Open 289 - Hard Boiled - Game over.

[iamausername]

your piggy-backing on V

I voted Yoshi before Vordark had expressed any suspicion of him, so I'm not sure how you can honestly describe it as 'piggy-backing'.

Since you seem to want to ask point blank opinions of other players, what is your opinion of CS? You seem to be skeptical of V voting him instead of Yoshi but did not actually explain why.

Actually, Vordark was voting Umbrage before, not CS. And I was sceptical because he was clearly displaying stronger suspicion of Yoshi than Umbrage in his posts, so it seemed odd that he didn't vote for Yoshi. Since he has now corrected that oversight, there's no need for me to pursue it any further.

This is a colossal waste of time and energy that I could spend looking for scum.

It turns out that the power to stop wasting time and energy and just find scum was inside you all along, Umbrage.

You are either incredibly dense or completely mischaracterizing other players.

There is no content in this post.

Interesting how these two posts come together. I've hardly gone into a lot more detail on any of my reads than Xtoxm did in that post, so why such a variance in response, Ythan?

What I don't understand is how it is pro-town to characterize pressing an at-the-time anti-town player as a "distraction." As Krazy's play picked up, my focus began to shift.

Here is the problem; you voted Krazy for being 'anti-town', not for being scummy. You've never given any opinion on Krazy's alignment; you voted him as a form of punishment for bad play, once he adjusted his play to fit more in line with your standards of good play, you rescinded that punishment. Did you decide that Krazy was probably town because he conformed to your standards? I don't know. I don't even know if you thought he was town in the first place.

In fact, you've never given any opinion on anyone's alignment. I have no idea who you believe to be town and who you believe to be scum. You've made huge posts talking in circles defending yourself from Vordark, and pointing out

anti-town

play, but nowhere in those 3000 odd words is there even the slightest hint of

scumhunting

.

[Quaroath]

@ Darth Yoshi #254 @Quaraoth: It sounds like you're backtracking from your pro-town read on me. Is that because of Vordark's case, or are there other reasons?

…. I hadn’t even posted between when I said I read you town and this post. Wtf!

Anyways, no I still feel you are town. The argument, if you want to call it that, between you and vordark has only reinforced that belief. You’ve answered to the questions posed to you reasonably). As the walls have grown you haven’t strayed or circled back to contradict yourself. I think that you are on firm ground on your position. I consider the lack of waffling a pro-town tell. Scum go with the wind, something you haven’t done. I don’t agree with some of what you’ve said (I’m really not getting some of the back and forth with you and vordak) but you don’t feel particularly scummy to me.



@ Vordak #262, While I understand there isn’t an *implicit* defense of CS by SE, I read an implied defense. Maybe we are just reading the posts and getting deferent things out of them.

@Abelcain #274

Teeing up mislynches has nothing to do with the fallacy of the excluded middle. It is scum misrepping a connection with a player in order to get that player mislynched. It's manipulation, not a fallacy

There's an article on the wiki and I'm sure the Googles can help you.

I am unfamiliar with this fallacy. Please explain.

Your first bit is obviously committing the fallacy of the excluded middle.

Yeah, there totally is not any scum motivation in insinuating relationships between players. Totally not a way to tee up future (mis)lynches..

your responce to this was:

: So... are you admitting that you're scum using a manipulation and not a fallacy? Vordark said you were committing the fallacy by saying that people had to believe that the question was scummy or not scummy, and that Snake must think it wasn't scummy because there was a possibility, not a certainty, that it was town. You're right that teeing up mislynches via connection has nothing to do with the fallacy, but Vordark never said that either. Way to misrepresent what he said though by trying to attribute the fallacy to Snake, though.

In the end, Vordark brings up a fallacy that doesn’t apply to the situation, Yoshi points this out, and abel implies that by pointing out that the fallacy doesn’t apply, Darth is scumy. When I read this, (and I had to look up the fallacy) it didn’t read that the fallacy applied only to the first sentence, but the first portion of the post, which was the first two sentances in the nest. I'm not sure you aren't misrepresenting the conversation yourself.

Re highlighting this one for snake eyes, because I really want an answer to it when he gets to posting:
@Snake Eyes: in post #191 you say:
Snake Eyes wrote:
Also, I think your assumption that there's scum on the wagon is a bit premature, as there's no way to know if Umbrage is town. I'd even say that given how scummy Umbrage looks, this wagon could have grown a lot faster, if Umbrage was actually town. It would be very easy for scum to add their votes to the Umbrage wagon, if he's town.

I’m not really following the argument you are making here. This seems loaded with WIFOM. Yes it’s easy for scum to add votes if Umbrage is flailtown. It’s also easy for scum to add votes if Umbrage is flailscum. I don’t see how this isn’t null, because it feels so circular.

Are you more or less inclined to think Umbrage is scum based off the speed of the wagon? Why?
Those are the questions I have off the top of my head. I’m sure more will come to the fore

[Vordark]

Anyways, no I still feel you are town. The argument, if you want to call it that, between you and vordark has only reinforced that belief. You’ve answered to the questions posed to you reasonably). As the walls have grown you haven’t strayed or circled back to contradict yourself. I think that you are on firm ground on your position. I consider the lack of waffling a pro-town tell. Scum go with the wind, something you haven’t done. I don’t agree with some of what you’ve said (I’m really not getting some of the back and forth with you and vordak) but you don’t feel particularly scummy to me.

I agree with none of this here. Particularly that DY has answered the questions posed to him "reasonably". I also wouldn't put too much stock in a lack of waffling and not going "with the wind" as town-tells. Scum don't waffle as much as you seem to think they do.

@ Vordak #262, While I understand there isn’t an *implicit* defense of CS by SE, I read an implied defense. Maybe we are just reading the posts and getting deferent things out of them.

There isn't an "implicit" defense but you read an "implied" defense? And no, there is no defense there at all. It is not a question of getting different things out of the posts, it is a matter that the definition being used for "defense" here is too broad to be useful and also covers things that Umbrage and DY have both been doing.

In the end, Vordark brings up a fallacy that doesn’t apply to the situation, Yoshi points this out, and abel implies that by pointing out that the fallacy doesn’t apply, Darth is scumy. When I read this, (and I had to look up the fallacy) it didn’t read that the fallacy applied only to the first sentence, but the first portion of the post, which was the first two sentances in the nest. I'm not sure you aren't misrepresenting the conversation yourself.

The "Hunting for scumpairs before there have been any flips is junk science" comment is strange as well. SE is talking about what happens "should Umbrage flip scum". It is also natural, and necessary, to look for relationships between the players as early as possible. All in all, it's a suspicious sentence.

Yeah, there totally is not any scum motivation in insinuating relationships between players. Totally not a way to tee up future (mis)lynches.

I personally think that hypothesizing about relationships so early in the game needs to be taken with a few grains of salt. Associative tells only become tells usually when flips have occurred. Meta me, and you’ll see I hold to this belief as town.

Your first bit is obviously committing the fallacy of the excluded middle. Also your comment that looking at relationships so early in the game "needs to be taken with a few grains of salt" is backing off your earlier, much stronger statement that it is "junk science". Discussing associative tells before a flip is useful, if for no other reason than making it easier to pick out after a flip.

The fallacy of the excluded middle certainly applies. I state that looking for relationships between the players as early as possible is natural and necessary. DY runs to the far end of the spectrum and claims it has a scum motivation and is a way to tee up future mislynches. There is a wealth of possibilities in there that DY ignores as a debate tactic. This is the fallacy of the excluded middle. There is a touch of the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses mixed with sarcasm as an appeal to emotion (which may be the reason for some people's confusion), but the fallacy of the excluded middle is most applicable because DY is ignoring his

earlier

statement that looking for these relationships was simply not useful. Regardless, looked at from any angle, DY's argument here is a scumtell.

[Xtoxm]

Having taking a closer look at Ythan, he's not been as complacent as I had initially thought.

I'm left with CS, TBL, Abelcain and DarthYoshi as people who less appear to be acting with town motivations than everyone else.

Vote: DarthYoshi

Why him rather than the others? Because he has the most votes.

[ConSpiracy]

Okay, I promised to get a catch-up post today, but some friends came here and occupied me. I have read everything and I have made some notes. I will work them out either tomorrow or in the weekends. Whenever I have time first.

[Ythan]

You are either incredibly dense or completely mischaracterizing other players.

There is no content in this post.

Interesting how these two posts come together. I've hardly gone into a lot more detail on any of my reads than Xtoxm did in that post, so why such a variance in response, Ythan?

Exactly what variance? The post Krazy was addressing in the post I was addressing (your post) had a point. Tom's was a whole different kind of post and didn't have one. Problem?

Here is the problem; you voted Krazy for being 'anti-town', not for being scummy. You've never given any opinion on Krazy's alignment; you voted him as a form of punishment for bad play, once he adjusted his play to fit more in line with your standards of good play, you rescinded that punishment. Did you decide that Krazy was probably town because he conformed to your standards? I don't know. I don't even know if you thought he was town in the first place.

If the vote was for anti-town behavior and he ceased to exhibit anti-town behavior, why would you want the vote to stay?

Having taking a closer look at Ythan, he's not been as complacent as I had initially thought.

I'm left with CS, TBL, Abelcain and DarthYoshi as people who less appear to be acting with town motivations than everyone else.

Vote: DarthYoshi

Why him rather than the others? Because he has the most votes.

Still completely devoid of content.

[implosion]

Regfan replaces TheBigLebowski.

[Ythan]

In fact, Tom's latest post is not just devoid of content. Beyond not explaining any of his reads, he made it clear that his choice of vote was completely arbitrary.

[Regfan]

Hey everyone I've had a brief look through the thread, certaintly not a deep enough read to be able to draw any conclusions but I plan to have a constructive post up sometime later tonight or at latest tommorow morning. In reponse to Yoshi's questions from earlier in the day:

What time zone are you in? GMT + 11, I live in Australia so it's highly unlikely that I will be online at the same times as you are.

RVS or RQS? Why? Neither, I think both detract from real scumhunting and lead the game to be iceboken by useless discussion rather then relevant reasoning. Personally I like to begin the game with a discussion on the setup in particular to work out what the optimal way to play it is. I'll go into this in my next post.

What is your experience level with Mafia? I've played mafia at epicmafia for two years, multiple forum mafia games here and at other mafia websites so I have a good amount of experience.

How active can we expect you to be? I've been quite active, between 1-2 posts a day on average, especially since I take my laptop with me to uni most days.

[Quaroath]

Anyways, no I still feel you are town. The argument, if you want to call it that, between you and vordark has only reinforced that belief. You’ve answered to the questions posed to you reasonably). As the walls have grown you haven’t strayed or circled back to contradict yourself. I think that you are on firm ground on your position. I consider the lack of waffling a pro-town tell. Scum go with the wind, something you haven’t done. I don’t agree with some of what you’ve said (I’m really not getting some of the back and forth with you and vordak) but you don’t feel particularly scummy to me.

I agree with none of this here. Particularly that DY has answered the questions posed to him "reasonably". I also wouldn't put too much stock in a lack of waffling and not going "with the wind" as town-tells. Scum don't waffle as much as you seem to think they do.

Okay, I can understand that from within the conversation you are having with Darth how this can be the impression you got. It's just not what I was getting. I'll do a more complete reread on the whole conversation to try to figure out what either A.) I'm missing, or B.) why I don't agree with you.

I'm relatively new to the site, but from the games I've read through I'd gotten the impression scum tend to dip their toes and end up talking themselves in circles while moving their opinions around. This led to obvious contradictions that gave them away. It's entirely possible that my random game election gave me a bias in this aspect of the game, one I am willing to reconsider.

@ Vordak #262, While I understand there isn’t an *implicit* defense of CS by SE, I read an implied defense. Maybe we are just reading the posts and getting deferent things out of them.

There isn't an "implicit" defense but you read an "implied" defense? And no, there is no defense there at all. It is not a question of getting different things out of the posts, it is a matter that the definition being used for "defense" here is too broad to be useful and also covers things that Umbrage and DY have both been doing.

Fair enough, it's probably me using an overly broad definition, and your using a more narrow one conflicting. I guess that having SE say CS wasn't being scummy with his actions towards Umbrage, without CS really having the opportunity to rebut it effectively himself was a defense of CS The second option I can read into it is that it's not a defense of CS, but of the thought process behind what CS did. The second option is also entirely possible.

In the end, Vordark brings up a fallacy that doesn’t apply to the situation, Yoshi points this out, and abel implies that by pointing out that the fallacy doesn’t apply, Darth is scumy. When I read this, (and I had to look up the fallacy) it didn’t read that the fallacy applied only to the first sentence, but the first portion of the post, which was the first two sentances in the nest. I'm not sure you aren't misrepresenting the conversation yourself.

The "Hunting for scumpairs before there have been any flips is junk science" comment is strange as well. SE is talking about what happens "should Umbrage flip scum". It is also natural, and necessary, to look for relationships between the players as early as possible. All in all, it's a suspicious sentence.

Yeah, there totally is not any scum motivation in insinuating relationships between players. Totally not a way to tee up future (mis)lynches.

I personally think that hypothesizing about relationships so early in the game needs to be taken with a few grains of salt. Associative tells only become tells usually when flips have occurred. Meta me, and you’ll see I hold to this belief as town.

Your first bit is obviously committing the fallacy of the excluded middle. Also your comment that looking at relationships so early in the game "needs to be taken with a few grains of salt" is backing off your earlier, much stronger statement that it is "junk science". Discussing associative tells before a flip is useful, if for no other reason than making it easier to pick out after a flip.

The fallacy of the excluded middle certainly applies. I state that looking for relationships between the players as early as possible is natural and necessary. DY runs to the far end of the spectrum and claims it has a scum motivation and is a way to tee up future mislynches. There is a wealth of possibilities in there that DY ignores as a debate tactic. This is the fallacy of the excluded middle. There is a touch of the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses mixed with sarcasm as an appeal to emotion (which may be the reason for some people's confusion), but the fallacy of the excluded middle is most applicable because DY is ignoring his

earlier

statement that looking for these relationships was simply not useful. Regardless, looked at from any angle, DY's argument here is a scumtell.[/quote]

Okay, NOW I get what you are saying.

Having taking a closer look at Ythan, he's not been as complacent as I had initially thought.

I'm left with CS, TBL, Abelcain and DarthYoshi as people who less appear to be acting with town motivations than everyone else.

Vote: DarthYoshi

Why him rather than the others? Because he has the most votes.

Still completely devoid of content.

Not to mention scummy as fuck, jumping on the biggest bandwagon just because its the biggest.

[DarthYoshi]

First, welcome, Regfan.

Xtoxm's vote of me is terrible, and it looks like I'm not the first to notice. He is still actively lurking, contributing no content, shrugging off questions addressed to him, voting arbitrarily, and as much admits that he's wagonhopping with his vote on me. I initially put my vote on him simply because of his lurking; now I am fine with it there for much more than just lurking. More people need to be voting for this guy.

I voted Yoshi before Vordark had expressed any suspicion of him, so I'm not sure how you can honestly describe it as 'piggy-backing'.

Your vote, such as it was, contained no substantive reasons or case for voting me. Since then, you've been letting Vordark do all of that.

Here is the problem; you voted Krazy for being 'anti-town', not for being scummy. You've never given any opinion on Krazy's alignment; you voted him as a form of punishment for bad play, once he adjusted his play to fit more in line with your standards of good play, you rescinded that punishment. Did you decide that Krazy was probably town because he conformed to your standards? I don't know. I don't even know if you thought he was town in the first place.

First, Ythan is right--it would have been scummy to leave my vote on a player who was now being pro-town.

Moreover, and I think I've already said this, when a player is exhibiting such anti-town behavior, I think it is a perfectly legitimate use of one's vote to utilize it in determining whether the player is scum or just playing a bad town game. I wasn't sure if he was town, either--that's the point. That's part of scumhunting. Your characterization of it as 'punishment' is bizarre--there's no tangible consequence to such punishment unless the player actually gets lynched. Doesn't sound like punishment to me.

I agree with none of this here. Particularly that DY has answered the questions posed to him "reasonably".

That you aren't giving reasons for either of these claims makes me think that confirmation bias may be affecting your play.

The fallacy of the excluded middle certainly applies. I state that looking for relationships between the players as early as possible is natural and necessary. DY runs to the far end of the spectrum and claims it has a scum motivation and is a way to tee up future mislynches. There is a wealth of possibilities in there that DY ignores as a debate tactic. This is the fallacy of the excluded middle. There is a touch of the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses mixed with sarcasm as an appeal to emotion (which may be the reason for some people's confusion), but the fallacy of the excluded middle is most applicable because DY is ignoring his earlier statement that looking for these relationships was simply not useful. Regardless, looked at from any angle, DY's argument here is a scumtell.

This ridiculousness has gone on long enough. Here's my original quote:

Yeah, there totally is not any scum motivation in insinuating relationships between players. Totally not a way to tee up future (mis)lynches.

I imagine from the tone of it that a touch of sarcasm is evident. I was pointing out the capacity for scum motivation in insinuating connections. I never said that it is scum motivated every time--that would be rushing to the other end of the spectrum and setting up said fallacy. If I didn't argue that it is always scum motivated, then the fallacy, I think, does not really apply.

PS: Don't think I didn't notice that you decided you didn't need to reply to my last wall to you, even when it contained a number of questions and suspicions about your scumhunting on me.

…. I hadn’t even posted between when I said I read you town and this post. Wtf!

Sorry 'bout that, for some reason, I thought you had.

[DarthYoshi]

Jeez, I really suck at quote tags. Messed one up at the top of this post. One of these days, I will wake up competent in all things quote tag-y.

[Regfan]

Firstly, lets start at the very beginning, a very good place to start. (Points for whoever can work out what the reference is from).

Incoming wall of text, my apologies in advance it's just a lot to catch up on in one post.

I've re-read this thread multiple times throughout the past few hours and each time I come to the same conclusion, there's been far too much discussion revolving around the same few players and not enough questioning and pushing of information against Xtoxm, Iamusername and ConSpiracy. Therefore I have some questions:

@ Xtoxm and Iamusername, if you both had to point to one post in this thread you think is the scummiest what would it be, and do you think the person is posted is mafia?

@ Krazy, you recently seem to have dropped your vote and suspicion for Ythan, does that mean you currently think he's town?

@ SnakeEyes, it's very apparent your content has dropped down as the game has progressed whether it's due to illness or lack of interest I do not know, but can you state your biggest three suspects right now?

@ ConSpiracy is your mafia read on Umbrage as strong as it previously was, and if so who do you believe to be his partners?

It's highly apparent that a great deal of this games posts have been back and forths between Ythan and Krazy. I read Ythan and Krazys back and forths to consist of multiple null-tells, in fact I don't see Umbrages suggestion that they could both be mafia attempting to buss and detract conversation being true at all, I doubt they would get as personal as they did if that were the case. Thefore I'm going to attempt to leave out their irrelevant posts in my summary.

Umbrage: OK, so my vote on ConSpiracy is about as serious as you can get for page 1 reads. Xtoxm stands out as odd to me, he didn't random vote, he didn't really say hello or anything, he just answered the questions. I'm not saying it's scum or town, it just looks odd.

This comment doesn't sit well with me at all, what's the point of stating your observation if you're not going to attempt to draw any conclusion from it. If you were indeed doing this to 'bait' people and reaction-test why has your reaction-catcher been limited to SnakeEyes reaction to it only?

SnakeEyes: We will never get anywhere without bandwagons. The whole idea of a premature bandwagon is a fallacy.

I strongly disagree here, a meaningless bandwagon shows close to no insight to anyones allignment and if anything can cause more harm then good due to an early claim, especially in a setup such as this one where there's multiple PR's.

DarthYoshi: Hunting for scumpairs before there have been any flips is junk science.

Disagree with this as well, there's no such as a junk science in mafia, any attempt at scum-hunting is generally a good one, you're never forced to stick with your reads or your interaction reads thus there's no reason that one shouldn't attempt to look towards the future when you think you're pushing towards a mafia.

Umbrage: Why do you care about xtoxm? I didn't attack him, and even if I did, he can defend himself.

Umbrage: I threw out that bit about xtoxm because I wanted to see who would either attack him, or come to his aid. Snake did the latter. Same basic principle with the vote on you.

You've just contradicted yourself right here, I don't even need to point out howso.

Umbrage: NO!!!!!!! WRONG!!!!!!!!!!! SNAKE EYES SAID THAT HE FOUND ME SCUMMY!!!!!!!!! I HAVE PROVEN IT WAS NOT A GET-OUT-OF-RVS BANDWAGON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU HAVEN'T EVEN BEEN FUCKING READING THE FUCKING THREAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Attempting to argue your point by spamming in caps lock is never going to help convince anyone, if you really want to convince us that your argument on Snake holds some ground (Which from re-reading I don't think it does) then you're going to need to refraining posting like this.

@ Umbrage, can you summarize your case on Snake into one coherent post that doesn't involve AtE (Appeal to Emotion) and caps-cruise rages?

DarthYoshi: Unvote. Vote: Krazy. Your play so far has been hellaciously anti-town, regardless of your alignment.

You state this without going into any depth, if his play was as anti-town as you make it out to be why not attempt to show it? Sure, he may have been attempting to tunnel Ythan for an early period of the game, but him doing so ensured that Ythan posted content in return

@ DarthYoshi, so again what did Krazy do that was hellaciously anti-town?

Xtoxm: I'm getting mostly town vibes from the more active players, with the sole exception of Ythan, whose reactions to the assault from Krazy look a bit too complacent for what I would expect from a townie.

You say this without elaborating on it at all which defeats the purpose of the post, it makes it seem just like an attempt to seem active when you're not at all.

@ Xtoxm, who do you have a town-read on and what caused the town-read?

Krazy: The funny thing about a vote that looks like it is an attempt to make it seem like you're not tunneling and a vote that means you're not tunneling is that there is no difference.

@ Krazy, you seem to be of the opinion that Yoshi is/was tunnelling on you, can you point out what posts he did so?

Snake Eyes: Krazy vs Ythan is making my head hurt. Neither is scummy, but it's a serious distraction.

Couldn't agree more with this.

Ythan: Krazy, you're not doing anything with Lebowski. You just picked out an arbitrary lurker to shift your vote to so you could pretend you're not tunneling. But moving your vote alone doesn't change anything. You're still a tunneling idiot.

vote Umbrage

@ Ythan, so you disagree with the concept of pressuring lurkers to post via voting them?

Abelcain: Although now that I'm looking through your ISO your case against Snake is starting to make more sense than it did the first time around. I'll read it tomorrow when I'm less tired and can retain more information.

@ Abelcain: I've yet to see this, in which case do you mind looking into it today?

Also, I think your assumption that there's scum on the wagon is a bit premature, as there's no way to know if Umbrage is town. I'd even say that given how scummy Umbrage looks, this wagon could have grown a lot faster, if Umbrage was actually town. It would be very easy for scum to add their votes to the Umbrage wagon, if he's town.

This is just speculation on top of more speculation.

@ SnakeEyes, do you think he's town, yes or no. Do you think mafia are yet on his wagon, yes or no. Reasoning for your answer in both cases would also be appreciated.

Umbrage: iamausername
ConSpiracy
Vordark
Ythan

You really think there isn't scum on my wagon? Do you mean then that each of the above is town? I asked you why you thought ConSpiracy was town a GAZILLION TIMES, and I still have not gotten an answer. WHY ARE THESE PEOPLE YOUR TOWN READS?

I read this as a town-tell, ignoring the anger shown in the post, there's a highly logical point provided here, I don't see any reasoning why mafia would attempt to point out a particular list of people stating a majority/a part of them are also mafia, it turns too many people against them and diminishes any real possibly they have of ridding their vote.

Abelcain: Having a scumread =/= necessarily thinking you're scummy. If someone did something really scummy once, but otherwise you felt like they were town, you'd have a scum read on them for the scummy thing but you'd still have town read overall.

No offence but this would be the stupidest post I've read in the entire thread, having a scum-read implies that you think they're mafia, whereas reading someone’s actions as scummy doesn't have to mean you think they're mafia. Either you've made a severe typo or don't understand that there's such thing as a scummy-town whereas there's no thing as a mafia-town.

Krazy: I also notice that CS's interest in the game basically seems to drop off simultaneously with V unvoting him.

@CS: Aside from the Umbrage wagon you helped form and then got bored of, I'm not really sure I at this point can characterize you as not also active lurking. Among the Umbrage wagon, if I were to guess that there was someone scum on it (which there is, admittedly, no guarantee), you would be my first guess.

Although I do understand what you mean here and where you may be coming from I don't agree with it, the game has involved various large amounts of walls and I can see how someone might become bored and less inclined to reading it regardless of allignment that being said I'd love to see some more content from CS.

Quaroath: On that note, RVS vote needs to come off. unvote
Now to apply some plz answer pressure vote: iamausername

A fresh person to the game, yay.

@Quaroath, what's the point of a pressure vote if you state it's a pressure vote?

Umbrage: I agree with him on some things, not the case with others. But hey, that's life. I've no reason to think he's scum at the moment.

@ Umbrage, what do you agree with him on and what do you disagree with?

Umbrage: I smell bussing buddies.

FoS: DarthYoshi and Vordark

You've now stated you FoS'ed CS for a period of time, you FoS Snake, you think Ythan and Krazy might be bussing and now Darth and Vordark, on top of that you vote TBL as a reaction test.

@ Umbrage: Is there anyone you haven't suspected yet?

Krazy: My opinion of DarthYoshi is rather in flux. In regard to your entire case on him, I don't think him explaining his thought process behind maintaining or dropping a vote is all that suspicious, no. There are some things he has said that have irked me, but right now he is not my top candidate, or even in my top 3.

@ Krazy, can you mind elaborating on who your top 3 canidates would include, and your reasoning behind it?

I still have to read through the Yoshi/Vordark interaction properly so I'll avoid that for now, as for my current reads on players I think Umbrage vs SnakeEyes is actually town vs town, I can understand parts of the case against Umbrage though I believe his intial actions were just scummy town caught in the headlights and attempted to back-pedal from there. I think Snake bringing up past games of Umbrages is a slight town-tell as well as there's close to reason in providing a game where he was scum and town if he were mafia, he could just show us the game were Umbrage was mafia in the past expecting us not to research ourselves.

As for my leading suspect at the moment it would have to be Iamusername, it seems highly evident that he's been attempting to post as minimal as possible while not being categorized as a an active lurker or a lurker, all of his contributions have been backed up with little to no logic of reasoning. So for now

Vote: Iamusername

.

This is very subject to change though as I still have a lot to read and take in, though I would love some answers to my questions and again apologies for the wall of text.

[Xtoxm]

@ Xtoxm and Iamusername, if you both had to point to one post in this thread you think is the scummiest what would it be, and do you think the person is posted is mafia?

This recent reaction of DY to my vote of him makes me very happy with my vote:

Xtoxm's vote of me is terrible, and it looks like I'm not the first to notice. He is still actively lurking, contributing no content, shrugging off questions addressed to him, voting arbitrarily, and as much admits that he's wagonhopping with his vote on me. I initially put my vote on him simply because of his lurking; now I am fine with it there for much more than just lurking. More people need to be voting for this guy.

Previously to this it was this post my Abelcain iso #6,12 but DY's new post really blows these out of the water; when I voted DY it was just voting for one of the 4 people that hadn't given me any town inclinations, now I feel that DY is actually scummy.

You say this without elaborating on it at all which defeats the purpose of the post, it makes it seem just like an attempt to seem active when you're not at all.

I'm not trying to appear active. If I was there would be a shit load of fluff. I have pretty much been giving my raw opinions and nothing else.

@ Xtoxm, who do you have a town-read on and what caused the town-read?

Krazy: The early blitz on Ythan.
Umbrage: Consistent town vibes.
Ythan: The reaction to Krazy's blitz.
Sanke Eyes:

There's definitely an unnatural player relation there, and should Umbrage flip scum, I'd start looking for his scumbuddies in xtoxm.

Vordark: Iso #2, the change to DY.
Quaroath: I'm not sure why I put him as town.
iamausername: He is trying to promote behavior that helps the town as whole, I do not think he would bother if he were mafia. That, plus vote on DY.

[Vordark]

I agree with none of this here. Particularly that DY has answered the questions posed to him "reasonably".

That you aren't giving reasons for either of these claims makes me think that confirmation bias may be affecting your play.

That would be because I've already addressed them at length in other posts. What I didn't address before (the "scum are flip floppers" bit), I addressed in the rest of the paragraph which you chose not to include. Way to keep up the misrepresentation and now outright lies.

I imagine from the tone of it that a touch of sarcasm is evident. I was pointing out the capacity for scum motivation in insinuating connections. I never said that it is scum motivated every time--that would be rushing to the other end of the spectrum and setting up said fallacy. If I didn't argue that it is always scum motivated, then the fallacy, I think, does not really apply.

I think everyone that has seen that interchange knows what you were doing and that your statement "I never said that it is scum motivated every time" is a ridiculous argument based

solely

on word choice. It is clear that you were claiming it has a scum motive, regardless if you used the specific words "every time". That would be you arguing semantics by the way. Of course, even if the fallacy of the excluded middle didn't apply (which it does), that's far from the only problem with that statement, as I have already pointed out.

PS: Don't think I didn't notice that you decided you didn't need to reply to my last wall to you, even when it contained a number of questions and suspicions about your scumhunting on me.

Was it my saying "I don't feel the need to respond to most of it" what gave me away? I gave you two opportunities to provide a well-reasoned post explaining your positions and behavior. Instead you twice made a point-for-point reply wherein you did everything you could misrepresent my questions and observations, used fallacious reasoning, quoted out of context, appealed to emotion and did nothing whatsoever to explain yourself, rather you attempted to attack and change the arguments. I don't feel the need to go through that dance a third time.

And don't think I didn't notice your latest tactic of trying to throw suspicion back on me.

DarthYoshi wagon is a good one.

[DarthYoshi]

Previously to this it was this post my Abelcain iso #6,12 but DY's new post really blows these out of the water; when I voted DY it was just voting for one of the 4 people that hadn't given me any town inclinations, now I feel that DY is actually scummy

Notice how Xtoxm still doesn't say precisely why he thinks I am scummy.

That would be because I've already addressed them at length in other posts. What I didn't address before (the "scum are flip floppers" bit), I addressed in the rest of the paragraph which you chose not to include. Way to keep up the misrepresentation and now outright lies.

First, you complain about me using AtE?

Second, yes, you addressed them in earlier posts. That you still think so is making me think if confirmation bias is at work...DY is scum, therefore everything he says is scummy. DY just said something else scummy, so he must be scum.

Third, I chose not to include the rest of the paragraph because it was a separate thought on your part (hence the transition of "Also..."), and because I actually agreed with you on that second part, so I saw no need to address it.

And I consider calling someone a liar to be a very serious charge. If you're not prepared to back that up, drop it now, because otherwise, that is really offensive.

[Vordark]

Second, yes, you addressed them in earlier posts. That you still think so is making me think if confirmation bias is at work...DY is scum, therefore everything he says is scummy. DY just said something else scummy, so he must be scum.

No, I still think so because you have never satisfactorily addressed my concerns. I do believe I have already made that clear. But let's take the other points in your statement...

1. Claiming I am suffering from confirmation bias (as you have done previously) is attacking the person, not the argument. It is ad hominem. Easily stated, easily applied to everyone that ever voices a suspicion and cannot be disproven by anyone.

2. You use a strawman in claiming that I think "everything he says is scummy". This is not arguing what I have been claiming. I have claimed that some of your behavior and remarks are scummy. Many, actually. I have never claimed that everything you write is scummy. You have said many things I consider to be simply neutral. This is not the first strawman you have used and it is another example of misrepresenting what I have actually said.

3. Your final sentence "DY just said something else scummy, so he must be scum" is not entirely accurate. You have said many things that are scummy. The total of these statements and your behavior have led me to conclude that you are scum. When you make additional scummy statements it would naturally continue to confirm that conclusion. I believe you would find this same result in any rational person.

4. To be clear, it is because of these sorts of debate tactics and your lack of ever putting forth a real defense that does not rely on misrepresentation and error-riddled reasoning that has led me to my conclusion. Perhaps if you put forward an explanation of your behavior that did not rely on these tactics and instead acted at all like you were town, I would revisit this conclusion. Instead, you offer only more of the same and continue to attack your attacker. That's a scumtell.

And I consider calling someone a liar to be a very serious charge. If you're not prepared to back that up, drop it now, because otherwise, that is really offensive.

This is my original quote, complete with yours. I have bolded the remark I was referring to.

I agree with none of this here. Particularly that DY has answered the questions posed to him "reasonably".

That

you aren't giving reasons for either of these claims

makes me think that confirmation bias may be affecting your play.

That would be because I've already addressed them at length in other posts. What I didn't address before (the "scum are flip floppers" bit), I addressed in the rest of the paragraph which you chose not to include. Way to keep up the misrepresentation and now outright lies.

This would be where you are lying.

Note the quote from you at the very beginning of this message? Let me put it here for proper context...

Second, yes, you addressed them in earlier posts.

Here you admit that I did, in fact, address these concerns. This would be where you are admitting to lying.

The entire sentence of your from the previous post, "That you aren't giving reasons for either of these claims makes me think that confirmation bias may be affecting your play" is a lie, followed by an ad hominem as I have already described. It is your repeated use of tactics like this, instead of reasoned debate, that have led me to conclude that you are scum.

[iamausername]

Problem?

Xtoxm's post does contain content. That's all I'm saying.

If the vote was for anti-town behavior and he ceased to exhibit anti-town behavior, why would you want the vote to stay?

You're totally missing the point. Whether or not the vote stays is irrelevent because the vote had no meaning.

Your vote, such as it was, contained no substantive reasons or case for voting me.

Do you agree with Krazy's assessment that I am piggy-backing on Vordark?

First, Ythan is right--it would have been scummy to leave my vote on a player who was now being pro-town.

FAO: The Clueless Masses

Read this quote.

Note that DarthYoshi does not say he removed his vote because he no longer found Krazy scummy. DarthYoshi says he removed his vote because not doing so would have made him look bad. This is because DarthYoshi is more worried about how he appears than he is about finding scum. This is because he is scum.

Moreover, and I think I've already said this, when a player is exhibiting such anti-town behavior, I think it is a perfectly legitimate use of one's vote to utilize it in determining whether the player is scum or just playing a bad town game.

OK, so did your vote help you to determine Krazy's alignment? How so?

@ Xtoxm and Iamusername, if you both had to point to one post in this thread you think is the scummiest what would it be, and do you think the person is posted is mafia?

Well, it's hard to narrow it down to a single post, since it's a pattern of behaviour across all of his posts, but I guess this one exemplifies DarthYoshi's scumminess the most. That or the one I just pointed out above.

Yes, I think the person that posted it is probably mafia. I mean, there's a slim chance that he is a townie who has even more of a woefully bad understanding of how to play as town than the rest of this game, but it's becoming increasingly unlikely with every post he makes.

There's definitely an unnatural player relation there, and should Umbrage flip scum, I'd start looking for his scumbuddies in xtoxm.

Xtoxm, I'm not seeing how this makes Snake town. The rest of your town reads I follow, but this one doesn't work for me. Care to shed any more light on it?

[Umbrage]

@ Umbrage: Is there anyone you haven't suspected yet?

No. Is there someone I shouldn't suspect?

Regarding Xtoxm: The whole point of making a neutral statement was to see if anyone would overreact to it and try and get a wagon on me.

Now, Snake Eyes is still a strong scumread of mine. But in my opinion, after reading over more carefully, Xtoxm is definitely the worst player here. I see DY, Vordark, and Abelcain as all town, the walls of text are mostly bullshit. But Xtoxm is all over the place. I can't make sense of his reads.

I'm not trying to appear active. If I was there would be a shit load of fluff. I have pretty much been giving my raw opinions and nothing else.

What you've been giving is a stream of consciousness. You've been going back and forth on players. You aren't contributing. Mafia isn't just finding who you think is scummy, it's convincing everyone of your reads. You aren't doing that.

I'll try to be more active now, the text walls kind of set me off this game.

[Xtoxm]

@Iam: I feel that it comes from a town motivated thought process. The sentiment itself is pretty nonsensical, but that's irrelevant.

[iamausername]

Mafia isn't just finding who you think is scummy, it's convincing everyone of your reads. You aren't doing that.

DarthYoshi isn't even doing the first part, so.

[Ythan]

Ythan: Krazy, you're not doing anything with Lebowski. You just picked out an arbitrary lurker to shift your vote to so you could pretend you're not tunneling. But moving your vote alone doesn't change anything. You're still a tunneling idiot.

vote Umbrage

@ Ythan, so you disagree with the concept of pressuring lurkers to post via voting them?

I find it hard to believe that you actually read the post that you were responding to and that is quoted above. That was not at all the message of my post.

Regfan's wall post not make me feel any better about the Lebowski slot.

Xtoxm's post does contain content. That's all I'm saying.

No. If you think there is, show me.

You're totally missing the point. Whether or not the vote stays is irrelevent because the vote had no meaning.

That may be what you think but that wasn't the point of your post. All your reads have to go on is the text. And to address this interpretation, it had a meaning. If it wasn't a suspicion vote, it still had meaning, and was removed at the appropriate time.

Note that DarthYoshi does not say he removed his vote because he no longer found Krazy scummy. DarthYoshi says he removed his vote because not doing so would have made him look bad.

You remove a pressure vote when the purpose of the pressure is alleviated.

Duh.

[DarthYoshi]

DarthYoshi isn't even doing the first part, so.

I have a finite amount of time I can devote to mafia, and much of it lately has been spent defending against Vordark's cases. I've been pressing my arguments against Xotxm, and I am noticing after getting called out and voted on for lots of active lurking, you're actually starting to be a bit more active.

Do you agree with Krazy's assessment that I am piggy-backing on Vordark?

I think you've been letting him do the vast majority of the work. I've been saying this for a while now.

Note that DarthYoshi does not say he removed his vote because he no longer found Krazy scummy. DarthYoshi says he removed his vote because not doing so would have made him look bad. This is because DarthYoshi is more worried about how he appears than he is about finding scum. This is because he is scum.

That is because I think it is scummy, or at the least anti-town, to leave a vote on someone who has reacted positively to the pressure of the vote.

(PEdit: Yeah, Ythan answered that.)

OK, so did your vote help you to determine Krazy's alignment? How so?

See above.

I'll try to be more active now, the text walls kind of set me off this game.

Sorry 'bout that. I'll try to knock it off.

@Vordark: With people getting turned away by our walls, I'm going to do my best to keep this brief. There is misrepping happening on both sides, I apologize for my part in that. The reason I pointed out what you said (and I know you probably won't like this on a semantic level, sorry) is because it is in the present tense--"I agree with none of this here, etc." And you are not giving reasons for your present opinion. You gave reasons in the past, and but now, at this point, it just looked like you were taking it as assumed. Hence my worry about confirmation bias. I wasn't lying. And I don't appreciate it when people say that I do.

[Vordark]

@Vordark: With people getting turned away by our walls, I'm going to do my best to keep this brief. There is misrepping happening on both sides, I apologize for my part in that. The reason I pointed out what you said (and I know you probably won't like this on a semantic level, sorry) is because it is in the present tense--"I agree with none of this here, etc." And you are not giving reasons for your present opinion. You gave reasons in the past, and but now, at this point, it just looked like you were taking it as assumed. Hence my worry about confirmation bias. I wasn't lying. And I don't appreciate it when people say that I do.

No, I'm pretty sure the misrepresenting has been limited to you. I believe I have been able to make a good case without needing to resort to that tactic.

I have already given my reasons. They have not changed and are still valid in the present. Your entire line there is trying to work your way out of the lie you were caught in.

And yes, you were lying as I've already shown. I'm sure you don't appreciate being caught in it.

[ConSpiracy]

So finally read the thread carefully. First thing I am doing is UNVOTE: Umbrage.

@ ConSpiracy is your mafia read on Umbrage as strong as it previously was, and if so who do you believe to be his partners?

Nope it isn't and I will tell you why:

Umbrage

I voted for him to get out of the RVS, as has been mentioned a lot of times. After that, this contradiction didn't sit well with me:

3) Nice strawman, but if you look back, you'll see I find you scummy because of how you've pushed a bandwagon. When I voted ConSpiracy, I made sure to let everyone know it was a serious vote. I was setting myself up as bait, and you bit. If you think a bandwagon is the best way to get out of RVS, then why not vote ConSpiracy with me? Even if you think he's town, it doesn't matter. It's just a wagon, and it gets us out of RVS. Unless you think that your page 2 reads are going to hold for the rest of the game, I see no reason why you wouldn't want to bandwagon him. It'd be a hell of a lot easier than wagoning me. But you weren't interested in a wagon to leave RVS, you wanted a wagon that would grow, and maybe turn into a lynch. And that is scummy.

I already answered that. I didn't know why CS was asking me to give reads. I had three choices.

1: Say I didn't have any good reads, and look stupid, maybe even scummy.
2: Make up some weak page one reads and end up eating my words later in the game, looking scummy.
3: Call CS out as scum, get us out of RVS, and maybe catch some scum along the way.

Both posts told me he voted me to get reactions and to get us out of the RVS. However, he also said this:

OK, that makes sense.

UNVOTE: ConSpiracy

VOTE: Snake Eyes

This comment wouldn't be made if he was just trying to get out of the RVS. He states here that he found me scummy for my vote and not to provoke reactions. Also in the second quote he mentions that he really cares about not looking scummy. It is not really townish to think that way especially if that aren't the only things he could do.

However, I read the reasons why people voted for him:

Why is ConSpiracy asking you specifically a question a somewhat serious scumtell? What about it is more scummy than a person who is arguably not doing much to get the game out of RVS, and why point it out if it's not scummy?

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Umbrage

Unvote: ConSpiracy
Vote: Umbrage

Right now I'm leaning town on Snake Eyes and ConSpiracy, neutral on Abelcain given the "act scummy" tactic use. Umbrage seems to be doing a lot of OMGUS voting and a whole lot of flipping out for a relatively painless page one, three-vote, get us out of RVS bandwagon. And the whole act scummy to see who bites thing is just silly. DarthYoshi's jumping on ConSpiracy and then Snake Eyes for "defending" him seems odd as well. And I think Krazy needs to focus on this game.

I am most likely to vote Umbrage right now, as he has the most of my outstanding questions, but those were made since his last post so I'm going to abstain for the moment.

Those three voted for Umbrage. Snake Eyes used a crappy reason to vote him. Snake Eyes's further elaboration is meh. The first thing I pointed out (read above) he used after I said it and that is the only thing in his Umbrage attacks that I found scummy.
Vordark used a catch up post to determine his vote. The reasons were: OMGUS, the going out of the RVS and the bait thing. Although the reason for my vote was strange and scummy, the OMGUS is nothing. On top of that his catch up post has some contradictions and seems like a buddying post to me.
Ythan reason is very, very bad. He had some questions about Umbrage and therefore he needs your vote? No suspicion was raised...
When three people were bandwagoning this easily, all of the Umbrage wagon is scumpoints and Umbrage himself gets townpoints. I wouldn't be surprised at all if at least one of the bandwagoners is scum.

Two people highly raised my suspicions.

Vordark

There is one big problem with him, his catch up post. The other things may seem town motivated, but I couldn't find much that made sence.
His "catch-up" post was buddying, buddying, buddying. All of the things he said were already mentioned in thread and he hasn't put anything at all for himself. For example:

17 - I don't like DarthYoshi's vote at all here. There's nothing inherently "sketch" about ConSpiracy's vote in #16. You might not find scum on page one, but getting people talking sooner rather than later is always a good thing.

So DarthYoshi's vote isn't good enough to let me talk? He didn't even think of this point, but he just blindly does what seems to be the flow of the game: My vote being right and all others being wrong.

This is a lot of Krazy-baiting. Krazy has actually started to settle down and contribute something. DY's reply was unnecessary and I think anyone that really wanted to focus the town would have let Krazy's comments slide, or at least tried more to defuse the situation than to egg him on, which this appears to do. He drops a sentence as props on Krazy's hunting of the lurkers, but makes sure he explains that his vote is staying on Krazy because of his responses. I read that last sentence as encouraging Krazy to keep engaging.

To summarize: Some of what DY is critical of I actually read as pro-town (moving us out of RVS, looking for relationships between players), he spent too much time FoSing CS's bandwagon on Umbrage while saying CS gave no reason for it, appeared to backtrack on that in the same post he continued to defend it and looks like he's trying to keep the Krazy train running. I also don't like how he felt the need to tell us why he moved his vote off Umbrage when he voted for Krazy.

At first, the reason he posted why DY is scummy is awful. Town wouldn't unnecessary post? That is the worst reason ever to vote for someone. On top of that the other reasons are bad as well: - Again the mention of my vote being great, - Krazy train (lol Ozzy Osbourne) attack was useless and - DY didn't vote for Umbrage at all.
DY asks rethorical if continuusly putting pressure on your suspect is scummy (which was on the list of scummy things), Vordark answers this way:

Again, this statement only works if we assume you have a town motive. An equally viable explanation for the events is that you are attempting to keep the Krazy train running as a distraction.

Lol, great answer. "I don't know wether you are scum or not so that is nothing." But you did find him scummy for it.

ConSpiracy's ISO is only eight posts long, the last of which looks a pre-flake. Hopefully he's able to catch up and lend us his thoughts now that the thread seems to have settled down a bit. To be sure, CS is a big null read to me. BW's on page one or two are common to roll out of RVS, so could be town or could be scum trying to look town. The people jumping on it, though, that's interesting to me.

Great post, only if you weren't bandwagoning yourself and not even looking at SE and Ythan yourself... Fake town points.

Xtoxm

Lack of content really much... First post:

Definitely not liking this Umbrage wagon, this is surely scum fueled. What i've seen of Vordark looks town, I like iam's succinctness and he's looking pro-town, so i'm thinking there is scum in {CS, SE, Ythan}. Will go with Ythan as my current top suspect, but I really need to read properly what I have only skimmed when I get a chance. I'll try and do this tomorrow.

This post screams scum pushing town to get into the "right" direction. He didn't do anything himself, but he did point out where we should go to. Scum not wanting to take the responsibility for the wagon, but easily can get on one. Scummy.

Having taking a closer look at Ythan, he's not been as complacent as I had initially thought.

I'm left with CS, TBL, Abelcain and DarthYoshi as people who less appear to be acting with town motivations than everyone else.

Vote: DarthYoshi

Why him rather than the others? Because he has the most votes.

Not taking responsibility for his vote. No content other than some unexplained reads.

Previously to this it was this post my Abelcain iso #6,12 but DY's new post really blows these out of the water; when I voted DY it was just voting for one of the 4 people that hadn't given me any town inclinations, now I feel that DY is actually scummy.

Lol, need I say more?

VOTE: Xtoxm

FoS: Vordark

Most things about DarthYoshi were very null. There are very many circular arguments and most things aren't even scummy. If somebody can post a proper case of Darth I would like to read it, since in my eyes he is by far less scummy than most of the players. He seems like an easy mislynch.

EDIT: So. Many. Posts. Between. My. Start. Of. This. Post. And. Me. Posting. It. Please...