Open 212--Hard Boiled Mafia (Game Over)

[semioldguy]

Vote: Mysterious Mystery Man

I didn't notice the thread was opened, thanks for the prod request.

[semioldguy]

@ksun
That choice should be left up to the Tracker/Vig to decide.

What experience do you have in playing mafia outside of this site?

[semioldguy]

Policy lynching sucks and is an excuse for poor scum-hunters.

Lurking happens about equally for both I think. Analyzing the manner/motivation of lurking on a case by case basis is much more useful. Hence I would agree that active lurking is typically scummy.

I am usually active. As in I have never lurked to replacement and never to more than a prod or two in any game (usually none). My most active days are Monday through Wednesday with Saturday being a day that I'm almost never at a computer.

@Bio Hazard
His post didn't twinge me one way or the other.

[semioldguy]

@ksun482
What experience do you have in playing mafia outside of this site?

[semioldguy]

My vote was a "Thank You" to Mysterious Mystery Man.

[semioldguy]

@ortolan
Why is it a good thing that you don't see anything explicitly scummy from players you've played with previously?

Unvote; Vote: Ythan

Making a case against a player even partially based upon another ongoing game is poor play as RayFrost wouldn't even be able to defend himself without discussing that game. You apparent insistence to continue using this line of thought even after your warning is scummy to me because it is a dead end as people can't really comment on it. Look elsewhere or come up with a case based upon this game.

[semioldguy]

Your whole basis is that he would be unable to defend himself

and you

don't even address the content once.

In case that was confusing.

The content revolves around an ongoing game. Why would I address something clearly against the rules?

[semioldguy]

Did you read the post in which I voted for you?

[semioldguy]

The first quote is not something I find scummy. Just useless, nothing productive comes from it.

Continuing to that after doing so is specifically said not to be talked about and actively not looking through anything else is scummy. You basically have led yourself to a dead end of discussion and then sat there at the dead end once it was already shown by the moderator to be a topic that couldn't be discussed.

[semioldguy]

That doesn't mean you have to sit in your dead end instead of looking for other reasons to indict RayFrost or look for scumminess in other players.

[semioldguy]

It looked to me as though you were content sitting there as you took several posts after the non-discussion about the topic was established in continuing to do essentially the same thing.

[semioldguy]

I agree that Ythan's case is unfair. However, I'm not sure why you would call it scummy. No one is going to follow Ythan based on secret information in an ongoing game. What advantage would scum have in persisting a chanceless case? It looks more like poor play to me.

I didn't call his case scummy. In fact, I used the same words you used, that it was poor play. What is scummy to me is his continuance of taking that stance while not doing anything else after it has been established that it cannot be discussed.

[semioldguy]

No it was p.1 everything there is basically null. But I do find it alarming that you're pushing so hard for it.

I disagree with this reasoning. Just because it is page one does not make things null.

btw, obviously ksun wasn't lurking since I replaced him so any offense on that is null lol

Why did you feel the need to point this out?

[semioldguy]

I have read the whole thread. What would that have to do with whether or not I question this?

The mere fact that you replaced him should have been answer enough regarding his lurking, that he flaked rather than lurked. You stating what you did was unnecessary in my opinion and it looks bad to me. No one has made that allegation since you replaced in. Did you feel that someone would? Did you feel that the allegation of his lurking still stood after you replaced in? Why or why not?

[semioldguy]

Why not be quick to defend myself? I came in the game with that question following me, so I answered it.

No one was attacking you for it. The question hadn't been asked of you since you replaced in. There was no need for you to be quick to defend yourself.

btw, obviously ksun wasn't lurking since I replaced him so any offense on that is null lol

Also, if you thought it was obvious, why did you need to say it?

[semioldguy]

@NickF227
You've had two posts with any sort of measurable content this game since replacing in. It is not possible for you to be talking in circles yet, nor do I agree with your assessment.

[semioldguy]

1. I am not going to apologize for answering an unanswered question. You are applying pressure for a reason in which there is no grounds.

I'm not looking for an apology, I'm looking for a reason. For what your thought process/motivation was when you decided to do what you did.

2. I said it just in case anyone tried to hold it against me. Why are you so determined to use the fact that I answered a question as a scum tell?

This isn't an accurate assessment. I am not using "answering a question" as a scum tell against you.

Semigold post 111: Although I agree with you that what ythan did was wrong on many levels why is it scummy?

Have you read my posts? I have explained this several times now and believe that I am quite clear on why I think it is scummy.

[semioldguy]

@ farside22:

I don't see Nick's vote as scummy. He said it wasn't entirely serious.

If he turned it into a big deal, then it would be a scumtell, but he just unvoted casually. I could be way off on this, but I call it like I see it.

I disagree with this. A vote without reasoning is always scummy, because there is no reason not to share your reasoning with the town. Scum can get an advantage with this though, because it's easy to come up with a reason that fits the situation perfectly later. Saying it's a joke is one of the worst late reasons. Maybe I would buy it if it included something like , but there is no such indication at all.

I partially disagree with this assessment. There are plenty of pro-town reasons to vote without reasoning. One of which would be pressure voting. If reasoning is given with that, then it negates the usefulness of the vote.

[semioldguy]

@Mysterious Mystery Man
You voting has the appearance of OMGUS and this is hardly deniable.

@everyone else holding this against him
What exactly makes his OMGUS scummy to you?

I don't like people using generic tells like this as a basis for scum hunting. It is both easy and convenient to hide behind such tells due to a wide acceptance of the tell. Please explain the motivation you see behind this OMGUS voting, and spare me a cookie-cutter response. I am not seeing a clear scum motivation here, just an action. An action can have many different possible motivations behind it depending upon context, etc. Find scum by keying into their motivations, not identifying an action.

More votes for NickF227 please. In addition to Ythan's play, NickF227's play doesn't really add up to me. Why did you choose Mysterious Mystery Man over Mindgamer initially? Also for someone who is used to much shorter timespans for games you do not post very frequently in this one. Could you link to a completed game on another site that you played in?

[semioldguy]

all OMGUS is scummy to me.

And your vote could be argued as OMGUS too. Mysterious Mystery Man pegged a gut scum read on your player slot, yet you vote for him. Is your own vote scummy to you? Care to give a better explanation than "all OMGUS is scummy to me"? I doubt that you actually believe your current explanation. If you do believe it, then

why

is all OMGUS scummy to you.

@Mysterious Mystery Man
I don't understand your above post. What are you trying to say/convey with your quoting?

[semioldguy]

The "scare tactic" and jumping to conclusions in that post are not things I think are particularly scummy. However it did alert me to something else that potentially could be scummy; post 105 gives off the impression that Mysterious Mystery Man knows that the other person, Bio Hazard, isn't scum by omitting him in his exception. (as in his example would also be good for town if Bio Hazard was scum, which Mysterious Mystery Man doesn't consider)

[semioldguy]

I think he needs to post more.

[semioldguy]

Do you think evilsnail is more or less likely to be scum than the average player?

More likely.

[semioldguy]

@chauchaudotcom
evilsnail is my leading suspect currently, but I'd really like to see some more posts from him first. Mysterious Mystery Man is slightly suspicious to me, but not for many of the reasons others have put forward as mentioned, and I am looking at you as my third suspect mostly for reasons brought up against you.

[semioldguy]

Mysterious Mystery Man is slightly suspicious to me, but not for many of the reasons others have put forward as mentioned, and I am looking at you as my third suspect mostly for reasons brought up against you.

What are these 'other reasons' for suspecting MMM?

I don't know what you mean by "other reasons" since I never mentioned "other reasons." I don't like many of the existing cases/reasons already against him, some of which I have specifically mentioned. One of the points I do see as potentially scummy I have also said in a previous post. Could you elaborate on what you are asking?

And what points brought up against me? The hypocrite one?

Not the hypocrite point. The fact that you have been asking questions and not following it up with much pointed out by farside22 and hitogoroshi. Looks like possible feigned scum-hunting/participation to me.

[semioldguy]

Why did you wait until now to comment on MMM's 105 post when farside made this accusation quite some time ago in d1?

Because I didn't notice it, or that the point had been made until just now.

Which questions have I not followed up on? I question things that are suspicious or off to me (or to get individuals to talk more so I can get a read on them). If it satisfies me, I move on. If it doesn't, I continue questioning and follow with a vote if necessary, or save it in my notes and keep my eye on that person.

I read their observation and agreed with it when looking back through the game. Many of your posts contain questions but many times they don't lead anywhere or I don't see the purpose in asking some of the questions you do. They seems to be for the purpose of simply asking a question rather than to analyze an answer.

I'm curious as to why I am more suspect versus farside whos posts I've found to be full of a lot of stuff I find rather distracting/unecessary. She comments on everyone but doesn't follow up much on them either and always winds up going back to tunneling on MMM.

I don't completely agree with your assessment of farside22. A lot is unnecessary, but that comes with tunneling which isn't specifically scummy, and I don't see her posts as being distracting. Posting things about everyone but not following up is not the same as asking questions and not following up. I don't see you two as doing that in the same way.

What are your thoughts about Confucius who is also tunneling on Mysterious Mystery Man and whose posts appear about as equally unnecessary to me as hers?

[semioldguy]

You missed my initial question. Out pf the questions I have asked, which ones give you this impression? Please show what posts or iso #'s these are.

I didn't miss your question, it just doesn't have the specific answer you are looking for. I'll start with ISO 4 through 7. You ask a string of questions while not really adding any content or interpretation of the answers you receive.

Ah...you misunderstood me. To clarify, I never regarded farside as scummy. I merely pointed out that her posts have a lot of unnecessary stuff in it which distracts me from getting a good read on her because reading through her posts become an exceedingly tedious task. Which may also serves for being a scum shield.

You made the distinction between the two but why is one more of a scum tell then the other? They indicate nothing in terms of alignment, merely two different styles of play.

Then you misunderstand me. It isn't your style of play that I primarily find suspect. It isn't what you are posting that I mostly find suspicious, it's what you aren't posting. A playstyle of asking questions is fine, but are you going to tell me that your playstyle is asking questions and not looking at the answers you get? Walk me through your thought process for a couple of those questions.

Going back up to your ISO 4 through 7, could you show and tell me what each answer you got to those questions told you about those players? What sort of potential answers would you have been expecting from town? From scum? What are you looking for in each of those questions?

When I look for scum, I don't look for actions. I look for plausible motivations. I am interested in the "why" behind the actions. Why do you ask the questions that you ask or what are you looking for in asking them? My perception is that a town player asks questions to gain information which she can analyze. That is the motivation: to ask questions to gain reads on players. I look at your questions and don't always see that as the most likely motivation behind asking the question.

[semioldguy]

Got my prod. Sorry for being MIA, will be catching up later today when I've got time.

[semioldguy]

... semioldguy purposefully tried to get away from taking a stance on evilsnail when I asked him a direct question about evilsnail.

No. I wanted evilsnail to partake in more posting to see whether a tell I was seeing could be given validity by potentially being repeated. I didn't want to mention such a tell and alert him to its presence.

Today, he is accusing me of “tunneling” on the sole fact that my second suspect (evilsnail) is not around for me to question. semioldguy’s posts look written to try to downplay my posts and therefore downplay my suspicions, and I think it is because my suspicions are dead-on.

So evilsnail isn't around for me to question either. You can't use this as both a point against me and a point to exonerate yourself.

I am trying to downplay your posts and suspicions because I think your posts and suspicions are poor. Not that this is not necessarily the same as your suspects being poor. Even someone who agrees with your suspects doesn't have to suspect them for the same reasons you do or even agree with any of your reasons for why you suspect someone.

semiolguy claims to have a top two suspicions, and yet he is not even voting right now. What are you afraid of? Why can't you put your vote where your mouth is?

I don't feel that a vote on evilsnail would be very useful at this point.

My posts are quite the opposite of “unnecessary,” and the fact that you are going to these lengths to paint my posts.

Hmm...

I am quite done responding to you on these subjects -- we have both said our piece. Our posts by this point are just rewording things we have already said, and they are taking up space. It is not my job to convince

you

that you are scum.

Sounds a lot like you think your posts are becoming unnecessary.

semioldguy, I also find it patently ridiculous how your top two suspects are my top two suspects (see Post 336), and yet my posts to you are "tunneling and unnecessary." If you think I am attacking

scum

, how are my posts unnecessary when I am covering a subject-ground that this town has somehow completely ignored up until this point? And how am I supposed to attack evilsnail at any length when he obviously is not here to respond?

My top two suspects are not your top two suspects. chauchaudotcom and evilsnail would currently make up my top two suspects. I don't think you are attacking scum. And again, are you going to use me not attacking evilsnail as a point against me but not against yourself? How am I supposed to attack him at any length when he obviously is not here to respond?

[semioldguy]

Yeah you implied you had reason's to suspect MMM but not for reason's others put forward. Which I also see to mean you had other reason's to suspect MMM.
What reason's do you have to suspect MMM?

Don't twist my words. I implied no such thing. The reason I found him slightly suspicious had been mentioned (though I didn't realize this at the time of my mentioning it), but most of what has been brought against him I disagree with.

The reason (singular) I found Mysterious Mystery Man to be slightly suspicious was because of his post 105. Go look at my ISO-20.

[semioldguy]

My questioning of Ythan and MMM were because they were both pushing false cases on people which is ultimately distracting town. As for questioning of gamer, it did lead to something. I vote him.

How did you determine them each to be false cases?

MMM - MMM was going off about the wagon and pushing a case for it. I was using questioning to point out how unlikely a quicklynch would occur during rvs.

This is the sort of reasoning for a question that I dislike. It looks like asking a question for the sake of asking a question. A statement would have done much better for the purpose you were asking the question.

MMM - Again, using questioning to point out that MMM is accusing people of things that aren't necessarily scummy.

Ditto.

I like the rest of your explanations and they make sense.

[semioldguy]

This post of yours makes it pretty clear that your top suspects were (i) evilsnail, (ii) Mysterious Mystery Man, and (iii) chauchaudotcom. It is fine if your top two suspects are

now

evilsnail and chauchaudotcom, but at the time you called my posts "unnecessary and tunneling" our top two stated suspects were exactly the same.

Again, suspects are not the same as reasons/suspicions. Even though I might have the same suspects as you I never agreed with your case on Mysterious Mystery Man. It was tunneling (an observation which isn't scummy to me, but isn't helpful either) and it had gotten to the point that your repeated posts were becoming unnecessary.

Just because we have the same top two suspects doesn't mean that your posts can't be unnecessary and/or tunneling. The two are not mutually inclusive.

[semioldguy]

semioldguy, you never mentioned Post 105 until Day Two when you commented on my initial post against Mysterious Mystery Man. Did Post 105 not strike you as scummy on Day One?

As mentioned already. I did not notice it previously.

Did Mysterious Mystery Man only become a suspect for you on Day Two? Exactly when did you find him scummy? If you found him scummy on Day One, why didn't you mention it or pursue it?

Yes, on day two. When I made that post.

What in my reasoning is "poor"? I have just read over Mysterious Mystery Man's Newbie game where he was nominated for a Scummie for his performance as scum, and his play in that game is matching the patterns of his play in this game practically perfectly.

Have you considered looking and analyzing games in which he is town? Or have you already done this? If/After you have done this, how does your read change or stay the same. When this is done I am more willing to accept a meta argument.

(If you want to make a case on meta, be complete about it and look at it from all angles)

This leads me to believe that you yourself did not remember your “reason” for finding Mysterious Mystery Man scummy, so you had to

isolate your own posts

just to find one. Why else would you happen to know (or bother to check) which post in isolation you were referring to?

It is easier/faster to find my post in ISO that it is to find the page and post number it is on. It isn't my fault that others ask me questions which already have an answer in the thread. An example would be the first question you ask up above. It already has an answer (ISO-25).

This makes me think that when you originally said you suspected Mysterious Mystery Man “but not for the reasons others have presented,” it makes me think you were just covering your bases. You were essentially agreeing that Mysterious Mystery Man could be scum (in case he got lynched), while at the same time you were saying all of the reasoning against him is bad (to deter his lynch).

I don't agree with most of the reasoning, which is why I was not on his case day one at all. The reasoning against him is bad simply because it is bad. The above contains a fair amount of speculation until Mysterious Mystery Man actually flips.

I am really thinking you were just using a throwaway “hedging” line there, and that you have since been forced to fill in the blank with a pretty weak reason that you had to search your own posts for to fill in.

This doesn't even make sense to me. What blank am I filling in that was ever blank?

[semioldguy]

Vote: chauchaudotcom

[semioldguy]

It's more that since chauchaudotcom is here and that evilsnail isn't it is easier to pressure and gets reads from her than from evilsnail. We also can't get a claim from someone who isn't here before lynching them.

@Mod: I am currently voting chauchuadotcom as of Post 420

The errors have been fixed.

@chauchaudotcom
Leading someone with questions is a way to make them come out looking bad, especially if you know where the answer to your question is leading. You can just as well get explanations about their throught process by commenting on something or simply asking "what was your thought process here?" rather than leading them.

[semioldguy]

a.)

I do not like semioldguy's page 5 vote for Ythan in Post 111.. His case was basically that “Ythan worked himself into a dead end” by pursuing RayFrost and supposedly not pursuing other people. This is a ridiculous reason to vote for somebody on page 5 of a game – semioldguy himself was not pursuing

anybody

, so why should he expect Ythan to be pursuing not one player, but two players? semioldguy was expecting something from Ythan that semioldguy himself was not providing. This is what logicians call a double standard.

I don't know how many people have to misinterpret this, but this was in no way my case. My point was that he set himself up into a dead end which gives him an excuse to not do anything. I was looking for him to do something that actually allowed involvement and interaction with other players. It wasn't about him pursuing multiple people.

Not only that, but semioldguy seems to be ignoring that when a player truly believes they have found likely scum (as Ythan believed he did), they are not about to start attacking a

second

player.

And then

semioldguy never moved his vote from Ythan (NickF227). It is fittingly ironic that semioldguy helped lynched Ythan on the basis that Ythan basically stuck to one suspect, and then semioldguy turned around and did the exact same thing.

Again, you don't even have my case against him right. If you want to make a point against something I do, at least represent me properly.

b.)

I do not like that semioldguy

today

suddenly thinks it is suspicious that Mysterious Mystery Man's Post 105 suggested that he knew BioHazard was town, but semioldguy somehow did not notice this until Day Two when farside22 made that

exact same point

in Post 135 and BioHazard repeated that point in Post 145.

As previously mentioned several times. I didn't notice it. If you think not noticing something is scummy, I can't refute that, but I'd like to know why you think it is scummy.

c.)

I don't like his suggestion that McGriddle was scummy when McGriddle replaced in and observed that ksun was obviously not tactically lurking because ksun was replaced for not posting. Players defend their predecessors all the time. This same comment also applies to chauchaudotcom.

I never said McGriddle was scummy or that defending a predecessor is scummy. I was looking for his reasons for doing something to determine motivation.

d.)

A good deal of your posts are just slightly disagreeing with people on theoretical reasons, whilst not really taking stands on people. These posts just make you look like you are a “reasonable player,” while you are not doing anything to actively help the town.

Could you provide some examples?

e.)

I have found it very strange how people have been attacking chauchaudotcom for asking so many questions without giving opinions when it feels to me like semioldguy has been doing that exact same thing. The only difference is that semioldguy also tosses in his theoretical disagreements (as noted above).

...examples?

f.)

I really do not like Post 350, which is why I FoS'd semioldguy in my very next post of the game.

What don't you like? Does not liking something equate with scummy to you? There are lots of things I don't like in games, but that doesn't mean they are scummy.

[semioldguy]

Here are the problems with your vote:

1.)

It was page 5 of the game. Ythan already believed he had found scum. He was voting for that scum, and then the mod told him he is not allowed to bring up his reasoning. Ythan had no reason to immediately unvote, nor did he have a duty to start attacking some other player.

Solution for Ythan: Keep attacking the same player from different angles until you have something from this game which can therefore be discussed. If he thinks he found scum, then sitting in the corner and not further pursing that player or anyone else doesn't do any good.

he could have done this. He didn't. He went down the exact same path again.

2.)

Ythan even asked you point blank – who did

you

suggest that Ythan look at if not RayFrost (Ythan's suspect). You did not give an answer. In fact, you never claimed that you really had suspects of your own. Instead, you simply voted for Ythan.

He could have gone after whoever he wanted, as long as it was for reasons that didn't break the site's rules.

3.)

It is ridiculously unlikely that Ythan purposefully wanted to keep himself in a position where could simply say “well, I'm not going to comment on anything else because I know who a scum is.”

Of course, Ythan

might

have done that. We don't know. At the very least, you should have seen

if

Ythan was going to try such a strategy, rather than voting for him

just in case

he tried to use that strategy. Ythan even said in-thread that he was looking at other people, but that he did not really have any other suspects by pages 5/6 of the game.

Seeing as

you

did not have any suspects besides Ythan by page 5/6 of the game, it is hard to see how you can fault Ythan for his vote on RayFrost.

After being told by the mod that the subject could not be discussed, his next couple posts continued on the same case, which he knew couldn't be discussed. He had already employed the strategy of sitting in the corner by refusing to drop the subject which he was not allowed to talk about. By making those posts he was avoiding making comments on anything else.

4.)

After you voted for Ythan, I feel that you did not really go after other players. I think you were just riding out your vote until deadline.

And here is the kicker: even after Ythan was replaced – in other words, when his replacement obviously could not use the “well, I have reasoning I can't share so I'm not going to scumhunt” –

you kept your vote on Ythan.

NickF227 was scummy in his own right for the time he had replaced in. I was looking at another player. McGriddle was the other suspect of mine. I questioned him. He danced around my questions and was uncooperative.

~

It is scummy that you missed Mysterious Mystery Man assuming BioHazard was town precisely because you have gone out of your way this game to mention how you have read the game, and you have also asked players at least twice if they have read

your

posts.

There is a difference between missing something, and making a false accusation on someone saying that they have done something that they haven't done. If they want to say that I've done something, they should be able to back it up by pointing to me actually having done what they claim I did.

As I said before, I am getting the feeling that you do not actually suspect Mysterious Mystery Man, but you are just saying that you do. You are trying to say the case on him is bad, but that you suspect him for "some other reason" that you just noticed on Day Two despite two other players making that exact point on Day One.

I don't heavily suspect him. I can't help having missed it. This still doesn't explain why my missing it is scummy.

For a player who gives the impression of being on top of the game and logical, I think this is the beginning of the chinks in your armor.

There is a difference between missing something and misrepresenting something, either of which could be intentional or unintentional. I have missed something and you are likening it to misrepresenting something. They are not the same thing.

[semioldguy]

@Fortune-cookie-sayeing-man
I'll have to check that in the morning, but I don't recall it having been his responses to everything that made him keep posting the same thing over again. If he did... well he alwyas has an option to post other things too.

You...like... weren't even here when that happened. Your perspective in that wouldn't even be the same as mine.

I don't even really like this game. I joined because I was killed off in several other games and there weren't any particularly exciting games to join in any of the queues so this seemed like the best setup of the available games like the lesser of evils to join at the time. But that's just how I felt about Ythan at the time. if you want to fault me for that... then I guess that's cool, but you don't seem to understand very well where I am coming from when I am made that case.

He coul hav contributed and asked questions that were about this game to me or Rayfrost or anyone,... but he didn't. He had the chance to... but he didn't and he refused to. Not like saying"hey I refuse to do this" but like the refuse to do this by just choosing not to do anything else when he clearly could have.

I was attacking him for reasons in this game and other people who have only one suspect have there suspect for things in this game... but not him. He had his suspect because of stuff happening in other games... like it even mattered to begin with.

Who do you think you are anyway!!?

We have a super nice mod who force replaced him instead of just offing the player slot... we got some extra information not just from that player slot but the day got to continue and everyone else got to keep weighing in on things... and then today we get a replacement finally and an extension on the deadline.

How lousy would it have been if the day ended now like it was originally going to? We'd have lynched evilsnail with no claim and no real info on that player slot's thoughts or what was going on there.

That's why I am going after chauchaudotcom. She is here and scummy and able to say things that we can look at. evilsnail wasn't like that and was like a consolation lynch which even if it hits scum wouldn't really tell us anything. I am fighting for more information and people who offer the game less information are bad.

[semioldguy]

I think it had more of a 'semioldguy is under the influence of copious amounts of alcohol' written all over it.

[semioldguy]

I am going to take your accusation of emotional involvement as a compliment.

[semioldguy]

@Confucius
I checked and I was correct. His was the first post after the mod's request to cease such conversation and that post was just continuing along the same lines and not trying to actually participate in this game.

[semioldguy]

Unvote; Vote: evilsnail

[semioldguy]

Semi: why are you voting for evil?

Deadline is tomorrow and evilsnail is my second choice.