/Invitational 11: Pick your Poison 5 (Game Over)

[VasudeVa]

Your hypocrisy pains me. One could say that your self-defense is all INTERPRETATIONS which are not the same level as proof.

I'm asserting that it is evidence that I am Town. I don't think I said that it proves I'm town, it just makes me more likely to be Town.

[Herodotus]

Your hypocrisy pains me. One could say that your self-defense is all INTERPRETATIONS which are not the same level as proof.

I'm asserting that it is evidence that I am Town. I don't think I said that it proves I'm town, it just makes me more likely to be Town.

Couldn't Seraphim say the same?

[Seraphim]

Generally, a good defense offers alternate interpretations of the case. So far, your defense seems to consist entirely of "Yeah, my play sucks, but don't lynch me because my play sucks. Hey, look over there, confirmation bias!"

[VasudeVa]

Your hypocrisy pains me. One could say that your self-defense is all INTERPRETATIONS which are not the same level as proof.

I'm asserting that it is evidence that I am Town. I don't think I said that it proves I'm town, it just makes me more likely to be Town.

Couldn't Seraphim say the same?

True. But I'm denying him as much as he's denying me so we're good.

[Herodotus]

Your hypocrisy pains me. One could say that your self-defense is all INTERPRETATIONS which are not the same level as proof.

I'm asserting that it is evidence that I am Town. I don't think I said that it proves I'm town, it just makes me more likely to be Town.

EBWOP: He offered some counterpoints to SK's case; did his counterpoints not make him more likely to be town? You reacted as if he needed to PROVE HE'S NOT SCUM.

[VasudeVa]

Generally, a good defense offers alternate interpretations of the case. So far, your defense seems to consist entirely of "Yeah, my play sucks, but don't lynch me because my play sucks. Hey, look over there, confirmation bias!"

I DID GIVE YOU ALTERNATE INTERPRETATIONS. You've kept lollygagging in confirmation bias land, which I am now interpreting to be scum motivated.

[VasudeVa]

Your hypocrisy pains me. One could say that your self-defense is all INTERPRETATIONS which are not the same level as proof.

I'm asserting that it is evidence that I am Town. I don't think I said that it proves I'm town, it just makes me more likely to be Town.

EBWOP: He offered some counterpoints to SK's case; did his counterpoints not make him more likely to be town? You reacted as if he needed to PROVE HE'S NOT SCUM.

His counterpoints were bad.

SK: Here's evidence that Seraphim is scum! *long good case filled with good interpretations*
Seraph: OH YEAH!? WELL, THAT DOESN'T PROVE ANYTHING!!! ALSO, STRAWMAN, MISREP ETC.

[Seraphim]

What makes SK's case on me more valid and "good" than my defense of it? What makes my counterpoints terrible?

[Herodotus]

Your hypocrisy pains me. One could say that your self-defense is all INTERPRETATIONS which are not the same level as proof.

I'm asserting that it is evidence that I am Town. I don't think I said that it proves I'm town, it just makes me more likely to be Town.

Couldn't Seraphim say the same?

True. But I'm denying him as much as he's denying me so we're good.

No, that's not good. I can't find the right words to explain what I mean, but an approximation is: that is treating the game like a personal competition.

What makes SK's case on me more valid and "good" than my defense of it? What makes my counterpoints terrible?

Vas, answering this would help a lot.

[Patrick]

Votecount

ekiM (1) -- Ellibereth
VasudeVa (4) -- Seraphim, ooba, SpyreX, Kmd4390
ooba (4) -- Papa Zito, Plumegranate, Rhinox, ekiM
DrippingGoofball (2) -- mith, Elmo
Seraphim (3) -- SaintKerrigan, DrippingGoofball, VasudeVa

Not voting: Zorblag, Herodotus, zoraster
17 alive, 9 to lynch.

Deadline: 11th of September, 6 am GMT.

[VasudeVa]

What makes SK's case on me more valid and "good" than my defense of it? What makes my counterpoints terrible?

You are attacking his interpretations by saying it does not prove anything. True, it doesn't prove anything but that doesn't mean his case is bad. SK could be wrong too(in the event that you are Town.)

It is also why I'm supposedly 'dodging' your attacks on me. Those are your interpretations and it is a case. I've told you your earlier case was good(I said I agreed with 80% of it) but that doesn't stop you from being wrong(since I'm Town). Also, you're completely ignoring new evidence(Scum choice of Vig + supposed coached VI me) that is evidence that I'm Town.

Therefore, I now think you are scum because you are still standing by your old washed up case while not listening to the new evidence that has come forth.

[Seraphim]

So, in other words, my defense is bad because I've been doing exactly what you've been doing this entire game to me?

And that's not true. The reason SK's case fails is because, even if the points were valid, he fails to connect the points he has made. For instance, he doesn't say why me throwing a little spin on my case means the entire case is fake. All he's done with that point is prove that I've thrown spin on the case, which I would agree with...what writer worth his salt does that? '

I don't understand why the second point makes me look bad at all.

The third point is the only one I've found valid but over clarification is just something I do as town and scum because I know, as both town and scum, that if I don't clarify, it will come to bite me in the ass later.

The fourth point I offered a very valid misconception of the facts on my part.

[DrippingGoofball]

Gah. Seraphim may not be scum after all. He's making my scumdar spin like a top.

Just top fighting.

Iso zoraster, dammit.

The scum is there.

Tunnel, lurk, lurk, lurk.

VOTE: zoraster

[DrippingGoofball]

First, zoraster tunnels on me.

Then, the below:

I'm not upset you're voting Hoopla. I'm upset you're voting people and then refusing to say why. And for defending people without saying why.

If you don't want to play the game, don't sign up for the game

.

This is RICH in "foresight." Look at Mr. Push-The-Lurkers throwing his weight around! Later, he himself starts to lurk hard.

Why MME, mith? Three of your four top 4 are pretty active and have had suspicion on them from others. I don't think that's true of MME.

= Active lurking textbook example.

got a prod. been traveling to visit my folks. I'll evaluate why there aren't more DGB votes shortly (as well as whether the other wagons have merit).

He never follows through on the DGB-hate.

AUG 18:

Active lurking, doesn't say anything significant

In a game with this amount of superstars and at the pace we are going,

there has to be at least one lurking.

Yes I know that silly stuff about 1 of 6 players is scum blah blah blah. What I did was to give a DEFINED list of players. Random can kiss my ass. In endgame, every reason to decide your vote counts and adding green to this defined list (with town flips) should be helpful in the long run.

Zoraster is still blabbing on about lurkers, and he's correct! He's the lurker-scum.

Zoraster, can you explain in two sentences why you want to lynch DGB?

Sure:
DGB made her anti-town "gambit" without any real calculation on whether it was helpful to the town, but she reasoned (correctly, it seems) that a "gambit" almost always comes across as pro-town, even when its substance is decidedly not. DGB is absolutely capable of using such a ploy, and we should not allow scummy behavior to slip by just because it comes from an chaotic player.

Fake-sounding tunneling thank you very much.

V/LA until Sunday night

OK, I buy this one.

Back from vacation. I have a game I'm modding that I need to launch, but I'll be catching up very soon, given that the deadline approaches.

*** NOTE THE CHANGE IN POSTING FREQUENCY ***

isn't everyone "maybe scum"? In any case, sorry for the absences. Been bad timing with travel, the timing of night, etc.

I'm reviewing back, but some of my reading feels "stale" if you know what I mean. Perhaps better to answer some questions to get back into it? Anyone have any for me or was that wagon just driven out of malaise?

^^^^^^^^^^^ Is that post scum, or what? Ask a vague question to no one in particular and run.

[mith]

Papa Zito's case is a pretty meh. The "Roleblocker blocking Vig = Scum found Vig" part is interesting, but would mean scum wanted to use the Roleblocker blindly, potentially wasting shots they would want later in the game. (Also, ooba doesn't seem the sort of player to come up with a plan like that.) Otherwise, it boils down to a "the Rolecop could find the Vig" argument - which is true, but is really just a statement of the strength of the Rolecop and leaves the question of why the scum gave us a Vig in the first place.

At some point, I want to look through the statements of "what would you have given as scum" to see if there's anything point to who might have been more likely to give us a Vig and a Tracker. (Unfortunately, I'm not terribly confident in that leading to anything useful. If I had a complete MD/meta workup of every player in the game and had a clear picture of how everyone evaluated the various roles, that's one thing, but scum have an obvious incentive to lie about it during day 0. But maybe something will come up on the "that doesn't look like a genuine statement" front.)

ooba: Answer Rhinox's point in 1000: Why did you go from a stance of "zoraster>VV" yesterday to voting VV, on the basis of 801?

Also agree with Rhinox's assessment of SpyreX, and that ooba's vote has some bus-like properties - except I don't think VV is scum, so I won't be voting for ooba on that basis. I've had some doubts about Seraphim's scumminess along the lines of Rhinox's defense, but at the moment my read on Seraphim is something like "Has done some scummy things, and overreached a couple of times with the VV case; could see town getting drawn into a vote based on VV's playstyle, but could see scum getting drawn to an 'easy lynch' as well; don't see anything pointing to his being town."

Third paragraph is weird, though - zoraster hasn't said anything at all, and Papa Zito seems to be locked into tunnel-mode, but both of those things are either scummy/not scummy on their own. Feels a bit like Rhinox is trying to create a scummy motivation where there isn't one, and is particularly reaching when he brings me into it. Almost a "hey, don't forget about mith, he could be scum!" sort of thing, much like DGB's 395. (The "these people aren't discussing VV" thing is especially odd coming from someone who earlier today posted "Here's an idea...lets ignore the VVI and lynch scum".)

DGB: Two questions. One: How accurate do you feel your reads are, in general? Two: If you're innocent, how do you think you would have played this game to this point as scum?

Agreed that zoraster's most recent post is pretty scummy; I guess I missed it amongst the Kmd/Elmo talk.

[mith]

Oh, one more.

Papa Zito: Who is your top suspect other than ooba if ooba is scum? Who is your top suspect if ooba is town?

[DrippingGoofball]

DGB: Two questions. One: How accurate do you feel your reads are, in general?

Does Geezer Mafia count? It totally shouldn't, because I sucked it in, I vig'ed two townies, didn't suspect 2 scumbags, defended the third... So, we agree not to count this game, I'd say my reads are about 40% correct, and normally the scum is roughly 25% of the players, so that's pretty good. If we do include Geezer Mafia, my reads are, historically, 0% correct and I should stick to modding.

Two: If you're innocent, how do you think you would have played this game to this point as scum?

Sounds like you're begging for WIFOM-sauce, so here it is. First of all, you'd be dead, not tajo. Also, if I were scum, and VV was my buddy, he'd be lynched already. And - you've seen me use the confused/paranoid card in your game, so... that one is about 7 layers of WIFOM.

[mith]

I found your earlier statement ("Now that you mention it, 100% of my reads are self-meta projections...") pretty interesting - I'd say most of my reads are "how are scum likely to act?" projections, but not

self-meta

projections. (That is, my current vote isn't based on you acting like I think I would as scum, but rather on you acting like I think

you

would as scum.) It's especially odd to see such a statement coming from you, given that you have one of the more unique playstyles on the site.

Anyway, question one was more a curiosity. Part of what I'm looking at in question two is: "If DGB is using a self-meta projection to scumhunt, does her self-meta match her scumhunting?" - and at the moment, I don't see a lot of that (for example: Would DGB-scum tunnel/lurk, as she is giving as her reason for a zoraster vote?), though that may be because DGB missed the point of the question, instead focusing on "this is what I'm not doing, but would do as scum" WIFOM-defense.

Possible slip in that she is now assuming that tajo was the scum kill; while she has expressed some confidence that Elmo is town after his claim/rationale post, this again reads as certainty rather than assumption (much like the "scum know there are no hiders" thing from day 0 that kicked off my DGB suspicion). The progression from "Kmd has role info, all ahead full!" to "I'm convinced Elmo is town to the point that I am assuming tajo was the scum kill" that town-DGB would have had to make just doesn't feel plausible.

[Rhinox]

Third paragraph is weird, though - zoraster hasn't said anything at all, and Papa Zito seems to be locked into tunnel-mode, but both of those things are either scummy/not scummy on their own. Feels a bit like Rhinox is trying to create a scummy motivation where there isn't one, and is particularly reaching when he brings me into it. Almost a "hey, don't forget about mith, he could be scum!" sort of thing, much like DGB's 395. (The "these people aren't discussing VV" thing is especially odd coming from someone who earlier today posted "Here's an idea...lets ignore the VVI and lynch scum".)

hmph. I did say that didn't I. Not many took that advice though. Is that why you haven't been weighing in on the subject? If not, my point still has some validity to it.

[DrippingGoofball]

You're forcing me to navel-gaze, something I like to avoid.

I don't want to bore people with self-analysis, but yes, I do have reads on people that are based on how I've acted as scum in the past, and how I've seen my buddies act and interact. My playstyle may be unique only because I am not going to let caution get in the way of scum hunting, ie, the fear of garnering votes, or the fear of being NK'd. My personal longevity, especially as town, is not relevant - unless I'm a PR, but even then, I'm pretty impulsive. Besides, the "self-meta projection" works. It delivers.

(for example: Would DGB-scum tunnel/lurk, as she is giving as her reason for a zoraster vote?), though that may be because DGB missed the point of the question, instead focusing on "this is what I'm not doing, but would do as scum" WIFOM-defense.

The F??? You ask me a question that can only be answered with a WIFOM-BBQ, then you call it "WIFOM-defense" when it wasn't even answering an accusation, but some apparent idle curiosity? This is more WIFOM, but I actually answered without even thinking about how you might perceive me to be behaving in this game, since that's WIFOM, too. Your question was a loaded one, in the sense that you could spew out your preconceived retort regardless of what I've answered.

Your last paragraph is disingenuous. You know me better than than. You've modded me. Either you're scum, and want to keep my seat warm for a possible lynch, or... disingenuous-ness is hardly a town tell.

I just made an excellent case on zoraster, and I see that after not posting a while, you show up, scheming to discredit my case by way of discrediting me, couched in WIFOM-voodoo-semantics that I have little patience for.

Mith + zoraster

YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST

mith really needs to die

[DrippingGoofball]

hmph. I did say that didn't I. Not many took that advice though. Is that why you haven't been weighing in on the subject? If not, my point still has some validity to it.

mith is scum, though.

[Rhinox]

@Rhinox:
Post 1014: serious? (y/n)

Serious, but not a strong consideration. Its interesting, but circumstantial only. Something I'd be curious if it was valid, in the post game discussion.

Out of curiosity, what is THE reason to lynch ooba? It seems a wagon built on wagoning for wagoning's sake.

Unexplained flip from "zoraster>VV" to "vote: VV". The reasoning given by ooba is that one of VV's posts today in particular is not scum hunting while appearing to be useful. I have hinted already so I might as well say it, you could have made that arguement well before today. From VV's iso:

this post
this post

both give off the trying to be useful vibe, but failing. There are plenty of posts prior to today to support the "VV is not scumhunting" half of the argument.

[DrippingGoofball]

Unexplained flip from "zoraster>VV" to "vote: VV".

Could be a variant of FOS:scumpal, vote:townie.

[Rhinox]

Unexplained flip from "zoraster>VV" to "vote: VV".

Could be a variant of FOS:scumpal, vote:townie.

[SaintKerrigan]

V/LA for the weekend due to being away for my birthday.

I think MME drops back in while I'm gone, so if that's so, cya'll later. I regret not having time to reply to Seraph's rebuttals, but hopefully I got a few of you to look in his direction.