Mini 739 ~ Mafia Jailbreak, Game Over

[popsofctown]

but... then i can't work on my physics homework. which is like, due soon. can i find it later? i'll find it later. no one tell me. It'll totally spoil my curiosity and wonder. but i will come back to this thread. And find it later. gaureanteed.

[Korts]

This post is a placeholder. Will post real stuff after I caught up with more urgent games.

[Rhinox]

This post is a placeholder. Will post real stuff after I caught up with more urgent games.

hmm? ...

Also, posting for the sake of posting? Admitting to it? Shame.

Also, did you expect not to be called out for posting for the sake of posting when you yourself admitted to it?

Let me help. Did you admit to posting for the sake of posting? Why did you post for the sake of posting? Why did you admit to it?

Why does this not apply to you?

[bionicchop2]

OGML, please make this game a higher priority for yourself.

[Jahudo]

Are you making the case that Spy is more guilty of the problems he has with pops than pops is?

No. The "like Spyrex" in my sentence refers to people that pops could be ignoring. I don’t think Spyrex is guilty of ignoring people. And I’ll chalk it down when someone needs to be reminded about a question but keep up with other current discussions. Sometimes people just miss a question directed at them among the walls of text. If it becomes a habit or they are missing big bolded text, for instance, then it becomes more questionable.

And then, pops forgets a question directed at him in post 172.

To arbitrarily say that all SK talk on Day 1 is useless without any regard for the implications it might have later in the game sounds naive to me.

Did Rhinox say this thing that you think is naïve? Did he imply it?

Absolutely he did.

I don’t see it anywhere. In post 45 he says that no conversations are useless as long as they are mafia related. He also agrees with Bio’s post 37 in which Bio says this:

I plan on working as many new angles as I can think of, even if it means I might discuss a potentially useless point.

So I don’t think Rhionx or Bio for that matter are saying anything to the extreme of “All SK talk on Day 1 is useless”.

And you asked Rhinox if he thought the discussion was useless but in post 154 he said it wasn’t; just that it helps scum more than town when the setup isn’t open. And that’s the biggest feeling I get from his posts; that he thinks scum can benefit here.

It wasn't meant as a defense of myself, RC, it was actually a question to bio. Since I didn't exactly have a stellar defense to go along with my mistake, there is nothing to indicate I'm playing like any alignment of a good player so far.

The first part is true because it was based on a Bio argument that good scum won’t dig themselves deeper than the original hole they fell into. Actually, I think other factors affect someone’s defense than if they are good scum or not. And even good scum could try and play a different angle or unintentionally lose focus. My meta says you play a good scum, so I think you can post-rationalize any mistake you made.

But then, maybe a good scum play off that knows they’re good and wants the WIFOM of not playing to the meta I have on them

This post is a placeholder. Will post real stuff after I caught up with more urgent games.

hmm?

He’s already done this once and explained why he did it. Have you looked at that post lately?

[Korts]

Why does this not apply to you?

Umm, I explained it here as well as in our other game; this kind of posting from me is only so that I don't weasel out in the face of a challenging read-up. I'm inherently lazy and I sometimes have to force myself into working by having the prospect of bringing shame to myself loom over me...

Nevertheless I have to back down on this one. Semester just started and I'm tired. I promise that this game is now the first in line.

[Rhinox]

Why does this not apply to you?

Umm, I explained it here as well as in our other game; this kind of posting from me is only so that I don't weasel out in the face of a challenging read-up. I'm inherently lazy and I sometimes have to force myself into working by having the prospect of bringing shame to myself loom over me...

Nevertheless I have to back down on this one. Semester just started and I'm tired. I promise that this game is now the first in line.

Oh, ok... guess I missed the explanation the first time. (and I also try to ignore what you say in our other game when I'm reading this one, so things don't start blending together and I start getting biased towards you having the same (or opposite) role in each game )

My meta says you play a good scum, so I think you can post-rationalize any mistake you made.

But then, maybe a good scum play off that knows they’re good and wants the WIFOM of not playing to the meta I have on them

haha... but if you look at my sig, you'll see that newbie game was the only game I've been mafia in so far. If you wanna see a game of me playing horrendus as scum (sk), check out Mini 688 where I got myself vigged D1, and the town won easily (meh, it was 2 mafia + 1 sk vs. 9 townies with some decent PRs).

Anyways, my current belief is that I don't need to alter my playstyle in any way as town or scum, because I think I play pretty much the same as scum as I do as town... but that could just be because I haven't been mafia enough to become aware of changes to my play. I've also never been in a situation where I've had the added dynamic of scum partners, unless you count the short time Prof. Guppy was alive...

So what I'm trying to say nicely is, I think your meta on me as scum is unreliable because of the small sample size. If you really wanted to meta-analyze me, I'd rather see you looking at my town games and decide how differently/similarly I'm playing now as opposed to when I was town.

Take Mafia 87 for example. I had a hunch Vi was scum for meta reasons, even though I'd never seen Vi play as scum. But I had seen him play as town 3 times, and saw some inconsisties with those examples.

[bionicchop2]

RedCoyote analysis:

Post #15:

confirm / random vote / flavor. Null

Post #25:

Comments on Huntress not voting and does not see anything wrong with it. Null on its own. Also, first mention of Rhinox.

Post #51:

Isn't the point of random voting to cause discussion to occur? Yeah, well, Huntress makes a good point, she caused more discussion than any other vote we had up there. She feels confident enough in her abilities to make that play and I absolutely respect that.

Second mention of Huntress' lack of vote. 1st time passively stated the non-vote as not scummy ("I don't see anything wrong"). This time implicitly displays the decision as pro-town for the discussion it generates. This says nothing of Huntress' alignment IMO.

A question for you Rhinox, since we're getting into the theoretical discussion anyways, what do you think of people who vote themselves during the RV stage?

While SK discussion and not-RVing discussion are borderline theory discussions, they are game-specific and the information discussed could reveal information about the player. This question is obscured and can only spawn a distracted conversation. If somebody had self-voted, this would be a valid line of questioning. This question is pure fluff and could not be used in any manner of scum hunting.

Korts 38 wrote:
I agree with BC on the fact that this discussion is mostly counter-productive


bionic refuses this label of his opinion, and I don't blame him. I haven't read anything similar to this in his posts, and I don't agree with the statement at all either.

---

pops 40 wrote:
If he's SK, he's done something that is very bad for himself.


I do not think there are grounds to make this charge. I'm not necessarily saying you are making the charge pops, but both you and Korts have basically implied it.

2 instances of seemingly defending me. I am not sure what benefit this has. The post of Korts quoted certainly did not require a comment from RC since I already stated that Korts was incorrect in his read of my post. Also, the interpretation of Pop's post is wrong. Pops was not accusing me of being SK, but more stating that is would be a horrible move for me if I was SK. This is reflected in his WIFOM ratings of my possible alignment - which he ranks SK as least probable.

I mean, I want to keep bringing this point up because I think the town should assume there is an SK until proven otherwise, not the other way around.

I will state here that I take no issue at all with this initial SK comment or any SK item you state in particular. I have no issue with slightly obscure lines of discussion / questioning as long as they are related to the current game. I find validity in this initial statement.

Post #78:

Anyways, I think we've beat just about all the life out of the SK argument.

I skip to this point of your post. Up to here, I think you have made your stance clear. You acknowledge the discussion has lingered a little. I don't really take any issue with anything said specifically in this post - though there is a little bit of fanning the flames with pops vs. korts.

Post #108:

RC, no, I thought it was pretty clear pops was making a joke. I actually agree with him that people were talking-about-nothing-like-they're-getting-paid up to that point, and to an extent since then. There's a lot of fluff and theory discussion going on in this thread, and from my experience all theory discussion ever does in games is give scum a nice, cozy place to hide while the real action goes on around them.

Good. I'm glad you said this because I absolutely feel the same way. Despite the fact that I keep bringing up the SK (which, granted, I think is a more worthwhile discussion), I don't particularly think all this discussion about random voting and our own personal experiences and theories about it end up helping the town all that much. It gives people a chance to sound scholarly on the subject of forum mafia and absolutely bores the hell out of me.

Here you reply to the question you asked OGML. Asking somebody for their opinion on something without stating your own, then coming back and just agreeing with their view sticks out to me. If you felt his post was a joke and not a scummy comment, you chose to address it in a different manner than when you defended Huntress and myself. This instance has a feel of testing the waters for the best place to push suspicions. Then you finish your response by distinguishing between your 'theory' talk and the other 'theory' talk in the thread (for the record, I think both the SK and the RV talk were perfectly game relevant and are harder to hide behind than pure theory talk which has nothing to do with the current game). There is hypocrisy here, especially in light of your previous comment that there is no clear distinction between good and bad discussion (post 51).
===
Now, this is the first instance where I feel you take the SK discussion too far, because you get repetitive.Rhinox specifically says he is not arguing to discount the SK and asks to identify how our play would change if we assume there is a SK. Your responses are scattered and miss directly addressing the question, instead circling to points you have already made clear and Rhinox has agreed to.

If you are going to tell me with a straight face, based on those role possibilities, that we should assume there isn't an SK, then I absolutely have to snicker.

There's no reason why we should be naive about the situation. I think it's very safe to say that it's probable there is an SK, and every townie should play like there is another scum out there.

With that said, your vote on Rhinox is fine here (not that you need my approval). Rhinox made contradictory statements that may reflect him having a scum role. There is no denying the action is suspicion worthy. What I haven't seen since this post is a follow up or anything that showed me you were trying to determine if he was scum or not.

Post #126:

My vote is better served on Rhinox at this point than it is on Rishi (which was originally a RV) or on no one. Do you disagree with that?

This is in response to Korts questioning your vote. This may be just because I had my vote on Rishi and still have him viewed as highly suspicious, but the comment sticks out. I understand your vote on Rishi was random, so it holds no meaning, but Rishi is the other person you identified as driving your discussion about SK and asked the same questions as Rhinox (as you noted in post 108). Despite that, you specifically identify Rishi as less vote-worthy. Now, my case on Rishi wasn't anything rock-solid or groud-breaking, but you didn't bat an eye at it.

Essentially, it's my opinion that forcing the town to talk about the SK may help the mafia, but in general I think it's good practice to talk about all roles and their implications to the game regardless of what day it is.

I am not going to jump on the obvious part of this quote (conceding it might help mafia), because it is pretty clear that is not the intent of your statement (or I over thought it). What I will question is the fact you say it is good practice to discuss all roles. My reason is that you have not discussed other roles. Where is your discussion about the mafia roles? Where do you discuss how we should prepare for and acknowledge that mafia may have a watcher who could identify town power roles at night? Where do you discuss town roles (Please don't)?

Post #152:

(continuation from post 126)
Semi-long post. I don't have many specifics to point out about it. The one oddity is your FoS of pops, when your major point (from what I can tell) against Rhinox was him making a weak/contradictory case against Pops. You also agree with OGML in your post 108 referenced above that Pops was joking. Coming back to this, it comes across as a second attempt to plant a seed of suspicion for a future vote - depending which way the tide flows.

Post #168:

Rhinox and Rishi both insisted that I give them a reason as to why having multiple killing parties makes a determining factor in this game. This forced my hand into talking about things I would rather not have talked about. I'm wondering why you're pressuring me because of this, and not Rhinox or Rishi.

This is a twist on what they asked. Both were clear in their question. They were both questioning you to determine how the current discussion was going to evolve into scumhunting. You deflected that and returned to the original premise that we should assume a SK even though both players were willing to concede that point very early on. You also can't blame any line of discussion on somebody else. Nobody can force you to talk about something. I frequently shut down discussions in games when I feel the conversation has reached an impasse and I have clearly expressed my views. Your initial view has been clear to me since your second post. As stated, I agree for the most part with your initial view. The statement has been repeated, reworded and restated multiple times without any new points being brought up or any evolution into scum hunting. The rest of your post does nothing expand on your case for the initial vote on Rhinox, yet you make it a point to unvote/revote as if you have confirmed something beyond a shadow of a doubt.

• In summation, my largest sticking points are:
  
• Failure to evolve discussion of choice into scum hunting
  
• Repetition of points which are IMO safe to discuss since nobody is truly debating the initial logic.
  
• Spinning the statements of those who questioned your methods
  
• Planting seeds of suspicion on pops without making your own case (piggyback onto Spyrex accusations) and wavering on truly committing to an opinion of him.
  
• minor contradictions of statements throughout
  
• unprovoked defenses of players

Any item on their own isn't any kind of definitive scum tell, but these seem to be stacking up from my perspective.

vote RedCoyote

[bionicchop2]

Rhinox - post 181 is full of yuck.

[SpyreX]

Ok, going to try to catch up with the few questions I know I've missed. (It helps me, with the walls of text, to have a nice little spot for questions.)

However:

How was it a shield? And where did I call out MME? I used him as an example to question Rhinox and later I followed up a comment that pops made about him but I never accused MME of anything.

How is it a shield? Your non-vote was a focal point of your first 5 of 8 posts. 2 others were short posts indicating a Red Coyote vote, and the last is the post in which you ask me this. So yes, from my eyes the non-vote has been used as a basis for the majority of your posts in the game as a shield from actual contribution.

Yet my non-vote has caused more discussion so far than any vote.

And a question: Why are you not mentioning My Milked Eek, who also posted without voting?

As this was in reference to Rhinox not liking your absence of random voting, this IS a callout. This is, "Why are you after me for X, when Y is ALSO doing X". At minimum you are calling him a lurker, at best you are saying Rhinox is a hypocrite for attacking you and not him for it.

I did not get that feeling, nor did I see anything to indicate that Spy did follow through with his castigation of lurkers after making the salt story.

I think the story is apt, but he then proceeded to vote pops. pops is not lurking.

pops is not a lurker. Spy is anti-lurker. Therefore, Spy is anti-pops. Doesn't make sense does it?

I realize there is more to Spy's vote on pops, I'm not doubting that. What I'm having trouble with is Spy pushing his salt story and then blantantly voting someone who was at the proverbial table.

I'm glad the story struck a chord, however - it wasn't the only theory I presented there. I gave three major theories in that post:

1.) That pops is scum.
2.) That huntress is scum.
3.) That, of the active players, there were no scum present and the lurkers were just waiting for an opportunity to strike.

Now, alas, I have only 1 vote. I have chosen to go with theory 1 at this point. If I had two more votes that had to go different places, you can be damn sure huntress would have one and one of the lurkers (at this point probably OGML or Rishi) would have one. As a plus, after my lurker callout Jahudo HAS been posting more. So, not a total loss on that front.

Trust me, I have not forgotten them. The only problem is that, as discussion has continued, I have become more sure about pops versus less. So, nope, I'm not dropping this avenue for another avenue I brought up.

Now, for the Rhinox wagon:

Can someone (much like bio did in regards to RC above) simply give me a bulleted list of their reasons for this wagon. Needless to say, I'm still not buying it but it has enough traction that I want to see the rationale without WORDS interfering.

[popsofctown]

Which question was it that Spyrex is upset about? Is it where he wants a resummary of my case on Rhinox?


In other news, i'm about as sure about Rhinox being scum right now as i am about RC. I have another meta-rooted tell for RC, which may or may not be valid. Do you want me to tell it to RC in front of you all so he can correct it again? I could, but i hope you people see why it might make me feel like i'm running on a treadmill.

[popsofctown]

either way, that tell is good, so

unvote, vote RedCoyote

Either Rhinox or RC is lynchalicious right now. RC needs teh pressure more though.

[bionicchop2]

I have another meta-rooted tell for RC, which may or may not be valid. Do you want me to tell it to RC in front of you all so he can correct it again?

IMO, I wouldn't say it. It is catch-22 though. If I were pops, I would withhold it, but be ready to defend the hell out of my vote if RC flipped town at some point. Hopefully you can find something more readily available to show why you think RC is scum. Meta alone can be dangerous, even though I do put a decent deal of weight in meta when I scum-hunt.

I guess in the end, I wouldn't cry either way. I personally try not to expose meta-reads for as long as possible (or even tell a player I have a meta-read if I can avoid it).

[popsofctown]

tbh, i'm additionally very impressed with your case on him, although i hate to me-too

[bionicchop2]

tbh, i'm additionally very impressed with your case on him, although i hate to me-too

With a case that awesome, me-tooing is allowed!

[popsofctown]

I know, right!?

Spyro will soon be here to chastise me for it though. Use the fire breath, it's super effective against my mushroomy head.

[Huntress]

@Huntress: What in your post 161 would you count against Coyote that supports your vote on him?

Mainly it was what looked like attempts at role-fishing; his statement re: night actions in post 108, and his comment about it being good practice to talk about all roles in post 126. It was also the way he tried to make out that others were assuming that there wasn't an SK. Those were in addition to the points I made earlier at the end of post 101:

I don't like the way RedCoyote kicked off the discussion about self-voting then just let it run without commenting further. I also didn't like his buddying up to me in post 51.

---

The implication is what counts.

Then who implied that we should assume there isn't an SK?

I was pushed into saying it. I was content with leaving it at a disagreement over whether or not setup discussion was good for the town on Day 1, but Rhinox and Rishi both insisted that I give them a reason as to why having multiple killing parties makes a determining factor in this game. This forced my hand into talking about things I would rather not have talked about. I'm wondering why you're pressuring me because of this, and not Rhinox or Rishi.

Hell, Rhinox said it himself that it was an insult to think that townies couldn't come to that judgment on their own. If it really was such an insult, why did he push me so hard to say it Huntress? Specifically after I made it clear my intention that I was no longer interested in talking about it.

You said that you would gladly continue to talk about it. That doesn't sound like your hand was forced, or that you would rather not talk about it, or that you were no longer interested in talking about it.

I accept that there is a difference. On the same token, is it not unnecessary to push one player who happens to have a disagreement of opinion to keep talking about it?

I think that's legitimate scum-hunting. The fact that you responded to it in the way you did is telling.

Let me put it another way. If I had stopped talking about the SK altogether, you would've been just as interested in pushing me for ignoring arguments now wouldn't you?

Not necessarily.

Because I feel comfortable knowing the town isn't taking the game lightly.
Why would you not think that?

Because I take it on trust that everyone will play their role to the best of their ability in accordance with the site rule to play to win.

Suppose, hypothetically, that one kill happens every night based on whatever circumstances for the first 3 nights. On Day 4 then, would you still make the argument that it is advantageous for the town not to discuss the possibility of an SK and therefore the interation from one player to another?

By a later day we will have more information, however many kills there are, so the circumstances will be different. I can't predict at this stage how soon that will happen.

No, sorry, I don't accept that. Circumstances beyond one player's control necessarily affect the outcome of each night and consequently cause the game to take on different forms. To then say, despite this, that discussing the setup never helps the town is naive at best, dodgy at worst.

I don't think anyone has said that we should

never

discuss the setup, only that it's too soon to do it today.

It's unfortunate that her vote is based on "stating the obvious" as her primary tell, which I continue to think is an ancillary tell that should have some deeper connection behind it.

This is not true. What is your justification for claiming this? And why are you are seeking to discredit my vote by claiming that it is based on a non-tell like this?


More to come, but this is already long enough for one post.

[Huntress]

How is it a shield? Your non-vote was a focal point of your first 5 of 8 posts. 2 others were short posts indicating a Red Coyote vote, and the last is the post in which you ask me this. So yes, from my eyes the non-vote has been used as a basis for the majority of your posts in the game as a shield from actual contribution.

My first post was the actual non-vote.
Second post was a reply to Jahudo.
Third post was a response to Rhinox together with a question designed to discover how genuine and/or impartial his comments to me were, and the fourth post was mainly a follow-up to that. I was satisfied with his responses there but found pops reactions to the initial question, where he jumped in before Rhinox had the chance to reply, and to my fourth post, interesting.
In the fifth post I replied to and/or commented on five different players, including mentioning my first suspicions of RC.
I fail to see how you can describe this as not contributing.

As this was in reference to Rhinox not liking your absence of random voting, this IS a callout. This is, "Why are you after me for X, when Y is ALSO doing X". At minimum you are calling him a lurker, at best you are saying Rhinox is a hypocrite for attacking you and not him for it.

I think your definition of "call out" may be different from mine. If I was calling out MME, i.e challenging him, I would have addressed him directly, or said something like "calling out MME for ...". What I was actually doing was using him to try to discover Rhinox's true intentions.


But all this reminds me of something I should have asked earlier:

@ Pops: Why did you intervene on my question to Rhinox (post 29) before he had a chance to answer?

[popsofctown]

@Huntress- i have a good answer for you're good question

hmmm... those are 2 options for sparking serious discussion. Another option is random votes, which huntress has not done.

Yet my non-vote has caused more discussion so far than any vote.

And a question: Why are you not mentioning My Milked Eek, who also posted without voting?

Not that you're question actually has a statement within it, set off by commas. I believed the statement to be incorrect (it stemmed from us having different meanings of "post"), and i think correcting false statements holds enough weight for me to intervene.

[OhGodMyLife]

Man, the posts in this game are just enormous. I am catching on up.

[OhGodMyLife]

Post numbers referenced because I'm so freakin' far behind.

And don't you agree that when there's a clear-cut scumtell (jokingly made or not) early in the game, it deserves pressure?

I don't agree that its clear-cut, for one thing, and you make it sound like we can play this game like its some kind of algorithm. A standardized response to a specific action is not diagnostic, and is therefore the perfect move for scum to make.

It's just as valid a starting point as anything else in this stage of the game.

"At this stage of the game"... whats that mean exactly? Whats the cut off point when the game goes from color by numbers to actually scumhunting?

I tried making it pretty obvious anyway that my reaction was only pseudo-serious.

This is just covering your tracks. Pseudo-serious is incredibly hard to define as it is. Does that mean you wouldn't lynch based on that vote? Or what? And no, it was not in any obvious that the vote was "pseudo-serious."

OGML FoSing without comment? Especially considering how Rishi called Rhinox out a few minutes before him, I think this is a strange move.

Define "strange move." Because this feels like a way to just smear me without backing anything up.

OGML, what gives you the feeling that Rhinox was ignoring me? I don't remember having unanswered points toward him.

Its not about him not answering questions you raise, its about him not commenting on you at all. Given that Rhinox's posts up to that point (and, well always) are basically little novellas, and he had had something to say on just about everything else that had happened in the game, his complete lack of interest in what I had said about you was something I found telling.

I'm really playing like a (Village) Idiot this game... lame, but true excuse: all 4 of my games I'm in got extremely active at the same time, the last couple days, and because of that I've been playing extremely crappy - i.e. not typing things the way I intend them to me, and now blatently forgetting which questions I've asked to which players. Also, without getting too sentimental, I've been looking forward to this game ever since Vi PMed me the list of pre-ins. This game is pretty much full of great players, and I was looking forward to the opportunity to prove I could run with some of the best mafiascum.net has to offer. The end result is me being a bit off my game, trying too hard, being a bit flustered, and looking like a big idiot.

I have to hope this has been discussed pretty heavily by now, but wtf Rhinox, you're defending yourself entirely with appeal to emotion,

and

you're simultaneously using flattery on everyone else in the game.

This gets you top marks on my scum report card. I'll hold off til I finish reading, but based on this alone you should hang today.

Yes, I realize both the irony and the phail. But, its the truth. More ironic phail: This is wifom, but what would be the benefit of saying "oops I'm just a VI who made a scummy mistake?" if I were actually scum. Why wouldn't I just make up some BS about how even though you were answering my question I still found it overly defending RC and scummy (kinda like I did when I forgot I said I didn't find your jokes scummy, and then said I did find them scummy later *facepalm*...)

...
You know, just because you acknowledge the fact that your argument is faulty doesn't mean we'll ignore the fact that its faulty.

This lets me know just how much I still have to learn... first bolded part I completely agree with. Second bolded part I also completely agree with, but was completely ignorant to that being an obvious extension to my "sk will alter their play if we're focused on him" thoughts...

Here, Rhinox specifically works on flattering bio by appealing to his authority on the subject. Silly padawan.

Re: Spyre's 119... the bit about the active players all being town..

FoS: SpyreX

Korts responded with a “Shame” that felt less serious because it did not have a serious explanation to go with the vote

How is a vote without a serious explanation suddenly not a serious vote?

More on its way soon

[OhGodMyLife]

I like Rishi's 127. Specifically:

Also, I said I didn't find bio scummy - not that I didn't find him suspicious.

I don't know if anyone else questioned this. What's the difference between scummy and suspicious? This is bordering on doublespeak.

QFT

and

Here's my issue with you, you're running around saying, "Hey, guys! We might have an SK! We should take that into consideration!" But, as far as I've seen (and you can correct me if I'm wrong), you have not offered one specific suggestion on what we should do to account for an SK. Okay, if we're supposed to play differently based on an SK, then HOW should we play differently? That's why it seems like you're creating a lot of noise but not providing any content.

QFT. This seems like a major issue regarding RedCoyote. I can't think of a single thing he's done this game aside from make a lot of noise about how we need to be wary of a possible SK.

even if you found that all of my votes seemed based on some idea of a by the book policy, would that say anything about my allignment?

And this was my issue with what Korts did, which you never seemed to find interesting enough to comment on. It doesn't say anything about alignment, thus making it an ideal play for scum.

Korts' 131 feels like its intentionally skirting the main issues by focusing only on the mechanical aspects of RC's SK bit. This is the problem with unwarranted setup speculating, or in this case debating about the

merits

of setup speculating which is even one degree removed from that, is that its got nothing to do with alignment, and therefore is an ideal thing for mafia to talk about instead of anything else.

I know you don't have a problem using wifom

, so do you really think that it would have been beneficial for me to be THAT honest as scum?

Re: bold - *rimshot* seems like a sly way to try and remind everyone that you're not the only one guilty of WIFOMing in this game. But you're certainly relying on it much more heavily than he is.
Re: the rest - well, everyone else should still have a problem with you trying to dig yourself out of a whole using an entirely WIFOM argument despite the fact that you admit that it is so. I certainly do.

vote rhinox. This is a good place for the first strong wagon of the day IMO.

The way you phrase that makes it seem like you don't expect to actually be lynching Rhinox today. Are multiple strong wagons in a day necessary? Were you willing to see Rhinox lynched when you placed this vote?

Aparently nothing I can say to stop it, since my defenses are overrated

Defending your appeal to emotion defense with... another appeal to emotion.

Spyre 149 has a big blinking sign on it that says "I'm stalling for Rhinox"

Working my way forward page by page

[Vi]

Vote Count:

popsofctown (L-4) ~ Korts, iamausername, SpyreX
RedCoyote (L-4) ~ Huntress, bionicchop2, popsofctown

Rhinox (L-5) ~ Jahudo,

RedCoyote,

popsofctown,

bionicchop2,

RedCoyote
Korts (L-6) ~ OhGodMyLife

Minimum (L-7)

Not Voting:

My Milked Eek, Rishi, Rhinox
[size=0]bionicchop2 - 0 | Huntress - 0 | iamausername - 1 | Jahudo - 0 | Korts - 0 | My Milked Eek - 3 - PROD1 0 | OhGodMyLife - 0 - PROD1 2 | popsofctown - 0 | RedCoyote - 0 | Rhinox - 0 | Rishi - 0 | SpyreX - 0[/size]

First Deadline Review: Saturday, Feb 14 2009
Current Deadline: Wednesday, Feb 18 2009

-----

Deadline review is in five days.

My Milked Eek has received his first prod.

[OhGodMyLife]

This I agree with. Unfortunately for me, there just hasn't been enough time for ANYONE to have stacked up a mountain of overwhelming town play... if you guys quicklynch me, that won't change. If you don't, then maybe I can turn around and be more pro-town.

Ah, the specter of a quicklynch. If thats not enough to scare people off your wagon, gosh I just don't know what is.

I've got news for you. A real, honest to god day one quicklynch will not happen outside of a newbie game, and even then I'm not convinced it will happen. Whats going on now is by no means quick, and there has been more than enough content generated up to this point to offset whatever theoretical devastating repercussions of a quicklynch are brought up when someone has no other way to get people to stop voting for them.

So I guess the question I should be asking everyone right now is if the initial suspicion from my contradiction is strong enough for a lynch, are I can't say anything to alleviate that initial suspicion, are you all prepared to end the day now with a quick lynch on me, or do you feel conversation should continue?

stallin' and stallin' and stallin'

Question(s) for Huntress, MME, Rishi, Rhinox and OGML:

If you were forced to vote for one player right now, who would it be and why? Does not require an actual vote, so basically I am asking for your top 1 suspect. I would prefer to not see a list of scummy rankings. I know OGML is voting, but his suspicions haven't been clear since the vote was placed as he addressed Rhinox as scum a few times.

Unvote, Vote: Rhinox

I was gonna wait til I got all the way up to the present, but there is just a tidal wave of scum coming from his direction. So there's your answer.

Although I think the SK talk is becoming a sticky point, what about this focus is scummy? I'm having a hard time finding a scum-motive for "WATCH OUT FOR THE SK" in the fashion its been. Is it bordering on silly now? Yes. I'm still not seeing the scum maneuver for it, though.

Because with all the effort he's spent shouting OMG SK GUYS DON'T FORGET THE SK he's managed to not actually scumhunt one iota, for all his reams of contribution to this game.

I think Spy has done a much better job convincing me to look at pops than either you or Korts have.

Thats interesting. Why is it that you need somebody to convince you to look at anyone? Shouldn't you be looking at

everyone

of your own volition?

Moreover, I am implying that cases on Day 1 are necessarily weaker than cases on succeeding days. Do you disagree with that?

*raises hand* I do. The only kind of evidence lacking from day one cases which may be present in later cases is connections to already dead scum. Aside from this, a day one case can and should be just as strong as any other case that leads to a lynch in a game.

OGML, please make this game a higher priority for yourself.

Hi. Working on it.

Re Rhinox 181: My meta of you as scum is that you're good. My meta of you as town is that you're good. So, similar to how you picked up on Vi in Mafia 87 for inconsistencies, the fact that your appeal to emotion to the Nth degree defense here is horrendous, is an inconsistency with your usual standard of play. You yourself explained why this may be so - its your first game with multiple scum partners, and certainly your first game without a self-destructive scum partner. Thus, the differences.

bio 182 is a winner. Your prior unvote of rhinox based on RC's voting has me worried though. Don't discount that rc and rhinox could be a) bussing [least likely], b) on two seperate scumteams [more likely] or c) one is mafia and the other is sk [also more likely]

there is nothing better for scum than being on the lynchwagon of a separate scum faction on day one

Official

FoS: RedCoyote

in case my suspicion wasn't obvious enough already.

And I'm done. If at deadline it comes down to me changing wagons or no lynch happening, I'll switch to RC, but I like the Rhinox lynch better.

[RedCoyote]

The crowd wants more RC! I'm happy to oblige

I see it as a BS cover for speculating on the setup and distracting the town from scum hunting.

Like I told Jahudo, I don't see setup speculation as a tell. I'm not convinced talking about the setup hurts the town in anyway other than the point that it gives the mafia a chance to keep the town paranoid.

To me, that's not enough to discount to probability of an SK.

I don't see how any of my actions change by assuming there is an sk, compared to not assuming one...

Alright, well I disagree with this.

What I have said is there is no reason to assume anything at all about the scum factions until there is evidence to support any assumption.

I disagree with this. I think the town should constantly be aware of how many people are left, what the worst possible number of scum there are, what roles they are working with, etc...

This should all be on a townie's (or really even a scum's) mind before they vote to lynch, Day 1 or not.

We all know the setup possibilies... stated very clearly after the rules... And you still haven't shown how any particular town role should play D1 differently by assuming there is an sk.

I have, but you're not willing to say that you agree/disagree with me (you'd prefer to talk in circles).

Moving on... I actually like quote wars

Yeah, I don't mind it. I don't get to post during the day usually so I have to settle for one extremely long post.

I think the town should decide the strength of any tell in context... not what you say is strong or weak.

Seeing as how I'm part of the town, doesn't my opinion deserve the same weight as anyone elses?

You can't have a conversation with someone without thinking you're being attacked? Sounds overdefensive, imo...

I don't think it's a discussion that's producing anything new. I think it's now being used to justify a lynch on me.

Another distortion... aside from this post, please quote where I said anything to point to me even thinking "stating the obvious" was a scum tell, let alone the best one I've found...

So, you insult everyone by thinking that any town power roles would be too stupid to take into consideration any possible roles when making their night choices? Thats what all this has been about?

So you can state the obvious, in an attempt to look like a perfect little highly informative townie?

(emphasis added).

You were being sarcastic here, correct?

I see you forcing a view onto the town and instead of justifying why, you attack anyone who questions you or disagrees with you.

Yeah, I admittedly did push people as to what they thought/didn't think about the SK. I've said multiple times now that I'm finished talking about it, but certain players saw an opportunity to push me on the idea.

I mean, I'm sure whoever is mafia loves your argument right now about sks... get the town paranoid about an sk, so maybe the town PR's spend tonight looking for the ghost sk instead of looking for mafia, or looking for scum in general.

Do you think that's what I'm trying to do?

You still haven't shown how anything you've said regarding the SK discussion is helping the town right now on D1 catch scum.

I have, but you're not willing to say that you agree/disagree with me (you'd prefer to talk in circles).

you said that it was

ALWAYS

pro-town to "assume the worst (i.e. an sk)"... you said nothing about it being day 1 only, or anything else. You said always...

Yeah, it is.

Again, that doesn't mean you should

forget

about actual scum. Assuming the worst doesn't imply that the SK is your only threat, it's just implying that he should never be discounted.

That statement was meant for BC, and not you. So, why the need to respond?

I'm sorry, would you prefer players

not

be allowed to read what people say to other players or respond to it?

How is this scumhunting?

It's passive-aggressive. You were saying that you haven't given anyone a reason to trust what you said.

When people say things like that about themselves, I get worried. I get worried because a player knows whether or not he should be trusted or shouldn't.

If you don't believe people should trust you, why should I?

The fact the you're pretty much using the whole conversation as justification for keeping your vote on me means that the topic obviously hasn't ran its course.

I'm not voting you based on any of this SK stuff. I'm voting you based on WIFOM, your attempts at pairing people off, and because of these little passive-aggressive manipulations you've been using to get people to feel sorry for you.

If you really wanted to be the bigger man, you wouldn't HAVE to have the last word...

Here's what you don't get (and possibly other people, I haven't read any of the succeeding posts),

I'm not voting anyone based on the stance they take on SKs

. I was stating my opinion, someone didn't like my opinion, and this is where we are now.

If you also think this conversation is pro-town, you better damned well be able to explain why. You still haven't done so.

I have, but you're not willing to say that you agree/disagree with me (you'd prefer to talk in circles).

Until 1 of those 4 things happen, I don't care how many times you repeat to take an SK into all considerations, I'm just hunting factionless scum. Its worked for me so far. I've never lost a game because I failed to account for a possible SK on D1. Have you?

I think those are fair points, a shame that no one brought those up earlier.

No, but then again I've never played on MS with an SK before. XD

Second point... what gives you the right to proclaim when its ok or not ok to talk about anything?

I have just as much right as anyone else, and I say it should always be ok to talk about an SK. I do not set limitations on what should or shouldn't happen for a town to talk about roles in a setup.

It wasn't meant as a defense of myself, RC, it was actually a question to bio. Since I didn't exactly have a stellar defense to go along with my mistake, there is nothing to indicate I'm playing like any allignment of a good player so far.

Regardless whether or not you think WIFOM is a good tell, do you dispute that this is a genuine case of it?

So what makes you think I don't think WIFOM is or can be bad?

I retract this point, I misread post 133 (which also has some nice Rhinox WIFOM if anyone is interested).

On one hand, maybe you're trying to make a point, or just be an ass, by unvoting the player you're ALREADY VOTING FOR and voting them again...

I thought it was clear that I realized that.

I was certainly not trying to be an ass, sorry if that was your interpretation.

My point was that I was very comfortable in my vote.

---

I am seeing a ton of repetition in your posts.

And yet you don't see a ton of repetition of the same questions being asked and answered?

You have posted many words, but your case against Rhinox is unclear.

See above.

You challenge people to identify how your talk of a SK is scummy, but I would challenge you to identify how the dissension against such talk is scummy.

I would not word my position in that way. Of course I don't see how talking about the setup, regardless of the Day, is scummy, and I know there are those that disagree with me, but I wouldn't say I've been actively challenging people to prove my contributions were scummy, no. That's misrepresentative.

I do not need a response to this post, except for

My posts are very succinct, it's just they're all mashed together into one as opposed to being spewed across the thread.

---

I don’t see it anywhere.

we should know tomorrow or at some point down the road if there is an sk to deal with, so why worry about it before we know?

I think it's the more risky approach to dismiss the probability of an SK in the game, but I understand your argument.

It was Rhinox's position that talking about the SK on Day 1 is useless, regardless of the implications it might have later in the game, because he thought we would know at some later date.

I said that sort of position seems risky and presumptive, but I understood his point.

The rest, as they say, is history.

---

This question is pure fluff and could not be used in any manner of scum hunting.

Then you take the position that self-voting is inconsequential to a game, correct?

Pops was not accusing me of being SK, but more stating that is would be a horrible move for me if I was SK.

What does this mean?

If someone uses the phrase, "If A is B" that means they are considering the possibility that A is, in fact, B, and not C, like A would have you believe.

Pops said, considering the possibility that you were an SK, that would be a bad move.

How could you read it any other way?

Asking somebody for their opinion on something without stating your own, then coming back and just agreeing with their view sticks out to me.

Are you making the statement that a player should have their opinion on an issue on the record in a game before they ask another player their own opinion on an issue?

Then you finish your response by distinguishing between your 'theory' talk and the other 'theory' talk in the thread

...

There is hypocrisy here, especially in light of your previous comment that there is no clear distinction between good and bad discussion (post 51).

Hence the term "granted".

I thought the SK was a more worthwhile discussion than that of whether or not one should random vote. That's my opinion.

It was also my opinion that the SK was pretty much a finished issue for me since post 78.

It's arguably hypocritical of me to say that it's hard to distinguish between good and bad discussion and then say that I wasn't getting anything helpful over the random vote discussion.

I wasn't. I didn't think the discussion was going anywhere. I thought Huntress made her point and made it well.

Regardless, I think this a fair point against me.

What I haven't seen since this post is a follow up or anything that showed me you were trying to determine if he was scum or not.

I have made note of every point, usually distinctively, that I thought stuck out to me as scum rather than just our general back-and-forth.

Despite that, you specifically identify Rishi as less vote-worthy. Now, my case on Rishi wasn't anything rock-solid or groud-breaking, but you didn't bat an eye at it.

Because Rhinox did something especially damning that I thought was more worthy of my vote than Rishi (e.g. pairing of me and pops).

Rishi, incidentally, was not anywhere near being the best townie in my mind, but my vote was better served on the person I thought was (and still is) the most likely scum.

What I will question is the fact you say it is good practice to discuss all roles. My reason is that you have not discussed other roles. Where is your discussion about the mafia roles? Where do you discuss how we should prepare for and acknowledge that mafia may have a watcher who could identify town power roles at night? Where do you discuss town roles (Please don't)?

Don't ask me questions you don't want the answer to.

Perhaps it stems from playing elsewhere, but I do indeed think talking about role possibilites is good stuff.

Like, for instance (God, this is going to sound like such heresy to you people), a townie Watcher is such a gold mine of an opportunity. It may be worth risking having one player come out, on the basis that there could be a townie Doctor and/or a townie Watcher.

This may help certain roles get information about who is clean in this town (and verifying it over night).

This would be a radical departure from the way MS is normally played, no doubt.

Then again, the more I think about the rationale certain players had for questioning why I would consider the SK a probable enemy, the more slack I have to give them considering the way MS is.

I want so badly to play the newbie card right now ;_;

The one oddity is your FoS of pops, when your major point (from what I can tell) against Rhinox was him making a weak/contradictory case against Pops. You also agree with OGML in your post 108 referenced above that Pops was joking.

Ok, well this is clearcut misunderstanding on your part.

I did think pops was innocent of the things Korts pushed on him.

I did not think, however, that pops was necessarily any more innocent because of that. Spy was right, pops plainly ignored him, and that's suspicious to me.

In regards to Rhinox, my beef was him tying pops to me over a clear case of misrepresentation. Rhinox went beyond reaching to make a pops-RC pair, and that stuck out to me.

Nobody can force you to talk about something.

The deed is done, and I can't reverse time, but I contend that had I just blantantly stopped talking about the SK on post 78 that Rhinox, Rishi, and possibly others would've continually pressured me into talking about it.

You can agree with that or not, but that's the position I have taken.

Failure to evolve discussion of choice into scum hunting

Repetition of points which are IMO safe to discuss since nobody is truly debating the initial logic.

Spinning the statements of those who questioned your methods

Planting seeds of suspicion on pops without making your own case (piggyback onto Spyrex accusations) and wavering on truly committing to an opinion of him.

minor contradictions of statements throughout

unprovoked defenses of players

- I have indeed found multiple instances to justify my vote of Rhinox, none of which are related to the SK discussion.
- Repetition of questions that have been asked and answered.
- What does my "methods" mean? Need a definition of this term.
- I made it clear that I suspected pops because he didn't respond to Spy's direct line of questioning.
- General accusation that can be lumped into any case.
- Giving my opinion on situations as they have arose.

---

Can someone (much like bio did in regards to RC above) simply give me a bulleted list of their reasons for this wagon. Needless to say, I'm still not buying it but it has enough traction that I want to see the rationale without WORDS interfering.

I'll be glad to when I get more time to do so.

---

With a case that awesome, me-tooing is allowed!

:eyeroll:

---

Then who implied that we should assume there isn't an SK?

The implication that "we don't know what the mod does, cannot assume there is an SK". Do you want that post?

You said that you would gladly continue to talk about it. That doesn't sound like your hand was forced, or that you would rather not talk about it, or that you were no longer interested in talking about it.

You're now talking about two different things. The SK discussion and discussing roles in general.

I can't tell if you are doing this on purpose or not.

I think that's legitimate scum-hunting. The fact that you responded to it in the way you did is telling.

Ok, so then you do think the town should discuss the roles in the setup. I'll rememeber that for later.

Not necessarily.

Perhaps, but I contend you would have.

For you to fault me in this instance is questionable.

By a later day we will have more information, however many kills there are, so the circumstances will be different. I can't predict at this stage how soon that will happen.

Indeed, so you'd prefer to discuss the SK an an undisclosed, later date and fault those who do so before this undisclosed, later date.

I think that's ambiguous and restrictive based on conditions that have not been set. It is my opinion that that is not helpful to the town.

This is not true. What is your justification for claiming this? And why are you are seeking to discredit my vote by claiming that it is based on a non-tell like this?

Because neither you nor Rhinox (but he's not voting me so he's excused) have laid out a proper case against me, you've therefore assigned me the burden of making assumptions as to why you are voting me.

Because the "SK talk" has been the prime discussion topic you've had with me, I can only assume that my habit of "stating the obvious" (e.g. that I think there is probably and SK and that we should assume that there is) is unsettling to you and is what primarily caused you to vote me.

You've mentioned other, minor things (e.g. I was defending your lack of a vote), but you've failed to make them significant factors in your most recent posts.

---

This seems like a major issue regarding RedCoyote. I can't think of a single thing he's done this game aside from make a lot of noise about how we need to be wary of a possible SK.

I believe this is what Spy feels as well as what bionic had felt at one point in time.

But far be it from me to put words in their mouth, they are welcome to speak for themselves.

Because with all the effort he's spent shouting OMG SK GUYS DON'T FORGET THE SK he's managed to not actually scumhunt one iota, for all his reams of contribution to this game.

That's either a lie or it's ignorant.

Despite all I've answered for, I've still managed to point out reasons I've found Rhinox to be scummy (none of which having to do with the SK argument).

I put my vote on him for a reason guys.

If you want my opinions of other people, just ask me. Rhinox and pops are my biggest worries at the moment. My offense will necessarily be affected the longer I have to spend addressing points made against me. You can call that an excuse if you'd like, but I'm calling it realistic.

Thats interesting. Why is it that you need somebody to convince you to look at anyone? Shouldn't you be looking at

everyone

of your own volition?

Yeah, one should.

...

And?

...

Obviously what I meant by that statement was that Spy did a better job bringing a case against pops than Korts did. Spy helped draw my attention to pops in a way that I had not previously noticed him. It was, in fact, necessary for Spy to do so because it was pops' ignorance of Spy that made me suspect him.

The more I think about your statement here, the more I dislike it. You are looking for something to throw at me if you actually think I'm saying that "I wouldn't have looked at pops at all this game if it wasn't for Spy". That's complete misrepresentation.

The only kind of evidence lacking from day one cases which may be present in later cases is connections to already dead scum.

And why is this evidence not as solid as any other piece of evidence?

Anything past the first day will only grow if only due to the fact that the town

will have

more information on next day.

Again, I think you are just looking for something to throw at me if you actually believe this. How is it even possible that having more information would mean being less informed about other roles?