Mini 765 - Welcome to Hambargarville GAME OVER!!

[Wall-E]

stuff

Before I answer any of your questions, can you link me to a game in which you were scum please?

[yellowbunny]

I've never been scum, so I have nothing to link.

[yellowbunny]

I have two completed games and 1 which is ongoing but I've been NKed. But, I was vanilla townie in two and a doctor in the other. They are all on this site so finding them should be easy for you.

[Kreriov]

@YB - Great, well, I still think the best case out there is against Cubarey, but will consider the Hero case.

Its Friday, so as usually, I will bid everyone have a good weekend and say do not expect much from me, if anything, until Monday.

[Jase]

Alrighty, somebody posted something along the lines of "It isn't prudent to hold the game for one person". I'm going to have to agree, it's been too long, and I'm not going to wait for cub any longer.

Unvote

and vote my next best guess

Vote: Wall-E

[yellowbunny]

Yay, wb Jase!

Btw, I'm not sure how far you are in catching up, but I FOSed you cuz I thought Hero's suspicions looked a lot like your suspicions (see his large post).

So what do you think of that? I am completely off base? Do you think he is mimicking your views for some reason? Is it a coincidence?

And aside from that, what are your impressions of Hero? And do they mesh w/your previous thoughts on Noob?

[Idiotking]

IK, it seems you REALLY want to lynch Wall-E and therefor attack Hero I guess with the intent to get him to switch to Wall-E? I find Wall-E suspicious for many reasons, but is there any reason to lynch him right now? We do not have a deadline, we have people who are still lurking, and we have another viable suspect with concrete scummy actions, not just poor posting or suspicious activity. I will unvote and will not support a lynch of Cubarey without him or a replacement getting an opportunity to post. Is it not prudent to wait for this before lynching Wall-E as well, no matter how scummy you find him?

it is never fun to put a game into a holding pattern waiting for one person. However, among other things, Cubarey clearly tried to fabricate a case against X and got caught.

I wasn't attacking Hero with an intent to switch him to Wall-E. I agree, CUBAREY hasn't looked good thusfar. But considering the fact that he may very well be replaced soon, my argument was more against Hero's reasoning. I did read a little defensiveness on Hero's part, but as you've said, I can't be the one to point fingers on that.



And Wall-E, seriously. You're taking posts which obviously aren't meant to be taken seriously and blowing them way out of purportion.

HEY, EVERYBODY! I'M SCUMMY MC.SCUMMINGTON! JUST LOOK AT MY AVATAR!

^^^Waiting for you to take the above statement, which is clearly a joke, and try and turn it into a "slip".

[Wall-E]

Here's the thing. I can't know when you're being serious. It's a medical condition I have called Asperger's. I've been called stubborn, stupid, and an asshole for it many hundreds of times.

That said, your attitude is not one I appreciate. When I make a fallacious statement, the response I would like to see is a well-reasoned refutation, not child-like sarcasm or ad hominem. If you're wondering why I focus on slips, fallacies and things of that nature it's because I can't distinguish tone or "vibes" as people call them. It's just my style. If you find it unhelpful, that's one thing, but you're reacting to it the way scum does when I catch them, and it's making me want to glean your posts even more for further slips and fallacies.

An appeal to emotion like this is something I would vote for me for making, which is why I have been loathe to bring it up for the past nine months.

Lately, however, I've become aware of a dichotomy of playstyles, one family of which are reaction-reading players and the other family of which are logic-analysis players. I'm a logic-analysis player, and you are the scummiest person in this game based on my experience with scum and my own style of hunting them.

Your continued failure to take me and this game seriously is only going to drive my proverbial foot up your joking anus, to use a colloquial phrase.

[Wall-E]

And it's, "proportion."

[Wall-E]

Since you didn't understand this post, I'm going to rephrase everything in it in a more understandable way. Sorry for the confusion.

Reading through the thread and assuming YB and IK are partners makes some of the things YB has done make a lot more sense. He starts with some distancing, downgrades his vote to an FOS, throws some suspicion my way and parrots someone else on why he feels that way, then goes on to slowly work himself into a lather over some point I missed or question I failed to answer.

YB: What questions/points would you like me to address, since I now think you're tunneling and therefore scum? Or are you uninterested in giving an innocent a chance to defend themselves from your probably-not-going-to-be-removed vote?

I had the thought that YB and IK could be scumbuddies. Upon reading through the thread with that assumption in mind, some things YB has done appear to line up with that theory:

He starts by distancing IK, but soon downgrades his vote on IK to an FoS. Next he throws some suspicion my way and parrots someone else's reasoning, then becomes increasingly "upset" with my failure to address some points, allowing that to be his reason for voting me. Later, he builds a case on me, completing the tunnel.

[yellowbunny]

Oh...I see. Wall-E...I'm a GIRL. When you kept saying "he" I thought you were referring to IK, so that's a large part of why I was confused. But reading the "he" parts to be directed towards me...your post makes more sense now.

Anyway, one rather large hole in your argument:

He starts by distancing IK, but soon downgrades his vote on IK to an FoS.

Would be a interesting theory...unfortunately, it never happened.

The vote you are referring to is a figment of your imagination.

I voted Llue as a joke in the RVS stage (for being an Euler groupie), FOSed Kre for not liking peeps, FOSed IK for not revoting (something which many ppl thought was a bit scummy), voted for you while you were AWOL, unvoted when you returned, and then revoted for you when I felt your behavior warranted it, and there it lived until I switched it to Hero.

Regarding:

Next he throws some suspicion my way and parrots someone else's reasoning, then becomes increasingly "upset" with my failure to address some points, allowing that to be his reason for voting me. Later, he builds a case on me, completing the tunnel.

That's also pretty inaccurate. I wasn't "upset" with your failure to respond. I WAS upset. You have admitted that your behavior at that point wasn't helping the town at all. And seriously, Wall-e...you posted an apology and asked for time to dig your way out, and since then I have really been trying to give you some breathing room to dig your way out of the hole. That HARDLY constitutes tunneling.

I'm sorry, but your whole argument isn't very logical to me. After your apology post, can you provide examples of me tunneling on you? And before it...well, you have admitted yourself that your behavior wasn't exactly pro-town. Its not wrong in a game of mafia to go after someone who is showing anti-town behavior.

[Hero764]

I almost forgot about this...

@Hero:

Quote:
Wall-E (rp. Kieraen) - Alright, I really don't like how he's been playing. He asserts that he's definetly town. But his posting style is very arrogant at times, and he's got this "are you fucking retarded? of course I'm not mafia" tone to his posts. It's like he's trying to act as scummy as possible so that everyone will assume there's no way he's scum because he would be acting too obvious(even though his plan doesn't look to be working so well.) I also don't like how he thinks he can just ignore posts and get away with it because "I'm obviously not scum, stop wasting your time discussing me".

So you are asserting that Wall-e is playing the "too scummy to be scum?" card? That's a well known logical fallacy. It seems unlikely to me to have scum pretending to be hardcore scummy so people will assume he's town.

Hero...what are your thoughts on this?

Logical fallacy? And what's so unlikely about it? And answer me this: Do you personally feel the way he's acting has been pro town?

Also...please see my post 217 (and the posts around there). I outline why I thought that the case against Qwints was similar to the case against Cubarey. However, your vote is on Cub and you state the following:

qwints - Well, first I'll have to unvote my RV on him, its been long enough since the RVS lol. Anyways, he hasn't really posted much, but I like what I've seen of him from what he has posted. I couldn't find any flaws in his reasoning.

What specifically do you like about his posts? And can you please explain why you find him not at all scummy, but Cubarey scummy? Is it just because Cub is AWOL or do you have further evidence?

@Post 217: Well, if my memory serves me correctly, at the time that Qwints made that post people were creating different scenarios for what Wall-E could've done. No one had brought up the idea of him simply having not gone into the thread, right? So it may have never entered his mind.

As for what I like about his posts, iso 11 and 13 by him gave me some good vibes. I thought his logic was pretty sound, and his suspicions were reasonable. He could be scum, but there were much bigger targets at the moment. He'd given me no reason suspect him of anything but a mild inactive scumhunter.

[Hero764]

Either you suck at making your sarcasm detectable, or this is one hell of a weird defense.

I'll accept your explanation though.

How dismissive! Normally when someone does something weird I pressure them about it to learn more. Why so accepting?

There was no way in hell I was going to get anything out of IK from that. Maybe being sarcastic is a scumtell, I'm not sure I agree with you on that though. If I tried to pressure him over that it be pretty desperate IMO.

[yellowbunny]

Logical fallacy? And what's so unlikely about it? And answer me this: Do you personally feel the way he's acting has been pro town?

Saying he's scum being so scummy he hopes he will think he cannot possibly be scum doesn't make sense. In order for that to be true, we'd have to commit something akin to "too townie to be town". If someone is acting scummy, that tends to indicate that they are scum. Saying someone is "too scummy to be scum" doesn't make sense. So for Wall-e to try to be "too scummy to be scum" doesn't make sense.

And no, I don't feel Wall-e has been pro-town overall. I do believe he is trying more now, but I am unsure if that is genuine or a desire to not get caught being scum.

Okay on the Qwints stuff atm...but I might have follow ups.

[Hero764]

I think you just explained my reasoning in your own post . Since it wouldn't make sense for him to be too scummy to be scum, then he would go for it in the hopes that others would think he was too scummy to be scum.

[yellowbunny]

I think you just explained my reasoning in your own post Razz. Since it wouldn't make sense for him to be too scummy to be scum, then he would go for it in the hopes that others would think he was too scummy to be scum.

Hehe...well, okay. Not so sure I agree with you, but I can accept that answer.

Here is another question for you. <offers Hero a chair and a martini> Let's stop fighting for a minute, and for the duration of this post and your answer to it, assume that you're town and I'm town. My question is...what do you make of the lack of participation from a lot of people? Despite the spike in posting, there are still quite a few people who are being very very quiet. Earlier, when Wall-e and I were butting heads (prior to your entrance) I thought that it was odd that these same people were being quiet. What do you make of this? I am starting to get this nagging worry that there is some scum sitting out there in that group, quietly laughing you, me, Wall-e and IK as we duke it out. So do you think that there has been too much fixation on Wall-e, and to a lesser extent, Cubarey and IK? Should we start looking under these other rocks? Or will that just introduce noise into this discussion?

[Hero764]

Well, since it is highly unlikely that you, IK, and Wall-E are all scum, I think that it yeah there's definitely some scum sitting. The problem is, we don't have too much info on the other guys. I say we should focus on the cases we have going right now, probably get a lynch for one of them, and see what info we can get from it. We can only lynch one person a day, there's no need to focus where there's nothing to focus on.

Of course, that's not to say, if you have a case against someone you shouldn't bring it up. I'd be glad to consider anything you've got to offer.

[yellowbunny]

No cases which are concrete enough to share at this point in time.

[hambargarz]

VOTE COUNT

(5) Wall-E (X, Idiotking, qwints, Sajin, Jase)

(2) CUBAREY (Kreriov, Hero764)
(1) X (CUBAREY)
(2) Hero764 (Wall-E, yellowbunny)

Not voting
burfy, Ojanen

CUBAREY is in the process of being replaced

[Hero764]

Alright, I'll keep my word and

unvote

then. I'm not going to revote at the moment.

[X]

Anyway, to respond to your statement back when and because it seems pertinent now, just because I do not think lurking in and of itself is scummy do not think I do not notice or want to do something about it.

When someone has less access, that's one thing. When someone's lurking, it's another. Lurking is scummy.

@X, hedging just means saying that you could be wrong.

e.g. wall-e's lurking is scummy BUT he might just be lazy.

It's not necessarily a scum tell, but scum can use it so that they can point back and say they were suspicious of their partners.

I see. And there is a lot of hedging in Idiotking's posts.

Wall-E's 252 is a major regression. More significant things have happened since page 3.

Please name what you think we should be discussing, X?

Looks like you guys found enough to talk about.

Still, your next message is the one (144) were you post your impressions on people. On the "townish" section are:

CUBAREY is not scummy, just confused, I think. He doesn’t get that the natural gut reaction to a loaded question is to think that your inquisitor is scum.
Idiotking is not scummy. He reacted well under pressure.
Ojanen is not scummy. He’s scumhunting analytically.

Sooo, CUBAREY votes for you. No explanation, but you've been badgering him recently before his vote (to be fair, several people have, but you're the loaded question guy). If he doesn't understand that natural gut reaction is to think that your inquisitor is scum, doesn't that kind of contradict the apparent reason of his vote? If his reason is something else totally unknown, why are you putting him to your townish-list without hearing explanation?

I see what you're saying, but it doesn't follow. I'm saying that he doesn't understand the concept. However, the idea still holds true for him, even though he doesn't realize it. Plus, I recognize that kind of confusion as my thought process in my first game on the site.

ISO 1: He random-votes me. I'm always suspicious when someone random-votes a player and then conveniently that person becomes their #1 scum suspect. It's a big coincidence pill to swallow. (smallville rocks)

ISO 9: Mentions me again, now taking a fence-sitty position on me.

ISO 12: Claims I'm adding no content despite the fact that I am.

ISO 13:

Wall-E is scummy for twice “forgetting” about the thread even while posting about not hitting the Watched Topics button. Plus, he hasn’t lifted a finger to find scum.

I dislike 13 because of the word, "Plus." A psychologist once told me that if I wanted to lie effectively I should give only one excuse when making an excuse for something, because the tendancy is for people to give two or more reasons, stringing them together with 'alsos' and 'besides.' X here looks like he's excusing himself from future attacks, and he gives two reasons. Minorest of minor points here, since I try to steer away from trying to find scum by reactions. This one popped out at me though.

ISO 15: He quotes someone else's defense of him in response to my "baiting" post and then goes on to vaguely respond to it. He follows that up with an appeal to emotion: "Wall-E, if you had done any of those attacks in 761 you would have been modkilled."

I am a logic-gamer who judges reactions. So basically, I look at a cause-reaction pair. If there's a reason that scum would have that reaction more than town, I note it (and usually announce it). Sometimes I'll probe further because of such a reason. But I have specific things to point to when I suspect/accuse someone. I never base my opinions on "vibes" - I just don't get them.

Hi! And as for attacking indiscriminately, that's how I try to get reactions from everyone. Judging reactions is how you can really find scum. Scum attack discriminately.

The contradiction here is telling, imo. Do you look for reactions (or "vibes" as some call them) or do you analyze plays?

ISO 20 and 21: He revisits IK and seems overly interested in IK's status. I think X is IK's partner, but I'm only about 20% sure.

Okay, I'll take this bit by bit. First, I can't see how it's tunneling to mention you in my first post and then not until my 9th. Second, my random vote turning into my prime suspect is coincidence, and not a very big coincidence. Third, I still think that you haven't scumhunted much, although it's certainly improving. And certainly you hadn't scumhunted up to post 135 (my ISO 12). Fourth, I can't see that my vocab is a scumtell. Fifth, in my "appeal to emotion," what was I trying to convince who of? Sixth, "vibes" are not the same thing as "reactions" for me. "Reply" + "action" = "reaction". "Vibes" are like stepping outside and, although there are clear skies and a sunny day, predicting there's gonna be a storm soon. Metaphysical kind of things. And lastly, I don't see how mentioning IK makes me IK's partner.

@X post 247- I was referencing the point when walle said he played multiple forum games of mafia simultaneously and that was his excuse about not posting. Then after he gets a few votes, spams posts. I see spamming posts in this regard as bad because it looks scummy to do so as its a tactical defensive measure, and that abrupt a change is usually because a lurking scum was caught and now tries to salvage the lynch. Note- its not the spam by itself that makes it look bad, its the fact that this only occurred after he felt threatened by votes, as clearly stated in reference post.

Gotcha.

Actually it started as soon as I had some time to dedicate to this thread. If you look at my posting activity today, I've been "spamming" all my threads (btw you're still wrong if you think i was spamming or making any contentless posts anywhere in this game).

Your parenthetical note is wrong.

That said, has anyone else done any meta on Wall-e? I've mentioned before that his behavior now seems fairly consistent with how he ALWAYS plays. So while he continues to be the most obviuous scum target in game, I cannot help but wonder if that is because he always (or almost always) reads scummy. Does anyone else have thoughts on this? This is especially important cuz I think Wall-e is at L-2 (if I can count correctly...and considering how little coffee I have in me atm, I have serious doubts about my number-skillz atm )

When I get the time, I'll try to. I have one game of knowledge already (I'm mod), but it's ongoing.

Just for the record, I disagree with you on RVS, Sajin. I think it leads to information, but I don't think it leads to more information if more people random vote (assuming people still post).

I've got my connection fixed now.

I'm really hoping Cubey comes back, if the bottom falls out of my case, I don't find the case against Wall-E all that compelling (I'm not sure why he's so close to being lynched).

Saying this is as scummy as voting without a reason. Can you tell me what reasons those who are on my wagon have given that you consider weak? Otherwise you're scum who knows I'm town and you're engaging in villagery.

QFT.

makes

me

the most obvious scum target atm. So Vote: CUBAREY

Unvote: Vote: Hero

A slip, a joking confession, and bussing IK.

Um, no. When people didn't buy your case on me, you decide to find another target on flimsy reasons?

Jase needs to talk more. A lot more. And I don't get the Hero/YB interaction. What are the cases, again?

Defending yourself is good. Being defensive is bad. It looks a little scummy.

Wall-E, this is an example of vibe

. I think it's null.

A confession, even a joking one, is a scumtell.

Depends on the person. I've joke-confessed as town. Natirasha confesses to be SK every game. If, say, Thestatusquo or SensFan did it, I might think otherwise. Or that someone hacked their account...

There are almost definitely things that I've missed. Let me know.

[Wall-E]

Waiting for IK to address my previous posts about him. Nothing else to add for now.

[Idiotking]

That said, your attitude is not one I appreciate. When I make a fallacious statement, the response I would like to see is a well-reasoned refutation, not child-like sarcasm or ad hominem.

I honestly don't care if you dislike my attitude. I hate yours, it seems arrogant and pretentious. So let's agree to disagree on that, hmm?

You want a well-reasoned refutation for what? You think I make slips by being sarcastic? You think sarcasm is a scumtell? Well, I apologize then. I just find it impossible to take you seriously anymore. You are grasping for straws so pathetically that I'm surprised we haven't killed you yet. Rather amazed, actually.

Your continued failure to take me and this game seriously is only going to drive my proverbial foot up your joking anus, to use a colloquial phrase.

Oh, I'm taking this game quite seriously. Just not you.

[yellowbunny]

And I don't get the Hero/YB interaction. What are the cases, again?

My case in a nutshell was that I thought that Hero's opinions too closely mirrored Jase's opinions, both in who he suspected, and how strongly he suspected them. Also I really didn't like that he put a vote on an effectively empty slot since the case against Cubarey has more merit than just him being AWOL, and that this voting was done in his first post of real content. The combination of those two facts surrounding his vote seemed opportunistic.

Those items made me suspicious, so I put my vote on him to see how he'd react. And we got some reaction! I'm still generally suspicious of Hero, but he didn't flake out when I was grilling him and I've found his posts since that first one to be better, and he kept his word about unvoting if it became apparent Cubarey was going to be replaced...so I shall

unvote

@Wall-e: You completely did not respond to my post 410. Me pointing out that you MADE UP A VOTE isn't something you should ignore. I do not know if you made it up on purpose or on accident, and I also realize that even if you did it on purpose you would say its on accident so you don't have to point that out. However, some sort of response is appropriate. Also I am waiting for your response to my tunneling question.

Your imaginary vote post makes me want to vote for you again, and the ***ONLY*** thing keeping me from doing so is that you are so close to a lynch.

[Wall-E]

Are you denying early-game suspicion on IK on your part?