Newbie 958 ~Game over!

[LordChronos]

remouk,

I just ISOed Shadow Dancer s well, and couldn't find a quote of him saying he had a town read on Early. He said he thought Earlder might have just been a newbie, but no explicit statement that he thought Earlder was town. Also, as I recall his case came up some time after he replaced in and in no way was only based off another game. It was also based off what Earlder said about being a little scummy being good and how that made no sense given the rewards Earlder got in his first game for being townie and not scummy.

So, where did you find a statement of a town read on Earl from SD?

@All

If Earlder flips scum, I think remouk could very well be his partner. Attacking SD with a case that is incredibly lame while defending Earlder suggests they could be scum buddies to me.

[Shadow Dancer]

Oh dear after a night of sleep I almost want to unvote Earl... I give you that: You know how to write a good appeal to emotion.

Still: major inconsistencies in playstyle stay major inconsistencies in playstyle. Objectively he is our best lynch.

@remouk: I like your play less and less. And other than you I have more than just "feelings" and can back up my suspicions without the need to twist or conceal facts.

Let's see in detail:
I.)

Since the begining, he explicitely said he had a town read on Earl,[...]

When did I say that? - OK, retorical question - of course I did not say that. I considered the possibility that he might be inexperienced town, based on his rather dumb behaviour and his claims of inexperience (which meanwhile turned out wrong for the most part). Still, if you really reread me you should have realized that I had a more or less latent suspicion on him - as most people, by the way.

What does this tell us about you:
- Either you are intentionally lying about what I said.
- Or you are lying about ISO reading me, making all that up from wrong memory with obvious intentions.
- Or you do not really care, do not read carefully and/or do not really follow the conversation.

Each of the three possibilities is pretty much scummy.
II.)

[...] but then, he suddently votes against him [...]

Please note this post of mine, where I (i) explicitely describe Earl as scummy and (ii) I officially announce that - and why - I was going to have a meta read on him.

Impression of you which one gets from this is pretty much the same as in I)

III.)

[...] with a case only based on another game.

Why

only

? Do you think meta reading or past game experience with other players is a illegitimate ground for suspicions for some reasons?

And no: My case on him case is based on

this

game, obviously. I only use that other game as a reference to point out why I think Earl is scum in

this game

.

IV.)

[...] and the fact that he has experience in the IRL game. I played a lot IRL at Werewolves (which is kinda the same thing as Mafia), and playing here is totally different, the forum changes everything.

I also have quite some RL experience in playing mafia and werewolf - with different setups and different kinds of people.
However, just answer me this question: Would you ever consider intentionally acting scummy/anti-townish and/or openly claiming that you are intentionally acting scummy/anti-townish consider pro-town play in eiter forum or meatworld mafia?

And no: Basically the forum only changes three (or four) things: I) You do not know most people you're playing with personally, Ia) can't look them in the face and II) have the possibility to reread and carefully revise every single one of your own and analyse other peoples posts (which

you

obviously do to a penally low amount). III) Is the obvious fact that games last much longer while being much more slow paced here.

V.)

Also, winning your first game doesn't mean your a good player

The fact that Earl

won

that game was one of the less impressive ones that I stated... I am tired of pointing out that you obviously do not care about the case against Earl or what people write in this threat...

VI.)

(I won my first game, and considering the suspicions I arise, I can defenitely say I'm not a good player...)

Another fact: Not only did Earl not arise much suspicion in that game but he was considered no. 1 target by both doc and mafia in N1, which is a sure indication of his pro town impression in that game. If you would have had a brief look at that game or just read the few facts I stated in my case post you would not compare apples and oranges right now.

VII.)

It looked like a weak reason to put him L-1

Why is bringing up a solid, backed up case against some one who was rather suspicious all the time, though for prior to that rather weak reasons, a weak reason to vote for some one?

VIII.)

@Shadow Dancer: I gave my opinion about Earlder1. I don't have a scum read on him. He did a few suspicious things but at this point, I don't see them as scum-tells.

Some questins:
- So how do you interpret Earl's behaviour?
- In your book - which relation is there between the words "suspicious" and "scummy"?
- What would you consider legitimate scum tells?
- What are the reasons (read: objective

reasons

, not just some obscure

feelings

) for your acquittal of Earl? Are they better researched than your case against me?!

Seriously: I have seldomly seen a post as short as yours peppered with so much more or less blatant scummyness. Time's ripe:

FoS remouk

I almost want to hope we've found 2 scum D1

[Shadow Dancer]

LC was first

[Incognito]

Yeah, I'm not seeing the case on Shadow Dancer at all.

Deadline's on Saturday, and no lynch is the worst thing we could do on a D1. And I've already made my feelings pretty clear about Earlder1.

vote: Earlder1

That puts him back at L-1. I recommend that we do wait for DTMaster to share his thoughts before anyone drops a hammer but if he doesn't get to do so in time, someone needs to hammer before deadline no matter what.

[remouk]

Sorry I meant "implicitely" when I said "explicitely"... And I guess I misunderstood the read Shadow Dancer had on Earl, here are the quotes:

I really did not like Earl openly admitting trying to seem scummy... But his explanation - as naive as believable as it was - gives me the feeling of an inexperienced player.

@ Earlder: OK, you're telling the truth (at least almost, you replaced out of a mini modded by Inco, right?). So I take you as inexperienced for now. Still - if you keep acting intentionally scummy one way or another I'd consider you at least a good choice for a D1 policy lynch, if no real suspect occurs...

That's where I understood you had a noob town read on him, while leaving the door open if he continues to play that way.

- Either you are intentionally lying about what I said.
- Or you are lying about ISO reading me, making all that up from wrong memory with obvious intentions.
- Or you do not really care, do not read carefully and/or do not really follow the conversation.

Each of the three possibilities is pretty much scummy.

Second one of course... Oh, or maybe I didn't lie and said what I understood in your posts?

II.)

[...] but then, he suddently votes against him [...]

Please note this post of mine, where I (i) explicitely describe Earl as scummy and (ii) I officially announce that - and why - I was going to have a meta read on him.

Impression of you which one gets from this is pretty much the same as in I)

It's still sudden to me: I thought you had a non-scum read on him, and then "I'd also put Earl rather in the scummy corner right now", before "metagaming" and voting.

III.)

[...] with a case only based on another game.

Why

only

? Do you think meta reading or past game experience with other players is a illegitimate ground for suspicions for some reasons?

And no: My case on him case is based on

this

game, obviously. I only use that other game as a reference to point out why I think Earl is scum in

this game

.

I'm sorry but when I read your case, I see a big part of it talking about what he did in his last game, and comparing it to what he's been doing here.

IV.)

[...] and the fact that he has experience in the IRL game. I played a lot IRL at Werewolves (which is kinda the same thing as Mafia), and playing here is totally different, the forum changes everything.

I also have quite some RL experience in playing mafia and werewolf - with different setups and different kinds of people.
However, just answer me this question: Would you ever consider intentionally acting scummy/anti-townish and/or openly claiming that you are intentionally acting scummy/anti-townish consider pro-town play in eiter forum or meatworld mafia?

He didn't say he was intentionally acting scummy, but that he was happy not looking "too town". That's a huge difference.

And no: Basically the forum only changes three (or four) things: I) You do not know most people you're playing with personally, Ia) can't look them in the face and II) have the possibility to reread and carefully revise every single one of your own and analyse other peoples posts (which

you

obviously do to a penally low amount). III) Is the obvious fact that games last much longer while being much more slow paced here.

Looks like you agree with me...

V.)

Also, winning your first game doesn't mean your a good player

The fact that Earl

won

that game was one of the less impressive ones that I stated... I am tired of pointing out that you obviously do not care about the case against Earl or what people write in this threat...

I was refering to "So I wonder: Where is all this brilliance in this game?", and the things that led you to this question.

VI.)

(I won my first game, and considering the suspicions I arise, I can defenitely say I'm not a good player...)

Another fact: Not only did Earl not arise much suspicion in that game but he was considered no. 1 target by both doc and mafia in N1, which is a sure indication of his pro town impression in that game. If you would have had a brief look at that game or just read the few facts I stated in my case post you would not compare apples and oranges right now.

You missed my point: I won my first game. But I can't say I'm a good player, because here, as a town, I arise suspicions.

VII.)

It looked like a weak reason to put him L-1

Why is bringing up a solid, backed up case against some one who was rather suspicious all the time, though for prior to that rather weak reasons, a weak reason to vote for some one?

VIII.)

@Shadow Dancer: I gave my opinion about Earlder1. I don't have a scum read on him. He did a few suspicious things but at this point, I don't see them as scum-tells.

Some questins:
- So how do you interpret Earl's behaviour?

I already said this: I don't have a strong scum read on him. That's why I don't hammer and try to find other leads.

- In your book - which relation is there between the words "suspicious" and "scummy"?

I said: "He did a few suspicious things but at this point, I don't see them as scum-tells". Meaning: "he did strange things but right now I can't say if it's scummy or nooby". Does that answer your question?

- What would you consider legitimate scum tells?

I'll tell you when I'll see one!

- What are the reasons (read: objective

reasons

, not just some obscure

feelings

) for your acquittal of Earl? Are they better researched than your case against me?!

I don't defend Earl. I just think he talked too casually ("look my avatar!", "I'm happy not to look too town"), that's not scum-tell to me.

I wonder if I better should have let it go and hammer him...

Anyway, my vote was also here to get reactions, and your reaction looks pretty agressive to me, so I'll leave my vote here for now.

P.S. In ~12h I'll be offline a few days, coming back sunday.

[DTMaster]

Status Update. I'm on Page 6. It's going to be a long post since I'm posting on a post by post basis commenting on the big things I see. It's a massive note pad with what I feel as I read through each post.

Since it's a little harder to read then most posts I'll make a summary at the bottom of my top scum lists which people who'd I prefer to lynch. I won't be making town lists, but they're pretty obvious from my analysis. I'll see what I can trim down to make it a little easier to read.

I also noticed Brian is V/LA again.

Mod can we get a 1 week extension. Just mainly so I can post my uber post without the fear of running a deadline. Also to make sure Brian can still play starting the 7th.

[Nikanor]

Vote Count 1.18

Earlder1 (4)

- LordChronos, Coach Travis, Shadow Dancer, Incognito

Shadow Dancer (2)

- brianj, remouk

Not Voting (3)

- smashbro_of_the_SSS, Earlder1, DTMaster

With nine players alive, five votes are required to lynch.

Deadline falls on Saturday June 5 at 17:14 UTC.

There will be no deadline extension.

[Earlder1]

@ Shadow Dancer

One last clarification:

I did not claim to look scummy on purpose. I commented that it's just not good to appear obvtown. I never state I purposely am acting scummy.

I am inexperienced. One game under my belt is all I have. Regardless of how well that game turned out or how long it was, I have only played here once. I think that can explain my defensive reaction because, as you should see from your meta, I was never under attack that game. Here, I was attacked, responded incorrectly, and have seemed scummy since. I am inexperienced. Do not try and refute that.

@Incog
I agree that we are very far from a different candidate for lynch with a deadline so close. If we have this extension however, please be more open minded toward other people.

About Remouk vs. ShadowDancer
I see logic in both sides, but errors as well. Shadowdancer should refer to above to find where I disagree with his statements. Remouk does makes the mistake of assuming SD's neutral read on me. He did not state that. I do think SD overreacts, however, to go as far to say he does not care about the game, is blatantly scummy, or is making thigns up. That seems overly defensive on SD's part. Remouk does hit a very correct point, however, that I was playing too casually. That is exactly right. I did think about posting my avatar quesstion before I did, and thought "is this a bad move?" but I figured it would be dismissed as early game banter. I was definitely playing too casually. I didn't expect this small thing to escalate into my lynch. That is a mistake by me, and the consequences fully make sense, it is just unfortunate.

Overall, I got a slightly more town read on Remouk for developing a case and then responding to SD'd case logically. I'm still questioning his play in general but this was a bit of hope that is town. SD's reaction seemed far too overzealous. This is an admittedly weak case and he just blew up because of it. Although mostly logical, a reaction this big was unwarranted. It reminds me of my reaction to brianj's vote because of my avatar talk. I overreacted and thus, appeared scummy. Likewise, SD appears a little more scummy to me now.

I do have to go now though. I will touch back later.

[Coach Travis]

I don't see how you could become more suspicious of Shadow Dancer just for making a big post to show why he feels Remouk's case was unfounded, and completely lazy. I read through what Remouk said, and didn't find anything that wasn't a stretch, and I agree with SD that he just seems to be lazy and not really putting much effort into his cases. He's my number 2 suspect right now, but at this point I think lynching Earl is still our best option. I'll be waiting for DTMaster's big post though, to see what he thinks, since he's replacing into a role I read as town.

[Shadow Dancer]

Yeah, WOT-wars continues...

@remouk:

[...] It's still sudden to me: I thought you had a non-scum read on him, and then "I'd also put Earl rather in the scummy corner right now", before "metagaming" and voting.

Let's put this straight: Before meta-ing Earl I considered him definitely clumsy noob.
However, I found out he has a lot more mafia experience than he let us know and is overall a really good and intelligent player, which pretty much nullifies that possibility. And yes: Sudden (or not even that sudden) changes in opinion

can

occur in a mafia game. IMO that's no scum tell, bad reasoning is.

[...] I'm sorry but when I read your case, I see a big part of it talking about what he did in his last game, and comparing it to what he's been doing here.

My reason for the vote is obviously what he did in

this

game so far. You have no point here. You also utterly ignore my questions.

He didn't say he was intentionally acting scummy, but that he was happy not looking "too town". That's a huge difference.

Yeah, you are right that were his very words.
Now tell me the difference between intentionally acting scummy and intentionally acting less townish. Both means you make it more likely scum hunting will be let astray and useless discussion will be created, thus both is likewise anti-town.
I think my exact word were "scummy/anti-town", by the way.

[...] Looks like you agree with me...

So? You also agree that acting intentionally anti-town is as bad in RL mafia as it is here?

V.)

Also, winning your first game doesn't mean your a good player

The fact that Earl

won

that game was one of the less impressive ones that I stated... I am tired of pointing out that you obviously do not care about the case against Earl or what people write in this threat...

I was refering to "So I wonder: Where is all this brilliance in this game?", and the things that led you to this question.[/quote]
So we are talking about the same thing. How comes that you do not know what that thing, the very object of our discussion, is? l2r!

You missed my point: I won my first game. But I can't say I'm a good player, because here, as a town, I arise suspicions.

And I know as a matter of fact that Earl is very well able to not play as clumsy as he did in this game (and my case against Earl is obviously based on Earl and not on

you

).

[...] - So how do you interpret Earl's behaviour?

I already said this: I don't have a strong scum read on him. That's why I don't hammer and try to find other leads.

You avoid my question.

- In your book - which relation is there between the words "suspicious" and "scummy"?

I said: "He did a few suspicious things but at this point, I don't see them as scum-tells". Meaning: "he did strange things but right now I can't say if it's scummy or nooby". Does that answer your question?

No, it awoids my qzúestion again. Instead you twist your own words. Now Earl's behaviour is suddenly just strange, no longer suspicious.

- What would you consider legitimate scum tells?

I'll tell you when I'll see one!

Abother question you do not want to answer... Pffff...

[...] I don't defend Earl. I just think he talked too casually ("look my avatar!", "I'm happy not to look too town"), that's not scum-tell to me.

And I do not mind his question about the Tuatara since he has a positive meta for it.

Hmm... And... Well... We still don't know what are scumtells to you...

I wonder if I better should have let it go and hammer him...

Are you doubting the legitimacy of your point here or are you just more concerned with your own appearance than with scum hunting?

Anyway, my vote was also here to get reactions, and your reaction looks pretty agressive to me, so I'll leave my vote here for now.

This is just me in hard core scum hunting mode. I know what I am doing, Do you?
And can I evidently assume that agression is a scum tell for you?
Also: Do not underestimate my sense of staginess!

@Earl: I loved hard about your last post. I just hope you really turn out scum because else I'd have really overestimated you. LOL

@ Shadow Dancer

One last clarification:

I did not claim to look scummy on purpose. I commented that it's just not good to appear obvtown. I never state I purposely am acting scummy.

OK, I give you that. We could play around with words for ever here. However, you said yourself that your play was poor.

I am inexperienced. One game under my belt is all I have. Regardless of how well that game turned out or how long it was, I have only played here once. I think that can explain my defensive reaction because, as you should see from your meta, I was never under attack that game. Here, I was attacked, responded incorrectly, and have seemed scummy since. I am inexperienced. Do not try and refute that.

So your RL mafia expereince doesn't count?
At least you handle all the framing attempts and other attempts by scum to mislead town in that game more than well.

Also you contradict yourself. First you claim your poor play was because of the experiences in newbie 919, now you claim it was just a bad reaction to pressure in this game. As I see it pressure in this game made your play better, at least on the surface...

And yeah, your Tuatara was nevr much of an issue for me and is not right now, I think I already stated that some times.

About Remouk vs. ShadowDancer
I see logic in both sides, but errors as well.

Were are my errors? And were the hack is rem's logic

Remouk does makes the mistake of assuming SD's neutral read on me. He did not state that.

Sense of this? If anything he assumes - wrongly - that I ever had a clear town read on you.
Also: How do you know what rem "assumed" if he does not state it?

I do think SD overreacts, however, to go as far to say he does not care about the game, is blatantly scummy, or is making thigns up. That seems overly defensive on SD's part.

Others agree with me, however.
Also I am not defensive here, if anything I am on an attack. I totally disassemble renouks post and his hollow reasoning and hand it back to him as the piese of junk it's been from the very beginning.

[...] I didn't expect this small thing to escalate into my lynch. That is a mistake by me, and the consequences fully make sense, it is just unfortunate.

The Tuatara is at least not my reason to lynch you. It is also no one else's as far as I can tell right now...

Overall, I got a slightly more town read on Remouk for developing a case and then responding to SD'd case logically.

Sorry, but this is just totally ridiculous. His case is as inexistent as his logic, IMO.

I'm still questioning his play in general but this was a bit of hope that is town.

Damn if that's true we're all doomed to die...

SD's reaction seemed far too overzealous. This is an admittedly weak case and he just blew up because of it. Although mostly logical, a reaction this big was unwarranted. It reminds me of my reaction to brianj's vote because of my avatar talk. I overreacted and thus, appeared scummy. Likewise, SD appears a little more scummy to me now.

You seem to not understand both my case against you and my case against rem.
I think, I know, my case against rem is really strong right now. I would even switch my vote to rem, if we can find a majority for the lynch.

Final question to Earl: What do you think of rem's behaviour? And why don't you consider it scummy?

Fixed quote tags 'cuz I'm bored. ~Nik.

[Shadow Dancer]

lol.... "I loved hard"= "I laughed hard", obvously

[remouk]

@Shadow Dancer: I don't have the time right now to make a proper answer to your post, but I really don't like the way you ignore my points or make them look stupid when they are legit...

See you sunday!

[LordChronos]

@remouk

That is the point though, many of them aren't legit. Also, I would like to see you answer the question about what you would consider to be a scum tell instead of dodging around the question.

[Shadow Dancer]

It's really interesting how remouk plays world upside down.

I do not want to make your points look stupid, I just point out the inconsistencies in you explanations.

Also It is not

me

ignoring

your

points.
Could it be that you take all this much too personnally?

[Incognito]

Earlder1, the mod's already said he's not granting a deadline extension, so I'm pretty certain that there's no way to shift a wagon right now:

There will be no deadline extension.

I have not read the most recent wall posts on this page and probably won't until after I see an Earlder1 flip. Our deadline's in less than 24 hours though, guys, so whoever has the power to do so right now NEEDS to hammer in his next post.

[DTMaster]

My Stream of consciousness post.

Lordchrono - 18 Insane Buddying to Incognito. Wooooo! I dislike this already.

Theory fluff in between.

Incognito 45 - Ew. No this isn't going as planned. Scum is coasting right now. Granted it's page 2 but with theory discussions going left and right,
this isn't correct scum hunting. A break down of the discussion is on the pros and cons on how to handle the RVS/RQS stage. The only person as of this read
that's actually doing direct scum hunting on a person is Chronos attacking Coach for his discrepency.

The fact that you're instigating more discussiong about the RVS stage reads as giant smoke screens. You can't scum hunt specific people like that if you're
only asking theory questions.

I actually agree with ThatTumblweed when it comes to completely random votes - in my experience, I haven't seen any clear delineation that says that scum are more likely to completely random vote than town or vice versa, so I too would consider it more a null tell. In the games you've played, have you seen a stronger tendency for scum to RNG vote than town?

With posts like that, it makes me question the motive to why is it impartive for you to understand Tumbleweed's theory on RVS

if from experience you already know that RVS generally is null, and should be used to add pressure to see how people behave under pressure

This is supported by the fact that you're questioning remouk for his reads here, but you're not giving any of your reads here. For an IC of your level, I'd expect some form of leadership being taken in the scum hunting effort. It's a good idea that when you ask a question of such a nature, you supply your own reads with that post.

Earlder1 - 55 with posts like that I predict you become the leading wagon. With reactions as sharp as that you do realize that people are trying to find out who's scum. I don't like the direct line of attack here on tumble/brian, but that could be attributed from lack of experience.

Alta - 57 This just reads as classic newb argument. Newb townie.

Coach Travis 59 - Oww an active lurker attack from 2 days in. Nice, job. Completely ignore the fact that people have lives outside of the game, and people live in diffrent parts of the world.

Lordchrono 60 - didn't reread the post on where Alta voted. hmm. at this moment I'd totally investigate you.

Incog 63 - Translation: You have a "secret reason" yay! I love secret reasons. I love to see pressure votes being applied.

vote: ThatTumblweed

Incog Theory. Seriously.

p.s. I think brianj is :goodvoting: and we rather need a bandwagon anyway.

unvote, vote: Earlder1

Also stop adding words to a neutral read. You're making remouk fancy with a neutral leaning townie read, that could easily flip to a newb scum read. You're stroking Tumbl's ego, which I don't like. If someone is a neutral read, I'd expect you to follow up on that person. Maybe I'm a bit too harsh since it's a newbie game, but in normal games people go out and scum hunt on their own.

Edit: I saw your reasoning. Ew. I'd expect a vote and reaction phase. I don't expect people who suddendly agree with you get the Incognito grace of simply agreeing with you. In fact if people suddenly jumped behind your vote without reasons, I'd be more suspect of those players because it sounds like they're classic newb hiding under the radar of the experienced player. It's called buddying, and scum can do that. Like ZOMG: they can support a townie, to cause a townie on townie fight and defend another townie, to ultimately win in the end by escaping scrutinney. Scum points for your reasoning. Your vote in itself isn't scummy. The after reason for it is.

Coach Travis, I sometimes don't provide reasoning for my votes to try and

see who might be thinking along the same lines as me when I place an unexplained vote. I figure that if a person can see what I see when I didn't even have to explain it, there's a decent chance that the person who has seen what I've also seen is likely thinking along the same lines I am and could potentially be pro-town.

I wouldn't realistically leave an unexplained vote on a person up until the point that the person gets lynched, but I do think it's a good initial indicator.

Edit 2: If you were explaining yourself, why didn't you A use this reason in 101? V.V. The above quote looks horrible. The next quote would have been awesome and if you'd caught scum like that I'd be awesome.

The point of my vote wasn't to change anyone's minds about anyone at that point - it was to obtain reactions from both the person I voted, and the other people in the game. Votes can serve multiple purposes; they don't necessarily only have to be used to push someone towards a lynch - they can also be used to apply pressure to people or gauge reactions from the player being voted or the other people in the game. There are probably other purposes for votes that I can't really think of right now. Also, in that very post you quoted me from, I pretty clearly explained why I voted Earlder1 in the first place - what did you think of my explanation?

That and: being ambigious to continue the whole reaction fishing would be awesome.

Coach 66 - Hmm, with logic like that votes on people = scummy because it's "too dangerous. You have been brought to shooting level. If you must realize, if a quick lynch happened, we know the scum was on the wagon. Town wouldn't be dumb to run people down to death (I'd hope) and scum would have outted themselves in that speed lynch. Learn to read behind the motives. With attacks like this post, you stall the game because you contribute voting on people for reactions as scummy. Now that's scummy.

Incog 67 - Now I like this post because it provides two things: a definate stance on a person and reasons to back it up.

Zomg. Leach 68. It's like you read my mind! Except it's mainly theory, and 1 neutral read. Booooooo.

Incog 73 - Ew. You let this go. Wut? Scummmy.

Brian 76 - Now this is what I'm talking about. Except the weird contradiction between Alta and Rem is weird. In the top half of this post:

I can somewhat see ThatTumbleweed's reasoning behind his vote; lurking scum and indecisive townie can be really indistinguishable when they had not made any choice or statement decisive to the game. This is exactly why I am surprised some seem to be against bandwagoning in RVS- it forces all player to make critical decision, and since day one is the period of the game where mislynch is most likely to occur due to lack of information there is not much to lose. However let me point out Alta is equally guilty of all the charges ThatTumbleweed is laying upon remouk? He hasn't expressed that much opinion and views, and his defense of remouk is also sounds somewhat neutral to me. He isn't necessarily scummy, but input would be appreciated
. Alta, who do you think is the most scummy player currently, and why him over others?

However, remouk, your post are completely devoid of game content. At least alta has decided to take lukewarm stance against ThatTumbleweed's vote- all you said is that you don't know anything. Let me tell you that active lurking is generally seen as much more scummy than lurking itself. Even if you are cluelss, fortunately there is plenty of discussion going on for you to talk about. What do you think about Earlder1's avatar question? Do you agree with Coach Travis's opinion of Incognito?

I don't see how at the top, you equate Alta on the same level as rem in being indecisive. But at the same time say that he has a stance after all in regards to tumbleweed's vote. It's pretty awlful. It also reads as if you're being more critical about tumble's vote over progressing the case on Alta. Aside from that little issue, I like this post over all.

Earl - 78 - Oh. That's some serious backwards logic here. Especially since in that game you got doc saved which blocked the kill from scum. You're justifying the fact that you're playing poorer when your abilities are much better. Upgrading to lynch list.

80 - V.V. Ew. I'd rather have obv townies then neutral reads a plenty k thanks bye.

Chrono 82 - Ew he backed off. Ew. Ew. Ew. Ew. Ew. Ew. This gives me gut reads on: scum who want to avoid direct confrentation. I'd totally investigate this guy now.

Incog 83 - So Chrono is neutral because his case on Alta wasn't correct? And Alta never really voiced critism on remouk? And you didn't get a good read until his vote on Earl? Wait. WHHHHAAAT?

Shouldn't the question be: What do you think of Chrono based on his attack and recoil on Earl? I'm shocked good sir you missed this. Plus the way you trail on doesn't really connect the dots from Chrono -> Alta -> Rem back to Chrono -> Earl. Chrono -> Earl action generated enough information for a read, but it's still a "neutral read". Upgrading to lynch list. I dislike this post. Very, very, very, much so.

I agree with the statement on Earl though. Except the fact that "he should die at somepoint". No one wants to die. Rather there are only two reasons one person should care about night. 1. If they are scum. 2. If they have a power role. If you are just a VT, you shouldn't care because you have no control over it. In fact it'll be preferred if you soak up the kills rather then the doctor/cop if we have them. Cops are broken. We can play follow the cop and break the game on a good day.

Lord Chrono 84 - Hm every time I reread Alta and this argument, I see your side. Especially at the point where Alta says: there's no real reason to go after rem. Well it's early game, and we should start somewhere. Upgrading Alta to investigation level.

Incog 85 - Because no one here is asking the hard hitting questions. Duhhhh.I'll attribute it to newbieness, since that comes with experience.

Earl 87 - This reads as obvious bread crumb to be PR. ><;;. Please, oh please don't be the PR player who decides to be scummy enough to fly under the radar, yet scummy enough to hurt the town during the day. The only other reason that this could be is: you're really, really, really, really, really bad and/or is scum. Proabably scum. If I could kill you right now, I'd do it on this post alone to move the day forward from this.

Alta 90 - You know with sudden personality changes like that, I'd totally kill you for that. Nice change from: not enough info to he's totally scummy. If Earl wasn't scum, I'd link Alta and Rem has bussing partners. Shoot/lynch list on either or.

93 - Ur... wut?

Earl 95 - Every time you post and it's not your awesome case makes me want to lynch you. Since I replaced tumbleweed I would have L-1ed you totally for that post.

Incog 96 - Someone is scummy, and doesn't need to be pushed by the person presenting this argument? WUT?

Rem 99 - Hmm I like his point about Earl. He's priortizing what's scummy and not in that argument. Town vibe.

Alta stroked his ego though, didn't think about the total buddying argument. Down grading Rem.

Ewwww. Ewww. Incog you're working your magic. Brian 103 - Of course pressure voting isn't scummy. It's reaction scum hunting. But see my point on Incog 63 with Edit 1.

Incog 105 - Now I'm confused, which is why you're on the investigation list. This post screams townie townie townie townie townie.

Chrono 110 - Usless question that was answered in 109. Hmmm.

Incog 116 - Yay that calls for an MS utility search. Also his response on Rem is pro-town. He's looking behind the layers of rem's scum hunting. Though if I'd investigate Incog and he turns up scum, I'd link the two as scum buddies who are distancing.

120 - I was under the same impression. Maybe it's the way that Alta posts this. I think you were under the same impression here. Why are you so hard on CT if you did the above in Incog 96, but you see the reasoning behind Alta's mood swing.

LC 121 - Scummah! Like hella scummah! Why don't you form your own opinions rather then make Incog do the work for you. I'd totaly shoot you for that post alone.

Earl 122 - Hmmmm. I get town vibes from this post. His point on CT seems like he's trying to figure out motives (ie seeing the CT is trying to improve is game play despite the former of defence over attacking as weak play/scummy play) and his Rem also reflects that. I'd prefer this post over your earlier play. This is what I'd like to see.

Brian 125 - I really really really like this post.

Earl 132 - Ew. I don't like this post. It reads as: One of Incog or Rem must be scum in that scruffle. Brian's post on both can be legitmate, where both sides are valid. But both sides could be town. Just because someone posts a case on someone else doesn't mean they're right. >>;; I dislike this.

Also I dislike how you're crtisising Brian about his Rem point when yours mirrors his. Ew ew ew ew. Scummah.

Shadow - 140 Note to self, if Earl flips scum. Look here.

Incog 146 - I thought I went over this. Aren't you as guilty as leech right now? V.V. In regards to contrasting Leech's post to yours. You're lying about your town reads. You're giving neutral reads. You say "hints of townieness". But if someone just has a dash of towniness, you can flop backwards and say: oh I was wrong he's actually scum. My read wasn't that strong anyways. It's a good backdoor exit for scum when providing reads in thread. I also dislike that you didn't question Chrono's question.

147 - Hmmmm. You've been pretty passive this game. Sorry but I'd like my ICs to lead by example. I don't like this sudden personality change. Other then that, I agree with the logic behind this post.

Everyone on the leech case - I'm a bit shocked right now because did anyone bother to use the MS utility search?

I'll use this as a refrence point Tue May 25, 2010. I went and looked at Leech's posts and we was Absent from the 17th to the 23rd. Hmm a 6 day absense from the site. Sorry guys but I think this guy has been busy. Then he had another 5 day absense from the 23rd to the 28th. He also replaced out of other games. Interesting. As much as I like to explore the non contributers you guys should really do your research and determine the scummy lurkers, or the people who were actually gone from the site. I had issues of leech's posts the moment he made it. But I feel that people are going to question his inactivity.

@Anyone reading this thread.
My experience, the usefulness of bandwagoning is to see how people behave under pressure. You want to determine in the defence posts that follow if the person is legtimately trying to scum hunt. Everyone wants to avoid being lynched. But scum particuallaly lose their cool easier under pressure. Signs come from experience with games where you learn to read what is posted, and then try to understand from the person's shoes, why would he make such a statement.


This is a newbie game. But I'll break it down to three catagories.

People I could shoot this instant.
Alta/Shadow , Earl, Chronos.

People who'd I'd like to lynch.
Alta/Shadow

People who'd I'd investigate.
Incog

The middle is the cream of the crop in terms of scuminess. The first is scummy and anti town mixed together.
People who'd I like to lynch are automatically on the people who'd I like to shoot list. People who'd I like
to shoot aren't necessarily on the who'd I like to lynch. People who'd I investigate, would be people
that appear townie, but I have gut reads that bother me. I made this list after playing many normal games with the Vig role, but we don't need to worry about
advanced roles like that in this game.

@Off topic questions
Brian: Are you in the military or something. Your V/LA messages sound like it.

DONT VOTE I'M NOT DONE YET THIS IS PART 1. I JUST WANTED TO POST IT SO YOU GUYS CAN START READING AND DO IMMEDIATE RESPONSES

4 pages left.

[DTMaster]

EDIT: Sorry I'd just realized my point on Leech was half invalid because at the time of the posts, you didn't see this. However the first absence was still occurring during these posts so.... yay! Hind sight is better.

[Nikanor]

Vote Count 1.19

Earlder1 (4)

- LordChronos, Coach Travis, Shadow Dancer, Incognito

Shadow Dancer (2)

- brianj, remouk

Not Voting (3)

- smashbro_of_the_SSS, Earlder1, DTMaster

With nine players alive, five votes are required to lynch.

Deadline falls on Saturday June 5 at 17:14 UTC.

[DTMaster]

Unfortunately I've reached the end limit before I have work. I won't be able to finish this analysis: So I'll post the rest of what I have done and hammer. :<

CT and Earl get scummy points who join late on the leech wagon, but doesn't actually do anything about it. The "i'm suspicious of him" after the gaining support of this wagon is poor.

Shadow Dancer - 152 No I like activity votes and pushing votes. You're vote is more scum hunting then CT and Earl regards to the Leech Case.

154 - Ur you fail at research sir. Leech as scum would have no motive to flake out intentionally. Especially when he entered the game in the leading townie scale from quite a few players. Leech as busy person does make sense if anyone bothered to MS utilitied search him. Why did Incog bother to link it if you won't check to make sure if Leech isn't in other games posting. See Part 1. Townie points from the previous points, lost.

CT 155 - But the RVS is over and the RQS is over. In fact we are discussing. Do you have an aversion from playing the mid game? These posts appear like that. Let me set a goal for you. Reread this thread. Formulate an opinion on people. Don't be wishy washy. Make a judgement call on them.

Incog 156 - Metagaming is ok. But this meta arguments were from

diffrent people

. Now if Shadow played a game with Leech who flaked out as scum, that's quite diffrent. But if you are saying that Leech behaves like Thesp in this game, well earth to people: Leech =/thesp in terms of players. They are diffrent people. Using meta to explain a concept is ok, and fine from Shadow's argument. That was the point. But this doesn't become a meta gaming argument. It evolves beyond that into: This guy is scummy for XYZ reasons as I seen in ABC games.

Earl 158 - Netural read = no read. It means you don't have a stance on someone. This is a failed definition argument. "face palm"

Coach Travis 159 - This is a Parrot/Echo/Repeat of the last 6 pages of your posts. Wooooooo. I'd totally shoot you because you're not putting an ounce of scum hunting in this post. You're repeating the same thing over and over. I'd so turn up the heat on your ass right now.

Shadow Dance 165 - I had to reread this a few times because on the surface I liked this post. But I noticed on how you recoiled with this little bit in this post:

@LC: I do not want to run a lynch all lurkers policy. That would basically also qualify as policy lynching, by the way.
However, voting some one and lynching some one are two different things. Besides lynching votes also help putting pressure on a player. That is by far the more important function of votes, especially on D1.
If I saw a promissing scum candidate I'd immediatelly change my vote on that one.

Right now I'd best like Leech replaced...

Initially it works well with your first vote on leech here: which the logic flows through.

Activity back to zero, eh?

unvote. vote Leech

My way of prodding people. His last post is nine days ago (I do not count his lame prod pickup).

I might change my vote if I find something else while ISO reading.

@Nikanor: Please Prod or replace Leech

But this post

My impression of LC is basically the same I had in Greek Mythology - apart from being more helpful on a meta level, which is normal for an SE player in noob game - doesn't necessarily mean he's town, though... His signature indicates he is quite a successful scum player...

I fully understand Remouk's feeling about Inco, but I think he is over focusing a bit lately, which I find strange since he also repeatedly points out that he has no clue who might be scum. He should spread out his antennae further, I think,
@Rem: What are your feelings about other players? Who else is suspect? Whom do you find rather townish? (I think there are quite some more directions you could think into if you are stuck in the game, that keep you off fatal one way streets).

I get townie vibes from CT, but I am quite irritated by him a)saying RQS>RVS and b)opening up the game with a random vote and not asking any questions for quite a while. Halfhearted scum hunting attempt by actual scum? I think some one else also pointed out this issue, but CT did not address it so far.

I think that's all for now. Or have I forgotten anybody?

I also just realized that Leech is no noob but official SE in this game. That makes his SE unworthy lurking/flaking out really suspicious, of course.

Vote confirmed

makes me see a spike where you swung in the aggressive attack range. I like it. Except the back and forth swing between: you should replace/pressure activity out of Leech to Leech actually scummy for flaking is off to me. It's something really subtle. Or I could be over paranoid because on it's own its ok.

167 - Earl Wooo that's subpar but its ok. There is a definite stance on SD there.

168 - CT now this is scummy because when you read it: it sounds like CT is contributing to the game. Yay! But when you read it right after Earl's post, you'd realize he just reposted 167. Booo. I don't like this post because it's totally, totally contrary to your play:

You're more reactionary. Ok. But I see glimpses where you're trying to take an offense. Ok. But when I see this post, all I think of is you're scum who's focusing on what's happening now rather then actually scum hunting. It's like flying under the radar with the current thoughts, without actually contributing to anything. Woo!

I don't expect big changes over 3 pages so this is sufficient for now.

Vote Earlder1

Fixed quote tags. ~Nik

[Nikanor]

Day One Final Vote Count

Earlder1 (5)

- LordChronos, Coach Travis, Shadow Dancer, Incognito, DTMaster

Shadow Dancer (2)

- brianj, remouk

Not Voting (2)

- smashbro_of_the_SSS, Earlder1

With nine players alive, five votes are required to lynch.

Deadline falls on Saturday June 5 at 17:14 UTC.

----------

Earlder1:

Guys, I think we should eat some cake. You know, for Greg.

LordChronos:

Are you out of your mind? You iguanas. All you care about is eating!

Earlder1:

That's not true. I just don't want to scumhunt on an empty stomach. And I'd appreciate if you didn't bring my iguananess into question.

LordChronos:

So you admit that you're an iguana.

Earlder1:

I didn't say that! I'm not an iguana, I'm a [REDACTED]!

LordChronos:

Sure you are.

The rest of the party goes to hang Earlder1 from the ceiling fan. It turns out he

was

an iguana, and an innocent talking iguana at that.

Earlder1

-

Vanilla Townie

- Lynched day one.

It is now night one. Deadline falls on Sunday June 6 at 19:03 UTC.

[Nikanor]

When you wake up, you smell something burning. Afraid that the whole house is going to burn down, you run into the kitchen to see what is causing the smell.
It's DTMaster's head! It's lit up like a giant birthday candle. I think that means he's dead and I can -

DTMaster:

I'm not dead yet!

Quickly, the flame consumes DTMaster's entire body so that nothing is left but a pile of ash. Then he apologizes to the mod for interrupting.
As I was saying, I think that means he's dead and I can reveal his role.

DTMaster

-

Vanilla Townie

-

Killed night one.

----------

Vote Count 2.0

Not Voting (7)

- remouk, Coach Travis, Shadow Dancer, brianj, LordChronos, smashbro_of_the_SSS, Incognito

With seven players alive, four votes are required to lynch.

Deadline falls on Sunday June 27 at 19:51 UTC.

[DTMaster]

Boooooooo.

[brianj]

Well, lot seems to have happened while I was gone. First silent respect to DTMaster for his splendid analysis before damned scums silenced him. He brought out many valid points

which I expect everyone to respond to.

I will be sad if people ignored his points just because he died. Here is my take on remouk-Shadow Dancer conflict.

#

remouk

What I notice about his play is that he tends to iso all of his post/attention toward single player he find most suspect. I can literally summarize his entire thought process like so: clueless -> Incognito -> Shadow Dancer. His use of Minimalist Approach itself is not particularly that scummy since he is apparently quite busy (#Remouk 5, #remouk 10), but I will have to increase my suspicion level if he persists on giving minimal analysis about rest of the players since his recent WoT seem to suggest that remouk now has enough time to do the basic read-through on all other players (specifically analysis about Coach Travis, LordChronos, smashbro_of_the_SSS, and me).

#214 I am uncomfortable with this; he seems to suggest that his vote against Incognito was purely done to "see the reactions" which too conveniently corresponds with his prior posts ("of course my vote is weak", "Am I the only one to think that way?"). The problem is that remouk's attack against Incognito was not grounded on any scummy argument IC had made, but simply on the statement 'unexplained voting is bad'. I cannot see how discussion following it will NOT collapse into meaningless theory-talk. Also by admitting he was making weak pressure/reaction hunting vote, his position on Incognito once again becomes ambigious.

remouk, so what is your opinion on Incognito now?

It's his saving grace he definitely made his position clear on Shadow Dancer b/c otherwise he would not have made any analysis at all- which at this point of the game is definitely anti-town play. Hypotheticals aside, although I do not necessarily agree with remouk's analysis on Shadow Dancer, I also do not see why remouk when day is about to end would suddenly start an shitstorm and be an active participant in it. I will see how remouk-Shadow Dancer situation develops before making firm judgement about him.

VERDICT:

Neutral

#

Alta/Shadow Dancer

You can read my opinion on Alta and how Shadow Dancer is trying too hard to distance himself from his replacement right here. The fact that he seemingly glossed me over (#165 and #166) as "beutral" and stopped talking about me at all despite the fact that I proposed major fos against his predecessor does not help improve my impression against him at all.

I see the same slow build-up of suspicion Shadow Dancer is having toward Earlder1 ("But his explanation - as naive as believable as it was - gives me the feeling of an inexperienced player." -> "I'd consider you at least a good choice for a D1 policy lynch, if no real suspect occurs... " -> "Who says all he's claiming is not just a gambit to cover his later real scum behaviour." -> "I'd also put Earl rather in the scummy corner right now. " -> "I think I have found bigger fish to fry - in Earl."), and pressuring Coach Travis to vote while discussing about Earlder1 as sneaky way to push his bandwagon further.

But mostly I really do not like Shadow Dancer's reaction against remouk in #226. What in the world happened for you to over-react so? remouk's case might have been poorly supported, but his main point ("meta-game itself is not enough for one to put other player in L-1") is still pretty viable. What I find most suspicious about his post is that Shadow Dancer immediately works on undermining remouk's credibility.

What does this tell us about you:
- Either you are intentionally lying about what I said.
- Or you are lying about ISO reading me, making all that up from wrong memory with obvious intentions.
- Or you do not really care, do not read carefully and/or do not really follow the conversation.

Each of the three possibilities is pretty much scummy.

This is False dilemma. Note at Shadow Dancer's opening post he said "No one screwed up so far, it seems to me, unusual for a newbie game", complaining somewhere he played with "vanilla townies fake claim cop and fake claim guilty investigation results on another townie"? Oh yeah, I really like how he automatically fos remouk for his statement and propose three scummy justifications for it while it could simply have been misunderstanding.

Oh, and I love "Could it be that you take all this much too personnally?" in #238. This is all after Shadow Dancer wrote:

I am tired of pointing out that you obviously do not care about the case against Earl or what people write in this [thread]...

If you would have had a brief look at that game or just read the few facts I stated in my case post you would not compare apples and oranges right now.

What are the reasons (read: objective

reasons

, not just some obscure

feelings

) for your acquittal of Earl? Are they better researched than your case against me

?!

Seriously: I have seldomly seen a post as short as yours peppered with so much more or less blatant scummyness.
...
I almost want to hope we've found 2 scum D1

+ All other thinly veiled sarcasm.

Another major weakness I found against Shadow Dancer's argument is that Earlder1's current playstyle is different from his past one, as he himself admitted. The argument that "Earlder1 is mafia because he is suspicious in this game unlike that other game" is not really valid.

I also like DTMaster's point about how Shadow Dancer asked the mod to replace Leech (#152), suddenly become agressive all over clearly afk player (#154) only to revert back to his position thereafter (#165). It just feels unnatural to me and seems like it was forced so that it leaves Town with impression of him being as active scum-hunter.

VERDICT:

Still Scummy

I will do my reading on rest of the players at another time.

[brianj]

Okay, quickly throwing in one more read since he has low amount of posts to read about.

#

Leech

/smashbro_of_the_SSS

Leech

is essentially null-read right now since he is confirmed afk. I might as well be better off just crossing Leech off from "Leech/smashbro_of_the_SSS" right now.

#smashbro 2
Alright; you have two suspects you wish to go over. You find Alta suspicious because he is a lurker, okay, and then Shadow Dancer comes in and... and? I cannout understand the point "I was curious as to why he did the dice roll and probably random voted from it, and then goes to place a real vote on an inactive player. It seems like he may be avoiding getting blood on his hands from a vote".

Can you explain this argument further please?

I know you still find Alta/Shadow Dancer highly suspect (#smashbro 5 "I have no clear top suspect, though Shadow Dancer / Alta is high on my list.") but you never clearly broke down how he specifically warranted your suspicion.

Your case against Lord Chronos seem decent, not bad for day 1 fos. Then when LordChronos replies right after, smashbro immediately withdraws. What? So it was pressure vote? How do you feel about Lord Chronos right now? I mean, he does fos

Shadow Dancer / Alta, Lord Chronos, and remouk

in his fifth post, but I am quite uncomfortable about how wishy-washy he is being about this. It gives him enough freedom to jump arond bandwagon between any three players to over-committing himself unnecessarily. There isn't that much post from him in order for me to judge his alignment right now, but I hope to see more opinions/arguments coming from him soon.

VERDICT:

Neutral

[Incognito]

I need to do a reread including reading through the large posts DTMaster made before he died. Never got a chance to read through them, and I'm curious as to why the scum chose to NK him.