Newbie 1120 - The Scum in Sherlock (Over!)

[Shahrizai]

1. You don’t necessarily have to say something in order to imply it; when I pointed out your insistence about hiplop, the “MUST” is something I inferred based on your choice of vocabulary and your tone.
RE: Your question: I’m willing to accept his claim at the moment because no one has countered; there is no reason NOT to believe him, and I don’t agree with you that scum would kill him for it when they could have also used their NK to get a player whom they perceived as being dangerous to them out of the way and push a lynch on hiplop today; the game will presumably last a few more nights, so they can comfortably kill him later.
I don’t know if he’s being honest or not, but I don’t want to kill the uncountered JK just because scum could be making a WIFOM gambit.

2. Your second point: I think I sort of addressed it in my first response. Just because someone claims doesn’t mean they will be killed, and their not being killed doesn’t mean they’re lying. It is a logical fallacy to insist otherwise.

For example (Making an analogy here): In 3-Card Monty with a crooked dealer (unknown to the player), the player might choose the center card as their pick for the “Joker” or whatever. The dealer picks up the middle card, and it’s the 2 of Spades. The player loses, assuming that either the card on the right or left is the joker because one of them HAS to be, right? But unknown to the player, the dealer is crooked, so actually NEITHER is. Had the player insisted the two side cards have been flipped instead of the center card, and then seen that neither was the Joker, then he could have called the dealer’s bluff and won, as the crooked dealer wouldn’t want the player to flip the center card and prove that it also wasn’t a Joker.

In this game, Mafia is the crooked dealer; they know things the rest of us don’t know, and it’s up to us to flip the right cards. Just because they do This or That doesn’t mean they can be counted on as reliable….follow? So, while one might expect that scum would outright kill a claimed PR, that doesn’t mean they HAVE to do so, or that they will do so.

You have to look at people’s intent as much as their actions here, because that’s where you will find scum.
I.E., I have a scum read on you because you’re accusing a claimed/uncountered PR of being scum because he wasn’t killed; you’re very smug about your conclusions, and whether or not you’re voting yet, you expect people to follow that logic or risk being accused themselves. (As you’ve done to me—I don’t agree with your logic, so you’re trying to twist that into a partnership with hiplop.) If you’re scum, perhaps you thought that your logical conclusion that “hey, hiplop’s not dead, so he must be scum!” would be met with acceptance right away? But you have completely failed to consider that this game isn’t always black and white.

3. Foilist’s disbelief of hiplop’s claim is the tell which I was referring to; that he was another PR and had reason to disbelieve it.

4. By hoping to out a cop, I mean that if scum can get hiplop run up to L-1, they could be hoping a cop investigated him and would declare him innocent, thus outing themselves. Presumably, a cop wouldn’t want to lynch the JK if he could clear him and would clear the JK before that happened. It would probably result in the NK of the JK and the kill of the cop the next night, but it also means that town would have two days with at least one or two-confirmed town to try to lynch more scum; in small games such as this one where flips have already happened, that’s even more important because the lynch pool shrinks even more.

5. Your line of thinking is specifically about the fact that Foilist didn’t believe him; again, I inferred that you are only concerned with that as you haven’t given any other reasoning.

6. Why don’t you believe him? Because Foilist is dead and he’s not? That’s not enough—again, there are plenty of reasons that might be the case.

7. You’re defense of Torquez's massive wall of fence-sitting in his first post is hrm? I don’t see a lot of true scumhunting in his post, for all that he talks about everyone and tries to sound town.

8. I’m not rushing to hiplop’s aid so much as I am questioning your actions. I don’t know if he’s being honest or not, but so far no one has CC’d him, and until I have further evidence from a cop or something, there’s no reason not to at least accept his claim.

Also, your set-up speculation is really not that great. This is a newbie game, and it really reads as you trying too hard. Also, I AM scumhunting—You. I’m calling your motivations and intentions into question, and I’m doing so because I think they are scummy.

Also, a case based on “could be lying” is pretty shaky. I would like to hear from you exactly why you don’t believe hiplop based on something other than the probability that he or didn’t draw his claimed PR. I have some questions about his play in general, but I believe his claim as I’ve been given no solid reason to disbelieve it, and I think your two pages of set-up spec being passed off as a case is far more worthy of attention right now.

[Hellhound1]

1. You don’t necessarily have to say something in order to imply it; when I pointed out your insistence about hiplop, the “MUST” is something I inferred based on your choice of vocabulary and your tone.
RE: Your question: I’m willing to accept his claim at the moment because no one has countered; there is no reason NOT to believe him, and I don’t agree with you that scum would kill him for it when they could have also used their NK to get a player whom they perceived as being dangerous to them out of the way and push a lynch on hiplop today; the game will presumably last a few more nights, so they can comfortably kill him later.
I don’t know if he’s being honest or not, but I don’t want to kill the uncountered JK just because scum could be making a WIFOM gambit.

Firstly, its called pressure. Yes, i was implying he's scum to see his reaction. However, i also used a fair amount of coulds and maybes.
Secondly RE: RE: My question, Why is there no reason to not believe him? He was almost lynched D1 before he outed, because he was scummy. If he outs as a PR is he meant to be excused from all his scummyness and ignored? No. Theres my reason to not believe him.

Why wouldnt they kill someone who they knew was a PR? IMO, foilist hadnt really had a massive impact on the game, i dont see what logical reason there is for killing someone thats just a stab in the dark.
Also, doesnt letting him live benefit the town, because if he randomly JKs someone tonight and they turn out to not perform any NK, the scum have lost a) a night kill and b) a scum player. Which could happen tonight...

I never said we should lynch him at all, im putting pressure on him to see his reaction, and so far he's failed. The whole "leave me alone im bored" thing seems either highly immature or highly scummy to me.
He refuses to respond to my questions.

2. Your second point: I think I sort of addressed it in my first response. Just because someone claims doesn’t mean they will be killed, and their not being killed doesn’t mean they’re lying. It is a logical fallacy to insist otherwise.

For example (Making an analogy here): In 3-Card Monty with a crooked dealer (unknown to the player), the player might choose the center card as their pick for the “Joker” or whatever. The dealer picks up the middle card, and it’s the 2 of Spades. The player loses, assuming that either the card on the right or left is the joker because one of them HAS to be, right? But unknown to the player, the dealer is crooked, so actually NEITHER is. Had the player insisted the two side cards have been flipped instead of the center card, and then seen that neither was the Joker, then he could have called the dealer’s bluff and won, as the crooked dealer wouldn’t want the player to flip the center card and prove that it also wasn’t a Joker.

In this game, Mafia is the crooked dealer; they know things the rest of us don’t know, and it’s up to us to flip the right cards. Just because they do This or That doesn’t mean they can be counted on as reliable….follow? So, while one might expect that scum would outright kill a claimed PR, that doesn’t mean they HAVE to do so, or that they will do so.

No, i understand he wouldnt have to be killed, but when he was the best person to go for, why WASNT he killed? If theres no doctor, theres no one to save him right? At least if the mafia had attempted to kill him, and failed, they'd know theres a doctor, which is another step.
also, your "not being killed doesn’t mean they’re lying" Im using logic from D1, and mixing it into this to draw the conclusion.
I followed your analogy, i see what you're saying, but saying they dont HAVE to doesnt mean they wouldnt have.

You have to look at people’s intent as much as their actions here, because that’s where you will find scum.
I.E., I have a scum read on you because you’re accusing a claimed/uncountered PR of being scum because he wasn’t killed; you’re very smug about your conclusions, and whether or not you’re voting yet, you expect people to follow that logic or risk being accused themselves. (As you’ve done to me—I don’t agree with your logic, so you’re trying to twist that into a partnership with hiplop.) If you’re scum, perhaps you thought that your logical conclusion that “hey, hiplop’s not dead, so he must be scum!” would be met with acceptance right away? But you have completely failed to consider that this game isn’t always black and white.

You have a scum read on me, because im mixing logic from D1 and N1, and saying wait why wasnt hiplop killed? Then questioning him about it, and him frankly responding like a child. That makes ME scummy?
And you're saying the person who was almost lynched D1, because they'd actually been acting scummy, and claim a PR, isnt scummy, just because they claimed a PR?
Am i right?

3. Foilist’s disbelief of hiplop’s claim is the tell which I was referring to; that he was another PR and had reason to disbelieve it.

I cant see where foilist said he was a PR, quote it for me please?
Are you also ignoring scumhunter and torqez's comments that they dont believe him?

4. By hoping to out a cop, I mean that if scum can get hiplop run up to L-1, they could be hoping a cop investigated him and would declare him innocent, thus outing themselves. Presumably, a cop wouldn’t want to lynch the JK if he could clear him and would clear the JK before that happened. It would probably result in the NK of the JK and the kill of the cop the next night, but it also means that town would have two days with at least one or two-confirmed town to try to lynch more scum; in small games such as this one where flips have already happened, that’s even more important because the lynch pool shrinks even more.

You're assuming we have a cop. If we dont have a cop? If we have just the jailkeeper?

5. Your line of thinking is specifically about the fact that Foilist didn’t believe him; again, I inferred that you are only concerned with that as you haven’t given any other reasoning.

I hope my first comment here explained that. Its pressure, because of the events of yesterday.

6. Why don’t you believe him? Because Foilist is dead and he’s not? That’s not enough—again, there are plenty of reasons that might be the case.

Hopefully same as above. But yes, in effect, thats a major part to it. How is it not enough for me to question him? Do i need a special reason if i want to question him?

7. You’re defense of Torquez's massive wall of fence-sitting in his first post is hrm? I don’t see a lot of true scumhunting in his post, for all that he talks about everyone and tries to sound town.

Whereas your first post was jumping to hiplop's aid, IGNORING everything else that happened, and already misvoting. Maybe you didnt get to play D1, but you cant ignore all the events that happened in it.

8. I’m not rushing to hiplop’s aid so much as I am questioning your actions. I don’t know if he’s being honest or not, but so far no one has CC’d him, and until I have further evidence from a cop or something, there’s no reason not to at least accept his claim.

Question my actions by saying hiplop isnt lying. Right..
Maybe my mechanics post didnt work, if theres only 1 PR in the game, hiplop had a 2/3 chance of choosing a PR that wasnt already taken. So there isnt anyone to CC him..
Also, you're again assuming theres a cop.
Thirdly, a point i've being pondering, hiplop claimed that he JK'd Thor. Now in D1, Thor was kind of the town leader. He had a very prominent role, and is pretty much confirmed town IMO. I may be wrong. However, hiplop claiming he protected thor (if hiplop IS the JK) proves thor is town, as he couldnt have taken part in a NK, if im correct yes?
However, if hiplop is making it up, a) he's just sucked up Thor, who he's hoping will respond to that by saying no no hiplop MUST be town, as some sort of gratitude etc, and b) it means thor could still be scum.

Also, your set-up speculation is really not that great. This is a newbie game, and it really reads as you trying too hard. Also, I AM scumhunting—You. I’m calling your motivations and intentions into question, and I’m doing so because I think they are scummy.

Firstly, i believe hiplop used the same set-up speculation as a point AGAINST me, are you going to say he's trying too hard?
Hey! Thats what i did with hiplop, yet you seem so up his butt already, that you seem to think im NOT scum hunting.. O.o

Also, a case based on “could be lying” is pretty shaky. I would like to hear from you exactly why you don’t believe hiplop based on something other than the probability that he or didn’t draw his claimed PR. I have some questions about his play in general, but I believe his claim as I’ve been given no solid reason to disbelieve it, and I think your two pages of set-up spec being passed off as a case is far more worthy of attention right now.

I think your case based on "OOH hiplop claimed he MUST be telling the truth" is equally, if not more, shaky.

[Shahrizai]

My case on you isn't based on whether or not I believe hiplop so much as I am suspicious of the way you are approaching him today. It doesn't mean I'm "up his butt" just because I don't agree with you and am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

I cant see where foilist said he was a PR, quote it for me please?
Are you also ignoring scumhunter and torqez's comments that they dont believe him?

He didn't...I was saying that scum might have suspected he was a PR based on his disbelief of hiplop's claim. I'm also not ignoring scumhunter or Torquez...but right now I'm focusing on you because you're my top read. Your question about foilist here has made me think about something, though.

It makes more sense that scum thought foilist was a PR because of his immediate and vehement disbelief of hiplop's claim...IF scum knew hiplop was lying. So there is that to be considered in the future. (But I still don't think hiplop is the lynch today.)

As to your set-up spec, I am still not sure it's the best way to approach this because we know there is at least one PR in the game and lynching people based on probability of whether its them or not is not good strategy.

Your response makes more sense to me now; you weren't filling in all the blanks before and I think I've got a better grasp of your case. I don't agree with you, but I think I understand you better.

Unvote

Also, V/LA until later tonight or tomorrow; I'm at my friend the bride's house and we're going wedding shopping, so I won't be around, and she's about ready to go now, so I don't have time to post my Torquez case. It's coming, though.

[hitogoroshi]

Vote Count #22

Shahrizai:

Thor665 (L-3)

Awesoma:

Toreqez (L-3)

hellhound1:

hiplop,

shahrizai

(L-3)

Not Voting:

Shahrizai

, Scumhunter, Awesoma, hellhound1, shahrizai

Day Two Deadline

(expired on 2011-07-26 19:00:00)

With 7 alive, it takes 4 to lynch.

Quite a few people are very close to prod range. Get on it.

[Thor665]

Scumhunter, Awesoma, hellhound1, shahrizai

These players need to get a couple votes out on the playing field. The game only moves forward when there's a wagon, and our lack of any wagons is why no one has much of worth to say other than some giant walls of slap-fest-city that comprise most of this and last page and which I'm pretty sure I didn't miss much by not reading at all.

Someone should probably sheep me and vote Shahriz.

[hiplop]

Scumhunter, Awesoma, hellhound1, shahrizai

These players need to get a couple votes out on the playing field. The game only moves forward when there's a wagon, and our lack of any wagons is why no one has much of worth to say other than some giant walls of slap-fest-city that comprise most of this and last page and which I'm pretty sure I didn't miss much by not reading at all.

Someone should probably sheep me and vote Shahriz.

Just read my posts. i made them short

[Scumhunter]

catching up, longer post coming when I can hopefully things will be slow at work today and I can get on an interrupred train of thought for more than like 2 mins.

Cliff notes of my thoughts since last post: Shah, I generally agree with what you were saying about hellhound. For 95% of players its much more about how they say something than what they say. I think you were on to something with hellhound. He is giving me the vibe that he could be scum who said in the night meeting "lol not kill hiplop" and then have a predetermined plan to push a ML on him today. His defenses to your accusations seem pretty generic and meh at first glance to me, but I really need to comb through the thread more to make a more informed decision. Like Shah or someone else pointed out its still quite possible for scum to kill hiplop n2 if he is real and doesn't get ML'd. Either way suspicion on hiplop would (and likely still will) take up much of our time on d2 here...so yea....for now...

vote: hellhound

[Hellhound1]

Scum, would you care to validate your vote against me, other than a) a vibe and b) sheeping someone else. Are you, too, going to ignore hiplop, even after your "i think you're scummy still" remark? Please, less sheeping.

[Scumhunter]

Scum, would you care to validate your vote against me, other than a) a vibe and b) sheeping someone else. Are you, too, going to ignore hiplop, even after your "i think you're scummy still" remark? Please, less sheeping.

Did you read my post? I explained briefly what my suspicions are, and that it was just for "now". I will care to validate my vote against you when I get a chance. It's possible my thoughts will change when I reread the thread.

[Scumhunter]

Eh fine, Ill

unvote

til I have time to put up a confident vote.

[Thor665]

Just read my posts. i made them short

Just because I'm not lynching you doesn't mean I'm lynching Hellhound on that logic.

@Scumhunter - hate you, grow grapefruit and use them.

@Hellhound - please stop voting hiplop, he's not the lynch today - the 'value' of your case is just as applicable to prove he's town as it is to prove he's scum. How about you figure out who his buddy is, I might be willing to vote his buddy.

[Hellhound1]

@Hellhound - please stop voting hiplop, he's not the lynch today - the 'value' of your case is just as applicable to prove he's town as it is to prove he's scum. How about you figure out who his buddy is, I might be willing to vote his buddy.

Eh? Im not voting anyone. I was pointing out that hiplop wasnt killed.
Also @hiplops last post, all your posts were short because they lacked content.

[Hellhound1]

Woops, *useful content

[Thor665]

@Hellhound - if you're not voting hiplop that suggests you don't want to lynch him.
If you don't want to lynch him why am I reading a page of you argy-barging with him?
Who should we lynch?

[hiplop]

Hellhound.

[Thor665]

I support that lynch more than a you lynch, but less than a Shah lynch. Other than 'he suspetz me, lolz!" is there much to the Hellhound case?

[hiplop]

yeah, im aumming you didnt read my pot?

[hiplop]

S key fell off laptop o i cant ue it!

[Thor665]

Let's presume I didn't read your post; how about you summarize all the parts in it where you explained he was scum while not using "he doubts mah role" in the case. That would be awesome.

[Hellhound1]

@Hellhound - if you're not voting hiplop that suggests you don't want to lynch him.
If you don't want to lynch him why am I reading a page of you argy-barging with him?

Well, because i said i had my suspicion about hiplop, because a) someone who didnt believe him was killed and b) a "claimed pr" wasnt killed.
He then went off on what was basically an OMGUS, then i posted my reasons and he acted like a 3 year old, threw all his toys on the floor and said "i dont like being asked questions go away" (in effect) which only heightens my suspicion of him. Obviously the more i pressured him the stupider his posts got until his lover Shahrizai stepped in to defend him, only to realise that what i was saying

could

be perfectly true, and backed off. I think that sums it up?

Who should we lynch?

Well, i find hiplop my FoS atm, but nobody is active enough to read or care it seems, so its either Shahrizai or someone inactive. Which includes half the players.
I'd at an extreme narrow it down to Shahrizai or Awesoma. I still think Scumhunter is is town, and Torqez actually needs to post something which has more actual content and less fluff, before i judge him. Im leaving hiplop out because he COULD be the JK, and i dont want a ML again. But if Shahrizai was to flip scum my finger would go straight to hiplop, and if he flipped town it would be an awesoma and torqez/scumhunter team.

[Thor665]

I'm fine with that - vote Shahri.

[Shahrizai]

Thor: I had to plow through pages of your walls with Cloud, and you're complaining about a page and a half? You also still haven't answered my question as to why Hellhound is so town, and I think you had some interesting things to say about not answering questions on D1, so what's with the double standard? You also haven't posted anything justifying a vote on me, and I'm curious as to your reasoning for wanting me lynched. Also, you seem to have missed the fact that I HAD a vote on Hellhound, and took it off when he satisfied my questions. I also stated I would be making my points on Torquez later, but I had real life things to do. Reading the game is pro-town.

Hellhound:

Obviously the more i pressured him the stupider his posts got until his lover Shahrizai stepped in to defend him, only to realise that what i was saying could be perfectly true, and backed off.

I already explained that disagreeing with you doesn't mean I'm defending anyone. I also never said your theory couldn't be true. What I said was your reasoning and fervor for getting people on a hiplop wagon was scummy. Your set-up spec is weak, and you're trying to pass it off as scumhunting when it's really just trying to outguess the mod so to speak. I didn't back off b/c you brought me around to your way of thinking--you finally explained your thinking well enough that I could understand your view and reasoning and have less concern that you are scum now.

Torquez:
Massive amounts of enthusiasm (exclamation points, bolded text, lots of emoties) right off the bat seem like you're trying way too hard to come across as town.

Also in ISO2/Post 191, your fear of L-1 seems a little too pat as well. I just have a feeling that again, you're trying too hard to appear town by putting so much effort into condemning L-1s. You talk about L-1 being dangerous, and you then say you dislike Thor's response to the L-1 discussion but immediately say, "but that's your playstyle so it's okay"; yet later it looks like you are FoSing him for that reason, even though you say it's okay before. You really seem to have a town read on Thor up to the FoS, also, for all that you disagree about running up a bunch of L-1 claims.

Subsequent ISO 7 / Post 235:
In the dialogue with Thor, you say

What...tricksy :s Again, don't really get it. Just to say again, I'm not saying your scum, but I'm not saying your not either. What I am saying though, is that I don't really like your playstyle (well, just your view on quick L-1s, really) and thusfar I don't think it's been that conducive (in the case of someone hammering or you asking for a quick claim).

It seems like you are afraid to confront Thor with a scum read on him. Why engage in dialogue with him if you don't think he's scum? And at this point, isn't he on your FoS list anyway?

Later you avoid giving a solid reason for your vote on him, saying instead something about his ISO making you more suspicious and Foilist's accusations making sense, but again, the only substantial thing you've said about him is that you don't like his stance on L-1, and when he asks you about this, you just say "Sigh." Next you avoid commenting on Foilist's case and unvote Thor--ALL of this seems like you were willing to sheep a strong voice and when that voice moved on, so did you. MORE wishy-washy posting in ISO 17.

I have more to say but I'm out of time, so

Vote:Torquez

[Thor665]

Thor: I had to plow through pages of your walls with Cloud, and you're complaining about a page and a half? You also still haven't answered my question as to why Hellhound is so town, and I think you had some interesting things to say about not answering questions on D1, so what's with the double standard? You also haven't posted anything justifying a vote on me, and I'm curious as to your reasoning for wanting me lynched. Also, you seem to have missed the fact that I HAD a vote on Hellhound, and took it off when he satisfied my questions. I also stated I would be making my points on Torquez later, but I had real life things to do. Reading the game is pro-town.

Careful - in that commentary block you actually explain why there's not much reason in me explaining a town read on someone you apparently don't feel like lynching. I'm lazy, I was sick Fri-Saturday (and maybe Sunday, though I'm feeling better) and I was doing lylo in one game and replacing into another. Making a town case on someone not even being pressed as a wagon? Pretty low on the priority scale. In fact, I don't even really see the point.

I want you lynched because I think Awesoma is town and I know DK and foilist were - what of it?

Also, you HAVING HAD a vote out does very little to help me when I want you to HAVE a vote out, yeah? Admittedly now, after I bring that up, you jump on Torq so...neutral feel there now, I at least like how the case considers actual motives moving forward, which is more than the Hellhound case had/has - still, thinking you're scum.

[hiplop]

Let's presume I didn't read your post; how about you summarize all the parts in it where you explained he was scum while not using "he doubts mah role" in the case. That would be awesome.

i didnt say that at all in my case... or anything similar. Dont be pretentious

[Thor665]

So, you'll restate your case for me now then?