Mafia 1114: Jim's Mafia - Game OVER!!!!

[ICEninja]

How much scummier can you be than a cold heartless assassin?

I'm cold and calculating, and will catch scum with ninja precision. I am not an assassin, thank you very much.

And yes, hello to you as well Oso. I wasn't referring to our game together, actually. I was referring to the one I am currently dead in, and shall not discuss. Our past game really wasn't as terrible, I just got frustrated.

Anyways, I like to open up games with a few questions.
1) What is everybody's timezone? This can be important if you live overseas and we're expecting a post from you, and it wont come until the wee hours of the morning.
2) What is your mafia experience here and elsewhere? It helps my reads to know who are the pros and who are still learning.
3) About how often can we expect you to post? Is this consistent with your meta?

I live in PST, which is something like GMT -8. I've played a decent number of games (check sig for amount) here, and have played/modded a good number of party based mafia. I post a lot, and they tend to be long posts. This is how I have played in every game, and will continue to play as long as time permits.

I feel like the beginnings of this game haven't been particularly productive. They usually aren't great, but as David pointed out, this stage has been even more random than is normal. Mute, why do you feel the need to make two random votes that don't actually advance the game?

[ICEninja]

Javert, thank you for pointing out the short deadlines. I was considering doing so myself. I'm particularly concerned with how short the days are considering prods aren't sent out until 72 hours of non-activity. I will likewise be unkind to lurkers given the situation, but your vote was quite premature. You voted someone for not posting yet on your first post, and it seems a bit hypocritical to me. I don't like it.

How don't they? Voting to get people involved, get discussions going, acquire info, find people whom are felt to be scum, etc etc etc.

You voted people based on their name. That doesn't do anything to get discussion going. There are some things people do to get discussion going, such as bandwagoning, voting people supporting bandwagons, asking questions, reaction hunting, etc. However, simply making random votes for random reasons do nothing of what you said.

Also, the only way Javert could overtly know that magnus is scum is if he is his scum buddy. I too, as indicated by a comment made earlier in this post (that is now obsolete but I don't feel like deleting for transparency reasons), believed he voted a player for reasons of not posting yet. Simply declaring a player scum without "if" is one of the most solid scum tells in the game, I'd say. I don't usually make serious votes like this so early, but...

Vote Javert

.

[ICEninja]

Excellent. This game has developed quickly and nicely, and is now fully developing in to real discussion. I will

unvote

now, as my vote has served its purpose and then some. I got a town impression from Javert responding to my overly strong accusation.

I've bolded the hyperbole.

Yes. The hyperbole was intended.

I feel like it is perfectly reasonable to question making two random votes. One completely random vote (I.E. voting someone because of their name) is inherently completely useless to the game. Two is doing something useless again. I've stated previously what things a player can do to advance the game, with both myself and Javert (and some others) having done some of these. I simply wanted to know if he was random voting for the purpose of having fun (completely innocent) or, more tellingly, if he was random voting because he though he was helping the game along. By random voting and claiming he was attempting to advance the game, I get the impression that he is trying to make himself look as if he is doing more, posting more, etc. than he really is.

Furthermore, I am absolutely disgusted by his consideration of policy lynching on day 2. David said everything I feel about that, essentially. I'd feel inclined to vote mute for the policy lynch suggestion alone as lynching someone based off of a random vote is not town motivated at all, and helps scum by causing confusion, robbing town of a lynch, and proceeding to night without having sufficient information gained. Everything else just makes me want to vote him even more.

Vote Mute.

We need some real content out of manut, Prox, magnus, and Rob.

[ICEninja]

The town were all tunneling on a player because of his refusal to answer questions and be apart of the town. He was not playing as "apart" of the town, so he got wagoned. That's somewhat understandable. However, it was an undesirable situation, because I clearly saw the intent behind Javert's play, and while I didn't think it was necessarily respective of him being town, it was definitely not worth labeling him scum over. They were "valid" points, but they just weren't thought out points

I'd like to point out that while all of this is true, we get a better read of the people who were participating. Most players, now, have made at least one (and many of us have made several) posts that contribute to the discussion and can be used to get reads on players. I feel like I have a better read on Javert now because we built a wagon on him, and that is helpful to us.

in fact it's probably more likely that the people unvoting and backpeddling now somewhat are scum.

This I disagree with, not just because it incriminates me, but just on simple mafia theory. I view the votes made against Javert as what I call "anti-RVS" votes, actions to garner reactions and advance discussion. Regardless of alignment, I make these votes and back out on them just like I would RVS votes, because I don't usually believe alignment can be determined by what happens on the first 2 pages of a game, barring strange occurrences.

I rather doubt that ICEninja would have eventually said "I was purposefully using hyperbole to try to see who else would vote Javert" if somebody had not called him out on it explicitly.

This isn't exactly what I did. I feel like I was fairly clear in that I voted for you not with the intent of seeing who else would vote you, but to get a better read on you specifically.

Claiming to have a "solid" scum tell and then backtracking to say it was all intentional and harmless hyperbole to gauge reactions sounds like you just got caught with your hand in the cookie jar.

Actually, it sounds like I did something very similar to what you did. You stated that "magnus is scum", and voted for him. I stated that "Javert is scum and this is why", and voted for you. You unvoted when it was obvious the purpose of your vote was served, and I unvoted when it was obvious the purpose of my vote was served. You are somewhat hypocritical to be calling me scummy for this.

And now you are trying to explain it away as being the Surprise Cookie Inspector. Attacking a player with a bad argument and then explaining it away as purposefully using a bad argument is not sitting with me.

Amusing analogy. What did you attack magnus for, again? Funny, I recall you saying that there was no reason and you were just reaction hunting. I never said I purposefully used a bad argument. I simply used the best argument I could, given the information we had. The first page or two of the game rarely yields any information that we can use to truly find someone's alignment, in my experience. At least not until we have more back information.

I have played my only game here on the site with ICE. His first vote struck me as really, really odd, not as ICE would do.
His "gambit" thing also wasn't something I would think ICE to do.

You'll find that I play fairly conservatively as an IC, particularly during day 1. When I'm not being looked to for example, I tend to play more recklessly.

I am going to ask again that players read, and give their opinion of, ICEninja's Post 47. I currently find it to be the most interesting post of the game. I find it very difficult to read a Town intention into this post.

Once again, considering we played at similar games, this strikes me oddly. Speaking from a psychological tell, people often project their scummy play on to other people. It may be worth considering that he is scum, and seeing me as scummy for doing something similar to what he did, completely unconsciously.

1)How exactly has the game developed "quickly and nicely"?
2)How has your vote served its purpose?
3)How has your vote served additional purpose (the "and then some" refereed to)?
4)Why do you get a town impression from Javert responding to your overly strong accusation?

I added numbering to make responses clearer.
1) The beginning of this game was more random than most random voting stages entail, in my personal experience. It began fairly uselessly. Things developed in to deep and serious discussion very quickly, and that is exactly how I like it.
2) I feel like I got a better read from Javert based on his response to my vote for him.
3) Additionally, my vote has generated further discussion amongst other players. This helps my reads as well. I'll likely begin making full fledged cases earlier this game than I normally do.
4) It wasn't just how he responded to my overly strong accusation, I felt like Javert (at the point of saying that, his more recent posts have piqued my interest somewhat) had very town motivated actions overall.

Part 2 is confusing because it is hard to figure out that he is talking about Mute here, and not explaining his unvote on Javert. At least, if my impression of it is correct.

My apologies, I should have made this more clear. Yes, the first part was about my unvote of Javert, and the second half was referring to why I've found Mute scummy thus far.

How are you not advocating the lynch of someone via a random vote with your previous vote on Javert, and your comments concerning mute in the above quote?

Not all votes are cast with the intention of lynching a player. I was not advocating Javert's lynch.

How exactly is advocating a policy lynch scummy? Do you believe that doing so is scum motivated?
How is advocating the lynch of someone for suggesting a policy lynch not also suggesting a policy lynch?

I believe that advocating a policy lynch on page 2 has no possible way of benefiting town. Scum, as I've already stated in an earlier post, can gain from this.

[ICEninja]

Explain why you felt like Javert had town motivated actions overall. Be specific.

Specifically, I'm referring to his ISO posts 3 and especially 4 where Javert seems very intent on bringing the town to a productive state. His reasoning for placing his original vote was, in my eyes, town motivated, and his vote on me, while misguided, appeared to be likewise placed by someone with town motivation. I'm not saying he's town, as while I've stated you can't determine that someone is scum from the very beginnings of the game you likewise can't declare someone overtly town this early, but it helps me in narrowing down good scum hunting targets for day 1.

I'm very interested in your case against David, as I've felt his actions to be town motivated. I'm reconsidering things from a different perspective, but likewise I find his response to be fairly compelling. I don't, however, feel like the points about the questions are terribly valid. I'm curious to see what David is going to be doing with his vote over the next few pages.

To be honest though, right now I feel like it is most likely that scum is in the shadows right now. I'm very interested, for example, to see what Rob has to say about the "going ons" tonight. Prox, as I stated earlier, also seems to be saying nothing about the actual discussion. We're at a stage of the game where we still really don't have reads on very many players, and I'm a bit worried that scum might just let these heavy accusations fly by, hop on the wagon after some good cases have been made, and slip through to day 2 without being noticed much.

[ICEninja]

I thought I answered all the questions directed at me. I apologize.

How do you bandwaggon without voting? How do you know he is not reaction hunting with his RVS votes?

This is a strange question. Bandwagoning and random voting are different. How can you simply lump them together? You have to vote, but any worthwhile bandwagon has to have better reasoning than "your name is scummy".

Do you think this adds anything useful at all to your vote?

What? That doesn't even make sense considering the situation. It was my reasoning for voting, so how can you ask if it adds anything useful to my vote?

Your questions don't give me the feeling that you really know what I'm talking about at all.

You refused to consider the possibiliy of a reaction seeking strategy by Javert and went all the way to support a vote (which you called serious) with a flawed additional argument (that only scum would know another players alignment... bussing accusation?).

You seem to be refusing to consider the possibility of a reaction seeking strategy by myself and are going all the way to supporting a vote you're calling serious on me. I'm not sure where people are getting the impression that what I said seemed forced. Both you and Javert have mentioned it, however, so I'll have to go back and read my own post to see where people are coming from.

Your responses are not void of logic but I consider that a trait of someone who knows how to carry out a discussion.

So you're calling me clever scum then? I'm feeling like you're going to use this statement to discount my contributions.

You try to politely shove off David's and Javert's inquiries. But, as they get more incisive, you start throwing back covert punches, that suggest a platform for a future vote (one that you can't afford to pull right now, because Mute is the easier wagon at this point).

Defending myself from and shoving off are completely different. I'm not throwing covert punches at all, I'm outright accusing Javert of hypocrisy. A lot of people are finding what I did scummy, and what Javert did pro-town. I just don't get it. I really honestly don't.

I'm not on Mute because he's the easier wagon, I'm on him because he looks the scummiest.

What A bold statement! Scum can gain from a policy lynch! It's like saying scum can gain from a mislynch. A non statement.

Someone asked. What was I supposed to say? I don't really think Javert is scum, as he's been acting with mostly pro-town intentions, or so it seems. I don't like his hypocritical attack on me, but I don't think he's scum for it. Mute, on the other hand, isn't acting with any pro-town intention that I can see. He's done quite a few things that bother me.

Here's a full case of why I'm suspicious of Mute.
-In ISOs 0 and 2, he places votes based on player's names. In ISO 3, he makes a statement suggesting his random votes accomplish a lot for town. Perhaps this is theory disagreement, but to me it looks like he's trying to make himself look more productive and pro-town than he is.
-In ISO 4 he makes a FoS against Javert. In ISO 5 he says that Javert's actions, as scum, wouldn't make sense. In ISO 6, he votes for Javert. In ISO 8, he says he feels justified in putting Javert at L-2. This seems contradictory to me.

This is in addition to his statement declaring a desire for a policy lynch that would hurt town and help scum. So yes, I think Mute is playing scummy. Does that mean I'm ready to declare him scum and lynch him? Absolutely not, it is page 3.

[ICEninja]

The single game I played with him (ICENinja), he was much milder in language until the point he got overly frustrated.

I've had a more cynical and frustrated look on mafia in general the past week or two, actually. I can't discuss it because it is ongoing, but a quick read through of day 1 of mini 1106 (its only a few pages) will tell you why. In response to CS's concerns, you'll also notice that I melted down quite unlike how I would have played in a newbie game. I would never have let that happen as an IC.

Rob, you seem to have a lot of material to indicate you are at odds with David. You seem to disagree with him a lot, but you make good points. I am concerned, however, that a lot of your post was dedicated to disagreeing with him and not a lot of it was dedicated to analyzing his alignment. Do you feel that his actions were scummy? Do you feel like David is more likely to flip scum than other players right now?

That wouldn't be a problem if it just seemed real. If his meta doesn't show him playing like this in his other games, then he must be scum.

Is he normally like this? Are you normally like this?

Yes, I'm always like this. Actually, I've been slightly more aggressive and have spent slightly less time combing through my previews than was typical for me 6 months ago. If you need a reference, I'd like to direct you to the end of this post, as I was town in that game as well. That comment gave me a good chuckle.

Your post #70 does not come off too well either. Firstly, you are preparing yourself to vote for me should a wagon kick off there by reluctantly saying I looked town but relooking you're not sure.

Honestly, at least right now I don't think I can. People keep making great points about you, but your responses are incredibly solid, and I'm having a really hard time keeping a suspicion on you very long. I often nod along at posts attacking you, agreeing with many of the points, but looking over your play and your responses as a whole, I actually have a slight town read on you.

Not explaining a random vote is a tried-and-true technique for getting reactions, and it is certainly not scummy.

In all seriousness, in my 15ish games I've played, I've never seen it before. Also, as I've stated, I did NOT purposefully set forth a bad argument. I took what was literally the best argument I had at the time (with the information I personally had) and pushed it harder than the strength of the case would suggest.

Just as you say what you did to start the game is common and normal to you, what I did to start the game is common and normal to me. I very regularly start games with making an over the top attack on someone based on an RVS vote, and it works. I was genuinely surprised when so many people called me scummy for doing this, too.

I think that had the Town largely agreed with your post -- and thought me scummy for not explaining myself -- you most certainly would not have said "wait a minute, guys, I was just joking around with my argument." I do not get the feeling that you were just "gauging reactions"; I think you were legitimately trying to paint me as scummy.

Then you're wrong. I honestly don't know what I can say about this, because this is a conclusion you have jumped to.

Splitting up my posts because this is becoming too long.

[ICEninja]

Oh my goodness I've been calling Poirot Patriot. I do this all the time, where my brain change's people's names. I'm sorry, it will be correct now.

Oso, what are you talking about? The only way Javert's opening vote without explanation could be scummy is because he knows, with scum information, who scum is. Mute then said that this couldn't be the case, but proceeded to vote for him anyway. How is that twisting words or anything of what you said?

He has just tried to sell us on something that just isn't so using a blatant distortion, again in my opinion.

Can you try to explain this again? I really don't understand where this is coming from.

There's a clear difference between somebody taking a (what should have been) clearly baiting action early at the very start of the game and somebody (ie you) being an ostensibly serious wagon for the same silly reason that many people were joining the wagon and then saying "Teehee I was faking it"

Well as I stated in my last post, I've never seen that "clearly baiting action" before. I figured it was just RVS play that

could

have been fueled with scum knowledge. As I've said countless times before, it was the strongest case I could make with what I had. I never said "teehee I was faking it". I never faked anything. Why do people keep making up things about what I did? I simply stated that I over-pushed the wagon based on the strength of the case.

This just isn't true. You completely misrepresent Mute as saying that his random votes "accomplish a lot". what he actually said was much more understated:

Not at all. I asked him "how do your votes help the game" and he responds "how don't they?" and lists a bunch of things votes (and he's implying HIS votes) do to advance the game. It isn't a strong tell, but it's what I got out of it.

secondly I would like to add that i don't really care for the reason that Ice gave for his mute vote and I don't like the strong reaction he had to the policy lynching suggestion. I will be honest I am not 100% against a policy lynch if I know the player's habits and he is going to screw town over (furclow for example) and I don't think anyone in here has shown traits of being bad enough to deserve a PL.

If Javert had displayed furclow behavior, then I wouldn't have had such a strong reaction. Javert did nothing wrong when Mute proposed his PL, which is why I was disgusted.

What you see above was the whole argument. The additional points of your "full case" have just popped up out of nowhere. This looks to me as a clear case of fabricating evidence based on your current needs.

I stated in my earlier post that you quoted that "everything else just makes me want to vote him more". These points you claim I fabricated were said everything else. Also, the point about the 2 random votes was something I was on his case about earlier, so that didn't pop out of nowhere. I hadn't mentioned his uncertainty about Javert is all.

As you can see, you argued that Javert could only know magnus_orion was scum if he, himself, was scum. That would be bussing. Mute thought that might warrant a Modkill. He was wrong, but his thought process was valid. He didn't say Javert was or wasn't scum. He just didn't think Javert was bussing, as you portrayed.

Then what reason did Mute have to suspect Javert if he didn't think he had scum knowledge? It's the only way that his actions could be viewed as sucmmy, at least from what I can see.

The very same tactics you expressed were the correct way to act might just apply to both Mute and Javert. SPECIALLY Javert (Which you decided to vote in that post).

I'm fairly certain I SPECIFICALLY said that Javert participated in doing this. I don't believe Mute did anything to advance the game at the beginnings.

I thought B was so weak that it was an addition to A) to strengthen the vote. You said it was a SERIOUS vote.

OK I see what you mean now. I had never seen anyone simply declare someone is scum on the first page before. This argument made sense at the time.

I think ICE saw that and thought them to be scummy and therefore voted for Mute. No scummy intentions.

This isn't exactly what happened. My primary reasoning for my vote on Javert was to get a better read on him, but I do tend to regularly advance games out of the RVS stage. I don't even consciously think about it anymore. Mute wasn't scummy for simply following my lead, but he is scummy for how he over reacted, considering a policy lynch based on RVS behavior. This just looked and still looks like someone trying to push a mislynch before people really even think about it.

This game is quite exhausting so far.

[ICEninja]

Pretty sure I'm at L-3

[ICEninja]

am going to declare V/LA till monday. too much work, i will get a full read in when i can.

Until Monday? You're going to be taking more than 1/3rd of day 1 off with that V/LA.

You never faked anything? Yet you said you have a solid tell on Javert, then later said you just used the hyperbole for reaction hunting purposes.

Really? This is your reason for jumping on my wagon? This is definitely as opportunistic of a vote as Prox's. Exaggerating and faking something are not the same at all. Saying I'm cautious but also reckless? How does that even make sense? I'm just playing how I always play, except more frustrated.

By the way, despite hating lurkers, I do like what Prox has posted in general, he has been straight-up and hasn't pretended that he will "catch up soon" or post some semi-fake-content which I would see as more likely to come from scum who don't have the time to keep up with all the wall posts we are posting.

Seriously? Have you read his ISO? He's hardly contributed anything, and really seems to be just hopping on my wagon and supporting it without contributing to it.

People have done a lot of accusing me of being on and off opportunistic wagons, but people really need to be looking at Prox and Jerbs. Do they really believe in votes for me, or are they just trying to push a mislynch?

Magnus, I'll set aside some time to be very specific about responding to you.

[ICEninja]

Alright magnus, here is very specifically what I felt I accomplished in my vote.

Firstly and most obviously, it drove us in to meaningful discussion and real votes. Unfortunately this lead to a bandwagon on me, but there have been some scummy jumps on to my wagon which could very well help town. This is what I was referring to when I said "and then some" when referring to that I had accomplished my goals.

In Javert's ISO 4, he explained exactly and clearly what he was intending to accomplish with his vote. Very specifically, he said this:

Not explaining a vote the instant you make it is not scummy, and I would be amused to see any person voting for me try to argue otherwise. I was hoping - at the least - to see magnus_orion's reaction, but with David Parker's post I suspect any reaction I may have gotten has now been lost.

He calls for people to actually explain why his actions were scummy, full well knowing that, considering this revelation, weren't. Granted this wasn't the reason I initially voted for him, as I insinuated that a player declaring someone scum has scum inside information, but he's right. He wanted to see a player's reaction to pressure, and had good intentions. Town points for being the first player to actively scum hunt with specific goals in mind.

Secondly, he examines my play more closely. He points out this about my play:

Essentially, ICEninja complains about Mute for making two random votes because random votes do not advance the game. But immediately afterwards, when I make a vote that is seemingly not random - i.e., a post that will likely advance the game - ICEninja jumps on me as if it is suspicious in Post 22.

While I didn't attack him to shut down action that would advance the game, and therefore this contradiction doesn't really stack, it shows more solid and genuine looking scum hunting from Javert. This wasn't exactly the reaction I was expecting, per se, and it had a dash of OMGUS in it, I felt that it was town driven suspicion. Javert fully knew that his vote was not scummy. Therefore, he attacked a vote that was based on actions that weren't scummy. This is a good and logical argument, if one assumes that I knew what he was doing at the beginning, that indicates further scum hunting.

I generally regard the first player to make a well reasoned vote that makes sense to be pro-town. This is because scum, in my experience, are less likely to be making waves. It's simply safer for scum to sit back and wait for someone like Javert to throw down a vote on me and to pile up the votes after a lot of people suspect the player, much like what Jerbs and Prox have done.

Since then, Javert hasn't read as the most town player, but I won't be voting him any time soon unless he says something that really bothers me. Hopefully you now have a good detailed understanding of everything I was thinking.

Now, I'd like to finally take a breather for trying to explain to everyone why I'm not scum and point out to everyone how scummy Mute has been behaving.

Right now, everyone who thinks that I twisted around Mute's words, read this statement:

The reasoning I had then was a scum-ploy to oust their partner to favor a town-reputation.

This is referring to the fact that he felt, at the time he voted Javert, that Javert was busing his partner to gain town cred. I would like to remind everyone that he made this statement IN BETWEEN his FoS and vote for Javert:

Problem is, if he is scum, why would he be ousting his partner now?

He clearly felt that Javert would not be scum busing his partner. Yet now he goes back and states that his reasoning for voting Javert, which happens in his next post, was that he was ousting his partner to gain town cred.

Also, when questioned about why he found Javert scummy enough to vote, he made this very strange statement:

Yay best defense I have is nothing but needless WIFOM at this point which even I don't fully trust. =_=

I can't quite put my finger on why this bugs me, but this just doesn't strike me as a town response to a very straightforward question.

In ISO 13, he states that he hasn't responded to CS's points simply because they weren't directed at him. That's a pretty weak excuse to not answer questions. In his own example of a guy addressing a crowd about him, I don't see any reason why the accused can't stand up and refute the points, once again speaking to everyone.

The funny thing, ISO 13 is all excuse as to why he isn't answering CS's questions, and he does absolutely nothing to actually respond. The whole post feels like a red herring to me. Especially with the amount of quotes he uses to fluff it up.

In ISO 14, he basically says everything all over again, and then

finally

responds in very weak terms, and very briefly.

In ISO 15, he OMGUS attacks CS pretty hard. His reasoning for suspecting him is, as far as I can tell, "he suspected me and attacked in a way that I couldn't easily defend". He also makes a pretty bold statement:

You, Conspiracy, I feel are scum.

This is a pretty strong statement to not follow up with a vote. Is it because you realize how weak your attack on CS is, and have scum knowledge that he's town?

[ICEninja]

Edger, two things. One, I never once thought that Javert was going to push a lynch on a scum buddy at the beginning of day 1. Outing him now would potentially give Javert some town cred later if magnus gets lynched. Javert could come back and say "I knew it all along", etc. Two, scum throwing a partner under the bus for town cred is by no means against the rules. Mod has blatantly stated this in game. Several of your statements against me are incorrect because of these facts.

Again, you're stating that exaggerating and lying are one and the same. I wasn't lying in believing that having scum knowledge of who scum is and who scum isn't is a scum tell. Is it not? The question of the matter is, how much did what Javert say indicate that he has scum knowledge? Given how he said he was reaction testing, that is a perfectly reasonable motive for his statement that magnus is scum, and means he probably wasn't saying anything out of having scum knowledge. Had Javert not been reaction testing, then that would have helped my read on him. If, down the road, one of Javert and magnus flipped scum, I would have suspected the other based on the RVS events.

I admit the wording of my original vote could have been better. I believe that someone knowing who is scum is a very solid scum tell. Stating that someone is scum without a qualifier is usually the slip that scum makes to indicate that they have inside knowledge of who is scum and who is not. My exaggeration was that what Javert did was blatantly stating that he knew who scum was. He was, but he probably didn't have information that actually indicated if magnus is or is not scum.

[ICEninja]

I said I didn't believe he would push for a lynch. He voted him, but pushing for a lynch on day 1 is absurd. That would be outing his scum partner. My theory was that he was simply distancing.

Assume Javert is scum. Assume Javert knows that Magnus is also scum. Why would Javert out Magnus in his first post?

He wouldn't think anyone would take him seriously, being that it was his first post. Even if they are scum buddies, I don't feel like he actually outed him. People say stupid things in the RVS all the time. Scum often vote for each other in the RVS to distance themselves. I felt it was a possibility that he was distancing himself, but letting it slip that he actually knew someone was scum.

It's optimistic to think that, but hey.

Rob, your case against David is a lot better and more clear now. I'd like him to respond before I comment on something I disagree about, however.

I didn't however, notice the whole bit about magnus. Now that you point it out, it does seem like he's been defending me and questioning those voting me. I guess since this was good for me I ignored it, but now that I think about it he could be doing this with scum knowledge that I'm town.

Now Prox, you really need to explain that vote on me. You're being seriously vague, and there's really no way I can defend myself against what you've said. You really seem to be making up scum tells here. You keep talking about my tone changing and adapting. Why does this make me scum? Town doesn't want to get lynched either. I'm trying to get this pressure off me because there are scummier players than me out there that need to be lynched instead.

This game has been a rough one for me. Of course I'm going to be careful about what I say. Of course I'm going to adapt to the pressure on me. None of this indicates scum in the slightest.

And no, it is absolutely not time for claim. My case against Mute is very sound, and hardly anyone has touched on it. A sizable case was just thrown down against DP, and while I may not fully agree with it, it carries some merit. A claim right now would help scum significantly, and town not at all.

[ICEninja]

Javert, how am I being squirrelly? Have you even read my case against Mute? What do you think about the case against DP? Your blatant tunnel vision is hurting this game, as this day is clearly not over.

Oso, the only reason anyone at that point could have thought Javert was scum based on his vote was because he was letting slip scum knowledge. Mute admitted to having voted Javert for this reason, yet in the post you seem to think I'm twisting his words, he didn't think scum would bus their partner at this point.

He just specifically said "Problem is, if he is scum, why would he be ousting his partner now?", and then proceeded to vote Javert in his next post because he believed Javert was ousting his partner.

Please explain how I am not justified in being suspicious of Mute for this?

That's where the distortion is at, you painted another player in the absolutely worst possible light with that string of ISOs by dropping an unrelated post in there and trying to get it to say what you wanted to.

Wrong. You seem so convinced that I'm scum that you're ignoring the fact that I caught Mute in a very scummy activity, and are attacking me for calling him out on this.

[ICEninja]

Oso, I seriously can not believe you right now. I just read your post and the fact that you still think I'm wrong and scummy for pointing out what Mute has done that is horribly scummy is just beyond me.

As I've said again and again without anyone seeming to listen or pay attention or understand any of it,

the only way Mute could have found Javert scummy at the time of his FoS and vote was because he felt Javert was busing/distancing a scum buddy

. He later confirmed that this was true, AND called it faulty reasoning.

In one post, he FoSs Javert for the above underlined reason. He then implies that the above underlined reason probably isn't the case. He then VOTES FOR JAVERT FOR THE ABOVE UNDERLINED REASON, despite having said IN HIS LAST POST that it wouldn't make sense for scum to be doing this.

The fact that no one else but me seems to notice this is beyond frustrating.

It is apparent that Javert is going to view me as scum for the rest of the game simply because of his bias. He thinks I'm lying, though I haven't lied about anything this entire game. Sure I exaggerated, but Javert also outright said that magnus is scum, when Javert had no information as to magnus's scum. I still don't see the difference.

[ICEninja]

Sorry CS, I forgot that you were also noticing how scummy Mute is.

[ICEninja]

Attacking bad play or bad arguments is not the same as defending the player who the attacks are directed towards. This appears to be what DavidParker did. He came to the game to see ridiculous attacks on me, and pointed out why they were silly.

And this is exactly what I was going to say, not wanting to speak for David before he posted, but it's already out there. I agree with this.

I don't like you "abridging" my quote though. I felt like that was extremely rude.

[ICEninja]

You overemphasize how good discussion is for Town, and it looks completely contrived

A quick scan through my games shows that I'm no fan of the RVS. I didn't overemphasize anything, I just personally want discussion to get serious quickly. You're interpreting this as something scummy when it is not.

You basically say you were "pretending" to look scummy

You made this up. I never did this. I said, for the 6th or so time that I exaggerated the best case I could make. I didn't do anything scummy.

You claim to be "disgusted" with the mention of policy lynching

I was. It was an awful suggestion, and as I've said enough times, policy lynching you based on what you had done would have hurt town and helped scum. How is it scummy for me to be disgusted with the suggestion?

Then you immediately shift focus to four players for not posting enough by Page 2 of the game.

Oh so it's scummy to call lurkers to post in the game? Shall we read your first post? Of course I'm going to call attention to people who aren't me. People who aren't me weren't posting. We, as you pointed out, have short deadlines this game so we need people posting. Why are you calling something that you've done scummy?

Sure you can go ahead and think that my tone is fake and that I'm lying, but you don't know me. You're calling me scum for just being me. That whole vote and post 47 is pretty much exactly what I would have said even if I was scum, which is why this is so frustrating.

[ICEninja]

If I was still deciding among my top suspects, this would have changed my mind in and of itself. This is just the mafia equivalent of "hey, look over there".

No, I was requested to claim prematurely. Several people seem fairly dead set on my lynch, but no one else has said that I should claim. The people who are already dead set on my lynch are going to lynch me regardless of what I claim, so I have no interest in claiming for them (you) anyway.

I agree. A lynch without a claim is bad - but not lynching somebody because they don't claim is infinitely worse.

I'm not refusing to claim in hoping that town wont lynch me. I'm refusing to claim now because it isn't time for a lynch yet.

Prox, you sure seem to be flailing. So now you think you felt like I was "too town" and faking it, but then you put your vote back on me because you're assuming other people have good reasons?

This wagon on me is getting fishier by the moment. The weirdest thing is that the most suspicion player (in my eyes) is the only one that seems to think I'm town.

[ICEninja]

By flailing I didn't mean like scum caught in a corner flailing, I mean struggling to find a place with his vote. Way for everyone to take my words out of context.

And I KNEW Mute would switch his vote over to me once the wagon was getting close. I simply knew it.

Guys, after you lynch me today, please lynch Mute tomorrow. Seriously.

[ICEninja]

I'm going to be busy until late-ish tonight, so don't lynch me before that please.

[ICEninja]

Forget it, I'm not reading all this. I'm done with this game. You got me.

I'm literally about 90% sure that I would have been today's lynch regardless of my role, because I played with EXACTLY the same mindset as I always do. My post 47 would have been exactly the same, word for word. I would have reacted to the pressure the same, adjusted my tone and adapted to pressure the same, and I would have made the exact same case against Mute. I'm extremely pissed out about how smug Javert is going to be about "catching" me, but it was simply dumb luck. Dumb being the operative word.

There are 2 mafia families, I think, which is why I played with EXACTLY the same mindset as a normal townie. I'm really seriously thinking Mute is on the other one. I was 100% genuine in my scum hunting and my case against him. Look at how opportunistically he hops on my wagon after calling me town, considering almost nothing changed in between that. The fact that no one besides CS recognized how stupidly scummy Mute's play has crushed my morale to play.

I'm sorry, partner. Like I said in the QT, I just can't take it any more. This game has destroyed me. I'm going to need a break before queuing again.

Had I been legitimately caught in something scummy, like I was the other time I played scum and got lynched day 1, I could take it. That wasn't this bad. But this...no.

[ICEninja]

I apologize for my lack of maturity. This isn't like me. This game has just caused me too much undue stress. I don't mean to be a poor loser, so try not to think poorly of me as a player after I come back from my break. Hopefully I'll have learned something from this.

[ICEninja]

Javert, I'm going to flip "knife mafia" goon or something like that. I wasn't actually given a title in my role so I wasn't clear, but that indicates pretty clearly that there is more than 1 family.

I feel like Oso has a pretty good likelihood of being Mute's partner, based on how ridiculously hard he tried to discount my VERY VERY valid point on Mute and make me look scummy for it. A chainsaw defense to the max, if Mute flips scum.

The way the wagon looked to me, Javert got lucky and saw scum tells where there were null and tunneled like an angry gorilla, Edger actually made a real case on me and was probably the most legit, Oso gave reasons for being on my wagon, but the big thing with him was my "twisting" of Mute's words. I still insist that I never did this. Oso is pretty scummy.

Prox never even really gave much of a reason for being on my wagon, except for the tones of my post. He also used the "too townie" fallacy, which is pretty bad. He never really seemed interested in contributing anything to this game at all, really. Mute's explanation for why he voted me is

HORRIBLE

. If you guys lynch him tomorrow you'll probably have half the scum gone in one swoop, and Oso will have a high likelihood of being his partner.

Poirot, like Edger, seemed to have a legit case against me. Jerbs did somewhat, but he had a laundry list of null tells and called them scummy, like Javert but with more lurking. He looks like a possible candidate for opportunistic scum, too.

I'm helping town as much as I can at this point because in serious honestly, I would prefer town to win than the other scum team. I want them caught.

[ICEninja]

ConSpiracy, I am going to kindly ignore your commentary on how you think I should play.

I can't remember who it was, but there was a good quote of something along the lines of "only fools ignore good advice".

[ICEninja]

I'm not trying to guilt you. I'm just pissed and think you're an ass.

[ICEninja]

Whatever. I still think your reasons sucked, and you got lucky.

[ICEninja]

Whatever

[ICEninja]

Fair enough. I apologize for my immaturity.

And, if someone posted the knife QT, you guys realized that I wasn't giving away info for the purpose of hurting my team. I think if Prox hadn't completely flaked, our side could have actually done reasonably well. Oso probably would have died, and probably the

only

thing I did well this entire game was distance myself from Prox. A lot of other people looked a lot more like my scum buddy than him.

Whoever (I think it was Oso) who caught my distancing on Prox was actually wrong, I wasn't upset at him in the least. I was just frustrated at the situation, and Prox was doing his best to help me out. I feigned frustration towards him to make it look like he "caught" me in something stupid. I'm surprised he got so little attention day 2, as his attacks on me were actually paper thin, and intentionally so.

[ICEninja]

Just FYI mod, it is good form to ask permission before posting a scum QT.

[ICEninja]

Well OK he asked for permission, but I haven't seen Prox anywhere and I never even read his request for permission, let alone give it.