Mini 568 - Nubigena (Game over!)

[jerubbaal]

Ripley is, without a question, the scummiest of the unconfirmeds, in my head. Regardless of whether you agree with my evaluation, that's my evaluation.

You're completely misreading my third point. Waiting to commit is a weak, weak move for townies, but they do it sometimes. Scum need the flexibility to end up on the right trains at the right moment. Townies don't. Regardless, "nice" or timid townies make the mistake of not committing quite often, so Ripley's lack of commitment is not that remarkable. It's nowhere near the "too townie" argument.

I don't care which one of the scum we lynch, I just don't see Mizzy happening in the short term. She still reads as town to me, but she has to be scum. This isn't that difficult to understand. Honestly, I'm still floundering at this point as to how the heck I'm supposed to convince you that she's scum.

I fail to see what my being firm about my read on the setup has to do with bussing. Honestly, I think you're just confused and pissed at me because I called you an idiot. Sorry about that, but it was a terrible, terrible play not protecting Near.

[Mizzy]

Common Sense Newsflash:

If you can't form a case for X person being scum, it's probably because they're not scum. Trying to lynch someone based on the fact that they "must" be scum due to set-up speculation that we can't prove and obviously can't comprehend right now is just begging for a mislynch leading to a scum win.

[Y]

That's not completely true. Some people are good enough to appear completely town while being scum.

[Mizzy]

That's not completely true. Some people are good enough to appear completely town while being scum.

... Maybe if I had some experience being scum, that could be said of me, but if one looks at my wiki, one will see that I have

never been scum

.

[Ripley]

Ripley is, without a question, the scummiest of the unconfirmeds, in my head.

You can't be expecting to sway people on the basis of what's in your head. You need to make a case and you've completely failed to do that. You harp on and on about the end of Day 1 with inaccuracies and lies.

jerubbaal kicked off by claiming I was a "floater until the pressure of a deadline showed". When I pointed out that my posting had been the very opposite of a floater's position, that I'd consistently defended Near and attacked Niv, he backtracked to a new position of "OK, well maybe you did that but you didn't

vote

":

He's right that he kind of stuck up for Near, but he never committed a vote until it came down to the deadline. Retaining that kind of flexibility early on is very valuable for scum, not so much for town.

Where to start with this?

1. I voted for Niv a full week before deadline.
2. I had no flexibility at all. It would have been impossible for me to vote for Near given all my previous posts.
3. Sammich was replaced and I gave the replacement a chance to post some content before voting. I would always try to do that for any replacement. I gave him a week then gave up and voted. I said at the time that this was what was happening.

jerubbaal has repeatedly tried to give the impression that my vote came right before deadline, which is a total untruth: (bolding mine):

he never committed a vote until it came down to the deadline.

none of the scum (Ripley/thephantom, Mizzy, Incog) joined in on the whole Niv/Near thing

until the end when everything was quite clear.

and this

You defended Near when he was getting beat on, and said that you were suspicious of Niv/Sammich,

but you didn't commit a vote until the very end

.

"Until the end when everything was quite clear" cannot possibly mean

before

Near's claim. "Until it came down to the deadline" clearly implies a last-minute vote. I'm going to put the actual timescale down here, in case anybody's assuming jerubbaal's account is true.

Thursday Mar 27th - Niv replaced Sammich
Thursday April 3rd - I voted for Niv
Sunday April 6th - Near claimed gunsmith
Friday April 11th - Mizzy lynched Niv 24 minutes before deadline.

I just want that down on record. Not that I myself think there's anything scummy in taking your time to vote, if that's how you're comfortable playing. It actually often puts you in an awkward position of placing high-profile votes close to deadline, which scum tend not to like. But anyhow, I want any future smears of this kind from jerubbaal against me to be seen in the context of the actual timescale, rather than subject to further distortion by him.

The rest of his case for lynching me tends to be along the lines of "I know Ripley's scum, so therefore he is", "Ripley is the standout scum amongst the unconfirmed", and "I'm going after Ripley because he's the easiest target". This is not a case.

---

jerubbaal, you have repeated many times that you view Mizzy's play as overwhelmingly town:

I have a strong townie read on her

Mizzy being scum is a surprise

I'm still surprised that my read on Mizzy was so blatantly wrong

For the moment, I'm not going to deal with the case against you, because I still think you sound like town,

you're on the bottom of my list for the three scum. I need to do some meta on you, because if you're acting, it's really convincing.

Mizzy has been acting like a townie,

my read on her has been completely town.

her play has been completely town

I think her play has been completely town,

She still reads as town to me,

but strangely you have still not provided any quotes or examples to illustrate this opinion of yours, which you hold so strongly you've stated it on every one of the occasions quoted above. Where you have made direct references to her play it has actually been negative. Please would you provide three distinct examples of Mizzy's play that illustrate why you believe her to have been completely town.

And are you willing to answer two simple questions, yes or no, without ifs or buts?

Are you willing to lynch Incognito?
Are you willing to lynch Mizzy?

[jerubbaal]

A week before the deadline is right before the deadline. It would have been hard for you to get on Near's wagon, but not terribly difficult to hop on anyone else's. None of the arguments here are valid.

I don't have any clue why you're asking me to provide examples of why I find Mizzy's play townie. It has absolutely nothing to do with any of your arguments against me. All you're doing is trying to shift the burden of proof to make me look bad. I'm not combing the thread for irrelevant information.

The case, in my head, is that I'm town so you must be scum. You can haggle about the legitimacy of this logic all you want, but knowing what I know, it's pretty solid.

Yes and yes.


Seriously, you all have to be blind if you can't see a change in posting patterns here with the threatened scum. Compare Ripley and Incog's posting with their earlier patterns. Somebody obviously feels threatened, and Ripley's sudden demand for textual support is textbook end of game scum.

[ooba]

Ok i still haven't got to the re-read as I promised - will finish tomorrow for sure and post my findings ..

[destructor]

.::] Vote Count [::.

jerubbaal² (1)

- gorckat

Not Voting (6) - jerubbaal², Incognito, Mizzy, Ripley, ooba, Y

Four

votes makes a lynch.

Note:

The deadline is seven days away.

[Y]

That's not completely true. Some people are good enough to appear completely town while being scum.

... Maybe if I had some experience being scum, that could be said of me, but if one looks at my wiki, one will see that I have

never been scum

.

I don't agree. In my first game as scum I was "the most obviously town".

With the deadline closing in, I'll

Vote Mizzy

.

[ooba]

That's not completely true. Some people are good enough to appear completely town while being scum.

... Maybe if I had some experience being scum, that could be said of me, but if one looks at my wiki, one will see that I have

never been scum

.

I don't agree. In my first game as scum I was "the most obviously town".

With the deadline closing in, I'll

Vote Mizzy

.

So you're voting her for this

one

thing on which you disagree?

[Mizzy]

I've gotten to the point where I just don't care about the outcome of this game anymore. I see people saying that I MUST be scum because they MUST be right about the set-up, you see, and there's no case against me other than process of elimination which is completely unprovable and not even a case. So not only can I not defend myself, but I'm watching town lose because certain people cannot see the forest for the trees.

I will say it again because it's all I can say; I am vanilla town. I am not the scum you are looking for. Voting for and lynching me will probably cost town the game.

That said, have at it. If anyone has any questions for me, I will gladly answer them, but other than that, I have nothing else I can say except point out the following:

- There is a possibility that Near was insane, or naive. "Cleared" people should not be overlooked.
- There is a possibility of a Godfather or other similar role, such as a traitor.

Being confident in yourself and in your findings is awesome, but I know from first-hand experience how much being wrong and unwilling to listen to other people can cost the town. Do not allow your stubborn attitudes to lose the game for everyone else.

[Incognito]

Mizzy, if that's the case, who do you think is scum? You haven't really taken a stance on anyone this whole day.

[gorckat]

I don't think jerubbaal and Ripley are scum together at all, unless today is some kind of Scummy winning distancing.

Incognito's calling out on Mizzy looks like it could be scum calling out a partner to get on board with pushing Ripley so they can win today.

I still feel most comfortable lynching jerubbaal out of the four of them.

[jerubbaal]

Why are you voting Mizzy, Y?

If there's too much contention on the Ripley/me scenario, we could certainly just go and lynch Incog today. He's scum, and he's pretty much ducked out recently once the Ripley/me thing started going. We are running very short on time and I don't think we're going to get any real resolution before the deadline. No-lynching is absolutely and completely unacceptable at this point, we need to lynch someone.

Vote: Incognito

[ooba]

Give me a chance to have my re-read - post my thoughts , then lets lynch someone (doing it right now as i post this) ? We do have a week left you know ..

If you do have a solid case on someone (instead of I'm town , so the other three are scum - valid from your POV , not mine) like player interactions and such - posting them now would be good ..

[Ripley]

I don't have any clue why you're asking me to provide examples of why I find Mizzy's play townie. It has absolutely nothing to do with any of your arguments against me. All you're doing is trying to shift the burden of proof to make me look bad. I'm not combing the thread for irrelevant information.

It’s highly relevant, and I found this reaction of jerubbaal’s to be very revealing.

He has seen the need to state at least ten times in the past four pages (quoted, in my previous post) that he thought Mizzy’s play was completely town, without once ever saying

why

. He really, really wants us to know how much he thinks this, and I believe that after a certain point it’s entirely reasonable to start questioning whether he genuinely does think it. There are three possibilities that I can see:

1. jerubbaal is telling the exact truth. Mizzy’s posts are as overwhelmingly townie as he says. If this is true it would surely take very little time to scan her posts and pull up a few examples. Just one, even, if three would be too much trouble. But we get nothing at all.

2. jerubbaal knows Mizzy is scum, because he is scum himself.

3. jerubbaal knows Mizzy is innocent, because he is scum himself. He perceives her as a vital swing vote and is trying to keep on her good side.

In both cases 2 and 3, jerubbaal’s much repeated “Mizzy looked completely town” is tactical rather than factual, and if asked to back it up with examples he would find himself in considerable difficulty. And would have not much option other than to try and bluster his way out of that difficulty with a list of excuses. And look what in fact happened: “Irrelevant information… nothing to do with any of your arguments…. don’t know why you’re asking… trying to make me look bad…” Hmm. Okay.

Seriously, you all have to be blind if you can't see a change in posting patterns here with the threatened scum. Compare Ripley and Incog's posting with their earlier patterns. Somebody obviously feels threatened, and Ripley's sudden demand for textual support is textbook end of game scum.

This is absolutely typical of what I’m starting to recognise as jerubbaal’s standard methods. Select the target you think will be "easiest to persecute" (his own words), then, whatever they do or say, describe this as classic scum behavior. However they respond, say “Your response confirms my suspicions”. Most decent players will step up a gear when subjected to this kind of treatment, doubly so in a lylo situation. If this doesn’t happen at once, needle them until it does. Then jump on this as a change in posting patterns that confirms your suspicions. Continue with unshakable confidence to insist that you know you are right. Avoid being dragged into discussion of actual game specifics, which can be awkward. Stick to generalisations. Insist that anything the target does is obviously scummy. Repeat ad infinitum.

On the rare occasion where I’ve been given anything tangible to respond to I’ve done so. But: “I know Ripley is scum”, “Textbook scum”, “Ripley is scum because he has to be,” “Classic threatened scum”… blah blah blah … unanswerable except by “No I’m not…”, “No it isn’t…” responses that just feed into jerubbaal’s system whereby he just classifies them as “the indignant splutterings of cornered scum”, or suchlike.

Mizzy, if that's the case, who do you think is scum? You haven't really taken a stance on anyone this whole day.

I agree some more input from Mizzy would be useful – and she’s not the only one - but it’s more than a week since you posted any content yourself. At that time you were trying to paint me and jerubbaal as a scum team with Y or ooba as a third. How’s that theory coming along? I’m starting to wonder if you’ve been watching, and figuring you can probably save your own skin today by lying low and letting other people slug it out.

PS: All of the above was written over the course of today, before gorckat and jerubbaal’s last posts. Oddly, given our history, jerubbaal’s last paragraph somewhat echoes mine with regard to Incognito's recent posting. And it’s certainly clear that we absolutely must lynch someone.

If there's too much contention on the Ripley/me scenario, we could certainly just go and lynch Incog today.

So - erm - when you said you were willing to lynch Incognito or Mizzy, what you actually

meant

was, you were willing to lynch Incognito?

We are running very short on time and I don't think we're going to get any real resolution before the deadline.

You’re concerned that we’re running out of time, you’re certain who the scum are and willing to lynch any of them, and yet you’ve voted a player you know to be scum who was on no votes, in preference to a player you know to be scum who had a vote already?

[Mizzy]

Well, here's a brief summary of my opinions:

Firstly, I think we should, if we are going to debate role set-up, take into consideration the opposite of what we have held as truth for so long; what if Near was insane or naive and ooba and Y are actually both scum? I'm not saying that this is true or not, I'm saying we should think about it some before moving forward.

Y:

I still find his past actions pretty questionable, and the more I think about it, the more I wonder if my initial suspicions are correct and that he is scummy regardless. It is almost as though Y has used his "confirmed townie" status to slack off and give some pretty iffy statements, knowing he can say and do whatever he wants and he still won't be lynched.

jerubbaal2:

I think he's probably townie trying to secure a town win. I just think he's a little too confident in his own theories, which are incorrect ,as far as my alignment goes.

Incognito:

Lurker vibes and confident scum vibes from him, but I have been watching him for a while. I don't remember anything blatantly scummy from him (I'd have to reread him) but I do remember some latent and unyielding suspicion of him for a long time.

gorckat:

I am having trouble looking past his failure to save our cop, and yet at the same time, I can see why Near was seen as scummy and I question his sanity (Near's.) What should have been done was have the doc protect him and have Near investigate himself, but we did not think of that or have the chance for it. Pro-town reads, even through the overbearing self-confidence in his opinions.

Ripley:

Perhaps it is his personality, but I have always been a little wary of Ripley and while a good bit of it is gut, some of it has been from his posting, too. I like that he's being very contributive right now, since we have so little of that, but I still think he's to be wary of.

ooba:

Pro-town read on ooba, despite his early bad start in my books. I don't have much else to say because ooba really hasn't been very active lately and so isn't very prominent in my radar.

In short, I would be most in favor of an Incognito lynch today.

[ooba]

I shall divide the post into 2 - Setup Speculation and Scum pairings

Setup Speculation
~~~~~~~~~~~~

a)

First thing i did was revisit all

older posts of destructor

From a moderating point of view, I think ensuring a setup essentially represents a conflict between an uninformed majority and an informed minority, and creating roles that require players to interact to come to an understanding of the setup or the motives of the players is within the spirit of the game.

I wasn't referring to theme flavour exclusively, but any flavour, including Mafia flavour. If a mod can, for example, create a logical backstory and coherent narrative that takes the roles and events of the game into account, I find it makes a game more enjoyable even if it is formulaic in it's setup.

This was the only flavor line which i found to be mildly linked to set up (apart from the gun falling out from avinashv proving he was a miller for the gunsmith)
- "But unlike you and those that have fallen by your hand, your legacy will live on. Your Mafiosi will outlive you."
Cannot say anything from this line including absence/presence of a Godfather.

A thread started by destructor approximately one month before this game was started. About Night Kill immunity and balance(he started it for SKs - although the second post someone tells him its possible to give godfathers NK immunity too)

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... ht=#908575

"I thought about four basic categories of roles and what they should entail to be 'normal'. Perhaps it's too restrictive, perhaps it's too broad, but it's a start. I don't assume that this is a good list, but it would certainly help me decide what sort of roles to expect and include in normal games.

I think every role should fulfil the "Normal Universal Role" criteria and all other specialised roles should fit into one of Investigative, Roleblocking or Killing roles.

Anything outside this shouldn't be normal.

[edited]
Normal Universal Role mechanics:
- Communication with other players by means of posting.
- Ability to place one vote for a player's lynch/no lynch.
- Role and alignment is revealed on death.

Normal Investigative Role (Cops, etc) mechanic:
- Ability to garner information about one other player's [alignment or role mechanics] through targeted investigation [once per Night phase].

Normal Roleblocking Role (Doc/Roleblocker/Godfather/Miller) mechanic:
- Ability to block/alter the standard function of another players non-universal role mechanic [once per Night phase, either passively in relation to oneself or actively by

targeting another player].
- [An active Roleblocking ability may not be used on oneself].

Normal Killing Role (Mafia/Vig/SK) mechanic:
- Ability to kill a targeted player.
- [An informed minority may only kill during Night phases and only once per Night phase]

What I'm trying to get at here is a clear guideline that leaves enough room for innovation while not letting things get too insane.

None of these really proved to be useful in deciphering anything about this game setup however

b) What info we have in the game

We already have a Investigative role (Gunsmith)
We have a role which is a combination of a Killing+Roleblocking role (Miller Vig)
We have a claimed Roleblocking role (Doc)

A night Start for scum. 3 Mafia since there is no evidence of any other killing group.

i) Could we have a Godfather?

Yes but if we did he would be Night kill immune instead of investigation immune because Investigation immunity (when we already have a miller) would be unbalanced for the scum
So - This clears the targets of Near's investigation - Y and me

ii) Is this setup possible without a Doc?

No it would be totally unbalanced (Maybe if the Vig was not a miller then maybe but even thats a bit against the town)
So - In the absence of any counter claims - that clears gorckat

If any of you disagree with any of these two points then please point out why you think so. (I'd also like you to give a possible set up if you do not think this is the case) .

Scum pairing will be posted tomorrow as its getting late for me and i'm going to bed.

[Incognito]

I agree some more input from Mizzy would be useful – and she’s not the only one - but it’s more than a week since you posted any content yourself. At that time you were trying to paint me and jerubbaal as a scum team with Y or ooba as a third. How’s that theory coming along? I’m starting to wonder if you’ve been watching, and figuring you can probably save your own skin today by lying low and letting other people slug it out.

Yes, it's been more than a week since I've provided content, but I really have nothing more to say. I've already made my case(s) by citing specific examples from within thread and meta-analysis and have pretty much been waiting for ooba, Y, Mizzy... anyone to chime in with their completed re-reads which they've all mentioned have been in the works for quite some time now.

Why are you voting Mizzy, Y?

If there's too much contention on the Ripley/me scenario, we could certainly just go and lynch Incog today. He's scum, and he's pretty much ducked out recently once the Ripley/me thing started going. We are running very short on time and I don't think we're going to get any real resolution before the deadline. No-lynching is absolutely and completely unacceptable at this point, we need to lynch someone.

Vote: Incognito

It's cute how you've mentioned numerous times now that you'd be willing to lynch any one of me, Ripley, and Mizzy but have now chosen to vote for

me

of the three

and

questioned Y about why he's voting for Mizzy. Here's how things look from my perspective: Jerubbaal has just chosen to vote for me when a vote has already been cast on Mizzy-alignment unknown. I think jerubbaal is scum and now he seems to be purposefully choosing to vote for me rather than anyone else despite the fact that he's mentioned that he has no preference? Does he

really

not have a preference when a vote has already been cast in Mizzy's direction, thus making his job of lynching

any

of us easier? It doesn't seem that way to me. I'm pretty much ready to cast my vote on jerubbaal at this point.

P.S. Funnier still is how jerubbaal labeled my increased frequency of posting as "scummy" earlier but now that I've been relatively quiet, he's labeled

that

as scummy too. This all pretty much goes along with that level of desperation that I mentioned earlier with respect to jerubbaal's play; he seems to be pretty much grabbing at anything to try and paint anyone in a negative light.

[jerubbaal]

FYI, I still

feel

like Mizzy is town, and I would prefer to defer her lynch to last among the three of you. I'm still trying to decide if there's any way that I can see how my theory would be wrong. ATM, I don't.

Ripley, you make the completely mistaken assumption that every argument about someone's scumminess is presented in a way which can be rebutted. In my experience, the way you've played this game is completely compatible with the way I see conservative scum play games. Support a beleaguered townie or too early, get some friends, ride the obvious trains, wait to commit, only post extensively when assaulted, demand endless textual support when attacked. You can say "nuh-uh" all you want, but the way you have played this game lines up perfectly with what I can perceive about your personality and how you would play as scum.

[Y]

I have my reasons to vote Mizzy, not only that sentence. I said I think she's scum when day started.
She seems like she's here, but we're getting nothing from her.

Mizzy, I'm not saying iffy things because I'm confirmed, I'm confirmed because I got investigated after saying some iffy things. I'm always like that.

[Incognito]

One other thing. About this:

Incognito:

Lurker vibes and confident scum vibes from him, but I have been watching him for a while. I don't remember anything blatantly scummy from him (I'd have to reread him) but I do remember some latent and unyielding suspicion of him for a long time.

This whole "lurking" issue had been covered before by Near and you actually

commented

about it before in the following:

When have I lurked?

I think he's referring to the need to have you prodded, no?

I guess? That was like one prod though at a time that I wasn't posting anywhere on site. It just seems odd to say that

I've

been lurking when there's like three people in this game (Near included) who are on the brink of being replaced due to inactivity issues.

Yeah, I didn't say he was being smart about it We need him to post more, methinks.

Why are you suddenly changing your opinion about it and mentioning that you've been receiving "lurker vibes and confident scum vibes" all game coming from me? WHEEEEEEEEEEE after these last few posts from Mizzy and jerub maybe this game really is as simple as a jerubbaal, Mizzy, and Ripley scum team and maybe there really

isn't

some investigation immune godfather like I suspected.

[Mizzy]

Why are you suddenly changing your opinion about it and mentioning that you've been receiving "lurker vibes and confident scum vibes" all game coming from me? WHEEEEEEEEEEE after these last few posts from Mizzy and jerub maybe this game really is as simple as a jerubbaal, Mizzy, and Ripley scum team and maybe there really

isn't

some investigation immune godfather like I suspected.

I'm not changing my opinion about it because the opinion is a newer one than that post. And it is not so much your lack of posting (although there has been that, off and on) but your lack of scumhunting/useful content that also seems intermittent. What I mean is, that while you have technically been around most of the time (key word most) I still feel like you have been sitting back and watching as opposed to full-out participating.

[Incognito]

Because I mean, by golly, you didn't actually give an opinion about anyone all day until I lyk... ttly asked you for it.

[Mizzy]

Incognito:

You rolled a 1 on an attempt to look witty.

As I have said in another game I am in with you, I don't have much time to do much in my games at the moment.

Oh, right, you keep ignoring that because it's easy to do so.