Mini 767: Cubic Mafia (Game Over!)

[Isacc]

Posting this in both my games:

Meh, really busy again tonight, and I just can't type any major posts. I'll reconvene with yall tomorrow. Sincere apologies.

[magnus_orion]

@Dourgrim:

OMG BACKPEDAL

Fair enough. I want to hear what you have to say about other players.

He should concentrate on the more scummy of players if he wants to be considered pro-town.

Who are these "more scummy of players" that he should be concentrating on?

Wrong choice of words. He should concentrate on people that have a more solid ground for being scum.

LOL, the question was who, so reclarifying it doesn't make the question go away does it?

Stop not doing what the inner quote says.

So you had run out of reasons for attacking everyone until now and attacked Philly. You really don't care who gets lynched. Also by doing WIFOM, you have yet another scumtell.

Right, I don't care who gets lynched [/sarcasm] So, care to back that statement up? Because I want my suspects lynched.
Preferably philly, because I'm pretty sure he's scum.
Or do you disagree with that assessment?
I'd like to hear your reasoning on a few other players, besides me. (And including how I interact with them as the defining quality is unhelpful.)

It seems you have suspected nearly everyone in the game. So you want everyone lynched? I'm not necessarily disagreeing with your assessment of philly being scum. I'll define other players later.

The jump from induction, to generalized statement, to more generalized statement is wacky.

"magnus has suspected a lot of players => magnus has suspected most of the players => magnus suspects all of the players." I don't like this movement of thinking at all.

I will say that I don't currently suspect walnut, and my suspicion on issac is purely conditional. And the condition being that I'm wrong. I also don't suspect nocmen as much after dourgrim's post on him, which sounds like he's had prior experience with nocmen.
Dourgrim is "iffy", I feel that his reads on players other than me will be valuable information into his alignment, information that has been lacking so far, so I don't really know, all I know is I dislike the points he's used against me.

So basically the only one I'm really okay with lynching at this point and time is phillyec.

[Beyond_Birthday]

*
MafiaSSK-?- I just met the guy.

I have some posts. How can you not deduct anything from them?

Probably trying to say the he's not attempting to be hasty in his method of deciding if you are town or scum by your current play.

I endorse this statement. My method demands X number of posts. (It's why I will probably drop any game I play with Killaseven.) And no, I'm not telling you the number. It is also inflated until at least two alignments are known (therefore, by day 2.)

However, I trust my system, it has worked so far, and it will work again. So, moving on:

Magnus:...wait, what is the condition that makes Isacc suspicious to you? You mention its conditional and then make the condition that your wrong which...is...well...true for anyone, so you are not explaining yourself well.

MafiaSSK: Seems like your putting as little effort into scum hunting as possible. I really don't see any real content from you. So, who do you find scummy?

[magnus_orion]

I'm suspicious of Isacc if phillyec is town.

[Nocmen]

@Dourgrim:

OMG BACKPEDAL

Fair enough. I want to hear what you have to say about other players.

He should concentrate on the more scummy of players if he wants to be considered pro-town.

Who are these "more scummy of players" that he should be concentrating on?

Wrong choice of words. He should concentrate on people that have a more solid ground for being scum.

LOL, the question was who, so reclarifying it doesn't make the question go away does it?

Stop not doing what the inner quote says.

So you had run out of reasons for attacking everyone until now and attacked Philly. You really don't care who gets lynched. Also by doing WIFOM, you have yet another scumtell.

Right, I don't care who gets lynched [/sarcasm] So, care to back that statement up? Because I want my suspects lynched.
Preferably philly, because I'm pretty sure he's scum.
Or do you disagree with that assessment?
I'd like to hear your reasoning on a few other players, besides me. (And including how I interact with them as the defining quality is unhelpful.)

It seems you have suspected nearly everyone in the game. So you want everyone lynched? I'm not necessarily disagreeing with your assessment of philly being scum. I'll define other players later.

The jump from induction, to generalized statement, to more generalized statement is wacky.

"magnus has suspected a lot of players => magnus has suspected most of the players => magnus suspects all of the players." I don't like this movement of thinking at all.

I will say that I don't currently suspect walnut, and my suspicion on issac is purely conditional. And the condition being that I'm wrong. I also don't suspect nocmen as much after dourgrim's post on him, which sounds like he's had prior experience with nocmen.
Dourgrim is "iffy", I feel that his reads on players other than me will be valuable information into his alignment, information that has been lacking so far, so I don't really know, all I know is I dislike the points he's used against me.

So basically the only one I'm really okay with lynching at this point and time is phillyec.

Just had to say this before I go to sleep,
I have never played with dourgrim before to my knowledge. I don't remember him at all.

[Walnut]

In my opinion, the time for critical thinking comes later in the game. The time for action is now.

This probably best explains the issues I have had with magnus. My preference is for thinking, especially as action without much thought naturally looks either silly or scummy.

@Caf19: The initial post that PhilyEC made that people reacted to was #42:

Nocmen wrote:
Who do you think is most likely to be scum and why?


Hmm..I'd be looking at the posts of the last ones that random voted or havent even posted yet. Scum aint too eager to stick out D1 page 2 so that be where my suspicions lay atm as for someone in particular, I think its not a good idea to throw names about just yet.

@nocmen: You noted my "defense" of Phily. What did you think of Riceballtail's explanation of BB's reasoning before BB had answered the question?

[MafiaSSK]

Will post later tonight.

[Nocmen]

@nocmen: You noted my "defense" of Phily. What did you think of Riceballtail's explanation of BB's reasoning before BB had answered the question?

I did not see that. But that seems a bit strange, RBT, why of all the questions to answer, you answered one not directed towards you?

[caf19]

@Caf19: The initial post that PhilyEC made that people reacted to was #42:

Nocmen wrote:
Who do you think is most likely to be scum and why?


Hmm..I'd be looking at the posts of the last ones that random voted or havent even posted yet. Scum aint too eager to stick out D1 page 2 so that be where my suspicions lay atm as for someone in particular, I think its not a good idea to throw names about just yet.

Ah, right. That doesn't feature much in my suspicions of Phily any more. I thought it was worth an eyebrow-raise at the time, but bigger and more important things happened in the thread, so I moved on. Now, I'm voting Phily based on his extended period of active lurking (that's not so far from the 'playing it safe' that you mentioned), and his jumping on an easy and obvious action and subsequent explanation that I don't really buy.

[magnus_orion]

This probably best explains the issues I have had with magnus. My preference is for thinking, especially as action without much thought naturally looks either silly or scummy.

Yes, well I do think when I post, I just don't focus on soley passive thinking. I focus more on aggression, the better to gather info pn day 1 with, and make it available for subsequent days.

[magnus_orion]

*on

[Riceballtail]

@nocmen: You noted my "defense" of Phily. What did you think of Riceballtail's explanation of BB's reasoning before BB had answered the question?

I did not see that. But that seems a bit strange, RBT, why of all the questions to answer, you answered one not directed towards you?

Because I happen to like that style of alignment-finding, instead of riding an individual "tell" to the fruition of a lynch.

[Trumpet of Doom]

All right, I've reread. Comments:

Re: magnus/Nocmen: Nocmen's not great, but it seems to have been cleared up.

Walnut seems to have been trying to get B_B and magnus suspicious of each other, then not been happy when it didn't work. For that matter, he's been trying to make individual players suspicious of each other for much of the game, including apparently trying to make Nocmen look at RBT.

Phily... I'm rereading the (now finished) game where we were both town to see if I can get a read on him relative to how he's playing here. Seems about the same, so probably a nulltell.

RBT is lurking almost as much as I've been.

Re: magnus/Dourgrim: ...why do I feel like you're both going to flip town?

For reasons stated above, I feel most comfortable with a

Vote: Walnut

right now.

[Walnut]

Walnut seems to have been trying to get B_B and magnus suspicious of each other, then not been happy when it didn't work.

While I don't agree, I can see why you think I was trying to make magnus suspicious of BB. However, why do you think I was trying to make BB suspicious of magnus?

For that matter, he's been trying to make individual players suspicious of each other for much of the game, including apparently trying to make Nocmen look at RBT.

It's about consistency. If two players perform a similar action there needs to be a reason given why it is scummy for one of them but a null tell for the other. It makes the player think about why they commented the first time and justify the decision around whether to apply the same logic the second time.

[Nocmen]

For that matter, he's been trying to make individual players suspicious of each other for much of the game, including apparently trying to make Nocmen look at RBT.

It's about consistency. If two players perform a similar action there needs to be a reason given why it is scummy for one of them but a null tell for the other. It makes the player think about why they commented the first time and justify the decision around whether to apply the same logic the second time.

I agree with this statement completely. Even I think it's bad play that so early in this game, we go and just ignore some players, and I will admit I've even been doing that, ignoring some of the peopole who havent psoted as much and gone after a few people. We should really make sure we get as many opionions in as possible before going and making the first lynch.

[Dourgrim]

I find it interesting that B_B has ignored two separate posts from me that were directed at him. However, the meaning of both of those posts has now changed, since the game he was alluding to previously is now finished and can therefore be referenced without cheating.

How precisely is my playstyle so much different in this game than it was in the other, B_B?

[Beyond_Birthday]

Dourgrim:
Your play in that game was significantly more logical (and I knew we won, which is why I didn't waste time referencing, my apologies and it was very loose) in my perspective. Here, you almost seem to be reaching. I would expect more of you, but maybe I just don't see your logic.

For that matter, he's been trying to make individual players suspicious of each other for much of the game, including apparently trying to make Nocmen look at RBT.

It's about consistency. If two players perform a similar action there needs to be a reason given why it is scummy for one of them but a null tell for the other. It makes the player think about why they commented the first time and justify the decision around whether to apply the same logic the second time.

I agree with this statement completely. Even I think it's bad play that so early in this game, we go and just ignore some players, and I will admit I've even been doing that, ignoring some of the peopole who havent psoted as much and gone after a few people. We should really make sure we get as many opionions in as possible before going and making the first lynch.

So, we should lynch Empking and Zwetchenwasser every single game because their play style is scummy? No. That is the point of metagaming, so you can use someone's play style to condemn/defend them. It is inherent that in a game with familiar people that you expect a certain style of play from a person and not from others. Lowell is one of the most unique styles I've seen and I will not attack him for his play. His actions have not been shown to be scummy, and I think you're very closed minded for ignoring this possibility.

[Kairyuu]

PhilyEc is getting prodded. Still looking for a replacement for Flame (helping me advertise would be helpful).

[PhilyEc]

his jumping on an easy and obvious action and subsequent explanation that I don't really buy.

Tie that into the fact that I've been distracted doing other things. When I skimmed the thread I picked out the most obvious scum tell and brought it up. My contribution when unfortunately unable to keep up with thread. I'm pretty caught up and I still think the action I pointed out was extremely scummy, what you call 'obvious'.

@Magnus
Who arent you suspicious of? Rather than aggressive gameplay it seems like random mud hurling till you hit a bullseye, your explanation is something scum would most likely fabricate for their suspicions being so random. Throwing my opinion in on the approach of Magnus' approach to the game~.

[PhilyEc]

Woah, sorry Mod, didnt realise O_o (began typing before Mod posted) <_<

[Kairyuu]

PhilyEc avoids the prod.

[magnus_orion]

his jumping on an easy and obvious action and subsequent explanation that I don't really buy.

Tie that into the fact that I've been distracted doing other things. When I skimmed the thread I picked out the most obvious scum tell and brought it up. My contribution when unfortunately unable to keep up with thread. I'm pretty caught up and I still think the action I pointed out was extremely scummy, what you call 'obvious'.

@Magnus
Who arent you suspicious of? Rather than aggressive gameplay it seems like random mud hurling till you hit a bullseye, your explanation is something scum would most likely fabricate for their suspicions being so random. Throwing my opinion in on the approach of Magnus' approach to the game~.

I'm suspicious of everybody, just in different measures. BB is pretty low, and a lot of people are in the ?? department. Scummy includes, well, just you.

Considering your playstyle so far, suddenly trying to attack me in this manner seems unnatural. You're trying to argue defense through ad hominem, I'm guessing.

Also, since I think you are scum, this post tells me something else. You're attempting to push momentum on the people voting me, without voting me. Because of this, it means you're still trying to avoid seeming scummy by voting, but you're also trying to see if the wagon will form momentum and justify your vote later if it does. Because of this, and the risks involved with the sudden change in playstyle, I theorize that someone currently voting me is town.
Between Dourgrim and Mafiassk, I'd say dourgrim is more likely if only 1 of the 2.
Mafiassk has shown a reluctance to display opinions, making a read on him difficult.

It is however possible that they are both town. Of course this is speculation based on you flipping scum, but putting it out there doesn't hurt anyone.

[Beyond_Birthday]

I'd say Nocmen is town.

I wanna know why you have this opinion.

Who I'm hunting is difficult to read. I dunno if I'm easy to read or not. I don't care what you think of me, no matter if you're scum or not, that isn't my job. My job is to find the anti-town factions

OMGUS Vote Nocmen

Eh? Dude thats the biggest scumtell all game, an omgus under generally believable opinion and now you simply punish your suspector by returning the vote rather than looking past 'his mistake' and identifying true scum. I'm really susprised at this move to be honest, care to redeem yourself before I'm completely convinced you're mafia?

In Myko's Open 126, recently closed, you mentioned reading a lot of (I assume Zwet's?) games and found his one or two liner posts were common for his game play. Why then do you mistake my normal game play for a scum tell?

Aggressive as in attacking everyone in the game. It's a scumtell because aggressiveness shows that they want night more and do not like the day. This usually means that they are mafia.

In Day One I'm not suprised. Theres been no concentration on scummy players yet since we've not made much progress, would you agree? The only problem is, attacking everyone doesnt help anyone. More concentration on scummiest players is more appropriate.

Here, you bother me because you start off sounding, vaguely, like you are defending Magnus. You then move on to suggest he is attacking everyone since their is no focus on scummy players, but then fail to make any reference or inference to who the scummy players are. Let's say you suspected me for my "scum tell." Why not say:
Scummy players such as BB or others? (I will grant you that at this point, you may have read that Magnus doesn't suspect me the way some people might, but I still feel that a lack of logic is present in this post.)

In Open 126, I will admit you have a plethora of worthless posts and arguments about...definitions? with whoever Wulfy... Looking at his join date, that had to be his second or third game... Why would you get in a stupid argument like that? Oh, your just as new... I just realized this. Anyway, my point here is that despite posts like THAT, you generally had a greater attention to attacking posts and actually posting helpful content (most notably, I am seeing a lack of scum hunting in this game.)

Oh, and
@MAGNUS:
In the other game, 126, he did repeat himself quite often as Vanilla. Therefore, that is playstyle/habit and not a scum tell.

Back to PHILY!
Phil, look: I get the fact you think I'm scummy, but my issue is that after doing this analysis of these two games, I feel that your contribution of scum hunting is seriously lacking. You constantly allude to the fact you thought my OMGUS VOTE post was scummy, which is fine, but your failure to actually extend that case beyond repetition makes you look very scummy. Therefore,

Vote PhilyEc

I'm affraid your meta game doesn't quite add up for me, though its very close, and this is a very slight percentile your leading by.

At the everyone! (intended)

PARTICIPATE!!

[magnus_orion]

@BB: What about phillyec suddenly changing from passive fence sitting comments to active attacks? Is that common for him?

[Walnut]

For that matter, he's been trying to make individual players suspicious of each other for much of the game, including apparently trying to make Nocmen look at RBT.

It's about consistency. If two players perform a similar action there needs to be a reason given why it is scummy for one of them but a null tell for the other. It makes the player think about why they commented the first time and justify the decision around whether to apply the same logic the second time.

So, we should lynch Empking and Zwetchenwasser every single game because their play style is scummy? No. That is the point of metagaming, so you can use someone's play style to condemn/defend them. It is inherent that in a game with familiar people that you expect a certain style of play from a person and not from others. Lowell is one of the most unique styles I've seen and I will not attack him for his play. His actions have not been shown to be scummy, and I think you're very closed minded for ignoring this possibility.

Did I say anything like that? No, I said that the accuser should look at why they accused one player and not the other and provide a justification. If your justification happens to be "Well, that was Empking, and he is always like that" it is answer that the town can work with, whether they agree with it or not.

That is the point of metagaming, so you can use someone's play style to condemn/defend them. It is inherent that in a game with familiar people that you expect a certain style of play from a person and not from others.

This bit is fine. I am not personally a huge fan of metagaming but can respect its place. I do think that if someone has adopted a consistent playstyle that on balance is unhelpful to the town they should not be allowed to hide behind it, but natural selection within a specific game can largely take care of that.