Mini 880 - Mini Quick and Dirty - Game Over

[Sando]

Sorry, I missed the thread link and didn't realise we'd started.

Def here, will post again in an hour or 2 with substance, promise

[Sando]

Oh, that was easier than I thought, most of that was RVS and theorycrafting. I'm mostly disappointed that I didn't beat Serial into the thread so I could vote him first, that's 2-0 to him

So it's clear, I tend to ignore meta arguments. I use my own meta for gut reads, but I wont tend to use them in arguments, or pay much attention to others.

Votes on me are fair enough given they were pre-mod posting regarding me, so that's no issue.

And I haven't posted in 2 weeks because my only other game has basically been closed since Nov 7 and my net was down for a week prior to that.

[Sando]

I don't pay attention to jokes either. I didn't even remember my joke to AGar about Berserking... If it's not related to the game at hand, I don't really focus on it. Hell, I forgot that there was a votecount on the page I was asking for regular votecounts on. I only pay attention to joke posts for the sake of joke posts later in the game since I view that to be

solidly

quite scummy. (until a recent game...)

How do you know not to pay attention to the post until after you've read it? You clearly read the post and at least thought about it enough to dismiss it as a joke post.

[Sando]

EBWOP:

@Sando: Who do you think is scummy and why?

You, but I always answer that to that question. If you want to know who I want lynched, see who I'm voting. If you think I'm fence-sitting, say it.

Your vote switching looks dodgy, and ignoring any posts is a terrible idea. Everything gives information, joke or not.

[Sando]

Is it Amished whinging at me to vote? I'll vote when I want to pressure someone or lynch them. I don't FOS, and throwing the vote around loses it's potency, especially early on. My point regarding looking at my vote history and calling me a fence-sitter is just that, I wasn't voting, if you wish to call me a fence-sitter, feel free, I'm not one, and you're not going to get me lynched on it before I form strong enough opinions to show that, so I really don't care.

A lot of the arguments put forward are meta, and I've said that I don't like meta, and basically ignore it from other people. There are only 2 people who I meta, Serial and Ojanen, Serial because I've known him a long long time, Ojanen because I've played 2 games with her, both with her as scum, 1 with me as her hydra partner as scum, so I trust my judgement there a lot more. In reference to meta's on those, serial is a lot more passive than normal, and Ojanen hasn't posted enough to make it worthwhile.

Amished constantly asking for reads from everyone gets on my nerves, and I personally find it quite scummy outside of newbie games. Every single time I get asked for them and provide them I get accused of being scum (as town), broad reads on everyone are way way way too easy to spin into anything you want. So when I have a case to articulate, I will, if you want to accuse me of fence sitting, do so.

Also, the advantage of being very broad in D1 as serial advocates is that you're open to a lot of information at a time when you need all the information you can get. Bandwagoning people for D1 slips so often ends in town lynches, as does Serials proposal, problem is that weak BWs on D1 result in little information for D2.

Vote: Amished

[Sando]

Sando, would you say that being asked for a read is your primary reason for voting Amished?

What do you see him as trying to accomplish by asking those sorts of questions, if he's scum?

Primary? Not just me personally being asked, but him asking a few people now, but yes, constantly asking for run-downs of who you find town/scum, I think is scummy or at least bad for town.

Doing it doesn't help scumhunt, most of them are things like 'I think xxxx is pro-town at the moment' or 'getting slight scum read on yyyy'. It doesn't point anything out to anyone, and it becomes way too easy to then pull out replies later and turn them into a fake case. The most common of these being linking cases.

What's he trying to accomplish? Well, for 1, they're useless for town, but look good, so it looks like there's a lot of info coming in, when really bugger all is happening. And secondly, it provides scum (and bad town I guess) with ample ammunition for making bad cases.

@Sando: You might want to read 143-145 again. First, you gave us words to describe yourself from what you've done, then *Raskol* said you were a fence-sitter, etc. and then I agreed with him.

1) I'm not voting for you, so I'm not going to "get you lynched on it".
2) I haven't voted for SC for not voting for somebody in serious, so what would make you think you're "special" enough to earn my vote?

You actually want to get into this game instead of applying your newbie experiences to more advanced players?

My point is that since you can't get me lynched before I show that I'm not a fence-sitter, and in showing that would completely remove that case, I really don't care if you wish to make that case against me. Basically, I was telling you to continue whinging about my lack of voting/ strong opinions all you want, it's not going to get you anywhere.

Also, considering you started the bit directed at me with "Ahh, Sando, about time", how long do I have to have these arguments with you before you stop accusing me of not being involved in the game? Just because I don't provide exactly what you want, doesn't mean I'm not involved.

[Sando]

P.S. I never said that the run-down posts that result in townie lynches only happen in newbie games, just that I find them less scummy in newbie games. It's happened to me and I've used it on others in non-newbie games as scum.

But you know, keep misrepresenting what I said Amished, looks real good.

[Sando]

I'm not saying that asking for peoples opinions is scummy, merely asking for run-downs on everyone is scummy. Generalisations I find scummy, they aren't helpful to town and provide too much ammunition to scum players. If you can't say more than 'this guy is generally scummy' then it's useless.

I've commented on Meta and provided it on the one person at the moment that I feel I can. I've commented on Amished refusing to even discuss joke-posts, and how stupid I find long 'xxx is probably town for no good reason, just is' posts on everyone. I also stated that I found Amished's vote switching scummy.

Just because I refuse to provide exactly what you're asking for doesn't mean I'm not contributing. I'm currently arguing with both you and Amished it seems, it provides information to us and provides information to others reading.

And asking for my 'primary' reason for voting someone and then treating that as my only reason for voting someone is a huge misrep, and seems like a pretty calculating one at that...

[Sando]

Raskol:

1: Fair enough if I got that wrong, I got that wrong, if noone asked me for a complete rundown of everyone, fine. I was in a rush and late to the game, I may have misread it as asking me for that sort of post. However, there's not a lot of difference between asking just who is scummy, and a complete run-down post. Clearly, anyone I don't include as scummy can be assumed as being seen as townie by me, and I'm providing even less info. So there's not exactly a lot of difference.

2: I'm not angry, not alot can get me angry in mafia, outside of sheer stupidity from someone I know or believe to be a faction partner. You guys aren't being stupid, and I like arguing, so I'm not angry.

3: I haven't refused to give my opinions, I've refused to give my opinions in the format he wants. He asked me a very general question, I attacked him over it, not sure what the problem from you is.

4: I have made my position clear, you decided to make it less clear by taking the 3 or 4 things that I didn't like about Amished and forcing me to define it as one 'primary' thing. You then said that all I've done is "vote the person who's asked you specifically for content" as if that's the only reason that I voted him.

As for my 'calculating misrep'--where did I say that was your only reason?

Saying that all I've done is "vote the person who's asked you specifically for content" pretty strongly implies that that's the only reason I voted him. I've said a few things that I find scummy about Amished, you chose to ignore them.

[Sando]

How can you have a meta on Oj if you've never played with her as town? That doesn't make sense, especially from someone who doesn't like meta apparently. You'd think given your distaste for it, you'd at least have a complete meta.

I should clear up 1 thing, I know Serial very well IRL. After playing with Ojanen I chatted with him about it, and he's played with her as town a few times now I think, and told me she was awesome at it, so I read the games. She also plays or at least played quite differently as scum to town.

lol. what?

What's the difference between saying "The people I find scummy are XYZ", and "The people I find scummy are XYZ and the people I find town are ABC"? Not a lot really. He's asking for the first, I hate the second and misread his post as asking for that, but the point still stands, they're both fairly useless in my eyes.

But you never replied to what your thoughts on me are. I said I was flat out ignoring PZ until he contributed something of substance and you didn't bat an eyelash. What's the difference between myself and Amished in that regard?

I hadn't realised I'd been specifically asked for them, have I?

Actually, didn't he ask you your suspicions and you said look at your vote, which was actually non-existant?

Yep, I was saying that since I'm not voting, you can take that as an indication that as of yet, I don't have any strong opinions. I can't believe that it's that hard for you guys to figure that out...

1) You seem to be ignoring that typically people back up their views on someone when asked for their opinion. How is this information useless to town? You don't think that going back later and seeing a confirmed scum's opinions on people help? You don't think you can read motives and logic on someones views on another?

No, I find generic 'xxx is scummy because he's done 1 tiny screw up in 5 pages' people freakin useless, and way too easy to turn into a link case later on. You seem to think that it's a good idea to make an incredibly weak linkage case?

And Scien, saying that I was responding to being asked for opinions is an absolute lie, and one that I've cleared up multiple times. My posts will focus on a single player or only 1 or 2, I won't make big 'these 6 players are likely scum'.

I had thought this was just some pressure being applied for some weak explanation on my part, but maybe not. Is it really that un-obvious what I'm saying? I never said that providing any opinions are bad, merely that providing certain opinions in certain formats are bad.

[Sando]

4) Your original concern seemed to be 'If I give you my thoughts, they will be twisted against me'. Would you say that paraphrase is a good representation of one of your concerns? If not could you fix it for me?

No, it's 100% not. I'm not worried about my views being twisted in the format I play. People try, but because I've actually put a lot of time and effort into making a case or answering questions, it's normally pretty easy to go back and show how I'm being misrepresented or misinterpreted. If I provide just small bite size chunks of my thoughts before I've fully processed them, then yes, I think I'll get misrep'd on them later.

@Sando, what would you like to see happen at this stage in the game. Apparently it's not asking who people find suspicious so what would be a better course for us to follow for now?

Ok, now I am actually getting slightly angry...

For anyone that wants to accuse me of this, do you honestly want to say for everyone's benefit that you do not think that I have provided opinions on people in the game, or that I'm against opinions?

All that I don't want to see is mind-numbing recap posts that serve absolutely no purpose, and when I join and get asked a very general 'hey who's scum' that's what I think I'm being asked for. I've said this maybe half a dozen times, are you guys just deliberately ignoring that?

Do you guys really think that I'm still not providing opinions on players or generating discussion? Seriously?

[Sando]

I was trying to clear up a misconception of my opinions before I went to work.

I also attacked Amished and have been attacked in return. I'm defending part of why I find him scummy and trying to clear that up. I was not attacked prior to posting opinions, read 143 onwards if you want that one cleared up re accusation and responding to it. I've also accused Raskol of deliberate mis-rep and Scien of lying, just because it's in defence of myself that makes it less worthwhile?

I have some opinions on the Odin/SC argument, but I'd like to give it a bit for them to argue it out, I don't like arguing for others, and I have to go to work now anyways.

And I'm happy to spend D1 giving and responding to accusations, just not the same accusation 6 times. Happy to spend every day doing that actually.

[Sando]

Wow, a whole 1.5 days. Anyhow, I am behind in this game and plan to catch in my free time today.

Maybe I just know Serial well enough to have known he was basically joking and that he was only asking fairly gently, but this seems like an unnecessarily defensive reaction right after he posted it.

Too townie fallacy?

You're not being accused of being too townie, I read it as being accused of theory over substance, which is scummy. And yes you were invoking it, calling it a fallacy means you're trying to say he's wrong, not trying to confirm whether that's what he means.

If only we were all as bright of a star as you. So your stance is you have no suspicions and saying "I find XYZ scummy" is anti-town.

I'm confused. You think that me saying "I find XYZ scummy" when I actually don't would be pro-town? That seems patently ridiculous. Are you saying that I still don't have any suspicions, because a quick look at my recent posts and the fact that I'm voting would seem to contradict that.

But this is getting stupid and repetitive, if you want to lynch me over it, go ahead, but we're just going in circles and wasting our breath at the moment, there's not much more I can say, I've said it ad-nauseum.

Serial, you're being way nicer than your regular townie play. I think that's the second argument with someone you've backed away from, and now backing away from a fairly innocuous post of yours, why are you so much less aggressive?

Zorblag, any thoughts on alignments? So far you've called me officially null and not much else, unless I missed something?

Officially un-lynchable it was a think. Speaking of, considering that's a major part of your D1 proposed play, got your list of non-lynch targets yet?

[Sando]

I was very tempted to put zorblag on it but I just finished a game with a player who reminds me of his early posts - very intelligent and reasonable. There was one reason that sort of gave her away by mid game though, so I'm waiting to see where he goes with it.

So you're looking to eliminate people as D1 lynch targets, and are waiting till mid-game (ie not D1) to see how Zorblag continues, but will still keep him on the D1 lynch list?

Seems like you don't want to lynch him but still want to leave him on the list.

[Sando]

@Sando (end of 217): This will be the main reason for my vote at the end of this post (I realize it's a long one). You're essentially asking for people that SC has as pro-town. This is much much worse than asking for scumspects. If there's a wagon on somebody that SC doesn't mind seeing lynched, you'll see that he's not pro-town enough in SC's eyes. Scum only benefit from that type of information.

Have you been reading the thread at all? Serial has stated many times, in this game and others that his D1 preferred gameplan is to eliminate people as suspects and then lynch pretty much anyone other than this. The reason I questioned him on his pro-town views is that because of his gameplan, he's forced to defend his pro-town views while not really defending his scum views.

If I asked him why he's voting someone, he can and will say 'well I don't find them town, and I've said I'm happy to lynch anyone I don't think is obviously town'. That doesn't provide me with any information. If I ask 'why don't you want to lynch this person' he's forced to explain what about that person he finds pro-town.

I'm forcing him to defend his position and provide opinions, and then questioning those opinions. This would seem pretty obvious given that he has stated it himself, you're stretching pretty hard to make a case. Is there a reason you don't want me to actually try and get information from someone in the game?

And yes, Serial is a fan of early claims. Early mass-claims I haven't seen from him so much, and I personally am generally against them.

I'm V/LA for 48 hours from nowish.

[Sando]

Also, you missed my point completely. If/when he votes for somebody, yes, I expect him to explain it. I don't expect him to come off with a "you're not in my town list" for the sole explanation as obviously there can't be the rest of the game in that list. Asking him reasoning for a vote is *far* from asking him for his town list.

No, I know exactly what your point was, you've missed mine, which is that I completely disagree with you. Serial is perfectly capable of not giving a suitable reason for his D1 vote, unless you count 'well he's not obviously town' as a suitable reason.

Knowing Serial in game and out, the best way to get information out of him in D1 is to question him as to his pro-town thoughts, as he puts a lot more effort into that than scum thoughts in D1, or at least wants to.

I'm actively trying to get information out of a player the best way I know how, and you seem to think that's a bad thing, you're not going to get far with this argument...

Charlatan's vote on me is the first to strike me as scummy. He's obviously read through fairly extensively, yet has either missed or chosen to ignore my post saying that while I can see peoples point yet disagree, constantly arguing about it is pretty pointless at this stage. Quoting the very first post I made regarding this and then ignoring every post subsequent to that is extremely dodgy.

I've made my position clear multiple times, if you think it's wrong, directly address it, if you chose to ignore it and merely jump on the bandwagon, you look scummy.

Now Sando's on a growing bandwagon

I'm the only person voting for Amished as far as I'm aware, if someone else has voted him, it was after me...

Yeah you're just making stuff up, good on you for that. Didn't take you long, I'll give you that.

[Sando]

It took you 12 posts to do the former (your communication with SC is the first time you stop talking about yourself), and most of your problems with other players have basically been in one way or another about how they're criticizing you and how that is so very problematic.

So on the one hand you think I didn't talk enough about other people and only defended myself, on the other hand you think I'm not taking my accusers seriously?

[Sando]

@Sando: I did not realize that you knew SC out of game/extensively in game to garner that sort of "meta-experience" with him. Probably why I didn't understand a damn thing you were trying to accomplish with that.

@SC: How much do you know of Sando?

I should clear up 1 thing, I know Serial very well IRL.

Guess I failed in clearing that up.

[Sando]

The reason I say I don't believe you take your accusers seriously is because really you don't address the issues people level against you -- you address the issues you make believe they're leveling against you.

Their issue was that I wasn't providing, and seemed to be refusing to provide, opinions on players. I figured the best way to respond to that was like I said I would, by providing opinions. The whole argument over the run-down posting etc was getting old and going nowhere, and I said so.

So yes, I addressed the issue that people accused me of, not providing opinions, like I said I would, by providing opinions when I had them.

Work time, might not be able to post for 24 hours.

[Sando]

Zorblag, you've never seriously outlined a case against me, care to do so? All you've really done is ask me questions regarding my opinions on posting. Your vote on me is from before I joined the game.

Amished, you've avoided the question, why did you find me questioning someone on their town reads, yet not find the others who did it scummy?

And jokingly asking 'are you the cop' is still scummy, and I'm not sure why you wouldn't assume I was doing the same thing in what I was looking for, considering we're asking the same person the same question.

Just fobbing a question that is scummy off as joking doesn't explain what you said and what you chose to ignore.

[Sando]

Did you really miss the Oddin quote asking for the town reads, or are you just choosing to ignore it?

[Sando]

So why was me asking for pro-town read scummy and Odinn's not?

[Sando]

I never said ODDin's wasn't scummy. That initially sparked my interest; but like I said since then I've gotten conflicting vibes from him. I'm not really getting those from you which is why I'm focusing on you at the moment.

You're not really, you're just answering the questions posed to you by others. You haven't said anything about why you find me scummy in a while, and what you said you found scummy you've done yourself and didn't find particularly scummy from someone else.

[Sando]

Is there a reason you're choosing to ignore the main reason that you're voting me, that I questioned the pro-town reads from SC, when you do a run-down of my activity?

You can't have forgotten, it's the main reason you're voting me after all.

The general apathy being shown in thread is fairly disheartening though.

[Sando]

So what do you find about me scummy then?

I think I've cleared up the asking SC for town reads, and I think you've even said that was explained to your satisfaction.

Are we going back to the debate over how opinions should be posted etc? I think I've been one of the more active people in the last week, which is hardly a big effort considering my competition, but I feel a bit miffed being attacked because I apparently won't provide opinions, when I've been one of the few doing so recently. Most people have been posting the bare minimum, with a few 'oh I need to catch up' and the great 'waiting for a votecount' etc etc.

[Sando]

When it comes down to it you still be interacting almost exclusively with those that be attacking you and SerialClergyman.

This is constantly being thrown at me, I attacked Amished, he responded to me, I started the argument between us, how am i merely responding to his questions?

Really though, we be getting to the end of the day, Troll no be any more sure that someone else be scum and you be our most viable wagon. Troll strongly believes that we want a lynch so Troll's vote will stay on you for that reason alone.

So you're basically divorcing yourself from responsibility for a vote/lynch? You accuse me of general apathy and a lack of engagement, yet are voting someone that you admit you don't really have a case on, and only because there's noone better. Sounds hypocritical in the extreme, and divorcing yourself from responsibility is extremely scummy, you sound like you're setting up a defence for when the person you lynch flips town of 'well I only did it because noone else was available'.

Since then, you've been much more passive. I think that's indicative of you trying to back off in a self-preservation tactic.

You do realise that I've attacked nearly all of your posts, right? Passive, you're calling me passive, in this game, with all the other players being generally apathetic, as you've said youself, harsh.

@Raskol
Oh, that question, yeah I missed until Oddin just quoted it now. Why am I answering a hypothetical question about a role that does not exist afaik?

But anyways, if I was a normal 1 shot vig, no, I wouldn't kill anyone today. As a 1 shot vig who can only kill on D1, which seems to be what you're asking, I doubt I'd kill anyone. Initially I thought it was just another oportunity for a pro-towner to lynch someone, but then when thinking about it, the major advantage of lynching on D1 isn't so much who you lynch, but how the lynch occured. You wouldn't get that information from me vig killing someone, and I'm not so sure that I'd trust my lone judgement. It's unlikely that a lynch on D1 will hit scum, hence newbies often call for no-lynch, but it's the information that it provides that is vital. A D1 vig kill is just as unlikely, or even more so, and doesn't provide much information.

Charlatan, are you asking that if I was 100% forced to kill someone today, who would it be? I think I'd go for a middle of the road, fairly apathetic, fairly objective person that is really hard to get a read on, but isn't really providing a huge amount of info, and is kinda of skirting the issues without doing anything overtly scummy. This would make the person very hard to out as scum, and while useful in their posting, the hard to get a read on makes the dangerous at all stages. If forced to kill someone, probably Zorblag for those reasons, I think he most fits the bill. He's not scummy, but I don't have faith that I'll get a read on him by the time it's crucial, and while I wouldn't want to vig kill him, it'd be my reasoning if forced to.

Why are we discussing a hypothetical of a role that as far as I know doesn't exist?

Then, he seems a bit too relaxed about the fact that he has good chances of being the D1 lynch. Again, not scummy, just weird. I wonder how invested he is in the game.

I'm fairly bemused by my seemingly inevitable lynch, but no, I'm not a happy chappy about what seems like a fairly inevitable lynch. Troll's reason for lynching me is a case in point, what the hell am I meant to say to it? I attacked someone for what I perceived them as asking for, and got attacked for it in return. I answered as best I could and went about my business, and I've been questioning things from others that are completely unrelated to me. Troll has stated that he's voting me simply because there's noone better to vote, what am I supposed to say to that?

There's also a slight vibe of Sando defending you back which reinforces my feelings in this direction. I'm getting the overall impression you two are defending one another.

I don't think I've ever said anything pro-town about Serial this game. I haven't overtly attacked him, but I've questioned his town reads, and then further pushed his response. I think I also stated that the meta on him is slightly scum, I think he tends to be a fair bit more aggressive than this, but then considering what I think is a general apathy in the game, I'm not sure how much stock I can put in this.

I'm not sure where you're getting the me defending him from though.

[Sando]

Nicely played scum.

As we discussed in the green zone, lack of talking about failed lynches and the NKs meant Amished had literally no pressure in D2. How someone with that sort of BW doesn't even get mentioned on D2 when a townie is the other BW blew my (our, was chatting with Serial a fair bit about it) mind.

I think we were more bemused in the Green Zone than anything else. 606 was a pretty funny moment though

BTW Ojanen, if I'm ever in a game with you and Serial and Serial dies N1, totally policy lynching you the next day

Thanks for modding BC.

[Sando]

I assume it can only happen once and then breaks? If so not automatically game breaking, but enough to really hurt town if it falls to scum.

But yes, I'd have held on to it.

Probably should just be lost if passed to scum though.

[Sando]

I assume it can only happen once and then breaks? If so not automatically game breaking, but enough to really hurt town if it falls to scum.

But yes, I'd have held on to it.

Probably should just be lost if passed to scum though.

Scum have virtually no need for the BPV except for a Town-cred gambit, so in practice the BPV IS lost if passed to scum.

Protection from a lynch doesn't seem half bad for scum. Also, I think the 'auto loss' that Scien is refering to is if the BPV doesn't break after use, meaning that scum with it are unkillable, hence scum can't lose.

[Sando]

Would definitely be /in.

Same teams?

[Sando]

I´ll happily /in to either, having played neither. I´ll have to try and notice that the game has started and not rely on Serial calling me up to ask where the hell I am, I always miss the game starting

I seem to have heaps of free time here on holidays

And serial, I know that they thrashed us this game, but I´m pretty sure we can pull it back next game... (sorry, bit of an in joke for us, probably not as funny for you guys)