Newbie 958 ~Game over!

[Coach Travis]

Yeah, I need to take another look at those posts as well, see if I missed something. Either way, I think a huge information overload like that from a townie, may be reason enough, because it shows he was clearly putting in a lot of effort to catch them. That, and because of Tumblweed, I think people generally considered him town, so lynching him would have been highly unlikely. But I will go back and read his posts more thoroughly now. Sucks that we lost him so soon.

On the Remouk/Shadow Dancer thing, I'm not quite sure what to think now, because I agree with SD about Remouk being a bad player, and SD is clearly a good player, but bad playing isn't a guaranteed scum tell, and a good player can just be really good at being scummy, so I'll look into him as well, see if I find anything suspicious.

[brianj]

#

LordChronos

#18: DTMaster pointed this out as "insane buddying", but I am reluctant to classify it as so because his support of Incog forced me to respond to his question- which I thought was good way to kick off beginning discussion. However this is not the only case he makes subtle statements that could be perceived as buddying:

Fair enough. I read your statement a little more strongly than you worded it.

I have to agree with Incog on the voting without giving reasons.

Totally agree with you about Leech, brian.

Also, brian wasn't trying to fence-sit and appease both sides. He supported Incog's position with regards to the case remouk made and said he thought more activity from remouk was good. That is in no way fence-sitting.

By the way, dice voting is something SD does. He did in Greek Mythology too. And his random dice vote was on the same player as his real vote, as I recall.

I would throw in his defense of Shadow Dancer as well, but I realize other people have pointed out flaw in remouk's argument as well. (

Incognito

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

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.") So this is yet a null-tell. I am curious though-

can you elaborate in what way rem is dodging around the question?

This goes for remouk too, back up your statements people.

#60: Your criticism of Alta still looks artifical to me. I initially thought it was effort to have Alta speak up but that theory was apparently debunked by yourself (#84). Something to ponder about if Alta/Shadow Dancer turns out to be scum in the future.

#82: DTMaster already spoke about this.

I also note though he had thrown around tons of questions, his only concrete fos this point in the game had been Earlder1 (and apparently Alta according to #196 though I don't recall him specifically explaining why I think). Wee.

VERDICT:

Scummy

#

Coach Travis

I really have no idea what to say about him. He seems to have glided all the way into this game posting wall of ambiguous statements- and as someone who successfully flew under the radar to 3-way lylo as scum in my first game, I find this to be highly dangerous. I am not sure he proposed any new idea or opinion of his own at all I think? He might as well be normal Townie who really has not much to write about, but everyone should remember to pay extra attention to him for reminder of the game just so he don't coast his way along unhindered.

VERDICT:

Scummy

til he changes his playstyle.

Please try to give details reasoning for your arguments instead of parroting majority concensus.

[brianj]

Not have enough time to analysis Incognito for today, but

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.

I really do not like this post, especially I think DTMaster is first player to actually point out Incognito's scummy points extensively.

[LordChronos]

@brian

When I said remouk was dodging around the question, I was referring to the question Shadow Dancer asked him about what he thought was a scum tell, since he didn't think Earlder did anything scummy.

He still hasn't answered this question.

You said you felt my criticism of Alta for continuing to vote a player that he felt was town and was defending was artificial. In what way was it artificial? You don't think that that point and the subsequent change of Alta's opinion about remouk were scummy?

@remouk

Are you still thinking Shadow Dancer is scum?

[Incognito]

I really do not like this post, especially I think DTMaster is first player to actually point out Incognito's scummy points extensively.

What don't you like about it? I seriously saw the hammer and the Earlder1 flip and didn't bother reading DTMaster's posts during the Night because a) I was already reading Tumbles as town anyway, and b) I didn't have much time to do a reread over the Night. And even though a lot of people try to avoid NK speculation because they claim it's subject to Night-time WIFOM, I think the exact opposite - I like looking into what NK-ed townies had to say because they're usually killed for a very specific reason.

I'll have some analysis tomorrow. I'm adjusting to a new work schedule - should be fully adjusted by then.

[Shadow Dancer]

OK, first of: Damn! Every! Freaking! Time!

vote rem

Should be clear why. I won't deepen his case right now, however. I want rem to answer at least some of my questions first. You can add "Why did you refuse to answer my questions on D1" to the list.

Meanwhile I'll do some rereading. There are still two scum in this game I do not want the other one escape my awareness because rem is absorbing all of it. DTM raised some interesting points about basically every one in this game that semm worth at least a second look.

It's really odd though, that now he'll never finsh his analysis.
This definiely raises a question, however: Who had an interest in DTM not continuing his analysis? One more reason to reread...

I have to reread into another game I replaced in, though, so I might need some time.

I think I need to adress this, how ever

# 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.

I won't - because I obviously can't - comment on your opinion about Alta. I cannot look into Alta's head and thus every statement I could ever make about his behaviour can only be fishing in muddy waters, wild speculation at best.
I gave you what I consider one possible explanation for his play. That's hardly "hard distancing". I obviously only have three choices:
1. Pat Alta on the back: "Well done boy, most pro-town play ever, perfect scum hunting on D1!" - Obviously not.
2. Pretend Alta was never here - Impossible, since you wouldn't ignore what he did, either, and (spoken form a general point of view) you do do right so.
3. Distance from Alta's play, not only in word but also in deed. - Yes, of course.

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.

So an OMGUS vote against you would have been better for you? I can only agree on your vote against Alta, I'd have done the same, so why should I doubt it? I had other priorities, obviously. Also, not posting anything about you does not mean that I ignore you, maybe I'm only lulling you into a false sense of security

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.

It's easy to say that now, as we basically can assume that the naivity explanation was correct in one way or another - Earl flipped town. It is strange that you only mention my building up suspicion against Earl but completely ignore the reasoning behind it. I was the only one on the Earl waggon that brought up a solid case on him and it is still a solid case - Earl is no newbie to mafia and the errors he did cannot satisfactorily be explained by being new to this forum. He can play significantly better and his explanations for not doing it here were majorly anti town at best.

My little exchange of words with CT only marginally had to do with the Earl case, btw. We could have had the same conversation about basically any player. My reason for pressing CT, not to vote Earl, btw, but to take a definite stance, was motivated solely by CT's incredibly fishy post i which he calls Earl town, then scum, then wants to vote while at the same time not wanting to vote him... CT had been waffling around with both his stances and especially his vote all the time - anti town if not scummy - and it was time some one set him straight. His reasoning for jumping on the Earl waggon - and doing so only after being pressed to take a stance - is definitely worth further investigation, by the way. Had I not pressed him he might now refer to the same post that led to his vote on Earl and point out how he was always convinced Earl was town...

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.

So why is using background information about a player to determine possible explanations for his behaviour and founding a case on that foundation not a viable voting reason?
Is L-1 voting some one one week before deadline a problem for you why?
You might realize that I asked rem the same questions. He did not/could not/did not want to answer them. Would you mind doing so?
Also the same reasoning aplies to Inco then. Why don't you question his L-1 vote in the same manner?

And I am not undermining rem's credibility-- there's little to undermine, really. What I do is point out how massively anti-town - at best - his post was.

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.

I was wrong, Alta screed up
I do nopt get what this has to do with what we're talking about... Because I liked the fact that no one majorly and obviously totally screwed up when I entered the game can only mean once some one does something incredibly scummy that can only be a major screw up? Wow, yeah, that's not how probability works...

Rem's post did not sound as if he was misunderstanding, he clearly said that I had said something I had

not

said. LC understood the same, btw, so do not pretend my interpretation of rem's words was far fetched.

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

II) 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.

III) 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?!

IV) 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.

Where's the thin veil? Alright, that's sarcasm. And? What do you find fault with here? That I pressure a scummy player? It's basically the same weak argument rem uses: I do not like how you approach people, you must be scum. Why do you think

I

take that personally? I don't. If rem would just answer my questions so we both know what we are talking about we might find a common ground, but he refuses. I consider a different reason than scummyness - that he feels personally offended - as explanation - I try to point him a way out of his dilemma. The last think I want is to pin down an inncoent newb, but I cannot hadle every one with kid gloves just because he/she might not be able to deal with it. If you haven't realized it yet - scum hunting relies for a good part on scum not being able to handle the pressure put on them in an appropriate way.

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.

Again - easily said

now

.
Why is a major difference in playstyle not a valid reason to assume some one's scummyness?
Also my main point was that Earl's own plea of inexperience was not valid because he is an experienced mafia player and the differences in his play style where not primarily forum mafia related.

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.

The mistake that DTM made and that you obviously adopted is to assune that I could realistically know that Leech had RL stuff to do (do we know that, anyway?). He was SE, so I assumed he did not just flake outand would post a V/LA, if he had no time to play, which he did not. He made a prod pickup promissing an analysis which then kept missing... Of course I demanded him to contribute.
I also repeatedly said that that was just a prodding vote and not a lynch all lurkers vote. Of course, in retrospect it looks kind of silly to try to pressure an obviously absent player. But again: I could not know that back then.

[remouk]

Was right about Earl... Let's start by replying to 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.

The fact that it was sudden was not the only problem: it was sudden + on a particular timing (L-1) + I did not agree with the reasoning.

[...] 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.

What question did I ignore at that point? Also, I repeat: your case is too much based on meta-gaming to me. That's just my point of view.

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.

Perfect example of what annoys me. You make me say things I didn't. I said he was "happy not to look too town": he didn't act "less townish" on purpose. Nothing was made on purpose. He just noticed that he was not considered "100% town" and casualy said he was happy about it.

[...] 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?

See above.

[...] - 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.

Mmh, I can read my answer, what's the problem with it? Or you want me to c/p once again that I think he was taking it too casually, etc.?

- 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.

If you're serious and not just here to upset me, please stop this kind of answer. 1) Tell me how did I "avoid" your question, 2) I OBVIOUSLY used other words to make my point clearer. Strange is suspicious. Suspicious is scummy. But it's not scum-tell (-> "because of this I know he is scum for sure").

- 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 answered... I'm noob. I have no idea of what a scum-tell can be. I won my first game because of the global behavior of the last scum, not because of scum-tells.

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?

I was worried that I'll draw too much attention and be lynched or NKed because of this.

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!

Being agressive by trying to make me look what I'm not, is not scum-hunting.
You can point a finger at me, but don't put false evidence in my pocket to make me look scum. (That's what I think you're trying to do)

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.

Thanks.

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

Thanks again.

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.

If you're town, let me tell you that you are REALLY bad... I'm as town as Earl was.

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?

Tell me what question did I ignore...

[remouk]

remouk, so what is your opinion on Incognito now?

Not sure yet. Sorry, there's a lot of things to analyze, I'm still trying to make things up.

@remouk

Are you still thinking Shadow Dancer is scum?

Yeah. His case against me is very "you attack me, so you lie: you are scum", and I don't think a townie has any reason to react this way. He constantly says that I avoids his questions, but I'd like to know which questions, because I tried to answer them all.

[Shadow Dancer]

I don't mind that you attack me, I mind that you do not care about telling me or any one else the reasons for that.

I also mind that you defend Earl but also do not care to find or tell us any convincing reasons for your defense, though Earl was close to lynch and anything that would have allowed us to see his behaviour in another light might have been really helpful - though that close to deadline it was unlikely we'd find another lynch anyway.

Your reasoning right now is the same by the way: I am scum because I attack you. Who is OMGUSing right now?!

I can make you a list. But how's to start with this one:
What are in your opinion legitimate scumtells? (would be good if you could weigh them a bit like strong scum tells, waek scum tells, things that might be scummy in certain contexts)
With that question answered we might be able to find a common ground to discuss about other things.

[Shadow Dancer]

I would also really ask you to do

yourself

the favour of answering my last question, just to yourself, you don't need to tell

me

:

Are you taking all this personally?

I ask this because from your argumentation style I've got the impression that you are a person that likes to go after feelings a lot and sets value on harmonic personal realtionships. That is not a bad thing of course and not even a generally bad approach to scum hunting - but in the boundaries of a game were you basically have to distrust every one it can be very dangerous.

[remouk]

I don't mind that you attack me, I mind that you do not care about telling me or any one else the reasons for that.

Are you serious? You may not agree with my reasons, but I explained them all. How can you say I didn't?

I also mind that you defend Earl but also do not care to find or tell us any convincing reasons for your defense, though Earl was close to lynch and anything that would have allowed us to see his behaviour in another light might have been really helpful - though that close to deadline it was unlikely we'd find another lynch anyway.

I did explain why I was not hammering: what I saw in his behavior was rookie mistakes, nothing more. Nothing scummy.

Your reasoning right now is the same by the way: I am scum because I attack you. Who is OMGUSing right now?!

Never said that...
Also, don't forget that I attacked you first...

I can make you a list. But how's to start with this one:
What are in your opinion legitimate scumtells? (would be good if you could weigh them a bit like strong scum tells, waek scum tells, things that might be scummy in certain contexts)
With that question answered we might be able to find a common ground to discuss about other things.

I still have no idea, I'm not enough experienced... Let's imagine... For example, someone changing his vote with no reason, to join a more successful wagon which leads to a town lynch. I'd consider this as a scum-tell. Does that answer? ...

Also, once again: please tell me which of your question I did not answer.

I would also really ask you to do

yourself

the favour of answering my last question, just to yourself, you don't need to tell

me

:

Are you taking all this personally?

I ask this because from your argumentation style I've got the impression that you are a person that likes to go after feelings a lot and sets value on harmonic personal realtionships. That is not a bad thing of course and not even a generally bad approach to scum hunting - but in the boundaries of a game were you basically have to distrust every one it can be very dangerous.

Of course I take your attacks personally. And I may look upset because of the way you're trying to make me look scum. Maybe it's not the perfect way to play, but I can't let you do it.

[remouk]

To everyone

: what do you think about the fact that Earl was town? Does it affect your read on someone?

[Nikanor]

Vote Count 2.1

remouk (1)

- Shadow Dancer

Not Voting (6)

- remouk, Coach Travis, 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.

[smashbro_of_the_SSS]

Alrighty, first off, sorry for not having posted yet, it's finals week, so I've been busy.

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.

DTM brought some interesting points up about Incognito. Why he had the discussion about RVS isn't much on its own but I can see how it applies.

The point about Incognito voting with no reason, then waiting to explain until he saw what others were thinking is scummy. At that point, it seemed like he wanted to know what others thought before pursuing a case, but if nobody agreed he could drop it, and it be forgotten.

As for his night kill, it seems pretty obvious that he was a kill choice. Something to note is that he listed Chronos, ShadowDancer, Earl, and Incog as suspects.

~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~

#smashbro 2You 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.

Shadow Dancer did a bit to lessen my suspicions, I liked the quality of his posts.

I was just wondering why he bothered to place a random vote, if he was going to switch it to a lurker later on. Both of those votes came from methods that were easy to give a simple reason for, and so it seemed like if either went through, he would be able to give a weaker reason and appear more innocent.

What I didn't liked about the slot was Alta's play (or lack thereof). As for Shadow Dancer, his posts are better, and I was satisfied with his play, so most of the case was based on Alta.

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?

Yes, it was a pressure vote. While I did (and do) believe in a case for him, I really didn't think that there was enough proof to get a strong case going. So I unvoted, and wanted to watch him through the rest of the day.

Right now, I have the same opinion. He has given us little information on his views of other players, so we don't know where he stands. He merely states that "Alta was scummy, but SD improves him a lot."

@Lord Chronos

Now that Earl has flipped town, who are your suspects?

~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~

To everyone

: what do you think about the fact that Earl was town? Does it affect your read on someone?

Not really. The reasons everyone voted where they did seemed to have decent reasons, so there really isn't anything much I can analyze by that.

Though, I can see what Shadow Dancer means by saying that remouk, if truly believing remouk to be newb town, should have tried to show this.

~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~

alright, for my final thoughts...I think I'll

vote Lord Chronos

for contributing little other than the case on remouk. There really is not much we know about him, which is always good for scum.

Also, I will not be on tomorrow through Saturday, because of finals and a graduation party. so

V/LA from Thursday to Saturday

[Incognito]

OK, so I finally got some time to put some of my nebulous thoughts together. I'll try to keep this as condensed as possible.

Right now, I'm thinking there's definitely one scum in

{

LordChronos, Coach Travis, Shadow Dancer

}

. Both scum could very well be in there, but I'm like 99% positive at least one is in that group right now. The strange thing is I feel like I'm getting very similar reads of LordChronos and Coach Travis - neither one of them seem to do anything that's outright scummy, but at the same time, neither one of them really pushes the envelope for me the way I would expect town to do. Chronos seems to ask a lot of questions, but looking back at his posts, I've noticed now that he basically just kept his vote on Earlder1 for the entirety of Day 1 and didn't seem to force too much pressure on anyone else.

Also this bugged me looking back on it:

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.

While I did disagree with remouk's case against Shadow Dancer, I don't at all see why his case against SD would have made him the natural buddy of a hypothetical Earlder1-scum. One thing that I've liked about remouk is I've always gotten the impression that he actually

believes

in the stuff he's saying and that he's not just putting stuff together for malicious purposes. His initial vote on me convinced me of that pretty well, so I'm curious as to why you got a different feel from remouk here, Chronos.

Also, can you explain this:

@CT
I have seen posts like Earlder's last from new town players, yes, but I have also seen them from scum. He really didn't respond to anything said against him or try to fight against his lynch, but just gave up.

What gave you the feeling that he "gave up"? I'm curious about this because as I mentioned before, I really did feel like Earlder1's final post made him look more town-ish, but you seemed to arrive at a different conclusion and downplayed that here.

-~-~-~-~-~-~

As for Coach Travis, I've looked through his posts, and I feel like he's had a tendency to be waffly for a good portion of the game. I could pull up specific examples but for the most part, it seems like he's trying to play both sides of the fence a lot of times looking more like he's attempting to appease certain people rather than figure out their alignments. It's the kind of behavior I'd expect to come more often from scum than town.

Also, I really don't like his Earlder1 vote now that I see it in a new light:

But yeah, since I am suspicious of him and he's no longer at the stage where voting him causes an L-1, I have no real excuse, so:

Vote:Earlder 1

I think he's probably the most likely day 1 lynch, but I'm not against voting anyone else if it comes down to it.

He doesn't say that he's voting him because he thinks he's scum; instead he says it's because he's the most likely day 1 lynch. It's like he's trying to absolve himself of responsibility.

Coach Travis, what are your current thoughts on the players particularly LordChronos?

-~-~-~-~-~-~

The last of the threesome is Shadow Dancer. My read of him Yesterday was leaning town - I liked the fact that he used meta-gaming to try to develop reads since I think meta-gaming is usually more likely to be done by town than scum especially when it's coming from a newer player. Reading through brianj's case against him, I'm seeing that brianj actually seems to mark that as a strike against him.

brianj, why does SD's metagaming negatively affect your read of him?

Also, I'm looking back at the point that DTMaster brought up on Shadow Dancer's flip on Leech - hadn't noticed it before actually, but I do think DTM brings up an interesting point there.

I also repeatedly said that that was just a prodding vote and not a lynch all lurkers vote. Of course, in retrospect it looks kind of silly to try to pressure an obviously absent player. But again: I could not know that back then.

Right, but in the post that DTMaster brought up, you used Leech-SE's flaking as a reason to confirm your vote on him, which would lead me to believe it was something that you thought was scummy coming from him since he has experience around here. Are you now saying that wasn't the case?

-~-~-~-~-~-~

Separate post to follow as this one's kinda long.

[Incognito]

I could probably see myself voting either LordChronos or Coach Travis at this point based on the points I raised in the above post.

vote: Coach Travis

for a push in a different direction from smashbro's vote.

I'll pick up on my read of anyone else I missed tomorrow, but I wanted to get my thoughts out there since I felt like the three players I've analyzed above needed the most immediate attention.

[Coach Travis]

Reading through the Remouk/Shadow Dancer exchange, I think it's possible they're both townies who are just getting badly sidetracked, as SD has made some good points, but while I haven't liked Remouk's responses, I feel he could as easily be confused townie as scum, and I have a gut feeling he's town, and just isn't very good at this game. SD I still think is town as well, but will be looking at closely. The problem is, he could in fact be a skilled scum, but right now I read him as town.

LC I'm really not sure of. I did kinda think he was town early on, but he really hasn't done that much and I can certainly understand the case on him. I think my most suspicious right now are him and smashbro, just because they're the two I'm less certain of.

Incognito I do still read as town, as he explained the one thing I found suspicious about him, and he's been doing well the entire game. He could be skilled scum as well(especially with the stats mentioned earlier), but I don't see him as scum at the moment. I've never suspected brian j either, and I'm definitely getting a townie vibe from him.

If I were to vote now it would likely be for LC, but I'm not really all that convinced, as I said, it's more that he's a player I'm less certain of, because he really hasn't done all that much.

As for my actions:I just don't think I'm a natural scum hunter, it's not my style. I have pretty much zero aggression in me, and it takes me a long time to come to conclusions on other players alignments. I did think Earlder 1 was the most suspicious, and I did say that in previous posts. I was just hesitant to vote before and so that post was me finally deciding not to worry about what could go wrong and just taking action for once.

[Shadow Dancer]

I am right now close to being lynched in my other game (why must I replays some super scummy predecessor again ), so I have no time to read, analyze or post much right now (i.e. today, tomrrow I'll be fully back in thi game again ;\ ).

I just skimmed through rem's last post and think we might be on the way to somehow resolve our dispute one way or the other:

Don't get me wrong: I still think he is super scummy. I'd just not have a good feeling lynching him right now, because I have a certain feeling that we are totally talking past each other, I see no other explanation why his only raction to my pressure consists of repeating the same things over and over again.
That's where my impression that he is taking the whole thing as a personal conflict comes from.
He confirms that. That gives me hope that we finally find a common ground.

First of: I never meant to offend you. I am certain you are a really nice guy as a person in real life. I swear you that my attack had nothing to do with you personally. It was just me playing mafia, applying pressure, huntig scum, realizing a scummy commment from you and disassembling it, just business if you want.
I am sure we could have a pretty harmless and enjoyable conversation about some interesting topic, drinking ale in pub or something.
But this is a game of mafia. For me that means I distrust you (and any one else in this threat) by principle. And I do not handle any one with velvet gloves if I see him or her acting anti town. That's the mindset that is required to play for my win condition.

I am convinced that you are really a genuine newb to this game and haven't developed that mindset yet (this realization isn't as trivial as it seems - I could create an alt account and join a newbie game, pretending to be newbie and using that as an easy cover for my scummy play - in short: newbieness is an easy and hard to refute excuse for scummy behaviour, so I do not trust people's newbishness unless I've tested it in some way. I did that with Earl and I did it with you.

I am putting much too much effort in this again... Well... A certain degree of coaching is also part of newbie games, I think.

I think the question about scum tells is a key question since the whole game - and also our argument - basically evolves around it. So you must understand that I am not satisfied with your answers so far.

But at least I like this

I still have no idea, I'm not enough experienced... Let's imagine... For example, someone changing his vote with no reason, to join a more successful wagon which leads to a town lynch. I'd consider this as a scum-tell. Does that answer? ...

and this

... I answered... I'm noob. I have no idea of what a scum-tell can be. I won my first game because of the global behavior of the last scum, not because of scum-tells.

much better than this

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

The first two do clearly read as: I am newb and overextended with the whole situation and other peoples demands on me.

The last one can easily be interpreted: "I do not care or want to tell you because my explanations could later on used agains me and stand in my way when I'm going to frame people for some far stretched reason that I am free to define as my genuine scum tell then, if I need it."
That's why I (and other people= consider comments like that heavily scummy.

I do not really know how to proceed now... Maybe I should give some examples of things I consider scum tells and you tell me if you agree.

I think you would emidiately agree that a guilty cop investigation is the best scum tell one can get.
Other PRs can provide similarly strong scum (and town) tells, of course.
There are other easy ones, for example:
Would you consider a player lying to you in any way scummy?
Would you consider a player that contradicts himself or makes significant differences in how he deals with different players in a game (as not voting some one for something he pointed out as super scummy on some one else) scummy?
Would you consider it scummy if a player significantly changes his play style or principles from one game to another scummy, especially if the changes lead to a significant decrease in that player's scum hunting effectiveness?

OK, let's delay this until later when I actually have my mind free for this game... Maybe it would be good if we could be online for the same time one day or another over the weekend...

[brianj]

Pre-emptive prod check since I am too busy to be involved in this game for now; I'll be back within three days I think, so I would appreciate it very much if no one speed-lynched before I get chance to respond O.O

[Nikanor]

Vote Count 2.2

remouk (1)

- Shadow Dancer

LordChronos (1)

- smashbro_of_the_SSS

Coach Travis (1)

- Incognito

Not Voting (4)

- remouk, Coach Travis, brianj, LordChronos

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

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

[Shadow Dancer]

I see no danger of a spped lynch. Also you should never speed lynch without the whole town (or at least a significant majority) agreeing to that. Every thing else can backfire in really ugly ways... It's in out best interest to generate as much useful content per day as possible...

[remouk]

@mod: I'd like to be replaced!

Sorry guys, not enough time to play properly. It's been really interestring and I'll try to follow the game, but I can't play anymore.

See you around!

[Nikanor]

Vote Count 2.3

remouk (1)

- Shadow Dancer

LordChronos (1)

- smashbro_of_the_SSS

Coach Travis (1)

- Incognito

Not Voting (4)

- remouk, Coach Travis, brianj, LordChronos

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

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

LordChronos has been prodded.

remouk is being replaced.

[LordChronos]

I'm really sorry guys, but I don't have time to play for a while.

Mod: Please replace me.

[brianj]

LordChronos (#253):
Thank you for the explanation- it would be nice if you guys clarified what particular questions have been ignored instead of seemingly randoming each other of doing so (at least in my pov) =/

You said you felt my criticism of Alta for continuing to vote a player that he felt was town and was defending was artificial. In what way was it artificial? You don't think that that point and the subsequent change of Alta's opinion about remouk were scummy?

The game was still at somewhat beginning phrase (page 3) where half of the votes made were yet random, and there were only 2 votes stacked against remouk. Without urgency of quick-lynch, I felt there was nothing strange with portraying opinion that conflicted with his vote since RV by it's very nature doesn't hold that much weight at all.

You don't think that that point and the subsequent change of Alta's opinion about remouk were scummy?

Yes; subsequent change of Alta's opinion was very scummy. In fact he could have voted remouk planning to subtly bandwagon him, which would explain why he wouldn't unvote like you criticize. HOWEVER YOU POINTED OUT ALTA'S VOTE BEFORE HE BEGAN TO MAKE HIS SCUMMY CHANGE OF OPINION and therefore it has nothing to do with my point. I find it curious why you felt the need to ask me this question?

Incognito (#254):
Yes, I also feel the importance of reading through opinion of NK'd Townies. It's just that #249 is your first baggage post that is hardly meaningful at all- I understand it could simply have been announcement that analysis is coming, but I just didn't like feel of sentence "Never got a chance to read through them, and I'm curious as to why the scum chose to NK him" since it: 1) emphasizes that you have not read DTMaster's post, and 2) subtly suggests that DTMaster's analysis caused scum to NK him (=scum NK'd DTMaster after reading DTMaster's post). See how it works? =/ Also I felt the need to shift some spotlight onto you because no one seemed to be paying attention to you that much, and like I said in case of Coach Travis, I don't like people slipping through people's suspicion list very much.

Shadow Dancer (#255):

I won't - because I obviously can't - comment on your opinion about Alta. I cannot look into Alta's head and thus every statement I could ever make about his behaviour can only be fishing in muddy waters, wild speculation at best.
I gave you what I consider one possible explanation for his play. That's hardly "hard distancing". I obviously only have three choices:
1. Pat Alta on the back: "Well done boy, most pro-town play ever, perfect scum hunting on D1!" - Obviously not.
2. Pretend Alta was never here - Impossible, since you wouldn't ignore what he did, either, and (spoken form a general point of view) you do do right so.
3. Distance from Alta's play, not only in word but also in deed. - Yes, of course.

No, when you replaced in though many thought Alta was suspicious, it was equally as agreed that it could have been newb playing as well. Concensus on the town was that "Alta was suspicious, but the judgement cannot be made until we see how Shadow Dancer behaves". You were definitely not on the risk of lynch because of what Alta had done, and by simply being pro-town the suspicion would have died away- just like what is happening now. You used way too much strong wording against Alta when considering the situation one simple statement, or just simply being pro-town, could have sufficied; and that is over-reaction.

So an OMGUS vote against you would have been better for you? I can only agree on your vote against Alta, I'd have done the same, so why should I doubt it? I had other priorities, obviously. Also, not posting anything about you does not mean that I ignore you, maybe I'm only lulling you into a false sense of security

No, but basic analysis about me and the reason behind it (like you had done with others) could have been nice. Your omission of me stands out quite notably. If I replaced in, and found someone who was fos'ing me - confirmed villager - the hardest, I would have at least paid attention to that person to determine whether his intention was genuinely misguided or scummy. At least, I would have taken notice of him, instead of being all like "Wait bria...whatever... Who's he?! Is he in this game?! Has he contributed something already?! - Seriously: I just realize that I totally overlooked him in my ISO reading... Will catch up on it :\"

I concede on the points you make at third paragraph.

So why is using background information about a player to determine possible explanations for his behaviour and founding a case on that foundation not a viable voting reason?
Is L-1 voting some one one week before deadline a problem for you why?
You might realize that I asked rem the same questions. He did not/could not/did not want to answer them. Would you mind doing so?
Also the same reasoning aplies to Inco then. Why don't you question his L-1 vote in the same manner?

And I am not undermining rem's credibility-- there's little to undermine, really. What I do is point out how massively anti-town - at best - his post was.
...
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.
...
Where's the thin veil? Alright, that's sarcasm. And? What do you find fault with here? That I pressure a scummy player? It's basically the same weak argument rem uses: I do not like how you approach people, you must be scum. Why do you think I take that personally? I don't. If rem would just answer my questions so we both know what we are talking about we might find a common ground, but he refuses. I consider a different reason than scummyness - that he feels personally offended - as explanation - I try to point him a way out of his dilemma. The last think I want is to pin down an inncoent newb, but I cannot hadle every one with kid gloves just because he/she might not be able to deal with it. If you haven't realized it yet - scum hunting relies for a good part on scum not being able to handle the pressure put on them in an appropriate way.

Wait, what? I was asking about why you felt the need to completely tear apart remouk's point in classic case of over-reaction, not how remouk's point was viable. I accept it was my bad choice of wording there; the main point on that paragraph, combined with following paragraphs, is that you completely over-reacted to simple accusation which hardly posed any risk about you, tried hard to paint remouk in scummy light while taking agressive gestures that was likely to start confrontation. You perceive it as following your usual playing style, I perceive it as excessive reaction. Am I the only one to see it this way?

I concede on your point at seventh paragraph.

The mistake that DTM made and that you obviously adopted is to assune that I could realistically know that Leech had RL stuff to do (do we know that, anyway?). He was SE, so I assumed he did not just flake outand would post a V/LA, if he had no time to play, which he did not. He made a prod pickup promissing an analysis which then kept missing... Of course I demanded him to contribute.
I also repeatedly said that that was just a prodding vote and not a lynch all lurkers vote. Of course, in retrospect it looks kind of silly to try to pressure an obviously absent player. But again: I could not know that back then.

I generally find complete absense from website to be signs of one being afk. To be honest, I am the one of those player who tried to pressure Leech into posting as well; however, at least I was consistent about my position. Main point in DTM's argument was that you were not. Your supposed reasoning behind attacking Leech has nothing to do with our argument.

smashbro_of_the_SSS (#263):

As for his night kill, it seems pretty obvious that he was a kill choice. Something to note is that he listed Chronos, ShadowDancer, Earl, and Incog as suspects.

Another thing to note is that he did not talk much about me, you and Coach Travis exactly because there was not much to talk about. Leech virtually has nil post, and he hammered before he got chance to analyze your meager five posts. I do not like how you re-stated what anyone else could have figured out simply by reading his post; the sentence makes it seem like DTM found you and CT not scummy, while truth had been there was simply not much posted from both of you to talk about.

Incognito (#264):

brianj, why does SD's metagaming negatively affect your read of him?

Poor choice of wording, my major point of attack toward Shadow Dancer is:
1) Shadow Dancer's over-zealousness to distance himself from Alta when suspicion against him was hardly critical.
2) His over-reaction toward remouk's attack.

I do agree one of LordChronos, Coach Travis, Shadow Dancer must be scum, so I'll

Vote: Shadow Dancer

for sake of being well-rounded.

Shadow Dancer (#267):
buddying? Though it could be interpreted either way, I am surprised at the amount of effort you put into explaining how remouk could be newb town after expanding so much effort into attacking him. Either way this is a terrible advice; at least after reaching seize-fire agreement, discuss about something related to this game instead of theory of "scum read".

And fuuuuuuu LordChronos and remouk replacement. D: