Mini #704: Hunchback of Notre Dame, Game Over

[Urzassedatives]

Ok, so I'm up to page 10 by this point. I wouldn't post during a re-read except that as soon as I catch up, we'll have a deadline over our heads, so time is of the essence.

From what I can tell the attacks on my predecessor are due to his inactivity. Well, lets have no more of that foolishness. I am here, and I am active.

"BUT URZA!" You say, "how can we possibly find someone better to lynch before deadline?"

Never fear. I am here. Up through page 9 I have some pretty good candidates for lynchinz.

First of all, I will say that I think that orto and MM (thats mach-mafia) are most likely town. This is for a couple of reasons. First of all, I really like how Orto responds to arguments against him, he's very good at pointing out logical inconsistancies and attacking where there is merit, but more importantly, I have not seen him attack where there ISN'T merit, yet. And that is a much more important town tell to me. MM I have just generally liked his play.

On my shit list are Uriel, but this is one I'm having a little difficulty with in my mind, because the things I am picking up on are either indicative of scum who knows what they are doing, or town who has no clue. He attacks things that appear out of the ordinary, without giving justification for whether or not they are SCUMMY. Remember, scummy has a very definite meaning. It is an action that a scum player is more likely to do than a town player. Therefore to see uriel jumping on those things, to me, is indicative of one or two things.

In particular the juxtaposition between post 21 and 71 is very telling, where he FOSs the self voter, while slightly condemning the actions, while trying to not actually look like he is that much attacking him. The FOS here makes no sense to me as a townie, seeing as if a player is scummy to you that early in the game, you vote for them, and if you don't, you don't attack them. Especially in the random voting stage, one would expect to see a vote as opposed to a FOS from a town player here. Thats what sets urziel apart from the rest of the people who attacked the self voter. He attacks, but doesn't put any weight behind it. Fence sitting at it's core.

His post 94, and subsequent posts on that issue, however, lend credence to the theory that he is a clueless townie. He makes a retarded (And I use retarded to have a specific meaning in mafia. That is, without motivation for either side) argument which is chock laden with wifom, and continues to talk about it, even though it clearly makes no sense at all.

Either he is attempting to appear like he is scum hunting without actually doing so which is scummy scum scummy, or he just has no clue what he is actually supposed to be doing as town, which is not not not. Either way, its the second best lynch for the day.

On the very top of the shitlist we have Clockwork ruse.

I really really REALLY don't like post 54. This is where clockwork ruse attacks a player for "defending the self voter" hell, if I were in the game then I would have been defending the self voter to. Self voting is stupid as hell, but it provides no insight at all into the alignment of a player. None whatsoever. Zip. Nada. Zilch. There is no real motivation for scum to do it that is separate from town motivation to do it, and therefore it is the definition of a NULL TELL.

Now, you might be saying to yourself "Well, a lot of people attacked the self voter...I was one of them." and this is true, but what sets clockworks actions apart is how he doesn't directly attack either player for any one thing. He attacks Orto for what clockwork did, and by proxy attacks the self voter. He clearly thinks what the self voter has done is "scummy" but doesn't vote him. This is not only dumb because in order for orto to be scum in the way clockwork is presenting the game, the self voter has to be, and since Ortos alignment is then dependant on the self voters, and not the other way around, he should be voting the self voter, but scummy because it allows him to add more pressure to the self voter wagon without actually implicating himself by it, and also allows him to poison ortos well by accusing him of things that aren't really scummy that put him on the defensive and take him off the offensive.

Secondly, a pretty big thing I look for is when players are not honestly interested in determining alignment, but are instead just looking to win the argument. Clockworks post 152 is a perfect example of this. The mischaracterization of Ortos vote "HE ADMITS IT WAS OMGUS" is pretty ridiculous, and is not something a player interested in determining orto's alignment would say. Orto quite clearly said that he was being a tad biased, and then went on to explain the nature of the vote. Clockwork IGNORES the real justification, something that if discussed might lead to information about orto's alignment, and goes straight for the jugular with a can't miss, look what stupid things he's doing he's an idiot argument. This is telling because I think there's a pretty clear divide between what a town player would do in this situation, and what a scum player would do in this situation. Psychologically, this is a pretty damn strong tell in my book.

Unvote, (if my replacee was voting) and VOTE: Clockwork ruse

[Urzassedatives]

Just noting that I have finished my read, and that I want to add Axelrod to the town list as well. He is making good arguments, and scumhunting his ass off, from what I can see. Lets string up Clockwork ruse, guys. Barring that, lets string up natirasha, who replaced uriel. If you really think any other lynches are good, I'd be happy to hear cases, but these are the best in my opinion.

[Urzassedatives]

Heyo, Mizzy.

Care to respond and/or comment on the COMPLETELY NEW perspective of the game I just gave, rather than taking a cop out and continuing your petty bickering with clockwork ruse.

Why are you arguing with him, anyway? He's pretty much obv scum.

[Urzassedatives]

Thats fair enough. Attack retracted.

[Urzassedatives]

Well, I would say the votes on me tended to develop from a "we have to lynch somebody at deadline, lets lynch the lurker" perspective, which is valid in it's own right I guess. However, I'm not here and not a lurker, so that case should disappear.

I have made a case on Clockwork, and I can only surmise that the votes on him have accumulated because of the same things I saw and have pointed out in my previous post. You call shenanigans, I call scummy play and a deadline.

[Urzassedatives]

EBWODP:

I AM here, heh.

[Urzassedatives]

FOS CarnCarn

On the very surface of it, I don't like that post because you're giving a false dichotomy. We don't even HAVE a deadline right now, so there is absolutely no need to limit your choices to just me or CR. What do you think of Natirasha? How about Mizzy? What do you think about ROFLcoptors flip flop? (Saying Caboose was obv scum to deciding that I am obv town in one post) Please don't limit yourself to just one direction of thinking.

Secondly, caboose had maybe four or five posts this whole game, maybe one or two with game relevant information in them. It seems silly to lynch a player you know that little about, especially given the fact that I am here and posting content from which you can gain reads, where as CR has been here posting lots, and is demonstratively scummy. Read my case on scum vs. town motivations on him. It's pretty strong. If you DO force yourself to choose between just those options, I think it's pretty sure that you should vote for the player who has posted lots of content and has scum tells as opposed to the replacer of a player who posted very little content, who is now giving you the opportunity to read the role.

[Urzassedatives]

Oh poop. I just noticed PJ DID reinstate the deadline already. Either way, my point still stands. There is plenty of time to find the right lynch. Don't limit to yourself.

[Urzassedatives]

Right, but you're missing my point about me. The main problems with caboose seem to be a) He's a pretty bad player, and b) he was basically inactive the whole game. Going off of that, you can't have a really strong read on him

(I mean, I don't think he strategically planned ANYTHING this game, he doesn't seem like a good schemer, of course I have the insight of knowing his role which makes me KNOW he's not a very strategic person, but I digress)

You're probably very annoyed at him, which might be clouding your judgment as to whether or not you think he's scum. Look at the facts, there really isn't enough to base even a barebones read off of him. I posted more game relevant analysis in my first post in this game than he did the whole rest of day one.

The point is, keeping me around and reading what I do tomorrow will be a much better indicator of the alignment of this role than reading cabooses play today. It's common sense, I give you more interactions with more players, as well as more posting frequency.

On the other hand, you have Clockwork, who has posted a shit ton, and you are not going to get a better read on, probably. You already have him pegged as scummy, and his posting is not going to give you any better opportunities to read him. He's not changing.

A simple calculation of accuracy tells you that he's a way better lynch for today, even IF you disregard the post I made which lays out two pretty damn good d1 reasons as to why he's obv scum.

That's my argument. You get a WAY more accurate read on my role by keeping me around, but the same isn't true on CR. So even if you find him and Caboose equally scummy (which I find highly unlikely) He's the better lynch.

[Urzassedatives]

At Urz, I’m seriously not going to defend myself against the same points over and over again. Finish reading please than take a look at your vote. I have admitted since; a.) I was tunneling Ort. b.) My vote on Ort was a pressure vote originally, I didn’t like how he reacted to it, and that I thought the pressure on the Ramus wagon was adequate even if he said it wasn’t. c.) I was definitely tunneling Ort. Looking over it, was some seriously horrible play on my part. I was the VI for a good portion of the game, but I don’t plan on continuing that bad streak.

I did finish reading. Your responses don't mean jack. First of all, while I am attacking the same things about you, I am attacking them in a different manner. I have presented psychological warrants for why these posts make you more likely a scum player than a town player. Please respond to those if you want to remove my vote from you. Tunneling on a player has nothing to do with how you psychologically approach their posts. Theoretically, even when you think a player is scum, you are interested in determining if that is true or not. You did not do that.

and i'm glad the replacement cleared up the caboose issue so succinctly, urzas is obvtown

And why is that?

Second. Why is that?]

Heyo, Mizzy.

Care to respond and/or comment on the COMPLETELY NEW perspective of the game I just gave, rather than taking a cop out and continuing your petty bickering with clockwork ruse.

Why are you arguing with him, anyway? He's pretty much obv scum.

And now we have another rofl, calling me obv scum before I even get a chance to respond?

And why does Mizzy have to respond to your “completely new” perspective to the game?

And I say “completely new” because I’ve seen most of it from rofl.

Please do not insult me. You didn't hear anything of what I said from ROFL. He's a pretty bad player. He may have been also attacking you, and he may have been attacking the same things you did. But he certainly did not provide REASONING for why the things you did are scummy. The psychological tell I raise is something which no one else this game has so much as THOUGHT about.

On the other hand, you have Clockwork, who has posted a shit ton, and you are not going to get a better read on, probably. You already have him pegged as scummy, and his posting is not going to give you any better opportunities to read him. He's not changing.

Well, if you exclude Ort. Shouldn’t you not be appealing to emotion to get my lynched, if your case is so strong and I am such obv scum?[/quote]
This is a pretty harsh misconstruction of my point. I am saying EVEN IF you don't buy the case, you want to lynch the player you have a more substantive read on, given two equally scummy reads. Note, I am not saying that our roles ARE equally scummy, but rather than IF HE DOES THINK THAT, he should lynch the player with more readable posts, because theoretically he will get a stronger read with more time with the other player. Please point out where I appeal to emotion?

I didn’t want to quote the entire post, but the more I read it…;

Right, but you're missing my point about me. The main problems with caboose seem to be a) He's a pretty bad player, and b) he was basically inactive the whole game. Going off of that, you can't have a really strong read on him

(I mean, I don't think he strategically planned ANYTHING this game, he doesn't seem like a good schemer, of course I have the insight of knowing his role which makes me KNOW he's not a very strategic person, but I digress)

You're probably very annoyed at him, which might be clouding your judgment as to whether or not you think he's scum.

Look at the facts, there really isn't enough to base even a barebones read off of him. I posted more game relevant analysis in my first post in this game than he did the whole rest of day one.

The point is, keeping me around and reading what I do tomorrow will be a much better indicator of the alignment of this role than reading cabooses play today.

It's common sense, I give you more interactions with more players, as well as more posting frequency.

On the other hand, you have Clockwork, who has posted a shit ton, and you are not going to get a better read on, probably. You already have him pegged as scummy, and his posting is not going to give you any better opportunities to read him. He's not changing.

A simple calculation of accuracy[/u tells you that he's a way better lynch for today, even IF you disregard the post I made which lays out two pretty damn good d1 reasons as to why he's obv scum.

That's my argument.

You get a WAY more accurate read on my role by keeping me around, but the same isn't true on CR.

So even if you find him and Caboose equally scummy (which I find highly unlikely) He's the better lynch.

Your logic is that “Because you can get a better read on me with me around, and you can’t get one on Clock, lynch him and look at me later.”
The bolded will prove that.

No, again. Misconstruction of my argument. ROFL presented a false dichotomy, you or me. He said he found both of us scummy. That is the assumptions he is working with, they are flawed, but if we can't get him to change his flawed assumptions, then we have to reason with him using them (Something you completely neglected to notice because it doesn't help your attack on me is that I TOLD ROFL THAT HIS POST WAS A FALSE DICHOTOMY and I TOLD HIM TO LOOK AT TWO SEPERATE TARGETS BESIDES YOU AND ME who I thought merited attention. Such an inconvenient thing, facts. )
Working under those two assumptions that I just outlined that he had in his head (that we are equally scummy and that he has to vote for one of us), it is absolutely the correct play to lynch you rather than me. This is because he has more reason to believe that his read on you is accurate than he does to believe that his read on me is accurate. This is because my replacee dd not interact this game, and you have. The reason you will not "Change" per se, is that because your level of interaction with him in previous days will either remain the same or go down, whereas his interaction with this role will go up significantly, that means that his read on this role will be much more strengthened by reading me tomorrow then his read on you will be strengthened by reading you tommorow.

Remember, however, that this argument is only if you accept his premises, which I don't really, but if he has them, and wont change them, there's very little I can do to change that.

Caboose’s play should not just be thrown out because he’s “a poor player.” He had plenty of time to be a “poor player” in other games, so why did he ignore this one? It wasn’t like he wouldn’t have had anything to comment on, he was under scrutiny the last time he decided to disappear. Obviously, this is going into WIFOM. But it needs to be pointed out that we can’t just excuse his play as him being a “bad player.”

Actually what you cite there is a reason why we SHOULD not look to his poor play for indication of alignment. The fact that he has done the same thing in multiple games and of both alignments demonstrates that poor play is not something which is indicative of cabooses alignment, and is therefore not a valid reason to vote him insofar as he's no longer in the game and you don't want to policy lynch him

Look at the underlined, “A simple calculation of accuracy”, do you mind explain what you mean by that?

This is because he has more reason to believe that his read on you is accurate than he does to believe that his read on me is accurate. This is because my replacee dd not interact this game, and you have. The reason you will not "Change" per se, is that because your level of interaction with him in previous days will either remain the same or go down, whereas his interaction with this role will go up significantly, that means that his read on this role will be much more strengthened by reading me tomorrow then his read on you will be strengthened by reading you tommorow.

I post the same thing I just wrote. It answers both questions.

How do you call me backing off my tunneling not changing? Have I not made more reasonable cases lately? You are attacking me because I made bad play and I tunneled, both of which I’ve admitted to and kicked myself for. What would the benefits of attacking Ort like I did be for scum?

Because thats not the sense I'm using "change" in. I'm using it to refer to your level of interaction with him. It is not going to get significantly different from your actions so far in terms of quantity of play to read. Whereas this roles play increases dynamically.

Italics is basically WIFOM. Unless you can prove you have a reasonable meta to back that statement up.

Well first off, I was not making an argument there, as you can see, I didn't try to prove any point with that statement, was just musing. I concede that it's basically wifom, but would point out that you can make the same judgment I have. Do you really think Caboose was scheming, based on his play?

I’m starting to run out of font styles to use. D=

I'm sorry.

Anyways, you state;

You're probably very annoyed at him, which might be clouding your judgment as to whether or not you think he's scum.

Do you think that the town would be willing to lynch on mere annoyance alone? What do you take of my thoughts of him yesterday when I voted him?

Maybe not the town, but remember I was talking to an individual player there, and I have definitely seen individual players keep their votes on people just out of annoyance. Also, what do you think policy lynches for poor play are for? People lynch lurkers because lurking annoys them.

There is also a load of false dichotomy in here.

Like I just said above, I think you're the best lynch completely independently of that logic. But secondly, the context of my post was "If carncarn will not stop his false dichotomy. I pretty clearly told him NOT to limit himself to two choices, and pointed out Mizzy and ROFLcotor. The fact that you "missed" this is convenient. I don't really buy, considering the fact that you went over that last post of mine with a fine tooth comb. Theres no way in my mind that you could have missed that I told him to not limit himself to two choices, and then went on to say "BUT IF YOU DO" So

FOS: Clockwork here

I just realized that a lot of when I refer to ROFLCOPTOR here I actually meant to refer to carncarn, and I'm too lazy to go back and fix it. You'll figure it out "Carn carns assumptions" etc, not "roflcoptors assumptions.

[Urzassedatives]

Carn carn, I'm willing to switch to nat at deadline, but I would MUCH MUCH MUCH prefer a clockwork lynch, because like I said, my read on urziel was conflicted.

[Urzassedatives]

CR, that is not wifom. Please learn what wifom is.

Vote: CarnCarn

[Urzassedatives]

Not understanding the votes on me. Urza is understandably going through a rough time, but he gave no reasoning for his vote and destructor is voting me for opportunistic FoSing of roflcopter D1,

after I gave a FoS for the same reason to Axelrod

. Also sees my vote for Caboose as scummy, even after I said Caboose was the scummiest, and at the end of the day I would have preferred a Caboose/Urza lynch to a CR one. Given ort's claim and explanation for his unvote, I think Urza is still the most suspicious to me.

Unvote: ortolan
Vote: Urzassedatives

Ort's claim makes him much more town at the moment, in my opinion, but still:

Ort, what about your flavor on CR makes/made you think he is town?

CC: Why FoS destructor and vote Ort and not the other way around?

Maybe a moot question at this point, but I voted ort for the reason I gave: hammering by unvote, for a player he never mentioned as finding suspicious. Destructor's vote for Nat was also most unexplained, but I can understand the reasoning behind putting 2 players at 5. So, while I found the Nat vote by itself a bit scummy, I originally thought the hammering unvote was worse.

There's a big difference between not giving a reason and not having one.

Secondly, if your reason for voting me is based off of "He voted me without explanation and I found his replacee scummy because he had 5 posts" then I really don't feel like I need to make any defense. Your attack speaks for itself.

[Urzassedatives]

Urza, I didn't say you had no reason, but that you didn't give one. I simply said that I couldn't understand the votes on me, especially yours since you didn't give a reason.
Also, that is not the only reason why I'm voting you. Caboose's voting and bouts of lurkerdom were scummy, plus I would also appreciate your response to my comments about your posts from D1, especially the part about Caboose's role and strategic play:

Reading through Urza and I've got some questions/comments:

On my shit list are Uriel, but this is one I'm having a little difficulty with in my mind, because the things I am picking up on are either indicative of scum who knows what they are doing, or town who has no clue. He attacks things that appear out of the ordinary, without giving justification for whether or not they are SCUMMY. Remember, scummy has a very definite meaning. It is an action that a scum player is more likely to do than a town player. Therefore to see uriel jumping on those things, to me, is indicative of one or two things.

I am currently in an ongoing Newbie where uriel also flaked. Could be scum, but also very n00b player in general.

Self voting is stupid as hell, but it provides no insight at all into the alignment of a player. None whatsoever. Zip. Nada. Zilch. There is no real motivation for scum to do it that is separate from town motivation to do it, and therefore it is the definition of a NULL TELL.

Scum could try the same gambit to trap townsfolk into doing something that, on the surface, looks scummy.

Now, you might be saying to yourself "Well, a lot of people attacked the self voter...I was one of them." and this is true, but what sets clockworks actions apart is how he doesn't directly attack either player for any one thing. He attacks Orto for what clockwork did, and by proxy attacks the self voter. He clearly thinks what the self voter has done is "scummy" but doesn't vote him. This is not only dumb because in order for orto to be scum in the way clockwork is presenting the game, the self voter has to be, and since Ortos alignment is then dependant on the self voters, and not the other way around, he should be voting the self voter, but scummy because it allows him to add more pressure to the self voter wagon without actually implicating himself by it, and also allows him to poison ortos well by accusing him of things that aren't really scummy that put him on the defensive and take him off the offensive.

Now this is seriously flawed. You conveniently choose to forget that scum try very hard to buddy with townies as a way to distance from their actual teammates. This is why defending someone can be scummy regardless of the alignment of the person being defended.

Secondly, a pretty big thing I look for is when players are not honestly interested in determining alignment, but are instead just looking to win the argument. Clockworks post 152 is a perfect example of this. The mischaracterization of Ortos vote "HE ADMITS IT WAS OMGUS" is pretty ridiculous, and is not something a player interested in determining orto's alignment would say. Orto quite clearly said that he was being a tad biased, and then went on to explain the nature of the vote. Clockwork IGNORES the real justification, something that if discussed might lead to information about orto's alignment, and goes straight for the jugular with a can't miss, look what stupid things he's doing he's an idiot argument. This is telling because I think there's a pretty clear divide between what a town player would do in this situation, and what a scum player would do in this situation. Psychologically, this is a pretty damn strong tell in my book.

This is a good point. As I think I said already, I felt CR was reaching with some of the accusations against ort. However, it's not necessarily a scumtell because I know people will sometimes ask reachish questions to get reactions. Still, in this case, I see it as a negative against CR.

---

Urza, why do you keep saying that I presented a false dichotomy after you realized we have a deadline? I've explained already why I think the best lynch is you or CR today, yet you keep dismissing this as a false dichotomy.

(I mean, I don't think he strategically planned ANYTHING this game, he doesn't seem like a good schemer, of course I have the insight of knowing his role which makes me KNOW he's not a very strategic person, but I digress)

Something just rubs me the wrong way here. Oh, maybe the suggestion that your role does clearly require strategy? But then, you say Caboose wasn't strategic at all. How exactly does knowing Caboose's role tell you that he wasn't strategic? His play is in line with careless scum, or town trying to act very hard like scum, but you say that's not strategic. So, are you saying he is careless scum?

Also, what do you think policy lynches for poor play are for? People lynch lurkers because lurking annoys them.

No, people lynch lurkers because lurking helps scum.

---

Also, CR is still on my scummy-list. Not sure why some folks are treating him as more town or as nearly confirmed town just because of ambiguous flavoring in ort's role message (or so he claims). Heck, I'm not sure why ort unvoted based on that.

1) agree on uriel. Remember my comments on her prefaced my suspicions with pretty much that exact same warning.

2) That's my point with regards to self voting. Scum COULD do it, and town COULD do it. The question is "is scum any more likely to do this than town is." and I really don't think they are. Which makes it a null tell. We could come up with conceivable reasons why people might do things all day, but in the end all that matters is what is more likely to have occured. Scumtells are very probabilistic.

3) On the defending the defense. Notice I make no insinuation about whether defending another player is scummy. (Note: I don't think it is, but that's immaterial to my point that you're addressing.) My point is that he attacked BOTH players, while not actually attacking either of them. This is a scum tactic because it's a way to see how the winds blow. It's called fense sitting. There's very little motivation for town players to wait and see who will gain more pressure, but a whole lot of scum motivations. Secondly, while scum players sometimes buddy up, it is much more common for scum players to try to get town players lynched...seeing as... you know, that's how they win the game. Given that, its very helpful for scum to have as many town players look suspicious as possible. Towards that end, his play makes perfect sense.

4) Note I never accused him of reaching. Reaching in and of itself is not scummy. I accused him of not earnestly trying to determine alignment. He did not approach that argument with the mindset of "lets see what alignment orto is" but rather with the mindset of "let me win this argument and make orto look scummy." The former is the tact town would take, the second is the one scum would take. That is why it's a pretty strong scum tell.

5) it was a false dichotomy because I felt you were zeroing in on two players when there were plenty of other players doing noteworthy things, and we were not under TOO strict a deadline as to constrain us to two choices.

6) I'm pretty sure that lurking for a whole day 1, popping in and saying almost nothing is poor strategic play regardless of what alignment or role you have. I would have thought that would be obvious.

7) I disagree with you that people "lynch lurkers because it helps scum." since scum are just as likely to lurk as town in my book, it doesn't help town to lynch them. People lynch lurkers because the meta of lurking annoys them. Plain and simple. They may try to justify it by saying that lurking is a scum strategy, but really lurking is not an indication of alignment. Lurking in plain sight, I.E. posting but without discussing relevant things is a much more common scum strategy in my book that just not posting is.

My vote on you was simply to make you react to me. The fact that you're antsy about it strikes me as odd though. In my experience town players tend to shrug off unexplained and unfollowed up votes on them. I know if someone just posts "vote: shea" I'm more likely to ignore it than anything else. Scum players tend to get nervous though. They wonder if the player is a cop with a guilty on them or something. In fact, that's exactly how your reaction reads to me, as a player who is hoping that a cop doesn't have a guilty on them. The purpose of the vote was to see how you reacted, and I really don't like what I see, so I'm keeping it.

[Urzassedatives]

My vote on you was simply to make you react to me. The fact that you're antsy about it strikes me as odd though. In my experience town players tend to shrug off unexplained and unfollowed up votes on them. I know if someone just posts "vote: shea" I'm more likely to ignore it than anything else. Scum players tend to get nervous though. They wonder if the player is a cop with a guilty on them or something. In fact, that's exactly how your reaction reads to me, as a player who is hoping that a cop doesn't have a guilty on them. The purpose of the vote was to see how you reacted, and I really don't like what I see, so I'm keeping it.

I don't see why anyone would ignore a vote against them, town or scum. Not getting lynched is usually the best way to fulfill your wincon regardless of alignment, and every vote counts.
If you are breadcrumbing that you're a cop and actually have a guilty on me, then your sanity is in question. It's also a possible scum tactic that could be used to lynch someone they think is a real cop/doc, etc. (testing the cop).
Also, from what I've seen, a cop with a guilty doesn't just cast out an unexplained vote on his investigation target, so, even if I were scum, that thought wouldn't have crossed my mind.

1) You might be right that a townie might not ignore the vote completely, but generally you would expect to hear a "Why are you voting for me?" rather than a "Urza voted for me without giving reasoning and I found his predecessor scummy so vote: urza" The former is a curious townie reaction, the latter is antsy scum.

2) I am making no sort of role claim. My statement in no way implicated that I was. Your further defense against a possible cop guilty when I never claimed to have a guilty on you is further evidence of scum antsyness.

3) Huh? Explain the comment about "it could be a possible scum tactic." I don't really understand what you're saying.

4) Actually, that is a pretty generally accepted way to breadcrumb a cop investigation early in the game, when it's not worth claiming yet. That way if the cop turns up dead, the town can look back and say "hey look, he voted X with no explanation and didn;t move his vote...In fact, it's really the quintessential way to bread crumb a guilty in the early game... All that aside, my argument isn't even contingent on whether or not cops WOULD breadcrumb in that way. My point is that a town reaction to an unexplained vote is dismissal or curiosity. A scum reaction is fear and attack. You didn;t do the first.

5) The attack aside, what do you think about the legitimacy of my vote? Do you still think that it's suspicious that I placed it? If so, why? If not, then why haven't you unvoted me?

[Urzassedatives]

MM, I think it might be worthwhile to include yourself and Rofl in your analysis as a test of your system. You say you're town and ROFL is now confirmed town, which means if you expect scum to react in a certain way, you'd expect town NOT to act in that way. By comparing the town reactions to the expected scum reactions, you would be able to discern if your system holds any merit.

CR: Wait wait wait...Who said anything about a mass claim? I am firmly opposed to a mass claim at this time.

[Urzassedatives]

Vote: Mizzy

Die suck die die suck suck die suck die scum scum die suck die.

[Urzassedatives]

OMG KORE!


I LOVE KORE.

JUS SAYIN'































































(Also, cocks.)

[Urzassedatives]

Guys, this is really simple.

We lynch mizzy and then tomorrow if she's town we lynch orto.

come the fuck on.

[Urzassedatives]

then perhaps it's time for a mass claim to determine if there's any other explanation for what happened?

[Urzassedatives]

Orto, are you effing kidding me? You get a no kill on the night that you RB someone and you don't want to lynch them? You want to lynch someone completely different?

Are you kidding me?

There are possibilities that make it POSSIBLE that Mizzy is town, but they are extremely unlikely. I just can't fathom how a RB would have a block on a night there was no kill and not go after that person? And not even wagon that person. What the hell? Do you have any clue how to play mafia? Are you a fucking idiot?

And seriously, mizzy? the ol' BUT SCUM WOULD KNOW WHO TO KILL fear mongering? It's acknowledged that town and scum get advantages from mass claims, you're an experienced player who knows this. However, I just brought up a very important benefit of mass claiming in this instance- we would know for sure if you're scum. This as a benefit highly outweighs outing power roles, as we NEED to lynch right today or tomorrow or we lose the game. Now, I understand that you have a very good reason for not wanting us to do this- You're scum- but I know the rest of the town won't see it that way.

Guys, if we mass claim we will figure out if mizzy is scum or if there is another plausible explanation for last night, and thats ridiculously important because we need to lynch right today or tomorrow.

[Urzassedatives]

GUYS STOP FLINGING YOUR VOTES AROUND AND THINK.

We have a RBed player on a night where there was no kill, and generally that should dictate that she or Orto are scum.

The only reason this could be not true is if there are confounding factors caused by other power roles. I think from my position it's pretty clear that I didn't mess with the kill in any way last night.

Let us mass claim and lynch intelligently, not do this "LOL URZA THINKS MIZZY IS SCUM VOTE: URZA"

Which pretty much seems to me to be what the case is. Erm... Excuse me, it was "scummy as hell"

hard to defend against, that. But I think I've very clearly laid out my position here, and I would be hard pressed to find a reason it's scummy.

So, challenge to the people who are voting me: what about my position is scummy. That is, what is the significant anti town motivation for what I have just laid out. It must be a doozy to be "Scummy as hell"

[Urzassedatives]

Major ++ town points to batt. That was well reasoned. Allow me to respond.

1) I was initially willing to believe ort and not mizzy because I have generally been finding ort townish all game. Please look at my posts from day 1. I am aware of the

possibility[/b] of other roles being able to confound the system. But I do not think it likely. It simply just does not happen often in mini games that there are two separate explanations for kill not happening. So why I acknowledged the possibility that there could be another explanation, I am a very percentage oriented player and I decided that mizzy was our percentage lynch for today.

2) It's true, however, considering mizzy already claimed "pro town power role" (lol, scum claim if I've ever seen one) the damage is miniscule, and I've already explained that since we NEED to lynch right today or tomorrow, the benefits of knowing for sure that mizzy is scum or if there's another possibility is drastically important to us, and outweighs outing power roles, because at this point we don't need pro town power roles, we need dead scum. it's as simple as that.

3) This is because it didn't occur to me that people would actually give credence to the remote possibility that they were BOTH telling the truth It's seriously very very very unlikely, but if we need a mass claim to convince the town that one of them is scum, then so be it. We need dead scumz, pretty much right now.


To Batt: Actually, I'm starting to get a bad taste in my mouth about how that whole thing went down. It was like, both players should theoretically have a very strong desire to lynch each other, but neither of them seem to. Orto comes out and says his result, and then immediately tries to get people to not vote mizzy, and then votes for someone else. Mizzy never attacks orto, which I guess is explainable if she is town, but ortos behavior makes no sense to me.

[Urzassedatives]

Mach: We don't HAVE a later day? we have two days at most. We need to figure this out NOW.

[Urzassedatives]

@ 677: Defeatism is another strong scum tell in my book. A town player doesn't make arguments like "OMG WEVE LOST NOW IF YOU LYNCH ME." because they typically have a good argument to make. Scum very often fall back on appeals to emotion.

@Orto: I only said that to get the town confortable with lynching mizzy. The odds that you are both telling the truth (as run by kore, but I had vaguely already done something like that in my mind) are so slim that mizzy should almost 100% be lynched today, as she is almost certainly scum. I would put the odds on mizzy being the liar about 85% and you being the liar about 15%.

@Destructor: Remember that my comment only makes me scummy if both mizzy and orto are town, therefore in your opinion my alignment is dependent on mizzys alignment. If Mizzy comes up scum, you can't find me scummy for the comment because there's no way I was trying to set up a 1-2 lynch if the first player lynched is scum. Therefore we should lynch mizzy before we lynch me because there is a good chance she is scum and if she isn't there's a good chance orto or i am scum. Therefore mizzy is the best lynch from likely to be scum perspective and from information perspective.

@batt: I am confused. You think mass claim at lylo is bad, and mass claim today helps us out, but you are against mass claim in general. Could you explain that last post more fully.

@Everyone: I think we at the very least need to push for a mizzy claim. Thoughts on this?

[Urzassedatives]

So you admit you were strawmanning to make me look bad?

Also, why does it matter which account I post under? Seems like you're choosing some very unimportant things to talk about because you know I'm destroying you on the important issues.

[Urzassedatives]

What you "think" doesn't matter.

Role fishing has a very specific meaning. Asking for a claim, and attempting to pressure to a claim has another, completely separate meaning.

For you to conflate the two, when under pressure, means something to me, because you are an experienced player who I am damn sure knows the difference. That means your conflation has a specific purpose. You are attempting to make me look bad by deliberately confusing two things that are very separate.

But I think that us commenting back and forth on this has reached its maximum level of use, so I am going to step out of the thread for a bit and let other players comment on what just happened.

[Urzassedatives]

I am not going to give a most pro town player as I think thats far too helpful to the scum.

Here's a list of people I'm generally comfortable with the assumption that Mizzy is scum:

Orto
thadmiral
Kore

Given that mizzy is town:
Thadmiral
batt
kore

[Urzassedatives]

And that was me posting with the wrong alt account.

hi mizzy.

[Urzassedatives]

Batt, are you saying asking Mizzy to give reasons behind her suspicions is anti town? If so, why? If not, why are you attacking me for it? It seems to me that a cursory glance at who mizzy attacked today and who she now thinks is most likely to be scum are very strongly correlated to who has been attacking her. Go back and look if you think I'm wrong.

Her suspicions are only important if a) she flips town, and b) she provides valid reasoning for them. If she doesn't do a then there's too much wifom to interpret them, and if she doesn't do b) then we will not be able to reason through her suspicions and will not be able to determine if she's completely mistaken in them...

It seems important than to me to force her to give reasoned answers about why she suspects people.

Do you disagree?

[Urzassedatives]

That's fair enough, I suppose.

[Urzassedatives]

These are just from today:

Guys, this is really simple.

We lynch mizzy and then tomorrow if she's town we lynch orto.

come the fuck on.

Said without the thought of consequences. It's not hard to guess, looking at the numbers and lynch history, that we are pretty close to lylo. Suggesting something like this is anti-town at best. He's not a noob, so he ought to know better than suggesting that we do something like that at this stage in the game. Only scum would benefit from this.

Pretty sure I was definitely thinking of the consequences. As I've already explained the point of this is not to set up a 1-2 lynch (which is only a point against me if mizzy comes up town) but mainly to get the town to lynch mizzy who I was pretty sure was scum. Also, as has already been stated by me, the math that supports them both telling the truth is miniscule. I grant that its a possibility, but not a large one, and mafia is probabilistic. The probability tells us that one of orto or mizzy is scum.

then perhaps it's time for a mass claim to determine if there's any other explanation for what happened?

Only scum would benefit from a mass claim. (ThAdmiral was up for the mass claim, too, scumpoints for him.)

Please tell us why "Only scum would benefit from a mass claim." Warrant your assertions, please.

Guys, if we mass claim we will figure out if mizzy is scum or if there is another plausible explanation for last night, and thats ridiculously important because we need to lynch right today or tomorrow.

Now he's trying fear tactics to get the town to do what he wants, and this is after he suggested that we lynch poorly twice in a row and got smacked for it.

Actually, that post is providing the reasoning for why "mass claim benefits the town" If the consequences ARE what I am stating them as, then it's not fear tactics to state them. Do you think I'm missrepresenting the consequences? If so, how?

GUYS STOP FLINGING YOUR VOTES AROUND AND THINK.

We have a RBed player on a night where there was no kill, and generally that should dictate that she or Orto are scum.

The only reason this could be not true is if there are confounding factors caused by other power roles.

I think from my position it's pretty clear that I didn't mess with the kill in any way last night.

Let us mass claim and lynch intelligently, not do this "LOL URZA THINKS MIZZY IS SCUM VOTE: URZA"

Which pretty much seems to me to be what the case is. Erm... Excuse me, it was "scummy as hell"

hard to defend against, that. But I think I've very clearly laid out my position here, and I would be hard pressed to find a reason it's scummy.

So, challenge to the people who are voting me: what about my position is scummy. That is, what is the significant anti town motivation for what I have just laid out. It must be a doozy to be "Scummy as hell"

Then he comes out with this piece of work. He knows he did something scummy and going on the aggressive about it. He even adds in the (bolded) softclaim which even if he's scum wouldn't be a lie.

And here all I am doing is asking the people attacking me to clearly state why. I am not necessarily sure why that's scummy. If you recall batt even responded to this post with clearly laid out reasons which I responded to. How is asking what you need to defend against scummy, again?

Secondly, I am not soft claiming. I am saying that I did not do anything to stop the kill from happening. The purpose of this is not to defend myself, but rather pretty clearly for people to take into account when they calculate the probability of you and orto telling the truth. This "case" looks like you're trying to find things I've said and deliberately taking them out of context and spinning them so that they "Might" seem scummy.

2) It's true, however, considering mizzy already claimed "pro town power role" (lol, scum claim if I've ever seen one) the damage is miniscule, and I've already explained that since we NEED to lynch right today or tomorrow, the benefits of knowing for sure that mizzy is scum or if there's another possibility is drastically important to us, and outweighs outing power roles, because at this point we don't need pro town power roles, we need dead scum. it's as simple as that.

Let me translate:

"I'm going to dismiss her role claim as obvscum so that when we lynch her and she was telling the truth, I can just point back to this and say, "Hey, I thought her claim was false for sure!" I mean, hell, the town's fucked up this much so far, maybe they'll just be blind as bats and let us do this if I make it sound like they'd be retarded to do otherwise."

Only a dipshit would not realize that protective power roles can lengthen the game by days. By carelessly tossing aside power roles at this stage, and gladly sacrificing one, he's not only weakening the town but helping them get one kill closer to winning.

pardon me if your experience is different from mine, but 9/10 of the time when someone claims "Pro town power role" when under pressure, it is because they're scum. I have played over 50 games on this site and others and literally almost every time I have seen that claim, it has been from scum. Town literally don't do it. This is me disbelieving your claim. I am not sure how disbelieving someones claim is scummy. This seems to fit in pretty well with my observation that you are finding people who attack you scummy.


WAIT WAIT WAIT WAIT.

Now you're claiming a protective power role? You claimed not to have used your power last night, so I'm pretty sure thats a complete and utter lie.

I don't understand that last passage at all if you're NOT claiming a protective role. Basically it seems like you're trying to raise the impact of lynching you arbitrarily, even though we know damn sure you're not a protective role. So either way you're being dishonest here...

Can we please lynch her already?

[Urzassedatives]

Anyone else feeling that this little tiff between Urza and Mizzy is sounding

just

a bit staged?

Mizzy: if you have accepted your lynch, and you are, in fact, a "pro-town power role" then ought you not be telling us what role you are and what you have done with it this game? Wouldn't that be the townie thing to do?

First part doesnt make much sense given the fact that orto would also have to be in on it.

second part I agree with whole heartedly.

[Urzassedatives]

Are you effing kidding me? I hate this site. Every time you zero in on a scum half the town goes "LOL BUSSING"

It makes no sense considering the fact that there was a good amount of town feeling that mizzy was not the play for today. In fact, my push against her is probably what assured she would be the play for the day. I recall batt and orto both voting and saying that other people were the play. Wouldnt it be better for a theortical scum to hang back and let his partner get not lynched and go to lylo?

Don't call wifom. Wifom has a very specific meaning. It means that each action is around equally likely. For instance, it would be not wifom to claim that you were not scum for day vigging your partner day one would be an extreme example. I would argue that theoretical benefits from scum bussing their partner are much less than hanging back and seeing what happens, especially because this site has a meta of being suspiciious of bussing.

[Urzassedatives]

Bullshit.

Who thinks we use the pie method here?

I do. I do.

[Urzassedatives]

There is literally no reason why a one shot vig would not claim right away when pressured. Literally zip. Fear of being outed doesn't play into the decision at all, because the scum wont waste a kill on you because you are likely to just use your one shot that night.

This claim smells absolutely terrible.

[Urzassedatives]

Oh, and, quick question. Why would I claim something dangerous like 1-shot vig when I could have claimed something safe like a second doctor or roleblocker?

Ironically this is a textbook example of wifom.

[Urzassedatives]

We have to take the safe percentage lynch here.

Its a simple case of cost-benefit analysis.

I am vanilla, my role pm is the one posted at the beginning of the game.

I will probably be the lynch tomorrow depending on how thadmiral flips.

I'm ok with that. Go out there and get the real scums after me, k?

vote: Theadmiral

[Urzassedatives]

Oops, I meant destructor. My bad.

Unvote, vote: Destructor.

[Urzassedatives]

I have resigned myself to my lynch tomorrow if destructor flips scum.

I don't mind you attacking me.

Just get the real scum after you lynch me.