Mini 692: Boost Mafia (Game Over!)

[Raging Rabbit]

No. "Too townie" is attacking someone for looking like they're being too helpful and in the right to someone else, which is the exact same thing she was attacking me for.

Too townie is based on

looking

"too" helpful, SL's (and my) attack was based on

trying

to look helpful. Here is a classic example of the difference:

Eh? All of my questions have been very relevant to the game, and I certainly wouldn't classify them as "'soft' questions" either. Just because I don't immediately reveal my insights from the answers I get doesn't mean that I haven't formulated any opinions on them. When I'm ready to make a case against someone who I think is scum, I'll do so but certainly not this early in the game. Trust me, when I have a scum read on someone I'll make my opinion on the person blatantly obvious. Right now, this is purely the information-gathering stage for me. I've seen certain things from people that make me lean slightly town on them or slightly scum but not enough to come to a definitive answer with respect to their alignments.

This post doesn't look pro town to me, it looks like you

trying

very hard to appear pro town.

Either way, if you're suspecting me for the same reasons, I have an exercise for you: I'd like for you to comb through the thread during early game before springlullaby began attacking me for these reasons and provide specific examples where you felt like I was "trying too hard" to look like I was being helpful. Then I'd like for you to do the same in other areas of the thread as well. gogogo!

I suspect you for similar reasons, but based on your back and forth with SL rather than your early game, in which I don't remember seeing much wrong.

It's not a contradiction? I had multiple reasons for voting sthar8 in my mind at the time, and the one you bolded in the first paragraph was one of them also. I pretty much forgot to list that one. Obviously if I voted him for doing it, I must have thought it was at least somewhat scummy to begin with.

To me the first quote totally look like you're saying it isn't an actual scumtell, just anti town and good cause for a pressure vote.

Her town play certainly looks more composed to me than her scum play so I'm not going to ignore this as "oh she was annoyed so she's likely town" when she has acted annoyed as scum before. Have you looked through her past games to be able to make this assumption, RR?

It's the manner of her annoyance that makes her look town, scum aren't anywhere near as emotionally involved in the cases they present but don't really mean. I fully believe her emotions were sincere, and if she didn't act pissed off in other games that just goes to show your little jabs did a lot to send her over the edge. I need to read that other game you mentioned of her getting pissed off as scum, but I recall the circumstances were different there and it's unlikely to change my opinion.

I don't think this is true, and I've already explained why but hey, I can't stop you from your "Incog is scum" fixation that only sees my actions in a scummy light. Again, I'd like you to read through the thread and try and notice that my focus was not primarily on springlullaby and that I was looking for scum in other places, otherwise I can probably conclude that you're likely suffering from a bout of tunnel vision.

I don't like how everyone who isn't convinced by your defences is automatically diagnosed to be inflicted with a bad case of tunnel vision.

How could I possibly plan things ahead like this and control a person across the internet to have him or her continuously attack me for more and more weak points to be able to plan my own future votes against them also? Wouldn't this only work if you thought springlullaby and I were scum together attempting some sort of gambit we agreed upon during pre-game?

Please. You don't have to be a genious manipulator or a mind reader to figure out that in response to your "it's nice to see you finally say something, and good job putting the spotlight on me for a bit, but you're dead wrong" posts she can either drop her case - which is good for you and allows you to maintain your pro town read and establish a sort of connection with her - or pursue it - in which case you appear to struggle, but finally vote her when all hope of convincing her to be a good little townie and see reason fails.

I thought you were pro-town before this attack, and I currently think you're probably misguided town. Your vote is probably the only one I can stand at the moment while Guardian's and Jahudo's votes make me cringe.

What makes my vote better?

How? In summary here were her thoughts:

eldarad - pro-town.
Electra - neutral.
fuzzylightning/RandomGem - scummy.
iLord - initially pro-town, lately scummy.
Incog - pro-town.
Jahudo - scummy.
Raging Rabbit - pro-town.
springlullaby/Guardian - pro-town.
sthar8 - neutral to pro-town.
TDC - neutral.

I'm seeing four to five pro-town listings and explanations for each one, two to three neutrals, and three scummy listings. Guardian had exactly one pro-town and the other person he thought was pro-town upon replacing in was suddenly iffy.

These are more or less the reads if you make a summary, but since he had negative things to say about everyone but you, including his boosts, this post sets him up to attack anyone he wants to in the future should the need arise.


Mana_Ku - what makes your good feeling on Incog not as strong as your good feeling on myself/Guardian?

[Incognito]

This post doesn't look pro town to me, it looks like you

trying

very hard to appear pro town.

Right. I can't argue with that one.

To me the first quote totally look like you're saying it isn't an actual scumtell, just anti town and good cause for a pressure vote.

Oh, well it's not the best scum-tell around, but I figured it was better than nothing at the time.

It's the manner of her annoyance that makes her look town, scum aren't anywhere near as emotionally involved in the cases they present but don't really mean. I fully believe her emotions were sincere, and if she didn't act pissed off in other games that just goes to show your little jabs did a lot to send her over the edge. I need to read that other game you mentioned of her getting pissed off as scum, but I recall the circumstances were different there and it's unlikely to change my opinion.

I'll make it easier for you. Here are some posts she made in that game that look glaringly similar:

Wtf yourself. You say that you are 99% sure Rogueben is town, suggesting a powerole which can determine people's alignment. If you are genuine, the cat is already out of the bag and scums know it so whether you claim or not is totally irrelevant to them. There is absolutely no reason for you to hint at something then not want to claim if you are town.

See above and fuck you too, scum. What do you want me to believe you since you seem to think I'm scum anyway?

Appeal to emotion my ass. Reading comprehension my ass. Don't call me springy you shit.

She can dish it out, but she can't take it when someone dishes it right back in her face?

I don't like how everyone who isn't convinced by your defences is automatically diagnosed to be inflicted with a bad case of tunnel vision.

Everyone? I didn't say the same about Jahudo's vote/attack.

I think you're likely town. I know I'm town. Therefore, since you think I'm scum, and you're only seeing everything I say in a negative light, you must be suffering from tunnel vision. How can I defend myself against someone who says "your posts just look like you're trying too hard to appear pro-town"? Did it occur to you that maybe they appear that way because I actually am town and that it's not an act?

What makes my vote better?

Difference in vibe. I thought your catch about my "contradicting" sthar8 vote was pretty good and pro-town-seeming as I might have not clearly explained myself when I first placed it. I also like the fact that you're still

asking me questions

while voting for me rather than just leaving your vote there and not making an effort to figure me out. Jahudo's reason for voting me seems off, and I feel like he hasn't made a conscious effort to figure me out, and Guardian just seems more "all guns blazing".

These are more or less the reads if you make a summary, but since he had negative things to say about everyone but you, including his boosts, this post sets him up to attack anyone he wants to in the future should the need arise.

Hm. This is actually a good point. I didn't actually see it that way when I first read it and looked more at her final conclusions rather than the actual content about people to determine if it was a dirty read.

Mana_Ku - what makes your good feeling on Incog not as strong as your good feeling on myself/Guardian?

This is actually a good question, and I'd like to know the answer it as well. Looking back at her post, she doesn't seem to say anything wrong about me, concludes that I'm pro-town, but doesn't boost me while she did have some negative things to say about both you and Guardian (well, more springlullaby than him), but she still went ahead and boosted you two.

[Raging Rabbit]

I'll make it easier for you. Here are some posts she made in that game that look glaringly similar:

I didn't question her ability to get pissed off as scum, I said I wanted to examine the manner and circumstance of it and I can do that on my own, thanks.

Everyone? I didn't say the same about Jahudo's vote/attack.

I think you're likely town. I know I'm town. Therefore, since you think I'm scum, and you're only seeing everything I say in a negative light, you must be suffering from tunnel vision. How can I defend myself against someone who says "your posts just look like you're trying too hard to appear pro-town"? Did it occur to you that maybe they appear that way because I actually am town and that it's not an act?

So basically, you're saying that anyone that attacks you is either scum or a tunnelvisioned townie. That's a very comfortable way to make it look like no attack against you can ever have any sort of value.

Yes, it's possible that you're "simply" a townie. Under normal circumastance, it's possible for everyone in this game to be a townie; and since the majority always

are

townies, that can always be presented as the simpler explanation. However, posts like the one I quoted and your whole process of slowly voting for SL prove to me that you're making a consious effort to look pro town, which is something few townies and all scum do. Therefore, the probability for you to be scum rises dramatically.

Do you seriously expect me to tell you how you are supposed to defend yourself? Do you think that all attacks that the person attacked can't defend from are bad attacks?

Difference in vibe. I thought your catch about my "contradicting" sthar8 vote was pretty good and pro-town-seeming as I might have not clearly explained myself when I first placed it. I also like the fact that you're still asking me questions while voting for me rather than just leaving your vote there and not making an effort to figure me out. Jahudo's reason for voting me seems off, and I feel like he hasn't made a conscious effort to figure me out, and Guardian just seems more "all guns blazing".

Fair 'nuff.

[iLord]

I'm back from V/LA.

Completely loss, but hopefully full reread today.

[Elmo]

Day 1, Vote Count #14 - Lynching

Huntress (3) <- Mana_Ku, sthar8, Electra
Incognito (3) <- Guardian, Jahudo, Raging Rabbit
iLord <- eldarad
Mana_Ku <- TDC
Raging Rabbit <- iLord
Guardian <- Incognito

Not voting: RandomGem, Huntress.

Boost Count

Electra (6) <- eldarad, Raging Rabbit, TDC, Jahudo, RandomGem, Incognito
Guardian (3) <- iLord, Mana_Ku, Raging Rabbit
TDC (2) <- Incognito, sthar8
sthar8 (2) <- Guardian, iLord
Raging Rabbit (2) <- Jahudo, Mana_Ku
eldarad <- TDC
Jahudo <- eldarad
iLord <- Guardian

With 12 alive, it's 7 to lynch/boost.

Also, I am

setting a deadline

for Thursday, 4th December 06:00 UTC, which is 10 days, 8 hours, and 38 minutes from this post. This will not be retracted outside of exceptional circumstances. Please remember that you must boost two people to be able to lynch someone, and you must get a full majority before deadline to lynch someone.

[Huntress]

My first impressions make me suspicious of Electra, iLord, eldarad, sthar8 and springlullaby/Guardian although this may change when I've delved deeper.

Lots of suspicion . Are these all about equal levels? Can you order them possibly? Who is most suspicious (Electra?)? Least? Can you say anything about why these players peaked your interest?

They're in no particular order at the moment. I'll go into more detail when I've done the individual reads.

[Guardian]

This point seems to be that scum don't want to make anyone pro-town since if they die those people would be likely their buddies.

Woah, no, that's not the point I was trying to make at all. When someone is lynched as scum, it sometimes helps to go back and look at any comments he or she might have made about certain players that he or she used to arrive at their reads of them that just don't seem to make sense or "fit in" correctly. Since you went ahead and just brought up negative comments galore, it would be extremely difficult for us (if you're scum and lynched) to go back to your list and determine who your most likely buddies are since practically everyone received the same sort of commentary. That should help answer the rest of what you mentioned below this point.

It doesn't really help answer anything. If analyzing how I categorize people is what is important, why can't people go back and see if my classifications of people as negative or neutral don't "fit in" to those categories??

I will also ask this to more clearly illustrate the second counterpoint: If this is all true, why is "buddying" a scum tell? Don't scum like to make friends and win people to their side?

Yes, of course they do, but they'll likely only buddy up to people who they see have major influence over the town or who they may perceive to be a major threat to their agenda. They're obviously not going to buddy up to every single person within the game; they wouldn't get very far that way.

Oh no? I'm pretty sure that of the five or so games I've won as scum where I lived to the end are where I buddied heavily with lots of people, got one or two of them to accept it and clear me, and used them to mislynch townies the rest of the game. The premises you are asserting as the basis for your arguments are unjustified.

So my second point within my explanation of dirty reads is still valid.

Maybe it does, but you haven't demonstrated this. You responded to my addendum/clarification, not to the main argument.

[...]even if it is a reasonable expectation for me to eventually have strong pro-town reads, why is it reasonable to expect me to have definitive reads one week into my playing, but unreasonable to expect you to have definitive reads one week into your playing? (Your easy response here is that there is more content in the game now, but I don't want to presume that that is your answer unless you say it is..)

Lol. Guardian, "easy response"? It's the obvious response. That's how the game of Mafia works, does it not? You begin knowing nothing, stuff happens, you begin formulating reads, and then you try and draw conclusions.

Is there a linguistic distinction between easily accessible and obvious that I am unaware of? The only non-archaic definition of obvious probided by merriam-webster online involves the word easy.

1archaic : being in the way or in front

2:

eas

il

y

discovered, seen, or understood

Would you prefer that I assume the arguments you are going to make in the future, e.g. stick words in your mouth? Why is my word choice of easy a big deal to you?

Anyway, it is the obvious response, but it does not work -- I do not have as firm a grasp of the game yet as someone who has been playing it all the way through. We've talked about this -- you find my "dirty" read suspicious. I disagree that reading quickly is suspicious, and you haven't really indicated why it is suspicious (other than the OMGUS reason that I read quickly and then attacked YOU) but we both acknowledge that I did read quickly.

It is not logically allowable for you to find me "additionaly" suspicious for things that directly stem from me reading quickly. I don't have a good a grasp on the game because I read quickly. If reading quickly in and of itself isn't suspicious, then me not having as good a grasp isn't suspicious.

Furthermore, this whole argument is based on the premise that I eventually should have approximately 1/3 players cleared, 1/3 suspicious, 1/3 more or less neutral, a premise I fundamentally disagree with and have not adhered to in any game to my recollection. You will be very hard pressed to find any game where I was town and I found 1/3 of the players solidly pro-town on day one; I guarantee that for every game you find like that I can find five where I found most players suspicious or neutral.

[RandomGem]

Sorry that I'm so inactive guys (haven't even read), but I'm really busy until after Monday... just 2 more days!
Dang deadline.

[Guardian]

Difference in vibe. I thought your catch about my "contradicting" sthar8 vote was pretty good and pro-town-seeming as I might have not clearly explained myself when I first placed it. I also like the fact that you're still

asking me questions

while voting for me rather than just leaving your vote there and not making an effort to figure me out. Jahudo's reason for voting me seems off, and I feel like he hasn't made a conscious effort to figure me out, and Guardian just seems more "all guns blazing".

Hm. Do you mean to assert that I'm not still asking you questions? Do you mean to assert that I am just leaving my vote there ant not making an effort to figure you out? Do you mean to assert that putting most of your effort into going after one target at a time "all guns blazing" is scummy? If the answer to any of those questions is yes I'd like you to explain why.

If none of those answers is yes, how is my vote different from RR's?

[iLord]

At post 386. Finish catching up tommorrow. Long post half-way done.

[Incognito]

It doesn't really help answer anything. If analyzing how I categorize people is what is important, why can't people go back and see if my classifications of people as negative or neutral don't "fit in" to those categories??

I just said why. You’ve categorized everyone in practically the exact same manner as everyone else and only listed one person as this shining beacon of towniness (sthar8). How could someone possibly extrapolate anything from that if you’re scum and lynched?

Oh no? I'm pretty sure that of the five or so games I've won as scum where I lived to the end are where I buddied heavily with lots of people, got one or two of them to accept it and clear me, and used them to mislynch townies the rest of the game. The premises you are asserting as the basis for your arguments are unjustified.

Sure they’re justified. In my experience, I’ve seen scum use the exact same method you’re using here of coming forward with this "smear campaign" against everyone else and buddying up to maybe one or two people. You yourself did this exact same thing in Mini 574 – Portal Mafia except you were even worse about it since you didn’t really buddy up to anyone at all; you just did the whole "smear campaign" portion. I’m not saying that I’m using that one game to come to the conclusion that you do this across the board as scum, but you’re not going to convince me that my points are invalid and this isn’t an actual scum tell when I’ve used this tell to pretty good success in past games. Tell me what’s wrong with my logic. You’ve cited a past game of yours where you were scum and where you’ve used a different technique of buddying to a large percentage of players rather than keeping your options open with a bunch of them, but you haven’t actually displayed why this logic of mine doesn’t make sense as a tell.

Maybe it does, but you haven't demonstrated this. You responded to my addendum/clarification, not to the main argument.

Your main argument was that you, as town, try not to go forward to clear people as town since it’s either burned you in the past or made people suspicious of you when you are presented with new information that leads you to believe the contrary to your original belief. If that’s the case, why have you gone forward and labeled sthar8 as this shining beacon of towniness who "should be boosted today obviously"? Shouldn’t this main argument of yours have applied across the board to every single one of your reads? Why does this one read of yours (sthar8) become the only exception to the rule and every single one of your other reads does not?

Anyway, it is the obvious response, but it does not work -- I do not have as firm a grasp of the game yet as someone who has been playing it all the way through.

So why didn’t you just say that when I asked you to produce those player-by-player analyses instead of producing them in the first place? By producing your analyses, I could only assume that you were completely caught up with everything that happened within the thread and that those analyses were how you felt about each person up until the point you produced them. After all, you made your feelings about me pretty obvious – would it be wrong for me to assume that you weren’t making your feelings about everyone else just as obvious as well? You’ve only come forward and said (and I’m paraphrasing here) "oh, you shouldn’t attack me for coming forward with those 'dirty reads' because I’m not completely caught up yet" only after I called you out about producing 'dirty reads' to begin with.

Furthermore, this whole argument is based on the premise that I eventually should have approximately 1/3 players cleared, 1/3 suspicious, 1/3 more or less neutral, a premise I fundamentally disagree with and have not adhered to in any game to my recollection.

No, it’s not actually. All I'm asking for is for more thorough reads from you. I don't want negative, negative, negative, neutral, neutral, neutral. Would you agree or disagree with me that the reads that you've produced in your PBP pretty much don’t say much of anything and don’t give me or anyone else a thorough enough look into what your possible alignment could be or feelings about everyone else actually are? If you’re pro-town, does this not concern you at all that you likely haven’t fully grasped the rest of the game? Wouldn’t you want to rectify this as soon as you possibly could instead of continuing this back and forth with me?

Hm. Do you mean to assert that I'm not still asking you questions? Do you mean to assert that I am just leaving my vote there ant not making an effort to figure you out? Do you mean to assert that putting most of your effort into going after one target at a time "all guns blazing" is scummy?

No, you are still asking questions. I don’t know if you’re making an effort to figure me out. To me, it doesn’t seem like it based on your overall tone and entrance to the game. And yes, I do think it’s scummy to go "all guns blazing" on one person when you now claim to not have a good grasp of the rest of the game, especially considering the fact that I had such a low opinion of your predecessor to begin with. I would think the pro-town, more responsible thing to do upon replacing in would be to read the thread thoroughly, produce coherent player-by-player analyses or at least partial player-by-player analyses, and then seeing if your suspicions matched your predecessors. Judging by your entrance and content you’ve produced thus far, I just get the sense that you mainly read what your predecessor had to say about everything and pretty much formulated your

main

thoughts around her frame of mind rather than reading through the thread on your own and seeing how you felt about it.

[Jahudo]

That Neils Bohr comment wasn't the only time I can find where Incog was discrediting the argument without looking at the content. I feel that it can be a scummy thing to do but on the other hand, most of his earlier responses to SL were nonjudgmental. It's possible that his later responses were provoked by the "guns blazing" attitude SL could have but I do not think that she was only repeating the same information the same was by post 164.

Obviously, SL did not say that. But by this time you were ready to ignore her altogether. I don't know how this is helpful to SL or anyone trying to read into the interaction and gain an accurate read on SL or Incog for that matter.

She can dish it out, but she can't take it when someone dishes it right back in her face?

What is the context of those quotes? Is it really a comparable instance? And besides, that's another game. The problem I have with the way you attacked her was it looked like you saw her points as weak but still tried to undermine them. It wasn't a case of stating why she wasn't bringing up strong enough points or trying to build up weak points, which I agree to an extent she did, and then tell her to look around some more for other scummy behavior while you do the same.

Yes, of course they do, but they'll likely only buddy up to people who they see have major influence over the town or who they may perceive to be a major threat to their agenda.

Have you seen instances of this in the boost count so far? How much does the timing, or this quick boosting, makes a difference as a read? I think that it could likely happen with the boosts, but I don't see any unusual buddying going on. I also think that people with major influence can tend to be people that the majority of people think are town, which is a good reason to boost someone.

And actually, now that I've gone back and looked at fuzzylightning a bit, his FoS of springlullaby bothers me regardless of springlullaby's (Guardian's) alignment.

What about it bothers you? Is that the primary reason for you thinking he was scummy?

@Huntress: Do you see anything suspicious from Electra that doesn't have to do with boosting/theory talk/setup talk?

@RandomGem: At least get the basics out with what you are feeling. Who are you suspicious of? What things do you disagree/agree with? Who would you boost, vote for before the deadline. It is not at all helpful to have a non-contributing player during a deadlined game and I still think your predecessor did nothing substantially scummy or town.

[TDC]

With a little over a week to go, I think it's time that someone finalizes the Electra boost, so that we can work on the second boost.
I'm currently boosting eldarad, but would switch to sthar8 or RR if necessary.

[Incognito]

With a little over a week to go, I think it's time that someone finalizes the Electra boost, so that we can work on the second boost.
I'm currently boosting eldarad, but would switch to sthar8 or RR if necessary.

I agree with this, and I too would be willing to boost eldarad, sthar8, Raging Rabbit, or leave my boost on TDC.

Jahudo, I'll respond to your post later.

[Raging Rabbit]

Agreed.

Will be willing to switch from Guardian to eldarad or TDC if necassary.

[Incognito]

Or maybe I'll respond now.

@Jahudo:

In response to the first portion of your post, the way I saw the exchange from my perspective was something like as follows:

1)

springlullaby brings up her initial case against me.

2)

I respond to her case trying to show why I felt the case was wrong.

3)

She responded back saying I was wrong and added some weak points to her attack.

4)

I responded again.

5)

She responded again with more weak points.

6)

I responded again.

Finally in that post where I put the "Bla Bla Bla" emoticon in place of her words, I felt like she wasn't even pushing a case anymore. She just became insulting saying "fuck you", calling me a "wuss", saying "fuck you" again, etc. If I had responded to that post with a

real

response, believe you me it would NOT have been pretty. Tell me, why should I respond to a post like that? Was my response not the more responsible way of dealing with it? Sure, I could have gotten into a flaming war with her but that would have been counterproductive to what I'm or what anyone else is trying to achieve in this game.

What is the context of those quotes? Is it really a comparable instance?

The point that I'm getting at with those quotes is I think (and I obviously may be wrong on this) that springlullaby has a tendency to push weak points against people as scum. When her points aren't gaining support against a person from the town, she then resorts to personal insults in her attack instead of trying to form a more coherent case against a person. This is the way I perceived her attack on me in this game and the way I perceived her attack in that game too.

Have you seen instances of this in the boost count so far? How much does the timing, or this quick boosting, makes a difference as a read?

I don't know? Wouldn't it kinda be difficult to tell whether or not someone is actually buddying up to someone else unless an alignment between a potential buddy buddy relationship is revealed? I think Guardian is scum so I suppose it's possible that his insistence that sthar8 and only sthar8 is this "paragon of towniness" could possibly be buddying up, but I can't definitely say that until Guardian's alignment is revealed.

What about it bothers you? Is that the primary reason for you thinking he was scummy?

fuzzylightning's FoS bothers me because he seemed to create a well-thought out post about why he felt like springlullaby could be scum, springlullaby didn't have many votes on her at the time (she might have had mine and someone else's - I'm going from memory here), and instead of voting for her, he merely FoS-ed her. If he's scum and she's town, he might have been reluctant to jump on her bandwagon as he thought he might be seen as scummy. If he's scum and she's scum, he might have felt like it wasn't worth bussing her yet. It's also possible that he's town and just very cautious with his votes, but I'd need to look into some of his past town games before coming to that conclusion. I don't recall mentioning that I found him scummy; I just know that I have pretty much no read on him.

[Guardian]

I'm gonna PM the mods. If scum weren't allowed to PM pregame I am more OK with sl being boosted.

I think sth is by far the most likely town and should be boosted.

I (obv) am also OK with me being boosted, as I know I'm town, and I think by far the most important thing is that we don't boost scum. I don't want scum with roleblocking, NK immunity, or double kills, or some crap walking about.

I need to finish my re-read on Incog but I am starting to get a similar vibe from him this game that I got in vollville, where he was town and super convinced I was scum for idiosyncratic reasons....

I need to re-read, and I am really busy with school and then I will be busy with relatives for thanksgiving. deadline sux

[Raging Rabbit]

The point that I'm getting at with those quotes is I think (and I obviously may be wrong on this) that springlullaby has a tendency to push weak points against people as scum. When her points aren't gaining support against a person from the town, she then resorts to personal insults in her attack instead of trying to form a more coherent case against a person. This is the way I perceived her attack on me in this game and the way I perceived her attack in that game too.

You didn't show that she pushed weak points or any kind or points at all, just that she's capable of getting pissed off as scum as well, which is besides the point.

[Guardian]

All roles are out; please confirm by PM. Game starts in day when everyone's confirmed; in the meantime, feel free to ask if you're unsure about anything.

Any roles that can nightalk can do so during the confirmation stage

.

I asked Elmo and Patrick if scum could talk pregame; Elmo responded first and directed me to this post. So, scum could nighttalk before day one. So, if Electra is scum, a more experienced partner could have told her exactly what to do.

I am thus still uncomfortable with boosting Electra.

[Jahudo]

Finally in that post where I put the "Bla Bla Bla" emoticon in place of her words, I felt like she wasn't even pushing a case anymore. She just became insulting saying "fuck you", calling me a "wuss", saying "fuck you" again, etc. If I had responded to that post with a

real

response, believe you me it would NOT have been pretty.

I agree that SL had weak points but she began these weak points around page 4 when there were only weak tells. Looking back I see that she was at least partly responsible for the personal attacks and ad-hom.

And yes, you are requited to express suspicions on page fucking 4, it is the fucking point of the game. What would you rather have? 4 other pages of inane blatter about mohinder suresh and 'pressure votes' on people who answer question for others?

I think this paragraph is full of bullshit, it looks good on paper for presenting vaguely himself as a steady and 'réflechi' character, but in reality it is a fucking fail inadequate justification for his passive play.

I think this is the first instance, and it comes after you calling her the Neils Bohr of mafia and about why you don't need to show your reads on "page fucking 4". I'm don't know what reflechi is but I can see some of this as diverting away from the argument into personal insults.

You've now pretty much resorted to personal insults which still say absolutely nothing and are actually quite scummy.

She also had this in response to eldarad:

So...what point were you making? How is it different to Skillit's point?

I made only 3 posts so far, if you can't bother to read them, don't count on me to babysit you by repeating myself. If you think that my point doesn't diverge from Skillit's, you point out how it is the case.

I was saying that during early game, there's absolutely nothing wrong with a pro-town player reserving judgment about a player until said pro-town player receives enough information to feel comfortable with his or her suspicions. In fact, reserving judgment and not jumping to conclusions is more likely to leave a pro-town player with a more satisfying result.

And you still ask the question of "don't you expect scum to lie?" but still seem completely oblivious to your own contradiction.

@Incog: Is this the contradiction that she thinks you're scum and asks you questions?

post 164 - SL talks about how you reserve opinion on Electra, your sthar vote being unpressured and your questions being ones that scum could easily lie about...

you expressly asked me why I thought Electra was town while being still unpronounced yourself and I believe that what you were doing there was trying to gauge the situation and see if there was an obviously protown reason people were thinking Electra was town before pronouncing yourself.

Is it abnormal for someone to not know who exactly is scum on page fucking 4 of the thread and who is instead choosing to use this early time to try and figure people out?"

Ok, so here is this insult you mentioned. You didn't initiate one to her in your quote but she responds to you. This has to go against SL.
My opinion: Fuck you, if you are town you are required to be pro-active.

post 172 - Incog says blah blah blah

This whole thing is confusing me now To me it seems like the case isn't going the way she hoped it would, maybe because you aren't responding the way she thinks you ought to or because not enough people are paying attention to her besides you. But at some point she stops building a better case as her first priority or at least starts to become insulting herself. So yeah, I'm starting to have doubts about my vote.

---

fuzzylightning's FoS bothers me because he seemed to create a well-thought out post about why he felt like springlullaby could be scum, springlullaby didn't have many votes on her at the time (she might have had mine and someone else's - I'm going from memory here), and instead of voting for her, he merely FoS-ed her....I don't recall mentioning that I found him scummy...

It's post 115 if you want to look over it again.

at least back up your statistic with empirical proof, otherwise I will call it unreasoned judgment, which I consider to be a scumtell.

That was in response to her 8 out of 10 thing and I think fuzzy's assessment was the same as what I had.

Currently I am receiving a pro-town vibe from incog and a slight scum read from lullaby, but not enough for a vote, so FoS: Springlullaby, for a weak, contradictory case and that seemingly random statistic.

Also I misread your post Incog. The suspect list in your post 416 wasn't in a quote box so I thought it was yours and it had fuzzy as scummy. But you were responding to RR about how Mana's reads could be dirty and those were Mana's. FoS Jahudo for not paying attention.

But still, Mana why do you think fuzzy is scummy?

[Incognito]

Guardian, why do you keep on making it a point to say you'd be fine with boosting yourself?

[Incognito]

And yes, Jahudo, that's the contradiction.

[sthar8]

We need to hear more from

RR

, Electra, Mana, Gem, and Huntress.

Thanks, RR.

Mod: can we get a prod on Mana_ku?

I still think electra is likely town, but the evidence for that is about as solid as the evidence for iLord being scum, so I'm not willing to boost her unless we get some more contribution.

Huntress has done nothing to change the read I had of Crazy, so I'm still very happy with my vote.

Mana_ku's vagary and seeming fixation on irrelevant points makes me very nervous.

I'm happy boosting TDC, and I'd have to reread to see who I'd be willing to switch to, or who I'd boost if Electra doesn't come through.

[Guardian]

Guardian, why do you keep on making it a point to say you'd be fine with boosting yourself?

To encourage people to boost me, and to remind them that I am a premium-grade, high-quality boosting option :).

[eldarad]

Let me try to summarise the position here. Guardian, Incog, if you think I have misrepresented your position, keep your explanation to 6 lines or less - you've both posted enough on the subject that there is no need to repeat it again.

Incog thinks sl was scummy because she attacked Incog for stuff (reserving judgement, relying on other peoples' opinions) that she didn't attack others for. He also thinks that it is at least a possibility that sl replaced out because Incog mentioned that he had discovered a "sl is always aggressive as scum" meta.
Incog also thinks Guardian adopting many of sl's points is indicative of Guardian/sl being scum, and that Guardian's list of his thoughts on other players is very negative and/or leaves wiggle room to attack later.

~~~
Guardian thinks Incog is scummy because he has been dismissive (read: evasive) of attacks on him, and that he provoked sl into replacing out with his dismissiveness. Guardian also thinks that, having read the thread independently of sl, the fact that he agrees with many of sl's points suggests that they hold some weight.
Guardian also thinks that the timing of Incog's vote (immediately after Guardian replaced in) is odd.

~~~
I am deliberately not expressing a view until both Incog and Guardian have agreed that my summary is brief but essentially accurate.
In the meantime, someone should Boost Electra, and I will read the thread from the beginning