726 - Mind Screw Gaiden, Game Over

[Isacc]

I am literally about to go to bed, but I had been waiting to see Tar's next post, as I expected to need to respond to it, so I'm making a really quick short post here, and will be able to do more tomorrow.

I definitely see your scenarios as logical, which is why it didn't surprise me that you were jumping on me in the first place. I can't really think of any other logical explanations myself.


In regard to the disappearance of Kinetic, I think it may have to do with Tar being resurrected, or else it could be a person's role? I don't see how it could be pro-town, though, if it was an individual's role, as thus far all they've done is taken away any evidence we could have looked at.

Alright. Bed...

[Natirasha]

Pretend this is the "no cylons are in this game." vote count

[MafiaSSK]

Bump

[veerus]

we need a mass prod here... is nat's situation still iphone-only? Who's the backup mod again?

[MafiaSSK]

I think its armlx.

[Natirasha]

Nope, it's Machiavelli. Also, you will know when I get my compy back. The manufacturer said 3-4 weeks though. Also malthy wanted replacement. I'll ask m-m to nassprod everyone.

[Tarhalindur]

EBWODP: Just noticed something. Isacc, how do you know there's only one scum left?

Speaking of Natirasha, that mysterious resurrection also bugs me. I had doubts about Natirasha's claimed explanation even before I noticed this (uh, his role is frakking Jesus... rising from the dead after

3

1 days, anyone?) and there is precedent for Mind Screw games having roles that change alignments after reviving (hi, MafiaSSK)... I trust his new incarnation far less than his old one.

Do you think a 1 day delay Judas is actually possible?

Uh, 1-day delay Judas sounds positively simple given some of the roles Nat knows about... hell, I've used both parts of that ability before (delayed ability resolution and Judas both have precedent in completed Mind Screw games).

The bigger problem here is, why is Kinetic not appearing in the list of players in any way, and why is Natirasha appearing where he is?

Could the Judas ability have also killed one of the mafia members when Natirasha got revived as possibly one of the mafia members?

Unlikely, but this *is* a Mind Screw game. As I said, the fact that Kinetic has disappeared from the player list is extremely problematic.

I do, however, need to look something over - I was looking over the thread earlier today, and I may have spotted something that might indicate a Townie Reviver. (No, I will NOT reveal what that something is.)

Besides, I have bigger things to deal with. Not Isacc, either - if he's scum, he's likely neutral (not Mafia given his D1 play), and I can always just block him if needed. PBPA on veerus coming shortly (hopefully tonight, but see the "need sleep" bit) - he's Mafia. Forget the D1 actions, his reaction to forbiddanlight's claim yesterday pretty much condemns him in my eyes.

Unvote, Vote: veerus

. (I am also considering a Natirasha lynch and asking veerus to hammer - he was a SuperSaint last time around...)

[Tarhalindur]

I don't have time to finish the PBPA tonight, so let's just throw up the comments that are drawing my attention:

Wow, thanks fl for fucking up the game. I told myself that I'd never enter a game you're in after that other game where you totally went berserko on everybody (the source of your ridiculous sig) and made the game less fun but you seem to join all the fun games that I want to play in so it is what it is.

This is mind-screw which sometimes implies bastard mod which often implies that some crazy and unfair shit will go down. Live with it or don't sign up for games with a high chance of bastard modding.

I'd like the game to continue as there seem to be a lot of unusual roles - something I've come to expect and love from MS games.

And since FL has admitted to being scum, this is a no-brainer:

vote: forbiddanlight

FURTHER, you have been in at least one game I know of with me and didn't complain. Do you just choose to selectively recall games? I don't like it when someone can't realize a game is just a game, and after the game we all kiss and make up. I didn't "ruin" that game any more than I "ruined" this one. Yes, I got a little emotional. It happens to everyone. Live with it.

That was the first game I played with you where you blew up. I think we've been in either 3 or 4 games together and you have gotten "a little emotional" twice now for a roughly 50% blow up rate while everyone else I've played with more than once has a 0% blow up rate.. makes me wonder how you define "everyone". Regardless, I obviously won't avoid a game because you're in it, but since the first game wasn't an isolated incident, I figured I'd get emotional right back at you. I'm sure you understand.

Veerus, I would like you to explain these two posts. NOW. Because I'm having some difficulty seeing why town would appear to be that disappointed in forbiddanlight's claim.

[veerus]

1) I was not disappointed in FL's claim, thus my vote on her

2) A scum claim the way she did it was totally inappropriate. And that forced the exchange which referred to an out of game incident. I'm having a hard time understanding why a player with your experience would jump on what is obviously an out-of-game interaction (should've been super obvious after even FL suggested to take the conversation off-line). Nice OMGUS attack though after I pointed out FL's slip mentioning you as her scum-buddy. I'm surprised no one else has said anything about it.

[Tarhalindur]

1) I was not disappointed in FL's claim, thus my vote on her

2) A scum claim the way she did it was totally inappropriate. And that forced the exchange which referred to an out of game incident. I'm having a hard time understanding why a player with your experience would jump on what is obviously an out-of-game interaction (should've been super obvious after even FL suggested to take the conversation off-line). Nice OMGUS attack though after I pointed out FL's slip mentioning you as her scum-buddy. I'm surprised no one else has said anything about it.

1) I hadn't bothered to respond yet because I strongly suspect that you yourself consider that attack a load of bullshit yourself - especially since I have a post in Mind Screw 3 (referenced earlier in this game) which forbiddanlight could have been referring to (I would daresay was logically referring to, but you may disagree) and which you damn well know about.

Here, for reference, the relevant quote:

Sorry, wrong answer, Nat - I seem to recall explicitly explaining why a player-Mod must by necessity be self-aligned. You're not town, and we're getting rid of you at some point.

Now, let's just get this over with. I suspect you're trying to trap me into using this line of reasoning to pull a "and how is this any different from your behavior earlier?". If so, nice try - the big difference is that I have difficulty seeing how "I'm assuming the scum have safeclaims" logically leads to "the scum have safeclaims". See below for details.

2) If you honestly believe that this is a slip (can't rule this out, but I doubt it), then nothing I say is going to change anything, because I have no way of knowing what forbiddanlight was thinking when she made that post. In addition, even if you were interpreting MY post, merely explaining a possible pro-town reason is unlikely to change your interpretation. Hence, there's no possible defense to your charge other than showing an alternate possible interpretation (which I have now done - see above), and no point in me dwelling on it further until such time as you give a detailed explanation of how my interpretation does not meet the facts.

3) OMGUS is a null tell (it's perfectly possible for a town to believe a scum is attacking them, or for a scum to believe a scum from another faction is attacking them*). An OMGUS attack should be looked at like any other attack.

* - See my attack on Jazzmyn in Mafia 87.

I suppose I wouldn't be entirely against a name claim, though I doubt it'll accomplish anything. Any name could be either town or scum (plus there are safeclaims) and the few roles that have name information likely don't have enough information or it is misleading/incomplete to break the set up.

Okay, let's break this post down, because it's damn incriminating.

1) Veerus says outright that there are safeclaims. He's claimed that he simply assumed that there were safeclaims given that all past Mind Screw games have had them. This is, admittedly, possible. The problem is the wording: not a statement that he assumes there are safeclaims, not a statement that G-Man *must* have a safeclaim (which I would agree with - I would not allow an anti-town player with a blatantly obvious role name to be trapped into a counterclaim). Instead, veerus makes a blanket claim that there are safeclaims (which, upon looking at it, also implies *more than one* - which is a shaky inference at best).

2) What's more, veerus himself also points out the reason why there need not be more than one safeclaim: role names (with the exception of G-Man, though I will not fault him for not pointing this out) are unlikely to be indicative of town or scum. (Note that the main reason I asked for a role claim was on the off chance G-Man would be stupid enough to claim his real role, since he's the exception.) I've been increasingly leery of giving Mafia safeclaims lately, instead trying to give them role names that do not make it obvious they are scum. Natirasha knows this (from Mind Screw II and LoZ: OoT at the very least - a grand total of one Mafioso in those two games had a safeclaim). Veerus should probably have known this - among other things, Ocarina of Time was finished by the time he posted this post.

3) The most decisive point - despite pointing out what is wrong with a massclaim, veerus doesn't fully oppose it. Instead, he says, effectively, that he doesn't like it but could be convinced to go along with it. I'm not completely sure why veerus would say this as town; apathy, maybe, or a belief that it wouldn't hurt the town to massclaim... but I'm reading an unwillingness to commit to a position there.

Now, from the unfinished PBPA:

Problem of the hour #2:

I suppose I wouldn't be entirely against a name claim, though I doubt it'll accomplish anything. Any name could be either town or scum

(plus there are safeclaims)

and the few roles that have name information likely don't have enough information or it is misleading/incomplete to break the set up.

Wait, how exactly do you know that there are safeclaims? That looks like one hell of a slip to me...

How is it a slip? It's an assumption based on history. All previous MS games included a safeclaim for scum. I see no reason to expect anything different here.

Tar, your #4 & #5 are interesting because I also know that someone from Half-Life is a mod-confirmed non-town. That's why I said I wouldn't be against a name claim and also why I think scum are likely provided a safe name claim ala previous MS games.

Also,

fos: populartajo

for voting me without much reasoning (except using someone else's who didn't even vote me in the first place). In fact, looking at tajo's posts in isolation shows that since the game started, he contributed absolutely NOTHING to the discussion.

1) Mind Screw II had enough roles without safeclaims (2 Mafiosos) that this alone doesn't convince me - especially given that there's only one non-town that *has* to have a falseclaim and veerus implied multiple falseclaims. I've had a clear tendency towards giving scum non-incriminating role names instead of safeclaims lately; I suspect Nat has done the same.

2) You're right that scum were almost certainly provided with a safeclaim. Why do you then assume that they have more than one?

3) veerus's vote at this time was a random vote. Why FoS instead of vote? (Note that his reasoning was not invalid at time of post - poptajo only became obvtajotown later - and that I consider OMGUS a nulltell.)

Also, as long as I'm here...

<snip>

Seriously? No, seriously tar? You should know better. I'm pretty sure Nat was trying to stay faithful to your modding practice.

<snip>

Hey look at the known scum defending veerus. Also note the dismissive, even disdainful attitude in said defense.

More is coming ASAP.

[populartajo]

Antiprod. If I have time today Ill find you scum tonight. Prob tomorrow.

[Illumina]

Here are my thoughts atm:

Right now I'd put veerus, MSSK and Isacc at the top of my scum list.

Isacc's 251 was interesting, because he seems to be doing the splits between suspecting Vi and tajo equally when I asked him to weigh in on their debate, taking care to avoid firm conclusions.

Recently I also found his 354 worth noting: right after Tar makes his case against f-light, Isacc goes to lengths to portray Tar as the G-man, as if he wants to shift direction away from f-light and onto Tar. Note that he doesn't talk about f-light at all, here.

His 361 is really interesting to me, because he seems less pleased than normal after f-light claims scum. It's like he grudgingly admits that lynching f-light is the best play, even though he'd rather have headed in a different direction (but makes sure to emphasize that Tar is the next-best choice). Between this and his 354, it looks like he was trying to run interference for f-light.

veerus: I have some notes on him (mostly regarding him trying to redirect back to hp in weird ways), but I agree with most of Tar's analysis so far. For me, f-light trying to make Tar look silly for calling him out on safeclaims is the most incriminating.

MSSK is hard to read due to his anti-town meta, but hammering f-light prematurely and not realizing she had claimed scum seems pretty dubious. Plus, there's the awkward and scummy way he tried to launch a case on Tar earlier, before we lynched Nat.

I'm torn between Isacc and veerus right now, MSSK is trailing behind them. I'd like to see a claim from Isacc, though.

I probably won't be able to post again until tomorrow, but I'll see what I can do.

[Isacc]

Tar's Veerus PBPA must have had me alerted to Veerus, cause as I was scrolling I re-noticed this post from very recently:

Nat asks:

So, really, no one cares that I ressureted myself?

Veerus says:

Why would we? You're

town aligned.

How does Veerus know this? Nat was apparently town aligned when he

died

but that in no way assures that he was resurrected the same way. As others have speculated, it's entirely possible he is scum or at least anti-town now, so how do you know he isn't scum?

Vote: Veerus

.



@Illumina:

Isacc's 251 was interesting, because he seems to be doing the splits between suspecting Vi and tajo equally when I asked him to weigh in on their debate, taking care to avoid firm conclusions.

Wasn't this the same argument Tar made? As I said then, that's how I play D1 (unless something obvious appears). Read my other games.

right after Tar makes his case against f-light, Isacc goes to lengths to portray Tar as the G-man, as if he wants to shift direction away from f-light and onto Tar. Note that he doesn't talk about f-light at all, here.

It was the first post I made that day, therefore the events of the night took precedence in my mind. I had thought that G-man was either Nat or Tar on D1, when it wasn't Nat, I wanted to make sure I questioned Tar about it.

I don't see how I should have been obligated to comment on FL's wagon, especially so early into the attacks against him.

His 361 is really interesting to me, because he seems less pleased than normal after f-light claims scum. It's like he grudgingly admits that lynching f-light is the best play, even though he'd rather have headed in a different direction (but makes sure to emphasize that Tar is the next-best choice).

You did not understand that at all the right way. You have a pretty huge misunderstanding here. I don't see where I was any less "pleased" than others were, and if you think so, then please provide evidence. Otherwise, that's a dead point.

I also don't see how I "grudgingly" admit anything. Can you post some words or phrases that actually give that impression? Again, evidence would be nice.

Oh and, I was not emphasizing Tar as next best choice. I was saying that I still wanted him to answer my questions, even though I unvoted him. That's all.

I'd post a little more, but a haircut calls. Lata boys.

[veerus]

This is probably the biggest attempt at strawmanning that I've seen on this site in my time here. What you've presented here is nothing but a bunch of weak, poorly supported arguments.

Now, let's just get this over with. I suspect you're trying to trap me into using this line of reasoning to pull a "and how is this any different from your behavior earlier?". If so, nice try - the big difference is that I have difficulty seeing how "I'm assuming the scum have safeclaims" logically leads to "the scum have safeclaims". See below for details.

The two phrases are the same thing to me. Since I'm ASSUMING that scum have safeclaims, then TO ME that means that they HAVE safeclaims. Yes, it really IS that simple no matter how you twist it.

2) If you honestly believe that this is a slip (can't rule this out, but I doubt it), then nothing I say is going to change anything, because I have no way of knowing what forbiddanlight was thinking when she made that post. In addition, even if you were interpreting MY post, merely explaining a possible pro-town reason is unlikely to change your interpretation. Hence, there's no possible defense to your charge other than showing an alternate possible interpretation (which I have now done - see above), and no point in me dwelling on it further until such time as you give a detailed explanation of how my interpretation does not meet the facts.

I'm following the facts whereas you're only speculating. FL said that Nat's comments in the quicktopics thread pissed her off. Then, in response to my post, she said that it's bullshit and implied that my opinion may change if I'd "read what Tar had to say about it." Now, knowing FL's tendency to blow up and let her emotions take her in another direction, I'm inclined to believe she mentioned your name unintentionally.

I suppose I wouldn't be entirely against a name claim, though I doubt it'll accomplish anything. Any name could be either town or scum (plus there are safeclaims) and the few roles that have name information likely don't have enough information or it is misleading/incomplete to break the set up.

Okay, let's break this post down, because it's damn incriminating.

1) Veerus says outright that there are safeclaims. He's claimed that he simply assumed that there were safeclaims given that all past Mind Screw games have had them. This is, admittedly, possible. The problem is the wording: not a statement that he assumes there are safeclaims, not a statement that G-Man *must* have a safeclaim (which I would agree with - I would not allow an anti-town player with a blatantly obvious role name to be trapped into a counterclaim). Instead, veerus makes a blanket claim that there are safeclaims (which, upon looking at it, also implies *more than one* - which is a shaky inference at best).

See my earlier comment on this: since there are more than one scum, it stands to reason that there must be multiple safeclaims.

2) What's more, veerus himself also points out the reason why there need not be more than one safeclaim: role names (with the exception of G-Man, though I will not fault him for not pointing this out) are unlikely to be indicative of town or scum. (Note that the main reason I asked for a role claim was on the off chance G-Man would be stupid enough to claim his real role, since he's the exception.) I've been increasingly leery of giving Mafia safeclaims lately, instead trying to give them role names that do not make it obvious they are scum. Natirasha knows this (from Mind Screw II and LoZ: OoT at the very least - a grand total of one Mafioso in those two games had a safeclaim). Veerus should probably have known this - among other things, Ocarina of Time was finished by the time he posted this post.

So you agree with me that safeclaims are possible and yet you attack me for it?? Also, just because OOT finished doesn't mean I've read it. In fact, I haven't. As for MS2, I skimmed through it a few months ago and I barely remember it and only reference it when I need to look something up. In this case, the knowledge that there WERE safeclaims in MS1 and MS2 was enough for me to make that assumption. I didn't count how many had what. This just shows how weak your argument is if you have to base it on the assumption of how lazy/dedicated I am to this site.

3) The most decisive point - despite pointing out what is wrong with a massclaim, veerus doesn't fully oppose it. Instead, he says, effectively, that he doesn't like it but could be convinced to go along with it. I'm not completely sure why veerus would say this as town; apathy, maybe, or a belief that it wouldn't hurt the town to massclaim... but I'm reading an unwillingness to commit to a position there.

My comments were based on the fact that I knew G-Man was anti-town and from Half-Life. Thus I wasn't entirely against the idea but I didn't really think it would get us anywhere since that would be too easy.

1) Mind Screw II had enough roles without safeclaims (2 Mafiosos) that this alone doesn't convince me - especially given that there's only one non-town that *has* to have a falseclaim and veerus implied multiple falseclaims. I've had a clear tendency towards giving scum non-incriminating role names instead of safeclaims lately; I suspect Nat has done the same.

You're rehashing your earlier argument so I will direct you to my earlier answer. Except that I never mentioned falseclaims, only safeclaims, though I suppose, to me, they're the same thing since I still don't fully understand the difference. Actually, the mere fact that you're mentioning falseclaims when I never said anything about them makes me think that you're scum who just looked at his role pm, saw the word and misused it. Since you've been hanging on my alleged "slip" the whole game, I'd like to point out that this is a MUCH bigger slip on your part.

2) You're right that scum were almost certainly provided with a safeclaim. Why do you then assume that they have more than one?

When did I say this? When I say "safeclaims", I refer to multiple people. I thought that was obvious, sorry if that's apparently not the case.

3) veerus's vote at this time was a random vote. Why FoS instead of vote? (Note that his reasoning was not invalid at time of post - poptajo only became obvtajotown later - and that I consider OMGUS a nulltell.)

You answered your own question. While OMGUS is mostly a nulltell, it may have been a jumpy scum. Such weak connection in no way deserves a vote.

This entire post has been a display of some highly shaky reasoning on your part, Tar. It worries me that Isacc has has hopped on this wagon considering I was getting a townie vibe from him before.

Also, as long as I'm here...

<snip>

Seriously? No, seriously tar? You should know better. I'm pretty sure Nat was trying to stay faithful to your modding practice.

<snip>

Hey look at the known scum defending veerus. Also note the dismissive, even disdainful attitude in said defense.

Really? At the time you didn't even blink an eye at this comment because you knew it made perfect sense and FL called you out on that.

[veerus]

Nat asks:

So, really, no one cares that I ressureted myself?

Veerus says:

Why would we? You're

town aligned.

How does Veerus know this? Nat was apparently town aligned when he

died

but that in no way assures that he was resurrected the same way. As others have speculated, it's entirely possible he is scum or at least anti-town now, so how do you know he isn't scum?

Vote: Veerus

.

Hmm.. you make a good point. I did not consider the fact that Nat may not be town-aligned upon his ressurection. Now that I think of it, I'd say it's more likely that Nat is mafia, and maybe even the beloved mafia godfather that Kinetic was whom he replaced apparently. It would also make sense from a "balanced" bastard mod point of view. Nat had used his perfect knowledge to save a townie from getting lynched and now as mafia he can use his perfect knowledge to help mafia win.

[Isacc]

I make a good point? I thought you said that my going at you bothered you? If I make a good point, then how does it bother you?

[veerus]

Since in the past you have made large posts before voting, it seems to me that you voted me primarily based on Tar's weak arguments. And that bothered me.

[Natirasha]

Pretend this is the "Here We Go Again" Vote Count?

[veerus]

your backup mod is slacking... make him do it

[Illumina]

Got out of lab early~

I reread a bit, and I think we should actually kill Nat today. If there's even a chance he's mafia with perfect knowledge of the game, it would be highly unwise to leave him alive. He was willing to use his perfect knowledge to block a mafia kill, and now that Kinetic's posts have disappeared, it isn't exactly a good sign for town.

Vote: Nat

.

[MafiaSSK]

Lamest MS Game EVER.

[Illumina]

Please ask for replacement, then.

[veerus]

seriously.. where is everyone?

[Tarhalindur]

I don't know about you guys, but I have FLIES to deal with. Annoying flies, of the species

Drosophilia melanogaster

.

Mod: I am V/LA for at least the next week.

[Illumina]

Well, at any rate, what does everyone think of lynching Nat today?