Mini 1005: Mafiaphobes! (Game over)

[quadz08]

Oh, crap. I just did a quick re-read; I had forgotten that vezok had, in fact, acknowledged SSBF's post in an EBWOP. My apologies, vezok; I wasn't intending to misrepresent you.

However, I still feel that vezok is more likely to be scum than anyone else at this point. All of his posts have been very short, and generally consist of responses and not much else. I know pretty much nothing about his usual posting style, but it seems to me that he could be trying to hang back, while still posting. Lurking without really lurking, if you will.

[vezokpiraka]

I have one game to point you to Newbie 950. I was cop that and had nearly the same posting style. I have more games to show but they are still ongoing.

[quadz08]

Ok, vezok. I read through the first 9 pages of 950. While the LENGTH of your posts is about consistent with this one, I think there is significantly more content in 950 than there is here. You have questioned no one and provided very little of your opinion in this game, which is quite opposite of 950. I believe my point still stands.

[vezokpiraka]

I questioned enough people to know what should I do tonight.
Don't start to ask me things like this.

[vezokpiraka]

I don't know what the second line should mean. I was looking at a movie when I posted that. I think I was arguing with someone in the movie. Ton tired. Must sleep.

[quadz08]

Are you referring to 950 in that post? Because these are the only two questions you've made in this entire game:

So you're giving tasky the noob pass but you're voting for me because of sheepping?
You sure you're not scum with Tasky?

[KageLord]

Vezo ISOs

ISO 0: Votes Tasky for asking RQs. Says "subtle questions = scum".

ISO 1: Disagrees with SSBF. Says that quicklynching can be good with an example of a previous game (

no link and I personally think this could be taken as a little bit scummy, though I'll say it's null

). Says scum do RQs more often then town (

no examples/links

). Doesn't like Tasky's response to vote (

I personally see nothing wrong with Tasky's response, other than the previously discussed "is it scummy to not answer RQs"

). Ignores Friend's direct request for links to back up the "subtle questions = scum".

ISO 2: Says Tasky's first 3 questions are useless. Says playstyle question is stupid. Says bandwagons are sometimes good and sometimes bad. In response to Friend's repeated request for links, says the game is in progress and on another site (

apparently vezo had only one unfinished game in mind when making this general rule about RQs and I'm hoping the person that asked the RQs there had already flipped scum

).

ISO 3: Says Tasky's questions are not in town's interest to be answered. Says allowing scum to self meta is bad (

good point here

).

ISO 4: Agrees with Oso and unvotes Tasky (

seems like first instance of sheeping to me, especially after appearing confident. but, we can give vezo the BotD here

).

ISO 5 and 6: Claims that Friend is giving Tasky a "noob pass" and yet is voting for him because of sheeping. Asks Friend if he's scumbuddies with Tasky. Claims he was "nathed" by SSBF.

Now, this is the most suspicious post of vezo's to me in the whole game so far. First, as I have already mentioned, he uses the phrase, "noob pass", that SSBF had used in the post before him. What makes it more suspicious is that he had posted after the "noob pass" was given but made no mention of it. In fact, in that post, vezo unvoted Tasky after agreeing with Oso. It's weird that vezo would agree if he felt that Tasky was being given a pass. Another important point here is his last sentence of this post. He asked Friend if he was scumbuddies with Tasky even though his last post had just been unvoting Tasky. No additional evidence was brought forth by anyone (including vezo) and Tasky hadn't even posted since vezo's previous post, so it couldn't be anything he said. If he really agreed with Oso and wasn't just sheeping, why did he switch in this post? Note: This point was originally brought up by Friend.

ISO 7: Claims that he usually reads preview posts after he posts (

either lying or telling the truth about being negligent

). Mentions that avatars aren't shown in preview posts (

??? Tasky asked why the avatars mattered, but... no understandable reason given. I still have no clue what it means.

). Asks Friend for top 2 suspects.

ISO 8: Answers Tasky's questions about the SSBF post and says he didn't know about SSBF's post until afterward. No response to Friend's picks.

ISO 9: Responds to Friend's claim of fake scumhunting by saying Friend is now in the town pile (

possibly true or possibly just trying to appease Friend

). Responds to my points by saying his phone rang in the middle of his post and the "noob pass" thing is a coincidence (

again possible, but I think that both being coincidences is unlikely

).

ISO 10: Says he suspects people one at a time and people usually suspect him when he doesn't have a PR and is uncced. Also insists it was two coincidences.

ISO 11: "Analyzes" (

in quotes since I'm not sure that one line or a couple words about each person should be considered a true analysis

) wagon. Claims Friend defended Tasky (

which was already mentioned multiple times... more sheeping?

). Claims I'm pushing wagon for out of game reasons (

again, someone else's words/more possible sheeping

). Says we are the possible 3 scum (

I'm unfamiliar with these minis and their setups, so... are there usually 3 scum or is it usually random or what?

). Votes me, saying my last few posts are incredibly scummy.

Again, no reasoning behind why Tasky is scummy after the unvote inspired by Oso. As for Friend, wasn't Friend in vezo's town pile according to vezo's second last post? Once more, no reason for the switch (unless the reason is "defending" the scum-for-some-unknown-reason Tasky). Also, the only original thought in that whole post (and in most of vezo's posts) was that the 3 of us may all be scum together, which I'm not sure is even possible. Now, I'm just going to quote the last one I wanted to mention.

I questioned enough people to know what should I do

tonight

.
Don't start to ask me things like this.

(bolding added by KageLord)

O.O O.O O.O

Well, this is either everything or nothing. I can think of only one logical explanation that doesn't involve vezo being a PR (scum or town), though it does involve some strange wording on vezo's part. However, I don't want to say it and I don't want anyone else, other than vezo, to. So, vezo, what did you mean by the bolded? Plus, I'm not sure who you actually questioned here, other than asking Friend his top suspects.

[KageLord]

Excuse the double post, but I would like to know the usual setups thing for Minis that I mentioned in ISO 11. Most importantly, I'm just wondering about the typical number of scum (or if there is no typical number).

[xvart]

And yes, I agree that what Diddin said is contradictory. However, I believe it to be a result of poor word choice, not of an attempt to look more townie. It's far too blatant (and too illogical) for that to fly.

And you felt the need to interject on his behalf why? Could he not have explained that himself? Also, what was the point of the comment at all, if it wasn't to score town points?

Defending people is a scum tell, period.

Heaven forbid I have a differing opinion on a player from someone else, amirite? That was a very foolish statement, methinks.

Says the guy who blatantly defended diddin for no reason.

Hm. You're right. Didn't catch that.

Although his unvote still reeks.

You seem to be trying to build a case no matter what. Everything about this post (and the one immediately afterwards) seems to be an afterthought.

Oh, my original reasons were incorrect; but this is still scummy for

this

reason. Oh, by the way, and this reason that has already been stated also supports my argument.

Ok, let me try to explain my wording. From my experience of playing mafia, a bandwagon in RVS helps generate discussion to end RVS. I am trying to imply a CORRELATION between my wagon and RVS ending so quickly, not necessarily a CAUSATION. The comment was meant to be halfway sarcastic and you guys took it way too seriously.

And, correlation does not mean anything. Correlationally speaking, if I decided to go swimming and then it rained, my decision to go swimming had nothing to do with it raining; so me announcing to the world that

my plan

to get it to rain worked is ludicrous.

I've just read through the thread and absolutely none of it has managed to stick in my head... Probably has something to so with it being 0:30 and having spent the whole day melting my brain with Thermodynamics calculations of doom.

Er...

Vote: q21

For his blatantly, if inadvertently, lurking through the first 5 pages of the game.

Are you trying to make a joke out of not being around because it is scummy and you hope to negate that? The fact that you have read the

entire five pages

and you have no better place to put your vote than on yourself is shocking.

I was scum hunting. I asked friend a question so I can get him out of the neutral zone. I liked his response and now he's in the town pile. You will see that after I post all my reads.

So you asked him a question with the intention of getting a solid read on Friend? That solid read was established by one question? What are your other reads? Are you trying now to get a solid read on others by moving them out of the neutral zone?

xvart.

[Friend]

You seem to be trying to build a case no matter what. Everything about this post (and the one immediately afterwards) seems to be an afterthought. Oh, my original reasons were incorrect; but this is still scummy for this reason. Oh, by the way, and this reason that has already been stated also supports my argument.

And the problem with this is..?
I made a mistake in my original reasoning. Despite that, his other posts were still scummy.

Also, this:

Especially because he unvotes Tasky and then, in his next post, calls Tasky scum. Doesn't match up.

Is neither an afterthought nor was it brought up by anybody else before me. Your logic is flawed.

[diddin]

Sorry I haven't been too active, I am usually very busy on the weekend. I'm gonna have an ISO of SSBF posted tonight because that "defending is a scumtell" line really got an odd look from me.

[diddin]

I looked at SSBF, and while I don't like his "defending is a scumtell" opinion, he's pretty consistant with this mentality, attacking Friend for defending Tasky in his ISO 7. However, his mentality sounds like a mentality of scum who wants to make buddying connections based on ANY defense and set up mislynches.

FoS: SSBF

[quadz08]

quadz08 wrote:

SSBF wrote:
Defending people is a scum tell, period.

Heaven forbid I have a differing opinion on a player from someone else, amirite? That was a very foolish statement, methinks.

Says the guy who blatantly defended diddin for no reason.

So if my opinion and my actions didn't match up, that'd be worse, right?

[Friend]

I questioned enough people to know what should I do tonight.
Don't start to ask me things like this.

What are you talking about here? Why are you telling quadz he can't ask you legitimate questions?

[vezokpiraka]

As I said in my last post I don't know what the last line means.
I was looking at a movie and it was 12 o'clock in the night. Guess I got tired and started arguing with the guy in the movie by posting here.

[q21]

I've just read through the thread and absolutely none of it has managed to stick in my head... Probably has something to so with it being 0:30 and having spent the whole day melting my brain with Thermodynamics calculations of doom.

Er...

Vote: q21

For his blatantly, if inadvertently, lurking through the first 5 pages of the game.

Are you trying to make a joke out of not being around because it is scummy and you hope to negate that? The fact that you have read the

entire five pages

and you have no better place to put your vote than on yourself is shocking.

It is not scummy that I missed the first 5 pages because I hadn't even seen my role PM yet. Yes, its a little pathetic that I didn't notice the new PM... but not scummy. That read of the game was made when my brain was completely fried, very little stuck so instead of voting completely randomly or posting nothing I did something with the potential to evoke some interesting reactions.

Town see someone self vote in their first post (even after 5 pages) and most of the time they'll laugh a little and move on. Scum on the other hand feel they need to jump on everything and as a result they jump on that self vote. On its own its hardly enough to condemn anyone, but your response and SSBF's earlier was enough to catch my attention.



@ KageLord: Some good points in 157 and you show that your suspicion of vezo is maybe more than just the ISO 5/6 thing. However, you still put way too much emphasis on that point so it still feels like you're reaching. It might be worth more if the terms noob pass and noob card weren't so common around here.
Also, 3 scum is the the case in the overwhelming majority of mini normal games. It's not a rule, but its highly unusual for it to be anything else.

[Super Smash Bros. Fan]

wow... where did you get that from? I don't like people who use such generalized statements to support their arguments... mafia doesn't work that was, every situation is new...

Every situation is new, that is true, but the same scum tells can be committed by scums. Scums will frequently use AtE, defending a person, IIoA, and other things. A person defending a town read can very well be scum defending a scum.

and pointing out a logical fallacy in an attack is somehow a form of defense, isn't it? would you call that a scum-tell?

That makes no sense. In the eleven posts I've made in this game, I cannot remember a single time that I defended a person. I also fail to see how pointing out a logical fallacy on a person is a scum tell. If I attack a post, it's because I find it scummy, not because I want to defend a person.

SSBF, what if the person I'm defending flips town? Is that still a scumtell?

No, but the thing is,

we don't know

if the person is town or not. The only way to find out is to lynch the person. Unless you yourself are scum, you have no knowledge of who is town and who is scum, so until then, I consider you guilty until Tasky's alliance is proven.

Defending people I think is town is how mislynches DON'T occur.

Just because you defend the person who you have a town read on doesn't mean that the person won't be lynched and it also doesn't mean the person is town-aligned.

If that person flips scum, well then I look pretty bad, and I agree hardcorely defending someone who flips scum warrants serious suspicion. BUT if they flip town, it's definitely NOT a scumtell, and until Tasky flips, it's not a scumtell either.

So you're saying that a series of chainsaw defenses on a person (Although you haven't done it, just saying) isn't a scum tell? Doing that would be a pretty obvious indication that you and another person might be linked.

Heaven forbid I have a differing opinion on a player from someone else, amirite? That was a very foolish statement, methinks.

I never said it's wrong to have a differing opinion on a person. If you gave a simple town read with decent explanation on why and not continue to further defend the town read, then it isn't a problem. What is a problem is going and deliberately defending the person. It establish links between a person and makes you scummier, especially if the person flips scum.

Bullshit. There are situations where it is not. Situations where it is even a towntell. You're trying to turn a circumstantial point into a concrete one. It won't work.

Alright, show me situations where it is a towntell. Not even a nulltell, a towntell.

Town see someone self vote in their first post (even after 5 pages) and most of the time they'll laugh a little and move on. Scum on the other hand feel they need to jump on everything and as a result they jump on that self vote. On its own its hardly enough to condemn anyone, but your response and SSBF's earlier was enough to catch my attention.

I got on to you because that self-vote was completely unecessary. We were already starting to hunt for scum, so the self-vote was completely unecessary. All you needed to do was to say "Hi, I'm here, will post tomorrow", and I would understand.

[diddin]

Smash, Chainsaw Defenses aren't a scumtell unless the person someone is defending indireectly is confirmed scum. So attacking people for chainsaws D1 is just lol.

[Tasky]

and pointing out a logical fallacy in an attack is somehow a form of defense, isn't it? would you call that a scum-tell?

That makes no sense. In the eleven posts I've made in this game, I cannot remember a single time that I defended a person. I also fail to see how pointing out a logical fallacy on a person is a scum tell. If I attack a post, it's because I find it scummy, not because I want to defend a person.

that's exactly my point...
I was not referring to any of your posts...
look:
A brings up a fallacious argument against B, C points out that fallacy, so in a way C is defending B from A's attack... but as you said, this is not a scum-tell...
therefore your assumption that every defense is a scum-tell is wrong
QED

[Oso]

A brings up a fallacious argument against B, C points out that fallacy, so in a way C is defending B from A's attack... but as you said, this is not a scum-tell...
therefore your assumption that every defense is a scum-tell is wrong
QED

Please, for my sanity, quit trying to be right and start hunting scum. That display of logic would have been far more impressive had you went out and gathered together some things that you could use to convince yourself and the rest of the thread that what SSBF posted was not only wrong according your reasoning, but that it somehow tied into him being scum. Or maybe just not clutter up the thread with logic lessons if you think he is wrong but not scummy.

Plus, this is a post to avoid prod. If I don't get a chance tonight to post more tonight, this should cover any auto prods the mods has.

[Friend]

Smash, Chainsaw Defenses aren't a scumtell unless the person someone is defending indireectly is confirmed scum. So attacking people for chainsaws D1 is just lol.

OMG CHAINSAW DEFENSE YOU MUST BE SCUM

[xvart]

You seem to be trying to build a case no matter what. Everything about this post (and the one immediately afterwards) seems to be an afterthought. Oh, my original reasons were incorrect; but this is still scummy for this reason. Oh, by the way, and this reason that has already been stated also supports my argument.

And the problem with this is..?
I made a mistake in my original reasoning. Despite that, his other posts were still scummy.

Yes, but everything is an afterthought. If you had those thoughts about the case originally they would have been included...

originally

. Once the first point was proven incorrect you came back with he is still scummy for other reasons. Then, immediately afterwards: this reason too!

So if my opinion and my actions didn't match up, that'd be worse, right?

Of course; my point was more it is expected for you to say that since you have already been found to be blatantly defending someone for no apparent reason. Also, you missed my question:

Also, what was the point of the comment at all, if it wasn't to score town points?

---

It is not scummy that I missed the first 5 pages because I hadn't even seen my role PM yet. Yes, its a little pathetic that I didn't notice the new PM... but not scummy. That read of the game was made when my brain was completely fried, very little stuck so instead of voting completely randomly or posting nothing I did something with the potential to evoke some interesting reactions.

Interestingly enough that you didn't mention any of that in your initial post. Yes, I believe you that you didn't see the role PM. Also, you honestly think that self voting five pages in is more productive than just saying, missed my role pm, read the game but didn't get anything because my brain is fried. Expect more later; or something along those lines? My point is that from my perspective it is an honest mistake to miss a role pm. But scum would have more of a reason to justify it or catch themselves before anyone else can call them out on the behavior, which is exactly what you did.

Town see someone self vote in their first post (even after 5 pages) and most of the time they'll laugh a little and move on. Scum on the other hand feel they need to jump on everything and as a result they jump on that self vote. On its own its hardly enough to condemn anyone, but your response and SSBF's earlier was enough to catch my attention.

Seriously? You think someone self voting on page five when there is actual scumhunting/discussion going on would just be laughed off? That's laughable, and now you are reaching to try and make those that called you out on it

appear

to be the scum. The fact that you are softly trying to build a case or a level of suspicion on the people calling you out on the self vote is suspicious; and if I wasn't so

Just because you defend the person who you have a town read on doesn't mean that the person won't be lynched and it also doesn't mean the person is town-aligned.

Furthermore, scum have incentive to defend someone they know is town so if that person is lynched they score major town points for being against a mislynch.

xvart.

[xvart]

EBWOP: Got distracted and forgot to finish my thought.

and if I wasn't so

...and if I wasn't so torn between the diddin/quadz relationship I would now be voting you.

Unvote

I still don't like diddin claim and justification of the causality of ending RVS, but I think quadz's defense of diddin and q21's most recent post are most indicative of scum. Expect my vote to be placed on one of these two shortly.

xvart.

[jayfl383]

whats up guys, I just got home but will read up on everythin and post tomorrow after work...just letting everyone know I am here.

[totallynotmafia]

Vote count 1.4

Oso (0)
Tasky (1) Super Smash Bros. Fan
KageLord (3) Oso, vezokpiraka, q21
Friend (1) jayfl383
q21 (0)
jayfl383 (0)
xvart (1) ChibiSanNub
quadz08 (0)
diddin (0)
vezokpiraka (4) Tasky, Friend, KageLord, quadz08
ChibiSanNub (0)
Super Smash Bros. Fan (0)

Not voting: xvart, diddin

With 12 alive, it takes 7 votes to lynch.

Deadline is July 21, 10:30 AM (GMT + 10:00).

ChibiSanNub has been prodded.