OMGUS vote. My comment was just messing with him, it wasn't meant to be serious.

I am aware of that. Why would it deserve your counter vote though?

Anyways, as for the latest newsworthy incident:

I concur with post 28. That is pretty much my opinion; Pope's argument is baseless.

Unvote

Vote: The Pope's Tiara

Your last post smelt very bad.

Yeah it was bad, but I think it's more of "obvious inexperience" than "obvious scum". I think it is mostly a null tell.

I'd have to say, on some level, Imaginality makes some sense. I can't see any reason that justifies TPT putting Untitled at L-1, especially this early in the game, and TPT's reasoning is weak.

You can justify all you like, but putting someone at L-1 on the second page runs the risk of a fast - lynch occuring, and given the small number of players I can't see how that possibly benefits town.

Imaginality isn't making reasons here, he's being sarcastic and pointing out the lack of evidence behind Pope's argument. And in all seriousness hammering shouldn't be that much of a problem since it seems most players here are competent enough to prevent random lynches. Scum wouldn't dare to hammer someone at this point in time.

ynch-1 and being ok with lynching someone this early is way scummy. wonder whether nudude would have pulled his vote so fast if imaginality hadn't nailed him?

Unvote

FoS: the pope's tiara, nudude

Post 28 was full of sarcasm. If you're trying the same thing, you're not doing it right. To me it seems like you are trying to jump on the opportunity.

Unvote

[darkdude]

It was on page 1 and I was still in the random vote phase of the game.

This is what I mean by brushing off with the "random" excuse.

No, IMHO his OMGUS did not deserve your vote. Your vote itself is a baseless counter vote, which is much of what OMGUS is.

And no comment about your lie that I pointed out?

so according to you it's scummy when I defend myself, it's scummy when I defend myself whilst somehow simultaneously attacking you, and it's scummy when I attack tpt instead of defending myself. that doesn't leave me with a whole lot of options other than making friends with everyone and waiting for you to kill me, which would probably suit you fine but it doesn't do much for me.

You miss the point. It's how you chose to work up imaginality's weak-to-nonexistent case to counter TPT.

sorry, I must have missed where inexperienced scum were immune from making mistakes. how is it a null tell when you say that you want to lynch someone whether they're scum or not?

Null tell means it has the same likely hood of leading to both scum and town. You seem to think all bad plays are scum tells. Just to let you know, that is FALSE. An inexperienced scum and an inexperienced town has the same chances of making such a mistake.

I'd rather that imaginality tells us himself whether he was being sarcastic, but I'm serious even if he's not. I don't do florid parody posts.

No, I don't like non-serious posts either, as it just adds unneeded confusion. But post 28 did a good job of fishing for opinion, and it seems like a couple players went for the bait.

I think molestatgazer is doing a fantastic job of brushing aside TPT's L-1 vote, while making everyone else in the game look suspicious.

I think otherwise. He has made the same points I was thinking of. He's not making cases out of thin air. There's good logic behind them. That's +1 protown point IMHO.

I do think that it's unlikely all three players who were voting Untitled at that time (molestargazer, Nudude and The Pope's Tiara) are town.

I don't think that's likely. Mole and Nudude's votes were random as far as I could tell, and TPT's was like I said, a null tell.

[darkdude]

I usually put the name for the first quote of a person. The quotes following that should be from the same person.

I'm sorry, I must have missed something. I haven't lied yet and I didn't notice where you called me out for lying.

You argue that equality is bad for town,

I didn't argue that point I agreed with the point.

Yes you did.

Thinking everyone is equal in Mafia is the enemy.

[darkdude]

This game is progressing at break-neck speed.

Why don't you contribute something? Make counter points to people's responses to your case?

darkdude, I think you're misreading that. At least, I took Greasy Spot to be saying that he didn't argue (as in put forward) the thing about equality being back, he agreed with Untitled when Untitled said that. I.e. he wasn't the first one to mention it.

Why does it matter? He didn't say "Gee, that is a good point" (= agreeing) but rather "Thinking everyone is equal in Mafia is the enemy." (= arguing for). Just because he wasn't the first to argue for the point doesn't mean he didn't...

[darkdude]

I don't see where molestargazer said that was the point, and it was him that I was responding to. why do you think you know what he meant better than he does?

What he meant was obvious, at least to anyone who was scum hunting. So does that exclude you...?

you seem to think that all mistakes should be discarded as null tells. this is also false.

No, I said "

such

a mistake", not "ALL mistakes". Indeed, it is situational. And IMHO in this situation it doesn't initially point more towards scum than town.

Initially...because TPT's silence is making me uncomfortable. Seems more scummy the longer he stays silent.

that's not what imaginality said in post 45. you seem to be modfying the facts to fit your opinion.

I didn't say he INTENDED for it to be a trap. It merely acted as one for all practical reasons.

this looks like a simple difference in interpretation to me. sort it out amongst yourselves, but don't drag it out.

??? I find your redundant comment scummy. What do you mean by "don't drag it out"?

My concern is that some people seem to be leaning toward TPT being pro-town.

I must have missed that. Mind giving me some quotes?

[darkdude]

Good quote.

We should not consider him pro-town, though I guess that is the instinctive reaction (assuming one does not think it is scummy) because it attracts so much attention and discredits the player. But WIFOM basically evens it out to null tell.

[darkdude]

Does anyone have anything to say about post #31?

lynch-1 and being ok with lynching someone this early is way scummy. wonder whether nudude would have pulled his vote so fast if imaginality hadn't nailed him?

Unvote

FoS: the pope's tiara, nudude

Personally I find this to be the most notable scumtell we have yet.

[darkdude]

Unvote:

Vote: The Pope's Tiara

my problem is with his use of the phrase "scum hunting" - in this context it's totally meaningless because the hypothetical scum in question is me

Scum hunting also includes decent understanding of what other players are pushing for. I'm saying that IMHO it was obvious from an objective point of view what mole was saying, so for one to not notice it would mean their play is not so normal.

if it was a trap then the first person it caught was imaginality himself, because he's stated that he actually believed what he said. you need to explain a little better why I'm scummy for agreeing with a genuine statement from someone that you have expressed no suspicion of (that I can recall)

I do not see how you can justify your reaction to the post simply because he did not intend for it to trap anything. And imaginality had even said that he did consider fishing for reaction.

On the related topic: I was wary of Imaginality since the post where he said the Untitled bandwagoners are likely to contain scum. As you may note, I did not agree with this point. The original post seemed to me like a 100% mock post of TPT. In fact Imaginality's attempt to make a mock case AND a real one simutaneously is not something that seems like a good idea to me.

His latest posts also is giving me some doubts, but I have not the time to review everything and pinpoint them yet.

[darkdude]

Seems like we have two lurkers, Greasy and TPT

[darkdude]

Hey guys, sorry my post will have to wait for next day I got some sudden urgent issues today and I'm tired as hell so I don't feel like posting tonight.

[darkdude]

First of all, I was looking for more replies to my quote of Untitled's post which initially drew my attention. Since I didn't get any I'll directly ask, starting with imaginality.

I think it's interesting that darkdude (post 27) didn't comment on TPT's L-1 vote at the time. As I mentioned in post 45, TPT's post 26 is a very convenient one for having it both ways, with experienced players likely to read it as a joke post at the tail end of the random vote stage, but the possibility of newbie players taking it seriously and perhaps even voting. No, I don't think it's definitely scummy, but I do think it (combined with the lack of posting since) is suspicious enough to warrant further explanation. To be clear: it's not just that TPT put Untitled on L-1 that led me to vote him, it's the way he did it, with an ambiguous post like that, neither clearly joking nor clearly serious.

I'm not sure what you're trying to get at here. TPT was clearly being serious. No town in the right mind would joke like that. I keep my joking in mafia minimal because it messes with people's reads. For example, I wholeheartedly agree with your parody in post 28, but it was not the best way to react to the post. Town players do not want to joke too much because it just fogs up everything and make it harder to pick out scum.

Basically, if it was a joke it would be scum trying using WIFOM to mess with town. And that wouldn't work because a real town player would avoid the WIFOM altogether.

My conclusion is that if TPT is inexperienced, then it is null tell. If TPT is experienced, it's scum tell. It is not between joking/serious, but rather level of competence.

And as for my view on putting someone at -1 to lynch, I think at this point it is totally safe to have players at -1. Similar to the above reasoning: no town would hammer without first providing good reason and attempting to convince others. Scum can hammer and try to shake it off with WIFOM, but since town would avoid it altogether it is still scum tell. Therefore scum wouldn't dare to hammer, and if they did it is a good trade off for town.

I think the discussion about whether my post was fishing for reactions or making a case misses the point that a post can do both.

Not really. Actually this goes against your point earlier in the same post; this is scummy due to ambiguity. Such a post could be defended with a variety of reasons, so it would not be seen as scummy even if the players interpret it differently. If I ever made such a post, it would clearly be a parody of TPT, not with my own case hidden in. How do you expect players to weed out the fact from fiction? It is just a convenient way to put something down which can become the jumping board for a wide spectrum of future arguments IMHO.

Untitled and molestargazer: I think at most one of them is scum. If one is scum, right now, I'm leaning towards Untitled, at least until he explains his post 46. I think molestargazer has driven the case against Untitled hard and

perhaps too hard

- I think it's fairly possible

they're both town

. I'm not ruling out molestargazer being scum, and want to reread his posts again soon to make sure I'm not missing anything.

You're being ambiguous in this one again I think. First you're saying "at most one is scum" implying that you do not think it is likely that they are scum buddies. Hm...well that is very informative . I don't see how you drew that conclusion just because one is pushing a case against another. Second, you point out some possible scum tells but then say "it's likely they're both town". And then go on again to say that mole can still be scum even though you pretty much leaned town on him.

To me that's just a lot of flip flopping and giving yourself loads of slack without a concrete opinion to help town.

imaginality: Pretty sure he's town.

This goes again with my dislike of redundancy. I believe Untitled was asking about this too (sorry, forgot about this point earlier), so I'll be general:

I don't like redundant statements because I find that often scum don't want to take sides so they just make posts like "uh...I'm not sure...I just know I'm not scum" and "I'm not sure about this argument...settle it out yourselves". Normally town players more often than not focus their attention of the most worthy arguments, while scum, being the case that they must fabricate arguments, would chose to show some degree of input, but often they don't make real contributions for fear of taking sides.


So yeah, basically I think imaginality's posts are too ambiguous. They leave lots of slack room, and he's not particularly devoted to any cases at the moment. Slight-to-average scum tell IMHO, and gives me gut feeling against him.

[darkdude]

Pffft. Forgot to stress my initial question.

Imaginality, what do you think of my case against Untitled (that he worked up your case in post 28 immediately to attack TPT)?

[darkdude]

scum stand to gain more from fast lynches than town (particularly fast mislynches, but my alignment is yet to be proven). putting someone at lynch-1 at the top of page 2 is therefore an anti-town action, and will be seen as such by most players.

Correct, but as you state below, rushing for lynch so obviously is not something scum wants.

an experienced player would only ever place a fast lynch-1 vote for wifom purposes, and that definitely isn't a strong scumtell, otherwise they wouldn't do it in the first place. they are, by definition, experienced enough to know what's a scumtell and what isn't.

You miss the point here. The point is that scum MAY OR MAY NOT decide to do this (the more you argue that it is unlikely the more it is subject to WIFOM), while an experienced town WOULD DEFINITELY NOT do this. Thus, if we assume TPT is experienced, only explanation would be that he is scum.

to conclude that tpt is town we must assume both that he didn't know that his vote was against the best interests of his faction and that he didn't know that it would be viewed as suspicious.

No one is trying to conclude he is scum or town (perhaps except you), so I don't see your point.

He needs not to know both of your suggested points either. If he is inexperienced, he would try to push for lynch the moment he thinks he has a decent case on someone, town or scum. If he is town obviously he does not know this is bad for town. If he is scum he does not know this is bad for town thus he does not expect it to land scum tells on him.

would you say that an argument about the meaning of the word "argue" is worthy? that was the entire point of my comment: to indicate that I thought your discussion with greasy spot was a waste of time.

Yes, because I think Greasy was trying to bullshit me. And if true, that is not pro-town.

but what if the player who hammers is inexperienced? by your own logic, that wouldn't be a scumtell

By the time I said this, I have already concluded that none except TPT seemed nooby enough to do such a thing. I do not think we run any risk of having someone prematurely hammer if TPT is already devoted on his vote. If someone does do this it would be out of character and cannot be explained by inexperience.

[darkdude]

I disagree. you and he were arguing over nothing. my differing opinion makes my statement on this subject less than "redundant".

You did not state this opinion initially, but rather wrote as if you did not care what became of the argument.

if experienced town would never do something then experienced scum would never do it either, because they know that doing so would reveal them to be scum. wifom doesn't come into it if you make that asumption.

Experienced scum can pretend to be inexperienced in this case. But whatever the reason, if we know that the player in question is experienced and he makes this move, it would be most likely a scum tell. You can assume that no experienced player will do this as well, which would lead to the conclusion that the player must be inexperienced.

The main point is, if the player is inexperienced, this situation is a null tell.

the bolded passage is not a correct assumption. newbies are often hesitant to push a case on someone early in the game.

I think I worded that wrong. I'm saying that following a newbie who's line of thinking is "see scum, lynch scum", he would push for lynch ASAP regardless of alignment. I suggest that this is the specific case for TPT, not all newbies in general.

[darkdude]

The Pope's Tiara picked up the prod I sent but has not posted. I am searching for a replacement, and if The Pope's Tiara does not post within a day, or before I find a replacement, he will be replaced.

Lurkerz....

[darkdude]

the first sentence indicates that I think your argument is pointless. the second sentence indicates that you should stop wasting time on it. that's pretty much exactly what I said above.

I must concede that this must have been misreading on my part.

I would think that no experienced player would do something like TPT's post. What we need to figure is if he's inexperienced scum, or inexperienced town.

What about experienced scum posing as inexperienced player? That was my point about the possibility of experienced scum doing this.

Unvote:

Vote: Greasy Spot

[darkdude]

Okay, I was waiting until activity picked up. I didn't want to look too suspicious by voting right off.

You're a replacement...you're telling me after you finished reading the game thus far you waited until we posted?

[darkdude]

Is Greasy going to get replaced?

[darkdude]

I think woodsman deserves some pressure for the stuff he's done so far. Scum are easier to crack if their under pressure than if you try to casually talk to them.

I'm waiting on Greasy or his replacement before I do much else though.

[darkdude]

I suppose you mean the way I seem to place certain emphasis on so called "tells" of Untitled? I'll admit, it's not like the case against him is rock solid, he just seems to have more evidence against him than anybody else. If you're really afraid of lynching the wrong guy, we could go No Lynch. But do we really want to risk that? I just don't like the idea of having to go around in circles again and give our enemies more chance to mislead us. If you really want to know, I've never played in a Mafia game where No Lynch resulted, so I'm a little nervous where that could lead us. Don't think you can somehow lead me in another direction because of that though. I shall evaluate the later posts myself.

But the question was why you thought Mole's pursuit of Untitled was "opportunistic" when you agree that Untitled is scummy?

[darkdude]

Okay. We'll be waiting.

[darkdude]

The one thing that bothers me about Imaginality is how he tried to accomplish (at at least claim to) two completely opposite intentions in the same post, namely #28. You can't make a point about over analyzing with a parody when you actually are taking the analysis seriously. To me the follow up response seemed like an attempt to satisfy everybody, so that none of the opposing schools of thought would go against him.

[darkdude]

Note: I didn't expect anyone to say, "Oh! Imaginality's post makes so much sense! Vote TPT/Nudude!" - and I agree that if I had been hoping people would agree with me about TPT and Nudude simply on the basis of that post, then that would be in contradiction with parodying TPT's post.

But is it okay or not for them to agree? If you weren't hoping for anyone to agree, but when someone does you say "yeah that's my point", you're still pushing for a case that was started as part of an ambiguous parody post.

Because this is what Untitled basically did. If you didn't expect it wouldn't you think it is scummy? So far you have said that you only found Untitled scummy because of him calling TPT "way scummy" yet not voting. That is the response I got when I questioned you about Untitled's reaction to your post, so to me this seems like you don't really find his working up of your trivial case to be suspicious. I myself find it extremely scummy, and it is the cause of him being on the very top of my scum list right now, followed by you, woodsman and grease (his behaviour before replacement).

I was worried about TPT being at L-1 only because it was obvious he was either lurking or absent, and I didn't want him to be hammered before he either responded or got replaced. At the time when Untitled described TPT as scummy, it wasn't long since TPT had posted, so that wasn't a concern. L-1 on an apparently active player when you have a case against them is different to L-1 on an apparently absent player before they've been given a chance to respond.

Why does being at -1 differ when a player is unresponsive than when a player is active? By your logic most players, not just scum, have a higher chance of hammering someone at -1 when the player in question is inactive rather than active.

[darkdude]

What's this stuff about No Lynch? You guys do realize it's nightless right? We must lynch.

Now,

that's the post we're all talking about. there are two separate points in there:

1. tpt's vote, along with his willingness to lynch me, are scummy
2. nudude's unvote may have been related to imaginality's post

This is correct.

But IMHO the second point is clearly trying to make something big out of Imaginality's trivial case. The first point makes your counter point against TPT, and the second redirects attention to a new hypothesis that makes Nudude + TPT scum buddies. If you had only done the first, or if you had some evidence other than relying on Imaginality's weak point it would have been normal. My case on you is that you decided to go seriously with post 28 which is mostly a baseless case regardless of its intention. Too opportunistic. Scummy.

Personally, I think if they were both scum that Untitled would have a little more of ability to know if imaginality was being sarcastic.

Actually I think they have a good chance of being scum buddies. It could be the case that Imaginality tried to ridicule and undermine TPT's post with a parody, but Untitled took it as a lead to redirecting attention. This would result in Imaginality restating the purpose of post 28, which he later called both a parody and a true case of his.

This is not a scum tell on the relation of these two players, but just one possible explanation that shows the possibility of them being scum buddies cannot be easily excluded.

Personally though, this theory is kind of getting to my mind as these two players happen to be on the very top of my scum list. I'll try not to lapse into tunnel vision.


I also read over the recent developments with mole, but I can't say I found much convincing arguments against him yet. I will try to reread more carefully later.

[darkdude]

so why have we been arguing about nothing but my tpt case for the last five pages?

Cause it's the scummiest thing I've seen yet.

[darkdude]

Yes it does. Your question is why I focus so much on that instance, and I gave you the reason.

[darkdude]

no, my question was why you're only now saying that the nudude point was what you actually found suspicious.

You seem to have missed something. That was my whole point. You decided to take Imaginality's post 28 and turn it into a possible case direction. That post contained next to nothing for a decent case to be made on. Thus your action was not really logical from a town perspective and seems to be opportunistic.

The case itself was the speculation about TPT+Nudude being scum buddies.

[darkdude]

I can't speak for the other players, but I'm perfectly prepared to lynch someone for inactivity. Just consider this a placeholder vote untill your activity picks up =)

So you don't think we have suspicious players that are more likely to be scum than inactives?

[darkdude]

I've got a some gut feeling against Imaginality as stated before, probably stemming part from some of his faults that I noticed and part from just the way he's acting. All those friendly comments and stuff in his posts always gives him an air of laid back and peacefulness to me. Not that town can't be calm, but in this instance it is rubbing against my gut feelings and I'm suspecting him to pull a "dagger from behind the smile" sort of thing.

We have three chances to lynch at least one scum (two mislynches). I'm okay with Imaginality lynch for today; he's the second on my list.

Woodsman is lower in my scum list because I'm not sure what to make of his reactions. Certainly his posts aren't flawless, but it's not something out of the ordinary for town, given the situation. I didn't expect a solid defense from someone just replacing in for a player like TPT.

Megatheory should definitely post more for us to get a good read on him; I'm looking for some more personal opinions and cases from his perspective.

I'm still most suspicious of Untitled, solely due to his reaction in post 31 and his follow up reactions to that.

Unvote:

Vote: Untitled

[darkdude]

darkdude: my problem is that we just had a lengthy discussion about whether tpt's vote was a scumtell, and at the end you just say "well that wasn't the problem I had with you in the first place". if I misinterpreted your original post then the best thing to do would be to correct me rather than allowing me to waste everyone's time arguing a point that isn't even relevant.

Whether TPT's post was scum tell or not is only part of my case against you. Even if I assume it was a scum tell, your inclusion of Nudude into the matter was still unbased. My main problem is that you worked up post 28 way too much based on way too little evidence. Even Imaginality didn't FOS them at that point, yet you did, and took it very seriously. For a case that weak it was very scummy. Seemed very much like an opportunistic version of OMGUS against TPT, which in itself would be an unreasonable reaction if you were town.

since we've apparently hit the heart of your case now, I'll address my point against nudude: as I mentioned above, I deliberately phrased it as an open question in order to elicit a reaction from nudude. we were still on page 2, thus I overstated my suspicion of nudude a little in order to create the perception of pressure and see how he dealt with it. it was pretty much an afterthought to my suspicion of tpt, though, which is why I've focused on him in our discussion since.

Yes, you

could

have been fishing for something, but then again the opposite could also be true. Your word means nothing as you could make that response as a cover-up even if you did not intend to fish.

I really don't think a decent town would try something as futile as that. Given what you have revealed in your posts so far you are certainly not a newbie. I find it hard to believe that you would think something like post 31 could have pressured something out of Nudude. He just had to say "Imaginality and Untitled, your case is crap".

In fact, what I had expected you to respond to TPT's post was something along the lines of "Your case is crap". Just a straight forward statement pointing of the baseless accusation would have been enough. Your reaction in post 31 was something I did not expect for town; immediately pushing the suspicion elsewhere.

Again, it reeks of OMGUS and redirection.

I'll ask again: do you think my suspicion of tpt is faked?

Not really. I think if you are scum you are attempting to base your suspicion on at least some evidence. But putting TPT and Nudude together clearly is baseless except for post 28's suggestion at a weak case. Your entire action in post 31 is what makes me suspicious of you, not just the FOS on TPT.

[darkdude]

I don't support TBW lynch yet. Basically he's just making some slips upon replacing in for a rather difficult position. The way I see it he is a bit scummy, but definitely not a rival to the other two on my scum list. Either Untitled or Imaginality will do for me though.

To recap my case against Untitled for Megatheory:

In post 28 Imaginality makes a parody post against The Pope's Tiara
In post 31 Untitled takes this seriously and bases what seems to me like an OMGUS case on that

Against Imaginality:

He claims post 28 is intended both to parody and to present his true case.

Thus, this could be signs of a partnership between the two, as Nudude is suggesting, but as I suggested even before that, it is just simple extrapolation and isn't solid evidence. I think the evidence is strong for individual cases, however, and IMHO they are the scummiest players so far.

[darkdude]

That's it? That's the sole reason for you wanting me lynched over TBW?

If you haven't noticed yet, to me not all scum tells are equal. IMHO That was something scum would likely go for; something ambiguous and support both camps of the "was he serious" argument. And also, as you note, since I find the post to be ineffective in its supposed intention, I believe a town player would not normally do something like that. Most people like to make their points clear, unless they are trying to fish for something.

That, in addition to some gut feeling against you. Yes, you could probably explain that as a matter of play style, but I'm getting deja vu from one of my past games where a very similar gut feeling turned out to be correct.


And what I forgot to clarify in my last post:

I do not support Nudude going for the hammer with that attitude. This way it seems like he is trying to avoid being responsible for the vote, because he is basically saying something along the lines of "guys, I don't think he's best lynch, but I'll do y'all a favour and hammer him anyways". This would be a problem if he actually does it.

The game of mafia works because town starts off with a majority and scum does not. If you're just playing the hammerer and not really listening to your own reasoning then scum can force mislynches much more easily. Also it makes observing vote patterns much more difficult when the players are voting half-heartedly.

So unless you change your mind and actually think TBW is a good lynch for today, you shouldn't hammer. We still have 8 days. I'm sure we can get somewhere closer to a good lynch that everyone agrees on in less than a week.

[darkdude]

@ Nudude

So you keep "town lists"?

I don't, and I find reminding oneself of people's town tells also give bias to one's scum hunting. I only keep a scum list, ranking players who are most likely to be scum. Because after all, scum should be trying to drop as many town tells as possible...

[darkdude]

@ Mole

I don't like this post:
1. Surely slips are what we have to pick up on when we're scumhunting? Surely slips are what give scum away?
2. The reasons just aren't there (Explained and quoted), and aren't solid enough to post a decent case. I think the TBW case is more solid than those (If the cases against Imaginality and Untitled are purely for the reasons you've just given).

As said before, I judge cases based on their respective strength, while it seems you are suggesting for me to read tells based on their face value and number.

I just think TBW's slips don't have a significant chance of being attributed to alignment. Seems like his entrance and opening personal playstyle was just shaky in general. I think that it is perfectly possible for town players to act this way too. Not saying what he did wasn't scummy. He's 3rd on my scum list. Only reason I'm not going for his lynch is because I think there are better candidates.

I think my the single tells in post 28 and 31 are significant because they are very likely to be attributed to scum playstyle. Neither Untitled nor Imaginality show any weaknesses in general playstyle, so these slips are more likely due to alignment. To summarize what I said in earlier posts, I think for players of their caliber it is most likely a play for scum rather than town.

[darkdude]

Because counting town tells isn't effective, and often gives the illusion that one is doing something when one is not?

[darkdude]

If you want to vote me based on your gut feeling, that's fair enough, but that's not a good argument for persuading others to vote me. You could at least try to figure out what it is that is resonating for you between that player's play and mine.

No, but I have never tried to gain support using that argument against you.

I already said that one factor in my decision to present post 28 in that way was to see how people reacted

Okay, mind if I ask for a little recap on what you think about TPT, now replaced by TBW, and Nudude based on their reactions?

Seems kind of like you're saying he's too scummy to be scum? Or at least, assuming that scum are more likely to be smart rather than dumb?

No. I'm saying I don't think these scum tells are as reliable as I've seen many players lose control coming into a situation like this regardless of alignment. Everyone else is making decent posts and TBW would still be most scummy in my eyes if it were not for yours and Untitled's cases that I'm on to right now.

Thanks for the compliment, but 'players of their caliber'? I'm pretty new to forum mafia. Your point here again seems to reduce down to saying that making just one slip is more suspicious than making several. Scum would have a pretty easy time of it if that became the meta, no?

No, again, I do not care about the number of slips, but what they suggest in the context of the game. I think the ambiguous intention in post 28 and its explanation clearly stands out as scummy. Same with Untitled's reaction. TBW on the other hand, has less solid tells against him IMHO. Stuff like "avoiding suspicion" is basically WIFOM. He may have been blunt about it, and it is suspicious, but I don't see it as damning evidence pointing to him as scum.

[darkdude]

The only reason I think a townie would choose to raise this point is get a bit of a better read. I don't mind being scrutinized, but this isn't the way to do it.

Why not? I don't think giving people credit for looking pro-town help root out scum at all. Needless to say, we all do it either intentionally or otherwise at some point since it is rather instinctive, but I thought you were more into this than others. It is not a question of which method one prefers, but rather which is objectively effective. Trying to be as objective as possible here, IMHO it is not "potentially beneficial" at all, because scum do rather easily fake town tells, which leads to almost all players displaying them anyways. It is much more reliable to disregard town tells and focus on scum tells instead, which every player is trying to avoid, but easier for scum to slip on.

From what I've seen players using "town lists" tend to be fooled easily by decent scum who fake good town tells and manage to avoid big scum tells. They often overlook objectively important scumtells because of their bias from the town tell.

One could of course, try to be as objective as possible when weighing the town and scum tells, but I just find it much easier to disregard most town tells altogether. Not making mistakes doesn't make a person town, basically, so it's irrelevant.

I am eager to know why making town lists works for you, or works in some other situation.

[darkdude]

Finding reasons why someone can't be guilty is just as valid as finding out why someone is guilty.

But most visible town tells aren't that type of evidence. They just show that the player makes reasonable town-perspective points and plays, which the scum is doing anyways. In the game of mafia, your example of video evidence would be the equivalent of being the target of an unsuccessful NK, or being confirmed by a cop. That is different from what we can do here in this game. From what I've seen players are making posts like "As for XXXX, I read him town, because he's doing what a good townie should and haven't made any scummy moves", while it should be "XXXX shows no evidence of being scum yet". It may sound like a simple rephrasing, but it projects the intention of the poster. The former statement more often than not leads the player to continue to read XXXX as town, while the latter tend to reflect a mindset in which the player is more open to suggestion of XXXX being a hard-to-catch scum. In addition, actual scum players often contribute with statements like "I think XXXX is doing pretty good as town", which adds no actual evidence to XXXX's alignment and the overall scumhunt. Because of this, I frown upon "town lists" based on such reasoning.

Basically, in post 196 you said that Mole is more likely to be town just because he's making reasonable points on a few players. Yes, this seems like a pro-town play, but IMHO it suggests nothing of his alignment. Note that I am not saying the opposite is true: someone making bad cases is certainly scummy. But I see no reason to write someone off as town just for making good arguments. It is something that is to be expected from all players, not something that only town players do and scum players avoid.

[darkdude]

lol just noticed something interesting I unintentionally said

not something that only town players do and scum players avoid.

Which would never last long in the game of mafia anyways since the global meta is always trying to make such tells extinct.

[darkdude]

Town players sometimes make a post that looks scummy, and scum players sometimes make a post that looks pro-town. That's why it's important to reference many pieces of information, and by making a town list it gives me access to more information than if I just made a scum list.

Town players SOMETIMES make a post that looks scummy, while scum players ALMOST ALWAYS makes a post for them to look like town. Which is why town lists are much less reliable and IMHO mostly useless.

I still don't see how you arrived at Mole being more likely to be town than scum based on a good post from town perspective.

In other news, is this discussion on the value of town tells really worth our time? It's not really helping us find scum, and I seriously doubt anybody's going to change their methods because of it.

I'm not giving lectures on game theory without a purpose

Like I said, scum try to blend in by appearing to contribute, but often they avoid giving real evidence so that town can argue among each other. Making posts saying "XXXX seems town because he's working hard" does exactly that.

If someone is making good posts, then of course they're more likely to be town, but 'more likely' is a far cry from 'definetely'. It's like someone who makes a scum tell is 'more likely' to be scum, but may not neccesarily mean they are, and it's with this open mindedness that I approach my lists. It's not for everyone, but it works for me.

At the moment, your trying to make it sounds like making a town list is always, absolutely and irrefutably a bad idea, when it's very clearly a matter of personal preference. Why are you pushing this so hard?

It is a bad idea because I think town players should avoid giving stuff for scum to camouflage in. I already stated why I don't think town lists do much, and thus if we pretend that they are an effective strategy, scum can easily hide behind that so that they look like they're helping town by gauging players when really they're not.

[darkdude]

Forgot another point:

Town tells are always subject to WIFOM while scum tells aren't.

[darkdude]

Well with 3 days left it seems like not much has changed. Can I just get a quick summary from each of the TBW lynch supporters of all the reasons for this lynch?

[darkdude]

Okay, thanks for the summary.

I think it's probably a matter of mindset during scumhunting. I tried reading TBW's posts again under the influence of Imaginailty's points, and it does seem like fence sitting and wagon hopping. Probably I did over look some of this while being very much focused on Untitled's case, but my opinion has not changed much. I'm wary of reading with assumptions from other players, because I still trust my own initial reaction to be the most neutral unless there's hard evidence. I still maintain the opinion that there's not more of a chance of TBW being scum than town. But now I think - and this is mostly due to the deadline - that his lynch at this stage isn't as bad as I had previously assumed. Well, not much else can be done any ways. I'm also have a bit of a doubt about my own cases...perhaps I did have some tunnel vision. Hopefully info from the lynch will help sort this out.

And TBW basically gone inactive. We can't really get a replacement can we? I don't think anyone wants to replace in 3 days before a deadline.

[darkdude]

Deadline is August 17, 8 PM. With 6 alive, 4 will lynch.

Shit, the deadline for Day 2 was a week ago

My suspicion stays on Untitled and Imaginality. I also agree with Nudude that Megatheory is not posting nearly enough.

Rereading Megatheory's posts, he seems to have ceased contributing after making his "replacing in" summary post.

[darkdude]

I didn't think scum would put his partner on L-1 that early in the game.

I thought aggressive bussing was becoming the norm meta? I personally would not rule out a player who lynches scum on Day 1, let alone put scum on -1. And in any case, this suggests that you were nearly sure that TBW was scum. I was under the impression you thought he was the "best lynch", not "obvscum".

By the way, Nudude, the "I know it wasn't me" adds nothing to the conversation.

Hypocritical much?

Conclusions:

darkdude and Nudude: I'm pretty sure darkdude is town. I'm also feeling fairly good about Nudude, who may perhaps have been a touch wishy-washy so far but who has made well-reasoned posts.

Untitled and molestargazer: I think at most one of them is scum. If one is scum, right now, I'm leaning towards Untitled, at least until he explains his post 46. I think molestargazer has driven the case against Untitled hard and perhaps too hard - I think it's fairly possible they're both town. I'm not ruling out molestargazer being scum, and want to reread his posts again soon to make sure I'm not missing anything.

Greasy Spot and The Pope's Tiara: I think at least one of them is scum. It would make a lot of sense for scum to sit back a little if two townies are going for each other all guns blazing, TPT's L-1 post is suspicious, and Greasy Spot has been given a pretty easy ride considering his early slightly noteworthy posts (the 'here! here!' and the vote on Nudude) and relative lack of content since.

imaginality: Pretty sure he's town.

Nudude has gotten me wary. His opening post of Day 2, post 230, when coupled with post 234 seems out of place. 234 seems like a OMGUS type reaction. And I was keeping this to myself in hopes of catching him off guard; in Day 1 Nudude did some serious wagon hopping. He was on TPT, Imaginality, Untitled, Greasy Spot, Molestargazer, and Megatheory wagons (and in that particular order, AFAIK). Ironically, he was never on a TBW wagon and never seemed to support it, but brought up the issue of hammering him. I already criticized this move. I have not much of a problem with his final hammer since we had to end Day 1, but the hammer proposal before that was already starting to stick out to me. And as Megatheory has just pointed out, his apparent reluctance to vote for Untitled seems weird, and even weirder given that he did not heed his own suggestion (waiting for comment from Megatheory).

I also reread Mole's posts after my first post of today. I didn't see much that were worth commenting, though I would be glad if someone else can also reread his posts. Maybe Megatheory should give it a try, since we all like more input from him?

[darkdude]

Untitled's post 233 didn't actually seem too bad to me IMHO. I got the feeling too but didn't want to elaborate on a WIFOM situation.

I think Untitled is scummy, but you could explain why you basically called him 100% likely to be scum? IMHO the chance of him being scum seems enough for a lynch but definitely not obvscum. So for me it's about 75% I think.

Actually, I just did basic reread of Untitled posts again, since I've been having doubts about my case on him. I come back with renewed confidence after being reminded of precisely why I find his actions scummy. I'm afraid that due to the length of time my points may have gotten lost, so for everyone's benefit I'll recap.

Starting from the point where he makes post 31, he has thus acted when I confronted him (in chronological order):

• Say that Imaginality didn't
  intend
  post 28 to be a trap, therefore his reaction was not scummy. He explicitly looked for support from Imaginality and quoted post 45 to try to prove this point.
  
• When I stated that Mole agreed with my interpretation of post 31, he avoided it by trying to question whether Mole actually agreed or not. Mole confirms my statement.
  
• He then says that my phrasing (using the word "scumhunt" instead of "cautious play" etc) makes my statement inherently biased.
  
• Then goes into argument about whether post 26 was scum tell or not. I say it is null tell, Untitled believes it is scum tell, thus his post 31 would be justified.
  
• Then he suddenly restates the argument, saying I did not properly say that it was his support of the TPT + Nudude theory which I actually found scummy. I disagree...I've been pretty much arguing that Untitled has worked up post 28, which was specifically addressing TPT + Nudude. There were other players thinking post 24 was scum tell as well, and I never FOS'ed them.
  
• Obviously I was talking about his work up of post 28 which was characterized by the inclusion of Nudude, but Untitled argues otherwise.
  
• Untitled then says, this time actually responding to my actual case, that his support of post 28 was to provoke a response. After all this, I have a REAL difficult time believing this unprovable supposed intention.
  
• He then quickly jumps on TBW wagon.
  
• Does not respond to Nudude's hammer suggestion (Though he wasn't the only one; I'll have to judge this with further reread later).

Yeah, I support Untitled Lynch.

Vote: Untitled

But he's not the only scummy one. Don't think that I support a

quick

Untitled Lynch. I'll most likely try to recap points against Imaginality like I just did with Untitled as well. I want some answers from Nudude, and I'll try to reread him in detail as well.

[darkdude]

Finally, if you want to have a look at me if you like, but I think I did a damn good job of get discussions rolling and building cases on D1. Given this is a timed game, why would I, as scum, WANT to generate conversation, and make efforts to start conversations, and poking people into contributing? It would be better for me to only chip in the occasional thought and generally keep my head down.

WIFOM ALERT.

Sorry, IMHO your posts have deteriorated significantly since the latter part of Day 1. Not sure what this can be attributed to though...

[darkdude]

The part about me is false. I don't remember voting for anyone to jump on a wagon. I do remember, however, voting for people I built a reasonable, well thought out case with, and a few people commented D1 on the quality of my posts. Why are you twisting the facts?

Whoops, missed that part in my previous posts.

You do give some reasons to your vote. No, I do not believe I claimed you just lazily slapped votes around. But you jumped on so many players in the game it seemed your cases were not very well thought out (since you override previous votes with each new turn of vote). It also gives me the impression of scum trying out every possible case. This though, is of course only an impression. Same as my gut feelings against Imaginality.

[darkdude]

You messed with the HTML somehow

Of course I can't be 100% he's scum, and I'm certainly not claiming that I know for a fact.

But you said...

So yeah, I'm certain I've got scum, so naturally I'm going to voice my suspiciouns.

Don't make the same mistake today and lynch the wrong person.

don't let him escape!

I would only say that if I was 100% sure he was scum... because if it's not 100% then one should always be on the lookout for new evidence instead of being hellbent on making "you're scum" statements.

And by the way, by "100% sure" I don't mean that there is no objective possibility of being wrong. Simply that from the player's perspective, the target must be scum.

And your critique of me yesterday keeping a town list wasn't WIFOM?

What? Of course not! First of all, I did not say that you were scummy because you had a town list. I was simple arguing that town lists don't do much and potentially give scum a way to hide, so we should avoid it. I don't see WIFOM in that.

Say what you like, but no scum player wants the town to have information.

It all depends on the risk/payoff ratio. Certainly I recall to have taken huge risks as scum just to try to win with WIFOM. By your logic, "no scum player wants to bus his partner on Day 1", and "no scum player wants to make any moves that are pro-town". The game of Mafia inherently forces scum to choose between making moves for immediate gain or to help town, or at least appear to, so that they do not get found out and lynched.

As for the source of my information, look up "Stoofer's law" in the wiki.

Oh please...that's not so much as a "law", or even "theory", as a JOKE. I don't see where he came up with evidence for that. Take a look at the other "laws" and you'll find them ridiculous. I wouldn't bother with those theories at all. Even if it was true at some point, you would still need to take into account of the constant universal meta change. Obviously if scum ALWAYS both hop on wagons, they'll switch their behaviour just to keep town guessing. Scum are, and will always remain, unpredictable.

But about your literal statement, if you take into account the actual behaviour of the players in the game, the suggestion itself is not that bad. As you all know, my top suspects are Untitled and Imaginality, so I don't really have any problems with that statement itself. Just the part where you said you had statistical evidence seems like bullshit.

And as I said in my previous posts, I had done a quick reread of Mole's posts at the beginning of Day 2. IMHO so far he has shown the least scum tells. So yes, I do think both scum are on the wagon. But not because of some "Stoofer's Law".

[darkdude]

Okay, our mod has fixed the deadline date.

Deadline is September 17, 8 PM. With 6 alive, 4 will lynch.

[darkdude]

Nudude's first post didn't appear to look like a backpedal to me.
However, I agree that it's not a safe bet that both scum were on the wagon.

What do you think the chances of both scum being on the wagon are? Seems to me like 90%.

Can you list your top suspects?

[darkdude]

Well, it looks pretty much like what I had in my last brief reread of him. Not much significant stuff, and little conclusions can be drawn out of it.

[darkdude]

Untitled definitely raises questions for me too.

Can you specifically list them for me, if you don't mind?

[darkdude]

Nudude's first post didn't appear to look like a backpedal to me.
However, I agree that it's not a safe bet that both scum were on the wagon.

[Regarding Molestargazer]What do you think the chances of both scum being on the wagon are? Seems to me like 90%.

Can you list your top suspects?

Just in case you forgot since it was buried under Megatheory's huge post.

[darkdude]

Well, I can try and answer those.

I honestly haven't given much thought to that idea - perhaps I should have done.
To refresh, on Day 1, there were 7 players, 4 votes needed to lynch.
I would say it's almost certain that there was 1 scum on the wagon to lynch - they would have appeared fairly pro-town in their voting, and they have to get townies out of the way.
2 is possible, but I wouldn't like to go out of my way to say so certainly - to do so could be to ignore a player and ergo let him off the hook.
If you want a percentage.. 75% chance that both scum were on the wagon. I wouldn't like to finger 2 players citing the lynch of TBW as evidence.

Okay, I've got a slight problem with this.

The only players not voting for TBW other than himself were you and I. You say "it's almost certain that there was 1 scum on the wagon", when it is actually 100% confirmed that at least one scum is on the wagon, assuming you considered that you know your own alignment (which should be town, as you defend yourself as such). You then say it is about 75% chance that both scum were on the wagon, which means there is a 25% of me or yourself being scum. Again assuming no town would think they could possibly be scum, this would mean I am pretty high up on your scum list, with a quarter chance of being scum?

To me this contradicts thinking from town perspective, as you seemed not to have considered yourself to be town.

[darkdude]

To add to my above statement, Mole's estimate implies I have a decent chance of being scum in his eyes, which I have not seen him point out prior to this... so I consider him not to be thinking from a town perspective when he made this estimate, due to the fact that he could have eliminated himself as one possibility.

I'd list my top suspects if I had a list, or indeed if I had any top suspects. I'd like to see the case against Untitled stated in full (As I requested in my last post) before I make any decisions regarding him.

Seems either fence sitting, or genuinely missed my prior post here:

http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 15#1229715

Of course, with that last post, my gut is telling me this is more likely to be the former...

[darkdude]

And yet I didn't try and eliminate myself as a possibility. I tried to think out of this game when I thought about that, and not include any names. All I wanted to do was provide my opinion on the theories, which is all you asked for.

Exactly. Why didn't you immediately eliminate yourself as a possibility? If you had just given a statistical probability percentage based on the numbers, it wouldn't have been an OPINION. I wanted your opinion, not a statistical fact. I wanted to see things from your point of view a bit, and when you don't eliminate yourself, it gives me the impression that being pro-town isn't set in stone within your mind. Of course it could be that you just completely forgot who was on the wagon, but IMHO this mindset is very suspicious.

[darkdude]

I gave my point of view without bias. I didn't even think about this game when I drew up those ideas, nor about any of the players in it - not even myself. I gave a very vague answer, yes, but the question itself cannot be answered in any certain terms, IMO

I don't understand why you did this from an objective, uninformed point of view instead of using the information available to you. Certainly a town player would try to use as much as he knows as possible to find scum.

Could I also ask now why you have a problem with me not eliminating myself, when you yourself previously had a problem with Imaginality labelling himself as town at the end of an analysis? (See below)

This is completely irrelevant. He was giving his thoughts on who he thought was scum. Unless he's a very stupid player, it is given that he will conclude he is town, so there is no need for him to openly stress that point. His analysis of other players was independent and did not require him to assume he was town. In your case however, your alignment makes a significant difference in the chances of scum being on or off the wagon, because only you and I were not voting for TBW. IMHO a town player would have realized to eliminate himself immediately and make appropriate conclusions. I can see how scum would overlook this point though.

[darkdude]

Well, what do you guys all think of my recent case against Mole?

[darkdude]

I think it made some posts addressing it late in Day 1.

[darkdude]

lol "He", not "It". Sorry, typo.

[darkdude]

It would suck if we have to get any more replacements... please don't leave us, guys!

[darkdude]

Damn wtf... Well if he gets replaced I'm certainly not discarding my reads on him so far. So go ahead, Megatheory. I like to see what you think.

[darkdude]

Uh, 6 more days. Skruffs, please do reread ASAP and tell us your top suspects.

Actually, I would like a recap of top suspect from everyone again. I'll start with my own:

Untitled
Imaginality
Formerly Nudude

[darkdude]

Nudude
imaginality
molestargazer (distant third)

Wait, I must have seriously missed some posts because I don't recall you voicing the opinion that Nudude was your top scum pick.

I'm pretty busy right now so I would appreciate it if anyone could list any posts where this was mentioned.

[darkdude]

Hm okay, that's basically what I've been suspicious of him for. But I wonder why you just shared that opinion when Nudude got replaced.

[darkdude]

@ Skruffs

He did a analysis because we wanted to get more read on him.

And no one ever said Nudude was suspicious for the hammer - but rather how he went about doing it.

If you read the last few part of Day 1, he wanted to place a hammer which he himself did not support a week (iirc) before the actual deadline. Then when TBW flipped town he immediately did a "whining post" and attacked Untitled. I think that's why he's suspicious to us right now, but because he did the hammering.

[darkdude]

lol reading through, I caught a typo by myself.

If you read the last few part of Day 1, he wanted to place a hammer which he himself did not support a week (iirc) before the actual deadline. Then when TBW flipped town he immediately did a "whining post" and attacked Untitled. I think that's why he's suspicious to us right now, but

[INSERT "NOT"]

because he did the hammering.

Anyways, yes, I do think Untitled is scummy enough for today's lynch. Nudude only started being scummy later in Day 1, and I think there's less of a of Untitled being scum, who I have suspected since way earlier, and continued to show scumminess by arguing the TPT case. Only since Day 2 had he not posted much that I would consider scummy, but I think his post rate dropped in general, and he did not seem to have a reply to my summary of the case against him.

Here it is for everyone's convenience:
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 15#1229715

[darkdude]

Dammit wth is wrong with me. I'm typing the exact opposite of what I mean these days!!! Quick drag-and-drop editing makes a fool out of me!

Nudude only started being scummy later in Day 1, and I think there's less of a

[INSERT "chance of him being scum than"]

of Untitled being scum, who I have suspected since way earlier, and continued to show scumminess by arguing the TPT case.

In case anyone was confused, I think Untitled is more likely to be scum than Nudude. And Imaginality is correct - two days won't do much on Nudude's case, and we'll end up with a shaky vote pattern to work with if we lynch him.

[darkdude]

Uh...shouldn't we be ready to hammer someone soon? I didn't see anything in the rules about extending deadlines, so I think Shy's being serious about this one. We MUST have a lynch before deadline, or seriously throw game to the scum.

[darkdude]

Skruffs, Unvoting needs a colon as well as voting.

Uh...at this point I'm gonna say it's unfortunately in our best interests to hammer Untitled right now. His case was one we have most info on, and I don't think there's any other case that will yield more results now, with the deadline tomorrow. Imaginality, the former Nudude, and myself were committed to our votes, so at the very least it would shed some light on us if we mislynch.

Conclusion: Untitled is best lynch today. Don't give scum advantage pointlessly by not lynching before the deadline.

[darkdude]

Wait, quick question.

Untitled, will you hammer yourself if it seems very likely that no one will vote in time?

[darkdude]

Vote: Imaginality

[darkdude]

Hm. I apologize for ending the game early. Here's the reasoning I made the move:

- First of all, there is a 50% chance even if I had no other good reason
- I always had gut feeling against Imaginality, and I thought he was most likely to be scum
- I thought I could keep an eye on the thread frequently and pull back the vote if someone tries to hammer
- If no hammer attempt is made, it would add proof to my suspicion of Imaginality to other town players

With this, in my mind it had at least 50% of hitting scum and less than 50% of mislynching town (since there was some chance of me retracting the vote if a scum player tries to lynch him off). I really thought we had not much of a better chance even if we end up debating for the rest of the day. I wanted to try this gambit as soon as day starts as to not seem like frustrated scum later in the day (which would probably backfire and have me lynched), or be influenced by later wagons.

Now, I see Mole's vote and Megatheory's were only off by a minute in timing. Were you guys lucky, or did you set up a time to hammer?

I was under the impression that scum could not communicate with each other during the day, though now that I flip back to the rules I can't seem to find this.... I only tried this gambit because I thought it was difficult for scum to organize a time to hammer (with everyone in different timezones and all that).

---
In hindsight, it seems like I was destroyed by tunnel vision again. But I think also that my first "case", against Greasy Spot's not-so-random retaliation vote, could have had made a difference if he didn't get replaced and force me to try to reread the new behaviour of Megatheory. And even now, I think Untitled's post #31 was scummy, and his continuous push for the TPT case. It was always clear to me that TPT would most likely be town (though I did not say that in public and instead called it null tell).

About Imaginality, I just basically had all my gut against him for some reason, and lately I've been trying to see the results of my gut feelings since in some instances it had proved to be accurate. I did realize at the end of Day 2 that I didn't have much read on Megatheory or Mole because they didn't really pursue any points strongly. Yet I was not ready to consider this scummy; I thought it was a case of playing style.

---
Interestingly, I have been inspired by Shy and used this setup sometimes in my face-to-face games with friends. It seems that either the scum do pretty well and win the first LyLo or they make some mistake that totally gets the town on their asses within the first 3 Days (I haven't seen it go into Day 4 yet). Not sure if this was an example of the former though.

[darkdude]

I thought the main suspicions of me centred around me being scumbuddies with Untitled

Nah, it's just that I have such a wild imagination (no pun intended) that once I have some suspicion (how you used post 28) that it grows on my mind. I knew I had this tunnel vision problem, but I didn't trust anything else either.

Like I said, I had some bells going off when Megatheory did that "analysis" on Mole and quoted more than he wrote. But I didn't bring myself to consider it alignment-relevant. So maybe I'll take that seriously in my future games. I think I'm okay at analyzing a game, but not experienced enough to see meaning in any of it.

I also considered taking Untitled's advice and voting for Mole instead. But in this game I wrongly trusted my own judgment more. Maybe next time if I'm not so sure I'll try doing what dead townies have said instead.

[darkdude]

Well there you go. My failure to note that ended the game. "Assumptions make an ass out of you and me".

[darkdude]

I think on Day 2 Nudude's play really messed town up. It provided a big distraction and wasted a lot of time.

Also in hindsight, it seems I was correct there was something fishy about Megatheory putting Nudude in his top scum spot after he flaked out.

Okay, so next game I'm gonna go after the pseudo-contributors and the fence sitting players more.