Mafia 1114: Jim's Mafia - Game OVER!!!!

[DavidParker]

This has to be the most quintessential RVS I've seen in a while.

Vote: Oso

[Insert generic RVS reason here]

[DavidParker]

I will take this opportunity to emphasize two facets of our ruleset:

1.)

We are on a 14-day deadline on Day One, and a 10-day deadline for every other Day; and

2.)

There is no reduced majority rule, which means we must reach a majority in order to achieve a lynch each Day.

With that in mind, I do not think we should take kindly to lurking. We cannot afford to dawdle.

Vote: magnus_orion

. One scum down.

Cool. This is my favorite post so far. These are quick deadlines so let's be proactive in getting organized wagons/claims/lynches done. Javert wins town points for highlighting this fact.

1) What is everybody's timezone? Right now live in US central for the next 3-4 days, then I fly back to Australian time zones.
2) What is your mafia experience here and elsewhere? Moderate experience. Some 15ish games offsite as joke/fun games. Some 15 games here.
3) About how often can we expect you to post? Is this consistent with your meta? Umm, I'll have splurges of activity and lulls in activity when I get swamped with work or because I'm travelling. You can probably tell by my activity where I'm at any given moment.



I'm disappointed by players reactions to Javert's antics. They are searching for reactions and you guys are giving them - bad ones.

He is moving us out of RVS even if it's by drawing negative attention to himself. Now get your votes off him.

I'll be looking at the various reactions to Javert to see which is most scummy.

[DavidParker]

Why are our 2 recent posters answering useless questions, but ignoring relevent discussion (the current wagon)??

Unvote, Vote: RobCapone

[DavidParker]

I like to think I can.

I just re-read Mute's last post and in the context of the situation (Javert's wagon), he comes off very scummy. He's constantly trying to validate his position on the wagon, refers to the others on the wagon as well (ie: so that any attacks on the wagon aren't at him, they are just as much on the others on the wagon, so if the wagon fails or the logic to the wagon isn't sound, he's pinning the others as well), the way he mentioned them just didn't come off right in a town-like manner.

Also, using the rules/win-con to justify a vote is.. meh. You state he deserves your vote for playing against a town win-con, but you actually believe him to be scum?? At this point I sure as hell don't believe Javert to be scum. That's obviously subject to change, scum have motive to draw negative attention to themselves to help end RVS (ie: win town cred by appearing reckless), so the whole thing to me is really a WIFOM-filled Null-tell. Javert doesn't seem super-town but he is helping the town with his play. So, yeah, you said your vote is justified because of if he is following rules, his play must be scum because he's playing against win-con etc etc, but really you don't state how or why you think he is scum.

And before we go any further.

WE WILL NOT BE POLICY LYNCHING

. Nor do we want to be discussing anything to do with policy lynches, the discussion itself is a huge distraction. Right now we should be focusing on Mute being a twitchy little scum who jumped on an easy wagon, and is just trying to cover his tracks. Then we have lurker/fence-sitter scum RobCapone who we should be focusing on after he ignored everything that has happened except for the useless question stage of the game.

P.s. I know manutdforever also ignored the happenings of this game, but he is by far the less experienced player and has almost no mafiascum experience. I still find it scummy he ignored the Javert wagon but less condemning. Rob, on the other hand, there is no excuse for as a "seasoned veteran". Also, as a

newbie

he may have just been following the example of the

experienced

poster before him.

So yeah. We are not talking about a policy lynch. We are talking about the Javert wagon. Reactions to it. Lack of reactions to it. And if you think Javert is scum then state why, apart from not playing to a town-win con (hint: blatantly not playing to a town win con is the same as not playing to a scum win con as it makes you a huge lynch target, so the reasoning behind using that to vote javert is.. well non-existent)

FoS: Mute

I'd rather be voting Rob at the moment. His lack of reactions is far worse than Mute's poor reactions and explanations given our short deadlines.


Preview edit: nice to seeee you here Javert

[DavidParker]

Sorry for ruining your little "ploy" but frankly I wasn't that interested in magnus's reaction and don't think it would have been as revealing as you are making it to be. It may have been interesting to see whether he bandwagoned you or not, but I could see him doing that as town or scum. As it stands, it was more important to diffuse the situation and get people off your back.

So yes, Javert's play while not being a town tell in my eyes, was definitely a move that benefited town (YEAH I KNOW CONTRADICTION)

[DavidParker]

Also that first line in my mini-wal was directed at Conspiracy, you snuck in between our posts Javert :/

[DavidParker]

And if you think Javert is scum then state why, apart from not playing to a town-win con (hint: blatantly not playing to a town win con is the same as not playing to a scum win con as it makes you a huge lynch target, so the reasoning behind using that to vote javert is.. well non-existent)

FoS: Mute

[DavidParker]

@magnus: The town were all tunneling on a player because of his refusal to answer questions and be apart of the town. He was not playing as "apart" of the town, so he got wagoned. That's somewhat understandable. However, it was an undesirable situation, because I clearly saw the intent behind Javert's play, and while I didn't think it was necessarily respective of him being town, it was definitely not worth labeling him scum over. They were "valid" points, but they just weren't thought out points. They didn't look into the intent behind Javert's play, and while it was what some would consider bad play (hey a policy lynch was even mentioned so it must have been bad play), it definitely helped move the game forward. The intent behind Javert's actions was town-like, the means was scum-like, as said, I see it as a null tell, but it is a step forward for town in finding scum. To me, "diffusing the situation" was a matter of focusing the town on actual scum hunting, I mean someone was more than welcome to show how what Javert did was more likely scum than town, but no one actually did that. (And no one seems intent to do it now with all the unvotes, although I can understand why Oso wants to keep his vote where it is and I'm fine with that), in fact it's probably more likely that the people unvoting and backpeddling now somewhat are scum.

[DavidParker]

Questions:
1. Do you think that scum could have (or may have) potentially take advantage of this wagoning to join the wagon?
2. Why is 3 votes "The town were all tunneling"?
3. By diffusing the arguments against a player that might have otherwise turned interesting results, do you feel that you may have wasted some opportunity to read that person?
4. How, exactly, have you focused the town on "actual" scumhunting?
4a. Is this (Focusing the town on actual scumhunting) a necessary/helpful thing to do? Why?
5. What exactly is "actual" scumhunting?
5a. Does wagoning a player for reactions qualify as "actual" scumhunting?
6. What is your read on Javert right now?

Feel free to answer in any format or order. Just please answer all of them.

You are annoying.

1) Uh, duh.
2) By town, I am just referring to the general public in this game, not referring to town-aligned players tunneling on him. Everyone was just hunting him after the incident.
3) No
4) These questions are getting more and more generic and annoying. I've been highlighting what's actually relevent, putting things in context, deterring discussion about MD (ie: policy lynching etc), and focusing on players reactions and intent in their post, just general analysis.
5) ...
6) No strong read as town or scum right now. Until I can see the bigger picture it's hard to say, but he's not the lynch for today.

Those questions were retarded. Can you please refrain from such broad questions which really just annoy me. I mean I did only spend a whole 30 seconds responding and didn't even try put any thought into my answers, but really that's just killing my desire to post more in this game and be more active. I'd rather you call me scum and attack me for something than this kind of nonsense.

[DavidParker]

Much better.

[DavidParker]

My "concern" was because the 3 people voting him were for all the wrong reasons. They were completely oblivious to Javert's intentions. They were not going to pressure Javert at all.. Javert knew fully well he would attract negative attention, whether he's town or scum he was going to be attacked for what he did, we weren't going to learn much because the pressure on him was always going to be negated by him simply pointing out the obvious - he was just reaction fishing. The situation wasn't that 3 people were voting for a null read of mine, it's that they were voting for him for all the wrong reasons. They were going after an easy wagon on someone who was in reality helping the game progress.

People in this game seem to overvalue "reaction fishing" as a scum tell. You don't learn much from player reactions if they know what attacks are coming there way. It's only really when you catch them off guard, or they miss something altogether that it can become useful. All I did was make the response Javert was going to make himself in the situation. There was more important issues to go after, the 2 lurker-posts who answered pointless questions but didn't comment at all on Javert's wagons.. I mean that was just downright scummy and by far the scummiest thing in the game so far when it happened. I felt it was beneficial for town to divert the attention away from Javert's wagons and focus on the intent behind Javert's action which was to move the game forward, I was merely pointing us in that forwardly direction.

Questions are useful in some forms, ie: when making accusations. In general I hate questions I'd rather the game ran more as a debate, but I do generally answer questions (okay that's not entirely true if you know anything of my meta, but this game I will make it true).. But I will post my dislike for any, what I perceive as, pointless questions.

You seem to also overestimate the ability of town players to discover and figure out player alignments in the first few pages. You're quite right in that I'm not entirely focused on figuring out player alignments on a constant basis, I'm seeing how players react to each other, looking into their intentions, and looking at the game as a whole. With only 1.5-2 pages of actual discussion, I find it hard to believe that anyone feels strongly that they know who is scum and town at this point. I have 2ish moderately-weak scum reads and 1 strong town read, and 2ish weak town reads. But really, my posts are intended to get as much information that can be useful in discovering scum just not a post by post basis which a lot of people seem to do.

[DavidParker]

Sigh, wall territory has been entered...

1. so what was the purpose of asking AND voting, do you feel they need to be together? You can't just ask and wait for my response? you can't vote and just give that as your reason?

2. What makes that wagon relevant when it isn't even a wagon yet, I don't consider it a bandwagon until more than half of the required number to lynch have voted(example if it takes 7 to lynch it doesn't become a bandwagon to me until there are 4 votes)

1. That is just how I word my posts. I use sarcasm and make subtle jabs at people. This will come up later in your big wall post. In general the way I post isn't straight-forward and analytical, not everything is meant to be taken word for word. (I'm actually a writer, so that's partly why I hate purely informative prose). I could easily have voted and given that as my reason.. What difference does it make to you whether I ask it as a question and vote or just state it and vote, or ask it as a question and not vote. Either way it was pressuring you to post and me clearly stating that I disapprove of your post and found it scummy. The three all accomplish the same thing. You'll notice the question wasn't even directed at you. So yeah, I can do any of those things you stated, sure, but I didn't. That's my playstyle.
2. It was the most relevent discussion at the time. It was the focus of the most recent posts and it was definitely a wagon being formed. Whether it had 1 vote or 4 votes on it, it was far more useful to have been discussing that, than some silly questions at the time of your post. It's not the size of the wagon that I was referring to but more about how the first case on a player had kicked off and the people posting who were on at that time should have been focusing on it unless they had something better (which hey, there was just a page of RVS and a few silly questions, so i doubt they did)


/Sidetrack.

@Javert: I think that post(#47), on a standalone basis, is probably the scummiest post so far and is definitely not well thought out and is very scummy. As a whole given the way your wagon occurred and Ice's positioning on it I'd say he is likely scum and would be in my top few picks for a lynch today at this point of the game. However, his response to accusations has been somewhat formidable, although it's much easier to respond to accusations regarding a scummy post than it is to avoid making scumlike-slips in posts.

@Oso: No fair

That game was a one-off terrible game of mine that I was never even caught up with or tried to keep up with! I wouldn't crack again. (And you don't seem to be talking to me at all, what's going on!)

@Manut:

Now, a lot of people will think I am lurking, but I am not. If I have nothing to say, i won't say anything. I am still inexperienced, so i am not great at knowing what to make of other's posts.

My best way of finding scum is finding the bandwagoners. I don't like bandwagons. I find if someone is constantly jumping on a bandwagon, I take extreme suspicion of him/her.

You might want to try other ways of finding scum. Use your gut and intuition, but bandwagoning alone won't get your far. Sometimes a wagon is the right place to be. (Kinda like this Ice wagon is tempting me right now)

@magnus: I probably do underestimate some tells, it's probably largely based on how I play, and how I react to certain things (ie: people voting me and attacking certain aspects of my playstyle), generally it's me in Javert's position creating negative attention towards myself to help create discussion. (ie: http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=15318) Anyways, point is, when I've been caught out it's not because of some "pressure wagon" getting to me, it's because I've been lazy keeping up and taken shortcuts or because as a whole players have analyzed my intent throughout the game.

@Ice: Your post #70 does not come off too well either. Firstly, you are preparing yourself to vote for me should a wagon kick off there by reluctantly saying I looked town but relooking you're not sure. That alone wasn't that scummy, but combined with your attempt to turn all the attention to people who aren't posting at this point (scum are in the shadows, we dont have reads on lots of players, etc) seems scummy. There is a slight problem with a few people not posting, but all you've done is say "hey some people aren't posting and we have no reads are them, and scum are probably in the shadows" (trying to make us connect the dots and go after these people), why don't you do something about those lurkers? That's what I was doing with my vote on Rob...

Btw,

Unvote

. I'm not happy but I'm not unhappy with your input.

@Humble: Nothing to say about/to you except you may as well change my timezone to GMT+8 since I fly out tomorrow night.

ALRIGHT! Back to responding:

@Rob: Calling you "lurker/fence sitter scum" was hyperbole and not something I even myself believed to be entirely true. (but hey it could be). This brings me back to my earlier point, there was some sarcasm or at least

jest

intended with that unfair labeling of yourself. Just like I did the same and labeled Mute as something similar, overly-cautious,twitchy scum or something.

Oh, I know he's a big boy and can defend himself. But sometimes hearing defences from other people can help players. It's helped me in the past. I was tunneling on someone pretty hard and any defense they said I just read as having scum intent and refused to see any town motivation to their play. It was only when another player stood up and defended them that I felt this player was in fact quite possibly town. And yeah, I did sink his ship somewhat, I'd rather let people know how clever I was for figuring it out than let it play it's course though. I do have an ego :/

- so 3 people are "the town"?

At that point in the game, more or less, yes. They were the 3 people actively posting and pretty much EVERYONE following Javert's random vote was wagoning onto Javert. So within the context of that post, yes, the town were tunneling on Javert. When taken out of context like you just did, well no 3 people is not the town. While I go read up on what fence-sitting is in terms of mafiascum meta, how about you go learn the importance of context.

but what if some people actually thought J was scum and they were scum hunting, also since you diffused the point of J's plot you have basically made that entire thing wortless and actually TAKEN AWAY from scum hunting.

They were going after Javert for what was a null-tell more or less. I am under the impression that wagons such as that one are more of a distraction to town, and is a common place where town end up going wrong on day 1, so I tried to divert attention else where. Those people have their right to think Javert is scum and go after him, but I merely didn't feel their pressure was going to be very fruitful.

DP, the wagon on him WAS helping the game progress, his vote declaration I don't think was never going to take off because once somebody declares something as fact especially this early on, that person is going to be suspect. If he was trying to get a wagon on himself going, than he succeeded and you just eliminated everything good that could have come out of it.

Oh sure, it was helping the game progress, but stopping the wagon helped just as much etc etc. You can claim anything that creates discussion and controversy as helping the game progress. That's why I didn't feel bad about derailing his wagon. And you know fully well that I didn't "eliminate everything good that could have come out of it".


*holds breath and hits submit*

Also, I hate these huge wall posts. They don't exactly accomplish huge amounts in my eyes either, but the alternative is being labeled as scum for ignoring peoples questions/attacks. So let's all stop yeah?

[DavidParker]

Sorry Prox... As said at the bottom, the alternative is being attacked for avoiding questions and accusations.. I hate wall posts.

TL;DR Sparknotes Style:

• Javert claims someone is 100% scum.
  
  Oso/Ice/Mute are around and push his wagon because of this.
  
  I come in and derail the wagon stating how Javert's post isn't a strong tell since it was getting the game out of RVS, and there is as much town motivation for it as there is scum motivation, and that their reason for voting Javert shouldn't be because of that post alone, but any reactions to subsequent posts.
  
  I vote Rob because he answers some silly timezone questions but ignores the game-relevent discussion
  
  Conspiracy starts (or tries to) the Mute wagon while Javert thinks ICE is scummier (both are wagons in reaction to Javert's wagon)
  
  Magnus starts my wagon based on my contradicting myself and overreacting and what not. Rob posts similar thoughts that I am scummy and expands on it even further.

In between you have huge wall posts explaining various cases and defending against these cases.


I will do my best to refrain from walls now :/

[DavidParker]

How many votes on ICE do we have?

[DavidParker]

@ConSpiracy, I think magnus already brought that quote up, by town I am referring to the people in the game, not talking about the alignment of the players going after him (yes it's confusing the way i worded it), Everyone who was actively posting around the time of javert's vote went after javert, hence the tunneling on him by "town", well by the players in this game. I was not referring to my thoughts on the alignments of any of the players on the wagon.

@magnus: I think I've stated I find him quite scummy as he doesn't seem to defend himself very well and I feel the case on him is very solid. He would be in the top few I would like to see lynched today. I'm still reserving to post some of my other scum suspects at this point while I gather my thoughts.

[DavidParker]

I haven't seen a vote count in a while and my ability to count after 2-3 hours of sleep is questionable.

@mod:

prettttttty please?

[DavidParker]

This game feels like it's actually on page 10 .. :O

[DavidParker]

I'd just like to post my agreement with Rob that 3-4 days before deadline if the activity and content of some of the players in this game doesn't pick up I will fully support a lynch of one of these players. It makes the game more enjoyable and.. is just more helpful if everyone is actively posting their opinions (as wrong as some people mind find those opinions to be).

Yes, I know I don't support policy lynches, but 3-4 days before deadline, lynching someone for not posting any content is not what I consider a policy lynch, but a player being anti-town and lurking, which is definitely a scum tell in current meta.

[DavidParker]

By the way, despite hating lurkers, I do like what Prox has posted in general, he has been straight-up and hasn't pretended that he will "catch up soon" or post some semi-fake-content which I would see as more likely to come from scum who don't have the time to keep up with all the wall posts we are posting. Also, I love Catcher in the Rye, so that reference wins mega town points.

[DavidParker]

cool you quoted all the RVS votes?!???

@Ice: I think prox's lurking to be more genuine business to some extent, and not having the oppurtunity to get fully involved yet. Jerbs I think is quite possibly a scum lurker. But I think if you flip scum, it'll just show he was hopping on your wagon in an attempt to win town points by bussing.

[DavidParker]

Again - what is the point of this?

If you think lurkers are scummy, you are just warning them not to lurk?

If you don't think lurkers are scummy, why the hell are you even contemplating lynching them?

I think lurking is scummy. However town also lurk, there is explanation for townies lurking, either disinterest or real life keeping them busy. Yes it is warning players not to lurk, if they can't handle the game they should not have signed or should replace out and send flowers to the mod as an apology for signing and then flaking. Assuming players signed to play the game and be involved in finding scum, lurking then becomes a scum tell. I see no point wagoning lurkers during the early stages of a day, it's much more beneficial to go after the information/reaction wagons such as Javerts/Ice's/Mute's/Mine where you will get accusation/defense/etc and just get more information on the table. Voting someone for not being caught up with the game isn't valuable until it actually gets to the point where we are about to lynch someone to end the day.

don't like the fact that he has defended Javert for his attempt at reaction fishing while completely negating the whole exercise. While I feel that yes Javert put the attention on himself, how can ANYONE think he was pro-town enough to be defended like DP was doing. The fact that he completely ruined the gambit to me means that he was doing 2 things.

1. defending Javert because DP thinks (or maybe knows) he is town
2. taking the attention off magnus

My defending of Javert in its purest sense was me realizing what Javert was doing and just wanting to post what came to my head. I post my thought process as it comes and there isn't a huge amount of filtering (when I'm town at least), and in general just react to posts and comment on them in the spur of the moment and post. I saw a bunch of silliness, and 3 people falling for this silliness, so having figured out what was going on I wanted to point out what was going on.

Also this link to magnus you are making with me is a HUGE stretch and how you can possibly fathom such a scum pairing on day 1 without a single flip is beyond me.

David's reaction to magnus's questions is proof that he isn't taking the game serious OR magnus seriously. If I asked somebody questions and they called me annoying, I'd be on his ass even harder, especially if he gives half-assed answers (and yes I have meta to support this statement)

I was annoyed because it seemed he was just asking questions for the sake of asking questions. It's the whole stop and think what you are trying to accomplish with his post. I mean what did he expect me to answer? He posted 6 questions, half of which I could have written several-thousand-word-essays to respond with. He didn't specify anything with the quesitons, just left open-ended broad questions. Would you rather I have written those thousand word essays as a response to show how serious I am about this game? I don't think anyone wants that. I opted for one liners instead.


@Rob: By all means, I was curious as to Ice's wagon. I felt and still do feel it is a legitimately scummy wagon to some extent and was thinking of putting my vote on him, I don't need to hide that. You don't see any case from Parker about ICE because I haven't made one, the case has been made, when the case was first made I found Mute scummier than Ice based on the cases alone, based on the player reactions to the 2 wagons I found ICE somewhat scummier than Mute at times. He has made some comments which just don't rub off as town responses, but other posts such as his 124 do seem like town responses.


I do agree with ICE that there is no reason for a claim at this point. We don't really want a claim until it is likely a hammer has occurred (Ideally a player has posted their intent to hammer, then the player claims, and move on from there).

Also, Oso is now the second person in this game to say he is certain a player is scum. Care to link me to that game where he was town and you were scum?

Mr. I am against PL is now agreeing with me that he would be up for a PL on lurkers

Lurking is scummy(admittedly not in all forms), since when was lynching someone for being scummy a policy lynch?

i can't speculate but if Ice does get lynched and he flips town, this is just going to solidify in my mind he is scum trying to defend Ice for points.

This I agree with entirely seeing as he does fail to give justification for ICE being town.

[DavidParker]

I do not advocate a "lynch all lurker" policy. I will not policy lynch for the sake of policy lynching someone. There are times when given the context of how a day went I strongly feel the optimal lynch at the end of the day is on a player who has lurked for most of the day.

@Edgerobin: as far as I remember I already responded to his case on me, so by all means go ahead and say what you want about it. At least I think I responded unless I have a saved post somewhere. I"m tired having just got off a 16hr flight. In dubai airport now.

I just remember Rob's case being a huge stretch. Especially the part where he tried to claim I was scum buddies with magnus. And Javert more or less reiterated and rehashed a lot of my response to the rest of his case which was based around how I derailed Javert's "reaction fishing plan". Apparently it's scummy because I didn't go along with it and let it unfold. I'd rather post my honest perceptions of the game and my current opinions than go along with a bunch of silliness.

[DavidParker]

How can a player who has no votes or pressure on him flail??

The last thing you comment on isn't all that weird or uncommon. Scum would rather avoid a wagon if they can. So maybe you've made yourself too easy/scummy a target and scum are just watching the wagon kick off. Or they could be taking advantage of your poor response. There is motive for both.

(OR YOU COULD BE SCUM CAUGHT!)

[DavidParker]

I wasn't taking it out of context, more so just hoping you'd say what you meant which you did. I just don't ask direct questions

[DavidParker]

Vote: ICEninja

I was asking about the size of the ICE wagon because I was deciding whether or not to join it.

In fact, After some of Ice's previous posts I was going to post how I felt he had some town-like reactions, ie: #170 (http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 9#p2742679), which struck me as genuine town.

I was caught completely off guard when he just claimed scum in that manner to be honest.

I can see why this game would destroy your mafia "spirit", I just skimmed over Humble_Poirtot's wall without even reading any of it really, just browsing to see if there was an "@DavidParker" anywhere in there (there wasn't as far as I could see), and have no intention of really doing more than a skim read later when I'm less tired from travelling. (Just ended 40hours of travelling from US to Australia). But really walls that big don't do much to help the town. People really need to try stick to being concise or people like Jerb/Prox etc will just be even less inclined to become involved and catch up.

[DavidParker]

Too town to be town is a huge fallacy that fails on so many levels Mute.

It's kind of like the "too scummy to be scum" argument. That if someone is so blatantly scummy they can't be scum because scum wouldn't act like that.

I mean there's some merit in the second argument, but the first one holds no merit in a case you are making against a player for them being scum. Appearing too town is NOT a scum tell in the slightest... You saw Ice crack?? He never cracked until that last post.. I dunno what you're talking about Mute, but if what Ice is referring to is true with the 2 scum teams, then you do look very suspicious as he stated for the other scum team.

[DavidParker]

Oh yeah, I'm well aware its not necessarily true.

[DavidParker]

ICE, you do realize people are reluctant enough to believe townies who get lynched.. Why would we listen to scum who get lynched? Why are you "trying to help town" hunt the other scum faction? Nothing you say we are going to really believe for the most part until we've seen game info that supports it. And your scum reads are the last thing we will listen to.. ANything you are currently doing is only to help your scum buddy. So you will be ignored.

Poirot, like Edger, seemed to have a legit case against me

So which of these is your scum buddy who bussed?

[DavidParker]

Haha, I'm going to assume scum killed him for that huge wall post of his. [/sarcasm]

We've no reason to believe there is two scum factions at this point, but I don't see why ICE would claim there is two, if there was only going to be one night kill. Yadee yah, pointless speculation etc etc.

Vote: RobCapone

[DavidParker]

I was going to?

[DavidParker]

Feel free to check my wiki for a list of my games, there's 3-4 scum ones.

[DavidParker]

@Oso: That post is just my opinion on the topic of lurking, and lynching people who lurk. There are situations where a lurker lynch on day 1 is optimal. That's all I was pointing out, my person beliefs, it's really more MD, so I'm not sure why you are voting me over a MD topic rather than actual game-related content. The timing of it was just because it had been brought up by Rob, suddenly suggesting a lurker lynch with 3-4 days left to deadline wasn't going to be a popular option, so I decided to bring it up sooner, that given the circumstances, it could be an optimal day 1 lynch.

Moving on.

DP did say he found ice scummy, he said he found mute scummy too but he never really says why, he admits he doesn't make a case because others have already (this is sheeping and refusal to make your own case IS a scum tell)

Refusal to make your own case is a scum tell?????? What world do you play mafia in??? Agreeing with a case and wagoning is not a scum-tell. Townies have to bandwagon just like scum bandwagon. Agreeing with a case is a scum tell??? You are just trying to make me look scummy with these ridiculous claims. In general, constant sheeping and town-following is bad play and a scum tell, but that's not what I've done at all. Your statement is just entirely wrong here. Refusal to make a case is not a scum tell. Bandwagoning in itself is not a scum tell. If others have made a case I agree with it is quite likely I will join that wagon. It's rather simple.. That's mafia basics.

As Ice's wagon gets bigger DP finds him more scummy

Error. As people posted a case on Ice, I found him more scummy.

I find it funny how you are claiming I am the "best lynch candidate" when your post is full of manipulative statements (such as this one saying I'm the best lynch candidate) and huge parts of your argument on me are just silly (Claiming bandwagoning = scum tell, misrepping me finding Ice more scummy as the wagon grew and coming to generalizations like these without actually backing it up)

You're right, I haven't posted a case on you, but essentially it is an OMGUS, because your case on me sucks. You are attacking me for a bunch of nonsense. My initial vote on you for actively lurking (ie: responding to questions, but not to Javert's play) was a stronger case than anything you have presented. I still don't believe that you were too busy at the time to even comment on it. You then proceed to tunnel on me for large parts of the day and make lol-worthy comments claiming that I am scum-buddies with magnus, who had started the case on me, and I had just got annoyed at. I mean you just seemed to want to avoid the obvious conclusions (ie: occam's razor), and come to some conclusion that some absurd connection exists and by pointing it out you are seeming more pro town.

At this point, I am fairly sure you are scum.

[DavidParker]

Agreeing with a good case (on someone who then flips scum) is now a scum tell??? I posted my input and reads and kept some to myself, as others did. I rethought my own reads as a result of other people's cases and found these players scummy. You seem to be trying to imply I've just town-followed the whole game... I agreed with a town case, and you are trying to sum up my entire play with this one act. You could say the same thing about countless people in this game.

[DavidParker]

Btw, @Edge: Your vote(?) on Rob had fail tags. Also it didn't include "Vote: ". (if it was indeed intended to be a vote)

My day opening post on Rob is not solely for active lurking. That's something I can't really

prove

, but just the impression I got. He could have easily commented on Javert at the time of his post, but chose to just answer Random Questions. Maybe that's all he had time to do, but I don't find it all that likely.

I think at the core of my vote on Rob, is that I don't see a very town-like case on me. Your case on me yesterday, while I know it to be wrong, didn't bother me because I could see how you got to your conclusion and I saw a train-of-thought that seemed to have town-like intentions attached to it. That was my interpretation of it. I don't see the same from Rob, from suggesting we are scum buddies, to just making a huge case on me for derailing a "reaction-fishing-ploy", he has just seemed to try to go for the absurd, almost as a way of seeming more pro-town, by posting these

original cases

and being involved in some

quality scum-hunting

, when really his cases just don't make sense coming from a town-aligned player with his experience.

[DavidParker]

That's why I put DP highest on my list because if there is a relationship it is between DP and someone else. Now I'm not saying I am 100% completely sure but based on my reads I'm fine with a DP lynch, knowing that if he flips town I'm going to be in a heap of trouble but it's a risk I'm willing to take cause that is how sure I am. Javert was so sure yesterday about Ice, that is how I feel about DP.

Oh since Javert was as sure as you are now and Javert was clearly right, clearly people should go on this feeling (Sadly, black eyed peas came into my head at this point) of yours because you tell us it's as clear to you I'm scum as it was to Javert that Ice was scum. Clearly.

[DavidParker]

It sounds like even you don't believe your case on me...

[DavidParker]

Oh yeah, I have no intent in more back and forths with you, as it's not me you should be even trying to convince, it's the others you have to convince I'm scum. I'm not entirely sold on your case, but at this point it is the most appealing, the absence of a few players at this point is troubling though, as one of them I find highly suspicious.

[DavidParker]

I don't think you are right in concluding what you have concluded. It is too soon to tell. Similarly, there is no need to even discuss the possibility of a second mafia group. If there is one, they lost out for not night-killing last night (if that's what they chose).

[DavidParker]

Interesting claim, that was the first thing which popped into my head, if you block a town player (even a VT), do all town PRs get blocked... I don't know how you didn't think of it?

Not to mention, the nightkill was done by Ice's partner(s), as it was done with a knife we can somewhat-safely assume, so seeing as you case on me is all about linking me to Ice, I'm going to assume you didn't block me last night. As far as your post on me, there's a huge amount of misrep that I'll address:

First, at the point when I unvoted Rob, you claim town-David would have been voting for Ice. I made it clear I found both Ice and Mute scummy, I was holding off deciding which to vote for, as cases were being made on them. You constantly state I should put my vote on Ice, when you'd notice at one point I even said I find Mute scummier than Ice at least initially I did, but I didn't put my vote on him either.

I was desperate to get pressure of my partner?? I'd love a single quote that shows this in the entire thread, because that's just a huge misrep. I was asking about the wagon as I was contemplating joining it and I felt he was near L-1, so I wanted others and myself aware of the state of the wagon. I had every intention of quite probably joining the wagon, you are basically saying me asking about the wagon but not joining it = intent to derail it??

Also, I hate to bring up self-meta, but this was brought up by someone in another game against me, funnily enough it might help here; my entire history of playing scum I've almost always bussed the shit out of my partners especially when they've played poorly. Even when they've played perfectly I've still bussed for no good reason. Scum-David definitely would have bussed Scum-Ice in this game, I'm just saying.

Town-David would have voted sooner?? Says who.. Town David was weighing his options as he hadn't had the time to make cases on Ice or Mute, and seeing as other people were doing so, I was happy to use my town power - my vote based on which case I felt was stronger.

[DavidParker]

Well, does Oso plan on revealing his information? It's fairly obvious we have 2 scum groups at this point. So we should be lynching whoever Oso blocked presumably and then if they flip town Oso is more than likely lying.

[DavidParker]

I can definitely see it as a possibility that Edge is scum with someone who is currently on my wagon (Rob or Conspiracy), although Edge has played fairly pro-town up until now, I can't say I have a strong town read on him.

[DavidParker]

I'd rather not go into some big linguistics discussion, but basically, I don't have a strong scum read on Edge or a strong town at this point based on his play so far. But given the information presented by Oso i could see myself voting for his lynch today.

There's obviously 2 mafia groups I can say. Why would scum-Ice even consider telling the town there was 2 mafia groups after claiming scum?? Claiming scum hurt his faction greatly and definitely hurt their chances of winning, he definitely wasn't concerned about his team greatly when he wrote those last 2 posts. There's no reason as to why he came up with some elaborate plot to make town believe there is 2 mafia factions. The fact he would even think that up as a good plan is beyond me (if there is only 1 faction).

So yeah, we are safe in assuming there is 2 mafia factions. I agree we have no proof yet, and as Oso admits to having roleblocked a faction (potentially) last night, that could be a valuable information lynch, unless someone has information pointing to Edge being town.


Why wouldn't one of you two be scum with Edge? There's been fairly significant distancing, and no real arguments that indicate that you are scum vs town or town vs town at any point. At this point, I feel you are town after your most recent point. I felt the same about Edge's post in that it was trying to bring doubt to the Roleblocker claim and make it seem less believable in a way that was somewhat manipulative. I don't find it likely that scum-Conspiracy would bring that up.

At your first point, So I get scum points for trying to potentially push a wagon on someone who is scuM?!?!? Even if there are two factions, how does that win me scum points?!?!?!? Whether I am town or scum(in different group) I would be pushing wagons on people who I found scummy.

[DavidParker]

Also, a prod is needed for manut and more content from Prox.

[DavidParker]

There's two.

What's so hard to understand?

At start of the day when I hadn't fully thought it through and had only seen 1 kill, there was no need to speculate over the number of scum-factions. Given Oso's claim, speculation over the number of scum-factions became relevant again.

Quote 1- I try to avoid speculation since there was no point to it at that point. I do mention that ICE claiming there is two makes no sense from a POV of there being 1 scum faction, but move on from there.
2,3 - Ugh, me saying there is 2 mafia factions?

[DavidParker]

The only scum game I haven't was one I replaced into midway through day 1 in a newbie game. But yeah, I'm well aware of this meta to some extent (well I sometimes forget it, it was brought up in another game, when someone used it to attack me), so I agree it's not a strong defense in itself, but somewhat relevant if you haven't seen my scum-meta (which basically consists of me failing as scum).

[DavidParker]

You guys have goes at my use of words (ie: Rob's triple quote, where I say 3 different things that are slightly different), yet you are the ones constantly using phrases that manipulate what actually happened.

"semi-allegiance with ICE"

ALLEGIANCE??!? Are you kidding? Phrases like that just make me think you are scum, there is plenty of reasons to be voting for me, and I can see why cases have been pushed against me, but using phrases like this that just misrepresent the truth is plain scummy.

FoS: MUTE

[DavidParker]

I think it is awfully soon into the game for Oso to conjure up his claim as scum, it's high risk and not something that can be decided upon easily, so I have a town read on him.

I also see no reason as to why he shouldn't roleblock Edge again tonight, as it "seems" to have prevented a kill last night.

I think lynching who Oso claims to have blocked last night gives us just as much and probably more info than lynching someone we think is partnered with Ice. (And no, I'm not partnered with Ice and trying to save myself). We can confirm there is 2 killing parties, we can confirm Oso's claim, we can make potential connections to both mafia parties. Not to mention, that why are we trying to eliminate one mafia party altogether? You seem to be assuming that their night kills are only capable of hitting town.. There is a good probabilty of them hitting scum. I mean even if we knew 100% who ice's partner was, keeping him alive, turns him into more or less a random-vig who we will later lynch. There's no reason we should be speculating too hard into Ice's scum-buddy when there is no huge gain to lynching his scum buddy over lynching scum of the opposing party. (Once again, i'm not ice's buddy trying to save myself, I honestly believe this, I'd probably be trying to prove my innocence if I was just ice's buddy at this point).

We have role information suggesting Edge is scum, acting upon actual role information gives just as much information as lynching somene based on analysis, and more information into the setup of the game and I see it as more likely to hit scum as well.

@Conspiracy: So you seem to be agreeing on 2 scum parties, then how does a group-roleblock not indicate scum? It doesn't mean it is for sure, but it definitely leads to that conclusion. Scum benefit more from night killing than not night killing. THere was only one night kill; something occurred to prevent a second night kill if there is two scum parties. We have a claim regarding a role that can stop a night kill (and can target one of two players to do so, with 2 scum teams). So yeah, his roleblock is definitely an indication towards scum. And yeah, I agree with Javert you do seem to be trying to deflect attention off Edge.

@Javert,

DavidParker agreed that ICEninja had the “scummiest post of the game” and yet did not vote ICEninja

WHile, I'm not digging up an exact quote to defend myself here, I stated at the time my scum hunting isn't based on post by post basis. I prefer to look at the poster in the "bigger picture". A single post of anyone regardless of alignment can be made to look scummy. And I've seen town players make really scummy posts at times, a personal favorite I've come back to a few times: http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 8#p2635198 . I died in this game and remember following it. I literally facepalmed when I read this post... I couldn't believe what I was reading. Thinking back on it, posts like this made me realize how you can't just look at PBPA. It's not that useful. I previously stated in this thread as well, I don't believe a scummy post is enough to come to the conclusion someone is scum, you have to look at the bigger picture; look at the player's intent (or what you perceive that to be) in posting a certain post.

I do however admit to flip-flopping somewhat with regard to how I viewed Ice's defense. Some of his posts were (like this one I linked) really bad. I found them scummy, others I found genuinely town (ie one of his last ones before claiming scum). I was leaning scum on Ice, but definitely not convinced, I was probably not willing to vote him as of his most recent post before his scum claim.

@magnus: I agree. My play today has been forced onto a "defensive" back foot. I don't have a strong case on anyone at this point or have a strong scum read on anyone. I'm willing to believe Oso's claim and as a result believe that Edge is scum based on role information and setup speculation that I believe to be reliable, but that isn't a personal scum read of my own. I don't actually strongly believe in my own case on Rob at this point.

So,

Unvote

,

You guys is referring to various claims, by Rob/Oso now Mute (maybe yourself at times, I can't remember, and as I'm mid post not going to check now), that I was "planning to derail the Ice wagon"; that's why I was asking how big it was.. Because asking for a vote count and how many votes a player has suddenly became "intent to derail the wagon". Then Mute claims I had a "semi-allegiance" with Ice. This has probably been the worst mis-rep of what surpassed yesterday compared to what was done by Rob and others that I can see as merely being apart of his case, and his interpretation of my play. Ie: he sees me "checking the ice wagon, and thinking of derailing it", while in my eyes I'm just curious as to how large the wagon has become; whether it's worthwhile to join it at this point or whether the wagon is strong enough without me, as I wasn't sure of my read on Ice.. I wanted a vote player on a swingy-player I was undecided upon. That's all it was from my perspective. Other's saw it differently.

However, something bothers me in your post. Oso's power is - apparently - very strong. Why are you trying to control it?

I am more and ore convinced that - if there are two scum parties - one decided to No Kill to discredit ICE's post. After which, seeing that there was a super-RB claim, they realised they could easily build a case on the blocked player.

Why not? There was only one kill last night instead of two, when we are fairly certain there is 2 scum parties. I see no reason as to why town shouldn't voice that they'd like to see Edge roleblocked again tonight as it's quite likely that it prevented a night kill last night.

I do like Edge's post about Javert trying to guide Oso, nobody should bs telling oso how to use his role
[/quote
Once again, repeating myself, while I know Oso is a good player, whats wrong with players voicing their opinions as to how they'd use his role if they were him. I'm sure he can come to his own conclusions, but having some input isn't a bad thing. I definitely encourage him to roleblock Edge again tonight, seeing as there was only 1 night kill last night.

@Javert: If we do lynch knife-mafia today; at which point their scum team should be dead; wouldn't it make more sense to roleblock Edge again preventing any night kills. At which point we can simply lynch Edge to confirm oso's claim. PR Oso will surely die happily with 3 scum and only 2 town dead largely due to his efforts, and town will be in a good position.

If there are indeed two scum groups, getting rid of one of them entirely today if we can, is worth doing irrespective of what my results from last may indicate of a possible member of a second group.

Oh sure, I'd agree to this to some extent, although there is some potential town benefit to having 2 scum groups with 1 player each who may hit each other, but that'd rely on town believing to a high-degree of success that they know who Ice's scum buddy is. With roleinformation/claims that can help us there (there was a knife-kill last night, same of ice's allegieance, so you couldn't have blocked his partner), the only thing we can conclude is Edge is not Ice's scum buddy. I mean, I'm all for your analysis, but especially since I know your connections with me to Ice are entirely wrong, I thoroughly believe Edge is a valuable lynch for today.

@Magnus: I agree with a town-read on Javert, but not your reasoning; Scum can just as easily lay a gambit to gain negative attention, and while they know it may not back off and know a wagon on them will form, they also know that if they survive day 1 they will be in a very strong position as that wagon is harder to push later, with the reasoning that "hey you were scummy on day one for that", when they weren't lynched day 1 for that, so why lynch them on day 4 for it?

Anyways, As I said in response to you, I'd like this to be point-counterpoint based, and I am largely defending, I don't have a huge belief in cases against many of the players who are currently active. If I had to guess, I'd say 1-2 scum are among the lurkers (Prox/manut), and there's scum among Mute/Conspiracy. I believe Edge is likely to flip scum but solely based on Oso's claim. For now, I'm stuck mostly defending myself it seems.


Preview Edit:

I like this post.

Oh so you like a post that discredits 2 very pro-town players at this point. Figures.

When Oso claimed, the first thing popped in my mind that town consists of 2 power roles: Oso's rb and a doc. There are a couple of reasons that would be balanced.

Scum definitely have a lot more insight into potential game setup than town do.. Even if town are right in assuming 2 groups of 2 scum, we have no idea of scum pr's if any. Scum can definitely speculate more into game balance/town PR's.

Eehm, how do you know it will be a shooting mafia?

Obviously he doesn't.. It's a perfectly reasonable assumption it will be a shooting mafia. Oh, and he put it in quotes. I guess you are just flowing on from Rob's post where he brought up that he may potentially not believe that pro-town-Oso and pro-town-Javert are town, so you throw in a quote to make Javert look scummy that isn't even a scummy quote. Figures.

Your last point,

This is stupid. If scum knows Oso would roleblock a townie, they could easily decide not to kill which would give us wrong info. It would give us a lot of WIFOM.

Hint: You just gave us a lot of WIFOM.


I actually wasn't intending on voting and was happy to just defend myself for the time being, but given Con's latest post, I'm quite happy to throw my vote back down.

Vote: ConSpiracy

[DavidParker]

Well then, your scumdar reeks off bad interpretations of scum thinking.

[DavidParker]

1. I'm saying we have role information leading us to very-probable scum. Of course looking for Ice's scum buddy is useful; but considering your entire few games play has consisted of making case after case on a town player (yeah it's different from my perspective) it kind of highlights to me how futile that effort is and how we are probably just better off lynching based on the information revealed through Oso's role.

2. .............. I don't get what it is with this specific game and constant misrep; I basically accuse your post of discrediting 2 confirmed town people?!?!?! No, I basically did not do that at all. No duh they aren't confirmed shit; and your post I was fine with, it's reasonable to bring doubt to them being perceived as town at this point, but Con instantly +1's this idea. There's a different between confirmed town, and having a town read on someone based on their play.

ATE time because I can: I'm definitely going to having a bit of a laugh if I'm lynched today; You spent 2 days pushing my case and only mine and go on about how sure you are I'm scum and everything I post is scum thinking... Oh man. It's not like I haven't tried responding to you either.

[DavidParker]

2. .............. I don't get what it is with this specific game and constant misrep;

I basically accuse your post of discrediting 2 confirmed town people?!?!?! No, I basically did not do that at all.

you ready for you to be busted on your lie?

I said -

the comment you made to CS

, you basically accuse my post of discrediting 2 confirmed town people,

Here is my post and ConSpiracy's response to it

Let's clear one thing magnus,

IF

there seems to be 2 scum groups, which it looks like there is

Javert is not cleared at all.

I'll even add that until we lynch edge and he flips confirm scum, oso technically isn't clear either

I am a skeptic by nature, I'm also ruined by playing at epic mafia, so sadly I beleive it's possible(although extremely doubtful) mafia could have NKd and made up this story

Do I beleive that has happened? No
Do I completely rule out the crazy thought? No

Oso and Javer earn credibility but I'd never say either is "confirmed" town

I do like Edge's post about Javert trying to guide Oso, nobody should bs telling oso how to use his role

It's the same as directing a cop, which isn't acceptable IMO either

I like this post.

and your response to conspiracy was

Oh so you like a post that discredits 2 very pro-town players at this point. Figures.

this my friend is you being busted as blatantly lying

/rest my case

.....

I was referring to your use of "confirmed town". I never stated anyone was confirmed town. You stated that I did.

[DavidParker]

Quick post:

To whoever was asking where "shooting" Mafia came from, and apparently missed my reference to the opening post of the game, I will just quote it with emphasis:

Screams pierced the sky just as the sun rose. All of the villagers rushed out, wanting to see what the noise was. The mayor, Jake Jones, was dead, a

knife sticking from his back!

Laying next to him, his two bodyguards’ bodies lay on the ground, all life gone in a single

bullet through the forehead.

This is definitely the n^th element pointing to a 2-scumteams theory. Since it represents the worst-possible-scenario, it is definitely safe to assume it. I can only say that, since I am not scum, there is a high chance that one of the mafias no-killed to disprove ICE's dying posts, and now, seeing there is a RB, they are trying to frame the target of the RB. Honestly, it is a win-win situation for scum. If they succeed in having me lynched, they will always be able to defend their attack as being very reasonable at this point.

@Rob: I don't understand your observation about Oso not pushing my lynch. Are you disbelieving his claim? As I said, I have no way to confirm or deny that I was blocked, and I trust his claim is true. A mafia faking such a claim (RB with power extended to team-actions) on day2 would be a suicidal move.

On the other hand, the fact that the players who support the hypothesis that the simplest explanation (me being scum) must be right, and suggest lynching me, are acting weird. Why are they not voting me yet? Javert? David? Please, convince me (and everyone else) that you are not scum weighting pro's and con's.

How does this even sit well with people. Why on earth would the second mafia party not kill? It's blatantly obvious there is two mafia parties because of the "knife" and the "gun" flavor. ICE also claimed 2 parties. They had no benefit to trying to hide themselves by not night-killing. Furthermore, Edge is claiming that the second scum team took a gambit and that their gambit will pay off if Edge is lynched... How was this mafia to expect that there was a group-roleblock player who would claim day 2 making their no-night-kill gambit worthwhile??!??! Edge seems to be implying that the mafia no-killed to frame whoever the roleblocker targeted. But, they had no idea there was a roleblocker. Furthermore, while they may decide it's possible, they wouldn't have guessed it was a group-roleblocker. And it's a dumb gambit anyways, because even if they no-kill, theres a chance the roleblocker targets them and claims and gets them lynched even though they didn't kill.

Edge is missing the obvious. The most logical alternative to Edge not being scum is that a doctor or protector of some kind saved the "gun" mafia's target. Edge implying that it was some gambit to discredit Ice's claim (which was obviously true) and also to frame him (LOLWOT how did they know this was going to happen) makes him seem a whole lot scummier. He definitely isn't thinking through his defense to Oso's claim very well.

[DavidParker]

I'm heading off in 30 or so minutes to do the same, have fun.

[DavidParker]

So; I'm still here, and still actually town.

WelcomeAmrun.

[DavidParker]

I am definitely trying to keep myself from being lynched to a strong extent because I'm fully aware that will hurt town more than help it.

[DavidParker]

Amrun's logic seems pretty solid. Personally, I have a different opinion on a couple of points.

Oh, good, subtly buddy up to the guy who just replaced in since he posted the same mimic'd suspicions of me without coming to a strong opinion of his own yet.

Yeah, because as Ice's only scum buddy I would resort to role-fishing as a last resort to try help my scum buddy once I've been lynched.. Oh wait, my scum buddy would be already dead... How is role fishing a scum tell at all considering the person you are claiming as my partner is dead? There's definitely no benefit to role fishing here for scum lol.

I'm not denying the option of a mafia-no-kill just saying its unlikely and not smart play for them if they had a night kill. My initial thought was actually that one mafia faction might have odd night kills, and the other faction have even night kills. But if both have nightkills every night then I am more inclined to believe that a PR prevented a kill last night than they no killed. No killing as mafia on night 1 is bad play. They have a chance of hitting Prs etc, and not night killing to confuse town with the 2 scum faction is not smart play.

what bothers me is that he is insisting on the existence of a doc

LOL? Major misrep more??!??! I believe your scum faction was roleblocked last night. The second most likely alternative is a doctor-like PR or something else saving the gun-mafia's target. The third most likely alternative for me is gun-mafia have even night kills and knife mafia having odd night kills. The Fourth most likely alternative is the gun-mafia choosing not to night kill. That is the least likely option. As I just stated there's no benefit to it. Those 4 options are ranked in what I perceive as the most likely to have happened last night.

yadee yah. Edge is slowly slipping into his scum-shoes.

[DavidParker]

I have been? That's a pity.

I'll claim this time I'm at L-1,

Claim: VT

I wasn't aware rhetorical questions of yours needed answering, such as:

Are you claiming in the 2nd quote of this post that you did not say the bolded?

(Hint: OFC I said it if it's quoted, unless you misquoted me)