Mafia 74: Minimally Flavoured - Game over!

[vollkan]

- Vollkan was able to post sooner then I thought. So yeah, Vollkan replaces Patch15.

Hello everyone. I'll post my notes and any comments I have as I read through the thread. This is

solely

to help me find my bearings - more detailed commentary on individuals will come in the future. Basically, hammering through the first read to get a general picture and then chiseling at the important bits later on.

So,

Page 1

Mostly just randomness. Egruntz makes a truly atrocious post, basically taking a defeatist approach and saying we should just No Lynch. Interestingly, he doesn't actually vote NL, despite clearly thinking it the best option. Testing the waters perhaps?

Page 2

Bookitty votes ergruntz; I agree with her reasons. Snaps takes a different view in that he disagrees with erg but thinks erg's post tells us about erg as a person. Methinks this is a tad soft. Erg maintains his opposition to NL saying it better to have NL than drag out for weeks and have nothing achieved. Again, I really disagree. D1 lynches usually end up lynching town, but there is a wealth of knowledge to be gained from such lynches. Without lynching, you rely on NKs as a source of reveals, and therefore you end up relying on the scum. xylth states just this very fact. Fonz votes Bookitty saying Bookitty must have noticed Erg is a 'townsperson'. Bookitty pithily responds by saying Fonz must know that votes need not be seeking of a lynch. OGML votes Fonz because Bookitty et al got erg talking. Erg shifts his position to say: "All I'm saying is that we shouldn't vote or lynch randomly. It'll most likely effect the town." This isn't true; he was saying it was better to NL; not that it was better to NL than lynch at random. Erg says that Book's vote shows she obviously thinks he's scum - er...he really doesn't have a clue how this works, does he? Panzer votes Fonz for writing off a newbie who isn't even a newbie - true I guess, since erg is not unused to mafia; just comes from a different site, apparently. However, site differences can translate into major play differences, so Fonz is not entirely in the wrong here.

Page 3

Mills is tossing up between DS for meta-reasons and Ermac for apparent defeatism in advocating a random lynch because mafia will cause a town lynch D1 anyway. Snaps echoes the anti-DS sentiment. DS votes Fonz - still nothing substantial from this guy. Fonz argues that erg is new to this site and, thus, is a newbie for MS purposes. Book says that newbies belong in newbie games and she is not going to alter her play to accomodate them in regulars - a very interesting atttitude. I don't get her accusation that Fonz overreacted, though. I think the point here is that Erg is clearly not totally incompetent (cf. a total newb). He is arguing in support of something ridiculous and that can't simply be ignored. Xylth votes liam for repeatedly referring to "our people" and "the town" - good pressure vote. Fonz criticises Book's use of the overeaction accusation and also a strawmanning about vote = desire to lynch. Fonz says that the reason he is still arguing is because nobody explained it. CKD arrives and goes after erg for his bad posts and Fonz for his responses to people's treatment of Erg. Erg points out he was the one that said the bad liam quote, not liam. Book unvotes thinking scum wouldn't do this - I'm a bit more skeptical, for the same reason as CKD. Mills goes after DS - adds nothing to the discussion.

Page 4

OGML votes Mills for his pursuit of DS; also expresses his view that Erg is well-meaning. Mills thinks erg is pro-town. liam FoSes both DS and Mills. Egr persists in advocating NL because he "thinks" it is best - doesn't even comment on Fonz's thorough rebuttal to this position. DS votes Bookitty because, apparently, Egr only "mentioned" NL and did not push it; this guy clearly is not paying any attention at all.

Page 5

Snaps cottons on to the ignorance displayed by DS over Egr and NL. Mills elaborates on actual reasons he has for suspecting DS: for shifting play and for attacking Mills' character. Liam thinks Mills could be a lyncher - weird suggestion. Lots of speculation.

Page 6

Fonz calls an end to the speculating. Egr FoSes Xylth for "wanting to end" D1; that wasn't what xylth was advocating, so Egr is wrong again. Egr shifts AGAIN this time saying that we should NL if we cannot come to a final "and positive" decision about who is scum. I'm getting tired of reading Egr's thoughts on NL; since he is so atrociously wrong.

Page 7

"Egruntz, being a moron is not a playstyle"- Best line of the entire game so far; kudos to Panzer. Some discussion about whether or not to lynch anti-towns. I don't have any objection in principle. I don't think the debate here is too meaningful, since views do differ on this subject.

Page 8

OMGL votes xylth for not focussing on the game and for pursuing idiots. Fonz notes the problem with this, namely that he is attacking for what he acknowledges may well just be play, and votes OMGL. Panzer argues that he has lynched ABR and BM too many times to go after an anti-town again, though Fonz raises the good point that allowing those players to live "because that's they're style" is tremendously risky. hasd votes DS for his lack of any meaningful contribution.

Page 9

Panzer FoSes anyone on DS because DS's play is antitown but not scummy; an "easy lynch". zz FoSes Egr for his advocacy of NL and votes him for the shifting of opinion that Egr has exhibited.

Page 10

Sangy doesn't think Egr is scum because Egr keeps pounding at his NL argument, rather than just sidling into the shadows. Liam raises a silly wifom. My predecessor votes Liam; his sole contribution to date

Next set of pages coming in my next post.

[vollkan]

I didn't mean that you were echoing Mills; merely that you were expressing suspicion of DS also. Again, that's just me note-taking so I know what to look back over. Where I see multiple people attacking somebody, that's something for me to refer back to.

[vollkan]

I'm going to finish my read and, hopefully, place a vote if any candidates stand out to me.

Page 11

Some theory discussion about scum advocacy of NL. Bookitty casts a vote for Mills for a contradiction in respect of 'gut votes' and for a strange attitude to DE. Mills responds to the first few points of Book's, but makes a very evasive response on the DE issue - focussing on one part of the point (DE knowing exclusively what DE 'meant') rather than the fact that (quoting Boo) "Mills defends him here, while attacking him fairly strongly in the first, less strong case."

Page 12

Bookitty gets rebutted quite strongly by Mills because the contradiction Bookitty pointed out seems to stem from Bookitty's own opinions about DE's posts, rather than any incoherence from Mills.

Page 13

Panzer FoSes hasdfas because hasd unvoted Eteocles on replacement and his explanation makes it seem like he was voting DS for idiocy. OGML votes Mills for overreaction and his sparking the DS wagon seemingly opportunistically. Snaps has DS in primary suspect position and DE in second; his first point on DE is just a theory disagreement (not actually suspicious), then an attack on a single dodgy sentence by DE and for his refusal to elaborate on "knowing" egruntz is town. Mills replaces out and is voted by Phate (replacing out is scumtell?) Panzer thinks Mills' meltdown "ensures that he is scummy". I've played with Mills before, and I have seen him engage in even more "meltdown-ish" behaviour; so this doesn't surprise me all that much. Bookitty suggests Mills' suspicions were feigned on the basis that he attacked for a minor semantic issue, but defended on something serious.

Page 14

Not much meaningful early on. Phate thinks the DS wagon is contrived and maybe scum led. He prefers the Mills wagon.

Page 15

Antithesis (Mills) claims cop. OGML votes CKD for adding nothing (This is true, CKD hasn't added anything since replacement and actually asked for the case on Mills). CKD reacts to OGML's vote rather angrily, since there are people who were actual total lurkers (my predecessor being an obvious case).

Page 16

Anti declares his intention to vote Eteo. Panzer attacks CKD for his OMGUS on OGML. And then I arrive.

~~~~~~~~~~~~
I realise that Eteocles is going to be the lynch now due to the deadline system in place. Given DS's useless bandwagoning (chaos is fine when it has some point) and Eteo's obvious lack of contribution, this is a decent wagon. Hopefully, the discussion will become less theory-oriented and not as destroyed by lurkers on D2.

Vote: Eteocles

[vollkan]

At least half the normal required lynching number is required at deadline. Eteocles has 8 votes and 10 are needed, so Eteocles will be the lynchee.

[vollkan]

Anyway, the Fonz and DS seem to be the most suspicious, but I'll go check over the previous few pages in a while.

He never came back to this and told us what about Fonz or Disciple Slayer he found suspicious.

It's worth noting that at the time, DS and Fonz were among those with the highest votecounts. Given the vagueness of DE's professed suspicions, this looks like sitting with consensus.

Consider it this way.In any mafia game where the mafia aren't retarded, there's going to be a townie lynched on the first day. We might as well random vote rather than not vote at all.

In posts 191 through 201, Mills and Hasdgfas argued about whether Dark Ermac was endorsing a random lynch or not. What I find suspicious is the fact that Dark Ermac NEVER jumped in to explain or justify his own post.

Whilst it is true that he never jumped in in that debate, DE did explain it in #83:

Normally a townie is lynched on the first day, except in the case of this mafia, where I can find a couple people worthy to lynch. The point is, even if they are townie, and get lynched, it won't secure the win for the mafia, but it will check off another name on our list of suspicious people. Eventually I may come up with such a list, but for now I will see what goes on next.

Right now I believe that you are the most scummy, but I won't vote for you. I actually believe you to be a townie. It's hard to understand, but I've seen many games in which the idiot was lynched first, and just so happened to be town. So, everyone who is currently voting for DS: you can choose to either not lynch this townie, or you can lynch him anyway for fears of being taken advantage of by the mafia. Your choice.

Here he does a complete turn around from “DS seems to be the most suspicious” to
“I actually believe you to be a townie”. He gives no explanation for his change of mind. He takes it a step further in post 224.

He explains it on the basis of meta - that VIs are often town. What's interesting is that he changes what is a

possibility

(DS being a town VI) to a fact ("you can choose to either not lynch this townie, or you can lynch him anyway for fears of being taken advantage of by the mafia.")

[vollkan]

PBP Review of Xylthixlm

{View is of Xy in isolation, oldest first}
0: Bandwagon vote on OGML
1: “We're bandwagoning YOU, not ME.” To OGML after OGML OMGUSed Xy
2: Opposes NL.
3: Set-up speculation (“I would assume 4 mafia + a serial killer, myself.”)
4: Calls for votes on OGML
5: Attacks liamcool for trying to appear protown. Votes liam.
6: It was actually egruntz. Votes egruntz
7: “egruntz is trying very hard to be helpful to the town.”
8: Translates something snaps said into: “So in summary: You think egruntz really is trying to help the town, but you also think he might be mafia.”
9: Tag fix
10: “Bandwagoning is a null tell until we know some alignments.”
11: “By the way, where did the other votes on egruntz go?” He sure is paying a lot of attention to egruntz
12: “DS and Mills, stop fighting each other and vote egruntz.” More on egruntz
13: Doesn’t want to rush a deadline lynch
14: “Oh, and I'm also really curious to see if DS and/or Mills will do what I tell them.”
15: Says that in 13 he didn’t mean that he wants a rushed lynch now
16: Admits he could be wrong about a rushed lynch being bad
17: Asks Mills to explain why he said he needs to reread in light of learning that this game isn’t restricted to the newbie roles
18: Wonders how to get info without a wagon
19: Asks for the suspicions of DE and Sangy
20: Votes DS for wagoning
21: “egruntz, do you think we should ever lynch without certain information that someone is mafia? If so, when? If not, how do you expect to win?”
22: Posts probability of town winning by random lynches
23: “Sufficiently bad idiots can be antitown without being scum.”
24: Scumdar post.

Egruntz:

Newbie tells. But giving off newbie tells as experienced player is scummy. His defensiveness is weird. (What’s interesting here is that he expresses a negative opinion of Egruntz without making any actual argument. A distancing tell)

DS:

Lurker

Mills:

“Seems townish”

Snaps:

Posts too much

Fonz and Bookitty

Competent players
Would be happy to vote DS or Egruntz.
25: Criticises Snaps’ verbosity
26: Advocates lynch of the antitown
27: Panzer hasn’t made an impression
28: “Phate, only if they contain useful content rather than saying the same thing three times.”
29: Refers to another post of snaps where he says too much
30: Snarky post at OGML who criticised Xy’s lack of content
31: Continues advocating the lynch of the antitown who are not scum
32: “Mills, that isn't what you said in post 192.”
33: Is sure DS will show up and defend
34: Pushes a DS lynch
35: Ditto
36: FoSes CKD
37: Asks DE what probability he thinks DS is scum.
38: “Any act that hurts the town is scummy”
39: Gives a scumlist:

Disciple Slayer
curiouskarmadog, for voting Mills for a scummy reason then not saying what it is
Dark Ermac, for suggesting random voting then arguing against voting the scummiest people
egruntz, for advocating nolynch and general strange play

It is quite likely, given the pervasiveness of distancing, that at least one other scumbag is in this list. Of those listed, we can rule out DS and CKD (both have died and came up as town). That leaves us with DE and egruntz. Of those two, his comments towards egruntz look most like distancing, since the arguments given against egr are the most flimsy (though the DE arguments aren’t much better).
40: Pushes DS
41: Ditto
42: Explains that scum will push NL more than town
43: “If scum never do it, then it is not a tell. If it's not a tell, there is no penalty for doing it. If there is a benefit and no penalty, then scum will do it.”
44: “The benefit of pushing nolynch is extremely small, so the associated tell is also extremely small... with optimal play. Real scum don't play optimally.”
45: Defends Mills against Boo
46: Puts that logic on hold after Mills
47: His read on Mills has become undecided. Starts attacking Book
48: “Whether you think it's a major issue depends on how you interpret Dark Ermac's post. "Semantics issues" are like that.”
49: Thinks Mills’ defence of DE was semantics
50: Asks why Mills is more inconsistent than Bookitty
51: Sees and accepts Book’s point
52: Asks what time zone the deadline is
53: Reiterates a call by Mills for DS to post
54: Calls for content
55: Questions Eteo’s lurking
56: Confirms vote on Eteo
57: 3 days to deadline
58: FoSes panzer
59: Accuses Panzer of distancing from DS
60: “I know the argument against Panzer is weak. Still, I've got my eye on her.”
61: Asks why some people are not voting
62: Keeps pushing the non-voters to vote
63: Points out mod error
64: Thinks DS might have forgotten his role
65: Doesn’t like DE not revealing suspicions
66: “I plan to take a hard look at Dark Ermac, egruntz, and Panzerjager tomorrow.”

I’m in agreement with Bookitty that Xyl was probably distancing against egruntz. DE is also a possibility.

Needless to say, I shall be giving both of them a thorough review in my future posts.

[vollkan]

Knew Xyl was scum >.>.

Good for you! I agree with hasdfas that this looks like trying to score points.

It all depends on the mod. Some mods only have Guilty results - a "No result" can mean that the player is innocent, or that the investigation failed.

Of course, BooKitty could also be a Neutral player, like a survivor, or whatnot, and sometimes those dont' show up.

I think the most likely explanation would be RB. If "No Result" is what happens for neutral players, then that is a possibility, but RB is more common.

PBPA of egruntz

0: Pushes NL. He seems to think that the random votes are intended to push a random lynch. Given the fact he is inexperienced, this is feasible to come from newbtown or newbscum. Interestingly, he doesn't vote for NL - saying he wants it to be discussed. This looks like he is trying to avoid potentially going against a consensus.
1: Continues pushing No Lynch, says his experience on other sites has it as a good thing.
2: More about his past experience
3: Shifts his position to say that we just shouldn't be voting or lynching randomly - which isn't the same as pushing NL.
4: Keeps opposing random votes. Says "Sure random voting helps stir up discussion, but otherwise I see no use for it" This is pretty stupid, since the only point of random voting IS to stir up discussion. He's basically admitting that random voting does exactly what it is meant to.
5: Corrects someone who voted for Liam instead of himself due to quote mux-ip
6: Says that he personally thinks NL is good, despite having also been opposed on other sites. Now he says that he doesn't think there is any need to NL, just that it is a good option. Again, his position varies since it was initially that he thought NL was best.
7: FoSes Xyl. This is interesting. The reason for the FoS is that he thinks Xyl wants to rush a lynch. However, egruntz makes it clear that "Not a scummy move, but something that grabbed my attention." Trying to make an attack, but also downplaying its significance. Smells like distancing.
8: Rejects that he is either newb or scum
9: "As I mentioned before, it would be best to not lynch at all if we all can't come up with a final and positive conclusion that a certain person is mafia." Actually, what you mentioned before has now varied several times.
10: Typo
11: Now says that D1 doesn't give enough evidence on which to base a lynch (and, of course, then you get to D2 with nothing and make a crappy lynch so you are actually worse off)
12: Says that you should be as sure as possible before lynching
13: Advocates getting rid of idiots.
14: Votes DS for BWing and being "too defensive". This was sixth on the wagon and is not very much substantiated.
15: Suspects (in order) DS, Mills, Xyl. The fact Xyl is in third place smacks of distancing (put a scumbuddy in your top suspects).
16: Promises content
17: "Knew Xyl was scum" Yeah, I bet you did
18: Says it wasn't trying to get points and was just "a friendly note." It might well be a "friendly note" (WTF is a friendly note?) but that doesn't rule the brownie-point seeking out.
19: Apparently he initially raised NL only against random lynching and later started to adapt to our playstyle. He was, in fact, consistently pushing NL, albeit for ever-changing reasons, and only cast a vote when it got him onto a cushy BW.
20: Says that he chose DS over Xyl since DS was doing more wagoning. First up, what about Mills? Secondly, you only had Xyl as a third suspect (you weren't expressing conviction that he was scum) and gave no explanation for that professed suspicion.
21: "Time to go eat"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'm a little wary of how much suspicion this guy merits, because he seems to be immensely naive. Nonetheless, his shifty advocacy of NL, his lack of scumhunting (apart from a slapdash DS vote) and what looks an awful lot like distancing to Xyl make him very suspicious in my eyes.

Egruntz, you have some explaining to do.

[vollkan]

Vote: egruntz

You have failed to respond to anything I have said, and now you have claimed scum. The former merits my vote of its own accord, and the latter is something that I detest. Whether you are town or scum, you have just hurt your team.

[vollkan]

With 2 down, this can only get easier. I'll do up an analysis of egr's links to other players very shortly - to check for distancing tells and so on.

And, Antithesis, let's hear some results

[vollkan]

So I noticed something. Xyl and egruntz were listed in different colors when dead. Now, Elias could have done this for no good reason, or Xyl and egruntz could have been on different scum teams.

With three deaths on the first night, it's likely there's more than one scum group. Only one death last night, but that doesn't mean anything... especially now that we know there's a doc in the setup.

Interesting point.

As you say, the triple NKs on N1 make it extremely likely we have more than one scum group (or SK). It would really surprise me if Xyl and Egruntz were different scum groups because their behaviour to each other stunk dreadfully of distancing.

[vollkan]

Vote : Rishi
That kind of 'in game' knowledge is usually a scum tell, I think!

One question, skruffs:
Is it unlikely, to the point of meriting a vote, that a townie would actually notice the colour difference and suggest that it may be indicative of two scum groups?

I must answer my question firmly in the negative. Colours are often used to differentiate alignments, so it is a perfectly ordinary suggestion that it might suggest different scum groups.

[vollkan]

Do you think a townie or a mafia would be more eager to posit that there are in fact two seperate scum groups? I am of the mindset that scum is scum. A mafia of one group seeing another mafia die would of course be inherently curious to go see if the colors were different, if there was a differentiation in the first post, which explains (more likely) why Rishi discovered this. I have no problem 'killing the messenger', in this regard.

Skruffs, go to page 1 and tell me whether or not you notice the colour difference when you look at the "dead players" list.

I don't think that the colour difference is so subtle as to make it unlikely a townie would notice it. Rishi has already said he checked the first post, so it seems natural that he would notice the colour difference.

[vollkan]

Vollkan - I'm not saying it's not noticeable. Did I say that it was too subtle to notice? I didn't. I said that Rishi's post seems to be very carefully formulated to be an 'oh by the way guys look at this'... I'm not saying he should be lynched for it, I'm expressing my suspicion of him.

Well, you said to me that:

Do you think a townie or a mafia would be more eager to posit that there are in fact two seperate scum groups? I am of the mindset that scum is scum. A mafia of one group seeing another mafia die would of course be inherently curious to go see if the colors were different, if there was a differentiation in the first post, which explains (more likely) why Rishi discovered this. I have no problem 'killing the messenger', in this regard.

That makes it pretty clear that you think it more likely that Rishi-scum would discover it than Rishi-town. You even use the exact words "explains (more likely) why Rishi discovered this." If your problem was only Rishi's reporting of his discovery, as you now claim, (and I will get to this in just one minute) then this doesn't fit.

As for the claim that the way he reported his discovery seemed to be formulated to stress that he found it by accident, you are veering into "too-townie" territory.

Let's look at what Rishi actually said:

So I noticed something. Xyl and egruntz were listed in different colors when dead. Now, Elias could have done this for no good reason, or Xyl and egruntz could have been on different scum teams.

With three deaths on the first night, it's likely there's more than one scum group. Only one death last night, but that doesn't mean anything... especially now that we know there's a doc in the setup.

He says he "noticed" it. He goes on to give the two best explanations, and gives evidence supporting that there are 2 scum groups.

You're reaching badly to suggest that this looks fake. If I had been in the same situation as Rishi, I dare say I would have written much the same sort of thing.

[vollkan]

I stand by my earlier stance. You'll notice that, however, that I'm not attacking people who disagree with me. It's a personal scum tell that I am going to stick by for the time being.

You'll notice that I have argued that it is not, in fact, a scumtell. Thus, I consider any suspicion of Rishi stemming solely from his reporting of the colour difference to be unjustified. Just because you personally consider it to be a scumtell doesn't justify your belief.

Imagine this - Vollkan has just argued the earth is flat:

"I stand by my earlier stance. You'll notice that, however, that I'm not attacking people who disagree with me. It's a personal view that I am going to stick by for the time being."

I am guessing by your last paragraph that you are *not*, in fact, in the same situation as Rishi. However, isn't the situation, as you see it, that Rishi, as town, noticed something on the front page? What about your situation is different than his?

Stupid question, really.

Rishi was in the situation of having noticed a colour difference which was potentially very significant. As I said: ". If I had been in the same situation as Rishi, I dare say I would have written much the same sort of thing."

If it was me that had noticed the difference and it hadn't yet been reported (ie. if I was in Rishi's situation) I would have said essentially the same thing as he did.

Also, noticed you teasing the cop that claimed to have been roleblocked the previous night. FOS that's as much a scum tell as someone congratulating the doctor on a successful no-kill. Why would you expect him to have results today?

I guess you are referring to this:

And, Antithesis, let's hear some results

That isn't teasing. My intention in adding the was to express eagerness at the prospect of getting more information, particularly given that we hadn't received information on D2.

I was

hoping

that he had results. In the same way that saying "Let's do our best" doesn't suggest any expectation that you will do your best - just that you are hoping to.

[vollkan]

I'm not slipping

You'll notice that I have argued that it is not, in fact, a scumtell. Thus, I consider any suspicion of Rishi stemming solely from his reporting of the colour difference to be unjustified. Just because you personally consider it to be a scumtell doesn't justify your belief.

Imagine this - Vollkan has just argued the earth is flat:
"I stand by my earlier stance. You'll notice that, however, that I'm not attacking people who disagree with me. It's a personal view that I am going to stick by for the time being."

If you bothered reading that, you would see my position stated very "I consider any suspicion of Rishi stemming solely from his reporting of the colour difference to be unjustified." In other words, I reject that it is a scumtell. Nowhere do I say he seems even slightly pro-town. All I am saying is that your arguments are bullshit.

The point of the flat-earth reference was because you seemed to be pulling an appeal to your subjective viewpoint - by calling it a "personal scumtell". My point was that I don't much care whether or not it is a "personal scumtell", I'm going to attack it and consider it illegitimate unless you either objectively justify it, or relinquish it.

[vollkan]

Why are personal scumtells unacceptable in games with you in them?

As I said, "I don't much care whether or not it is a "personal scumtell", I'm going to attack it and consider it illegitimate unless you either objectively justify it, or relinquish it."

Having a "personal scumtell" is not prima facie unacceptable, but it is when you can't justify it.

You reference involved something that is known not toue; the earth being flat; under the that it is their personal opinion and not something they expect others to believe. The two examples don't match up,though. I provided reasoning for why rishi scum would say what he said, you then called my hypothesis a flat earth theory. If the earth might in fact 'be flat', (or in this casse, rishi might be scum), why the unadulterated resistance agaiinst theoretical examinations of his motives??? One clue either leads to anotheer clue, or it leads to a dead end.

Again, you miss the point.

I think your reason for suspecting Rishi is a manifestly stupid one - akin to the earth being flat. That doesn't mean I think Rishi is town - just that I think your argument for him being scum is bullshit.

I'm not opposed to theoretical examinations - I am opposed to you assuming that he did something which is scummy in the absence of evidence.

[vollkan]

Justify with either logic or evidence. Stuff that the rest of us can critically examine. We cannot critically examine you saying that you "personally" hold the view.

To make this clear:
Subjective = "I feel X is scum."
Objective = "I believe X is scum because X did Y, which is scummy because <reasoning>"

[vollkan]

You continue to be obtuse about this. The argument you made was that the way Rishi announced his findings was such as to merit suspicion on the basis that it looked like he was trying to seem pro-town. You also suggested that Rishitown finding it was less likely than Rishiscum. I refuted this.

You then went about calling it a "personal scumtell" and I have denounced your appeal to subjective views. You gave objective arguments, I trashed them, and then you appeal to "personal" views.

[vollkan]

The "mod messing up" is a legitimate possibility. It isn't a "weaker" one.

Again, though : What "EVIDENCE" are you looking for?

Anything that demonstrates why Rishi's actions are more likely to come from scum than town. Even that much will appease me. So far, you've just been asserting that what he said looks scummy, and I've been asserting the contrary. As accuser, the onus is on you.

[vollkan]

If there truly are two scum groups, then looking at how people interacted with Xyl and Egruntz won't be all that helpful. It also seems really strange, considering their behaviour looked exactly like distancing to me.

I do agree that it's bizarre. I mean, my distancing analysis worked in catching scum just fine - except if there are two scum groups (which Elias's confirmation of the colours being deliberate would strongly suggest) the scum weren't actually distancing

I'm still going to go back over the interactions. Distancing tells are still distancing tells even if there are two scum groups.

[vollkan]

I think a clearer way to say what I meant is that *I* haven't found much of use in looking at how people interacted with Xylthixlm. And I have the opposite problem with egruntz... basically all the interactions I'm looking at there can be taken as legitimate bad reaction to his horrible no-lynch plan, or defending someone who is clearly a newbie... I can't derive much from it either. Nearly all of us had one reaction or the other to egruntz, and I don't have a clear idea whether scum would distance or defend such play. If you see something different, Snaps, I'd be glad to hear it, but I'm not gleaning much I think is definitive or useful in either case personally.

Have you seen any such connections? If so, what information have you derived?

I actually agree with you about egruntz. Boo, remember Roach in Mini 492? I think I see the same thing happening here egruntz - both were newbscum who played in an insane manner, denying the ability to judge reactions. I've been reading over egruntz without being able to nail down anything solid.

I'm going to review OGML next up myself.

[vollkan]

The advantage is to raise one's perception as town. Bussing your teammate is a viable option because it makes you look town. It would help your team by not getting you lynched by the town because they think you are town. You weren't the only one who accused him and until you mentioned it I didn't even know you had an arguement against egruntz. Again you'd do it because it'd make you look town.

This is just ridiculous, Panzer. I was the one who brought UP the idea that egruntz and Xyl were scumbuddies. I made the case, I pushed it, and you didn't even know I had an ARGUMENT against him? Did you read anything during the last day of the game?

Your argument is complete nonsense, and you admit you don't even KNOW what happened yesterday. I ask you again, what is the advantage to a scum TEAM to bus one of its members as soon as it finds out there are two scumteams? How does that help a scum TEAM to win?

I'm in agreement with Bookitty here. She led the charge against egruntz in #426. I followed that up with my analyses, but she definitely started it.

As for the bussing charge, I'll go further and call it bullshit. Fine, yes, Bookitty could have bussed egruntz - but beyond that speculation I see nothing. Similarly, Bookitty might well be scum on the non-egruntz scum group. Similarly, Bookitty might well be town.

[vollkan]

Cause the norm is 2 groups of 3..every game i've been in with 2 greoups has been 2 groups of 3.

Can you explain the relevance of this Panzer? What were you addressing when you said this (as in, what question was the "Cause" in response to)?

[vollkan]

As promised:

PBPA of OGML

0: Random vote
1: Switches to Xylthix
2: Serious vote for Fonz for him attacking Boo for voting a 'Townsperson' (newb) on the basis that he had said he had played elsewhere.
3: nothing
4: Criticises Mills pushing meta-lynch of DS. Thinks egr is pro-town because he was forthcoming about misquoting, but says he is drastically wrong about No Lynch.
5: Votes Mills for pushing a meta lynch of DS. Thinks egr is doing his best, just in a different way.
6: Asks xyl why is always trying to BW
7: Thinks it isn't that outlandish that Mills is a lyncher
8: Unvotes Mills for making a good point about CKD. Thinks Phate is laying low. Xyl is making him uneasy and he wants to hear more. Also doesn't like Xyl pursuining egruntz for his idioticanti-town play. Votes Xyl. I think this attack here is very weak ; the main crux of it seems to just be playstyle-based, which makes me smell distancing. Another possibility, given by Book, is that OGML is actually seeking to defend his buddy egruntz by deflecting away from him.
9: Interesting post. He unvotes saying that Xyl has reassured him and thanks him for addressing 'that' (it's unclear what he is referring to). The reasons OGML gave for voting initially were Xyl's use of one-liners, his focus on Snaps' style and his attacks on Egr. Xyl's play, however, did not improve at all: He just kept giving theory and swiping at DS for lurking and BWing. Plus, his explanation of the egr thing was not fantastic, particularly to the extent that it makes sense for OGML to just drop it. The way he just drops this is suspicious in and of itself, but given that Xyl was scum, it continues the appearance of distancing. Despite having just unvoted, he now revotes Mills for being 'overeactive' (a voting justification that I loathe and which always smells opportuntistic to me) and says that, after rereading, Mills' wagoning of DS looks scummy. He never explains why, havnig just said this suspciion was 'erased' he double-takes on it. It is scummy, then it's erased, and then it's scummy again.
10: *facepalm* after Mills asks for replacement
11: Now he is ready to lynch Mills for his 'very scummy actions' (which he just previously "erased") and his meltdown (how is the meltdown scummy?)
12: Post references
13: Swaps to CKD for not contributing.
14: Opposes Eteo wagon
15: Thinks NKs are ironic. Expresses agreement with the egr case.
16: nothing
17: Votes Egr. No explanation
18: Had the same thought about the colours and doesn't think it is a legitimate basis for attack
19: Asks Boo for reasons
20: Explains his Xyl. Didn't think case was strong. Didn't like pursuit of newb-tells.
21: FoSes zz. Votes snaps, for doing nothing but lurker hunting.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I find the behaviour in posts 8 and 9 the most interesting.

FoS: OGML

. Up/downgrade contingent on responses. Current value is 65%.

[vollkan]

Vollkan, not sure what I can tell you. This looks like the same case bookitty made on me, but bookended by a post-by-post of everything else I've done around it. I've already said what I can about your numbers eight and nine. I was wrong about egruntz. I was right about xyl, and wrong to unvote him, but clearly he was doing a good job since my attack on him brought me under pressure from fonz, a townie.

Okay. I will reexamine those responses again.

Did it warrant an explanation? He had claimed scum.

That's what I get for using the view in isolation function.

[vollkan]

I'm suspicious of Snaps and OGML for another reason, though; the three people who voted egruntz AFTER he admitted to being scum were Korlash, Snaps, and OGML. I do NOT think scum would bus their teammate, knowing there were two scumgroups. But once he admitted it? Why not take the townie points for being in on the lynch?

I don’t quite follow the logic here. OhGodMyLife and I are suspicious because we voted for Egruntz after he claimed scum? At the point that Egruntz claimed he was three votes away from getting lynched. After claiming scum, who here would not have voted for him? I think everyone in this game would have, regardless of alignment. Korlash, OGML, and myself just happened to be the next three players to log on after his claim.

I think the point Bookitty is making (if I am thinking on the same wavelength) is that the scum of Egr's group would most most likely have bussed him once he had claimed scum; once it was certain that he was a goner. In other words, we have the rats running aboard the sinking ship.

However, it is a fair rebuttal that any decent player - town or scum (be it Egr's group or otherwise) would have voted egruntz at that point (Indeed, Korlash - the deceased doc - was the penultimate voter). It is still unlikely that Egr's own group would have joined quickly (unless they sensed impending doom), but that's to say nothing about the other scumgroup.

This was the Egr wagon (Elias doesn't have the completed list in a vc):
Bookitty, Panzerjager

|My PBPA|

hasdgfas, Phate

| Scum claim |

Vollkan, Snaps, Korlash, OGML

(Ftr, I also voted Egruntz after he had claimed. However, that was simply due to the fact that (as I have done with OGML) I gave my PBPAee the right of reply. Egruntz's reply was to not address my PBPA and claim scum - both unforgivable in the circumstances).

In every mafia game I have played in and in almost every game I have followed there have been scum quietly staying out of the spotlight, posting just enough to keep from being replaced. So far, in this game two scum have been found, neither of which were lurkers. I believe there is a good chance we still have lurker scum among us.

How many mafia games have you been in? I highly doubt enough to warrant an assertion that at least one scum will always/very usually be a lurker.

Now, as promised, I have reviewed OGML's responses to Bookitty as suggested:

Bookitty, I didn't consider my attack against xyl particularly strong at the time, which is why I was persuaded so quickly to unvote. Fonz's quick defense of him also made me vacillate, because I was getting a pro-town vibe from him regardless of his coming after me. Nobody else seemed to feel suspicious of xyl at all, but I was trying to bring up a topic of discussion aside from DS and egruntz, as I said in the post you quoted. Obviously I failed on that note, as DS/eteo ended up getting lynched anyway. Yeah it looks bad that egruntz did turn out to be newbscum trying to get us to no-lynch, but I honestly just bought the argument that it was just people trying to lynch a newb for newbtells instead of real scum tells.

In post 9 (OGML, oldest first), OGML votes Xyl saying:

Unvote: Mills

I actually don't see the above as an OMGUS argument, rather I think mills makes a good point about CKD's input and general activity level. Certainly enough to erase my original suspicions that were the basis of my vote.

Phate, you started off the game announcing that you'd be V/LA so your absence is excused, but since returning you've done nothing but have a discussion about what constitutes anti-town and whether snaps talks too much. Trying to stay off the map?

Xylthixlm, you've been making me uneasy lately. Could just be your playstyle, but I'd like to hear more out of you that just one liners, and you've been way too focused on the way that snaps has been writing rather than whats actually going on in the game. Also this:

Sufficiently bad idiots can be antitown without being scum.

really struck me the wrong way. Lets leave the stupid people alone and go after the scummy people, shall we?

Vote: Xylthixlm

Now, the first part against Xyl (third para) is very weak indeed. Vague "you've been making me uneasy". He equivocates by saying it could be playstyle, and then moves on to request more content and less useless clutter. This is weak in itself, and even OGML seems unconvinced (as he later declared in answer to Boo). Despite this, he makes a fairly strong declaration ("really struck me the wrong way") against the sentence by Xyl he quotes. Not really vote-worthy at all (especially on its own), since it is a theory position.

Now, OGML you say this was to bring up an alternative topic to DS and egruntz. You've acknowledged that this looks bad, given egruntz's reveal. The other question I would ask is why you would present something so trivial as what you Xyl for. I mean, seeking productive discussion is all well and good, but the 'case' you formed was not going to lead anywhere. You called for Xyl to post more, made weak kidglove hits at his playstyle, and then made a puffed-up strike against a theory point.

I admit here that my read on this is split: The attack is so weak that it reeks of distancing to Xyl. However, it is also readable as an effort to side-track. I fail to see how, you could (as you declare) reasonably try to spark an alternative discussion based on such a weak case. Tell me, what did you actually expect to happen? You have even yourself admitted that it was weak.

From there, 5 days later, we move to this:

OK, Xyl, you've more than reassured me, so thank you for addressing

that

. The biggest reason for my vote was because I think the DS bandwagon and constant talk of egruntz' no-lynch theory were consuming too much of the town's attention and I wanted to get people to look elsewhere.

Unvote, Vote: Mills

I'm still of the opinion that the way the bandwagon started was BS, which was my original reason for voting mills. Since then he's made some good points on other matters, specifically CKD, who still needs to respond to the issues brought up. However, in the past few pages Mills has been extremely overreactive, and having done a reread of his posts from the beginning, the way he started the DS bandwagon still looks scummier than hell.

The "that" which I have bolded is ambiguous. What were you referring to? I guess you meant Xyl's post where he explains why he thinks non-scum can be anti-town. Xyl's answer is crap, quite frankly (it's in Xyl 31; I will attack it if you want me to). For someone that apparently had such a huge problem with his first post, I find it odd that you would just retreat from the offensive. You then say that your biggest motivation was to "get people to look elsewhere" (which you later repeat). I refer you to my previous questioning on this point. The fact you then vote Mills (for being 'overeactive') makes this look even worse.

[vollkan]

Coming up next: Review of Snaps

[vollkan]

Review of Snaps

0: FoSes Phate and Sens for not random voting (hypocrisy, no? )
1: nothing
2: theory

3: Declares he will most likely be voting DS for "lurking and bandwagoning. Both very common mafia tells." They are also very unreliable mafia tells. Now, come late in D1, when all DS had done was BW hop and add nothing, there is a valid argument for lynching him - his play is patently anti-town, and an easy way for scum to hide. However, this was just one day into the game - I am surprised Snaps seems to just assume that DS's chaos is pointless (eg. consider someone like Adel).
4: Reiterates his lurking-based suspicion of DS. Swipes at Mills for pushing a meta-based lynch of DS. Interesting two paragraphs follow:

egruntz is trying very hard to be helpful to the town.

Sometimes a player that appears to be trying too hard to help the town, actually is trying to help the town. I get the feeling this is the case with Egruntz. There has been much make of his seeming "newness", yet he tells us he has played before. Mafia playing up newbie tells to gain a bit of FoI is ploy that has been used before.

Currently my highest suspicions are Disciple Slayer and Egruntz. We have a few lurkers as well, and they always have my suspicion. However, I am willing to give a few more days before calling them out, as this is a busy time of year and I'd like to give them the benifit of the doubt.

It's completely unclear what he thinks of egruntz - On one hand he suggests egr may actually be pro-town, but then goes on to raise conspiracy of him being mafia concocting newbtells, and then lists egr as one of his two highest suspicions.

I can see this as scum pushing an easy lynch (two actually, given DS) or as distancing (given the weakness of his attacks and him combining egr with another suspect).

5: Weird post in which he stresses that Boo disagreeing with Fonz does not necessitate that one is scum, and he seems to think distancing is an unlikely gambit because they wouldn't have time to plan it

In my experience, distancing is not something you "plan" anyway.

6: Xyl notes the weirdness in Snaps' suspicion of Egr. He shifts his story to say that he was not actually suspicious of egr, but was concerned about the potential fabrication of newbtells

In short, he's contriving a conspiracy theory - and anyone that's played with me before knows I loathe this sort of "reasoning".

7: DS's first three posts are "blatent bandwagon votes"

Oh, right - and that's scummy how?

Thinks DS is the most suspicious

This is all based solely on the assumption that BWing and chaos = scum, which is wrong this early on

8: Theory

9: Lurkerhunting. Votes DS for "obvious bandwagon votes and lack of contribution to the discussion"

Again, when things get down to the wire, these reasons are valid - but so far, all you have been doing is pushing DS for what are pretty dreadful reasons

10: Suspicion list:

1. Disciple Slayer is a lurker and bandwangoner, and seems the most likely candidate to be mafia yet. (posts #56,#72,#103)
2. Mills has aroused my suspicion by using aspects of another game to fuel his arguments against Disciple Slayer, at least at first. (post #72)
3. Egruntz's idea of no lynch on day one has put him on my watch list. (post #72,#81)
4. Lurkers, regardless of status, hurt the town. (post #131)

This shows very little in-depth analysis. He seems to just be jumping on what seems most obviously "anti-town" rather than actually trying to properly work out who is scum. Again, anti-town-hunting is valid at a point, but it should NOT be all that a player does. We are yet to see Snaps actually making inquiries about these behaviours - to try and work out whether this stuff is actually scummy.

11: Defends gut feelings, but says it is worth trying to figure out where they came from, because they can be mafia screening

I agree with you here. My policy for dealing with people who declare "gut feelings" is to demand that they find objective justification for their feelings. If they don't, I will hound them down until they do so, or relinquish the gut feeling. I detest "gut feelings" - they are a sneaky means of turning reasons for suspicion (which should be objective) into a murky subjective thing.

12: nothing

13: Puts DE at second most suspect due to lack of contribution

More lurker-hunting. Look there is nothing wrong with aggression towards lurkers (eg. Listing them a whole swag of questions and demanding they either answer, explain why they can't, or ask to be replaced since they can't play) but lurking =/= suspicious

14: After DE says he thinks DS is town (dodgily, since he gives no explanation), Snaps misrepresents this and says: "This post seems to me like Dark Ermac KNOWS Disciple Slayer is a townie" and says this is suspicious.

Whilst DE's lack of explanation was worth questioning, he did not say he KNEW. The last few sentences seemed more certain, but in whole context it seems that he is just saying that he thinks DS is town. Again, Snaps leaps without questioning. The mistake Snaps makes here is a reasonable one, and I made it myself - but since it was pointed out to Snaps later, I don't think he can tenably maintain this view.

15: Mills makes the same observation as I just did about DE. Snaps says that he can sees Mills' point, but then he just reiterates his own previous view. Snaps then cites the next post by DE where DE states:

It's better to think about the vote than it is to just vote for them because they seem scummy.

Believe me when I say this: he's town.

I may not be 100% accurate, but from past experiences

I know this

.

{Bolding is Snaps'}

It should be pretty clear that what DE is saying is that he knows that village-idiots are often townies. The second "I know this" bolded is completely misrepresentative, since snaps ignores the bit about the past experiences bit. Basically, again, Snaps leaps on the obvious without looking more deeply.

16: Reiterates the same attacks against DS as justification for DS being #1, and re-asserts DE as #2. This quote is troubling:

We need to use the first few days to strip away the places that mafia traditionaly hide. Lurking, mindless bandwagoning etc.

Really? We should spend the first few days not scumhunting and, instead, go about getting rid of the people who play at a substandard level?

He also swipes at DE's defense (that it just looked scummy in writing, but it wasn't what he meant), without considering the potential truth of this. Reiterates he thinks DE was saying "he knows" (Snaps doesn't elaborate as to why)

17: Suspects Eteocles, Dark Ermac, Mill’s replacement. Compiles a lurker list.

18: Reiterates his views on DS - "mafia in plain sight"

19: "I still feel that DS/Ecto is the strongest case for scum, but I will be willing to change my vote to Mills/Anti or DE as they both seem scummy to me."

20: nothing

21: Vote/FoS history

22: More arguments against DE. Some of these are valid (most notably, an unexplained backslip on DS), but he also reiterates the attacks on the "I know" posts and the typing style post. Ends up voting DE, admits there is nothing tremendously scummy, but a lot of little things.

It's a few little things, and a few misrepresentations

23: Suggests the people Xyl had mutual ignorance of may be buddies.
24: Setup speculation about a paranoid doc.
25: Says it was only an idea and he isn't assuming it - personally thinks RB is responsible
26: "I only brought up the jailkeeper/paranoid doctor senario scenario because we shouldn't discount any possibilities. "
27: nothing
28: Jumps on egr after he confesses.
29: Vote/FoS review
30: Says xyzzy looks like mafia lurkiing

Question: Why not town lurking?

31: Asks panzer to explain phate vote
32: Doesn't think what RIshi did is scummy as Skruffs said
33: Jumps to liam, another lurker since xyzzy is on V/LA
34: Realises Liam is also V/LA, but keeps the vote

Odd...he takes it off zz

35: theory
36: Most suspects Liam, xyzzy and phate

Reasons for each, please

37:Swaps to zz for lurking again
38: Says lurkerhunting is a viable strategy.

NO! Lurking is anti-town, yes. It doesn't help, yes. Is lurking scummy? No. Whilst town don't have an actual game-based motivation to lurk, that doesn't mean that scum are more likely than town to lurk. Lurking will often draw undue attention and, if the other players have any functioning brain cells, a barrage of "What is your opinion on...." questions. Voting lurkers is as anti-town as lurking. Lurkers need to be dealt with aggressively, but lynching them is just stupid. It stunts discussion (you don't need to make arguments to lynch lurkers), hands the scum free NKs and, more often than note, diminishes the size of the town. Now, the other thing I need to address is meta: Some people post less than the average; some people most more. For some people, this might (in theory) be due to their alignemnt. In such cases, a lurker lynch could be valid. However, Snaps, you have not once given meta evidence for any of your lurker targets being more likely to lurk as scum - so this doesn't apply here.

39: Doesn't understand the logic about scum jumping on after egr's claim. Says defensive behaviour from lurkers can be judged

As can defensive behaviour from ANYBODY (But, of course, it's much easier to go after people who you won't need arguments to justify your attacks upon, isn't it? )

Says there has usually always been scum amongst lurkers

This is my experience too. But there is also usually always town amongst lurkers. Lurking itself is a null-tell.

40: Thoughts on the players:
Bookitty - she is not likely scum with egr

I agree

Liam - Says he is not lurking anymore
Phate - Mostly one-liners with little expressed suspicion
Antithesis - Says he is either lying, or was found innocent by the real cop, but may be a GF.

For this to make sense, we either have to assume a townie would lie, or that there are at least two cops

hasd - non-confrontational
zz - lurker beginning not to lurk
Panzer - Accuses of having set-up knowledge. The first quote Snaps cites to justify this is one which is clearly just speculation from Panzer; it gives no suggestion of knowledge. Same with Panzer's detailed NK analysis. Notes a backflip by Panzer towards egr

@ Panzer: Please address this backflip

Vollkan - He likes my analyses. And describes me as "open-minded and intellegent. If he is scum, he is a very dangerous one."

Ass-kissing will get you nowhere.

Only thing suspicious is the non-interaction me and my predecessor had with Xyl.

Rishi - Doesn't find the colour thing scummy, but that seems to be Rishi's only entry

Skruffs - Again raises the spectre of non-interaction with Xyl as a scumtell

OGML: Notes the distancing, and an effort to score brownie points.

Suspicion list:

In order of most suspicious to least:
Panzerjager
OhGodMyLife
Liamcool
Xyzzy
Rishi
Phate
Hasdgfas
Volkan
Skruffs
Bookitty
Antithesis

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The biggest problem here is the total lack of actual scumhunting. He goes after lurkersm, BWers and similar "easy targets" without asking the necessary questions or showing adequate depth of reasoning. His comment about lynching lurkers for the first few days remains ringing in my head. I peg this at

65%

. And, again, I call on snaps to explain himself - on the basis of which I may push this up or down.
~~~~~~~~~~~~

As for OGML, his response to me was simply that I review his answers to Bookitty. I did this in a previous post and found nothing convincing - in fact it brought up more criticism. So:

Vote: OGML

~~~~~~~~~~~~
Finally,

@ Anyone voting ZZ:

Explain to me why you think ZZ is scum.

[vollkan]

Still, I don't like the wishy-washy analysis on every player. What you're doing is much worse - pretending to contribute without actually providing any content.

This is something which I hoped would come across in my analysis of his analysis. The only people he takes an actual town/scum stance on are Panzer (though he only makes one good point here) and OGML (restates what's already been noted).

[vollkan]

I’m not sure what I’m being called to explain. A little more specific please, Volkan.

The pbp broadly, but you seem to have responded to the main points yourse

Lurkerhunting:
Yes, I am a lurkerhunter. Lurking is an anti-town behavior and must not be tolerated. Lurking causes games to stall, stifles conversation, and provides cover for the mafia. I will always put pressure on lurkers because of this. True, it is better for lurkers to be replaced, and if that is a possibility it is one I endorse. However, the problem comes when we have a lurker or few who post just enough to avoid being replaced.

Lurkerlynching is as anti-town as lurking itself (potentially more so, potentially less so in special circumstances). Can you meta-link me to you lurker-hunting as town?

(Theory point: The correct means to deal with lurkers, imo, is to bombard them with questions and give the following ultimatum: "Answer or f*** off completely and be replaced". That gives them no excuse.)

On day one I voted Disciple Slayer, not only because he was lurking, but because he was distracting the town and not even attempting to contribute. I didn’t then, and don’t now see why a townie would act in that way.

That's not the point. As I said, late day those things can be justification. But from the start of the day you were effectively pushing DS purely for his unhelpful play.

Then we have things like:

He has been lurking and bandwagoning. Both very common mafia tells. He has not contributed to the discustion at all. He has two posts in this thread, both are bandwagon votes with no statement.

As of yet, my highest suspicion is still DiscipleSlayer. His obvious bandwagon votes and lack of contribution to the discussion really makes him seem like a mafia, and I can see no reason for an innocent to use such obvious mafia tells. I beleive he is a mafia hiding in plain sight.
Vote : DiscipleSlayer

I agree with Mills that Disciple Slayer is being unhelpful, and that pointless bandwagon votes without contributing discussion is pretty scummy looking. However, his scumminess seems to me to be way too obvious. What mafia would give such blatent tells? On the other hand, what townie would? If I were to hazard a geuss right now, I would say that Disciple Slayer is a mafia attempting to hide in plain sight. Perhaps, he thinks that such obvious tells would incline us to belive that he is not mafia after all. I will be reserving my vote until after Disciple Slayer attempts to explain himself.

None of this is actual evidence for scumminess. It's you equating unhelpfulness and pointless BWing with scumminess.

On day two I initially voted for Dark Ermac. I thought he was scum because he seemed to have information that only scum would have. Looking back at his posts, it still seems to me that he was saying he KNEW Disciple Slayer was innocent, though I know now he couldn’t have know for sure. Another reason I was suspicions of him was because he ignored my allegations. I changed my vote to Egruntz when he claimed scum, because he claimed scum. I am sure everyone who didn’t would have if they had the chance.

Yes. He expressed the view that he DS was pro-town, but when, for example, Mills points out that you weren't reading it closely enough, you don't shift your position

On “conspiracy theories” and being “wishy washy”:
I believe that is important to consider all possibilities. That is why I brought up the possibility of a jailkeeper or that Antithesis might be lying about his role. I personally don’t think either of those is the case, but needed to be addressed as possibilities.

The conspiracies I can see are:
* Suggesting egr may be scum faking newbtells
* DS as mafia in plain sight

This is not a question of valid possibilities - this is contriving suspicion based on mere conjecture.

[vollkan]

Plus, I replaced into this game fairly late, at the very end of Day 1. Day 2 was ridiculously short. So, for me, it still feels like the early game. There's a colossal difference between reading the first 20 pages and actually participating in the first 20 pages.

Is this an excuse?

Please respond to what has been said. I replaced in too, and I've managed to pull my weight in analyses. Not having played is not an excuse. It just means you need to try and make an extra effort.

[vollkan]

Volkan : While your analysis and arguments are very good, I haven't seen where you state who you think is scum and/or town. Who do you suspect?

I rely on my analyses to give me proper reads on people.

Antithesis has claimed cop, which is a reason to think him protown. Other than that, seeing as scumhunting is not a towntell per se in this game, I am keeping an open mind.

Right now, my biggest suspects are OGML and snaps.

Something is bugging me about panzer and phate also, but I will need to reread them to work out whether this is just gut-nonsense, or if there is something behind it.

[vollkan]

Plus, I replaced into this game fairly late, at the very end of Day 1. Day 2 was ridiculously short. So, for me, it still feels like the early game. There's a colossal difference between reading the first 20 pages and actually participating in the first 20 pages.

Is this an excuse?

Please respond to what has been said. I replaced in too, and I've managed to pull my weight in analyses. Not having played is not an excuse. It just means you need to try and make an extra effort.

I think it's bad policy to criticize people for replacing in and expecting them to do MORE work. I read the first 20 pages and have been participating. Why would anyone want to replace into a game if they're going to get crap like this?

This makes me want to participate LESS, not MORE.

I didn't say you needed to do MORE work. I asked you specifically to respond to the questions which had been asked. You misunderstand what I mean by "extra effort". It's harder for replacements to contribute. Thus, they/we usually need to put in some more effort than a normal player otherwise would. But, the mere fact that someone has replaced doesn't excuse them.

[vollkan]

I think Rishi is overreacting a bit to vollkan's comments, but I'm not sure whether that means anything or not.

there's a difference between defending yourself vigilantly and seeming to get emotional about it. You can definitely overreact to a comment.

It means nothing (unless you have meta evidence)

You can "overreact", sure. (eg. "OMG WHY DID YOU FOS ME!? IT WAS A MISTAKE") but I don't see how that's scummy. Stupid, definitely; but scummy, no.

[vollkan]

People I solidly think are town: Antithesis (I believe his claim), Skruffs (Despite the fact that he has a vote on me, he seems solidly interested in scumhunting and makes good points) and hasdgfas (My previous experience with hasdgfas was as his mod and he seems off in this game. Since I've modded him as scum, I'll assume the odd play is the way he acts as town).

Could you please elaborate on what you mean by "solidly interested in scumhunting"?

Also, I don't see the logic in your read of hasd. So he is playing differently here to when he was scum? I don't think that necessarily has any bearing upon his alignment.

[vollkan]

My inclination is to vote for Snaps, given my analysis yesterday. I will read over him again, checking over my pbp, given that I was wrong yesterday.

[vollkan]

Panz and Volkan, are you suspicious of me for any other reasons than lurkerhunting? Lurkerhunting is a pretty weak tell.

I'd direct you to my PBPA for this in full.

First off, lurkerhunting is distinct from suspecting lurkers - and you did the latter.
Egs:

He has been lurking and bandwagoning. Both very common mafia tells.

[voll edit] Fwiw, bandwagoning isn't a tell either [/voll]

The last half page struck as huge distancing about non-consequental bullshit.

I have to disagree with Panzerjager here. Mills and Hasdgfas disagree on the content of Dark Ermac's post. (Post # 47). I find it very useful to discuss differences of opinion in this game. I can see both sides of the argument and I think both have valid points. What I find interesting is the silence of Dark Ermac. He is the one player who could clearly state which view point is correct, yet he has chosen to remain silent.
So far Dark Ermac has contributed very little to the game. In fact the post in question seems to be only worthwhile post he has made. His last post was on Dec 30:

Anyway, the Fonz and DS seem to be the most suspicious, but I'll go check over the previous few pages in a while.

He stated his suspicions, but gave no explanation. Dark Ermac is not helping find mafia with his lurking, or his unexplained suspicions. As a result, he has climbed my "suspicious persons list" to second place, after Disciple Slayer.

We need to use the first few days to strip away the places that mafia traditionaly hide. Lurking, mindless bandwagoning etc.

I'm open to policy arguments about lynching lurkers (eg. a "categorical imperative"-esque argument that if all town lurker town would lose. Thus, lurking should not be tolerated.) but it's bullshit to suggest that lurking is a scumtell. I've seen town lurkers; I've seen scum lurkers.

Your play this game has not relied on deep reasoning or cases so much as it has relied on attacking people for lurking (or, when contorted, for "not contributing"). That isn't scumhunting. That's lurkerhunting disguised as scumhunting. Lurkerhunting is all well and good, but it is useless if there isn't scumhunting as well.

[vollkan]

Vollkan, what do you think of Panzerjager?

I don't like him, but I will analyse him in order to work out whether this is concrete or just gut nonsense.

[vollkan]

What I am saying is that participating in all the lynches (and, yes, that did include one scum) seems odd to me. I guess I'm just looking for an explanation from you and vollkan why you have participated in every lynch.

The question you are asking assumes that an explanation can be given. I can only explain it on the basis of there being 2 good lynches (OGML and egr) and 1 obvious/necessary lynch (Eteo).

[vollkan]

Before I do my next PBPA, something which has come up in House Mafia, which just finished, is what shaft.ed terms the "Vollkan effect" - namely that my use of PBPAs has the effect of causing other people to rely on me as the "Cliff's Notes" version of the game. I don't like this because I need argument in order to test any ideas I get. I am slightly worried that my actions in this game may be having this effect. The point of these PBPAs is to incite debate, not to educate the lazy.

In order to get around that, I am going to make this more case-oriented than summary-oriented. So that you can't get away with just reading me.

PBPA of Panzerjager

1: Tells egr to stop spouting stupid ideas.
2: Votes Fonz for writing egr off and voting somebody for attacking egr

I don't see how Fonz's actions are scummy. He votes someone for assuming that anti-town =/= scum, and it was reasonable to assume he was a newbie (He had townsperson under his name).

5: Votes Mills for advocating the lynch of anti-towns

HA! Irony. You call Fonz scum because he voted Bookitty for voting egruntz for being anti-town, when you yourself just voted Mills for pushing against DS.

11: Is against Xyl's proposal to lynch the anti-town

But doesn't vote him...interesting

12: Votes Mills and FoSes hasdfas for a page of distancing (it was distancing because it was "non-consequential"

This argument is crap. Obvious distancing involves kid-glove attacks - designed to show suspicion but not to risk a lynch.

13: After being attacked for the issue I italicised, he then says that the very fact there was no attacking (ie. no 'distancing') is what makes it suspicious.

How is this scummy at all?!

14: Suspicion list:

Mills
Egruntz
Cow
The Fonz
Disciple Slayer
Patch15
the other lurkers that I haven't mentioned
everyone else
Elias
Me

15: FoSes DE; it's unclear why "I haven't really liked what he has had to say, but i think it's semantics cause the idea isn't scummy just the words. "
16: "I think egruntz is town. I really do."

Your suspicion list from just two days ago says otherwise

His top contender for scum is Mills.
20: The meltdown confirms he is scummy.

How?

21: More anti-Mills. Doesn't think DS deserves more votes.
27: Attacks CKD for

• a) Lurking - Not a scumtell
  b) Over-reacting - Not a scumtell
  c) OMGUSing - Depends how its done. And you don't analyse the how

31: Again attacks CKD for being over-defensive, saying it shows a guilty conscience

Bullshit

32: Jumps onto Egr in agreement with Bookitty

What happened to "I think egruntz is town. I really do."?

42: Votes Phate for thinking Egr would spill

Scummy how?

55: Thinks OGML and Snaps are scummy, with no reasons
62: Swaps to snaps because OGML seems somewhat sincere
67: Votes OGML for the "sake of a lynch"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Please respond to all that is italicised.

[vollkan]

A variety of potential factors:
1) Scum wanted to take out scum, and didn't think I was scummy
2) My involvement in the OGML lynch
3) Power-role hunting
4) WIFOM

[vollkan]

vollkan, I agree with most of your PBPA, but on 11, why do you find it strange that someone could disagree with someone else but not vote them? That's not really too unusual.

Whereabouts are you referring to exactly?

[vollkan]

Unfortunately real life prevents me from playing this game anymore.

I officially request to be replaced.

Sorry.

Your most recent PBPA.

Obviously I meant which post # in my PBPA.

****

PROPOSAL

****
All players submit a scumdar giving at least 2 sentences per person. I will post mine first if the majority so wills it. Otherwise, I suggest random sequencing.

[vollkan]

I never support listmaking. I think it gives too much information to scum. It lets them know who the most townie people are, giving them targets to kill (especially since the scum in this game are trying to target townies rather than the other scum team). Also, it lets scum know how they're doing. If scum know their partner is on the verge of going down, then they'll know it's time to gas up the bus.

Normally I'd disagree with you. Here I must do so even more. Yes, the lists will potentially give scum a heads up as to the most town. However, scum base their NKs on much more than that, especially in a game where they know there is another scum group.
1) Scumhunting by scum - If we have 2 groups of 3 (Which seems most likely because 2 mafia and 1 SK is probably a serious disadvantage for town) or even 2 of 3 and a SK, scum have a massive incentive to wipe out other scum. Not only do they need to outnumber rival factions, but rival factions are a lynching threat (since they don't care if they lynch anyone outside their group)
2) Power role hunting - Scum do it. Nothing more needs saying.
3) Player hunting - Scum often will kill the strongest anti-them player, even if that player is not squeaky-clean suspicion-wise.

[vollkan]

vollkan, what are you trying to accomplish with this? I'm not entirely sure how it has any practical value - if we were catching SKs, it'd be a good idea, but lists of who are commiting what scumtells doesn't tell us who is who's buddy.

1) Discussion
2) Adduces clear suspicions
3) Forces people to take some initiative
4) Potential for distancing tells

[vollkan]

1) Discussion - Well, this one is a no-brainer. If you don't talk, you don't lynch scum.
2) This is a mixed-bag, so to speak: It boosts discussion since people have to give reasons for suspicions and arguments stemming from those reasons are a good means of assessing people. Moreover, it prevents specific instances of being non-committal (eg. where people only give their opinions on the scummiest and not on those who are somewhat foggier). The draw-back is the potential for informing scum but that ordinarily is NOT serious (I have given my reasons already) and particularly so in a setup where scum have a huge imperative to lynch other scumgroups.
3) People who are forced to speak up are less murky when it comes to reading them. This also helps catch people who are leeching.
4) Only scum can distance. True, scum can try and play around with this and manipulate things, but at the end of the day, this is another source of information.

[vollkan]

This jumped out at me. Look at the weaselly words he uses to interpret zz's actions. Rather than "Xyzzy didn't find Panzerjager scummy enough to lynch; he finds me a better lynch for lurker hunting and being unhelpful.", he throws in phrases like "has been careful not to vote for Panzerjager when he was in any real danger of being lynched" and "apparently dropped his suspicions and he has switched his attack to me". Those are the words of someone who's absolutely sure that someone else is scum, yet he doesn't go on to vote him, FoS him, or even mention his opinions on zz's scumminess. It feels to me like someone just trying to stir up suspicion without making any commitment.

Smells like distancing, in other words. Declarations of suspicion without any possibility of a case arising.

I really don't like nor agree with your scumlist, especially since there is a major inconsistency in it.

That inconsistency being?

And vollkan, while I'm not sure it's scummy, your adamance that scum have absolutely no way to use our analysis seesm slightly scummy, as if you're hoping for a nightkill roadmap. Knowledge of who feels others are town=helpful for scum, not so much for town.

Meta me if you want. You will find that I adore such lists and use them frequently. If you disagree with them, that's all well and good and I am sure we can debate ad nauseum. In themselves, however, they don't mean a thing regarding my alignment (nulltell, in other words).

[vollkan]

That's hilarious.

He not only contradicts his own stance on lurkers ("got to", "probably", "lurker but...") but he contradicts the crux of the argument against Snaps.

I eagerly await an explanation. *baited breath*

[vollkan]

Meta me if you want. You will find that I adore such lists and use them frequently. If you disagree with them, that's all well and good and I am sure we can debate ad nauseum. In themselves, however, they don't mean a thing regarding my alignment (nulltell, in other words).

So essentially, you're saying that because you always use lists, it's a null tell. So you're essentially a slightly more spohisticated VI?

What I am saying is that any insinuation that my fondness for lists is scummy is plainly untrue in light of my record.

If by "slightly more sophisticated VI" (only slightly? ) you mean that "I consistently behave in a manner which you don't agree with" then I accept that epithet.

You only need to look at the dirt which has surfaced on Panzer to see the benefit that forcing people to give their reasoning can do.

[vollkan]

You only need to look at the dirt which has surfaced on Panzer to see the benefit that forcing people to give their reasoning can do.

I agree completely, but I don't think listmaking is the most beneficial way to do this, since knowing who is most protown is

much

more useful for scum, and knowledge of who is acting scummy has only limited use to the scum.

Interesting.

The information we have just received on Panzer could only have come about by asking him to give his opinions on multiple people. I'm not quite sure what alternative exists which is not effectively the same thing.

Then again, I am only a "slightly more sophisticated VI" so I have probably missed some other method of getting opinions on multiple people. Right?

[vollkan]

I am commencing a reread of all players and will post an updated scumdar shortly.

[vollkan]

Scumdar

{I am trying a new method for these. Rather than reading in isolation, I reread the thread and take detailed notes for each person. That way, I shouldn't make isolation-based errors. I don't pretend for this to be as thorough as a PBPA, but it is intended to provide a better-than-rough guide - a means to focus myself onto the scummiest few, rather than to take on a single suspect}

I am also going to try reworking my % ranking system, since it could be made clearer. Henceforth, there will be no 'percentages'. Each person shall receive a rank from -100 to 100. Each person starts at 0. Towniness pulls the number down (ie. confirmed town = -100). Scumminess pushes it up (ie. confirmed scum = 100)

For the purposes of this reread, each starts at 0 (the neutral position):

** Also: Claims are irrelevant to the ranking, which is solely behavioural. Claims are factored into consideration after attributing a ranking.

NOTES

{These aren't exhaustive (only until page 25 or so) but I thought I might as well include them}

Bookitty

- She is quick to vote egr for pushing No Lynch. I don't like the fact that she doesn't actually ask him to justify his belief, instead just attacking it. She later implies the vote was for pressure/info-gathering (#41) but, again, she asked no questions at the time of voting.

+5

. Shaky unvote also, after she says that Egr pointing out the missed quote tag was a towntell. Her post 136 has my firm agreement, and probing questions of egr. I don't like her lack of explanation for voting DS in 170; she almost sets up a dichotomy. *SEETHES* at 274. Overreaction IS NOT A SCUMTELL!!! Good case against egr.

Toaster Strudel

- {TS}Liamcool casts an unexplained FoS on Mills in 78. Weird speculative questioning in 464.

Phate

- Lurks early on, only posting "We're not out to lynch the antitown players. We're out to lynch the scum." Which is true, but hardly a big contribution. I don't like the one-liners. (+5) Much theory posting (+5) Unexplained vote for egr. His lurking is disconcerting.

Kison

- {Mills} Really atrocious post by Mills in 70, voting DS for being a VI (+10). I also dislike Mills' use of aggression as a suspicion justification. His stance on gut votes is inconsistent. He doesn't mind them...but he wants reason

Xyzzy

- Good attack on egr. Good response to Snaps' anti-lurkering.

Panzerjager

I don't like his vote on Fonz for "writing off" egr as newb, and voting Boo for voting Egr. Boo's vote was scummy and Egr was looking like a newbie, if not a VI. (+5) Decent vote on Mills for the BM Fallacy. I really don't like 202; he doesn't back up his claims. (+5). I really like 206, since he adopts a smart attitude to the DS wagon. I don't like his vote for Xyzzy in 503 - he refers to my reasons, and undefined reasons of his own. (+5) I don't follow the attack against Bookitty...

Rishi

Casts a vote on OGML, and never follows it up with reasons (+5). The colours issue as a null-tell imo.

Snaps_the_Pirate

Snaps rationalises egr in an odd way - that it's obviously just how egr plays. I wonder why he didn't actually try and probe out egr's belief and reasoning. Pushes DS for "lurking and bandwagoning" neither of which are scumtells, and both of which make for easy targets.

+5%

Irony of ironies - in 72 he again continues his crap attacks on DS, as well as accusing Mills of trying " to start an easy bandwagon."

+5

Bizarrely, he says his highest suspicions are DS and Egr - despite having declared that he thinks Egr is genuine. In 103, he raises the WIFOMic idea that DS is pulling a double-bluff. Again pushes this line in 131. Don't like his reasoning that we should vote lurkers to prevent scum having hiding places. Opens D2 with an attack on DE - again attacks lurking and misconstrues 226 as justifying scummy play. Lurker-hops in 549 (+5)

CONCLUSIONS:

Bookitty

- She's been active, posting in a well-reasoned fashion and not giving off scumtells. I haven't written her off, especially given the setups, but she won't be going under the hammer today.

-20

Toaster Strudel

- Liam is largely unreadable, and TS hasn't done enough thus far to give anything tangible in terms of reasoning to analyse.

0

presuming the reasoning picks up.

Phate

- Lurker, too much theory to begin with, little scumhunting.

60

Kison

- I didn't like aspects of Mills' play, but I trust his claim for now.

35

Xyzzy

- Little original scumhunting. Seems to be playing lightly. He doesn't like Snaps' lurker-hunting (neither do I) but nor does he like my proposal. I can't understand what he wants.

50

Panzerjager

- See above for a number of inadequately justified votes. Claim is believable, so not being lynched by me at this stage.

30

Rishi

- Passive play, largely. I don't like his insinuating Boo defending me as being scummy when she wasn't defending me and when defence is not illegitimate.

45

Snaps_the_Pirate

- Ahoy. The persistent lurker-hunting is an enormous black mark against this guy. I've given a PBPA, anything here will just be repetitive.

80

[vollkan]

I just ran a google search. This is the ONLY game which turns up a result for "two shot vig"...

[vollkan]

I even get more for "one shot vig". The reason I was only getting this game was because google was doing the "In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the 2 already displayed. If you like, you can repeat the search with the omitted results included."

[vollkan]

Which would be valid if not the fact that no less than 14 posts ago I explicitly affirmed that you were not on my lynchable list.

[vollkan]

Vote: Snaps

See previous page, PBP, and my other comments for reasons for this. With the deadline approaching, this is where I most want my vote. I am not dogmatically settled, but this is my top candidate.

[vollkan]

yes.. i was blocked by Bookitty

Please explain.

[vollkan]

I just know. Its gotta be.

Bravo. You earn a *headdesk*

In a game with two scumteams, what is the benefit to bussing, aggressively or not?

Have a look at my play in Stargate SG-1 mafia and you will see the potential boons in bussing in multi-scumgroup games. If you are able to hunt down the other scumteam AND bus against your own, it is a potently effective town-tell.

Indeed, there is something to be said for the argument that the very fact that bussing poses more risks in a multi-scumgroup game makes it more rewarding if done well, because most people will take

exactly

you are taking now Bookitty.

[vollkan]

EWBOP:

The necessary addition to the sentence is bolded in

Indeed, there is something to be said for the argument that the very fact that bussing poses more risks in a multi-scumgroup game makes it more rewarding if done well, because most people will take

exactly

the position

you are taking now Bookitty.

[vollkan]

Indeed, there is something to be said for the argument that the very fact that bussing poses more risks in a multi-scumgroup game makes it more rewarding

if done well

, because most people will take

exactly

you are taking now Bookitty.

(bolding mine)

Is it your argument, Vollkan, that Panzer is doing it well? I have not regarded his play in that light in this game.

While I fully believe you are capable of fooling me in that way, I don't think Panzer could do the same.

Thanks for the kind words. I don't know enough about Panzer to make that sort of a judgment. I was just making a general theory point that such bussing can be highly effective if you get it right.

[vollkan]

Beginning to think TS might be scum, because of the "OMG PEG is scum because he distracted us from lynching Panzer with useful info!" thing. I'm 100% in favor of a Panzer lynch, but I'm okay with data.

And could you please quote and explain the post where she makes the "OMG PEG...<snip>"?

[vollkan]

Did you analyze zz, voll?

He is included in my previous scumdar analysis with a 50, but I had actual observations on him. Did I say somewhere else that I was going to analyse him?

Unvote, Vote TS Why are you voting me..I'm townie..anyone wanting to lynch me is stupid and TS is obvious scum.

"TS is obvious scum" because?

[vollkan]

I've lost track of this game. Are we lynching someone?

Sure. Would you like to volunteer?

If it stops this game from stalling, I'm willing to sacrifice myself for the common good.

How does you sacrificing yourself help the common good in 25 words or less.

Ooh. Sweet! (No pun intended)

Vote: Toaster Strudel

Why so quick?