Newbie 810 - Game over!

[Raskol]

Hello all. It might take me a few days to get caught up, but I'll go as fast as I can.

I see the deadline is near. Any help in the way of summary would go a long way.

[geekalicious]

Hello, Raskol, welcome to the game. When you get a chance to (I understand that this thread is a lot to read), could you give us your read on who you find most scummy at the moment?

[KittyMo]

Welcome.

Summary:
Random voting stage is normal until TFGM shows up and votes no lynch. Then we all argue, and TFGM gets frustrated and asks for replacement. Zachrulez replaces him. On page 3, BlueRaven votes me, saying he's "just going with the crowd", creating a mini-bandwagon on me. People begin bandwagoning BlueRaven for this, until they mostly come to the conclusion that it was a newbie mistake. Geekalicious draws attention for "following the crowd." Zach makes the mistake of moving his vote around too much, drawing a lot of suspicion towards him, and eventually has an end of day bandwagon on him. When he refuses to roleclaim to try to redirect the NK, he is hammered by illiniguy. Our other IC, Reckoner, gets nightkilled.

Day 2, we've mostly been going in circles. illiniguy, geekalicious, and BlueRaven have been given the most attention. Monsieur, the person you replaced, along with Keyblade, Ronnie, and me gave analysis on all players. Right now, we're in the awkward "we only have a few days to lynch and we really don't know who to lynch" stage that happens almost every late Day 2. Mind posting some content to help us?

[KittyMo]

Oh, and could you please answer these questions that I just asked Riddle (he recently replaced illiniguy09):

@ Riddle: Welcome! I have a few questions for you for when you get the chance to answer them:
1) How do you feel about your predeccessors' (reverendpsycho & Monsieur) playstyles?
2) How much experience do you have playing mafia? (That includes chat, forum, and real life mafia.)
3) Who do you currently find scummy?
4) Are you scum? :p

[ronnieroo]

My feelings on the lynch? Well, we lost a townie, that's never a good thing.
It's hard for me to get a read on anyone with so many replacements.

[Raskol]

Thanks for the welcome and the info all, I'll post my thoughts on what I read, as I read it.

[Raskol]

I'm on page 5 now. Thoughts so far:

Ronnieroo: Casts suspicion on others without voting, then hangs back and lets others carry the BW. Combined with her comments on using voting records to track scum and the fact that she wasn't on the lynch bandwagon D1, this seems a bit scummy. IGMEOY.

Blueraven: made a stupid mistake, I find this a nulltell. Jury's out so far.

TFGM: see blueraven.

Krauthammer: Mildly suspicious. Seems to me like newbscum is more likely to think they should be cautious than newbtown. This is pure gut, so I'll not push it too far unless I see more in later pages.

______________________________________________________

Keep in mind this is all just as of page 5, I'll update every 5 pages at least, or sooner if there's something that I think really justifies doing it sooner/more often.

[Raskol]

On page 8 now. I feel I've seen enough that I'm going to

Unvote

.

I have a pretty good idea of who I want to vote for at this point, but I'm going to finish reading the thread first before I do it/say who, to make sure there isn't someone even more scummy.

(KittyMo, I'll also answer your questions when I'm caught up.)

[Riddle]

Hello Raskol, welcome!

Once you are all caught up it would be good if you posted what you think, it would be nice to have a fresh set of eyes to find what we've missed. Try to stay active and not get replaced lol.

[KittyMo]

Once you are all caught up it would be good if you posted what you think, it would be nice to have a fresh set of eyes to find what we've missed.

You haven't really told us what you think of the current players...would you mind following Monsieur's earlier request, and doing some sort of analysis of all the players?

[Raskol]

Page 13:

Getting more reasons to confirm my early reads than disconfirm them.

Null/hazy read on geek, kitty, keyblade. Hindsight is 20/20, but Zach was obvtown at this point. Interested in seeing how he got lynched.

Reading on....

[Raskol]

Page 17: Ugh. Now I see why Zach got lynched. I can understand why someone would vote for him, after his tantrum at least.

[Raskol]

@ Riddle: Welcome! I have a few questions for you for when you get the chance to answer them:
1) How do you feel about your predeccessors' (reverendpsycho & Monsieur) playstyles?
2) How much experience do you have playing mafia? (That includes chat, forum, and real life mafia.)
3) Who do you currently find scummy?
4) Are you scum? :p

1) I think reverend was pretty neutral, with a slight scum lean because of his inactivity. Monsieur seemed to try his best to scumhunt, I think his problem was that he thought he was going to jump in and save the day singlehandedly, then got frustrated and left when it started to look like things weren't going to turn out that way.

2) Got one game under my belt, that was played here. I've read a lot of mafia theory in MD and the wiki, and have read through 5 or 6 newbie games.

3)ronnieroo is my top suspect by a large margin.

4)no.

[Raskol]

K, so I finished reading and answered the questions. It went a lot quicker than I feared it would. 5 hours of reading is a lot, though, and I'm pretty tired atm. I'm not sure I'll be able to word what I say perfectly, but there's not enough time to wait until tomorrow so I'll post it now and perfect it later.

Anyway, rundown of ronnieroo and my suspicions of her:

-Low post count, this is always the first place to look for scum. Not damning in itself, but when the behavior in the few posts that exist is indicative of scummy reasons for inactivity, it becomes a scumtell. I think, in ronnieroo's case, it's scummy. Specifically, I think her strategy has been to influence town's decisions from behind the scenes, casting suspicion without voting in order to keep attention off herself and keep her voting record clean, while posting just enough theory to keep it from looking like she's doing nothing but trying to lead town by the nose.

There's nothing I can point out that proves 100% that she's scum, but overall I think I've got a relatively good read on her, and she's scummier than anyone else. I've got a bunch of notes on her that I can post if someone wants a lot of detailed justification, but it's a wall and I'd rather post a bit at a time, as questions come up.

[KittyMo]

Oh, and Raskol: mind posting some sort of analysis on everyone? Your analysis thus far seems helpful, but we want mooooore.

[Raskol]

Almost forgot O_o

vote: ronnieroo

[ronnieroo]

Ok Raskol that is just the way I play the game. Low post counts for me are not an unusual thing. I don't like spammy or repetive posts. Quite frankly, they annoy me and serve to distract us and keep us from finding the scum. Why didn't I vote on day one? *pushes repeat button*

a. I left for a week. I didn't want to leave my vote on someone, and didn't have time to vote after I got back.
b. Before I left, I didn't see anyone scummy enough to place a vote on.

I don't post as much as some people do. That is my play style. I don't vote/FOS as much as some people do. Once again playstyle. If I had voted for everyone I had cast suspicion on I would look just like Zach did. Placing my logic up there is just as good as posting an actual FOS in my opinion. I would like to see your notes on me, as it would help me defend myself. (Doesn't have to be a wall. A little at a time is fine)

[Raskol]

Interesting response. Here's a quick analysis:

1---Scummy is scummy, even if it's her playstyle. No one said she had to be spammy or repetitive, either. But her play so far has been at the opposite end of the extreme. Why does she try to justify one extreme by pretending that her only other option would be to go to the opposite one? Nobody is recommending spam.

Besides, even if I were the type to care about meta defenses, it's awfully convenient to claim meta when we don't have any of your previous games to go on. So no, that's not going to cut it as a defense.

2---Not voting as much as some people do is fine. Not voting at all isn't. She's trying to imply that her only options are to either 'vote for everyone' and 'look like Zach' or vote for no one. She's twisting things again, pretending like her only option if we don't like her extreme, is for her to go to the opposite extreme. This is a scummy way to defend yourself.

Also, why is she so worried about looking like Zach? It seems like town would want to justify their voting record based on how it helps town, not how it makes them look.

ronnieroo----can you give any good reason why not voting at all is pro-town?

[Raskol]

Ronnie, I'll definitely post my notes later, but for now I'd like to hear your take on my read for you, and especially the thinking behind your no-vote policy.

[12Keyblade]

Ummm...holy crap. Can I be perfectly honest for a minute? I'm considering voting for Raskol just for that. I don't see ronnie's playstyle as scummy in the least...OK, slightly. Very, very little. Like, almost not at all. Point is, I never considered voting for such a pro-town player. I really want to see the reasons behind this, or my vote may go from geek to Raskol.

[Riddle]

Fine Kitty. I'll get a full analysis done in a little while, but it might take me a couple of days, because I am busy and lazy.

[Vel-Rahn Koon]

Official

3 Days to Deadline

Vote Count

BlueRaven - 1 (geekalicious)

ronnieroo - 1 (Raskol)

Not Voting - 5 (12Keyblade, BlueRaven, KittyMo, Riddle, ronnieroo)

4 to Lynch.

Deadline

is the end of Sunday, August 9 (Eastern, GMT - 4).

[KittyMo]

Ummm...holy crap. Can I be perfectly honest for a minute? I'm considering voting for Raskol just for that. I don't see ronnie's playstyle as scummy in the least...OK, slightly. Very, very little. Like, almost not at all. Point is, I never considered voting for such a pro-town player. I really want to see the reasons behind this, or my vote may go from geek to Raskol.

Then why's she a 6 on your scum-o-meter?

[Raskol]

When scumhunting, it's usually better (I feel) to make the accusation, wait for an explanation, and THEN post the reasons. Doing it this way forces the potential scum to come up with a story for their actions before they know

exactly

what they'll be using it to defend against. That way when you've given the details, you've got something to make them stick to in their defense afterwards. It gives them a chance to make a mistake.

On the other hand, if they're town, it doesn't hurt them because they tell the truth the first time and have no need to change their story depending on what the charges are.

If none of you agree with this policy, I'll post the notes sooner. But I'll want more than one person's say-so on it at the least, since we know there are 2 scum out there

[Raskol]

Alright, I've thought about it for a while, and despite all that I think circumstances require that I do things a little differently this time and post the notes without getting a story first. First, we're close to the deadline and with ronnieroo's level of activity it's possible that if I wait we wont' be able to discuss enough before closing time. Second, my connection is acting up today, I'm getting disconnected constantly and when it does this it often shuts off for hours at a time. If I don't post it now I may not be able to today. So here are the notes I have so far, condensed a bit. They cover D1, and are a good start even if more could be said.



http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 36#1745036
-casts suspicion on TFGM without a vote, for the stupid noobie mistake. (putting town on the track of an easy target, yet no vote from her herself).
-points out that voting records can and often are used to catch scum. A nice little piece of theory, hard to fault her for bringing it up, except that it shows that voting records are on her mind. It could just be someone pointing out the obvious, or it could be the comment of a scum who plans to use her clean, empty record as a defense later on. (note later comment: when asked about her feelings on the lynch, all she says is “we lynched town and that’s bad”. No comment on what the lynch could mean as far as finding scum.)

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 26#1745126
Points out that mafia have to get people to follow them. Again, true enough, and it might be taken as another innocent little comment on theory, except that later on she talks about this concept so much as to seem obsessed with it, and her playstyle is exactly that of scum trying to get town to follow them to a lynch. Kinda makes you wonder why the idea is so prominent in her mind.

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 89#1748189
-casts suspicion on BlueRaven without a vote for another newbie mistake (casting suspicion on another easy target, with no vote).
-another nice little bit of theory, great way to add to the discussion without helping town.

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 69#1749969
-blatantly misrepresents Geekalicious in, guess what, another suspicion-post without a vote. A pattern of throwing mud and then hiding in the shadows waiting for a reaction. Guess what? This post came pretty close after Zach had voted Geekalicious. Third time ronnieroo tries to covertly push along a bandwagon after it's already been started.
-more theory, urging Geek to think for himself and warns against the possibility of following a mafia member. Empty, obvious advice, post-padding at its best (although it shows again the kind of things that are on her mind). Theory is fine and not a problem in itself as long as it's accompanied by content and genuine scumhunting, but when all you get from someone is theory and voteless mudslinging, things start to look bad.

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 13#1751413
A comment from this post is very telling, and I want to quote it directly:

Leading sheep to water is ridiculously easy in a noobie game... especially when you're an IC.

This sounds like gloating. Other highlights of the post: more voteless suspicion-casting and 'helpful theory'.

Overall:
-Nothing that could really help catch scum. Absolute minimum interaction, points out the obvious, votelessly points suspicion toward easy targets.
-one of the suspicion-castings relied on a blatant misinterpretation of a player’s post (see above)
-almost all of her posts contain something like the words "this makes me

very

suspicious of you" and yet she never votes. This is scum behavior. Moreover, when asked later why she didn't vote, she said she had never found anyone suspicious enough! If

very suspicious

doesn't cut it, ronnie, just what does it take to get you to vote?
-her theory comments show that she’s extremely concerned about two things: first, influence and the idea of manipulating townies. Second, using voting records to track scum. The fact that her playstyle is consistent with a scumplayer who is trying to use exactly those things to her advantage is evidence for her being scum.